Active Users:3095 Time:20/06/2026 04:35:53 AM
There are two points: Joel Send a noteboard - 19/01/2011 02:47:48 AM
but so far the majority of your posts rely on something that to my knowledge has yet to be proven. It is as of now undetermined what, if any, affect Palin etc had on Loughner's choosing targets.

Am I correct in this assumption?

1) Because Giffords originated the suggestion that Palins use of crosshairs on her district endangered her, calling that suggestion "blood libel" accuses Giffords of it first and foremost, whether or not Palin intended that.

2) While it's unlikely that Loughner viewed that image (which is only relevant because Giffords mentioned it prior to an attack on her) it's at least as unlikely he was completely unaware of two solid years of paranoid hatefilled extremism directed at all liberals (and Giffords certainly qualifies) by all the far right demagogues, of which Palin is one.

That doesn't make Palin entirely or even largely responsible for what one nut with a gun decided to do, but to say all her inflammatory rhetoric, including but limited to the crosshairs, is wholly separate from his actions assumes he's been living under a rock for two years, only emerging occasionally for long enough to harass Gabrielle Giffords and ultimately gun down 19 people. The mere fact that he was on FB and MySpace makes it incredibly dubious he was unaware of all the militant extremist rhetoric from the far right, and anyone with his inclinations would've found encouragement there. Sarah Palin is only one of many far right demagogues, and the crosshairs imagery only one of many provocative, inflammatory and militant examples from her; regardless, Jared Loughner pulled the trigger (though had federal background checks required under the Brady Bill still existed his documented history of criminality and mental instability would've made that nigh impossible) and bears the lions share of the guilt, to say the least. HOWEVER, it's ludicrous to suggest the two solid years of incitement by demagogues didn't contribute, even though it's impossible to say how much. If you run around for years demanding unrestricted gun right and shouting, "death to n----rs!" you may not pull the trigger, but when a fellow gun nut and racist DOES you bare some of the blame. It would take a lot of cheek to accuse one of the people he shoots of libel for saying so.

Hope that helps.
Honorbound and honored to be Bonded to Mahtaliel Sedai
Last First in wotmania Chat
Slightly better than chocolate.

Love still can't be coerced.
Please Don't Eat the Newbies!

LoL. Be well, RAFOlk.
Reply to message
OK, I'm Officially Sick of the "Blood Libel" BS. - 16/01/2011 12:18:22 PM 2213 Views
Why are they calling it "blood libel"? - 16/01/2011 12:23:47 PM 1094 Views
Because if the facts were as they represent them those words would be applicable. - 16/01/2011 12:49:22 PM 1257 Views
It's not entirely clear to me whether you're aware of this or not, but... - 16/01/2011 01:12:22 PM 1295 Views
That's why I said, "popularized". - 16/01/2011 01:46:52 PM 1276 Views
I think Alan Dershowitz dealt with this nonsense already - 16/01/2011 02:34:10 PM 1646 Views
Interesting. I didn't realize it was so wide-spread. - 16/01/2011 03:10:28 PM 1172 Views
She wasn't even the first to use the term that week either - 16/01/2011 10:10:35 PM 1194 Views
I don't know that "expert" has anything to do with it. - 16/01/2011 10:18:54 PM 1179 Views
Re: I don't know that "expert" has anything to do with it. - 16/01/2011 11:30:38 PM 1080 Views
Oh please don't you start to - 17/01/2011 02:34:43 PM 1016 Views
I for one hadn't noticed it before. - 17/01/2011 10:25:57 PM 1213 Views
it was used here and nobody commented - 17/01/2011 10:37:07 PM 1112 Views
LOL, I totally forgot that got posted here - 17/01/2011 10:54:26 PM 1140 Views
It's funny you should say that... - 18/01/2011 10:32:59 PM 1182 Views
Re: It's funny you should say that... - 19/01/2011 03:29:52 PM 1166 Views
It was permissible to ignore until it became a rallying cry. - 20/01/2011 04:27:23 PM 1197 Views
A rallying cry is hardly illegal - 20/01/2011 05:32:45 PM 1266 Views
I never said it was. - 20/01/2011 06:59:39 PM 1353 Views
Oh, I noticed that one alright. - 18/01/2011 10:25:23 PM 1025 Views
compared to the way similar terms are used? - 19/01/2011 06:58:02 PM 1188 Views
I meant I hadn't seen it used in different contexts before. - 19/01/2011 07:35:00 PM 1144 Views
Indeed, my response to Legolas references Wikipedias quotation of him. - 16/01/2011 10:24:09 PM 1232 Views
Re: Indeed, my response to Legolas references Wikipedias quotation of him. - 16/01/2011 11:09:21 PM 1287 Views
Again, Giffords specifically made the connection between Palins imagery and an attack on her. - 17/01/2011 12:53:08 AM 1419 Views
That means precisely nothing - 17/01/2011 03:59:07 PM 1115 Views
It means everything. - 18/01/2011 08:34:55 PM 1360 Views
I'm trying to understand your logic - 19/01/2011 12:50:28 AM 960 Views
There are two points: - 19/01/2011 02:47:48 AM 1184 Views
Re: It means everything. - 19/01/2011 05:55:02 PM 995 Views
That's simply illogical. - 20/01/2011 01:08:51 AM 1389 Views
the old step one steal underwear step three profit argument - 19/01/2011 06:01:14 PM 1257 Views
that is some twisted and bizarre logic - 17/01/2011 02:38:41 PM 1204 Views
So I am a little confused on something... - 16/01/2011 02:38:59 PM 1247 Views
Palin putting Giffords district in the crosshairs and Giffords implying at the time she feared this - 16/01/2011 11:21:36 PM 1383 Views
If I understand what you are saying correctly... - 17/01/2011 07:07:56 AM 1116 Views
I'm sorry you so badly misunderstand. - 17/01/2011 08:33:47 AM 1143 Views
Re: I'm sorry you so badly misunderstand. - 17/01/2011 04:24:01 PM 1213 Views
The Secret Service does guard Congressmen, just not all of them automatically. - 18/01/2011 09:13:39 PM 1012 Views
No, they don't - 18/01/2011 10:19:34 PM 1209 Views
Really? Cannoli says differently, and I believe he's right on that one. - 18/01/2011 10:50:51 PM 1314 Views
You seem to be reading what you want to from what I said - 19/01/2011 01:27:32 PM 1146 Views
I read what you said & understood it as you restate here, hence I referenced local police (twice) - 20/01/2011 02:15:17 AM 1210 Views
The problem here is your ignoring normal policing powers to concoct an absurdity - 20/01/2011 04:20:25 PM 1288 Views
More absurd than the notion such incitement warrants no notice? - 20/01/2011 05:42:47 PM 1263 Views
really because people post that kind of crap daily and nothing happens - 20/01/2011 05:57:52 PM 1090 Views
Your shifting your original premise, *again* - 20/01/2011 08:24:18 PM 1111 Views
No, you're simply missing the point of it. - 20/01/2011 11:09:57 PM 1127 Views
There is no point - 21/01/2011 12:22:30 AM 1173 Views
If I had no point I wouldn't bother, but fair enough. - 21/01/2011 01:20:32 AM 1418 Views
