|
Post by jacquelope on Oct 12, 2011 20:33:41 GMT -6
Man, I have been having fun harassing #iamthe53. Look for Le Jacquelope on there.
|
|
|
Post by jacquelope on Oct 13, 2011 0:41:45 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by jacquelope on Oct 19, 2011 16:14:31 GMT -6
articles.businessinsider.com/2011-10-15/news/30282827_1_global-economy-corporate-profits-chartsHere Are Four Charts That Explain What The Protesters Are Angry About... Henry Blodget|October 15, 2011| Last week, we published a chart-essay that illustrates the extreme inequality that has developed in the US economy over the past 30 years. The charts explain what the Wall Street protesters are angry about. They also explain why the protesters' message is resonating with the country at large. Here are the four key points: 1. Unemployment is at the highest level since the Great Depression (with the exception of a brief blip in the early 1980s). 2. At the same time, corporate profits are at an all-time high, both in absolute dollars and as a share of the economy. ..........
|
|
|
Post by jeffolie on Oct 20, 2011 16:00:06 GMT -6
Occupy Wall Street may think they represent a 'harbinger of change': "...“Historically, a story about people inside impressive buildings ignoring or even taunting people standing outside shouting at them turns out to be a story with an unhappy ending.” ... "
Compare the enthusiasm, the real deal can be found in Greece, Rome Italy, Spain ... I continue to expect more political change from a European Crisis first resulting in a euro crisis before the dollar crisis.
=======================================
QOTD: Impressive Buildings, Bad Endings
By Barry Ritholtz - October 20th, 2011, 10:30AM
Quote of the Day:
“Historically, a story about people inside impressive buildings ignoring or even taunting people standing outside shouting at them turns out to be a story with an unhappy ending.”
From “Thirteen Observations made by Lemony Snicket while watching Occupy Wall Street from a Discreet Distance” -Occupy Writers
|
|
|
Post by jacquelope on Oct 21, 2011 4:06:08 GMT -6
Jeff you think that these taunters will defeat the protesters?
|
|
|
Post by jeffolie on Oct 21, 2011 10:16:40 GMT -6
Jeff you think that these taunters will defeat the protesters? Taunters will not defeat protesters. I favor unlawfulcombatant's view ... America's version of the protester, OWS, are a slower going more peaceful group that may well eventually sustain a powerful impact on politics in America. My above piece just reflects that the peripheral European protesters gathering in the OWS versions are different than the American peaceful groups ... for now. The Europeans version of protester compare to the European rowdy, more prone to violence and mobs at their soccer games whereas American football fans are not known for violence and are known for painting their upper bodies in colors for their teams or wearing stuff on their heads to associate with their teams.
|
|
|
Post by graybeard on Oct 21, 2011 12:10:30 GMT -6
They're saying on Dobermann that OWS has already changed the MSM attention from the deficit to unemployment, which is a really good thing.
|
|
|
Post by jacquelope on Oct 21, 2011 15:16:49 GMT -6
Jeff you think that these taunters will defeat the protesters? Taunters will not defeat protesters. I favor unlawfulcombatant's view ... America's version of the protester, OWS, are a slower going more peaceful group that may well eventually sustain a powerful impact on politics in America. My above piece just reflects that the peripheral European protesters gathering in the OWS versions are different than the American peaceful groups ... for now. The Europeans version of protester compare to the European rowdy, more prone to violence and mobs at their soccer games whereas American football fans are not known for violence and are known for painting their upper bodies in colors for their teams or wearing stuff on their heads to associate with their teams. What is the 'bad ending' that will come of this if OWS's peaceful approach is going to have a powerful impact? My opinion of the guys in Europe is they don't go far enough. There's just not enough jails in Greece to contain a full scale rebellion.
|
|
|
Post by jacquelope on Oct 21, 2011 17:08:23 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by unlawflcombatnt on Oct 24, 2011 19:56:51 GMT -6
Occupy Dallas occupied the Dallas branch of Chase Bank and the Chase tower today. Nearly 2 dozen arrests were made. from NBC-Dallas Fort Worth: 23 Arrested after Occupy Dallas Protest at Chase Bank Mon Oct 24, 2011 by Frank Heinz " Nearly 2 dozen Occupy Dallas protestors were arrested after a demonstration outside of Chase Tower and a Chase Bank branch in downtown Dallas Monday afternoon.
At about 2:15 p.m., NBC 5 got word that protestors were said to be blocking customers from entering the Chase bank at Main and Akard in downtown Dallas.
