Sent time:   Tuesday, September 27, 2011 7:19:24 PM
Subject:   Re: Re: Re: [september17discuss] confusion about demand

 We could have both
On 09/27/11, Gabriel Johnson<> wrote:
And also relentlessly mockable, and will be treated as meaningless by most people on the street, even those otherwise supportive. Even if we all disagree on the eventual political solutions to the problems, I feel as if we need a few specific, immediate demands for what the government or some sort of entity could (won't, but if they really wanted to could) do tomorrow.


On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 7:43 PM, <> wrote:
 I agree--Something like  "We Demand that the People take control of their Government."  or  "We Demand that  the 99% take control from the Corporations."  or "We Demand that the 99% Take to the Streets, and Take Control from Global Banks."  or some combination of this.
Making a demand directly to the people and ignoring the government  and wall st would be a surprise and put the responsibility where it ultimately lies.
On 09/27/11, Justine<> wrote:
I demand the one demand be what we've been talking about recently where we basically ask the 99% to organize.

On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 11:19 AM, Jon Good <> wrote:
We're working as fast as we can.  I'm trying to get consensus on letting the media know we are going to have a statement on Friday. I hope the GA can agree exactly what kind of statement(s) this is going to be (a slogan, a list of demands, a manifesto, etc.) at tonight's meeting.


On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 11:09 AM, Micah White <> wrote:
FYI, seems there is a lot of media confusion about the demands.  Many media are pointing to this article as the official list of demands:

For example, see this Guardian piece: