Hi Alex: Yes I have been following the actions of the movement, particularly through the Commondreams website, since mainstream media didn't report much in the beginning.
As to answers to your questions - probably too soon to know.
Some articles that you might find interesting.

Published on Friday, September 30, 2011 by In These Times
Labor Movement Rolls Into Wall Street Occupation
by Michelle Chen
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2011/09/30-7

Published on Friday, September 30, 2011 by TruthDig.com
#OccupyTogether: The Best Among Us
by Chris Hedges
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2011/09/30-0

I really like the Chris Hodges article. 

It reminds more of of Keith Olbermann call for people to turn to the streets to fight the system, after the US budget deal, which he says like the whole political sytem is based on lies and hypocrisy.

"“Where is the outrage to come from?” Olbermann asked.

“From you,” he answered, not skipping a beat.  Olbermann then urged the audience that they “must find again the energy and the purpose of the 1960‘s and early 1970’s and we must protest this deal and all the goddamn deals to come, in the streets.”

The Current host, who believes “our government has now given up the concept of right and wrong,“ stated that those who defend the debt deal have ”called it a credit to a pragmatic president who wins some sort of political ‘points’ because, having stood for almost nothing here, he gave away almost nothing for which he stood.”

Here is a livestream of the protest today. Which according to most sources on twitter is continuing to grow,

http://www.livestream.com/globalrevolution

Interesting address by Keith Olbermann - he calls a spade a spade.

Think the movement is gaining great momentum through facebook and twitter now that people are more comfortable participating.

I live in the USA.  Keith Olberman is the most gifted and articulate TV political commentator on USA news.  But his reputation as an extremist  shill for the Democrats undermines his impact.  Even the far left cable news network MSNBC booted him from their airwaves because he is so over the top.  Meanwhile MSNBC's ratings are plummeting, and the beneficiary is CNN, currently my favorite news network.  But neither CNN nor  MSNBC can light a candle to the high ratings consistently earned by Fox News, the most politically conservative network.  Fox is thus a major reason why the Republicans may regain the presidency next election. 

I tell people here that, in my view, Canada's 2 major advantages over the USA are (1) universal health care that allows more compassion for the poor; (2) the presence in Canada of a viable 3rd party, the NDP.  Though the NDP has never won a federal election, it is responsible directly or indirectly for some  of the most humane legislation in Canadian political history.  When I was young, I had little use for Tommy Douglas.  Now he is the politician I most respect from my lifetime.  Both USA parties are bad for the poor.  My political priorities have changed during my stay in eastern Washington in a region that both extremely beautiful and full of the poor and the homeless.  When I visit my family in Kelowna, BC, it is painful to look at the wonderful apartment complex there built for the homeless at the behest of the NDP provincial government.  I have little hope that such compassion can soon become part of American political sensibilities.  Nor do I expect that the amazing Wall Street protest  movement will be the catalyst for significant change. 

We're in full agreement on al points. If the Wall Street protest creates any change, it will almost certainly be one of even more and more brutal police powers. .

Nobody Can Predict The Moment Of Revolution ( Occupy Wall Street )

i have been following it through the many american friends i have on facebook... it is just a fascinating thing to watch play out.

the police brutality is quite stark.  the images of people being corralled and pepper sprayed just makes me shake my head.

There is no point attacking bankers, no matter how vile they are.

They need to get their Congress to pass some laws to regulate banking in the US, which both Dems and Republicans have been very slack about.   In fact, they have steadily de-regulated.

Greedy people will always exist.   That is why the US needs regulation, not populist protests, however much they may temporarily make someone feel better.   

Unfortunately I can't listen to the videos, my sound doesn't work.

I think the hope is that populist protests will draw enough attention to lead to banking regulation. If everyone sat at home and pined about it, what hope would there be?

I just wanted to point out where the real problem was.  Too many people think "greedy bankers."   But there have been, are and always will be people like this.   But regulated capitalism can work.

They would be better off protesting in Washington to Congress directly, is my point.

I think this might be more effective actually, because it's taking place right were Americans feel their money has been taken and manipulated and squandered--even if it is the government that has not put enough checks and balances on this--the bankers know full well they are in the government's favour, and the American people are upset about it.. Protesting to congress/ at the whitehouse would likely just be looked at the same old thing that doesn't get nearly as much attention anymore.

the occupy wall street demo has spawned demonstrations across the US , Including DC.

Tale a look at this map. from http://www.occupytogether.org/

http://www.livestream.com/globalrevolution has a live stream of a near  riot on  the Brooklyn Bridge caused by police arresting demonstrators. It seems the police are in shook that the demonstrators have not backed down after the arrests, and that the demo continues.

Not much in the mid-west, huh?

15.00 people are at the protest now

. the live stream is fascinating.

however it seems the video feed of the livestream can not handle the million unique viewers the site says is watching online at http://www.livestream.com/globalrevolution and it keeps breaking up.

You don't understand, EO. congress and Obama are owned by Wall St. Obama has just raised the biggest campaign funding in american history. That didn't come from widows and orphans. It came from Wall St.  (Republican money tends to be more oriented to oil.)

As you say, capitalism can be regulated to work properly. The trouble is capitalists don't want regulations - and they are the real government.

Anonymous is promising to shut down Wall Street on October the 10th in support of the Occupy Wall Street protest. Using denial of Service attacks they plan to shut down the New York Stock Exchange computers for one.

This is anonymous biggest action yet, if they succeed they will grow, if they fail, it will mean they will be seen as irrelevant. However so far, they have been key in getting the Occupy Wall Street growing during the first two weeks.

Here is their Youtube statement for those who have not seen it.

A posting on Anonnews.org said it was almost impossible to verify the operation because of the nature of Anonymous as an organization “free of hierarchical structure.”

The potential attack on NYSE “may or may not be a false flag operation initiated by authorities in order to discredit Anonymous and Occupy Wall Street,” the post said.

I must say, I was expecting more from Obama.   He is acting like a Republican!

There is no, essential difference between the two parties. That's why I said - before Obama was elected - that he was going to be a disaster.

There were differences in the past.  Franklin Roosevelt was different from Herbert Hoover.

It is interesting how the negative connotation of words reveals how the utility of politics gets crippled.  Few Iiberals can tolerate the "liberal" label.  The term "progressive" is still fresh enough to have significant staying power.  Similarly, most theological conservatives wince at the label "fundamentalist."  Another political kiss of death is the label "socialist."  There is a healthy socialism and a socialism run amuck.  But in my view, the American political malaise will be ripe for healing only when the term "socialis"' is no longer a dirty word

I'm afraid it is nowhere close to healing.

Alex writes:

"This demo is ...  becoming one of the largest in the US history, ( even if ignored by the media which is controlled by big business)."

Now that it's not being ignored, I guess that means either the media is no longer controlled by big business or the reason it was initially ignored had nothing to do with a conspiracy by big business to suppress news about the demo and, perhaps, more to do with a small demo by marginal activists wasn't worth reporting.

Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against people expressing their frustrations through a demonstration. But I don't see any reason to consider the Occupy Wall St movement significant. It's certainly not the largest in U.S. history - not even close - and it seems to be without goals.

Just wait it is not over yet. I said it is becoming one of the largest.  It was only ignored for for the first 2 weeks. than it became to large to ignore.

What did you think of the similar ongoing protests in Israel. Which became the largest in it's country after a month?

Alex,

The protests in Israel were about high taxes, high prices, and most especially the lack of affordable housing, especially in Tel Aviv and Jerusalem.
 

Anger was also fueled by various kinds of unfairness in Israeli society; for example,. that the gains of Israel's on-going economic boom seem to go mainly to the few, while daily life remains an economic grind for most.

I expect that because of the protests, the Israeli government will make some movement to relieve the acute housing shortage. The other issues, though, are far tougher to actually do anything about. The government did appoint a panel to advise them.  Perhaps it will come up with some concrete suggestions that can be acted on.

