Home | Away

Time for liberals to stop politicizing politically-motivated killings

So I’m reading Brian Beutler over at TPMDC, who says

Back in early April, the Department of Homeland Security released a report warning that the ranks of right wing extremist groups might swell. There was nothing especially controversial about the memo, which was put together under the supervision of a Bush appointee. It was the sort of threat assessment certain government agencies are supposed to provide; and DHS had prepared a similar memo about the threat of left wing extremists just three months beforehand.

But that didn’t stop conservatives and Republicans from turning on the outrage. The story drove cable news coverage for days, and inspired elected officials like Michelle Bachmann (R-MN) to stand before Congress and denounce the report.

“The Homeland Security Secretary [Janet Napolitano],” said Bachmann, “has redefined pro-life gun owning veterans who like smaller government and who believe America should secure our border against invasion from illegal aliens are labeled the domestic right wing extremists.”

Napolitano was ultimately compelled to apologize for the memo. But she probably shouldn’t have since subsequent events have vindicated the original warnings.

Let’s take stock of what’s happened in the months since President Obama was elected just over six months ago, and in the weeks since the DHS story broke. In November, the New York Times reported that “gun owning” Americans—responding to rumors that the incoming administration would confiscate their weapons—had embarked on a shopping binge and were hoarding guns and ammunition. By the time Obama was inaugurated, the climate of fear on the far right had grown hotter. In February, MSN’s moneyblog noted that the surge in sales had led, unsurprisingly, to a surge in gun stock prices.

Then on Sunday May 31 of this year, George Tiller--a Witchita doctor who provided late term abortions--was murdered while attending church services, allegedly by a right wing anti-abortion zealot named Scott Roeder.

And today, a white supremacist, Obama birth certificate conspiracy theorist--and World War II veteran--named James W. von Brunn entered the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum with a shotgun and opened fire, killing one guard. . . .

All of this seems to indicate that the DHS report was actually prescient; its critics refuted. Indeed, one of the chief sources of that criticism was Fox News--which led the charge against Napolitano in the media

All quite true, and all the more reason for every card-carrying wingnut to issue a prompt and sincere apology to Janet Napolitano.  But isn’t there something missing here?

Ah, yes.  A shooting in Pittsburgh that had nothing to do with hockey.

Now, I do acknowledge that the above link takes you to an essay by Dave Neiwert, who happens to be a hysterical left-wing blogger of some kind.  If you want more sober and reliable coverage of the Pittsburgh murders, I can direct you to this evenhanded piece by Tommy Christopher, who calmly urged “the liberal blogosphere” to “stop exploiting the Pittsburgh shooting tragedy.” (Likewise, after George Tiller was murdered, Mr. Christopher decried those who would “scapegoat” Bill O’Reilly and Anne Coulter.  “This is an argument of opportunity, and it reeks,” said Mr. Christopher, professional-strength clothespin to nose.)

Well, Mr. Christopher, we did stop exploiting the Pittsburgh shooting tragedy!  Indeed, Richard Poplawski has already been forgotten.  And I should add that even if we did remember the shooting incident involving a far-right lunatic in Pittsburgh, it would have no connection whatsoever with more recent shooting incidents involving far-right lunatics elsewhere.  Besides, some liberal bloggers use the f-word, so we should be concerned about civility across the political spectrum.

Posted by on 06/11 at 08:44 AM
  1. Besides, some liberal bloggers use the f-word, so we should be concerned about civility across the political spectrum.

    What the fuck are you [virtually] talking about?

    Posted by  on  06/11  at  11:06 AM
  2. True T. Dude, I dont agree either.

    Posted by htc magic  on  06/11  at  11:09 AM
  3. By the time Obama was inaugurated, the climate of fear on the far right had grown hotter.

    I had no idea that fear on the far right produced heat—have the global warming experts accounted for this in their models?

    To be fair to the right wing, I think we can all agree that if, say, a couple of environmental acrivists killed a couple of oil executives, the wingnuts certainly would not try to generalize that behavior beyond being isolated incidents.

    Posted by  on  06/11  at  11:13 AM
  4. How did you manage to write this post without mentioning Ward Churchill?

    Posted by  on  06/11  at  11:24 AM
  5. As Atrios would say, “time for another blogger ethics panel.”

    Posted by Russell60  on  06/11  at  11:32 AM
  6. To be fair to the right wing, I think we can all agree that if, say, a couple of environmental acrivists killed a couple of oil executives, the wingnuts certainly would not try to generalize that behavior beyond being isolated incidents.

    Actually, this is probably true.  They wouldn’t try to make such generalizations at that point, since they’ve already made such generalizations in order to establish false equivalency between Scott Roeder and both “animal-rights activists” and Bill Ayers.  So they’d just have to link back to their previous work.

    Also, I’m wondering* if we’ll ever get an apology and walkback from the Obama administration over the earlier report citing the dangers of left-wing domestic terrorism.

    *NB: I’m not actually wondering this.

    Posted by  on  06/11  at  11:50 AM
  7. And for the sake of goodness, liberal bloggers also shouldn’t politicize workplace deaths either. Because no political party bears any responsibility for this or for the thousands of workers who die every year on the job, just because of their systematic attacks on OSHA funding levels over the years. Because OSHA isn’t the solution, it’s the problem, don’t you know? If it weren’t for their interference with the market, workers would have been able to make rational, informed choices and shunned companies with unsafe practices, thereby driving up their labor costs and eventually running them out of business, leaving only the safe companies behind. Or something like that. It’s teh magic of Marketism!

    Posted by John Protevi  on  06/11  at  12:09 PM
  8. The saddest thing about your comment, Professor Protevi, is that I could post it virtually unedited over at Obsidian Wings, and it would fit in just fine with the deadly-earnest schmibertarian comments.  Heck, I’m surprised all the recent shootings haven’t been blamed on unconstitutional expansion of the Commerce Clause.  At least not yet.

    I’m beginning to suspect the Internet might be bad for my health.  I think my liver hurts.

    Captcha: perhaps.

    Posted by  on  06/11  at  12:40 PM
  9. Oh, for God’s sake.  Conservatives are currently blaming this latest shooting by a long-time right-wing extremist on Obama’s “anti-Jewish” positions.  Yes, Mr. von Brunn thought to himself, “Hey, the Kenyan-born Muslim who isn’t legitimately President has apparently said some mean things about the Juden Volk.  I should go shoot up the Holocaust Museum to show my support for the policies of that usurping leftist mud person.”

    So, yeah, liberals had better watch out and not fucking politicize this.

    ...Whoops, now my gall bladder, too.  As was inevitable, since it couldn’t handle that large a load from the Right.

    Posted by  on  06/11  at  12:51 PM
  10. Conservatives are currently blaming this latest shooting by a long-time right-wing extremist on Obama’s “anti-Jewish” positions.

    Chutzpah!

    Posted by  on  06/11  at  01:09 PM
  11. @8: mds: this is just part of my war on your internal organs. Bwaaaahaaahaa! Your thymus is next! You have been warned!

    Posted by John Protevi  on  06/11  at  01:33 PM
  12. The invisible hand of the market has an itchy trigger finger.

    Posted by  on  06/11  at  03:00 PM
  13. If liberals stop politicizing politically-motivated killings only politically-motivated killers will be able to stop liberals.

    Posted by  on  06/11  at  03:23 PM
  14. Conservatives are currently blaming this latest shooting by a long-time right-wing extremist on Obama’s “anti-Jewish” positions.

    James von Brunn is the Jew of Obamanian liberal fascism Islamic socialism.  Indeed, this is central to my point.

    Posted by  on  06/11  at  03:32 PM
  15. Conservatives are currently blaming this latest shooting by a long-time right-wing extremist on Obama’s “anti-Jewish” positions.

    As is revealed in the note found in his car. How many must die due to Obama’s pandering to the Musulman?

    You want my weapons—this is how you’ll get them. The Holocaust is a lie. Obama was created by Jews. Obama does what his Jew owners tell him to do. Jews captured America’s money. Jews control the mass media.

    Posted by  on  06/11  at  03:42 PM
  16. Time for the “majority” party to re-enact the assault weapons ban. Even if it isn’t a top priority of Obama.

    captcha “working” as in if more people were working maybe fewer would be shooting. As we know idle hands are the devils workshop.

    Posted by  on  06/11  at  03:44 PM
  17. Oops, almost forgot.  Because crazed, murderous converts to Islam are now objectively on the left, this blog officially condemns Abdulhakim Muhammad’s attack on a Little Rock recruiting center, killing Army Pvt. William Andrew Long and wounding Pvt. Quinton I. Ezeagwula. 

    See the third italicized paragraph here for guidance.

    Posted by  on  06/11  at  04:00 PM
  18. And there you are right in DC and you still to my knowledge have not condemned the DC snipers! Or John Wilkes Booth!

    Posted by  on  06/11  at  04:09 PM
  19. All quite true, and all the more reason for every card-carrying wingnut to issue a prompt and sincere apology to Janet Napolitano.</i>

    Spoken like an honest J-Edgar-crat, aka zion boy-- but keeping yr frat boys happy. Triste, Maestro Mike (yes, the museum shooting was wrong. Worse, the police state reaction on the part of the Feinstein-AIPAC right). Anyway, violence isn’t inherently wrong. Even Zizek the Klown says that.

    Posted by Perezoso  on  06/11  at  04:15 PM
  20. Well, I’m convinced. Perezoso’s case is so well constructed, who could argue?

    Posted by Jason B  on  06/11  at  04:20 PM
  21. Anyway, violence isn’t inherently wrong.

    Yes, and what more appropriate target than guards at the Holocaust Museum with their “I was just following orders” excuses.

    Posted by  on  06/11  at  04:20 PM
  22. Oh, I knew you couldn’t stay away, Perezoso / E-Hound.  And you’re right, Feinstein-AIPAC are way worse than the mere shooting of a security guard at the Holocaust Museum.  We will condemn Feinstein-AIPAC as well.  But not violence, because we believe everything Zizek tells us.

    And good news!  It appears that von Brunn is also objectively on the left.  Which explains the police-state reaction of the Feinstein-AIPAC right.

    Posted by  on  06/11  at  04:20 PM
  23. As is revealed in the note found in his car.

    Expect that to go the way of the Operation Rescue contact information in Scott Roeder’s car.  Or the fact that Richard Polawski was a right-winger who thought the Obama administration was out for his guns.  No, no, it was all a domestic dispute about a dog.

    Or John Wilkes Booth!

    Let’s not go overboard, here.  Remember, states’ rights and righteous revenge for the War of Northern Aggression were at stake.

    this blog officially condemns Abdulhakim Muhammad’s attack on a Little Rock recruiting center

    What do you want to bet that this guy remains the only one to face terrorism charges (15 counts)?  In Kansas, the maximum penalty and conspiracy are preemptively off the table.

    Posted by  on  06/11  at  04:27 PM
  24. Google back to like 9-11-01-ish, when Feinstein and her pal Ellison the Oracle jefe wanted to implement the cyber-gulag, Mikeski--this is the sort of event they want to initiate J-Edgarocracy. Serio.  And yes, given her support of neo-cons and Izrael for last few years, DiFi and her supporters (and GOP) are responsible for far more deaths.  Now, does that mean I support Von Braun’s actions? No. He does have a cool name though.

    Posted by Perezoso  on  06/11  at  04:31 PM
  25. "We in the Anti-Reconstruction Resistance deplore Mr. Booth’s use of violence, directed though it was against a murderous tyrant who trampled liberty further into the mire with each passing second.  Now, how about some Midwestern Buffalo wings?”

    Posted by  on  06/11  at  04:36 PM
  26. OK, OK, Dianne Feinstein is the Eichmann of liberal fascism.  I guess I’ll have to take down my shrine to her now, and put it over in the compost heap with the rotting remains of my Billary shrine.

    Posted by  on  06/11  at  04:36 PM
  27. Squeak away, mdsokov.  And your usual lame, chi chi attempt at regionalism. Ah those rustic midwesterners: not cutting-edge Borati-Seinfeldish- dudes like you mdsokov. 

    See I’ve already reinvigorated your gals, Mike! De nada.

    Posted by  on  06/11  at  04:40 PM
  28. Von Braun’s ... He does have a cool name though.

    “Vonce I shoot at the Jews, who cares who takes the hit.
    That’s not my department, says James dub von Brunn.”

    Posted by  on  06/11  at  04:42 PM
  29. Mikeski, I’m not a libertarian, or GOP.  Goldberg should dangle from streetposts along with, like, any demopublicans you can think of.

    Malatesta-Kazcynskian moderate, man

    Posted by Perezoso  on  06/11  at  04:42 PM
  30. Looks like I picked the wrong week to stop sniffing glue.

    Posted by  on  06/11  at  04:44 PM
  31. Put out the troll bait and they come swarming in.

    Posted by Hattie  on  06/11  at  04:47 PM
  32. Put out the troll bait and they come swarming in.

    All the more reason not to feed them. Please.

    Posted by John Protevi  on  06/11  at  04:52 PM
  33. Trolls? Nyet. Some of us, even non-rightists, simply detest eastern zion-liberal skank: even the ones pretending to be male, dearie.  Von Brunn was a lone nutjob. Not a symbol, or representative of anything, left or right. 

    Now the soccer mommies have to get on their high horse, the Courics are winding up for the usual indignation fest---we have concerns about right-wing violence! eeek---. Von Brunn alas did not have the spine to take on a real monarchist tyrant, like CBS

    Whoop--there it Be

    Posted by Perezoso  on  06/11  at  04:55 PM
  34. #30 was supposed to be a response to #27, but I think #31 thought it was trollery, and so I apologize.  I am not smart enough to use the internets properly.

    Posted by  on  06/11  at  05:20 PM
  35. @34: #30 was okay as it’s okay to comment *about* trolls and how they seek out community and friendship only in order to shit all over them. A DNFTT request only asks that you not respond *to* trolls.

    Posted by John Protevi  on  06/11  at  05:30 PM
  36. You’re the troll, Putevi--just an untalented, irrational, byatchy one. Like stick with the Rod McKuen-Deconstructed site, puto.

    Posted by Perezoso  on  06/11  at  05:32 PM
  37. Actually, Protevi is a friend of mine, and a genuinely good fellow, which nobody can deny.  And while this fair and balanced blog denounces all politically motivated killings as well as the liberals who seek to politicize them, we’re sometimes fond of disemvowelment, because it makes us laugh.

    Posted by  on  06/11  at  05:36 PM
  38. Dsmvwl wy, stnst. Prtv’s lttl whny phny mbcl..

    Sm f s mstk y fr hmbr, nc.

    Yr knwn s rghtst, nd pr-srl nw, MB.

    vn Cckbrn hd y pggd

    Posted by Perezoso  on  06/11  at  05:39 PM
  39. Dang.  I actually didn’t want to disemvowel “satanist.” Because I kind of like that.

    Posted by  on  06/11  at  05:54 PM
  40. I’m pretty sure “Cckbrn hd y Pggd” is a very popular brand of Welsh sausage.

    Posted by  on  06/11  at  06:05 PM
  41. @37: now I have to watch this video again! And this one too!

    Posted by John Protevi  on  06/11  at  06:11 PM
  42. Sm f s, vn nn-rghtsts, smpl dtst strn zn-lbrl sknk: vn th ns prtndng t b ml, dr.

    The woman-hatred and anti-Semitism has reached LaRouchian levels.  Please disemvowel.

    Thanks for this post, Michael. That I’d forgotten all about Poplowski underscores your point.

    Posted by Nell  on  06/11  at  06:13 PM
  43. Ah. Already done. Thanks.

    Had to puzzle on the satanism charge a while, but I believe I have it:  You’re rooting for unnatural man-penguins against the saintly, angelic, winged Wheel!

    Posted by Nell  on  06/11  at  06:20 PM
  44. we’re sometimes fond of disemvowelment, because it makes us laugh.

    Sometimes the best approach is Making Light of things.  (Hehehehe, that one never gets old.)

    And after spending years moving away from my rustic Midwestern roots, I have apparently succeeded.  Why, now I can go back to wearing bib overalls… only ironically.  Which makes me think of Jane Smiley, and not in a good way.  Remind me to relate my old advisor’s opinion someday, when this is no longer a family blog.

    You’re rooting for unnatural man-penguins against the saintly, angelic, winged Wheel!

    So, Detroit have the Book of Ezekiel on their side?  We’ll see if that’s enough to triumph over a communist “open source software” mascot.

    Posted by  on  06/11  at  07:26 PM
  45. If I weren’t a feminist opposed to such remarks, I would say that Perezoso must be on her period. (Because being a woman is an objectively bad thing and ooh, you can really insult a man by accusing him of being a woman.)

    Posted by Orange  on  06/11  at  07:28 PM
  46. So what happened the hound dog was gone and came back with a different name and thought people wouldn’t notice?

    Posted by  on  06/11  at  07:30 PM
  47. being a woman is an objectively bad thing and ooh, you can really insult a man by accusing him of being a woman

    OMG, you’re so totally right, Orange!  But you have to admit that the insults in question were completely original and devastating.

    Elliot, I can’t imagine for a moment that he thought we wouldn’t notice. Ye Olde Troll of Sorrow has a, shall we say, distinctive prose style.

    Posted by  on  06/11  at  07:35 PM
  48. I’m still confused as to why all “yr frat boys” are girls. I expect more rhetorical consistency from a first-class troll. Didn’t this blog used to attract a higher grade of troll? It might’ve jumped the shark in the troll department.

    Posted by Orange  on  06/11  at  07:43 PM
  49. Oh, great, now you all have Kirby Olson nostalgia.  Yeah, late ‘06—those were the days, my friend, we thought they’d never end.

    Posted by  on  06/11  at  07:51 PM
  50. Yeah, ‘cuz we knew we’d meet again, didn’t know where, didn’t know when.

    Posted by  on  06/11  at  08:13 PM
  51. Oh, great, now you all have Kirby Olson nostalgia.

    Well, compared to the thirteen-year-old Ayn Rand fans running amuck these days, KO did have a certain je ne sais quoi.

    Of course, you young bloggers missed out on the glory days of Floyd Alvis Cooper.  Now there was a master.  Cut his troll teeth on Usenet, ol’ Floyd did.

    being a woman is an objectively bad thing and ooh, you can really insult a man by accusing him of being a woman.

    Wait, what?

    Posted by  on  06/11  at  08:14 PM
  52. Floyd Alvis Cooper, Peace Be Upon Him!

    Captcha, “century” as in “Floyd Alvis Cooper, troll of the”

    Posted by John Protevi  on  06/11  at  08:33 PM
  53. mds: Stale sexist move. Card-carrying members of the patriarchy set great store in girl/gay as insults. (E.g., MoDowd on John Edwards’ hair and Obama’s book-clubbing.) I figured I, as an actual woman, could do worse than to one-up Prefuzo, Pezoluso, whatever that name was, in that department. Surely he finds the concept of a menstruating woman to be more horrifying than a merely “byatchy” woman. I myself do not find “woman” to be an insult, mind you.

    Posted by Orange  on  06/11  at  08:49 PM
  54. mds: Stale sexist move.

    Oh, I get that.  I was simply attempting to put a new spin on that blog classic, “mds, you’re not a woman?”

    And trust Professor Protevi to have a FAC link handy.  “Trolls abound on the Internet but 99% of them are dreadful, witless bores. Truly talented trolls, trolls of genius and artistry, are few and far between.” Indeed.

    I am also intrigued by the poster’s own favorite troll: “So everyone is telling me they care not that we send a 4 foot runt [Colin Powell] who’s metal arms hang uselessly by his side out to represent this country?” Genius of a different sort.  Not enough to threadjack everyone into a Usenet flamewar FAC-style, as we said back in those days when iPods were called onions, but still poetry of a kind.

    Posted by  on  06/11  at  09:12 PM
  55. Seems like his act got old, so he had to ratchet up the hatefulness to see if he could get everyone’s attention again.

    This blog seems to get (sample size = 2, so this is a highly scientific opinion) trolls who put together Mad Lib ideologies.

    I will be a Lutheran . . . conservative . . . surrealist!

    I will be an anti-Semitic . . . misogynist . . . culture snob . . . who uses 3rd-grade insults . . . while trying to write like Ezra Pound!

    So if I want to start trolling here, I have to put together something. I will be a libertarian . . . Mormon . . . interpretive dance enthusiast. I will be a vulgar Marxist . . . science fiction monomaniac . . . who writes like William Blake. I will be a Buddhist . . . totalitarian . . . hair color essentialist.

    It’s hard to come up with anything as bizarre as the trolls who really came along.

    Posted by  on  06/11  at  11:42 PM
  56. When do we get back to the original topic? And when do we get to go door to door and confiscate peoples guns.

    Or if that is politically unpalatable, we could discuss the Palin/Letterman dustup.

    captcha “human” which to be considered gender neutral probably needs to be changed to huperson.

    Posted by  on  06/11  at  11:54 PM
  57. Apparently this one has really struck close to home. Some of these folks are almost done chewing off the third leg and still caught in their own trap.

    Andrew Breibert:

    [Brunn is a] multiculturalist just like the black studies and the lesbian studies majors on college campuses.

    Glenn Beck:

    Our country is vulnerable; our enemies know it as much as we do and groups like Al Qaeda are even planning to work with white supremacists (which police say this guy might be), coming through our southern border.

    Harry Binswanger of the Ayn Rand Institute (on Beck’s show):

    Well, this Von Brunn’s culture is a tribe of racist, anti-Jewish, anti-Negro, anti-immigrant, everything, and therefore he’s a phenomenon of the left, because racism is a form of collectivism. The right wing is individualist—believes in individual rights, freedom, the dignity of each individual life. But it’s the left wing—you know, Hitler was National Socialism, right? It’s a leftist phenomenon

    Debbie Schlussel:

    Until 9/11 and our resulting new tolerance for Islam [JP - yes, that is what she wrote, “new tolerance for Islam"], the neo-Nazi types were marginalized and howling at the wind. ... Mr. Von Brunn has been on this planet for 89 years, and he didn’t feel comfortable shooting up a Holocaust museum until now--this new era of “tolerance,” in which we must tolerate the most extremist Muslim behaviors and sentiments.

    Sorry, no real point, just, wow.

    Posted by  on  06/12  at  01:18 AM
  58. When do we get back to the original topic?

    Oh, right.  56 comments in, someone invokes the hegemonic Western scopic-imperialist trope of the “original” “topic.” Not on this anti-imperialist blog, E-Tarabour (if that is indeed your real name)!  Not today!

    In fact, I hereby declare that in the future all Chávezian Airspace commenters will be required to ... hold the phone ...

    I figured I, as an actual woman, could do worse than to one-up Prefuzo, Pezoluso, whatever that name was, in that department.

    O-Girl, you’re a woman?  Like, a girl woman?  What ever happened to the Pandagon comment thread in which you promised to give mds a son the size of the Sun.jpg?  And mds, what ever happened to that duct tape ... nah, too easy.

    Posted by  on  06/12  at  01:29 AM
  59. Zzzzzz...{head snaps up in sudden reflex action} Wha..? Huh?… Did somebody call my name? {Wipes sleepy gunk from eyes, takes a wake-up shot of whiskey, feigns coherence}.

    Yeah, I probably did promise mds a gigantic baby, but I can’t be sure. See, I make a lot of promises to a lot of different guys in exchange for getting twittered and other highly sex-ified stuff.

    But don’t judge me. It’s not my fault. It’s society’s fault for letting me carry on this long without being forced into a God/Government mandated man-on-top marriage to control my natural unbridled sexuality, which I clearly can’t control myself. And if dangerously unattached women like me were better controlled, men would be happier and there wouldn’t be all this gun violence and killing.

    Or if that is politically unpalatable, we could discuss the Palin/Letterman dustup.

    Sure. This is pretty good.

    captcha: couple

    Posted by  on  06/12  at  04:58 AM
  60. groups like Al Qaeda are even planning to work with white supremacists (which police say this guy might be), coming through our southern border.

    Okay, Glenn Beck is a performance troll.  I’m surprised he didn’t have them plotting with MEChA and the Black Panthers, too.

    Meanwhile, Harry Binswanger (hehehehehe):

    racism is a form of collectivism.

    Oh, Harry.  “Racism is the lowest, most crudely primitive form of collectivism.” No bedtime objectivist spike through the skull for you.

    The right wing is individualist—believes in individual rights, freedom, the dignity of each individual life.

    Coincidentally, though, only for white males.  A poser, that.

    But it’s the left wing—you know, Hitler was National Socialism, right? It’s a leftist phenomenon.

    I occasionally have a guilty daydream.  In it, all the leftists killed by the Nazis drag themselves up out of the ground at concentration camps and the Eastern Front, and come for people like Jonah and this twit.  Alternatively, it could be actual Nazis, with their hatred for gays and intellectuals, their big “God is with us” belt buckles, their fetishization of military and corporate power, and their jingoistic German exceptionalism.  Those guys take Sean Hannity out for drinks.

    Posted by  on  06/12  at  08:55 AM
  61. @57: I just have four one word: ZOMG.

    OK, I can’t resist; more words: I’m thinking Mr. Binswanger needs a little Daseinanalysis of his own.

    Posted by John Protevi  on  06/12  at  08:57 AM
  62. Now I’m feeling sheepish about those quotes. Debbie Schlussel? Ayn Rand Institute dude? Braille plate Becks? Big Hollywood/Little Me Breitbart? How hard is it to find those four say something assholish about anything?* But then again, I’m reminded of how absolutely vilified MoveOn was (and for years afterward) when a couple of entries in an ad contest compared Bush to Hitler despite their being quickly deleted. My what an unusually-shaped Overton window you have, my dear country.

    *Plus, just preaching to the choir.

    Posted by  on  06/12  at  10:23 AM
  63. JP, it’s not how pitiful they are, it’s that they have giant media megaphones. It would be unfair to gape in horror at the ravings of a homeless guy on the street, but when that guy gets his own cable show, then we get to gape and despair.

    Beck: “coming through our southern border.” I quite agree we should secure our southern border against terrorists and radicals. Just draw the line south of the border states, ‘cause I live in one of those. The most difficult to secure will be the mountain borders like Tennessee/Kentucky and W.Va./Virginia. The actual Mason-Dixon line and the Western borders (Iowa/Missouri, CA/AZ) ought to be relatively easy.

    Posted by  on  06/12  at  10:46 AM
  64. The actual Mason-Dixon line and the Western borders (Iowa/Missouri, CA/AZ) ought to be relatively easy.

    As a bonus, we’d finally be rid of those people who use “Coke” for every kind of soft drink.

    Posted by  on  06/12  at  11:14 AM
  65. I am either ashamed or proud, not sure which, of the fact that I had never encountered Floyd Alvis Cooper.  So thank you, John, for that link.  Wow.  *That* is how it is done.

    “cases”, as in “head”

    Posted by Dave Maier  on  06/12  at  12:17 PM
  66. Sorry, my mistake.  I meant not FAC, but the nameless troll ("Venus_Montgomery") kc discusses immediately below.  I actually wasn’t impressed by FAC himself (that example anyway).  Sorry for the confusion.  I blame everyone other than myself, for I am constitutionally unable to accept responsibility for anything.

    Posted by Dave Maier  on  06/12  at  12:21 PM
  67. I actually wasn’t impressed by FAC himself (that example anyway).

    You really need to evaluate his oeuvre as a whole, aka “You had to be there.”

    Also, as I noted, the examples illustrate different goals.  Venus_Montgomery was a performance artist.  FAC was a provocateur.  His unimpressive Sheehan comment was fine-tuned to produce maximum outrage and chaos, like dropping kerosene onto a smouldering forest fire from a helicopter.  Which, er, I suppose isn’t actually commendable, but one frequently had to admire his chutzpah.  And now I’m fresh out of foreign words to italicize.  Scheiße.

    Posted by  on  06/12  at  02:28 PM
  68. mds, I do understand that important distinction, which you explain very well.  It’s just that the V_M performance at that link was so very brilliant, e.g. the way he ups the ante with each post.  I’m sure you’re right that in context, FAC’s provocations are equally brilliant in their fine-tuning, if also less knee-slapping (and indeed, as you say, not entirely commendable).

    Posted by Dave Maier  on  06/12  at  02:51 PM
  69. A certain amount of hypocrisy on this subject considering that Mr Berube himself justifies the murder of thousands of innocent people by American bombers, while being himself a holocaust denier.

    I would also say that censoring the fact that his friends have been cutting up thousands of people while alive because this is a political friendship is a certain amount of politicisation.

    Posted by Neil Craig  on  06/13  at  12:34 PM
  70. Ah, the long-awaited return of Neil “the Serbs were the victims all along of America’s fascist Muslim allies” Craig!  Yes, well, I’ll be sure to tell my friends to stop cutting up thousands of people.  Tomorrow, though.  I’ve got some holocausts to deny today.

    Posted by Michael  on  06/13  at  12:52 PM
  71. Friends don’t let friends cut up thousands of people.

    Posted by  on  06/13  at  01:08 PM
  72. Despite Mr Berube’s wit that is precisely what our government has spent the last decade doing.
    http://www.slobodan-milosevic.org/news/ips040108.htm

    He knows that the entire media have been censoring such actions numercially less than, but in terms of obscenity exceeding Auschwitz.

    It takes a particular sort of human being to deny that people cut open while alive so that Mr Berube’s friends could profit are victims.

    Last time he decided to censor - lets see if this is his only possible answer again.

    Posted by Neil Craig  on  06/13  at  02:30 PM
  73. Hmm. In this competition of supporters of wars in Yugoslavia I can finally say “a pox on both your houses”. Although I’d say that just as I insist that my opposition to the US aggression isn’t the result of me personally gaining from it (the opposition) in any way, or predicated on me admiring Milosevic, I think it absurdly over the top to accuse Michael of supporting said aggression simply so his “friends” could make a killing (no pun intended) in the process.

    Posted by  on  06/13  at  03:02 PM
  74. In other words, I happen to think Michael is wrong on this, and other issues. (As is Neil, for that matter.) Too bad. We all are wrong sometimes, that doesn’t make us evil or naive or whatever else.

    Posted by  on  06/13  at  03:03 PM
  75. Michael, I know you had to make a lot of tough decisions during those years you were the de facto ruler of Kosovo. You should not have paid those organ trafficers to cut people up, though. Shame on you.

    And you should just step up and admit that because you ruled Kosovo in the nineties, we have nothing to complain about when crazy Americans start shooting down doctors, policemen, and security guards. Don’t you see???

    Posted by  on  06/13  at  05:56 PM
  76. Certainly you are nothing, Michael, if not a cutup.

    Posted by Dave Maier  on  06/13  at  07:17 PM
  77. While the Bosnian Croat refugee elders (Čelo i Dragan) i tutor see the Serbs (and their attempts at ethnic cleansing and rape of Croats and Muslims) very differently than that sprezzatura NC, they have nothing but praise for Michael’s outstanding leadership in the Balkans.

    Posted by  on  06/13  at  10:04 PM
  78. I thank all my Internet friends for their praise of my leadership in the Balkans, and I thank them also for the profits they realized from cutting open live bodies, the kickbacks from which helped keep this blog running even in the darkest days of 1999.

    But I strongly resent the suggestion that I “censored” Mr. Craig last time around.  On the contrary, I allowed him to post a number of batshit insane comments, and when he called me “a corrupt racist Nazi liar” while accusing me of “rudeness,” I disemvoweled his final comment.  Because no one has the right to show up on my blog and call me “rude.” That’s just wrong.

    Still, I acknowledge that Mr. Craig is the real victim here, as were the helpless Serbs massacred by the US proxies known as the KLA.

    Posted by Michael  on  06/14  at  12:22 AM
  79. The fact is that Mr Berube supported what he knew was a NATO war to assist in genocide. It was certainly not a “pox on both your houses” operation but a “depleted uranium & cluster bombs on Serb houses to help NATO armed Nazi gangsters* commit racial genocide” sort of operation. By the standards we used at Nuremburg those who supported it were certainly engaged in war crimes & crimes against humanity. The remarks by America’s current vice President that he wished to put the entire Serbian people in “Nazi-style concentration camps” proves that.

    And that was before we knew that our governments were involved in cutting up living human beings.

    As regards “rudeness” may I point out that my initial dispute with him was over remarks he made about Noam Chomsky, because he was opposed to the racial genocide Berube so enthusiasticaly supported. His remarks certainly involved “rudeness” to Choamsky.

    As to whether it was improper of me to accuse him of “rudeness” to me - his remarks, while at no time attempting to introduce any hint of fact accused me of being a “genocide denier”, “bad foul dust” (really) & “truly insane”. This may be common by-play in his adacdemic circles but I think my response:

    57 - “Answer the question.

    The rest is just rudeness & obfuscation.

    58 Posted by Neil Craig on 07/01 at 12:46 PM
    “the job of the intellectual is to tell the truth and expose lies” to quote yourself.

    Assuming you claim to be an intellectual:

    Answer the question. Tell the truth.”

    ...Was by comparison reasoned & restrained & resulted in him engaging in what he describes as “not censorship” but merely censoring me.

    That Berunbe could preface his initial fact free attack on Choamsky with the “job of the intellectual” remark shows that he knows that he has prostituted any claims to intellectual status he may have in the interests of assisting people he knows to have committed crimes individually exceeding in evil, though not in numbers, those of Adolf Hitler.

    The previous discussion is here & it will be obvious who was relying on rudeness. http://www.michaelberube.com/index.php/weblog/comments/971/

    *That is the literal case. he KLA were recruited by NATO from gangsters, pimps & organleggers in Albania, Germany & New York’s jails rather than ever being a legitimate Kosovo organisation. That the media have lied about this as they have censored the news of the dissections of living people must be a matter of grave concern to ANBODY who wishes to live in a free society.

    Posted by Neil Craig  on  06/14  at  08:01 AM
  80. Yes, as for my initial fact-free attack on Chomsky.  Chomsky said this:

    The worst crime was Srebrenica but, unfortunately for the International Tribunal, there was an intensive investigation by the Dutch government, which was primarily responsible– their troops were there– and what they concluded was that not only did Milosevic not order it, but he had no knowledge of it. And he was horrified when he heard about it. So it was going to be pretty hard to make that charge stick.

    However, the NIOD report on Srebrenica to which Chomsky refers actually says this:

    It is also not known whether Milosevic had any knowledge of the continuing Bosnian-Serb offensive that resulted in the occupation of the enclave. After the fall of the enclave, Milosevic made no mention to that effect to the UN envoy Thorvald Stoltenberg– he was too much of a poker player to reveal anything. On the other hand, Milosevic did express himself clearly later, in 1996, when he dropped the question to a group of Bosnian-Serb entrepreneurs as to “what idiot” had made the decision to attack Srebrenica while it hosted international troops when it was obvious that, in any event, the enclave would eventually have been bled dry or become depopulated. It is not clear to what extent that statement had been intended to clear his responsibility for those events.

    And one of my points in that 2006 post was that it is possible to oppose the Kosovo war without indulging in apologetics for Milosevic.  Why does Chomsky entertain such apologetics?  I don’t know.  You should ask him.

    Posted by Michael  on  06/14  at  08:17 AM
  81. In normal circumstances if someone is “not known to have any knowledge” of a crime that is considered to be innocence. Being alleged to use the term “what idiot did it” would, to an impartial mind, not seem to be an announcement of personal responibilty.

    I should admit that during the Milosevic trial evidence was introduced of Milosevic’s complicity in the alleged Srebrencia massacre. NATO general Wesley Clark testified, on oath, that for no apparent reason Milosevic had approached him at an international conference & solely in the presence of somebody who had since conveniently died, told him of his complicity. Milosevic said he was lying & a few minutes later Wesley Clark perjured himself by saying that there was no link between NATO & the KLA. This is the sole “evidence” of any sort brought, throughout the 4 1/2 years of “trial” that Milosevic had been personally involved in anything criminal.

    Of course the only massacre agreed to have happened at Srebrenica was of 3.700 Serbss in surrounding villages carried out by our Moslem Nazi allies. Since this is more than the number of bodies found since & since the ICTY refuse to check their DNA for ethnic grouping it seems likely it was the only massacre.

    This is supported by evidence from a Dutch soldier you mention:

    “Everybody is parroting everybody, but nobody shows hard evidence. I notice that in the Netherlands people want to prove at all costs that genocide has been committed. (...) If executions have taken place, the Serbs have been hiding it damn well. Thus, I don’t believe any of it. The day after the collapse of Srebrenica, July 13, I arrived in Bratunac and stayed there for eight days. I was able to go wherever I wanted to. I was granted all possible assistance; nowhere was I stopped.”
    -- Captain Schouten quoted below. Captain Schouten was the only UN military officer in Bratunac at the time a massacre is alleged.)

    http://emperors-clothes.com/analysis/falsely.htm#p

    A number of other Dutch soldiers have agreed to testify to the same effect at the Karadzic “trial”. This is, of course, extensively reported by every newspaper & broadcaster in the NATO countries that is in the remotest degree honest.

    Posted by Neil Craig  on  06/14  at  09:18 AM
  82. The “pox on both your houses” remark was a bit of a joke, by the way, based on the fact that I rarely agree with that kind of argument, as regular readers know.

    But it any event it wasn’t aimed at NATO and Milosevic (although I am no fan of the latter in the least, any more than of the former) but rather at two factions in the argument who desperately try to either make Milosevic out to be some heroic socialist standing up to the West while unfairly smeared by Western media, or on the other hand yell “genocide” about various Serb atrocities in order to link them up with Ruanda and ultimately the holocaust in people’s minds and thus justify the atrocity of NATO intervention.

    For what it’s worth, I do not believe there is proof Milosevic ordered the Srebrenica massacre (which provably did happen and denial of which puts, imo, a person into dangerous intellectual territory). Using it to charge him with genocide was extremely flimsy even if we accept said massacre did, in fact, constitute an act of genocide (which it well might given the very expansive definition of that crime in international law). The reason for this charge was entirely political: if Milosevic had merely been charged with ‘ordinary’ war crimes (ample of evidence for his responsibility for those) someone might have justifiably asked why, say, Wesley Clark wasn’t in the dock for numerous blatant and deliberate violations of the Geneva conventions by forces under his command.

    Posted by  on  06/14  at  11:09 AM
  83. Milosevic was only charged by the ICTY some days into NATO’s war & sg=hortly after Albright had publicly demanded it which certainly makes it look political. I think they had to charge him with genocide in Bosnia, particularly since when the indictment against him was “unsealed” it turned out that only the alleged Racak massacre had actually allegedly happened at the time NATO started bombing.

    Milosevic could not be found not guilty since it was certain a war had taken place & if he was not guilty then, by definition Clark, Clinton et al were. In the end they compromised by poisonng him with rifampicine.

    While denying the official Srebrenica massacre may be “dangerous” I strongly suspect Christian that you had not previously heard of the Dutch soldier’s denial of it. At the very least that should suggest that the media sources, which are almost everybody’s only sources are wholly corrupt. hat is indeed dangerous territory but I am informed that it is the job of the intellectual to tell the truth & I actually believe it.

    Forensic tests of the Racak massacre show it was also a fabrication, that the innocent peasants shot were actually KLA soldiers with gunshot redidue on their hands & that while William Walker, the US observer said that he had seen bodies shot in the face “execution style” this was a lie. Confronted with the evidence he admitted to the Milosevic “trial” that he had, for undisclosed reasons, lied.

    Obviously were the US media not wholly & completely corrupt racist filth willing to tell any lie & censor any fact to promote genocide they would have reported this extensively. Such scum are hardly trustworthy reporters of Srebrenica either.

    Posted by Neil Craig  on  06/14  at  11:46 AM
  84. Impartial minds understand the difference between “it is not known whether X had any knowledge” and “X had no knowledge.” Likewise, impartial minds understand the difference between “‘what idiot’ had made the decision to attack Srebrenica while it hosted international troops when it was obvious that, in any event, the enclave would eventually have been bled dry or become depopulated” and “Milosevic was horrifed when he heard about it.”

    But I take your major point here, Mr. Craig.  Because I accurately noted, three years ago, that Noam Chomsky misconstrued the NIOD report so as it make it sound more favorable to Milosevic than it really is, I am a hypocrite to call the murder in the Holocaust Museum “politically motivated.” You have an airtight argument there, sir, and you leave my metal arms hanging uselessly by my side.

    Posted by Michael  on  06/14  at  03:08 PM
  85. You know, back when the Cathars were being wiped out, I remember thinking, “Strange as it seems now, one day an embarrasingly simple-minded version of Manichaean dualism will return, and ironically it will be an exclusively conservative worldview.” Boy, is my face red now.

    if Milosevic had merely been charged with ‘ordinary’ war crimes (ample of evidence for his responsibility for those) someone might have justifiably asked why, say, Wesley Clark wasn’t in the dock for numerous blatant and deliberate violations of the Geneva conventions by forces under his command.

    Uh, not to get all cynical or anything, Professor h., but I’m fairly sure that everyone would have known the answer to that question.  So there was probably a little bit more to it than that.

    Posted by  on  06/14  at  05:54 PM
  86. Yes mds, obviously that wasn’t the only reason. It was also useful in order to justify war - our gracious host isn’t the only one in the “responsibility to protect” crowd who draws a line at genocide. How convenient if the enemy of the day is guilty of one, then, isn’t it?

    Posted by  on  06/14  at  08:54 PM
  87. Mr Berube in any remotely judicial the discovery that there is no evidence against somebody is equated with innocence. here is, for example, no evidence either way that you were the 2nd gunman on the grassy knoll which means any reasonable person would assume you weren’t rather that that there was merely doubt as to your guilt. here are philosophical & indeed scientific reason as well as judicial ones for taking this as innocence.

    I didn’t mention the museum murder either way & you are clearly throwing sand to pretend otherwise. The fact is that you are supporting war criminals, people engaged in racial genocide & worse.

    Christian I’m not sure what “ample evidence” there is of Milosevic’s responsibility for ordinary war crimes was. Since the NATO funded “court” couldn’t find any I am not the only one seeking enlightenment. Certainly he did not invade foreign countries, he did not bomb civilians or indeed hospitals, he did not hire drug lords & gangsters to commit genocide, he did not cluster bomb NATO civilians, he did not blow up any American TV stations & to take it to true equivalence he did not bomb Washington to help ethnicly cleanse southern California & Texas of Anglos & liberate it from the US. here is not even evidence of him calling for the entire Anglo population of the US to be put in concentration camps, a remark so unexceptional that it has not prevented a corrupt, fascist & racist US President choosing the speaker as his Vice.

    I look forward to you producing this evidence - you may find it less ample than you thought.

    Posted by Neil Craig  on  06/15  at  05:35 AM
  88. I didn’t mention the museum murder either way & you are clearly throwing sand to pretend otherwise.

    You might want to reread your first comment here, @ 69, which begins, “A certain amount of hypocrisy on this subject,” and then you might want to reflect on what the subject of this post was.  Not that I have any confidence in your ability to read, or your capacity for reflection.  But I wish you good luck with your future apologetics for Milosevic’s innocence and with your brave explorations of the dangerous intellectual territory of Srebenica denial.  It has been most illuminating to hear from you again on these subjects, and to allow you to use up a bit of my bandwidth.  And now that you have posted your final comment here, I bid you adieu.

    Posted by  on  06/15  at  06:46 AM
  89. I for one am grateful for Mr. Craig’s follow-up via e-mail.  Shame on you, Professor, for disrespecting the First Amendment by banning a commenter who has been given no opportunity to make his arguments in this forum, especially given your putative dedication to engagement and debate.  The same old cut-and-paste assertions about the innocent Serbian blood staining your own hands, now coupled with accusations of hypocrisy because you thought the Holocaust Museum shooting was bad, should be addressed on the merits.  Again and again and again.

    Meanwhile, I’m trying to come up with some way to synthesize the radical notion that bad actions by one party don’t automatically excuse bad actions by another party.  “Morality doesn’t work by double negative,” perhaps.

    More generally, I’ve come up with:

    Good/Morally Ambiguous/Bad people and institutions frequently perform Good/Morally Ambiguous/Bad actions for Good/Morally Ambiguous/Bad reasons, leading to Good/Morally Ambiguous/Bad outcomes.  Pick each selection independently.

    But I’m not entirely happy with the middle category being “morally ambiguous.” Suggestions?

    Posted by  on  06/15  at  12:03 PM
  90. Being a bit if an intellectual lightweight, I sometimes find myself reading this blog and scratching my head; sometimes I recognize something as a joke and think, hmmmm, if I’d actually ever read Schopenhauer*, maybe I’d get that . . .

    But this string is just—WTF?

    Did I fall through a freak worm-hole in the scape-time continuum?

    captcha: further - I shall go no ____________.

    *or is it Neruda?

    Posted by jazzbumpa  on  06/15  at  03:26 PM
  91. jazzbumpa:  I could try to clarify things, but then I’d have to deconstruct you.

    Posted by  on  06/15  at  03:41 PM
  92. Nor can I type.  That s/b “space-time.”

    Though, “scape-time” might be amusing, if I understood it . . .

    captcha: standard, as in feeling sub__________

    Posted by jazzbumpa  on  06/15  at  03:52 PM
  93. mds-
    Would that involve removing my metal arms?  Could the whole process be lubricated with fluids imported from Scotland?

    Posted by jazzbumpa  on  06/15  at  03:55 PM
  94. Milosevic and Manson both started with M’s; then later they merely guided and inspired others to do horrible evil things.  And the captcha is “freedom,” thus leading us to desire to free those that didn’t actually commit the crimes, but just ordered them, because??????

    Posted by  on  06/16  at  12:08 AM
  95. This article really fits on what is happening in our country.

    Posted by Dhamphy  on  08/11  at  03:50 PM

Name:

Email:

Location:

URL:

Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Submit the word you see below:


Next entry: Tough times

Previous entry: Game 6 analysis

<< Back to main