Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Is it appropriate for Mayor Bloomberg to call the NYPD "HIS ARMY"?

Posted 2 years ago on Dec. 3, 2011, 2:10 p.m. EST by Restorefreedomtoall1776 (272) from Bayonne, NJ
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Also, he said the NYPD is the 7th largest army on earth. Does this statement tell us that he considers himself to be the Dictator of New York City and in control of a private (although taxpayer funded) militia?

63 Comments

63 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 4 points by professorzed (308) from Hamilton, ON 2 years ago

No, I don't think it's appropriate. I think it is arrogant. That is perhaps the 1%'s greatest weakness, their arrogance.

[-] 2 points by nomdeguerre (1775) from Brooklyn, NY 2 years ago

Delusional little Nappy. It's not true either, not even close to seventh largest. I think OWS frightens him.

[-] 2 points by Socrates469bc (608) from New York, NY 2 years ago

The problem with hiring a CEO to be Mayor is that the CEO thinks the citizens work for him; he doesn't understand what it means to be a public servant.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2068428/Bloomberg-I-army-NYPD-State-Department-New-York-City.html

New Yorkers beware, there's a dictator in the making in your midst. He had already removed term limits for the Mayor.

Remember Hitler was "democratically" elected to power.

[-] 2 points by thecommonman (63) 2 years ago

Mayor Bilderberg is a micro-cosim of the deluded, power hunger 1%.

Extreme Wealth, Priviledge and Political Power is not enough. He is a wanna be Nazi with his own Toy Soldiers to impose force on a down trodden public. Screw that term limit cheat, Just another empty souled elitist.

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

Didn't you mean 'General Bloomberg'?

[-] 2 points by flip (5008) 2 years ago

you do realize that 1776 wasn't much of a revolution - replacing one ruling class with another - restore freedom is a bit incorrect since many never had freedom - i assume you know the story

[-] 2 points by Restorefreedomtoall1776 (272) from Bayonne, NJ 2 years ago

Thank you for your thoughts. Although I disagree with your commentary, I respect your right (or do we still have it?) to Freedom of Speech, a precious right which we should strive to retain.

[-] 1 points by barb (835) 2 years ago

Let them show their true identities and their real political agenda to destroy the rights of American citizens. What he did was admit to the accusations made by many people in this movement and the general public that our leaders are working for a dictatorship government in the future. They have been hiding behind their lies for a long time now to the public and they are at a point that they don't care what we think or want anymore.

[-] 1 points by Socrates469bc (608) from New York, NY 2 years ago

Recall Bloomberg Please sign the petition:

http://occupywallst.org/forum/recall-mayor-bloomberg/

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33128) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

He is wrong and he needs to be told that. But more importantly law enforcement needs to realize that he is wrong. They need to realize that they are the army of "THE PEOPLE". That their job is to serve and protect "THE PEOPLE" not to oppress or suppress. Because "THE PEOPLE" are the government, "THE PEOPLE" are the nation! But the government and the nation seem to have forgotten this! That's why this movement is happening and is gaining momentum. Because "THE PEOPLE" are finally starting to wake-up!

[-] 1 points by beautifulworld (20419) 2 years ago

No, of course it is not appropriate. I think Blooomberg is one of the worst mayors New York has ever had. He is a little megalomaniac!

This country needs to be run by political leaders who have real political philosophy holding them up (certainly not our current politicians). I'm sick of hearing how we need a CEO to run this country. This is a nation, not a corporation. I think Bloomberg is the perfect example of how bad it is to have businessmen running a government.

[-] 1 points by FrogWithWings (1367) 2 years ago

I find it refreshing for "them" to drop their pretenses and facades in order to blatantly tell the truth. However, such truth will fall on the complacent ears of so many, while many others will even uphold and defend such malarkey!

[-] 1 points by Febs (824) from Plymouth Meeting, PA 2 years ago

Absolutely not. The mayor should be removed and his army disbanded.

[-] 1 points by RedJazz43 (2757) 2 years ago

Technically any police force is a paramilitary force, not a military force, but Bloomberg is kind of using the NYPD as his army, isn't he?

[-] 1 points by Socrates469bc (608) from New York, NY 2 years ago

By Hunter Walker 11/30 10:06am

Mayor Bloomberg (Getty) In a speech at MIT last night to discuss the packed sweepstakes to build a tech campus in New York City, Mayor Bloomberg said he prefers City Hall to the White House. Almost immediately after Mayor Bloomberg dampened recent speculation he’s eyeing a White House bid, he added fuel to the fire by explaining why a mayor would be the best person for the job.

Mayor Bloomberg’s recent criticism of President Obama for allowing the debt reduction Supercommittee to fail led many political tea leaf watchers to believe he’s eyeing a potential White House bid. To the dismay of those who hope he’ll mount presidential campaign, Mayor Bloomberg began his speech last night by discussing why City Hall is just fine by him.

“I have my own army in the NYPD, which is the seventh biggest army in the world. I have my own State Department, much to Foggy Bottom’s annoyance. We have the United Nations in New York, and so we have an entree into the diplomatic world that Washington does not have,” Mayor Bloomberg said.

http://www.politickerny.com/2011/11/30/mayor-bloomberg-i-have-my-own-army-11-30-11/

[-] 1 points by Socrates469bc (608) from New York, NY 2 years ago

The problem with hiring a CEO to be Mayor is that the CEO thinks the citizens work for him; he doesn't understand what it means to be a public servant.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2068428/Bloomberg-I-army-NYPD-State-Department-New-York-City.html

New Yorkers beware, there's a dictator in the making in your midst. He had already removed term limits for the Mayor.

Remember Hitler was "democratically" elected to power.

[-] 2 points by divineright (664) 2 years ago

Good point.

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (21785) 2 years ago

Is it appropriate? Oh, yeah. In fact, I appreciate his honesty. I would rather see exactly where someone is coming from.

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

His Army, his world.

[Removed]

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

right

every action is based on the need to return to mother land Israel

Cabaret - Tomorrow Belongs to Me

[Removed]

[-] -1 points by necropaulis (491) 2 years ago

NYPD is nothing compared to the Police force in other states. No they are not the army. The Army is the army. The police are there to do-to an extent what the governor wants. He's wants a bunch of idiots out of his park because he asked them to leave nicely, and they say no, so what happens?? He sends in the police. Wait till you see what happens when these vagrants try to "occupy" bank foreclosed houses.

[-] 1 points by karenpoore (902) 2 years ago

Occupying is symbolic of taking our country and voice back. It was one of the tools used in the Kent State incident too years ago.

[-] 0 points by necropaulis (491) 2 years ago

They were protesting invading Cambodia. We were in the middle of a war. I know, what does that have to do with sitting in a park and being mad, 'cause your broke and the other guy isn't?? Nothing It's tough kid, but it's life. It wasn't "too"(it's two) years ago, it was in 1970. You gotta try harder than that. If your gonna spout useless crap at least Google it first. Anything labeled "incident" would not be a good reference point for positive change.

[-] 1 points by karenpoore (902) 2 years ago

No it is "too"! I think the Kent State incident happened more than "two" years ago. "sitting in a park and being mad, 'cause your broke and the other guy isn't?? Nothing It's tough kid, but it's life." Boy, with all due respect, you need to dig a little deeper into this movement and do your homework. Thanks for calling me "kid"! lol

[-] -1 points by necropaulis (491) 2 years ago

Yes it was more than "too" years ago(two [2] is a number, "too" means also) it happened in 1970. It was during the Vietnam war. You need to dig a little deeper into the info you spread. It's people like you drawing parallels where there aren't any that's destroying your "movements" credibilty. When I called you kid, it was in reference to a song about Cambodia. There's another about the Kent State incident: For what it's worth by Buffalo Springfield (1970) Google either one and tell me I'm wrong. We both know I'm not. Being broke isn't a right. These people may have done bad things to get rich and maintain, but the were coded that way. If you want to be rich and successful, you gotta work, and do what you gotta. Not piss more people off by being a disorganized mess of people.

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

no need to use the word you

[-] -1 points by necropaulis (491) 2 years ago

Huh??

[-] 1 points by karenpoore (902) 2 years ago

Not a parallel. I was just stating the occupying and civil disobedience are tools of protest that have been used in the past. Geesh!

[-] 1 points by karenpoore (902) 2 years ago

My sentence: . It was one of the tools used in the Kent State incident too years ago. "too" meaning also!

