April 18, 2009

American Hate Groups Exposed!

Justin Katz

There may really be reason for concern about terrorism among domestic hate groups:

After Tancredo entered the room, protesters kept him from speaking by shouting insults and holding a sign declaring “no dialogue with hate” in front of his face. Tancredo waited calmly while protestors held the sign and chanted…

After protestors exited the hallway, Tancredo spoke for about two minutes before a protestor outside the building banged on a window, shattering the glass.

Tancredo was escorted out of the room by police after he deemed the situation too volatile, Young said.

Protesters proceeded to chant “We shut him down; no racists in our town” and “Yes, racists, we will fight, we know where you sleep at night!”

They'll know much more detail than that once the Department of Homeland Security is done gathering information on people who hold those threatening conservative beliefs.

Comments, although monitored, are not necessarily representative of the views Anchor Rising's contributors or approved by them. We reserve the right to delete or modify comments for any reason.

and we're the hatemongers who cleaned up after our tea party day,and had no problems with the police. Amazing how they didn't appear on the watch list from homeland security.

Posted by: kathy at April 18, 2009 6:10 PM

This is the standard tactic of the left.
DHS has no problem with left wing terrorists because they are now running the government.
I may be sounding more nasty and bitter recently because I am.Once the leftists realize they have ignited a fire I think their arrogant,self indulgent sense of victory will dissipate a little.
This president seems like a one termer.
The only time you can find him at work in the White House is when he's running around like a kid with the new dog or at a cocktail party/reception.What a joke on this country he is.Only it ain't very funny.

Posted by: joe bernstein at April 18, 2009 6:49 PM

That crack about "we know where you sleep at night"is precious.It scares me because the results of buckshot in the face poses a real difficult cleaning problem.I've seen it first hand.Kinda like a Sloppy Joe with eyes.

Posted by: joe bernstein at April 18, 2009 6:52 PM

Tancredo should have been permitted to speak so that his views would become better known and thereby soundly rejected. I do not agree with violently shutting him down. However, I consider the threat to our multicultural way of life that he poses as much more severe than that posed by the protesters at Chapel Hill. Let me reiterate, I don't like either.

Tancredo urges America to reject "the siren song of multiculturalism" and depicts Islam as "a civilization bent on destroying ours." In September 2006, when Pope Benedict XVI gave a speech quoting a 14th century Byzantine emperor who said the prophet Mohammed had brought "things only evil and inhuman",sparking Muslim anger throughout the world, Tancredo urged him not to apologize - that's not breaking a window, but it is a huge brick thrown at the Muslim world - no comment on this made by you, kathy or joe???

In July, when Tancredo proposed that America respond to any future terrorist attack by bombing Mecca and other holy sites, John Podhoretz, writing on the National Review's website, said: "Tom Tancredo is an idiot." I agree with Podhoretz on his assessment and would like to shine more light on what I consider Tancredo's Fascist views.

Justin, you, and those who wrote in this thread, might want to let us know your feelings on (1)Podhoretz' assesment of Tancredo. It would also be enlightening, in the broadest sense of the word, (2)to hear your thoughts on
Tancredo's views about bombing Mecca, (3)multiculturalism, and Tancredo's statement that (4)Islam is a civilization bent on destroying ours.

Yeah, the protesters apparently went too far, but we could have a substantive discussion on Tancredo's views instead of the tsk, tsks evinced by the responders to this thread.


Posted by: OldTimeLefty at April 18, 2009 7:22 PM

I'm not Catholic,so what is it to me what the Pope said about Muslims?
I don't even care if he dumps on Jews,because I didn't ask to be born one and know nothing about the religion to be honest.
David Duke is a racist,Al Sharpton is a racist,Avigdor Lieberman is a racist,but Tom Tancredo isn't.
John Podhoretz is a neo con slob and I could sh*t care less what he thinks.

Posted by: joe bernstein at April 18, 2009 7:42 PM

You asserted, with no evidence submitted, that "David Duke is a racist, Al Sharpton is a racist, Avigdor Lieberman is a racist, but Tom Tancredo isn't." Can you explain why you say they are and he isn't? If you can't you're just in a rant.

Also, "What you freely assert, I just as freely deny". Sticking your tongue out does not constitute an argument.

My comment regarding the Pope's remarks about Islam were directed at Tancredo's take on them, i.e. he said "Don't apologize". I was asking what you think of Tancredo's comments and you avoided or misunderstood the issue completely.

I agree that Podhoretz is right wing nut job. My point is that when one right wing nut job calls another right wing nut job "a nut job" then the right wing nut job being so called is a double right wing nut job.

Your Pal

Posted by: Richard Tuoni at April 18, 2009 8:19 PM

Come out. Come out, wherever you are.

Posted by: OldTimeLefty at April 18, 2009 8:21 PM

Just another tea party with the refrain "shut him down no racist in our town" rather than "enough is enough". Union police protection appears to have provided the speakers at the RI statehouse the opportunity to address a rally peacefully. Keep the small government talk going and maybe you will remove their presence and make the right to speak a more difficult prospect.

Posted by: Phil at April 18, 2009 8:43 PM


I don't recall seeing a single police officer at the Providence rally.



So when the topic is a large and peaceful conservative rally, you want to talk "monochrome march," but when the topic shifts to violent leftists declaring veto power over the First Amendment, you want to move on to a "substantive discussion"?

Posted by: Justin Katz at April 18, 2009 8:47 PM

The Capital police were no doubt aware of your presence as was the Providence police. If anyone had tried to disrupt your peaceful rally you would have seen them. So for you ignorance is bliss.

Posted by: Phil at April 18, 2009 9:15 PM

Sharpton has a long history of anti white and antisemitic statements and bad results-Tawana brawley and Freddie's(wherer the victims of his racist incitement were all hispanic and black);David Duke-KKK,need I say more?,Avigdor Lieberman-wants Arab Israeli citizens to take a special loyalty oath-WTF??;Tom Tancredo-no racist statements that you can present.If you can,do so.Supporting current laws is not racist.Opposing amnesty is not racist.I was not on a rant,Richard Tuoni(welcome to the honest discussion arena),but if you really want to hear ranting,check out David Cicilline.

Posted by: joe bernstein at April 18, 2009 9:19 PM

Come out, come out wherever you are.

I consider it substantive to point out that the April 15th event was a monochrome march of chicken littles as a way of reminding folks that (1. the marchers were overwhelmingly of one color. Compare the tea bag convention with last year's May march. You are welcome to make substantive comments on the obvious racial mixes of the two events, and (2. The theme of the April gathering was that the sky is falling because taxes may increase for the very wealthy. It ignored the fact that now, there is a proposed tax reduction for 90% of the taxpayers in this country. I hear nothing of substance from you on this score.

As for Tancredo's views, let's hear you say a few words about his ideas of (1. bombing Mecca,(2. criticizing the Denver Public Library system for purchasing reading materials written in Spanish and for offering space for classes to be held for these library users. - Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper defended the library's policies, as did Congresswoman Diana DeGette.- (3. of his wildly inflamatory advocacy for immigration reform, particularly of his criticism of President George W. Bush's border security controls, which reportedly made him persona non grata in the White House. According to Tancredo, he and Bush's political adviser, Karl Rove, got into a "screaming match" after Tancredo claimed that "if the nation suffered another attack at the hands of terrorists able to skirt immigration laws, the blood of the people killed" would be on Bush's and Congress’ hands. Rove responded by calling Tancredo "a traitor to the party" and "a traitor to the president," and warned him to never "darken the doorstep of the White House." Care to comment on these, Justin?

Come out, come out wherever you are.

Posted by: OldTimeLefty at April 18, 2009 10:07 PM

I'm not very religious. But God bless you, Joe Bernstein. Everything you say here is correct.

As for Justin's post - glad we've sorted out who believes in free speech and whose willing to talk about matters on a substantive level without resorting to gross thuggery. If monitoring devices had been attached to the brains of these "protesters" while they were carrying out this ... "dialogue", what level of brain activity do you suppose would have registered?

Posted by: Monique at April 18, 2009 10:50 PM

Can we put Sharpie and Tancredo in a steel cage and let them destroy each other? All they're good for is exploiting the fears of the poor saps who put them on their respective pedestals.

Posted by: rhody at April 19, 2009 12:28 AM
Post a comment

Remember personal info?

Important note: The text "http:" cannot appear anywhere in your comment.