The Occupation of Wall Street Spreads

[Kamakazie Sith]

[
He's actually a former Marine if I remember right, and in any case, can you really see the military going for bat for one of their people who gets hurt at an anti-government rally? I know they have to at least pay lip-service to the Constitution, but I can't imagine the brass are exactly happy about the Other Ranks showing signs of independent political thought.

Even if they did come to bat for one of their own you wouldn't be able to charge civilian police, or a US civilian with a ROE violation or a crime under the UCMJ. Rules of Engagement apply to military forces in combat areas. The UCMJ applies to only military personnel.

Eh, I suppose I have to give you that much, KS. A lot of my feelings on the matter tie into my desire to see police who abuse the public trust placed in them crucified for the deed (and before any of you N&P whiners pipe up, no, not literally, blah, blah, take your 'internet tough guy!' jabbering and stow it). Now, whoever was firing tear gas grenades at head-level right in front of the police line is perhaps in a substantially less defensible position...

Watching the video I see the one officer who was at the front of the line step back and then do his casual toss. There was another device thrown from behind the front line. The officer at the front has some explaining to do and should probably face charges due to the fact that Scott Olsen went down in front of them so he should have known he was injured and that the people running over to him were likely coming to provide aid.

Shame more police don't follow Albany's lead and recognize that the best way to turn a peaceful protest into a riot is to fire tear gas into it. Then you can get into the policy decisions behind the assumption that a peaceful protest in a non-permitted area is more of a threat to civic peace than riot police firing chemical weapons in the streets.

Well, Albany is taking an usual stance since they are disobeying the orders of their Mayor. There are lots of factors to consider. If the protest is peaceful and they aren't interupting any services, business, or blocking streets then they should be allowed to continue indefinitely. However, not all of these protests fall into that category. So, what do you do to break it up?

[MKSheppard]

So I was reading the NYC branch's declaration Linkypoo; and it's the standard generic tropery; but I particularly liked this one:

■They continue to block alternate forms of energy to keep us dependent on oil.

Do I have to remind these people who closed down Yucca Mountain, and blew $25+ Billion in loans on low-density, unreliable "green energy", instead of investing it in safe, reliable Atomic Fission?

The first AP1000 if it's built here in the US, would cost about $3.5 billion; while additional successive AP1000s would cost $2 billion, ultimately falling to a goal of $1 billion per plant.

[Zaune]

Do I have to remind these people who closed down Yucca Mountain, and blew $25+ Billion in loans on low-density, unreliable "green energy", instead of investing it in safe, reliable Atomic Fission?

In their defence, said forms of green energy don't usually give local residents a multitude of new and interesting kinds of cancer when they're outsourced to the low bidder.

[White Haven]

Well, Albany is taking an usual stance since they are disobeying the orders of their Mayor. There are lots of factors to consider. If the protest is peaceful and they aren't interupting any services, business, or blocking streets then they should be allowed to continue indefinitely. However, not all of these protests fall into that category. So, what do you do to break it up?

Those are two separate distinctions. A peaceful protest that's disrupting business and/or blocking streets is, to my mind, far less of a breach of the peace than riot police firing chemical weapons into a packed crowd. The fact that one's illegal and the other isn't is immaterial on that count. One's a breach of the law, one's a breach of the peace, and I count the latter as far more of a problem than the former.

[Alerik the Fortunate]

Well, Occupy Los Angeles has split in to two warring camps over the issue of drug use and conduct code enforcement. One group feels that the occupation camp should obey the law and organize around policy goals, while the other feels it should be an anarchist counter-culture commune "outside" of ordinary society. This is the kind of imagery that feeds into stereotypes about the 99% movement that are promulgated by its enemies, and represents an exploitable weakness in the movement, which could get worse. My local group, Occupy AV, seems to be trying to organize a code of conduct from the start to prevent this sort of thing from happening, so we'll see what else turns up.

[Simon_Jester]

So I was reading the NYC branch's declaration Linkypoo; and it's the standard generic tropery; but I particularly liked this one:

■They continue to block alternate forms of energy to keep us dependent on oil.

Do I have to remind these people who closed down Yucca Mountain, and blew $25+ Billion in loans on low-density, unreliable "green energy", instead of investing it in safe, reliable Atomic Fission?

The first AP1000 if it's built here in the US, would cost about $3.5 billion; while additional successive AP1000s would cost $2 billion, ultimately falling to a goal of $1 billion per plant.

Shep? Which people?

You can't assume every librul, or even every hippie, is complicit in the troubles of the American nuclear industry...

[MKSheppard]

Shep? Which people?

I'd remind the OWS idjits that it's the Obama administration which closed down Yucca mountain; which means that our reactors have to store spent fuel on site; which was a major cause in a lot of Fukushima -- the spent fuel pools there were full.

[madd0ct0r]

but shep- they're protesting against the administatration. it is still Obama in power yes?

[K. A. Pital]

Shep? Which people?

I'd remind the OWS idjits that it's the Obama administration which closed down Yucca mountain; which means that our reactors have to store spent fuel on site; which was a major cause in a lot of Fukushima -- the spent fuel pools there were full.

Shep, they're protesting against the Obama administration.

[open_sketchbook]

Really, they are sort of protesting the government compliance and assistance in this bullshit in general. They are tired of having the choice between the guys who don't represent their views and the guys who are diametrically opposed to their views.

[SVPD]

hey, It just occured to me, if we are still at war in Afganistan, and the Oakland Police apparently assulted a Marine, can the Marine Shore Patrol arrest the Oakland PD SWAT/RIOT squad members for Violations of Rules of Engagement under the Uniform Code of Military Justice?

He's actually a former Marine if I remember right, and in any case, can you really see the military going for bat for one of their people who gets hurt at an anti-government rally? I know they have to at least pay lip-service to the Constitution, but I can't imagine the brass are exactly happy about the Other Ranks showing signs of independent political thought.

The military isn't going to go to bat, any more than the brass cares what a former (or even off-duty) Marine expresses in terms of political thought. The military is apolitical, and the brass likes it that way. It's a point of pride among professional Western militarys (not just the U.S.) that, despite the political opinions of individual troops or even officers, they salute and answer to the elected civilian representative rather than engaging in coups every time something they don't personally like happens. Generals and Admirals do not want to live in that environment any more than anyone else does. Stereotyping is no more accurate when applied to military brass than to ethnic minorities.

Generals and admirals that stray into public political commentary prior to retirement are almost always forced to resign and retire, even if it's accidental, or they didn't think they were making a political comment. McChrystal is the most prominent recent example.

[Kamakazie Sith]

Those are two separate distinctions. A peaceful protest that's disrupting business and/or blocking streets is, to my mind, far less of a breach of the peace than riot police firing chemical weapons into a packed crowd. The fact that one's illegal and the other isn't is immaterial on that count. One's a breach of the law, one's a breach of the peace, and I count the latter as far more of a problem than the former.

You didn't answer my question. I'll rephrase. What do you think is an appropriate response when a peaceful protest is disrupting businesses and/or blocking streets and those involved refuse to leave when told to do so by the police?

[Count Chocula]

^ I'll take "judiciously applied force" for $200, Alex! With the emphasis on judicious.

[White Haven]

If the cost of clearing out a peaceful protest occurring where you don't want one occurring is using the police to incite a riot, then you don't clear them out because the cure is worse than the disease. It'd be as if you had a rash that itched annoyingly, but otherwise was not health-threatening, and the only cure was a cream that had a long list of unpleasant and possibly lethal side-effects. Sounds really stupid, right? But hey look, having that rash is illegal, so you're forced to apply the potentially-deadly cream.

I'll be even more blunt: If the price of breaking up a peaceful demonstration is rolling the dice and hoping you don't have another Oakland, don't break it up. You bring in riot police to counter a riot. Bringing them in when there's not a riot is an awfully good way to trigger one.

[CaptainChewbacca]

Problems beginning to emerge:

In Madison the group lost their permits for being a public health and safety hazard due to such things as public masturbation.

In Portland the group's fundraising apparatus has either lost, stolen, or misplaced $20,000.

The charm is beginning to wear off in a lot of places, and with heavy snows in the northeast this weekend, I'm thinking it won't last much longer.

[KlavoHunter]

Problems beginning to emerge:

In Madison the group lost their permits for being a public health and safety hazard due to such things as public masturbation.
The charm is beginning to wear off in a lot of places, and with heavy snows in the northeast this weekend, I'm thinking it won't last much longer.

The Occupy Madison encampment has moved to 800 East Washington, and is now set up in an old used car lot rather close to their original location at Reynolds Park, and is now directly visible from the main road, with, importantly, lots more room to grow.

[Terralthra]

Occupy Denver is currently under police attack. Riot police with rubber bullets and pepper spray have a crowd (with a permit to be there) surrounded, and are telling women and children to evacuate as they're preparing to fire tear gas. Many of the police (illegally) have their badge numbers covered.

[White Haven]

On one hand, I'd like to feel smug, on the other hand...naah, too depressing.

[Shroom Man 777]

Fortunately, I don't have those compunctions, WH!

