'Occupy' types

[mlmpetert]

@ JoeRedskins – thanks very much. I completely agree and feel the same on all points you raised.

@ NCSkins – I have requested that the author of that list add Buddy Roemer to the list, which im almost positive he will. There are a lot of people/groups still not on the list and the author mention that this is just a start. Michael Moore, comes to mind. Also Unions are left off.

I think the intention of the list is to show that there is a lot of extremely questionable and unsavory supporters of the OWS movement. Although its obvious to rational people that OWS leadership (if there is any) would not accept endorsement from some of these groups. However, the reasoning these groups are supportive of OWS is because of the socialist/communist/collective principles that they and OWS share. The same issued plagued the Tea Party’s limited government capitalistic principles, and the attraction unsavory groups had early on to the Tea Party was very well publicize by the media. If anything I would say OWS is being treated far better by the media then the Tea Party ever was.

Ill also add that the majority of Americans and nearly all conservative commentators ive heard are upset and agree with the heart of what OWS is protesting (bailouts, inequality, special interest/corporation influence) (I think that’s what their protesting, right?), but the solutions to those issues are far different then the solutions OWS seem to endorse. I define myself as socially liberal / fiscally conservative and that individual interest is just as important and sometimes even more important than collective interest; in no way am I supportive of Social Justice. So while current fiscal and social issues may be just as upsetting to me and most other Americans as they are to you and OWS protesters, my views on solving the problems are vastly different.

[mlmpetert]

Originally Posted by mlmpetert

Unfortunately there was another rape reported, this time at Occupy Baltimore. Baltimore is the same place that started handing out pamphlets that discouraged individuals from reporting sexual assaults to the police in a effort to keep the allegations internal.

Raped and Robbed Occupy Baltimore Woman Receives No Help From ‘Activists’ | Video | TheBlaze.com


I think I was 1 rape short in my above post, plus there was one i missed all togather at Occupy Lawrence in Kanas.

This is the current recap of reported rapes or sexual assaults:


1 at Occupy Cleveland
1 at Occupy Dallas (statutory, 14 year old)
1 at Occupy Oakland (questionable)
3 at Occupy Wall Street (NYC), including one on a deaf man
1 at Occupy Lawrence (Kanas)
1 at Occupy Baltimore


Plus 1 at Occupy Glasgow (in the UK)


This brings the total to 8 or 9, plus 1 serial flasher that was arrested in Seattle and 1 serial groper that was arrested in NYC. Again these are a mix of reported rapes from a combination of first hand and second hand testimony, although a minimum of 4 have been reported to police. Heres a good recap of most of the assults:

Occupy Wall Street | Sexual Assault | The Daily Caller

Also a couple more things to add to this list:

An Occupy New Hampshire protester got arrested for trying to pimp out a 16 year old girl to a undercover police officer:

New Hampshire woman, Justina Jensen, tried to pimp Â*out teen she met at Occupy protest: policeÂ* - NY Daily News

And Occupy Madison (Wisconsin) was denied getting their perment reissued do to instances of public masturbation (I guess because theyre no longer willing to be screwed by the banks):

Permit denied for Occupy Madison due to public masturbation - Fayetteville Political Buzz | Examiner.com

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

You don't want to debate. You just want to sit up here, paint these guys as the hippies and that they should just go home so you all can continue business as normal. ... Like I said, you don't want to debate and it's obvious by the remarks many of you have made up here.

First, I have not painted them as hippies - I believe I have been very evenhanded in both my portrayal and understanding of individuals within the movemnt.

Second, I am sorry but it is you who continually cut off debate by ignoring valid points, moving your rhetorical target and assuming you have some moral high ground on all the issues. I am happy to debate the validity of the movement, what it stands for and how it can best accomplish it's goals. You, however, have a disconcerting methodology of disparaging/ignoring facts you don't like or are not supportive of your agenda and of selectively addressing questions with answers that would be disprove your answers to other questions (the whole "govt. suing finance companies as evidence of misdoing but not of govt. action" thing - it wasn't the first time you have used such disengenous arguments and I doubt it will be the last).

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

As long as you continue with this type of "debate" and nonsense, I'm going to continue to be "angry". You are fine with your arguments of "What do they want?", "What are their demands?", "why are they there?". Valid arguments and points. So why bring the other mud slinging into this? To back up the stereotypes you all have so eloquently painted? I'm going to fight fire with fire. It's how I operate. When you stop stereotyping, so will I.

So when confronted with what you believe to be unreasonable arguments, rather than expose the lack of reason through thoughtful logical responses based in fact, you will simply respond with what you know to be equally unreasonable arguments.

"Fight fire with fire"?? When others act unreasonably or speak illogically it is okay to do the same? That's an excellent way to solve the problems facing America - I am sure that responding to what you believe to be name calling with name calling will raise the level of debate and create a political atmosphere conducive to problem solving.

[Alvin Walton]

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

First, I have not painted them as hippies - I believe I have been very evenhanded in both my portrayal and understanding of individuals within the movemnt.

Second, I am sorry but it is you who continually cut off debate by ignoring valid points, moving your rhetorical target and assuming you have some moral high ground on all the issues. I am happy to debate the validity of the movement, what it stands for and how it can best accomplish it's goals. You, however, have a disconcerting methodology of disparaging/ignoring facts you don't like or are not supportive of your agenda and of selectively addressing questions with answers that would be disprove your answers to other questions (the whole "govt. suing finance companies as evidence of misdoing but not of govt. action" thing - it wasn't the first time you have used such disengenous arguments and I doubt it will be the last).



So when confronted with what you believe to be unreasonable arguments, rather than expose the lack of reason through thoughtful logical responses based in fact, you will simply respond with what you know to be equally unreasonable arguments.

"Fight fire with fire"?? When others act unreasonably or speak illogically it is okay to do the same? That's an excellent way to solve the problems facing America - I am sure that responding to what you believe to be name calling with name calling will raise the level of debate and create a political atmosphere conducive to problem solving.

LOL.....he also stated the he would throw gasoline bombs at police if so provoked.

[Slingin Sammy 33]

I wonder if the OWS types considered their effect on local, small businesses, and their workers:

Cafe Owner Says He Was Forced To Cut Staff By Nearly A Fourth Because Of 'Occupy' Protests | Fox News

The OWS folks aren't doing anything to hurt Wall Street, investment bankers, hedge fund managers, or corporate CEOs, but they're destroying this small business and certainly others like it so they can keep up their Woodstock-like, 20-something shenanigans.

[firstdown]

So I'm flipping through the news and saw this guy trying to explain the complex process the Occupy group is going to use to police themself. They have more layers in their process then the federal gov. to kick people out of a park they don't even own or control. I love to see what will happen when they try to kick someone out of a park and the person says its not your park. LOL So for a good laugh I found the link to the interview and what the hell kind of face is the host making?

Occupy Wall Street: Ryan Hoffman on security detail, serving the 'undesirables' - Countdown with Keith Olbermann // Current TV

[Beemnseven]

Peter Schiff vs. Occupiers

(actually a pretty good dialogue...)

[over the mountain]

i think its safe to say most of the criminal and vagrant problems associated with the occupy people are from "street" people hitching their wagon to the movement.

the guy who jacks off at an occupy site is the same guy would be doing it under a bridge or behind a dumpster somewhere else. same for people shooting up, etc . . . imo.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by over the mountain

i think its safe to say most of the criminal and vagrant problems associated with the occupy people are from "street" people hitching their wagon to the movement.

the guy who jacks off at an occupy site is the same guy would be doing it under a bridge or behind a dumpster somewhere else. same for people shooting up, etc . . . imo.

That is the occupy group. Have you not looked at the 99% of the people involved with occupy. Its not like they could have a job and protest 24/7 for months at a time.

[Alvin Walton]

Originally Posted by firstdown

That is the occupy group. Have you not looked at the 99% of the people involved with occupy. Its not like they could have a job and protest 24/7 for months at a time.

FD, dont be such a hippy hater.
Dont you know its easier to sit in a park and complain you don't have a job than to actually go look for one.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

Peter Schiff vs. Occupiers

(actually a pretty good dialogue...)

I'd vote for Peter Schiff if he ran for office. Never thought about student loans as he talked about them and it makes good sense.

[mlmpetert]

Harsh brah....

[mlmpetert]

Originally Posted by firstdown

I'd vote for Peter Schiff if he ran for office. Never thought about student loans as he talked about them and it makes good sense.

Yeah i never thought about student loans in that sense either, definitely makes a good point.

[Lotus]

Several pleas were made above not to stereotype occupy people as a monolith. Yet the stereotypes continue. Sigh.

[JoeRedskin]

Well, mainly by firstdown ... does that really count?

I kid, I kid.