Occupy movement could be damaged by violent clashes

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 28, 2011 3:33 PM GMT
    I wish the Occupy folks a long political life.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/post/occupy-movement-could-be-damaged-by-violent-clashes/2011/10/27/gIQAXXgtMM_blog.html

    New Post polling shows the Occupy Wall Street movement could be a boon for Democrats in 2012. But violent clashes with the police at Occupy Oakland, along with arrests elsewhere, raise questions about how long the movement can last — and whether its message will be muddled by violence.

    As police start ousting protesters, a disparate movement — one that has been embraced by many Democratic politicians and labor organizations — is struggling to respond.

    Protesters in other cities are worried about suddenly finding themselves in a clash with police. And even if the vast majority of protesters are peaceful, violent provocateurs could tarnish the movement’s image in the eyes of the public.

    Just as Democrats tried to tie Republicans to the most extreme tea party activists, the Massachusetts Republican Party is already attacking Democratic Senate candidate Elizabeth Warren as the “Matriarch of Mayhem” for saying she helped create an intellectual foundation for the protests.

    Pollster Stan Greenberg argues that the violent clash in Oakland won’t much change public opinion, pointing out that there was already a large gap between support for the goals of the movement and support for the movement itself, suggesting there’s already “some ambivalence on methods” — an ambivalence that has always existed about civil disobediance, including during the civil-rights movement.

    “My guess is that people are not surprised by these moments. I think it’s factored in” to pre-Oakland public opinion, Greenberg said.

    Most Occupy gatherings have been peaceful, and protesters have developed good working relationships with the police. Most disputes have been over logistical issues like garbage and drumming.

    That peace was disrupted Tuesday night in Oakland, when the city sent riot police to clear protesters out of a public park, saying they could no longer camp there.

    The police fired tear gas and bean-bag shots (and possibly rubber bullets and flash grenades) at protesters to to prevent them from regrouping. Occupiers responded with paint, bottles and rocks. A fence was erected around the area; protesters tore down the fence and re-occupied.

    Other Occupy groups have been disbanded by police. In Atlanta, the mayor ordered the protesters removed in the middle of the night. About 50 were arrested and went peacefully, avoiding a confrontation. But now they have no place to camp.

    AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka stood firmly on the side of the Occupiers, saying that labor leaders “are extremely alarmed by the increasing number of arrests of peaceful protesters across the country and call on elected leaders to stop ordering the police to make these arrests.”

    Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.) echoed Trumka, expressing “outrage and grave concern about the policy brutality.”

    Labor groups in Baltimore — including the police and firefighters’ unions — wrote to the mayor asking him to let the protesters stay.

    But not every Democrat wants to wade into a fight with the police. “I don’t think” the protesters have the right to ‘Occupy’ forever,” said Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) Wednesday. I don’t think people, for example, can sleep in a square for weeks on end. You have to have some order to it.”

    And public pressure has prevented — or at least forestalled — police action in San Francisco, where a planned raid was called off on Thursday night. Protesters have rallied around an Iraq war veteran seriously injured in Oakland, inspiring anger at the police crackdown.

    There has been some anger over the police response — in Oakland, thousands marched through the city after the camp was broken up. Occupy Atlanta says that support has been growing since the arrests.

    Still, future clashes seem inevitable. In New York Wednesday night, protesters marched to Times Square in solidarity. Some broke through a police barricade; about a dozen were arrested. As Occupiers start to wear out their welcome with public officials, they will have to find a way to keep the movement going peacefully.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 28, 2011 3:43 PM GMT
    And then there is the opposite side of that coin.. When our (thats a collective term used for an American citizen, so dont read more into it) ability to voice our opinion and/or gather as a group publicly on publicly owned space is attacked by the 'system' attempting to dissuade or stop it, there is a galvanizing effect. There is some evidence of that happening now. The incident in Oakland is under investigation as possibly being a rogue action by the police.
    There will be a lot more being revealed soon enough.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 28, 2011 4:16 PM GMT
    What is happening in some cities (like Atlanta) is the denial of American citizens basic rights to peacefully assemble. The police in Oakland are a disgrace to their uniforms and I sincerely hope that they are sued and the mayor is pressured to resign.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 28, 2011 4:24 PM GMT
    It seems that any violence that happens seems to be caused by the police. Who do you get to control the police though? Its sad that these peaceful protests are usually disturbed by the police.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 28, 2011 4:34 PM GMT
    Christian73 saidWhat is happening in some cities (like Atlanta) is the denial of American citizens basic rights to peacefully assemble. The police in Oakland are a disgrace to their uniforms and I sincerely hope that they are sued and the mayor is pressured to resign.


