White supremacist kills guard at Holocaust Museum
posted at 4:39 pm on June 10, 2009 by Ed Morrissey
An 89-year-old white supremacist attacked guards at the Holocaust Museum in Washington DC today, killing one guard before taking a bullet himself. James Von Brunn, well-known in the lunatic fringe that is white supremacism, had attempted a similar attack in 1981 at the Federal Reserve, and had been on the radar screens of watchdogs for years:
The suspect in Wednesday’s shooting at the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum is James von Brunn, an 88-year-old white supremacist from Maryland, two law enforcement officials told CNN.
Von Brunn served six years in prison on federal attempted kidnapping, assault and firearms charges after what he called a “legal, nonviolent citizens arrest” of members of the Federal Reserve Board of Governors.
On his Web site, “Holy Western Empire,” von Brunn said he was “convicted by a Negro jury, Jew/Negro attorneys, and sentenced to prison for eleven years by a Jew judge.”
“He is in our files going back way into the 1980s,” said Heidi Beirich, a researcher for the Montgomery, Alabama-based Southern Poverty Law Center.
“He has extremely long history with neo-Nazis and white supremacists. He’s written extremely incendiary publications, raging about Jews, blacks and the like.”
Yet again, we have a despicable attack based on hatred and political extremism, the third such attack in two weeks to result in fatalities. Doubtless many people will try to find ways to score political points, like the e-mailer who waited a whole 20 minutes to blame conservatives for dismissing the DHS report on right-wing extremism for this tragedy. To that, I’d respond that our criticism was that the DHS report didn’t focus on known, specific threats, instead making generalized threats about abortion opponents and other vague and broad generalizations about conservative issues. In fact, it never mentioned Holocaust denial at all, nor did it mention anti-semitism at all [see Update V below], either; those terms don’t appear at all in the report. And despite being well-known as a threat since the 1980s, the DHS never bothered to identify von Brunn or his organization as a specific threat in the report — which, again, was the heart of our criticism.
Michelle notes that one prominent blogger on the Left is already twittering that the Tea Party movement is to blame for the attack, which is as nutty an observation as anything I’ve heard. What do the anti-tax Tea Parties have to do with anti-Semitism? Only in the fevered imaginations of the most extreme on the Left can they imagine that groups calling for less government have something in common with neo-Nazis. And it certainly wasn’t a conservative talking about Jewish conspiracies in government earlier today.
People who commit crimes bear the entire responsibility for those crimes. Assigning guilt, real or imagined, to groups rather than individuals for their own actions is one of the reasons we have to have a Holocaust Memorial at all. It’s the kind of thinking that leads to genocide when allowed to run to run to its extreme.
Meanwhile, our prayers go to the family of the murdered guard and all who were traumatized by this shooting, which is where our thoughts should be, rather than political fingerpointing.
Update: Kathy Shaidle reports on von Brunn’s ideology, which was hardly “conservative” or even “right wing”. He was also a Truther. That doesn’t make all Truthers responsible for this attack, either.
Update II: As Mary Katharine Ham and Brian Faughnan said on Twitter, Godspeed, Stephen Tyrone Johns:
Update: My meaning was that white supremacism is lunatic fringe, but some people misunderstood it. I;ve rewritten the sentence for more clarity.
Update IV: Tommy Christopher:
Now, where does that leave Wright and Von Brunn? While their actions are, by no means, equivalent, Wright’s comment betrays a bigotry toward Jews that would seem right at home in Von Brunn’s repertoire. But, put to Clouthier’s voting booth test, how do we divvy these two up?
The answer is, we don’t. If we do, we do so at our own peril. While we waste time playing “pin the tail on the ideology,” we distract from the real enemies of freedom, who reside neither on the Right nor the Left, but beneath them.
Exactly.
Update V: I wrote that the report didn’t mention anti-Semitism, but it actually did. It talked about anti-Semitic extremists. I did a search on “semitism” and not “Semitic”, and I should have done both. Sloppy work. I apologize.
Update VI: Balloon Juice’s John Cole calls this the dumbest thing he’s read on the internet:
Anyone want to explain some of the many reasons why they might not have released the names of people under investigation by various federal agencies in an openly published DHS report (notwithstanding the central fact that identifying specific threats was not the intent of the damned thing in the first place)?
Gee, John, then why did the report on left-wing extremism actually name the groups that posed a threat?
