errrr..McVeigh was not RW?

[Sheepshank]

During an on-line discussion, one poster was drawing the inevitable analogy of todays RW fundie-extremists with Timothy MvVeigh. RW poster says there's no evidence and therefore no truth to the urbanlegends that McVeigh was RW, or even any sort of religious nut. Yikes, jumping on the bandwagon of re-writing history----or not?

[Webster Green]

1. They're claiming Hitler was a liberal.

And people are no doubt buying into it. :crazy:

[SDuderstadt]

2. It's a stupid game RWers play all the time....

they failed history class.

[MUAD_DIB]

7. And English 101.

[Ohio Joe]

99. Unfortunately, it is not a game

They do it with deadly seriousness. They lie, and do it with a straight face. They re-write history on a regular basis and figure if they keep repeating it people will believe them... regrettably it works all to often.

[MUAD_DIB]

5. Right, they claim Hitler was a liberal because...

he led a party called the National Socialist German Workers Party. ...Socialists.

They claim Hitler was a liberal because the name "Socialist" appeared in the party that he led.


Brain donor does not begin to describe how stupid these right wingers really are.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

39. My standard response to such idiots:

- Well, then North Korea is democratic. Hey, it's in the name!

[NoPasaran]

47. But that only leads to Obama = Kim Jong Il

Or as Sarah Palin would say, Obama = Kim Jong the Second.

[leftynyc]

56. And the republican guard in Iraq

was obviously a right wing group.

[Iggo]

68. It's right there in the name!!!

Jeez!!!

[niceypoo]

29. When my coworker pulls that, "Hitler was a liberal" crap I ask...

"Are you saying that Hitler was, 'touchie feelie?'

[Papa Boule]

55. Of course they're claiming Hitler was a liberal.

Their movement, in order to revive, has to distance itself from the cautionary, stigmatizing icons of its past and pretend it's totally different.

[Cha]

3. All fucking stupid bombers are rightwing idiots.

[SwampG8r]

6. tell that to the weather underground

[Cha]

8. Sorry, I wasn't paying much

attention back then..I take it they were left wing? Let me rephrase that then..all bombers are stupid.

[SwampG8r]

9. i will go you one better

all bombers are stupid cowards
to walk into an area of your fellow humans
unknown to them packing a bomb
and indiscriminately maiming and killing
are the acts of stupid cowards

[Cha]

10. Absolutely.

[SwampG8r]

14. lol

i looked at at your sig and i read it as "teenagers are domestic terrorists"

[Cha]

17. No..teenagers are alright.

:)

[SwampG8r]

18. true

by the time they are teenagers all your good stuff is already broken

[PSzymeczek]

88. That's why you don't bring out your really good stuff

until they're well into their teens.

[Recursion]

48. Even Che Guevara? NT

[maxsolomon]

61. is that what the WU did?

"walk into an area of your fellow humans
unknown to them packing a bomb
and indiscriminately maiming and killing"

they sure were stupid, but they didn't deliberately target human beings. i think they fucked up and killed a security guard after thinking the building was empty, right? pretty milquetoast for a LW terrorist.

unlike mcveigh & al queda, who are BOTH RW terrorists.

or the Unabomber, who was a friggin crazy terrorist.

[JuniperLea]

107. Spot on...

I don't defend the destruction of property, but the WU went out of their way to gather intelligence on building occupation and never intentionally hurt any living being. Yes, they were stupid, but they never set out to commit murder.

[druidity33]

53. actually

they targeted specific places based on at the moment policies and government initiatives. If i remember correctly, no one died in any of their bombings (except 3 of their own members) because their intent was not to kill anyone, but to highlight the governments injustices. And to cripple the bureaucracy.

I'm not saying i approve of their methods. But they were more careful than our military is in trying to prevent "civilian" deaths. I would agree that they weren't RW and that they weren't idiots. I'd also agree that they were terrorists.

:shrug:

[Lagomorph]

42. Even the Weather Undergroud?

I think they leaned a little left.

Radicals come in all flavors.

[onehandle]

4. He was a registered Republican in New York, An NRA Member, a gun rights/show fanatic.

He was all about 'The Turner Diaries.' The ultimate RW terrorist masturbation fantasy.*

The poster was full of shit.



*Aside from all the crap that Ayn Rand wrote.

[PinkTiger]

11. Yes, but

He had left-wing tendencies, radical left-wing. That is what made him a terrorist. The Weathermen were left-wing activists. Being to the left is not just a political thing; it is a way of life. I mean to the FAR left. The far right is just as scary. But his separatist leanings are considered by most experts to be leftist.

