![]() |
|
Occupy Everywhere - Sept 17th - Day of Rage Against Wall Street and what it stands for! - Printable Version +- Deep Politics Forum (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora) +-- Forum: Deep Politics Forum (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/forum-1.html) +--- Forum: War on Workers and Labor Unions and Students (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/forum-30.html) +--- Thread: Occupy Everywhere - Sept 17th - Day of Rage Against Wall Street and what it stands for! (/thread-7624.html) Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
|
Occupy Everywhere - Sept 17th - Day of Rage Against Wall Street and what it stands for! - Peter Lemkin - 22-04-2013 The Manhattan District Attorney will not be prosecuting the NYPD cops who were caught on video pepper-spraying and punching Occupy Wall Street protesters, the Daily News reported. The DA's office made the announcement on Friday. The cops in question are two Deputy Inspectors, Anthony Bologna and Johnny Cardona. In video footage that surfaced in late 2011, Bologna was seen liberally pepper-spraying a seemingly calm crowd in Union Square on September 24, and Cardona was captured punching a protester named Felix Rivera-Pitre in the face in the Financial District on October 14. Bologna was reportedly docked 10 vacation days, and Cardona was cleared by the department. Manhattan DA spokeswoman Erin Duggan reportedly told the Daily News that additional evidence made it unclear that the officers' actions were unjustified. "After a thorough investigation … we cannot prove these allegations criminally beyond a reasonable doubt," Duggan said. Roy Richter, Captains Endowment Association President praised the decision, and hailed Cardona as "a true victim of the [Occupy Wall Street] fiasco." Cardona needed hip- and knee-replacement surgery due to injuries sustained during a demonstration. Richter also said that Bologna "did nothing that rises to the level of criminal conduct." Ron Kuby, an attorney who pressed for assault charges on behalf of victims in both cases, condemned the DA's decision, particularly in light of the office taking "almost 19 months to decide he would do nothing." "Despite the overwhelming proof on videotape, seen around the world, Cy Vance Jr. has shown that he will do nothing to disturb his cozy relationship with the police, even in the face of the clearest wrongdoing," Kuby complained. Occupy Everywhere - Sept 17th - Day of Rage Against Wall Street and what it stands for! - Peter Lemkin - 01-05-2013 No Charges for Police Commanders Over Actions During Protests By ANDY NEWMAN Deputy Inspector Anthony Bologna at an Occupy Wall Street protest in 2011.Charlie Grapski via YouTube Deputy Inspector Anthony Bologna at an Occupy Wall Street protest in 2011. During the Occupy Wall Street protests and their aftermath, they were the online-video symbols for those who said the New York Police Department was using excessive force: Deputy Inspector Anthony Bologna, in his white commander's shirt, walking up to a crowd of people and appearing to pepper-spray protesters at random. And Deputy Inspector Johnny Cardona, who appears to turn around a protester who is walking away and punch him in the face. Inspector Bologna was found by the Police Department to have violated internal guidelines and was docked 10 vacation days. Both men are facing civil lawsuits in which the city has declined to defend them. But there will be no criminal charges against either commander, the office of the Manhattan district attorney, Cyrus R. Vance Jr., said Friday afternoon. "The district attorney's office has concluded, after a thorough investigation, that we cannot prove these allegations criminally beyond a reasonable doubt," a spokeswoman, Erin M. Duggan, said in a brief statement. "We have informed the Police Department, the complainants, and the city of our decision." Video taken Sept. 24, 2011, showing Deputy Inspector Anthony Bologna pepper-spraying Occupy Wall Street protesters. The incident was examined by prosecutors. A former Manhattan prosecutor, Thomas J. Curran, said that it is harder to prosecute police personnel, particularly for conduct in a chaotic situation like a street demonstration, because using force "is part of their job." "The use of force would have to be a complete departure from any legitimate police activity," said Mr. Curran, who is now a defense lawyer. "You'd have to show an intent to assault, and you have to prove that beyond a reasonable doubt, as opposed to using force as allowed pursuant to police activity. It's very difficult to do." Kaylee Dedrick, one of the protesters pepper-sprayed by Inspector Bologna who has since sued him, said in a phone interview, "Part of me expected that he wouldn't be prosecuted, but I'm still pretty shocked, with all the evidence against him." Video taken Oct. 14, 2011, shows Deputy Inspector Johnny Cardona appearing to hit a protester. Her lawyer, Ron Kuby, who represents several protesters who are suing the inspectors, called the decision "cowardly and despicable." Prosecutors said they investigated possible assault charges against Inspector Bologna for his use of pepper spray in a protest on East 12th Street on Sept. 24, 2011. In a widely viewed video, Inspector Bologna can be seen striding up to a crowd penned behind orange mesh netting, discharging his pepper-spray canister with a sweeping motion, and walking away. In the episode involving Inspector Cardona, video shot from several angles on Oct. 14, 2011, appears to show the inspector tapping a man, Felix Rivera-Pitre, on the shoulder, and then, after Mr. Rivera-Pitre turns to look at Inspector Cardona and walks away, the inspector grabbing Mr. Rivera-Pitre and punching him in the face. The police said at the time that Mr. Rivera-Pitre had tried to elbow Inspector Cardona in the face beforehand and was being sought for attempted assault. Mr. Curran, who said he had spoken to prosecutors in Mr. Vance's office about the cases, said that in the case of Inspector Bologna, "he used the spray not specifically at any one person but at the crowd, in response to a situation that's getting out of control." The department guidelines Inspector Bologna was found to have violated had to do with using pepper spray in a nonarrest situation without sufficient training, which Mr. Curran said was an entirely different thing from committing assault. In the Cardona case, Mr. Curran said of Mr. Rivera-Pitre, "the evidence that the D.A. saw suggests that he had his arm cocked in a fist form before Cardona hit him." Roy Richter, president of the union to which both commanders belong, the Captains Endowment Association, said that declining to prosecute Inspector Bologna was "the right decision" and that Inspector Cardona had been injured by Occupy protesters and "is the true victim of the O.W.S. fiasco." Mr. Kuby said he would ask federal prosecutors to review the cases. Occupy Everywhere - Sept 17th - Day of Rage Against Wall Street and what it stands for! - Peter Lemkin - 06-05-2013 Just saw a 'hit piece' on OWS-2013 comparing them to a Communist Youth Movement, complete with photos of only those protesters [real or planted for the story] with signs, tables or T-shirts with Marx or Lenin on them, or other similar. Yes, a few OWS persons might be of that political bent, but by far most were not. Fine propaganda operation. Gee, I wonder who it serves......? http://www.google.com/url?sa=X&q=http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/347128/occupy-wall-street-2013-edition&ct=ga&cad=CAcQAhgAIAEoBDABOABA59CbjAVIAVgAYgVlbi1VUw&cd=vE01xXb-e64&usg=AFQjCNEQV-_dbOMzC4Ib73EgWM4AYze3RQ Occupy Everywhere - Sept 17th - Day of Rage Against Wall Street and what it stands for! - Magda Hassan - 06-05-2013 Just more divide and conquer tactics. They use it because it works and people are too uneducated to tell they are being played. Occupy Everywhere - Sept 17th - Day of Rage Against Wall Street and what it stands for! - Peter Lemkin - 18-05-2013 Hey Dawn, I'll bet they never taught this in Law School!.... Appeals Court Turns Away Twitter's Challenge To Subpoena by Wendy Davis, 8 hours ago An appellate court in New York has dismissed Twitter's appeal of a ruling requiring it to turn over the records of Occupy Wall Street protester Malcolm Harris, who was arrested for disorderlyconduct during a protest in 2011. The court said this week that questions about the legality of the ruling were "academic," because Twitter had already turned over the information.That's the type of ruling that makes advocates want to tear out their hair: The only reason Twitter complied with the subpoena was because the appellate court refused to stay a trial judge's order requiring the microblogging service to do so. Inother words, the court said Twitter had to disclose information, and then refused to hear Twitter's appeal because it did so. The case dates to the fall of 2011, when Harris was accused ofblocking traffic on the Brooklyn Bridge by walking in the area reserved for cars. The Manhattan District Attorney's office subpoenaed Harris's records from Twitter, in hopes of proving that his tweetswould show he deliberately went into the street. At that point, Harris's tweets were no longer publicly available. Harris challenged the subpoena, but Judge Matthew A. Sciarrino, Jr., ruledthat Harris lacked "standing" because the subpoena didn't require him to turn over any information. The ruling meant that only Twitter could challenge the subpoena. Twitter thenfiled its own challenge, arguing that prosecutors had no right to the information unless they obtained a search warrant. Sciarrino rejected Twitter's position and ruled that the prosecutor wasentitled to obtain the data with just a subpoena. Sciarrino ruled that federal Stored Communications Act only requires a subpoena -- and not a search warrant -- for data more than 180 daysold. Despite that law, one federal appeals panel has said that the constitutional ban on unreasonable searches and seizures nonetheless requires law enforcement to obtain search warrants beforeaccessing users' messages. In that case, the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the police must obtain a search warrant before they're entitled to email messages. That difference iscrucial: To obtain a search warrant, prosecutors must show there's probable cause to believe the material sought will yield evidence of a crime. But subpoenas only require showing that information isrelevant to an investigation. There's an ongoing effort on Capitol Hill to revise the Stored Communications Act to require search warrants for all digital messages, regardless of how longthey've been stored. In the meantime, the New York appellate court lost an opportunity to weigh in on the issue by punting. As for Harris, he pleaded guilty to disorderly conduct after his tweets were turned over.They reportedly showed that he heard the police tell protesters to stay out of the street. Read more: http://www.mediapost.com/publications/article/200595/appeals-court-turns-away-twitters-challenge-to-su.html#ixzz2TcTVy3H6 Occupy Everywhere - Sept 17th - Day of Rage Against Wall Street and what it stands for! - Peter Lemkin - 20-05-2013 The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has been engaged in massive surveillance of peaceful protesters which undermines protections enshrined in the First and Fourteenth Amendments.Two recent studies raise serious questions about the way the DHS has reacted to Occupy style protests. Let us not forget the primary mission of the DHS is to "safeguard the United States against terrorism."In August of 2012 the bipartisan think tank The Constitution Project issued a report on DHS counter-terrorism fusion centres. It notes how there are 77 active fusion centres in the US which are information sharing hubs where DHS, FBI and state/local law enforcement agencies can pool intelligence and coordinate their activities. This report investigates the use of counter-terrorism fusion centres and notes that many: "pose serious risks to civil liberties, including rights of free speech, free assembly, freedom of religion, racial and religious equality, privacy, and the right to be free from unnecessary government intrusion. Several fusion centers have issued bulletins that characterize a wide variety of religious and political groups as threats to national security. In some instances, state law enforcement agencies that funnel information to fusion centers have improperly monitored and infiltrated anti-war and environmental organizations. " The report further notes that many fusion centres are keeping files upon people without proper justification. Racial, political and religious profiling of ordinary citizens is being carried which undermines First Amendment rights to freedom of association, freedom of religious and political beliefs.Apparently, there are numerous examples of counter-terrorism fusion centres targeting a wide variety of different political groups for surveillance and infiltration. For example, between 2005-2007 the DHS and Maryland State Police spied upon and infiltrated anti-war, anti-death penalty and animal rights groups. Despite the fact that these were peaceful protesters who engaged in no criminal activity the surveillance went on for several years with many activists being designated terrorists. The report observes that: "All told, data characterizing 53 peaceful activists (including two nuns) as "terrorists" was transmitted to at least seven federal and state agencies, including the National Security Agency."The Constitution Project report into DHS counter-terrorism fusion centres concludes with the recommendation that,"Congress, DHS or DOJ should commission an independent study of fusion center performance, sustainability and impact upon civil liberties."This violation of civil liberties is further confirmed by the release of DHS documents released by the Partnership for Civil Justice on 2 April 2013. Freedom of Information Act requests saw the DHS release hundreds of pages of heavily redacted documents that reveal the routine surveillance and disruption of free speech Occupy protests by DHS agents in collaboration with local law enforcement agencies.Back in December, documents received by the Partnership for Civil Justice revealed the role of the FBI in monitoring and disrupting peaceful Occupy protests. They clearly show how the FBI regarded Occupy protestors as potential terrorists and criminals despite acknowledging that Occupy Wall Street movement consistently called for peaceful protests.In the last few months of 2011 Occupy Wall Street faced a coordinated violent crackdown to evict protesters from public spaces by DHS, FBI and local law enforcement agencies. This violent crackdown had a stunning effect upon the peaceful Occupy movement which it has still not fully recovered from.The recently released DHS documents show it devoted a lot of time, energy and resources to the constant surveillance of Occupy style protests in cities and towns across America. The DHS was obsessed with the question of whether any protests were receiving media coverage and if they were targeting federal property.Before examining the nature of DHS activities during this phase of the Occupy movement it is worthwhile bearing in mind a comment made by DHS secretary Janet Napolitano on 2 April 2013:"DHS is mindful that one of its missions is to ensure that privacy, confidentiality, civil rights and civil liberties are not diminished by the Department's security initiatives". The surveillance of the Occupy Portland movement during October-November 2011 serves to illustrate the nature of DHS activities during this phase of the Occupy Wall Street movement which undermined First Amendment rights to freedom of speech and association.In early October 2011 Occupy Portland was just getting going and DHS devoted considerable time to monitoring its twitter and face book activities. The main focus of its energies were daily surveillance of the various demonstrations and encampments that were set up in city parks and Terry Shrunk Plaza. The DHS was particularly concerned by the encampment on Terry Shrunk Plaza. DHS inspectors worked in shifts to carry out this round the clock surveillance. They were instructed to come with riot gear and be armed.On the 5 October one agent's report reads:"300 turned up for last week's planning session. This is triple the turnout for a similar event for a planning counsel. Event organizer's have been heard discussing the coming wet weather…I think it is likely this event will affect federal property." [He calls for extra agents to be sent to Portland for ]"civil disturbance operations". A report on 31 October 2011 with the heading "Crime/Incident: Demonstration-Violent" notes that DHS agents and Portland police told 200 protesters to leave Terry Shrunk Plaza. The agent says that the DHS,"Acting Area Commander [redacted] advised that the demonstrators appear to have a mob mentality….Portland Police Commander [redacted] wants to coordinate with FPS [read DHS agents] an early morning removal of the tent and protesters tomorrow morning. Michael Moore (Hollywood Film Director) is at Terry Shrunk Plaza right now and is getting the crowd excited and having them bring more tents…" On 1 November another report notes how DHS agents and Portland police were working together to remove Occupy protesters from Terry Shrunk Plaza:"[DHS] inspectors entered Terry Shrunk Plaza and began announcing that everyone needed to leave and take down their tents or they would be arrested. 10 subjects refused to leave the property. …We handcuffed and transported all 10 subjects to Gus Solomon courthouse where we processed them. All of the subjects were cited and released for failure to conform to Lawful Direction." One could be forgiven for asking why are DHS agents spying upon peaceful protesters and then breaking up their free speech protests with arrests? The mission charter of the Department of Homeland Security says nothing about its role being to police free speech protests. One can only draw the conclusion that the DHS regards free speech protests as potential terror threats hence why it devoted such large amounts of energy and resources to mass surveillance of Occupy Wall Street during the autumn and winter of 2011.Maria Verheyden-Hillard, Executive Director of the Partnership for Civil Justice has observed that DHS agents during this period were"functioning as a secret police force against people participating in lawful free speech activity…. The federal agencies' actions were not because Occupy represented a "terrorist threat" or a "criminal threat" but rather because it posed a significant grass roots political challenge to the status quo" These reports show how the third biggest government department is obsessed with peaceful Occupy protests. The Department of Homeland Security spends a large amount of time and resources in undermining the civil liberties of peaceful protesters that have nothing to do with its official mandate of fighting terrorism.It is clear that the 1% who make up the ruling class of America feel threatened by the political awakening that is represented by the growing Occupy movement.The growing wave of protests against murderous drone strikes, against home foreclosures, against the destruction of the environment and public services all show how the American people are slowly moving on to the scene of history. When the giant, that is the American working class, moves en masse on to the political scene no force on earth will stop it from sweeping the ruling class away into the dustbin of history.The Department of Homeland Security declined the offer of commenting upon issues raised in this article.
Occupy Everywhere - Sept 17th - Day of Rage Against Wall Street and what it stands for! - Peter Lemkin - 21-05-2013 Government Surveillance of Occupy MovementJump to: navigation, search Special Report by Center for Media and Democracy and DBA Press![]() - by Beau Hodai, CMD/DBA On May 20, 2013, DBA Press and the Center for Media and Democracy 
released the results of a year-long investigation: "Dissent or Terror:
 How the Nation's Counter Terrorism Apparatus, In Partnership With 
Corporate America, Turned on Occupy Wall Street."

 The report, a distillation of thousands of pages of records obtained
 from counter terrorism/law enforcement agencies, details how
 state/regional "fusion center" personnel monitored the Occupy Wall
 Street movement over the course of 2011 and 2012. The report also examines how fusion centers and other counter terrorism entities that 
have emerged since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 have
 worked to benefit numerous corporations engaged in public-private
 intelligence sharing partnerships. 

While the report examines many instances of fusion center monitoring
 of Occupy activists nationwide, the bulk of the report 
details how counter terrorism personnel engaged in the Arizona Counter
 Terrorism Information Center (ACTIC, commonly known as the "Arizona fusion center") monitored and otherwise surveilled citizens active in
 Occupy Phoenix, and how this surveillance benefited a number of 
corporations and banks that were subjects of Occupy Phoenix protest 
activity. 
While small glimpses into the governmental monitoring of the Occupy Wall Street movement have emerged in the past, there has not been any reporting -- until now -- that details the breadth and depth with which the nation's post-September 11, 2001 counter terrorism apparatus has been applied to politically engaged citizens exercising their Constitutionally-protected First Amendment rights. REPORT Dissent or Terror: How the Nation's 'Counter Terrorism' Apparatus, in Partnership with Corporate America, Turned on Occupy Wall Street REPORT APPENDIX open records materials cited in report. PRESS RELEASE "New Report Details How Counter Terrorism Apparatus Was Used to Monitor Occupy Movement Nationwide" SOURCE MATERIALS almost 10,000 pages of open records materials are archived on DBA Press. PRWATCH ARTICLE "Dissent or Terror: How Arizona's Counter Terrorism Apparatus, in Partnership with Corporate Interests, Turned on Occupy Phoenix" Key FindingsKey findings of this report include:
Occupy Everywhere - Sept 17th - Day of Rage Against Wall Street and what it stands for! - Peter Lemkin - 23-05-2013 Why Are Homeowners Being Jailed for Demanding Wall Street Prosecutions?Bankers go free while cops tase peaceful protesters and the Department of Justice targets journalists Activists put up tents during a protest outside the U.S. Justice Department in Washington, D.C. Alex Wong/Getty Images By John Knefel May 22, 2013 3:00 PM ET A two-day long housing protest outside the Department of Justice this week has resulted in nearly 30 arrests and several instances of law enforcement unnecessarily using tasers on activists, according to eye-witnesses. The action which was organized by a coalition of housing advocacy groups, including the Home Defenders League and Occupy Our Homes called for Attorney General Eric Holder to begin prosecutions against the bankers who created the foreclosure crisis. "Everyone here is fed up with Holder acknowledging big banks did really bad stuff but [saying] they're too big to jail," says Greg Basta, deputy director of New York Communities for Change, who helped organize the event. Holder has previously suggested that prosecuting large banks would be difficult because it could destabilize the economy. The attorney general recently tried to walk those comments back but the conspicuous lack of criminal prosecutions of bankers tells another story, one that Rolling Stone's Matt Taibbi has written about extensively. Gangster Bankers: Too Big To Jail Alexis Goldstein, a former Wall Street employee and current Occupy Wall Street activist who was also at the event on Monday, agrees. "I want Eric Holder to uphold the rule of law, regardless of how much power the criminal has," says Goldstein. She says the lack of criminal prosecutions has created a "culture of immunity" that only gets further entrenched by the small settlements that banks now consider a cost of doing business. "There's no risk," she says, adding that the DOJ is effectively "incentivizing breaking the law." Around 400 homeowners and 100 supporters took part in Monday's actions outside the DOJ, according to Basta. One of them was Vera Johnson, of Seattle. "I've been dealing with foreclosure issues for three years," says Johnson, just minutes after being released from the jail where she was held for over 24 hours for participating in this peaceful protest. Bank of America recently granted Johnson a loan modification after the media picked up on a Change.org petition that she started to save her home; this reprieve turned out to be a time bomb, as her rates were set to return to their original levels after four years. It's an all too common story, and Johnson went to Washington, D.C. to "join in solidarity" with others in similar situations. Many of this week's protesters have been black and Latino homeowners, who were hit particularly hard by the foreclosure crisis. Mildred Garrison-Obi a black woman from Stone Mountain, Georgia was evicted from her home in 2012, though with the help of Occupy Our Homes she was able to return to it after four months of facing homelessness. "It was devastating," says Garrison-Obi, who was arrested today in a related action held outside of a law firm where Holder was once a partner. "But I'm not alone." Activists note with dismay that the government has been significantly harder on people who stage nonviolent demonstrations against Wall Street than it has on the crooked bankers responsible for the housing crisis. Goldstein and Basta both say they witnessed law enforcement using tasers on multiple protesters this week. Johnson says that several hours before her arrest, as she and others sat on planter boxes outside the DOJ, a Department of Homeland Security officer asked, "Do you want to get arrested?" and then, "Do you want to get tased?" Later, when she refused to unlock her arms with another protester after three warnings hardly a violent act or a threat to public safety she says she was tased from behind on her left arm. She turned around to see the same officer, who she recalls telling her, "That's what you get." Carmen Pittman, an activist with Occupy Our Homes in Atlanta, suffered similar treatment at this week's protests. In video footage of her arrest, Pittman appears to have her arms interlocked with another protester. Lawyers familiar with police codes of conduct note that this kind of passive resistance generally does not meet the official standards for when an officer can use a taser. "In a study of regulations around tasers, the National Institute of Justice found that most police departments do not allow taser use against someone who 'nonviolently refuses' a police command," says NYU law professor Sarah Knuckey, who co-authored a report on the suppression of the rights of Occupy activists. "The incident needs to be thoroughly investigated, there must be a public accounting of what happened and why, and any wrong-doing must be punished." Zach Lerner, another activist with NYCC, displayed marks left on his torso after a taser had been used on him. A spokesperson for the Washington, D.C. police department directed requests for comment to the Federal Protective Service, part of the Department of Homeland Security. Scott McConnell, an FPS spokesperson, said that "a number of individuals" had "breached a security barricade after repeated warnings to leave the area" and that there had been 27 arrests as of Tuesday morning; he declined to comment on the video of Pittman getting tased or on FPS's taser policy generally. Monday and Tuesday's actions came as the DOJ falls under increasing criticism for its investigations of journalists first seizing records that cover dozens of Associated Press reporters, and now targeting Fox News' James Rosen. Many media observers have found the Rosen case especially troubling, due to the fact that he was investigated under the theory that he engaged in a conspiracy with Stephen Kim his source to leak government information. This is the same theory that U.S. officials have used to go after Wikileaks, and if applied more widely, it would effectively criminalize the basic act of investigative reporting. Some see the Obama DOJ's war on whistleblowers and leakers and now journalists less as a means of protecting national security than a way to crack down on who controls information. As journalists start to get the feeling that their profession is under attack by Obama's DOJ, that department is saying something entirely different though just as clearly to the nation's financial elite. "The message," says Goldstein, "is that you can get away with anything." Occupy Everywhere - Sept 17th - Day of Rage Against Wall Street and what it stands for! - David Guyatt - 23-05-2013 Peter Lemkin Wrote:"Everyone here is fed up with Holder acknowledging big banks did really bad stuff but [saying] they're too big to jail," says Greg Basta, deputy director of New York Communities for Change, who helped organize the event. Holder has previously suggested that prosecuting large banks would be difficult because it could destabilize the economy. The attorney general recently tried to walk those comments back but the conspicuous lack of criminal prosecutions of bankers tells another story, one that Rolling Stone's Matt Taibbi has written about extensively. This is what Holder actually stated (see link in above post): Quote: |