The Occupation of Wall Street Spreads

[Terralthra]

Photo #7, the Sheriff on the left of the frame has no badge displayed and no number on his helmet.

Photo #9, the policeman carrying off the tent has neither badge nor number visible on his helmet.

Photo #11, the kneeling officer has no badge on his outergarment and none on his helmet (on the ground).

Photo #27, the officer in the foreground with the beanbag shotgun has no badge/number on his chest and none on his helmet.

Photo #58, the officer furthest on the right has no visible badge or badge number.

edit: fixed a link.

[Terralthra]

I distinctly recall many of those instances, but never recall anyone actually saying (peaceful) Tea Party protests should be cleared with tear gas and riot police.

I don't think there is a difference between calling for bankers to be shot or calling for protestors to be dispersed.

That is a separate question. The issue at hand is:

You may hate the assholes who do it, but would you really argue you should come at Tea Partiers with gas canisters and batons and beatings just to "clear access"? I mean, everyone hates the Tea Partiers, but seriously?

No, I wouldn't.

But I would point out that there are those on this board who would, or at least would advocate that on the conveniently faceless, consequence-less, and influence-less location of an internet message board.

[Agent Fisher]

I don't htink we can count 9, he might have it on the right side of his vest, so unless we see him from straight on, I can't vote on that one. 11 is pulling on a mask, he might be getting set, so can't really tell and his helmet does have a badge, we just cant see it well enough to tell if it has a number on it too. 27, bean bag, yeah, can't see a number. 58, yes, no badge on his jacket.

[Kamakazie Sith]

Photo #7, the Sheriff on the left of the frame has no badge displayed and no number on his helmet.

Ok, so that's one.

Photo #9, the policeman carrying off the tent has neither badge nor number visible on his helmet.

Not acceptable. The numbers visible on other officers have been on the right side of the body and we can't see the right side this officers body.

Photo #11, the kneeling officer has no badge on his outergarment and none on his helmet (on the ground).

That's two.

Photo #27, the officer in the foreground with the beanbag shotgun has no badge/number on his chest and none on his helmet.

Again, the numbers are displayed on the right side of the vest. But since his appears to be different from the others we'll count that as three.

Photo #58, the officer furthest on the right has no visible badge or badge number.

edit: fixed a link.

That's four.

You've found four examples out of 61 pictures. This means it is likely a logistical issue due to an emergency callout of additional personnel. Should it be corrected? Absolutely. Is it evidence of anything malicious. Absolutely not. None of those support your claim that a substantial number of law enforcement are concealing their identities either accidently or intentionally.

[Thanas]

Sorry, still not seeing a difference in attitude.

[Kamakazie Sith]

Why not? A sufficiently large protest will always infringe on some rights of others. I think it heavily depends on how severe the infringement is.

As I stated earlier if the infringment amounts to causing an inconvience then I do think that should be tolerated. Anything more than that is unacceptable.

[Questor]

For Terralthra:

And we all know there's only two things we can do to deal with wild animals. We either tame them, or Put Them Down.

Advocating political violence? Check.
Target is Tea Party? Check.

[CaptainChewbacca]

So how's the New England snows affecting the Occupation over there?

[madd0ct0r]

For Terralthra:

And we all know there's only two things we can do to deal with wild animals. We either tame them, or Put Them Down.

Advocating political violence? Check.
Target is Tea Party? Check.

yeah, and he's already apologised over statements like that and retracted the threat.
like i said. some people learn better.

[K. A. Pital]

SM93 has been the laughing stock of the board for the last few months. Precisely for making statements like that (and a whole lot of other stupid statements as well).

[Broomstick]

Meanwhile, back at the actual protests...

Judge Tells Tennesee to Stop Arresting Protestors

(CNN) -- A judge told Tennessee officials on Monday to stop enforcing new rules that have been used to arrest Occupy protesters in Nashville.

The decision was a victory for the fledgling movement and for the American Civil Liberties Union of Tennessee, which sought a temporary restraining order to block a curfew put in place last week.

U.S. District Judge Aleta Trauger issued the order, which state officials did not fight.

"Political expression deserves the highest level of protection and it was unacceptable for the state to suddenly shut down protesters' speech and forcibly oust them from Legislative Plaza that has long been used as a place for peaceful expression," said Hedy Weinberg, executive director at the ACLU of Tennessee.

"The state conceded that the temporary restraining order should be issued and we hope that this is the first step (that) the state is recommitting itself to safeguarding -- not thwarting -- public political expression," she added.

Efforts by CNN to reach officials in the state attorney general's office were not successful.

The order will remain in effect for 21 days. A hearing in the case is scheduled for November 21.

Demonstrators across the country are protesting what they consider to be corporate greed and corruption as part of the weeks-long "Occupy" movement. Many say the nation's wealthiest 1% hold inordinate sway over the remaining 99% of the population.

In Tennessee, protesters have gathered at Legislative Plaza in downtown Nashville since early October.

Authorities issued the new rules on Thursday, requiring protesters to have permits and restricting the times they would be allowed to gather.

In subsequent days, protesters were arrested, including more than two dozen overnight Saturday, after they defied the curfew imposed by the state's governor. Most received citations for trespassing, while two others were cited for public intoxication.

[Raw Shark]

So how's the New England snows affecting the Occupation over there?

Occupy Boston Protesters Stay Put In Snow
Anti-Wall Street Protesters Vowing To Stand Their Ground

POSTED: 6:14 am EDT October 28, 2011
UPDATED: 10:17 am EDT October 28, 2011

BOSTON -- Wall Street protesters around the country who are vowing to stand their ground against the police and politicians are also digging in against a different kind of adversary: cold weather.

With the temperature dropping, they are stockpiling donated coats, blankets and scarves, trying to secure cots and military-grade tents, and getting survival tips from the homeless people who have joined their encampments.

"Everyone's been calling it our Valley Forge moment," said Michael McCarthy, a former Navy medic in Providence. "Everybody thought that George Washington couldn't possibly survive in the Northeast."

More than a month and a half into the movement, Occupy Wall Street activists from New York to Colorado have pledged to tough out the snow, sleet and cold as they protest economic inequality and what they call corporate greed.

But the dangers of staying outdoors in some of the country's harsher climes are already becoming apparent: In Denver, two protesters were hospitalized with hypothermia this week during a storm that brought several inches of snow.

The activists also know full well that the number of demonstrators is likely to drop as the weather gets colder.

Some movements are scouting locations indoors, including vacant buildings or other unused properties, possibly even foreclosed homes, though some question the wisdom of holding a protest outside the public eye.

Lighting campfires is probably out of the question in most places because of safety regulations.

Boston's Occupy movement, which has roughly 300 overnight participants and could face some of the most brutal weather of any city with a major encampment, has set up a winterization committee that will try to obtain super-insulated sleeping bags and other winter survival gear. Activists from the movement's flagship encampment, consisting of hundreds of people in New York City's Zuccotti Park, are sorting through packages arriving daily that include coats and jackets.

In Providence, where city officials are threatening to go to court to evict hundreds of campers from a park across from City Hall, a core group said it will remain through the winter months - if not there, somewhere else. Rhode Island's capital has an average low temperature in the 20s from December through February and recorded nearly 3 1/2 feet of snow last year. Many of the more than 100 tents are not built to withstand harsh conditions.

Temperatures were expected to drop into the 30s across much of the Northeast by Friday morning, and forecasters said snow is possible in some places over the weekend. Boston got its first dusting late Thursday night.

In Denver, as protesters prepared for this week's snow, a few dozen sympathizers stopped by to drop off blankets, gloves, chili and hot chocolate. Police refused to let activists erect a tent. That left some sleeping on the wet ground, covered by snowy tarps.

"I welcome the challenge of this cold weather," said Dwayne Hudson, a landscaper who has been living at the Occupy Denver site for nearly two weeks. "This is like war. You know, soldiers do it when they occupy a place. I'm sure the mountains of Afghanistan get pretty cold."

But after the first snowfall, he admitted: "It's getting tough."

Eric Martin, who is on Occupy Boston's winterization committee, said the group had raised about $35,000, which could help buy winter supplies. Various ideas are being discussed to keep tents warm without using combustion-based heaters, which are forbidden. Another proposal: igloos.

"We're looking at ideas from military vets to survivalists, to the homeless community to indigenous peoples," Martin said.

Activists in Philadelphia are also researching sturdier, warmer structures that could replace the 300 to 400 tents set up on the concrete plaza surrounding City Hall.

Chris Goldstein of Riverside, N.J., owns one of the tents, though he sometimes sleeps at home. He learned the hard way during the first rainfall that the site has poor drainage: "I occupied a puddle." The self-employed writer and activist put pallets under the tent to lift it off the ground, and outfitted it with small carpets for insulation.

In the meantime, he and other activists have access to a Quaker community center two blocks away where they can shower and thaw out in common rooms.

In Chicago, where winters are famously bitter, protesters living in Grant Park are working to secure several indoor locations to get them through to spring. A church nearby is letting some demonstrators sleep overnight. Activists in Portland, Ore., likewise said that moving the protest inside is the only realistic option.

Patricia Phelan and her fiancee, Savanah Kite, have been camping in the Providence park in a $20 tent from Walmart. As temperatures dipped into the 40s in the morning this week and people could see their breath, they hadn't yet employed their hand warmers or a down comforter Phelan had in the car just in case.

Their plan is to add layers as necessary.

The trick will be keeping morale up, Phelan said, "and not letting the climate get to us."

Read more: http://www.thebostonchannel.com/news/29 ... z1cSgqP7se

[Ryan Thunder]

This is why I'm buying blankets for the Occupy Toronto guys. I've heard they're always in need of them, so if anybody else around here wants to help out but can't get directly involved for some reason, that's one way.

[Ziggy Stardust]

Does anybody know what kind of warning the protesters are getting? That is, when there are illegal tents or anything else violating the permit, or causing the inconveniences to business, that the police are so upset about, what are the police doing? Do they just go right in and tear down the tents or arrest people or whatever, or are the protesters given some sort of warning, like "If this tent isn't moved, or if this street isn't cleared, you will be arrested. You have 1 hour/until morning/whatever."?

Since I am not at any of the protests, I have no idea what's going on, and the media seems to refuse to comment on that side of the issue.

Why WOULDN'T the cops do this? I see absolutely no reason besides spite that the police wouldn't give the protesters the chance to clear out of an area first. If the protesters are given fair warning, they can't complain when the police come in to break things up. And it's not like there are any serious logistics to the warning. It takes one cop to go over with a megaphone and make the announcement.

Any have any idea if this sort of thing is happening and, if it isn't, why on Earth the police wouldn't do something like this instead of going in with tear gas and riot gear? I mean, it's not like this is a drug bust that needs to be done quickly before evidence is flushed, it's a legal protest. Unless you have a sincere desire to injure people, I cannot see why the police would use riot tactics first.

[Losonti Tokash]

The police probably DO give notice and such in most instances. But it sort of defeats the purpose of civil disobedience if you clear out right when the authorities tell you to.

[Lord Zentei]

Does anybody know what kind of warning the protesters are getting? That is, when there are illegal tents or anything else violating the permit, or causing the inconveniences to business, that the police are so upset about, what are the police doing? Do they just go right in and tear down the tents or arrest people or whatever, or are the protesters given some sort of warning, like "If this tent isn't moved, or if this street isn't cleared, you will be arrested. You have 1 hour/until morning/whatever."?

Don't paint with too broad a brush. The reactions in the various cities has been quite different, as are local conditions for the protestors. I must admit that I'm puzzled by your claim that the media isn't saying anything, there's plenty of information to be had online.


EDIT
@STAS:
Sorry for disappearing in the middle of our discussion like that. I had a lot of crap to deal with and was unable to reply.

[Terralthra]

You've found four examples out of 61 pictures. This means it is likely a logistical issue due to an emergency callout of additional personnel. Should it be corrected? Absolutely. Is it evidence of anything malicious. Absolutely not. None of those support your claim that a substantial number of law enforcement are concealing their identities either accidently or intentionally.

What emergency? Protestors had been occupying and marching around downtown Denver for over a month. Police action is what created the emergency situation in the first place! State constabulary don't get to cause a violent confrontation, then blame the confrontation they initiated as an "emergency" which necessitated violating police code.

As for Anonymous publicizing names and badge numbers: fuck them. If officers of the police don't want to be publicly called out for brutality and violence, they should quit following orders to violate people's first amendment rights to free assembly and free speech. If they are unwilling to do that, they should quit, and if they don't do either, they deserve to have their identity known so that everyone can find out exactly which officers are violating the public trust.

A number of OPD officers are rumored to have gone AWOL, given notice, or straight up turned in their badges after the violence caused by police action in Oakland last week, for example.

[Flagg]

You've found four examples out of 61 pictures. This means it is likely a logistical issue due to an emergency callout of additional personnel. Should it be corrected? Absolutely. Is it evidence of anything malicious. Absolutely not. None of those support your claim that a substantial number of law enforcement are concealing their identities either accidently or intentionally.

