EcoTort's POSTS IN "THE GUARDIAN" re the protest at St Paul's Cathedral

ecotort

27 October 2011 12:27AM

PRESENT DAY SLAVERY

It would seem that:-

1. by means of extensive criminal malpractice, the world's major banks have assumed financial control over nearly all of the world's governments.

2. they have assumed near infinite financial wealth by charging untold interest on loans of virtual money which was created through the stupendous criminal fraud known as "fractional reserve banking".

3. the banks are financing heinous "agravated criminal damage and destruction of the environment" we all share " by means of criminal industrial piracy.

4. furthermore they are guilty of criminal economic exclusion of lawful organic & sustainable permaculture theory and practice, the general 'excuse' being that it is not financially viable. The financial arguments used are based upon fraudulently created virtual money and lawfully unenforceable contracts to commit "agravated criminal damage and destruction of the environment".

5. When combined, points 1 to 4 above clearly constitute "criminal global economic slavery" by the bankers, in other words: "we are in criminal bondage to destroy our planet!"

As in North Dakota, USA, bankers must be public servants, not agents of unlawful free-market enterprise including salvery.

7. The only necessary criteria for a public servant's finances, is that all those finances be open to public scrutiny. Any concealment may constitute a criminal offence punishable in law.

Noblesse Oblige.

http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/slaveryen.pdf

Nedlly

27 October 2011 1:04AM

Definition of an " Occupier ". rude, obnoxious, insensitive, unaware of reality and history,pretentious, uneducated, chav( in thinking ), intolerant,stupid, self centered,incomplete, pseudo-labour, lazy thinkers, non thinkers, unemployed, rude,rude, rude.

Capitalism has always had its faults but it has helped to make Britain put bread on everyones table. ( and cake ).

Perhaps they should have lived in Russia after the revolution.

Peace be with you.

• ecotort

27 October 2011 11:49AM

"@Nedlly: not being anti semetic myself, (zionists are NOT of the semetic tribe, whereas Palestinians ARE semetic, which makes zionists anti-semetic!), this is quoted from English translation of German MP Martin Hohmann's 'antisemic speech' of October 3 2003:

How many Jews were actually represented in the (Russian) revolutionary assemblies?

4 Jews were part of the 7 men Politibureau. Leo Trotsky, Leo Kamenjew, Gregory Sinowjew and Gregory Sokolnikow.

The none-Jews were Lenin, Stalin and Bubnow (1).

Among the 21 members of the Revolutionary Central Committee in Russia in 1917, 6 had the Jewish nationality, which is 28.6 %.

This overrepresentation of Jews amongst the creators of the Communist Movement was in no way limited to the Soviet Union.

Also Ferdinand LaSalle was Jewish, as were Eduard Bernstein and Rosa Luxemburg.
In Germany in 1924 4 out of 6 leaders of the Communist Party were Jewish, and thereby made up one third.

In Vienna out of 137 leading Austro-Marxists there were 81 Jews, which comprises 60%.
Among the 48 Folk Commissionaires, there were 30 Jews.

But also among the Soviet revolutionary secret police the Jewish quota was exceptionally large. While the Jewish quota of the total Russian population in 1939 was about 2 %, the Jewish Cheka (Tcheka) leaders made up no less than 39 %.

"Jewish", to make things clear, was recognized as a separate nationality in the Soviet Union.

The Jewish quota of the Cheka was by 36% higher than the Russian.
In the Ukraine even 75 % of the Cheka were Jews

These facts lead onward to a chapter that at that time caused an enormous outrage. The murder of the Russian Tsar family had been planned by the Jew Jacob Swerdlov, and Tsar Nicholas II was murdered by the Jew Chaimowits Jurowski in person.

Furthermore, there is the question if the Jews in the Communist movement were merely followers, or if they had a leading function. The latter was the case. Leo Trotsky in the UUSR, and Bela Kun in Hungary.

According to a statistical study by a professor who was presented by Churchill in 1930, 28 orthodox Bishops, 1.219 orthodox priests, 6.000 professors and teachers, 9.000 doctors, 12.950 landowners, 54.000 officers, 70.000 policemen, 193.000 workers, 260.000 soldiers, 355.000 intellectuals and merchants and 815.000 farmers had fallen as victims of the Soviets until 1924.

An especially revolting chapter was the annihilation of any resistance against the forced collectivization in the Ukraine. Under the examplatory participation of Jewish Chekists far more than 10 million people found their death here.

