Occupy Wall Street: The Movement Grows

[mudwhistle]

According to Title 18. Chapt 115 of the US Code.....


....I am duty bound to alert the authorities to anyone who is committing treasonous or seditious acts, are fomenting insurrection.


US (United States) Code. Title 18. Chapter 115: Treason, sedition and subversive activities


Dependent upon the seriousness of the offense you can do time for advocating insurrection.

I can get 7 years for not saying anything to a federal judge or the FBI.


So, are you fully intending on committing acts that would be considered treasonous, seditious, or actively engaging in insurrection against the United States????

 

[Dragon]

So, are you fully intending on committing acts that would be considered treasonous, seditious, or actively engaging in insurrection against the United States????

Am I?

You go ahead and report anything you want, Muddy. So far, all I've done is to advocate a constitutional convention to modify the Constitution. If you really think that's "insurrection," you probably need to take that up with the Founding Fathers who wrote that clause into the nation's governing document. Oh, that and express support for the Occupy movement, which if it were considered insurrection would be dealt with quite a lot differently than what we see. Anything I post here is wide open to anyone who wants to read it, and I'm not concerned about any federal authorities taking a look at my published material. I will let it speak for itself, retract nothing, and I am quite certain remain comfortably undisturbed by your nonexistent Gestapo.

Incidentally, you are very much backing up what I'm saying here about YOU. You are not engaged in any kind of serious discourse. Everything you do, including this, is taking no position at all relevant to any topic under discussion.

 

[mudwhistle]

So, are you fully intending on committing acts that would be considered treasonous, seditious, or actively engaging in insurrection against the United States????

Am I?

You go ahead and report anything you want, Muddy. So far, all I've done is to advocate a constitutional convention to modify the Constitution. If you really think that's "insurrection," you probably need to take that up with the Founding Fathers who wrote that clause into the nation's governing document. Oh, that and express support for the Occupy movement, which if it were considered insurrection would be dealt with quite a lot differently than what we see. Anything I post here is wide open to anyone who wants to read it, and I'm not concerned about any federal authorities taking a look at my published material. I will let it speak for itself, retract nothing, and I am quite certain remain comfortably undisturbed by your nonexistent Gestapo.

Incidentally, you are very much backing up what I'm saying here about YOU. You are not engaged in any kind of serious discourse. Everything you do, including this, is taking no position at all relevant to any topic under discussion.

Your published material???

What have you published????

I see you're backtracking now.

Personally I think you're a nut because if you feel I'm not taking a position then you have to be crazy.

 

[Dragon]

Your published material???

What have you published????

Everything I post here, and everything anyone else posts here, is published. I've also published other writings, including the ones in my signature.

I see you're backtracking now.

Nonsense. I'm not backtracking from anything I've actually said, and it's impossible for me to backtrack from anything you said I said that I didn't. Which is really what this discussion is about. You took something I posted, replaced it with your own words which meant something completely different, and threatened to report your own words falsely attributed to me to the authorities. To which I responded, go right ahead.

Nothing I have posted here or published elsewhere is not Constitutionally protected free speech. This is not Nazi Germany -- not yet anyway. So feel free.

Personally I think you're a nut because if you feel I'm not taking a position then you have to be crazy.

The way to counter that is to say, "I've taken the positions A, B, and C you bloody fool, can't you read?"

What you're doing instead is to reinforce what I'm saying: you are taking no positions.

EDIT: And what you absolutely DON'T do, if you don't want to earn yourself complete and unutterable contempt, is make hollow threats to turn people over to the Gestapo if they don't shut up. That was incredibly revealing, Muddy. What an utter toad you are.

 

[mudwhistle]

Your published material???

What have you published????

Everything I post here, and everything anyone else posts here, is published. I've also published other writings, including the ones in my signature.

I see you're backtracking now.

Nonsense. I'm not backtracking from anything I've actually said, and it's impossible for me to backtrack from anything you said I said that I didn't. Which is really what this discussion is about. You took something I posted, replaced it with your own words which meant something completely different, and threatened to report your own words falsely attributed to me to the authorities. To which I responded, go right ahead.

Nothing I have posted here or published elsewhere is not Constitutionally protected free speech. This is not Nazi Germany -- not yet anyway. So feel free.

Personally I think you're a nut because if you feel I'm not taking a position then you have to be crazy.

The way to counter that is to say, "I've taken the positions A, B, and C you bloody fool, can't you read?"

What you're doing instead is to reinforce what I'm saying: you are taking no positions.

Published means you've published works in book or document form.

It has to be something you were paid a fee for.


If what you say is true I've written several novels.

Saying you published materials is pure hyperbole.

And taking a position is saying you support one side over another.

My positions are well known to everyone here.


Basically you're a fool that likes to waste other people's time.

 

[Dragon]

Published means you've published works in book or document form.

It has to be something you were paid a fee for.

Incorrect. Published means nothing more than that the words are put out for others to read on a public venue. It may be paid or unpaid. I've done both. It may be in print or electronic media. I've done both.

If what you say is true I've written several novels.

Might want to stick to fiction, frankly. On second thought, that seems to be what you're doing . . .

And taking a position is saying you support one side over another.

And what exactly are the "sides" on this thread? This thread is about the Occupy movement.

I've seen you post stuff about Obama, which has nothing to do with Occupy. I've seen you post irrelevant fluff that doesn't have anything to do with Occupy. I've seen you post empty rhetoric that had no cognitive meaning at all. And now I've seen you post threats to turn me in to the Gestapo.

You have, so far, said nothing whatever in this thread that is in any way relevant to the thread discussion itself. And that is what I call not taking a position, and using many words to say nothing.

 

[The Gadfly]

My ONLY wish is this:

I WISH the OWS events loomed as large and potentially society altering in the minds of the average American as they so obviously are in the minds of this boards right wingers.

You can smell the fear in their hateful posts.

Are you advocating Change through Fear and Intimidation?

Now don't get your panties all in bunch, Intense.

When I advocate something you won't have to ask if I'm advocating it.

I'm just noting the obvous fear that the OWS movment evokes from this boards right wing trolls.

It reminds me of the same kind of fear and loathing that the left wing trolls so obviously felt when the TPM had the spotlight.

Both these movements terrify the MASTERS.

And that is, I think, a good thing.

They need to wake up and realize that their divide and conquor propaganda techniques that work so well on their easily mislead partisans could be leading to problems that could easily get out of hand.

The masters need to ratchet down the rhetoric despite the fact that both parties know that they'll need to ratchet up the hateful rehetoric in order for the candidates to appeal to the conceits and prejudices of the their most loyal know-nothings.

Both parties need to stop throwing gasoline of the smoldering fires that could lead to civil strife.

Is it a good thing? I doubt that. They have a monopoly on the machinery of state violence, after all, and that is pretty formidable. Therefore, they will ratchet up the rhetoric, and everything else to attempt to win politically; they already KNOW they can win militarily. No one is going to frighten or threaten them out of power. most people know that, and given the choice between the devil they know, and the one they don't will choose the devil they know.

Is it possible civil strife/insurrection could be a potential outcome? Yes. Is it possible, for such an insurrection to succeed? In my opinion, no. If you like, I can lay out a plausible scenario for how such a thing could develop, and what the response would be. Even if such a movement had broad popular support (it does not), and even if it could choose the precise moment to initiate hostilities (that would likely be some spontaneous event), and if it were prepared to sustain those hostilities (it is not), its chances of success would still be slim to none. Inside a week, such a "movement" would find itself fighting an urban battle, in the dark, short on food and water with no hope of resupply, low on ammunition and with little to no communications (no electricity means no internet, among other things).

As for Dragon, and his dreams of a glorious revolution, and his assertion that he would rather face violent death than a continuation of the present, well, he might just as well blow out his own brains and be done with it, rather than be left to bleed to death like a dog in the street (no romance or glory in THAT), or live out his days in a prison cell lamenting "what might have been". That is usually what happens to romantics and "death lovers" in battle, with the unfortunate corollary that they usually take others not so inclined with them in the process.

 

[mudwhistle]

Published means you've published works in book or document form.

It has to be something you were paid a fee for.

Incorrect. Published means nothing more than that the words are put out for others to read on a public venue. It may be paid or unpaid. I've done both. It may be in print or electronic media. I've done both.

If what you say is true I've written several novels.

Might want to stick to fiction, frankly. On second thought, that seems to be what you're doing . . .

And taking a position is saying you support one side over another.

And what exactly are the "sides" on this thread? This thread is about the Occupy movement.

I've seen you post stuff about Obama, which has nothing to do with Occupy. I've seen you post irrelevant fluff that doesn't have anything to do with Occupy. I've seen you post empty rhetoric that had no cognitive meaning at all. And now I've seen you post threats to turn me in to the Gestapo.

You have, so far, said nothing whatever in this thread that is in any way relevant to the thread discussion itself. And that is what I call not taking a position, and using many words to say nothing.

We don't have any Gestapo. That ended in 1945.

The very thing you accuse me of you are guilty of. It's like you're describing yourself, so Pot meet Kettle.

If I had the inclination to talk back and forth with you about issues or just plain shoot the shit I would. But somehow I get the feeling I'm not dealing with someone possessing a full deck.

And if I leave the discussion I'm sure you'll jump up in the air and declare victory. I've already seen you attempt that one....even when you were the butt of a joke and didn't know it. What I'm dealing with here is an adult with a child's mind. Somebody not to be taken seriously. Continuing to talk to you only encourages you.

3 guesses what I'll do next.

 

[Dragon]

As for Dragon, and his dreams of a glorious revolution, and his assertion that he would rather face violent death than a continuation of the present, well, he might just as well blow out his own brains and be done with it, rather than be left to bleed to death like a dog in the street (no romance or glory in THAT), or live out his days in a prison cell lamenting "what might have been". That is usually what happens to romantics and "death lovers" in battle, with the unfortunate corollary that they usually take others not so inclined with them in the process.

I think you are suffering from a paucity of the imagination, Gadfly. You seem unable to envision revolution except in terms of fighting against the U.S. military by an armed militia attempting to overthrow the government by force.

Do you think the machinery for maintaining the status quo in this country is more intimidating than what existed in the Soviet Union, or less? I would say less, wouldn't you? Not because the U.S. military is less formidable than what the USSR had (it's more so), but because the Soviet Union was a despotic state with a secret police and gulags and all that nasty stuff. And yet the Soviet Union was overthrown by its own people, peacefully, with hardly a shot being fired.

The U.S. has an implicit social contract: the people are supposed to be in charge. But the people aren't in charge; elections mean almost nothing because corporations call the shots and buy our elected officials. If that continues, and if there is no other way to change it, then revolution will become possible, not by fighting, not by violence, but simply by the withdrawal of popular support for the government and putting that support behind its replacement, peacefully, without a shot being fired. The military will not stop that, because the military will be among those who are withdrawing their support.

If we have to fight against the military, if we have to resort to violence, we can't succeed. If we can succeed, it will be because there is no longer a military force to fight, because it is on our side.

There may actually be ways of reform short of revolution and, realistically, that's the way to bet. It's what's happened in the past. One very workable possibility would be a constitutional convention to change the Constitution in a way that would resolve the problem and create genuine democracy -- either the radical direct democracy I refer to in my little e-book which you can find by the link in my signature, or, less drastically, a representative democracy purged of the influence of corporate money. I think doing it that way would be better than revolution, not as messy and containing an inherent legitimacy that would avoid post-revolutionary chaos.

But make no mistake, if push comes to shove, and if there is no other way for the people to take the government back from the monied interests that now control it, revolution is possible. If it was possible in the Soviet Union, it's certainly possible here.

