Protesters blast Wall Street and war; support OccupySF

|
(93)

Story by Nena Farrell, photos by Ariel Soto-Suver

“We’re mad as hell, and we’re not taking it anymore!” was Tanya Dennis’s cry yesterday (Thurs/6) afternoon at a march and rally that drew from the Occupy San Francisco/Occupy Wall Street and the anti-war movements. It began at the Federal Building at Mission and 7th streets, where protesters will return today at 4:30 pm for a march marking the 10th anniversary of the war against Afghanistan.

Dennis got the crowd to scream the words with her, chanting it. Because it’s true—they’re not taking it anymore. She was one of the many featured speakers at the protest, along with representatives from OccupySF, the California Democratic Party, the American Indian Movement, and so many more. There were also sections of open microphones, where people could stand up to make a proposal, or usually just to make a point.

One of the open speakers proposed we free people. She had the entire gathering call it out with her: “Free people, free people.”

That’s one of the four demands that the 99 percent – the people that the occupiers say they represent – is making. One, to protect the environment. Two, to care for the people. Three, to tax the rich. And four, to end the wars. These are the four demands of the movement. At the protest, these four demands were posted on multiple signs.

The protest was in solidarity with the anti-war action in Washington DC. And from DC, the event had Dick Cheney – or rather, an impersonator of the former vice president – here to open the event. Upon his arrival, he was booed, but Cheney himself seemed fairly pleased with the entire situation. He joked that he brought three virgin hearts with him in case he was shot.

After the speakers, the protest moved to march down to 101 Market Street, where Occupy San Francisco has its movement encampment. The group moved down the blocks, chanting “Banks got bailed out, we got sold out!” Each time they came to a bank along Market Street, the entire group would stop and cry together “Make banks pay” and “Tax the rich.”

It was the speakers, overall, that brought the real power to the event. They described the madness the working class was facing, the entire country and our state, and even the outside countries that we have both declared and undeclared wars on. And not just by the selected featured speakers, but also the ones like Sheila Gun Cushman, a blind woman who spoke up during the open speakers, saying “We have wanted this for years, it’s about bleepin’ time!”

Janet Weil, a Code Pink activist, was moved by the speakers as well: “[The] testimony of people at open mike was very powerful and important.”

Comments

save the whale, kill the rich, stop all wars, dissolve all banks, power to the people, give peace a chance, hug a tree, equal rights for transexual midgets, free love, legalize all recreational drugs, abortion on demand, instant karma, an end to suffering, free Nelson Mandela, power to the people and kumbaya?

Good to see they have a focussed agenda.

Posted by Anonymous on Oct. 07, 2011 @ 12:17 pm

Here are the actual 8 demands that the OccupyWallSt movement has put out according to their website OccupyWallSt.org.

LIST OF PROPOSED "DEMANDS FOR CONGRESS"
1. CONGRESS PASS HR 1489 ("RETURN TO PRUDENT BANKING ACT" http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h112-1489 ). THIS REINSTATES MANY PROVISIONS OF THE GLASS-STEAGALL ACT.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass–Steagall_Act --- Wiki entry summary: The repeal of provisions of the Glass–Steagall Act of 1933 by the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act in 1999 effectively removed the separation that previously existed between investment banking which issued securities and commercial banks which accepted deposits. The deregulation also removed conflict of interest prohibitions between investment bankers serving as officers of commercial banks. Most economists believe this repeal directly contributed to the severity of the Financial crisis of 2007–2011 by allowing Wall Street investment banking firms to gamble with their depositors' money that was held in commercial banks owned or created by the investment firms. Here's detail on repeal in 1999 and how it happened:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass–Steagall_Act#Repeal .
2. USE CONGRESSIONAL AUTHORITY AND OVERSIGHT TO ENSURE APPROPRIATE FEDERAL AGENCIES FULLY INVESTIGATE AND PROSECUTE THE WALL STREET CRIMINALS who clearly broke the law and helped cause the 2008 financial crisis in the following notable cases: (insert list of the most clear cut criminal actions). There is a pretty broad consensus that there is a clear group of people who got away with millions / billions illegally and haven't been brought to justice. Boy would this be long overdue and cathartic for millions of Americans. It would also be a shot across the bow for the financial industry. If you watch the solidly researched and awared winning documentary film "Inside Job" that was narrated by Matt Damon (pretty brave Matt!) and do other research, it wouldn't take long to develop the list.
3. CONGRESS ENACT LEGISLATION TO PROTECT OUR DEMOCRACY BY REVERSING THE EFFECTS OF THE CITIZENS UNITED SUPREME COURT DECISION which essentially said corporations can spend as much as they want on elections. The result is that corporations can pretty much buy elections. Corporations should be highly limited in ability to contribute to political campaigns no matter what the election and no matter what the form of media. This legislation should also RE-ESTABLISH THE PUBLIC AIRWAVES IN THE U.S. SO THAT POLITICAL CANDIDATES ARE GIVEN EQUAL TIME FOR FREE AT REASONABLE INTERVALS IN DAILY PROGRAMMING DURING CAMPAIGN SEASON. The same should extend to other media.
4. CONGRESS PASS THE BUFFETT RULE ON FAIR TAXATION SO THE RICH AND CORPORATIONS PAY THEIR FAIR SHARE & CLOSE CORPORATE TAX LOOP HOLES AND ENACT A PROHIBITION ON HIDING FUNDS OFF SHORE. No more GE paying zero or negative taxes. Pass the Buffet Rule on fair taxation so the rich pay their fair share. (If we have a really had a good negotiating position and have the place surrounded, we could actually dial up taxes on millionaires, billionaires and corporations even higher...back to what they once were in the 50's and 60's.
5. CONGRESS COMPLETELY REVAMP THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION and staff it at all levels with proven professionals who get the job done protecting the integrity of the marketplace so citizens and investors are both protected. This agency needs a large staff and needs to be well-funded. It's currently has a joke of a budget and is run by Wall St. insiders who often leave for high ticket cushy jobs with the corporations they were just regulating. Hmmm.
6. CONGRESS PASS SPECIFIC AND EFFECTIVE LAWS LIMITING THE INFLUENCE OF LOBBYISTS AND ELIMINATING THE PRACTICE OF LOBBYISTS WRITING LEGISLATION THAT ENDS UP ON THE FLOOR OF CONGRESS.
7. CONGRESS PASSING "Revolving Door Legislation" LEGISLATION ELIMINATING THE ABILITY OF FORMER GOVERNMENT REGULATORS GOING TO WORK FOR CORPORATIONS THAT THEY ONCE REGULATED. So, you don't get to work at the FDA for five years playing softball with Pfizer and then go to work for Pfizer making $195,000 a year. While they're at it, Congress should pass specific and effective laws to enforce strict judicial standards of conduct in matters concerning conflicts of interest. So long as judges are culled from the ranks of corporate attorneys the 1% will retain control.
8. ELIMINATE "PERSONHOOD" LEGAL STATUS FOR CORPORATIONS. The film "The Corporation" has a great section on how corporations won "personhood status". http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8SuUzmqBewg . Fast-forward to 2:20. It'll blow your mind. The 14th amendment was supposed to give equal rights to African Americans. It said you "can't deprive a person of life, liberty or property without due process of law". Corporation lawyers wanted corporations to have more power so they basically said "corporations are people." Amazingly, between 1890 and 1910 there were 307 cases brought before the court under the 14th amendment. 288 of these brought by corporations and only 19 by African Americans. 600,000 people were killed to get rights for people and then judges applied those rights to capital and property while stripping them from people. It's time to set this straight.

Posted by Guest on Oct. 07, 2011 @ 12:26 pm
Posted by Anonymous on Oct. 07, 2011 @ 12:30 pm

Why doesn't that surprise me?

Today he's "Anonymous".
So clever is this Troll!

Posted by Anonymous on Oct. 07, 2011 @ 12:57 pm

tired old personal attacks?

Posted by Anonymous on Oct. 07, 2011 @ 1:12 pm

Lots of times.

Posted by Guest on Oct. 07, 2011 @ 2:23 pm
Posted by Anonymous on Oct. 07, 2011 @ 2:48 pm
Posted by Anonymous on Oct. 07, 2011 @ 8:37 pm

why doesn't it surprise me that you post anonymously?

Posted by Guest on Oct. 10, 2011 @ 11:37 am

Let's get "Repeal the Federal Reserve Act" and investigate (really investigate) 9/11 and I'd say the list is awesome!!!!

Posted by Guest on Oct. 07, 2011 @ 3:49 pm

This is the tenth anniversary of the beginning of the war in Afghanistan. I just found a site that lists all the activities or programs that could have been funded with the $460 billion we have wasted on that engagement.

For instance, we could have used this year's spending on the Afghanistan war to plug the holes in these state budgets and avoid cuts to essential services. (42 states and the District of Columbia are facing serious budget shortfalls for FY2012).

Or we could have used this year’s spending on the war to cover the total amount of Pell Grants awarded since the start of the war through Fiscal Year 2009, the last year data is available.

Not to mention the human costs of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, which have been staggering and could have been avoided. A demand to end the wars NOW deserves a prominent place on the list.

http://costofwar.com/en/publications/2011/ten-years-after-911/afghanista...

Posted by Lisa on Oct. 07, 2011 @ 4:55 pm
Posted by Guest on Oct. 07, 2011 @ 11:35 pm

idiot, you're just want the %1 wants.

Posted by Guest on Oct. 07, 2011 @ 6:05 pm

What people want is a government that works for everyone. Are you suggesting that government is working well for the people? Didn't thinks so.

Thanks God for dissent. I couldn't live in a country without it.

Posted by Larry Nusbaum, Phoenix on Oct. 19, 2011 @ 12:08 pm

LIST OF PROPOSED "DEMANDS FOR CONGRESS"
1. CONGRESS PASS HR 1489 ("RETURN TO PRUDENT BANKING ACT" http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h112-1489 ). THIS REINSTATES MANY PROVISIONS OF THE GLASS-STEAGALL ACT.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass–Steagall_Act --- Wiki entry summary: The repeal of provisions of the Glass–Steagall Act of 1933 by the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act in 1999 effectively removed the separation that previously existed between investment banking which issued securities and commercial banks which accepted deposits. The deregulation also removed conflict of interest prohibitions between investment bankers serving as officers of commercial banks. Most economists believe this repeal directly contributed to the severity of the Financial crisis of 2007–2011 by allowing Wall Street investment banking firms to gamble with their depositors' money that was held in commercial banks owned or created by the investment firms. Here's detail on repeal in 1999 and how it happened:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass–Steagall_Act#Repeal .
2. USE CONGRESSIONAL AUTHORITY AND OVERSIGHT TO ENSURE APPROPRIATE FEDERAL AGENCIES FULLY INVESTIGATE AND PROSECUTE THE WALL STREET CRIMINALS who clearly broke the law and helped cause the 2008 financial crisis in the following notable cases: (insert list of the most clear cut criminal actions). There is a pretty broad consensus that there is a clear group of people who got away with millions / billions illegally and haven't been brought to justice. Boy would this be long overdue and cathartic for millions of Americans. It would also be a shot across the bow for the financial industry. If you watch the solidly researched and awared winning documentary film "Inside Job" that was narrated by Matt Damon (pretty brave Matt!) and do other research, it wouldn't take long to develop the list.
3. CONGRESS ENACT LEGISLATION TO PROTECT OUR DEMOCRACY BY REVERSING THE EFFECTS OF THE CITIZENS UNITED SUPREME COURT DECISION which essentially said corporations can spend as much as they want on elections. The result is that corporations can pretty much buy elections. Corporations should be highly limited in ability to contribute to political campaigns no matter what the election and no matter what the form of media. This legislation should also RE-ESTABLISH THE PUBLIC AIRWAVES IN THE U.S. SO THAT POLITICAL CANDIDATES ARE GIVEN EQUAL TIME FOR FREE AT REASONABLE INTERVALS IN DAILY PROGRAMMING DURING CAMPAIGN SEASON. The same should extend to other media.
4. CONGRESS PASS THE BUFFETT RULE ON FAIR TAXATION SO THE RICH AND CORPORATIONS PAY THEIR FAIR SHARE & CLOSE CORPORATE TAX LOOP HOLES AND ENACT A PROHIBITION ON HIDING FUNDS OFF SHORE. No more GE paying zero or negative taxes. Pass the Buffet Rule on fair taxation so the rich pay their fair share. (If we have a really had a good negotiating position and have the place surrounded, we could actually dial up taxes on millionaires, billionaires and corporations even higher...back to what they once were in the 50's and 60's.
5. CONGRESS COMPLETELY REVAMP THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION and staff it at all levels with proven professionals who get the job done protecting the integrity of the marketplace so citizens and investors are both protected. This agency needs a large staff and needs to be well-funded. It's currently has a joke of a budget and is run by Wall St. insiders who often leave for high ticket cushy jobs with the corporations they were just regulating. Hmmm.
6. CONGRESS PASS SPECIFIC AND EFFECTIVE LAWS LIMITING THE INFLUENCE OF LOBBYISTS AND ELIMINATING THE PRACTICE OF LOBBYISTS WRITING LEGISLATION THAT ENDS UP ON THE FLOOR OF CONGRESS.
7. CONGRESS PASSING "Revolving Door Legislation" LEGISLATION ELIMINATING THE ABILITY OF FORMER GOVERNMENT REGULATORS GOING TO WORK FOR CORPORATIONS THAT THEY ONCE REGULATED. So, you don't get to work at the FDA for five years playing softball with Pfizer and then go to work for Pfizer making $195,000 a year. While they're at it, Congress should pass specific and effective laws to enforce strict judicial standards of conduct in matters concerning conflicts of interest. So long as judges are culled from the ranks of corporate attorneys the 1% will retain control.
8. ELIMINATE "PERSONHOOD" LEGAL STATUS FOR CORPORATIONS. The film "The Corporation" has a great section on how corporations won "personhood status". http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8SuUzmqBewg . Fast-forward to 2:20. It'll blow your mind. The 14th amendment was supposed to give equal rights to African Americans. It said you "can't deprive a person of life, liberty or property without due process of law". Corporation lawyers wanted corporations to have more power so they basically said "corporations are people." Amazingly, between 1890 and 1910 there were 307 cases brought before the court under the 14th amendment. 288 of these brought by corporations and only 19 by African Americans. 600,000 people were killed to get rights for people and then judges applied those rights to capital and property while stripping them from people. It's time to set this straight.

Posted by Guest on Oct. 07, 2011 @ 12:27 pm

Here are the actual 8 demands from OccupyWallSt.org

LIST OF PROPOSED "DEMANDS FOR CONGRESS"
1. CONGRESS PASS HR 1489 ("RETURN TO PRUDENT BANKING ACT" http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h112-1489 ). THIS REINSTATES MANY PROVISIONS OF THE GLASS-STEAGALL ACT.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass–Steagall_Act --- Wiki entry summary: The repeal of provisions of the Glass–Steagall Act of 1933 by the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act in 1999 effectively removed the separation that previously existed between investment banking which issued securities and commercial banks which accepted deposits. The deregulation also removed conflict of interest prohibitions between investment bankers serving as officers of commercial banks. Most economists believe this repeal directly contributed to the severity of the Financial crisis of 2007–2011 by allowing Wall Street investment banking firms to gamble with their depositors' money that was held in commercial banks owned or created by the investment firms. Here's detail on repeal in 1999 and how it happened:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass–Steagall_Act#Repeal .
2. USE CONGRESSIONAL AUTHORITY AND OVERSIGHT TO ENSURE APPROPRIATE FEDERAL AGENCIES FULLY INVESTIGATE AND PROSECUTE THE WALL STREET CRIMINALS who clearly broke the law and helped cause the 2008 financial crisis in the following notable cases: (insert list of the most clear cut criminal actions). There is a pretty broad consensus that there is a clear group of people who got away with millions / billions illegally and haven't been brought to justice. Boy would this be long overdue and cathartic for millions of Americans. It would also be a shot across the bow for the financial industry. If you watch the solidly researched and awared winning documentary film "Inside Job" that was narrated by Matt Damon (pretty brave Matt!) and do other research, it wouldn't take long to develop the list.
3. CONGRESS ENACT LEGISLATION TO PROTECT OUR DEMOCRACY BY REVERSING THE EFFECTS OF THE CITIZENS UNITED SUPREME COURT DECISION which essentially said corporations can spend as much as they want on elections. The result is that corporations can pretty much buy elections. Corporations should be highly limited in ability to contribute to political campaigns no matter what the election and no matter what the form of media. This legislation should also RE-ESTABLISH THE PUBLIC AIRWAVES IN THE U.S. SO THAT POLITICAL CANDIDATES ARE GIVEN EQUAL TIME FOR FREE AT REASONABLE INTERVALS IN DAILY PROGRAMMING DURING CAMPAIGN SEASON. The same should extend to other media.
4. CONGRESS PASS THE BUFFETT RULE ON FAIR TAXATION SO THE RICH AND CORPORATIONS PAY THEIR FAIR SHARE & CLOSE CORPORATE TAX LOOP HOLES AND ENACT A PROHIBITION ON HIDING FUNDS OFF SHORE. No more GE paying zero or negative taxes. Pass the Buffet Rule on fair taxation so the rich pay their fair share. (If we have a really had a good negotiating position and have the place surrounded, we could actually dial up taxes on millionaires, billionaires and corporations even higher...back to what they once were in the 50's and 60's.

Posted by Guest on Oct. 07, 2011 @ 12:28 pm

5. CONGRESS COMPLETELY REVAMP THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION and staff it at all levels with proven professionals who get the job done protecting the integrity of the marketplace so citizens and investors are both protected. This agency needs a large staff and needs to be well-funded. It's currently has a joke of a budget and is run by Wall St. insiders who often leave for high ticket cushy jobs with the corporations they were just regulating. Hmmm.
6. CONGRESS PASS SPECIFIC AND EFFECTIVE LAWS LIMITING THE INFLUENCE OF LOBBYISTS AND ELIMINATING THE PRACTICE OF LOBBYISTS WRITING LEGISLATION THAT ENDS UP ON THE FLOOR OF CONGRESS.
7. CONGRESS PASSING "Revolving Door Legislation" LEGISLATION ELIMINATING THE ABILITY OF FORMER GOVERNMENT REGULATORS GOING TO WORK FOR CORPORATIONS THAT THEY ONCE REGULATED. So, you don't get to work at the FDA for five years playing softball with Pfizer and then go to work for Pfizer making $195,000 a year. While they're at it, Congress should pass specific and effective laws to enforce strict judicial standards of conduct in matters concerning conflicts of interest. So long as judges are culled from the ranks of corporate attorneys the 1% will retain control.
8. ELIMINATE "PERSONHOOD" LEGAL STATUS FOR CORPORATIONS. The film "The Corporation" has a great section on how corporations won "personhood status". http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8SuUzmqBewg . Fast-forward to 2:20. It'll blow your mind. The 14th amendment was supposed to give equal rights to African Americans. It said you "can't deprive a person of life, liberty or property without due process of law". Corporation lawyers wanted corporations to have more power so they basically said "corporations are people." Amazingly, between 1890 and 1910 there were 307 cases brought before the court under the 14th amendment. 288 of these brought by corporations and only 19 by African Americans. 600,000 people were killed to get rights for people and then judges applied those rights to capital and property while stripping them from people. It's time to set this straight.

Posted by Guest on Oct. 07, 2011 @ 12:28 pm

doesn't represent the 99%. I would guess that the 37% of the nation that are born againers could be taken right off the top.

I went to a few anti-war protests during the first gulf war. It even crossed my mind to drop by some this time around. A few years ago I rode my bike by a city hall protest and there was the usual cavalcade of 9/11 conspiracy kooks, Israel obsessed moonbats and whatnot. I wouldn't be surprised if there were was a showing of Larouchites somewhere. Many people don't want to be associated with that kookery.

There are some interesting ideas in the text, but there is also a lot of the same out of touch conspiracy ravings. Eliminating person hood for corporations and not replacing it with some sort of corporate/personal liability legislation along the same lines would send trillions more off shore to never be seen again.

Posted by meatlock on Oct. 07, 2011 @ 1:14 pm

"I would guess that the 37% of the nation that are born againers could be taken right off the top."

37% of all Christians (not Americans) are born again and of those, a sizable number are African American and Latino and yes, liberal.

Jeez, what an idiot. Learn how to read, GOPper.

Posted by guest on Oct. 07, 2011 @ 2:20 pm

racialism.

Because someone is of a certain race they must think a certain way.

37% of Americans are born again types. Maybe 1% of that are not as rote minded as SF progressives around the revealed agenda.

Your post makes no sense, as usual.

Something like 90% of Americans are Christians.

