Bob,

Here is the point:

> The media slavishly pushed war propaganda in Bush's first term, but they will
prove even more sycophantic of Obama. Fair-weather left-liberals who often
criticize the most violent side of the Republican state look the other way as
their leader jails people without trial, builds civilian surveillance systems,
and kills innocents.<

As I think I've shown over many years of posting here and elsewhere, I am 
opposed to the police state whether coming from left or right.

I get criticisms of posts which skew right, and likewise those that skew left.
Must be doing something right.

Take the point of the post, and ignore the particular political stream from 
which its author adheres.

You can assume that your points made below are understood by me and everyone 
else on this particular list.


Norgesen

-=======

Re: The Waco Butchers Are Back 


I didn't know that Lon Horiuchi of Ruby Ridge and Waco was a left-liberal
Democrat. Waco's Janet Reno was a Bushie from Florida, corresponding to JFK
admin traitor Boneser McGeorge Bundy leveraging the pre-planned Bay of Pigs
failure by calling off air support. Waco, Bay of Pigs, and recently Hugo Chavez
of Venezuela kept a short rein on his military and prevented a Waco during
rightwing protests over a TV station. Later in the Clinton admin Reno refrained
from making another Waco slaughter ought of another rightwing cult standoff.

For that matter, Mena and the Arkansas Train Deaths and Casualties of Bill were
more about Bush than Clinton, and Lon Horiuchi was at Ruby Ridge shooting more
civilians. Waco was not about liberal gun-control. It was a Bay of Pigs, first
JFK assassination by Skull and Bones. October Surprise, Waco, WTCbomb, Enron,
911, anthrax 2001 and Mena anthrax mailing to Arkansas state police investigator
Russell Welch, both anthrax mailing incidents by CIA and the rightwing Bushies.
The newtist colony is talking about wiping out an American city this time, like
Hurricane Katrina but worse. Don't make it easy for the American terror lords!

-Bob

--- In [email protected], "norgesen" <norge...@...> wrote:
>
> The Waco Butchers Are Back
>
> By Anthony Gregory
>
> 04-19-2009
>
> Sixteen years ago we were reminded of the deadly danger of having the
left-liberals in charge of the police state. The largest massacre of American
civilians by the US government since Wounded Knee climaxed on April 19, 1993.
>
>
>
> The siege that had begun on February 28 with a botched ATF publicity stunt
ended when the Branch Davidian church and home went up in flames, after an
FBI-operated tank on lease from the military was driven through the building,
pumping flammable CS gas for six hours into the place where women and children
were cowering in fear. Chemistry professor George Uhlig later testified that the
high concentration of the gas combined with poor ventilation subjected the women
and children to conditions "similar to… the gas chambers used by the Nazis in
Auschwitz."
>
> On April 12, the FBI had ruled out using gas because it was dangerous to
children. A week later, Bob Ricks, FBI Assistant Special Agent in Charge, said
the gassing was "to make their environment as uncomfortable as possible until
they do exit the compound." This excuse came after weeks of throwing flash-bang
grenades at the building when people tried to leave.
>
> Attorney General Janet Reno said the gas attack "was not meant to be D-Day.
This was just a step forward in trying to bring about a peaceful resolution by
constantly exerting further pressure to shrink the perimeter." This militaristic
lingo was characteristic of the feds' approach throughout the siege. The
government had waged psychological warfare by blaring obnoxious music, shining
glaring lights and cutting the Davidians off water, electricity, their friends,
attorneys and the press. Firefighters were not permitted near the scene as the
flames continued engulfing the home. When it was all over, the ATF stuck its
flag up on the building to declare victory.
>
> At a press conference on April 20, a day after the FBI gassed American
civilians, President Clinton said he did not believe "the Attorney General
should resign because some religious fanatics murdered themselves." The press
corps, in an unusually naked expression of solidarity with the government,
applauded Clinton's statement.
>
> This underscores the dynamic of having this crop in power. If even the
liberals are for a show of force, it must have been necessary. The blame was put
on the "religious fanatics," not the government fanatics, and the press and most
Americans ate it all up.
>
> The media slavishly pushed war propaganda in Bush's first term, but they will
prove even more sycophantic of Obama. Fair-weather left-liberals who often
criticize the most violent side of the Republican state look the other way as
their leader jails people without trial, builds civilian surveillance systems,
and kills innocents.
>
> Over the last eight years, muckraking liberal journalists dissected every word
and deed of the Bush regime, but under Clinton very few were bothered about the
unambiguously atrocious nature of the federal raid at Waco. They did not care
that Lon Horiuchi, the sniper who murdered Vicki Weaver at Ruby Ridge in August
1992, had been brought to Waco. They were not jumping up and down about Janet
Reno using internationally banned chemical warfare on American children. They
did not condemn the FBI for using explosives in addition to flammable gas and
then lying about it. They were not concerned what it meant for the
militarization of law enforcement, and did not ask why David Koresh, who had
befriended federal agents, was friendly with local law enforcement, and had
opened the Davidian home up for inspection, was simply not arrested when he was
jogging or visiting the bar. The liberals did not wonder why the excuse for the
raid shifted from a meth lab to illegal gun ownership to child abuse. They
assumed that, as much as the government might have messed up the raid, the fault
was primarily that of the victims. The fact that the Davidians were different
and armed – though no more armed than the average Texan – was enough to dismiss
their suffering and excuse the death of 80 Americans, many of them children, at
the hands of law enforcement.
>
> Many mainstream conservatives also backed the administration after Waco, but
the weak reaction by the left-liberals, who Americans rely on as the outspoken
critics of police abuses, was more important. Incidentally, many libertarians,
broadly defined, also took the government's side. Notably, Objectivist Leonard
Peikoff of the Ayn Rand Institute defended the state's raid and demonized the
victims.
>
> When Democratic administrations murder, the law-and-order right is often
split. The left is in denial or supportive. And the press tends to spin the
story to make the administration seem soft.
>
> The headlines today emphasize Obama's rhetorical shift from the "war on
terror" and his superficial changes in detention policy. The media push the
notion that Obama has cut military spending, when he is doing the opposite.
>
> Moreover, the continuity between the Clinton and Obama administrations is not
encouraging. We have Hillary, who cheered on the belligerent foreign policy of
her husband, the bomber of Belgrade, now in charge of State. We have a Justice
Department even more committed to sovereign immunity than the last
administration and headed up by Janet Reno's Deputy Attorney General Eric
Holder.
>
> Then there is the group the Democrats love to demonize: "Rightwing
extremists." Clinton built a proto-Bushian police state around fear of militias.
We saw a major blow to federal habeas corpus, which liberals claim to love, when
the Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act passed in 1996, in response
to Oklahoma City and the supposed epidemic of rightwing militias. When John
Ashcroft was being confirmed as Attorney General, his very suggestion that the
U.S. government could become "tyrannical" was mocked as ridiculous and extremist
by Ted Kennedy and liberals nationwide.
>
> Today, we're seeing a return of anti-militia hysteria. Just as the federal
government and its liberal defenders throughout the 1990s conflated patriotic
Americans and peaceful separatists with dangerous "hate" groups and Rush
Limbaugh's listeners with Timothy McVeigh, we have the same kind of culture-war
nonsense today.
>
> The Department of Homeland Security recently circulated a report that warns
against the "Rise in Right-Wing Extremism." The document is apparently
unclassified but nevertheless indicates it is "not to be released to the public,
the media" or others who do not "need to know." The libertarian Judge Andrew
Napolitano, who has roundly criticized the tyrannical usurpations of both
Republicans and Democrats, writes:
>
> The thrust of this report is that in the present environment of economic
instability, returning military veterans, those who fear of the loss of Second
Amendment-protected rights, those threatened by an African-American president,
and those who fear "Jewish `financial elites'" could all be a fertile breeding
ground for groups whose power and ideas the government hates and fears. The
document is essentially a warning for DHS and FBI officials to be on the
look-out for rootless persons looking for the comfort of groups as they may be a
danger to American security.
>
> The summary (unclassified) document is terrifying. One can only imagine what
is contained in the classified version. This document runs directly counter to
numerous U.S. Supreme decisions prohibiting the government from engaging in any
activities that could serve to chill the exercise of expressive liberties.
Liberties are chilled, in constitutional parlance, when people are afraid to
express themselves for fear of government omnipresence, monitoring, or
reprisals. The document also informs the reader that Big Brother is watching
both public and private behavior.
>
> Do you oppose the Federal Reserve? Support states rights? Hate the income tax?
Support the right to bear arms? Know the Constitution better than our rulers?
You are a likely suspect of a hate crime. You are in the same class as violent
racists and terrorists.
>
> With the upsurge in gun and ammo purchases and the mysterious rise in mass
shootings, we can expect more efforts to lump violent agitators together with
normal Americans who simply wish to defend themselves and their families. With
growing resentment about Washington's saddling future generations with debt,
there will be more attempts to characterize Americans who hate paying ransom to
a distant government with people who hate their country or want conflict. With
the neglected veterans of Bush's wars having trouble readjusting to society or
simply dissatisfied with the increasingly socialistic country they come home to
after being told they were defending freedom, we will see this tragedy caused by
the federal government disgustingly twisted into a way to bolster that
government.
>
> Many Republicans are making a big stink about the DHS report, but others have
pointed out that the administration has also warned about "left-wing extremists"
and so it is no big deal. Most grassroots conservatives are rightly outraged,
although they do not see the continuity from the Bush era. As I warned them on
LRC precisely four years ago:
>
> Conservatives today might be able to wrap themselves in the flag and condemn
dissidents as traitors, but before they know it, another Clinton might come to
power and they'll be the ones again accused of assisting the enemy by opposing
the State. They might come, once again, to see the difference between love of
country and love of the government, only it might be too late to bask in the
distinction, thanks to the anti-dissident political atmosphere they are helping
right now to create. Today's leftists, it is to be hoped, will remember the
feeling of being branded a traitor, should a Democrat be in power during the
next national crisis or war.
>
> The next national crisis has come and the left has for the most part not
learned its lessons. Now that their guy is in power, we are back to the peculiar
political dynamic of the 1990s, when the left-liberal police state conducted
atrocities and dissent was thin.
>
> Of course in reality, the policies are bipartisan. Ruby Ridge happened and
Waco was planned under Republicans, and Waco was whitewashed by the Republican
Danforth Report. The Homeland Security Department and the Fusion Centers going
after rightwing militia were begun in the Bush era. Under Bush the Violent
Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act, which targeted many of
the same groups today targeted by Obama, won the support of the overwhelming
majority of Republican Congressmen. But what changes most is the way the public
reacts to state violence, and with left-liberals at the throne police brutality
and massacres tend to be more tolerated by the mainstream. It is somehow
politically correct when a Democratic administration cracks down on the most
marginalized people in society.
>
> Meanwhile, the Obama regime is raiding medical marijuana clinics in violation
of the spirit of campaign promises, continuing most dictatorial Bush terror
policies, and scheming new ways to censor and control us. They want to take over
the internet. They are contemplating more citizen disarmament, a move toward
national service and more cradle-to-grave welfarism. By casting "rightwing
extremists" as the Other, they can use this domestic bogeyman to expand upon the
tools of oppression Bush constructed in the name of fighting the foreign
bogeyman. It will aggravate the culture war and cause social division, but we
must remember it is the state that is doing this dividing.
>
> Obama has already killed a lot of foreigners. He has already broken key
promises on civil liberties and transparency. He has already looted enough for
five years of profligate spending. Let us hope his team does not react to
"rightwing extremists" the way Clinton's did at Waco. They would get away with
it.
>
> http://www.lewrockwell.com/gregory/gregory186.html
>
>
http://www.noonehastodietomorrow.com:80//index.php?option=com_content&task=view&\
id=1039&Itemid=27

Reply via email to