Tuesday, January 11, 2011

Media Ignores Many Left Wing Beliefs, Ideologies and Influences of Shooter Jared Lee Loughner


Even people who knew him called him “liberal” and “left wing” on Twitter entries

by Larry Simons
January 11, 2011

First and foremost, let me begin this post by expressing my deepest, heart-felt sympathies to the families who lost loved ones and of those who were injured in Saturday’s mass shooting spree in Tucson, Arizona. At a political event outside of a supermarket on Saturday, a psychopathic nut opened fire and killed six people in an attempt to assassinate Arizona Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords.

This post is not meant to, in any way, shape or form, exploit the injured and dead of Saturday’s shooting, but it is meant to make things perfectly clear about certain facts pertaining to Jared Lee Loughner, the deranged nut who is charged with these crimes.

Almost immediately since Saturday [even before they knew who the shooter was], the blogs and media, predictably, have been attempting to associate Loughner with Constitutionalists, conservatives, gun owners, libertarians and the Tea Party movement. In fact, practically the exact opposite is the case. We are learning that many of the ideologies and influences of Loughner are actually considered in the range from leftist to far left.

The NY Post mentioned that Giffords’ father, Spencer, was asked if his daughter had any enemies, in which he stated, “Yeah. The whole Tea Party”, despite the fact that [Congresswoman] Giffords was a strong supporter of the second amendment and tighter border security, two key issues that Tea Partiers also support.

Others like Arizona Democratic Rep. Raul Grijalva suggests that anger at the government will automatically translate to assassination of public officials. He says, “[When] you stoke these flames, and you go to public meetings and you scream at the elected officials, you threaten them – you make us expendable you make us part of the cannon fodder. For a while, you’ve been feeding this hatred, this division… you feed it, you encourage it…. Something’s going to happen. People are feeding this monster…. Some of the extreme right wing has made demonization of elected officials their priority..”

Perhaps no one has painted a more vivid picture of obliterating anti-government speech than Arizona Sheriff Clarence Dupnik when he said, “When you look at unbalanced people, how they are, uh, how they respond to the vitriol that comes out of certain mouths about tearing down the government, the anger, the hatred, the bigotry that goes on in this country is getting to be outrageous.”

watch the clip


In an interview with FOX News’ Megan Kelly, Dupnik was asked by Kelly if he had any reason to believe that Loughner was taking in information or was any way influenced by the vitriol and the rhetoric that he refers to [namely anti-government rhetoric], in which Dupnik responds:

“If your question is specific, I have to be specific and say I don’t have that information yet. The investigation is it it’s very initial phases. But my belief, and I’ve been watching what’s been going on in this country for the last 75 years and I’ve been a police officer for over 50 years. There’s no doubt in my mind when a number of people night and day try to inflame the public, that there’s going to be some consequences from doing that and I think it’s irresponsible to do that.”Kelly responds, “It sounds like you’re being very honest that that’s just your speculation and that’s not anything that’s fact based at this point.”

Dupnik says, “That’s my opinion, period.”

After Kelly asked him why he is not focused primarily on facts, Dupnik says:

“Well, I think it’s more than just a political spin. I’m not sure that it really has anything to do with politics. I grew up in a country that was totally different from the country that we have today. We didn’t have this kind of nonsense going on, and it used to be that politicians from different parties could sit down, forget about their ideology and work on the countries problems.”

watch the clip


I find it interesting that Dupnik insists that “there’s no doubt" in his mind Loughner was influenced by anti-government rhetoric seconds after he just said that he didn’t have the information yet [on whether Loughner was inspired by political vitriol and anti-government rhetoric].

Equally hilarious was Dupnik saying, “Well, I think it’s more than just a political spin. I’m not sure that it really has anything to do with politics” then proceeds to make it a political issue by saying, “it used to be that politicians from different parties could sit down, forget about their ideology and work on the countries problems”.

Perhaps the most bizarre statement from Dupnik was this: “I grew up in a country that was totally different from the country that we have today. We didn’t have this kind of nonsense going on”. Hmmmm…did he take a time machine from 1959 and go straight to 1970 and completely miss the 1960’s? Where was he when both Kennedy’s, Martin Luther King, Gandhi, Metger Evers and Malcolm X were all assassinated? Brilliantly, Megan Kelly does not miss the chance of mentioning a few of these names to the Sheriff, of which he has no response. [Also, Dupnik was 18 years old when four Puerto Rican nationalists opened fire in the House of Representatives on March 1, 1954, injuring five representatives who were among the 240 reps of the 83rd congress debating the immigration bill. But, Dupnik is right, that kind of nonsense didn't happen in his day....only what he conveniently remembers...which is nothing.]

On Saturday night, on a special presentation of Countdown during his Special Comment, Keith Olbermann praised Sheriff Dupnik for his above comments while not missing a chance to blame Loughner’s actions on the Tea Party and every conservative he could think of while completely omitting from his speech the fact that just two days before the shootings in Arizona, the Daily Kos posted this story [now removed] by someone named BoyBlue entitled, “My CongressWOMAN voted against Nancy Pelosi! And is now dead to me!” The Congresswoman BoyBlue is referring to? Gabrielle Giffords.

Here are the screen shots of the story. [click to enlarge, as well as all remaining pictures]




The Daily Kos also ran a story posted by Markos Moulitsas himself in June of 2008 where he said these words:

“Not all of these people will get or even deserve primaries, but this vote certainly puts a bulls eye on their district. If we can field enough serious challengers, and if we repeat the Donna Edwards and Joe Lieberman stories a few more times, well then, our elected officials might have no choice but to be more responsive. Because if we show them that their AT&T lobbyist buddies can't save their jobs, they'll pay more attention to those who can.”

Right above this quote was a list of “targeted” Democrats who voted for the 2008 FISA bill. Giffords name was one of 43 blue dog democrats whose names were highlighted for “added emphasis”.

Olbermann also omitted the fact that Barack Obama said on June 14, 2008 at a Philadelphia fundraiser [to Republicans]: “If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun”. Here’s the screen shot of the original Wall Street Journal story posted on the left wing Huffington Post website.



Had a conservative, gun owning libertarian said this, they would not only be mentioning it every 6 seconds on MSNBC and CNN, and not only would it be on every liberal blog you can name, but they would be tar-and-feathering the one who said it and hanging them on a flag pole by his ballsack. Since Obama said it, no big deal…move along, nothing to see here. We would also be hearing “He didn’t mean that LITERALLY, get real.”Here is a clip of Obama telling his supporters on Sept. 17, 2008 to “argue” with their political opponents and “get in their face”. Again, if there were a clip of a libertarian gun owner saying these words, they would be charged right along with Loughner as a co-conspirator of his crime. Since Obama said it, no big deal….move along, nothing to see here.



This brings us to the ramblings, yet again, of Mark Potok, of the Southern Poverty Law Center, who was on Countdown with Keith Olbermann on Saturday night. Like clockwork, Potok wastes no time lumping Loughner in with the “conspiracy theorist/patriot movement/white supremacy” group because that’s his job.

watch the clip


Potok mentions Loughner’s YouTube page, in which Loughner lists his favorite books, but only mentions Ayn Rand’s We the Living, while completely ignoring the fact that Hitler’s Mein Kempf and The Communist Manifesto are among his faves. It’s quite clear why Potok would purposely refrain from mentioning these books, because they were written by socialists and mentioning them would have obliterated his point that Loughner is “right wing”. The Wizard of Oz and Peter Pan are also on Loughner’s favorite book list. Does this mean that Potok believes children all around the world who have read these two books are prone to assassinate politicians in public?


Loughner's YouTube page

Potok attempts to connect Loughner to conspiracy theorist David Icke by mentioning that Loughner posted that he studied “conscience dreaming” in college on his YouTube page. Potok says that term should be “conscious dreaming” and insists that Icke [which Potok pronounces “Icky”] practices conscious dreaming despite there being no mention of that term nowhere on Icke’s website or wikipedia page.

Potok also says that another “sign” that Loughner was part of the “radical right” was his “idea of the only legitimate currency being backed by gold and silver”. Potok calls this a “core idea of the radical right”, despite the fact that it was a core idea of the framers of the Constitution. Article 1, Section 10 says this:

“No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility.”

According to Mark Potok, Thomas Jefferson and James Madison would be prone to assassinating political officials. They get no nuttier than Mark Potok.

Then, we have our favorite liberal wingnuts Dave Neiwert and Andy Ostroy to add their exploitation to the mix.

Neiwert, in his latest article, without any facts whatsoever to link Loughner to “right wing extremism”, the Patriot movement or government hatred, immediately links Loughner to the right wing by saying that the Giffords shooting makes “19 total cases of domestic-terrorism inspired by right-wing extremism in the past couple of years”.

Neiwert cites 18 incidents of “supposed” right-wing acts of domestic terrorism in the past 2-½ years. Most of his list are incidents that seemingly had nothing to do with right-wing extremism. Four of the incidents appear to be grounded in racism against President Obama. Neiwert has never made a conclusive link between white supremacists and right-wing extremists.

A good example of the point I am making is holocaust museum shooter James von Brunn [who happens to be one of the 18 examples Neiwert lists] who supposedly was “right wing” and a white supremacist. Nevermind the fact that Neiwert NOT ONCE mentioned in ANY of his stories that von Brunn hated both Bush’s, McCain and FOX News and that the FOX News affiliate in Washington DC was his next target.

Neiwert mentions an unidentified man who walked into a Jacksonville mosque in May of 2010 and set it on fire, also setting off a pipe bomb. In the article that he links to, nowhere does it mention the man was “right wing” or how anyone would even know what his political views were since he is UNIDENTIFIED.

Neiwert mentions tax protester Joe Stack who flew a plane into an IRS building in Austin, Texas in February of 2010, but fails to mention that “right wing” Joe Stack was a DEMOCRAT and quoted socialist Karl Marx in hs suicide note.

Neiwert mentions Scott Roeder, the man who assassinated abortion doctor George Tiller in May of 2009. No mention by Neiwert on how he knows Roeder was “right wing” or even had a political agenda. It was not possible that Roeder killed Tiller because he was pissed off about abortions? Not that this would justify it. In fact, I wrote about this story and condemned O’ Reilly for possibly fueling the murders. You don’t have to be right wing or a follower of O’ Reilly to be angry about abortion. Case-in-point….I, myself, abhor Bill O’ Reilly and I am not right wing, but I still oppose abortion. Case closed.

Neiwert mentions Pittsburgh cop killer Richard Poplawski, who killed 3 cops in April of 2009. Again no mention of what makes a white supremacist “right wing” [as I debunked in the James von Brunn incident].

Neiwert mentions Pentagon shooter John Patrick Bedell, who wounded two officers in March of 2010, but once again fails to mention that he was a registered DEMOCRAT.Neiwert’s remaining examples may very well be tied to right-wing extremists, I have no idea. I don’t have much knowledge of those incidents, but I just explained away 10 of them very quickly. I am sure if I spent more time investigating the lesser-known incidents, I am sure I would find more evidence that Neiwert is sensationalizing these incidents and that would make him an even bigger lying sack of shit than I have already proven him to be.

Neiwert calls the Giffords shooting the “19th case of domestic terrorism by right-wing extremism” when we still do not have any idea what the reason is behind the Arizona shootings. It could be anything. It could be the fact that Loughner is a known anti-semite [because he obviously loves Hitler] and he acted out because Giffords is Jewish. My point is: we don’t know the reasons yet, and that is why people like Sheriff Dupnik and Dave Neiwert need to shut their gigantic pieholes until we have FACTS. Until then, these fucktards are exploiting the deaths of six people [including a 6-year-old]. I bet that makes those bastards real proud!

Fucktard Andy Ostroy is another who exploits the tragedy to make a cheap political point. He immediately blames O’ Reilly, Limbaugh, Palin, Hannity and Glenn Beck for hateful rhetoric when his own site is filled with the exact same hateful rhetoric. I don’t have time to post it all.

Ostroy says this:

“Is it not fair or accurate then to connect the dots to these reckless rabble-rousers and put the blood of the Tuscon victims on their hands? Given the political rantings on his website and in YouTube videos, are we to be so naive as to think that 22-year-old mass murderer Jared Loughner, who took his glock to that supermarket parking lot with the clear intent to assassinate Giffords, was not at all influenced by this steady stream of hate-speak from Palin, Hannity, Limbaugh, Beck, O'Reilly and others? Or worse, have we become so dominated by political correctness that we fail so miserably to directly place blame where it so rightfully lies?”

