Skip to main content

I originally wanted to post about another subject. Then something caught my eye, Greta Van Susteren  had called me out. While visiting her Gretawire blog I left a little message and she was not too happy with it.


An answer to a GretaWire comment

From time to time I like to answer comments. Here is a comment posted here on GretaWire:

“Fox and white Americans are making black people riot! Al Sharpton is the firewall between black anger coming for your neighborhood. MLK tried to warn you and you had riots in America. Now Greta and all the bigots at Fox are trying to start a race riot by dogging out blacks, Native Americans, and Hispanics.”

RESPONSE FROM ME: Let’s get something straight. First, I will put my civil rights record up against anyone’s, including the person who wrote this comment. I spent years and years in the courtroom fighting for the rights of people of color.

I think that she's protesting too much. What first drove me to her site in 2007 was how she kept throwing red meat to her audience. There would be four or five articles in a row questioning the POTUS intelligence. She would print the POTUS schedule and would describe in detail which car he's in. It was as if she was working for another government intelligence service. It was TOO detail and unnecessary. It was as if she was trying to get the President killed.  
Second, no one is making anyone riot. There is a big difference between passionate exercise of First Amendment (which incidentally I also spent years in the courtroom protecting) and rioting. The line? try looting.
There's a difference between the 1st Amendment and outright lying. You told your audience that Trinity United Church of Christ was teaching hate. The church got death threats and so did the new minister Otis Moss III. Otis Moss III is the son of Dr. Martin Luther King's best friend Rev. Dr. Otis Moss Jr, the man that performed the wedding ceremony for Dr. King. Another  thing that Greta may not have known is that the headquarters for the United Church of Christ is in Cleveland home of the 2016 Republican Party Convention. At one point Connie Schultz and her husband Sen. Sharrod Brown attended the church to humanize the congregation. Yes Greta someone had to make Black people look human because one network was busy trying to make them look savage. It didn't matter if the POTUS went to Ebenezer Baptist Church, Dr. King's former church, you had to get your audience so angry that they could kill.
Third, I would not put Reverend Al Sharpton in the same category as Martin Luther King. Anyone who has studied (or lived) history, studied MLK knows better.

You wouldn't put Rev. Sharpton in the same category as Dr. King, well let me tell you a story. Remember when Glenn Beck had his fake ass March on Washington (actually it was on Black people), Black media, Rev. Sharpton, Black Fraternities and Sororities tried to calm Black people down. Glenn was basically defecating on the memory of Dr. King. All these groups and like minded Whites saved Glenn Beck's and his Tea Baggin' friends lives. You have to remember the racism was over the top and people brought their guns and racist signs with the N-word to  previous functions hosted by Glenn that he has to issue a statement telling his "friends" to not bring signs.  Rev. Sharpton is no Dr. King, that because racist killed off most of our leaders in the 60's. If Dr. King was alive now you would be attacking him just like you do any of our leaders.

Then there's the language that your audience use concerning minorities. When people make bigoted racist statements, they are rewarded at your site. There are mentions of coup attempts, lawsuits, treason, and genocide. This is not hyperbole. Below is a link to her site.

http://gretawire.foxnewsinsider.com/...

Below is one of her fans responding to her and teaching "Fox" Black history.

tsigili  • 2 days ago  

First, MLK was an anarchist. he simply knew how to keep from getting himself arrested for it, by having his lieutenants start the riots after he left town. I suspect, Greta, you were still a kid, during the MLK years.

Second, the most racist organization in America today, is not the KKK (although they are obviously racist), the most racist of all is the NAACP.

Blacks still want to blame whitey for everything, because they are taught it was all whitey's fault, from the beginning, as soon as they are old enough to learn words. They are so consumed by hatred for whites, they don't even recognize the truth..........they are their own worst enemy.

O'Reilly was right about one thing, those who work the hardest, and do the best in America, are Asians. They earn it, and they do better than whites do. Indeed, white America has fallen victim to the federal hand outs, and has become far more useless today, than ever before, in this country.

Blacks who make the comments above, are simply haters who refuse to accept responsibility for their own actions.

Whites going to take some responsibility for the violence going on out there, not all Whites just the people at Greta's site that live in a parallel universe. Some of the blame for the state of our country has to go to those on the right. I didn't cause Rosewood, Black Wall Street, or the Red Summer. I didn't kill Emmitt Till. I didn't segregate the schools. Some of those with White privilege need to take responsibility. Another thing, we get sick of people telling us to fix our own community and stop the violence, try your neighborhood first. Not too many "brothers" (and "sisters") bring guns and bombs to their schools. The violence isn't a Black or White thing, it's an American thing. It's woven into the fabric of America. Stop blaming the victim.  According to Fox racism is when a Black person opens their mouth and complain.
PS: I found these little nuggets on a couple of blogs. The first on is the program of the Tea Party trying to help the businesses of Ferguson by shopping at some of the stores damaged during the troubles there. If the Tea Party wanted to help they would apologize to Black America for being racist in the first place. These people blame the current POTUS for the debt cause by Bush spending Bill Clinton surplus.

The second link is from Yahoo. Yes Yahoo publishes an fake ass article from the Examiner sending out dog whistles to harm the POTUS.

KCTV5
http://nation.foxnews.com/...

CIA now admits that President Obama is a radical Islamic enemy of America
http://www.examiner.com/...

11:13 PM PT: http://www.mediaite.com/...

Poll

Is Greta and her Fox friends trying to incite violence?

88%88 votes
12%12 votes

| 100 votes | Vote | Results

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tip Jar (8+ / 0-)

    Think...It ain't illegal yet ! George Clinton

    by kid funkadelic on Sat Aug 30, 2014 at 04:04:38 AM PDT

  •  From a criminal perspective it is nearly (3+ / 0-)

    impossible for a broadcaster in the US to commit the crime of "incitement". The case on point is Brandenburg v Ohio and the bar to indict a broadcaster is extraordinarily high. What Fox does isn't close, from a criminal law perspective.

    "let's talk about that" uid 92953

    by VClib on Sat Aug 30, 2014 at 04:33:00 AM PDT

    •  That said, the answer is YES. (5+ / 0-)

      Conservative media dreams of an American Rwanda.

      TRhis is why the word "stochastic terror" was coined.

      Rush Limbaugh is a call for violence.

      Sean Hannity is a call for violence.

      Glenn Beck is a call for violence.

      The Savage Weener is a call for violence.

      Rightwing media hawks rightwing propaganda 24/7/365.

      A large component of this is the massaging of their personal righteousness: they have the world correctly envisioned and "blacks and liberals" are assailing it.

      Wingnut propaganda tells them they are being assailed, that they are being persecuted.

      And these rightwous folks are alos - tyada - our frothy-mouthed gun-woshipping nutjobs, itching to shoot these blacks and liberals and it is THEM who are supporting the widespread murder of blacvk people by white cops.

      It is NOT a stretch to think that America's police force is riddled with the RaHoWa crowd and it looks to me like they are trying to jumpstart their nutbag "Racial Holy War".

      Rightwing media is constantly trying to get their nutjob listeners to shoot and hurt people.

      If one doesn't see it, one just isn't looking hard enough.

      You can give a 9 yo Girl an Uzi but you can't make pot brownies for adults.

      [41984 | Feb 4, 2005]

      by xxdr zombiexx on Sat Aug 30, 2014 at 05:27:19 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  xxdr - nothing that is done on right wing talk (4+ / 0-)

        or at Fox comes close to meeting the criminal standards outlined in Brandenburg.

        It is interesting that you mention Rwanda in your comment because when asked what would be required for a broadcaster to be indicted under Brandenburg I often refer people to the radio broadcasts in the movie Hotel Rwanda. That would be a criminal act under Brandenburg.

        A recent example might be helpful. After the tragic assassination of Dr. George Tiller, the heroic abortion provider, some thought that Bill O'Reilly, who referred to Dr. Tiller as "the baby killer" should have faced some criminal charges. Under Brandenburg there are four tests, all of which must be met, and O'Reilly didn't meet any one of them. In lay terms the tests are:

        The broadcaster must be specific in calling out the people who should be attacked.
        The broadcaster must be specific in stating that the targets should be killed or injured.
        The people committing the attacks have to have listened to the broadcast personally.
        The violence must come immediately following the broadcast.  

        That's a very high hurdle that is unlikely to ever be present in broadcast media in the US.

        "let's talk about that" uid 92953

        by VClib on Sat Aug 30, 2014 at 05:55:35 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  There has to be (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      AmazingBlaise

      Something done about this

      Think...It ain't illegal yet ! George Clinton

      by kid funkadelic on Sat Aug 30, 2014 at 05:48:14 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  The key case Brandenburg v Ohio (1969) (3+ / 0-)

        is viewed by many legal scholars as one of the pillars of the Warren Court's civil rights rulings. In this thread I give the conditions under which a broadcaster could be indicted, a standard that makes broadcasters in the US essentially immune from prosecution. The current SCOTUS might not completely agree with Brandenburg, but it has not been tested for more than 40 years.  

        "let's talk about that" uid 92953

        by VClib on Sat Aug 30, 2014 at 06:04:32 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I believe it is being tested. To be specific, in (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          kid funkadelic

          a case where someone said to blow up a certain building and then said "and as the building is built to be bomb resistant, here is how you make and place the explosive devices necessary to bring it down".

          You have watched Faux News, now lose 2d10 SAN.

          by Throw The Bums Out on Sat Aug 30, 2014 at 06:57:22 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Is the "someone who said" a broadcaster? (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            kid funkadelic

            "let's talk about that" uid 92953

            by VClib on Sat Aug 30, 2014 at 07:41:46 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  I am not sure, but according to G2Geek he was (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              VClib

              "broadcasting on internet radio and possibly shortwave.  And he also posted pictures online of his intended target building and person, with annotations as to how to do the deed." (which included the instructions as to how to bypass the bomb resistant features of the building as well as how to make the bombs)

              If you are using a shortwave transmitter then you are a broadcaster and I would argue the same is true if you have an internet radio station.

              You have watched Faux News, now lose 2d10 SAN.

              by Throw The Bums Out on Sat Aug 30, 2014 at 08:03:29 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  If the person has actual two-way (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                kid funkadelic

                communications with potential perpetrators, it would be a conspiracy to commit a specific crime. If they are broadcasting only there may be provisions under one of the anti-terrorism acts that would apply, trumping Brandenburg.

                "let's talk about that" uid 92953

                by VClib on Sat Aug 30, 2014 at 09:43:41 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

    •  red herring (0+ / 0-)

      this diary doesn't talk about incitement in a criminal sense.

      nowhere, in the diary, does the author call for a criminal investigation and/or charges.  (but the author does, hours later, in a comment.  hours AFTER your post.)

      the author seemed to be, instead, simply drawing attention to yet another case of incendiary speech where the speaker may have unspoken desires to cause unrest and/or to incite others.

      by immediately addressing it as a legal/criminal issue, you have managed to stifle, whether deliberately or not, discussion about a serious issue.

      legitimate questions that could be discussed following the information in this diary:

      --how does one define "hate speech" and what is and should be allowed in a free society?

      --what repercussions/consequences, if any, should or could be the result of hate speech and/or incendiary speech?

      --how can those opposed to hate speech, and/or with a differing viewpoint, effectively counter and/or present their arguments?  especially when the one engaging in hate speech and/or incendiary language has a very public platform from which to do so?

      •  The entire concept of "hate speech" is (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        denise b

        inconsistent with the First Amendment. Laws defining hate speech would be unconstitutional in my opinion. It is an abomination that the place where "hate speech" rules have been applied is at colleges and universities. If there was ever a place where hate speech rules were more inappropriate it is at institutions of higher learning, where all speech should be unfettered. The answer is always "more speech" not rules or laws.

        "let's talk about that" uid 92953

        by VClib on Sun Aug 31, 2014 at 04:37:03 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  There is a difference between committing a crime (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    a2nite, kid funkadelic, colbey

    and being put on trial for that crime (see Wall Street meltdown).

    Life is just a bowl of Cherries, that stain your hands and clothes and have pits that break your teeth.

    by OHdog on Sat Aug 30, 2014 at 04:41:50 AM PDT

  •  I would be interested in seeing her civil rights (5+ / 0-)

    records since she is of an age to have marched a few times during the late 60s and certainly was around for some of the litigation of the 70s.  I have searched her various biographies and cannot find any reference to her civil rights work.  Maybe someone could find it?  My research skills are inadequate to the task but I cannot find her membership in organizations that I would expect or find her showing up at events where people with an extensive history of civil rights activism would be.

    I do find that she and her husband are a well connected Beltway power couple and she and Mr. Palin were making the party circuit back in the day when Mrs Palin was a hot commodity.  It would be refreshing to see a powerful DC attorney who did have a strong record of civil rights cases as opposed to defending corporations for megabucks.

    I would like to point out that before we get started, having minority clients is not the same thing as having a strong record in civil rights, no more than having a couple of minority friends means you are not prejudiced or a minority neighbor does not mean you live in a mixed neighborhood.

    So yeh, I would love to see her record since it needs to be more widely touted.  It seems the world in general is unaware of this aspect of the lady  

  •  Yes but an evil white supremacist has (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    kid funkadelic, johnny wurster

    free speech also.

    I voted Tuesday, May 6, 2014 because it is my right, my responsibility and because my parents moved from Alabama to Ohio to vote. Unfortunately, the republicons want to turn Ohio into Alabama.

    by a2nite on Sat Aug 30, 2014 at 05:44:21 AM PDT

  •  The DOJ (0+ / 0-)

    need to investigate Greta.

    Think...It ain't illegal yet ! George Clinton

    by kid funkadelic on Sat Aug 30, 2014 at 07:21:10 AM PDT

  •  Threat made against President Obama (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    colbey

    Secret Service Investigates Possible Threat Made Against President Obama (UPDATED)
    by Josh Feldman | 9:16 pm, August 29th, 2014
    408

    The Secret Service is investigating a possible threat made against President Obama. Authorities tell NBC News that there was a “potentially suspicious person and vehicle” near where Obama made fundraising stops tonight.

    Connecticut police have been informed of the report by the Secret Service, as well as being advised to be on lookout for this suspicious person. State law enforcement is currently looking for the car this person was driving, which they believe to be a blue Jetta with Connecticut plates.

    Obama attended one fundraiser in Connecticut tonight before heading to another one in Rhode Island later in the night.

    Update — Aug. 30, 11:35 a.m. ET: Police in Hamden, Connecticut have taken a suspect into custody in connection to the alleged threats against President Obama, according to NBC News.

    “We have taken all appropriate investigative steps in this matter, based on the information we received yesterday about a suspicious vehicle and person, ” a spokesperson for the Secret Service said. “There have been no arrests or charges brought in this case at this point.”

    [h/t NBC Connecticut]
    http://www.mediaite.com/...

    Think...It ain't illegal yet ! George Clinton

    by kid funkadelic on Sat Aug 30, 2014 at 11:22:59 PM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site