Friday, November 18, 2011

The Error of Preterism

Challenging Preterism

"Preterists" believe that all Bible prophecy is history; that most of it took place in 70 AD with the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans. They suggest the Tribulation was the persecution of the saints and Nero was the antichrist.

At the heart of the doctrine is that prophecy was declared and destined to be fulfilled within the generation of Messiah Yeshua's earthly ministry. All references in the Bible to the "last days" refer to the "last days" of Israel, which means that today Israel supposedly has no more relevance than the lost continent of Atlantis. The "New Jerusalem" is the Church now and forever, according to Preterists.


Preterism consists of "full" and "partial" Preterists. Partial Preterists actually consider much of what "full" Preterists teach to be heretical. Full Preterists insist that "Jesus" returned "in spirit" in 70 AD and nothing is future. "We're in "the New Heavens and New Earth" right now and satan is bound!

But to both full and partial Preterists, hardly anything is taken literally; most all is allegorical or symbolic, particularly the Book of Revelation. To all Preterists, the Olivet Discourse is not about the coming of Messiah, but about the destruction of Jerusalem. Revelation was not written in 95 AD but much earlier according to full and partial Preterists....

Partial Preterists do believe in a Second Coming and the resurrection of believers (but not in the Rapture), along with a "Judgment Seat of Christ." They do not believe in a literal Millennium, Battle of Armageddon, literal antichrist, or a role for national Israel. Prominent partial Preterists include Gary DeMar, R.C. Sproul, Ken Gentry, and "The Bible Answerman", Hank Hanegraaff.

Preterism became prominent thanks to a Jesuit priest, Luis de Alcazar, who sought to defend the Catholic Church against attacks of the Reformers. He sought to defend the Roman Church from claims about Catholic apostasy. The Preterism taught today, however, only became popular in the late 20th Century.

Some Preterist teachings include the following:

  • Nero was the antichrist and the False Prophet was the leadership of apostate Israel who rejected Messiah and worshipped instead the Roman Empire (who tormented them then slaughtered them). Nero's persecutions were limited to Rome, not the whole world.

  • Matthew 24 and the book of Revelation are all fulfilled. The destruction of Jerusalem was the Great Tribulation along with the persecution of believers. (Makes one wonder how they justify Matthew 24:21 which states that the period after the "antichrist" signs a seven-year peace treaty with Israel will be the worst time in all of history? Many scenarios since 70 AD have been far worse than the destruction of 70 AD, including World War II. And ALL NATIONS of the world did not come against Jerusalem in 70 AD...only Rome. All nations coming against her are to be destroyed....

  • Everything is taken symbolically including the Millennium. They believe we are now in the "Kingdom of Christ" and have been since the days of the early church. Satan is bound, they say....Never mind that the earth is reeling with sorrow, pain, disasters, and godless governments under Communism and radical Islam. More than 50 million believers have died since 70 AD and there have been 15,000 wars - so how can this possibly be "the Kingdom of Christ"?

Since, according to Preterists, "Jesus" isn't coming back, one has to ask: What about scriptures such as Acts 1:11, "And they said to them, Galilean men, why are you standing and staring into heaven? This Y'shua who was taken up from you to heaven, likewise he will come just as you have seen him who ascended into heaven. This should be a challenge to the "full Preterists" who believe He came back "in spirit" in 70 AD and that's it for His return! Also, the Jews as a nation did not turn to Messiah in 70 AD as prophesied in Zechariah 12:10....

Also, if all these events took place in 70 AD, one must ask: When were the nations judged as described in Matthew 25:31-46? They weren't judged back then because this is future....

As for Nero - he couldn't have been the antichrist, as he died in 68 AD before the destruction of Jerusalem. He was a whimpy emperor though evil, indeed, but he doesn't come close to being the "King of fierce countenance" of Daniel 8:23 and he made no covenant with Israel, Daniel 9:26, 27. Dispensationalists believe he will be destroyed by the King of kings, but Nero committed suicide. Before that, he issued no "mark" and people could buy and sell. He sat in no Temple declaring himself God, demanding he be worshipped (2 Thess. 2:4). All Preterists deny there will be future Temples such as the Tribulation Temple and Millennial Temple....

The vials, bowls, seals, and trumpet judgments of Revelation are all symbolic to all Preterists. Thus the carnage (and victory) of Revelation is overlooked and written off.

How can people with this theology accept that all of the prophecies of Yeshua's first coming were fulfilled literally but Second Coming verses must be symbolic? Are we permitted to pick and choose like this and remain with any hermeneutical credibility and accuracy?

Folks, Revelation was written in about 95 AD and not before 70 AD. It's therefore obvious that Preterism is just another teaching that is filled with doctrinal error and should not be taken seriously. It takes our eyes off of our "blessed hope" - the glorious return of Yeshua who was YHWH in the Flesh who will take believers out of our world of pain and sorrow. Satan has definitely not been bound yet, but he will be and we can be sure that television cameras will be there to capture the moment - along with the moment when the King of kings will inaugurate the greatest Kingdom the world has even known!



Source

Crisis in Europe, Transformation in China




NOV 17 2011, 2:49 PM ET

Chinese leaders know that, with Europe and the U.S. struggling, they can't rely on exports forever. China's future may hinge on whether its leaders can make the necessary changes in time.
max nov17 p2.jpg

A 1979 poster promotes China's steel industry / AP

"I want to remind those cadres who are staying on the job beyond me: my biggest worry right now is an overheating economy," Chinese Premier Zhu Rongji said in a January 2003 cabinet meeting, his last before leaving office. "I've already worried about this for a year now. I wouldn't say this publicly, but only bring it up to the top leadership, that overheating is the one thing that preoccupies my mind. Many signs seem to have emerged, and if we're not vigilant, the economic situation will be difficult to rein in." Zhu's comments, recently published for the first time, are translated to English here.

The next premier, Wen Jiabao, warned in 2007 that China's economic model of skyrocketing export-based growth was "unstable, unbalanced, uncoordinated and ultimately unsustainable." Fortunately, he and his government seem to know how to fix it. But the question isn't whether China's economy can accommodate the necessary changes. It almost certainly can. The big question is whether China's political system can accommodate those changes. If it can't, Chinese citizens may begin to more aggressively question the Communist Party's model of rule, which delivers tremendous economic growth at the cost of political and human rights.

When they issued their calls for change, neither Zhu nor Wen could have possibly foreseen the financial crises that have crippled the U.S. and European economies. Though China's leaders have long planned to change the country's economic model -- which is also at the heart of its political model -- these crises mean that China must accelerate its plan to restructure its economy. Right now, China's economy is based on exporting to wealthy, developed countries. For that export-driven system to work, China's economy needs to remain weaker than those of its buyers. One of the biggest reasons that China sells so much stuff is because it can produce that stuff cheaply. But as China's growth accelerates and European and American growth slows due to financial crises, China is catching up with the developed economies faster than anyone had anticipated. If and when China gets too wealthy to continue exporting cheap products -- or if the developed economies become too weak to keep buying them -- it will be in big trouble.

China will have to shift its economic emphasis from exports -- driven by state-run industrial enterprises -- to individual households. This means moving wealth from the state and state-run companies to Chinese households, which would then drive China's continued growth. This is feasible -- China has nearly 1.5 billion consumers, after all, an increasing number of whom are entering the middle class, where they will be willing and able to power the economy. This wouldn't be so different from how the U.S. economy became the largest in the world: our consumer base is big, rich, and it loves to shop.

"It's true that Chinese authorities are hotly discussing how and whether they can move away from the export-dependent model of development," colleague James Fallows wrote in an email when I asked him about how China was handling the worsening European crises. "But this has been the main topic of discussion for at least three years, and the real question is whether they can do so, and how, and over what period of time. For outsiders the real question is whether there is anything the rest of the world can do to hasten the process."

The timeline for how quickly China needs to restructure its economy appears to be shortening, and not just because of the ever-expanding European debt crises. Housing authorities just capped real estate prices in a second city to try and prevent a housing bubble, informal lending markets arebooming, export growth is already slowing ahead of expectations, and the gap between mainland China's managed currency rate and Hong Kong's floating currency rate is expanding. China doesn't appear to be anywhere near financial calamity or anything like it, but the urgency for China to change its economic model is increasing.

The changes that China's leadership knows it needs aren't just about making Chinese households better off and finding a way to responsibly manage overall growth. They're about maintaining the very stability of the Chinese system. In a democracy, if people feel their government has failed them then they can vote that government out of office. But in an autocracy like China's, popular discontent can be more dangerous. Demonstrations, some of them violent, have already broken out in a number of interior cities this year. Last month, a young man lit himself on fire in Tienanmen Square, an eery echo of the self-immolation that set off Tunisia's revolution in December.

China has remained largely stable since 1989 for a number of reasons, perhaps the most important of which are its ever-rising economy (which gives Chinese good reason to be happy with their government) and, to a lesser extent, China's ability to prevent and stifle dissent. It's a carrot-and-stick approach. But the Chinese government knows it can't maintain power through censorship, propaganda, and riot police alone. They need to keep growing to keep Chinese citizens happy, but they also need to slow that growth down to keep the economy healthy in the long-term.

This is a difficult balance, but not an impossible one by any means. Michael Pettis explains how and why it's achievable. And Chinese leaders seem to understand what they need to do. But as Damien Ma recently wrote, "It's not that the Chinese leaders don't get what's at stake -- they know such a reckoning must be had. But recognizing what must be done is quite different from summoning the political chutzpah to achieve it." If Chinese leaders want to continue to behave as disinterested and benevolent rules, and make the necessary but difficult changes, they'll have to overcome the same problem that partially inspired the recent "Occupy Wall Street" protests in the U.S.: industrial capture.

China's growth has created some very powerful industries and interests in the country. The firms that made a lot of money became politically connected, and vice-versa. Think of how much of a problem the coziness between business and government has become in the U.S., making it tougher for the U.S. government to regulate industry and to not be overly influenced by commercial interests that might conflict with the greater good. And that's just in the United States, which has a (relatively) free market economy with a (relatively) transparent and democratic political system. Imagine how much more influence American corporations would have over our government if we had a closed autocracy that partially ran our industries and you can get a sense of the scale of China's potential problem. The Chinese firms that rose with China are going to want to resist change -- even changes that might be beneficial to China overall -- and now they've got the political connections to make that possible.

In the Eurasia Group's lengthy report on China's new Five-Year Plan, they warn that Chinese Community Party will have to overcome some deeply entrenched financial interests to make the necessary changes. Their prediction is severe: "China's leadership will fail to introduce the bold reforms necessary to meaningfully redistribute wealth from corporations and government to households. For instance, big state-owned firms will fiercely resist contributing large chunks of their dividends to government social security funds."
But the same tendency to intervene in the economy, particularly in China's financial system, could well set up a battle over capital allocation and investment decisions, in which powerful stakeholders will resist any attempt to transfer wealth to new constituencies. And China's leaders are unlikely to deal with these powerful "losing" interest groups holistically. Nor is a strongman or tightly knit group of leaders likely to be able to overcome them. Ultimately, then, China's political environment will defeat many elements of the FYP. Without significant changes to governance structures--and to the role the state plays in capital allocation--China's economic landscape will not change as fundamentally as the FYP's designers (and many foreigners) hope.

... The senior political leadership is not receptive to reforms that would weaken the Chinese Communist Party's power over the financial system and thus jeopardize its ability to bankroll massive industrial policy spending on powerful constituencies, which constitutes another major 12th FYP priority. Given this discord, Beijing is unlikely to articulate or pursue a convincing plan for remedying the financial sector's most glaring inefficiencies over the next five years.

The report warns that the Chinese Communist Party could endanger the very stability of Chinese politics if they fail to implement the needed reforms. "China's rebalancing agenda is not merely about economics but, ultimately, the political viability of the Chinese system. Beijing has delivered economic prosperity to many Chinese citizens. But those very successes have yielded numerous problems--some large--that could undermine the regime's legitimacy if left wholly unattended," they conclude. "That income and development gap is unsustainable both economically and politically."

One of the immediate issues will be, as in the U.S., jobs for grads. "Disenchanted graduates earning only slightly more than migrant workers will be a source of significant political pressure and Beijing will intensify its efforts to employ them," the Eurasia Group report warns. "Meanwhile, as Chinese workers' expectations rise, Beijing will continue grappling with demands for better working conditions and representation, even as the country tries to remain an attractive investment destination." While China remains politically stable -- stabler than a number of European democracies -- dissent and protest are increasing. Government censorship and repression -- including through violence -- are also increasing. China's autocratic government, though a frequent and severe human rights abuser, is still relatively open and stable for an autocracy. If it's going to stay that way, the Chinese Communist Party will need to make some significant changes to the country's economy.


Source

Timothy Geithner's Best Asset: Everybody Hates Him



NOV 14 2011, 3:31 PM ET

A lack of ideological bias has allowed him to pursue practical solutions to deal with crises

615 Geithner unbrella REUTERS Jason Reed.jpg

If you're a conservative, then you probably have no love for Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner. He wanted to end the Bush tax cuts for the rich in 2010. You might think his foreclosure prevention plan was a mess. But if you're a progressive, then you probably don't love the guy either. He wasn't particularly aggressive in pursuing cramdowns or principal reductions for struggling homeowners. He also doesn't tend to be too hard on the banks. So who does like Geithner? President Obama must -- he worked to ensure that Geithner wouldn't resign earlier this year when his family moved back to New York. It isn't hard to see why: Geithner is a rare breed of high-level official who looks for practical solutions without letting politics get in the way.

Jackie Calmes at the New York Times highlights the president's surprising unwavering desire to keep Geithner around as other economic advisors departed over time. Calmes notes that both sides of the aisle have attacked Geithner's policies and positions over the past couple of years. Let's look at some of the chief reasons why people don't like Geithner.

He Went Too Easy on the Banks

Those who lean left sometimes criticize Geithner for being too friendly to the banks. Indeed, some even accuse him of having worked for Goldman Sachs. (He didn't.) In fact, Geithner's financial reform proposal that preceded Congress' legislation set the tone for many of the provisions that eventually were passed -- and we all know how much noise the banks have made about that bill. He also helped to ensure that the government got back more than it provided the banks in the 2008 rescue, as taxpayers ultimately made a profit on the bank bailout.

To be sure, he could have been harder on the banks. But don't forget: the financial crisis was a time when the banking industry nearly collapsed. The entire purpose of the bailout and subsequent stability programs was to ensure that the industry survived. Even if harsher punishment was justified, it would have been impractical until the broader economy had improved. So even if Geithner did want to go harder on the banks, he likely understood that doing so would make everyone worse off.

His Housing Policy Was Too Aggressive / Not Aggressive Enough

When I first read the Treasury's mortgage modification plan in early 2009, I thought it would result in a fairly large number of modifications. I was wrong -- it will struggle to reach the 1 million mark. The program was crafted as a way to gently persuade banks to modify mortgages without compelling them to do so with lots of carrots but few sticks. And remember, this was before we knew about all of the bank's foreclosure process flaws.

Still, critics on the right think that government-induced mortgage modifications are unfair to borrowers who dutifully pay their bills, while critics on the left want to see the government aggressively force banks to write-down principle to end foreclosures. Either option is extreme. Geithner took a moderate approach by providing incentives for banks to modify mortgages without compelling them to declare deep losses on underwater loans that could endanger stability.

He Didn't See Such a Deep Recession

Perhaps the most unfair criticism of Geithner is that he didn't realize how bad the recession would be. It's certainly true that he probably didn't expect that unemployment would be 9% 34 months into Obama's first term. But then, who did? Only a select few anticipated this much pain for the U.S. economy. None of Obama's other major economic advisors got it right either.

