Cops with Assault Rifles Chasing Down Protesters in Chapel Hill

Misleading headline, cops weren’t chasing down anyone as far as I can see, a complete embellishment from the OWS.  A lot of comments on this has been that the police overreacted against the nice people who occupied a building that wasn’t theirs, that they broke into.

By Katelyn Ferral and Mark Schultz –,
Tags: Occupy | Chapel Hill | Franklin Street | Occupy Wall Street | Occupy Chapel Hill

CHAPEL HILL — A police tactical team of more than 25 police officers arrested eight demonstrators Sunday afternoon and charged them with breaking and entering for occupying a vacant car dealership on Franklin Street.

Officers brandishing guns and semi-automatic rifles rushed the building at about 4:30 p.m. They pointed weapons at those standing outside, and ordered them to put their faces on the ground. They surrounded the building and cleared out those who were inside.

About 13 people, including New & Observer staff writer covering the demonstration, were forced to the ground and hand-cuffed.

Those who had been outside of the building at the time of the arrests – including N&O staffer Katelyn Ferral – were detained and then let go after their pictures were taken. Eight people inside the building were cuffed and put on a Chapel Hill Transit bus to be taken to the police station to be charged with misdemeanor breaking and entering.

“Along with facilitating citizens’ ability to exercise their constitutional rights, it is also a critical responsibility of all levels of government in a free society to respond when rights of others are being impinged upon,” Chapel Hill Mayor Mark Kleinschmidt said in a statement issued Sunday night.

“This weekend a group of protesters broke into and entered a privately owned building in downtown Chapel Hill. … The Town has an obligation to the property owners, and the Town will enforce those rights …”

Police closed off four blocks of West Franklin Street with six squad cars and a fire truck while officers removed signs the demonstrators had hung in the former dealership’s show room windows.

In a statement Sunday night, police said they had been monitoring the building since Saturday night when they learned attendees of an anarchist book fair held this weekend were aligning themselves with Occupy Chapel Hill and that about 70 people had entered the former car dealership.

“Officers also learned that strategies used by anarchists in other communities included barricading themselves in buildings, placing traps in buildings, and otherwise destroying property,” said the statement released by Sgt. Josh Mecimore. “The group in the … building used large banners to obscure the windows to the business and strategically placed members on the roof as look-outs.”

Police waited until the crowd had reached “a manageable size” before moving in Sunday, the statement said.

A crowd of between 50 and 75 people gathered across the street, watching and taking pictures as the bus carrying the protesters pulled away. They jeered police officers, chanting, “Shame! Shame! Shame!” When someone noticed the Wells Fargo advertisement on the side of the bus, they began chanting “Who do they serve? Wells

The group, who identified themselves as “anti-capitalist occupiers” moved into the former University Chrysler and Yates Motor Co. building at 419 W. Franklin St. on Saturday night, the police statement said.

The brick and cinderblock building with large windows fronting the sidewalk is owned by out-of-town businessman Joe Riddle and has stood empty for many years. One demonstrator said they were acting in the tradition of working-class squatters’ movements around the world that some say inspired the Occupy Wall Street movement and its offshoots across the United States.

The group printed a flier that proposed a possible new use for the space that would include a free clinic, kitchen, child care, library and dormitories, among other uses. The flier acknowledged they were breaking the law by entering the building.

“Make no mistake: this occupation is illegal,” it said, “as are most of the other occupations taking place around the U.S., as were many of the other acts of defiance that won the little freedom and equality we appreciate today.”

Get the biggest news in your email or cellphone as it’s happening. Sign up for breaking news alerts.

Read more:

OWS Portland tensions escalates, police in riot gear

Police Move In on ‘Occupy Portland’ Campsite as Protesters Remain


Published November 13, 2011

| Associated Press

  • occupy_oregon_1113


    Nov. 13, 2011: A protester offers police a rose after the deadline passed when the city wanted them to vacate the Occupy Portland Camp in Portland, Ore. Thousands of protesters showed up as mounted police and police in riot gear moved in but were forced to back down by the crowd.

PORTLAND, Ore. –  In a tense escalation of the Occupy Portland protest, police in riot gear Sunday surrounded demonstrators in a downtown park area after hundreds of people defied the mayor’s order to leave the park by midnight.

By early afternoon, officers had mostly surrounded the camp where the protesters were holding a “general assembly” meeting to discuss their next moves following the eviction order.

Some officers used nightsticks to push people away from the encampment and used loudspeakers to warn that anyone who resisted risked arrest and “may also be subject to chemical agents and impact weapons.” Demonstrators chanted “we are a peaceful protest.”

