TWCL

[Traegorn]

As a guy in his thirties with a household income right around his metro area's average, and while never having served in the military has been actually poor too, I say set up the camps.

[Dutch]

Why is one person speaking for the 99% different from someone else in the thread speaking for the 99%?

Surely the odds are pretty high that everyone is in that 99%?
_________________

[afterthedream]

Dutch wrote:

Why is one person speaking for the 99% different from someone else in the thread speaking for the 99%? Surely the odds are pretty high that everyone is in that 99%?

Nobody speaks for the 99% That's the point. There is no leader or spokesperson. I am in the 99% but I speak only for myself. I find it hilarious that SpamBot tries to make that claim since he's obviously never even been to an Occupy demonstration (as evidenced by his claim that it's a bunch of rich white kids slumming it). I'm a registered EMT who's up to his elbows in it every day, so I know different.

[Casual Notice]

Quote:

Nobody speaks for the 99% That's the point. There is no leader or spokesperson.

Then it's not a protest, it's just bunch of idiots squatting in the park.

You say you're an EMT and you claim to have been there when Scott Olsen was hurt, but I've seen the videos of the event. What kind of EMT would allow (perhaps even participate in) the cluster-fuck that was the attempted extraction of the inured Olsen? The young man probably took more damage from being raged, lifted improperly, dropped, then drgged again than from his initial injury and fall.

Anyway, Mr. Begin, a casual search of the web reveals you to be a 9-11 truther (at least since 2008), the author of a self-published comic book that claims to bear the "truth" about American history, and a long-time organizer and protester. Gosh with all that AND your combat hitch in Afghanistan defending a warlord's poppy fields (previously mentioned in this thread) I wonder that you ever found time to undergo the 6 - 12 months of intense and specialized training necessary to become a registered EMT in most states.

Protip: That last paragraph was an actual ad hominem attack. Calling me "SpamBot" was the sort of whiny namecalling that grownups expect from spoiled children.
_________________
What I lack in sincerity, I make up for in sarcasm.
S*P*Q*R

[afterthedream]

Casual Notice wrote:

Quote: Nobody speaks for the 99% That's the point. There is no leader or spokesperson. Then it's not a protest, it's just bunch of idiots squatting in the park. You say you're an EMT and you claim to have been there when Scott Olsen was hurt, but I've seen the videos of the event. What kind of EMT would allow (perhaps even participate in) the cluster-fuck that was the attempted extraction of the inured Olsen? The young man probably took more damage from being raged, lifted improperly, dropped, then drgged again than from his initial injury and fall. Anyway, Mr. Begin, a casual search of the web reveals you to be a 9-11 truther (at least since 2008), the author of a self-published comic book that claims to bear the "truth" about American history, and a long-time organizer and protester. Gosh with all that AND your combat hitch in Afghanistan defending a warlord's poppy fields (previously mentioned in this thread) I wonder that you ever found time to undergo the 6 - 12 months of intense and specialized training necessary to become a registered EMT in most states. Protip: That last paragraph was an actual ad hominem attack. Calling me "SpamBot" was the sort of whiny namecalling that grownups expect from spoiled children.

1) Not even really sure where to start with this. Look up civil disobedience. Try to understand what it means and what it has meant throughout history.

2) I wasn't one of the people who carried Olsen, and maybe it could have done better, but in my professional opinion those people did as well as could have been expected. If someone is in immediate danger I may well pull them out of it before slapping a C-spine collar on them or anything else.

3) Went to my website and found my real name on the front page all by yourself, did you? Clever. Too bad you couldn't be bothered to notice that my book isn't self-published. I do have a stack of them lying around though. I'd be happy to send you one. You might learn something.

4) I never claimed to be a combat vet. The person holding the Scott Olsen photo is a character in After the Dream. Again, try reading.

5) You have zero basis for claiming that I'm not actually an EMT, although I don't particularly care.

6) Your own avatar identifies you as "Spambot Extraordinaire" so I don't know why you're whining about the identification. This is an actual example of an ad hominem:

Casual Notice wrote:

it's just bunch of idiots squatting in the park.

Good day.

[Casual Notice]

afterthedream wrote:

1) Not even really sure where to start with this. Look up civil disobedience. Try to understand what it means and what it has meant throughout history.

Civil disobedience is the peaceful refusal to abide by an unfair and unjust law. For instance, Dr. King's followers often peacefully and without seeking incident entered "Whites Only" restaurants. Squatting in a park and whining that some people are richer than you isn't civil disobedience.

Quote:

2) I wasn't one of the people who carried Olsen, and maybe it could have done better, but in my professional opinion those people did as well as could have been expected. If someone is in immediate danger I may well pull them out of it before slapping a C-spine collar on them or anything else.

He was in no danger from the police and emergency services officers who were on-hand once he was down, the only danger he was in was the same danger he got: a trip to the hospital to tend his wounds.

Quote:

3) Went to my website and found my real name on the front page all by yourself, did you? Clever. Too bad you couldn't be bothered to notice that my book isn't self-published. I do have a stack of them lying around though. I'd be happy to send you one. You might learn something.

Yeah..., I read comics for fun, when I want information I read actual books with footnotes and cross-references for verifiable information.

Quote:

4) I never claimed to be a combat vet. The person holding the Scott Olsen photo is a character in After the Dream. Again, try reading.

Now, see, you never made it clear that the posted comic was a regular "After the Dream" comic, and not a special, autobiographical entry. I had every reason to assume the first person narrative in the single panel you posted was your own story. I apologize for thinking you would honor your country and defend your fellows' freedoms.

Quote:

5) You have zero basis for claiming that I'm not actually an EMT, although I don't particularly care.

I never made that claim. You may have inferred from my incredulous statements that this was my belief, but I never claimed that you are not an EMT.

Quote:

6) Your own avatar identifies you as "Spambot Extraordinaire" so I don't know why you're whining about the identification.

That's notmy avatar. That's a poster class. In this case, I believe it refers to members with more than 2000 posts.

Quote:

This is an actual example of an ad hominem: Casual Notice wrote: it's just bunch of idiots squatting in the park.

No, that's an assessment of the crowd. An ad hominem attack is an attack on one's opponent that is unrelated to the topic of debate.

Assessment wrote:

I think Michelle Bachman's stated opinions regarding vaccinations are moronic.

Ad Hominem wrote:

Michelle Bachman is a bitch

See the difference?
_________________
What I lack in sincerity, I make up for in sarcasm.
S*P*Q*R

[Traegorn]

You called them "idiots" because you disagreed with them. You violate your own example.

If you had said "people sitting in a park" it would be different.

[Casual Notice]

I called them idiots because my honest assessment of people that shut down a burger king store (not a corporate office) harrassing the manager while claiming to fight for the rights of the "99%" is that those people are idiots. People who knowingly squat in filth and refuse to clean up after themselves after occupying a public (or private, in the case of Zucotti) park are idiots.

More to the point, the people sitting in the park are not my opponents in the debate, they are the subject of it.
_________________
What I lack in sincerity, I make up for in sarcasm.
S*P*Q*R

[Jardel]

This thread makes me wish I had popcorn.

[Casual Notice]

It makes me wish my generation had spent more time raising our children and less time whining about the school system and the "fairness" of competitive rewards.
_________________
What I lack in sincerity, I make up for in sarcasm.
S*P*Q*R

[Dutch]

Ooh, this could get even more interesting once I'm back home from work teaching the next generation!

Australia tried that 'non competition' style for a while through the 90s, I think. Got rid of it though.

Possibly had something to do with our national cricket team dropping off slightly in ability - some things can't be toyed with!
_________________

[afterthedream]

Here are the facts, Casual Notice:

*You falsely concluded that my post was autobiographical, and falsely stated that there was no reason to believe otherwise even though the very short commentary I offered on the pictures clearly stated, "The characters pictured are both from my comic. The first is Jonas DeSantis, a soldier-turned-activist".

*You falsely stated that my previous book, Fighting for G.O.D. (Gold, Oil, and Drugs) is self-published, which it is not.

*You falsely assumed that it lacks footnotes or references, when in fact it does. It is presented in comic book format to make the information more widely accessible. With your reading skills I'm sure you'll have no problems with some of the more in-depth research upon which it is based, such as Nafeez Ahmed's The War on Truth or Michael Ruppert's Crossing the Rubicon. Given your reactionary attitude and ignorant regurgitation of Faux News talking points, I seriously doubt you'll read these or any other books which might force you to rethink your position.

*You falsely stated that Scott Olsen was in no danger once he got shot when anything could be further from the truth. People were fleeing the area half-blinded by teargas and could easily have trampled Mr. Olsen underfoot. Furthermore, the police subsequently hit both Olsen and the people attending to him with a flash grenade.

*You falsely stated that Olsen's fellow demonstrators cared for him improperly when in fact they did the right thing by removing him from immediate further danger. A similar but politically neutral situation would be a car crash. As an EMT, I know that someone in a car crash is at high risk for neck trauma and shouldn't be moved without a C-spine collar in place. If their car is on fire, however, I'm going to pull them out of immediate danger before I apply a collar.

*You call the occupiers whiny brats and idiots and through some weak sophistry falsely claim that you haven't been insulting me (an occupier).

*Following Frank Miller's lead, you falsely claim that the so-called War on Terror is about honoring my country and defending my fellows' freedoms. It is a series of invasions which were illegal under the Constitution/U.S. common law, and international law. I doubt you know the first thing about 9/11 or the subsequent wars. If you don't know who the following people are, then your opinions are based on ignorance and do not concern me:

Emad Salem
Ali Mohamed
Mahmoud Ahmad
Khalid bin Mahfouz
Yassin Qadi
M. Yaqub Mirza

I don't mind someone having a different opinion than me when they can make an intellectually honest argument for it. I simply can't abide when willful ignorance trumpets falsehood as fact.

[afterthedream]

Apparently the second picture I originally posted has gone missing from its image hosting site, so here it is again:

[Casual Notice]

afterthedream wrote:

Here are the facts, Casual Notice: *You falsely concluded that my post was autobiographical, and falsely stated that there was no reason to believe otherwise even though the very short commentary I offered on the pictures clearly stated, "The characters pictured are both from my comic. The first is Jonas DeSantis, a soldier-turned-activist".

Granted, although I would use inaccurately, since it was an error on my part, and not an attempt to mislead.

Quote:

*You falsely stated that my previous book, Fighting for G.O.D. (Gold, Oil, and Drugs) is self-published, which it is not.

No, it's published by a tiny start-up company specializing in poorly researched screeds by conspiracy theorists and Abby Hoffman wannbes. Pardon me for not making the distinction.

Quote:

*You falsely assumed that it lacks footnotes or references, when in fact it does. It is presented in comic book format to make the information more widely accessible. With your reading skills I'm sure you'll have no problems with some of the more in-depth research upon which it is based, such as Nafeez Ahmed's The War on Truth or Michael Ruppert's Crossing the Rubicon. Given your reactionary attitude and ignorant regurgitation of Faux News talking points, I seriously doubt you'll read these or any other books which might force you to rethink your position.

One cannot falsely assme. One can only assume and have the assumption proven wrong.

Claiming "accesibility" is a bullshit excuse. Comics don't make anything more accessible in a nation with 98% literacy. They are excellent at obfuscating errors of fact and applications of motive, however,

I don't watch Fox News, and I rarely listen to talk radio. If their "talking points" parallel my observations, it is either a coincidence or the natural alignment of observations based on fact.

Quote:

*You falsely stated that Scott Olsen was in no danger once he got shot when anything could be further from the truth. People were fleeing the area half-blinded by teargas and could easily have trampled Mr. Olsen underfoot. Furthermore, the police subsequently hit both Olsen and the people attending to him with a flash grenade.

There's that word again: falsely. You like to throw it about like the Wonderland Cook and her pepper.

From the several views and angles I watched (including a good aerial angle from a news chopper), the only protesters that might have trampled Olsen were the ones who were "helping" him.

The smoke gas grenade (not a flash-bang) was fired to disperse them so proper medical attention could be brought to Olsen. Questionable tactics, I'll admit, but not the aggressive hostility you want to pretend.

Quote:

*You falsely stated that Olsen's fellow demonstrators cared for him improperly when in fact they did the right thing by removing him from immediate further danger. A similar but politically neutral situation would be a car crash. As an EMT, I know that someone in a car crash is at high risk for neck trauma and shouldn't be moved without a C-spine collar in place. If their car is on fire, however, I'm going to pull them out of immediate danger before I apply a collar.

You're repeating yourself. And you're still wrong. They endangered him more by crowding him and dragging him away from proper care.

Quote:

*You call the occupiers whiny brats and idiots and through some weak sophistry falsely claim that you haven't been insulting me (an occupier).

Never made that claim. I said I wasn't engaging in an ad hominem attack. I can be insulting without engaging in ad hominem. Just as I can assess the general motives, actions, and appearance of the members of a crowd. It's not insulting to call a female dog a bitch.

Quote:

*Following Frank Miller's lead, you falsely claim that the so-called War on Terror is about honoring my country and defending my fellows' freedoms.

Never made that claim. You inferred it from my statement. I believe any service in the military or service as a peace officer or fireman is honoring you nation and its liberties. I believe the same of primary school teachers, general practice doctors in inner city and rural areas, nurses, janitors, and several other occupations that don't involve organizing the foolish and pimping books.

Quote:

It is a series of invasions which were illegal under the Constitution/U.S. common law, and international law.

The Invasion of Afghanistan was legal by all accounts.

The resumption of hostilities against Iraq in 2003 was authorized by Congress in 2002. Its International illegality is a matter of debate, lying between the fact that the "first" Gulf War had not been resolved and had only been halted by a ceasefire agreement, one which had been broken by Hussein on many occasions, and the accusations that the Bush administration failed to gather a widespread coalition for the invasion.

The current administration has violated the Constitution at least twice, once when a strike was authorized into the soveraign land of one of our allies with no Congressional approval and no imminent threat to our nation or its interests (the killing of bin Laden) and the other when he obligated the use of American jets and support units in the NATO operation supporting Lbyan rebels.

Quote:

I doubt you know the first thing about 9/11 or the subsequent wars. If you don't know who the following people are, then your opinions are based on ignorance and do not concern me:

Your opinions of and attitude toward me are less important than you seem to think, but what the heck, I'll play.

• Emad Salem—An FBI Confidential informant in the attempted bombing of the World Trade Center in the nineties. He claimed the Bureau told him they would supply him and the organization on which he was informing with non-functional explosives.
  
• Ali Mohamed—Is a member of the Egyptian Islamic Jihad who may either be an Al Qaeda spy working in the CIA or a Spook reporting on Al Qaeda. In either case he is a double agent.
  
• Mahmoud Ahmad—Commander of the Pakistani Intelligence Service and a fundamental Islamist hardliner. He has been implicated in a surprising number of assassinations, "cleansings", and other acts of war and terror.
  
• Khalid bin Mahfouz—Was a Saudi expat and banker. He donated a quarter of a million dollars to bin Laden's organization in the 80's. Whether he had knowledge of bin Laden's plans for al Qaeda, or intended to assist in the expulsion of the Soviets from Afghanistan is a matter of debate. He was later convicted of fraud and money laundering in the BCCI scandal.
  
• Yassin (al) Qadi—Is a Saudi businessman who is currently suspected of terrorist activity (as a financial supporter). He was sued by a group of the families of 9-11 victims and acquitted. The multiple financial sanctions levelled against him were the basis for a new movement of more transparency among the UN, the World Bank, and other large institutions with international effect in their application of sanction, since many of the sanctions against al Qadi were based on evidence that was never publicized.
  
• M. Yaqub Mirza—Dunno who he is, and all I can find on him is that he runs a lending bank under Shari'a principles.

Quote:

I don't mind someone having a different opinion than me when they can make an intellectually honest argument for it. I simply can't abide when willful ignorance trumpets falsehood as fact.

I could insultingly change the above statement to more accurately reflect what i believe your true sentiments are. I've done it before, but there'd be no point. I don't mind anyone having a different opinion than me. I like debate; it expands my store of knowledge and exposes me to perspectives I may not enjoy on my own.
_________________
What I lack in sincerity, I make up for in sarcasm.
S*P*Q*R

[afterthedream]

Casual Notice wrote:

No, it's published by a tiny start-up company specializing in poorly researched screeds by conspiracy theorists and Abby Hoffman wannbes. Pardon me for not making the distinction.

What an interesting opinion. I'm eagerly awaiting your searing intellectual analysis of the arguments presented in some of the books published by Trine Day. Oh, wait... that's right, you haven't read a single one of them, and all you can muster is some uninformed tirade of insults.

I can't speak for all of the books in their catalog, having only read a few personally, but that still puts a few thousand pages of evidence ahead of you. Nick Bryant's The Franklin Scandal, for example, I found to be a superbly researched bit of reporting on the pedo ring in Oamaha, Nebraska which catered to a number of highly place political figures. Bryant interviewed dozens of primary witnesses and concludes his book with over 100 pages of court papers and other primary documents. Another excellent research piece is H.P. Albarelli's A Terrible Mistake: The Murder of Frank Olson and the CIA's Secret Cold War Experiments for which he filed numerous FOIA requests and poured over literally tens of thousands of pages of government documents.

As for the list of names I presented, you went further than I expected by actually wikipedia-ing them, although I'm not surprised that you failed to turn up most of the relevant facts. I don't have time this morning to drop all of the relevant knowledge on you, but stay tuned and your education will continue.