Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Occupy Wall Street Terrorists Dump Condoms on Catholic School Girls

Posted 8 years ago on Jan. 31, 2012, 8:54 p.m. EST by monarch (-5)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

88 Comments

88 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 3 points by Nicolas (258) from Québec, QC 8 years ago

... Terrorism? Really? Throwing little plastic squares at people is terrorism? And people can be "defenseless" against it? I mean, I don't think it was a very bright idea, but at most it's on the level of a mildly reprehensible prank.

None of the "victims" will bear deep psychological scars or suffer emotional trauma. At worst there will be some giggling and uncomfortable questions to the parents. Sexuality is not some dark secret whose mere idea is liable to shatter the fragile minds of school girls. "Horrendous"? "The most disgusting thing I've seen in my life"? In a world where television regularly brings us images of war and human misery? Seriously?

[-] -1 points by monarch (-5) 8 years ago

Little plastic squares were condoms. OWS is my opinion is a bunch of irresponsible people that are not trying to better the Country but instead to disrupt

[-] 2 points by Nicolas (258) from Québec, QC 8 years ago

Yes, condoms. Also known as "not weapons" and "harmless" and "sex protection". They might be inappropriate for young kids, but they are not dangerous, physically or psychologically.

Look, I'm not saying it's totally cool to do that. I'm saying it's more or less as damaging and serious as the pranks siblings play on each other every day. Probably less. Kids can get nasty (and not because they saw condoms once).

[Removed]

[-] -2 points by monarch (-5) 8 years ago

Ok then why are they attacking Catholic girls then?? I thought the original intent of OWS was to go after Wall Street and the big banks

[-] 2 points by Nicolas (258) from Québec, QC 8 years ago

First, they are not attacking them. Why exaggerate?

Second, OWS is decentralized and while I do think you are correct, its difficult to say exactly what it's "objectives" are. There is no central authority to control the actions people take. I think that's good, personally : we could certainly do with some politics not wholly operated by the marketing department.

I assume those people are against the pro-life thing and while I share their position, I think those sort of demonstrations often fuel an unproductive group confrontation dynamic. If I'd been there I might have personally engaged them on their action and argued it wasn't a very good idea. Pro-life folk demonstrating in front of abortion clinics, and shaming the clients, is no better.

But. While it might be at best somewhat misguided, it is at the very worst assholery. Not terrorism.

[-] -1 points by monarch (-5) 8 years ago

I still think the way that some members of OWS that are going about doing things like this, are doing damage to OWS

[-] 1 points by Nicolas (258) from Québec, QC 8 years ago

To this I can agree. This is still fairly innocent, but I do wish OWS would refrain from things like it (which it mostly is really, unless they are grossly under reported, which I kinda doubt as it makes better tv than conscientious protest). But we can't and shouldn't strong-arm people into doing things the way we like by acting like they are committing some horrible crime.

Sensationalism of this sort is like : " A MURDER HAPPENS IN AMERICA! AMERICA AN EVIL AND BLOODTHIRSTY SOCIETY!"

"Also, by 'murder' we really mean unfortunate medical mistake."

[-] 2 points by ineptcongress (648) 8 years ago

these people were not acting on behalf of OWS. plus, i flat out don't believe it because it's fox. why not generalize further and say all americans are low life scumbags? or maybe all people are? don't generalize monarch.

[-] -1 points by monarch (-5) 8 years ago

There is two sources one is Fox and the other is not.

[-] 1 points by ineptcongress (648) 8 years ago

it looked like the other plagerized from the foxifiers.

[-] -1 points by monarch (-5) 8 years ago

I added more credible sources

[-] 1 points by ineptcongress (648) 8 years ago

it does appear that it may have happened; OWS does promote safe sex, at least they're concerned for the girls' health--they may have been hurt if the girls turned down the invitation to shag.

[-] -1 points by monarch (-5) 8 years ago

What I am getting at is this type of behavior coming from some of the OWS members, is going to do damage to OWS as a whole.

[-] 1 points by ineptcongress (648) 8 years ago

sure i do agree. i'd appreciate if people were respectable; however, in a barrel of a million apples, at least a few are going to be bad.

[-] 0 points by monarch (-5) 8 years ago

OWS should have some type of leadership whereas they can cleanup on this type of behavior then. I know it is impossible to police the whole movement but every time something happened , I never seen anything where OWS said they would look into it

[-] 2 points by paulg5 (673) 8 years ago

Thats why it's called FAUX news!

[-] -1 points by monarch (-5) 8 years ago

Read the links or have someone do it for you. The sources are not all from Fox

[-] 2 points by paulg5 (673) 8 years ago

Every one of the major actions that Occupy has there is a live streamer present. And by the Faux news report you post sounds like a large crowd! Why can't I find a live stream of this action? Anyone can write anything about anyone or anything and post it online doesn't mean it's true! besides even if it was it was a fraction as harsh as murdering and bombing abortion clinics! People living in glass houses shouldn't throw stones my friend!

[-] 2 points by demcapitalist (977) 8 years ago

Oh right I believe every thing on fox news and I believe in alians,Santa Claus the Easter bunny ,elves ,unicorns the weekly world news and whatever that fat old junkie Rush Limbaugh says.

[Removed]

[-] 2 points by Joeboy32 (72) 8 years ago

wait a minute. this came from "FOX News"?.

don't believe the hype.

[-] 0 points by commonsense11 (195) 8 years ago

Oh sure it's from Fox must be wrong. Don't be such a Simpleton.

[-] -2 points by monarch (-5) 8 years ago

This is one source and there is many more other sources to. Quit sticking up for these low life's

[-] 2 points by gnomunny (6819) from St Louis, MO 8 years ago

Show some (non-Fox) links. No legitimate links, no legitimacy.

[-] 1 points by Joeboy32 (72) 8 years ago

yah, i got a response. cool. now i really feel like a News corporation.

[-] 1 points by jph (2652) 8 years ago

Religion is a blight on humanity. Faith is willful delusion. There is no invisible man in the sky.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by jph (2652) 8 years ago

ah yeah,. with the Unicorns and Santa Claus ?

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by bigbangbilly (594) 8 years ago

How do you know it was even ows that did it? Could be just some pranksters that claimed that we did it.

[-] 0 points by monarch (-5) 8 years ago

I am just going by what all the sources are saying. If it was or was not OWS, it seems like OWS is not doing anything about it, as far as making any type of statement etc

[-] 1 points by Blacksheep (7) from New York, NY 8 years ago

Actions like this will swiftly turn all reasonable people away from OWS. Lots of people are making excuses, blaming others, etc - but you know that this sort of thing is classless, low-end, and juvenile. It makes the 1% smile - and turn away.

[-] 1 points by IslandActivist (191) from Keaau, HI 8 years ago

So you're telling me that Fox News covered this story and made it go viral across the internet- yet there isn't ONE picture or video that shows the evidence? That in fact, the only video from the event shows no occupiers whatsoever and

"The Providence Journal had a camera at the event and posted a video with the title “Abortion rights Occupiers crash RI Right to Life rally.” However the video is edited and without showing any of the chanting and disruptions alleged by Barth Bracy and Fr. Healey."

Wow, sounds like the best scam yet. The Occupy Providence group also has no news whatsoever on even protesting at this event since they have been occupying Burnside Park for well over 100 days straight. Genius. What's more unbelievable is that not a single protestor was arrested at this event while at any other event, most protestors are arrested on site.

[-] 1 points by nickhowdy (1104) 8 years ago

Good...Catholic School girls are the horniest bitches every! Decrease the surplus population...

[Removed]

[Removed]

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by KofAIII (234) 8 years ago

Those who did this are akin to Marines pissing on corpses...

Don't judge the whole based on the moronic actions of the few.

[-] 1 points by April (3196) 8 years ago

There's a difference. We don't judge the whole Marine Corp based on the actions of the few because there is leadership and accountability. I'm sure those Marines will face disciplinary actions.

OWS has no leadership and therefore no accountability. So even the bad actions of a few ruin the movement for all of us because they are not held accountable for their actions. So it ends up putting the whole movement in a bad light.

[-] 1 points by KofAIII (234) 8 years ago

I hear that...

One of THE BIGGEST problems I have with the OWS movement is the complete and utter lack of accountable leadership. I am sick and tired of hearing that "OWS is a leaderless movement". The truth is there ARE leaders, they are simply unaccountable.

[-] 1 points by April (3196) 8 years ago

I agree in a big big way! This movement will continue losing support if these things don't change. It needs some real leadership and focus. I was doing some reading to find out what has been happening in the Working Groups. Come to find that the Demands Working Group is not allowed to make demands. Go figure!

I summarized here. It is beyond absurd! They even say that the "hardcore anarchists" in the movement are holding them back from making progress.

http://occupywallst.org/forum/whats-up-with-the-various-list-of-demands/#comment-619768

[-] 1 points by KofAIII (234) 8 years ago

"hardcore anarchists" in the movement are hold back progress...?

SHOCKING!!! Only not so much shocking at all.

In fact, this is specifically what spawned this post.

[-] 1 points by April (3196) 8 years ago

Yes, we all know this, but the thing that really got me was even the Demand Working Group says this! This is actually kind of good in a way. It shows that there are at least some moderate, non-anarchists, participating in at least one of the Working Groups. They even end by saying since the anarchists are holding back their progress they should just take over the GA.

This is further evidence of what we have known all along, that the GA is run by anarchists. They are manipulating everything in this movement. It's all being manipulated. From the group think at the GA's which is nothing more than consensus building through group manipulation towards a predetermined outcome. To the propaganda of the News articles on this site. All horrible propaganda to demonize authority and incite people to violence.

Use my link. You have got go to the Demands Group Minutes and read it for yourself!

[-] 2 points by KofAIII (234) 8 years ago

I read the minutes from the link you provided...

It is no longer surprising AT ALL as to why OWS is floundering.

I took part in a conference call a couple of weeks ago, that was supposed to be some kind of work group. There were 20-something people on the line. If I were to describe how the group acted, I'd say they'd probably have the most in common with a group of monkeys trying to fuck a football.

Were I to say the call was filled with intelligent, insightful, forward thinking individuals, I'd fear my pants my might burst into an inferno.

I can't believe I wasted $14 on that long distance call.

Most of the talk was about how they could cause chaos, stop traffic, and potentially get arrested...and NOT about specific march messages, solution based strategies, or taking direct actions to make the world a better place.

In short you are 100% correct.

[-] 1 points by XenuLives (1645) from Charlotte, NC 8 years ago

That doesn't sound good. I can only hope that the more moderate, sensible voices will eventually outnumber those who aren't being productive.

[-] 1 points by KofAIII (234) 8 years ago

Hope into one hand and shit in the other, then see which one fills up first...

Sadly sensible voices are in the minority within the leadership/working groups.

And it is easy to understand why. If you are an intelligent, capable, educated individual, you likely have a job or a life, and are too busy to dedicate your day(s) to OWS. What's left are the disillusioned under-educated, unemployed who are pissed that the system has left them out.

So, what you get are leaders who don't know how to lead, and want only to disrupt the system, rather than work within it.

[-] 0 points by April (3196) 8 years ago

K - You have really great insight and direct knowledge of what is happening on the ground that alot of us here don't have if we are not near a protest site. You should keep talking and telling people about your experiences like this.

So you know that info I found in the minutes from the Demands Group - something really strange, the minutes were changed, editted, revised or something. Some of the stuff that I originally read is gone now.

Can you do me a favor and check this out. And please post a comment. I want someone to confirm what I read and quoted in case it gets editted or modified like the last one.

http://occupywallst.org/forum/whats-up-with-the-various-list-of-demands/#comment-621193

[-] 1 points by KofAIII (234) 8 years ago

I'll keep talking, but I can't say anyone is listening...

I've been saying the same things for months, now.

[-] 1 points by April (3196) 8 years ago

I know how you feel. : (

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by florian (-2) 8 years ago

GirlFriday and many other protesters feel it's important to keep the organizers hidden. I would prefer a transparent protest, especially since they are accepting donations and asking from more transparency from the government of America.

[-] 1 points by KofAIII (234) 8 years ago

Unaccountable leadership makes Johnny an abusive, corrupt, ineffective leader...

'Leadership' in the Occupy Dallas has delete posts on public forums, put protesters in danger, and jealously guards leadership positions like a UAW member guards the pension fund.

I for one, am ready to abandon OWS completely due solely to "unaccountable leadership".

[-] 0 points by florian (-2) 8 years ago

GirlFriday's argument is that it would put OWS organizers at risk if they were to reveal their names and methods of operation. Many agree with her and that is why they prone a behind the scenes approach.

Like you, I do not agree with this at all. Unfortunately, we are part of the minority.

[-] 1 points by KofAIII (234) 8 years ago

Girlfriday and the rest of the leaders are "afraid" to stand up publicly for what they believe in...???

I wonder what would have happened to the Civil Rights movement if MLK would have felt the same way.

OWS leaders make me sad. :(

[-] 0 points by XenuLives (1645) from Charlotte, NC 8 years ago

When leaders are exposed and appointed then all of the criticism and attacks are directed at a PERSON instead of an IDEA. Without a formal leader, you have to troll the IDEAs behind OWS or the actions of the group as a whole instead of just making up crap about one person.

For example: People like to blame the POTUS for whatever idiotic thing Congress is currently doing...but the President doesn't have any say in what Congress does besides a threat of a veto. Its the members of Congress that the people should be rallying to usurp, not the person who is only involved in the very last step of the lawmaking process.

The same holds true for Wikileaks. Instead of having to come up with an argument for why the information that Wikileaks was sharing should remain secret (hint: It wasn't just the US cables...a couple of dangerous cults also were exposed through the site's leaks) people just attacked Julian Assange. When Julian came out as the leader of that group, he was immediately attacked by several countries, and was suspiciously wanted on some criminal charges that just happened to surface right after the US cable leaks...

A leader is a point of weakness for a group. I think that the concept of having leaders is outdated, and would rather see committees of appointed persons fulfilling the leadership roles instead. That way there isn't just one person to discredit, blame, attack, and bear all of the responsibility for an entire group.

[-] 1 points by KofAIII (234) 8 years ago

In both of the cases you stated you failed to say that both the President and Julian get to PUBLICLY defend their actions and decisions.

"Weak leaders" are a point of weakness for a group. Completely unaccountable leadership is not only a weakness, but a crippling element.

[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 8 years ago

While a public leader does indeed become a point of focus, having public leadership is both a weakness and a strength. You have listed the negatives quite well, in my view, but have not considered the positives, nor the negatives of not having open leadership.

Open leadership provides accountability. That's important.

It creates a face of the movement to the public. That is a double-edged sword: on the one hand, weaknesses can be exploited. On the other, it gives the otherwise abstract ideas of economic equity, etc, a human face the public can relate to more easily. It also makes debunking false rumors faster by virtue of having a spokesman.

Not having open leadership allows anyone and everyone to hijack the movement and create false information about it . That's huge. We have already seen it in action. This alleged condom throwing incident, the vandalism in Oakland, and so on, is eroding public support, and rapidly.

For all its potential negatives, no movement in the US has succeeded without public leaders or at least public spokespeople, from Women's suffrage to civil rights and beyond.

There are valid arguments on both sides of the issue. I am concerned that they are not being discussed by the leadership on an ongoing basis, that minds are made up and no changes in tactics are being considered as realities on the ground change.

[-] 1 points by KofAIII (234) 8 years ago

Here HERE.. +10 for: "...For all its potential negatives, no movement in the US has succeeded without public leaders or at least public spokespeople, from Women's suffrage to civil rights and beyond..."

[-] 0 points by XenuLives (1645) from Charlotte, NC 8 years ago

I agree with you that there needs to be some transparent leadership. I just don't think that it should be one person. I would rather see a committee approach to leadership of a movement like this.

Consider the US Supreme Court. Right now 9 people hold jurisdiction over every other court in the country. Right now if Alito gets caught selling drugs on the side or some other crazy scandal breaks out, then the court can still function. Losing one out of the 9 leaders is not going to kill the Court, and the Court itself hasn't been damaged just because 1 member of it was rejected. If the Supreme Court had only 1 person on its bench, then only one person would have to be discredited or arranged for the whole court to be deemed a failure.

You see the same thing happen in any large company. There is a board of directors that votes on the direction of the company, where to invest profits, etc. That makes way more sense to me than to give the ultimate decision making power to just one person in that company, since that one person may not make the correct judgements every time.

An executive committee would provide all of the leadership functions that the movement could use right now, while also providing protection against the inevitable barrage of attacks against that committee. It is much easier to defend an idea when it is represented by several people than by one.

[-] 1 points by KofAIII (234) 8 years ago

I was in favor of rotating spokespeople, but this leader by committee sounds promising...

[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 8 years ago

Seems we are in accord. I single person is not necessary, but I believe that identifiable people to interface OWS with the greater public is warranted.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by Simpleminded (28) 8 years ago

The Marines KILLED the men they were pissing on, and you get angry about the piss? Sounds like you're biasing your appraisal to try and prove a point, similar to the 'elite media' you're so akin to bashing. Hypocrisy so thick you could cut it with a knife.

[-] 0 points by KofAIII (234) 8 years ago

People get killed during War... It is WAY HORKED UP to them defile their bodies with human waste. Individually these men should be dishonorably discharged from the Marines. However, it would be wrong to identify all Marines as responsible for this act.

So too, the MORONS who dumped condoms on school girls should be removed from OWS functions, and asked to no longer 'represent' OWS in any shape form or function. These people don't deserve the honor of serving this movement, anymore... IMHO.

Whomever ordered this strike should also be removed or replaced.

[-] 1 points by gestopomillyy (1695) 8 years ago

Since the days of Mohammed, it has been an hoary and a popular ghastly practice for the Muslim to dismember the bodies of the murdered enemies and carry body parts as souvenirs, dance over the corpses of slain enemies and distribute candy whenever Muslims kill non-Muslims. This is what we witnessed in across the Arab world and especially among the Palestinians on 9/11.

guess they should have chopped them up and had a party instead

[-] 1 points by KofAIII (234) 8 years ago

Americans do NOT treat the dead in such ways, to do so would be to lower ourselves...

[-] 1 points by shadz66 (19985) 8 years ago

BS ! That sounds like a 'Blood Libel' by a lying, bigoted sack of shit, to me !! honi soit qui mal y pense !!!

[-] 1 points by gestopomillyy (1695) 8 years ago

it was copied from a web page.. dont take things so personal..

[-] 1 points by shadz66 (19985) 8 years ago

Really ? But it spoke 'to & for' you, right ?!!! 'H8 'bigots' H8' !! Geddit ?!

"To go into the dark with a light is to know the light.

To know the dark, go dark. Go without sight,

And find that the dark, too, blooms and sings,

And is travelled by dark feet and dark wings." ...

(Wendell Berry, "To Know The Dark") !

verb. sat. sap. ...

[-] 1 points by Simpleminded (28) 8 years ago

A man is trying to end your life. He prays 5 times a day to a god that will not only allow him into heaven if he kills you, but he shall be rewarded. Instead, you kill him first. I'd piss on him too.

Occupiers heckle and demean girls for no reason other than to cause mental stress and anguish.

I'd piss on the occupiers as well.

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by KofAIII (234) 8 years ago

I think you have been misinformed about what Islamic folk actually believe.

No one deserves to be pissed on, not dead people, not moronic OWS'ers, and not even you...

"Simpleminded",...how perfectly fitting.

[-] 1 points by BlackSun (275) from Agua León, BC 8 years ago

No he is not "misinformed. Many Muslims believe just that.

[-] 1 points by KofAIII (234) 8 years ago

Really? "Many Muslims" believe that???

How 'many' exactly? 20, 200, 20 million...? Do some, most, or all Muslims believe this?

[-] -1 points by BlackSun (275) from Agua León, BC 8 years ago

I would think that most in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, many in Iraq, and most(if not all) Muslim countries. But it seems you believe in the whole "mainstream Muslim they are just like us" propaganda. Too bad.

[-] 1 points by KofAIII (234) 8 years ago

In all seriousness, I don't have a clue as to what you are specifically talking about...

What you 'think' Muslims believe is completely irrelevant. Do yourself a favor and stop watching Fox News.

[-] 0 points by BlackSun (275) from Agua León, BC 8 years ago

Okay. I don't watch Fox news. So will I get the truth on CNN? al Jazeera? NBC? Where oh WHERE will I find the truth about that "religion of peace" ( in Bush's immortal words) ?

[-] 0 points by BlackSun (275) from Agua León, BC 8 years ago

ARE you SERIOUS? That is your explanation? That is your explanation of the oppression of women? The obsession with fucking little boys? The slaughter of non Muslims? REALLY?

[-] 2 points by KofAIII (234) 8 years ago

No, that isn't MY explanation... You asked me to provide you with what Muslims believe, so I provided you a site that that features their beliefs.

Are you talking about Muslims or the Catholic Church, when you were talking about oppression of women, fucking little boys, and the slaughter of non-believers???

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by Riley2011 (110) from New Britain, CT 8 years ago

I am for a number of ideas that occupy stands for However, if anyone dumped condoms on or touched one of my kids...they had better damn well have some form of insurance...it's not about Catholicism...you don't scare or make kids uncomfortable...pure cowardice

[-] -3 points by monarch (-5) 8 years ago

It does not matter if they were catholic or not and you are right, there is no excuse for this

[-] 1 points by Riley2011 (110) from New Britain, CT 8 years ago

Thank you Monarch People are forgetting the line between activism And stupidity...disgusting actions

[-] 1 points by monarch (-5) 8 years ago

The ones that did it are sorry azz excuses for human beings

[-] -1 points by hamalmang (722) from Lebanon, PA 8 years ago

My teachers gave me condoms when I was in the 4th grade. Goddamn commies!

[-] 0 points by BlackSun (275) from Agua León, BC 8 years ago

Did they dump them on you while insulting your religious beliefs?

[-] -2 points by hamalmang (722) from Lebanon, PA 8 years ago

No. They taught us to not be ashamed or embarrassed about sex and contraception like decent human beings.

[-] 2 points by BlackSun (275) from Agua León, BC 8 years ago

So Catholics are not decent human beings? Hell,I'm not even a Christian and I say you can take your self righteous bullshit and go fuck yourself.

[-] -2 points by monarch (-5) 8 years ago

OWS is dying a slow death

[-] 0 points by uncensored (104) 8 years ago

Slow? They are off the cliff, just waiting to hit bottom.

[-] -1 points by monarch (-5) 8 years ago

got that right

[-] -2 points by monarch (-5) 8 years ago

OWS is on life support and about to have the plug pulled

[-] -2 points by monarch (-5) 8 years ago

disgusting

[+] -4 points by monarch (-5) 8 years ago

Have u slapped a hippie today???

[Removed]