Police could be seen carrying at least one protester away from the park. Another man was taken away on a stretcher; he was alert and talking to paramedics, and raised a peace sign to fellow protesters, who responded with cheers. There was no immediate word on arrests.

“We were talking about what we were going to do and then they just started hitting people. Seems like a waste of resources to me,” protester Mike Swain, 27, told The Associated Press.

Choya Adkison, 30, said police moved in after giving demonstrators a false sense of calm. They thought they had time to rest, relax and regroup, she said

“Camp was completely vulnerable, completely defenseless” when police moved in, she said. “I’m disappointed that they created a sense of trust by walking away and then completely trampled it.”

Mayor Sam Adams had ordered the camp shut down Saturday at midnight, citing unhealthy conditions and the encampment’s attraction of drug users and thieves.

The anti-Wall Street protesters and their supporters had flooded the park area even as authorities in other cities stepped up pressure against demonstrators, arresting dozens of people.

At one point overnight, the Portland crowd swelled to thousands. As dawn arrived, riot police had retreated and most of the crowds had gone home, but protesters who have been at the two parks since Oct. 6 were still there.

One of the organizers, Jim Oliver, said the night had been a victory for Occupy Portland.

“We stood up to state power,” Oliver told the AP, standing on a corner opposite the camp.

Still, the camp was a shadow of what it was before Saturday. A large segment of the campers consisted of homeless people who had been drawn to the free food and shelter offered by Occupy Portland. They are gone, after outreach workers went through the camp to help them find shelter elsewhere.

And as the Saturday midnight eviction deadline neared, protesters themselves began dismantling tents.

Around 4 a.m., dozens of police formed a line across from demonstrators who had poured into the street. Protesters facing them appeared to be in festive spirits with some banging on drums and plastic pails, another clanging a cowbell while others danced in the streets as a man juggled nearby.

Other demonstrators used pallets and old furniture, wood debris and even a bicycle to set up two makeshift barricades on a street that runs through the encampment, apparently in an attempt to block traffic.

Protesters ultimately got off the street after the police asked them to and also cleared away the barricades.

On Sunday at an impromptu news conference, the mayor defended his order to clear the park, saying it is his job to enforce the law and keep the peace. “This is not a game,” Adams said.

He also noted that implementing the eviction order may require more patience.

“Giving the order that the parks will be closed to the public is putting my foot down. Enforcing will take time,” he said.

Officials said that one officer suffered minor injuries when he was hit by some kind of projectile in the leg. Police had prepared for a possible clash, warning that dozens of anarchists may be planning a confrontation with authorities. Officers seized pieces of cement blocks Friday, saying they were told some demonstrators had plans to use them as weapons against police. They said they believe some demonstrators were building shields and trying to collect gas masks.

Also Sunday, for the third time in three days, Oakland city officials warned protesters that they do not have the right to camp in the plaza in front of City Hall and face immediate arrest. Police did not respond to requests for comment on whether officers were preparing to forcibly clear the camp.

The eviction notices come as officials across the country urged an end to similar gatherings in the wake of three deaths in different cities, including two by gunfire. Demands for Oakland protesters to pack up increased after a man was shot and killed Thursday near the encampment site.

Police officials have said a preliminary investigation suggested the shooting resulted from a fight between two groups of men at or near the encampment. Investigators do not know if the men in the fight were associated with Occupy Oakland, but protesters said there was no connection between the shooting and the camp.

The shooting occurred the same day a 35-year-old military veteran apparently committed suicide in a tent at a Burlington, Vt., Occupy encampment. Police said a preliminary investigation showed the veteran fatally shot himself in the head. They said the death raised questions about whether the protest would be allowed to continue.

Read more:

Bachmann’s Manager backtracks on bias claim

Bachmann Campaign Expresses Regret After Manager Goes on Tear Over Alleged Bias at CBS

by Fox News | November 13, 2011

The campaign manager for Michele Bachmann called the head of CBS’ political news to apologize for calling him a “fraud” and a more scatological term after the Minnesota congresswoman’s team said it had proof the network tried to marginalize her during Saturday night’s Republican presidential candidate debate.

The Bachmann for President campaign released an email chain on Saturday that it says indicates a “planned effort to limit” the number of questions Bachmann would receive at Saturday night’s CBS/National Journal Debate.

Communications Director Alice Stewart said the campaign inadvertently received a message from CBS Political Director John Dickerson to Senior Producer Caroline Horn about getting a guest from the Bachmann camp to appear on the webshow.

