Enviro-kook takes hostages at Discovery Channel HQ

[Archangel M]

I have never heard anyone call for armed insurrection. As a matter of fact I have heard some of those guys explicitly state that any action has to be non-violent. And I think that rhetoric from each side can have an influence on people that are "influence-able"..always has always will. Do we limit any "sides" freedom of speech because of what some nuts may do?

I dont think that the "enviro doomsday" types in the media should be suppressed. Not at all. However, look at how willing politicians are to bring legislation for "media fairness" as long as its aimed at conservative media. Should that be supported? Yet the influence of other "more left" media favorites is to be ignored?

 

[Archangel M]

usually, yes...or really, really gullable.

Hmmm. Some people would argue that they were simply radicalized by extremist politics. But to say "no they are not necessarily crazy" would open to door to saying "well why couldn't Lee have been radicalized?"

 

[Big Don]

usually, yes...or really, really gullable.

If either is the case, wouldn't that make the people encouraging them to acts of violent death be especially despicable?

 

[WC_lun]

If either is the case, wouldn't that make the people encouraging them to acts of violent death be especially despicable?

Absolutely. I think the guys behind training the suicide bombers are much worse than the bombers themselves...not that I have much sympathy for the bombers. Believing something enough to sacrifice your own life may not be a bad thing...maybe. However, if someone is selling you something and telling you that killing innocents is the way to achieve it...that has all kinds of wrong to it.

 

[chrispillertkd]

usually, yes...or really, really gullable.

No, they just believe that they are following the dictates of Jihad by blowing themselves and others up. Just because they engage in evil behavior it doesn't mean they are, therefore, mentally ill. There is a difference.

Pax,

Chris

 

[chrispillertkd]

Nope, these are taken from Fox news I have seen.

Could you put up a link to the video of this. I'd be very interested in seeing it so I can write FOX News and tell them they are being irresponsible for putting this kind of thing on the air.

Pax,

Chris

 

[WC_lun]

Could you put up a link to the video of this. I'd be very interested in seeing it so I can write FOX News and tell them they are being irresponsible for putting this kind of thing on the air.

Pax,

Chris

No. I'm not looking through Fox programs to prove to you it is there. If I did you would just make an excuse for it, anyway. The stuff has been said. It is there if you want to find it. Probably the easiest to find will be the stuff on Dr Tiller, since it was also brought up after Dr Tiller's death.

 

[chrispillertkd]

No. I'm not looking through Fox programs to prove to you it is there. If I did you would just make an excuse for it, anyway.

On the contrary, if you put up a link showing the comment(s) I'd e-mail FOX News as soon as I saw it and give them a piece of my mind.

Pax,

Chris

 

[Archangel M]

I saw Al Franken kill a puppy once on CNN.

 

[Big Don]

I saw Al Franken kill a puppy once on CNN.

I missed that episode, but, Randi Rhodes DID "Joke"about killing the President of the United States... But, that wouldn't encourage nuts...
In hindsight, it is probably a good thing no one listened to Air America...

 

[5-0 Kenpo]

No. I'm not looking through Fox programs to prove to you it is there. If I did you would just make an excuse for it, anyway. The stuff has been said. It is there if you want to find it. Probably the easiest to find will be the stuff on Dr Tiller, since it was also brought up after Dr Tiller's death.

Weak.

 

[5-0 Kenpo]

From Salon.com:

This is where O'Reilly's campaign against George Tiller becomes dangerous. While he never advocated anything violent or illegal, the Fox bully repeatedly portrayed the doctor as a murderer on the loose, allowed to do whatever he wanted by corrupt and decadent authorities.

Even those sites that are virulently left-wing can't point to any statement made by Bill O'Reilly that would be advocating killing Docter Tiller.

But alot of sites say that he and other conservative hosts are "complicite", or shoulder some responsibility for his death.

Quite frankly, WC, your position on this is blatently partisan, and downright hypocritical. You blame people here for talking about this incident being perpetrated based on someone's radical environmentalist views (rather then a mental illness), but then do exactly that when talking about Dr. Tillman's death.

 

[Sukerkin]

blatently partisan

That's the root cause of far too many endless circular arguments in this section of the board (and around the world).

Once people engage their default religious or political 'axes' to the grinding wheel of their favourite 'sacred cow' all semblance of rational intelligence vapourises.

Debate is supposed to be the exchange of views for the enlightenment of all. It sadly fails to aspire to that on most occasions.

Speaking to this thread in particular, I have said all that I am going to say but I am saddened that it has been twisted into yet another Left vs Right anger fest.

I thank the gods I stepped down from being a Moderator but, with my Mentor hat on, I do think that perhaps what posts are added to this pile should more closely address the original topic rather than the tangent that has been developed.

 

[5-0 Kenpo]

That's the root cause of far too many endless circular arguments in this section of the board (and around the world).

Once people engage their default religious or political 'axes' to the grinding wheel of their favourite 'sacred cow' all semblance of rational intelligence vapourises.

Debate is supposed to be the exchange of views for the enlightenment of all. It sadly fails to aspire to that on most occasions.

Speaking to this thread in particular, I have said all that I am going to say but I am saddened that it has been twisted into yet another Left vs Right anger fest.

I agree. It's why I try to limit the amount of time that I come here. I think few people are interested in rational discourse.

I don't mind things being controversial or even a bit heated. But I would hope that people could be intellectually honest.

As for the last part of your statement, it was obvious what it was going to be from the beginning. And it was intended to be a left vs. right thread.

 

[Tez3]

I agree. It's why I try to limit the amount of time that I come here. I think few people are interested in rational discourse.

I don't mind things being controversial or even a bit heated. But I would hope that people could be intellectually honest.

As for the last part of your statement, it was obvious what it was going to be from the beginning. And it was intended to be a left vs. right thread.

Why? Why does everything have to be left v right? Do you have no middle ground then in America, only hatred of each other? Is everything to be seen only through your own political viewpoint? it's almost rabid this arguing, the only thing I've seen comparable to this is the Sectarian divide in Northern Ireland.

 

[girlbug2]

Tez we need to be polarized, it keeps us from looking at the real problems facing our country.

 

[Cryozombie]

Once upon a time there were leftist organizations that tried to accent thier point with violence and violent imagery. It wasn't right then and it isn't right now, when the right is doing it.

Once upon a time? No. Both sides are there now. The Yippies are still alive and kicking. So are other radical Leftist groups. We can't really pretend they only happened in the past.

Lets call it what it is... Radical Politics. Doesn't matter which side.

 

[Archangel M]

Bemoaning polarization does nothing about the underlying fact.

 

[WC_lun]

Once upon a time? No. Both sides are there now. The Yippies are still alive and kicking. So are other radical Leftist groups. We can't really pretend they only happened in the past.

Lets call it what it is... Radical Politics. Doesn't matter which side.

What leftist side now advocates violence or incendary speach as part of thier politics? What main stream progressive does this?

 

[Cryozombie]

What "leftist side?". I think Im misunderstanding you. Cuz my answer would be, the one to the left.

I didnt say mainstream, I said Leftist. Not all leftists are mainstream, and not everyone on the Right are either. But you need to attend some "Peace Rallies" in DC if you think none of the leftist groups are advocating Violence.

I've personally witnessed large groups of Socialists and left wing anarchists trying to incite violence at these rallies... or should I suppose those guys in their homemade riot gear with their riot shields cut from 50 gallon steel drums egging on the cops back in 08 weren't trying to incite anything, just there to pass out flowers and peace and love?