Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Occupy Wall Street


Navyblue

Recommended Posts

There's a very good reason that this was done and it's so no President could ever use a domestic police force as his personal force among the original colonies and in effect be that which the U.S. was trying to get away from in seeking its independence from a tyrannical monarchy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's the president's duty to uphold the constitution of the United States which encompasses the bill of rights, where you can find this...

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Yes the President has power to intervene and is not using it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, the President does not have the 'power' to intervene in police powers issues that are matters of States rights and powers under the 10th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

The Federal gov't does not have general police powers that the States do.

And another point of clarification, Congress has authority over creation of laws and the Courts have authority over interpreting, upholding or striking down and generally redressing laws. The President as part of the Executive Branch does not have those powers.....and does not have powers over the means of how the police use their powers granted to them by the State, State Constitutions and State courts.....since police powers are not granted by, nor the jurisdiction of the Federal gov't.

President Obama's comments, while influential because of the importance the Office of The President has in American life, and which I personally hope to hear from, hold no actual power over a police force or its actions.

There's a very good reason that this was done and it's so no President could ever use a domestic police force as his personal force among the original colonies and in effect be that which the U.S. was trying to get away from in seeking its independence from a tyrannical monarchy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good long read from Arianna Huffington:

Pepper-Spraying Occupy: An Assault on Our Democracy

This weekend, while listening to an NPR story about police using tear gas and rubber bullets to break up a demonstration, I was actually surprised when it turned out the newscaster was talking about Tahrir Square -- I had assumed it was about another brutal response to a peaceful protest here at home.

All across the country -- most recently on the campus of UC Davis -- a war is being waged. This isn't a battle over parks and tents and sleeping bags. Though many of our leaders don't seem to realize it, this is a battle about their credibility -- even their legitimacy -- about how they represent us, about whom their real allegiance is to. Their misguided response to the Occupy protests has actually proved the point of the protesters more than any sign or chant could. Sure, you can clear the protesters out from this or that park in the middle of the night, or send in riot-geared police to clear a campus sidewalk, but that doesn't mean you've won. Quite the opposite. As James Fallows writes, "what is going on is a war of ideas, based in turn on moral standing."

The Occupy movement has been a test -- a national MRI -- that has allowed us to check-in on the health of our democracy by allowing us to see what's going on underneath the surface of America's power structures. And the results are dire. What the movement, and the response to it, has shown is a government almost completely disconnected from those it purports to represent.

Each week brings an image more iconic than the last. There was the NYPD officer calmly walking up to several women who were penned, pepper-spraying them in the face and then slinking off. There was the 84-year-old woman pepper-sprayed in Seattle, along with a pregnant 19-year-old and a priest. There was Iraq War veteran Scott Olsen splayed on the ground with a serious head injury after being assaulted by police in Oakland. There was the picture of Elizabeth Nichols being pepper-sprayed directly in the face at close range by police in Portland.

And there were the indelible images from the surprise 1 a.m. raid on Occupy Wall Street's Zuccotti Park encampment by the NYPD -- which, Mayor Bloomberg claimed, was because it had become "a health and fire safety hazard." Really? Does the city traditionally take care of "health and fire safety hazards" under cover of darkness?

The mayor may have won the battle of sleeping bags in a park but, as protester Nate Barchus put it, "this reminds everyone who was occupying exactly why they were occupying."

If the mayor is so concerned about the hazards posed by people sleeping on the street and is prepared to use immense city resources to take care of it, as of last year there were over 3,000 homeless people sleeping on the streets of New York City.

City officials usually like to publicize their efforts fighting "health and fire safety hazards" for their citizens. But not this time. Not only were the media not allowed to report on the raid on Zuccotti, many reporters were barricaded, blocked, manhandled and even arrested. "The first thing the police did was clear out the journalists so that they could not see what was going on," writes Eric Alterman, "just as they routinely do in totalitarian nations."

Rivaling his "health and fire safety hazard" line, Bloomberg

the reason reporters were kept away was "to protect members of the press." Another hit to the mayor's credibility.

As Harry Siegel put it in the Daily News:

The city doesn't take actions it's proud of at 1 a.m., and with the police literally shoving reporters away from the scene, 'to protect members of the press,' as Bloomberg insisted. That 'protection' applied to at least six journalists who were arrested, and many others who were handled roughly, including myself.

.