The outspoken anti-church and anti-Christian objectives of the Bolshevist Revolution shall not be played down, as is the case in most schoolbooks. It is a fact, that Bolshevism, with their militant atheism has carried out the greatest persecutions of Christians, and religion as such.

According to statistics worked out by the Russian authorities, 96,000 orthodox Christians, among them priests, deaconesses, monks, nuns, and other church workers were shot after having been arrested.

Quoted from English translation of German MP Martin Hohmann's 'antisemic speech' of October 3 2003.

http://www.mosaisk.com/revolution/Winston-Churchill-Zionism-Versus-Bolshevism.php

for your information 'Nedlly' it is BAKERS who make cake, NOT BANKSTERS !

Peace be with you.

Nedlly

27 October 2011 9:55PM

@ecotort.

I thank you for your very detailed contribution to this debate. However I am rather confused why you should go to very detailed lengths to refute my very simple statement ( although you may say very simple ).

Not really sure what to say except that you have brought up issues which I was not at all implying but all power to you.

Peace be with you.

• ecotort

27 October 2011 11:42PM

@Nedlly: . . . as an "Occupier" of more than thirty years standing, I am, I hope, simply making the point that I am neither, rude, obnoxious, insensitive, unaware of reality and history, pretentious, uneducated, chav ( in thinking ), intolerant, stupid, self centered, incomplete, pseudo-labour, lazy thinkers, a non thinker, nor am I unemployed, or rude,rude, rude except when sorely provoked . . .

• Nedlly

28 October 2011 12:07AM

@ ecotort.

What can i say except that i was rude , which was wrong and I apologize.

• ecotort

27 October 2011 12:07PM

there is much confusion between 'anti semetic' and 'anti zionist'.
anti-Zionism is not anti-semitism:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2003/dec/03/comment

. . . - it is alleged that the City of London:
1. is private "CITY STATE" owned by a PRIVATE CORPORATION known as the "CROWN ESTATE".
2. that it is not subject to English Law.
3. it has it's own Government and Police Force.
4. it was responsible for financing the African Slave Trade and the Opium Wars.
5. it financed monsanto in the production of "AGENT ORANGE", otherwise known as "DIOXIN", a defoliant used for killing trees in the Vietnam War to expose the Vietnamese who were hiding in the Trees. . . "AGENT ORANGE" was sprayed indiscriminantly upon Americans and Vietnamese alike, and has produced extraordinarily painful mutations in children for three subsequent generations, both in America and in Vietnam.
6. it is responsible for RECKLESSLY financing continuous attempts to SELL UNTESTED GENETICALLY MODIFIED FOOD ALL OVER THE WORLD.
6. it is currently responsible for financing wholesale AGGRAVATED CRIMINAL DAMAGE AND DESTRUCTION OF THE EARTH, to the extent that the threat of environmental damage and destruction to the Earth is now as serious as a World War.

It is recorded in History that the territory known as the "City of London" was given to "Jewish" Bankers by Cromwell in exchange for financial support in his invasion of Britain against the Crown.

It is essential at this point, in order not to be labeled as "Anti-Semetic", to be clear that just because we are saying that the the CRIMINAL Bankers in question were "Jewish", does not mean we are saying that all Jews are to be tarred with the same brush as those Criminal Bankers amongst them. There is also some doubt as to whether those CRIMINAL "Jewish" Bankers are Semetic at all, that they are in fact descendants of Esau not Jacob/Israel:

In the time of Jesus, 2000 years ago, the inhabitants of Jerusalem and Judaea, and their ruler king Herod, were Edomites (sons of Esau not Jacob/Israel), who had stolen the land from the “House of Judah” whilst the House of Judah had been in slavery in Babylon and the Idumeans were pretending to be Israelites when they were really Edomites (Idumeans) - sons of Esau (who had sold his birth-right to his younger brother Jacob in exchange for a bowl of soup).
Jesus condemned them and warned the world against them in Revelation 2:9 and 3:9.
King of kings’ Bible – Revelation 2:9: "I know thy works, and tribulation, and poverty, (but thou art rich) and [I know] the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are NOT, but [are] (Idumeans) the synagogue of Satan."
3:9: "Behold, I will make them of the synagogue of Satan, which say they are Jews, and are NOT, but do LIE (Idumeans); behold, I will make them to come and worship
before thy feet, and to know that I have loved thee."

http://www.erichufschmid.net/TFC/Rothschild-timeline-revised-excerpt.html
1688: A. N. Field, in his book, “All These Things,” published in 1931, explains the situation in England this year, as a result of Cromwell’s decision to ignore the law banning the Jews from entering England, and allowing them back in defiance of the law, only 33 years earlier, as follows,
“Thirty-three years after Cromwell had let the Jews into Britain a Dutch Prince arrived from Amsterdam surrounded by a whole swarm of Jews from that Jewish financial centre. Driving his royal father-in-law out of the kingdom, he graciously consented to ascend the throne of Britain. A very natural result following on this event was the inauguration of the National Debt by the establishment six years later of the Bank of England for the purpose of lending money to the Crown. Britain had paid her way as she went until the Jew arrived.”
1694: The deceptively named, “Bank of England,” is founded. It is deceptively named as it gives the impression it is controlled by the Government of England when in fact it is a private institution founded by Jews. In his book, “The Breakdown of Money,” published in 1934, Christopher Hollis explains the formation of the Bank of England, as follows,
“In 1694 the Government of William III (who had come in from Holland with the Jews) was in sore straits for money. A company of rich men under the leadership of one William Paterson offered to lend William £1,200,000 at 8 per cent on the condition that, ‘the Governor and Company of the Bank of England,’ as they called themselves, should have the right to issue notes to the full extent of its capital. That is to say, the Bank got the right to collect £1,200,000 in gold and silver and to turn it into £2,400,000 (that is, double it), lending £1,200,000, the gold and silver to the Government, and using the other £1,200,000, the banknotes, themselves.
Paterson was quite right about it that this privilege which had been given to the Bank was a privilege to make money…In practice they did not keep a cash reserve of nearly two or

• ecotort

27 October 2011 12:13PM

Paterson was quite right about it that this privilege which had been given to the Bank was a privilege to make money…In practice they did not keep a cash reserve of nearly two or three hundred thousand pounds. By 1696 (ie. within two years) we find them circulating £1,750,000 worth of notes against a cash reserve of £36,000. That is with a, ‘backing,’ of only about 2 percent of what they issued and drew interest on.”
The names of the Jewish controllers of the Bank of England are never revealed, but it is clear, as early as this year, through their control of the Bank of England, Jews had control over the British Royal family. However, whilst their identity is protected, they may have wished they picked a more discreet front man, after William Paterson states,
“The Bank hath benefit of interest on all monies which it creates out of nothing.”
The fact that Paterson chose to let the cat out of the bag in this manner, may explain why he would go on to die a poor man, outcast by his associates, or maybe this, “shabbez goy,” (a non-Jew who chose to clandestinely represent the interests of Jews), had merely outlived his usefulness to the Jews behind the scenes.
1698: Following four years of the Bank of England, the Jewish control of the British money supply had come on in leaps and bounds. They had flooded the country with so much money that the Government debt to the Bank had grown from its’ initial £1,250,000, to £16,000,000, in only four years, an increase of 1,280%.
Why do they do it? Simple, if the money in circulation in a country is £5,000,000, and a central bank is set up and prints another £15,000,000, stage one of the plan, and sends that out into the economy through loans etc, then this will naturally reduce the value of the initial £5,000,000 that was in circulation before the bank was formed. This is because the initial £5,000,000 that was 100% of the economy is now only 25% of the economy. It will also give the bank control of 75% of the money in circulation with the £15,000,000 they sent out into the economy.
This causes inflation which is simply the reduction in worth of money borne by the common person, due to the economy being flooded with too much money, an economy which the Central Bank are responsible for. As the common person’s money is worth less, he has to go to the bank to get a loan to help run his business etc, and when the Central Bank are satisfied there are enough people with debt out there, the bank will tighten the supply of money by not offering loans. This is stage two of the plan.
Stage three, is sitting back and waiting for the people in debt to them to go bankrupt, allowing the bank to then seize from them real wealth, businesses and property etc, for pennies on the pound. Inflation never affects a central bank, in fact they are the only group who can benefit from it, as if they are ever short of money they can simply print more.

Almost every national bank in the World is either hosted or represented in the City of London, and almost all of them are guilty of the FRAUD which is otherwise known as "Fractional Reserve Banking".
The FRAUD known as "Fractional Reserve Banking" is one of the primary methods by which the internatioal banking cartel has gained (UNLAWFUL) posession and control (CONVERSION -see below) of the World, it's finance, and it's Governments.
Another primary tool is USURY, which is otherwise known as "the practice of charging rates of interest on loans of that (FRAUDULENTLY CREATED) money".
A third tactic is the practice of manipulating those rates of interest in order to operate the "BOOM AND BUST" cycles in the World's economies . . . when everyone goes BUST, the BANK-ERs buy the BANK-RUPT stock at Pennies on the Pound . . .

