Buzz Aldrin lands Right Hook in addition to moon!!

RanchMan · Sep 10, 2002

WOW! /w3tcompact/icons/shocked.gif

Just saw a spot on TV where 72 year old was being hounded by one of these "conspiracy theorists" pestering him to swear on a bible that he actually landed on the moon. (This fellow claims it was all a <A target="_blank" HREF=http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2001/ast23feb_2.htm>hoax /w3tcompact/icons/eyes.gif).

Anywho, after changing directions several times to try and get away from him (it was an "ambush" interview as Buzz was leaving the hotel), Buzz "had all he could stand" and CLOCKED the guy with a right hook!!! /w3tcompact/icons/shocked.gif

Normally I'd say that type of behavior is really not appropriate, but have to admit, even though technically it may have been the "wrong" thing to do, my gut says "Good for 'ol BUZZ! Clock that punk!" /w3tcompact/icons/laugh.gif

Not shure if the fellow went down, but this was a good shot - better than I've seen most boxers put out. Anyway, if you get a chance to catch it, check it out. It might just make you smile...../w3tcompact/icons/smile.gif

Chuck52 · Sep 10, 2002

Re: Buzz Aldrin lands Right Hook in addition to mo

Good for Buzz! I see so many interviews on TV where I think I would tell the journalist where to implant his/her mike if I was the interviewee. Any disaster, and you have all these idiots pushing microphones into the faces of crying people asking them, "How does it feel to have lost your relative in such a manner?"

Chuck

Thomas · Sep 10, 2002

Yep..one could say.."eagle has landed" /w3tcompact/icons/wink.gif

knucklehead · Sep 10, 2002

Sometimes there is no other appropriate response. I'd like to see more people get decked when they go way over the line. That's one small facet of my idea of a good community. It'd sure put an end to domestic violence, wouldn't it?

Intellectual ruminations regarding using violence against violence aside (where they belong), it sure would be nice to employ a little Operant Conditioning on some of our more difficult social problems, wouldn't it?

Mosey · Sep 10, 2002

Media people are about as low as they come. I saw a spot on the local news a few years ago that I'll never forget. Some poor guy was the victim of some kind of scam that was going on (I forget the details now) and the news was there doing a story about it and commented that so-and-so did not want to be on camera - as they filmed him walking down the isle to get on an elevator!. They just harass innocent people. My hat's off to Buzz!

cstocks · Sep 10, 2002

Ranchman,
Have you been to <A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.moonmovie.com/>http://www.moonmovie.com/</A>? They'll sell you a movie that they say will prove that man never went to the moon. I am neither endorsing this site nor buying what they are selling. Just passing on info relevent to this post.

RanchMan · Sep 10, 2002

Cstocks -

/w3tcompact/icons/laugh.gif Kindof funny you mentioned that site as that "Investigative Journalist" is the very one who got decked by Aldrin! He is also the one that produced the Fox networks hour long program "Conspiracy Theory: Did We Land on the Moon?"

He is 37 and is a much bigger fellow than Buzz - <A target="_blank" HREF=http://abcnews.go.com/sections/us/DailyNews/buzz020910_attack.html>here's a link</A> to a bit more detail, including a picture. (You have to subscribe to RealVideo to see the video on this site, although I'm not sure if it actually shows the punch or not.)

As you can see, this guy is almost half his age and has both the height & weight advantage and Buzz kicked his..... well, Buzz "did a good job" on him. /w3tcompact/icons/wink.gif

Anywho, I hear that the punk has already started lawsuit proceedings, which doesn't surprise me in the slightest (hence my first comment of it technically being the "wrong" thing to do on Buzz's part.) HOPEFULLY due to the age, weight, & height difference along with the continual "escape" moves Buzz tried before he was cornered and executed the punch, a "common sense" jury/judge will throw it out. 'Course "common sense" isn't that common sometimes. (gee, that sounds a lot like another TBN'ers signature comment..../w3tcompact/icons/wink.gif)

My sentiment is that if we had more folks like Buzz, we'd have fewer "punks" on the streets, more respect for one another and a lot of our problems wouldn't exist. Not saying physical conflict is always the best way to solve an issue, but it isn't all bad either. (Sometimes when you mess with a bull, you get the horns!)

I doubt he'll need it as his finances are probably much better than mine, but I'd be the first to contribute $5 to the "MDF" - (Moonman Defense Fund.) /w3tcompact/icons/laugh.gif /w3tcompact/icons/smile.gif

Go Buzz, Go!

CSAW · Sep 10, 2002

I saw the news footage. I did not see the guy hounding him though, just asking him. Maybe I just missed that part.

However, when you are a celebrity you must put up with media and others. I think Buzz should be put in jail just like any other common violent criminal. And If you watch racing he could share a cell with Tony Stewart. Just because someone is famous does not give him the right to attack anyone.

As far as the conspiricy theory I wouldn't be so sure this guy is a quack. I just happened on the show one day and it raises many valid points. If the pictures are real and not doctored I think he might be on to something.

If you have not seen the show it is well worth watching.

But we all know the government would never lie to us. /w3tcompact/icons/hmm.gif

I believe the government. /w3tcompact/icons/wink.gif

knucklehead · Sep 11, 2002

Well, unless I heard wrong (and the audio is garbled) it appears the dear, sweet, innocent questioner may have been calling Buzz a liar, among other things, or at least implying that his swearing on the Bible old Sweet n' Innocent was thrusting in his face would help Buzz avoid being characterized as such.

I've been watching Fox News, hoping to get a glimpse of the footage again, but it isn't coming up right now.

Sorry if I seem callous, but I don't think everything has to be settled in court, and I don't think anyone needs to tolerate a person who ignores being asked to "shove off". We've gotten weak, and the impolite elements of society have grown too large. I'd say Buzz made a good start.

BAP!

RanchMan · Sep 11, 2002

CSAW-

I did not see the guy hounding him though, just asking him. Maybe I just missed that part.

Yup. The version you saw was edited more heavily than the version I saw - course it doesn't surprise me that some media outlets would take out the part where "their guy" was pushing 'ol Buzz around before hand. Where you generally don’t trust the Government, I generally don’t trust the media.

Just because someone is famous does not give him the right to attack anyone.

Never said anything about celebs having "special privileges" or being "above the law” nor do I think they aren’t entitled to the same protection it offers the average citizen (I don’t subscribe to the “they deserve it” point you make.) 'Course I don't think photographers/journalists have "special rights" to harass, pester, block, stalk or otherwise prevent anyone from going about their normal routine either - they aren't "above the law" either (although a lot of them think they are.)

I think Buzz should be put in jail just like any other common violent criminal. 

Lets see, someone gets in your face, starts yelling at you, when you turn to try and get away, he blocks your path and prevents your escape, and then corners you - he has the weight advantage, height advantage, age advantage and won't let you go. Hmmmm, where you see a "common criminal attack" on Buzz’s part, I see an old man defending himself and trying to get away from a snot-nosed arrogant jerk.

You know though, maybe you have a point. /w3tcompact/icons/shocked.gif I'm not sure about California law, but if it happened here in Texas, based on the evidence I saw (granted, I wasn't there), seems to me that the "reporter" was already in violation of Texas Penal Code § 20.02 - Unlawful Restraint or even Texas Penal Code§ 22.01. Assault when Buzz made his move (20.02 is self explanatory while 22.01 has verbiage about "physical contact" with another person "when the person knows or should reasonably believe that the other will regard the contact as offensive or provocative.") I think it's fair to say that any "reasonable" person should have figured Buzz would find it both "offensive AND provocative." (Incidentally, the penalty increases if it is committed against an elderly individual, such as Aldrin.)

Seems to me that Buzz could use this as a valid Defense to Prosecution on the charge of Assault leveled against him – after all, he was attempting to get away from a "common criminal" as you point out. (kindof like if you shoot someone in the act of self defense - that is a valid Defense to Prosecution to criminal act of “Discharge of a Firearm within City Limits.”) Yea - perhaps we see things the same after all - put the common criminal (the jerk of a reporter) in the clink! /w3tcompact/icons/wink.gif

As far as the conspiricy theory I wouldn't be so sure this guy is a quack. I just happened on the show one day and it raises many valid points. If the pictures are real and not doctored I think he might be on to something....If you have not seen the show it is well worth watching.

Yes I've seen the program. Yes, on the surface they seem like valid points, however, being "into" photography a bit, I caught some definite misleading points they made (The "average Joe" who isn't that familiar with the craft would not catch them.) Even did a bit more research after the program on some of the "issues" that seemed plausible. Suffice to say, after my exploring the various explanations, I found myself having far more faith in the "establishment" than this reporter fellow. Not sure the majority of folks who "buy into" the whole hoax theory have spent much time doing detailed research on the topic.

But we all know the government would never lie to us./w3tcompact/icons/hmm.gif...I believe the government. /w3tcompact/icons/wink.gif

Well, goes to the point of "consider the source." In my book, even though the Govt. doesn't necessarily tell the public everything, I put a lot more faith in the evidence they present than a pseudo-scientific television show created for entertainment value during sweeps week.

Perhaps I shouldn’t have started this thread after all, didn’t really plan on the whole debate over if the U.S. actually went to the moon or if celebrities are entitled to more/less protection under the law. Didn't think I would feel like I needed to make a long post to reply to folks either (I'm tired of that - maybe I'll hang out on the whole "Mesquite Grubbing" thread I started instead...)

-- Oh well, at least some folks seem to get a smile out of the incident as I did. *sigh* /w3tcompact/icons/sad.gif