It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Is the Occupy Wall Street movement the new Tea Party or actually the old Tea Party?

page: 1
6
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 11:43 AM
link   
When the Tea party first originated, they espoused much of what is being said now. Mainly accountability.

Then others with money co-opted the movement and divided the message. You can see it with the Tea Party Nation, the Tea Party Express, etc, etc. But there are those who stay true to their morals, ethics and standards and don’t buy the party line.

Now we are seeing the same thing with this movement. The Occupy movement has been co-opted by the unions in my opinion. They have learned their lesson well.

The Unions are co-opting the occupy movement and will destroy whatever message they once had by spinning it to the left…for their own gain.

I believe that the Occupy movement will gain momentum, but it will be for the worst. Not for the better.




posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 11:49 AM
link   
reply to post by TDawgRex
 
The "occupy Wall Street" crowd is being led by the nose.
Sure, the banks/Wall Street ae culpable. But it's the spineless pols in DC that make the laws that the bankers abuse.

This is a White House sponsored event to place blame away from those in power.

Just my humble opine.


edit on 1-10-2011 by beezzer because: spellling



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 11:55 AM
link   
anyone who's been watching since day one will tell you anon is behind it =/ also if they are said tea party wheres the tea? and does that count all the union workers, cops, etc, that um, defected? and joined the lines?

the wheres the tea thing was a joke >_> I realise some of the alegations against said group.

ed: I can't see 200,000 people maintaining an entirely peaceful protest indefinatly, but i'll believe it if I see it with my own eyes. godspeed america.
edit on 1/10/2011 by whatsinaname because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 11:58 AM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


Watching the livestream last night was hilarious.

One kid walked up to a cameraman and asked where the RadioHead concert was at.

The camera guy said, "They ain't playin' here tonight.'

The kid the then said, "F(BLEEP) this, I'm going to the bar."

Priceless!



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 12:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by TDawgRex
 
The "occupy Wall Street" crowd is being led by the nose.
Sure, the banks/Wall Street ae culpable. But it's the spineless pols in DC that make the laws that the bankers abuse.

This is a White House sponsored event to place blame away from those in power.

Just my humble opine.


edit on 1-10-2011 by beezzer because: spellling


I think you are looking at it the wrong way. The banks buy the politicians, pay for the campaigns and pay
for the policy. This has been on the lefts mind for some time...



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 12:04 PM
link   
I was watching the chicago feed yesterday and one guy spoke from the internationalist socialist org for about 5 minutes. Not saying everyone in the movement feels this way but their beliefs seem to be the exact opposite of the original tea party movement started with ron pauls campaign. They love marx and think the russian revolution was awesome.

www.internationalsocialist.org...



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 12:08 PM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


But when those spineless pol's come from a banking fraternity background or are in the pockets of the banks then they will always make the laws in favor of the banks. Look at the amount of ex Bankers working in the treasury. From Hank Paulson to Geithner. Look at the billions banks spend in Lobbying to deregulate their industry.

I think it becomes clearer everyday that the banks are running the show and not the ineffectual national leaders.

Let's just say Ron Paul became president, do you think he would be able to change the nature of international banking? What would he be able to do to change the current problems with the banking industry, he is just one man up against the most powerful institutions in the world.and why he will never make president in the first place. He is too much of a threat to the status quo.



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 12:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by mastahunta

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by TDawgRex
 
The "occupy Wall Street" crowd is being led by the nose.
Sure, the banks/Wall Street ae culpable. But it's the spineless pols in DC that make the laws that the bankers abuse.

This is a White House sponsored event to place blame away from those in power.

Just my humble opine.


edit on 1-10-2011 by beezzer because: spellling


I think you are looking at it the wrong way. The banks buy the politicians, pay for the campaigns and pay
for the policy. This has been on the lefts mind for some time...

The only way that banks buy the pols is because the pols are spineless cowards with no integrity. What we need are political leaders with backbones and a sense of duty.



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 12:16 PM
link   
reply to post by woodwardjnr
 
Any real, lasting change won't take place overnight. We need to bring people in that won't bow to the bankers.

Even if it's just one at a time.

Blaming bankers is like accusing the bullet and forgiving the gun.



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 12:18 PM
link   
reply to post by mayabong
 


What would you call the whole TARP bailout? Would that be defined as socialism or communism? It sure wasn't free market capitalism.
I guess socialism's cool as long as it's for the rich.



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 12:29 PM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


If the bankers are the bullets, and the politicians are the gun, then who is pulling the trigger?

You could say the fools who voted for them.



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 12:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by jlv70
reply to post by mayabong
 


What would you call the whole TARP bailout? Would that be defined as socialism or communism? It sure wasn't free market capitalism.
I guess socialism's cool as long as it's for the rich.


It's most similar to feudalism. Taking money from the citizens/subjects/servants and giving it directly to the power elite under the assumption that doing so protects us from harm.



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 12:32 PM
link   
reply to post by woodwardjnr
 


Ron Paul would not be able to change things without executive orders. Something he is against.

He has said he would do such if needed, but acknowledges that it would be a divisive tactic.

So Ron Paul is a non issue here. What America needs is reform, one politician at a time.

Where I live in NE Ohio, people keep voting DNC, buying the party line...it ain't working out to good for them here and they are starting (Finally) to turn.

Will it get any better? I doubt it. This mess can't be turned around in four years.



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 12:43 PM
link   
reply to post by TDawgRex
 


The thing is we are on the verge of global financial collapse. these people protesting know this. They know the future is really on a knife edge. They dont feel they have the time to change things politician by politician. This crisis is also bigger than any one nation. It's a global financial meltdown that is being controlled by the markets not the politicians.



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 12:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by cassandranova
reply to post by beezzer
 


If the bankers are the bullets, and the politicians are the gun, then who is pulling the trigger?

You could say the fools who voted for them.

Bloody well said!



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 12:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer

Originally posted by mastahunta

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by TDawgRex
 
The "occupy Wall Street" crowd is being led by the nose.
Sure, the banks/Wall Street ae culpable. But it's the spineless pols in DC that make the laws that the bankers abuse.

This is a White House sponsored event to place blame away from those in power.

Just my humble opine.


edit on 1-10-2011 by beezzer because: spellling


I think you are looking at it the wrong way. The banks buy the politicians, pay for the campaigns and pay
for the policy. This has been on the lefts mind for some time...

The only way that banks buy the pols is because the pols are spineless cowards with no integrity. What we need are political leaders with backbones and a sense of duty.


You're not going to change the composition of politicians, they have always been susceptible.



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 12:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by woodwardjnr
reply to post by TDawgRex
 


The thing is we are on the verge of global financial collapse. these people protesting know this. They know the future is really on a knife edge. They dont feel they have the time to change things politician by politician. This crisis is also bigger than any one nation. It's a global financial meltdown that is being controlled by the markets not the politicians.


Know about the financial collapse and doing something about it are two totally different things.

You have to get inside, take it over (without compromising your ethics) and turn it around. That is where the revolution starts.

Most of these protesters just want free stuff in my opinion and are not willing to work for them.



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 12:55 PM
link   
reply to post by mastahunta
 


Precisely why we need a resurgence of statesmen, and stop trying to polish the proverbial turds that are politicians.



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 12:57 PM
link   
I was just thinking the same thing!

It's really the old tea party - but the old tea party got subverted and became the right wing radicals.

I was very supportive of the Occupy Wallstreet protests - but watching them fight over whether or not they should push LBGT issues and such as that is leaving a bad taste in my mouth - it's hard to explain.

I'm a liberal at heart. That said, I support Ron Paul. I'm really a left libertarian. I don't like the militants on the left. They scare me as bad as the brutes on the right that applaud people dying without healthcare.

Is there a peace on earth goodwill towards men party? One where the 100% all agree to try to love and take care of each other? Voluntarily and in the spirit of supporting the beauty in humanity?

I think that's the party I want to go to.



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 01:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by TDawgRex
 
The "occupy Wall Street" crowd is being led by the nose.
Sure, the banks/Wall Street ae culpable. But it's the spineless pols in DC that make the laws that the bankers abuse.

This is a White House sponsored event to place blame away from those in power.

Just my humble opine.


edit on 1-10-2011 by beezzer because: spellling


While I could see this as a viable plot in a movie, it doesn't seem to be playing out that way. First of all, it is being ignored by left-wing and right-wing media. The only ones who are giving it any positive light are the comedy central personalities (and Lawrence O'Donnell did a cool piece about the police abuses). If this were a government-driven event, wouldn't you think it would be fully supported by the media?

I agree that if we stopped voting for corrupt politicians, there would be no corrupt politicians. But that's like saying Justin Beiber will go away if we just stop listening to him. Sure, some of us would stop but there is still that huge pop music money machine that will cram it so far down the rest of the country's throats that he'll never go away.

Wall Street is that machine. As long as it exists in current form, media will be bought. Politicians will be bought. PACs will be bought. Unions will be bought. Government will be bought. And our option between the two candidates we have every four years will always belong to them. Why do you think RP is never supported (again, with the exception of Lawrence O'Donnell and the Comedy Central crowd... strange now that I think of it)...



new topics

top topics



 
6
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join