SEIU Claims They Were Attacked; Video Shows They're Lying
Correction: Commenters Say He Says "He attacked a minister," and They're Right

Correction: Commenters point out that he does seem to be saying "He attacked a minister!"

Having listened to it, yes, that is what he says. Sorry, I kept hearing "America" rather than "a minister."

So, they do seem to have made that claim at the time. But we know the guy who got beaten up didn't attack anyone -- he wasn't even a partisan. He was just a guy peddling political novelties. He had no reason to attack anyone, as he really didn't care about anything going on particularly, except as a sales opportunity.

Plus, we still have that grotesque toad of a female union dolt playing pushy-face unprovoked. Kinda letting you know who's there expressly to push people around.

...

From the SEIU "blog," which is of course merely a PR effort.

The claim a union member and "Reverend" was attacked.

The Reverend, a St. Louis Post-Dispatch reporter, and others who attended in hopes of a peaceful dialogue about our nation's healthcare crisis, endured the latest attempt by right-wing fringe groups to hijack the democratic process through violence if necessary. Last night, the Teabaggers' violent tactics broke and dislocated the shoulder of the Reverend.

So -- was the "reverend" attacked? Or did he merely get hurt in a scuffle the SEIU began?

One would imagine that if one of their own were attacked, they'd mention that fact after the fight when they're accused of beating someone. One would imagine they'd say, "We attacked you? You just attacked us?"

They don't say that. Oh, after the fact, casting about for a legal defense, they say that.

But at the time? One minute after the scuffle? Let's see what their legal pretext for the beat-down was at the time of the fight, before they'd had time to lawyer up.

The defense offered at the time? "He attacked America!"

Imagine someone caught on tape immediately after shooting someone. In court, he offers the defense "He came at me first!"

But on tape, he said nothing about that; instead, he shouted "You had sex with my wife!"

What's the real reason for the shooting? It's not the crap he comes up later when his lawyer tells him adultery is not a defense to murder.

Now, it seems to me that unless the good reverend has the unlikely nickname of "America," the real reason for the beat-down is not "you attacked us first," but rather "You said things we don't like, so we decided we had a right to beat on you."

As we've been reminded by the left ad nauseam, dissent does not give license to violent reprisal. (Indeed, the left usually claims that dissent doesn't even give license to disagree with the dissent, as even simple verbal disputation constitutes "brutalizing" and "chilling" dissenters.)

If that's not evidence enough, we also have an example of the SEIU attacking first right on tape -- the horrid, lumpy female union creature slaps the woman holding the camera, without any provocation. (Except, I suppose, the "she attacked America" provocation.)

There is a real danger of sending union goons to these things in the first place. They are not cops and have no right to their own self-styled law enforcement and protection against breach of the peace. Private citizens have no duty whatsoever to obey their illegitimate commands.

But they seem to be behaving as if they imagine they've been deputized as justices of the peace.

Furthermore, the SEIU has sent, it seems, the most hot-tempered, partisan, and violent volunteers possible, people just looking for a reason to punch a conservative they don't like.

Even if one accepts the SEIU has the right to send goons to these things, they ought to be sending cool-headed folks, not people who use "He attacked America!" as a legal pretext to beat people on the street.

Oh: It's also looks kinda bad for the "we were attacked first defense" that the union douchebags shout out "It's the Union Way!"

Yeah, buddy, we know about the "union way."

posted by Ace at 10:40 AM

| Access Comments