|
On November 16 2011 01:55 ziggurat wrote:
It seems to me that the only real people who suffer from these protests are small business owners and normal people who want to hang out in the park. Rich bankers couldn't care less about the OWS protests.
Yeah you're totally right, this is what i was thinking too.
Although these people have a right to protest, the small business owners also have a right to do business, so there's a conflict here. The protesters have had their time to protest, now let's let the small business owners have their time to do business.
|
On November 16 2011 01:55 ziggurat wrote:
It seems to me that the only real people who suffer from these protests are small business owners and normal people who want to hang out in the park. Rich bankers couldn't care less about the OWS protests.
you can't protest inside their private property for very long although you could do sit-ins if you could get inside, but i doubt you could do it more then once. Also you think it's alright that your statement shows a disconnect, an ivy tower sort of deal between bankers and normal people? Also really people enjoying new york parks... yes new york parks farmed for their beauty and hobos having sex/doing drugs around a corner. The only thing it does hurt small business is people who have anxiety when near protesters and thus avoid them and would avoid near by business.
|
On November 16 2011 02:04 dolvlo wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2011 01:55 ziggurat wrote:
It seems to me that the only real people who suffer from these protests are small business owners and normal people who want to hang out in the park. Rich bankers couldn't care less about the OWS protests. Yeah you're totally right, this is what i was thinking too. Although these people have a right to protest, the small business owners also have a right to do business, so there's a conflict here. The protesters have had their time to protest, now let's let the small business owners have their time to do business.
it doesn't work like that. If the protests were illegal they should have been arrested and dismantled immediately. You don't get to selectively enforce the law like this.
The biggest thing imo is now you have a government entity that's (by their own admission or clear evidence):
1. Denied freedom of press
2. Destroyed private property
3. Violated a court order
4. Most likely prevented freedom of assembly
4b. Conspired to do so on a country wide scale
Combine that with our absurdly high incarceration rate and it all doesn't seem so free anymore.
Especially since no matter the consequences the property destroyed is gone and it's almost 100% sure that there will be no compensation.
|
Ydanis and other protesters who were arrested have still not been given access to their lawyers.
|
On November 16 2011 03:30 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
Ydanis and other protesters who were arrested have still not been given access to their lawyers.
It's a big conspiracy.... Or maybe some things just take a little time...
|
On November 16 2011 03:04 Logo wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2011 02:04 dolvlo wrote:On November 16 2011 01:55 ziggurat wrote:
It seems to me that the only real people who suffer from these protests are small business owners and normal people who want to hang out in the park. Rich bankers couldn't care less about the OWS protests. Yeah you're totally right, this is what i was thinking too. Although these people have a right to protest, the small business owners also have a right to do business, so there's a conflict here. The protesters have had their time to protest, now let's let the small business owners have their time to do business. it doesn't work like that. If the protests were illegal they should have been arrested and dismantled immediately. You don't get to selectively enforce the law like this. The biggest thing imo is now you have a government entity that's (by their own admission or clear evidence): 1. Denied freedom of press 2. Destroyed private property 3. Violated a court order 4. Most likely prevented freedom of assembly 4b. Conspired to do so on a country wide scale Combine that with our absurdly high incarceration rate and it all doesn't seem so free anymore. Especially since no matter the consequences the property destroyed is gone and it's almost 100% sure that there will be no compensation.
Although you're right, I still think we need to consider the small business owners. What about their rights to not have people protesting outside of their businesses? What about their rights to not have their customers driven away by the protesters?
|
On November 16 2011 03:04 Logo wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2011 02:04 dolvlo wrote:On November 16 2011 01:55 ziggurat wrote:
It seems to me that the only real people who suffer from these protests are small business owners and normal people who want to hang out in the park. Rich bankers couldn't care less about the OWS protests. Yeah you're totally right, this is what i was thinking too. Although these people have a right to protest, the small business owners also have a right to do business, so there's a conflict here. The protesters have had their time to protest, now let's let the small business owners have their time to do business. it doesn't work like that. If the protests were illegal they should have been arrested and dismantled immediately. You don't get to selectively enforce the law like this. The biggest thing imo is now you have a government entity that's (by their own admission or clear evidence): 1. Denied freedom of press 2. Destroyed private property 3. Violated a court order 4. Most likely prevented freedom of assembly 4b. Conspired to do so on a country wide scale Combine that with our absurdly high incarceration rate and it all doesn't seem so free anymore. Especially since no matter the consequences the property destroyed is gone and it's almost 100% sure that there will be no compensation.
So you are saying they should have not allowed the protests from the start now? Interesting.
I think this comes down to to give people an inch they take a mile.
People just are not allowed to camp overnight in the city, NYC and many other cities tried to be accomodating and ignored their own rules when they initially allowed people to stay overnight and protest.
After a while the cities have come to realize that they are not going anywhere and the issues of safety and sanitation (and in my view common sense) prevailed so they are going back to
As to your points.
1. Denied freedom of press
There seems to be plenty of press coverage and video of the park being taken down
2. Destroyed private property
A little ironic here as they were squatting on private property, that is a private park.
They were given warning to leave and could have taken their belongings with them.
3. Violated a court order
Court order as was posted a page earlier in this thread came after the fact and said basically they will have a hearing on it at 11:30 today (not sure what came from that hearing)
4. Most likely prevented freedom of assembly
People can assemble all they want aslong as they are not distrupting traffic/businesses and as long as they are not camping overnight.
4b. Conspired to do so on a country wide scale
<puts on tin foil hat> The problem with the NYC park is the same problem every other city has, so eventually yes every city is going to take down their tent city.
|
On November 16 2011 03:43 Kaitlin wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2011 03:30 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
Ydanis and other protesters who were arrested have still not been given access to their lawyers. It's a big conspiracy.... Or maybe some things just take a little time...
Time to do what exactly? It's over 12 hours after the people were arrested afaik.
|
On November 16 2011 01:55 ziggurat wrote:
It seems to me that the only real people who suffer from these protests are small business owners and normal people who want to hang out in the park. Rich bankers couldn't care less about the OWS protests.
As if the objective is to make rich people "care". It's about affecting politics and politicians.
Now I don't really think the protests are causing much problems at all, but let's assume it is indeed affecting small business owners and normal people... seems like a real effective way to get attention and force action.
|
|
|
I'm disappointed at the way NYC/NYPD is handling this situation. First a surprise night raid, then violence and arrests (including journalists: source), then now the hours of "no news" - I think it's time we heard something other than Mr. Bloomberg giving unsubstantiated reasons for the forcible eviction.
|
On November 16 2011 03:59 HellRoxYa wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2011 01:55 ziggurat wrote:
It seems to me that the only real people who suffer from these protests are small business owners and normal people who want to hang out in the park. Rich bankers couldn't care less about the OWS protests. As if the objective is to make rich people "care". It's about affecting politics and politicians. Now I don't really think the protests are causing much problems at all, but let's assume it is indeed affecting small business owners and normal people... seems like a real effective way to get attention and force action.
You are correct sir, that is why they have moved in to clear the camps. The got attention and forced action based on how much they were disrupting small businesses and normal people.
Places where they are not disrupting their neighbors so much (and have had minimal health/crime problems) the camps are still intact (Boston for example).
Here is an article about Occupy LA affecting small businesses.
Vendor Article
Targeting Wall Street but hurting small vendors instead
About 40 vendors who sell on the City Hall lawn every Thursday were forced off the property after Occupy L.A. protesters refused to remove their encampment. The irony of the mini-businesses being hurt isn't lost on the demonstrators.
October 30, 2011|By Esmeralda Bermudez, Los Angeles TimesThe Occupy movement came to Los Angeles aiming for Wall Street titans, but farmers market vendors are the first to take a real hit.