I'd suggest the main reasons the protest grew so large was that it remained non-partisan (it was neither pro-Likud nor pro-Labour, nor in support of any other party) and did not articulate clear demands; hence there was nothing to disagree with and became simply an expression of frustration - of which there's plenty in Israeli society.

But this was also its weakness; a protest without demands cannot create a new agenda.

Compare this to the Peace Now protests of an earlier age, which were nearly as large and sustained over a long period. Peace Now's demands that the Israeli government pursue peace more vigorously and deal with the PLO has become the norm of Israeli politics. Even the Likud now recognizes the right and the desirability of the Palestinians having their own state.

Indeed, this is one reason Peace Now has become irrelevant - it's success made it redundant. Of course, Peace Now also assumed that if Israel pursued peace, the Palestinians would respond in kind.

Unfortunately, when Israel offered the Palestinians Gaza, the West Bank and east Jerusalem, Arafat responded with a terrorist war. And that was the end of Peace Now as a broadly supported movement. Not of course the end of support for peace, just the end of naivete about the Palestinian leaders embodied in the Peace Now ethos.

Do you see the similarities in the demonstrations in Israel and Wall Street.  Both are about Social Justice, and the struggle that people go through when society is structured unfairly, towards the advantage of a few.

Both attack the political establishments of all parties, pushed on by the economic crisis, and similarities with protests in Arab countries, is why I see the Wall Street growing into the largest

I'd be very reluctant to predict where this is going. we have not seen a protest against American capitalism like this since the depression.

we may be watching the beginning of of a terminal decline in the nature of american society. the news media kept quiet because they hoped it would die away. Even now, they report it as little as possible. The government is now worried. that's obvious.

It doesn't matter whether they have an agenda. what has happened is a boiling up of rage and the greed, gluttony, and failure of American capitalism. You can argue all you like about whether it's right or wrong. The only reality is that it is happening.

And anyone who says he knows where this is going is a fool.

Too bad about all those Israeli settlers beating up Palestinians and torching their mosques.

Alex,

I think the differences are larger than the similarities. First, obviously, Arab countries have been experiencing revolution and civil war (not protest) and with the clear intent of overthrowing dictators.

Israel is  a democracy, not a dictatorship, and the protests weren't about driving the government from power or about changing the political system. They were about people being fed up.

I'm not sure that we can even say that much yet about the American protests. I'd suggest that to the extent that they're about a fundamental change to the political system, that's the extent to which the protests are a marginal affair - the voice of middle class anarchists who think political activism is cool.

whatis this letter relevant to?

How about those "settlers' beating up and killing Palestinian Isaelis, and torching their mosques in recent days?

Understand this David, I live most of my life in Jewish circles. I found there the love of learning and love of family that I found weak in Christian society.

I have two problems with Israeli policy.

1. It will destroy Israel and, quitie likely, much of the region.

2. It has destroyed the Judaism of love that II knew.

i see three similarities.

1) I believe all the demonstrations have been triggered by the economic crisis, which has revealed to a varying degree gross unfairness, in that it is regular people who have to pay the price, not the rich and powerful , who have paid no price, and are largely responsible for the collapse.

2) All the demonstrations are being lead by young people, in a non hierarchical system with broad based demands.

3) The demonstrations are not the typical one day demos. The demonstrations are taking over public spaces, for days, weeks, and months. People are occupying these spaces until they get action.

The first collective statement of #OccupyWallStreet, Read by Keith Obermann.

Alex:

1. I don't think the U.S. is experiencing an economic crisis; I think it's just a recession, followed by a slow recovery - this has happened before.

Israel hasn't experienced an economic crisis; quite the opposite.

Iran and the Arab countries haven't experience an economic crisis either; but a slow economic deterioration, stemming from a growing population and a corrupt economic system based exclusively on oil.

I do agree that the protests in Israel and the U.S. are fuelled by anger at perceived and actual  unfairness.  However, the degree of "unfairness" involved can't be compared to what's happened in Iran and the Arab states.

In Iran, the penalty for protesting against the regime is usually imprisonment, torture and rape (for both males and females) or death at the hands of the regime's thugs.

