This is what it feels like to be a ‘citizen’.
Excuse me while I vomit.

Posted by: ‘citizen’ | Sep 18 2007 16:33 utc | 3

we are as jack henry abbot so indelicately put it becoming ghosts of the civil dead
the young man is clearly unbalanced & the very last thing that is required is force. on the contrary – in this situation – & i am confronted often enough with these sorts of circumstances in my work – great gentleness is required
i was taught from the womb almost that tenderness was a force & if used properly & wisely – it can transform many many volatile situations
i speak a lot here of crudeness & vulgarity & perhaps empires & power were always so – but inour time there seems to be something so solidly sordid – you want to wash yourself down in watching information or reveiwing the facts
& what happened to this poor lad was that instead of someone knowingly offering their hand – they offered instead the go! go!go! psychopathology that is serving blackwater so well in iraq
& they it is essential not to be melodramatic – episode like this always have the character of good german/good taste hanging over it
it is not an accident that three figures of great force & potence were in essence men of great gentleness, proved gentleness – ernesto che guevara, uncle ho chi minh & nelson mandela. che really listen to people & all the historical evidence shows that, uncle ho was concerned about the smallest things & in his poetry we witness what is a possible humanity & the courageous & caring mandela washing the shit of his coprisoners
power exercised as it is in this video constitutes the cultural aberration & death fixation of the u s empire

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Sep 18 2007 16:45 utc | 5

If they win in the U.S. again today – and Mukasey’s nomination is one more step in that victory – we are well and truly screwed.
What makes you think they have not already won?

Posted by: Bea | Sep 18 2007 17:08 utc | 7

NYTimes Science today picks up report from Annals of Emergency Medicine of the “case of officer in North Carolina who volunteered to be shocked at a training class [for tasers]. The officer ended up in the emergency room with two spinal fractures.

The fractures were caused by intense muscle contractions, the report said.
Nine weeks later, the officer reported considerable continuing pain and told doctors that he had been able to return to work just part-time and at a desk job.
Tasers are used by more than 11,000 law-enforcement agencies in the United States, and they are widely considered safer than other tools used by police officers, like pepper spray and nightsticks, the authors said.
“However,” they wrote, “conducted energy weapons are weapons and, like other weapons, are clearly capable of causing injuries.”

Posted by: small coke | Sep 18 2007 17:21 utc | 9

Another video of the incident by MSNBC. Kerry answering questions while the guy in the back gets tasered. Why didn’t he intervene … asshole

Posted by: b | Sep 18 2007 17:29 utc | 11

the young man is clearly unbalanced & the very last thing that is required is force.
Passionate and outspoken, yes — I thought those were desirable traits. But “unbalanced”? He only went ballistic once he was assaulted by the police without being informed of what he had done wrong.

Posted by: Pyrrho | Sep 18 2007 18:09 utc | 13

@Bea
As long as I do not say, I have lost, then they have not won.
I realize I may be evading my terms from above. You are right, in the terms that I spoke of above, TPB may already have won. However, I believe their main problem is the general one that haunts elites – that another faction might defeat them. Bloody Hillary! That is all we have, the ability to use their force and their competition with each other fo rour own preservation.
But the key is to never let them win in my mind. Why seek any battleground other than my own? What is chilling, as you noted on the OT thread I see, is that all the others in the room were already knuckled under to the inevitability of police as the the law.
Of ocurse, Orwell wrote to remind us that although our own interior may be our place of strength, it is not likely indomitable. But enough darkness for one day.

Posted by: ‘citizen’ | Sep 18 2007 18:26 utc | 15

Unfortunately, this is the kind of police behavior that sends some of us in the crowd ballistic, as well. Then we get arrested…. How DARE they stand up to the POLICE?!!!!

Posted by: Jake | Sep 18 2007 18:28 utc | 17

and what about all the other cowards in the room. this turns my stomach

Posted by: annie | Sep 18 2007 18:35 utc | 19

The conformity and complicity of the audience is appalling
my point exactly, i was reading the thread, watching #11, didn’t see the last couple comments. john kerry? so what. its the whole damn room that is wrong w/america

Posted by: annie | Sep 18 2007 18:39 utc | 21

i am offended by the brutality
i am also shocked that a people, any people could live – with the reality & its expression in film – of the victims of katrina
of bloated black bodies floating on the water was for me completely insupportable. the brutality that permits a people to live with that & not create an insurrection – is completely beyond me
we know as a fact that minorities & the marginalised in america are tasered every day . we know that
that the state & its servants use force against the poor as a matter of course
it has a long history. soldiers walked on washington after world war 1 to demand the housing they were promised. they were murdered & battered. the people lived with that
it is a truth that when you have lived with brutality so long you become brutal
joseph conrad’s jungle was in fact, western civilisation

