IDBillzFan Posted November 16, 2011 Share Posted November 16, 2011 These nitwits can now threaten to "shut down Wall Street" tomorrow, disrupt the subways and roads, littely standand in front of police en masse and DARE them to do something and then the second the police DO take action and do as little as TOUCH one of these guys, they drop to the ground, go into the fetal postion and cry "VICTIM!!!!! ABUSE!!!!!" Here's hoping all those capitalism-hating OWS folks take the time to charge their iPhones so they can record, document, tweet, twitter, and Facebook the injustice they'll face from law enforcement when they throw the first Molotov cocktail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted November 16, 2011 Share Posted November 16, 2011 I still have no idea what "ideas" he's talking about. I really wish these people would just start rioting already. It's what they all want to do, they are just to cowardly to start it themselves. And what "public discussion"? These nitwits think they're recreating the "Arab Spring" in the US. Don't they realize that after all this time, eight or maybe ten people are taking them seriously? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted November 17, 2011 Share Posted November 17, 2011 From the SF Chronicle: The Department of Public Works released a list of 11 conditions.They are: No more than 100 small tents and no more than 200 people campers at time [i know...terrible writing[/b]] will be allowed; no other structures can be erected; city inspectors must be allowed access; the area must be kept clean and accessible for regular steam-cleaning and garbage pickup; and drinking water must be in individual, shatter-resistant bottles. In addition, portable toilets must be serviced regularly; no hot food can be prepared at the camp; no alcohol or illegal drugs can be sold, distributed or consumed at the encampment; no ropes or cables can be attached to poles or trees; no stoves or open flames are allowed; and walkways must be kept clear at all times. So what the whimpy city of SF is saying is that you can live anywhere you want rent free. As long as there are no more than 100 tents and no more than 200 people there. Also you must allow the city to clean up after you. What the hell kind of precedent are they setting here?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted November 17, 2011 Share Posted November 17, 2011 From the SF Chronicle: So what the whimpy city of SF is saying is that you can live anywhere you want rent free. As long as there are no more than 100 tents and no more than 200 people there. Also you must allow the city to clean up after you. What the hell kind of precedent are they setting here?? Doesn't SF allow homeless people to sleep anywhere they want already? Sounds like they just formalized it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buff_bills4ever Posted November 17, 2011 Share Posted November 17, 2011 From the SF Chronicle: So what the whimpy city of SF is saying is that you can live anywhere you want rent free. As long as there are no more than 100 tents and no more than 200 people there. Also you must allow the city to clean up after you. What the hell kind of precedent are they setting here?? I like how they even had to make a special section about using illegal drugs. Uhh... You aren't supposed to use or sell drugs to begin with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted November 17, 2011 Share Posted November 17, 2011 Doesn't SF allow homeless people to sleep anywhere they want already? Sounds like they just formalized it. The key is that homeless people are, well......homeless. Many of these OWS have a nice cozy cellar at their mother's house to live. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wacka Posted November 17, 2011 Share Posted November 17, 2011 Of course they all have a "prescription" for "medical marijuana". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buff_bills4ever Posted November 17, 2011 Share Posted November 17, 2011 Protests at Occupy Berkeley About 10,000 students "voted" to erect tents at UC Berkeley in defiance of the University's rule against tents. California is screwed. Sorry LABillzfan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted November 17, 2011 Share Posted November 17, 2011 Protests at Occupy Berkeley About 10,000 students "voted" to erect tents at UC Berkeley in defiance of the University's rule against tents. California is screwed. Sorry LABillzfan And knowing Berkeley, the school considers that a "win" for the school. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buff_bills4ever Posted November 17, 2011 Share Posted November 17, 2011 And knowing Berkeley, the school considers that a "win" for the school. Yeah. I don't know why anyone would choose to live in Cali. LABillzfan excluded. I guess we can add "tuition increases" to the list of demands they are "protesting" against. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted November 17, 2011 Share Posted November 17, 2011 Yeah. I don't know why anyone would choose to live in Cali. LABillzfan excluded. I guess we can add "tuition increases" to the list of demands they are "protesting" against. Reason number one - It ain't !@#$ing New York Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WilliamCody Posted November 17, 2011 Share Posted November 17, 2011 There is a good correspondent's piece on last night's Daily Show that emphasized the growing divisions within the Occupy Movement at Zuccotti Park just before it was cleared out. Pretty interesting...and funny. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted November 17, 2011 Share Posted November 17, 2011 So I heard on the news this morning that the OWS folks were going to stage a "sneak" attack on the NYSE. They were going to "disguise" themselves as brokers and wear suits and just walk in and disrupt the opening bell. Great idea until they realized that none of them owned a suit. But seriously. Did they really think that that's all they needed to get in was a suit. These folks are dumber than I thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erynthered Posted November 17, 2011 Share Posted November 17, 2011 So I heard on the news this morning that the OWS folks were going to stage a "sneak" attack on the NYSE. They were going to "disguise" themselves as brokers and wear suits and just walk in and disrupt the opening bell. Great idea until they realized that none of them owned a suit. But seriously. Did they really think that that's all they needed to get in was a suit. These folks are dumber than I thought. I wonder whats going on at " Avenue Jew" this morning? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WilliamCody Posted November 17, 2011 Share Posted November 17, 2011 Here is a really cool article that uses twitter feed visualizations to discuss the difference in composition between the TEA Party and the OWS Movements: http://www.newscientist.com/blogs/onepercent/2011/11/occupy-vs-tea-party-what-their.html It confirms in a really interesting way what we already know: OWS is a diverse movement with a lot of different ideological bases and the TEA Party is an insider network that is more coherent but less diverse in its social connections and perhaps in its ideological composition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted November 17, 2011 Share Posted November 17, 2011 So I heard on the news this morning that the OWS folks were going to stage a "sneak" attack on the NYSE. They were going to "disguise" themselves as brokers and wear suits and just walk in and disrupt the opening bell. Great idea until they realized that none of them owned a suit. But seriously. Did they really think that that's all they needed to get in was a suit. These folks are dumber than I thought. They'd have done better with empty pizza boxes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted November 17, 2011 Share Posted November 17, 2011 Here is a really cool article that uses twitter feed visualizations to discuss the difference in composition between the TEA Party and the OWS Movements: http://www.newscient...what-their.html It confirms in a really interesting way what we already know: OWS is a diverse movement with a lot of different ideological bases and the TEA Party is an insider network that is more coherent but less diverse in its social connections and perhaps in its ideological composition. Those tweeting about the Tea Party emerge as a tight-knit "in crowd", following one another's tweets. By contrast, the network of people tweeting about Occupy consists of a looser series of clusters, in which the output of a few key people is being vigorously retweeted. Man reporting these days really sucks. It's spelled loser. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeviF Posted November 17, 2011 Share Posted November 17, 2011 They'd have done better with empty pizza boxes. "You've been served!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WilliamCody Posted November 17, 2011 Share Posted November 17, 2011 Man reporting these days really sucks. It's spelled loser. Not sure if serious... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted November 17, 2011 Share Posted November 17, 2011 So I heard on the news this morning that the OWS folks were going to stage a "sneak" attack on the NYSE. They were going to "disguise" themselves as brokers and wear suits and just walk in and disrupt the opening bell. Great idea until they realized that none of them owned a suit. But seriously. Did they really think that that's all they needed to get in was a suit. These folks are dumber than I thought. I read last night at the New York Post that police were expecting about 10,000 protesters to create all kinds of havoc. So far all I've found is a live blog at ABC.com reporting that only a handful of people have shown up, and those who did have no idea where they're supposed to be going and what they're supposed to be doing once they get there...all of which only serves as further evidence that Obama is behind this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts