What's your take on the shooting of Dr. George Tiller

[blondboinsd]

I agree with Rachel Maddow Statement (below)

There's an anti-abortion terrorist movement in the United States that operates relatively openly. They advocate and their members commit acts of violence, including murder, against Americans who are not breaking the law, who are engaged in protected legal activity on American soil. These acts of violence are politically motivated. They are designed to change American policies and to terrorize Americans. They have succeed in making providing abortion services to American women so dangerous, so intimidating that there are only a handful of doctors in the entire country who provide late-term abortions--as Dr. Tiller did--abortions late in pregnancy.

In other words, this terrorism is working. Violence as a political strategy is working to make abortions so unsafe for doctors that they are unwilling to bear the risk of performing it so women can't actually get one regardless of whether or not it's legal. It's the same outcome as if abortion had been outlawed. They're winning.

[JVegas]

Two Standards In The Media's World Of Hate

By MICHELLE MALKIN | Posted Wednesday, June 03, 2009 4:20 PM PT
When a right-wing Christian vigilante kills, millions of fingers pull the trigger. When a left-wing Muslim vigilante kills, he kills alone.
These are the instantly ossifying narratives in the Sunday shooting death of late-term abortion provider George Tiller of Kansas vs. the Monday shootings of two Arkansas military recruiters.
Tiller's suspected murderer, Scott Roeder, is white, Christian, anti-government and anti-abortion. The gunman in the military recruitment center attack, Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad, is black, a Muslim convert, anti-military and anti-American.
Both crimes are despicable, cowardly acts of domestic terrorism. But the disparate treatment of the two brutal cases by both the White House and the media is striking.
President Obama issued a statement condemning "heinous acts of violence" within hours of Tiller's death. The Justice Department issued its own statement and sent federal marshals to protect abortion clinics.
News anchors and headline writers abandoned all qualms about labeling the gunman a terrorist. An almost gleeful excess of mainstream commentary poured forth on the climate of hate and fear created by conservative talk radio, blogs and Fox News in reporting Tiller's activities.
By contrast, Obama was silent about the military recruiter attacks that left 24-year-old Pvt. William Long dead and 18-year-old Pvt. Quinton Ezeagwula gravely wounded.
On Tuesday afternoon — more than 24 hours after the attack on the military recruitment center in Little Rock, Ark. — Obama held a press conference to announce his pick for Army secretary. It would have been exactly the right moment to express condolences for the families of the targeted Army recruiters and to condemn heinous acts of violence against our troops.
But Obama said nothing. The Justice Department was mum. And so were the legions of finger-pointing pundits happily convicting the pro-life movement and every right-leaning writer on the planet of contributing to the murder of Tiller.
Obama's omission, it should be noted, comes just a few weeks after he failed to mention the Bronx jihadi plot to bomb synagogues and a National Guard air base during his speech on homeland security.
Why the silence? Politically and religiously motivated violence, it seems, is only worth lamenting when it demonizes opponents. Which also helps explain why the phrase "lone shooter" is ubiquitous in media coverage of jihadi shooters gone wild — think convicted "Jeep Jihadist" Mohammed Taheri-Azar at the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill or Israel-bashing gunman Naveed Haq, who targeted a Seattle Jewish charity, or LAX shooter Hesham Hedayet, who opened fire at the El Al Israeli airline ticket counter — but not in cases involving rare acts of anti-abortion violence.
Even Jeffrey Goldberg of the left-leaning Atlantic magazine noticed the double standards. He called attention to a National Public Radio report on the military recruiter attack that failed to mention the religion and anti-military animus of the suspect.
Wrote Goldberg: "Why not tell people what is actually happening in the world? We saw this a couple of weeks ago, when the press only gingerly acknowledged that the malevolent though incompetent suspects in the synagogue bombing-conspiracy case in New York were converts to Islam.
"How is the public served by this kind of silence? The extremist Christian beliefs of Tiller's alleged murderer are relevant to that case, and no one in my profession is hesitant to discuss them. Why the hesitancy to talk about the motivations of the man who allegedly killed Pvt. William Long?"
The truth is that the "climate of hate" doesn't have just one hemisphere. But you won't hear the Council on American-Islamic Relations acknowledging the national security risks of jihadi infiltrators who despise our military and have plotted against our troops from within the ranks — including convicted fragging killer Hasan Akbar and terror plotters Ali Mohamed, Jeffrey Battle and Semi Osman.
You won't hear about the escalating war on military recruitment centers on the op-ed pages of the New York Times — from vandalism to obstruction to Molotov cocktail attacks on campus stations; to the shutdown of a Pittsburgh military recruitment office by zealots holding signs that read "Recruiters are Child Predators"; to the prolonged harassment campaign against the Marine recruiting center in Berkeley, where Code Pink protesters called American soldiers assassins; to the bomb blast at the Times Square recruiting center last March.
And you'll hear little about the most recent left-wing calls to violence by a Playboy magazine writer who published a vulgar list of conservative female writers and commentators he said he'd like to rape. The list was hyped by the magazine's publicity team and lightheartedly promoted by mainstream publications such as Politico.com (founded by Washington Post reporters).
Is it too much to ask the media cartographers in charge of mapping the "climate of hate" to do their jobs with both eyes open?
Copyright 2008 Creators Syndicate, Inc


Email To Friend | Print | View All Editorials | Search
Back To Top

[chile1]

Originally Posted by JVegas

Two Standards In The Media's World Of Hate

By MICHELLE MALKIN | Posted Wednesday, June 03, 2009 4:20 PM PT
When a right-wing Christian vigilante kills, millions of fingers pull the trigger. When a left-wing Muslim vigilante kills, he kills alone.
These are the instantly ossifying narratives in the Sunday shooting death of late-term abortion provider George Tiller of Kansas vs. the Monday shootings of two Arkansas military recruiters.
Tiller's suspected murderer, Scott Roeder, is white, Christian, anti-government and anti-abortion. The gunman in the military recruitment center attack, Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad, is black, a Muslim convert, anti-military and anti-American.
Both crimes are despicable, cowardly acts of domestic terrorism. But the disparate treatment of the two brutal cases by both the White House and the media is striking.

Michelle Malkin.......... Now that's someone's view points we should all take very seriously

[JVegas]

Originally Posted by chile1

Michelle Malkin.......... Now that's someone's view points we should all take very seriously

So, the article is misrepresenting the truth of the situation? Enlighten me on your point of view...

[chile1]

Originally Posted by JVegas

So, the article is misrepresenting the truth of the situation? Enlighten me on your point of view...

With regards to Malkin's article, the two deaths happened back to back....one on a day when nothing happened-- a Sunday church shooting, while the other happened on a Monday, when they were discussing other political issues.

I realize Malkin is insisting that these two are somehow comparable but you'll notice she never explains why. You can't tell me that O'Reilly's continued incitement to violence against Dr. Tiller is somehow the same as the guy who shot up the recruiting center? Which person on the left incited him? Which talking head?


There are a few flaws in her observations:

First -- I don't see any fingers pointing at "all Conservatives". Just the ones (on FOX) who have done everything they can to paint a bullseye on Tiller by claiming things like anybody who stands by and does nothing about him has "blood on their hands". Like Bill O'Reilly. And Operation Rescue. And anyone else whose rhetoric inflamed Tiller's murderer.

Second - Where is the evidence that the Little Rock gunman is "left-wing"? She and many other conservatives love to try to attach that label to anybody whose actions they don't agree with, no matter how violent, criminal, psychotic, lunatic, or off-the-wall those actions are. Is this what passes for responsible journalism on the right? I personally think that Muslim extremists have much more in common with their kin on the Christian Right - you know, think our way or we'll shoot your ass.

The "disparate treatment" of the two cases exists only in her mind.

[Wagner]

Originally Posted by chile1

With regards to Malkin's article, the two deaths happened back to back....one on a day when nothing happened-- a Sunday church shooting, while the other happened on a Monday, when they were discussing other political issues.

I realize Malkin is insisting that these two are somehow comparable but you'll notice she never explains why. You can't tell me that O'Reilly's continued incitement to violence against Dr. Tiller is somehow the same as the guy who shot up the recruiting center? Which person on the left incited him? Which talking head?


There are a few flaws in her observations:

First -- I don't see any fingers pointing at "all Conservatives". Just the ones (on FOX) who have done everything they can to paint a bullseye on Tiller by claiming things like anybody who stands by and does nothing about him has "blood on their hands". Like Bill O'Reilly. And Operation Rescue. And anyone else whose rhetoric inflamed Tiller's murderer.

Second - Where is the evidence that the Little Rock gunman is "left-wing"? She and many other conservatives love to try to attach that label to anybody whose actions they don't agree with, no matter how violent, criminal, psychotic, lunatic, or off-the-wall those actions are. Is this what passes for responsible journalism on the right? I personally think that Muslim extremists have much more in common with their kin on the Christian Right - you know, think our way or we'll shoot your ass.

The "disparate treatment" of the two cases exists only in her mind.

Have you ever watched Bill O'Reilly? A lot of what you infer seems like sound bytes, so I'm curious. Plenty of people, myself included, would view what that doctor did as murder. Now would we all act on it? No. And certainly not at the beck and call of Billy.

[chile1]

Originally Posted by Wagner

Have you ever watched Bill O'Reilly? A lot of what you infer seems like sound bytes, so I'm curious.

I actualy watch him as well as Sean Hannity every night........

[Wagner]

Originally Posted by chile1

I actualy watch him as well as Sean Hannity every night........

Then I'm even more curious as to what incitement you're talking about. He runs an opinion show, not news, so you're getting his opinion.

[chile1]

Originally Posted by Wagner

Then I'm even more curious as to what incitement you're talking about. He runs an opinion show, not news, so you're getting his opinion.

Yeah but that entire "news network" is loaded with opinions and very little news.........Glenn Beck, Hannity, O'Reilly and even the FOX and Friends comic act in the morning. Is it possible for Fox to produce a single article which doesn't use as a source "some" "some people" "opponents" "A group" Either this is the laziest bunch of journalists in the world or they are just making up their sources to fit their political agenda.

[LobsterX]

Originally Posted by chile1

Yeah but that entire "news network" is loaded with opinions and very little news.........Glenn Beck, Hannity, O'Reilly and even the FOX and Friends comic act in the morning. Is it possible for Fox to produce a single article which doesn't use as a source "some" "some people" "opponents" "A group" Either this is the laziest bunch of journalists in the world or they are just making up their sources to fit their political agenda.

C'mon now. Don't they all? CNN? MSNBC? They're all guilty! That's why it's good to have FOX to balance out the biases of the other networks.