Ehemaliger_User
Beatus ille, qui procul negotiis.
- 10. April 2002
- 29.057
AW: "occupy wall street" Weltweite Proteste gegen das Finanzsystem und die Hintergrün
Für diejenigen, die die OWS-Bewegung in Amerika verfolgen, habe ich hier einen
Artikel, der die konzertierte Aktion beleuchtet, in der in 18 amerikanischen Städten die
Protestcamps geräumt wurden.
The shocking truth about the crackdown on Occupy
Und weil alles mit allem zusammenhängt, noch einen Artikel:
9 Reasons Wired Readers Should Wear Tinfoil Hats
Einen Kommentar möchte ich gerne komplett zitieren:
Für diejenigen, die die OWS-Bewegung in Amerika verfolgen, habe ich hier einen
Artikel, der die konzertierte Aktion beleuchtet, in der in 18 amerikanischen Städten die
Protestcamps geräumt wurden.
The shocking truth about the crackdown on Occupy
[...]The mainstream media was declaring continually "OWS has no message". Frustrated, I simply asked them. I began soliciting online "What is it you want?" answers from Occupy. In the first 15 minutes, I received 100 answers.
The No 1 agenda item: get the money out of politics.
[...]
No 2: reform the banking system to prevent fraud and manipulation, with the most frequent item being to restore the Glass-Steagall Act
[...]
No 3 was the most clarifying: draft laws against the little-known loophole that currently allows members of Congress to pass legislation affecting Delaware-based corporations in which they themselves are investors.
[...]
Sadly, Americans this week have come one step closer to being true brothers and sisters of the protesters in Tahrir Square. Like them, our own national leaders, who likely see their own personal wealth under threat from transparency and reform, are now making war upon us.
Und weil alles mit allem zusammenhängt, noch einen Artikel:
9 Reasons Wired Readers Should Wear Tinfoil Hats
Einen Kommentar möchte ich gerne komplett zitieren:
When we abandoned our principles in order to use force against terrorists and drug dealers, the answer to the question, What are we defending? started to change.
The original answer, ostensibly, was, "We are defending the peaceful
and law-abiding citizens of the United States, their principles, and
everything America stands for."
Then after a while it became, "We’re defending the current population
of the country, but we can’t defend the principles so much anymore,
because they weigh us down in the fight against a ruthless enemy who
must be stopped at all costs."
Then finally it became this: “We are defending ourselves, against the
citizens who insist on keeping their rights and their principles.”