“I was at the Kerry speech today, sitting 2 rows away from all the action. I’ll let you know how it really went down.
The forum was going to be over at 2 pm, and Kerry spoke for so long that the Q and A portion had to be shortened. He only got through about 7 of the 50 people who were waiting to ask questions. While the final question was being read, some douchebag ran down the aisle, grabbed the mic from the other side of the room, interrupted the kid who was talking, and started yelling at Kerry, demanding that his questions be heard. He started ranting about how Kerry talks in circles or something, and everyone was getting annoyed. The cops are all over him in no time and try to escort him out, but he starts yelling and resisting. Kerry insists that they let him stay and even agrees to answer his question.
After the interrupted guy’s question was answered, Kerry keeps his promise and lets the angry guy talk. This is the point where people started taking their cameras and phones out. All the videos floating around youtube start around here. You can see in the videos that his questioning gets kind of inappropriate, so somebody cut his mic. Instead of shutting up, he starts yelling and making an even bigger scene. He struggled all the way up the aisle, and started violently trying to free himself. They threatened to taze him and he wouldnt stop fighting, so he got tazed. They only had to arrest him because he was causing a disruption and wouldn’t leave peacefully. He wasn’t being silenced for asking tough questions, trust me.
It’s a shame that they had to taze the guy, but he had a chance to calm down and didn’t take it. He probably didn’t pose a physical threat to anybody in the room, but someone can’t just hijack the floor of a forum like that and expect not to get kicked out. This wasn’t some poor guy who was brutalized for trying to ask some tough questions. He’s just an obnoxious guy who had a fit when there wasn’t time for his questions and refused to be calm even when he was given the chance to speak. He was looking for trouble, and everyone applauded when he was forced to leave.”
UPDATE:
The source of this eyewitness account can be found here. I apologize for not posting this link earlier, I was unaware of its origin.
Back to AnimamRecro
Animam Recro 
September 18, 2007 at 11:42 pm
can you attribute this account to the witness name or source link?
this accounting sounds and feels totally credible and is quite believeable. i haven’t seen it any where else for that matter, and enjoyed finding it here. the lack of attribution is unsettling though.
i do appreciate and enjoy this blog.
john farwell
okc, ok
http://gigabyte-jones.livejournal.com
September 19, 2007 at 1:50 am
It’s a shame he “had to be tazed”? Okay, even if the eye witness account (sans attribution) is basically correct in describing the order of events, I find this statement pretty ridiculous. He was already on the ground with several cops on his back. At that point, seems pretty easy to cuff him. But no, instead they “had to taze him.”
I fail also to see how being a douchebag and an annoyance makes it “okay” for him to have been tazed. If being an annoying douchebag is now the new minimum thresh-hold required for the public (or college kids, anyway) to decide someone deserves a tazing, then I’ve got some pretty grave concerns about the mental state of the kids today.
Fine, this kid is misguided or not intelligent, as I’ve heard it said. That doesn’t excuse the action taken anymore than Rodney King’s police record excuses what those cops did to him all those years ago.
This is the second such tazing in a public educational institution this year. The other was the tazing of a middle school kid:
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/158815/tazing_when_not_needed.html
You gotta start to wonder about whether this is becoming a go-to procedure and where it ends.
http://media.www.thefamuanonline.com/media/storage/paper319/news/2005/04/22/News/Panel.Faces.Heat.Over.Tazing.Incident-934473.shtml
September 19, 2007 at 3:00 am
“He struggled all the way up the aisle, and started violently trying to free himself. They threatened to taze him and he wouldnt stop fighting, so he got tazed”
Your account would be more believable if you didn’t actually contradict all the video accounts with this comment.
September 19, 2007 at 3:01 am
Yeah, sure, this guy was acting obnoxiously, but whatever you say, if the police could get him to the door, they could get him out of the door and out of the auditorium. Instead, they chose to knock him to the ground and inflict pain on him.
