Occupiers Celebrate 4th of July by…Burning American Flags and Vandalizing Police Property

Originally posted by SGTSECRET
reply to post by HamrHeed

 

The end result would be a more fair and just government and society. Less capitalism and more humanity, it's not rocket science.

I'm almost positive you aren't just 'trying to understand the movement,' you're trying to be a smarta$$.

edit on 7-7-2012 by SGTSECRET because: added content

edit on 7-7-2012 by SGTSECRET because: (no reason given)

edit on 7-7-2012 by SGTSECRET because: (no reason given)

No I'm genuinely confused about the whole message and direction of the movement, On one hand, you guys say you're for less capitalism and more humanity (whatever that means) and on the other, alot of your solutions involve more gov't (more left leaning gov't)

If you guys had a legitimate direction, I'm sure more people would join the movement.
Although most of us support your right to free speech, we don't appreciate you vandalising innocent peoples property.
Atleast the tea party was somewhat organised

Originally posted by muzzleflash
The KKK has a right to protest.
The Neo-Nazis have a right to protest.
Westboro fanatics have a right to protest.
Black Panthers have a right to protest.
Tea Party has a right to protest...

And indeed, so do those people in Oakland whoever they are.

The real un-Americans here are those who condemn anyone's right to speak their mind and express their grievances with the system.

We do have a right to ignore them, after all.

Let's call this a brief lesson in America 101.

thank you for a sane answer
star to you my friend

xploder

reply to post by muzzleflash

The real un-Americans here are those who condemn anyone's right to speak their mind and express their grievances with the system.

Is “Speak their mind and express grievances with the system” code for Occupy taking a dump on a police car, breaking windows on businesses, destroying public and private property, assaulting people, lighting fires, etc?

Just wondering!

Are these behaviors protected by the 1st amendment?

reply to post by HamrHeed

If you guys had a legitimate direction, I'm sure more people would join the movement.
Although most of us support your right to free speech, we don't appreciate you vandalising innocent peoples property.
Atleast the tea party was somewhat organised

yes the tea party helped ORGINIZE THE NDAA

OWS is busy creating legislation to counter the corperate written legislation that attempts to give control to the 1%

while on the other hand tea party signs the NDAA

xploder

Originally posted by seabag
reply to post by muzzleflash

 

The real un-Americans here are those who condemn anyone's right to speak their mind and express their grievances with the system.

Is “Speak their mind and express grievances with the system” code for Occupy taking a dump on a police car, breaking windows on businesses, destroying public and private property, assaulting people, lighting fires, etc?

Just wondering!

Are these behaviors protected by the 1st amendment?

does signing the NDAA mean liberty and patriotism?

come on man

xploder

reply to post by HamrHeed

let me help you out

No I'm genuinely confused about the whole message and direction of the movement

occupy wall street until the criminal bankers who crashed you finacial system are in prison without the proceeds of their crimes

pretty simple

xploder

Originally posted by XPLodER
reply to post by beezzer

 

i had hoped to see OWS work WITH the tea party,

but we have tolerated attack thread after attack thread after attack thread,

we get it from the tea party the main stream news and from breitbart

through all of this i hoped you would come to your sences,

i have tryed to be paitent,

but you have proven to me that truth doesnt matter to you if it gets in the way of your ajenda to smear occupy.

we have been reasonable till now
and every report states a very peaceful protest

oakland was not officail ows or IT WOULD HAVE BEEN PEACEFUL





xploder

edit on 7-7-2012 by XPLodER because: (no reason given)

Dude, I don't even see any real difference between Occupy and the Tea Party, except that the "Republicans" , can create a far more vicious and brutal attack campaign against OWS than did the "Democrats" against TP.

It's reasonable to understand that a third or so of the people in the first were also present in the latter movements.

At first the Tea Party was a general open protest, essentially against corruption in government and against oppressive taxation without representation. But then it was hijacked by the "Republicans" and became about complete fake personalities like "Sarah Palin". This way they could change the terms of the protest away from eliminating the tax code to something else, anything else.

With OWS, it began as a general protest against corruption in the banking system and how it's connected to and controls our government. Then the "Democrats" hijacked it and changed it into a "Communist / Criminal" movement.

This is how the Right and the Left control everyone else, with subterfuge and cunning artifice.

The Tea Party controls all.

Just 10 members in congress.

But we control the House, Senate and the White House.

We also eat small kittehs.

Originally posted by muzzleflash

Originally posted by XPLodER
reply to post by beezzer

 

i had hoped to see OWS work WITH the tea party,

but we have tolerated attack thread after attack thread after attack thread,

we get it from the tea party the main stream news and from breitbart

through all of this i hoped you would come to your sences,

i have tryed to be paitent,

but you have proven to me that truth doesnt matter to you if it gets in the way of your ajenda to smear occupy.

we have been reasonable till now
and every report states a very peaceful protest

oakland was not officail ows or IT WOULD HAVE BEEN PEACEFUL





xploder

edit on 7-7-2012 by XPLodER because: (no reason given)

Dude, I don't even see any real difference between Occupy and the Tea Party, except that the "Republicans" , can create a far more vicious and brutal attack campaign against OWS than did the "Democrats" against TP.

It's reasonable to understand that a third or so of the people in the first were also present in the latter movements.

At first the Tea Party was a general open protest, essentially against corruption in government and against oppressive taxation without representation. But then it was hijacked by the "Republicans" and became about complete fake personalities like "Sarah Palin". This way they could change the terms of the protest away from eliminating the tax code to something else, anything else.

With OWS, it began as a general protest against corruption in the banking system and how it's connected to and controls our government. Then the "Democrats" hijacked it and changed it into a "Communist / Criminal" movement.

This is how the Right and the Left control everyone else, with subterfuge and cunning artifice.

for this very reason i held out hope that a united front,
both tea party and OWS would realise that we are in this togther,

and both work for liberty and justice for all.

left right is fake

unite or be enslaved as we argue TP VS OWS

xploder

reply to post by XPLodER

does signing the NDAA mean liberty and patriotism?

come on man

Did OWS sign the NDAA???

Oh wait…they don’t have anybody in congress….or even a leader…or anybody who even owns a suit!

Originally posted by seabag
reply to post by muzzleflash

 

The real un-Americans here are those who condemn anyone's right to speak their mind and express their grievances with the system.

Is “Speak their mind and express grievances with the system” code for Occupy taking a dump on a police car, breaking windows on businesses, destroying public and private property, assaulting people, lighting fires, etc?

Just wondering!

Are these behaviors protected by the 1st amendment?

Clever question.

However, it is clear that anyone could do that and claim false association with whatever movement in order to "make it look bad".

But that is ad hominem and irrelevant, and amounts to petty character assassination of the messenger.
For all I know, you or any Republican could have been out there doing that claiming to be OWS to make them look bad. The motive is there...

In reality this all boils down to politics.
And I am convinced that people are more interested in controlling other people's opinions than they are interested in what those actual opinions are about.

If you take even a basic cursory examination of either parties official platforms you will quickly realize they are bias, out of context, and misleading "catch phrases", "hype", "sound bites", etc. There is no real substance to either party intellectually or philosophically. This is apparent to anyone with half a clue.

Originally posted by beezzer
The Tea Party controls all.

Just 10 members in congress.

But we control the House, Senate and the White House.

We also eat small kittehs.

just a few black bloc but we control every single person at a protest?

you do see how you just used the,
its only a small percentage that signed the NDAA and they dont represent ALL tea partires?

in comparison to

its only a small percentage of protestors are black bloc and they dont represent the ows movement

xploder

Originally posted by seabag
reply to post by XPLodER

 

does signing the NDAA mean liberty and patriotism?

come on man

Did OWS sign the NDAA???

Oh wait…they don’t have anybody in congress….or even a leader…or anybody who even owns a suit!

how did sending tea party members to congress work out for you?
oh the NDAA

wooops

do you honestly think nop one in OWS owns a suit?
really?

we have
latwers
wall street traders
doctors teachers
military
students
grannies
mothers
IT

the list is really long but
you think we dont own suits? WTF?

xploder

Originally posted by seabag
reply to post by muzzleflash

 

The real un-Americans here are those who condemn anyone's right to speak their mind and express their grievances with the system.

