What this man does not understand, or is too full of himself to grap, is that his way is the way of anarchy and chaos.

If all of a sudden, people feel they have the right to arrest or attack people with whom they feel have done wrong, where will it stop?

To him, John Bolton is easy... he knows he's wrong, so what's the problem? But what about the person who holds Barack Obama responsible for wrong doing? Are they able to arrest and detain him? What happens when someone gets fed up of not being allow near enough to arrest them, and starts resorting to violence?

This is not how our, or anyone's CIVILIZED society should function. But I can't say I'm surprised. Believing that this behavior is somehow acceptable is just another step in the current ego driven world... where I get to make the decisions, and the question isn't "What have you done?" It's, "What have you done for me?"

You have to take a good look around Washington. You may not see anarchy, but you will find treason and chaos everywhere.

As Monbiot stated; My demonstration has two meanings. Non-violent direct action is both a protest and an exposition. It seeks to demonstrate truths which have been overlooked or forgotten. I sought to remind people that the greatest crime of the 21st century remains unprosecuted, and remains a great crime. If you have read this far, I have succeeded.

A far cry from anarchy, I would say.

I would also say far from non-violent. He rushed the stage and was going to "arrest" Bolton. It was only "non-violent" because it was stopped before it got violent.

A non-violent protest is a march, a walk, or a sit-in... not trying to arrest someone. The moment your intention is to lay your hands on, or throw something at someone, it becomes a violent protest, as it could be considered "battery."

To me, his motives are inconsequential. It would be wrong if someone rushed Bill Clinton, it would be wrong if someone rushed George Bush… it is wrong, period… motive changes nothing.

I find it quite amusing that this guy's name reads a lot like "moonbat".

From Wikipedia:
The pejorative political epithet "Moonbat" is often used by various political commentators to mock Monbiot.[30] The epithet was coined in 2002 by Perry de Havilland of Samizdata.net, a libertarian weblog. The claim that the term was originally used as a play on Monbiot's surname[31] has been denied by de Havilland - the full epithet being "barking moonbat". Monbiot himself does not object to the epithet.[32]

Also read ..