Occupy Seattle….Really?

I was watching the news the other day and noticed a blurb about Occupy Seattle taking over a property in Central Seattle as their outpost.  The property has been vacant for a couple of years now as a project had been stopped in the middle of rehabbing the building for expansion.  What thought jumped out at me was whether it was right for Occupy Seattle to take over this property for their own personal agenda?  

The owner had been working in the process with the banks to deal with the property, and as many know, lending institutions do not move quickly in resolving issues with properties.  Granted this property is an eyesore, and I won’t deny that, but is it really in the rights of anyone, whether Occupy Seattle, or some random strangers to squat in a property because they believe they have a right to do based upon their own beliefs, political agenda, homelessness, whatever? 

If they had known the circumstances of the owner, would they be so inclined to jump in and take what they believe to be a property for the taking?  There are many reasons why properties are in disrepair or not occupied and I find it very hard to accept that anyone can stake claim to what belongs to a property owner for their own personal use, media attention, just to justify their cause. 

The property belongs to someone and it isn’t Occupy Seattle’s right to trample on that persons property rights for media attention.

Speak Your Mind


403 - Forbidden: Access is denied.

403 - Forbidden: Access is denied.

You do not have permission to view this directory or page using the credentials that you supplied.