Ostroy knows this? He has proof Loughner was influenced by the aforementioned people? Do the people listed say inflammatory things on occasion? Of course they do, but so do liberals. Remember Chris Matthews saying he wished Rush Limbaugh would die from a CO2 pellet to the head? Does Ostroy mention this? Hell no.

Here are Matthews’ words and the clip [from October 13, 2009]:

“You guys see Live and Let Die, the great Bond film with Yaphet Kotto as the bad guy, Mr. Big? In the end they jam a big CO2 pellet in his face and he blew up. I have to tell you, Rush Limbaugh is looking more and more like Mr. Big, and at some point somebody's going to jam a CO2 pellet into his head and he's going to explode like a giant blimp. That day may come. Not yet. But we'll be there to watch. I think he's Mr. Big, I think Yaphet Kotto. Are you watching, Rush?"



Of course Ostroy doesn’t mention this. It would destroy his agenda and his exploitation of the Arizona tragedy by telling his 3 readers that LEFT wing people spew vitriol too.

Also, it makes no sense that Loughner would be a rock-solid right-winger when Giffords advocated right-wing issues like border security and gun rights. It has also been revealed in the last 24 hours that Loughner was into the occult, idolized fake human skulls and dressed like the grim reaper. Odd behavior for a right-wing conservative.

A photo was recently taken [below] of Loughner’s back yard showing the human skull shrine.



Also, others who knew Loughner tweeted on Saturday and said he was “left wing” and “liberal”. Tweeter “antderosa” said this on Twitter on Saturday:

As I knew him, he was left-wing, quite liberal & oddly obsessed with the 2012 prophecy

“lakarune” said this:

I haven’t seen him since ’07. Then he was left-wing



The bottom line is this: Vitriol and hate speech comes from both sides of the political fence. For one side to demonize the other without facts and without a pure and sincere desire to know what was at the very heart of these crimes is dangerous, unprofessional and downright despicable.

Olbermann, Potok, Neiwert, Dupnik, Ostroy and any other asshole that immediately jumped on board the exploitation train should be immediately fired and on their knees begging for forgiveness for taking a real tragedy [that resulted in real dead people] and turning it into a cheap political soundbyte to advance their political agendas.

Real Truth Online wishes speedy recoveries for Congresswoman Giffords as well as the remaining injured. We wish comfort and peace of mind to the families that lost their loved ones.

19 comments:

the_last_name_left said...

first of all, you don't know what leftwing or rightwing mean. That leaves you reaching.

You say:

"It’s quite clear why Potok would purposely refrain from mentioning these books [Mein Kampf and Commie Manifesto], because they were written by national socialists and mentioning them would have obliterated his point that Loughner is “right wing”.
--------

hehe. Karl Marx was not a national socialist. National Socialism is the official name and term for the German Nazi Party formed in 1927.

Karl Marx was an international socialist. Nazism's "national socialism" takes its name to distinguish itself from such international socialism aka "communism". Nazism loathed communism, aka "international socialism" - when Germany invaded the Soviet Union the socialist apparatchiks were rounded-up and shot. Nazism - National Socialism - considered International socialism to be synonymous with being Jewish: for Nazism, Judaism and International socialism (aka communism) were the same thing.

You know what the Nazis did to Jews, right? They did much the same to communists ie international socialists in the vein of Karl Marx and the Communist Manifesto.

Further, the ComManifesto is a pamphlet whereas Mein Kampf is a book. The Manifesto can be read in 30 minutes, Hitler's drivel takes a lifetime to read as it's so dull. It takes a far greater commitment to get through.

Anyway, the point is "national socialism" (Nazism) considered itself antithetical and in opposition to "international socialism" aka communism. They did invade and attempt to destroy the USSR, you know.

Fact is, The Communist Manifesto is leftwing/communist.....whilst Mein Kampf a staple of the far-right/neo-nazism.

They are quite different things. You make a big mistake in conflating them both as leftwing (or at least not rightwing).

