What right to a small minority lets call them the 1% that do not like the way things are going to take away a public place and deni other people the right to use and enjoy that area?

Deastwood, if it weren't for the government bailing out huge corporations then they'd be in the same situation everybody else is; scrambling for money. Don't deny it.

It is much better then what happened in Melbourne Australia.

It's been happening in the US too for weeks where have you been? Watching too much major media?

The police force in Oakland just decided not to deal with shit and used the tear gas but in San Francisco, NYC, etc police used the same force to arrest protesters and they also used the health issue excuse. Copy + Paste.

I don't think the health issue is an excuse I think it is a genuine concern for the people that have to go through the area and for the people there.

The major media in Australia has been focusing on the Royal Visit and QANTAS's. When you go to the BBC news sight the occupy movement doesn't make the front page and there is only 1 article in the US&Canada sub news section

Corporate media after all.

I think it is more people just don't care here the Royal visit was a big thing and the QANTAS's disputes are of importance to the Australian population, some dickheads sitting in a park attacking and being attacked by police may make the news one day heck it might even make it 2 or 3 days but when the people show that they have no interest in it they ignore it so the media stops reporting it.

We are not in the same situation Australia never went in to recession and we are preparing for a second GFC, Americas little 1st world problem is of no importance currently.

There are always a small number of people that will be violent and they always get the most media attention.

I wonder if it's really necessary to camp out in the chosen "Occupy" spots for the long term? Is it more publicity versus simply committing to a normal protest?

Dear lord. That's mind-blowing. The US congress is dead weight right now.

Yes, this...

So how does everyone feel about the passive aggressive crackdowns being made on occupy protests in a few different places?

Occupy Quebec today asked protestors to take it home, along with sweeping through the site and taking away everything deemed to be a fire hazard (extension cords, toasters), and other sites have demanded protestors move their tents farther apart.

I wonder if it's really necessary to camp out in the chosen "Occupy" spots for the long term? Is it more publicity versus simply committing to a normal protest?

It's not a very uncommon feeling, however, nor is it specific to the United States. Civic engagement has been on the decline for decades now, and people perceive assimilative pathways of political participation as having been closed off to them - often even incorrectly, which in itself shows the failure of the biggest political parties to mobilize at the level of the average citizen.

However, in the United States, I think a case could be made that those assimilative channels have actually been closed off to the average person as corporate lobbying has become exponentially more influential in the past 20-30 years.

Then what's the point on voting on the first place?

Thirteen Observations made by Lemony Snicket while watching Occupy Wall Street from a Discreet Distance

1. If you work hard, and become successful, it does not necessarily mean you are successful because you worked hard, just as if you are tall with long hair it doesn’t mean you would be a midget if you were bald.

2. “Fortune” is a word for having a lot of money and for having a lot of luck, but that does not mean the word has two definitions.

3. Money is like a child—rarely unaccompanied. When it disappears, look to those who were supposed to be keeping an eye on it while you were at the grocery store. You might also look for someone who has a lot of extra children sitting around, with long, suspicious explanations for how they got there.

4. People who say money doesn’t matter are like people who say cake doesn’t matter—it’s probably because they’ve already had a few slices.

5. There may not be a reason to share your cake. It is, after all, yours. You probably baked it yourself, in an oven of your own construction with ingredients you harvested yourself. It may be possible to keep your entire cake while explaining to any nearby hungry people just how reasonable you are.

6. Nobody wants to fall into a safety net, because it means the structure in which they’ve been living is in a state of collapse and they have no choice but to tumble downwards. However, it beats the alternative.

7. Someone feeling wronged is like someone feeling thirsty. Don’t tell them they aren’t. Sit with them and have a drink.

8. Don’t ask yourself if something is fair. Ask someone else—a stranger in the street, for example.

9. People gathering in the streets feeling wronged tend to be loud, as it is difficult to make oneself heard on the other side of an impressive edifice.

10. It is not always the job of people shouting outside impressive buildings to solve problems. It is often the job of the people inside, who have paper, pens, desks, and an impressive view.

11. Historically, a story about people inside impressive buildings ignoring or even taunting people standing outside shouting at them turns out to be a story with an unhappy ending.

12. If you have a large crowd shouting outside your building, there might not be room for a safety net if you’re the one tumbling down when it collapses.

13. 99 percent is a very large percentage. For instance, easily 99 percent of people want a roof over their heads, food on their tables, and the occasional slice of cake for dessert. Surely an arrangement can be made with that niggling 1 percent who disagree.