Jun 10th, 2009 at 2:46 pm
Shooting at the Holocaust Museum
Following up on the assassination of George Tiller, we appear to have a new outbreak of right-wing domestic terrorism as white supremacist James Von Brunn goes on a shooting spree at the U.S. Holocaust Museum.
Not a great deal more to say about this right now, but I hope that everyone who mau-maued the Department of Homeland Security for expressing concern about this kind of thing feels appropriately ashamed of themselves.
132 Responses to “Shooting at the Holocaust Museum”
Register
RSSLogin
Advertisement
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Books By Matthew Yglesias
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Abortion
Afghanistan
Africa
Basketball
Budget
China
climate
Congress
Crime
DC
Defense Budget
Demographics
Economics
Economy
Energy
EU
Finance
Gender
Health Care
History
Inequality
International Law
International Relations
Iran
Israel
Media
Monetary Policy
National Security
NBA
Pakistan
Palestine
planning
Political Reform
Public Health
Public Opinion
Race
Regulation
Sarah Palin
Science
Sports
Stimulus
taxes
Technology
Trade
transportation
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Contact Matthew Yglesias
Use this form to contact blog author Matthew Yglesias.
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Matt YglesiasContact Me
Donate
June 10th, 2009 at 2:51 pm
What the hey, von Brunn sounds like Mr. abb1s’ kind of guy.
June 10th, 2009 at 2:55 pm
It’s only going to get worse, much worse. And Republicans are incapable of shame, or admitting error of any kind. So don’t expect any second thoughts from the party of Limbaugh and Palin.
June 10th, 2009 at 2:56 pm
When Homeland Security wrote up some warnings about the chance of right wing domestic terrorism, they were just hatin’ on white people, says Limbaugh and his ilk. Apparently the right-wing terrorist nutcases disagreed.
June 10th, 2009 at 2:57 pm
If the right wing does not feel ashamed of the last 8 years, they are incapable of the emotion.
June 10th, 2009 at 2:59 pm
I hope that everyone who mau-maued the Department of Homeland Security for expressing concern about this kind of thing feel appropriately ashamed of themselves.
Based on their collective track record, I would advise you not to hold your breath.
June 10th, 2009 at 3:00 pm
Sure sounds like a left-wing extremist like the guy who shot and killed that Army recruiter last week.
We seem to be in a spate of left-wing domestic terrorism here in this country, no doubt fed by the left-wing hate speech being spouted daily by the extreme left.
June 10th, 2009 at 3:01 pm
Shorter Al: Look over there!
June 10th, 2009 at 3:01 pm
When I visited the museum in 1995, they patted me down for some unknown reason. They did this to maybe 1 in 10 visitors.
How did this guy get close enough to shoot a guard? At 89, he couldn’t have been moving too fast. Was he wearing a trenchcoat to conceal the weapon? Who dresses like that in DC in June?
I hope the guard pulls through.
June 10th, 2009 at 3:02 pm
Al says, “Sure sounds like a left-wing extremist like the guy who shot and killed that Army recruiter last week.
We seem to be in a spate of left-wing domestic terrorism here in this country, no doubt fed by the left-wing hate speech being spouted daily by the extreme left.”
What does this drivel even mean?
June 10th, 2009 at 3:02 pm
The elephant in the room: guns.
Blame right-wing radio hosts, drugs or videogames; but don’t take away our precious guns!
June 10th, 2009 at 3:03 pm
Remember kids, only the speech of rap musicians and video game designers can inspire violence.
June 10th, 2009 at 3:03 pm
left-wing extremist like the guy who shot and killed that Army recruiter last week
Fun fact – religious wackjobs, even Muslim religious wackjobs, are in no rational sense “left-wing.”
June 10th, 2009 at 3:03 pm
Al, at least try. As for the Arkansas guy, he was Muslim, so probably very conservative.
June 10th, 2009 at 3:05 pm
That’s either a fake Al, or he’s phoning it in.
June 10th, 2009 at 3:07 pm
Probable response of the NRA: If the patrons at the museum had been armed, they could have offed the perp before he could have gotten a shot off.
June 10th, 2009 at 3:09 pm
This really is Go Time for the crazies, isn’t it? These things are just going to escalate until we have another Oklahoma City, or something even worse.
June 10th, 2009 at 3:10 pm
Sure sounds like a left-wing extremist like the guy who shot and killed that Army recruiter last week.
Fantasy world. The only place that’s safe for Al.
June 10th, 2009 at 3:11 pm
Thank God the NRA is pushing hard on legislation to annul all of DC’s gun laws. You see, if all of the visitors to the museum were packing heat, this never would have happened.
June 10th, 2009 at 3:12 pm
I hope that everyone who mau-maued the Department of Homeland Security for expressing concern about this kind of thing feel appropriately ashamed of themselves.
I do think the threat of rightwing violence is overblown, just as the threat of muslim terrorism is overblown all in the name of funds for the security apparatus. Not to say it’s unheard of.
Shooting people at a Holocaust museum? This 89 year old seems more looney tunes than rightwing. I mean if there was a hell, he’d have a first class ticket.
June 10th, 2009 at 3:13 pm
Shorter Al: Look over there!
Facts. There have been what now appears to be a second instance of “right wing” political violence. They get tons and tons of press coverage full of people seeking to paint the entire conservative movement as responsible. The incedent that Al refers to is one of several acts of political violence that have been committed over the last few weeks that you here nothing about and no one seeks to blame on anyone other than the gunmen. While I will not join Al in calling these “left wing” gunmen per se, the fact is that the people getting all up in arms over some political violence and ignoring other political violence are doing so out of purely partisan considerations. As this thread will be full of people claiming that everyone who had ever voted republican is culpible for these murders, Al pointing out your hypocrisy is completely on point.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/jun/04/murder-by-any-means/
June 10th, 2009 at 3:13 pm
As this thread will be full of people claiming that everyone who had ever voted republican is culpible for these murders
Ah, the strawman. Always the idiot right-winger’s best friend.
June 10th, 2009 at 3:16 pm
Duvall,
Nonsense. A member of a religious group who opposes the existing power structure, is left wing. Was Thomas Muentzer not a man of the left? Or Girolamo Savonarola?
That said, Islamic movements have not traditionally been numerous enough in this country to have much political influence, and are thus rather hard to classify as left-wing or right-wing. I have no problem, however, classifying Jeremiah Wright or Gustavo Gutierrez as men of the left.
June 10th, 2009 at 3:17 pm
“Ahmed al-Jihad”? Why didn’t I think of that nick?
June 10th, 2009 at 3:18 pm
So all Republicans are now left wing.