Therefore your claim is wrong that Potok never mentioned them because it would destroy his argument about Loughner likely being rightwing.

the_last_name_left said...

second, you say

----
Potok also says that another “sign” that Loughner was part of the “radical right” was his “idea of the only legitimate currency being backed by gold and silver”.
----

That's true. Leftwingers are not goldbugs. Ron Paul is a goldbug.

So is your treasured Eustace Mullins a goldbug and obsessed with Federal Reserve conspiracy, a la Alex Jones. Mullins has a history of Nazi connections extending across 50 years.

Goldbugs are invariably rightwing? It isn't an issue of note on the left, that's for sure.
-----------------------------
3, you say

---
Neiwert has never made a conclusive link between white supremacists and right-wing extremists.
---

Oh dear, Larry.

How on earth can racism fit into leftwing core values such as egalitarianism and classlessness?

The left stands against inequality and for equality - against nationalism and for internationalism - against class and for classlessness. All in opposition to the right which we can say supports inequality (at least of outcomes), nationalism, and class.

Racial supremacism is completely antithetical to the left - it is a staple of the far-right.

the_last_name_left said...

4, you say

-------
A good example of the point I am making is holocaust museum shooter James von Brunn [who happens to be one of the 18 examples Neiwert lists] who supposedly was “right wing” and a white supremacist. Nevermind the fact that Neiwert NOT ONCE mentioned in ANY of his stories that von Brunn hated both Bush’s, McCain and FOX News and that the FOX News affiliate in Washington DC was his next target.
-----

That's a good example of how poorly you are making your point.

Von Brunn was far-right.....and like the far-right he hated FOX, BUSH, McCain. And he hated Jews, the Holocaust Museum, the Federal Reserve etc.

Hating mainstream right figures is not something restricted to the left, Larry. The far-right hate the mainstream left AND right. That's kinda what makes them FAR-right. Kapiche?

5, you say

----
Neiwert mentions tax protester Joe Stack who flew a plane into an IRS building in Austin, Texas in February of 2010, but fails to mention that “right wing” Joe Stack was a DEMOCRAT and quoted socialist Karl Marx in hs suicide note.
----

Stack did not "quote Karl Marx". He vaguely uttered some semblance of famous socialist slogan.

You can be rightwing and a Democrat, you know? Europeans would generally consider the American left to be rightwing - that's how little "left" the Dems are.

And consider the healthcare reform? It is way less "left" than any European systems.....and was introduced by your supposedly "left" Democrats.

Anyway, whether Stack was left or rightwing seems obscure. However, attacking an IRS place in one's plane because one's business has gone pfft! hardly fits the profile of a leftie. Not many socialists have their own capitalist businesses.....nor do they deeply resent taxation in principle.

the_last_name_left said...

6, on abortion.

The campaigns against abortion were led by ...what'shisname? Amery? And the other dude whom has recanted, and now sees that he and his father were creating a far-right religious army around the abortion issue.

Whilst lefties can obviously care about abortion, the campaigns were clearly emanating from the right and had far greater impact amongst the right. As an important issue, it is of the right, essentially.

7, you say

-----
Neiwert mentions Pittsburgh cop killer Richard Poplawski, who killed 3 cops in April of 2009. Again no mention of what makes a white supremacist “right wing” [as I debunked in the James von Brunn incident].
-----

Come on Larry? Poplawski as you know was a member of Stormfront, hated Jews, was a gun-nut and dug all the crap Alex Jones and other rightwing conspiracists spew.

Sheesh. Poplawski was rightwing.

8, you say

-----
people like Sheriff Dupnik and Dave Neiwert need to shut their gigantic pieholes until we have FACTS.
-----

Well, there you go Larry - displaying the exact sort of behaviour Dupnik was on about, I suggest.

Dupnik is entitled to his opinion - and he clearly admitted that was it all was. As he's a cop with long experience, you might at least respect his opinion as likely it is informed by his experience (which you lack).

8, you say

-----
Also, others who knew Loughner tweeted on Saturday and said he was “left wing” and “liberal”. Tweeter “antderosa” said this on Twitter on Saturday:

“As I knew him, he was left-wing, quite liberal & oddly obsessed with the 2012 prophecy”
------

Jut as you don't have a clue about left and right, Larry, I never trust American use of the word, at least without some qualification and evidence that the speaker knows what they mean.

Obsession with 2012 prophecy, and occult stuff is really not leftwing - socialism is scientific, materialist, rational - not occultist. Indeed, if any political system were occultist it'd be Nazis (extreme right) because of Euro/German paganism etc.

the_last_name_left said...

nazi party was 1920....not 1927. ooops./

Real Truth Online said...

I did take the word "national" out because while you are correct that the manifesto leans toward communism, it doesnt make Marx any lessof a socialist than Hitler. Youre comparing apples to applesauce. Your other points----sameold TLNL BULLSHIT as usual.

You said:

"----
Potok also says that another “sign” that Loughner was part of the “radical right” was his “idea of the only legitimate currency being backed by gold and silver”.
----

That's true. Leftwingers are not goldbugs. Ron Paul is a goldbug."

I guess you IGNORED my very next comment about the FOUNDERS stating in the Constitution their opposition to paper money and my link the constitution. Yeah, why mention that?

"The left stands against inequality and for equality - against nationalism and for internationalism - against class and for classlessness."

Yeah, that LEFT wing Hitler really hated inequality, didnt he?

"Fact is, The Communist Manifesto is leftwing/communist.....whilst Mein Kampf a staple of the far-right/neo-nazism."

NEO-Nazism?? Hitler was a NEO-Nazi? He was a NEW Nazi? Hmmm, thought he was an original one.

"You can be rightwing and a Democrat, you know?"

By far, the funniest thing you EVER said. LOL

Anonymous said...

"Come on Larry? Poplawski as you know was a member of Stormfront, hated Jews, was a gun-nut and dug all the crap Alex Jones and other rightwing conspiracists spew."

Funny, he actually CRITICIZED Alex Jones on Jones' site! Ive already said this in my stories, but you IGNORE it, naturally.

"Dupnik is entitled to his opinion - and he clearly admitted that was it all was. As he's a cop with long experience, you might at least respect his opinion as likely it is informed by his experience (which you lack)."

And his long experience should tell him to SHUT HIS PIEHOLE UNTIL HE HAS FACTS. I love how you completely IGNORED the points I made during his interview with Megan Kelly. See, with wingnuts like YOU, it's more important to me the things you IGNORE than the things you address!

"Jut as you don't have a clue about left and right, Larry, I never trust American use of the word, at least without some qualification and evidence that the speaker knows what they mean."

LOL. It would have been better for you to have IGNORED my comment here than to give me such a bullshit response like that! LOL

the_last_name_left said...

L: Funny, he actually CRITICIZED Alex Jones on Jones' site! Ive already said this in my stories, but you IGNORE it, naturally.

-------------

Back this claim up, Larry. Let's see your evidence.

And let's see some evidence you know what left/right means?

You usually insist there's no such thing, which makes your use of the phrases perplexing.

So, it's incumbent on you to be clear - let's see some evidence you have the slightest clue what the terms generally mean.....else how are we to understand your use of the terms?

the_last_name_left said...

Chapter and verse - let's see Poplawski's criticisms of Alex Jones etc.

QUOTES, Larry. EVIDENCE, Larry.

And err....if there's no left or right, what does it mean when you say Poplawski disagreed with rightwinger Alex Jones?

Is that supposed to suggest he was leftwing? Even though you usually insist the terms are meaningless, you draw logical conclusions based on them being opposites! Well, that shows that you do understand there's a difference, even though you insist there is no such thing.

Someone opposes a rightwinger, and that makes them left.....even though there's no such thing as left or right? Come on, Larry, stop playing it both ways?

Anyway - let's see your evidence for Poplawski "disagreeing" with Alex Jones?

And let's have some evidence you know what left and right means - because you haven't shown much so far, even though you betray yourself as clearly rightwing, and your values and sympathies clearly lie with the right.

Larry said...

"Back this claim up, Larry. Let's see your evidence."

I already did in my story about Poplawski. I dont have the time nor the energy to re-post old stories that you ignored initially. Look under my stories under Poplawski in the labels and read it. Asswipe.

"Someone opposes a rightwinger, and that makes them left.....even though there's no such thing as left or right? Come on, Larry, stop playing it both ways?"