Two weeks ago, about 40 vendors who sell on the City Hall lawn every Thursday were forced off the property after protesters refused to remove their city of tents.
The mini-businesses — produce farmers, popcorn poppers, flower sellers — were abruptly moved by city officials to a new and less visible location across Main Street. Since that relocation, profits have plummeted, vendors have pulled out and shoppers have become scarce.
FULL COVERAGE: Occupy protests
"The cause is good," said Genaro Lopez, a vendor who initially helped protesters with free sodas and burritos. "But this is our bread and butter, and we've taken a huge hit."
Many vendors, who already struggle to make it through the slow winter months, have reported a 40% to 60% drop in sales since the move, said market manager Susan Hutchinson. So far, three have decided to quit showing up until the demonstrators are gone.
The irony is not lost on Occupy L.A. protesters.
"Here we are representing the 99%," said Martine Fennelly, an activist. "And the farmers are the first to suffer from the movement."
Still, Fennelly said, protesters are choosing to stay put, because "an occupation means an occupation, not a three-week camp-out."
The decision was made through a vote Oct. 19, she said. Close to a hundred demonstrators cast votes. Nearly everyone agreed to move, but a handful did not. Because decisions required unanimous approval, the handful won, Fennelly said.
"Some people cried because they were so affected," she said, adding that the voting rules have changed: A 90% majority is now required.
Fennelly said protesters have tried to help the market by announcing its new location on Twitter and Facebook.
For vendors, some of whom travel from as far as the Central Valley, the publicity is little consolation. As with real estate, they say, location is key.
The 6-year-old market had struggled to find a good spot to sell, Hutchinson said. It started in the Arts district but shut down after six months because of a lack of customers. Then it moved to Little Tokyo, where nearby businesses complained of the competition.
Finally, in 2007, with help from City Councilwoman Jan Perry, the vendors set up shop on the south lawn of City Hall. There, business was thriving. From 9 a.m. to 2 p.m. on Thursday, workers descended from City Hall and surrounding high-rises to enjoy lunch, shop and listen to music performances.
"It was a beautiful thing to look out there," Perry said. "And they'll be back. We're going to have to rebuild the confidence of some of the vendors and rebuild momentum, but they'll be back."
When that will happen is unclear, because protesters have shown no sign of budging. City Hall officials, who initially embraced the occupation, told demonstrators last week they can't stay indefinitely. So far, they have not figured out what to do about them.
Panorama: 360° tour of Occupy L.A. encampment
Until then, Jorge Zaragosa plans to steer clear of the market. For six years, he had traveled 60 miles from Oxnard to sell his fruit and produce. The second week of the protest, he went home with only $180 and a truck full of strawberries, broccoli and other goods. That's when he decided to bow out.
"I have a lot of expenses," Zaragosa said. "I don't have time to go there and gamble."
For Silvia Ibarra, who drives from Downey to sell $5 jars of honey, the displacement has cost her a day's pay each week.
Two weeks ago, when the market first moved, Ibarra made $9, 10% of her usual sales. Worried about losing money, her bosses at Aunt Willie's Apiary told her to stop going to the market.
"Now I'm out $60 a day, $240 a month," said the mother of three. "That's gas for a month, or two or three bills."
Set back in a paved plaza off Main Street, Lopez, the owner of A Taste of Baja, hopes his faithful customers will track him down.
Lopez, like other vendors, bounced from one farmers market to another. But he counted on the City Hall setting to deliver his greatest earnings: about $1,200 per day. People lined up for his ceviche and shrimp tacos, recipes borrowed from his mother to launch the business two years ago.
On the most recent Thursday, he made about $500, just enough to cover his costs.
The night the protesters took their vote, Lopez visited the camp with Hutchinson in hopes of reaching an agreement, but he said he left upset and confused.
"Too many chiefs and not enough Indians," he said.
But Lopez plans to keep selling from his taco and burrito booth.
"We have no choice but to believe business is going to get better."
FULL COVERAGE: Occupy protests
esmeralda.bermudez@latimes.com
|
On November 16 2011 03:59 mechavoc wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2011 03:04 Logo wrote:On November 16 2011 02:04 dolvlo wrote:On November 16 2011 01:55 ziggurat wrote:
It seems to me that the only real people who suffer from these protests are small business owners and normal people who want to hang out in the park. Rich bankers couldn't care less about the OWS protests. Yeah you're totally right, this is what i was thinking too. Although these people have a right to protest, the small business owners also have a right to do business, so there's a conflict here. The protesters have had their time to protest, now let's let the small business owners have their time to do business. it doesn't work like that. If the protests were illegal they should have been arrested and dismantled immediately. You don't get to selectively enforce the law like this. The biggest thing imo is now you have a government entity that's (by their own admission or clear evidence): 1. Denied freedom of press 2. Destroyed private property 3. Violated a court order 4. Most likely prevented freedom of assembly 4b. Conspired to do so on a country wide scale Combine that with our absurdly high incarceration rate and it all doesn't seem so free anymore. Especially since no matter the consequences the property destroyed is gone and it's almost 100% sure that there will be no compensation. So you are saying they should have not allowed the protests from the start now? Interesting. I think this comes down to to give people an inch they take a mile. People just are not allowed to camp overnight in the city, NYC and many other cities tried to be accomodating and ignored their own rules when they initially allowed people to stay overnight and protest. After a while the cities have come to realize that they are not going anywhere and the issues of safety and sanitation (and in my view common sense) prevailed so they are going back to As to your points. 1. Denied freedom of press There seems to be plenty of press coverage and video of the park being taken down2. Destroyed private property A little ironic here as they were squatting on private property, that is a private park.
They were given warning to leave and could have taken their belongings with them.3. Violated a court order Court order as was posted a page earlier in this thread came after the fact and said basically they will have a hearing on it at 11:30 today (not sure what came from that hearing)4. Most likely prevented freedom of assembly People can assemble all they want aslong as they are not distrupting traffic/businesses and as long as they are not camping overnight. 4b. Conspired to do so on a country wide scale <puts on tin foil hat> The problem with the NYC park is the same problem every other city has, so eventually yes every city is going to take down their tent city.
Pretty much this. If you trespass onto private property, you thereby waive all rights to any of your own private property that you bring with you.
The Cease and Desist order given by that extremist judge holds no weight in court. And even if it does, the police have every right to stop protesters there, as they exist to uphold the law.
If you really think ppl are conspiring to stop these protests you're a conspiracy theorist. Of course they're a thorn in all the cities sides but its not like they're secretly working together to crush them all, that's just ridiculous
|
On November 16 2011 03:59 mechavoc wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2011 03:04 Logo wrote:On November 16 2011 02:04 dolvlo wrote:On November 16 2011 01:55 ziggurat wrote:
It seems to me that the only real people who suffer from these protests are small business owners and normal people who want to hang out in the park. Rich bankers couldn't care less about the OWS protests. Yeah you're totally right, this is what i was thinking too. Although these people have a right to protest, the small business owners also have a right to do business, so there's a conflict here. The protesters have had their time to protest, now let's let the small business owners have their time to do business. it doesn't work like that. If the protests were illegal they should have been arrested and dismantled immediately. You don't get to selectively enforce the law like this. The biggest thing imo is now you have a government entity that's (by their own admission or clear evidence): 1. Denied freedom of press 2. Destroyed private property 3. Violated a court order 4. Most likely prevented freedom of assembly 4b. Conspired to do so on a country wide scale Combine that with our absurdly high incarceration rate and it all doesn't seem so free anymore. Especially since no matter the consequences the property destroyed is gone and it's almost 100% sure that there will be no compensation. So you are saying they should have not allowed the protests from the start now? Interesting. I think this comes down to to give people an inch they take a mile. People just are not allowed to camp overnight in the city, NYC and many other cities tried to be accomodating and ignored their own rules when they initially allowed people to stay overnight and protest. After a while the cities have come to realize that they are not going anywhere and the issues of safety and sanitation (and in my view common sense) prevailed so they are going back to As to your points. 1. Denied freedom of press There seems to be plenty of press coverage and video of the park being taken down2. Destroyed private property A little ironic here as they were squatting on private property, that is a private park.
They were given warning to leave and could have taken their belongings with them.3. Violated a court order Court order as was posted a page earlier in this thread came after the fact and said basically they will have a hearing on it at 11:30 today (not sure what came from that hearing)4. Most likely prevented freedom of assembly People can assemble all they want aslong as they are not distrupting traffic/businesses and as long as they are not camping overnight. 4b. Conspired to do so on a country wide scale <puts on tin foil hat> The problem with the NYC park is the same problem every other city has, so eventually yes every city is going to take down their tent city.
1. Bloomburg said the media was kept away to, "“to prevent a situation from getting worse and to protect members of the press.". Which is an admission of denying press. There are also a lot of accounts of press being arrested or harassed. ( http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/11/15/reporters-say-police-denied-access-to-protest-site/ )
2. I don't see how a warning really makes it ok, nor do I see it as ironic (the park is for public use if it was completely private property it might be different).
3. Even after the court order the park has remained closed and arrests continue.
4b. There's documented quotes that 18 cities all talked together about occupations. If you were removing people for health and safety or other violations of the sort.... why would you need to talk about or coordinate such an effort? http://ht.ly/7u8Uh
The reason why selective enforcement like this is a problem is they allowed people to move in, to bring stuff into the park. Then decided to shut it down when they felt like it. If they shut it down immediately yeah that would have been annoying for protesters, but it'd be consistent and something that would only have been a setback for the movement. It's a lot bigger blow to have 5k+ books, tons of tents, clothing, food, etc. all destroyed.
|
On November 16 2011 03:59 Talin wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2011 03:43 Kaitlin wrote:On November 16 2011 03:30 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
Ydanis and other protesters who were arrested have still not been given access to their lawyers. It's a big conspiracy.... Or maybe some things just take a little time... Time to do what exactly? It's over 12 hours after the people were arrested afaik.
I think this is the kind of thinking this permeates this group. It's not all about "them". The jail has a shit load of people to process. People don't get what they want, when they want it. There is a system in place for processing things. Don't expect the world (especially the jailers) to be at your side granting any request on the spot. They have jobs to do, unlike these 'protestors'.
|
On November 16 2011 05:06 Kaitlin wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2011 03:59 Talin wrote:On November 16 2011 03:43 Kaitlin wrote:On November 16 2011 03:30 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
Ydanis and other protesters who were arrested have still not been given access to their lawyers. It's a big conspiracy.... Or maybe some things just take a little time... Time to do what exactly? It's over 12 hours after the people were arrested afaik. I think this is the kind of thinking this permeates this group. It's not all about "them". The jail has a shit load of people to process. People don't get what they want, when they want it. There is a system in place for processing things. Don't expect the world (especially the jailers) to be at your side granting any request on the spot. They have jobs to do, unlike these 'protestors'.
This is their job. And there's a big difference between "on the spot" and 12+ hours.
I wouldn't want to spend 12 hours in jail for no reason, would you?
|
On November 16 2011 05:25 Talin wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2011 05:06 Kaitlin wrote:On November 16 2011 03:59 Talin wrote:On November 16 2011 03:43 Kaitlin wrote:On November 16 2011 03:30 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
Ydanis and other protesters who were arrested have still not been given access to their lawyers. It's a big conspiracy.... Or maybe some things just take a little time... Time to do what exactly? It's over 12 hours after the people were arrested afaik. I think this is the kind of thinking this permeates this group. It's not all about "them". The jail has a shit load of people to process. People don't get what they want, when they want it. There is a system in place for processing things. Don't expect the world (especially the jailers) to be at your side granting any request on the spot. They have jobs to do, unlike these 'protestors'. This is their job. And there's a big difference between "on the spot" and 12+ hours. I wouldn't want to spend 12 hours in jail for no reason, would you?
The jailer's job is not to be your servant. It's to process the people who have been arrested.
No, I don't want to spend 12 hours in jail for any reason. That's why I obey the law and don't instigate shit with law enforcement. The antics of these people are doing them more harm than good, ie. shitting on public sidewalks ... Getting corruptive influences out of government is a great goal, but clouding that message by acting like complete dregs of society is not the way to get it done.
|
http://www.therightscoop.com/bloomberg-press-conference-on-clearing-zuccotti-park/
Basically Bloomberg isn't playing the little protesters' and their sympathizers in the city governments and courts game anymore. A judge can issue a bullshit injunction because he's little OWSer at heart all he wants, injunctions can be challenged or demanded to be clarified and they don't go into effect until the dispute is resolved after a hearing.
It only takes one side going and filing for an injunction for a judge to see it and grant it (or not), the other side still has its right to argue against it. This is a politically motivated ruling by a judge who cares more about his politics than the law. City governments aren't putting up with OWS crap anymore, their using legal delaying tactics to cover them breaking the law.
It's over.
Ydanis and other protesters who were arrested have still not been given access to their lawyers.
The horror! The city councilman who has done more than perhaps any other to aid and abet the rampant criminality in Zucotti got arrested. And less than 24 hours later, his demands to see a lawyer he can go order to play more games of legal obfuscation aren't being heeded? How long before the inevitable slave camps?
Do you even know when the right to a lawyer kicks in? Probably not.
Sorry, the real world isn't Law & Order. You don't get arrested, put in an interrogation room, and then just when Jerry Orbach is starting to really crank up the sarcasm, your lawyer runs in and saves you, all within an hour of being cuffed.
You guys are just so, so desperate to find something, anything, to try to stave off the current crumbling of your little crusade, to fire people up people with delusions of oppression, to do something to hold off the end.
It is over. You can all grow up and realize that being supercilious angry kids living in filth has failed and try your hand at real organization for political impact, or you can keep playing games in parks with cops and continue never amounting to anything.
Zucotti Park is cleared, you couldn't even defend that. Time for your OWS delusions of grandeur to end. You don't know anything to do other than sit around and bitch. No more sitting around, no city is going to allow these camps back. All that's left is the bitching.
OWS has failed and it is in worse shape everyday. Just like anyone not blinded by their delusion of OWS being unstoppable knew, and said, would happen.
|
On November 16 2011 06:00 DeepElemBlues wrote:
Sorry, the real world isn't Law & Order. You don't get arrested, put in an interrogation room, and then just when Jerry Orbach is starting to really crank up the sarcasm, your lawyer runs in and saves you, all within an hour of being cuffed.
This post was unneccessarily hostile, but damn this is a good quote.
<3 Lenny Briscoe
|
On November 16 2011 06:04 bonifaceviii wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2011 06:00 DeepElemBlues wrote:
Sorry, the real world isn't Law & Order. You don't get arrested, put in an interrogation room, and then just when Jerry Orbach is starting to really crank up the sarcasm, your lawyer runs in and saves you, all within an hour of being cuffed. This post was unneccessarily hostile, but damn this is a good quote. <3 Lenny Briscoe
This is very true. Even in places much smaller than NYC, getting a lawyer after being arrested takes some time. Booking and processing in jails is a somewhat lengthy process, and you have to keep in mind the jail employees are not likely to be rushing to make sure you get out in time to watch the fantastic performances of Jerry Orbach. I'm not a huge fan of our justice system, or of current police procedures, but not everything is a conspiracy or a violation of our rights. I think when people get outraged at small things like this, it takes away from any real issue present.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
