US Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords Shot, Six Die

[bobbin]

Having seen his youtube channel I don't really think he was influenced by the Palin/Teabagger rhetoric.
He doesn't make any sense and goes on about "new currency" and "grammar", it doesn''t look like someone with a specific hate for the Democrats, he say some vaguely anti government things but they seem to be about government in general.

[naut]

Having seen his youtube channel I don't really think he was influenced by the Palin/Teabagger rhetoric.
He doesn't make any sense and goes on about "new currency" and "grammar", it doesn''t look like someone with a specific hate for the Democrats, he say some vaguely anti government things but they seem to be about government in general.

Hmm. Seems he's a nutjob who attacked his local "government official". So to a degree I'd have to agree.

[Louis VI the Fat]

He doesn't make any sense and goes on about "new currency" and "grammar", it doesn''t look like someone with a specific hate for the Democrats, he say some vaguely anti government things but they seem to be about government in general.

'New Currency' drivel seems to be a thingy from the more obscure wings of the Tea Party movement.

Command Centre 'For God and Country': http://teapartyvets.ning.com/forum/topics/not-just-if-but-when-our



The shooter is not a Tea Party activist per se. No more than an Islamic terrorist is an Islamic theologist per se. It is about inspiration, about inflammatory rhetoric, about an extremist climate, about delusions of martydom and revenge. When you are repeatedly told in an agitated tone that some people are pigs/socialists responsible for the destruction of your way of life, that they ought to be stopped by violent means, then invariably some loser without a life will take it all literally and seek his revenge.

Also, what is it with young suicidal men? If you are a loser just do the honourable thing and jump in front of a train, alright? You are not any less of a loser by killing others as you go down.

[Beskar]

Wouldn't have happened if it weren't for those pesky guns!

[PanzerJaeger]

The shooter is not a Tea Party activist per se.

Really? That's not at all how your opening post spun it. You could have fooled me with that graphic of Sarah with an AR. It made it seem like, ya know, there was a direct connection between the two.

Is there any evidence, any at all, that suggests the shooter was motivated in any way by Sarah Palin's website?

High school classmates just expressed shock to the Star. One woman who said she went to high school with him, and was his friend and bandmate, Caitie Parker, recalled him as "left wing, quite liberal. & oddly obsessed with the 2012 prophecy."

[Louis VI the Fat]

Really? That's not at all how your opening post spun it. You could have fooled me with that graphic of Sarah with an AR. It made it seem like, ya know, there was a direct connection between the two.

Is there any evidence, any at all, that suggests the shooter was motivated in any way by Sarah Palin's website?

The shooter was a liberal as a juvenile. As an adult he radicalised to become an anti-government extremist. Why don't you moderates speak out against this extremism instead?

Not every Islamic suicide bomber needs to have steeped out of a mosque five minutes earlier, or even be a pious man. Nor does every extreme anti-governement nutter need to be a paying member of some Tea Party club or Rocky Mountain militia.

In the 1960s/70s the west was plagued by leftist terrorism. This existed in an atmosphere of Communist agitation, of constant questioning of the validity of the capitalist sytem. In the past fifteen years, in America, terrorism has been inspired by the extreme right and by anti-government agitation.


Giffords has been under serious threat ever since the Teas Party started its campaign of extremist anti-government agitation. As have been many other politicians. If one takes half of what is shouted by the Tea Party seriously, then it would be the duty of every American to rise up in arms against his government. Fortunately, most people do not take it seriously. But it only is a matter of time before some unhinged nutter does think it is all for real.

The shocking shooting of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords has Washington and the nation reeling, but the threat of violence is nothing new to the rising young star of the Arizona delegation. The Arizona representative was among several members of Congress whose vote in favor of Obama's health care legislation sparked vandalism and threats by opponents of the bill.

Just a few hours after legislators - including Giffords - voted to approve Obama's controversial health care bill in March 2009, the front door of Giffords' office in Tuscon was smashed in by vandals.
Last August, Giffords aides called the police after a man dropped a gun at a similar town hall style event at a Safeway.

She was among at least 10 congressional Democrats who expressed concern about their personal security in the face of anonymous threats after voting in support of the health bill.

[PanzerJaeger]

Not every Islamic suicide bomber needs to have steeped out of a mosque five minutes earlier, or even be a pious man. Nor does every extreme anti-governement nutter need to be a paying member of some Tea Party club or Rocky Mountain militia.

Actually most (all) Islamic terrorists make their faith a large part of their identity, which leads us back to the my original question. Is there any evidence that Sarah Palin had anything to do with the motivation behind this shooting? It has been over 24 hours now and the shooter was active on the internet; certainly something would have emerged.

And if you think about it, such a motive makes little sense. The election has already been held, the Republicans won big, and the congresswoman was rebuked. If the shooter was a Tea Partier, he is very late to the party.

What is really disgusting about this incident (apart from the actual shooting) has been how quickly the Left has jumped to use it in an attempt to validate their rhetoric about the Tea Party. As in this thread, feigned sympathy for the victims masking cheap political point scoring.

[Louis VI the Fat]

What is really disgusting about this incident (apart from the actual shooting) has been how quickly the Left has jumped to use it in an attempt to validate their rhetoric about the Tea Party. As in this thread, feigned sympathy for the victims masked cheap political point scoring.

Genuine outrage, PJ.

The Backroom lacks a search function. I would like to link here to the 'Obama' thread(?), where Banquo and I repeatedly and to some lenght shared our sentiment that we thought that a great many things openly said in US politics are tantamount to treason and sedition.


Political climate is important. It can kill people.

Which begs the question: 'If that is so, silly Louis, then how come all those millions of armed and apparantly easily excitable Tea Party'ers do not kill, save for one (two?) lunatic?'
Well, that is because the link is not that causal. One is not turned from a sane, law-abiding citizen into a murderer by a few Palin bumper stickers. The killer did not decide on his act after careful political delibiration. I think that this man could just as easily have gone on a shooting rampage on his college. It is not the political climate that made him mental, it is what made him chose a political target. And perhaps, just maybe, gave him that final bit of assurance he needed to self-justify his act.

Why are gays and blacks beaten up in the Moscow underground, but not in the Paris and London ones? Is it owing to individual tastes? Or should one look at broader sociological context, regard it in the context of homophobia and racism, a culture of hate? Why do desperate lonely man commit suicide in Japan, but go on a killing spree in the West? And why do women never do sthis stuff? It is all not a matter of individuals, but of sociological phenomena.

[Lemur]

The Congresswoman sounds like a very sane, very levelheaded person. A loss to our country.

[Ronin]

Genuine outrage, PJ.

The Backroom lacks a search function. I would like to link here to the 'Obama' thread(?), where Banquo and I repeatedly and to some lenght shared our sentiment that we thought that a great many things openly said in US politics are tantamount to treason and sedition.


Political climate is important. It can kill people.

Which begs the question: 'If that is so, silly Louis, then how come all those millions of armed and apparantly easily excitable Tea Party'ers do not kill, save for one (two?) lunatic?'
Well, that is because the link is not that causal. One is not turned from a sane, law-abiding citizen into a murderer by a few Palin bumper stickers. The killer did not decide on his act after careful political delibiration. I think that this man could just as easily have gone on a shooting rampage on his college. It is not the political climate that made him mental, it is what made him chose a political target. And perhaps, just maybe, gave him that final bit of assurance he needed to self-justify his act.

Why are gays and blacks beaten up in the Moscow underground, but not in the Paris and London ones? Is it owing to individual tastes? Or should one look at broader sociological context, regard it in the context of homophobia and racism, a culture of hate? Why do desperate lonely man commit suicide in Japan, but go on a killing spree in the West? And why do women never do sthis stuff? It is all not a matter of individuals, but of sociological phenomena.

QFT.