Then the group of Black Bloc demonstrators set fires. Their exact
> motivation for doing so wasn't clear. When Occupy medic Douglas Connor
> arrived shortly after 1 a.m. and asked what the fire was for, he got a
> matter-of-fact response from one of the protesters standing guard. "Fires
> help dissipate tear gas," the protester said. Apparently, they'd all read
> it somewhere in a protest manual.
>
How does this passage make any sense at all? It sounds like the motivation was perfectly clear, but Swan didn't like it, for reasons she doesn't bother to share. "[T]hey'd all read it somewhere in a protest manual"? Good for them! I'm glad to know those things are still in use (although I'm sure they've gone through a few revisions since I touched one). Why her weird, cagey dismissiveness?
When a journalist is allowed by her editor to publish illogical drivel like this - not disagreeable opinions, but sheer, transparent nonsense - I'm hard-pressed to take the rest of what she "reports" very seriously.
-- "Hige sceal þe heardra, heorte þe cenre, mod sceal þe mare, þe ure mægen lytlað."