Skip to main content

View Diary: NYPD Raid on OWS: Refreshing the Tree of Liberty (12 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  eatbeans - you are right (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Escamillo

    There are two key differences between the Tea Party rallies and the OWS groups. First as you note, the Tea Party obtained permits which included posting an insurance bond, having portable sanitation stations, and paying for local police to provide security. Second, they never camped in public spaces overnight, even if they had multiple day events. Basically they obeyed the law, including rallies in open carry states when some brought guns to the meetings.

    In at least one city the Tea Party is suing for the money it spent complying with city permit rules because an OWS group has been in the same space for a month with no permit.

    "let's talk about that"

    by VClib on Wed Nov 16, 2011 at 08:00:44 AM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  actually, many Occupy sites obtained permits (0+ / 0-)

      But those permits are now being denied for renewal. Here's a Motley News story on Occupy Albuquerque for this very thing. Occupy Madison lost their permit. Occupy Raleigh were similarly denied a permit. Occupy Detroit is doing things by the book, but were denied a renewal permit to clean up after themselves.

      This "they are breaking the law" criticism is silly, and false on its face. From what I can tell, Occupy sites across the nation are attempting to comply with laws curtailing free speech and assembly, but are being denied... by the very power structures they are criticizing.

      Go figure.

      Above Grecian mantles were chiseled these words... Know Thyself... Nothing in Excess... the pop philosophy of its day.

      by ravagerofworlds2 on Wed Nov 16, 2011 at 09:57:49 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  ravager - thank you, that's new information (0+ / 0-)

        I knew that some of the Occupy groups had obtained permits and some of those through sympathetic mayors who were helpful. I was not aware of the number. In cities where permits were obtained I am assuming there were few clashes with local police. Hopefully that is the case. Regarding the renewal I don't think anyone could expect to be allowed to camp in public parks indefinitely. My guess is that permits for overnight stays have traditionally been for a week or less and the initial permits granted to the Occupy groups were for longer than historical precedents. I applaud the Occupy groups who followed the permit process and operated within the law. Unfortunately for many Occupy groups camping, without a permit, isn't allowed in public parks and that has been the primary area of dispute with local authorities.

        "let's talk about that"

        by VClib on Wed Nov 16, 2011 at 03:38:52 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Oh, you mean (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      ravagerofworlds2

      the national group that created the "tea party" arranged for their employees to get permits for the official events? Everything was handled up the chain of command.

      Did you mean to say that where armed tea partiers showed up at Democratic town hall meetings and shouted Congressmen and other citizens into silence until nothing could take place and the meetings had to disband... Are you saying that they had taken out permits to do that? I would like to see your evidence.

      •  AQ - Armed Tea Party at town halls? (0+ / 0-)

        I saw pictures of them at Tea Party rallies, but don't recall armed Tea Party members indoors at town hall meetings.

        The process by which they obtained the permits isn't really the issue. They got them and followed the law.

        "let's talk about that"

        by VClib on Wed Nov 16, 2011 at 03:32:19 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site