Politically Convenient Terrorism

Early into the Tucson massacre, I wrote a post called White Terrorist Apologia. It was based on a statement from a

Click on this picture to go to a short discussion on skinheads. Read the apologia for skinheads there in the comments. Comments like " skin heads have there place in our society" and "Great topic to write about but unfortunately, they pose no real threat to the Country as a whole! "

reader of Juan Cole’s Informed Comment that “pointed out that if a Muslim organization had put out a poster with American politicians in the cross-hairs, and one had gotten shot, there would have been hell to pay”.   We had a recent terrorist threat in Spokane with pics just shown  in the Seattle Weekly as a “sophisticated and deadly” bomb deposited along a MLK celebratory parade route.  Then,  we got the silence of the lambs.  My guess is that napsack was deposited by the Washington State Hate Group “The American Front Skinheads’ or some such spin off.  They’ve done stuff like that before. Here’s a refresher for those of you that don’t remember the early 1990s around the Ruby Ridge Incident and Waco.

In this context, the FBI recorded four incidents of right-wing terrorism between 1990 and April 1996 (when The Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996(1) “AEDPA” was signed into law), including two July 1993 bombings in Washington state, by the American Front Skinheads–one of a gay bar in Seattle and the other of the NAACP headquarters in Tacoma. More generally, from 1989 through 1991, the Justice Department reported that the number of bombing incidents in the United States increased from 1208 to 2499; none were acts of Arab terrorism. In 1993, there were forty-three deaths and over three hundred injuries due to bombings not tied to international terrorist groups.

EmptyWheel picked up on the quiet too and noted that Some Terrorism Scares Are More Useful Than Other Terrorism Scares.  Marcy discusses not only how we don’t screech about acts of terrorism most likely committed by right wing groups but that right wing blogs seem complicit in the silence.   She cites  David Neiwert and his running list of domestic terror attacks that she argues “demonstrates clearly that these are not isolated incidences”.  She also points out a very interesting headline at The Philadelphia Inquirer: ‘Has right-wing carping killed media coverage of major “domestic terrorism” case in Spokane’ by Will Bunch.

Which is why I can’t help but wonder if there’s a backstory here related to the past weeks coverage of the assassination attempt on Rep. Giffords, and the right-wing critique of some of that coverage. As you surely recall, the fact that a Democratic congresswoman was targeted in a state that has beeb a bastion of the Tea Party Movement and unrest over issues like illegal immigration provoked a number of articles about political rhetoric on the right — including the fact that Giffords had been mapped with crosshairs in the now famous political mailing by Sarah Palin’s PAC.

Does the pro-gun crowd disown these kinds of militias, own them, or just want them ignored by the MSM so as not to interfere with their spin that only leftist loonies threaten our government?  Marcy’s thoughts are pretty clear on the matter.

Because the press almost never covers these domestic terrorism incidents. And, just as importantly, our government doesn’t often (the biggest exception was the Hutaree bust) hold big press conferences to report on such events, partly is because most press conferences are about arrests, not unsolved crimes. Moreover, in spite of Neiwert’s and Bunch’s work, there is not one bogeyman, like al Qaeda, which the press can blame.

And without an easy and convenient bogeyman, terrorism scares don’t serve the same purpose for the press, or the government.

How much of this also has to do with the fact that we really have no real left in this country?  We actually have no actual liberals or socialists that really have a voice in media or a major following on the web.  All we have is ‘progressives’ and conservatives that aren’t interested in conserving anything but the wealth of the plutocracy.    As I pointed out in my January 8 post, even when the FBI and other law enforcement agencies point out these right wing militia groups, the right wing blogosphere and media turns it into an attack on gun rights and veterans. They deliberately miss the point.

This leads me to believe that we’re only subject to concern about terrorists when it’s politically convenient.  We can extrapolate terrorism out of building mosques but actually finding bombs along parade routes isn’t so interesting because it doesn’t play into the current political theatre.  The current political theatre is what’s cooking on the list of John Boehner and the like.  Right now, the list of acceptable terrorist threats include anything that might be linkable to  Mexican Drug Cartels, women wanting reproductive care, and Muslims. So, building a mosque is an act of terrorism.  Asking a pharmacist for drugs which stop uterine infections is an act of  terrorism.  Printing signs in both Spanish and English is an act of terrorism.  Actually leaving bombs on MLK day parade routes; not interesting.

We need to start calling a lot more people out on this.  It’s obvious that most Americans really don’t know what a long and violent history we have with these right wing militia groups.  Check out that running list and a similar one I posted on my January 8 thread.  These folks are violent, crazy, and well armed.  They are already in the country.  The press needs to do a better job of providing information on all threats to domestic security even when it doesn’t match with the narrative the right wing wants on gun ownership and anti-federal government memes.

Buried in our newspapers from yesterday:

Yesterday the AP reported an anonymous U.S. official saying it was the most “potentially destructive” device he’d ever seen.

“They haven’t seen anything like this in this country,” the official said. “This was the worst device, and most intentional device, I’ve ever seen.”A bit alarmist, perhaps. But no doubt that this thing exploding on a parade procession would have been horrific.

Oh, and think you’re someplace safe?

Police Seize ‘Large Amount’ Of Weapons From Blogger Who Praised Giffords Shooting: ‘1 Down And 534 To Go’

Police in Arlington, MA this week seized a “large amount” of weapons and ammunition from local businessman Travis Corcoran after he wrote a blog post threatening U.S. lawmakers in the wake of the shooting of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ). In a post on his blog (which has since been removed) titled “1 down and 534 to go” — 1 referring to Giffords and 534 referring to the rest of the House of Representatives and the Senate — Corcoran applauded the shooting of Giffords and justified the assassination of lawmakers because he argued the federal government has grown far beyond its constitutional limits. “It is absolutely, absolutely unacceptable to shoot indiscriminately. Target only politicians and their staff and leave regular citizens alone,” he wrote in the post.

Oh, and this guy wasn’t a Muslim, wasn’t a Mexican, and wasn’t a woman wanting an abortion.  He  falls into the extreme libertarian anti-government category like his buddies described up top.  His tweets indicate he’s a fan of Senator Rand Paul.  What will the Drudge Report and the Tea Party say to defend his arsenal and his speech?  Just another white guy who loves parts of the first amendment and all of the second?

Update: Description of  Corcoran’s Politics from the ThinkProgress post.

Corcoran calls himself “an anarcho-capitalist” and while his blog has been taken down, based on his Twitter page, he appears to hold views similar to those of many in the anti-government libertarian wing of the conservative movement, like many tea party activists. Anarcho-capitalism is a radical subset of libertarianism, and is often referred to as “libertarian-anarchy.” For example, echoing calls from many on the right, Corcoran tweeted, “it is unconstitutional for the Feds to even run a department of education.”


Shorter Hu: Just shut up and buy our stuff because we’ve manipulated our currency to the point you have no choice

If you’re not watching the joint Hu/Obama presser you should be .

2.06pm ET: A Bloomberg journalist asks Hu directly why he didn’t answer the first AP question about human rights – and follows up with a query about the reaction from congressional leaders, as mentioned below.

Hu says he didn’t hear the question about human rights for technical reasons, saying it was a question directed at President Obama, but says he will answer it now:

“President Obama and I have already met eight times. each time we met we had an exchange of views in a candid manner … in the issues we covered we also covered human rights. China is always committed to the protection and promotion of human rights. In terms of human rights China has made enormous progress.”

“Chinese is a huge country with a huge population,” Hu reminds us, and it “still faces challenges in terms of reform”.

2.05pm ET: “We want to sell you all kinds of stuff. We want to sell you planes, we want to sell you cars, we want to sell you software,” says Obama in response to a question about the growth of China.

Joint asskissing session here on CPSAN2.

Read the rest of this entry »


K Street Apologia

The President has written a WSJ op-ed and an executive order to declare war on ‘unnecessary’ regulation while  looking for necessary regulation.   He’s evidently a little bit pregnant.

This must be the new and improved, more business friendly President.  (Like he wasn’t business friendly enough already? What about bailing out GM, Chrysler, and most of the finance industry?)   This is the one that needs to raise $1 billion in campaign funds for re-election and knows it won’t come from unemployed and financially struggling voters.

From his WSJ Op Ed:

This order requires that federal agencies ensure that regulations protect our safety, health and environment while promoting economic growth. And it orders a government-wide review of the rules already on the books to remove outdated regulations that stifle job creation and make our economy less competitive. It’s a review that will help bring order to regulations that have become a patchwork of overlapping rules, the result of tinkering by administrations and legislators of both parties and the influence of special interests in Washington over decades.

When is the last time you read a Democratic politician that suggested something like “remove outdated regulations that stifle job creation and make our economy less competitive”?  There’s something even more weird and ironic about this sudden urge to op ed for the WSJ.   This is an interesting day for the release of a new improved middle path that’s sounds like something the Club for Growth can really sink its teeth into.  On this very same day, “The Financial Stability Oversight Council on Tuesday released its six-month study into the Volcker rule and held its third public meeting.” according to FT Alphaville. This group has just made it very clear that removing what several administrations thought was “outdated regulations that stifle job creation and make our economy less competitive” caused the biggest financial melt down and global recession since The Great Depression.  They want more regulation not less.

At the moment, banks are playing musical Special Purpose Vehicles; a delightful accounting parlor game that does nothing to get rid of systemic risk.  According to the FT article, this includes “creatively shuffling their more obvious proprietary trading operations internally (for example, into asset management and ETF desks) and externally into spun-off funds”.  Sure, like that saved ENRON all that nasty embarrassment of bad decision making.

While this report is trying to pick up the pieces of  nuclear financial meltdown by suggesting which gaps in regulation need to be filled, the President is chatting up the CEO set on the WSJ op-ed page.  There are not even any code words or in-between the lines nudge, nudge wink, winks in these statements.  He’s just pandering away.

As the executive order I am signing makes clear, we are seeking more affordable, less intrusive means to achieve the same ends—giving careful consideration to benefits and costs. This means writing rules with more input from experts, businesses and ordinary citizens. It means using disclosure as a tool to inform consumers of their choices, rather than restricting those choices. And it means making sure the government does more of its work online, just like companies are doing.

Does this mean the bidding window is open on which regulations the K street minions want thrown out next?  That worked so well with looking the other way for the shadow banking industry and letting the commercial banking industry run a virtual casino, didn’t it?  There’s a list of ten major regulatory blueprints coming from The Financial Stability Oversight Council.  Are investors, holders of 401ks, pension plans, and savers expected to take any of this seriously given the Wall Street missive?

Regulations reflect the social cost of private consumption and private production of goods and services that have bad side effects.  (See this Wikipedia entry on market externalities for more information.)  Markets with externalities have bad side effects that do not fall completely on the private producer or the private consumer.   This leads to market inefficiency.  Goods and services with negative externalties get overproduced, they are under priced,  overconsumed and the side costs hit all of us with some of us suffering more than others. Usually, the ones that suffer the most are those least able to get out of the way or stop the problem.   The experiences of Hinkley California, people that get lung cancer from secondary smoke, and any of us that were invested in financial or housing assets in the last five years suggests that you cannot just let people and businesses run amok and hope they’ll do right by the people they hurt.  Without an effective and accessible judicial system and a vigorous system of sticks and regulatory oversight, you get all kinds of social costs that we get to manage without having any of the fun of buying and using the product or service.  Ask me.  I’ve spent the last five years living with the results of badly built levees and dealing with the first year of a BP Oil disaster.  Let’s  point to my 403(B)  and my home price that are still in a recovering state from the shadow banking boys run amok. I’m sure you can list a boatload of the ones that the Federal Government ignored recently to give business a more ‘competitive environment” too that have cost you more than they’ve been worth.  Sure, they’re now creating more jobs along the Gulf Coast right now but would you seriously let one of your children on to a fishing boat or deep water drilling rig?  Do you seriously want your child sitting next to a chain smoker day in and day out?

So, my next question is did I just read that every regulation is now going up to the highest bidder?  Maybe, at least,  if we get them off the books, we won’t have the moral hazard of thinking any one pays attention to them anymore.  If that’s the case, we should all be trial attorneys litigating hazard suits.  From where I sit–in a city reeling from the social costs of externalities–our biggest problem is that no one takes regulations or regulators seriously any more because the federal government prioritizes the bottom lines of the perpetrators and not the suffering and the well being of the victims.


Tuesday Reads

Good Morning!!!

It’s the end of a long weekend that celebrates the life of an American with vision, purpose, and fortitude in the pursuit of principle.   The news at the moment is as glum as the weather.  I will try to end the morning reads on higher and lighter ground.  I promise.

With that, I start with Glenn Greenwald at Salon and ‘The U.S. role in Gulet Mohamed’s detention’.  Thought we were done torturing people and denying them due process?  Dream on!  This is the story of a young American held in extraordinary conditions in the extraordinary country of Kuwait that basically still owes us their oil fields and freedom from the occupation by Saddam Hussein.  Gulet’s been held in some horrible situations that beg the question of who is responsible?  Is it some Sultan or President Obama?  Yes, this is change you can believe in if you’re Dick Cheney. Gulet and his family were led to believe that he would be released and sent home.  Home is the U.S. because he is a US citizen.  He deserves a lawyer and due process.  Now, he’s on the no-fly list and you know what that means.

As an American citizen, Gulet has the absolute right to return to and re-enter his country.  But by secretly placing him on the no-fly list while he was halfway around the world — and providing no information about why he was so placed — the U.S. Government is denying him his right to return.  Worse, they know that this action is not only preventing him from returning, but is keeping the 19-year-old in a state of absolute legal limbo, where’s he imprisoned by a country that admits it has no cause for holding him and does not want to hold him, yet which cannot release him.  The U.S. government has the obligation to assist its citizens when they end up detained without cause; here, they are doing the opposite:  they’re deliberately ensuring it continues.

If there’s any evidence that he has has done anything wrong, he should be charged, indicted, and brought back to the U.S. for trial.  What the Obama administration is doing instead is accomplishing what they could not do if he were in the U.S.:  holding him without a shred of due process, interrogating him without a lawyer present, and — if his credible claims are to believed — using beatings and torture to get the information it wants (or false information:  Gulet told me he was very tempted to falsely confess to make the beatings stop).  This abuse of the no-fly list is a common tactic used by the U.S. Government to circumvent all legal and constitutional constraints when it comes to its own citizens; this case just happens to be extra viscerally repellent.

Let’s see what our Secretary of State can do about this.

Not too long ago, our intrepid frontpager BostonBoomer took us down memory lane in pursuit of the vast criminal background that fills the resume of our head Inquisitor, Darrell Issa.  Now, it appears The New Yorker does the same. Just remember, your read it here first.  Skip the first two pages, those read like some blah blah blah  American Fairy Tale.  When you hit the rest, look for the pattern of insurance scams, crime, and a fortune that appears to be based in car theft.  The justice system is likely the force behind young Issa going into the military.   The unraveling of the Fairy Tale begins in 1998–like so many do–with a political tall tale that reflects the spin and not the facts.  Some one fact checked Issa’s campaign material.

In May of 1998, Lance Williams, of the San Francisco Examiner, reported that Issa had not always received the “highest possible” ratings in the Army. In fact, at one point he “received unsatisfactory conduct and efficiency ratings and was transferred to a supply depot.” Williams also discovered that Issa didn’t provide security for Nixon at the 1971 World Series, because Nixon didn’t attend any of the games.

A member of Issa’s Army unit, Jay Bergey, told Williams that his most vivid recollection of the young Issa was that in December, 1971, Issa stole his car, a yellow Dodge Charger. “I confronted Issa,” Bergey said in 1998. “I got in his face and threatened to kill him, and magically my car reappeared the next day, abandoned on the turnpike.”

Bergey died of lung cancer in 2002, but his widow, Joyce, recently said to me that she remembered her husband telling the story of the stolen Dodge Charger. She laughed when she heard that Issa is now a prominent member of Congress. “Well, he probably figured he was borrowing it from a friend,” she said. “But now we’re discussing politicians, so we all know how honest they are. When I meet a good one, I’ll let you know.”

Issa was transferred to a supply depot in the military.  That explains a lot.  For example, how does a guy coming out of the army find the funds for a really expensive sports car?   Only in America can this sort’ve  fractured fairy tale occur and play out in success.  Issa is bad news.   This is the second time I’ve linked to BB’s expose and it will not be the last.  We can muckrake with the best of them here and we intend to keep it up.

Read the rest of this entry »


Late Night Drift

Doctor Daughter introduced me to Ricky Gervais for the joint celebration of youngest daughter’s birthday and another one of mine that I really tried to ignore back in November.  Both daughters were exhausted and spent the evening after sushi at Wasabi determining what was watchable On Demand.  The movie that won the  twenty something vote was called “The Invention of Lying”. Doctor Daughter told me that that the religious right was ticked off about it which immediately got me interested.  I actually sat, then watched for a change.  It was watchable.  That’s a big compliment coming from me.

Whenever some one is accused of crashing some big Hollywood self love celebration or  having a  prime time meltdown, my interest is completely piqued. It’s the same sorta thing that gets me up and about when some one pisses off the supremely ultra-religiously sanctimonious. Some of the snooty set were into Ricky’s muse and some took themselves completely TOO seriously.  It’s always fun to see the nerds and outkasts take revenge on the kool kids.  If it wasn’t for the big pay checks, the plastic surgery and the multiple retakes, they wouldn’t be so cool.  I know. I’ve sat in mix stations before and heard raw results.

The Daily Mail called him “saucy“.  Hugh Hefner faced his own mortality by tweeting “age is just a number”. (That isn’t what most of us thought when Ronald Reagan could push the detonator button on the ‘football’.)  I will say that the word self-destructive came to my mind as I read and watched the many snippy folks accessing his performance.  As long as he has a nice paid for cottage some where near Scotland, he should never worry.  The UK has national health, after all.

You can chant along with me … “you’ll never work in this town again …”

It’s an open thread.   Other blogs behave badly.  Here, we just embrace the snark.  Have fun!!

Oh, and in the word’s of The Bard:   “Well, God give them wisdom that have it, and those that are fools, let them use their talents.”