Rush Vs. Rwanda
Jeffrey Feldman's Frameshop has always been a favorite of mine. Jeffrey has recently published Outright Barbarous: How the Violent Language of the Right Poisons American Democracy, which is a real eye-opener.
Jeffrey looked at Rush Limbaugh's recent crowings about "Operation Chaos" and looked at other instances where airwaves were used to foment violence:
During the Rwandan genocide of 1994, radio broadcasts called for direct acts of violence to be committed by one faction of the Rwandan public against another. These broadcasts drew considerable attention because (1) radio was the major source of information for the listeners in question, (2) the audience was largely non-literate, and (3) there was an ongoing nationalist struggle into which the broadcasts fed (emphasis mine):
In March 1992, Radio Rwanda was first used in directly promoting the killing of Tutsi in a place called Bugesera, south of the national capital. On 3 March, the radio repeatedly broadcast a communiqué supposedly sent by a human rights group based in Nairobi warning that Hutu in Bugesera would be attacked by Tutsi. Local officials built on the radio announcement to convince Hutu that they needed to protect themselves by attacking first. Led by soldiers from a nearby military base, Hutu civilians, members of the Interahamwe, a militia attached to the MRND party, and local Hutu civilians attacked and killed hundreds of Tutsi (International Commission 1993: 13-14). (from "Hate Media in Rwanda")
The broadcasts in Rwanda, thus, were directly engaged using false reports as propaganda, the goal of which was to encourage listeners to commit acts of violence. The effort worked, and subsequent investigations linked the violent language to the actual deaths, thereby including the broadcasts within the framework of the genocidal action both legally and morally.
In stark contrast, Limbaugh's broadcasts were removed from encouraging direct acts of violence, focusing instead on creating the conditions for violence--what Limbaugh described as 'chaos.' In this transcript (Apr 23, 2008), Limbaugh explains how his broadcasts are intended to incite political violence. Notice how he describes creating conditions for violence rather than actual violence (emphasis mine):
This is about chaos. This is why it's called Operation Chaos! It's not called Operation Save Hillary. It's not called Operation Nominate Obama. It's called Operation Chaos! The dream end... I mean, if people say what's your exit strategery, the dream end of this is that this keeps up to the convention and that we have a replay of Chicago 1968, with burning cars, protests, fires, literal riots, and all of that. That's the objective here. And there has been nothing that's happened on the battlefield for my vision of this to change just because Hillary won. We got what we wanted last night, and people want me to change course now? "We got what we wanted, okay, now time to support Obama." No. If Obama runs the table with the rest of these primaries, it's over, and the superdelegates are going to have a much easier choice choosing him, because he'll end up with a big lead. (from "Why It's Called Operation Chaos")
So the goal of the 'operation' for Limbaugh is not to encourage his listeners to commit acts of violence, but encourage his listeners to commit acts of politics that 'end' in Democrats committing acts of violence on each other.
Even though the violence is one step removed for Limbaugh in comparison to the 1990s broadcasts in Rwanda, Limbaugh clearly includes the eruption of political violence as an ideal goal of his rhetoric. Read on...
So the question falls to us: what can we do to not only reject this kind of violent framing, but to discourage it from continuing?
Limbaugh is scum. But isn't this comparison a little extreme?
I remember a time not so long ago when the airways were owned by the public for the public.
"So the question falls to us: what can we do to not only reject this kind of violent framing, but to discourage it from continuing? "
One answer is to have someone who can stomach listening to the show write down each sponsor`s name and found a web site dedicated to asking sane people to write each of his sponsors and tell them what they think as well as telling them that we will not ever buy their products.
I think the FCC should come down hard on his pimpled ass.
Rush is just the loudest mouth not the only mouth. My feeling is that he has gotten way too much attention for his "operation". It's been mentioned on several of the cable news shows and I'm not just talking about fox. I doubt his listeners are going to actually do any of this trouble making he suggests with riots etc. They may be ignorant enough to listen to him but I'm guessing most of them are not stupid enough to break the law merely by his suggestions.
I'm much more concerned about how the MSM happily went along with the bush administration and lied us into a invasion of a country who was not a threat to us. How do we stop that from happening again in the future?
What can we do?? Show up in huge numbers outside the studio. By the hundreds of thousands file complaints with the FCC. STOP buying the products that advertise on these programs and let them know. There are MANY MANY more of us than them. They just like to organize their little hate patrol and we would rather live and let live. But those times are over. Time to be angry as hell and fight back in HUGE number. Make the press focus on the major protests. Have some elected representatives with some balls call this asshole out. Scream, yell and complain by the hundreds of thousands and it will stop.
Wow, who pays this guy?
How can we make this change? Well sully18 has a good start - there needs to be a collective effort.
* Document each sponsor involved in these outrages and encourage mass mailing, protest, boycot - and if possible PROTEST AT THEIR STORES. Public awareness.
* Get experts to talk on the effect of violent dialogue. If conservatives can rally against television, we can note that actually using violent language is far worse.
* Embarass government officials who kowtow to these voices. Make it part of the campaigns. Organize. Get commercials, ads, flyers, etc.
* Encoruage people that work at sponsoring and broadcast companies to act - strike, protest, note it makes a harassing envornment, etc. Try to imagine a walk-out of employees at a broadcaster.
AND organize people to go door to door to spread the word about this man`s hateful violence,just as we go door to door to help get our candidates for office elected.If enough of us spread the seeds of compassion the hatred will eventually be stamped out.
This is a stretch to compare machete wielding gangs to a prank. Limbaugh's a jerk, but it's within his first amendment rights to do this, and far removed from the yelling-fire-in-a-theater test.
I'd say throw the man in prison, but I've seen the cells. He's way to big to fit into one.
fiver @ 1:
Tell me about it....I dislike Rush as much as the next guy, but to compare him telling people to commit potential voter fraud, is a far cry from Rwanda.
*shrugs*
Just my thoughts though.
sully18 @ 3:
I have little hope of that kind of action having any effect. If that kind of action had the kind of effect you want Wall-mart would be out of business by now. The effort from the Fascists have been going on for many years, I remember when there was a very successful effort to eliminate civics from elementary school because the history of the founding fathers and the government they set up has a real liberal bias.
Newspapers, and I'm guessing it's the same for radio shows, love stories that stir up controversy. The more the story or the show is talked about, the more attention it draws. The more attention it draws, the more the sponsors' product is exposed and the more sales they make.
If no one spoke of Rush's show and it got no media attention, I'm betting the sponsors would balk and pull away. No one wants to advertise in a newspaper or on a radio show if no one is reading or listening.
"So the goal of the ‘operation’ for Limbaugh is not to encourage his listeners to commit acts of violence, but encourage his listeners to commit acts of politics that ‘end’ in Democrats committing acts of violence on each other."
One problem is many of his listeners are not smart enough to make the distinction, and may assume he means the former. This is, of course, the intention.
This is what you get when a fat drug addicted pig
is given carte blanche when spewing hatred and
marching orders to his Flying Monkeys from the
toilet throne of his basement.
The way to fight RL's crap is to call it out, raise discussion, keep it out there that he's on the edges of reality, that his thinking is intellectual trash.
As to comparing Rush to what happened in Rwanda, it's not totally comparable, but Rwanda is instructive. The hard right has for decades been barely skirting the active promotion of violence against political opponents. This goes all the way back to McCarthy, to Kristol, etc. They try to say what they want so badly to say by implying violence, by presenting scenarios in which violence could be justified, by taking the rhetoric to the edge and looking over without jumping. It's Bennett talking about black babies, it's Rush about causing another 1968, it's about calling equating Obama with Osama and labeling Keith Ellison swearing on the Qu'ran a treasonous act. Their flippant use of the words "treason", "sedition", and "traitor" are inherently silent calls to violence, or at the very least use of judicial force in in appropriate and entirely capricious ways to silence others simply for speaking.
Maybe the "wizard" school teacher could take care of him? You know...a little "disappearing".
This describes the current situation we find ourselves in so well I had to share it.
"Oh, it's true. I know your race. It is made up of sheep. It is
governed by minorities, seldom or never by majorities. It suppresses its
feelings and its beliefs and follows the handful that makes the most
noise. Sometimes the noisy handful is right, sometimes wrong; but no
matter, the crowd follows it. The vast majority of the race, whether
savage or civilized, are secretly kind-hearted and shrink from inflicting
pain, but in the presence of the aggressive and pitiless minority they
don't dare to assert themselves. Think of it! One kind-hearted creature
spies upon another, and sees to it that he loyally helps in iniquities
which revolt both of them. Speaking as an expert, I know that
ninety-nine out of a hundred of your race were strongly against the
killing of witches when that foolishness was first agitated by a handful
of pious lunatics in the long ago. And I know that even to-day, after
ages of transmitted prejudice and silly teaching, only one person in
twenty puts any real heart into the harrying of a witch. And yet
apparently everybody hates witches and wants them killed. Some day a
handful will rise up on the other side and make the most noise--perhaps
even a single daring man with a big voice and a determined front will do
it--and in a week all the sheep will wheel and follow him, and
witch-hunting will come to a sudden end." - Mysterious Stranger, By Mark Twain
My definition of violence is a bit different.I believe that any violation of another`s self is violence .We are all spiritual beings, and when the spirit is attacked by whatever means it is violence,or a violation if you will.America is the most violent country on earth.To realize this one must look at how we protect and treat our most vulnerable--woman and children.We don`t do a very good job especially poor women and children.We can do better but we have to stop listening to people who want to stamp out creativity and live because they were abused as children.
I don`t say this as an argument to be debated in this thread.I know it iis fact so any attempt to persuade me otherwise will meet with no resistance,only apathy.
Let`s get these damn babies off the airways and into therapy where they belong.
Rush just needs to be ignored. He's an idiot. The more attention you give him, the more he thrives. It's like taking care of trolls, feed `em and they stick around...
This is Rush overstating his influence and underestimating the Democratic party. *yawn*
Indiana was a loss for Rush.
fiver @ 1:
Hear, hear, the comparison is silly. A dumb radio stunt that had absolutely no effect is a far cry from state sponsored genocide, not "one step away." Puh-leeze. Howard Stern couldn't even make Sanjaya the "American Idol" last year (even though he gave it a good run), I hardly think Rush can have ANY effect on a convention or an election.
Baba Booey to you all.
The Rwandan station in question which helped prompt the genocide was actually Radio-Télévision Libre des Milles Collines -- Free Radio TV of the Thousand Hills, which refers to a popular conception of Rwanda with lots of smaller, pastoral mountains as the Land of the Thousand Hills. It was founded just after the Arusha Accords and aimed at a more popular audience than the older Radio Rwanda.
It would be RTLM that would be the model of more recent hate radio.
In my opinion the analog here would have been the numerous right wing extremist and white supremist shortwave broadcasters in the USA in the 1990s, which constantly warned of imminent government coups and United Nations and socialist and atheist conspiracies along with Clinton murder tales.
FOX is State Sponsored TV @ 7:
Bull's eye, excellent question. I mean $250 million or something???
El Cid @ 24:
You just described the am radio hate crowd and faux propagandists (except for the shortwave part).
Am I on a bumpy computer road today or is C&L having some sort of server problems. It started with the post about the quake in China. It wouldn't load exactly right and froze up my computer. After that there are times when I just can't connect with C&L and my computer times out. Not running into those problems anywhere else so I thought I would ask if there have been glitches here?
I feel sort of proud that I have never heard one of Rush's shows. I have seen clips on the net and on tv, but never made the effort to see if his show is even carried where I live.
Why is this pig still employed?Why isn't he in jail?What does someone like Limbaugh--that is a conservative talking head--have to do to finally convince his employers that he has crossed the line?Is there a line?
I picture seeing Rush chased down and off the street by concerned Americans. Rush needs to sample his prescription of chaos for America.
Isn't this grounds for losing your FCC license? Also, under Nixon's safe streets act, isn't against the law to incite violence? Could we bring a civil action on grounds of inciting violence?
Rush is trying to create his own importance.
He must have Reverent Wright and William Ayres on his speed dial.
Since the media market is so fragmented there will aways be a small but loyal following for Rush.
Bringing legal charges against him will not help, it will only make him a martyr.
Limbaugh will spew his poison as long as there's an audience.
He wouldn't find an audience in any country with social equality and real education policies. Let's hope the U.S. takes a turn in that direction soon.
No one has mentioned it yet, so I guess I will. What, you ask, may we do to reject this violent framing, but to discourage it from continuing?
Well, it would seem that in order to be progressive and go forward, sometimes one has to be reactionary and go back in time. We need to do today, as we did in days of old. Back to the days of another inept repug era aka Herbert Hoover's administration. During the 1920's when radio first became a public phenomena, the government passed a law called the "Fairness Doctrine" so that the new medium of Radio could not be used as a powerful propaganda machine. If the station aired 3 hours of Republican shill, then it must reciprocate and air 3 hours of Democratic shill. This kept fairness in broadcasting for both radio and television. This worked fine for around 40 years or so.
So, what happened? Well, let's now zip forward to a more recent time in the past. Around 1988, give or take a few months, during a rethuglican administration, the Fairness Doctrine was done away with. Now it would be legal to feed you propaganda 24/7/365 without ever mentioning an opposing viewpoint. Shortly after the elimination of this protective document, the onslaught of mewling, pribbling, pustules of spiritual and political feces e.g. Pederast Limpballs, Glenn Bleeeeech, Savage Wiener, and others came into being. And then right after that came the consolidation of the media, tv stations, radio stations, newspapers, etc...
So, the short answer to your question, is bring back the Fairness Doctrine, break up the big Media consolidations, vote Democrat to take over both legislative houses, and elect a Democratic President, and ride herd on their newly elected asses to get shit done. Just putting them in isn't going to cut it.
> So the question falls to us: what can we do to not only reject this kind of violent framing, but to discourage it from continuing?
I hate to say it, but another thing that we HAVE to do is to actively ensure that all forms of protest are peaceful. Violent protest doesn't make sense for a lot of reasons, and it's not appealing to a whole lot of the public. Believe me, I know how much more organized and peaceful protest has gotten in the last decade, and it's wonderful; but if people like this are going to stoke that particular fire, then we'll likely see a lot more of this happening in the future:
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2007/08/23/police-montebello.html
(fascinating story, on it's own)
sully18 @ 3:
I've tried... but all I got was a headache and psychotherapy sessions.
pissed off patricia @ 31:
Rashbo is trying to create his own impotence. Then who were all those viagras for?
samdog @ 23:
i wouldn't let rush's oversized, oxy-encrusted, sex-starved, NAMBLA-joining ego cloud the issue.
rush tried to foment political riots and the such. and just b/c he is a buffoon-baboon doesn't change the fact that, had he been successful, in his attempt to stir up violence, his actions would be very analogous to the state-run rwanda radio program.
the comparison, as i see it, is not between rush and the murderous thugs chopping people down in rwanda, but to those that used the airwaves to spread misinformation, fear, hatred and called for hutus to hunt down tutsis.
he is a complete joke and idiot, but never overestimate those that listen to his program. one who follows a fool is more than foolish, they are a danger to themselves and others.
Sedition
Pronunciation:
\si-ˈdi-shən\
: incitement of resistance to or insurrection against lawful authority
From Cornell UniversityCornell Law School
(http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/usc_sec_18_00002384----000-.html)
U.S. Code collection
TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 115 > § 2384
§ 2384. Seditious conspiracy
If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.
AND...
TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 115 > § 2383
§ 2383. Rebellion or insurrection
How Current is This?
Whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.
Sedition
Pronunciation:
\si-ˈdi-shən\
: incitement of resistance to or insurrection against lawful authority
From Cornell UniversityCornell Law School
(http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/usc_sec_18_00002384----000-.html)
U.S. Code collection
TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 115 > § 2384
§ 2384. Seditious conspiracy
If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.
AND...
TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 115 > § 2383
§ 2383. Rebellion or insurrection
Whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.
O.o Mind telling me how voter fraud is equal to hacking people with machetes in large numbers, which is how the Rwandan Genocide happened? Limbaugh's an ass, but to compare his "Operation Chaos" to a genocide created in large part by outside forces is disingenuous bordering on libel. Rush Limbaugh in his wildest dreams could not hope to create the circumstances of the 1990s genocide (which, incidentally, how much did Europe and the US step in? I believe the answer is none.) The comparison is the sort of libel one expects from the Right, not the reality-based community.
O.o Mind telling me how voter fraud is equal to hacking people with machetes in large numbers, which is how the Rwandan Genocide happened? Limbaugh's an ass, but to compare his "Operation Chaos" to a genocide created in large part by outside forces is disingenuous bordering on libel. Rush Limbaugh in his wildest dreams could not hope to create the circumstances of the 1990s genocide (which, incidentally, how much did Europe and the US step in? I believe the answer is none.) The comparison is the sort of libel one expects from the Right, not the reality-based community.
Here is where Rush is wrong. In 1968 the Democratic administration was engaged in a war that they were being blamed for. Also you throw into the mix a party that can't choose a nominee and protesters against the war who came for a fight. This year the war is viewed as being caused by a Republican administration. If the democrats are elected no matter which candidate wins the war will end so that eliminates the protesters. Rush is simply trying to insite a riot and that just won't happen.
ketan @ 36:
Instead of chaos, give them back terrifying order. Highly organized, easily accounted-for actions of individuals equipped with common yet powerful technology, like phones and cams. To converge out of nowhere and express disapproval.
Seemingly chaotic swarms of integrated individuals could be unpleasant, inconvenient, yet non-violent. If individuals in the group instigate or commit criminal acts, they would be accounted for and dealt with.
I'm reminded of the Ron Paul supporters chasing Hannity, accounting for their actions on video.
I agree. As near as I can tell, he is conspiring with unknown others to effect the political process through violence or the threat of violence. In a sane world, or one in which the Justice Department did its job, he would be under investigation for conspiracy.
Doug Markell @ 40:
pinkobait @ 28:
Why is he employed? Because the drug addled, racist pig is effective. That's why.
General_Rennenkampf @ 43:
the comparison is not "voter fraud is equal to hacking people with machetes", as you frame it. the comparison is much simpler: the use of state-radio to foment violence against one section of the populace (and, yes, i think rush's program is the same as state-controlled radio, call me crazy).
i don't find it to be libelous at all. yes, if the claim was that rush's 'operation chaos' was the same as killing pre-teens in the street with machetes, then i would agree with you. but, at least as i see it, that is definitely not the comparison being made
Limbaugh knows what he can or can't say legally, and he's skirting the law.
I think we ought to go after his advertisers. Ask them if they support this?
By his own words and boasts, he convicts himself of conspiracy to incite terrorist acts.
Here's a plan. Send Rush more stogies and a sandwich. Let nature take its course.
Brad @ 29:
Yes. I don't know why the rich, fat, physically impotent gasbag thinks that chaos on the streets will work to his advantage.
a bit much, for sure. on another tangent, i'm curious to know how future generations will perceive guys like o'reilly and limbaugh. will history be kind to them like it has been to raygun? or will people see them for what they truly are? i also wonder how bush will be remembered in 30 years.
I think there should be a federal commission that monitors communication over public airwaves to ensure such obscene barbarities as Rush Limbaugh are banned from broadcasting. Such a commission could impose heavy fines for discourse that is deemed harmful to the nation, such as Limbaugh's incitements of political chaos and violence.
I'm not sure what to call such a federal communication commission, but it sure looks like the nation needs one!
Further proof, were it needed, that the only Rush worth listening to is from Toronto, Canada and consists of Geddy Lee, Neil Peart and Alex Lifeson.
Rush Limbaugh touched me where my bathing suit covers.
There is simply no comparison. RL is a popular entertainer. I think that he is an obnoxious buffoon, but that is just me.
The Rwandan genocide was a pre-planned attempt to wipe an ethnic minority off the face of the earth. The hatred had been building for years, the interahamwe had the infrastructure in place, including lists of names, and following the death of the Rwandan President, they used the radio to set their attempt at genocide in motion while the world looked on and did nothing.
To compare Limbaugh to that event insults the memory of the victims and survivors of the Rwandan genocide, and at the same time gives Limbaugh more ammunition to skewer the left. (I can hear him now: "The loony left compares me, and you dear listeners, to the perpetrators of one the worst genocides in history because I urged you go an vote!") Feh.
I am in full agreement with weg in 57, that's exactly what I thought when I read this article. I like how we on the left like to consider ourselves above this type of thing and then on occasion we use the exact same tactics as the neocons do.... this is nonsense. Rush is bad, but he's not RTLM/Interahamwe and to compare the two is shameful.
When he says "That's the objective here", it tells me that he is directly calling for violence just as in the 1968 convention. Thee is no getting around it.
Isn't that against the Constitution?
It's not at all excessive to compare Rush Limbaugh's impotent (pun is utterly intentional...) petty tirades to the radio-based fomentation that preceded the Rwandan Genocide. But by this logic, using the brutalities of the American Slave Trade to serve as an analogy for someone's bad day at work appears frighteningly legitimate. It isn't.
I'm sure that the author of the post will conveniently argue that the words "In stark contrast" are printed directly before a description of Limbaugh's activity - thereby innoculating her against any such accusation. The fact of the matter, however, is that if the original author had not intended for the reader to use the Hutu-Tutsi atrocities as a frame of reference, he would not have mentioned them in the first place.
As far as I'm concerned, Rush Limbaugh is anything but a big deal. He is less than unimportant - whatever the word may be for this status. What concerns me is an instance where an individual diminishes the significance of a blood-curdling atrocity, only in order to pimp a book that will ironically sell for 80% off on the same rack as Ann Coulter's will.
Don't you have anything better to post about?
Well, people could stop listening to Fat Bastard, but that's asking a lot of all the simpletons out there.
And no, there are few things that are more important to post about. This man is promoting violence and fascism. I'd say that's important.
"These broadcasts drew considerable attention because (1) radio was the major source of information for the listeners in question, (2) the audience was largely non-literate, and (3) there was an ongoing nationalist struggle into which the broadcasts fed "
Ironically, this also describes conservative talk radio in America.
But seriously, I thought there used to be laws against using mass media to incite (directly or indirectly) violence in America, or did Ashcroft and Gonzo have them all removed while we weren't looking?
He's doing what he does best and that's yap like a dog while he sits on his fat ass. hmmm. i'll remain civil and refrain from being edited.
Rush is just a little spanish boy loving idiot. nobody but the same people listen to his show
weg @ 57:
ALThomas @ 58:
I concur. As obnoxious as Rush is, he is not telling people to hack their neighbours to death with machetes.
The answer to Rush's devious mischief is to charge him with inciting abuse of the electoral process over the public airwaves. Write this into the FCC regulations and set fines of up to twice Rush's annual salary, and fines to the network of the value of Rush's show's advertising revenue from the date of the incident until election day.
After Janet Jackson's "wardrobe malfunction" at the Super Bowl a few years back, Michael Powell (Colin's son & head of the FCC) wanted to fine MTV and CBS's 200 affiliate stations $27,500 each. That's $5.5 million for a boob and nipple ring. Inciting electoral "chaos" ought to be worth several times that.
The real voices are on the internet these days- the people who listen to Rush Limbaugh are societies fall-backs. The mass media is finished in this country and I for one am very happy about this because we can talk about the issues in a sensible way rather than having information spoon fed to us by one reporter and later explained what it all meant by another.
The network fat-cats have not really figured this out yet, and one they realize the audience they are catering to don't have two nickels to rub together they will further spread their disinformation disease to the net. We probably have another year or a little less before the net begins to look like FOX News.
Pericles @ 62:
Oh, really? Did someone tell Father Coughlin that? Or the Southerners fighting against Jim Crow? Or G. Gordon Liddy?
This shit's been ongoing since well before Limbaugh. Matter of fact, mass media once started a war just to prove it could. A little phrase might spark your memory: "Remember the Maine, to Hell with Spain!" A war provoked on an innocent power and later proven to have been based on a lie. Sound familiar?
Just because I'm studying this particular time in history for my doctorate, here's an interesting bit of media propaganda to consider: It's the end of the second world war, and everyone pretty much hates the Germans, with by and large good reason. Berlin is under seige and Germany is being squeezed on two fronts, by the Russians in the east, and the Brits and Americans (mostly) in the west. Along comes a young Jewish man named Ilya Erhenburg who had leaflets distributed to the Russian troops at the front. They read:
“The Germans are not human beings. From now on the word German means to use the most terrible oath. From now on the word German strikes us to the quick. We shall not speak any more. We shall not get excited. We shall kill. If you have not killed at least one German a day, you have wasted that day ... If you cannot kill your German with a bullet, kill him with your bayonet. If there is calm on your part of the front, or if you are waiting for the fighting, kill a German in the meantime. If you leave a German alive, the German will hang a Russian and rape a Russian woman. If you kill one German, kill another -- there is nothing more amusing for us than a heap of German corpses. Do not count days, do not count kilometers. Count only the number of Germans killed by you. Kill the German -- that is your grandmother's request. Kill the German -- that is your child's prayer. Kill the German -- that is your motherland's loud request. Do not miss. Do not let through. Kill.”
Result? Ehrenburg's pamphlets contributed in very large part to the ensuing orgy of murder and rape by Soviet soldiers against German civilians on an appalling scale. En masse migrations of a desperate German population fled into the west begging for protection from the Russians. Those Germans left in Berlin fought on with absolutely mind-boggling ferocity, far more than those in the Western forces ever expected, fighting to the death rather than surrender. Along with astronomical suicides of entire families rather than risk falling into Russian hands.
Does the Holocaust make this level of hatred and incitement to mass murder of civilians less despicable, somehow?
A fat racist drug addict incites violence in America?
And gets away with it?
Is he white?
nonny mouse @ 68:
Um, dude, you do realize that pamphlet was due to Germans going into the Soviet Union and slaughtering 17 or so million of its inhabitants? The Germans weren't innocent victims of the Soviet retaliation, not by any means.
I have no sympathy for German sympathizers who point to the Red Army atrocities and ignore the horrors the Third Reich perpetrated in the USSR. The Soviet Union was nearly obliterated west of Moscow, Leningrad, and Stalingrad. The horrors of the Eastern Front had an equal counterpart in our war against Imperial Japan. In both wars, the technologically superior army saw the inferior in technology side as subhuman. The main difference was the Soviets won.
The Germans did so much damage to Russia that they in large part caused the collapse in 1991.
Forgive me for lack of sympathy for the Germans.
Uh, 'dude' (which I'm not, by the way), of course I know the Germans slaughtered 17 million plus Russians during their occupation of the East. I'm hardly a German sympathizer, which if you knew anything about me would be completely laughable, in a very dark way - nor am I 'ignoring' the Nazi atrocities committed not only in Russia but elsewhere.
By your reasoning, it was Muslims who ran two planes into the WTC. Therefore any Muslims we've killed in our war since, civilians or otherwise, deserve what's coming to them, and anyone who says otherwise is an al Qaeda sympathizer. What was done on 9/11 was an atrocity. It was wrong, horrifying, gut-wrenchingly wrong. What we've done in Iraq is an atrocity. It's been wrong. Horrifyingly, wrenchingly wrong, and who did what to who first doesn't matter. One atrocity does not justify or condone another.
Ehrenburg's incredibly effective 'media campaign', by distributing such pamphlets to Russian soldiers to whip them into a killing frenzy, was reprehensible. So is your knee-jerk reaction that a twelve year old German girl in Berlin deserves to be gang-raped by drunken Russians before being bayonetted to death because of the actions of someone else.
Seems all you've learned from this is about vengeance, and the perpetuation of blame and hatred. Forgive me if I prefer a world where - even if I can't forgive, I can restrain from becoming the evil I despise myself.
General_Rennenkampf @ 70:
Pardon me for jumping in here you guys, But it was nature that beat the Germans on their eastern front.
Same as what happened to Napolean.
I have no sympathy for the Germans of that time.
People say that the fire bombing of Dresden by Lemay was a war crime. Maybe.
But the Germans were fire bombing London and did burn Coventry to the ground.
Not to mention they dropped bombs on my mother and father and the whole families in Scotland.
But I certainly don't harbor any ill will to the Germans of today, unless their still wearing a swastika on their arm.
Actually, what you do is have MASSIVE political rallies during the Democratic convention....in other cities, not DENVER. Have a massive protest right outside ALways Been Conservative Radio stations where Fatboy spews his crap every day. have one at the same time in Chicago, and LA, and Philly, and Seattle, ANd MIami. Don't play into the Denver or bust mentality. Make our voices known ALL OVER THE LAND, of course they should all be peaceful, but vocal and large, reallll large.
Also, Give plenty and give often to the Presidential Candidacy of "Former GOP Rep" Bill Barr on the Libertarian ticket.
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D90K4OUG0&show_article=1
You go Bill. Spout your Conservo crap and steal votes from McFlip-flop, by the thousands. And talk about OPERATION CHAOS, HEY RUSH, SUCK ON THAT.
Go Bill Racer, Go Bill Racer, go Bill Racer...gooooo.
I fu(king LOVE IT!!!! I hope another wingnut muddfugger comes out on the Conservative ticket and totally blows McCrazy out of the FU(KING water.
WOOOO HOOOO.
Yes, McDonalds, "I AM LOVING IT!"
Also there is the opportunity to start Operation KRUSH...And the "K" don't stand for Kiss.
Darrell Kern Says: The real voices are on the internet these days- the people who listen to Rush Limbaugh are societies fall-backs. The mass media is finished in this country and I for one am very happy about this because we can talk about the issues in a sensible way rather than having information spoon fed to us by one reporter and later explained what it all meant by another.
The network fat-cats have not really figured this out yet, and one they realize the audience they are catering to don’t have two nickels to rub together they will further spread their disinformation disease to the net. We probably have another year or a little less before the net begins to look like FOX News.
So then, why do you figure Jim Dolan, owner of Cablevision, one of the largest cable networks in the country, is outbidding Rupert (I am a fugitive conspirator) Murdoch for Newsday? Hmmm, Seems backwards, no?
http://www.newsday.com/business/ny-bznews0512x,0,7341028.story
nonny mouse @ 71:
Having no sympathy for Germans who reap what they sow does not equal condoning it. German slaughters of Slavs were war crimes, and deserved to be brought to trial. Equally so, the Russian mass rape of German women. Equally so, the US Army and its head-hunting and mass slaughter of Japanese soldiers. Equally so, the Imperial Japanese Army for the slaughters like Nanking and Korea.
Everybody had blood-smeared shit on their hands in WWII. Only, the victors don't seem to get that remembered as much...
RoscoPeeholePain @ 53:
I was laughing to my wife this morning that it is going to hurt poor dinkledoofusses neck, when he snaps his head around because all eyes are not on him, when he recognizes that he is no longer king sh|t on January 20, 2009. And the three words I want President Obama to state after "So help me God" is
"ARREST THESE MEN!!!!!"
General_Rennenkampf @ 75:
You know, Pious assholes like yourself are the reason all historians are full of shit. Fu(k you and your take on history dickwad, try living it, and then telling us, that well it was only the leaflet that made me do it. It is human nature you stupid sh|t for brains. The jews got slaughtered, and they recruited the RUssians who got slaughtered, and now Little Nazi sympathizers like you scumbags are here trying to wring some sort of HORROR out of their animalistic instincts to protect and defend their lives, from a murdeous scumbag mutherfugger Nazi scumbags who PURPOSEFULLY committed atrocities out of shear wonton loss of feeling for humanity. You bet your ass I would have killed a fu(king slew of you and yours if that was me. So I will tell you piece of sh|t Nazi fuck one thing, When the sh|t hits the fan, you better keep your heads down, because Justice's MIGHTY SWIFT SWORD is a-coming, and it ain't gonna give a sh|t what kind of Nazi bullshitter you are, you and yours will be dead, D-E-A-D.
99Luf Balloons @ 77:
What. the. fuck. are. you. talking. about?
How am I a Nazi sympathizer when I actually think the Germans had it coming to them after they smashed up Russia? You seem to have Nazi sympathizer and Soviet sympathizer mixed-up.
I point out that Soviet rape of German women was pretty much the only result that was gonna happen when Stalin's boys could extract vengeance and I sympathize with Nazi Germany?!!! Dammit, reading comprehension!
The US Army had plenty of shit on its hands as well. We had more than one massacre of Italians and Germans, and plenty more of Japanese, in addition to interning mostly Japanese and some Italians and Nazi sympathizers in WWII. Does pointing out that the WWII Army was not squeaky-clean make me a Nazi sympathizer when that movement was loathsome and horrific, but unfortunately taking 2,000 years of Jew-hatin' to the only logical conclusion? Let's not forget that while we had our problems, the Empire of Japan was running all through China, Indonesia, Papua New Guinea, Oceania, Russia, all of them and doing genocidal slaughters in many of them for the glory of the Emperor? Let's not forget that Stalin moved people through the Soviet Union, displacing them and costing many of them their lives. Let's not forget that Stalin callously massacred Poles, and expelled the Germans from Eastern Europe. Let's not forget Mussolini's invasions of Africa and his ravaging those regions. Let's not forget Hitler striking all across Europe in an orgy of death and destruction that killed more than Jews. Eastern Europeans, Romani, gays and lesbians, the mentally ill, Soviet POWs, Communists and Socialists, all of them.
You call me a Nazi sympathizer. Fuck you and the horse you rode in on.
General_Rennenkampf @ 78:
I think you're right about the reading comprehension skills there General.
wow.
In any national emergency the local GOP talk radio station will probably be the loudest and last the longest, even though they continue to be wrong on just about anything of importance.
Talk radio has been the single biggest factor getting us into this Bush disaster. Since Reagan killed the Fairness Doctrine the Roves of the GOP have been framing with a nail gun while progressives have been using a rock. Talk radio has been the difference, even with other media consolidation (which was enabled to a large degree by the same TR monopoly).
The biggest political blunder in the last 20 years, or longer when you factor the time lost dealing with climate change and implications of the bush disaster, was progressives ignoring the talk radio monopoly.
Talk radio does the groundwork for the GOP. It isn't a matter of how distasteful or inane it is- it is the uncontested repetition to an often captive audience that counts. It is what makes most 'red' states 'red'- large areas with few alternatives to listen to on that ancient medium of information- radio. And until America has some new form of Fairness Doctrine or some other way to limit the monopoly, bipartisanship is for liars or fools and democracy is just about impossible.
Getting a Dem in the White House, even this year, will be made much harder because of the talk radio monopoly. The rest of the lazy celebrity talking heads will use it to set the bar for what they can do to Clinton or Obama in getting Mccain into the White House. Right now it is being used to keep Clinton in the race.
Most political and media analysis is done while discounting or even ignoring the effect of the Republican talk radio monopoly. Most media analysts read and watch. There are no talk radio transcripts to search to analyze to demonstrate the power of that coordinated uncontested repetition that reaches 50-70MIL Americans 24/5/365 and is used by the Roves and Norquists like an invisible hammer to whack their opponents in the democratic party and anyone in the media who would dare to criticize their annointed leaders and irrational policies.
Since the Fairness Doctrine was killed by Reagan the GOP has had near complete free rein to frame and control the debate and the limits of the debate, to threaten and intimidate politicians without having to face those they threaten, to censor and to swiftboat anything and anyone progressive. The loudmouths lay out a smorgasbord of prechewed and tested one liners and talking points for the lazy celebrity media to pick from and most analysts only see the final result.
Many of the political myths that dog progressives now could not have been created without the uncontested repetition of that talk radio monopoly. The Clintons, Gores, and Kerrys probably still don't know what really hit them. Those kinds of character hit jobs can't be done on TV and print alone, even with today's consolidation-- they have to put up an appearance of balance.
The question is, are some American people so stupid that they would listen to this right wing gang of thugs in this media and not vote for a man for what ever reason they make up to disguise their racists views?, or well they do the right thing for this country and honor the fair results of an election with rules made by the very people who question them, or the very people they have put so much faith and trust ?.
We should all be so dame tired of the the kind of shit this country has been put through with these greedy, disgusting bastards, who believe their shit don't stink.
All this shit we are now listening to in this same old dog media, that so far we are not buying and should continue to not buy for reasons we are all so familiar with buy now as they spout 0ff about Senator Obama's lack of experience crap, as opposed to his unquestionable, ability to not only read between the Bush lies, but to stand with courage, in times that are difficult and call a spade a spade, as he has done so many times.
I think we have been through so dame much, that we will continue to connect all over this country and help this man bring this country back to some kind of semblance of order.
While we are at it. Can we all somehow empress upon Senator Clinton that her quest for the office is now over and that she really needs to get behind Senator Obama and help the party defeat the Republicans as she claimed she would do. It's not like she lost this one because it was stolen from her and it should give her great pride to know that she came so close.
It gives so many women the knowledge that we can all count on someday seeing a great lady lead this country, but she is destroying that for us, if she continues down this dark bleak path of destruction.
She is so rich and famous and has pretty much everything any woman could hope for and to continue this mud bath is simply selfish and disrespectful to the party and the American people who have given her and her husband so much to be thankful for.
Yes it is painful to not win, when you think you should, but that is not a reason to continue to hold up this country, when she of all people knows how important it is to move on and deal with the huge issue of beating the hell out of these right wing thugs that have desecrated this country and totally disrespected the American people, while doing so.
For the first time in a long time, we have made a choice of who we really want in that office and that simply is Senator Obama at this time.
I am by no means advocating violence, but it never ceases to amaze me that no one has shot that fat crap. Yes, we are liberals, or progressives, or whatever it is we are these days, and certainly, that makes us more tolerant and respectful of others rights to free speech and idiocy. But how is it we continually manage to fight with our hands tied behind our backs? If there was a progressive voice out there that was as widely influential in moving the country left as Douche Limbaugh has been in moving the country right, someone would have already shot them. JFK, RFK, and MLK are just the first three that pop to mind... Any time someone emerges from our side who is truly charismatic, who captures the publics attention and carries a message of genuine hope for the future, BLAM. This fact alone makes me worry deeply for Obama's safety. This time, however, I suspect that we have become so desperate for change that if something like that were to happen, the backlash would be so extreme that it could start a new civil war. But really, with the level of frustration in this country, the degree of influence Rush has, and the concentration of hateful bullshit he spews, it does surprise me. Same goes for O'Reilly.
As for Limbaugh, I often think guys like him are just waiting for a moment like that but it's probably hard to predict who does what in those circumstances.
I was in a town on the zaire/rwandan border 6-8 months before the massacre. I remember this rwandan business man in a suit drinking heavily and trying to drag me into a conversation about something horrible. My French wasnt good enough to catch it all but basically it was, "They are going to kill everyone, you can't believe it", etc, etc. He was very distraught and animated. Obviously he knew something about the plans (Assuming the plan existed at that point).
Comments are closed on this entry