Peace, Olives Branches, Righty Reckless Ranting And Ravings, Torture, Twisted Fearing Mongering And Out Right Media Lies…
AND WE’RE SUPPOSED TO STRAIGHTEN IT ALL OUT…HOW ABOUT WE TURN THE TV OFF AND TAKE TO THE STREETS UNTIL THE CONGRESS WAKES UP?
Listen to Francis Boyle
OpEdNews - Newtown,PA,USA
He was talking about Afghanistan, and he would go on, as early as anyone else, to talk in the same way about impeachment (which he supported from November ...
See all stories on this topic
Report links medics to CIA jail torture
Irish Times - Dublin,Ireland
Senate judiciary committee chairman Patrick Leahy has called for a “truth commission” to look into the detention policies of the last administration and the ...
See all stories on this topic
Red Cross Report: Medics Grossly Violated Ethics
NPR _All Things Considered, April 7, 2009 · Medical personnel who monitored the CIA's interrogation of detainees at black sites around the world violated medical ... LISTEN HERE!
| | | | |
If we didn’t learn the lesson from the Great Depression; maybe this time we will understand that in a truly global economy there no longer is such a thing as total economic independence or sovereignty.
Media figures advance false claim that Obama ceded economic sovereignty at G-20 summit
Summary: Media figures have advanced the false claim that in signing the G-20 communiqué establishing a new Financial Stability Board, President Obama ceded U.S. sovereignty to international economic regulators. In fact, the FSB referenced in the communiqué does not have any authority over U.S. policy.
Since the conclusion of the Group of 20 economic summit in London, media figures including Fox News contributor Dick Morris, CNN correspondent Kitty Pilgrim, and syndicated radio host Monica Crowley have advanced the false claim that in signing the G-20 communiqué establishing a new Financial Stability Board (FSB), President Obama ceded U.S. sovereignty to international economic regulators. For instance, in his April 6 column, Morris claimed, "On April 2, 2009, the work of July 4, 1776 was nullified at the meeting of the G-20 in London" -- an assertion Morris repeated on that night's edition of Fox News' Hannity, when he asserted, "Basically, from an economic standpoint, [Obama's] repealed [the Declaration of Independence]. We no longer have economic sovereignty." In fact, the Financial Stability Board referenced in the G-20 communiqué does notcontain cross-border authority and thus does not in any way limit or eliminate U.S. sovereignty. Indeed, an April 3 New York Times articlereported, "While the leaders agreed to create a new Financial Stability Board to monitor the financial system for signs of risks, they stopped well short of giving regulators cross-border authority, something France has long advocated."
Examples of media figures advancing the falsehood that the Obama administration ceded U.S. economic sovereignty include the following:
- During the April 3 edition of Fox News' America's Newsroom, Morris claimed of the FSB, "[I]t effectively ceded massive areas of American sovereignty to Europe and to the global economic mavens." Morris later claimed that "this literally is a massive surrender of sovereignty to an essentially European body."
- During the April 3 edition of CNN's Lou Dobbs Tonight, Rep. Don Manzullo (R-IL) stated, "Secretary [Timothy] Geithner's proposing, with the help of the administration, a worldwide international control over all financial interests -- in fact, over any corporation, to the extent of even controlling the compensation of the employees. That's not only radical, Kitty, that's frightening." Pilgrim responded, "Yeah, it certainly is."
- During the April 5 edition of the syndicated program The McLaughlin Group, Crowley claimed the G-20 communiqué is the "the first step to abrogating American sovereignty here, because ... it is going to allow European bureaucrats to step in, not just on the hedge fund regulation and the other explicit things that they agreed to, but buried deep down in this communiqué was the ability for European bureaucrats sitting in Brussels to decide what kind of executive compensation American executives should -- ", at which point Financial Times U.S. managing editor Chrystia Freeland interjected, "No, there was no authority like that there, Monica." Crowley responded, "I read it in the communiqué this morning."
As Freeland noted, the communiqué does not establish authority for the FSB to determine the types of compensation American executives earn and cedes no regulatory authority to any international body. While signatories to the communiqué agreed to "establish a new Financial Stability Board (FSB) with a strengthened mandate, as a successor to the Financial Stability Forum (FSF)" and agreed "that the FSB should collaborate with the IMF [International Monetary Fund] to provide early warning of macroeconomic and financial risks and the actions needed to address them," the communiqué explicitly stated that it is the responsibility of member nations' "Finance Ministers to complete the implementation of these decisions." Indeed, while the signatories agreed "to reshape our regulatory systems so that our authorities are able to identify and take account of macro-prudential risks" and "to extend regulation and oversight to all systemically important financial institutions, instruments and markets," they did not cede that oversight authority to the FSB.
From the G-20 communiqué:
We each agree to ensure our domestic regulatory systems are strong. But we also agree to establish the much greater consistency and systematic cooperation between countries, and the framework of internationally agreed high standards, that a global financial system requires. Strengthened regulation and supervision must promote propriety, integrity and transparency; guard against risk across the financial system; dampen rather than amplify the financial and economic cycle; reduce reliance on inappropriately risky sources of financing; and discourage excessive risk-taking. Regulators and supervisors must protect consumers and investors, support market discipline, avoid adverse impacts on other countries, reduce the scope for regulatory arbitrage, support competition and dynamism, and keep pace with innovation in the marketplace.
To this end we are implementing the Action Plan agreed at our last meeting, as set out in the attached progress report. We have today also issued a Declaration, Strengthening the Financial System. In particular we agree: to establish a new Financial Stability Board (FSB) with a strengthened mandate, as a successor to the Financial Stability Forum (FSF), including all G20 countries, FSF members, Spain, and the European Commission; that the FSB should collaborate with the IMF to provide early warning of macroeconomic and financial risks and the actions needed to address them; to reshape our regulatory systems so that our authorities are able to identify and take account of macro-prudential risks; to extend regulation and oversight to all systemically important financial institutions, instruments and markets. This will include, for the first time, systemically important hedge funds; to endorse and implement the FSF's tough new principles on pay and compensation and to support sustainable compensation schemes and the corporate social responsibility of all firms; to take action, once recovery is assured, to improve the quality, quantity, and international consistency of capital in the banking system.
In future, regulation must prevent excessive leverage and require buffers of resources to be built up in good times; to take action against noncooperative jurisdictions, including tax havens. We stand ready to deploy sanctions to protect our public finances and financial systems. The era of banking secrecy is over. We note that the OECD [Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development] has today published a list of countries assessed by the Global Forum against the international standard for exchange of tax information; to call on the accounting standard setters to work urgently with supervisors and regulators to improve standards on valuation and provisioning and achieve a single set of high-quality global accounting standards; and to extend regulatory oversight and registration to Credit Rating Agencies to ensure they meet the international code of good practice, particularly to prevent unacceptable conflicts of interest.
We instruct our Finance Ministers to complete the implementation of these decisions in line with the timetable set out in the Action Plan. We have asked the FSB and the IMF to monitor progress, working with the Financial Action Taskforce and other relevant bodies, and to provide a report to the next meeting of our Finance Ministers in Scotland in November.
Further, while signatories to the communiqué agreed to "endorse and implement the FSF's tough new principles on pay and compensation," those principles do not grant international regulators authority to set executive compensation. Indeed, the statement of principles explicitly provides, "They are not intended to prescribe particular designs or levels of individual compensation" [emphasis in original]. The statement of principles also states, "The firm's board of directors should be responsible for the compensation system's design and operation."
From the April 3 New York Times article:
The Group of 20 did agree on new global rules to govern the pay and bonuses of bankers. The leaders also agreed to "name and shame" countries that erected trade barriers, intended to resist growing protectionist sentiment.
But a European push for sweeping global regulation of the financial markets was blunted, to a large degree, by the United States. While the leaders agreed to create a new Financial Stability Board to monitor the financial system for signs of risks, they stopped well short of giving regulators cross-border authority, something France has long advocated.
Instead, the leaders agreed to more closely coordinate their regulation of "systemically important" financial institutions. They did not, however, agree on a mechanism to resolve cross-border disputes that might arise in the winding down of insolvent banks, an issue that might yet arise if global banks like Citigroup or Royal Bank of Scotland fell deeper in trouble.
"The regulatory part was close to a zero," said Simon Johnson, a professor of economics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
From the April 3 edition of Fox News' America's Newsroom:
ALISYN CAMEROTA (co-host): All right, the G-20 has just ended. President Obama says that he thinks that it went well. You say it was a disaster. How so?
MORRIS: Well, it effectively ceded massive areas of American sovereignty to Europe and to the global economic mavens, but, in fact, they are mainly European.
Let me read you from the communiqué. They set up a new Financial Stability Board, as you mentioned. One of its missions is to endorse and implement new principles -- tough new principles -- on pay and compensation and to support sustainable compensation schemes and the corporate social responsibility of all firms. That was A-L-L firms -- all firms.
CAMEROTA: OK, so let me stop you right there, Dick, just for a clarification. So, in other words, an international body will have some say over how much American CEOs make?
MORRIS: You got it. And it's not just some say. They will effectively set international standards that will be applied to the SEC and the Federal Reserve Board and the Commodities Exchange Commission -- each of those agencies -- which will then implement them, so that you're really setting up an international governance over the economy. And not just specifically for certain firms -- for all firms. That was A-L-L.
And another one is to extend regulation and oversight to all systemically important financial institutions, instruments, and markets. By that, they mean the "too big to fail" -- so that while Obama is basically extending national regulation to these bodies, the G-20 is putting a layer of regulation over the national regulation, which basically is European regulation. Europe has wanted to do this for over -- for two decades. They're basically socialists, and they've wanted to control how the United States regulates its industries. But this literally is a massive surrender of sovereignty to an essentially European body.
CAMEROTA: OK, so let's just dig a little bit deeper into that Financial Stability Board -- the FSB, as we're referring to it. You say that they set up something so that all financial institutions that are systemically important -- in other words, those banks, those hedge funds -- that should they fail, they would create --
MORRIS: Or car companies --
CAMEROTA: Oh.
MORRIS: -- or insurance companies --
CAMEROTA: All companies?
MORRIS: -- or God knows what -- public relations firms. I mean, you know, whatever -- "systemically important" is one of those phrases that is about as stable as an accordion.
CAMEROTA: So -- so, but the point is is that if it would be -- it would create a disastrous domino effect, such as AIG, if one of these were to fail. Shouldn't those be better regulated?
MORRIS: Yeah, absolutely -- by the United States government; by people appointed by an elected president and confirmed by an elected United States Senate. Not by a group of central bankers from Europe who outvote the United States 19 to one, who can put whatever standards they want on this thing.
From the April 3 edition of CNN's Lou Dobbs Tonight:
PILGRIM: Yeah, no, I mean, it seems very clear to us that the line -- a certain line was crossed.
You know, last week, you grilled Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner on his plans to seize businesses that could harm the economy if they failed. You called that absolutely radical.
MANZULLO: Right.
PILGRIM: Tell us a little bit more about -- about why you think we're off the track here in terms of government participation in business.
MANZULLO: Well, he did not draw the distinction between financial companies that received TARP funding and those that don't. He wants to have a one-size-fits-all pattern to control -- for example, executive compensation -- and as what happened with the bill that the House -- passed the House yesterday that would control compensation, down even to the teller.
But what we saw happen just yesterday, in Europe at the G-20, was nothing less than even more radical, because now Secretary Geithner's proposing, with the help of the administration, a worldwide international control over all financial interests -- in fact, over any corporation, to the extent of even controlling the compensation of the employees. That's not only radical, Kitty, that's frightening.
PILGRIM: Yeah, it certainly is.
From the April 5 edition of The McLaughlin Group:
McLAUGHLIN: What do you think, Eleanor -- 20 frightened world leaders there?
ELEANOR CLIFT (Newsweek contributing editor): It was substantive enough, considering you had 20 people around a table. And one of the president's best comments was he said this wasn't FDR and Churchill sitting with, you know, sipping brandy. This is complicated to get that many people to agree. But stylistically it was a wonderful message to the world about the reassertion of America in our standing in the world.
CROWLEY: I thought it was largely symbolic, but the one point of substance that I took issue with was at the end, when they issued this communiqué, they agreed -- and President Obama signed on to this -- to the creation of something called a Financial Stability Board, which I view as the first step to abrogating American sovereignty here, because --
McLAUGHLIN: What did they -- how did they --
CROWLEY: -- because it is going to allow European bureaucrats to step in, not just on the hedge fund regulation and the other explicit things that they agreed to, but buried deep down in this communiqué was the ability for European bureaucrats sitting in Brussels to decide what kind of executive compensation American executives should --
[crosstalk]
FREELAND: No, there was no authority --
McLAUGHLIN: No.
FREELAND: -- like that there, Monica. Had -- had there --
CROWLEY: Yes. No, I read it in the communiqué this morning.
FREELAND: No. So did I --
CROWLEY: Yes.
FREELAND: -- and there was no such authority. Had there actually been such authority, the Europeans would be cheering, and the hedge fund guys would be beating down the doors of the White House right now.
From the April 6 edition of Fox News' Hannity:
MORRIS: This is a president who basically thinks like a European -- in his economic program, in his view of the -- of abhorring nationalism, abhorring American exceptionalism -- and he certainly gave evidence of that. But what is driving me crazy about this trip, Sean, is -- when I was on your show one week ago today, we talked a lot about what I was afraid he would do at the G-20 summit. And he not only did everything I was afraid of, he made it even worse than that. He literally -- the way I put it, Sean, is during this trip, the Declaration of Independence was repealed; that essentially the United States gave up its economic sovereignty to the G-20.
HANNITY: So basically, our Declaration, our founding document, you know, with the idea that we're endowed by our creator and America has paid the price for that liberty and freedom around the world -- you're saying he has basically pushed that -- that aside?
MORRIS: Basically, from an economic standpoint, he's repealed it. We no longer have economic sovereignty. What he did was that this group called the Financial Stability Forum -- it was a quasi-academic group that would come up with ideas. It was based on the central banks of all the European countries, plus a few others. Well, they've taken this central -- this Financial Stability Forum and created the Financial Stability Board.
And the board is charged with making recommendations for uniform high standards to be implemented by the regulators of each of the G-20 countries. And it says what they're supposed to do. They're supposed to have regulation and oversight to all systemically --
HANNITY: Sure.
MORRIS: -- important financial institutions, instruments, and markets -- and hedge funds; and implement tough new principles on pay and compensation; and to support sustainable compensation schemes and corporate social responsibility --
HANNITY: Sure.
MORRIS: -- for all firms.
So this, essentially, is a vehicle for the Europeans, the Financial Stability Board, to regulate all major companies in the United States, acting through the SEC and the Federal Reserve. And because Obama didn't kick up a fuss and has agreed to the concept of consensus regulations -- that then are imposed as mandatory by the U.S. regulatory agencies -- he essentially is saying that the compensation for chief executive officers of major American companies is going to be determined --
HANNITY: Let me --
MORRIS: -- by the European central bankers, with a little bit of input from the United States.
HANNITY: Yeah, when you --
MORRIS: This is an unbelievable surrender of sovereignty.
From Morris' April 6 column:
On April 2, 2009, the work of July 4, 1776 was nullified at the meeting of the G-20 in London. The joint communiqué essentially announces a global economic union with uniform regulations and bylaws for all nations, including the United States. Henceforth, our SEC, Commodities Trading Commission, Federal Reserve Board and other regulators will have to march to the beat of drums pounded by the Financial Stability Board (FSB), a body of central bankers from each of the G-20 states and the European Union.
The mandate conferred on the FSB is remarkable for its scope and open-endedness. It is to set a "framework of internationally agreed high standards that a global financial system requires." These standards are to include the extension of "regulation and oversight to all systemically important financial institutions, instruments, and markets ... [including] systemically important hedge funds."
