OCCUPY ACROSS THE U.S.: Dispatches from the movement

Wednesday, November 30, 2011 | 3:00 p.m. CST; updated 12:01 p.m. CST, Thursday, December 1, 2011
Desiree Trujillo, 17, of Aurora, Colo., chants between to a pair State Troopers outside the State Capitol following the Occupy Denver march in Denver on Nov. 19. Several hundred people marched for the eighth straight Saturday in Denver.

The Occupy movement started Sept. 17 in the financial district of New York City when demonstrators began camping in Zuccotti Park. Since then, camps and protests have spread across the country.

According to, the movement fights the power of major corporations and banks "over the democratic process," and blames Wall Street for contributing to the ongoing recession. It takes inspiration from the uprisings in the Middle East.


Related Media

Related Articles

The common bond among groups is that they represent the 99 percent that "will no longer tolerate the greed and corruption" of the wealthiest one percent," the website states.

The following reports on the Occupy movement in six U.S. cities were compiled by Missourian reporters visiting their homes during the week of Thanksgiving.

Occupy Boston: Police don't allow cold weather supplies at Boston protest

Occupy Cedar Valley: Protestors in Cedar Falls, Iowa, still active, even without a camp

Occupy Cincinnati: More than 1,000 protesters have joined Cincinnati cause 

Occupy Denver: Protesters forced to adapt to police tactics in Denver

Occupy Lincoln: Protesters, police in Lincoln maintain cordial relationship

Occupy Minneapolis: Minneapolis protesters brace for winter demonstrations

We've also compiled a photo gallery from protests around the country.

Like what you see here? Become a member.

Show Me the Errors (What's this?)

Report corrections or additions here. Leave comments below here.

You must be logged in to participate in the Show Me the Errors contest.


Vega Bond November 30, 2011 | 4:59 p.m.

Doesn't the Missourian have reporters who are from warmer places? It hurts me just to read this.

(Report Comment)
Tony Robertson November 30, 2011 | 11:37 p.m.

I can't believe there is not a link to Occupy McBaine. It should be 10 to 12 feet higher than it used to be.

(Report Comment)
Gary Straub December 1, 2011 | 10:36 a.m.

Thank you for giving front page recognition to this movement, which has pretty much been the most under-reported story since the demonstrations against invading Iraq. The Iraq movement was the largest demonstration in the world until now. There are literally millions of citizens around the world who are protesting the direction the ultra-rich are leading the world society, they have a voice and it should be heard. The old saying, "if you tell a lie enough times, it becomes fact", should also include: If you hide the truth long enough it will be forgotten

(Report Comment)
frank christian December 1, 2011 | 11:05 a.m.

More coverage for the "movement" from The Boston Occupier:

"A frequent criticism of the Occupy movement is that the occupiers have expressed no central set of demands. Some critics have concluded that the lack of defined demands signifies that the protesters are not protesting anything at all. However, the survey finds that ten issues and beliefs have near-universal support among occupiers.

They are:

1. Revoke corporate personhood so that corporations have no ability to interfere in elections.
2. Remove the “revolving doors” that contribute to the corruption of the regulatory process.
3. Institute a progressive tax code which both removes loopholes as well as makes the rich and corporations pay their “fair share”.
4. Re-institute the Glass-Steagall Act and place stricter regulations on capital leveraging.
5. Increase the transparency and accountability of the Federal Reserve.
6. Institute election reform so that money can no longer be used to buy elections.
7. End the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
8. Invest in clean energy development and increase environmental regulations.
9. End the drug war and institute rehabilitation programs for non-violent offenders.
10. Protect unions and increase worker safety protections.

(Report Comment)
Michael Lewis December 1, 2011 | 3:51 p.m.

"The 20th century has been characterized by three developments of great political importance: the growth of democracy; the growth of corporate power; and the growth of corporate propaganda as a means of protecting corporate power against democracy." -Alex Carey, Australian social scientist

Following reports of serious financial abuses in the 1972 Presidential campaign, Congress amended the FECA in 1974 to set limits on contributions by individuals, political parties and PACs. But politicians exempted the commercial press, because the 1st Amendment prohibits abridging their freedom of speech and the press.

2 USC 431 (9) (B) (i) The term "expenditure" does not include any news story, commentary, or editorial distributed through the facilities of any broadcasting station, newspaper, magazine, or other periodical publication, unless such facilities are owned or controlled by any political party, political committee, or candidate;

Section 431(9)(B)(i) makes a distinction where there is no real difference: the media is extremely powerful by any measure, a "special interest" by any definition, and heavily engaged in the "issue advocacy" and "independent expenditure" realms of political persuasion that most editorial boards find so objectionable when anyone other than a media outlet engages in it. To illustrate the absurdity of this special exemption the media enjoys, I frequently cite as an example the fact that if the RNC bought NBC from GE the FEC would regulate the evening news and, under the McCain-Feingold "reform" bill, Tom Brokaw could not mention a candidate 60 days before an election. This is patently absurd.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people to peaceably assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

It would be strange indeed however if the grave concern for freedom of the press which prompted adoption of the First Amendment should be read as a command that the government was without power to protect that freedom. That Amendment rests on the assumption that the widest possible dissemination of information from diverse and antagonistic sources is essential to the welfare of the public, that a free press is a condition of a free society. Surely a command that the government itself shall not impede the free flow of ideas does not afford non-governmental combinations a refuge if they impose restraints upon that constitutionally guaranteed freedom. Freedom to publish means freedom for all and not for some. Freedom to publish is guaranteed by the Constitution, but freedom to combine to keep others from publishing is not. Freedom of the press from governmental interference under the First Amendment does not sanction repression of that freedom by private interests.

(Report Comment)
Michael Lewis December 1, 2011 | 3:55 p.m.

It is wrong that existing federal campaign laws require candidates, citizens, political parties and grassroots organizations and other than ‘news’ corporations to familiarize themselves with terms like: political action committee (PAC), independent vs. in-Kind donations, issue vs. express advocacy, spending limits, reporting intervals and coordination with a candidate’s campaign, before engaging in politics. If they fail to comply it is a felony.

Every man is equally entitled to protection by law; but when the laws undertake to add... artificial distinctio¬ns, to grant titles, gratuities¬, and exclusive privileges¬, to make the rich richer and the potent more powerful, the humble members of society--t¬he farmers, mechanics, and laborers--¬who have neither the time nor the means of securing like favors to themselves¬, have a right to complain of the injustice of their government¬. President Andrew Jackson.

The corporate method of organization is not going to be banned any time soon. People work in corporations. They invest in them or own them (most are small). Interest groups, from the ACLU to the NRA to, are all corporations too. The persons in these groups have interests, and particularly in the non-profit sector, it's a method for organizing the so-called 99% so they can pool their resources and be sure they are heard.

To restore the 'equal rights' of flesh and blood, the language of the press exemption should be modified to read: “The term expenditure does not include any news story, commentary, or editorial distributed by any candidate, political party, citizen, citizens group, broadcasting station, newspaper, magazine, or other periodical publication and other types of corporations.”

(Report Comment)

Leave a comment

Speak up and join the conversation! Make sure to follow the guidelines outlined below and register with our site. You must be logged in to comment. (Our full comment policy is here.)

  • Don't use obscene, profane or vulgar language.
  • Don't use language that makes personal attacks on fellow commenters or discriminates based on race, religion, gender or ethnicity.
  • Use your real first and last name when registering on the website. It will be published with every comment. (Read why we ask for that here.)
  • Don’t solicit or promote businesses.

We are not able to monitor every comment that comes through. If you see something objectionable, please click the "Report comment" link.

You must be logged in to comment.

Forget your password?

Don't have an account? Register here.