OK, he was obnoxious. But couldn’t he have been just dragged outside? Why hurt someone physically just for being obnoxious? It was clearly not necessary, unless the intention was to punnish the kid then and there. That’s thuggery, not law and order.
September 19, 2007 at 3:59 am
i was also a witness to the incident at the john kerry town forum. This eye witness account is completely accurate. The videos being shown on tv do not accurately portray what occurred…several events have been left out.
September 19, 2007 at 4:13 am
[…] check out an eyewitness account of the event, which counters some of the points I made in this […]
September 19, 2007 at 5:24 am
This event is completely inexcusable. It may be that Meyer “started violently trying to free himself,” but that is very different from attacking a police officer or another person. Of course it would have been better for him and everyone else if he had just walked out, but he was not physically aggressive, and even by the worst accounts was just trying to free himself. What people are failing to realize is that tazers have been attributed to deaths across the country. I have been working with a severely mentally ill population and it is entirely possible, when you have received training, to restrain a man of his size when he is resisting. There is no reason to inflict intense pain, which can be fatal, when there are other solutions available. I feel that many people have an emotional reaction that the officers should shut him up quickly and quietly (for being disrespectful and annoying), but that is not the just solution. It might have been loud and uncomfortable to wrestle on handcuffs, but officers would not be on CNN and that student would certainly be facing his charges appropriately had they acted in that fashion.
September 19, 2007 at 6:29 am
Okay, Anonymous. You’d have a whole lot more credibility if you weren’t, you know, anonymous. You say there’s missing footage not being shown? Fine, I’m all ears. What’s missing? I’m curious to know.
And does whatever’s missing in the footage warrant using a means of subduing people that has actually killed?
Please, let us know: what’s missing in the footage? Where in the auditorium were you when this all went down? How clear was your view? Do you believe the actions taken were justified and, if so, why? Articulate it.
And finally, who are you? Or if you, like the other anonymous person, doesn’t wanna say, I personally would appreciate knowing why you’d rather be anonymous.
September 19, 2007 at 7:52 am
Store this incident in your little memory bank.
One of the most notable liberals from the left wing was the speaker.
Presumably, the audience was probably
composed of students of the same persuasion.
I would like to know the “persuasion” of the “eye” wittness account. I heard a different story from a supposed “objective” eye wittness.
So yes, the “eye” witness’ may have been wearing shaded glasses.
Now take note of the criticisms and from what quarters they come.
We can only hope to see a similar situation – but in reverse i.e.
A Speaker, one of the most notable conservatives from the right wing at a
University forum and see what happens.
Lets make it a little more aggressive –
No questions to be delivered by the leftist liberal student, but only a LARGE PIE delivered into the face of the conservative speaker, obvious intention is to disrupt and cause confusion.
First off do you think it will make the news. Maybe a little, but it sure wouldn’t be the lead story, plastered all over the networks.
Well it did happen, but few probably heard about it. It happened at a liberal university (NE) with a very notable conservative and a not so well known liberal who was debating.
The liberal student that threw the pie at Ann Coulter was not arrested, and is unknown, as far as I know. No arrest no vilification – nothing. But that is ok – it was a conservative who was targeted – in a liberal school, with a liberal audience.
If someone has information to the contrary, please correct me, thanks.
Again, I am not trying to justify this young man, but just pointing out – how things are handled differently, based on the environment it is done in, and whom it is done to and by whom it is done.
It seems like the liberal, leftist, seek to disrupt communication.
If you remember example of this type incidents, please recall it for me.
It seems like this student, was actually trying to get Kerry to respond.
If Kerry is not smart enough to handle a situation like this, I wonder what he what do in other similar situations, would he take control and not let a situation
completely degenerate. Oh well- –
September 19, 2007 at 9:04 am
This was indicative a dangerous trend in America, that of a country moving closer to fascism everyday. And when no one bothers to do anything about it, then things will only get worse.
He was obnoxious, but was he any more obnoxious than Bush, Cheney et al?
And look at the damage they have wrought.
This kid is harmless.
Brute and excessive force in America is a fact of life. There were 800–that’s right, 800–cops on the campus of Columbine High School the afternoon of the Dylan/Klebold killing.
That’s overkill.
September 19, 2007 at 1:16 pm
As a former NYPD I ask would you rather have him hit with a night stick a couple of times and let me state that is illegal to resist even an unlawful arrest..Let the civil suits begin
September 19, 2007 at 3:13 pm
Well ye anonymous eyewitnesses, perhaps you could explain one little detail. Usually when speakers come to a forum and take questions from the audience it is etiquette to THANK THE SPEAKER for appearing and answering questions.
That is what Meyer did.
Are you implying that he only commenced to do so AFTER a long preamble for which no video exists?
That seems a priori highly unlikely.
Try again.
September 19, 2007 at 3:27 pm
The campus police crossed the line. Tasering one college student who is being held down by way more cops just doesn’t seem right or fair.
September 19, 2007 at 3:44 pm
‘Tasers should only be used as an alternative to lethal force, in very limited circumstances. They should certainly not be used to subdue an unarmed, non-violent protestor, as was clearly the case during that meeting.’
‘Would people sit idly by and allow a police officer to baton a non-violent student a protest in the same way many did with the use of the Taser in this incident? This is a clear indicator of how acceptable the Taser has become in the USA.’
Amnesty International UK
September 19, 2007 at 3:56 pm
Tazers can be lethal? Did you see what type of tazer they used? They used a hand tazer, not a tazer gun. Tazer guns distribute thousands of volts of electricity and can totally incapacitate a person. Meyer was quite obviously not incapacitated. He was still verbally communicating during and directly after the tazering. When they stood him up he was still able to function his legs. They used a very low voltage tazer designed to get someone’s attention, not to incapacitate him.
Meyer resisted arrest and would not comply with the requests of the officers. The officers needed to get control of the situation in the shortest means possible and they accomplished just that. Free Speech comes with responsibility. This adolescent behavoir needed to be controlled and I applaud the campus security for doing their job.
September 19, 2007 at 4:01 pm
There is absolutely no reason this poor guy had to be tazed. Maybe he did cause a scene, but everyone is entitled to freedom of speech. They denied him this right. It even sounds like John Kerry was going to grant him “the floor” to speak.
If Kerry was alright with this guy speaking, then why should the cops even care?
If I were Andrew Meyer, I would get my lawyers ready to file a lawsuit against each of those cops and the police department.
September 19, 2007 at 4:09 pm
The american police forces seem to have a hard on for a taser.. Just ridiculous they couldn’t cuff a skinny guy like that!
This kid is going to have a legitimate lawsuit for excessive use of force.
September 19, 2007 at 4:11 pm
This is a different account than what any of the videos show, so thank you for enlightening us. However, nobody should be silenced for asking “tough questions.”
The tasering was completely unacceptable. Even for the most annoying of people.
September 19, 2007 at 4:14 pm
And here we see demonstrated, peoples, how much the citizenry of this country has come to disrespect laws and the enforcement of them. I don’t stinking care what’s fair and what’s not fair, folks, the dude was breaking the law by creating a disturbance of the peace and what not, therefore, he goes down. As a cop, you don’t say: I’m not going to shoot the gang member waving a gun at me because I have backup, so therefore it’s not fair, you just shoot. When someone is being confrontational and causing a public disturbance, you have to shut him up, and if it involves shocking him with a minor amount of electricity, so be it.
September 19, 2007 at 4:19 pm
It’s also too bad he didn’t ask his questions in a more calm and rational way, because I would have liked to hear the answers–
September 19, 2007 at 4:22 pm
Kerry is a Skull and Bones member!
The guy asked him about it!
Visit http://www.infowars.com to find out more about this death cult Kerry and his cousin George Bush are involved with…
September 19, 2007 at 4:36 pm
I agree with this article. Too many people are trying to abuse the “police brutality” line. You cant just do whatever you want in a situation like that and say “freedom of speech”. There are certain ways to go about things. I hate it that it had to be that out of control. The guy didn’t have to go out kicking and yelling. Look at it from the police stand point. What were they supposed to do, let him stand there and say whatever he wanted to? I bet you he wasn’t even under arrest to start with. He is the one that got himself arrested by being so resistant. I think he should be punished, not the police.
September 19, 2007 at 4:50 pm
It all comes down to the moment they decided to arrest him. When he asked if Kerry belonged to Skull and Crossbones. Kerry had no problem with that question, but it was at that point that the woman cop put her hands on him to arrest. In this case the cop is presuming to judge over what is a legitimate question and what is not.
The police in this country are really getting out of hand.
September 19, 2007 at 4:53 pm
So if I think your comment is annoying and it’s in a public place, I guess I should just taze you… Come on! “Disturbing the Peace” as a crime is highly overused and misinterpreted. So next time I turn my guitar up too loud in my apartment and the police show up, I guess they should taze me too! Free tazings for everyone!
September 19, 2007 at 5:41 pm
-After watching the video and reading this account, I’m quite surprised that there were so many detractors to the opinion that this kid should have been shut up. People are attacking this account because it’s anonymous and blunt. That’s just ridiculous, its just the truth. And its refreshing after all the news articles out there suggesting the loss of freedom of speech just to bristle some hairs.
I think people like to argue just for the sake of arguing.
September 19, 2007 at 5:42 pm
My guess is, any court will be hard pressed to demonstrate under the first amendment, that a limitation of his freedom was necessary.
I admit he could have presented his comments and question without sounding as adamant, but that certainly is not a crime.
To have used unnecessary force was an abuse of power.
Two police officers were placed on leave while authorities investigate the incident. One issue being considered is whether the Tasers were used improperly.
When they have to investigate, when there is question and they have to ask, it usually means the Taser was used improperly.
(Refer to the comment I started with)
September 19, 2007 at 7:08 pm
The positive thing to come out of all this (besides fame and hopefully a juicy settlement for Meyer) is that people will now be more interested in the actual issues he brought up, not to mention Greg Palast’s (pron:ˈpalÉ™st) brilliant and terrifying book, Armed Madhouse — a must read for anybody who is even slightly concerned about the validity of our election process. Remember Stalin’s (in)famous utterance: “The people who cast the votes decide nothing. The people who count the votes decide everything.”
Wake up call!!!
September 19, 2007 at 9:18 pm
I might help if you had used the link from Daily Kos to source that post.
I found that post ignorant. Anyone who thinks it’s okay for the police to arrest someone who has not broken the law really doesn’t understand what the outrage is about. Being obnoxious is not a crime, and violence was unnecessary to defuse the situation. The cops should have stayed out of it.
(Anyone who thinks Kerry is from “the left wing” is already too far gone to understand that Kerry is actually right of center these days. Not the Fox News “center”, of course, but the real American center.)
September 19, 2007 at 9:31 pm
Are you saying that six police officers couldn’t control a guy armed only with a book (and it looked like a paperback)? I recently watched two police officers wrestle with a very belligerent and strong fellow who was also resisting arrest. They were forceful, but somehow, they managed to cuff him without hitting him with a night stick or Tasering him. Maybe they just train ’em differently around here.
September 19, 2007 at 9:53 pm
People assume that all Constitutional rights are absolute, but they are not. The government can regulate your speech at what’s called a public forum, or a limited public forum. They can regulate your speech as long as it is “content neutral”. How do they do this? By time, place and manner restrictions. Requiring you to wait in line to speak, limiting your speaking time, asking you to fill out a comment card, etc. These are acceptable regulations on free speech.
And if you violate those regulation you can be removed from the forum.
If the above is correct, then this kid did violate the regulations, they still allowed him to speak and then cut him off. It seems that they have the authority to do this. While I am not a constitutional lawyer, I am a practicing criminal lawyer in Florida.
Once leo attempted to remove him, he resisted. While I don’t think it raised to the level of attempting to incite a riot (which is a hard charge to prove) I believe from what I have read and seen (I wasn’t there, neither were most of us) they had the authority to remove him and once he started to resist they had the authority to arrest him.
