[FoRK] The shocking truth about the crackdown on Occupy

Gary Stock gstock at nexcerpt.com
Mon Nov 28 11:18:34 PST 2011

On 11/28/11 9:49 AM, Gregory Alan Bolcer wrote:
> Only in the twilight zone are small, local retailers and large 
> corporations considered equal, much less their influence on 
> controlling legistlation.
> Greg
> On 11/27/2011 5:10 PM, Reese wrote:
>> At 06:55 PM 11/27/2011, Bill Humphries wrote:
>>> In Oakland, much of the pressure came from some retailers on Ogawla 
>>> Plaza (but many retail/restaurants saw increased business) and banks 
>>> (natch.)
>> What a coincidence. Wasn't corporate influence on government one of 
>> the OWS complaints? Were any of the complaining banks the same ones 
>> being protested?
>> Where is Rod Serling when he is needed...

Please note that corporate "influence on government" is not the same as 
corporate "influence on controlling legislation."

When it is so obvious that "He who owns the cops, controls the form of 
speech," the Constitution becomes scarcely relevant. (Presuming it ever 
had been.)

Denying the use of public areas to OWS isn't what created our current 
Twilight Zone. That freakishness began years ago. A relatively recent 
case in point:


"Morgan Stanley was the top borrower with a peak of
$107 billion on Sept. 29, 2009. That was eight days
after then-CEO John Mack said the firm was
“in the strongest possible position.”

More on that issue, indexed 38 seconds ago:


On Nov. 26, 2008, then-Bank of America (BAC) 
<http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/quote?ticker=BAC:US> Corp.
Chief Executive Officer Kenneth D. Lewis wrote to
shareholders that he headed “one of the strongest
and most stable major banks in the world.” He didn’t
say that his Charlotte, North Carolina-based firm
owed the central bank $86 billion that day.

Serling would've found plenty of material there...


More information about the FoRK mailing list