Posted by meatlock on Oct. 07, 2011 @ 8:10 pm

of you is an idiot.

Posted by Anonymous on Oct. 07, 2011 @ 8:38 pm

Thanks for that, Michelle Malkin.

Posted by Guest on Oct. 07, 2011 @ 2:24 pm
har

Michelle Malkin as crazy and as annoying as any SF progressive.

Posted by meatlock on Oct. 07, 2011 @ 8:07 pm

Not on Malkin's site.
Why is that?
Because you're a right wing reactionary asshole Troll who hates progressives.
The rest of this is just a bunch of mealy-mouthed bullshit that you spew as cover, in hopes that people will engage with you in good will.
Har indeed, you stupid cocksucker.

Posted by Anonymous on Oct. 07, 2011 @ 8:24 pm

How do you know where I spend my time?

On right wing web pages they think I'm a leftist idiot like you.

Go figure.

Posted by meatlock on Oct. 08, 2011 @ 1:17 am

This is why these protests don't attract middle-class and majority support - because kooks come and attach themselves to them and no one wants to have anything to do with these kinds of people.

The list of demands is eminently reasonable. The hodgepodge of signs expressing extremist demands is really not.

Posted by Guest on Oct. 07, 2011 @ 2:38 pm

Because 'Guest' the Israeli occupation of Palestine is an arm of the U.S. war on the Middle East for which our government is stealing billions of dollars a year from us, in order to unconscionably send these funds as military and civilian aid to a wealthy brutal occupier, when that aid should instead be going to strengthen our local economy, and lift jobless and housing stressed Americans out of poverty.

Posted by Eric Brooks on Oct. 07, 2011 @ 6:44 pm

Not to the American public, who from recent polls seem quite adamant on what they want - full American backing of Israel.

The surest way to stamp these protests, which are worthy of support, with the "EXTREMIST" brand is to start linking them in the public's mind with anti-Israel radicals. That is a sure-fire loser in American political discourse.

Posted by Guest on Oct. 07, 2011 @ 7:06 pm

It is precisely -because- so much of the general public is not yet making the deep connections between the billions a year we send to support Israel's brutal occupation, and our own local poverty at home, that we must make the occupation a key education point in our organizing.

Posted by Eric Brooks on Oct. 07, 2011 @ 7:16 pm

And you harping on it, in a strange echo of Republican insistence than American assistance to the Palestinian Authority actually impoverishes the United States and should be ended, doesn't change that fact.

The Tea Party, as much as I dislike it, has had an impact on political discourse because it's focused on spending, spending, spending. If Occupy is going to have an impact it can't be focused on Israel, the environment, global warming, homelessness, the economy and human rights. YOU may see the connection between those things but the job of a political movement is not to educate the broader populace - it's to win and you win by being as narrowly focused as possible and then repeating that narrow focus again and again and again. And that focus is not "Israel, Israel - ISRAEL."

Posted by Guest on Oct. 07, 2011 @ 7:37 pm

Tell me. In what way is it 'spurious'?

Posted by Eric Brooks on Oct. 07, 2011 @ 7:54 pm

They make the same connection between US aid to the Palestinian Authority and US economic problems and declining US influence as you do between US aid to Israel and those same issues. It's just two sides of the same coin. Personally I find it interesting that you're echoing such reactionary viewpoints.

Are you opposed to all US aid abroad or only US aid to Israel?

Posted by Guest on Oct. 07, 2011 @ 8:04 pm

Wrong. There are a -lot- of extreme right wing Republicans who support Israel because they see it as a fulfillment of biblical prophesy.

And in any case, how does what Republicans think about the matter render the -clear- connection between local poverty and the export of billions in unnecessary aid to Israel spurious?

Answer the question rather than again raising your ludicrously spurious nonsequitur argument about Republicans.

Posted by Eric Brooks on Oct. 07, 2011 @ 8:19 pm

Except in your own mind. Hence it's a spurious theory. Simply stating and restating what you believe, and denigrating the statements of others, doesn't make what you say true.

If you can quantitatively prove that the yearly $3 billion in US loan guarantees to Israel contribute to US poverty and have exacerbated the economic crisis in the US, then I'll personally donate $500 to a charity of your choosing. I can prove those loan guarantees actually increase employment in the US - if I do so will you match my challenge?

Posted by Guest on Oct. 07, 2011 @ 8:26 pm

Bullshit. These are far from simple loan guarantees. Billions of what is delivered to Israel every year is direct aid, and weaponry. And the amount is on average far higher than 3 billion per year. You are trying to rehash a debate we had months ago Lucretia and using the same deceptive mathematical tricks you used back then. It won't work for you now, any better than it did then.

Posted by Eric Brooks on Oct. 07, 2011 @ 8:48 pm

Thanks for playing though.

Posted by Guest on Oct. 07, 2011 @ 9:02 pm

And, as I said previously:

You Fail To Recognize That These Issues Are All Interconnected

'Guest' you are failing to recognize that all of the issues that the protests are raising are intimately connected with eachother. The different problems they call out, all have their roots in out of control capitalism and the profound wealth disparity and environmental destruction that goes with it.

You are also failing to realize the powerful truth that in 1999 in Seattle, it was exactly this synergy of a wide array of organizers each working on separate issues, but also able to see the deep connections between all of their causes, who were able to unify together as an undefeatable force, to target the corporations and governments at the heart of the problem, and then shut -down- the WTO; a now deeply weakened corporate plundering tool, which has still not gotten back on its feet since that day.

It is our differences, and the connection points between them, which make us a powerful force against the global corporate attack on our planet.

Posted by Eric Brooks on Oct. 07, 2011 @ 8:05 pm

corporate control accelerated, environmental degradation and global warming continued unabated, we ended up with George W. Bush as president 2 years later and now, two wars after, our economy is destroyed and we're on the verge of conservative success in the 2012 elections.

If that's success I'd sure as hell hate to see what failure looks like.

Posted by Guest on Oct. 07, 2011 @ 8:14 pm

No. You are simply wrong.

In each round that the WTO has met since Seattle, attempts at further agreement have collapsed. Period.

That is success on the part of the Global Movement.

Do we need to further repeal the WTO? Of course.

But halting it in its tracks is pretty damned good.

Posted by Eric Brooks on Oct. 07, 2011 @ 8:25 pm

The 8 demands seem quite reasonable. Only if the influence of corporations and banks is reduced, is there an increased chance of financial stability. If banks were limited in their size, we wouldn't have to worry about the bad apples failing.

Posted by Guest on Oct. 07, 2011 @ 3:56 pm

I couldn't agree more that the focus of the protests should remain on the economic disparity, increasing poverty, corporate take-over of the country, and the class war being waged against us. There is a vital, immediate need, and an actual opportunity this time, for us, the working-class/middle-class wealth producers, to be heard on the current economic debate.

I've attended many protests in S.F. that were sprinkled liberally, not to say inundated, with manifestations of every possible progressive concern. Without fail, the coverage by broadcast and print media showed only footage of the protestors with the most unrelated issues. The impact of the protest is spread out enough to form a small ripple instead of a tidal wave. Imagine if each of the protests that have looked exactly the same over the years, had instead been focused on the particular issue at hand. The resulting footage of large numbers of people seriously concerned about the issue and their relevant signage, not obscured by other signs and banners, would make it harder for the media to ignore, and keep the attention of some of the populace for a change. People across America would see people of all ages and types, some of whom look like them, getting out in the street (think, my middle-aged plumber husband instead of another clown on stilts with a pro-slow food sign filling up the screen). Those who think I'm trying to silence them need to consider whether they actually do care about the success or failure of THIS particular movement, or are just taking the opportunity to burn off a little steam while making their protest of another situation known. If it's the latter case, please help us out by picking another time or venue. This is important, and doable.

Posted by Guest on Oct. 07, 2011 @ 4:56 pm

'Guest' you are failing to recognize that all of the issues that the protests are raising are intimately connected with eachother. The different problems they call out, all have their roots in out of control capitalism and the profound wealth disparity and environmental destruction that goes with it.

You are also failing to realize the powerful truth that in 1999 in Seattle, it was exactly this synergy of a wide array of organizers each working on separate issues, but also able to see the deep connections between all of their causes, who were able to unify together as an undefeatable force, to target the corporations and governments at the heart of the problem, and then shut -down- the WTO; a now deeply weakened corporate plundering tool, which has still not gotten back on its feet since that day.

