"Maybe if you stopped breaking the law and antagonizing the justice system by squatting at property you don't own..."

And adding the act he was a veteran, what the fuck did he think was going to happen

http://www.britishpathe.com/record.php?id=3118

That's a precedent motherfucker just be glad Patton wasn't around to order a saber charge like last time.

sabre that is

@Santa - Epic fail, dude. I was specifically talking about Sic. Sic was one of the home squatters awhile back.

And don't say I wasn't clear abou tthat, because my post was addressed directly *at* Sic. It said "@Sic - Maybe if *you*..." (emphasis added)

+1 Darug

yes because im supposed to know what you are talking about when you go completely off topic and reference something that you two discussed at some point in the past. WTF specifically is "A home squatter" in this context, and what exactly does that have to do with his post. And if you are talking about the protests I believe my post warning our veterans to watch out for sabre charges is completely relevant.

and sabre charges in general, they can be dangerous...

the question I guess is why is Sic a home squatter

Because if you walk down the street and there are homless people on on side, and boarded up houses on the other, thats immoral.

Also draug, I think we're a little past the "if you didnt do anything wrong you have nothing to worry about" myth.

@Santa, read Doc's generalization about law enforcement and how we should all be afraid and how we are a police state. He went OT so I responded and pointed out that his experience was a typical as his anarchistic beliefs has home regularly breaking the law.

@Sic, it isn't immoral. There are homeless shelters but those properties aren't the property of the homeless and I would have had your ass resting I'm -another- shelter of a different kind for many years.

Read *Sic's* not Doc's. Stupid phone. :-)

Yeah I guess you're right draugnar. there are more than 4 million homeless people in this country because they didnt work hard enough.
Thinking over the excellent points you made I realized that the rule of private property does and should reign supreme, and it would be much better for everyone if the millions of foreclosed homes just sit and rot while the bankers 'wait for the market to turn around'. A much better use of the homes than for people to actually live in them. people... living in homes.... ridiculous...

Property... being used... without permission...

It is the property holder's right to deny others access to the property. So yes, the homeless should use the shelters or sleep on the street. Those are their only options
Tough suit otherwise.

Tough shit...

Why capitalism fails. Millions of empty homes + millions of homeless. Talk about inefficient use of resources.

Really Putin? you REALLY want to go there?

Draugnar you are really something else

Draugnar chugs raw blood for breakfast. He's a tough guy. So are all the righties here.

I think you're mistaking Draugnar for http://tinyurl.com/43gcuhd

Kinda like in S.america when they privatized water.
OBVIOUSLY s.americans shouldnt be allowed to drink rain water... without permission. Thats not their water. It's the corporations right to deny others access to the water. So the s.americans should drink their own piss or die, those are their only options, tough shit otherwise

All I'm going to say is that revolution is healthy. Just go ask Jefferson.

a natural resource (water) =/= a manufactured resource (house). Epic fucking fail, Sic.

Oh, and the privatization of water in S. America (particularly Bolivia) has nothing to do with rainwater (it's about ground-based water resources and in particular running water that has been processed like our own clean water system), so nice exageration but second epic fucking fail in the same post.

...Water privatization
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia....

"The government proceeded to bid out the concession, this time including the Misicuni dam. Only a single company submitted a bid, Aguas del Tunari, a consortium led by Bechtel.[52] The government accepted the bid and signed the concession.[51][52] The consortium was guaranteed a minimum 15% annual return.[51] In parallel, a law was passed that appeared to give a monopoly to Aguas del Tunari over all water resources, including water used for irrigation, communal water systems and even rainwater collected on roofs.[52][53] Upon taking control the company raised water tariffs by 35%."

"even rainwater collected on roofs"

"rainwater"

52^ a b c June C. Nash (2002). Social Movements: An Anthropological Reader. United Kingdom: Blackwell Publishing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_privatization

Review the details... It wasn't rainwater collected on the roofs of private residences or private businesses, but of government buildings. Still an epic fail.

Also note the phrase "appeared to give" meaning it didn't actually give them that monopoly.

"Bolivian Activist Oscar Olivera on Bechtel’s Privatization of Rainwater and Why Evo Morales Should Remember the Ongoing Struggle Over Water"
http://www.democracynow.org/2006/10/5/bolivian_activist_oscar_olivera_on_bechtels

"It raised water rates by an average of 35 per cent, meaning Bolivians earning $100 per month were paying a monthly rate of $20 for water. People even had to obtain licenses to collect rainwater from their roofs. "
http://www.zcommunications.org/from-coca-to-congress-by-evo-morales

"thus making it illegal for poor people to collect the rainwater upon which they depended. After the privatization the price of water increased an average of 35% to about $20 a month where the average wage is $70."

"The film describes the efforts of the Bechtel corporation to privatize water in Bolivia, which made it illegal for people to collect rain water."
THE CORPORATION (2004) (documentary)

oh shit I forgot one.... well just google the phrase like you always do anyway

http://ecolocalizer.com/2011/02/28/even-the-rainwater-does-not-belong-to-us/

http://jamesptaylor.wordpress.com/2007/11/29/bolivia-bechtel-and-the-fight-for-public-water/
"The corporation then held a monopoly over this very basic human necessity and proceeded to raise rates by as much as 200 percent, far beyond what families could afford. The law even said that people had to obtain a permit to collect rainwater! (that means even rainwater was privatized!)"