BREAKING: Judge says NO to Occupy Wall Street

Originally posted by My.mind.is.mine

Earlier, a judge ruled that they COULD be there but apparently the Mayor and Police made a case worth a new ruling. This is big.

edit on 15-11-2011 by My.mind.is.mine because: (no reason given)

Or the judge's financial benefactors gently reminded him of his bill of sale. The time is now to stop the madness.

reply to post by My.mind.is.mine

Earlier, a judge ruled that they COULD be there but apparently the Mayor and Police made a case worth a new ruling. This is big. edit on 15-11-2011 by My.mind.is.mine because: (no reason given)

This may be off topic if so i apologize, but i thought this point should be brought up. When the first verdict allowed them to come back fully and the mayor didn't like that, they just went right back into another hearing?This has to be the fastest the justice system has EVER worked.I personally have been waiting for an adoption case to be heard for 2 years! How do they have the ability to just ramrod another verdict the same day?

It is OVER!
www.nydailynews.com...

Judge backs city's ban on Occupy Wall Street protesters' tents at Zuccotti

Now they scatter like cocka roaches.

The ruling by Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Michael Stallman says that city can stop protesters from bringing tents, tarps and other camping equipment into the park.

The decision is likely to be appealed, so it was unclear if the city would immediately reopen the park to people without tents.

Some Occupy Wall Street protesters had already moved to another public space, owned by Trinity Church, at c anal St. and Sixth Ave., where they used bolt cutters to open a fenced-in area.

No revolution, no change, OWS accomplished nothing except
bring surge of crimes, disease, fecal and piss everywhere
not a good movement,

It is over now goobye!

reply to post by popsmayhem

occupystreams.org...
this does not look like the scattering of "cocka roaches" to me. You give these peoples resilience too little respect.

reply to post by Shillbillyjim


Not off topic at all. You don't have enough money to have the justice system work at your pace. They'll get to you when they're ready. Of course a judge would hop outta bed to try and end the OWS.

Originally posted by jjjtir
hosted2.ap.org/COGRA/APWorldNews/Article_2011-11-15-ML-Iran's-Nuclear-Mind/id-497c9f863ccc4b35b34254a104536f18

Female Iranian students hold posters of supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and a poster against US President Barack Obama, while they gather in front of the Isfahan Uranium Conversion Facility in support of Iran's nuclear program, just outside the city of Isfahan, 410 kilometers, 255 miles south of the capital Tehran, Iran, Tuesday, Nov. 15, 2011. (AP Photo/Vahid Salemi)



Iranian students chant slogans and hold an anti-US placard and a poster of supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, as they gather in front of the Isfahan Uranium Conversion Facility in support of Iran's nuclear program, just outside the city of Isfahan, 410 kilometers, 255 miles south of the capital Tehran, Iran, Tuesday, Nov. 15, 2011. (AP Photo/Vahid Salemi)

What the fizzle does that have to do with ANYTHING?

reply to post by jjjtir

Aside from wondering how far off topic those pics are....Do Iranian women make a habit of carrying signs written only in English? You don't think that display might have been just a tiny bit staged, do ya?

reply to post by jjjtir



Did you post this on the wrong topic?

I have done that.

Originally posted by SLAYER69
It's been What?

Two months already?

Fall back, regroup, come out swinging fresh in the Spring with a real Agenda, a real leadership and maybe they'll gain some support. But Squatting on Private Property making demands for somebody listen to them then complain when they are legally told to leave is not helping.



.02

Bingo,

reply to post by My.mind.is.mine


If they want to go in and ensure it's not a "fire trap" (I guess the park must be in a giant steel cage with 1 exit) that's exactly what they should do, and OWS had best let them do that. If it's a safety issue, address the safety issue without trampling on peoples rights.

First they came for the communists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a communist.

Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Socialists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a Socialst.

Then they came for the Tea Party Members,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a Tea Party Member.

Then they came for the OWS Protesters,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't an OWS Protester.

Then they came for me
and there was no one left to speak out for me.

The second you allowed "free speech zones" in America, you doomed yourselves

This will no be the end of this by far. It's only gonna get crazier. This is hold on to your hats time.

I can't believe that Americans have not joined in much more numbers with the level of police violence towards protesters, it makes me sad. OWS isn't the problem. The Banks who own the government and media ARE. Wake up all you deniers. There's little time left. IMO

Originally posted by SLAYER69
But Squatting on Private Property making demands for somebody listen to them then complain when they are legally told to leave is not helping.

How can they be squatting if the park owners don't mind them being there?

Riddle me that.

reply to post by Kryties


The owners of the park have to uphold the guidelines and the laws set by the city in order for this park to be considered open for public use. It's all part of the agreement with Zuccotti and the 40 plus privately owned "public" spaces in the city. Otherwise, the facility should just have a 12 foot privacy wall built around it.

They may own and maintain it but it is the city who is charged with the public safety aspect of the park and all that goes on within it boundaries.

reply to post by jibeho


Ahh yes, rules and red tape - designed and implemented by the elite in order to squash any easy resistance.

I say screw the rules, keep Occupying.

reply to post by jibeho


Watch which public safety measures you support. Most of them are not there to help the average joe. Many of them are outright constitutional violations. Watch what you allow for "public safety".

Exactly, those rules are not in place for peoples safety. The only time people need a generator, a microphone, or tents, and make shift kitchens is either when they're protesting, or homeless, and living there. The "rules" are only in place to keep protests and truly homeless individuals off of private property. Who cares if it's for public use. These laws are not in place for your well being, or my well being.

Answer this question please: How do you call yourself protecting somebody from a fire started by a generator, but beat them out of the park? And arrest them? and treat them like animals?

The fact that the situation went down like that, says that it's not for safety. You don't put someones well being in danger for their own safety. This system doesn't give a # about us. They only care about themselves. Everything they do, is for the benefit of the "them". Stop reaching all into the atmosphere hoping that they did something for the protection of citizens.

You need to find a "free speech zone" to talk about so called public safety 'round here.

Originally posted by My.mind.is.mine
The owners say yes to the protest, AND the tents.
The city says yes to protests, and NO to tents.

So clearly it's not as simple as you think. The city has made a ruling on what goes on on PRIVATE property.

It is not private property, is is a privately-owned public park. It is subject to the laws and local codes and ordinances that address public places including sanitary requirements, food preparation, prohibition of temporary housing, etc. Besides that, if you own a house within a city, try letting a bunch of homeless people come pitch tents and live in your front yard and see how long it is before you get a code violation letter from the city and/ or a covenant violation letter from your HOA. It is NOT anyone's right to just go set up a tent and live wherever they want even if they have the property owner's permission.

I fail to understand why the OWS movement thinks the only way they can be heard is if they break the law, they should borrow a page from the Tea Party movement which managed to protest peacefully, publicize their agenda publically and effect a huge change in the next voting cycle; all without breaking any laws.

reply to post by SavedOne


see my previous post regarding these 'laws'...

and if you don't see a problem with the fact that "even with owners permission, you can't do _______" then you sir have been indoctrinated..