I originally intended to simply write a comment in response to the recent NY-Times op-ed titled “The Guns of August” but comments were closed so I am entering my correction here along with an analysis of the strange similarities between that article and the August 20th entry on the Economist website “Still crazy after all these years”
It is relevant to note for context that I was a very strong Obama supporter and have always associated with the democratic/liberal side, and have even engaged in quite a large amount of right-wing bashing myself. However, recent realities such as the global financial crisis and massive war expenditures have led me to down the path of investigation, and I have discovered that the left/right paradigm is a false, divisive tool and that many of the fears about the U.S. government of the “right” are shared by the “left” and unfortunately, backed by quite a lot of evidence.
I will start with the strange similarities between the NY Times op-ed and the Economist entry and then conclude with some information refuting a few of the claims in the NY Times article.
I believe there is a concerted propaganda campaign aimed at political dissidents, a.k.a. “right-wing extremists”, which is currently rolling out a new phase of articles. In this particular instance I cannot be certain as to whether one author simply took a few helpful ideas from the other or if they were each actually following specific bullet points from an overall propaganda plan.
Strangely Similar Text
The bolded words match exactly and the italicized phrases seem to mean about the same thing.
three men from Bagdad, Ariz., drove 2,500 miles in 1964 to testify against a bill tightening federal controls on firearms after the Kennedy assassination. As the historian Richard Hofstadter wrote in his own famous Kennedy-era essay, “The Paranoid Style in American Politics,” these Arizona gun enthusiasts were convinced that the American government was being taken over by a “subversive power.” Sound familiar?
NOT long after the assassination of John Kennedy in 1963, the Senate contemplated a bill to tighten federal control over the sale of guns through the post. Three gun-lovers drove 2,500 miles from Arizona to Washington, DC, to protest. One argued that the bill was part of “a further attempt by a subversive power to make us part of one world socialistic government” and that it could “create chaos” and help “our enemies” to seize power. Not much has changed since Richard Hofstadter described this incident in a hugely influential book, “The Paranoid Style in American Politics”. Gun-lovers still argue that the slightest curb on their right to bear arms will make America vulnerable to tyranny. And in other areas, too, the paranoid style is alive and frothing.
This month the Southern Poverty Law Center, the same organization that warned of the alarming rise in extremist groups before the Oklahoma City bombing, issued its own report. A federal law enforcement agent told the center that he hadn’t seen growth this steep among such groups in 10 to 12 years. “All it’s lacking is a spark,” he said.
This uptick in the radical right predates the health care debate that is supposedly inspiring all the gun waving.
Some people watch the ferment at town-hall meetings in America today and worry that another Oklahoma-style atrocity is brewing. A few protesters are waving placards wishing for Mr Obama’s death. Others are ostentatiously wearing firearms outside his rallies. A recent report by the Southern Poverty Law Centre describes an uptick in the number of “Patriot” militia groups since Mr Obama’s election and frets that some could turn violent.
Coburn is a Republican senator from Oklahoma, where 168 people were murdered by right-wing psychopaths who bombed a federal building in Oklahoma City in 1995. Their leader, Timothy McVeigh, had the Jefferson quote on his T-shirt when he committed this act of mass murder.
Timothy McVeigh killed 168 people with a bomb in Oklahoma in 1995 because he thought the federal government was hatching various dastardly plots.
“What the right as a whole fears is the erosion of its own social position, the collapse of its power, the increasing incomprehensibility of a world — now overwhelmingly technical and complex — that has changed so drastically within a lifetime.”
Belief in conspiracy theories can be comforting. If everything that goes wrong is the fault of a secret cabal, that relieves you of the tedious necessity of trying to understand how a complex world really works.
Aside from the four instances above where the text of the articles was strikingly similar, the articles have many other assertions in common:
- Individuals who believe the government is criminal are crazy
- Individuals who believe the government is criminal are right-wing
- Individuals who believe the government is criminal are terrorists threatening violence
- Individuals who believe the government is criminal are associated with Hamas and other middle-eastern terrorist groups
- Individuals who believe the government is criminal are Nazis
- Politicians must stop repeating criminal accusations against the government
- The Secret Service agents will protect the president from individuals that carry guns who are threatening the president
- Radio or television hosts that support individuals who believe the government is criminal are outrageous or crackpots
- Accusations about euthanasia policies are obviously irrational fear-mongering
Real Government Conspiracies
Unfortunately, offenses attributed to “right-wing extremism” in the NY Times article were very real conspiracies involving the U.S. government in what is referred to as false-flag attacks. The Oklahoma bombing is a good example.
False flag operations are covert operations conducted by governments, corporations, or other organizations, which are designed to deceive the public in such a way that the operations appear as though they are being carried out by other entities. The name is derived from the military concept of flying false colors; that is, flying the flag of a country other than one’s own. False flag operations are not limited to war and counter-insurgency operations, and have been used in peace-time; for example, during Italy‘s strategy of tension.
First of all, we are supposed to believe that a truck bomb caused this damage:
The following is an excerpt from a recent infowars.com article that provides insight into the true nature of the Oklahoma City bombing:
- Just like 9/11, the official story of the Oklahoma City Bombing, that McVeigh alone carried out the attack using a fertilizer truck bomb, is contradicted by a plethora of eyewitness account as well as physical and circumstantial evidence.
- In early April 1995 a Ryder truck identical to the one used in the bombing was filmed by a pilot during an overflight of of an area near Camp Gruber-Braggs, Oklahoma. A June 17th, 1997 Washington Post article authenticates the photos as being exactly what they appear to be, photos of a Ryder truck in a clandestine base at Camp Gruber-Braggs. Why were the military in possession of a Ryder truck housed in a remote clandestine army base days before the Alfred P. Murrah bombing?
- In a 1993 letter to his sister, McVeigh claimed that he was approached by military intelligence and had joined an “elite squad of government paid assassins.” McVeigh often contradicted himself and changed his story on a whim to fit in with the latest government version of events. Is the Camp Grafton footage evidence of McVeigh’s enrollment in such a clandestine program?
- Multiple reports of Arabs at the scene assisting McVeigh were ignored and surveillance tapes were withheld under national security. The likely reason for this was the fact that Bush senior and Clinton were responsible for bringing in nearly 1,000 Iraqi soldiers captured by U.S. forces during the 1991 Persian Gulf War, some of whom were involved in the bombing.
- The FBI claimed McVeigh scouted the Alfred P. Murrah building weeks before the bombing and yet on the morning of the attack he stopped at a local gas station to ask directions, lending credibility to the new claims that he was being controlled by other conspirators and that the target of the bombing had been changed.
- Original reports of two explosions and several failed devices being defused by bomb squads were buried by the establishment as the official explanation that McVeigh acted alone was pushed. Scientific analysis conducted by General Benton K. Partin revealed core columns were blown out from within the building and the extensive damage to the Alfred P. Murrah building was completely inconsistent with the explanation of a single and relatively weak fertilizer truck bomb.
- Many eyewitnesses reported that bomb squads in full reaction gear were seen around the building immediately before the blast. Police officer Terence Yeakey, who helped save dozens of victims, was one such witness. Yeakey compiled extensive files on his observations but was later found with his throat and wrists slashed having also been shot in the head after he had told friends he was being followed by authorities.
Southern Poverty Law Center
Both articles refer to the SPLC, which references a Department of Homeland Defense report in April in relation to its concerns about “right-wing extremism”. DHS responded to a Freedom of Information Act request for data used to compile the report titled “Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment” not with any first-hand interviews or intelligence, but rather with the following list of web pages, all visited on August 4th, most of which are actually on the SPLC website or ordinary news articles: