Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: questioning Occupy's tone (blog post)

Posted 1 year ago on Feb. 1, 2013, 4:04 p.m. EST by jdeboi (0) from New York, NY
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

I wrote a blog post about my observations of the Occupy's tone. In case anyone is interested: http://jdeboi.com/2013/01/06/questioning-occupys-tone/

75 Comments

75 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 6 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 1 year ago

Occupy lifted America's skirt and exposed her filthy undergarments. Cleaning her isn't a simple matter of just joining hands and everything will be fine. It will take years of terribly difficult work to clean off the multiple layers of corruption that have accumulated over the decades while she squirms and kicks and punches in protest at every chance. Be prepared to be bruised and bloodied.

[-] 1 points by Narley (280) 1 year ago

Change will require support from the masses. If a movement is seen as dangerous the people won’t support it. I personally feel breaking store windows and hassling the cops was a mistake. It turned off a lot of middle America.

Peaceful determination is the only way.

[-] 1 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 1 year ago

Agree completely, violence has definitely set us back. We need to stand our ground and keep applying steady political and economic force.

[-] 3 points by GirlFriday (17435) 1 year ago

I am of the mindset that occupy should not be bottled and sold.

[-] -2 points by oldJohn (-646) 1 year ago

If you don't bottle and sell yourself with care and clarity, then the media will bottle and sell you how they see fit. That's exactly what happened with Occupy over a year ago.

[-] 3 points by GirlFriday (17435) 1 year ago

Clear Channel is owned by private equity firms Bain Capital and Thomas H. Lee Partners. Charles K. Gifford sits on the board of CBS and Bank of America. Arthur Harper sits on the board of Gannett Co. and Monsanto.

Michael Angelakis: Michael J. Angelakis has served as the Chief Financial Officer of Comcast Corporation since March 2007 and had been an Executive Vice President until he was appointed Vice Chairman in November 2011. Before March 2007, Mr. Angelakis served as Managing Director and as a member of the Management and Investment Committees of Providence Equity Partners for more than five years. Mr. Angelakis currently serves on the board of directors of NBCUniversal Holdings and the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia.

Judith Rodin sits on the board of Comcast and Citigroup.

How about Stephen Burke? Stephen B. Burke has served as an Executive Vice President for more than five years. On January 28, 2011, Mr. Burke became the President and Chief Executive Officer of NBCUniversal Holdings and NBCUniversal and resigned from his position as our Chief Operating Officer, which position he had held for more than five years. Mr. Burke also had been the President of Comcast Cable until March 2010. Mr. Burke is also a director of NBCUniversal Holdings, JPMorgan Chase & Company and Berkshire Hathaway, Incorporated.

Ronald Olson

Ronald L. Olson, Partner, Munger, Tolles & Olson, law firm, for more than the past five years. Director, Edison International since 1995, Berkshire Hathaway, Inc. since 1997, The Washington Post Company since 2003 and Western Asset Funds, Inc. since 2005, including serving as a Director of Western Asset Income Fund and as a Trustee of Western Asset Premier Bond Fund.

And sits on the board of City National Corporation.

Barry Diller sits on the board of Washington Post and Coca Cola which donates to ALEC. Bruce Rosenblum sits on the board of City National Corporation and is president of Warner Brothers Television Group.

I could keep going.

Bottle and sell? OWS will stand for nothing.

[-] -1 points by oldJohn (-646) 1 year ago

Your point?

At the beginning, Occupy tried to hide their anarcho-communist roots because most Americans equate anarchy with violence and have a distaste for communism. This resulted in very big numbers out of the gate. When the dust settled, a lot of people caught on and felt cheated. We now have small numbers.

[-] 2 points by GirlFriday (17435) 1 year ago

My point is that you seem to want to strip tease for the very same people you are up against and that they will somehow like you better. The people that sit on the boards of banks also sit on the boards of the media. They aren't going to slice their own throats. MSM understands quite clearly and it represents a threat to their bottom line. They will never like OWS. Ever.

The only way you can by pass that is to prostitute it. It becomes meaningless at that point.

It has nothing to do with anarchy. That's like waving the nice shiny object way over there.

[-] 0 points by oldJohn (-646) 1 year ago

You misunderstand. I agree the media is controlled by banks and that they won't paint a good picture of Occupy. However, Occupy painted a false picture of itself by hiding it's anarcho-communist roots. This was done purposely and that's easily proven by the many threads you can read in anarchist forums dating from the time Occupy began. Many people who supported Occupy felt let down not by the MSM, but by Occupy itself when they found out it was an anarchist protest. They should have came clean from the beginning, that's the only way they could have survived the onslaught of the MSM. When you're honest and you do something good, then you grow. When you try to play tricks, then you die. The MSM didn't kill Occupy, Occupy killed itself. The MSM simply had more ammo because Occupy gave it to them.

[-] 4 points by shadz66 (19985) 1 year ago

'Tr@shyManqué' : Your weasel words and dissension intention are perfectly encapsulated right there in your comment above and tho' GF can well deal with your bullshit and bollocks all by herself, I'll be your huckleberry right now, as I watch the international rugby on TV (contact sport 'n' all, lol!).

That paragraph of your's above can be dissected on so many levels, that it is not even sporting for me to do so now but your message and intent here on this forum should be seen in the round and across your many, many comments, consistently whispering 'glass half empty' negativity & anti-OWS poison & bile.

For example see "I'm not saying Occupy is dead, but it's on life support with a few nurses assisting it. It certainly doesn't have the energy of the beginning, that's dead. It's something else now", from the b-s on http://occupywallst.org/forum/lets-look-occupy-numbers/#comment-923259 , not to mention your abject fork-tongued twaddle on : http://occupywallst.org/forum/lets-look-occupy-numbers/#comment-923272 & also for further example : http://occupywallst.org/forum/lets-look-occupy-numbers/#comment-923099 .

Anyone not acquainted with your ego should also see your comments such as this on Odin's recent thread : http://occupywallst.org/forum/is-the-republican-party-becoming-more-liberal-in-t/#comment-921181 as well your steering animus behind : http://occupywallst.org/forum/we-love-gk-dont-go/ where you even tried to sign off as ~Odin. I called you out there and I call you out here.

You do NOT support OWS. You are a 'neo-feudalist, pro-elitist, libertopian idealist' at best and a paid corporate shill at worst. Your beef is personal too as you never got over jart & co's rejection of you and your li'l bit of computer code, from back in the early days in 2011, maybe because they suspected you &/or your ego was insufferable and your later pro-SOPA and pro-Police views proved them right, I think.

You are a narcissist and not any kind of team player and you more than likely have a deep, dark disdain for most of society too. So how's the wintering over in Bali going ? Ready for Montreal this summer ? Ou peut-etre Rennes? Hi to your long suffering wife & have a 'Jim Beam' on ice for me later. Be advised that any further comments on this or any other thread between us, will be accompanied by links such as :

anguis in herba - nosce te ipsum ...

[-] -1 points by penguento (362) 1 year ago

Oh, dear me. This sort of juvenile name-calling is precisely the problem with OWS.

You wanna know the truth? To outsiders, OWS presents two faces: Thugish anarchists that start riots and destroy property, and arrogant, silly children who talk a lot of trash about changing the world, but do nothing meaningful at all. Neither one presents the picture to the rest of the world that you imagine it does. Quite the contrary.

Those of you who think that this sort of thing is somehow building a movement that will sweep America someday are delusional. You have much to learn, but you are too arrogant to do the sort of introspective contemplation and study of past movements and of history that would allow you to learn. You all seem to think that, having read a first-year political science textbook, you know everything there is to know about the world. Sorry guys, it just ain't so.

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 1 year ago

Thras-knock it off.

[-] 2 points by shadz66 (19985) 1 year ago

Not really sure that that is him - but such are the confusing 'joys / effects of weaseldom' and negativity, right ? Thing is with these characters is that they invite themselves to your place, mouth glib entreaties and then stand in the doorway, pissing into the hall. They expect instant results but with no concession to time. They have no idea how to socialise or about basic manners and are too enamoured of their own egos to even care. Anyway, why am I whining to you ? I'll try to redeem myself with :

It has a good graph, some great embedded links and some killer quotes from G.K. Galbraith. Sorry to beat u to the slap re Trashy but I had a moment's red mist, so waded in without even a 'by your leave' !!

pax et lux ...

[-] 2 points by GirlFriday (17435) 1 year ago

All good by me. :D

[-] 2 points by GirlFriday (17435) 1 year ago

Not just banks, Thras. Do you have any idea how many of these people are members of CFR? This means that there is no quality news internationally simply to protect any of their investments.

GA's success and failure is based on the resolution of intra/inter group conflict resolution. This is not different from what occurs on any projects or in any workplace because of group dynamics. Horizontalism was never scary. The reality is that it was never hidden.

You can't gauge if people were turned off by it---nor can I. I can say that you turned me on to David Graeber. Remember when you took him out of context? Yeah, then I went and found out what he really said and whom he was and all of that. He rocks.

[-] -1 points by oldJohn (-646) 1 year ago

I love David Graeber. He's a genius. His texts are clear, yet sharp. I wish Occupy would have been honest about the whole philosophy of anarchy from the very beginning. They should have explained the word through education. Most American's have a bad understanding of it which is what made it very easy to tarnish Occupy's image.

Horizontal governance is the way of the future. It's just that it won't be implemented in the United States first. The people aren't ready and don't understand it. It needs to be tried in a small country made up of people with good education. Luxembourg might be a good place.

[-] -2 points by nomdeguerre (1775) from Brooklyn, NY 1 year ago

The fraud David Graeber and his Graeberites need to be vomited out of OWS. He and his theories were a fraud from the getgo, designed to frontrun a social movement and lead it to a swift defeat.

"Anarchists" -- I've never met one in my life, where did they find them, a museum? It seems to me that they wanted to turn off and turn away the vast middle -- communism has past it sell-by-date, 'hey, let's try anarchism.'

From http://occupywallst.org/forum/who-runs-occupy-wall-street/#comment-839503 : "These people say they are the true leaders: http://assange.rt.com/occupy-episode-seven/ . Note how they primp and preen, the little prima donnas.

Obvious there are leaders, that's why almost all Occupies are structured the same -- GAs with consensus driven decision making -- which means no decision making. That's by design.

David Graeber seems to be the puppet master -- the social scientist/anthropologist based in London. He probably sees himself as a social engineer. It's his design. Fraud by design. He's so brilliant that he front ran a whole social movement, but designed it to fail.

Too bad David, we've only failed initially. We need to throw off the consensus model, come to real decisions and make real demands. That's how we'll reach the still sleeping, that's how we'll reach those lost in misery as they slide out of the middle class.

OWS hasn't even appealed the ruling that kicked us out of the park. NLG said there was no body capable of making the decision because we were leaderless -- I'd laugh, if I weren't crying.

Thanks for leading us into the ground David, you globalist swine."

From http://occupywallst.org/forum/should-there-be-a-leader-after-all-is-leaderlessse/#comment-872703 :

"I think the bigger problem than no leader, are the consensus driven GAs. It's ineffectiveness by design. It allows no direction, no demands and it hobbles intellectual development of the movement.

Unfortunately I believe this was by design. David Graeber is a dangerous fraud. I don't know who he works for but I believe his and his peoples' task was to frontrun popular dissatisfaction and saddle it with an ineffective structure. . . . "

[-] -2 points by oldJohn (-646) 1 year ago

You're joking right? Occupy would never have existed without the anarchists who came up with the idea in AdBusters, and without Graeber who architected the movement's beginning in NYC on September 17th 2011.

Too bad David, we've only failed initially. We need to throw off the consensus model, come to real decisions and make real demands.

The question is why did you support Occupy if it did not espouse your ideologies? Why didn't you simply start your own movement, or joined one that had ideas similar to yours.

I really don't get it. You support an anarchist protest, then you complain that it should not be anarchist. It's like a person going in a church, and then complaining that religion is no good. It makes no sense. Don't join groups or protests if you don't agree with their basic tenets and your problem is solved. Do you go on republican websites and complain that it's a bad system because it's based on republican ideals?

[-] 2 points by frovikleka (2563) from Island Heights, NJ 1 year ago

I agree with you here.

~Odin~

[-] 2 points by nomdeguerre (1775) from Brooklyn, NY 1 year ago

And how did things work out?

