It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Occupy Portland Prepares For War

page: 27
<< 24  25  26    28  29  30 >>

log in


posted on Nov, 12 2011 @ 03:10 PM
reply to post by neo96

Were you referring to your hitler post comparing hitler and nazis to ows? Or was there some other twisting you're referring to? Honestly confused here.

posted on Nov, 12 2011 @ 03:11 PM

Originally posted by SLAYER69
reply to post by L00kingGlass

I like how you phrased that "Fire them" that's perfect. They work for us. Not the other way around.

Better word usage than 'overthrow' or 'Coup'

I was tempted to say fire at them, but I'm a nice guy.

Edit: Also civilized.
edit on 12-11-2011 by L00kingGlass because: (no reason given)

posted on Nov, 12 2011 @ 03:11 PM
reply to post by HangTheTraitors

Two questions:

1) With regard to your pseudonym, would you agree that turnabout is fair play (i.e. you'll face the end of a rope if you fail to overcome these traitors)?

2) Is your neighbor aware that you've tapped his or her wireless network?

posted on Nov, 12 2011 @ 03:13 PM
reply to post by Resinveins

Hitler was relevant for the simple fact that all the German peoples problems were due to those evil rich bankers just that they were jewish and guess what OWS attacked a Israeli consulate.

Yeah its like that someone said denial which is a most apt term for the things OWS does back in the 30s we call can bet that the German people were plotting and planning for their little war in the name of the people and well we all know how that turned out.
edit on 12-11-2011 by neo96 because: (no reason given)

posted on Nov, 12 2011 @ 03:14 PM

Originally posted by Jason88
reply to post by sonnny1

Ha. I do know you. And I will not defend myself because of your fears, ask for some clarification from someone you trust before posting nonsense. Next time you try to pigeonhole someone with mind games, please understand context before it bites you on the behind. And then, read and re-read and then read some more why that comparison was made.
edit on 12-11-2011 by Jason88 because: (no reason given)

I did reread it.

Originally posted by Jason88
I hear ya. Maybe the remedy is just like the mid-east terrorists (again not supporting, just a good comparison in my mind) --- and that is to have a whole chain of command, that is hidden, so if one leader goes down, another pops up in another city, and on and on and on.

In YOUR mind its good to compare the tactics of terrorists,and incorporate them into OWS.Your "again,not supporting" means what? You dont support mid east terrorists,just terrorist tactics?

Terrorism is the systematic use of terror, especially as a means of coercion. In the international community, however, terrorism has no universally agreed, legally binding, criminal law definition. Common definitions of terrorism refer only to those violent acts which are intended to create fear (terror), are perpetrated for a religious, political or ideological goal, and deliberately target or disregard the safety of non-combatants (civilians). Some definitions now exclude acts of state terrorism and some also include acts of unlawful violence and war. The use of similar tactics by criminal organizations for protection rackets or to enforce a code of silence is usually not labeled terrorism though these same actions may be labeled terrorism when done by a politically motivated group.

Yeah,I know what you want and mean.................

You give OWS supporters,and OWS as a whole,a bad name.

posted on Nov, 12 2011 @ 03:15 PM
reply to post by yourmaker

Actually no consent is needed now. Congress has no say. We have no say. They just put boots on the ground and worry about political fallout afterwards. Even Obama just sidesteps congress on matters of war and conflict. Better to say sorry than ask permission I guess.

posted on Nov, 12 2011 @ 03:16 PM
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

These people are anarchists.......but they advocate nanny-state big government.

You can't have both, so which one is the current talking point? I need to know! Should I hate them because they want the government to give coc aine money to unemployed minorities, or should I hate them for wanting to destroy social order through reckless disregard for the rule of law?

They don't have a message, but their message is the welfare state.
They won't have any effect on anything, but they're causing the decline of society.
They're too stupid to realize how stupid they are, but they're crafty enough to topple our way of life so the police should whack them.
They're too lazy to get a job, but motivated enough to build an encampment fort, stockpile weapons, and fight violently with cops....presumably to avoid the hassle of getting a job.....even though there's no proof of any of this yet.
They're protesting government corruption, but they're un-American trashballs who obviously do not care about America.

anti-OWS folks have a tougher time staying on message than OWS does!