So to criticize Geithner for not pushing for a bigger stimulus bill in 2009 just doesn't make sense. At the time $787 billion was thought to be fairly aggressive. But more importantly, there are very real political obstacles for having made the size of the stimulus much larger. If it approached $1 trillion, a psychological boundary begins to materialize. The public can handle billions, but trillions just sounds like too much money. That's also a part of the reason why we saw $700 billion chosen for the size of the pool of funds used for the bank bailout in 2008.

A Pragmatic Approach

In all of these examples, Geithner has taken a pragmatic approach. One of the most common Republican criticisms against Geithner was his lack of private sector experience. He is a career policy guy. This can be dangerous, because if you live in policy circles for too long, your ideology can blind you to practical solutions. Despite his background, however, Geithner never fell into the partisan trap. He generally chose a practical approach.

This is the right mindset for dealing with crises. Few want to see the government bail out anyone with taxpayer money. But the chaos that would have ensued if the U.S. banking system had crumbled in 2008 was far worse than the moral hazard that a bailout created. That's why the Bush administration looked past its free market politics and intervened.

As the economy has remained in a fragile state, Geithner has taken on a similar approach, putting the most sensible solutions before the most politically convenient. And that's why nobody likes him. No matter your political persuasion, you can criticize Geithner for some policy that conflicts with your principles. But Geithner has left the politics to politicians and focused on doing the little that government could to help without making matters worse. That might not make him popular with the right or the left, but his approach should be appreciated by those of us who don't believe that either party is correct all of the time.

Image Credit: REUTERS/Jason Reed




Source

Pentagon seeks flexibility in case of ‘doomsday’

For weeks, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta has been urging the supercommittee to do what it takes to avoid the threat of sequestration and spare the Pentagon from further cuts.

But what if the panel fails?

Sequestration, which Panetta has described as a “doomsday” mechanism, would mean across-the-board cuts beginning in fiscal 2013 under existing statute. But even if it comes to that — and there’s plenty of reason to think it won’t — the Pentagon wants some flexibility in applying the roughly $500 billion in further cuts over the next 10 years.

“If Congress agrees by vote, we would have the flexibility to apply sequester cuts as the administration recommends,” Panetta wrote recently in a fact sheet sent to the chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.), and the panel”s ranking Republican, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.).

“Even with flexibility,” Panetta was quick to add, “cuts of this magnitude would be highly disruptive.”

Republicans have made clear that they will seek to protect the Defense Department from cuts if sequestration fails. Among other efforts, McCain and Sen. Lindsey Graham (S.C.) have drafted a bill that would try to offset some of the reductions by cutting congressional pay and imposing 5 percent across-the-board cuts to other federal spending.

In his fact sheet, Panetta said that for fiscal 2013, when the cuts would take effect, the reductions would delay production and raise the procurement costs for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, the Army’s new ground combat vehicle and Navy ships and aircraft. In addition, civilian employees would have to be furloughed for a month or more and training by all services would be curtailed.

While funds that pay for overseas military operations in Afghanistan, Iraq and elsewhere are not affected by sequestration, Panetta said the disruptions caused in the core Pentagon budget by late approval of contracts and perhaps payrolls “would have adverse effect on our ability to support the Afghan war.”

By | 04:19 PM ET, 11/17/2011



Source

Crystal Cathedral to be sold to Catholic diocese



SANTA ANA, California (AP) — The Crystal Cathedral will sell its iconic, gleaming glass building to the Roman Catholic Diocese of Orange in an effort to get back on solid financial footing after declaring bankruptcy last year.

The move was approved Thursday by U.S. Bankruptcy Court Judge Robert N. Kwan after a bidding war between the diocese and Orange County's Chapman University for the sprawling 40-acre property — and was opposed by many Crystal Cathedral congregants who fear it will be the end of their church

The diocese will pay $57.5 million to use the building in Garden Grove made of 10,000 panes of glass as a long-sought countywide cathedral.

"It will become a true center for our Catholic community in Orange County," Bishop Tod D. Brown told reporters after Thursday's packed hearing in federal bankruptcy court.

The decision will force congregants of the Crystal Cathedral to find a new home after three years — possibly in a Catholic church up the street that the diocese will vacate.

But some fear the ministry won't survive the move as congregants — and possibly "Hour of Power" television viewers — feel dismayed after pouring their hearts, and pocketbooks, into the elaborate campus.

Rather, churchgoers threw their support behind a proposal by Chapman University for the site to expand its health sciences offerings and possibly start a medical school — a plan that would have paid up to $59 million for the site allowed the church to continue to use the famous building designed by renowned architect Philip Johnson.

For the last two weeks, the board of directors of Crystal Cathedral Ministries had supported Chapman as the preferred buyer. But the board did an about-face Wednesday and voted to back the diocese instead to preserve the church as a religious institution, citing church bylaws and a wish to respect the spirit of donors who footed the bill for the building.

"I'm really pleased to know that this campus is likely for at least decades, if not centuries, to be kept as a sacred place of worship," Carol Milner, daughter of church founder Rev. Robert H. Schuller, said after the hearing.

The decision riled several dozen congregants who attended the six-hour hearing in bankruptcy court and pleaded with the judge to let them remain in their beloved church.