[-] -2 points by oldJohn (-646) 1 year ago

That's beside the point. Again, why did you even support Occupy if it didn't espouse your ideologies? If you're a liberal minded person you join the liberals, you don't join the republicans then tell them they should be liberals. You make no sense.

[-] 3 points by cJessgo (729) from Port Jervis, PA 1 year ago

I read your blog.American history shows that any progressive reform is met with brutal repression.State violence is the favorite tool of status quo.I very much doubt that polite conversation will change anything. The only reason people are talking at all is because Occupy's tactics were nonviolently in your face.

[-] 3 points by JesseHeffran (3903) 1 year ago

That was a good blog post!

Here is my view of the whole situation. I believe that Occupy should stay the way it is so it can continue to create awareness and continue to be radical. As long as there is a radical group of people saying what a lot of people believe but don't say, it gives the less radical groups better leverage when they negotiate with the establishment..

I remember reading a book about environmental radicalism. In it, a Sierra Club member was glad that there were radical groups out there making a ruckus. Such antics made the Sierra Club organization stronger when negotiating with industry.

Occupy, at least this web site, is seen by me as a information hub. What people do with that awareness, such as join Progressive groups, is better off done in other organizations.

[-] 2 points by beautifulworld (20867) 1 year ago

Here are some links you might find interesting that I think really explain this movement and what it searches to do and why it goes about it the way it does:

An article by David Graeber, who coined the term "We are the 99%," about the anarchist roots of Occupy Wall Street: http://occupywallst.org/forum/occupy-wall-streets-anarchist-roots/

A video, "The Revolution is Love" that for me, embodies what this movement is all about: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BRtc-k6dhgs

And, who can forget Shamar Thomas who shows the resistance this movement met up with in it's early stages and the reason why numbers have decreased. Police intervention! (Check it out, more than 8 million views): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BRtc-k6dhgs

[-] 2 points by bensdad (8977) 1 year ago

I read your blog and I will reply as a ME not WE
OWS was started primarily by anarchists and antipoliticals and attracted many of these.
After seeing Obama do a lot less than he could have, and the Rs lie constantly, many came here to try to find another way - not D & not R
After 6-12 months, they learned that they could not snap their fingers and make massive changes ( such as direct democracy or alternate currency or creating millions of jobs ) - and many gave up
Percentage wise, I think OWS progressives ( like you & me ) may now be in a stronger position - to push D in our direction - and most importantly push R out.
Please see OUR OWS working group web site to see where and how to get it done


http://corporationsarenotpeople.webuda.com


[-] 1 points by freakzilla (-161) from Detroit, MI 1 year ago

"many came here to try to find another way - not D & not R"

you, of course, not being one of the many

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 1 year ago

I'm not sure if you are "accusing" me ?

not that I mean to be critical of a newbie, but as someone who has been to hundreds of working group meetings since 2011, I have not hide my opinion that the problem is primarily R
I personally witnessed the shrinkage of people who refused to see - that given a choice between D & R & neither - that D is the best way to get something done.
D is not perfect, but if I could make greed illegal I would
but I would not waste a minute of time trying to do that.


here is my other way - working inside the system to change it
We can do what 80% of Americans say they want
We can do what 1,900,000 Americans signed
We can do what 363 local & state resolutions call for
We can do what 1,309 American mayors endorsed
Via one of 13 constitutional amendments already proposed in congress And supported by over 100 congressmen


Virtually every OWS goal –
jobs, taxes, government honesty, energy, environment, economy
all go back to EXACTLY one place
MONEY IN POLITICS

And there is EXACTLY one first step:

╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬

A constitutional amendment to
Overturn Citizens United and Corporate Personhood

╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬

▬► http://corporationsarenotpeople.webuda.com ◄▬

╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬

For a complete analysis of the amendment issue,

and the text of all amendments,
and our comparison of all of the amendments,
and the Citizens United case transcript,
and the Citizens United decision,
and the Buckley decision,
and analysis of corporate personhood,
and analysis of Article III,
and the ABC News poll on CU / CP,
and the PFAW poll on CU / CP,
and 70+ videos on CU / CP from

Chomsky, Hedges, Witchcraft, Reich, Cobb, Warren, Lessig, Hartmann, Maher, Stevens, Sanders, Hightower, etc.

http://corporationsarenotpeople.webuda.com
no password or signup

JOIN our OWS Working Group:
http://nycga.net/groups/restore-democracy

[-] 0 points by freakzilla (-161) from Detroit, MI 1 year ago

I've been here a very long time and have read most of your posts. For you to deny that you were here to do anything but get Democrats elected is an insult to everyone's intelligence. Man up and admit it at least. Don't try to pass yourself off as some independent, above the fray, gadfly.

You said it yourself: D is the best way to get something done. So you did not come here looking for something else. You are the few, not the many

[-] 2 points by bensdad (8977) 1 year ago

"For you to deny that you were here to do anything but get Democrats elected is an insult to everyone's intelligence"
Yes I do deny your statement - and I can prove it - it you dare to watch the 70+ videos or read 40+ documents on our site
do you disagree with ANYTHING there?
do you think we should overturn CU & CP ?
if you do - how? If you dont - why?

[-] 1 points by freakzilla (-161) from Detroit, MI 1 year ago

How many of your political cartoons attacked Obama for kissing Wall Street's ass? Dodd's hypocrisy? Rangel and Geithner's FU to paying taxes? Pelosi's insider trading? Not one. Just Willard posts. I was brought here by the idea that this could be an alternative to the two parties, and you now think OWS should be about getting rid of Republicans while giving Obama and the Dems a pass. Take your knee pads to MoveOn

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 1 year ago

I do not give Obama a pass.
He was the most progressive ELECTABLE candidate.
I believe in voting for candidates who CAN do something good
not for ideals who can do nothing

[-] -1 points by freakzilla (-161) from Detroit, MI 1 year ago

Do something good like appoint Jack Lew? Like you would say anything. Obama doing "a lot less than he could" is par for the course with you. But hey, at least you aren't giving him a pass. Try not to be so hard on the poor guy.

If OWS would quit wasting time with "summits" and seminars and get a voting block together, we could decide who is electable. Now, these might not all be Democrats, you would have to accept that. You would actually have to criticize a Democrat. But something tells me you are happy with Democrats being in power and have no hope or plan to see that change.

[-] 2 points by bensdad (8977) 1 year ago

If you went to our OWS web site, you would see that WE DID WORK specifically to create a voting block.
I personally spent dozens of hours on it.

Specifically, I would support any ELECTABLE candidate from any party that supports the 99%
D=Elizabeth Warren I=Bernie Sanders
If R=TR was electable, I would vote for him
ditto I=Nader or G=Stein

Do you disagree?

[-] 0 points by freakzilla (-161) from Detroit, MI 1 year ago

In denial, much? You're for the Dems no matter what and everyone knows it. You're like Steve Kroft when it comes to criticizing them. Go ahead and try to achieve what you call the most important goal of OWS: voting Repubs out. I'm sure that when the Dems have no opposition, they will just bend over backwards to help the 99%. Kinda like the pigs in Animal Farm did.

[-] 2 points by bensdad (8977) 1 year ago


1

"Go ahead and try to achieve what you call the most important goal of OWS: voting Repubs out"
Show us where I said this was an OWS goal
Or are you a liar?

2

ARE YOU AFRAID TO ANSWER THIS QUESTION? Specifically, I would support any ELECTABLE candidate from any party that supports the 99% D=Elizabeth Warren I=Bernie Sanders If R=TR was electable, I would vote for him ditto I=Nader or G=Stein

Do you disagree????????????????



I will not respond further if you do not have the courage to answer the two questions between the double lines

[-] 1 points by freakzilla (-161) from Detroit, MI 1 year ago

"Percentage wise, I think OWS progressives ( like you & me ) may now be in a stronger position - to push D in our direction - and most importantly push R out. "

I would support the candidate, and so would many others here, but no way would you unless there was a D next to their name. Remember, many came here to try to find another way, just not you.

BTW, I love how you are pushing the Dems by starting threads making fun of Scott Brown. That'll light a fire under them.

[-] 1 points by gsw (2692) 1 year ago

Are there any good replicants left at national level? Wo. Spell check suggested that one.

[-] 0 points by freakzilla (-161) from Detroit, MI 1 year ago

some of them are making moves on immigration, which goes to show what happens when you make a party work for your support instead of pledging blind allegiance.

[-] 0 points by OTP (-203) from Tampa, FL 1 year ago

When you have the popualation convinced they have two choices in a nation of 300 million, we all lose.

[-] 0 points by bensdad (8977) 1 year ago

I never said I was not a D. I made it very clear that D was the only way to get something done. FYI - I have NEVER attended a Democratic Party meeting - I've been to hundreds of OWS meetings

[-] 2 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 1 year ago

so you're saying the only way to accomplish anything is to support one of the factions of the corporate state?

Please explain how people funded by Wall Street will save you from Wall Street. Keep in mind this is one of the 2 factions responsible for voting to give trillions to Wall Street and corporations while wasting tax dollars on wars of imperialism.

[-] 2 points by KevinPotts (363) 1 year ago

"I made it very clear that D was the only way to get something done." -bensdad

Coming up next...Steve Forbes & Elizabeth Ames are here with us today...to promote their new book (a best-selling, intellectual masterpiece of pure revolutionary genius) 'How Capitalism Will Save Us: Why Free People and Free Markets Are the Best Answer in Today's Economy'

LOL

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 1 year ago

People like Jill Stein * Ralph Nader may be great leaders and have great ideas, other than educationall y, they have NO POWER.
The civil rights movement and the womens vote was accomplished by politicians INSIDE the system
NY AG is working on prosecuting banksters Elizabeth Warren's U.S. Consumer Financial Protection Obama is appointing "consumer watchdog" Richard Cordray In the last year or two there have been dozens of Wall Street insider traders convicted

[-] 2 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 1 year ago

why don't you democrats vote for real liberals in the primaries?

You fall victim to propaganda every year and vote for the guy advertised by banks and corporations on the tv.

You have no excuse. You always say "well the republicans are bad" - which is very true - but you never have an explanation for your voting choices in the primaries.

Further more you idolize people like Clinton, who signed the Defense of Marriage Act, pushed the WMD lie propaganda, deregulated the banks, and helped take down unions and outsource labor with NAFTA and other trade deals.

Sorry, I'm done believing in corporate propaganda about how democrats are alleged liberals.

You can't just use the 5 people who act outside of the corporate mold as your example. There's still the other hundreds funded by corporations and banks that continually vote in favor of corporatism and war.

You all try and act like Obama and Biden and anti-war too.... which is even more bogus...

I remember standing outside an Obama rally with my sign listing all the countries bombed under Obama's administration... a guy next to me selling Obama Peace shirts.

You are the people who should abide by logic and reason. I don't expect anything like that from republicans who instead operate on a belief system pushed by religious zealots and corporate assholes.

[-] 1 points by OTP (-203) from Tampa, FL 1 year ago

The only reason those things passed was because of outside pressure, of which Nader and Stein do a good job of creating. They have a hell of a lot more influence than most do.

"Dozens convicted"...pssss please. Then how did JP Morgan, a lifelong Dem, get to file an 8 billion loss in the 2nd quarter and then report a record gain in the 3rd?

Theres always low level people getting the shaft. Thats how it goes.

Keep relying on people who accept money from the ones they are suppose to prosecute. That makes a lot of fuckin sense.

If you want to work the power from within, then work on gettting some real people in there, not fakes like EW and BO. And that would require going to some Dem meetings.

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 1 year ago

"Dozens convicted"...pssss please. Then how did JP Morgan, a lifelong Dem, get to file an 8 billion loss in the 2nd quarter and then report a record gain in the 3rd?
I cannot argue with someone who generalizes & conflates different issues
Many were convicted of insider trading. That is a fact & has nothing to do wit JP Morgan P&L


The convictions of Anthony Chiasson and Todd Newman in a lucrative insider trading case may well send a message to Mathew Martoma, the former SAC Capital portfolio manager, about the risks he runs if he fights similar charges filed against him.

The potential sentences of more than 10 years in prison that the two defendants face puts even more pressure on Mr. Martoma to cooperate in the government’s apparent quest to get his former boss, Steven A. Cohen, the founder of SAC. (Mr. Cohen has not been accused of wrongdoing, and his spokesman has said that Mr. Cohen has acted appropriately.)

