Occupy Movement Till _____________ (What?)

reply to post by Blaine91555


Blaine it sounds a little as if you are projecting all your problems with people generally onto OWS. I can't recognise some of the criticisms you are making.

For instance when you say me me me, this movement is more about the community than about the individual, it is one of the least me me me movements out there.

I don't understand your saying that people who have protested longer than most protests in the history of opposition are lazy. Clearly they are committed, you might think they are misplaced or wrong, but they are willing to get off their arses and stand up for something they believe in. That is not lazy.

You talk about following fools. This movement is criticised precisely because it has no leaders. How can people be following when nobody is leading?

Finally you talk about innocent business owners, those are some of the same innocent business owners (taxpayers) that bailed out the banks, they are the same business owners that are not being given loans by banks to invest in their companies because the banks want to hang on to the taxpayers money.

No, whether you are aware of it or not, I find this type of argumentation you are using a little dishonest. You are trying as hard as you can to pin as much blame on OWS as you can regardless whether its true or not.

reply to post by capone1


I like that idea, my issue is that us as americans should know why were are gathering to protest, ive seen too many selfish people interviewed during this movement and sometimes i think they are plants who are sent there by MSM to try and derail a movement that i think needs to continue.

The answer is simple.

The Globalists who paid for OWS and created OWS get their way or they get sent packing.
They got their bought and paid for man in the White House, this is their window of opportunity. All the damage they caused through the global financial markets was coldly calculated over decades. They are making their move, and no OWS is not it, it is just an operation like the failures put in place on the Markets were. The real move is when/if they collapse enough at the top and simultaneously stir things up enough at the bottom (that's where you reside) they can make controlling gains over global resources in the cleanup phase.

They really stand nothing to lose because they can try it again if they fail in a few decades with another dumbed down generation.

reply to post by PrimalRed


A typical citation of the unsuccessful application of an apparently equalised society. I simply find it curious that we are so ready to assume the ability of Man to own the universe and yet everyone comprehends you cannot take it with you. I will adjust my previous statement:

Who exactly was it that said one could privatise what belongs to none.

Further I ponder the ability of a concept to endure time more-so than any structure, and though it may have been an individual or collection of individuals whom decided to divide the planet and price its constituents, why should their concepts necessarily be applicable now? Particularly when so removed from the time in which they were conceived.

The problem as it is from my perspective expressed ever so cryptically is: everyone has taken a thread, everyone draws on their threads little realising they all draw upon the same tapestry.

Blaine, do you remember when Mubarak was telling egptians to go home when their point has been made?

reply to post by WarJohn


Many people do not realize that many of the original Tea Partiers are part of this movement. They have agreed they are fighting against the government not representing them, instead representing corporate interests. Both groups can agree on this. Therefore their numbers are strengthened in unity of this. This movement will not die. It is growing and another group will join once they find common ground with the protesters.

Originally posted by usernamehere
reply to post by PrimalRed

 

Who exactly was it that said one could privatise what belongs to none.

The constitution gives us the right to own property and own a business. Did you want a list of authors?

The problem as it is from my perspective expressed ever so cryptically is: everyone has taken a thread, everyone draws on their threads little realising they all draw upon the same tapestry.

The problem is it is obvious you are trying to sound smarter than you are.

According to Van Jones we have just witnessed Act One in the Progressive screenplay. He claims that Act Two will involve a heavy penetration of our political structure and that the Occupy movement will be ready to place 2,000 people into the political realm for election/ force placement, rigged elections by unions etc.

If Van Jones is even remotely accurate, that would easily explain why there was absolutely no desire to open a dialogue with anyone in the political realm or in any capacity to help facilitate any change or reform whatsoever.

Personally, the core group originally involved in OWS has moved on and off the streets. The derelicts and raging fools are just about all that's left. Today's shenanigans on Wall Street amounted to absolutely nothing while OWS is trying to claim a victory. They were shut down and the masses that were around this morning are gone.

I think Jones suffers from an extreme case of Tea Party Envy.

Van Jones offered a prediction Wednesday for those who have been watching the Occupy Wall Street movement: “You haven’t seen anything yet.”

The former Obama administration “green jobs czar” — an ardent supporter of the Occupy movement since its inception — said in an interview with CNN that the movement is ready to evolve into the areas of politics and policy-making, much like the Tea Party did in 2010.

I find this next statement to be most amusing

ones said the movement is “going to be recruiting 2,000 candidates to run for office now under this 99 percent banner“ as Occupy Wall Street enters ”phase two.”

“Phase two, you move from anger to answers. You move from pointing out the problem to pointing out the solutions,” Jones said. “What you’re going to see now is you have the Occupy movement at the center, that’s the beating heart.”

So, now the solutions are supposed to miraculously appear. Anger to Answers? Hmmm... So squatting in NY for two months was for what again? Attention? To further divide this nation? I'll go with the latter.

The guy is just making BS up as he goes along

We’ve learned that leader-centered movements don’t work. This is about a leader-ful movement. It’s not leaderless. It’s leader centric. It’s leader-ful,” he said.

What in the hell does leader-ful mean? Just more esoteric jargon and empty talking points.

www.theblaze.com...

Originally posted by Blu82
reply to post by capone1

 

I like that idea, my issue is that us as americans should know why were are gathering to protest, ive seen too many selfish people interviewed during this movement and sometimes i think they are plants who are sent there by MSM to try and derail a movement that i think needs to continue.

In todays world, with the media, its impossible to control all the protesters who have legitimate reasons, then add people who are just there to complain for their #ty life. I have ideas to separate the two. And that is what needs to happen. Sorry for typos, im typing on my phone as fast as I can.

I said in response to the embedded quote

Originally posted by usernamehere

Freedom of Speech is not camping out for no reason, invading private property or harming others financially who are not part of it. That is just plain old crime.

Who exactly was it that said one could privatise what belongs to everyone? Is it simply because we inherited a system of corruption where kingdoms rose and fell by the sword? That seems irresponsible to me.

Everything is given freely.

Primarily asking if it is the inheritance of a system that was literally built by conquest and the selfish opinion that one may covet that which belongs to none.

You said in response to the embedded quote

Originally posted by PrimalRed

Originally posted by usernamehere

Freedom of Speech is not camping out for no reason, invading private property or harming others financially who are not part of it. That is just plain old crime.

Who exactly was it that said one could privatise what belongs to everyone?

ummm, the constitution?
Look up what soviet russia was like, they nationalized everything for everyone and look how that turned out.

My response was thus

Originally posted by usernamehere
reply to post by PrimalRed

 

A typical citation of the unsuccessful application of an apparently equalised society. I simply find it curious that we are so ready to assume the ability of Man to own the universe and yet everyone comprehends you cannot take it with you. I will adjust my previous statement:

Who exactly was it that said one could privatise what belongs to none.

Further I ponder the ability of a concept to endure time more-so than any structure, and though it may have been an individual or collection of individuals whom decided to divide the planet and price its constituents, why should their concepts necessarily be applicable now? Particularly when so removed from the time in which they were conceived.

The problem as it is from my perspective expressed ever so cryptically is: everyone has taken a thread, everyone draws on their threads little realising they all draw upon the same tapestry.

Do you understand? I am asking if the concept of ownership is built upon the premise it is correct and right for one to covet the universe by sword missile intimidation etc etc and yet as we as a species have developed our opinions have changed and yet the underlying thought is the same.

So yeh call me dumb smart reduce me in whatever way you need to reconcile myself within yourself.

EDIT: Frustration set in, to finalise the above question:

I am asking if the concept of ownership is built upon the premise it is correct and right for one to covet the universe by sword missile intimidation etc etc and yet as we as a species have developed our opinions have changed children are encouraged to share etc etc Is it not time to question the conquest premise of success of ownership?

Anyway I ain't trying to fight you I just find interesting the perceptions of others.

This movement has a solution that could take-off! The right people need to be in place.

reply to post by capone1


This movement is actually gaining strength at least in New York.

You can watch it here if you like.

www.ustream.tv...

This was the phase to let people know what was going on and to recruit more people whom had no idea about what was going on. I support OWS but there was no plan on what to do after this and they are all running around like chickens without a head. If you have any ideas on a plan or a list of "demands" that you believe all of us would agree on then please post it and remember that this is world wide, we are not being shown all of it. If you want to see most of the protests you have to go to live stream and you can see behind the scenes and all that is involved.
They need your help and they will listen if you talk. Yes, they have been infiltrated by many groups but what everyone wants is basically to end all of the corruption that has us and the world at the point that we are now. I'm pretty sure that if you post your ideas here they will be passed along to the OWS and the other movements involved in this.