This is from Fox News. Hey, isn't Fox owned by Rupert Murdoch. The same man who owned the newspaper in England that was found to be paying cops for information and hacking the phones of celebrities?
The article's titles is "Weapons Cache Found During Zuccotti Park Cleanup, Sources Say"
One line from the article is very telling, "Officials from the NYPD would only confirm that one knife was found buried in a planter on Tuesday." We read earlier in the article about this weapon of mass destruction. "Gardeners employed by the park owners, Brookfield Properties, to clean up the mess made by occupiers during their two-month stay discovered various knives, including a large kitchen knife and other potential instruments of violence in flower beds throughout the public space, according to officials."
They had a large kitchen knife, of my, didn't they also have a kitchen? I wonder if the two things are connected? Kitchens and kitchen knives, I see a pattern here. How does this pass for reporting? In another part of the article it talks about how Sanitation workers found items that COULD have been used as weapons. No kidding, anything can be used as a weapon. What it did not say was that anyone who has been arrested or anyone who was a participant was found with any weapons, not even a gun. Across the United States over 1,000 protesters have been arrested and how many had guns on them, none.
The New York police department is not claiming that they found weapons, no, the honest and good folk at Fox news are making this garbage up. Who are these unnamed sources and why not just name them? Because it is a smear piece and not real journalism, it is propaganda.
Here is the issue. I can understand not liking what the movement stands for, I can especially understand people not liking the approach; but, why just run a smear campaign, why not deal with the issues? The reason is the same, because the people that have power see this as an attack upon the system that they use to take advantage of the rest of us.
Everybody knows that the rich got bailed out and the rest of us have to pay the bill. That is what upset everyone on the left, right and even in the middle. We know that the politicians represent the interests that get them elected and it isn't 99% of us, doesn't matter if you are left, right or in the middle. We don't matter and we don't like that. The Tea Party and the Occupy Movement have the same issues, their solutions are just different.
The Tea Party was disliked by the conservatives until they found a way to manage them. The Occupy movement is not liked by liberals because they haven't found a way to get them into the party to support their candidates. The Tea Party and the Occupy Movement members need to meet together to find out what they do agree upon and then insist upon legislation that achieves their united goals rather than agree on candidates.
The most common thing that both agree on is that the Federal Reserve should be abolished and that people should be prevented from paying off politicians with anything. At this point the goal of the media is to make sure that it does not happen and they do that by vilifying both and making both look like wackos.
Wednesday, November 23, 2011
New Lies About Occupy from L.A. and U.C. Davis
Lets start with the ridiculous. Linda Katehi, the U.C. Davis Chancellor must have cut her deal with the campus police. She has just come out and said that the police DEFIED her by using pepper spray, here is a quote from the L.A. Times article and a link.
"We told the police to remove the tents or the equipment," she told the paper. "We told them very specifically to do it peacefully, and if there were too many of them, not to do it, if the students were aggressive, not to do it. And then we told them we also do not want to have another Berkeley."
L.A. Times - UC Davis chancellor: Police defied my orders by using pepper spray
Do you believe her? If it were true then why didn't she say so when it occurred, it seems like important information to know. The most likely reasons are that she is playing word games now or that if she had said it at the time she was attempting to support clearly wrong police actions after they occurred. Neither is very hones. As for the police, if that had been her instructions then why were they ignored and riot gear and weapons brought?
As for the officers who used the pepper spray, you have officially been thrown under the bus as I predicted. Right now the Chancellor has probably told the officers involved to keep silent; but, your best bet is to speak up and tell the truth. Fact is the officers involved have been identified and no matter where they go or what jobs they are offered somewhere else, this will follow you. Something for the officers to consider is that if, as she says, they violated her instructions then when the civil suits come the University will not be responsible for representing you or paying the damages, you will be personally responsible because you acted beyond your authority according to the Chancellor.
L.A. Times - Occupy L.A., city inching into endgame for City Hall camp
Now, this story is interesting. It is claimed that the City has offered the Occupy protesters 10,000 square feet of office space in exchange for leaving City Hall at the cost of $1 a year. That my friends is called a gift of public funds and requires Council approval or it is illegal. Rather than clash with them, buy them off. The City apparently thought that their offer would be immediately accepted except there were a couple of problems, one is that it became public and the other is that the protesters that were in discussions had no authority to speak for the movement.
