Solidarity action with Occupy Wall Street eviction


Occupy London will be holding a solidarity action outside the US Embassy in Grosevener Square at 3pm today.

Meet at the steps of St Paul’s at 2pm.

OWS “Such a movement cannot be evicted. Some politicians may physically remove us from public spaces — our spaces — and, physically, they may succeed. But we are engaged in a battle over ideas. Our idea is that our political structures should serve us, the people — all of us, not just those who have amassed great wealth and power. We believe that is a highly popular idea, and that is why so many people have come so quickly to identify with Occupy Wall Street and the 99% movement.”



15 Responses to “Solidarity action with Occupy Wall Street eviction”

  1. Does OccupyLSX have a mobile phone list of people who are not at the occupation every day, but who would be willing to get there at short notice to support the camp(s) in the event of a police eviction in London?

    • Excellent idea, I would certainly add my phone number to any rapid action list.

  2. Be prepared for our eviction. Be prepared to be beaten with batons, sprayed with pepper gas and targeted with tasers. All in the name of health and safety.

    • I’ve posted this before, but you will do better by leaving peacefully and making some sort of media spectacle of it, attracting lots of good publicity. If you leave violently then you will do your cause no good at all.

  3. Sounds like you really want to provoke violence, why is that not a surprise??

    • Its not about provoking violence. It is a fact that if and when the eviction of LSX occurs then Ghandi style passive resisitance will be met with violence. Euphemistically called ‘pain compliance’. Police are permitted to use such tactics and unfortunately some of those who are supposed to serve and protect see ‘pain compliance’ as theraputic. It wasn’t my intention to provoke violence, that would be a breach of health and safety.

      • And, if there is a legal requirement for you to leave, you will resist, leaving the police with no option but to forceably remove you. Cut out the Gandhi stuff, you want confrontation, pure and simple!

        • Gosh, Billy, your ability to read other people’s minds and know more about what they are thinking than they do is truly astonishing. I’m thinking of a number between 0 and 100. Go on, please tell me what it is…

          • Excuse me, I’m not camping out at St Pauls. I’m not trying to impose my views on the majority. I’m not the one trying to destroy a system, without having any idea of what to replace it with. Get real!

        • I am delighted to hear you’re not wishing to impose your opinions on anybody, Billy… but you’ve certainly exerted considerable influence on my thinking over these last few days.

          I have decided, therefore, to stop being an ‘interested by-stander’ but to dedicate the rest of my years (which may not be all that many) to supporting the Occupy movement.

  4. Why are they not livestreaming the event

  5. I’ve just seen the Guardian Comment is Free circle-jerk over Occupy and quite honestly, this nonsense needs to stop. Occupy is an indulgence and a scam. Having asked the questions around donations, expenses, and who is in charge of the money, I’ve either been ignored, insulted, told to mind my own business, or otherwise rebuffed. What probably started as good intentions has just ended up in folly with nothing achieved whatsoever. The saddest thing is that Occupy are leeching off others – camping out (perhaps only part time) on someone else’s property, larking around playing games all day, making a good living (£10k profit in a month) off donations made by generous people who believed that their money was going towards trying to make the world a better place. Put bluntly, they are parasites and scammers taking good folk for a ride. That’s money potentially diverted from charities and small businesses and spent on God knows what.

    If you think I’ve libeled you then sue me, but you’ll have to open up your income and expenditure for scrutiny to prove me wrong, which I’m pretty confident that you won’t do.

  6. Returning to the earlier post, I think OccupyLSX should consider putting-out a call for a large number of supporters who would pledge to come down at very short notice and link arms around the camp should eviction be attempted. Twitter or mobile phone alerts to a list of several hundred supporters could enable non-violent resistance which would prevent what happened in NYC. I am sure you have many supporters in nearby neighbourhoods like southwark, bethnal green, hackney and islington who could respond quickly in such a situation.

  7. Protesters Have the Right to Protest … and to Resist Unlawful Arrest
    Posted on November 13, 2011 by WashingtonsBlog
    Top Military Commander and Courts Support Right to Protest

    In response to comments from those supporting the police crackdowns on peaceful protesters exercising their constitutional rights but violating local ordinances (see comments here), reader Purplemuse writes:

    The Constitution supersedes local ordinances that are being used to OBSTRUCT 1st Amendment Rights. The camping ITSELF is in order to MAKE A STATEMENT – a First Amendment Right. Protesters are not camping because it is fun to expose yourself to the elements and hardship and you want to roast wienies and marshmallows and drink beer while swapping ghost stories.

    Would you listen to Colin Powell, retired four-star general in the United States Army, Powell also served as National Security Advisor (1987–1989), as Commander of the U.S. Army Forces Command (1989) and as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (1989–1993) when he says, “It isn’t enough just to scream at the Occupy Wall Street demonstrations. We need our political system to start reflecting this anger back into, ‘How do we fix it? How do we get the economy going again?’” He also states that the Occupy Wall Street Protests are “As American as Apple Pie.”

    Does he go on to qualify his statement by saying, “as long as they obey local (misdemeanor) ordinances. No, he does not. He actually goes on to say that he “gets” it.

    If a man, well above your rank, that you’d likely drop everything to stand up in a room to honor, “gets” that peaceful protests, by design (that’s why they are referred to as ‘civil disobedience’) infringe on ordinances and make the public uncomfortable in order to be heard, are as American as Apple Pie; do you think you could set your fear of disobedience aside long enough to defend those protesters against physical harm for exercising those American as Apple Pie Rights? If you can’t than I think you need to join the ranks of officers who simply “do as they are told” and jab petite women in the spleen with billy clubs (as in Berkeley) in order to incite a riot. (BTW: They did not succeed, Berkeley stood firm in determined peace).

    (Watch Powell’s statement here).

    Of course, it’s not just Powell. Veterans from every branch of the military – and across 3 generations – are coming out to support the “occupy” protests.

    And in response to the Berkeley police saying that linking arms and resisting attempts to clear a space is an act of “violence”, reader David writes:

    It is every citizen’s duty to resist false arrest

    There is no such crime as “resisting arrest.” This is a fictitious crime dreamed up by law enforcement to accuse a citizen of a crime when they refuse to surrender to the illegal demands of the police.

    The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled on numerous occasions that resisting a false arrest is not merely a citizen’s right, but his duty! In fact, the Supreme Court has gone so far as to rule that if a law enforcement officer is killed as a result of actions stemming from a citizen’s attempts to defend themselves against a false arrest, it is the fault of the officer, not the citizen.

    Here’s a short collection of relevant court rulings on false arrest and resisting arrest:

    “When a person, being without fault, is in a place where he has a right to be, is violently assaulted, he may, without retreating, repel by force, and if, in the reasonable exercise of his right of self defense, his assailant is killed, he is justified.” Runyan v. State, 57 Ind. 80; Miller v. State, 74 Ind. 1.

    “These principles apply as well to an officer attempting to make an arrest, who abuses his authority and transcends the bounds thereof by the use of unnecessary force and violence, as they do to a private individual who unlawfully uses such force and violence.” Jones v. State, 26 Tex. App. I; Beaverts v. State, 4 Tex. App. 1 75; Skidmore v. State, 43 Tex. 93, 903.

    “An illegal arrest is an assault and battery. The person so attempted to be restrained of his liberty has the same right to use force in defending himself as he would in repelling any other assault and battery.” (State v. Robinson, 145 ME. 77, 72 ATL. 260).

    “Each person has the right to resist an unlawful arrest. In such a case, the person attempting the arrest stands in the position of a wrongdoer and may be resisted by the use of force, as in self- defense.” (State v. Mobley, 240 N.C. 476, 83 S.E. 2d 100).

    Do individuals have the right to come to the aid of another citizens being falsely arrested? You bet they do. As another court case ruled:

    “One may come to the aid of another being unlawfully arrested, just as he may where one is being assaulted, molested, raped or kidnapped. Thus it is not an offense to liberate one from the unlawful custody of an officer, even though he may have submitted to such custody, without resistance.” (Adams v. State, 121 Ga. 16, 48 S.E. 910).

    And on the issue of actually killing an arresting officer in self defense:

    “Citizens may resist unlawful arrest to the point of taking an arresting officer’s life if necessary.” Plummer v. State, 136 Ind. 306. This premise was upheld by the Supreme Court of the United States in the case: John Bad Elk v. U.S., 177 U.S. 529.

    I believe that violence discredits the entire protest movement. I therefore hope that the protesters remain peaceful, even when confronted with unlawful arrests. However, as David points out, the police have no right to make unlawful arrests in the first place.


Leave a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment. Log in »

© 2012 Occupy London
Powered By DynamiX