Calling all keyboard protestors, ranter and ravers

I disagree with this guy's analysis. First of all he behaves as if the all the members of Occupy are of one mind, that they all have a unified idea of what needs to take place, they are not all socialist and they certainly are not all against capitalism. They are asking for social responsibility, fiscal responsibility and a return to the rule of law. Second he assumes that this is a movement of hippie students alone and I have been talking to middle and upper middle class working adults, members of various unions and academics. Third the members of occupy do know that everything that is operating is operating as one state but here's the thing, when Argentina (Varda may know a little about this), was being fucked every which way by all of their government leaders and institutions who had co-opted with the international bankers and corporations, their nation was in debt and then the IMF came in and fucked them a little harder, it was precisely non-violent civil disobedience that brought the government down. I mean you had every man, woman and child out in the streets confronting the uniformed men with guns. What worked? Implementing regulation, unhinging themselves from the dollar, telling the IMF to go to hell and nationalizing their assets and putting the money back into society. This guy seems to think that the same people whom he says shouldn't ask the government for anything because the government is the problem then turns around and suggests that the protestors try and get the government to relate to them peacefully (as if the state would abide by that desire and not others). He is also confused, he says that corporations are there to make money, this is true but that doesn't mean corporations cannot make money and contribute to the common good, Apple Inc being a prime example. They make money through their innovations and they don't underpay their employees and they try and they are open about their carbon footprint etc. Not all business and not all banks engage in fraud. He claims corporations don't engage in war but they do, they did in Argentina and its what Max Keiser calls economic terrorism, its just as brutal as dropping a bomb on a nation. As far as Occupy goes there are many who speak of local economies and turn their backs on state solutions all together. He's advocating understanding the problem but if you really talk to people in Occupy there are varying degrees of understanding and education. He seems to think that if everyone stayed home and 'studied' the cause of the problem that the problem will magically fix itself, this is evident in that he blasts all solution but cannot offer one. He also uses a reductive argument that we 'choose' things everyday, which is only partly true. The poor cannot choose what they want to eat, what jobs they can have or where they can live. The desire to not have one system to rule the group is exactly how Occupy is organized.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I believe they are protesting the lack of regulation and lack of taxation of the rich and corporations. The government representatives are not doing enough to reign in the worst aspects of capitalism because they are bought.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Exactamundo. There are other things too but that's the gist of it.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Very insightful. I agree with most of this analysis, though I am not sure I am in complete agreement with the virtues of the Apple corp. lol When I posted that interview, I posted it as critique of the movement as a whole, and why it won't achieve it's aims, what it is lacking. For instance, they are protesting in the wrong place. They should be protesting in Washington or at the Federal Reserve. The corporations on wall street after all, did do nothing technically wrong, they followed the law. I watched one of these videos when it was posted, I forget which one now. . .
WALL STREET EXECUTIVES DRINKING CHAMPAGNE DURING OCCUPY WALL STREET PROTEST

In some of the exchanges on this video, I noticed the frustration. Some were wondering why they just didn't shoot those rich people drinking and laughing at the protesters. Others wondered why that building wasn't lit on fire. Why were these elites laughing and enjoying the protest? Because they had nothing to fear. They followed the law to get rich. And were still following it. Why? Because they helped make it. And they know that these poor folk down on the street aren't going to change anything by protesting. They control the media, so few people that are affected by their control of the system are going to know about what is going on there.

Now this guy Stefan has a lot of good critiques as to why this thing will not grow or be effective. Namely, a lack of leadership articulating what exactly is wrong with the system that can generate a true understanding and mobilize a mass movement. With out that, why will people show up to protest if they don't think a protest will make any difference. What does the protest hope to achieve? Who is going to come join the protest w/o that understanding? At least with the civil rights protests? That was made clear. With the Arab Spring protests, that was made clear. Here? Nope, we just don't know what we want.

But I am a bit suspicious of Stefan. He has clear links to the Mises Institute, which I tend to be suspicious of, like any other ideological map for societal control.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

As such, he has in common, a philosophical bent which could be categorized as being kin to that of a Ron Paul. Mises is a big Ron Paul supporter. I find it odd that many of the items and philosophical agenda that these protestors are venting are along the same lines which Ron Paul is actively campaigning on. How many more poor disenfranchised people could show up to these locations, if he just took half a million from his campaign chests, bused in a bunch of people, and talked to their concerns. You know, told the WHY none of the rules and regulations on wall street where changed after the 2008 melt down. Tell them how the corruption continues no matter what party is in office. But I think there is something more going on here. . . .

I have followed Stephan's video's a long time, and personally, I would have thought that he would have come out in favor of these protests, yet with a critical eye towards what they need to be successful. Currently, I am on the fence. My heart is with the protesters, but what I see in the alternative news sources is an anemic movement that has no coherent strategy, one that is just barely struggling to keep momentum alive. My hope is that by Octobers end, when the budget is in crunch time, there will be mandatory cuts, and there will be tax increases, but most likely on the middle class. At this point we may see some growth in the protests. But hopefully by then there will be a strategy, the people will be educated and know how this was done to them, and we will not just hear the mantra of "This is unfair."

SO? What do the people propose to do about it?

 

@Eso

First you are making a lot of assumptions on a movement you clearly haven't really investigated.

First there is a march on Washington October 6th I believe and there are those who are staging events at the Federal Reserve, the point is for Occupy to spread to other cities. Wall street location is symbolic, it also provides them the space. The Fed building isn't that far from their location anyway, neither is Goldman Sachs for that matter except they don't even have name on their building. They have daily activities, such as occupying media networks etc. You really have to go to one of the general assemblies and start talking to people there to really know what is going on.

I disagree that they didn't do anything wrong. Here's what they did wrong or rather here is where the fraud lies:

"Most discussion of the role of fraud in the crisis has focused on two forms of deception: predatory lending and misrepresentation of risks. Clearly, some borrowers were lured into taking out complex, expensive loans they didn’t understand — a process facilitated by Bush-era federal regulators, who both failed to curb abusive lending and prevented states from taking action on their own. And for the most part, subprime lenders didn’t hold on to the loans they made. Instead, they sold off the loans to investors, in some cases surely knowing that the potential for future losses was greater than the people buying those loans (or securities backed by the loans) realized.What we’re now seeing are accusations of a third form of fraud."

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/19/opinion/19krugman.html


There were also other abuses:

Paul Krugman waltzed into the foreclosure fraud settlement today, with a column that even John McCain found himself agreeing with. That’s because it criticizes the Obama Administration for letting the banks get off easy in the aftermath of the financial crisis, and in preparing to offer a settlement on foreclosure fraud that amounts to a slap on the wrist:
The failure to seek real mortgage relief early in the Obama administration is one reason we still have 9 percent unemployment. And right now, the arguments that officials are reportedly making for a quick, bank-friendly settlement of the mortgage-abuse scandal don’t make sense. The claim that removing the legal cloud over foreclosure would help the housing market — in particular, that it would help support housing prices — leaves me scratching my head. It would just accelerate foreclosures, and if more families were evicted from their homes, that would mean more homes offered for sale — an increase in supply. An increase in the supply of a good usually pushes that good’s price down, not up. Why should the effect on housing go the opposite way? [...]

What about the argument that getting tough with the banks would threaten the overall economy? Here the question is: What’s holding the economy back?

It’s not the state of the banks. It’s true that fears about bank solvency disrupted financial markets in late 2008 and early 2009. But those markets have long since returned to normal, in large part because everyone now knows that banks will be bailed out if they get in trouble.
The big drag on the economy now is the overhang of household debt, largely created by the $5.6 trillion in mortgage debt that households took on during the bubble years. Serious mortgage relief could make a dent in that problem; a $30 billion settlement from the banks, even if it proved more effective than the government’s modification program, would not.

http://news.firedoglake.com/2011/07...lk-without-a-foreclosure-fraud-investigation/

I agree with Chris Hedges that a violent response is exactly what the powers that be would enjoy. They don't know what to do with a public that uses peaceful disobedience, they definitely know what to do if the public get's violent which would be to shut down the whole group. We do have the National Lawyer's Guild who have come out and offered their services to the group. So for example that's who I would call if I were arrested, they do the work pro bono. The only time violence works as a tactic is when you have the whole of society reacting that way, meaning not just a few hundred people but thousands of people, that's when it becomes a bloody coup. But if that happened then it wouldn't be a few execs drinking champagne it would be the White House administration having to escape via helicopter or get eaten alive by the hoi polio. I

Also Occupy is growing, its in San Francisco, Unions have joined and its sprouting up in other cities, Not bad for a movement that only began 3 weeks ago. The problem with stating what is wrong with Occupy is that no one else is offering any other form of action. To stay home and do nothing and then criticize those who are isn't really very effective, because they are actually doing more than pontificating from their couches. There is no head for a reason, its modeled on organizations such as Anonymous and the Wobblies, if he you have a head then it can be cut off, if you don't have a head then there is no one person to attack and there is no one person whom the whole group relies upon. I don't know about the group not getting any traction, there is an occupy asia and its popped up in Europe and when 700 protestors from Occupy were arrested at the brooklyn bridge it made Al Jazeera's top story. The great thing about media these days is that not everyone is dependent on main stream news. I know a lot of people who watch Democracy Now and Truthdig and look to other media sources. The whole point is to get people to be pro-active and not dependent on orders from above. They don't need to have one packaged ideological system nor do they need leadership, they've had marches and this whole thing was organized without any leadership. Everyone has their role and everyone does their part, you don't need leadership to know to set up a labor committee or a civil disobedience committee or run a general assembly meeting or set up a PR committee all of these things are being done without any 'leader'. There is not one thing wrong with the system, there are a whole lot of things wrong with the system and every time its addressed the list grows longer and longer. What was wrong with the system in Argentina or Greece? It would probably be easier to list what wasn't wrong. Because there is so much wrong, the general idea that deregulation, bailouts and the reigning in of the financial sector and the lobbyists who buy our politicians is a great place to start.

The beauty of Occupy is that it doesn't exclude any particular group, if it focused solely on jobs then you wouldn't have room for the Green people, or those who are concerned about other issues. All the problems we see today are inter-connected and a large group of people are being affected. Occupy welcomes them all. The larger the movement grows the more solutions available.

If you want to know what the protestors hope to achieve you have to go to the website Occupywallst.org. Go check out the forum and read their list of demands: http://occupywallst.org/forum/

LIST OF PROPOSED "DEMANDS FOR CONGRESS"

1. CONGRESS PASS HR 1489 ("RETURN TO PRUDENT BANKING ACT" http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h112-1489 ). THIS REINSTATES MANY PROVISIONS OF THE GLASS-STEAGALL ACT. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass–Steagall_Act --- Wiki entry summary: The repeal of provisions of the Glass–Steagall Act of 1933 by the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act in 1999 effectively removed the separation that previously existed between investment banking which issued securities and commercial banks which accepted deposits. The deregulation also removed conflict of interest prohibitions between investment bankers serving as officers of commercial banks. Most economists believe this repeal directly contributed to the severity of the Financial crisis of 2007–2011 by allowing Wall Street investment banking firms to gamble with their depositors' money that was held in commercial banks owned or created by the investment firms. Here's detail on repeal in 1999 and how it happened: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass–Steagall_Act#Repeal . 


2. USE CONGRESSIONAL AUTHORITY AND OVERSIGHT TO ENSURE APPROPRIATE FEDERAL AGENCIES FULLY INVESTIGATE AND PROSECUTE THE WALL STREET CRIMINALS who
clearly broke the law and helped cause the 2008 financial crisis in the following notable cases: (insert list of the most clear cut criminal actions). There is a pretty broad consensus that there is a clear group of people who got away with millions / billions illegally and haven't been brought to justice. Boy would this be long overdue and cathartic for millions of Americans. It would also be a shot across the bow for the financial industry. If you watch the solidly researched and awared winning documentary film "Inside Job" that was narrated by Matt Damon (pretty brave Matt!) and do other research, it wouldn't take long to develop the list.

3. CONGRESS ENACT LEGISLATION TO PROTECT OUR DEMOCRACY BY REVERSING THE EFFECTS OF THE CITIZENS UNITED SUPREME COURT DECISION which essentially said corporations can spend as much as they want on elections. The result is that corporations can pretty much buy elections. Corporations should be highly limited in ability to contribute to political campaigns no matter what the election and no matter what the form of media. This legislation should also RE-ESTABLISH THE PUBLIC AIRWAVES IN THE U.S. SO THAT POLITICAL CANDIDATES ARE GIVEN EQUAL TIME FOR FREE AT REASONABLE INTERVALS IN DAILY PROGRAMMING DURING CAMPAIGN SEASON. The same should extend to other media.

