Letters to the Editor

Your views in 200 words or less

PROTESTS: Revolutions usually aren’t civil

Letter by Bonnie Berkey, Fircrest on Nov. 10, 2011 at 11:40 am with 142 Comments »
November 10, 2011 12:40 pm

Re: “Radicalism discredits Occupy movement’s message” (Michael Gerson column, 11-8).

At what point do people get that the Occupy movement is not a political party convention? The Democrats had nothing to do with it; they only hoped to usurp the movement.

Gerson, a former policy adviser for George W. Bush, expects a well-mannered revolution. The British expected the colonists to act with civility before the first tea party broke out, igniting the revolution that broke us free from the oligarchies of aristocracy.

The Occupy Wall Street movement is just the beginning of our doomed history repeating itself against the current plutocracy in power. If it’s not nice then it’s becoming a revolution. Those who don’t see the OWS movement as having a point or think it is all students, jobless or homeless being disobedient are, well, partially right but mostly not going to change it by deriding it so.

To those I say, how goes the battle for the rich? Revolutions by the proletariat are not civil. This was inspired by the Arab Spring revolutions – a nice name for extremely violent revolutions. The Guy Fawkes masks are a reminder of where it can lead. Be thankful it is still trying to follow some rules of conduct.

I support and admire those camped in our cities. They show conviction and are out from behind their keyboards trying to do something. If it gets messy and elitists are offended, I apologize in advance. I recommend to lead, follow or get of the way because most likely it will.

Leave a comment Comments → 142
  1. Most modern revolutions arise from the bourgeois and the proletariat; which is why the rich fear the middle and working classes.

  2. Vox_clamantis_in_deserto says:

    Sounds ominous, Bonnie. And when the Occupy Fircrest movement decides to camp down at Fircrest Park, I am sure you will be right there with them.

  3. concernedtacoma7 says:

    Sorry folks, but a revolution requires a leader, a message, and popular support. These OWS urban campers have none of the above.

  4. There are roughly seven hundred thousand people living in the greater Tacoma area. Last time I strolled around occupy park, there were two people on the sidewalk holding signs, and three people inside the big white tent. The fifteen or so little camping tents were empty. You do the math. Nuff said.

  5. concernedtacoma7 says:

    “The Guy Fawkes masks are a reminder of where it can lead”-

    Guy Fawkes, a man who faught for the Catholic Church. No relation to these campers or the OWS movement.

    These kids need to read a book, not take V for Vendetta as fact.

  6. First comes the movement, then comes the leaders.

    Fawkes was and English Catholic who fought against the English Protestants.

  7. alindasue says:

    lanq said, “The fifteen or so little camping tents were empty. You do the math.”

    You do the math. Fifteen or so camping tents means at least fifteen people spending the night there.

    What time did you go by the park? It’s very likely that some of the campers were at work or off at a rally outside the camping area…

    … or maybe those tents were just as “empty” as some of you keep trying to convince us the Pierce Transit buses are. Those of us who actually ride the buses know better – as do the owners of those “empty” tents.

  8. alindasue says:

    xring said, “First comes the movement, then comes the leaders.”

    Just as it was at the time of our founding fathers.

  9. concernedtacoma7 says:

    OK, give her the 15 tents as occupied. Lets say they have 10 people in each. 150 people do not represent 700k. Not even a stat within a margin of error.

  10. the founding fathers were the leaders of the movement… a group of people lead a movement, that’s what you need to move from a tent to…. where you want to go.

  11. Most of the kids wearing the Guy Fawkes masks wouldn’t know Guy Fawkes from Lester Maddox. It’s the “V” thing. In the movie “V”, the hero employs terror tactics against an oppressive, Nazi-like British government. As we learn, the “conservative” government had purposely created a bad situation so that the population would demand that they (the conservatives) assume power. Ironically, a similar scenario was playing out right here in the USA, with the Democrats, led by SOS Hillary Clinton, lamenting the amount of American guns making their way into Mexico and the hands of the drug cartels. This was done for the purpose of stirring up the uninformed (a favorite tact of the left) against gun ownership and The Second Amendment. But all this fell to the ground when we learned that the Obama administration had endorsed and even facilitated the illegal transfer of guns. They were setting the table, and were caught.

    Actually, “V” is a look right smack into the minds of the left. It’s complete fiction, after all, but it took a leftist mind to think it up. :)

  12. “You do the math. Fifteen or so camping tents means at least fifteen people spending the night there.”

    Not true, hombre. Several news media have already exposed this tact in other cities, by taking thermal image photography of the occupy sites at night. Most of the tents are empty. Fail, junior.

  13. SafewayOrangeSoda says:

    I find it rather offensive to compare our founding fathers, who risked lifetime imprisonment and hanging… to these car poopers with their iPhones.

  14. Doubt if any of the Founders were out snowballing on March 5, 1770.

    Lanq.
    Show me the link?

  15. xring – again it was well reported, done in London, a counter video was done… and then people moved on.

  16. hansgruber says:

    Didn’t the American Revolution have something to do about paying too much taxes?

    So shouldn’t the rich be down there protesting the poor? The poor who demand the rich support them? That’s what England did to the colonist, Taxed ‘em til they had enough….watch out what you want.

  17. aislander says:

    I think there are more red diaper babies on this forum than there are in the streets…

  18. I presume then Bonnie that you were excited by the Tea Party rallies as well?

  19. Vox_clamantis_in_deserto says:

    Lanq.
    Show me the link?

    Her you go x:

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2053463/Occupy-London-90-tents-St-Pauls-protest-camp-left-overnight.html

    It shows the actual imagery in multiple stills – pretty hard to refute, but go ahead, x, take a shot.

  20. alindasue says:

    SafewayOrangeSoda said, “I find it rather offensive to compare our founding fathers, who risked lifetime imprisonment and hanging… to these car poopers with their iPhones.”

    I keep hearing about “car poopers”, but so far all links seem to go to the same picture: one person who may or may not have been part of the larger group…

    What seems to be lost in a lot of conversations about the founding fathers of this country and those they associated with is that they were men, not heroic images on a two dollar bill, each of them behaving with varying personalities and varying degrees of decorum as is normal for men. That doesn’t detract from the fact that those men accomplished greatness.

    Do you really think it all looked all clean and Disneyfied like in Johnny Tremain?

    Back to the #OWS movement…
    Notice that the movement continues despite the fact that literally hundreds have been arrested and a few have been critically injured. They know the risks… not quite as severe as the founding fathers faced (thanks to the founding fathers who brought us The Constitution), but risks none-the-less.

    I don’t know why you mentioned iPhones as part of your derisive reference. I’m sure that if iPhones had been available in the 1700s, the founding fathers would have been quite happy to use them too.

  21. old_benjamin says:

    One must assume few of these wantabe revolutionaries lived through or remember the sixties. I remember the flower children fantasizing about “when the revolution comes.” The revolution that came was Ronald Reagan. History is about to repeat itself when the Democrat wastrels are swept from office in 2012. Viva la revolution.

  22. So Rupert Murdoch’s Tabloid shows pictures of OWS-London and we are to believe the all OWS sites are Potemkin Villages?

  23. “…Rupert Murdoch’s tabloid…” too funny, like thats relevant.

  24. concernedtacoma7 says:

    Sue- they were men of action and boldness with honest and clear intentions. They took charge, organized, motivated, and acted. OWS- none of the above.

    Dirty, well, 1780’s were not famous for hygiene. 2011 though?

    They were, on the most part, affluent. Stealing from the rich was not their mantra.

    Read up, and do not compare them to these tent dwellers http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Founding_Fathers_of_the_United_States

  25. Here is the original video shot by the London Daily Telegraph.

    Note how the tents block the thermo images of the people.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ZTiBqJEOMI

    The defense rests.

  26. aislander says:

    See, xring, the thing about thermal images is that they are supposed to show who (or what, more aptly) are IN the tents. The tents block nothing…

  27. Aislander,
    Then why do you not see all of the people on the other side of the tents?

    The video proves nothing. Except how despite the right is to denigrate OWS.

  28. aislander says:

    It is not necessary to disparage OWS (or, as I call it: LRV): it is what it is, and sane people see that…

  29. SwordofPerseus says:

    lanq + concerned – less than 200k souls live in the greater Tacoma area. So what if only a few dozen are at the OWS in Tacoma? A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.

    It is true that the Founding Fathers were men of action, but they operated with great secrecy, even after the first shots were fired. The British were notoriously very cruel in meting out punishment to traitors, as our Founding Fathers were considered to be by the British. The British spoke of them as you do of the OWS.

    “V” is eerily familiar with what is happening today, with the false flag attack on 9/11, followed by the patriot act, illegal war in Iraq, the consolidation of the news media into a few monolithic corporate owned propaganda outlets etc…

    If you think you are free in this country, just try and camp in a park or stroll through Sea-Tac airport with a lit cigar or walk into your own city hall with a loaded legally carried sidearm or shotgun slung over your shoulder, see how “free” you really are. When you list, you limit your freedom. Your freedom is very limited indeed.

    hans’- the American Revolution was about fighting against tyranny and corporate monopolies in the forms of the British Crown(tyranny) and the East India Trading Company(corporate monopoly). A direct comparison can easily be made regarding the OWS movement; The Wall Street Banks (tyranny) and the corporate monopolies (ExxonMobile, GE, Halliburton, Viacom, etc…) Get it?

  30. SwordofPerseus says:

    ‘lander; what is LRV? Liberty lovers, Revolutionary thinkers and Veterans?

  31. aislander says:

    Lice ridden vermin…

  32. hansgruber says:

    SwordofPerseus-The dif is these OWS folks aren’t paying the majority of the taxes. The American Revolution was about the colonies paying huge taxes to support the governemnt (The English Crown) because they were broke.

    The OWS folks are demanding the rich (ie:tax payers) pay to support them. Just like the British.

    Get it?

    I didn’t think so

  33. aislander says:

    Oops: forgot the hyphen…

  34. Hans and AI – you are both wrong.

    What OWS and the 99ers want are jobs and a level playing field.

    Level playing field – now where I have heard that phrase?

  35. aislander says:

    Raising taxes doesn’t create jobs, but based on the words of the LRV (from their mouths and on their signs), they want the end of a free America, violent revolution, and the instituting of European-style socialism at best and another try at communism at worst.

    It is interesting that Europe, even with the advantage of having the burden of their defense borne by the US, is still going broke under their other burden: socialism.

    What are they rioting for over there–even more socialism? No, they are rioting because they feel entitled to the benefits their nations can no longer afford. That is the fruit of dependency.

    And you pathetic weasels want to do the same thing to America…

  36. Pacman33 says:

    What better way to send a message to Wall Street, by sitting in a piss stained pup tent banging on a drum.

    I think these idiots are about the best argument against their own beliefs that’s ever been devised. I hope they continue to get lots and lots of attention, especially during disturbed self-comparisons with our nation’s founders.

    The Leftist can neither manage the capitalist state nor overcome it, and aspires to do both and neither at the same time.

  37. “Then why do you not see all of the people on the other side of the tents?

    The video proves nothing. Except how despite the right is to denigrate OWS.”

    you cannot “see” because you are measuring an infrared image that detects infrared radiation that is emitted from all things, typically alive, above a certain temperature.

    Because of the density of the fabric you will not “see” a body but the “glow” of the radiation from the body or a source that eminates an infrared signature.

    notice about 22 secs into the video the large tent that is “glowing”. that tent has a significant source (you can see it in the lower right hand corner of that tent) that is causing the infrared camera to pick up that significant signature. It does not appear to be human.

    The people would like to rest on this issue but it appears the defense will never be satisfied with an answer. Even on based on simple science.

    All one has to do is step back and let the movement denigrate themselves. That video evidence is plentiful… on that, the people rest.

  38. “What OWS and the 99ers want are jobs and a level playing field.”

    xring – how do you propose we get there… jobs – how will they be created in your 99% world. “level playing field” what does that mean to you?

  39. “Hillary Clinton, lamenting the amount of American guns making their way into Mexico and the hands of the drug cartels. This was done for the purpose of stirring up the uninformed (a favorite tact of the left) against gun ownership”

    And you have actual, credible evidence to prove this allegation? Without any supporting evidence, the only possible explanation for your claim is that you think you can read Hilary Clinton’s mind.

    So which is it? DO you have corroborating evidence? Or do you think you can read peoples’ minds?

  40. “Lice ridden vermin… ”

    When you can’t refute the message, demonize the messenger.

  41. “they want the end of a free America, violent revolution, and the instituting of European-style socialism at best and another try at communism at worst.”

    Another mind-reader. LOL

  42. “you pathetic weasels”

    More demonization. Another admission that you can’t refute the message.

  43. “And you have actual, credible evidence to prove this allegation? Without any supporting evidence, the only possible explanation for your claim is that you think you can read Hilary Clinton’s mind.”

    dude, I gotta ask… are you related to xring in any sort of way?

    Sir, with all due respect, you can be this uninformed about what was happening on the Southern border (maybe more) and the current grillin’, and I dont mean steak, that is going on in DC.

    I would say you need to get on top of this “FAST” and if that don’t make you “FURIOUS” then I have no clue what will.

    I could offer you links but they are too numerous now and it appears you need the work.

  44. PS – no need to refure any message… they have not articulated one yet.

  45. funny, like thats relevant.

    Like anything on this thread is relevant……

  46. harleyrider1 says:

    Why would the “leaders” of this movement deposit their payroll of $20,000 into Wells Fargo one day and lead the minions to deface the bank and intimidate customers?

    Makes one wonder what is really behind this so called I hate banks protest?

    http://www.davidicke.com/headlines/55914-hypocritic-occupy-oakland-deposits-20000-in-wells-fargo-bank

    http://www.thedailyeconomist.com/2011/10/some-protesters-being-paid-to-attend.html

  47. NickDixon says:

    “The dif is these OWS folks aren’t paying the majority of the taxes.”

    Funny, I didn’t know that our rights and government were up to the highest bidder.

  48. NickDixon says:

    Now, how would anyone know how much money someone deposited in a bank? That is private information.

    It doesn’t take much for people to jump on a pure fictional story.

    As to “paid protestors”, I don’t doubt it. The Heritage Foundation has been paying their water carriers for years. For an opposition to do the same seems like a reasonable thought.

  49. “Now, how would anyone know how much money someone deposited in a bank? That is private information.”

    we know because they actually told us that’s what they did. It’s fairly common knowledge if you have a diverse source of news…

  50. “funny, like thats relevant.

    Like anything on this thread is relevant…… “

    we are having a lovers spat aren’t we?

    ok, prepare ye to be “loved” xx style…

  51. NickDixon says:

    No, a blogger said “they told me”.

    A source becomes valid when you want them to be.

    So we are to believe that the OWS folks opened up a bank account and then went looking for a right wing blogger to tell.

    I don’t think so.

  52. NickDixon says:

    After a little research – it appears that the story might have origins at the CBS local affiliate. Strangely, no one quotes a OWS spokes person or the alleged “statement”, but relies on a allegory format. One would think that if this is as big a deal as they claim, a little name dropping or a pdf of the “statement” would be in order.

  53. “dude, I gotta ask… are you related to xring in any sort of way?”

    Dude, think anyone noticed that you didn’t provide any corroborating evidence to support your claim that Hilary Clinton’s “purpose [was] stirring up the uninformed (a favorite tact of the left) against gun ownership”?

    “you need to get on top of this “FAST” and if that don’t make you “FURIOUS”

    You must have been FURIOUS really FAST about “Wide Receiver”, the Bush Administration’s very similar tactic. http://articles.cnn.com/2011-11-08/us/us_holder-fast-and-furious_1_operation-fast-and-furious-illegal-guns-atf?_s=PM:US

  54. There is no secret source, the west coast version of OWS opened a bank account at a bank that the group previously vandalized the week before (breaking windows, etc… maybe a little poop too). This is not a left or right wing anything, this is a being observant thingy… don’t know what to tell ya.

  55. This one is ongoing and since you went there… Wide Receiver didn’t kill anybody, Fast Furious did, three times. Taking a few steps back…

    I am stunned that you decide go partisan instead of berating your… our government for one of the most ill-conceived operations ever. And the fact that WR was tried and did not work as intended should have been an obvious clue to the current administration that their version would be a bad idea of major proportions.

    This one should not be partisan. Every American should ashamed at the behavior of our government.

  56. aislander says:

    You don’t have to be able to read minds to read the plentiful (not just occasional) signs, and listen to interviews. Sum-one hasn’t been paying attention…

  57. “I am stunned that you decide go partisan”

    … said the person who refused to castigate the Bush administration for doing the same thing as the Obama administration. Pardon me, but your double standard is showing.

    Oh, and by the way. Do you think anyone noticed that you STILL haven’t presented any evidence that Hilary Clinton’s “purpose [was] stirring up the uninformed (a favorite tact of the left) against gun ownership”?

  58. “You don’t have to be able to read minds to read the plentiful (not just occasional) signs, and listen to interviews”

    So you should have no problem providing transcripts of those interviews, should you? Let’s see them.

  59. aislander says:

    Youtube “OWS interviews.” Try to pay attention to what’s going on in the world. And don’t ask anyone else to do YOUR homework…

  60. LOL – do ya think anyone noticed that you failed to provide any evidence to support your claim?

    “don’t ask anyone else to do YOUR homework…”

    My homework? I’m not the one making the claim.

  61. I didn’t make the claim, I am refuting your dismissal of said claim.

    I am trying to save my time and energy. Dont really care about yours.

    We could go all day long telling me how I am wrong, etc… It becomes clear as day that you don’t believe and you want proof. You badger, double down, badger some more, triple down… whatever. I provide said proof in the form of a government document, signed, sealed, etc…

    Your response, either nothing or dismissal.

    When you wish to engage like a mature adult in a conversation, acknowledge when you are corrected, apologize when you are wrong and also make yourself more pleasant to converse with… then maybe I might muster up some respect for you and your time to actually provide you with a response and a link to my resource for my statement…

    Until it is really a short trip on the internet. Happy trails

  62. “… said the person who refused to castigate the Bush administration for doing the same thing as the Obama administration. Pardon me, but your double standard is showing.”

    a claim that I refused anything means that your delusional mind believes we had this conversation before.

    We have not, their is nothing between you and I to “refuse”

  63. “I didn’t make the claim”

    Then why are you defending it?

    “It becomes clear as day that you don’t believe and you want proof.”

    So asking for proof is wrong? When someone claims that they know what someone else wants or thinks, there are only three possible explanations: (1) they have corroborating evidence to support that claim, (2) they think that they can read the other person’s mind, or (3) they made the claim up.

    “I provide said proof in the form of a government document, signed, sealed, etc…”

    You didn’t provide any proof – or any evidence at all – of Hilary Clinton’s purpose. Or anything else. Perhaps you’d care to scroll back up and look to see what proof you provided.

    “claim that I refused anything means that your delusional mind believes we had this conversation before.”

    When you brought up the subject of the fast and furious this thread, I responded with the Bush administration’s use of the same tactic. You had the opportunity at that point to respond and state whether or not it was equally bad. You refused to do so.

  64. Claim – so what if I make comment… ???

    Proof – you can ask for proof. I just don’t provide it anymore. People like you really don’t want proof for the purpose of settling an issue. It doesn’t matter. You have, you continue to and will continue to believe what you believe regardless of what I provide. Hence, I ain’t wasting my time son…

    Hilary – nope and I’m not. It’s out there. Holder was in the hot seat the past few days. If you don’t know that but continue to believe I am wrong then the problem is with you and your awareness of this issue. In that case you need the work… go forth and google…

    Bush – you attempted to use a now classic divert the attention with a bushism. You are wrong, it wasn’t the same tactic. Hence, no refusal, nothing to refute.

  65. I don’t mind going off subject, fun at times…

    but Occupy had a murder in Oakland, a dead man in Salt lake city, cases of tuberculosis in Atlanta, and a suicide in Vermont, and somewhere another man was dead for 2 days at a camp before anyone noticed… I believe we are up to 22… dead people that is…

    And I haven’t even checked up on New York today…

    Like I said you guys need to be more concerned about the movement, the vision, the mission, the objective and the direction of the Occupy movement than some guy named xx###’s and his accurate, non-refutable observations.

  66. “People like you really don’t want proof for the purpose of settling an issue. You have, you continue to and will continue to believe what you believe regardless of what I provide.”

    And you know what I (or “people like me”, whatever the heck that’s supposed to mean) want or don’t want because…? As I said before, there are only three possible explanations for claiming to know what others want. Which reason are you using this time?

    “You are wrong, it wasn’t the same tactic.”

    Because you say so and everybody is just supposed to take your word for it.

  67. OWS is about standing up for those whom are not able to do so for themselves as much as it is for those who have the ability to go and stand up for their right to say “I am not okay with this. I am not okay with working two to three jobs to support my family. I am not okay with losing my home due to these corporate theives.” The reason we are lucky enough to have people standing up at OWS camps for us and the other millions of americans that cannot leave work because they have to be at work or lose a job is because they either have the luxury to leave their jobs at times, devote their time, or have no other place to go because of the corporate theives and uber wealthy that continue to not give back to their country in its time of need. Remember, they say those wealthy folks will create jobs for us not wealthy folks right? Where are the jobs for those at the OWS camps? Those that lost their homes in the last few years? – And yes my name is Bonnie Berkey and I would be fine with an occupy Fircrest event. Anytown USA should be proud to have an OWS encampment or group on parade to show the government that we are not happy with what is occurring.

  68. “Because you say so and everybody is just supposed to take your word for it.”

    The three explanations are for your little world. To play along, I got my chips at what would be table table one in your world.

