What I said about his behavior is not a claim, it is a fact, substantiated by not only the video, but by witnesses statements in interviews to the press. You clearly have no idea just how long he was going on, and no, John Kerry did not want him to stay. John Kerry told the audience he would answer the question, there is a big difference. This man was not asking a question, he was going on a tirade. And he went to the event WITH THE INTENT to do so, he stated it on his website in advance of the event.
THESE ARE FACTS, and are not disputable.
So sorry that the facts do not support your predisposed viewpoint.
But like I said, if he felt he was being wronged, the PROPER course of action was to co-operate with the police and take appropriate actions afterwards. It is NEVER acceptable to act the way he did. NEVER.
He went on way too long, and was monopolizing the mic. The event organizers asked him to stop his tirade, he refused multiple times. The decision then was made to remove him. Police gave him every opportunity to cooperate. He didn't.
Regardless of whether you believe the police removing him was legal or not (in my mind there is no question it was, and the only ones claiming otherwise didn't take the time to find out the full story before spouting off, but this is/. after all) when the police give you an order, you follow it. He was yelling out "What did I do wrong" over and over, but while doing that, he was fighting them. You submit, and THEN you have the opportunity to ask your questions and discuss it with them. And if after that, you feel you were mistreated, or your rights violated, you have avenues available to pursue that.
But you do NOT resist the police under any circumstances. Resisting, and fighting, and honestly, he was lucky that was all he got off with. All of you saying that the cops should not have had any problem subduing him without the tazer have never known anyone in law enforcement obviously. He was resisting, and in the process of resisting could have caused injury to any of those officers, or even caused more severe injury to himself than the stunner would cause. He was experiencing an adrenaline rush, and in that state, as the police well know, would be reacting with a force greater than he normally would. Had this been before the use of non-lethal stunners, tazers, and other tools available to law enforcement now, he would have been billy clubbed and had more severe physical force used against him, most likely causing greater physical injury to himself, and possibly to the offices.
This guy went into the event with the INTENT of creating a scene, and trying to get himself arrested to play into his own agenda on his website and support his little paranoid agendas.
Bottom line, don't resist the police, follow their orders, and then afterwards you have the means to protest the police actions.
Slashdot Mirror
What I said about his behavior is not a claim, it is a fact, substantiated by not only the video, but by witnesses statements in interviews to the press. You clearly have no idea just how long he was going on, and no, John Kerry did not want him to stay. John Kerry told the audience he would answer the question, there is a big difference. This man was not asking a question, he was going on a tirade. And he went to the event WITH THE INTENT to do so, he stated it on his website in advance of the event.
THESE ARE FACTS, and are not disputable.
So sorry that the facts do not support your predisposed viewpoint.
But like I said, if he felt he was being wronged, the PROPER course of action was to co-operate with the police and take appropriate actions afterwards. It is NEVER acceptable to act the way he did. NEVER.
This really is a simple matter.
/. after all) when the police give you an order, you follow it. He was yelling out "What did I do wrong" over and over, but while doing that, he was fighting them. You submit, and THEN you have the opportunity to ask your questions and discuss it with them. And if after that, you feel you were mistreated, or your rights violated, you have avenues available to pursue that.
He went on way too long, and was monopolizing the mic. The event organizers asked him to stop his tirade, he refused multiple times. The decision then was made to remove him. Police gave him every opportunity to cooperate. He didn't.
Regardless of whether you believe the police removing him was legal or not (in my mind there is no question it was, and the only ones claiming otherwise didn't take the time to find out the full story before spouting off, but this is
But you do NOT resist the police under any circumstances. Resisting, and fighting, and honestly, he was lucky that was all he got off with. All of you saying that the cops should not have had any problem subduing him without the tazer have never known anyone in law enforcement obviously. He was resisting, and in the process of resisting could have caused injury to any of those officers, or even caused more severe injury to himself than the stunner would cause. He was experiencing an adrenaline rush, and in that state, as the police well know, would be reacting with a force greater than he normally would. Had this been before the use of non-lethal stunners, tazers, and other tools available to law enforcement now, he would have been billy clubbed and had more severe physical force used against him, most likely causing greater physical injury to himself, and possibly to the offices.
This guy went into the event with the INTENT of creating a scene, and trying to get himself arrested to play into his own agenda on his website and support his little paranoid agendas.
Bottom line, don't resist the police, follow their orders, and then afterwards you have the means to protest the police actions.