Advertisement
Don't you even get sassy with Kerry or Kerry will drone on (endlessly) while the pigs taser your ass in the back.
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Student Arrested, Tasered at Kerry Event
September 18, 2007 3:03 AM EDT
GAINESVILLE, Fla. - A University of Florida student was Tasered and arrested after trying to ask U.S. Senator John Kerry about the 2004 election and other subjects during a campus forum.
Videos of the incident posted on several Web sites show officers pulling Andrew Meyer, 21, away from the microphone after he asks Kerry about impeaching President Bush and whether he and Bush were both members of the secret society Skull and Bones at Yale University.
"He apparently asked several questions - he went on for quite awhile - then he was asked to stop," university spokesman Steve Orlando said. "He had used his allotted time. His microphone was cut off, then he became upset."
As two officers take Meyer by the arms, Kerry, D-Mass., is heard to say, "That's alright, let me answer his question." Audience members applaud, and Meyer struggles to escape for several seconds as up to four officers try to remove him from the room.
Meyer screams for help and asks "What did I do?" as he tries to break away from officers. He is forced to the ground and officers order him to stop resisting. Meyer says he will walk out if the officers let him go.
As Kerry tells the audience he will answer the student's "very important question," Meyer struggles on the ground and yells at the officers to release him, crying out, "Don't Tase me, bro," just before he is Tasered. He is then led from the room, screaming, "What did I do?"
Meyer was charged with resisting an officer and disturbing the peace, according to Alachua County jail records. No bond had been set. Meyer was scheduled to appear in court Tuesday morning, a jail official said.
It was not known if Meyer had an attorney.
Orlando said university police would conduct an internal investigation.
"The police department does have a standard procedure for when they use force, including when they use a Taser," Orlando said. "That is what the internal investigation would address - whether the proper procedures were followed, whether the officers acted appropriately."
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Student Arrested, Tasered at Kerry Event
September 18, 2007 3:03 AM EDT
GAINESVILLE, Fla. - A University of Florida student was Tasered and arrested after trying to ask U.S. Senator John Kerry about the 2004 election and other subjects during a campus forum.
Videos of the incident posted on several Web sites show officers pulling Andrew Meyer, 21, away from the microphone after he asks Kerry about impeaching President Bush and whether he and Bush were both members of the secret society Skull and Bones at Yale University.
"He apparently asked several questions - he went on for quite awhile - then he was asked to stop," university spokesman Steve Orlando said. "He had used his allotted time. His microphone was cut off, then he became upset."
As two officers take Meyer by the arms, Kerry, D-Mass., is heard to say, "That's alright, let me answer his question." Audience members applaud, and Meyer struggles to escape for several seconds as up to four officers try to remove him from the room.
Meyer screams for help and asks "What did I do?" as he tries to break away from officers. He is forced to the ground and officers order him to stop resisting. Meyer says he will walk out if the officers let him go.
As Kerry tells the audience he will answer the student's "very important question," Meyer struggles on the ground and yells at the officers to release him, crying out, "Don't Tase me, bro," just before he is Tasered. He is then led from the room, screaming, "What did I do?"
Meyer was charged with resisting an officer and disturbing the peace, according to Alachua County jail records. No bond had been set. Meyer was scheduled to appear in court Tuesday morning, a jail official said.
It was not known if Meyer had an attorney.
Orlando said university police would conduct an internal investigation.
"The police department does have a standard procedure for when they use force, including when they use a Taser," Orlando said. "That is what the internal investigation would address - whether the proper procedures were followed, whether the officers acted appropriately."
posted by:
|
Advertisement
Advertisement
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Tue, September 18, 2007 - 6:31 AMI watched the video. It convinces me more than ever that Kerry is a wimp. He made no attempt to reign these pigs in from the lectern. He had a mike and a voice and all he said was "now everybody, I think if we could just calm down." He sounded like an trainee teacher in a kindergarten class that was out of control. -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Tue, September 18, 2007 - 6:33 AMI want my vote back. Might as well have gone to Mickey Mouse. -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Tue, September 18, 2007 - 6:39 AM"He made no attempt to reign these pigs in from the lectern."
he has no authority to do so. -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Tue, September 18, 2007 - 6:42 AMYa and those motherfucking pigs had any right to clamp down on his freedom of speech without even telling him why he is being arrested or mirandizing him?
I understand your desire to rationalize any extremely fucked up behavior on the part of your piggy little pig pig friends, but COME ON NOW!!!!!!
This is SO FUCKED UP -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Tue, September 18, 2007 - 7:03 AMit was a forum setting, with alotted time to ask questions and he wanted to extend his time at the expense of others who were waiting and who had respected his time. he was asked to leave and stayed. an attempt was made to escort him and he struggled and was thus arrested. i am sure he was told why he was arrested and mirandized once he was secured.
"I understand your desire to rationalize any extremely fucked up behavior on the part of your piggy little pig pig friends, but COME ON NOW!!!!!! "
could you please not refer to me, or my "friends" as a pig(s). i am sure you and everyone else can express your infinite displeasure without doing the online equalvalent of spitting on me. thanks. -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Tue, September 18, 2007 - 7:05 AMoink oink oink
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Tue, September 18, 2007 - 7:09 AMI'll stop as soon as your pig friends agree to not fuck over anyone ever again -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Tue, September 18, 2007 - 9:59 AM. . .
Ya and those motherfucking pigs had any right to clamp down on his freedom of speech without even telling him why he is being arrested or mirandizing him?
. . .
He WASN'T being arrested when they tried to remove him from the mic. Now when he started resisting their demands, for nearly two minutes, thats when they turned the dial to 11.
He was a pissant who wanted to make a scene and he did so. -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Tue, September 18, 2007 - 10:56 AM>>He WASN'T being arrested when they tried to remove him from the mic.
Oh, so they were just assaulting him? -
-
This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Tue, September 18, 2007 - 11:00 AM"Oh, so they were just assaulting him?"
I think you can easily charge these cops with assault..
That had no legal reason to arrest him..
-
This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Tue, September 18, 2007 - 11:51 AM. . .
Oh, so they were just assaulting him?
. . .
It's assualt now to remove someone who isn't playing by the rules?
And what kind of weak ass taser shot allows someone to walk of their own accord?
The guy is a jokester, knew exactly what he was doing, and even when he was being escorted out and placed in handcuffs, still had the presence of mind to play to the cameras:
youtube.com/watch -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Tue, September 18, 2007 - 12:24 PM>>It's assualt now to remove someone who isn't playing by the rules?
Yes, Professor Law, to physically accost an individual under the guise of an unlawful arrest constitutes assault.
And no, going over your question time at a university forum is not an arrestable offense. "Forum rules" /= criminal law. -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Tue, September 18, 2007 - 12:45 PM. . .
Yes, Professor Law, to physically accost an individual under the guise of an unlawful arrest constitutes assault.
. . .
Where does the UF have it that campus police do NOT have the authority to remove someone they feel needs to be removed? I know you folks like to live in this fantasy world where because this is "AMERICA!" you can say and do w/e the fuck you want - but sorry, that world doesn't exist, and never has.
-
-
-
-
-
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Tue, September 18, 2007 - 9:53 AM:: could you please not refer to me, or my "friends" as a pig(s).
come on man - the cops are out of control. any time citizens try to stand up for themselves, the police swarm in and beat everyone up and throw them in a cage. the cops are pigs, they are dangerous, they are unamerican. -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Tue, September 18, 2007 - 10:54 AMYeah, since when did tasering people get to be acceptable in this kind of situation?
this is Nazi Germany type shit. -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Tue, September 18, 2007 - 12:58 PM"Yeah, since when did tasering people get to be acceptable in this kind of situation?
this is Nazi Germany type shit."
the comparison is laughable. -
-
This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Tue, September 18, 2007 - 3:51 PMLaugh it up, cop.
-
This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Sat, September 22, 2007 - 12:16 PM"the comparison is laughable."
your ignorance is as well
-
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Tue, September 18, 2007 - 5:46 PM<Yeah, since when did tasering people get to be acceptable in this kind of situation? >
cD - he was resisting.
What would YOU suggest? That he cops use more force which has a possibility of actually HARMING someone, or a painful but harmless taser shock?
Seriously - which would you like more? Those were his only two options, so in this hypothetical, of these two options, which one are you more supportive? -
-
This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Tue, September 18, 2007 - 5:49 PMI'm supportive of just letting the guy ask his questions, get his answers, and then let him leave.
That would have been the mature way to deal with someone who is obviously worked up about his questions and wanting to get answers.
-
This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Sun, September 23, 2007 - 9:15 PMFirst, it's not harmless:
The CBS news puts the number at 70
www.cbsnews.com/stories/20...48859.shtml
Amnesty puts the number at 150
www.amnestyusa.org/document.php
I would have just let Kerry talk his way out of the question. Which he was perfectly willing to do. Kerry was answering the questions. Kerry
has always freely admitted he chickened out of the fight because he couldn't win, and it was important that the "World see that there was a President called by the next day". He repeats the mantra: We had 30,000 lawyers. Yadda Yadda...
And when asked if he's Skull and Bones, he says yes! Every time I've seen him asked the question. Of course, it would have been great to see him answer the question in front of an audience, not just a push-over corporate reporter and a camera.
Seriously though, there is nothing in any of the videos that should have made police escalate the situation. The amount of time between cutting the mic and laying there hands upon the kid was at most a few seconds. They could have easily cut the mic, and let Kerry answer the questions. Kid would have been fine.
These jokers weren't even as professional as the cops on Reno 911.
Me personally, I've had NO cops on my side, and 500 punks in chain mail and leather in my living room, and had to kick them ALL out without any violence at all.
-
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Sun, September 23, 2007 - 9:36 PM<Seriously though, there is nothing in any of the videos that should have made police escalate the situation. >
Except for the point that the organization asked a) for his mic to be turned off - which I believe that it was - and then b) for the security to escort him out. In fact, in the first video that you linked to in another thread, you can see someone in a jacket behind the kid give a signal for the mic to be cut, and then I do believe that the mic was cut after that.
Also, your video does not show how he reportedly bum-rushed to the front of the line and was allowed to stay there, so they were ready for him to be a troublemaker, and he was...........
<The amount of time between cutting the mic and laying there hands upon the kid was at most a few seconds. >
He could have walked out with them, could he not? Why did he not? Why resist?
<They could have easily cut the mic, and let Kerry answer the questions. Kid would have been fine. >
I don't think so, I don't think that the kid would have shut up or gone away quietly, but we'll never know.
That kid should not have caused this to happen. It's that easy. -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Mon, September 24, 2007 - 11:08 AMThe cops jumped the gun. Anyone can watch the videos, it clearly shows that they never waited for Kerry to answer the question, after the mic was cut. No what they did instead is put there hands on him immediately.
Here's a scenario I could except. 1. Cut the mic. 2. Let Kerry try to answer his 2-3 questions. 3. If the kid continues to be belligerent, tries to do anything but leave, starts yelling instead of letting Kerry answer, etc... remove him by force.
I've got little argument that the kid was out of line. But that's why we call him a college kid, while the police and Kerry could be considered "adults". The amount of force used was inappropriate. And it was caused not by the child, but by the adults.
I've had cops stick there guns to my head, so I know all about necessary compliance. And I also will guess this college kid wouldn't treat the cops the same way if it wasn't in front of a crowd, mugging it up for the cameras. I just want adults to act like adults, not like Jackbooted thugs.
And Kerry, wow, what a fool. The least he could have done was to have said something in the Kid's defense, just so the media shitstorm didn't overcome him. But he's got a pretty obvious foot-in-mouth disease, and a long track record of not standing up for himself, the presidency, or democracy. So I wouldn't have expected much more. A real leader would have fought for the presidency, fought for that kid not to be tazed, and would be pushing hard to keep us from going into Iran. Pretty much verbatim what the college kid said.
-
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Mon, September 24, 2007 - 1:45 PM<The cops jumped the gun. Anyone can watch the videos, it clearly shows that they never waited for Kerry to answer the question, after the mic was cut.>
Gent, that's because the ORGANIZERS ordered him to be escorted out. The "cops" (they are not cops but security) were just acting on the directions of the organizers of the event. Kerry was not the boss there, nor were the students. The organizers - which was I do believe the university - ordered the kids mic to be cut and the kid to be escorted out, which is when the kid resisted and escalated the issue.
<Here's a scenario I could except.......>
We're not re-writing history here. There are all sorts of scenarios that we could come up with that would have worked out better for everyone. But, we can't go back in time.......so, we have to deal with the reality on the table that has come out, which in this case is that the organizers instructed the security to escort the kid out. Thems'r the facts.
<The amount of force used was inappropriate. And it was caused not by the child, but by the adults. >
I disagree. I do believe that the policy is to use overwhelming force in any situation such as this one, and I agree with that policy. It's safer for everyone involved. This causes quicker and more safe resolutions vs. less cops using MORE force to subdue and submit someone. If you watch the video, within 40 seconds from when the kid was taken down, he was handcuffed and within one minute, he was out of the room. If there were just two cops with one resisting person, they'd have had to use a lot more force, leading to the kid in all probability being harmed.
<The least he could have done was to have said something in the Kid's defense, just so the media shitstorm didn't overcome him.>
Well, I imagine that Kerry was supporting the police's ability to do what they thought was necessary for their safety, the safety of everyone in the room and the safety for the kid that was resisting. I'd rather that Kerry not cynically try for some PR points while making the cops job more difficult. If he had done what you suggest, I would have lost respect for Kerry. He let the cops do their job. And, I support that. -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Tue, September 25, 2007 - 11:35 AMI don't know where you get your information but the AP reports:
ap.google.com/article/ALe...2Clj0dIgUOww
"University of Florida student Andrew Meyer struggles with University Police as officers try to remove him from a question and answer session with Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., Monday, Sept. 17, 2007, in Gainesville, Fla. Meyer, 21, was Tasered and arrested after he angrily and repeatedly tried to ask Kerry about the 2004 election and other subjects during a campus forum. (AP Photo/Independent Florida Alligator, Andrew Stanfill)"
Someone in some thread on this starting calling them security... but the AP clearly identifies them as University Police.
"Meyer was arrested on charges of resisting an officer and disturbing the peace, according to Alachua County jail records, but the State Attorney's Office had yet to make the formal charging decision. Police recommended charges of resisting arrest with violence, a felony, and disturbing the peace and interfering with school administrative functions, a misdemeanor."
To me it is pretty clear that they were in fact University Police officers. University Police, at least at most colleges I've been to are full fledged departments. Not just security. If this was security, they would be in a mess more trouble.
You are all over the map Andrew, you have several times asked what people would have wanted instead of the use of overwhelming force, and when I provide a scenario that I would have wanted instead, you weirdly say I'm trying to rewrite history. Total nonsense. Which is it, do you want people to answer your questions or not.
Ok, so you clearly believe in overwhelming force. Odd, but ok. That's your opinion. Fine. Don't ever become a cop.
As to Kerry's response, no, that's not what he was doing. He was meekly responding to the questions. He doesn't appear in the videos to support the police, and he's later CYA press relations on the subject aren't clearly in favor of the police either.
Kerry is just a terrible politician. Heck the Democrats should run Kerry and Lieberman next. -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Tue, September 25, 2007 - 2:59 PM<Someone in some thread on this starting calling them security... but the AP clearly identifies them as University Police.>
What's the difference between University Police and security? They are state police? Is that it? Well, hmm. OK. They are State Police. Not actual police, but basically security that is warranted through the state. I wonder what the story is with how state police - especially those that work at universities - are hired and licensed? Are they paid as much as regular police? Anyway - I call them "security" because they are not regular police. But, now that we know that they are state police, we can call them state police.
<You are all over the map Andrew, you have several times asked what people would have wanted instead of the use of overwhelming force, and when I provide a scenario that I would have wanted instead, you weirdly say I'm trying to rewrite history. Total nonsense. Which is it, do you want people to answer your questions or not.>
True. We were both writing in hypotheticals.
-
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Tue, September 25, 2007 - 7:23 PMUniversity Police are city cops, working for the city. At least here in Seattle. The University of Washington's police force is called University Police, but they are simply a branch of the Seattle Police department. It's the same as calling them West Precinct, etc.
As far as any of the reports are concerned they call them University Police. So that means they are really real regular cops who happen to work for the University Police Precinct (because big Universities are 40-50k in population). These were not event security.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Tue, September 18, 2007 - 5:44 PM
There was no "clam down on ... freedom of speech". There's no freedom of speech when one interrupts a program. That's asinine and immature to suggest such a thing. Should every program just be a free for all where anyone can interrupt and interject as often as they want? Is that what you're suggesting? How could there ever be any communication of ideas like that?
I support 100% those people that want to interrupt with the full knowledge that they probably will face arrest or expulsion. Go kid go! But, to resist against the security? Bullshit. He got what he deserved, in my opinion. Well, the tasering was maybe too much, but my understanding is that a cop has to use MORE force without what really is a harmless tasering, compared to a choke hold or another submission. I'd rather be tasered any day instead of having huge guy put me in a choke hold. -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Tue, September 18, 2007 - 5:48 PM<Should every program just be a free for all where anyone can interrupt and interject as often as they want? Is that what you're suggesting? How could there ever be any communication of ideas like that?>
You tell me, you're the one who has a habit of posting up to 11 times in a row in a single thread. -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Tue, September 18, 2007 - 5:52 PM<Yes, Professor Law, to physically accost an individual under the guise of an unlawful arrest constitutes assault. >
Abraxas, why do you suggest that he was being unlawfully arrested? He was asked to stop, and then asked to leave by the authorities and would not comply. Where's the unlawful part?
And, thank you Metric for that view.
cD and Abraxas, what do you think of that side of the story?
-
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Sun, September 23, 2007 - 9:22 PMI'd say the incident clearly violates the reasonable cop test. Chickenshit cops have to escalate to violence when smart cops know how to handle the situation... that's the problem in this situation.
Those cops put their hands on the kids immediately on cutting the mic. If they'd waited and let Kerry handle the questions, and simply stopped his mic time... which is what cutting the mic is all about... Kerry would have had back control.
Now privileged college kid looks like he's had a habit of taunting the campus for awhile... so the cops will have been looking out for this kid in the first place.
But there's nothing that should be in a cops training manual that says you should shock a guy already in handcuffs in the back on his belly, with 6 full grown cops on him.
Jesus, it's not like Kent State or anything, but it shouldn't be standard procedure to automatically escalate a non-violent situation. Especially when you haven't even let cutting the mic play out.
-
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Tue, September 18, 2007 - 5:54 PM<You tell me, you're the one who has a habit of posting up to 11 times in a row in a single thread.>
Awwww..........
You can just scroll up/downthread. One did not have the opportunity to do this with this kid.
You're so put upon, Sticky. It's horrible. It's almost like you're being tasered!!! It's shockingly unfair that you have to just scroll the webpage! Your civil rights are being harmed!
<I'm supportive of just letting the guy ask his questions, get his answers, and then let him leave. >
He would not leave. He was asked to leave, and would not comply. It's that easy. -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Tue, September 18, 2007 - 5:56 PMIt *is* often torturous to read what you write. Getting tasered could be more enjoyable.
-
-
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Tue, September 18, 2007 - 6:57 PMandrew:
> This was not Kerry's job to do this. The kid was interrupting the lecture........he was asked to leave and resisted. What did he expect would happen?
You would expect Kerry to act presidential, or at least act like a real leader, right?
I consider it pitiful for a "leader" to stand by idly while an unarmed man behind held down by 6 cops is tazered.
Yeah the kid was rude. But so what. That is no excuse for a democratic presidential candidate to stand by idly watching police brutality.
> Well, the tasering was maybe too much, but my understanding is that a cop has to use MORE force without what really is a harmless tasering, compared to a choke hold or another submission.
Come on andrew. Maybe one cop would have to work hard to subdue this kid and maybe a chokehold would be necessary.
But he was being held down by _six_ policemen. There was zero need to use extreme force. This is clear police brutality.
Tasers kill people:
www.google.com/search
The kid was a jerk, but that does not excuse this gross case of police brutality. -
-
Unsu...
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Tue, September 18, 2007 - 7:06 PM>I consider it pitiful for a "leader" to stand by idly while an unarmed man behind held down by 6 cops is tazered. <
Adam, you've always seemed like a smart guy to me..i'm amazed you made this statement. HE has ZERO control over the law. No way he could have stopped the police from doing their job -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Tue, September 18, 2007 - 10:18 PMRik:
> i'm amazed you made this statement. HE has ZERO control over the law. No way he could have stopped the police from doing their job
He's a United States Senator watching police brutality.
Don't tell me that United States Senator has no power. -
-
This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.Unsu...
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Wed, September 19, 2007 - 9:02 PM>Don't tell me that United States Senator has no power.<
So, you're saying a Untied States senator should be above the law? Because he surly isn't trained in Law enforcement and he surely has no rank amongst those officers doing their job, especially because he doesn't even work for the school. What you're saying sounds like you're in favor of corruption.
Again, i'm very surprised you feel this way -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Thu, September 20, 2007 - 1:23 AMRik:
> So, you're saying a Untied States senator should be above the law?
Above the law? What law is that?
What law says that Senator cannot ask police to refrain from using violence against a man who is no threat to anyone. -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Sun, September 23, 2007 - 9:23 PMThe fact that he didn't shows he's got about as much press savvy as a turnip.
-
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Thu, September 20, 2007 - 2:02 AM>>>Don't tell me that United States Senator has no power.<
So, you're saying a Untied States senator should be above the law? <<
Fucking ridiculous.
This line of thought merits no serious response whatsoever. His rights being violated was - amazingly - the least of it; the police brutalized him while a whole audience of fake americans sat there and *watched* mutely, and a supposed paragon of government mewled 'boo hoo' like a bitch under the porch.
Kerry's a simp, the audience was composed of good little fascist pawns, and the nation failing to respond this latest hint that we're all seriously fucked unless we revolt right now couldn't strike a clearer chord that this is - hands down - the weakest, most worthless collection of almost-people to fart on this soil in quite some time, which is saying something, indeed.
End of story, unless you really want to make a case for LAW officers' rights to batter citizens without cause, in which case, by all means, Rik, do go ahead. -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Thu, September 20, 2007 - 2:13 AMRomans got like this too.
Prolonged conditions have a lot to do with peoples charecter. In periods of enduring prosperity, your average persons charecter becomes morally weak and decadent. As conditions errode, they turn to brutality and extreme depravity. At the bottom, when all is dark and all is lost, good people stand out when they did not before, and the tendency towards goodness can again become respected, admired, and contagious.
Maybe its something that can be stopped, or a cycle that can be rapidly sped up-- i dont know. But it seems a cycle similar to this plays out thru out history, over and over. -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Thu, September 20, 2007 - 8:43 AM>>What law says that Senator cannot ask police to refrain from using violence against a man who is no threat to anyone.<<
Violence? By THAT standard, using a choke-hold to restrain Meyer would have been unneccesary violence. I would suggest that using the taser to stun Meyer (who didn't even appear all that stunned according to the police report, and his own recognizance) was a lot less violent than physically restraining him. You think they couldn't have ended all that in seconds if that's how they wanted it to end?
And you aren't answering the question. What LEGAL power does a US Senator have over lawful campus police? Besides, he already explained that he didn't know the kid was being tasered, and he probably did think Meyer was being a nuisance and disruptive to the proceedings so why should he say "let him go"?
>>the kid was threatened with death for speaking. <<
They tazed him because he asked the wrong questions huh? Get your head out of your ass. He got tazed for REPEATEDLY failing to heed LAWFUL police commands to stop resisting and to leave the lecture hall.
Where the fuck do some of you get this rationale from? From speaking to other people, I am so glad that you two do not make up the majority. -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Thu, September 20, 2007 - 12:24 PM>> Where the fuck do some of you get this rationale from? <<
god knows. it seems that the game is to provoke a response and then cry foul. the typical game employed by the more rabid types of provocateurs and activists. and I guess some of us are gullible enough to fall for this kind of bullshit... you know the ones unable to distinguish an abuse of freedom from exercising one's right to free speech. -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Thu, September 20, 2007 - 12:45 PMKerry should have ripped off his shirt, jumped off the lectern and fought the guy one on one. It was Kerry's last chance to show his inner animal to us and restore our bovine confidence in him. Sadly what will echo through history will be, "don't tase me bro..."
sad, sad days... do we have an OJ thread yet?
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Fri, September 21, 2007 - 7:15 PM<...it seems that the game is to provoke a response and then cry foul. the typical game employed by the more rabid types of provocateurs and activists...>
Ohhhhhhh, _I_ get it! Like Ann the Man and every single one of the rightie Ministry of Propaganda leting loose with slams, slanders, and bald-faced lies about everything under the sun and SCREEEEEEECHING like scalded babies when the majority side calls one of their tame puppets on its crap.
I don't expect that you'll be able to make sense of this post. It's the same as when DillDo'Liely manages not to hear or understand his guests, and turns off their mike when he can't refute them.
-
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Thu, September 20, 2007 - 1:07 PManderson:
> What LEGAL power does a US Senator have over lawful campus police?
Answer the other question. Is there any law which says a US Senator cannot use his influence to encourage police to engage in restraint or non-violent actions?
> Violence? By THAT standard, using a choke-hold to restrain Meyer would have been unneccesary violence.
YES.
There were 6-cops surrounding him.
Two could have grabbed his arms. Two could have grabbed his legs. And that would have still left 2 cops free to handcuff him.
There was _no_ need for the police to perpetrate acts of violence against this kid!!
I would love to see love to see the police prosecuted for assault and battery! -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Thu, September 20, 2007 - 3:59 PM>>Is there any law which says a US Senator cannot use his influence to encourage police to engage in restraint or non-violent actions?<<
That isnt the relevant question and is irrelevant to the discussion. Besides, why should KERRY come to the defense of a douchebag? He's already stated he didn't know the restraint escalated to a tasering, so why should he think he needs to intervene to prevent the guys removal from the hall. Be aware, he ALREADY intervened on the kids behalf when he hopped to the front of the line, and told the cops to step back and let him ask the question after he got through w/ another student. So suggesting he didn't do anything is bullshit. He did. "Fool me once, shame on you. . ."
>>Two could have grabbed his arms. Two could have grabbed his legs. And that would have still left 2 cops free to handcuff him. <<
And who prevents MEYER from further wrenching free, or attempting to wrench free and possibly causing himself to be injured in the process? Again, if the cops wanted to end it that way - they could have. The black guy coming up from behind could have rendered the situation resolved in a matter of seconds using the physical tools at their disposal. They didn't.
It's just amazing how this issue is being construed, how those going over the actions of the cops with a fine tooth comb REFUSE the same analysis of MEYER, his actions and subsequent response (his glib attitude and confession that the cops did NOTHING wrong on the way to county). Do those screaming FASCIST! have nothing to say to that? -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Thu, September 20, 2007 - 4:07 PManderson:
> > Two could have grabbed his arms. Two could have grabbed his legs. And that would have still left 2 cops free to handcuff him. <<
> And who prevents MEYER from further wrenching free, or attempting to wrench free and possibly causing himself to be injured in the process?
Ummm... which part of this do you miss?
Two cops holding his legs, and the two cops holding his arms should have been _more_ than adequate to restrain him.
Are cops so incapable that 4 of them cannot restrain an individual without resorting to violence? -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Thu, September 20, 2007 - 4:35 PM>>Ummm... which part of this do you miss? <<
Must have been the part where grabbing his arms or legs prevents him from still flailing and thrashing about - if you know some new technique, please share it with the rest of us.
>>Are cops so incapable that 4 of them cannot restrain an individual without resorting to violence? <<
Was MEYER so incapable of not resisting? See, I can offer up rhetorical questions that have sod all to do with the actual situation (well mine does more-so than yours).
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Fri, September 21, 2007 - 2:25 PM>> Are cops so incapable that 4 of them cannot restrain an individual without resorting to violence? <<
so what? the kid should be allowed to monopolize the forum? he was asked to take a hike. he was given an opportunity to speak. he refused to relinquish and the cops were forced to physically remove him. he resisted. case closed.
what were the police supposed to do? -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Fri, September 21, 2007 - 3:07 PM<what were the police supposed to do?>
According to many here, the security was supposed to sit around and wait until he had spent himself and voluntarily gave up his rant. Then, when the NEXT person also got up there and started ranting, they were to wait also until that person voluntarily gave up their rant. Hopefully, there'd be some time left for the legitimate questions.
Next time, I think that they should just give up all rules, since most people here think that the rules are irrelevant.
I tell you what, how about not rules, but requests?
'We request that you speak for no more than two minutes. If you choose to go on for an hour, that's I guess cool too, but we'd rather you limit yourself to two minutes.' -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Fri, September 21, 2007 - 3:11 PM>> Next time, I think that they should just give up all rules, since most people here think that the rules are irrelevant. <<
but from the perspective of some, the police are in the wrong no matter what they do. if they don't react, then they should be punished and sued. if they do react, they should be punished and sued. the cycle is ridiculous.
and for the record, laws were broken by meyer.