The case against Mr. Chiasson and Mr. Newman was a classic insider trading prosecution built on the testimony of analysts at their hedge funds who had confessed to receiving confidential information about Dell and Nvidia and then passing it on. The government did not have recordings of the defendants discussing the companies, the type of evidence that proved so devastating in other recent cases.

[-] 2 points by OTP (-203) from Tampa, FL 1 year ago

The NYTImes is nothing but a front for wall st when it comes to trumping up stuff like this.

Let me know when a head rolls for LIBOR.

[-] 0 points by freakzilla (-161) from Detroit, MI 1 year ago

Don't hold your breath on LIBOR or MF Global.

[-] 0 points by OTP (-203) from Tampa, FL 1 year ago

If you believe that D is the only way to go, and you have never attended a Dem Party meeting, and OWS just started in late 2011, then what the hell have you been doing?

If D is the only way to go, and you dont even go to the meetings, then what the hell are you doing? Im not trying to be rude, but if you are so adamant about that, and have never attended a meeting, then wtf?

Jeez, even I have been to a handful of em.

[-] 2 points by bensdad (8977) 1 year ago

As I said, I have been to HUNDREDS of OWS meetings
I believe in POLITICAL power
I am a D - not because I agree with all D moves, but because they ARE the people who CAN get it done & I want to push them further to the left
To my knowledge, there are only two non-D & non-R in federal office
I am going with the odds
If Bernie had a chance of winning the White House, I would vote for him.

[-] 2 points by OTP (-203) from Tampa, FL 1 year ago

I would hope you disagree with the vast amount of D moves at this point. They are lazy, sold out, and pretty much useless. Openly accepting corporate money and continuing the bail outs, all in the face of Occupy.

The fact there are only a few non D/R in office is a direct link to power of money in politics, and more importantly, the people's refusal to get involved on a local level.

The thing is, if they were going to be pushed left, it would have happened by now with Occupy. They still went right. How long will the left chase their own tail?

[-] 1 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 1 year ago

you say "give up" like there wasn't massive levels of police oppression scaring the fuck out of people from joining and expanding.

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 1 year ago

I do not disagree with your point
I was much more on the street on Vietnam - police did not make us give up. There were & are MANY things OWS is doing that is not on the street - Occupy Sandy is just one.
Sadly, I have witnessed 60 Wall St working groups dwindle by around 80% or more
I hope the "anti-politicals" [ pardon MY label if you are insulted ] can find a way to rebuild OWS in ways that can help America

[-] 2 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 1 year ago

I'm not anti-political.

I just have no intention of conforming to propaganda to support people funded by Wall Street and corporations. -you push a lot of that on this forum.

I'm currently working for a campaign for a 99 percenter running for city council. Just getting launched. We're editing videos next week.

[-] 2 points by bensdad (8977) 1 year ago

I think that is an excellent idea. Is this NYC? With NYC matching funds, you may stand a chance & the PR should be excellent. Will you publicize an OWS connection? Please keep us updated here

[-] 1 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 1 year ago

I'm in Nebraska. We have to take on well funded individuals. It is going to be a steep hill.

He announced his candidacy wearing a "we are the 99 percent" shirt.

Here's a sample of his speech from yesterday - ""While Congress is busy bailing out big banks who plunder and steal people’s homes, our City Council is equally busy handing out our tax dollars to big land developers and corporations in the form of tax cuts and abatements. While Congress and the President commit our resources and citizens to war in the name of spreading democracy which is really a war for control, our leaders here commit us to a phony war on crime which is really a war on the poor.

In this day and age unlimited political donations turn public servants into private stooges. Puppeticians, if you will. Those who seek office have abandoned the guiding principle of public service: People over Profit. What our forefathers worked to build, a country by and for the people, has devolved into a country that is ran as a for-profit venture by the financial elite. This was never meant to be tolerated by the people."

here's his page - http://www.facebook.com/pages/DShawn-City-Council-2013/205700106241452

Here's an article from the local paper - Occupy Omaha activist plans run for City Council - http://www.omaha.com/article/20130202/NEWS/702029902/1694#occupy-omaha-activist-plans-run-for-city-council

From the article - "Wearing a “We are the 99%” T-shirt, Cunningham said he wants to represent District 3 because current elected officials haven't done enough to address problems such as homelessness, unemployment and misconduct by law enforcement officers."

