About that ‘DHS Coordinated’ Crackdown on Zuccotti Park…

I’ve called bullshit — it’s still ringing.

 Twitter is abuzz with news that the Occupy raids were coordinated with the help of the Department of Homeland Security and the FBI, and that Obama “greenlit” the raids.  (See also this.)

As far as I can tell, the source for this claim is an article in Examiner.com, which quotes an anonymous Department of Justice official who claims that the multi-city raid of Occupy camps “was coordinated with help from Homeland Security, the FBI and other federal police agencies.”

From (the disreputable) Examiner.com:

Over the past ten days, more than a dozen cities have moved to evict “Occupy” protesters from city parks and other public spaces. As was the case in last night’s move in New York City, each of the police actions shares a number of characteristics. And according to one Justice official, each of those actions was coordinated with help from Homeland Security, the FBI and other federal police agencies.

The official, who spoke on background to me late Monday evening, said that while local police agencies had received tactical and planning advice from national agencies, the ultimate decision on how each jurisdiction handles the Occupy protests ultimately rests with local law enforcement.

According to this official, in several recent conference calls and briefings, local police agencies were advised to seek a legal reason to evict residents of tent cities, focusing on zoning laws and existing curfew rules. Agencies were also advised to demonstrate a massive show of police force, including large numbers in riot gear. In particular, the FBI reportedly advised on press relations, with one presentation suggesting that any moves to evict protesters be coordinated for a time when the press was the least likely to be present.

Is that true? Maybe. But given that this information came from Examiner.com, the proper response is “citation needed.” Why? Because Examiner.com is Fox News light. From Media Matters:

If you like what Rupert Murdoch, the right-wing billionaire behind Fox News and the New York Post, has done for the national discourse, you’ll love what Philip Anschutz is trying to do in your hometown.

Anschutz built his fortune — his $8 billion net worth is good for 36th place on the Forbes 400, ahead of better-known Murdoch and Steve Jobs — in the oil and gas industry, augmented with railroad and telecommunications holdings, as well as Regal Cinemas and the production company behind The Chronicles of Narnia films.

The far-right American Spectator describes Anschutz as “a committed conservative” who “gives lots of money to the Republican National Committee and to GOP candidates” and is “friendly with fellow oilman George W. Bush.”

~snip~

But Anschutz’s publications certainly do reflect his conservative views.

Earlier this year, Media Matters’ Terry Krepel detailed the right-wing tilt to the Washington Examiner’s staff, including alums of the National Review, The Washington Times, NewsBusters, Robert Novak’s newsletter, the American Enterprise Institute, and the Heritage Foundation.

And those kinds of staffing decisions lead to headlines like these, all featured on the front of the Washington Examiner’s web page Wednesday afternoon:

Are Democrats exiting the sinking ship?

Inside the numbers: How Obama has fallen

Global warming industry becomes too big to fail

Youngest voters spurn Obamacare

Damn the deficit: Full speed ahead on health care

Then there’s the Opinion section, which features such gems as:

Gene Healy: Obamacare is unconstitutional

Grace-Marie Turner: Ten reasons public won’t buy Senate health care plan

Dr. David Gratzer: Medicine isn’t perfect, Obamacare is even less perfect

Ken Blackwell: Obama’s indecision is hurting foreign alliances

Sounds reputable, dontcha think?  Here’s more from the Examiner article:

The FBI has so far failed to respond to requests for an official response, and of the 14 local police agencies contacted in the past 24 hours, all have declined to respond to questions on this issue.

But in a recent interview with the BBC,” Oakland Mayor Jean Quan mentioned she was on a conference call just before the recent wave of crackdowns began.

“I was recently on a conference call of 18 cities who had the same situation, where what had started as a political movement and a political encampment ended up being an encampment that was no longer in control of the people who started them.”

At the time this story was updated, Mayor Quan’s office had declined to discuss her comments.

Sounds pretty damning — if not for the fact that the mayors have denied colluding on the crackdown:

Eleven mayors participated in a conference call last week about “Occupy” protests in their cities, but they deny their talk was a strategy session to coordinate the sweeping of demonstrators’ encampments.

“It was more like a therapy session,” Amy Ruiz, spokesman for Portland, Ore., Mayor Sam Adams, told msnbc.com on Tuesday about the Nov. 10 call.

Portland was one of at least five cities where over the next four days after the call police moved in on anti-Wall Street camps. Others included Denver, Salt Lake City, Oakland and New York.

The call was organized by the U.S. Conference of Mayors, which said 11 mayors participated but the records of who called were not immediately available.

Another “conversation” about Occupy Wall Street was held in early October, the Denver mayor’s office told NBC station KUSA.

“The conversation was focused on general information-sharing and best practices surrounding the challenges and opportunities this unique situation presents to every city,” Amber Miller told KUSA.

On Tuesday, Oakland Mayor Jean Quan’s acknowledgement of talks brought charges of anti-Occupy collusion among mayors from a variety of watchdogs, including broadcaster RT and progressive blog Firedoglake.

Look, I don’t know what’s going on — partly because I had a glass of Benmorach Peat smoke (and it was delicious) — but I guess we better uncritically cite bullshit newspapers and go ahead and freak out in advance — just in case.

It’s the progressive way.

[cross-posted at Angry Black Lady Chronicles]






212 replies
  1. 1
    Dee Loralei says:

    Damn you’re fast LOL. Thanks, the service here is most excellent. Talk about readership capture LOL

    Also, I love the line “I called bullshit- it’s still ringing,” made me LOL

  2. 2
    Geoduck says:

    I suppose I’m being stupid here, but.. why would a hard right-wing News(tm) source run with this story, when it would seem to bolster the OWS movement? Just knee-jerk Obama-bashing?

  3. 3
    FlipYrWhig says:

    Just last week I found a childhood friend on Facebook. I was interested to see he had become a writer. It was for examiner.com. He’s a flaming conservative crazy who calls Obama “hussein” and approvingly quotes commenters on the Glenn Beck web page. Sigh. “Unsubscribe” never sounded so sweet.

  4. 4
    KCinDC says:

    Examiner.com is not the Washington Examiner (though I think they have the same owner). Examiner.com is a collection of blogs by random people that sort of looks like a newspaper web site and is sometimes mistaken for one. Seriously, there’s no editorial control, and many if not most of the bloggers have no experience in journalism. It’s a breeding ground for hoaxes, because someone will see a sensational story there and think it’s on a real news site and start sending it around to their friends, who do the same thing.

    It’s possible there was federal involvement in the raids, but if so I’d’ve expected there to be *some* story by this point that doesn’t go back to that one Examiner.com blog post.

  5. 5
    Linnaeus says:

    I would definitely need to see more information on all of this, particularly the level of federal involvement, if any. Given our history, federal involvement would not surprise me at all, but we do need more proof of that than this article.

    I’m less skeptical, however, of the claim that the mayors didn’t coordinate somehow. “Therapy session?” I’m not so sure…

  6. 6
    Paul says:

    @Geoduck:

    Well, it might make progressives think twice about supporting Obama’s reelection.

  7. 7
    Allan says:

    You’re saying that Michael Moore, Greg Mitchell, Mike Elk, Gregg Levine and Digby are all placing their reputations on the line over an unsourced scoop from the examiner.com just because it feeds their Obama Derangement Syndrome? Unpossible!

  8. 8
    KCinDC says:

    Yes, evidence of mayoral coordination has been reported elsewhere. It’s just the claim of federal involvement that seems shaky. Hell, if the federal government is cracking down, why have they left Occupy DC alone? The Park Police seem to be getting along reasonably well with the protesters here relative to police in other cities.

  9. 9
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @Geoduck:

    when it would seem to bolster the OWS movement?

    You’re not thinking of it from a right-wing nutbar perspective. The one-time friend I mentioned above… he’s sure that OWS is hippies, anarchists, and losers who deserve everything that’s coming to them. A story about OWS getting kicked out of the parks by order of Homeland Security is like a wet dream for people who think all liberals are freaks and patsies. A guy like that wouldn’t read such a story and think it bolstered the OWS movement at all. He reads it, pictures cops cracking heads, and then zips up.

  10. 10
    Nylund says:

    Slightly (or more than slightly) unrelated is a thought I’d had. I once studied under Dr. Israel Kirzner. Probably his most famous claim is to be the world’s greatest authority on Mises (and Hayek). He’s about as Libertarian as one can get. And studying under him, I know that Libertarians are a close second cousin to Anarchy. It’s basically anarchy with property rights. Yet, if you follow OWS, you will find no one more insulted by the idea of OWS than today’s so called Libertarians (of the sort that read McArdles’s posts for the Atlantic). It’s funny (and sad) to me that so many of today’s “libertarians” are about the most extreme as one can get in current American society towards the notion of Authoritinarianism as one can get. Somehow, the powers that can be, convinced those who should be most inclined to root against the government to embrace a government sponsored military action against those voicing an opinion on publicly owned property.

  11. 11
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @Allan: Haha. “Reputations.”

  12. 12
    ruemara says:

    I also call bullshit. It’s like they think every mayor, every governor sits alone in a room and they don’t chat or share data about major issues. I get to see municipalities in action every day. When something as disruptive as OWS occurs, in multiple cities, they do get together and discuss what is happening and how others are dealing with it. The FedGov is also used as resource to back up Federal law issues along with local municipality laws. There’s no co-ordination to speak of, no cloak and dagger. All of the mayors have probably asked what level of legal authority do they have to remove protestors since this has been a few months. Nothing in this article says that they were co-ordinated at a fed level nor does it even remotely say that the President ordered it. I just don’t get these “progressives”. It’s like they’re looking for ways to blow up the good feelings and refocused coalition that last week’s victories brought about. Nice work, assholes.

  13. 13
    Jenny says:

    Hillary Clinton killed Vince Foster.

    That’s what government sources tell me.

    LBJ assassinated JFK. Jackie Kennedy says so in her posthumous oral history book. Coming from a source so close to Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy, it must be true.

  14. 14
    Allan says:

    @ruemara: Why, it’s almost as if they are engaged in a coordinated attack against the Obama administration! I demand that Digby, Michael Moore, Greg Mitchell, Mike Elk and Gregg Levine release all their emails to disprove my suspicions that they are conspiring.

  15. 15
    Uncle Clarence Thomas says:

    .
    .
    Fortunately, it is physically impossible for President Obama to greenlight or even known about these scurrilous raids.
    .
    .

  16. 16
    Mnemosyne says:

    I would not be surprised if the mayors coordinated their shutdowns. I also would not be surprised if they got advice from the FBI and/or DHS before doing the shutdown.

    I would be astounded if this all turned out to be ordered by the FBI and/or DHS or “coordinated by” them in the sense that they planned it and the mayors just went along. There is absolutely not a single iota of evidence that that was the case.

    I think a whole lot of folks with pre-existing ODS have grabbed the wrong end of the stick and are running with it. Yes, digby, I’m looking at you.

  17. 17
    West of the Cascades says:

    @Linnaeus: yes, as a Portlander, I can definitely vouch for the notion that it was a “therapy session,” at least as Mayor Sam was concerned.

