Advertisements
Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘2011 revolutions and protests’ Category

December 10, 2011

Tens of thousands of Russians gathered peacefully in central Moscow on Saturday to shout “Putin is a thief” and “Russiawithout Putin,” forcing the Kremlin to confront a level of public discontent that has not been seen here since Vladimir V. Putin first became president 12 years ago.

The crowd overflowed the square where it was held, forcing stragglers to climb trees or watch from the opposite riverbank, and organizers repeatedly cleared a footbridge out of fear it would collapse. It was the largest anti-Kremlin protest since the early 1990s.

The crowd united liberals, nationalists and Communists, a group best described as the urban middle class, so digitally connected that some were broadcasting the rally live using iPads held over their heads. The police estimated the crowd at 25,000 while organizers put the figure much higher, at 40,000 or more.

The rally was a significant moment in Russia’s political life, suggesting that the authorities have lost the power to control the national agenda. The event was too large to be edited out of the evening news, which does not report criticism of Mr. Putin, and was accompanied by smaller demonstrations dozens of other cities, including St. Petersburg.

The government calculated that it had no choice but to allow the events unfold. There was a large police presence, including rows of troop carriers, dump trucks and bulldozers, but remarkably when the crowd dispersed four hours later, no detentions had been reported.

On Saturday many in the crowd said the event was a watershed moment.

“People are just tired, they have already crossed all the boundaries,” said Yana Larionova, 26, a real estate agent. “You see all these people who are well dressed and earn a good salary, going out onto the streets on Saturday and saying, ‘No more.’ That’s when you know you need a change.”

Calls for protest have been mounting since parliamentary elections last Sunday, which domestic and international observers said were tainted by ballot-stuffing and fraud on behalf of Mr. Putin’s party, United Russia. But an equally crucial event, many said, was Mr. Putin’s announcement in September that he would run for the presidency in March. He is almost certain to win a six-year term, meaning he will have been Russia’s paramount leader for 18 years.

Yevgeniya Albats, editor of the New Times magazine, said that the gathering was the most striking display of grassroots democracy that she had seen in Russia, and that the involvement of young people was a game-changer. When Mr. Putin revealed his decision to return to the presidency, a full six months before presidential elections, she said, “this really, really humiliated the country.”

“Today we just proved that civil society does exist, that the middle class does exist and that this country is not lost,” Ms. Albats said.

The authorities had been trying to discourage attendance, saying that widespread protests could culminate in a disaster on the scale of the Soviet collapse, which occurred 20 years ago this month. Officials have portrayed the demonstrators as revolutionaries dedicated to a violent, Libya-style overthrow. Mr. Putin last week said that Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton had set off the wave of activism by publicly criticizing the conduct of the parliamentary elections.

“She set the tone for some actors in our country and gave them a signal,” Mr. Putin said. “They heard the signal and with the support of the U.S. State Department began active work.”

The demonstration’s organizers have put forward several demands: the immediate release of prisoners arrested last week in connection with the protests; the scheduling of new parliamentary elections; the ouster of Vladimir Y. Churov, who runs the Central Election Commission; investigation of election violations; the registration of so-called nonsystem opposition parties, ones that have been unable to win seats in Parliament or put forward presidential candidates.

Speakers said they would give the Kremlin two weeks to satisfy the demands, and hold another large protest on Dec. 24.

Aleksei Navalny, a popular blogger who has helped mobilize young Russians over the last year, sent an address from the prison where he is serving a 15-day sentence for resisting the police. Mr. Navalny was arrested Monday night after the first of three demonstrations.

“Everyone has the single most powerful weapon that we need — dignity, the feeling of self-respect,” read the address, which was delivered by a veteran opposition leader, Boris Y. Nemtsov. “It’s impossible to beat and arrest hundreds of thousands, millions. We have not even been intimidated. For some time, we were simply convinced that the life of toads and rats, the life of mute cattle, was the only way to win the reward of stability and economic growth.”

“We are not cattle or slaves,” he said. “We have voices and votes and we have the power to uphold them.”

The blogosphere has played a central role in mobilizing young Russians this fall. During the parliamentary campaign, Russians using smartphones filmed authority figures cajoling, bribing or offering money to their subordinates to get out the vote for United Russia. More video went online after Election Day, when many Russians in their 20s camped out in polling stations as amateur observers.

“The Putin system, over many years, repeats the same mistakes and ignores public opinion,” said Leonid Gigen, 26. “We have a lot of evidence. A lot was shot on video. And then Medvedev says these videos are fake,” a reference to President Dmitri A. Medvedev. “But people saw it themselves, because they voted.”

The ruling party, United Russia, lost ground in last Sunday’s election, securing 238 seats in the next Duma, compared with the 315, or 70 percent, that it holds now. The Communist Party won 92 seats; Just Russia won 64 seats; and the nationalist Liberal Democratic Party won 56 seats.

The vote had come to be seen as a referendum not only on United Russia but also on Mr. Putin and his plans to stay on as Russia’s paramount leader. Mr. Putin remains by far the country’s most popular political figure — the independent Levada Center reports his approval ratings at above 60 percent — but that approval has been diminishing gradually despite the authorities’ efforts to shore it up.

It seems unlikely that the authorities will accede to the protesters’ demands. A deputy chairman of Russia’s Central Election Commission told the Interfax news service that the final report on the election results was signed Friday, and that he saw no reason to annul them.

“The elections are declared valid, and there is no reason for any other assessment,” the official, Stanisav Vavilov, said. “There is no reason to revise the results of the elections.”

One of the few official remarks on the gathering on Saturday came from Andrei Isayev, the deputy secretary of the presidium of the general council of United Russia, who told demonstrators that they risked becoming “cannon fodder.”

“Do not allow yourself to become a pawn in the hands of those who want to destroy our country,” he said.

from:  http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/11/world/europe/thousands-protest-in-moscow-russia-in-defiance-of-putin.html

—————————————————————————————

Monday December 5th, 2011

December 5th, 2011

12 + 5 +2+0+1+1 = 21 = the life lesson and personal year for the protests in Russia = On the world stage.  For all the world to see.  Seeing the big picture.  Connecting the dots.

21 year + 12 (December) = 33 = the protests in Russia’s personal month (from December 5th, 2011 to January 4th, 2012) = Courage.  Bravery.  Backbone.  Taking a stand.  Not backing down.  Not caving in.

33 month + 5 (5th of the month on Monday December 5th, 2011) = 38 = the protest in Russia’s personal day = We’re not gonna take it anymore.

33 month + 10 (10th of the month on Saturday December 10th, 2011) = 43 = the protest in Russia’s personal day = Crowds.  Gathering together.

33 month + 24 (24th of the month on Saturday December 24th, 2011) = 57 = the protest in Russia’s personal day = Feel our pain.  Hillary Clinton.

Numerologically, a person’s life lesson number stands for themself.  Hillary Clinton was born on October 26th, 1947.

October 26th, 1947

10 + 26 +1+9+4+7 = 57 = her life lesson number

So perhaps Hillary Clinton (whose life lesson number is 57) will be of significance to the Russian protest situation on it’s 57 day (Saturday December 24th, 2011).

—————————————————————————————–

—————————————————————————————–

—————————————————————————————–

find out your own numerology at:

http://www.learnthenumbers.com/

Advertisements

Read Full Post »

4:11 PM EST     Tuesday December 6th, 2011

Dozens of protesters staged sit-ins in front of lawmakers’ offices Tuesday and several hundred more camped out on the National Mall as part of a new movement calling itself “Take Back the Capitol.”

