Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: VIDEO - Oakland Woman Cried due to Violence towards her store

Posted 9 years ago on Nov. 5, 2011, 5:08 a.m. EST by electrictroy (282)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

"I cried. We donated to the 99% and they do things like this to me and My store??? Very disheartening."

VIDEO - http://youtu.be/bSxKwiML6T0

98 Comments

98 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 3 points by EndGluttony (507) 9 years ago

I believe she cried DUE to violence. I've been consistently entertained by the rampant grammatical and spelling errors posted on this forum by right wingers, i.e. fucking morons.

[-] 1 points by mynameisfred (115) 9 years ago

We work much more on our MATH skills. You are probably still paying for that student loan from a liberal univeristy.

[-] 0 points by electrictroy (282) 9 years ago

Oh look! A spelling bot escaped from wikipedia! How cute.

I think I spelled pretty well considering it was 5 a.m. and I was tired. And no I am not "fucking morons". I prefer the ladies with college degrees in the sciences. I like to fuck smart people.

Oh wait... you meant ME. You think I'm dumb. Well I have two (soon to be three) college degrees and an IQ of 135, so I'm certainly no moron.

[-] 1 points by EndGluttony (507) 9 years ago

Degrees in what? Did you take that IQ test online?

[-] 0 points by electrictroy (282) 9 years ago

It just occurred to me that even if you were a Spelling bot, you would not have caught my error. I spelled "do" correctly... I merely substituted the wrong homophone.

Engineering, Electronics, Computer programming, No a formal test.

[-] 2 points by KirkVanHouten (123) 9 years ago

This is what thugocracy looks like.

[-] 2 points by Teacher (469) 9 years ago

Crazy people show up at protests. Its a fact but we can do something about it. We need to police our own people the way that (some) civil rights groups did in the 50s and 60s.

[-] 1 points by derek (302) 9 years ago

Well said on the need for OWS to police its own demonstrators, and this is why: http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/change/science_nonviolence.html "The shocking terrorist attacks of September 11th, coming just six weeks after Genoa, add to the likelihood that any type of property destruction or confrontations with police at future demonstrations will be highly counterproductive. Such attacks would anger the overwhelming majority of Americans and meet with strong repression on the part of the government. Reassessment therefore becomes a necessity, providing an opportunity for a new start based on the realization that the property destruction and physical attacks on the police of the previous few years led the movement into a dead end. In democratic countries, social movements need to be based on a commitment to the strategic, nonviolent forms of direct action discussed throughout this document. Such a commitment leaves plenty of room to disrupt routines and get in the way of power without dividing the movement and alienating potential supporters, and it is far more effective in the long run. This commitment should include the principles put forth by advocates of strategic nonviolence for dealing with pro-violence groups. Nonviolent groups should distance themselves from violent groups and strongly condemn their philosophies and actions. Only groups that specifically state that they are completely committed to strategic nonviolence should be allowed to be co-sponsors of marches and participate in their planning."

[That site seems to be down all of a sudden; an archive link: http://web.archive.org/web/20101205055529/http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/change/science_nonviolence.html ]

[-] 2 points by electrictroy (282) 9 years ago

SILENCE from the occupy group.

Not even denunciations.

[-] 0 points by ChristopherABrownART5 (46) from Santa Barbara, CA 9 years ago

Apparently the notion that city officials, police, and people posting here, infiltrating those that stand for constitutional government, is not something you will consider as something of THIS occupy group. OR, that those of this group opposing unconstitutional, collusive efforts to attack the media standing of the group that seeks to defend the constitution is actually from the Occupy group.---

Your action of creating this thread with the intentions you have is DENOUNCED as unconstitutionally motivated and intending to oppose those seeking to defend the constitution. You actions here are ultimately treasonous against the US constitution just like you co-infiltrator of this group techjunkie. You are exposed and these posts of one of THIS occupy group exposing treasonous behavior you employ as well joins you to another with the same behavior.----

This is a denunciation of you and your effort to imply that legitimate Occupy efforts in Oakland actually damaged property of a citizen supporter. Your behavior is treasonous in its obvious collusion.

http://occupywallst.org/forum/woman-cried-do-to-violence-towards-her-store/#comment-300589 http://occupywallst.org/forum/woman-cried-do-to-violence-towards-her-store/#comment-293508 http://occupywallst.org/forum/woman-cried-do-to-violence-towards-her-store/#comment-296288 http://occupywallst.org/forum/woman-cried-do-to-violence-towards-her-store/#comment-296415 http://occupywallst.org/forum/woman-cried-do-to-violence-towards-her-store/#comment-297837

[-] 0 points by electrictroy (282) 9 years ago

Uh... what?