Note the key word: "all." If the FSB, in its international wisdom, considers an institution or company "systemically important", it may regulate and over see it. This provision extends and internationalizes the proposals of the Obama Administration to regulate all firms, in whatever sector of the economy that it deems to be "too big to fail."
The FSB is also charged with "implementing ... tough new principles on pay and compensation and to support sustainable compensation schemes and the corporate social responsibility of all firms."
That means that the FSB will regulate how much executives are to be paid and will enforce its idea of corporate social responsibility at "all firms."
| | | | |
| | | | |
From Here On Down; It Would Be Funny If These Folks Weren’t Dangerous And If They Didn’t Take Themselves Seriously,
And Consider Themselves Sane.
Michele Bachmann Warns of "Re-Education Camps"
http://video.newsmax.com/?assetId=V3666764
Fox News Hosts Join Right-Wing "Tea Party" Movement (VIDEO)
Rick Santelli and CNBC may be keeping their distance from the tax day tea party movement Santelli inadvertently spawned in an on-air rant, but Fox News seems to be throwing everything it's got behind protests planned for April 15.
Fox anchors Sean Hannity and Neil Cavuto boarded the bandwagon first by signing on with tax day tea parties in Atlanta and Sacramento. Now Glenn Beck will be broadcasting from the Alamo in Texas and Greta Van Susteren will party in Washington, D.C., amounting to hours and hours of rotating live coverage of the anti-tax, anti-spending events.
"This year Americans across the country are holding tea parties to let politicians know that we've had enough," Beck said yesterday. "Celebrate with Fox News."
The Huffington Post wants to have citizen journalists at as many of these events as possible. If you think you'd be interested in attending one of the Tea Parties and reporting back to us with dispatches, photos, or video, click here to sign up. We'll contact you shortly with further instructions.
Glenn Beck And The Rise Of Fox News' Militia Media By Eric Boehlert
After a night of drinking, followed by an early-morning argument with his mother, with whom he shared a Pittsburgh apartment, 22-year-old Richard Poplawski put on a bulletproof vest, grabbed his guns, including an AK-47 rifle, and waited for the police to respond to the domestic disturbance call his mother had placed. When two officers arrived at the front door, Poplawski shot them both in the head, and then killed another officer who tried to rescue his colleagues.
In the wake of the bloodbath, we learned that Poplawski was something of a conspiracy nut who embraced dark, radical rhetoric about America. He was convinced the government wanted to take away his guns, the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette reported. Specifically, Poplawski, as one friend described it, feared "the Obama gun ban that's on the way" and "didn't like our rights being infringed upon." (FYI, there is no Obama gun ban in the works.) The same friend said the shooter feared America was "going to see the end of our times."
We learned that Poplawski hosted his own (failed) Internet radio show and that he visited the website of 9-11 conspiracy backer Alex Jones, who has been hyping the threat of a totalitarian world government for years. More recently, Jones has been warning listeners like Poplawski about The Obama Deception (that's the name of Jones' new documentary DVD) and how President Obama is bound to destroy America.
Who's Alex Jones? Even according to some conservative bloggers, the anti-government, anti-Obama talker is a "freak" who's popular with "the tin foil hat crowd." Like with Poplawski, apparently.
Jones might be a "freak," but he has recently been embraced -- and mainstreamed -- by Fox News, as part of the news channel's unprecedented drive to push radical propaganda warning of America's democratic demise under the new president.
During a March 18 webcast of FoxNews.com's proudly paranoid "Freedom Watch," Andrew Napolitano introduced a segment about "what the government has done to take your liberty and your property away." And with that, he welcomed onto the show "the one, the only, the great Alex Jones," who began ranting about "exposing" the New World Order and the threat posed by an emerging "global government."
"I appreciate what you're exposing," Napolitano assured his guest.
Waving around a copy of his Obama Deception, Jones warned Fox News webcast viewers about Obama's "agenda" for "gun confiscation" and the new president's plan to "bring in total police-state control" to America.
Jones also noted with excitement that Fox News' Glenn Beck had recently begun warning about the looming New World Order on his show, just like Jones had for years. "It is great!" cheered the conspiracist. (Like Jones, Beck recently warned viewers that "the Second Amendment is under fire.") Concluding the interview, Fox News' Napolitano announced "it's absolutely been a pleasure" listening to Jones' insights.
We don't know if Poplawski tuned in to watch Jones' star turn for Fox News last month. But is there any doubt that Fox News is playing an increasingly erratic and dangerous game by embracing the type of paranoid insurrection rhetoric that people like Poplawski are now acting on? By stoking dark fears about the ominous ruins that await an Obama America, by ratcheting up irresponsible back-to-the-wall scenarios, Fox News has waded into a territory that no other news organization has ever dared to exploit.
What Fox News is now programming on a daily (unhinged) basis is unprecedented in the history of American television, especially in the form of Beck's program. Night after night, week after week, Beck rails against the president while denouncing him or his actions, alternately, as Marxist, socialist, or fascist. He felt entirely comfortable pondering whether the federal government, under the auspices of FEMA, was building concentration camps to round up Americans in order to institute totalitarian rule. (It wasn't until this week that Beck was finally able to "debunk" the FEMA conspiracy theory.) And that's when Beck wasn't gaming out bloody scenarios for the coming civil war against Obama-led tyranny. In just a few shorts months, Beck raced to the head of Fox News' militia media movement.
Just prior to the Pittsburgh massacre, Beck's often bizarre on-air performances, in which his rants against the Obama administration's dark forces were mixed in with his tearful proclamations of love of country, had turned him into a highly rated laughingstock. "That is a shaky cat," Dennis Miller recently giggled while describing Beck. MSNBC's Joe Scarborough broke into hysterics after a montage of Beck's most weepy moments. And TV satirists have had a field day at the Fox News host's expense. (Stephen Colbert: "Crank up the crazy and rip off the knob!")
But I'm not sure people should be laughing.
The consequences of Fox News' doomsday programming now seem entirely predictable. As Jeffrey Jones, a professor of media and politics at Old Dominion University, recently explained to The New York Times in regard to Beck's rhetoric, "People hear their values are under attack and they get worried. It becomes an opportunity for them to stand up and do something."
People like Richard Poplawski? FYI, weeks before his deadline shooting spree, Poplawski uploaded a video clip of Beck ominously referencing the FEMA camps on Fox News.
It's true that Beck, in response to mounting criticism, made this statement on his show:
BECK: Let me be clear on one thing. If someone tries to harm another person in the name of the Constitution or the truth behind 9-11 or anything else, they are just as dangerous and crazy as those people we don't seem to recognize anymore -- you know, the ones who kill in the name of Allah.
But look at the very next two lines of his monologue: "There are enemies both foreign and domestic in America tonight. Call it fear mongering or call it the truth." That doesn't sound like Beck was backing away from his rhetorical call to arms to fend off the Marxist -- no, wait -- fascist Obama administration.
And let's drop the idea -- pushed hard by Beck himself -- that he's simply a modern-day Howard Beale, from the classic film Network, just an angry, I'm-mad-as-hell everyman lashing out at the hypocrisies of our time. Nonsense. Beale's unvarnished on-air rants from Network targeted conformity, corporate conglomerates, and the propaganda power of television. ("This tube," he called it.) Beale's attacks were not political or partisan. Beck, by contrast, unleashes his anger against, and whips up dark scenarios about, the new president of the United States. Big difference.
Here's a sampling of what Beck's been drumming into the heads of viewers, a portion of whom likely (and logically) hear his rhetoric as a call to action. That the government is a "heroin pusher using smiley-faced fascism to grow the nanny state." That it's indoctrinating our children; that we have "come to a very dangerous point in our country's long, storied history." Beck's concerned that the "Big Brother" government will soon dictate what its citizens can eat, at what temperature their house can be set, and what kind of cars they're allowed to drive.
Beck's sure "[d]epression and revolution" are what await America under Obama, and fears moving "towards a totalitarian state." The country today sometimes reminds Beck of "the early days of Adolf Hitler." Beck thinks that Obama, who has "surrounded himself by Marxists his whole life," is now "addicting this country to heroin -- the heroin that is government slavery."
And it's not just Beck. Appearing on Fox News, Dick Morris recently made a wildly irresponsible comment that looks even worse in light of the Pittsburgh law-enforcement slayings: "Those crazies in Montana who say, 'We're going to kill ATF agents because the UN's going to take over' -- well, they're beginning to have a case."
And it's not just Fox News. Radio nut Michael Savage recentlyclaimed that "we have a naked Marxist for president." And high-profile conservative blogger Erick Erickson contemplated the beating of politicians: "At what point do [people] get off the couch, march down to their state legislator's house, pull him outside, and beat him to a bloody pulp for being an idiot?"
Of course, the right-wingers at Free Republic are way ahead of Erickson as they fantasize about Obama's assassination: "And let's face it: all the speculation about Obama being the actual Antichrist will either be confirmed or denied if someone gets off a lucky shot at the SOB."
"Go Kill Liberals!"
I wonder if Glenn Beck knows who Jim Adkisson is. Adkisson made headlines on July 28, 2008, when he brought his sawed-off 12-gauge shotgun into the Tennessee Valley Unitarian Universalist Church in Knoxville, Tennessee, and, after whipping it out of a guitar case, opened fire on parishioners while a group of schoolchildren performed songs up by the altar. Adkisson killed two people and wounded several others.
Adkisson, a 58-year-old unemployed truck driver, brought 70 shotgun shells with him to the church and assumed he'd keep killing until the police arrived on the scene and shot him dead as well. Instead, some members of the congregation were able to wrestle him to the ground and hold him for police.
When investigators went to Adkisson's home in search of a motive, as well as evidence for the pending trial, they found copies of Savage'sLiberalism is a Mental Disorder, Let Freedom Ring by Sean Hannity, and The O'Reilly Factor, by Fox News' Bill O'Reilly. They also came across what was supposed to have been Adkisson's suicide note: a handwritten, four-page manifesto explaining his murderous actions. The one-word answer for his deed? Hate. The three-word answer? He hated liberals.
The only way we can rid ourselves of this evil is kill them in the streets. Kill them where they gather. I'd like to encourage other like minded people to do what I've done. If life aint worth living anymore don't just Kill yourself. Do something for your Country before you go. Go Kill Liberals!
What Adkisson especially hated about liberals ("this cancer, this pestilence") and what he hated about candidate "Osama Hussein Obama" was that they were marching America toward ruin: "Liberals are evil, they embrace the tenets of Karl Marx, they're Marxist, socialist, communists." Adkisson seethed over the way liberals were "trying to turn this country into a communist state" and couldn't comprehend why they would "embrace Marxism."
Sound familiar, Glenn?
John Bohstedt was one of the Unitarian church members who tackled Adkisson after the first round of gunfire went off inside the sanctuary. Two months ago, Adkisson pleaded guilty to the murder charges and was sentenced to life in prison. At the hearing, Bohstedt told the Associated Press he didn't think the killer had been insane, but rather had been manipulated by anti-liberal rhetoric.
"There are a lot of people who hate liberals, and if we stir that around in the pot and on the airwaves, eventually there will be people (like Adkisson) ... who get infected by the violent rhetoric and put it into violent action," Bohstedt said.
He remained worried about future violence: "Do you think there are other Jim Adkissons out there listening to hate speech? I do."
Me too.
Lighten Up With These.
http://kydem.blogspot.com/2009/04/mlb-to-eliminate-chicago-cubs-from.html
I Think Someone Is Trying To Stick An Olive Branch Where It Won’t Fit!
| | | | |
I can’t wait to see what happens when someone gets around to Nancy’s new face and calls her “Stretch Pelosi”. That ought to be a helluva lot of fun.
No comments:
Post a Comment