Encampments are not "homes" - stop with the gaslighting

We’re the shopping carts donated by those businesses or was it just a five-finger discount? We already know the answer.

Since The Stranger is so concerned with the homeless, I’m sure HanHan offered up her couch or floor for someone to sleep on, right?

I get a strong sense that there's an unspoken personal vendetta being pursued here, presumably against Pedro himself but possibly one of his companions. Otherwise there's no logical reason for this particular encampment to be a sweep priority when there are so many others that are much more publicly visible, much more impactful on neighboring residents, much more of a safety risk, and much less functionally stable -- and whose occupants would for the most part be thrilled to get into a tiny house village. I hope the Stranger's close scrutiny of this sweep has some influence both on how it plays out for this encampment and on how future sweep decisions are made.

@4 The catalyst for this sweep, as is so often the case, was a shooting: https://komonews.com/news/local/city-to-clear-out-homeless-encampment-on-aurora-avenue-in-north-seattle . Nice try on the baseless conspiracy theory though.

@6 That report is about a different encampment.

@7 Is it? Sorry. I guess you can go on assuming this is a city-wide conspiracy against Pedro.

@8
I can't remember the name of who posted number 2 but it was a well written comment about the article, without being insulting to the camp residents or anyone.
It did question the journalistic integrity of the author and her employer but not in an aggressive, insulting, or inappropriate manner.

@9 That isn't what I'm "assuming" at all. What I'm inclined to suspect is that somewhere in the labyrinthine bureaucracy that makes these decisions, there's one influential person (maybe more than one, but one would suffice) who personally finds Pedro, and/or the example he sets, intolerable.

Even if you support sweeps in principle, it should be obvious that by prioritizing this one the city is inexplicably adding to its own immediate shelter burden. If anyone can think of a better explanation, I'm listening.

Yep - they are aggressively deleting posts that don't agree with their world view now.

They don't want anyone questioning Hannah's journalistic integrity or the validity of their arguments. How republican.

@8 and @ 10. Thank you for noticing. I wrote the long now deleted comment number 2. I may have access to it in which case I will attempt to repost. I do not believe I in any way violated a term of service. I spent some time and thought on it and resent that it was disappeared. I would certainly appreciate a note in these comments from whoever was responsible for deleting it as to their thinking. I also noted for what it is worth that the formatting I used, went away and it did not look as it should have on the page. Deleting comments should be for clear reasons, otherwise it is a betrayal to all readers, who are left with those not deleted, which might not reflect the variety of responses. Stay tuned as I will need to access a different device a bit later.

@12: The city has swept many other large encampments north of the Ship Canal. Sweeping this encampment does not break that pattern.

“Even if you support sweeps in principle, it should be obvious that by prioritizing this one the city is inexplicably adding to its own immediate shelter burden.”

Cuba/Pedro has refused shelter already, so that’s an odd statement to make. Yes, in general, sweeps add to the shelter burden, but the voters and the mayor are clear sweeps should continue.

@16, OK, but again: Why is this inobtrusive campsite being prioritized when there are plenty of others whose neighbors have long been screaming for the city to come deal with? Does that not seem odd to you at all?

@17 -- I think you're making a pretty big assumption that this particular campsite referenced in this post is unobtrusive. The first article on this place referenced repeated thefts at nearby businesses that one of the residents acknowledged were perpetrated by people living at the encampment. This entire process was likely initiated because people living and working nearby got fed up and called demanding removal of people they believed were stealing their stuff.

@17
Odds.

We are targeting every encampment in the city. The voters of Seattle have entrusted Mayor Harrell with the removal of the encampments. There are many and we want them all gone. From Shoreline to Tukwila, from Puget Sound to Lake Washington we want every single encampment swept and cleared. We also understand that it might take multiple sweeps to clear a specific area. We are okay with that. Just keep sweeping until all the campers are swept back from whence they came.

With that mandate every encampment is a target, that one is chosen before another is a roll of the dice.

@18

Wow I think it is happening again.

Strange.

Of course Index Newspapers, as the owner of this blog, is free to delete visitor comments as they see fit. They own this digital playground and can do with it whatever they want.

But it is odd this selective deletion of comments about a very specific encampment and a very specific SLOG author.

Natalie crossed a journalistic line with her coverage of the Every Day Protests, inserting herself as a participant and not simply an embeded reporter.

Perhaps Hannah is doing the same. Ever since she was hired from Real Change, it's been obvious she is extraordinarily biased, even for the Stranger. Making herself a part of the story does remove certain first amendment protections.

Though the Stranger generally doesn't care.

What is it about Park Place's comments that is causing Hannah to delete them without explanation?

@17: No, removal of this encampment does not strike me as odd. Several reasons have already been given in this thread, but also the campers have given many indications they intend to stay there permanently. (Recall the original justification for tolerating encampments was the cruel lie about the campers being “victims of capitalism” who just needed a brief chance to recover.) To that end, these campers have built many unpermitted, below-code constructions, which may take the city a long time to remove. So it may make sense to start the removal process sooner for this encampment.

Turns out this encampment was having some pretty major impacts on people living nearby. And it was people scraping by in one of Seattle's last mobile home parks -- not some glittering high rise condo building where everybody's a millionaire. I guess the trailer park residents don't really matter to The Stranger when there's a narrative to maintain.

Apparently now there's no links allowed here now. I'll try this again.

www.seattletimes.com/business/real-estate/trash-piled-up-at-seattle-mobile-home-park-as-rents-rose-homeless-camp-grew/

The rederal ro the shelters are always available. Is it really difficult to nail dowm how many people live tnere Probably two. The predicament you are in when you live outside is that you are down ro wnat hou have on your back. I mean arleast tne seattle times has corporate sponsers for rhis devisive pointless billshit. They should not give these assholes shit until theu clean up tneir fucking mess They are not suffering it isnt lack of garbage cans. Tney dont give a shit and neiher does this shit rag. Really ...they baricaded tnemsellves behind shopping carts.

This encampments residents were stealing from the mobile home park and home Depot to create their homes and gardens. Other violence went on there also. Residents who pay taxes and follow rules deserve to live in a safe place - it's part of the city charter.

Fortunately it remains up thirteen hours after being reposted. I appreciate this. And it occurs to me that they may have an autodelete function if enough report a post. So it could be other readers who believe in censoring ideas they disagree with. Perhaps with the complaints someone has turned this off. Hope so if this is the case. Only The Stranger knows.

@23 Excellent comment. Thanks for taking the trouble to repost twice after being deleted twice by Stranger. Stranger owes us an explanation for these deletions. Hannah owes an explanation as to why she's crossing the same journalistic line that Natty had problems with. OR Hannah could just give up the pretense of being a "journalist, " which maybe she already has done.

I often tell Dewey to fucking kill himself and they don’t remove those posts. Removing posts because they point out shitty reporting is pathetic. I typically line up closely with the stranger staffs perspective but come the fuck on. If it’s a strike call it a strike every time whether you like the team or not.

@35
Yea pretty much every commenter left on this blog, myself included, has made posts far more outrageous than what Park Place is posting. In fact it’s the type of well written, thoughtful post that fosters respectful discussion.

Something doesn’t add up.

Hey Stranger! HELLOOOO? Can you hear us? Why are you repeatedly deleting Park Place's reasoned and respectful comments? WTF Strsnger? Will we ever hear anything from you on this issue or will you simply continue to judge on high in a weirdly anonymous manner?

Park Place / Comment 34 nailed it. Great comment. The Stranger has degraded into crap. Hannah and team: you should take Park Place's comment to heart and do some real reporting.

This is great. Knee jerk conservatives complain about being censored/cancelled, in a privately owned forum (what about my free stuff), while demanding the homeless (what about my free stuff) be booted off the streets.

Maybe the usual suspects here can find common cause with the homeless and demand things they have no right to. Ponies are always good.

@39
You realize this is Seattle right? There are hardly any conservatives here, let alone kneejerk ones.

Read 34 again. Park Place speaks for the vast majority of Seattlites, the ones who resoundingly elected Bruce Harrell to be mayor.

@39: Yeah, both Seattle, and the Stranger’s readership, are just chock-full of “[k]née jerk conservatives.” Just like Seattle’s District 3 has thousands upon thousands of racist right-wingers, because only persons fitting that description could ever possibly have a problem with CM Sawant’s repeated and intentional abuses of her powers. Seattle itself must be a hot-bed of conservatism, because it elected a Republican to the City Attorney’s office. There simply cannot be other explanations, especially not explanations which involve a chronically liberal and prosperous electorate utterly rejecting your failed radical philosophy. That is doubleplus unpossible, and so you will not consider it. Keep banging on with all of that, and enjoy both more sweeps now, and more Republicans later.

(When one person posts a comment here, it does not displace or deny another’s ability to do so. When campers simply appropriate a public space for their own personal use, they deny it to everyone else. Your analogies form as poorly as have your other beliefs.)

Wow! Deleted for the third time with zero explanation. I want to stress that until someone responds with how it came to be deleted, I can't assume it was by a Stranger staffer or writer vs. a reader(s) who reported it. I can surmise that it might be the latter insofar as my repostings have not been stopped and I have not had my user name blocked. Perhaps that's next. I would really appreciate a comment by The Stranger here that lays out why some comments are deleted and if this is a function of the software getting complaints, they might adjust the settings. In any event here it is again:

34
@32 and others. Well, I was prematurely pleased. It is gone again, so below is reposting #3. I would certainly appreciate it if the system or person(s) responsible for deletion had the character and integrity to post their rationale. In the interim, if others wished to copy and save for their own reposting of my comment - with proper attribution, should it come down again, they are certainly free to do so, as well as weigh in with their own thoughts. And seriously Stranger, this is well worth writing about as a local publication that wishes to have impact and relevance. Here is the last one, reposted without any change from approximately 1030 pm on 8/26:

@22 You are right. I will repost word for word below the latest deletion. I had edited it to remove any inference about the intent of the reporter beyond my question on some inconsistencies in language that made it unclear how she saw her role. I have no evidence that it was she that removed it. And despite my request to clarify reasons for removing the comment, the responsible decider has been silent. Seriously, is cancelling a comment that is not profane appropriate? Many of us value the ability to engage and respond to important civic topics and discussions.

One of the complaints leveled against some on the left is an apparent unwillingness to engage rather than be enraged and as demonstrated twice so far in this thread, deleted/cancelled. I ask that this be escalated to the editorial people in charge for them to deal with. And again, I ask that if the Stranger is going to delete comments, that they explain their policies publicly. Thank you. Now for the 2nd deleted comment:

(This is a reposting of the comment that was inexplicitly deleted, with some improved formatting and a few small tweaks. Kindly keep it up, or make it clear why is does not belong)

Appreciate the video. A compelling portrayal. I wish Hannah would make it clear if she is reporting objectively or a participant/advocate insofar as she uses "we" as in "we are hunkering down right now". At other times she seems to report. In any event, it was very illuminating and I encourage more video coverage.

The reality is that a few of us regularly bloviate in a predictable way in these comments and that there are relatively few comments in most Stranger articles, by a relatively few, likely reflecting a waning readership. My favorite parts are "I Anonymous" and of course anything Dan Savage, and the occasional Slog reveal.

I am so pleased to see this and every other sweep. This video is ironic insofar as they use stolen shopping carts in a futile effort to block the site. And I imagine that this site, like others, is full of stolen stuff, including bicycles, package contents from porches, propane tanks and more. Not to mention, large piles of trash, and non-working waste systems in the RV's.

It seems that a basic tenet of apologists for urban campers is to engage in a number of tactics or dodges:

Never ask meaningful questions of the subjects, such as why they are doing what they do instead of something else, like work, move, accept shelter and the like. Cuba is an immigrant. What is his story? The others likewise? And perhaps some real fact-checking and objectivity?

Always invoke systemic injustices to diss the system. Trash capitalism that created the technology to enable this website and the funds to pay for the stuff that people use in Seattle and elsewhere. Remind readers of Slavery, red-lining, US imperialism, entering native lands over the centuries and other injustices that can be conflated and wildly stretched into the current situation being discussed.

If they have color, they are oppressed. Unless a successful Asian or Jew (though Lisa Manion can with a straight face campaign as a POC due to a Korean parent - she knows this gets votes among certain folks). If they are white, their success is at the expense of others.

Claim that the stuff that belongs to others, whether a business or private citizen, are free for the taking based upon a statement of desire or need on the part of the thief.

Never suggest individual agency and personal responsibility exists. Insult those of all means who behave ethically, legally and responsibly.

Always shoot messengers whose message you don't like, including this writer. Hurl insults but do not address the substance. Heck, report it so it might get deleted, as it has once.

Include statements or videos of people who seem to have sufficient disposable income for costly tattoos, nice electronics, and many other possessions that may or may not have been acquired honestly. But never ask any tough questions of them that might challenge their world views, or the views of the writers or advocates.

Patronize those on the streets as childlike and incapable of personal agency, choice or deserving of consequences for their choices and decisions. But never actually take them into one's own personal domain and home, just demand that others take care of them with nothing expected in return.

Ignore crime, impact of drugs, dealing and the like. Claim that any form of accountability is racist if the numbers skew towards one group being disproportionately doing bad stuff. Be dismissive of criminal prosecution and the safety and security of the community when lawbreakers are held to account in a meaningful manner.

Include poetic comments with visible stanzas, allowing one to quickly skip or read as they wish.

I am sure I am missing a few and others can and will set me straight, with some incisive insults added.

The good news is that at long last the community sees the consequences of empty platitudes, enablement, non-enforcement of laws, and giving over the public square to a small group of self-entitled people and their enablers.

Most of us are beyond over this and thank Bruce Harrell and others for finally doing what needs to be done. It is a good start but please revisit daily every cleared location as I regularly see within days, new tents appearing in such sites.
Park Place on August 27, 2022 at 12:56 PMReport this

The Stranger is now burying the story, hoping it will go away. And it will. What won't go away is the sour taste of Hannah's "reporting " and the Stranger's freakish repeated deletions of reasoned comments, with no explanation. That will linger like the fart you never wanted to be near.