Occupy Santa Cruz and the 75River group

Why should anyone bother to attend the GA? What happened was illegal. No one has the right to just takeover property that belongs to someone else. This is a simple case of breaking and entering and should be treated as such.

This is a big setback for the OSC movement. What started out as a good concept has been taken over by the anarchists. Public opinion is now doing a quick shift against the movement as we now see that there is little regard for the law.

Or, i bet you love talking about Egypt. You do know what actually was/is happening over there right?

the building belongs to a subsidiary of WELLS FARGO. Despite what corporate personhood laws and capitalism would have you believe, Wells fargo is not a person. nobody is going to steal your house, bro.

Please consider using the word that appears in the article's first line, "NECESSARILY" cautiously: "While the Occupy Santa Cruz General Assembly DOES NOT NECESSARILY SUPPORT the unconsensed and unannounced autonomous action of reclaiming 75 River Street, Occupy Santa Cruz does support the need for community space." (The capital letters in that sentence are mine, for emphasis.) I understand that the GA did NOT support the action of reclaiming 75 River Street. If the GA had supported it, it would have taken a definite vote on it and supported it, in addition to supporting the need for community space. So "necessarily" is irrelevant and misleading. It implies that GA support of the 75 River Street action might or might not be the case. Thanks for receiving this input. Thanks for all you have done and are. I attend GAs when I can and did not this afternoon, 12/4/11.