EPTOnce more unto the breach dear friends.
That's it.
Occupy Wall Street - Page 3
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
Perscienter
957 Posts
Once more unto the breach dear friends. That's it. | ||
|
HaRuHi
1220 Posts
Then someone will write a book to make some cash of the event and some talkshows will interview the "revolutioners of the wallstreet" + documention. Oh god, pls let them all get killed brutally! gl guys | ||
|
[UoN]Sentinel
United States11320 Posts
On September 18 2011 10:59 HaRuHi wrote: This potentially restores my faith into mankind. Hope they all get shot by cops or the army, so they really can start to show people how sick the world has become. Probably they gonna get just interviewed and after a few month no one will any longer care about this. Then someone will write a book to make some cash of the event and some talkshows will interview the "revolutioners of the wallstreet" + documention. Oh god, pls let them all get killed brutally! gl guys That made me legitimately laugh out loud, because it's horrible but you're absolutely right. They get news coverage (that's why everyone loves "Cops", who doesn't enjoy police brutality) and now we get thousands of "innocent" martyrs. And start the revolution. | ||
|
yandere991
Australia394 Posts
On September 18 2011 10:44 Perscienter wrote: Let me tell you this: no one knows how the economy works. Economics itself is highly split into different branches, where every Professor can do his job his way. And all other people in an 'economy' are doing their job their way. Once more unto the breach dear friends. That's it. Fine let me rephrase that. A adequate understanding on the basic functions of how the economy operates and how the financial system runs. That's like saying it doesn't matter if a surgeon or a plumber operates because no one understands how the human body works. What I'm basically saying is that I hope they can have a meaningful discussion instead of saying stuff such as "taxing capital gains through the teeth" and "leverage is bad." | ||
|
Cassel_Castle
United States820 Posts
I'd love to go out there with a video camera and see just how informed people really are, shame I'm on the other side of the country (and don't own a video camera). | ||
|
jdseemoreglass
United States3773 Posts
On September 18 2011 10:59 HaRuHi wrote: Hope they all get shot by cops or the army, so they really can start to show people how sick the world has become. The irony is killing me. On September 18 2011 11:12 [UoN]Sentinel wrote: That made me legitimately laugh out loud, because it's horrible but you're absolutely right. They get news coverage (that's why everyone loves "Cops", who doesn't enjoy police brutality) and now we get thousands of "innocent" martyrs. And start the revolution. This "revolution" some of you are idealizing is part of the reason I am so grateful that I don't have any children to grow up in our authoritarian future. Human envy and resentment is becoming far more dangerous than human greed. | ||
|
Bswhunter
Australia954 Posts
If does, I will be impressed. | ||
|
Krehlmar
Sweden1149 Posts
The whole worlds bends to money... I pray for new world order. EDIT: And yes, it'd take more than 300 anon-4chan dead idiots to start a revolution, but it's a hell of a start. | ||
|
Sermokala
United States14042 Posts
| ||
|
Dapper_Cad
United Kingdom964 Posts
Haha yea africa is funny. sadafkl;aa tttht last post... I$% think... I'm asfda sfhaving a stroke... | ||
|
cLutZ
United States19574 Posts
| ||
|
freddievercetti
224 Posts
Heres the reddit link with some more info. http://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/kisqc/any_news_on_the_occupy_wall_streetus_day_of_rage/c2kmm9f | ||
|
MozzarellaL
United States822 Posts
On September 18 2011 08:46 Reborn8u wrote: Only problem I see is that there are over 40,000 police in NYC. A protest where the police outnumber you 2 to 1, this isn't going to end well. Enjoy your night in jail, because they are going to arrest you. See now a days in the U.S. things that are your (according to the constitution) unalienable rights endowed from your creator, require you to get a permit (or permission) from your local government (sounds like an alienation from your right to me), costs a fee, and they are open to decline. Things like protests, gathering (or your right to association and to assemble) and your right to bear arms. They are not going to give you permission to use wall street even if you ask. Sorry, but we have decided to deny your rights today, if you don't obey we will arrest you. See the constitution is a piece of paper, the people with the guns make the rules. Enjoy your protest. Strict Scrutiny. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strict_scrutiny It's existed for quite a while now, and applies to everything regarding Executive or Legislative authority (or lack thereof) to do something. You might want to educate yourself on it, seeing as to how you don't know jack shit about it. In the meantime, you might want to actually read the Constitution, as it doesn't guarantee you any sort of inalienable rights endowed by a 'creator'. You should lay off the LSD. On September 18 2011 09:41 Reborn8u wrote: The constitution clearly states that only congress can declare war, last time that happened was WWII, how many wars have we been in since? The Constitution also clearly states that only the President is the Commander in Chief of all the Armed Forces, yet you completely ignore this when it is convenient for you. Tell me, how does someone command the Armed Forces when the only time he can issue orders to them is when external group of people tell him he can? The supreme court ruled in the 70's that a warrant must be obtained to wire tap, congress over ruled that with the patriot act. Which they don't actually have the power to do, but guess what, they did it anyway. The Supreme Court did not rule in the 70's that a warrant must be obtained in order to wire tap a phone. They addressed the issue earlier, in '67, and they were referring to a public phone booth. But no matter, I'm sure you really do know what you're talking about. It's true, Title 2, § 216 of the Patriot Act drastically expanded the scope that the gov't could 'search' during a wiretap. Of course, you fail to realize the same Title authorized federal district court judges to issue such a warrant in §§ 204, 209, 216, and 219. Could you be referring to the bypass waiver noted in § 217, which allowed the warrantless surveillance of specific computers used in foreign and interstate commerce? I find it hard to imagine this is what you mean, given that the statute specifically notes that the owners of such computers used in foreign and interstate commerce are allowed to voluntarily give that information to federal agencies. Maybe you're referring to the roving wire taps the FBI can do, but these still require a search warrant from a federal judge. Do you even know what you're talking about? My guess is no. Freedom of expression and speech are also in the constitution, but our government censors television, which is also a direct violation of the constitution. Why do you persist in making wild, totally unsubstantiated statements? First Amendment jurisprudence is long, historied, and very easy to understand. You seem content with using the verbatim words of the Constitution when it suits you (like just now), and turning to Supreme Court opinions when the words don't suit you (see above regarding search warrants for a phone tap). The Supreme Court finds your argument "but the First Amendment states X" completely without merit. I'd like to see you argue in front of a federal judge "The First Amendment gives me the right to yell "FUCK ME HARD, RIDE ME LITTLE GIRL" with a loudspeaker in front of an elementary school." You owe me $100 for every second he laughs. Freedom of Speech isn't unlimited like you think it is. And the FCC doesn't censor television like you think it does. You want to see television censorship, go to China. The constitution guarantees you the right to a lawyer and a trial, but if you are labeled an enemy combatant you are denied all of these rights and they've done it to at least one American citizen already. I can only assume you're talking about Mr. Yaser Hamdi, who, by the way, won his case on appeal to the Supreme Court on an 8-1 plurality ruling. Apparently in your psychotic, deranged, and delusional perception of this country, just because it happened in the past means it will continue to happen in the future, despite an SC rulings stating to the contrary, and a Congressional Act which limited such detentions of persons to those involved with the Sept 11 terrorist attacks and none other. Pub.L. 107-40 (http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-107publ40/content-detail.html). By the way, there is no criteria for being labeled an "enemy combatant" our government can give this label to whomever they choose and are not required to disclose a reason. Right. Except there is criteria. An enemy combatant is someone who takes up arms against the armed forces of the USA. And an unlawful one is a combatant associated with a terrorist organization, i.e., specifically not one enlisted in the armed forces of a legitimate government. The definition of a lawful enemy combatant is carved out in the Geneva Convention. By even standards of rudimentary 1st grade logic, that makes illegal enemy combatants everyone else that is an enemy combatant. I totally agree that protests are needed in this country, but they really need a greater number of people to do it. When the Iraq war started we saw one of the biggest anti-war protests in world history, guess what 10 years later our troops are still in Iraq. I agree that you should go take a high school level class in civics. They will probably just