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.

 

MoveOn Recruits for '99% Spring' Training

page: 4
5
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 16 2012 @ 01:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by Germanicus
reply to post by xuenchen
 


I love this thread


Where are all your McCarthyist buds?


Believe me, my friend. My only grievance with what is usually known as Communism, is the internationalist aspect. Aside from that, however, I'm much more of a closet Communist than most here might think. With all of the other people here who talk about Communism, that is all they do; talk.

I on the other hand have recently spent time on a bona fide commune, and paid over $2,000 last year, for permaculture instruction from various people, some of whom, I can assure you, would be perceived as bona fide Communist subversives. If you think Senator McCarthy would approve of me, think again. I'm not merely one of the armchair apologists that exist here on ATS. I'm something much, much more dangerous.


For all the people here who congratulate themselves about how the government is supposedly crapping its' pants over Occupy, I can assure you that Occupy is no real threat to the American government. A little protest, a little getting necklifted or their heads caved in by the cops, and a little time causing a stir in the blogosphere. The state knows that it has no real cause to fear those whose idea of activism, is getting into street fights with the police, as I have pointed out before. The government might fear the overall trend, where it knows the wind is blowing; but not the actual tactics that have been used against it so far, no.

If Occupy really wanted to give the government nightmares, however, they wouldn't be going and rabble rousing outside any City Hall, dashing themselves against the rocks.

But let them scatter, and fan out, and really teach the people, only a few in one place, at one time, and then you would have something. Let them spread the knowledge of how to set up co-operatives. Let them seed the population with organisations like this. Let them spread the use of psychedelics; both encouraging such, and actually enabling the people to have access to them. Let them show the people that society without currency is actually far better than what they think they have right now.

Kali misunderstands me, I think. She suspects that my grievance with Occupy is due to my perception that its' nature is excessively subversive, when in reality, the opposite is true. Occupy as an organisation have no real idea of how to be subversive enough.




posted on Apr, 16 2012 @ 01:06 AM
link   
reply to post by XPLodER
 


The movement hasn't been co-opted. It was always a Soros/Obama/MoveOn/Progressive/leftist/radical/hippie/Marxist/anarchist group to begin with.



posted on Apr, 16 2012 @ 01:12 AM
link   
reply to post by petrus4
 





I'm much more of a closet Communist than most here might think


I have noticed. But all you spout is McCarthyist rot. And as I said,you remind me of a matador.Messing with two bulls.

Seems your style is to pander to the left for a little then you stab them in the guts when they are not paying attention.

Maybe you should pick a side and be a little more up front about what you believe.



posted on Apr, 16 2012 @ 01:12 AM
link   
reply to post by petrus4
 





I'm much more of a closet Communist than most here might think


I have noticed. But all you spout is McCarthyist rot. And as I said,you remind me of a matador.Messing with two bulls.

Seems your style is to pander to the left for a little then you stab them in the guts when they are not paying attention.

Maybe you should pick a side and be a little more up front about what you believe.



posted on Apr, 16 2012 @ 01:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by Germanicus
reply to post by petrus4
 


Maybe you should pick a side and be a little more up front about what you believe.


Or maybe I'm saying exactly what I mean, and I simply have sufficient intelligence, that my beliefs don't always adhere exclusively to one side or the other.

There's a book of Chinese philosophy that I'd suggest you read, at some point; you can find it online if you Google for it. It's called The Doctrine of the Mean, by Confucius.



posted on Apr, 16 2012 @ 01:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by XPLodER
 


The movement hasn't been co-opted. It was always a Soros/Obama/MoveOn/Progressive/leftist/radical/hippie/Marxist/anarchist group to begin with.


so you are saying calling for criminal justice is all of those things?
are you saying that socialistic eleite bailouts being pointed out is all of those things?

let me help you a little bit,
you have been misslead my friend,
you are parroting the MSN naritive,
soros did not start OWS
move on tryed and failed to subvert OWS
progressives are a part of OWS
leftists are also a part of OWS
radicals are also a part of OWS
hippies are also part of OWS
marxists are also part of OWS
anarchists are also part of OWS

what you are trying to do is SPLIT AMERICA INTO SMALL GROUPS TO DEVIDE THEM

you see the same percentage of each group is present in the american society

you would be better informed to simply say all groups in american society can be found WITHIN america and WITHIN OWS

you seek to devide

its not working


xploder



posted on Apr, 16 2012 @ 01:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by petrus4

Originally posted by Germanicus
reply to post by petrus4
 


Maybe you should pick a side and be a little more up front about what you believe.


Or maybe I'm saying exactly what I mean, and I simply have sufficient intelligence, that my beliefs don't always adhere exclusively to one side or the other.

There's a book of Chinese philosophy that I'd suggest you read, at some point; you can find it online if you Google for it. It's called The Doctrine of the Mean, by Confucius.


Another thing I notice is that you try to dazzle with syllables. Here is a heads up buddy. The masses are stupid. Your propaganda has no appeal.

And I am pretty sure that I am more well read than you buddy. Dont patronise me.
edit on 16-4-2012 by Germanicus because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 16 2012 @ 01:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jameela

Originally posted by Germanicus
reply to post by xuenchen
 


Nobody is buying.


To be honest I am...

why should we trust someone who was in the Obama administration again? I trust nothing from those people, they have lied upon lied, so why trust its people?

Especially when those people have been trying to take over a legitimate movement in one form or another?

If it is change people are wanting why accept the same old lines from those we want changed?

I am curious your views on this point! It is perhaps I am not understanding something?



edit on 16-4-2012 by Jameela because: (no reason given)


this is the second OP from the same author trying to say that VAN JONES has co-opted occupy (or at least that is the insinuation)

that is incorrect and van jones has failed to group any support at all

the op seeks to confuse people like you into fearing co-option from politicians

THIS IS NOT THE CASE
we will not be co-opted

xploder



posted on Apr, 16 2012 @ 01:38 AM
link   
that was my first post in the entire thread! how can you say second post from the same author?


So please clarify once more... is Van Jones been trying to take over occupy? (yes or no)

Did he try and fail, then started a different movement after said failure? (yes or no)





THIS IS NOT THE CASE we will not be co-opted


This appears clear.... and makes me feel more secure with occupy



posted on Apr, 16 2012 @ 01:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jameela
that was my first post in the entire thread! how can you say second post from the same author?

the same author of this thread,
also posted a similar thread last week on the same suject but worded differently



So please clarify once more... is Van Jones been trying to take over occupy? (yes or no)


van jones is trying to co-opt the 99% movement (not specifically occupy but a statement or slogan of occupies)


Did he try and fail, then started a different movement after said failure? (yes or no)

he has tryed a number of times to co-opt occupy and when unsuccesful he tryed to start a movement using the slogan "the 99% spring"
this too has been an abject failure




This appears clear.... and makes me feel more secure with occupy


occupy is NOT political and will not be used for ANY political party
van joneses name is now being used by the op (author) to fear monger about "co-option"

xploder



posted on Apr, 16 2012 @ 01:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jameela
that was my first post in the entire thread! how can you say second post from the same author?


So please clarify once more... is Van Jones been trying to take over occupy? (yes or no)

Did he try and fail, then started a different movement after said failure? (yes or no)


I think Van Jones is probably just trying to cause whatever trouble for Occupy that he can, Jameela, and he's going with whatever works. If he can infiltrate, he'll do that. If he can form a copycat org and use that to discredit/smear Occupy in the minds of people who don't know better, he'll do that.

Either way, the goal is mischief.



posted on Apr, 16 2012 @ 01:54 AM
link   
I understand the not affiliated with any political party...

but I do not understand 'not political' comment... is occupy not trying to get a political message across concerning corporate involvement in government and making corporations accountable?



posted on Apr, 16 2012 @ 02:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jameela
I understand the not affiliated with any political party...

this is to prevent co-option and partisan politics


but I do not understand 'not political' comment... is occupy not trying to get a political message across concerning corporate involvement in government and making corporations accountable?