Today, in Syria, where the revolution continues, and during the revolution in Libya, the regimes used ruthless military force against civilians.

Nothing like remotely this has - or will - happen in the U.S. or Israel.

2. Led by young people: Well, most demonstrations are.

"Non-hierarchical," again, I'll mostly agree with this. Except, where actual civil wars have developed as in Libya and (apparently) Syria.  Successful wars need leaders.

3. "Occupying spaces till they get action." Yes, in Egypt. No in Iran, Libya, Syria, Israel - and I'll bet you dollars to donuts, no also in the U.S.

So, again, I'll say I don't see significant similarities, and I can't imagine why there would be. Israel is far more similar to the U.S. than either the U.S. or Israel is to Egypt, for example. But even Israel and the U.S. are very different societies, with different political cultures, different political systems and different problems.

I understand why the media makes these comparisons: an item about the protest in Israel can hitch a ride on pre-existing interest in the Arab spring and thereby catch the interest of more readers.

But, Alex,  I'm not sure why you're interested in drawing comparisons. Even supposing there are significant similarities, so what? I'm not being sarcastic; I just don't get your enthusiasm for drawing these comparisons. 

Indeed, I'll even add a point of similarity myself: in the U.S., they're modelling themselves on the Arab spring and on the Israeli protest. But the U.S. isn't Israel and isn't Egypt, so basing a protest on such imported models probably isn't good strategy.

 I think people in the US are having a protest simply because they're fed up and feel they have no control over government decisions, and big finance decisions and schemes made at their expense...and whether or not they call it some kind of "spring" is just an irrelevant talking point. The point is the protests are happening. I personally hope positive changes come out of this, however incrimental, and not the negative scary ones the Graeme is suggesting, although I am aware it is possible. I think if it really errupts into anything horrible, the protests will stop, but the sentiment won't. I think at least one new political party will spring (pardon the pun) up from this. A major difference between US and Egypt, and Libya or anywhere else where a dictatorship is or has been ousted, is that democratically structured elections are due to take place next year, so it is fertile ground for new politicians to emerge.

I just assume with the rise of Internet access, and the rise of these protests, shows that reformers are drawing encouragement from one another, and that they add fuel to the fire in other countries.  Thus the success of reformers in totalitarian states, inspires those, who face less oppression to follow their example, and not to stop political actions like occupations, until they have won serious concessions to their demands.

With transnational corporations controlling mainstream media, they have been able to frame the debate. However now that the economic and political debate has been taken partially out of the hands of transnational corporations, and onto the net we are facing a change with how the whole world deals with political, and political action.

How do you think Spain, and Greece fit into this?

Dream on , Brian. There ain't no real recession. 50 million are living on foodstamps. At a recent meeting of CEOs, all announced staff cuts coming. The only reason it's called a recession is because the very big corporations are still making money - largely off the taxpayers. The US is in depression. And I have seen no authority saying it's going to get better in the foreseeable future.

But live on in your dreamworld. It's people like you who are destroying Israel.

The cutest video ever. I was laughing and crying with happy tears.

"How do you think Spain, and Greece fit into this?"

They don't. Their governments have simply been spending far more than they take in for a long time. Now they're broke and need to make drastic cuts or no one will bail them out (esp Greece).

When Greece defaults, this will negatively affect the world economy and worsening economic times may make for more street protests - so there could be a connection there.

People like Gaeme will be overjoyed to see increased misery. Who knows, possibly there could be a depression, and then he'll be really happy. But of course the majority of people on the left, who remain decent human beings, don't rejoice at the prospect of worsening economic times - even if that will increase street protest.

Kimmio,

I think your comments are spot on, and I certainly hope that positive changes come out of this.

But I don't expect to see a new political party. In the States, change occurs from within the party structure. The Civil Rights movement, for example, didn't require a new party; political change was effected when the Democrats took up the Civil Rights cause.

Also, I don't expect to see much change at all, as it's doubtful the protesters have much support within the broader public (though I'd be happy to be proven wrong on this).

What rights?. blacks ares still disproportionately poor, and convicts. A few have been allowed into the better schools and into politics. But those are only the ones who have money, and who have adopted the policies of their white masters.

Virtually no change occurs within part structure in the US. Both parties are owned by the same people.

So you are an American. Who else could have such a naive view of american politics.

Graeme writes:

"A few [blacks]have been allowed .. into politics. But those are only the ones who ... have adopted the policies of their white masters."

What racist crap is this?

If a black man becomes president, secretary of state, chief of staff, supreme court judge, etc, Graeme accuses him or her of toadying up to his white masters.

Maybe they're just good at what they do, Graeme. This may come as a news flash to you, but black people can be talented.

They're also capable of developing their own ideas, their own politics, etc.  Only a racist pretends the success of a black man or woman proves his servility to "their white masters."

I am simply amazed. You're an antisemite, a racist, a dyed in the wool American-hater, an Israeli-hater.  What happened to make you so twisted?

Zionist bigots.

Graeme,

You answer that your anger and hatred come from "Zionist bigots." 

Has it occurred to you that there are Zionists who aren't bigots?

 A Zionist is simply someone who supports the right of the Jewish people to their own state, just like the Swiss or the Japanese or the Palestinians for that matter.

And like Switzerland and Japan, Israel already exists. For reasonable people the argument over Zionism is long over. These days, saying "I'm a Zionist," is like saying "I'm a suffragette." Because, really, who doesn't support votes for women, who doesn't support Israel's right to exist?

Answer: Only bigots and nutters on the far fringes of the political spectrum.

I'm speaking about within Canada, of course. Certainly there are places in the world where women don't get to to vote. (Indeed, in many places, no one gets to vote). And in many places, even if the women do vote, they're second class citizens.

In many of these same places, Israel's right to exist is also denied, and antisemitism is common. 

I don't think it's an accident that one kind of bigotry often pops up alongside another. Sartre pointed out that one of the pleasures of being an antisemite is that you get to feel superior to someone else without the need to do anything yourself.

The same is true of all kinds of bigotry. A dirt poor alcoholic racist can congratulate himself that he's still superior to a black man. Likely, the same racist also considers himself superior to any woman.

But I wander off topic. The point is, Graeme. You don't have to let yourself be consumed by hatred. It's true the world is not a pretty place, but there's no need to make it uglier. Think about it: with all your raging, who do you really harm except yourself?

Keep writing, Brian. It's important that people really get a look the pig-headedness, bigotry and hatred that characterize some who hide behind noble-sounding causes.

Churches need to understand that bigotry and hatred is an easy sell. Understanding is not.

You are a useful reminder of what we are dealing with.

Write lots more.  You're probably quite sincere, too. So, I am told, was Hitler.

Graeme

Exactly what have these "Zionist bigots" done to you?   

Or Americans for that matter?

Why would you let a political matter in which you have no stake make you bitter?   I can understand you might be bitter about the business in Quebec and Bill 101--that affected you life.

All one needs to remember is that Brian, if this were a generation ago, would be hating Jews.

Prejudice doesn't have to make sense, it just needs a cold, diseased place to grow.

zionists have destroyed the Jewish community in which I spent most of my life.

Now. Please give me an example of any anti-semitic statement I have made. This is Brian's claim, and you have made it yours. So either give us evidence, or back off.

Back to the original post, if possible. I have been following the spread of the protest movement with  some interest. A friend and colleague (who I would say actually has a somewhat conservative bent politically) described it as a mass reaction to "the socialization of debt and the privatization of profit." In other words, the small number of rich are profiting excessively, while the poor (gaining little benefit from the profit) are expected to pay most of the cost. Essentially a Marxist analysis, which I was surprised considering what I know about who it was who shared the comment.

Graeme writes: "zionists have destroyed the Jewish community in which I spent most of my life."

This theme of the Jewish community being debased is a constant with graeme. It's rmarkable he can write things like this and in the same post ask how anyone can consider him antisemitic.

What a fool.