Flash-Banging the Right to Peaceably Assemble

Scott Olsen, 24, served two tours of duty in Iraq as a U.S. Marine. In July 2011, after returning Stateside, he moved to the San Francisco Bay Area where he worked with a software company. He also became active with Iraq Veterans Against the War.

On Tuesday, October 26, Olsen joined approximately 1000 other “Occupiers” marching on Frank Ogawa Place, in Oakland.

Earlier in the day, the police had “cleared” the two-week long encampment at the Plaza. At 4:45 AM (Tuesday) hundreds of multi-task force officers marched on the Plaza and ordered to Occupiers to disperse. Five minutes later, the police lobbed “flash-bang” grenades into the crowd

Speaking in de rigueur mili-cop speak, Oakland city spokesperson, Karen Boyd, said "We have contained the plaza, we are in the process of mobilizing the clean-up phase."

Boyd went on to say that “it was apparent that neither the demonstrators nor the city could maintain safe or sanitary conditions, or control the ongoing vandalism" and that "those arrested now face charges for camping or assembling without a permit".

Throughout Tuesday, police and demonstrators contained one another on the streets leading to the park. At this time, protestors splattered the police with paint.

The confrontation continued on into the night at which time things had more or less lulled into a standoff. Videos taken at the scene show protestors standing about in an intersection with the police aligned behind metal barricades drawn across the street leading to the park.

(video by vimeo.com/31187119)

At this time, and without any provocation, the police fired tear gas cannisters and a flash-bang into the crowd hitting Olsen in the head. Olsen fell to the ground and the police continued firing as other protestors rush to his assistance. Olsen is carried away with a bloody gash in his forhead and taken to hospital where he was listed as being in critical but stable condition.

As Olsen was being carried off, President Obama was being broadcast on the Jay Leno Show. Obama says that the protests indicate people are “frustrated”.

The following day (Wednesday) Oakland officials start the usual cover up.

Police Chief Howard Jordan said at a late afternoon news conference that the events leading up to Olsen's injury would be investigated as vigorously as a fatal police shooting. (Yawn)

"It's unfortunate it happened. I wish that it didn't happen. Our goal, obviously, isn't to cause injury to anyone," the chief said. (Yeah, "obviously". )

"We are committed to allowing free speech," he said, "but the First Amendment doesn't allow violence or endangering the public or property." (What "violence"? The potential violence that might have occurred had police not fired into the crowd to prevent violence from occuring?)

As it emerged, on Thursday, that the police had in fact lobbed a flash-bang, officials began back pedalling further.

City officials claimed that the plaza was damaged by graffiti, litter and unspecified vandalism. Police officials implied that perhaps non Oakland police units were responsible for the projectile that hit Olsen, although they did not deny having used flash-bangs earlier in the day.

In a news conference, Oakland major, Jean Quan sought to distance herself from the police action, saying she was away in Washington at the time and had not expected it to unfold the way it did.

The New York Times opined that “stressed out cities” around the country were having difficulty containing the protests. Speaking on the Jay Leno Show, on the night Olsen was hit, President Obama said that while he understood the “frustration” felt by many people he could not condone lawlessness.

The “frustration” people feel is at a corpocracy that does not minimally meet the needs of ordinary people. Democrats and Republicans can log-jam one another all they want neither party meets the needs of ordinary people. President Obama can understand all he want, he chose to help out banks instead of ordinary people.

What stresses out cities is non-existent revenues which are the result of non-existent economies. Last, but not least, what is “lawless” is police firing at people as if they were targets in some cop joy-shoot. No action of the protestors damaged much less “endangered” property. Since when does marching down a street put property “at risk” other than in a fevered imagination? It is precisely to foreclose that kind of repressive excuses that the Constitution guarantees the right to peaceably assemble.

For exercising that right, Scott Olsen was almost killed by a “non-lethal” projectile fired at close range.

.

Half a Percent for Ninety Nine Percent!

In the news today, it was reported that President Obama once again used his executive authority to implement a legislative change -- this time, to ease the debt burden on student loans.

According to reports, the executive order moves up the effective date of a previoulsy enacted law which reduced maximum required repayments from 15 to 10 percent of annual discretionary income. Under Obama's order, the law will take effect in 2012 instead of 2014. Obama's executive action will also allow student-borrowers to consolidate their loans into a single government debt, carrying an interest rate that is half a percent lower than at present.

Obama's move is such patent financial demagoguery it is hard not to laugh. Obama is obviously feeling the heat of his own betrayal of the 99 percent. His answer? Shave off half a percent!

This is the third time within the week that Obama has announced an executive action which bypasses the congressional dead end. Earlier in the week he announced a housing re-fi plan and a job-training program for veterans. Needless to say, the Republicans are huffing indignantly about constitutionalism and the End of the Republic!

In all honesty, it would be unfair to accuse Obama of "currying favor" with the demos like kings scattering coin to the jubilant throng or would-be emperors promising donatives to the Praetorian Guard in quid pro quo of electoral support. It would be unfair because such transparent skullduggery is exactly what American democracy is all about. Getting some change to the Code of Federal Regulations is what a thousand-bucks-a-plate is for.

What is scandalous is how cheaply Obama seeks to buy student support. Big Bank, Big Pharma, Big Inc., big anything get small, teensy changes in the law through which billions in profits are siphoned. Rope through the eye of a needle? No problem. But when it comes to buying the support of ordinary people, the small change produces small change.

According to the WSJ, Julie Margetta Morgan, a policy analyst at the liberal think tank Center for American Progress, called the Obama plan a step in the right direction, but said that without Congress on board, the White House can't advance "the kind of really big changes we want to see."

The really big change would be for Obama and Congress both to stop thinking in terms of leveraging the profit generator to gear-in some small social or economic change. What students need is European style merit-based university education that taxes only the brain.

.

Official Bullshit and Twin Hole Memorial

But lo! On closer inspection, all the skillfully "angled" photographs were not able to hide a salient fact: virtually no one showed up for the events, and those that did were mostly in some sort of uniform or married to a uniform. The number of people surrounding the massive Twin Hole Memorial, could not have numbered more than 1000 and was more like 500. And this despite the Real Presence of two Presidents!!

What was the rest of the country doing? Around here, at least, they were strolling babies, walking dogs, necking in woodsy nooks and splashing into water holes, on a lovely bright day.

As for "the News".... it was all Official BULLSHIT.

.

Transparency

Headline (August 22): Rebels Enter Tripoli. (ABC News)

News story shows fresh-faced Twitterites rejoicing.

Headline:(August 23): The Scramble for Access to Libya's Oil... Begins. (NYT)

"Colonel Qaddafi proved to be a problematic partner for international oil .... A new government with close ties to NATO may be an easier partner for Western nations to deal with."

Headline (August 25): European Firms Hoping for Big Business in Libya (Spiegel)

"[Under Qadaffi] it was a difficult country to do business in. State-owned companies dominated most markets,... Now, though, companies are hopeful that the incoming government -- however it might ultimately look -- will provide better conditions for doing business. During [a] meeting with the transitional council, the German economic leaders were assured that the private economy would be strengthened, ..."

Headline (August 26): United Nations unfreezes Libyan Assets (NYT)

"The Obama administration is working to find ways to provide financial assistance to the rebels in Libya, officials said Monday ..." and as a result "[t]he Security Council committee that monitors sanctions against Libya agreed on Thursday to unfreeze $1.5 billion in Libyan assets for emergency aid to the country, where rebel forces that have ousted Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi are confronting a humanitarian crisis as they attempt to establish security and form a new government."

-oOo-

We previously wrote that the Obama Administration had successfully roped in NATO as an adjunct partner in the U.S. global war against terrorism.

We recently wrote that the core strategy of the U.S. "security wars" is to promote chaos and civil degradation so as to create perpetually fluid conditions for exploitation and control of resources. The strategists and leaders of the "First World" have realized that it is no longer necessary to go through the trouble and expense of installing despot puppets like Augusto Pinochet. It quite suffices to destroy whatever national authority exists and to negotiate contracts with whatever tribal or urban gangs (passing off as a "transitional government) are nearest to the bananas we want to pick.

©Woodchip Gazette, 2011.
.

Obama's Stunning Hypocrisy

In his Monday night Address to the Nation (July 25) [1], Obama called upon Americans to contact their representatives and rally around his “balanced approach” to reducing the budget. Obama’s speech was littered with fair sounding sound bites but he was in fact asking ordinary Americans to pay for corporate tax breaks with cuts to Social Security and Medicare.

The President has himself stated that Social Security is not a cause of the deficit. (April 2011 White House “Fact Sheet”) [2] If Social Security recipients are not the cause of the either the debt or deficit why should they pay for it at all? How “balanced” is that?

The President’s illogic is stunning. The purely tactical justification for his four trillion dollar “Grand Plan” was that Republican support for “tax increases” on wealthy Americans and corporations could only be teased out by offering matching cuts to entitlements. In other words, unfairness is the price struggling Americans have to pay for getting the richest elements in society to pay their so-called fair share. What kind of logic is that?

Obama’s Oxymoron is tissued over with ambiguous weasel words. In his Monday night address Obama first spoke of “modest adjustments” to entitlements such as Medicare. He then turned around and spoke of the “painful cuts” needed to make sure “the burden is fairly shared.” Which is it?