Nice. Thanks for your daily self-refuting joke.
June 10th, 2009 at 3:18 pm
Ah, the strawman. Always the idiot right-winger’s best friend.
Go back and read the comments from some of the Tiller threads and then tell me this is a straw man. This is a response to observable fact.
June 10th, 2009 at 3:19 pm
The DHS report singled supporters of out two libertarian candidates was a clear attempt to scare libertarians all of whom disapproved of these tactics when Bush did them as well. None of the shooters are libertarians.
June 10th, 2009 at 3:20 pm
Re JD
Ah, the Washington Times, personal propaganda sheet of the Reverend Sun Yung Moon, noted fascist goat fucker, convicted felon and ex-con. The Washington Times is about as reliable a source of information as Pravda and Isvestia were during the former Soviet Union.
June 10th, 2009 at 3:20 pm
Uh, if it’s an “observable fact,” you should have no problem providing us with an example. Then again, you cited the Washington Times and can’t write good English, so I guess we would have to do your work for you.
Anyways, yeah. Whole lot of wingnut radio types have been killing people lately. This is not a surprise.
June 10th, 2009 at 3:21 pm
Yes, you know, 15th-Century German theologians are precisely the examples I would use to illuminate the left-right divide in 21st century America. I think they have tremendous explanatory power.
June 10th, 2009 at 3:22 pm
Did I mention the shooter was an habitué of Ron Paul websites?
I’m sorry, you were saying … ?
June 10th, 2009 at 3:23 pm
Also, while the Tiller killing was an extreme extension of right wing ideolgy as the right wing is in fact against abortion, calling this right-wing is sorta deceptive. Conservatives are not pro-Holocost, as our Isreal policy preferences should show. Liberals are the ones most outspoken about our need to work with Holocost denying nations and individuals. Now Obama properly spoke against Holocost denail in his Ciaro speech, and I am not trying to say that this is the work of a left wing individual, but I do think that calling this right-wing misleading.
June 10th, 2009 at 3:23 pm
A member of a religious group who opposes the existing power structure, is left wing.
So pro-life religious activists, opposed to existing abortion rights, are left-wing? WTF?
June 10th, 2009 at 3:25 pm
As I recall you thought it was a good thing that conservatives complained about this. Something about how we need them to worry about executive power.
June 10th, 2009 at 3:26 pm
“A member of a religious group who opposes the existing power structure, is left wing.”
Even when the left wing is considered the most anti-religious of all the wings? The left wing is pro-gay, pro-women’s rights, pro-secular- but if you need to put a muslim shooter someplace, that’s where he goes. Sweet!
June 10th, 2009 at 3:26 pm
The incedent that Al refers to is one of several acts of political violence that have been committed over the last few weeks that you here nothing about and no one seeks to blame on anyone other than the gunmen.
Possibly because there’s no obvious larger American movement to worry about that might be implicated in the case of the shooting at the base. What in gawd’s name would an American committed to radical Islam see favorably in broad program of “the Left”? Antipathy or apathy toward religion? More rights for women?
June 10th, 2009 at 3:26 pm
From von Brunn’s own website:
No, that’s not right-wing at all. Hell, that could be written by Obama himself! What could anyone be thinking calling this guy a right-winger?
June 10th, 2009 at 3:29 pm
Did I mention the shooter was an habitué of Ron Paul websites?
I’m sorry, you were saying … ?
I’m sure a Kerry supporter or two committed a crime after 2004 election, if the Bush administration put out a memo saying to treat Kerry supporters as potential criminals would you be ok with it.
June 10th, 2009 at 3:29 pm
Here’s Ron Paul with Don Black.
The DHS doesn’t have to link them, there they are. And Ron Paul refused to give back the money.
Libertarians. Racists. Considering their demographics, they’re a natural fit.
June 10th, 2009 at 3:31 pm
Please show me where Kerry consorted with a “criminal” organization. I’ve already shown you a libertarian consorting with a racist organization. If you had waited a second to post, you would have realized that your analogy is non-analogous, and makes you look desperate and stupid.
Is it possible you’re just a wannabe, who knows nothing about his own supposed movement?
June 10th, 2009 at 3:33 pm
as the right wing is in fact against abortion
It most definitely is not. If you control for religious fundamentalism, women on the right wing get abortions at the same rate as everyone else. Religious fundamentalist women have slightly lower rates for getting abortions.
June 10th, 2009 at 3:33 pm
Coming tomorrow: Bay Buchanan’s column decrying the gassing of Von Brunn by hateful left-wing bloggers.
June 10th, 2009 at 3:33 pm
Over the last couple of days, I’ve been involved in a discussion on the Motley Moose about Holocaust Denial groups on Facebook and the BNP winning seats in the U.K. The discussion has already generated over 170 comments. That was while it was still an academic discussion about whether it is better to give these groups exposure or to pressure FB to shut them down. This latest shooting ups the ante.
June 10th, 2009 at 3:35 pm
The shooter was also very popular at Free Republic.
Natch.
June 10th, 2009 at 3:35 pm
Royce,
I’m fairly socially conservative (pro-life, opposed to modern cultural trends like postmodenism, second wave feminism, and soft-on-crime attitudes) and consider myself on the Left. Funnily enough, politics does not, for all of us, come down purely to the social issues. A Muslim might vote Democratic because of their positions on economics, foreign policy, or the environment, as I do.
June 10th, 2009 at 3:36 pm
That picture says as much about Ron Paul as Obama being in the same room Bill Ayers says about Obama which is to say, nothing.
June 10th, 2009 at 3:38 pm
Probable response of the NRA: If the patrons at the museum had been armed, they could have offed the perp before he could have gotten a shot off.
I mean, this fact set hardly constitutes an argument against the idea that the solution to crazies with guns is non-crazies with guns.
June 10th, 2009 at 3:40 pm
I agree, you’ve said nothing.
Don Black is a racist leader right now. Ayers set a bomb when Obama was EIGHT. By the time Obama wound up on a board with Ayers, Ayers had already been vetted by Republicans, which is why the Ayers talking point only works on people naiive enough to be libertarians.
Any more lame false-equivalencies you care to hide behind? Or are you just going to run away?
Neither would surprise me.
June 10th, 2009 at 3:42 pm
That DHS report was pretty crappy. It was very general and contained no new information. From a civil rights perspective, I find it creepy to have a government agency called the Department of Homeland Security issuing reports like that. No different from what the government did in the 60’s and 70’s to civil rights groups and antiwar groups.
June 10th, 2009 at 3:44 pm
No different from what the government did in the 60’s and 70’s to civil rights groups and antiwar groups.
