The Rise of Anti-Government Bigots: Spitting, the N-Word, Anti-Gay/Lesbian Slurs

[Corkey]

Originally Posted by Linus

Whoa. Not cool.








[/INDENT]

This shit reminds me of meaner days of the Nazi regime, Crystal Nacht.

[dreadgeek]

Originally Posted by Corkey

This shit reminds me of meaner days of the Nazi regime, Crystal Nacht.

Yeah, I'm waiting to see what happens this summer. Temperatures will rise. Tensions will rise. The campaign season will kick into high gear. And I suspect we'll have more "one bad apple" incidents of violence by guys who look a lot like the folks we see at Tea Party rallies who will, in their 'this is why I went crazy' letter/blog/video spout much the same rhetoric.

We still haven't had our Reichstag fire yet. But I'll bet anyone here a steak dinner that if/when it *does* happen, the perpetrator will either be a Muslim or a queer person.

Cheers
Aj

[Linus]

Originally Posted by dreadgeek

Yeah, I'm waiting to see what happens this summer. Temperatures will rise. Tensions will rise. The campaign season will kick into high gear. And I suspect we'll have more "one bad apple" incidents of violence by guys who look a lot like the folks we see at Tea Party rallies who will, in their 'this is why I went crazy' letter/blog/video spout much the same rhetoric.

We still haven't had our Reichstag fire yet. But I'll bet anyone here a steak dinner that if/when it *does* happen, the perpetrator will either be a Muslim or a queer person.

Cheers
Aj

Why? I would have thought the perpetrator would be a member of the Tea/Republican party (aka White).

[dreadgeek]

Originally Posted by Linus

Why? I would have thought the perpetrator would be a member of the Tea/Republican party (aka White).

Okay, I probably should have clarified my comment. What I meant by "will probably be Muslim or queer" is that if *I* were, say, Dick Armey and I wanted to *really* get the American people to vote in my slate of John Birch Conservatives who would then vow to 'keep America safe no matter what' I would set up a Reichstag fire-type incident.

The people who *actually* set the fires will be Tea Partiers. The people who take the fall will be Muslim or queer.

Recall that the Reichstag fire was allegedly set by a Communist. As it turned out, of course, it was a group of brown shirts that actually planned and committed the crime. But a convenient scapegoat was found in the personage of a recently immigrated Dutch Communist.

I should have been more clear. I don't think that the *actual* perp of this kind of false flag will be a Muslim or queer but one of those groups will take the fall for it. They need a bogeyman and blacks just aren't going to cut it. It has to be someone still considered sufficiently other that it's okay to hate them in polite company. That means queer or Muslim.

Cheers
Aj

[Linus]

Originally Posted by dreadgeek

Okay, I probably should have clarified my comment. What I meant by "will probably be Muslim or queer" is that if *I* were, say, Dick Armey and I wanted to *really* get the American people to vote in my slate of John Birch Conservatives who would then vow to 'keep America safe no matter what' I would set up a Reichstag fire-type incident.

The people who *actually* set the fires will be Tea Partiers. The people who take the fall will be Muslim or queer.

Recall that the Reichstag fire was allegedly set by a Communist. As it turned out, of course, it was a group of brown shirts that actually planned and committed the crime. But a convenient scapegoat was found in the personage of a recently immigrated Dutch Communist.

I should have been more clear. I don't think that the *actual* perp of this kind of false flag will be a Muslim or queer but one of those groups will take the fall for it. They need a bogeyman and blacks just aren't going to cut it. It has to be someone still considered sufficiently other that it's okay to hate them in polite company. That means queer or Muslim.

Cheers
Aj

Ah.. they may have a bogeyman to blame but with the Interwebz being all over the place ('cuz Gore set it up that way, don't'cha know?), it'll be hard to maintain and will likely backfire.

Unlike the 1920s, it's a lot harder to hide who the true source of an attack or behaviour. (e.g., "Baby Killer" comment was recorded and the person apologized; given time someone would have recognized his voice easily).

[dreadgeek]

Linus:

I agree with what you're saying in part, but I'm a little more pessimistic because of my experiences watching my countrymen believe, against all available evidence, that Saddam Hussein's Iraq was instrumentally involved in the 9/11 plot OR that Al Qaeda was in bed with that tyrant. The second, more risible claim, could be disproved with less than two hours of web research. All one would have to find out is that Al Qaeda is a Wahhabist sect of Sunni Islam and that Saddam Hussein was a secular pan-Arabist who cynically used religion but was not devout by any measure and that would put the lie to that. It would be like claiming that Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson were the two biggest contributors to the ACLU or the American Humanist Society. Osama bin Laden would no more get in bed with Hussein as Falwell would with Richard Dawkins.

The first claim, about Iraq's involvement in 9/11 is partially debunked from knowing about the differences between Hussein and bin Laden and partially just by looking at the details that were known within a week of the attack.

The point I'm trying to make is that I'm not sure, given our current state, that it would *matter* if the information that a false-flag operation had taken place in the U.S. The kinds of people who are showing up at the Tea Party rallies aren't particularly likely and unless it came from some approved (read right-wing) information source they would continue to believe that it was done by the convenient perps even IF there were a YouTube video of Armey, Cheney, et. al. planning it. Low-information voters, gotta love 'em.

Cheers
Aj

Originally Posted by Linus

Ah.. they may have a bogeyman to blame but with the Interwebz being all over the place ('cuz Gore set it up that way, don't'cha know?), it'll be hard to maintain and will likely backfire.

Unlike the 1920s, it's a lot harder to hide who the true source of an attack or behaviour. (e.g., "Baby Killer" comment was recorded and the person apologized; given time someone would have recognized his voice easily).

[Linus]

Originally Posted by dreadgeek

Linus:

I agree with what you're saying in part, but I'm a little more pessimistic because of my experiences watching my countrymen believe, against all available evidence, that Saddam Hussein's Iraq was instrumentally involved in the 9/11 plot OR that Al Qaeda was in bed with that tyrant. The second, more risible claim, could be disproved with less than two hours of web research. All one would have to find out is that Al Qaeda is a Wahhabist sect of Sunni Islam and that Saddam Hussein was a secular pan-Arabist who cynically used religion but was not devout by any measure and that would put the lie to that. It would be like claiming that Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson were the two biggest contributors to the ACLU or the American Humanist Society. Osama bin Laden would no more get in bed with Hussein as Falwell would with Richard Dawkins.

The first claim, about Iraq's involvement in 9/11 is partially debunked from knowing about the differences between Hussein and bin Laden and partially just by looking at the details that were known within a week of the attack.

The point I'm trying to make is that I'm not sure, given our current state, that it would *matter* if the information that a false-flag operation had taken place in the U.S. The kinds of people who are showing up at the Tea Party rallies aren't particularly likely and unless it came from some approved (read right-wing) information source they would continue to believe that it was done by the convenient perps even IF there were a YouTube video of Armey, Cheney, et. al. planning it. Low-information voters, gotta love 'em.

Cheers
Aj

I think one of the biggest differences between what happened with Iraq and WMD is who is handling the main megaphone on Capital Hill (aka the President). I suppose as a non-American and based on what I've seen as a non-American I'm a little more optimistic about it today than things were in 2001. Things are far more transparent than before (2001-era) and FOXNews et al would be hard pressed to really contradict proof.

Heck, they could have used that for the plane that crashed in the IRS and didn't. I was expecting it but it really never appeared...

[Corkey]

Deception of facts isn't just for the tea-baggers. Congress has been a great dissipator of false information. If any one thinks they can trust their congress person to do the right thing, one needed not look further than Congress woman Dahlkemper. She was willing to vote no, for the simple fact that she is pro life, so even though she may be a Dem, she sure can't claim she holds any woman's reproductive right issue to her heart.
For me I look to history for where the next onslaught will come from. Those who have lost their privileges.