Forum Post: Occupy Congress - Celebrate with those of us who were there !
Posted 12 years ago on Jan. 20, 2012, 12:03 a.m. EST by BearDickinson
(125)
from Ewing, VA
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
the Bill of Rights NOT A suggestion.................... step up - support what is right !
This is us - Occupy People who did the best we could do..........
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=dK7MWRMN_l4
Thank you, and sometime soon there will be 100,000. This is all a matter of planning and timing. I know there are more than that who would go if able.
oh dear, where have you been, january 17th was deemed to be the day the earth would change, they hyped it up so much even i got ecxited. what happened? 100 people turned up and threw a smoke bob and tried desperately to find occurances of the police ''harrassing'' protesters, thus posting the tiniest shove by a police on youtube and comparing it to torture at guantanamo bay. when will you people grow up?
Actually it was 2000 people, but tha fact is that this movement is not effectively coordinated at the point, and those numbers in no way reflect the deph of it's support. And by the way, I think corporations are becoming increasingly understood.
[Removed]
Thanks for this.........:)
Nice video!
The Bill of Rights, is NOT a suggestion!!!
Ya gotta love it.
The big sign @ 7:50 and the sign on the lower right @ 8:00 are very telling.
Also, why no mention of the smoke bomb thrown at the White House and the Secret Service/FBI manhunt now in progress?
I'm sure FLAKESnews has all the crap you'll ever believe.
Just like the tabloids at the grocery store, but the pictures move.
Don't worry, none of that tedious thinking is involved.
You're the perfect fit.
So then explain this......
http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/01/17/10177904-apparent-smoke-bomb-tossed-at-white-house
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/17/white-house-lock-down_n_1211982.html
The above are not FOX.
What we did was beautiful. we wanted 100,000 there - the police expected 10,000 ......what we got was people of true heart - dedicated and true to the cause............... i'll take the 2,000 who were there of true heart - dedicated beyond all possible cognition............. i love you - all who were there ...... i'll love you all to my dying day !
just watch, just listen - even the police loved what we did.................... it was beautiful, it was a start................it was spiritually right....................
Thanks for posting. Just so everyone knows, The 99% Declaration was there. Hopefully this will inspire everyone to join their effort. The time is now.
http://www.the-99-declaration.org/
THank you to those that went to DC. You are doing the whole country a service.
That said, the "99% declaration" does NOT represent OWS. It is completely dishonest to present it as such.
Gather 'round people, Tommy is going to give a lesson... on what does represent OWS.
AFarewellToKings:
The "99% declaration" is a document that displays a great deal of ignorance. Among its main demands is a return to the gold standard, and an elimination of the Fed. It is clearly written from a Ron Paulista Libertard point of view, something many people here have been battling tooth and nail. As such, it is DEVISIVE, the very reason OWS has not created such a list.
There may or may not be an official declaration by OWS in the future.(This is where they are working on it: http://www.nycga.net/groups/demands/ ) It will not be anytime soon, I'm sure. And it won't because it is trying to gather support from a broad range of people, not feed anti Fed conspiracy theorists and turn everyone with a brain off.
That stupid, premature, half-baked declaration is harming OWS, and presenting it with the name "99%" in an attempt to link it directly to this movement is blatant misrepresentation and attempted misdirection. It is the very thing we accuse politicians we revile of doing.
You blatantly ignore the fact that the document clearly states that the List Of Grievances is at this point only a suggested list, the final list to be determined by the delegates. Then you single out one or two items from the suggested list and use derogatory language in an attempt to eliminate all but the voices of anyone who may like a person's (RP's) ideas. How is that not divisive?
How could anything said be 'official' unless it can be proven that it is strongly and broadly supported by people from all over the USA? From what I have seen, Petitions for Redress in the past have always failed to past this test, hence ignored. At this point in time, large numbers of people electing two delegates from each Congressional District has a chance of passing this crucial test. More derogatory language implying anyone who supports the 99% Declaration is 'brainless'.
And still more derogatory language. To suggest that The 99% Declaration is doing OWS harm would indicate that OWS is in harms way and therefore weak. There is mounting evidence to back this up. To ignore serious concerns like the issue of two individuals copyrighting the OWS name, running an office in NYC populated by persons unknown that are at present shutout due to alleged inappropriate uses of the office space that donations to 'the movement' pays for, and illegitimate websites claiming 'officialdom' such as we have here and at the NYCGA site where there is a "Statement Of Autonomy" which openly and blatantly misrepresents itself by saying "passed by the General Assembly at Occupy Wall Street" , not "Liberty Park", then it is petty and ridiculous to spend time griping about the name chosen for 99% Declaration when the real transgressions which mirror the accused politicians we revile are alive and well at the very core of this movement.
Calling the proposed list of grievances and/or demands "the 99% declaration" is dishonest. It attempts to link the declaration to OWS. That is misdirection. It is purposeful. Whatever you think, rightly or wrongly, of the NYCGA, it does not mitigate the fact that you are being dishonest in your representation of who you are.
As to divisiveness, you have just proven my point for me. You claim, without evidence of any sort, that OWS is "weak". You claim that NYCGA is illegitimate; that, although an office is being paid for with OWS funds, it is merely a front for some nefarious Canadian organization, and on and on,,,,,,,,what are your statements other than divisive?
You may (or may not) have real grievances with OWS. Your misrepresenting yourself as part of OWS is, especially in light of that, misrepresentation. Dishonesty about yourself does not inspire confidence about your motivations. The divisiveness you yourself have just revealed does not indicate your solidarity with OWS.
You want to have a parallel movement? No problem. You might actualy get more supporters than OWS has. But don't do it while pretending it is the SAME movement as OWS. It is patently not.
The Declaration was linked to OWS at the NYCGA on the night of October 15th. Read about http://www.the-99-declaration.org/about/
Is it dishonest to call the movement OCCUPY Wall Street now that the eviction has occurred? It is just a name. It is not dishonest.
There is evidence right here in this post: 100,000 hoped for, 10,000 expected by police, some 2,000 attend Occupy Congress.
So now OWS, We Are The 99%, that bastion of every voice being heard, wants to evict The People that support the 99% Declaration? Interesting.
I'd be OK with calling OWS one arm of the body Revolution and calling The 99% the other arm. Different arms, same body. The way The Sons Of Liberty and The First Continental Congress worked together. Crushing strength there, in Unity.
NGA NOW
Indeed. OWS has stated time and time again that they will not make demands. That would create an hierarchical relationship between them and the government by putting all the decisional power into the government's hands. That's against the anarchic principles underlining OWS.
Personally, I like the idea of making demands. However, this should not be done in the name of OWS because, as you say, it is dishonest.
That said, it's hard to blame the ones behind the 99% Declaration for riding the wave created by OWS. I just wished they didn't use terms like 99% and icons like the Bell which clearly come from OWS. They should always make it clear that they are a side project profiting from the OWS popularity, and not an subgroup affiliated to OWS. Clarity and honesty can go a long way.
MY DEMAND - sanity - simply sanity. what we have is anything but that.
then by Thrasy's read of OWS shown above, you and I and others have no place in OWS because OWS does not make demands. Guess we've been evicted ; )
The relationship between The People and the government came into existence when we gave our consent to be governed, ie day one. The appearance of hierarchy has crept in over time as The People became complacent. Ultimately the real decisional power always lies with The People, not the government. OWS exercises the 1st Amendment right to peaceably assemble so why wouldn't it task a group, open to anyone and everyone, to exercise the 1st Amendment right to Petition for Redress? If OWS subscribes to anarchic principles hence revoking their consent to be governed, then how can they expect protection under the 1st Amendment?
It's name is The 99% Declaration not The OWS Declaration and is struggling for legitimacy as is OWS. It is not dishonest.
OWS would be a handful of people occupying land (or not) in a park in NYC if it weren't for 'The 99%' that marched in the streets. So who is riding who's wave? Could you show me where The Liberty Bell icon was previously used by OWS?
The 99% Declaration raises funds for specific purposes. Given that The 99% Declaration Working Group is included on the NYCGA website, would it be fair to say that all groups listed there are "profiting" from the OWS popularity? Given the size of the bank account under the control of the NYCGA and the highly questionable disbursements, what percentage of the total funds has been given to The 99% Declaration WG? I would hazard a guess that it is teeny tiny if not $0. Yet they raise funds to support the movement as a whole, offer a high degree of transparency, haven't squandered some $3000 on herbal tea and then are attacked constantly.
The 99% Declaration is not clear or honest? How does OWS measure up? Or is OWS not required to measure up because 'they' 'own' the movement?
I disagree with just about everything you wrote. I'm too sick to offer an in-depth reply at the moment. If I feel better tomorrow, I'll do it then.
Look at the old OWS Philly posters from the beginning of the protest.
It's their movement. They started it. Are you saying that anybody with any idea can claim to represent OWS? That's ludicrous, and would be utterly meaningless. If anything can be OWS, than OWS means nothing.
Just be honest and clearly state that the 99% Declaration wasn't passed in an OWS GA and has nothing to do with OWS.
The Liberty Bell image used on some old posters from Philadelphia is hardly on par with the the fist logo of OWS.
It's their movement? They sought support from all quarters and promised everyone a voice. The concept of unifying the ga's at the national level so that the petition for redress can be verifiably legitimized is portrayed by you as outer limits fringe? (isn't that a straw man or red herring or something?) I'd love to see poll numbers on that. I can't accurately poll all USA General Assemblies so it's impossible to say that it wasn't passed in an OWS GA. But since OWS want's every backyard to be a GA, I'll hold a General Assembly tonight in my back yard and let you know tomorrow if the 99% Declaration passed. ok?
Given my unwaivering position regarding the 99% Declaration on this forum since I joined, and honestly I don't discuss too much else, and given my +/- score, that could be a modest indicator of the mainstream support for the 99% Declaration too.
Your trying to use your karma score on this site to validate your claim that the 99% Declaration benefits from the mainstream support of OWS protesters?
Sorry, but that is the lamest argument I have read on all the Internet forums I have ever used. And, really, the only thing it does is show that you have no counter-arguments of worth. You're really digging at the bottom of the barrel, not to say underneath it where the earth worms reside.
It doesn't matter what the people on this site think. The only thing that matters is what passes in general assemblies. You're profiting from the popularity of OWS by passing off your declaration as being officially supported by OWS. That is a dishonest lie, and the fact that your 99% Declaration must lean on the shoulders of OWS like a young depressed teenage girl leans on the shoulders of her boyfriend after the unfortunate death of her first dog in order to not to crumble to the ground says a lot about its validity,
Keep playing Donkey Kong. Maybe you'll hit the high score with those karma points sooner or later.
Cheers
Lame? then why bother having the score at all?
What is this site if not as equally valid a GA (the 'official' cyberGA) as any GA anywhere. It calls itself occupywallstreet.org and OWS is a name in the process of being patented, so won't people coming here assume that this is in fact THE cyberNGA? And how is what passes in any GA more valid or material when only a teeny-tiny percentage of people can or do attend them. And where's the data flow from these GA's to show any broader consensus if it did matter?
Perhaps the 'karma score' here is in fact a better indication of consensus because the data can be analyzed unlike any GA meeting?
Profiting? I see a lot of people volunteering a lot of time to support the 99% Declaration and I also see a lot of money flowing out of the donations bank account in NYC for herbal tea and metro passes etc. I have to pay for my own ISP and transportation to de occupation ; )
Who is it again that decides what is 'official' and what is not?
Well, if it's all about karma, I got 1000+ points on top of you so I guess my counter-argument wins. Tough luck.
I don't think there should be karma points. I've told this to jart on more than one occasion. I'm not here to play Donkey Kong, and I think it's a logical fallacy of appeal to authority to base one's arguments on the karma points earned. The only thing that matters to me is the content of a post, not it's author nor his points.
This site is not a valid GA because there is no method to table ideas, nor a method to come to a consensus to decide if those ideas should be passed and adopted by OWS.
It's just a site for discussions; discussions which don't have much bearing of what OWS ends up doing. Originally, it wasn't even designed for discussions, but was designed for a place so that OWS protesters could organize real life meetings.
You can read the GA minutes on the NYCGA site which is linked in the menu of this site.
No, the karma points don't indicate much at all. All new users start off with 0 karma points. These new users might have wonderful ideas, and they shouldn't be judged on the fact that they have yet to accumulate karma points.
That's really not an argument of worth. What OWS does with its money is decided in GA and that's the business of whoever attends to decide.
It's ridiculous to think that anyone can decide that anything is suddenly officially supported by OWS just because they decide that it is.
You are profiting from the popularity of OWS in a dishonest way. Just be honest and state clearly that the 99% Declaration has nothing to do with OWS.
The official stuff is what is passed in GA. It's as simple as that.
As I said, my comments earn points mostly discussing the 99% Declaration. Harness up a team of search engines and see what happens.
Agreed, I didn't need the score to know the score.