(U//FOUO) DHS/Office of Intelligence and Analysis defines leftwing extremists as groups or individuals who embrace radical elements of the anarchist, animal rights, or environmental movements and are often willing to violate the law to achieve their objectives. Many leftwing extremist groups are not hierarchically ordered with defined members, leaders, or chain of command structures but operate as loosely-connected underground movements composed of “lone wolves,” small cells, and splinter groups.
— (U//LES) Animal rights and environmental extremists seek to end the perceived abuse and suffering of animals and the degradation of the natural environment perpetrated by humans. They use non-violent and violent tactics that, at times, violate criminal law. Many of these extremists claim they are conducting these activities on behalf of two of the most active groups, the Animal Liberation Front and its sister organization, the Earth Liberation Front. Other prominent groups include Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty; and chapters within the Animal Defense League, and Earth First!.
— (U//FOUO) Anarchist extremists generally embrace a number of radical philosophical components of anticapitalist, antiglobalization, communist, socialist, and other movements. Anarchist groups seek abolition of social, political, and economic hierarchies, including Western-style governments and large business enterprises, and frequently advocate criminal actions of varying scale and scope to accomplish their goals. Anarchist extremist groups include entities within Crimethinc, the Ruckus Society, and Recreate 68.
Again, had the DHS focused on actual threats, then von Brunn — who had already committed a violent attack on the Federal Reserve and who was well known to the SLPC — and his organization might have been highlighted. Not to mention that the report is supposed to help law enforcement identify actual threats, not have them play guessing games and encourage them to spy on normal political activity.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 … 3 4 5 6 Next »
Yep.
davidk on June 10, 2009 at 10:20 PM
Best spin job I’ve ever seen. You’re not a lawyer are you?
SouthernGal on June 10, 2009 at 10:23 PM
As Jeff Goldstein suggested, Letterman’s comments should be turned to Obama. Does he approve bringing politicians daughters into fights like this?
But here is a bigger issue.
The Von Brunn shooting was a terrorist act and a horrible crime. His victim was a hero and I pray for him and his family. Von Brunn in no way represents my views, any more than scum like Fred Phelps represents view of most Christians. But I know that Charles Johnson and other mendacious individuals on the left will use the opportunity to blame this act on right wing extremism. Von Brunn was wearing a confederate hat wasn’t he?
But the Reverend Wright (why doesn’t Wright count as a Christianist to Sullivan?) gives another example of Jew hatred, with his rant today.
Granted Wright is not a criminal or a murderer. Wright just mentions that Israelis are engaged in ethnic cleansing in Gaza. That is true. The Israeli Defense Forces did do ethnic cleansing in Gaza, they evicted several thousand Jooooooooooz so the Palestinians could have their ethnically pure Shangra la. How has that turned out?
So let’s question President Obama about anti Semitism. Obviously Von Brunn is a violent murderer beyond the pale for any rational person, but Wright’s comments are not acceptable are they? Ask if it is true Barack Obama told Israel it cannot bomb Iran. If Von Brunn can kill a single person, what stops Iran from killing millions? These are all legitmate questions. I would suggest we start asking them now.
Mr. Joe on June 10, 2009 at 10:23 PM
Well said, Loxodonta.
(So I wanted to bump it to the new page.)
FloatingRock on June 10, 2009 at 10:25 PM
And you’re not ashamed, are you?
And you haven’t provided a single example of “hate” speech from Jon Voight, nor can you.
FloatingRock on June 10, 2009 at 10:27 PM
I wonder what the MSM would do/say if O’Reilly had said that one of OsamabamabidenHussein’s daughters was getting it on with David Dukes in the Lincoln bedroom?
davidk on June 10, 2009 at 10:27 PM
My tea parties were amiable, filled with people from all walks of life, all ages, and definitely not nasty.
They took one u-tube and blew it up on a progressive blog. But I went to 2 in LA, and I saw no anti-semitism/racism at all.
AnninCA on June 10, 2009 at 10:28 PM
So, you are quite willing to use the death of Stephen Tyrone Johns for your own political purposes.
Obviously, you have no shame.
Or any respect for the dead.
Loxodonta on June 10, 2009 at 10:28 PM
That covers it.
davidk on June 10, 2009 at 10:30 PM
I doubt Pres. Obama agrees or disagrees with Rev. Wright, I believe that church was just politically expedient.
The killer today should be judge on his own and the only reason I mentioned the president and his former minister was in answer to a really really boring troll who tried to blame Jon Voight. I am sorry I mentioned it because I don’t want to detract from this murderer and his innocent victim.
Cindy Munford on June 10, 2009 at 10:34 PM
Boy, Wright and now this guy….it’s enough to confuse the pundits, eh?
LOL*
They won’t know quite what to say.
AnninCA on June 10, 2009 at 10:35 PM
If you want to show respect for a man who gave his life to defend children and other visitors to the Holocaust Museum, let’s talk about how we can reduce anti-Semitism and anti-Israeli propaganda in our country and the world. Or, let’s talk about how we can reduce hatred and violence.
But let’s not try to blame anyone for this crime on our political opponents or certain groups. That is the same game that contributes to the problem.
Loxodonta on June 10, 2009 at 10:36 PM
Please, I understand what you are saying but leave the children out of it.
Cindy Munford on June 10, 2009 at 10:36 PM
I believe it was yesterday that Mr. Voight called the government a “regime” and called it not a democracy but an “oppression.”
I feel this kind of hatespeech leads to negative thoughts and negative actions and does not help build solidarity and empathy with people of different races, religions and backgrounds.
We need more empathy and mutual understanding, and less divisiveness and incivility. I believe Mr. Voight will apologize for adding to the divisiveness.
SouthernGal on June 10, 2009 at 10:37 PM
The Rev. Wright, President Obama’s pastor of 20 years, today accused “them Jews” of preventing him from speaking with the President. What do you have to say about the hate that the president of the United States listened to for 20 years?
Loxodonta on June 10, 2009 at 10:41 PM
As far as I know, the only pundit that has made the connection between Rev. Wright and today’s murder at the Holocaust Museum is Allahpundit at Hot Air.
Have you read any others? If so, link please.
Loxodonta on June 10, 2009 at 10:43 PM
Like the president, I condemn it as misguided.
SouthernGal on June 10, 2009 at 10:45 PM
But on the thread about David Letterman making jokes about Governor Palin’s daughter getting raped, just 8 minutes before you posted the above, you posted the following:
The “empathy and mutual understanding” is just dripping from you, isn’t it?
Loxodonta on June 10, 2009 at 10:46 PM
What kind of hate speech? You still haven’t provided a single example!
FloatingRock on June 10, 2009 at 10:48 PM
The President condemned today’s murder, not what the Rev. Wright said.
What do you have to say about Rev. Wright? And how do you explain the president’s sitting in his pews listeing to such hate speech for 20 years?
Loxodonta on June 10, 2009 at 10:49 PM
southerngal,
Where the heck have you been for the last 8 years? The lefties in the media constantly referred to the Bush regime and called GWB fascist & nazi and made all sorts of outrageous accusations. Were you outraged then?
I’m disgusted by the behavior of the MSM media & our resident trolls with regard to the recent 3 shootings. They don’t give a crap about the suffering of the victims and their families. They just want to score political points and point fingers at their enemies. Grow up! May
drflykilla on June 10, 2009 at 10:50 PM
My niece and nephew were in the museum today with their school group when this happened. Those kids sure got a lifetime of lessons about hate today.
rockmom on June 10, 2009 at 10:52 PM
May Stephen Tyrone Johns rest in peace and may his family find comfort.
drflykilla on June 10, 2009 at 10:52 PM
I condemn his statements.
I believe the president has a good heart and does not share the anti-American views that Mr. Wright claims to have.
Mr. Wright and the shooters of the past few weeks are proof positive that the religious do not hold a monopoly on truth, patriotism and virtue.
SouthernGal on June 10, 2009 at 10:55 PM
rockmom,
Thank God your niece & nephew are ok! I hope they are all right emotionally. It must have been a scary experience.
drflykilla on June 10, 2009 at 10:56 PM
Who, other than those opposed to religious people, has ever claimed that religious people hold a monopoly on truth, patriotism and virtue?
And speaking of virtue, would you please extol the virtues of telling jokes about raping girls, which you find so funny, in comparison to Mr. Voigt’s speech, which you find so hateful.
Loxodonta on June 10, 2009 at 11:00 PM
I am so sorry to hear that. Thank God they are alright and that the security was up to the job. Bless their hearts, I just feel awful for them.
Cindy Munford on June 10, 2009 at 11:03 PM
There exists such a thing as right-wing socialism. Thank you for insulting my intelligence, though–I needed a good chuckle.
hicsuget on June 10, 2009 at 11:03 PM
Southern(?)Gal finds Rev. Wright misguided but Mr. Voight hate filled, I don’t think we can dig any deeper in that logic.
Cindy Munford on June 10, 2009 at 11:06 PM
Religious people.
SouthernGal on June 10, 2009 at 11:06 PM
Yes, I know. I rarely go troll hunting, but this one in this thread really ticked me off.
Loxodonta on June 10, 2009 at 11:07 PM
Right-wing socialism? LOL! You’re a blithering idiot, moron.
FloatingRock on June 10, 2009 at 11:08 PM
Don’t sell yourself short—you managed to do that just fine all on your own.
FloatingRock on June 10, 2009 at 11:10 PM
…says a person who is unaware that there is a difference in meaning between the terms “right-wing” and “conservative,” or between the terms “socialism” and “Marxism.” The idea of a conservative Marxism is laughable, yes. So too is your smug sense of intellectual superiority.
hicsuget on June 10, 2009 at 11:13 PM
Because Leftists think black people are unable to think for themselves don’t know any better and must always be guided. Therefore they are properly “guided” or “misguided.” The Left never describes blacks using terms which imply personal responsibility or autonomy.
baldilocks on June 10, 2009 at 11:13 PM
Me too. If I had a ban hammer I’d use it in her case.
FloatingRock on June 10, 2009 at 11:13 PM
Speak for yourself. I know the differences far better than you, obviously.
FloatingRock on June 10, 2009 at 11:15 PM
You are a delusional, feeble minded lefty, and have no business commenting on today’s tragedy. Your kind has placed an antisemitic monster in the white house, his foreign policy is destroying the one and only Jewish state and giving nukes to holocaust denying terrorist, his winking and nodding to the arab hoodlums in the middle east has signaled an open season on Jews everywhere, so STFU about your president.
runner on June 10, 2009 at 11:16 PM
Quotes and links.
Then, how about responding to my other point, which will be just as difficult for you to do:
And speaking of virtue, would you please extol the virtues of telling jokes about raping girls, which you find so funny, in comparison to Mr. Voigt’s speech, which you find so hateful.
Loxodonta on June 10, 2009 at 11:19 PM
When you’re in a hole, stop digging.
From Ludwig von Mises’ Socialism, first published in 1922:
hicsuget on June 10, 2009 at 11:21 PM
I hear the approaching thunder that,
one day, will destroy us too,
I feel the suffering of millions.
And yet,
when I look up at the sky,
I somehow feel that this cruelty too shall end,
that peace and tranquility will return once more.
– Annelies Marie Frank (1929-1945)
From the Diary of Anne Frank
Loxodonta on June 10, 2009 at 11:36 PM
hicsuget,
Just because the author you cited describes state socialism also as conservative socialism, it does not mean that it can be called right-wing socialism–at least not if you’re referring to American conservatives. American conservatives want to preserve Constitutional principles in our government, while etatists want to maintain their power structure through force which could be applied to a leftist or rightist government . That’s my take on it anyway.
drflykilla on June 10, 2009 at 11:39 PM
Please, would you just stop for a second a find a clue? There’s got to be one around there somewhere….
In 1922 political classifications were entirely different than they are in modern America. Right-wing back then is left-wing now, (although it’s a bit more complicated than that because different regions of the world have their own ideas on the matter which have also changed over time), just like conservatives now were considered left back in 1776. Classical liberalism, which was a force for change in it’s day, is now considered conservative because it represents the status quo, (even if that’s not as true as it used to be).
As you can see, not only does the meaning of right and left change over time, so does the meaning of liberal and conservative. Even the term “progressive”, which may have actually been intended to mean “progressive” back in it’s day, is no longer really a liberal ideology. It’s not new anymore, it’s been tried. Fascism was tried, it failed. Communism was tried, it failed. Socialism was tried, it failed. Statism doesn’t work because it’s antithetical to human nature. It’s failed or is failing everywhere it’s been tried, and in a relatively short period of time.
Some might even argue that there isn’t really an American “left” anymore, but there is, it’s just that the classification is more straightforward than a hundred years ago. It’s less subjective. The left is now comprised of authoritarian statists of various forms and the right is comprised of freedom loving individualists. That’s the widely accepted modern day American political classification system and has been all my adult life. The only exception, which is false, is when dishonest liberals like you try to use the legacy definition of right-wing to tar the new right-wing with your sides own past and present transgressions.
FloatingRock on June 10, 2009 at 11:42 PM
Which is what refutes your 11:21 argument.
FloatingRock on June 10, 2009 at 11:44 PM
In the archaic sense of political classification.
FloatingRock on June 10, 2009 at 11:46 PM
Yet you seem to believe that most blacks are “misguided” because they vote consistently Democrat.
The sense of irony is weak with this one.
crr6 on June 10, 2009 at 11:49 PM
You’re conflating conservatism the movement with conservatism the concept. If you were, temporarily, to cease referring to your own political ideology as conservatism and to call it something else, like Reaganism, then your confusion would abate. (It is the American traditions of political liberalism and Protestant parochialism that modern American conservatives wish to conserve.) Etatism is not conservative by today’s standards, but it is still undeniably right-wing (unless cognitive dissonance is involved–with enough of it, anything is deniable.)
hicsuget on June 10, 2009 at 11:53 PM
The limits of your comprehension are becoming obvious.
First, the work I cited also happened to be the first book to predict, on aprioristic economic grounds, the complete collapse of any socialist scheme. (In the interest of full disclosure, the same author said as much in a paper two years earlier.)
Second, you are correct that I am a liberal, but you are way off in the inferences you make therefrom. We liberals (all two of us) believe in capitalism, individual rights, and peace. Any form of socialism is highly illiberal. Any form of socialism is also highly illogical, so I guess I could fault you for the misery it has wrought.
Third, the sine qua non of “right-wing” is the desire to return to the traditions of a past era. The actual traditions involved are irrelevant. Al Qaeda is conservative in that it wants to bring back the Caliphate; the Republican Party is conservative in that it wants to bring back Federalism. “Right-wing” and “conservative” are not value judgments in and of themselves (except to a Marxist); they are mere statements of fact.
hicsuget on June 11, 2009 at 12:04 AM
Did you see this about Private Quinton Ezeagwula, the surviving soldier from the Little Rock attack? Unfortunately, the video doesn’t match. Can’t find much else about him, either.
Loxodonta on June 11, 2009 at 12:07 AM
It seems my arguments are too nuanced for you.
Cf:
hicsuget on June 11, 2009 at 12:08 AM
That’s pretty insulting isn’t it? Although for this particular commenter I don’t think I would give her(?) that much credit, if you go from thread to thread you will see that she just takes a contrarian stand. I am going to add her to my “do not reply” list in hopes that she will go away.
Cindy Munford on June 11, 2009 at 12:11 AM
You have it exactly right, Ed, and so does Tommy Christopher. I don’t agree with Tommy on hardly anything politically, but he hits the nail on the head. These acts are caused by individuals, not groups. And where was DHS on von Brunn? Probably listening to Sean Hannity’s or Rush Limbaugh’s latest broadcast and trying to figure how to shut them down.
simkeith on June 11, 2009 at 12:16 AM
Geez, hic, do you have to be such a condescending boor? You won’t win many fans that way. I’m interested in what you have to contribute here, but you definitely could use a little more courtesy in your posts.
drflykilla on June 11, 2009 at 12:26 AM
Wrong. The definition in common use is more government verses less government. That will likely continue for centuries to come because all future forms of government that may yet be devised will fall into this system and isn’t so subjective.
Think about it. Europe is very liberal and has been for at least a century. The revolutionary end of their classification spectrum is what they presently call the “right”, whereas by the archaic model European “conservatives” would be “left”.
The only way calling them “right” makes sense is by the less/more equation, which achieves a very similar result to the archaic model up to a certain point in history but would be backwards by modern standards.
And in present day America, the left is at least as established as the status quo as the right is, so by the old standard it is unclear (to me, at least), if there would even be a “left” anymore. Democrats and Republicans, I think it could be argued, are both right-wing.
That’s why the system had to change to more government/less government. That’s the present reality and has been for decades, regardless of what any textbook may or may not say.
And by that measure, Hitler, who clearly favored a strong authoritarian government, falls into the left.
But this is purely academic. My point in all this wasn’t to saddle the left with any responsibility for this murderer, who was clearly a nut, but to dispute the notion that he was right-wing, which is commonly alleged following these sorts of incidents.
And with that, I think I’m through with this topic for the night.
FloatingRock on June 11, 2009 at 12:28 AM
…And it’s the only exception where the archaic system is still used, no doubt encouraged by lefty professors and put into practice by the lefty media.
FloatingRock on June 11, 2009 at 12:37 AM
Washington Post: Grief, Shock After a ‘Gentle Giant’ Loses His Life in the Line of Duty
Loxodonta on June 11, 2009 at 1:23 AM
Back on topic, from The Washington Post:
Yessiree, no question about it–he’s a leftist.
/stupid
hicsuget on June 11, 2009 at 1:31 AM
The lessons of the Holocaust are simple to understand,
however hard they are to live.
Never blame others for your troubles.
A society is as large as the space it makes for the stranger.
Cherish life.
Fight for the rights of others.
– Jonathan Sacks, Britain’s Chief Rabbi, 2005
Loxodonta on June 11, 2009 at 1:41 AM
You’re right about that. There’s no evidence in the portion you quoted, at least, that indicates he’s either left or right other than the Washington Post’s own characterization. And Todd Blodgett having been an “aide” 20 years ago could mean just about anything, including an errand boy, and regardless, that’s an extremely flimsy pretext even by guilt-by-association standards.
FloatingRock on June 11, 2009 at 1:41 AM
And my point wasn’t to saddle conservatives with responsibility for this murderer, but to dispute the risible assertion that he is a leftist.
I prefer to argue on the level, but when my opponents resort to vapid ad hominems or argue against the evidence and against the weight of the evidence, I get a little bit testy. Iustum fatum stultorum. Incidentally, I’m not interested in winning fans, or hearts and minds; I’m merely interested in getting people who are pigheadedly wrong to recognize that it is at least conceivable that their views may be less than 100% correct.
hicsuget on June 11, 2009 at 1:48 AM
Actually, the fact that he’s an anti-Semite and felt he fought on the wrong side during WWII suggest left.
FloatingRock on June 11, 2009 at 1:49 AM
It’s really a wonder
that I haven’t dropped all my ideals,
because they seem so absurd
and impossible to carry out.
Yet I keep them,
because in spite of everything
I still believe that
people are really good at heart.
– Annelies Marie Frank (1929-1945)
From the Diary of Anne Frank
Loxodonta on June 11, 2009 at 1:52 AM
Right, because Hitler was a leftist fighting against the reactionary conservatives Stalin, Roosevelt, and Churchill.
hicsuget on June 11, 2009 at 1:53 AM
Why are you incapable of understanding something so self evident? Hitler was a fascist and a member of a political organization that referred to themselves as socialists. That’s not surprising because the two are very similar, (practically the same thing in many regards), and closely related to communism as well. Sure, fascism and socialism are to the “right” of communism, (no question), but all three are on the far left of the modern political spectrum. It’s just that simple, and as hard as you might try there’s no reasonable way around that fact.
At any rate, I’m done with this conversation. Good night.
FloatingRock on June 11, 2009 at 2:13 AM
Wait, one more thing. Maybe you’re not getting it because you’re not familiar with the definition of fascism? Fascism is basically socialism but instead of owning the means of production, the government only controls it. The effect is the same but there are technical differences.
So how can two political systems that are practically the same thing be on two different ends of the full political spectrum? Answer: they can’t be. They are right next to each other.
FloatingRock on June 11, 2009 at 2:27 AM
hicsuget: well, well, well!
Not only have you Devastatingly lost every single argument on this thread as to what side of the Political spectrum Hitler was on (he was a Leftist, like yourself, of course); but now, you have been absoluted FLATTENED in your argument that the Holocaust Museum shooter was a “Rightwing” member as well!
http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-722-Conservative-Politics-Examiner~y2009m6d10-Holocaust-Museum-shooter-von-Brunn-a-911-truther-who-hated-neocons-Bush-McCain
What’s that smell?
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!
Don’cha just LOVE the smell of CRUSHED Anti-American/Anti-Semitic/Pro-Jihadi Traitor Leftist Democratic Nutbags in the morning?
Opens up the old nasal passages!
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!
Dale in Atlanta on June 11, 2009 at 2:53 AM
I may despise everything multicilti leftists stand for but boy do I owe at what propaganda from brazen, unapologetic force can do to an unreasonably humble and respectful force when I see a blogger at one of the top conserbvative blogs assume a leftist talking point that their racist twins are actually “extreme right” as in “extreme conservatives”. White supremacist ideology has always been leftist and coming ultimately from lowlife motives. Just like internationalist leftism. Both are based on greed and hate.
