shooting at DC Holocaust museum

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Postby compared2what? » Sun Jun 14, 2009 4:26 am

compared2what? wrote:
Percival wrote:THIS THREAD IS ALL FUCKED UP AND UNREADABLE NOW, FUCKING BLOODY HELL CHRIST ALMIGHTY FIX THE SHIT SO WE CAN ENJOY READING IT WITHOUT ALL THE GOD DAMNED SCROLLING FROM SIDE TO SIDE.

Bloody fucking hell I HATE that! It was such a good thread until now too.


Well. If you can call finding yourself trapped in a nightmare world in which the twin streams of noxious rhetoric that mutually antagonistic and hate-filled professional propagandists have been pumping into the atmosphere for decades have now reached such high levels of saturation that in effect at least for rhetorical purposes, it sometimes seems that they might as well have become the atmosphere, since there's so little fresh air left that even people of integrity who would suffocate before they would willingly draw in a breath that breathed greater life into the vicious and oppressive forces they're committed to opposing can barely speak without starting to choke "good," then I agree with you!

Also, I'm doing what I can on your behalf to kick it to the next page by using many more words than I need to in order to express something that doesn't, strictly speaking, even need to be expressed. But even my naturally prolix style has its natural limits, I'm sorry to say, since I think I've now reached them. Although I guess it never hurts to remark that it's really astonishing how truly influential Lyndon Larouche has ended up being, in view of how mind-numbingly and monotonously unoriginal, petty and pedantic a writer, thinker he actually is. When you get right down to it. Not to mention -- as far as one can tell absent sustained, firsthand experience, which I concede it not so far that it constitutes more than an impression based on partisan witness accounts, and therefore not far enough to speak to the subject with any degree of authority -- how insane, unpleasant, and corrupt an individual he appears to be. To boot.

Personally, I would never in a million years have predicted it, back in the day when dodging Larouchites was a more regular part of my quotidian existence.

So color me astonished.

Also, don't say I never did anything for you, Percival.

Here's hoping that this sees you on the jump.


Oh, @*#%!

I fucking hate when that happens.

On edit: Yay.
User avatar
compared2what?
 
Posts: 8383
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2007 6:31 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby AlicetheKurious » Sun Jun 14, 2009 5:25 am

c2w said:
...Although I guess it never hurts to remark that it's really astonishing how truly influential Lyndon Larouche has ended up being, in view of how mind-numbingly and monotonously unoriginal, petty and pedantic a writer, thinker he actually is. When you get right down to it. Not to mention -- as far as one can tell absent sustained, firsthand experience, which I concede it not so far that it constitutes more than an impression based on partisan witness accounts, and therefore not far enough to speak to the subject with any degree of authority -- how insane, unpleasant, and corrupt an individual he appears to be. To boot.

Personally, I would never in a million years have predicted it, back in the day when dodging Larouchites was a more regular part of my quotidian existence.


Ok, this is something I don't get, and I wish someone would explain it to me. In all the time I've been on this board, I can't recall even one time when Larouche was quoted, referenced or described approvingly by anyone here. Not even one time.

Yet every once in a while, Larouche is dragged out of wherever he's being kept and catapulted into a thread by a poster, in an apparent attempt to smear other posters. It's never worked so far, especially since this tactic often targets individuals for whom "Larouche" is simply a name, with vaguely unpleasant connotations to be sure, however as an archetype of evil, the reference is too obscure and too American-centric to really pack the kind of punch the smearer presumably intended.

Instead, the presumed target, and I speak from personal experience, feels bewildered at this implication that he or she is actually not acting as an independent, intelligent, thoughtful and knowledgeable individual, more than capable of informing him or herself and coming to his or her own conclusions, but as a sock-puppet for some guy who he or she has never read, and who or she is not even sure is still alive.

Besides reeling from the clearly implied insult, the target can be forgiven for wondering whether this is some kind of "gate-keeping" strategy that is recommended for use when one finds oneself unable to come up with a rational and factual counter-argument.

Thus the hurling of gratuitous Larouche-grenades into a thread, rather than diminishing the credibility of the intended target, have the opposite effect -- of diminishing the credibility of the hurler.

For me, personally, this is not a happy turn of events, as the hurler in this case is the last person I would have expected to such a sordid tactic.

Of course, in life, one frequently is forced into a re-evaluation of one's beliefs and perceptions in light of new evidence. It's rarely a comfortable experience but it is a necessary part of growing up, a process that I believe we must all strive to continue until our dying breath.
"If you're not careful the newspapers will have you hating the oppressed and loving the people doing the oppressing." - Malcolm X
User avatar
AlicetheKurious
 
Posts: 5348
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 11:20 am
Location: Egypt
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby American Dream » Sun Jun 14, 2009 9:08 am

To me LaRouchism is a cult, and not the kind which people take half-way. You're either in it, or you're not.

