Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
That's a different situation. We were living under the tyranny of a foreign power, that's not what we have here. We have a system of government that allows citizens to change their government legally, through the voting process. There's no reason to threaten an armed revolt, because you didn't get your way.And that proves my point.
You would have informed on the Revolutionaries to King George. Undeniably.
I've satisfied that burden! I've provided testimony from the people who were there. Once I've done that, the burden of proof shifts to the objector, to prove their objection has merit. All you've provided, are ad hominem attacks on the sources I used, which is not a valid rebuttal.I have never said you were lying. Further, I am not the one who has the burden to prove a fact, you do. Beyond that your position is nothing more than talk.
So cut the foreplay and pony up the evidence; otherwise, apologize to this forum, for wasting its bandwidth.
Oh...you think it's bad because you LIKE the current flavor of tyranny.That's a different situation. We were living under the tyranny of a foreign power, that's not what we have here. We have a system of government that allows citizens to change their government legally, through the voting process. There's no reason to threaten an armed revolt, because you didn't get your way.And that proves my point.
You would have informed on the Revolutionaries to King George. Undeniably.
You attacked the source of my citation! That's an ad hominem attack. In addition, your inferring what they said should automatically dismissed, then list bias and hearsay as the reason. I'm sorry, but eye-witness testimony is allowed in court. And "hearsay", is someone in the third person recounting the events someone else experienced. My sources are from 1st person testimony and there's nothing more credible than that. Just because you don't like what they're saying, doesn't mean its bullshit.porkloin, that "testimony" is nothing more than hearsay from very biased and interested parties. I have attacked no one, what I have done was disagree with you and ask for sources. You have failed to establish your position.
As a matter of fact, I don't. Which I've stated on many occasions.Oh...you think it's bad because you LIKE the current flavor of tyranny.
You attacked the source of my citation! That's an ad hominem attack. In addition, your inferring what they said should automatically dismissed, then list bias and hearsay as the reason. I'm sorry, but eye-witness testimony is allowed in court. And "hearsay", is someone in the third person recounting the events someone else experienced. My sources are from 1st person testimony and there's nothing more credible than that. Just because you don't like what they're saying, doesn't mean its bullshit.porkloin, that "testimony" is nothing more than hearsay from very biased and interested parties. I have attacked no one, what I have done was disagree with you and ask for sources. You have failed to establish your position.
Then why do you keep supporting it, and opposing those who point it out?As a matter of fact, I don't. Which I've stated on many occasions.Oh...you think it's bad because you LIKE the current flavor of tyranny.
And you seem to keep forgetting I have, on many occasions.
What you say I'm supporting and what you are pointing out, are two different things.Then why do you keep supporting it, and opposing those who point it out?
You're not even qualified to draw that conclusion, without evidence to the contrary. You need a reason for your objection. And a belief, is not a reason, just an opinion.The standard is much less on an internet forum than a courtroom, in spite of that, what you presented does not establish that "fact" which you state is true.
You're not even qualified to draw that conclusion, without evidence to the contrary. You need a reason for your objection. And a belief, is not a reason, just an opinion.The standard is much less on an internet forum than a courtroom, in spite of that, what you presented does not establish that "fact" which you state is true.
First person accounts of what happened are definately proven facts! In order for you to claim they are not, would require someone else who was there, saying the opposite.
OWS forgot one basic tenet.
If you want to be taken seriously, then act like it.
They paraded around like a bunch of hobos. Take a shower, get a shave, put on some clean clothes and I'll listen.
MLK KNEW he had to convince White America of the worthiness of his fight, or nothing of any consequence would change Carrying guns and screaming 'Kill Whitey" would have had the opposite effect. So they went the route of non-violence and made the southern crackers look like the bad guys. It worked.
OWS looked like a bunch of dirty losers, and without the support of the bulk of the middle class, was doomed from the get-go.
Doesn't matter what the government has "classified" them as. Most of America dismissed them very quickly.
Their message is sound (money has too much power), but it was delivered improperly.
Don't have too!This is not one of these deals where one asks if a tree falls in a forest and no one is there does it make a sound,
You have provided nothing that supports the stories told by those giving "testimony".
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
Don't have too!This is not one of these deals where one asks if a tree falls in a forest and no one is there does it make a sound,
You have provided nothing that supports the stories told by those giving "testimony".