4. CONGRESS PASS THE BUFFETT RULE ON FAIR TAXATION SO THE RICH AND CORPORATIONS PAY THEIR FAIR SHARE & CLOSE CORPORATE TAX LOOP HOLES AND ENACT A PROHIBITION ON HIDING FUNDS OFF SHORE. No more GE paying zero or negative taxes. Pass the Buffet Rule on fair taxation so the rich pay their fair share. (If we have a really had a good negotiating position and have the place surrounded, we could actually dial up taxes on millionaires, billionaires and corporations even higher...back to what they once were in the 50's and 60's.

5. CONGRESS COMPLETELY REVAMP THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION and staff it at all levels with proven professionals who get the job done protecting the integrity of the marketplace so citizens and investors are both protected. This agency needs a large staff and needs to be well-funded. It's currently has a joke of a budget and is run by Wall St. insiders who often leave for high ticket cushy jobs with the corporations they were just regulating. Hmmm.

6. CONGRESS PASS SPECIFIC AND EFFECTIVE LAWS LIMITING THE INFLUENCE OF LOBBYISTS AND ELIMINATING THE PRACTICE OF LOBBYISTS WRITING LEGISLATION THAT ENDS UP ON THE FLOOR OF CONGRESS.

7. CONGRESS PASSING "Revolving Door Legislation" LEGISLATION ELIMINATING THE ABILITY OF FORMER GOVERNMENT REGULATORS GOING TO WORK FOR CORPORATIONS THAT THEY ONCE REGULATED. So, you don't get to work at the FDA for five years playing softball with Pfizer and then go to work for Pfizer making $195,000 a year. While they're at it, Congress should pass specific and effective laws to enforce strict judicial standards of conduct in matters concerning conflicts of interest. So long as judges are culled from the ranks of corporate attorneys the 1% will retain control.

8. ELIMINATE "PERSONHOOD" LEGAL STATUS FOR CORPORATIONS. The film "The Corporation" has a great section on how corporations won "personhood status". http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8SuUzmqBewg . Fast-forward to 2:20. It'll blow your mind. The 14th amendment was supposed to give equal rights to African Americans. It said you "can't deprive a person of life, liberty or property without due process of law". Corporation lawyers wanted corporations to have more power so they basically said "corporations are people." Amazingly, between 1890 and 1910 there were 307 cases brought before the court under the 14th amendment. 288 of these brought by corporations and only 19 by African Americans. 600,000 people were killed to get rights for people and then judges applied those rights to capital and property while stripping them from people. It's time to set this straight.

http://occupywallst.org/forum/proposed-list-of-demands-please-help-editadd-so-th/

 

Admittedly, you are more knowledgeable about this than I. However, I must point out, that Stephan was right. You posted the Occupy demands, and they were all a list of demands for congress to do something. . . . and isn't it congress that is the problem? The people are given essentially two candidates to vote for. If the candidates are in a critical district, money comes in from influential sources. If not, then influential sources sway the parties which put pressure on the representatives after they are elected. Either way, the protest is looking towards the government to correct the problem, when government is the problem.

Government is the creator of this problem, and yet the people are looking for it to solve this problem. I just don't think it will, or even can. Not with in the framework of the existing system. Incidentally, the only way to accomplish demand number eight is through a hearing at the supreme court. This is where this person hood status was determined for corporations, and I believe this is the only way it can be "undone."

Most of the representatives in congress? Their reaction to such a protest, and these demands would be as follows: "If you are so passionate about this, why not just vote in representatives that will do your bidding?" And what is the answer to this. . . we are a representative republic are we not?

Here's something I found interesting. The people are protesting the government for a redress of grievances. . . so what does JPMorgan do?
It buys more cops. lol

http://www.jpmorganchase.com/corporate/Home/article/ny-13.htm?TB_iframe=true&height=580&width=850

 

@Eso

Its through congress where many deregulations went through, that helped create the problem. Clinton removing glass-steagal helped create the crises, its at the heart of the problem. The lack of election funding reform is part of the problem. You say 'government' is the creator of this problem and then you say Congress isn't the problem when Congress is a government institution.

Representatives can and are driven by popular movements. Why do you think they got rid of DADT! Or why did they decriminalize abortion, or change jim crow laws. Most of the social benefits in this country came through popular grass-roots movements. Let them get more cops by all means, cause they'll need them. You think it was easy arresting 700 protestors clustered on the Brooklyn Bridge?

 

@Eso

This is for you Eso, its about Occupy. Its spreading like a hot rash: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=m-vwfXbhLzo#!

I challenge you to join us:

Actions

MIDWEST

1) Illinois
Occupy Chicago
Occupy Springfield, IL

2) Indiana
Occupy Columbus, IN
Occupy Evansville
Occupy Indiana
Occupy Indianapolis

3) Iowa
Occupy Iowa

4) Kansas
Occupy Wichita

5) Michigan

Occupy Grand Rapids
Occupy Michigan

6) Minnesota
Occupy Minnesota

7) Missouri

Occupy Columbia, MO
Occupy Joplin, MO
Occupy Kansas City
Occupy St. Louis

8) Nebraska

Occupy Omaha
North Dakota
Occupy Fargo-Moorhead

9) Ohio

Occupy Cincinnati
Occupy Cleveland
Occupy Columbus, OH
Occupy Dayton
Occupy Toledo, OH
Occupy Youngstown

10) Oklahoma

Occupy OKC
Occupy OSU (Stillwater)
Occupy Tulsa

11) Wisconsin

Occupy Madison
Occupy Wisconsin

NORTHEAST

12) Connecticut

Occupy Hartford, CT
Occupy New Haven

13) District of Columbia

Occupy D.C.

14) Maine
Occupy Maine

15) Maryland

Occupy Baltimore

16) Massachusetts

Occupy Boston

New Jersey
Occupy New Jersey

17) New York

Occupy Albany
Occupy Binghamton
Occupy Ithaca
Occupy Rochester
Occupy Utica, NY

18) Pennsylvania

Occupy Allentown, PA
Occupy Harrisburg, PA
Occupy Philadelphia
Occupy Pittsburgh

19) Rhode Island

Occupy Providence, RI

20) Vermont

Occupy Vermont

21) West Virginia

Occupy Huntington, WV
Occupy Morgantown, WV
Occupy Wheeling, WV

SOUTHEAST

22) Alabama

Occupy Auburn
Occupy Birmingham, AL
Occupy Mobile

23) Arkansas

Occupy Arkansas

24) Florida

Occupy Daytona Beach
Occupy Fort Lauderdale
Occupy Gainesville
Occupy Jacksonville, FL
Occupy Miami
Occupy Ocala
Occupy Orlando
Occupy Pensacola
Occupy Sarasota
Occupy Tallahassee
Occupy Tampa

25) Georgia

Occupy Atlanta
Occupy Columbus, GA
Occupy Savannah

26) Kentucky

Occupy Lexington, KY
Occupy Louisville

27) Louisiana

Occupy New Orleans

28) Mississippi

Occupy Mississippi

29) North Carolina

Occupy Asheville
Occupy Charlotte
Occupy Durham
Occupy Greensboro
Occupy Raleigh, NC
Occupy Winston Salem

30) South Carolina

Occupy Columbia, SC
Occupy Florence, SC

31) Tennessee

Occupy Clarksville, TN
Occupy Knoxville
Occupy Memphis
Occupy Nashville

32) Virginia

Occupy Norfolk, VA
Occupy Richmond, VA

SOUTHWEST

33) Arizona

Occupy Phoenix
Occupy Tucson

34) New Mexico

Occupy Albuquerque
Occupy Santa Fe

35) Texas

Occupy Austin
Occupy Dallas
Occupy El Paso
Occupy Houston
Occupy McAllen, TX
Occupy San Antonio

WEST

36) California

Occupy Arcata
Occupy Berkeley
Occupy Chico, CA
Occupy Fresno
Occupy Humboldt (HSU)
Occupy Long Beach
Occupy Los Angeles
Occupy Merced
Occupy Modesto
Occupy Napa
Occupy Riverside
Occupy Sacramento
Occupy San Diego
Occupy San Francisco
Occupy San Jose
Occupy Santa Ana
Occupy Santa Barbara
Occupy Santa Cruz
Occupy Ventura

37) Colorado

Occupy Colorado Springs
Occupy Denver

38) Hawaii

Occupy Hilo
Occupy Kona
Occupy Oahu

39) Idaho

Occupy Boise
Occupy Idaho Falls

34) Montana

Occupy Montana

35) Nevada

Occupy Las Vegas
Occupy Reno

36) Oregon

Occupy Ashland, OR
Occupy Eugene
Occupy Portland
Occupy Salem

37) Utah

Occupy Salt Lake City

39) Washington

Occupy Olympia
Occupy Seattle
Occupy Spokane

INTERNATIONAL

Asia

Occupy Tokyo

Australia

Occupy Adelaide
Occupy Brisbane
Occupy Melbourne
Occupy Perth
Occupy Sydney

Canada

Occupy Calgary
Occupy Montreal
Occupy Newfoundland
Occupy Nova Scotia
Occupy Ottawa
Occupy Toronto Market Exchange
Occupy Vancouver
Occupy Victoria

Europe

Occupy Cologne
Occupy Cork, Ireland
Occupy Den Haag, NL
Occupy Denmark
Occupy Finland
Occupy Frankfurt
Occupy Hamburg
Occupy Ljlubljana, Slovenia
Occupy Manchester
Occupy Norwich
Occupy Prague
Occupy Stockholm
Occupy the London Stock Exchange

Mexico

Occupy Tijuana

http://www.occupytogether.org/


JOIN US!!! All of you! WE ONLY HAVE 11 STATES MORE TO GO!!!

 

I just don't think you realize the forces the people are up against. You yourself probably still cling to the governments crazy conspiracy theory that 9/11 was perpetrated by lone fundamentalist islamist terrorists.

Likewise, you are probably among the many that accept the Warren commission report on the JFK assassination, not giving a second thought to the fact that the head of the commission later became president.

And what president wanted to reign in government the most, to shrink it down, get it out of people's lives? Could it be Reagan? What did he get for those efforts? How about a bullet? How many people know the association between Reagan's would be assassin's family and the Bush family? Not many I would speculate.

No, there are very powerful elite forces that come into play, where anything but masses (hundreds of thousands) of people out in the streets will not affect any significant change due to the nature of the system. The people in control are deadly, and are willing to kill, lie, maim, steal, and do nearly anything to hold onto their power. . . including destroy a major American city. And they will use the press to spin that destruction any way they wish to. Why? Because they own the press. . . and by extension, the peoples thoughts too.

With out really knowing how we got to this point, change will not come easy. And the ways you mention to get effective change done? Those won't work.

History records that the money changers have used every form of abuse, intrigue, deceit, and violent means possible to maintain their control over governments by controlling money and its issuance. -James Madison

If congress has the right under the Constitution to issue paper money, it was given them to use themselves, not to be delegated to individuals or corporations. -Andrew Jackson

The Government should create, issue, and circulate all the currency and credits needed to satisfy the spending power of the Government and the buying power of consumers. By the adoption of these principles, the taxpayers will be saved immense sums of interest. Money will cease to be master and become the servant of humanity. -Abraham Lincoln

Issue of currency should be lodged with the government and be protected from domination by Wall Street. We are opposed to...provisions [which] would place our currency and credit system in private hands. - Theodore Roosevelt

Despite these warnings, Woodrow Wilson signed the 1913 Federal Reserve Act. A few years later he wrote: "I am a most unhappy man. I have unwittingly ruined my country. A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men. We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated Governments in the civilized world no longer a Government by free opinion, no longer a Government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a Government by the opinion and duress of a small group of dominant men." -Woodrow Wilson

The real truth of the matter is,as you and I know, that a financial element in the large centers has owned the government ever since the days of Andrew Jackson... -Franklin D. Roosevelt (in a letter to Colonel House, dated November 21, 1933)

Lord Acton: "The issue which has swept down the Centuries, and must be fought - sooner or later -is the people versus the banks...Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupt absolutely..."

Former Navy Secretary John Lehman: "Power corrupts. Absolute power is kind of neat." [Why would the superclass want to give it up?]

