Anti-OWS threads reach for everything they can to denouce the movement.

reply to post by FreedomXisntXFree


Thanks OP. Many of the anti OWS threads are just plain silly. I dont understand how they get flags...

Ok well you're at fault for not actually asserting yourself in school. You're talking to a kid that busted his ass and didn't party his way through college. I deprived myself of sleep to get the grade. I worked hard, got good grades, and did everything I could to absorb what I needed to get a job in my field. I went to college to set myself up for a better future.

The problem is the job market is already full and they only want people with experience. Not a fresh newbie out of college. I'm qualified but have no experience. The only way to get experience is by getting a job.

I can thank the bankers on Wall Street for destroying the economy which in turn disables people in my position from finding a job.

reply to post by LeoStarchild


They represent my interests?

Certainly doesn't seem like it.

Ya know why? because they don't.

They represent party first.. special interests second.. their own need to stay in office third.. they barely bother to pretend anymore.

There is no more representation anymore.. except for those already in power.. that's who is represented.

State politicians.. lol.. that's how they start.. minor leagues.. scum like santorum.. then they go national.. if they look electable.. not if they're qualified.. or honest.

Please.

No more fairy tales.

Originally posted by ker2010
So CBS taking down a poll he was winning isnt blacking him out?

www.youtube.com...

Here. Let me show you something.

Ron Paul isn't being covered by the media

he's being blacked out because he's simply not seen as being newsworthy

Either way, the take-home story amounts to the media not actually covering news

Know where those three lines came from? They came from the post of mine that you just responded to - and I must note, quoted. As in, when you were typing this, you were staring at text that conclusively proves exactly the opposite of what you are accusing me of.

Why do you feel the need to misrepresent my position, even when you yourself have quoted it in your own post for all to see?

I guess you do not want change in this country, we all know why you do not support RP. Its because you are scared he will end the welfare state and it will be harder for people to suckle on government tit.

It doesn't even cross your mind that there are actual reasons for welfare to exist, does it? It's just a "dirty word" you like to use without any understanding of meaning or context.

Every time someone brings him up you bash him. In every thread you try your best to discredit him.

well, every time someone brings him up, it's done in a terribly unintelligent manner - in this case, "OWS is going to follow Ron Paul" - 'cause you know OWS is all about the US kicking itself in the balls with self-imposed austerity measures, right?

yes, I hash on Ron Paul, and I hash on him hard. I do so for one very simple reason - he advocates godawful policy. It's painfully evident to me that a great many of Ron Paul's supporters actually do not understand what his position is. Since this site's call line isn't "deny ignorance except for Ron Paul," I feel I have a duty to educate you guys about the dude.

See, you kids are running around, believing Ron Paul is something new, something revolutionary, something - dare we say it - experimental! Well... he's not. He's a plain old Hayek-style monetarist (if you do not know what these words mean, you certainly can't call yourself informed about Ron Paul. Go read a book or something.) The monetarist philosophy is, at its essence, "burn down the government and let "the markets" do their thing" - you know, just as Ron Paul just encouraged us to do in that youtube link. This is not new, nor is it experimental. it's been done in several countries around the world, and each and every time it has ended up with a ruined country, often with mass graves (since the people of those countries often object to the system being shoved on them.)

These policies will not magically cause a different result in the US than they did in Argentina or Bolivia or Poland or South Africa. They will be a disaster here as well, and should be strongly avoided.

The guy is 100% for the people of this country, never voted to raise his salary, and is gonna take a 39k year salary if elected. The man is a class act.

A man who - as you have pointed out with your jibe at welfare - wants to stick it to poor people, while selling off our nation to "the market", and insists on pushing for a gold standard while himself being the biggest congressional gold investor... is not someone I see as "100% for the people."

You just keep playing with my little pony and let the people ready for real change vote for it.

Oh, I can enjoy My Little Pony AND vote. And what's more I can inform myself prior to casting a ballot. What's it like being someone who votes according to ignorance and peer pressure?

reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus


ThirdEye, can you provide a source for your claim, or are we supposed to go on your totally honest good word?

Originally posted by LeoStarchild

Originally posted by Resinveins
reply to post by LeoStarchild

 

Hmm.. I've no idea to what you're alluding to.

Take your time.. compose your thoughts. It might help

in short..your out of ammo ..

its okay ill wait

edit on 19-11-2011 by LeoStarchild because: (no reason given)

im wondering how long till the OWS movement breaks down and goes outlaw.

edit on 19-11-2011 by LeoStarchild because: (no reason given)

I was wondering how long it was going to take before one of you got authoritarian up in here...
Gotta get them terrorists who are mad at the banks, the ones who robbed your whole country
blind as a bat. Next it call a preemptive strike upon the nearly outlaw, lazy hippies who are
threatening communism upon the world for being pissed off. Someones gonna get authoritarian
if this misunderstanding keeps going and PWS is not threatening the status quo.

I hope OWS can become more convincing and make for a more fluid political situation.

