# Shouldn't Americans be Occupying Congress rather than Occupy Wallstreet?



## Donald Polish (Apr 5, 2015)

If it is reform from Congress that they want, then why are they in NY and not Washington. In my opinion, an Occupy Congress movement would be a better direction to go in as far as media coverage, and as far as finding the quickest means to an end. Just a thought.
Who does support the idea?


----------



## Pogo (Apr 5, 2015)

Wall Street *owns *Congress.  Why go after the underling?


----------



## Two Thumbs (Apr 5, 2015)

Donald Polish said:


> If it is reform from Congress that they want, then why are they in NY and not Washington. In my opinion, an Occupy Congress movement would be a better direction to go in as far as media coverage, and as far as finding the quickest means to an end. Just a thought.
> Who does support the idea?


they know enough that the dems would turn on them if they tried to expose them for what they are


----------



## Donald Polish (Apr 5, 2015)

Pogo said:


> Wall Street *owns *Congress.  Why go after the underling?


I think _Occupy Congress_ would be more useful than _Occupy Wall Street_.
Occupy Wall Street is a concept. There does not seem to be any specific endgame to the protests. I love the enthusiasm, but would like to see a more organized effort.
The Congressional buildings are public property. Each senator and representative has an office in their district. A peaceful sit-in, a la the 60s, in Congress and Congressional offices would accomplish more then camping in parks and squares across the street from financial offices.
Did you get my idea?


----------



## Agit8r (Apr 5, 2015)

I don't even like giving money to out-of-state candidates.  Politics should be local.


----------



## Delta4Embassy (Apr 6, 2015)

I'm pretty sure the Capitol Police would have a few objections.


----------



## Disir (Apr 7, 2015)

Donald Polish said:


> If it is reform from Congress that they want, then why are they in NY and not Washington. In my opinion, an Occupy Congress movement would be a better direction to go in as far as media coverage, and as far as finding the quickest means to an end. Just a thought.
> Who does support the idea?



The Tea Party.


----------



## Teddy Pollins (Apr 15, 2015)

Technically we should be occupying both.
However, Wall street is occupied now because Congress is pretty much owned and operated by lobbyists and private interest groups, which are mostly on Wall Street.
Any  good initiative must be continued.


----------



## |electric|foxy| (Apr 16, 2015)

Pogo said:


> Wall Street *owns *Congress.


Who owns Wall Street then?


----------



## Iceweasel (Apr 16, 2015)

We do occupy congress. That's how it works in a republic. Just because things aren't going your way doesn't give you the right to over throw the system. If you, like the dumb scrotums in the occupy movement are unhappy, go change things the legitimate way. Anarchy will be put down if it gets out of control. 

Just because they were over tolerant of their nasty asses on Wall Street doesn't mean it will remain so. Like Europe, they will bust out the water canons and clean the street. And I think we are far overdue. Tolerating illegal activity invites more of the same.


----------



## Pogo (Apr 16, 2015)

Iceweasel said:


> Anarchy will be put down if it gets out of control.


----------



## Christophera (Jul 12, 2015)

Pogo said:


> Wall Street owns Congress.  Why go after the underling?





Donald Polish said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > Wall Street owns Congress.  Why go after the underling?
> ...





Delta4Embassy said:


> I'm pretty sure the Capitol Police would have a few objections.




Donald Polish wrote:
"I think Occupy Congress would be more useful than Occupy Wall Street.
Occupy Wall Street is a concept. There does not seem to be any specific endgame to the protests."

Pogo, it should be obvious to you that the public cannot functionally believe what you state.  Also, the media is more obligated to cover protests directed at official entities than they are commercial ones.

Donald, in 2012 myself and a few others tried to get occupy to consider occupying congress and they refused on their message board and on the ground.

It was clear they have an agenda of intentional dysfunctional leadership.  From my direct experience this dysfunction has been cultivated over the last 20 years.

We've all heard of the "dumbing down" where the American educational system was complicit in removing specifics needed to intellectually apprehend covert governmental takeover and redirection.  Well I witnessed a modified version of that I will call "screwing around".

Which is where a hijacked educational system is intentionally infiltrated with young MKultra victims who are conditioned to only be able to recognize socialism.  AND, they practice a form of socialism amongst themselves where their agreement and synonymous action is the only reality.

Remember the indymedia effort following 9/11?  I actually participated in meetings of university students conducting "general assembly" (GA).  I witnessed them ignoring logic and reason in two environments; an email list and meetings; in order to have control.

This was related to the creation of articles of incorporation and bylaws.  They intentionally grouped, defeating their own stated purposes, weakening their organizations mission, in order to control the mission and limit it.  Something they were disabled from understanding.

Their solitary, shared political understandings were those learned at the university embodying socialism.  They deemed the constitutional republic, and the notion of its principles which are mostly parallel to their "humanization" of politics, as opposition.

Occupy did exactly the same thing on their forum and in their "GA".

I clearly witnessed national law enforcement recognize occupy as a signal or a "conditional trigger" to put on rubber gloves when dealing with ANY group of Americans assembling with an appearance of "counter culture".