That said, the LaRouchies are ideologically somehere in the militant far right, a zone where many others share similar beliefs with them.

I've never seen what seems to be a LaRouchite on this thread, but the ideas of that far right which he perpetuates are alive and well on this board and in conspiracy culture in general. These ugly tendencies surface in all kinds of ways.

This I think is why having critical consciousness about what LaRouche represents does really matter here.
American Dream
 
Posts: 19946
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby justdrew » Sun Jun 14, 2009 4:12 pm

here's an interesting article...

Sun, Jun. 14, 2009
Some say Holocaust Memorial shooting signals a broader war
By Jesse Washington
Associated Press

Crazies. Lone nut jobs. Isolated loonies. Those are frequent descriptions of people like James von Brunn, the 88-year-old white supremacist accused of opening fire at the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum and killing a black guard.

Others believe he represents something more dangerous: a growing racist movement motivated by a number of converging factors, including the first African American president.

The potential for an increase in violence from whites who feel they are slipping from power is high, people from across the ideological spectrum say.

"I believe we are headed for an unprecedented level of conflict and racial turmoil," said Carol Swain, author of the 2002 book The New White Nationalism in America and a professor of political science and law at Vanderbilt University.

Swain cited anger over immigration, growing minority populations, racial preferences, high minority crime rates, the economy, and multiculturalism as forces driving white people toward nationalism.

"It seems like the tables have turned for some white people, and they have no recourse except desperation," Swain said.

An April intelligence assessment by the Department of Homeland Security said that right-wing extremists could use the troubled economy and the election of President Obama to recruit members.

Former FBI agent Danny Coulson, who headed the terrorism investigation of 1995's Oklahoma City bombing and now runs a security firm, said that federal agents had increased their monitoring of white supremacist groups since Obama's election, and that they had noticed increased chatter and membership.

"These neo-Nazi groups have been lying in the weeds for a long time," he said. "Then you have a president who comes in who's an African American, and they hate that. And he's tough on guns, and they really hate that."

The movement has broadened beyond neo-Nazis. Advocacy groups for blacks and Hispanics unwittingly provided a blueprint for others to organize and defend the interests of white people.

Louis R. Andrews is chairman of the National Policy Institute, a white advocacy group. He does not advocate violence but expects to see increased racial animosity that will eventually manifest itself in more physical attacks.

"There's no such thing as post-racial," Andrews said, when asked about the contention that Obama's election moved American race relations to a better place. "There's conflict, conflict, and continued conflict."

Andrews said he voted for Obama because "I want to see the Republican Party destroyed, so it can be reborn as a party representing the interests of white people, and not entrenched corporate elites."

Swain argues that many people with "white nationalist" views don't fit the extremist stereotype - they are professors, scientists, elected officials.

"What drives a person to the point where they hate someone?" she asked.

Historically, the answer has been economic trouble, combined with several more factors, scholars say.

"The hate is always there. Social factors have to exacerbate it or bring it out," said Jacques Berlinerblau, associate professor of Jewish civilization at Georgetown University.

Some people can be "pushed over the edge" by stresses such as the loss of a job or another traumatic event, said psychologist David Eigen.

"Men aren't supposed to feel powerless or helpless," Eigen said. "When a man starts to feel that, he feels angry and ashamed inside, and he can project it outward. For hundreds of years, Jews have been a convenient target. So let's blame the Jews."

In Pittsburgh, Richard Poplawski was recently charged with gunning down three officers after his mother called the police on him. Poplawski had been upset over losing his job and was afraid Obama would ban guns, his friends said.

Poplawski had posted numerous racist messages on an extremist Web site in the months before the attack, according to the Anti-Defamation League.

"I've been a longtime lurker on Stormfront," said one post on an account identified as his, "and I see myself probably ramping up the activism in the near future."
User avatar
justdrew
 
Posts: 11966
Joined: Tue May 24, 2005 7:57 pm
Location: unknown
Blog: View Blog (11)

Postby American Dream » Sun Jun 14, 2009 4:18 pm

Image
American Dream
 
Posts: 19946
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby AhabsOtherLeg » Sun Jun 14, 2009 4:28 pm

He was a peripheral member of the American Freinds of The BNP, wasn't he?
User avatar
AhabsOtherLeg
 
Posts: 3285
Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2007 8:43 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby compared2what? » Sun Jun 14, 2009 6:14 pm

AlicetheKurious wrote:c2w said:
...Although I guess it never hurts to remark that it's really astonishing how truly influential Lyndon Larouche has ended up being, in view of how mind-numbingly and monotonously unoriginal, petty and pedantic a writer, thinker he actually is. When you get right down to it. Not to mention -- as far as one can tell absent sustained, firsthand experience, which I concede it not so far that it constitutes more than an impression based on partisan witness accounts, and therefore not far enough to speak to the subject with any degree of authority -- how insane, unpleasant, and corrupt an individual he appears to be. To boot.

Personally, I would never in a million years have predicted it, back in the day when dodging Larouchites was a more regular part of my quotidian existence.


Ok, this is something I don't get, and I wish someone would explain it to me. In all the time I've been on this board, I can't recall even one time when Larouche was quoted, referenced or described approvingly by anyone here. Not even one time.

Yet every once in a while, Larouche is dragged out of wherever he's being kept and catapulted into a thread by a poster, in an apparent attempt to smear other posters. It's never worked so far, especially since this tactic often targets individuals for whom "Larouche" is simply a name, with vaguely unpleasant connotations to be sure, however as an archetype of evil, the reference is too obscure and too American-centric to really pack the kind of punch the smearer presumably intended.

Instead, the presumed target, and I speak from personal experience, feels bewildered at this implication that he or she is actually not acting as an independent, intelligent, thoughtful and knowledgeable individual, more than capable of informing him or herself and coming to his or her own conclusions, but as a sock-puppet for some guy who he or she has never read, and who or she is not even sure is still alive.

Besides reeling from the clearly implied insult, the target can be forgiven for wondering whether this is some kind of "gate-keeping" strategy that is recommended for use when one finds oneself unable to come up with a rational and factual counter-argument.

Thus the hurling of gratuitous Larouche-grenades into a thread, rather than diminishing the credibility of the intended target, have the opposite effect -- of diminishing the credibility of the hurler.

For me, personally, this is not a happy turn of events, as the hurler in this case is the last person I would have expected to such a sordid tactic.

Of course, in life, one frequently is forced into a re-evaluation of one's beliefs and perceptions in light of new evidence. It's rarely a comfortable experience but it is a necessary part of growing up, a process that I believe we must all strive to continue until our dying breath.


I wasn't attempting to smear other posters, or to hurl gratuitous incendiary devices into the thread, or to....You know. Do any of that stuff that I don't do. Just as you don't. Are you sure that you seriously believe that I was? I mean....If you are, and you feel that a full and detailed clarification is in order, please feel free to say so, and I'll provide one, of course. But I'd far prefer not to, if it's not really necessary. Objectively speaking, it wouldn't be a very complex thing to explicate, once I'd finished arduously clearing the road of all the self-imposed obstacles created by my own boring and childish wounded-vanity issues, about which no one who's not getting paid to listen should have to hear. But it would just take me forever to get to that point, even if I set out fully determined to brook no nonsense from my own stupid self.

I wouldn't want to shirk a responsibility if I have one, in short. Nevertheless, I'm pretty sure that nobody exactly looks forward to having a long and tiresome confrontation with this or that petty and disagreeable aspect of his or her own imperfect self. However inevitable any honest person who's managed to become a grown-up knows such encounters sometimes are. In any event: The tedium, it just fully pre-enervates me. But whatever. I trust you to make the call fairly, and will act in accordance with it, whichever way you make it. Please advise.
User avatar
compared2what?
 
Posts: 8383
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2007 6:31 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby starviego » Sun Jun 14, 2009 6:15 pm

It is starting to look like 'friendly fire' may have killed the security guard:

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/us_worl ... t_at_.html
--Visitor Maria Hernandez told CNN she heard five shots and saw the wounded security guard. "He was face down. His back ... blood was coming out."

http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/06/10/mus ... witnesses/
She heard security guards yell to someone she could not see: "They were, 'Get on the floor. Drop the weapon! Drop the weapon!' Once he didn't respond, they started shooting." .. Hernandez saw another security guard lying flat on his belly.
[Comment: If the perp had already shot off a round, the cops would not have given him a warning. The old guy never got a chance to fire his gun.]

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/ ... nr.06.html
MARIA: I ran towards the glass doors to see what was going on.... And there I could see a security man pull out his gun and shoot towards the shooter.
I also saw another security man on his belly. There was blood everywhere. So I didn't actually see him get shot, but I saw that he was badly hurt and he did get shot.
HENRY: And then you saw some of the return fire from the security personnel?
MARIA: Yes, it hit the security man. ... ... I thought that the security guards were just shooting, but then I know that they were shooting at someone. So it sounded like a small gun. It did not sound very loud. It sounded like the ones that the security guards -- almost the same as the ones the security guards were shooting.

HENRY: ... as we heard from that eyewitness, Maria, 19 years old, who was saying that the security officer was bleeding profusely, was face down on the ground, was bleeding from the back, she believed...
...she thought that he was shot in the back and that the security guard had blood coming out of his back and he was face down on the ground.


http://podcast.gcnlive.com/podcast//wha ... 061009.mp3
--Radio talk show host Mike Rivero at whatreallyhappened.com says a reporter ask a police spokesman if the accused
gunman was wearing a "special police uniform." This indicates that an eyewitness identified the shooter as someone other than the designated patsy.