    No, don’t take my word for it. To double down…

    The Wide Reciever and the Fast and the Furious program were/are different in their concept and execution.

    There is more meat for you to enjoy or when you find I am right… choke on…

  69. Would you like to use english in your comment so that we can all understand what you are saying XX98411.

  70. well bonkey – though I believe you have some serious issue with the “enter” key I was somehow able to read your post.

    Do I use the enter too uch for you… it there a specific post that you have issue with… or do you think I just generally suck?

    how can I help bonkey?

  71. concernedtacoma7 says:

    bonkey, read the whole thread before you respond. You obviously cut and pasted your touching post about the OWS people representing the world’s oppressed.

    “I am not okay with losing my home due to these corporate theives.”

    Please explain that one. Also, you point out the beef is with the govt, so why support a movement that ignores the cause of the issues they dislike?

    Ehill/Kard- Widereceiver attempted to track every gun in the program. When they could not, they stopped the program. Yes, it was risky and did not work out well.
    F&F intentionally let the weapons loose, with no attempt to track them after purchase.

    So once again you play the ‘blame Bush’ game with a twist. Now it is ‘this was stupid, but Bush did it too!’ False, and I hope the BHO uses some of your talking points.

  72. “The Wide Reciever and the Fast and the Furious program were/are different in their concept and execution”

    Both programs allowed illegal weapons to remain in the hands of the purchasers in the hope they would lead to the higher-ups.

    “No, don’t take my word for it. ”

    I don’t, nor do I expect you to take mine. When I post statements of fact, I’m prepared to back them up with links to actual, verifiable facts. And I expect others – of all sides of the political spectrum – to do the same. That’s what adult discussion is supposed to be all about.

    Oh, and by the way. I’m still waiting for you to explain how it is that you know what I (or “people like me”) want or don’t want.

  73. “Both programs allowed illegal weapons to remain in the hands of the purchasers in the hope they would lead to the higher-ups.”

    Wrong again sir, what you cite here is what you believe is the result of both programs. The programs were different.

    The Wide Receiver program was done with the full cooperation of the Mexican government in both concept, coordination and execution. The Bush administration worked with the Mexican government in an attempt to reduce the flow of illegally obtained weapon across the border.

    Fast and Furious were done without the knowledge nor cooperation of the Mexican government, nor it appears the local and state officials of the border state. The Obama administration, against the wishes of a sovereign nation, allowed weapons to enter their country without their knowledge nor cooperation.

    What is most egregious is that the Obama administration went forward with the program knowing the issues, risks and results of the Wide Receiver program.

    Again this is not a partisan issue.

  74. First you’d like to think you post statements of fact… most people don’t. They are generally opinion based on an aggregate of facts. No big deal.

    Like I said, you challenge in an attempt to get something on the table and then attack minutia of the position. If my position is solid fact then the ire turns to me. Again, no biggie and predictable. Such is life on the TNT board.

    One would think it is the same for you guys but your facts typically don’t stand up to scrutiny so some end up making fun of you. Such is life on the TNT board.

    I have posted quite a few thing about OWS and the response from you and your ilk… talk about Fast and Furious or anything else but OWS… such is life on the TNT board.

    Explanation – I am stereotyping you based on what you write as well as the tone and tenor of your postings. I make an assessment of your political position and with that comes stereotypes. Vary rarely am I surprised in your position (as well as others) and I move forward form there.

    No explanation, you do it too by the way so please don’t pretend you don’t.

    So, you got a comment on any of the OWS posts, bonkey got me teary eyed. You wanna give it a shot or you wanna change the subject again?

  75. ““Both programs allowed illegal weapons to remain in the hands of the purchasers in the hope they would lead to the higher-ups.”

    Wrong again sir” — Nope. I was correct.

    “you challenge in an attempt to get something on the table and then attack minutia of the position.” — Thanks for the admission that you think facts and corroborating evidence are just minutiae. An opinion without supporting facts is about as reliable as a house without a foundation.

    “If my position is solid fact then the ire turns to me” — You just got through admitting that most people don’t post facts. Are you now claiming to be the exception?

    “your facts typically don’t stand up to scrutiny” — Oh? Perhaps you could back that claim up with a few examples.

    “I am stereotyping you” — You most certainly are. Stereotyping is SO much easier than attempting any sort of reasoned discourse.

  76. aislander says:

    Not you, xx…

  77. aislander says:

    Sure can tell the government agencies (including public schools) got the day off…

  78. Let’s start here…

    Stereotyping is SO much easier than attempting any sort of reasoned discourse.

    Nope, we can have reasonable discourse… are we not now?

    Wrong again sir” — Nope. I was correct.

    Well maybe not this. Ok, we tried.

    Minutia – that not what I said. In the interest of discourse you can try again. My perception is that this is more of a battle of wits than a conversation. Again that is not what I said…admission… WTF is that?

    Facts – most people post an opinion that is an aggregate of facts… ie a foundation of facts…

    Exception – again that is not what I said so I have no clue what you are attempting to say here. I claim no exception.

    Scrutiny – we’ll get there, patience my ‘ito

    Stereotyping – again are we not having sane and reasonable discourse now. I feel enriched by this conversation, how about you?

  79. Perhaps for good reason.

    I am of the mindset that flooding a soveriegn nation with weapons, and the country has a weapon, drug, and corruption problem is a good idea.

    I appreciate that ehill, you are concerned with corruption and such but their are honest folk in Mexico.

    Also what we did may be a violation of international law.

    Latly, I know the government is understandly pissed and I read in passing that they were considering a lawsuit to of course, get some dollars from us.

    So, interesting post but I don’t believe it a justificaiton for keeping the Mexican Government out of the loop… this is an opinion based on a quick read of the articles.

  80. aislander – I kinda figure if you are going to call me a tool, I’ll probably overhear you talking to Larry first… ;)

  81. and you are right, what a bunch of tools

  82. Perhaps for good reason.

    I am of the mindset that flooding a soveriegn nation with weapons, and the country has a weapon, drug, and corruption problem is NOT a good idea.

    I appreciate that ehill, you are concerned with corruption and such but their are honest folk in Mexico.

    Also what we did may be a violation of international law.

    Latly, I know the government is understandly pissed and I read in passing that they were considering a lawsuit to of course, get some dollars from us.

    So, interesting post but I don’t believe it a justificaiton for keeping the Mexican Government out of the loop… this is an opinion based on a quick read of the articles.

  83. whoops on my 4:42 post. Changed the structure of the sentence and left out a few critical words…

    see ehill, I am no exception.

  84. “Sure can tell the government agencies (including public schools) got the day off…”

    Yep. You’re posting here.

  85. “Minutia – that not what I said.” — Really? Then was it someone impersonating you who said “you challenge in an attempt to get something on the table and then attack minutia of the position”?

    “most people post an opinion that is an aggregate of facts… ie a foundation of facts” — And they should be able to prove that what they claim to be facts are indeed facts. But you’ve admitted that you refuse to do so, so reasoned discourse with you is nigh onto impossible.

    “your facts typically don’t stand up to scrutiny” — I’m still waiting for corroborating evidence to support this claim. Or you could just admit that you made it up.

  86. took14theteam says:

    BTDT

  87. LSMFT

  88. old_benjamin says:

    It is curious that the OWS supporters liken their grievances to those of the American colonists. The colonists were angered by the tax policy of the British government, wheras the OWS protestors are complaining about the policies of private companies, i.e., the banks. I know of no private company that has ever granted the general public power over its policies or control of its assets. It is this confusion about public and private entities that is at the heart of the protestors misguided actions. They have the right to refrain from patronizing business they find objectionable but not to determine their policies or profits. The protest is more appropriately directed to the government, which does have the authority to oversee banking policy. Curious, very curious indeed that the OWS supporters should not address the agency that has the power to redress their grievances but rather the one that has no responsibility to do so. Do I detect the odor of partisan politics? Some have said that the OWS encampments have a decided stench about them.

  89. This is what I challenged:

    Thanks for the admission that you think facts and corroborating evidence are just minutiae. An opinion without supporting facts is about as reliable as a house without a foundation.

    I have no clue why you interpreted what I actually said to this… again, one more time, “…the admission…” admission of what?

    Proving claims – I have provided facts and the resources via links where I got that information. You can thank the former Kardnos for this.

    You would post fact “A” with a link to back up fact “A” and he would then ignore that, since it was correct IMHO and point to another shiney object off subject so that you were chasing each others tail. Fun for about a trip or two until you realize that that will be the style of debate. It was also others, a few others that would do that.

    So I stopped wasting my time and stopped providing sources. If you have two braincells and a pulse you can find them. Besides it more fun to have you guys claim something as fact, find a solid source to prove you guys wrong, have you do the mi-direct dance and of course, attempts to move on to another shiney object.

    We are having discourse now, seems reasonable…

    In order to have a conversation you must also read for comprehension. I said you will step in it, I will then call you out. We’ll have fun from there…

  90. aislander says:

    xx (and LarryFine): I don’t think the motivation is to have a conversation; rather to impede one. Don’t play…

  91. Yeah you’re right, it was reminiscant of my… whatever they were with my little karnitos… sigh…

    Anyway, on the OWS front… did you know that more people died at Occupy protests than in Afganistan? One was dead for two days in his tent, in Vermont a suicide, OWSOakland was a standard beat down followed by gunshots. 101st murder for the year… wow…

    Health issues are surfacing in Atlanta – Tuberculosis… and in NY what they are calling “Zuccotti Lung’ – that can’t be good.

    On the “Why are they dissing Wall Street when the celebraties are pissing on them and calling it rain…” probably what you are smelling Old Ben… Jay-Z the media mougal, is creating a line of very expensive t-shirts that state “Occupy All Streets” one would expect that the proceeds would go to support our fine friends at OWS but sadly no.

    “At this time, we have not made an official commitment to monetarily support the movement,” the Rocawear spokeswoman said in a statement to the Gawker website.”

    I didn’t provide any links… hmmm, can I call it a summary?

  92. “I have no clue why you interpreted what I actually said to this… again, one more time, “…the admission…” admission of what?” — As I said, the admission that you think that facts (upon which solid opinions depend) are noting more than minutiae. Sorry you didn’t get it. I’ll try to use smaller words with you from now on.

    “If you have two braincells and a pulse you can find them” — The way reasoned discourse works is that the burden of proof lies with the person making the claim. When you make a claim (such as “your facts typically don’t stand up to scrutiny”), the burden of proof is on you to provide credible supporting evidence. This is the third time I’ve asked you to provide said evidence. The irrefutable fact that you have refused to do so leads anyone with “two brain cells and a pulse” to conclude that you CANNOT provide any evidence for one simple reason: there isn’t any. Which in turn leads that same person with “two brain cells and a pulse” to conclude that you have no factual basis for making such a claim because you made the accusation up.

    When one person lies, there can be no reasoned discourse.

