28043877
Three weeks ago, I expressed skepticism about the Occupy Wall Street (OWS) movement (“ We’d all love to see the plan,” Oct. 20). Since then, my skepticism has only grown deeper. When the protest spread from Wall Street to other big cities, including in Philadelphia, it raised the question why occupy the urban areas that are victims of the recession caused by the financial institutions? The actions of Occupy Philly since then have not come close to answering that question.
Some of the protesters attended City Council hearings, unaware they were not allowed to discuss issues unrelated to the bills before Council. Shouldn’t you take the time to understand the process before going to the hearings? That alone makes you wonder about their lack of political savvy. Putting that aside, their intent was to stop the approval of the proposed teen curfew extension (they failed). Exactly what does a curfew have to do with the stated aims of OWS?
Besides, the teen curfew has worked. Its implementation during the summer helped to stop the flash-mob activity that threatened to disrupt the cultural and business center of our city. The protesters’ cries of age discrimination and violation of the civil rights of teenagers sounded like a bad Students for a Democratic Society rally in the ’60s.
On another day, Occupy Philly protesters shut down all of the traffic around Police Headquarters, Eighth and Race streets. The protesters had no local gripe. They were supposedly expressing solidarity with OWS protests in a few cities that had resulted in police brutality. The actions of Mayor Michael Nutter and Police Commissioner Charles Ramsey have been exemplary in dealing with the peaceful protests of the local occupiers.
Nutter had invited former President Bill Clinton to appear with him in Philadelphia Oct. 29, but a surprise storm forced its cancellation. Occupy Philly apparently had planned to protest the joint appearance. Why? Whatever you might think of Clinton’s personal behavior in the White House, he remains popular with most of the 99 percent OWS says it represents.
The Clinton Global Initiative has made strides in combating world hunger. Nutter is hardly a symbol of Wall Street run amok as he struggles to deal with the effects on our city of the national recession. Congressional Republicans block the president’s jobs bill and you’re protesting Clinton and Nutter?
Occupy Philly has sent a letter to the mayor demanding a smaller police presence at their protest site (preferring no police at all). Inasmuch as the City is now spending a reported hundreds of thousands of dollars in police overtime, there is presumably nothing more the City would desire than not having to expend so much of its police department’s resources. But it is difficult to argue with success, and Occupy Philly ought to acknowledge that success and stop whining. A recent protest took place inside the Comcast Building’s lobby. When demonstrators refused to budge, police arrested them, only to have another protest spring up again around police headquarters protesting the arrests.
In that same letter, Occupy Philly has rejected the City’s request to move out of Dilworth Plaza so the planned construction can begin Nov. 15. That date had been set long before OWS came to town. A few weeks ago a knowledgeable City source told me the City was earnestly trying to negotiate a peaceful move to another site. There also are health concerns. Apparently, some of the City’s homeless community have become part of the protest site and it is believed the highly contagious bacteria MRSA may have already made an appearance. The source said that if the group moved to another site in the city, it would likely face the same sanitation concerns with a month.
It has rankled me no end to be on the same side of an issue as Fox News, but I have visited the OWS website and I just don’t like the 10 point aims of the group. OWS plans to confront the White House and Congress after the 2012 elections and present a list of demands. If those demands are not accepted and in place within one year, OWS will demand the resignation of the president and the entire Congress. Does such a plan have even the remotest chance of succeeding? Is OWS so impressed with its self-importance that it believes it has the right to nullify the results of the 2012 election? Are the aims of this group really liberal and should liberal groups be so ready to embrace OWS?
My fear is that the longer the “occupation” in Philadelphia, the more chance it will grow violent as we have seen in other cities around the world. If OWS continues to refuse to negotiate and allow sanitation efforts and construction to begin around Dilworth Plaza, what will happen?
I am beginning to believe the protesters want confrontation as part of a strategy to gain attention. I have to wonder whether OWS really believes in reform or is it something else they are after? SPR
Contact the South Philly Review at editor@southphillyreview.com.
28043877
