The shooting in Arizona yesterday was a tragedy. Thanks to the heroism and basic knowledge of first aid of some of the people there, Representative Gabrielle Giffords is still alive. Hopefully, she will recover fully. I wonder, however, if free speech in America will survive this shooting. I am listing six links to articles I found on the internet about the shooting. I will excerpt some of them and let you draw your own conclusions.
Yesterday in Human Events:
"Rep. Bill Pascrell Jr., a New Jersey Democrat, blamed the Fox News Channel for today's shooting spree that left Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords critically wounded and four others slain.
"He told a local New Jersey paper shortly after the incident, "There's an aura of hate and elected politicians feed it, certain people on Fox News feed it.""
Common sense from BigGovernment.com:
"From my vantage point, having spent several years working undercover with the Federal Bureau of Investigation on issues related to both domestic and international terrorism, I know that political violence is a human problem. It is an issue which transcends Left or Right, race, or any other confine or label we as Americans might try to place upon the age old problem. However, I also have another vantage point regarding political violence. This is, to put it simply, the personal experience of being burned by the discrepancy in how the predominantly Left oriented Mainstream Media portrays the political violence of the Left in comparison with that of the Right."
There are pictures on a website called Verum Serum of Democrat party literature using bullseyes to represent targeted Republican districts. Democrats have said that Sarah Palin using crosshairs to represent targeted districts caused this shooting. I guess bullseyes are different than crosshairs. Please follow the link to see the pictures of literature sent out.
Power Line points out that some of the people screaming 'hate speech' caused this are the same people who routinely use 'hate speech' against anyone who disagrees with them.
The Washington Examiner reminds of the press reaction to the Fort Hood shooting:
"Nevertheless, public officials, journalists, and commentators were quick to caution that the public should not "jump to conclusions" about Hasan's motive. CNN, in particular, became a forum for repeated warnings that the subject should be discussed with particular care.
""The important thing is for everyone not to jump to conclusions," said retired Gen. Wesley Clark on CNN the night of the shootings.
""We cannot jump to conclusions," said CNN's Jane Velez-Mitchell that same evening. "We have to make sure that we do not jump to any conclusions whatsoever."
""I'm on Pentagon chat room," said former CIA operative Robert Baer on CNN, also the night of the shooting. "Right now, there's messages going back and forth, saying do not jump to the conclusion this had anything to do with Islam.""
Contrast these statements with how quickly conservatives were seen as responsible for the attack in Arizona.
My point in listing all of this is that this horrendous attack was the work of a deeply disturbed young man. Today's Washington Post posted an article noting that he was removed from a class at a community college for being disruptive.
Free speech is one of the foundations of democracy. Right now our mainstream media is not doing its job of fairly reporting the news. This fact has opened the door for alternative media that is actually reporting the news. The thing to remember here is that just because someone disagrees with you it does not mean that they are engaging in 'hate speech.' We are reaching a situation where the term 'hate speech' will have no meaning at all because it has been used so often in an attempt to gain political advantage. It's time to step back, take a deep breath, and help the people who were directly impacted by this event.
Leave a comment