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Sep 18 2007 18:57 utc | 23

Sorry SmallCoke, didn’t see that you’d already linked to the NYT.
@22, The people in the room aren’t unaware. They have decided to ignore the fact that someone is being deprived of his rights and tortured in front of their eyes. I was going to say that they also rejected the notion that the audience significantly outnumbered the cops and so could have done something about it, but that sort of thing doesn’t happen any more, does it?

Posted by: Tantalus | Sep 18 2007 19:15 utc | 25

Why was Andrew Meyer afraid?
a sample of what happens to justice here

Reaction to the killing of Taylor was much more widespread because his hands were handcuffed behind his back when a policeman fired 11 shots into his vital organs. People previously silent spoke out. By March 1, there had been 25 downtown demonstrations. Weekly Sunday vigils sometimes drew 200 people, large for Louisville. Most participants were young African American, but a growing number of whites also came. The Alliance was catalyst for a new white ministers group calling for basic change. The recognized coalition of African American ministers, many conservative, took a stand.
Anger intensified February 24, 2003, when a grand jury-following the prosecutor’s recommendation-declined to indict Taylor’s killer. Jurors apparently believed the policeman’s story that he feared for his life because Taylor, although handcuffed, still held a box-cutter in one hand.

He knows we’re selling each other out here.
2+2=5

Posted by: ‘citizen’ | Sep 18 2007 19:38 utc | 27

John Kerry is a coward. Like the movie The Dead Zone…. the politician holds up the baby to protect himself from the assasin. Kerry could have had a shining moment by telling the security to allow this student to speak freely. Instead he let it happen. He did not care. Nor did the cowards in the rest of the room. Is this what America is coming too? Are we all sheep unwilling to speak our minds about a government out of control?

Posted by: lincoln | Sep 18 2007 19:48 utc | 29

He is perhaps “unbalanced” in the sense of being emotional and somewhat overwrought, but not in the sense of being mentally awry or less than sane. His unbalance is due, no doubt, to his sense that the police are monitoring his every breath, just waiting to move in and make their move. Why they did that, I have no idea.
Has anyone seen any information about what prompted the police to behave so atrociously? What did they think they were “protecting”? Or were they merely making an example of a readily available, easily exploitable victim — to send a broad message out to Student America to “cease and desist or else?” Honestly, a few videos like this spread like wildfire over the internet and you certainly could shut down a lot of kids from speaking up. Is this kid suing?

Posted by: Bea | Sep 18 2007 21:08 utc | 31

Apparently Andrew Meyer i salso a journalist, and the police followed him because they already knew the sorts of questions he would ask.
Darker and darker.
‘citizen’
(formerly citizen)

Posted by: ‘citizen’ | Sep 18 2007 22:26 utc | 33

Well. Romney thinks it’s funny.

Posted by: beq | Sep 18 2007 22:34 utc | 35

one woman

Posted by: small coke | Sep 18 2007 23:19 utc | 37

After looking at the vids and feeling the same outrage as everyone else I wondered “what is here that is new or surprising?”
As I’m sure many other MoA habitues can attest getting bashed batoned, tasered or shot at when engaged in public political discourse is no new thing, it pretty much goes with the territory. So that isn’t new but when I have received the order of the long baton (scroll down @75%) or cattle prod it has usually occurred away from the public eye.
Not always – there have been notable exceptions but never in a situation where a politician could be embarassed. And not where there is a possibility that solidarity might rear up and inspire resistance or even payback. So that’s new tho hardly surprising. As the cultural impetus for citizens to become sociopathic in their regard to other citizens takes hold, we can’t be surprised that the oppression arm of the political elite would choose to express their increased power publicly. Just as we cannot be surprised that apart from one person, most present chose to either ignore the scene or regard it with the same aspect coliseum vistors adopted a couple of thousand years back.
What about John Kerry? Was there anything new or surprising in his actions? Well there was – tho not what you’d think.
Kerry’s behaviour answered the student’s questions far more directly and elequently than people have come to expect from a Tweedle St politician. No he didn’t query the 2000 or 2004 result and yes he belongs to Skull and Bones. That’s because he isn’t one of us. Kerry sees himself as a member of amerika’s ruling elite, well above any petty concerns of the hoi polloi. This wasn’t cowardice, although I’m sure the man probably is a coward, it was indifference. If there was any emotion at all about John Kerry, it would have been the petulance of unrequited ambition. Almost “there’s one of the bastards who made my dream confront reality.”
That said, and acknowledging the suffering that the bloke has beeen put through, we should see this horror as a ‘plus’. Each incident like this makes it harder for those who still choose to support the left hand side of Tweedle St, to justify their blind tribal loyalty. Sure they applauded when the guy was initially carted off – but scenes like that are bad. The diehard partisans know that deep down and eventually being the follow the leader types they are, they will follow everyone else out of the demopublican party.

Posted by: Debs is dead | Sep 19 2007 0:40 utc | 39

Pretty much just “ditto” what everyone has already said. I wonder about the people in that room – I have not read anything about the setting, but infer that Kerry was speaking to students at a university in Florida. In general I would just expect students at state universities who are interested enough in current affairs to go hear someone like Kerry speak to be a lot more active and to have expressed concern about the guy’s civil rights and the overkill response. Especially since it could be any one of them on the receiving end next time. Unless they never plan to think for themselves or question authority, but then, why were they there in the first place? Just seems strange to me.
(Hi Beq!)

Posted by: Maxcrat | Sep 19 2007 1:16 utc | 41

A white person came up to the bus stop asking for bus fare, complaining that they had all their ID’s stolen, yada, yada.
Seemed like an average person, down on their luck, everyone
pitched in. Hey, it’s a free country, freedom to speak and
loiter on public property. Why can’t we all just get along.
Bus came, the white person got a cell phone call, and the entire bus sat and waited at rush hour while this person spat out the most bizarrely soto voce howling, saying it
wasn’t their fault that X ended up in jail, f–k off, etc.
The bus driver politely asked the person to move it along,
to which the white person kicked the door, shouted f–k
you, I’ll take another bus where they treat people better!
Everyone still waiting started staring hard at the ground.
As soon as the bus left, the white person went through a
second complete change of personality, shrieking where’s
my bus, and demanding of everyone to know what time it was.
Yeah, hold the taser, let’s use chocolates and rose petals.
Everyone knows that works best on insane megalomaniacs.
If you didn’t live through post-Viet Nam on the streets,
then you have no idea the ‘s–t’s about to go down, man’.
Don’t trust no smackhead and don’t trust no crackhead.
Most of all, don’t trust no proselytizing crackerhead.
Yo’ mama.

Posted by: Yo Mama | Sep 19 2007 3:40 utc | 43

And by the way, that yellow book Andrew Meyer is waving around is not the bible but a copy of Greg Plast’s Armed Madhouse.

Posted by: anna missed | Sep 19 2007 5:31 utc | 45

Been thinking about this for a day now and am well and truly disgusted by all sides.
To begin, the guy at the mike was obviously trying to make a scene and was hoping to get arrested to make his point. Mission accomplished.
Secondly, the overzealous polizei were obviously more than happy to be manipulated into showing their authoritarian colors… and you can bet that they were also aware that the cameras were rolling which is why they limited themselves to some rough manhandling and some spiffy tazering action. Mission also accomplished.
John Kerry stood stammering impotently, clearly demonstrating that he has no leadership skills in his body. In 2004, against my better judgement, I was persuaded to vote for Kerry after being lectured that ANYONE was better than Bush and voting for a third party would be tantamount to voting Republican. It won’t happen again. My only question for Senator Drone (after waiting my turn to ask it) would be: “After watching your disregard for this citizen’s welfare, why should other citizens care about your future answers to anything?” Mission crawling away snivelling.
The crowd were mostly docile and didn’t escalate this into a Kent State by assaulting the police… instead, they kept the cameras rolling and posted it posthaste on YouTube and the local networks for the world to see. Mission very, very much accomplished.
The Freepers needed to change their underwear after they spontaneously ejaculated into their shorts from watching the first fresh bit of fascist porn since Abu Ghraib. The left, conversely, get to engage in extremely well-rehearsed outrage and wear the phrase “police state” into the ground. No mission, no accomplishment.
This whole thing is an embarrassing sideshow. There was nothing spontaneous about any of it.

