Quantcast

Friday, July 25, 2014         

 Print   Email   Comment | View 115 Comments   Most Popular   Save   Post   Retweet

Police arrest 2 as they evict protesters at Thomas Square

By Michael Tsai

POSTED:
LAST UPDATED: 01:34 p.m. HST, Dec 30, 2011


Occupy Honolulu protestors say they have no plans to leave Thomas Square Park, even though they've been literally kicked to the curb.

Acting on newly confirmed boundaries, Honolulu police swept in late Thursday night and attempted tp evict Occupy Honolulu campers at the park, arresting two protesters.

Despite a few heated words, the confrontation — captured by video cameras on both sides — was mostly peaceful.

Police Sgt. Cullen Kau said one woman “chose to be arrested” after she was warned to remove her belongings and leave the park, but refused to do so.

Some personal belongings of the protestors were confiscated, including bicycles and dishes. But Madori Rumpungworn, one of the group's organizers, said the group plans to continue their protest on the sidewalk, closer to the edge of the street. 

"You can't evict an idea," said the 22-year-old swap meet vendor and plumber's apprentice.

The protesters have been part of a national movement that claims that big business and government cater to the richest 1 percent of U.S. citizens to the detriment of the other 99 percent.

In Honolulu, the protesters, in varying numbers, have been occupying the park since Nov. 5.

But the rules changed Thursday.

That’s when Mayor Peter Carlisle determined that the sidewalk areas where the campers have been staying are actually part of the city park.

City officials toured the park around 1 p.m. Thursday and painted white dots to indicate the boundaries of the park. The dots extended as far as 30 feet farther than the orange dots previously used to advise campers of the park’s limits.

Police Sgt. Lawrence Santos said previous boundaries were not clearly delineated.

Santos said campers were warned that they would be in violation of park rules if they remained in the area after the park’s official closing time of 10 p.m.

“At this point, we don’t have people looking to go to jail,” said Megan Brooker, one of the leaders of Occupy Honolulu. “We have the legal right to be here, and we will continue to negotiate with the Parks Department to make sure we have the right to make our voices heard.”

Police say 51-year-old woman was arrested for a parks closure violation. A 25-year-old man was arrested, but for outstanding traffic violations. An 18-year-old was cited, but not arrested.

The Associated Press contributed to this story.







 Print   Email   Comment | View 115 Comments   Most Popular   Save   Post   Retweet

COMMENTS
(115)
You must be subscribed to participate in discussions
By participating in online discussions you acknowledge that you have agreed to the TERMS OF SERVICE. An insightful discussion of ideas and viewpoints is encouraged, but comments must be civil and in good taste, with no personal attacks. Because only subscribers are allowed to comment, we have your personal information and are able to contact you. If your comments are inappropriate, you may receive a warning, and if you persist with such comments you may be banned from posting. To report comments that you believe do not follow our guidelines, email commentfeedback@staradvertiser.com.
Leave a comment

Please login to leave a comment.
clum56 wrote:
it's trespassing and the protesters should be arreseted if refusing to leave Thomas Square when asked. It's just ruining the beauty of the park in the city. I say, AUWE to the protesters.
on December 30,2011 | 02:17AM
droid wrote:
I say the protestors weren't making any news, so HPD helped them out by clearing them out. Ignorant people don't understand what the 99% are trying to accomplish, and that's to wake people up to the corporate/military-industrial complex that completely controls the U.S. government. The American colonists declared independence to escape the tyranny of the British government. It is time to realize that here in the 21st century, our own government has become tyrannical and it is time for a revolution!
on December 30,2011 | 04:40AM
Aquarius1 wrote:
Perhaps this 99% should exercise their right to representation by voting in the elections instead of being a visual blight on the landscape. I wonder if these people have jobs, supporting the 1% they loathe. Do they shop at the WalMarts, KMarts, Home Depots that represent the corporate complex they so loathe? Where did they get their tents, their lawn chair. Uh huh, I thought so.........what a bunch of hypocrites!
on December 30,2011 | 07:22AM
SteveToo wrote:
You got it right Qquarius.
on December 30,2011 | 10:48AM
OldDiver wrote:
It appears most of the commenters here are the millionaires and billionaires who benefit from corrupting politicians to change laws for their benefit which screws the 99%.I say congratulations to them for their financial success.
on December 30,2011 | 07:43AM
tiki886 wrote:
No, it proves that the majority of commentors and the public as a whole, do not believe the lies of stupid people without a job.
on December 30,2011 | 08:01AM
aomohoa wrote:
You are right tiki886!
on December 30,2011 | 08:45AM
OldDiver wrote:
Guess I was wrong. There are a few in the 99% who are fighting tooth and nail for the 1%.
on December 30,2011 | 08:50AM
VivaPuertoRico wrote:
There does tend to be a high level of class traitors on these news comments sections, but this is very disproportionate to the amount you will find actually talking face to face with people in the real world.
on December 30,2011 | 10:01AM
grantos wrote:
Indent
on December 30,2011 | 10:30AM
Buckykat wrote:
Class traitors? The people sitting out on sidewalks yearning for the 60s don't speak for me. Most of them appear to come from rather well-to-do roots, most likely in the top 5%, and would rather play homeless than actually have to go out and work for a living. The whole idea of separating us into classes is abhorrent.
on December 30,2011 | 10:54AM
VivaPuertoRico wrote:
@ Buckykat 1. Class struggle didn't start in the 1960s, and we are not a 60's revivalist movement. Were you aware that there is currently a global wave of austerity measures being carried out against the working class? This is the now, time to take your head out of the sand. 2. Most people at the camp go to school, work, or both, and live or visit the camp when they can. Why do you not know this by now? You know, one thing you could do is actually go talk to the people there. It might help dispel your fallacious predetermined ideas about what you think you know. Experience is a good way to eradicate ignorance. 3. " The whole idea of separating us into classes is abhorrent." Newsflash, we live in a class society, which is the only kind of society capitalism can create. Buckykat, you can't really believe anything you write, it's too detached from reality to be believable. The question is, who do you think would buy into your pablum?
on December 30,2011 | 11:56AM
payattentionplease wrote:
viva P..R.. your post makes no sense...at all. re-read it. I think you are a 13 yr. old boy playing with his dad's computer. what you said is bizarre. pls. stop playing around with something that some of us enjoy....how our neighbors feel about things.
on December 30,2011 | 12:01PM
Kawipoo wrote:
Move to Puerto Rico and form your communist government. You can befriend Castro and Chavez.
on December 30,2011 | 12:12PM
IAmSane wrote:
Agreed. These comments sections should never be see as a reflection of public opinion. This website has always attracted a certain demographic--"class traitors," if you will. Try talking to practically any working class individuals face-to-face--they are tired of the system that is heavily weighed against them and the wealth inequality that the system perpetuates.
on December 30,2011 | 04:31PM
kokocats wrote:
correct - I work hard for my money and would love to be one of the 1% - instead I work 3 jobs to pay for my right to live where I want and send my children to the best schools possible. The protesters are either jobless, lazy, or rich kids living off trusts and having nothing better to do than complain about not being given everything for free. That "freedom" worked great in the Soviet Union and China didn't it??
on December 30,2011 | 10:46AM
VivaPuertoRico wrote:
China and the Soviet Union were state capitalist societies where there were classes, commodity production, wage slavery, and the working class had no control over production. That is capitalism. The protesters are not jobless, not lazy, and none of us are rich. What's lazy is just making up stuff about them so that you can continue to believe that maybe someday you'll be one of the 1% and force others to live as you do now for your own benefit. Really, if the best we can do is hope to become the oppressors ourselves, we must be suffering from a lack of imagination. It's time to start acting in our own class interests, but to do that we will need a class consciousness, kokocats.
on December 30,2011 | 12:01PM
OldDiver wrote:
It was just a matter of time before the right wing extremist ran out of logical arguments and started to call you a communist.
on December 30,2011 | 01:10PM
Bdpapa wrote:
I am not a 1%er, but you donʻt represent me!
on December 30,2011 | 01:38PM
IAmSane wrote:
Hahahahaha. Are you serious? Working three jobs and you're defending the 1%? Must be nice for them to have such a obedient slave with no self-respect to defend them. Try getting 300 jobs and maybe you'll finally become a part of the 1%.
on December 30,2011 | 04:18PM
Aquarius1 wrote:
Hahaha! I wish I was a millionaire. But that I definitely am not. This working class stiff has responsibilities and goes to my job 5 days a week. Thank you boss, company for providing me gainful employment that pays me a reasonable salary and benefits. Thank you to my big box customers who help stimulate the economy. Hard work never hurt anyone.
on December 30,2011 | 10:42AM
VivaPuertoRico wrote:
Occupy never attacked big box customers. Our action at Walmart was in solidarity with the workers inside, victimized with low wages and working for a union busting firm (remember Hawaii is a union town), and in solidarity with the shoppers, who are also facing wage and pension cuts, crappy or no healthcare, slashed social infrastructure and so on. Don't try to claim the moral high ground by saying you have a job, especially when you parrot the ideology of the ruling class, the foremost leeches on society and the wealth created by workers, despite this B.S. about them doing us all a favor by being the "job creators." What a joke!
on December 30,2011 | 12:21PM
Aquarius1 wrote:
Poor VivaPuertoRico. Can't find anyone to agree with you so you try to bing others down. I'm entitled to my opinion and the fruits of my labor. If you don't like the society we live in, go back to PR.
on December 30,2011 | 08:44PM
SteveToo wrote:
I sure wish that were true. If it were I'd donate at least a million to Wai`anae High School. But I ain't just a poor, well not to poor, but a member of the 99% for sure retired school teacher.
on December 30,2011 | 10:49AM
ISCREAM wrote:
Obama inspired class warfare!
on December 30,2011 | 09:09PM
Kawipoo wrote:
Droid find another country. You have no concept of tyranny. I get tired of the whinning from spoiled brats who think they are entitled to everything. The only grip you have is that you are not one of the 1% otherwise everything would be fine.
on December 30,2011 | 12:08PM
Kapakahi wrote:

The only complaint against protesters which can, I think, rise to the level of official concern was their obstruction of pedestrian and bicycle traffic at the corner. But that was the result of the city's convoluted enforcement, allowing them to remain, provided the occupied that tiny parcel near the corner.

Had the City truly been interested in "public safety" and other legitimate concerns, they would have allowed the encampment to move onto the grass and away from the sidewalk.

Free Speech is an important right which should be accommodated, even when it is sometimes inconvenient. At the same time, there is a legitimate public interest in minimizing health and safety problems. The City was clearly NOT motivated by these concerns or they would have allowed the campers to move away from the street and to use the public restroom after 10pm.

Big surprise. A government agency not encouraging of free speech. Rightwingers on a newspaper's discussion board not supportive of free speech. I am shocked!


on December 30,2011 | 10:57AM
copperwire9 wrote:
I agree 100% Kapakahi. Thanks.
on December 30,2011 | 11:06AM
payattentionplease wrote:
now see you just exercised your free speech in a very calm respectful manner without calling people names like I did! thank you for teaching me a little respect.
on December 30,2011 | 12:49PM
payattentionplease wrote:
good try! the only 'wingers" in Hawaii are to the left. you are as ignorant as you are out of date. Free speech??? what are these "occupiers" saying?? what have they accoplished other than making broke cities pay for police and other city workers to clean up the mess. In the 60's there was a purpose and a theme and a GOAL....stop the war....civil rights...ban the bra ect. One poster said it right. how can these people afford to be out there for weeks and months?? donations....bull. answer that one. when I see your post I am not even going to waste my time reading them!!
on December 30,2011 | 12:15PM
HDoug wrote:
In the afternoon, some people from the State came and redrew the park boundaries with blots of paint in order to include the (De)Occupy Honolulu area into the park area so they could be arrested. The group had taken pains to maintain a public forum and encampment area outside the designated park area in order to comply with the law. The police changed the boundaries of the park in order to arrest those who were critical of the corporate ownership of government. (De)Occupy Honolulu remains, albeit in changed form.
on December 30,2011 | 03:15AM
OldDiver wrote:
Changing the rules in the middle of the game. Sounds like what the British did to the colonist which led to the Boston Tea Party.
on December 30,2011 | 07:49AM
Kapakahi wrote:

I suspect you are mistaken. Either the land in question was part of the sidewalk easement belonging to the City or it was part of the park, belonging to the City. I doubt there is any land there which falls between the cracks and is owned by a third party or by nobody.

The public employees marking out the boundaries were "dotting the 'i's' and crossing the 't's'" in preparation for the eviction. By re-surveying and marking the property boundaries, they were unambiguously establishing their authority to control the use of the property. Activity within the city-owned park could be controlled through use of the park closure law. The dotted lines did not change the boundary lines. They merely helped document the existing authority, both for people being order to leave and as evidence for a trial.


on December 30,2011 | 09:52AM
HDoug wrote:
The boundary itself was moved. Earlier, HPD informed (De)Occupy Honolulu that the encampment was indeed outside the park. A few hours before the arrest, the boundaries were moved. If the police can change the boundaries according to their convenience, how much does it matter where the actual boundary itself is? Since many of those participating in the Occupy Honolulu encampment do not live there, the owners of much personal property were not present when the attempted eviction and seizure of property was executed. No notice was given so the personal property could not be removed. I'm a little worried that so many people are okay with the armed suppression of dissent and the lack of protection of the free speech in the public forum. Being quiet and uncomplaining has helped huge corporation take over government, even our local government.
on December 30,2011 | 01:17PM
VivaPuertoRico wrote:
I'm so glad to see rational informed and compassionate posts from a person with some history under his belt. It's of course a stark difference from the people who think debate consists of them pretending to be Archie Bunker. But just as Archie Bunker was a total distortion of actual working class views in the 1970s, so too are the posters here not very representative of the working class in Hawaii. For every clown that drove by the Occupy encampment yelling "gt a job!" (either thinking they were being original or being fully aware that since they were on the side of the status quo they could afford the luxury of not having to be creative or interesting) there were 20 people or more who honked in appreciation or brought food, or stopped to talk with us, or who posted concerns and questions on the website. That is the actual proportion in the non-cyber world, where living and breathing people exist. I share your concern about the flippant support for thuggery if carried out by the 1%. It shows how brown nosers to power do exist. But we can't lose the context that these cyber-flamers are relatively disempowered folks themselves, who show that they are unwilling or incapable to realize their own interests and take the lazy way out which is to identify themselves with the "winners" or 1%.
on December 30,2011 | 01:55PM
Aquarius1 wrote:
Get a job and pay for your own food instead of mooching others. By the way, what have you done to help those less fortunate than you? Have you shared some of that free food with the homeless? Have you volunteered at Meals on Wheels, have you lent a hand at fundraisers and food drives? Somehow, I don't think you do. I think you're one of those who are still trying to further your education, for the nth year and still have not found gainful employment, just trying to pass yourself off as an intellectual, probably one of those who complained about the rising tuition at the UH system. Poor thing, you think you're better than us average joe, but you are in the minority. Go back to drinking your latte. You're dissing someone who went to private college, worked to pay for tuition and rent and am happily and thankfully employed.
on December 30,2011 | 08:51PM
VivaPuertoRico wrote:
You went to a private college, but you're writing and analytical skills are lacking. The proof, as they say, is in the pudding.
on December 30,2011 | 09:50PM
Bdpapa wrote:
Good job HPD. These people gotta go. They are not the 99% ers, they are the 1% of whining pepole with no life!
on December 30,2011 | 04:03AM
toomuchpilikia wrote:
"DITTO'S"
on December 30,2011 | 05:10AM
Buckykat wrote:
Amen!
on December 30,2011 | 06:07AM
Aquarius1 wrote:
LIKE!
on December 30,2011 | 07:23AM
hokumakakilo wrote:
I agree! Do they have jobs, or is their protest funded by taxpayer assistance (welfare, food stamps, unemployment?)
on December 30,2011 | 09:43AM
VivaPuertoRico wrote:
In fact most have jobs. But the amount that goes to funding welfare, food stamps, and unemployment is a drop in an ocean in comparison to the amount that the business class expropriate from our labor on a daily basis. The fact that you are so upset about people getting tiny amounts as part of a safety net shows how clueless you are as to how society, and more specifically, capitalism, works. This might be something for you to read about at the public library. Unless you consider such a public service "welfare" and therefore an evil socialist conspiracy.
on December 30,2011 | 10:06AM
Kapakahi wrote:

The libraries have been particularly hard hit by cutbacks in recent years. And, yes, it is because they are 'socialist," in the sense they are providing a free public service aimed at improving the lives of ordinary folks instead of some rich, well-connected, special interest.Folks might find it difficult to find a library open during convenient hours. Once there, they are likely to find lines of people wanting to use the computers were all need to find online information.

Years ago, in response to complaints about cuts in library services, Sam Slom, an inconsistent libertarian, replied that people should get their books from private bookstores and stop complaining. That 'logic" has since creeped into the thinking of two many politicians. Even if they may not be so absolutist, they share it to the extent they would rather make library services less easy to use than inconvenience wealthy people by raising their taxes to pay for a sensible level of public services. Why should we give a darn if the poor read, anyways?


on December 30,2011 | 10:38AM
VivaPuertoRico wrote:
Right on Kapakahi!
on December 30,2011 | 12:55PM
bender wrote:
As I assume that Mayor Carliisle will be sending in the police to remove all the other people camping or storing their goods on public property. Seems like the police singled out the "occupy" campers but ignore the real problem, that being the homeless. I guess some 1%'s called the mayor and pulled his strings.
on December 30,2011 | 05:17AM
Kapakahi wrote:

The City Fathers allowed hotels and shopping centers to take over broad swaths of the public land in Waikiki. Portions of land once dedicated to public access as "sidewalks" have been shifted away from the street and onto private property, subject to control by private landowners and businesses. Areas which had been sidewalk are now private planting beds to spruce up the value of the shopping centers, hotels, retail outlets.

So private obstruction of public property is OK when it is for private gain and increased profits for the tourism industry generally. For trivial matters like "free speech" or assembling to petition the government for justice? Not so important.


on December 30,2011 | 10:44AM
payattentionplease wrote:
pls. name one example and address of all that happening in Waikiki
on December 30,2011 | 12:20PM
VivaPuertoRico wrote:
You should find the movie "Taking Waikiki" online at the internet archive if you want to learn about how a tiny ruling elite turned Waikiki into the capitalist disneyland it is today, from what was once agricultural land. You don't have to just look at specific planting beds because Waikiki in and of itself is a privatization of land that belonged to people who were pushed off and marginalized in the name of profit. That's what capitalism does.
on December 30,2011 | 12:59PM
payattentionplease wrote:
this is a typical bs answer from someone who has no personal experience in the matters he is talking about. You throw up a bunch of hyperbile about something you read or was told why you were standing on a city bus. You have no idea of the real history and who turned it into what it is today. I agree it is just a concrete jungle, but how it got there and who is responsbile, you have not idea. the other guy writes just like you...alot of fancy words with other peoples facts and ideas. be original if you are going to write.
on December 30,2011 | 11:36PM
LanaUlulani wrote:

If these protestors are American they have the RIGHT to freedom of expression WITHOUT government intervention. Obviously some people need to re-read the U.S. Constitution and its amendments and repeatedly review the Bill of Rights.

Kudos to these protestors for exercising their RIGHT.