    Although I don’t doubt at all that they discussed potential strategies against the protestors. But the President having any involvement in it (even indirectly through DHS)? Gotta be bullshit. Local governments have been perfecting these semi-militarized tactics for years, so it’s not surprising all of them were ready to go when the mayors decided the time was right.

    I’m sad they cleared out the parks here, but glad that they didn’t hurt anyone and used the bare minimum of militaristic tactics — I also think that Occupy Portland will continue to be a strong protest movement, and it will keep getting in the city’s face, and this city will tolerate its continued presence better than most.

  18. 18
    Jenny says:

    The raids were actually coordinated by the Elders of Zion and The Stone Cutters. Video of the meeting has already emerged. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dSpOjj4YD8c

  19. 19
    MikeJ says:

    @Mnemosyne: But Obama is worse than Bush! My delusions told me so. It must be true.

  20. 20
    JGabriel says:

    @Geoduck:

    I suppose I’m being stupid here, but.. why would a hard right-wing News™ source run with this story …

    Why would a hard-right news source want lefties and progressives to think that the Obama administration was organizing stormtroopers against them?

    Does the phrase “divide and conquer” strike a bell?

    .

  21. 21
    ruemara says:

    Jayzus. We fucking run co-ordinated drills with other locales. And it doesn’t require DHS/President O approvals either. Swear. To. God. people need to learn a little fucking bit how local government runs.

  22. 22
    andrewsomething says:

    Oh Christ… I’ll repeat what I said last thread on this:

    I was out the streets in NYC all day, and it really saddens me that the Balloon Juice comment section managed to turn the whole thing into yet another addition of “Firebaggers” vs “Obots.” I guess I’m just a DFH…

  23. 23
    MikeJ says:

    @andrewsomething: It saddens me that you have to post the same lame shit in every thread.

  24. 24
    andrewsomething says:

    I don’t see why you feel the need to imply that Digby claimed that Obama “greenlit” the raids. I don’t see his name any where in her piece. She’s long written on the militarization of local police with Federal assistance which has gone back decades. These are long standing programs which where intensified after 9/11.

    Also, too.

  25. 25
    soonergrunt says:

    @andrewsomething: I was at work all day, and it really saddens me that the firebaggers do stupid shit like reflexively blaming the president for everything they don’t like, to the point of believing a right-wing rag with a transparently bullshit story and then, sometimes the same firebaggers, sometimes other firebaggers whining about the Balloon-Juice comment section pointing out that firebaggers are fucking stupid when they do shit like that.
    I’d prefer that the firebaggers actually do something productive for the progressive movement instead of the aforementioned behaviors, but I guess we’re both going to have to get used to disappointment.

  26. 26
    MJ says:

    I posted a version of this comment in A.L.’s thread below, but I thought that it would be relevant here, so pls forgive me for the re-post.

    I don’t know how I feel about relying on an anonymous source for such a potentially explosive revelation. I think it is far more likely that these Mayors are all just getting desperate to get rid of the Occupy camps because we’re a week out from “Black Friday”, and they are trying to get rid of the camps b/c the fear that the occupiers will interfere w/ the holiday shopping season. In other words, doesn’t it look like money is the real issue here, and not any stealth effort by the feds to coordinate a nation-wide crack-down?

    Two follow-up questions:

    Also, if the feds were running the show, why would they leave the D.C. camp alone, which is the place where they arguably have the most influence? (See tonight’s Maddow show. Deleted the link to get out of moderation.)

    Also too, doesn’t the C.R.E.A.M. theory do a better job of explaining the contemporaneous efforts to oust protesters at a bunch international Occupy camps in cities like Toronto, Calgary, London and Zurich that all are way, way beyond the reach of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security?

  27. 27
    Yutsano says:

    @MikeJ: No it doesn’t. You’re too much of a sardonic rabble rouser for that.

  28. 28
    jwb says:

    If this was coordinated by the Feds it would look better coordinated. Everything so far has all appearances of being very ad hoc. The mayors, pressed by their local 1% to put an end to this uncomfortable spectacle, have clearly been talking to each other; the police all have similar training and so act similarly when facing a similar situation; and, when consulted, DHS almost certainly passes along similar advice to each of the cities. It’s hardly a surprise that all the actions therefore look somewhat similar; given that each mayor is above all a pol, it’s also no surprise that none of them wants to act alone and so all the police actions are happening about the same time. You really don’t need a grand conspiracy to explain anything that has happened so far.

  29. 29
    srv says:

    Well if Quan and Bloomberg say so, then that’s certainly good enough for me.

  30. 30
    MikeJ says:

    @Yutsano: A rabble rouser with fresh cinnamon raisin wheat bread.

    Come to the dark side, Yutsy…..

  31. 31
    Marc says:

    @andrewsomething:

    I just went to her page. It’s a wall of slander and sneering at Democrats in general and Obama in particular. If there is something useful that she’s written recently I’ve missed it.

    Are you seriously reading her posts about “federal co-ordination” as something other than insinuating “Obama done it”? If so, how?

    These so-called progressives aren’t allies, unless one defines people sniping at you as friends.

  32. 32
    andrewsomething says:

    @MikeJ:

    Well I’m glad you’ve noticed me. At least I’ve moved beyond people claiming that every time I post a comment is the first time they’ve seen me here so my opinion doesn’t matter.

  33. 33
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @Marc: Does she still have that composer guy guest-posting?

  34. 34
    MikeJ says:

    @andrewsomething: I noticed you before but you weren’t annoying enough yet to answer. And if you’ll notice, I’ve still only talked about how annoying you are, not about any so called points you have.

    You’re no better than a spammer. You whine for attention. Hope you like pie.

    Plonk.

  35. 35
    Yutsano says:

    @MikeJ: I’d hate you, but I also want to know your price for bringing a loaf of that to the Federal Building on Thursday. :)

  36. 36
    Cacti says:

    Did Michael Moore say if President Obama wasn’t being black enough about this?

  37. 37
    Marc says:

    @FlipYrWhig:

    Occasionally. It’s just her and Atkins posting recently. I guess there is some market for OBAMA IS GOING TO SELL US OUT, THIS TIME I REALLY MEAN IT PART 6,234…

  38. 38
    Linnaeus says:

    @FlipYrWhig:

    Tristero? I don’t think he’s posted in a while.

  39. 39
    David Koch says:

    Darrell Issa needs to conduct an investigation into this matter, right after he finishes his investigations into Whitewater and Kitty Dukakis’ flag burning.

    During the 1988 U.S. presidential election, Symms claimed in a radio interview that a photograph existed from the 1960s showing Kitty Dukakis, the wife of Democratic presidential candidate Michael Dukakis, burning an American flag to protest the Vietnam War. Kitty Dukakis angrily denied the accusation as “totally false and beneath contempt,” and Symms later admitted that he could not substantiate it. Nevertheless, the claim became national news, as media outlets began searching for the photograph Symms said he had “heard” about.

  40. 40
    Linnaeus says:

    @Marc:

    Gotta disagree with you here. Digby’s posts are more varied than that.

  41. 41
    eemom says:

    @Uncle Clarence Thomas:

    I’ll tell you what, asshole, let’s make a deal.

    If you can come up with a shred of credible evidence that Obama had anything to do with this, I’ll match your $20 contribution to Porky the Panhandler.

    If you can’t, you get the hell off this blog forever and devote your life to cunnilinguing Jane Hamsher like the good Lord intended you to do.

    It’s what you desperately want to be doing anyway, and it won’t cost you a cent! Win-win! Whaddaya say?

  42. 42
    Elias says:

    Just wanted to repeat what KCinDC said in #4. This is Examiner.com, not the Washington Examiner. It’s more of a blog service than anything else and its reputation is, well, I give more credibility to Glenn Beck.

    You too can become a writer for Examiner.com if you simply submit your registration on their website. It’s easy. And then you too can claim that unnamed government sources are informing you that aliens did in fact land at Roswell.

    Good post ABL, but you confused Examiners. This one is definitely much worse than the rag you thought it was (although that one should come with a packet of table salt in the fold).

  43. 43
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @Linnaeus: Right, that’s the guy. I couldn’t remember his name. When I used to spend more time there, I remember he conducted a jihad against Nutella advertising for, like, weeks on end.

  44. 44
    Calouste says:

    OT, but TPM reports that Gingrich didn’t get $300,000 in consulting fees from Freddie Mac. He got between $1.6 and 1.8 million.

  45. 45
    Elias says:

    FWIW, Examiner.com is owned by Anschutz, but it’s not the Washington Examiner.

  46. 46
    MikeJ says:

    @Yutsano: This week sucks. Thursday I’m doing dress rehearsal for the next Thursday, only with a chicken playing the part of The Turkey and wheat rolls standing in for white (yes, I have a bag of wheat flour to go through). Probably a few fewer sides, but ideally I won’t be cooking those for turkey day either. That’s why you invite people after all.

    Catch me after turkey day, before xmas, I’ll set you up with the loaf of your choice. (I’d go with with the challah.)

  47. 47
    Marc says:

    @Linnaeus:

    She does alternate between blaming “democrats” and obama for problems, granted. She’s always needed an editor. Now she needs an intervention.

    Seriously, there was a time when you’d run across her writings all over the net. I can’t recall the last time that she wrote anything that got significant attention from other sources. I think that’s an accurate reflection of how predictable and poorly written her work has become.

  48. 48
    The prophet Nostradumbass says:

    @eemom: Why are you paying any attention to that character?

  49. 49
    eemom says:

    @The prophet Nostradumbass:

    I flunked Don’t Feed The Troll 101, and chose Community Service over a remedial class. : (

  50. 50
    Linnaeus says:

    @Marc:

    Well, the Bush years were very conducive to the kind of writing Digby does. Plus those first few years of progressive blogging had a lot of wide-open spaces in which a lot of writers could get heard. That window’s narrowed considerably.

    I don’t think her observations about the Democratic Party are entirely off-base; there’s a real problem in the party that needs to get resolved somehow if we’re going to use it as a vehicle for progressive change. And she always gets in a few shots at the Republicans while she’s at it. I do think she should be more skeptical of “Obama sold us out” stories.

  51. 51
    AxelFoley says:

    @eemom:

    @Uncle Clarence Thomas:
    I’ll tell you what, asshole, let’s make a deal.
    If you can come up with a shred of credible evidence that Obama had anything to do with this, I’ll match your $20 contribution to Porky the Panhandler.
    If you can’t, you get the hell off this blog forever and devote your life to cunnilinguing Jane Hamsher like the good Lord intended you to do.
    It’s what you desperately want to be doing anyway, and it won’t cost you a cent! Win-win! Whaddaya say?

    Fucking owned! LOL

  52. 52
    Jenny says:

    This isn’t the first time Digby has used unsourced crap from some unknown blog to smear Obama.

    She did this in the heat of the 2008 primaries saying that Oprah Winfrey used non-union staff. Of course, the usual suspects ran around repeating it.

    When Digby got called out, she screamed bloody murder over being criticized (surprise, surprise).

    http://www.dailykos.com/story/.....-with-lies

  53. 53
    Marc says:

    @Linnaeus:

    Fair enough. There’s just a willingness to believe the absolute worst about Obama et al. that’s become pathological.

    Another exhibit: Atrios today linked to Ezra with the following:

    “For most of this year, the White House has thought that the surest path to President Obama’s reelection was to strike a big deficit deal with Republicans, or at least be seen trying to strike a big deficit deal with Republicans.”

    The actual paragraph was

    “For most of this year, the White House has thought that the surest path to President Obama’s reelection was to strike a big deficit deal with Republicans, or at least be seen trying to strike a big deficit deal with Republicans. The debt-ceiling debacle proved it wrong. The White House was unable to reach an agreement, and the sorry sight of its ineffectual efforts led it to sink in the polls. Since then, it has moved toward a more confrontational stance with the GOP, and has seen its poll numbers tick up slightly. So White House officials do not consider a supercommittee deal crucial to their chances. Perhaps that’s for the best, as the Democrats on the supercommittee think it would be harder to secure Republican support for a deal if the White House were more involved.”

    One of these things is not like the other…

  54. 54
    William Hurley says:

    I’m surprised that I’m surprised by the speed and dismissiveness of inst-o-bots who have already planted a flag in defense of Obama in the face of reasonable speculation regarding multi-police agency cooperation to visit violence upon peaceful citizens executing their right to speak and assemble in at least 5 locations – nearly simultaneously – across the country.

    Clearly, more data is needed to form a solid conclusion. However, one can work with the publicly available data regarding the Obama Administration’s willingness to play fast and loose with the facts in service of arresting, detaining, charging and/or deporting “ne’er-do-wells”. So too with Obama’s eagerness to involve multiple agencies, Federal, state and local, in police actions.

    Witness the recent arrest of 4 codgers in Alabama on terrorism charges. Don’t get me wrong, the news about them portrays a picture of militia reprobates – but they’re no doubt far less dangerous than the Spokane, WA militia/white-supremacist the FBI nabbed after his MLK Day parade route IED was discovered. The “Waffle House 4” were taken down by a multi-agency team led by the FBI and DHS.

    Consider also the matter of the “Christmas Tree Bomber” who was arrested in Portland, OR last year. He too was subject to a multi-agency effort to “foil” the bomb plot they themselves invented – then entrapped – the young, impressionable Somalia-born “terrorist” by invitation only threat.

    As for truthfulness, Obama has been cavalier in his willingness to outright lie when convenient. Drone attacks killing hundreds of innocent civilians in Yemen, Pakistan and elsewhere – all denied by the big “O”.

    Let’s see where the data takes us. Until then, keep spinning.

  55. 55
    Marc says:

    @William Hurley:

    Obama has drone attacks in Pakistan, thus he is plotting to destroy all that is good with his minions in the Fortress of Evil.

    How can anyone argue with that?

  56. 56
    Yutsano says:

    @MikeJ: Tomorrow I have an appointment then have to squeeze in a shopping trip before heading downtown. Then I’m cooking when I get home. Thursday we’re potlucking at work and I got three things planned but I’m trying not to go overboard. :)

  57. 57
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @William Hurley: “Clearly, more data is needed. But in the absence of such data, I have made up my mind. Is this the frisson of despair or the shiver of anticipation precedent to a falling star? Prithee let us know anon.”

  58. 58
    cat48 says:

    The WH Press asked Jay on the way to Australia. This is on Google New:

    ABOARD AIR FORCE ONE (AP) — President Barack Obama’s spokesman is suggesting the president believes it’s up to New York and other municipalities to decide how much force to use in dealing with Occupy Wall Street demonstrations.

    Spokesman Jay Carney also says Obama hopes the right balance can be reached between protecting freedom of assembly and speech with the need to uphold order and safeguard public health and safety.
    ….
    Carney spoke to reporters Tuesday as Obama flew to Australia. He was asked whether Obama had been following the early-morning police raid on Zuccotti Park in New York, where Occupy Wall Street protesters have camped out for weeks.

    Carney said the president was “aware of it.”

    He said the administration’s position is that each municipality has to make its own decisions about how to handle these issues.

  59. 59
    Yutsano says:

    @William Hurley: You know, when you got nothin’, shutting up is not a bad idea.

  60. 60
    Mnemosyne says:

    @William Hurley:

    So since we don’t have any proof that the president didn’t personally coordinate the shutdown of various Occupy camps, therefore that’s proof positive that he did do it?

    That’s about as logical as your assertion that old white guys couldn’t possibly be terrorists, so the Waffle House Four must be innocent.

  61. 61
    cat48 says:

    The prez is having a press conference in Australia now on msnbc.

  62. 62
    eemom says:

    @William Hurley:

    I’m surprised that I’m surprised by the speed and dismissiveness of inst-o-bots who have already planted a flag in defense of Obama in the face of reasonable speculation regarding multi-police agency cooperation to visit violence upon peaceful citizens executing their right to speak and assemble in at least 5 locations – nearly simultaneously – across the country.

    on behalf of my fellow commenters, I apologize for the collective failure to recognize The Great DougJ Half-Wit-Spoof-Troll-On-Speed-AND-LSD Experiment of 2011 that is being conducted right before our very eyes.

  63. 63
    Jim, Foolish Literalist says:

    in the face of reasonable speculation regarding multi-police agency cooperation

    Is it reasonable to speculate? It is unreasonable not to.

  64. 64
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Jim, Foolish Literalist:

    To be fair, it’s not unreasonable to speculate that there was some kind of coordination.

    But when your first and only thought in the face of contrary evidence is, “Obama ordered it!” you should probably realize that you’re wearing crazypants.

  65. 65
    The prophet Nostradumbass says:

    @William Hurley: Lame.

  66. 66
    Jim, Foolish Literalist says:

    @Mnemosyne: and now, of course, for the fire baggers, the burden will be to prove that Obama didn’t order it. The Roberts Rule (It doesn’t matter if it’s true or not, it’s out there!”) has come to the Professional Left.

  67. 67
    slightly-peeved says:

    Obama looked pretty good for someone who spent the brief time between APEC and his official duties in Australia, while flying over the pacific, coordinating the police raids on OWS.

  68. 68
    AxelFoley says:

    @eemom:

    on behalf of my fellow commenters, I apologize for the collective failure to recognize The Great DougJ Half-Wit-Spoof-Troll-On-Speed-AND-LSD Experiment of 2011 that is being conducted right before our very eyes.

    How many alter-egos does DougJ have here? Sheesh.

  69. 69
    cat48 says:

    CBSNEWS has an article. Since the protests are new to them, the cities talk to each other a lot. I don’t know how to do a link so here’s part of it:

    (AP) PORTLAND, Ore. – Don’t set a midnight deadline to evict Occupy Wall Street protesters — it will only give a crowd of demonstrators time to form. Don’t set ultimatums because it will encourage violent protesters to break it. Fence off the parks after an eviction so protesters can’t reoccupy it.

    As concerns over safety and sanitation grew at the encampments over the last month, officials from nearly 40 cities turned to each other on conference calls, sharing what worked and what hasn’t as they grappled with the leaderless movement.

    In one case, the calls became group therapy sessions.

    While riot police sweeping through tent cities in Portland, Ore., Oakland, Calif. and New York City over the last several days may suggest a coordinated effort, authorities and a group that organized the calls say they were a coincidence.

    “It was completely spontaneous,” said Chuck Wexler, director of the Police Executive Research Forum, a national police group that organized calls on Oct. 11 and Nov. 4. Among the issues discussed: safety, traffic and the fierceness of demonstrations in each city.

    “This was an attempt to get insight on what other departments were doing,” he said……

  70. 70
    sharl says:

    @cat48:
    I believe this link goes to the online article you excerpted.

  71. 71
    AA+ Bonds says:

    These raids were clearly coordinated with many cities’ police forces. It’s really naive to believe otherwise. The spending done on this capability per year is astronomical.

  72. 72
    hhex65 says:

    @AA+ Bonds: it was an inside job

  73. 73
    AA+ Bonds says:

    “It was completely spontaneous,” said Chuck Wexler, director of the Police Executive Research Forum, a national police group that organized calls on Oct. 11 and Nov. 4. Among the issues discussed: safety, traffic and the fierceness of demonstrations in each city.

    LOL at anyone who reads this as anything but the opposite of the statement made. “Police executive research forum” that “organized” two calls on the topic of OWS and then a series of crackdowns against Americans across the country, sure, right, nothing to see here

  74. 74
    AA+ Bonds says:

    My guess is some of the Ron Paulers had something to do with it just like the “libertarian” anti-war movement ratfucked the left back in the early 70s

  75. 75
    cat48 says:

    @sharl:

    Thank you much. I need to read how to do that at wordpress. Haven’t done that yet.

  76. 76
    Corbin Dallas Multipass says:

    If you sympathize with the Protesters and haven’t been actively participating, you can join in on Thursday’s day of action. The following site will help you find activities and rallies in your area by entering your zip code: http://november17.org/

    I appreciate ABL’s efforts to fight against disinformation. The next step is to continue supporting those who Protest by following through and capitalizing on the opportunity they’ve created.

    From http://digbysblog.blogspot.com.....d-fbi.html, you can read this DHS Memo that assesses the situation in Pittsburgh.

    http://nigelparry.com/writing/.....urgh.shtml

    Based on that document, I don’t think DHS is coordinating anything, but is serving as a resource for advice. Whether you think that is within the bounds of what they should be utilized for is debatable (and Digby in fact hints at that point). I would wager its more important to focus on the goals of the Protest then any particular conspiracy that detracts from what Progressive’s goals should be.

  77. 77
    Jenny says:

    Did you notice, Elizabeth Warren didn’t make any statements on the crack-downs. Her silence just proves she was involved in the conspiracy coordination.

  78. 78
    Odie Hugh Manatee says:

    @andrewsomething:

    You may be tired of the Obot and Firebagger bullshit but you are the one who drug it into this thread.

    Firebagging at its lamest.

  79. 79
    sharl says:

    @cat48:

    Here’s a short (and hopefully coherent) set of steps to create linked text, that works for this site specifically* (*thanks to the ‘link’ icon just above the comment entry box; more on that below).

    1. while in the online post you want to link, find the URL (starts with h_t_t_p_:_/_/, but without the underlines); highlight the whole thing, then copy (Ctrl-C on a PC; Command-C {⌘-C}** on a Mac).

    2. Go to the comment box of the B-J post where you want to link the outside article within your comment, and highlight the text in your comment which you want to be linked.

    3. Leaving that highlighted text in place, single-click on the link icon that is just above the comment box. A pop-up window will come up.

    4. Empty that window, and paste in – Ctrl-V on PC; Command-V {⌘-V} on a Mac – the URL that should still be saved in your “clipboard” (or whatever it’s called these days). Click ‘OK’. The text you selected within your comment should now be linked to the article you wished to reference.

    There is actual code you can enter in manually, that will work here (as I recall), but I think the editing icon above the comment box is easier to use.

    **I got that ‘⌘’ symbol from the Wikipedia page for the Apple keyboard: highlighted followed by Ctrl-C over there, then Ctrl-V (paste) here. It pasted OK during comment assembly; we’ll see if it survives once FYWP posts the comment.

    Edit: Ha, the ⌘ survived. Yay.

