London riots: Violence erupts for third day

Liberté, égalité, fraternité, ou la mort!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

​

OUR leaders have asked for “shared sacrifice.” But when they did the asking, they spared me. I checked with my mega-rich friends to learn what pain they were expecting. They, too, were left untouched.

While the poor and middle class fight for us in Afghanistan, and while most Americans struggle to make ends meet, we mega-rich continue to get our extraordinary tax breaks. Some of us are investment managers who earn billions from our daily labors but are allowed to classify our income as “carried interest,” thereby getting a bargain 15 percent tax rate. Others own stock index futures for 10 minutes and have 60 percent of their gain taxed at 15 percent, as if they’d been long-term investors.

These and other blessings are showered upon us by legislators in Washington who feel compelled to protect us, much as if we were spotted owls or some other endangered species. It’s nice to have friends in high places.

My friends and I have been coddled long enough by a billionaire-friendly Congress. It’s time for our government to get serious about shared sacrifice.​

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

​

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I see Roger Malar sustainable living ideology is there too Captain . Ever Heard of U.N. Resolution Agenda 21 . Inseminated by trade organizations like " The League Of Towns and Cities . I wonder what seminars you guys Mayors go to . They drink at the gatherings too. I know a couple of mine drink big whiskey a lot

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Rich people get free shit all the time . I think the though is if they use it it has value so get some rich people to use your product and it will have insta value cause they do . So what do you do ? You give the shit to em . I didn't re-post your Picture Gustav . Pat Me on the back for being a good little soldier at your request. I got a painting for you . Be back with it if I can make it happen

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Third_of_May_1808


Anybody heard of the Paxton Paintings . 3.5 million for the collection is what I heard . Me new friend I played with last Sunday just moved em and made the front page of the Missoulian the other day . I didn't think they would publicize it like that as he was worried enough by the liability of the move ( For cleaning reasons . That is why they were moved )

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I wouldn't be surprised if Livingstone drank whisky too.
He's a little weasel, but at least he is a left wing weasel.
I think he's one of those old Soviet style reds.
Some very odd ideas, he has.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Ken Livingstone. Whiskey Lover


Later note:
Yes, he does drink whisky.

 

Ask the average Joe about human rights or health and safety ad they will sneer at the idea.
That's how good a job the British Press have done to prepare the way so that the Government can free the country from legislation that supports their legal rights and working conditions.

 

Arr, me hearty!
I don't think it's just "Capitalism" at work. I think it goes further than that. But that's just me. I's a dumm midell amerriken flyovr typ persun.

I've heard that you have plenty of eastern europeans to do the jobs as well, but then again, it's only a rumor.

Aye, or why educate when there are no jobs for those people with degrees in the first place.
Came across a program in the US, it was to keep people in this country from foreign countries who were educated in the US here, by extending their green cards/Visa's. It was being promoted by one of those "libertarian" free enterprise type organizations who seem to care more about low-wage workers (for increased "free market" profits) or just plain foreigners in general.
I was wondering about all the people that get college degrees in this country who were actually born here and can't find jobs.

People are in debt over everything. Hopefully, we'll be in Carbon Debt soon. Close down the factories (or what's left of them) make energy double and triple in price. That'll fix things for sure.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Oh, thank God! I was thinking I wasn't going to be exempted from "spic" jokes or something!
But anyway, I don't see why our borders should be open and unchecked illegal immigration allowed to run rampant.
I'm not convinced that all illegals are just taking jobs that no one else will take. We have record unemployment and foodstamps and all that. There was a recent news item about people camped out in front of a job fair to get jobs.. any jobs. And people are saying that illegal immigrants only take jobs that no one else will.
Or is it that employers are more than happy to pay lower wages to those people under the table, so that they get bigger profits?
Wonder how much welfare money goes to these illegals? You can't tell me that people who have children here, don't have a greater chance of getting a welfare check.

And forget about the southern border for a second. How many decent jobs from the former industrial powerhouse that was the USA have been shipped south of the border, or across the sea to China in the name of "free trade" and free market?

America is being raped from all sides, and from their own politicians. It disgusts me to see the rabid "free market" corporate apologists talking about how the lowest common wage denominator is helpful to the US, or that people who complain about unchecked immigration from any country are somehow xenophobes and racists.

America for Americans. America First.
Apparently that's racist.
(And for anyone tempted to do so, don't give me the semantics, the name America has for a long time generally meant the USA, not any North American or South American country)

I don't care what your race, religion, etc. If you were BORN (particularly to people who already LEGALLY lived here) in this country, then you DESERVE first pick of anything it has to offer, especially at this time.
No more selling out to any foreign industry or country.

 

Oh, ALERT ALERT!!! We have a filthy Carbon Footprint violating conspiracy theorist in the house! Oh, GOD!!!!

 

Fact.
Most of the new jobs being created in the UK are not now going to unemployed UK citizens, they are going to immigrants.
Why should that be.?

Let me tell you.
It's because in the UK we have a substandard schooling system, which churns out a proportion of young people who can hardly read and write and do simple arithmetic after 11 years.
That makes them totally unemployable.