on December 30,2011 | 05:23AM
Bdpapa wrote:
They do have the right, but please donʻt raise your voice.
on December 30,2011 | 05:59AM
kainalu wrote:
lol. Many of us understand, there's no need to raise your voice.
on December 30,2011 | 06:12PM
Buckykat wrote:
They may have the right to voice their opinion, but they don't have the right to camp illegally, litter, block access to public facilities, These jokers give the homeless a bad name. Homeless wannabes, hippie wannabes that missed their chance by being born too late. Most of them can't even explain their demands. They certainly haven't voiced any suggestions short of communism. If all the wealth of Wall Street was "redistributed" I'd give the country about 5 years before it looked like Detroit.
on December 30,2011 | 06:12AM
VivaPuertoRico wrote:
Capitalism is a massive redistribution of wealth from the working class to the ruling class. This is done through commodity production. In this process, owners take most of the value created by workers to realize it as profit, a redistribution of the fruits of labor from the worker to the owner. You are free to parrot the arguments that the ruling class "earned" their positions, and that the poor are all lazy, privileged, and stupid, but these are not arguments so much as ideology that shows your own lack of any analysis. So keep posting to prove me right.
on December 30,2011 | 10:11AM
HD36 wrote:
I assume your an Obamanite?
on December 30,2011 | 01:06PM
VivaPuertoRico wrote:
Hell no. I oppose the Left and Right Wing of capital. I'm sure my criticism of Obama is a hundred times deeper than yours. Check your brainwashing because you might find that your critique of "socialism" is nothing more than a FOX News fantasy.
on December 30,2011 | 01:57PM
lee1957 wrote:
Their freedom of expression is intact, just do it somewhere else.
on December 30,2011 | 06:22AM
cojef wrote:
Guess, squatting is a form of expression and so it should not be confused with verbal expression. There is no distinction as what constitute expression. Confused??
on December 30,2011 | 10:23AM
payattentionplease wrote:
what's the definition of a squatter? you will find the word "illegal" in there. thus the police.
on December 30,2011 | 12:54PM
TeamVision wrote:
Yes, they have a right of expression, as long as they don't intrude on my rights. They did so when they created an eyesore for me.
on December 30,2011 | 06:37AM
Kapakahi wrote:
The "eyesore" argument is legally weak. The right to free speech is a fundamental right and trumps your alleged "right" to not view an "eyesore."
on December 30,2011 | 09:55AM
TeamVision wrote:
Yes, they have the right to free speech, but not ONCE did I ever hear them speak. All I saw was an eyesore 24/7, with them sitting in chairs in front of their dilapidated tent city.
on December 30,2011 | 10:13AM
Aquarius1 wrote:
TeamVision, don't forget that while they're sitting in their tents and chairs from the Home Depots of Loew, they are also typing away on their computers from HP, Apple, Dell, Toshiba, wearing clothes and shoes, eating food which they bought from the 1%. LOL!
on December 30,2011 | 10:47AM
VivaPuertoRico wrote:
You are really confused. Of course people who live in a capitalist society buy commodities, because they have no option for the most part. You could take your critique further and point out that people who work for bossess also make profits FOR the ruling class, and reproduce class inequity. That's how capitalism works. We the working class don't own the means of production, hence have no say over what is produced, why, for whom, etc. Therefore we have no control over our lives other than to act as workers and consumers, which reproduces the system. But you're wrong if you think computers, lawn chairs, and other commodities are "made" by the 1%. The 1% OWN the labor power that made those things, and they exploit the workers, the source of all value, to their advantage. If you had the mental capacity to even think through your own "gotcha" Limbaugh talking points you would see what a dupe you are being. I feel embarrassed for you.
on December 30,2011 | 12:30PM
Invested wrote:
so you would have the exploited workers at Apple or Walmart quit their jobs so that capitalism would fail? and to what quality of life do you think those workers would then have? perhaps you should take a basic course in economics and learn why America is one of the riches countries in the world. its because hard work and the freedom to try can make a dream come true. my company is small and i work hard to make a living for my family but my employees are grateful for a well paying job and they are wonderful, happy people that i am grateful to have. so stop with capitalism is BAD because its companies like mine that really keep this country successful.
on December 30,2011 | 02:30PM
Aquarius1 wrote:
Who forced you to purchase goods from these capitalist companies owned by bosses who make a profit? Yes, that's how a capitalist society works. But if you're not interested in participating, why don't you find a society that fits your requirements? When did I say or think computers, lawn chairs and other commodities are 'made' by the 1%? I said that you "Occupy space" folks protest too much about the 1% when you're purchasing goods sold by companies owned by the 1%. I really think that's hypocritical. If I don't like a particular restaurant or place of business for whatever reason, I don't patronize that place. If you read your posts, you'd realize how lame your arguments sound. Name calling is so immature. I don't feel sorry for you because you're the best you can be. Who's the dupe?! Not me.
on December 30,2011 | 09:04PM
lee1957 wrote:
Then you should have good luck defending them in court.
on December 30,2011 | 11:16AM
payattentionplease wrote:
name 3 things they are saying to exercise the "free speech" other than that tired diatribe of !% have everything.. do they think we all don't know that the "rich get richer"? they do...but I have gone along for the ride and managed to get a nice piece of the pie by hard work and effort. I am no where even close to the 1% but I have a house,nice car and take my family on vacations. I thank God eveyday for what I have. I have NOTHING to complain about in life. I even have my health.
on December 30,2011 | 12:27PM
VivaPuertoRico wrote:
Embedded in the simple model of 1% versus the 99% is a class analysis. Here are three things we've talked about with our free speech: 1. While you claim you are doing well on the "ride" there are literally millions of homes that are foreclosed each year in the U.S. Were all those people lazy bums or is this a systemic problem? 2. Walmart is the largest employer in the U.S. and probably the world. They spy on employees, bust unions, drive down wages, create urban and suburban blight, get subsidies from our tax dollars by which their workers who can't afford their health care plans get medicare/medicaid, or have to get foodstamps because their salaries are too low to both pay rent AND have enough food to eat, and so on. We used our free speech to express solidarity with ripped off Walmart workers and the working class people who shop their and who face the same assault on wages, pensions, and social infrastructure as Walmart workers. 3. We called attention to the abuses of Hyatt employees, who have engaged in nationwide strikes in the last couple of years because their employer won't give them a fair contract, and has engaged in speeding up and increasing their workloads, among other things. I could go on, but you asked for three.
on December 30,2011 | 01:05PM
Invested wrote:
I'm not the 1% nor am I YOUR 99%. I am some where in the 90-95% range of Americans that love their country. I go to work everyday and pay my taxes, certainly not rich but I'm happy. I have a mortgage for a modest apartment, i'm blessed with good health and love from a wonderful family and I'm thankful for these simple things that corporate America have enabled me to have. It seems to me that your class analysis would place you somewhere in the 1% at the other end of the spectrum. Now we have the 1% that represent the wealthy capitalist and 1% like yourself that feel we should lean more toward socialism and the rest of us that just want to live our life in peace and love. express yourself to your hearts content but you will never convince most of us that your right.
on December 30,2011 | 02:52PM
payattentionplease wrote:
again VPR you responded to my comment with your usually long winded diatribe. You are a bad communicator. You just talk and write, you need to listen and read. All that bs you put up there were 3 reasons YOU submit. I haven't heard one sylable about all of this from that encapment.And that was what my questions asked.."what have they said." all 3 of your examples are over-work half truths with small bits of info blown out of porportion with their own slants. do you know how many people apply to Wal Mart each week for emploment. they have had to lower their requirements to fill positions. Next time you go in one look at how the people are acting and working! yea right...they really look abused.
on December 30,2011 | 11:45PM
soshaljustic wrote:
You will need your health because the 1% own everything health related if you lose one bit of your health! You will eventually find yourself camping out too with your disability eventually, after spend down policies, LMAO, you will have so much fun going through that! Your once also health portfolio will catch an immune system problem too, die from being immune to everything you touch after your health fails you, or you should have an inopportune accident. The greenbacks you have been saving for years? Poof...say hello to your camping neighbors. I cannot wait til you have everything to complain about and finally understand OWS from the street point of view! It will be a ride of the 99% you will never forget.
on December 30,2011 | 02:08PM
Invested wrote:
Soshaljustic...are you ok? Your ranting makes no sense. Calm down and learn to live and love everything around you, even those you cannot agree with.
on December 30,2011 | 08:42PM
OldDiver wrote:
LanaUlulani, The US Constitution was trashed after 9/11. Unfortunately President Obama has drunk the Republican (let's get rid of the US Constitution) kool aid. Very sad state of affairs.
on December 30,2011 | 08:54AM
Kapakahi wrote:

I agree with you, except I would not limit that right to "Americans." Hawaiians who may not consider themselves "Americans" also have that right, as do legal residents, even non-residents.