Even if you say he shouldn’t have been removed – lets get past that for a minute. No one has the right to violently resist the police, unless they are using deadly force on you. Once he started pulling and shoving, he committed a felony of resisting arrest with violence. If you listen to the tape carefully you will hear the female officer telling him to stop resisting or he will be tased. At that point and before, and after, the kid still resists. Leo has the authority to use tasers as non deadly force when a suspect uses force against them. It’s a lot better than a billy club.
I also think it’s interesting if you read the police reports that the kid immediately calmed down when cameras weren’t around. And then began again as soon as cameras were around again.
September 19, 2007 at 9:55 pm
Let me clarify – while I may not think what they did was the best thing, ie, using a taser in a crowded room with cameras rolling – I am saying that freedom of speech can be regulated and leo have the authority to use tasers.
September 19, 2007 at 10:19 pm
This is an interesting dilema that should not exist, to hook up wires and electrocute someone in order to get a confession is considered torture. Even the simulation of going to electrocute is considered a type of torture.
However elecrocution via tazer is acceptable for a means of subdueing an individual who created no act of violence? Why have we as a country permitted this?
September 19, 2007 at 11:01 pm
Actually there is a big difference between the amps in a taser and those used to kill or harm. A lot of people were concerned about tasers 50,000 volts; however, it’s amps that people need to be concerned about.
When tasers first come out in 2004-2005 there were series of grounps that looked into it found:
“The 50,000 volts of electricity released by the Taser affect both the sensory nervous system and motor nervous system, marking an improvement over its predecessors, Kehoe said. Stun guns made before 1999 affected only the sensory nervous system, he said, so people who were stunned would feel intense pain but would not be incapacitated and could continue to attack.
Though 50,000 volts may seem like a lot of electricity, Kehoe said, the current, which is only 0.0021 amperes — as opposed to a Christmas tree bulb’s one amp — renders the charge too weak to affect the central nervous system.”
Most of the deaths that have been linked to tasers are due to the suspect being on a controlled substance – usually cocaine.
I still think it’s a lot better than hitting someone over the head with a billy club, or worse, shooting someone.
September 19, 2007 at 11:58 pm
I think you would be pretty upset if you had 6 cops on you and you haven’t been given an explanation as to why you are being manhandled.
Cops have to inform you of why you are being detained, tased, or removed. It’s called Habeus Corpus.
September 20, 2007 at 12:16 am
WOW!! Although I find it DISGUSTING what happened to Andrew (and I CAN’T WAIT until he wins many, many bucks through the legal system — ha! take that!!), I find it distressing that more people have a “bully” mentality rather than a “Let’s talk this over” metality. . . This was a political QUESTION AND ANSWER!! What part of that is confusing?? He had a RIGHT to ask his questions!! But, at the same time, Senator Kerry had a right to refuse to answer. The end. Problem calmly solved!! All Sen. Kerry had to do was politely thank him for going to the “Q and A” and listening to him for two hours and giving up his time to listen to him, but that he wasn’t comfortable asnwering those particular questions. No big deal. If you choose not to vote for Kerry because he refused to answer some questions, then that is the chance Kerry has to take, but he should NOT have remained quiet while all of this was happening to Mr. Meyer!! Where is this country’s sense of discourse, decency and respect? WORDS were all that was necessary and it’s revolting that it came to the unwarranted violence that was video taped!! My respect for Sen. Kerry has dropped DRAMATICALLY for his decision to stand by as a silent SPECTATOR and not say or do a thing to “calm the situation down”. . . It would have been as simple as Kerry just opening his mouth, thanking him for his time, being respectful, SMILING and moving on to the next person. . . The end!! Why must arm muscle and weaponry be involved when this particular situation could have been disarmed with courtesy and BRAIN muscle?! No more bullies, please. . . let’s go back to our Kindergarten days of “respecting others and using OUR WORDS to communicate with people”!! What is our society coming to?? HONESTLY!!