 

[mudwhistle]

Are you advocating Change through Fear and Intimidation?

Now don't get your panties all in bunch, Intense.

When I advocate something you won't have to ask if I'm advocating it.

I'm just noting the obvous fear that the OWS movment evokes from this boards right wing trolls.

It reminds me of the same kind of fear and loathing that the left wing trolls so obviously felt when the TPM had the spotlight.

Both these movements terrify the MASTERS.

And that is, I think, a good thing.

They need to wake up and realize that their divide and conquor propaganda techniques that work so well on their easily mislead partisans could be leading to problems that could easily get out of hand.

The masters need to ratchet down the rhetoric despite the fact that both parties know that they'll need to ratchet up the hateful rehetoric in order for the candidates to appeal to the conceits and prejudices of the their most loyal know-nothings.

Both parties need to stop throwing gasoline of the smoldering fires that could lead to civil strife.

Is it a good thing? I doubt that. They have a monopoly on the machinery of state violence, after all, and that is pretty formidable. Therefore, they will ratchet up the rhetoric, and everything else to attempt to win politically; they already KNOW they can win militarily. No one is going to frighten or threaten them out of power. most people know that, and given the choice between the devil they know, and the one they don't will choose the devil they know.

Is it possible civil strife/insurrection could be a potential outcome? Yes. Is it possible, for such an insurrection to succeed? In my opinion, no. If you like, I can lay out a plausible scenario for how such a thing could develop, and what the response would be. Even if such a movement had broad popular support (it does not), and even if it could choose the precise moment to initiate hostilities (that would likely be some spontaneous event), and if it were prepared to sustain those hostilities (it is not), its chances of success would still be slim to none. Inside a week, such a "movement" would find itself fighting an urban battle, in the dark, short on food and water with no hope of resupply, low on ammunition and with little to no communications (no electricity means no internet, among other things).

As for Dragon, and his dreams of a glorious revolution, and his assertion that he would rather face violent death than a continuation of the present, well, he might just as well blow out his own brains and be done with it, rather than be left to bleed to death like a dog in the street (no romance or glory in THAT), or live out his days in a prison cell lamenting "what might have been". That is usually what happens to romantics and "death lovers" in battle, with the unfortunate corollary that they usually take others not so inclined with them in the process.

Anyone can say when they're in a safe place that they will face death.

But when the time comes and they actually are facing it......they usually shit themselves.

 

[Dragon]

We don't have any Gestapo. That ended in 1945.

My point exactly. In that case, I don't have anything to worry about, do I?

Nothing else here that's anything but your usual empty rhetoric and diversion. You have nothing to say. I must admit, though, you do say nothing well. I imagine your novels are probably quite good. Too bad you seem unable to tell the difference between fiction and reality, but hey, that's not necessarily a bad trait in a novelist.

 

[georgephillip]

Why are the crimes of Citigroup and Goldman Sachs unpunished?

Excellent question.

One that both the OWS movement and the Tea Party movement both ought to have been asking.

It is not as if Republicans AND Democrats haven't caused this problem. Bill Clinton and Robert Rubin had no shortage of help from Phil Gramm when it came to repealing Glass-Steagall.

Clinton and Rubin, with many Republican helpers, then compounded the crime with the Commodity Futures Modernization Act in 2000 which completed the groundwork for Wall Street's latest looting of the global economy. (They are coming back for more in Europe as we speak)

I suspect a poll of OWS and Tea Party members would reveal strong support for beginning the Wall Street prosecutions with Clinton, Rubin and Gramm, but we will all grow gray and dead before elected Democrats OR Republicans will alienate their 1% base.

 

[georgephillip]

Why are the crimes of Citigroup and Goldman Sachs unpunished?

Excellent question.

One that both the OWS movement and the Tea Party movement both ought to have been asking.

Just follow the money.

The money leads to the 1%.