    There's a difference between peaceful assembly and taking up permanent shop - public space is not just for the minority of protesters but for everyone. I think the police overreacted but to claim that these have only been peaceful protesters is overstating the point.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 28, 2011 4:41 PM GMT
    O yeah I heard the police is using dirty tactics.... the US really has turned into a righ-wing extremist police state it seems... Ive been hearing about it for years already, but that makes it pretty clear....
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 28, 2011 4:54 PM GMT
    TropicalMark saidAnd then there is the opposite side of that coin.. When our (thats a collective term used for an American citizen, so dont read more into it) ability to voice our opinion and/or gather as a group publicly on publicly owned space is attacked by the 'system' attempting to dissuade or stop it, there is a galvanizing effect. There is some evidence of that happening now. The incident in Oakland is under investigation as possibly being a rogue action by the police.
    There will be a lot more being revealed soon enough.


    Oh please! Peaceful assembly my ass. The people in Oakland were attacking the police, throwing object including glass bottles at them. If that is your definition of peaceful I dont want to see what your definition of violent is. Not to mention that any protest needs to be approved by the city as it can cause public health hazards (like many in OWS, considering they are pissing in the streets in some cases) and can disrupt the flow of traffic (you know, the thing that people who actually have jobs use to get to work). Saying that this is the oppressive government attacking a peaceful protest is just plain wrong, and a lie. But shit flies like you and Christian love lying (without even realizing that they make baby Jesus cry)
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 28, 2011 5:04 PM GMT
    Chainers said
    TropicalMark saidAnd then there is the opposite side of that coin.. When our (thats a collective term used for an American citizen, so dont read more into it) ability to voice our opinion and/or gather as a group publicly on publicly owned space is attacked by the 'system' attempting to dissuade or stop it, there is a galvanizing effect. There is some evidence of that happening now. The incident in Oakland is under investigation as possibly being a rogue action by the police.
    There will be a lot more being revealed soon enough.


    Oh please! Peaceful assembly my ass. The people in Oakland were attacking the police, throwing object including glass bottles at them. If that is your definition of peaceful I dont want to see what your definition of violent is. Not to mention that any protest needs to be approved by the city as it can cause public health hazards (like many in OWS, considering they are pissing in the streets in some cases) and can disrupt the flow of traffic (you know, the thing that people who actually have jobs use to get to work). Saying that this is the oppressive government attacking a peaceful protest is just plain wrong, and a lie. But shit flies like you and Christian love lying (without even realizing that they make baby Jesus cry)


    I went to one of the protests last week and I can assure you that it was very peaceful. Burger King let us use their bathrooms. The police have been provoking violence with the protesters all over the country. The government needs to send people in to watch over the police.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 28, 2011 5:07 PM GMT
    When rocks and bottles are being thrown at the police, they should respond only with kindness and empathy. Isn't that what Huff Post suggested? So it must be true. Will be interesting to see how the polls show people reacting to this.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 28, 2011 5:17 PM GMT
    I'm confused, this seems to say that the police started the violence by interrupting the peaceful protest with tear gas and bean-bag shots to clear them out.

    "That peace was disrupted Tuesday night in Oakland, when the city sent riot police to clear protesters out of a public park, saying they could no longer camp there.

    The police fired tear gas and bean-bag shots (and possibly rubber bullets and flash grenades) at protesters to to prevent them from regrouping. Occupiers responded with paint, bottles and rocks. A fence was erected around the area; protesters tore down the fence and re-occupied."



    socalfitness saidWhen rocks and bottles are being thrown at the police, they should respond only with kindness and empathy. Isn't that what Huff Post suggested? So it must be true. Will be interesting to see how the polls show people reacting to this.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 28, 2011 5:19 PM GMT
    creyente saidI'm confused, this seems to say that the police started the violence by interrupting the peaceful protest with tear gas and bean-bag shots to clear them out.

    "That peace was disrupted Tuesday night in Oakland, when the city sent riot police to clear protesters out of a public park, saying they could no longer camp there.

    The police fired tear gas and bean-bag shots (and possibly rubber bullets and flash grenades) at protesters to to prevent them from regrouping. Occupiers responded with paint, bottles and rocks. A fence was erected around the area; protesters tore down the fence and re-occupied."



    socalfitness saidWhen rocks and bottles are being thrown at the police, they should respond only with kindness and empathy. Isn't that what Huff Post suggested? So it must be true. Will be interesting to see how the polls show people reacting to this.


    The protesters are exercising their first amendment rights. They had a right to be in the park. The police came in and started riots and protesters were acting in self defense. Shame on the police, shame on them.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 28, 2011 5:35 PM GMT
    riddler78 said
    Christian73 saidWhat is happening in some cities (like Atlanta) is the denial of American citizens basic rights to peacefully assemble. The police in Oakland are a disgrace to their uniforms and I sincerely hope that they are sued and the mayor is pressured to resign.


    There's a difference between peaceful assembly and taking up permanent shop - public space is not just for the minority of protesters but for everyone. I think the police overreacted but to claim that these have only been peaceful protesters is overstating the point.


    They have been overwhelmingly peaceful and most violence has been instigated by the police.

    And the Constitution doesn't say you can peacefully assemble when it's convenient for others or for a limited amount of time. It's an inherent right that cannot be restricted.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 28, 2011 5:40 PM GMT
    Christian73 said
    riddler78 said
    Christian73 saidWhat is happening in some cities (like Atlanta) is the denial of American citizens basic rights to peacefully assemble. The police in Oakland are a disgrace to their uniforms and I sincerely hope that they are sued and the mayor is pressured to resign.


    There's a difference between peaceful assembly and taking up permanent shop - public space is not just for the minority of protesters but for everyone. I think the police overreacted but to claim that these have only been peaceful protesters is overstating the point.


    They have been overwhelmingly peaceful and most violence has been instigated by the police.

    And the Constitution doesn't say you can peacefully assemble when it's convenient for others or for a limited amount of time. It's an inherent right that cannot be restricted.

    Not a question of it being convenient for others, it is a matter of the rights of others to have access to public places or have a way to transit. Rights have practical limits, just as screaming "fire" in a theater is not protected by the Constitution.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 28, 2011 5:42 PM GMT
    creyente saidI'm confused, this seems to say that the police started the violence by interrupting the peaceful protest with tear gas and bean-bag shots to clear them out.

    "That peace was disrupted Tuesday night in Oakland, when the city sent riot police to clear protesters out of a public park, saying they could no longer camp there.

    The police fired tear gas and bean-bag shots (and possibly rubber bullets and flash grenades) at protesters to to prevent them from regrouping. Occupiers responded with paint, bottles and rocks. A fence was erected around the area; protesters tore down the fence and re-occupied."



    socalfitness saidWhen rocks and bottles are being thrown at the police, they should respond only with kindness and empathy. Isn't that what Huff Post suggested? So it must be true. Will be interesting to see how the polls show people reacting to this.

    If they chose to question police tactics, there are legal ways to do this, and throwing rocks and bottles don't happen to be one of them.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 28, 2011 5:44 PM GMT
    socalfitness said
    Christian73 said
    riddler78 said
    Christian73 saidWhat is happening in some cities (like Atlanta) is the denial of American citizens basic rights to peacefully assemble. The police in Oakland are a disgrace to their uniforms and I sincerely hope that they are sued and the mayor is pressured to resign.


    There's a difference between peaceful assembly and taking up permanent shop - public space is not just for the minority of protesters but for everyone. I think the police overreacted but to claim that these have only been peaceful protesters is overstating the point.


    They have been overwhelmingly peaceful and most violence has been instigated by the police.

    And the Constitution doesn't say you can peacefully assemble when it's convenient for others or for a limited amount of time. It's an inherent right that cannot be restricted.

    Not a question of it being convenient for others, it is a matter of the rights of others to have access to public places or have a way to transit. Rights have practical limits, just as screaming "fire" in a theater is not protected by the Constitution.


    And those rights are a) not being denied others and b) there is no right to relax in public park in the Constitution. The right to petition the gov't for redress of grievances trumps anyone who wants feed the pigeons or not be inconvenienced by having to cross the street or walk around the corner to get to their destination.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 28, 2011 5:53 PM GMT
    Christian73 said
    socalfitness said
    Christian73 said
    riddler78 said
    Christian73 saidWhat is happening in some cities (like Atlanta) is the denial of American citizens basic rights to peacefully assemble. The police in Oakland are a disgrace to their uniforms and I sincerely hope that they are sued and the mayor is pressured to resign.


    There's a difference between peaceful assembly and taking up permanent shop - public space is not just for the minority of protesters but for everyone. I think the police overreacted but to claim that these have only been peaceful protesters is overstating the point.