According to OccupyLosAngeles.org, this whole offer is a little shaky and suspicious. "The City/"liaison" Exit Deal & the General Assembly" Their article claims that someone named "Mario Brito" sort of appointed himself as their liaison without support from their general assembly. Now I am not familiar with Mr. Brito; but somewhere in the back of my mind I thought I had read his name before so I did a search.
According to numerous articles, Mr. Brito was depicted as a communist and union organizer running the encampment. Now that is interesting. He is sort of an all around patsy. When the encampment began the accusation was that communists were actually running it rather than some participating in it, big difference. Mr. Brito was the one they used to make this assertion and now apparently he is a representative working with the City to end the encampment.
I am off today and have plenty of water to drink, I like to stay hydrated even if the European Union says that people cannot legally claim that water hydrates us (that is an article that you can search for - lol). A couple of questions come to my mind, if Occupy Los Angeles is not a legal entity (incorporated) then who would the property be leased to? Mr. Brito and his organization?
It all seems sort of orchestrated with complicity on the part of the City. The mayor of Los Angeles has probably done one of the best jobs at not letting it get violent in Los Angeles and he has done it by mostly ignoring the protesters and not surrounding the camp with police day and night. The fact is that one block away from the encampment is the headquarters of the LAPD, one short block away.
What is apparent is that across the nation mayors want to have the encampments closed down before the year ends. What they don't want is for this to last into an election year and buying them off is the last offer. Now if some of the people take the offer then the remaining ones will be removed by force and will be accused of being radicals who will not work with the City, pretty nifty public relations set up isn't it.
Now, there is the chance that the Occupy movement will be removed from the encampments and that the only encampments left will be on Universities and the message will then be about student loans and tuition costs alone as fewer voices are heard because the vast majority of protesters are not students and they will not be allowed to camp out on University properties.
So what should the people within the movement do? I am not a member so I don't get a vote; but, I can make some suggestions. My first one would be don't be bought off and turned into supporters for some political party or "leader". The moment you do your relevance will go away. My second recommendation is remain peaceful no matter what. Third is be prepared to be removed, it will happen soon. The "leaked" letter from the head of Recreation and Parks was done in preparation for the removal (by the way, does anyone really believe that it was not written at the instruction of the mayor?).
Personally, I think it would be a good tactic to remove the encampment prior to the police taking action and then put it up somewhere else for a month and then return again to City Hall. In the end though, this is not about an encampment, that only works so long. It has highlighted the dissatisfaction with our system of finance and political influence; but, now what?
This is not Egypt or Libya and the Occupiers will not topple a government through protests in the streets. For any movement to remain relevant it must not just be against things, it must determine what it is for and then find a way to sustain it's message. I recommend that they consider what they want people to think the message was five and ten years from now.
This blog has often focused on corruption within the political system and continues to attempt to discuss the lies and deceit that we are confronted with in the media. When I changed the title to OCCUPY The Truth is Inside You, it was done partly tongue in cheek and mostly to support the idea of the first amendment and the right to free speech because too many people dismissed the protesters without even making an attempt to hear what they had to say.
Well, the movement has "occupied" many public spaces, the question is what do you do once you occupy, do you involve, do you revolt, do you find consensus for what specific changes you want, how do you continue to be heard as a group. In the end if you will continue to be heard you must have representatives or leaders, I wrote about that not long ago.
Many years ago there was a movement in the United States called the "good government" movement. The protesters might want to investigate it to consider a method that had some effect long term.
"We told the police to remove the tents or the equipment," she told the paper. "We told them very specifically to do it peacefully, and if there were too many of them, not to do it, if the students were aggressive, not to do it. And then we told them we also do not want to have another Berkeley."
L.A. Times - UC Davis chancellor: Police defied my orders by using pepper spray
Do you believe her? If it were true then why didn't she say so when it occurred, it seems like important information to know. The most likely reasons are that she is playing word games now or that if she had said it at the time she was attempting to support clearly wrong police actions after they occurred. Neither is very hones. As for the police, if that had been her instructions then why were they ignored and riot gear and weapons brought?