“Let me issue and control a nation's money and I care not who makes its Laws.” ANSELM MEYER ROTHSCHILD (owners of major banks including the Bank of England)

"Bankers own the earth. Take it away from them, but leave them the power to create money and control credit, and with a flick of a pen they will create enough to buy it back." - Sir Josiah Stamp, former Director, Bank of England

”Can anything be more absurd than that a nation should apply to an individual (Rothschild) to maintain its credit, and with its credit its existence as an empire, and its comfort as a people...” BENJAMIN DISRAELI, Prime Minister, Great Britain

“All wars are economic in their origin”. BERNARD BARUCH, before Nye Committee, 9-13-1937

“And there was a cry of the people...against their brethren the Jews...we have mortgaged our lands, vineyards, and houses that we might buy corn because of the dearth...and lo, we bring into bondage our sons and our daughters to be servants...some of our daughters are brought into bondage already; neither is it in our power to redeem them for other men have our lands and our vineyards...” BIBLE: NE: 5:1,7

“Misunderstandings about money have been and continue to be intentional. They derive neither from the nature of money nor from any stupidity of the public...the International Usurocracy aims at preserving intact the public's ignorance of the Usurocratic System and its workings...” EZRA POUND economist

“It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning.” - HENRY FORD

“Henry Ford thinks it's stupid and so do I, that for the loan of (its) own money... the United States should be compelled to pay...interest. People who will not turn a shovel of dirt nor contribute a pound of material will collect more money from the United States than all the people who supply all the material and do all the work...why must we pay interest to money-brokers for the use of our own money!” THOMAS A. EDISON, re Congress borrowing from FED

“The banks - commercial banks and [privately owned] Federal Reserve - create all the money of this nation, and the nation and its people pay interest on every dollar of that newly created money. Which means that private banks exercise unconstitutionally, immorally, and ridiculously the power to tax the people. For every newly created dollar dilutes to some extent the value of every other dollar already in circulation.” JERRY VOORHIS, U.S. Congress, CA-D., 1946

”No one has the right to be a moneylender save him who has it to lend.” THOMAS JEFFERSON

”PATMAN: Mr. Eccles, how do you get the money to buy those two billions of government securities? ECCLES: We created it. PATMAN: Out of what? ECCLES: Out of our right to issue credit money.” HOUSE BANKING AND CURRENCY COMMITTEE hearing, 1941

“When a bank makes a loan it simply adds to the borrower's deposit account in the bank...The money is not taken from anyone else's deposit; it was not previously paid into the bank by anyone. It's new money, created by the bank for the use of the borrower.” SEC'Y TREASURY ANDERSON, "U.S. News & WR", 8-31-59

“In purchasing offerings of Government bonds the banking system as a whole creates new money, or bank deposits. When the banks buy a billion dollars of Government bonds as they are offered...the banks credit the deposit account of the Treasury with a billion dollars. They debit their Government bond account a billion dollars, or they actually create, by a bookkeeping entry, a billion dollars.” MARRINER ECCLES, Chairman Board of Governors, FED, 1935

”The government should create, issue and circulate all currency and credit needed to satisfy the spending power of Government and the buying power of consumers. The privilege of creating and issuing money is the supreme prerogative of Government….” ABRAHAM LINCOLN (one of the seven US Presidents assassinated after taking issue with the issuance of money by the bankers vs the people)

”Some people think Federal Reserve Banks are United States government institutions. They are not Government institutions. They are private credit monopolies which prey upon the people of the United States for the benefits of themselves and their foreign customers; foreign and domestic speculators and swindlers; and rich and predatory money lenders. In that dark crew of financial pirates there are those who would cut a man's throat to get a dollar out of his pocket; there are those who send money into states to buy votes to control our legislation; and there are those that maintain an international propaganda for deceiving us...that will permit them to cover up their past misdeeds and set again in motion their gigantic train of crime...” (10 June 1932) Congressman Louis T. McFadden

“Our money system is nothing better than a confidence trick... The "money power" which has been able to overshadow ostensibly responsible government is not the power of the merely ultra-rich but is nothing more or less than a new technique to destroy money by adding and withdrawing figures in bank ledgers, without the slightest concern for the interests of the community or the real role money ought to perform therein...to allow it to become a source of revenue to private issuer's is to create, first, a secret and illicit arm of government and, last, a rival power strong enough to ultimately overthrow all other forms of government.” Dr. FRED SODDY, Nobelist, Wealth, Virtual Wealth & Debt

“A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all of our activities are in the hands of a few men. We have become one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated governments in the civilized world...no longer a government of free opinion...but a government by the opinion and duress of small groups of domineering men.” PRESIDENT WOODROW WILSON, 1916, when he realized his gigantic mistake in supporting the Banksters with the Federal Reserve Act in 1913.

“This [Federal Reserve] Act establishes the most gigantic trust on earth. When the President signs this bill the invisible government by the Monetary Power will be legalized...the worst legislative crime of the ages is perpetrated by this banking and currency bill. The caucus and party bosses have again operated and prevented the people from getting the benefit of their own government.” CHARLES LINDBERGH, Sr., U.S. Congress

President Andrew Jackson, wrote: "The bold effort the present bank had made to control the government, the distress it had wantonly produced...are but premonitions of the fate that awaits the American people should they be deluded into a perpetuation of this institution or the establishment of another like it."

Thomas Jefferson wrote: "The Central Bank is an institution of the most deadly hostility existing against the principles and form of our Constitution

Felix Frankfurter, Justice of the Supreme Court (1939-1962), said: "The real rulers in Washington are invisible and exercise power from behind the scenes."

Congressman Louis McFadden, House Committee on Banking and Currency Chairman (1920-31), stated: "When the Federal Reserve Act was passed, the people of these United States did not perceive that a world banking system was being set up here. A super-state controlled by international bankers and industrialists...acting together to enslave the world...Every effort has been made by the Fed to conceal its powers but the truth is--the Fed has usurped the government."

When a bank makes a loan it simply adds to the borrower's deposit account in the bank...The money is not taken from anyone else's deposit; it was not previously paid into the bank by anyone. It's new money, created by the bank for the use of the borrower." SEC'Y TREASURY ANDERSON, "U.S. News & WR", 8-31-59

"A power has risen up in the government greater than the people themselves, consisting of many and various powerful interest, combined in one mass; and held together by the cohesive power of the vast surplus in banks." - John C. Calhoun

"Whoever controls the volume of money in any country is absolute master of all industry and commerce." - James A. Garfield

"Money power denounces, as public enemies, all who question its methods or throw light upon its crimes." - Wm. Jennings Bryan

 

Go back and look at my thread one more time!! I don't care about 9/11, this is bigger than 9/11. Fuck JFK, he's dead! Go back and look at the link I gave you and take on the challenge! You're a pessimist, a pessimist or anyone who believes that the 'forces' are greater then the whole is not going to have any passion devoted to change. Overwhelming forces have always been around and people have still been able to change things, and win! You aren't offering anything but your fears. Get over your fears and get your ass in the streets!!

DO SOMETHING!!! You think the forces will weaken if you sit around doing nothing? No! Join the people who have balls to spare! The only thing that's certain is change. Join history why don't you! Play your part in real time, revolution and change isn't an intellectual exercise played out on the couch!

 

bravo, lucy

 

And its what I'm still hoping is true. What's funny is folk like Eso, whom I know to be aligned with the movement by and large are the ones who doubt that such a thing is still possible. Its like the people think that the powers that be in the present situation are soo soo powerful that no mass movement could change it. I find this baffling, history shows otherwise.

 

And I am willing to go with the good wishes of those who wish everyone luck.

 

This isn't directed specifically towards you Trippy but a blanket statement:

All I have to say is 'We are legion, We are anonymous, Expect Us...in other words we are the public that will use all resources at our disposal to effect change...even if it means selling short on Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan.

Oh? You think that the 'everyone' is incapable of forcing their economic strength on the downfall of the few? Think again! The beauty of the stock market, its elegance lies within the truth of quants, and the black boxes they share, which can never be accounted for by the human equation. This is why, with the help of quants, unions and the disenfranchised 'We are legion, We are anonymous and you better fucking expect us'.

That's the level of commitment. The heart of health is getting out of the two party system.

 

No no, you are absolutely right. You have no idea what I have lived with and how long I have waited for something like this. I just see this as something that seems to be, too little, too late. I hope and I hope. If, at the very least, we can prevent WWIII, which is on the horizon, and is planned by some in the upper echelons in power, than I suppose it will be all worth it. NOT IN OUR NAME!

What To Do? What can we as Individuals do to Free Ourselves and our Country?

Semper Fi: Marines Coming To Protect Protesters On Wall Street

America: More Than a Failed Dictatorship

 

You have nothing to lose.