Posted by: Monolycus | Sep 19 2007 6:45 utc | 47

Monolykus . To begin, the guy at the mike was obviously trying to make a scene and was hoping to get arrested to make his point. Mission accomplished.
I don’t see that he wanted to get arrested.
Making a scene? Well – anybody who has taught at a university or other big classes knows such unavoidable folks and how to handle them. There are two easy ways to counter them. First: answer their questions, point them to sources, let them know they still have to learn, Second: make them the laughing stock of the people present, mock them.
I have three big issues here.
Why is security present at all? Police/security on campus is wrong in may ways. Within ten years of university teaching I have seen it twice. Once in an attempt to stop a student strike – ended in a desaster for the police and the ouster of the university chancler. The second time in arresting a thief. All other scenes, even quite livid once, were handled by staff and group pressure.
Why didn’t Kerry interfere? He was ready to answer the questions and he asked the police to stay off. When the police didn’t, he just answered the questions even though the questioneer was arrested. He should have gotton off the stage and tell the police to stand off. As a senator he has the cloud to do so. He didn’t even try.
The police action is totally unprofessional. One police should have talked to the guy, quietly and ask him for calm. If not followed, one police person should have directed the others. There was clearly no lead here. Six or more police jump on the guy without much result. There are easy ways for one trained person to overwhelm and arrest such a guy. But why do so at all. If he offended, wait outside and arrest him when he comes out.

Posted by: b | Sep 19 2007 12:03 utc | 49

@b (#49)
There might be some projection on my part which is based on years of experience in getting the other guy to throw the first punch in front of a witness. Unfortunately, Andrew Meyer also seems to have some experience in manipulation. He was far too ready with the “What did I do?” and other talking points, and his compadres were far too quick in posting (or selling) the footage they were taking. There is no doubt in my mind that this incident was at least partially planned. Hey, I’ve always advocated smarter, higher profile activism, so I’m not really complaining on that score.
I’m sure that they assumed the presence of the cameras and many witnesses would prevent Meyer from ending up on the receiving end of some of the more egregious acts of police brutality. They appear to have gambled correctly as the equally media-conscious campus rent-a-cops kept the taser discreetly out of sight of the cameras and quietly drive stunned him rather than pulling a full-blown Rodney King episode. It’s one thing to volunteer to be a martyr to get people talking about an issue, but most folk would like to leave that scene with as many teeth as they walked in with. Hence, the massive video coverage and over-the-top hysterics to draw attention.
But, as for your specific questions:
“Why is security present at all?”
Because Americans are hyper-paranoid and find boogiemen under their beds as a matter of course? They would have rent-a-cops at a basketball game. That the cops surrounded this single guy and were ready to pounce is also a no-brainer. Bush isn’t the only one who screens the guest lists for his soirees. That doesn’t surprise me in the least. What surprises me is the fact that this function featured a US Senator, which means that the US Secret Service was undoubtedly present. Where were they during all of this? The fact that Meyer got as far as a microphone without a swarm of blue suits and sunglasses detaining him raises red flags in my mind that this story isn’t even as legitimate as I’m suggesting. Is there something going on in the world right now for which even O.J. Simpson wouldn’t pose a significant distraction?
“Why didn’t Kerry interfere?”
Nutless or complicit… the perpetual question when dealing with representatives of the Democrat Party.
“If he offended, wait outside and arrest him when he comes out.”
You’re preaching to the choir. Either the authoritarian impulse took over and they had to make a show of being “in control” with “overwhelming force” (and don’t underestimate how well that plays to the closet fascists… they eat that shit up), or we’re back to this being one big damned distraction again and everything went exactly the way it was planned to go.
Nutless or complicit? Fuck-uppery or intentional media event? Twitchiness or prestidigitation? These are ALWAYS the questions we’re left with once the outrage subsides. Are they REALLY that stupid or is this just the public face of crafty manipulators?
I’ve got no answers for your questions. I’ve barely even got any shocked outrage left in me. You want disgust, anger or crippling depression, we can talk. I’ve got those in spades.

Posted by: Monolycus | Sep 19 2007 13:50 utc | 51

Or what Michael Hawkins said at #50.

Posted by: Monolycus | Sep 19 2007 14:06 utc | 53

I’ll be damned. I assumed US Senators automatically gained Secret Service protection. Apparently not.*
*This vague answer riddled with typos was the most info I could find in what might very well have been the most distasteful websearch I have ever performed.

Posted by: Monolycus | Sep 19 2007 14:32 utc | 55

b,
Six or more police jump on the guy without much result…
So much for the theory: more police = more security…

Posted by: ralphieboy | Sep 19 2007 14:54 utc | 57

from the #51 ‘some experience link..An officer, however, said in the police report that Meyer’s “demeanor completely changed once the cameras were not in sight” and that he was “laughing” and “lighthearted” on the way to jail.
not to poo poo on your theory but the supporting evidence seems rather weak. even it is was a prank i find it hard to believe after being tasered meyer could be so friendly.
there is a difference between posting practical jokes online, being a prankster to provocate w/anticipating this result or even aiming for it. it is also beside the point.
a Web site featuring several homemade videos. In one, he stands in a street with a sign that says “Harry Dies”
huh? this and licking a womans face. ok, maybe he did want to confront kerry. hell, i would like to blast him many times for rolling over like a dead dog after 04. nonetheless i can’t see how raising a stir and asking him these questions even in a disruptive manner could raise to the level of police hostility. maybe you anticipate this at a university Q&A but i sure don’t. this wasn’t some big rally, it didn’t look like more than 150 students in the room. i think he got waaaay more than he bargained for. the pushback for the justification seems very weak, indeed.
either way it served a public service to wake people up. if this is what we have to look forward to let’s have it out! why live in trepidation and wondering? are people going to accept this as normal in america as more and more police carry these things? what if the guy just thought he could raise a stink? who anticipates tasers? this is sick.

Posted by: annie | Sep 19 2007 17:31 utc | 59

@ Monolycus – Kerry pointed to the man and said “sir” before he asked his question. Then security grabbed him as soon as he asked about skull and bones upon which Kerry said “that’s alright let me answer his question”. Clearly Kerry didn’t see a big deal here. That was the end of Kerry’s interference and he actually joked about the arrest.
What was wrong with the question is what I want to know
We are talking about a 21-year-old student here, not an experienced political activist:
Hey, I’ve always advocated smarter, higher profile activism, so I’m not really complaining on that score.
Could have fooled me.

Posted by: Sam | Sep 20 2007 0:41 utc | 61

Kerry Taser Fiasco
More video clips at this link and a LOT of interesting commentary by many folks… interesting to see everyone’s impressions of how/what happened.

Posted by: Bea | Sep 20 2007 1:16 utc | 63

I’m with Monolycus: my perception was that the kid was intent on causing a scene, and maybe even getting arrested. Getting tasered may not have been part of his strategy, however.
I’m afraid I don’t see anything particularly exceptional about this, nothing that speaks to our Descent Into Fascism (which I believe is real). If you violently resist police, you invite an ass-kicking, and you forfeit any high ground upon which you might have stood. This is nothing new.
What sort of intervention are we asking for here? That the other students should have attacked the police?
Someone questioned why police were present. I would think that after Virginia Tech, it’s SOP.
I think the police response was over the top, but I’m taken aback by the outrage that’s been ginned up over this.

Posted by: montysano | Sep 20 2007 2:12 utc | 65

montysano:
I’m with Monolycus: my perception was that the kid was intent on causing a scene, and maybe even getting arrested.
For asking a question that millions of Americans want to hear the answer?

Posted by: Sam | Sep 20 2007 2:34 utc | 67

I will agree, however, with Bernhard’s title for the post. A real leader would have finessed the situation. Jesus, what a bumbling tool.

Posted by: montysano | Sep 20 2007 2:58 utc | 69

#65
…… but I’m taken aback by the outrage that’s been ginned up over this.
I think we should be heartened by the outrage, although the outrage itself could be more of a secondary by-product of the larger narrative played out in the whole incident. Riddled as the event is by apparent irony, posturing, and ulterior motives. All of which preform in microcosm our plight in the alice in wonderland world we seem to be living in. And so we have this small event where the larger truth is brought to bear in a crush of confusion, and nobody present – the speaker, the questioner, the audience, or the police have an idea in hell what to do. So instead of a simple or imaginative response initiated all the actors presume their given rolls: the protagonist throws a tantrum, the politician drones on, the audience remains an audience, and the police fulfill their authority mandate and call it what you may, proceed to torture the protagonist in full public disclosure to the audience who have dutifully assumed the cowed posture of sheep. Its what we have become, that makes it interesting if not outrageous.

Posted by: anna missed | Sep 20 2007 3:26 utc | 71

@Sam #61 (since you addressed me directly)
Kerry pointed to the man and said “sir” before he asked his question. Then security grabbed him as soon as he asked about skull and bones upon which Kerry said “that’s alright let me answer his question”.
Actually, the police pounced the second the microphone was cut after a small false start earlier (You will see Meyer say “Thank you very much” to a female cop who had started to usher him away and was waved back). The decision to usher him out was made before the Skull & Bones remark. That remark simply happened to be the last thing that was said before the microphone was cut. Let’s not make this situation even more cryptic.
Meyer did not want Kerry to answer him… the Senator started to, but Meyer couldn’t or wouldn’t drop the Dane Cook routine and cut him off with “No, I’m going to preface this. This man just spoke for two hours, I can’t have two minutes? I’m going to inform these people, then I’m going to ask the question. I have two more questions.”
The cops didn’t want Kerry to answer the question… they dutifully ignored him when he said “That’s all right, let me answer his question.”
The crowd apparently didn’t want Kerry to answer his question because I have seen no reports of subsequent guests asking “Yeah, you know, I’m curious about what that guy asked.”
So, my question to you (and don’t taze me using up so much time here), is “Who, precisely, are these ‘millions of Americans’ who want to hear the answer to this question?” This incident sparked debate about police policy and brutality, but small coke at #66 above is the only treatment of the question-in-question (which, for the sake of clarity, I will re-iterate: “Why did John Kerry concede so readily in 2004?” NOT “Something, something, Skull & Bones?”)
Clearly Kerry didn’t see a big deal here. That was the end of Kerry’s interference and he actually joked about the arrest.
Yeah, he did. What he said, precisely was “Whatever happened, the police had a reason, had made their decision that there was something they needed to do. Then it’s a law enforcement issue, not mine.”. Or, translated into English: “I don’t know. I don’t want to know. Trust the police. Somebody else’s problem.”
And this is why he is not the President of the United States.
Could have fooled me.
Yeah, well, tell me when I do something difficult.

Posted by: Monolycus | Sep 20 2007 4:21 utc | 73

If the question is why Kerry didn’t intervene, I ask, why didn’t the other students intervene?

Posted by: mimi | Sep 20 2007 5:02 utc | 75

My tuppenceworth:
1) Watching the video Sam posted at 61 (thanks Sam), I heard an audible (to me) intake of breath when those around heard the taser fire, so I think no one actually expected the guy to get tasered–they thought it was a “get that guy out of here” bouncer scene until then
2) The question isn’t, I don’t think, “Was this guy obnoxious?” It is: Is that acceptable police practice in the situation? Where acceptable means: “Yes, I think they were well within their rights to taser him, given the situation,” and unacceptable means, “If you don’t accept it, what could/should be done to make sure it doesn’t happen again?”
I’m wary of the impugning of the guy’s motives. If he was a self-obsessed idiot, does that make it okay to taser him? Is tasering okay/not okay based on the cause of a non-violent disruption?
One more point: The police officer loudly warns the guy on the floor that he will be tasered unless–and at that point the guy says words to the effect of “If you’ll just get off me I’ll walk out of here.”
And montysanto:
If you violently resist police, you invite an ass-kicking, and you forfeit any high ground upon which you might have stood. This is nothing new.
In your next post “violently resist” (I can see no violent resistance in any of the videos) becomes “thrashing about” (I didn’t see any thrashing about–he just didn’t want to be grabbed, and then I presume he was trying to avoid being cuffed) I think it is important to state clearly what happened (the difference between “violently resist” and “thrashing about” may, in law, be between a six month and a six year prison term?)
But…if one (a la the civil rights movement and Ghandi) is part of a programmed form of civil disobedience, then one doesn’t resist arrest as arrest is taken for granted. I’m not a U.S. resident (or citizen) so I don’t know how things are seen over there, but I have the sense (maybe wrong?) that once you’re arrested, small differences (e.g. from “thrashing about” to “violently resist”) can be blown up in court–and without access to good (=expensive?) lawyers, “arrest” = “punishment” of some kind, almost regardless of what actually happened.

Posted by: Argh | Sep 20 2007 10:56 utc | 77

Iraq, the Media and Shannon’s Dad
by Andrew Meyer Thu Sep 20, 2007 12:47
We hear it on the news almost everyday.
“At least 18 people were killed when two car bombs exploded in a busy market…”
It happens so frequently at this point that we have become desensitized to the message.
“Eleven more died when a minibus blew up in the Karrada district, while a suicide attack…”
Iraq is thousands of miles away from the United States. When a suicide bomber strikes in the middle of a crowded Baghdad street, leaving mayhem and carnage in his wake, America is largely unaffected. The only thing we hear in the States is the same tired story. Yeah, yeah, suicide bomber, 20-something dead, we’ve heard this one before. But in Baghdad, no one is “over” these attacks. Every new bombing is a deadly and frightening jolt, a senseless thunderbolt of destruction bringing the city to its knees and death to its inhabitants. Yet we in America are so far removed from Iraq, so jaded to the tales of violence in its streets, perhaps the only time we truly feel the human cost of the War in Iraq is when it hits close to home.
Shannon Timmann is a friend of mine. On January 7, 2006, her father was killed outside of Mosul, the biggest city in northern Iraq. He was in one of two Black Hawk helicopters that lost contact with base. “Human error in a storm,” they called it. They don’t know what happened. The helicopters just went down. They just crashed.
In exchange for the life of her husband, Shannon’s mom received this letter from the government:
“Dear Mrs. Timmann:
I extend my heartfelt condolences on the death of your husband. My thoughts and prayers are with you and your family. I am grateful for Robert’s service to our nation and to the Department of State. His dedication and bravery should serve as an example to us all.
Sincerely,
Condoleeza Rice.”
Nice words from our Secretary of State. But that is all they are. Words. Nothing can bring back Shannon’s father, nor the 3,566 other Americans who have died in Iraq to date.
I asked Shannon what she thought of the letter sent from our government. She said it was nice, but, “I mean ….but how many of those do they send a week? It’s just copy.”
Shannon had another letter, sent to her from the Iraqi chief of police. It was heartfelt, and genuinely saddened for the loss that Shannon and the world would feel from Bob’s death.
I watched a video that Bob Timmann filmed in Iraq before he died. He was a good man, and he believed that America was doing good work in Iraq. But what exactly are we accomplishing over there? America invaded Iraq on false pretenses, bogus intelligence that Saddam had WMDs and links to al-Qaeda.
When Cho Seung-Hui killed 32 people on the Virginia Tech campus, it was like a knee to the stomach of Americans across the country. It was the only story on the news for days, and everyone felt affected, whether they had family or friends at Virginia Tech or not.
If 32 Americans died in a bombing in Iraq today, would the media give the story the full-court press that Virginia Tech got? Would every kid on facebook change his or her picture to a ribbon with the message “We support our troops”?
The story would get lumped in with every other Iraq story, mentioned for a day, and then swept under the rug and forgotten.
Virginia Tech was a tragedy, but you can see that death toll almost everyday in Iraq. And for what? For democracy in Iraq? As if anyone in the U.S. government really cares about the Iraqi people? We are there to make money for Vice President Cheney’s corporation, Halliburton. We are there for oil. When insurgents or terrorists or whatever you want to call them blow something up in Iraq, and kill Americans, its not big news – for a reason. The powers that be do not want a true audit of the War in Iraq, and the cowed American media is more than happy to accommodate them. More than anything, the mainstream media is part of the problem. Now here’s a real tragedy – what it takes to get play in the mainstream media. Billions of dollars are missing from the department of defense, eight U.S. attorney generals were fired in an unprecedented political coup, and the biggest news stories of the year are Paris Hilton and Anna Nicole Smith.
It’s enough to make you think about what the real goal of the news is. Is it to keep the populace as educated and up-to-date on America and world affairs as possible, or is the news like any other business, with the chief goal to make money. The news is designed to keep viewers watching and sedated and not thinking bad thoughts about America, because that would be bad for the economy. Stories about a severely unbalanced budget are out, train wrecks like Paris and Anna are in. A train wreck may be senseless and pointless, but Americans sure do love to watch.
Is it “news” when a toddler accidentally drowns in Lake Michigan? It’s a tragedy, to be sure, but does it affect the world as much as, say, the decisions of the U.S. Federal Reserve, which drastically affects the value of money? The news is a crock of spit, mostly of the bull variety. People need to stop assaulting their brains with garbage, and start educating themselves with books.
If you truly want knowledge on the world around you, try picking up a book. The great thing about books? They have authors who have to do months of research, and actually know exactly what they are talking about. (Unless the author is Bill O’Reilly or Sean Hannity, in which case they can say whatever they want because their audience is a bunch of self-deluded ignoramuses who want to be told what they think they already know.)
Do you care about what’s going on in Iraq? Do you want to know the truth? Start reading. Just now, I typed “Iraq Book” into google and found this: Target Iraq: What the News Media Didn’t Tell You. Without even reading this book, I can all but guarantee you that this book has more information than every news story NBC, ABC, and CBS did in 2003, when invading Iraq was still up for debate.
“Deftly separating truth from propaganda, Target Iraq is a hard-hitting expose of the harsh realities and consequences of the pending war and the media’s failure to present the full spectrum of issues to the public.”
Why wasn’t this stuff on the news? It isn’t necessarily corporate malfeasance hiding facts. Maybe they just think critical reasoning and big words and knowledge will drive away viewers. Whatever the case, the war in Iraq is still going on, and most of America still doesn’t know why we went there in the first place, or what we’re doing now to get out.
Americans might not care, like when they hear about “just another bombing” in Baghdad, but I’ll bet you a Prius that if Iraq was negatively affecting the price of gas, people would start to give a damn. Maybe they’ll care next time around, when Bush starts talking about “consequences” for Iran. You know, one of two “Axis of Evil” countries that actually has nukes? The one that’s secretly funding the Hamas takeover of the Gaza Strip? Maybe Iran should start getting some attention. If only they were run by a millionaire debutante famous for nipple slips and a sex tape. Then they might even be news-worthy.
Related Link: http://www.theandrewmeyer.com

Posted by: drunk as a rule | Sep 20 2007 13:06 utc | 79

It is unbelievable that 4 police were incapable of handcuffing one student, leading me to believe that they used the taser because it was easier. I’m told by police friends in my area, most campus police are security people and cop wannabes who failed to make grade. Putting it frankly, they were rejected for various reasons. Many times the reason is they verbalized a gung-ho attitude and indicated in some way they wanted to throw their weight around. Heck, doesn’t that description fit the video pretty good? However, I’m curious about the man in plain clothes (off to the student’s right) standing with the police when the student began to speak at the mike. He seemed to be directing the campus police and motions toward the back of the auditorium to cut the student’s mike. When the police began walking toward the student, this guy appeared to call them back, then (covering his mouth)seemed to give the command to apprehend the student. Is this guy the security director? Seems the media should be questioning him, asking if he gave the cops the order to grab the student.

Posted by: Crusader | Sep 21 2007 14:14 utc | 81

Kerry should have jumped off that stage and taken charge.

Posted by: Anonymous | Sep 21 2007 23:16 utc | 83

paul craig roberts
Why Did Senator John Kerry Stand Idly By?

The question we should all ask is why did a United States Senator just stand there while Gestapo goons violated the constitutional rights of a student participating in a public event, brutalized him in full view of everyone, and then took him off to jail on phony charges?
Kerry’s meekness not only in the face of electoral fraud, not only in the face of Bush’s wars that are crimes under the Nuremberg standard, but also in the face of police goons trampling the constitutional rights of American citizens makes it completely clear that he was not fit to be president, and he is not fit to be a US senator.
Usually when police violate constitutional rights and commit acts of police brutality they do it when they believe no one is watching, not in front of a large audience. Clearly, the police have become more audacious in their abuse of rights and citizens. What explains the new fearlessness of police to violate rights and brutalize citizens without cause?
The answer is that police, most of whom have authoritarian personalities, have seen that constitutional rights are no longer protected. President Bush does not protect our constitutional rights. Neither does Vice President Cheney, nor the Attorney General, nor the US Congress. Just as Kerry allowed Meyer’s rights to be tasered out of him, Congress has enabled Bush to strip people, including American citizens, of constitutional protection and incarcerate them without presenting evidence.
How long before Kerry himself or some other senator will be dragged from his podium and tasered?
…..
The Bush Republicans with complicit Democrats have essentially brought government accountability to an end in the US.

Posted by: annie | Sep 21 2007 23:39 utc | 85

That reminds me of an interpretation I read of the Roman gladiator games. It was (according to this interpretation) a way of scaring the enemies, by sending the message that Romans were the kind of people who killed for fun at applauded it.

Posted by: a swedish kind of death | Sep 22 2007 2:20 utc | 87

small coke
For some time I’ve thought I noticed more humor of cruelty creeping into popular culture.
I quit watching television –nearly a decade ago now–, partly for that reason. For me it all started with the ‘America’s most wanted’ and ‘Cops’shows. And how they go out of their way to humiliate people on them. At the time I was dealing with my own personal issues of dehumanization, so these type ‘reality show were major red flags for me. Point is, if I noticed it back then, I can’t imagine what it must be like now.

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Sep 22 2007 12:38 utc | 89

cruelty as humor on tv goes back to at least candid camera…

Posted by: b real | Sep 22 2007 19:32 utc | 91