• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Mass Shooting at Sikh Temple Outside Milwaukee [W:211]

Just as an observation point... something for all of you on both sides of the aisle to remember as one side blames the other for what happened. The ideology is not the problem... for two reasons. Firstly, it is people who choose how to respond to their beliefs. Two people can have the same beliefs and both can respond and react to those beliefs completely differently. And secondly, anyone who uses the actions of an extremist to condemn an entire group... NOT just the extremists of that group, doesn't know what they are talking about and are just making invalid and ridiculous overgeneralizations, probably based on their own invalid biases. So... leftwingers... please remember this when you foolishly try to condemn right wing ideology for what happened in Milwaukee.

You may now return to your regularly scheduled foolish partisan bashing.

I believe it is the extremism that much of the right is embracing that is the frightening part. How far is Donald Trump from this maniac, ideologically? Extremisn is extremism, there really is no middle ground.
 
Last edited:
Just as an observation point... something for all of you on both sides of the aisle to remember as one side blames the other for what happened. The ideology is not the problem... for two reasons. Firstly, it is people who choose how to respond to their beliefs. Two people can have the same beliefs and both can respond and react to those beliefs completely differently. And secondly, anyone who uses the actions of an extremist to condemn an entire group... NOT just the extremists of that group, doesn't know what they are talking about and are just making invalid and ridiculous overgeneralizations, probably based on their own invalid biases. So... leftwingers... please remember this when you foolishly try to condemn right wing ideology for what happened in Milwaukee.

You may now return to your regularly scheduled foolish partisan bashing.

If the ideology, the ideas, are the rationale for the actions, then yes, the ideology is a problem.

Please, do continue to try to muddy the water, cloud the issues.
 
:lamoGood point, because as we know 'right wing ideology' has nothing to do with racism.:lamo
 
Last edited:
I believe it is the extremism that much of the right is embracing that is the frightening part. How far is Donald Trump from this maniac, ideologically?

There are extremists on both sides of the coin. I prefer to condemn the extremists rather than attacking the entire ideology. A BETTER idea is for members of that ideology to attack their own extremists. The more rightwingers that come out and condemn this guy and his beliefs, the more isolated he becomes... and the less most people will associate him with them.
 
As in, in wouldn't have been so bad if it was a mosque?
I did not think about it that way (my comment was about someone so ignorant and blinded by hate,
that they did not know they picked the wrong target).
Yes it might have been better if it was a Mosque.
The Muslim sabbath is on Firday, so fewer people might have been around on a Sunday morning.
 
If the ideology, the ideas, are the rationale for the actions, then yes, the ideology is a problem.

Not at all. It's how someone interprets and then acts on what they interpret.

Please, do continue to try to muddy the water, cloud the issues.

No, I'd imagine that's your job. I'm clearing things up.
 
Not at all. It's how someone interprets and then acts on what they interpret.
This is an argument to divorce ideology from action. It is totally false. The values you act upon can be legit, rational...or not. Those values can be judged. Your argument is to remove judgement of ideologies, an argument that ideas are all neutral, no matter how extreme that idea appears.

This is a totally false argument, it is BS.



No, I'd imagine that's your job. I'm clearing things up.
Making false arguments is NOT clearing things up at all, other than making clear what kind of arguments a person makes.

Edit:
It appears as though there are ideas you hold to, an I would assume that they are legitimate to you:

I'm actually a pretty Conservative Jew.

I would love to see how you would make an argument that the views of white supremacy/neo-NAZI-ism are not a problem.
 
Last edited:
Just as an observation point... something for all of you on both sides of the aisle to remember as one side blames the other for what happened. The ideology is not the problem... for two reasons. Firstly, it is people who choose how to respond to their beliefs. Two people can have the same beliefs and both can respond and react to those beliefs completely differently. And secondly, anyone who uses the actions of an extremist to condemn an entire group... NOT just the extremists of that group, doesn't know what they are talking about and are just making invalid and ridiculous overgeneralizations, probably based on their own invalid biases. So... leftwingers... please remember this when you foolishly try to condemn right wing ideology for what happened in Milwaukee.

You may now return to your regularly scheduled foolish partisan bashing.

There isnt much of a hassle with partisanship on discussing the epidemic of social terrorism because too many still think each attack is an isolated incident.
 
:lamoGood point, because as we know 'right wing ideology' has nothing to do with racism.:lamo

No more than "left wing ideology" has to do with classism.

For ****s sakes...can we stop throwing out wide sweeping ignorant broad stroke statements about an entire span of an ideology due to what some morons on the most fringe ends of it happen to do?
 
A BETTER idea is for members of that ideology to attack their own extremists. The more rightwingers that come out and condemn this guy and his beliefs, the more isolated he becomes... and the less most people will associate him with them.

The reality is many members are condemning this guy and his beliefs. The issue is that in the midst of doing that we have to also correct the ignorant bull**** being slung around suggesting that, simultaneously as we blast this guy for being a horrible person and ignorant ****, we operate ideologically due to racism beause that's supposedly inherent to "right wing ideology" as a whole. It's hard to JUST condemn the extremists on your side, and you know I'm one that's quick to do that, when simultaneous to doing so you're being referred to as someone whose thought process is somehow inherently racist, your regional location means you're inherently racist, or in other circumstances that you're a step away from being Fred Phelps.

I agree with you regarding extremists on both sides of the coin, and on the fact right wingers need to condemn guys like this. I'm simply saying that some of the reason why right wingers spend times in these threads away from condemning the guy is because were also having to argue that White Supremist views isn't somehow integral to the Right.
 
No more than "left wing ideology" has to do with classism.
RWA's do trend towards racism.....but how in the world does that compare to the left describing classism? It is not as if the left created classes, they point out that it exists. That is hardly the same thing as participating in racist acts.

For ****s sakes...can we stop throwing out wide sweeping ignorant broad stroke statements about an entire span of an ideology due to what some morons on the most fringe ends of it happen to do?
Funny, isn't that what you were just trying to do with a false equivalence?
 
Last edited:
There are extremists on both sides of the coin. I prefer to condemn the extremists rather than attacking the entire ideology. A BETTER idea is for members of that ideology to attack their own extremists. The more rightwingers that come out and condemn this guy and his beliefs, the more isolated he becomes... and the less most people will associate him with them.
But you just made the argument that the ideology is not the problem.

That is a total contradiction of arguments.
 
It turns out the 'speculation' that the guy was a white supremacist and that the shootings were racially motiviated wasn't quite as 'mindless' as those on the Far Right wanted to believe.
Funny how morons tend to trip over themselves decrying a 'rush to judgement' re acts of terrorism in the middle east yet they have no problem doing so in this case. You yourself dont even have the decency to allow the blood to dry before you turn a tragic incident perpetrated by a vulgar ugly human being into a mindless partisan attack. The truly sad thing...your trainwreck partisan mindset is at least as repugnant than the asshole that committed the act if not more so. He perpetrated the act...you bathe in it and attempt to score political points. Speaks volumes about the shooter...and...you.
 
The reality is many members are condemning this guy and his beliefs. The issue is that in the midst of doing that we have to also correct the ignorant bull**** being slung around suggesting that, simultaneously as we blast this guy for being a horrible person and ignorant ****, we operate ideologically due to racism beause that's supposedly inherent to "right wing ideology" as a whole. It's hard to JUST condemn the extremists on your side, and you know I'm one that's quick to do that, when simultaneous to doing so you're being referred to as someone whose thought process is somehow inherently racist, your regional location means you're inherently racist, or in other circumstances that you're a step away from being Fred Phelps.

I agree with you regarding extremists on both sides of the coin, and on the fact right wingers need to condemn guys like this. I'm simply saying that some of the reason why right wingers spend times in these threads away from condemning the guy is because were also having to argue that White Supremist views isn't somehow integral to the Right.
In April 2009, DHS issued an intelligence assessment, co-authored by Johnson, titled " Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment ." The document was one of many threat assessments shared between DHS and state and local law enforcement agencies to keep them apprised of potential and looming threats, and warned of a surge in right-wing extremism due to the election of the country's first black president and the economic recession.

Although the report was intended only for distribution to law enforcement agencies, it was immediately leaked to the media causing a political firestorm among conservative pundits, who wrongly suggested that it labeled all conservatives as potential terrorists.

DHS initially defended the report, but within days caved to political pressure and practically disowned it, with Secretary Napolitano apologizing to the American Legion for the report's mention of military veterans. But DHS did more than just publicly buckle under the political weight of conservative critics. According to Johnson, the department effectively dismantled his intelligence team following the right’s uproar.

In an in-depth interview published in the Southern Poverty Law Center’s Intelligence Report , Johnson reveals the level of sway the political right had in thwarting intelligence work on right-wing extremism. He says DHS deliberately "mischaracterized the report as unauthorized, even though it had passed through proper channels" and "instituted restrictive policies that brought the important work of his unit to a virtual standstill." As a result, Johnson "left DHS in dismay and was followed by almost all the members of his team, leaving a single analyst where there had been six." In comparison, there are at least 25 analysts devoted to tracking Islamic terrorism.

When questioned about Johnson’s claims -- which have been confirmed by current and former department officials in the Washington Post – DHS officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, have repeatedly disputed his account and insist that "the level of activity by right-wing extremist groups has remained consistent over the past few years." In addition, they claim "the perception of increased extremist activity may be due to increased awareness of the threat by the government and the public." But the numbers beg to differ.


How the Political Right Bullied the Department of Homeland Security Into Ignoring the Threat of Right-Wing Extremism | Alternet
 
This is an argument to divorce ideology from action. It is totally false. The values you act upon can be legit, rational...or not. Those values can be judged. Your argument is to remove judgement of ideologies, an argument that ideas are all neutral, no matter how extreme that idea appears.

However a white-surpremisist neo-nazi's ideology and view point is comparable in reference to the mainstream conservative ideology of Republicanism in the same way NAMBLA's ideology is comparable in reference to the mainstream GLBT communities ideology, or how ALF/ELF's ideology are comparable in reference to the mainstream Democrat.

People shout out "right wing" ideology as with regards to this guy and his extremist fringe views as if him and the run of the mill Republican off the street must be one in the same outside of this guy actually killed someone.

It's not that the views of white supremacy/neo-nazi-ism arne't problematic. It's that many in this thread are routinely attempting to make it out that they're somehow in lock step or close analogs to mainstream Republicans, or are simply right in line with "right wing ideology" all together as if those who think that Whites are inherently superior to other races is somehow right there analogous with "lower taxes stimulate the economy" in terms of what the universal notion of "right wing ideology" is.
 
No more than "left wing ideology" has to do with classism.

For ****s sakes...can we stop throwing out wide sweeping ignorant broad stroke statements about an entire span of an ideology due to what some morons on the most fringe ends of it happen to do?

If this guy thought he hit Muslims, do you think we would have to dig to find the rhetoric that validated his actions? Do you realize think the Adkisson terrorist attack had anything to do with the voices he was surrounding himself with on a daily basis?
 
In thinking about the extremes of right and left wings, I think they are opposite sides of the same coin.
The right wing fears the unknown, so assumes it is inherently bad.
The left wing through multiculturalism assumes the unknown is inherently good.
both approaches are extreme and dangerous in their own right.
Different cultures are nether good or bad, just different, and like our own, some good some bad.
The best we can hope for is to learn and embrace the good parts, and not pick up the bad parts.
 
The reality is many members are condemning this guy and his beliefs. The issue is that in the midst of doing that we have to also correct the ignorant bull**** being slung around suggesting that, simultaneously as we blast this guy for being a horrible person and ignorant ****, we operate ideologically due to racism beause that's supposedly inherent to "right wing ideology" as a whole. It's hard to JUST condemn the extremists on your side, and you know I'm one that's quick to do that, when simultaneous to doing so you're being referred to as someone whose thought process is somehow inherently racist, your regional location means you're inherently racist, or in other circumstances that you're a step away from being Fred Phelps.

I agree with you regarding extremists on both sides of the coin, and on the fact right wingers need to condemn guys like this. I'm simply saying that some of the reason why right wingers spend times in these threads away from condemning the guy is because were also having to argue that White Supremist views isn't somehow integral to the Right.

The notion that the Far Right on this forum condemns and denounces racism and racially based posts is ludicrous. It's for those of us on the left to denounce it, and then for those of you on the right to denounce us. That's the pattern, and it continues in this thread.
 
Funny how morons tend to trip over themselves decrying a 'rush to judgement' re acts of terrorism in the middle east yet they have no problem doing so in this case. You yourself dont even have the decency to allow the blood to dry before you turn a tragic incident perpetrated by a vulgar ugly human being into a mindless partisan attack. The truly sad thing...your trainwreck partisan mindset is at least as repugnant than the asshole that committed the act if not more so. He perpetrated the act...you bathe in it and attempt to score political points. Speaks volumes about the shooter...and...you.

So I'm worse than a neo-nazi who just murdered 6 people in the name of white supremacy? You really are on a different planet, aren't you? Perhaps in your world, white racists who murder are more acceptable than those that call them out.

I'd say you and he have far more in common.
 
Sorry, but the argument Capt is making is that the ideas are not the problem.

It's the argument that's always used. Far Right ideology is never a contributing factor to these kinds of incidents. They all apparently occur in a vacuum.
 
Sikh temple shooter: decorated Army veteran on watchlist for 10 years
Sikh temple shooter: decorated Army veteran on watchlist for 10 years (+video) - CSMonitor.com

Wade Michael Page, who officials say shot and killed six people in a shooting at a Sikh temple Sunday in Wisconsin, was a decorated Army veteran psychological warfare specialist and white supremacist who has been watched with concern by anti-hate groups for more than 10 years.

A member of a racist skinhead punk band, Mr. Page, who was killed in a shootout with police, had also tried to make purchases from the National Alliance, a neo-Nazi organization, according to Heidi Beirich, director of the the Intelligence Program at the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC).

"We've been tracking him for more than a decade," says Ms. Beirich. The SPLC has long warned of the dangerous ties between white supremacist groups and the US military. "We know there have been a lot of white supremacists in the military," Beirich adds. The problem was a source of particular concern for the SPLC in the mid-2000s, when the civil rights group warned the US military about a spate of extremist activity among US forces in 2006. At that time, the Pentagon "steadfastly denied that a problem existed and insisted that its ‘zero tolerance’ policy was sufficient to keep organized racists out of its ranks,” according to the SPLC.
The problem was that while the US military had banned “active participation” in extremist groups, it did not specify prohibitions against, for example, posting to white supremacist social media pages.
[.......]
Three years earlier, in 2006, the SPLC had published “A Few Bad Men,” a report noting that “large numbers” of neo-Nazi skinheads were joining the armed forces “to acquire combat and weapons training – skills that could be used to commit terrorist acts against targets in the US.”
[........]
White supremacist groups including the National Alliance continue to have active “outreach programs” to recruit members of the US military into their organizations, says Beirich. “They have literally reached out to people from the military to come work for them,” Beirich adds, noting that the groups prize the fighting and training expertise that potential recruits develop in the US military.....
 
Last edited:
In April 2009, DHS issued an intelligence assessment, co-authored by Johnson, titled " Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment ." The document was one of many threat assessments shared between DHS and state and local law enforcement agencies to keep them apprised of potential and looming threats, and warned of a surge in right-wing extremism due to the election of the country's first black president and the economic recession.

Although the report was intended only for distribution to law enforcement agencies, it was immediately leaked to the media causing a political firestorm among conservative pundits, who wrongly suggested that it labeled all conservatives as potential terrorists.

DHS initially defended the report, but within days caved to political pressure and practically disowned it, with Secretary Napolitano apologizing to the American Legion for the report's mention of military veterans. But DHS did more than just publicly buckle under the political weight of conservative critics. According to Johnson, the department effectively dismantled his intelligence team following the right’s uproar.

In an in-depth interview published in the Southern Poverty Law Center’s Intelligence Report , Johnson reveals the level of sway the political right had in thwarting intelligence work on right-wing extremism. He says DHS deliberately "mischaracterized the report as unauthorized, even though it had passed through proper channels" and "instituted restrictive policies that brought the important work of his unit to a virtual standstill." As a result, Johnson "left DHS in dismay and was followed by almost all the members of his team, leaving a single analyst where there had been six." In comparison, there are at least 25 analysts devoted to tracking Islamic terrorism.

When questioned about Johnson’s claims -- which have been confirmed by current and former department officials in the Washington Post – DHS officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, have repeatedly disputed his account and insist that "the level of activity by right-wing extremist groups has remained consistent over the past few years." In addition, they claim "the perception of increased extremist activity may be due to increased awareness of the threat by the government and the public." But the numbers beg to differ.


How the Political Right Bullied the Department of Homeland Security Into Ignoring the Threat of Right-Wing Extremism | Alternet

Just to follow up on this....SPLC has stated that they had been monitoring Page:

Officials at the Southern Poverty Law Center said they had been tracking Mr. Page for about a decade because of his ties to the white supremacist movement and they described him as “a frustrated neo-Nazi who had been the leader of a racist white-power band.”
 
Back
Top Bottom