You obviously haven’t read up on what the government did in the 60’s and 70’s to civil rights and antiwar groups. It was, ah, a bit more aggressive than general reports about nebulous dangers.
June 10th, 2009 at 3:45 pm
There are, count ‘em, 300 million people in this country! I don’t consider a shooting or a bombing here and there especially significant, apart from the obvious human consequences. Apart from the empirical question of significance, it’s strategically inane to encourage would-be shooters and bombers to think they’ll make a difference, however indirectly.
June 10th, 2009 at 3:46 pm
A member of a religious group who opposes the existing power structure, is left wing.
As a self-described “socialist”, Hector is one of a kind. He is a mix of Michele Bachman and Stalin. At least we know who his #1 enemies are: hipsters.
June 10th, 2009 at 3:48 pm
The libertarian ran away.
So sad.
I was all ready for the “Obama started his career in Ayers’ living room” nonsense.
Oh well.
June 10th, 2009 at 3:52 pm
And now FreeRepublic has scrubbed the shooter’s postings.
All the guts and courage of a libertarian.
June 10th, 2009 at 3:55 pm
Why oh why,
Ah, this from the guy who keeps insisting that French and German social democrats are somehow ’socialist’ (As opposed to, you know, the United _Socialist_ Party of Venezuela).
Father Cardenal was an _actual_ socialist, unlike your French and German pals, was he somehow not left-wing?
My number #1 enemies- well, it’s probably a tie between capitalists, libertarians, second wave feminists, pro-choicers, and Jihadist barbarians.
June 10th, 2009 at 3:55 pm
I don’t consider a shooting or a bombing here and there especially significant, apart from the obvious human consequences.
Except when the victim(s) are in fact unique, as in the case of Dr. Tiller.
June 10th, 2009 at 3:58 pm
The vast majority of libertarians are non violent the DHS report painted us all with the same broad brush. Was everyone who opposed the Vietnam War a potential terrorist on account of the Weathermen?
June 10th, 2009 at 4:01 pm
Al, at least try. As for the Arkansas guy, he was Muslim, so probably very conservative.
Huh? The guy was an anti-war fanatic. It is all about opposing the war, which is a left-wing crusade.
June 10th, 2009 at 4:03 pm
The vast majority of libertarians are non violent the DHS report painted us all with the same broad brush.
Oh, bullshit, the report says nothing of the sort.
June 10th, 2009 at 4:12 pm
Let’s never hear about this shooter again. Like that’ll happen. He’s infamous now, which is as good as famous for some people.
June 10th, 2009 at 4:13 pm
I very much hope the guard recovers. But in a nation of 300 Million people, an occasional , ineffectual nut like this shooter is no significant threat to the nation or to the Constitution. A far greater threat to the nation –and to progressives — lies in the unnecessary and unchecked expansion of government power based on politicians milking the overreaction.
Thus, I think it greatly cheapens the word “Terrorist” to apply it to a single, elderly nut. Real terrorists are a major, unusual threat calling for unusual measures. That fact gets buried if every criminal act is described as terrorism.
June 10th, 2009 at 4:16 pm
Re lurking libertarian at 56: “The vast majority of libertarians are non violent the DHS report painted us all with the same broad brush ”
————-
I agree that sweeping judgment was in error.
The vast majority of libertarians are boring, ineffectual pussies.
June 10th, 2009 at 4:16 pm
I agree with Don. We’re not talking about the Lincoln assassination here.
June 10th, 2009 at 4:18 pm
This is going to sound weird, but Don Williams is right.
June 10th, 2009 at 4:18 pm
The name of the shooter at the Holocaust Museum was VON BRUNN???
Fuck me — you could’t make this shit up. It would get laughed out of Hollywood studios.
June 10th, 2009 at 4:19 pm
No, LL, you just don’t understand the difference between “John is a man” and “All men are John.”
June 10th, 2009 at 4:19 pm
This is going to sound weird, but Don Williams is right.
June 10th, 2009 at 4:21 pm
I think whether von Brunn is a “terrorist” depends on his motivation, but I do agree with Don that the threat of a lone nut — assuming that’s what he is (which we don’t really know yet) — is not so great as to warrant a reaction different than for any other criminal act.
June 10th, 2009 at 4:21 pm
Von Brunn was part of a network of individuals committed to using violence to bring about a race war. We really need to hesitate to use the term “terrorist” to describe him? Strange how many “lone nuts” there are all of a sudden…
June 10th, 2009 at 4:26 pm
joe from Lowell, I remember that during the Bush administration many environmentalist groups complained that DHS was using eco-terrorism as a pretext to silence them I don’t think my complaints are any different.
June 10th, 2009 at 4:29 pm
Probable response of the NRA: If the patrons at the museum had been armed, they could have offed the perp before he could have gotten a shot off.
I mean, this fact set hardly constitutes an argument against the idea that the solution to crazies with guns is non-crazies with guns.
This fact set isn’t even a fact set. OK, sure, in theory, in some hypothetical imaginary set-of-Die-Hard world, the patrons “could have offed the perp”. Oooh, tough guy language.
In the real world, though, that is, the world in which we live, although maybe I should just say “I” because I don’t know about you, non-crazies with guns couldn’t have “offed the perp” until after he got a few shots off. Anyone so trigger-happy is crazy.
June 10th, 2009 at 4:32 pm
I’d been waiting for another one. Expecting the rule of 3 to apply.
June 10th, 2009 at 4:35 pm
The Tiller murder probably doesn’t qualify as domestic terrorism-though you might be able to stretch it and get it in under 5Bi. But let’s count it anyway.
We’ve had two incidents in a few weeks after many weeks of, well, nothing similar. It’s a little soon to declare this part of a pattern, especially when the report Matt is referring to was couched in “possible,” “could,” “perhaps” and “maybe.”
A good part of the reason for the outrage over the report was the singling out of Iraq/Afghanistan veterans for concern as potential terrorists. Do these two shootings, neither of which involved that category of veterans, vindicate the report, Matt?
I thought the report was all too typical of the shoddy research, threat inflation, and cherry-picking of data to support a pre-determined conclusion common to intelligence estimates. Readers doubting me on this should read the actual report and judge for themselves.
These two incidents have not changed my opinion on that matter.
What will change my opinion is if we start seeing incidents, over a sustained period of time, involving Iraq and Afghanistan veterans with right-wing political viewpoints. (Notice I use the word “will.” Not qualified with “perhaps,” “possibly,” or “maybe”.)
I’m guessing the chance Matt will read this is about zero, but if I’m wrong, I hope he starts thinking long and hard about when he is willing to accept the word of unsourced intelligence reports.