  80. 80
    Pat In Massachusetts says:

    Christmas shopping season has descended on New York City and the corporate overlords need the place pristine for all those flocking to Times Square for their yearly dose of the Rockettes and window shopping at Bloomingdales. And isn’t there a huge Thanksgiving Day Parade sponsored by every corporate overlord alive so Macy’s can blow up some gigantic balloons? Those are the priorities right now. WE ARE BEING DIRECTED TO ACQUIRE OUR CHRISTMAS CHEER BECAUSE OUR CORPORATE OVERLORDS SAYS IT’S TIME. The corporate overlords will not allow anything to stand in their way of spreading their Christmas Cheer or let a day go by without maximizing profits for their shareholders.

    Is DHS involved and did Obama give the green light? It does not seem at all far fetched to me, not by a long shot. After all Obama is still the top dog garnering private hedge fund donations.

    Whoever STILL thinks that we in America are living in a democratic society is solely mistaken.

    It’s us against them and it will only get worse before it gets better.

    OCCUPY!

  81. 81

    So, the Macy’s parade is proof positive that fascism has finally arrived? Julian was right. Amerika is rising up its evil head…and it’s shape is Barack Obama sending out his minions from the DHS.

    I’m thinking that the protests are going to continue, just not as a sleep in. And that will actually be better all around. The protest will become more focused and purposeful and the hanger on’s who were just there for the kicks won’t bother.

  82. 82
    AlladinsLamp says:

    Also at examiner.com:

    Two former participants in the CIA’s Mars visitation program of the early 1980’s have confirmed that U.S. President Barack H. Obama was enrolled in their Mars training class in 1980 and was among the young Americans from the program who they later encountered on the Martian surface after reaching Mars via “jump room.”

  83. 83
    SFPoet says:

    This isn’t about the fucking election. Citizens of this country are violently being denied their first amendment rights of assembly, using whatever pathetic excuse the authorities can manufacture.

    I agree that the article should be verified, but it has the ring of truth to me. I’ve noticed for awhile now how tactics against OWS have evolved over time, and have been applied simultaneously in different cities.

    For example, within 24 hours of Bloomberg’s first unsuccessful attempt to clear Zuccotti Park using the excuse of ‘cleaning:’ several other cities raided camps using that justification.

    Some Occupy camps have also reported seeing DHS and FBI observers during raids.

  84. 84
    AxelFoley says:

    @Pat In Massachusetts:

    Whoever STILL thinks that we in America are living in a democratic society is solely mistaken.
    It’s us against them and it will only get worse before it gets better.
    OCCUPY!

    You better OCCUPY! a voting booth, muthafucka. You and the rest of the OWS crew. Stop listening to the likes of Moore and Olbermann.

  85. 85
    Rita R. says:

    Neither Radio City Music Hall and its Rockettes nor Bloomingdales are in Times Square, and none of them are anywhere near Zuccotti Park, just as the Macy’s Thanksgiving Day Parade route isn’t either.

    Corporate f*cks are corporate f*cks and Bloomberg — unfortunately my mayor — is acting like the out-of-touch plutocrat he is. (Although Giuliani would’ve relished sending out the riot cops a long time ago, with express orders to bloody as many hippies as possible.) But it’s dumb to blame New York’s landmarks and holiday traditions for what happened yesterday.

    In any case, I’ve thought this for a while now:

    I’m thinking that the protests are going to continue, just not as a sleep in. And that will actually be better all around. The protest will become more focused and purposeful and the hanger on’s who were just there for the kicks won’t bother.

    And it will take away the “dirty and unsafe” argument city governments and the right have been using against OWS. Hell, even Adbusters was saying Monday that it’s time to move on to the next phase of the movement.

  86. 86
    Admiral_Komack says:

    @cat48:

    After spokesman Jay Carney said all this, did he twirl his moustache and go “BWAHAHAHHAHAHA!”?

  87. 87

    @AxelFoley:

    You better OCCUPY! a voting booth, muthafucka. You and the rest of the OWS crew. Stop listening to the likes of Moore and Olbermann.

    THIS. Either that or start working on small-arms training exercises. The protest is great, it’s raising awareness, but change will only come from one of two ways: the ballot box or the barricade.

  88. 88
    Admiral_Komack says:

    @AxelFoley:

    Don’t waste your time.
    They’re trying to find “consensus”.

  89. 89

    Some Occupy camps have also reported seeing DHS and FBI observers during raids

    How the fuck would they know? Were the FBI agents wearing their blue jackets with “FBI” in big yellow letters? And there are no DHS agents. The DHS is an umbrella for a number of agencies? Were there Customs officials taking notes? or maybe some guys from the Coast Guard?

  90. 90
    Admiral_Komack says:

    @magurakurin:

    Maybe they were the Men In Black?

  91. 91
    EZSmirkzz says:

    It appears the citation needed in the Examiner piece is the BBC, as you’ve highlighted. The only pertinent information is did the Mayor say what she is alleged to have said, and dies it mean what the BBC reported. Everything else is moot.

  92. 92
    kay says:

    It bothers me because it sounds and feels like fear.

    I think the response to a set-back (they were evicted, they lost a court case) shouldn’t be panic and a search for a larger villain pulling puppet strings. That bothers me because it takes all the power and the control from the individuals involved in this on the ground and hands it to some shadowy larger entity.

    There are going to be losses. There are going to be set-backs. If the movement is going to grow it’s going to have to change and adapt to real conditions and circumstances. That’s hard enough without adding fear-based panic and theories. That distracts. It saps energy.

    They’ve had a string of successes. Sometimes they’re going to lose a round, and looking for a GIANT (and unidentified) uber villain when they lose just doesn’t seem helpful or supportive to me.

  93. 93
    kay says:

    @EZSmirkzz:

    The only pertinent information is did the Mayor say what she is alleged to have said, and dies it mean what the BBC reported.

    That’s not the “only pertinent information”.

    This is real. They’re real people. They need to know if the mayors’ coordinated, as opposed to the mayors’ coordinating with a federal agency, because that will go to a response, a regrouping, a change in approach, whatever.
    How is it helpful to them to speculate or panic? IMO, if we’re supporting them, that should be the first question.

  94. 94
    4tehlulz says:

    anonymous Department of Justice official

    Bush holdover detected.

  95. 95
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @kay: kay, the people who believe stories like this one–oh noes, Obama’s jackbooted thugs!–look around for giant, unidentified uber villains when they _win_.

  96. 96
    kay says:

    @FlipYrWhig:

    I really do think it’s a consistent response to a loss, in my observation. Any loss.
    We don’t have to explain away minor set-backs. They got evicted and the lost a court case. Both of those things were predictable. Both of those things can be dealt with, but not if we’re going to hand off all capacity and agency from the people who are (I would imagine) scrambling to come up with Plan B to something as ill-defined and unapproachable as “the federal government”. I wouldn’t know where to start with that.
    I think I would be dispirited. I don’t really know how to oppose or deal with “DHS”. I might know what to do next with “my mayor”.
    They’ve had a sort of amazing (to me) continuing dialogue with these mayors. They have some power there. Not much, but some :)

  97. 97
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @kay: IMHO you have a model of activism that involves local engagement, hard work, and parlaying small victories into larger victories.

    There is another model of activism that involves sanctifying your struggle by thinking of yourself instead as a martyr to implacable, distant, malevolent forces. If that’s the way you see your cause, you’d almost rather fail and find a villain who made it happen, because that way you never have to accept less than everything you want (because if you’re sure to lose, there’s no reason to bargain or compromise). And then, paradoxically, you can spin fables about how you were so strong and righteous that They had to do everything in their power to stop you.

    I agree that the latter model is willfully self-disempowering. And I think it’s that way by design.

  98. 98
    different-church-lady says:

    @SFPoet:

    Citizens of this country are violently being denied their first amendment rights of assembly, using whatever pathetic excuse the authorities can manufacture.

    I’m not picking on you in particular, but you’ve provided a good example of something I’ve been wondering lately: when did the right to assemble and protest morph into the right to live in a public space for lengthy periods of time?

    @kay:

    I think the response to a set-back (they were evicted, they lost a court case) shouldn’t be panic and a search for a larger villain pulling puppet strings.

    One can only hope the leaders of Occupy (blank) are smarter than the people who yap about it on the internet.

  99. 99
    different-church-lady says:

    @FlipYrWhig:

    There is another model of activism that involves sanctifying your struggle by thinking of yourself instead as a martyr to implacable, distant, malevolent forces. (etc.)

    As I implied above, I am sincerely hoping that mindset is only representative of those on the blogshpere, and not most of those on the ground.

  100. 100
    singfoom says:

    I don’t really think this was coordinated at the national level. And I don’t get the need of some (I haven’t seen where, I’m going to assume at FDL) to blame Obama for this.

    Now, there’s the bullshit part of this story. Regardless of whether the administration was involved, it seems that Occupy Protests around the country are being stymied.

    OWS lost the lawsuit. What’s next for them? How do they respond? I hope they stay out there, trying to get people to talk about our problems and their source, rather than blaming the poor and/or unions for our fiscal problems.

    But hey, don’t let me stop another round of Obots vs. Firebaggers. That’s been so productive over the last couple years. I’m sure that’ll solve our problems.

  101. 101
    bin Lurkin' says:

    Do local police forces have the authority to close airspace without any federal input?

    Because NYC police closed the airspace at OWS for the raid last night.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/worl.....a-blackout

    Not asking a rhetorical question, I honestly don’t know the answer.

  102. 102
    bin Lurkin' says:

    A dirty fucking hippie who got pepper sprayed in Seattle last night..

    http://farm7.static.flickr.com.....e31a_z.jpg

  103. 103
    kay says:

    @FlipYrWhig:

    I was really impressed by one group I met here. I met two groups, one in Toledo and one n Defiance, and the Defiance group just blew me away. It was ten people, kids, mostly, standing in front of a county courthouse. I could just feel the disdain and the meanness coming at them in waves.
    They were so earnest. That just destroys me. These were not “privileged” people, which I know is the stereotype and maybe true in some places. My impulse was really to protect them, which I know is patronizing, but they seemed so vulnerable out there. I don’t know if they’re still “active” or whatever, I haven’t been able to find them, but they did do that one day which, in a place like rural Ohio, is a brave thing to do. I think that’s a success.

  104. 104
    kay says:

    @singfoom:

    are being stymied.

    I like “stymied”. I can live with that :)

    I’m not a constitutional law expert, but they have lawyers, and I just don’t think grappling with ‘time, place and manner” restrictions on the exercise of political speech are this catastrophic, unanticipated set-back/shocker. I think they probably knew that was coming, eventually, because it was inevitable, with time.
    I believe NLG lawyers knew that was coming. The space between lawful opposition/civil disobedience is their whole thing. That’s where they operate.

  105. 105

    The Oakland PD was under court order to not use rubber bullets, pepper spray and a list of other weapons against political demonstrators because of past abuses.

    The Oakland PD did use rubber bullets, tear gas and other methods that violated the court order.

    It’s hard for me to conceive that leadership of the Oakland PD and City of Oakland chose to violate that court order without receiving assurances from prosecutors with jurisdiction that they would not prosecute.

    Prosecutors with jurisdiction definitely includes the county prosecutor an U.S. Attorney (Northern California District).

  106. 106

    Do the raids around the country appear to have been coordinated?

    How would they have been coordinated?

    Who could have coordinated them?

    What explanation is the simplest?

    Without facts, the answers to these questions are conjecture. But the public does deserve to know if the raids were coordinated and by whom.

    If ABL’s position is that we shouldn’t ask and expect answers that’s… a little odd.

  107. 107
    Baron Jrod of Keeblershire says:

    @AxelFoley:

    You better OCCUPY! a voting booth, muthafucka. You and the rest of the OWS crew. Stop listening to the likes of Moore and Olbermann.

    Uh, Michael Moore and Keith Olbermann are telling people they shouldn’t vote? You got a link for either of those claims?

    I know that Olbermann once said that he doesn’t vote so he can remain objective, which I think is kinda bullshit, but I’ve never heard of him saying anyone else should abstain.

    Or is this just a case of simple logic, where those two men are bad, and not voting is also bad, and since we all know bad people like bad things, well…

  108. 108

    @Mnemosyne:

    I would not be surprised if the mayors coordinated their shutdowns. I also would not be surprised if they got advice from the FBI and/or DHS before doing the shutdown.

    I would be astounded if this all turned out to be ordered by the FBI and/or DHS or “coordinated by” them in the sense that they planned it and the mayors just went along.

    The raids violated the civil liberties of people who were “peaceably assembled” to “petition the government for redress of grievances”.

    The federal government should not be participating in schemes to deprive citizens of our rights.

    How much involvement of the DOJ and DHS are you willing to tolerate in a nation-wide effort to use police to deprive citizens of our rights?

  109. 109
    different-church-lady says:

    @Carl Nyberg: Nothing like a little JAQing off to start the day.

  110. 110

    @bin Lurkin’:

    Do local police forces have the authority to close airspace without any federal input?

    Because NYC police closed the airspace at OWS for the raid last night.

    What was the purpose of closing the air space?

    It’s the same purpose as denying journalists access to the raid.

    It’s part of the police attack on the First Amendment.

    When the police plan and execute a scheme to deprive citizens of our rights, they are violating federal law.

    These violations were absolutely clear in Oakland.

    What is the Justice Department supposed to do when police violate the civil rights of U.S. citizens? Is the Justice Department supposed to open an investigation and prosecute the perpetrators?

    ABL is claiming there is weak evidence (so far) the Obama administration planned the violations of the civil rights of OWS participants (around the country). OK.

    But the Obama Justice Department has clearly sided with the Bull Connors of law enforcement and not will the OWS participants who are having their civil rights violated.

  111. 111
    Marc says:

    It’s perfectly plausible that different mayors would discuss tactics, or even decide to build on what they perceive as being successes. We’ve militarized the police as part of the vile War on Drugs, and having a bunch of paranoid and arrogant police has also been institutionalized.

    The security state freaks out when a child goes through a metal detector in an airport wearing shoes; they’re certainly soiling themselves with OWS. And individual offices of the FBI, etc. chase phantom threats all the time.

    The argument here is with the need to blame some centralized villain, and in particular the reflexive need to blame Obama.

  112. 112
    golemtulpa says:

    you guys did see that Digby had a couple of stories up that show that DHS has indeed been involved with actions against OWS from the beginning? One even has a photos of people in DHS uniforms arresting people in Portland on October 31st.

    http://digbysblog.blogspot.com.....d-fbi.html

    Examiner.com might be trash, and it’s an unsourced “slip” designed to smear the Obama administration, but it doesn’t mean that it’s not true.

    After all, whose idea would it be to make the first call to get 11 or 18 mayors on conferences calls, or on another occasion, police from 40 different cities (AP sourced) on a conference call. Is it common for mayors and police departments to jump on such conference calls? OWS might be “leaderless” but the American government doesn’t really work that way.

  113. 113

    @different-church-lady: Do you support the Occupy movement? Why do you support it?

    What have you done to support it? Or do you just dispense advice on the Internet?

  114. 114
    EZSmirkzz@gmail.com says:

    @kay:

    It appears the citation needed in the Examiner piece is the BBC, as you’ve highlighted.

    As noted, I am responding to an assertion of ABL’s, nothing more.

    This is real. They’re real people. They need to know if the mayors’ coordinated, as opposed to the mayors’ coordinating with a federal agency, because that will go to a response, a regrouping, a change in approach, whatever.
    How is it helpful to them to speculate or panic? IMO, if we’re supporting them, that should be the first question.

    That is a different subject altogether than the one I addressed, and one in which we agree. “Make sure of all things, hold fast to that which is true.”, applies here as well.

  115. 115
    BobS says:

    Is there a name for the collective hysteria that occurs on any Balloon Juice thread when something is said or written somewhere that might cause someone to entertain the possibility that Obama belongs to the 1% and is governing primarily for the benefit of the 1%? I scrolled through the lexicon but couldn’t find an entry.

  116. 116

    @magurakurin:
    That struck me as a weird claim, too. Are there any other possibilities between ‘Hello, I’m an FBI agent, here’s my badge, I’m here to observe you.’ and seeing some guy in a blue suit?

    @different-church-lady:
    I see this a great deal in Balloon Juice, and any liberal blog I glance at, really. There are a lot of arguments that don’t understand that you have absolutely no rights whatsoever that don’t have SOME exception. Your free speech does not include harassing and threatening someone else. Your right to religion does not include human sacrifice. Your right to vote can be taken away. In this case, you have the right to assemble, but not camp out in large numbers on public land while you’re doing it. Which is presumably what the judge decided. Your rights are only sacrosanct right up until they start interfering with other people.

  117. 117
    Nutella says:

    @magurakurin:

    change will only come from one of two ways: the ballot box or the barricade

    I think OWS has given up on voting for change since they see that all candidates that are ever offered up for their vote are owned by Wall Street, so they’re going to see what they can do with barricades because the ballot box hasn’t been getting them anywhere.

    Really there are three choices:
    1. Ballot box – doesn’t help since the process is so corrupted in both parties.
    2. Barricades – we’ll see how well occupying works in the long run.
    3. Third party – sounds good but useless in practice.

  118. 118
    EZSmirkzz says:

    @kay:

    It appears the citation needed in the Examiner piece is the BBC, as you’ve highlighted.

    As noted, I am responding to an assertion of ABL’s,

    Look, I don’t know what’s going on—partly because I had a glass of Benmorach Peat smoke (and it was delicious)—but I guess we better uncritically cite bullshit newspapers and go ahead and freak out in advance—just in case.

    It’s the progressive way.

    by noting the Examiner is attributing the BBC, as she herself noted,

    But in a recent interview with the BBC,” Oakland Mayor Jean Quan mentioned she was on a conference call just before the recent wave of crackdowns began.

    I find absolutely nothing pertinent to #OWS in her post. Your assertion is one that I can agree with, “Make sure of all things, hold fast to what is true.”, being applicable here as well, to both her post, and your response to mine.

  119. 119
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Carl Nyberg:

    How much involvement of the DOJ and DHS are you willing to tolerate in a nation-wide effort to use police to deprive citizens of our rights?

    Camping out in a public park for several months is a right? Weird, I don’t remember seeing that one in the Constitution.

  120. 120
    Mnemosyne says:

    @BobS:

    Is there a name for the collective hysteria that occurs on any Balloon Juice thread when something is said or written somewhere that might cause someone to entertain the possibility that Obama belongs to the 1% and is governing primarily for the benefit of the 1%?

    Ah, yes, the old “Well, Obama didn’t close down Goldman Sachs, so clearly he personally coordinated the crackdown!” Because there’s absolutely no chance that, say, the mayors acted on their own without puppetmaster Obama giving them his marching orders.

  121. 121
    different-church-lady says:

    @Carl Nyberg: I see you didn’t google ‘JAQing off’.

    Either that you’re being quite clever.

    For the record, I support OWS. Which is why I hope the organizers are smarter than most people who post on the internet supporting OWS.

  122. 122
    Marc says:

    @BobS:

    Fallacy of the excluded middle. We’re reacting to claims that Obama secretly planned a nationwide crackdown on liberal demonstrators. That’s a different claim than someone saying that Obama is rich, or that some of his policies favor the rich.

    Reading is fundamental!

  123. 123
    different-church-lady says:

    @Nutella:

    3. Third party – sounds good but useless in practice takes forever and a hell of a lot of work to make it happen.

    FTFY

  124. 124
    J says:

    @andrewsomething: Couldn’t agree more!

  125. 125
    vernon says:

    Obama totally loves OWS and hates Wall Street! ANYONE CAN SEE THAT! And anyone who disagrees works for a right wing Roger Ailes news organ or, you know, is Michael Moore & Digby (same thing). Oh, and the cops in riot gear are only roughing up journalists and stifling the press because there’s no Consitutional right to occupy public space! NOTHING TO SEE HERE!!

    Thank you, ABL & friends, for telling us all once again what time it is! The Left needs you! Really!

  126. 126
    BobS says:

    @Mnemosyne: No, more like the Obama led Justice Department or SEC has devoted very few resources over the past 3 years to investigating malfeasance or misfeasance at Goldman Sachs or others (the ranks of whom provide a substantial number of his senior economic advisers). .@Marc: I agree with your statement regarding reading. For instance, the examiner.com story reads “Homeland Security, the FBI and other federal police agencies”. Nothing about Obama. There is, however, mention of Obama (in the form of a question) asked on Twitter.

  127. 127
    J says:

    @Marc: In many of these comments it looks to me as if anyone who raises the concerns you did, but doesn’t explicitly and–dare I say it–reflexively excuse Obama from all responsibility (for anything, ever), is being lumped together with those who instantly and automatically jump to the conclusion that Obama is Satan’s emissary on earth.

  128. 128
    different-church-lady says:

    @BobS:

    For instance, the examiner.com story reads “Homeland Security, the FBI and other federal police agencies”. Nothing about Obama. There is, however, mention of Obama (in the form of a question) asked on Twitter.

    a) There’s what happens.
    b) There’s what a reporter says about what happened.
    c) There’s what people say on the internet about what that reporter said about what happened.

    Sadly these appear to always end up being three different things nowadays.

  129. 129
    Mnemosyne says:

    @BobS:

    No, more like the Obama led Justice Department or SEC has devoted very few resources over the past 3 years to investigating malfeasance or misfeasance at Goldman Sachs or others (the ranks of whom provide a substantial number of his senior economic advisers).

    And therefore that proves that Obama personally ordered the crackdown? Because that’s where people like Carl Nyberg are taking the story.

    As I’ve said multiple times, I wouldn’t be surprised if the mayors colluded with one another. I would be astounded if breaking up the Occupy camps was a top-down order from Obama, which is what some people (like, say, Michael Moore) seem to be reading into the reporter’s choice to use the word “coordinated” in the story.

  130. 130
    vernon says:

    @Marc:

    Fallacy of the excluded middle. We’re reacting to claims that Obama secretly planned a nationwide crackdown on liberal demonstrators. That’s a different claim than someone saying that Obama is rich, or that some of his policies favor the rich. Reading is fundamental!