Ideas are tabled with every post topic. This forum has some shortcomings with regard to consensus but as i said so do the physical GA's. As for being "adopted by OWS" do you mean NYCGA? How are the ideas from the GA being held tonight in my backyard to be "adopted by OWS". Are you saying the GA in my backyard is a waste of time when the official GA is in NYC? Sorry i can't remember where I saw that bit about every backyard being a GA
I said broader consensus.It looks like minutes from any GA other than NYC, the GA that represents 1% of protesters, who also control the (majority?) cash donations are completely irrelevant. For example, there is no consistent times and agendas from one GA to the next so there is no way to determine a broad concensus. The NGA at least gives the opportunity to approach a broader more meaningful consensus until a better system is implemented that is supported widely and trusted: ie
July 4, 2012: NECA releases the world's first ever Nation Polling App for Millions of Americans to vote and/or poll on important national issues via their mobile phone or computer. NECA estimates that more than 100 million Americans will download the App in the next 12 months as the new App can show instant results of millions of people voting each and every second on a specific topic. The new polling technology will be featured on the NECA's Channel's new prime-time show "The Real Voice of America" coming this Fall. This first-of-its-kind TV show makes it possible for those in The White House and Congress to see with empirical evidence what "We the People" are saying on a weekly basis.
When OWS relies on donations from people then we find out that unless we're physically present at the right place and the right time, our thoughts and ideas can be deemed irrelevant by a handful of people who we had no chance to choose to represent our interests who can do whatever they want, and they seem to be running the ship onto the rocks, and if we demand better they attack....
I guess they've created the 98%.
Well, good luck in passing off your ideas as being OWS ideas.
Let's hope people don't just start coming here, post a few things, get high karma points, then think whatever they are advancing has magically got the OWS approval because of that.
BTW - 1400 points is nothing. And, points can be tampered with in many ways. They mean nothing.
The 99% Declaration wasn't my idea. OWS wasn't my idea. I just like supporting them.
I'm not waiting for OWS approval, I'm saying the NYCGA has lost it's legitimacy to issue or deny 'approvals'. It's a conflict of interest that destroyed it's legitimacy. A lot like the political class OWS is railing against.
0 points is nothing. 3000 points for posting watch nba season 9 free online blah blah is nothing either. 1412 points which would stand up pretty well under analysis is something at this point in time however may be next to nothing if OWS persists. Remember, this forum is meaningless as you said. And points are too due to tampering and lack of transparency (Jart and Co)
"Its authority was limited to the willingness of the people to respect and obey its suggestions and mandates." applies to this site and the NYCGA as it did to the First Continental Congress.
2877 points certainly represents some worthwhile reading too.
Soon, AFTK
it's sad what we have in here - this forum. so many trolls - i will not feed you. you are forgotten and ignored. get a life and try to do something positive, please.
i challenge you !
Lobby the government. Your voice is a vote. Petitioning is lobbying. The Peoples Lobby. Take part, take action.
Forward environmental change. Your participation can make a difference.
http://act.credoaction.com/campaign/keystone_sotu/?id=33678-4904244-%3Dxzka6x&t=7
187,506 signatures so far for Bernie Sanders petition as of 9:48am central time 01/20/2012
http://sanders.enews.senate.gov/mail/util.cfm?mailaction=clickthru&gpiv=2100081904.557411.411&gen=1&mailing_linkid=34578
The petition to save abandoned houses has 16 signatures as of 01/20/2012. Were just rolling right along.
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/Savingpeople-savinghomes-payingdowntheNationaldeficit/
Here is a place where you can directly address change. Take part, it does not hurt and may very well heal/help. Forward the cause of reform and rebirth.
http://www.care2.com/go/z/e/Ag8nw/zL2Q/B18Bb
Sierra Club has some good things to take part in as well. Set-up and ready for you to take part in. http://sierraclub.org/
The big sign @ 7:50 and the sign on the lower right @ 8:00 are very telling.
Also, why no mention of the smoke bomb thrown at the White House and the Secret Service/FBI manhunt now in progress?
OWS planned a terrorist attack against the White House?
Duh!
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,2104719,00.html
Hmm... I had a feeling OWS would get violent. I predicted that two months ago.
And I don't see anyone here condemning that..... or any of the other violent acts either.
well open your fucking eyes then -
That post is top of the board:
The strategy has been to exaggerate police violence and to push aside OWS violence by saying it comes from fringe groups and individuals who don't represent the movement.
For example, the story of the veteran hit by a canister and the story of the Pepper Spray were horrible, but I don't think they represent the majority of police encounters with Occupy. Nevertheless, OWS has used them to promote the idea that all cops behave in this way. In contrast, the Occupy violence in Oakland was quickly brushed away by pinning it on the BlackBloc.
I support many aspects of OWS, but I also have problems with the protest. I think it could be a lot more transparent and honest. But, of course, every group in the world uses propaganda in an attempt to have their bright colors plastered in the news instead of their darker shades. This is normal, but we must talk about it.
Exactly. Classic Saul Alinsky tactics.
BTW, OWS...... This is the only part of your lame protest that made the news: http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,2104719,00.html
Nice job, as always.
I found this bit interesting:
The forgot to mention the Socialists! LOL