I am certain that the police have good reason to do this and are doing their duties to preserve the peace, and it would be in poor form for any clueless civilian to actually needlessly videotape or otherwise record the police activities in regards to the civil freedomization of those involve in that undoubtedly illegal rally/occupation/whatever. These video recordings would document nothing of substance or value at all, and would undoubtedly be used out of context by biased agitating degenerates to make our great boys in blue look bad while all they are doing is honest good work serving and protecting the upstanding members of society from the dregs of the underclass who had it coming anyway. There is no need for the outside scrutiny of the know-nothing histrionic and easily-outraged common man with the video camera, as the non-transparent internal processes of the government and of the law enforcement agency itself is completely trustworthy and has never ever failed us ever.

[Broomstick]

You didn't answer my question. I'll rephrase. What do you think is an appropriate response when a peaceful protest is disrupting businesses and/or blocking streets and those involved refuse to leave when told to do so by the police?

Well, here in Chicago they announce over TV and radio when the Occupy folks are blocking streets and route mass transit and traffic around the block as best they're able, businesses start letting employees leave via the back and side doors/emergency exits to avoid the crowds, and in general they let the demonstration(s) vent for a few hours. Yes, it causes some inconvenience - that's sort of the point of a protest - but by and large they're not erupting into violence on either side.

They had a bunch camped outside the mayor's office for a couple days. The mayor left them alone. I'm sure he was aware of them, what with all the chanting and yelling in the hallway right outside his office, but the party line in Chicago is that they DO have a right to assemble and speak and as long as things don't get violent the mayor will pretty much let them do it.

If protesters completely blocked businesses so that no one could get in or out at all it might be a different matter around here. So long as they're just an inconvenience, though, the authorities are leaving them mostly alone.

[White Haven]

Irony's a bitch. I was just watching some of the news footage coming out of Denver. Not only are the police starting fights with nonviolent protesters as has been previously mentioned, but while the protesters are in a park and thus not obstructing traffic or business, the massive police response has the major street in front of the park completely blocked off with a massive number of police vehicles and officers. Apparently it's a massive legal problem when peaceful protesters inconvenience people, but not when an aggressive, intermittently-violent police response to a legal protest does the same.

[Kamakazie Sith]

If the cost of clearing out a peaceful protest occurring where you don't want one occurring is using the police to incite a riot, then you don't clear them out because the cure is worse than the disease. It'd be as if you had a rash that itched annoyingly, but otherwise was not health-threatening, and the only cure was a cream that had a long list of unpleasant and possibly lethal side-effects. Sounds really stupid, right? But hey look, having that rash is illegal, so you're forced to apply the potentially-deadly cream.

I'll be even more blunt: If the price of breaking up a peaceful demonstration is rolling the dice and hoping you don't have another Oakland, don't break it up. You bring in riot police to counter a riot. Bringing them in when there's not a riot is an awfully good way to trigger one.

It's a bit more complicated then "I don't want them protesting here". It's more along the lines of business owners and other citizens trying to get to work/appointments/whatever calling in to the police and complaining that they're unable to do so because the peaceful protesters are blocking streets and/or businesses which is illegal for that very reason so peaceful assemblies don't violate the rights of others. BTW - Other reports indicate that the protesters in Oakland were pelting the police with bottles and rocks BEFORE the police began using force.

Now, I agree with Broomstick that if it just amounts to an inconvenience then yeah let it go.

[Kamakazie Sith]

Irony's a bitch. I was just watching some of the news footage coming out of Denver. Not only are the police starting fights with nonviolent protesters as has been previously mentioned, but while the protesters are in a park and thus not obstructing traffic or business, the massive police response has the major street in front of the park completely blocked off with a massive number of police vehicles and officers. Apparently it's a massive legal problem when peaceful protesters inconvenience people, but not when an aggressive, intermittently-violent police response to a legal protest does the same.

If the facts of the situation are how you describe then that's a problem. Though, I doubt they are. The fact of the matter is you're only seeing a small perspective of what is actually happening. Do you actually believe you have a full understanding of what's going on just by watching a news recording?

[Kamakazie Sith]

Occupy Denver is currently under police attack. Riot police with rubber bullets and pepper spray have a crowd (with a permit to be there) surrounded, and are telling women and children to evacuate as they're preparing to fire tear gas. Many of the police (illegally) have their badge numbers covered.

According to the source below they may have been out of the bounds the permit grants.

Source

In the most violent Saturday in more than a month of Occupy Denver demonstrations and marches, Denver police fired pepper spray and pepper balls at a crowd of protesters in Civic Center and arrested 20 people.


Two of the protesters were held for felony charges after police said an officer was knocked off his motorcycle and other officers were kicked, as they moved into the park to tear down illegal tents.

