Daily Kos

Antiabortion Violence: A Return to the Silence?

Tue Dec 27, 2005 at 12:15:20 AM PDT

(From the diaries -- Plutonium Page. Edited to bring more above the fold.)

Antiabortion violence, a staple of American life for a generation, has been in steep decline in recent years. That's why it was so striking to read recently of an attempted firebombing of a clinic in Shreveport, Louisiana. An investigator quoted in the short, local news item called it potentially an act of domestic terrorism.

Wow. Potentially an act of domestic terrorism. But as far as I can tell, the incident went almost unnoticed around the United States. This is striking in part, because that is the way it once was in America. Crimes committed against abortion providers were treated differently than the same crimes committed against other institutions.  Sometimes they were ignored by law enforcement. They were often ignored or played down by the media. National patterns of violence were ignored, even denied. In the past decade or so, that has changed, thanks in large part to the Clinton administration, and later the Bush administration, taking antiabortion violence far more seriously than their predecessors.

But given this history, I have to wonder about the apparent lack of interest in the attempted firebombing in Shreveport. Is this the return of the silence?  

Firebomb thrown at abortion clinic

Shreveport fire investigators today asked the public for help in finding the people who threw a firebomb outside an abortion clinic.

The Dec. 12 incident did not hit the Hope Medical Group for Women clinic on Kings Highway.

Security camera videotape, released by investigators today, shows a car pull into the parking lot and a woman get out on the passenger side. She is seen throwing the device at the clinic and then fleeing.

No arrests have been made.

"This is not a crime to be taken lightly," Shreveport Fire Department spokesman Brian Crawford said. "It's an arson crime -- and because of the nature of this crime, someone could also be charged with domestic terrorism as well."

Investigators say they have a "substantial" amount of physical evidence that was left from the firebomb.

The National Abortion Federation notes two arsons at clinics this year; one in Florida and one in Washington state.  

In addition to shootings and murders, anthrax attacks, stalking, death threats bomb threats and more, abortion providers have been the targets of more than 200 bombings and arsons in the past 3 decades.

For its part, the antiabortion Army of God, which promotes and celebrates violence against abortion providers, links to the story -- as well as a detailed Wikipedia discussion of the Molotov cocktail.

Violence had been widespread for 25 years until after 9/11, the "domestic terrorism" that the Army of God used to brag about, became something to which society was no longer willing to turn a blind eye.  Federal law enforcement agencies have done an excellent job of investigating and even preventing acts of violence in recent years. In 2001, three men wanted for acts related to antiabortion violence were on the FBI's Most Wanted list:  James Kopp for the assassination of a doctor; Eric Rudolph for the bombing of two clinics and the death of a police officer and wounding of a nurse; and Clayton Waagner, for among other things, sending fake anthrax threats to over 700 clinics and abortion rights organizations in the wake of 9/11. They have all been captured and prosecuted.

But the lull in the violence, in the face of public opprobrium and police crack downs, does not change the long range views of the proponents of violence.  Indeed, as I wrote in Eternal Hostility:  The Struggle Between Theocracy and Democracy, convicted clinic bomber and arsonist Michael Bray (among others) explicitly supports "the principle of revolution and the goal of establishing or preserving a Christian government... What are patriots to do? he asks.  "Revolution may well be justified in our time of legalized sodomy, and national apostasy ('in the name of separation of church and state)' and taxation to support child slaughter."  He does not believe that revolution is currently possible because "American Christians are too morally apathetic to carry out such an enterprise at this time."

While Bray and others may have sought to spark Christian theocratic revolution in their time, others, such as Christian Reconstructionist author Gary North (a theorist of theocratic revolution in the U.S.) sees a longer term effort in which any "mature" Christian ultimately must become "a revolutionary against Satan's kingdom;" and that the battle over abortion is really about "extending the revolution" and that "the abortion question" will never be settled "until Satan's kingdom is obliterated." North sees the confrontation deepening and expanding to the point of "armed revolution" and notes that revolution became necessary in 1776.  (See Eternal Hostility, page 149.)

In my view, there are two contexts of this possible act of domestic terrorism in Louisiana to keep in mind -- the quarter century of a more- or-less underground war of attrition against abortion providers; and a period of similar length of the development of an above-ground theocratic political movement that keeps it's distance from the underground revolutionary violence, even as it politically benefits.

But antiabortion violence has become a public relations inconvenience for the broad theocratic movement in its several parts -- which would prefer not to have terrorism associated with it's cause. It is also political inconvenience for the Bush administration, which has built so much of it's identity based on the fight against terrorism. Even as it has done a good job on the antiabortion violence front, it has downplayed it as much as possible. After all, militant opposition to abortion is integral to the the GOP electoral base these days. Where the media was on this, I don't know.

One can only imagine what would have happened if say, a seeming Islamic person had tossed a firebomb at say, an airliner. There has always been a deep double standard in how antiabortion violence is treated by society at all levels.

Sometimes, even abortion providers have played down such situations for reasons of their own.

I don't know why there is such a remarkable silence in this instance. But I do believe that as a society we cannot return to the silence in the face of violence and threats of violence against abortion providers.

 [Crossposted from Talk to Action]

Tags: Abortion, domestic, terrorism, Eternal Hostility, Michael Bray, theocracy, revolution (all tags) :: Previous Tag Versions

Permalink | 67 comments

  •  It's strange to me (4.00 / 19)

    that such a volatile subject; one so difficult for the GOP to navigate, is not better highlighted by progressives.
    •  Or, maybe, there's less violence, because they (3.50 / 6)

      think they're winning.

      Tell your Senators, no to Alito:

      Save the Court Petition

      And while you're at it: sign Planned Parenthood's anti-Alito petition, too:
      Planned Parenthood Petition

      NARAL is shooting for 500,000 signatures, please add yours:

      Naral Anti-Alito Petition

      And don't forget: urge Congress to support Plan B:

      Plan B Petition

      •  umm, no, that's probably not it (none / 0)

        While it is important to continue to fight on the fronts listed here, there is no evidence that violence is declining because "they" think they are winning.

        But there is plenty of evidence that other matters having directly to do with the criminal element have played a decisive role:  increased enforcement of FACE; the long term effects of the permanent injunction aimed at many violence prone people in the NOW vs. Scheidler case that was just argued before the Supreme Court; the aggressive pursuit of the antiabortion underground by law enforcement, and public revulsion in general in the wake of 9/11. Not to be underestimated is the capture of antiabortion criminals. History has shown that they tend to be serial criminals. So when they are caught, suddenly things get quiet.

      •  I'll give you another "1" (none / 0)

        for throwing more unproductive spam at a well-thought out diary, as you always do.

        Democrats will fight for a Renewed Deal with the American people.

        by Hoyapaul on Tue Dec 27, 2005 at 06:16:38 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  You Lost Me (none / 0)

          What's up with the 1?  I thought the comment re Alito was on target.  Granted it could have been added as a comment in its own right - but Alito's confirmation hearings is a key issue when it comes to defending our rights and countering the neo-cons who are trying everything (including bombing clinics) to overturn a 30+ year old law.

          Please reconsider that rating - it smacks of ratings abuse (IMHO).

          •  A "1" (none / 0)

            because judybrowni insists on spamming every single Alito/abortion/Constitutional Law thread with the same list of links with little or no substantive comment of her/his own.

            If judybrowni wants to offer a substantive comment and include links, fine. But this is just out-and-out spam. If everyone thinks my "1" is ratings abuse, then I'll stop. But I find spamming the comment thread of well-thought out diaries unproductive.

            Democrats will fight for a Renewed Deal with the American people.

            by Hoyapaul on Tue Dec 27, 2005 at 09:34:16 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Well We'll Just Have to Agree To Disagree on this (none / 0)

              because I think she's dead-on in reminding everyone that if Alito gets in - we're all fucked.

              Stick your head in the sand if you want - but I'm looking at all angles in this fight to defend my rights.  And Alito's a huge part of the battle.

              In the meantime, you might want to consider that others feel as I do on this, and re-think that 1 you gave her.

      •  Thanks for the Links Judi (none / 0)

        Keep reminding folks that if Alito gets in, we're all screwed when it comes to our civil liberties.
  •  it just weirds me out (4.00 / 2)

    that someone "pro-life" would do this stuff.  shouldn't be shocking, not after so many years of it... but then again maybe it should be shocking. i mean, wouldn't you love it the majority of people who oppose legalized abortion were like "wait a minute, if i'm pro-LIFE then i'm against these anti-life criminal acts!" ... but the ignoring of it is kind of a tolerance of it.
    •  Consider their viewpoint (4.00 / 2)

      C'mon fellow liberals.  You guys know why they do this, in their own minds it makes perfect sense.  It is ironic that Frederick writes, "Silence is complicity" since that is exactly what the pro-life terrorists are telling themselves.  

      The pro-life movement sees abortion as a holocaust against the unborn in which 1 million souls are being killed every year.  Their religion tells them that abortion is a crime against life.  Now, if you sincerely believed that 1 million innocent souls are being killed a year, wouldn't you do something extreme?  The real issue is that pro-lifers see these little clusters of cells or underdeveloped fetuses as human life.  It's an issue of belief, not rationally obtained, and therefore unassailable with calm discourse and argument.  

      The bigger issue is a failure of science and rational interpretation of what life is.  For instance, pro-lifers think that life actually "begins."  This is silly.  Life doesn't "begin" since there is no dead stage in human reproduction.  Sperm are alive, eggs are alive, fertilized eggs are alive, embryos are alive etc etc.  Life "began" at some point billions of years ago and hasn't stopped since (amazing how the abortion debate actually ties into the intelligent design debate).  They don't care about the eggs and sperm because we naturally waste those, and they aren't bright enough to reconcile their religion with nature.  They literally believe  eggs are "ensouled" at fertilization.  This is also silly, since an estimated 50% of fertilized eggs are naturally lost during menstruation meaning limbo is full of human caviar.  They don't give their god a whole lot of credit, after all, in his omniscience he can't seem to tell which embryos are going to make it and which are destined for the trash heap of probability.

      Now, given that they have these irrational beliefs about life itself, are you surprised when they then turn to violence at what they see as a campaign of violence against life itself?  In a numbers game they see the one or two doctors that die or women or nurses killed as tiny in comparison to the hundreds or thousands or millions that they can prevent.  That's what your up against.  Do you still want this fight?  Do you think you'll be able to win or just at best repress the violence through vigilance?  That is the only answer, the war won't end until people's understanding of the nature of life is changed.

      •  Unfortunately (none / 1)

        their arguments are borne out of emotionalism, which is far more enthralling than intellectualism.

        It's been how long since we identified the origins of most diseases and perfected the science of epidemiology?  And our drug stores are filled to the brim with ineffective "medicines" and "cures."  The shelves overflow with creams and ointments that promise to remove wrinkles, grow hair, melt fat and eliminate blemishes.

        It's easier to sell a dream than it is to sell a reality.

        A fetus is a dream.  It doesn't whine, smell, have a criminal record, or require subsidies.  It is the ultimate embodiment of innocence.  So well meaning folks rally around.  It's easier, so much easier than feeding born people who are hungry or rehabilitating born people who have criminal records, or curing born people of disease.

        It's a cheap, easy path to "holiness."

        When life becomes more complicated, humans seek solace in emotional arguments.  At least understanding this is one step toward not letting them have power over us personally.  Taking that to a national level, however, is a bit trickier.

      •  Not true (none / 1)

        They believe what they need to believe so that they may obtain the satisfaction of controlling another's life.  These people care about babies?  Yeah, right!  If they were true antiabortion "warriors," then rather than resorting to terrorism and murder, they would be driving a vigorous campaign for wider access to contraception, child care, and a living wage.  They don't give a damn what science says nor do they care to resolve the internal scientific and moral contradictions of their stance.  They are shrouding a disgusting impulse to see others suffer and controlled in religious rhetoric.

        Please don't buy into their bullshit.

      •  I disagree, but they're not irrational (none / 1)

        Now, given that they have these irrational beliefs about life itself, are you surprised when they then turn to violence at what they see as a campaign of violence against life itself?
        No, I don't think they're irrational. I think you're trying to see something as obviously black and white, and (IMO) it isn't. Look at the doctor's oath: First, do no harm. Under "normal" circumstances, a significant percentage of fertilizations/pregnancies will result in a child being born, if no emergency contraception or abortion takes place, which is "harm" to the fetus. If one believes that a fetus is a person, there's a moral problem here. Nature makes this very difficult. The situation might be less murky if both male & female had to orgasm for conception to happen. But our biology has it that pregnancy (not sexuality nor pleasure) is active for men and passive for women, yet women get assigned the major biological costs. Mother Nature badly discriminates against women.

