M$M Cuts Oakland OWS Live feed to avoid showing....

[ChumpDumper]

Is that what they are doing?

[ChumpDumper]

Drove by around the start of the curfew. The police presence was, um, significant.

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/428791_356679661023468_277000925658009_1265585_145 9255880_n.jpg

[Nbadan]

To serve and protect

6AdDLhPwpp4


UC Davis Guilty at All Levels in Student Pepper-Spraying Incident


According to a report released this week, the pepper spraying of student Occupy protesters at the University of California, Davis last November, should never have happened. Students had been protesting rising tuition, privatization, and declining student services.

According to the report, the use pepper spray on seated protesters was not justified nor authorized, the Bay Citizen reported. The spraying was carried out at close range, though it is not supposed to be used at a range of less than six feet. Furthermore, the pepper spray used by the police was a high potency variety that was not approved for use on peaceful protestors. As a result, two students were hospitalized, while twelve others were treated and released by fire department personnel.

The task force, chaired by former California Supreme Court Justice Cruz Reynoso, held the university completely responsible for the atrocity, blaming campus police and the administration of UC Davis Chancellor Linda Katehi. Reynoso is an emeritus professor at the UC Davis law school. The task force was made up of 12 current and former UCD officials, professors, alumni and students.

The report also concluded that campus police leaders never confirmed their assertion that the protest involved outside agitators (not that this would have justified the brutality they used), nor did they consider alternative, less violent options, compromises or communication with the student activists.

Modern School
http://modeducation.blogspot.com/2012/04/uc-davis-guilty-at-all-levels-in.html

[Winehole23]

The NYPD has arrested protesters and journalists thousands of times since Occupy Wall Street first began in September, but the case of Alexander Arbuckle was the first of them to actually go to trial.

Arbuckle was arrested while photographing a march early on January 1. As a contingent of a few dozen protesters turned off Sixth Avenue onto 13th street, heading east, the police following the march on foot and on scooters moved in, making several arrests.


Among those arrests was Arbuckle, charged with disorderly conduct for standing in the middle of the street blocking traffic, even after police had repeatedly told protesters to get out of the street. That's the story told in the criminal complaint against Arbuckle, and it's the story that the officer who arrested him told again under oath in court on Monday. The protesters, including Arbuckle, were in the street blocking traffic, Officer Elisheba Vera testified. The police, on the sidewalk, had to move in to make arrests to allow blocked traffic to move.


But there was a problem with the police account: it bore no resemblance to photographs and videos taken that night. Arbuckle's own photographs from the evening place him squarely on the sidewalk. All the video from the NYPD's Technical Research Assistance Unit, which follows the protesters with video-cameras (in almost certain violation (http://www.salon.com/2011/11/04/is_all_that_nypd_surveillance_legal/) of a federal consent decree), showed Arbuckle on the sidewalk.
http://blogs.villagevoice.com/runninscared/2012/05/in_the_first_oc.php

[Winehole23]

Arbuckle's arrest is particularly ironic because he wasn't on 13th Street January 1 to protest -- he was there to document the cop's side of the story. (Here's his Flickr page (http://www.flickr.com/photos/alexarbuckle/sets/).) A junior at New York University majoring in political science and journalism, Arbuckle doesn't identify with the Occupy movement, but was working on an assignment for class to document the officers assigned to police it.

"I felt the police had been treated unfairly on the media," he said. "All the focus was on the conflict and the worst instances of brutality and aggression, where most of the police I met down there were really professional and restrained."


"It was a total fabrication," Arbuckle said. "When I was first arraigned in February, they offered me an ACD [Adjournment in Contemplation of Dismissal]. It would have been nice to have everything over and done with, but it would have been an acknowledgment of guilt, and I knew I wasn't guilty."same

[Wild Cobra]

I'll bet he isn't so happy to help the police any longer. they lost someone on their side.

[Nbadan]

They're back!

and 75,000 strong in Chicago to protest the NATO summit...

And one Occupy L.A. activist posted more livestream links:

From Occupy LA
http://www.ustream.tv/channel/​crossxbones
http://​www.occupyfreedomla.org/
http://www.ustream.tv/channel/​lady-libertine

From Occupy SF/Occupy Oakland
http://www.ustream.tv/channel/​codeframeosf
http://www.ustream.tv/channel/​therevolutionwillbestreamed
http://www.ustream.tv/occupysf
http://www.ustream.tv/channel/​occupyoakland-viz

From Occupy San Diego
http://www.ustream.tv/channel/​p91fun

From Occupy Chicago
http://www.ustream.tv/channel/​occupiechicago
http://www.ustream.tv/channel/​occupychi

From OWS
http://www.ustream.tv/timcast
http://www.ustream.tv/​wearechange

LA/NYC based journalist
http://www.ustream.tv/channel/​insightoutnews

The brown shirts...

http://p.twimg.com/AtXHACRCEAADDEK.jpg

[ChumpDumper]

Are they actually saying anything this time around or are they making sandwiches and loan libraries again?

[Marcus Bryant]

Are they actually saying anything this time around or are they making sandwiches and loan libraries again?

Protest aesthetes. Best to be seen and heard, no agenda required.

[Wild Cobra]

Occupy, Vagrancy, Trespassing....

Not much difference here...

If these Mo Fo's get gassed, or treated badly. I don't care.

Did they get a permit this time and stick to it?

[Nbadan]

Something is happening in Anaheim - Why the Media Blackout?

62pffXqRR7o

Amber Lyon, award-winning investigative journalist and filmmaker, joins Thom Hartmann. Something is happening in Anaheim, California - despite a complete blackout from the mainstreem media. Take a look at some of these pictures by award-winning investigative journalist Amber Lyons from Anaheim over the weekend. When we hear terms like militarized police - this is what comes to mind. Officers decked out in full military gear as though they're about to be deployed to Afghanistan. So what's behind this? Why are militarized police on patrol in Anaheim? Well - Sunday marked the ninth straight day that local citizens took to the streets to protest police brutality. Nine days after police shot an unarmed man - 25-year-old Manuel Diaz - in the back of the head killing him. Since that shooting...the streets of Anaheim have been the scene of mostly peaceful protests that have at times turned violent in response to heavy handed police crackdowns. Last week - this was the scene in Anaheim - as police in riot gear fired less lethal projectiles like bean bags and pepper balls indiscriminately into crowds of people. 24 people were arrested that night - storefront windows were smashed, and fires were started. And last night - as hundreds poured into the streets for a peaceful march and ceremony for Manuel Diaz - they were once again met with Anaheim police equipped with full military gear. Nine people were arrested on Sunday.

[Clipper Nation]

They don't know who they are voting for. They listen to the news, unions, etc. to tell them who to vote for, or vote by party. They don't learn who they are actually voting for. As part of the 1%, I at least do some research as to whom I vote for.
And your research involves Hannity, O'Reilly, and Greta.....

[ChumpDumper]

There is no media blackout. You guys got suckered by Putin's news again.

[Wild Cobra]

And your research involves Hannity, O'Reilly, and Greta.....
No.

You disappoint me by making such unfounded assumptions.

I cut my cable a long time ago. I watch the local news with an antenna sometimes, and that's it.

[Winehole23]

http://www.myfoxaustin.com/story/19432196/apd-officers-infiltrated-occupy-movement

[Bill_Brasky]

No.

You disappoint me by making such unfounded assumptions.

I cut my cable a long time ago. I watch the local news with an antenna sometimes, and that's it.

So you get your political inions from AM radio.

[Winehole23]

Austin PD withheld Brady material, administrators contradict each other on infiltration of Ocupy movement


Austin police administrators gave contradictory statements to Austin Chronicle reporter Jordan Smith (http://www.austinchronicle.com/news/2012-09-07/apd-infiltrates-occupy/) about their use of three undercover operatives (or, perhaps, provocateurs) who infiltrated the Occupy Austin organization.

Police detective Shannon Dowell built a "lockbox" device for use at a Houston sit-in, the use of which upped criminal charges against the protesters from a misdemeanor to a felony. Reported Smith, such a "device usually must be cut off, posing risk to the user and, potentially, to the police or firefighters doing the cutting, if booby traps are employed inside the pipe." Further, "It was those concerns about safety, says APD Assistant Chief Sean Mannix, that prompted APD detective Shannon Dowell to get involved last December in constructing a series of lockboxes that the seven protesters were arrested for using at the Port of Houston."

So according to Mannix, the officer's actions were part and parcel of the intent of the operation to promote the safety of protesters and law enforcement. However, Austin police chief Art Acevedo told Smith that the undercover activities "went beyond the scope of the mission ... that was established at the executive level." "The trouble wasn't coming from the 'core Occupiers,'" says Acevedo, ignoring that the trouble was coming in part from APD's own officers. The chief told Smith that "'we are reviewing the matter, from top to bottom,' ... to see where the mission might have gone astray, in order to keep anything like that from happening in the future."