    Political education is fundamental. Obama acts in the interest of his class. This is not a radical statement and should not be a provocative statement. It’s consistent with roughly 100% of his policy decisions and with the actions of government agencies since he took office. If he can be shown to have “greenlit” the police crackdown it would make a useful rallying cause; what’s astonishing is that the idea of him greenlighting it is controversial among people who know pro wrestling isn’t real.

  131. 131
    xian says:

    @eemom: I’d give the troll $20 to drop the stupid fucking vertical ellipses look-a-me intro shit on every goddamned comment

  132. 132
    Marc says:

    @vernon:

    If it can be shown that you’re a Republican plant you’d be totally discredited here.

    What’s astonishing is that evidence isn’t needed for people, like you, who are predisposed to hate someone.

  133. 133
    different-church-lady says:

    @vernon:

    t’s consistent with roughly 100% of his policy decisions and with the actions of government agencies since he took office.

    So I take it the CFPB was put in place to protect the 1%?

  134. 134
    different-church-lady says:

    @xian: If one shouldn’t give trolls food, then one really shouldn’t monetize their paradigm.

  135. 135
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @Mnemosyne: It’s all because “coordinated” is a sloppy word in this particular context. It can mean that the mayors were cooperating with each other and also consulting federal authorities, or it can mean that federal authorities took charge and led.

    Kind of like how if you talk about “associations” between “Iraq” and “terrorists” you can take terrorists inside parts of Iraq that aren’t under government control and make it sound like the government of Iraq has terrorists acting at its behest.

  136. 136
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @different-church-lady: But he didn’t fight _hard enough_ for it, and that proves he doesn’t really support it, and that the whole thing is kabuki. That’s how it always goes. There’s always some reason why, even with good things, Obama didn’t do it exactly right, and thus what did come to pass might as well be deliberate sabotage aimed at spiting the doyens of the blogosphere. “From Hell’s heart I stab at thee!”, I think he said.

  137. 137
    vernon says:

    @Marc: I don’t hate anyone. Obama acts in the interests of his class. As I said, this should not be a controversial statement. As it is, it gets me accused of being a Republican plant.

    The struggle between the classes is a political struggle—tell me, Marc, which GOP bigwig sowed that idea?

  138. 138
    Allan says:

    @SFPoet:

    Citizens of this country are violently being denied their first amendment rights of assembly, using whatever pathetic excuse the authorities can manufacture.

    That “pathetic excuse” would be the precedent established by the Supreme Court in many cases over the years, which developed the premise that reasonable, content-neutral restrictions on the time, place and manner of public protest may be permissible under the First Amendment.

    Occupy the Supreme Court!

  139. 139
    Marc says:

    @J:

    There is a long list of Obama-haters who jump into every damn thread making exactly the same claims (Recent examples here: Carl, vernon,bob). After awhile you realize that they don’t actually care about issue A, B, or C: they’re all just clubs to use in a way to prove that they’re purer than the rest of us.

    The local custom is to create a space for people who don’t reflexively jump on every flimsy excuse to bash Democrats and Obama. We’re capable of seeing the Republicans as the bigger problem – and, yes, criticizing Democrats when they actually do foolish things.

    The online left culture, by contrast, is much more embedded in the traditional splinter left: the communists hated the socialists more than they hated the right, because the socialists were traitors. And the online radicals are enraged that people on the left dare to disagree with them. We’re not going to cesspools where people compete with one another in their hatred of Democrats in general and Obama in particular (e.g. virtually all other comment threads on major left=leaning sites.) But the existence of a dissenting view is too much for a lot of our, um, visitors.

    So there is an element of “you again. Given that you’re been outraged here a hundred times, I’m just going to dismiss you, since discussion is a waste of time.”: It’s a human response.

  140. 140
    different-church-lady says:

    @FlipYrWhig:

    t’s consistent with roughly 100% of his policy decisions and with the actions of government agencies since he took office.

    Or to put another way: the difference between “coordinated with help from…” is being conflated with “coordinated by…”

    Understanding the distinction is not in some people’s interest, so they will correspondingly fail to understand it. C’est la guerre-des-flammes.

  141. 141
    xian says:

    @different-church-lady: well, I try to talk *about* trolls, whenever possible, not to them. I also try not to stare directly at gorgons or get seen by basilisks.

  142. 142
    Allan says:

    @Mnemosyne: I’m confuzzled. Does the pro left claim that Obama is simultaneously the puppet of Wall Street Joos AND the puppetmaster who controls America’s mayors?

  143. 143
    different-church-lady says:

    @FlipYrWhig: It has really amazed me how much of the behavior of left-blogistan over the past couple of years resembles the behavior of a manipulative spouse.

  144. 144
    Marc says:

    @vernon:

    I was applying your logic to you. Can you prove that you’re not a Republican plant who is trying to sow dissension among progressives? (Hint: once that is the subject you’re going to find it mighty hard to get out of!) Now I don’t actually believe that; I think you’re on the extreme left and are voicing sincere opinions. But the way you’re discussing Obaam is exactly the same as the “Republican plant” discussion: it’s not an honest game. There is nothing I can say to disprove conspiracy theories.

  145. 145
    different-church-lady says:

    @xian:

    I also try not to stare directly at gorgons…

    Yeah, you need to do that thing with two sheets of paper, and one has a small hole in the middle…

  146. 146
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @different-church-lady: I think there was a copy-paste snafu there… ‘s OK. I agree that “coordinated” with/by is a distinction that’s getting blurred.

  147. 147
    BobS says:

    @Mnemosyne:You should take Marc’s advice regarding reading. I didn’t write a word one way or another about the crackdown. I commented on the panic that ensues whenever the Obama sycophants here think even a single voter many be persuaded to think critically of the president.
    Given the massive Homeland Security apparatus and it’s liaisons with state and local law enforcement, as well as the history of intolerance for leftist protest in this country, I think it’s naive to believe there wasn’t coordination between agencies facilitated by the federal government. It’s probably a mechanism that kicks into gear whenever a threat to authority arises. Why they pulled the trigger now is open to question- it’s possible that Obama was embarrassed in front of other world leaders by the guy who crashed his luau with the Occupy song. I also find it equally plausible that Obama was advised of the plan and signed off on it or that it happened without his knowledge. I think it’s silly to think he planned or managed the crackdown. Just as silly as the panic I read here.

  148. 148
    vernon says:

    @different-church-lady: An agency that restores public faith in the finance? OF COURSE that benefits the 1%.

  149. 149
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @Marc: Disproving conspiracy theories is totally the kind of thing conspirators are always trying to do! That’s how deep it runs!

  150. 150
    different-church-lady says:

    @vernon: Yeah. You know what this country really needs right now? Complete loss of faith in our economy.

    Are you people for real?

  151. 151
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @BobS: So what do you call the panic that results when there is a story that can be made through a series of conjectures, inductive non-reasonings, and just sheer leaps of faith to reflect poorly on Obama, and a dedicated cohort of self-avowed principled critics rushes to embrace that story as fast as possible? Because it happens consistently, and persistently.

  152. 152
    different-church-lady says:

    @FlipYrWhig:

    So what do you call the panic that results when there is a story that can be made through a series of conjectures, inductive non-reasonings, and just sheer leaps of faith to reflect poorly on Obama, and a dedicated cohort of self-avowed principled critics rushes to embrace that story as fast as possible?

    The Aristocrats!

  153. 153
    General Stuck says:

    Naomi Wolf was just on MSNBC, peddling this bullshit. It only confirms Malkin was right that Obama is a seekrit dictator. Coordinating with gay unionized O’thugs in NYPD disguise.

    edit – and yes, my comment makes no sense, but is accurate for describing silly firebagger mouthbreathing.

  154. 154
    vernon says:

    @Marc: “My logic”? Analysis on class lines is “my logic”? Yeah. Right. I invented that. Seriously, read a book, you clowns.

    Re the “coordination” back & forth: Christ, go up to ABL’s original comment! She was in a tizzy based merely on “greenlighting”! She’s taking issue with the idea that Obama merely OK’d the raids, which were “coordinated” by the DHS. FWIW, I think it’s highly unlikely that Obama stayed up into the night masterminding the logistics of the crackdown, but highly, yawn-inducingly highly likely that he greenlit them. That’s what I’m arguing; getting caught up in arguments about personal coordination is mind-bogglingly retarded.

    But whatever. Don’t let me rob you of the thrills & chills of your RAW Classic Smackdown hero-vs-heel drama.

  155. 155

    This sequence of photos depicts demonstrators in Portland being loaded into vehicles that say “Department of Homeland Security” after being arrested.

    Is that sufficient evidence of federal government involvement in the coordinated effort to silence dissent?

  156. 156
    kay says:

    @EZSmirkzz:

    I find absolutely nothing pertinent to #OWS in her post. Your assertion is one that I can agree with, “Make sure of all things, hold fast to what is true.”, being applicable here as well, to both her post, and your response to mine.

    I’m sorry. I think I completely misunderstood you. I’m still confused.

    What I was trying to say was that I thought the first “report” on the mayor’s statement was misleading, because it was incomplete. It sounds much less malevolent if she was simply saying she spoke with other mayors.

    If she’s volunteering that, my impression would be that it wasn’t a secret or clandestine or improper meeting, rather than, “there’s something about this meeting thing she isn’t telling us!”

    Bottom line, I don’t know how one would defend OWS without knowing who or what is threatening OWS, so I think we agree on “hold fast to what is true”.

  157. 157
    different-church-lady says:

    @FlipYrWhig:

    I think there was a copy-paste snafu there…

    Absoltely correct: the block I meant to quote was…

    It’s all because “coordinated” is a sloppy word in this particular context. It can mean that the mayors were cooperating with each other and also consulting federal authorities, or it can mean that federal authorities took charge and led.

  158. 158
    xian says:

    @vernon: your class analysis is shallow and glib, so there’s that. the idea that Obama would be required in any sense to “greenlight” a coordinated crackdown strains credulity. Would he sign off on it if asked? Hard to know, since his public statement is that it’s a municipal matter. Is that greenlighting any action they decide to take?

    On the other hand, I don’t see any problem with people investigating and reporting on such suppositions. The people have a right to know. Obama should be scrutinized as carefully as any other powerful person. I just hesitate to assume I have all the answers, especially based on a cliff’s notes quality interpretation of class struggle that would, for example, have a lot of trouble explaining FDR or Teddy Kennedy.

  159. 159
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @vernon:

    She’s taking issue with the idea that Obama merely OK’d the raids, which were “coordinated” by the DHS.

    No, that’s willfully misreading the word “coordinated.” Coordinated _by_ DHS would be one thing. Coordinated among the conference of mayors _with_ DHS would be rather different. And there would still be plenty to complain about. But it makes for a less fun fantasy about Obama’s jackbooted pretorian guard.

  160. 160
    vernon says:

    @different-church-lady: I’m not disagreeing with your last statement. There’s no way the creation of the CFPB can be called an attack on the 1% or even a departure from their interests. Keynes was one of the 1%, you know. And nothing he promoted was against his class interests.

  161. 161
    eemom says:

    @General Stuck:

    Naomi Wolf was in my college class. She is and always has been a self-loving, hair-tossing twit.