"It shouldn't be about the money. It should be about what's inside your heart," Jim Kirkland Jr. told the court, breaking into tears. "A lot of these beautiful people have put in their hearts, put in their time."

Schuller started the Crystal Cathedral as a drive-in church in the 1950s under the auspices of the Reformed Church in America. Decades later, the Southern California ministry evolved into an international televangelism empire and erected its now-famous building.

In 2008, the church's revenues plummeted amid a decline in donations and ticket sales for holiday pageants due to the recession, church officials said. But some experts say the church failed to attract younger members while alienating older churchgoers with an ill-fated attempt to turn the church over to Schuller's son, ending in a bitter and public family feud.

The church laid off employees and cut salaries, but its debts surpassed $43 million, prompting the Crystal Cathedral to declare bankruptcy last year.

Much of Thursday's hearing was devoted to analyzing the church's sudden change of heart about a buyer, with Kwan urging the church to justify its reason for choosing a lower bid and one that went against the wishes and recommendations of many of its congregants.

Some congregants at the Crystal Cathedral said losing their church would be a sign of failure of the ministry's leadership and they wouldn't follow its leaders to a new site.

Churchgoers also questioned whether the ministry that shares the name of the building it inhabits would be financially viable elsewhere, noting that viewers of the "Hour of Power" are equally attached to the glass-spired church and are the source of 70 percent of the church's revenue.

But those who supported the board's decision said the congregation will continue to thrive through the good-hearted people who worship together and band together to help those in need.

"The Crystal Cathedral will go on," said Susan Dawson, whose husband was recently appointed to the church's board. "They will love wherever we go because we are a community, we are a community of loving believers."


Source


Social justice




A woman protester at Occupy Wall Street surrounded by signs that demand social justice, September 2011

Social justice generally refers to the idea of creating a society or institution that is based on the principles of equality and solidarity, that understands and values human rights, and that recognizes the dignity of every human being.[1][2][3] The term and modern concept of "social justice" was coined by the Jesuit Luigi Taparelli in 1840 based on the teachings of St. Thomas Aquinas and given further exposure in 1848 by Antonio Rosmini-Serbati.[1][2][4][5][6] The idea was elaborated by the moral theologian John A. Ryan, who initiated the concept of a living wage. Father Coughlin also used the term in his publications in the 1930s and the 1940s. It is a part of Catholic social teaching, Social Gospel from Episcopalians, and is one of the Four Pillars of the Green Party upheld by green parties worldwide. Social justice as a secular concept, distinct from religious teachings, emerged mainly in the late twentieth century, influenced primarily by philosopher John Rawls. Some tenets of social justice have been adopted by those on the left of the political spectrum.

Social justice is based on the concepts of human rights and equality and involves a greater degree of economic egalitarianismthrough progressive taxation, income redistribution, or even property redistribution. These policies aim to achieve what developmental economists refer to as more equality of opportunity than may currently exist in some societies, and to manufacture equality of outcome in cases where incidental inequalities appear in a procedurally just system. The Constitution of the International Labour Organization affirms that "universal and lasting peace can be established only if it is based upon social justice."[7] Furthermore, the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action treats social justice as a purpose of the human rights education.[8]


Wiki

Thursday, November 17, 2011

Wall Street protesters tie up traffic in protests around the US; more than 200 arrested


SETH WENIG / THE ASSOCIATED PRESS Enlarge Image

An Occupy Wall Street protester yells as he is arrested by the police after blocking an intersection near The New York Stock Exchange in New York, Thursday. Two days after the encampment that sparked the global Occupy protest movement was cleared by authorities, demonstrators marched through New York's financial district and promised a national day of action with mass gatherings in other cities.

NEW YORK, N.Y. - Occupy Wall Street protesters clogged streets and tied up traffic around the U.S. on Thursday to mark two months since the movement's birth and signal they aren't ready to quit, despite the breakup of many of their encampments by police. More than 200 people were arrested, most of them in New York.

The demonstrations — which took place in such cities as Los Angeles, Las Vegas, St. Louis, Washington and Portland, Oregon — were for the most part peaceful. Most of the arrests were for blocking streets, and the traffic disruptions were brief.

Chanting "All day, all week, shut down Wall Street," more than 1,000 protesters gathered near the New York Stock Exchange and sat down in several intersections. Helmeted police broke up some of the gatherings, and operations at the stock market were not disrupted.

As darkness fell, a crowd of several thousand people, their ranks swelled by union members, jammed Manhattan's Foley Square, where their chants boomed off the surrounding courthouses and other government buildings. From there, they began a march over the Brooklyn Bridge.

The protests came two days after police raided and demolished the encampment at New York's Zuccotti Park that had served as headquarters of the Occupy movement.

"This is a critical moment for the movement given what happened the other night," said demonstrator Paul Knick, a software engineer from Montclair, New Jersey. "It seems like there's a concerted effort to stop the movement, and I'm here to make sure that doesn't happen."

At least 177 people were arrested in New York. Some were bloodied during the arrests. One man was taken into custody for throwing liquid, possibly vinegar, into the faces of several police officers, authorities said. Many demonstrators were carrying vinegar as an antidote for pepper spray.

A police officer needed 20 stitches on his hand after he was hit with a piece of thrown glass, police said.

In Los Angeles, about 500 sympathizers marched downtown between the Bank of America tower and Wells Fargo Plaza, chanting, "Banks got bailed out, we got sold out!" More than two dozen people were arrested.

Police arrested 21 demonstrators in Las Vegas, and 20 were led away in plastic handcuffs in Portland, Oregon, for sitting down on a bridge. At least a dozen were arrested in St. Louis after they sat down cross-legged and locked arms in an attempt to block a bridge over the Mississippi River.

Several of the demonstrations coincided with an event planned months earlier by a coalition of unions and liberal groups, including Moveon.org and the Service Employees International Union, in which out-of-work people walked over bridges in several cities to protest high unemployment.

The street demonstrations also marked two months since the Occupy movement sprang to life in New York on Sept. 17. They were planned well before police raided a number of encampments over the past few days, but were seen by some activists as a way to demonstrate their resolve in the wake of the crackdown.

Thursday's demonstrations around Wall Street brought taxis and delivery trucks to a halt, but police were largely effective at keeping the protests confined to just a few blocks. Officers allowed Wall Street workers through the barricades, but only after checking their IDs.

Mayor Michael Bloomberg said police had been expecting as many as 10,000 protesters based on what activists had been saying online. But he said there had been "minimal disruption."

"Most protesters have, in all fairness, acted responsibly," he said after visiting an injured police officer in the hospital.

Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly said officers confiscated metal devices that some demonstrators had apparently planned to use to lock themselves into the entrances to Wall Street businesses.

The demonstration that drew thousands to Foley Square in the evening was a rarity in the Occupy movement: Union organizers obtained a permit from the city, and speakers were allowed to use a sound system.

Among the demonstrators arrested in New York was a retired Philadelphia police captain, Ray Lewis, who was taken into custody in his dress uniform. Others included actor and director Andre Gregory, who said he hoped the movement would lead to national action on economic injustice.

"It's a possible beginning of something positive," he said.

Some onlookers applauded the demonstrators from open windows. Others yelled, "Get a job!"

"I don't understand their logic," said Adam Lieberman, as he struggled to navigate police barricades on his way to work at JPMorgan Chase. "When you go into business, you go into business to make as much money as you can. And that's what banks do. They're trying to make a profit."

Gene Williams, a bond trader, joked that he was "one of the bad guys" but said he empathized with the demonstrators: "The fact of the matter is, there is a schism between the rich and the poor, and it's getting wider."

The confrontations followed early-morning arrests in other cities. In Dallas, police evicted dozens of protesters near City Hall, citing health and safety reasons. Eighteen protesters were arrested. Two demonstrators were arrested and about 20 tents removed at the University of California, Berkeley.

City officials and demonstrators were trying to decide their next step in Philadelphia, where about 100 protesters were under orders to clear out to make way for a long-planned $50 million plaza renovation at City Hall. Union leaders pressed the demonstrators to leave, saying construction jobs were stake.

___

Associated Press writer Colleen Long in New York contributed to this story.


Source


Tahrir Square NYC


An Occupy Wall Street demonstrator is arrested by New York City Police during what protest organizers called a "Day of Action" in New York November 17, 2011. Hundreds of Occupy Wall Street protesters marched through New York's financial district toward the stock exchange on Thursday to protest economic inequality at the heart of American capitalism. REUTERS/Mike Segar (UNITED STATES - Tags: BUSINESS CIVIL UNREST)

A man is arrested as demonstrators with 'Occupy Wall Street' mark the two month anniversary of the protest November 17, 2011 in New York.

New York Police Department officers push back people as demonstrators with 'Occupy Wall Street' mark the two month anniversary of the protest November 17, 2011 in New York.

Police clash with protesters from the Occupy movement in New York

11-17-2011: The Star-Ledger's Photos of the Day

Protesters Clash With Police in Lower Manhattan

James Estrin/The New York Times
A group of Occupy Wall Street supporters took a subway to an evening rally in Foley Square. More Photos »
By CARA BUCKLEY
Published: November 17, 2011

Nearly a thousand protesters took to the streets of Lower Manhattan on Thursday, clashing with the police and tossing aside metal barricades to converge again on Zuccotti Park after failing in an attempt to shut down the New York Stock Exchange.

Organized weeks ago, the so-called day of action came two days after the police cleared the Occupy Wall Street encampment from Zuccotti Park in an early-morning raid. Removed from the park that had become their de facto headquarters, protesters looked to Thursday — two months to the day after the demonstrations began — to gauge the support and mettle that the movement still retained.

“We failed to close the stock exchange, but we took back our park,” said Adam Farooqui, 25, of Queens. “That was a real victory.”

By Thursday afternoon, about 175 people had been arrested, many after rough confrontations with the police.

After staging protests near the stock exchange, protesters returned to Zuccotti Park, which had been surrounded by police barricades, with one or two entrances monitored by police officers, as well as by private security officers working for Brookfield Properties, the park’s owner.

But protesters tossed aside the barricades and rushed in as officers tried to keep them out, with some officers shoving demonstrators and throwing punches.

On Thursday afternoon, the police led a man with a bloodied face from the park. Onlookers said the man had flicked the hat off a police officer’s head and rushed into the crowd. He was later apprehended by the police, and, according to a witness, Jo Robin, 29, from New Orleans, he was beaten.

The police said the hand of an officer was badly cut by a shard of glass wielded by a protester near Zuccotti Park. The police said that the injured officer would probably require 20 stitches and that the officer’s attacker was in custody.

Four other officers were being evaluated at a hospital for possible injuries after an acidic liquid of some sort was thrown at them.

At a Midtown gathering of business leaders on Thursday, Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg indicated that he empathized with the demonstrators’ grievances, saying the protests were a dire sign of the public’s economic fears.

“The public is getting scared,” he said. “They don’t know what to do, and they’re going to strike out. They just know the system isn’t working, and they don’t want to wait around.”

The mayor later visited Bellevue Hospital Center, along with the police commissioner, Raymond W. Kelly, to visit officers wounded in the clashes.

Protesters began gathering at 7 a.m. on lower Broadway across from Zuccotti Park. By 7:30, the crowd had swelled to hundreds, and protesters walked south on Broadway toward Wall Street, only to be quickly met by metal barricades and thick cordons of police.

Over the next three hours, the protesters wound their way through the heart of the financial district, breaking off into groups, and were repeatedly met by the police. At one point, the protesters engulfed police vehicles, forcing them to halt, and broke police lines, only to be pushed back by metal barricades and swinging batons.

The morning was marked by increasingly tense standoffs. Shortly before 10 a.m., a large group of people dancing and chanting at the corner of Broad Street and Beaver Street was rushed by the police, who began throwing people to the ground.

Though some traders appeared to have a hard time getting to work, the stock exchange opened for trading as usual at 9:30 a.m.

Protesters planned to demonstrate later on Thursday at subway stations throughout the city, and to reconvene in Foley Square in Manhattan — where protesters expect to meet up with representatives from a dozen unions — and march across Lower Manhattan bridges.

Reporting was contributed by Matt Flegenheimer, Rob Harris, Colin Moynihan, Kate Taylor




Police: 177 Occupy Wall Street protesters arrested in NYC


Visit msnbc.com for breaking news

Image: Police officers prevent protesters from entering Wall Street

Richard Drew
/ AP
New York City Police officers prevent protesters from entering Wall Street from the east on Thursday. Demonstrators marched through New York's financial district and promised a national day of action with mass gatherings in other cities.


NEW YORK — At least 177 people have been arrested during clashes between police and Occupy Wall Street demonstrators in New York City, part of a day of mass gatherings in response to efforts to break up Occupy Wall Street camps nationwide.

Thousands of protesters took to the streets around the U.S., including Los Angeles, Dallas, Portland, Ore., to mark two months since the movement's birth. Dozens of arrests were reported, including 23 in Los Angeles.

One of the largest demonstrations was in New York, where at least 1,000 demonstrators tried to clog up streets around the stock exchange. Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg and Police Commissioner Raymond W. Kelly said five of the protesters arrested were charged with felony assault and that seven police officers and 10 protesters were injured.

Five other officers were treated after being hit in the face with stinging liquid.


Occupy LA takes to the streets for 2-month anniversary of movement

In New York City, frustrations seemed to spill over in Zuccotti Park, the movement's headquarters since Sept. 17, as hundreds of people shoved back the metal police barricades that have long surrounded the area. A live television shot from above showed waves of police and protesters briefly pushing back and forth before the barricades appeared to be settled at the edge of the park once more.

"All day, all week, shut down Wall Street!" the crowd chanted.

Some of the police hit protesters as they resisted arrest. Most of the marchers retreated. At least four cops were injured in the confrontations, NBC reported.

Hundreds of protesters thronged intersections around the financial district, an area of narrow, crooked streets running between stately sandstone buildings housing banks, brokerage houses and the New York Stock Exchange.

Story: Does Constitution protect camping protesters?

The protesters began marching just before 8 a.m., according to NBC New York, but were initially blocked by police once they reached the intersection of Nassau and Pine streets. A law-enforcement source estimated there were about 700 protesters by the time the group met police.

"You do not have a parade permit! You are blocking the street!" a police officer told protesters through a bullhorn.

By early afternoon, police officers stormed into Zucotti Park, clearing demonstrators out of the park's center, according to The New York Times. Protesters said one person was beaten in the confrontation.

The congestion brought taxis and delivery trucks to a halt. Police were allowing Wall Street workers through the barricades, but only after checking their IDs.

The protest marked two months since the Occupy Wall Street Movement sprang to life on Sept. 17 with a failed attempt to pitch a protest camp in front of the New York Stock Exchange. After police kept them out of Wall Street, the protesters pitched a camp in nearby Zuccotti Park, across from the World Trade Center site.

On Tuesday police raided Zuccotti Park and cleared out dozens of tents, tarps and sleeping bags.


Occupy protesters march on NYC, nationwide

"This is a critical moment for the movement given what happened the other night," Paul Knick, 44, a software engineer from Montclair, N.J., said as he marched through the financial district with other protesters on Thursday. "It seems like there's a concerted effort to stop the movement and I'm here to make sure that doesn't happen."

Bloomberg said police had been expecting as many as 10,000 protesters based on what activists had been saying online. But he said there had been "minimal disruption."

The demonstrators included actor-director Andre Gregory, who said he hoped the movement would lead to national action on economic injustice.

"It's a possible beginning of something positive," he said.

Some onlookers applauded the demonstrators from open windows. Others yelled, "Get a job!"

The New York group announced it would rally near the New York Stock Exchange, then fan out across Manhattan and head to subways, before gathering downtown and marching over the Brooklyn Bridge.