[-] 0 points by necropaulis (491) 2 years ago

Now I understand what you were trying to say. No offense, but a comma goes a long way on the internet. Surely you understand the confusion. And a lot of these people do draw parallels. One guy says they're like anne frank, another says native americans.

[-] 1 points by karenpoore (902) 2 years ago

lol, thanks for the grammar lesson. So the sentence should read: It was one of the tools used in the Kent State incident too, years ago. or maybe "Years ago, it was one of the tools used in the Kent State incident. Ha, I did take advanced grammar in college thirty years ago, but when you do not write often you forget. Glad we got that cleared up! (-:

[-] 0 points by necropaulis (491) 2 years ago

If you were in college back then, then surely you understand my point. The protests that you were around for were about real problems, not being mad because someone else is rich and you're(not you specifically). And when called out about it, parallels get drawn about the past which have nothing to do with rich vs. poor.

[-] 0 points by karenpoore (902) 2 years ago

Hi, I am sorry, but I do not see this movement (or things I have been mad over for the last 20 years) as a "rich vs poor problem. I see this as the screwing of the American people! I see this as wars killing innocent people for greed and power. I could go on ... I am sure a lot of people here could care less about being rich and just want to live. Personally, when my life and home are threatened that is when I fight back! I am 64 ...

[-] 1 points by necropaulis (491) 2 years ago

At the end of the day that's what it is. Nobody is Occupying Somolia. Or Haiti, or even the poor sections of the US. This got started because kids(and yes they are mostly kids the mean age is 24-26) were mad the life wasn't what they were told it was, and their mad. You've been mad about things for 20 years, but now, you stand up?? Not a slam, just follow me. You have had the expierence of seeing real causes firsthand. You know about people protesting wars(not including anything from 2000 up-forget those for now) that we had no business doing, and real problems like racism and eqaulity. I have not, but I can imagine to a point. There's always going to be someone richer than someone else. Has anyone threatened you personally or your home?? If so, than that is wrong and you have every option to do what you need to do and I support that. But to be mad because you signed a deal knowing you didn't have the resources to follow through on you end is wrong too. Power and greed go hand in hand, we need it, it's a great motivator. We wouldn't have a reason to live without it. Even the animal kingdom does it. How people go about what they do is up to them. If if means robbing and stealing, then so be it. Will they get caught?? Maybe. Does that exuse the pain inflicted?? No. Maybe the person wronged uses it as to learn, so they may be made richer in the future. Nothing will fix this issue, because you(not you specifically) are going after things that are hard coded into us as animals, which brings me to your sentence of you don't want to be rich, you just wanna live. Some are motivated more than others, and will use that motivation to excess. Out of that excess will come help or harm, but it's still needed at the end of the day.

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

I have to agree with you. I really get peeved when they compare themselves to the actions of protesters of the 60s and 70s, of which I was a part of. They have the look, the dress, the words of that era but they have none of the understanding. Our protests went to the heart of the problems, the OWS stubbornly refuses to focus their efforts on the one place that actually have the power to make changes they say are needed .... and that is Washington DC.

[-] -1 points by karenpoore (902) 2 years ago

Sorry I cannot reason further with someone that thinks as you do: Power and greed go hand in hand, we need it, it's a great motivator. We wouldn't have a reason to live without it.

[-] 0 points by necropaulis (491) 2 years ago

what do you mean??

[-] -2 points by aries (463) from Nutley, NJ 2 years ago

is it appropriate for you to try & live in the park ? get outa here !

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

To make a constitutionally protected point about the state of the nation? Yes it is appropriate to camp out, sleep in and shout.

[-] 1 points by aries (463) from Nutley, NJ 2 years ago

The First Amendment doesn't say anything about taking over & living in a park. That's the biggest stretch of free speech I've ever heard of lol!

[-] 1 points by shooz (26679) 2 years ago

The second, doesn't say anything about handguns and assault weapons either.

That never stopped the NRA or gun nutters.

[-] 1 points by aries (463) from Nutley, NJ 2 years ago

right to bear "arms" I suppose you'd prefer to dis arm us & let only the criminals have weapons. Violent crime is lowest among states with the least restrictions on gun ownership.

[-] 1 points by shooz (26679) 2 years ago

See what I mean?

Let's give the right to assemble the same kind of chance.

[-] 1 points by aries (463) from Nutley, NJ 2 years ago

assembly is one thing. living there is another lol!

[-] 1 points by shooz (26679) 2 years ago

Is it really?

100,000+ in Wisconsin failed to get a redress.

To me that's a failure of constitutional interpretation.

[-] 1 points by aries (463) from Nutley, NJ 2 years ago

???

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

Argued: Feb. 27, 28, 1939 Date Decided: June 5, 1939 Vote: 5-2; A municipal ordinance requiring a permit for public assembly in or upon the public streets, highways, public parks or public buildings of the city is void on its face.

Facts: A Jersey City ordinance prohibited public meetings without a permit. Individual citizens and a labor union, the CIO, seeking to educate laborers about the National Labor Relations Act, applied for a permit. The permit was denied, and the citizens and the CIO filed suit, arguing that the ordinance violated their First Amendment rights to speak and assemble. Both the district and appellate courts ruled in favor of the individuals and the union.

Issue: Whether an ordinance prohibiting public meetings without a permit in order to prevent disorderly assembly violates the First Amendment.

Legal Basis for Decision: Governing principles at the time required restrictions on speech to relate to the municipality's comfort and convenience of using the streets and parks. The Court determined that the Jersey City ordinance was arbitrary and therefore did not relate to the comfort or convenience of using the streets or parks. The Court justified its finding by explaining that the director of public safety, who had authority to issue and deny permits, could determine that any communication had the potential for causing disorderly conduct and therefore could limit expression far more than the prevailing standards of the time would suggest.

Quotable: "Wherever the title of streets and parks may rest, they have immemorially been held in trust for the use of the public and, time out of mind, have been used for purposes of assembly, communicating thoughts between citizens, and discussing public questions. Such use of the streets and public places has, from ancient times, been a part of the privileges, immunities, rights and liberties of citizens." Writing for the Majority: Justice Roberts

[-] 0 points by necropaulis (491) 2 years ago

Not when the law says to be out of said park by sundown

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

Constitution trumps that stuff. The nation and world face a moral and economic catastrophe. Trumps petty park curfew.

[-] -1 points by necropaulis (491) 2 years ago

So if I was mad because you had something I didn't, does that give me the right to sit in your bedroom with a picket sign, scream my brains out, do drugs, listen to your stereo, defecate, rape some chicks, and not leave when you ask me to leave so you can clean the place up; 'cause I ain't cleaning nothing(f that, you got that cool lamp that I can't get because I don't wanna work); and then I can come back, it's cool? Gimmie you're address, I could use a vacation. I mean, it's in the constitution that says nothing about that, right?? This is not an orderly assembly. It's a bunch of asses hanging out and partying, who, as I said before are now resorting to squatting -also illegal, you start with at least two charges doing that- in empty houses that are owned by banks.

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

You probably would run away as fast as you could once out of the subway station where I live.

You think that in 2008 a wave of laziness overtook millions of people? No! The economy was wrecked and those responsible are not only at large but living large. Wrecked economy means real live misery for millions of people, which is a political issue, a moral and economic crisis. Asshole

[-] 0 points by necropaulis (491) 2 years ago

1 don't call me an asshole. The scenario I just described is what is happening right now at these "occupations". They are the assholes. Look in the news, and at on the scene footage from these "occupants". Nothing you or anyone of those people can say will make me think doing what their doing is right or will change anything, because they are too stupid too understand they are going about it entirely the wrong way.

[-] 0 points by necropaulis (491) 2 years ago

My point exactly. Thank you. They were told, (before they started going off at the mouth, which would expose them as protestors) like everyone else who was actually there to do business, to be quiet or you would be removed. If your gonna protest, do it outside. They deserved to get arrested.

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

Occupy is keeping on.

[-] 0 points by necropaulis (491) 2 years ago

Yeah, and the cities are working on kicking you out. They are getting tired of the shitty conditions you put yourself in

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

The one percent are scared, angry too, that they have to acknowledge that there is gross inequality, that "the game" is rigged, Their super committee imploded. People are waking up.

[-] 0 points by necropaulis (491) 2 years ago

They don't care. And the ones that do(where is the exact black and white line on who good and whose bad in this issue, because a lot do help) do what they need to to help their employees. Not fellow board members, but even the guy sweeping floors. People shouldn't have gone to sleep. While you slept, they competed. And won. The game isn't rigged, you stopped watching it.