Found an interesting statement from the 'Occupy Eugene' camp in yesterday's Register Guard article 'Breaking Camp' about "a clear betrayal of the collaborative relationship established between (Occupy Eugene) and the city” since the protest began. Couldn't substituting "(Voting taxpayers)" for "(Occupy Eugene)" in this statement also be appropriate? I originally felt the Occupy Movement had merit regarding its protest of financial malfeasance. But, when the rhetoric centered on homelessness - to the detriment of the original protest reason - my support waned; there are organizations better trained to aid the homeless. Perhaps the Occupy Eugene people raised awareness and habitat/funding for the homeless - but, in the meantime, "de-railed" on their original purpose, which is sad. I feel that those that receive corporate welfare try to misdirect the American public to abuses of social welfare, the cost of which is 'peanuts' in comparison to what corporate welfare costs taxpayers.

Those same countries also provide health insurance to all their citizens. That's the American way, screw your people financially, not with physical brutality.

"Meanwhile, some of the Occupy Eugene protesters say they will not go anywhere unless they are arrested and will stand by their message no matter what happens...and so... what is their message??? That they will take advanatge of the county's lenience,"squat" on public property,and cost us tax-payers lots of money. When they've caused enough damage, become enough of a public nuisance and long-worn out their welcome, to where the law finally says enough, then they'll ILLEGALLY stay, cost more tax payer money and law-enforcement resources, and undoubtedly scream THEY'RE being mistreated??? You know...most of the time I find it an atrocity how other countries handle protestors (with brutal sometimes lethal force) but once in awhile, idiots like these make you wonder....