        Yet, for many people "things happen for a reason." I don't think it's totally, even mostly, "the pill gave women more freedom, we have to reign it in." For some of the anti-abortion women I've discussed with or observed, medical advancements make a contribution. These women may not be for oppressive legislation ... but being oppressive culturally is still oppression. For women and couples who want to be pregnant, pregnancy tests and ultra sound allow mothers & fathers to interact with their child at an early and earlier time in the process. You can't tell those people that their fetus (or their sister's fetus, etc.) aren't children. If they're anti-abortion, they aren't seeing there's a magical change happening, and that magic doesn't happen if the woman doesn't want the child, or a wanted pregnancy can fail & "die" if tests reveal there are/will be birth defects that are more serious than the family thinks they can handle.

        That's what we have to counter. We can't tell them they're wrong. The most (IMO) we can tell and educate them about is that they're ignoring another moral problem. We can agree there's a moral problem ... but there also should also be a moral problem that equal minds don't have equal liberty. The only way women can, maybe, have equal liberty is if reproductive choice is private & not a community decision. (IE, the potential person becomes a person when the woman welcomes the pregnancy ... or decision is postponed until "too late")

        The abortion discussions I've observed or have gotten into with good-hearted "legal & rare" people have all, unfortunately, been polite variations of "you were born a women, suck it up". With the people who are uncomfortable on the issue (or stronger emotions) but who think culture/social services needs changing rather than attaching reproductive rights, I try to use the "that means you don't believe that women should be/are equal to men" ... and they look at me strange, as if I'm missing something obvious.

        My PoV is that - biologically - women have been made by nature to be weaker, in that we have a systemic susceptibility to the burdens of producing the next generation. This is systemic discrimination by biology, and - culturally & legally - there should be mechanisms to level the playing field, so women have an equal chance. (Affirmative action type stuff.) How I understand the other viewpoint is different variations on "everyone gets different burdens & duties" ... which, my PoV, is too often a pretext for "hierarchy is good, don't be uppity". It really gets my brain twisted into a knot. Because I don't want to call these people bad/evil (many aren't), but it always seems to be a meme of "if we give women more resources and better birth control then there will be fewer percentage of abortions" and it seems to me that's a campaign of "if we make servitude more attractive more women will be happy with their lot."

        A lot of women want to be mothers and fathers and people who want to be parents to adopt - I'm glad; I'm glad for those children who are wanted and loved. But I don't want to have cultural pressure saying I (we) were unnatural because we didn't want to be parents. This attitude about abortion doesn't just oppress women. It's also the hierarchy telling the rank & file, "You will have children because we say so." My husband & I didn't want children (yet), so I got an IUD. Which failed. So we decided probably no kids ever, I got an abortion & tubes tied. Being forced to continue a pregnancy we didn't want would have been compelling both of us against our wills.

        I believe what I believe. If my belief is "wrong", then I'm in rebellion against Nature/God because I don't agree with the results, which are (IMO) sexist & unfair.

        If your local service workers don't get a living wage (including healthcare) then your local social contract is broken

        by julifolo on Tue Dec 27, 2005 at 09:41:07 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  I think these people are (4.00 / 3)

      evil, vile criminals and terrorists of the worst kind.

      But, I don't personally see anything hypocritical about their actions if you take into account their personal opinions about abortion.

      These people believe that abortion is murder. And not just some kind of "sorta-murder," but total, 100% mass murder, just as bad as 9/11 or the Nazi Holocaust. If we were to accept that view as true, then we would probably be applauding their actions.

      What would our reaction be if we found out Osama was assassinated? How would we feel if we read a book about a person who managed to shut down a concentration camp by firebombing the ovens?

      Like I said, I think these "pro-life" criminals are the worst kind of terrorists and murderers, but their actions do follow a certain twisted sense of morality.

      In a sense, the fact that most "pro-life" people don't support clinic bombings is probably a good sign that deep down in their soul, they don't REALLY believe abortion is murder, even if they claim they do.

      It's too easy to write off our enemies as crazy, or irrational, when the truth is probably more subtle. (BTW, I consider conservatives to be opponents, but people who commit serious crimes on their behalf to be enemies.)

      congratulations on your foreskin -- osteriser

      by bartman on Tue Dec 27, 2005 at 02:24:38 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  It is true (none / 0)

        Everyone follows their own twisted sense of morality.  I'm quite sure that Osama thinks that he's the most moral person on the face of the planet, as has just about every other evil nasty person in the history of the world.  I can't think of one so-called "evil" person in history who sat around like Dr. Evil laughing diabolically while torturing puppies.  Evil doesn't exist, just humans and their good intentions (which happen to pave the road to hell).

        But what does acknowledgement of a consistent but warped moral worldview gain us?  Little, unless at the same time you think of a way to counter how their worldview originates.  The worldview of the pro-life terrorist originates from a warped view of life itself.  This view comes from an also-warped educational system that allows people to graduate from high school without an even basic understanding of where we come from, how we reproduce, and when life really began some 3 billion years ago.  Thus they develop a very black and white worldview on what abortion represents in terms of ending of human life, when in reality the grey is so deep you can't see either end of it.

        We can wonder at the violence and hem and haw and shake our fist at the sky over the origins of extremism, or we can sit back, put ourselves in their shoes and actually figure it out.  Once you see the world from their point of view, you see that many people raised to believe that life "begins" and abortion is absolute evil will support, at least tacitly, violence against clinics and given the right conditions and disposition actually bomb them.  High and mighty conversations against violence being wrong and talk of "evil" are silly.  Violence is sometimes an excellent response to a certain situation, examples abound throughout history of good and evil uses of violence.  This is a bad use of violence, agreed, but just calling your enemy evil and stopping there is what Bush does.  Don't do that, please.

        •  Huh? (2.50 / 2)

          I made my comment in an attempt to point out that writing off these extremists as idiots is simplistic, and we need to try to understand their point of view if we are going to stop them.