"Meyer was arrested on charges of resisting an officer and disturbing the peace but the State Attorney's Office had yet to make the formal charging decision. Police recommended charges of resisting arrest with violence, a felony, and disturbing the peace and interfering with school administrative functions, a misdemeanor."
www.orlandosentinel.com/servic...0.story
I hope the dean grows some balls and kicks the brat out of school. -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Fri, September 21, 2007 - 3:42 PM
<I hope the dean grows some balls and kicks the brat out of school.>
I don't know if that's called for.
He's a kid that is acting like a kid.
-
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Tue, September 25, 2007 - 11:37 AM<what were the police supposed to do?>
See, when addressed above, you say answering this question is trying to "rewrite history".
The police were suppose to do there jobs better. It's obvious that the cops on Reno 911 would have done better than these morons.
-
-
-
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Thu, September 20, 2007 - 5:40 PM***************That isnt the relevant question and is irrelevant to the discussion.**************
Actually it is an entirely relevant question. The man is a senator~!!
************Besides, why should KERRY come to the defense of a douchebag?************
Douchebag is now the standard for whether first amendment rights and freedom from police brutality is to be measured?
**********He's already stated he didn't know the restraint escalated to a tasering,******************
And you believe that all that commotion failed to be hear at the lectern? Kerry is a lying shit for brains asswipe. -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Thu, September 20, 2007 - 9:08 PM>>You're right; cutting the power to his mike or something would have been ... <<
Uhm - they did that. You have seen the video no?
>>I just watched the video footage again and from the onset of Meyer's first question to the first request made for him to give up the microphone a total of 32 seconds elapsed.<<
What was Meyers first question - because he didn't ask one until a minute into his rant about KERRY conceding the election. He then manages - somehow - to go on for another 30 seconds.
>>Obviously this wasn't about the length of his question(s), but rather the content.
<<
Oh yea - real scary questions he was asking that KERRY I'm sure has NEVER been asked before.
>>Actually it is an entirely relevant question. The man is a senator~!! <<
And? Once again - he ALREADY intervened on the behalf of MEYER before the cameras started rolling telling the campus police to not interfere with MEYER's who jetted to the front of the line (I dont know about you, but if I'm security, and we've got a US Senator on our campus, some idiot who has ALREADY caused a disturbance, all of a sudden dashing towards KERRY isn't going to just get a free pass to do so).
>>Douchebag is now the standard for whether first amendment rights and freedom from police brutality is to be measured?<<
Sorry, but MEYER's first amendment rights weren't violated - he asked his question, and when he (according to forum moderators) used up all his "benefit of the doubt" bucks - he was removed. What's stupid about this entire discussion is that people REFUSE to see beyond MEYER's question as the reason he was removed. Nevermind there are PAGES of first hand accounts out there that show that MEYER was there to cause a scene, and that once he started in on his antics, he was on campus police's radar. He causes a ruckus in line, jets to the front of the line and interrupts the proceedings, is beligerent to security and the moderators, uses (for the setting) obscene language, and goes over his alloted time. Yea - it MUST have been the scintillating questions he asked that got him removed.
As for police brutality - so MEYER himself stating that the cops did NOTHING WRONG has zero affect on you?
>>And you believe that all that commotion failed to be hear at the lectern?<<
Commotion now equals "Omg hes being electrocuted!". Yea, I'd make that leap as well instead of "Sheesh, why wont that kid just go quietly - oh great now hes mewling like a spoiled child". -
-
Unsu...
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Thu, September 20, 2007 - 9:38 PMSo anderson, I take it you'll be getting the "Taze the Bro!" parephenalia? And you wear a size what?
Hey, I might as well play both sides here cuz whatever side of this fence you fall on, there's some good ol' capitalist marketing to be had at your expense.
Muahahahahahahaha.....
Crap! Did I type that out loud?
-K -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Thu, September 20, 2007 - 10:33 PM>>And you wear a size what? <<
Smaller than you I'm sure.
>>Hey, I might as well play both sides here cuz whatever side of this fence you fall on, there's some good ol' capitalist marketing to be had at your expense. <<
Oh noes, I buy things I want - I'm trapped in this money-bubble.
Get a life hippy.
-
-
Unsu...
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Thu, September 20, 2007 - 11:50 PMEeek...now I'm a fat hippy, anderson?
BUahahahahahahahahahahahahAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Get mamma her pryin board, cuz it's time to open that can of whoop-ass!
-K -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Fri, September 21, 2007 - 1:01 AM"If she's fat then I pray to god for a rain of fat girls"
~Rev. Freign
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Fri, September 21, 2007 - 5:40 AMFat - I'd never hurl such a personal attack. You must be projecting.
-
-
-
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Thu, September 20, 2007 - 10:41 PM>>so MEYER himself stating that the cops did NOTHING WRONG has zero affect on you?<<
Correct. He is clearly not a person to take seriously, besides not having anything to do with what constitutes proper authoritarian application of weaponry.
His personal views don't change any facts, not at all. He could be one of those minority-types that spouts republican ass-kissing tropes from sunup to workday's done, and it still wouldn't be appropriate for him to be tased in that situation, no matter how much I might personally find it hilarious. Wrong is wrong, and in this case it's fucking *scary* wrong.
-
-
-
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Thu, September 20, 2007 - 7:31 PM<Two could have grabbed his arms. Two could have grabbed his legs. And that would have still left 2 cops free to handcuff him. >
No, he was flailing and he could not be restrained with just people holding on to his joints unless they used some sort of submission - which WOULD have hurt him.
I'd rather be tasered any day rather than have someone chokehold or jointlock me. Any day. He is healthy today, which he may not have been if they tried a force submission. -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Sun, September 23, 2007 - 9:36 PMHe was in handcuffs talking shit. Once a guy's in cuffs, let him up. If he's still a problem, put a neck harnass on him. You don't need to shock someone.
A cholkhold is probably the same. It can kill them. So can the tazer. 70 by CBS news, 150 by Amnesty International have died from being tazed.
www.amnestyusa.org/document.php
I've watched the videos multiple times. I have them posted from different views here:
novbm.wordpress.com/2007/09/...hn-kerry/
The fact is the cops escalated the situation first by immediately putting their hands on the kid first. From then on both the cops and the kids keep escalating it. Then once they escalated the situation, they had a wily big kid on their hands. But any two cops should be able to take one college kid with basic force compliance. These officers were grossly incompetent. Shit at my prime at 18, having trained since 3rd grade in Kyukido (TaeKwon, Judo, Hopkido), I was hard pressed to keep two guys from pinning me and pinning me pretty quick. We practiced up to 4 people pile ons in Judo pretty regular, and 4 people was impossible if they had any trainging at all... unless you start hurting people bad.
So if this kids like Kung-fu Master breaking bones, sure taze the dude. But what they did was way over the line. I could have had two 3 month white belts take him down, and if not two 4 could have done it fine.
-
-
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Fri, September 21, 2007 - 2:12 AM>>Where the fuck do some of you get this rationale from?<<
From the fact that he wasn't threatening anyone.
How is that unclear? It was an unlawful assault. I'm not condoning the guy's asshattery - I'm saying the response was passing excessive, and that you're a bad person inside for not realizing it instinctively.
Had he endangered anyone at all, I'd roll my eyes and chuckle at the spectacle like any other jaded modern population surplus, but since I'm not a broken and soulless semihuman, I react with certain concern when men are brutally ganged and tased for no good reason, as all other non-evil people are. See how the other non-evil people on this thread also see the wrong, while the evil cheer it on. It's clear; it's science, babe. -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Fri, September 21, 2007 - 2:43 PM
>> How is that unclear? It was an unlawful assault. I'm not condoning the guy's asshattery - I'm saying the response was passing excessive, and that you're a bad person inside for not realizing it instinctively. <<
hmmm. not sure a disagreement is sufficient cause to pass judgment on character.
>> Had he endangered anyone at all, I'd roll my eyes and chuckle at the spectacle like any other jaded modern population surplus, but since I'm not a broken and soulless semihuman, I react with certain concern when men are brutally ganged and tased for no good reason, as all other non-evil people are. See how the other non-evil people on this thread also see the wrong, while the evil cheer it on. It's clear; it's science, babe. <<
he endangered the campus police that were forced to physically escort him from the building. he endangered anyone around him that may have been hurt by the physical struggle.
-
-
-
-
-
-
This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Thu, September 20, 2007 - 7:21 PM<He's a United States Senator watching police brutality. >
Adam, there was no "police brutality". He did not comply with the requests of the security, and they took what I feel are appropriate actions. -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Fri, September 21, 2007 - 1:03 AMStill brutality, even though you endorse it.
Surprise.
What other heinous brutality do you endorse?
-
-
-
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Wed, September 19, 2007 - 8:56 PM<I consider it pitiful for a "leader" to stand by idly while an unarmed man behind held down by 6 cops is tazered. >
Adam, what was he supposed to do? Go and jump down from the lectern and take on the cops? No, this kid was being disruptive and got pretty much what he asked for. I don't fault Kerry at all.
What you are saying is that this same person was a crazy republican who was doing the same thing, that you would also then expect Kerry to get involved.
That's bullshit.
Rules in the case are rules for a reason, and that reason is to allow there to be an orderly meeting and exchange of ideas. Should people be able to interrupt meetings all the time under some mistaken guise of "freedom of speech"?
No. That's ridiculous.
<Yeah the kid was rude. But so what. That is no excuse for a democratic presidential candidate to stand by idly watching police brutality. >
He was not "rude", he was disruptive.
*He first broke into the converstion.
*Then, when given a chance, he was blathering, but that's his right, but did it past his two minutes,
*Then, when asked to allow the NEXT PERSON to speak, he refused.
*Then, when told to leave by security, he refused.
*Then, when forced to leave, he fought back.
*Then, when he was fighting against the security, he would not stop fighting.
*Then, he got tased. No surprise there.
This kid was not just some innocent. He caused a problem, and got what he or anyone else that acts like that should expect to get if one acts as such.
<Come on andrew. Maybe one cop would have to work hard to subdue this kid and maybe a chokehold would be necessary. >
Adam, submissions cause bodily injury, and tasers are specifically used because people have died from chokeholds. Not many people are killed by tasers. It DOES happen, but people get harmed far more from submissions and chokeholds.
<But he was being held down by _six_ policemen. There was zero need to use extreme force. This is clear police brutality. >
To restrain him, they'd have to use a lot of force. The taser in this case helped him not be harmed by these police, and it helped the police not harm him.
Sorry - I just think that he got what he deserved.
-
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Thu, September 20, 2007 - 2:09 AM>>The taser in this case helped him not be harmed by these police, and it helped the police not harm him. <<
Yeah. Nothing makes me feel safer than a nice fatherly tasing.
Ridiculous, again.
All this sage "deserved it" talk ignores the essential: the kid was threatened with death for speaking.
Face it, and understand that you, in condoning and endorsing this, are a full-on opponent of the flag you mockingly wear on your profile. Replace it with a Vichy France one, or a Union Jack if you want to roll back the years, but don't pretend you're anything more than another dulled and selfish voice calling out for your neighbors to be controlled and herded like cattle.
Prepare to be tased, if you're a human being. Shut down your mind and stop fighting, if you're cattle. -
-
This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Thu, September 20, 2007 - 12:20 PM>> Face it, and understand that you, in condoning and endorsing this, are a full-on opponent of the flag you mockingly wear on your profile. <<
you seem to be confusing freedom of speech with freedom to monopolize speech... an all too common trait that allows "trolls" to dominate chat forums.
the kid was allowed to "speak." he chose to abuse that right. certainly, other kids deserve a turn. right? and according to witnesses, he was escorted away and chose to resist. there are consequences for that kind of disruptive behavior.
I'm a little confused by your position on this. I seem to recall you defending the actions of police in Seattle that decided to arrest some guy in his car that chose to flip the bird to "immigrant rights" demonstrators. certainly, that was an exercise in "freedom of speech." in this particular instance, you seem to be applying inconsistent standards to two very similar situations. or does the activist voice supersede the rights of the everyday citizen? please explain. -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Thu, September 20, 2007 - 8:06 PMNothing to do with "freedom of speech" and everything to do with "excessive force".
Were the attendees at the event about to riot? I didn't get that impression. -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Fri, September 21, 2007 - 2:30 PM>> Nothing to do with "freedom of speech" and everything to do with "excessive force". <<
how so? he was resisting the police. he was monopolizing kerry's time which incidentally came at the expense of his fellow students.
>> Were the attendees at the event about to riot? I didn't get that impression. <<
no. there was only one idiot in the room that day and he got tazed. he invited it upon himself.
-
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Fri, September 21, 2007 - 7:51 AM***********the kid was allowed to "speak." he chose to abuse that right.*************
Yah well that is democracy in action.
However, he broke no law. The talk was open to the public. He was not about to instigate a breach of the peace he was simply being a pain in the ass.
****** certainly, other kids deserve a turn. right?********
Not a reason to attack the guy. That was the job of the organizers.
************ and according to witnesses, he was escorted away and chose to resist.**********
Resist what? They never arrested him and they do not have theright to simply haul you off absent any due process.
The police are not enforcers of private rights.
They either had to have P.C. to arrest him or not get involved and that is the law.
By law that P.C. must rise to the same level of Probable Cause that a Judge would have to have to issue an arrest warrant.
*********there are consequences for that kind of disruptive behavior.************
Yah it's called civil litigation.
-
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Fri, September 21, 2007 - 10:29 AM>>However, he broke no law.<<
Other than resisting the commands of campus police. So if I'm on private property, and I am given a command to leave and don't - I can just hang around regardless of how unfair I think it is?
>>They never arrested him and they do not have theright to simply haul you off absent any due process.
The police are not enforcers of private rights. <<
So even though they are campus police, they dont have to enforce campus policy?
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Fri, September 21, 2007 - 2:38 PM>> Yah well that is democracy in action. <<
no it isn't. civil society depends upon order and respect not only for the letter of the law but the rights of others. if I were to cut in line at a bank, certainly a security guard would be within his rights to escort me (physically if necessary) from the premises. the same applies if I were to ignore a "wait to be seated" sign at a restaurant or urinate on someone's front lawn. although, we can thank those of you in the legal profession for chipping away at laws that prevent brats like meyer from taking it upon himself to monopolize kerry and steal time away from his peers.
