Stupidity at the United Nations: Supporting the Occupy Movement

Yes, the organization that is powerless to prevent real attacks on human rights has taken up a bogus cause:

United Nations officials are using American taxpayers’ money, which subsidizes UN operations, to put their noses into the treatment of Occupy Wall Street protesters in various cities across the United States.

In a letter written to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton by Frank La Rue, UN special rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, and Maina Kiai, UN special rapporteur on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association, the UN officials demanded an explanation of “the behavior of police departments that violently disbanded some Occupy protests last fall.”

The letter, sent in December 2011, was publicly released last week in connection with the 20th annual United Nations Human Rights Council meeting. It complained of “forced removal” by law enforcement officials in various cities, including New York, Portland, Seattle, Denver and Oakland, of “unwilling protesters from the public areas in which they were located.” The letter theorized that the primary reason for the “forced removal” was “related to their dissenting views, criticisms of economic policies, and their legitimate work in the defense of human rights and fundamental freedoms.”

Innocent civilians are being massacred every day in places like Syria and Sudan, which the UN is helpless to prevent. Yet these special rapporteurs focus their attention instead on an internal domestic matter that is none of their business — how local law enforcement officials in the United States decide to deal with lawless behavior. Moreover, the allegations they cite are way off the mark. The police across our country dealt with the utmost patience and restraint against increasingly criminal and violent elements that were taking over the Occupy Wall Street movement. Not to mention having to deal with the public nuisance and public health problems caused by unsanitary conditions in the “public areas” where the occupiers encamped, which were encroaching on the rights of residents and businesses in the affected areas.

Let’s take New York City, for example. Protesters began to “occupy” the quasi-public Zuccotti Park on September 17, 2011. The park is technically privately owned but is dedicated to public use. The police did not immediately intervene, declaring that it was up to the owner, Brookfield Office Properties, to make and implement rules for the park’s use. A spokesperson for Brookfield expressed concern, but in fact the park owner took no steps at first to evict the occupiers from the park:

Zuccotti Park is intended for the use and enjoyment of the general public for passive recreation. We are extremely concerned with the conditions that have been created by those currently occupying the park and are actively working with the City of New York to address these conditions and restore the park to its intended purpose.

On October 6, 2011, Brookfield issued a statement which said, “Sanitation is a growing concern… the park has not been cleaned since Friday, September 16th and as a result, sanitary conditions have reached unacceptable levels.” Nevertheless, despite plenty of provocations by the occupiers against the police who were trying to keep the peace in the area, the occupiers were still permitted to stay put.

During the month that followed, Zuccotti Park, which the occupiers had taken over completely with large tents and the like, became a breeding ground of crime, including alleged rapes and other assaults. The New York occupiers shared such lawless behavior in common with their comrades in other cities across the country. Finally, in the early morning of November 15, 2011 – nearly two months after the occupation had started — the police moved in to clear out the occupiers from Zuccotti Park. The action was meant to halt the increasingly dangerous around-the-clock occupation of the park that prevented other members of the public from using it for recreational purposes. However, the occupiers were not barred from returning without their tents and sleeping bags to make their views known through peaceful demonstrations.

During the month that followed, Zuccotti Park, which the occupiers had taken over completely with large tents and the like, became a breeding ground of crime, including alleged rapes and other assaults. The New York occupiers shared such lawless behavior in common with their comrades in other cities across the country. Finally, in the early morning of November 15, 2011 – nearly two months after the occupation had started — the police moved in to clear out the occupiers from Zuccotti Park. The action was meant to halt the increasingly dangerous around-the-clock occupation of the park that prevented other members of the public from using it for recreational purposes. However, the occupiers were not barred from returning without their tents and sleeping bags to make their views known through peaceful demonstrations.

Here is how New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg explained why his patience with the occupiers had run out:

Unfortunately, the park was becoming a place where people came not to protest, but rather to break laws, and in some cases, to harm others. The majority of protesters have been peaceful and responsible. But an unfortunate minority has not been – and as the number of protesters has grown, this has created an intolerable situation. Protesters have had two months to occupy the park with tents and sleeping bags. Now they will have to occupy the space with the power of their arguments.

As usual, the United Nations has butt in where it does not belong. Moreover, while saying in their letter to Secretary of State Clinton that they were not prejudging the accuracy of the information they received indicating a violation of the occupiers’ rights, the UN special rapporteurs repeated over and over again the occupiers’ false accusations. They focused their letter on allegations that the police used disproportionate, unnecessary action and even violence to disperse or remove “peaceful” protesters, without even once acknowledging the possibility that some of the so-called “peaceful” protesters were infringing on other peoples’ rights and committing criminal acts.

The UN special rapporteurs do not understand what they were supposedly appointed to protect. Of course, that should be no surprise considering that they are reporting to the misnamed travesty known as the United Nations Human Rights Council. Freedom of speech and freedom of assembly do not mean that one group of demonstrators can completely take over, with permanent encampments, a space dedicated to public use and turn it into their own private law-free zone to do what they like, excluding other members of the public from using the space for other legitimate purposes.

The UN special rapporteurs’ nonsensical letter does not deserve a reply from the U.S. government other than to tell them to get their facts straight and mind their own business.

The leftie Huffington Post confirms this report, while (of course) taking a much more favorable view of the U.N. action.

This, of course, highlights the folly of Barack Obama’s obsession with working through multi-national bodies. Sometimes, doing that can be prudent. But often, such bodies are corrupt (the U.N. Human Rights Council), and sometimes they are motivated by things that are adverse to the interests of the U.S. (the EU). Either way, they lack moral authority, and the U.S. president has no obligation to sacrifice U.S. interests to a bunch of foreigners.

Sexual Assault at Occupy Wall Street

Colbert Sends Up Occupy Wall Street

Michael Coren Tells Off the “Occupy” Crowd

College Republicans to Protest College Democrats Support of “Occupy Milwaukee”

Earlier today, we blogged about a plan by the Marquette College Democrats to drum up support for an “Occupy” event tomorrow under the Bridge at the library.

The actual “Occupy” event, involving leftists from all over, will be Saturday.

The College Republicans will be staging their own counter-protest nearby.

From a press release from the College Republicans:

Milwaukee, WI – On October 14, the Marquette community will see that not all young people believe in the victim mentality of the Occupy protesters. Members of the College Republicans at Marquette will be hosting an information table outside Raynor Library from 10am through 2pm in an effort to drown out those attempting to occupy America. The students will be promoting free market values, limited government, and exposing the lackluster, job-creating performance of the Obama Administration.

Professional protesters and freeloaders that make up the Occupy Wall Street movement has spread to cities across the country. These out-of-touch demonstrators will be continuing their blitzkrieg on American values in Milwaukee on Saturday, October 14th. The College Republicans of Marquette will be making a stand to defend their turf.

So the College Democrats and the College Republicans will be simultaneously holding demonstrations a few paces apart next to the library.

Cool.

We expect everything to be perfectly civil, although a bit of good-natured badinage between the two groups would be entirely appropriate.

We would urge everybody who will be on campus tomorrow to drop by and offer your support to whichever side you happen to favor.

Even asking polite but pointed questions of the side you oppose is fine. But any incivility hurts whatever point you are wanting to make.

And besides, any uncivil behavior these days is invariably caught on video and shortly made visible on You-Tube.

But we don’t see any problems. We expect everybody to have a good time.

The Occupy Wall Street Protesters

There are tons of videos on these folks, but this is pretty good, and probably fairly representative.

Marquette College Democrats Drink the Kool-Aid: Supporting “Occupy Wall Street” Event

From an e-mail to members of the College Democrats:

From: Heffernan, Erin
Sent: Monday, October 10, 2011 5:13 PM
To: LS-CollegeDemocrats
Subject: Occupy Wall Street event

Hey MU College dems!

Several things are going on this week you all should know about:

1. The occupy Wall Street movement is growing and Occupy Milwaukee is having their first protest this Saturday.

The Occupy Milwaukee’ movement has been endorsed by figures like Russ Feingold, Rob Zerban, the New York Times, and Nancy Pelosi. It is a great movement and we hope many of you can come out for the protest.

Here is a link for more information: http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=143038022460557

2. We are having an informational table under the bridge this Friday to advertise for the Occupy Wall Street event and to promote general membership. We need people to sit at the table in one hour shifts from 10am until 3pm. If you can make anytime at all during that period, please email us at: marquettedems@gmail.com

3. Once again, our next meeting on October 18th at 7pm we are holding e-board elections. If you are interested in running or voting you must come to the meeting in person. If you would like to run for a position you should also email a paragraph describing why you would like that position and what makes you qualified to us at: marquettedems@gmail.com. These paragraphs will be sent to the club to inform our member’s about each person running.

Here is a link to RSVP for the meeting/elections: http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=247051955337218

And if you haven’t already:

Like us on facebook: http://www.facebook.com/pages/Marquette-University-College-Democrats/168055839891684

Follow us on twitter: http://twitter.com/#!/MarquetteDems

Thanks and have a great week!

Erin Heffernan
College of Arts & Sciences, ‘14
Secretary, College Democrats
Marquette University
erin.heffernan@marquette.edu

Historically, this is out of character for the Marquette College Democrats.

The organization has traditionally been dominated by students who were moderate liberals, not given to anti-capitalist rhetoric. And the reason for that has been that the College Democrats have been students with an interest in real-world politics: working on campaigns, interning on Capitol Hill, and so on.

You can be liberal and do that, but you can’t be extreme.

But now they are associating themselves with a bunch of air-headed, supercilious, smug, spoiled and not-very-bright people.

To the extent that the movement has a coherent message, it’s socialist.

But mostly it’s whining about the trials of privileged kids who can skip class, and who got to go to an expensive college because daddy worked for one of those corporations they are demonizing.

They feel put-upon because their Women’s Studies major doesn’t get them a good paying job. And they think it’s unfair that they have to repay student loans.

Thus it seems the Marquette College Democrats have lurched to the left.

[Update]

Rick Esenberg nailed the issue of the protests in a recent blog post:

The occupation protests are straight up demagoguery. The protesters are either incoherent (rants about “corporations,” “we are the 99%”) or call for incredibly stupid and destructive things (guaranteed “living” incomes or debt forgiveness.)

The protests are less about a program than they are about a psychology. They are fueled by the frisson of opposition and manned by the usual suspects. To be sure, there is real economic uncertainty. If you borrowed $100,000 for a degree in Comparative Literature, the prospect of paying it back with your earnings at Noodles is frightening. Unemployment is scary. Underemployment is frustrating and there is too much of both.

But the protesters have no solution. The “movement” largely reduces to a claim that other people have something that I want and should be made to give it to me. It’s easy to rail about a few people who are very wealthy but the notion that the nation’s economic problems can be solved by taking their stuff away doesn’t bear the slightest scrutiny. You can’t balance the budget that way. You can’t solve sluggish economic demand. Maybe the world would be a better place if Steve Jobs and Bill Gates couldn’t become filthy rich by revolutionizing the way we live and work, but I don’t think so.

There is a reasonable critique of government bailouts and the overheated financial industry but it’s a complicated one that can’t be reduced to narratives about greed (although greed is certainly part of the story) or unfettered capitalism.

I think that the occupation protests will wither away but expect continued emphasis on the class warfare theme by the Democrats and their allies. Without an unexpected economic turnabout, the President can’t run for re-election based on his record. He needs a scapegoat - someone to blame and somebody to fear.