          I did use the word evil in my initial sentence, but if you read my entire comment, I don't see how you could characterize it as "calling your enemy evil and stopping there."

          Then you go on to say:

          But what does acknowledgement of a consistent but warped moral worldview gain us?  Little, unless at the same time you think of a way to counter how their worldview originates.

          I'm sorry for not writing a doctoral thesis on how to stop abortion clinic bombers!

          Acknowledgement of their worldview gains us the ability to preceed with the task of trying to figure out how to counter their worldview. Perhaps your username is "quitter" because you get overwhelmed by looking at all of the huge tasks in your life, and can't see that a huge task can be accomplished by taking small steps.

          Also, just because they have a seemingly self-consistent worldview doesn't mean they are not evil according to MY worldview.

          I personally choose to view the actions of some people as evil, even though I assume they see themselves as righteous.

          Bush assumes some people are evil. He also breathes. Just because Bush does something doesn't automatically make it wrong. (Although I wouldn't want to have to defend that position in a debate *grin*)

          The difference between myself and Bush is that I perceive shades of grey, and he doesn't. I just feel that some shades are dark enough that I prefer to call them black.

          congratulations on your foreskin -- osteriser

          by bartman on Tue Dec 27, 2005 at 03:04:05 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Sorry (none / 0)

            I'm sorry, I was replying more to the first line than the rest of your post, you are correct.  I had picked up a lot of the other stuff from other comments in this post and was just too lazy to reply to every single one.  

            Also, I wasn't thinking so clearly at 5am or whatever when I wrote that.

            I still believe though we tend to ascribe more sinister motives or thought to pro-lifers than they actually possess.  The leadership might have more of sinister worldview concerning control of women's bodies and what not, but the crazies that show up with the cut up fetus signs are really rather simplistic.  I've been to many pro-choice rallies, and each time I've tried to talk to the counterprotestors.  They are totally nuts yes, but sincere in their religion (though poorly informed), and above all convinced that abortion ends human life above all else.  Most people would rather ascribe motivations to this group rather than try to figure out what they are for themselves.  

            I'm quitter because I don't really believe in arguing with Republicans anymore, I believe that if they're given their way, they'll destroy themselves forever with incompetence and callousness towards their own constituents.  Recent events seem to be confirming my worldview.  I'm actually a scientist, so it's funny that you ascribe to me an inability to see that small steps can complete a huge task.  My whole life seems to be about vigorously achieving small steps.  Ha!  Maybe I should quit science too.

        •  oh you just nailed it (none / 0)

          These people are terrorists like Osama Bin Ladin. They think a holocaust is going on against unborn babies and that can justify their terrorist acts - just like Osama thinks he can do against the West.
      •  I don't believe them (3.25 / 4)

        They scream, they holler, but I don't believe a word they say.  When the antiabortionists turn their fervor towards reforming the foster care systems, and creating macro conditions which decrease unwanted pregnancies (access to contraception and comprehensive sex ed, child care, better maternity and paternity leave legislation, increasing the minimum wage), then I'll believe that they actually care about decreasing abortions.

        But as they continue to wrap themselves in religiosity while applauding the killing of abortion providers, I refuse to believe a fucking word they say about the sanctity of life.

        Look at their actions, not their words to see what this crew is really about.

    •  Pro-Life isn't what they're about (none / 1)

      It's all about control.  Not life.

      And the bombings fit right in with their goals.  They want to control others - in this case it's women - and they'll do whatever it takes to win the day.

      Including killing people.

      •  too true (none / 0)

        i can't say i disagree.

        i was listening to a think about how all of the WI state govt Republicans are anti-birth control.

        There was a thing where they didn't want any of the UW schools to provide birth control.

        Who the HELL does anyone think they are to tell anyone else to not have sex?  I could go on and on about that but I don't think I need to.  I don't seen any morality attached to sex, so long as it's consentual, with one or more adult humans who are capable of consenting.  I hope people have safe sex too - emotionally and physically - but you know what? Part of the freedom we have as Americans is the freedom to make dumb decisions like unsafe sex if we want.

  •  In 1975, 15 of us in .... (4.00 / 9)

    ...Boulder, Colorado, founded the nation's frist not-for-profit abortion clinic. Ours was the first or one of the first to be fire-bombed. Actually, they struck a garage attached to the large house we had converted into the clinic. Damage was not great, but it certainly alerted us to just how crazy our foes were.

    In the late 1980s, in Los Angeles, I spent a considerable amount of time arm-in-arm with others dealing with lesser violence of traveling harassers at several area women's clinics that offered abortions. Only a couple of fistfights arose on those occasions. There were no assassinated doctors, although there were phoned-in death and bomb threats. We should take the quiescence of anti-choice violence over the past few years as a hiatus, not a permanent state of affairs. And we should be prepared to make sure that any renewed violence is met with the full force of the law. First up is making sure people know that the violence may be on the rise again.

    I am an anti-imperialist. I am opposed to having the eagle put its talons on any other land. -- Mark Twain

    by Meteor Blades on Mon Dec 26, 2005 at 07:35:37 PM PDT

  •  The anti-aborts are not "pro-life" (4.00 / 10)

    This issue has nothing to do with life. It is actually about the conflict between "denial of the flesh" inherent in Abrahamic-based religions and the pursuit of individual fulfillment inherent in the Enlightenment. This argument has been going on for hundreds of years, but it got turbocharged in the 1950s when the birth control pill was invented.

    That was the dawn of true mass-market recreational sex. The arguments over contraception, abortion, homosexuality and obscenity are all tributaries. The anti-abortion crowd doesn't care about the sanctity of life. They never have and they never will. This is about controlling sexuality.

    That, in turn, is about whether happiness is to be pursued in this world apart from religious worship, or in the next world. The Abrahamic religions come from a sparse, harsh, deprived area of the world where deferring gratification to the next life was essential if anything was going to be organized in this world.

    Modern life is a direct challenge to that whole way of thinking, and you've got a large group of people who feel adrift unless they have someone telling them what to do. And lest anyone here feel too superior, there's a very strong puritanical streak in liberals, too. Banning cigarette smoking comes from the same underlying impulse, which is to solve personal conflicts by seeking to reform the habits of others.

    The hardest thing for anyone to really come to grips with is freedom, because when you're free you've got no one's life to run but your own and no one to complain about except the person in the mirror.

    First you've got to get the facts, then you've got to face the facts.

    by cwilson on Mon Dec 26, 2005 at 08:26:00 PM PDT

    •  it's about pleasure. (3.75 / 8)


      Notice that the liberal antismoking control-freaks don't go out of their way to ban automobiles, whose exhaust smoke is contributing to climate change as well as to individual illnesses.  

      Puritanism, on the left as well as the right, is all about controlling things that involve somato-sensory pleasure.  

      BTW, we should drop the phrase "antiabortion violence" and start using the phrase antiabortion terrorism.   If ever there was a well-organized domestic terrorist movement, that is definitely the one.  

      And there is no good reason that the full weight of the Patriot Act shouldn't be brought down on antiabortion terrorists as well.  

      Dominionism is as anti-American and un-American as Marxist Leninist communism was in its own day.  When it becomes allied with terroristic causes, it's fair game for a full-court-press by law enforcement.  

      •  Right-wing domestic terror is a bigger threat (none / 1)

        The only time this hasn't been the case was during the Vietnam War, when there was a genuine far-left violent terror network. Other than that, it's the far right wing that's always had more of a terror network. This is one reason I think liberals need to stop and think about just how far they want to go in tearing down the government's investigative power.

        See, if you get a controversial Democrat elected to the presidency -- Hillary C., for instance -- I could certainly imagine a serious outbreak of rightwingnut terror. The gun nuts came very close to aligning themselves with the militia groups in the '90s and forming private armies. I'm not sure it's in our interest to render the federal government impotent in the face of that sort of threat.

        First you've got to get the facts, then you've got to face the facts.

        by cwilson on Mon Dec 26, 2005 at 10:41:49 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I agree (4.00 / 2)

          All the way back to the original KKK, which was a role model for Hitler & Co.

          I am in no way arguing for dismantling investigative or intel capabilities.  Far from it.  Though, the Executive always needs to follow the law, which in the present case means getting warrants for surveillances.  

          If we get a liberal Administration, yes I'd expect to see a resurgence of rightwing terrorism, which, like foreign terrorism, should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.  

          •  Just like during the last liberal administration (none / 0)

            The largest act of domestic terrorism before 9/11 was Oklahoma City.  It was the act of an extremist.  A year later, we had the Olympic Park and abortion clinic bomber, Eric Robert Ruldolph.
      •  Poor example (none / 0)

        Notice that the liberal antismoking control-freaks don't go out of their way to ban automobiles, whose exhaust smoke is contributing to climate change as well as to individual illnesses.

        Liberals recognize that people need to use their automobiles for transportation. Also, it's hardly the cars that liberals are ignoring the polution produced by cars.

        It is the job of thinking people not to be on the side of the executioners.

        by A Citizen on Mon Dec 26, 2005 at 11:45:13 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Another poor example (4.00 / 4)

          Banning cigarette smoking comes from the same underlying impulse, which is to solve personal conflicts by seeking to reform the habits of others.
          I have no desire to ban personal drug use (and yah, alcohol's a drug) when it doesn't affect me directly. But banning cigarettes in public comes from the same place DUI charges do — a desire to protect the health of society in general. So how is that liberal (or conservative) puritanism? If there were significant modern attempts to ban smoking and drinking completely, you might have a point. But I think most Americans learned that lesson with the 18th and 21st amendments.
      •  Wrong (none / 0)

        It's not about pleasure - it's about sex.  They don't care about other pleaures in life.

        They get wigged out over a tit popping out of a constume during the super bowl, but have no problem with a cop show that has repeated gory scenes of murder & mayhem.

        Trust me - this about sex. Full stop.

      •  Anti-modernity terrorism (none / 0)

        Both the anti-abortion terrorism and Islamicist terrorism is directed at thoughtcrime.

        Both fundamentalist Christianity and fundamentalist Islam enslave their adherents by confining them in a sphere of influence where "sinning" is not only punished severely, but made impossible by the smothering influence of extremist religion.

        The only way the fundamentalists can keep power over their own is by eliminating thoughtcrime, defined as anything that goes against the fundamentalists' crabbed view of holiness.

        Popular culture, outside religions, and pleasure of any sort are threats to the control of a totalitarian fundamentalist religion, and must be eliminated, whether by law (Iran, Saudi Arabia, the FCC) or through terrorism (al-Qaeda, Hamas, Army of God).

        9-11 changed everything? Well, Katrina changed it back.

        by varro on Tue Dec 27, 2005 at 04:26:08 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  It's not all negative (none / 0)

          Zealots offer something that modern life cannot, which is certainty or at least the illusion of it. It's a sense of belonging to something greater than yourself. Everyone has felt the tug in some way. I mean, why so many posts at Daily Kos? To some degree, we're all lemmings. It's baked in the cake.

          There's obviously a continuum. Daily Kos isn't a cult, although with all the time I'm spending here I am starting to wonder. But seriously, there's a common thread that runs through many affiliations and most political and religious movements. They satisfy needs or they wouldn't exist.

          First you've got to get the facts, then you've got to face the facts.

          by cwilson on Tue Dec 27, 2005 at 08:20:13 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  Let's not be afraid to call a spade a spade. (4.00 / 2)

    calling this hanus act "potentially an act of domestic terrorism" is a definate understatement.  In fact, it is a textbook example of what terrorism really is.  

    you have:

    •  Extreme ideological motives
    •  Complete disregard of laws
    •  Using violence as a deterrent force

    What more do you want?  The only difference is that those who committed these acts are not arabs.

    The Bill of Rights, and not the Ten Commandments, is what should be displayed on the front of our federal buildings

    by chinkoPelinke on Tue Dec 27, 2005 at 12:54:56 AM PDT

    •  Only in 2005 (3.00 / 3)

      Could people know how to make those bullet-point lists in html, yet not even come close to spelling heinous correctly.  =]
      •  spelling snob (none / 0)

        lol!

        Kidding about the snob part.  Some of us can't help ourselves.

        I'd say more about spelling (I'm learning another language, God help me with the spelling part), but that's sooo off-topic and not fair to Frederick.

        </diary hijacker>

        Frederick, I have a friend who's sort of an expert in the area of rightwing extremists.  Do you mind if I send this diary to her?


        Blind faith in your leaders, or in anything, will get you killed. -- Bruce Springsteen

        by Plutonium Page on Tue Dec 27, 2005 at 02:20:40 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Ah, this is why... (none / 0)

        I have Mac's.

        They also point out spelling mistakes by underlining them in red.

        Being a Texan, one has to look good to the rest of the world!

        Feloneous

        PS. Yes, I know that Feloneous is misspelled. It is intentional. Makes it easier to google. F

        "Bubba, what did I tell you about starin' into the sun? You want to become a Democrat or somthin'?"

        by feloneouscat on Tue Dec 27, 2005 at 04:40:49 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  So basically (none / 0)

      the difference between terrorists and the current administration, taking into account your bullet points, would be the word "complete."
  •  Wolcott on Bloodlust (none / 1)

    James Wolcott has an interesting piece up here about some of the right wing haters' penchant for bloodlust.

    It's not the typical Wolcott chuckle-fest.. it's a pretty serious look at the derangement of some of the warmongers.

    excerpt

    More and more the rightwing militant "anti-idiotarians" (as they deludedly think of themselves)have been relishing the prospect of antiwar figures undergoing the Daniel Pearl treatment. They keep bringing it up as the retribution that'll deliver certain choice heads on a platter. In a sick irony, Daniel Pearl's marytrdom has provided a negative inspiration to certain super patriots professing to fight for truth, justice, and the American way.
  •  This just shows (none / 0)

    that those that supposedly are pro life and believe in law and order are liars and hypocrites not worthy of respect, which if you notice is the category that most of the right wing wackos fall into considering their extreme views on everything from a to z.

    Of course conveniently these rules only apply to those that the right deem to be unworthy of con religious ferver, or another words narrow minded and hateful without regard to common sense or empathy for other opinions and life styles.
    PEACE!  

    •  I wouldn't say (none / 0)

      that these people understand the fundamentals of hypocrasy or could even view their actions as such.  Anti-abortionists see themselves as crusaders for God.  They believe in their actions, their cause and see abortion as murder.

      This is what makes them so dangerous.  Religious fundamentalism from the Christian Right is as much a threat to democracy and our values as any religious fundamentalist from the middle east.

      And they don't even have the eyes to see past their crusade.

      Flee fro the prees and dwelle in sothfastnesse.

      by mismolly on Tue Dec 27, 2005 at 03:33:02 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  You don't, really? (4.00 / 2)

    There has always been a deep double standard in how antiabortion violence is treated by society at all levels.

    Sometimes, even abortion providers have played down such situations for reasons of their own.

    I don't know why there is such a remarkable silence in this instance. But I do believe that as a society we cannot return to the silence in the face of violence and threats of violence against abortion providers.

    You've got upwards of 70% of the people in this country who believe their all-loving god is justified in setting people on fire for eternity. It doesn't seem like a great leap of "logic" for them to think it's excusable to set a few heathens on fire.

    I agree with you, we shouldn't turn a blind eye towards this bigotry and hatred; don't expect those who resort to these actions to be succeptible to reason, though, so the best we can hope for is to catch the nutters after they commit crimes.

    Pointing out that I am not, in fact, clever at all, is neither original nor clever.

    by Not Clever At All on Tue Dec 27, 2005 at 03:38:13 AM PDT

    •  we have a winner (none / 1)

      The Shreveport case doesn't surprise me. What surprises me is that we don't have dozens of abortion providers murdered every day, considering the vast number of people who buy into a fundamentalist worldview.

      And you know what?

      No amount of reason, persuasion, law enforcement, or education will change their minds. The best we can hope for -- and I mean this both literally and seriously -- is some form of partition where these people are given an independent homeland somewhere in the (former) United States. As far as I'm concerned, two Americas already exist -- one based on reason, tolerance, and cosmopolitanism; the other on faith, tribalism, and fundamentalism.

      The sooner we don't have to live with one another, the better.

      •  an independent homeland somewhere in the US (none / 0)

        can be found in South Dakota!

        The last doctor in South Dakota to perform abortions stopped about eight years ago; the consensus in the medical community is that offering the procedure is not worth the stigma of being branded a baby killer.

        South Dakota, those on both sides of the abortion debate agree, has become one of the hardest states in the country in which to obtain an abortion. One of three states in the country to have only one abortion provider -- North Dakota and Mississippi are the others -- South Dakota, largely because of a strong antiabortion lobby, is also becoming a leading national laboratory for testing the limits of state laws restricting abortion, both opponents and advocates of abortion rights say.

  •  Reaping the 'rewards' (4.00 / 3)

    This is what happens when we allow the mental health system to be gutted. Groups such as the "Army of God" are magnets for dangerous lunatics, many of whom are only running around loose because we have fewer legal avenues for keeping them off the streets and safely in treatment where they belong.

    We'll leave for another day the discussion of whether radical christianity itself is a mental illness, only because they seem to pose less of a physical danger to others.

    •  What's funny is that when I (none / 0)

      think of what a "radical Christian" should be, I'm picturing someone who devotes the entirety of their life towards assisting fellow wo/man.  How these people have perverted Christ's message, that a "radical Christian" is now seen as someone willing to kill others to convert them.
  •  Wink Wink (4.00 / 2)

    Look at the Army of God website.  There is a snarky headline saying someone used a molotov cocktail on the clinic.  Be careful out there!  Then, there is a detailed explanation as to what exactly a molotov cocktail is with a disclaimer that they are illegal.  As if the editors of the website want people to know how to make a molotov cocktail.  This is a very subtle terroristic incitement to violence if you ask me and I think the Justice Department should investigate.

    See you at the debate, bitches!

    by calipygian on Tue Dec 27, 2005 at 04:24:56 AM PDT

  •  Oh and look at this (4.00 / 3)

    this is definitely something that law enforcement can use.  Follow the link at the top of their page to homo news.  Then, follow the link to Christian News.  There they have pictures of an "abortion mill visited by the army of god".  Seems like an admission by this man
    To contact e-mail: Glory2Jesus@ArmyofGod.com
     Telephone 1-757-204-4454
     Or write to: Rev. Donald Spitz
                        Pro-Life Virginia
                        P.O. Box 2876
                        Chesapeake VA 23327

    that they have comitted terroristic violent crimes.

    See you at the debate, bitches!

    by calipygian on Tue Dec 27, 2005 at 04:35:12 AM PDT

  •  The reason (4.00 / 4)

    there was a decline in the violence on clinic's was because of the video footage I shot during the 92-93 protest in Milwaukee by the Missionaries to the Preborn. The video exposed them for what they are; terrorist, cowards and thugs. There is a 17 minute docu-music-drama called The Inquisitors posted online this link if anyone is interested in seeing some of the footage.

    http://ourmedia.org/...

    The video is free for anyone to download and copy. There is a section of the video where the stated goal of turning America into a Theocratic Fascist State is openly talked about by some of the leaders of the pro-life movement.

    Every clinic in the nation learned the value of the video taping techniques I developed during that time period since they were copied and distrubuted by Planned Parenthood, NARAL and other pro-choice organizations.

    The tapes were also seen by Members of Congress, the Senate, the Justice Dept. and then, President Bill Clinton. The video footage was the tipping point that resulted in passage of the Clinic Protection Act.

    I have some 80 hours of video footage which at some point I would like to copy to DVD for historical purposes. The problem is I can't stand watching this stuff over and over anymore. So if there is anyone or any organization willing to take on the copy project send me an email at

    infinia@toxicreality.com

    Nobody back then believed these nutcases would one day wield the political power they do today. It's kind of ironic and twisted that now everyone will take everything these assholes say seriously and voices such as my voice is silenced by even the powers that be on Dkos.

    No one here on Dkos talks about The Kingdom of Infinia' and how these people set me up to take the fall for their attempt to destroy America.

    Back then I predicted that they would learn the same lesson Hitler learned after the Munich Pusch and seek to impose their stated goal in America by using the political arena. No one was listening to me back then and no one is  listening to me now. I'll just have to keep up the good fight without the help of Dkos or anyone else. I guess that's the way a lot more than just the cookie crumbles in America today. Go Figure!

  •  nearly all... (none / 1)

    nearly all domestic terrorism in the last 20 years has been from right wing groups.
    •  I'm not sure (none / 0)

      that all domestic acts of terrorism are caused by the right, but I would say that all acts resulting in death are committed by the right. There are extremists on both sides; the far left just damages property while the right goes after people. Of course this administration just cares about the property. A good article about this comes from the Southern Poverty Law Center.

      "No matter where you go, there you are" -Buckaroo Banzai "I drank what?" -Socrates

      by UEtech on Tue Dec 27, 2005 at 06:24:13 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  People over property (none / 1)

        I am in no way excusing far leftist groups which choose to harm property to make a point.

        But that doesn't even begin to compare to the disgrace of a lunatic blowing up a building with young children in it (Oklahoma City) or another lunatic shooting a man, in his home with his family present, with a sniper rifle.

        Neither is acceptable, but the harm to persons is far more egregious IMO.

      •  You Don't See the Far Left (none / 1)

        lynching people, or dragging them around behind some pick-up truck.

        The violence against blacks in this country (starting with slavery!) makes anything the left could have done pale in comparison.

        •  Absolutely. (none / 0)

          Piss off a liberal and you might get sued. Piss off a conservative and you might die. The SPL Center article points out that all the deadly acts of terrorism were committed by the right. It's my belief that they just don't have the ability to think with compassion, sympathy, or empathy. I understand that I'm generalizing, but as those are evolved human traits it makes me wonder about the conservative brain...

          "No matter where you go, there you are" -Buckaroo Banzai "I drank what?" -Socrates

          by UEtech on Tue Dec 27, 2005 at 08:17:16 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  Certainly the Biggest Bang (none / 0)

      Oklahoma City (Tim McVeigh)
      The Atlanta Olympics and several abortion clinics (Eric Rudolph

      Not to mention the many doctors who've been shot in cold blood and then crossed off some whacko web-site.

      The 9/11 terrorists are coming from the extreme right side of the spectrum as well.

      Excellent point.

  •  It's always amazing... (none / 1)

    ...how violence can be justified under the "right" circumstances.    

    Fear will keep the local systems in line. -Grand Moff Tarkin -SLB-

    by boran2 on Tue Dec 27, 2005 at 06:05:47 AM PDT

  •  Anti-abortion terrorism and violence (4.00 / 7)

    was the training ground for the current right wing movement.

    Many of the movement's leaders honed their skills attacking abortion clinics.

    Ralph Reed, for instance, was arrested in the early to mid-80's at an abortion clinic in Raleigh.  His mugshot was prominently in the paper.  Nobody can find it now, though.  It seems to have disappeared.  He refuses to talk about his anti-abortion activism...and is currently running for Lt. Gov. of Georgia.  He has other problems with the native American casino issue, but still...I want that mugshot.  If there are sleuths out there, please help.

    Other anti-abortionists from the 70's and 80's are in positions of power now.

    In my Blog from November 2004, "The Right Wing's 20-Year Plan", we detailed this power grab and it's reprinted below:

    http://hotflashreport.blogspot.com/...

    The Right Wing's 20-Year Plan

    Military wars are not fought between the Generals. They're fought on the ground. The Christian Right Wing initiated a battle plan over 20 years ago to attain the victory that occurred on Tuesday. This war bubbled up from the small towns of America to Washington and vice-versa.

    The surprise of a second term for George W. Bush that many liberals and the elite media are expressing today is disingenuous because they were warned 20 years ago.

    20 years ago, the social issue battle was being fought in front of abortion clinics in every city in this country. From 1984 to the present, the battle front was sidewalks in front of abortion clinics. These were the first skirmishes., The Catholic Church and Evangelical movement had decided to draft their soldiers for this cultural war locally and to train them on the abortion issue.

    The plan that we saw in these small towns involved not only protests that would become violent and involve killings, but also a methodical and secret plan to start at the bottom of the political ladder with school boards, city councils, etc. in the quest to take over the Congress and the White House

    The National media and liberals watched this occurring and came in for the skirmishes but never dug deeper, nor did the Democrats. Just as the protests and attacks against clinics were well organized like a military campaign, so was the ultimate goal. These people were not only militarily brilliant, they were very very patient. They knew it would not happen over night and they recruited young people to carry them through the campaign.

    One example of a good soldier is Ralph Reed, who amazingly enough, is now a spokesperson and campaign manager for President Bush. While at school in North Carolina in the early 80's, he was arrested for anti-abortion activity in front of an abortion clinic in Raleigh. That was his first assignment. We have continually tried to tell the press about the beginnings of his political activity to no avail. Even with mug shot evidence, the national media was never interested in his roots. The plan was succeeding. As the anti-abortion activity ratcheted up, the leaders of it began to be promoted to higher positions.

    Bryan Brown, an infamous protester in Ft. Wayne, Indiana, was appointed 2 years ago as assistant to the Governor in Kansas. He had been sued successfully by a clinic in Ft. Wayne 14 years ago and is Federally injoined from coming near that clinic, but yet the media was never interested in his background and subsequent rise. After his successes in protests in Ft. Wayne, Indiana, and Wichita, Kansas, he was "promoted" or "rewarded" by going to Pat Robertson's law school to hone his skills. These things were not coincidental.

    The two twin Schenk brothers are former Buffalo Pentacostol Born Again Jews for Jesus that were run out of Buffalo after 1992 anti-abortion activities. They were brought up on charges often, and Paul Schenk was sentenced to Federal Prison for lying under oath about their activities and identities. His twin brother Robert moved to Washington DC and is currently the Pentecostol chaplain on Capitol Hill for Attorney General John Ashcroft.

    This kind of anti-abortion activity in Buffalo also incited James Kopp to come to Buffalo to eventually murder abortion physician Bart Slepian on October 3, 1998.

    Jordan Laurence first appeared on the scene in the mid-80's in a North Dakota abortion clinic case as a young attorney for right wing interests. He went on from that case to reappear 15 years later as one of the lead attorneys for a right wing group defending anti-gay marriage legislation. In between, he was a young attorney working on the anti-sodomy case in Georgia.

    In the mid-90's, Michael Farris, another attorney who had worked with Mr. Laurence in the North Dakota case appeared on the ballot in Virginia as a candidate for Lt. Governor.

    All of these people had been part of the right wing army on the battle front years ago. The pattern continued to prove that the training ground was anti-abortion zealotry. The committment made by these people then would never change, and the way to become a General was to win your stars in every right wing skirmish in middle America.

    They've done it brilliantly. They knew it was gorilla warfare that would take years, and they've succeeded.

    We must reiterate. We watched the troops years ago with walkie-talkies and camouflage outfits taking over abortion clinics. At the time, Susan Hill described it in a Federal Court hearing as "looking like young boys playing war". They were young men at the time, but they were not playing. It was for real.

    The question of connecting the dots never occurred to Democrats and was "poo-pooed" by the media. It was as if abortion providers were yelling fire but the theater was empty. This is a well constructed campaign that goes on, and unless the left and moderate left recognizes the campaign it's in, it can't win.

    People need to be exposed. Their roots have to be investigated. They have to be taken seriously. And just as this country never connected the dots between the international terrorists that relentlessly attack us, they have refused to connect the dots on this systematic, well-planned campaign to take over America and to do it secretly.

    There are hundreds of thousands of others that have been involved in these battles over the past 25 years. Abortion providers were in essence the special forces of the left in America. We saw what the enemy was planning. We lived through it and were killed for it. But there were no Generals to report to.

    Paramilitary campaigns are never fought in the open. The secret to their success is always secrecy. You must believe us. The end game is danger for this democracy.

    HotFlashReport - Opinionated liberal views of the wrongs of the right focusing on abortion and reproductive rights.

    by annrose on Tue Dec 27, 2005 at 07:00:27 AM PDT

    •  I'm still reeling over today's Wa Po.... (4.00 / 3)

      I linked the article above.

      But also part of that article is this little piece:

      Each week, 15 to 20 or so women from across South Dakota find their way to the Sioux Falls Planned Parenthood for an abortion, no easy feat for many of them. South Dakota is home to some of the poorest counties in the country, including the poorest, Buffalo County, seat of the Crow Creek Sioux reservation. State law forbids any public funding for the $450 procedure, even in the case of rape or incest. Beyond cost, there is the distance. It's a long slog here from places like Rapid City, about 350 miles away in the western part of the state. For some women, the only way to do it -- and not pay for a hotel room -- is to make the 700-mile trip in one day.

      "Women in the western side of the state don't think about abortion until they need to," said Kate Looby, Planned Parenthood's state director, "and then they're completely shocked that there's no way to receive that care unless they go to Sioux Falls." Even women in a medical or life-threatening emergency have only one hospital to go to that will perform an emergency abortion, she added. "One hospital. In the entire state, again in Sioux Falls."

      So when we take a retrospective look at Ralph Reed's career, we see a man who got his start limiting reproductive choices for poor people, particularly native Americans, and is reaching his apex simply robbing them blind outright.

      What a fine, fine Christian Ralph Reed is.

  •  License Plate (none / 0)

    If this bomber pulled up in a car and it was caught on a security camera, there has got to be a way to get a still shot of the license plate of the car.

    This should be a slam dunk folks.  Any word on whether they caught the terrorist that tried to bomb that clinic?

  •  Insurgency is okay (none / 0)

    • insurgency is okay when it's comprised of members of your voting base... just ignore that its happening

    • you can't be guilty of hypocricy if you fail to acknowledge your accusers... just ignore them

    • the separation of church and state will cease to exist if you just ignore it and instead accuse others of erecting this wall to discriminate against you

    • science can't mock the bible if you just ignore it

    everyone is all over the Republican 'talking-points' but no one seems to be addressing their 'action-points'

    ignorance is bliss, don't ya know

  •  Front-paged and still (none / 0)

    so few comments here.

    How sad that this generated so little interest here at a progressive web-site.  Clinics are getting bombed again and...

    nothing.

    The silence here is deafening.

  •  I counter-protested Trinity Church in Sacramento (none / 0)

    after a women's health center was firebombed there in the 90s...  I was substitute teaching at the time, and had a student a week later who happened to be inside the church with her family...our protest was peaceful (a few catchy slogans, one of which I contributed), and only lasted a couple of hours...the kids inside the church, however, were told that they were in grave danger from satanists outside, and they were all cowered together crying and praying that they'd survive our attack.

    I thought that was over...now bush is president and the wackos are back at it again...just great.

    Once in a while you get shown the light in the strangest of places if you look at it right.

    by darthstar on Tue Dec 27, 2005 at 10:00:51 AM PDT

Permalink | 67 comments