If you're a government official and you choose to do something in the middle of the night and you don't want the press to see, that's a pretty good sign you shouldn't be doing it. Since September, 26 reporters covering the Occupy movement have been arrested (you can see the run-down here, courtesy of Choire Sicha). A spokesman for the Mayor later bragged that "only five" of those arrested were officially credentialed by the NYPD. What a victory for civic government! Putting aside the fact that the NYPD doesn't get to decide who "the press" is, they actually want credit for "only" arresting five credentialed reporters of the many they shoved and beat and blocked and barricaded who were doing nothing more than trying to tell the citizens of New York what the officials they voted into office and whose salary they pay were doing in their name.

And then there is UC Davis, where police calmly and at close range pepper-sprayed students who were sitting down, arms locked and huddled. As the New York Times notes, one voice on the video of the assault is heard screaming, "These are children. These are children."

If this video were from China or Syria, James Fallows writes, "we'd think: this is what happens when authority is unaccountable and has lost any sense of human connection to a subject population."

The response by UC Davis Chancellor Linda P.B. Katehi illustrates that lack of connection. In her first statement on Friday, she passive-aggressively said, "We deeply regret that many of the protestors today chose not to work with our campus staff and police to remove the encampment as requested." Hard to look at the way those campus police were outfitted and think they're people who really came ready to "work with" others. No, they weren't there to work with -- they were there to inflict upon.

By Saturday, in a statement that used "safe" or "safety" four times, Chancellor Katehi said that the officers' actions were "chilling" and that the video "raises many questions." That's certainly true. It also raises one answer: governments that purport to be democratic shouldn't assault their own citizens in the name of keeping them safe.

Obviously, protests and use of public space present complicated challenges, but it is actually possible to navigate them, as government officials of the city of Davis itself seem to have done.

This was a statement put out by Occupy Davis:

At Occupy Davis relations with the democratically elected city council and local police forces have been genial and productive. The authorities have worked continuously to harmonize the occupation's presence with the park and surrounding businesses and ensure that all aspects of the encampment remain non-violent. Those in charge of using force are aware that they are democratically elected officials that are directly accountable to the people.

.

That awareness seems to be in short supply, however. Three blocks away, UC Davis Police Chief Annette Spicuzza defended her officers by saying -- stunningly -- that their actions were justified because camping on the quad is "not safe for multiple reasons." The main one of which is apparently that you'll be violently assaulted by her officers.

Kristin Koster, who aided protestors who had been pepper-sprayed while trying to shield others said: "When you protect the things you believe in with your body, it changes you for good. It radicalizes you for good." By "for good," it's unclear whether she meant permanently or in a positive way. Maybe it's both, and, if so, she's right. And it happens not just by doing it, but by being witness to others doing it.

And that radicalizing for good effect can now be scaled up dramatically because of the abundance of smartphone cameras. The weapons brought by the police are more powerful in the immediate sense, but the power of the weapons of the protesters and the press (both citizen journalists and those officially credentialed by the NYPD) is much greater and more long lasting.

As Andrew Sprung writes at xpostfactoid:

You have a truncheon or gun, I have a camera. You inflict pain, I inflict infamy. Martyrdom is instantaneous and viral. Bearing witness is the keystone of political action. It can also affect the action directly. You shoot, I tweet (or IM or phone) for more demonstrators.

.

Or, as Carlos Miller put it on the blog Photography Is Not a Crime: "for every pepper spray canister they have, we have at least ten cameras. And that's why we'll win in the long run."

Another example of just how powerful images can be came the next day. These images weren't of a loud protest, but just the opposite. "I thought I wouldn't see a more dramatic video than the ones yesterday of the pepper-spraying of students by police at UC Davis," writes Boing Boing's Xeni Jarden. "I was wrong."

As Chancellor Katehi left a meeting and walked to her car, student protesters parted and watched her in stony silence. "The disciplined, contemptuous dead silence of the protesters through whom UC Davis chancellor Linda Katehi walks en route to her car is another astonishingly powerful demonstration of moral imagery," writes Fallows. "Again, as a moral confrontation, this is a rout."

It's worth noting that some of the most troubling instances of violence have happened in cities -- Portland, Seattle, Oakland -- led by leaders who are not predisposed to seeing protesters as violent hippies. In fact, Jean Quan, mayor of Oakland, site of some of the most brutal clashes, issued a statement early on saying, "We support the goals of the Occupy Wall Street movement."

And President Obama has likewise expressed sympathy for the Occupy movement. "I understand the frustrations being expressed in those protests," he told ABC's Jake Tapper. "The most important thing we can do right now is those of us in leadership letting people know that we understand their struggles and we are on their side, and that we want to set up a system in which hard work, responsibility, doing what you're supposed to do, is rewarded."