arrest them for something ambiguous like "disturbing the peace" I'd imagine. Yup, the NYPD will arrest hundreds of people for 'disturbing the peace'. No, the more likely reason is that they will have failed to comply with NYC's demonstration ordinances. But again the people with the guns (or the people in charge of the people with guns) make the rules, they do what they want, and a 230 year old piece of paper (the US constitution) isn't going to stop them, is it? Actually, it is, and it does. The NYPD, the NYPD Chief, NYC's mayor, NYC itself, they can all be sued for infringing on people's constitutionally protected rights. It's long and protracted, these lawsuits. And there won't be any shortage of attorneys, given the fact that defendants will have to pay attorneys' fees and the case is going to be so very cut and dry. See, the funny thing is, federal court judges are entirely removed from State political trappings (unlike some barbaric States where judges are elected and can be ousted by the State legislator or governor). That's what sets this republican form of government apart from a Nazi form of government, you can sue your government and you can win, and the government has to abide by the rulings of its own appointed independent arbiters. BTW, the protesters may want to bring gas masks, unless they like the smell of tear gas. I realize the topic of Constitutional Rights is a complex one, but its level of complexity is probably far beyond what your middling intellect can handle. User was temp banned for this post. | ||
|
zalz
Netherlands3704 Posts
There is a tiny difference between protesting in one of the most free countries in the world where you have a guarentee no cop is going to even think about shooting you and protesting against a totalitarian regime that's even telling you it's going to shoot you. Have a little class and stop trivializing the middle east protests by linking them to people protesting a vague cause. People can protest all they like and this is certainly a topic that should get more attention but let's keep things in perspective. Not everything needs to be a day of rage this or that just like not every scandal needs to get -gate on the end. | ||
|
SpeaKEaSY
United States1070 Posts
| ||
|
wakefield
United Kingdom114 Posts
This is just the beginnings of an international war, the lower income groups are going to see their incomes going smaller and smaller as their money becomes increasingly worthless. | ||
|
Mobius_1
United Kingdom2763 Posts
So, yes, Wall Street f**ked up, and SEC f**ked up, but there isn't some huge conspiracy to rob Main Street and buy more mansions for Blankfein and Co. Moreover, WS salaries are what they are because they are some of the smartest people in the world and doing some of the craziest hours in the world. (Of course, there's also the issue of crazy leverage making what they earn exceptionally risky, but regulators are onto it, for what it's worth) Such protests only widen the chasm between Wall Street and the rest of the economy, when really they should be cooperating and helping the economy back on track, with a more prudent driver who has learnt lessons from 2008. Finally, it is frustrating to see the (mostly uninformed) public grab their pitchforks so eagerly to "stick it to the man" while not even considering that they have WS to thank for that F-150, that Mustang, that 4 bedroom, that garden, that pool, and last Christmas in Tahiti. And if you want to go protest inequality, go protest at a Rolls-Royce dealership. (I don't even know where the super-rich actually hang out :/) | ||
|
Baarn
United States2702 Posts
| ||
|
darkscream
Canada2310 Posts
On September 18 2011 13:52 MozzarellaL wrote: The Constitution also clearly states that only the President is the Commander in Chief of all the Armed Forces, yet you completely ignore this when it is convenient for you. Tell me, how does someone command the Armed Forces when the only time he can issue orders to them is when external group of people tell him he can? .... I realize the topic of Constitutional Rights is a complex one, but its level of complexity is probably far beyond what your middling intellect can handle. This is like the worst argument I have ever seen on this subject. You clearly have absolutely no idea why the constitution was structured like it is, or why there was ever a separation of powers in the first place. Being commander-in-chief of an army does not grant you the ability to break the law. You might choose to do it because there's nobody powerful enough to stop you, but might does not make right. | ||
|
Kanil
United States1713 Posts
On September 18 2011 17:28 Mobius_1 wrote: ... not even considering that they have WS to thank for that F-150, that Mustang, that 4 bedroom, that garden, that pool, and last Christmas in Tahiti. Normal people have two cars, a four bedroom house, a pool and money to travel abroad? :S | ||
| ||
