This latest attempt by officials to justify the excessive violence by police against University of California students protesting against steep new hikes in tuition throughout California, is nothing less than a self-serving attempt redefine what constitutes violent behavior.
Shooting death near Occupy Oakland prompts calls for camp to disband
Students and professors reacted angrily Thursday to the previous evening's police response, saying officers used too much force against nonviolent protesters, who joined arms and blocked access to the encampment. But police and campus officials said they had given demonstrators ample time to remove their tents, and they said the resistance to police orders could not be considered a nonviolent protest.
Using this new lower standard of what constitutes violence would have us redefine Mohandas Gandhi as a very violent man. Gandhi led Indians in many protests whereb the central element was "resistance to police orders".
How forcefully to resist police orders is a very contentious issue here as Occupy Seattle, as it is at other occupy sites. But simply resisting a police order doesn't cross the line into instigating violence IMHO.
Please share your thoughts on this issue of what constitutes violence.
A Violent Man?