Brownshirt Watch -- vol. 1

I'm sure that most Americans who criticize the imperialism and the militarism of our government have encountered various folks who don't agree with them. Some of these imperial apologizers stand out from the others with the way they handle themselves, the amount of idolatry they display toward their glorious leader, and the complete and utter hatred of anyone who dares speak out against their leader's agenda in any way whatsoever. Paul Craig Roberts wrote a column on these people awhile back called "The Brownshirting of America".

As much as I would like to avoid this particular breed of state worshipper, there are times when such people happen to appear close enough on my radar to warrant some sort of reaction. One of these people recently left a comment on my "Brown Equals Terrorist?" post. While his actual comment isn't nearly enough for me to conclude that he's wearing a brown shirt or to consider writing a new post specifically about him, I did discover things that do warrant such things, and I will address them later. First, I'll respond to his comment.

He starts off by saying:

Brown may not equal terrorist but this kind of thinking DOES equal suicide.So you think it makes sense to hike up grannies dress while ignoring Muhammad atta?

Where exactly did I state that it makes sense to "hike up grannies dress", yet alone anyone's dress? I don't approve of the state hiking up anyone's dress or otherwise infringing on their freedom by subjecting them to intrusive profiling.

Next comment:

I hope you never have kids, 'cause your going to be doing some serious "profiling" of your daughters dates if you want her to be safe.

While I may choose to engage in some sort of "profiling" in this situation, there is a line that should not be crossed, and violating one's freedom clearly falls into this category. It is far different to be exposed to questions by a parent than it is to be harassed by state thugs who have the ability to use the force of the state to interfere with or strip one's livelihood and freedom from them.

Moving on:

Grow up boy, there IS a certain kind of individual that is most likely to be seen butchering children & other NON-combatants for the sake of THEIR ideals and he isn't wearing a pair of "Depends" and a moo moo.

You're right, I don't think that the non-state sponsored Muslim terrorists, nor the state sponsored terrorists based in Washington are wearing "Depends" and moo moos. But please, leave the ageist intimidation rhetoric out of this. Age is not necessarily an accurate gauge for one's wisdom or intelligence, and I'm sure that, unless you're pushing the century mark, there are people out there much older than you who would love to tell you to "grow up", although they may be wise enough to see the folly of such comments.

After reading this comment, I checked out the blogger profile for this "2spotlefty" character, and ended up reading one of his three blogs. Here are a couple of exerpts from his rants:
Regarding Ward Churchill and other anti-war critics:

What are we doing folks ? If we can't go beyond whining about this sort of treason and take action against those who aide and abet our blood enemies for the sake of so-called "free speech" (I thought that it was unlawful to holler "kill Americans" in a crowded representative republic) then where is the limit ?

Later on in this rant:

No folks, action must be taken. Yes, it was a different time when the "Proclamation Suspending the Writ of Habeas Corpus" was undertaken, but that was "only" for the sake of the Union. What is now at hand is the future of the lives of freedom loving people EVERYWHERE. The streets of progress could go dead for a thousand years if these animals have there way and word has it that they have access to the mechanisms that could make that nightmare come true. An example must be made and it must be made with conviction and righteousness. A senator would be preferable, but a racist, self hating ANTI-AMERICAN will suffice. Put the son-of-a-bitch in leg irons and show the American people... SHOW THE WORLD, that you don't mess with the U.S., you don't mess with New York and yes, YOU DON'T MESS WITH TEXAS and get away with it !!!

In a post about suspending Habeas Corpus:

I know George Bush, a man of honor, would never do this lest he appear to be whiny-as though A.C.L.U. appologists for the assassins of freedom fighters/innocents are not whining- but, is it dishonorable or whiny to smack down the American cowards who openly encourage our enemy, which results directly in the deaths of MORE of OUR soldiers and countless targeted innocents ?
I can just see the perp walk now...Oh how sweet it'd be.

If this guy was actually familiar with the PATRIOT Act, then he'd know that his glorious leader has indeed attacked habeas corpus, although he has done so without having to appear "whiny".

Does this sound like the words of a man who understands what freedom is, let alone cares about it? If we were to actually believe the bogus state propaganda claim that the terroists "hate our freedoms" and wish to destroy them, then wouldn't the rantings of 2spotlefty serve to promote the terrorist cause?

Now, I'm not going to make the accusation that he's attempting to aid the foreign enemies, but it is certainly clear that he holds freedom in contempt and wishes for people he disagrees with to be punished somehow, even by the state. Do y'all now know why I began this post by referring to the notion of brownshirts?

The legitimacy of war notwithstanding, there is no legitimate reason to ever support the state's infringement of peoples' liberty. To do so reveals a contempt of liberty that deserves nothing but shame. No indefinite detentions, no legal harassments, no "leg irons", just shame.