As for the officers who used the pepper spray, you have officially been thrown under the bus as I predicted. Right now the Chancellor has probably told the officers involved to keep silent; but, your best bet is to speak up and tell the truth. Fact is the officers involved have been identified and no matter where they go or what jobs they are offered somewhere else, this will follow you. Something for the officers to consider is that if, as she says, they violated her instructions then when the civil suits come the University will not be responsible for representing you or paying the damages, you will be personally responsible because you acted beyond your authority according to the Chancellor.
L.A. Times - Occupy L.A., city inching into endgame for City Hall camp
Now, this story is interesting. It is claimed that the City has offered the Occupy protesters 10,000 square feet of office space in exchange for leaving City Hall at the cost of $1 a year. That my friends is called a gift of public funds and requires Council approval or it is illegal. Rather than clash with them, buy them off. The City apparently thought that their offer would be immediately accepted except there were a couple of problems, one is that it became public and the other is that the protesters that were in discussions had no authority to speak for the movement.
According to OccupyLosAngeles.org, this whole offer is a little shaky and suspicious. "The City/"liaison" Exit Deal & the General Assembly" Their article claims that someone named "Mario Brito" sort of appointed himself as their liaison without support from their general assembly. Now I am not familiar with Mr. Brito; but somewhere in the back of my mind I thought I had read his name before so I did a search.
According to numerous articles, Mr. Brito was depicted as a communist and union organizer running the encampment. Now that is interesting. He is sort of an all around patsy. When the encampment began the accusation was that communists were actually running it rather than some participating in it, big difference. Mr. Brito was the one they used to make this assertion and now apparently he is a representative working with the City to end the encampment.
I am off today and have plenty of water to drink, I like to stay hydrated even if the European Union says that people cannot legally claim that water hydrates us (that is an article that you can search for - lol). A couple of questions come to my mind, if Occupy Los Angeles is not a legal entity (incorporated) then who would the property be leased to? Mr. Brito and his organization?
It all seems sort of orchestrated with complicity on the part of the City. The mayor of Los Angeles has probably done one of the best jobs at not letting it get violent in Los Angeles and he has done it by mostly ignoring the protesters and not surrounding the camp with police day and night. The fact is that one block away from the encampment is the headquarters of the LAPD, one short block away.
What is apparent is that across the nation mayors want to have the encampments closed down before the year ends. What they don't want is for this to last into an election year and buying them off is the last offer. Now if some of the people take the offer then the remaining ones will be removed by force and will be accused of being radicals who will not work with the City, pretty nifty public relations set up isn't it.
Now, there is the chance that the Occupy movement will be removed from the encampments and that the only encampments left will be on Universities and the message will then be about student loans and tuition costs alone as fewer voices are heard because the vast majority of protesters are not students and they will not be allowed to camp out on University properties.
So what should the people within the movement do? I am not a member so I don't get a vote; but, I can make some suggestions. My first one would be don't be bought off and turned into supporters for some political party or "leader". The moment you do your relevance will go away. My second recommendation is remain peaceful no matter what. Third is be prepared to be removed, it will happen soon. The "leaked" letter from the head of Recreation and Parks was done in preparation for the removal (by the way, does anyone really believe that it was not written at the instruction of the mayor?).
Personally, I think it would be a good tactic to remove the encampment prior to the police taking action and then put it up somewhere else for a month and then return again to City Hall. In the end though, this is not about an encampment, that only works so long. It has highlighted the dissatisfaction with our system of finance and political influence; but, now what?
This is not Egypt or Libya and the Occupiers will not topple a government through protests in the streets. For any movement to remain relevant it must not just be against things, it must determine what it is for and then find a way to sustain it's message. I recommend that they consider what they want people to think the message was five and ten years from now.
This blog has often focused on corruption within the political system and continues to attempt to discuss the lies and deceit that we are confronted with in the media. When I changed the title to OCCUPY The Truth is Inside You, it was done partly tongue in cheek and mostly to support the idea of the first amendment and the right to free speech because too many people dismissed the protesters without even making an attempt to hear what they had to say.
Well, the movement has "occupied" many public spaces, the question is what do you do once you occupy, do you involve, do you revolt, do you find consensus for what specific changes you want, how do you continue to be heard as a group. In the end if you will continue to be heard you must have representatives or leaders, I wrote about that not long ago.
Many years ago there was a movement in the United States called the "good government" movement. The protesters might want to investigate it to consider a method that had some effect long term.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)