His criticism was much harsher than "they haven't done enough."

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 1 year ago

I hope you can spread this to other states as inspiration
I was part of an OWS group who failed to unseat michael grimm on Staten Island

[-] 1 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 1 year ago

We'll see how it unravels. Never give up.

[-] 1 points by frovikleka (2563) from Island Heights, NJ 1 year ago

From reading your blog, it seems evident to me that you believe that our problems are small, and that our differences with the corrupt elite can be negotiated. I disagree. If however my supposition is wrong, please correct me.

~Odin~

[-] 2 points by frovikleka (2563) from Island Heights, NJ 1 year ago

Nope, not interested in your links. I've got your number.

~Odin~

[-] -1 points by oldJohn (-646) 1 year ago

They were meant for the OP. He or she wrote things I had already written a while back. Same line of thought. If you're not interested, just skip them. I'm not expecting those writings to interest everybody. That wouldn't be possible. People have different penchants, different ideas. That's good.

[-] -1 points by Shayneh (-482) 1 year ago

In my opinion Occupy has done nothing but talk, talk, talk. People post on this site continually about what they think should be done or accomplished.

In the end all they are are "data bites" with no follow up. Next year and the year after people will be doing the same thing - posting information about what they think should happen but in the end nothing is going to happen.

You may say that Occupy made people aware but the only awareness that they have made is to "destroy" - and that's the main reason there is no following.

[-] -1 points by peacehurricane (293) 1 year ago

What you will find here is not necessarily Occupy people. They are posers and many if not all of them are being compensated to attempt to mess with us or give us ill rep. The treatment that I have received here is shameful. I will continue doing my part and saying as I please. Your message is as Godsend to me for I do know Occupy. You see I have been doing this movement since I was 10 years old. Ken Kesey & friends delegated me and the things I learned have been my life I am now 49. What they spoke of was exactly as today though had it been moved forward we would be done. Solar energy was spoken of as if it already was a done deal being so ideal in every way and yet here we are. All is well as we prepare for the fast track to remedy is approaching. If they are not working with you then it is only misunderstanding because they are with us whether they no it or not for everything is connected ALL ONE I am WE... In Solidarity Worldwide FREEDOM... Thank you...

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 1 year ago

It's not half as bad as the treatment that you are about to get.

[-] 1 points by peacehurricane (293) 1 year ago

Come on with it if you can take it believe I already have. I mentioned no such thing shameful and you are the example.

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 1 year ago

I'm right here, baby. Bring out your socks.

[-] 1 points by peacehurricane (293) 1 year ago

I believe that is to you about to yes I am that's what I was born to do and why bother with an incoherent crazy the only way that would be is hitting target on the mark ooohh I am not your baby

[-] 2 points by GirlFriday (17435) 1 year ago

We have covered this. In fact, I have seen you write coherently. That just makes you a special kind of suckiness.

[-] 0 points by peacehurricane (293) 1 year ago

A special kind of something my years of overtime have had an effect on my communicating and so much in head with an occupy consumed life for solid 39 years and never doing money in any way shape or form and then have people making fun of my heartfelt efforts once again it is shameful and really you have no business representing Occupy anything the way you talk to grow up around me that soap in mouth may have cleaned you up you could use this on yourself that is what I did when wanting to be sure and talk as best as can be.as in yes yes can can do do WE WE

[-] 2 points by GirlFriday (17435) 1 year ago

Yep, you're a twit. :D

[-] -1 points by peacehurricane (293) 1 year ago

And I am so Okay with everything I am you might try that oh it would mean talking nicely and respecting people you do not even know it is not too late so please give it a try it may surprise you how far it goes. Unless of course your paycheck requires such as it seems to be the case and will await clarification for final answer(so far I am 100%).

[-] 2 points by GirlFriday (17435) 1 year ago

You are 39 and you have multiple IDs. You are an evil bastard.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (28164) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Funny how your broken English just disappears.