Revealed: how the FBI coordinated the crackdown on Occupy

Discussion in 'News and Current Events' started by Quentinanon, Dec 31, 2012.

  1. Quentinanon Member

    • Like Like x 1
  2. anonymous612 Member

  3. rickybobby Member

    Wow. Just wow. Proof of our government law enforcement agencies colluding with the banks to break up peaceful protests of those banks. School administrations feeding information about their peacefully protesting students to the FBI. Thanks, Quentinanon for bringing this.

    FYI, here is the original story posted by the nonprofit organization that broke it, The Partnership for Civil Justice fund. I just went to their site and gave them a donation.
    • Like Like x 2
  4. rickybobby Member

    I think this deserves it's own thread. This is like 1968 all over again with government goonies colluding to break up peaceful, lawful protests. Chilling.
    • Agree Agree x 2
  5. Quentinanon Member

    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Like Like x 1
  6. rickybobby Member

  7. rickybobby Member

    This could just as easily read

  8. Quentin,

    Wake up & smell the roses you silly cunt! The FBI are all over everything [including this shitty site], its there job...COLLECTING INTELLIGENCE??? Which is something you lack in spades.

    Get out & protest in front of a church for fucks sake...DO SOMETHING USEFULL FOR ONCE IN YOU PATHETIC LIFE CUNT!!
    • Dislike Dislike x 1
    • Dumb Dumb x 1
  9. rickybobby Member

    To me, this is not an Occupy issue; this is an alarming civil liberties issue. When we lose the right to peacefully protest, we are toast. OUR OWN SWORN PUBLIC SERVANTS squashed peaceful protests at the behest of private companies. Our PULIC UNIVERSITIES gave information on their students to law enforcement so that information could be used against them. Anybody remember Kent State???? Innocent college kids shot for protesting?
    • Agree Agree x 4
  10. PresidentShaw Member

    I like how everyone acts surprised
    • Agree Agree x 1
  11. rickybobby Member

    Sadly true.
  12. Quentinanon Member

    Is this Vad?

  13. PresidentShaw Member

    Hell, I hate those annoying OWS faggots, but this is way too orwellian for me. Even if they are a bunch of dirty hippies crybabies, they have a right to not be oppressed like anyone else.
    • Agree Agree x 4
  14. raboon Member

    • Funny Funny x 1
  15. anonymous612 Member

    I'm sorry, who got killed by the National Guard during Occupy Wallstreet?
  16. Anonymous Member

    I don't think anyone, a couple of hundred were just beaten, gassed or arrested.
    No deaths AFAIK.
  17. Anonymous Member

    At taxpayer expense. I can't even imagine how much all of those agencies collaborating cost.
    • Agree Agree x 2
  18. rickybobby Member

    No, law enforcement used tear gas instead. Maybe there were a few lessons they took from Kent State; this time they just non lethally gassed the peacefully protesting students. Maybe next time they will only use a taser.
  19. grebe Member

    Centralized data storage of zillions of phone calls, emails, and financial transactions is creepy. But how is the presumed data mining on all of us actually supposed work?

    Can you imagine having to listen to some guy's every phone call because he might be linked to a group of disgruntled students who might one day do something to The Man? Oy, worse than having to look at dozens of baby pics on Facebook.

    Law enforcement needs probable cause to focus their efforts --not just for our sake but for their own. Too many wild goose chases will drive them nuts with boredom.

    Remember the Strategic Defense Initiative aka Starwars or the plan to shoot ICBMS out of the sky before they hit our cities? Physicists said it was impossible. But we invested in it anyway. I think we liked the idea of solving the crazy Russians with nukes problem so much we were willing to overlook the plausibility issue.

    Maybe right now there are people pitching a similarly beautiful idea to the higher ups in Homeland Security: If we have piles of info on everyone, we can sort the bad from the good before we place anyone in a position of trust.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  20. grebe Member

    There's an important difference between Scientology and the banks: we, the people, insure the banks when they suffer losses and go into the red.

    But the Chamber of Commerce... I dunno what is up with them. I think of our local one as a way for business people to network. I don't know why the national organization crawled into bed with HB Gary and the FBI. Maybe it's those damn billionaire loonies we seem to have now, like the Koch brothers and those Crossroads GPS people.

    We the people need to figure out how to do the checks and balances thing to the billionaires. Too much power in one place.
    • Agree Agree x 2
  21. lulzgasm Member

    We've all suspected that a ratcheted up police state was in the works. What happened with Occupy proved just how far along they are on that. The next step will likely be a ban on firearms via executive order - oh wait...

    As much as I agree with the core philosophy behind OCW (removing corporate personhood, holding the big banks accountable), my lefty /b/ros need to realize that if there hadn't been a pro-gun fella' named Malcolm X around to scare the shit out of the government, MLK likely would not have been anywhere near as successful (same goes for Ghandi since the British knew that there were armed militias in the country who agreed with him).

    If a blanket gun ban does occur, future Occupy rallies will likely face more than just pepperspray. We may start seeing over here what we saw in the Middle East.
    • Agree Agree x 2
  22. cafanon Member

    DOX plz? As far as I have read, there is no firearms ban in any of the recent executive orders. Perhaps I misunderstand your implication. I hate Obama's record on civil liberties as much as the next guy who has been paying attention...but hold him accountable for what he's done, not paranoid speculation.

    But there is a fair point that many on the liberal/democratic side of things ignore: if you disarm civilians without disarming our almost para-military modern police are asking for trouble. Every gun ban should also apply to police, just saying.
  23. Anonymous Member

    lurk moar
  24. Anonymous Member

    Yes I said yes I will

    • Winner Winner x 1
  25. Quentinanon Member

    I found this perspective on Obama's gun agenda interesting:

    • Agree Agree x 1
  26. Anonymous Member

    Unusually cultured for WWP.

    • Funny Funny x 1
  27. Anonymous Member

    Scaremongering based on........well, nothing.
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Funny Funny x 1
  28. lulzgasm Member

    Been living in a cave for the past 13 years? Or just that ignorant of 20th Century history? Or both?
    • Funny Funny x 1
  29. Anonymous Member

    No, the point is no one is going for a blanket ban on guns, it's the same old shite from the gun lobby, omg! They want to ban all guns! No, just fucking no.
  30. Nothing wrong in my eyes with questioning things. Well trained people with guns are the last line of defense against a government that wants to be able to kill its own citizens.
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  31. Anonymous Member

    Gun control. Is. OK.
    Pay no attention to the NRA-man behind the curtain.
    • Dumb Dumb x 1
  32. Anonymous Member

    Gun control = hitting what you aim at.
    Unlike the LAPD, who recently are spraying bullets in a most indiscriminate manner.
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Like Like x 1
  33. Anonymous Member

    Hitting what you aim at= mandatory training, trigger locks so your 4 year old doesn't kill her 3 year old cousin and a background check to be sure =hitting what you aim at is not Gabby and the kid in the crowd.
    • Like Like x 1
  34. Anonymous Member

    that's training, not control. I expect to learn how to use my tools before using them. That doesn't require a government.
  35. Anonymous Member

    Beg to differ. If everyone was well intentioned and careful we would not need any laws ever. If you are a libertarian your argument makes perfect sense. Libertarians are the optimists of ideologues.
  36. Anonymous Member

    If you think governments are there to protect us, then you should consider the LAPD these past few days. Now that is a truly scary example of the State controlling weaponry.
    You want to give them more control?
    I beg to differ.

    At least if a private citizen goes batshit we can hope that LEO will handle the problem. When the LAPD goes apeshit, the law protects the killers, not the victims.

    It really doesn't matter what ideology you are, when cops fire 50 bullets into a car that is no way matches the description of the vehicle they are searching for they have betrayed everything they stand for as well as showing themselves to have incredibly poor fire discipline, so bad that at the very least they should be fired. I think they should do hard time;

    What are the odds of that happening?
  37. Anonymous Member

    Works much better than guns.
  38. Anonymous Member

    Don't worry, in the future, it will be a drone. They can do that doncha know. It's a fact.
  39. Anonymous Member

    And having well trained nut jobs with camps and huge amounts of weapons in forests is only going to end badly
  40. A.O.T.F Member

    Gun control = Self Control

    Re the LAPD incident - Bad Pressure - When an individual or individuals being in a judgemental and prejudicial environment and there is no competition, an individual may become depressed and unmotivated, losing self-control

Share This Page

Customize Theme Colors


Choose a color via Color picker or click the predefined style names!

Primary Color :

Secondary Color :
Predefined Skins