Dallas police were called to the branch, as well as Chase Tower, and the protestors were asked to leave. Dallas officers informed the protestors at the bank branch that none of them would be arrested if they complied with the criminal trespass warning and vacated the property.
Many of the protestors refused to leave and, as a result, the Dallas Police Department arrested 23 people for criminal trespass. advertisement
Shortly before 4 p.m., on their Facebook page, the organization relayed information to supporters about moving the protests to Lew Sterrett Justice Center to protest the arrests.
NBC 5 crews say around 30 protestors are stationed around the Justice Center, waiting for the arrested protestors to be released.
A Dallas detective says the process is being delayed in the jail, due to some protestors not identitifying themselves with the correct name. Those individuals are being fingerprinted to have their information checked against state databases.
Video of the arrests was published to YouTube shortly after 3 p.m.
Dallas police are expected to remain at both locations for the next several hours. According to the group's schedule on their website, supporters from the encampment were to march on Chase Tower at 5 p.m., that obviously changed. On Facebook, the group said the protest was planned from noon to 5 p.m.
The group is currently occupying and living in a section of land at Dallas' City Hall Park as part of the Occupy Wall Street movement."
|
|
|
Post by unlawflcombatnt on Oct 24, 2011 20:02:49 GMT -6
Video of "Occupy Chase Bank" in Dallas:
|
|
|
Post by jacquelope on Oct 25, 2011 0:50:36 GMT -6
Overwhelm the jails. Completely jam up law enforcement.
|
|
|
Post by unlawflcombatnt on Oct 25, 2011 21:40:27 GMT -6
Overwhelm the jails. Completely jam up law enforcement. Yes. And focus on the BANKS, like Occupy Dallas did. The Occupy Dallas (Occupy Chase Bank) protestors deserve extra credit for actually occupying a bank and blocking access. Even more impressive is that several of them reportedly have outstanding minor legal violations, yet were willing to risk being arrested anyway. Bravo to Occupy Dallas!! from WFAA.com News: Arrested Occupy Dallas protesters releasedby DAVID SCHECHTER WFAA Oct 25, 2011 " DALLAS - Nearly 2 dozen Occupy Dallas protesters are free Tuesday after spending the night in jail. They were arrested following protests at the downtown Chase bank for not letting customers inside.
As Paul Penny sees it, this was a moment of sacrifice and solidarity for Occupy Dallas. He was arrested and spent the night in jail.
"The point was to raise awareness,” Penny said.
For others, it’s just punishment for breaking the law by physically blocking bank entrance. Many of the 23 protesters spent their 1st night ever in jail, including Oscar Gallegos.
"[It was] cold, uncomfortable, not very nice, but worth it," Gallegos said. "Totally worth it."
With more and more people are asking who the Occupy Dallas protesters are, the 23 arrests give a little more information.
A background search shows the arrested protesters are home-grown, none with any serious run-ins with the law.
There's 30-year-old Joe Hernandez of Dallas. 17-year-old Catherine Chansky from Cedar Hill. And 18-year-old Kira Lendir from Wylie.
Also, 22-year-old Whytney Blythe of Allen. Court records show she's failed to appear on a speeding ticket in Red Oak.
21-year-old Sarah Younger of Arlington has a charge for possession for a small amount of marijuana. And 21-year-old Ameer Wadhan, also from Arlington, has an unpaid traffic ticket.
All of them now face charges of criminal trespass.
"Yes, I would take more than a night in jail for this cause," Gallegos said. "I'd rather be out on the streets educating people, but I'll do whatever I need to open people's eyes."
The attorney representing the group says the protesters will fight on the grounds that their freedom of speech and assembly were violated."
|
|
|
Post by jacquelope on Oct 26, 2011 20:18:05 GMT -6
The attorney representing the group says the protesters will fight on the grounds that their freedom of speech and assembly were violated.
Jam up the courts, man, jam up the courts!
I went to the Sacramento OWS protest twice, but the cops apparently chose another protest in this area to get tough.
|
|
|
Post by jeffolie on Oct 29, 2011 14:24:20 GMT -6
Taibbi blog agrees with an OWS poster: exit BoA accounts Taibbi has skills ... he proved his creative phrases become quotesYou do not have to agree with his politics to enjoy his creativity. For those of you who might not be able to link I posted the entire piece ... like just a few of Taibbi's pieces this in not more than one page: ========================================== Matt Taibbi is one of my favorite writers, muckraker, expose extraordinaire, book author: [from wikipedia] ".... His July 2009 Rolling Stone article "The Great American Bubble Machine" famously described Goldman Sachs as "a great vampire squid wrapped around the face of humanity, relentlessly jamming its blood funnel into anything that smells like money" ... (born March 2, 1970) is an American author and polemical journalist reporting on politics, media, finance, and sports for Rolling Stone and Men's Journal. Previously he edited and wrote for The eXile, the New York Press, and The Beast. ..." en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matt_Taibbi#Awards========================================== Another Weapon for OWS: Pull Your Money Out of BofA October 28, 2011 My good friend Nomi Prins has a great new piece out that I just caught on Zero Hedge, chronicling 10 reasons why depositors should pull out of Bank of America. Obviously Goldman, Sachs has become the great symbol of investment banking corruption, and other companies like AIG and Countrywide have become poster children for problems with businesses like insurance and mortgage-lending. But when it comes to commercial banking, Bank of America is as bad as it gets. The markets, of course, have lately come to agree, as B of A has lately been downgraded again to just above junk status. The only reason the bank is not rated even lower than that is that it is Too Big To Fail. The whole world knows that if Bank of America implodes – whether because of the vast number of fraud suits it faces for mortgage securitization practices, or because of the time bomb of toxic assets on its balance sheets – the U.S. government will probably step in to one degree or another and save it. The government’s patronage of the bank was never clearer than in recent weeks, when B of A quietly decided to move trillions of dollars (trillions, not billions) in risky Merrill Lynch derivatives contracts off Merrill’s books and onto the books of the parent/retail arm, Bank of America. This decision was done at the behest of counterparties to those transactions, who wanted those contracts placed under the aegis of Bank of America, whose deposits are insured by the FDIC. The move was made, according to reports, so that Bank of America could avoid posting $3.3 billion in collateral to satisfy the company’s creditors. In other words, Bank of America just got You the Taxpayer to co-sign as much as $53 trillion worth of dicey derivative contracts. The FDIC wasn’t pleased by the move, but the Fed apparently encouraged it. Bloomberg, citing people with “direct knowledge” of the deals, reported that, The Fed has signaled that it favors moving the derivatives to give relief to the bank holding company, while the FDIC, which would have to pay off depositors in the event of a bank failure, is objecting, said the people. The bank doesn’t believe regulatory approval is needed, said people with knowledge of its position. So the primary regulator of the banking industry is encouraging a functionally insolvent megabank to respond to a credit downgrade by pushing its most explosively risky holdings onto the laps of the taxpayer. This is lunacy…. Remember that story about the Chinese man who had a world-record 33-pound tumor removed from his face? This would be like treating that patient by removing the tumor and surgically attaching it to the face of a new patient, in this case the U.S. taxpayer. A series of lawmakers on the Hill, including most notably Sherrod Brown, Carl Levin, and Bernie Sanders, are trying to figure out if there’s any way to stop this transaction, but of course there is not. Upstate NY congressman Maurice Hinchey put it best. "What Bank of America is doing is perfectly legal – and that's the problem,” he said. This is exactly why the Glass-Steagall Act needs to be reinstated: without a separation of Investment Banks and Commercial Banks, what we end up getting is taxpayer-guaranteed gambling. Instead of encouraging prudence and savings by insuring deposits in commercial banks, the FDIC is now being turned into a vehicle for socializing speculative losses. So our government is not only no longer encouraging fiscal conservatism, it is doing exactly the opposite, i.e. encouraging speculation and risk-taking. That this is happening in the fever of the OWS movement, and at a time when top politicians from Barack Obama on down are paying lip service to public complaints against Wall Street, should tell you everything you need to know about whether or not we can expect this government to voluntarily enact real changes, and stop making the taxpayer eat Wall Street’s pain. Anyway, Nomi’s list goes a long way toward explaining why Bank of America is the last company on earth whose $53 trillion derivatives portfolio we should be insuring. A sample of her top ten: Bank of America got the most AIG money of the big depositor banks. By virtue of having acquired Merrill Lynch's AIG-related portfolio, B of A got to keep approximately $12 billion worth of federal AIG backing, too. It also received more government subsidies than any other mega-bank except Citigroup ... In terms of overall federal subsidies (including TARP), Bank of America was second only to Citigroup ($230 billion compared to $415 billion). None of that got in the way of former B of A CEO Ken Lewis' personal take, a $63 million retirement plan, in addition to the $63 million he scored during the three years before his departure. If you’re a Bank of America customer, Nomi is right: find another bank. Try a local credit union. Keeping your money in this TBTF behemoth is very unsafe sex. Incidentally, this kind of suggestion might prove a real help to OWS. One definite tactic that Occupy Wall Street can adopt, going forward, is educating people about the perfidy of certain financial institutions and convincing people to do what they did back in the days of apartheid, which is disinvest. If everyone were to start pulling their money out of the worst-offending banks, that would have a profound effect on the markets and may function as a great short-cut to political change. Bank of America is a great place to start. All the TBTF banks suck equally, but as George Orwell would say, some banks are more equal than others. Withdrawals would be a great way for people to answer the Fed's decision to put depositors on the hook for Merrill Lynch's bad bets. Read more: www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/taibblog/another-weapon-for-ows-pull-your-money-out-of-b-of-a-20111028#ixzz1cCdYLpAB
|
|
|
Post by jacquelope on Oct 29, 2011 20:16:58 GMT -6
The government’s patronage of the bank was never clearer than in recent weeks, when B of A quietly decided to move trillions of dollars (trillions, not billions) in risky Merrill Lynch derivatives contracts off Merrill’s books and onto the books of the parent/retail arm, Bank of America. This decision was done at the behest of counterparties to those transactions, who wanted those contracts placed under the aegis of Bank of America, whose deposits are insured by the FDIC. The move was made, according to reports, so that Bank of America could avoid posting $3.3 billion in collateral to satisfy the company’s creditors. In other words, Bank of America just got You the Taxpayer to co-sign as much as $53 trillion worth of dicey derivative contracts. If B of A goes boom and requires a bailout, how much money might they need? How potentially big is this transplanted tumor that we're talking about? I'm no economist but I know the taxpayer tab can't be $53 trillion... can it?
|
|
|
Post by unlawflcombatnt on Oct 29, 2011 23:22:59 GMT -6
Here's more from Nomi Prinz's article from ZeroHedge: " Here are 10 reasons to take your money out of Bank of America - and park it at a credit union or community bank near you. (And yes, that may be near impossible if you have a mortgage with them, as refinancing away from any big bank nowadays is a nightmare.)
1. B of A rejects the right of customers to protest. When two Occupy Santa Cruz protesters in California marched into a local Bank of America to close their accounts, the response was, "You cannot be a protester and a customer at the same time," followed by a threat to call the police if the women didn't leave. (The attending officer later reiterated the bank manager's message.) Meanwhile, the fact that Bank of America charges a fee for closing an account prompted Rep. Brad Miller (D-North Carolina), who resides in Bank of America's headquarters state, to introduce a bill to protect customers from such fees.
2. To recoup ongoing losses from its stupendously dumb acquisitions of Countrywide Financial and Merrill Lynch, B of A pillages its customers. Thus, despite massive public outrage, the $5 debit usage fee for customers with less than a $5,000 balance and no mortgage with the bank will begin in 2012. B of A was the first large bank to confirm it would charge this fee, which is the highest in current discourse among the banks.
On October 18, Consumers Union wrote a letter to B of A chief Brian Moynihan asking him to reconsider this fee, which impacts poorer clients disproportionately. The letter summed it up nicely: "Consumers should not be required to pay a costly fee that appears to be arbitrary and designed to generate income to make up for Bank of America's bad business decisions rather than covering the costs of providing debit card services." Banks collect 24 cents from retailers for each customer swipe, much more than the median 8 cents it costs a bank to process the purchase. Senator Dick Durbin's (D-Illinois) response was to urge customers: "Vote with your feet. Get the heck out of that bank."
3. B of A's other fees are just as bad. According to its last annual report, the bank has 29.3 million active online subscribers who paid over $300 billion worth of bills in 2010. In May, B of A raised its checking account fees, which included e-banking, to $12, in line with JP Morgan Chase's decision to do the same, up from $8.95 per month. In June, it started a $35 overdraft fee, even on overdrafts of one cent. Next year, it will incorporate basic checking with a new "essentials'' account structure that makes monthly fees unavoidable, that will not include free bill pay, and that has a mandatory $6 minimum fee.
Last Monday, Bank of America was charged (along with JP Morgan Chase and Wells Fargo) with colluding with the two major credit card companies, Visa and MasterCard, to keep ATM fees high; in other words, they were charged with "price-fixing," in direct opposition to antitrust laws. This is the third of three such suits filed recently, each seeking class action status.
4. Bank of America takes gross advantage of the military.
It is the official bank of the US military and has branches by or on many bases, which provides the firm with another locus of extortion. B of A can entice military personnel to take out loans at usurious rates. Personal loans made to soldiers for a few thousand dollars can actually keep them indebted for the rest of their lives.
Last May, Bank of America paid $22 million to settle charges of improperly foreclosing on active-duty troops. The firm spun these foreclosures as being Countrywide's fault for having started them before becoming part of B of A.
5. Bank of America is officially rated the biggest, scariest bank. Its stock price also fared the worst of the group of banks (which also included Citigroup and Wells Fargo) when Moody's Investors Service downgraded it on September 21.
B of A's long-term holding company (parent bank) rating was chopped two notches to Baa1 from A2, and its retail bank rating was cut two notches from A2 to Aa3, placing B of A four notches below rival JP Morgan Chase and one below Citigroup, the third-largest US bank. Its bank holding company has the lowest rating among the top five banks with the largest derivatives positions.
This caused great fear for investors involved in derivatives trades with the Merrill Lynch division, prompting them to request trades be moved to the part of the bank with the better rating - the retail part with the insured (peoples') deposits. That way, B of A doesn't have to pony up as much collateral to back the trades, as it would in a subsidiary with a lower rating. The Fed was recklessly happy to approve, despite the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation's (FDIC) misgiving about having to insure more risk, even if it can borrow from the US Treasury to do so. Meanwhile, Bank of America's stock price got so crushed that Warren Buffett scooped up a $5 billion preferred stock deal, effectively betting that the government won't let this big bank go bust.
6. B of A's derivatives position keeps rising. The total amount of derivatives in the FDIC-insured portion of B of A as of mid-year was $53.7 trillion, up 10 percent from $48.9 trillion the prior year, and up nearly 35 percent from its pre-fall crisis level of $40 trillion (the Merrill Lynch securities division holds $22 trillion in addition.) The bank has $5 trillion of credit derivatives, nearly double its $2.7 trillion pre-Merrill amount. In addition, because of its inherent zombie status and rating downgrades, the cost of insuring B of A against a possible default continues to rise in the credit derivatives market - a pattern that American International group (AIG) once followed.
7. Bank of America got the most AIG money of the big depositor banks. By virtue of having acquired Merrill Lynch's AIG-related portfolio, B of A got to keep approximately $12 billion worth of federal AIG backing, too. It also received more government subsidies than any other mega-bank except Citigroup. Its stimulus package included an initial Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) helping of $15 billion for the bank and $10 billion for Merrill, plus a second helping of $20 billion in January 2009 after it became clear that Merrill's losses had spiked to $15 billion - in order to ensure the takeover from hell went through and Fed chairman Ben Bernanke, then-Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson, and then-Merrill Lynch executive John Thain could pat themselves on the back for saving the world. The government guaranteed $118 billion in assets, mostly Merrill's, in the new merged firm. With the benefit of the Fed's nearly 0 percent money policy, and a depositor base to plunder, B of A repaid that aid.
In terms of overall federal subsidies (including TARP), Bank of America was second only to Citigroup ($230 billion compared to $415 billion). None of that got in the way of former B of A CEO Ken Lewis' personal take, a $63 million retirement plan, in addition to the $63 million he scored during the three years before his departure.
8. Bank of America leads the big bank fraud lawsuit settlement tally. So far, it has racked up the largest settlement, $8.5 billion in June, to settle claims related to $100 billion worth of Countrywide-spun mortgage securities backed by faulty loans, with bigwig investors like Pimco, BlackRock, and the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.
B of A is also being sued by state and federal regulators for questionable foreclosure practices and a union benefits plan for hiding foreclosure problems that impacted its share price. It is one of 17 major US financial institutions being sued by the Federal Housing Finance Agency for billions of dollars of mortgage-securities-related losses that may require B of A to potentially repurchase $50 billion worth of allegedly fraudulent securities. Earlier this year, B of A settled for $3 billion regarding bad loans that they had repackaged by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, as well as agreed to a $624 million settlement in a securities fraud class-action suit filed by New York Sate and City pension fund regarding Countrywide stock losses. Then there's AIG's August lawsuit, in which AIG wants $10 billion in damages for mortgage-related securities it bought and against which it claims B of A committed securities fraud.
That's a lot of pain for a Federal Reserve-approved $4.1 billion acquisition. Meanwhile, since the settlement didn't lead to a financial restatement, under the supremely elastic (read: useless) Dodd-Frank Act, executives get to keep their related bonuses.
9. Even after lawsuits, B of A would still rather please investors than customers. Investors that won money in the $8.5 billion settlement were upset that B of A was continuing to service loans, instead of foreclosing on them more quickly. Now, B of A had a nasty incentive to kick people out of homes faster, rather than work with them to refinance or restructure mortgages. Two months later, their foreclosure process has, in fact, sped up. Bank of America foreclosure notices are surging again following a slight robo-signing- related slowdown, meaning they are now sending out a greater increase in default notices (90-day overdue loans) than other banks. The bank has $30 billion in residential mortgage loans in default, which will become foreclosures for thousands of families.
10. Bank of America, despite having been buoyed up by the government, did not pay taxes, and, given its glorious ineptness, will be laying off 30,000 workers. Not only did the bank pay no federal taxes for 2010 (or 2009) by making use of its posted pre-tax loss of $5.4 billion, it actually cited a tax benefit of $1 billion. Meanwhile, it has announced plans to cut up to 30,000 jobs over the next few years as part of its plan to save $5 billion, ostensibly due to the settlements it's paying for engaging in upper-management-approved fraud.
Finally, consider the two reasons that any of this list is possible. One is the Glass-Steagall Act repeal, which enables banks to comingle straight costumer business with reckless securities creation and trading. The second reason is coddling by a Fed that finances and approves every bad move. B of A is the poster child for a Glass-Steagall repeal gone wrong. Lewis pulled in a slew of other banks under the B of A umbrella, making it - at one time - the country's largest bank, including the infamous Countrywide Financial and Merrill Lynch. Now it has $2.26 trillion in total assets and $1.8 trillion assets in insured subsidiaries, $1.2 trillion of customer deposits ($1.066 trillion in the United States) and about $804 billion in FDIC-insured deposits - all part of the giant, risk-laden mess that is B of A.
Without being broken up via a new, strong Glass-Steagall Act, when banks need to find ways to make money, they resort to extorting it from their sitting ducks, er - customers. Meanwhile, that's where credit unions, which are not-for-profits owned by their members and not by outside shareholders, come in. They generally don't engage in crazy derivatives trades, or charge unnecessary fees for holding your money or for letting you pay bills with it, or for online banking. In terms of personal attention, among other economic reasons, the credit and smaller community banks are a much better bet."
|
|
|
Post by unlawflcombatnt on Oct 30, 2011 23:50:28 GMT -6
More Occupy Movements lead to arrests. From Austin, TX from KWTX More Occupy Austin Protestors Arrested" AUSTIN (October 30, 2011)--Two pre-dawn confrontations Sunday between police and Occupy Austin protesters led to 38 arrests.
The first confrontation was at about 12:30 a.m. Sunday when officers moved to enforce a new rule banning food tables in the City Hall plaza after 10 p.m.
Some protesters surrounded the tables with arms linked.
The Austin American-Statesman reported that another confrontation occurred when more than 50 police officers moved to clear an amphitheater on the plaza for a regular power-washing, leading to more arrests.
Most of the protesters, however, remained peaceful and moved to allow the cleaning before returning to their spots." ________________
[a href=" Occupy Tucson"] Occupy Tucson[/a]: from the Tucson Sentinel Oct 28, 2011 by Dylan Smith " Tucson police arrested 18 Occupy Tucson demonstrators overnight, as the protest spread to a third park at downtown's Main Library.
After they refused to leave city parks at the 10:30 p.m. closing time, officers cited and released 18 protesters Thursday night, said TPD spokeswoman Sgt. Maria Hawke.
At downtown's Armory Park, the main Occupy encampment, 12 were arrested. Two were cited at Veinte de Agosto Park (also known as Pancho Villa Park), and four at Library Park, 101 N. Stone Ave.
There have been nearly 370 arrests since the protest began Oct. 15, police records said.
Occupy Tucson protesters have been allowed to remain in the parks overnight after being cited for the misdemeanor offense of being the a park after 10:30 p.m. Each night, police allow those who wish to leave to do so before making arrests and writing tickets.
Wednesday night, 20 demonstrators were cited and released—12 at Armory Park and 8 at Veinte de Agosto Park.
Tuesday, 28 were arrested at Armory Park, and 8 at Veinte de Agosto Park. Monday, 11 protesters were arrested at Armory Park, and 12 at Veinte de Agosto Park, TPD Sgt. Matt Ronstadt said. Three were cited at both parks.
Earlier Tuesday, the City Council told police and Parks and Recreation Department staff to continue to enforce the closing time.
After meeting in a lengthy executive session to hear legal advice, the council discussed Occupy Tucson at its afternoon study session.
Police were told to continue to arrest, cite, and field release demonstrators.
Enforcing the park closing time has cost the city about $36,000 in overtime for police, TPD Chief Roberto Villaseñor told the council. Over 300 had been arrested up to that time, he said.
But, by releasing protesters after giving them a ticket, instead of booking them into the county jail, the city has saved about $71,000, he said. The county charges the city about $225 for a first-day arrestee. The city has also saved on transportation costs, and is shifting schedules to account for the ongoing enforcement effort, Villaseñor said.
The protesters face a maximum $1,000 fine for violating the park closing rules, a misdemeanor, but many of those arrested for trespassing at unrelated Tucson demonstrations in the past have seen their charges dismissed.
Wednesday, the first group of protesters had their court dates moved to Nov. 17.
At the call to the audience at last week's City Council meeting, some protesters asked the city to waive enforcing the ordinance against remaining in the park after it's 10:30 p.m. closure.
Council members declined to do so, citing concerns about unequal treatment of different groups.
City Attorney Mike Rankin told council members that content-neutral restrictions on the time and place citizens may assemble are constitutional. Waiving the rules for Occupy protesters would open the city to claims by other groups, he said."
|
|
|
Post by jeffolie on Nov 1, 2011 7:15:44 GMT -6
OWS is part of the POLITICS OF THE BACKLASH worldwide now. Greek referendum issue confirms the dynamics still are in place to oust Obama ... Obama 2012 fail: Greek fail...POLITICS OF THE BACKLASH This bring me to place my political prediction framework in perspective: 1. POLITICS MATTER 2. THE POLITICS OF THE BLACKLASH I have a fundamental ECONOMIC point of view that POLITICS AND ECONOMICS ARE 2 SIDS OF THE SAME COIN My long term predictions are shaped by a reversal or swing in voting that often happens when disgust, unhappiness with the existing governing rulers, incumbents results in a shift in the other direction. In America, this means sweeping out the incumbents such as happened in modern times twice by Republicans ousting Democrats: 1. Newt Ginrich lead a revolt agains incumbent House Democrats charging and campaigning on a Contract with America in 1994; 2. grassroots conservatives gathered under the Tea Party's leaderless umbrella to control the primaries and election of Republicans culminating in a revolt agains incumbent House Democrats in 2010. I call this revolt against incumbents, the swing from one side to the other side in politics "THE POLITICS OF THE BLACKLASH". "THE POLITICS OF THE BLACKLASH IN the 2012 US ELECTIONS" In 2008, I applied this political concept to the Democratic PRIMARIES predicting rejecting the incumbent Democratic name Clinton in favor of the power and riches seeking outsider named Obama ... predicting Obama would win the election after defeating Hillary in the primaries but Obama would face his own "THE POLITICS OF THE BLACKLASH IN AMERICA" resulting in Obama not being reelected in 2012. The rise of grassroots conservatives gathered under the Tea Party's leaderless umbrella to control the primaries and election of Republicans culminating in a revolt agains incumbent House Democrats in 2010 CONFIRM AND VALIDATED my view of "THE POLITICS OF THE BLACKLASH IN AMERICA". Obama is unpopular in the fading months of 2011. "THE POLITICS OF THE BLACKLASH IN EUROPE" The 1st sucessful "THE POLITICS OF THE BLACKLASH IN EUROPE" rejected the incumbents in the UK bringing in conservatives with the ouster of 500,000 public employees, austerity and consequentially a decline in consumer spending (supporting another theme of mine that austerity in the form of reduced government spending results in lower GDP immediately while its long term balancing the budget, anti Keysian, Austrian economics impact remains theoretically attractive but short term bad). The UK twisted: Cameron kept up the austerity on the budget, fiscal side while on the monetary side Cameron went for money printing resulting in higher consumer prices turning into INFLATION during a decline in consumer spending also know as STAGFLATION. The 2nd soon to be sucessful "THE POLITICS OF THE BLACKLASH IN EUROPE" will be this month, November elections in Spain resulting with incumbent Socialist being ousted and replaced by a conservative party called the Popular party. Most likely the incoming Spanish government will repeat or 'history never repeats, at best it sometimes rhymes' follow the UK Cameron policies. GREECE, the 3rd soon to be sucessful "THE POLITICS OF THE BLACKLASH IN EUROPE": the .... Re: Greek PM calls referendum on new EU aid deal .... OCCUPY WALL STREET (OWS) OWS is part of the POLITICS OF THE BACKLASH. OWS started small, grew quickly and now exists in over 100 Cities worldwide. Like the grassroots beginning of the POLITICS OF THE BACKLASH Tea Party, the Main Stream Media heavily covered these organizations spreading the revolt against the incumbents in part because the Main Stream Media want quick, high viewship and rating that immedicately result from new controversies. Unlike the Tea Party which had existing political entities to build on (conservative Guns, God, antiGovernment militias and PACs), the OWS was low cost ramble, poor, jobless middle classes and their jobless college graduates and/or students in America. In Europe, the OWS were jobless across a wider spectrum beyond their low cost ramble, poor, jobless middle classes and their jobless college graduates and/or students which expanded to gather from for example the 21.5% general jobless in Spain, the 500,000 UK laid off government workers by Cameron, the Greeks losing benefits, the Italians hating their Prime Minister and then onto Asia. OWS is part of the POLITICS OF THE BACKLASH worldwide now. =================================================== FRANKFURT (MarketWatch) — U.S. stock futures posted heavy losses Tuesday after Greece’s surprise decision to call a referendum on its bailout package stirred new default fears. Futures on the Dow Jones Industrial Average -1.52% fell 162 points to 11,733 and those on the Standard & Poor’s 500 index -2.19% dropped 25.20 points to 1,224.10, while Nasdaq 100 futures -1.87% declined 41.25 points to 2,314.50. Greek Prime Minister George Papandreou late Monday unexpectedly called for a referendum on the latest bailout plan in the face of growing public anger over further austerity measures and a deepening recession. “The latest brinkmanship creates new uncertainty in the eyes of markets, which could be concerned that, should the outcome of the referendum be negative, then either Greece would have to restructure its debt much more aggressively than the 50% currently envisaged ... or it could even pave the way for an eventual exit from the euro area,” wrote economists at Barclays Capital. The move comes after European leaders last week announced a three-pronged plan to cut Greece’s debt load by writing down 50% of the value of government bonds held by banks and other private investors, recapitalizing European banks and boosting the firepower of the euro-zone bailout fund. The Barclays economists said the surprise move by Papandreou appears to be a bid to shore up support for further austerity and economic liberalization efforts as the government has seen its popularity wane in the wake of two years of austerity measures and recession. MORE ... www.marketwatch.com/story/us-stock-futures-drop-on-greek-referendum-2011-11-01?dist=beforebell
|
|
|
Post by unlawflcombatnt on Nov 1, 2011 11:44:02 GMT -6
The Dow is down over -500 points for the week as of about 12 noon.
The Gold to Platinum spread is now about 130 (Gold $130/oz more than Platinum)
It looks like the "optimism" has dropped out of the market as Jeff Ollie predicted.
And for those keeping track, the Dow is now officially "down" again for 2011--undoing the bubbly optimism that was regurgitated at the end of the day yesterday about it being "up" for the year.
Meanwhile, Gold remains "up" for 2011--and by a lot.
And at the same time "serfs up" as well--evidenced by the astronomical increase in Occupy movement participation.
|
|
|
Post by jacquelope on Nov 3, 2011 5:02:24 GMT -6
Hey guys, I was there at the Occupy Oakland rally at the Port of Oakland.
LOTS of anti-offshoring folks there, man. TONS of people wanting to rebel against free trade.
If you look at the China currency votes in Congress you can see America is about to burst at the seams with opposition. And the Occupy movement has officially joined the fray, at least in Oakland we have.
Apparently the cops came and attacked a few hours after my wife and mine left, though.
|
|
|
Post by jacquelope on Nov 3, 2011 10:21:31 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by unlawflcombatnt on Nov 3, 2011 11:45:15 GMT -6
Excellent. And here's a quote from the last article from Sacramento, showing the shear stupidity, hypocrisy, and dishonesty of Sacramento's idiotic District Attorney: [/i]"[/ul] Martinez absolutely DOES have the "luxury" of selecting who to prosecute. He has chosen selectively and by choice to prosecute these cases--which is made obvious by the superseding passage: "the District Attorney's Office has declined to file charges against the protestors." In fact, Martinez has chosen to protect the interests of the 1% against the completely Legal actions of the Occupy movement.
|
|
|
Post by judes on Nov 4, 2011 10:27:09 GMT -6
jacq, kudos for taking part!! Wish I could of been there. I have been waiting for the ports to get occupied, it is the one area where a difference can be made by choking the global flow of imports into this country! A real modern day tea party, not what the bat shit tea party patriots stand for, dump those containers in the ocean!!!
|
|
|
Post by jacquelope on Nov 4, 2011 10:33:26 GMT -6
The problem with dumping the Chinese crap into the ocean is the Ports are protected upon pain of FEDERAL prosecution.
That's going to take a rally of about 100,000 people. At that point the Federal courts will be unable to handle it... much less Federal prisons.
|
|
|
Post by judes on Nov 4, 2011 12:16:20 GMT -6
I hear ya Jacq, but if things keep going they way they have been I foresee over 100,000 people at the ports!
Omg this video I just came across is priceless!! Scott Walker gets Occupied!! hahah
|
|
|
Post by unlawflcombatnt on Jan 30, 2012 5:59:32 GMT -6
Occupier Tased in Washington, D.C.
|
|