Blacklisted Occupied State of the Union Address

[AnonnaMyss]

"When Americans of all ages, ethnicities, economic standings, and backgrounds Occupy together, we stand united against a broken system; a system that has stopped listening to the People and has allowed this country to be run into the ground, having a ripple effect across the world.

Occupying is not an encampment. It is not on a street corner. It is not in a reclaimed a foreclosed home. When we Occupy, it is a state of mind. As of December 20th, there were 2,751 Occupy communities worldwide that know you cannot evict an idea whose time has come."

How do people stand united in their minds? Is standing united a metaphor then? No literal translation? Perhaps what the establishment wants is for us all to think that occupy is a state of mind, retreat to the comfort and warmth of wherever it is you land, and then go about our regularly scheduled programming. They certainly don't want us out on a street corner, occupying public space, occupying the public's mind with our bodies and our signs, engaging in political discussion, relating to each other face-to-face, garnering more support from the 99. This behind closed doors shit is what's so problematic about Washington.

oc·cu·py (ky-p) tr.v. oc·cu·pied, oc·cu·py·ing, oc·cu·pies
1. To fill up (time or space).
... 2. To dwell or reside in.
3. To hold or fill (an office or position).
4. To seize possession of and maintain control over by or as if by conquest.
5. To engage or employ the attention or concentration of.

It doesn't mean to occupy your own mind with delusions of grandeur of forming a new government. It means getting out there and doing it.

"Gandhi was an occupier; Dr. King was an occupier; Mandela was an occupier"

So did they occupy their own minds? Or did they occupy the minds of others. Out of sight, out of mind.

"Yet I realize that it is my duty and obligation as an American to question authority and challenge the corruption that has eroded our system."

but from the safety of behind the computer screen, right. fifty years from now, they'll write "emails and phonecalls changed the world".

"I am not going anywhere! I will occupy until there is real economic justice; I will occupy until there is real social change; I will occupy until there is real power for the people again. I stand up! I Declare! So I Occupy!"

as the movement retreats to the perceived safety and warmth of an indoor space where they can all play on their computers pretending to effect socio-economic and political change. OC not only goes indoors, now it goes into its own minds, completely forgetting the fact that there are people on the street who've been foreclosed, laid off, kicked around, and ignored, people that will freeze to death this winter, homeless families that we are supposed to be standing up for, who don't have the luxury of going indoors, and are too busy trying to survive in this society to get in the occupy state of mind. too cold to stand on a corner for a couple hours? what kind of fucking Chicagoans are you? (Of course we should be handing out literature, but I haven't seen Education or anyone come up with any. Response to your initial response, I don't have the fucking time, I'm already stretched thin with all of my responsibilities)

Occupying is not a state of mind. I vehemently disagree with that statement. I'm not buying that shit, no matter who says it. Sorry M.

I think this is fucking bullshit that you are going ahead with it, conveniently after "rejoining" in typical sugar-dramatic fashion, WITHOUT approval from GA.

commence the people negating what I say and not giving a shit that all this fucking ego shit is driving away people that were with the movement in the very beginning and others that joined later and gave their heart and soul to Occupy Chicago.

there is no "I" in Occupy.


P.S. Nice fucking title of the email. "They" are trying to break apart the movement from the inside. Are you all going to let it happen? (By "they", I'm not implying dear sugar. the "they" I am referring to is the establishment.) They are separating, radicalizing, moving us indoors and out of the way. They are desperate to keep us from mobilizing the 99. Don't fall for their tricks. we stand together or we fall. Empowering individuals=good. empowering individuals to make decisions that segregate and alienate=the death of occupy.

I'm sure my opinion doesn't fucking matter to any of you anyway. I'm just nobody on a street corner.

[Rojo]

I personally don't understand the issue people have with Jackson and Lasalle in the movement. Personally, that's not the best place for me to carry out what I do best. That said, if a person feels like being there makes the best use of them, so be it. Just forget the encampments, though. It's honestly a lost cause and paints a giant bullseye on people. My personal opinion.
I do think it's quite funny how some of the most vocal supporters of L&J have abandoned so easily. We all know who they are. They were the ones calling people who dissented over the "taking of the horse" 2 trolls, etc. And told them to get down to L&J and get involved. How quickly so many of them seem to have dropped it.
Some of them are arguing it is because L&J is not the best location to engage people. On some level they are right. But it doesn't mean that you disappear behind closed doors completely, either. The Flying Squads would have been an excellent source with which to engage people. Take a page from the Greenpeace people. They roll out to various, busy parts of the city and engage people, mainly to raise money, but educating them nonetheless. Whether or not OC would want to file the necessary permits to use this is a legitimate form of fundraising is up to you guys. I don't know the legalities of that, so I have no opinion on that. The point is you can still maintain a presence in public view, but now it's all over the city.
If you were to do this, I would suggest making sure that people are well educated on all the points and not just the propaganda (let's be honest, folks. You are using some) and engage the people in a straightforward conversation. None of the "people's mic" or "mic checks". I'm telling you, that shit just turns off the average joe. And like it or not, you need the average Joe's on your side if your really hope to accomplish anything.