If anyone reading this isn’t just dismissing me (and since I’m not me-tooing, I’m willing to bet that is a small number of people), please, read that report and note the amount of qualification in it.
June 10th, 2009 at 4:37 pm
Let’s all bow our heads for a moment of silence
And pray with our ObaFuhrer’s
Friend, Minister, Guide and Counselor
The Reverend Jeremiah Wright:
“Them Jews aren’t going to let him talk to me.”
June 10th, 2009 at 4:38 pm
Environmentalists complained that DHS was paying informants to join their organizations and spy on them. No way in hell is your local libertarian clatch going to have that happen to them.
June 10th, 2009 at 4:40 pm
His real surname is apparently merely Brunn–Von Brunn is his Teutonic, neo-Nazi nom de guerre.
The back and forth about left-wing vs. right-wing terrorism misses the point. First of, all it’s all evil, regardless of motivation. Secondly, the apparent motivating ideologies of the Arkansas shooter and the Museum shooter are Islamism and Naziism, respectively. Islam is a religion that predates contemporary ideological constructs of left and right, and its militants existed long before Communists and Nazis. The Arkansas shooter was motivated by a force distinct from, but as pernicious as, left wing or right wing: religious fanaticism.
Naziism is an ideology of the right, but of course one does not become a neo-fascist terrorist by virtue of being extremely conservative. And as for the abortion shooter, the motivation appears also to be theocratic, rather than “right wing” per se. Who knows though? Our fellow poster Hector (N.B., I know he doesn’t support terrorism) appears to be a militantly anti-abortion Catholic socialist proudly of the left.
Fact is America has always been home its share of ideological kooks and I believe DHS is fully justified in keeping a vigilant eye on both the radical right and the radical ledt.
June 10th, 2009 at 4:42 pm
Re Bryce at 68: “Von Brunn was part of a network of individuals committed to using violence to bring about a race war. ”
————
Then they are pretty fucking ineffective.
Look, send the asshole to prison for life –although Alan Dershowitz could probably get him off.
If you find evidence that others conspired with him to carry this act out, then send them to prison for long terms as well. If the guard dies, execute everyone seriously involved.
The point is: The CRIMINAL CODE is more than sufficient to handle this.
If REAL terrorists were involved, the Building would’t be standing — and there would simultaneous explosions around the country — and there would be no evidence of who was behind it. THAT would justify unusual measures.
We need to keep a distinction between criminals and terrorists. I’m seeing reports of fucking rowdy schoolchildren being threatened with terrorist charges.
June 10th, 2009 at 4:47 pm
“A good part of the reason for the outrage over the report was the singling out of Iraq/Afghanistan veterans for concern as potential terrorists. Do these two shootings, neither of which involved that category of veterans, vindicate the report, Matt?”
Wow, I didn’t realize how fast goalposts could be moved these days. Back here on the ground, WAY more people were up in arms (no pun intended) over the inclusion of the “right wing” language than they were about singling out veterans.
Furthermore, I think it’s worth pointing out that in the last 7 years the military did recruit gang members. Pictures of tagged humvees appeared in the news a few years ago, in fact. Now those gang members have military-grade training in firearms and are back on the streets. At least that I know of killed several people including cops commando-style.
June 10th, 2009 at 4:47 pm
Actually, seems like a terrorist is simply anyone wishing to use some means (usually violence) to instill fear in a society and, thus, make that society act differently, change policy, etc.
For example, the Bush Administration reaction to 9/11 — stripping away civil rights, violating treaties and laws, invading countries that were not a threat — was a classic case of terrorism working as intended. Instead of standing by our nation’s principles, Bush Co. chucked those principles aside out of fear. Hell, that’s the very defense Cheney has used while defending torture: they were scared.
And, as Ok. City proved, it need not be a large group or network. A small cadre is more than enough to instill terror.
While I totally agree we should be conscientious about over-using the term, it really does describe the recent shootings quite well on numerous levels. Especially in the Tiller situation, since the clinic is now closed for fear of additional violence (I actually know someone involved).
June 10th, 2009 at 4:53 pm
Actually, the report said that some groups may try to recruit vets, not that the vets themselves would become terrorists because … well, just because.
Nice try, though.
June 10th, 2009 at 4:57 pm
while i agree that it would be nice if conservatives noted that racism does apparently still exist in this country (apart from the rampant “racism” against white people, of course) i don’t think calling this guy a terrorist or the abortion doctor murder a terrorist act is a good idea. i know the point is to frame the argument in the same way that the right wing does, but i think this is a huge part of the problem. if we don’t like it when the right wing goes crazy and calls everything terrorism, we shouldn’t do the same thing. it makes the discussion of the topic more vague, makes people angry, and doesn’t accomplish anything of substance. we shouldn’t try to further sensationalize already disturbing issues by conflating them with a whole other set of arguments.
June 10th, 2009 at 4:58 pm
Tapir Boy,
I appreciate your insightful post. One quibble: i’m high church Anglican, please, not Catholic. No disrespect to the Church of Rome intended, of course.
June 10th, 2009 at 4:58 pm
Re Mark D at 78: “While I totally agree we should be conscientious about over-using the term, it really does describe the recent shootings quite well on numerous levels. Especially in the Tiller situation, since the clinic is now closed for fear of additional violence (I actually know someone involved).”
———-
I have sympathy for the family of Dr Tiller — but I think a far better memorial to him would have been to have kept the clinic open. If not for late term abortions, then for 1st term ones.
Administered by armed family members with CCW permits who were prepared to shot the next violent anti-abortion protester right between the eyes.
Maybe they could not find any other doctor to staff it. But in that case, I would have burned the fucking building to the ground and salted the ashes before I would have sold it to the anti-abortionists.
No one in his right mind wants a violent and lawless society. But at some point citizens have to be adults and have to refuse to be intimidated. The police can not be a 24-hour nanny. And the LAW says they do NOT have to be — that they have no obligation to protect any one citizen.
If you try to turn the FEDERAL government into a mommy surrogate who will make life totally risk-free, you will end up with something far more dangerous than any possible threat.
June 10th, 2009 at 5:02 pm
The guy was an anti-war fanatic. It is all about opposing the war, which is a left-wing crusade.
To state the obvious, the fact that many people on the left oppose the Iraq War does not mean that everyone who opposes the Iraq War is on the left.
Al is being particularly inept today. I wonder if he still has enough humanity left that his heart really isn’t in this one.
June 10th, 2009 at 5:05 pm
By the way, I’m neutral on the use of the term “terrorism” for these acts, but I think the more important question is what, if any, sort of organizational or institutional support might be involved in these acts. And that isn’t just a criminal issue (although in some cases it might be).
