We Have Nothing But Fear Itself

[davidswanson]

By David Swanson

A Roseland, Indiana, city council member orders police to remove a fellow city council member. The police escort him out, shove him down on his face and pound his head. Onlookers either cheer, do nothing, joke, behave as if all were normal, or yell at others to let the police do their jobs. Not a single person protests. Only the one victim is hauled off in the police car. No one jumps in and shouts "Before this becomes Nazi Germany, arrest me too!"

A University of Florida student asks inconvenient questions of a U.S. senator. Police tackle him and shoot him with a taser. Onlookers, including the senator, either cheer, do nothing, joke, behave as if all were normal, or yell at others to let the police do their jobs. Not a single person seriously protests. Only the one victim is hauled off to jail. Fascist-friendly media outlets love the story because the senator is a Democrat, but they don't tell the story right. Progressive media outlets don't tell the story, even though they would tell it right, because the senator is a Democrat.

A television newscaster announces that planes were delayed in Boston's airport and tells us the name of a college student, shows us her picture, and tells us that we should blame her. He tells us to give the airport security guards credit for doing their jobs. They mistook her school project for a bomb. Again, we must let the "authorities" handle things.

We must pretend toothpaste and deodorant are weapons. We must pass through metal detectors. We must shout through bullet proof glass. We must refrain from hysterically laughing at police officers who solemnly believe every backpack or stroller is a threat to national security. We must speak freely in "free speech zones," except when we speak the wrong things freely and go to jail for it. We must be treated as criminals any time we attempt to get near members of our government.

We must accept genocide to support "our troops" doing their job. With very few exceptions, when those troops witness torture, rape, and murder, they either cheer, do nothing, joke, behave as if all were normal, or yell at others to let the mercenaries and the troops do their jobs. They're brave enough to fight and kill, but just as scared to challenge abuses of power as everyone back home.

Back home in the land of the free, the wrong sign or t-shirt can now land you in jail. The wrong bumper sticker at a peace rally can get you a ticket. The wrong words out of your mouth can now constitute any number of serious crimes. Police brutality is now considered part of keeping us safe. And everyone is too scared to notice that anything is changing. Those who notice, obviously believe nothing can be done or believe someone else will do it. If those abroad who resent the United States really did so for our freedoms, we'd be pretty safe now.

"If You See Something, Say Something."

Everyone needs to quit all the idiotic spying on neighbors and snooping around their bags to check for bombs. When you see someone assaulted by police, SAY SOMETHING. Do not let that moment pass.

One young woman approached the University of Florida police and screamed "Why are you doing that?" That's a start.

Sam Provance exposed some of the torture at Abu Ghraib. That's a start.

But most Americans appear paralyzed by fear. And that includes many Americans with the power to put a halt to our slide into martial law. We have an opposition political party afraid to oppose anything. We have grassroots groups that swear obedience to the opposition party, even as the useless unopposing party condemns the activists. Those with the power to end national crimes are afraid to do so. They fund the occupation of Iraq and promise never to impeach anyone, all as part of letting the "authorities" handle things. And citizens play along, pretending the Democrats have no power and, in addition, shouldn't use it. They base this on the theory that by not using any power you are most likely to acquire more power. This is thinking driven by fear. We have almost nothing but fear now driving our national decisions, and it is beginning to scare me.

But there are signs of courage. There is a growing and successful counter-recruitment movement. Expensive corporate movies are beginning to challenge the occupation of Iraq. And peace and impeachment activists are engaging in more and more civil disobedience. People are speaking and protesting and sitting-in in the face of nascent fascism. Even sometimes those in power are speaking truth to those with more power.

Congressman Dennis Kucinich alone in Congress is repeatedly articulating the indisputable but taboo fact that the Democratic leadership in Congress can end the occupation by announcing that it will not fund it anymore. Congresswoman Lynn Woolsey has suggested that pseudo peace activists targeting Republicans may not be enough, that it might be a good idea to challenge pro-war Democrats as well. The Congressional Black Caucus Monitor is holding "Lawn Jockey Awards" for the "four worst black members of Congress." And many progressives around the country are energetically opposing the presidential candidacy of Hillary Clinton. There are signs of life still in our body politic, but they are struggling against an incoming tide of fear and self-inflicted terrorism.

[proud2BlibKansan]

1. This authoritarian philosophy is downright scary

It reaches from local cops tasering people all the way to the Supreme Court thinking their role is to change federal laws. It is way past time for all of us to rise up and say "ENOUGH".

Thanks, David, for another great piece.

[flora123]

74. yeah

Yeah, I agree.
Thanks, too

[bos1]

106. Here is a video of someone standing up to police intimidation

and doing it well.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=z8fvVKgIrtc

[loudsue]

2. Boy! If that isn't the truth!! Everything in that post hits home with the TRUTH

about what this once great nation has come to be. We've become a fascist state, and there never was a revolution over it.

It's never too late to say "ENOUGH"!!!

:kick: & rec.

[snappyturtle]

3. I agree with your piece. However, I think there's another factor,

other than fear, keeping citizens from stepping up to the plate to protest mistreatment of individuals, to complain about searches, etc, and that is apathy. People want to be on their way to do their thing with as little encumbrance as possible...simply not get involved. Sad.

[EFerrari]

4. I wonder. I wonder if knowing your govenment kidnaps and tortures

doesn't subconsciously work on people.

[Canuckistanian]

27. Wow. That's something to ponder.

And after reading the account of Donald Vance, I'm more convinced that at least for government and contract workers, we'll never hear REAL stories of resistance within the system.

[superkia]

23. America needs a president that will give the people a voice.

Someone willing to stand up against the corruption and corporations influence in government. That could wake people up but we continue to elect the medias choice and that choice is the one that speaks for the corporations. Until we are willing to elect a different kind of position, one that doesn't fit in so well with the Washington crowd, we will always get the same results.

[dickbearton]

31. Superkia, you are exactly, right.

The greed of the corporations and their bought off politicians
are destroying America.

[Fly by night]

5. One suggestion: when you see an Army or National Guard recruitment promo when you go to the movies,

... shout out "Support the troops. Bring them home!"

I did this in Nashville and got applause from many members of the audience.

While I'm at it, let me recommend two movies:

"No End in Sight" is a scathing (and, amazingly, non-partisan) denunciation of the utter stupidity, cronyism and incompetence that caused us to FUBAR Iraq after the mission was "accomplished" (sic, and sick).

"In the Valley of Elah", starring Tommy Lee Jones, Charlize Theron and Susan Sarandon, is the most nuanced and intelligent film (on any subject) I have seen in a while. It also illustrates the single most important reason why we need to get our young men and women out of Iraq (and Afghanistan) as quickly as possible.

[cascadiance]

76. I just came back from seeing "Valley of Elah", and it scared the bejesus out of me...

Here's why...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=105&topic_id=6957159&mesg_id=6961666

[mmonk]

88. Want something disturbing to think about?

US Rep. Walter Jones (R) NC has written 6700 condolence letters to families that have lost a loved one in Iraq. What are the official counts? Who else has written such letters and how many have they written?

[fenriswolf]

6. k & r fo dennis

[Solly Mack]

7. K/R

[ooglymoogly]

8. Hey they are only tasering them loony, unholy Americans and carting them off to gulags

They are not bothering us righteous Murkins....so who cares....hey why are you tasering me....I'm a righteous Murkin!!!

[mmonk]

9. Very true David.

K&R

[Mad_Dem_X]

10. K&R

"If You See Something, Say Something." - I like that! As Americans, it is our right and our DUTY to speak out when we see wrongdoing. Otherwise, there is no difference between this country and Nazi Germany.

[madrchsod]

11. somethings never change----"for what it`s worth"

"...paranoia strikes deep
into your life it will creep
It starts when you're always afraid
You step out of line, the man come and take you away..."

i`m to old to be afraid anymore

[Ripley]

12. Great post. However,

I really don't believe it is all about "But most Americans appear paralyzed by fear." I think this new form of government we have is suitable to many, many Americans. They have been bound by the liberal agenda for so long now (you know laws about sexual harassment and that PC stuff about not making racist jokes at work, etc. etc.) that they are exploding with their newly found Justification for harassing certain members of our society. Protestors of any stripe, Artists, Passionate speakers, Feminists, Muslims, Blacks, anyone who Questions Authority.

It's one thing to keep your head low to avoid the taser, it's another thing to cheer on the sadistic intrusion upon civil rights and personal freedoms and physical space of Americans just because 9/11 happened.

Many Americans are a bloodthirsty bunch of cruel individuals.

[dickbearton]

32. As the Bush administration and economy drives more people into the corner...

Many more Americans will become a bloodthirsty bunch of cruel
individuals.

[Cleita]

13. The truth is these incidents are increasingly showing what

a totalitarian police state we are living it. I believe many of these victims believed things were still normal like when Bill Clinton was President and people still had rights to self-expression and be obnoxious if you will. These incidents are increasingly showing how much of our rights we have lost, thanks to the neo-cons in charge of our government and their Saudi royal family buddies. Those guys know how to cross that capital "T" in the word totalitarian and I believe the Bushes have learned this from those little cozy hand holding sessions in Crawford.

[Gonzo Gardener]

14. Wearing the wrong t-shirt may land you in jail...

but it could be fairly lucrative. :evilgrin:

Remember this?

Fed pays $80,000 settlement in anti-Bush T-shirt case.

[Cleita]

15. Maybe that's what needs to be done.

Everytime someone is AWWAT (arrested while wearing a T-shirt), tasered or otherwise manhandled or roughed up by authorities, they should sue. Let the lawsuits be many, so many that the insurance companies, that cover their liability, push for change.

[f the letter]

16. Great post.

i hope i have the courage to stand and be arrested/beaten in solidarity with someone when my time inevitably comes.

[cali]

17. Re Swanson's piece from another thread:

Let me commence by saying; I value intellectual honesty. A lot.

From Mr. Swanson's piece:

"A University of Florida student asks inconvenient questions of a U.S. senator. Police tackle him and shoot him with a taser. Onlookers, including the senator, either cheer, do nothing, joke, behave as if all were normal, or yell at others to let the police do their jobs. Not a single person seriously protests. Only the one victim is hauled off to jail. Fascist-friendly media outlets love the story because the senator is a Democrat, but they don't tell the story right. Progressive media outlets don't tell the story, even though they would tell it right, because the senator is a Democrat.

A television newscaster announces that planes were delayed in Boston's airport and tells us the name of a college student, shows us her picture, and tells us that we should blame her. He tells us to give the airport security guards credit for doing their jobs. They mistook her school project for a bomb. Again, we must let the "authorities" handle things."

What's wrong with that passage? Mr. Swanson attributes Mr. Meyer's arrest to his "asking inconvenient questions". If that's true, the police had no business trying to remove him. But there's lots of evidence that it's not true. Andrew Meyer bypassed a long line at the end of the forum, grabbing an open mike, and rambling on for approx. 2 minutes. He did not allow Sen. Kerry to answer his purported questions. His mike was turned off, not by the cops but by the those running the forum. And they're the ones who called the police. Did the police handle it badly? Yes. The tasering is enough to come to that conclusion. But resisting arrest is not a wise option. Flailing your arms about and swinging at a cop is not wise action. It's hardly the stark black and white picture that Mr. Swanson paints.

As for his slur towards Senator Kerry, I find that despicable. Not because I'm a great Kerry supporter, but because there's more than enough evidence to support that Kerry did what he could to ratchet down a tense situation. That evidence has been posted repeatedly in many DU forums.

Mr. Swanson's account of what happened in Boston, neglects a description of the student's attire. Do I agree with him about the media response? Yes. And I don't think she should have been arrested, let alone prosecuted. BUT, I do think it's common sense not to wear what she wore to Logan Airport. And stopping her was appropriate, albeit with less general hysteria.

Mr.Swanson states:

"Fascist-friendly media outlets love the story because the senator is a Democrat, but they don't tell the story right. Progressive media outlets don't tell the story, even though they would tell it right, because the senator is a Democrat."

He wants it every which way. And provides no evidence for his assertations.

Sadly, Mr. Swanson has some good points to make, but his OP is littered wiht distortions of truth, and that cheapens it to the point of worthlessness.

Sad.

[ProSense]

19. "Mr. Swanson has some good points to make, but his OP is littered wiht distortions of truth"

Wonder if he'll respond to your post?

[cali]

20. It would be interesting

I take it you'd be curious as to how he responds as well. I have to say, I find it troubling that people aren't reading this with a critical eye.

[dickbearton]

33. Critical eye, Hell most people don't give a damn about the whole issue.

[earth mom]

18. Fear is the best way to control people so the powers that be can get what they want.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5420753830426590918&q=RUSSO&total=5530&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=4

[mod mom]

21. "...But Fear Itself"- especially when fear is named Darth Cheney.

[Hissyspit]

22. This country is dysfunctional (read: sick). It has become a parody of its own values. n/t

[Gregorian]

62. I would like to add to that. They're sick from power.

Power and comfort. It has divided us. We no longer care about each other.

The other day a friend of mine was hit by a car while on his bike. The first thing I said was, I'll bet the guy didn't even stop. My friend said he had too, as there were too many people who saw it. But it is implicit among those of us who aren't wielding two ton vehicles, that when one of them hits us, they never stop.

Shit, if I start here I'll have to write a novel. But each and every day I stand and watch, dumbfounded, as Americans zoom all over the place in their stupid cars. This is just a symptom. I've been watching for decades.

We're divided by glass and rubber and steel and oil. That is one piece of the puzzle. The other is media. And leadership. Power corrupts. We're now a corrupt nation. Except for a few of us. The ones who are tazerable.

[Loge23]

24. "You must do the thing you think you cannot do"

Fear has paralyzed this country.
Fear causes us to behave differently. We (in general) tend to freeze up and hope it just goes away. It's so easy to stand up to fear, but few do.
David, your title - from FDR's famous words - remind me of another Roosevelt's take on fear. From FDR's wife, Eleanor:
"You gain strength, courage and confidence by every experience in which you really stop to look fear in the face. You are able to say to yourself, 'I have lived through this horror. I can take the next thing that comes along.' You must do the thing you think you cannot do."
Eleanor Roosvelt (1960)

We can beat this. We can and must face it.

[davidswanson]

124. A-

men, brother or sister

[RestoreGore]

25. It isn't only fear, many people just don't give a damn

As long as all is right in their little worlds...until it touches their little worlds. The one story that sticks in my mind is the rape and murder of Kitty Genovese years ago in her doorway in NY as neighbors actually watched it happen. All it would have taken was a phone call and they let her die. We really are a sad species.

[emlev]

26. Song of Choice by Peggy Seeger says it well

Later You Can Say You Didn't Know

[LWolf]

35. Thank you for the link. n/t

[sss1977]

28. great post!

Thank you for writing such a solid post. I just want to add something to it that has quickly become one of my favorite quotes. Stephen Colbert said it last week in regards to a student in the audience at the Kerry event, complaining that security told them not to interfere...

"How are you supposed to protest an abuse of authority, when an authority figure has told you not to?"

That pretty much sums up the "logic" going on in American's heads right now, doesn't it?

[Senator]

29. If You See Someone, Say Impeachment

Especially if it's a congressman or senator, but any elected official will do.

Say it to your local politicos. Get them to agree. Force them to oppose -- demand they say why.

Say it to the Euphemedia - by on-air shoutouts, on phone calls, in letters, with emails.

Say it loud and often. Make it a mantra.

Force someone to notice the rotting elephant carcass in Our National Living Room.

Say Impeachment.

===

[ray of light]

30. David, too bad you opted to use a lot of intellectual dishonesty, the same

way that you harp against the media and everyone else in your piece.

I'm very disappointed in this because as a supporter of the work you've done on the Downing Street Memos and afterdowningstreet.org, you should be honest about the situation that Andrew chose to cause. You pretend that Andrew's free speach was interfered with while you ignored the rest of the people in line. You pretend that Andrew deserved to resist arrest because he wanted a question answered but he didn't have to obey the rule of law in this country which says to listen to the police when you're asked to stop something.

[robinlynne]

34. You mean your opinion differs about one tiny incident. You were there of course?

[renie408]

40. Who had to be there to form that opinion? The video has been all over the place.

God, people, this level of disingenuousness is embarrassing.

[Mythsaje]

45. "listen to the police when you're asked to stop something."

Damn straight. Then if they beat you down or taser the shit out of you, even here people will come up with ways to excuse it. Even here.

This is how it starts...the idea that the authorities have the right to do whatever the minute you don't jump to obey their requests.

[renie408]

52. Who said that the tasering was excused?

I don't see anybody here saying that.

And why do you have to exxagerate? Nobody has said that the authorities have the right to do whatever they want. But if the police come and say, "Don't do that" and you keep doing whatever 'that' is, don't be amazed if they arrest you. If they use excessive force while arresting you, raise holy hell about it and sue them. But the arresting part shouldn't come as a shock (pun intended).

[Mythsaje]

64. Sorry...

I'm frustrated by some of the arguments here. I don't think there's an excuse for what was done. They (deliberately or otherwise) escalated the situation, then used excessive force to deal with the problem they helped create.

The guy may have been grandstanding, but the idea that one is somehow obligated to immediately obey the police, even if they push the limits of what they should do. I've had too many questionable encounters with various individual officers to feel any sense of automatic respect.

[ray of light]

65. The guy was politely asked to leave. He refused.

He escalated the incident willfully. I know when a cop pulls me over for speeding, and I see his lights in the rearview mirror, I have to stop what I'm doing and pull over. Should I chose not to do so, and they have to chase me and assume that I am resisting arrest, then it is I who caused the incident.

The first thing Andrew did wrong was decide that he wasn't going to listen to the police.

The police didn't pull out the taser first and ask questions later. And if someone in that room had been injured or killed as a result of Andrew's antics or the polices' lack of response then you know full well everyone here would be blaming the police and kerry for that too.

Basically, this whole thing, as David should know, had nothing to do with kerry, but had more to do with the laws regarding tasering and whether that method of enforcement should be utilized. If the law needs to change, then he should advocate for a law change. But to pass the blame to anyone and everyone really just shows a little bit too much rancor and less logic about the law itself.


But what David did wrong is try to blame kerry and the media and everyone else instead of focusing on the legality of what happened, if it was police brutality, or if maybe, just maybe, it's a bad law and needs to be fixed.

[Mythsaje]

67. A bad law that needs to be fixed?

We're not talking about law. We're talking about people thinking that an assault on a citizen at a ratio of 6:1 followed by a tasering because he didn't do what he was told is just A-OK.

It isn't.

[ray of light]

116. no is it ok to resist arrest. And that's the bottom line. We have laws

for a reason. That reason being: TO KEEP EVERYONE IN THE COMMUNITY SAFE.


ANYONE who resists arrest may get injured. And the citizen has a responsibility to follow the rules of the land. And so do the police.

By the way... resisting arrest is considered a crime. And it's considered a crime because the police risk their life to defend everyone and as such the lives and safety of EVERYONE in that room (including the police) must be protected FIRST.

You know.. you act like Andrew just walked into a room, waited in line patiently, went to the mic like everyone else did, didn't get asked to leave, didn't endanger everyone in that room, and didn't cause the whole event. Sorry. I may approve of the taser, but ultimately, this student chose everything that happened. And interesting enough, most people inside that hall that day believe that the police and kerry did the right thing. And that tells me quite a bit about what was seen and heard that doesn't show up on those videos.

[ray of light]

121. oops..typo It was suppose to read:

"I may NOT approve of the taser but...."

[davidswanson]

36. Proving My Point

more than one post here defends tasering and arresting someone because he cut ahead of someone else in line, and fantasizes that that's why he was tasered and arrested. Responding to that idea would dignify it in a way I wish we all recognized was undesirable.

[ProSense]

37. No one is defending tasering!

There is however the matter of truth!

[renie408]

39. Forget it. It looks like more than the GOP has been paying attention to KKKarl's tactics. n/t

[cali]

42. Truth?

It's simply a casulty of Mr. Swanson's zealous advocacy. Pretty shocking.

[davidswanson]

51. If you just want

to point out that the student butted in line or asked more than one question or whatever, then just point it out. But what is your motive if not to partially excuse arresting and torturing the kid? Assuming you have some other unrelated motive, then what is your disagreement with me?

[renie408]

56. Man, I have to give you credit. When you adopt a specious argument, you stick with it.

Hey, I am seeing more and more resemblance to certain members of the GOP by the minute. Way to read the other team's playbook!!

Ok, let's pretend like I am typing really slowly here....the disagreement is based on your mischaracterization of the behavior of Andrew Meyers.

[Usrename]

70. What mischaracterization?

Do you mean this?: "A University of Florida student asks inconvenient questions of a U.S. senator."

If you would, please try to explain exactly where anything has been mischaracterized. And you can try it fast or slow, I think we can keep up.

[renie408]

91. Who is 'we', paleface?

And no, I don't think you can keep up. You have consistently refused to admit that Andrew Meyers did anything out of the way. You have consistently insisted on categorizing his behavior as 'cutting in line' and 'asking a few inconvenient questions'. When you were called on THOSE issues and ONLY those issues, instead of addressing those concerns about your own 'journalistic' agenda, you attacked the questioners for tolerating the police tasering the guy. No matter how many times you were told, "no, we don't support the tasering", you refuse to accept that. Your argument, after accusing the people who disagree with your Pollyanna rendition of the events at the Kerry forum of being unable to discern nuances; seems to be that if you denounce Meyers behavior, you support the police tasering him. Period. No shades of gray.

It isn't that I don't understand. It's that I don't agree with your 'journalistic' efforts which I find to be as deliberately misleading as the things that come out of the WH and the hacks that support this administration.

Now, was that clear enough for you?

If you want to have a civil conversation with a group of people that you know very little about, don't automatically assume that if somebody doesn't agree with you, they are government sheep or not as bright as you. Calling people 'good little Germans' and saying that they don't understand 'nuances' because they are able to detect obvious bias in your writing and don't agree with it is obnoxious.

[Usrename]

118. You are the one throwing around all the accusations here.

I just asked you clarify what the hell you are going on about when you accuse the OP of some sort of mischaracterization.

Why not just try and answer my question, rather than start accusing me of things?

What do you think was mischaracterized in the OP? It should be a simple question for anyone to answer, if you are making the claim.

What do you think really happened that the OP is ignorant of or misleading about?

[renie408]

38. Actually, I think you just proved THEIR point.

'cut in line'? I didn't see the video where a guy simply cut in line, asked some inconvenient questions and the was instantly tasered.

I saw the video where the guy screamed questions without waiting for answers, refused to step aside when his time was up, resisted arrest while wildly swinging his arms and trying to run away.

I won't argue about the tasering. It was wrong. But the rest of it...you are not doing your actually very astute point any good by pretending that Andrew Meyers was some college student who just asked the wrong questions. People get hung up on the fact that he was acting like an ass and you are ignoring that. The right approach, it seems to me, is to say, "Andrew Meyers is an ass and showed it amply at the Kerry public forum. But the last time I checked, being an ass is not a taserable offense."

You are schmoozing facts as surely as the WH did in their report on violence in Iraq. You are trying to make what Meyers did sound as innocent as possible.

[davidswanson]

53. and your point

is something other than trying to partially excuse tackling and tasering and arresting a student? Please share.

[renie408]

58. Can you hold more than one thought in your head at a time? No, don't try to answer that...

Something might pop in your head.

Look, this is getting ridiculous. You refuse to even TRY to see any flaw in your logic. I suspect you are too in love with it. A dead giveaway to people who love their own arguments are long elaborate posts with bylines. It's the byline. It screams "I like to pretend I am really a journalist."

Go forth with your fractured logic and keep telling yourself that I am the one who doesn't get it. Hey, whatever gets you through the day.

[cali]

60. You are a real piece of work

and a discredit to honest journalism. It couldn't be clearer that you wouldn't know the truth if, like Tilopa's slipper, it smacked you across the face.

It's fortunate for you, that their are so many uncritical people willing to read your, um, work, with an uncritical eye.

[progressoid]

78. If I could, I'd give this post a recommendation!

:thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:

[DancingBear]

82. As opposed to someone else perhaps,

who uses the same "uncritical eye" that he/she blames others for having to blindly defend ANYONE that carries the scarlet (D) next to their name?

If anyone is a discredit, it it you.

You could not see your own hypocrisy if it was 10 feet tall and standing in front of you holding a freight car.

[cali]

85. I have no idea what you're

talking about. Nor do I particularly care.

Here's a little something about hypocrisy for you:

"Only hpocrite cannot forgive hypocrisy"

It's clear to anyone who bothers to carefully read and put aside preconceived bias, that Mr. Swanson is less than truthful in both the OP and in his comments in the thread.

Sorry you don't like that I'm pointing that out.

[DancingBear]

89. Of course you don't

How could you?

Mr. Swanson is less than truthful in your eyes, but for those of us without blinders the truth is very different indeed.

Sorry if you don't like that I'm pointing that out.

[cali]

92. Try using an argument

and try not seeing truth as a commodity wholly owned by anyone. And anyone who proclaims that they don't wear blinders, usually does. In fact, I'll venture to say, we all wear blinders made up of our experiences and pov.

Try grappling with a little complexity.

[ray of light]

122. If this were kos, I'd recommend your comment(s) here.

Not many would dispute that the tasering of Andrew was wrong. What people are disputing is the way everyone wants to shift the blame off Andrew and onto everyone else, like Kerry, the media, the people in the crowd, the people on stage... Though I don't endorse everything those police did, I have no reason to believe that they just wantonly used the taser as some have suggested.

[davidswanson]

125. This is beautiful

The tasering was wrong, but we're allegedly trying to shift the blame away from the victim of the tasering, presumably rather than admitting openly and honestly that the poor sucker tasered himself.

[ray of light]

127. Poor victim? Yes, he a victim but he resisted arrest which is ILLEGAL

and always has been illegal. to call him "poor VICTIM" when in fact he provoked the whole incident takes away any kind of rationality into looking into if it was police brutality. Because it was your op-ed in which you chided EVERYONE THERE and you rebuked the media and you blamed everyone involved EXCEPT the one person who determined that come hell or high water HE was going to make a statement--that would be Andrew.

You should have just called for an investigation before you assumed that everyone else was all participating in a fascist program.

[cali]

41. Where?

If you're referring to my post, here's what I wrote:

"Did the police handle it badly? Yes. The tasering is enough to come to that conclusion. But resisting arrest is not a wise option. Flailing your arms about and swinging at a cop is not wise action. It's hardly the stark black and white picture that Mr. Swanson paints."

Is that a defense of tasering? Indeed it is not. To the contrary, I condemn the cops for use of the taser.

You sir, are being not just intellectually dishonest, but straight out and out dishonest. I find that sad.

[renie408]

43. You know what is SERIOUSLY funny? Those of us who can separate the tasering

from Andrew Meyers actions are accused of an inability to detect nuances. See, you are supposed to see the word 'taser' and automatically assume that the person tasered is equivalent to Jesus and an American Hero.

Gee, I wonder if some of these people understand the definition of the word 'irony'??

[cali]

46. I'm actually less than amused by

the ability of people to sanction dishonest journalism on the left, when they rage about it in the MSM.

As for Meyer, his behavior should have gotten him kicked out, but the cops tasering him was beyond the pale. And though some folks here obviously did raise him to hero status, at least an equal number did not. I recall very few people here justifying the tasering.

[american_typeculture]

66. kind of like a WillPitt piece when it get's 100 recs

for him typing the word "poop".

[davidswanson]

55. and here i

didn't even know jesus WAS an american hero

[davidswanson]

54. sorry to add

to the overwhelming sadness around here, but if you want to condemn the tasering, why do you follow that with a "But..." unless it is to partially excuse the tasering?

[cali]

57. That sir, is diversionary in nature

Again, here's what I wrote:

Did the police handle it badly? Yes. The tasering is enough to come to that conclusion. But resisting arrest is not a wise option. Flailing your arms about and swinging at a cop is not wise action. It's hardly the stark black and white picture that Mr. Swanson paints."

There is absolutely nothing in that statement that can be honestly construed as condoning the tasering. One more time: I completely condemn the police tasering Mr. Meyer. I do not condemn the police removing Mr. Meyer from the forum. And he was not removed because of speech.

You have, sadly, not addressed any of the points I brought up about your slanting events to fit the narrative you wished to create. Do you even know that you did that?

[renie408]

59. Run, don't walk, away from this thread.

There is no point in wasting your breath. Apparently, this guy and Karl Rove were separated at birth. He is going to keep attacking you for the wrong thing and you keep doing what Democrats do in the same position...you are defending yourself against a bogus argument HE is framing.

For god's sake...the man puts bylines on his posts.

[cali]

61. And that's why I won't walk away

This is someone who claims the mantel of truth. He's one of the founders of After Downing Street. Is he credible? After this perfomance, I'd say not at all, and people here site him frequently.

http://www.davidswanson.org/

[proud2BlibKansan]

115. David Swanson is one of the best progressives I know

You bet he is credible. And his actions speak volumes. After the Downing Street Minutes were released and the MSM refused to print them, he started a website. When impeachment looked important, he started investigating. He now travels all over the country educating progressives. He is one of the cogs in the progressive wheel that keeps it turning. We have few progressive leaders with more credibility than David. And few who represent progressive issues better.

So you need to stop. Now. There is a good reason people here cite him frequently.

[Usrename]

71. What the hell was the reason for him being singled out by security?

What exactly do you mean by this?: "And he was not removed because of speech."

Do you have an alternate theory of the crime?

[cali]

79. The facts and only the facts

Mr. Meyer, as the forum was coming to a close, bypassed the line of people still waiting to as the Senator a question. He grabbed an open mike and spoke/questioned for a period of, I believe, 1:47. He did not allow Senator Kerry to respond, but kept on speaking. The people running the forum turned off the mike, and requested that he cease. These same people called the police and asked that he be removed. Mr. resisted the police. He flailed his arms and took a swing at a cop. It was his behavior that was the proximate cause of his botched removal.

Did the police botch it. Yes. Should he have been tasered? No. Should he have been allowed to continue disrupting the event? I suppose there's an argument for that, but behavior, not speech was the root of his removal.

[Usrename]

119. So what specific CRIME did he commit.

I would assume that some CRIME would have had to be commited in order for someone to attempt to arrest him.

Or do you also believe, like some other posters, that no crime is needed, that anyone can be arrested at anytime, for anything, anywhere, and that they must comply or be in breech of the law?

Just wondering what you think, and why you would think that way.

[cali]

132. I believe he was arrested for disorderly conduct

Whether you think the charge was bullshit, is pretty irrelevant. Then he resisted arrest. And yes, I believe that actively resisting arrest is dumb. I've been arrested and passively resisted. That's a different thing.

[DancingBear]

84. Why look! - someone else used "Sir" is their response

Perhaps you forgot which persona you are today?

Interesting.

[cali]

90. And your point is?

Never mind. Look, whether you agree or disagree, I actually made an argument as to why I believe Swanson's article is flawed and intellectually dishonest. Argue with the points I made, but why bother with inane and vague accusations?

[Ripley]

95. So sorry your thread has been firebombed.

It's sad that a couple of people can use personal attacks 24/7 and eventually get good threads locked. Hope it doesn't happen here.

[cali]

97. Firebombed? Please

This is what I originally posted to the OP. How is that firebombing?
Or are we all supposed to simply be a hallelujah chorus? Want to dispute the points I made? Do so, but don't falsely label dissent as 'firebombing.

Let me commence by saying; I value intellectual honesty. A lot.

From Mr. Swanson's piece:

"A University of Florida student asks inconvenient questions of a U.S. senator. Police tackle him and shoot him with a taser. Onlookers, including the senator, either cheer, do nothing, joke, behave as if all were normal, or yell at others to let the police do their jobs. Not a single person seriously protests. Only the one victim is hauled off to jail. Fascist-friendly media outlets love the story because the senator is a Democrat, but they don't tell the story right. Progressive media outlets don't tell the story, even though they would tell it right, because the senator is a Democrat.

A television newscaster announces that planes were delayed in Boston's airport and tells us the name of a college student, shows us her picture, and tells us that we should blame her. He tells us to give the airport security guards credit for doing their jobs. They mistook her school project for a bomb. Again, we must let the "authorities" handle things."

What's wrong with that passage? Mr. Swanson attributes Mr. Meyer's arrest to his "asking inconvenient questions". If that's true, the police had no business trying to remove him. But there's lots of evidence that it's not true. Andrew Meyer bypassed a long line at the end of the forum, grabbing an open mike, and rambling on for approx. 2 minutes. He did not allow Sen. Kerry to answer his purported questions. His mike was turned off, not by the cops but by the those running the forum. And they're the ones who called the police. Did the police handle it badly? Yes. The tasering is enough to come to that conclusion. But resisting arrest is not a wise option. Flailing your arms about and swinging at a cop is not wise action. It's hardly the stark black and white picture that Mr. Swanson paints.

As for his slur towards Senator Kerry, I find that despicable. Not because I'm a great Kerry supporter, but because there's more than enough evidence to support that Kerry did what he could to ratchet down a tense situation. That evidence has been posted repeatedly in many DU forums.

Mr. Swanson's account of what happened in Boston, neglects a description of the student's attire. Do I agree with him about the media response? Yes. And I don't think she should have been arrested, let alone prosecuted. BUT, I do think it's common sense not to wear what she wore to Logan Airport. And stopping her was appropriate, albeit with less general hysteria.

Mr.Swanson states:

"Fascist-friendly media outlets love the story because the senator is a Democrat, but they don't tell the story right. Progressive media outlets don't tell the story, even though they would tell it right, because the senator is a Democrat."

He wants it every which way. And provides no evidence for his assertions.

Sadly, Mr. Swanson has some good points to make, but his OP is littered wiht distortions of truth, and that cheapens it to the point of worthlessness.

Sad.

[renie408]

101. Hi, from one of the firebombers....

Yes, what a shame that someone cannot twist the truth to suit their argument without people point it out. If us few 'firebombers' were bitching about Petraeus doing the same thing, we would have a herd of DUers behind us screeching 'YEAH!!'.

Can you not see that this is the same thing? Why is it OK for 'us' to do it and NOT ok for 'them' to do it? And why are cali and I the enemy for noting that the OP is using an essentially flawed argument? You know what kind of pisses me off? That he has a point and had he been HONEST about fleshing it out instead of cloaking it in crap, we could be talking about that.

[cali]

44. Point it out. Point out the posts that defend tasering.

You can't. Because not one single post here actually does that. And you evidently prefer to make accusations rather than address arguments.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

47. The way of life that we know now may be over before too long

[renie408]

49. I wonder how many times that has been said throughout this country's history? Or how many times they

use that same line to crank up the base for the GOP?


I read your comment to my husband and he said, "Inauguration Day and thank god."

[Sparkly]

48. There are many valid points here, but no need for distortion or hyperbole

which weakens the arguments.

For example: "We must accept genocide to support "our troops" doing their job." I disagree with that.

About the incident in Florida, you say "they don't tell the story right." Well, I don't think you tell the story right. So who's right?

"And citizens play along, pretending the Democrats have no power and, in addition, shouldn't use it. They base this on the theory that by not using any power you are most likely to acquire more power." I think it's quite a bit more complicated than that.

Again, I agree that fear has enabled BushCo to wreak havoc on the fundamental principles of our country, and they spread it at every opportunity. But I also think that can be better articulated without sweeping generalities, words like "most" and "must" without some evidence ("Most Americans," "We must accept," etc.), or retelling of events in ways that invite hole-poking, even from those who agree with you.

The plain truth makes all your points even better!

Sorry if I sound like "essay composition police." I just think it's important to state things in doubt-resistant ways. :hide:

[cali]

50. Don't apologize.

The author of this piece has been out and out dishonest. And not only in the OP, but on the thread, and then saying he won't dignify responding because more than one person on the thread defends tasering. It's an accusation with no truth to it, and evasive as hell. That this piece has gotten over 45 recs, is just sad.

I expect better of lefty writers than this.

[Usrename]

72. Ok, since you are the honesty expert here, a question.

What is the crime that you claim to be witnessing in the video?

If it's so clear to you, then perhaps you can explain it to the rest of us.

[renie408]

94. It is against the law to resist arrest.

You may disagree with that, but it is the law. If you feel that you are being arrested unfairly, you can address that after the fact. But you are not supposed to fight with the police, swing your arms around and try to run away. I don't believe it is automatically a 'taserable' offense. I would imagine a lot depends on the violence of the person resisting arrest, the number of officers on hand and the danger the resister poses to both bystanders, themselves and the police. Meyers didn't appear to me to be a danger to anybody, so I think his tasering was an overreaction.

[Usrename]

117. I get it. That's what I thought. They arrested him for resisting arrest.

Don't you see the problem here? Are you really missing it completely?

Unless that you believe all law-abiding citizens are subject to arrest without any cause.

Because, surely, he could not be resisting arrest unless they were trying to arrest him for something, or in this case, nothing.

Thanks for your honesty.

[Scriptor Ignotus]

63. yea I thought the post was right on some points

but exaggerating on others. there's no need to embellish the story of what's happening to our country. the truth is shocking enough on its own.

[Exultant Democracy]

68. Wow, just wow. This is an amazing post. Thank you!

[onehandle]

69. Once the Democratic Presidential nominee is final, get behind them.

No matter who it is.

"Progressives" are welcome to back a Nader elsewhere.

[flora123]

73. no

We can do it if we can, not just fear

[file83]

75. K & R - I thought I was the only one who felt this way about all this incrementalism.

Baby steps into fascism.

It's fucking everywhere now.

[varkam]

77. K&R - my hat is off to you, Mr. Swanson.

:yourock:

[Cobalt Violet]

80. Great post.

I'm so shock at how many around here want us to bend over and grease up as soon as anyone with a badge comes around. :wtf:

[cali]

83. I'm so in shock

over DUers not reading critically. Not parsing information and thinking for themselves. That's just bending over in another direction. I'm also in shock over the number of people who excused Waco because it happened under a dem.

[renie408]

98. I am less and less so shocked. I used to think that the problem with the GOP

was their willingness to follow a flawed party line. I thought that their method of arguing or debating their positions was deceitful and I thought it was exclusive to them. I thought that they were too quick to establish and repeat memes.

But I am starting to figure out that those things are possibly endemic to any group of people, Democrat or Republican. Think of all the times somebody here can make a solid, well framed argument only to accidently write 'Democrat' party instead of 'Democratic' party. And suddenly the response isn't about the content, it's about that one flaw. How many times do you see a DUer latch onto ONE word or line in a post and FREAK OUT over it, completely ignoring and twisting what was actually written? Half this thread is about that very thing.

We accuse 'them' of all of those things, but are guilty of the very same things.

We aren't any different from them. We suffer from our own cognitive dissonance. We are just like them...just about different subjects.

[KG]

81. america is over.

even the thin veneer of myths of the high school civics history books hiding the ugly truth about what america is realy about is crumbling before our eyes.

[renie408]

99. Instead of reading high school civics books (if you can find one) read some other history

and you will see that America has had problems very similar or worse than what we are going through now. America isn't over. And when was America SO much better than it is now?

[KG]

100. i've read plenty of the real history of the US, hence my statement.

but, thanks for missing the point. :hi:

[Greyhound]

86. Reading through the replies to your piece I was at first, disheartened, then I

noticed that the asses trying excuse the actions of the police state were, as usual, quite vocal but few in number. It seems to me that the only reason this is so effective is exactly what you wrote about in your piece, fear (and apathetic ignorance, of course).

There is a growing resistance to the increased authoritarianism we have seen for the last 25 years or so. The guy in Florida is one such case, I heard the frustration and anger that motivated him to act out as he did. The over-reaction to a perceived loss of control by the staff in bringing in the police, was itself motivated by fear.

What has happened to the American spirit of independence and love of liberty that once defined us? When was it replaced by this slavish acquiescence to the false rule of authority?
:kick: & R

[cali]

87. First of all, perhaps one person in this thread

is defending or excusing the actions of the authorities in any of these cases. If you actually maintain that there is more that, cite those posts please. And you, of course, haven't any super natural powers enabling you to know that the staff calling in the police because they were motivated by fear, and if that's true- fear of what?

As for the continual, "ah the good old days of the American spirit.."- those days never existed. Police brutality is a long established tradition in this country. Pretending that 20 or 50 or 100 years ago, America was this idyllic place is, of course, revisionist history.

[renie408]

96. Funny you mention that...I am reading a biography of Benjamin Franklin

right now. I just finished the one on Einstein awhile back and have read some other historical non-fiction in between. The thing that strikes me is that history repeats itself continuously. From before we were a country, there have been idealogical clashes, issues over law enforcement, etc. I see a lot of people talking about how the country is about to fall apart, about how bad things are now, etc. This is interesting to me both in that I bet you could find people on the Free Republic saying the EXACT SAME things in the EXACT same way (just different POV's) and in that people on both sides have been saying those things for...ever.

[Greyhound]

123. Did you say something? There seems to be a lot of noise coming from your direction. n/t

[renie408]

93. Please, would you list the numbers of the posts that were excusing the actions of the police state?

I didn't see those and would like to read them. Also, instead of just generally categorizing the posters who have not jumped right onto this bandwagon as 'asses', would you please address them specifically? I would really hate to be lumped in with people who excuse the actions of a police state since I have done nothing of the kind.

[Greyhound]

131. Ah, both appeasers rise to the occasion. n/t

[live love laugh]

102. David you are an obvious threat--why, only Will Pitt gets more naysayers per thread.

It is amazing what lengths the opposition will go through to muddy the waters. You message, however, remains crystal clear.

[cali]

103. Actually, there are only two or three of us

challenging Mr. Swanson. Most folks are endorsing every word he wrote. And why choose to see it as some attempt to "muddy the waters", instead of honest disagreement and criticism? Do you want discourse and dissent or everyone lined up in absolute agreement?

[bos1]

105. These naysayers are sad attention-seekers

looking to split hairs while ignoring a police-state mentality sweeping the US.

[cali]

107. I'd really love to discuss the article

and my response to it. I'm hardly ignoring the encroaching abuses of authority vis a vis the use of tasers and security. Odd, that no one will actually step up to debate the claims in Mr. Swanson't essay, and the questions that arise as to those claims. Instead there's a lot of derision for those who don't join the admiring majority.

[bos1]

108. most people seem to agree

that except for some partisan bias the article is a bullseye.

I also don't appreciate that partisan bias.

But I think the derision you're experiencing comes from people not wanting to relentlessly pick at flaws of the article.

And maybe they are tired of some people's idea of "debate".

[cali]

109. You call it partisan bias

I call it intellectual dishonesty, and yes it's a big deal to me. You consider it nitpicking, I consider it fundamental.

We simply disagree. And I'm willing to speak out on something I see as fundamentally flawed. The derision doesn't bother me. It's what I see as group think that I find troubling.

[bos1]

110. probably that's taking it too seriously

to call it "group think". It's a thread to be forgotten tomorrow. But the problem will still be around and maybe getting worse. That's the point, and a bit more "troubling" to me than people generally supporting the main thrust of the article (which even you do) while ignoring its flaws.

[cali]

111. Well, Swanson has

a large readership. He puts himself out there as a truth teller. It's not like his stuff isn't influential. All the more reason for him to be intellectually and factually honest.

[bos1]

112. well I understand your point and I think others do too

especially since you make it so often.

[cali]

114. I'm glad you understand

I think a lot of people don't understand it, and the reason I've repeated it is because I've been attacked for saying it, as if I were attacking a sacred cow.

[bread_and_roses]

113. No derision here, but no agreement with you either. It's too late or I'd add an "R" to the OP.

Obviously, the points you raise seem very meaningful to you, but to me - and I am guessing to many others on the thread - they seem pretty insignificant. On the order of someone in a NYT article on the Jena Six that I read this AM saying there were two, not three nooses hanging from the tree in the original incident. As if that makes a big difference?

Nor do I think that you are justifying tasering - or, more accurately, I think that you don't think that you are, and have no intent to do so (if that convoluted sentence can be parsed into coherence). But I think that the - more than likely unintentional - subtext of your points is that only "reasonable" and "well-behaved" dissent is tolerable. While I think that any objective analysis of current affairs screams that they have a reached a pass that demands unreasonable and ill-bred dissent.

I do not advocate violence, and I wish that the student had responded with non-violent passive resistance rather than flailing and swinging about. But I think that the current slaughter and oppression perpetuated by this Country - including its' Democratic enablers - requires massive, disruptive, "unreasonable" and "impolite" non-violent protest. Sit-Ins at the Halls of Congress, the Stock Exchanges, the Military BAses, and like sources of death, destruction, and the ever-more-apparent police-state apparatus. That is what we'd do if we were serious in our dissent. Go Code Pink, Cindy, and the Rev. They have the right idea.

The larger point is that - whether student A was rude or student B innocent/oblivious/mischievous/whatever - that we've reached a point where the first response to rudeness or stupidity is to call the police. That's insane in a supposed democracy, a supposed "free" country.

In a time when people ARE arrested for t-shirts while the millions and millions of $$ that Corporations use to buy "our" representatives are called "free speech" and protected, a student's rudeness is truly insignificant to the larger point.

Whether you call it "genocide" or not seems insignificant to me in the face of the indisputable fact that we are torturing around the world and have perpetrated and abetted an unconscionable and criminal slaughter on the people of Iraq.

So I am not surprised that few address your specific "debate" points. Like two vs three nooses, they don't alter the big picture at all.

[cali]

128. No i don't think only well behaved dissent is tolerable

I've been arrested for civil disobedience. And I'm proud of it. I've participated in street theatre protests with Bread & Puppet.

I object to intellectual dishonesty. You seem to have missed my point. It's not about three nooses or two, it's about telling the whole story, not merely the parts that fit with your agenda.

Thanks for the thoughtful post though.

[davidswanson]

126. yeah

goddam that will pitt - he thinks too much is what his problem is

you should seen my recent post that was silently deleted

[bos1]

104. "behave as if all were normal"

well said.

[Whisp]

120. to the top. excellent piece, David. nt

[davidswanson]

129. Moooooo

Heil

[Whisp]

130. whooooooooooosh

plumbob