    They have been overwhelmingly peaceful and most violence has been instigated by the police.

    And the Constitution doesn't say you can peacefully assemble when it's convenient for others or for a limited amount of time. It's an inherent right that cannot be restricted.

    Not a question of it being convenient for others, it is a matter of the rights of others to have access to public places or have a way to transit. Rights have practical limits, just as screaming "fire" in a theater is not protected by the Constitution.

    And those rights are a) not being denied others and b) there is no right to relax in public park in the Constitution. The right to petition the gov't for redress of grievances trumps anyone who wants feed the pigeons or not be inconvenienced by having to cross the street or walk around the corner to get to their destination.

    Protestors have by their presence denied access of others to transit. Taken to extreme, you would suggest no municipalities have the right to restrict any access at all. In other words, no sleeping on beaches or in public parks, laws in many areas would be unconstitutional. If a bunch of us wanted to bring tents and set up permanent residence on the beach, my town shouldn't be able to prevent it? Assembly with no constraints doesn't exist.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 28, 2011 6:42 PM GMT
    It would seem this logic should apply to the police as well. I do not believe they have the right to use this level of force in this situation.

    Certainly they would be able to arrest people if they felt they were doing something illegal, but to initiate a riot by using weapons against a whole crowd is extreme in this particular instance.


    socalfitness said
    creyente saidI'm confused, this seems to say that the police started the violence by interrupting the peaceful protest with tear gas and bean-bag shots to clear them out.

    "That peace was disrupted Tuesday night in Oakland, when the city sent riot police to clear protesters out of a public park, saying they could no longer camp there.

    The police fired tear gas and bean-bag shots (and possibly rubber bullets and flash grenades) at protesters to to prevent them from regrouping. Occupiers responded with paint, bottles and rocks. A fence was erected around the area; protesters tore down the fence and re-occupied."



    socalfitness saidWhen rocks and bottles are being thrown at the police, they should respond only with kindness and empathy. Isn't that what Huff Post suggested? So it must be true. Will be interesting to see how the polls show people reacting to this.

    If they chose to question police tactics, there are legal ways to do this, and throwing rocks and bottles don't happen to be one of them.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 28, 2011 6:48 PM GMT
    creyente saidIt would seem this logic should apply to the police as well. I do not believe they have the right to use this level of force in this situation.

    Certainly they would be able to arrest people if they felt they were doing something illegal, but to initiate a riot by using weapons is extreme in this particular instance.


    socalfitness said
    creyente saidI'm confused, this seems to say that the police started the violence by interrupting the peaceful protest with tear gas and bean-bag shots to clear them out.

    "That peace was disrupted Tuesday night in Oakland, when the city sent riot police to clear protesters out of a public park, saying they could no longer camp there.

    The police fired tear gas and bean-bag shots (and possibly rubber bullets and flash grenades) at protesters to to prevent them from regrouping. Occupiers responded with paint, bottles and rocks. A fence was erected around the area; protesters tore down the fence and re-occupied."



    socalfitness saidWhen rocks and bottles are being thrown at the police, they should respond only with kindness and empathy. Isn't that what Huff Post suggested? So it must be true. Will be interesting to see how the polls show people reacting to this.

    If they chose to question police tactics, there are legal ways to do this, and throwing rocks and bottles don't happen to be one of them.


    They didnt initiate a riot dude, the protestors are the ones squatting in public spots that tax payers pay for (ironically in which they dont) and disrupting the public. Protest is different from a bunch of loser hippies with no job bitching and moaning about the world. They can be the change they want to see, and no one wants to see a bunch of people depending on the country to survive. That is how Rome fell btw, more people depended on Rome to live than they contributed.

    Remember, it is not what my country can do for me, but what can I do for my country.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 28, 2011 7:24 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    Christian73 said

    And the Constitution doesn't say you can peacefully assemble when it's convenient for others or for a limited amount of time. It's an inherent right that cannot be restricted.


    Erecting living quarters in a public space is not "peaceful assembly."



    According to whom? I know you like "interpret" the Constitution to suit your ideology but it's not up to you to decide.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 28, 2011 7:32 PM GMT
    Christian73 said
    southbeach1500 said
    Christian73 said

    And the Constitution doesn't say you can peacefully assemble when it's convenient for others or for a limited amount of time. It's an inherent right that cannot be restricted.


    Erecting living quarters in a public space is not "peaceful assembly."



    According to whom? I know you like "interpret" the Constitution to suit your ideology but it's not up to you to decide.


    According to squatting laws. Its not a protest, they are breaking laws, you cant set up tents in public space and say it is a protest when really they are homeless. Their are decent people walking those street, good hard working tax paying people (who ironically pay to keep the space clean) who cant get to work because of these damn protesters.
  • GQjock

    Posts: 11649

    Oct 28, 2011 7:43 PM GMT
    Seems to me that the right's consternation is more wishful thinking than anything else........

    Oaklands police chief should NEVER have used force like he did on Tuesday
    And unless he comes up with a literal smoking gun his job is in serious jeopardy
    You don't use force like that against people who were not using force against you
    This is only going to cement even more sympathy for the Wall streeters
    Whose positive poll numbers are only growing

    But OOOOOOOOOH that burns a righties ass now doesn't it? LOL
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 28, 2011 7:44 PM GMT
    Chainers said
    creyente saidIt would seem this logic should apply to the police as well. I do not believe they have the right to use this level of force in this situation.

    Certainly they would be able to arrest people if they felt they were doing something illegal, but to initiate a riot by using weapons is extreme in this particular instance.


    socalfitness said
    creyente saidI'm confused, this seems to say that the police started the violence by interrupting the peaceful protest with tear gas and bean-bag shots to clear them out.

    "That peace was disrupted Tuesday night in Oakland, when the city sent riot police to clear protesters out of a public park, saying they could no longer camp there.

    The police fired tear gas and bean-bag shots (and possibly rubber bullets and flash grenades) at protesters to to prevent them from regrouping. Occupiers responded with paint, bottles and rocks. A fence was erected around the area; protesters tore down the fence and re-occupied."



    socalfitness saidWhen rocks and bottles are being thrown at the police, they should respond only with kindness and empathy. Isn't that what Huff Post suggested? So it must be true. Will be interesting to see how the polls show people reacting to this.

    If they chose to question police tactics, there are legal ways to do this, and throwing rocks and bottles don't happen to be one of them.


    They didnt initiate a riot dude, the protestors are the ones squatting in public spots that tax payers pay for (ironically in which they dont) and disrupting the public. Protest is different from a bunch of loser hippies with no job bitching and moaning about the world. They can be the change they want to see, and no one wants to see a bunch of people depending on the country to survive. That is how Rome fell btw, more people depended on Rome to live than they contributed.

    Remember, it is not what my country can do for me, but what can I do for my country.
    Well then do THIS for your country.. Do a little investigation on Mr Olsen.. Tell us all that Former US Marine Olsen is a "loser hippie with no job".
    I dare you............................................................................ C'mon, put your money where your cranial ass is.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 28, 2011 7:44 PM GMT
    GQjock saidSeems to me that the right's consternation is more wishful thinking than anything else........

    Oaklands police chief should NEVER have used force like he did on Tuesday
    And unless he comes up with a literal smoking gun his job is in serious jeopardy
    You don't use force like that against people who were not using force against you
    This is only going to cement even more sympathy for the Wall streeters
    Whose positive poll numbers are only growing

    But OOOOOOOOOH that burns a righties ass now doesn't it? LOL


    Arent their reports of the protesters using force by throwing blunt object and glass bottles at the police first? Yea, I guess in a liberal commie world that is not using force right?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 28, 2011 7:51 PM GMT
    No one was injured during the Tuesday morning raid, Interim Oakland Police Chief Howard Jordan said. The plaza was "contained" at around 5:30 a.m., city officials said.

    Btw, this source happens to be FOX.
    http://nation.foxnews.com/occupy-wall-street/2011/10/26/occupy-wall-street-gets-violent-oakland

    Protest
    Raid

    Hmmmmmm, two different words, two different actions, one deadly outcome.
  • GQjock

    Posts: 11649

    Oct 28, 2011 8:12 PM GMT
    Chainers said
    GQjock saidSeems to me that the right's consternation is more wishful thinking than anything else........

    Oaklands police chief should NEVER have used force like he did on Tuesday
    And unless he comes up with a literal smoking gun his job is in serious jeopardy
    You don't use force like that against people who were not using force against you
    This is only going to cement even more sympathy for the Wall streeters
    Whose positive poll numbers are only growing

    But OOOOOOOOOH that burns a righties ass now doesn't it? LOL


    Arent their reports of the protesters using force by throwing blunt object and glass bottles at the police first? Yea, I guess in a liberal commie world that is not using force right?


    Dude those policemen came in full riot gear
    You don't show up to a party with a condom unless you're intention is to Fuck somebody..... Correct?