    Her other recent “feminist” accomplishments include dissing the women who accused St Julian (the Libertarian) Assange of rape.

  162. 162

    @Mnemosyne:

    Camping out in a public park for several months is a right? Weird, I don’t remember seeing that one in the Constitution.

    Was Scott Olsen camping out?

    I don’t see why having a demonstration run for a long period of time is excluded from the rights of the citizenry to assemble and petition for redress of grievances. If it stays peaceable, why wouldn’t it be allowed to continue.

    And if the goal of the authorities is public safety, what is the greater threat to public safety? Allowing a demonstration to continue or engaging in a paramilitary assault?

    Further, the actions by the police are not targeting people who are “camping” but directed at everyone.

    The Justice Department has failed to initiate investigations of law enforcement officers violating the civil rights of citizens. Why is this?

  163. 163
    different-church-lady says:

    @vernon: Fine. So if he’s not attacking the 1%, it means he’s primarily doing what’s in their interests instead?

    Help me out here, because I’m really having a hard time sorting out all the stories about the Obama-Wall Street love fest from all the stories about how much Wall Street hates him.

  164. 164
    vernon says:

    @xian: Admittedly, what I’ve written here is shallow and glib. I guess if there were an individual so ignorant that all he’d ever heard of class analysis consisted of those glib and shallow statements of mine, he might assume that class analysis couldn’t explain FDR or Ted Kennedy. That extremely ignorant individual would be extremely wrong.

  165. 165

    @Carl Nyberg: To highlight the point, the police who are working with DHS in Portland are arresting people in the daytime.

    Presumably it’s a bit hard to distinguish campers and non-campers if the arrests are in the middle of the day.

    So, the claim that arrests are motivated by camping is suspect.

    The government is arresting OWS demonstrators not because of what they are doing. The government is arresting them because they are being effective at organizing and getting their message out.

  166. 166
    vernon says:

    @different-church-lady:

    I’m really having a hard time sorting out all the stories about the Obama-Wall Street love fest from all the stories about how much Wall Street hates him.

    Follow the money. Everything else is talk.

  167. 167
    General Stuck says:

    @Carl Nyberg:

    The arrests were made at the federally owned Strunk Plaza,
    where protestors had chained themselves to property. The “Federal protective Service” has the primary job of policing federal properties, so this was well within their basic purpose for existing. With no need for nefarious ‘coordination’ with local police.

  168. 168
    BobS says:

    @FlipYrWhig: Republicans?
    However, by asking your question, you seem to concede the legitimacy of mine. And now, finally, who better to scream fire in a crowded theater than General Stuck.

  169. 169
    different-church-lady says:

    @Carl Nyberg: I think it provides evidence that Homeland Security detained a photographer. Your mileage seems to vary.

  170. 170
    kay says:

    @Carl Nyberg:

    This sequence of photos depicts demonstrators in Portland being loaded into vehicles that say “Department of Homeland Security” after being arrested.

    That isn’t what I saw. This is what I saw:

    The Federal Protective Service officers who arrested the man gave no reason as to why he was arrested and the man provided no details to the amassing crowd who wanted to help. Reportedly his arrest was not concerning the Occupy Portland movement.

    That’s from the text that accompanies the photos. Are there other photos that depict protestors being loaded into vehicles? Or are we talking about this man who was reportedly not arrested in connection with Occupy?

  171. 171
    vernon says:

    The cops in riot gear are only roughing up journalists and stifling the press because there’s no Consitutional right to occupy public space!

    HOORAY COPS!!

  172. 172
    different-church-lady says:

    @vernon:

    Follow the money. Everything else is talk.

    FTFY

  173. 173
    different-church-lady says:

    @General Stuck:

    The arrests were made at the federally owned Strunk Plaza…

    Federal cops on federal property! Clearly we’re living in an Obama-coordinated police state!

  174. 174
    General Stuck says:

    finally, who better to scream fire in a crowded theater than General Stuck.

    More like screaming “IDIOTS” on a crowded blog.

  175. 175
    kay says:

    @Carl Nyberg:

    And, what happened to him?

    If he was hauled in by the federal protective service without cause wouldn’t that be something to follow up on? Is he out? Did he just disappear and no one will ever know?

    and the man provided no details to the amassing crowd who wanted to help.

    I don’t disagree that they have and will continue to meet resistance. I just don’t know what to do with these vague, mysterious sightings. I think getting arrested and processed is much more rote and rule-bound than it is random and unknowable.

  176. 176
    different-church-lady says:

    @Carl Nyberg: Carl, I have to say in complete honesty that if what you’re trying to accomplish here is to convince a bunch of people who are relatively sympathetic with OWS to instead think that OWS is a bunch of half-informed, overly emotional semi-nutbags who just won’t back down from weak, unnecessary conspiracy theories, then you’re hitting the mark rather squarely on the nose.

    And I’m pretty sure that’s not your goal. In fact, I really hope it isn’t. So, I respectfully suggest a bit of a think about that.

  177. 177
    different-church-lady says:

    @kay: Careful Kay: soon folks bloggers reporters will start linking to your post as evidence Homeland Security is disappearing people.

  178. 178
    xian says:

    @vernon: I get it. the lurking class analysis agrees with you in email.

  179. 179

    The federal government has jurisdiction on federal property. So that’s that.

    But the actions of the police in many instances have gone far far beyond any legitimate policing goal. They have risen to the level of civil rights violations.

    And what has the Justice Department done? Have investigations been initiated?

  180. 180
    kay says:

    @different-church-lady:

    When I worked for the postal service I was shocked at how much power the postal inspector service has. I wasn’t alive when they were seizing porn and such, and I knew about that whole sorry history, but they have this whole other giant, sweeping jurisdiction. I was looking at it as “my” workplace inspector with lots more police power than your ordinary “boss” or “auditor”, and that was true, but there’s a lot more to them.

  181. 181
    General Stuck says:

    @Carl Nyberg:

    Even before OWS, the Obama DOJ launched a series of investigations into big city cops violating civil rights.

    In shift from Bush, Obama’s DOJ is aggressively investigating police departments accused of civil rights violations

    Since OWS is a fairly recent phenomena, I would suspect some of the cop behavior that was obviously over the line will be folded into on going investigation. In these cases, it usually is the case that the feds wait and see how the local police police their own, in an appropriate manner, before getting involved.

  182. 182
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @BobS: There may be such things as reflexive supporters; there may be such things as reflexive critics. I’d prefer to think that most of us are not reflexive but actually believe in drawing conclusions from facts and rather than embracing the particular kind of hyperbole that flatters our preexisting views.

  183. 183
    Cain says:

    @cat48:

    Our mayor is a fan of the OWS folks. He acted because lives were at risk. Essentially, #occupypdx camp turned into a haven for thieves to hide there. Drug users also were also using it as well as the homeless.

    The OWS folks tried to turn the conversation into things like homelessness, and I think a number of us got irritated because they aren’t focusing on top objectives.

    Also they believe tehy should just sit in the streets indefinitely until they are heard. While I agree that initially the protests brought some attention, there should be some work into evolving the movement like the Tea Party. If they want change they need to evolve into a bigger big tent political movement.

    If you want to hear something interesting, you need to listen to the podcast for “Think out loud” where Mayor Adams were engaging with the #OccupyPDX folks.

    Here is the podcast podcast.

    I must admit, I was annoyed with the attitudes of the #OccupyPDX folks.. it’s hard not to succumb to popular stereotypes of protestors. It just seems that there could have been a better way to argue the case.

    Sam Adams is a dirty hippy himself and he is a 99 percenter. But unfortunately, he has a job to do.

  184. 184
    EZSmirkzz says:

    @kay: It’s all good. I’ve heard everything from optics to black helicopter stuff. All I’ve actually heard is the Mayor speaking before cameras which was carried by the BBC radio, where she admits to having been in a conference call with other mayors.

    The thing about the bazaar of #OWS is that the bizaaros were either attracted, or I’ve heard, been sent to the camps, which given our mental health system here in America means some psychotics are going to be involved too, I would imagine. That #OWS would take them in is just as predictable I suppose, given the nature of the protest.

    Between the best and worst then, all rumors are equal and peoples preconceptions, prejudices, and biases are going to determine the truth for the myopic, which will include the American media.

    What is obvious however is that the city government is going to be more tactically adept than #OWS, since the police are a veteran,defensive force, pure and simple. #OWS will have become more inventive, IMHO.

    Their cause I believe is just. I haven’t thought about how I would advise them to go about obtaining their goals either, but as long as they remain non-violent then riot police are over kill, and any violence has to be initiated by the police, which de-legitimizes them as a defensive force. In that case #OWS will have the optical advantage at least.

    As Shimon Peres has so eloquently stated in Israel, the government is there to serve us, not we them.

  185. 185
    different-church-lady says:

    @FlipYrWhig:

    I’d prefer to think that most of us are not reflexive but actually believe in drawing conclusions from facts and rather than embracing the particular kind of hyperbole that flatters our preexisting views.

    Which is true, but the problem is that gathering and weighing of facts takes longer than being reflexive. So the ‘most of us’ are constantly playing catch-up, never creating even a fraction of the instantaneous volume of the reflexive.

    And I think some people get seduced by that volume and the instant gratification, and succumb more and more over time.

    PS: Oops, dropped one of my main points: so the reflexive can always make instantaneous loud noise, unencumbered by a sense of obligation to veracity, and thus always appear to me much more numerous than the non-reflexive.

  186. 186
    digby says:

    It’s funny to see self-righteous people running to blame others(“yes, digby, I’m looking at you”) for failing to properly source information when it’s quite clear they didn’t read my post.

    Read it. The guy who wrote that examiner post is a local Minneapolis journalist. I didn’t vouch for what he said, merely posted it as part of a series of posts I’ve done wondering whether or not the the DHS is working with police forces appropriately. It’s something I would think any liberal would be concerned with.

    You will see that nowhere did I say that the Obama administration or Obama himself had ordered anything or coordinated anything. I’d frankly be stunned to find out that was the case. I can’t imagine why they would want to do that and I haven’t written one single critical word of the president on this issue.

    Honestly, this reflexive slapping down by the president’s supporters of people who dare to even criticize the government police agencies or military is kind of frightening. Skepticism of the authorities in these matters is something that should be beyond politics and it isn’t in any way a reflection of loathing for Obama. As I said, I doubt very seriously the president is aware of these operational decisions and I don’t think he could do much about it even if he wanted to.

  187. 187
    Yevgraf says:

    @digby:

    We’re laughing at your dissembly.

  188. 188
    Mnemosyne says:

    @digby:

    I read the link to that scary, scary DHS report and it seemed to say, “Yeah, there’s really no threat, but keep an eye out for outside jerks who try to capitalize on an otherwise peaceful protest.” Isn’t that the kind of assessment you would want the DHS to make? Or is the problem that they do threat assessments at all?

  189. 189
    General Stuck says:

    @digby:

    LOL, and of course you might read somewhere that Obama beats his wife, and you just post it because it would be something liberals would want to know about. You don’t make any assumptions, because you don’t have to. The question itself is the answer and message. And besides, you been wondering about that for a while now, and you don’t actually accuse Obama of beating his wife, so it’s okay. Specially since you’d be shocked to find out it was true, Obama beating his wife.

    Well, it is okay, if you are a republican, or just don’t like Barack Obama, or his policies.

    Here is a hint/ when you don’t have viable sourcing on something this volatile, just don’t say anything till you have that sourcing. simple rule, unless you hang your hat on the wingnut side of things.

  190. 190
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @General Stuck: I don’t think that’s fair, though. There’s a consistent civil-libertarian skepticism about law enforcement monitoring citizens, the militarization of the police, etc. The troublesome leap is from “I don’t like the idea of law enforcement agencies scheming together to snuff out protests” to “Don’t be naive, all this stuff comes from the top down, which means it’s all Obama’s responsibility. Worse than Bush!”

  191. 191
    David Koch says:

    @digby: Funny, I didn’t think someone as fat as you would be so thin skinned.

  192. 192
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @David Koch: Dude, seriously?

  193. 193
    General Stuck says:

    @FlipYrWhig:

    If there was even the slightest evidence in this story that the feds were actively participating inappropriately in conducting these raids, then I would agree. But there isn’t, and baseless speculation, is in fact baseless. Unless you are going for a subtle smear job to get acolytes and followers fired up and suspicious. I see no way to excuse that as being unfair.

  194. 194
    eemom says:

    I didn’t vouch for what he said, merely posted it as part of a series of posts I’ve done wondering whether or not the the DHS is working with police forces appropriately.

    Shorter Digby: I posted something I have no reason to believe is true that supports my speculation over something I have no reason to believe is true. Cuz if you’re a liberal, it would be irresponsible not to speculate.

  195. 195
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @General Stuck: Even so, I think it would be more a case of credulous civil libertarianism than malicious anti-Obama-ism.

  196. 196
    General Stuck says:

    I used to work in a form of federal law enforcement, and there are some pretty stark conditions that need to be evident, before that can legally occur. Some mayor, or mayors calling up some DHS liason and asking for advice of crowd control, is about the limit for the feds getting involved materially in such operations. Otherwise, there needs to be some kind of trigger for fed jurisdiction to occur. And if those aren’t evident, then it is a very big deal. There is absolutely no evidence I have seen that indicates the DHS has done anything other than maybe provide some advice for tactics, and that is not coordination.

  197. 197
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @General Stuck: I am no expert in any of that, but my reaction was similar — that the guy who wrote the piece used the word “coordinate” either inappropriately or misleadingly, and it’s important to get that kind of thing right, because it’s not just any word, it’s a term of art.

  198. 198
    David Koch says:

    @eemom: digby’s excuse is same bullshit Bush used to pull. “We never said Iraq was behind 9/11, we only said there were reports that Mohammad Atta met with Iraqi Intelligence in Prague. We never said those reports were true, so we’re at a loss to how the 65% of the country got the impression that Saddam was behind 9/11”.

    That’s right Digby, you learned well from Bush.

  199. 199
    General Stuck says:

    @FlipYrWhig:

    Nobody knows that other than digby. But the ultimate effect of taking liberties for suggestion without factual basis, does have anti Obamaism result, as we have seen a thousand times before. Either prominent bloggers care about the truth, and double so when doing polemics directed at the side they profess to be on, or they don’t. All I say, is be honest about what side you are on and don’t try and pass out any wooden nickels for that side.

  200. 200
    Marc says:

    @digby:

    It’s sad to see how little credibility that you have left. Your response is a perfect example of why. You screwed up, and instead of admitting it you just dig in.

    You know perfectly well what you’re doing – insinuating sinister connections and then making believe that you were not when someone calls you on it.

    Digby: “I am curious as to how they are going to justify the federal government’s interest if this turns out to be true? (It will eventually come out if it’s true.) If there’s coordination of some kind, as seems fairly obvious, what’s the legal foundation for it?

    I don’t have the answers. But I do know that the Federal, state and local police agencies have a tremendous amount of capability and I have no doubt they have been clamoring for the chance to use it.”

    “Update: it turns out there is quite a bit of documentation out there about at least some coordination with DHS and the locals. Here are some pictures from Portland on October 31st clearly showing DHS arresting people.”

    (As people told you in your comments, nope. Not true, and not related to OWS. No correction, oddly enough.)

    “I see no reference to terrorism, so I guess DHS is now in the business of doing threat assessments and advising the local authorities about tactics and strategy about peaceful domestic demonstrations. Good to know.”
    —————-
    And yet you didn’t specifically say that Obama is an evil puppet master, so anyone who read you differently is obviously just a deluded O-bot…

    If it’s any consolation, the paranoid series on “The Supercommittee That is Totally Going To Sell Us Out Because Democrats Betray Us” is just as bad.

  201. 201
    cat48 says:

    @Cain:

    Our mayor is a fan of the OWS folks. He acted because lives were at risk. Essentially, #occupypdx camp turned into a haven for thieves to hide there. Drug users also were also using it as well as the homeless.

    I read in USA Today about 10 days ago that Zicotti Park had the same problem with people who might be shady, criminal?, just showed up & stayed & didn’t interact. The original occupiers stayed on one side & kept one eye open & the strangers stayed on the other side.

    I have nothing against the protestors personally, but since I’m a Mom I worry a lot. It bothers me they’re spending the night with new strangers who might hurt them. I would feel better if they didn’t spend the nite or some of them stayed awake to keep watch.

    Also, some of them make me nervous when the Police are trying to move them b/c they’ve pushed back on the billy clubs or pushed on the Officer deliberately. I wish they would collapse into a sitting position & stay sitting if they don’t want to move. Cops will shoot people who push them. It happened in the 60’s & it happens today too often. It’s just Mom stuff really……I don’t want anyone killed or crippled for life, etc. I worry a lot abt people.

    Michael Moore I’m simply furious with b/c everything is always Obama’s fault with him. Just sick of him stabbing O in the back and making crap up. I’ve seen him on different shows & its just Obama Derangement Syndrome. He started all this on Twitter last night with a tweet. However, this anger does not transfer to the protestors themselves. I don’t want someone injured by police. They are young & don’t seem to grasp the danger involved sometime. That is all.

    Thanks, Cain. I’ll listen to the podcast later tonite.

  202. 202
    vernon says:

    @David Koch: That’s pretty insane. Bush invaded a country; Digby posted an article.

    The fact is there IS plenty of reason to suspect a coordinated crackdown; if that reflects badly on POTUS you all can cry me a river (which I’m sure you will). It’s starting to look like reality has a marked anti-Obama bias.

  203. 203
    Someguy says:

    @golemtulpa:

    That “DHS threat assessment” cited by Digby is actually a Pittsburgh Emergency Management threat assessment. Pittsburgh/DHS – same thing. Close enough anyhow.

    As for uniformed federal cops showing up at demonstrations… if you demonstrate at a federal building, or on a military base, either uniformed cops of one agency or another will be present, with Justice, the Department of Interior (Park Police), Defense, and the Capitol Police being represented, and DHS’s Federal Protective Service covering the lions share of GSA-provided buildings. State & local cops don’t have legal authority on federal property so executive branch agencies, Congress and parts of the judiciary (e.g. Supreme Court) all have their own little police forces. They do renta cop duties like building security, but then act basically the same as state and local cops if something goes down on the property they patrol.

  204. 204
    ABL says:

    @digby:

    I didn’t vouch for what he said, merely posted it as part of a series of posts I’ve done wondering whether or not the the DHS is working with police forces appropriately.

    OK… so then why the alarmist blog post title: “Oh. Homeland security AND the FBI”?

    And what’s all this, then?

    I’m not surprised by this, but I am curious as to how they are going to justify the federal government’s interest if this turns out to be true? (It will eventually come out if it’s true.) If there’s coordination of some kind, as seems fairly obvious, what’s the legal foundation for it?

    As for this:

    Honestly, this reflexive slapping down by the president’s supporters of people who dare to even criticize the government police agencies or military is kind of frightening.

    You’re wrong. What I am slapping down is those who rumormonger and insinuate sinister motives with no basis. Face it, there was no basis for your post. It was alarmist, I have no doubt you intended it to be so, and judging by the comments to your post, it served its purpose.

  205. 205
    Odie Hugh Manatee says:

    @ABL:

    I’m not Emeril but BAM! ;)

  206. 206
    amused says:

    Wait a minute. Is this the same digby who often chided the talking heads about the “It’s out there” gambit? Man. That’s just sad.

  207. 207
    mr. whipple says:

    Wait a minute. Is this the same digby who often chided the talking heads about the “It’s out there” gambit? Man. That’s just sad

    Yes.

  208. 208
    AxelFoley says:

    @digby:

    Keep digging deeper and deeper.

    It’s so just like you liberals–hate to admit when you fucked up, so you keep digging.

    Matter of fact, you have that in common with conservatives. You fuckers deserve one another.

  209. 209
    AxelFoley says:

    @Baron Jrod of Keeblershire:

    Uh, Michael Moore and Keith Olbermann are telling people they shouldn’t vote? You got a link for either of those claims?
    I know that Olbermann once said that he doesn’t vote so he can remain objective, which I think is kinda bullshit, but I’ve never heard of him saying anyone else should abstain.
    Or is this just a case of simple logic, where those two men are bad, and not voting is also bad, and since we all know bad people like bad things, well…

    Uh, Michael Moore and Keith Olbermann have major influence among impressionable liberals.

    Keith’s going around complaining about government, but the motherfucka doesn’t even vote, so he can’t say jack shit.

    And that bastard Moore has a tendency to undermine Dems with his support of assholes like Ralph Nader. Y’know, the asswipe who only shows up every four years to screw up elections for Dems and gave us George Bush.

    Yeah, those two pricks. Fuck them, and fuck anyone who supports them.

  210. 210
    Joey Giraud says:

    Oh what fun it must be to a Republican ratfucker, to run around the liberal blogs pretending to be a liberal and stirring up shit.

    I think Obama has a lot of Bush appointees in “his” administration sabotaging him. I’ve got plenty to back this up.

    And Obama’s just too dignified to complain about it.

    And that’s not even assuming Obama is a “good guy.”

  211. 211

    “CBS news is reporting more information on coordination prior to the recent raids. Specifically, two conference calls included officials from 40 cities across the US and were organized by a D.C. think-tank named the “Police Executive Research Forum” (PERF). The calls took place on Oct. 11 and Nov. 4th:

    While riot police sweeping through tent cities in Portland, Ore., Oakland, Calif. and New York City over the last several days may suggest a coordinated effort, authorities and a group that organized the calls say they were a coincidence.
    “It was completely spontaneous,” said Chuck Wexler, director of the Police Executive Research Forum, a national police group that organized calls on Oct. 11 and Nov. 4.”

    “What CBS does not mention is that Wexler, Executive Director of PERF, serves on The Department of Homeland Security’s Homeland Security Advisory Council.”

    http://amovingworld.blogspot.c.....nt-in.html

    Maybe somebody should simply ask DOJ/DHS if they were involved.

  212. 212
    Jody says:

    Actually, I’m wondering why people think it so absurd that the federal government would use all the departments at its disposal to try and shut down a national movement.

    But let’s all troll each other and call one another fat.

    Sigh.

Comments are closed.