published Monday, October 31st, 2011

Wall Street protesters' 'demands?

One of the more disturbing aspects of the ongoing so-called "Occupy Wall Street" protests -- not only on Wall Street but in other locations around the United States -- is the demonstrators' listing of various "demands" that they want society to meet.

Whatever you may think of their grievances about "corporate greed," the vague threat that is implied when a rowdy crowd lists its "demands" is troubling.

And yet demonstrators in New York have put together a "Demands Working Group" to spell out what they want.

But what exactly does that mean? Does it mean that if they do not get what they want, they will continue forcibly occupying public and even private locations after they have been lawfully ordered to disperse? Or will they engage, as some of them have, in outright violence?

That is certainly not the protected right of peaceful assembly that was envisioned -- and is guaranteed -- by the First Amendment to our Constitution.

Anyone can verbally "demand" anything, but the use of violence, coercion and public disorder to achieve those demands is wrong -- and un-American.

5
Comments do not represent the opinions of the Chattanooga Times Free Press, nor does it review every comment. Profanities, slurs and libelous remarks are prohibited. For more information you can view our Terms & Conditions and/or Ethics policy.
acerigger said...

"Anyone can verbally "demand" anything, but the use of violence, coercion and public disorder to achieve those demands is wrong -- and un-American." I guess you've forgotten The American Revolutionary War! Demands are in order! They're complaining about the fact the Wall Street wrecked the economy three years ago and nobody's held responsible for that. Not a single person has been indicted or convicted for destroying twenty percent of our national net worth accumulated over two centuries. They're upset about the fact that wall street have iron control over economic policies of this country and that one party is a wholly owned subsidiary of wall street and the other party caters to them as well, that's the truth of the matter

These are the people who think we should not have twenty four million people in this country who can't find a full time job. That we should not have fifty million people who can't see a doctor when they're sick. That we shouldn't have forty seven million people of this country who need government help to feed themselves. And we shouldn't have fifteen million families who owe more on their mortgage than the value of home

October 31, 2011 at 5:21 a.m.
Livn4life said...

Wow Ace those are some really big but are they verifiable numbers you have going there? Comparing the Wall Street situation to the Revolutionary War, now that is really being informed. Maybe if the Occupiers were in Washington in front of Congress for their complicity in what has angered the Occupants and many Americans, that might in some sad way compare. But then, when we raise almost a generation of people who have the mentality that they blame all their plights on someone else and take no personal responsibility for their actions, what do we expect? Wall Street continuing on as if nothing occurred has as much to do with federal government bailouts as with Big Corporate, Big Unfailable Bank corruption. So why not take the Occupation to a major source of partnership in the corruption? That place can be found in Washington DC.

October 31, 2011 at 7:30 a.m.
acerigger said...

After reading the editorialists claim that "Anyone can verbally "demand" anything, but the use of violence, coercion and public disorder to achieve those demands is wrong -- and un-American.",yes,my first thought was comparing the "demands" of the American Patriots.Numbers are verifiable.

October 31, 2011 at 8:34 a.m.
librul said...

The slur trying to brand the OWS protestors as using violence and coercion is typical FP propagandizing. The Occupy Chattanooga protestors have nearly been laughed out of the movement for timidly asking for a place to set up camp. To heck with that. You can't make an omelet without breaking some eggs and civil disobedient protest is meaningless when you ask your overlords for permission. The only violence and overreaction in this whole affair has come from our police state. Numerous police and federal provacateurs have been identified trying to incite violence to give the pigs a reason to use violence against citizens peacefully occupying public spaces. For cities or legislatures to place restrictions on the use of public spaces to try to suppress the public expression of grievances is unamerican and must be opposed.

October 31, 2011 at 4:31 p.m.
conservative said...

So if their demands are not met, then what? Violence and destruction of property, of course. Good American citizens make their demands known at election time. Have you noticed these riffraff are not appealing to voters for change?

October 31, 2011 at 6:01 p.m.
please login to post a comment

videos »         

photos »         

e-edition »

advertisement
advertisement

Find a Business

400 East 11th St., Chattanooga, TN 37403
General Information (423) 756-6900
Copyright, Permissions, Terms & Conditions, Privacy Policy, Ethics policy - Copyright ©2014, Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc. All rights reserved.
This document may not be reprinted without the express written permission of Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc.