OWS Protester: …in a few days you’re going to see what a Molotov cocktail can do to Macy’s.

reply to post by Skewed


Good point. OWS squatting in public places is at worst a misdemeanor, what the original Tea Party did was a felony, and yet somehow it's the OWSers that are vilified? Something is not right there.

reply to post by Mythfury


exactly...one man's view....not the OWS plan....when the OWS succeeds in getting the criminals to trial...you haters, here, will rue your words....spoiled brats???!!!!!!!!! really!!!!!!!???????? starving college graduates, and homeless folks put on the street by fraud, military veterans, teachers, nurses, truck drivers, grannies, 60 year olds whose pensions were stolen as they are on the brink of retirement, after 30+ years of labor.......these are spoiled brats????....shame on you for even typing those words....

reply to post by Kryties


Actually, during that time if the king had caught the rebels/insurgents they would have been killed on the spot.

I love the connotation the words rebel and insurgent have when used this way. I honestly can't wait to be called a rebel or insurgent.

A protest and a revolution are two different things.

Originally posted by Skewed
reply to post by TinfoilTP

 

Would one call the Boston Tea Party violent when they were throwing potentially thousands of dollars worth of tea into the bay? Think about it, throwing all that tea overboard also meant they were hurting the rest of society by keeping them from having tea, as it turned out it was indeed for a greater good. Despite the fact that people had to do without tea they were justified in doing this. I feel it is fair game to most extents and as long as the anger is properly placed.

That’s not a good comparison because back then we didn’t have the constitution. Today we have the means to achieve change without violence or destroying property. They should protest, raise awareness about the issues they feel strongly about and then VOTE. If you think our system is rigged and voting doesn’t work then please explain how the Tea Party got people elected in 2010. It wasn’t near as many as TTP wanted but it was a start…..and there was never any violence.

One of the most significant narratives of the 2010 midterm election cycle has been the rise of the Tea Party movement. By channelling the frustrations of ordinary voters—many of whom have never been politically active—the Tea Party has given voice to a new conservative political activism focused on opposing not just Democrats, but establishment Republicans as well. The result has been the nomination of many first-time candidates who promise fealty not to party, but to the principles of limited government

Link

OWS’ers can protest all they want but when they use violence or destroy property they’re just going piss off the majority of Americans and lose any support they have right now.

Ideots!
they just stand there next to a pile of there own sh$$.
and get angree when some one needs to clean it up!!!

I am all for what they stand for.
just not what they stand IN.

reply to post by seabag


I do not think the Constitution really has a place in this case, like you said the Boston Tea Party happened before the Constitution. But what it does boil down to is the two sides. On one side, you have the king telling them that they are breaking the law and must pay the taxes. One would agree if they were on the side of the king.

On the other side there was a group that says no, we do not have to pay your taxes or recognize your authority.One would agree with the people that were against the king and would agree they are breaking no law.

Who is right and who is wrong. It is a matter of perception and which side the person is on. When you two have two groups of strong willed people that refuse to give in to either side and come to an agreement, then all hell will break loose between the groups. It is inevitable. Is it right that the king demands taxes and recognition of authority when these groups of people left to start new lives under a different government. Is it right that the people destroyed crates of tea in protest against the king. From a neutral stance I suppose one could say both sides were wrong, or right.

Where did you see that comment?
What happened to following the rules? Posting the headline of the actual article rather than your rhetoric.

They obviously are just calling for more protests not violence, If you are going to make points about the movement make valid points. Think to yourself. If you personally are spinning stories than obviously you are wrong about the movement and are doing a disservice to everyone here.

reply to post by Skewed


Actually the people behind the original Boston Tea Party were complete pricks. They screwed over a lot of American business owners even Benjamin Franklin frowned upon it.

reply to post by ModernAcademia


..the point was to do it differently.
Camping was the consequence of doing a 24 hour 7 days a week protest.
They are doing something different so your "escalation process" means nothing. The rules change when you get serious. This is a new form of non violent protest that is being given a shot.

reply to post by neo96


I doubt they ever stopped rolling after the Tea Party.
Especially Benjamin Franklin.

This story is nothing, the headline is misleading. I have to come here and tell you that since you just take anything negative about OWS at face value.

reply to post by Ferris.Bueller.II


The whole thing is becoming a lie. They can still protest all they wish from that park, they just can't live in it.

Really sad but expected. Once the sociopaths take over people get hurt, people die and innocent people are victimized.

Nothing but a bunch of punks.

My apologies to the real protestors and you have my sympathy. Keep going but make it clear to these nuts they are NOT part of you or welcome. Your support is dropping daily.

Originally posted by Kryties
reply to post by Skewed

 

Good point. OWS squatting in public places is at worst a misdemeanor, what the original Tea Party did was a felony, and yet somehow it's the OWSers that are vilified? Something is not right there.

Very dishonest to rationalize this is like the original Tea Party?

Do you side with the Anarchists and other sociopaths and approve of stomping all over everyone elses rights and that only their rights matter?

We all know that a trait of sociopaths is to lie when confronted with the truth. They are incapable of anything else. They don't care about the country. They only care about me, me, me. To hell with everyone else and what they want.

This is about a serious thing here. Burning buildings is insane on its face. If they do this, they will and should go to prison to protect the rest of us from them. They are punks and nothing more. Many are mentally ill and dangerous in fact. These things are like honey to flies for them. Anyone who participates is one of them.

I only hope they get stopped before they hurt people and destroy property. They throw a Molotov Cocktail, which is a deadly weapon, they should be stopped by any means necessary to protect the innocent.

reply to post by Blaine91555


How do you figure they are stomping on everyone elses rights?

Originally posted by SLAYER69

Originally posted by DerekJR321
I swear its like the people of this country are so brain washed that they think this is all ok. What if our founding fathers just said "eh.. lets not make trouble against the Brits... let's just do what they say. After all we don't want to cause problems for those Brits who are just trying to make a living."???

There is no comparison between these "Gimmie Gimmie Squatters" and the Founding Fathers. The Founding Fathers were highly intelligent intellectual businessmen, scientist, entrepreneurs and Men of Means who outlined set goals, set a clear direction supported by real content which outlined a clear agenda and when they spoke it was with purpose

So that analogy doesn't work!

So your telling me you have the amazing ability to define an entire group of people? You know for 100% fact that every single person involved in the OWS movement are "Gimmie Gimmie Squatters"?

Some are carrying the attitude of "gimme gimme". But the vast majority are not. They just want things to change. For this country to stop with the BS and start actually focusing ON THE PEOPLE.

Gimme gimme.. GIMME a break. Yes.. every single OWS protester expects entitlement. I guess they expect entitlement like our congress, who get Cadillac health insurance for life, for free. Or maybe they want to be like the Senate, who get to partake in insider trading on Wall Street and have it NOT be illegal for them.

People like you need to stop assuming you know exactly what is going on down there because you don't.

At this point in the protest.. I DONT agree with what they are doing. I DONT see the point of worrying about Zucatti park. Sitting in tents and crapping in buckets aren't solving anything. They need to march and organize and get their selves in order. Nothing they are doing now is making a difference. Repeating each other after every two spoken words is just annoying. I know I sound confusing right now. I agree with the protests in terms of "something needs to be done" but I don't think at this point "they" know what it is.

reply to post by DerekJR321


There is no comparison between the Founding Fathers and OWS.
PERIOD!

Originally posted by SLAYER69

Originally posted by DerekJR321
I swear its like the people of this country are so brain washed that they think this is all ok. What if our founding fathers just said "eh.. lets not make trouble against the Brits... let's just do what they say. After all we don't want to cause problems for those Brits who are just trying to make a living."???

There is no comparison between these "Gimmie Gimmie Squatters" and the Founding Fathers. The Founding Fathers were highly intelligent intellectual businessmen, scientist, entrepreneurs and Men of Means who outlined set goals, set a clear direction supported by real content which outlined a clear agenda and when they spoke it was with purpose

So that analogy doesn't work!

they weren't infalliable demi-gods, their ideals are not just their own but what mankind has secretly longed for the entire time. now that some rotten apples have spoiled the whole bunch you're willing to throw every single occupier into one lump sum of pathetic degenerates when the reality is there are intellectuals in the mix pushing, and LIVING the founding fathers morality.

i supported the cause in the beginning but not anymore :/ what happened to non violence ???

reply to post by SLAYER69


I would disagree a little. I think they would have supported the action entirely. Probably would have hated the plugged in homebodies of today's society. Would have loved seeing people using the rights they proposed.

Also they would have HATED the tea party.
Franklin hated the original TP and they were likely a lot smarter than the majority of the current one.

reply to post by SLAYER69


I would disagree. I think they would have supported the action entirely. Probably would have hated the plugged in homebodies of today's society. Would have loved seeing people using the rights they proposed.

Also they would have HATED the tea party.
Franklin hated the original TP and they were likely a lot smarter than the majority of the current one.