Originally posted by FreedomXisntXFree
Ok well you're at fault for not actually asserting yourself in school. You're talking to a kid that busted his ass and didn't party his way through college. I deprived myself of sleep to get the grade. I worked hard, got good grades, and did everything I could to absorb what I needed to get a job in my field. I went to college to set myself up for a better future.

The problem is the job market is already full and they only want people with experience. Not a fresh newbie out of college. I'm qualified but have no experience. The only way to get experience is by getting a job.

I can thank the bankers on Wall Street for destroying the economy which in turn disables people in my position from finding a job.

You can thank Carter and Clinton for forcing banks to lend to people who defaulted on their loans, and you can also thank Barney Frank for not being forthright about the Fannie and Freddie debacle. After all, he was the Congressional oversight and he said things were fine. The derivatives are a real banking issue, so really a lot of people are at fault. I was not for the baillouts, but OWS is repeatedly calling for solutions I will not support. Obama is one of the biggest examples of cronyism Ive ever seen in my lifetime, and yet he is backing OWS, along with Nancy Pelosi, whom we have recently heard is involved in some shady insider trading.

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
You can thank Carter and Clinton for forcing banks to lend to people who defaulted on their loans,

No, actually, you can thank the federal reserve for setting interest rates below inflation rate for seven years in an effort to combat the post-911 slump in the market. This resulted in a sort of feeding... you know what, why am I trying to give you facts, you're just going to ignore 'em and try to blame poor people anyway.

Originally posted by LeoStarchild
The US SHOULD be a Republic.... *cough* no where in the constitution does it say anything about a democracy...

a republic is a nation of LAWS..

a democracy is a rule of majority or people.. but as we find .. the minority seems to think they are the majority.. when clearly they are not.

And by what process is this Republic formed?

Is this a simpler way of saying people shouldn't be self governed?
We get direct representation which is characterized by
the democratic process. The constant use of this point makes me think
some of you figure that a form other than the people direct input is the source
of our freedom. I have a very strange feeling that some think money should
grant the freedom to dominate an entire country of people. That would make
sense of the entire anti OWS crew, just saying,,,

Originally posted by Resinveins
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

 

Are you sure you do? Our forefathers revolted due to tyranny. Maybe you don't classify our current government as tyrannical.. but I and others most certainly do.

Taxation without representation ring a bell?

Who in government represents me.. instead of their own interests?

edit on 19-11-2011 by Resinveins because: (no reason given)

Yes, I'm 100 % certain. I've been to the Tea Party rallies which is supportive of our Constitution and Founding Principles. I believe in LIMITED govt, NOT the NANNY State. OWS wants nanny statism, they want the govt to pay for their college education, they want to abolish capitalism, etc etc. Yes I'm 100 % certain I'm on the Founding Fathers side of things. If you believe in the principles of our Founding Fathers, why get behind a group who obviously wants certain peoples to be taxed higher in order to pay for entitlements? Class warfare. I know our Founding Fathers were not communist or socialist.

OWS is calling to change the system. The Founding Fathers knew that direct democracy would bring bad results. It is not the answer. Demanding to change that is not going to get rid of tyranny. It is just going to subject us to mob rule and abolition of private property. I've been reading their demands. Have you?

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus

Originally posted by Resinveins
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

 

Are you sure you do? Our forefathers revolted due to tyranny. Maybe you don't classify our current government as tyrannical.. but I and others most certainly do.

Taxation without representation ring a bell?

Who in government represents me.. instead of their own interests?

edit on 19-11-2011 by Resinveins because: (no reason given)

Yes, I'm 100 % certain. I've been to the Tea Party rallies which is supportive of our Constitution and Founding Principles. I believe in LIMITED govt, NOT the NANNY State. OWS wants nanny statism, they want the govt to pay for their college education, they want to abolish capitalism, etc etc. Yes I'm 100 % certain I'm on the Founding Fathers side of things. If you believe in the principles of our Founding Fathers, why get behind a group who obviously wants certain peoples to be taxed higher in order to pay for entitlements? Class warfare. I know our Founding Fathers were not communist or socialist.

You are making this up. Has anyone here on this thread representing OWS said they would like to abolish
capitalism?

No

They have not, you keep dating it, I could say you want a few rich people to world the world like
overlords, would that make it true? Same difference...

reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus


So your telling me then.. that there are people in Washington DC who actually represent the people they're supposed to represent.. free of outside interests.. and corruption .. not a pawn of a political party.. and making their decisions accordingly?

Who might these people be?

reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus


Still waiting on source... Tick tock, tick tock...

Stop making things up, thirdeye. If you want to try to create a personal fantasy world and convince others to live in it... ATS has a Philosophy & Metaphysics forum. Utilize it.

Originally posted by TheWalkingFox

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
You can thank Carter and Clinton for forcing banks to lend to people who defaulted on their loans,

No, actually, you can thank the federal reserve for setting interest rates below inflation rate for seven years in an effort to combat the post-911 slump in the market. This resulted in a sort of feeding... you know what, why am I trying to give you facts, you're just going to ignore 'em and try to blame poor people anyway.

Yes, I do blame the Federal Reserve. Very much so. Check my posting history. OWS is not blaming the Fed(mostly anyway). In my view, it is not that the Fed set interest rates too low, but that they continually control the cycles and manipulate the economy. But the Federal Govt is to blame for continued borrowing from the Fed and driving up the deficit with programs we cannot afford.
I always go back to G Edward Griffin on the Fed. No need for giving me facts.

Obama/Pelosi are only openly backing OWS for re-election. They don't believe in what Occupy stands for.

Ron Paul is the only guy. I hate to put my faith in a politician again but he seems genuine. I truly don't think you can lie without contradicting yourself for 35 years.

The Media showed me how they operate in 2008 with the Obama election. I admit I was fooled. I won't be fooled again. The funny thing is the Media's "choosing of a candidate" is apparent already. Every time I turn on the MSM its laughable and at the same time makes me furious. Its so easy to see through the lies after 2008.

Every action(Wall Street/US Government/Federal Reserve)that was taken in 2008 exposes TPTB in 2011. They are so transparent now as much as they don't want to be.

2012 is going to be a time of positive outcome whatever it may be. However it may come about. You can take that to the bank.

Originally posted by Resinveins
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

 

So your telling me then.. that there are people in Washington DC who actually represent the people they're supposed to represent.. free of outside interests.. and corruption .. not a pawn of a political party.. and making their decisions accordingly?

Who might these people be?

What I am telling you is that our Founding Fathers built our Constitution on the principles of a representative republic, not a direct democracy. OWS is trying to change that, and that means a fundamental transformation of our country and all that it stands for, by adopting socialist democracy.

reply to post by mastahunta


Mastahunta, all due respect, while you may not personally be for abolishing Capitalism, I have seen numerous signs and heard people on the livestreams demanding the end of Capitalism. One night I heard two different people in ten minutes say it on the microphone. No, I am most definitely not making it up. Why you cannot see that from the evidence which has been abundantly posted I cannot say. It may be willful or not.

reply to post by FreedomXisntXFree


I think he's.. honest enough.

I disagree with many of his policies.

He lost some credibility with me when he declared republican.

The republicans can't use him so they have no use for him.. he doesn't advance their agenda.. so they shut him out.. treat him shabbily.. make light of his protests.. they minimize him wherever they can.

So mainstream reps don't like him.. and independents feel like he gave his integrity for a chance to get exposure.. votes.. and a chance to actually win.

I don't see that as a win.

Originally posted by TheWalkingFox
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

 

ThirdEye, can you provide a source for your claim, or are we supposed to go on your totally honest good word?

edit on 19/11/2011 by TheWalkingFox because: (no reason given)

Which part are you referring to? The part where I say that communists hate Capitalism? or the part where I say Soros is a Socialist who hates Capitalism but who abuses Capitalism to make money to build a Socialist Utopia?

After reading many of the ATS anti-OWS threads, I was disappointed to find so much expression of classist and ageistic oppressive ideology and manipulative techniques that violate the rationality of the reader (for example, in threads with inadequate reasoning, anti-OWS posters trying to associate negative things with the origins and continuation of the Occupy protests to develop in the reader an emotional aversion against the Occupy protests and protestors). In these threads, I have found much hyperboly, and numerous fallacies, look them up (it's good to know these so that you won't be fooled by these fallacies when disinfo posters use them thinking that you won't notice), (1) 'causal oversimplification,' (2) 'genetic fallacy,' (3) 'poisoning the well,' (4) 'circular reasoning,' and the more popular fallacy, so commonly used by anti-OWS protestors, (5) 'guilty by association.' It is as if some of these posters are intentionally being fallacious to convince others, and disrespectful to rationality without regard for rational persuasion...

These fallacious lines of ill, political reasoning which are promoted by Neocons, and which I believe are indicative of the paralogic and paramorality which fit the descriptions of characteropathies predicted by "ponerology" - important to know look it up- secure.wikimedia.org...
in the rise of political tyrannies due to the rule by psychopaths...these faulty lines of political reasoning serve only as illogical traps for unjust social consequences...and ironically, many of these posters that claim the protestors are only being naive are actually themselves showing political naivety - you are falling for the illogical traps that the likes of neocons are throwing at you to get you to oppose much needed protests.

The presence of so much fallacy (fallacy! fallacy! fallacy! fallacy!) in these anti-protest views shows that they lack logical relevance and as such are logically disconnected from the reality of these social movements. To whether the protestors should be allowed their free speech, it is of little or no logical relevance who works to coopt (many do try!), or what a tiny statistical minority of protestors have been seen doing, even more so when the images were taken out of context to produce a misleading and false portrayal of the protestors in general!

Undeniably, there are many issues that are motivating these protests, and the demand to have only one common message is inappropriate given that there is so much injustice to complain about in the economy - Even if any of the claims against a statistical minority of protestors were true, it still does not take away from (1) the real economic causes that are truly psychologically motivating the participation of the protestors, and (2) the need for government to consider or address their grievances.