Anti-OWS activist barred from securities industry

[DisgustipatedinCA]

The self-appointed defender of Wall Street who demanded in a counter-protest last week that OWS demonstrators “Occupy a Desk” has been barred from the securities industry since he was sanctioned for misconduct in the late 1990s.

John Tabacco and his brother Derek got massive press attention when they showed up at the big protest Thursday with anti-Occupy signs and posed for the news cameras, deriding the protesters as “animals” and demanding they leave Wall Street. They declared the launch of the “Wall Street Freedom Fighters” movement and were immediately embraced by Fox News.

(more at link)

http://www.salon.com/2011/11/21/anti_ows_activist_barred_from_securities_industry/

[arcane1]

1. "massive press attention" for TWO PEOPLE!

:crazy:

[Rex]

2. THANK YOU JOB CREATORS!

These are the JOB CREATORS!? Holyshit are we all screwed six ways from Sunday! So Foxnews embraced them and will probably give them their own SHOW! They called the protesters ANIMALS? You haven't seen ANIMALS YET you fucking NOB! PRAY that it doesn't turn into ANIMALS! Pray little man.

[zbdent]

3. "immediately embraced by Fox News" ... there's the difference between libs and the supporters of

the 1%ers ...

you can royally become scum, and someone will make you into a martyer, if you're swallowing the Santorum for the 1%ers ...

[progressoid]

4. Uhhhh...two pasty white guys?

Jeez, that's more pathetic than the teabagger rallies

[freshwest]

5. These two media seekers are perfect for the LI crowd. KISS, miss the point. That article links to...

persuadedld article about the UC Davis assault. I'm not much of a fan of his, but he analyzed the purpose of anti-OWS actions.

Not as ironic as these two clowns, but it's all coming from the same place of supporting the status quo. Upton Sinclair said "It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it!"

http://www.salon.com/2011/11/20/the_roots_of_the_uc_davis_pepper_spraying/

And he makes point when he says regarding these consistent, abusive reactions against peaceful protesters:

'The intent and effect of such abuse is that it renders those guaranteed freedoms meaningless. If a population becomes bullied or intimidated out of exercising rights offered on paper, those rights effectively cease to exist...

The genius of this approach is how insidious its effects are: because the rights continue to be offered on paper, the citizenry continues to believe it is free. They believe that they are free to do everything they choose to do, because they have been “persuaded” — through fear and intimidation — to passively accept the status quo...

Pervasive police abuses and intimidation tactics applied to peaceful protesters — pepper-spray, assault rifles, tasers, tear gas and the rest — not only harm their victims but also the relationship of the citizenry to the government and the set of core political rights. Implanting fear of authorities in the heart of the citizenry is a far more effective means of tyranny than overtly denying rights. That’s exactly what incidents like this are intended to achieve...'

And I'd say these two shills don't have a clue about protest.