#OMEL, LOL it was hijacked long ago.

OMEL hijacked

Following the interest in our feminism appreciation week, the hijackers that stole #OMEL along with all the other Occupy Melbourne media resources have claimed this website is not representative of Occupy Melbourne. Occupy Melbourne was never truly unified, it was always a series of factions. Some people tried to claim they would act as representatives for the voices of the occupiers, but it didn’t take long before they saw themselves as elites who had special privileges and special rights. Most of the hijackers spend little or no time at the occupations. Many never slept over in the parks, but felt it was their right to dictate the terms and conditions of those who did.

Eventually they claimed occupy Melbourne was dead but saw fit to continue to use all the media resources to promote their own agenda. They didn’t care about Occupy Melbourne or its original stated causes or objectives. That’s why Nick Carson didn’t bother to monitor the OM Wikipedia page and let it get vandalized. They didn’t care that they didn’t renew the OM domain names, simply anyone could have taken this domain name. Nick Carson never wanted to say what happened to all the monetary donations, the email contact lists.

If the Nick Carson led faction of media hijackers hadn’t stolen the voice of occupy Melbourne, this website would never have needed to exist. The fact that it does exist shows that he doesn’t represent Occupy Melbourne. People were so pissed off that their effort were being used to promote things they never voted for they started posting their own views here and asking for meaningful debate. Not every contributor here agrees with each other of different views, but most agree that the fraudulent monetary system we have is a cornerstone problem from which so many others originate from.
Dozens of author invites were sent out, some actually wanted to respond and contribute. Many people are just addicted to Facebook, which is their own issue. The reality is Facebook is a tool of narcissism not activism, it’s totally superficial heavily monitored and achieves nothing. So when nick Carson and his hijacker faction say this is website is not authoritative, he’s not willing to admit, his media resources which he stole from the OM community are not authoritative. We even held a public meeting to declare the old media resources as dis-endorsed.
This website was not funded by community donations has never asked for donations, doesn’t support any political party, Nick Carson cannot honestly make the same claims.

He’s a green party stooge posing as an activist, to push the green party agenda, which is Marxism.

Because we are smart enough to realize Nick Carson and his hijacker faction for what they are; hijackers.
Because we are smart enough to realize this and know how bad Marxism is we oppose it and all its branches.

Every time we  challenge him on his control of the stolen media resources he just spits out a series of lies like this: OM is dead, There is no media team, I don’t have the password, we haven’t had a GA about it, We don’t listen to the GA anymore, OWS doesn’t listen to the GA anymore….

You’ll see in the future he’ll use the OM platform to promote the green party and politics of the left in general, this will be done without mandate or a vote. Just be aware of his real agenda.

Just BS excuses really to justify their stranglehold on the media resources, because that’s all that really matters to them… control

This is the voice of the occupiers, is not going away, get used to it.

It’s nice to know he’s occasionally reminded we exist and we are getting bigger all the time.

Posted on June 22, 2013, in Carl Scrace, Cognitive Dissonance, Faketivists, Fascism, Feminism, Marxism, Narcissism, Nick Carson Narcisstic Scumbag, Teigan Trotsky Evans, Whistle Blowers and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink. 25 Comments.

  1. So the “real” Occupy Melbourne website is “idle since assemblies stopped? So it’s not operating but it’s the “real” website? What a joke.

  2. A spelling mistake in both tweets.
    (assembles: should be *assemblies*)
    (an: should be *and*)
    You only have to proofread 140 characters and you can’t even do that. Further proof of incompetent dictators hijacking the resources.

    Real website idle, what a joke alright.

  3. When was the last Occupy Melbourne General Assembly held?
    When was the last request, for an Occupy Melbourne General Assembly called for, on the various OM pages.?

    • This website started long after General assemblies had stopped. you would have to look at .org to get a clue, but minutes were not taken or at least released for many of the later ones. Personally I thought GA’s were a waste of time and just a platform for hijackers and provocateurs. In the end the GA’s didn’t get quorum and many proposals were passed without majority. If you think back, you’ll remember the most keen to have their say at the GA were the least likely to actually to spend any time at the occupation or god forbid, sleep there. Most of the stuff that was done at a GA could have been done online i.e. ideas and votes. But the GA’s were just designed to single out and criticize independent thinkers. So what we are doing here getting ideas out there for the public to think about and discuss, and we aren’t following a set agenda, we are just looking for the truth. We called for a meeting and invited the public to discuss the state of affair relating to the media team’s theft of media assets and dis-endorsed them as they refused to show up.

  4. GA is the mechanism in place, through and by which, we the people articulate a diverse voice, table proposals and vote on them, so that horizontal collective decision is facilitated and theoretically, how we the people ensure that the decisions/positions reached, reflect the will of the majority of those paparticipating in the direct democracy process and to ideally ensure that the decisions/positions reached are in synch with the people’s capacity to collectively organise.

    It’s how ‘relevance’ is achieved… GAs discover what’s relevant to people and without the process being participated in…..anyone can represent themselves as OM…… but……. the decisions they make in their representation of OM…… doesn’t reflect the will of the people, as the people, haven’t been included in horizontal decision making,(that the GA’s are there to provide)…… about how and what is released in an official manner, or can’t represent the expressed wishes, concerns, aspirations etc of the people…. because no GA’s have taken place for these to be ascertained.

    Which brings us to now….. where there is no transparency…. no accountability…… top down decisions are made by a small number, representing for or on behalf of others… sounds very much like what some who participated in OM, saw wrong in the broader community and gathered to challenge.

    Yes, arduous and painful as they could be GA’s can’t really be hijacked. Any decisions made or positions reached through horizontal decision making…. were always open to be revisited, re proposed.

    Someone might propose turning up in pink shirts…. 2 out of the10 support it and vote yes.
    Someone might propose turning up in pink shirts…. 8 out of the 10 support it and vote yes.

    Either scenario… the 1st.. the two could still turn up in pink shirts
    the 2nd.. the two could still turn up in pink shirts, or maybe they won’t

    But the majority who supported the decision,(in the OM context) reached it by participating in the GA horizontal decision making process….. and……. even if it was the majorities intention to wear pink shirts…….No one could force another to wear a pink shirt against their will…..<<< hijacked.??

    Those who dominate such a scenario, are really,(as is with the broader system) all bluff… they can only get away with……. what YOU allow them to.

    If a decision is reached that you feel doesn't sit well with you…. you can chose to not participate in whatever the decision was… or you can argue your case and keep proposing it for as long as it takes, until a) you figure out the proposal won't fly, as it doesn't have the majorities support…. or it does resonate with others and momentum gathers…

    I called for the last GA…… prior to the 1 year anniversary of the eviction of OM….. so that those who had or where participating in OM, could have a hand in deciding how the day unfolded…. as opposed to the top down plans being decided by others, presenting themselves as real democracy and an event called global noise, from memory.

    Many complained before and after the anniversary yet other than me, no one turned up to the GA, even though it was advertised as per the understanding of more than 24hour's notice on the various OM pages.

    Speaks volumes that…..

    • The original decision making model was of consensus decision making. this meant in reality *anyone* could veto any decision. because of the openness this could literally be anyone. people got turned off really fast by that fact and some factions were totally willing to make a mockery of the decision making process by only turning up during a GA and never to be seen between them. this brings us to the first 2 important points.
      1) consensus decisions are good but not at he risk of pandering to extreme minorities.
      A majority decision making process should have been in place from the beginning. (80-90% majority maybe).
      2) the only people to vote should have been the occupiers, not random strangers who wanted to poke their heads in.
      sure its great to get community interest,
      but allowing people to vote who have no vested interest, and are not going to be bound by the results of the vote, is a bad idea.

      It’s no real surprise that no one was interested in GA’s 12 months on.
      a) the process was very frustrating and highly liable to hijack.
      b) the rules were never written down or publicized.
      c) no one wanted to enforce the rules agreed on.
      d) any one attempting to point out some one was not adhering to the rules got abused generally.
      e) a huge amount of politically correct rhetoric surrounded the rules making it all appear vague and elitist.
      f) the process of the GA itself was never clear leading to confusion.
      g) the facilitators were really pushing their own agenda and derailing GA’s rather than helping.

      it’s quite clear to a lot of people that OM ( and other occupies) were set up to fail. Some people analyzed and learned from these failures some didn’t.
      Some just used OM in a completely opportunistic way, so it you want transparency and accountability go and demand it from the .org and all the rest of the stolen resources.
      twitter, facebook, email lists, media contacts, donated money etc…

      You know exactly who I’m talking about.

  5. Yes… I’m well aware of the history, the personalities, we are taliking about ‘people’ warts and all….. attempting to organise…. Was never going to be easy.

    My thoughts I’ve shared, aren’t an accusation, they’re a pragmatic observation. Transparency and accountability are two elements of relevance….

    Some who participated agreed that transparency and accountability and horizontal decision making were problematic, or they didn’t exist in the broader community.

    They were identified as standards within OM and other Occupies, as something not only to aspire for, but to actively develop……

    And ……

    Anything…. action, group, etc that can’t be transparent or accountable,(in the OM context) isn’t in synch or relevant…. imho and tracing back through endless threads…. I’m not alone in this thinking.<<<< phew..!!

    * Demands of others….?? I've relayed the same information to those who represent themselves as OM.org… I don't need to demand anything from anyone… Nor do I have to support those acting in a way, that is elitist and condescending.

    I filtered through the background noise of fist shaking and finger pointing and figured out who had pulled what string or used smoke and mirrors. Something that will remain general knowledge.

    I relayed those observations and then asked…… you 'all.'………'hey please… stop fighting over an old stale tossed away chip…… and look up….there's literally food everywhere, your just not seeing it, because your focused on fighting over a stale chip…… Yep that was me…. process stale chip how you will.

    * Set up to fail… (studies that quantify and qualify this)…. yes blame is something we as disconnected people have been inclined towards.

    There are plenty nowadays that have earnt their 'broken rose coloured glasses badge' and can only assume that the lack of preparedness to have another attempt at collective organisation with GA, in a way that circumvents were 'hijacking' can occur…. is

    A) vested interest
    B) Lack of insight
    C) Lack of conviction
    D) Lack of capacity

    Could go on, meh..!!

    So I've got a question…….. the second year anniversary of OM, will soon be upon us…. there's possibly already those planning and promoting it….with guest speakers from Melbourne University lined up…… ah yeah and no overnight occupation…<< because that's sends a bad message….. and it'll be planned in a pub on the second floor… where those who say are, Muslim and can't attend, because they have a position on alcohol….. or theres no wheelchair access etc. City square had positives as well as negatives, when it came to access and inclusivity.

    My question….. do you see any benefit in holding a GA about groups that represent themselves as OM media…..


    That holding a GA, to plan and organise an event for the second year anniversary of the eviction of OM is something worth promoting and engaging in..??

    • before we can move on and learn from our mistakes we must identify the mistakes and make sure they are not repeated.
      One of the mistakes was adopting (or allowing) politically correct language, which is elitist and condescending.
      Worst of all politically correct language is vague and suits only a narrow undemocratic agenda; Marxism.

  6. I was at a GA once, about the declaration and told by Tal,(one of those facilitating the meeting) that the GA could only run for 1 hour, because she had to go somewhere.

    When in reality….. anyone could have stood up and stated, ‘no I’m uncomfortable with that and ask that they themselves fill the facilitation role or for someone else to…

    No meeting could be hi jacked, more about people either not confident enough yet to challenge, or still haven’t broken free from the cognitive map of follow the leader.

    As time went on though, different people took on facilitation roles, predominantly those who occupied overnight participated in them and organic evolution saw the role of facilitation being rotated….<<< so as to circumvent the collective experience of top down decision making hidden behind process…

    We will have our humanity….. Those silly enough to try and stand in the way of that, have a shock coming.