>> Not a reason to attack the guy. That was the job of the organizers. <<
what? why do you think security was there in the first place. are you even trying to make sense?
>> They never arrested him and they do not have theright to simply haul you off absent any due process.
The police are not enforcers of private rights. <<
so you advocate a society where any individual could decide at any moment to disrupt a restaurant, concert or forum with impunity? I guess for you this is good for business considering the amount of litigation it will generate. for the rest of us, you and your profession are just chipping away at what remains of civility in this country.
>> Yah it's called civil litigation. <<
yes. it is called the death of civility. I'm sure it is good for your pocketbook. just hope it doesn't come back to bite you in the ass someday when someone like Meyer decides to take it upon himself to put his selfish wants over yours.
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Fri, September 21, 2007 - 2:44 PM<<****** certainly, other kids deserve a turn. right?********>>
<Not a reason to attack the guy. That was the job of the organizers. >
Cliff, you have backed yourself into a corner with this rationalization.
A) The organizers DID ask him to stop,
B) They DID cut of his mic,
C) They DID ask him to leave.
All of which he refused to do.
So, they had two choices:
Tell Kerry to go home because this jackass was going to just take up as much time as he wanted,
or,
Have security deal with the issue, which is what they are there for.
<Resist what? They never arrested him and they do not have theright to simply haul you off absent any due process. >
EXACTLY!!!!!!! When you wrote, "They never arrested him", you are completely correct. He is on private property, and the security was exercising their right to have him comply with the organizers requests. The "due process" happens if they hand him over to the cops. -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Fri, September 21, 2007 - 2:50 PM>> Tell Kerry to go home because this jackass was going to just take up as much time as he wanted,
or,
Have security deal with the issue, which is what they are there for. <<
It doesn't matter Andrew. The purpose behind this outburst was to get attention. The fact it comes at the expense of other kids was the last thing on the mind of this narcissistic brat. but thank god for civil litigation which will only serve to encourage other brats like meyer to follow suit. and inevitably when one of these "pranks" get out of control and some innocent bystander gets hurt, I'm sure some enterprising lawyer will sue the authorities because the name of the game is to keep the gravy train rolling. -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Fri, September 21, 2007 - 3:21 PM<inevitably when one of these "pranks" get out of control and some innocent bystander gets hurt, I'm sure some enterprising lawyer will sue the authorities because the name of the game is to keep the gravy train rolling.>
Exactly.
Then what will all these people say? That the security was at fault for not doing their job........
-
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Sun, September 23, 2007 - 9:39 PMB to C
They did not give sufficient time to allow cutting the mic to actually matter
Then they escalate to force compliance...
They had no reason to escalate to force compliance.
-
-
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Fri, September 21, 2007 - 7:18 PM<...you seem to be confusing freedom of speech with freedom to monopolize speech... an all too common trait that allows "trolls" to dominate chat forums...>
Ohhhhhhh, the IRONY!!!!!
-
-
This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Thu, September 20, 2007 - 7:28 PM<<>>The taser in this case helped him not be harmed by these police, and it helped the police not harm him. <<
<Yeah. Nothing makes me feel safer than a nice fatherly tasing. Ridiculous, again.>
It's better than choke holds, trust me on that. It's safer for all sorts of reasons.
<All this sage "deserved it" talk ignores the essential: the kid was threatened with death for speaking. >
He was not "threatened with death for speaking". What nonsense. What total nonsense. He was a healthy guy who got tasered and whined about it like a piteous adolescent.
<Face it, and understand that you, in condoning and endorsing this, are a full-on opponent of the flag you mockingly wear on your profile.>
And you have the reasoning of a child. This guy was disruptive, and it's not like one can allow ONE person to ruin a whole program.
Loki, what would you have done? How would you have gotten him to stop being disruptive? -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Thu, September 20, 2007 - 7:44 PMandrew:
> What total nonsense. He was a healthy guy who got tasered and whined about it like a piteous adolescent.
Why don't you sign up to be tased, just so that you know what it feels like?
After all, it's perfectly safe and non-violent, right? -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Fri, September 21, 2007 - 2:36 PM<Why don't you sign up to be tased, just so that you know what it feels like? After all, it's perfectly safe and non-violent, right?>
Adam, where does one 'sign up to be tased'?
And, I never said that it was comfortable. I said that it's not as dangerous as submissions. Ergo: If it's not as bad as submissions, it's the better option.
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Fri, September 21, 2007 - 7:05 PMWe should sign him up for extended psychological torture as well, since he said that he'd be "delighted" to experience it.
-
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Sun, September 23, 2007 - 9:42 PMIt would be interesting to know if choke holds kill more, or tazers. Tazers do kill. And so do choke holds. Either way police didn't have sufficient cause to escalate at that point. -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Sun, September 23, 2007 - 9:47 PM
<Either way police didn't have sufficient cause to escalate at that point.>
Well, we'll have to agree to disagree on that point. They only escalated the issue when the kid resisted. All they did is try to escort him out when he started resisting, right? At that point, they were WELL into their right to restrain him.
Should they have let Kerry have tried to talk the kid down? Maybe, maybe not - but at that point your argument should be with the organizers, and not the security.
Anyway - I have to frame out a couple of rooms tomorrow, so I'm going home to get some valuable rest!
All in all, this has been a great discussion in my opinion.
-
-
-
-
Unsu...
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Thu, September 20, 2007 - 5:40 PM
-
-
-
-
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Tue, September 18, 2007 - 10:58 AM**********he has no authority to do so. **************
Authority over the pigs he did not have. However he did have the bully pulpit and he could have tried to bring order in some fashion other than doing nothing while the pigs tasered some stupid kid who just wanted to feel like he had been heard. -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Tue, September 18, 2007 - 12:32 PMCliff I agree. Kerry lost all respect from me in 04.
-
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Tue, September 18, 2007 - 5:40 PM<he has no authority to do so.>
A) These people want form over function,
B) not only does he not have authority, but he has no responsibility either. -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Tue, September 18, 2007 - 7:01 PM>>A) These people want form over function, <<
No; they want function. What they have is 'form'. Pay attention, please.
>>B) not only does he not have authority, but he has no responsibility either.<<
Stunning.
What are the personal qualities that you seek in a politician, Andrew? -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Thu, September 20, 2007 - 7:16 PM<What are the personal qualities that you seek in a politician, Andrew?>
My point, Loki, was that it was not Kerry's job to get between the security and their job. What - he is supposed to get down from the lecturn and get between the security and every loudmouth that chooses to ignore the requests from first the organizers, then the security? Every time? So, you're suggesting that every person that wants to be disruptive, the speaker should get personally involved? No, that's EXACTLY the job of the organizers and the security.
If YOU were the organizer, would you allow as many disruptions as people could operate? That's what you'd do? -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Thu, September 20, 2007 - 8:19 PM>>he is supposed to get down from the lecturn and get between the security and every loudmouth that chooses to ignore the requests from first the organizers, then the security? Every time?<<
That would make him something grand, something worthwhile, something inspiring, yes.
"Stands up for right even at personal cost". You're right not to expect it from a show pony, but you're wrong to ridicule it in anyone.
-
-
-
Unsu...
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Fri, September 21, 2007 - 10:11 PM<< B) not only does he not have authority, but he has no responsibility either. >>
I certainly would've felt responsible to open my mouth as an adult, let alone a senator. You can be commanding while still being funny or charming. "Now you officers go easy on that young man--he's still a paying voter [cue corny laughter]--I don't want to see any marks on him when you're done, now, you hear?"
A move like that would've diffused energy on all sides, and make Kerry look good in the process (saying nothing made him look worse).
-
-
-
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Tue, September 18, 2007 - 5:39 PM<I watched the video. It convinces me more than ever that Kerry is a wimp. He made no attempt to reign these pigs in from the lectern.>
This was not Kerry's job to do this. The kid was interrupting the lecture........he was asked to leave and resisted. What did he expect would happen? Should Kerry have to just sit through every person providing a distraction an interruption for some erroneous ideal of what 'free speech' is? The kid behaved in a way that is not appropriate, and he should not have behaved like this.
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Fri, September 21, 2007 - 8:43 PM> He made no attempt to reign these pigs in from the lectern.
rein = to check, stop, direct, guide, or control, as in "rein in" a horse. From "retinere", to hold.
reign = to exercise sovereign power or authority, to govern as king or emperor. From "regere", to rule.
Folks confuse these here all the time. I guess it's 'cause they both have something to do with exercising power, but ... the root words are different, and the differences in meaning are significant.
-
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Tue, September 18, 2007 - 7:36 AMThe guy was obviously and literally "resisting arrest". You don't actually physically fight with cops unless one of three things apply:
(1) you are a moron
(2) you think you have a chance
(3) you actually want them to taser you (or beat the shit out of you - or shoot you). -
-
how to fight cops
Tue, September 18, 2007 - 7:59 AMhow it's done:
www.youtube.com/watch -
-
Re: how to fight cops
Tue, September 18, 2007 - 10:40 AM"how it's done: "
i wonder why police get antsy during protests? now, if, an officer was separated from the contingent, being beaten and set on fire as in this video, would any of you complain if they opened fire and killed every motherfucker with 50 feet of this guy to get him out? -
-
Re: how to fight cops
Tue, September 18, 2007 - 11:59 AMwell if that is your idea of a rational approach to fix the problem is by killing all the "motherfuckers w 50 feet"
you have made your point obvious
why they referred to you as a pig
your response speaks for your mentality and training
both need to be worked upon -
-
Re: how to fight cops
Tue, September 18, 2007 - 12:04 PMoh was this about kerry
billionaire klub boy
-
-
Re: how to fight cops
Tue, September 18, 2007 - 12:03 PMand dont get me wrong.....no way will i condone what they did....
my point is violence begats more
if i were a cop there...i say go in and get your guy and do what you have to to those who impead you
you sound as if your justified to nuke the whole area.. -
-
Re: how to fight cops
Tue, September 18, 2007 - 12:18 PM""you have made your point obvious"
i thought so, but i think you misunderstood.
"if i were a cop there...i say go in and get your guy and do what you have to to those who impead you "
that was my point; however, i will concede i was pissed when i previously posted... -
-
Re: how to fight cops
Tue, September 18, 2007 - 3:53 PMjust another cop with an anger problem. you should turn in your gun and your badge in the hopes that a rational person will fill your position. -
-
Re: how to fight cops
Tue, September 18, 2007 - 4:30 PMFrom: michellemalkin.com/2007/09/...ry-forum/
UF student Tyler Antar was there and e-mails his account of what happened. Looks like there was more to the story than meets the eye:
So I went to the John Kerry town hall forum this morning trying to get students registered to vote. I run a student government organization called Chomp the Vote. Anyway I went inside to watch the event. Senator Kerry took the podium and began delivering a speech about the Middle East, Iraq, dimplomacy, etc. Anyway, after he was done, a university ambassador asked Kerry a few premade questions. Once that was over, Senator Kerry announced he would take questions from the students. There were two microphones placed on each side of the aisle. One on my side and the other on Andrew Meyer’s side. Senator Kerry began answering the student’s questions from each aisle. Eventually it was announced that there would only be a few more questions answered. Since Meyer and I were both in the back of each line, it did not seem likely that our questions would be answered.
However, while Senator Kerry was responding to a student’s question, all of a sudden Meyer rushed to the microphone with cops in pursuit. At that point no one knew what was going on. Could he have a gun, a bomb? Immediately, Meyer began yelling into the microphone that he had been waiting in line forever and that Senator Kerry should “spend time to answer everyone’s questions!” Senator Kerry tried to calm the student down by telling him that he would “stay here as long as it takes to get the questions answered.” The police approached Meyer who began taunting them by saying “what! are you going to taser me? are you going to arrest me?!” The police grabbed Meyer, but Senator Kerry asked the police to let him go and that he would answer his question. Senator Kerry finished answering the other student’s question and then proceeded with Meyer. (*This entire scene is not in any video I can find so far. This is why 2 cops are seen right behind Meyer at the start of some videos*).
Meyer approached the microphone and began to talk about a book he had which stated that Kerry won the 2004 election because of disenfranchisement of black voters and faulty voter machines that produced “Bush” as the winner. He then posed another question about why President Bush had not been impeached. “President Clinton was impeached because of a blowjob, why not Bush?”. The third and strangest question he posed to Senator Kerry was asking him if he was part of the skull and bones society with Bush at Yale. Meyer’s mic cut off after that, probably because he had mentioned the word “blowjob”. The cops grabbed him, but Meyer was able to get away several times. Eventually more cops were brought in to help subdue Meyer. Meyer continued to resist arrest, scream, curse; however he was enventually subdued by about six cops up around the entrance. As he is on the ground, he is told several times to put his hands around his back. He is also warned that he will be tasered if he does not comply. Eventually he is tasered twice. The video does not show whether he complied or not.
Senator Kerry was trying to answer his question to the audience, mostly the one about faulty voter machines. I am a die hard conservative Republican but I do respect Senator Kerry for trying to soothe the situation as best he could and trying not to escalate the situation. He DID intervene by letting the student at least present his question. I never received an opportunity to ask my question, but when Senator Kerry ended the show after the Meyer incident, he did come off stage to shake hands and give autographs. At that point, I was able to ask him my question, shake his hand, and get a autograph at the same time. Now why couldn’t Andrew Meyer do that?
I don’t know if this is relevant or not, but Andrew Meyer is a former sports writer for the school newspaper The Alligator. In his columns, he has been known to make ridiculous statements in order to gain attention for himself. Was today a publicity stunt? -
-
I would also point out
Tue, September 18, 2007 - 4:34 PMThe audience reaction to his removal seemed to be one of support. His right to free speech does not give him the right to be a rude idiot. The guy was an idiot. If he was indeed tasered after he was handcuffed, I thin that's a bit excessive, but he was obviously being belligerent, was potentially dangerous, and there are no permanent injuries. -
-
This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.
Re: I would also point out
Tue, September 18, 2007 - 9:14 PM<His right to free speech does not give him the right to be a rude idiot.>
I didn't know it was illegal to be rude or an idiot. He broke no law. The cops shouldn't even have approached him. Free speech is indeed about be being able to express unpopular opinion and peaceful protest. The very notion that there is any freedom left in the USA is a joke as proven by this incident. -
-
Re: I would also point out
Wed, September 19, 2007 - 9:56 PM. . .
I didn't know it was illegal to be rude or an idiot.
. . .
No, but I'm sure resisting an officers commands and disturbing the peace is.
. . .
He broke no law.
. . .
Other than resist the campus police's verbal commands.
. . .
The cops shouldn't even have approached him.
. . .
He rushed to the front of the line (he's lucky it wasn't the President, he probably would have been shot first, questioned later), cut off KERRY and another student, and was beligerent before this. Yea, campus police had ZERO reason to have this guy on their radar.
. . .
Free speech is indeed about be being able to express unpopular opinion and peaceful protest. The very notion that there is any freedom left in the USA is a joke as proven by this incident.
. . .
Free speech doesn't give you the right to resist an officer, or go bat-shit crazy on private property. Any suggestion that this guy was prevented from exercising his rights and was subdued because of it is, quite frankly, a crock of shit.
-
Re: I would also point out
Thu, September 20, 2007 - 7:20 PM<He broke no law.>
Um........he did not comply with the requests from first the organizers, then the security and then fought against two security (not cops - state employees), so while he broke no law, he did resist the requests from the security. No one ever said that a law was broken but you.
<The cops shouldn't even have approached him. Free speech is indeed about be being able to express unpopular opinion and peaceful protest.>
So you're suggesting that this idiot should have been able to speak as long as he wanted even though every other person got their two minutes? What was special about him? You are basically saying that if Kerry was there for - say - one hour, ONE person could have just blathered for the whole one our and that'd be fine with you? -
-
Re: I would also point out
Thu, September 20, 2007 - 8:16 PMYou're right; cutting the power to his mike or something would have been ...
uh, no; pardon; that's what they should have done. So, you're wrong, I guess. Oops. -
-
Re: I would also point out
Fri, September 21, 2007 - 2:38 PM<You're right; cutting the power to his mike or something would have been ... uh, no; pardon; that's what they should have done. So, you're wrong, I guess. Oops.>
Hey, Loki - THEY DID CUT THE POWER TO HIS MIC!!!!!!!!!!
"So, you're wrong, I guess. Oops."
In fact, not only are you wrong, but you just made an argument that does against your point and in fact MADE mine.
"Oops."
-
-
Re: I would also point out
Thu, September 20, 2007 - 8:21 PM<Um........he did not comply with the requests from first the organizers, then the security and then fought against two security (not cops - state employees), so while he broke no law, he did resist the requests from the security. No one ever said that a law was broken but you.>
Why would security/cops have any right to approach/hold/attack anyone if they were no breaking the law. It is amazing all the "Good Germans" supporting the destruction of American freedoms and the constitution.
-
-
Unsu...
Re: I would also point out
Thu, September 20, 2007 - 8:26 PMI just watched the video footage again and from the onset of Meyer's first question to the first request made for him to give up the microphone a total of 32 seconds elapsed.
Obviously this wasn't about the length of his question(s), but rather the content.
-K -
-
Unsu...
Re: I would also point out
Thu, September 20, 2007 - 8:35 PMOh, and 'subduing' Meyer required 3 plus minutes...the footage cut out at that point though I'm sure the show was far from over.
-K
-
Re: I would also point out
Thu, September 20, 2007 - 11:22 PM>>from the onset of Meyer's first question to the first request made for him to give up the microphone a total of 32 seconds elapsed. <<
!!!!!!!!!!
-
-
-
-
Re: I would also point out
Sat, September 22, 2007 - 12:09 PM<...I didn't know it was illegal to be rude or an idiot....>
If it were illegal to be rude or an idiot, Anderson would turn 21 in prison doing life without parole.
Wonder if his mama tried or finally just gave up.
-
-
-
Re: how to fight cops
Tue, September 18, 2007 - 4:38 PMI don't know how much I trust the source, but that is interesting. I still think the cops overreacted.
-
-
This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.
Re: how to fight cops
Tue, September 18, 2007 - 4:43 PMtribes.tribe.net/politicsr...812a36513a
This story has been all over the news for the last day or so, but seeing as it was Greg Palast's book that the unfortunate Andrew Meyers was brandishing at John Kerry, I thought it would be worth quoting from Greg's report on the incident on his website. Go to the site for the full article and of course check out the video on YouTube (warning, it's kind of disturbing):
See the video
View a slideshow of excellent pictures from the Alligator staff Photog. Andrew Stanfill
Read the excerpt from Armed Madhouse that got Andrew Meyer's in trouble.
We warned you: 'Armed Madhouse' is a dangerous book. Yesterday, Andrew Meyer, a University of Florida student was(Andrew Stanfill / Alligator Staff) attacked by five cops, zapped with tasers and arrested after demanding that Senator John Kerry answer the question.
Meyers, just released from jail and now facing five years in prison for resisting arrest, held up a copy of the book and began,
Student to John Kerry: "I want to recommend a book to you. It's called 'Armed Madhouse by Greg Palast.' He's the top investigative journalist in America."
Kerry: "I have the book. I've already read it."
Student: "In this book, it says there were 5 million votes and you won the election; How could you concede the election on the day?"(Andrew Stanfill / Alligator Staff)
Meyers, a telecommunications student at the Gainesville campus, asked related questions including a query as to why Kerry refused to vote for impeachment. When he passed his allotted one minute mic time, five cops jumped him, threw him to the ground, shot him with taser shockers.
Kerry, true to character, stood immobile.
Now, I've given many talks. And some questioners have taken too long at the mic. But I've never done the Stalin thing of cops and electronic beating to limit the discussion. (Yes, it's true that Randi Rhodes recently threatened me with a taser when I've monopolized the mic in her studio.)
The Washington Post reported only that Meyers was holding a "mysterious yellow book." VERY mysterious.
I would note that enchained student was busted in Alachua County, Florida, where, six years ago, I uncovered massive, systematic and utterly illegal disenfranchisement of Black voters - ordered by Gov. Jeb Bush's office just before the 2000 election. ("Florida's Disappeared Voters," February 2001, The Nation.) Alachua remains under federal scrutiny for its long history of racial bias against Black voters.
I must admit I feel some appreciation for Meyers, especially because, even while he was being shot with untold amps of electricity, until he was handcuffed, he would not let go of his mysterious yellow book, 'Armed Madhouse.'
Hear the update live tonight on the new "Palast Report" on Air America Radio. The Palast Report will now broadcast every Tuesday night, at 9:30pm, on Richard Greene's new weeknight show, "Clout."
And get America's most SHOCKING book, the New York Times bestseller, Armed Madhouse: From Baghdad to New Orleans (Penguin 2007).
blog.myspace.com/index.cfm -
-
Re: how to fight cops
Tue, September 18, 2007 - 5:19 PM. . .
Meyers, a telecommunications student at the Gainesville campus, asked related questions including a query as to why Kerry refused to vote for impeachment. When he passed his allotted one minute mic time, five cops jumped him, threw him to the ground, shot him with taser shockers.
. . .
This is why noone takes this shit seriously - hyperbolization like this.
He badgered his way to the front of the line (KERRY himself confirms this), went past his alotted time to speak, was beligerent to security, and resisted law enforcement when he was escorted out. No one threw him to the ground, he tripped and brought two officers down with him. He then rambles about being "killed" by the US Gov - all because he knows he has a spotlight on him. What I find hilarious about this entire situation is that the folks going through the actions of the police and KERRY, dont turn that same fine laser on the actions of the CHILD here.
As for the Malkin link - she provides links to all the material up there. Dismiss the "source" all you want - shes not pulling them out of thin air.
-
-
-
-
Re: how to fight cops
Tue, September 18, 2007 - 6:52 PM"just another cop with an anger problem. you should turn in your gun and your badge in the hopes that a rational person will fill your position. "
i get agitated when people are set on fire by angry mobs... sue me....
-
-
-
-
Re: how to fight cops
Fri, September 21, 2007 - 8:57 PMUmmmm.....Manos.....You ARE aware, are you not, that that vid was made in South Korea, where people have lived under a fascist dictatorship for the last 60 years, and they're maybe...._just maybe_ getting a little fed up? -
-
Re: how to fight cops
Sat, September 22, 2007 - 12:46 PMWe're not supposed to resist oppression, Cats. We deserve it - that's what these true-blue american heroes have been saying all along. -
-
Re: how to fight cops
Sat, September 22, 2007 - 1:13 PM<...We're not supposed to resist oppression, Cats. We deserve it - that's what these true-blue american heroes have been saying all along....>
Good sarcasm, but as far as I'm concerned, the "true-blue Amerikkkan heroes" can bite me. <];-)
-
Re: how to fight cops
Sat, September 22, 2007 - 3:27 PM>> We're not supposed to resist oppression, Cats. <<
oppression? the kid invited this. in fact it was his intent to disrupt the forum and provoke campus security. you can contend that the response was excessive. I disagree but I could be wrong. however, to associate the term "oppression" with some shithead that so attention-starved that he is willing to ruin a great opportunity for his peers to speak with a senior senator is ridiculous. don't diminish the memory of that poor kid that stood in front of a tank in tiananmen square by associating him with a product of another product of failed american parenting.
>> We deserve it - that's what these true-blue american heroes have been saying all along. <<
ridiculous. people all over this country are free to express their ideas. and despite the claims we read on the internet, no one is being "oppressed" despite the increasingly extreme nature of these voices opinions. I think this is the point in this discussion where honest advocates for freedom need to evaluate the tone of their rhetoric and weigh the very real possibility that they may do more harm than good in staking out such an outrageous position. -
-
Re: let's test it
Tue, September 25, 2007 - 1:36 AMWe should revolt, as the storied USA founding fathers indicated would be necessary. Non-violent / passive resistance should be our first weapon, including staged demonstrations and refusal to pay taxes, but we shouldn't be afraid to consider any means necessary to ousting the criminal cartel that has usurped our government, including subterfuge, propaganda, agitation and vocal dissidence, and yes, even the dreaded 'gettin' shot at'.
If anyone gets spooked, jump behind me. They can't get me with the Bill Hicks / Andy Kauffman / Lenny Bruce cancer-assassination, and I'm fuckin' bullet-proof to boot. RISE.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Yeah this was crazy
Wed, September 19, 2007 - 9:48 PMcampus pigs are tools just like Kerry, except the fact that Kerry is a Bones Brother.
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Thu, September 20, 2007 - 12:31 PM
>> Don't you even get sassy with Kerry or Kerry will drone on (endlessly) while the pigs taser your ass in the back. <<
Cliff... I'm kind of disappointed. does your partisan hackery know no bounds?
>> It was not known if Meyer had an attorney. <<
can the other kids at the forum sue meyer for monopolizing kerry's time and limiting their opportunity to speak? and essentially, that is what the brat decided to do; take away from the opportunity of his peers to speak with Senator Kerry. I really don't think this kid is all that good a poster child for first amendment advocates. -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Thu, September 20, 2007 - 5:12 PMAndrew Meyers was the guy who made the news during the first day of the last Harry Potter Book release by standing in front of a book store, holding a big sign " Harry Potter dies"
according to the police report, andrew meyers complied and smiled after being handcuffed and tased and out of the sight of cameras......as soon people followed him with cameras, he started to scream again. " they gonna kill me.""help"
later he asked cops if there were cameras installed inside the police station and holding cells .
i think he expected/hoped to get the reaction out of the cops......and got his 15 minutes of fame. -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Thu, September 20, 2007 - 5:42 PM*************Andrew Meyers was the guy who made the news during the first day of the last Harry Potter Book release by standing in front of a book store, holding a big sign " Harry Potter dies"****************
And holding up a sign that says " Harry Potter dies" violates which law exactly~?
What was he doing that broke any law and what law might that have been?
Was he obstructing the sidewalk any more than any other moron with a sign? Hitting people? What exactly~? -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Thu, September 20, 2007 - 5:51 PMno,no,no.......
i am just saying that he was the same guy .......and nothing happened during the bookstore " incident"....just shows that he is a jackass.....and i am not even a Harry Potter fan...
anyway....you are a lawyer.....and you know he resisted arrest....plus......at the time he was down and they tried to handcuff him, he managed to keep one hand away to be cuffed.
now....you got a guy with cuffs on one hand, which can be used as a weapon....result: tased -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Thu, September 20, 2007 - 8:23 PM<i am just saying that he was the same guy .......and nothing happened during the bookstore " incident"....just shows that he is a jackass.....>
Again being a "jackass" isn't illegal. You have just as much right to speak as any other jackass. -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Thu, September 20, 2007 - 8:42 PMmy point is....he was asking for it......literally....it was his goal to provoke something and ...he got it.
wait a few days.....and he will sue everyone who sells " don't tase me, bro" t-shirts and bumper stickers. -
-
Unsu...
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Thu, September 20, 2007 - 8:49 PMThat's possible, jay. I'm not dismissing it. I won't be buying the t-shirts/bumper stickers/buttons or magnets, but I also won't support the wanna-be pigs who were accomplices in the orchestration of this debacle.
Moral of the story is the same either way....
-K -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Fri, September 21, 2007 - 5:35 AMas i addressesd the meat about this before, i won't be repeating myself....but... there was some question earlier in the thread as whether 4 people could safely handcuff one person, even if they were resisting. as someone who has done this, the answer is no.... if a person doesn't want to be handcuffed and flails and wiggles, kicks etc. you (or a group of you) won't be able to handcuff the person, without breaking something or having them give up (i have always preferred to wait for them to tire, but sometimes that is practical or safe). because this is true (i'm telling you, gently try it with your friends, tell one of them not to hit you, but not to let you get his/her hands behind their back) tasers are used. -
-
This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Fri, September 21, 2007 - 5:36 AM...sometimes that is NOT practical or safe...
-
This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Fri, September 21, 2007 - 9:34 PMOh, now I get it. It's ok to run 50,000 volts through a kid if he might cause you a sprain. Never mind the fact that there is a relatively high fatality rate associated with tazer use. Sorry, my bad. -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Fri, September 21, 2007 - 11:18 PM<Oh, now I get it. It's ok to run 50,000 volts through a kid if he might cause you a sprain. Never mind the fact that there is a relatively high fatality rate associated with tazer use. Sorry, my bad.>
Wrong and wrong.
A) The cops are not afraid of hurting themselves, but of the person that otherwise they'd have to forceably restrain. Which leads to...
B) There is not a "relatively high fatality rate associated with taser use" when compared to the unquestionably high fatality rate when the cops use submissions such as choke holds and such. -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Sat, September 22, 2007 - 12:09 AMmeh. what kind of a people dispenses with annoyances with violence?
sad, sad sad.
frankly I just think they were incompetent. Kerry's saying "let him speak" and they didn't know to back off because they were in "thug" mode and you know it. anyone knows that when someone is wound up, doing confrontational moves is only going to wind them up/freak them out more. and these cops should have known that--considering it's part of their training.
it's that whole bullshit... "stay calm and hold still while the four of us grind you into the floor, sir..."