The rights to both "free speech" and to "assemble" for political purposes, are fundamental rights under the US Constitution. Therefore, legal restrictions on those rights have to satisfy a stricter scrutiny than restrictions on things like "camping", "loitering," etc. Consideration is also given to "time and place" considerations. Had the protestors linked their free speech activity more closely to the specific place, Thomas Square, their constitutional argument would be even stronger.

The location of the Occupy Wall Street demonstration in New York, for example, can argue that Wall Street itself is a reasonable location for an ongoing demonstration directed at abuses of the corporate elite. For Thomas Square, the argument is weaker. Had the group included Hawaiians, or "local people" in greater numbers, they could make a claim that Thomas Square is a site dedicated to the memory of the pono act of returning Sovereignty to the Kingdom of Hawaii. They could say they are invoking that image in an appeal for a "pono" resolution of growing social inequality which undermines the rights of all of Hawaii's people. A society run without regard for "pono" destroys the rights and happiness of its people.

"Free speech" AND "free assembly" rights should not be disregarded simply because they disrupt people's expectations of "normalcy" or create relatively minor "inconveniences." But few people, despite their protestations about their patriotism and commitment to freedom, actually honor the need for "free speech." Sad, but too true.


on December 30,2011 | 10:11AM
payattentionplease wrote:
it wasn't their exercising that got them in trouble it was were they were doing it. do you think they didn't notice the city people out there making dots on the ground with spray paint? do you think they didn't ask "hey brah how come you spray painting the ground with dots?" open your eyes and pay attention pls. so you see what is really going on.
on December 30,2011 | 12:35PM
IAmSane wrote:
WHAT I'M SAYING IS IMPORTANT BECAUSE IT BOLDED.
on December 30,2011 | 04:35PM
islandsun wrote:
About time. These people are not true occupiers anyway. They should occupy the real crooks -HECO, BWS, City Halll & FHB. Why occupy Thomas Square????
on December 30,2011 | 06:15AM
payattentionplease wrote:
i was wondering that myself. they picked a"'safe" place to "protest"
on December 30,2011 | 12:31PM
HASASURF wrote:
Yes, everyone have the right to do anything that is legal. The group is not only breaking the law but they are a eye sore to the public. There are people there that is not from Hawaii so what is up with that. They can be like everyone else and comply with Hawaii laws. Carry your sign within the law but go home when you are breaking the law and see how many people that are not from here stay in Hawaii.
on December 30,2011 | 06:24AM
Anonymous wrote:
The right of the people peaceably to assemble for a redress of grievances, or for anything else connected with the powers or duties of the National Government, is an attribute of national citizenship, and, as such, under protection of, and guaranteed by, the United States.
on December 30,2011 | 07:34AM
wondermn1 wrote:
Is Hawaii part of the United States or is it the Carlyle Island penitentiary ran by thieves and crooks?
on December 30,2011 | 07:58AM
Sid_Hartha wrote:
Peaceful, clean, organized, intelligent, respectful,...I went there, talked to some of the folks and they seem like very nice, law-abiding, decent people. But let's give them the boot to make room for the homeless losers. Drugs, crapping in the park, urinating in public view, garbage everywhere. Then who gets the bill to clean up? Several million dollars a year? The homeless aren't threatening to the 1%. They are only the results of the 1%'s greed. Catch up, people!
on December 30,2011 | 06:32AM
TeamVision wrote:
Do you mean up until now nobody knew that a sidewalk at a park was part of the park??
on December 30,2011 | 06:35AM
allie wrote:
This comment has been deleted.
on December 30,2011 | 07:08AM
VivaPuertoRico wrote:
Everyone at occupy is working class. It's not too late for you to go down there and see if there is any way for you to participate, since you seem genuinely concerned and interested. But Occupy has done outreach, riding the bus, financial district fridays, and actions around town such as protesting the abuse of Hyatt workers in their hotel, solidarity rallies with Walmart workers and shoppers against the owners of Walmart, support for Hawaiian Tel workers, outreach to the ILWU and Local 5, and a constant open invitation to people to participate in General Assemblies, where all have input to shaping the actions of Occupy. Hope to see you at Thomas Square, or wherever we end up, fellow worker.
on December 30,2011 | 12:52PM
Aquarius1 wrote:
Hawaiiantel IBEW members are fighting for, among other things, 26 weeks of paid sick leave. Now who's the 1%? !!!!! Occupy my arse!
on December 30,2011 | 09:14PM
Wazdat wrote:
ONLY in HAWAII where INCOMPENTENCE is the norm.
on December 30,2011 | 07:19AM
Happysahm wrote:
finally!!!
on December 30,2011 | 07:27AM
Royabell wrote:
Dont the protesters at Thomas Square have something better to do like work, or are they all on public assistance?
on December 30,2011 | 07:54AM
livinginhawaii wrote:
Now they have moved onto the sidewalk... This is a bad law - all they have to do is move their tents a few feet away and the 24 hour clock will start over. This is what happens when you have a politician in office who only knows how to be a politician because she has been one though out most of her young adult life...
on December 30,2011 | 08:21AM
loio wrote:
clean 'em out. the whole "occupy" movement is fueled by lazy losers and misfits who have no clue
on December 30,2011 | 09:01AM
VivaPuertoRico wrote:
WRONG. You're the lazy one for not doing your homework. Get a clue.
on December 30,2011 | 12:47PM
ballen0607 wrote:
This commentary never ceases to amaze me. Granted, these protesters don't have the best image nor do they have the best methods, but they have a very valid and strong point to make in relevance to how our society is being run today. For those in this forum who can totally pass it off as a bunch of lazy eyesore protesters, you would have to be so ignorant to our present day situation and, more importantly, how history has already shown these problems. See, this 99% label doesn't work for them. And it's not because it doesn't represent the 99%. It's because 99% of the 99% are so disconnected to the point where their view of freedom is totally justified as long as it's not "an eyesore". Wow! Welcome to the neo-gilded age folks....
on December 30,2011 | 09:38AM
VivaPuertoRico wrote:
The repetition of the lame arguments that you rightly criticize makes me wonder how many of these posters passing themselves off as average joes are either chamber of commerce members, delusional small business people who think entrepreneurship is their golden ticket to being in the 1%, or hired posters with a list of talking points: "they're lazy"; "get a job"; "they buy stuff from stores, so they have no right to protest capitalism"; and all the other tedious playground "common sense" that they will never ever grow out of.
on December 30,2011 | 12:34PM
payattentionplease wrote:
what is their valid strong point and why to they need weeks and months of "occupying" public property to express it. I mean really. What's the point of closing down the Oakland port. What change did it bring? Name one thing that has been changed since this all started other than draining resources for already impoverished cities and counties. Let them march in the streets and have rallies like we used to. And then go home. This whole "occupying" method has gotten twisted way out of porportion.You write like someone who is very intelligent...so tell me what even small change has this movement brought or is close to bringing? or you think it will bring.
on December 30,2011 | 12:46PM
VivaPuertoRico wrote:
Closing down ports is an action that was carried out because the tactic of shutting down capitalists at their points of production and distribution has a proven historical track record of effectiveness. There are small victories daily, whether workers gain contract demands, or simply defend against losses demanded by employers. One recent example was the sit down occupation of workers at the Chicago Windows and Doors company. There, the employer had begun illegally moving equipment to a non-union shop without alerting workers and the Bank of America had taken over the local financial aspects of the company and denied workers their severance in the process. Due to the occupation, the workers won all their demands. But the tactic of occupation has many historical victories. Not so long ago, occupations on college campuses helped create ethnic studies programs across the nation, opening up history of non-Europeans. Occupations in the form of sit down strikes proved to win the day especially when carried out in mass solidarity across entire industries (rather than just at one isolated plant or location that could be ignored by the bosses), and especially when other workers engaged in solidarity strikes because "an injury to one is an injury to all." But in general, mass movements have never been about "shut down a port on Tuesday, see massive improvements for all on Wednesday." It is a long haul in which victories accumulate and eventually shift the balance of power in the war between the classes (that class war is the very definition of capitalism). What we are seeing globally now is a resurgence of working class militancy based on the realization that gave rise to the occupy movement: that the rules of the game are stacked against workers to perpetuate the exploitation they face, which makes direct action based on class necessary and desirable.
on December 30,2011 | 01:31PM
payattentionplease wrote:
and did it really shut down capitalism??? closing the port? Name ONE thing that has changed because of all of this. the cold weather came and they went home.
on December 30,2011 | 11:48PM
Kapakahi wrote:

