Still around

"City officials don't need to be banning things like opening an umbrella while sitting down, and if they do... don't do it just to see what happens." Great point. I don't have speakers on my work computer, but these videos generally annoy me when the camera is turned on AFTER whatever happened to spark the arrest. From what I could see, she was unwilling to comply. About 2 minutes in there is also a girl getting in one officer's face, yelling at him. He casually pushes her away. Considering they pretty much ignored her, I highly doubt that umbrella lady didn't do anything other than opening an umbrella.

Uh...the title of this video is "Legal Observer Assaulted by Police..." At what point is there an assault? I only see contact twice between the police and the protesters. #1 - the girl walking in front of, and impeding the pace, of the officer. He uses his hand to push her back after telling her to get back. She at one point pushes back at him. IMO, she should have immediately been arrested. You are not allowed to lay hands on the police, end of story. #2 - the whole tangle of bikes. Some protester gets in the way of some officers bike, causing a pileup(which he later admits to doing), and a bike is pushed into an officer who shoves the guy who pushed the bike into him. WTF is the problem here? Frankly, I'd like to see them pass a law that says you must remain a minimum of 5 feet from any officer conducting an arrest. Since these protesters are so intent on getting in the officers faces they caused both of the above problems. Then to overblow this as an assault? An assault??? I'm curious, why would you post this? What possible purpose does this serve?

Wow, I just read the article you linked too. It appears this woman who was arrested wanted to "test the law" and was arrested after INTENTIONALLY breaking it. Again, why is this news? I'll tell you why, so an article can be written like the one you linked to with a screaming headline "40 Seattle Cops arrest woman for sitting down, opening umbrella." What a biased piece of garbage. Why not write an article discussing the tenants of the 'movement'? How about one discussing what exactly these people hope to accomplish? Or one exploring where these protesters are getting their money and support from? But no, it's much easier to simply write a big headline and glorify someone who intentionally set out to break the law. You don't serve your cause by redistributing this nonsense.

Raider have you seen the satellite "picture" of the giant OWS crowd? The reason I put quotes is because it was doctored - somebody took a Google Earth photo of City Hall, added dots to look like people, and rotated the photo 180 degrees to look like Zucotti Park/Wall Street. This type of dishonesty, and similar dishonesty you mentioned, is largely ignored even though it speaks volumes about the people willing to lie or at least stretch the truth for this cause.