I'm just tired of seeing cops escalating situations, resorting to unnecessary violence, and then justifying it through the whole, "we took him down for everyone's safety" crap. Hmm... Cliff's right. We need smarter cops out there. Getting tired of seeing this thug shit.
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Sat, September 22, 2007 - 7:39 AMForcible restraint does not necessarily mean choke hold. Hell, if the cops happen to break an arm while restraining the guy, at least they aren't venturing into unknown territory. With the tazer you are inviting the possibility of heart attack or seizure in individuals prone to these. -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Sat, September 22, 2007 - 3:22 PM<Forcible restraint does not necessarily mean choke hold.>
But, it could, right? That's the main thing that cops do to finally restrain someone who is thrashing about and who is uncontrollable (kinda like this kid).
<Hell, if the cops happen to break an arm while restraining the guy, at least they aren't venturing into unknown territory. With the tazer you are inviting the possibility of heart attack or seizure in individuals prone to these.>
More people die or are seriously injured (as I understand it) by police submissions than by tasers. Don't get mad at me for this statistic - I just heard it. Most people resond to tasers very well and suffer no even short-term injuries. That's why when someone dies or is harmed by tasers, it's news - because it's rare. When people had bones broken/separated or were killed by chokeholds? It was not news. It happened, and more often than not the cop was found totally free from any guilt because the person was reportedly not responding to controls - kinda like this kid.
-
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Sat, September 22, 2007 - 3:34 PM>> Forcible restraint does not necessarily mean choke hold. <<
from what I learned playing judo, I can't think of a better and less dangerous way of restraining a larger opponent than applying a choke hold. I'd really like to ask all the armchair quarterbacks on this one what would you have done. allowed one person to shutdown a lecture? or should the police have punched him out? while carrying him out, would it have been better to let the kid struggle while carrying him? what if one of the officers (at least one was a smaller female) dropped him? if a kid that size were dropped on a cement floor, certainly that could have caused serious injury.
really, this is a tempest in a teapot. the campus security did about all they could. these weren't 6'6 beasts restraining this kid. these were campus security trying to prevent a man-size emotional child from preventing a group of serious kids from benefiting from a discussion with senator kerry. -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Sun, September 23, 2007 - 5:54 PM<I'd really like to ask all the armchair quarterbacks on this one what would you have done. allowed one person to shutdown a lecture?>
I've asked that question a number of times, and none of these armchair libertarians will answer that question.
Ask them what they'd suggest if a republican did this at a Cindy Sheehan speaking engagement. Would everyone here be so cavalier with that person?
HA! RIIIGHT! They'd boast about taking the guy out themselves!
Loki:<Good example. Clear, unambiguous. >
What about that example? Would it be OK with you for a Republican to interrupt a <insert favorite speaker here> engagement? You'd just wait until that republican got tired, gave up and went home?
Bullshit.
<while carrying him out, would it have been better to let the kid struggle while carrying him? what if one of the officers (at least one was a smaller female) dropped him? if a kid that size were dropped on a cement floor, certainly that could have caused serious injury.>
Which is EXACTLY why no longer do they do this. Which is EXACTLY why they use the tasers instead of choke holds.
Me: >>This kid did not act like an adult, and he got what he asked for. <<
Loki: <Think hard, Andrew. Think carefully. >
I did. The kid is a 'famous' provocateur and got as a reaction probably exactly what he wanted to get.
<My constituency knows this. >
You have a constituency? Really?
<It's my theory that those of you who fail to see the wrong here have just never really been in danger yourselves, and have no way to gauge what is a real threat to you or not.>
I'd rather not have every individual be the jury and judge of who is or who is not a danger. That's what the security / police are for. You really want EVERY person in that audience to react as they feel is appropriate, Loki? Really? -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Sun, September 23, 2007 - 6:52 PM>> What about that example? Would it be OK with you for a Republican to interrupt a <insert favorite speaker here> engagement? You'd just wait until that republican got tired, gave up and went home? <<
let's not get off-base here. there is no historical basis to accuse Loki of partisanship. going too far down the wrong road will only detract and distract from any point you're trying to make.
-
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Sun, September 23, 2007 - 8:04 PM<let's not get off-base here. there is no historical basis to accuse Loki of partisanship.>
Arthur, I am not intending, accusing nor am I even trying to manipulate Loki into any kind of show of partisanship.
I asked the question because it seems to me that many here would LOVE to see some far-right flyover staters or neocons or far-right Israelis getting tasered if they behaved as this kid did if someone they aligned themselves with was interrupted as was Kerry.
I just can't believe that most of those here who are arguing for this kid being able to be as disruptive as he wanted to argue the same if it was a republican/Bushy/far-right Israeli acting similarly.
So, I am asking for those people who are supporting this kid and his actions to give their opinion on this hypothetical. -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Tue, September 25, 2007 - 3:37 PM>>I just can't believe that most of those here who are arguing for this kid being able to be as disruptive as he wanted to argue the same if it was a republican/Bushy/far-right Israeli acting similarly.
So, I am asking for those people who are supporting this kid and his actions to give their opinion on this hypothetical.
<<
Did you miss my reply? The thread is pretty dense.
The call isn't for letting anyone be disruptive, but rather pointing out that the tasing was wrong and many americans' reaction to it is repugnant. That's the argument: tasing those who didn't break the law : y/n?
(no matter how many times you insist he broke a law - he didn't. Cops cant tell you your time is up, cops can't treat forum decorum as "law" - he broke no law. A case for obstruction might be made since, after he was beaten down and tased, he failed to stand as directed, but the assault was improper at best particularly in that he threatened and harmed no one. Perhaps you'd've favored a quick cavity search?) -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Tue, September 25, 2007 - 3:48 PM<Cops cant tell you your time is up, cops can't treat forum decorum as "law" - he broke no law.>
No matter how many times you insist that the cops made the call - they did not. It was the organizers that made the call, NOT the University Cops. In the first video that Gent put up, you can see a guy in a suit behind the kid make a 'it's over' movement, and that's when the cops came in to get him. So, they waited until they were asked to do so.
<Perhaps you'd've favored a quick cavity search?>
Perhaps you'd favor leaving the snarky comments out? I could always start being snarky also, if you think that this will improve the discourse..... -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Tue, September 25, 2007 - 4:34 PM>>No matter how many times you insist that the cops made the call - they did not. It was the organizers that made the call, NOT the University Cops.<<
OK.
?
So the officers obeyed orders from non-officers to break the law. Your point is:
-
-
-
-
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Tue, September 25, 2007 - 11:43 AMI've responded numerous times. They were suppose to escort he kid out without escalating the situation. The kid was on his stomach, with 6 cops on him. Pretty easy to get the cuffs on and drag him out with the tazers. Tazers are just like candy to law enforcement these days. -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Tue, September 25, 2007 - 3:46 PM<They were suppose to escort he kid out without escalating the situation.>
Gent - they tried.
They tried to escort him out, but he not only resisted their efforts, but he actively resisted even their controlling him enough to escort them out. So, WHO was the one that escalated the situation? The cops? No, they were just trying to contain and control him. The only other solution seemed to be that they wait until he is done with his rant and tires of his acting out. That's not a good solution. Forcing him into their control was the good idea.
<The kid was on his stomach, with 6 cops on him.>
A) he was only on his stomach AFTER they first tasered him,
B) the 6 cops had only two choices:
a) taser him
b) control him through pain or a chokehold or something.
Which one is better? -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Tue, September 25, 2007 - 4:31 PM>>they were just trying to contain and control him<<
...which was inappropriate at best.
>>A) he was only on his stomach AFTER they first tasered him,
B) the 6 cops had only two choices:
a) taser him
b) control him through pain or a chokehold or something. <<
A is proof of wrongdoing.
B is false.
Bb=Ba. -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Tue, September 25, 2007 - 4:39 PM<>>they were just trying to contain and control him<<
<...which was inappropriate at best. >
Then you're blaming the wrong people. Blame the organizers who ordered the cops to do their job.
<B is false. >
You still have not answered what you think that they should have done. If A and B are not good options - what would YOU have done if you were the organizer or cop?
<So the officers obeyed orders from non-officers to break the law. Your point is:>
Can you please let me know what law was broken? We have hundreds and hundreds of posts, and I have not yet seen what law was broken. But, you seem to know, so please let us know.
-
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Tue, September 25, 2007 - 4:49 PM"A) he was only on his stomach AFTER they first tasered him"
I think this is incorrect. They got him on his stomach, handcuffed him, and *then* tasered him. At least this is what I recall after viewing the clip several times.
Regardless, even if they did taser him before they got him on his stomach and handcuffed him:
A) It was still wrong.
B) What possible excuse would they have had for tasering him again after they had gotten him on the ground and handcuffed him? -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Tue, September 25, 2007 - 5:13 PM<I think this is incorrect. They got him on his stomach, handcuffed him, and *then* tasered him. At least this is what I recall after viewing the clip several times.>
Enrika - go and look at the SECOND video that Gent posted. This video CLEARLY shows that the kid was a) NOT on his stomach, and b) NOT in handcuffs until they continued to use the taser.
<Regardless, even if they did taser him before they got him on his stomach and handcuffed him:
<A) It was still wrong.
<B) What possible excuse would they have had for tasering him again after they had gotten him on the ground and handcuffed him?>
A) What do you suggest that they should have done?
B) He was not yet handcuffed (look at the video again, I would suggest) because he was not doing what they told him to do. They tasered him again because he was not complying and they were unable to get him handcuffed.
-
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Tue, September 25, 2007 - 7:29 PMUm I just watched the second video again:
novbm.wordpress.com/2007/09/...hn-kerry/
And I fail to see them shock him until the third video. After compliance to order to roll over. And after getting him in cuffs already.
If they shock him before he's in handcuffs on his stomach, please tell me where and I will be totally blown away by that information, because I've watched even more footage than the 3 I've linked on my blog, and nowhere have I seen him tazed before his on his stomach and in handcuffs. -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Wed, September 26, 2007 - 2:44 AM
So, at 44 seconds into that second video, he starts resisting their efforts to get him out of the room, which is seconds after they try to escort him out..
At 37 seconds he vigorously resists.
At 9 seconds; after he resists that whole time, they choose to take him to the ground - two or maybe three cops took him to the ground as he struggles to break free.
But, you are right, on the second vid - there is no taser.
At 1:48 he says that he'll walk out (he's on his back), but it's too late. There appear to be four cops on him, which still does not get him to stop resisting.
At 1:45, they are ordering him to put his hands behind his back.
At 1:37, he finally is able to roll over as they order.
At 1:18, he is finally handcuffed, but as he is handcuffed, he tries to get up, says, 'Get the fuck off me, man', and continues to resist. That's when he gets tased the first time. Because he is struggling against them.
Now - is this good or bad? Hmm. He's struggling against four cops that have control over him. What else should they do at this point? Should they allow him to continue to resist? Should they use some kind of pain submission on him instead of tase him? Should they just let him resist until they reason with him and he complies on his own? At this point, I STILL think that it was OK to tase him, because I do not think that the person under arrest should be able to define the timeline for their own arrest. If he struggled on (as he was), should they have used pain to subdue him? My guess is that you all would say 'no'. So, the only other option that they had would then have been to just let him go on as long as he wanted. Not a good option when public security in these situations is their paramount issue. The last thing that I imagine that these cops want is to have the person under arrest to have the power to make the situation go on as long as it takes to otherwise control the person and make them comply with the cops demands.
And, as I watch the rest of the video - he IMMEDIATELY capitulates and allows the cops to control him JUST AFTER he was tased. Without hitting him with the taser, he'd not have submitted to their demands for him to allow them control of him and the situation until who knows how long.
So.......sorry. But, if he had used better judgment when they said that they'd tase him (you can hear him ask/beg/plea for them to not tase him BEFORE they do it), he'd not have been tased. I mean, they TOLD him that they were going to do it. He only complied AFTER they tased him.
What this comes down to is:
One side that believes that the cops should have taken as much time as was necessary along with other forms of making him submit instead of ever using the taser probably short of pain. So, he should have been reasoned with.
Then, there's my side which says that I am supportive of the cops as quickly as possible gaining his compliance because of HIS safety (no pain submissions) and the safety of others if this situation was some kind of red herring to allow someone else to attack Kerry. Yes - I know that the chances of this kid being this subterfuge of sorts is very, very low - but the cops have to treat every situation the same, and I would bet money that they have a policy here and that they followed it. I'd also bet that next time they'll act exactly the same.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Sat, September 22, 2007 - 12:45 PM>>Wrong and wrong.
A) The cops are not afraid of hurting (citizens)
and
B) Andrew pulls nonfact from invisible anus and feels strongly about it.
You're advocating for the use of extreme violence to silence dissent, and that means you're evil and bad. Repent.
-
-
-
This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Sat, September 22, 2007 - 5:49 AM*************but... there was some question earlier in the thread as whether 4 people could safely handcuff one person, *************
You are a prison guard. Prisoners as a group tend to be a tad tougher than politically minded college squirts.
-
-
-
-
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Sat, September 22, 2007 - 5:47 AM****************anyway....you are a lawyer.....and you know he resisted arrest....plus......at the time he was down and they tried to handcuff him, he managed to keep one hand away to be cuffed. ****************
No one informed him that her was under arrest. That's a problem for the cops.
Some states allow you to use force to resist an unlawful arrest.
I don't know about this one but I can damn well assure you that the guy's conduct on that video did not rise to any breach of the peace or other arrestable offense. -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Sat, September 22, 2007 - 12:42 PMHe threatened no one. He endangered no one. He was unlawfully attacked, and so-called "Americans" are just laughing about it. -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Sat, September 22, 2007 - 1:11 PMI am not laughing.
I am ashamed.
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Sat, September 22, 2007 - 3:24 PM<He threatened no one. He endangered no one. He was unlawfully attacked, and so-called "Americans" are just laughing about it.>
He was no threat until he resisted those security. As soon as they had to get involved (his fault), he became a threat.
And, he was NOT "unlawfully attacked". What the security did was their job. They were asked to move that kid out, and he resisted. Where's the unlawful attack?
<You're advocating for the use of extreme violence to silence dissent, and that means you're evil and bad. Repent.>
No. I am advocating for everyone to act like adults. This kid did not act like an adult, and he got what he asked for.
According to you, the kid should have been able to disrupt the event, and they all should have just gotten up and gone home when he went past the time that he was alloted. According to you, ONE person can disrupt an event and there's NOTHING that anyone can do about it on some laughable and immature ideal of what 'freedom of speech' means.
<We're not supposed to resist oppression,>
That was not "oppression", that was the security doing their job.
Here's a direct question, Loki:
So, if you were at a Noam Chomsky speaking engagment, and some republican got to the mic and just started talking and would not leave, you'd support that republican's ability to just talk as long as he wanted?
Pleas answer that question.
-
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Sat, September 22, 2007 - 3:40 PM>> And, he was NOT "unlawfully attacked". What the security did was their job. They were asked to move that kid out, and he resisted. Where's the unlawful attack? <<
I guess not Andrew. and we can assume from this discussion that all those thugs standing in front of the stage at a stone's concert are in fact "oppressing" all those harmless fans that want to storm the stage. or the security that prevents crazed fans from tormenting celebrities. I guess the security guards are not supposed to lay a hand on them unless the fan threatens to harm their clients. and surely bouncers at bars are not supposed to physically escort obnoxious drunks from bars. I guess that would be considered "excessive force." and when all these controls and protections are removed we can enjoy the resulting utopian society these well-meaning fools dream of where any asshole can take it upon themselves to disrupt and ruin a public event with impunity. yeah. what a wonderful world that will be. -
-
This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Sun, September 23, 2007 - 3:46 PM>>we can assume from this discussion that all those thugs standing in front of the stage at a stone's concert are in fact "oppressing" all those harmless fans that want to storm the stage.<<
Excellent example. If a performer is being threatened, there's a defense. If the performer is only being pointed to and reached for and screamed at in the middle of a quiet ballad, you'll find not that may stagestompers are going to tase anyone over it.
Good example. Clear, unambiguous.
No amount of disdain over the oaf's behavior is cogent or even pertinent; no amount of indignantly pointing at etiquette or formal time allotments or any of that shit is at issue, at all. You're all advocating for tasing to serve as dissent control. Look at your words. You're saying it over and over: 'he was an ass; he deserved it'.
Every attempt at an analogous example you give involves some actual threat. The only parallel with the issue under discussion is that *you* are advocating unlawful attacks with deadly weapons on unarmed non-threatening citizens. To make any of this stick, you have to show me the threat the oaf posed. You've hinted at it; you've pretended there was some indication of this - but there wasn't. Was there?
You seem to want me to step into a foolish and fictional frame: "letting him get away with it"... do I really have to point out that that's wholly irrelevant, based in speculation and utterly contrived narrative, and is nothing more than a disingenuous dodge?
It's depressing to note the lack of mental facility so many of you are exhibiting. It's not too hard to reason out a slightly-more-complex-than-pokemon ethical problem. -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Sun, September 23, 2007 - 5:30 PM>> Every attempt at an analogous example you give involves some actual threat. <<
not at all. I mean this is a convenient excuse to dismiss the hypothetical implications of allowing people to disrupt public events.
>> The only parallel with the issue under discussion is that *you* are advocating unlawful attacks with deadly weapons on unarmed non-threatening citizens. <<
advocating? you do acknowledge that there is a significant difference between responding and attacking. the language you are using is deliberately misleading.
>> To make any of this stick, you have to show me the threat the oaf posed. <<
it is pretty obvious. he was *struggling* with campus police. at least one was a medium-sized woman. all were put in physical jeopardy by his histrionics.
>> You've hinted at it; you've pretended there was some indication of this - but there wasn't. Was there? <<
sure there is. he was *struggling* with police. if an officer restrains you, you are supposed to go limp and comply. meyer instead chose to struggle and brought about the inevitable. a stray kick or shove could easily have caused one of the officers to lose their footing, break a bone... I've seen it happen. this isn't rocket science. figure it out.
>> You seem to want me to step into a foolish and fictional frame: "letting him get away with it"... <<
you seem to be deliberately misinterpreting my words. don't confuse "letting him get away with it" with "removing an obnoxious lout so that a public event can proceed." and the fact is, he did "get away with it." so what.
>> do I really have to point out that that's wholly irrelevant, based in speculation and utterly contrived narrative, and is nothing more than a disingenuous dodge? <<
where is the dodge? why the need for this deliberately misleading language? there was just cause to escort the kid from the event. security does this everyday at concerts, lectures, etc. if I were to shove my way on to a stage and prevent an event from going on, security would be justified in removing me... physically. even if I posed no physical threat to the performers. why is this so difficult to acknowledge?
>> It's depressing to note the lack of mental facility so many of you are exhibiting. It's not too hard to reason out a slightly-more-complex-than-pokemon ethical problem. <<
it's a little depressing that you need to demonize people over a difference of opinion. from my perspective, you're entitled to be wrong on this and other issues without it changing my overall respect for your intellect and character. -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Sun, September 23, 2007 - 7:17 PM>>I mean this is a convenient excuse to dismiss the hypothetical implications of allowing people to disrupt public events. <<
Really? I don't see it. In fact, I think that trying to tout public manners as being of equal importance to brutality from authority figures would be laughable if not for being supremely unfunny.
>>the language you are using is deliberately misleading. <<
Not at all.
>>he was *struggling* with campus police. at least one was a medium-sized woman. all were put in physical jeopardy by his histrionics.<<
Sorry; no. If you attack me, I don't endanger myself by resisting. You endangered me.
>>meyer instead chose to struggle and brought about the inevitable.<<
Maybe it was 'inevitable'. So what? It was wrong, and good people know it. Cry foul all you like; the time has long past for evensies. It's time to stand up. This is wrong. You're wrong. It's the wrong kind of wrong, too.
>>you seem to be deliberately misinterpreting my words.<<
I don't see any evidence for that surmise.
>>if I were to shove my way on to a stage and prevent an event from going on, security would be justified in removing me... physically. even if I posed no physical threat to the performers. why is this so difficult to acknowledge? <<
More dodging. If you're subjected to brutality- particularly involving weapons - when you pose no threat to anyone, that's wrong. There's not wiggle-room, here - that is, not if we're pretending that there's an ethical component to the problem. If we're talking about jungle-law, sure, fuck the little bastard up and laugh at him.
>>a stray kick or shove could easily have caused one of the officers to lose their footing, break a bone...<<
Imagine my anguish.
Is it jungle-law we're discussing, then? I have some thoughts about that scenario, as well, involving other unfortunate but inevitable consequences and introducing other tough ethical challenges, such as innocent young pigs gettin' set on fire and wasted for being vile enough to take up arms against their mommas and babies on the say-so of crooks and merchants.
If you want to draw a line between 'civilians' and 'campus cops', then say everyone on the 'civilian' side needs to accept that they'll be assaulted if they resist, then you must accept that the 'campus cops' immediately and inexorably become targets for the exact same lack of consideration. It isn't about 'fair' or 'right'; it's the law of the jungle. In that I see 'civilization' has collapsed entirely for the placid sheep of this once-promising collective, it doesn't pain me *that much* to point out that you're swimming in evil if you can say with a straight face "he had it coming" in anything outside the jungle-context.
On the playground: tase the oaf. On the youtube: suffer the fact of your own indefensible lapse in quality. As you say, it "isn't rocket science," but then, turns out rocket science isn't all that complex, really. Wrong can be funny, right can be boring, and good people can have evil inclinations, especially when habituated to evil. That's what's happening here (at least, I hope that's what's happening - otherwise it really just comes down to 'no longer worthwhile,' for our society).
You keep saying I'm being 'deliberately misleading' - but I'm just pointing at reality. I'm not trying to 'lead' you anywhere. I'm saying that the way you're wiling to go is hellish and wrong.
>>it's a little depressing that you need to demonize people over a difference of opinion.<<
It is; you're totally right. Yet, some opinions are fucking demonic. I will say I certainly never made myself out to be a great respecter of shitty / malevolent opinions. From my perspective, a decent person can only forgivably retain demonic opinions inasmuch as the truth is not available to them. That isn't the case, here.
"Them injuns shoulda expecked t'git genocided" -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Sun, September 23, 2007 - 8:25 PM<Sorry; no. If you attack me, I don't endanger myself by resisting. You endangered me.>
But, Loki - you DO endanger yourself and others by resisting. If he had just agreed to cease being obstructive or walk out when the organizers asked him to leave, there'd not be ANY story here. What about that point? What about the point that he was not immediately attacked? Have you seen the whole video? They only resorted to 'attacking' him when he struggled out of their control and resisted their attempts to simply escort him out of the building.
<>>a stray kick or shove could easily have caused one of the officers to lose their footing, break a bone...<<
<Imagine my anguish. >
That's the point, is it not? You do not seem to express ANY care that this kid's actions caused the security to act as they did. He could have harmed them, or harmed himself - and that's why they attempted to restrain him. You don't care that they were protecting themselves as much as they were protecting him. THAT is why there were four to six people on him, in order to effect complete control so no one was injured. And, no one got injured. If it was just two people as it started out as, then there was every opportunity for him or them to be harmed. They did the right thing to overwhelm him by their numbers. That's what security is trained to do in any situation like that one.
<"Them injuns shoulda expecked t'git genocided">
That's just ridiculous. -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Mon, September 24, 2007 - 10:17 PM>>You do not seem to express ANY care that this kid's actions caused the security to act as they did.<<
As has been pointed out, it's their job. I'll grant you this, though: had he injured anyone, he'd've gotten a lot worse than a tasing and I'd have little to say about it.
>>You don't care that they were protecting themselves as much as they were protecting him.<<
What were they protecting him from?
>>They did the right thing to overwhelm him by their numbers.<<
Yep. But it didn't stop there; he was tased and brutalized. Maybe you forgot.
>><"Them injuns shoulda expecked t'git genocided">
That's just ridiculous. <<
I'm not at all surprised that you find the comparison unpleasant. -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Tue, September 25, 2007 - 3:02 AM<>>You don't care that they were protecting themselves as much as they were protecting him.<<
<What were they protecting him from?>
Thank you for helping me make my point.
"What were they protecting him from?" Well, we're talking about the tasering. Without the taser, it is quite clear that the kid had absolutely no intention of submitting to their orders. It was only the taser that finally made him quit fighting. So, if they did not have the taser, it is reasonable to surmise that they would have had to use MORE force in order to get the same results as they got with the taser. So - they were protecting him from being more seriously hurt as may have happened if they had used more force. Also - in using overwhelming force, they were protecting him and others from any other violence that may have happened if he was not just some dumb kid screaming for attention. In a situation such as this one where they do not know the intent of the person causing the problem, the faster that they can get done with him, the faster that they can be ready for any other danger that presents itself.
In this case, there was no additional danger, but that does not mean that in the future there would be no additional danger.
Let's play "What If!"
In this game of "What If!", we will paint a picture of a kid that is part of a larger conspiracy to harm a famous politician. So, in this case, his gaining all of the attention from the security could be a ploy to allow someone else to harm that senator.
Sure - this is a longshot, but it's not impossible as I am sure you could admit if you were open to being honest with us. And, I am willing to bet that these security people are trained to get the danger over and secured as quick as possible so as to minimize any chance of any additional problem being able to take advantage of this situation.
If something like this situation that I describe ever happened to someone that you liked and the person that you liked was killed, there are many here who would say that it was a conspiracy. If someone killed Ron Paul or some Super-Lefty, there are many here that would say that if the security DID NOT act quickly and decisively, it was because they were in on the plan to kill that person.
I just think that they acted as they were trained to act, and were right to act like that.
<>>They did the right thing to overwhelm him by their numbers.<<
<Yep. But it didn't stop there; he was tased and brutalized. Maybe you forgot. >
Bullshit. He was not "brutalized". They did not strike him once, they did not in any way brutalize him. That's just ridiculous hyperbole. They tasered him because he resisted their efforts to restrain him and eject him from the premises. That you even think that he was brutalized, that shows where you really come from if you think that what we all saw was brutalization.
<I don't think that's a carte blanche for tasing the mouthy, though.>
That's not what happened though, Loki. That's simply NOT what happened. They did not just tase every mouthy person, but ONE guy that refused to leave and resisted the efforts of FOUR guys on his back. They only tasered him when it was clear that he would not comply in any other way.
I am genuinely surprised that you see the situation as you do. I really am. You have a 180 degree view of what happened from the same video. I am really surprised. -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Tue, September 25, 2007 - 11:48 AM>it is quite clear that the kid had absolutely no intention of submitting to their orders.
Um, not true... the kid clearly rolls over when told to do so by police. He complies, and they start putting him in cuffs. Now I imagine that for 6 chicken cops, they have to tazer him now because he's talking smack still. But for anyone of minor competence, this wouldn't have been an issue.
If the kid gets a good lawyer that lawyer is going to have a field day with this. This story isn't going to die soon.
-
-
-
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Mon, September 24, 2007 - 3:26 PM>> Really? I don't see it. In fact, I think that trying to tout public manners as being of equal importance to brutality from authority figures would be laughable if not for being supremely unfunny. <<
you're clever. it takes a clever person to manipulate a conversation so that it remains black and white when it suits your purpose. but this is pretty far from the cut and dry state sanctioned progrom you're making it out to be. what we are discussing is four members of campus security trying to prevent one person from shutting down a public event. these are not trained riot police. these are four under-trained people trying to do their job. perhaps, they overreacted. that happens in a stressful situation. I disagree. and unfortunately, the campus rent-a-cops are going to be reprimanded. not exactly the monumental clash between good and evil you seem to be portraying.
>> Sorry; no. If you attack me, I don't endanger myself by resisting. You endangered me. <<
bullshit. if you choose to create a public nuisance with the intent of provoking someone in authority, then you are no longer a victim. sure, the poor schmucks forced to deal with you may overreact. but at some point in time individuals are every bit as responsible as the faceless institutions they struggle against.
>> Maybe it was 'inevitable'. So what? It was wrong, and good people know it. Cry foul all you like; the time has long past for evensies. <<
absurd.
>> It's time to stand up. <<
coming from someone planted in front of a keyboard. completely absurd.
>> More dodging. If you're subjected to brutality- particularly involving weapons - when you pose no threat to anyone, that's wrong. <<
how far are you willing to take this stance? a drunken asshole that gropes some hapless female at a bar probably poses no threat. that doesn't mean he isn't guilty of sexual battery. if you stick to the facts, the kid jumped in line in front of a female. he then monopolized his time, preventing other kids from having a turn. are you saying we're all just supposed to sit and wait for this kid to get tired before going about our business? is that practical? is that even sane?
>> Is it jungle-law we're discussing, then? <<
it seems that is what you're advocating... asymmetrically speaking.