September 20, 2007 at 12:28 am
Interesting stuff,
Why was he bothered at all? He was talking. Who decided that the Police needed to approach him at all? Kerry said he would answer the question. The police had NO REASON to bother him.
This is happening way to often in this country. It’s a huge problem. What do I tell my 9 year old kid? Keep your mouth shut or some dumb ass with a badge and a gun will shock you?
To protect and to serve? I know some cops and some are good friends but these folks went way way over the line. I’m in total disbelief that once again, the Media is pretending that there are two sides to this story. There is one side only. These cops should be fired for good. No Gun, No badge. This level of poor judgment can not be tolerated.
September 20, 2007 at 1:41 am
Bootpdx, I’m sure they could have told him outside, where it would not have been a disruption to the event. If he had peacefully complied, they would not have had to use force.
Ivan, if (keyword: if) this account is true, then I don’t see what the problem was with the police removing him. If he stole the microphone from another student, he’s already disrupting the event (not to mention even taking away the other student’s freedom of speech, since I see many posts about that). His removal and arrest wasn’t because of what he was saying, it was the manner in which he did it.
However, I do think the taser was taking it too far. I don’t see why they could not have arrested and removed him with that many cops without the use of a taser.
September 20, 2007 at 1:48 am
habeas corpus literally means “return the body”
it doesn’t mean “Cops have to inform you of why you are being detained, tased, or removed” It’s an appeal or motion defendant’s file when they beleive they are in jail or juvenile detention illegally.
September 20, 2007 at 4:11 am
The campus police were clearly on guard because of Senator Kerry’s presence. If the campus police were not at this event, students would have let this student finish his questions, Kerry would have answered and the other students could have used peer pressure to let him know his actions of cutting in line violated their social morey of fairness. This is clearly a case where the police escalated the situation. If this was a private venue, an escort out of the building for trespassing vould have been warranted, but this was an event open to the public. Anytime you are detained, you may inquire as to the reason. If you are being arrested, your Miranda Rights should be read to you. The fact that the police were physically removing this student from a public forum because an event personnel did not like the embarrassing content of this student’s questions is equal to your neighbor allowing his dog to attack your baby because his crying is annoying. Shame on the student for cutting in line, double shame on the event planner for not allowing this student to be heard and triple shame on the police for not being respectful to the students requests of the reason for his detainment.
September 20, 2007 at 9:59 am
Exactly the same happended around 1940 under Hitler. Its a shame that America is slowly but surly going the same way. Watching your country from the outside gets more and more terrifying. And its a shame as well, that Kerry had not the balls to step in there.
September 21, 2007 at 8:12 am
Maybe we should start wearing rubber suits. 😉
September 21, 2007 at 8:18 pm
Okay…
he should NOT have resisted arrest. But the cops didn’t need to lay a hand on him in the first place. This is what angered him so much. He’s asking a question (that had been approved), and all of a sudden, out of nowhere, the cops grab him.
September 22, 2007 at 1:42 am
Jeez louise.
I have to say that the only one here who i am on board with is oneofthree. Does anyone else not see this as an immature stunt by a spoiled kid?
Tom, please read up economic history before making comparisons of the US government to the Nazi Party. The Nazi’s were adamant about centralizing (almost everything) and were diametrically opposed to a free market model. Also, In Nazi Germany the SS would already be at the houses of anyone posting in this blog and arresting them with methods far more brutal than those faced by Meyer. In fact, this blog would probably not even exist.
Meyer’s right to free speech was NOT violated. He could have set up a website for free and got his message across… The first amendment does not guarantee the right to say anything anywhere. Private property for example. If someone is on my (fictional)lawn shouting at the top of his lungs I could justifiably tell him to leave and enforce this with the police if it needed to come to it.
Meyer wasn’t arrested for walking down the street and handing out pamphlets, he was arrested for violating the rules laid out by the forum and then whining (very loudly) about it. It wasn’t his show. He violated those terms as soon as he refused to give back the microphone when asked. The only thing that Meyer had a right to was to wait in line and ask a question under the same terms as everybody else. If he was really there to excercise that right, he should have been prepared with a concise question to ask. If he had done all of those he would have had a legitimate case.
September 22, 2007 at 1:54 am
Thoughts on Liberty & Freedom & Truth & Hope
Liberty is a wonderful thing, it is in fact a license. One’s Liberty,
however, is sometimes determined by a certian sect or group of elites.
They will defend their “Liberty” to oppress. They believe their position
gives them “license” to do so. In the War between the States both sides were
fighting for” Liberty.” As this conflict demonstrated, “Liberty” can be
interpeted in many ways.
Freedom is a wonderful thing, it is in fact Anarchy. Freedom can be
expressed in any way without limit or bond.Freedom accepts no master nor
tolerates restraint. Freedom conforms to no one Individual or group. Freedom
is as Individual as it gets. Like Liberty, Freedom can have its drawbacks.
It is in fact Liberty which keeps Freedom in check. One’s Individual Freedom
has a Natural border where it meets another’s Liberty. This is the most
important check and balance in our society. The balance between these two
forces propels us forward.
Truth is a wonderful thing, it is in fact immutable. Truth can be a
dangerous thing, a shock to the system. Truth must be faced maturely, mixed
with Reason. Without Truth as the basis for Liberty and Freedom, the balance
is destroyed. Truth must be demanded and disseminated, for Reason dictates
that Truth only emerges when Liberty and Freedom are in balance.
Hope is a marvolous thing, it is in fact all on which we base the Future.
Reason demands that without Liberty & Freedom & Truth, there is little basis
for Hope.
Yet we have Hope. We shall Hope. We must Hope. Hope is a task master. Hope
demands Action. If you Dare Hope you Must Act. You Must Act with Liberty,
You must Act with Freedom. You must Act with Truth. You must Act with
Reason. You must Act with Hope. But You must ACT.
Andrew Fletcher said ” Let me write the Songs of a Nation, I don’t Care who
writes the Laws.”
Sing America! Sing!
Sing for Liberty!
Sing for Truth!
Sing for Freedom!
Join the Youth!
Hope for America is Hope for us all!
Join the Revelution!
Vote for Ron Paul!!
September 22, 2007 at 5:29 pm
Has it occurred to anyone that ‘the poor douche bag’ went in there with the aim of being arrested and silenced? His pleas of ‘help’, ‘don’t taze me’ and especially ‘is anyone watching this’ leave me thinking that he went there to prove a point and when Kerry proved to be an understanding opponent rather than a dismissive or aggressive one, ‘the douche bag’ decided to take it all the way. Do any of you believe that he would have just left of his own accord?
Sure, why taze him, but that was a mistake in judgment rather than outright police brutality.
It’s funny how much outrage there is about things so insignificant.
September 22, 2007 at 6:57 pm
I perceive things differently on this one.
The student obviously had an agenda going into the talk. In my opinion it was to question Kerry on his inability to confront Bush on numerous issues. We could assume that his logic may be fueled by the fact that Bush and Kerry were members of the same secret society.
I seriously call into question the belief that Andrew Meyer went into this speech to pull off a stunt. He’s obviously informed about the issue and it’s apparent that he’s passionate about it. Very superficial and perhaps unfounded psychoanalyzing would reveal a student who has a background in conspiracy theories and is worried about the decline of democracy in America (listen to his questions). When the cops grabbed him it may have been confirmation of his worldview. That is probably why he screamed “is anyone watching this”. “This” being proof of what is in his mind unjust action by the police, which I personally maintain to be accurate.
Many people, especially the incredibly enlightened individuals in mass media are telling us that this was a stunt to gain publicity. To believe this you must ignore all the facts that point otherwise.
I am highly speculative of the idea that his arrest was premeditated. Although it suits his agenda, to believe that it was intentional on his part is to give Andrew Meyer more credit than he deserves.
Civil disobedience is an intriguing notion supported by Martin Luther King and Ghandi among others. Could Andrew’s action be considered as such?
