Calling all keyboard protestors, ranter and ravers

Occupy London: Knockin' on Heaven's Door


​

The anticapitalist protesters have said they never intended to target the cathedral—they wound up camping at its steps after being denied access to the nearby London Stock Exchange.

St. Paul's initially welcomed the campers when they set up in mid-October, but later tilted toward legal action to remove them, causing one top priest, Giles Fraser, to resign in protest. A week into the protest, the cathedral shut its doors for the first time since World War II, calling the tents a fire hazard.

On Friday, St. Paul's said it planned to take legal action against the campers. That sparked a barrage of criticism, causing the head of the cathedral, Graeme Knowles, to resign on Monday.

A part-time chaplain, Fraser Dyer, also resigned last week, saying he was "embarrassed" by the decision to resort to legal action.​

whats that, jesus?
“Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites!”
oh, thanks

jJ2qT.jpg
 
Corporation of the City of London



st_pauls_backers.jpg
]

It's the dark heart of Britain, the place where democracy goes to die, immensely powerful, equally unaccountable. But I doubt that one in 10 British people has any idea of what the Corporation of the City of London is and how it works. This could be about to change. Alongside the Church of England, the Corporation is seeking to evict the protesters camped outside St Paul's cathedral. The protesters, in turn, have demanded that it submit to national oversight and control.

What is this thing? Ostensibly it's the equivalent of a local council, responsible for a small area of London known as the Square Mile. But, as its website boasts, "among local authorities the City of London is unique". You bet it is. There are 25 electoral wards in the Square Mile. In four of them, the 9,000 people who live within its boundaries are permitted to vote. In the remaining 21, the votes are controlled by corporations, mostly banks and other financial companies. The bigger the business, the bigger the vote: a company with 10 workers gets two votes, the biggest employers, 79. It's not the workers who decide how the votes are cast, but the bosses, who "appoint" the voters. Plutocracy, pure and simple.

As Nicholas Shaxson explains in his fascinating book Treasure Islands, the Corporation exists outside many of the laws and democratic controls which govern the rest of the United Kingdom. The City of London is the only part of Britain over which parliament has no authority. In one respect at least the Corporation acts as the superior body: it imposes on the House of Commons a figure called the remembrancer: an official lobbyist who sits behind the Speaker's chair and ensures that, whatever our elected representatives might think, the City's rights and privileges are protected. The mayor of London's mandate stops at the boundaries of the Square Mile. There are, as if in a novel by China Miéville, two cities, one of which must unsee the other.

Several governments have tried to democratise the City of London but all, threatened by its financial might, have failed. As Clement Attlee lamented, "over and over again we have seen that there is in this country another power than that which has its seat at Westminster." The City has exploited this remarkable position to establish itself as a kind of offshore state, a secrecy jurisdiction which controls the network of tax havens housed in the UK's crown dependencies and overseas territories. This autonomous state within our borders is in a position to launder the ill-gotten cash of oligarchs, kleptocrats, gangsters and drug barons. As the French investigating magistrate Eva Joly remarked, it "has never transmitted even the smallest piece of usable evidence to a foreign magistrate". It deprives the United Kingdom and other nations of their rightful tax receipts.

It has also made the effective regulation of global finance almost impossible. Shaxson shows how the absence of proper regulation in London allowed American banks to evade the rules set by their own government. AIG's wild trading might have taken place in the US, but the unit responsible was regulated in the City. Lehman Brothers couldn't get legal approval for its off-balance sheet transactions in Wall Street, so it used a London law firm instead. No wonder priests are resigning over the plans to evict the campers. The Church of England is not just working with Mammon; it's colluding with Babylon.​
 
Dunedin police say removing the Occupy Dunedin protesters from the Octagon "is not a straightforward matter' and any action must be both reasonable and lawful.
Police have come under pressure since yesterday afternoon when the Dunedin City Council issued a trespass notice to the group, who have been camped in the Octagon since October 15...
...In a statement released this afternoon, Dunedin/Clutha Area Commander Insp Greg Sparrow said the power to trespass people protesting in a public space "must be exercised reasonably and balance rights and freedoms".

"We understand the wider community's frustration and recognise the competing interests who use this space. However we live in a democracy and we need to be sure that any power to trespass people protesting in a public space is exercised reasonably and lawfully," he said...

..."This is a public space and legally, it is not simply a straightforward matter of police visiting the site and removing people from it," Inspector Sparrow said.​
Source

1181314.jpg

Shock!
Horror!
BLASPHEEMER!

Police ensuring the democratic rights of protestors to protest are protected, and balanced against the rights of the wider community!

Fuck the police indeed :rolleyes:

Maybe NZ should invade the US and instal a democracy.
 
​

The third suggestion is probably the most far-reaching. The Vatican statement strongly backs the proposal of a Financial Transaction Tax – a "Tobin Tax" or, popularly, a "Robin Hood Tax" in the form in which it has been talked about most recently. This means a comparatively small rate of tax (0.05 per cent) being levied on share, bond, and currency transactions and their derivatives, with the resulting funds being designated for investment in the "real" economy, domestically and internationally. The modest rate of taxation conceals the high levels of return that could be expected (some $410bn globally on one estimate).

This has won the backing of significant experts who cannot be written off as naive anti-capitalists – George Soros, Bill Gates and many others. It is gaining traction among European nations, with a strong statement in support this week from Wolfgang Schaüble, the German finance minister. The objections made by some who claim it would mean a substantial drop in employment and in the economy generally seem to rest on exaggerated and sharply challenged projections – and, more important, ignore the potential of such a tax to stabilise currency markets in a way to boost rather than damage the real economy. (Dr Rowan Williams)​

​
 
Last edited:
This means a comparatively small rate of tax (0.05 per cent) being levied on share, bond, and currency transactions and their derivatives, with the resulting funds being designated for investment in the "real" economy, domestically and internationally.
Click to expand...

Gee thanks.

So when I see one of my stocks isn't doing well and so I decide to sell and you want to increase my losses by another fucking 5 per cent?

In what universe does that perversion make sense?

Arthur
 
Occupy Oakland: General Strike​


​

Protesters have effectively shut down maritime operations at the port, Director Omar Benjamin said Wednesday, as more than 4,500 people arrived at the gates.

Earlier, 50 police officers, many in riot gear and armed with tear-gas canisters, formed a line at Maritime and Bataan roads, near the police command center. About a dozen motorcycle officers had formed a second line behind the police, but have now moved.

The crowd of more than 4,500 arrived at the Port shortly after 5 p.m. and stretched several blocks down Middle Harbor Road leading into the port as they begin their attempt to shut down the port for start of the 7 p.m. night shift.

Starting at 4 p.m., two massive groups walked the mile from 14th Street and Broadway. The crowd fanned out for a least a mile, climbed on trucks and chanted "Whose city is it? Our city!" Police cars were parked on side streets but kept a low profile. No injuries or arrests have been reported.​

r


r
 
heh
you haven't a clue do you
labor unions gave the ok to strike (unofficially)
all will get paid

This general strike call was taken up by many union activists, and began to get support in the labor movement, starting with a Carpenter’s local and then spreading to the ILWU (dockworkers union). However, most union leaders have not shown the same commitment to take decisive action. Given the weakness of US trade unions at the moment and the role of the pro-capitalist leadership of most of the unions, calls for a general strike by the occupation movement will not be enough, in most cases, for serious, wide-spread strike action. It would take a concerted drive by union activists in Oakland to compel union leaders to prepare a serious, all-out strike. and preparing the ground to re-develop the union movement in Oakland and around the US on the basis of militant, democratic principles

Below we republish a number of the solidarity statements and calls to action in solidarity with Occupy Oakland and their call for a general strike and protests on November 2nd. In part to avoid legal repercussions, none of the unions have officially called their members out on strike. Anti-union laws ban political strikes or solidarity strikes. Socialist Alternative and many on the left believe union leaders must be prepared to defy such anti-union laws. Most unions in the Oakland area who are endorsing the strike call are not actually organizing coordinated work stoppages or mass walkouts, which would be necessary steps in a real general strike. Instead they are encouraging their members, where possible, to use more limited legal methods such as to leaving work and joining the protests.​

why the fuck should little girls and boys have to set an example for these corrupt union assholes? wake the fuck up and move! mobilize! shut the fucking city down!

adoucette said:
So dock workers aren't part of the 99%.
Click to expand...


the cops are asking that same question

However, the city's police union in an open letter Tuesday slammed Mayor Jean Quan for her "flip-flop" stance on the city's Occupy Wall Street protests, questioning her motives and why the city plans to beef up its police presence at strike-related events while giving other city workers leeway to participate.​
hahaha
why cant we strike too?
 
Last edited:
Gustav said:
heh
you haven't a clue do you
labor unions gave the ok to strike (unofficially)
all will get paid
Click to expand...

Then that's even worse, it allows them to hurt others.

The port is about our imports and exports and.
Imports and Exports are tied into our manufacturing.
Thus this hurts people INDISCRIMINATELY.

Arthur
 
While the city was not shut down by the protest, many businesses chose to remain closed Wednesday. Some that stayed open posted signs declaring their support for the marchers.​

the 99% understand the concept of self sacrifice unlike you greedy and rapacious 1%ers

why are you so intent on feeding the machine?
you must be just another enemy of the working man

/disgusted

​
 
Last edited:
Gustav said:
While the city was not shut down by the protest, many businesses chose to remain closed Wednesday. Some that stayed open posted signs declaring their support for the marchers.​

the 99% understand the concept of self sacrifice unlike you greedy and rapacious 1%ers

why are you so intent on feeding the machine?
you must be just another enemy of the working man

/disgusted
Click to expand...

Since when are Truckers not the "working man"
Since when are small business owners and their employees left waiting on shipments to come or go, not the "working man"?

Making someone else suffer, like the truckers who couldn't deliver/pick up their goods, is NOT self-sacrifice.

Just hurting people's livelihoods indiscriminately is simply moronic.
 
How're the ever helpful "anarchist" groups doing? You know, the ones without any slogans or demands, but loaded down with shit to throw through windows? They're also the ones who occasionally turn out to be cops. Yeah, those ones.

They've done wonders for many movements... so I've heard...

adoucette said:
Gee thanks.

So when I see one of my stocks isn't doing well and so I decide to sell and you want to increase my losses by another fucking 5 per cent?

In what universe does that perversion make sense?

Arthur
Click to expand...

It's not a product? Do you admit that Wall Street is mostly trading numbers back and forth?

I think of it as a sales tax for Wall Street. There is a tax on the books in New York state, I believe, and it is similar, albeit it was like 1/2 to 1/10 of a percent. It's not enforced, but would even at the tenth of a percent apparently generate billions of dollars for NY state.

I guess I would like to know more about what all it applies to. Webster Tarpley has proposed a 1% Wall Street tax, which I feel is very reasonable for people who are trading what is supposed to be a real tangible product or commodity.

It seems funny to me that many banksters and their cronies in the political arena (Herman Cain) would propose a national sales tax on the poor and middle class, while most of them would probably balk at the suggestion of a 1% tax on Wall Street trading.
Unless they want to make the argument that what is being traded is not actually a product, commodity, or something that has tangible value. I wouldn't put it past them.
 
Giambattista said:
It's not a product? Do you admit that Wall Street is mostly trading numbers back and forth?
Click to expand...

No, Wall Street is NOT mostly trading numbers back and forth.

Brokers and brokerage houses provide a valuable service and woudn't get paid well if they didn't.

Actual stock trading is pretty complex and handles about 11 or 12 billion shares changing hands each day (and of course all the accounting and financial settlement that goes with that volume of trades)

In any case, it's not at issue what they do to make money because if brokerage houses are making money on the transactions, then like everyone else you tax their PROFITS.
Taxing Transactions and you simply screw people even when they are already taking a loss, or just changing who they are investing in, even if no profits or losses are involved.

Because consider the alternate: if I sell 1,000 shares and make $10,000, then indeed I'll pay income taxes on the profits I made on the trade.

Arthur
 
Last edited:
Giambattista said:
How're the ever helpful "anarchist" groups doing? You know, the ones without any slogans or demands, but loaded down with shit to throw through windows? They're also the ones who occasionally turn out to be cops. Yeah, those ones.

They've done wonders for many movements... so I've heard...



It's not a product? Do you admit that Wall Street is mostly trading numbers back and forth?

I think of it as a sales tax for Wall Street. There is a tax on the books in New York state, I believe, and it is similar, albeit it was like 1/2 to 1/10 of a percent. It's not enforced, but would even at the tenth of a percent apparently generate billions of dollars for NY state.

I guess I would like to know more about what all it applies to. Webster Tarpley has proposed a 1% Wall Street tax, which I feel is very reasonable for people who are trading what is supposed to be a real tangible product or commodity.

It seems funny to me that many banksters and their cronies in the political arena (Herman Cain) would propose a national sales tax on the poor and middle class, while most of them would probably balk at the suggestion of a 1% tax on Wall Street trading.
Unless they want to make the argument that what is being traded is not actually a product, commodity, or something that has tangible value. I wouldn't put it past them.
Click to expand...

The problem isn't people like Arthur, the problem is the big companies (and the owners of those companies) that have six ways to sunday to get out of paying their taxes - what's needed is to close the loopholes (for a start, anyway).
 
trippy
no comment on the city of london plc inc ltd post?
i had some vague notions but ended up shocked and outraged after reading
 
Gustav said:
trippy
no comment on the city of london plc inc ltd post?
i had some vague notions but ended up shocked and outraged after reading
Click to expand...

Well from what I can tell, it's not overly true.

Consider this KEY statement:

The City of London is the only part of Britain over which parliament has no authority.
Click to expand...

Yet in the Wiki article we find:

Parliament in 2002 reformed the voting system for electing Members to the Corporation of London and received the Royal Assent on 7 November 2002. Under the new system, the number of non-resident voters has doubled from 16,000 to 32,000.
Click to expand...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/City_of_London

So, in absence of support for that key statement, the rest is just about who administers to this square mile of real estate, and this would indicate that indeed it is based on the people who live and work there. The idea that the businesses and such don't operate under normal Parlimentary rule appears bogus though, and that indeed is the crux of the complaint.

http://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/NR/r...4-A6333EF24076/0/AU_CG_committees_0809pdf.pdf

Arthur
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top