The first midafternoon confrontation had police and state troopers shoulder-to-shoulder pushing a group of marchers off the state Capitol steps, which is out-of-bounds to protesters without a permit. Some of the Occupy Denver sympathizers then raced to set up tents in Civic Center, where city officials have allowed ongoing


Protesters there surged around about eight police officers. Other officers responding to calls for help fired the pepper bullets, which resemble paint balls. One protester filming the scene — one of hundreds of cameras documenting police activity — was knocked out of a tree in the melee.

Five people were arrested in the first conflict, before 3 p.m. Hundreds of officers and SWAT members converged on the park, and Broadway was shut down for hours as police and protesters reached a tense stalemate.

About a dozen of the angriest marchers stood nose-to-nose with police and screamed profanities or anti-Wall Street slogans. Others tried to calm the situation, even while filming.

Just before 6 p.m., with ambulances waiting and police cruisers covering whole blocks around the park, officers donned gas masks and used megaphones to warn protesters that the remaining tents were illegal. Wielding long batons, a few dozen officers pushed into the park and formed a circle around the tents.

University of Colorado student Daniel Ellen tried to jump through a gap to help other protesters he feared were stuck in the tents but was knocked

Occupy Denver protesters are pushed back onto the sidewalk by police after blocking traffic on Broadway just west of the state Capitol building in downtown Denver Saturday afternoon. (Karl Gehring, The Denver Post)to the ground by police. He stood up and charged at them again, screaming in anger, took a blow to the temple with a baton and was pushed down twice more.

"I support the people here who are unemployed," said Ellen, who said adrenaline kicked in and he grabbed one of the batons before getting knocked back again. While the crowd surged around the officers, a Hare Krishna group chanted and danced just behind them.

Fifteen people were arrested in the second action, said Lt. Matt Murray, Denver police spokesman. "All we did was take down the structures," he said. "We're reacting to what they do. As long as they are legally protesting, we'll protect their right to do that. The officers today did a great job of showing restraint."

Occupy Denver protesters marched on the State Capitol Saturday as police stood watch. (Jordan Steffen, The Denver Post )The 15 later arrests, including two juveniles, were all for misdemeanors, he said. One of those arrested was taken to the hospital.

Murray said Denver's newly appointed police chief, Robert White of Louisville, Ky., was aware of the action. White, whose appointment is pending City Council approval, was in Denver on Saturday for a news conference.

A Public Works truck parked in the middle of Broadway after the second sweep was quickly crammed with tents, tarps and the tables and food from the "kitchen" area that was a social hub for protesters.

During a noontime march, which was smaller than the previous three Saturdays, as many as 2,000 demonstrators peacefully made their way through downtown Denver.

As the crowd made its way back to Civic Center on Broadway, they veered east and up to the steps of the Capitol. Officers formed a line at the bottom of the west steps.

Some protesters pushed officers, while others joked with them. One person tagged an unmarked patrol car with orange spray paint — scrawling "99%" across the hood and driver-side door.

Protesters toward the front of the crowd started fighting with one another after one protester told another to stop taunting police.

Fewer than 10 officers in riot gear were in the middle of a hive of pushing protesters. Behind them, a man and a woman were face-down in hand restraints. Officers pushed protesters back, only to have them collapse on them again.

More officers were able to move in after several rounds of pepper spray and one round of pepper balls were fired.

Mike Korzen, 25, washed pepper spray out of his eyes with a bottle of water.

"I was standing there with my hands behind my back," Korzen said.

He said police had been trying to get people out of the surrounding trees.

During the midafternoon stalemate, U.S. Rep. Ed Perlmutter waded into the crowd alone but for a bullhorn, urging protesters to remain as peaceful as they had been during his previous visit. A few in the crowd drowned his words, shouting that it was the cops in assault gear who needed to tone it down, not them.

"Obviously you're making an impression," said Perlmutter, the 7th District Democrat. "You've got to de-escalate this thing."

"We want jobs!" a man shouted back. "Democrats won't get elected anymore!"

Others standing near Perlmutter defended him to the crowd. "He's the only elected official who bothered to come down here today," one said.

Demonstrator Bobby Guerrero said that camping is an important part of the protest.

"We're just trying to hold our ground," Guerrero said. "We just want our voices to be heard."

[White Haven]

I've seen combinations of news and livestream footage showing quite clearly a mass of protesters in the park, a line of riot police standing just outside the park, and the street beyond utterly /filled/ with police and police vehicles, blocked off. Never mind reports, I've seen the actual footage demonstrating that the road is closed because of the police presence, totally devoid of any protester presence. Hence the irony: it's only a bad thing when protesters do it, apparently.

Much like throwing grenades, come to think of it.