Which is right? Mannix's comments imply the officers were doing exactly what they were put there for, while if Acevedo is correct, it speaks to gross failures in management and oversight.

Regardless, the claim that the purpose of the undercovers was to protect the First Amendment rights of protesters is outright Orwellian. What a low opinion of public intelligence they must have to imagine anyone is stupid enough to believe such a disingenuous comment! (Sadly, the low opinion is probably justified. After all, the MSM keeps repeating the claim.)

Then there's APD's blatant recalcitrance when ordered to submit records for judicial oversight. Reported Smith:

Based on the transcripts of an Aug. 27 hearing in Campbell's court, the judge has not readily embraced the APD's official story. Dowell was subpoenaed by Gladden to attend the pretrial hearing, and to bring with him all written and electronic records – police reports, text messages, emails, pictures, and notes – related to his Occupy assignment. But Dowell showed up, essentially, empty-handed. He had photos on a thumb drive of the boxes and the woman he delivered them to, he testified, but he somehow lost that drive on the way to court; he had emails on a work computer (and, it seems, on a personal computer as well) and phone messages, but said he had deleted them. He brought with him only "a little note that I made here regarding [an Occupy] meeting," he said. There are no written police reports, he said; since there was no criminal investigation ongoing, there was no reason to write an official report for the APD system, he testified. Judge Campbell did not seem impressed: "When he is sent a subpoena and he doesn't respond and he doesn't come with his own attorney," she said, "I think they lose a little bit of the dignity that they should be carrying themselves with."

At the end of last week's hearing, she told prosecutor Joshua Phanco that the state must produce the names of Dowell's undercover APD cohorts or see the case dismissed. The two other officers are fact witnesses who could help determine whether the police induced the activists' use of the lockboxes. On Wednesday, those names were provided to the court for the judge's private inspection. Also provided were documents related to the APD's undercover mission, though court watchers said that some of those documents were redacted – which did not appear to make Campbell happy. A motion was also filed to quash the subpoenas for the APD's undercover officers, including Dowell, to appear in court, though the judge has not yet ruled on that request. Campbell has again reset the hearing, for Sept. 25, in order to give her time to review all of the relevant documents. This "dog ate my homework" excuse is simply not credible. KTRK-TV reported (http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/story?section=news/local&id=8799208) that, in court, "APD dodged most questions Wednesday" at the latest hearing, where according to the Houston Chronicle (http://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/article/Undercover-Austin-police-officers-aided-Houston-3841846.php), "State District Judge Joan Campbell lectured prosecutors ... about not disclosing the police officers' roles in the case." However, according to the Houston Chronicle:

prosecutors told the judge they had no idea the Austin Police Department evidently planted an officer in the movement, until defense attorneys subpoenaed him.

"Had we realized that an undercover officer was involved" and had participated in the construction of the dragon sleeves, "that is clearly Brady material," Harris County prosecutor Colleen Barnett said in an interview after the hearing. "Had we known that, we would have turned it over to the defense." "Brady material" is exculpatory evidence that's required by law to be handed over to defendants. Police failing to hand that information over to prosecutors - much less destroying it, as Dowell may have done - is a bigger deal, even than the alleged entrapment. Given that, I find bewildering the statement from Assistant Chief David Carter to the Austin Statesman (http://www.statesman.com/news/local/assistant-chief-austin-police-leadership-didnt-know-about-2451491.html) that "Nothing officials have seen initially indicates department policies were violated." Is there not a policy in the department to turn over Brady material to prosecutors?

As Grits mentioned previously (http://gritsforbreakfast.blogspot.com/2012/08/austin-pd-undercover-officer-allegedly.html), I've little sympathy nor patience with the Occupy protesters' methods (http://gritsforbreakfast.blogspot.com/2011/11/death-to-facilitators-why-grits-wont-be.html) - which I earlier called "dumb as a bag of hair" - and in most cases I think anyone foolish and narcissistic enough to intentionally get themselves arrested at such an event deserves what they get. But here the police sought not to deter crime but to worsen it, facilitating felonious actions instead of thwarting them, and withheld exculpatory evidence from prosecutors. Combine that with the contradictory justifications from APD administrators - disavowing their officers' activities while simultaneously justifying them - not to mention the evasive refusal to provide documentation to the judge, and it's difficult not to find understated the judge's observation that, at the very least, the episode caused the department to "lose a little bit of the dignity that they should be carrying themselves with." http://gritsforbreakfast.blogspot.com/2012/09/austin-pd-withheld-brady-material.html

[Winehole23]

A complicated and confusing case involving "Occupy Austin" protesters, the Port of Houston and undercover Austin Police officers has come to a conclusion in a Harris County courtroom.
Back in December of 2011, six members of Occupy Austin were arrested and charged with felonies for using PVC pipe and chains during a protest at the Port of Houston. It turned out that the people who built the restraints and encouraged the Occupiers to use them were Austin police officers undercover as members of the Occupy movement. Now, Harris County prosecutors have dropped the felony charges and the defendants have instead plead guilty to misdemeanors. Greg Gladden represented Ronnie Garza, one of the protesters originally charged with a felony.

http://app1.kuhf.org/articles/1361550856-Court-Case-Involving-Occupy-Protesters-Resolved.html

[boutons_deux]

http://app1.kuhf.org/articles/1361550856-Court-Case-Involving-Occupy-Protesters-Resolved.html

:lol

Here's more entrapment, stings, etc:

Top U.S. Terrorist Group: the FBI

one organization leading all others in creating terrorist plots in the United States: the FBI.

try to picture someone so naive, incompetent, desperate, out-of-place, or deranged as to be manipulable by an FBI informant. Now you're at the level of the evil terrorist masterminds out to blow up our skyscrapers.

Well, not really. They're actually almost entirely bumbling morons who couldn't tie their own shoes or buy the laces without FBI instigation and support. The FBI plants the ideas, makes the plans, provides the fake weapons and money, creates the attempted act of terrorism, makes an arrest, and announces the salvation of the nation.

Over and over again. The procedure has become so regular that intended marks have spotted the sting being worked on them simply by googling the name or phone number of the bozo pretending to recruit them into the terrorist brotherhood, and discovering that he's a serial informant.

Between 911 and August, 2011, the U.S. government prosecuted 508 people for terrorism in the United States. 243 had been targeted using an FBI informant. 158 had been caught in an FBI terrorism sting. 49 (that we know of, FBI recording devices have completely unbelievable patterns of "malfunctioning") had encountered an agent provocateur. Most of the rest charged with "terrorism" had little or nothing to do with terrorism at all, most of them charged with more minor offenses like immigration offenses or making false statements. Three or four people out of the whole list appear to be men whom one would reasonably call terrorists in the commonly accepted sense of the word. They intended to and had something at least approaching the capacity to engage in acts of terrorism.

http://www.alternet.org/world/top-us-terrorist-group-fbi

[Nbadan]

double penetration

[Nbadan]

n. It turned out that the people who built the restraints and encouraged the Occupiers to use them were Austin police officers undercover as members of the Occupy movement.

That shit was nationwide..and .if it could happen to occupy....agent provocateurs working for the government used to be Alex Jones conspiracy shit...

[Wild Cobra]

So...

It wasn't the 1%'ers, but the authoritarian law enforcement...

[boutons_deux]

So...

It wasn't the 1%'ers, but the authoritarian law enforcement...

... working FOR the 1%. OWS say they saw Goldman's security people and the NYPD harassing OWS together. Wall ST PAID/PAYS NYPD to provide them EXTRA protection. and lots of NYPD, etc moonlight for the financial sector, on their own time, but in police uniform. They certainly wouldn't ever bite the hand the feeds them so well.

If the police/national guard/army were ordered to fire on US civilians, being "good Germans", like Adolf Eichmann, "just following orders", I have no doubt they would

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e1/Boston_Massacre_high-res.jpg/510px-Boston_Massacre_high-res.jpg

[Wild Cobra]

No...

It's just police getting their jollies, as normal.

[Wild Cobra]

LOL...

Watching Atlas Shrugged part II right now. Just saw a sign "we are the 99.98%"

[Winehole23]

AP:


A federal appeals court has upheld a judge's ruling that a lawsuit over the arrests of 700 Occupy Wall Street protesters on the Brooklyn Bridge can proceed.

The ruling Thursday by the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan affirms the 2012 ruling allowing the lawsuit against police officers who arrested the protesters to go forward.
U.S. District Judge Jed Rakoff ruled that the marchers had adequately backed up claims that they were not properly warned by officers that they would be arrested on the bridge on Oct. 1, 2011.


A three-judge panel of the appeals court agreed. One judge dissented.

http://www.newsday.com/news/region-state/appeals-court-occupy-mass-arrest-suit-can-proceed-1.9120047