What emergency?

A public demonstration with numerous minorities without fat white people dressed in funny hats who named themselves after a homosexual act sounds alot like an emergency to me. :V

[Ryan Thunder]

As for Anonymous publicizing names and badge numbers: fuck them.

I'm sure Anonymous is a perfectly impartial, trustworthy, and objective organization that will be certain to get their facts straight before doing this.

[Flagg]

As for Anonymous publicizing names and badge numbers: fuck them.

I'm sure Anonymous is a perfectly impartial, trustworthy, and objective organization that will be certain to get their facts straight before doing this.

Who cares? Any cop that witnesses brutality and doesn't immediately attempt to arrest the one responsible is an accomplice.

[Kamakazie Sith]

What emergency? Protestors had been occupying and marching around downtown Denver for over a month. Police action is what created the emergency situation in the first place! State constabulary don't get to cause a violent confrontation, then blame the confrontation they initiated as an "emergency" which necessitated violating police code.

I said an emergency callout of personnel. Key words "emergency callout". The emergency callout was likely initiated because of the large number of people that were violating the law and refused to move on. That violation was when the protesters moved out of the bounds established by the permit. Now, I have no idea whether this violation presented just an inconvenience or was more than that.

As for Anonymous publicizing names and badge numbers: fuck them. If officers of the police don't want to be publicly called out for brutality and violence, they should quit following orders to violate people's first amendment rights to free assembly and free speech. If they are unwilling to do that, they should quit, and if they don't do either, they deserve to have their identity known so that everyone can find out exactly which officers are violating the public trust.

Seriously? When I say personal information you think "Names and badge numbers". That's not personal information, dummy. Try home address, personal phone numbers, and in a handful of cases the names of their spouse and children. Also, I should not need to remind you that police are people to and are protected by the same rights that protect you from having your personal information provided to those that you are accusing of a crime.

A number of OPD officers are rumored to have gone AWOL, given notice, or straight up turned in their badges after the violence caused by police action in Oakland last week, for example.

Yeah, so? Again, police officers are people to which means they can make hasty decisions based off of not knowing all the facts.

[Kamakazie Sith]

Who cares? Any cop that witnesses brutality and doesn't immediately attempt to arrest the one responsible is an accomplice.

Again, another example of "fuck your rights" when it suits you. You're a hypocrite, Flagg. You have no place in discussions regarding civil rights when you throw them out the window when the situation suits you.

As for arresting on observed instances of police brutality - most departments have a policy that should you witness brutality then it must be immediately reported to a supervisor.

[Flagg]

Who cares? Any cop that witnesses brutality and doesn't immediately attempt to arrest the one responsible is an accomplice.

Again, another example of "fuck your rights" when it suits you. You're a hypocrite, Flagg. You have no place in discussions regarding civil rights when you throw them out the window when the situation suits you.

As for arresting on observed instances of police brutality - most departments have a policy that should you witness brutality then it must be immediately reported to a supervisor.

Eat a dick, apologist. Cops have no right whatsoever to hide their identities while on duty and any that do are just as bad as criminals wearing a mask.

[Lord Zentei]

Eat a dick, apologist. Cops have no right whatsoever to hide their identities while on duty and any that do are just as bad as criminals wearing a mask.

Really? What about undercover cops? I would have thought that cops do have the right to hide their identities if they have reason to fear reprisals against themselves or family due to their pursuit of their duties.

Of course, abuse of this anonymity isn't something to be defended, I'm merely wondering about their actual rights.

[Flagg]

Eat a dick, apologist. Cops have no right whatsoever to hide their identities while on duty and any that do are just as bad as criminals wearing a mask.

Really? What about undercover cops? I would have thought that cops do have the right to hide their identities if they have reason to fear reprisals against themselves or family due to their pursuit of their duties.

Of course, abuse of this anonymity isn't something to be defended, I'm merely wondering about their actual rights.

Of course undercover work is a situation where cops identities should be shielded. Those are special circumstances. I don't see how riot police fit in there, though. As far as I'm concerned hiding your badge number is as much of an admission of bad intentions as walking into a bank with a ski mask on. And it's not like police have all the privacy rights of a civilian, either. They have a higher responsibility given to them by the people they are supposed to protect but all too often abuse.