Fanning the Flames

Below is Glenn Beck's rambling response to the Holocaust Museum shooting and it includes:

- a warning that there will be more of this type of behavior
- a warning that Jews and conservatives will be the likely scapegoats of this violence.
- a defense that he doesn't stir the pot of hysteria, but merely points it out. (See the gas can skit in my previous post as well as my post on his 9/12 Project.)

and a host of other ramblings including items about Iran's nuclear program:




Michael Rowe has a recent piece that discusses this topic:

This week, nearly two years later, James von Brunn, driven by his own twisted version of Coulter's publicly-proclaimed perspectives regarding the "imperfection" of Jews, entered the Holocaust Museum in Washington and put them into action, with tragic and deadly consequences.

Much the same thing happened on May 31st when Scott Roeder entered the Reformation Lutheran Church during Sunday services and slaughtered abortion provider provider Dr. George Tiller. Media analysts continue to explore a possible continuum between Tiller's murder and FOX host Bill O'Reilly's well-documented on-air tirades against the doctor, whom he repeatedly called "Tiller the Baby Killer." O'Reilly broadcast his vendetta to millions and millions of FOX viewers already infected with evangelical superstitions and a horror of science, especially science as it applies to a woman's right to choose.

If O'Reilly had been a serious journalist or broadcaster instead of a sclerotic, chronically-aggravated right-wing rage pimp, he might have had the professional self-awareness or ethical sense to realize that he was putting George Tiller's life in danger over the more than 28 broadcasts in which he used Tiller's name. But O'Reilly, like, for Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Michael Savage, and indeed Coulter herself (to name only the gratin of that particular food chain) is neither of those things.

[...]

When challenged on the inherently destructive nature of their enterprise, they invariably claim that their First Amendment right to free speech is being abrogated. Or, like Ann Coulter defensively does in those instances, they cite their place on the New York Times bestseller list. Or the ratings. In other words, since people buy it, watch it, or listen to it in huge numbers, it must have merit, and it must be right.

[...]

There was a time when decency, even honor, was an essential part of the American dialogue in its most ideal form, and part of its very identity. There was a time when our culture would have recoiled in horror at the vituperation flowing unchecked from radios, televisions, and the Internet, instead of applauding it as "common sense," "free speech," or "mavericky," or "a spin-free zone."

There was a time when intellectual honesty was not considered unpatriotic; when compassion for, and understanding of, your fellow man was a sign of strength, not weakness. There was a time when the phrase Have you no shame? meant something, and the First Amendment was not used as toilet paper to wipe up the excremental verbal degradation of vulnerable segments of the American population. A time when it was expected that citizens would understand the difference between free speech and irresponsible speech.

and in an interview with Amy Goodman of Democracy Now!, senior Political Analyst Chip Bartlet weighs in:

Well, it’s very clear that the kind of agitating rhetoric that’s used by certain leaders in the pro-life movement—the anti-abortion movement, more accurately called—sets up a dynamic in which some people are more likely to act out in violence.

But this goes all the way up to a whole range of right-wing demagogues, on not just issues involving women, but racism and homophobia. And let’s name names: Glenn Beck, Ann Coulter, Sean Hannity, Lou Dobbs. These are people who are creating an environment of violence against targets that are scapegoats. And these are demagogues who may have a First Amendment right to say these things, but we have an absolute obligation as citizens in a civilized society to call them for what they are, that they’re demagogues, they’re hate-mongers, and they are setting up a situation in which some people will choose violence as the only alternative to achieve their political goals.

White Supremacist Opens Fire at Holocaust Museum in Washington

There are reports streaming in to all the news outlets stating that James W. von Brunn, an 89 year-old white supremacist, walked into Washington's Holocaust Museum and opened fire injuring two. From the Times article I linked to above:

Von Brunn, who claims on his own website to have been a decorated PT-boat captain and lieutenant in the US Navy during World War II, has written a book entitled ‘Kill the Best Gentiles!” According to its preface, its purpose it “to present WHITE YOUTH” with factual information to explain that an “age old CONSPIRACY does exist to destroy Western Civilisation.”

Von Brunn also has a Wikipedia user profile in which he champions the virtues of Western culture and the practice of eugenics. In another article he claims that Holocaust history is destroying Western civilization.

[...]

In 1981, von Brunn entered the Federal Reserve in Washington with a shotgun to make a citizens arrest, he later said, to protest about high interest rates. He was sentenced to 11 years in jail.

On his website, he claims he was convicted by a “Negro jury, Jew /Negro attorneys, and sentenced to prison for eleven years by a Jew judge. A Jew/Negro/White Court of Appeals denied his appeal.”

While details are still emerging my thoughts once again are turned toward the Department of Homeland Security report that was released a few months ago and outlined the possibility of a rise in right-wing extremist violence. Again, not that all conservatives or people who hold right-wing viewpoints are extremists who want to commit violent acts, but with the election of President Obama we have seen rhetoric that began during the campaign escalate into a very angry opposition. An opposition that is angered by policies and fueled by rhetoric that we must stop Obama at all costs in order to save our Democracy from Fascism.

On a somewhat related note, I was recently criticized in the comments section of a recent post for writing, "to an almost obsessive degree", on an instance of right-wing terrorism (the death of Dr. Tiller) while ignoring "a left-wing political murder". This "left-wing political murder" that this poster referred to was this incident:

Muslim convert charged with fatally shooting an American soldier at a military recruiting center said Tuesday that he doesn't consider the killing a murder because U.S. military action in the Middle East made the killing justified.

"I do feel I'm not guilty," Abdulhakim Muhammad told The Associated Press in a collect call from the Pulaski County jail. "I don't think it was murder, because murder is when a person kills another person without justified reason."

Obviously my lack of posting on that story does not mean that don't find that shooting any less disturbing, it is very disturbing and should also be labeled as domestic terrorism. What I don't accept is the broad labeling of this as a "left-wing" incident. Are there members on the fringe of the left that demonize military recruiters? Yes. Is there a left-wing movement that advocated violence on military recruiters that Muhammad was a part of? No. In fact, much of what we know in this story paints Muhammad as an American who was converted to radical Islam while he spent time in a prison in Yemen. Scott Roeder, however, has a much different background that includes participation with radical right-wing anti-abortion groups and various offenses for damaging abortion clinics.

There are also two other differences. There is no one that I am aware of on the left, who is attempting to justify the murder of the military recruiters. No one is saying that justice was served or that people were saved because of this shooting. Secondly, there was not a presence of cable television hosts who continually targeted these military recruiters as "killers" or suggesting that they ran a "death mill". There was no talk of "stopping" these recruiters and mentioning that anyone who didn't stop them would have blood on their hands.

While both of these scenarios are domestic terrorism, there are notable differences that complicate these scenarios more than putting them in neat little boxes of "right-wing terrorism" and "left-wing terrorism".