Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > Political/War Lounge > Fascist government official brutalizes silent protester

Fascist government official brutalizes silent protester
Thread Tools
Buckaroo
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2002
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 20, 2011, 09:56 AM
 
During a speech condemning the brutal actions taken by the Egyptian government against protesters, a hypocritical communist government official ignores the brutal beating and torture of a US citizen.


VETERAN�S GROUP DEMANDS APOLOGY FROM SEC. OF STATE CLINTON<BR>Claims vet was manhandled for silent protest | BREAKING NEWS | Sky Valley Chronicle Washington State News

VETERAN’S GROUP DEMANDS APOLOGY FROM SEC. OF STATE CLINTON

As Secretary of State Hillary Clinton gave a speech at George Washington University yesterday condemning governments that arrest protestors and do not allow free expression - and lauding freedom of speech on the Internet - 71-year-old military veteran Ray McGovern was grabbed from the audience in plain view of her by police and an unidentified official in plain clothes and hustled out of the building and, according to McGovern and his supporters, was “brutalized and left bleeding in jail.”

What McGovern did was simply remain standing silently in the audience and turned his back on her as Secretary Clinton began her speech.

That was it.
     
Wiskedjak
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Calgary
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 20, 2011, 11:54 AM
 
The hypocrisy here is impressive, and against a valuable political activist, no less.
Ray McGovern - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
     
Helmling
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2005
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 20, 2011, 12:15 PM
 
It was particularly ironic that the speech included rhetoric about the value of free speech.
     
Dork.
Professional Poster
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Rochester, NY
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 20, 2011, 12:46 PM
 
I don't know. There are people there whose job it is to protect the Secretary of State, and when someone suddenly stands at a press-conference type event where everyone else is sitting, especially when everyone in attendance is so close, their first thought is not likely to be "Maybe we should let him be, he's likely to be just making a political statement". I'm willing to give the folks who were restraining him (were they local police?) the benefit of the doubt that they took action in the moment not because of any political motive, but simply because he was acting unusually.

Charging him with disorderly conduct seems excessive, though. And his treatment after the fact by the authorities probably needs to be investigated. It's not apparent to me what the Secretary of State has to apologize for, though, since she did neither of these things. She may not even have been able to see it beyond the lights.
     
Helmling
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2005
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 20, 2011, 01:30 PM
 
Originally Posted by Dork. View Post
I don't know. There are people there whose job it is to protect the Secretary of State, and when someone suddenly stands at a press-conference type event where everyone else is sitting, especially when everyone in attendance is so close, their first thought is not likely to be "Maybe we should let him be, he's likely to be just making a political statement". I'm willing to give the folks who were restraining him (were they local police?) the benefit of the doubt that they took action in the moment not because of any political motive, but simply because he was acting unusually.

Charging him with disorderly conduct seems excessive, though. And his treatment after the fact by the authorities probably needs to be investigated. It's not apparent to me what the Secretary of State has to apologize for, though, since she did neither of these things. She may not even have been able to see it beyond the lights.
The captain of a ship is responsible for everything that happens under his command.

The secretary should apologize for a wrong committed in the name of protecting her.
     
Dork.
Professional Poster
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Rochester, NY
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 20, 2011, 02:11 PM
 
Originally Posted by Helmling View Post
The captain of a ship is responsible for everything that happens under his command.

The secretary should apologize for a wrong committed in the name of protecting her.
I suppose. I still contend, though, that the security at the event was entirely in the right with their actions, and the only reason to apologize would be for how he was treated while in custody.

It doesn't matter that the guy just wanted to stand up and turn his back on Clinton. The security people, in the moment, wouldn't be able to know that. All they knew is that this guy stood up at the wrong time, in a manner inappropriate for the situation, and he was close enough to throw a shoe (or worse!). The manner in which he chose to make his statement led to him being ejected, not the content of his statement.
     
Wiskedjak
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Calgary
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 20, 2011, 02:29 PM
 
I suppose it's lucky that nobody stomped on his head ...
     
lpkmckenna
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Toronto
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 21, 2011, 09:49 AM
 
Uh, was it a communist government official, or a fascist government official? Because I think those kind of distinctions matter, even in thread titles.
     
SpaceMonkey
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Washington, DC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 21, 2011, 11:08 AM
 
I have no problem if someone is removed from an event for being disruptive (however that is defined in that context, which might include standing), whatever the political affiliation of the speaker.

If McGovern was mistreated while in custody that is shameful and the responsible people should be punished.

However, based on the article that Buckaroo linked to I doubt very much that McGovern suffered from a "brutal beating and torture." The entirety of his injuries is described as: "McGovern was later found to have his arm covered with bruises. The metal handcuffs were fastened so tightly that his wrists were cut and some blood flowed from the cuts." Frankly, given his age (71?), I expect that he received most of these injuries (certainly the bruises) while resisting against being taken out of the room (you can clearly see the struggle at the end of the video posted in the article).

"One ticket to Washington, please. I have a date with destiny."
     
Helmling
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2005
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 21, 2011, 12:06 PM
 
Originally Posted by lpkmckenna View Post
Uh, was it a communist government official, or a fascist government official? Because I think those kind of distinctions matter, even in thread titles.
No, no, don't be silly. They're just meaningless pejoratives meant to be hurled indiscriminately at anyone with whom we disagree.
     
Helmling
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2005
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 21, 2011, 12:06 PM
 
Originally Posted by Dork. View Post
I suppose. I still contend, though, that the security at the event was entirely in the right with their actions, and the only reason to apologize would be for how he was treated while in custody.

It doesn't matter that the guy just wanted to stand up and turn his back on Clinton. The security people, in the moment, wouldn't be able to know that. All they knew is that this guy stood up at the wrong time, in a manner inappropriate for the situation, and he was close enough to throw a shoe (or worse!). The manner in which he chose to make his statement led to him being ejected, not the content of his statement.
I really don't see how someone standing up in a crowded auditorium represents a security threat. I mean, would they tackle somebody getting up to pee?
     
Dork.
Professional Poster
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Rochester, NY
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 21, 2011, 12:40 PM
 
Originally Posted by Helmling View Post
I really don't see how someone standing up in a crowded auditorium represents a security threat. I mean, would they tackle somebody getting up to pee?
Someone getting up to pee (or, perhaps, leaving due to a sudden illness) would likely stand and then proceed to the aisle. That person would likely be met by security, and when the situation was explained he or she would likely get a quick and calm escort out (that person is unlikely to resist, since their goal is to leave in the first place). While uncommon, I'm sure that the security folks have seen that before.

All I'm saying is that the guy's behavior was unusual enough, given the venue, to warrant being escorted out. They have to make the decision in seconds, after all, and will err on the side of caution.

The auditorium didn't seem all that large or crowded to me. It looked like a briefing room to me. There is certainly a different standard for a smaller speech than there is for a speech in a convention center.
     
Buckaroo  (op)
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2002
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 21, 2011, 01:26 PM
 
Every single person in that crowd went through metal detectors and were throughly screened for any security threats.

Just like the Democrats want to control all forms of speech on the radio, television, internet, and now political indoctrination meetings that does not support their views, they use immediate Gestapo tactics to squash any, I repeat any protest against their agenda.


Originally Posted by Dork. View Post
Someone getting up to pee (or, perhaps, leaving due to a sudden illness) would likely stand and then proceed to the aisle. That person would likely be met by security, and when the situation was explained he or she would likely get a quick and calm escort out (that person is unlikely to resist, since their goal is to leave in the first place). While uncommon, I'm sure that the security folks have seen that before.

All I'm saying is that the guy's behavior was unusual enough, given the venue, to warrant being escorted out. They have to make the decision in seconds, after all, and will err on the side of caution.

The auditorium didn't seem all that large or crowded to me. It looked like a briefing room to me. There is certainly a different standard for a smaller speech than there is for a speech in a convention center.
     
SpaceMonkey
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Washington, DC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 21, 2011, 01:54 PM
 
Originally Posted by Buckaroo View Post
Every single person in that crowd went through metal detectors and were throughly screened for any security threats.

Just like the Democrats want to control all forms of speech on the radio, television, internet, and now political indoctrination meetings that does not support their views, they use immediate Gestapo tactics to squash any, I repeat any protest against their agenda.
Godwin alert! Give me a break. Having a point of view does not mean that the organizers of an event (public or not) do not have a right to control the audience to minimize disruptions. Your reference to Gestapo tactics is vile and uncalled for. McGovern could have protested just off-site to his heart's content. I would guess, however, that he was in some sense counting on being ejected from the event as part of his protest, because that gets the most media attention and, consequently, the most people Googling his name to see what he's on about. Whining about bruises and abrasions received (probably) in the process of having people drag you out of a room does not endear him to me.

"One ticket to Washington, please. I have a date with destiny."
     
olePigeon
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 21, 2011, 04:09 PM
 
This is the second thread on the subject, so I guess I'll repeat myself: the event was being held on private property. The school had every right to remove the man, he was there by invitation. I'm not lost on the irony of the situation given the context of the speech, but there's no apology deserved anywhere.

I'm curious about Buckaroo's reasoning why only Democratic meetings are political indoctrination.
"…I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than
you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods,
you will understand why I dismiss yours." - Stephen F. Roberts
     
   
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:21 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,