June 10th, 2009 at 5:06 pm
Sorry, Hector: I’ve always been impressed with high church Anglo-Catholicism; dare I say it, you have my “empathy.”
June 10th, 2009 at 5:19 pm
With no intention of diminishing the seriousness of this incident…
Jonah Goldberg should give this guy a stern talking-to: his admiration for fascism clearly indicates that he is a granola-munching liberal. On the other hand, he hates liberals.
Over to you, Jonah.
June 10th, 2009 at 5:26 pm
Re Mark D at 79: “Actually, the report said that some groups may try to recruit vets, not that the vets themselves would become terrorists because … well, just because. ”
————-
I haven’t read the report but I would think the analysts were just tactfully pointing out the obvious:
That the flag-waving, lapel-pin wearing, National Anthem singing Republicans “supported the troops” by fucking them in the most vicious, deceitful way possible.
Terrorism if often fueled by rage. And
it must be fucking infuriating to have served in combat for years — and to realize it was in service of a lie crafted by self-serving draft-dodgers for private interests.
And to combat veterans, the Secret Service doesn’t even qualify as light infantry.
June 10th, 2009 at 5:33 pm
Guard died. Which means anyone associated with Von Brunn must be getting dammed nervous. I don’t have a law degree but I seem to recall that co-conspirators are guilty of murder as well.
Be interesting to check the Internet caches and see which sites have been purged in the last hour or so.
June 10th, 2009 at 5:35 pm
Don–
Excellent points, and I agree: They should have kept the clinic open. But the threat of violence (well beyond just shooting) was simply too great. After all, it’s not like this was the first time anything happened to Tiller–he had been harassed for YEARS, as had anyone who ever worked there (such as the person I know), visited there, talked to anyone there, etc. It really was frightening for many people.
And that’s kinda my point about the terrorism label: Today’s incident may not necessarily qualify because the dude seemed to be more interested in killing anyone non-white-Christians and/or those who have no hatred toward Jews, rather than having any sort of true, honest, and coordinated political agenda he hoped to accomplish as a result of his action.
But in Tiller’s case, it does fit, IMHO, and here’s why:
1.) It was a coordinated effort of harassment, intimidation and, yes, terror, done by an organized group;
b.) Other legal abortion providers around the nation have had similar issues, with similar groups (and, in at least one case, the very same group);
iii.) The intent of the actions was to instill terror and, thus, change behavior, policy, actions, etc.
This is NOT to say that all pro-life groups are terrorist organizations, nor that all pro-lifers are terrorists. Dear lord no. But there are, in fact, pro-life groups that behave much like terrorists and are willing to carry out terrorist acts to get their way.* That’s just a fact.
Granted, this may all be chalked up to semantics, but it is an important distinction that should be discussed. Otherwise, and as others have pointed out, the word starts to lose meaning.
(*Note that one could use several various, nebulous groups in this way, including some environmental groups on the left. So please don’t see it as some “only applies to the right” label. It doesn’t)
June 10th, 2009 at 5:37 pm
@Tim B, 77
The American Legion complained the references to veterans in April, and got an apology. I don’t know about anyone else, but that was the part of the report that irked me.
Speaking of changing the goalposts, would you care to respond to any of the criticisms I made about the report itself? (That is vague, couched in vague language (could, maybe, perhaps, possible), full of cherry picked data, and unsourced?) Or to my criticism that a grand total of 2 incidents doesn’t vindicate the report at all?
Your comment about gang members appears to be true, but unless those gangs are the Aryan Nations, it’s irrelevant to the report, which doesn’t mention gangs at all. (Last I knew, the Crips and the Bloods (the gangs mentioned in the news story I linked to) were not right-wing white supremacist organizations.)
This has shown up at Talking Points Memo as well, so I’m guessing it’s suddenly become a talking point (joke intended) for people of Matt’s political ilk. Which means critics of the report and of the idea that the report was vindicated will be dismissed, probably.
@Jane, 80. Your comments are sensible and logical. They will also almost certainly be ignored, as a good part of the partisan commentary game is “my side’s argument is right, no matter what.” This is true for the right as well as the left. When the grandees of the movement issue ukases like “The DHS report is vindicated” and “the murder of Dr. Tiller is domestic terrorism,” the foot soldiers are expected to echo, not criticize.
June 10th, 2009 at 5:48 pm
Don – Although the law varies from jurisdiction to juridiction, the general rule is that someone is guilty of a conspiracy to commit murder when he agrees with at least one other person to commit murder and at least one of them does some act in furtherance of the conspiracy. Moreover, each conspirator is punishable to the same extent as is provided for the punishment of the crime itself. In short, any conspirator would have committed conspiracy to murder whether or not the guard had died.
June 10th, 2009 at 5:49 pm
To state the obvious, the fact that many people on the left oppose the Iraq War does not mean that everyone who opposes the Iraq War is on the left.
To state the obvious, because many people on the right oppose abortion does not mean that everyone who opposes abortion is on the right.
So, by your logic, there is no evidence Tiller’s killer is on the right.
June 10th, 2009 at 5:54 pm
[...] Matthew Yglesias [...]
June 10th, 2009 at 5:57 pm
[...] as long as intemperate liberal bloggers are using the occasion to score points against “the right,” who they somehow connect to the murder of George Tiller and the shooting at the [...]
June 10th, 2009 at 5:59 pm
@Don Williams, 87.
I’ve linked to the report twice already in these comments, but one more won’t hurt. It’s here and it’s six pages long, so it’s not too hard of a read.
I really wish people would read the thing before declaring it vindicated. It’s an embarassing example of the same kind of problems with intelligence analysis that have been dogging us since 9/11, repeatedly.
Consider, for example, circular reporting, a big problem in the community, especially in the Homeland Security Front, according to the WMD Commission report. On page 7 of the report, the “prominent civil rights organization” is probably the Southern Poverty Law Center, and the reference is likely to this. Well, the Southern Poverty Law Center turned right around and cited the DHS report to back their claims.
It’s problematic enough that government agencies rely on private organizations for intelligence to this degree (especially ones which have been criticized for engaging in threat inflation). The very clear instance of circular reporting in this should make people very cautious about declaring it vindicated.
June 10th, 2009 at 6:05 pm
[...] from Andrew Sullivan, this garbage from Gawker, and this shameful post from highly overrated Matthew Yglesias of Think Progress, which I might add (hat tip to Joseph Lawler) [...]
June 10th, 2009 at 6:07 pm
Re: How did this guy get close enough to shoot a guard? At 89, he couldn’t have been moving too fast.
