Occupy Wall Street Fail

[MHz]

Who said this man was purposely hurt? (other than your innuendo)

I think it's unlikely that a police officer aimed directly at the guys' head. Maybe tone down the hyperbole son and consider it an errant canister until the investigation has concluded. There's more likelihood that amidst the darkness, smoke and chaos, it was an unfortunate ricochet or maybe even a careless buckaroo firing into the dark haze. Either way, to say it was intentional is a reckless big stretch.

Protesters and/or their 'spokemen' say this or that about eggs while the cops do the same insisting rocks and bottles were thrown.


It is tragic he got hurt but thankfully he seems to be doing better today.


Wounded Iraq vet awake after Oakland protest injury | Reuters

Was the flash-bang grenade an accident also?
Think that name will be easily given up?
"As for the officer who fired a flash grenade at civilians trying to save Olsen's life, a member of Anonymous has offered $1,000 to anyone who would identify him, according to Occupy Oakland's Twitter feed."
http://gawker.com/5854135/scott-olsens-condition-upgraded-from-critical-to-fair
Didn't NATO also claimed they weren't there when Libya's leader was killed?
Gadaffi Death. NATO WAS THERE. PROOF! - YouTube

 

[Dixie Cup]

As I said... they never should have got the loans to begin with. But it was the "Right for every American to own a house." as Barney Frank said.[/QUOTE]


It wasn't only Barney Frank that said it. It was the ALCU, and other so called "non-profit organizations" that said it was discriminatory not to provide loans for poor people who have the right to own a house. They then pressed the politicians to change the rules and regulations to allow the banks to give out these mortgages and they did. The rest is history.

I remember thinking when this all happened that this political correctness BS was getting crazy and shaking my head. While I knew the results wouldn't be good, I didn't realize is how bad it would really get.

We live in crazy times!

JMO

 

[petros]

As I said... they never should have got the loans to begin with. But it was the "Right for every American to own a house." as Barney Frank said.


It wasn't only Barney Frank that said it. It was the ALCU, and other so called "non-profit organizations" that said it was discriminatory not to provide loans for poor people who have the right to own a house. They then pressed the politicians to change the rules and regulations to allow the banks to give out these mortgages and they did. The rest is history.

I remember thinking when this all happened that this political correctness BS was getting crazy and shaking my head. While I knew the results wouldn't be good, I didn't realize is how bad it would really get.

We live in crazy times!

JMO

Why were they given credit for a shiny new single family dwellings when all they could afford was an inner city condo? The applicant's fault or the lenders fault?

You'd almost think they intended to have these loans fail by handing them out like lolipops.

 

[MHz]

Why were they give credit ffor a shiny new single family dwelling when all they could afford was an inner city condo? The applicants fault or the lenders fault?

You'd almost think they intended to have these loans fail by handing them out like lolipops.

To prop up the illusion that things were just fine in America while knowing full well that the economy was going to be much poorer in the future as more and more companies moved to poorer parts of the world to open their factories. That foreknowledge would make it a fraud against the people where they should have been told many years before that there was going to be a downturn which would have resulted in housing prices taking a tumble where people could actually afford to buy something at wholesale price rather than the market inflated prices that the 'boom' falsely created.

 

[petros]

So now that taxpayers are the hook for the money who has title to the land and homes? Taxpayers or banks?

 

[captain morgan]

Why were they given credit for a shiny new single family dwellings when all they could afford was an inner city condo? The applicant's fault or the lenders fault?

Isn't it the applicants inalienable right to get access to credit to get a home. Talk to Jimmy Carter, he got the ball rolling in this mess.

So now that taxpayers are the hook for the money who has title to the land and homes? Taxpayers or banks?

So what?.. They also have ownership of the liability as well.

 

[petros]

Who approved larger than needed loans? Carter or banks?

Liability? They never took on the liability. Taxpayers did.

Why are taxpayers on the hook for $70 TRILLION in derivative liabilities?

 

[captain morgan]

Who approved larger than needed loans? Carter or banks?

Who are you or I to say it was larger than needed? The mortgages are capped based on the provable income of the applicant, a borrower making $20k a year won't be approved for a $10MM mortgage.

BTW; Carter altered the regulatory environment that made all this possible.

 

[petros]

They were never capped by proof of income. You've got some studying to do Capt Morgellans. Go fester and learn a little.

 

[captain morgan]

yeah.... sure

 

[petros]

Done festering already? What did you learn?

 

[JLM]

It was interesting to see that the median income earner in the world survives on $950 a year...........maybe a little belt tightening wouldn't kill us after all. :smile:

 

[petros]

It was interesting to see that the median income earner in the world survives on $950 a year...........maybe a little belt tightening wouldn't kill us after all. :smile:

You go first.

 

[JLM]

You go first.

Actually, Petros, it's an ongoing exercise for me, I want a newer truck and different house so I'm continually cutting back on stuff I don't consider necessary.

 

[captain morgan]

It was interesting to see that the median income earner in the world survives on $950 a year...........maybe a little belt tightening wouldn't kill us after all. :smile:

You go first.

Let me know how living on $950 a year works out for ya... Ah hell, it's almost Xmas... Tell ya what, move the amount up to $5,000/year - I'm feeling generous

 

[petros]

Actually, Petros, it's an ongoing exercise for me, I want a newer truck and different house so I'm continually cutting back on stuff I don't consider necessary.

Wants before needs? That is not a good thing.

 

[JLM]

Let me know how living on $950 a year works out for ya... Ah hell, it's almost Xmas... Tell ya what, move the amount up to $5,000/year - I'm feeling generous

I wasn't thinking of such a dire change, a dollar here, a dollar there was more what I have in mind. :smile:

 

[captain morgan]

I wasn't thinking of such a dire change, a dollar here, a dollar there was more what I have in mind. :smile:

I was teasing ya buddy.

Unfortunately, the relationship between 'wants and needs' is a highly relativist depending on your income, let alone geography and climate.

 

[JLM]

Wants before needs? That is not a good thing.

Nope, wants before things I don't need! :lol:

 

[Locutus]

Occupy Boston Removes Two From Finance Team


BOSTON (CBS) – Occupy Boston has pulled two members from its finance team for their lack of transparency and accountability.
Read: Police Threatened After ‘Occupy’ Arrests
The group, which is seeking more transparency in financial institutions has excluded Paul Carnes and Sidney Sherrel from financial decisions.
Read: Keller @ Large: ‘Occupy’ – Declare Victory, Clear Out
The pair allegedly didn’t follow the group’s rules when it comes to spending money and organizing a fundraiser.
Occupy member Nadeem Mazen says the actions of one of the accused were in poor taste.


He says Paul was using his spending, “To appropriate channels of power and channels of influence.”
Mazen hopes this incident will serve as a lesson for financial institutions and the government to address failures transparently.




Occupy Boston Removes Two From Finance Team « CBS Boston