  93. “I don’t think the motivation is to have a conversation; rather to impede one”

    Another mind reader. LOL

  94. Vox_clamantis_in_deserto says:

    BTDT gone viral. Just when this forum was starting to smell better.

    I’m taking ai’s advice.

  95. Xx98 says “notice about 22 secs into the video the large tent that is “glowing”. that tent has a significant source (you can see it in the lower right hand corner of that tent) that is causing the infrared camera to pick up that significant signature. It does not appear to be human.”

    Thank you for proving my point. The thermo imaging in the vedio is unable to detect a human heat signature inside the tents.

    Jobs – we can start by penalizing rather than rewarding them for sending jobs overseas.

    OWS deposit – show me some proof, name me names.

  96. aislander says:

    Yeah, penalizing companies is a great way to attract and keep them here…

  97. Info to the board, anybody know whats up with this…

    xx98411 says:
    Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    Nov. 11, 2011 at 7:00 pm

    I noticed it once before on a post of mine. It was never removed.

    I checked the words in the post and maybe – pissing – otherwise???

    Post is flagged? This one? I’ve been more offensive than this?

    Anyway just a curious FYI and infoyou… carry on…

  98. xring – that large tent they were having a bonfire in ok. you really don’t know how that stuff works do you?

  99. Their is no admission of anything, don’t know what to tell ya… the premise is wrong, so here we… no, you are stuck, again don’t know what to tell ya.

    It’s not that I can’t prove a fact it’s that you (and a few others) are not worth my effort to do that. You can take it personally…

    When one person lies, there can be no reasoned discourse.

    Heck if that is the standard, then half the board is gone.

  100. “you (and a few others) are not worth my effort to do that.”

    How very elitist of you.

  101. “BTDT gone viral. Just when this forum was starting to smell better.”

    See my previous response to xx.

  102. I am of the mindset that flooding a soveriegn nation with weapons, and the country has a weapon, drug, and corruption problem is NOT a good idea.

    Yep…invading Afghanistan was completely boneheaded……..oh….you were referring to Mexico and the O Administration doubling down on the W Administration’s stupid efforts – oh well Afghanistan, Mexico….it really doesn’t matter….the O’s are rather steadfast in proving that the W’s policies were really stupid by taking them to the extreme.

  103. NickDixon says:

    taxing companies for the use of services is not penalizing them

  104. aislander says:

    I don’t really care if the posters change or not. I’d really like to see the same old annoying M.O. disappear, though. Not sure if it’s the same lefty with a brand new moniker, or if the M.O. is a part of the personality disorder that causes one to admire Michael Moore, wear Che tee shirts, and believe that one has a “right” to the property of others, but that is immaterial…

  105. fiftytwopickup says:

    after months of reading these comments, I just got a laugh at the above comment about MO. Predictable to say the least. Is that MO?

  106. “personality disorder”

    When you can’t refute the message, accuse the messenger of having a “personality disorder”.

    “admire Michael Moore, wear Che tee shirts, and believe that one has a “right” to the property of others”

    When you can’t refute the message, make stuff up about the messenger.

  107. we have refuted the message… over and over and over again… and like herpes it keeps coming back

    make stuff up… please read the board, rub some braincells together…

  108. NickDixon says:

    Hey, ehill! I just dropped the bomb in another thread that you aren’t “Kardnos”. I’m sure the embarrassment will be too much for certain people to bear, but I tried my best.

    I spoke to old Kardy on the “wireless” and he is asking the locals how you laugh in a Hawaiian dialect. Even though you don’t know him, he says “Aloha!”

  109. aislander says:

    So…fiftytwopickup: are you Andy Assmussen? He took your one “thought” and wrote a whole LTE about it…

  110. “we have refuted the message”

    Yet another claim without supporting evidence. What a surprise.

    Just out of curiosity, is that the royal “we”, the editorial “we”, or are you admitting to posting under multiple names?

  111. “Hey, ehill! I just dropped the bomb in another thread that you aren’t “Kardnos”.

    I’ve never posted under any identity other than this one, and I honestly don’t get this obsession with sockpuppets by a few of the folks in here. I have to wonder if it’s projection on their part.

  112. concernedtacoma7 says:

    Hills- for 2 days you have posted nothing of value, just pushing people’s buttons. You have succeeded in annoying the board. Good job. A three year could have done the same (and a 10 year old would link to a humor site as ‘proof’ of anything).

    Maybe you know, don’t know, or are the guy everybody dislikes. Not because of his view, but of his childish tactics. Your new (or old) pal dick stated on another thread people were directed here just to spam the discussions. Well, if the shoe fits….

  113. “…are you admitting to posting under multiple names?”

    Do you have any evidence to support you allegation or you just slinging to see what sticks?

    “I’ve never posted under any identity other than this one,…”

    What evidence do you have to support this claim? When you make a claim (such as “I’ve never posted under any identity other than this one…”), the burden of proof is on you to provide credible supporting evidence. That’s the way reasoned discourse works, isn’t it… ?

    Your right, what a fool hearted elitist I have been. I will try to live down to your standard… In the meantime, you got anything to back these claims up?

  114. “for 2 days you have posted nothing of value” — … while you and others have done little but call me names and accuse me of being some other mysterious poster.

    “You have succeeded in annoying the board.” — Too bad. Deal with it.

    “A three year could have done the same” — You ought to know.

    “Maybe you know, don’t know, or are the guy everybody dislikes.” — Everybody? Really? You’ve polled everyone who posts in here?

    “Your new (or old) pal dick stated on another thread people were directed here just to spam the discussions” — I’ve read that thread, and your claim is flat out false.

  115. “Do you have any evidence to support you allegation or you just slinging to see what sticks?”

    Nope, I have no evidence at all. To use your own words, “It’s not that I can’t prove a fact it’s that you (and a few others) are not worth my effort to do that.”

  116. xx – don’t know how anyone could prove that they never posted under other screen names. You can’t prove a negative.

  117. bb – dude, take a step back and think about the question you just asked me…

    ok… now apply that same logic to the questions from many of our left side of the TNT sandbox friends…

    I am just demanding the same stupid answers to the equally stupid, impossible to answer question… it is nothing more than a tactic to throw someone off a scent trail. There is no answer… that is the point.

    ehill can’t prove anything… he knows I either can’t or it will take way, way too much work to prove the accusations/questions he asked me. I aint’ wasting my time (and between you and me, he aint’ either and he knows it).

    by the way – When did you stop beating your wife?

    stop… take a step back… is there any good answer to that question? Consider the premise of the question to even ask.

    Let’s go conspiracy, these guys are paid DNC hacks… in that case we should feel complimented that they send the big boys to little olde TNT to take on the geezer squad. Who knows bb.

    Promote and defend your beliefs or someone else will suck the oxogen out of the room and you won’t be able to…

  118. “ehill can’t prove anything… he knows I either can’t or it will take way, way too much work to prove the accusations/questions he asked me. I aint’ wasting my time (and between you and me, he aint’ either and he knows it).”

    Ahhh, yet another claim of clairvoyance.

  119. aislander says:

    You can’t shame the shameless, xx; all you can do is ignore them…

  120. aislander says:

    BTW: Clairvoyance is from the French for “clear-seeing,” something that has never been said of a lefty. So, if seeing clearly is the virtue imputed to me, I’ll take it…

  121. “if seeing clearly is the virtue imputed to me, I’ll take it…”

    I was responding to xx. Are you admitting that the two of you are one and the same?

  122. BTW: Clairvoyance is from the French for “clear-seeing,” something that has never been said of a lefty. So, if seeing clearly is the virtue imputed to me, I’ll take it…

    Since clairvoyance is a super-power of a fantasy-based “reality”, it isn’t surprising that you claim it.

    I wonder what Derrida would think…..

  123. Xx98 – I know enough not to build a bonfire in a tent. And that thermo imaging should be able to see thru both sides of a tent.

    Clairvoyance – the ability to gain information by means other than the five senses.
    In other words seeing what is not there.

  124. aislander says:

    beerBoy: I believe tool has imputed clairvoyance to everyone on the forum. I speak only for myself, though. As for claiming a “superpower,” bB, I am merely accepting the imputation rather than “claiming” anything…

  125. Monkey wrench,

    Making claims about what other people know, think, or want can only be done when (1) the other people said directly what they know, think, or want, or (2) you think you can read peoples’ minds.

    The only other possible explanation for such a claim is that you just made it up and naively expect gullible people to believe you.

    You have another explanation?

  126. “I was responding to xx. Are you admitting that the two of you are one and the same?”

    dude you should be ashamed to have written that, that is the dumbest conclusion to a post ever…

    yes, you were responding to me (I ignored you) and he provided a general comment to your statement… he knows you were responding to me, duh!!!

    wow, am I being clairvoyant…?

  127. You can’t reason with twisted logic, ai; all you can sanely do is ignore them…

    I thought about smoking some pot to follow the logic of that 2:10 post, wow… that would be a waste…

  128. LarryFine says:

    “…feel entitled to the benefits their nations can no longer afford. That is the fruit of dependency.

    And you pathetic weasels want to do the same thing to America… “

    Splendidly stated !

  129. LarryFine says:

    LOL… ehill_nos claiming someone is using multiple monikers…

  130. aislander says:

    Hey, LF! Where’ve you been?

  131. LarryFine says:

    Helping to managing the Razor Clam population and helping to ‘spread the wealth’ to the coast…

  132. aislander says:

    Sounds good. I hope you decimated those clams…

  133. LarryFine says:

    :)

  134. “he knows you were responding to me, duh!!!”

    Ahhh. Yet ANOTHER claim to be able to read other peoples’ minds.

  135. “LOL… ehill_nos claiming someone is using multiple monikers…”

    Coming from someone who admits to believing in talking wallpaper, that’s pretty funny!

  136. ABC is reporting today that the occupations have essentially gone berserk; the mayor of Philadelphia where a woman was dragged into one of the tents and raped, says that OWS “has changed.” Indeed.
    People found dead inside tents and no one willing to talk about it?

    Tell me, are folks here still trying to attempt to compare this occupation to the Tea Party rallies?

    And does this not tell you something significant about who wants what in this country? All we can do is hope and pray that any heroes of the OWS crowd are NEVER elected to serve…which means we really need to keep an eye on that Chicago crowd…imo.

  137. P.S. Any comparison between OWS and American revolutionaries is now shot as well.

  138. sozo – except in the case of gang rape or when a crowd is aware of a rape but does nothing about it – YOU CAN”T BLAME A GROUP FOR ONE INDIVIDUAL’S ACTIONS.

  139. Not blaming the whole group for the rape, bBoy. But please tell me you can see that the general tone and tenor of this occupation has gone to pot. It’s a disgusting spectacle. I am embarrassed that it is playing for folks all over the world.

*
We welcome comments. Please keep them civil, short and to the point. ALL CAPS, spam, obscene, profane, abusive and off topic comments will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be blocked. Thanks for taking part and abiding by these simple rules.

JavaScript is required to post comments.

Follow the comments on this post with RSS 2.0