quade 4 #1 November 15, 2011 QuoteMayor Michael R. Bloomberg has struggled with how to respond. He repeatedly made clear that he does not support the demonstrators’ arguments or their tactics, but he has also defended their right to protest and in recent days and weeks has sounded increasingly exasperated, especially in the wake of growing complaints from neighbors about how the protest has disrupted the neighborhood and hurt local businesses. The mayor met daily with several deputies and commissioners, as more business owners complaining and editorials lampooning him as gutless, the mayor’s patience wore thin. Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/16/nyregion/police-begin-clearing-zuccotti-park-of-protesters.html I got a text at 1:05 AM EST. Yeah, doing this in the middle of the night . . . what could go wrong? I guess we'll find out in the morning.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #2 November 15, 2011 If you're going to clear it out, much safer, less violent to do it in the middle of the night when they're stoned and sleepy. Worked for Oakland just fine last night. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lost_n_confuzd 0 #3 November 15, 2011 Great, now these pests can say their rights were violated when in fact the mayor only wants the park cleared to clean the filth left behind by these clueless sheep. QuoteThe mayor's office sent out a message on Twitter at 1:19 a.m. saying: "Occupants of Zuccotti should temporarily leave and remove tents and tarps. Protesters can return after the park is cleared." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Meso 38 #4 November 15, 2011 Reportedly destroying the books that were held at the donation established library they had there and arresting scores of people. Ah yes, middle of the night. Good thing those cellphone cameras don't have night-vision. Because police brutality only exists when it's recorded. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Elite_Marksman 0 #5 November 15, 2011 People wouldn't be being arrested if they weren't breaking the law, and they were warned any personal property that was not removed would be disposed of... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Meso 38 #6 November 15, 2011 You're right, the police have never arrested anyone who wasn't breaking a law. They also have never tazered, beat or killed any innocent person either. Because the law enforcement system is ever so grand. This whole OWS thing is stupid, the protesters are mainly just a bunch of hipsters who are borrowing their corporate parents money to go hang out there. But with that said, I'm fairly sure that once again the police will be using excessive force and having fun beating down some people in the night. EDIT: Rumors that the press have been threatened and kept away from the action by the police to prevent filming. Rumors also saying the air space has been closed to helicopters to prevent media filming the event. And reports of blatant violence against unarmed protesters. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Belgian_Draft 0 #7 November 15, 2011 yep, reports from the protesters. No chance they could be telling an untruth. HAMMER: Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the object we are trying to hit. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Meso 38 #8 November 15, 2011 No one said they aren't - hence 'rumors'. But apparently some video cameras managed to catch some police brutality, regardless of the NYPD's attempt to make their actions less visible, so that people would be left saying things like: "reports from the protesters. No chance they could be telling an untruth." But hey, it'll probably be shrugged off anyway, because you know. Police are perfect and everyone who gets beaten by the police deserve it. Because they're each a little walking Jesus who are naturally more trust-worthy than the average protester. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #9 November 15, 2011 QuoteNo one said they aren't - hence 'rumors'. But apparently some video cameras managed to catch some police brutality, regardless of the NYPD's attempt to make their actions less visible, so that people would be left saying things like: "reports from the protesters. No chance they could be telling an untruth." Did they catch the several minutes beforehand, to prove it was unprovoked, or did the recording conveniently start once the police moved in?Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Meso 38 #10 November 15, 2011 QuoteDid they catch the several minutes beforehand, to prove it was unprovoked, or did the recording conveniently start once the police moved in? I haven't seen it, I do not know the details. It's all just rumors at the moment. But most people who begin filming do so when the police move in. What instigation could possibly warrant police brutality on unarmed people when the police have weapons and defence, how could they actually feel threatened for their lives. Again, it's just a lot of hear-say at the moment, but it's happened time and time again when police use blatantly excessive force on protesters. Nothing like some shields and weapons to make you feel untouchable. If the police were wanting the 'true story' to be seen, then why such a big effort to keep the media from documenting it? Preventing media coverage is basically admitting "We don't want the public to see what's happening here". Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #11 November 15, 2011 QuoteQuoteDid they catch the several minutes beforehand, to prove it was unprovoked, or did the recording conveniently start once the police moved in? I haven't seen it, I do not know the details. It's all just rumors at the moment. But most people who begin filming do so when the police move in. What instigation could possibly warrant police brutality on unarmed people when the police have weapons and defence, how could they actually feel threatened for their lives. 1. When they're ordered to disperse and do not, it's not brutality for the police to make them move. For someone who's operating from 'rumors', you sure don't seem to have a problem labeling the police's actions as brutality. 2. The protesters are throwing rocks, bottles, human waste, using prison shives on the cops...let's not pretend it's all one-sided, hmm? QuoteAgain, it's just a lot of hear-say at the moment, but it's happened time and time again when police use blatantly excessive force on protesters. Nothing like some shields and weapons to make you feel untouchable. Nothing like damning before the evidence is in to make you feel superior as well. See above referencing being told to disperse. QuoteIf the police were wanting the 'true story' to be seen, then why such a big effort to keep the media from documenting it? Preventing media coverage is basically admitting "We don't want the public to see what's happening here". Probably for exactly the reason quoted above - the cameras never seem to catch the protestors attacking the cops, only the reverse.