In English Law, the offence of "CONVERSION" covers all aspects of THEFT. It is quite clear that "IF A LEGAL PROCESS IS USED TO GAIN ANOTHER PERSONS' PROPERTY WITHOUT MORAL JUSTIFICATION, THAT WILL CONSTITUTE CONVERSION or THEFT"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conversion_%28law%29
"an action for conversion lies for every species of personal property which is the subject of private ownership, whether animate or inanimate." [51][52][53][54][55]

Any unjustified exercise of dominion over property by one (THE BANKERS) who is not the owner, nor entitled to possession, which interferes with the LAWFUL right of possession of another (THE REST OF US), constitutes a conversion. [101][126][127][128][129][130]

IF IT IS TRUE, as alleged, that the "City of London" is an independent State, which is NOT constitutionally subject to English Law, then in the light of the serious crimes against Humanity committed therein, and in the LAWFUL INTEREST of GLOBAL HEALTH AND WELL-BEING, there is a MORAL AND LAWFUL IMPERATIVE for the People of England to peacefully re-occupy and reclaim that Square Mile of territory and bring it back under English Law.

IF however, the "City of London" IS constitutionally subject to English

• ecotort

27 October 2011 12:13PM

IF however, the "City of London" IS constitutionally subject to English Law, then similarly, there is a MORAL AND LAWFUL IMPERATIVE for the People of England to peacefully make a (?Symbolic!) citizens' arrest upon the senior executives of the City of London, and LAWFULLY insist that they be brought, in full Public View, before the Courts to answer for their crimes.

• ecotort

27 October 2011 11:35PM

FRAUD is a CRIME
under the "Proceeds of Crime Act 2002" [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proceeds_of_Crime_Act_2002] all the money created out of nothing (FRAUD) can be CONFISCATED and placed in the PUBLIC PURSE in order to finance such worthy causes as the NHS, Libraries, a decent education for our kids, etc etc

PRESENT DAY SLAVERY

PRESENT DAY SLAVERY

It would seem that:-

1. by means of extensive criminal malpractice, the world's major banks have assumed financial control over nearly all of the world's governments.

2. they have assumed near infinite financial wealth by charging untold interest on loans of virtual money which was created therby - through the stupendous criminal fraud known as "fractional reserve banking".

3. the banks are financing heinous "agravated criminal damage and destruction of the environment" we all share " by means of criminal industrial piracy.

4. furthermore they are guilty of criminal economic exclusion of lawful organic & sustainable permaculture theory and practice, the general 'excuse' being that it is not financially viable. The financial arguments used are based upon fraudulently created virtual money and lawfully unenforceable contracts to commit "agravated criminal damage and destruction of the environment".

5. When combined, points 1 to 4 above clearly constitute "criminal global economic slavery" by the bankers, in other words: "we are in criminal bondage to destroy our planet!"

As in North Dakota, USA, bankers must be public servants, not agents of unlawful free-market enterprise including salvery.

7. The only necessary criteria for a public servant's finances, is that all those  finances be open to public scrutiny. Any concealment may constitute a criminal offence punishable in law.

Noblesse Oblige.

http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/slaveryen.pdf

26. The process of enslavement and, in many cases, the treatment of victims of slavery, servile status and forced labour are often accompanied by other violations of human rights. For example, THE CLASSIC PROCESS OF ENSLAVEMENT, INVOLVING either abduction or RECRUITMENT THROUGH FALSE PROMISES (education?) OR DUPLICITY, involves a violation of the individual’s right to liberty and security of person, as

guaranteed by article 9 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, as well as, in many cases, a violation of the right of a person deprived of his/her liberty to be treated with humanity and of the right not to be subjected to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment (eg, working in an industry which is damaging and/or destroying the environment you live in).

The Supplementary Convention of 1956 explicitly prohibits “the act of mutilating, branding or otherwise marking a slave or a person of servile status in order to indicate his status, or as a punishment, or for any other reason” (art. 5).  (BAR CODES AND PROPOESED MICROCHIPPING OF HUMANS!)

