Amazing Video: WeAreChangeLA member is attacked by Neo-Con David Frum

[Twist_U_Up]

WeAreChangeLA's Stewart Howe asks some tough questions of Neo-Con David Frum, author and speechwriter credited with the "Axis of Evil" phrase, at the LA Times/UCLA Festival Of Books on Saturday April 26th. David Frum responds with profane suggestions and Frum demonstrates the violent nature of the Neocons by hitting Mr. Howe and his camera no less then three times. Mr. Frum apparently thinks that it is acceptable behavior to attack people who ask questions.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QHorpNLKUfg

RUSH TRANSCRIPT BELOW (BASED ON AUDIO)

HOWE: Here he is-- the man the myth, the legend-- David Frum.

FRUM: The one thing I regret from our last conversation is that I didn't say to you what my friend Christopher Hitchens said.

HOWE: What, you're friend said which type of medication? (apparently referring to a previous incident)

FRUM: No, no, -- which is, you should fuck off.

HOWE: Oh, okay .. alright... Well, I guess we kind of saw that one coming -- but gosh you got me back on my heels here. Let me then pose you an A or B question very civilly-- A) do you think you think that this hoax which is the 9/11 investigation is going to keep on going

(Frum gets up from table approximately 5 ft. away)

HOWE (cont'd): could you perhaps see that there will be culpability fears

(Frum now approaching Howe from around camera-- reaching for camera lens, swatting)

FRUM: Turn off the camera. (smacks it) Go away!

(Frum walks away.)

HOWE: I will not go away. I will not turn off the camera. We are in public. Are you worried, perhaps, about the criminal liability?

(Howe turns to avoid Frum swinging, hits camera)

HOWE (cont'd): Of being a partner to mass murder after the fact. You know that is a real concern because the truth is coming out.

FRUM: Go away--

(An older woman wearing an 'event staff' shirt gets between the altercation)

EVENT STAFF: I'm going to have to ask you to leave; (Frum walks away)

HOWE: I'm being polite; I'm asking him a question. It's my first amendment right as a citizen.

EVENT STAFF: But not in this context .

HOWE: And he's too scared to address the question. Look at him running away. As the truth continues to come out, Mr. Frum, there are going to be criminal charges against all of those who are complicit in mass murder after the fact because of the cover-up. And you know that's very real possibility.

You should be scared. You should be unwilling to address this, you know. Because when it all comes out there are going to be a lot of people held responsible for the deaths. I mean, you must be a little concerned about that.You know the house of cards is falling apart. The 9/11 commission report is a joke.

SOMEONE IN CROWD : If you want to ask him a question, buy a book

HOWE: I'm asking a question. There's no one in line.

(Security walks up).

HOWE: I'm asking a question

SECURITY: What's going on here?

BOOKSIGNING STAFF : The author is signing for the people who've made purchases. (There is no one actually in line.) And we don't know the validity of him being press.

(muffled audio)

HOWE: No, I have not made a purchase

WOMAN: He's crowding me in line

HOWE: But there's nobody in line

HOWE: I'M actually with WeAreChange LA media and I'm asking a civil, polite question. IF the 911 investigation continues to fall apart and the facts come out, if he's worried about being held liable as a co-conspirator in cover-up after the fact.

SECURITY: I see what you're saying. it's a reasonable question. We just don't want anyone creating an obstruction.

HOWE: As you can see, there's nobody in line to get books signed.

SECURITY: I know, I understand, but you're making people uncomfortable

HOWE: Yeah, well, it's not my intention to be irritating, but it is an irritating question-- the situation of the murders in Iraq and the murders on 9/11 were irritating beyond irritating.

HOWE:And Mr. Frum is a neo-conservative; they have spelled out their agenda-- (Frum gets up from table) --in the PNAC docs and he must have to run away rather than face a simple question.

(Frum again lunges at Howe, swings at camera.)

HOWE: Now He's assaulting me. And I have it on film.

FRUM: I don't want to be on your camera.

HOWE: We're in public. I've just been assaulted by David Frum on film.

(Security guard witnesses this.)

SECURITY: You need to take a walk with me this way.

HOWE: And the grounds would be?

SECURITY: I'm just trying to save you some trouble.

(See video for the rest of the conversation).

[vincent_vega_lives]

1. That is Hillarious

Looks like Frum was having a bad day. Unfortunately it is not a 1st amendment right to film someone on private property.

[victordrazen]

5. UCLA is private property?

I thought their universities were state run maybe I'm wrong.

[Sweet Pea]

2. Hilarious is right!

I always love watching the Twoofers and their "The truth will win out!" and the obligatory "There will be criminal charges coming!!!"

They'd have to criminalize stupidity for anyone to pay, if that is his gig.

[Twist_U_Up]

3. Why skirt the issue like frummy? Kill the messenger ?

transparency guys read up

[vincent_vega_lives]

4. German? (n/t)

[Name removed]

13. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[vincent_vega_lives]

21. Neo-Fascist

Not Nazi.

[Twist_U_Up]

22. Gotcha

;-)

[wildbilln864]

6. He should have ....

dotted Frum's eye in self defense for assaulting him like he did IMHO! :hi:

[Flatulo]

7. If Mr. Frum is guilty of something other than being an idealogue, why

not get a District Attorney or grand jury to consider charges against him?

Do you really want to replace the criminal justice system with public accusations of murder and YouTube videos?

[jberryhill]

8. Because that's precisely the sort of system the ultra-right wants

I'm surprised that nobody has bothered to mention the latest and greatest exploits of WeAreChange NY here yet.

[mhatrw]

10. It's only because quoting the NY Post and Fox News is bad form here.

You have plenty other forums to crow about the obvious set up on.

[jberryhill]

20. Ah, I see

But chasing Alan Colmes, and shouting at him, at an ATM dispenser booth when he's trying to make a withdrawal from his bank account, is a First Amendment right.

Got it.

But, I wasn't at all suggesting the NY Post story.

Since they were "attacked" by Frum, why not also tell the story about how a woman with cerebral palsy was used as a weapon by an agent of the NWO.

I like the "obvious set up". Yes, instead of sending these brave truth avengers off to prison camps, they are going to be brought down by a series of misdemeanor charges.

This conspiracy, which can kill 3000 folks in broad daylight, plant secret explosives, shoot missiles at the Pentagon, and so forth, can't come up with a way to deal with those pesky kids and their dog....



Jinkies!

[mhatrw]

32. You can tell a lot about a poster by the company he or she keeps. n/t

[mhatrw]

12. What District Attorney? What grand jury?

A small band of people is trying to make a difference against all odds using their First Amendment rights. Why is this so scary to you?

[Flatulo]

15. I believe lynch mobs, in their own small way, were also trying to bring about change. nt

[Flatulo]

17. Do you see a significant difference between what WeAreChange is doing

and stalking? I don't.

Would you mind being chased around with a camcorder all day being called a murderer?

Look, Frum is one of the wrongest guys alive and a complete fool, but I see no inherent First Amendment right to stalk people and publicly accuse them of murder and then post the videos on YouTube.

We have a criminal justice system. If Frum has committed crimes, let the charges come forth.

[Twist_U_Up]

24. I plead the fifth says Frummy. lol

Why do you hate OUR Constitutional Rights? Your not suggesting limiting free speech are you? This forum could get awfully lonely. Or is that the plan?

The questioner was civil, was not vulgar and was not a threat to Frummys safety whatsoever.
This leads one to wonder,what is he hiding?

You would think a man of his intelligence on these matters he would be a little more forth coming with some answers. Maybe actually initiating these debates.

He was at a public venue selling his crap, surely he could answer a few of his fans questions regarding the events he is so qualified for.

He is a snake and should be charged for assault,complicite to murder,conspiracy and treason.

I hope that doesnt upset you that I feel this way ;-)

[Flatulo]

25. Definition of STALK:

"To follow or observe (a person) persistently, especially out of obsession or derangement."

I cherish our constitutional rights. I also cherish the right of people to go about their business without being stalked, harangued or otherwise badgered by anyone with a camcorder and an axe to grind..

If some person or persons chased me around with a video camera accusing me of murder, I would immediately go to court and get a restraining order.

Lastly, if you want to try haranguing me Twist, I'll send you my home address and you can show up with your camcorder and bullhorn.

If you have the clankers.

[mhatrw]

29. So you support the right of someone to adverstise a public event

but then to selectively allow only those who agree with them politically to attend?

Rove has taught you well, young Jedi!

[Twist_U_Up]

33. Pretty transparent isn't he.

they show their spots from time to time.

Now he wants a physical confrontation with me,"if I have the clankers".

Apparently he doesn't understand my screen name enough.

[Flatulo]

37. Hey Twist, you could use a little support there. Ever hear of the 'Bro'?

[Flatulo]

34. Stalking someone is not OK. Howe has no inherent right to demand

an audience with Frum. I don't see how this can be so complicated for you... you seem fairly intelligent.

Try this experiment...

Find someone whom you are attracted to who is not interested in you (shouldn't be hard) and ask him/her out 3-4 times. Then continue to follow him/her around with a camcorder to public events and insist that she answer your questions.

Let me know how that works out for you.

[mhatrw]

39. Yes, if an individual corners another individual one on one three or four times, that is stalking.

When are you suggesting this has happened?

[Flatulo]

41. Frum asked Howe, in no uncertain terms, to 'fuck off'. At that point,

Howe should not have continued to badger him. It's common decency, which Howe seems to lack.

Stalking is not defined by the number of encounters. It is defined by one party making it clear to the other party that the encounter is unwelcome. This may occur during the first encounter.

I believe there are some exceptions that allow the paparazzi to legally follow celebrities around, but I doubt that Frum qualifies as a celebrity.

[Flatulo]

35. Which part of 'stalk' do you not understand?

To pursue someone obsessively is to stalk.

Stalking is illegal in all 50 states.

No one has an inherent first amendment right to demand that another person answer their questions or even acknowledge them.

If Howe wants to attend Frums event and protest Frum all day long in any way he desires, that is perfectly fine with me.

Harranguing someone is a completely different matter and is illegal. Frum would be perfectly within his rights to obtain a restraining order.

[mhatrw]

40. So you can file for a restraining order if someone comes to your publicly

advertised "meet the author" public appearance and asks you an uncomfortable question?

The legal definition of harassment in this case is "a pattern of attending public events after being notified that one's presence is harassing to another."

One uncomfortable encounter cannot make a pattern, and no decent judge would grant a restraining order based on a single non-threatening encounter.

[Flatulo]

42. You're overlooking one important point...

Howe was very clearly made aware that his badgering and videotaping of the event were quite unwelcome. The duration of the encounter was quite lengthy, during which time Howe had many opportunities to withdraw.

Howe repeatedly confronted Frum with essentially the same questions, and this constitutes badgering.

I also strongly disagree that a judge would not grant a restraining order, given the pre-encounter comments that Howe made in his video. He clearly had an agenda to cause extreme discomfort to a man he considered to be a monster and a devil.

Given that context, Howe was clearly out of line.

This may be difficult to parse because of the nature of the man involved (Frum), but try imagining that Howe pulled the same stunt with Al Gore or Mother Theresa. The perceived notoriety of the victim has no bearing on how one should behave.

[mhatrw]

45. It doesn't matter. It can't be a pattern of harassment if it happens

only once and there was no threat to your safety, security or privacy. Frum was a public figure at a public event the purpose of which was to meet and greet the public, so the privacy part doesn't apply.

If he gets hassled by the same guy again, he has a case for a restraining order. Otherwise, he does not.

[Flatulo]

47. The threat to safety/security is not defined by the stalker. It is defined

by the perception of the stalkee. You do not get to decide what is an acceptable pattern.

Every single stalker since the beginning of time has said 'Hey, I just wanted to talk'.

[Flatulo]

27. WeAreChange seriously misunderstands the First Amendment

http://topics.law.cornell.edu/wex/First_amendment

Free speech does not give one the right to engage those individuals who do not wish to be engaged.

For a more thorough understanding of this, look at your state's anti-stalking laws. It is unlawful for anyone to pursue or attempt to engage another person when that person does not wish to be engaged. My right to privacy trumps your rights to invade my privacy with your speech, even in a public place.

So, while it would be perfectly legal to erect a podium in the town square and proclaim your belief that Frum is an evil man (with which I would wholeheartedly agree), it is not lawful to pursue the man in public or private if he makes his wishes clear that he does not wish to engage with you.

In Massachusetts, the most common reason that restraining orders are issued is for domestic conflict, when one party wishes to "just talk" with the other party. If the first party chooses to do so, he/she may obtain a restraining order that forbids the aggressor party from coming closer than <X> feet of the first party.

I would be delighted to see restraining orders drawn against any and all members of WeAreChange or any other body that chooses to confront their targets in this manner.

[mhatrw]

30. Great idea. How about if everbody in the the town of Skokie takes out

a restraining order against everyone in the Nazi party?

That would certainly get around the damn ACLU!

[mhatrw]

28. Publicly confronting someone at a public event is now "stalking"?

Keep this up and we'll have to change its name to the First Half Amendment.

[jberryhill]

19. That would be a great slogan for....

...the KKK as well.

You have a First Amendment right to stand on the street and say what you like about me. You do not have a First Amendment right to follow me around and shout at me.

These people are stalkers, not speakers.

[mhatrw]

31. Better yet, let's put a clause in the First Amendment that excludes Nazis

and 9/11 truth activists! That would set a great precedent!

[Flatulo]

36. Where have I or John advocated silencing anyone? I challenge you to

show me this or retract your ridiculous statement.

Howe can shout from the rooftops for all I care.

Stalking however is illegal.

[mhatrw]

38. Coming to someone's public event and asking them a question is not stalking.

How about the people demonstrating outside Pelosi's home? Do you want to strip them of their rights of political expression as well?

[Flatulo]

43. Demonstrating is perfectly legal. However, since you brought it up...

the SCOTUS has clearly upheld regulations on speech on several occasions.

Back in the 80s, my wife was being harassed on a daily basis by abortion protesters who were demonstrating in front of the Planned Parenthood clinic, which was in the same building in which she worked.

Although they did not technically obstruct her passage, they would run up, scream at her, and shove pictures of aborted fetuses in her face. This behavior caused her to nearly suffer a nervous breakdown. I started escorting her to work, and on one occasion, I actually assaulted a protester. I got him in a headlock and actually knocked him out for a few seconds. It was totally wrong, but I just completely lost it.

This behavior led to the local passage of laws preventing the protesters from coming within 25' of the entrance of a clinic. These laws were challenged and upheld by SCOTUS.

Do you agree with their decision? Should abortion protesters have the right to scream in the faces of women trying to walk down the sidewalk?

[mhatrw]

44. Wow! An emotional appeal using a hot button issue! How unlike you!

Harassment includes:

1. Repeated, intrusive, or unwanted acts, words, or gestures that are intended to adversely affect your safety, security, or privacy, regardless of the relationship between you and the alleged harasser;
2. Targeted residential picketing, which includes:
1. marching, standing, or patrolling by one or more persons directed solely at a particular residential building in a manner that adversely affects the safety, security, or privacy of an occupant of the building, and
2. marching, standing, or patrolling by one or more persons which prevents an occupant of a residential building from gaining access to or exiting from the property on which the residential building is located.
3. A pattern of attending public events after being notified that one's presence is harassing to another.

If it fits one of these definitions, it's harassment. If it doesn't, you may not like it, but it's still protected speech.

[Flatulo]

46. My analogy holds, and Howe violated definition 1 in your list.

He was clearly informed that his questions and presence were unwelcome, yet he persisted in repeating them.

A pattern does not require incidents separated by some minimum amount of time to have elapsed.

Here's an example of harassment:

"Want to go bowling?"

"No, you're a toad. Go away."

"Aw, c'mon, it will be fun."

"I said no. Please go away or I will mace you."

"What's the matter, don't you like me?"

"No, I don't. Please go away or I will shatter your spleen."

"Tell me why you won't go out with me."

Do you agree that this is harassment? Do you agree that it was established within a single encounter? If you can agree with these statements, then can you see that Howe was harassing Frum?

Oh yeah - you really didn't answer my previous question - do you believe that abortion protesters have the right to get into someone's face and badger them? I don't. Whether you consider it a violation of their speech rights or not is irrelevant - it's the law.

[Flatulo]

48. By the way, did you know that you can commit assault without ever touching someone?

In the US, assault can consist of causing someone to feel in danger by your physical proximity.

My Kenpo instructor was, by practical necessity, very versed in the assault statutes. Wagging your finger in someone's face can get you a justified broken nose or black eye. He was constantly reminding his students that they could get in trouble by just raising their hands.

I'm not suggesting that Howe committed assault in any way. He was very non-threatening, and I don't believe Frum had any reason to fear for his safety.

[Flatulo]

9. By the way, the anti-Jewish comments supporting Stewarts's confrontation video are disgusting.

We are Change is certainly getting a lot of support from the 'Joos Did It' crowd.

[mhatrw]

11. Keep up the good work! n/t

[Twist_U_Up]

14. that card again ??

yawn

[Flatulo]

16. Yep - no Joo haters here. Just keep moving.

[Flatulo]

18. Some YouTube comments... nice friends you have there...

"NEOCONZIONISTTHREAT"

"The Jew York Post is guilty of criminal libel, defamation, and slander."

"don't forget the "nazi hunters" forgot to nail the zionist, rockefeller, warburg and bush connections to ww2"

"Considering that the Neocon Zionist cabal planned out & orchestrated 9/11..."

"The neocon cabal is not imaginary but you're right that it is just another wing of the Zionist Jewish crime network which is the most powerful force in the world."

"Not that there aren't any Jesuits or non-Zionists involved necessarily but Zionist Jews are at the top of the power chain."

"David Frum...Jewish lowlife scum"

"Your Jewish Satanic New World Order is going down!!!!!!!!!! "

"There is no debate...9/11 was a Zionist-orchestrated false flag attack."

[Twist_U_Up]

23. For all we know, you and your merry band of misfits wrote that garbage.

I wouldn`t put it past you guys.
I have seen worse tactics coming from the OCTers
just sayin

[Flatulo]

26. For all we know, you're David Frum. nt