demonstration

[moreluck]

Dem Leaders Backing Occupy Wall Street Have Received The Most Contributions From . . . Wall Street…
Via Heritage Action:

Despite their support of the Occupy Wall Street movement, (who, unlike the Tea Party, believe government is the answer to our economic problems), Democrats have enjoyed large paychecks from the industry.

President Obama, former-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), Congresswoman and chair of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL), and Congressman Barney Frank (D-MA) have all raised significant funds from Wall Street – and these numbers are just since 2008!

This information was pulled from OpenSecrets.org. They don’t quite tell the whole story, since Presidential donations are listed differently than other politicians. So the President’s funds are much higher. He’s actually raised $3.9 million just this year so far. But, he has raised nearly $12 million in Wall Street donations for the DNC. In total, that’s more than all the Republican Presidential candidates combined have received from Wall Street.

Yet President Obama supports the Occupy Wall Street Movement. He said that their protests were a reflection of a “broad-based frustration about how our financial system works.” He has also adopted the term “99%” when talking about raising taxes.
Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) has also spoken favorably for the protesters, saying “I support the message to the establishment, whether it’s Wall Street or the political establishment and the rest, that change has to happen.” Where was this support when the Tea Party was taking on the political establishment, hmm?

Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL) parroted Pelosi by saying that these protests are ““symbolic of the frustration that middle class folks and working people feel that the wealthy always seem to have the wind at their backs.” She went on to say that, “[w]e understand their frustration, we applaud their activism and hopefully they’re going to help get the Republicans in Washington’s attention so we shift the Republican’s focus from just Barack Obama’s job, to everyone’s job,”
Not surprisingly, Debbie Wasserman Schultz also denounced the Tea Party.

And finally, Congressman Barney Frank (D-MA), who has raked in more from Wall Street than Pelosi and Wasserman Schultz combined. Just after announcing his support for Occupy Wall Street, Congressman Frank headed to a fundraiser – with Wall Street bankers. How’s that for hypocrisy? Of course, he had an answer for that, saying:
“If you take money from them, but you don’t vote [for] the things they want, how does that put you in conflict?”
I can think of a few ways.
​

 

[Babagounj]

well done Oakland.
On the East Coast, we are waiting for the cold wet weather to put an end to this lawless mob.
Also we are waiting for the invasion of Norway Rats { they are all over Boston, something left over from the olden days of ocean shipping } with their fleas and sickness.

 

[wkmac]

Great piece by Matt Taibbi @ Rolling Stone

I was surprised, amused and annoyed all at once when I found out yesterday that some maroon-provocateur linked to notorious right-wing cybergoon Andrew Breitbart had infiltrated
a series of private e-mail lists – including one that I have been participating in – and was using them to run an exposé on the supposed behind-the-scenes marionetting of the OWS movement by the liberal media.
According to various web reports, what happened was that a private "cyber-security researcher" named Thomas Ryan somehow accessed a series of email threads between various individuals and dumped them all on BigGovernment.com, Breitbart's site. Gawker is also reporting that Ryan forwarded some of these emails to the FBI and the NYPD.
I have no idea whether those email exchanges are the same as the ones I was involved with. But what is clear is that some private email exchanges between myself and a number of other people – mostly financial journalists and activists who know each other from having covered the crisis from the same angle in the last three years, people like Barry Ritholz, Dylan Ratigan, former regulator William Black, Glenn Greenwald and myself – ended up being made public.
There is nothing terribly interesting in any of these exchanges. Most all of the things written were things all of us ended up saying publicly in our various media forums. In my case, what I wrote was almost an exact copy of my Rolling Stone article last week, suggesting a list of demands for the movement. I said I thought having demands was a good idea and listed a few things I thought demonstrators could focus on. Others disagreed, and there was a friendly back-and-forth.
So I was amazed to wake up this morning and find that various right-wing sites had used these exchanges to build a story about a conspiracy of left-wing journalists. "Busted. Emails Show Liberal Media & Far Left Cranks Conspired With #OWS Protesters to Craft Message," wrote one.
Breitbart's site, BigGovernment.com, went further, saying that the Occupy Washington D.C. movement is "working with well-known media members to craft its demands and messaging while these media members report on the movement."
The list, the site wrote, include:

...well known names such as MSNBC’s Dylan Ratigan, Rolling Stone’s Matt Tiabbi [sic] who both are actively participating; involvement from other listers such as Bill Moyers and Glenn Greenwald plus well-known radicals like Noam Chomsky, remains unclear.
​

Aside from the appalling fact of these a**holes stealing private emails and bragging about it in public, the whole story is completely absurd. None of the people on the list, as far as I know, are actually organizers of OWS -- I know I'm not one, anyway.
In fact, I was surprised by the entire characterization of this list as being some kind of official wing of OWS. I thought it was just a bunch of emails from friends of mine, talking about what advice we would give protesters, if any of them asked, which in my case anyway they definitely did not.
This whole episode to me underscores an unpleasant development for OWS. There is going to be a fusillade of attempts from many different corners to force these demonstrations into the liberal-conservative blue-red narrative.
This will be an effort to transform OWS from a populist and wholly non-partisan protest against bailouts, theft, insider trading, self-dealing, regulatory capture and the market-perverting effect of the Too-Big-To-Fail banks into something a little more familiar and less threatening, i.e. a captive "liberal" uprising that the right will use to whip up support and the Democrats will try to turn into electoral energy for 2012.
Tactically, what we'll see here will be a) people firmly on the traditional Democratic side claiming to speak for OWS, and b) people on the right-Republican side attempting to portray OWS as a puppet of well-known liberals and other Democratic interests.
On the Democratic side, we've already seen a lot of this behavior, particularly in the last week or so. Glenn Greenwald wrote about this a lot last week, talking about how Obama has already made it clear that he is "on the same side as the Wall Street protesters" and that the Democratic Party, through the DCCC (its House fundraising arm), has jumped into the fray by circulating a petition seeking 100,000 party supporters to affirm that “I stand with the Occupy Wall Street protests.”(I wonder how firmly the DCCC was standing with OWS sentiment back when it was pushing for the bailouts and the repeal of Glass-Steagall Act).
We've similarly heard about MoveOn.org jumping into the demonstrations and attempting, seemingly, to assume leadership roles in the movement.
All of this is the flip side of the coin that has people like Breitbart trying to frame OWS as a socialist uprising and a liberal media conspiracy. The aim here is to redraw the protests along familiar battle lines.
The Rush Limbaughs of the world are very comfortable with a narrative that has Noam Chomsky, MoveOn and Barack Obama on one side, and the Tea Party and Republican leaders on the other. The rest of the traditional media won't mind that narrative either, if it can get enough "facts" to back it up. They know how to do that story and most of our political media is based upon that Crossfire paradigm of left-vs-right commentary shows and NFL Today-style team-vs-team campaign reporting.
What nobody is comfortable with is a movement in which virtually the entire spectrum of middle class and poor Americans is on the same page, railing against incestuous political and financial corruption on Wall Street and in Washington. The reality is that Occupy Wall Street and the millions of middle Americans who make up the Tea Party are natural allies and should be on the same page about most of the key issues, and that's a story our media won't want to or know how to handle.
Take, for instance, the matter of the Too-Big-To-Fail banks, which people like me and Barry Ritholz have focused on as something that could be a key issue for OWS. These gigantic institutions have put millions of ordinary people out of their homes thanks to a massive fraud scheme for which they were not punished, owing to their enormous influence with government and their capture of the regulators.
This is an issue for the traditional "left" because it's a classic instance of overweening corporate power -- but it's an issue for the traditional "right" because these same institutions are also the biggest welfare bums of all time, de facto wards of the state who sucked trillions of dollars of public treasure from the pockets of patriotic taxpayers from coast to coast.
Both traditional constituencies want these companies off the public teat and back swimming on their own in the cruel seas of the free market, where they will inevitably be drowned in their corruption and greed, if they don't reform immediately. This is a major implicit complaint of the OWS protests and it should absolutely strike a nerve with Tea Partiers, many of whom were talking about some of the same things when they burst onto the scene a few years ago.
The banks know this. They know they have no "natural" constituency among voters, which is why they spend such fantastic amounts of energy courting the mainstream press and such huge sums lobbying politicians on both sides of the aisle.
The only way the Goldmans and Citis and Bank of Americas can survive is if they can suck up popular political support indirectly, either by latching onto such vague right-populist concepts as "limited government" and "free-market capitalism" (ironic, because none of them would survive ten minutes without the federal government's bailouts and other protections) or, alternatively, by presenting themselves as society's bulwark against communism, lefty extremism, Noam Chomsky, etc.
All of which is a roundabout way of saying one thing: beware of provocateurs on both sides of the aisle. This movement is going to attract many Breitbarts, of both the left and right variety. They're going to try to identify fake leaders, draw phony battle lines, and then herd everybody back into the same left-right cage matches of old. Whenever that happens, we just have to remember not to fall for the trap. When someone says this or that person speaks for OWS, don't believe it. This thing is bigger than one or two or a few people, and it isn't part of the same old story.

 

[wkmac]

Corporations Verses The Market by Roderick Long @ Cato Unbound

Defenders of the free market are often accused of being apologists for big business and shills for the corporate elite. Is this a fair charge?
No and yes. Emphatically no—because corporate power and the free market are actually antithetical; genuine competition is big business’s worst nightmare. But also, in all too many cases, yes—because although liberty and plutocracy cannot coexist, simultaneous advocacy of both is all too possible.
First, the no. Corporations tend to fear competition, because competition exerts downward pressure on prices and upward pressure on salaries; moreover, success on the market comes with no guarantee of permanency, depending as it does on outdoing other firms at correctly figuring out how best to satisfy forever-changing consumer preferences, and that kind of vulnerability to loss is no picnic. It is no surprise, then, that throughout U.S. history corporations have been overwhelmingly hostile to the free market. Indeed, most of the existing regulatory apparatus—including those regulations widely misperceived as restraints on corporate power—were vigorously supported, lobbied for, and in some cases even drafted by the corporate elite.[1]
Corporate power depends crucially on government intervention in the marketplace.[2] This is obvious enough in the case of the more overt forms of government favoritism such as subsidies, bailouts,[3] and other forms of corporate welfare; protectionist tariffs; explicit grants of monopoly privilege; and the seizing of private property for corporate use via eminent domain (as in Kelo v. New London). But these direct forms of pro-business intervention are supplemented by a swarm of indirect forms whose impact is arguably greater still.
As I have written elsewhere:

One especially useful service that the state can render the corporate elite is cartel enforcement. Price-fixing agreements are unstable on a free market, since while all parties to the agreement have a collective interest in seeing the agreement generally hold, each has an individual interest in breaking the agreement by underselling the other parties in order to win away their customers; and even if the cartel manages to maintain discipline over its own membership, the oligopolistic prices tend to attract new competitors into the market. Hence the advantage to business of state-enforced cartelisation. Often this is done directly, but there are indirect ways too, such as imposing uniform quality standards that relieve firms from having to compete in quality. (And when the quality standards are high, lower-quality but cheaper competitors are priced out of the market.)
The ability of colossal firms to exploit economies of scale is also limited in a free market, since beyond a certain point the benefits of size (e.g., reduced transaction costs) get outweighed by diseconomies of scale (e.g., calculational chaos stemming from absence of price feedback)—unless the state enables them to socialise these costs by immunising them from competition – e.g., by imposing fees, licensure requirements, capitalisation requirements, and other regulatory burdens that disproportionately impact newer, poorer entrants as opposed to richer, more established firms.[4]
​

Nor does the list end there. Tax breaks to favored corporations represent yet another non-obvious form of government intervention. There is of course nothing anti-market about tax breaks per se; quite the contrary. But when a firm is exempted from taxes to which its competitors are subject, it becomes the beneficiary of state coercion directed against others, and to that extent owes its success to government intervention rather than market forces.

 

[moreluck]

Pundit Press: OCCUPY PORTLAND: A crime infested cesspool?

 

[moreluck]

Video Gold: Leftist Loon Threatens To “Declare War” On Oakland Police Over Occupier Arrests…He has a pair of handcuffs, and he knows how to use them.

 

[moreluck]

The former New York office for ACORN, the disbanded community activist group, is playing a key role in the self-proclaimed “leaderless” Occupy Wall Street movement, organizing “guerrilla” protest events and hiring door-to-door canvassers to collect money under the banner of various causes while spending it on protest-related activities, sources tell FoxNews.com.
The former director of New York ACORN, Jon Kest, and his top aides are now busy working at protest events for New York Communities for Change (NYCC). That organization was created in late 2009 when some ACORN offices disbanded and reorganized under new names after undercover video exposes prompted Congress to cut off federal funds.

NYCC’s connection to ACORN isn’t a tenuous one: It works from the former ACORN offices in Brooklyn, uses old ACORN office stationery, employs much of the old ACORN staff and, according to several sources, engages in some of the old organization’s controversial techniques to raise money, interest and awareness for the protests.

Sources said NYCC has hired about 100 former ACORN-affiliated staff members from other cities — paying some of them $100 a day — to attend and support Occupy Wall Street. Dozens of New York homeless people recruited from shelters are also being paid to support the protests, at the rate of $10 an hour, the sources said.

At least some of those hired are being used as door-to-door canvassers to collect money that’s used to support the protests.
Sources said cash donations collected by NYCC on behalf of some unions and various causes are being pooled and spent on Occupy Wall Street. The money is used to buy supplies, pay staff and cover travel expenses for the ex-ACORN members brought to New York for the protests.

In one such case, sources said, NYCC staff members collected cash donations for what they were told was a United Federation of Teachers fundraising drive, but the money was diverted to the protests.

 

[moreluck]

Wednesday, October 26, 2011 @ 11:30 am | Leader of Occupy Atlanta: “We Have a Team of Alchemists And Faith Healers” Who Are Trying To “Levitate” The Koch Brothers Building…

Lay off the doobage.

ATLANTA — Wearing his trademark red knit cap, Tim Franzen is very concerned when I meet him at Woodruff Park. He points to a man standing just three feet from former Mayor and Ambassador Andrew Young.

The man has an AK-47 slung around his back. The man goes by the name of ‘Porch.’ Porch later tells me he is at the park to support the occupiers and the gun is part of that support.

Franzen has become the unofficial leader of Occupy Atlanta. Video of Franzen was shown at the Mayor’s press conference monday, and Franzen was there as well, challenging the Mayor while he was speaking, almost getting himself thrown out. . . .
“Here it is right here, see?”

I nod yes, looking up at the building. I am asking Franzen about his latest proclamation, that he and the group intend to levitate the Georgia Pacific Building if the Koch brothers in New York do not withdraw their political money from Georgia Politics.

“We’ve been having a team of alchemists and faith healers and doctors of physics working together to develop a mathematical formula to levitate the building,” Franzen said.
​

 

[moreluck]

(Politico) — In his chat with Jay Leno on Tuesday, President Obama was asked (not for the first time) about the “Occupy Wall Street” protests. While he said again that the movement is based in “frustration,” he told Leno that it’s similar to the tea party.

“Look, people are frustrated, and that frustration expresses itself in a lot of different ways. It expressed itself in the tea party. It’s expressing itself in Occupy Wall Street,” Obama said. “Everybody needs to understand that the American people feel that no one is looking out for them right now.”

It’s not monumental that Obama made the comparison with the tea party, but it reflects a small progression since he was asked about the protests at the beginning of the month. At an Oct. 6 press conference, he was asked specifically if Occupy Wall Street could be like the tea party; Obama didn’t answer. In an interview on Oct. 18, though, Obama said that the demonstrations are “not that different from some of the protests that we saw coming from the tea party.”

 

[moreluck]

(NYP) — Newly sprung ex-cons and vagrants rousted from other parks are crashing the Occupy Wall Street protest, where gourmet meals are free and boozy, drug fueled parties are on tap, the movement’s leaders griped yesterday.

“They’re telling people who leave prison to go to Zuccotti Park,” lamented Daniel Zetah, a leader of the OWS community-relations group.

Volunteer Lauren Digioia, 26, said, “We have drug dealing going on here, gang activity, public intoxication. There are a lot of instigators. There are a lot of vultures.

“Everyone knows we give out free food and sleeping bags, and it’s a perfect opportunity for squatters.”
Digioia said she recently met a man who just before getting sprung from Rikers, was told by a fellow inmate to hit Zuccotti for the free accommodations.

The frustrated organizers said they’re brainstorming how to launch a protest within the protest to target the drunken, stoned layabouts.
The derelicts, organizers say, are terrorizing people who are there to support the movement.

“There’s a lot of drugs, alcohol, assault [and] theft [by] the homeless groups coming in. We’ve had meetings all day to brainstorm what to do,’’ said Zetah, 34.

The hardened thugs are having a field day preying on overly trusting protesters, many of whom hail from small towns, leaders said.

 

[moreluck]

I received this today...........I like hearing "the other side"

This fellow has a perspective on how the “real world” runs, rather than the opposing Wall St. crowd who see businessmen/women as crooks. After reading this, some of you may change your political thinking.

I urge you to read it to the end please

Michael A. Crowley, PE
is the owner of Crowley & Associates, Inc. and was President and an owner of Crowley, Crisp & Associates, Inc. and Michael A. Crowley, PC. As President of Crowley & Associates, Inc., Mike is a lead designer of water supply, treatment and storage projects, regional sewage lift station design, and residential and commercial site development projects and is responsible for the management of the firm. Mike’s industry background includes over 20 years experience in the civil engineering field inclusive of executive level responsibilities in Marketing and Project Management. Prior to founding Michael A. Crowley, PC, Mike held positions with several engineering firms in North Carolina and Maine. Mike holds a B.S. Degree in Civil Engineering from University of Maine and a Master of Business Administration from Boston College. Mike is a member of the American Water Works Association (AWWA) and holds professional registrations in North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia, Maryland, Arkansas, Texas, Arizona, New Mexico, Indiana, Maine, Tennessee, Australia, and Trinidad & Tobago, West Indies. Mike is a native of Norridgewock, Maine. The Crowley family resides in Wake Forest.

]To All My Valued Employees:

There have been some rumblings around the office about the future of this company, and more specifically, your job. As you know, the economy has changed for the worse and presents many challenges. However, the good news is this: The economy doesn't pose a threat to your job.

What does threaten your job however, is the changing political landscape in this country. Of course, as your employer, I am forbidden to tell you whom to vote for - it is against the law to discriminate based on political affiliation, race, creed, religion, etc.

Please vote for who you think will serve your interests the best. However, let me tell you some little tidbits of fact which might help you decide what is in your best interest. First, while it is easy to spew rhetoric that casts employers against employees, you have to understand that for every business owner there is a back story.

This back story is often neglected and overshadowed by what you see and hear. Sure, you see me park my Mercedes outside. You saw my big home at last year's Christmas party. I'm sure all these flashy icons of luxury conjure up some idealized thoughts about my life. However, what you don't see is the back story.

I started this company 12 years ago. At that time, I lived in a 300 square foot studio apartment for 3 years. My entire living space was converted into an office so I could put forth 100% effort into building a company, which by the way, would eventually employ you.

My diet consisted of Ramen Pride noodles because every dollar I spent went back into this company. I drove a rusty Toyota Corolla with a defective transmission. I didn't have time to date. Often times, I stayed home on weekends, while my friends went out drinking and partying. In fact, I was married to my business -- hard work, discipline and sacrifice.

Meanwhile, my friends got jobs. They worked 40 hours a week and made a modest $50K a year and spent every dime they earned. They drove flashy cars and lived in expensive homes and wore fancy designer clothes. Instead of hitting Nordstrom's for the latest hot fashion item, I was trolling through the Goodwill store extracting any clothing item that didn't look like it was birthed in the 70's.

My friends refinanced their mortgages and lived a life of luxury. I, however, did not. I put my time, my money, and my life into a business --- with a vision that eventually, some day, I too, will be able to afford these luxuries my friends supposedly had.

So, while you physically arrive at the office at 9 am, mentally check in at about noon, and then leave at 5 pm, I don't. There is no "off" button for me. When you leave the office, you are done and you have a weekend all to yourself. I unfortunately do not have the freedom. I eat, ****, and breathe this company every minute of the day. There is no rest. There is no weekend. There is no happy hour. Every day this business is attached to me like a one-day old baby.

You, of course, only see the fruits of that garden -- the nice house, the Mercedes, the vacations. You never realize the back story and the sacrifices I've made. Now, the economy is falling apart and I, the guy that made all the right decisions and saved his money, have to bail out all the people who didn't.

The people that overspent their paychecks suddenly feel entitled to the same luxuries that I earned and sacrificed a decade of my life for. Yes, business ownership has its benefits but the price I've paid is steep and not without wounds. Unfortunately, the cost of running this business, and employing you, is starting to eclipse the threshold of marginal benefit and let me tell you why:

I am being taxed to death and the government thinks I don't pay enough. I have state taxes. Federal taxes. Property taxes. Sales and use taxes. Payroll taxes. Workers compensation taxes. Unemployment taxes. Taxes on taxes. I have to hire a tax man to manage all these taxes and then guess what? I have to pay taxes for employing him. Government mandates and regulations and all the accounting that goes with it, now occupy most of my time. On Oct 15th, I wrote a check to the US Treasury for $288,000 for quarterly taxes. You know what my "stimulus" check was? Zero. Nada. Zilch.

The question I have is this: Who is stimulating the economy? Me, the guy who has provided 14 people good paying jobs and serves over 2,200,000 people per year with a flourishing business? Or, the single mother sitting at home pregnant with her fourth child waiting for her next welfare check?

Obviously, government feels the latter is the economic stimulus of this country. The fact is, if I deducted (read: "stole") 50% of your paycheck, you'd quit and you wouldn't work here. I mean, why should you? That's nuts. Who wants to get rewarded for only 50% of their hard work? Well, I agree which is why your job is in jeopardy. Here is what many of you don't understand, to stimulate the economy you need to stimulate what runs the economy. Had suddenly government mandated to me that I didn't need to pay taxes, guess what? Instead of depositing that $288,000 into the Washington black-hole, I would have spent it, hired more employees, and generated substantial economic growth. My employees would have enjoyed the wealth of that tax cut in the form of promotions and better salaries. But you can forget it now.

When you have a comatose man on the verge of death, you don't defibrillate and shock his thumb thinking that will bring him back to life, do you? Or, do you defibrillate his heart? Business is at the heart of America and always has been. To restart it, you must stimulate it, not kill it. Suddenly, the power brokers in Washington believe the mud of America are the essential drivers of the American economic engine.

Nothing could be further from the truth and this is the type of change you can keep. So where am I going with all this? It's quite simple. If any new taxes are levied on me, or my company, my reaction will be swift and simple. I fire you. I fire your co-workers. You can then plead with the government to pay for your mortgage, your SUV, and your child's future. Frankly, it isn't my problem any more. Then, I will close this company down, move to another country and retire.

You see, I'm done. I'm done with a country that penalizes the productive and gives to the unproductive. My motivation to work and to provide jobs will be destroyed, and with it, will be my citizenship.

While tax cuts to 95% of America sounds great on paper, don't forget the back story: If there is no job, there is no income to tax. A tax cut on zero dollars is zero. So, when you make decision to vote, ask yourself, who understands the economics of business ownership and who doesn't? Whose policies will endanger your job? Answer those questions and you should know who might be the one capable of saving your job. While the media wants to tell you "It's the economy, stupid" I'm telling you it isn't.

If you lose your job, it won't be at the hands of the economy; it will be at the hands of a political hurricane that swept through this country, steamrolled the Constitution, and will have changed its landscape forever. If that happens, you can find me in the South Caribbean sitting on a beach, retired and with no employees to worry about.

Signed, Your boss,

Michael A. Crowley, PE
Crowley, Crisp & Associates, Inc.
Professional Engineers
1906 South Main Street, Suite 122
Wake Forest, NC 27587
Phone: 919.562.8860 x22
Fax: 919.562.8872

Location: This is a real letter

 

[UpstateNYUPSer(Ret)]

Do us a favor and Google "How to post a link".

 

[moreluck]

Do us a favor and Google "How to post a link".

It was a private e-mail that was sent to me and there was no link to post, just the full e-mail. Get off my back Padre Pio!!

How come you're not on wkmac's ass when he posts 9000 words ???????????????????????????????????????????


Pick on a chick make you the cock of the walk?

 

[moreluck]

Leftist Radicals Leading Occupy Chicago Under Investigation By FBI For Terror Links…
Via Rebel Pundit:

Today Occupy Chicago protesters stormed City Hall to let Mayor Rahm Emanuel know their displeasure in the recent arrests of the Occupy campers at Grant Park on Michigan Avenue.

They were lead by radical anti-war activists Joe Iosbaker and Andy Thayer, who we have reported on in the past for their ongoing investigations by the FBI. In September of 2010 they were targeted for suspicion of providing material support to Hamas, the friend.A.R.C. and other terrorist organizations.


​

 

[Lue C Fur]

How come you're not on wkmac's ass when he posts 9000 words ??????????????????????????????????????????

Maybe because like most here...they just dont look at WKmac's posts...

 

[UpstateNYUPSer(Ret)]

Maybe because like most here...they just dont look at WKmac's posts...

Sadly this is the case---I am sure he has some very good points but I don't want to have to read a novel just to get to those points.

It also frustrates me when moreluck posts e-mails from her friends that are longer than the last book that I read.

Posting links give us the option of clicking or not clicking as we choose.

 

[trplnkl]

Sadly this is the case---I am sure he has some very good points but I don't want to have to read a novel just to get to those points.

It also frustrates me when moreluck posts e-mails from her friends that are longer than the last book that I read.

Posting links give us the option of clicking or not clicking as we choose.

Are you sure those are the only two options?

 

[Babagounj]

Oakland Occupier: “I’m All About The Riot — We Need To Be Violent”…
Amazing how people can compare these thugs to Tea Partiers.

 

[Babagounj]

The latest stories coming out of all these OWS details an encampment that is quickly turning into one lawless mess.
Maybe this was the real area that Biden claimed that crimes and rape would be increasing in.

 

[moreluck]

Sadly this is the case---I am sure he has some very good points but I don't want to have to read a novel just to get to those points.

It also frustrates me when moreluck posts e-mails from her friends that are longer than the last book that I read.

Posting links give us the option of clicking or not clicking as we choose.

You know, you don't have to open anything on BC....you have that option once you see who posted what. Scroll down to #242 post ....that's a link. I post a lot just like that. Personal e-mails that I get are the exception. Can't live without 'whine' ??