I'm probably the most constitutional person on this website. I'm one of a very few who understands the 9th and 10th Amendments are our most important rights. (Power is reserved to the People and the People's State Legislatures, not the corporate-controlled congress.)

So basically your attack missed the target my friend... waaaaay off.

[-] 0 points by ChristopherABrownART5 (46) from Santa Barbara, CA 9 years ago

Okay, then you've inadvertantly created a thread alleging with no factual basis other than obvious conjunct timing that Occupy was responsible. I know the Oscar Grant riots were made violent by people bussed in just to do that, so I would EXPECT that a peaceful and lawful protest would be targeted by such violence impersonating those that are lawful.-

Along the same lines, some proof that they were Occupy people rather than just malcontents or worse directed, needs to be posted. Maybe it's here already, but I haven't seen it.-----

Yes the states are what create the lawful demand for article 5. This movement really is about that at best, but it is so mislead it does not articulate well. I defend what it says from its very loose official basis, which is not violent and is law abiding. If others try to confuse that with criminal acts, it will be coming out probably.

[-] 0 points by PandoraK (1678) 9 years ago

Ever think that there are actions being taken you are unaware of?

I was around for a few demonstrations in my day and in every group there are subgroups some of which are either overzealous or actually destructive, and there are also groups which will attempt to correct the errors of the former.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 9 years ago

youtube video description


Details are sketchy. But it appears a small faction of some 90 protesters set-out to provoke police action. This has detracted from the success of the daytime General Strike, which saw 9,000 people assemble peacefully.

AP is a registered trademark of The Associated Press. I do not claim, or have any, affiliation with The Associated Press. This video was not intended for any personal gain, only for information purposes. All comments by others are their own and I do not take responsibility for their actions. For more information http://www.ap.org


[-] 1 points by Capitalist111 (59) 9 years ago

If you have to, protect your property, if your property is attacked you have a right to protect it by any means, don't believe me? Ask any Korean Shop owner during the Rodney King riots.

[-] 1 points by moediggity (646) from Houston, TX 9 years ago

Fucking dumb bitch doesn't even think that "hey maybe some dick wad did this". but no we live in dumbfuck america where the only path is the one that our idiotic government and corporate owned media provides. Blame OWS blame OWS yadda yadda yadda.

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 9 years ago

This is jacked up.

[-] 1 points by CancelCurrency (128) 9 years ago

OWS did not started the problems in society. It just reacted to it. Police should do better job arresting violent people not peaceful! But anyway I would sacrifice few windows in exchange for the lifetime slavery!

[-] 1 points by Daennera (765) from Griffith, IN 9 years ago

Except you didn't work your butt of to earn those windows now did you? I doubt you own any windows at all. I bet you rent all your windows and therefore don't give a rat's ass about someone breaking them because they are not your responsibility. These assholes that did this to this poor woman should be hanged in the street.

Nothing, not life nor limb, is more sacred than property. Get it right, dumbass.

[-] 1 points by hivemind (131) 9 years ago

This was sad... :(

[-] 1 points by ChristopherABrownART5 (46) from Santa Barbara, CA 9 years ago

This obviously calls for strategy of citizen enforcement by arrest. These are very complex condition created by the infiltrators of our nation, official and otherwise.---

A group of occupy protesters that are deeply committed to peaceful and lawful assembly can act demanding the enforcement of the the constitution, and that is what people are doing, whether they know it or not; they can act to prevent impediment to defending the constitution from treason, by conducting citizens arrest of ANYONE sabotaging the reality of citizens peaceful acts. Any such thing that by design damages the reputation in the media, of citizens seeking to defend the constitution must be exposed to the greatest degree.-----

The group needs to be on the advancing or flank edges where vandalism or violence might be conducted. They need to be unmarked and basically acting independently because OWS probably does not have what it takes to support this. Not solid with law and constitutional enough in basis.----

The group needs to study citizens arrest and the simple logic behind claiming the vandalism is in support of treason. One witness is all that is needed, but 4 would be a minimum as support and they should be ready to call police if there is a unified resistance against their lawful arrest of a provocateur by the associates of the criminal.-----

The first words to 9-11 for assistance should be something like this. "An imposter demonstrator, infiltrating our lawful assembly and opposing citizens good standing with media in their constitutional defense against treason, is being arrested in a citizens arrest for vandalism and police support is needed." Or in the case of group resistance against those attempting to arrest a criminal in this position, "During an arrest of a vandal impersonating lawful assembly, it has been found that a group of impostors are attempting to damage our standing with media and impede our efforts to defend the constitution against treason..........." Give details of the group, arrestee, arrestor and witnesses. Have at least 1 witness to the phone call.

[-] 1 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 9 years ago

You're proposing a militant White Bloc faction to go after the Black Bloc people?

[-] 0 points by ChristopherABrownART5 (46) from Santa Barbara, CA 9 years ago

No.-----

You attempt to change the subject. You are exposing yourself. The subject is that you are trying to damage the standing of citizens in media working in the defense of the constituion from treason. You are using the vandals or some other group set for the same purpose to try and do that. They are your tool in this attack on those defending the constitution from treason.-------

Logic exposes you in your action.

[-] 1 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 9 years ago

You proposed covert ("unmarked") teams, four people each minimum, who would go to the "advancing of flanking edge", to conduct "citizen arrests" of people committing vandalism. You didn't actually use the term White Bloc, but aside from that...

[-] 0 points by ChristopherABrownART5 (46) from Santa Barbara, CA 9 years ago

I only know you oppose those that ARE defending the constitution from treason. They may not know that, but I do. You are working to attack their standing in the public eye and media. You are assisting treason. Go away. Get a nation, get some principles.

[-] 2 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 9 years ago

Your all-or-nothing thinking that places people into black or white categories has you classifying me as somebody who opposes whatever it is that you stand for. Which in your case happens to be "defending the Constitution from treason". And therefore you naturally conclude that I must be against the Constitution, and for treason.

And so the irony in this one is that you're the one going around trying to convince people to change the constitution, while telling me that I'm against the constitution, even thought I like the Constitution the way it is! There is a lot of irony with you, that's why I find you so entertaining.

[-] 1 points by derek (302) 9 years ago

Here is an entire website on your point about moving beyond thinking in "black and white" to thinking in "color": http://www.anwot.org/

[-] 1 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 9 years ago

I totally agree. I'm just picking on Christopher for his hilarious self-contradictions. Specifically, at the moment, the one where he's going around accusing everybody who disagrees with him of being "infiltrators" who employ "cognitive distortion", which he defines in a list of tactics that starts with:

"1. All or nothing thinking: Things are placed in black or white categories. If things are less than perfect self is viewed as failure"

Funny, right?

[-] 0 points by ChristopherABrownART5 (46) from Santa Barbara, CA 9 years ago

Your "no constitution" thinking places you in opposition to it infiltrator. Article V and the rule of law. Your act is to attack those that defend the constitution from treason. You are assisting treason.------

If this is NOT true, you will show how you are supporting or defending the constitution.

Because of law, or you are against the law or within the law, my position generalizing your behavior is fully justified. There is a constitution which needs defense. Your turn, explain how you will defend and enforce it.

[-] 1 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 9 years ago

Your logic is really entertaining. I cherish the First Amendment, and the rest of the Constitution, and the ever-evolving interpretation. Whereas you think that the First Amendment is wrong and needs to be changed, as well as the rest of it. But somehow you manage to twist that into telling me that I'm the one who is against the Constitution.

The way that it happens in your mind, is that you see yourself as standing for a cause. The specific cause doesn't matter. Fill in the blank: [ defending the Constitution ] Then if I come along and don't agree with you, then you classify me as against you. It doesn't occur to you in any way that I could be anything other than "against" you, because you employ all-of-nothing thinking. You can't imagine any other possibility, other than support for whatever your cause is, or opposing you. If I'm not with you, then I must be against you. Therefore, your logic concludes that I must be against the Constitution.

If your cause were protecting chinchillas from tsunamis, and I showed up to pick on you, then you would assume that I'm for killing chinchillas with tsunamis. It doesn't ever occur to you that I could just be making fun of the idea of protecting chinchillas from tsunamis.

Funny stuff. Very entertaining. I have no need for television for entertainment as long as this movement is still going, and as long as this web site is still here, attracting a certain demographic.

[-] 0 points by ChristopherABrownART5 (46) from Santa Barbara, CA 9 years ago

Explain how you are going to enforce, support and defend the constitution you say you cherish. So far you are a total failure, in fact your continued presense works against it as long as you bring no substance defending it.

[-] 1 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 9 years ago

My job is not to enforce the Constitution. But I have been doing my part to inform some people here of their incorrect ideas related to the Constitution. For example, the widespread belief among Occupy protesters that it's a violation of the First Amendment for the government to require a permit for a political protest.

But your pressure on me to explain how I'm going to defend the Constitution really is just another manifestation of your black-or-white thinking. If I don't actively defend the Constitution, then I must be against the Constitution? There are only two options? If I'm not out volunteering to save chinchillas from tsunamis, then I must be a chinchilla drowner?

[-] 0 points by ChristopherABrownART5 (46) from Santa Barbara, CA 9 years ago

As I thought, you attempt to evade enforcement or defense of the constitution. Your presence can only be interpreted in this context as against the constitution. You are exposed and continue to expose yourself as long as you do not engage law that shows support and defense of the constitution.-------

If you are here doing what you are doing then you are working to attack those that defend the constitution. You assist in treason and your continued actions prove it.

[-] 1 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 9 years ago

You're entitled to that paranoid conspiracy theory. But you really should stop going around accusing people of "cognitive distortion" tactics that start with 'tactic #1: black or white, absolutist thinking'. Because that makes you look like a hypocrite who barely understands what he's accusing other people of doing. You've admitted repeatedly that you haven't even read that Isebyrt book that you're going around using as a citation to back your paranoid delusions. And you're committing your own "cognitive distortion" sin with this absolutism. Regardless of the fact that I don't volunteer on weekends to protect chinchillas from tsunamis, I am not anti-chinchilla. Accusing me of being anti-chinchilla for not spending my time defending chinchillas is just a manifestation of absolutist thinking.

[-] 1 points by nickhowdy (1104) 9 years ago

Come on...electrictoy....All of us need to look at the ultimate cause of all of this. OWS..is just a symptom of the disease which the world is having to endure..Which is Sociopathic Predatory Capitalism...

[-] 0 points by electrictroy (282) 9 years ago

Capitalism is Ebay.

I list my goods for sale and you buy them (or vice-versa I buy from you). How is that evil and why do Occupy protesters want to end it?

Perhaps because of the Bailouts? But that is really forced-market Cronyism not free-market capitalism. That was Congress stealing money from the buyers (us) and giving it to the sellers (megacorps). That's Force not a free market

[-] 2 points by nickhowdy (1104) 9 years ago

I didn't say I wanted capitalism to end. I said "Sociopathic Predatory Capitalism". The Sociopaths out there that are missing that little thing I call "scruples"..and are the reason why this form of Capitalism is failing...

Capitalism works when people are getting a value for value transaction..When someone enters into an agreement with the intent to steal then you are destroying the thing that makes Capitalism work...

The Banks are the reason Capitalism (in it's current form-Crony Capitalism) is self destructing...Heads they win, tails they win, and they control our government to extract wealth from the people and there is a real good chance if you aren't at the top of the pyramid scheme that you'll walk out of this casino gulag state with nothing.

These bankers are Sociopatic. They are too willing to destroy everything for the sake of extreme arbitrage. Yes that is evil.

[-] 0 points by electrictroy (282) 9 years ago

You don't have to borrow money from banks. Just as you don't have to buy TV from Comsucks or other cable companies.

[-] 2 points by nickhowdy (1104) 9 years ago

It's not about borrowing...I invest in a 401K and if that is just money for someone else to steal from me them I'm not fucking investing in the market..This is what I'm talking about...Even if the Bernanke makes things just so, that interest rates went negative, I still wouldn't invest in that piece of shit..Because of the problem it has of not providing a value for a value..Again the market is a rigged casino and if you walk into the casino without the intent of stealing from the thieves... You are making a big mistake. Another option: Don't play and don't give them your money..

[-] 0 points by electrictroy (282) 9 years ago

Another option: Don't play and don't give them your money..

I was just about to say that. You don't have to deal with banks or buy Comcast cable or buy phone service from Apple or ....... (Vice-versa I challenge you not to give money to the government. You'll get jailed.)

[-] 3 points by nickhowdy (1104) 9 years ago

I make upper 6 figures (100-200) and have a 11.98% effective tax rate..Only BofA can get away with paying nothing...Yea someone should be going to jail..All those fake "job creators" asking for lower tax rates to create jobs and then not create anything...Of course you'd have to buy into the idea that people create jobs they don't need to for some tax benefit. They don't.

[-] 1 points by electrictroy (282) 9 years ago

The effective tax rate for the top 1% is now 32% not "nothing".

[-] 1 points by nickhowdy (1104) 9 years ago

I was saying BofA payed "nothing" (that's a fact) and if you look at the progressive tax rate you should be in the 12's if you made between 100-200. Your top rate is 35 I believe..but that is not applied to your entire income.

