NY Police Handled Occupiers with Restraint and Professionalism

Thursday, 22 Dec 2011 02:08 PM

  Comment  |
   Contact  |
  Print   |
    A   A  
  Copy Shortlink
I was surprised to learn of the letter sent by Congressman Jerry Nadler — who is my Congressman, by the way — to Attorney General Eric H. Holder requesting the attorney general to investigate, as the New York Times stated, “whether the police in New York and other cities had deprived protesters of rights protected by the Constitution or by law, and to determine what can be done to prevent future similar actions.”

His letter was a reference to the Occupy Wall Street protest, which used Zuccotti Park as its base.

Mayor Michael Bloomberg quite understandably criticized the Congressman for requesting such an investigation. Had I been Mayor, I would have similarly protested.

Indeed, when I was Mayor, other members of Congress at the time, at the request of some civil rights activists, demanded the House Judiciary Committee investigate charges of police brutality alleging biased racial actions by the NYPD.

The current ranking member of the Judiciary Committee, John Conyers, D-MI, then a senior member of the committee responding to the demand of the advocates, first and prior to hearings denounced the city and the NYPD, then held hearings, and then announced that the charges against the NYPD were not sustained. But the damage was done and, of course, the holding of the hearing itself gave credibility to the false charges.

So here too the Congressman’s letter gives credibility to the false charges of advocates for Occupy Wall Street. The protesters occupied Zuccotti Park for two months before the City of New York, acting pursuant to court order, removed the tents and sleeping bags that had been erected against city directives.

Occupy Wall Street is represented by well qualified lawyers to argue the merits of their case in court. They did so and lost. They have a right of appeal. It is reputed that they have a bank account available to them with more than $500,000 in it as a result of donations.

Their rights, in my opinion, have not been violated. Just the opposite. The protestors have violated the rights of others doing business or living in the area of Zuccotti Park.

Congressman Nadler and Speaker of the Assembly Shelly Silver jointly complained by letter to the mayor, stating “Some of the protesters have created serious and quality of life concerns for residents.” So Nadler, as often happens with public officials trying to please constituents, ended up on both sides of the issue.

The forum to determine rights and wrongs in this case are the New York courts. Does Nadler believe they are incapable of doing so and that the U.S. attorney general needs to enter the matter? That is a real smack in the face to New York City.

Occupy Wall Street protesters on December 17th tried to illegally occupy a parcel of land owned by Trinity Church, which had declined to make it available as an encampment for Occupy Wall Street protesters.

Protesters were arrested by the NYPD for their attempted illegal occupation. Did Congressman Nadler condemn Trinity Church, the NYPD or the Occupy Wall Street protesters? Or, is he leaving that issue to the New York courts?

I will now venture an opinion.

Congressman Nadler represents the Upper West Side, a bastion of liberalism and radicalism. Citizens flood him with letters and visits demanding he side with Occupy Wall Street.

He decides that since he’s criticized Occupy Wall Street by letter to the mayor at the request of business people and residents of the area near Zuccotti Park, why not now ingratiate himself with Occupy Wall Street by demanding an investigation of the NYPD and its tactics?

As they say, “It can’t hurt.” But it does hurt. In this case, it attacks the integrity and professionalism of the police, which most New Yorkers would say in this case is unfair. By and large, and with few exceptions, the police handled themselves with restraint and professionalism.

I hope the attorney general will conclude that the New York courts can — and should — handle the matter.

Nadler’s political correctness, seeking to please the advocates, is seen for what it is — the craven response of a politician worried about a possible primary from the left.

© 2014 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

  Comment  |
   Contact  |
  Print   |
  Copy Shortlink
Around the Web
Join the Newsmax Community
Please review Community Guidelines before posting a comment.
>> Register to share your comments with the community.
>> Login if you are already a member.
blog comments powered by Disqus
 
Email:
Country
Zip Code:
Privacy: We never share your email.
 
Follow Newsmax
Like us
on Facebook
Follow us
on Twitter
Add us
on Google Plus
Around the Web
Top Stories
You May Also Like

My Plan To Reduce the National Debt

Thursday, 10 Jan 2013 12:15 PM

Following is a letter that I sent to the New York Congressional Delegation proposing a project to reduce the national de . . .

My Letter to Prime Minister Cameron

Wednesday, 02 Jan 2013 11:25 AM

My commentary this week is the letter that I sent to Prime Minister David Cameron of Great Britain. I had hoped that by  . . .

NYT's Friedman Is Hostile to Israel

Friday, 28 Dec 2012 15:48 PM

In his December 26 New York Times editorial, Tom Friedman wrote in support of former U.S. Senator Chuck Hagel and the po . . .

Most Commented

Newsmax, Moneynews, Newsmax Health, and Independent. American. are registered trademarks of Newsmax Media, Inc. Newsmax TV, and Newsmax World are trademarks of Newsmax Media, Inc.

 
NEWSMAX.COM
America's News Page
©  Newsmax Media, Inc.
All Rights Reserved