His age may well be the reason no one was suspicious of him. How many times have security personnel been held up to mockery for searching little old ladies instead of swarthy Muslim-looking guys?
Re: The elephant in the room: guns.
Banning guns would not keep determined people from getting hold of one any more than banning mind-altering drugs has kept people determined to get high from doing so.
Re: It is all about opposing the war, which is a left-wing crusade.
Um, Pat Buchanan? (Buchanan isn’t nutty enough to start shooting people, but he is an example of a rock-ribbed rightwinger who has no love for Israel, opposes the Iraq war, and thinks the US should have sat out WWII.
Re: His real surname is apparently merely Brunn–Von Brunn is his Teutonic, neo-Nazi nom de guerre.
“Brunn” is still a German name. The “Von” simply
indicates someone of aristocratic rather than commoner lineage in German.
June 10th, 2009 at 6:12 pm
[...] this garbage from Gawker, and this particularly shameful post from the highly overrated Matthew Yglesias of Think Progress whose pontifications are funded by the George Soros-led Democracy Alliance. (hat [...]
June 10th, 2009 at 6:32 pm
The pooh-poohing of the DHS report on rightwing domestic terrorism is comparable to Jindal scoffing at volcano monitoring (and then Mt. Redoubt blowing in Alaska) and Palin scoffing at fruit fly research (and then finding out it’s integral to, guess what, research for special needs children).
The GOP has gotten out of the habit of doing positive things proactively, and can only rouse themselves to deride the people that do the actual work. Like apathetic, surly, pimply-faced teens. It’d save them a lot of embarrassment if they’d cut back on the over-the-top, obstruction for obstruction’s sake, and start taking responsibility for the well-being of their fellow citizens.
But that’d take “empathy,” I guess.
June 10th, 2009 at 8:02 pm
There was also the mass-shooting in the Unitarian Church in Tennessee last summer, but a fine, upstanding individual who said he wanted to kill every Democrat in Congress, and everyone on Bernard Goldberg’s list of 100 people who are screwing up the country, and decided to target Unitarians because their church in politically liberal.
June 10th, 2009 at 8:11 pm
Actually, the fact that Tiller’s murderer had a longstanding relationship with people from explicitly right-wing groups like Operation Rescue, is pretty convincing evidence. The religious fundamentalist who murdered the soldiers at the Army recruiting office has zip zilch nada relationship with any leftist groups.
Not to mention, not a single one of the numerous anti-abortion terrorists in American history has been a leftist. Every single one of them has been a right-wing, “traditionalist” religious fanatic. There is absolutely no history of left-wing anti-abortion violence, and no left-wingers who call for violence in the effort against abortion.
Once again, as opposed to the case of the Muslim who killed the soldier and recruiter. Not only is a there a cause/movement other than the left that has engaged in and called for violence against the military (Islamist fanatics), but that movement has committed several orders of magnitude more violence against the military than any American leftist.
Really, not a very plausible argument, Al.
June 10th, 2009 at 8:25 pm
The talking point that this is the doing of left wing Socialists and Rev. Wright went out on Glenn Blechh today, so it’s not surprising the typical nitwits try it on this blog too.
June 10th, 2009 at 8:59 pm
To state the obvious, because many people on the right oppose abortion does not mean that everyone who opposes abortion is on the right.
That is absolutely correct, of course. In fact, we have a frequent poster here, Hector, who is anti-abortion, but doesn’t really count as a member of the political right.
So, by your logic, there is no evidence Tiller’s killer is on the right.
No, by my logic the mere fact that Tiller’s killer was anti-abortion doesn’t prove he is on the right. But we know a lot more about Scott Roeder than that, including his affiliations with right wing extremists groups such as the Montana Freeman and Sovereign Citizen Movement. Meanwhile, we also know a lot more about Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad, including that he was a convert to Islam who had recently travelled to Yemen, was jailed on an immigration violation, and while in jail apparently was radicalized by Islamic terrorists also being held in the same jail.
So there you go: in neither case do we need to rely solely on the fact that they opposed abortion or the Iraq war respectively.
June 10th, 2009 at 8:59 pm
Yeah, good luck with that, fellas.
I think I figured out why Republicans think the DHS report about extreme right domestic terrorist groups was about them because they recognize themselves in its description not of their ideology, not of their propensity to use violence, but in their political strategy. In the passage below, I’ve replaced “rightwing extremists” with “Republicans.
Somebody, anybody, find a sentence in that paragraph that’s not true.
And please note, I’m not accusing Republicans of violence, terrorism, or even ideological sympathy here. I’m just talking about their political strategy.
June 10th, 2009 at 9:02 pm
Apparently Brunn, in addition to despising Jews, also hated Bush, neocons, and Bill O’Reilly.
http://www.examiner.com/x-722-Conservative-Politics-Examiner~y2009m6d10-Holocaust-Museum-shooter-von-Brunn-a-911-truther-who-hated-neocons-Bush-McCain
Clearly, Keith Olbermann is responsible.
And now, for my special comment: A man is dead at the hands of a person who espoused the same vile, hate-filled worldview that Keith Olbermann spews forth every night on his national TV show. If Olbermann had a shred of decency, he would apologize for the hateful comments which have inspired this attack, and leave public life forever. But, of course, Olbermann has no decency, and so will continue to spew his bile on a nightly basis. And MSNBC, which long ago decided to forego any commitment to responsible journalism, will continue to provide this troll a forum from which to broadcast his hate. Shame on you, MSNBC. Shame. On. You.
June 10th, 2009 at 9:02 pm
Yeah, good luck with that, fellas. i/t/t The talking point that this is the doing of left wing Socialists and Rev. Wright went out on Glenn Blechh today, so it’s not surprising the typical nitwits try it on this blog too.
June 10th, 2009 at 9:05 pm
Keith Olbermann has never preached against Jews, the victim of today’s act of terrorism.
Bill O’Reilly really did preach against abortion doctors, and Dr. Tiller in particular, for years, in graphic terms, using the man’s name, before the act of terrorist murder that ended his life.
Rather a significant difference, but good try!
June 10th, 2009 at 9:12 pm
Somebody like S., but smarter and with a working relationship to the truth, might have followed up the evidence about Von Brunn’s opinion of Bush and neocons by linking him to the anti-Iraq War paleocon right – people like Justin Raimondo and Pat Buchanan. This argument would have the added advantage of being consistent with the anti-Semitism that was James Von Brunn’s defining political ideology, instead of being completely refuted by it.
But a smarter S. with a conscience probably wouldn’t be a Republican in the first place.