OWS serves many functions but is designed to not partisipate in the political arena,
the function is to educate people of the corperate injustice robbing the people of fair and just representation,
and to facilitate smaller groups into larger "non violent" protest groups that can "raise awareness" of the acual "cause and effect" of that lack of representation.

to achive change the slogan "be the change you seek" is to show people they are the true power in a democracy,
and by practicing direct horizontal democracy for every action,
the movement is wholly democractic in direction and planning.

occupy is encouraged to use the democractic "general assemblies" to find issiues that effect the people,
and to find solutions and prepair "sample" legislation to remidy problems.

this is in contrast to a corperate group like ALEC
who prepair legislation for the benifit of corperations at the detriment of the general population.

the idea is to expose the mecanism used by the 1% and
write bills and legislation to fix the 1% legislation that allows them to pay negitive taxes and or damage the environment and remove civil rights and repeal labour laws.

while the tea party "directly engauges" with the political structures of power,
OWS is in the education and problem recognition stages and with education of the issues has served to expose
the underlying problems occouring at the political levels of govenment.

the occupy wall street name is recognition that 1% policies have taken over the needs of the people and the vast sums of corperate money has drowned out the voices of the people from their reps

amoung other things Occupy Wall Street is to draw attension to the fact that criminal bankers have criminal actions not investigated by the authorities,
and that the wall street bankers have criminally and intentionally caused server damage to america "on pupose" for the purpose of personal profit at the expense of the great nation the USA.

we support ANY non violent peaceful legal group of any political type and see all people are equal and ALL are FREE to partisipate.

xploder


edit on 16-4-2012 by XPLodER because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 16 2012 @ 02:52 AM
link   
reply to post by XPLodER
 


Very nice and thorough explanation, thank you for taking the time to explain to all of us!



posted on Apr, 16 2012 @ 03:20 AM
link   
reply to post by Jameela
 


the truth is the second stage of evolution of occupy is in the hands of the horizontally democractic general assemblies.
that is to say that the future of occupy is now in the hands of the people,
in the democractic process of "the wants and needs" of the people by the people and for the people.

the acual democractic decitions formulated by the people will ultimatly decide what is required for the people.

to show the world what democracy looks like,
when it is truly,
by the people and for the people.

this act of democracy allows us to rejoin with our comunities in unity and in the spirit of love and comunity.

the people once united can never be defeated,
xploder



posted on Apr, 16 2012 @ 03:28 AM
link   
reply to post by petrus4
 


You are right, the govt does not fear the Occupiers any more than the Bolsheviks feared Nicholas and Alexandra. But let me tell you something. There is a force for good much stronger than you and your communist Komrades, and you will not prevail.
edit on 16-4-2012 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 16 2012 @ 03:28 AM
link   
reply to post by Jameela
 


you are welcome and please ask any questions you would like my humble opinion on,
i have been studying the subject in depth


xploder



posted on Apr, 16 2012 @ 03:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by petrus4
 


You are right, the govt does not fear the Occupiers any more than the Bolsheviks feared Nicholas and Alexandra.


the govenment has nothing to fear from occupy,
but the corrpt bankers,
they should fear the people who now know what they have done.

xploder



posted on Apr, 16 2012 @ 04:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jameela

Originally posted by Germanicus
reply to post by xuenchen
 


Nobody is buying.


To be honest I am...

why should we trust someone who was in the Obama administration again? I trust nothing from those people, they have lied upon lied, so why trust its people?

Especially when those people have been trying to take over a legitimate movement in one form or another?

If it is change people are wanting why accept the same old lines from those we want changed?

I am curious your views on this point! It is perhaps I am not understanding something?



edit on 16-4-2012 by Jameela because: (no reason given)


Hey sorry,I missed that. I think we covered in the U2U since but yeah, in my opinion Obama is the devil. OWS is anti-duopoly.



posted on Apr, 16 2012 @ 06:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by RealSpoke
God forbid people actually try to change something.


Be careful of what?

Didn't the Tea Party protest? No one on here cared on here about that. Hell they cheered them on.


Revisionist history. ATS joined the MSM and Democrats in attacking them daily as extremeists and racists

Moveon.org is a Democrat based group that runs cover for other Democrats. Its no surprise their training their fellow Democrats to go out and do what they can to distract from Obama and Democrats horrible record over the last 6 years.



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join