There are two camps that believe the nonsense about neocon manipulation of pre-Iraq war intelligence--they would be the anti-war left and for lack of a better word, the anti-war right. Both camps have elements that are hostile to Jews and when they say, 'neocon,' they really mean Ashkenazi-American.
blah, blah, blah- virulently anti-semetic people see Jewish conspiracies in everything and anything they deem to be bad.
also, if memory serves me correctly, the neo-cons did manipulate and engineer the intelligence on iraq. that war didn;t just "happen" all by itself.
Of course, there are strong anti-establishment currents on the fringes of both sides of the spectrum, and conspiracy minded individuals frequently turn their attention to "jewish control." People of all political stripes have turned against the Iraq War, because of course it didn't make any f*cking sense. To say "well, nutty people on the margins hate jews, so therefore this guy's closer to the left" is ridiculous. Its more accurate to say that even the craziest of the crazy far-right are able to discern how damaging these neo-con fantasies have been to the country.
Of course, there are strong anti-establishment currents on the fringes of both sides of the spectrum, and conspiracy minded individuals frequently turn their attention to "jewish control." People of all political stripes have turned against the Iraq War, because of course it didn't make any f*cking sense. To say "well, nutty people on the margins hate jews, so therefore this guy's closer to the left" is ridiculous. Its more accurate to say that even the craziest of the crazy far-right are able to discern how damaging these neo-con fantasies have been to the country.
I don't think getting rid of Saddam Hussein was a fantasy, I don't think Bush lied--in the sense that the intelligence everyone believed about Iraq, he knew to be false; and I think it's readily apparent that Buchanan's preferred non-intetrventionist, neutralist foreign policy is closer to the anti-war left than it is to the mainstream right. And it's time that the left in particular own up to the fact that places like Kos have attracted an ugly, Jew hating fringe. The talk-radio right has nothing to do with that.
I don't think getting rid of Saddam Hussein was a fantasy, I don't think Bush lied--in the sense that the intelligence everyone believed about Iraq, he knew to be false that's because you are either an idiot or in deep denial
I know a lot more about this than you do. But I've been round on this before.
Which is why you've developed this fantasy that opposition to the war based on facts is somehow an anti-semitic conspiracy? Really?
That's a misreading of what i have wrote. I am just saying this holocaust museum shooter--and his insane rantings about the state, the war and the Jews--has more in common with anti-war left than mainstream right. Specifically he is a paleoconservative. Paleocons during the last administration sided with the anti-war left about a group of policy intellectuals that they called neoconservatives. Most of what the paleocons and the anti-war left wrote about said neoconservatives was specious nonsense. Some of it, in its most pernicious forms, played on old and vile hatreds of Jews. Mainstream American conservativism wants and has nothing to do with this kind of thing.
"Lunatics have more in common with other lunatics than they do with mainstream political discourse."
A bold proclamation for sure. You already agree that this dude is a paleocon, so enough shading and tarring the left alright? Those people you're referring to have as much to do with mainstream liberals and Daily Kos as you do with Pat Buchanan and his "Holocaust" discussion group.
And just to bring it full circle, I still think that one factor pushing these guys over the edge is mainstream talk radio on the right and the panicked atmosphere spurred daily by their Chicken Little "Obama is a cancer destroying this country" diatribes. Or is Rush not mainstream?
Wow. Lot going on here. I found myself agreeing with Dolo. I need to check myself. I don't think anyone on here would say any one shooting is the direct cause of right wing radio. I think what some are saying, and I tend to agree, when 10-20 million a day listen to right wing hate media, the level of right wing hate raises with the level of hate being spewed. When Bush was in office, the level of hate being spewed was toned down. In fact, the message was anyone who disagrees with the president is a traitor. Today the message is "they" are taking over and destroying our country. I think it is rational, in this climate, to expect hate crimes to increase.
As for this shooter, as I said before, he is more likely to have hosted a (short wave) radio show than to listen to one.
I don't think any of you could argue with anything I wrote. There are two camps that believe the nonsense about neocon manipulation of pre-Iraq war intelligence--they would be the anti-war left and for lack of a better word, the anti-war right.
You are in deep deep denial.
Before the war, we went back and forth on evidence. All the evidence put out by the "anti-war left" [like the weapons inspectors] turned out to be true. All the evidence put out by the neo-cons [like Chabila] turned out to be false. The noe-cons had a chance to test their theories. The theories proved to be false. Time to find a new philosophy.
Accept it. Get over it.
You are correct, the left and right form a circle that meets at Ron Paul. Guys like this shooter, are outside the American political left & right. Your argument that the right wing extreme is allied with "anti-war left" [also known as most Americans] is something I would expect from Orielly or Limbaugh.
I think i understand the point that vitamin is trying to make because I do know a few of these so called radical left wing fringe types. But to be honest they have unknowingly shifted way more to the libertarian fringe.
Here's another guy that needs to stop listening to those Right Wing Radio Codetalkers......
The Reverend Jeremiah Wright latest comments that, "Obama is owned by the Jews" and "Them Jews aren't going to let me speak to him" was clearly most inauspicious for President Obama, occurring as it did on the same day a neo-Nazi, white supremacist whack-job murdered a security guard at the national Holocaust Memorial.
All your example shows is that people of widely varying backgrounds can be antisemitic. In these two cases, while the conclusions might have been similar (the government is controlled by Jews), the people behind them didn't take the same route to arrive there.
You're simply setting up strawmen. Par for the course.
All your example shows is that people of widely varying backgrounds can be antisemitic. In these two cases, while the conclusions might have been similar (the government is controlled by Jews), the people behind them didn't take the same route to arrive there.
You're simply setting up strawmen. Par for the course.
Call it what you want....I'm making my point....some will agree some won't.
You don't...that's cool.
BTW....one of the main arguments in this thread is placing blame on the media...if you're not making that argument my posts are not directed at you.
All your example shows is that people of widely varying backgrounds can be antisemitic. In these two cases, while the conclusions might have been similar (the government is controlled by Jews), the people behind them didn't take the same route to arrive there.
You're simply setting up strawmen. Par for the course.
This would be my argument with Vitamin's position, too. Many of the folks on Stormfront dislike Fox and O'Reilly and the war in Iraq and Limbaugh and so forth as much as American leftists do, but these camps began with entirely different premises before arriving at seemingly similar conclusions. In other words, it's worth pointing out the irony, and probably worth suggesting that these factors sometimes do result in a "politics make strange bedfellows" situation, but no more than that...
Is there a difference between "the media" and "entertainers" in your view?
Does "the media" have any responsibility?
My problem with your above posts is that I don't know what your point actually is. That the media can't possibly be responsible for one person's ideas or their execution of them when there's someone else, in a different part of the country, different walk of life, who happens to have a similar viewpoint?
Do I have that right? Jeremiah Wright's comments mean that the DC shooter couldn't have been influenced by far right wing rhetoric?
btw, Rush Limbaugh said today that he gets tons of "kill the jews!" emails and he does not read them because he loves Israel.
I don't think any of you could argue with anything I wrote. There are two camps that believe the nonsense about neocon manipulation of pre-Iraq war intelligence--they would be the anti-war left and for lack of a better word, the anti-war right. Both camps have elements that are hostile to Jews and when they say, 'neocon,' they really mean Ashkenazi-American. Not all people who oppose the war think this way. But there is a species of argument that might start with the Likud party in Israel and end with saying that American troops are ghurka regiments for the Jewish state, that play on the kind of anti-semitic nutsiness of the shooter at the holocaust museum. There is a reason he also wanted to go to the Weekly Standard. It's because the fringes of the Ron Paul right have more in common with the fringes of the anti-war left.
Really, Eli? This is a wild stretch of bullshit. Even for you. Where to start?
Pass.
Looking forward to you blessing us with your knowledge again in two months.
Is there a difference between "the media" and "entertainers" in your view?
Does "the media" have any responsibility?
My problem with your above posts is that I don't know what your point actually is. That the media can't possibly be responsible for one person's ideas or their execution of them when there's someone else, in a different part of the country, different walk of life, who happens to have a similar viewpoint?
Do I have that right? Jeremiah Wright's comments mean that the DC shooter couldn't have been influenced by far right wing rhetoric?
btw, Rush Limbaugh said today that he gets tons of "kill the jews!" emails and he does not read them because he loves Israel.
If you've read all of this thread you'll see I made a point of differentiating the "Media" and the "News Media".
Jeremiah Wright's very unfortunate comments simply show that you can have hatred towards a group of people without the influence of "entertainment media".
Blaming anyone other than the 88 year old nutjob, without an iota of evidence that the clown even listened to the accused medium is knee jerk and misguided.
That's what I find crazy.....and that is the point I'm trying to make...albeit, apparently poorly.
Blaming anyone other than the 88 year old nutjob, without an iota of evidence that the clown even listened to the accused medium is knee jerk and misguided.
Re: Holocaust Museum Shooting
Fatback Said:
Right wing talk radio is working these assholes up. Expect more of this kind of shit.
__ A number of people, including myself, concurred.
No one blamed right wing talk radio for the shooting or the nutjob.
Blaming anyone other than the 88 year old nutjob, without an iota of evidence that the clown even listened to the accused medium is knee jerk and misguided.
Re: Holocaust Museum Shooting
Fatback Said:
Right wing talk radio is working these assholes up. Expect more of this kind of shit.
__ A number of people, including myself, concurred.
No one blamed right wing talk radio for the shooting or the nutjob.
All in all fairness, when someone writes, "expect more of this kind of shit" the translation = "expect more shootings to happen" presumably because "right wing talk radio is working these assholes up."
Personally, I think right wing radio contributes to a climate of hostility. That doesn't establish some kind of causal culpability but does it help foment anger and possible violence? I>Absolutely[/i]. Since when has the media NOT exerted that kind of influence?
Blaming anyone other than the 88 year old nutjob, without an iota of evidence that the clown even listened to the accused medium is knee jerk and misguided.
Re: Holocaust Museum Shooting
Fatback Said:
Right wing talk radio is working these assholes up. Expect more of this kind of shit.
__ A number of people, including myself, concurred.
No one blamed right wing talk radio for the shooting or the nutjob.
All in all fairness, when someone writes, "expect more of this kind of shit" the translation = "expect more shootings to happen" presumably because "right wing talk radio is working these assholes up."
Personally, I think right wing radio contributes to a climate of hostility. That doesn't establish some kind of causal culpability but does it help foment anger and possible violence? I>Absolutely[/i]. Since when has the media NOT exerted that kind of influence?
^^^A more detailed and articulate way to say it. As far as the "expect more"...I pray to God I am totally wrong.
Blaming anyone other than the 88 year old nutjob, without an iota of evidence that the clown even listened to the accused medium is knee jerk and misguided.
Re: Holocaust Museum Shooting
Fatback Said:
Right wing talk radio is working these assholes up. Expect more of this kind of shit.
__ A number of people, including myself, concurred.
No one blamed right wing talk radio for the shooting or the nutjob.
All in all fairness, when someone writes, "expect more of this kind of shit" the translation = "expect more shootings to happen" presumably because "right wing talk radio is working these assholes up."
Personally, I think right wing radio contributes to a climate of hostility. That doesn't establish some kind of causal culpability but does it help foment anger and possible violence? I>Absolutely[/i]. Since when has the media NOT exerted that kind of influence?
Thank you for being more articulate than fatback or me.
I don't want to sound Polyanna-ish here but I don't know if two shootings in two weeks constitutes anything resembling a "trend" (aside from the trend where Americans shoot Americans far too often). That sounds like some other kind of media-whipped hype, the one that tries to make folks feel as if there is violent political extremism suddenly about to explode uncontrollably.
I'm not discounting the potential danger posed by extremists but as with, say, the swine flu, there's a major difference between a "plausible concern" and heralding that an epidemic is on the loose.
That all said, I also challenge the implicit assumption underlying the assertion that media personalities are "entertainers" and therefore, have no influence. Since when has entertainment = non-influential? The entertainment industry, aka the culture industry, dictates myriad things in everyday life: what we eat, wear, listen to, watch, who we look up to, who we don't, etc. etc. Entertainers exert an inordinate amount of influence on society, just not in the same, obvious way that say, a lawmaker does. Can and is entertainment superficial? Absolutely. But superficial is not the same as "inconsequential."
Comments
blah, blah, blah- virulently anti-semetic people see Jewish conspiracies in everything and anything they deem to be bad.
also, if memory serves me correctly, the neo-cons did manipulate and engineer the intelligence on iraq. that war didn;t just "happen" all by itself.
I don't think getting rid of Saddam Hussein was a fantasy, I don't think Bush lied--in the sense that the intelligence everyone believed about Iraq, he knew to be false; and I think it's readily apparent that Buchanan's preferred non-intetrventionist, neutralist foreign policy is closer to the anti-war left than it is to the mainstream right. And it's time that the left in particular own up to the fact that places like Kos have attracted an ugly, Jew hating fringe. The talk-radio right has nothing to do with that.
that's because you are either an idiot or in deep denial
Which is why you've developed this fantasy that opposition to the war based on facts is somehow an anti-semitic conspiracy? Really?
That's a misreading of what i have wrote. I am just saying this holocaust museum shooter--and his insane rantings about the state, the war and the Jews--has more in common with anti-war left than mainstream right. Specifically he is a paleoconservative. Paleocons during the last administration sided with the anti-war left about a group of policy intellectuals that they called neoconservatives. Most of what the paleocons and the anti-war left wrote about said neoconservatives was specious nonsense. Some of it, in its most pernicious forms, played on old and vile hatreds of Jews. Mainstream American conservativism wants and has nothing to do with this kind of thing.
A bold proclamation for sure. You already agree that this dude is a paleocon, so enough shading and tarring the left alright? Those people you're referring to have as much to do with mainstream liberals and Daily Kos as you do with Pat Buchanan and his "Holocaust" discussion group.
And just to bring it full circle, I still think that one factor pushing these guys over the edge is mainstream talk radio on the right and the panicked atmosphere spurred daily by their Chicken Little "Obama is a cancer destroying this country" diatribes. Or is Rush not mainstream?
And keep the wholesale dollar store item industry on lock.
Not fair. V is not a racist.
I found myself agreeing with Dolo.
I need to check myself.
I don't think anyone on here would say any one shooting is the direct cause of right wing radio.
I think what some are saying, and I tend to agree, when 10-20 million a day listen to right wing hate media, the level of right wing hate raises with the level of hate being spewed.
When Bush was in office, the level of hate being spewed was toned down.
In fact, the message was anyone who disagrees with the president is a traitor.
Today the message is "they" are taking over and destroying our country.
I think it is rational, in this climate, to expect hate crimes to increase.
As for this shooter, as I said before, he is more likely to have hosted a (short wave) radio show than to listen to one.
You are in deep deep denial.
Before the war, we went back and forth on evidence.
All the evidence put out by the "anti-war left" [like the weapons inspectors] turned out to be true.
All the evidence put out by the neo-cons [like Chabila] turned out to be false.
The noe-cons had a chance to test their theories.
The theories proved to be false.
Time to find a new philosophy.
Accept it. Get over it.
You are correct, the left and right form a circle that meets at Ron Paul.
Guys like this shooter, are outside the American political left & right.
Your argument that the right wing extreme is allied with "anti-war left" [also known as most Americans] is something I would expect from Orielly or Limbaugh.
The Reverend Jeremiah Wright latest comments that, "Obama is owned by the Jews" and "Them Jews aren't going to let me speak to him" was clearly most inauspicious for President Obama, occurring as it did on the same day a neo-Nazi, white supremacist whack-job murdered a security guard at the national Holocaust Memorial.
It's a separate phenomenon from antisemitism among white, rural, libertarian conspiracy theorists.
Trying to conflate the two is, again, arguing in bad faith.
Blaming the media for a crime without one shred of evidence that it could even possibly be true is an argument based in "bad faith".
My examples just attempt to show how ridiculous it is.
And apparently they do if you see them as being in "bad faith".
All your example shows is that people of widely varying backgrounds can be antisemitic. In these two cases, while the conclusions might have been similar (the government is controlled by Jews), the people behind them didn't take the same route to arrive there.
You're simply setting up strawmen. Par for the course.
Call it what you want....I'm making my point....some will agree some won't.
You don't...that's cool.
BTW....one of the main arguments in this thread is placing blame on the media...if you're not making that argument my posts are not directed at you.
This would be my argument with Vitamin's position, too. Many of the folks on Stormfront dislike Fox and O'Reilly and the war in Iraq and Limbaugh and so forth as much as American leftists do, but these camps began with entirely different premises before arriving at seemingly similar conclusions. In other words, it's worth pointing out the irony, and probably worth suggesting that these factors sometimes do result in a "politics make strange bedfellows" situation, but no more than that...
Does "the media" have any responsibility?
My problem with your above posts is that I don't know what your point actually is. That the media can't possibly be responsible for one person's ideas or their execution of them when there's someone else, in a different part of the country, different walk of life, who happens to have a similar viewpoint?
Do I have that right? Jeremiah Wright's comments mean that the DC shooter couldn't have been influenced by far right wing rhetoric?
btw, Rush Limbaugh said today that he gets tons of "kill the jews!" emails and he does not read them because he loves Israel.
Really, Eli? This is a wild stretch of bullshit. Even for you. Where to start?
Pass.
Looking forward to you blessing us with your knowledge again in two months.
If you've read all of this thread you'll see I made a point of differentiating the "Media" and the "News Media".
Jeremiah Wright's very unfortunate comments simply show that you can have hatred towards a group of people without the influence of "entertainment media".
Blaming anyone other than the 88 year old nutjob, without an iota of evidence that the clown even listened to the accused medium is knee jerk and misguided.
That's what I find crazy.....and that is the point I'm trying to make...albeit, apparently poorly.
Re: Holocaust Museum Shooting
Fatback Said:
Right wing talk radio is working these assholes up. Expect more of this kind of shit.
__
A number of people, including myself, concurred.
No one blamed right wing talk radio for the shooting or the nutjob.
All in all fairness, when someone writes, "expect more of this kind of shit" the translation = "expect more shootings to happen" presumably because "right wing talk radio is working these assholes up."
Personally, I think right wing radio contributes to a climate of hostility. That doesn't establish some kind of causal culpability but does it help foment anger and possible violence? I>Absolutely[/i]. Since when has the media NOT exerted that kind of influence?
^^^A more detailed and articulate way to say it. As far as the "expect more"...I pray to God I am totally wrong.
Thank you for being more articulate than fatback or me.
Here is Vitamin's report on the DHS report about the increase in rightwingextremists.
It's a shame that this report was pooh poohed.*
The guy who shot the doctor in KC was reported to the police twice in the weeks leading up to the shooting.
The KC police chose to ignore the reports.
*That's right, I just said pooh poohed.
1) Totally besides this current point, but I emailed you back to say I'm still down to do a BH convo. Holler back.
2) Just so we get this right - are you saying that the anti-war left is anti-Semitic?
I'm not discounting the potential danger posed by extremists but as with, say, the swine flu, there's a major difference between a "plausible concern" and heralding that an epidemic is on the loose.
That all said, I also challenge the implicit assumption underlying the assertion that media personalities are "entertainers" and therefore, have no influence. Since when has entertainment = non-influential? The entertainment industry, aka the culture industry, dictates myriad things in everyday life: what we eat, wear, listen to, watch, who we look up to, who we don't, etc. etc. Entertainers exert an inordinate amount of influence on society, just not in the same, obvious way that say, a lawmaker does. Can and is entertainment superficial? Absolutely. But superficial is not the same as "inconsequential."