LOL. Quite funny. Thats all YOU do on your blog----condemn Mike Rivero, Alex Jones and Carto for not agreeing with YOU [a left winger] so they must be RIGHT WING---correct?????

Larry said...

Here's your precious EVIDENCE fucktard:

http://www.adl.org/learn/extremism_in_the_news/White_Supremacy/poplawski+report.htm?LEARN_Cat=Extremism&LEARN_SubCat=Extremism_in_the_News

In this link, near the bottom it says this:

"One of Poplawski's favorite places for such conspiracy theories was the Web site of the right-wing conspiracy radio talk show host Alex Jones. Poplawski visited the site, Infowars, frequently, shared links to it with others, and sometimes even posted to it. One of his frustrations with the site, though, was that it didn't focus enough on the nefarious roles played by Jews in all these conspiracies. "For being such huge players in the endgame," he observed in a March 29, 2009 posting to Infowars, "too many 'infowarriors' are surprisingly unfamiliar with the Zionists." Another time he was more hopeful, noting that "racial awareness is on the rise among the young white population.""

Anonymous said...

hey, its last cock in mouth queenie fraud name left. and hes made himself look a fool again. how can this retard talk about fighting, when the only thing that him and his grand dad fought was boredom. get real. your a fraud. and as usual larry in one verse destroys fucktard again. winner, larry.

the_last_name_left said...

Larry said:

-----
he [Poplawski] actually CRITICIZED Alex Jones on Jones' site! Ive already said this in my stories, but you IGNORE it, naturally.
------

NOWHERE CAN LARRY BACK THIS UP. LARRY FAILS TO SUBSTANTIATE HIS CLAIM.

Poplawski's issue with Alex Jones was that he wasn't "100%" sure Jones was an anti-semite.

No other differences are known. Not surprising seeing as Polawski was a commenter and reader of Prisonplanet etc.

Larry, you failed to prove your point.

the_last_name_left said...

Poplawski was a nazi who frequented Alex Jones' website.....your own quote says he frequently shared site-links with others.

He was rightwing. You understand that, Larry?

Larry said...

"your own quote says he frequently shared site-links with others."

AND my quote also mentions him CRITICIZING Alex Jones-----which is the VERY PROOF you asked for!! When I GIVE the proof you ask for, naturally, you focus on ANOTHER portion of the quote!! LMFAO!!

This makes you a COLOSSAL fucking FRAUD!

Larry said...

Also funny how you ignored this:

"Someone opposes a rightwinger, and that makes them left.....even though there's no such thing as left or right? Come on, Larry, stop playing it both ways?"

LOL. Quite funny. Thats all YOU do on your blog----condemn Mike Rivero, Alex Jones and Carto for not agreeing with YOU [a left winger] so they must be RIGHT WING---correct?????

Anonymous said...

last queenie fraud destroyed again.

the_last_name_left said...

L: [Poplawski] actually CRITICIZED Alex Jones on Jones' site!
-----------

No he didn't.

Where is your evidence he did?

Your link goes to the ADL whom say one of Poplawski's "frustrations" was that Jones' site wasn't openly anti-semitic ENOUGH - "he wasn't 100% about Jones" - he said at Stormfront.

That isn't opposition - and Prisonplanet claimed Poplawski's views were 180 opposed to those of Prisonplanet! A lie.

I've told you this before and you still persist with these lies on behalf of Prionplanet and Alex Jones et al. That's your "service" to your "movement" I suppose......

The point of criticism is that Prionplanet is sufficiently attractive to Nazis.....such that Poplawski was drawn there. That doesn't show opposition - it shows shared concerns and perspectives etc - not opposition.

It shows one can go directly from Prionplanet to Stromfront.....

So you're flat wrong about Poplawski, for one. He simply has to be admitted to be a member of the far-right. And that's why he was interested in Prisonplanet....because it attracts the far/right.

------

Removing the word "nationalism" does not mean Hitler and Marx "were both socialists". You can't simply remove the nationalism from Hitler and declare he's now a socialist!

eg Under socialism, everyone is supposed to be the same, and equal, yes? That is so obviously not the case under Nazism, right?

Anonymous said...

wow its last cock in mouth queenie fraud name left again looking like a jackass. theres a new one. lol..lol.