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Meso 38 #12 November 15, 2011 QuoteProbably for exactly the reason quoted above - the cameras never seem to catch the protestors attacking the cops, only the reverse. Or the possibility that in many cases where said instigating attacks occurred, they actually did not. But it's a very nice little defence to use "Oh no, they attacked me first... If you had been filming prior you would have seen." Sounds like a great way to wiggle out of something regardless of the truth. QuoteWhen they're ordered to disperse and do not, it's not brutality for the police to make them move. For someone who's operating from 'rumors', you sure don't seem to have a problem labeling the police's actions as brutality. Extrapolating from previous incidents. It's hardly by any means a stretch of imagination to believe the police acted with more force than they needed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #13 November 15, 2011 QuoteQuoteProbably for exactly the reason quoted above - the cameras never seem to catch the protestors attacking the cops, only the reverse. Or the possibility that in many cases where said instigating attacks occurred, they actually did not. But it's a very nice little defence to use "Oh no, they attacked me first... If you had been filming prior you would have seen." Sounds like a great way to wiggle out of something regardless of the truth. QuoteWhen they're ordered to disperse and do not, it's not brutality for the police to make them move. For someone who's operating from 'rumors', you sure don't seem to have a problem labeling the police's actions as brutality. Extrapolating from previous incidents. It's hardly by any means a stretch of imagination to believe the police acted with more force than they needed. Given the documented incidents of attacks BY the protestors, it's hardly a stretch of the imagination to believe they were the innocent victims that you want to portray them as.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamdancer 0 #14 November 15, 2011 these would be the 'documented' attacks made up by the criminal murdoch family...stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Dean358 0 #15 November 15, 2011 My wife and I live three blocks north of Zuccotti park, where the protestors have been camping. While we're of course sympathetic to their cause what was going on in the park needed to end. There were major sanitation issues in and beyond the park (I'll spare you the details, but yikes...) the local restaurants and businesses were being abused, e.g. all their bathrooms were being trashed by the protestors and there was a general lack of respect shown for people living in the 'hood. We have rights too. Although I wasn't there last night, my direct observation of the NYC cops is that, with the exception of a couple of rouge officers and isolated incidents, they showed amazing restraint in dealing with the protestors over the past two months and treated them respectfully. Certainly more respect than the protestors showed those of us who who live here.www.wci.nyc Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamdancer 0 #16 November 15, 2011 toilets were not being 'trashed' - they were being used. we're all human you know...stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #17 November 15, 2011 Quotethese would be the 'documented' attacks made up by the criminal murdoch family... SF Chronicle isn't owned by Murdoch...guess they didn't cover that in your latest instructions from alter-nut.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wmw999 2,447 #18 November 15, 2011 That poster lives there. I wouldn't be surprised to find that, in using the toilets, many of them were left in far dirtier condition than they would be under normal usage and circumstances. Wanna use something free? Leave it in better condition than you found it. Wendy P.There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamdancer 0 #19 November 15, 2011 QuoteThat poster lives there. I wouldn't be surprised to find that, in using the toilets, many of them were left in far dirtier condition than they would be under normal usage and circumstances. Wanna use something free? Leave it in better condition than you found it. Wendy P. well these are not 'normal' usage and circumstances. if you want to nitpick about a function that every human has to perform then go for it...stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Dean358 0 #20 November 15, 2011 Quotetoilets were not being 'trashed' - they were being used. we're all human you know... I call bullshit, as it's easy for you to say,since you're not here. The bathrooms at all the local biz are for customers. The protestors felt they had the right to take them over, overload their capacity, make them filthy with no compensation to the owners. And when that became an issue the protestors expnded, e.g., one or two used the vestibule of the lobby in our residential building as a toilet. That's not my definition of enlightened human behavior.www.wci.nyc Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamdancer 0 #21 November 15, 2011 so they were only for 'customers' - it being well known that protesters don't have the same human need. what you seem to be saying is that the toilets were segregated. have you got anything else to nitpick about...stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Dean358 0 #22 November 15, 2011 Quoteso they were only for 'customers' - it being well known that protesters don't have the same human need. what you seem to be saying is that the toilets were segregated. have you got anything else to nitpick about... Please re-read wmw999's post above.www.wci.nyc Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamdancer 0 #23 November 15, 2011 i've already answered her. you both seem to be appalled that people need to use the toilet. strange priorities...stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #24 November 15, 2011 QuoteQuoteThat poster lives there. I wouldn't be surprised to find that, in using the toilets, many of them were left in far dirtier condition than they would be under normal usage and circumstances. Wanna use something free? Leave it in better condition than you found it. Wendy P. well these are not 'normal' usage and circumstances. if you want to nitpick about a function that every human has to perform then go for it... Yep. With this post you've just completely explained your thinking to everybody. Shitting is a human function. Therefore, screw anybody who objects to my dirtying up their property, bathroom, toilet. Yours is an example of the complete lack of respect that you have for people, property and the rights of anybody but you. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamdancer 0 #25 November 15, 2011 you do realise toilets flush don't you? then you can use them again...stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