  7. Yes…. what her intent was….. I can’t say…..

    What I’m saying, is that any time, anyone of us, had within our power the opportunity to stand up and call for someone else to fill the role….

    I personally think that such outcomes wouldn’t occur nowadays, people are more aware. Take the spokes council model participated in…… the role of facilitator rotated…… and… the facilitator for the next meeting was decided and announced at the end of the meeting….. for the next meeting….<<< allowing one to prepare for filling the role….

    All experimental…… yet….. an attempt to ascertain the will of those participating, by providing a mechanism, through which the people's will,(those participating)became relevant and tangible..

    I'm torn….. as I've stood knee deep in shit with most of you…. I admire your convictions and ingenuity and determination. I share these thoughts, not out of attempting to attack…. but ideally to work towards solution….. <<< this is my truth….. and I'm articulating it here….. I'm hoping that my thoughts resonates with others, whether they do or not…. I've spoken my truth.

    So GA……… we've spoken about cause and effect….. what about solutions?? Does 'full spectrum activism' include pragmatic solutions.??

    • Reasonable people would assume that when reasonable groups have conflicts, the truth lies somewhere in the middle. but when an unreasonable groups has a conflict with a reasonable group the same logic cannot be applied, someone is very wrong and someone is very right.
      keep this in mind regarding the faction war in OM.

      People were talking about a spokes council long before it was ever implemented. It’s just only when some people talked about it they were listened to or rather imposed their agenda.
      A spokes council is abetter model because it recognizes and declared factions and affinity groups before the meeting rather than wondering who is on who’s side and who are the plants/shills.
      Pragmatic solutions?
      At this stage we are just waking people up, and until people are awake there will be nothing meaningful taking place.
      People wake up when they realize their money is fake and they know what their straw man is.
      Until then its all just spinning your wheels.

  8. One last thought…..

    At least my contributions to this page are posted….. whereas contributions I submitted to OM.org must have been vetted for no release….. as they never appeared on the OM.org page.

    Instead I recently saw a post titled something like ‘Our good friends from FACT’…. who not only individually condemned OM, but left some hard questions unanswered about individuals actions in the role they filed as OMFACT and way they acted during Occupation.

    Could go on…. but not really that interested in sitting around in a circle jerk….. picking at old scabs…. Just making a point about relevance and how those representing themselves as OM media, can do a disservice.

    Bit like the last larger waltz in my opinion… two steps to the left and three ti the right…..

    Where’s the forward momentum…??

    • I’m glad you raised those points.
      1) OM.org is completely close as a voice for occupiers. Its a small group who hijacked media assets for their own agenda.
      2) OMFACT leaving behind a murky history
      3) OM.org endorses the what evolved out of OMFACT ( containing the same problematic characters)

      So form this can you see OMFACT’s tactics being endorsed by OM.org, possibly yes.

      Deal with the past to deal with the present, and don’t make the same mistakes again

      we haven’t dealt with the past.

  9. Yes… spokes council model has been around, probably sincebefore Jesus got his sandles from the Occupy Jerusalem free shop…
    Who came up with it…. or whoscagenda it was to implement it etc…. to me is irrelevant.

    We both agree…. it’s an effective model…… and……. as opposed to the challenges noted in this thread,(about cause and effect)….. it presents itself as a pragmatic solution, a way of moving forward…… that doesn’t depend on having to wait until past business is dealt with……. because guess what….. we could effectively be waiting,(as you note,’unreasonable’ people) until the sun go’s super nova and still not see resolution occur.

    Anywaaaays, I posed the question and I’ve heard your replies.

    • …and unreasonable people keep creating division in the OM community, so until they are removed, people keep infighting, there is not enough trust, and nothing gets done. So back to square one, get rid of the ‘wreckers’ or they will wreck again.

  10. Is the OM community….. those who participate in OM, nowadays..?

    Is there a tangible OM community somewhere, at the moment..?

    • I guess I’m talking about people who are still interested in the main ideas, it’s somewhat splintered into factions now, but there is always a chance a a reformation once people get the right ideas.

  11. OM was predominantly a physical presence….. not a digital presence.

    Nowadays, as far as I can tell…. the OM digital presence and the unfolding conflict surrounding that…… has become what people identify OM as.

    And again as far as I can tell….. when it comes to a physical presence, the ‘dirty dozen’….. myself included……. engage in Occupy style actions……. yet don’t really promote it as OM actions… like OM free shop….. becoming FFS…..and yet 90% of those participating in it, were active OM participants….and the other 10% who weren’t, probably identifying with Occupy…

    Regardless….. Amongst the dirty dozen……. there isn’t imo the levels of strained relationships, (as was evident, when the group was larger)…. and those who have remained, as a disparate group still pursuing the aspirations of Occupy…. or just simply campaigning and engaging in actions that challenge failures to social/environmental justice and human rights…. or participate for collective organisation reasons etc…… have demonstrated a capacity to not be problematic and disruptive or inclined toward vested self promotion etc…

    Do you think the above description, accurately describes the physical presence of what for all intents is OM today..??

    • predominantly a physical presence?


      There were more people engaged in the digital/online sphere than ever arrived to the various occupation sites.

      The controversy surrounding the online/media resources, this controversy still exists because the media assets were stolen by an undemocratic, unaccountable group of people who continue to dodge any questions about their illegitimate control of those assets.

      People who have continued in the physical protest space since occupy:
      Dirty dozen if you wish to call it that, met from occupy, dozen is a fair estimate of the number this would mean that dozen are literately the last 1% of occupy, meaning conversely that 99% of occupiers don’t support those actions. This is not to say that they aren’t good causes, because they are (primarily Manning and Assange situation).

      more to come…

    • the free shop was never renamed FFS, someone just made a Facebook group called FFS and unilaterally claimed ‘ownership’ of it. Once again some decided to make them selves leader without anyone else’s consent. Typical for occupy, typical for facbook. incompetent Dictators abound.
      The dirty dozen, i think out of any group of over 1000 people i could select 12 people to do political/protest actions with. no self promotion? are you sure about that? It does seem to be morphing towards supporting politics particularly Wiki leaks party.

  12. Your right…. dozen was over stating it slightly…. probably 5 would be more accurate. Nonetheless, the online media resonates you mention… have had answers provided.. fairly clearly through numerous threads, on various OM pages.

    The answers weren’t liked….. and the answers only did those who provided them…. a disservice.
    Admitting to not being bound by OM decisions, nor there being any need for them to be transparent, accountable or relevant…. seems to smell like the same old same old main stream media..

    You’ve started your own space that relays your perspective of what Occupy Melbourne is….or isn’t….. bit like The Age and The Herald Sun….. relaying content in a way that targets or is the preferred way of digesting content, for different peeps.

    Still at the end of the day….. For me…… and I still identify as an Omer……the energy invested into the back and forth Coke vs Pepsi thing… Hasn’t really been something that I think has demonstrated progressive solutions or as we articulated in OM, being the best we could be, being an example to inspire others….

    Instead the opposite in my opinion has occurred… TOXICITY and as opposed to achieving resolution, has become problematic. Which discourages people from participating in something that is amongst the viable solutions to the challenges we the 99% collectively face, including the closed loop of remaining divided and conquered.

    And if I….. as an omer, who’s never once said I’m not… or its dead… or….l as a brother….. can’t table these thoughts, without being dismissed, then there’s something fundamentally wrong.

    • The importance of the online media for occupy in general and for the Melbourne incarnation specifically cannot be stressed enough. People still look here for issues of relevance socially and politically.
      Occupy was always factional in nature and each faction having a voice is important, and each faction has the right to criticize other factions based on the facts. Without criticism we never arrive at any improvement. Any real change in the world starts and being not content at the current situation.

      So the faction we claim stole the media resources of OM and effectively shut everyone else out of, we strongly criticize them, because they have acted in direct opposition to the principles that occupy stood for.
      Accountability? .org none
      Open? .org no
      Transparent? .org nope.

      I think people quite rightly feel that the .org and Facebook based media resources (of OM) are a closed group pushing their own agenda largely in secret.
      That aspect greatly reflects people concerns about many parts of the main stream media and government/corporate circles of power.
      So by following the same model they have become the same thing, the thing which has not helped us.
      This is not to outright attack the mainstream media, there are some really great stories (from the MSM) that are sadly not given he prominence they deserve, we do push them occasionally, they certainly followed one of our stories.

      Yes we started our own space, more or less from the ruins of OM, an abandoned URL, disillusioned former occupiers, and an audience that wanted the so many alternative voices that were shut down, to finally be heard.
      We allowed ideas that were blocked previously, and we encourage debate from people who want to debate (not people who want to just troll or waste time) the issues raised.
      Occasionally we will allow a troll comment through and then challenge them for a real discussion, only to show everyone they really have no argument.
      We invited activists to be authors of this site, rather than politically motivated opportunists. Many were still too obsessed about Facebook in general, or more specifically the OM Facebook pages to show an interest. certainly we offered activists a voice here some have not chosen to speak or don’t agree with the views expressed here.

      Coke vs Pepsi,
      Well we consider them both dirty words here, if you are talking about the duopoly nature of ‘.net’ vs ‘.org’ i feel i have explained the reason for it. If I could have a voice in ‘.org’ i would not have gone to this trouble. Certain ideas are simply censored there, ask your self why that is.
      If an idea has little of no merit, it would be easily defeated in a debate. If an idea has great merit it would be very difficult to defeat in a debate.
      So censorship allows poor idea to be unchallenged, and great ideas to be silenced.
      The world we live in is based on a series of enormous lies, and we must each uncover them for ourselves and point others in the right direction.

      there will always be toxicity when there is a cancer. We see ‘.org’ and the OM facebook groups largely as a cancer, opposing and subverting the cause rather than helping it.
      As to the term ‘progressive’ you should look into its origins in a political context, and see where is is attempting to progress you to.
      I think you will find ‘progressive’ means the opposite of freedom ultimately.

      Those who declared publicly that OM was dead were largely attempting to bury the body while it was still alive to deny any wrong doing in its demise. What made it so obvious were most who did so were not serious occupiers, many of which just tinkered at the fringe subtly to steer it in a the direction that suited them. Some even used their brief involvement to further their careers. Parasitic- like a cancer.

      Rather than a game of divide and conquer, its a game of find the truth for yourself, be you own leader, make up you own mind. Find like minded individuals and get out there are do what you need to do to enlighten others.

  13. I made myself incompetent dictator of the Bentleigh Free Shop page, because if I hadn’t done so, someone else would have. That is the sad truth :you have to go into damage control mode, when you have no inclination to do so. Like people claiming they started the Free Shop when they didn’t, because the people who did start it didn’t think it important to bring it up initially. And then, when I did rectify the information, people claimed it wasn’t important who started it.. But that is not true at all, that is a bullshit hippy-trippy lie. History is written by people who claim credit. The Free Shop history is part of OM history and it may well one day be quite important, even if it isn’t so now.

    In my opinion OM digital presence is important because at this stage it is largely the idea that counts. The idea that there is a worldwide movement against the greed of the 1% and the idea that occupation is a now an established form of protest, like what we are seeing in Tecoma now.

    While it made sense to have a city occupation initially, in front of the major banks in the city, anit-corporate takeover protest is valid anywhere people want to assemble. Especially in Australia,where we didn’t have major bank bailouts like in the US, but everyone is affected by big corporations , mining companies, outsourcing etc..

    • I agree.
      No matter what you do in activism there are always people wanting to claim credit and hijack the media presence of it.
      So you have to strongly protect your media presence.
      Facebook has allowed provocateurs a platform to claim credit for the efforts of real activists and just subvert the real cause.
      Another reason to not use Facebook.
      Just to clarify: there were some small bank bailouts (in Australia and other places) that were kept very quiet however, not on the scale of the US bailouts, but they did happen.
      The EU is in the process of ‘bail ins’, the banking haircuts Cyprus was first, the PIGS economies are probably next.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: