Via this-on-that, we learn that far-right-wing whackaloons really don’t get this “incitement to commit murder” thing.
Hal Turner… Hal Turner… Oh yeah, the Hal Turner that posted this on Sunday:
…and went on to suggest that another “target” has stepped up to the plate, referring to Dr. LeRoy Carhart, one of the last few doctors who provide late term abortions in the US:
But no doubt Turner is just an “extremist”, not a peace-loving fetus fetishist like Jill Stanek, who wouldn’t dream of doing something as incendiary as posting pictures of doctors and their clinics… err uh what’s that?
Nice license plate shot there… Operation Rescue probably already has this person’s name and address. But not wanting to focus on just one doctor the way they focused on Dr. Tiller, Stanek adds Dr. Warren Hern to the hit list err perfectly harmless “photograph album”:
Oh, what? What’s the problem? No dog whistles there! It’s nothing: just an entire post with pictures of doctors and their clinics, spiced up with provocative language about baby-killing “pro-aborts”. Because heaven knows nobody in Stanek’s spittle-flecked readership might be a fucking nutcase with an urge to make a name for himself by doing something like this. (And should the post go down the memory hole, well, cowardly, pants-pissing, murder-inciting anti-choice bloggers are why Google cache and screenshots were invented.)
(h/t JAB and cache link via little green footballs)
![[Most Recent Quotes from www.kitco.com]](http://www.kitconet.com/charts/metals/silver/tny_ag_en_usoz_2.gif)
![[Most Recent Quotes from www.kitco.com]](http://www.kitconet.com/charts/metals/gold/t24_au_en_usoz_2.gif)
JJ:
I’m genuinely happy that Turner was arrested.
Are there any laws in the US (or Canada) that can be used to prosecute things like what Stanek is doing?
If not, what kind of law would you propose?
I don’t know what the answer is, Scary, but I would hope it wouldn’t be in going all Patriot Act on these people.
I’m not a “law & order” type person — frankly, I’m a bit of an anarchist in that respect, and the thought of rounding up people and prosecuting them for the things they say makes me feel kind of ill.
People have a right to their opinion. Jill Stanek even has a right to post those pictures. It’s the wrong thing to do, and it makes her complicit in fostering the culture of insane hate that produces people like Scott Roeder, but it’s still her right.
I don’t want anyone silenced by state dictate. I want them to realize the damage they’ve done, and continue to do, and I want the majority of rational people out there to do the job of marginalizing them. And I want doctors and clinics protected from the ones who will continue to go on doing the wrong thing, meaning bubble zones and no more clinic protests. (And that is not a free speech issue, since they can protest somewhere else)
That’s Hannity’s pal, “Hal in North Bergen”.
So that sorta tells more about Hannity, too.
Revulsive isn’t it to have persons like them
and just as bad to have listeners to them!
They’re Number 1, They’re Number 1.
In hatred! In hatred! I
BUT–and this is the BIG BUT
JESUS LOVES THEM. OH INDEEDY DO!
So, that’s all right, then?
Zow. The stooopitooode is breath-taking.
“I’m not a “law & order” type person — frankly, I’m a bit of an anarchist in that respect, and the thought of rounding up people and prosecuting them for the things they say makes me feel kind of ill.”
I’m with you on that, JJ. I think everyone really should be free to promulgate their own views and opinions to anyone who wants to listen or read.
I think, too, that those voluntarily made public opinions should be allowed in a court of law if the question of prosecution for contributing to violence is ever prosecuted. Prosecution not for the opinion itself, mind you, but for its contributing factor to a physical crime.
As in, if you say, “kill him,” to one person of another and no killing is done, no crime is committed. But if you say it and someone does kill, the very least that should happen is that you be compelled to explain yourself to a court of law.
Henry II set a precedent. Doesn’t anyone read history?
Great job on expanding the story, JJ. And thanks for the link. I am surprised it went through, Bell has been horrible the last ten days.
“Because heaven knows nobody in Stanek’s spittle-flecked readership might be a fucking nutcase with an urge to make a name for himself by doing something like this.”
That’s exactly the point. These folks spew their venom with hope that some nutjob springs into action. Cowards, all of them.
I went over to Jill’s cesspool to call her out on her bullshit, only to have my comment deleted and be called a troll and a terrorist.
Projection: it’s not just for 24-theater multiplexes anymore!
Wow.
It’s hard to believe, but I agree with you!
I am pro-life (I hear you gagging from here) but I agree that people such as Randall Terry and Bill O’Reilly have a moral duty, but not a legal one, to think twice about inflammatory rhetoric and aggressive tactics.
Same goes for militant Muslims, animal rights activists, etc.
I do think Canada’s criminal law on hate speech draws the appropriate line at “incitement to violence” (i.e. Turner).
Chimera:
Did O’Reilly (or Stanek) ever say “kill him” or anything of the sort?
Seems like the only one that did that is Turner, and now he’s arrested before any violent crime was committed.
Nice try Scary Fundamentalist.
You’ve got the concern troll schtick down pat.
I know that you’re anti-abortion; that’s not the part that makes me gag.
It’s the part where you set the trap It’s hard to believe, but I agree with you! and …. wait for it … snap it shut: Same goes for militant Muslims, animal rights activists, etc.
You forgot to mention radical feminists.
There have been court orders in the US to have what amounted to hit lists removed from the web. (No handy linkies, sorry.)
There should be some recourse when the sheer volume (in both senses) goes over some limit. Call me babybee-murderer once, fine, no bother. But 29 times on national television? Or daily on blogs read by nutters? Daily on hate-radio?
I dunno. I don’t want to see speech curtailed either. But when the whole climate is absolutely poisoned by deliberate whipping-up of the nutters, I’d like the legal system to kick in and shut them up.
Sorry, DeBeauxOs, but I’m relatively new to blogging/commenting and I wouldn’t know a troll from a harp seal.
What part of my stuff is fake concern? You can go to my site and see that I’m concerned myself about what led to Tiller’s murder, about branding a movement by the actions of a few, and about free-speech implications regarding any prosecution of O’Reilly and others.
Yes, I’m an evil, scary religious so-con. I think anyone will guess that from my handle (hence calling me a troll is kinda funny). Maybe you’re just annoyed that I’m not living up to the stereotype – spewing scripture, being abusive, condemning heathens left and right (like good ol’ “godbag” Debra.)
I fully agree with JJ regarding free speech. I express genuine surprise that a so-con and a lefty anarchist can find common ground. I can understand the wisdom of bubble zones (though, ironically, this wouldn’t have made a difference in Tiller’s murder). If we did criminalize what O’Reilly said, then we would also have to go after many Christian and Muslim preachers, animal rights activists, climate change extremists, and many critics of foreign nations.
As far as radical feminists go, I don’t know of any who wantonly accuse others of murder, so I didn’t consider adding them to the list.
“Did O’Reilly (or Stanek) ever say “kill him” or anything of the sort?”
Did I say they did?
Fern:
Honest questions (no trolling)
In your opinion, would it require a domestic murder to occur first before the legal system gets involved? As well, would it only be for individuals who are targeted, or would identifiable groups also be protected?
As well, do you know if these “hit lists” advocated violence?
Scary: I’m not sure what you’re asking. There are laws on stalking, harassment, threatening, libel, slander — all kinds of laws before one gets to murder.
The hit lists published name, addresses, phone numbers, photos and license plate numbers if they had all that info not only on doctors but clinic staff. When one of the targets was killed, a line was drawn through that entry, much like the Hal Turner post above. I think there were some in Olde West ‘most wanted’ sort of format. So, while they might not have come right out and said ‘kill’, it was abundantly clear that that was the intent. So clear that judges were convinced and had them removed.
You google it. I’m pretty sure Operation Rescue and/or Army of God was involved.
Chimera:
Nope. Sorry, your post left me with the impression that you were looking for a way to at least hold O’Reilly (and possibly others) to account for his public slagging of Tiller. Under your proposal, though, nobody from the pro-life movement (including O’Reilly and Stanek and even Randall Terry) would be called into court to explain their actions with regard to Tiller’s murder.
When one of the targets was killed, a line was drawn through that entry, much like the Hal Turner post above.
Chilling.
I guess issues like these hit-lists would have to go in front of a judge on a case-by-case basis, though, because the intent isn’t clearly made. But I agree that some sort of mechanism needs to exist by which these sorts of things (obvious provocations/justifications/glorification of violence) can be dealt with.
For example, a grade-12 here locally posted a hit-list on his Facebook page, which gave the police enough grounds to arrest him and search his house.
I ask whether prior violence associated with a movement is a prerequisite for legal curbing of “sheer volumes” of BS. For example, some trade unions employ much the same tactics, including vandalism and minor assaults, but never (at least recently, to my knowledge) go as far as murder. Should they be held to a similar standard when they verbally eviscerate members of business and government?
SF, I hold O’Reilly and Stanek and Terry and a lot of other name-calling, bully-urging, holier-than-everybody, rabid, foaming, batshit crazy, fascist, misogynist, anthrophobic cretin (good choice with that, JJ — I’m borrowing it) responsible for Tiller’s assassination!
But I’m not the law.
However, the “law” really does need to get up off its well-fed ass and do something about incitement to murder. Because yes, I really do think that O’Reilly — who proudly proclaims his followers, and thereby his influence, in great, big, numbers — ought to be held as accountable for their murderous actions as he wants to claim for their helpful ones, whatever they are. He cannot be allowed to get away with calling his verbal target “Tiller the killer” (which he now tries to deny, but he’s been caught on video and that ain’t workin’ out so good for him) and then claim he had nothing to do with the subsequent actions.
Did he say, “Kill him?” Not in those specific words. Did he say, “Tiller the killer?” Oh, you betcha! Many, many times! Did someone extrapolate his meaning? Someone named Roeder, perhaps? Finding that out, right now. Stay tuned.
Torontonian – The sad thing is that Hannity probably only ever had contact with this Turner asshole because it was good for his ratings. The nutcases thrive on listening to the kind of shit Turner spews, they revel in it. For other listeners it’s like watching a train wreck, who can resist.
Conservatives need to learn that pandering to their lunatic fringe is a bad idea. Not only does it sometimes get people killed, but it ultimately discredits the conservative movement, and rational conservatism is an important part of the greater political dialogue.
fern hill – The Turners of the world are why the term “spittle-flecked” was invented.
Chimera – I always find myself conflicted when it comes down to bringing in the Law and prefer to avoid it if possible, but…
On one hand, there are some people who are very close if not over the legal line of criminal conspiracy in Dr. Tiller’s death… I’m thinking of Operation Rescue… but we won’t know that unless there’s an investigation. There’s no question that OR helped create the climate of demonization that drove Roeder to kill — whether that crosses a legal line, ie. whether they helped create the opportunity, is another thing. If so, they should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law as a criminal organization.
OTOH, people like Stanek are something else. They unquestionably have moral culpability in going all-out to push their lunatic fringe’s buttons to get the right response. But is this illegal, or should it be? Just because some pit bulls kill, it doesn’t mean nobody should be allowed to own pit bulls. But if it can be proved that a dog killed someone because its owner trained it to be vicious (and that’s very much what was going on with a lot of the Tiller propaganda, training) then that person has legal culpability in the death.
However, with anti-choice bloggers, there’s a gray area with regard to malicious intent.
Christian
I’m not sure the malicious intent is that direct. But everyone who disseminates the propaganda, like the kind of thing Turner spews and the ongoing hate campaign against Dr. Tiller, knows on some level that they’re pushing buttons to get a response. Not necessarily the response of actually grabbing a rifle and killing someone, but the kind of emotional/psychological response that could set the stage for such action.
Anti-choicers know their “movement” includes a disproportionate number of nutcases, and they know that spinning them into a rage on a constant basis probably won’t end well. But somehow, the fact that nobody comes right out and says “go shoot this guy” means they aren’t responsible.
JAB
That’s rich — they called you a terrorist?
I hope you weren’t hit by any flying shards of exploding irony.
Not surprising though — that’s a pretty tight little fetus fetishizing community over there, united by brain damage, seething rage and a white-hot hatred for abortion providers.
But totally not complicit in anyone’s untimely demise.
Scary
What’s so hard to believe? I may be vitriolic
but I’m rational.
Scary
Even Operation Rescue (*spit*) hasn’t, to my knowledge, openly advocated killing anyone. (Note the word “openly”.)
Nobody is saying that anyone *openly* advocated for killing Dr. Tiller. What we are saying, that seems to be so hard for people to grasp, is that the culture of virulent hatred fostered by anti-choice extremists with their targeted harassment and propaganda was the perfect petri dish for growing murderous urges in people already close to the edge psychologically.
This is where the culpability lies, in relentlessly pushing the kind of cultural zeitgeist that creates people like Scott Roeder.
fern hill – Oh, I hear ya. That’s what makes freespeechitude so trying at times, that people use theirs to say such stupid and vicious things. Because sometimes, speech does have consequences.
In advertising, you seldom hear the voice over say “Now go and buy this product!” but that’s the message people get, and some of them buy the product as a direct result. The Tiller Campaign lauched by Operation Rescue was as systematic and organized as any ad campaign. It didn’t say “Now go and kill this guy!”, but that’s clearly the message at least one guy got. It remains to be seen if a legal connection can be made. If so, then so be it. There’s a difference between free speech and a calculated campaign of hate.
Scary fundie – The hit list fern hill refers to is known as “The Nuremberg Files”. It was a list of abortion providers put up by OR’s Neal Horsely (*spit*) — they later took it down due to legal problems. I saw it in its original form — each dead doctor had a strikethrough across his name — and it was chilling.
But that’s why they call it “terrorism”.
Here it is with a note at the top about how they had to stop using the list with strikethroughs, now they only list the dead and injured doctors. (I notice they haven’t updated Dr. Tiller’s entry yet.)
Good morrow, all!
Nobody ever had to say, “Somebody out there kill Tiller The Killer!” All they had to say was, “Somebody do something to stop him, if the law refuses to do so.”
Henry II of England did not order the execution of Thomas A Beckett. All he had to say was, “Will nobody rid me of this meddlesome priest!” And the Archbishop of Canterbury was duly asassinated.
Abortion is NOT about morality, or sex, or health or any such thing. It is about control. It is about controlling the lives, and the thoughts, and the actions of women. That is what so-called social conservatives of both genders want. They want women to be subservient to men, not equal. They want anybody who is not male, straight and WASP to shut up and toe their line. These people do not merely bemoan Roe V Wade, they want suffrage ended and the Emancipation Proclamation revoked. The only freedom they value is their own, and they whine, bitch, cry, and wail when ANYBODY disputes their GOD-GIVEN RIGHT to walk all over the rights of anybody NOT JUST LIKE THEM.
Does anybody seriously believe that America was the first country to allow women any say in their social and political lives? Before the above-mentioned Henry II invaded, Ireland had the Brehon Laws. Women were equal to men in all respects. Let me repeat that. Before the militarily-imposed rule of English Common Law, BEFORE THE MAGNA CARTA, in Ireland, women could vote, and stand in political assembly and hold and convey and retain property. In Ireland, women were socially and politically equal to men. Imagine that, if any of you can.
It’s about who controls whom, people. Do not ever deceive yourselves that it is about anything else.
All men are brothers
All women are sisters
All childen are family
All life is precious
The meek shall inherit the Earth
When the violent are done with each other
Peace — if you can only imagine — CTZen
I’m just emerging from my self-imposed exile from Tiller-related internet stuff to say this: no one had to say “Kill Tiller”. There were people standing outside his clinics with signs that said things like “They kill babies here”. WTF else is a nutjob supposed to do except take revenge? Nutjobs are nutjobs, people. We all know what they’re capable of and how much they want to belong/be martyred. For example, see ALL OTHER ABORTION PROVIDER MURDERS.
Sure, none of the “peaceful” pro-lifers pulled the trigger. But they are the reason those of us who work in reproductive health services live in fear. Is that what Jesus would do?
Oh and Scary, just because you don’t know you’re a concern troll doesn’t mean you aren’t one. It’s lovely that you’re genuinely concerned, but maybe you should back off and let those of us that actually care, grieve for a bit, you know?
Thanks for covering all this JJ.
Pedge:
maybe you should back off and let those of us that actually care, grieve for a bit, you know?
What makes you think I’m not grieving too? Why can’t you put off your ideological blinders for a bit and recognize that those not of your stripe are capable of humanity?
Or would you rather I stick to violent rightie websites and get all radical on you?
As I’ve said before, I think that some of you are offended by the thought of a pro-lifer who actually cares about life; it shatters your stereotype.
I don’t know if you’re grieving or not. I do know that you barely waited a day after Tiller’s death before you started poking about on pro-choice sites, concern trolling, trying to assure everyone that you are devastated. What makes you think we care? Why not just be respectful and back off for a bit?
I am not offended by your pro-life sensibilities. I don’t care if you’re pro-life, or about any of your other opinions and ideologies. I care when you bother me.
Since we’re talking about shattering stereotypes, however, I do think you are so far up your own ass trying to show everyone how compassionately socon you are, you have no concept of how people are actually dealing with Tiller’s murder and how little we want to hear from pro-lifers right now – regardless of their feelings on the issue.
Nothing you say is as earth-shatteringly novel as you think it is.
” I think that some of you are offended by the thought of a pro-lifer who actually cares about life…”
No. That’s not it.
We’re (at least I am) not “offended” so much as infuriated by the insistence that the fetus is the only “life” that matters!
When your people understand that if you ever do win the argument that a fetus is a “person with rights,” it must now compete on an equal level with the rights of everyone else involved, including the rights of the woman whose body it must invade and occupy.
Nobody is saying that you can’t give up your body if you want to. But you’re not allowed to speak for anyone else’s body!
Do you grok?
Chimera: Maybe we can discuss another day. As Pedge says, maybe the nerves are a little too raw to be getting into this right now.
Pedge:
you have no concept of how people are actually dealing with Tiller’s murder
Some are dealing with it by cussing, swearing, and hate. I will take your advice and try not to bother those too much. Others (JJ, Dawg) are dealing with it by reasonably discussing what we can do to prevent this sort of thing in the future. Forgive me for thinking that you were one of the latter.
I can understand the “concern troll” reactions, and I hope some of you give me the time to dispel that notion. (there I go again, sounding all concerned – ack! Maybe if I hang around long enough, I can learn some of this vitriol stuff
)
Wiki (from DeBeauxOs): Furthermore, in a group that has become sensitized to trolling — where the rate of deception is high — many honestly naïve questions may be quickly rejected as trollings. This can be quite off-putting to the new user who upon venturing a first posting is immediately bombarded with angry accusations.
Scary:
I’m really angry, heartbroken, and terrified. Maybe in a while I will be able to discuss ways to prevent this from happening again. But right now, especially as someone for whom anti-abortion violence is a real threat, I can’t see straight enough to talk about it with the other grown-ups.
Maybe it’s not your intention, but your multiple comments in multiple blogs about Tiller feel less like pro-life insight and more like some asshole poking at fresh wounds.
Just so you know.
Sorry for the derailment, JJ. This is exactly why I exiled myself…
Will try to be more considerate in the future, Pedge. (Concern! Dang!)
I found your remarks of feeling threatened and intimidated to be very compelling. IMHO, protest tactics that produce this kind of fear in people like you is incompatible with the core values of both pro-life and Christianity.
“IMHO, protest tactics that produce this kind of fear in people like you is incompatible with the core values of both pro-life and Christianity.”
Then why do they do it? And with such gleeful enthusiasm?
Is it because they’re firmly convinced that even though they step outside the boundaries their god has drawn for them, they “know” it will “forgive” them their “sins” as long as they “repent” afterwards?
Shit, at least with suicide bombers, they blow themselves up at the same time and are gone forever, never to commmit the same crime again. But these fundies, dammit, are like goddam jacks-in-the-box, spring-loaded and hiding in ambush, just waiting for someone minding his own business to brush past the trigger that launches them.
A.S. Neill said something that amounted to, “I’d rather see a child (and adult, by implication) who swears and treats people decently than a child who never swears and does not treat people decently.”
Another thing. When someone who respects others is asked to back off, they simply do so. Without further ado.
Might I suggest a different course of action…?
So far the pro-life battle appears to be one sided. Pro-lifers stalk, insult, throw acid, shout obscenities, maim and kill abortion providers and their staff. I lived in Boston when Salvi blew away the receptionist at PP. (I was an EMT on standby in Cambridge that day.) They do all the damage and the law does little to stop it, only arriving to clean up the mess. I suggest we use their own tactics against them.
Terrorism operates on the premise of fear. They have already labeled their target as “killers” so is it such a stretch to challenge them in the way they have challenged providers? Start small. Show the residences of every pro life leader on the web, addresses and phone numbers, license plates and vehicle descriptions. Make sure their family knows they are being watched, tracked and observed. Exploit gaps in their personal security to undermine their sense of safety. Little calling cards left in places they feel secure, like their car, that say “If this had been a bomb you would be dead now.”
Once you undermine their security you go after their message, basically that they have chosen to decide how YOU should live your life, by their rules at their bidding. List other leaders who have chosen to dictate how people should live, or not live, at their own discretion, such as Stalin, Pol Pot, Idi Amin and Charles Taylor. Point out how their efforts mirror muslim extremism, a religious based decision to kill people who don’t agree with your brand of faith.
After three weeks of such branding ads should start showing the carnage caused by these extremists, clinic bombings, injury photos, autopsy photos, all with the staying caption of “This is Pro-Life?”. If you have managed to get to this point you might be ready to go the rest of the way. List them as sponsors of terrorism against Americans, protected by Christian Right wingers in Congress, who will never see justice for the crimes they have encouraged others to do. All Pro Choicers are just killers in their eyes anyways, living up to the label might not be such a stretch for a few misguided, maladjusted women who have been abused by the protesters.
The Pro-Life movement claims the moral high ground. Dig it out from beneath them and then bury them with it. I am sure Jill Stanek would love to have her address at home, her kids names and ages, what school they go to, her license plate and vehicle description, her place of employment, her husbands place of employment and vital statistics listed on a pro-choice website. Reporters checking around her garbage looking for signs of drug use, child abuse or sexual deviancy.
I do not believe you fight tyranny with gentlemens’s rules. But this is just my opinion.
Soldier
Sorry, Soldier. The ads idea has merit, but I don’t cotton to stooping to the “pro-life” movement’s darker tactics.
“He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you.”
- Friedrich Nietzche, Beyond Good and Evil, Aphorism 146
Soldier: It wouldn’t work. Sure, the harassment and stalking would be annoying, but because our side has very few actual murderous nutters to actually complete the terrorism with, you know, actual violence, it wouldn’t be actual terrorism. Maybe annoyism.
Soldier – I appreciate your sentiments, but as the other commenters pointed out, counter-attacks wouldn’t work for a number of reasons.
The pro-choice side lacks the irrational zealotry (esp. religiously-motivated) that fuels anti-abortion violence. We believe in the cause of women’s reproductive liberty, but I doubt that many of us feel it’s a “mission from God” or some other kind of whacked-out “higher calling”. It’s a rational issue of a woman’s right to bodily autonomy — one either owns their body or they don’t, it’s that simple.
Without the zealotry, we also lack the obsessiveness that it takes to engage in intimidation tactics like stalking people, publishing names & addresses etc. Also, to me, this is an invasion of privacy of the highest order — no matter who it’s being done to and for what reason — that I personally abhor and am not willing to perpetuate.
I am all for defensive tactics though, and I sincerely hope that one of these creeps is shot to death in the commission of their next terrorist act. If Dr.Tiller had had a body guard, this would have happened to Roeder as soon as he pulled his gun.
I also think a lot of these anti-abortion groups need to be seriously investigated by the FBI, starting with Operation Rescue but also American Right to Life and others. They’ve been allowed to carry on with harassment and intimidation tactics against doctors who offer a LEGAL medical procedure for far too long.
pedgehog – I thought of you when I first heard about this. I don’t blame you at all for “exiling” yourself — as outrageous and heartbreaking as this is for all of us in the pro-choice community, those on the front lines at clinics have to be the most shook up, angry, terrified and heartsick. That’s what it was meant to do — send a message. To doctors, clinic staff, escorts, the message is clear. The fact that the clinic is now closed for good sends an even worse message (although nobody can blame the Tiller family after the years of HELL anti-choicers have put them through).
This is still a pretty raw wound. But when the healing is a little further along, Dr.Tiller’s legacy should be that we stand up to this intimidation and terrorism as bravely as he did.
And hey — thanks for all you do.
Actually, I really like what Soldier has to say!
And I think it may be worth a try.
“I do not believe you fight tyranny with gentlemens’s rules.”
Exactly!
JAB, I don’t live my life by quotes from other people, however interesting they may be. They are not me, and their experiences are not mine. Why, then, would I try to fit myself into their patterns? I’d look at that quote this way: If Nietzche’s abyss dares to gaze into me, I punch it in its eye!
Fern Hill: Annoyism works.
JJ: Yes, we pro choicers lack all the earmarks of zealotry except for one: our individual rights to CHOICE. Our downfall in this is that often we don’t act as a group because we’re all individuals and resist the group-think, lock-step, rank-and-file organization type movement, complete with spokesindividuals and head-bobbers. Trying to gather us all under one umbrella is like herding cats and feeding them carrots.
But that may actually work in our favor. Guerilla tactics as opposed to uniform tactics. Unpredicatable and ubiquitous. The enemy would never know where to look next. Or when. Keep them really off balance!
And I don’t think it breaches anyone’s privacy to publish their names and addresses and license numbers. That’s all public information, not stalking.
Anyhow, I think it’s worth some further thought. Thanks, Soldier!
I thank you folks for the comments.
In light of today’s shooting at the Holocaust Museum it would appear the religious zealots are quite willing to commit suicide attacks to accomplish their agenda. An 88 year old man walks into a heavily protected building in our nations capitol, opens fire knowing he most likely will be shot and killed. How much longer before they break out the semtex and a hunting vest?
Law Enforcement does need to get their head out of the sand about these people. If not, they should allow us to defend liberty, which is what they really are challenging. Your right to be free to live unmolested by other peoples ideas, philosophies and beliefs. I, myself, am a Christian. While Jesus would have us turn the other cheek it is kind of hard to do when your face has been taken off with a shotgun. At some point the PEOPLE must choose to stand and fight if their enforcers of laws and liberty refuse or are incapable. A fine example is what is happening in Northwest Pakistan. Fed up with government inaction and corrupt judges they have gone out and driven the Taliban back into the hills. They chose to fight the tyranny imposed on them.
Tyranny only requires good people to do nothing in order to succeed. While the methods I have laid out are similar to those of the Pro-Lifers, despite the lack of religious fervor, the motivation is just as important and imperative…the right to live free of fear.
They live free of fear because the ProChoice movement allows them to. Abortion providers, as well as many other groups of people that get blacklisted by Army of God, live in fear. People live in fear until they choose not to.
So the question remains…How long do you wish to live in fear? How long are you willing to fight terrorists with Gentlemen’s rules? What is it going to take before someone finally fires back?
Soldier