Wil B.

A Saul Alinsky book, eh? How far are you? Is Obama really an Alinsky radical as Newt likes to say?

A+

Because of the open, leaderless, amorphous sort of movement, it's easy for more belligerent people to get involved with it, but at the same time, given the consensus-driven approach of the General Assemblies, I think it'll be hard for those people to get enough support to change the nature of the entire movement. From what I've seen and heard from people involved, I'm pretty sure they realize that, whatever they're trying to do, they're not going to do it if they become a rioting mob.

Wil--

I think that OWS might take on a more belligerent identity--if the Economy remains as stagnant as it is....

I believe, therefore, that the Movement will acquire, unfortunately, "new kinds" of members--with aggressive resolve and a broader impatience.....IF the Economy does not improve.

OWS is not about to die out.....a moratorium for the winter, perhaps...but eventually it will take action; let's hope it's real political action.

If numerous incidents of violence occur, however, it will almost assuredly, first, be goaded by police.

Keep in mind, though, that OWS is attracting the homeless--which could mean the possibility of unpredictable, psychotic behavior.

By indepth research I am assuming she means watch Fox News to get the real story..hahaha

I happen to notice that you joined the Occupy Wall Street Movement group. You folks may be wise to do a wee bit more indepth research on that? Often things are not as they appear?
THE BILLIONAIRES CLUB AND OCCUPY WALL STREET GANG STRANGE BEDFELLOWS INDEED.. GOOGLE SEARCH 365,000 RESULTS

Well here I am again. I went back to my school house post to find out someone's icon that had posted on there. I've been reading for over and hour and arguing the whole time. :) Be glad I used self control and didn't actually leave 10 messages!
Now I have to go baack and find the icon.

Thanks :)

Wil B.,

Thank you for stopping by and reading & commenting on my aricle. Have a great weekend!

Wil, I left the following on the web page of Vicente's Post:


"Wil, thanks for your comments above. As I told you in a ping to you, I will try to look into the veracity of your work above.

And then I will comment further. If I am wrong, then I will be more than happy to say it.

However, what I wrote above is NOT a rant.

Instead, it is a defense against the rampant BIAS that is going on
everywhere, at the expense of facts.

Your claims of such Inequity, in the Military, did not add up to me--because it suggests that the Military formally proclaims positions that are Unconstitutional...AS IT RELATES TO OBTAINING INFORMATION VIA WHISPERING CAMPAIGNS AND THEN, AFTER OBTAINING SUCH QUESTIONABLE INFORMATION, DEEMS IT ACTIONABLE...

If that were the case, ACLU litigation would have almost certainly challenged the policy, very very early on.

I know of no such litigation, early on. AND BECAUSE THERE IS NO SUCH LEGAL CHALLENGE, I QUESTION YOUR CLAIM.

But I will look into it, further."