Goldman Sachs received more subsidies and bailout related funds than any other investment bank post 2008 largely because the 1% permitted the investment bank to become a bank holding company. GS has used $billion$ of taxpayer funds to reward its elites: $18 billion in bonuses in 2009, $16 billion in 2010 and $10 billion in 2011...

Chris Hedges had this to say before his recent arrest on Wall Street:

"'This massive transfer of wealth upwards by the Bush and Obama administrations, now estimated at $13 trillion to $14 trillion, went into the pockets of those who carried out fraud and criminal activity rather than the victims who lost their jobs, their savings and often their homes...'”

Journalist Chris Hedges arrested at Goldman Sachs protest | The Vancouver Observer

Which side are you on?
OWS or Goldman Sachs?

 

[Intense]

Excellent question.

One that both the OWS movement and the Tea Party movement both ought to have been asking.

Just follow the money.

The money leads to the 1%.

Goldman Sachs received more subsidies and bailout related funds than any other investment bank post 2008 largely because the 1% permitted the investment bank to become a bank holding company. GS has used $billion$ of taxpayer funds to reward its elites: $18 billion in bonuses in 2009, $16 billion in 2010 and $10 billion in 2011...

Chris Hedges had this to say before his recent arrest on Wall Street:

"'This massive transfer of wealth upwards by the Bush and Obama administrations, now estimated at $13 trillion to $14 trillion, went into the pockets of those who carried out fraud and criminal activity rather than the victims who lost their jobs, their savings and often their homes...'”

Journalist Chris Hedges arrested at Goldman Sachs protest | The Vancouver Observer

Which side are you on?
OWS or Goldman Sachs?

Yep, allot of it does, but you are missing the trail. What if your diversion is just another channel to the same end? Take charge of your Life, your Resources, your choices. Get liberated. Join the Free Market of small Enterprise, and take a break from the Bullshit. Imposing on others is not exactly taking a break, just to be clear.

 

[Intense]

So, are you fully intending on committing acts that would be considered treasonous, seditious, or actively engaging in insurrection against the United States????

Am I?

You go ahead and report anything you want, Muddy. So far, all I've done is to advocate a constitutional convention to modify the Constitution. If you really think that's "insurrection," you probably need to take that up with the Founding Fathers who wrote that clause into the nation's governing document. Oh, that and express support for the Occupy movement, which if it were considered insurrection would be dealt with quite a lot differently than what we see. Anything I post here is wide open to anyone who wants to read it, and I'm not concerned about any federal authorities taking a look at my published material. I will let it speak for itself, retract nothing, and I am quite certain remain comfortably undisturbed by your nonexistent Gestapo.

Incidentally, you are very much backing up what I'm saying here about YOU. You are not engaged in any kind of serious discourse. Everything you do, including this, is taking no position at all relevant to any topic under discussion.

all I've done is to advocate a constitutional convention to modify the Constitution.

Is that really all you've done??? If so, no Foul. If you advocate Violence or Destruction, or Riot, that is another matter.

The reason I don't trust a Constitutional Convention is because I Truly believe one of the First Protections to be Abandoned will be Unalienable Rights, The Progressive Puppet Masters will ensure that happens. Speech, Voice, Property, Dissent, anything unsanctioned that does not give Government Ultimate Authority and control over our very being will be on the chopping block and Totalitarianism will win the day. Consider for a moment how scheming Hamilton was. We have yet to correct the damage he has done to the Republic. With the sophistication and High Mindedness today, the damaging effect will be beyond comparison or measure. Constitutional Amendment deals with abuse and Miscarriage of Justice so much more effectively, Issue by Issue, Baby Steps. Move to fast and the Predators will Hi-Jack the Republic.

 

[The Gadfly]

Excellent question.

One that both the OWS movement and the Tea Party movement both ought to have been asking.

Just follow the money.

The money leads to the 1%.