[AnonnaMyss]

From genx:

I want you all to read the correspondence and rebuttals to Rob Wheeler letter

Rob Wheeler

Question. Who is the National Occupy group who is supposed to be involved with writing this and editing the video?

2nd. The reason it is not an official occupy sotu is because the people imvolved made no attempt to get it to pass G.A. In Chicago or at OWS. They fully intended to speak for occupy while getting around the democratic process. When told that this is making people angry they did not care and said they would move forward anyway.

Do you support and agree with actions like this? If you do get ready for the DNC to start having people speak for occupy while undermining occupy's democratic process.

response:
Okay and here is OSTU's response
Notice how this is being represented as something Occup Chicago's Tech Committee is involved with. This is carefully worded so it will be interpreted that way.

Dear generation.x@gmail.com,

I would like to address these issues you presented.

There is no longer a National Working Group (reason addressed in letter below). The people who wrote this has gone from the original 10 (San Fran, Des Moine, Omaha, Albany, and Chicago) to many more who have stacked, emailed, or had conversation with me. I have not taken a count, but I would guess somewhere around another 50 or so.

The people editing are from Chicago (part of the OC tech committee). They have donated space on their secure server to hold video and will edit. Edits will be based on video quality and flow of energy.

Below is an email I sent to info@interoccupy.com after they wrote to apologize for this experience and requesting further information on the situation. I believe that it addresses the rest of your questions and concerns. If not, please let me know and I will continue to respond.

12:27 AM (57 minutes ago)

to oc_directaction
Here is a reply to OSTU's email which OSTU has not responded to yet.


Based on your reply

You are stating that Occupy Chicago's Tech Committee is assisting with this project and members of their team are the people doing the editing.
And that they will host this video on "their" server. Who's server. Occupy Chicago's website server?

Next. You have not listed or named who these people are. You named places they are allegedly from. But have given no way to verify who they are or if they even exist. I would like to know and verify who they are and if they are from an occupy group in those areas and if those occupy groups support the work of that person. Transparency is the key.

And let's make this clear. The Interroccupy group is not the "National Group" like someone claimed.

Please address all questions please.

[AnonnaMyss]

my response to genx:

you are so right about DNC being next up to misrepresent Occupy.
i personally think the democratic party is behind the meme "occupy is a state of mind", their version of sit down and shut up: go in and log on.

the genesis of this speech is whats problematic. some people feel they have been lied to about the existence of the national working group, and nothing has been produced to make us think otherwise.

why didnt you bring this up at that ga where you planned sugar? is it because we had ows occupiers with us? why so shady? and, by the way completely undemocratic.

the statement of the movement of the people, by sugar. im not comfortable with that. the press will have a field day with it and use the rift to tear down the movement. cant you see that by the title of that email?

answer the questions genx asked. please.

[Bunny]

I'd like to point out that I was added to the OSOTU gmail chain without my consent. I don't think I've ever returned an email because I was so against the circumvention of our process. How many of the "50" people participating are like me?

[Dreadsen]

Sugar Replied in the Interroccupy topic. Here is her Reply.

You are assuming or have been misguided a lot. So let me clear some things.

I never denounced OC, nor did I do it in a public forum. I sent and email that I was leaving OC, not the movement. The reason for this was a result of a member assaulting 3 OC members, including myself. The guy tried to light someone on fire. And yet OC could not find a way to handle it for weeks while I was being attacked in the public forums and via email by him and his friends. I had hit my limit of abuse. I kept communication with those that I conciser friends. I also have participated with other local occupy groups and producing and hosting multiple OC fundraisers.

I let OC groups know that I was going to continue this project (that I had started developing within a comm at OC) and welcomed their help. I also let them know that I was reaching out across the country. The concept that this was written by any political party is not one that I will even respond further on because I reject the primes entirely.

As far as this being a closed group, again, I reject the premise. If that were the case would I request Interoccupy (once I found out they could help) to let people know this project was looking for help? Why would I go to the OC GA and request feedback? Why would I continue to work with people at OWS? Why would I have created a FB page for it with instructions on how to participate? It was never a closed group. Just because people did not request to be part of the process, or had not heard about the project, does not make it a closed group. I have the email for this project up all over for people to see the speech and participate in it. Anyone who wanted it got a copy.

The couple of people that expressed issues were the ones that I had conversations with and tried to find different language with. Everything that the blacklisting email came from a GG group that I was not part of and that never clarified anything with me. Hence requesting a peace circle with them.

And Rob is right. Why would I recommend this type of accusations be thrust on anyone who worked on this? I will, however, ask if people would like their emails released, but if I was in their place, I wouldn't offer that up.

I NEVER said that the group wanted to remain anonymous. I NEVER said that I was there representing OC. I NEVER said that I did not care about consensus building. I NEVER said that people would not see the final version.

This speech is not in the Occupy name. It is an individual project. I find that your assumptions and lies to be insulting and slanderous. This is the last that I will choose to respond to you on these issues.

With dismay,
Sugar

[Dreadsen]

Here Is my Reply.

Here is my response to your long email earlier.

I believe this group does not exist. Regardless of being closed or not.
You stated in an earlier email that this National Group no longer exists. My statements is in regards to when this group WAS still in existence.

If the intention was to create the video on her own as an individual person. Then there would be no need to try to get OWS to endorse this speech at their GA. Next there would be no need to make an attempt to get as many Occupy's to endorse it. Based on the wording from Sugars on post in the original topic in this link

http://occupychi.org/phpbbforumforum/viewtop ... =10&t=1995

Quote: “
The Plan:
1) Due to timing of final edits, I am at OWS for the Holidays, and will have the opportunity to get the speech endorsed (hopefully) by OWS first.

2) Get the speech submitted to as many Occupies around the country as possible. “


Now from her another post of hers in the same topic.

“People involved in this project have been part of a national working group that ranges from Cali to Nebraska to NY. Everything in it has been widely endorsed by the American Occupy Movement. There is nothing in there that we expect will be blocked my any local Occupy Movements based on content.”


This proves that this speech was advertised as something that is intended to pass the GA's of all Occupy groups this speech was submitted to. And the first one being OWS.


The idea of getting something to pass is to work with that group so that it DOES PASS. Then you have the groups blessing. This is also done so that it gives more credibility to the speech. If someone was to create a video and state that they are “individual occupiers” who do not belong to any occupy group then the press potentially will not take it seriously. But if it is “worded” carefully it can be intentionally misinterpreted AS being something that multiple occupy groups have endorsed.

Rumors were flying around when Sugar went to OWS that she was speaking on behalf of Occupy Chicago and was representing them. Now she did clear this up. But she words things quite often with the full intention of misleading people to believe certain groups are working with her who are not working with her at all. Look at what she wrote in this same email earlier.

“The people editing are from Chicago (part of the OC tech committee). They have donated space on their secure server to hold video and will edit. Edits will be based on video quality and flow of energy.”

She carefully worded that statement to it will be interpreted as OC tech committee and that OC chicago Server will be hosting this speech. IT gives plenty of wiggle room so if someone accuses the wording of suggesting that she can claim that this is not the case.
“people” is plural. Notice when I asked her If Occupy Chicago Tech committee was involved and if this was going to be on Occupy Chicago's server she did not answer or address this.

I believe she didn't think that anyone on this Interroc group was from Occupy Chicago and could verify this stuff.

I suspect the tactic used in the above wording is the same tactic which was used when she went to OWS which caused them to think that she was a rep from OC and speaking on behalf of OC.

Now moving back to original point.

If the intention is to represent the occupy movement, and submit this speech to as many Occupy groups as possible so it can pass their GA and then after it does NOT pass their GA then it is expressed that they will move on with the project (intended to represent occupy movement) anyway regardless of consensus. This is like saying F.U. You vote against and don't pass my agenda I will do it anyway.

Again. If anyone wants to do something similar. Don't claim you are going to get consensus and get it passed through multiple GA's and when you get push back then proceed anyway so you can get around the democratic process and achieve the same goal of representing all of occupy movement.

Now after not getting it passed through OWS, not getting it passed through OC, to the best of my knowledge didn't attempt to get it passed through any other G.A. She is now trying to get support from Interroccupy to add credibility to this speech.

Just do the speech and stop trying to get anyone to support it. If you want support let people add input and voice concerns with certain portions of it. If you honestly had 50 people from around the country which I think is a lie then you would have plenty of support with out having to ask anyone else. Even the people from OWS twitter also suspect that this “national working group” is something that was just made up. We have the photo of the Twitter hoopla when this was first presented to them.

Also please read the link to the discussion the first time. I included it above.

Last point this quote from Sugar in the link posted at the top.

“I understand the frustration on not being able to read the final version, but like some actions, the details need to be as tightly kept as possible. Have some faith that the national working group on this is not trying to dupe anyone in the Movement. And I also think that once you hear it, you will be excited about this project.”

This substantiates the claims by me and others that no one was invited to join this secret group to work on this project. Thus raising suspicion of who is a part of this group and if it ever exited.