Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff
by MayDay » Wed Apr 04, 2012 2:08 pm
by MayDay » Wed Apr 04, 2012 2:15 pm
by MayDay » Wed Apr 04, 2012 3:18 pm
"by 8bitagent » Wed Apr 04, 2012 3:36 pm
MayDay wrote:"Not sure where the reptile no planers thing came from"
You're the one who keeps bringing those things up, aren't you? 8bit, your shtick is getting old and lame. Do you realize that those of us who have continually perused this forum over the years can see right through you? When will 8bit mention David Icke or Alex Jones next??!! Who knows?
by Wombaticus Rex » Wed Apr 04, 2012 3:38 pm
Meet the #Occupy Candidates
When Walid Hakim helped convince a judge that police wrongfully evicted him and other Occupy Columbia protesters from the South Carolina statehouse grounds in November, a prominent local blogger declared that the local movement finally had “a leader.” Occupy Columbia was miffed. “This is NOT the case!” the group fumed in a statement. “Occupy Columbia is and always will be a LEADERLESS movement. Contact them and DEMAND a rewrite!!!”
Hakim supported the angry declaration, which is why it’s a surprise that he’s now running for a seat in the very statehouse he occupied last year. For any other political movement, running a candidate for office would be a natural progression. But this is Occupy, which touts its reflexive opposition to authority and hierarchy. And yet, as the movement matures some of its brightest activists are turning their ambitions to the very institutions they set out to oppose. “In order to change the system, we have to change it from within,” says Hakim, who announced his run last Friday.
He is one of the first candidates from the Occupy movement, joining a small handful of others who camped out in New York City’s Zuccotti Park and town squares across the country. Most notably, there’s Nathan Kleinman, a former Democratic political operative running for Congress in Pennsylvania, and former MoveOn.org organzier Ilya Sheyman, who ran for a congressional seat in Illinois but lost last week. And there will likely be many more soon. The Candidate Project, a collaboration between two progressive grass-roots organizations, has the ambitious goal of recruiting 500,000 progressive candidates for local elections, many of whom align themselves with Occupy. A spokesperson says they’re well on their way.
In many ways, Hakim is an ideal candidate from the Occupy movement. A former Marine from a long line of military men, he’s articulate and savvy, with long wavy hair and a blue blazer over a collarless shirt. While he’s not exactly a political creature, Hakim is experienced — serving as vice chairman of a state-empaneled community relations board — and pragmatic in a way that’s refreshing from a movement that can feel shrill.
The first vote Hakim cast was for Republican George H.W. Bush in 1992, and he later served as the executive director of the South Carolina Libertarian Party — that is, until he resigned and publicly rebuked the party. People had told him libertarians didn’t care about the poor, and after ruminating on the policy goals he was pushing, he couldn’t help but agree. He joined Occupy Columbia on day one and was arrested with 18 others during the eviction — substantial movement bona fides.
“Occupy is not left or right, it is American, it is human rights,” Hakim told Salon. But it’s not clear if Occupy wants a candidate, no matter how qualified.
“Should Occupy get involved in electoral politics?” That was the question that kicked off a panel on the issue held Tuesday in Washington, part of a week-long national Occupy forum. The resounding answer from the small group of activists gathered at the Quaker Meeting House: “No.” “I don’t see any opportunity inside electoral politics,” said activist Kevin Zeese.
Mark Naison, a professor at Fordham University who both studies and participates in the Occupy movement, agrees. “The electoral process is very, very vulnerable to being corrupted by the power of big money,” he told Salon in a telephone interview. “So, for the moment, you have a better chance of changing things from the outside.”
Not surprisingly, some of Hakim’s strongest supporters are conflicted about his candidacy’s meaning to the Occupy movement. Occupy Columbia organizer Melissa Harmon, who is involved in Hakim’s campaign and says she thinks he “would do an amazing job,” said she hopes electoral politics is “not the future of Occupy.” “This system that we’re working within is corrupt to the point that it will only corrupt individuals that go into it.”
Asked if she thought Hakim himself would ultimately be corrupted, she paused, hesitantly, before saying, “I think all politicians will, because I think they don’t have a choice … They have to run for office. To run for office, you have to raise money.” She continued, “With time, I think that that does change people.”
Hakim, clearly, has a different view. “This is just another medium [for change],” he says, though he’s quick to note, “I’m not running as an Occupy candidate. I want to make that very clear.” In standard political speak, he explains that he wants to represent all his potential constituents.
Indeed, Hakim’s platform, while perhaps radically progressive by South Carolina standards, is hardly the kind of fundamental transformation that many Occupiers hope for. His main goals are to expand services for veterans — many of whom he noticed appearing among the homeless that his encampment fed — provide state funding for two years of college to all residents, and make the tax system more fair. Laudable progressive goals, but not revolution.
Sheyman, took a similar approach in Illinois. He announced his campaign before the Occupy movement began and ran in the vein of Howard Dean in 2004: an insurgent who would nonetheless have worked within the system. It wasn’t enough, however, to boost him over the establishment pick, Brad Schneider, in last week’s Democratic primary. Kleinman, whose campaign grew out of Occupy, ran into similar trouble in Pennsylvania. He didn’t make the ballot after he was unable to collect enough signatures and is now running as a write-in candidate.
And therein lies the problem. To be a part of the political system means forgoing overthrowing the system and playing by its rules. It means accepting the value of incrementalism and appealing to moderates — two things that are mutually exclusive with radical revolution.
Perhaps, a little over a year after he was kicked off the statehouse grounds by the wrong end of a billy club, Hakim will have a seat in the statehouse and look out at the Occupy movement outside, keeping him honest.
by MayDay » Wed Apr 04, 2012 3:47 pm
8bitagent wrote:MayDay wrote:"Not sure where the reptile no planers thing came from"
You're the one who keeps bringing those things up, aren't you? 8bit, your shtick is getting old and lame. Do you realize that those of us who have continually perused this forum over the years can see right through you? When will 8bit mention David Icke or Alex Jones next??!! Who knows?
You really think I want a bunch of troofer nerds with "Bush blew up WTC7, WAKE UP SHEEPLE" involved in Occupy? I was just commenting in my first post how ironic it is Zuccoti park is a few blocks from the former ground zero and simply wondering if the magnitude of all that ever entered the conversation. I was specifically talking to Lupercal about what the objective of Oakland Occupy is. Ive already said Occupy is a chapter by chapter basis, with all sorts of differing localized goals.
And I only said the "2012 occupy" because 2012 Countdown was saying I believe there should be "No Planer" Occupiers...then again most of 9/11 "Truth"(tm) in my view isnt far removed from no plane nonsense
by 8bitagent » Wed Apr 04, 2012 3:49 pm
by MayDay » Wed Apr 04, 2012 3:51 pm
8bitagent wrote:"
“Occupy is not left or right, it is American, it is human rights,” Hakim told Salon. But it’s not clear if Occupy wants a candidate, no matter how qualified."
See I like that. I don't want Occupy to be some DNC tool come this Fall. (Though I fear some of it will end up like that) People think in terms of the General 4 year election,
but it's really about specific local, congressional district and other elections that people definitely have a lot of sway and power in. So it's good to see some Occupy chapters
getting behind or even putting in their own horses
by 2012 Countdown » Wed Apr 04, 2012 3:52 pm
by 8bitagent » Wed Apr 04, 2012 3:55 pm
MayDay wrote:8bitagent wrote:MayDay wrote:"Not sure where the reptile no planers thing came from"
You're the one who keeps bringing those things up, aren't you? 8bit, your shtick is getting old and lame. Do you realize that those of us who have continually perused this forum over the years can see right through you? When will 8bit mention David Icke or Alex Jones next??!! Who knows?
You really think I want a bunch of troofer nerds with "Bush blew up WTC7, WAKE UP SHEEPLE" involved in Occupy? I was just commenting in my first post how ironic it is Zuccoti park is a few blocks from the former ground zero and simply wondering if the magnitude of all that ever entered the conversation. I was specifically talking to Lupercal about what the objective of Oakland Occupy is. Ive already said Occupy is a chapter by chapter basis, with all sorts of differing localized goals.
And I only said the "2012 occupy" because 2012 Countdown was saying I believe there should be "No Planer" Occupiers...then again most of 9/11 "Truth"(tm) in my view isnt far removed from no plane nonsense
Nice to meet you, 8bit. I freely admit that my statement has more to do with long term observation of your posts than with the matter presently at hand. Perhaps we could 'agree to disagree', and (mostly) ignore each other from here on out rather that take this any further into taboo territory?
by 8bitagent » Wed Apr 04, 2012 3:58 pm
2012 Countdown wrote:8bit, Your complete lack of knowing what is going on ( and it is obvious to those who have been following occupy) has never stopped you from offering a strong cavilier opinion. Have at it. btw, you missed my point, but I have no inclination to correct. Again, have at it.
by MayDay » Wed Apr 04, 2012 4:16 pm
8bitagent wrote:MayDay wrote:8bitagent wrote:MayDay wrote:"Not sure where the reptile no planers thing came from"
You're the one who keeps bringing those things up, aren't you? 8bit, your shtick is getting old and lame. Do you realize that those of us who have continually perused this forum over the years can see right through you? When will 8bit mention David Icke or Alex Jones next??!! Who knows?
You really think I want a bunch of troofer nerds with "Bush blew up WTC7, WAKE UP SHEEPLE" involved in Occupy? I was just commenting in my first post how ironic it is Zuccoti park is a few blocks from the former ground zero and simply wondering if the magnitude of all that ever entered the conversation. I was specifically talking to Lupercal about what the objective of Oakland Occupy is. Ive already said Occupy is a chapter by chapter basis, with all sorts of differing localized goals.
And I only said the "2012 occupy" because 2012 Countdown was saying I believe there should be "No Planer" Occupiers...then again most of 9/11 "Truth"(tm) in my view isnt far removed from no plane nonsense
Nice to meet you, 8bit. I freely admit that my statement has more to do with long term observation of your posts than with the matter presently at hand. Perhaps we could 'agree to disagree', and (mostly) ignore each other from here on out rather that take this any further into taboo territory?
I'll take your word that you're a longer time poster. I agree my writings are a bit scattershot at times, as there's a lot of multiple angles it feels like depending on a story with commenting on.
But I've tempered my original reservations on the Occupy movement from last summer/early fall when I began to see it acting as a springboard for localized government or specific local concerns people have. Seeing footage of Michael Moores speech at several recent Occupy gatherings I felt was rather moving. Anyways I do admit my posting style is a bit over the top, but it's freeing to see a forum that embraces outside thought. Most the right wing or left wing forums or discussion areas I've seen have a very controlled way of group think.
It's like Hugh...I think his material even trumps the bizarre nature of some of my posts, but I think his heart is squarely in the right place and I like all different sort of food for thought.
You mentioned David Icke...there's times when he sounds like he has an overall good, broader message...then times when you're wondering what he's really trying to say. Alex Jones comes off like an abusive step father who berates people into agreeing with him, even he's proven flat out wrong.
by Bruce Dazzling » Wed Apr 04, 2012 4:22 pm
MayDay wrote:You're the one who keeps bringing those things up, aren't you? 8bit, your shtick is getting old and lame. Do you realize that those of us who have continually perused this forum over the years can see right through you? When will 8bit mention David Icke or Alex Jones next??!! Who knows?
MayDay wrote:Nice to meet you, 8bit. I freely admit that my statement has more to do with long term observation of your posts than with the matter presently at hand. Perhaps we could 'agree to disagree', and (mostly) ignore each other from here on out rather that take this any further into taboo territory?
MayDay wrote:8bitagent wrote:"
“Occupy is not left or right, it is American, it is human rights,” Hakim told Salon. But it’s not clear if Occupy wants a candidate, no matter how qualified."
See I like that. I don't want Occupy to be some DNC tool come this Fall. (Though I fear some of it will end up like that) People think in terms of the General 4 year election,
but it's really about specific local, congressional district and other elections that people definitely have a lot of sway and power in. So it's good to see some Occupy chapters
getting behind or even putting in their own horses
Blah, blah, blah, Occupy the Machine.
MayDay wrote:I didn't say I was a longtime poster. I said I was a long time observer. Your ability to observe whats going on in the present moment is once again called in to question.
by Wombaticus Rex » Wed Apr 04, 2012 4:30 pm
The Occupy Movement: Rising Anarchy
April 03, 2012
By: Ian Oxnevad
The Occupy movement presents a challenge to police and policymakers both in the United States and abroad. Occupy, the now-worldwide movement spawned by Occupy Wall Street, serves as a 21st century anarchist movement the likes of which has not been seen since WWI.
So far, Occupy protests in the United States exhibit a mostly peaceful nature. However, certain elements within Occupy that have been seen both here and abroad have the potential to inflict major damage to governments, people and the private sector. If not carefully monitored and mitigated, these elements pose a significant threat to modern democracies.
Modern anarchism traces back to mid-19th century leftist groups in Europe. Anarchists differ from Marxists in that Marxists believe the state must be seized and then used as a tool to achieve a “free” society. Conversely, anarchists believe that the “system,” including the state, must be dismantled entirely. After a complete systemic collapse, anarchists believe that a just and free society will organically emerge out of the chaos.
Immediately after it’s formation as an ideology, historical anarchists targeted a number of individuals and organizations both in the Americas and Europe. Anarchist tactics included the assassination of government officials, bombing police stations, public venues, mob violence and poisonings.
The most significant anarchist attack occurred in 1914 when the anarchist group, the Black Hand, murdered Archduke Ferdinand of the Austrian Empire. This attack sparked WWI, causing millions of deaths. In today’s politically unstable environment around the world, anarchist groups have the potential to cause a chain of events leading to similar carnage.
Today’s Occupy, with Occupy Wall Street as the informal flagship of the overall movement, has its intellectual origins in small groups of left-leaning academics and publications. Economically inspired protests around the world brought together a number of professors and other academics that hold an anarchist philosophy. In late 2011, a number of anarchist intellectuals and academics from the fields of sociology and anthropology joined the pre-existing protest movements from 2010.
Prior to the arrival of the anarchist academics, the global protests often had specific demands, revolved around single issues and targeted specific businesses and government agencies. Upon getting involved in the protests movements, academics and theorists began breathing anarchist philosophy into the protests and moving them towards a less specific leftist phenomenon.
Occupy Wall Street, while not the leadership group of the global Occupy movement, came into being through a caballing together of anarchist thinkers. Many of the Anarchist academics that now dominate the character of the Occupy movement also enjoy support from a number of left-leaning publications and magazines. Since the economic crash of 2008, many Leftist and Marxist periodicals began to call for action against banks, mortgage firms and governments.
But rather than propose economically practical solutions, these leftist publications catered to the most extreme fringe elements. These publications, combined with active involvement from anarchist academics, provided the perfect storm for creating the current Occupy movement.
Occupy’s decision-making revolves around the idea of “consensus” as a way of determining what direction the movement should take. Consensus is reached through “general assembly” meetings where there is no official leadership, and rather follows a “horizontal” model as opposed to a “vertical model.” These general assembly meetings determine what actions the specific Occupy movement will take, and include decisions such as when and where marches will occur, and what business or government entity will be targeted.
So far, most Occupy protests have been peaceful, despite taking a heavy financial toll on the cities where they occur. However, many Occupy groups have violent sub-groups within them that are responsible for most of the violence that has happened. These violent sub-groups are called the “Black Bloc.” The Black Bloc originated as a tactic used by anarchist groups in Germany in the early 1980s. Black Bloc members can usually be identified by the way they obscure their faces and the all-black clothing they wear.
Serving as the violent DNA inside an otherwise peaceful modern movement, the Black Bloc represents the same violent anarchist ideology that triggered WWI. Black Bloc groups inside Occupy have caused significant damage in cities in Europe.
Greece, for example, which is struggling with crushing debt and a 25 percent unemployment rate, has seen significant violence from Black Bloc members. So far, Greek Black Bloc members have destroyed roughly 100 buildings through arson attacks and have confronted police with sophisticated unit-level tactics involving homemade shields, clubs, molotovs, rocks and the occasional low-grade improvised explosive device (IED).
Greece serves as an interesting example in that their Greek counterparts may have actually trained violent Black Bloc members in Italy, thus spreading the violence.
The Internet also has allowed for the sharing of ideas among the Occupy groups, and the Black Bloc inside them. Black Bloc members in Occupy Oakland have demonstrated some of the same sophisticated violence against the police that their counterparts used against law enforcement in Greece and Rome.
Organized use of shields, unit tactics and molotovs have allowed the Black Bloc in Oakland to cause considerable damage to Oakland, and serious injuries to officers in the Oakland Police Department (OPD).
What is most disturbing is that members from Occupy Oakland have photographed OPD officers, and compiled enough information on the officers to cause cyberattacks targeting the officers.
In conclusion, Occupy as a movement poses a number of challenges to law enforcement, local governments and the democratic system as a whole. New approaches to confronting the violent elements inside Occupy are needed if the Black Bloc is to be prevented from radicalizing the rest of the movement.
Approaches more often used by intelligence agencies are needed to confront this threat. The creative use of intelligence officers, either developed internally or borrowed from the private sector, can afford police agencies the speed, knowledge and agility needed to counter these emerging threats and the chaos that they promote.
Ian Oxnevad is a security and intelligence consultant specializing in the Middle East and Counterterrorism who has both tactical and intelligence training. Oxnevad holds a degree in Arabic and a Master's Degree in National Security Studies from California State University San Bernardino. Contact him at, ian(at)chabotstrategies.com
by MayDay » Wed Apr 04, 2012 4:42 pm
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 94 guests
