No, aggressive police behaviour against passive protests is how riots happen.

Violence should only be met with violence?   If that was the case then there would be no way to remove peaceful protestors, no matter where they are, be it blocking traffic, or a hospital or whatever.

Dragging the protestors from their illegal spaces afterall is inherently violent and can cause some pain and even possibe longterm damage.  Which is what makes the pepperspray incidient even more confusing.  Sure it hurts like a bitch, but the possible permament after affects are less likely or prevelent then what's used already.

Additionally, whether they intentionally block the way of the police due to theif, murderer, protestor or tax cheat... they are committing the same crime.  Resisitng Arrest. (You can be charged with it by trying to prevent soemone elses arrest.)

Resisting Arrest is listed under Active Resistance.

Once they decided to try and block the arrests they technically weren't passive resisters anymore, but active ones.  Regardless of not trying to physically attack anyone.

I am speaking not in legal terms, but in moral ones in this case. Those who have the conviction to protest in a purely non-violent way should never be put down by nonviolent means, even if it is for the good of the society to remove said persons from the scene to restore normal working order in the short term

So in otherwords, if protestors are blocking the streets to anywhere be it Denny's or a hospital.  Nobody should force them to move.

I am speaking not in legal terms, but in moral ones in this case. Those who have the conviction to protest in a purely non-violent way should never be put down by nonviolent means, even if it is for the good of the society to remove said persons from the scene to restore normal working order in the short term

How is confining/restraining people against their will without their consent a non-violent act?

Detainment without inflicting harm would be preferable to inflicting harm, and it will not breed violence if the protest is truly nonviolent (for at its root it is no less violent than the transportation of individuals)

... and having protestors who were lawful and peaceful is preferable to having the unlawful and violent protestors that are always associated with "progressive" protests

Come on, they were clearly telling the police to fuck off. Anywhere else, you'd get your ass handed to you in a split second but cause those little pricks had enough people, they felt empowered. People are blocking your way, telling you to fuck off, (from what I understood) twisting words and just being little entitled babies. In another country, this would have gone way way way way worse. They should be glad they got pepper sprayed and not worse. They provoked the police, saw them take out the pepper spray, they walked around the goddamn circle and this is police brutality? The students were being stubborned babies, not complying to reasoning like "hey we're about to get pepper sprayed in the face at point blank range...let's stay." And what I find like a slap in the face is that from that video, you can see people laughing it up and giggling like it's cool to fuck with the police.

I will stay by my believe that was not police brutality. The police was extremely patient, well behaved and from what I can at least derive from the videos I watched, well organized. Until undeniable proof of actual police brutality comes to light, I stand by the police. These "children" didn't learn you don't always get what you want the hard way.

and I ask you, If I came up to you, asking for something and telling you to fuck off and give me what I want and blocking your way, is that not aggresive behaviour? I am aggresively demanding my needs/wants to be satisfied with strong language and physically preventing you from being on your way. "Oh no, I can't hit him cause he hasn't touched me first, whatever shall I do?" 

Anywhere else?

I come from NZ. That would not have happened here.

What the police should have done if they had to arrest/move the protestors (and what they did after pepper spraying) is simply to arrest/move the protestors. There was no reason for the pepper spray to be used against protestors who were not a threat to the police. Pepper sprays only purpose is to subdue through pain - to use it on a non-threatening person is in itself police brutality.

Edit: I also have to wonder if the people who support the police in this would have been so supportive of the same thing against a movement whose ideals they agreed with. (Also for the record, I think the occupy protests are kind of stupid)