4 indoor-only kitties and a cat-harassed cattle dog. All humane-society rescues or adopted ferals. The poor pooch gets rousted out of her favorite sleeping spots by one of our cats on a regular basis. I think he wants to cuddle with her, but she gets nervous and moves.

The reason I think he wants to cuddle is because when they’re both up, they’ll play together and they wander around outside in the yard together (the cat on a leash, of course). She’s just not comfortable when he’s trying to curl up next to her. Of course, for all I know, he could be a major bully telling her “Move!”

The other three don’t interact much with the pooch, but they’re not at all afraid of her.

We didn’t plan on having four cats, it just kind of happened… Two cats and a dog is the right number for us, I think.

I wouldn’t discount that as a possible motivation. But if history is any guide it indicates that violence against women provokes a vigorous reaction from men, more so than a demoralized one.

Either way, it serves the oppressor’s purpose.

The dedication and adherence to non-violence is a wonder to behold. I am far less familiar with Indian history than I would like, so I do not know if OWS has been practicing satyagraha as opposed to civil disobedience, but even if they haven’t I still think Gandhi would be proud of them.

Targeting women is a useful tool ESPECIALLY when confronting non-violent movements. If the oppressors can cause some of the protestors to rise up in a chivalrous defense, it will allow them to paint the movement as a violent group and justify preemptive action to shut it down.

That is of course made easier with a complicit media. And, as we have seen, made harder for the oppressors by the work of non-WSM journalists such as Kevin and the army of video-equipped protestors capturing unprovoked violence from the police. How many times has the NYPD spokesman Paul Browne had to walk back statements he made about “justified and necessary force”? The guy needs a sashimono emblazoned with the words “I’m going to regret saying this.”

And as TD pointed out, there can be multiple motivations.

I may be mistaken about how the appellate system works, but I always thought that if the 9th Circuit ruled on something it applied to Arizona, Alaska, California, Oregon, Washington, Hawaii, Nevada and Idaho, not simply the locale from which the case originated. Or does that quality exclusively reserved for cases that make it to the SCOTUS?

Since the 9th Circuit is the largest, I’m hoping it is the case that a decision for equal marriage will be applied to the entire jurisdiction. Almost 20% of the population of the US!

Newyorkist Newyorkist
Zuccotti Park signs earlier this evening: flickr.com/photos/quinn/6…. Zuccotti Park signs shortly after: twitter.com/#!/ADRjeffries…
2 minutes ago

Looks like someone (with some level of authority) pointed out that Brookfield signed a contract with NYC that the park MUST remain open 24 hours a day.

Like Sen. Claire McCaskill and her TSA “love taps”.

He left for Australia this morning. I believe he was heading to the airport during rush hour. So I imagine that everyone on Oahu was cursing him this morning.

Hoo boy, you’re asking the wrong fellow those questions. I cribbed those items from Cynthia’s comments in an earlier post. I’m no lawyer, so any of my comments on it are from the peanut gallery as it were.

I tend to agree with you that our legal system appears little more than gilded refuse, but I’m not entirely there yet. I’m currently considering whether my feelings on this matter are colored by my concerns over the implications.

We already know that voting can no longer be relied upon, thanks to the voting machines with no paper records. The executive and legislative branches of government seem to be in a race to see who can sell the country off to the corporations faster and just how quickly they can implement fascist policies. Once it becomes irrefutably proven that the judiciary will no longer serve as a check upon the other two branches, what’s left?

Cynthia Kouril listed a number of points on which it looks like Stallman will be savaged on appeal.

#1 Inappropriate application of Snyder v Phelps. (If I understand correctly.)
#2 Speech is not limited to words. (Thank you Citizen’s United?)
#3 Brookfield rules were implemented SPECIFICALLY to stifle protected First Amendment activity in a public space.

Now, that ASSUMES that our judiciary is not fully captive. I haven’t made my final decision on that yet, but this case will definitely push me to one side or the other.

Food now prohibited. All you can do is walk and talk. Maybe with a sign.

Here ya go.

Stallman’s decision

10 PM curfew in Zuccotti now.

And there is now a 10 pm curfew. HEY! That IS supposed to trigger a review!

No musical instruments in Zuccotti. Guitar, accordian and drums all barred from entry. Also footballs.

Based on the rules Brookfield implemented, signs appear to be ok. I don’t recall anything about drums either. The kicker is that according to NYCDCP, Brookfield can make “reasonable” changes without triggering the 45-day review process. So the existing rules are totally valid, even though the article I just read seems to indicate that similar rules HAVE triggered review in the past.

Brookfield and Zuccotti Park Rules

So, expect to see placards EVERYWHERE tomorrow banning drums, sleeping bags, tents, setting down personal items and whatnot. You can talk and walk. And maybe hold a sign.

Cynthia, since this case will certainly be appealed, is there any precedent created by Judge Stallman ruling that rules implemented without adhering to NYC Department of City Planning procedures can be enforced?

Does the fact that the judge referenced the invalidly implemented rules in his ruling have any significance? IANAL, so I dunno if in law you can build a house of cards without a bottom floor.

Hmm, and in a stunning move, it appears that the court has eliminated the oversight function of the NYC Department of City Planning over privately owned public spaces, by decreeing that Brookfield’s rules are enforceable. This despite them not meeting NYCDCP implementation guidelines.

But, IANAL, so my layperson interpretation may be off.

Decision here

TRO Denied. No Tents.