Uh...Last I checked conservatives didn't list the Communist Manifesto as a favourite book. - 16/01/2011 03:05:07 PM 1443 Views
You're awesome at missing points, aren't you? - 16/01/2011 07:26:30 PM 1182 Views
where is the accountability for those committing slander? - 17/01/2011 02:52:40 PM 1093 Views
Libs hate Mein Kampf and We the Living; conservatives hate the Communist Manifesto: He's neither. - 16/01/2011 10:06:02 PM 1112 Views
conseartives hate Mein Kampf and liberals stil read the Communist Manifesto - 17/01/2011 02:57:22 PM 1098 Views
That first line is says it all. - 18/01/2011 09:34:06 PM 1194 Views
Nazis had more in common with communist then capitalist - 19/01/2011 04:10:09 PM 1296 Views
The founder of fascism called it "the merger of corporate and national power". - 20/01/2011 02:51:09 AM 1194 Views
and that is supposed to mean something? - 20/01/2011 06:06:18 PM 1184 Views
YOU are cherry picking. - 20/01/2011 07:50:21 PM 1132 Views
It is to be expected that this site would be libtard central... - 16/01/2011 05:23:53 PM 1410 Views
See my reply to Dragonsoul above. - 16/01/2011 07:30:40 PM 1232 Views
Yeah, your first was better - 16/01/2011 09:48:58 PM 1071 Views
Palin didn't really have anything to do with this, but it makes sense she's blamed. - 16/01/2011 10:19:51 PM 1129 Views
Pretty much. - 16/01/2011 11:44:35 PM 1189 Views
Did they ever catch the person(s) that vandalized Gifford's office? *NM* - 17/01/2011 03:30:36 AM 545 Views
politcal offices are vandalized on a regular basis *NM* - 17/01/2011 02:41:29 PM 514 Views
She only asked if they caught the guy, she didn't accuse anyone, Sarah. - 18/01/2011 11:27:18 PM 1083 Views
OK Olberman when did I imply otherwise? *NM* - 19/01/2011 02:48:41 PM 556 Views
"Political offices are vandalized on a regular basis". - 20/01/2011 03:16:39 AM 1268 Views
Took you this long, huh? - 17/01/2011 01:53:31 PM 1013 Views
I am sick of the desperate attempts of liberals to find a way to use a tragedy - 17/01/2011 02:31:18 PM 1049 Views
I'm just curious. - 17/01/2011 03:23:47 PM 1012 Views
Re: I'm just curious. - 17/01/2011 03:28:04 PM 1172 Views
I always said I'd do that after Bush was re-elected. - 18/01/2011 11:52:45 PM 1053 Views
like I said a matter of faith - 17/01/2011 04:27:51 PM 1037 Views
I find it interesting... - 17/01/2011 05:31:54 PM 1177 Views
I mention her looks solely because... - 20/01/2011 02:30:42 PM 1063 Views
If slander, not mine, Giffords' (at least you don't err like Palin and say, "libel" ). - 18/01/2011 11:14:23 PM 1240 Views
mark you calendar today is the day Joel offically went around the bend into insanity - 19/01/2011 05:28:06 PM 1091 Views
A mirror will show me who's to blame? On whom have I put a crosshairs? - 20/01/2011 03:23:43 AM 1108 Views
so it is all a matter of faith for you - 20/01/2011 05:48:44 AM 1053 Views
No, it's fairly straight forward logic. - 20/01/2011 03:25:56 PM 1152 Views
sorry Joel but you haven't - 20/01/2011 03:29:49 PM 948 Views
It's there; in this thread alone people from both sides of the aisle have acknowledged that. - 20/01/2011 05:51:21 PM 1047 Views
only in your does the connection exisit - 20/01/2011 06:39:35 PM 1083 Views
No. - 20/01/2011 07:35:09 PM 1177 Views
dude wake up - 20/01/2011 08:54:33 PM 1291 Views
So in your opinion... - 17/01/2011 05:27:58 PM 1043 Views
How 'bout simply color coding them? - 18/01/2011 11:21:03 PM 1088 Views
Why not just blame Giffords? - 17/01/2011 06:07:14 PM 1391 Views
Indeed, why not; Sarah Palin does. - 18/01/2011 06:58:01 PM 1213 Views
The irony of this thread is not lost on me. - 19/01/2011 04:09:01 PM 1218 Views
Exactly. *NM* - 19/01/2011 04:51:40 PM 611 Views
Bizarre thread for that Soapbox - 19/01/2011 05:17:58 PM 966 Views
You missed the point, obviously. - 19/01/2011 06:04:23 PM 1074 Views
so you are saying it is the same old RAFO - 19/01/2011 06:47:24 PM 1147 Views
The thread has admittedly degenerated - 19/01/2011 07:02:12 PM 988 Views
Check your NB. Noted you a response. *NM* - 19/01/2011 07:04:58 PM 576 Views
That I knew it would go this way is why I avoided looking closely for so long. - 19/01/2011 11:20:44 PM 1227 Views
Hey, now. I have to step in. - 20/01/2011 04:44:49 PM 1257 Views
I'm just saying a significant link can be demonstrated. - 20/01/2011 07:07:27 PM 1314 Views
Re: OK, I'm Officially Sick of the "Blood Libel" BS. - 22/01/2011 05:49:44 PM 1248 Views

Reply to Message