New ATS Survey: Occupy Wall Street

Originally posted by rabidrabbit

Don't you believe Wall Street are the ones really calling the shots?

I believe that if laws were passed making lobbying and bribery hanging offenses for politicians, Wall Street wouldn't be able to do a damn thing about it any more. I most definitely believe that no wall street bean counters are going to pass any laws to block their own avarice.

I believe it doesn't matter in the least whether wall Street thinks they're calling the shots or not.

I believe that no amount of protest at Wall Street will cause Wall Street to pass any laws against themselves.

Why are you so interested in maligning a protest you admit to not knowing much about?

I know only what information they give out about themselves on their web sites. If I don't know much about them, it's not from lack of effort at trying - it's from lack of transparency in their communications.

Why shouldnt they be protesting on Wall Street?

Because it's worse than non-productive, it's counter-productive. Unless, of course, those pulling the strings intend to provoke a violent reaction for sympathy's sake, to try to garner popular support for their own (hidden) agenda later on down the road.

Also, people are ALSO protesting in DC. It's not an either/or. And all over. It seems like you are desperately trying to malign a group that you might very well have much in common with.

Good for the ones in DC - but they need help, which is being siphoned off elsewhere, tilting at windmills.

I may have a few common goals with them, but most definitely not common methodology or strategy. I learned long ago that the enemy of my enemy is not necessarily my friend.

reply to post by Jason88


Talk to people and ask the same types of questions to each and everyone. That's what I did. I didn't hide my curiousity nor did I make them feel as if I supported each individual idea.

I questioned.

I also studied prior so I could possibly educate if I heard utter nonsense. Which I didn't.

But a lot of people were surprised when they brought up a subject and I had a valid counterpoint.

One amusing counterpoint I brought up was when one girl told me that they were there to bring down the corperations, as she was munching down a McDonalds Big Mac Value meal.

I mildly told her..."You realize that McDonalds is a corporation, right?" and pointed to a Corp/American Flag (whatever it's called).

She actually stared at me with her mouth open (full of fries) and didn't say a thing. I kinda felt bad. , but in a good way.

Maybe she opened her mind a bit that day.

I don't mind that this one is US oriented - although many think it is based on the Arab Spring. But if ATS wants to get us stupid Europeans in, then there should be some questions for us too.

Originally posted by neo96
already know how that survey is going to turn out theres nothing new there same things i have been reading for over a year on here.

government has zero blame wall street is evil and we want our "Free stuff" same thing the current potus campaigned on.

theres not one original thought among that crowd.

Pffffft. Obvious political troll is obvious.

I'm sure there are TONS of people on here that think that the government is 100% innocent. You betcha. .

reply to post by TDawgRex


Maybe funny, but you asked questions and brought your opinions right there to influence the kids? That's the kind of poll I don't like at all.

>>>Do you support the overall direction and intentions of the Occupy Wall street Movement?

reply to post by nenothtu

I most definitely believe that no wall street bean counters are going to pass any laws to block their own avarice.

Because of this reason, I believe that this is one of those rare occasions where we should have a nationwide referendum. Just put it on the 2012 ballot. Take the power out of congress's hands. Let the people decide how, and from whom, they receive their money. Otherwise, Congress will never bite the hand that feeds them...and the cycle continues.

Speaking of referendums, why do we not have them? Seriously, congress does so many things that are outside the constitution, but they will cry foul over something that makes sense.

reply to post by Siddharta


I was honest with them and asked for their honest answers. Nothing more. They gave them to me as well and all were very polite. As was I.

It was a pretty good day all in all. I learned a lot, but was amused at times as well. Read the story.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

I took the survey and had to answer a couple neutral as well, but if NYC protest does get down and dirty violence, I whole heartily blame the NYPD. They have been showing brutality on protestors from the get go. From all the video's I saw it's always the police shoving, slamming people down, twisting peoples arms, pepper spraying. If you watch the video's very closely especially the one with protestors on the bridge you will see the fallacy in their way of thinking all over the place. If police wanted all the protestors to disperse and leave the area on the bridge then why barricade each end of the bridge?? They had no intention in letting people go! Portland Oregon never had this problem it was completely peaceful and looked exactly the same as NYC did. Probably because law officers and the mayor was marching in protest Portland too. It wouldn't look good to pepper spray your own mayor. NYPD definitely has issues though.

Originally posted by mishigas


It seems to me that the OWS is Obama's desperate version of the Tea Party Movement. He has even infused unions into some of these gatherings. But it is a poor, pathetic attempt at a copy of the TPM;

Funny, that is basically the EXACT same thing the liberal press said about the Republicans and the Tea Party.

And, as with them your broad generalizations don't actually consider the many valid points and varied nuances of an actual political movement.

Considering the amount of Ron Paul supporters down there, considering the amount of anti-Obama signs, I'd say calling this an "Obama movement" is sort of head-in-the-sand.

reply to post by SkepticOverlord


YES!!!

I'm going to submit now so you can use the results for whatever purpose you see fit. I'm sure there's no other motive other than just to gauge an opinion....LOL

*snip*

Originally posted by nenothtu


I believe that no amount of protest at Wall Street will cause Wall Street to pass any laws against themselves.

And yet there presence there is stirring up a discussion which very well could lead to what you claim you want, which is political reform. As for the protesters who ARE currently in DC? You choose to ignore that Or the various smaller 'demonstrations' in various cities? You seem far more interested in criticizing them from the start than you are on actually listening and understanding. That takes time, reflection and an open mind. Not per-determined positions.
I could easily list off all the problems i have with the naive left and their silly little demonstrations. It aint hard. Half those kids havent a clue what they are talking about. But there is FAR, FAR more to this.

It's just like how the left maligns the 'tea party'; they focus on a few idiots and claim it represents the whole. They intentionally misrepresent their ideology ("they're racists!") and then argue against straw men.

I'm not saying you need to agree with everything the are saying. I certainly don't. I'm just saying that you might actually benefit from listening to what they are actually saying and finding the common thread, instead of being intent upon maligning a very large, disparate group so casually, as your posts constantly do. You certainly don't have to seek common ground. I'm merely offering you the suggestion to not just believe the MSM's narrative here.

I'm sorry,but I really have to bring this in the ring.
The Glass-Steagall Act.
I haven't seen anyone mention it.
Research and educate yourself.
That is all.

Sooner or later someone will start shooting.

I rather expect it will either be:

1- A 'white shirted' NYPD officer.
2- Someone who was maced or beaten by the police (or a direct family member there of.) (Protestor side.)
3- Someone who works at Wall Street who just loses it. (Establishment side.)
4- A False Flag 'Shooter.' (Anyone's guess as to what side.)
5- Some alphabet soup agency because they can.

Frankly I hope it won't go south. But....

M.

Originally posted by morder1
YES!!

Finally!

Going to take it right now

One of the last questions

"I believe that, if violence is to occur, that those responsible should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, and that they should expect such prosecution as a necessary outcome."

I dont really know how to answer this, because laws are put in place by the very people who are being protested against...and the punishment lessened for those who enfoce the laws, compared to the "peons/people"... And I think that is also a major issue at play here, certain groups of people being "more equal" than others...

Its pretty obvious the cops are allowed to swing away with clubs, let their sprays go, while the people have to just sit there and absorb the hits , and even get arrested after being beaten... For just doing something our constitution should protect us against

edit on 7-10-2011 by morder1 because: (no reason given)

Agreed

This question was very misleading as the laws are not applied to the police who commit straightout inglorious assaults on the people , purely and simply because they ENJOY assualting people.

This is the mentality of a barbarian who has barely evolved out of the caveman stage of life before the DNA upgrade .

So ATS surveyors are asking a very tricky question that is not answerable in the format unless the person taking the test is one way or another . Its a black or white question.

Please re word it to a more civilized format ats staff

Originally posted by rabidrabbit

And yet there presence there is stirring up a discussion which very well could lead to what you claim you want, which is political reform.

It's possible, but seem to me to be going around the elbow to get to the ass. Why not go straight for the jugular?

As for the protesters who ARE currently in DC? You choose to ignore that Or the various smaller 'demonstrations' in various cities?

I thought I was pretty clear when I said "good for the ones in DC - but they need help, which is out tilting at windmills rather than attending to the business at hand." Sometimes I don't express myself well, and it would be helpful to me in refining the way I express myself to know just what part of that wasn't clear. I'm not ignoring them, I'm saying they're doing it wrong - unless there is really another motive altogether.

You seem far more interested in criticizing them from the start than you are on actually listening and understanding. That takes time, reflection and an open mind. Not per-determined positions.

Of course I have predetermined positions! their job is to convince me I'm wrong, at which point I will have brand new positions. So far they haven't.

But there is FAR, FAR more to this.

THAT I agree with wholeheartedly!

It's just like how the left maligns the 'tea party'; they focus on a few idiots and claim it represents the whole. They intentionally misrepresent their ideology ("they're racists!") and then argue against straw men.

Similar, perhaps, but not the same. I'm still waiting on OWS to put out some statement that represents the whole, indicates a direction for the protests. Until they do, I'm afraid we MUST listen to all the individual pieces to formulate an opinion from. There's just nothing else to work with.

reply to post by nenothtu


You really think its an accurate analogy to say that people trying to draw attention to the frustration with the fiscal policies represented by Wall Street are 'tilting at windmills'?

Because that implies that Wall Street isn't a threat at all, which I think is not very accurate.

Was the Boston Tea Party 'tilting at windmills' when they threw the tea in the harbor, instead of taking a petition to England?

If your point is that they need to be MORE specific, then I agree. But I don't agree that they entire 'protest' is invalid just because they aren't all storming Congress.

Try as you may, I'm not going to say I unequivocally support this movement. But I support people organizing and expressing their frustration. I think it's a good thing. I said the same thing about the Tea Party before FreedomWorks and FOX co-opted it. Hopefully the Unions and MSNBC don't co-opt this one.

Star for you for being a mature, intelligent debater, tho.

I'm still waiting on OWS to put out some statement that represents the whole,

Personally, I will be VERY skeptical of any one person or group who claims to speak for this whole 'movement'. The varied causes, while seemingly disparate, at least represent to me a genuine-ness. No mass-produced placards and talking points YET.

reply to post by nenothtu



Here is something for you to think about and the reason that some know and some don't know behind OWS.

If you’re looking for a major cause of the current banking meltdown, you need seek no farther than the 1999 repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act. The Glass-Steagall Act, passed in 1933, mandated the separation of commercial and investment banking in order to protect depositors from the hazards of risky investment and speculation. It worked fine for fifty years until the banking industry began lobbying for its repeal during the 1980s, the go-go years of Reaganesque market fundamentalism, an outlook embraced wholeheartedly by mainstream Democrats under the rubric "neoliberalism."

Obama and McCain . . . have accepted a substantial amount of campaign money from Wall Street bankers, investment and securities firms and their executives during this election cycle. Investment firms have donated $9.9 million to Obama and $6.9 million to McCain this campaign thus far, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. Commercial banks have given Obama $2.1 million and McCain $1.9 million. Private equity firms and hedge funds have given Obama $2 million and McCain $1.4 million, according to CFRP. Lehman Brothers, Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan Chase & Co., UBS and heavyweight law firm DLA Piper are among Obama’s top contributors. JP Morgan acquired Bear Stearns with the federal government taking on as much as $30 billion Bear assets as part of the deal. McCain’s top donor sources include Merrill Lynch, Goldman Sachs, Citigroup and Blank Rome and Greenberg Traurig LLP law firms.

www.counterpunch.org...

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
I think I forgot to add one question...

"Will the original core message of eliminating corporate financial influence from government, be marginalized, obfuscated, and otherwise eliminated through the politicization of the movement in mainstream media?"

I think that's the point SO.The people trying to hijack the movement and turn it into a pro Obama/Democrat movement have connections to the administration and are big donators as well.The people behind the left/right scam are terrified of an all encompassing movement.

Originally posted by mike dangerously

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
I think I forgot to add one question...

"Will the original core message of eliminating corporate financial influence from government, be marginalized, obfuscated, and otherwise eliminated through the politicization of the movement in mainstream media?"

I think that's the point SO.The people trying to hijack the movement and turn it into a pro Obama/Democrat movement have connections to the administration and are big donators as well.The people behind the left/right scam are terrified of an all encompassing movement.

exactly... just on O'reilly factor now at 11pm O'Reilly saying the Occupy Wallstreet movement wont do anything.

bad newsman, bad boy O'Reilly..... O'No O'Reilly

Then Giraldo Rivera said something more in their favor, go Giraldo nice mustachio!