[Aristus]

12. Umm...no. Not left wing. Take a look at him again. He was a right-wing, white-supremacist,

gun-nut, anti-government terrorist.

I don't know where you got this Timothy McVeigh was a left-winger stuff. Maybe pulled it out of your ass? That's why it stinks...

[onehandle]

15. Bullshit.

The material of his life were the things of rural conservatism and free republic.

[Cleobulus]

19. The guy had excerpts from the Turner Diaries in his car when he was caught, the OKC bombing...

was part of a plot to start a race war/revolution in this country against the federal government, that is what McVeigh wanted. Now explain to me how the fuck that was left-wing?

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

38. Silly, it was an evil act, and everything evil is left-wing. And vice versa.

:sarcasm:

[PSzymeczek]

86. Not just excerpts,

the whole book. The bible of the White Supremacist movement.

[Cleobulus]

101. Meh, I was going by my memory of the news reports...

I guess I was under the impression that he had cutouts or printouts of specific passages in his car when he was arrested. Could have been the whole book.

[Webster Green]

20. I'm gonna need some links to those "experts".

This is the Internets, after all.

You have made a really zany statement.

Care to make an attempt to back it up? :shrug:

[name not needed]

30. He was a registered Republican and a self-described libertarian.

Doesn't sound too left wing to me.

[SDuderstadt]

31. WTF? n/t

[aquart]

36. Experts at what, precisely?

Separatists can be anyone who's had a bad day. I have a hard time seeing the glorious South as "leftist."

[izzybeans]

63. Experts at doublethink

[RoyGBiv]

37. Name these experts, please. n/t

[Dogtown]

44. Citation?

You can back up that claim, I suppose?

Which "experts" consider him to be leftist?

And please support your claim that his "left" tendencies are those that made him a terrorist?


Also, in what way was he connected to the SDS?


Why is "being to the left" a "way of life"?



You do not have the slightest idea what you're prattling about.

[annabanana]

46. only if you think "left wing" = "violent".. Check your definitions, please...n/t

[City Lights]

50. Can you provide a link to the "expert" opinion you cited?

Thanks in advance. :-)

[Donnachaidh]

51. historicaly separatists have been RW haven't they?

The South left the Union - and you can NOT call them *leftists*. What group advocating separatism today can be called leftist?

[wolfgangmo]

74. What group.

Why the Quebecois, or course. They advocate seperatism and poutine. Oh, the humanity.

[PSzymeczek]

89. Poutine is one thing

French fries and brown gravy is a good thing. Separatism, not so much.

[timtom]

64. Perhaps it's his attendance at at least one Klan rally

that marks him as RW, forevermore.

[BlooInBloo]

72. Congratulations on having stuck around here for so long.

[wolfgangmo]

73. "Experts?"

What experts?

Please provide a link or reference.

[Alcibiades]

90. You're dead wrong on that one

Not sure if you're addressing McVeigh or Kaczinski, but both were right wing. The militia movement was and is a right wing phenomenon. Kaczynski's writings were soundly in the tradition of American conservatism. Interestingly, it was the supposedly "crazy" one who had the more informed political ideas.

[Recursion]

94. It's difficult to fit Kaczynski in a left or right wing shoebox

He had the kind of Ron Paul anti government anti corporate thing going.

[Alcibiades]

98. Really?

I take it that it has been too long since you have read Ted Kaczynski's Manifesto. What follows is an excerpt from Ted Kaczynski's manifesto. If you can tell me how it is that what follows, a paranoid rant about the supposed pathologies of the American left, qualifies as something that ought to make him hard to put "in a left or right wing shoebox," I'd be really interested to hear it.

Kaczynski was a right winger, and so is Ron Paul. The difference is that Kaczynski is one of many nutjob terrorists, whereas Paul is one of a handful of consistent libertarian conservatives. I prefer the latter to the former, but both are right wing.

The sad thing is that Kaczynski makes more sense than most teabaggers.

What follows may seem excessively long, but I quote the section in full to show that his opposition to the left was not simply a minor theme cor Kaczynski, but a major part of his delusional system.

THE PSYCHOLOGY OF MODERN LEFTISM



6. Almost everyone will agree that we live in a deeply troubled
society. One of the most widespread manifestations of the craziness of
our world is leftism, so a discussion of the psychology of leftism can
serve as an introduction to the discussion of the problems of modern
society in general.