[-] 1 points by iam99pct (115) 9 years ago

Ebay is a pretty dumb example of "how capitalism works"...

...unless you consider the "unseen hand" of the Ebay infrastructure:

  • profiting from EVERY POSTING AND TRANSACTION
  • controlling each sale, invalidating it if needed
  • working fist-in-glove with Paypal, further profiting on EVERY TRANSACTION

Come to think of it - maybe Ebay=government and Paypal=banks.

I'm starting to like this game

[-] 0 points by electrictroy (282) 9 years ago

If you don't like Ebay as an example, then substitute Farmers' Market. They sell food and I buy it.

Vice-versa they buy farm equipment from my store. Free market capitalism. Why do you want to kill this and replace it with communes?

[-] 0 points by Killumination (80) from Los Angeles, CA 9 years ago

Pizzazz Picasso and the Killumination - Killuminati ft. Gaje http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mLUpGGmku8g

Pizzazz Picasso and the Killumination - Change (Killumination version) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5SMrnx6nkRw

Pizzazz Picasso and the Killumination - The inevitable incredible truth http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Wg1bH6-1YY

Pizzazz Picasso and the Killumination - The all seeing eye http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HgKS4i-u0OM

http://www.reverbnation.com/Killumination

http://www.soundcloud.com/Killumination

Donate!!!

https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=NKRL8TGE95H2Y

[-] 0 points by ChristopherABrownART5 (46) from Santa Barbara, CA 9 years ago

TechJunkie wrote: You're entitled to that paranoid conspiracy theory. But you really should stop going around accusing people of "cognitive distortion" tactics that start with 'tactic #1: black or white, absolutist thinking'. Because that makes you look like a hypocrite who barely understands what he's accusing other people of doing. You've admitted repeatedly that you haven't even read that Isebyrt book that you're going around using as a citation to back your paranoid delusions. And you're committing your own "cognitive distortion" sin with this absolutism. Regardless of the fact that I don't volunteer on weekends to protect chinchillas from tsunamis, I am not anti-chinchilla. Accusing me of being anti-chinchilla for not spending my time defending chinchillas is just a manifestation of absolutist thinking.END------

Trying to assert that the constitution and law under it, or logic supporting that law by interpreting behaviors which DO support it as "paranoid conspiracy theory" shows you attacking those working to support the law of the land. That is a treasonous action in these conditions.

[-] 0 points by Rob (881) 9 years ago

How about occupy Oakland clean the graphitti and pay for the damage?

[-] 0 points by karenpoore (902) 9 years ago

It is a shame that this happened and was not done by the supporters of OWS. Please lady look at the overall cause and not some of the effects.

I wonder how many tears you have shed over the slaughter of millions of innocent people overseas in this ten year war.

[-] 0 points by steven2002 (363) 9 years ago

You get what you deserve, you pay your employees minimum wage, you do not provide health insurance or a retirement plan. You keep the money you make for yourself in stead of sharing the wealth.

[-] -2 points by electrictroy (282) 9 years ago

You're a shitbag. How DARE you say the woman "deserved" to have her coffee shop destroying? Stupid selfish liberal-socialist Democrat

[-] 0 points by Daennera (765) from Griffith, IN 9 years ago

Rule by mob, otherwise known as "direct democracy". This is what it looks like when you give the most numerous, and therefore the lowest quality of human, the most power.

[-] 1 points by alfi (469) 9 years ago

no, you are engaged in misinformation. Please do not spread falsities:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2011/mar/17/us-spy-operation-social-networks

my comment from a previous post here: http://occupywallst.org/forum/i-demand-informed-direct-democracy-online-whos-wit/#comment-290118

"Interesting how the US government has such an interest to undermine the obvious Democratic World Revolution enabled by the internet. They are so scared that the people will figure it out here in the US soon, their intelligence told them of this probably from the time the first online Democratic voting site went up anywhere in the world. I'm sure they have been preparing for this for a while now. This article you posted makes me try EVEN harder! Thanks! for me, this is even MORE of a confirmation that it will work than any other pro-DD argument - the fact that the US gov is preparing so hard for people gaining direct online voting power - their fear makes me believe it will work, the US war machine is not afraid for nothing."

@Daennera, testing, testing, are you human? are you drone? how realistic can you make your answers?

[-] 1 points by Daennera (765) from Griffith, IN 9 years ago

Nope, I'm pretty sure if the actual majority of the populace is making the decisions, we will devolve into violence and poverty. There are reasons the lowest of the low are so numerous. I do not wish to have those reasons introduced into my house or onto my land or into my life.