Although disguised in a morass of legerdemain, the “modest adjustments” are, in Senator Bernie Sanders’ (Ind-Vt) words, “horrendous.”

Worse than the double-talk on the entitlement side is Obama’s outright obfuscation on the revenue side. Not once has Obama ever called for an increase in tax rates for the wealthy. In fact, in his April 2011 Fact Sheet, the President spoke glowingly of his plan’s lowering of the corporate tax to the lowest level in 25 years. [2]

What “revenue increases” really means is asking wealthy speculators and corporations “to give up some their breaks in the tax code and special deductions.” While this may be a step toward fairness, it is basically small beer.

Over the weekend, Senate Majority Leader, Harry Reid (Dem Nev) put forth a 2.7 trillion dollar plan that balanced the budget with somewhat fuzzy cut backs to discretionary spending coupled with an end to the occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan. Tax rates were not raised, but entitlements were not cut. [3]

The White House at first praised the plan, but later in the evening, the President himself took to the air to champion his Grand Slam to the elderly, sick and disabled. Obama argued,

“So the debate right now isn’t about whether we need to make tough choices. ... The debate is about how it should be done. Most Americans, regardless of political party, don’t understand how we can ask a senior citizen to pay more for her Medicare before we ask a corporate jet owner or the oil companies to give up tax breaks that other companies don’t get.”

Actually, most Americans don’t understand why a senior citizen on a meager fixed income and barely getting by should pay at all for a deficit he or she did not cause. (See Fauxbama Strikes Again)

Obama's hypocrisy is stunning. Republican intransigence and the Reid Plan, put forth by Senator Harry Reid (Dem Nev) gives Obama a political out by opting for a more than patch- piece budget that does not penalize entitlements while still being able to shift blame onto the opposition. And yet Obama still pushes for a plan that imposes cuts on Social Security.

In other words, Obama’s tactical justification for offering up Social Security sacrifices was and is simply a ruse. The President wants cuts to entitlements whether or not they are needed to get the Republicans on board.

Obama's Grand Slam is wrong and unfair. Of course, a long term deficit and debt reduction plan is desireable. But desireability is not an alchemy that turns unfairness into justice. Yes, Americans should contact their representatives and tell them: Thou shalt not offer up the aged and the orphaned as sacrifices to Moloch.

©WoodchipGazette, 2011.


[1]http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press office/2011/07/25/address-president-nation

[2]http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press office/2011/04/13/fact-sheet-presidents-framework-shared prosperity-and-shared-fiscal-resp

[3]http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/173445-reid-unveils 27t-debt-cut-plan-dares-the-gop-to-vote-no

[4]http://wcg-features.blogspot.com/2011/07/fauxbama strikes-again.html

.

Another Reason to Avoid Supermarkets

The Food and Drug Administration today published new rules that would require meat vendors to specify how much water and brine their T-Bones and chicken breasts contain.

As it turns out, much of the so-called "meat" offered to the American public for sale contains up to 40% of salt-water. This is particulary true of products such as "Teriyaki Chicken" or "DownHome Mesquite Flavored Steak", but "plumping up" meat with water is not apparently limited to pre-flavored products. Who in the world wants to pay $4.99 a pound for a product that is 40% water?

Just as pertinently, is there anything in the United States that is not a money-grubbing scam?

.

The Shadow of a Past Betrayal

The mainstream mudia reported this week that President Obama had put Medicare and Social Security on the "chopping block" in an effort to reach a budget consensus with the Republicans.

As usual, the mudia does its best to obfuscate rather than to inform. What do the Republicans want? Any imbecile knows that the pet rock and wet dream of the Republican Party is to abolish, kill off, destroy, repeal Social Security and Medicare. Given that fact, words like consensus and compromise have no place in the report. Try this,

Obama has put Medicare and Social Security on the chopping block in order to reach an agreement with those who want to put Medicare and Social Security on the chopping block.

Uh huh....

We at the chip stack, never put much stock in Fauxbama. But it ought to be clear by now to even the thickest block of wood that Obama was simply a false flag operation -- a put up job, a mole, a swindler and a fake.

What is stunning is the extent to which so many still don't get it, arguing that what we are seeing is an Obamian Gambit which aims to paint the Republicans into a corner. Bullpucky. What we are seeing is a classic Mutt and Jeff routine, in which Obama plays the consoling good guy to a totally battered middle class America. "Stick with me. I'm doing the best I can."

This is not some unexpected turn of events. Goldman Sachs was a major bankroller of Obama's campaign. Was it any surprise that as millions lost their savings and livelihood, Obama took to the podium to declaim that he did not begrudge Blankfein his millions?

There are some who speak of a "looming" sell out. Nah. What we are witnessing is simply the shadow of a past betrayal.

.