General Discussion

hack89

(39,181 posts)

245. Because you say so. Got it. nt

Reply to girl gone mad (Reply #242)

Tue Jan 17, 2012, 03:13 PM

Jan 2012

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

260 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Single dad trying to take back home occupied by OWS [View all] hack89 Jan 2012 OP

I agree Broderick Jan 2012 #1

Agree! "This is pretty fucked up." RKP5637 Jan 2012 #2

Who To Believe? cantbeserious Jan 2012 #3

Is there another side to the story you can present? nt hack89 Jan 2012 #4

Good question Broderick Jan 2012 #5

Sure Aerows Jan 2012 #30

If you need time to find some actual facts, just say so. nt hack89 Jan 2012 #32

YOU posted it Aerows Jan 2012 #41

I just ran the article on the google nadinbrzezinski Jan 2012 #59

So you are categorically saying the story is false? hack89 Jan 2012 #62

No actually what I did is dig deep nadinbrzezinski Jan 2012 #65

And I will have to simply take your word for it? Don't think so. nt hack89 Jan 2012 #137

Why not? jberryhill Jan 2012 #145

Nadine is arguing secret knowledge she appears to be reluctant to share hack89 Jan 2012 #148

You are asking me about someone else's behavior? jberryhill Jan 2012 #157

Cerridwen has document that BoA bought his mortgage the year before he started foreclosure. nt hack89 Jan 2012 #179

Cerridwen has a document that alliance mortgage bought Cerridwen Jan 2012 #183

Don't take mine nadinbrzezinski Jan 2012 #161

Cerridwen confirmed what BoA said - they hold his mortgage. hack89 Jan 2012 #176

Hence, let's connect dots here very slowly, LEGALLY this guy nadinbrzezinski Jan 2012 #177

But we are talking about a small 2nd mortgage. Lets talk about the large first mortgage. hack89 Jan 2012 #194

As I said, bye nadinbrzezinski Jan 2012 #196

So now the mortgage is not important? Got it. nt hack89 Jan 2012 #198

What part of he does not own title or have claim nadinbrzezinski Jan 2012 #201

Not according to the official records hack89 Jan 2012 #202

and public records say otherwise nadinbrzezinski Jan 2012 #203

I linked to the 2 public records that Cerridwen conveniently overlooked. hack89 Jan 2012 #204

alliance purchased it in October of 2008. Cerridwen Jan 2012 #185

I notice you are not talking about the 1st mortgage for $339,000. Why is that? nt hack89 Jan 2012 #190

He purchased the property for $440,000.. girl gone mad Jan 2012 #238

OWS is right - once someone is fucked by the big banks they simply need to accept their fate. hack89 Jan 2012 #239

How was he fucked by the big banks? girl gone mad Jan 2012 #241

So OWS made a hard-nosed, pragmatic decision that the guy did not deserve his house back? hack89 Jan 2012 #244

They will be damned if they do and damned if they don't, in your eyes. girl gone mad Jan 2012 #246

He appears to be the legal owner of the house - that counts for nothing in OWS eyes? nt hack89 Jan 2012 #248

If Ahadzi is the legal owner of the house, he will not be for long. girl gone mad Jan 2012 #250

OWS is lousy with tactics. randome Jan 2012 #251

So OWS only fights for certain types of people? How do you get on their list? hack89 Jan 2012 #252

LMFO... but you'll take the word of the NY Post... SomethingFishy Jan 2012 #174

"But word of advise" - you meant "But word of advice" (You got good editors right?) snooper2 Jan 2012 #243

This is why movements need leaders. Joe the Revelator Jan 2012 #6

I knew who posted this before I even opened it Aerows Jan 2012 #7

So you support what OWS did to this man? hack89 Jan 2012 #8

It's not a smear Aerows Jan 2012 #22

I think OWS is pissing away the opportunity of a lifetime hack89 Jan 2012 #29

So you post stuff from a right wing site to convince democrats? Aerows Jan 2012 #33

Feel free to post some actual facts anytime now. You are starting to flail a little. nt hack89 Jan 2012 #40

LOL Aerows Jan 2012 #42

Seriously, do you have any facts to back up your view that this isn't fucked up by OWS? Joe the Revelator Jan 2012 #63

Yes, there are facts within the story itself jberryhill Jan 2012 #70

It doesn't tell the whole story Aerows Jan 2012 #74

The key tip-off is in the story itself jberryhill Jan 2012 #78

Yep Aerows Jan 2012 #93

The key tip-off for me is the venue (NY Post), a Murdoch coalition_unwilling Jan 2012 #113

Hmm....thanks for the heads-up. AverageJoe90 Jan 2012 #120

fact have been posted by several people here nadinbrzezinski Jan 2012 #75

I don't think anyone has facts based upon Aerows Jan 2012 #77

If you think that's what OWS should be doing, you don't understand OWS. Zhade Jan 2012 #58

So should OWS actively oppose the reelection of President Obama? hack89 Jan 2012 #60

Show me evidence they are doing that. nadinbrzezinski Jan 2012 #79

Look at the post I am replying to. Obama is part of that corrupt system is he not? nt hack89 Jan 2012 #101

It's FAR bigger than Obama Aerows Jan 2012 #109

I know you really are having a problem with this non partisan shit nadinbrzezinski Jan 2012 #114

We have a problem because that "non partisan shit" is just shit. TheWraith Jan 2012 #116

It's not "shit" Aerows Jan 2012 #118

I can certainly understand why partisans (on both sides) may feel this way nadinbrzezinski Jan 2012 #129

So you support the idea of OWS as "a direct challenge" to the Obama presidency? hack89 Jan 2012 #154

They are challenging the system... it is much bigger than Obama nadinbrzezinski Jan 2012 #159

So when push comes to shove in a close election, we can count on OWS to help? nt hack89 Jan 2012 #163

You can count on INDIVIDUALS nadinbrzezinski Jan 2012 #169

Kind of ironic that you would make such a statement on MLK day. girl gone mad Jan 2012 #215

You would have to admit that that your argument heavily relies on sharing TheKentuckian Jan 2012 #253

So they are useless to those of us working to get President Obama reelected. nt hack89 Jan 2012 #132

Actually they are not useless nadinbrzezinski Jan 2012 #160

But they will never actively oppose us? nt hack89 Jan 2012 #164

They will oppose you in the same extend they will oppose Romney nadinbrzezinski Jan 2012 #170

So they will never Mic Check Obama. Good - so they are sort of partisan. nt hack89 Jan 2012 #175

You are late to that party nadinbrzezinski Jan 2012 #178

It's not a relevant question Aerows Jan 2012 #81

So those of those who are partisan Democrats - what does OWS mean to us? hack89 Jan 2012 #104

Not as members of OWS Aerows Jan 2012 #107

OWS will help simply by spreading a pro-99% message. joshcryer Jan 2012 #110

exactly Aerows Jan 2012 #122

Well... Thanks For Being Blunt... But If The Democratic Candidates/Party Want The Support Of OWS... WillyT Jan 2012 #123

This was done by an off-shoot group BumRushDaShow Jan 2012 #25

And it's the NY Post Aerows Jan 2012 #27

Well yeah, the New Yawk Boast BumRushDaShow Jan 2012 #34

I'm not anti-OWS at all. I think it's important we know stuff like the OP riderinthestorm Jan 2012 #10

It's a Murdoch publication Aerows Jan 2012 #26

Reading the rest of the thread has certainly provided a lot more to mull over. You're right. riderinthestorm Jan 2012 #52

Agreed Aerows Jan 2012 #84

OWS made a mistake. Own it, stop it, prevent future such incidents, but don't piss on all of OWS!!! Zalatix Jan 2012 #9

+1 (nt) rbnyc Jan 2012 #49

New York Post is a Murdoch rag... Spazito Jan 2012 #11

So the owner is lying about OWS? OWS can do no wrong? hack89 Jan 2012 #13

I did a search to see if this story could be found on any other news website... Spazito Jan 2012 #17

I am willing to wait until you have some actual facts. Take all the time you need. nt hack89 Jan 2012 #20

So, in other words... Spazito Jan 2012 #36

Um, no Aerows Jan 2012 #37

You cannot prove a negative obamanut2012 Jan 2012 #106

You will simply find another reason to not accept it - it is a clear pattern on OWS threads. nt hack89 Jan 2012 #131

Why don't you wait until you have a non scandal rag source? RedCloud Jan 2012 #130

I also ran a search for "Wise Ahadzi" - every single link ultimately goes back to right-wing sources Hugabear Jan 2012 #188

Yes, I am not at all surprised... Spazito Jan 2012 #205

Actually, people have provided information that make the story very murky. Moreover, you don't tpsbmam Jan 2012 #68

I agree. Don't trust what they print. LiberalFighter Jan 2012 #15

Why did he move out? laundry_queen Jan 2012 #12

What do you think about the OWS theater involving the "homeless family" ? hack89 Jan 2012 #16

There's one aspect of this story that troubles me salvorhardin Jan 2012 #14

I am not sure OWS is actually using that "homeless" family. hack89 Jan 2012 #19

Wise Ahadzi in a bit of a mystery csziggy Jan 2012 #125

Apparently people are trespassing in a house the neither own or claim they own legally... Historic NY Jan 2012 #18

the only links I can find to this story are the post, freep, and another reichwing site niyad Jan 2012 #21

Which is why I question the motivations Aerows Jan 2012 #23

See this link - this is an off-shoot group BumRushDaShow Jan 2012 #28

And DU pintobean Jan 2012 #24

yes, quoting a reichwing site as its sole authority niyad Jan 2012 #54

"the only links I can find" pintobean Jan 2012 #57

But you still recced the post Aerows Jan 2012 #117

That's there for everyone to see. pintobean Jan 2012 #126

I like bringing it to people's attention Aerows Jan 2012 #171

And it's interesting to me pintobean Jan 2012 #208

Oh, I agree Aerows Jan 2012 #210

It doesn't matter to me pintobean Jan 2012 #212

LOL Aerows Jan 2012 #213

My self-righteous indignation? pintobean Jan 2012 #218

Okay Aerows Jan 2012 #226

It's the New York Post; What did you expect? Scootaloo Jan 2012 #31

fyi... from one month ago handmade34 Jan 2012 #35

Nice political theater hack89 Jan 2012 #38

Whatever makes you think that the homeless can't be activists? countryjake Jan 2012 #90

He was hand pick to say the right things hack89 Jan 2012 #105

Because the owner Aerows Jan 2012 #112

Reading comphrension is important hack89 Jan 2012 #133

And reading a reliable source is even more important Aerows Jan 2012 #168

Occupy is fighting financial institutions like Bank of America... countryjake Jan 2012 #119

Why is the "homeless family" not living in the house? nt hack89 Jan 2012 #138

Interesting. Three years after he abandoned Cerridwen Jan 2012 #39

"The spin also stinks. " Aerows Jan 2012 #44

Why do you think OWS didn't support him though? hack89 Jan 2012 #45

The whole NY Post article Aerows Jan 2012 #46

First, the idea that a political activist Cerridwen Jan 2012 #47

He may have. Perhaps he was desperate and felt he had no other options hack89 Jan 2012 #48

I agree. That could very well be a reason; Cerridwen Jan 2012 #50

I thing he is simply angry that OWS is refusing to fight for him and his rights. hack89 Jan 2012 #51

Hell, I can think of tons of answers for Cerridwen Jan 2012 #53

"refusing to fight for him" jberryhill Jan 2012 #72

"Bank of America ... confirmed to the Post that he is still the rightful owner." hack89 Jan 2012 #135

This message was self-deleted by its author jberryhill Jan 2012 #141

You missed a clear bullshit line in the story jberryhill Jan 2012 #76

Bank of America says he is the legal owner. hack89 Jan 2012 #136

Bank of America is not the county title office jberryhill Jan 2012 #139

Not sure, but is a bank always the title owner Broderick Jan 2012 #140

No jberryhill Jan 2012 #142

ok Broderick Jan 2012 #143

That simply shows the mortgage was sold to another mortgage company - happens all the time hack89 Jan 2012 #151

Again, I'll ask, was your name removed each time the mortgage Cerridwen Jan 2012 #187

Since no "ASSUMPTION OF MORTGAGE" document was generated, I suspect you are wrong about this. hack89 Jan 2012 #197

Where is the evidence that he sought support from OWS? girl gone mad Jan 2012 #216

Why do you think the "homeless family" is not living in the house? hack89 Jan 2012 #220

Let me guess: girl gone mad Jan 2012 #225

So you have nothing - that's ok, you are not the only one. nt hack89 Jan 2012 #230

I found this which i_sometimes Jan 2012 #43

The NY Post is Fucked Up otohara Jan 2012 #55

Trust but verify. Mistrust but also verify. pnorman Jan 2012 #56

Save you some... first page of search nadinbrzezinski Jan 2012 #61

This pretty well confirms it. Thanks! pnorman Jan 2012 #80

No it does not nadinbrzezinski Jan 2012 #82

I checked the public records. Cerridwen Jan 2012 #64

Good work nadinbrzezinski Jan 2012 #69

Fairly straight forward. Cerridwen Jan 2012 #71

thanks it will come handy in San Diego nadinbrzezinski Jan 2012 #73

You're welcome. Cerridwen Jan 2012 #86

Oh look! Facts! graywarrior Jan 2012 #83

. Cerridwen Jan 2012 #85

Agreed Aerows Jan 2012 #88

Thank you vedy much graywarrior Jan 2012 #95

Cool. Please remind people to tip Cerridwen Jan 2012 #96

Great idea! graywarrior Jan 2012 #99

Ewwww, ick. Cerridwen Jan 2012 #100

I just did graywarrior Jan 2012 #103

Er, no get. HughBeaumont Jan 2012 #186

Lucky you. Cerridwen Jan 2012 #191

Hack89 will studiously avoid your observation from an authoritative source jberryhill Jan 2012 #146

The one that documents a routine mortgage sale between mortgage companies? hack89 Jan 2012 #152

A source that shows that BoA owns his mortgage? hack89 Jan 2012 #166

Naw. He's just going to serve out so many one-liners I don't have time to keep up. Cerridwen Jan 2012 #193

You are the one who completely missed the 1st mortgage on the property or the deed. hack89 Jan 2012 #200

Two different documents - the second simply shows that the mortage was sold hack89 Jan 2012 #149

Was your name removed from the Cerridwen Jan 2012 #155

So you have documented a routine mortgage transfer hack89 Jan 2012 #153

I'm not sure why you replied to Cerridwen Jan 2012 #156

They are two seperate types of document hack89 Jan 2012 #158

Actually, the bank does buy the mortgage Cerridwen Jan 2012 #165

But you showed that BoA purchased the mortgage before they started forclosure. hack89 Jan 2012 #172

So which is it? The bank doesn't buy mortgages Cerridwen Jan 2012 #181

Technically, BoA purchased the rights to service the mortgage. hack89 Jan 2012 #192

BTW - guess who owns COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS, INC. nt hack89 Jan 2012 #162

Countrywide was taken over by BofA. Cerridwen Jan 2012 #167

So you just confirmed that he has a active mortgage held by BoA. Thanks. nt hack89 Jan 2012 #173

Nope...unless alliance banking corp is BofA. Cerridwen Jan 2012 #180

Shall we review the legal responsibilities of 2nd party mortgage servicers? hack89 Jan 2012 #189

So you're saying BofA owns the home and not Mr. Ahadzi? Cerridwen Jan 2012 #195

No - there was no transfer of title or deed. At least none that you can find. hack89 Jan 2012 #199

I found your mistake - you missed the 1st mortgage for $339,600.00 hack89 Jan 2012 #184

That looks like a run-of-the-mill assignment to me. Hosnon Jan 2012 #231

Lol! But, I think I'll give the benefit of doubt to Occupy, thank you. (nt) (nr) T S Justly Jan 2012 #66

There seem to be some apparent facts you are missing in the story jberryhill Jan 2012 #67

I'm waiting to see if you get an answer Aerows Jan 2012 #87

I have a lot of respect for hack89 jberryhill Jan 2012 #92

Understood Aerows Jan 2012 #94

My enemies I fight. My friends I criticize. jberryhill Jan 2012 #97

Well stated Aerows Jan 2012 #102

" I believe hack89 is an insightful critical thinker" greiner3 Jan 2012 #128

"enemy"? jberryhill Jan 2012 #144

You didn't ask me but... he wants a free house? joshcryer Jan 2012 #108

Many here think that people should simply accept it when the bank screws you out of your house. nt hack89 Jan 2012 #209

There's a group protesting this called "Occupy Occupy" Bucky Jan 2012 #89

LOL! randome Jan 2012 #121

There should have been additional info.. Wind Dancer Jan 2012 #91

Why are you using a Murdoch shit-rag as a source? Odin2005 Jan 2012 #98

Sorry but anything out of the Murdoch empire is suspect and Cleita Jan 2012 #111

Your irresponsibility in posting this yellow journalism smear of OWS is coalition_unwilling Jan 2012 #115

Before you start crying about this, find a non-biased source. baldguy Jan 2012 #124

You're probably right. ClassWarrior Jan 2012 #127

NY Post bullshit, of course...BRING BACK THE UNREC OPTION! nt joeybee12 Jan 2012 #134

Agreed. Murdoch lies don't belong on the greatest page of Democratic Underground. girl gone mad Jan 2012 #217

But he's a Single Dad! A SINGLE DAD!!!! That makes the lies OK. Gold Metal Flake Jan 2012 #147

Look at all the BOGers hopping on this made-up, Murdoch anti-OWS thread. Marr Jan 2012 #150

Right? SomethingFishy Jan 2012 #182

OK, one red flag Yo_Mama Jan 2012 #206

Or perhaps they wanted a compliant person that would not stray from the OWS message? hack89 Jan 2012 #207

Wow, the anti-OWS brigade has been putting in overtime lately. MNBrewer Jan 2012 #211

Not really - don't forget OWS is taking their winter hiatus. hack89 Jan 2012 #214

It has been anything BUT quiet. sabrina 1 Jan 2012 #228

So lots of small scale community activity? hack89 Jan 2012 #232

Lol, just wait. I guess you don't know what they are doing right now, speaking of largescale sabrina 1 Jan 2012 #235

it it's in the New York Post and Fox News it must be true!! Douglas Carpenter Jan 2012 #219

Well, no one seems to have any actual facts to the contrary. hack89 Jan 2012 #221

"emotional responses"? Douglas Carpenter Jan 2012 #222

Your OP was nothing but one long emotional diatribe against OWS.. girl gone mad Jan 2012 #229

Is that why OWS promptly provided a factual rebuttal? Oh wait... hack89 Jan 2012 #234

What's to rebut? girl gone mad Jan 2012 #237

So those direct quotes are lies? That BoA statement can't be rebutted? OK. nt hack89 Jan 2012 #240

The direct quotes are half-truths, at best. girl gone mad Jan 2012 #242

Because you say so. Got it. nt hack89 Jan 2012 #245

Or you can just believe whatever crap Murdoch tells you to believe. girl gone mad Jan 2012 #247

So I should believe the crap you make up instead? Don't think so. nt hack89 Jan 2012 #249

Idiots all around chrisa Jan 2012 #223

You are right - people should just give up when fucked by the banks. He needs to learn his place. hack89 Jan 2012 #233

We're pretty fucked up. We found out the problem. mmonk Jan 2012 #224

Yep, Rupert Murdoch owned media n/t Aerows Jan 2012 #236

Lol, Rupert Murdoch's NY Post strikes again. sabrina 1 Jan 2012 #227

Taking the story at face value, what is your concern? That OWS isn't a credit counciling/refi outfit TheKentuckian Jan 2012 #254

Because victims of the largest financial scam in American history deserve a second chance hack89 Jan 2012 #255

Okay, but what do you want them to do for him? Why has he no occupied the dwelling for years? TheKentuckian Jan 2012 #256

Your question is very pertinent - perhaps they are truly powerless to affect real change. hack89 Jan 2012 #257

Move them back in? They were supposed to force these people to occupy their homes, I see. TheKentuckian Jan 2012 #258

The guy asked for their help and they blew him off for their handpicked "homeless family" hack89 Jan 2012 #260

Oy Vey ellisonz Jan 2012 #259