Frank Miller completely loses the plot

[sidious618]

Miller claimed that the Occupy Movement was, in essence, a bunch of criminals. The arrest records would seem to bear this out. There have been many, many, more arrests than one saw at a Tea Party rally, more than three hundred, in fact.

The Tea Party loses no matter that argument because the Tea Party and its policies would hurt the poor, the ones who have no voice. To compare OWS and the Tea Party is absurd. We're talking about the party that wants to let people without health care die. I will not address Tea Party vs. OWS anymore in this post because it's an absurd comparison.

Now as to the arrests, yes, there have been many. That's what happens when there is civil disobedience. Martin Luther King Jr. was also arrested. I guess the Tea Party is now better than him, too?

And that doesn't include the guy who shot at the White House

That article is so poor that I won't waste time rebutting it. What I will say is that the man in question had very libertarian viewpoints. Is there a group out there that'd like him?

All of which tends to make Miller look at least a bit less crazy than some have alleged.

Not at all.

I suppose one can say "yeah, but...you can't judge an entire movement by 300+ members."

However, the Occupy Movement wants us to think of them as some sort of unified force (hence, the "we are the 99%" rhetoric).

This doesn't even make sense.

 

[the G-man]

[But when the "Occupy" clowns are found to have hundreds of thugs in their midst, many on the left suddenly says "oh, no, we can't have anyone generalize them. That wouldn't be civil."

Based on the arrests so far, Miller seems to be more accurate than, say, Janeane Garofalo.

Of course Tea partiers didn't get arrested, they were officially approved!

Ah, the old "it's a conspiracy" dodge. I hope your tinfoil hat isn't too tight.

 

[stj]

^^^The news media publicized the Tea Party from the very beginning. That was open, no, it was blatant. The Occupy movement was buried as long as possible, and that too was blatant. There was no conspiracy, just the same old same old. False facts you make up yourself are the mental equivalent of tin foil hats however.

 

[Stevil2001]

^^^The news media publicized the Tea Party from the very beginning. That was open, no, it was blatant. The Occupy movement was buried as long as possible, and that too was blatant. There was no conspiracy, just the same old same old. False facts you make up yourself are the mental equivalent of tin foil hats however.

This is demonstrably false.

 

[Brian]

 

[stj]

^^^The news media publicized the Tea Party from the very beginning. That was open, no, it was blatant. The Occupy movement was buried as long as possible, and that too was blatant. There was no conspiracy, just the same old same old. False facts you make up yourself are the mental equivalent of tin foil hats however.

This is demonstrably false.

First, the comparison of news coverage of OWS and first Tea Party demos is meaningless without comparing the events. It is foolish to assume that they were equally newsworthy and draw conclusions about bias in media coverage. Second, even this source has to concede that the Tea Party soon got a media champion, whereas the Occupy movement was blacked for far longer than the first week. And the official excuses about the suppression of the movement are dutifully relayed without the slightest effort at critical judgment.

The ability to paste a link is not the same as the ability to analyze a tendentious source.

 

[Captaindemotion]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2011/nov/27/alan-moore-v-vendetta-mask-protest

Perhaps unsurprisingly, Alan Moore, whose V for Vendetta mask has been appropriated by many protestors, and who is no fan of Miller, looks on the Occupy movement more favourably:

"At the moment, the demonstrators seem to me to be making clearly moral moves, protesting against the ridiculous state that our banks and corporations and political leaders have brought us to."

 

[MNM]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2011/nov/27/alan-moore-v-vendetta-mask-protest

Perhaps unsurprisingly, Alan Moore, whose V for Vendetta mask has been appropriated by many protestors, and who is no fan of Miller, looks on the Occupy movement more favourably:

And what he says is laughable as he lives in the UK and the Occupy people there have no clear idea, at all, as to why they are doing it. ask 10 of them and you get 10 different answers.

Though it is not a surprise it's from the Guardian, a very leftist paper, that got so excited when those riots broke out a while ago, thinking it was "the revolution", only to be disappointed when most of the people involved when asked by reporters were only too happy to say they rioted because they could get free stuff.

 

[Sci]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2011/nov/27/alan-moore-v-vendetta-mask-protest

Perhaps unsurprisingly, Alan Moore, whose V for Vendetta mask has been appropriated by many protestors, and who is no fan of Miller, looks on the Occupy movement more favourably:

And what he says is laughable as he lives in the UK and the Occupy people there have no clear idea, at all, as to why they are doing it. ask 10 of them and you get 10 different answers.

Doesn't that just mean there are ten things wrong with society instead of just one?

 

[Haggis and tatties]

I watched the video of the policeman indiscriminately spraying pepper spray across a bunch of young adults having a sit in protest on a campus..........Disgraceful behaviour for a policeman...........I thought this type of equipment was issued to police to be used as a last resort when in a threatening situation.

 

[RoJoHen]

Hipsters are scary!

 

[Captaindemotion]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2011/nov/27/alan-moore-v-vendetta-mask-protest

Perhaps unsurprisingly, Alan Moore, whose V for Vendetta mask has been appropriated by many protestors, and who is no fan of Miller, looks on the Occupy movement more favourably:

And what he says is laughable as he lives in the UK and the Occupy people there have no clear idea, at all, as to why they are doing it. ask 10 of them and you get 10 different answers.

Though it is not a surprise it's from the Guardian, a very leftist paper, that got so excited when those riots broke out a while ago, thinking it was "the revolution", only to be disappointed when most of the people involved when asked by reporters were only too happy to say they rioted because they could get free stuff.

Why is it laughable that someone in the UK should have an opinion on it? Don't we live in an information age?

It is equally laughable when Americans support uprisings in Libya or Egypt or have a view on anti-government agitators in Iran or China?

I'm sure you'll disregard this, it coming from the Guardian (obviously we should only trust Fox News and the Wall Street Journal) but as regards the idea that OWS don't know what they're protesting about:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/nov/25/shocking-truth-about-crackdown-occupy

The No 1 agenda item: get the money out of politics. Most often cited was legislation to blunt the effect of the Citizens United ruling, which lets boundless sums enter the campaign process. No 2: reform the banking system to prevent fraud and manipulation, with the most frequent item being to restore the Glass-Steagall Act – the Depression-era law, done away with by President Clinton, that separates investment banks from commercial banks. This law would correct the conditions for the recent crisis, as investment banks could not take risks for profit that create kale derivatives out of thin air, and wipe out the commercial and savings banks.
No 3 was the most clarifying: draft laws against the little-known loophole that currently allows members of Congress to pass legislation affecting Delaware-based corporations in which they themselves are investors.

Now, personally, I can't see how anyone who is interested in clean, honest politics, be they right or left wing, could possibly be against 1 and 3 of those answers. But as I live in Ireland, I guess my opinion is merely laughable.

 

[Robert Maxwell]

I watched the video of the policeman indiscriminately spraying pepper spray across a bunch of young adults having a sit in protest on a campus..........Disgraceful behaviour for a policeman...........I thought this type of equipment was issued to police to be used as a last resort when in a threatening situation.

Nope, nonlethal weapons (tasers, pepper spray, etc.) are the first resort as soon as someone appears not to be complying.

Shooting you to death is the last resort.

 

[Captaindemotion]

^ So 'not complying' should result in pepper spray, tasers etc as a first option?

What about negotiation, restraint such as handcuffs, armlocks, carrying away, etc?

 

[RoJoHen]

Yeah, weapons of any kind should really be a middle resort. First resort should always be talking.

 

[Hound of UIster]

^ So 'not complying' should result in pepper spray, tasers etc as a first option?

What about negotiation, restraint such as handcuffs, armlocks, carrying away, etc?

There is no reasoning with hipsters. You have gotta shot them with something to make them understand.

 

[RoJoHen]

^ So 'not complying' should result in pepper spray, tasers etc as a first option?

What about negotiation, restraint such as handcuffs, armlocks, carrying away, etc?

There is no reasoning with hipsters. You have gotta shot them with something to make them understand.

Surely there must be some kind of iPhone pepper spray app that would have been just as effective.

 

[the G-man]

^ So 'not complying' should result in pepper spray, tasers etc as a first option?

What about negotiation, restraint such as handcuffs, armlocks, carrying away, etc?

CBS recently interviewed an expert who explained that most of what you suggest is arguaby more dangerous:

• Charles J. Kelly, a former Baltimore Police Department lieutenant who wrote the department's use of force guidelines, said pepper spray is a "compliance tool" that can be used on subjects who do not resist, and is preferable to simply lifting protesters.
  
  "When you start picking up human bodies, you risk hurting them," Kelly said. "Bodies don't have handles on them."
  
  After reviewing the video, Kelly said he observed at least two cases of "active resistance" from protesters. In one instance, a woman pulls her arm back from an officer. In the second instance, a protester curls into a ball. Each of those actions could have warranted more force, including baton strikes and pressure-point techniques.
  
  "What I'm looking at is fairly standard police procedure," Kelly said.

Perhaps unsurprisingly, Alan Moore, whose V for Vendetta mask has been appropriated by many protestors, and who is no fan of Miller, looks on the Occupy movement more favourably

Speaking of that mask, according to the New York Times: What few people seem to know is that Time Warner, one of the largest media companies in the world and parent of Warner Brothers, owns the rights to the "Guy Fawkes" image and is paid a licensing fee with the sale of each mask.

So, the anti-corporate protesters, by wearing Moore's masks, are enriching the very "corporate media" so many of them claim to be against. Brilliant.

 

[Haggis and tatties]

I watched the video of the policeman indiscriminately spraying pepper spray across a bunch of young adults having a sit in protest on a campus..........Disgraceful behaviour for a policeman...........I thought this type of equipment was issued to police to be used as a last resort when in a threatening situation.

Nope, nonlethal weapons (tasers, pepper spray, etc.) are the first resort as soon as someone appears not to be complying.

Shooting you to death is the last resort.

That's some scary stuff, i had no idea the police were allowed to use such things in such a manner, especially dealing with something like a peacefull protest, and used in such a hap hazard manner......still very shocking to see.

 

[Captaindemotion]

^ So 'not complying' should result in pepper spray, tasers etc as a first option?

What about negotiation, restraint such as handcuffs, armlocks, carrying away, etc?

CBS recently interviewed an expert who explained that most of what you suggest is arguaby more dangerous:

• Charles J. Kelly, a former Baltimore Police Department lieutenant who wrote the department's use of force guidelines, said pepper spray is a "compliance tool" that can be used on subjects who do not resist, and is preferable to simply lifting protesters.
  
  "When you start picking up human bodies, you risk hurting them," Kelly said. "Bodies don't have handles on them."
  
  After reviewing the video, Kelly said he observed at least two cases of "active resistance" from protesters. In one instance, a woman pulls her arm back from an officer. In the second instance, a protester curls into a ball. Each of those actions could have warranted more force, including baton strikes and pressure-point techniques.
  
  "What I'm looking at is fairly standard police procedure," Kelly said.

Wow, a former police lieutenant backing up the police. Imagine that. So surprising.

Speaking of that [V for Vendetta] mask, according to the New York Times: What few people seem to know is that Time Warner, one of the largest media companies in the world and parent of Warner Brothers, owns the rights to the "Guy Fawkes" image and is paid a licensing fee with the sale of each mask.

So, the anti-corporate protesters, by wearing Moore's masks, are enriching the very "corporate media" so many of them claim to be against. Brilliant.

That's talked about by Moore in the link I posted to. Of course, the flipside is that TW are against the protests but quite happy to rake in the coinage. Anyway, does that in any way detract from the point the protestors are making?