Occupy Wall Street protests not valid?

Occupy Wall Street protests not valid?

Is it ok for police to pepper spray peaceful protesters and then walk away?



Oh, and the media hardly covers the protests themselves, much less this so there's only youtube.

Originally posted by jo15d:

it is truly amazing that someone from the banking industry, which has just had the biggest subsidy in history, has the nerve to call CU's unfair competition!

It's more like "meh", just another day in the USA.

Anyway, regardless of any bank transfer days or anything, these government coup leaders will continue to go to the "casino with a taxpayer bankroll" called over the counter derivatives and credit default swaps, all the way to the next, and likely final economic collapse. If nobody challenges these practices, the fallacy that they're not catastrophic will continue. And the only way to even begin to challenge anything is to get secret big money out of politics.

Originally posted by xyzoneon:

It's more like "meh", just another day in the USA.

Anyway, regardless of any bank transfer days or anything, these government coup leaders will continue to go to the "casino with a taxpayer bankroll" called over the counter derivatives and credit default swaps, all the way to the next, and likely final economic collapse. If nobody challenges these practices, the fallacy that they're not catastrophic will continue. And the only way to even begin to challenge anything is to get secret big money out of politics.

And yet to 90-97% of Americans think this new..

Originally posted by Virusboy:

Originally posted by xyzoneon:

It's more like "meh", just another day in the USA.

Anyway, regardless of any bank transfer days or anything, these government coup leaders will continue to go to the "casino with a taxpayer bankroll" called over the counter derivatives and credit default swaps, all the way to the next, and likely final economic collapse. If nobody challenges these practices, the fallacy that they're not catastrophic will continue. And the only way to even begin to challenge anything is to get secret big money out of politics.

And yet to 90-97% of Americans think this new..

As long as they now wake up from the American Dream, something might get done.

Originally posted by Macallan:

Originally posted by Muttsfan:

no comment:

Is it just me or does he look a bit like Augusto Pinochet?

Well, that just proves the point about perception. To me he looked like Commissioner Gordon.
Btw, here's the story:
"The Philadelphia Daily News
NEW YORK — In full uniform and with his head held high, a retired Philadelphia police captain was arrested in New York yesterday while participating in an Occupy Wall Street demonstration.
Ray Lewis — who left the Philadelphia department in 2004 after serving as captain of the 25th Police District, headquartered at Front and Westmoreland streets — reportedly was among more than 170 protesters who were arrested."

Arresting protesters, isn't that what Iran did last year?

Originally posted by Smileyfaze:

Here in the USA 80% + of all mortgages are the fixed rate type, where a borrower of say $100,000 today who gets a rate of 7.00% over 30 years would pay $665.00 a month each & every month for 360 months....never increasing, nor decreasing for any reason whatsoever. Except for -- see below***

Oh yes they can. The bank just jacked up ours, again without missed payments. It was some nonsense about the insurance. Another case of the financial industry finding ways to gouge the consumers.

Originally posted by fanfaron:

Yep. Bingo again. And I toooooold ya so.

But this guy is no doubt a tool of corporations and one of the 1% and should be ignored.

No, the establishment media kept repeating the lies that there was one underlying purpose, despite the fact that it had been spelled out multiple times.

Originally posted by Smileyfaze:

I don't believe in the trash being spewed by the OWS who want to do anything, except work hard, for what they want handed to them as if they might have a right to what somebody else earned. Income redistribution is the equivalent of thievery.

Dude, I work my ass for what I have. We have that in common. The income redistribution is thievery, so stop bloody supporting it. The wealth and income redistribution has not been going the way the GOP pundits whine about...

There is somewhat of macro-economic point is raising the wages of the working and middle class, though. This is a consumer based economy, therefore you'll be putting more money back in the hands of more consumers, thereby encouraging economic growth. Clearly there are are couple caveats: it would need to be done a pace that will not cause too much inflation and the other is not pricing American labor right out the the global market place and thus causing unemployment (you can only have so many call center reps and people working in shops, etc )

Originally posted by Smileyfaze:

I'm neither for the banks or the consumers.

My bad. I thought you believed in anything at all.

Originally posted by Smileyfaze:

That's called personal responsibility.

If a man or corporation is an island. On a personal level, if I poorly choose a stock and it goes under, yes it's usually my fault. Why would not be? Because if the major financial institutions, "benefiting" from the deregulation" make a series of poor investments (such as credit swap derivatives) that ultimately cause the entire economy to falter (or the economy falters for some other reason), hitherto sound investments turn sour and, of course, this can domino through the entire economy. This is part of why we had not one, but four full blown economic depressions in the 19th century. Following the Great Depression, regulatory safe guards were put into place to prevent it from happening again. They were working well until the deregulatory fervor beginning with Reagan administration. Finally Glass-Steagall act we repealed and this economy is what happens.

Anyway, it's not as simple of "personal responsibility" unless one happens happens to be dumbass that pounces on those "penny stock" spams without understanding why the stock is worth a penny to start with. (Ever get those? Arrrgh)

I was checking on gold myself. Apparently, it's 50% overpriced, or about 25% underpriced How helpful He does say

Disclosure: I am short GLD.

, though.

Originally posted by Sanguinemoon:

Anyway, it's not as simple of "personal responsibility" unless one happens happens to be dumbass that pounces on those "penny stock" spams without understanding why the stock is worth a penny to start with. (Ever get those? Arrrgh)

I seem to remember Microsoft was one of those, back then…

Changing the rules mid-game, government insisting that S&Ls divest… Ah, what's the point in asking you to understand?

Is there anything short of commissars running the American economy that you'd think reasonable? (Maybe Krugman, and his Mrs.? Worked out well for Enron, eh? )

Originally posted by Sanguinemoon:

Originally posted by Smileyfaze:

Here in the USA 80% + of all mortgages are the fixed rate type, where a borrower of say $100,000 today who gets a rate of 7.00% over 30 years would pay $665.00 a month each & every month for 360 months....never increasing, nor decreasing for any reason whatsoever. Except for -- see below***

Oh yes they can. The bank just jacked up ours, again without missed payments. It was some nonsense about the insurance. Another case of the financial industry finding ways to gouge the consumers

Oh, you silly.

The mortgage lender is duty bound by law to inform you that taking out private mortgage insurance (PMI) is an option you can exercise.

You obviously simply ignored that, they 'forgot' to inform you, or you chose their 'cheaper' insurance plan & forgot to read the fine print. Don't worry, you probably aren't alone, but if you did your homework you should have known.

The above example I made was based purely upon Principal & Interest repayment ONLY...not insurance, which you don't finance (or pay interest on).

In the end, an uneducated decision has an uncanny habit of coming back to bite ya in the ass!

Originally posted by Smileyfaze:

In the end, an uneducated decision has an uncanny habit of coming back to bite ya in the ass!

And the bite area hurts. Now I know, I guess Maybe it can be fixed by refinancing? Here's noree info on that issue, including the disclosures that you were talking about.

I admit, this type of stuff is complicated for example I have trouble exactly understanding this:

What If Your Home Value Has Increased?

When making mortgage payments, most of the payments during the first few years are finance charges. Therefore, it can take 10 to 15 years to pay down a loan to reach 80 percent of the loan value. If the home prices in your area are rising quickly, your property value may increase so that you can reach the 80 percent mark a lot faster. Your property value could also increase due to home improvements that you make to your home.

If you think your home value has increased, you may be able to cancel PMI on your mortgage. Although the new law does not require a mortgage servicer to consider the current property value, you should contact them to see if they are willing to do so. Also, be sure to ask what documentation may be required to demonstrate the higher property value.

Why? The loan amount is the same.

Oh well. I wonder if hottubs count as a home improvement. (Was about to get a six seater for the price of a four seater, because it was last year's model as if anybody cares what "model year" a spa is as long everything works properly, which it does You should see it. It's almost the size of some those crap-tastic above the ground swimming pools they sell at WalMart and Target) Oh well. Fairly knowledge about Macroecnomics and shopping, but need more work personal finance, got screwed on the car loan too - but that one I think I can sue the bitches because it wasn't what we talked about. I'm not crying, just recognizing something I need to work on. But I'll do better when I trade it in for Range Rover in few years, hopefully.

Maybe one day, I'll get a house on Mount Charleston . There's a village on the mountain near the 7,000 mark. It's a bitch to get up there in the winter, though; hence the wanting needing the Range Rover.

Originally posted by Smileyfaze:

Don't worry, you probably aren't alone, but if you did your homework you should have known.

Which is what I told customers when I worked for JP Morgan Chase...

PMI insurance should stay fixed, because the amount insured for stays the same. You only need to insure for the amount of the original loan, any increase in home value should be covered by your homeowners insurance (most have an automatic increase rider you can activate if you wish--but the cost rises too ) , which is a totally different instrument/product, & serves a totally different purpose.

Originally posted by Sanguinemoon:

Maybe it can be fixed by refinancing?

Whatever you do ------ do not refinance!!!!

Banks love it when you refinance after the first 2-5 years of the mortgage.

You ask why?

Because over 90+% of what you have already paid is ALL interest, & virtually no principal. You'd be amazes that after paying off your $100,000 mortgage for 5 years on a 30 year fixed term @ $700.00 a month you still owe $95,000...you made $42,000 in payments, but only about $5,000 of it went to paying off the principal while the other $37,000 you paid all went into the banks pockets as interest.

The $37,000 in interest you paid would be blown to high heaven if you refinance because you'd have to pay it all over again just for the privilege of refinancing.

Oh, I didn't mention new loan origination fees & the like. You get to pay them all over again too!

BTW....you'd be 5 years older by then too with 30 years still to go!

The bank would love if you started back at scratch again!!!!!

Do your own amortization here, & verify what I just said as true.....

Originally posted by Smileyfaze:

Whatever you do ------ do not refinance!!!!

You're probably right. It seems fixed rate mortgage rates are increasing anyway.

Originally posted by Smileyfaze:

Oh, I didn't mention new loan origination fees & the like. You get to pay them all over again too!

Yeah, they can kiss my ring-tailed ass on that one It's like...."Hrmm..I'll be paying for thirty years, get lots of interest charges and you want to charge fees on top of that...Just cancel Christmas on that one, buddy!"

Just a word on home ownership, since we're talking about that again. Increasing home ownership rates has been a multi-president policy in America. Both parties. You had Bush and Clinton, at least, in on it (without me bothering to check George HW Bush and Reagan, Carter ((the CRA was passed in his administration, though )) ) OK, a bunch of people getting mortgages that couldn't afford them without a doubt had something to with the crises. It's almost foolish to say otherwise. However, putting this whole mess on the CRA seems very simplistic and ignores banks' and other brokerage houses behavior outside this. For example, Lehman Brothers cooked its books; it's a verifiable non-partisan fact that's not up for dispute and their were plenty of dodgy financial products born of short-sighted greed that had nothing do with and those collapsed (those are what needed to stay illegal.) It was a perfect storm of multiple factors.

Originally posted by Smileyfaze:

Originally posted by jo15d:

Irish banks, bailed out by the taxpayer, and of course allowed to keep their bonuses, are taking an unflinchingly hard line with people who are behind with mortgage payments. So, those people have organised and demanded the banks negotiate with them, or there'll be a mortgage strike. Way to go!

I understand & agree with the principal, but wouldn't the strike---once ended---just have the arrears interest portion merely added to the tail end of the interest portion of the mortgage thus making say $3,000 of interest in arrears blow out to many thousands more than $3,000 over the remaining term of the mortgage due to compounding?

Unlike here in the USA, I believe there in the UK almost all mortgages are of the variable rate type, no?

Mortgage rates in Ireland and the UK are mainly variable, and it was the refusal of the banks to pass on the reduction in rates by the European Central Bank to mortgagees (Ireland is a member of the European Single Currency, so it's central bank no longer sets interest rates) that was the final straw.
A mortgage strike in Ireland has not started, it's a threat if the banks won't negotiate. So far they haven't, and as a quarter of a million have signed up to the strike threat a showdown looks likely. I can't say how that would end, but with so many taking part, the banks would have a problem.
It's worth recalling the background to this. Irish bankers impoverished their country, causing fast rising unemployment, and savage wage cuts in both private and public sectors, while enriching themselves in the process, and their banks pocketing billions in public cash in the bail out. Yet those same bankers show no responsibility for their actions, and Irish politicians, like others elsewhere, refuse to make them. That isn't capitalism, it's socialism reserved exclusively for bankers, paid for by ordinary people. Now some are fighting back, they've no choice as their elected representatives have betrayed them, and I wish them well

This is what happened today. You can see the UC Davis students sitting there and the cop just fucking walks down the line spraying people. At :40 you can see the police randomly arresting people. The "peace officer" downing the spraying was Lt. John Pike

This is an interesting article on the incident. The title is "Why I Feel Bad for the Pepper-Spraying Policeman, Lt. John Pike" and at first I was like :Are you kidding."

James Fallows summed up the situation with his usual precise moral compass. "This is what happens when authority is unaccountable and has lost any sense of human connection to a subject population," he wrote. "That's what I think here."

There's unaccountability everywhere within the establishment, from the banks, to the government itself (including the cops)

Structures, in the sociological sense, constrain human agency. And for that reason, I see John Pike as a casualty of the system, too. Our police forces have enshrined a paradigm of protest policing that turns local cops into paramilitary forces. Let's not pretend that Pike is an independent bad actor. Too many incidents around the country attest to the widespread deployment of these tactics. If we vilify Pike, we let the institutions off way too easy.

The same with the financial institutions. When we go after specific people, we ignore systemic corruption and horrendous flaws within the given institutions.

The article goes on with changes in police response through the decades and offers this table:

While it's easiest to note the incidents of police violence, the protesters' cameras also record what's *not* in the images. Authorities have long claimed that they were merely battling the "black bloc" of violent anarchists. But when you look at all these videos, the bogeyman isn't there.

In this case, the black bloc was non-existent. There were cases were there was a black bloc. There were a number of black bloc operatives on the night Occupy Oakland took the port and if somebody truly committing arson, force could have been justified.

Again, in this case:

Instead, it's a dozen scared kids and a police officer named John Pike spraying them in the face from three feet away. And while it's his finger pulling the trigger, the police system is what put him in the position to be standing in front of those students.

As one poster on Youtube noted, if the protesters really have been violent, they could have physically overwhelmed the cops. Unlike the author, I do feel Pike needs to be dismissed and barred from the "law enforcement" profession even though police tactics do need to be investigated and corrected.

More information. According to UC Davos police chief Annette Spicuzza the protest originally involved only 50 students, but swelled to over 200 after the police arrived. What part of showing up in riot gear against protesters just sitting on the sidewalk makes the situation worse is so hard to understand? Riot gear is for, I dunno, riots.