Goldman Sachs received more subsidies and bailout related funds than any other investment bank post 2008 largely because the 1% permitted the investment bank to become a bank holding company. GS has used $billion$ of taxpayer funds to reward its elites: $18 billion in bonuses in 2009, $16 billion in 2010 and $10 billion in 2011...

Chris Hedges had this to say before his recent arrest on Wall Street:

"'This massive transfer of wealth upwards by the Bush and Obama administrations, now estimated at $13 trillion to $14 trillion, went into the pockets of those who carried out fraud and criminal activity rather than the victims who lost their jobs, their savings and often their homes...'”

Journalist Chris Hedges arrested at Goldman Sachs protest | The Vancouver Observer

Which side are you on?
OWS or Goldman Sachs?

NEITHER! I am on the side of the rule of law and the constitution. That means, that whoever you are, you play by the laws and the constitution, and by what they actually say, NOT what you think they ought to say. If you foment, create, or advocate, insurrection and/or civil disorder in this Republic for whatever purpose, I will oppose you! PERIOD!

 

[georgephillip]

Just follow the money.

The money leads to the 1%.

Goldman Sachs received more subsidies and bailout related funds than any other investment bank post 2008 largely because the 1% permitted the investment bank to become a bank holding company. GS has used $billion$ of taxpayer funds to reward its elites: $18 billion in bonuses in 2009, $16 billion in 2010 and $10 billion in 2011...

Chris Hedges had this to say before his recent arrest on Wall Street:

"'This massive transfer of wealth upwards by the Bush and Obama administrations, now estimated at $13 trillion to $14 trillion, went into the pockets of those who carried out fraud and criminal activity rather than the victims who lost their jobs, their savings and often their homes...'”

Journalist Chris Hedges arrested at Goldman Sachs protest | The Vancouver Observer

Which side are you on?
OWS or Goldman Sachs?

Yep, allot of it does, but you are missing the trail. What if your diversion is just another channel to the same end? Take charge of your Life, your Resources, your choices. Get liberated. Join the Free Market of small Enterprise, and take a break from the Bullshit. Imposing on others is not exactly taking a break, just to be clear.

Just to be clear, are you saying Goldman Sachs and other investment banks should not face prosecution for control accounting fraud? Can you answer that simple question without deflection or extraneous capitalization?

 

[editec]

Are you advocating Change through Fear and Intimidation?

Now don't get your panties all in bunch, Intense.

When I advocate something you won't have to ask if I'm advocating it.

I'm just noting the obvous fear that the OWS movment evokes from this boards right wing trolls.

It reminds me of the same kind of fear and loathing that the left wing trolls so obviously felt when the TPM had the spotlight.

Both these movements terrify the MASTERS.

And that is, I think, a good thing.

They need to wake up and realize that their divide and conquor propaganda techniques that work so well on their easily mislead partisans could be leading to problems that could easily get out of hand.

The masters need to ratchet down the rhetoric despite the fact that both parties know that they'll need to ratchet up the hateful rehetoric in order for the candidates to appeal to the conceits and prejudices of the their most loyal know-nothings.

Both parties need to stop throwing gasoline of the smoldering fires that could lead to civil strife.

But who are the masters.......

It sure as shit isn't us.

Wake the fuck up.

Did anything I wrote in the above suggest to you that I thought we were the MASTERS?


Here's a unique thought.

Respond to what is written, not what you imagine I meant to say.

 

[mudwhistle]

Now don't get your panties all in bunch, Intense.

When I advocate something you won't have to ask if I'm advocating it.

I'm just noting the obvous fear that the OWS movment evokes from this boards right wing trolls.

It reminds me of the same kind of fear and loathing that the left wing trolls so obviously felt when the TPM had the spotlight.

Both these movements terrify the MASTERS.

And that is, I think, a good thing.

They need to wake up and realize that their divide and conquor propaganda techniques that work so well on their easily mislead partisans could be leading to problems that could easily get out of hand.

The masters need to ratchet down the rhetoric despite the fact that both parties know that they'll need to ratchet up the hateful rehetoric in order for the candidates to appeal to the conceits and prejudices of the their most loyal know-nothings.

