A brief list of "Occupy" mayhem

[DarrinS]

You clearly failed to stir up any passion from your own considerable reserves of fake outrage, instead mouthing the word excessive, as you drove by.

Impressive.

Uh, ok.

[Winehole23]

You are either boring or bonkers and there is seldom any question as to which you are being. This morning you are pleasantly understated and boring.

[Cry Havoc]

Uh, ok.

Wooooosh.

[LnGrrrR]

Why do you guys still engage WC? I can't think of a single time he's had a rational thought on pretty much any subject. Asking him questions and then expecting anything other than a ridiculous answer is, well, ridiculous.

I argue not just against WC, but any silent lurkers who share his opinions. It also lets me practice debating against individuals with a faulty worldview, which is a handy skill to have.

WC is an itch that is hard not to scratch.

[Wild Cobra]

Why do you guys still engage WC? I can't think of a single time he's had a rational thought on pretty much any subject. Asking him questions and then expecting anything other than a ridiculous answer is, well, ridiculous.

I aim to please.

Expect a ridiculous answer, I will give you one you can perceive as such.

[Wild Cobra]

I argue not just against WC, but any silent lurkers who share his opinions. It also lets me practice debating against individuals with a faulty worldview, which is a handy skill to have.

WC is an itch that is hard not to scratch.

Not my fault you have poor hygiene.

[LnGrrrR]

Can you name a place that they can protest without being arrested and pepper sprayed for obstructing commerce or blocking a thoroughfare? By all means, name one.


WC, I think you forgot to answer this question.

[spursncowboys]

What is a protest then? They are staying in these "protests" for weeks and sometimes months. When they are blocking sidewalks and told to move to the side, what steps should the police do?

lngrrrr: They can protest wherever their permit allows them. same answer for the amount of time. These kids were clearly trying to incite a riot.

[Wild Cobra]

What does logic tell you, that if there isn't a single place, what the proper thing to do is?

----Raid---

http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRF5fRASHa9RWJ-QopCYsNXovvZ1X1TWParT_XIirBsPQWA1OtZVQ

[spursncowboys]

buying the Guy Fawke masks, which the royalties are owned by the king of bail-outs, govt. loopholes, greed, and corporatism- Time Warner.

[DarrinS]

That pepper spray incident is just like Tienanmen Square.

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/michael-moore-uc-davis-pepper-spray-incident-resonates-with-the-world-like-tiananmen-square/

[Wild Cobra]

That pepper spray incident is just like Tienanmen Square.

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/michael-moore-uc-davis-pepper-spray-incident-resonates-with-the-world-like-tiananmen-square/

LOL...

What do you expect from a moore-on?

[ChumpDumper]

buying the Guy Fawke masks, which the royalties are owned by the king of bail-outs, govt. loopholes, greed, and corporatism- Time Warner.What bailouts did Time-Warner receive?

[LnGrrrR]

lngrrrr: They can protest wherever their permit allows them. same answer for the amount of time. These kids were clearly trying to incite a riot.

Are you talking about the UC Davis kids? I don't quite see how they were trying to incite a riot.

[LnGrrrR]

What does logic tell you, that if there isn't a single place, what the proper thing to do is?

----Raid---

http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRF5fRASHa9RWJ-QopCYsNXovvZ1X1TWParT_XIirBsPQWA1OtZVQ

So you admit that you think there is no conceivable public place in which people can assemble peaceably. Thanks for admitting that you don't care much for the Constitution. :tu

[FuzzyLumpkins]

What does logic tell you, that if there isn't a single place, what the proper thing to do is?

----Raid---

http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRF5fRASHa9RWJ-QopCYsNXovvZ1X1TWParT_XIirBsPQWA1OtZVQ

The proper thing to do is certainly not to call US citizens a bug that is considered a pest and killed as a matter of course in order to try and justify poor treatment.

Its what you see countries do during war like the way troops were taught to perceive the Japanese or Vietnamese. This is also the type of commentary the nazi's and southern planters would use in justifying the treatment of minorities.

Its not cute and its not worthy of an intelligent discussion. Its also dumbing shit down which you do a lot of still.

[Wild Cobra]

So you admit that you think there is no conceivable public place in which people can assemble peaceably. Thanks for admitting that you don't care much for the Constitution. :tu
My God.

I'm beginning to thing you have a low IQ.

Care to review the questions and answers again along those lines, or sould I consider you a dunce?

[Wild Cobra]

The proper thing to do is certainly not to call US citizens a bug that is considered a pest and killed as a matter of course in order to try and justify poor treatment.

Its what you see countries do during war like the way troops were taught to perceive the Japanese or Vietnamese. This is also the type of commentary the nazi's and southern planters would use in justifying the treatment of minorities.

Its not cute and its not worthy of an intelligent discussion. Its also dumbing shit down which you do a lot of still.
I just decide to start giving you guys what you already think of me.

[greyforest]

Wild Cobra is the resident Frank Burns.

[Wild Cobra]

Wild Cobra is the resident Frank Burns.
If you say so.

Frank was pretty stupid, and if you don't see the differences, then I must question your intelligence, or your ability to parse facts.

[boutons_deux]

Wasn't it Savage, or was it Boortz, who called Muslims cockroaches?

Freedom of peaceable assembly and freedom of political dissent only apply to right wingers, esp those who pack heat to peaceable assemblies, or to church, or to bars.

[Wild Cobra]

Wasn't it Savage, or was it Boortz, who called Muslims cockroaches?

I don't know who said it first. Sounds like something Neal would say. I repeated it from one of the YouTubes someone embedded.

[Wild Cobra]

Wild Cobra is the resident Frank Burns.

I don't appreciate the reference, but it did prompt me to put the DVD in.

http://i181.photobucket.com/albums/x262/Wild_Cobra/Misc/MASH.jpg

Ul1Gz-zsSIg


xIIqYqtR1lY

[LnGrrrR]

My God.

I'm beginning to thing you have a low IQ.

Care to review the questions and answers again along those lines, or sould I consider you a dunce?

You just implied that there was no place to peaceably assemble without interrupting traffic flow/movement of people.

Are you saying there is a way to peaceably assemble without doing so? If so, I missed it.

And you can't quite blame me for not understanding your posts... when the majority of posters here seem to "misunderstand" you, then perhaps the problem lies with the speaker and not the listeners.

[Wild Cobra]

You just implied that there was no place to peaceably assemble without interrupting traffic flow/movement of people.

Are you saying there is a way to peaceably assemble without doing so? If so, I missed it.

And you can't quite blame me for not understanding your posts... when the majority of posters here seem to "misunderstand" you, then perhaps the problem lies with the speaker and not the listeners.
No, you mist the whole context of the question. Didn't you?

[Wild Cobra]

In post #150, we had this exchange:



Can you name a place that they can protest without being arrested and pepper sprayed for obstructing commerce or blocking a thoroughfare? By all means, name one.
Waterfront park, Portland, OR.
Now the thoroughfares through waterfront park were obstructed, but it's a huge park, and Portland allowed the protesters to set up camp there. I believe still to date, there is no action taken against those at the waterfront Park camp. When Cry Havoc made indication that didn't fit his criteria, I figured there is no point in disagreeing. He says:

Reading is fundamental. Thanks for admitting that you effectively support abrogating the first amendment.
He said "obstructing commerce or blocking a thoroughfare" earlier. In guess he meant "and" instead of "or," my fault for not knowing what he meant, rather than any reading fundamentals, right? So even though he was in error rather than me, I ask this:

Is that what you mean? "obstruction," or "blocking?"

Are you suggesting that illegal activity is peaceful? No clarification forthcoming from my question. He gives me a really dumb-ass response. You turn around and use the total opposite of peaceful, rather than recognizing all the grey space between. You expect me to accept that? Talk about polarized. You show you definitely are. One way or another, no center ground, or any variance.

Since you two fail to comprehend any thing not highly polarized, I took a polar view as well at times. I explain my usage of peaceful, and applied by the 1st amendment. The protesters may be peaceful, but some are breaking laws. Once they break the laws, they are not peaceable. They no longer have 1st amendment protection.

I can go on and show you guy's problems here, but continue looking at the context from where I stopped. If you still don't get it, I see no point in wasting my time farther.

[LnGrrrR]

WC, first off, thank you for clarifying. I don't think our posts are as clear as we think they are.


Since you two fail to comprehend any thing not highly polarized, I took a polar view as well at times. I explain my usage of peaceful, and applied by the 1st amendment. The protesters may be peaceful, but some are breaking laws. Once they break the laws, they are not peaceable. They no longer have 1st amendment protection.

I can go on and show you guy's problems here, but continue looking at the context from where I stopped. If you still don't get it, I see no point in wasting my time farther.

That's the problem I think we're having. You merely pointed out a dictionary reference, and when I asked if your definition of "peaceful" meant "obeying", I saw no response. Do you feel that one can be "peaceful" while still protesting?

Also, do you think the UC Davis protesters were breaking the law? (Not all Occupy protesters, just referring to the UC Davis ones in general.)

[DMC]

That pepper spray incident is just like Tienanmen Square.

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/michael-moore-uc-davis-pepper-spray-incident-resonates-with-the-world-like-tiananmen-square/
I would say it's just like the Holocaust.

[Wild Cobra]

I would say it's just like the Holocaust.
Wow...

Tanks rolling over protesters, Millions of people executed...

You think it's the same?

[boutons_deux]

Pregnant #OccupySeattle Protester Miscarries After Being Kicked, Pepper Sprayed

http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/david/pregnant-seattle-protester-miscarries-after-

[boutons_deux]

"How Could This Happen in America?" Why Police Are Treating Americans Like Military Threats

James Madison may offer some long-range perspective. During the 1787 Constitutional Convention, arguing for forming a nation instead of retaining the confederation of states, he said that force applied to citizens collectively rather than individually ceases to be law enforcement and becomes war; groups so treated will seize the opportunity to dissolve all compacts by which they might otherwise have been bound. Madison's argued against militarism in favor not of anarchy but of a higher kind of law and order.

And in 1794, Secretary of State Edmund Randolph, advising President Washington (to no avail) to eschew military adventure against the so-called Whiskey Rebels, and to use prosecutions instead, argued passionately that the real strength of government always lies not in coercion but in the affection of the people. Randolph was facing an actual insurrection, with threat of secession, not a peaceful protest; there were federal crimes involved. Still he advised against a military operation. The loathing of military suppression as a substitute for due process of law, going back to our first administration, runs deep in the American psyche.

But it's worth remembering that equally strong feelings have always run the other way. Long before events known as the Whiskey Rebellion had risen to any kind of crisis, Alexander Hamilton, Secretary of the Treasury, was urging Washington to bring military force against citizens somewhere in the country; otherwise, Hamilton believed, authority would always be in question. When Washington did so, he ignored habeas corpus and nearly every individual right set out in the new Bill of Rights, federalizing militias to bring overwhelming force to shock and awe innocent citizens of an entire region of the country. In his book Crisis and Command, John Yoo, author of the notorious "torture memo," has defended the George W. Bush administration's tactics in dealing with suspected terrorists by citing precedent -- not wrongly -- in Washington's behavior in the 1790s.

http://www.alternet.org/module/printversion/153170

[scott]

I'm beginning to thing you have a low IQ.


No, you mist the whole context of the question. Didn't you?

[Cry Havoc]

In post #150, we had this exchange:

Now the thoroughfares through waterfront park were obstructed, but it's a huge park, and Portland allowed the protesters to set up camp there.

How nice! The first amendment is contingent only on the condition of police officers choosing to "allow" it.


He said "obstructing commerce or blocking a thoroughfare" earlier. In guess he meant "and" instead of "or," my fault for not knowing what he meant

lololol typo smack talk. The last bastion of someone who has no decent argument left. :lmao


rather than any reading fundamentals, right? So even though he was in error rather than me, I ask this:
No clarification forthcoming from my question. He gives me a really dumb-ass response. You turn around and use the total opposite of peaceful, rather than recognizing all the grey space between. You expect me to accept that? Talk about polarized. You show you definitely are. One way or another, no center ground, or any variance.

The guy who calls other human beings "trash" and "scum" is not speaking about other people not having any center ground or compromise. Weak.


Since you two fail to comprehend any thing not highly polarized, I took a polar view as well at times. I explain my usage of peaceful, and applied by the 1st amendment. The protesters may be peaceful, but some are breaking laws. Once they break the laws, they are not peaceable. They no longer have 1st amendment protection.

But you just admitted that they are breaking laws:


Now the thoroughfares through waterfront park were obstructed, but it's a huge park, and Portland allowed the protesters to set up camp there.

So when I asked you this:


Can you name a place that they can protest without being arrested and pepper sprayed for obstructing commerce or blocking a thoroughfare? By all means, name one.

And you said Waterfront Park. A location that you have ALREADY ADMITTED THAT OWS IS BLOCKING THOROUGHFARES
TO AND FROM. And yes, apparently the font increase is completely necessary. If you had a SHRED of logic in your head, you'd realize that when you say "they're blocking thoroughfares", it kind of disqualifies that from the question I'm asking above. You admit that OWS at Waterfront Park could be arrested at any time because they are currently in violation of laws that supersede the first Amendment.

Therefore, my question still stands:


Can you name a place that they can protest without being arrested and pepper sprayed for obstructing commerce or blocking a thoroughfare? By all means, name one.

And no, WC, Waterfront Park in Portland Oregon does not count, as you have already stated that the OWS protest is in violation of laws there.

[Cry Havoc]

Can you name a place that they can protest without being arrested and pepper sprayed for obstructing commerce or blocking a thoroughfare? By all means, name one.


Let's emphasize this question.

[Cry Havoc]

He said "obstructing commerce or blocking a thoroughfare" earlier. In guess he meant "and" instead of "or," my fault for not knowing what he meant, rather than any reading fundamentals, right?


Originally Posted by Wild Cobra
I'm beginning to thing you have a low IQ.


Originally Posted by Wild Cobra
No, you mist the whole context of the question. Didn't you?

:lmao :lmao :lmao

[ChumpDumper]

I must say that when cops engage in their cosplay with their riot toys, they are much more inclined to use them.

[Wild Cobra]

Let's emphasize this question.
Can you name a place that they can protest without being arrested and pepper sprayed for obstructing commerce or blocking a thoroughfare? By all means, name one.
My original answer. Waterfront park. There is no commerce to block, only the paths within the park itself. As much as I dislike mayor Sam Adams, I think he did an exceptional job of handling Occupy Portland. From day one, he said the hours would not be enforced at Waterfront park.

Why would any mayor of any city allow occupiers who block commerce and the methods of travel to get there? You see, Waterfront park is at the edge of the city center, on the Willamette river. It is separated to downtown by a busy street. Why do you keep asking me that question? Do you know of any where the cities do not take police action from blocking commerce or travel? Besides, Waterfront park is huge, and protesters can organize and get a permit and march the city from there.

Waterfront park extends several city blocks and under several bridges. Plenty of room for the protesters not to be a problem. To the east is the river, and to the west, a major city street. The two smaller areas I circled are where the occupiers illegally stayed and were forcibly removed.

http://i181.photobucket.com/albums/x262/Wild_Cobra/satellite%20view/waterfrontparkgooglemap-edit.jpg (http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ll=45.519459,-122.669477&spn=0.027754,0.051112&t=h&z=15&vpsrc=6)

Here are some pics of the park:

http://www.exclusiveportlandrealestate.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/Tom-McCall-Waterfront-Park2.jpg

http://farm1.staticflickr.com/8/6490641_9c5e8a33b4_z.jpg?zz=1

http://friendsforourriverfront.org/images/Portland_waterfront_pk2.jpg

http://www.planetware.com/i/photo/waterfront-park-charleston-sc120.jpg

http://blog.americanfeast.com/images/Portland%20Oregon%20Blues%20Festival.jpg

http://pdx.edu/sites/www.pdx.edu.usp/files/planpdx_TomMcCallWaterfrontPark.jpg

[ChumpDumper]

Where are the flaglots?

[Winehole23]

http://reynosoreport.ucdavis.edu/reynoso-report.pdf

[Winehole23]

via Reason (http://reason.com/blog/2012/04/12/how-and-why-a-campus-cop-at-uc-davis-vic)

[DarrinS]

http://reynosoreport.ucdavis.edu/reynoso-report.pdf

190 pages on a pepper spray incident?

[Winehole23]

don't worry, there won't be a quiz

[DarrinS]

don't worry, there won't be a quiz

Probably one very brief blast would have dispersed the crowd eventually. That stuff is unpleasant, but transient.

[Winehole23]

hmm...

[Winehole23]

This is why using violence on non-violent protesters doesn't work...

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2011/11/22/national/a011220S80.DTL




Are the police just keep going to pepper spray them? Then they'll come back again, in greater and greater numbers.

also, it can get expensive:


Police officers may be held liable for injuring someone with a pepper ball intended to disperse a crowd, a federal appeals court decided Wednesday.


The unanimous ruling by a three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals was a setback for police agencies defending themselves against lawsuits arising out of the Occupy movement. Students from UC Davis have sued police for dousing them with pepper spray (http://articles.latimes.com/2012/apr/12/local/la-me-0412-uc-davis-20120412), and UC Berkeley students have sued campus police for using batons during a protest. Oakland also has been sued by Occupy protesters.




Wednesday's ruling stemmed from an April 2004 incident in which UC Davis and city police tried to disperse a crowd at a party by shooting pepper balls, which break on impact and spray a powder akin to mace or pepper spray.


About 1,000 people were at a Davis apartment complex to celebrate UC Davis' annual Picnic Day. The police wanted to break up the party because the street was congested, partygoers had parked illegally and some minors were drinking alcohol, the court said. Police in riot gear entered the complex, and an officer fired a pepper ball into an area where UC Davis student Timothy Nelson was standing with friends.
The pepper ball hit the sophomore in the eye and caused permanent damage, eventually leading Nelson to lose a football scholarship and drop out of the university, the court said.


Writing for the court, Judge Stephen Reinhardt said police used excessive force. "A reasonable officer would have known that firing projectiles, including pepper balls, in the direction of individuals suspected of, at most, minor crimes, who posed no threat to the officers or others, and who engaged in only passive resistance, was unreasonable," he wrote.
http://articles.latimes.com/2012/jul/12/local/la-me-uc-davis-pepper-20120712

[LnGrrrR]

These UC cops are stupid as hell. The school board/administrators should probably look at raising the bar on their hiring practices.

[spursncowboys]

So the campus police have to have tact, and professionalism but not the students?

[ChumpDumper]

So the campus police have to have tact, and professionalism but not the students?Seeing as the students are not police, no.

[Winehole23]

yep.

[Winehole23]

http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2013/jul/25/us-occupy-pepper-spray/

[Winehole23]

http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2013/07/24/state-accused-of-using-occupy-protesters-as-guinea-pigs/