"The only thing necessary for evil to triumph in the world is that good men do nothing."
OK, that quote might be a bit over the top for this topic, but being over the top is what this article is all about. And I believe that if I were to sit by and not shine a light on this behavior, it'd be an example of standing by and letting a bully triumph.
The Vice President & Events Director of Greenwood Knights, John Hardwood, went berserk in an email response to a very fair and simple query from a local resident about a recent car show put on by the organization, which was,
Hi, I was surprised to see a booth for the Hells Angels at the Greenwood Car Show this Saturday. I'm wondering how they were allowed to have a booth at the show since they are considered a criminal organization by the US federal government and many other law enforcement agencies around the world. Should it be considered that the Greenwood Car Show supports them?
The resident then included a link that verifies that the Hells Angels are considered a criminal organization, though the Hells Angels are quite famously a two-wheeled gang, making it somewhat strange for them to have a booth at a car show. And they're considered by the US federal government to be a criminal organization. Just recently, I reported that an entire chapter was arrested.
So, all in all, pretty fair, right? Well, that's not how Hardwood saw it.
I won't quote the entire email, but here's the Reddit thread that put us onto the predicament between the parties.
I asked the Greenwood Car Show why they allowed the Hells Angels at their event this weekend. This is their response.
byu/HuggleBear inSeattle
The email response states, "Hello anonymous person, It should be considered that the Greenwood Car Show supports anyone that does charity work and supports their local communities and charitable organizations and events. The Greenwood Car Show however does not support chicken shit people that anonymously judge others without the proper information to do so, as they hide behind their keyboards & spreading hatred."
It goes on to rant some more, as evidenced above.
But if he had just ended his email after the first line, it would have been perfectly acceptable, reasonable, and mature, in my opinion. But Hardwood proceeded to go on a rant about anything and everything he could even faintly tie to his argument. And you're left with a pretty unhinged statement that seemingly comes out of left field.
But what do you think? Did Hardwood seem overly triggered by the question posed to him or was his response justified? Let us know your thoughts in the comments section.
