Very unfortunate IMO, although it sounds like both sides have some blame from the article linked below. I recently heard there were a number of NYC officers who refused to carry out their orders to arrest the protestors...that came to me as a shock.

Occupy Oakland: Police use tear gas on OWS protesters; 100 arrested

I'm not sure everyone in OWS wants violence as you put it. The only thing I can find is a cursory "sampling" from WSJ saying a third of protestors would support violence to achieve their goals. That to me, seems extremely high and uncharacteristic (ultimately questioning sampling) but perhaps the sentiment in NYC is different than here in Philly.

I don't know if we can be so "either" ..." or "

In your example up there, people such as lay ministers, social workers, whether voluntary or paid, and people who start free medical clinics would all be stigmatized or branded as evil.

I would like to see a little more gray in this discussion and less black and white. I think people could meet on the gray "land" and have a useful, constructive conversation. We might even agree to disagreeon some points.

But we would bring back what used to be called " civil discourse."

I would invite you to reread my post previous to the above that you assumedly are responding to. I said that "MANY" of the protesters got what they wanted. I can't imagine that ALL of the protesters were wanting violence.

You make a very good point. There are indeed people with a spirit that is drawn to dangerous places such as missionaries, good hearted medical professionals and such. Point well taken.

As far as civil discourse in this forum, for my part that went out a LONG time ago with my being pummelled time and time again. If you can't beat 'em, join 'em and I have. I do my best to stop short of straight out name calling. If I have inadvertently crossed that line I apologize to whomever might have been in my path at the time.

Fair call - sorry for misconstruing your post.

I think it all points out the flaw in the original title of this thread.
There is no clarity about what OWS is all about. There is no universal agreement.

A post of wisdom!

I agree, its sort of a motley bunch of people who vaguely share political and economic ideology. In the case of that post, I simply read it wrong and don't want to pin the wrong words on Larry.

Here's the "poll" I was referring to
Douglas Schoen: Polling the Occupy Wall Street Crowd - WSJ.com

It's unfortunate that the disenchantment cannot be reduced to a single slogan or sound byte. It is somewhat interesting that many here who distrust "mainstream media" Yet rely on it to learn about the protest issues. Perhaps this is a movement that needs to be experienced personally rather than through media dissection.

You make a very valid point. The problem with your theory is that GOOD people who obey the law and stay out of trouble do not have it in their nature to engage in such activity.

Dedicated to the cause...yeah right!

Occupy London: 90% of tents in St Paul's protest camp are left empty overnight | Mail Online

The foreign press is doing a credible job of reporting the OWS.

No big surprise! I expect the foreign press would be more objective than our biased mainstream media in this country.

So protesting economic conditions are just not what a good conservative like y'all up in NE texas would consider doing?

EXCLUSIVE: OCCUPY WALL ST. Unaired Footage FOX reporter OWNED - YouTube

Has this clip been shown on fox?