7. But what is leftism? During the first half of the 20th century
leftism could have been practically identified with socialism. Today
the movement is fragmented and it is not clear who can properly be
called a leftist. When we speak of leftists in this article we have in
mind mainly socialists, collectivists, "politically correct" types,
feminists, gay and disability activists, animal rights activists and
the like. But not everyone who is associated with one of these
movements is a leftist. What we are trying to get at in discussing
leftism is not so much a movement or an ideology as a psychological
type, or rather a collection of related types. Thus, what we mean by
"leftism" will emerge more clearly in the course of our discussion of
leftist psychology (Also, see paragraphs 227-230.)

8. Even so, our conception of leftism will remain a good deal less
clear than we would wish, but there doesn't seem to be any remedy for
this. All we are trying to do is indicate in a rough and approximate
way the two psychological tendencies that we believe are the main
driving force of modern leftism. We by no means claim to be telling
the WHOLE truth about leftist psychology. Also, our discussion is
meant to apply to modern leftism only. We leave open the question of
the extent to which our discussion could be applied to the leftists of
the 19th and early 20th century.

9. The two psychological tendencies that underlie modern leftism we
call "feelings of inferiority" and "oversocialization." Feelings of
inferiority are characteristic of modern leftism as a whole, while
oversocialization is characteristic only of a certain segment of
modern leftism; but this segment is highly influential.

FEELINGS OF INFERIORITY



10. By "feelings of inferiority" we mean not only inferiority feelings
in the strictest sense but a whole spectrum of related traits: low
self-esteem, feelings of powerlessness, depressive tendencies,
defeatism, guilt, self-hatred, etc. We argue that modern leftists tend
to have such feelings (possibly more or less repressed) and that these
feelings are decisive in determining the direction of modern leftism.

11. When someone interprets as derogatory almost anything that is said
about him (or about groups with whom he identifies) we conclude that
he has inferiority feelings or low self-esteem. This tendency is
pronounced among minority rights advocates, whether or not they belong
to the minority groups whose rights they defend. They are
hypersensitive about the words used to designate minorities. The terms
"negro," "oriental," "handicapped" or "chick" for an African, an
Asian, a disabled person or a woman originally had no derogatory
connotation. "Broad" and "chick" were merely the feminine equivalents
of "guy," "dude" or "fellow." The negative connotations have been
attached to these terms by the activists themselves. Some animal
rights advocates have gone so far as to reject the word "pet" and
insist on its replacement by "animal companion." Leftist
anthropologists go to great lengths to avoid saying anything about
primitive peoples that could conceivably be interpreted as negative.
They want to replace the word "primitive" by "nonliterate." They seem
almost paranoid about anything that might suggest that any primitive
culture is inferior to our own. (We do not mean to imply that
primitive cultures ARE inferior to ours. We merely point out the
hypersensitivity of leftish anthropologists.)

12. Those who are most sensitive about "politically incorrect"
terminology are not the average black ghetto-dweller, Asian immigrant,
abused woman or disabled person, but a minority of activists, many of
whom do not even belong to any "oppressed" group but come from
privileged strata of society. Political correctness has its stronghold
among university professors, who have secure employment with
comfortable salaries, and the majority of whom are heterosexual, white
males from middle-class families.

13. Many leftists have an intense identification with the problems of
groups that have an image of being weak (women), defeated (American
Indians), repellent (homosexuals), or otherwise inferior. The leftists
themselves feel that these groups are inferior. They would never admit
it to themselves that they have such feelings, but it is precisely
because they do see these groups as inferior that they identify with
their problems. (We do not suggest that women, Indians, etc., ARE
inferior; we are only making a point about leftist psychology).

14. Feminists are desperately anxious to prove that women are as
strong as capable as men. Clearly they are nagged by a fear that women
may NOT be as strong and as capable as men.

15. Leftists tend to hate anything that has an image of being strong,
good and successful. They hate America, they hate Western
civilization, they hate white males, they hate rationality. The
reasons that leftists give for hating the West, etc. clearly do not
correspond with their real motives. They SAY they hate the West
because it is warlike, imperialistic, sexist, ethnocentric and so
forth, but where these same faults appear in socialist countries or in
primitive cultures, the leftist finds excuses for them, or at best he
GRUDGINGLY admits that they exist; whereas he ENTHUSIASTICALLY points
out (and often greatly exaggerates) these faults where they appear in
Western civilization. Thus it is clear that these faults are not the
leftist's real motive for hating America and the West. He hates
America and the West because they are strong and successful.

16. Words like "self-confidence," "self-reliance," "initiative",
"enterprise," "optimism," etc. play little role in the liberal and
leftist vocabulary. The leftist is anti-individualistic,
pro-collectivist. He wants society to solve everyone's needs for them,
take care of them. He is not the sort of person who has an inner sense
of confidence in his own ability to solve his own problems and satisfy
his own needs. The leftist is antagonistic to the concept of
competition because, deep inside, he feels like a loser.

17. Art forms that appeal to modern leftist intellectuals tend to
focus on sordidness, defeat and despair, or else they take an
orgiastic tone, throwing off rational control as if there were no hope
of accomplishing anything through rational calculation and all that
was left was to immerse oneself in the sensations of the moment.

18. Modern leftist philosophers tend to dismiss reason, science,
objective reality and to insist that everything is culturally
relative. It is true that one can ask serious questions about the
foundations of scientific knowledge and about how, if at all, the
concept of objective reality can be defined. But it is obvious that
modern leftist philosophers are not simply cool-headed logicians
systematically analyzing the foundations of knowledge. They are deeply
involved emotionally in their attack on truth and reality. They attack
these concepts because of their own psychological needs. For one
thing, their attack is an outlet for hostility, and, to the extent
that it is successful, it satisfies the drive for power. More
importantly, the leftist hates science and rationality because they
classify certain beliefs as true (i.e., successful, superior) and
other beliefs as false (i.e. failed, inferior). The leftist's feelings
of inferiority run so deep that he cannot tolerate any classification
of some things as successful or superior and other things as failed or
inferior. This also underlies the rejection by many leftists of the
concept of mental illness and of the utility of IQ tests. Leftists are
antagonistic to genetic explanations of human abilities or behavior
because such explanations tend to make some persons appear superior or
inferior to others. Leftists prefer to give society the credit or
blame for an individual's ability or lack of it. Thus if a person is
"inferior" it is not his fault, but society's, because he has not been
brought up properly.

19. The leftist is not typically the kind of person whose feelings of
inferiority make him a braggart, an egotist, a bully, a self-promoter,
a ruthless competitor. This kind of person has not wholly lost faith
in himself. He has a deficit in his sense of power and self-worth, but
he can still conceive of himself as having the capacity to be strong,
and his efforts to make himself strong produce his unpleasant
behavior. <1> But the leftist is too far gone for that. His feelings
of inferiority are so ingrained that he cannot conceive of himself as
individually strong and valuable. Hence the collectivism of the
leftist. He can feel strong only as a member of a large organization
or a mass movement with which he identifies himself.

20. Notice the masochistic tendency of leftist tactics. Leftists
protest by lying down in front of vehicles, they intentionally provoke
police or racists to abuse them, etc. These tactics may often be
effective, but many leftists use them not as a means to an end but
because they PREFER masochistic tactics. Self-hatred is a leftist
trait.

21. Leftists may claim that their activism is motivated by compassion
or by moral principle, and moral principle does play a role for the
leftist of the oversocialized type. But compassion and moral principle
cannot be the main motives for leftist activism. Hostility is too
prominent a component of leftist behavior; so is the drive for power.
Moreover, much leftist behavior is not rationally calculated to be of
benefit to the people whom the leftists claim to be trying to help.
For example, if one believes that affirmative action is good for black
people, does it make sense to demand affirmative action in hostile or
dogmatic terms? Obviously it would be more productive to take a
diplomatic and conciliatory approach that would make at least verbal
and symbolic concessions to white people who think that affirmative
action discriminates against them. But leftist activists do not take
such an approach because it would not satisfy their emotional needs.
Helping black people is not their real goal. Instead, race problems
serve as an excuse for them to express their own hostility and
frustrated need for power. In doing so they actually harm black
people, because the activists' hostile attitude toward the white
majority tends to intensify race hatred.

22. If our society had no social problems at all, the leftists would
have to INVENT problems in order to provide themselves with an excuse
for making a fuss.

23. We emphasize that the foregoing does not pretend to be an accurate
description of everyone who might be considered a leftist. It is only
a rough indication of a general tendency of leftism.

[Recursion]

102. Have you read any of the rest of the manifesto?

136. If anyone still imagines that it would be possible to reform the system in such a way as to protect freedom from technology, let him consider how clumsily and for the most part unsuccessfully our society has dealt with other social problems that are far more simple and straightforward. Among other things, the system has failed to stop environmental degradation, political corruption, drug trafficking or domestic abuse.

137. Take our environmental problems, for example. Here the conflict of values is straightforward: economic expedience now versus saving some of our natural resources for our grandchildren. <22> But on this subject we get only a lot of blather and obfuscation from the people who have power, and nothing like a clear, consistent line of action, and we keep on piling up environmental problems that our grandchildren will have to live with. Attempts to resolve the environmental issue consist of struggles and compromises between different factions, some of which are ascendant at one moment, others at another moment. The line of struggle changes with the shifting currents of public opinion. This is not a rational process, nor is it one that is likely to lead to a timely and successful solution to the problem. Major social problems, if they get "solved" at all, are rarely or never solved through any rational, comprehensive plan. They just work themselves out through a process in which various competing groups pursuing their own (usually short-term) self-interest <23> arrive (mainly by luck) at some more or less stable modus vivendi. In fact, the principles we formulated in paragraphs 100-106 make it seem doubtful that rational, long-term social planning can ever be successful.

138. Thus it is clear that the human race has at best a very limited capacity for solving even relatively straightforward social problems. How then is it going to solve the far more difficult and subtle problem of reconciling freedom with technology? Technology presents clear-cut material advantages, whereas freedom is an abstraction that means different things to different people, and its loss is easily obscured by propaganda and fancy talk.

139. And note this important difference: It is conceivable that our environmental problems (for example) may some day be settled through a rational, comprehensive plan, but if this happens it will be only because it is in the long-term interest of the system to solve these problems. But it is not in the interest of the system to preserve freedom or small-group autonomy. On the contrary, it is in the interest of the system to bring human behavior under control to the greatest possible extent. <24> Thus, while practical considerations may eventually force the system to take a rational, prudent approach to environmental problems, equally practical considerations will force the system to regulate human behavior ever more closely (preferably by indirect means that will disguise the encroachment on freedom.) This isn't just our opinion. Eminent social scientists (e.g. James Q. Wilson) have stressed the importance of "socializing" people more effectively.

[Alcibiades]

106. Yes, I've read it

The citation in question is further evidence of Kaczinski's right-wing ideology. Even on the subject of political socialization, a decades-old and expansive area of literature within political science, who is it he cites? Wilson. Google James Q. Wilson if you don't know who he is.

[Alcibiades]

108. He is absolutely a right winger

I don't mean to be a jerk about this, but the media have planted this idea out there that Kaczynski was either neither left nor right or on the left (!) This is simply not true. Yes, he had some serious critiques of the status quo, and wrote some things that sound leftist, but are in fact either libertarian or downright authoritarian. There have always been folks on the right who are opposed to technology: Leo Strauss, for example, spends a lot of time criticizing the supposed flaws of enlightenment rationalism's reliance on technology.

In the end, and I say this as a political theorist, albeit a mediocre one, Kaczynski was certainly on the right. He was 95% reactionary, 5% leftist and 100% crazy.

[political_Dem]

13. That's their modus operandi: distance and disavow.

I think the RW handlers are banking on their followers having a short attention span and not being knowledgeable about the world. Therefore, they drop these little nuggets in so that they can mindlessly spread this false crap not only on the internet, but in the media when one of the followers (i.e. the media's obsession with Teabaggers) get interviewed.

Then the earworm begins to be placed in another person's ear--granted that this viewer (or listener) is quite susceptible to suggestion and easily swayed by pathos.

That's why I am not surprised that these yahoos try to "rewrite history" by disseminating false facts. September 11, 2001 really unleashed the cowed idiocy in America based on the notion of fear. The RNC wants to keep the masses stupid.

[MurrayDelph]

16. They have two basic rules in their propaganda:

1. If it's bad, then it's a liberal <what-have-you>
2. If it's a liberal <what-have-you>, then it's bad

[akbacchus_BC]

21. If he was not? Then you are? Why you on here defending him?

[Mike K]

22. Timothy McVeigh was neither a religious fanatic or -

- a right wing extremist. He is best described as a radical revolutionary who became fixated on federal law enforcement's oppressive actions against the Branch Davidians at Waco, TX, in 1993. His attack on the Murrah Building in Oklahoma City took place on the anniversary of the Waco massacre and according to his own depositions he did it in retaliation for that event.

McVeigh continued to insist right up to the day he was executed that he would not have bombed the Murrah Building were it not for what the government did at Waco.

[SDuderstadt]

23. WTF? n/t

[4lbs]

24. Wrong. Long before Waco, he showed white supremist and RW-extremism tendencies.

He purchased a "white power" T-shirt while attending a KKK protest.

That was detailed in the book American Terrorist page 61 if anyone has it.


He left Buffalo, NY because he deemed it to be too 'liberal' for his taste. That was detailed in the documentary "Timothy McVeigh & Terry Nichols: Oklahoma Bombing".


He then traveled on the gun show circuit until he reached California. Or what he called "The People's Socialist Republic of California."

That is again from the book American Terrorist, page 121.

[devilgrrl]

71. Buffalo, NY too liberal?

:spray:

Buffalo makes Selma, Alabama look like Berkley, California.

[Name removed]

25. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

26. The only people upset by Waco are crazy RW fucks.

Furthermore, if it hadn't been a democratic administration, the Republicans would have cheered on the tanks.

[SDuderstadt]

27. Further, the tanks had had all their offensive capabilities disabled....

So, why did the Feds need tanks? Because the Branch Davidians kept shooting at them when they approached the building.

[B Calm]

33. Amazing how they can put a child molester cult leader on a pedestal!

[eridani]

34. Molly Ivins was a right wing fuck? On what planet? n/t

[Recursion]

49. Which is weird, because the Davidians themselves were not right-wing

I think the left and the right ignores that fact.

[B Calm]

67. So the gun hoarding, religious, child molesting clan was not political? Sounds like

they were conservative to me. . .

[Recursion]

69. Jonestown was a liberal cult

The Davidians were somewhat like them.

[B Calm]

77. What was so damn liberal about Jonestown? This group hated the US

government, much like the teabaggers today!

[Recursion]

79. Lots of the left hated the US government back then; some took up arms

Jonestown started as an attempt to make a non-racist society; the Waco group started with very similar goals.

[B Calm]

83. If I recall they killed a Democrat Congressman who was down there

investigating them. Can you name any republicans they killed?

[Recursion]

91. They called their religion "apostolic socialism"

Jones was kicked out of Indiana and went to San Francisco because he was an advocate for racial integration.

Jones was one of the key backers of Moscone's mayoral campaign in San Francisco (see "Milk" or "The Life and Times of Harvey Milk" if you want to know more about him; you may have heard of Moscone's protege, a woman by the name of Diane Feinstein).

The group moved to Guyana because they feared the influence of multinational corporations, detested the racism in the US government, and feared "creeping fascism".

Congressman Ryan was a Democrat (he was from northern CA, after all); he went down there because several of his constituents were worried their relatives were being held against their will. As to the party affiliation of the others in his party who were killed, I can't say. Since the People's Temple had essentially checked out of San Francisco Democratic politics because it was too conservative, I seriously doubt any of the members themselves were Republicans, though it's always possible.

Where did you get the idea that Jonestown was a right-wing group?

[B Calm]

95. Despite what they called themselves, they were a right wing group

that hoarded guns and were deep into religious fanaticism!

[Recursion]

96. Being anti-gun is a relatively new position for the Left

I gave you several examples of how the People's Temple was on the loony fringe of the Left; do you know of any positions of theirs that could be called "right wing"? Or does "right wing" just mean "crazy" to you?

[Gold Metal Flake]

84. Jonestown started as an attempt for Jones to step up his...

...fleecing the savings of his parishioners while raping men, women and children without the eyes of US law enforcement on him. The Waco group did not get to the leaving the country stage before they murdered LEOs.

[Recursion]

92. I'm torn about when Jones went to the dark side

From what I've seen I honestly can't say whether he was always evil or whether he went crazy. "Power corrupts" isn't just a saying. At any rate, his political stances before the Temple moved to Guyana were ones we would mostly agree with here. As were Koresh's, which was my point.

[wolfgangmo]

76. Tanks? Hell no the wouldn't have cheered on the tanks.

They would have been using AT-10s and bombers WAAAAAYYYYYYY before the tanks.

[yewberry]

28. He was not a religious fanatic, but he was a RW extremist.

He was a Republican, then a Libertarian. He attended KKK rallies and quit the NRA because their stances weren't strong enough for him. He was one of those "Socialist gummint coming to take our guns" survivalists.

Not a religious nut, but definitely a right-wing extremist terrorist.

[Name removed]

Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

35. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[NNN0LHI]

40. He took Catholic Last Rites before he was executed so he must have believed the woo would save him

Did you forget about that?

Don

[Donnachaidh]

52. the woo?

:rofl:

[spoony]

100. McVeigh: "Science is my religion."

His religious views were so tepid that if they were water you wouldn't wade into them. Born Catholic, claimed agnosticism, could also be called a quasi-Deist based on some statements. That he took last rites is just another chapter in his wishy-washiness. Religion in no way, shape or form affected his actions. That much is quite clear.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

41. I see you measured your post very carefully in order to stop short of...

...something.

But you fail.

[Name removed]

45. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ThomWV]

54. Excerpts from recordings of him played on MSNBC during the last 2 nights contradict you

In excerpts played on Rachel Madow's TV program McVeigh made a number of comments that gave right wing reasons far beyond Waco as his motivation and made more or less continuous reference to his God. His recorded statements seem to contradict what you have said.

[Ichingcarpenter]

66. McViegh sold copies of the Racist Turner diaries at gun shows

Get Real, the Turner diaries not rightwing?

Sounds like you won't respond but do spread misinformation
or are just terribly misinformed

[wolfgangmo]

75. Riggggghhhhhhhhht.

"McVeigh continued to insist right up to the day he was executed that he would not have bombed the Murrah Building were it not for what the government did at Waco."

And Bush claimed that; there were WMD in Iraq, American's don't torture, he was never AWOL, that Jesus appeared to him and cured him of his addictions, that the Mission was accomplished, that we would be greeted as heroes, etc..

McVeigh was a fanatic, but his politics and all evidence points at him being right wing and a solid registered republican. To paint him as liberal flies in the face of the evidence and to paint him as non-political is also not based in reality. Sure he claims he wouldn't have blown the shit out of kids, etc. but we can't know the motivations of a madman. What we can know is his influences which were RW AM radio, libertarian philosophy, Fox, and related fanaticism, non of which can be remotely be considered "liberal" by anyone except Rush, et.al..

[B Calm]

32. You are dealing with a today's RW fundie. They think Pres Obama

is a Nazi, Socialist, Communist, Fascist, Antichrist Black man from Kenya, Africa who pals around with Terrorists and willing to pull the plug on your Grandma. . .

These people are not right in the head! Because of their Insanity, there's nothing you can do or say to change them!!

[gleaner]

43. McVeigh was ....

a loner who went to the Gulf War and came back with a rabid hatred for the federal government. He was affiliated with the Michigan Militia which was certainly as right wing as it is now. He was also involved with the Nichols brothers one of whom is doing time and the other who should be, but can't be connected. They are right wing nut jobs to the bone.

I was a federal employee at the time he bombed the federal building in Oklahoma and one of their many potential targets. Like most right wing violence loving nuts they believed that killing one of us was one of the most desirable thing they could do. Unfortunately the public being served by the federal offices in that building died too. They were the only ones who Clinton mentioned in his "I'm sorry they died speech." I guess the deaths of the federal workers didn't matter much to him either. He did a lot of mea culpas after he was called on his omission, but we got the point.

[jberryhill]

57. The Birkenstock Sandals Were The First Clue.... /nt

[arcadian]

65. Yeah, there is a picture of McVeigh at Prince William sound scrubbing otters

after the Exxon Valdez spill, damn commie.

[Jennicut]

58. A right leaning libertarian is what he was. Actually, he was just plain nuts.

[Bryn]

59. History Channel said that Jim Jones was a Democrat, Liberal, Progressive!

That cult leader of Peoples Temple that caused death of many people drinking poisoned kool-aid plus US Senator in Jonestown, Guyana.

x(

[Dr. Strange]

60. Based on his history, that seems reasonable.

According to the wiki:

Indiana beginnings
Further information: Peoples Temple

In 1951, Jones became a member of the Communist Party USA, and began attending meetings and rallies in Indianapolis.<12> Jones became flustered with harassment he received during the McCarthy Hearings,<12> particularly regarding meetings between Jones and his mother with Paul Robeson.<13> He also became frustrated with what he perceived to be ostracism of open communists in the United States, especially during the trial of Julius and Ethel Rosenberg.<14> This frustration, among other things, provoked a seminal moment for Jones in which he asked himself "how can I demonstrate my Marxism? The thought was, infiltrate the church."<12><13>

Jones' interest in religion began during his childhood, primarily because he found making friends difficult, though initially he vacillated on his Church of choice.<4> Jones was surprised when a Methodist superintendent helped Jones to get a start in the church even though he knew Jones to be a communist and Jones did not meet him through the American Communist Party.<14> In 1952, Jones became a student pastor in Sommerset Southside Methodist Church, but left that church because its leaders barred him from integrating blacks into his congregation.<12> Around this time, Jones witnessed a faith-healing service at the Seventh Day Baptist Church.<12> He observed that it attracted people and their money and concluded that, with financial resources from such healings, he could help accomplish his social goals.<12>

Jones then began his own church, which changed names until it became the Peoples Temple Christian Church Full Gospel.<12> Jones sold pet monkeys door-to-door to raise funds for his church.<15>

Jones moved away from the American Communist Party and Maoists when ACP members and Mao Zedong became critical of some of former Soviet leader Joseph Stalin's policies.<14>
Integrationist

In 1960, Indianapolis Democratic Mayor Charles Boswell appointed Jones as a director of the Human Rights Commission.<16> Jones ignored Boswell's advice to keep a low profile, finding new outlets for his views on local radio and television programs.<16> When the mayor and other commissioners asked Jones to curtail his public actions, Jones resisted and was wildly cheered at a meeting of the NAACP and Urban League when he yelled for his audience to be more militant, and climaxed with "Let my people go!"<17>

During this time, Jones also helped to integrate churches, restaurants, the telephone company, the police department, a theater, an amusement park, and the Methodist Hospital.<12> After swastikas were painted on the homes of two African American families, Jones personally walked the neighborhood comforting African Americans and counseling white families not to move, in order to prevent white flight.<18> Jones set up stings to catch restaurants refusing to serve African American customers.<18> Jones wrote to American Nazi leaders and then leaked their responses to the media.<19> When Jones was accidentally placed in the black ward of a hospital after a collapse in 1961, he refused to be moved and began to make the beds, and empty the bed pans, of black patients.<20> Political pressures resulting from Jones' actions caused hospital officials to desegregate the wards.<20>

Jones received considerable criticism in Indiana for his integrationist views.<12> White-owned businesses and locals were critical of him.<18> A swastika was placed on the Temple, a stick of dynamite was left in a Temple coal pile and a dead cat was thrown at Jones' house after a threatening phone call.<19> Other incidents occurred, though some suspect that Jones himself may have been involved in at least some of them.<19>

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Jones#Indiana_beginnings

[Mojeoux]

87. He was a Fiend who used Christianity and LW politics to gain Power Over People!

He was left wing-ish for sure. But he had tons of rules. That worked for detox and rehab needers but not the Wild wonderful Northern California Left. In the SF bay area, The Jim Jones People were never considered to be part of the non-violence movement. There were always sketchy stories about thuggery and revenge on people who left the church.
When the infamous "SLA," that kidnapped Patty Hearst, caused the Hearst family to distribute food to the poor as part of the ransom, they only trusted the Jim Jones' Church to give the food away. This was before Patty became Tanya the bank robber.
The "distribution" was a logistical and blood-money moral disaster and the Jim Jones people stole most of the food in the end.

The whole deal validated my commitment to non-violence.

[Recursion]

93. Yeah. He backed George Moscone in SF

And he was kicked out of Indiana in the 60's for advocating integration.

The People's Temple was an openly socialist movement, and they went to Guyana because they thought the US was becoming a fascist state.

[Posteritatis]

62. Remember, the rule is no one bad can share one's political alignment

People on the right consider McVeigh, bin Laden, Hitler, Mussolini, etc., etc., etc., to be liberal. It's one of those silly no-true-Scotsman things.

(We have the same problem, but I generally think there's fewer examples for us to get quite that absurd about.)

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

70. Your RW poster probably thinks Obama is a leftist

It's just perspective.

McVeigh didn't seem to have a ton of nazi, xtian, and white-power tattoos, so may not appear very "right" to the teabaggers.

[Motown_Johnny]

78. respond to that poster by saying " Compared to You he is not a RWer"

[lpbk2713]

80. If they can say Dumbya was the greatest Prez ever ...

they can say McVeigh was not one of them.

The tricky part is getting someone to believe their line of bullshit.


:rofl:

[walldude]

81. Actually this is good timing... Maddow is about to unleash a Documentary

about McVeigh which has unseen jailhouse interviews, where he confesses, and shares his ideology. So his right wing ideology is about to become public record from McVeighs own mouth.

[lonestarnot]

97. But nutfuckers won't believe him either. "Come on shitty let's go home they won't believe you either

:toast:

[pitohui]

82. mcveigh was rightwing -- so rightwing he planned the bombing for hitler's birthday

liars lie it's what they do, sheepshank

once someone indulges in deliberate lies, accept that you're not debating w. an honest person in search of the truth, you're debating a liar who is hoping to spread lies and propaganda

[Shell Beau]

85. We're talking about a psychopath here.

So whatever view he held (I can only guess it was extreme right wing), it is skewed.

[LLStarks]

103. Just for the sake of argument, what would a left-wing terrorist be? nt

[Enrique]

104. the Weathermen, e.g. n/t

[dorkulon]

105. This is why Maddow's doc is a good thing.

RWers always try to disown their terrorists, claiming they're really lefties. See von Brunn. Now we'll have his own words, indisputably identifying him as holding pretty much all of the beliefs of an average Freeper.