Both parties need to stop throwing gasoline of the smoldering fires that could lead to civil strife.

But who are the masters.......

It sure as shit isn't us.

Wake the fuck up.

Did anything I wrote in the above suggest to you that I thought we were the MASTERS?


Here's a unique thought.

Respond to what is written, not what you imagine I meant to say.

I was responding to what was written.

You just didn't understand my point.

I don't think the GOP is controlling this in any shape or form. There are some who are playing along with the socialists from the left primarily because they themselves are left-leaning socialist running as conservatives. The Masters as you call them are all socialists. If the RINOs were to try to split from them they'd become targets of a smear campaign like Herman Cain. They want Mitt Romney because he plays their game.

The mess going on in Greece is just like the mess Obama brought to America. Socialist countries using Greece as a pawn to play their Wealth Distribution games, sucking cash from their own countries in effect robbing their own people of trillions.

Didn't it look familiar? Didn't it look the same as the mess that hit us when Obama was elected?

You saw what happened to the Greek President when he tried to ask the people what they thought of the bailouts through referendum. They had him go in front of his own government and go through the insult of a confidence vote. He barely squeaked by. Now he's resigning in disgrace. Count that as another one of Obama's government take-downs and add it to Egypt, Libya, and several others. Soon Syria's President will come under the knife. No big loss, but governments are falling all over the place. There are no honest brokers in the world anymore. Obama is trying to bring down renegade governors in America. Wisconsin, Alabama, Arizona, anyone who bucks his plan becomes a focus of protests and lawsuits.

This is the threat we face when you have an irresponsible jerk in our White House. Our Presidents have been holding off the dogs and now Obama is just letting all of this happen. He doesn't give a damn. He figures he's safe. The next GOP president will catch hell going through the massive struggle it will be to clean this mess up, and the press is ready to tie into ass.

 

[georgephillip]

Just follow the money.

The money leads to the 1%.

Goldman Sachs received more subsidies and bailout related funds than any other investment bank post 2008 largely because the 1% permitted the investment bank to become a bank holding company. GS has used $billion$ of taxpayer funds to reward its elites: $18 billion in bonuses in 2009, $16 billion in 2010 and $10 billion in 2011...

Chris Hedges had this to say before his recent arrest on Wall Street:

"'This massive transfer of wealth upwards by the Bush and Obama administrations, now estimated at $13 trillion to $14 trillion, went into the pockets of those who carried out fraud and criminal activity rather than the victims who lost their jobs, their savings and often their homes...'”

Journalist Chris Hedges arrested at Goldman Sachs protest | The Vancouver Observer

Which side are you on?
OWS or Goldman Sachs?

NEITHER! I am on the side of the rule of law and the constitution. That means, that whoever you are, you play by the laws and the constitution, and by what they actually say, NOT what you think they ought to say. If you foment, create, or advocate, insurrection and/or civil disorder in this Republic for whatever purpose, I will oppose you! PERIOD!

Do you oppose this sentiment from a convicted financial criminal?

"We have no respect for the laws.

"We consider your codes of ethics, and your laws, weaknesses to be exploited in the execution of our crimes.

"So the prosecutors, hopefully most prosecutors, are honest if they're playing by the set of the rules; they're hampered by the illegal constraints.

"The white-collar criminal has no legal constraints. You subpoena documents, we destroy documents; you subpoena witnesses, we lie. So you are at a disadvantage when it comes to the white-collared criminal.

"In effect, we're economic predators. We're serial economic predators; we impose a collective harm on society; time is always on our side, not on, not on the side of justice, unfortunately.”

The Wall Street Crime Syndrome: Ten Reasons Why the Banksters "Get Away With It"

Do you believe ethics and laws are weaknesses?

Do the crimes of the 1% qualify as insurrection or civil disorder?

Do the people ever have an obligation to dissolve government and create a new one?