Arizona Congresswoman, shot in the head

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

Can you PROVE that Hitler's rhetoric led to persecution of the Jews in Europe?

Considering that he was in charge of the government that killed several million of them, yes. His rhetoric became policy.


So, John, have you found any evidence that Tea Party rhetoric was a proximate or even a but-for cause of the shooting of Giffords?

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[lawrocket 3]

I had perceived you as arguing for greater speech suppression. I apologize - simply for the sake of it.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

The tactic is still contiuing today by the left

I really don't see it, but my glasses are different colored than yours.

Clear compared to your rose?

Ya

I guess you are right

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Well, the claim "left wing rhetoric incites hatred and violence but right wing rhetoric is harmless" is a bit of a tough sell.

So is the claim that "targets on a right wing map incite violence but targets on a left wing map are harmless".

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Both sides actually. "Liberals have absolutely been the worst offenders in the lead in this regard" - from right here in this thread.

Palin had targets. Dems had targets and people calling for pitchforks (McCaskill) and specifically for people to be shot (Kanjorski).

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[Amazon 7]

Quote

Quote

Both sides actually. "Liberals have absolutely been the worst offenders in the lead in this regard" - from right here in this thread.

Palin had targets. Dems had targets and people calling for pitchforks (McCaskill) and specifically for people to be shot (Kanjorski).

NANNY NANNY BOO BOO

They did it TOO

[kallend 2,026]

Quote

Quote

Can you PROVE that Hitler's rhetoric led to persecution of the Jews in Europe?

Considering that he was in charge of the government that killed several million of them, yes. His rhetoric became policy.

Could be coincidence. You have no actual PROOF that it was his RHETORIC.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[lawrocket 3]

Kallend - quit with the shit. I didn't askk for "proof." I asked for "facts." Whether "facts" are enough to constitute "proof" is a different thing altogether.

The fact is, John, that many specifically attributed THIS incident to rhetoric - talkin out of their asses before facts came in.

I'm just waiting for you to say the hoocaust didn't happen because you are using the Holocaust denier paybook right now. Bringing up "Hitler" and suggesting the his rhetoric didn't kill Jews.

So, let me put "facts" out there to be denied by you.

Quote

"Today I will once more be a prophet: If the international Jewish financiers in and outside Europe should succeed in plunging the nations once more into a world war, then the result will not be the Bolshevization of the earth, and thus the victory of Jewry, but the annihilation of the Jewish race in Europe!"

- Hitler, 1939

Quote

None of the Führer's prophetic words has come so inevitably true as his prediction that if Jewry succeeded in provoking a second world war, the result would be not the destruction of the Aryan race, but rather the wiping out of the Jewish race. This process is of vast importance, and will have unforeseeable consequences that will require time. But it can no longer be halted. It must only be guided in the right direction."

- Goebbels, 1943

Quote

As for the Jews, well, I can tell you quite frankly that one way or another we have to put an end to them. The Führer once put it this way: if the combined forces of Judaism should again succeed in unleashing a world war, that would mean the end of the Jews in Europe. ...I urge you: Stand together with me ... on this idea at least: Save your sympathy for the German people alone. Don't waste it on anyone else in the world, ... I would therefore be guided by the basic expectation that they are going to disappear. They have to be gotten rid of.

- Hans Frank, 1941

Here are some FACTS, Kallend. Not proof to you, but facts.



Now, Kallend, how about facts showing that right wing rhetoric had anything to do with the shooting of Giffords. And quit manufacturing men from the straws at which you are grasping...

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[billvon 2,990]

>So is the claim that "targets on a right wing map incite violence but targets on a left wing
>map are harmless".

Yes. That would be an equally stupid claim.

>Palin had targets. Dems had targets and people calling for pitchforks (McCaskill) and
>specifically for people to be shot (Kanjorski).

Yes. Are you for or against such rhetoric?

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

>>Palin had targets. Dems had targets and people calling for pitchforks (McCaskill) and
>specifically for people to be shot (Kanjorski).

Yes. Are you for or against such rhetoric?

I am not thrilled when people choose to speak this way (calling for pitchforks or shooting people - I think 'targets' are harmless - we can target profits - we can target success in AFF - we can target that girl in the bar - etc). But I am more against government banning speech that they will define as they see fit.

I'm concerned at how they'd apply it in practice (take the House speeches from the last couple days, ....seriously?! "you Reps have to stop this hate filled speech.....you nazi baby killing assholes that should be knifed on sight" - do you want THAT guy defining "illegal speech"?) Even now, they aren't using the 'courtesy agenda' to be more civil - they are staging it to stifle dissent of opposing opinions - "your speech is bad, mine is perfectly fine."

People can hear these things and anyone with a brain will recognize it for either the hyperbole, or analogous rhetoric is really is. Anyone looking to conduct a shooting spree will find their own justification and use this or manufacture something else to rationalize what they want to do anyway. Or they might just do it without any prompting.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[billvon 2,990]

>I'm wondering if anybody has any information or reports indicating that
>right-wing rhetoric was a proximate cause in this.

A case where right wing rhetoric was stopped _before_ an incident like this occurred:

===============================================
Police Seize ‘Large Amount’ Of Weapons From Blogger Who Praised Gifffords Shooting: ‘1 Down And 534 To Go’

By Alex Seitz-Wald
January 20 2011 3:15 pm

Police in Arlington, MA this week seized a “large amount” of weapons and ammunition from local businessman Travis Corcoran after he wrote a blog post threatening U.S. lawmakers in the wake of the shooting of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ). In a post on his blog (which has since been removed) titled “1 down and 534 to go” — 1 referring to Giffords and 534 referring to the rest of the House of Representatives and the Senate — Corcoran applauded the shooting of Giffords and justified the assassination of lawmakers because he argued the federal government has grown far beyond its constitutional limits. “It is absolutely, absolutely unacceptable to shoot indiscriminately. Target only politicians and their staff and leave regular citizens alone,” he wrote in the post.

“We certainly take this as a credible threat,” Arlington police Captain Robert Bongiorno told reporters, adding that “multiple federal law enforcement agencies” were involved. Authorities also suspended Corcoran’s gun license, though he is currently not facing any charges.

Corcoran calls himself “an anarcho-capitalist” and while his blog has been taken down, based on his Twitter page, he appears to hold views similar to those of many in the anti-government libertarian wing of the conservative movement, like many tea party activists. Anarcho-capitalism is a radical subset of libertarianism, and is often referred to as “libertarian-anarchy.” For example, echoing calls from many on the right, Corcoran tweeted, “it is unconstitutional for the Feds to even run a department of education.”

In a Twitter exchange with reporter Laura Leslie, Corcoran lays out a conventional anti-government philosophy, and explains in depth why he views assassination as legitimate:

“I assert that the US federal gov has grown unconstitutionally large, and the legislature exceeds the powers delegated to it by the people,” Corcoran wrote. “As per the Declaration of Indep, when a gov becomes destructive those ends, it may be abolished,” he continued, “and the most moral approach is that which spares the maximum number of lives. Thus, assasination is a legitimate tool.”

He goes on to further justify assassination as “morally legitimate,” citing “Catholic Just War doctrine” among other theories, and explains, “It’s illegal, yes, but it’s not un-American. America was founded on the idea of shooting gov officials. Lexington Concord!” In another tweet, he writes, “I disagree with murder. …but shooting politicians who pass illegitimate, unconstitutional laws is not murder.” And in case there’s any doubt about his sincery, he writes, “Nope, it’s not a joke. I’m 100% serious.”

He also appears to be a fan of Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY), re-tweeting a positive message about him in May: “Lefties: Before you start fringe-baiting Rand Paul, note that he’s better on civil liberties than most Democratic senators. And Obama.” He seems to dislike liberals, writing, “You so-called liberals make me laugh – you’re all for free speech until someone disagrees, then it’s ‘report him!’” He also accuses the Daily Kos of “Stalinism.”
=================================

[lawrocket 3]

So a guy specifically writes not only about shooting 534 more, but that indiscriminate shooting should not occur. That's actually writing about assassination.

I see a significant difference between that and targeting a district.

Much like tossing the Beatles in jail for inciting Manson into murdering people to start a race war with Helter Skelter. Yes, Manson specifically stated it as the reason. Where do we draw the line?

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[billvon 2,990]

>I see a significant difference between that and targeting a district.

Absolutely. Palin can't hold a candle to this guy.

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

>I'm wondering if anybody has any information or reports indicating that
>right-wing rhetoric was a proximate cause in this.

A case where right wing rhetoric was stopped _before_ an incident like this occurred:

===============================================

By Alex Seitz-Wald
January 20 2011 3:15 pm

he appears to hold views similar to those of many in the anti-government libertarian wing of the conservative movement, like many tea party activists. =================================

sure, and then this article creates another one

too bad the authorities didn't arrest Alex Seitz-Wald before he wrote that bit trying to incite violence against your tea party members

right?

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[rushmc 23]

Yes. Are you for or against such rhetoric?

[billvon 2,990]

>Neither I am indiferent to it

Cool, so you will be retracting this, then:

"Krugman needs to STFU and we need to see his like kind call him on his bs
. . .Civil discourse be damned"

Good to see that you don't really think he should STFU, since you're indifferent to it.

[Amazon 7]

Quote

>Neither I am indiferent to it

Cool, so you will be retracting this, then:

"Krugman needs to STFU and we need to see his like kind call him on his bs
. . .Civil discourse be damned"

Good to see that you don't really think he should STFU, since you're indifferent to it.

Or come anywhere near "civil discourse" to anyone not on the same well populated band wagon

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

>I'm wondering if anybody has any information or reports indicating that
>right-wing rhetoric was a proximate cause in this.

A case where right wing rhetoric was stopped _before_ an incident like this occurred:

Then Eric Fuller being arrested was a case where left wing rhetoric was stopped _before_ an incident like this occurred.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[rushmc 23]

Quote

>Neither I am indiferent to it

Cool, so you will be retracting this, then:

"Krugman needs to STFU and we need to see his like kind call him on his bs
. . .Civil discourse be damned"

Good to see that you don't really think he should STFU, since you're indifferent to it.

not the same thing but I guess I should not be suprised you would try and say it is.

He, and know you, try and twist for advantage

Shame on you yet again

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[billvon 2,990]

Are you for or against angry rhetoric from republicans? "Neither I am indiferent to it As it should be for all of us "

Are you for or against angry rhetoric from democrats? "Krugman needs to STFU and we need to see his like kind call him on his bs . . .But that will not happen . . .there is an agenda to fullfill I guess . . .Civil discourse be damned"

Rarely have you stated your biases so clearly.

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Are you for or against angry rhetoric from republicans? "Neither I am indiferent to it As it should be for all of us "

Are you for or against angry rhetoric from democrats? "Krugman needs to STFU and we need to see his like kind call him on his bs . . .But that will not happen . . .there is an agenda to fullfill I guess . . .Civil discourse be damned"

Rarely have you stated your biases so clearly.

Yes I have
And rarely has some one purposely chosen to miss-represent the comments of another (although it is something seen regularly from you)

Krugman took unrelated web pages and comments and turned them into a blame tactic

I am calling him on his lies and willful misrepresentation to blame an event (a tragic one) on a person (and a party) for a political agenda.


I guess you support those tactics based on your misleading lies about my position

Yes sir
My biases (as you call them) are very clear.

And I believe yours are now too.

My views and biases are based on a principled belief of honesty and fairness.

Yours?

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

Or come anywhere near "civil discourse" to anyone not on the same well populated band wagon

well, today, if anyone not normally on a particular bandwagon says "hello" - the bandwagon is now screaming "hate speech"!!!!

pick your wagon

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

Or come anywhere near "civil discourse" to anyone not on the same well populated band wagon

well, today, if anyone not normally on a particular bandwagon says "hello" - the bandwagon is now screaming "hate speech"!!!!

pick your wagon

Say it ain't so...

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[petejones45 0]

hate to break it to you but girls can be decent looking and still have a brain, so your picture is pointless

clinton: presided over the longest economic expansion in US history

gwbush: fucked it all up

obama: picking up the pieces of GWB Shitshow.... and is also giving people what they deserve like healthcare... hell even gm is back on their feet now and has paid off their debt to the government....

Look out for the freefly team, Smelly Peppers. Once we get a couple years more experience we will be a force to be reckoned with in the near future! BLUES!

[sundevil777 102]

Quote

Are you for or against angry rhetoric from republicans? "Neither I am indiferent to it As it should be for all of us "

Are you for or against angry rhetoric from democrats? "Krugman needs to STFU and we need to see his like kind call him on his bs . . .But that will not happen . . .there is an agenda to fullfill I guess . . .Civil discourse be damned"

Rarely have you stated your biases so clearly.

Your point fails because you portray the rhetoric as equivalent in nastiness and such. It is hardly.

Conservatives are fed up with the biased treatment from the mainstream press, your bias is representative of that.

People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am