Magazine Calls Occupiers To Come To Chicago In ‘Tradition of’ 1968 Rioters

I hadn't seen that this was posted yet, so if it has, please disregard.

Magazine Calls Occupiers To Come To Chicago In ‘Tradition of’ 1968 Rioters

cnsnews.com...

Adbusters, the radical, Vancouver-based anti-consumerist magazine, credited by many media outlets for launching the Occupy Wall Street protests, has put out an ad calling for 50,000 protestors to “Occupy” the G8 summit in May. And they are not calling for peaceful protest.

I find it interesting that a Canadian publication is encouraging protestors to flock to Chicago. We all know about Chicago politics, which is the same place Obama and Rham learned their trade.

The Adbusters ad shows a picture of policemen beating up a defenseless protestor, and comes with the caption: “In the Tradition of the Chicago 8.” The Chicago 8 were radicals who incited riots in Chicago during the 1968 Democratic convention. The 1968 convention unrest became so legendary that the band Crosby, Stills, Nash (and Young) wrote a song about it called “Chicago.” The “tradition” of the Chicago 8 included calling for displays of public fornication and attacking police.

So, the message is come and get your head bashed in?

According to the official statement of Adbusters (titled Tactical Briefing #25), “On May 1, 50,000 people from all over the world will flock to Chicago, set up tents, kitchens, peaceful barricades and #OCCUPYCHICAGO for a month. With a bit of luck, we’ll pull off the biggest multinational occupation of a summit meeting the world has ever seen.”

The ad threatens to shut down the economy if their demands are not met: “And if they don’t listen … if they ignore us and put our demands on the back burner like they’ve done so many times before … then, with Gandhian ferocity, we’ll flashmob the streets, shut down stock exchanges, campuses, corporate headquarters and cities across the globe … we’ll make the price of doing business as usual too much to bear.”

So the same group that called for the Occupy Wall Street protests in the first place is now calling for protestors to shut down the entire economic system of a city if their demands are not met, in the tradition of people who brought us the 1968 Democratic convention riots.

The claim that the Occupy Movement is composed of peaceful protestors seeking constructive and meaningful change stopped being credible long ago.

Chicago may be where it's going to begin and Martial Law is enacted. I find it interesting that history is being used as a means of instigation when many people refuse to believe that history repeats itself when it has to do with aerosol spraying and internment camps.

Let's look at the history behind the Chicago 8.
secure.wikimedia.org...

In 1968, America was divided over the Vietnam War. Due to the growing anti-war movement, President Lyndon B. Johnson announced that he would not run for re-election. Democrat Robert Kennedy, the Presidential hopeful, was assassinated that summer. The Democratic National Convention was held in Chicago where leaders of the anti-war movement planned a protest. During the protest, Chicago Mayor Daley used police force to brutally quell the rally, and as a result, rioting broke out in the streets. One person was killed, hundreds were injured and thousands were arrested. One year later, newly-elected President Richard Nixon gave the green light to prosecute eight men who were accused of conspiracy to incite a riot. The FBI brought them to Chicago, where they stood trial. They were known thereafter as The Chicago 8.[1]

Considering that it is also an election year, this seems to be an ominous call to make history repeat itself.
Why should we be concerned? Why is Chicago the perfect place to begin another uprising?
www.americanthinker.com...

The lack of media interest in the role of former domestic terrorists Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn in Democratic nominee Barack Obama's political ascent in Chicago is one of the most remarkable aspects of the 2008 presidential campaign. When the question is raised at all, reporters are quick to repeat Sen. Obama's claim that his relationship with the two former bomb-makers was fleeting and casual. Some cite Chicago mayor Richard Daley's defense of Ayers as a "distinguished professor of education" and "a valued member of the Chicago community." Why then should there be cause for concern?

Ayers is known as one of Obama's past associates and is now considered a distinguished professor.
From the above article:

Ayers and Dohrn were never prosecuted for the bombings because of government misconduct in collecting evidence. In 2001, Ayers told the New York Times, "I don't regret setting bombs. I feel we didn't do enough."

Where is Bill Ayers today?
secure.wikimedia.org...

Ayers is a retired professor at the University of Illinois at Chicago, College of Education. His interests include teaching for social justice, urban educational reform, narrative and interpretive research, children in trouble with the law, and related issues.[3]

He began his career in primary education while an undergraduate, teaching at the Children’s Community School (CCS), a project founded by a group of students and based on the Summerhill method of education. After leaving the underground, he earned an M.Ed from Bank Street College in Early Childhood Education (1984), an M.Ed from Teachers College, Columbia University in Early Childhood Education (1987) and an Ed. D from Teachers College, Columbia University in Curriculum and Instruction (1987).

He has edited and written many books and articles on education theory, policy and practice, and has appeared on many panels and symposia. On August 5, 2010, Ayers officially announced his intent to retire from the University of Illinois at Chicago.[41]

On September 23, 2010 William Ayers was unanimously denied emeritus status by the University of Illinois, after a speech by the university's board chair Christopher G. Kennedy (son of assassinated U.S. Senator Robert Kennedy), containing the quote "I intend to vote against conferring the honorific title of our university to a man whose body of work includes a book dedicated in part to the man who murdered my father, Robert F. Kennedy."[42] He added, "There is nothing more antithetical to the hopes for a university that is lively and yet civil...than to permanently seal off debate with one's opponents by killing them".[43] Kennedy referred to a 1974 book Prairie Fire: The Politics of Revolutionary Anti-Imperialism, written by Ayers and other Weather Underground members, which includes a dedication to a list of over 200 revolutionary figures, musicians and others, including Sirhan Sirhan, who is currently serving a life sentence for Robert Kennedy's assassination in 1968.[44] Ayers said he has never dedicated any book, including Prairie Fire, the book in question, to assassins.[45]

Please visit this site for Ayers' forgotten communist manifesto:
www.zombietime.com...

Is the fact that this uprising is being provoked from a Canadian publication causing us to look away from who is actually inciting the new riots? I could add more, but I've run out of room. Thoughts?

reply to post by Afterthought


you claim that ad busters is advocating violet riots?
are you serious?

occupy is a pieceful movement,
and you sound a little silly slandering them,

According to the official statement of Adbusters (titled Tactical Briefing #25), “On May 1, 50,000 people from all over the world will flock to Chicago, set up tents, kitchens, peaceful barricades and #OCCUPYCHICAGO for a month. With a bit of luck, we’ll pull off the biggest multinational occupation of a summit meeting the world has ever seen.”

this is the stated intent,
pieceful barricades, kitchens to feed people including the poor and homeless,
tents for a pieceful sitdown pieceful occupation,

you are miss interpreting the intent of the protests and are calling them violent?

deny ignorence, occupy is stated non violent stop spreading disinfo

xploder

reply to post by XPLodER


I believe that the call to action is using double speak.
Why would they even want to emulate the Chicago riots if they wanted a peaceful demonstration?

reply to post by Afterthought


to be clear i can only speak from my own humble opinion,
flash mobs are groups of dancers and proformers,

kitchens are places were people eat and im not shure what a pieceful baricade is,
but they hardly sound illegal.

i would like to clearly state that the only violence will be from security and or poliece,
hence the picture of a protestor being beaten.

i do not expect to see ant willful destruction except for protestors property, by poliece.

deny ignorence dont spead it

thanks
xp

reply to post by XPLodER


I understand where you're going, but the way it's written and the images of history they're using are, I believe, being used to purposefully confuse.

Allow me to use my sister's brother-in-law as an example. He's in his mid-forties and a "go against the grain type" of guy. He can't stand any forms of government and believes that he should be able to do whatever he wishes. He also cannot read. If I were to show him this article, all he would do is focus on the video and the violent images that are accompanying the article. How do you think he would interpret the message?

Considering many younger people these days have difficulty comprehending literature, I feel that this is a purposefully confusing message they're sending out.

reply to post by Afterthought


in my humblw opinion,
that photo was choosen for a number of reasons, here are a couple i can see
it is historic in the arena of protesting,
and it shows that poliece violence is expected.

all occupiers are expected to conform to "non violence"
and free speach type activities

xploder

reply to post by Afterthought
The true face of the Occupy movement may eventually show itself.

Interesting.

Occupy is a 1-sided, non-violent "protest". Their minds may be peaceful...but 5-0 is bringing the heat. They are hardly thinking peace. They're thinking....job security and some butt-kickin'. Anyone that gets involved, in any of these protests...are downright IDIOTS. You are not going to change ANYTHING...with your gatherings; but you will change them with your WALLETS! Wisdom brings success!

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by Afterthought

 

The true face of the Occupy movement may eventually show itself.

Interesting.

what do you mean beezer?
i have seen ocupiers attacked numous times and they have NOT retailiated,
they have embraced pieceful ways and i think that speeks volumes.

xploder

Originally posted by nuttin4U
Occupy is a 1-sided, non-violent "protest". Their minds may be peaceful...but 5-0 is bringing the heat. They are hardly thinking peace. They're thinking....job security and some butt-kickin'. Anyone that gets involved, in any of these protests...are downright IDIOTS. You are not going to change ANYTHING...with your gatherings; but you will change them with your WALLETS! Wisdom brings success!

acually the stop SOPA app is a new way of protesting with your wallet,
mabey a g8 or nato app is needed

xploder

Originally posted by XPLodER

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by Afterthought

 

The true face of the Occupy movement may eventually show itself.

Interesting.

what do you mean beezer?
i have seen ocupiers attacked numous times and they have NOT retailiated,
they have embraced pieceful ways and i think that speeks volumes.

xploder

I have no doubt that many of the actual protestors are non-violent.

But it has always been my contention that those that organize the Occupy movement have violent ulterior motives. They are using the protestors as a means to an end.

Just my humble opinion, of course.

I'm just trying to look at all angles here. I'm also asking why Chicago? Why not Wall Street or D.C. since this is where all the main corruption is? Why even mention doing something in the TRADITION of a bloody riot?

People are going to misinterpret the use of the word "tradition". The word "tradition" is defined as such:
www.thefreedictionary.com...

1. The passing down of elements of a culture from generation to generation, especially by oral communication.
2.
a. A mode of thought or behavior followed by a people continuously from generation to generation; a custom or usage.
b. A set of such customs and usages viewed as a coherent body of precedents influencing the present: followed family tradition in dress and manners. See Synonyms at heritage.
3. A body of unwritten religious precepts.
4. A time-honored practice or set of such practices.
5. Law Transfer of property to another.

1. the handing down from generation to generation of the same customs, beliefs, etc., esp by word of mouth
2. the body of customs, thought, practices, etc., belonging to a particular country, people, family, or institution over a relatively long period
3. a specific custom or practice of long standing
4. (Christianity / Ecclesiastical Terms) Christianity a doctrine or body of doctrines regarded as having been established by Christ or the apostles though not contained in Scripture
5. (Non-Christian Religions / Judaism) (often capital) Judaism a body of laws regarded as having been handed down from Moses orally and only committed to writing in the 2nd century a.d
6. (Non-Christian Religions / Islam) the beliefs and customs of Islam supplementing the Koran, esp as embodied in the Sunna
7. (Law) Law, chiefly Roman and Scots the act of formally transferring ownership of movable property; delivery
[from Latin trāditiō a handing down, surrender, from trādere to give up, transmit, from trans- + dāre to give]

I've never viewed riots as traditional. Christmas trees and Easter egg hunts are traditional. Even passing along the same fruitcake for twenty-five years is traditional. The riots in Chicago happened one year a long time ago. Why is the article even using the word "tradition" to describe them?

I have no doubt that many of the actual protestors are non-violent.

But it has always been my contention that those that organize the Occupy movement have violent ulterior motives. They are using the protestors as a means to an end.

Just my humble opinion, of course.

well i think the end of corperate person hood and the removal of money is free speach is something i personally agree with.

as the the means to an end,
i would suggest that OCUUPY WALL STREET,
is a statment of intent as well as a type of free assembly, and the act of occupying as the expression of free speach is designed to raise awarness that fraud from wall street is causing pain in comunities, damaging the contries economy and REQUIRES by law prosicutions under CRIMINAL not civil proceedings.

this is about the law,
prosicute all laws or it will cause damage to civil society and business confidence.

xploder

reply to post by Afterthought


here is a quote from an occupy friendly site,

And if they don’t listen … if they ignore us and put our demands on the back burner like they’ve done so many times before … then, with Gandhian ferocity, we’ll flashmob the streets, shut down stock exchanges, campuses, corporate headquarters and cities across the globe … we’ll make the price of doing business as usual too much to bear.

gandi

Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi (Gujarati: મોહનદાસ કરમચંદ ગાંધી; Hindi: मोहनदास करमचंद गांधी, pronounced: [moːˈɦənd̪aːs kəˈrəmtʃənd̪ ˈɡaːnd̪ʱi] ( listen). 2 October 1869[1] – 30 January 1948) was the pre-eminent political and ideological leader of India during the Indian independence movement. Pioneering the use of non-violent resistance to tyranny through mass civil disobedience, a tool to fight for civil rights and freedom that he called satyagraha, he founded his doctrine of nonviolent protest to achieve political and social progress based upon ahimsa, or total nonviolence for which he is internationally renowned

wki source

i would say that the stated form of protest is in the spirit of gandhi non violent traditions.

as stated within press release,

with Gandhian ferocity

total non violence action using civil disobence, usually a st down type of protest.
but in this case employing the tactic of song and dance "flashmobs"

xploder