Secondly, we have no apprenticeship system worth the name any more.
Instead, we have a University system, which trains the average person to do what? Carry folders around?
We are not giving people the skills they need to be useful.

Instead, we draw in nursing and medical staff from Asia, so that poorer countries pay for the training and we reap the benefits.
Our tradesmen are coming from the former Soviet Union, where training of young people was one of the things they did superbly well.

Everything is being done on the cheap.
Then we call our unemployed people lazy and shirkers.

 

Advice for my British Comrades​

*Do not panic.

With police and prosecutors going about doing their jobs, virtually every complaint has the possibility of being investigated. That means if you are the one that is suspected or accused of wrongdoing, the chances are good that you will be investigated. Don’t panic, you are not alone. Find a good attorney – preferably one that has experience with investigation cases, and go get help – sooner rather than later.

*Do not be in a hurry to resolve your case.

Time works in favor of the accused. You should be aware that there are time limits imposed by law to charge someone with a crime. The vast majority of legal actions are resolved by negotiation rather than by hearing or trial. Negotiations may become easier when prosecutors are trying to resolve old cases.

*Always remember that the investigator and the prosecutor are not your friends, and they are not trying to help you.

If you remember nothing else, remember that. All too often people are surprised when visited by an investigator. People lower their guard and say and do things that are ill-advised. In an attempt to defend their actions or make sure an investigator understands their side, people often jeopardize their opportunity for an effective defense by answering questions and providing written statements without even a clear understanding of what the investigation is about.

*Do not answer any questions, ask them.

Many people agree to an interview or to provide documents before they have a clear idea of who is requesting information and for what purpose. Sometimes people are told they have to cooperate, and sometimes they are even threatened with arrest. Don’t let them fool you, it is just a clever trick. You can politely ask such things as: “what is this all about?” or “can I contact my attorney first?” If you are told nothing, say nothing. If you are told you can contact an attorney first, do it. If you are told you cannot contact an attorney first, insist on it and say nothing else.

*Beware of investigators' attempts to minimize.

If you are told, "this is just a routine investigation," ask yourself for whom is it routine? Sure, it is routine for the investigator; he or she probably investigates someone every day, but it is not routine for you. Being investigated is not a trivial matter. If the investigator refuses to disclose who is being investigated or says he or she can't tell you what the investigation is about, then it is time to terminate the interview. If the investigator is not going to be up front with you, it is not in your best interest to talk to him or her. Politely ask for their contact information and tell them you will discuss it with your attorney first, then your attorney will contact them.

*If an investigator attempts to intimidate you, terminate the interview.

If the investigator's response to your questions or concerns is: "if you don't want to answer questions here, you can answer them downtown," or "we can put you out of business," or "we can do this the easy way or the hard way," then right away it is clear that the investigator is not going to be reasonable and is more concerned with his or her ego than your rights. Such an attitude is a signal to stop talking and call an attorney immediately. A good investigator will be friendly, and a friendly investigator is far more effective and far more dangerous than a surly one. Remember, although an investigator might be friendly, the investigator is not your friend, and is not there to help you; he or she is there to do a job.

*An interview can be terminated at any time.

People who are being investigated often worry about appearing uncooperative and angering the investigator. Remember, the investigator is not your friend and not going to help you. It doesn't matter if an investigator does not like you. Your rights are at stake – exercise them.

*Do not give investigators any documents, potential items of evidence, or anything else unless served with a subpoena or search warrant.

An investigator might not have any legal right to requested materials but, if you provide them, then they may be used against you. Further, there might be a legal reason to question the validity of a subpoena or the authority of the entity that issued it. So, never give up anything. Next, if you only served a subpoena, call your attorney immediately. He or she should know what to do about it. If you served with a search warrant, call your attorney before letting anyone in your house, car, or anything else. There are few occasions where police can break into some place without you permission, but there is no law that requires you open the door to your house – or go outside. If you are in your house when they come, don’t open the door. Ask who it is and what do they want. If they say something like “police, search warrant,” ask them to show you a copy through a window or something, then call your attorney. Police will lie about having one, so make them prove it.

*Do not ever provide a written statement or confession at the time of an interview.

This is critical. There is absolutely nothing to be gained by providing a written statement at the time of an interview, and much to be lost. The only reason for an investigator to request a written statement during an interview is to lock you into that statement. Such a statement will only be used against you and never for your benefit. While it is in your best interest to provide requested information in writing for the purpose of avoiding misinterpretation, it is not necessary to do that at the time of an interview. Carefully review all written information with your attorney before it is submitted.​

 

Just read this in a completely different context at mondoweiss and it seems that sadly, some sentiments are just timeless:

 

Parliamentary Sovereignty​

Throughout centuries of British history, many laws and treatises asserted various requirements as being part of "due process" or included in the "law of the land". This view usually held in regards to what was required by existing law, rather than what was intrinsically required by due process itself. As the U.S. Supreme Court has explained, a due process requirement in Britain was not "essential to the idea of due process of law in the prosecution and punishment of crimes, but was only mentioned as an example and illustration of due process of law as it actually existed in cases in which it was customarily used."

Ultimately, the scattered references to "due process of law" in English law did not limit the power of the government; about this, American law professor John Orth wrote that "the great phrases failed to retain their vitality." Orth points out that this is generally attributed to the rise of the doctrine of parliamentary supremacy in the United Kingdom, which was accompanied by hostility towards judicial review as an undemocratic foreign invention.

Scholars have occasionally interpreted Lord Coke's ruling in Dr. Bonham's Case as implying the possibility of judicial review, but by the 1870s, Lord Campbell was dismissing judicial review as "a foolish doctrine alleged to have been laid down extra-judicially in Dr. Bonham's Case..., a conundrum [that] ought to have been laughed at." Lacking the power of judicial review, English courts possessed no means by which to declare government statutes or acts invalid as a violation of due process. As a consequence, English law and American law diverged, with American legislators possessing no means by which to declare judicial invalidation of statutes incorrect (with the sole exception of proposing a constitutional amendment, which are rarely successful). In 1977, an English political science professor explained the present situation in England for the benefit of American lawyers:

“An American constitutional lawyer might well be surprised by the elusiveness of references to the term 'due process of law' in the general body of English legal writing... Today one finds no space devoted to due process in Halsbury's Laws of England, in Stephen's Commentaries, or Anson's Law and Custom of the Constitution. The phrase rates no entry in such works as Stroud's Judicial Dictionary or Wharton's Law Lexicon. (wikishit)​

------------------------------------------​

"I think there may be a slight problem in that judges and magistrates are working without court of appeal guidelines and I expect cases to reach the court of appeal quickly. I share the hope of many lawyers that the court of appeal will produce a set of guidelines so there can be a sufficient level of consistency, even with guidelines there will be variation because a judge is perfectly entitled to reflect local circumstances.

"My suspicion is that as time passes the level of sentencing in these cases will reduce. I am actually more concerned with the number of people who are on remand in custody. There are numerous first offenders who have been remanded in custody who in other circumstances would not have been remanded in custody. I think there will be crown court appeals. A lot of people have been remanded in custody by magistrate courts for relatively minor offences such as receiving small quantities of stolen clothing. In ordinary circumstances people in that situation would not be remanded in custody – they might get a custodial sentence but they would not be remanded in custody in the first instance."

He said that deterrent sentences were to be expected for those who commit acts of violence or theft of valuable items but added: "There will be a shakedown of the less serious cases although all forms of looting and rioting are going to attract greater sentences. In due course people with no previous convictions who have received stolen clothing for example may be more likely to find themselves with non-custodial sentences."

He added: "Just filling up prisons may not be contributing in the long term to the peace and orderliness of society. They may only have themselves to blame but prison should never be the first option." (Lord Carlile)​

------------------------------​

This week's riots have been so shocking that normally level-headed people start to see due process of law as an encumbrance to justice. The reverse is true – due process is fundamental to justice, even for the unprepossessing and the downright nasty offender. (bystander)​

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

​

 

That pretty much describes all of America's so-called "leftists."

-- Derrick Jensen

 

really? do some research and see if you wanna still maintain that

 

I was referring to the context of the post where I read it

 

you are making an absolute distinction b/w present day england and the american civil rights era. either justify or amend.

 

If you read my post, I referred to the timelessness of the quoted sentiment, which was a response to the non sequitor that was the body of Capt Kremmen's response(s) to my quoted figure on the high rates of unemployment in black youth

 

So, what is a proper response to a figure of high unemployment among British black youth.?

I say we should have proper job training courses for all our young people..
We should be training our young people to do the jobs we need done.
Instead, we are poaching trained people from other countries, often far poorer than ourselves.
Because it's cheaper than training our own youth.

Meanwhile the rich people in our country are getting richer year by year.

What's your solution?
Rioting?

 

MLK was a great man . He has not got his just due yet . Time will be very good to him cause he was milk for the world that is just now starting to understand his greatness

 

Something you said Captain . About your school systems . That is the same rhetoric in the U.S.
Our schools are broke and the kids are not getting a proper education .
It ain't the kids , I can tell you that cause kids will be kids . Lack of leadership or the lack of leaders being seen as leadership . Meaning we elect those that promise the moon instead of leaders that make the hard decisions. Our Leaders are going rouge , Some of them . No not Sara . The other ones that got elected . They can do that in the U.S. . Did you know that the people that make the electoral vote ( The Hard copy vote ) can change there mind at the last minute . Yeah the people think if they made a decision by vote an it is a an electoral vote by proxy of the state that it is all sowed up . nOt true ? That very official representing the state can change there vote at the last minute . There was a congress woman in the south that did it quite frequently . Can't remember her name but she didn't win friends and influence to many people by her antics . The conservatives still drag her name up occasionally .

 

Clearly, a more perfect capitalism, by men with bigger beards.

I am assured that this will occur, much like the reverse of perfect Communism, within our lifetime. And if not, its architects will be long dead anyway before they could be profitably brought to justice. Is the order of the middle class' interest the order of order or the order of smokescreens?