September 22, 2007 at 7:34 pm
Somehow Carrie Gilbert (post 35) has come to the misunderstanding that John Kerry just stood there as a quiet spectator and did nothing to calm the situation. It can be heard on several of the videos that he did repeatedly say that he will answer the questions and that he can handle the situation. The eyewittness report posted here even states that “Kerry insists that they let him stay and even agrees to answer his question.” Indeed, he did answer the questions after the questioner had been removed from the room. Likewise there has been some misunderstanding as to how close Kerry was to the scuffle. One noted radio talk show host (who has linked this site to hers) repeatedly has said incorrectly that Kerry just looked on as the scuffle took place just six rows in front of him. She has also incorrectly accused Kerry as changing his posted story to say that the scuffle took place at the back of the room. The tasering did take place at the back of the room, alongside and slightly behind the platform where the official camera on a tripod was placed. Perhaps she has misunderstood the eyewitness account statement that he was two rows away to mean Kerry was two rows away. No, it was the writer of the eyewitness account that was two rows away. When it was said “He struggled all the way up the aisle,” “Up” meant the direction toward the back of the auditorium, not towards the stage.
September 24, 2007 at 1:27 am
The word freedom was invented because some powered people can decide about how free less powered people are allowed to be.
This word would have no purpose in our dictionnary if everybody would be equal.
It was my distinct opinion that freedom of speech is etched in the constitution. And that that freedom would be respected, above all in the land of freedom which is America.
This is a good example of how NAZI germany dealt with people who had different opinions.
The police brutality here is way out of line and serious overkill. Like 7 (armed) cops vs 1 (unarmed) guy.
It was clear that the cop who tazed, wanted to experience how it felt to taze someone, for the kick. It was absolutely unnecessary.
The overkill situation probably had to do with the presence of Kerry and it is possible those cops were fishing for a promotion for having ‘dealt with the unruly questioner’. Politicians don’t do their dirty work themselves, not when they go to war, with another nation and as you can see, not if they don’t want to answer some ‘painful’ questions.
The reaction of the people there, doing nothing against that ‘act of the law’ reflects that they are all inside the matrix anyway, and happy in their bliss.
These cops, and I mean, all of them there, should stand trial for police brutality, and thrown in jail or enjoy a taze-therapy in some remote cop-correction facility.
God Bless America.
September 24, 2007 at 4:34 am
I agree with Mark and oneofthree on the basis that Andrew did go over the line in attempting to state his case and should have regarded the etiquette of the forum. I read that he is a journalism major with a website. He also brought his book with him, so he had an agenda (I do think it’s good to have your sources, though). He wanted to create attention to his cause.
Although I agree with what he was trying to say, I think he was disrespectful to his peers and Kerry. I have always read that Kerry will not answer or will talk in circles in answering questions related to Skull and Bones. Here we see he did offer to answer the question. We don’t know how straight that answer would have been, though.
The police had no need to use this device on a single unarmed student. There was no threat of physical harm, even if he was causing a problem. They could have taken him outside. I thought it was a good point made that you cannot resist arrest even if it is unlawful.
On a side note, please consider Ron Paul for president. He’s the only candidate not sponsored by the corporations, and he wants to uphold the constitution. Did you know that an executive order has been passed that allows anyone to have his home searched or his person taken without a warrant? I don’t care whether your liberal or conservative: That is against what we believe. Why wasn’t this issue on the news, and why did we not vote on it? I’m becoming convinced that so much of the news is a smokescreen. It is important for us to defend our rights.
September 24, 2007 at 4:38 am
I’m also learning to be wary of any order that is made in the name of freedom. I figure freedom speaks for itself and doesn’t need to be explicitly called as such.
September 25, 2007 at 1:31 am
[…] Here is an interesting take “I was at the Kerry speech today, sitting 2 rows away from all the action. I’ll let you know how it really went down. Eyewitness Account of Taser Incident at Kerry Speech « Animam Recro […]
September 25, 2007 at 5:19 pm
he did not deserve to be tazered, those think he did are obviously red necks.