“Okay let’s keep it loose though since she’s not going to get many questions and she’s nearly off the charts in the hopes that we can get someone else,” Dickerson writes to Horn and others.

Horn then copies Stewart on the reply, in which she writes: “I was just speaking with Alice Stewart, cc’d here, about the Congresswoman or a senior member if (sic) her staff joining you for the webshow. She said she would be happy to arrange. Sarah – you want to touch base with her later tonight?”

Bachmann aides say when they contacted CBS and National Journal about the Dickerson email before the debate, they were assured she would be given fair treatment.

After the debate, they expressed frustration  and anger, and shared the exchange with reporters in the spin room.

Speaking post-debate, Campaign Manager Keith Nahigian told reporters what he thought of Dickerson.

“John Dickerson should be fired. He is a piece of s—. He is a fraud and he should be fired,” Nahigian said.

Nahigian later expressed regret for the phrase after saying he could not recall his choice of words in the description.

A CBS spokeswoman did not apologize for the email.

“It was a candid exchange about the reality of the circumstances — Bachmann remains at 4 percent in the polls,” the spokeswoman told Fox News.

Read more:


The 90 Second Debate


As Ron Paul 2012 campaign manager John Tate noted of last night’s debate:


“90 seconds. That’s how much of the first hour of tonight’s GOP debate was given to Ron Paul. 90 measly seconds out of 3,600 seconds. The remaining 3,510 seconds were spent with the other major candidates:


*Declaring their desire to start wars in Iran, Pakistan, and Syria;


*Rehashing their support for torture;


*Agreeing that President Obama has the right to unilaterally assassinate an American citizen without a court conviction;


*Explaining their plans to continue nation-building, policing, and occupying countries across the globe.


John’s point about the time allotted Paul and the positions taken by his opponents is particularly important when you consider that basically the only actual “debate” taking place on stage last night was between Paul and the other candidates, all of whom, with the arguable exception of Jon Huntsman, basically agree with the Obama/Bush foreign policy consensus, as described by Tate above.


Many observers thought an Obama-era GOP might actually begin to question the Wilsonian, police-the-world liberalism that masqueraded as conservatism during the Bush era. Paul wasn’t the only candidate eager for such a debate. As The Politico’s James Antle noted:


Remember the foreign policy debate that was supposed to break out in the Republican Party during next year’s primaries?


Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels… ruffled hawks’ feathers by suggesting that America might have to shrink its military footprint around the globe to restore solvency to the federal budget…


Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour, one of the most successful Republican National Committee chairmen in recent history, sounded a similar note. “Anybody who says you can’t save money at the Pentagon has never been to the Pentagon. We can save money on defense… What is our mission? How many [members of] Al Qaeda are in Afghanistan? … Is that a 100,000-man Army mission?”


New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie has also said, “The United States must also become more discriminating in what we try to accomplish abroad… We certainly cannot force others to adopt our principles through coercion…”


Daniels, Barbour and Christie are not running for president… So despite initial impressions that much has changed since 2008, the Republican foreign policy debate may remain Paul versus everyone else.


This bears repeating:


“Despite initial impressions that much has changed since 2008, the Republican foreign policy debate may remain Paul versus everyone else.”


Last night was the first chance the GOP has really had in this election to substantively have the foreign policy debate many in the party believe it must have.


Considering this, giving Ron Paul only 90 seconds last night was worse than simply snubbing the Congressman again—it was effectively saying that the Republican Party should have no foreign policy debate.

Occupy Salt Lake City gets bulldozed.

Video at

Police evicted the Occupy Salt Lake City protesters who had made Utah’s Pioneer Park their campsite, arresting 19 people Saturday who refused to comply.

Despite the arrests, the protesters’ removal was peaceful and no incidents of violence were reported, and city sanitation crews arrived to clear debris from the park — with a bulldozer.

Protesters were ordered to vacate after a man was found dead in his tent at the encampment Friday, apparently due to carbon monoxide poisoning and a drug overdose.

Story continued at

CNBC Removes Post-debate Poll Because Paul Was Winning

Written by Raven Clabough
Friday, 11 November 2011 12:08

CNBC reportedly pulled an online poll half an hour after the GOP debate ended on Wednesday night, indicating that “one candidate” was leading by a large margin. That candidate was Ron Paul.

Video reveals that the longtime Texas Congressman was significantly ahead of the others just prior to the poll being removed from CNBC’s website and replaced with an article entitled, “Who won the debate — Attendees weigh in.”

Just before the poll was removed, Ron Paul was leading with 62 percent of the vote, followed by Newt Gingrich with 12 percent of the vote, and Mitt Romney and Herman Cain with 9 percent.

CNBC’s managing editor Allen Wastler issued the following statement to explain why the poll was removed:

Gamed Poll … So We Took It Down

We had a poll up from our Republican Presidential Debate asking readers who they thought won. One candidate was leading by such a margin that it became obvious the polling wasn’t so much a reading of our audience, but of the Internet prowess of this particular candidate’s political organization. We have therefore taken the poll down. Yes, we’ve gone through this exercise before.

CNBC made a similar decision in 2007, when exactly the same thing was taking place. In his statement, Wastler included a link to the 2007 statement as well, which was entitled “an open letter to the Ron Paul faithful.” The letter sarcastically began by saying, “Congratulations, you folks are obviously well-organized and feel strongly about your candidate and I can’t help but admire that.” The letter continued, however:

Paul is a fine gentleman with some substantial backing and, by the way, was a dynamic presence throughout the debate, but I haven’t seen him pull those kind of numbers in any “legit” poll. Our poll was either hacked or the target of a campaign. So we took the poll down.

You ruined the purpose of the poll. It was no longer an honest “show of hands” — it suddenly was a platform for beating the Ron Paul drum. That certainly wasn’t our intention and certainly doesn’t serve our readers … at least those who aren’t already in the Ron Paul camp.

Some of you Ron Paul fans take issue with my decision to take the poll down. Fine. When a well-organized and committed “few” can throw the results of a system meant to reflect the sentiments of “the many,” I get a little worried. I’d take it down again.

As noted by Steven Watson, however, any serious online poll restricts voting to one per IP address. Likewise, Watson adds, “Wastler bemoans the fact that Paul’s online supporters came in droves to vote, yet he does not consider why supporters of the same candidates did not do the same.”

Alt-Market’s Brandon Smith asserts that CNBC’s decision to pull the poll was virtually intended as punishment against Ron Paul’s supporters for being highly motivated.

“What margin of success does CNBC consider “realistic” for a presidential candidate?” Smith writes. “I mean, is it really necessary for you to punish Ron Paul for being a popular candidate, or to punish his supporters for being well organized and showing up for the vote? Do you not see the … absurdity of your claim that Ron Paul won by ‘too much’?”

Likewise, Smith went on to question the authenticity of CNBC’s claims that the poll was “gamed,” (i.e. hacked).

Above all, Smith questioned the motivation behind removing the poll by asking, “If Mitt Romney had won the poll by a landslide, would CNBC have suppressed the results then? Or is it only farfetched when Ron Paul prevails in the final calculations?

It is becoming increasingly clear that Ron Paul is perceived as a threat by the mainstream media and is therefore treated unfairly by it. A University of Minnesota study confirmed recently that Paul has been given the least amount of time of all the candidates to speak at the debates.

And the times when Paul is provided the opportunity to speak prove to be heavily critiqued. Jack Hunter of Paulitical Ticker observed, “So CNBC puts up the graphic that tuition prices have gone up nearly 500% since the inception of student loans and American student debt is now $1 trillion — and they seem to insinuate that Ron Paul is somehow being unrealistic in wanting to change the status quo. Unbelievable.”

Midway through Paul’s answer, one of the anchors interrupted to ask, “How are students going to pay for education?” Paul immediately responded, “The same way you pay for computers and cellphones,” emphasizing the need for healthy competition that will naturally bring down the cost of education while simultaneously improving its quality.

Still, despite the biased handling of Paul’s campaign successes, his campaign chairman Jesse Benton, as well as GOP leaders in Iowa, contend that Paul is the only other candidate besides Romney to have strong enough support to carry him through the key caucuses — Iowa and New Hampshire.

The Missouri News Horizon reports, “Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney and Texas U.S. Rep. Ron Paul are poised for high finishes in the Iowa caucuses but no one can seem to agree on who joins them in the top tier, local Republican leaders said Wednesday.”

“We need to do well in Iowa and New Hampshire, because it’s very important for perception,” Benton told Politico after the Michigan GOP debate. “It’s also important because the voters in those states are very adept and astute at evaluating candidates, so we need to be in the top three in those states, no question about it.”

He continued: “But we’re setting up organizations in caucus states across the country and we have a real plan to win the delegates necessary to be the Republican nominee. I don’t think anyone, outside of perhaps Mitt Romney, can say that.”