The demonstrators had already accomplished a great deal. In a sense, they got trapped by the name of their movement into trying to hold onto their small, physical encampment. The "occupy" movement is about a helluva lot more than just holding onto a small piece of a public park. And support for the aims of the movement, to highlight the INCREDIBLE and growing inequality in our society, greatly exceeds the number of folks camped out there. It even exceeds the number of folks who might have supported that particular tactic.

Now they can move on to other means, more difficult means, of promoting equality and opposing corporate domination of our political system, our media and our entire society. That will require more courage, more creativity and more steadfastness than the discomfort of sleeping out in the cold and rain.

I am grateful for what you attempted--and accomplished--through your actions. But see this as an opportunity to leave the park, reflect upon your weaknesses --upon OUR weakness-- and re-commit. Aloha!


on December 30,2011 | 09:45AM
VivaPuertoRico wrote:
Kapakahi has some solid posts here, but I would like to respectfully disagree with your proposed agenda of focusing on reforming the political system. Occupy, as you know Kapakahi, comes out of a tradition that spans from sit down strikes and worker occupations from the 1930s, from more recent occupy movements globally protesting things like rising tuitions or the maltreatment of workers, and so on. But occupy arose out of a frustration with and realization that the political system itself is a coopted dead end, hence the move to direct action, taking over space, and creating places where direct democracy can occur (as with the General Assemblies at occupy). Such actions are more in the tradition of workers movements that have realized that the legal and political system are stacked against them (as they are almost entirely controlled by the ruling class, or 1%), and that things like strikes and occupations have a proven track record, if done in mass class solidarity, of success. Playing the legal and political games are guaranteed to bring disappointment. It's not that you can't push for reforms, but to channel the occupy movement into mainstream politics would be a huge loss. If anything points the way forward it was the West Coast Port shut downs, which included organizing by rank and file unionists despite the timidity of their leaders, in an effort to hit capitalists in their pocket book, disrupt their profit making, and show that working class people (even those without jobs) have the power to bring the ruling class to their knees if a sustained effort is carried out. This is the future that occupy has sparked, not recall or political campaigns in a system that is built to preclude real change.
on December 30,2011 | 12:44PM
payattentionplease wrote:
come on guys....be honest. they accomplished a great deal? what did they accomplish? and don't ramble on and on. what did they change? does the 99% have more?
on December 30,2011 | 11:50PM
VivaPuertoRico wrote:
Whether the encampment is "legal" or not is utterly beside the point. Look at labor law over the last 5 decades and you will understand how the government, at the behest of your precious capitalist class, has made any meaningful methods that the working class had used to stand up for itself in the "free labor" contract between themselves and the owners, illegal. The law, business class, and government are in lock step in their war on workers. When you're in a class war, it's best not to have any delusions about the reality of the situation. If there is to be any kind of fight back, it's going to take strikes: cross-industry strikes, and sympathy/solidarity strikes, by workers, even those not in unions. We are going to have to shut down the functioning of the exploiting class, and bring them to their knees before they give up any of their obscene control over our lives. As workers, we produce the wealth of society, and the profits of the "1%." We actually reproduce our own chains by reproducing the capitalist system every day. But when the workers let the owning class know that ALL VALUE COMES FROM LABOR, they will find out it is the workers who have the upper hand.
on December 30,2011 | 09:58AM
RuffDiamond wrote:
The laws and regulations do not "cater" to the richest and the 99% do not suffer, where on earth did they dream up these percentages. The rick have normally earned their monies and the life style they earned. Whether we like it or not, we would be no different if rows were reversed. Today you see so many of the rick giving to the less fortunate everywhere. I will say that is was nice to learn that the individual interviewed today on KHNL/KGMB was at least employed, working, and making a living. Less than 100 protesters here in total, and there message is totally warped. It's not unlike the rest of the world - do good/get good. Don't do good/don't expect a lot. America was built on the backs of hard working American citizens who did everything to build a life for themselves and their families future. So these protestors can tell their future families "I protested" but they'll have no result for it. No doubt our system is not the best, everyone should be taxed equally and everyone should contribute equally to our state and our country - if not for us - for our children's and families futu4re.
on December 30,2011 | 10:52AM
Kapakahi wrote:

Thanks, RuffDiamond! Don't ever get polished. You are too valuable in your rough form!

Allow me to present a new, improved solution to our economic woes:

"Tax the Rick!"


on December 30,2011 | 11:02AM
payattentionplease wrote:
stop being arrogant!!! Either RuffDiamond can't type or he doesn't have his glasses on and is mispelling words like I some time do. You are being rude and crass and arogant. R..D has the right to freedom of speech even if he speaks with and accent or can't spell English that well. He has the most inteligent post yet today. Kapakahi....YOU owe an apology for being rude.
on December 30,2011 | 01:04PM
SteveToo wrote:
Why re-mark anything. I'm sure it's just as illegal to camp on the sidewalk anyplace in the city.
on December 30,2011 | 10:52AM
PUNCHBOWLER wrote:
I don't really agree with the occupiers' "message," but I do gotta hand it to them in terms of their tenacity and their commitment to the cause (however undefined and fractured it may be). All in all, I am proud to live in a country where people do have the right to assemble, protest, and express themselves... even though, again, I may not agree with their cause.
on December 30,2011 | 11:01AM
warriorfaithfull wrote:
glad we finally got these idiots out of there!
on December 30,2011 | 11:30AM
Bdpapa wrote:
Thatʻs the bottom line.
on December 30,2011 | 01:43PM
Oye_Como_Va wrote:
Strange that the Gestapo takes immediate action on the 'Occupy" people but not on the sidewalk homeless who continue to poluute our City sidewalks and parks. I guess the would require super strength latex gloves and masks?
on December 30,2011 | 12:31PM
VivaPuertoRico wrote:
I'm sure a Gestapo officer would share your view of the homeless as vermin who need to be eradicated. Look up irony in the dictionary. Occupy is in solidarity with the homeless, even though we learned that we alone did not have the capacity to help some of those who needed specific social services.
on December 30,2011 | 01:36PM
Classic_59Chevy wrote:
This comment has been deleted.
on December 30,2011 | 01:38PM
VivaPuertoRico wrote:
We hear your cry for help.
on December 30,2011 | 01:59PM
Poidogs wrote:
My turn........Occupy Honolulu protesters have a right to protest, but not in public places that are utilized by everyone. This puts a strain on others (taxpayers) who want to use the park. There is much too much wannabe expression of freedom in this case because they can take their protesting right to their own back yards and do something more constructive than occupy public space. They dirty the bathrooms, leave their trash blowing here and there, smell up the area and moreover, are loud, noisy and irresponsible folks. I sympathize with homeless people but I do not sympathize with people trying to do nothing to make lives better for themselves except to grumble and take up public space. Geez, get a life people and move on!
on December 30,2011 | 05:57PM
Carang_da_buggahz wrote:
These whiners at OccupyWallStreetAnywhereUSA need to get a job and a life. For all of the vitriol hurled at the "racist" Tea Partiers, these OWSers are the exact polar opposite. One look at these kooks and you just instinctively know, you can't take these "protesters" seriously. I've absolutely NO respect for this movement and their juvenile antics, trying to pass themselves off as somehow "representative" of the 99% of society. In your dreams! I say we let them camp out there and carry out their tantrums like the recalcitrant spoiled brats that they are. Paying attention to them only serves as encouragement. You learn that when you've got 2 year olds who act the same way.
on December 30,2011 | 05:59PM
dopaco24 wrote:
1 % of the population supposedly screws the other 99%. 1 % of the population claims that they represent the 99%. 98% of the population does not care.
on December 30,2011 | 07:39PM
IN OTHER NEWS
Breaking News