Posted on 01/24/2011 9:49:07 AM PST by Cardhu
Schneider: Of course, it's absurd to assign the blame to Palin. But even without drawing paranoiac conclusions, one can immediately recognize a web of relationships into which the assassination fits and to which Loughner, the killer, consciously refers. And the fundamentalist Republic polemic is part of this context. Take, for example, the use of the term "mind control." This is the central, paranoiac concept of the American right, which assumes that the government controls the thoughts of citizens through language and the media. It's paradoxical for Palin to demand that we see the killings as an isolated incident, that is, a chance event. In doing so, she is suddenly abandoning the system of paranoia, with its accusations of mind control, that she and the Tea Party were more or less complicit in creating.
F***ing nonsense.
I went to their website...holy moley...if you dig deeper, prepare to be frightened...magritte
GIGO
Doesn’t matter how logically you examine and analyze data if the data you input is inaccurate.
Conclusion... keep guns out of the hands of Vulcans.
June, 1970 -- Kerry joins Vietnam Veterans Against the War (VVAW), a national veterans group that is part of the Peoples Coalition for Peace and Justice. The PCPJ is a broad coalition of local and national organizations, including the Communist Party, USA, "committed to conducting demonstrations aimed at ending the war in Indochina, and poverty, racism and injustice at home." The VVAW, CCI and PCPJ all have headquarters at 156 Fifth Avenue in New York City. VVAW Executive Secretary Al Hubbard, a former Black Panther, is also on the coordinating committee of the PCPJ. Hubbard soon appoints Kerry to the VVAW's Executive Committee, bypassing the normal election process.
http://www.wintersoldier.com/index.php?topic=Timeline
___________________________________________________________
Fact: The Black Panthers were revolutionary communists...
From the Maoist Internationist Movement:
[1960s/original] Black Panther Party [BPP] Archives
From the article: REVOLUTIONARY HEROS
"On May 1st, May Day [1969], the day of the gigantic Free Huey rally, two of Alioto's top executioners vamped on the brothers from the Brown Community who were attending to their own affairs. These brothers, who are endowed with the revolutionary spirit of the Black Panther Party defended themselves from the racist pig gestapo [i.e., the police].
Pig Joseph Brodnik received his just reward with a big hole in the chest. Pig Paul McGoran got his in the mouth which was not quite enough to off him.
The revolutionary brothers escaped the huge swarm of pigs with dogs, mace, tanks and helicopters, proving once again that "the spirit of the people is greater than the man's technology."
To these brothers the revolutionary people of racist America want to say, by your revolutionary deed you are heroes, and that you are always welcome to our camp."
Source: Maoist Internationist Movement
Article: REVOLUTIONARY HEROS (May 11, 1969):
http://web.archive.org/web/20060717050055/http://www.etext.org/Politics/MIM/bpp/index.html
___________________________________________________________
November 22, 1970 -- During a fund-raising tour for GI deserters, Vietnam Veterans Against the War and the Black Panthers, Jane Fonda is quoted in the Detroit Free Press as telling a University of Michigan audience:
"I would think that if you understood what communism was, you would hope, you would pray on your knees that we would someday become communist," and "The peace proposal of the Viet Cong is the only honorable, just, possible way to achieve peace in Vietnam."
http://www.wintersoldier.com/index.php?topic=Timeline
___________________________________________________________
John Kerry and the VVAW--Hanoi's American Puppets?
"Two recently discovered documents captured from the Vietnamese communists during the Vietnam War strongly support the contention that a close link existed between the Hanoi regime and the Vietnam Veterans Against the War (VVAW) while John Kerry served as the group's leading national spokesman."
http://www.wintersoldier.com/staticpages/index.php?page=puppets
___________________________________________________________
Vietnam Veterans Against the War (VVAW) Complete FBI files:
http://www.wintersoldier.com/index.php?topic=VVAWFBI
Please, not this again. It's just not true.
Can we agree war is a horrible means? Mass murder and destruction? Yet most sane people will agree that war is sometimes justified as a means to prevent a particularly horrible end. WWII, for instance.
Some ends are themselves evil and do not justify any means.
Some ends justify most means. Preventing Hitler from ruling the world, for example.
Most people would agree that harsh interrogation and even true tortuer are justified to save innocent lives.
Some means are not justified by any end, IMO. For example, mistreating or torturing an innocent family member of a terrorist. Even to save innocent lives.
So does the end justify the means?
Depends entirely on the end and the means involved.
The Left is continually changing the terms and usage of words to specifically dodge being called out for the anti-US a$$holes that they are.
Sticking with strictly historical verbiage, most Democrats today would be currently on trial for treason.
It is true.
The ends do not justify the means.
War is not an evil unto itself, provoking an unjust war is.
The Communists thought that mass murder was an acceptable price to pay for the ends of a Communist Paradise.
Most people in a Capitalist society don’t think mass murder is an acceptable price to pay to continue with our way of life - but luckily with Capitalism such is not a necessity - while with Communism it is.
Torture is not something the USA engages in, we use “harsh interrogation methods” - not torture.
The torture of an innocent would never be justified, whatever the “ends” you sought.
“Loughner Acted, from His Perspective, in a Moral Fashion”
This means alot coming from Germans.
The screamingputz is still at it; just noticed.
I’ve never had a Freeper stalker in all these years.
Not bad for having no idea what he’s mad at you about, but you did a good job. He’s amusing.
That's exactly the guy's point. To Loughner, what he did was utterly rational and a good thing.
This is a good thing, because it undercuts any notion of an insanity defense.
I heard a podcast one time where the guy was asking "Who was more evil, Alexander the Great or Hitler?" and his point was that, whatever crimes were committed, Hitler believed that he was doing good for the German people. There was an actual belief system, as horrifying as we find it. Alexander, on the other hand, appears to have tried to conquer most of the world for no other reason that his own personal glory, committing crimes on those he conquered that lacked only the industrial scale of the Nazis, such as massacring the male residents of any city that resisted him and selling the women and children into slavery.
And yet today, Hitler is considered the arch-villain of all time and Alexander is "the Great." Partly that's the result of the Romans, an aggressive people themselves, making Alexander their hero a few hundred years after his heyday. It makes you wonder what Hitler's image will be a thousand years from now.
Mmm...yeah. Of course, his perspective is at the very least deeply strange, if not technically insane.
Alexander’s policy of killing or enslaving the inhabitants of cities he conquered was pretty much standard practice in that period. It was done regularly by Greek cities against other Greek cities during the Peloponnesian War. However evil, it was not particularly associated with Alexander, except that he was better than that.
better than most.
There is little wrong with Loughner, besides the fact that he is a socipath. I do not buy the insanity schtick even for a moment.
This was not a crie of passion, it was a crime of premeditated,cold blooded murder.Sociopathic.
Nope..
Evil is evil.
Kind of unrelated, but there is a Greek story, I think, to the effect that Alexander had a dream that (what he considered to be “a”) god appeared to him and told him that, if he spared a certain city when people came out to greet him wearing certain ceremonial dress and surrendered, that he (Alexander) would be permitted to conquer the known world.
Turns out the dress was the High Priest outfit for the Jewish Temple in Jerusalem, they, too, had been told in a dream to ride out undefended and surrender with the gates of the city open.
Anyway, depsite Israel nominally siding with earlier enemies, Alxander did, inexplictedly, decline to attack Jerusalem, accepted their peaceful surrender, and let the Jews go about their business as a satelite nation of his.
I’ve heard a Jewish version of the same story.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.