Here's a cop (or maybe a model for the company that makes the equipment) in riot gear.


Don't they stop to consider that showing this overequipped like a stormtrooper is going to have a psychological affect. I'm sure they must, but it's not the one they were planning on. Our man above looks like he's about to kill somebody or at least brain them.

Originally posted by Sanguinemoon:

<iframe allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen" frameborder="0" height="381" scrolling="no" src="http://embed.myopera.com/video/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DWmJmmnMkuEM&height=375&width=620" width="626" />


This is what happened today. You can see the UC Davis students sitting there and the cop just fucking walks down the line spraying people. At :40 you can see the police randomly arresting people. The "peace officer" downing the spraying was Lt. John Pike

This is an interesting article on the incident. The title is "Why I Feel Bad for the Pepper-Spraying Policeman, Lt. John Pike" and at first I was like :Are you kidding."

James Fallows summed up the situation with his usual precise moral compass. "This is what happens when authority is unaccountable and has lost any sense of human connection to a subject population," he wrote. "That's what I think here."

There's unaccountability everywhere within the establishment, from the banks, to the government itself (including the cops)

Structures, in the sociological sense, constrain human agency. And for that reason, I see John Pike as a casualty of the system, too. Our police forces have enshrined a paradigm of protest policing that turns local cops into paramilitary forces. Let's not pretend that Pike is an independent bad actor. Too many incidents around the country attest to the widespread deployment of these tactics. If we vilify Pike, we let the institutions off way too easy.

The same with the financial institutions. When we go after specific people, we ignore systemic corruption and horrendous flaws within the given institutions.

The article goes on with changes in police response through the decades and offers this table:

While it's easiest to note the incidents of police violence, the protesters' cameras also record what's *not* in the images. Authorities have long claimed that they were merely battling the "black bloc" of violent anarchists. But when you look at all these videos, the bogeyman isn't there.

In this case, the black bloc was non-existent. There were cases were there was a black bloc. There were a number of black bloc operatives on the night Occupy Oakland took the port and if somebody truly committing arson, force could have been justified.

Again, in this case:

Instead, it's a dozen scared kids and a police officer named John Pike spraying them in the face from three feet away. And while it's his finger pulling the trigger, the police system is what put him in the position to be standing in front of those students.

As one poster on Youtube noted, if the protesters really have been violent, they could have physically overwhelmed the cops. Unlike the author, I do feel Pike needs to be dismissed and barred from the "law enforcement" profession even though police tactics do need to be investigated and corrected.

Exactly. Couldn't agree more. Protesters keeping busy by skirmishing with low level grunts is exactly what the banksters want. There is absolutely no point in doing it unless you are prepared to win an all out war, or if you're an instigator enemy of the movement. Period.

I think that there is something very fundamentally flawed about the police service over there. It has a conceited notice of it's own importance and place in society. The brutality of a police service in a country proclaiming high standards of democracy, freedom of expression and so on are being seen all over the globe. Only adds to the hypocrisy of so-called freedom traditions. Many will now be realising over there the double standards and suss out why the country is getting a PR problem around the world. I wouldn't want to ask a cop the time!

There indeed is something fundamentally flawed about the police situation, Mr Howie.

Originally posted by rjhowie:

Only adds to the hypocrisy of so-called freedom traditions.

America is a republic with strong democratic traditions. Those traditions are deeply undermined when police use pepper spray and other violence against peaceful protests when the police are not under threat. University Chancellor Katehi says that the people were meant to take down protesters tents, but not disperse the rally, because campus rules prohibit "camping." I wonder if she even met with protesters to attempt to establish time frames, agreed upon by both parties, when protests could take place. It seems like she simply cited the no "camping" rule and called the campus police, who showed up in their black shirts and proceeded to pepper spray people straight down the line. Perhaps that type of communication could have ensured First Amendment rights while keeping public safety.

Here's the police excuse:

http://www.sacbee.com/2011/11/20/4067841/ucd-peppered-by-net-outrage.html

There was no way out of that circle," Spicuzza said Friday. "They were cutting the officers off from their support. It's a very volatile situation."

And yet anyone watching the video can see that the police were not surrounded and were able to leave and that the protesters were not behaving aggressively in the first place.

Originally posted by xyzoneon:

Protesters keeping busy by skirmishing with low level grunts is exactly what the banksters want

Police skirmishes look ugly to nice, suburban people that would otherwise agree with protesters and thus are a tool control public opinion. Where it all goes wrong are instances like this where it's beyond any shadow of doubt that the police were in the wrong.

The police, even campus police in this case, have turned into a paramilitary force that can be used against the citizens. Beyond the Occupy movement, it's very frightening.

Originally posted by xyzoneon:

Exactly. Couldn't agree more. Protesters keeping busy by skirmishing with low level grunts is exactly what the banksters want. There is absolutely no point in doing it unless you are prepared to win an all out war, or if you're an instigator enemy of the movement. Period.

then where are the instigators behinds OWS?

Sanguinemoon there is a three step table, its the basis of which way to go ruling, but America seemed to make all three as a stepping stone thing.

Originally posted by rjhowie:

I wouldn't want to ask a cop the time!

Carry a pocket watch you ole codger....in the end people all over the world are willing to die to get into the USA, because even though she isn't perfect by a long-shot, she has more of what they want than anywhere else, & because they are willing to work for it & go through the process, she might just give them a chance to have it---if they pass muster.

Feels good to still be wanted for the right reasons.

The UK is fast becoming the new Mecca, or sewer--which ever is most appropriate PC wise--of the Western World because they--the leaches--have found that the authorities in the UK are pushovers, & the government is so progressive that they spend so much time each & every day patting themselves on the back on how nice they can be to people that hate all that they stand for, rather than keeping the sloths out.

If you're an American Citizen, our cops, though not perfect by a long-shot, are appreciated, respected, & trusted by the overwhelming majority.

There's nothing worse for a bad cop here in the good ole U.S. of A., than to be convicted of a crime, & then put in jail alongside the scum they put away. They seem to get invited to all the sleepovers before they have uncanny accidents, the clumsy bastards they be. Eventually, they will get what they deserve.....in this life or the next.

So, if you refuse to buy a watch you cheap Scot....then stay home, & listen up for big Benny (if the terrorists haven't blown it to shyte yet).

That way you won't need to deal with our Officers.

Two of the officers involved in the incident have been placed on administrative leave, source . However, officials refused to identify which. Hopefully one was Lt. John Pike, who casually walked up to peaceful demonstrators and sprayed them in the face.

On Saturday, the UC Davis faculty association called for Katehi's resignation, saying in a letter there had been a "gross failure of leadership." Katehi has resisted calls for her to quit.

She needs to step down. Neither the students nor the faculty want her there anymore.

Originally posted by Sanguinemoon:

She needs to step down. Neither the students nor the faculty want her there anymore.

the only time she will truly step down is when she is publicly humiliated

Originally posted by Sanguinemoon:

Two of the officers involved in the incident have been placed on administrative leave, source . However, officials refused to identify which. Hopefully one was Lt. John Pike, who casually walked up to peaceful demonstrators and sprayed them in the face.

On Saturday, the UC Davis faculty association called for Katehi's resignation, saying in a letter there had been a "gross failure of leadership." Katehi has resisted calls for her to quit.

She needs to step down. Neither the students nor the faculty want her there anymore.

I only skimmed but correct me if I'm wrong.

This was the Campus police force, making Lt. Pike a Campus Cop---not a 'real' cop,
& Katehi is a Chancellor of the University?

Originally posted by Smileyfaze:

I only skimmed but correct me if I'm wrong. This was the Campus police force, making Pike a Campus Cop, & Katehi is the Chancellor of the University

Yes.

Now Pike wasn't some scared Renta-Cop, but a veteran of both the military and police. He was in the Marines from 1991-1995, the Sacramento Police Department from 1995 to 2001 and has since worked for UC Davis Police Department. With such an impressive resume, he should have known how to better handle the situation.

Originally posted by Sanguinemoon:

There indeed is something fundamentally flawed about the police situation, Mr Howie.

Of course, they're american cops
If exactly the same thing happened in Britain he'd defend the cop tooth & nail & whatever else he can find.
( sorry, couldn't resist )

Originally posted by Sanguinemoon:

The police, even campus police in this case, have turned into a paramilitary force that can be used against the citizens. Beyond the Occupy movement, it's very frightening.

Huh, the university I went to employed a few people to watch the parking lots and that's as close as it gets to 'campus police'

Originally posted by Sanguinemoon:

Originally posted by Smileyfaze:

I only skimmed but correct me if I'm wrong. This was the Campus police force, making Pike a Campus Cop, & Katehi is the Chancellor of the University

Yes.

Now Pike wasn't some scared Renta-Cop, but a veteran of both the military and police. He was in the Marines from 1991-1995, the Sacramento Police Department from 1995 to 2001 and has since worked for UC Davis Police Department. With such an impressive resume, he should have known how to better handle the situation.

Ok,,,I stipulate to your impressions of who & what might be.

To me he was probably just a "Cop Wannabe" who couldn't cut the mustard in the real police force, who probably had an axe to grind with one of, or all those, in the group he was given the charge to keep in order.

My initial shock is that he was a "real cop", & how dare he put all the police force in such disrepute!

I was misled, probably like may others who believed he might have been a real cop....Instead he was just a "Campus Cop"---they ALL were!

Wrong he was -- he should be taken down, but I feel better now knowing all he was was a just a wacko wannabe with enforcement power over mindless, impressionable children who just so happen to go to the University he works for.

He wasn't a REAL COP.

He was only a CAMPUS COP, only one step up from a janitor, who probably didn't have to pass any mental capacity, or psychological tests real cops have to throughout their careers.

Actually, when I watched those Campus Cops back off, they looked like the cops I saw in the UK Riots.....jelly for spines, gutless wonders.

Yep,,,,,Only Campus Cops!

You would be right, if he wasn't in the Marines and was a "real" cop for years and did pass those tests for the both the Marines and Sacramento PD. The Marines are one branch of the services that turns away most applicants and a large number of recruits lack the psychological and physical capacity to complete training.



I looked for jobs in the UC Davis police force to get specific requirements. The closest I got was a security guard for the library that has the low requirements that you're thinking of. Anyway, like I said, with his resume he doesn "jelly for spines, " or is one of those "gutless wonders."

Originally posted by Sanguinemoon:

You would be right, if he wasn't in the Marines and was a "real" cop for years and did pass those tests for the both the Marines and Sacramento PD. The Marines are one branch of the services that turns away most applicants and a large number of recruits lack the psychological and physical capacity to complete training.

I looked for jobs in the UC Davis police force to get specific requirements. The closest I got was a security guard for the library that has the low requirements that you're thinking of. Anyway, like I said, with his resume he doesn "jelly for spines, " or is one of those "gutless wonders."

So you say, but do you know for sure?

Why did he leave the real cops?

Did you have access to his military files, or any of his police records?

Do you know for sure that he wasn't passed on through the Marines regardless of 'emotional problems', like a lot of them come out with?

Was he gay, & had to leave because he was ashamed, or was afraid of gettin' his ass disciplined?

What do you really know about Lt. Pike, except what you want us all to believe, so to fit your own OWSI agenda?

Come on 'Coon, where's the Beef!?

Originally posted by Sanguinemoon:

Those traditions are deeply undermined when police use pepper spray

oh, nonsense:

Originally posted by Smileyfaze:

Come on 'Coon, where's the Beef!?

I just gave you a 2/3 pound Six Dollar Burger from Carl's Jr. (Hardee's back east) He was in the Marines from 1991-1995, having served the enlistment terms. From 1995-2001, he was in Sacramento PD. This doesn't fit the profile of somebody that couldn't cut as a Marine or a "real" cop.

It was surprising to me too that these were campus police. I don't remember any riot gear for our campus cops. This actually makes the situation scarier even you think about, even campus cops are coming in with prepared for war against people just sitting there now. Our renta-cops would have just stood there until the regular police arrived.

Funny about your cartoon. I didn't see a single "Blame Jews" sign, picture of Che Guevara or anarchist symbol....

Originally posted by Muttsfan:

oh, nonsense:

Well crap. It happened longer ago than I realized.

Originally posted by Sanguinemoon:

security guard for the library

officially on papers, in the mind of Katehi, and himself, he was the FBI

This is an example of the OCCUPY WALL STREET MOVEMENT

OCCUPY WALL STREET INFESTATION

Hitting on poor little defenseless children as they make their way to school.

How low will they go?

The OWSI protestors were chanting "FOLLOW THOSE KIDS, FOLLOW THOSE KIDS".

For those kids, going to school was frighting normally, but all these big people screaming at them, trying to kick them, following them....They were petrified!

I guess that's what OWSI wanted, to terrorize little children!

Cowards one & all!

Those that yelled & kicked at those little children, & those that condone their existence!

Those Shameless Cowards............

They should of used FDS Feminine Hygiene Spray, or Mouth Wash!!!!

Originally posted by Smileyfaze:

Hitting on poor little defenseless children as they make their way to school.

How low will they go?

I don't know about this particular alleged incident, but don't worry, the OWS supporters here will no doubt come up with a rationalization or two regardless of whatever goes on at Occupy events. Uh, they weren't really members of OWS, ya know, or you can't judge the worth of the thing based on a few bad apples, blahblahblah. And this is after they had to make up incidents of violence occurring at Tea Party events. This is the sort of utter dishonesty and hypocrisy that really turned me off of the Democratic party and its adherents back during the 2008 election cycle. I'm not a member of either "movement", TP or OWS. But I would like to see some consistency and basic honesty from those critiquing both. The moonbatty OWS shills in this thread have yet to address the hypocrisy issue. They have no defense other than strawmen and red herrings.

The whole "OWS is violent hippies" is sticking about as well as "we are the 43% webcammers in pajamas".

Originally posted by xyzoneon:

The whole "OWS is violent hippies" is sticking about as well as "we are the 43% webcammers in pajamas".

Something's sticking pretty well, considering the plummeting support for OWS. And that's with what was fairly positive press coverage starting out. You're not the "99%". You're more like the 10%, and it was bound to become apparent sooner or later.

Originally posted by fanfaron:

And that's with what was fairly positive press coverage starting out.

Friend, you must be some form of deranged to go on the way you do. Repetition and redundunce (sp?). There is no point in repeating for time one million that there is no "press", such as you imply that it's still valid free press merely because you say so. No, you're not missing the statements of the media being an establishment tool, you're just being a deranged buffoon obnoxiously venting the same trash ad nauseum.

Mainstream media is state news. Can you even acknowledge that statement far enough to deny it? No? Then just go back to spouting nonsensical inanities, dropping arguments and getting owned by pretty much everyone that replies to you. Whatever floats your boat.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-15814383

If they wouldn't have caught this guy, they would have said he represented OWS. Basically, anything that happens within the vicinity of any protest is the protest.

But on the flip side, banksters that destroyed the global economy for their benefit and then demand the public pay for it causing the protests to begin with? Totally different. Totally. The banksters are legit and should be dealt with only through the rules they wrote.

TWO THUMBS UP

Originally posted by fanfaron:

I don't know about this particular alleged incident, but don't worry, the OWS supporters here will no doubt come up with a rationalization or two regardless of whatever goes on at Occupy events. Uh, they weren't really members of OWS, ya know, or you can't judge the worth of the thing based on a few bad apples, blahblahblah. And this is after they had to make up incidents of violence occurring at Tea Party events. This is the sort of utter dishonesty and hypocrisy that really turned me off of the Democratic party and its adherents back during the 2008 election cycle. I'm not a member of either "movement", TP or OWS. But I would like to see some consistency and basic honesty from those critiquing both. The moonbatty OWS shills in this thread have yet to address the hypocrisy issue. They have no defense other than strawmen and re

Fanfaron, you are on the right track, but, a few things to consider... The OWS is purely dysfunctional in terms of a distraction. If this was like the civil right movement, things would transpire differently, and everyone, would in some way, accept the fact of whats happening. But since the OWS is nothing but puppets, hypocrisy truly can't be factored in to this. And yes, being neutral is best.

Originally posted by xyzoneon:

The whole "OWS is violent hippies" is sticking about as well as "we are the 43% webcammers in pajamas".

umm how does this even work?

Originally posted by fanfaron:

Something's sticking pretty well, considering the plummeting support for OWS. And that's with what was fairly positive press coverage starting out. You're not the "99%". You're more like the 10%, and it was bound to become apparent sooner or later.

As long as people understand that those number are merely for bandwagon jumpers ONLY!

Originally posted by xyzoneon:

Mainstream media is state news.

Uhhh if you to think such you can.

Originally posted by fanfaron:

But I would like to see some consistency and basic honesty from those critiquing both. The moonbatty OWS shills in this thread have yet to address the hypocrisy issue. They have no defense other than strawmen and red herrings.

Let me get this straight. You would like some consistency and honesty while not applying those traits to your won criticism. Got it! The OWS complains Crony Capitalism and it's moonbatty, Sarah Palin complains of the same thing and it's not, etc. Talk about hypocrisy.

Originally posted by Jesus:

First remove the plank from your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck that is in your brother's eye

Originally posted by xyzoneon:

Repetition and redundunce (sp?).

Not to mention, that's not even true. "The protesters don't seem to have know what they're protesting" and assorted other tripe.

What Fanfaron is saying about plummeting support seems to be basically made up as well
More Continue To Support Occupy Wall Street Goals Than Oppose Them


Gallup shows very little change as well.

This is despite the Soviet era Pravda-like "reporting" the MSM as been giving against them.

The nation is still recovering from a crushing recession that sent unemployment hovering above nine percent for two straight years. The president, mindful of soaring deficits, is pushing bold action to shore up the nation’s balance sheet. Cloaking himself in the language of class warfare, he calls on a hostile Congress to end wasteful tax breaks for the rich. “We’re going to close the unproductive tax loopholes that allow some of the truly wealthy to avoid paying their fair share,” he thunders to a crowd in Georgia. Such tax loopholes, he adds, “sometimes made it possible for millionaires to pay nothing, while a bus driver was paying 10 percent of his salary – and that’s crazy.”

Preacherlike, the president draws the crowd into a call-and-response. “Do you think the millionaire ought to pay more in taxes than the bus driver,” he demands, “or less?”

What President is this...the NAZI/Socialist/Communist/Fascist Obama?

The crowd, sounding every bit like the protesters from Occupy Wall Street, roars back: “MORE!”

Oh no! The mob is violent and demanding the 1%'s money....Holy Shit! Run for cover! Won't somebody think of the children?!?

Why that President was Reagan himself

"Taxes are ridiculously low!" says Bruce Bartlett, an architect of Reagan's 1981 tax cut. "And yet the mantra of the Republican Party is 'Tax cuts raise growth.' So – where's the fucking growth?"

Barlett's profanity, not mine.

"It was not a Democrat who led the effort in 1982 to undo about a third of the Reagan tax cuts," recalls Robert Greenstein, president of the nonpartisan Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. "It was Bob Dole." Even Reagan embraced the tax hike, Stockman says, "because he believed that, at some point, you have to pay the bills."

Yeah, pay the bills...

A study by the Federal Reserve estimated that the tax giveaways boosted housing transactions by 17 percent through 2007.

Clearly it was the government's fault after all, for giving too many tax breaks

The stimulus argument was lousy economics. The previous two decades, after all, had demonstrated that "trickle-down" tax cuts don't juice the economy – they create bubbles and balloon deficits.

Yup. Maybe that's why the CBO projected these deficts well before Obama took office.

The article goes on with Bush's tax cuts and picks back up at the 2010 elections:

"You can look up my record: On conservatism and taxes I was better than Jesse Helms," says Simpson, the former senator. "But whatever happened to common sense? People are going to look around in five or 10 years and say, 'Whatever happened to the things that made me comfortable? That made our streets and schools good things?'

Up in smoke...

Looking at those poll tables unfortunately shows how deeply divided the country is and how it gives no clear solution as to the direction to go?

I also think that Macallan is wrong in comparing like with like over the police in the UK and the USA. The American police have a far more violent image and only too keen to turn out like the paramilitary even without a riot but for peaceful protests. They flaunt the batons in willing hope. The service of both police services is vastly different Police in the US have a tougher and more intimidating stance and often for the least wee thing. Such does conflict with principles and seems rather out of kilter when it comes to serving never mind protecting. I feel you are often ill-served by macho stuff. Recent happenings I suspect have been an eye opener for decent people who thought they lived in a fre society free from uniformed intimidation.

Originally posted by Sanguinemoon:

Oh no! The mob is violent and demanding the 1%'s money....Holy Shit! Run for cover! Won't somebody think of the children?!?

"Reganomics will hurt us, it commie talk. We are democracy". Bull Fucking Shit.

Now the Campus Police chief has been put on Leave in addition to the two officers.

Hrmmmm.....

After the episode, Ms. Spicuzza told The Sacramento Bee that the students had surrounded the police, “cutting the officers off from their support.” The videos, however, show no evidence of threats from the protesters.

Even the nearly blind MSM notices that, the police were not threatened in any way.

One of the commenters said:

re “how to ensure proportional law enforcement response to nonviolent protest": For starters, let's de-militarize our police departments. No more riot gear, no more attack dogs, no more assault rifles, no more tasers, no more pepper spray. Only squads assigned to truly dangerous work should be given guns and bullet-proof vests. You would see an immediate change in the attitude of the force.

It's true. I noticed pointed out that in even showing up like that escalates the situation, but it would also decrease the "macho stuff" Howie mentioned.

Another commenter pointed out the same thing happened in the 1999 WTO demonstrations in Seattle. Demonstrators just sitting their on the sidewalk getting sprayed.

Originally posted by Sanguinemoon:

Why that President was Reagan himself

You-know-who after reading that:

............................................

Great shot, what kind of ammo did they use, & at what distance was the shot taken?



My preferred handgun of choice.

This is why Righties are no fun, just shooting stuff. It's more visceral and all around more fun just smashin' shit

Awwwww, you Leftists are so passive-----Takin' it out on fruits-----How homophobicly symbolic--

This VC won't be comin' 'round no moe,,,,no moe,,,,,,no moe,,,,no moe!!

.......................

"Tanks" against the demonstrators?



http://news.yahoo.com/police-tank-spurs-wild-speculation-occupy-tampa-rally-165800157.html

FIRST PERSON | TAMPA, Fla. -- The police department's Tactical Response Team (TRP) rolled out a tank at the Occupy Tampa protest today at Curtis Hixon Park in downtown.

The purpose of the vehicle was unclear and its presence immediately sparked wide speculation among the protestors. I have to admit that when I first saw the tank, it felt ominous and an extreme measure.

....

According to the city of Tampa's website, "Rescue 2" is a "12-ton Armored Personnel Carrier (APC)… can be used for search and rescue during a natural disaster or terrorist attack."

Another source says the police claim it was on the way to a Great American Teach-in event, but that's a lie. Turns out the vehicle was actually parked there. Why do our law enforce persist in lying? Anette Annette Spicuzza lied about the police being surrounded. What else did they lie about?

Now I can agree with the author that the protesters jumped to some wild conclusions, although the very presence of the vehicle is frightening (perhaps it was psychological tactic by the police as the article suggests) I knew immediately that it wasn't a tank, but an APC, then again I grew around the military. Funny that the author mocks the protester's lack of research, when he can't even research the correct usage of the word "protestor" (the correct usage can be found here


Here's a clip from a local television station that reports the police lie that was just driving by, despite it being parked there. It further shows a small group just standing there with signs. Those folks were well under control and didn't need psychological intimidation.

In the video, retired FBI agent Brian Kensel is also lying. A quick check at Wikipedia tells us that pepper spray is not as harmless as he says. At least 27 people in California have died from complications from the chemical weapon. People with asthma or conditions can die of it.

The US Army concluded in a 1993 Aberdeen Proving Ground study that pepper spray could cause "[m]utagenic effects, carcinogenic effects, sensitization, cardiovascular and pulmonary toxicity, neurotoxicity, as well as possible human fatalities. There is a risk in using this product on a large and varied population"

...

Pepper spray has been associated with positional asphyxiation of individuals in police custody. There is much debate over the actual "cause" of death in these cases. There have been few controlled clinical studies of the human health effects of pepper spray marketed for police use, and those studies are contradictory.

So don't just start spraying folks unless you're actually in danger