A past attempt to march across the bridge drew the first significant international attention to the Occupy movement when more than 700 people were arrested.

The police department said it would have scores of officers ready to handle protesters in the subways.

"The protesters are calling for a massive event aimed at disrupting major parts of the city," Deputy Mayor Howard Wolfson said. "We will be prepared for that."

Passer-by Gene Williams, a 57-year-old bond trader, joked that he was "one of the bad guys" but that he empathized with the demonstrators.

"They have a point in a lot of ways," he said. "The fact of the matter is, there is a schism between the rich and the poor and it's getting wider."

New York City officials said they had not spoken to demonstrators but were aware of the plans.
"The protesters are calling for a massive event aimed at disrupting major parts of the city," Deputy Mayor Howard Wolfson said. "We will be prepared for that."

New York taxi driver Mike Tupea, a Romanian immigrant, said his car was stuck amid the protesters for 40 minutes.

"I have to make a living. I pay $100 for 12 hours for this cab. I am losing money every minute," he said. "I have all my sympathies for this movement but let me do my living, let working people make a living."

Some of the latest developments in other Occupy protests:

Washington state

An 84-year-old woman has become a face of the national Occupy Wall Street movement after she was hit with pepper spray during a Seattle march.

A photo of Dorli Rainey with the chemical irritant dripping from her chin quickly went viral, becoming one of the most striking images from the protests that have taken place in cities across the globe.

Rainey has been active in Seattle's liberal politics for decades and once ran for mayor. She said Wednesday that she showed up at the downtown protest the previous day to show support.

Police said demonstrators were blocking a downtown intersection. Rainey was not among the six people arrested.

Mayor Mike McGinn is apologizing to some protesters who were pepper sprayed during a march and said he has spoken to Rainey.

Nevada

In a city that celebrates behaving badly, Occupy Las Vegas protesters are touting civil obedience and government cooperation as anti-Wall Street efforts elsewhere have turned to violence and police confrontations.

Las Vegas demonstrators have sought approval from government leaders and police before protesting or setting up a camp site. They called off a protest during President Barack Obama's visit to Las Vegas last month because police asked them to do so. And they have created a system of protest rules that ban, among other things, law-breaking and hate signs.

A night of re-Occupation at Zuccotti Park

The good behavior in Las Vegas and other Occupy efforts across Nevada is even more noteworthy because Nevadans may have the most cause to rage against the machine. The state tops the nation in foreclosures and unemployment and entire neighborhoods have been overtaken by vacant homes and storefronts.

But while protesters in other cities riot and rage, the Vegas group is hosting a series of free foreclosure mediation workshops for homeowners who are underwater on their mortgages.

Story: To demand or not to demand? That is the 'Occupy' question

Organizers insist their anti-greed message has a better chance of spreading if they aren't labeled violent anarchists.

Pennsylvania

Philadelphia officials have told protesters camping out next to City Hall to leave because of the "imminent" start of a long-planned renovation project.

Mayor Michael Nutter's office said Wednesday the city has posted an official notice saying the $50 million renovation work at Dilworth Plaza is about to start following selection of a general contractor. Officials issued no deadline and said they would work with the protesters on finding another location for them.

PhotoBlog: Occupy Wall Street

"This project's commencement is imminent," the statement said. "Accordingly, you should take this opportunity to vacate Dilworth Plaza and remove all of your personal belongings immediately."

The protesters have had hundreds of tents camped in the plaza for more than a month. The group has resisted the city's call to move to another plaza across the street to clear the way for the renovation.

Massachusetts

A Boston judge has ordered the city not to remove protesters or their tents from a downtown encampment without court approval, except in an emergency such as fire, a medical issue or an outbreak of violence.

A temporary restraining order was issued after a hearing Wednesday on the protesters' lawsuit. Fuller arguments will be heard Dec. 1, and the judge orders the sides to hold a mediation session before then.

A lawyer for the demonstrators says they are concerned they will be forced out in the middle of the night as Occupy protesters were in New York City this week.

California

Several hundred Occupy Wall Street sympathizers marched through downtown Los Angeles again Thursday after police stopped their progress down Broadway when they spilled off the sidewalk and into the street.

Three people were arrested as lines of officers forced the group back onto sidewalks. Police then allowed marchers to leave. The group headed west on 3rd Street, staying on sidewalks.

Earlier, police arrested 23 people without incident after they sat down in a street during a peaceful rally by hundreds of people organized by labor groups who had a permit. Two other people were also arrested separately for interfering with officers.

The day's second march left the Occupy LA encampment at City Hall shortly after noon.

Oregon

Protesters and police faced off on the Steel Bridge in Portland Thursday morning in what was expected to be a day-long series of Occupy Portland demonstrations, according to KGW.com.
Police arrived early to close the bridge ahead of the rally, KGW.com reported.

London, England

Protesters camped outside St. Paul's Cathedral in London said Thursday they are staying put as a deadline passed for them to take down their tents or face legal action.

London officials attached eviction notices to the tents Wednesday, demanding they be removed from the churchyard by 1 p.m. EST Thursday.

The Occupy London group said no one had left by the deadline, and marked its passing with a rally and a minute of silence outside the cathedral.

"The general feeling is excitement at the moment," said protester Nathan Cravens, 27. "It's brought us together."