Death threat claims 10 people will kill Grayson

Source: WDBO

Death threat claims 10 people will kill Grayson
By
Brittny Krause
@ July 22, 2010 11:23 AM Permalink | Comments (0)

Congressman Alan Grayson says someone sent his office a death threat and now, he's trying to turn that in to campaign cash.

..........

Now Grayson claims someone called his office in DC and told the intern receptionist "10 people are going to kill the Congressman within 24 hours."

In an email, Grayson says he turned over the information to Capitol Police. He ends the email with a link to a site, where you can donate money, to his campaign.



Read more: http://wdbo.com/localnews/2010/07/death-threat-claims-10-people.html

---

Below is the letter sent to WDBO from Grayson.

Dear WDBO:
One day, a Republican operative offers $100 to anyone who'll punch me in the nose.
The next day, I get a death threat.

After Fox News spewed its usual clownish hatred about me yesterday, my office received a call. The caller told our receptionist - a young intern - that "10 people are going to kill the Congressman within 24 hours." We gave the information to the Capitol Police; they are investigating.

Fox. You'd think that they would have learned their lesson after Dr. George Tiller was killed. And they did learn a lesson: a lesson in killing.

more:
http://wdbo.com/localnews/2010/07/death-threat-claims-10-people.html

...angry white men.

Karl Rove be damned.

So bringing race into this is pretty inappropriate.

There had to be one.

I have found that people who feel comfortable launching these very public kind of death threats -- especially against a Liberal -- are generally of Caucasian background. This is part of their concept of American freedom. It's their right to speak this freely. They are bullies at the least, potential assassins, at the most. I wouldn't be surprised to find they are also heavy Amendment Two types.

I think race has been a part of this issue for sometime. I'm not concerned with the five mil. I'm concerned with the five or ten who are capable of pulling the trigger.

And you would be very ill-advised not to recognize that they are stoking each other. It's just a matter of time. There is already precedent for this form of domestic terrorism. We just never called it by that name before.

This is just silliness. There is no need broad-brushing entire groups of people for the ill-conceived notions of a few. Not all white people are exemplified by the few just the same as not all of those of Middle Eastern descent (be they any of a multitude of ethnic affiliations) are terrorists. I believe that was a liberal meme at some point. Have we lost it already?

Who are you talking about?

BTW, I side with the NAACP that there are racist overtones behind the Tea Party movement, too.

"I'm guessing that ten out of ten be... ...angry white men" is needlessly racializing the issue. The NAACP and the Tea Partiers have nothing to do with this issue.

This kind of logic is patently a gross oversimplification of the issue. Might these unknown threat-givers be against liberals/progressives? Clearly. Are they white? Statistically, more than likely. Are they racist? There is no basis for that argument. Could they be? Of course. But is there any indication of this being true? Not a bit.

The point is that this particular action of threatening a US Representative for their beliefs and actions (beneficial as those actions are) has nothing to do with race! You might as well call them all anti-Semites because he's Jewish and the KKK is made up of angry white men too! The point is however that we become just as bad an example as the person who shouts racial epithets when we shout back unfounded claims. There are many good angry white men out there who are on our side. To lump everyone together is unconscionably careless.

Should that be the case, I'm afraid we'll have to agree to disagree. First of all, I didn't say that ten out of ten be...angry white men. I said that ten out of ten will be...angry white men. Why your brain would interpret it in that manner, I can only imagine.

I don't think that any Democrat should be setting a PC agenda for anybody else on this matter. The way I see it, PC blinds you and gives the right-wingers the upper hand to continue with their "read between the lines" messages to each other. While their followers hear one thing, all you PC Liberals steer us away from listening to their real message. That won't work again. These people have a very racist and anti-Liberal agenda and if you can't see it, that's your problem.

On the other hand, I very much doubt that someone who might be antisemitic will not also have problems with people of other ethnic denominations. For now, we'll just say they are very angry white men. If you think that's not PC enough, I'm sorry. But that's how I see it. I doubt these people would get Miss Congeniality Awards. I'm pretty sure someone has to be angry before they can bring themselves to pull a trigger.

There is NO information saying that these people are racist. Period. We don't even know who they are. You are wrong to label them as such JUST BECAUSE YOU FEEL THAT THEY ARE. This hurts us because it makes people think we're stupid. Tell me your FACTS NOT ASSUMPTIONS that prove that these people are racist for threatening the Representative and we can include race into this issue, as you said it must be.


---------------------

Also my leaving out the word "will" accidentally does not change the meaning of your statement or my response in any way at all. Grammatically the statements both mean the same thing.

We are talking about people who are likely to pull a trigger. They are angry, and in all likelihood, the ones who would be a subject of a death threat against Mr. Grayson will be white. Do you disagree with that? Because if you do, we obviously live in different neighborhoods.

Besides, "Angry white Man" is an accepted term for a specific demographic:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angry_white_male

On that basis, I will continue referring to these people as angry white men. That was how they were defined by the media. And you know what, they weren't bothered by the term.

So, maybe, you should tell me who you think we're offending by using it, since most people who have been following the political trends would agree.

It's a different issue, but I think you're all losing the battle on this one:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=433x385783

The fact is that we don't know who these people are. To speculate on the race of an individual based on their actions or intents is racial profiling. I don't agree with it at airports and I certainly don't agree with it at DU.

You can call people whatever you want, but it will not stop people for calling out broad-brush generalizations when they occur. The fact is that it is wrong to stereotype people based on their race. Period. It doesn't matter what race that might be, or whether they are doing something you like or doing something that (obviously in this case) you (and I) don't. It's the same mentality which labeled Black people as "savage" and many other even less favorable words. I will not accept this outlook. It is needlessly and baselessly detrimental to racial and ethnic equity.

Additionally, the media is not an erudite resource to be quoted. It's definition of "angry white men" is no less offensive because they used it. It is on the same level as the pundits who built the rumor of the "angry black man" and then tried to stick it to the President, thankfully unsuccessfully.

Likewise, that CNN took a poll asking if Tea Partiers were racist, is still a non-factor here. The threats against Rep. Grayson have NOTHING to do with race. Even if the people who made the threats were Tea Partiers themselves, even if they are racist, the threats are not made because of the race of the Representative. Adding racism into this argument is just a straw man argument which adds to racial tension in this nation NEEDLESSLY and must finished.

Look, ever since the 9/11 situation I had to deal with heighten scrutiny just because of the way I look. Somewhere, somehow it became acceptable to profile us with dark complexions whenever there was a concern that something was about to happen. Now, Alan Grayson, a very loud mouth Liberal, living in a town which is surrounded by red and corrupt counties gets a death threat. I live here. If I had a million dollars to gamble on who is behind this threat, I would put it all on the chip that said "Angry White Man." If it's okay to pull me out of lines to check over at every opportunity, then you all better be damned prepared to live with your own defining label, which I've already demonstrated, is a defined demographic. 'Cuz I'm telling you now, the next time we have a Timothy McVeigh incident, things aren't going to go easy for any of you, like it was the first time.

But I will say, that it is not right to pull you out of lines. Period. And we should not then inflict the same in kind on others, knowing the irritation and hurt it causes us. An eye for an eye will make the whole world blind.

The comment you are referencing was senseless and needed to be shot down. Thanks for beating me to it.

I hold my right to use a term which has been used by the media. I really want to know, however, who is pulling your chain? What group are you worried about offending? Conservative Democrats? Or, Democrats who are so financially well off that they're always in the best of company? Who?

It's a different subject, but I think you're losing the battle on this one:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=433x385783

And, here is the coup de gras:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angry_white_male

Angry white man is an accepted term for a specific demographic.

telling everyone that Obama wants to take their guns away.

White Christian men obsessed with abortion and guns.

Will all 10 get a crack at him at once? Or is there a murder "pecking order?" If that's the case, does the lead killer start the process, or get to deliver the final blow?

These people are %$#@ing nuts! This is just personal opinion, but I believe a lot of this insanity is thanks to Fox, Beck, Hannity, et al. They have crossed the bridge from political disagreement to complete unhinged hatred.

Grayson! He should be President, for gosh sakes.

If we really want to piss off the righties and the Freepers... Grayson's our man.

He'd do a better job than Obama seems to be doing these days. He wouldn't let DADT stand, he wouldn't have let Shirley get fired.

He would be right there screwing over the rich, with a "Bush war tax"

Such as the recent case in Oakland with the I-580 shootout, the murder of three Pittsburgh Police officers by a paranoid gun nut that bought all of Faux's completely bogus "Obama gun ban" nonsense, the murder of Dr. Tiller, the kamikaze attack on the IRS building in Austin, and the Jim Adkisson shooting at the Unitarian Church.

These are scary times indeed. I sure hope the FBI is keeping a good eye on all the crazy wingnuts out there.

is supposed to pale in comparison to the fear of being killed 10 times?

they consider themselves in a culture war and people die in war.

maybe one can shoot straight

J

Fox "News" will blame it on Grayson, and the WH will attmept to reach out to the moderate Repukes for common ground.

I hope they catch the person/people that threatened him ASAP!

.. I'm proud to say I send Grayson money when I can. When someone as rare as this straight-talking hero comes along, you CAN'T miss the chance to see/help him spread the truth!

Just the stupidity of saying ten men are gonna kill him says alot in itself. Not to say it shouldn't be taken seriously - I'd LOVE for them to find that caller and show him what real fear is.

Everything else conservatives say is a lie, so I really wouldn't put much stock into their threats.

Grayson can only be wrong once. I hope the cops find these nincompoops and justice served.

Welcome to DU! :hi:

If it was still officially Bushland, and the threat was to a con, then the DOHS would be
shitting their pants to declare such threats terra.

Anything goes.. Nothing is taboo.

watch FuxNews "religiously"?

Bets? Anyone?

...all those good, wholesome, Christian values...at work!

To bad for them. Let's hope Congressman Grayson stays safe.

... threatening crimes against your opponents.

:eyes:

Amazing psychological disconnect. There HAS to be a disconnect, or the perps wouldn't be able to sleep at night.

----------------------------------------

They've already been given their marching orders.

And/or scrare Grayson into shutting up --

Any truth is a big threat to the pile of BS the right wing is sitting on --

Now get ten to be killers....


WHAT EFFIN HOGWASH