Metro Jacksonville

http://jacksonville.com/news/crime/2011-12-23/story/jacksonville-cracks-down-occupy-protesters (http://jacksonville.com/news/crime/2011-12-23/story/jacksonville-cracks-down-occupy-protesters)

QuoteBy Matt Soergel jacksonville.com Copyright 2011 The Florida Times-Union. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. 
December 23, 2011 - 02:26pm
Jacksonville cracks down on Occupy protesters
The city is cracking down on Occupy Jacksonville supporters who have gathered in front of City Hall night and day since Nov. 5.

A letter Thursday from Howard M. Maltz, the city’s deputy general counsel, gives the group until Tuesday to remove signs on public property as well as items stored along Duval Street.

The letter, which said the group was in violation of city codes, was not precipitated by any one thing, said Cindy Laquidara, the city’s general counsel. There was a sense, however, that the group was escalating its lack of compliance, she said.

“We would expect them to cooperate,” Laquidara said Friday. “They’re generally nice people.”

However, Kristian Gore, a frequent Occupy protestor, said he anticipates the group will vote to sue the city to keep the signs and stored items. That could lead to a showdown of sorts on Tuesday, he said.

Meanwhile, a man connected to the Occupy group was arrested Thursday evening after lying down in the middle of the intersection of Duval and Hogan streets.

Police identified him as Bryan Jeremy Kael, 23. He was charged with resisting an officer without violence and two counts of disorderly intoxication for a public disturbance and endangering property or others.

“We tried to talk him out of it,” said Gore. “Even our legal team wasn’t really interested in doing anything [about the arrest] because he was inebriated.”

According to Gore, Kael had been at early Occupy Jacksonville events before going to join the group in Orlando. He had returned to Jacksonville recently.

A video of the arrest taken by Occupy supporter Keith Downey showed Kael howling in apparent pain as he was handcuffed and lifted off the sidewalk, although Jacksonville Sheriff Office officers seemed to take caution to treat him without roughness as the arrest was made.

Gore expressed frustration over Kael’s actions.

“We’re trying to figure out solutions, and he’s out there getting arrested for the sake of getting arrested,” he said. “We can’t control who comes and goes. It’s a public street.”

Early Friday afternoon there were about 10 protesters sitting between the sidewalk and Duval Street. One played a guitar and sang. There was a long table set up near them with food stored underneath it. Nearby were stacks of signs, along with folded tarpulines, blankets and unopened umbrellas.

Gore said any city crackdown on signs on city property would be selective enforcement because there are signs elsewhere throughout downtown.

The city’s letter also asked Occupy members to stop using sidewalk chalk to write messages. It noted that while it doesn’t violate a city code, “we would ask your indulgence to cease this activity. We strive to maintain a professional appearance to this and every City building.”

Friday afternoon the chalk messages remained, including one that read “RIP your rights.”



Read more at Jacksonville.com: http://jacksonville.com/news/crime/2011-12-23/story/jacksonville-cracks-down-occupy-protesters#ixzz1hOUfxfx8

All 10 people are really pissed off and considering suing the city.

 ::)  Well....at least Kudos to JSO for not getting out the pepper spray or rubber bullets on this massive crowd .   

They are still down there??

Being relevant to this thread, I thought I would post the below letter, which I gave to my occupy friends today in hopes that it might offer some ideas for future decisions.


To: My Good Friends at Occupy Jacksonville
From:  Ron Chamblin  (Chamblin’s Uptown)
Subject: Occupier Opinions and Suggestions
Date: Christmas Eve 2011

     I’ve heard rumblings about the city wishing to end your presence near city hall, beginning with pressuring you to have no signs.  Also, and this has always been, there are those who suggest that your presence is an eyesore for the area.  These things are to be expected.

     This note is to offer some observations about what your first stage of occupation has accomplished, and also to suggest a second stage, as the benefits of the first seem to be waning.

     First of all, I hope that you realize the very important consequences of “all” of the occupy locations.  The influence of the occupiers all over the U.S. is phenomenal.   In the news today are the Russian protesters who are attempting to remove the growing dictatorial yoke which has been tightened around the citizens over the past several years by Putin, the former KGB agent.  If you remember, several years ago Putin removed the elected outlying officials and governors and replaced them with appointed cronies.  He also obliterated all vestiges of the free media by closing them, or forcing the high management to leave Russia or, by ordering their assassination.  In the NYT recently, a Russian citizen commented that their current bravery comes from their knowledge of the “occupiers” in America. 

