Labor, Occupy and Tea Party Supporters: 'It’s the Empire!!'

The truth of the matter is that we are all serfs under this current 21st century American feudalism. Centuries ago the barons and lords of the manor earned in excess of hundreds of times what their serfs did, as do the owners and CEOS of our present economy. Yet, this is but the tip of the iceberg of a much more frozen and devious block of wealth and power: Our Military Industrial Empire.

I refuse to use the word complex to describe this conglomeration of private interests mingled in with our Pentagon and the myriad of national security agencies. Sadly, all that these movers and shakers of our foreign and domestic policies care about is profit and power! They rely on the majority of we serfs to make sure that the cages do not rattle too much as they carry us off into the zoo.

I was watching the Wisconsin gubernatorial recall election debate last night. It really doesn’t matter who the two candidates were, as they represented our 2 Party con job. What fascinated me was the content of the Q & A and of the messages each man presented.

You see, with all the problems concerning budget deficits and cuts in services, layoffs etc; there was not one mention of the real cause and its easiest solution. All the budget cuts and loss of needed services, all the corporate excesses and FAT CATS are part and parcel of this Military Industrial Empire.

Wall Street is linked to the war industries and contractors who make out like bandits from our invasions and occupations. When over 50 cents of every tax dollar we serfs send to Uncle Sam goes for military spending, how in the hell can there be enough revenue to support our states’ and cities’ budgets? For decades we had a system in place (Federal Block Grants) whereupon Uncle Sam would send back to each state enough tax money to help balance budgets and fund needed programs. No more!

Occupy Movement : URGENT WARNING: Look out for Police Provocateurs

Occupy The Justice Department

Kevin Zeese on the Status of the Occupy Movement

OCCUPY: Infiltration of Political Movements is the Norm, Not the Exception in the United States.

When the long history of political infiltration is reviewed, the Occupy Movement should be surprised if it is not infiltrated. Almost every movement in modern history has been infiltrated by police and others using many of the same tactics we are now seeing in Occupy.

Virtually every movement has been the target of police surveillance and disruption activities. The most famous surveillance program was the FBI’s COINTELPRO which according to COINTELPRO Documents targeted the women’s rights, Civil Rights, anti-war and peace movements, the New Left, socialists, communists and independence movement for Puerto Rico, among others. Among the groups infiltrated were the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, the NAACP, Congress for Racial Equality, the American Indian Movement, Students for a Democratic Society, the National Lawyers Guild, the Black Panthers and Weather Underground. Significant leaders from Albert Einstein to Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., who are both memorialized in Washington, were monitored. The rule in the United States is to be infiltrated; the exception is not to be.

The Church Committee documented a history of use of the FBI for purposes of political repression. They described infiltration efforts going back to World War I, including the 1920s, when agents were charged with rounding up “anarchists and revolutionaries” for deportation. The Church Committee found infiltration efforts growing from 1936 through 1976, with COINTELPRO as the major program. While these domestic political spying and disruption programs were supposed to stop in 1976, in fact they have continued. As reported in “The Price of Dissent,” Federal Magistrate Joan Lefkow found in 1991, the record “shows that despite regulations, orders and consent decrees prohibiting such activities, the FBI had continued to collect information concerning only the exercise of free speech.”

How many agents or infiltrators can we expect to see inside a movement? One of the most notorious “police riots” was the 1968 Democratic Party Convention. Independent journalist Yasha Levine writes: “During the 1968 protests of the Democratic National Convention in Chicago, which drew about 10,000 protesters and was brutally crushed by the police, 1 out of 6 protesters was a federal undercover agent. That’s right, 1/6th of the total protesting population was made up of spooks drawn from various federal agencies. That’s roughly 1,600 people! The stat came from an Army document obtained by CBS News in 1978, a full decade after the protest took place. According to CBS, the infiltrators were not passive observers, monitoring and relaying information to central command, but were involved in violent confrontations with the police.”

The COINTELPRO documents disclose numerous cases of the FBI's intentions to stop the mass protest against the Vietnam War. Many techniques were used to accomplish the assignment. The documents state: “These included promoting splits among antiwar forces, encouraging red-baiting of socialists, and pushing violent confrontations as an alternative to massive, peaceful demonstrations.”

Anonymous Calls For March Of Solidarity February 27 2012

The Real 99 Percent

2011 the year of OWS

Recipe for a Revolution

Time Magazine calls "The Protester" person of the year

Occupy Wall Street and Webster Tarpley … We’re All LaRouch-ites Now! (Sums up why Tarpley / LaRouche are wrong!)

I have had many heated debates with Mr Tarpley and Mr LaRouche (and his Moony like repeaters) over the years. They HATE Libertarians such as Ron and Rand Paul with such a venomous fuss, we think that they doth protest too much (as the guilty old saying goes)… LaRouche was almost single – handedly responsible for the Elite Media branding of the American Tea Party as Racists – as followers were encouraged to crash events with Obama Hitler posters, and various extremist placards.

True, that (Fulbright Scholar) TARPley and LaRouchees have that Geo Political – Love Russia / Blame England rap down pat…. And Tarpley was generally right on with his Pre Selection analysis on Obama. (which is why its so hard to out him now) On many issues they are brilliant, But their undying oath to fascist Big Govt, and a ‘Progressive” FDR “Newer Deal” seem suspiciously akin to what the (Rockefeller / Rothschild sponsored) OWS mindless hoards are calling for…. With just enough truth sprinkled in to get you to fall for the trap.

Namely: Laws and regulations for all BUT the richest 1% who have regulatory immunity from Prosecution and accountability. (ALL Laws and Rules are Selectively enforced… Just ask BP, Chase, Citi-Group, Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, etc…)

Of course fans of these men will follow them right into a hell of World Govt.

They want dependents, NOT Independence!

As these men are smart enough to know better, it seems that their Propaganda efforts point to only one final conclusion: They have an agenda. I believe that “agenda” is in “solidarity” with the very people that Tarpley and LaRouche rail against.

(Is THIS why Webster Tarpley secretly meets with “well meaning” DuPonts, and other establishment types? Ask him about that, and why Tarpley helped to derail and divide the peace movement in 2006-7…)

American awakening-News Analysis

R.E.V.O.L.U.T.I.O.N! I Am Not Dead

AMAZING video of a journalist not taking crap from NYPD

Conservatives Side With Pepper-Spraying Thugs

Police officials – and these days, campus security guards have gained the power of full-fledged police officers, complete with those massive pensions and all the usual protections from accountability – claimed that the officer felt that his life was in danger when they he methodically walked down the line of protesters and assaulted them with the spray. "If you look at the video you are going to see that there were 200 people in that quad," said Chief Annette Spicuzza, who was placed on leave (i.e., additional paid vacation) Monday after a backlash against the brutality. "Hindsight is 20-20 and based on the situation we were sitting in, ultimately that was the decision that was made."

That's what police always say no matter the situation. But in this age of video, we can see for ourselves that the officers were in no danger. Multiple officers effortlessly moved in and around the protesters. The burly officer who sprayed the kids strutted slowly in front of them in a way that belies any sort of danger, real or perceived. He, too, was put on administrative leave after the video went viral, along with another officer. Without the video, you know what would have happened – nothing. The lies would have become the official record. This is why police officers have become zealous in their confiscation of video cameras and arrest of people who record them doing their jobs.

Such brutality is par for the course for today's militarized police and campus security departments. What's really disgusting is the natural instinct of so many conservatives to stick up for the police. They don't like the Occupy protesters, so they willingly back brutality against them, without considering the possibility that conservatives at some point might be on the receiving end of this aggression. Then again, this common, vulgar form of modern conservatism almost always sides with the state, even as it champions the empty words of limited government.

For insight into the modern conservative rabble, one ought to read FreeRepublic. It's beyond irony. One commenter expressed disbelief at the sight of police backing away rather than engaging the protesters: "Do you get a chill up your spine like I do when you see the police slowly back away as if they are backing down from an impending violent standoff?" Others seemed eager to see violence: "A Billy-club to the ribs would have been just as effective at removing the bums and we would be hearing all this crying about pepper-spray!" Granted, these are anonymous commenters, but they reflect widespread sentiment.

Has Truth Occupied Wall Street?

An amazing thing is happening on the world stage. While the Occupy Revolution continues to be minimized, marginalized and seemingly bastardized by the mass media and even some of the alternative media, it keeps rolling on in spite of all the efforts to ignore, deter or derail it.

And I think I know why.

This now multifaceted phenomenon appears to be morphing...and in very exciting ways. Occupy just-about-anything has taken on a life of its own and energized vast multitudes of fed-up people worldwide. Citizens everywhere are realizing their officials and leaders are sold out stooges of the military corporate complex and that they're not going to get any changes by "normal" means.

So they're mobilizing--physically, mentally and spiritually. And it's wonderful--in spite of all the damn co-opters, distortionists, jealous non-participants and the like.

Screw 'em.

And the fundamental cry at this point is simple - DO something! Make your presence known and try to effect change in whatever sphere you can, cuz clearly the establishment isn't going to do anything except continue to make things worse.

The Difference Between OWS and Anti-Vietnam Protests

The Occupy protesters imagine that they stand in a great tradition of American radicalism, willing to stand up to the man and risk arrest in order to achieve their goals. The most obvious case of such a mass movement would be the anti-war protests of the 1960s. They started small and grew and grew until they became mainstream and actually affected a dramatic policy change. The U.S. military pulled out of Vietnam, implicitly conceding defeat and mourning the long history of calamity.

But consider the gigantic differences. The Vietnam protest movement had a clear goal. It wanted to end the war. It had a clear enemy: the politicians and bureaucrats who wanted the war to last forever. It had a clear message: this war is wrong. It had an intense motivation: the protesters were terrified of being drafted to kill and be killed. This is what standing up to power is all about.

So far as anyone can tell, the Occupy movement has none of this clarity. Ten thousand articles have been written on these people and there is still no consensus concerning what the issue really is. The goals of the movement are posted here and there, but not everyone among the protesters agrees with them. The motivation is just as amorphous and varied: unemployment, sinking job prospects, sinking incomes, blowback from the bailouts, the desire to slum around in a decadent sort of way, and the destructive urge to trample down the pea-patch of life itself.

Worse, from my point of view, is that the movement isn’t really standing up to power. It is standing in for power to urge that the state take on more responsibilities and control people’s lives even more than it does already. They imagine that they are demanding human rights, but the main agenda as listed in public websites amounts to a list of ways for the government to violate human rights, or at least intrude aggressively upon them.

The Occupy Movement Is Protesting the SAME THING that the Founding Fathers Protested at the Boston Tea Party

The Founding Fathers hated big corporations. See this, this and this. They were as suspicious of big corporations as they were the monarchy. So they only allowed corporate charters for a very brief duration, in order to carry out a specific, time-limited project.

As James Madison noted:

There is an evil which ought to be guarded against in the indefinite accumulation of property from the capacity of holding it in perpetuity by…corporations. The power of all corporations ought to be limited in this respect. The growing wealth acquired by them never fails to be a source of abuses.

Indeed, while the Boston Tea Party was a revolt against taxation without representation, it largely centered on the British government’s crony capitalism – and disproportionate tax breaks – towards the East India Company, the giant company which dominated the tea market and hurt small American business.

Protesting against the government propping up today’s giant banks – who are ruining the chance for small businesses to have a fair chance at competing – is exactly the same idea.

The Police State Vs. Occupy Wall Street: This Is Not Going To End Well For Any Of Us

Right now, we are watching the early rounds of a heavyweight fight between two extremely determined opponents. Occupy Wall Street has no plans of losing this fight and neither do law enforcement authorities. Perhaps those running the show actually believed that raiding Zuccotti Park and more than a dozen other "Occupy camps" around the nation would end these protests, but that is just not going to happen. Whatever your opinion of Occupy Wall Street is, everyone should be able to agree that this is one dedicated bunch. They are absolutely obsessed with their cause and in response to the recent raid on Zuccotti Park organizers are calling for “a national day of direct action” on Thursday. But if Occupy Wall Street protesters want to take things to "the next level", they should not underestimate the resolve of the police state. Over the past decade, the homeland security apparatus of the federal government has been slowly but surely turning this country into a "Big Brother" police state. Today, our law enforcement authorities are obsessed with watching us, listening to us, tracking us, recording us, and gathering information on all of us. We are constantly reminded that we live in a prison grid (just think about what they do to you before you are allowed on an airplane) and they are not about to put up with anyone challenging their authority or their control. Have you even known parents that constantly feel the need to prove that they are "the boss" of their children? Well, that is essentially what the homeland security apparatus in this country has become. All over the United States, law enforcement personnel are taught that every American is a potential terrorist and they are actually trained to "act tough", to bark orders at us and to not let anyone question their authority. If Occupy Wall Street believes that it can get the police state to "back down", they are sorely mistaken. Hopefully everyone will cool off a bit as the temperatures go down this winter. But if we do see a "cooling off", it probably will not last for long. As the U.S. economy continues to get worse, these kinds of protests are going to keep growing and they will become even more intense. Eventually, mass civil unrest will cause the streets of many of our major cities to closely resemble war zones. When it is all said and done, this is not going to end well for any of us.

“No more talking. They’ve got guns, we’ve got bottles. They’ve got bricks, we’ve got rocks…in a few days you’re going to see what a Molotov cocktail can do to Macy’s.”
That is a very frightening statement.

As I noted the other day, one recent survey found that 31 percent of all Occupy Wall Street protesters "would support violence to advance their agenda".

Let us hope that cooler heads prevail and that we don't see outbreaks of violence.

If we do see violence in the coming days, it will just give law enforcement authorities an excuse to crack down even harder.

Here's the Risk: "Occupy" ends up doing the bidding of the global elite

History shows us it is easy for 'grassroots' campaigns to become co-opted by the very interests they are fighting against.

A 21st-century grassroots movement faces many pitfalls. This was as true back in 1968 as it is today. It could be infiltrated by law enforcement and intelligence agencies, or co-opted by a major party. As the state continues to creep further into our lives, activists can expect that it will use all its resources – not just the violent reaction seen in New York overnight, but also its agents, informants and surveillance packages – in its effort to monitor both sides of any serious social debate. Even bleaker, however, is the possibility that the movement was actually planned and launched by the very establishment activists thought they were waging a battle against in the first place. The larger the movement, the more interested a major party becomes in absorbing it into either the left or the right side of the current two-party paradigm.

The sudden emergence of America's Tea Party movement in 2007 is a good example. Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul, its inventor, used it as a springboard to highlight libertarian and constitutional issues during his 2008 campaign. Soon after, it was co-opted by key political and media influencers from the US right wing, associating itself less with a libertarian manifesto, and more with emerging figures within the Republican establishment. Now it is has morphed into nothing more than a block of voters whom the Republican party can rely to strike a deal with during an election cycle.

Arguably, the Occupy Wall Street movement has already drifted into the shadow of the Democratic party – with a number of Democratic establishment figures from the top down endorsing it. The Democrats' own media fundraising and media machine, Move On, has visibly adopted the cause. Like the Tea Party before it, the Occupy block would swing a close election during a national two-party race, functioning as a pressure-release valve for any issue too radical for the traditional platform.

Alongside this is the threat of being infiltrated. Scores of declassified documents, along with accounts from veteran activists, will reveal many stories of members who were actually undercover police, FBI or M15. In the worst cases of infiltration, undercover agents have acted as provocateurs. Such incidents normally serve to radicalise a movement, thus demonising it in the eyes of society and effectively lessening its wider political appeal.