Conquer Club

Night Strike wrote:

Symmetry wrote:I'm not sure how much weight this has at the moment, but looks like some people are starting to think of a Constitutional Convention, which would seem to satisfy the demands of both sides of the latest argument ITT. Might be an idea to carry forward and bring people to the table.

It would either be a dismal failure or a massive loss of rights for the people (which would end up being a dismal failure). The people at OWS don't want rights or the rule of law, they want to use mob rule to take from others and give to themselves. And then those "rights" would be enshrined forever in a new constitution. Our founders weren't in this for their own prosperity like OWS would be.

Apologies, but I'm not entirely sure how this part of the US gov't works when it comes to a Constitutional Convention. My understanding would be that grievances from all sides would be up for discussion and debate, rather than establishing a constitution based on the beliefs of a single group.

And, of course, the founders were in it for their own prosperity, among other issues.They weren't saints, just smart good people, who occasionally purchased and sold human beings for profit.

looks like i'll be the first person to vote IDK, and the last person to finally post in this thread

Night Strike wrote:It would either be a dismal failure or a massive loss of rights for the people (which would end up being a dismal failure). The people at OWS don't want rights or the rule of law, they want to use mob rule to take from others and give to themselves. And then those "rights" would be enshrined forever in a new constitution. Our founders weren't in this for their own prosperity like OWS would be.

Zzzzzzz; have you ever looked at ANYTHING objectively?

Lootifer wrote:

Night Strike wrote:It would either be a dismal failure or a massive loss of rights for the people (which would end up being a dismal failure). The people at OWS don't want rights or the rule of law, they want to use mob rule to take from others and give to themselves. And then those "rights" would be enshrined forever in a new constitution. Our founders weren't in this for their own prosperity like OWS would be.

Zzzzzzz; have you ever looked at ANYTHING objectively?

There's nothing to look at objectively. Communism =/= freedom, whether you have an objective or subjective viewpoint. I don't have to post 1 positive thing and 1 negative thing every single time I speak on a subject in order to be objective (especially since in the case of OWS, there might only be 1 positive thing).

Night Strike wrote:

Lootifer wrote:

Night Strike wrote:It would either be a dismal failure or a massive loss of rights for the people (which would end up being a dismal failure). The people at OWS don't want rights or the rule of law, they want to use mob rule to take from others and give to themselves. And then those "rights" would be enshrined forever in a new constitution. Our founders weren't in this for their own prosperity like OWS would be.

Zzzzzzz; have you ever looked at ANYTHING objectively?

There's nothing to look at objectively. Communism =/= freedom, whether you have an objective or subjective viewpoint. I don't have to post 1 positive thing and 1 negative thing every single time I speak on a subject in order to be objective (especially since in the case of OWS, there might only be 1 positive thing).

"The people at OWS don't want rights or the rule of law, they want to use mob rule to take from others and give to themselves."

Why do you continue to presume that OWS is this homogenous blob of people who only share this certain kind of goal?

What BBS said basically.

Your lack of objectivity is pretty clear (OWS isn't some thinly veiled communist movement...).

Lootifer wrote:What BBS said basically.

Your lack of objectivity is pretty clear (OWS isn't some thinly veiled communist movement...).

You're right, it's quite obvious that they promote a process of violent revolution in order to institute communist-like policies to satisfy their greed. There's not really anything "thinly veiled" with them.

Lootifer wrote:What BBS said basically.

Your lack of objectivity is pretty clear (OWS isn't some thinly veiled communist movement...).

The really bizarre thing is that what you are saying will actually be controversial among some of our more conservative colleagues.

Night Strike wrote:But rights aren't based on feelings. It will never matter what someone "feels", it's either a right or it's not a right.

Truth. "Rights" are what those more powerful than you let you have.

I dare somebody to use the words "media blackout" and "Constitution" in the same sentence.

spurgistan wrote:I dare somebody to use the words "media blackout" and "Constitution" in the same sentence.

But, you just did.

All for one, and all for one!


--Andy

I personally don't see how sitting around in park in tents is going to convince politicians or wall street executives to change their ways, and the way they're doing it is not going to get the public support to rally the 99% on their side against the 1%. They have some good ideas, but the lack or organization, and inability to appeal to the people, along with the coming winter weather will ultimately lead to the movement dying off.

Crazyirishman wrote:I personally don't see how sitting around in park in tents is going to convince politicians or wall street executives to change their ways, and the way they're doing it is not going to get the public support to rally the 99% on their side against the 1%. They have some good ideas, but the lack or organization, and inability to appeal to the people, along with the coming winter weather will ultimately lead to the movement dying off.

What ARE the good ideas? Obviously it's a conglomerate of individuals who are protesting individual things, but what I got in the beginning, and what I'm getting now, is "we want the wealth to be redistributed".

And here are a few of the Wackos who persist in Toronto: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/s ... court.html

Oh joy, a socialist liberal "named" "Sunny Justice" is the first person photographed. She should be their spokesperson.

Crazyirishman wrote:I personally don't see how sitting around in park in tents is going to convince politicians or wall street executives to change their ways, and the way they're doing it is not going to get the public support to rally the 99% on their side against the 1%. They have some good ideas, but the lack or organization, and inability to appeal to the people, along with the coming winter weather will ultimately lead to the movement dying off.

For me, the movement served as a forum for exchanging ideas. People should be talking about what's going on. People should be more aware. OWS was providing that service, but apparently, talk is dangerous.

The movement wasn't dying off--until the city orders the police to beat up people, then "yeah, what a dead cause!"

Night Strike wrote:

Lootifer wrote:What BBS said basically.

Your lack of objectivity is pretty clear (OWS isn't some thinly veiled communist movement...).

You're right, it's quite obvious that they promote a process of violent revolution in order to institute communist-like policies to satisfy their greed. There's not really anything "thinly veiled" with them.

lol u so funny NS!

"a process of violent revolution" lol, OWS is like factory line for producing and distributing guns! AHHH!!!!

OMG! THEY"VE GOT GUNS BUT NOT REALLY BUT YEAH THEY DO< SO GAS AND SHOOT THEM!!!!

BigBallinStalin wrote:

Night Strike wrote:

Lootifer wrote:What BBS said basically.

Your lack of objectivity is pretty clear (OWS isn't some thinly veiled communist movement...).

You're right, it's quite obvious that they promote a process of violent revolution in order to institute communist-like policies to satisfy their greed. There's not really anything "thinly veiled" with them.

lol u so funny NS!

"a process of violent revolution" lol, OWS is like factory line for producing and distributing guns! AHHH!!!!

OMG! THEY"VE GOT GUNS BUT NOT REALLY BUT YEAH THEY DO< SO GAS AND SHOOT THEM!!!!

You don't have to have a gun to be violent. They were doing a pretty good job of it by using glass bottles, bats, breaking into businesses, etc.

BigBallinStalin wrote:

Crazyirishman wrote:I personally don't see how sitting around in park in tents is going to convince politicians or wall street executives to change their ways, and the way they're doing it is not going to get the public support to rally the 99% on their side against the 1%. They have some good ideas, but the lack or organization, and inability to appeal to the people, along with the coming winter weather will ultimately lead to the movement dying off.

For me, the movement served as a forum for exchanging ideas. People should be talking about what's going on. People should be more aware. OWS was providing that service, but apparently, talk is dangerous.

The movement wasn't dying off--until the city orders the police to beat up people, then "yeah, what a dead cause!"

Indeed, there seems to be a bit of cognitive dissonance on this. The people who started off saying that it was just a temporary thing with no purpose have had to watch the movement evolve and expand into different countries. The response, of course, is that that somehow just shows that they were more right.

Anyway, OWS protesters in London have just taken over a building owned by the UBS banking group in the centre of London. The building had been abandoned by the company for several years, and OWS London intend to use it for public lectures and sheltering the homeless during the winter.

Damn commies.

Night Strike wrote:

BigBallinStalin wrote:

Night Strike wrote:

Lootifer wrote:What BBS said basically.

Your lack of objectivity is pretty clear (OWS isn't some thinly veiled communist movement...).

You're right, it's quite obvious that they promote a process of violent revolution in order to institute communist-like policies to satisfy their greed. There's not really anything "thinly veiled" with them.

lol u so funny NS!

"a process of violent revolution" lol, OWS is like factory line for producing and distributing guns! AHHH!!!!

OMG! THEY"VE GOT GUNS BUT NOT REALLY BUT YEAH THEY DO< SO GAS AND SHOOT THEM!!!!

You don't have to have a gun to be violent. They were doing a pretty good job of it by using glass bottles, bats, breaking into businesses, etc.

Are you going to apply small instances of violence to every single individual of every single OWS-related movement?

Where are the news stories of the Occupy movement in New Orleans trashing businesses, shooting cops, and burning cars? Did that happen in New York? Is this common, or is NS merely applying a small instance to the entire movement?

Where are they getting all of their food from? It appears that people are mass serving them. Why?!? Why are the protestors clinging to their cell phones and technological gadgets?

General Brock II wrote:Where are they getting all of their food from? It appears that people are mass serving them. Why?!? Why are the protestors clinging to their cell phones and technological gadgets?

Seems like a couple of leading questions. What's your point?

Night Strike wrote:

BigBallinStalin wrote:

Night Strike wrote:

Lootifer wrote:What BBS said basically.

Your lack of objectivity is pretty clear (OWS isn't some thinly veiled communist movement...).

You're right, it's quite obvious that they promote a process of violent revolution in order to institute communist-like policies to satisfy their greed. There's not really anything "thinly veiled" with them.

lol u so funny NS!

"a process of violent revolution" lol, OWS is like factory line for producing and distributing guns! AHHH!!!!

OMG! THEY"VE GOT GUNS BUT NOT REALLY BUT YEAH THEY DO< SO GAS AND SHOOT THEM!!!!

You don't have to have a gun to be violent. They were doing a pretty good job of it by using glass bottles, bats, breaking into businesses, etc.

Where do you get this information? You have yet to supply a single link, video, anything with proof.

Symmetry wrote:

General Brock II wrote:Where are they getting all of their food from? It appears that people are mass serving them. Why?!? Why are the protestors clinging to their cell phones and technological gadgets?

Seems like a couple of leading questions. What's your point?

Billionaires from all around the world that want to see America fall and profit off it have been buying food for everyone who wants some. I posted about this probably in this thread or the other OWS thread.

George Soros bought pizza for everyone, not to mention Obama has a billion dollars for re-election. In related news, Obama spending part of his billion dollars on food for OWS is completely within the parameters of getting re-elected.

General Brock II wrote:Where are they getting all of their food from? It appears that people are mass serving them. Why?!? Why are the protestors clinging to their cell phones and technological gadgets?

my impression is that they have been continuously fundraising. Both for food and legal costs. For example the occupy Ottawa group have collection boxes set up. It wouldn't surprise me if other groups did the same.

Phatscotty wrote:

Symmetry wrote:

General Brock II wrote:Where are they getting all of their food from? It appears that people are mass serving them. Why?!? Why are the protestors clinging to their cell phones and technological gadgets?

Seems like a couple of leading questions. What's your point?

Billionaires from all around the world that want to see America fall and profit off it have been buying food for everyone who wants some. I posted about this probably in this thread or the other OWS thread.

George Soros bought pizza for everyone, not to mention Obama has a billion dollars for re-election. In related news, Obama spending part of his billion dollars on food for OWS is completely within the parameters of getting re-elected.

The Obama re-election campaign of course! it makes perfect sense!