U.S. Capitol Police said one person was arrested for unlawful entry at the office of Rep. Vicky Hartzler, R-Missouri.

Borrowing language from the Occupy movement and drawing demonstrators “from Occupy sites from coast to coast,” the movement says its goal is to affect congressional legislation.

“For far too long, Congress has been catering to the 1% instead of representing the 99%,” the movement says on its website, 99indc.org. Protesters will push Congress to renew unemployment insurance and will focus on “other important budget and tax measures,” the website says.

“Now more than ever, Congress needs to see us and hear us.”

The group is calling its setup “The People’s Camp.”

Groups from different states went to lawmakers’ offices Tuesday.

About a dozen people were conducting what they called a sit-in outside the office of House Speaker John Boehner. One of them, John Reat from Ohio — the state Boehner represents — told CNN, “I’ve been unemployed for 24 months, and that’s why I’m here. And we’re not leaving until we talk to the speaker, or they close the building, whichever comes first.”

About 25 people visited the office of Rep. Chris Van Hollen, D-Maryland. He spoke to the group outside his office and told them he sympathizes with the unemployed.

That group also went to a conference room outside the office of another Maryland Democrat, Rep. Steny Hoyer, and spoke to his aides.

“I hear you loud and clear,” a staffer for Hoyer told the group, assuring them, “We’ll take that back to the congressman.”

One group of protesters said they planned to conduct a sit-in at the office of Sen. Jon Kyl of Arizona, the Republican whip.

About 20 people went to Kyl’s office saying they wanted a forum to be heard. “All of Arizona is in the dark. We don’t know what he’s thinking,” one said. “We’ll stay until he hears us.”

Donna Stebbins of Phoenix told CNN the group had not been able to make an appointment to meet with Kyl about President Barack Obama’s jobs bill.

Stebbins said she and her husband lost their jobs about 18 months ago.

“Our world has fallen apart,” she said. “We lost everything we saved. All of our dreams, the American dream, are gone.”

Denee Rodriguez, a former teacher, said her husband is in a union and is fighting to keep bargaining and other rights.

“You take those rights away from us, then we’re not a worker anymore,” said Rodriguez. “We’re an indentured servant.”

The Surprise, Arizona, resident said her children were forced to drop out of college because they could not afford the tuition.

Axel Bello, a veteran from Phoenix, said soldiers are making sacrifices to benefit America’s thirst for oil and corporations.

Many of the protesters gathering Tuesday in Washington were older than the largely young crowds at many Occupy events.

The protesters include union members.

“Take Back the Capitol” is, in part, an outgrowth of the movement to protect collective bargaining that started in Wisconsin and Ohio.

The “Rebuild the Dream” movement organized the event, with funding from many sources, including MoveOn.org and the Service Employees International Union (SEIU).

The movement says thousands of people signed up to join the protest, being organized “by a wide variety of community, labor, Occupy, and other groups around the country.”

The official website links to SEIU.org, which says SEIU is the fastest-growing union in North America.

“We’re making congressional office visits all this week to make Congress listen to #the99%,” SEIU tweeted Tuesday.

The group tweeted about demonstrators going to offices of Sens. Joe Lieberman, Scott Brown, Marco Rubio and other lawmakers.

The company Berlin Rosen, which specializes in public affairs campaign management, said sit-ins were taking place at the offices of more than a dozen lawmakers, including Sens. Dean Heller, Kay Bailey Hutchison and Mark Kirk.

“Unemployed workers and activists from around the country are refusing to leave congressional offices until they are able to speak firsthand to their members of Congress about the need for action on jobs and extending unemployment insurance benefits,” the company said in a news release.

The event continues through Friday.

from:  http://www.cnn.com/2011/12/06/us/dc-capitol-protest/index.html?npt=NP1

—————————————————————————————

Tuesday December 6th, 2011

December 6th, 2011

12 + 6 +2+0+1+1 = 22 = The People’s Camp and Take Back the Capitol’s life lesson and personal year = Like a three ring circus.  Are you  kidding me?  You’ve got to be kidding me.  This is no joke.

22 year + 12 (December) = 34 = The People’s Camp and Take Back the Capitol’s personal month (from Tuesday December 6th, 2011 to Thursday January 5th, 2012) = Things happen really quickly.  Generating a buzz.  Text messages.  Lashing out in anger.

34 month + 6 (6th of the month on Tuesday December 6th, 2011) = 40 = The People’s Camp and Take Back the Capitol’s personal day = Be kind.  Help out your fellow human being.

—————————————————————————————–

—————————————————————————————–

—————————————————————————————–

find out your own numerology at:

http://www.learnthenumbers.com/

Read Full Post »

A couple in their tent on the edge of the Occupy L.A camp in front of City Hall Saturday

November 27, 2011       12:43 pm

Police officers were laying the groundwork Sunday morning for moving in to remove campers and demonstrators from the Occupy L.A. site around City Hall — an action that could take place just after midnight.

Two officers circulated through the 1.7 acres of green space Sunday morning, handing out fliers notifying demonstrators that their presence on the lawn violated two city ordinances, one that bans camping in city park space and another that sets legal hours of park use as 5 a.m. to 10:30 p.m.

Until now local authorities have tolerated and, at times, even commended the seven-week occupation — an extension of the Occupy Wall Street movement for economic justice that began in New York City’s financial district and spread across the county.

FULL COVERAGE: Occupy protests

The encampment in Los Angeles is the largest remaining in the country. Camp removals in some places, including New York City, Oakland and UC Davis, have resulted in rough treatment of demonstrators by police who encountered resistance.

The two officers with fliers declined to give their first names but their badges identified them as officers Martinez and Wyno.

People accepted the fliers, but there was little interaction.

“I respect what you guys do,” one protester told the officers.

Los Angeles police have tried to live down a legacy that includes excessive use of force on peaceful demonstrators. The city has paid out more than $12 million in civil settlements since officers fired foam bullets and struck people with batons to disperse a crowd at a MacArthur Park rally for immigrant rights on May Day 2007.

On Thanksgiving, officers delivered two turkeys to the encampment. But on the same day, protesters booed when workers posted signs listing the park’s official hours of operation.

Officers moved slowly and carefully to make arrests when demonstrators recently shut down a busy downtown intersection. That incident concluded peacefully.

On Sunday, even police — at least at the street level — expressed uncertainty about what would happen at midnight, when the city officially wants protesters out. Occupy organizers said there are 543 tents and about 600 to 700 people at the site. Police said their count is about the same.

“We have absolutely no idea” what will happen, said Officer Wyno.

from:  http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2011/11/police-signal-their-intent-to-remove-occupy-la-as-soon-as-midnight.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+lanowblog+%28L.A.+Now%29

————————————————————————————–

Occupy Los Angeles first manifested on October 1st, 2011 according to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupy_Los_Angeles

October 1st, 2011

10 + 1 +2+0+1+1 = 15 = Occupy Los Angeles’ life lesson = Wall Street.  Greed.

—————————————————————————————

October 1st, 2011

10 + 1 +2+0+1+1 = 15 = Occupy Los Angeles’ personal year (from October 1st, 2011 to October 1st, 2012) = Wall Street.  Greed.

15 year + 11 (November) = 26 = Occupy Los Angeles’ personal month (for November 2011) = Photos.  Television.  In the news.  Making headlines.

26 month + 27 (27th of the month on Sunday November 27th, 2011) = 53 = Occupy Los Angeles’  personal day (on Sunday November 27th, 2011) = Principles.

26 month + 28 (28th of the month on Monday November 28th, 2011) = 54 = Occupy Los Angeles’  personal day (on Monday November 28th, 2011) = Spontaneous.  Interviews.  Live footage.  Check it out.  Let’s watch and see what happens.

—————————————————————————————–

—————————————————————————————–

—————————————————————————————–

find out your own numerology at:

http://www.learnthenumbers.com/

Read Full Post »

File:Bill Moyers 24 May 2005.jpg

November 2, 2011

I am honored to share this occasion with you. No one beyond your collegial inner circle appreciates more than I do what you have stood for over these 40        years, or is more aware of the battles you have fought, the victories you have won, and the passion for democracy that still courses through your        veins. The great progressive of a century ago, Robert LaFollette of Wisconsin – a Republican, by the way – believed that “Democracy is a life; and        involves constant struggle.” Democracy has been your life for four decades now, and would have been even more imperiled today if you had not stayed the        course.

 

I began my public journalism the same year you began your public advocacy, in 1971. Our paths often paralleled and sometimes crossed. Over these 40        years journalism for me has been a continuing course in adult education, and I came early on to consider the work you do as part of the curriculum – an        open seminar on how government works – and for whom. Your muckraking investigations – into money and politics, corporate behavior, lobbying, regulatory        oversight, public health and safety, openness in government, and consumer protection, among others – are models of accuracy and integrity. They drive        home to journalists that while it is important to cover the news, it is more important to uncover the news. As one of my mentors said, “News is what people want to keep hidden; everything else is publicity.” And when a student asked the journalist and historian Richard Reeves for his definition of ”        real news”, he answered: “The news you and I need to keep our freedoms.” You keep reminding us how crucial that news is to democracy. And when        the watchdogs of the press have fallen silent, your vigilant growls have told us something’s up.

 

So I’m here as both citizen and journalist to thank you for all you have done, to salute you for keeping the faith, and to implore you to fight on        during the crisis of hope that now grips our country. The great American experience in creating a different future together – this “voluntary union for        the common good” – has been flummoxed by a growing sense of political impotence – what the historian Lawrence Goodwyn has described as a mass        resignation of people who believe “the dogma of democracy” on a superficial public level but who no longer believe it privately. There has been, he        says, a decline in what people think they have a political right to aspire to – a decline of individual self-respect on the part of millions of        Americans.

 

You can understand why. We hold elections, knowing they are unlikely to produce the policies favored by the majority of Americans. We speak, we write,        we advocate – and those in power turn deaf ears and blind eyes to our deepest aspirations. We petition, plead, and even pray – yet the earth that is        our commons, which should be passed on in good condition to coming generations, continues to be despoiled. We invoke the strain in our national DNA        that attests to “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” as the produce of political equality – yet private wealth multiplies as public goods are        beggared. And the property qualifications for federal office that the framers of the Constitution expressly feared as an unseemly “veneration for        wealth” are now openly in force; the common denominator of public office, even for our judges, is a common deference to cash.

 

So if belief in the “the dogma of democracy” seems only skin deep, there are reasons for it. During the prairie revolt that swept the Great Plains a        century after the Constitution was ratified, the populist orator Mary Elizabeth Lease exclaimed: “Wall Street owns the country…Our laws are the output        of a system which clothes rascals in robes and honesty in rags. The [political] parties lie to us and the political speakers mislead us…Money rules.”

 

That was 1890. Those agrarian populists boiled over with anger that corporations, banks, and government were ganging up to deprive every day people of        their livelihood.

 

She should see us now.

 

John Boehner calls on the bankers, holds out his cup, and offers them total obeisance from the House majority if only they fill it.

 

That’s now the norm, and they get away with it. GOP once again means Guardians of Privilege.

 

Barack Obama criticizes bankers as “fat cats”, then invites them to dine at a pricey New York restaurant where the tasting menu runs to $195 a person.

 

That’s now the norm, and they get away with it. The President has raised more money from banks, hedge funds, and private equity managers than any        Republican candidate, including Mitt Romney. Inch by inch he has conceded ground to them while espousing populist rhetoric that his very actions        betray.

 

Let’s name this for what it is: Democratic deviancy defined further downward. Our politicians are little more than money launderers in the trafficking        of power and policy – fewer than six degrees of separation from the spirit and tactics of Tony Soprano.

 

Why New York’s Zuccotti Park is filled with people is no mystery. Reporters keep scratching their heads and asking: “Why are you here?” But it’s clear        they are occupying Wall Street because Wall Street has occupied the country. And that’s why in public places across the country workaday Americans are        standing up in solidarity. Did you see the sign a woman was carrying at a fraternal march in Iowa the other day? It read: “I can’t afford to buy a        politician so I bought this sign.”

 

We know what all this money buys. Americans have learned the hard way that when rich organizations and wealthy individuals shower Washington with        millions in campaign contributions, they get what they want. They know that if you don’t contribute to their campaigns or spend generously on lobbying,

 

  …you pick up a disproportionate share of America’s tax bill. You pay higher prices for a broad range of products from peanuts to prescriptions. You pay        taxes that others in a similar situation have been excused from paying. You’re compelled to abide by laws while others are granted immunity from them.        You must pay debts that you incur while others do not. You’re barred from writing off on your tax returns some of the money spent on necessities while        others deduct the cost of their entertainment. You must run your business by one set of rules, while the government creates another set for your        competitors… In contrast the fortunate few who contribute to the right politicians and hire the right lobbyists enjoy all the benefits of their special        status. Make a bad business deal; the government bails them out. If they want to hire workers at below market wages, the government provides the means        to do so. If they want more time to pay their debts, the government gives them an extension. If they want immunity from certain laws, the government        gives it. If they want to ignore rules their competition must comply with, the government gives it approval. If they want to kill legislation that is        intended for the public, it gets killed.

 

 

I didn’t crib that litany from Public Citizen’s muckraking investigations over the years, although I could have. Nor did I lift it from Das Kapital by Karl Marx or Mao Tse-tung’s Little Red Book. No, I was literally        quoting Time Magazine, long a tribune of America’s establishment        media. From the bosom of mainstream media comes the bald, spare, and damning conclusion: We now have “government for the few at the expense of the        many.”

 

But let me call another witness from the pro-business and capitalist- friendly press. In the middle of the last decade – four years before the Great        Collapse of 2008 – the editors of The Economist warned:

 

   A growing body of evidence suggests that the meritocratic ideal is in trouble in America. Income inequality is growing to levels not seen since the        (first) Gilded Age. But social mobility is not increasing at anything like the same pace….Everywhere you look in modern America – in the Hollywood        Hills or the canyons of Wall Street, in the Nashville recording studios or the clapboard houses of Cambridge, Massachusetts – you see elites mastering        the art of perpetuating themselves. America is increasingly looking like imperial Britain, with dynastic ties proliferating, social circles        interlocking, mechanisms of social exclusion strengthening, and a gap widening between the people who make decisions and shape the culture and the vast        majority of working stiffs.

 

 

Hear the editors of The Economist: “The United States is on its way to becoming a European-style class-based society.”

 

Can you imagine what would happen if I had said that on PBS? Mitch McConnell and John Boehner would put Elmo and Big Bird under house arrest. Come to        think of it, I did say it on PBS back when Karl Rove was president, and there was indeed hell to pay. You would have thought Che Guevara had run his        motorcycle across the White House lawn. But I wasn’t quoting from a radical or even liberal manifesto. I was quoting – to repeat – one of the business        world’s most respected journals. It is the editors of the The Economist who are warning us that ” The United States is on its way to becoming        a European-style class-based society.”

 

And that was well before our financiers, drunk with greed and high on the illusions and conceits of laissez faire (“leave us alone”) fundamentalism,        and humored by rented politicians who do their bidding, brought America to the edge of the abyss and our middle class to its knees.

 

How could it be? How could this happen in the country whose framers spoke of “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” in the same breath as        political equality? Democracy wasn’t meant to produce a class-ridden society. When that son of French aristocracy Alexander de Tocqueville traveled        through the bustling young America of the 1830s, nothing struck him with greater force than “the equality of conditions.” Tocqueville knew first-hand        the vast divisions between the wealth and poverty of Europe, where kings and feudal lords took what they wanted and left peasants the crumbs. But        Americans, he wrote, “seemed to be remarkably equal economically.” “Some were richer, some were poorer, but within a comparative narrow band. Moreover,        individuals had opportunities to better their economic circumstances over the course of a lifetime, and just about everyone [except of course slaves        and Indians] seemed to be striving for that goal.” Tocqueville looked closely, and said: “I easily perceive the enormous influence that this primary        fact exercises on the workings of the society.”

 

And so it does. Evidence abounds that large inequalities undermine community life, reduces trust among citizens, and increases violence. In one major        study from data collected over 30 years (by the epidemiologists Richard Wilkinson and Kate Pickett in their book:        The Spirit Level: Why Greater Equality Makes Societies Stronger            )                 the most consistent predictor of mental illness, infant mortality, educational achievements, teenage births, homicides, and incarceration, is economic        inequality. And as Nobel Laureate Kenneth Arrow has written, “Vast inequalities of income weakens a society’s sense of mutual concern…The sense that we        are all members of the social order is vital to the meaning of civilization.”

 

The historian Gordon Wood won the Pulitzer Prize for his book on The Radicalism of the American Revolution: If you haven’t read it,        now’s the time. Wood says that our nation        discovered its greatness “by creating a prosperous free society belonging to obscure people with their workaday concerns and their pecuniary pursuits        of happiness.” This democracy, he said, changed the lives “of hitherto neglected and despised masses of common laboring people.”

 

Those words moved me when I read them. They moved me because Henry and Ruby Moyers were “common laboring people.” My father dropped out of the fourth        grade and never returned to school because his family needed him to pick cotton to help make ends meet. Mother managed to finish the eighth grade        before she followed him into the fields. They were tenant farmers when the Great Depression knocked them down and almost out. The year I was born my        father was making $2 a day working on the highway to Oklahoma City. He never took home more than $100 a week in his working life, and made that only        when he joined the union in the last job he held. I was one of the poorest white kids in town, but in many respects I was the equal of my friend who        was the daughter of the richest man in town. I went to good public schools, had use of a good public library, played sand-lot baseball in a good public        park, and traveled far on good public roads with good public facilities to a good public university. Because these public goods were there for us, I        never thought of myself as poor. When I began to piece the story together years later, I came to realize that people like the Moyers had been included        in the American deal: “We, the People” included us.

 

It’s heartbreaking to see what has become of that bargain. These days it’s every man for himself; may be the richest and most ruthless predators win!

 

How did this happen?

 

You know the story, because it begins the very same year that you began your public advocacy and I began my public journalism. 1971 was a seminal year.

 

On March 29 of that year, Ralph Nader bought ads in 13 publications and sent out letters asking people if they would invest their talents, skills, and        yes, their lives, in working for the public interest. The seed sprouted swiftly that spring: By the end of May over 60,000 Americans responded, and        Public Citizen was born.

 

But something else was also happening. Five months later, on August 23, 1971, a corporate lawyer named Lewis Powell – a board member of the death-dealing tobacco giant Philip Morris and a future Justice of the United States Supreme Court – sent a        confidential memorandum to his friends at the U. S. Chamber of Commerce. We look        back on it now as a call to arms for class war waged from the top down.

 

Let’s recall the context: Big Business was being forced to clean up its act. It was bad enough to corporate interests that Franklin Roosevelt’s New        Deal had sustained its momentum through Harry Truman, Dwight Eisenhower, John Kennedy, and Lyndon Johnson. Suddenly this young lawyer named Ralph Nader        arrived on the scene, arousing consumers with articles, speeches, and above all, an expose of the automobile industry, Unsafe at Any Speed. Young        activists flocked to work with him on health, environmental, and economic concerns. Congress was moved to act. Even Republicans signed on. In l970        President Richard Nixon put his signature on the National Environmental Policy Act and named a White House Council to promote environmental quality. A        few months later millions of Americans turned out for Earth Day. Nixon then agreed to the creation of the Environmental Protection Agency. Congress        acted swiftly to pass tough new amendments to the Clean Air Act and the EPA announced the first air pollution standards. There were new regulations        directed at lead paint and pesticides. Corporations were no longer getting away with murder.

 

And Lewis Powell was shocked – shocked! – at what he called “an attack on the American free enterprise system.” Not just from a few “extremists of the        left,” he said, but also from “perfectly respectable elements of society,” including the media, politicians, and leading intellectuals. Fight back, and        fight back hard, he urged his compatriots. Build a movement. Set speakers loose across the country. Take on prominent institutions of public opinion –        especially the universities, the media, and the courts. Keep television programs under “constant surveillance.” And above all, recognize that political        power must be “assiduously (sic) cultivated; and that when necessary, it must be used aggressively and with determination” and “without embarrassment.”

 

Powell imagined the U.S. Chamber of Commerce as a council of war. Since business executives had “little stomach for hard-nose contest with their        critics” and “little skill in effective intellectual and philosophical debate,” they should create new think tanks, legal foundations, and front groups        of every stripe. It would take years, but these groups could, he said, be aligned into a united front (that) would only come about through “careful        long-range planning and implementation, in consistency of action over an indefinite period of years, in the scale of financing available only through        joint effort, and in the political power available only through united action and united organizations.”

 

You have to admit it was a brilliant strategy. Although Powell may not have seen it at the time, he was pointing America toward plutocracy, where        political power is derived from the wealthy and controlled by the wealthy to protect their wealth. As the only countervailing power to private greed        and power, democracy could no longer be tolerated.

 

While Nader’s recruitment of citizens to champion democracy was open for all to see – depended, in fact, on public participation – Powell’s memo was        for certain eyes only, those with the means and will to answer his call to arms. The public wouldn’t learn of the memo until after Nixon appointed        Powell to the Supreme Court and the enterprising reporter Jack Anderson obtained a copy, writing that it may have been the reason for Powell’s        appointment.

 

By then his document had circulated widely in corporate suites. Within two years the board of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce formed a task force of 40        business executives – from U.S. Steel, GE, GM, Phillips Petroleum, 3M, Amway, and ABC and CBS (two media companies, we should note). Their assignment        was to coordinate the crusade, put Powell’s recommendations into effect, and push the corporate agenda. Powell had set in motion a revolt of the rich.        As the historian Kim Phillips-Fein subsequently wrote, “Many who read the memo cited it afterward as inspiration for their political choices.”

 

Those choices came soon. The National Association of Manufacturers announced it was moving its main offices from New York to Washington. In 1971, only        175 firms had registered lobbyists in the capital; by 1982, nearly twenty-five hundred did. Corporate PACs increased from under 300 in 1976 to over        twelve hundred by the middle of the l980s. From Powell’s impetus came the Business Roundtable, the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), the        Heritage Foundation, the Cato Institute, the Manhattan Institute, Citizens for a Sound Economy (precursor to what we now know as Americans for        Prosperity) and other organizations united in pushing back against political equality and shared prosperity. [Thanks to Charlie Cray for a succinct        analysis of the Powell memo and to Jim Hoggan for calling attention to it more recently.] They        triggered an economic transformation that would in time touch every aspect of our lives.

 

Powell’s memo was delivered to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce at its headquarters across from the White House on land that was formerly the home of        Daniel Webster. That couldn’t have been more appropriate. History was coming full circle at 1615 H Street. Webster is remembered largely as the most        eloquent orator in America during his years as Senator from Massachusetts and Secretary of State under three presidents in the years leading up to the        Civil War. He was also the leading spokesman for banking and industry nabobs who funded his extravagant tastes in wine, boats, and mistresses. Some of        them came to his relief when he couldn’t cover his debts wholly from bribes or the sale of diplomatic posts for personal gain. Webster apparently        regarded the merchants and bankers of Boston’s State Street Corporation – one of the country’s first financial holding companies – very much as George        W. Bush regarded the high rollers he called “my base.” The great orator even sent a famous letter to financiers requesting retainers from them that he        might better serve them. The historian Arthur Schlesinger Jr. wondered how the American people could follow Webster “through hell or high water when he        would not lead unless someone made up a purse for him.”

 

No wonder the U.S. Chamber of Commerce feels right as home with the landmark designation of its headquarters. 1615 H Street now masterminds the        laundering of multi-millions of dollars raised from captains of industry and private wealth to finance – secretly – the political mercenaries who fight        the class war in their behalf.

 

Even as the Chamber was doubling its membership and tripling its budget in response to Lewis Powell’s manifesto, the coalition got another powerful jolt of adrenalin from the wealthy right-winger who had served as Nixon’s secretary of the treasury, William Simon. His polemic entitled        A Time for Truth argued that “funds generated by business” must “rush by multimillions” into conservative causes to uproot the institutions        and “the heretical strategy” [his term] of the New Deal. He called on “men of action in the capitalist world” to mount “a veritable crusade” against        progressive America. Business Week magazine somberly explained that “…it will be a bitter pill for many Americans to swallow the idea of doing        with less so that big business can have move.”

 

I’m not making this up.

 

And so it came to pass; came to pass despite your heroic efforts and those of other kindred citizens; came to pass because those “men of action in the        capitalist world” were not content with their wealth just to buy more homes, more cars, more planes, more vacations and more gizmos than anyone else.        They were determined to buy more democracy than anyone else. And they succeeded beyond their own expectations. After their 40-year “veritable crusade”        against our institutions, laws and regulations – against the ideas, norms and beliefs that helped to create America’s iconic middle class – the Gilded        Age is back with a vengeance.

 

You know these things, of course, because you’ve been up against that “veritable crusade” all these years. But if you want to see the story pulled        together in one compelling narrative, read this – perhaps the best book on politics of the last two years                    :                            Winner Take All Politics: How Washington Made the Rich Richer and Turned Its Back on the Middle Class                        .                Two accomplished political scientists wrote it: Jacob Hacker and Paul Pierson – the Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson of political science, who wanted to        know how America had turned into a society starkly divided into winners and losers.

 

Mystified         by what happened to the notion of “shared prosperity” that marked the years after World War II; 

 

puzzled         that over the last generation more and more wealth has gone to the rich and superrich, while middle-class and working people are left barely hanging        on;

 

vexed         that hedge-fund managers pulling down billions can pay a lower tax rate than their pedicurists, manicurists, cleaning ladies and chauffeurs;

 

curious         as to why politicians keep slashing taxes on the very rich even as they grow richer, and how corporations keep being handed huge tax breaks and        subsidies even as they fire hundreds of thousands of workers;

 

troubled         that the heart of the American Dream – upward mobility – seems to have stopped beating;

 

astounded         that the United States now leads in the competition for the gold medal for inequality;

 

and dumbfounded that all this could happen in a democracy whose politicians are supposed to serve the greatest good for the greatest number,        and must regularly face the judgment of citizens at the polls if they haven’t done so;

 

Jacob Hacker and Paul Pierson wanted to find out “how our economy stopped working to provide prosperity and security for the broad middle class.” They        wanted to know: “Who dunnit?”

 

They found the culprit: “It’s the politics, stupid!” Tracing the clues back to that “unseen revolution” of the 1970s – the revolt triggered by Lewis        Powell, fired up by William Simon, and fueled by rich corporations and wealthy individuals – they found that ‘Step by step and debate by debate        America’s public officials have rewritten the rules of American politics and the American economy in ways that have benefitted the few at the expense        of the many.”

 

There you have it: they bought off the gatekeepers, got inside, and gamed the system. And when the fix was in, they let loose the animal spirits,        turning our economy into a feast for predators. And they won – as the rich and powerful got richer and more powerful – they not only bought the        government, they “saddled Americans with greater debt, tore new holes in the safety net, and imposed broad financial risks on workers, investors, and        taxpayers.” Until – write Hacker and Pierson – “The United States is looking more and more like the capitalist oligarchies of Brazil, Mexico, and        Russia where most of the wealth is concentrated at the top while the bottom grows larger and larger with everyone in between just barely getting by.”

 

The revolt of the plutocrats has now been ratified by the Supreme Court in its notorious Citizens United decision last year. Rarely have so few imposed        such damage on so many. When five pro-corporate conservative justices gave “artificial entities” the same rights of “free speech” as living, breathing        human beings, they told our corporate sovereigns “the sky’s the limit” when it comes to their pouring money into political campaigns. The Roberts Court        embodies the legacy of pro-corporate bias in justices determined to prevent democracy from acting as a brake on excessive greed and power in the        private sector. Wealth acquired under capitalism is in and of itself no enemy of democracy, but wealth armed with political power – power to shake off        opportunities for others to rise – is a proven danger. Thomas Jefferson had hoped that “we shall crush in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed        corporations which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and [to] bid defiance to the laws of our country.” James Madison        feared that the “spirit of speculation” would lead to “a government operating by corrupt influence, substituting the motive of private interest in        place of public duty.”

 

Jefferson and Madison didn’t live to see reactionary justices fulfill their worst fears. In 1886 a conservative court conferred the divine gift of life        on the Southern Pacific Railroad. Never mind that the Fourteenth Amendment declaring that no person should be deprived of “life, liberty or property        without due process of law” was enacted to protect the rights of freed slaves. The Court decided to give the same rights of “personhood” to        corporations that possessed neither a body to be kicked nor a soul to be damned. For over half a century the Court acted to protect the privileged. It        gutted the Sherman Antitrust Act by finding a loophole for a sugar trust. It killed a New York state law limiting working hours. Likewise a ban against        child labor. It wiped out a law that set minimum wages for women. And so on: one decision after another aimed at laws promoting the general welfare.”        The Roberts Court has picked up the mantle: Moneyed interests first, the public interest second, if at all.

 

The ink was hardly dry on the Citizens United decision when the U.S. Chamber of Commerce organized a covertly funded front and rained drones packed        with cash into the 2010 campaigns. According to the Sunlight Foundation, corporate front groups spent $126 million in the fall of 2010 while hiding the        identities of the donors. Another corporate cover group – the American Action Network – spent over $26 million of undisclosed corporate money in just        six Senate races and 26 House elections. And Karl Rove’s groups – American Crossroads/Crossroads GPS – seized on Citizens United to raise and        spend at least $38 million that NBC News said came from “a small circle of extremely wealthy Wall Street hedge fund and private equity moguls”- all        determined to water down financial reforms designed to prevent another collapse of the financial system. Jim Hightower has said it well: Today’s        proponents of corporate plutocracy “have simply elevated money itself above votes, establishing cold, hard cash as the real coin of political power.”

 

No wonder so many Americans have felt that sense of political impotence that the historian        Lawrence Goodwyn described as “the mass resignation” of        people who believe in the “dogma of democracy” on a superficial public level but whose hearts no longer burn with the conviction that they are part of        the deal. Against such odds, discouragement comes easily.

 

But if the generations before us had given up, slaves would still be waiting on these tables, on Election Day women would still be turned away from the        voting booths, and workers would still be committing a crime if they organized.

 

So once again: Take heart from the past and don’t ever count the people out. During the last quarter of the 19th century, the industrial revolution        created extraordinary wealth at the top and excruciating misery at the bottom. Embattled citizens rose up. Into their hearts, wrote the progressive        Kansas journalist William Allen White, “had come a sense that their civilization needed recasting, that their government had fallen into the hands of        self-seekers, that a new relation should be established between the haves and have-nots.” Not content to wring their hands and cry “Woe is us” everyday        citizens researched the issues, organized to educate their neighbors, held rallies, made speeches, petitioned and canvassed, marched and marched again.        They ploughed the fields and planted the seeds – sometimes in bloody soil – that twentieth century leaders used to restore “the general welfare” as a        pillar of American democracy. They laid down the now-endangered markers of a civilized society: legally ordained minimum wages, child labor laws,        workmen’s safety and compensation laws, pure foods and safe drugs, Social Security, Medicare, and rules that promote competitive markets over        monopolies and cartels. Remember: Democracy doesn’t begin at the top; it begins at the bottom, when flesh-and-blood human beings fight to rekindle the        patriot’s dream.

 

The Patriot’s Dream? Arlo Guthrie, remember? He wrote could be the unofficial anthem of Zuccotti Park. Listen up:

 

Living now here but for fortune
Placed by fate’s mysterious schemes
Who’d believe that we’re the ones asked
To try to rekindle the patriot’s dreams

Arise sweet destiny, time runs short
All of your patience has heard their retort
Hear us now for alone we can’t seem
To try to rekindle the patriot’s dreams

Can you hear the words being whispered
All along the American stream
Tyrants freed the just are imprisoned
Try to rekindle the patriot’s dreams

Ah but perhaps too much is being asked of too few
You and your children with nothing to do
Hear us now for alone we can’t seem
To try to rekindle the patriot’s dreams       

 

Who, in these cynical times, when democracy is on the ropes and the blows of great wealth pound and pound and pound again against America’s body        politic – who would dream such a radical thing?

Transcript courtesy of Nieman Watchdog.

Bill Moyers’ new show, Moyers & Company, premieres in January.

story from and video at:  http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bill-moyers/occupy-wall-street_b_1071288.html

———————————————————————————————–

Bill Moyers was born on June 5th, 1934 according to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Moyers

June 5th, 1934

June 5th

6 + 5 +2+0+1+1 = 15 = his personal year (from June 5th, 2011 to June 4th, 2012) = The ways of the world.

15 year + 10 (October) = 25 = his personal month (from October 5th, 2011 to November 4th, 2011) = Activist.  Advocate.  Rooting for the underdog.

15 year + 11 (November) = 26 = his personal month (from November 5th, 2011 to December 4th, 2011) = Popular.  Spokesperson.  In the news.  Making headlines.

—————————————————————————————–

—————————————————————————————–

—————————————————————————————–

find out your own numerology at:

http://www.learnthenumbers.com/

Read Full Post »

Tasha Casini is one of the wounded Occupy Oakland protesters

October 26, 2011      3:16 pm

An Occupy Oakland protester injured in the clash with police Tuesday night showed off a massive bruise Wednesday that she said she received in a direct hit from a rubber bullet.

Tasha Casini, 22, had been among the protesters camping at Oakland’s central plaza since Oct. 13.

Police said they did not use rubber bullets in the clash with protesters but many of the demonstrators said they had the bruises to prove otherwise.

PHOTOS: Occupy Oakland protest

“It was an anti-repression march,” Casini said of the demonstration, noting that she saw no violence from protesters.

Casini was wounded when she returned with others to try to retake the plaza after the “second or third order to disperse.”

A woman in the crowd was hit by a projectile fired by police, she said. As Casini rushed to help the unconscious demonstrator, she was struck in the back of the thigh.

A flash grenade landed right next to the downed woman’s face, and those trying to assist her were forced to flee.

Casini acknowledged that an officer a few blocks away had been hit with a paintball but said she was appalled at the force of the police response given the overall peaceful nature of the action.

Others seemed to agree. Leandra Johnson, 36, of El Sobrante stood in the intersection at the plaza, holding a sign reading: “We Have the Right to Peaceful Assembly” as motorists honked in support.

It was the mother of five’s first outing in support of the movement.

“Last night is the reason I’m here today, and it’ll be the reason I’m here tomorrow,” she said. “We have dictators falling around the world, and we support peaceful protest in those places, and this happens here.”

She called Oakland’s tactics “very disappointing.”

Richard Rossman, 83, said he and his wife joined other “old farts” in peaceful protest every Monday in Berkeley, where they live, to call for taxation of “the richest Americans.”

He said he thought the Occupy Oakland camp could have been disassembled more effectively.

He noted that Oakland’s gathering had taken on a disturbing flavor, marred by drinking, drugs, trash and violence and a large number of homeless people and others who incited conflict.

San Francisco’s action, which he visited early on, was more “joyful,” with a zero-tolerance policy for drinking and littering, he noted.

“I think it [Occupy Oakland] needed to be removed, but it could have been done in a different way,” he said, with more outreach from city leaders and public health officials.

Oakland city officials, however, insist they tried to work cooperatively with the camp and got nowhere. They were planning a news conference for later in the day to discuss police actions.

from:  http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2011/10/occupy-oakland-damage-clash-police.html

————————————————————————————–

Occupy Oakland began on October 10th, 2011 according to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupy_Oakland

October 10th, 2011

10 + 10 +2+0+1+1 = 24 = Occupy Oakland’s life lesson = what Occupy Oakland’s here to learn = In charge.  Taking charge.  Getting people to clean up their act.

—————————————————————————————

October 10th, 2011

10 + 10 = 20 = Occupy Oakland’s core number = Turning point.

—————————————————————————————

October 10th, 2011

10 + 10 +2+0+1+1 = 24 = Occupy Oakland’s personal year (from October 10th, 2011 to October 9th, 2012) = In charge.  Taking charge.  Getting people to clean up their act.

24 year + 10 (October) = 34 = Occupy Oakland’s personal month (from October 10th, 2011 to November 9th, 2011) = Generating a buzz.  Lashing out in anger.  Things happen really quickly.  Direct hit from a rubber bullet.