P.S. If you get that the movement is largely about the corruption of government by big money interests, to the point of it no longer serving the average citizen or even acting in the interest of this nation anymore.....and you say that the founding fathers would not support're lying. That is, unless you buy into the picture of the founding fathers as moneyed elite who acted quite aggressively in their own self interest by calling for revolution. Then, they'd BE Wall Street, and you'd be completely cohesive with your belief. Again, you can't have both.

posted on Nov, 12 2011 @ 03:16 PM
While media shows footage of peaceful protestors getting jabbed in the abdomen with clubs (or lack of showing), the public sympathy still rests with the protestors.

As soon as you see armed protestors striking back, wearing masks or tossing Molotov... the protest movement is going to lose part of their support. The police NEED a reason to come down hard. What we have seen from the police is only proactive action to the protests. Any justifiable reason to swiftly and decisively clear the streets.

As soon as a firearm is fired and real blood spilt with loss of life. That will be the moment the police need to really start cracking skulls.

posted on Nov, 12 2011 @ 03:18 PM

Originally posted by yourmaker

Originally posted by IofRa
Anything you try to solve with violence is a lost cause.
Remain peaceful, folks. This will only turn against them.

Then why is it acceptable for our government to use?

On other nations and it's own citizenry?

And if that were the case, why do we give them consent?

And if we don't give them our consent, then we would be slaves, no?

we are slaves to violence in the name of peace.

Is your government's use of violence acceptable to you then?
They give themselves the consent. We don't vote them in office to wage war, mind you.

You're right. We are slaves to violence. Remember "1984"?

posted on Nov, 12 2011 @ 03:21 PM
Although I doubt any of this is true, and probably just propaganda to justify a violent police crackdown, why shouldn't those who wish to protest peacefully be allowed to? Is it not their right? I say that comparing them to the Founding Fathers is NOT stupid, because they are simply protecting what the Founding Fathers gave them.

You have to be blind to think that we have not lost more of our rights as time has passed, and if it takes fighting back to preserve our only means of showing our dissent toward the government, protesting, then so be it.

posted on Nov, 12 2011 @ 03:22 PM
reply to post by wonderboy2402

As soon as a firearm is fired and real blood spilt with loss of life. That will be the moment the police need to really start cracking skulls.

I'll bet "black bloc anarchists" will be there with bells on. Luckily for the protesters Portland Police released a statement saying they were willing to be patient and weed out violent protesters from the peaceful ones, rather than just attacking all of them.
edit on 12-11-2011 by L00kingGlass because: (no reason given)

posted on Nov, 12 2011 @ 03:24 PM
reply to post by neo96

How did you actually get a star for calling OWS Nazis? As a fairly new member, I'm still navigating how best to accumulate stars, given that I don't have a specialty like Phage and Astronomy or whatnot.

I'll do you one better.....the anti-OWS folks are like the German population who just let everything happen, since the alternative was to put themselves into direct opposition with the government.

Or, I could make it more topical.

You guys are like Joe Paterno.

Now, I'll follow your formula and say it's a relevant comparison because inaction in the face of a perceived moral outrage is similar to the guilt of the perpetrator. This would make supporting OWS the only morally acceptable play. Except that it's not a relevant comparison at all, I'm being completely and utterly troll-tastic, and doing nothing except adding to the echo chamber and accumulating stars.

Am I doing it right?

posted on Nov, 12 2011 @ 03:25 PM
reply to post by Phantom28804

I live in canada, in a small town far from the protests, but i did go to vancouver about 2 weeks ago and drove by the protest.

But, to my surprise i was met buy a guy silently pumping one fist in the air, so naturally, i stood out my window with both fists up and said "Together we can destroy capitalism"

And what was my responce, lol, he imediatly took his fist out of the air and with a scared bewildered look we quickly turned his head and looked away. LMAO

So yes i agree first hand that most these people dont even know why they are there let alone are ready to give up there freedom or life for the betterment of mankind.

But some of us are, and theyll be more, especially when smoke clears and only the real freedom fighters are left standing.

Just remember not to call them terrorists, casue you know thats what they call them.

One mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter, and even though most these people dont know exactly what there goal is, i think its pretty obvious what the 99.9% goal should be.

And i appluade these people for atleast trying, because in the end they will be the ones that gave our fight a name.

Sheep yes, but still our borthers and sisters. but now its time for the wolves to have a turn. Our wolves.

You see, if someone were to take extreme action now, the sheep would call them terrorists, but if the cops kill a few sheep, the sheep will praise our justified violence and many more will follow.

edit on 12-11-2011 by kman420 because: grammer nazi made me do it

posted on Nov, 12 2011 @ 03:29 PM
reply to post by Jiggyfly

You guys are like Joe Paterno.

So now the people who do not support violent actions condoned by OWS and their defenders are now pedophiles.

Actually nah sounds like the "master race" and their superiority complex.

To answer the question No,
edit on 12-11-2011 by neo96 because: (no reason given)

posted on Nov, 12 2011 @ 03:31 PM
reply to post by neo96

Hmm attacked the israeli consulate.. pretty sure they occupied the lobby.. for like 20 minutes.. then they left... that's an attack to you? Are you twisting things to your advantage here?

And we can all bet that the germans were planning...?
What are we betting? Perhaps this is conjecture on your part? I'm not sure what you mean there actually.

posted on Nov, 12 2011 @ 03:34 PM
reply to post by kman420

Maybe because most Occupy protester AREN'T againt capitalism, just the abusing of power that some who benefit from capitalism take part in.

reply to post by neo96

Not pedophiles, the comparison was about seeing a problem and not doing anything about it, making you as guilty as the person committing the crime.

posted on Nov, 12 2011 @ 03:36 PM
reply to post by Rockpuck

Wow Rock, have you ever passed by there? It sounds bad. I am glad to see people taking this seriously though. Even though I do not agree with Occupy Movements completely.

posted on Nov, 12 2011 @ 03:39 PM
reply to post by neo96

As a pennsylvanian.. I'll clear up your confusion.. Joe Paterno is not charged with being a pedophile.

His long time defensive coordinator was. Joe Paterno.. is one of the people who allegedly kept it quiet.

In fact he's yet to be charged with a crime. Civil suits will be a different matter though most likely.

So not sure what the paterno comparison was supposed to mean.. but I think someones confused over who did what.

posted on Nov, 12 2011 @ 03:40 PM
WELL, looky there. Go figure, they were serious. They really want things to change. So, they are not going to protest in a way that is easily ignorable.... good on 'em.

Peacefull protesting on serious matters is all that is allowed, because it acts as a meer pacifier to the masses. Making them feel as if they have accomplished what ever it was that was eating at them so. Peacefull protests are allowed because governments can easily dismiss them and go back about their business.

Truth be told, NOTHING changes until force is applied. Until the people can NOT be dismissed.

The government SHOULD be afraid right now. Citizens have been pushed too far.

All citizens are allowed access to information which is different than in the previous generations. We now KNOW if the correct change is being made. Its to the point that the government cant pass gass in the morning with out the rest of the world knowing by lunch time.

These protesters have nothing left to loose. Now that word has gotten out that there is the opprotunity to stand up against the police .... this is going to spread like wildfire once this begins.

posted on Nov, 12 2011 @ 03:41 PM

Originally posted by Resinveins
reply to post by neo96

Hmm attacked the israeli consulate.. pretty sure they occupied the lobby.. for like 20 minutes.. then they left... that's an attack to you? Are you twisting things to your advantage here?

What is apolitical about occupying an "Israeli" Consulate?

Where was OWS at all the "other" Consulates?

What Capitalist change will come from Occupying the Consulate?

What big bankers were at this Consulate?

Apolitical minds would like to know.......

top topics

<< 24  25  26    28  29  30 >>

log in