June 10th, 2009 at 9:19 pm
Re Nonny Mouse at 95:
thanks for the link — I see what you mean. The analysis conflate several very different groups into a single category (”right wing extremist”) which confuses any further analysis of motivators and goals.
Plus no competent analysis would make blanket claims re what covert groups are currently doing.
Finally, there is no indication of the confidence levels of various conclusions/judgments. Only a moron is ever 100 percent confident — and there is a big difference between being 50 percent confident in a conclusion versus 90 percent confident.
June 10th, 2009 at 9:20 pm
Sometimes you wonder what the world’s come to.
All I can say is that it’s really sad that this horrible shooting will cause people to associate the Holocaust with violence.
June 10th, 2009 at 9:41 pm
As somebody said at another site, that’s why we need Holocaust museums.
Last time I heard, the gunman was in critical condition. I hope he pulls through so he can stand trial.
June 11th, 2009 at 12:37 am
The dead man is black, not jewish. Inconvenient for history’s professional victims, but there it is. Just needs a little spin though I’m sure.
June 11th, 2009 at 12:39 am
[...] of Homeland Security concerning a rise in ‘rightwing extremist activity.’” Matthew Yglesias of Think Progress, whose pontifications are funded by the George Soros-led Democracy Alliance, [...]
June 11th, 2009 at 1:26 am
You know what you are all amazing. The main thing about today is that a man lost his life, because of this scumbag old hatemonger. This wasn’t terrorism, it was a hate crime just like Dr. Tiller and my fellow soldiers in Arkansas.
All you do by pointing fingers at each other and arguing is help fuel the fire. By all the finger pointing and accusations back and forth about who is left wing and who is right wing; you are just furthering the divide that things like the DHS report helped to create. The DHS doesn’t specify groups but picks on people for beliefs. It helps make people suspicious of each other and caused a political rift. Now if someone doesn’t believe in “abortion”, “immigration”, “gun control”, or some of the other issues people look at each other differently during discussions and even watch what they say. As an Iraq veteran, I was at first deeply offended then had a good laugh at whoever the bonehead was that wrote it. The majority of soldiers today are volunteers that joined to serve their country, and would never turn against it. Their may be skinheads in the military, but there are also black panthers and the latino equivalent as well I would wager. Not to mention those with gang affiliations or who will use their skills for criminal purposes. It is the way the world is, unfortunately.
The media and blogosphere is just creating a panic of it’s own and hyper-inflating these instances by crying terrorism every time. Some things are just a simple crime, and people have got to start using common sense.
June 11th, 2009 at 3:28 am
Golly, Marseille, what rock did you crawl out from under?
June 11th, 2009 at 7:42 am
I almost put in an explicit statement that my comments were a parody of the sort of thing that that bile geyser Olbermann does, but then I thought that a) my use of the term “special comment” would tip people off, and b) it would be fun to see the reactions of people who didn’t get it.
Now my only question is, did those who didn’t get it not get it because a) they have a deficient sense of humor (a common problem among liberals I’ve observed) or b) they don’t watch Keith Olbermann, and so lack the contextual basis (based on his ratings, that’s a very real possibility)?
P.S. joe from Lowell: I would tend to agree that the shooter seems to have a certain philosophical affinity with Pat Buchanan. I would just point out that it was MSNBC that gave Buchanan a job and respectability after his presidential runs that left even close friends of his saying “Well, I know Pat isn’t an anti-Semite, but…”
June 11th, 2009 at 9:42 am
Fact is America has always been home its share of ideological kooks and I believe DHS is fully justified in keeping a vigilant eye on both the radical right and the radical ledt.
The problem is, the only radical left they can find in this century amounts to protesters so organized they color-coordinate their outfits and people who vandalize the labs of shampoo companies. So somehow that vigilant eye just roves on over to Quakers and farmers’ market organizers. That shit needs to stop.
June 11th, 2009 at 9:49 am
S.,
Just because people don’t laugh at your attempts at humor doesn’t mean they don’t get them. Rather, they may just think your attempts at humor are hella lame.
June 11th, 2009 at 9:54 am
the number of right-wing crazies who come to lefty blogs to DEFEND DOMESTIC TERRORISTS is surprising even to me. what an ignorant bunch of buffoons there are on this thread, talking about how this “isn’t terrorism” and that the DHS report was wrong and this and that. you people have no souls.
June 11th, 2009 at 10:57 am
@Oncelor, 119-
I used to lurk on the right-wing blogs and criticize them when they flipped out over things like the guy who shot up an El Al counter or the guy who drove his car into a crowd. Or when they’d take crappy leaked reports and go gaga over them.
Both probably met the legal definition of domestic terrorism (as did the Holocaust Center shooting-the murder of Dr. Tiller probably doesn’t, though), but they weren’t harbingers of a greater trend.
This is my problem with Matt’s take (now repeated at TPM, Atrios, and Salon, among other places) on the DHS report and the two incidents. It seems like the mirror image of Michelle Malkin freaking out over crimes that hit her buttons.
As for why I read and comment on lefty blogs, well, during most of the Bush years, they were a lot more sensible and well-written than the right wing ones, especially after the invasion of Iraq. I feel like I am much more likely to be able to actually have a meaningful discussion in comments on most lefty blogs nowadays, or even, possibly, change someone’s mind. I’ve given up hope of doing that on most of the righty blogs I once read. Heck, I’ve given up reading them.
I mean, at this point, we have, what, two incidents in the last few weeks, and a third one (in PA) since Obama became President. Tiller’s murder isn’t terribly surprising (albeit still reprehensible), and he’d faced threats and attempts on his life for years, so I’m skeptical of the idea that you can tie that into most of the phenomenon that DHS report talks about.
So that gives us two incidents. Is that a trend? I don’t think so.
I’ll note that the way the DHS report is written, you could claim it is vindicated if these two incidents are the start of a trend-but you can also claim it was right if nothing happens. That’s the beauty of using words like “could,” “perhaps,” “possibly” and “maybe,” and it’s been a problem with intelligence reports for a while.
Contrast the DHS report with an FBI report covering similar ground from the summer of 2008. The FBI report has sourcing, expresses confidence levels, and is also a good deal less alarmist. The DHS report says “large numbers of potentially violent neo-Nazis, skinheads, and other white supremacists are now learning the art of warfare in the [U.S.] armed forces”-which is a quotation lifted from an SPLC report. No number is given in the DHS report (though if you dig into their SPLC source, you’ll get vague numbers of around 400). The FBI says
Now, if this were, say, Free Republic, and they were going nuts about the Muslim threat after a similar vague report came out and then one Muslim went and committed a crime (as they’ve done before), I’d not even be bothering with criticism, as I’ve learned they aren’t going to hear it.
