So OP, what was that about us liberal apologists again? “Whiny, worthless, pieces of crap.” “…douchebags.”
Seems to me if anybody fits that description it’s the right wing nutbar who authored the screed.
Another instance of liberal hypocrisy debunked. Delicious.
Well, to be fair, we still don’t know who put the pamphlets there. It could have been an Occupier or it could even be a Tea Partier who is also an Occupier. There is some overlap. Or it could have been a Tea Partier or anti-Occupier trying to tarnish their image. But we don’t know.
Semi-related anecdote: When I attempted NaNoWriMo last year, there was a kick-off party I attended. One of the people there insisted on passing around political pamphlets to a bunch of people who were just trying to support each other in novel-writing efforts.
Individual activists are always going to be attracted to large groups of potentially similar-minded people where they can try to spread their crackpot agenda. Unfortunately it can pretty easily tarnish the entire group if an outsider sees the work of that activist among the group.
Yeah, coulda been spirits, I suppose, we just don’t know. Still doesn’t change the fact that whoever it was is not “This group of occupiers…” (emphasis mine).
I don’t think anyone thinks that the Tea Party is actually capable of anything substantive.
Except the stupid people in the Tea Party of course.
A friend (who happens to be politically and socially conservative) and I (who happens to be politically and socially liberal) often joke that there is no Liberal Conspiracy, because liberals could never get organized enough to start one.
This is where it comes back and bites us in the ass. Because the OWS movement is so anarchic, it invites individuals who are not necessarily concerned with the political movement itself but relish the opportunity for doing whatever the hell they want under the cover of a disorganized, organic, anarchic gathering of people. Hence, the guy who took a dump on a police car, the other crimes G-SE listed, and now this. Stir in righteous anger and an unhealthy dose of mob mentality - which belong to no political movement but is shared by all of them - and even more bad things can happen.
Personally, I think the movement would be better off with more organization - municipal permits, cleaning patrols, civilian security guards, bouncers, and self-imposed clothing standards - if only so they don’t alienate a large part of the audience they’re trying to sway. Yet, that would go counter to their ideal of a spontaneous, people-led movement. The price is that they become rich targets for criminals, police overreaction, and agents provocateur.
Agreed that it was not the group. I wouldn’t put “spirits” in the same realm of possibilities as the ones I listed. I suspect we will never know who the culprit was. But we’ll see.
Can’t wait for the OP to come back. Thank you, GIGO, for once again shining the light of reason on a pile of shit. 
Poster of the year candidate, this one.
From the article: “Organizers in Oakland viewed the strike and port shutdown as a significant victory. Police said that about 7,000 people participated in demonstrations throughout the day that were peaceful except for a few incidents of vandalism at local banks and businesses.”
There’s also documented footage of protesters attempting to stop vandalism and property destruction at the same riot, and very little mention of what kind of numbers we’re dealing with; whether it’s a tiny group of anarchists using OWS as cover or a few hundred makes a pretty big difference.
Oh look, one person. Again.
Been addressed in the thread; the tract’s author was actually a radical anti-tax tea partier.
Single person.
OWS: Rape and grope other OWS protestors
OWS: Sex offender rapes 14yo girl in Occupy camp
OWS: Has to set up women only tent to prevent sexual assaults
OWS: Assault bystanders that film them
Yeah yeah yeah.. it’s all those evil teabaggers.
[/QUOTE]
sigh
Look, I hate to break it to you, but when a movement is several hundred thousand people strong, there are gonna be some bad eggs. There are gonna be some problems. And when a movement primarily made up of people who are fed up with the system gets first ignored, then actively oppressed, and you add to the mix that there are a lot of anarachists who are very sympathetic to their goals… I dunno. It’s kinda like pointing to someone like Alexander Brevik or Herman Cain and saying “all christians are douchebags”, you know what I mean?
And here’s the thing: most of us don’t hate the Tea Party because of their actions. We hate them because of their goals. We hate them because they represent an IMMENSE stupidity in regards to reality.
Yeah, the OP needs to do a bit of a mea culpa. This stuff started on the fringe right, and it’s a distinct possibility that the fringe right is involved even here.
I adore the mind-picture that creates.
The Occupations are open to whoever wants to come in. That is why the homeless and indigent come in. In Detroit the IWW has a tent. I thought they were defunct decades ago. There is also a guy pushing the Schwa , a new universal language that is supposed to supplant Esperanto .
Nobody is tossed out unless they are dangerous.
But the fact that they are there does not mean the occupation backs them.
Why yes, yes it does.
That’s what the 2nd amendment is all about – keeping firepower in the hand of normal citizens so the use of force is not government monopoly.
If we could trust that agents of the government would always act in the best interests of the citizenry, then such a right would be unnecessary. However since we can’t be sure that the agents of the government will act in that manner, then the 2nd amendment is intended as a final check on the power of police and soldiers to tyrannize and oppress.
And if this check on police and military power is to mean anything, then eventually it comes down to a question of “When is it justifiable to shoot a cop?”
That’s why some of us of liberal bent start to get really nervous when people on the right start getting vocal about their “2nd amendment rights”. Because what the 2nd amendment guarantees is very, very serious business. It means insuring that the people retain the means to revolt against the government if that government becomes unjust. It means insuring that people have the tools at hand they need to kill cops and soldiers and other agents of a tyrannous government if necessary.
So when someone starts waving a gun around and talking about the 2nd Amendment, my first thought is “Who exactly are you planning to shoot with that thing?”
I’m not at all sure that the framers of the Second Amendment were specifically focused on protecting the viability of armed insurrection. if that pesky part about a regulated militia were excised, perhaps.
Not to worry, like most nutjobs, he has his own website. You can even buy his books!
I agree. Assholes come from both sides of the continuum. If he’s who did this, he’s a douche.
I’ll concede this. And add this.
**Anyone **of any political/non-political, stripe who foments this kind of lawlessness should be dealt with harshly. Chatting with friends at Starbucks? Fine. Hypotheticals in class? Sure. Yelling “Fire” in a crowded theater? Well, it’s already established that 1A has some limits for the greater good.
Someone - anyone - putting out pamphlets like this at an Occutard rally is like pouring gasoline on some tinder and scooting it over by the smoldering ember that is an angry group of possibly the least intelligent members our society has to offer.
Fanning the flames that are already burning with rhetoric like this does no one any good.
As an EX cop, I’m generally for doing good, not bad.
Except for the French. Don’t get me started on those bastards!
Nah, get it right…
The correct thing is to say that “we DON’T WANT THE IRISH.”- Mel Brooks 
But kudos for considering the evidence, you would not believe how many do attempt to ignore it.
Your use of a term like “Occutard” and your epithet regarding “the least intelligent members our society has to offer” make me suspect that your concession is bullshit.
I am grateful that I apparently never encountered you in your own jurisdiction when you weren’t an “EX cop” if you believe that the exercise of free speech constitutes “lawlessness [that] should be dealt with harshly”. This too is bullshit.
As for the flaming results you so confidently predict – cite?
Fun fact: either that someone didn’t do their homework, or that someone is purposely trying to hurt the movement. Furthermore… “least intelligent members of our society”? Are you nuts? You do realize that the movement contains an awful lot of war veterans, retirees, and college graduates, and that the goals they are fighting for are generally pretty smart (as opposed to the Tea Party’s childish libertarian tirades), right?
Oh, I agree. But insinuating that it’s the movement itself, not one or two radicals from either inside or outside the movement, is ridiculous.
Sarcasm doesn’t work online.
Hahahahahahahahaha hahahahahaha
That is priceless!
I seem to recall the leader of tea party express being a racist.