27. Victims of slavery, servile status and forced labour are, almost by definition, deprived of their right under article 12 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights to liberty of movement and freedom to choose their residence. ALMOST INVARIABLY, THEY ARE DEPRIVED OF OR PREVENTED FROM EXERCISING THEIR RIGHT OF ACCESS TO THE COURTS AND TO A FAIR TRIAL 31 BY THEIR OWNERS, CONTROLLERS, EMPLOYERS OR BY THE AUTHORITIES THEMSELVES.

28. …Virtually all cases involve violations of the victims’ freedom of expression, their right to receive and impart information, their right of peaceful assembly and their freedom of association.

29.. . . on the death of former slaves, the families of their former owners still intervene to take possession of their property – sometimes with the author-

ity of the courts – thus preventing the heirs of former slaves from inheriting. (DEATH DUTIES ? )

33. The Supplementary Convention of 1956 categorizes serfdom as a form of “servile status”, and defines it as “the condition or status of a tenant who is by law, custom or agreement bound to live and labour on land belonging to another person and to render some determinate service to such other person, whether for reward or not, and is not free to change his status” (art. 1(b)). Land tenure systems viewed in all their aspects – legal, economic, social and political – can in certain circumstances be seen as oppressive power relationships arising from ownership or use of land and disposition of its products to create forms of servitude and bondage.

34. Records of discussions that occurred both in the United Nations and in the ILO before the adoption of the Supplementary Convention in 1956 indicate that the term “serfdom” was intended to apply to a range of practices reported in Latin American countries and more generally referred to as “peonage”. Those practices, which had developed in a context of conquest, subjugation of indigenous peoples, and seizure of their lands, involved a landowner granting a piece of land to an individual “serf” or “peon” in return for specific services, including (1) providing the landowner with a proportion of the crop at harvest (INTEREST CHARGED ON A MORTGAGE!)), (2) working for the landowner or (3) doing other work, for example domestic chores for the landowner’s household. In each case, it is not the provision of labour in return for access to land that is in itself considered a form of servitude, but the inability of the person of serf status to leave that status. The term “serfdom” and its prohibition in the Supplementary Convention appear applicable to a range of practices that still occur today but are rarely recognized or described in the countries concerned as “serfdom”, as the term is linked by many to the political and economic order of medieval Europe.

35. In some cases the status of “serf” is hereditary, affecting entire families on a permanent basis,

while in others it is linked to and reinforced by debt bondage; in the latter case those affected are

obliged to continue working for their landowner on account of debts they supposedly owe as well

as on account of their tenant status.

1. by means of extensive criminal malpractice, it seems that the world's major banks have assumed financial control over nearly all of the world's governments.

2. they have assumed near infinite financial wealth by charging untold interest on loans of virtual money which was created therby - through the stupendous criminal fraud known as "fractional reserve banking".

3. the banks are financing heinous "agravated criminal damage and destruction of the environment" we all share " by means of criminal industrial piracy.

4. they are guilty of criminal economic exclusion of lawful organic & sustainable permaculture theory and practice, the 'excuse' being that it is not financially viable. The financial arguments used are based upon fraudulently created virtual money and legally unenforceable contracts to commit "agravated criminal damage and destruction of the environment".

5. when combined, points 1 to 4 above constitute criminal economic slavery by the bankers, in other words: "we are in criminal bondage to destroy our planet!"

The Protocols of Zion - In Modern English

  http://republicbroadcasting.org/Protocols.of.Zion/index.htm   The Protocols of Zion

In Modern English
The original translation is here

The basic premise of the protocols is that the end justifies the means. Here is a one page summary… Goyim are mentally inferior to Jews and can’t run their nations properly.  For their sake and ours, we need to abolish their governments and replace them with a single government.  This will take a long time and involve much bloodshed, but it’s for a good cause.  Here’s what we’ll need to do: Place our agents and helpers everywhere Take control of the media and use it in propaganda for our plans Start fights between different races, classes and religions Use bribery, threats and blackmail to get our way Use Freemasonic Lodges to attract potential public officials Appeal to successful people’s egos Appoint puppet leaders who can be controlled by blackmail Replace royal rule with socialist rule, then communism, then despotism Abolish all rights and freedoms, except the right of force by us Sacrifice people (including Jews sometimes) when necessary Eliminate religion; replace it with science and materialism Control the education system to spread deception and destroy intellect Rewrite history to our benefit Create entertaining distractions Corrupt minds with filth and perversion Encourage people to spy on one another Keep the masses in poverty and perpetual labor Take possession of all wealth, property and (especially) gold Use gold to manipulate the markets, cause depressions etc. Introduce a progressive tax on wealth Replace sound investment with speculation Make long-term interest-bearing loans to governments Give bad advice to governments and everyone else Eventually the Goyim will be so angry with their governments (because we’ll blame them for the resulting mess) that they’ll gladly have us take over.  We will then appoint a descendant of David to be King of the World, and the remaining Goyim will bow down and sing his praises.  Everyone will live in peace and obedient order under his glorious rule. Chapters What We Believe Economic Wars Methods of Conquest Materialism to Replace Religion Despotism and Modern Progress Take-Over Technique World-Wide Wars Provisional Government Re-education Preparing for Power The Totalitarian State Control of the Media Distractions Assault on Religion Ruthless Suppression Brainwashing Abuse of Authority Arrest of Opponents Rulers and People Financial Program Loans and Credit Power of Gold Instilling Obedience Qualities of the Ruler

A Creative Response to the UK Government's Proposed Criminalisation of "Squatting" . . .

A Creative Response to the UK Government's Proposed Criminalisation of "Squatting" . . .

The obvious bias in the consultation shows a predjudice that Squatters are (already)

criminal in that their point of view is not asked for, in fact it is actively discouraged by the

loaded nature of the questions - this makes the whole consultation unbalanced, hence it is

inequitable, and therefore without doubt unlawful and invalid.


The very word "Squatting" has extreemely predjudicial connotations; and in fairness it

ought to be relegated to the dustbin of civilised society, in the same way that words such

as Nigger, Wog, and Chink already have been.


A new name needs to be chosen to describe lawful occupation of otherwise empty,

abandonned, and/or disused properties. 


In the particular case of eco-activists occupying a property for the purposes of eco-activism

(including accommodation for eco-activists), the word "Requisition" springs readily to mind

 - particularly bearing in mind that the threat of environmental damage and destruction is

commonly agreed to be every bit as serious as a threat of World War.


An entirely new consultation must be initiated, which seeks to obtain balanced information,

 including facts about the many benefits of Squatting otherwise disused and empty

properties.


Such benefits may include, but are certainly not limited to:

-fostering self reliance and a healthy "outside the box" mentality.
-development of arts and craft skills.
-furthering social skills.
-providing self-funded/resourced housing and further education; in particular to socially excluded younger people, at little or no cost to the local council or government.
-renovation and care of properties in many cases.
-formation of housing associations - partnerships with local councils.
-eco-activism - eg Ploughhares, Trident, Transport Policies (RTS), GMO's banned in Europe, etc
-SOCIAL CENTRES.

NURTURING NVDA ON IMPORTANT ISSUES:-
Organiations, many of whose members would say that Squatting has nurtured their activism include, but are not limited to:
CND
GreenPeace
Green Party
FoE
Groundswell
Monetary Reform

The fact that the present "consultation" is clearly designed to lead respondants in a

negative train of thought with regard to squatting, while almost entirely disregarding the possibility of 

lawful occupation of disused properties for positive and genuinely socially beneficiant purposes,

can only lead the reasonable person to the conclusion that the present consultation be

entirely set aside, and a new equitably balanced one be inaugrated prior to any proposed

legislation being enacted, lest any such legislation be later found by the Courts to be

unlawful, thereby further undermining the demonstrably already tenuous respect

bestowed upon our government by the youth of today.

A Response to the London Riots . . ..

A common cause of disaffection shared by most of the people

involved in the riots, (and a great multitude who were not

involved), has to be the inhumanity of the built environment on

inner city housing estates, together with extreemely limited

education and employment (escape) prospects, except for

exceptionally gifted and highly motivated young people in an

extreemely challenging environment.


Our built environment is directly created through investment of

finance, or lack of it, which is directly controlled by the banks.


The banks are controlled from the City of London, which is an

independant state, similar to the Vatican State, and it is NOT

subject, nor is it answerable, to the English Parliament.


In fact, for several hundred years, due to insufferable levels of

National Dect, and consequent interest payments thereupon

(since the time of Cromwell), the English Government has been

heavily influenced, if not completely controlled by the City.


People need to be engaged in employment which benefits the

environment in which we all live, rather than damaging and

destroying it for limited financial gain; this is the only way for

people to gain proper respect for self AND others, and a 

healthy pride in the local area, which will halt vandalism and 

anti-social behaviour


Bearing in mind that over 95% of the money in the world has

been created by the fraudulent (criminal) practice of Fractional

Reserve Banking, and consists of nothing more substantial than

millivolts of electricity in a computer, there is no real economic

reason why that 'money' should not be seized by the English

Government under the 'Proceeds of Crime Act', and used to 

pay the people to use all our splendid and amazing 

technologies in the creation of a beautiful  

Permaculture world to live in.

Riot victims help: personal insurance, business insurance, crisis loans

This article is from "Martin's Money Savng Expert"

Business owners, motorists and residents affected by the riots that hit many parts of the UK should be covered under most insurance policies, according to senior insurance figures.
For those without cover, there may be help available via crisis loans or a separate compensation scheme.

Key Points

• Insurance likely to pay out
• But check policy wording
• If no insurance, crisis loans may be available

The Association of British Insurers (ABI) estimates the cost to households, businesses and insurers will top £100 million.
Even those with insurance should act fast as some policies have a time limit on when you can claim. Some are within seven days of the incident.
Below, we round up the financial aid available to those affected.
We need your help to help those affected
This is a constantly evolving story, we will update it throughout the week. If you have ideas or suggestions that may help victims please email news@moneysavingexpert.com.

Insurance – damage to homes
The ABI says damage to homes, including riot damage and fire, would be covered under a standard home insurance policy. It adds that many policies will also cover people for accommodation costs if they can't stay in their home.
Insurance – damage to cars
The AA similarly says comprehensive car insurance policies will normally cover you for any damage to cars that have been smashed, burnt out or damaged in any other way by the rioting.
Third party policies will not cover you because they exclude cover for your car by their nature.
Third party, fire and theft may cover you for fire-related damage, so check the policy wording.
Insurance – damage to businesses
The ABI says most policies will cover the direct physical damage and theft, plus they will pay compensation for business interruption, if the policy includes that cover.
How to claim
Contact your insurer or broker as soon as possible. Some policies will have a time limit on when you can claim so don't delay.
As with all insurance, the policy wording is key so check to ensure there are no exclusions, though your insurer will be able to advise you on that.
Nick Starling, director of general insurance and health at the ABI, says: "It is important for people to contact their insurer to check what they are covered for and arrange for immediate help."
The British Insurance Brokers' Association says the majority of insurance providers operate a 24 hour claims line and can help people arrange for emergency repairs and the damage to be inspected as quickly as possible.
Martin Lewis, creator of MoneySavingExpert.com, says: "After a horrible night, thankfully people are volunteering to clean up the streets. Unfortunately, it will take longer than that for those personally affected. It's to be hoped the insurance companies and social security operatives will pay speedy and quick attention to help people get back on their feet.
"If you have been a victim of the riots and are struggling to get what you are owed, please email the link above and let us know, and if we can, we'll try to help."
If you don't have insurance - can you get compensation?
Many insurance experts say large numbers of homes, cars and businesses affected will not be insured, especially those in deprived areas. However, there may be help available.
Assuming the event is officially deemed a riot under the Riot Damages Act 1886 , the police/Government must compensate individuals and businesses that suffer loss or damage as a result of a riot, if a claim is made. There is no cap on the level of compensation.
Some suggestions state this only applies to building property or contents damage, not damage to cars or business interruption, though this is unconfirmed.
The 'riot loss' compensation scheme applies to all persons and organisations who suffer a riot-related loss regardless of whether or not they are insured.
Crucially, anyone claiming must do so within 14 days. The ABI points out this will be difficult for those unable to get to their property if it's still a crime scene.
It is calling for the Government to extend the deadline to 42 days.
Insurers are also able to claim their losses from payout to customers from the Government under the same scheme.
How do you claim under this Act? The Home Office says you need to make a claim to your local police authority. However, some aspects are still unclear.
Crucially, as the Metropolitan Police Authority states, it has not yet been decided whether to define the disturbances as a riot according to the definition within the Act.
For instance, a Home Office spokesman says he "thinks" the 14-day window begins from when the damage happened, rather than when the incident is officially deemed a riot. But this has not yet been determined.
He also says that if the 14 days is up before the event is deemed a riot it will be up to the local police authority to decide whether to still allow claims.
If you don't have insurance - crisis loans
If you're struggling, there are two main types of loan available from the Government's Social Fund that can give out up to £1,500. These may be able to provide you with interest-free borrowing rather than getting any commercial debt.

• Crisis loans are for emergencies or disasters, and to help stop serious damage or risk to you or your family's health and safety. You don't need to be in receipt of benefits to get them.
• Budgeting loans are only for benefit-recipients, but allow a wider range of borrowing. For instance, to pay for clothes and furnishing.

To apply, fill in the Department of Work & Pension's claim form for the crisis loan or budgeting loan and take it into your nearest Job Centre.
Demand may be extremely high at the moment and there isn't a bottomless pot of money, so if the Job Centre decides your circumstances aren't urgent or you're not struggling, you may not get anything.
Help from banks
Talk to your bank or building society if you're struggling financially as a result of the riots.
Some, such as Barclays, have already pledged to waive overdraft fees, temporarily extend customers' overdrafts, or start an overdraft for those who don't have one, if affected.
Charitable help
Another option is to contact any charities or benevolent funds you may be linked to as these can help with advice, counselling and in some circumstances grants. Some examples include:

• Civil Service Benevolent fund – for current, former and retired employees of a civil service department.
• The Royal British Legion – for serving and ex-service personnel and their families.
• Teachers' Support Network – for training, serving and retired teachers.
• Nurse Aid – for all nurses registered with the UK Nursing and Midwifery Council (NMC), together with retired nurses, health care assistants, auxiliaries and student nurses.
• Retail Trust – for employees or business owners within the retail sector.

If you've nowhere to sleep
If your home is damaged and you can't get any help from an insurer or you have no-where else to go, housing charity Shelter says you can contact it for advice on 0808 8004444 or by visiting the Shelter website.
Comment/Discuss

Discuss this MSE news story: Riots: your financial rights

You may also like...

Cheap Home Insurance

Quickly grab 100+ quotes & cashback

Cheap Car Insurance

Compare 200+ quotes & cashback

Grant Grabbing

Free cash if you're on a low income

Yesterday in Hackney

Copied from an email from the "University For Strategic Optimism"

Yesterday in Hackney there was an air of anticipation and waiting, some kind of word had gone round that “Today’s Hackney”. People were hanging around on corners and shopkeepers were standing on the pavement outside their shops. There was some running backwards and forwards, then the flashpoint came when the police stopped and searched two black men on the Narrow Way. A big crowd gathered and surrounded the police, and people were shouting that police harrassment was the cause of the riots in Tottenham. Reinforcements quickly came with riot gear and started chasing people around and trying to block people in.

The crowd ended up on Mare Street and a pattern soon developed where the police had a strong line to the north of the street, slowly advancing, and also blocking some side streets, and the crowd were gathered and moving slowly south. Whenever the police advanced people panicked and ran but in general the police were not trying to make arrests or charge seriously. Possibly their main priority was keeping people away from the shops in the Narrow Way.

The businesses that were damaged on Mare Street were fairly targetted: businesses seen as parasites like the bookmakers, the Cashconverters pawn shop and so on; a bank; and places with valuables such as a sports shop and a jewellers’. The petrol station was also looted for drinks and people handed out bottles of water to strangers. The only cafe looted was one which is a big chain and also has no atmosphere and really crap tea so I had no problem with it. Quite ridiculously one of the few arrests early in the day was a kid who had looted a packet of crisps from there. A man with a good grasp of targetted looting was shouting to the crowd “if it ain’t gold, don’t be bold!” The atmosphere during the day was pretty friendly and open, the crowd was very multiracial and of different ages and there was lot of passive support. The line between spectators and participants wasn’t clear. There was only one attempted mugging which was broken up quickly by the crowd.

Later on in the night people were gathered around Clarence Road, next to the Pembury Estate. Possibly the police were trying to keep them there away from the shops and main roads or maybe people felt comfortable there. There were quite a few burning cars and a line of riot cops that every now and then someone threw a bottle at. The atmosphere there was pretty different, heavier and nastier. There were some robberies of people in the crowd and I didn’t feel as safe as I did earlier. The convenience store on Clarence Road was looted for drinks which was upsetting and today I can hear lots of people objecting to: “He’s been here twenty years”, “we all shopped there” and so on.

Today walking around that is the only small shop attacked that I have seen apart from one optician, the rest are electrical goods shops or big brand stores. Contrary to what I’ve heard I didn’t see any houses burned but there were a lot of burned out cars. One thing that I keep hearing people say is “What’s the point of cleaning it all up when it’s all going to happen again tonight?”

Re-blogged from: http://thecommune.co.uk/2011/08/09/london-riots-quick-report-from-hackney/