To say that “real enemies of freedom…reside neither on the Right nor the Left, but beneath them” is like to say that real enemies of public order reside neither on the Chelsea hooligans nor on the Police side but beneath them”. Because Chelsea hooligans conducted a succesfull propaganda campaign saying that Arsenal hooligans are “extreme Police”. The very definition of leftism (multiculti or racist) is a) limited or non-existent economic freedom 2) looting the rightful and just owners from the fruits of their labour. This despicable agenda can be and is blended with any hateful ideology from multiculturalism and racism to islamism. The world is full of such ideologies and American leftism is just a reincarnation of this filth in America. It may be more civilized than their international and especially Russian or Chinese bretheren but by not that much. That’s why the initiatives of political speech freedom limitations are coming in US from them only (like “hate speech”, “Fairness Doctrine” etc).
American conservatism on the other hand is the only ideology in the world that has economic freedom and justice as it’s agenda (though it is compromised imho by the recreational drugs prohibition agenda). Respect for the innocent life and well being is its core foundation. This ideology is incomarable with any form of leftism. And this is coming from someone who was born and raised in Russia and had no idea what American conservatism is only 5 years ago.
Alexey on June 11, 2009 at 7:32 AM
Loxodonta, Bravo! You’ve done your best work on this blog to date here.
FloatingRock, thanks for reminding fools that Fascism is just another Leftist expression. Spitefulgal @10:37 hates her own inept character and blames all her own faults upon her opponents.
maverick muse on June 11, 2009 at 7:32 AM
If there is anything that would fall into the category of “Right-Wing Socialism,” it could only be the Protestant Populism of Huckabee-types who believe management of the poor with tax money is the duty of a religious populace. One of the hallmarks of those arch-protestants is their support of Israel and opposition to Islam, clearly the opposite of what we see in this tragic occurrence.
Deny it all day, but anti-Zionist, anti-capitalist, anti-Christian, anti-Catholic, pro-Islam, pro-Palestine, 9/11 Truther social-Darwinists are LEFTISTS, just like you.
TMK on June 11, 2009 at 7:38 AM
Last night on both CBS and NBC news, parallels were drawn between the “hate crimes” and “extremists” in the holocoaust memorial shooting and the abortion doctor murder.
Missing from both stories: the muslim who killed a recruiter last week. Why do you suppose that is? It doesn’t fit the narrative, that’s why.
Phineas Caesar on June 11, 2009 at 7:42 AM
really?? is there also protestant catholicism too???
talk about a chuckle…you provide one with every post.
beyond stupid.
right4life on June 11, 2009 at 7:46 AM
Rightwing Socilists = …
…Protestant Papists
…Kosher Pig Farmers
…Islamic Jihad-of-Hugs-and-Piñatas
TMK on June 11, 2009 at 8:01 AM
The problem is that the president never condemned Wright until he was politically forced to do so. Before that he was perfectly happy to sit in Wright’s “church” and listen to him. He never walked out, never resigned his membership, never questioned, never protested. He only denied sitting there for twenty years of sermons and hearing anything controversial coming out of Wright’s mouth.
Why? Did the president actually agree with Wright? Is the president anti-semetic? Is he a racist? Are his views on Jews closer to Von Brunn’s than you want to admit? I don’t know but I do know there is enough circumstantial evidence to question.
sdd on June 11, 2009 at 8:32 AM
Demerits for acknowledging the senior fellow at the Andrew Sullivan asskissing Institute at Balloon Juice. All he wants is attention and yet you give it to him.
rjwest21 on June 11, 2009 at 9:07 AM
Any information on the guard out there? I hate glorifying the killer by plastering his name all over the place. I’d rather celebrate the heroic effort of the security guard.
hawksruleva on June 11, 2009 at 9:34 AM
The security guard Stephen T. Johns is dead. Rest is peace, sir.
Shy Guy on June 11, 2009 at 9:43 AM
I agree, “labels… are only applicable in a particular historical context…” or by further specific definition and refinement by those who espouse the particular religion or ideology.
Geezer on June 11, 2009 at 10:08 AM
The strnage aspect about this entire incident is that von Brunn walked into a fully secure Holocaust Museum, loaded with metal detectors and other detection equipment with a handgun? Secondly, lets look into von Bruun’s history:
In 1981, he was bold enough to try to take Fed Reserve board members hostage. So fast forward to 2009, and apparently he’s lost any sense of purpose in that he’s reduced to killing an innocent black security guard who probably makes 12 dollars an hour? If this von Bruun was so intent on sending a message, why do it in such a pathetic fashion? It doesn’t make any sense unless he was stricken with a terminal disease.
__________________
Pitchforker on June 11, 2009 at 10:29 AM
I find it amazing how much coverage the MSM’s are giving the Holocaust shooter compared to the terrorist who shot our soldier!!