Occupy was created by money from Soros through adbusters.  I tested adbusters in 2003 to find them wholly non communicative and conducting a sophisticated counter elitist psyops designed to mislead a generation.  Crimethinc was another such that exploited young peoples disadvantage to create a socialistic fantasy of collectivism to join into now appearing in occupy with an illogical obsession with anarchy.

The rabbit hole is deeper than we think, with red and blue pills at every juncture.

I would recommend reading these threads for related comment and strategy.

Five Thousand Traitors US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

Can the American public sue congressmen US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum


----------



## Delta4Embassy (Jul 12, 2015)

The Occupy movement was a waste of time and didn't accomplish anything. A Congressional version too wouldn't achieve anything but a few headlines and news segments. Alas. 

When the substance is excrement, reshaping it into something else doesn't matter. It's still crap. Only a complete abandonment and founding of a new country on the ashes of the old has any hope of fixing what's broken. 

Could replace every elected politician currently in office and still not actually fix anything. It's not the people but the system itself that's FUBAR. When your system permits bribery (campaign donations) replacing one guy with another guy doesn't fix anything. The new guy, no matter how pristine and honorable is still finding themself in a system where corruption is the way things work. If they remain uncorrupt they can't succeed. So to get anything they want, or anything done, they MUST become corrupt because the system itself is corrupt. The system can't work via honesty and integrity.


----------



## Interpol (Jul 12, 2015)

Of course we should Occupy Wall Street. They own Congress. Leave it to our Republican friends to get it all backwards.


----------



## Christophera (Jul 15, 2015)

Delta4Embassy said:


> The Occupy movement was a waste of time and didn't accomplish anything. A Congressional version too wouldn't achieve anything but a few headlines and news segments. Alas.
> 
> When the substance is excrement, reshaping it into something else doesn't matter. It's still crap. Only a complete abandonment and founding of a new country on the ashes of the old has any hope of fixing what's broken.
> 
> Could replace every elected politician currently in office and still not actually fix anything. It's not the people but the system itself that's FUBAR. When your system permits bribery (campaign donations) replacing one guy with another guy doesn't fix anything. The new guy, no matter how pristine and honorable is still finding themself in a system where corruption is the way things work. If they remain uncorrupt they can't succeed. So to get anything they want, or anything done, they MUST become corrupt because the system itself is corrupt. The system can't work via honesty and integrity.


Within the current public appreciation of constitutional intent and social aspect of the political system, all that is true.

When the public becomes aware of the true, primary intentions of the framers relating to rights then control and change over government, that is all different.

Curiously, there is an existing unspoken agreement that is latent in the average American psychology.  That agreement has to do with the sanctity of unalienable rights.  One right that is associated, but not properly associated with those is the right to freedom of speech.

Currently, people do not realize that the ultimate PURPOSE of free speech is to enable the unity needed to alter or abolish government destructive to the unalienable rights they hold in very high esteem.

When the right to have free speech serve its PURPOSE is associated with protecting the the other rights, things will have potential to be quite different than they are now.

For example.

Politicians and officials of state governments must also hold the right to alter or abolish with free speech enabling it as prime.  If they do not, the people of the states are deprived of their right to alter or abolish properly with Article V.  Properly means that all amendments have constitutional intent, and only the people can define that.

So when we define it, things are ready to begin to change

These of course are the unwritten ideals of our social agreement.  But, as long as the basics of the agreement holds these ideals, people are very close to being able to agree in a way meaningful to manifesting the ideals.

Accordingly it is our responsibility as Americans and human beings to supplant the hijacked media and share the awareness of this inherent agreement with the people around us creating a mass that can support those that are able to use this agreement within legal process to eject the politicians you describe and elect new ones that can properly conduct Article V.

The first step is to enlarge the agreement by preparatory amendment which ends the abridging of free speech, secures the vote and reforms campaign finance.  Most Americans want those things done anyway.


----------



## Idadunno (Jul 16, 2015)

Donald Polish said:


> If it is reform from Congress that they want, then why are they in NY and not Washington. In my opinion, an Occupy Congress movement would be a better direction to go in as far as media coverage, and as far as finding the quickest means to an end. Just a thought.
> Who does support the idea?


I kept saying all throughout the OWS thing. They were protesting against the wrong people. Congress allows the bs. That is who those people should have picketed.


----------



## my2¢ (Jul 23, 2015)




----------



## jasonnfree (Jul 27, 2015)

Christophera said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > Wall Street owns Congress.  Why go after the underling?
> ...


 
So the colleges are teaching socialism now?  Glad to hear that.  In an economics class I had in late  60's,  I had a professor tell his philosophy.  "There are two types of people, the screw-ees and the screw-ors". He said he hoped that his  students would be the latter.  This was and still is,  the heart of the republican  party.  The worship of money and profit above all else. 
As far as occupying congress, all it will do is get you arrested.  Almost all of the  politicians listen to the billionaires and corporations today,  with a few exceptions like Elizabeth  Warren and Bernie Sanders.


----------



## WinterBorn (Jul 28, 2015)

If I think a grocery store is doing something illegal or unethical, I don't go after the bagboy or even the store manager.  I go to the store owner.   Wall Street owns Congress.


----------



## Pogo (Jul 30, 2015)




----------



## quorthon (Sep 9, 2015)




----------

