Quote Originally Posted by a completely inoffensive name View Post
Isn't it the duty of individuals to disseminate information for themselves? If the protesters have no substances and are just crying wolf, shouldn't the public recognize it for themselves? Why do we need to have the government act for the public? Why should the government have the power to decide when a group is legitimate and which are wannabe martyrs.


The government isn't doing that. It's closing down camps and keeping bridges open and trying to stop vandalism and so on.


Maybe not America, but my impression of what you are saying is that you think they are a threat to free speech and the health of the countries discourse.
Yeah, if people believed in them. It's certainly degrading to both of those things.

The Phelps guy can go ahead and get as much press as he wants from conflicts with police. When the public reads about him camping in a park, they should know that he is actually a crazy person with no substance. Same goes for OWS, the public should take individual responsibility for learning about legitimacy of a movement and chose to ignore/participate for themselves. The government should not be tear gassing students, even if they are wannabe martyrs.
And they wouldn't be, if it weren't for specific actions by the protesters (which have nothing to do with a real protest) that the police SHOULD put a stop too.

Imagine that you were a small business owner by St. Paul's, and worshiped there. How would you feel with the huge hit to your income, the noise, the people harassing you (that might have been a different camp), and the fact that people were pissing on your church's grounds? Why does the government not have any business putting a stop to the camp?