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
The "testimony", IS THE SUPPORT! If you feel there is reason not to believe it, you have to show what that reason is. Simply believing it isn't true, is not a valid rebuttal.
Were you similarly outraged when Christian veteran gun-owning, small-government-supporting conservatives were labeled "potential domestic terrorists" by this Administration?Obama's not a liberal!That's what happens when radicalized liberals are "elected" to office.
He doesn't have liberal policies and there's not a single liberal in his Cabinet!
You're fuckin' nuts! And your lack of outrage on this issue, shows you're also anti-American.
No?
Then feel free to eat shit.
Were you similarly outraged when Christian veteran gun-owning, small-government-supporting conservatives were labeled "potential domestic terrorists" by this Administration?Obama's not a liberal!
He doesn't have liberal policies and there's not a single liberal in his Cabinet!
You're fuckin' nuts! And your lack of outrage on this issue, shows you're also anti-American.
No?
Then feel free to eat shit.
Anyone who goes against obama is going to be considered a terrorist. The liberals are insane and, unfortunately, are running the country into the ground right now. Your point is???
Were you similarly outraged when Christian veteran gun-owning, small-government-supporting conservatives were labeled "potential domestic terrorists" by this Administration?
No?
Then feel free to eat shit.
Anyone who goes against obama is going to be considered a terrorist. The liberals are insane and, unfortunately, are running the country into the ground right now. Your point is???
Explain something to me please?
How can the country be going down the tubes because of "liberal or republican" policies, when all the policies are being created by wall street and multi national corporate interests. Wall Street does not care about democrats and republicans since they donated to both Obama and Romney.
They lost Romney but still have their old boy Obama in.
You think it just a coincidence that their donors are doing so well?
OWS was what? I don't remember.FOIA documents "reveal that from its inception, the FBI treated the Occupy movement as a potential criminal and terrorist threat."
It did so "even though the agency acknowledges in documents that organizers explicitly called for peaceful protest and did 'not condone the use of violence' at occupy protests."
FBI surveillance is standard practice. PCJF called information received "just the tip of the iceberg." It reflects longstanding policy.
It treats peaceful protests against massive financial fraud and related malfeasance as "potential criminal and terrorist activity."
Documents show FBI, Homeland Security, and other federal agencies function "as de facto intelligence arm(s) of Wall Street and corporate America."
Heavily redacted material shows federal authorities concealed more than they revealed. PCJF is appealing for full disclosure.
What's known divulges police state harshness. In October 2011, Obama lied. Doing so comes easy to him.
He alleged OWS support. He told ABC News:
"The most important thing we can do right now is those of us in leadership letting people know that we understand their struggles and we are on their side, and that we want to set up a system in which hard work, responsibility, doing what you're supposed to do, is rewarded."
"And that people who are irresponsible, who are reckless, who don't feel a sense of obligation to their communities and their companies and their workers that those folks aren't rewarded."
His key words were "we are on their side."
At the same time, FBI, Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and Secret Service agents were working cooperatively with state and local authorities.
They still do. They actively engage in infiltrating, disrupting, subverting, and destroying OWS in cities and communities nationwide.
Peaceful protests, marches, public speeches, picketing, sit-ins, camp-outs, leafleting, banner and placard displays, as well as other constitutionally protected activities are targeted.
Various Supreme Court cases affirmed that First Amendment protections are wide-ranging. They're not limited to speech and assembly. They include conduct intended to convey vital messages.
OWS activists put their bodies on the line for justice. They want Wall Street crooks held accountable. They're criminalized for doing the right thing.
It bears repeating. Tyranny in America approaches full-blown. Freedom hangs by a thread. Activism is called terrorism. Constitutional protections are null and void.
Some of America's best are called enemies of the state. Indefinite detentions threaten them. So does military tribunal justice. Perhaps targeted assassinations come next.
Police state harshness reflects official policy. No one anywhere is safe. Rogue governance takes precedence.
Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at [email protected].
His new book is titled "How Wall Street Fleeces America: Privatized Banking, Government Collusion and Class War"
HOW WALL STREET FLEECES AMERICA: Privatized Banking, Government Collusion and Class War
Visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening.
Progressive Radio News Hour
There's far more going on with corruption besides Wall Street....but granted, they are a major contributor. No coincidence at all that the campaign donors are doing well....that's always the case. Right now the liberals have the upper hand....everyone knows this....and because obama is in the WH, people can get away with all kinds of crazy shit.