     In any case, great productive conversations, which are still going on, and will continue with even greater eloquence over the months ahead, are the direct result of the accumulated presence of “occupiers”.  So, when you hear the occasional detractor of the occupier movement, pay little mind, as they are either one of the very comfortable, or one of the somewhat ignorant.

     As to my opinion of the future, I sense that it might be productive to “consider” the idea of ending the 24 hour occupation of a particular site, and to meet perhaps once every two weeks, or once a month, at a certain location, thereby making a physical presence still, keeping the message visible so that the occupy effect could still be.  In my opinion, if done properly over facebook and other means, the attendance would reach into the hundreds, or even thousands.  Also, there would be greater convenience and time to generate more creative and proper agendas through which the periodic  “occupiers” could engage the issues at hand.

     The above change would remove the accumulating negatives which seem to be coming from several fronts.  It would also remove the possibility of a damaging and unnecessary confrontation with the city, which would only detract from our message.  If we are to work for ultimate positive accomplishments and change, we might wish to spend less time in confrontation with the local government, and thus have more time and energy to confront the big issues, which involve primarily the federal government and the banking and corporate entities which “must” and “shall” be challenged.

Ron Chamblin   
     
     
     

This article was on Huff Post today.  I'm not suggesting that the situation in Russia and the U.S. has great similarities, as the U.S. has a much more complex situation.  But at least, it shows how protesters (occupiers) can make a difference.  I'm sure that Mr. Putin, and the many that have gained wealth and privilege during his reign are quite concerned right now about their future ability to retain the assets they've stolen from the 99%. 
   

Russia Protests: Tens Of Thousands Rally In Biggest Anti-Putin Demonstration Yet

By NATALIYA VASILYEVA and JIM HEINTZ -- The Associated Press

MOSCOW (AP) - Tens of thousands of demonstrators on Saturday cheered opposition leaders and jeered the Kremlin in the biggest show of outrage yet against Prime Minister Vladimir Putin's 12-year rule.  The Moscow demonstration was even bigger than a similar rally two weeks ago, signaling that the protest movement ignited by the fraud-tainted Dec. 4 parliamentary election may be growing. Protests were also held in dozens of other cities and towns across Russia.

Rally participants densely packed a broad avenue, which has room for nearly 100,000 people, about 2.5 kilometers (some 1.5 miles) from the Kremlin, as the temperature dipped well below freezing. They chanted "Russia without Putin!"  A stage at the end of the 700-meter (0.43 mile) avenue featured placards reading "Russia will be free" and "This election Is a farce." Heavy police cordons encircled the participants, who stood within metal barriers, and a police helicopter hovered overhead.

Alexei Navalny, a corruption-fighting lawyer and popular blogger, electrified the crowd when he took the stage. A rousing speaker, he had protesters shouting "We are the power!"  Navalny spent 15 days in jail for leading a protest on Dec. 5 that unexpectedly drew more than 5,000 people and set off the chain of demonstrations. Since his release, he has helped to further galvanize the opposition.

Putin's United Russia party lost 25 percent of its seats in the election, but hung onto a majority in parliament through what independent observers said was widespread fraud. United Russia, seen as representing a corrupt bureaucracy, has become known as the party of crooks and thieves, a phrase coined by Navalny.

"We have enough people here to take the Kremlin," he shouted to the crowd. "But we are peaceful people and we won't do that - yet. But if these crooks and thieves keep cheating us, we will take what is ours."  The recent protests in Moscow and other cities have dented Putin's authority as he seeks to reclaim the presidency in a March vote. The Kremlin has responded by promising a set of political reforms that would allow more political competition in future elections.

But protest leaders say they will continue pushing for a rerun of the parliamentary election and punishment for officials accused of vote fraud. They say maintaining momentum is key to forcing Putin's government to accept their demands.

"We don't trust him," opposition leader Boris Nemtsov told the rally, urging protesters to gather again next month to make sure that the proposed changes are put into law. Along with liberals, the rally also drew Communists and nationalists.  Nemtsov called on the demonstrators to go to the polls in March to unseat Putin. "A thief must not sit in the Kremlin," he said.

Former world chess champion Garry Kasparov was among an array of speakers who sought to give the protesters a sense of empowerment.  "There are so many of us here, and they (the government) are few," Kasparov said from the stage. "They are huddled up in fear behind police cordons."  Many in the crowd were young.
"We want to back those who are fighting for our rights," said 16-year-old Darya Andryukhina, who said she had also attended the previous rally.  "People have come here because they want respect," said Tamara Voronina, 54, who said she was proud that her three sons also had joined the protest.

The protests reflect a growing public frustration with Putin, who ruled Russia as president in 2000-2008 and has remained the No. 1 leader after moving into the prime minister's seat due to a constitutional term limit. Brazen fraud in the parliamentary vote unexpectedly energized the middle class, which for years had been politically apathetic.

"No one has done more to bring so many people here than Putin who managed to insult the whole country," said Viktor Shenderovich, a columnist and satirical writer.  Putin has accused the United States of fomenting the protests in order to weaken Russia and has said, sarcastically, that he thought the white ribbons many protesters wear as an emblem were condoms.  In response to Putin's blustery rhetoric, one protester Saturday held a picture montage of Putin with his head wrapped in a condom like a grandmother's headscarf.
"We can't tolerate such a show of disrespect for the people, for the entire nation," journalist and music critic Artyomy Troitsky said in a speech at the rally. He wore a white gown that resembled a condom, mocking Putin's comment.  Although Putin has derided the demonstrators as Western stooges, he has also sought to soothe public anger by promising to relax his grip on the political scene.

He has promised to liberalize registration rules for opposition parties and restore the direct election of governors he abolished in 2004. Putin's stand-in as president, Dmitry Medvedev, spelled out those and other proposed changes in Thursday's state-of-the nation address, promising to restore direct elections to fill half of the seats in parliament and ease rules for the presidential election.

Some opposition leaders welcomed the proposals, but stressed the need for the protests to continue to force the Kremlin to quickly turn the promises into law.  "These measures are insufficient," said Arina Zhukova, 45, another participant in Saturday's rally. "They are intended to calm people down and prevent them from showing up at rallies."

The electoral changes, however, will only apply to a new election cycle years away, and the opposition has stressed the need to focus on preventing fraud in the March presidential election and mounting a consolidated challenge to Putin.  Former Finance Minister Alexei Kudrin, who lost his seat after complaining about increased defense spending, surprised the protesters by saying the current parliament should approve the electoral changes and then step down to allow new elections to be held.  Kudrin, who remains close to Putin, warned that the wave of protests could lead to violence and called for establishing a dialogue between the opposition and the government. "Otherwise we will lose the chance for peaceful transformation," he said.

In another sign of the authorities' efforts to stem the tide of public anger, the presidential human rights commission early Saturday echoed protesters' demands in a statement condemning violations in the vote and calling for the ouster of Central Election Commission chief Vladimir Churov.  It said that allegations of widespread fraud have led to a "moral and political discrediting of the election system and the lower house of parliament, creating a real threat to the Russian state."

Vladimir Isachenkov and Lynn Berry contributed to this report.

    I occasionally wonder about the major differences between the economic and political plights of the masses of Russia and of the U.S.?  Which of the two protest groups, one in Russia, the other in the U.S., faces a more difficult road to political and economic reform?

     The Russians of the old communist party, and others in the best positions at the fall of the Soviet Union, grabbed assets and opportunities.  They became the Russian 1%.  However, one might hesitate to blame these opportunists because, as in any system in chaos, such as the case immediately following the fall of the Soviets, “someone” had to grab the assets abandoned by the government.   

     The 1% of the U.S. however, achieved their wealth, income, and power over a longer period of time, and by different methods, some quite ethical, by hard work and ingenuity, and others, by becoming involved in a selectively unfair and corrupt system which has been questioned over recent months by the occupiers and others.

     If one agrees that both the Russian and the U.S. workers (the masses) have before them a difficult task in addressing and changing their respective systems so that increased fairness and opportunity for “all” might exist, what are the dynamics affecting the workers in Russia as compared to those in America?

      By equality in the U.S., I do not suggest that we should force equality between all citizens, as this would be unnatural, unfair, and stifle creativity and hard work, but that we should encourage a system which provides an environment offering “equal opportunities for all to strive for wealth and a reasonable income”.  A system approaching a true equality of opportunity and fairness to all citizens in the realms of education, health care, and economic development, will, by way of the natural pressures in every human, result eventually in a more equal distribution of wealth and income; that is, as compared to the current extreme inequality. 

     There is nothing wrong with an individual being worth billions of dollars.  However, if the maintenance of this individual’s wealth depends upon the perpetuation of a system which obstructs the opportunities for the masses to achieve a reasonable standard of living, then there “is” something wrong with this individual’s wealth. 

     The current scenario, wherein there exists extreme wealth and income as held by 1% of the population, and wherein the 99% are sinking into a less than tolerable standard of living because there are no jobs, indicates that something is very wrong.  Changes must occur either by newly enlightened governmental and corporate entities, or by the force of the people, the protesters, the occupiers.  And this is what the occupiers and others have been talking about for the past several months.

     To those who suggest that equality of opportunity exists for all who wish to expend the will and energy, I say to you that you are blind to the subtle and hidden impediments to one’s freedom and opportunity to excel and work, and that this blindness is caused perhaps by the fact that you, for a time, happen to be comfortable, with job and home, or perhaps that you have two homes, a yacht, and an airplane.     

     The below article, from the NYT, is interesting in that it shows the great promise of positive change in Russia.  The average worker and citizen in Russia and the U.S. have before them the task of regaining their freedom to govern themselves so that they can fracture the bulwark of embedded politicians and the privileged power and financial elites who have been making decisions for themselves at the expense of the average worker.  The Russians are moving along to needed change at a greater rate than we in the U.S. perhaps because our scenario is much more complex, as the forces at work in America are more subtle and hidden, are embedded in tradition and habits of governing and “doing business”, are given validity by ties to religion and to the realities of racism and elitism. 

Please forgive for the following long article from the NYT, but it is exciting to ponder the events unfolding in Russia, which admittedly involve a scenario quite different from that in the U.S., but there are enough similarities to allow reflections and comparisons.   

MOSCOW â€" Tens of thousands of citizens converged in Moscow on Saturday for the second huge antigovernment demonstration in a month, an early victory for activists struggling to forge a burst of energy into a political force capable of challenging Vladimir V. Putin’s power.
The first such demonstration, two weeks ago, was unprecedented for Mr. Putin’s rule, and there were reasons Saturday’s turnout could have been lower â€" among them, winter holidays and the onset of bitter cold.

Instead, people poured all afternoon into a canyon created by vast government buildings, and the police put the crowd at 30,000, more than they reported on Dec. 10. Organizers said it was closer to 120,000. Hours later, as the protesters dispersed, they chanted, slowly: “We will come again! We will come again!”

If the movement sustains its intensity, it could alter the course of the presidential election in March, when Mr. Putin plans to extend his stretch as the country’s dominant figure to an eventual 18 years.

Opposition voters were furious over the conduct of this month’s parliamentary election, and will be roused again by Mr. Putin’s campaigning. Still, maintaining momentum is a huge challenge, and the initial giddy mood has already hardened into something more serious.

The crime novelist Boris Akunin, peering out through wire-rimmed glasses as he addressed the crowd from a stage, said demonstrators should prepare themselves for a long haul.
“We will have a difficult year,” Mr. Akunin said. “But it will be an interesting year. It will be our year.”

The protests have rattled the Kremlin, which has not encountered widespread political resistance for a decade. Mr. Putin initially sneered at the demonstrators, saying days after the first rally that the white ribbons they have adopted as a symbol resembled limp condoms, and that they participated only because they were paid by foreign agents seeking to undermine Russia.
But it is clear that government elites are taking protesters’ complaints as a warning and scrambling to head off a more dangerous confrontation. On Saturday, for the first time, two high-level figures connected to the Kremlin were at the demonstration.

Former Finance Minister Aleksei L. Kudrin, a member of Mr. Putin’s inner circle for more than two decades, took the stage to express his support for many of the protesters’ demands: the dismissal of the head of the Central Election Commission, Vladimir Y. Churov; the dissolution of Parliament and new elections; and changes in the election code to allow for free competition. Mr. Kudrin published an article on Saturday in Kommersant, a respected daily newspaper, noting that many employees of state enterprises were participating in the demonstrations.

“It seems to me they wanted to say the following: ‘Respected leaders! Many of us have come here for the first time, fully consciously and entirely independently. We have something to lose, and we are for stability,’ ” Mr. Kudrin wrote. “But the violation of your own rules â€" and this is the way we take the information about mass falsifications and violations of statistical patterns â€" this is too much.”

The billionaire Mikhail D. Prokhorov, who has said he will run against Mr. Putin, was also in the crowd, though he did not deliver a speech. He arrived without a security detail, stooping occasionally to answer questions and pose for photographs with young women.

Both Mr. Kudrin and Mr. Prokhorov are viewed skeptically by a portion of the protesters, who fear they represent attempts by the Kremlin to dilute or divide a powerful new protest electorate.
“Sorry, what relationship does Kudrin have to democratic movements?” wrote Vladimir Varfolomeyev, an editor at the radio station Ekho Moskvy, via Twitter. “He’s a bureaucrat who has faithfully served the regime for 10 years.” When Mr. Kudrin took the stage, he was booed by some in the crowd and cheered by others.

Though all demonstrators interviewed said they were hoping to avoid a violent uprising, some left the possibility hanging in the air like a warning. Aleksei Navalny, the blogger whose enormous popularity set these protests in motion, was greeted with a deafening roar from the crowd, which had been begging to see him for more than an hour.

“I can see that there are enough people here to seize the Kremlin,” said Mr. Navalny, 35, who listened to the earlier protest on the radio while serving 15 days in jail. “We are a peaceful force and will not do it now. But if these crooks and thieves try to go on cheating us, if they continue telling lies and stealing from us, we will take what belongs to us with our own hands.”

Mr. Navalny especially delighted the crowd with barbed insults of Mr. Putin; indeed, hatred for the prime minister has become a motif at these events. One popular sign read “Putin is our condom,” in a reference to his comments about the white ribbons. Another, painted in the style of Salvador Dalí, showed the prime minister melting in front of a giant clock with the words “Your time has passed.”

“Where is this man?” Mr. Navalny asked. “Can you see him? Is he here?”
He added: “These days, with the help of the zombie-box, they are trying to prove to us that they are big and scary beasts. But we know who they are. Little sneaky jackals! Is that right?” The crowd roared. “Is that true or not?” Another roar.

Pavel Morozov, 23, said he realized that dislodging Mr. Putin might hurt the middle-class quality of life he enjoys. But he said it did not matter. “Putin is a reincarnation of Brezhnev,” he said. He added that while he did not know whether people like Mr. Navalny or the environmental activist Yevgenia Chirikova were worthy alternatives, “at least they are an alternative. Anyone now but Putin.”

Former President Mikhail S. Gorbachev told Ekho Moskvy that he thought Mr. Putin should withdraw his bid for the presidency. When asked whether he thought Mr. Putin would give up power voluntarily, Mr. Gorbachev, who was not at the rally, said, “What’s terrible about it?” and noted that he had done so 20 years ago. “Then all the positive that he has done would be safeguarded.”

For organizers, the challenge is to keep the movement alive at all, since the protesters are working people who will leave the city for two soporific weeks in January. Their commitment to politics is unclear; some say that they are willing to demonstrate for years, others that they will lose interest if a leader does not emerge.

“I don’t know what people here want or what they expect from today, but the fact that they are here is important and valuable in and of itself,” said Zinaida Burskaya, 22. “I do feel that it will affect things over the next two to three years. That people have torn themselves from off their couches and have come here and are not apathetic. This may allow for new leaders to emerge.”
Toward evening, the humorist Viktor Shenderovich looked out at the protesters and said, “This toothpaste cannot be put back in the tube.” And they dispersed in a great surge through back streets and alleyways â€" anarchists and incrementalists, nationalists and bread-and-butter voters waving the hammer-and-sickle flag of the Soviet Union. Marina Shkudyuk, 58, an economist, said she was motivated by rising housing and utility costs, and planned to keep coming out until her demands were satisfied. She said she did not see a leader emerging from the movement, but “at least let there be something different.”

“My family thinks that Grandma has gone crazy,” she said.