Eagles Dominion on June 11, 2009 at 10:57 AM
Stephen Tyrone Johns, God Bless You, may God give comfort to your family.
Dr Evil on June 11, 2009 at 11:03 AM
I don’t know if “amazing” is the word I would choose, however it does show how the media is the propaganda arm of the Democrat Party. I guess it is amazing that more people haven’t had the discriminatory abilities to tell propaganda from actual news reports.
But then “discrimination” is on the politically correct hit list. Life is so confusing under Democrat governance. Purposefully so.
BetseyRoss on June 11, 2009 at 11:23 AM
“Anti-Government”
Beware this grotesque label applied to conservatives who eschew Marxism. “Anti-government” is the obnoxious code permission to annihilate all legitimate opposition to the Obama-Pelosi-Reid propaganda machine.
As with “right wing radicals”, the Anti-Government smear is misapplied as what we’ve noted are murderers with blatant disregard for our Constitution, hence another variant of the Left that comprises ideologies that require the dismissal of our Constitution.
It is the Left that is pirating our Constitutional Government. It is Marxists who are anti-Constitutional Government. The Anti-Government radicals are authoritarians smearing their guilt upon their opposition, just as the DNC smears Republicans as representing the Democrat KKK party.
There are murderers and hate mongers who latch onto any political ploy to exploit their evil upon humanity. MOST FREQUENTLY these deviant opportunists sink to the path of least resistance to let loose their blood lust.
At this point, President Obama has painted the bullseye target on Israel in his international “diplomatic” doctrine: Islam first.
Though totally appalled, how can anyone honestly claim surprise that a neo-Nazi (white eugenic supremacists are radical Leftists) would choose this moment to let loose his murderous mania on America?
Given 9/11, Obama’s fetish to placate radical Islam, and the populist antipathy for Israel today as demonstrated by American Democrats and many American “Liberal” Jews, I am disappointed that our nation’s Memorial to the Nazi Holocaust must implement metal detectors to protect those who come to honor the memory of all those lives abused, of persecuted and murdered by fascists, determined to be inconvenient and undesirable by the German National Socialist Party’s international tyranny.
Stephen Tyrone Johns, God’s Speed and Peace.
I hope that the Museum’s point of safe entry commemorates Johns’ ultimate sacrifice, not to be forgotten.
maverick muse on June 11, 2009 at 11:46 AM
My kind? You mean Jewish Americans?
SouthernGal on June 11, 2009 at 11:53 AM
The National-Socialist Party and the German National (Conservative) Party ~ By Adolf Hitler (1922)
Geezer on June 11, 2009 at 12:04 PM
My kind? You mean Jewish Americans?
SouthernGal on June 11, 2009 at 11:53 AM
Really? Then how do you feel about what Rev. Wright said? Or the Administration’s treatment of Israel?
kingsjester on June 11, 2009 at 12:05 PM
As I said before, I condemn Mr. Wright as misguided. He has much hate and misunderstanding in his heart.
I support Obama’s policy on Israel and Palestine.
SouthernGal on June 11, 2009 at 12:11 PM
Meaning idiot liberals.
dpierson on June 11, 2009 at 12:12 PM
As I said before, I condemn Mr. Wright as misguided. He has much hate and misunderstanding in his heart.
I support Obama’s policy on Israel and Palestine.
SouthernGal on June 11, 2009 at 12:11 PM
1. The President sat in this man’s church and under this man’s leadership for 20 years.
2. Then you have abandoned your birthright as given to Abram in Genesis 12: 1-4.
kingsjester on June 11, 2009 at 12:19 PM
I am not Jewish so maybe someone who is can answer this for me. Why do American Jews vote for Barrack Obama and continue to support Obama even so he is leaving Israel in the lurch. Those two positions don’t seem to square.
dpierson on June 11, 2009 at 12:25 PM
1) I know the president has a good heart and loves his country. I do not believe he supports Mr. Wright’s anti-American hatespeech.
2) I don’t care.
SouthernGal on June 11, 2009 at 12:26 PM
dpierson on June 11, 2009 at 12:25 PM
So they can have a cocktail weenie with the rest of the Liberals at the party.
SouthernGal on June 11, 2009 at 12:26 PM
And that is a shame.
kingsjester on June 11, 2009 at 12:30 PM
He already showed his support the only he could in the church setting by remaining in the pews and coming back every Sunday.
dpierson on June 11, 2009 at 12:41 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 … 3 4 5 6 Next »