That sounds good, but setting up that system will require more than "understanding." We need to start closing the gap between rhetoric and reality. In his open letter demanding the resignation of Chancellor Katehi,

UC Davis assistant professor Nathan Brown writes:

Your
words
express concern for the safety of our students. Your
actions
express no concern whatsoever for the safety of our students. I deduce from this discrepancy that you are not, in fact, concerned about the safety of our students.

.

It's another example of the events of the Occupy movement serving as metaphors for the country as a whole. We hear a lot from our leaders about their concern for the middle class and the need for jobs. But their actions express considerably less concern. And that discrepancy, between words and actions, is where this battle of credibility is being waged.

That the Occupy movement has pushed this battle into the national consciousness -- no small feat in a country that loves to be distracted -- is undeniable. "This peaceful grassroots movement has succeeded in raising awareness about growing income and wealth inequality and, more generally, a system that seems better at serving the privileged few than enabling jobs and income growth for the many," writes PIMCO CEO Mohamed El-Erian. And Politico points out that the term "income inequality" went from being used in the media 91 times the week before the protests started to nearly 500 hundred last week.

The challenge now, writes El-Erian, is to pivot from offering a critique of the current system to building a system to replace it. True, but we should remember that by the time Dr. King made his famous speech on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial, the civil rights movement was almost ten years old. Change is not going to happen in an instant. But the more government officials continue to respond in a way that only serves to illustrate the critique the movement is making, the faster change will come.

Shepard Fairey, in explaining why he morphed his famous "Hope" poster into one championing the Occupy movement, wrote:

Obviously, just voting is not enough. We need to use all of our tools to help us achieve our goals and ideals. However, I think idealism and realism need to exist hand in hand. Change is not about one election, one rally, one leader, it is about a constant dedication to progress and a constant push in the right direction. Let's be the people doing the right thing as outsiders and simultaneously push the insiders to do the right thing for the people.

.

Having those insiders recognize that what they're doing is supposed to be for the people and not against the people would be a good start.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The irony there, is that the person in the video, a British Citizen, most likely had their A levels and college/university paid for in full or part by the British gov't vis-a-vis the British taxpayer, and that program was relatively recently cut as part of austerity measures, affecting this generation of students, because of the business and gov't decisions that ran the British economy into the loo.

I absolutely agree that the wealthiest and most prosperous nation on earth, in the history of the earth, should subsidize higher education or provide it in full and free for those who want to make themselves and their country better. Education is the key to progress, innovation and prosperity for the individual and all nations.

It's an absolute shame and sham that the U.S. doesn't provide their kids with free education.....and instead spends their public's tax income to feed the war machine by the hundreds of billions.

It's pathetic for that interviewer to pick on some kid who hasn't even gone to college yet or is trying to afford it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you know his status and whether he had his tuition paid for or are you just out on your familiar limb again ?

So you from Canada say that those seeking a higher education in the U.S should have it paid for by others, and then ramble on about feeding the war machine? In your world where does personal responsibility start or does it start at all ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"I'm all for individual responsibility as well as social responsibility.....the two aren't mutually exclusive ideas."

Actually in this instance they are. Again why is it the guy down the streets responsibility that I or anybody else go to college ? If somebody wants to go to college bad enough let their parents pay and let them get a job and help pay or take a loan.

In the United States there has been a steady increase in dollars spent per pupil and yet no significant rise in test scores. There is however a steady stream of political donations from the NEA and ATF to the democratic party. This is basic, and it is telling that you are apparently unaware of it.

In addition the United States has run a deficit of over one trillion dollars the last two years and has an overall deficit of about 15 trillion dollars... I think that sending kids who don't know what they may want to do to college at no cost is a great idea... You have a warped and ultimately flawed view of the relationship between the citizen and his government..

http://nces.ed.gov/f...splay.asp?id=66

http://www.heritage....mic-achievement

http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/list.php

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"I'm all for individual responsibility as well as social responsibility.....the two aren't mutually exclusive ideas."

Actually in this instance they are. Again why is it the guy down the streets responsibility that I or anybody else go to college ? If somebody wants to go to college bad enough let their parents pay and let them get a job and help pay or take a loan.

In the United States there has been a steady increase in dollars spent per pupil and yet no significant rise in test scores. There is however a steady stream of political donations from the NEA and ATF to the democratic party. This is basic, and it is telling that you are apparently unaware of it.

In addition the United States has run a deficit of over one trillion dollars the last two years and has an overall deficit of about 15 trillion dollars... I think that sending kids who don't know what they may want to do to college at no cost is a great idea... You have a warped and ultimately flawed view of the relationship between the citizen and his government..

http://nces.ed.gov/f...splay.asp?id=66

http://www.heritage....mic-achievement

http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/list.php

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...