Is “Speak their mind and express grievances with the system” code for Occupy taking a dump on a police car, breaking windows on businesses, destroying public and private property, assaulting people, lighting fires, etc?

Just wondering!

Are these behaviors protected by the 1st amendment?

Let's say person X is a "Communist" in political beliefs.

Let's say that person Y, who claims "Communist allegiance", craps on a police car.

So you are saying that Person X should be prevented from ever protesting and claiming their ideology in public, because person Y who claimed association, did something unrelated ?

Interesting.

Why wouldn't you just suggest Person Y be cited for an offense, and ignore Person X as irrelevant?

Are you trying to claim that OWS is an organized criminal syndicate? That is the only legitimate way you will be able to connect person X to person Y.

Originally posted by muzzleflash

Originally posted by seabag
reply to post by muzzleflash

 

The real un-Americans here are those who condemn anyone's right to speak their mind and express their grievances with the system.

Is “Speak their mind and express grievances with the system” code for Occupy taking a dump on a police car, breaking windows on businesses, destroying public and private property, assaulting people, lighting fires, etc?

Just wondering!

Are these behaviors protected by the 1st amendment?

Clever question.

However, it is clear that anyone could do that and claim false association with whatever movement in order to "make it look bad".

But that is ad hominem and irrelevant, and amounts to petty character assassination of the messenger.
For all I know, you or any Republican could have been out there doing that claiming to be OWS to make them look bad. The motive is there...

In reality this all boils down to politics.
And I am convinced that people are more interested in controlling other people's opinions than they are interested in what those actual opinions are about.

If you take even a basic cursory examination of either parties official platforms you will quickly realize they are bias, out of context, and misleading "catch phrases", "hype", "sound bites", etc. There is no real substance to either party intellectually or philosophically. This is apparent to anyone with half a clue.

star for common sence
you are wise


xploder

reply to post by seabag

Oh wait…they don’t have anybody in congress….or even a leader

Having people that sign the NDAA in congress are absolutely pointless. That does nothing to help anyone. It does everything to hurt everyone. Congrats on having fascists in congress..



The Tea Party doesn't own suits unless they are bought by the Koch Brothers. Their natural dress is 20 year old jeans with dirt stains all over them topped with john deere hats.

Originally posted by XPLodER

for this very reason i held out hope that a united front,
both tea party and OWS would realise that we are in this togther,

and both work for liberty and justice for all.

left right is fake

unite or be enslaved as we argue TP VS OWS

xploder

"We" would be united if it wasn't for people being really susceptible to misleading terminology, half - truths, catch phrases, petty differences, etc.

And anyone who pays attention knows that the Republican, Democrat, Corporate, Pentagon, International, etc entities have psyop agents out there spreading complete bunk claiming it's legitimate information. Like from a hundred directions (tv, net, radio, work, school, etc).

They don't make it easy.

Originally posted by XPLodER
reply to post by HamrHeed

 

If you guys had a legitimate direction, I'm sure more people would join the movement.
Although most of us support your right to free speech, we don't appreciate you vandalising innocent peoples property.
Atleast the tea party was somewhat organised

yes the tea party helped ORGINIZE THE NDAA

OWS is busy creating legislation to counter the corperate written legislation that attempts to give control to the 1%

while on the other hand tea party signs the NDAA

xploder

edit on 7-7-2012 by XPLodER because: (no reason given)

Never heard that before?
So what does it prove if true anyways? That politicians were bought off?

Are you an obama supporter? Think carefully


edit: were you referring to scott walker by chance?

reply to post by muzzleflash


I’m not going to play the analogy game.

Simple question…IS THIS OCCUPY?




IS THIS THE TEA PARTY?


I think it’s clear by the way the two groups conduct themselves which one is capable of the atrocities I described.

reply to post by XPLodER


I threw the gauntlet down for Kali but she didn't accept the challenge.

I now do the same for you.

I challenge you to a debate on Tea Party versus Occupy.