It is our differences, and the connection points between them, which make us a powerful force against the global corporate attack on our planet.

Posted by Eric Brooks on Oct. 07, 2011 @ 7:00 pm

The WTO talks continued after a slight interruption and no lasting movement was built out of the protests. Corporate control continued unabated and global environmental degradation actually sped up. Two years after the Seattle WTO protests we had George W. Bush as president and two wars later (and many smaller conflict as well) we're where we are today. Does that sound like a success to you?

That is not a good example to prove your point.

Posted by Guest on Oct. 07, 2011 @ 7:40 pm

Complete and utter bullshit. Since Seattle, the WTO has not once managed to seal any substantial new trade agreement. Furthermore all other attempted multinational trade agreements such as the FTAA have also abjectly failed.

Seattle was the tipping point at which we shut multinational trade agreements down in their tracks.

Posted by Eric Brooks on Oct. 07, 2011 @ 8:00 pm

Jordan, Australia, Chile, Singapore, Bahrain, Morocco, Oman, Peru, Dominican Republic-Central America

President Obama recently submitted three more (Panama, Columbia, South Korea) for ratification.

You, Eric Brooks, have a very, very strange idea of what "success" entails. Rather than wait for a successful WTO round of talks, the United States simply negotiated the exact same agreements bilaterally.

That is success?

Posted by Guest on Oct. 07, 2011 @ 8:21 pm

Those agreements are all much weaker and far more limited bilateral pacts which don't have anywhere near the power or influence of an international trade regime. And other bilateral trade agreements that the U.S. has now been forced into slowly pursuing one at a time, are failing. It has become a -lot- harder since Seattle for the U.S. to get away with its previous bullshit.

That - is success.

Here is how it is spelled...

s - u - c - c - e - s - s

Posted by Eric Brooks on Oct. 07, 2011 @ 8:42 pm

The international trade regime is simply tottering and free trade is in retreat! Neo-capitalism is on its last legs!! Bilateral trade agreements aren't oppressive!

Unfortunately Eric, none of what you're saying is true. But I understand why you have to say it. Because admitting that resistance has been futile and that if anything, workers are worse off than they were in 1999, would illustrate the complete and total failure of the modern progressive movement you represent to actually influence the course of events on a national or international scale. To admit failure would represent total defeat for you, so I understand where the self-deception comes in.

But that's small potatoes to the workers and the planet, all of which have continued to get a raw deal over this past 12 years of glowing successes for your movement.

Posted by Guest on Oct. 07, 2011 @ 9:01 pm

Interesting, how do you figure? The clear victories that I have just described, have considerably slowed the advance of neo-liberal capitalism, and have put it into a weaker position from which, at this very moment, it is facing a new rising revolution against it.

You are desperate, and it shows. You are limply grasping at some very weak straws in this debate.

Just as in the 60s, your side is about to get its ass kicked. I'm not surprised you are so overly loudly protesting this, from your standpoint, very bitter reality.

Maybe I'll be there to shake your hand,

Maybe I'll be there to share the land,

That they'll be givin' away,

when we all live together... ;)

Posted by Eric Brooks on Oct. 07, 2011 @ 9:24 pm

And I'm not a fan of self-deception to make oneself feel better. The anti-capitalist movement as headed by progressives of your ilk has been a total and complete failure for workers and for the planet as a whole. Real wages and living conditions have declined, privatization has continued apace, environmental destruction has increased as has use of fossil fuels. To act as if these things don't exist is again, an eery echo of the same right-wing claims (" America is doing fine!"), something I've noticed that you engage in quite frequently. I find that very strange that as you're constantly proclaiming your progressive bona fides, you're turning around and echoing their very same arguments.

Countering fact-based arguments with personal attacks is a fallacy and I don't deal with those either. So willful self-deception, echoing right-wing arguments and fallacies all aren't going to work with me Eric. Screeching "Oceania is at war with Eurasia!" again and again doesn't make it so.

Posted by Guest on Oct. 07, 2011 @ 9:43 pm

So what's your solution, Guest? Overthrowing the government? And then what? The question is serious, not mocking (a la meatlick). If electoral politics and progressive activism is a failure, what is the alternative that could bring about success?

Posted by Greg on Oct. 07, 2011 @ 10:05 pm