Stomping Rand Paul Supporter Wants Victim To Apologize To Him

[LibocalypseNow]

And where was her Male Minder? Women are not permitted to be out in public unaccompanied by their Male Minder. That alone is punishable by the lash. Her behavior was not in accordance with Sharia. Her beating was not only justified but was also probably a light sentence. Hopefully she learned her lesson. Praise be Allah.

 

[DiveCon]

Oh MOVE ON you Moveon.org Drama Queens! Most Americans could care less that this despicable little troll got her ass kicked. You guys got about one more day to milk this one so you better get to work. No one cares. MOVE ON!

ya know, really, just shut up
the woman did not deserve to be stepped on
no one does
Profitt was wrong and he will pay the consequences

 

[Propain]

And where was her Male Minder? Women are not permitted to be out in public unaccompanied by their Male Minder. That alone is punishable by the lash. Her behavior was not in accordance with Sharia. Her beating was not only justified but was also probably a light sentence. Hopefully she learned her lesson. Praise be Allah.

Edited by Intense

 

[Propain]

And where was her Male Minder? Women are not permitted to be out in public unaccompanied by their Male Minder. That alone is punishable by the lash. Her behavior was not in accordance with Sharia. Her beating was not only justified but was also probably a light sentence. Hopefully she learned her lesson. Praise be Allah.

Well it looks like I hit the nail right on the head about you. Considering you reported every post I made regarding you specifically.

 

[LibocalypseNow]

And where was her Male Minder? Women are not permitted to be out in public unaccompanied by their Male Minder. That alone is punishable by the lash. Her behavior was not in accordance with Sharia. Her beating was not only justified but was also probably a light sentence. Hopefully she learned her lesson. Praise be Allah.

Well it looks like I hit the nail right on the head about you. Considering you reported every post I made regarding you specifically.

I don't report anyone for anything. Not my style. So i'm not sure what you're babbling on about. I am not a Mod here. Someone else may have reported you but i assure you i didn't. So stop wigging out and praise be Allah.

 

[beowolfe]

Tim Profitt with Rand Paul

Tim Profitt -- the former Rand Paul volunteer who stomped on the head of a MoveOn activist -- told told local CBS station WKYT that he wants an apology from the woman he stomped and that she started the whole thing.

"I don't think it's that big of a deal," Profitt said. "I would like for her to apologize to me to be honest with you."

He then blamed the forceful downward motion of his foot on the head of Valle as a function of chronic back pain, a claim he has made before:

"I put my foot on her, and I did push her down at the very end, and I told her to stay down. I actually put my foot on her to -- I couldn't bend over because I have issues with my back," Profitt said.

More


Equality, rightly understood as our founding fathers understood it, leads to liberty and to the emancipation of creative differences; wrongly understood, as it has been so tragically in our time, it leads first to conformity and then to despotism.
Barry Goldwater

I think most know that the head stomping was out of line and will probably be dealt with in a Civil court. I have no idea if he will be brought up on criminal charges...if he was I would be good with it.
But the "victim" wasn't so innocent herself and she could have legal issues also. She shoved the poster she was carrying into Paul's face through an open window. I really can't feel too sorry for her.

As long as she didn't hit Paul with the poster, then she is 'innocent'. Now, if she hit him with the poster, then she committed assault also......just like the guy who stomped her. And he is a total loon for thinking he deserved an apology. She was already under control and there was no need (back issues or no) for him to put his foot on her.

 

[DiveCon]

Tim Profitt with Rand Paul

Tim Profitt -- the former Rand Paul volunteer who stomped on the head of a MoveOn activist -- told told local CBS station WKYT that he wants an apology from the woman he stomped and that she started the whole thing.

"I don't think it's that big of a deal," Profitt said. "I would like for her to apologize to me to be honest with you."

He then blamed the forceful downward motion of his foot on the head of Valle as a function of chronic back pain, a claim he has made before:

"I put my foot on her, and I did push her down at the very end, and I told her to stay down. I actually put my foot on her to -- I couldn't bend over because I have issues with my back," Profitt said.

More


Equality, rightly understood as our founding fathers understood it, leads to liberty and to the emancipation of creative differences; wrongly understood, as it has been so tragically in our time, it leads first to conformity and then to despotism.
Barry Goldwater

I think most know that the head stomping was out of line and will probably be dealt with in a Civil court. I have no idea if he will be brought up on criminal charges...if he was I would be good with it.
But the "victim" wasn't so innocent herself and she could have legal issues also. She shoved the poster she was carrying into Paul's face through an open window. I really can't feel too sorry for her.

As long as she didn't hit Paul with the poster, then she is 'innocent'. Now, if she hit him with the poster, then she committed assault also......just like the guy who stomped her. And he is a total loon for thinking he deserved an apology. She was already under control and there was no need (back issues or no) for him to put his foot on her.

yes, he is a loon for thinking he deserves an apology
he was the one in the wrong

 

[Meister]

Tim Profitt with Rand Paul

Tim Profitt -- the former Rand Paul volunteer who stomped on the head of a MoveOn activist -- told told local CBS station WKYT that he wants an apology from the woman he stomped and that she started the whole thing.

"I don't think it's that big of a deal," Profitt said. "I would like for her to apologize to me to be honest with you."

He then blamed the forceful downward motion of his foot on the head of Valle as a function of chronic back pain, a claim he has made before:

"I put my foot on her, and I did push her down at the very end, and I told her to stay down. I actually put my foot on her to -- I couldn't bend over because I have issues with my back," Profitt said.

More


Equality, rightly understood as our founding fathers understood it, leads to liberty and to the emancipation of creative differences; wrongly understood, as it has been so tragically in our time, it leads first to conformity and then to despotism.
Barry Goldwater

I think most know that the head stomping was out of line and will probably be dealt with in a Civil court. I have no idea if he will be brought up on criminal charges...if he was I would be good with it.
But the "victim" wasn't so innocent herself and she could have legal issues also. She shoved the poster she was carrying into Paul's face through an open window. I really can't feel too sorry for her.

As long as she didn't hit Paul with the poster, then she is 'innocent'. Now, if she hit him with the poster, then she committed assault also......just like the guy who stomped her. And he is a total loon for thinking he deserved an apology. She was already under control and there was no need (back issues or no) for him to put his foot on her.

You evidently don't know what a simple assault is, Beowolfe. Please take this definition as a learning moment.
Assault: an unlawful act that places another person, without that person's consent, in fear of immediate bodily harm or battery. Simple assault - definition of Simple assault in the Medical dictionary - by the Free Online Medical Dictionary, Thesaurus and Encyclopedia.
The guy is a total loon and broke the law, no doubt about that. Even crazier that he even thought he deserved an apology. We do have common ground, yes.

 

[MarcATL]

I'm sorry, but he has a valid point...you were definitely inferring that she deserved what she got and was not a real victim ("victim") at all.

She put herself out there, and did what she did, Bo. If she was on the sidelines with a sign, she would have been a complete victim.....but she didn't do that, and for some reason none of you can even admit that part of it. I did not infer she should have had her head stomped, I made that completely clear. But, She Was Not Completely Innocent. Incredible!!!!!!!

And you quantify again. This is like the rape victim who dresses sexy....and has to hold some of the blame. Seriously, folks.

It's called being Wrong & Strong, that's the camp Meister and his ilk can ONLY feel comfortable in.

Disgusting!

*spits on the floor*

 

[MarcATL]

She put herself out there, and did what she did, Bo. If she was on the sidelines with a sign, she would have been a complete victim.....but she didn't do that, and for some reason none of you can even admit that part of it. I did not infer she should have had her head stomped, I made that completely clear. But, She Was Not Completely Innocent. Incredible!!!!!!!

AKA..."Yes, the woman was raped by 4 savages, which is absolutely horrendous, but...she did put on a sexy skirt and high heel pumps and walk in a seedy part of town. Not suggesting its her fault or anything, but I'm just sayin' ya know. Also too!"

Despicable.

 

[Meister]

She put herself out there, and did what she did, Bo. If she was on the sidelines with a sign, she would have been a complete victim.....but she didn't do that, and for some reason none of you can even admit that part of it. I did not infer she should have had her head stomped, I made that completely clear. But, She Was Not Completely Innocent. Incredible!!!!!!!

AKA..."Yes, the woman was raped by 4 savages, which is absolutely horrendous, but...she did put on a sexy skirt and high heel pumps and walk in a seedy part of town. Not suggesting its her fault or anything, but I'm just sayin' ya know. Also too!"

Despicable.

Refer to post #281.

 

[Sallow]

Violence to squelch free speech for the most part should be unacceptable. And that does not come with "buts"..

Obviously, you're uninformed on the "whole story", Sallow, as usual. But, you do have your wingnut talking points, so life is good for you.

Having said that, violence to squelch freedom of speech IS unacceptable, yes.

Ummmm..

Yeah.

 

[MarcATL]

She put herself out there, and did what she did, Bo. If she was on the sidelines with a sign, she would have been a complete victim.....but she didn't do that, and for some reason none of you can even admit that part of it. I did not infer she should have had her head stomped, I made that completely clear. But, She Was Not Completely Innocent. Incredible!!!!!!!

AKA..."Yes, the woman was raped by 4 savages, which is absolutely horrendous, but...she did put on a sexy skirt and high heel pumps and walk in a seedy part of town. Not suggesting its her fault or anything, but I'm just sayin' ya know. Also too!"

Despicable.

Refer to post #281.

I'm trying to figure out what's worse...a willful defender or a defender in denial?

 

[Cuyo]

First, yes, if convicted(I think he will be convicted if it goes to trial) should do what is mandated by the conviction....I don't know what the going jail time is or what the charge has been brought against him.
I feel that any one....black, latino, white, asian, republican, democrat, liberal, conservative, athiest, agnotstic, christian, jew......It would have been wrong.
You still will not admit that she commited a simple assault, can you, Cuyo? Restraining her was proper, but the stomp was way out of line and should be dealt with accordingly.

Hand to God, I saw nothing indicating assault on her part. Maybe she was being rude but that's about it.

Apparently you need to see an eye dr. She turned the sign around and stuck it through the window, and Paul flinched. I'm not going to try and change you mind, because I know I can't. But there is simple assault there.

Assault: an unlawful act that places another person, without that person's consent, in fear of immediate bodily harm or battery.
Simple assault - definition of Simple assault in the Medical dictionary - by the Free Online Medical Dictionary, Thesaurus and Encyclopedia.

For a crime to take place, there are three necessary criteria: An Act, Mental Capacity, and Intent. If Paul was startled by an otherwise legal act, no crime has taken place. The dictionary definition you gave of assault could apply to almost anything that startles someone; If intent was lacking, there is no crime. If people are legally hunting in the woods behind my house and a gunshot scares the BeJesus out of me for a couple seconds, there is no crime.

Splitting hairs. I don't think anyone questions that she did not intend to physically harm Mr. Paul, now do they? Or maybe you think she did, but there would be no basis in fact for that accusation.

 

[Sallow]

She put herself out there, and did what she did, Bo. If she was on the sidelines with a sign, she would have been a complete victim.....but she didn't do that, and for some reason none of you can even admit that part of it. I did not infer she should have had her head stomped, I made that completely clear. But, She Was Not Completely Innocent. Incredible!!!!!!!

AKA..."Yes, the woman was raped by 4 savages, which is absolutely horrendous, but...she did put on a sexy skirt and high heel pumps and walk in a seedy part of town. Not suggesting its her fault or anything, but I'm just sayin' ya know. Also too!"

Despicable.

Refer to post #281.

Refer to United States Law.

As in..you cannot tackle a person, who has not attacked you, to the ground and then stomp on their heads.

It is illegal.

 

[Meister]

AKA..."Yes, the woman was raped by 4 savages, which is absolutely horrendous, but...she did put on a sexy skirt and high heel pumps and walk in a seedy part of town. Not suggesting its her fault or anything, but I'm just sayin' ya know. Also too!"

Despicable.

Refer to post #281.

Refer to United States Law.

As in..you cannot tackle a person, who has not attacked you, to the ground and then stomp on their heads.

It is illegal.

First....WTF are you talking about?
Second....her head was not stomped on...let's keep with the facts.

 

[Sallow]

Refer to post #281.

Refer to United States Law.

As in..you cannot tackle a person, who has not attacked you, to the ground and then stomp on their heads.

It is illegal.

First....WTF are you talking about?
Second....her head was not stomped on...let's keep with the facts.

First...um the law?

Second..yeah it was.

That's the fact..jack.

 

[DiveCon]

Refer to United States Law.

As in..you cannot tackle a person, who has not attacked you, to the ground and then stomp on their heads.

It is illegal.

First....WTF are you talking about?
Second....her head was not stomped on...let's keep with the facts.

First...um the law?

Second..yeah it was.

That's the fact..jack.

have you watched the video?
her head was NOT stomped

 

[Meister]

Hand to God, I saw nothing indicating assault on her part. Maybe she was being rude but that's about it.

Apparently you need to see an eye dr. She turned the sign around and stuck it through the window, and Paul flinched. I'm not going to try and change you mind, because I know I can't. But there is simple assault there.

Assault: an unlawful act that places another person, without that person's consent, in fear of immediate bodily harm or battery.
Simple assault - definition of Simple assault in the Medical dictionary - by the Free Online Medical Dictionary, Thesaurus and Encyclopedia.

For a crime to take place, there are three necessary criteria: An Act, Mental Capacity, and Intent. If Paul was startled by an otherwise legal act, no crime has taken place. The dictionary definition you gave of assault could apply to almost anything that startles someone; If intent was lacking, there is no crime. If people are legally hunting in the woods behind my house and a gunshot scares the BeJesus out of me for a couple seconds, there is no crime.

Splitting hairs. I don't think anyone questions that she did not intend to physically harm Mr. Paul, now do they? Or maybe you think she did, but there would be no basis in fact for that accusation.

There was an act....she shoved the sign into the window.
There was Mental capacity....She wasn't crazy, and she knew exactly what she was doing.
There was intent.....She intended to to do exactly what she did, why did she move forward and put the sign through the window?

I'm not a mind reader and you're not a minder reader either. We have no idea what her intent was, so let's stop with that BS.
Sheesh you people are not using the critical part of your brain.

 

[Meister]

Refer to United States Law.

As in..you cannot tackle a person, who has not attacked you, to the ground and then stomp on their heads.

It is illegal.

First....WTF are you talking about?
Second....her head was not stomped on...let's keep with the facts.

First...um the law?

Second..yeah it was.

That's the fact..jack.

Ummm....quote the "law"