This place is, I hope, different. I don’t hold any hope out for Yglesias himself (he almost never changes his mind or corrects mistakes-witness his entry where he placed a major German city in Denmark, still up without correction months later), but I do think his readers might change their minds.
June 11th, 2009 at 12:32 pm
[...] Walker of Reason points out that certain leftist political opportunists would like you to think, however, that von Brunn is the vanguard of a homegrown army of right-wing [...]
June 11th, 2009 at 12:40 pm
Sorry, I failed to link to the FBI report in mentioned in comment 120. It is here.
June 11th, 2009 at 2:44 pm
Hey…
What about that leftest nut muslim who killed the recruiting solider? Where’s your comment on that????
June 11th, 2009 at 4:15 pm
It was an attack on the Holocaust Museum, you twit. The dead man was killed because he was a guard at the Holocaust Museum.
June 11th, 2009 at 4:18 pm
S.,
Nobody “didn’t get” that you trying to parody Olbermann. I didn’t misunderstand your point, I found it idiotic and offensive, so I trashed it.
Yeah, they also fired Phil Donohue, their highest-rated host, for being too liberal, and they give Joe Scarborough 3 hours every day. MSNBC does a lot of right-wing butt kissing. So?
June 11th, 2009 at 4:20 pm
What leftist nut Muslim? The guy who killed the recruiting soldier was a religious fundamentalist.
June 11th, 2009 at 5:02 pm
DTM: Reread my comments. I’m not talking about people who didn’t find it funny (based on my reading of some of the comments here, I’m not surprised–liberals are pretty humorless, particularly when the joke’s on them); I’m talking about those who didn’t get the joke.
Speaking of which…
joe from Lowell: You trashed my comments, but you didn’t trash them for being not funny, which DTM did; you trashed the substance of what I said, which means you were taking my comments seriously, which, sorry, means you didn’t get that those comments weren’t serious.
Of course, you think MSNBC engages in right-wing butt kissing, so I’m not exactly surprised by your cluelessness.
June 11th, 2009 at 5:25 pm
No, actually, I didn’t. I trashed your comment for drawing an equivalency between blaming Bill O’Reilly for contributing to Dr. Tiller’s murder, and blaming Keith Olbermann for contributing to a neo-Nazi shooting a security guard at the Holocaust Museum.
Believe it or not, your gambit isn’t actually difficult to understand. It’s childishly simplistic, as a matter of fact. You took out “Bill O’Reilly” and replaced it with “Keith Olbermann,” you took out “abortion doctor” and replaced it with “Bush, neo-cons, and Bill O’Reilly.” You tried to make up a theoretical attack on Keith Olbermann, one that is deliberately nonsensical, in order to make the similar-sounding attacks on Bill O’Reilly appear nonsensical.
And I pointed out that you juvenile little ad absurdum stunt doedn’t work, because Bill O’Reilly really did rant against Dr. Tiller, while Keith Olbermann never actually ranted against the Holocaust Museum, or the Jews.
So get over yourself.
And not only do I think it, but I provided real-world examples of them doing that. As opposed to just expressing a feeling. But thanks for sharing.
June 11th, 2009 at 9:46 pm
“No, actually, I didn’t. I trashed your comment for drawing an equivalency between blaming Bill O’Reilly for contributing to Dr. Tiller’s murder, and blaming Keith Olbermann for contributing to a neo-Nazi shooting a security guard at the Holocaust Museum.”
That was the subsstance. And the fact that you went to the trouble to trash it meant you took it seriously. And the fact that you took it seriously strongly suggests you didn’t realize it was a parody, because why would you bother to take a parody seriously? It’s PARODY! It’s like reading Gulliver’s Travels and arguing that the book is a pack of lies because a creature the size of a Lilliputian wouldn’t have enough brain cells to be sentient, or that a floating island is impossible.
June 11th, 2009 at 10:25 pm
For starters, let me commend our host for being in the first wave of those exploiting this tragedy for political purposes. Good job.
We’ll put aside the fact that the inane “”mau-mauing” comment reveals someone who has no clue about what was objectionable in the DHS report, and possibly someone who never read it.
Let’s instead move on to the implication that someone who rants about Bush, neocons, and Bill O’Reilly…not to mention 9/11 as an “inside job”…somehow represent the “right wing.” That’s nearly as dumb as a fair amount of what precedes me here. But, as they say at WaPo and the Times, why let facts get in the way of ideology.
June 12th, 2009 at 5:41 pm
Americans remind me of the Little Rascals commented upon by the one who says… “They’ll never learn….”
Americans don’t realize both the right and left are owned and manipulated by the same folks. (Hint: does American hegemonic policy ever change regardless of which party supposedly “controls’ the government during any cycle? Of course not. But you do get to argue about gay marriage. Yippee.
Americans still live under the delusion that the media is honest in reporting or that it is not controlled… The CIA’s Operation Mockingbird continues to control most reporters and commentators, etc., under the auspices of the six corporations that own (control) 95% of all cable, broadcast and print media. Do you still naively believe that your information is not molded, minded, and delivered to you to create a dumbing down of Americans, fractionation and illusion? Get a life.
Do you really believe the idiots who state Homeland Gestapo was right to slander many millions of Americans through false guilt by association. Do you believe the Homeland Gestapo? What good Germans you are.
The media and the politicians go to great lengths to propagandize you into believing there is a war on terror (there isn’t for the most part) – most terror and terror groups (e.g., Al Qaeda) – were created by the government – and that anybody who confronts, resists and condemns the government is some kind of terrorist. Well, get a clue, clueless folks, the government has controlled the terror for a long long time … and the enemy of the government is You. IF you question, IF you gripe about a private bank known as the Federal Reserve sending your grandchildren’s grandchildren into debt slavery. That you disparage a media that serves only to mislead and to promulgate fear in order to get your backing for yet more wars to steal resources and gain territory and to murder your children in the army.
And now they would have you believe that 9/11 truth folks (many scientists, architects, structural engineers, physicians and just general folk) are just terrorists. That folks who support the 4th amendment, the Constitution and the Republic are terrorists. That people who believe that the private bank (the Fed) is an abomination are terrorists.
Americans are such dupes. Their Republic is nearly dead, replaced by an oligarchical authoritarian state. Yet they still believe the tripe spewed by representatives of the main stream elite wannabes. Mr. Mau Mau who wrote this tripe is either incredibly naive or simply cointelpro.
June 14th, 2009 at 6:40 am
Why all the chatter about the abortion doctor and the museum shootings yet so very little mention of the ONE murder that was really a terrorist act, the killing of a US soldier on US soil by a Muslim? Just askin’.