Is this why there is no video evidence of this event yet released?
starviego
 
Posts: 63
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2005 12:35 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby vigilant » Sun Jun 14, 2009 6:39 pm

jeff wrote:
Since I'm fairly certain AD acknowledges both media concentration and its bias towards Israel, I didn't know who these people you mention who own roughly 96% of major media might be, other than Jews. Still don't, actually


People demand to be known by certain labels. Then, in an effort to distract attention from their actions, invoke the "label bashing" clause.

Honestly I don't feel that this deserves a reply, as it sums up the problem very nicely. If media owners demand to be known as a "jew" or a "christian" or "American" or "Israeli", etc..., then for purposes of identification, we use the labels.

We all know how the "don't touch my label, because if you do it points to my actions" game is played.

AD is of course, throwinig religion into an arena that it does not belong in. It is the actions of people that is the subject matter, and their religous affiliations are not important nor considered by me.

I made that clear. Crystal clear. I think we understand one another perfectly. Some people seek to throw labels in such a way to shade and protect their actions, from detection. Its an old game, played by every classification of peoples.

I'm insulted by your inference, but thats ok, i'll get over it won't I?

For the record, I have never even read LaRouche, nor studied his philosophy. I have intended to, but for some reason it hasn't made it far enough up my priority list.
The whole world is a stage...will somebody turn the lights on please?....I have to go bang my head against the wall for a while and assimilate....
vigilant
 
Posts: 2210
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2007 9:53 pm
Location: Back stage...
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby OP ED » Sun Jun 14, 2009 7:09 pm

i have. he's a retard. do not waste your time.
User avatar
OP ED
 
Posts: 4673
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 10:04 pm
Location: Detroit
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby Jeff » Sun Jun 14, 2009 7:21 pm

vigilant wrote:Honestly I don't feel that this deserves a reply, as it sums up the problem very nicely. If media owners demand to be known as a "jew" or a "christian" or "American" or "Israeli", etc..., then for purposes of identification, we use the labels.


Okay, I'm still struggling to understand you. I'll just continue the struggle on my own and stop expecting you to lend me a hand.
User avatar
Jeff
Site Admin
 
Posts: 11134
Joined: Fri Oct 20, 2000 8:01 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby lightningBugout » Sun Jun 14, 2009 7:36 pm

OP ED wrote:i have. he's a retard. do not waste your time.


Worse than that, but he's a fine Futurist. The Eurasian Land Bridge and the Magnetically Levitated Trains are pretty awesome.

Image

Image
"What's robbing a bank compared with founding a bank?" Bertolt Brecht
User avatar
lightningBugout
 
Posts: 2515
Joined: Mon Jun 16, 2008 3:34 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby Jeff » Sun Jun 14, 2009 8:07 pm

vigilant wrote:I'm thinking that some of the other things I wrote in this thread would easily clear up your difficulty, however, you have chosen, as I expected, to isolate 'certain' aspects. We undersand each other, I am confident of that.


If I do understand you, I would have to ban you. And because I always hate to do that, for the time I'll assume

this is a concept beyond your intellectual ability, and that you cannot grasp it



And I apologize, your original post disappeared because I pressed edit instead of quote. Error to the admin.
User avatar
Jeff
Site Admin
 
Posts: 11134
Joined: Fri Oct 20, 2000 8:01 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby monster » Sun Jun 14, 2009 8:12 pm

Last edited by monster on Thu Jun 18, 2009 2:08 am, edited 1 time in total.
"I’ve just completed Mike’s Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (ie from 1981 onwards) amd from 1961 for Keith’s to hide the decline."
User avatar
monster
 
Posts: 1712
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 4:55 pm
Location: Everywhere
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby lightningBugout » Sun Jun 14, 2009 8:25 pm

Jeff wrote:
vigilant wrote:I'm thinking that some of the other things I wrote in this thread would easily clear up your difficulty, however, you have chosen, as I expected, to isolate 'certain' aspects. We undersand each other, I am confident of that.


If I do understand you, I would have to ban you. And because I always hate to do that, for the time I'll assume

this is a concept beyond your intellectual ability, and that you cannot grasp it



And I apologize, your original post disappeared because I pressed edit instead of quote. Error to the admin.


Sorry to hear about your intellectual difficulties Jeff. Your rather historic blog is a testament to the power of the intellectually challenged worldwide.
"What's robbing a bank compared with founding a bank?" Bertolt Brecht
User avatar
lightningBugout
 
Posts: 2515
Joined: Mon Jun 16, 2008 3:34 am
Blog: View Blog (0)
PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 166 guests