>> On the playground: tase the oaf. On the youtube: suffer the fact of your own indefensible lapse in quality. As you say, it "isn't rocket science," but then, turns out rocket science isn't all that complex, really. Wrong can be funny, right can be boring, and good people can have evil inclinations, especially when habituated to evil. That's what's happening here (at least, I hope that's what's happening - otherwise it really just comes down to 'no longer worthwhile,' for our society). <<
hypergraphic rubbish.
>> It is; you're totally right. Yet, some opinions are fucking demonic. <<
absolutely. and they are simple to identify based on the intolerance and dogmatic tone of the person that holds them.
>> From my perspective, a decent person can only forgivably retain demonic opinions inasmuch as the truth is not available to them. <<
rationalizing your infallibility. I think this is a good point to revisit the old adage about opinions and assholes. seems to me the real assholes are immune to the smell of their own opinions. -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Mon, September 24, 2007 - 10:01 PM>>it takes a clever person to manipulate a conversation so that it remains black and white when it suits your purpose.<<
No, Arthur, that's not an accurate jibe. I've acknowledged plenty that the issue is nuanced, that I don't care about the prankster, that it doesn't matter what he is, what he thinks, or what he did wrong - what I simply won't surrender is that the wrong of the tasing is unambiguous and the wrong of people ignoring it - applauding it - is unambiguous.
It's not cleverness nor manipulation, it's integrity. I'm unwilling to entertain the bullshit frame you all seem to have accepted without qualm. I say further that acceptance of the frame you're propounding is an ethical failure and a social disgrace. Deny it, I guess, if you like; there's really no other defense available. "It's OK to attack people for no reason"...?
Sidebar: On the individual level, I imagine that you and I will always fall on either side of the "authority" fence. I reject authority automatically.
>>not exactly the monumental clash between good and evil you seem to be portraying. <<
No? I think you're mistaking what I'm pointing at. Let me try it this way:
Here's an imaginary dialog taking place as I mert one of the cops involved:
Me: "so, you're one of the ones that tased that guy?"
Helpless cop: [frown, suspicious, doesn't want to get into it] "Yep..."
Me: "Ha, ha! What a fucking circus that was."
HC: [relaxes slightly] "Heh, heh, uh; yeah."
End of story.
Look to the contrasts. There, you'll see the black&white moray-pattern of reality masquerading as an ethical "gray". It *is* gray when viewed as a "conflict" event: are those individual cops just bad? Was he 'right' to break in line? They *did* give him post-tasing orders to stand - a virtual impossibility - and punished him for non-compliance - is that "ambiguously maybe OK sometimes"?
All of that is beside my point.
Ignore the narrative and look at the plot device: in this situation the insidious evil is simple and clear: he was assaulted without having posed a threat because his dissent was discomfiting. If an old lady stood up and started the same spiel not *any* of these so-called Americans would cry "tase the Granny!"
Our collective response has been a disgrace. Our reliance on frame-makers to tell us what to think about violence being used to control dissent is wicked in its sheer sloth. Our access to information and education indicts us, here. We failed, we suck, we're monumentally and historically worthless.
>>coming from someone planted in front of a keyboard. completely absurd. <<
Sure, hike that out. See if it sticks. I recommend staying in areas you can meaningfully argue, though, since you don't have the facts you need to make this particular case. Hint: try again. Dead-end. Personally attacking me, anyway, doesn't absolve you of the heinous atrocity of your evil opinion, though.
>>how far are you willing to take this stance? a drunken asshole that gropes some hapless female at a bar probably poses no threat.<<
Incorrect, but another great example; s/he's already passed the 'threat' and proceeded into potential 'assault'. Said individual is met with just reprisal, at the very least involving ejection from the premises or, possibly, some light battery on the way out after the inevitable bellowing protest.
>>at some point in time individuals are every bit as responsible as the faceless institutions they struggle against. <<
Yes. When they cause harm or threaten to. When they arm themselves and / or attack humans or their livelihood. That's one of the 'some point's. There are a few, I suppose, but they come down to that: causing harm.
>>it seems that [jungle law] is what you're advocating... asymmetrically speaking. <<
Explain, please.
>>...rationalizing your infallibility.<<
Nope. Pointing at evil. If you'd like to indict me, there's a fertile field of possibilities. In this case, though, I'm right. It's one of those things that pisses people off: I'm right about stuff. This kind of stuff. Moo and sermonize if it helps you cope, but we both know that, at the end of the day, it won't change; it's just a fact. I'm right; you're wrong; tasing the oaf was a crime and a national disgrace. In this case it's also a moral and ethical wrong - that's pretty hardcore, Arthur.
"Them mal-kin-tents dont mind they place thass why they gits tased"
"Buss up th' Lion's Club meetin' agin'n' we may jess have ol' Dark Chester lynch you 'round back, Irish." -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Mon, September 24, 2007 - 11:31 PM>> Deny it, I guess, if you like; there's really no other defense available. "It's OK to attack people for no reason"...? <<
deny what? there is nothing to deny. you think my opinion is evil. I think you're wrong. I see a pretty simple distinction based on moderation. you see a good german and I see an idealist that has a soft spot for civil disobedience. my opinion is based on an understanding that civil society at times requires that individuals subordinate their selfish desires. you don't seem to like hypotheticals so it will have to suffice it to say that laws need to be enforced... and some of those laws have nothing to do with real or perceived threats. I see what happened as an act of necessity. you think that position is "evil." I think your opinion is wrong.
>> in this situation the insidious evil is simple and clear: he was assaulted without having posed a threat because his dissent was discomfiting. <<
dissent? what was the kid's argument? assault? the kid was given every opportunity to comply and leave. you've managed to string together another response that reads well but is vastly overstated.
>> though, since you don't have the facts you need to make this particular case. Hint: try again. Dead-end. Personally attacking me, anyway, doesn't absolve you of the heinous atrocity of your evil opinion, though. <<
absurd. "personally attacking you?" christ Loki, you've been here long enough to handle a smartass comment? I thought it was pretty clear that I enjoy your posts. you can't be that thin-skinned... so I must be the latest specimen on the trolling block.
>> heinous atrocity of your evil opinion, though. <<
and here I thought we were having a serious conversation. good one. -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Tue, September 25, 2007 - 12:14 AM>>you see a good german and I see an idealist that has a soft spot for civil disobedience. <<
That's totally fair, and I accept that.
>>laws need to be enforced... <<
I agree. I don't think that's a carte blanche for tasing the mouthy, though. I'd say the line is best drawn at enforcing laws against crimes, how about?
>>reads well but is vastly overstated.<<
Not too dangerous for me to crow out "Mission Accomplished" eh?
>>....the latest specimen on the trolling block. <<
Naw; I only troll BM tribes. I welcome all acerbic comments and character attacks. My point was twofold - no wait, threefold:
• I do a lot. Even under nearly intolerable suffering and physical limitations. I realize there's no way for you to know or verify this, though.
• My good works or lack thereof aren't really pertinent to the issue, though.
• I get to make acerbic comments, too! It is a shame that sometimes my sense of humor doesn't translate too well to text format.
All of that crap aside, and since you brought it up, I thoroughly enjoy your posts as well and I'd be really disappointed in myself if I accidentally pissed you off to the point of not wanting to respond. There are so few people in the world one can really find intellectual *resistance* in, you know? It's very valuable to me. I think you're an important person.
It is a serious discussion to me, though, and I'm not being totally theatrical when I make moral judgments based on peoples' expressed opinions - if it's any consolation, I see myself as a well-meaning but ultimately highly flawed example of a person that understands that hypocrisy in its core form is not only forgivable, but actually desirable, since, when we live up, finally, to our greatest aspirations, we've obviously lowered our standards considerably.
-
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Tue, September 25, 2007 - 2:51 AM<Sidebar: On the individual level, I imagine that you and I will always fall on either side of the "authority" fence. I reject authority automatically. >
And, that's the point.
Because you automatically "reject authority", you immediately close your mind to any option that goes against your preconceived agenda and ideals. You STARTED with a belief that the authorities did wrong here, and you refuse to leave this neighborhood to venture out into new territory. By your own admission, a surprising one at that, you claim that you have an intent to reject authority - even in situations like this one where you are quite simply reacting instead of thinking.
<Here's an imaginary dialog taking place as I mert one of the cops involved: Me: "so, you're one of the ones that tased that guy?" Helpless cop: [frown, suspicious, doesn't want to get into it] "Yep..." Me: "Ha, ha! What a fucking circus that was." HC: [relaxes slightly] "Heh, heh, uh; yeah.">
WOW! You are now making up in your head a whole storyline to go along with your creative reality to confirm to yourself that you are right. Wow. I have never seen anyone admit that they are so defined by their imagination as opposed to being realized by allowing for each situation to be different in reality.
-
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Tue, September 25, 2007 - 3:17 AM>>Because you automatically "reject authority", you immediately close your mind to any option that goes against your preconceived agenda and ideals.<<
How do you figure?
>>You STARTED with a belief that the authorities did wrong here<<
No, not at all; you're extrapolating far too much, here.
>>By your own admission, a surprising one at that, you claim that you have an intent to reject authority - <<
No. Read it again. My intent is to be aware; it's nothing more than honesty and integrity that lead to my "admission". The fact is that I've arrived at my rejection of authority via philosophical and critical means. You might be able to imagine that, for someone as passionate as I am, it's difficult to avoid asserting authority over others. I have to do that, in my life, though, in order to remain true to what I feel is the right course. Authority - such as we have evolved to acknowledge - is damaging to progress, which I define as the limiting of suffering.
>>I have never seen anyone admit that they are so defined by their imagination yadayada
Calm down, fella. Dialog as exposition is a tool in the toolbox. Add it to yours, do. Read some Plato, and then ease into the deep end with us, would you please.
-
-
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Tue, September 25, 2007 - 11:52 AMThe AP reports that these were real police, not campus security. I can't imagine they'd have "security" protecting Kerry. Universities usually have full police departments.
-
-
-
-
-
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Sun, September 23, 2007 - 4:00 PMYes:
It is, in fact, illegal for anyone to use a weapon on someone without provocation. Provocation of the sort that merits armed response is well defined, and it involves posing a threat.
evil croons:
>>This kid did not act like an adult, and he got what he asked for. <<
Think hard, Andrew. Think carefully.
>>you'd support that republican's ability to just talk as long as he wanted? <<
I wouldn't care, personally, and would just be listening, but since you brought it up, I haven't the faintest whiff of concern over how disruptive speakers are dealt with. It becomes my problem when armed thugs attack a harmless citizen, and further, I actually have to ramp up to pointing out that cheering on illegal brutality is fucking evil when the other citizens hoot like a pack of excited baboons over it.
If he'd threatened anyone, I'd be evilly chuckling along with the rest of you. My record shows this! My constituency knows this.
It's my theory that those of you who fail to see the wrong here have just never really been in danger yourselves, and have no way to gauge what is a real threat to you or not. You don't see the threat to your nation, but you invent a threat in a kid with a book and a mouth. If I were you, I'd be ashamed at my own obvious cowardice and lack of value both as a human being and a citizen.
-
-
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Sat, September 22, 2007 - 3:19 PM<No one informed him that her was under arrest. That's a problem for the cops. >
Why are you assuming that they first tried to put him under arrest? You keep saying that, but I have seen no evidence at all that at first they were going to do ANYTHING but escort him out. Why do you keep bringing up this seeming canard?
<I don't know about this one but I can damn well assure you that the guy's conduct on that video did not rise to any breach of the peace or other arrestable offense.>
So, you are saying that one can ignore the requests by security (state employees in this case) anytime that you feel like it? If that's the case, why are there security at all then? Are they there just in case someone really commits a crime?
Basically, you are saying that the kid should have been able to blather as long as he wanted.
Got it. -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Sun, September 23, 2007 - 3:36 PM>>Are they there just in case someone really commits a crime? <<
uhhhhhhh..... yes?
Is this a trick question of some kind?
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Tue, September 25, 2007 - 11:53 AMThese were University Police officers... according to every mainstream news report. Not security.
-
-
-
-
-
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Sat, September 22, 2007 - 5:43 AM***********************Cliff... I'm kind of disappointed. does your partisan hackery know no bounds? *********************
Huh?? Whaa?? I'm not getting this at all. -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Sat, September 22, 2007 - 3:18 PM>> Huh?? Whaa?? I'm not getting this at all. <<
operating under the assumption that this offers an opportunity for certain conservatives to make the former democrat candidate for president look bad. considering the title of this thread, my point should be obvious.
I'm not a kerry fan but he did NOTHING wrong. why would you associate him with this incident if you didn't intend to score a partisan point? -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Sun, September 23, 2007 - 3:51 PM>>I'm not a kerry fan but he did NOTHING<<
Fixed it for ye, pal. -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Sun, September 23, 2007 - 5:32 PM>> Fixed it for ye, pal. <<
not your best post, chum. -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Tue, September 25, 2007 - 12:00 AMYeah; it was a trope. I have moments.
-
-
-
-
-
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Sun, September 23, 2007 - 3:49 PMAmericans are such fucking wimps and cowards these days.
"Meh meh meh - he was talking too much. TASE HIM!!!! Ahhhhahahahahaha! That'll teach you to point out uncomfortable facts in a manner that disturbs people!"
Fucking worthless mob of ugly and greedy slaves.
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Sun, September 23, 2007 - 5:35 PMthe moron was sure playing it up for the cameras. Ooo police brutality!! -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Sun, September 23, 2007 - 10:00 PMWell maybe I just see both sides:
1. Yes he was playing it up
2. The cops went WAY overboard
The big loser here is Kerry. The kid got his flipping wet dream, full-on media exposure. He just didn't count on the fact that now it looks like they are going to bring charges. -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Tue, September 25, 2007 - 12:16 AMI wish someone would have asked if anal intercourse was mandatory for being a Skull on "crossed bones" Presidential candidate or if it is just highly recommended.
When I met Clinton my friend asked what he was going to do about Cuba and he got tackled and got a boot on his throat. I'm sure he will cherish that memory. More people would have seen that but they schedules a free Fish concert with free Ben and Jerry's at the same time so the 18-32 yo crowd was quite occupied! -
-
Re: No fuking around at a Kerry lecture~!!
Tue, September 25, 2007 - 12:28 AMMy aunt and cousin went to see Clinton in CA; later that night they wanted to see the TV coverage because of the tough and penetrating questions students were asking him - but the news report showed (according to them) a completely fake and staged photo-op that didn't take place anywhere near the event the news agencies were claiming to report on.
He supplied utterly fake appearance footage.
It wasn't long before "free speech zones" were swallowed whole by an American public thirsty for humiliation.
-
-
-
