The Chicago protests, linked to the Occupy Wall Street movement that sparked weekend demonstrations around the world, drew more than 2,000 people on Saturday and into the early hours of Sunday. Marches in New York and Los Angeles attracted about 5,000 people each on Saturday.But the predawn arrests scuttled, at least for now, plans by the Chicago protesters to build a protest camp similar to that in New York’s Zuccotti Park, the Manhattan hub of the Occupy Wall Street movement that began last month.After the arrests, demonstrators in Chicago said they were plotting a way forward, grappling with issues including trespassing laws barring occupation of public spaces, organizing challenges and dropping temperatures.The arrests happened after protesters marched on Saturday from Chicago’s financial district, where some have spent the night on sidewalks, to Grant Park where they hoped to set up camp despite a law barring the public from city parks after 11 p.m.”We went in knowing that we were going to occupy,” said Kyle Miskell, a 24-year-old computer technician, adding he was among those arrested. “We were hoping the city would say, ‘OK, let them occupy here.’ But it didn’t work out that way.”Police warned them to leave. But some protesters linked arms around the tents, saying they were willing to be arrested. Others stood across the street to chant and sing on the sidewalk in a gesture of solidarity.”They were given warnings, advised of the statute and that they were in violation, and they chose to stay,” Chicago Police spokesman Daniel O’Brien said.Police took down close to 30 tents after hauling away the last of the arrested protesters early on Sunday, protesters said. At least one protester said the police acted “humanely.”Miskell said the protesters “definitely need a more permanent residence” more comfortable than the financial district sidewalk they currently occupy.”Sleeping on the streets in November and December in Chicago is not a good idea,” he said.Another Chicago protester, an intensive care nurse, said that as the Chicago movement grew it needed a “more visible, yet safe” place to call home.”There has been talk about people trying to reoccupy Grant Park tonight. When the police were tearing down the tents, there was a chant of ‘We have more tents,’” said the woman, 31-year-old Heather Fallon.ARRESTS IN OTHER CITIESIn New York, where the movement began when protesters set up camp on September 17, 92 demonstrators were arrested on Saturday and early on Sunday for disorderly conduct and resisting arrest, police said.More than a dozen were demonstrators arrested in Washington Square Park for violating the park’s midnight curfew.Another roughly 20 protesters were arrested late on Saturday in Raleigh, North Carolina, and about 50 were arrested in Phoenix.In addition to the U.S. protests, demonstrations stretched into Sunday in London, where about 250 people set up camp outside St Paul’s Cathedral, vowing to occupy the site indefinitely to show their anger at bankers and politicians over the global economic crisis.The protests, in Asia and Europe as well on Saturday, were mostly peaceful apart from in Rome, where the demonstration sparked riots.American protesters are angry that U.S. banks are enjoying booming profits after getting bailouts in 2008, while many ordinary Americans are struggling to stay afloat in a difficult economy with more than 9 percent unemployment.They also believe the richest 1 percent of Americans do not pay their fair share in taxes and want a more equitable economic system.Some protesters said they were pleased with the weekend’s turnout, although some marches were smaller than organizers had expected and it was unclear if the movement, largely driven by social media, would sustain its momentum. Critics have accused it of lacking clear goals.Occupy LA organizer Clark Davis was exuberant over the 5,000 people who marched through the streets of Los Angeles and gathered peacefully outside City Hall.”Wow, they really showed up,” he said.In New York, Troy Simmons, production manager for a health food business, said he was surprised turnout was not larger.”People don’t want to get involved. They’d rather watch on TV,” he said.
@7 months ago with 47 notes
#About #175 #arrested #early #Sunday #in #Chicago #protest
* Waxman defends Obama administration agencies* FTC says age should be limited to 11 and underWASHINGTON, Oct 12 (Reuters) - Republican lawmakers on
Wednesday attacked an Obama administration proposal for
limiting food advertising to children even as the team behind
the plan offered concessions to food and beverage makers.Fred Upton, chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee
in the U.S. House of Representatives, attacked the Interagency
Working Group for failing to produce a study it was asked for
and instead proposing last April voluntary limits on food
advertisements to children.”Instead of conducting the study or providing
recommendations, the (group) unilaterally proposed guidelines
that were so extreme that they would prevent the marketing to
children of foods that most parents consider a win if their
kids eat — such as yogurt, cheese sticks and even soup,” said
Upton at a joint hearing of two subcommittees.Representative Marsha Blackburn, a Republican said the
limits would “suppress free speech.”Representative Henry Waxman said the food industry spent
$1.6 billion marketing to kids each year. The Democrat raised
questions about assertions that the proposals would mean
700,000 lost jobs.”It’s a way not to have our kids subjected to advertising
that they don’t know what to do with. They’re kids!” said
Waxman. “Somebody should do something. If not government
suggesting ideas, will industry act on its own?”Food, beverage and restaurant companies, which are under
scrutiny for contributing to rising childhood obesity rates,
oppose the administration’s attempts to limit ads to children.About 17 percent of U.S. children aged 2-19 are obese,
according to data on the CDC website. Nearly one in three U.S.
children are overweight and rates are rising quickly.The working group, which includes the Food and Drug
Administration, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the
Agriculture Department and the Federal Trade Commission, said
in April that companies should end all food advertising to
children unless they promote healthy fare, such as whole
grains, fresh fruits or vegetables.Under that proposal, salty, fatty or very sweet foods or
foods with trans fats would no longer be advertised to children
aged 17 or under.But in testimony from the Agriculture Department, Dr.
Robert Post backed a program from the industry’s Children’s
Food and Beverage Advertising Initiative (CFBAI).”Overall, the CFBAI standards present, in many respects, a
reasonable set of criteria to consider for revising the…
draft proposal,” said Post.The industry effort would ensure that at least half of all
advertising to children would tout healthier foods.Food companies also say they have cut the amount of sugar,
far and calories in some products.The FTC also weakened its recommendations.David Vladeck, head of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer
Protection, said the group would exempt older children from the
guidelines and limit recommendations to children 11 and under.It also excluded from the proposal advertising aimed at a
general audience and advertising that was part of charitable or
community events. It would not recommend banning clowns and
cartoon characters, such as Ronald McDonald and SpongeBob
SquarePants, used to advertise unhealthy foods.Advertisers, who also are lobbying against the proposals,
welcomed the changes, but said industry should be left to
regulate itself.The Obama administration, with its goal of containing
healthcare costs, has emphasized children’s health. First Lady
Michelle Obama’s “Let’s Move” campaign has pushed children to
eat healthier food and exercise more.
@7 months ago with 71 notes
#CORRECTED #Lawmakers #attack #US #plan #to #limit #food #ads #to #kids
French judges had asked the ECJ for a clarification on the issue. A court adviser had said in March a ban on Internet sales restricted competition.”A clause in a selective distribution contract banning the distributors of the company Pierre Fabre Dermo-Cosmétique from selling its products online amounts to a restriction on competition by object, unless that clause is objectively justified,” the court said.”Such a ban may not benefit from a block exemption but may, if certain conditions are met, benefit from an individual exemption,” it said.It is now up to French judges to assess whether there are legitimate reasons for PFDC’s ban.PFDC, maker of the Avene, Klorane, Galenic and Ducray brands, requires distributors to sell its products only in shops and with a qualified pharmacist.Luxury brand owners have long argued that bricks-and-mortar outlets are key to protecting their image and exclusivity, while online retailers and markets such as eBay have challenged such claims.
@7 months ago with 33 notes
#EU #court #ban #on #Internet #sales #can #sometimes #be #justified