34 month + 26 (26th of the month on Wednesday October 26th, 2011) = 60 = Occupy Oakland’s personal day = Revolutionary.  Thinking outside of the box.  Moving forward.

—————————————————————————————

using the number/letter grid:
1      2      3       4       5       6      7      8      9
A      B     C       D       E       F      G      H      I
J      K      L      M      N       O      P      Q      R
S      T      U      V      W      X      Y      Z

 

Where:

A = 1              J = 1              S = 1

B = 2              K = 2             T = 2

C = 3              L = 3             U = 3

D = 4              M = 4            V = 4

E = 5              N = 5            W = 5

F = 6              O = 6             X = 6

G = 7              P = 7             Y = 7

H = 8              Q = 8             Z = 8

I = 9               R = 9

 

 

Occupy Oakland

633377 6123154        51

 

Occupy Oakland’s path of destiny = 51 = The police.  The government.  Officials.  Citizens.  Electorate.  Harsh.  Brutal.  Merciless.  Weapons.

—————————————————————————————–

—————————————————————————————–

—————————————————————————————–

find out your own numerology at:

http://www.learnthenumbers.com/

Read Full Post »

File:Jean Quan at Lake Merritt during her Campaign for Mayor.jpg

October 29, 2011

When Jean Quan was an undergraduate, she once sat for 10 hours inside Sproul Hall at the University of California, Berkeley, demanding better treatment for minority students. As a community activist, she helped unionize hospital workers and organized parents in a poor neighborhood of West Oakland.

At another time, Ms. Quan, the mayor of Oakland, might have joined the hundreds of protesters who have camped out near City Hall as part of Occupy Oakland. Instead, she is now a focus of their wrath. Late Thursday night, protesters chased her from a rally, shouting “Go home,” and refusing to let her speak. The protesters were reacting to her decision to shut down the encampment, which led to a night of street violence on Tuesday, with police unleashing tear gas on the demonstrators. Ms. Quan said the area had become unsanitary and unsafe.

“She raided us. People are hurt for no reason,” said Adam Jordan, an Occupy Oakland organizer, alluding to several people who were injured, including an Iraq war veteran who sustained a severe head wound. “She’s the establishment.”

Ms. Quan’s transformation from one of the more progressive mayors in the country into an object of Occupy Oakland’s scorn has left her isolated and weakened politically. Even her closest friends and supporters questioned her judgment. Dan Siegel, Ms. Quan’s legal adviser who has known her since her days at Berkeley, said he briefly considered resigning over the raid.

But instead of giving in, Ms. Quan is trying to win back the support of the protest community she once called her own.

On Friday, hours after she fled the rally, Ms. Quan said she would not resign. She apologized for a second time and sought to align herself with the Occupy movement, which claims to represent the 99 percent who they say are shut out of a political process that caters to corporations.

“Oakland is definitely part of this 99 percent,” Ms. Quan said.

On Thursday, Ms. Quan had reversed herself and allowed the protesters to resettle in Frank H. Ogawa Plaza, despite the fact that Oakland, facing a $76 million budget deficit, spent an estimated $1 million on cleanup costs and police overtime during the Occupy protest, according to finance officials.

Three-dozen tents were spread across the plaza on Friday morning; there were 150 before Tuesday’s raid. Phil Horne, a San Francisco attorney, was handing out yellow leaflets asking people to sign a petition to recall Ms. Quan as mayor. Her actions last week erased her accomplishments as an activist, he said.

Edwin, a 23-year-old office assistant from San Mateo who declined to give his last name out of concern he would lose his job, said he regretted that Ms. Quan had not been allowed to speak to the protesters. But he said he was not sure whether to forgive her.

“I’m willing to give her a second chance because of her history,” he said. “But if she continues to do what she’s been doing the last two days, I think she needs to go.”

Ms. Quan, who got her start in activism as an undergraduate at Berkeley, clearly has a lot of work to do in order to regain her anti-establishment credibility.

At Berkeley, she gained experience working with the Third World Liberation Front, whose efforts on behalf of minority students led to the establishment of the university’s ethnic studies program.

After graduation, Ms. Quan moved to Hong Kong, New York and Los Angeles, working in the labor movement. In 1980, she returned to the Bay Area and led a campaign against the Ku Klux Klan after five anti-Klan protesters were killed in Greensboro, N.C.

In the mid-1980s, Ms. Quan, who by then had two children with her husband, Floyd Huen, helped elect several progressive candidates to the Oakland school board. She then ran herself, and later became school board president before being elected to the City Council.

Mr. Siegel, her legal adviser, said part of her strength as an activist and politician is her tireless approach.

“When Jean runs for office and knocks on doors, the joke that people make is that they’ll vote for her because she won’t leave,” he said. “She’s not afraid when it gets dark, she’s not afraid when there’s an angry dog or if she’s in a sketchy neighborhood. She’s not afraid of a couple of angry people in the plaza.”

Ms. Quan often speaks in short forceful spurts. Since her upset victory last November, which made her the city’s first Asian-American mayor, she has sought to impose a progressive agenda on Oakland, but she has been stymied by polarizing politics, a struggling economy and her city’s 16 percent unemployment rate.

She often clashed with the police, recommending community organizing to offset a police force decimated by budget cuts. On Oct. 11, Chief Anthony Batts abruptly resigned. While he did not blame Ms. Quan directly, he said bureaucracy and micromanaging by city officials had made it impossible for him to do his job.

Long-time allies have encouraged Ms. Quan to embrace Occupy Oakland. Josie Camacho, executive director of the Alameda Labor Council, said she told Ms. Quan: “If we let this movement continue, we will have a lot of pride for stepping out there. And we will have your back. You have to look at things differently.”

Ms. Camacho said it was important to help build the movement, and allow people to stay where they want to stay. “When do you see homeless and students and families come together in a shared space?” she said. “At some point you have to take a risk and at some point you have to take a stand.”

On Thursday, Ms. Quan released a video in which she addressed the protesters directly and emphasized her background as an activist.

“We are a nation in crisis,” she said. “Oakland more than most cities faces budget cuts, unemployment and foreclosures. We are also a Progressive city. And as a long-time civil rights activist and union organizer I want my City to support the movement.”

On Friday, after fleeing from the rally, Ms. Quan decided she would not let up. She continued to court the protesters.

“This is a tough job,” she said. “I wanted to talk to them. I still want to talk to them and we stand ready to talk to them any time.”

from:  http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/30/us/Oakland-Protests-Test-Mayor-Jean-Quan-Activist-Background.html

————————————————————————————

Jean Quan was born on October 21st, 1949 according to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean_Quan

October 21st, 1949

10 + 21 +1+9+4+9 = 54 = her life lesson = what she is here to learn = Observing.  Dialogue.  Asking questions.  Thinking quickly.  Mental agility.  Things are not as they appear.

————————————————————————————

October 21st, 1949

October 21st

10 + 21 +2+0+1+1 = 35 = her personal year (from October 21st, 2011 to October 20th, 2012) = Standing ready.

35 year + 10 (October) = 45 = her personal month (from October 21st, 2011 to November 20th, 2011) = Apologies.  Investigation.  This is a tough job.

—————————————————————————————–

—————————————————————————————–

—————————————————————————————–

find out your own numerology at:

http://www.learnthenumbers.com/

Read Full Post »

5:44 PM EST     Tuesday October 11, 2011

A group of union-backed organizations joined the loosely defined Occupy Wall Street movement again Tuesday, leaving behind the confines of New York’s financial district for the posh neighborhoods that dot Manhattan’s Upper East Side, according to multiple group representatives.

Crowds also swelled in Lower Manhattan’s Zuccotti Park, where demonstrators waved placards and chanted slogans attacking corporate greed and social inequality.

The union-organized march, meanwhile, took protesters past the homes of well-to-do residents like billionaire David Koch, News Corp. CEO Rupert Murdoch and JP Morgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon.

Organizations such as UnitedNY, the Strong Economy for All Coalition, the Working Families Party, and New York Communities for Change were accompanied by protesters typically based in Zuccotti Park, a privately owned park in New York’s financial district.

The Upper East Side march was “in support” of the Occupy Wall Street movement, but was not organized by it, said T.J. Helmstetter, a spokesman for Working Families Party, a coalition of New York community and labor groups.

Protesters hopped on the subway, emerging at Fifth Avenue and 59th Street near Central Park, where organizers held a press conference that addressed both New York-centric themes, such as state taxes, and the movement’s broader concerns of social inequity.

“We are the 99%,” the group chanted, a reference to their insistence that most Americans lack the influence in their country’s political and financial affairs enjoyed by the elite 1%.

“I think it’s time that these people realize that people are hurting in this country and it’s time to reform what’s going on in Washington,” said New York resident Lenore Silverstein, who attended Tuesday’s march.

Emily Monroe , a North Carolina college student and marcher, said the city’s wealthiest “are buying billion-dollar apartments and living lavishly, while we are just trying to sustain ourselves.”

“The American dream is no longer possible because these people are stealing from the middle class,” she told CNN Radio.

New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, meanwhile, said authorities will defend protesters’ right to demonstrate, but he doesn’t appreciate “the bashing of all of the hardworking people who live and work here.”

“Our city depends on the jobs that the financial services industry provides,” Bloomberg said during a news conference in the Bronx.

He added that he didn’t understand what the picketing of wealthy and prominent New Yorkers is intended to achieve.

The mayor’s comments coincided with a state comptroller report released Tuesday that predicts Wall Street could lose an additional 10,000 jobs by the end of next year, raising the total number of jobs lost in the securities industry since 2008 to 32,000.

Earlier, in Boston, 129 protesters were arrested during a similar demonstration Tuesday, mostly for “unlawful assembly and trespassing,” said police spokesman Eddy Chrispin.

The group allegedly blocked traffic and refused to disperse while marching to “areas of the city where they hadn’t been previously,” he said.

Protesters have been occupying Dewey Square Park in downtown Boston, but expanded to the neighboring Rose Fitzgerald Kennedy Greenway on Monday night. Protesters were given a 1:30 a.m. deadline to move back to Dewey Square. Those who did not were arrested.

The nationwide Occupy movement has been largely peaceful, though it has led to some skirmishes with police and arrests. It has also stoked fervent public debate, including among politicians. Democrats have generally offered sympathy for protesters’ concerns while several Republicans, among them 2012 presidential candidates Herman Cain and Newt Gingrich, have described the demonstrations as “class warfare.”

The movement shows few signs of slowing down. Rallies and marches have been held in numerous towns and cities in recent days, with many more planned.

That includes a “Call to Action Against Banks” planned for Saturday, which New York’s Occupy Wall Street announced on its Facebook site.

“No longer will banks take our homes. No longer will banks rob students of our future. No longer will banks destroy the environment. No longer will banks fund the misery of war. No longer will banks cause massive unemployment. And no longer will banks create and profit from economic crisis without a struggle,” according to the online message Monday.

It then urges people to “visit your local Bank of America, Wells Fargo or Chase (branches) and let them know, we will not allow business as usual.”

“We. Will. Occupy. Everywhere,” the posting ends.

from:  http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/11/us/occupy-wall-street/

————————————————————————————-

Protesters affiliated with Occupy Wall Street moved uptown on Tuesday to demonstrate outside of some of New York's richest residents' homes.

Occupy Wall Street is on the move … uptown.

Why uptown? Because that’s where the rich folks live!

Community groups and progressive organizations that have been working with the broader Occupy Wall Street movement marched on Tuesday to the homes of JP Morgan Chase (JPM, Fortune 500) CEO Jamie Dimon, billionaire David Koch, hedge fund honcho John Paulson, Howard Milstein, and News Corp (NWSA, Fortune 500) CEO Rupert Murdoch.

The millionaires and billionaires were targeted for what event organizers called a “willingness to hoard wealth at the expense of the 99%.”

Making their way up 5th Ave., the protesters — relatively modest in number — chanted “we are the 99%” and “banks got bailed out, we got sold out.”

Until Tuesday, protesters had not strayed too far from downtown, where a home base of sorts has been established at Zuccotti Park.

The march was organized by UnitedNY, the Strong Economy for All Coalition, the Working Families Party and New York Communities for Change.

iReport: Occupy Wall Street protests

Protesters converged on 59th street near Central Park, where they started their tour just after noon.

Doug Forand, a spokesman for the groups, said that the protesters did not have a permit for the march, but were not planning on obstructing traffic and would stick to the sidewalks.

Organizers declined to estimate how many protesters would attend. A Facebook event page dedicated to the march had a modest number of confirmed attendees. Just over 300 people said they would attend as of 11 a.m. Tuesday.

On Monday, New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg — also a billionaire — said that Occupy Wall Street protesters could stay in Zuccotti Park indefinitely, so long as they obeyed the rules.

“The bottom line is people want to express themselves, and as long as they obey the laws, we’ll allow them to,” Bloomberg said.

from:  http://money.cnn.com/2011/10/10/news/economy/occupy_wall_street_protest/

————————————————————————————-

Occupy Wall Street started on Saturday September 17th, 2011

September 17th, 2011

9 + 17 +2+0+1+1 = 30 = Occupy Wall Street’s life lesson = what Occupy Wall Street is here to learn = Quality of life.  Fundamentally unsatisfied.  Perpetually offended.  Going to people’s houses.

————————————————————————————-

September 17th, 2011

9 + 17 = 26 = Occupy Wall Street’s core number = Popularity.  Posters.  Communication.  E-mail.  In the news.  Making headlines.  Celebrities.

————————————————————————————

September 17th, 2011

17 +2+0+1+1 = Occupy Wall Street’s secret number = On the world stage.  For all the world to see.  The human condition.

————————————————————————————-

using the number/letter grid:

 
1      2      3       4       5       6      7      8      9
A      B     C       D       E       F      G      H      I
J      K      L      M      N       O      P      Q      R
S      T      U      V      W      X      Y      Z

Where:

A = 1              J = 1              S = 1

B = 2              K = 2             T = 2

C = 3              L = 3             U = 3

D = 4              M = 4            V = 4

E = 5              N = 5            W = 5

F = 6              O = 6             X = 6

G = 7              P = 7             Y = 7

H = 8              Q = 8             Z = 8

I = 9               R = 9

 

 

Occupy Wall Street

633377 5133 129552       65

 

the path of destiny for Occupy Wall Street / how Occupy Wall Street learns what it is here to learn = 65 = Mansions.  Fat cats.  Corruption.  It’s up to the crowd. Economy.  Wealth gap.

 

—————————————————————————————–

—————————————————————————————–

—————————————————————————————–

find out your own numerology at:

http://www.learnthenumbers.com/

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »