Yesterday we had another act of violence by a right-wing extremist intent on attacking and harming the government, inflamed by far-right conspiracy theories about 9/11 and other supposed instances of government "tyranny":
Internet postings linked to the suspected gunman in a Pentagon subway shooting suggest long-held frustration with the government's reach into the private life of Americans.
The suspect, John Patrick Bedell, 36, died after exchanging gunfire with two police officers. He spent weeks driving to the Capital area from the West Coast, authorities said Friday.
A blog connected to him via the social networking site LinkedIn outlines a growing distrust of the federal government. The blog suggests a criminal enterprise run out of the government could have staged the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.
It was the latest batch of conspiracy-laden Internet postings to surface since Thursday night's shooting.
Bedell died Thursday night from head wounds received in a volley of fire with police. Richard Keevill, chief of Pentagon police, said the two injured officers and another officer who came to their assistance fired upon Bedell at the subway entrance into the Pentagon building in Arlington, Va.
"He came here from California," Keevill said. "We were able to identify certain locations that he spent that last several weeks making his way from the West coast to the East coast."
Keevill described Bedell as "very well educated" and well-dressed, saying Bedell was wearing a suit, armed with two 9 millimeter semiautomatic weapons and carried "many magazines" of ammunition. There was more ammunition in Bedell's car, which authorities found in a local parking garage, Keevill said.
[UPDATE: Think Progress has more on Bedell's background as a right-wing extremist.]
NBC's Jim Miklaszewski assured us this morning that there was no indication this was "terrorism." Likewise, the Associated Press report had a similar assurance:
Investigators have found no immediate connection to terrorism. The attack that superficially wounded two officers guarding the massive Defense Department headquarters appears to be a case of "a single individual who had issues," Richard Keevill, chief of Pentagon police, said Friday.
Excuse me, but WTF?
It seems to be the new standard among journalists that terrorism is now defined only as conspiracy-based international terrorism. Lone-wolf domestic terrorism? That's now just "a single individual who had issues."
You remember when an anti-tax radical flew his plane into IRS offices in Austin a couple of weeks ago in an attempt to blow those offices up, the Foxite media were eager to proclaim that it was not an act of terrorism, too.
As we explained then:
This too is nonsense: There are different kinds terrorism, to be certain. There's international terrorism. Then there's domestic terrorism, sometimes conducted by a larger conspiracy, and sometimes conducted by small cells like McVeigh and Terry Nichols, and lone wolves like Eric Rudolph, Scott Roeder and James Von Brunn.
All of these acts fit the FBI's twin definition of terrorism:
Domestic terrorism refers to activities that involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any state; appear to be intended to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; to influence the policy of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States. [18 U.S.C. § 2331(5)]
International terrorism involves violent acts or acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or any state, or that would be a criminal violation if committed within the jurisdiction of the United States or any state. These acts appear to be intended to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination or kidnapping and occur primarily outside the territorial jurisdiction of the United States or transcend national boundaries in terms of the means by which they are accomplished, the persons they appear intended to intimidate or coerce, or the locale in which their perpetrators operate or seek asylum.
Remember that DHS bulletin warning of a potential outbreak of right-wing domestic terrorism that so freaked out conservatives because they claimed it "smeared" conservatives? Let's recall what it actually said:
DHS/I&A assesses that lone wolves and small terrorist cells embracing violent rightwing extremist ideology are the most dangerous domestic terrorism threat in the United States.
[..] Similarly, recent state and municipal law enforcement reporting has warned of the dangers of rightwing extremists embracing the tactics of “leaderless resistance” and of lone wolves carrying out acts of violence.
As we explained after James Von Brunn engaged in a similar act in D.C.:
Now, here's the odd thing about "lone wolves": Right-wingers like to use the solitary nature of this kind of terrorist act to dismiss them as "isolated incidents." But in reality, the continuing existence of acts of this nature demonstrates primarily that the radical right in America is alive, well, and functioning better than it should. And the continuing -- and as we've seen this week, ultimately futile -- attempts by the right to whitewash their existence from the public consciousness have played no small part in helping that trend continue.
... A 2003 piece by Jessica Stern in Foreign Affairs described how even Al Qaeda was finding the concept useful. And she explains its origins:
The idea was popularized by Louis Beam, the self-described ambassador-at-large, staff propagandist, and "computer terrorist to the Chosen" for Aryan Nations, an American neo-Nazi group. Beam writes that hierarchical organization is extremely dangerous for insurgents, especially in "technologically advanced societies where electronic surveillance can often penetrate the structure, revealing its chain of command." In leaderless organizations, however, "individuals and groups operate independently of each other, and never report to a central headquarters or single leader for direction or instruction, as would those who belong to a typical pyramid organization." Leaders do not issue orders or pay operatives; instead, they inspire small cells or individuals to take action on their own initiative.
The strategy was also inspired by at least one "lone wolf" shooter: Joseph Paul Franklin, a racist sniper who in the late 1970s and early 1980s killed as many as 20 people -- mostly mixed-race couples -- on a serial-murder spree, and attempted to assassinate both Vernon Jordan and Larry Flynt. (Franklin was also the inspiration for William Pierce's Hunter, the follow-up novel to The Turner Diaries.)
There has been no dearth of lone wolves in the years since Beam set the strategy for the radical right: Eric Rudolph. Buford Furrow. Benjamin Smith. James Kopp. Jim David Adkisson. In 20099, we added Scott Roeder and James von Brunn to the list.
That's quite a trail of "isolated incidents," isn't it?
As we saw in Austin, far-right extremist rhetoric plays no small role in inspiring these acts. And inevitably, it is ordinary Americans who pay the price.
All I know is that if this had been a Muslim man who had walked into the Pentagon and opened fire, all the talk this morning would be about an "act of terrorism". Instead, it's just another "isolated incident." Funny how that works, isn't it?




The United States is the greatest sponsor of state terrorism in history.
Witness the overthrow, sponsored by the US, of 50 governments since 1945. Usually democratic attempting to address social development of their own societies.
It has been the march of the American Empire. It also exists at home where the surveillance state is ubiquitous.
The United States spends $1 trillion per year on a program of perpetual war. As much as the rest of the world together.
The United States has engaged in torture!, and by failing to investigate and prosecute continues in complicity.
The issue should be that war profiteering and the militarism that it engenders takes precedence over social development.
The United States government is the handmaiden of the right wing.
Terrorism is the boogeyman du jour which the MICC must have to scare us in passivity while watching our national treasure go steadily down the military drain. They have one billion muslims for this purpose. Before that they had the Soviets.
statusquObama, change you can only pretend in
Excuse me for correcting you on one little fact you are absolutely wrong about David.
In the body of the text up top you say, "far-right conspiracies about 9/11".
It is a travesty for you to try to align respected architects, engineers, physicists, NYC fire fighters who were AT THE SCENE on 9/11, pilots and thousands world-wide from various fields of academia to "far-right wing conspiracies about 9/11".
Here is a link for you to peruse before you go off half-cocked again. I try to respect those who post here at Crooksandliars, but that disingenuous crack you just made trying to discount years of serious research into 9/11 done by so many thousands of concerned human beings WORLD-WIDE makes you look like a tool:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?contex...
"The US has an army of 90,000 soldiers in Afghanistan and is spending $100bn a year, but has still been unable to defeat 20,000-25,000 Taliban who receive no pay at all." - Patrick Cockburn
Excellent response Right On.
Domestic Terrorism's Threat all over the Dead Body of one deranged bipolar pothead and two wounded officers. Thanks gang. Wolf. wolf, wolf.
"I mean Romney is the most conservative on illegal immigration and I don't think Ronald Reagan could get elected in California today."
Ann "Clipped" Coulter
1,000 Architects & Engineers Call for New 9/11 Investigation
New Hampshire Investigation
VIDEO
http://www.youtube.com/user/RussiaToday#p/u/6...
These are not right wing extremist at all .
The Free State Project (FSP) is a political movement, founded in 2001, to get at least 20,000 libertarian-leaning people to move to New Hampshire in order to make the state a stronghold for libertarian ideals.
Study the symptoms not the virus...
You find them on the radical left and radical right-but mostly on the left-I love how these freaks deny planes even went down that day-they claim body parts and plane debris were planted. I've debated with Truthers morons who really thought all the footage was fake. Their collective stupidity is shocking.
If Bush was the idiot his critics paint him as being, then how did he pull it off? No way he and Cheney could have carried it out- and even if they could- what could possibly be gained? And a 'coverup' would involve thousands of people- yet nobody talked, no paper trail. The clusterfuck of Bush's war in Iraq was proof enough he and his administration couldn't accomplish any objective. Oh- I forgot, the Truther nuts blame it all on Israel
..
Check this Video OUT!
The new American Century
The PNAC Cabal
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3776...
The best on the topic
Thanks for the article. Didn't know that flame was still burning. The nano-thermite article brings it back it seems...
Couldn't have said it better. After all, isn't this distrust what progressives and c&l been describing for years but just in other words?
What would Marlon Brando say if he were still alive?
I just discovered this guy, and I love him, as so many did.
"The horror.
The horror."
"They can be a great people, Kal-El, they wish to be. They only lack the light to show the way. For this reason above all, their capacity for good, I have sent them you... my only son."
has even died and been resurrected, this is oddly appropriate.
He was an actor, he would be following a script.
statusquObama, change you can only pretend in
He was never following a script. That's what was so great about him. Take a gander at his 1973 interview with Dick Cavett. It's funny how I, like I think so many others, don't know about Brando because he was so subversive, and, thus, mainstream society abhorred him.
Well, he was accused of not being able to remember lines.
statusquObama, change you can only pretend in
Streetcar Named Desire
On the Waterfront
In those two movies alone, his very screen presence was subversive, especially for the times.
Brando worked to do it his way. It did not make him an easy person, apparently.
He is definitely one of the greats of Hollywood. Nicholson pales, and I'm sure he'd agree.
The Wild One!
Imagine if you were Brando and every time your name was mentioned on the great Almighty TV (at least in my lifetime) you were shown--completely out of context--shouting "Stella!" Think of how America perceives Howard Dean's turn into the microphone.
For me, I never saw the greatness supposedly captured in that millisecond of film and still don't because I haven't watched the movie in full, but I wonder if Brando could have been irritated by such a narrowly drawn view of himself and if this was why he scorned being praised, especially if he believed there were so many more important things going on. Notice, how he never much cared to discuss his movies, and now I am left to wonder if this was done intentionally to demean the man.
milk toast?
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
want?
audit-prosecute-incarcerate
Add another Glenn Beck terrorist to the right wing domestic terrorist chalkboard tally.
Most Truthers aren't right wing, are they?
Ever tune in to Alex Jones?
scared the crap out of me.
“The greatest evildoers are those who don’t remember because they have never given thought to the matter, and, without remembrance, nothing can hold them back,”
ever listen to hartmann when he allows those idiots to spew their insanities?
there are way too many on the left who believe the troofer fantasies
but don't you go stompin' on my Thom Hartmann...........he just lets those people rail because he's too much of a gentleman to cut them off at the knees. He is the most intelligent, well-informed talk show host on the planet....well, he and Rachel.
“The greatest evildoers are those who don’t remember because they have never given thought to the matter, and, without remembrance, nothing can hold them back,”
i just dont like when he gives those people a voice, and doesnt respond to their insanities
by letting them present their views. Unfortunately, most of them are the screaming, unreasonable types that he can't have a conversation with...they just plow ahead and talk over him like Liz Cheney does when she's on one of those talking head shows.
“The greatest evildoers are those who don’t remember because they have never given thought to the matter, and, without remembrance, nothing can hold them back,”
Mike malloy is the left wing equivilant of Glenn Beck- The man is nothing but venom and conspiracy theories, and both men have a history of being fired from their radio jobs due to their questionable sanity- in that regards, he and Beck are two sides of the same coin..
Actually- Malloy is more like Michael Savage, because both men drip with hate and venom towards anyone who thinks any differently than them...
Don't you want to know the troof?
You can't handle the troof!
!!
“The greatest evildoers are those who don’t remember because they have never given thought to the matter, and, without remembrance, nothing can hold them back,”
sorry
are whack-jobs, no doubt about it. But the fact remains that the "troof" of what happened that day still hasn't been revealed. I would like to know what happened on 9/11. Does that make me a troofer?
What is so wrong about wanting to know what actually happened that it engenders ridicule from the mindless sheep swallowing the pablum?
It's clear we've been lied to by those "in control" that day to cover-up something. I want to know what the hell was covered-up.
Truthers simply choose not to believe the official findings, just as Christian nuts choose not to believe in Evolution.
They choose to believe that no planes went down that day, despite the evidence to the contrary...
9 years on Truthers still have no concrete proof that it was an inside job...They need to move out of their parent's attic and get a job...
but it is the anti-truthers who embody the Christian analogy you're using. The religious belief is that America is good, the terrorists are bad, and if more people would simply vote (presumably for Democrats) then everything would be fine.
Just as Christian nuts are afraid to admit that there is no heaven, anti-truthers are afraid to admit that unelected powers are behind most of what we call politics.
the "true believers" never believe the TRUTH!
Cue the Kabuki....
The Unofficial Story
CBC (Canada) on 9-11 "Conspiracie":
http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/2009-2010/the_unoffic...
You call any truther : Alex Jones.
That's not fair
regarding the events on 9/11 I am NOT referring to those who claim the WTC's (1,2 and 7) came down by light beams from UFO's or other wack job nonsense and I believe that those of you who are foolish enough to spout that crap actually know better.
At least you WOULD know better if you bothered to read the link I posted above.
You would know better if you bothered to take an OBJECTIVE look at the evidence that has been amassed since that horrid event.
Before you tar ALL individuals with your broad brush of "looniness", do yourself a huge favor and try doing some SERIOUS RESEARCH AND READING on the subject.
Believe me, I don't relish the idea of NOT BELIEVING THE 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT. But when they purposely decided to exclude any mention of a 47 story steel beamed building that collapsed into it's own footprint at 5:20 p.m. on 9/11, not to mention all the other distortions and OMISSIONS, I am not the only college educated person in the world who wonders what is going on.
Even some who sat on the commission have serious doubts regarding the conclusions that were arrived at.
Any person posting here who badmouths the thousands of highly educated professionals who have serious questions regarding the events of that day is, in my mind, suspect.
What is it about the TRUTH that so scares all of you??
Abbybwood, R.N.
Proud Member - Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth
"The US has an army of 90,000 soldiers in Afghanistan and is spending $100bn a year, but has still been unable to defeat 20,000-25,000 Taliban who receive no pay at all." - Patrick Cockburn
It's like offending their religion. They don't want to admit that unelected power is the main culprit behind most of what we call politics. If we simply challenge Rush Limbaugh's lies, sign petitions and vote, then everything will turn out okay. To admit otherwise would be to admit that we live in a corporate feudal state, where elections are rigged and individuals have no real power, and that is a reality that they are not prepared to accept.
But how am I to take seriously people who argue the footage of planes hitting the WTC was fake, and that all the plane debris was planted?
Cue the Kabuki....
Sure, some of the "troofers" advance such theories, but you know as well as I do that the 1000 architects and engineers who recently called for a fresh investigation aren't claiming faked footage or that plane debris was planted.
You are making the same type of disingenuous arguments that right-wingers make when they attempt to portray, say, Charles Rangel as a representive of the Democratic Party's core values. It's intentionally obtuse, and it betrays your underlying fear that there might actually be something to the "troofer" theories.
C'mon Dave. That's a pretty broad brush.
Was the 911 commission a collection of fanatical right wingers?
Several of them feel the investigation needs to continue and that they were lied to.
He was trying so desperately to get a woman, any woman, to like him but he couldn't prevent himself from going into the most insanely paranoid rants imaginable. He reminded me of the high school nerd who was home schooled until he was 16 or 17 and then dumped into a public school setting. Lisa never invited him to another party.
Barack Obama: Change we can only imagine
is defined by the passport of the beholder...
this guy would have been a member of a sleeper cell. He would be all over Fox as an Al Quada member and then he was "disappear" into Darth Cheney's undisclosed man sized safe.
Does that even include the Mossad agents who were carrying passports they STOLE FROM OTHER INDIVIDUALS when they flew into Dubai and followed the military leader of Hamas into his hotel room, injected him with a potent muscle relaxer then held a pillow over his face until he was dead?
Netanyahu is now wanted for arrest by the government of Dubai because his little Mossad agents (allegedly...pfftt!), assassinated this Palestinian.
So....."terrorism is defined by the passport of the beholder..."
Or by the beholder who stole the innocent person's passport?
"The US has an army of 90,000 soldiers in Afghanistan and is spending $100bn a year, but has still been unable to defeat 20,000-25,000 Taliban who receive no pay at all." - Patrick Cockburn
.
Of course it's not terrorism when someone seeks to attack a branch of our Government so as to affect a change...
... NO?
.
Starve the WAR Beast...
... Feed Americans.
wanted "change"... so he's a terrorist! Not that he actually attacked anyone or even enacted any changes....but that's not the point....he's a terrorist!!! ;)
he's black and Muslim, dontcha know.
“The greatest evildoers are those who don’t remember because they have never given thought to the matter, and, without remembrance, nothing can hold them back,”
he's not even 'Mericun!
!!
“The greatest evildoers are those who don’t remember because they have never given thought to the matter, and, without remembrance, nothing can hold them back,”
I've noticed the Corporate Media has been relatively quiet about this, a topic that I would have thought they'd be screeching about. As for political motive, yes I see anti-government, but could I have any examples of this person's left or non-left beliefs, if any. I don't want to jump on the blame Fox bandwagon, unless there's some decent proof. I haven't researched it, so I'm not saying one way or the other.
All I've heard was he didn't believe the government story on 9/11 and didn't like pot prohibition. Sounds like a lot of Americans from both the left and right to me. But still a terrorist act.
Regardless of political leanings, killing people is wrong.
on TPM. He was a property rights, anti-commernist, anti-laws kinda guy. The 9/11 and pot stuff are just parts of his ideology.
on his balcony, I would say it was more than ideology. I'd say he was maybe smoking the stuff from time to time.
http://search.cbsnews.com/blogs/2010/03/05/cr...
"I mean Romney is the most conservative on illegal immigration and I don't think Ronald Reagan could get elected in California today."
Ann "Clipped" Coulter
... that pot smokers tend to be a little more paranoid than people who don't smoke pot. Maybe the pot was a contributing factor to the shooting.
do you have a link for that? I'd like hear it.
http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/201...
.
"The US has an army of 90,000 soldiers in Afghanistan and is spending $100bn a year, but has still been unable to defeat 20,000-25,000 Taliban who receive no pay at all." - Patrick Cockburn
here is a link to his supposed amazon wish list, he's got anti-bush books on it along with some that are pro dem and pro repub. The anti-bush doesn't mean much by itself though, there are people on both sides that don't like him.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/pdp/profile/A1S137X4...
the police officers is beyond me. They are not the ones setting policy or even have a clue as to who sets policy. Just as in the case of the Christmas day terrorist, he is not the one issuing the orders and wouldn't be able to give information on future attacks. Those that attack the innocent are attacking the wrong people.
symbolic than anything...akin to the suicide bombers in the middle east. Or heavy duty drama queens.
They call it death by cop.
Some nut job is afraid to off himself so he/she pulls a stunt that will make a cop shoot them.
It's actually considered a form of suicide.
He's white and his name isn't Muhammad or Hakkim.......or Barack....
Barack Obama: Change we can only imagine
a ton of the troofers are wacky lefties
wacky lefties?
statusquObama, change you can only pretend in
the majority on the left are intelligent and sane, but to not accept that some are over the top is to not accept reality
I would be interested in hearing your definition of left and right.
statusquObama, change you can only pretend in
That "whacky" seems to be the default condition for those on the right and the exception to those on the left.
Barack Obama: Change we can only imagine
There was or maybe still is a rule here at C&L that no one could discuss the possible involvement of the govt in 9-11. Plenty of commentators had their comments deleted because they broke that rule and I can promise you not all of those commentators were right wing people.
For that reason when I heard this guy might be a truther I cringed because I was afraid it was a left winger who had gone over the edge.
Say what you mean. Mean what you say. But don't say it mean.
The one thing they seem to have in common are some very legitimate doubts, coupled with some theories which are unsupported by science or the evidence. They don't do themselves any favors by discrediting what I believe are well founded doubts about the official explanation with ridiculous accusations of "implosions" and "missile attacks".
Barack Obama: Change we can only imagine
And I respect that rule for two reasons.
The major reason is that I simply do not know who committed the [terrorist] attacks of 9-11 and to speculate is fool hardy.
All I know for certain is that my government went out of its way to cover up the facts, to whitewash the truth, to sell THEIR conspiracy theory as truth.
Who actually orchestrated the attacks is a big unknown.
But it's obvious who covered it up, and who capitalized on it. So it's easy to point the finger at them. But that is not proof. Nor does it reveal the facts as to how the plot was conceived or carried out.
And the second reason I don't get involved in such a discussion here is I'd prefer not to go to all the trouble of posting just to see it deleted.
Democracy is too important to be entrusted to politicians.
Rise Up!
Protest!
Not sure what I said that would be verboten, especially since C&L opened up the thread to discuss terrorism and the 9/11 truth movement???
[It was your link, and I won't override the deletion. I don't see where the thread was opened up to discuss 9/11 stuff. I am starting to delete these comments; they're way way way off topic, and are in territory we have ALWAYS shut down, because as those of you left on the thread can see, it is out of control-Sitemonitor]
"The US has an army of 90,000 soldiers in Afghanistan and is spending $100bn a year, but has still been unable to defeat 20,000-25,000 Taliban who receive no pay at all." - Patrick Cockburn
A few people left on the thread trying to have a discussion on an OLD thread and we 'troofers' are a problem how?
Cue the Kabuki....
web manifesto of Mr. Neiwert's most recent terrorist trying to find out if they could provide an Alice approved definition of right or left to attach to the IRS divebomber.
"I mean Romney is the most conservative on illegal immigration and I don't think Ronald Reagan could get elected in California today."
Ann "Clipped" Coulter
You wouldn't need my approval, or anyone else's for that matter, to have your own definition of left and right, which I would be interested in hearing.
statusquObama, change you can only pretend in
The left and the right can be used simultaneously to rub the center.
.
"I mean Romney is the most conservative on illegal immigration and I don't think Ronald Reagan could get elected in California today."
Ann "Clipped" Coulter
Your own personal menage a tois.
"Anyone that makes less than $150K in this country, has no business voting Republican."
was thorough, well researched, and preferably with links.
"I mean Romney is the most conservative on illegal immigration and I don't think Ronald Reagan could get elected in California today."
Ann "Clipped" Coulter
My definition had a link. I clicked it over and over again until, finally,it loaded.
Click it over and over while it was loaded.
"I mean Romney is the most conservative on illegal immigration and I don't think Ronald Reagan could get elected in California today."
Ann "Clipped" Coulter
debate: From ThinkProgress, complete with links and citations.
Barack Obama: Change we can only imagine
Is that what you are referring to, Walt?
Is it wacky to believe that the world is for the living and not the dead? That the dead should not be controlling our lives as they do? I bet you think that is wacky or somehow unconstitutional?
I wonder if you agree that the equal protection clause needs to be more strictly enforced?
Or how about the abolition of corporate interference in the political process, which is diluting my voting rights and yours?
Is impeaching Roberts, Alito, Scalia or just Thomas? Is that wacky?
But, how about eliminating the stock market, the bond market, banks undue leverage, the Federal Reserve, the IMF and the World Bank? Is that wacky?
Or how about the US government not only defaults on many military contracts but refuses to fund them beyond the meagerest of salaries and board. No new weapons, and no arms sales ever to any foreign nation. That you must think is wacky?
I am guessing you think this is the wacky left?
Cause we smoke the wacky tobaccy.
"Anyone that makes less than $150K in this country, has no business voting Republican."
about fine cannubian fibers. This is just another meme of the right wing lifestyle projecting itself.
"I mean Romney is the most conservative on illegal immigration and I don't think Ronald Reagan could get elected in California today."
Ann "Clipped" Coulter
:)
Barack Obama: Change we can only imagine
You make the cannibinal in me smile.
http://search.cbsnews.com/blogs/2010/03/05/cr...
"I mean Romney is the most conservative on illegal immigration and I don't think Ronald Reagan could get elected in California today."
Ann "Clipped" Coulter
Because when I hear the word "terrorism," I wonder why it's important to use that word. Do they want to scare me? Do we need to invade somewhere? Which Amendment to the Constitution do we need to fudge? How much?
Do we need to do something extra to this guy? Killing him twice might be difficult, but if he were alive should we torture him?
Do we need to not do something if we label it terrorism? Like have a fair trial? Or give his name and location to the Red Cross?
Why the label?
Are they trying to scare us?
Corruption favors the wealthy.
The point of the post is that they are NOT calling it terrorism!
statusquObama, change you can only pretend in
No matter who is asking to apply that label, I'd still like the answer.
Especially when we're talking about an attack on a military installation, by a guy who is dead, who could have been convicted and sentenced to death in a heart beat had he lived.
If the answer is to point out the inconsistency and absurdity of the label (e.g. a Quassim missile attack is terrorism while using white phosphorous on civilians is not), then bravo.
But if the answer involves including everyone's pet fears into the definition of terrorism, then it really does just boil down to someone trying to scare us.
Otherwise, what's the point?
Corruption favors the wealthy.
Terrorism is the bogeyman du jour of the MICC and they have one billion muslims which is all they need.
statusquObama, change you can only pretend in
Ah, the good old days . . . .
Corruption favors the wealthy.
Most of the opium out of Afghanistan is ending up in Russia.
All the profits, just imagine!
statusquObama, change you can only pretend in
None.....
http://www.fortifyingthefamily.com/None_Dare_...
"I mean Romney is the most conservative on illegal immigration and I don't think Ronald Reagan could get elected in California today."
Ann "Clipped" Coulter
I had forgotten about that book, what a piece of propaganda.
This person is completely brainwashed.
I have commented repeatably about the dual propaganda purpose of the Soviets calling themselves socialists in order to legitimize an illegitimate system.
And, the Americans calling the Soviets socialists for the exact opposite reason, to delegitimize the immense moral authority of SOCIALISM by associating it with the totalitarian Soviets.
The purpose for the Americans came to be the march of empire and cold war profiteering.
And to brainwash Americans into going along with the entire thing.
Thanks for reminding me how well the brainwashing worked.
statusquObama, change you can only pretend in
1) that I linked to begin with
2) that I picked a wacky rightist without having to defend or define my terms. Home schoolers are usually easy marks for that.
"I mean Romney is the most conservative on illegal immigration and I don't think Ronald Reagan could get elected in California today."
Ann "Clipped" Coulter
I was reading it, and, like, yeah John Dewey is awesome, and then I was like, WTF?
Pfffttt!!!
"The US has an army of 90,000 soldiers in Afghanistan and is spending $100bn a year, but has still been unable to defeat 20,000-25,000 Taliban who receive no pay at all." - Patrick Cockburn
It was privatized!
statusquObama, change you can only pretend in
the "terrorist" label applies here, since the purpose of terrorism is to instill terror. This guy's motive was simply to attack the government, not terrorize the population. The IRS divebomber, on the other hand, had a stated goal of inspiring others, so that comes closer to terrorism.
Oh...so the thought of walking down the street innocently, or riding the subway, or entering an office building...when suddenly some extremist asshat with a weapon jumps out and starts spraying bullets all over the place doesn't instill terror.
So, you agree then that sole Palestinians that blow up buses are also not terrorists?
Thanks for the clarification.
"Anyone that makes less than $150K in this country, has no business voting Republican."
You're reading stuff I didn't write. Blowing up buses is the very definition of terrorism, because the objective is to scare the population. Picking off federal agents is more of a directed attack.
Blowing up buses is the very definition of terrorism
Really? And what was the guy that killed the guard who tried to stop him from walking into a Washington DC tourist spot with a loaded weapon last year?
He's not a terrorist until he actually fires into a crowd?
So, the determining factor is body count?
"Anyone that makes less than $150K in this country, has no business voting Republican."
pick your fight with someone else, okay?
I'm not picking on you. The point is...terrorism can be applied to just about any act of RANDOM violence.
You don't need a web posted manifesto to be tagged a terrorist.
The cherry picking by the government and the media of this label is PURELY political.
"Anyone that makes less than $150K in this country, has no business voting Republican."
This was a targeted attack.
So was 9/11, bus bombings, airplanes flown into IRS buildings.
NOT all of those were defined as "terrorism".
"Anyone that makes less than $150K in this country, has no business voting Republican."
otherwise they wouldn't be able to charge the Christmas day passenger on a plane with terrorism.
We've probably got dozens of different ways to do that already with the attempted murder of so many people. It's not like this should be a very tough case.
Corruption favors the wealthy.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ukUL_I14GPw
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
or with white liberals...But they will never accept that a white right winger is a terrorist
(Was that in Cat on a Hot Tin Roof?)
Does it matter matter what we call it? Even if he were alive, we have the most "efficient" "justice" systems in history. By "efficient" I mean that we have the largest prison population, per capita and in raw numbers, ever.
Convicting and punishing people isn't difficult for us; we're quite good at it.
Why do we need that extra fear boost the word "terrorism" provides?
Corruption favors the wealthy.
comes from the observation that many people have made that if a Muslim or Leftist commits an act of violence, it's called "terrorism," but if an Israeli or right-wing whackaloon does it, it's called something else. Most "terrorism" in Merka comes not from Muslims or lefty extremists, but from the right-wing, which is simultaneously validated by the likes of Glenn Beck and Sean Hannity. Therefore the question of what to call it is reasonable, IMHO.
I'm still happy I had a chance to use "But he's dead, BigDaddy" in a political discussion. I mean, how many times is that one gonna come around?
Corruption favors the wealthy.
than the smell of mendacity.
"I mean Romney is the most conservative on illegal immigration and I don't think Ronald Reagan could get elected in California today."
Ann "Clipped" Coulter
Why do we need that extra fear boost the word "terrorism" provides?
Cause when appropriately applied it really ramps up the base and scares the sheeple.
"Anyone that makes less than $150K in this country, has no business voting Republican."
The Russian media labels people Anarchists the same way the American media labels people terrorists.
What it means is that the state does not want to explain to the general population why this is happening.
You can't use a label that most of the folks in your general population can't spell or know the definition of.
Terrorism is marketed and sold the same way Coke and Pepsi are.
"Anyone that makes less than $150K in this country, has no business voting Republican."
There is no such thing as terrorism. If this guy is not considered a terrorist then there is no terrorism. Terrorism is an attack on a government, or its citizens, intended to respond to (i.e. retaliate for) governmental policy and, perhaps, political change.
If I understand this latest incident correctly, this man went to the Pentagon with the express purpose of killing some people, hopefully military. He intended to attack the US government with a political purpose in mind, yes? How is that any different than a suicide bomber? Is a suicide bomber a terrorist?
about your sorry-ass, if you know what I'm saying?
In the end, if there really is a bin laden out there fighting us, do you think he cares if Americans are scared? Or, do you think that he cares how many of us die?
But, then again, it's kind of funny because the US government doesn't worry too much if we die, but they sure do like it when we're scared, yes?
Don't knock the media, only muslims are called terrorists not white americans, they only have beefs with gov't when stuff like happens.
How about he was just a man who lost it for one reason or another? Maybe he was encouraged by someone or something but the bottom line is he went up against the pentagon with two guns and ammunition. You have to be insane to do something like that no matter what moniker is placed upon him.
Say what you mean. Mean what you say. But don't say it mean.
military capital of the Military Power of the planet and opens fire at a check point. Who is to say he wasn't a Xe sales rep who had a flashback to the Green Zone?
"I mean Romney is the most conservative on illegal immigration and I don't think Ronald Reagan could get elected in California today."
Ann "Clipped" Coulter
They were 15 days passed due on paying his contract.
The recession really is starting to make people edgy.
"Anyone that makes less than $150K in this country, has no business voting Republican."
American Express Card were not resulting in getting paid faster.
He was anxious and decided to make a personal call.
"I mean Romney is the most conservative on illegal immigration and I don't think Ronald Reagan could get elected in California today."
Ann "Clipped" Coulter
Maybe, Glen Beck will tell us tonight how this guy is really no different than Daniel Shays?
should have been a clear signal that he was a criminal.
Cue the Kabuki....
posting or they would have nailed him before he could get off the first round.
"I mean Romney is the most conservative on illegal immigration and I don't think Ronald Reagan could get elected in California today."
Ann "Clipped" Coulter
Only if he were wearing an empty suit.
Say what you mean. Mean what you say. But don't say it mean.
And until we know the truth about 9-11 (whatever the actual real truth is) MANY of us will continue to "question the circumstances behind the Sept. 11, 2001, [so-called] terrorist attacks."
We're not (all) wackos.
It's just that the "official conspiracy theory" doesn't fit the facts.
And what we've been told is OBVIOUSLY another coverup.
Just like the Warren Commission.
Unlike some, I do not pretend to know what actually happened on 9-11.
All I am certain of is that the truth has yet to be told, the official conspiracy theory does not fit the facts.
Democracy is too important to be entrusted to politicians.
Rise Up!
Protest!
a bunch of saudis hijacked planes, flew them into the towers, the pentagon and the ground in pa
there...feel better now?
Governor Connally.
"I mean Romney is the most conservative on illegal immigration and I don't think Ronald Reagan could get elected in California today."
Ann "Clipped" Coulter
Walt Kovacs?
That's the official Conspiracie theory
New Hampshire Investigation:
http://www.youtube.com/user/RussiaToday#p/u/6...
RT's on my subscription list at YouTube .. usually excellent reporting .. well sourced ..
Democracy is too important to be entrusted to politicians.
Rise Up!
Protest!
so simple anyone could do it ..
thanks for the explanation ..
I thought it would have been more complicated than that ..
Democracy is too important to be entrusted to politicians.
Rise Up!
Protest!
I believe 911 was a faith-based Initiative.
Study the symptoms not the virus...
and it sure is NOT included in the official 9/11 report.
To those that believe the "official conspiracy theory"...you must be smoking something stronger than the guy who just committed suicide by cop. Have any of you done any of your own research? are you aware of..... Scientific Paper Finds Nano-thermite Explosives in World Trade Center Dust, April 3, 2009
A peer-reviewed paper published in the Open Chemical Physics Journal on April 3, 2009,2 reported that a little known high-tech explosive called nano-thermite was found throughout the World Trade Center dust.
Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe,” Open Chemical Physics Journal, Vol. 2 (April 3, 2009)
[OK. We have been extremely lenient on this thread. Head on over to a 9/11 specialty site to advance any further discussion of all this 9/11 stuff. This is precisely WHY we don't allow it here. The topic of this thread is "'Lone wolf' anti-government extremist opens fire at the Pentagon. But let's not call it terrorism," not the chemistry of the debris in the WTC wreckage-Sitemonitor]
Cue the Kabuki....
I concur.
You 9/11 Truthers are hopeless- a coverup would involve thousands of people- why hasn't there been a single whistle blower?
Where is the papertrail?
Comments are closed on this entry