"Where's your proof that conservative terrorists are hiding in the bushes ready to strike?"

The right-wing nutjobs really came out of the woodwork when I posted a comment about the media refusing to call Tiller's murderer and the Holocaust museum guy terrorists. I think this was my favorite response:

"Where's your proof that conservative terrorists are hiding in the bushes ready to strike? People like the mentally unstable psycho who killed Tiller have nothing to do with the mainstream of the pro-life or conservative movements."

George Tiller
Jim David Adkisson
James W. von Brunn
Timothy McVeigh
Eric R. Rudolph

And that's just the tip of the iceberg.

Posse Comitatus. The Minutemen. John Birch Society. The KKK. Dare I say, Operation Rescue.

The above named individuals were NOT lone nuts - they were connected to a slew of violent RW organizations.

and the likelihood that they would act out. Instead of seeing it as it was, and perhaps helping to alert the police to people like these nutjobs, they just fed them more bile. And they were 'outraged' about the report. Enough so that napolitano, who apparently didn't even having anything to do with the writing of the report, actually apologized!! But it ended up being right. So where is the apology, folks!! I think the conservative right wing owes us all an apology. Because instead of stopping these folks before they killed, they basically enouraged them. They may not have 'known' they would do it, or pulled the trigger. But they knew what these people were capable of and did nothing to stop them. Therefore there is blood on their hands.

... by this logic. If you are referring to the "right wing hate groups" report, when the government can 'target' groups who do not engage in violence because some person claiming a similar philosophy carries out violence, we all loose our rights. Read about the FBI's Cointelpro program targeting anti-war groups - or more recently, the Pentagon's infiltration of the Quakers for opposing the war in Iraq. All it takes is one nutjob claiming to be carrying out violence to 'stop the war' and all anti-war groups suddenly become 'potential terrorists'. The attack on a military recruiting office in NYC a couple years back comes to mind.

It is easy for us on the left to point the finger at the 'right wingers' and encourage the government to "sic 'em," but this will come back on us in spades if the precedent is allowed to be set.

hooting and hollering and no one would be complaining in that group. I am not sure what I think of the idea of looking into these groups, but obviously there is a violent faction in these groups, left or right. and they need to be looked at. It's hard to tell who would snap or act out like some of these guys have... but people in the groups know who are the nuts. The thing that gets me, is I wonder if they don't want these guys to act out in some part of their minds... then someone would get hurt, but they wouldn't be responsible. I know that is not a good way to live, thinking people are like that, but unfortunately I can't help but think it when I see these people hurting and killing , and the reaction of these 'christian' 'prolife' groups.

... that each side seems happy to have the government go after 'the other side'. There is plenty of hypocrisy to go around. I'd prefer the FBI go after *individuals* who are violent rather than targeting 'groups'.

Making a threat of violence is a crime. Anyone who makes such threats can, and should, be held responsible. Wishing someone else would be violent is despicable, but it is not criminal until it rises to 'inciting to violence'.

Of course, Michael Reagan did exactly that on his radio show with respect to activist Mark Dice - he even offered to pay for the bullets. He didn't even get taken off the air. Whatever you think of Mr. Dice and his opinions, this was criminal activity that went unpunished. You can listen to Mr. Reagan on YouTube - video# WdJO-kUINMs .

"I'd prefer the FBI go after *individuals* who are violent rather than targeting 'groups'...."

It's certainly not an either-or proposition; as going after the individual does not preclude going after the organization.

If there is indeed evidence that points to one or another group conspiring to commit or incite violence, I think anyone would want to see that group investigated-- regarldess of either our political spectrum, or that of the organization in question.

... but history in the US for the last 100 years shows that this investigative power is often abused (I mentioned Cointelpro earlier). Just recently, we have the 'Liberty Six' and other FBI plots that were literally sold (for cash) to poor people. Check out the Mother Jones article on this here:
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2008/02/department-pre-crime

The solution to terrorism, and crime in general, is to eliminate the pool of potential perpetrators - i.e. eliminate hopeless poverty and the desperate mindset it engenders. But in the meantime, if you can think of a way to place a check and balance on these investigative powers such that the power will not be abused, I am open to suggestions. It would seem the courts have been impotent to do so.

Due Process. If it's lacking, it's lacking regardless of whether the investigation targets an individual or an organization, and so it's a moot point in the first place.

And although I have little doubts that the elimination of poverty would reduce crime, and that you are open to suggestions, I can merely say that all things being equal, the conscious discontinuation of an investigation for no other reason than the target is an organization would preclude so much white collar crime from being prosecuted, I can only find it (at best) absurd.

I did not mean to imply that all organizations, including corporations, should be immune from scrutiny. I was referring to political-activists. Corporations have been erroneously awarded 'personhood' - but that is another long story. White collar crime generally falls under 'fraud' - another topic for another thread.

Let me break it down further to clarify; if a person who is a member of a group makes a threat, that person can be investigated and prosecuted - this may involve attending the groups meetings to observe that person's statements. I have no problem with this provided the 'FBI informant' did not encourage the unstable individual to join the group as a pretext for infiltration.

What *should not* happen, is that a group is investigated in order to *search for potential suspects*. The groups targeted historically oppose a government policy or have distasteful opinions - That path leads to tyranny. Women's rights and civil rights, more generally, were once so labeled. Political speech and political organizing, when it does not cross the line to inciting violence, must be protected - however much we may hate it.

"I was referring to political-activists..."

As being part and parcel of the overall umbrella of the concept of 'organization', so did I.

I happen to believe that when we see copious amounts of smoke, we should investigate to see if there's any fire.

go after any leftish groups anyway. What we need to demand is that if they are going to go after peace parties and civil rights groups, they should go after actual violent terrorists with the same vigor.

Who, BTW, has been murdered by a LW anti-war activist?

So far, the 'left' groups have only been accused of property crimes - the recruiting office which was bombed was empty at the time - though these activities are now labeled as 'terrorism'. Do a search on "animal rights" and terrorism to get the idea.

I am not defending violence or property crime nor saying that individuals who incite or threaten violence should not be held accountable for their actions. I *am* saying we need to stop all of this spying on 'groups' - left or right - and stick to prosecuting those engaged in criminal activity.

Based on the intelligence of the CIA I've seen, the CIA couldn't find a flourescent bat in a bat cave.

while tragic, do not make a statistically significant trend.

For instance,a few acts of muslim terrorism since 2000 in the US(wikipedia):

2000 New York terror attack Three young men of Arab descent hurled crude Molotov cocktails at a synagogue in The Bronx,New York to "strike a blow in the Middle East conflict between Israel and Palestine".

2001 September 11: September 11, 2001 attacks carried out by Al-Qaeda. Islamic fundamentalists use airplanes to destroy the twin towers of the World Trade Center and heavily damage The Pentagon. A fourth plane crashed prematurely in Pennsylvania.

2002 July 4: 2002 Los Angeles Airport shooting Hesham Mohamed Hadayet, a 41-year-old Egyptian national, kills two Israelis and wounds four others at the El Al ticket counter at Los Angeles International Airport. The FBI concluded this was terrorism, although they found no evidence linking Hadayet to any terrorist group.

October 2002 Beltway Sniper Attacks: During three weeks in October 2002 John Allen Muhammad and Lee Boyd Malvo killed 10 people and critically injured three others in Washington D.C, Baltimore, and Virginia. An earlier spree by the pair had resulted in 3 deaths in Louisiana, Alabama, Georgia, California, Arizona, and Texas to bring the total to 16 deaths. No motivation was given at the trial but evidence presented showed an affinity to the cause of the Islamic Jihad.

2006 March 5: Mohammed Reza Taheri-azar injured 6 when he drove an SUV into a group of pedestrians at UNC-Chapel Hill to "avenge the deaths or murders of Muslims around the world".

2006 July 8: Naveed Afzal Haq walked into the Jewish Federation in downtown Seattle, Washington and began shooting after shouting, "I'm a Muslim American; I'm angry at Israel". During the attack he demanded that the US military get out of Iraq, and asked the emergency dispatcher to be patched through to CNN.<34> Haq killed one and wounded five others (three critically).

2009 June 1: Arkansas recruiting office shooting One military recruiter was killed and another critically injured by gunshot at a Little Rock, Arkansas Army/Navy Career Center. The suspect Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad said he was upset over U.S. killing of Muslims in Iraq and Afghanistan.


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

Instances of leftwing terrorist attacks since 2000:

2001 May 21 The Center for Urban Horticulture at the University of Washington burned. Replacement building cost $7,000,000. Earth Liberation Front members pleads guilty.

May 2002 Mailbox Pipe Bomber: Lucas John Helder rigged pipe bombs in private mailboxes to explode when the boxes were opened. He injured 6 people in Nebraska, Colorado, Texas, Illinois, and Iowa. His motivation was to garner media attention so that he could spread a message denouncing government control over daily lives and the illegality of marijuana as well as promoting astral projection.

June 2006: The Animal Liberation Front targets UCLA professor Lynn Fairbanks with a firebomb due to her research on animals. The bomb was placed on the doorstep of a house occupied by her neighbor and a tenant. According to the FBI, the device was lit but failed to ignite and was powerful enough to have killed the occupants.

2008 February: In the first reported incident of animal-rights extremists physically assaulting the family members of animal researchers, six masked activists attempted to force their way into the home of a University of California, Santa Cruz, researcher and injured the researcher's husband.

2008 March 3: Four multimillion-dollar show homes place in Woodinville, Washington are torched. The Earth Liberation Front is suspected in the fires.

2008 August 2, August 3 University of California-Santa Cruz molecular biologist David Feldheim's home was firebombed. A car belonging to another researcher from that University was destroyed by a firebomb in what is presumed to be related. FBI is investigating incidents as domestic terrorism related to animal rights groups.

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

On so on. Remember how a little while ago there was a "sudden increase" in child abductions because a few high profile cases happened to occur around the same time? And it turned out in reality there was no significant increase in those cases for that year? Let's not blow this out of proportion.

Point 1) What makes you think environmental activists are "left wing". They have their own agenda.

Point 2) Ever hear of Cointelpro? How many of these attack, bombings, whatever, have been actually directly linked to these organizations - as in, they claimed responsibility for them? How many of them might have been government agents committing acts to discredit these organizations?

Point 3) Lucan John Helder? Seriously?

There is NO equivalence between RW terror and these supposed LW terror incidents.

That's news. I suppose you could eliminate all terrorism among the left and right by simply not claiming them. But that doesn't really make it go away, just hides it a bit.

Can you prove that the tiller assasination wasn't some government plot? Once you go that direction there is really no point in debating. Lack of evidence is proof that the government was very good at covering it up. Denying it is proof they are in on it. Etc. I've debated enough conspiracy type to realize the futility of trying to argue with a true believer.

And, Lucas John Helder. Yes.

Denial does make one feel better, but accomplishes little else.

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

Where is there any indication that this delusional boy had ANY political motives, much less 'left wing'?

He is STILL in a mental hospital.

Tiller - how would it benefit the government to kill Tiller? When I spoke of Cointelpro it was a serious statement, because Cointelpro's basic tactic was to discredit opposition groups by inducing their members to commit crimes - much as the 'FBI informants' have recently been linked with fomenting and funding 'terror plots' made up of people who do not have the perspicacity to come up with such plots themselves. It might be noted that Cointelpro operations have only been greenlighted by Republican administrations.

And, no, environmentalism is NOT left/right - it has no place in those parameters. More lefties get involved in environmentalism than righties, but the hardcore - such as join ELF - will turn on the left as readily as the right, and they will not make common cause with lefties unless their primary cause is the focus. Anything less is a waste of their energies which need to go to their cause.

Handy. I guess that means no terrorist is political, since they could all be considered crazy by some definition.

How would it benefit to kill tiller. Well let's see, if you wanted to protect abortion rights what better way to silence the critics than to convince the country that everyone on one side is psychotic? (note, I'm not making this claim, I'm using your logic).


I wonder how many ELF, PETA, etc members would vote republican if forced to choose between them or democrats? You can't just pretend they aren't political because you don't like being associated with them.

You know perfectly well that Helder had NO politican connections - he wanted to make a giant smiley face with the pipe bombs, with no thought as to who would open the mailboxes - what's the political motive there? He thought to bring attention to the subject of astral projection - what's the political motive there?

Killing one of only three doctors in the country that performed late-term abortion would HELP the pro-choice camp? And again - cointelpro is 100% RW. There has never been a case where the Dems have been implicated in the misuse of police powers in perpetrating terror - at least, not since Daly's police riot at the 68 convention.

As for the political leaning of environmental extremists - why don't you ask around in environmental forums? You will find, the extremists have given up on politics and do no see themselves as left or right, and many of them come from Republican backgrounds as well as Democratic backgrounds. I guarentee it.

But what the hell - you're not interested in facts. Just arguing for argument's sake.

I knew better than to initiate a debate with a true believer. You actually believe all that conspiracy stuff don't you?

Might as well try to explain evolution to a creationist as try to explain the faults with your conspiracy theories to you.

even when there has been no 'conspiracy theory' mentioned.

Or do you think that cointelpro (which I believe YOU first brought up - I'd have to read back the thread to be sure) is a 'conspiracy theory'?

Never mind - I'm too old to waste time arguing in ignorant kids.

Welcome to ignore - you have the honor of being #2 since the election.

when one side brings up shadowing government agents as the cause for all lifes woes. And no, I didn't bring up cointelpro, you did.

just like themselves - people with conservative values.

Geez, I would think that they're all right out in sight ... and the law is looking at a shiny object ...

* Weapons of Mass Dumbshittery

Or in groups of 2 or 3, connected to each other by the internet. This is the stuff nightmares are made of.

Is it even possible to fight an enemy like that?

to see that hate radio and Faux are fanning the flames of domestic terrorism.

They're not "ready to strike", they're striking.