The last thing anyone should do is take advice from a filthy rich liberal that made his money through capitalism. People who bave money can always say how much money the rest of us can live with or without. These people will never have to sacrifice their life styles in the name of any cause. As foe an organizes effort to close these movements down I hope that is happening . When they set up tents and engage in illegal or dangerous conduct they they need to be dealt with accordingly. If their wrongful conduct is not stopped law abiding citizens will be victimized.

There is so much to deconstruct, including subtexts,that it’s hard to respond thoroughly.

We were not expecting a lack of bias from one with more than 3 decades in enforcement. We hoped for that experience revealing the integrity of balance from a professional demeanor cultivated thru dealing with violators of law who were sincerely convinced they were within the law & were being illegally set upon by authorities giving illegal orders. It happens. The identical arguments are used,not only here,but in TahrirSquare, Tripoli,Tehran & Damascus…even in the recent past in Chicago,D.C., Wilmington, Philadelphia & Birmingham. As Hahn points out, information discovered thru due diligence of the press revised the first impressions. “Most sadly”,We learned it was worse than it looked. Our trusted authorities were not trustworthy. In this, America was not exceptional.We don’t remember the FBI being the principal agent in these events, even with the things it’s most celebrated director tried(MLK’s sexlife?); so, maybe analysis by someone from that unique a perspective is not most relevant?

Were we to apply to Hahn’s writing the standards he applies to the press( title says,tiredly,”Media”) his observations would fail for reason of not knowing who ordered what, prior events, speculation on impending crowd & speculative turns from passive to active resistance. Generally, press standards,outside letters to editor,discourage basing analysis on things “presumed”/”assumed”.

The concept of being provocative by taking a nonconfrontational unthreatening posture and absorbing gassing by blinding incapacitating deluges of military-grade weapons made of chemicals, is a fascinatingly novel theory. Experts in police matters,including those who advise & train police have commented on this episode. None we heard give this degree of support to this action. The questions of how the demonstrators relinquished their Constitutional rights to assembly, expression & to gain redress of grievances(all Tea Party & conservative traditional values? Jeffersonian?) were still unresolved. Too, enforcement leaders ask why assault rifles & armor fit for Fallujah or HelmanProvince were proper for campus police. Ignoring that, why respond to misdemeanors with what the law reserves for felonies?
Hahn refers generically to police,but facts say that campus cops were suspended. He suffers the same shadow of misinformation as he finds in the press?

Since the officers, nonetheless,retired from the field unharmed, and spectators, “provocative” though some might have been[transferring their mere words to the silent few being gassed(remember Halabjah?"gassing his own people") is a novel proposition on its own],forgive U.S. for wondering how not saving face for “duty to disperse” would not have resulted in the same outcome, less the violence & American doublestandards making U.S. laughingstock for those we wish to intimidate who see it unspun(as here, Hahnspin) in the worldmedia? Do we need more thinking before we call the cops?

N.B. :
Two things (are you watching RickPERVY?) We have seen this same situation where police methodically grabbed feet & whatever protruded, to paddywaggons as they are trained. 2nd, officers who have been teargassed with pepperspray say a tiny bit is as effective as it gets, and is one of their worst memories…worse than being “tasered”. (FBI training?) A bonus 3rd; in what situations does “THEGOLDENRULE” NOTapply? Were these students? Our children? A girl got sniped to death for about the same in a crowd in Iran. We need to act so unpredictably as to risk another KentState? UNINTENDEDCONSEQUENCES?
Every one was “‘right’ as they sped along; now they’re just as dead as if they were wrong.” (from “YieldRightofway” safety slogan by JonHudgens)

Our initial exposure to this came thru FOX channels, not known for liberal nor left-wing “mediabias”(though they may not be so rigorous in “casting out the beam in their own eyes”?)

Still, “WE MAY NOT AGREE WITH WHAT YOU SAY, BUT WE INTEND TO DEFEND TO THE DEATH YOUR RIGHT TO SAY IT!” —Msr Arouet
“Right”?

“PubliusPaine”

ATTN: BRUJO,
We are not into the occult arts, still we feel compelled to respond to admit where we agree with a WHITE WITCH.

The fact that MichaelMoore is a capitalist, and a superbly successful one, is evidence that applied economics is both “liberal”& “conservative”.

“Occupiers” likely appreciate the views regarding overbearing rich & that many of them are insulated at least emotionally, from the consequences of their actions on others.

We wonder about the crime found in setting up tents. Does it apply to the “ArabSpring” where our sacred principle of “petition for redress of grievances” is echoed in tent villages of those OCCUPIERS of TahrirSquare?

Remember CaesarChavez & the actions they took over landowner abuses & “telling them how much money they could live with” while keeping them in virtual slavery ? That resistance was said to be illegal. So was women’s sufferage, runaway slave emancipation,attempts to register minorities inAlabama & Mississippi, veterans in tents in D.C. trying to get promised bonuses denied & much, much more. All this demonstrates AmericanExceptualism?

Take care in denying democracy,no matter how messy, to others lest you set precedents that later deny it to you and U.S.? Not to mention that you may be practicing the values you despise in “filthy rich liberals”?

Will the world judge our doublestandards as hubristic hypocrisy and await the “AmericanFall”? Ask Libyans, Egyptians, Syrians, Iranians, Iraqis, Israelis, and other “forefathers”, DEMOCRACY IS “DANGEROUS”! Even our ConstitutionalConvention feared it enough to restrict it into a republic to placate those (many of whom were “filthy-rich liberals” who feared “the rabble”?

Thanks for setting U.S. straight!

C.H.,Cassius,Chm.,
PRECISIONINMEDIA,LLP