Big Ed Schultz Takes on the Savage Weiner's Attack of Media Matters in Psycho Talk
June 24, 2009- is he inciting violence
Michael Savage Issues Fatwa Against Media Matters by Jason Linkins, Huffington Post June 25, 2009. & alternet.org
Savage recently called on people "harassed by this Stalinist group, Media Matters" to publish the names and pictures of Media Matters staffers.
...So, Savage recently called upon "all people in the media who have been harassed by this Stalinist group, Media Matters, to join forces to publish the names of the people and put their pictures up on their websites." Ahh, yes! Who can forget the robust growth of media watchdog groups that flourished under Stalin!
...What's strange about this is that Media Matters has been making the case for some time now that right-wing voices have been ramping up rhetoric that specifically urges violent acts and intimidation. So now, Savage is talking about a running a web-stalking campaign against them? Hmmm. I wonder what sort of conclusions a person might draw from that?
Ron Moore, writing for the Washington Examiner, June 24, 2009:
The history of right wing extremists using "wanted" posters against abortion providers is well documented. Recently the right wing Christian group the American Center for Law and Justice celebrated its court victory for the "truth truck" that promoted incendiary attacks on Dr. George Tiller. Sadly two days later Tiller was dead, assassinated in his place of worship. While the court case and Tiller's murder cannot be directly linked it demonstrated a certain morbid insensitivity that the group continued to trumpet the court victory after Tiller's death.
Against this backdrop the threat to post pictures and personal information about media watchdogs as a response to criticism can legitimately be perceived as a threat. Michael Savage may be famous for brash talk and incendiary language, but recent history must be taken into account as his "Savage Nation" may take the talker's inflammatory posting as marching orders to take action against his enemies.
and see: Michael Savage vows to post Media Matters staff pictures and ‘pertinent information’ on website ,by Ron Moore Washington Examiner,June 24,
The history of Media Matters.org and its monitoring & analyzing the Hate Speech & inflammatory language of Michael Savage on his radio program "The Savage Nation.
Savage Nation: It's not just Rush; Talk radio host Michael Savage: "I commend" prisoner abuse; "we need more" at Media Matters.org May 13, 2004
On May 10, Media Matters for America began monitoring Michael Savage's radio program, Savage Nation, which reaches 6 million listeners per week; we will continue to do so on a daily basis. The following are excerpts from Michael Savage's May 10 and May 11 radio shows, during which he commended the abuse of Iraqi prisoners at Abu Ghraib (repeatedly referring to it as "Grab-an-Arab" prison); said that "we need more of the humiliation tactics, not less"; and blamed American civilian Nick Berg's death on Senators John Kerry, Chuck Hagel, Joe Biden, and Hillary Clinton as well as on The New York Times and The Washington Post.
Savage Nation is syndicated by Talk Radio Network and is the third-largest syndicated radio talk show in the nation. He is the author of two New York Times best-sellers, The Savage Nation: Saving America from the Liberal Assault on Our Borders, Language and Culture and The Enemy Within: Saving America from the Liberal Assault on Our Schools, Faith, and Military -- both published by the conservative WorldNetDaily press WND Books. Savage hosted a short-lived televised version of his show for MSNBC, also called The Savage Nation, before being fired by the cable channel for referring on the air to a caller as a "sodomite" and saying that the caller should "get AIDS and die."
From the May 10 Savage Nation:
Savage on the Iraqi prisoner abuse photos:
I don't mean to be too comedic in the political arena, but these so called abuse photos frankly are mild by comparisons to what goes on in South of Market clubs in San Francisco.
Savage on why "we need more of the humiliation tactics, not less":
And eventually you're gonna find that we need more of the humiliation tactics, not less. ...
I don't know what its gonna take for you to finally welcome what the troops are doing, what the interrogators were doing until you finally recognize the enemy, the true face of the enemy and what its gonna take to break this death grip that they seem to have on the minds of the Democrats. ...
These people don't fear death, they fear humiliation. The only way to humiliate them is take their deepest fear, the pig, the dog, the woman with the leash, and use it on them to break them!
Savage on the consequences of prohibiting "these interrogation tactics":
What's gonna happen is terrible. What's gonna happen now is even worse that you can imagine. Because these interrogation tactics which were working, by everything I can read, are no longer permissible, you are gonna have an event in this country before the election, and you can thank your friends Levin and Kennedy for that, you can thank all the phonies on the Democrat side for that.
Savage on the utility of the abuse to facilitate intelligence-gathering:
These people live only for their honor, and so the only thing you can withhold from them is their honor. There is the answer as to why you see these graphic pictures. These are not a few individuals who made this up. That's crap. That's crap in my opinion. This came from the top. And how high up it goes I don't know but frankly I commend them for it. It's wise intelligence techniques, to break the enemy where he's vulnerable, not try to get him where he's strong. ...
That's why the women were used! It's a very intelligent method to break the enemy without resorting to thumb-screws and the much more severe methods of torture. ...
I think it's a very good policy, and the more I learn about it I think that it made good sense. Short of real torture, this worked. Use little women in particular. Little, ugly women. And let 'em take big strapping Iraqis and put 'em on leashes naked. ... Get police dogs to bark at naked Iraqis, until they crack and tell you which Ahmed or... [unintelligible mocking of Arab names]
...Savage on Democrats and the media:
Carl Levin and Ted Kennedy and Hillary Clinton, The New Yorker, CBS have destroyed the war effort against terror. And if, God forbid, a suitcase bomb goes off you'll know who to blame. I'm -- hey I'm not going to mince words, there's no grey zone here. It's black and white, it's them versus us and the enemy within on their side.
Savage on the media going "over to the enemy's side":
I would like to give a medal to everybody at Grab-an-Arab [sic] prison for showing constraint. Every one of these American soldiers should be given an award for having restrained themselves, for what you see today is a direct result of the political correctness that is defeating this nation. ...
The scum at CBS, the filthy vermin at MSNBC are reporting that this beheading is revenge for the abuse at Grab-an-Arab prison, which means that the scum at CNN, the verminist traitors at MSNBC have gone over to the enemy's side.
Savage on what should be done to the Iraqi prisoners:
And I think there should be no mercy shown to these sub-humans. I believe that a thousand of them should be killed tomorrow. I think a thousand of them held in the Iraqi prison should be given 24 hour -- a trial and executed. I think they need to be shown that we are not going to roll over to them... It won't happen because of the CBS Communists. It won't happen because of the CNN traitors. It won't happen because of the MSNBC empty heads. And we the people are the ones who are going to suffer today. ...
Instead of putting joysticks, I would have liked to have seen dynamite put in their orifices and they should be dropped from airplanes. How's that? You like that one? Go call somebody that you want to report me to, see if I care. They should put dynamite in their behinds and drop them from 35,000 feet, the whole pack of scum out of that jail.
---------------
Like Ann Coulter & Michelle Malkin Laura Ingraham Michael Savage blames "liberals" or " secular Humanists" for all that is wrong with America. He blames "liberals" for the failures in Iraq & Afghanistan because they refuse to give their full support to the troops .
Savage also claims that those he refers to as the Gay Mafia are now in complete control of the United Kingdom . He then argues that it is Gay activism & granting rights to Gay which is fueling the hatred & violence of the Islamic
Jahdists.
Setting himself up as the only one who tells the truth in America he says" If you want truth turn to me."
The Gay Mafia & the sick perverts & liberals & leftists destroying western civilization
Michael Savage on Liberal Nutcases Destroying Culture and Society Norms
January 19, 2009
A Savage Nation Indeed-Media Matters June 25, 2009
As for immigration at first Michael Savage claims he is concerned over the issue of illegal immigrants and then goes on to attack all immigrants legal or illegal who come from Non-European third world countries. Savage claims that if America doesn't stop the steady flow of third world immigrants from Mexico & South America & Africa these immigrants who carry diseases & who do not have the same values as Americans will destroy American society.
He argues that "They ( all those turban folk) don't remember what the white male is capable of." He implies again that whites are superior to other races.
Michael Savage on Third World Immigrants
Jeffrey Feldman writes about the danger to society of right-wing talk radio because by using hate speech & inflammatory language combined with a sense of urgency & an emotional appeal can lead members of the audience to commit violent acts. He uses the extreme example of how radio was used in Rwanda in its propaganda war against the Hutus against the Tutsies which resulted in Genocide the massacre of some 850,000 people. Hitler & the Nazis in Germany also used the radio & film etc. to poison the minds of the German people convincing tham that the Jews were the ones who were destroying German society & culture.
Feldman use the example of the campaign of Rush Limbaugh which was called "operation Chaos" as a means to disrupt the Democratic party's process during the primaries to create confusion & chaos in the party. He hoped that this would lead to a major rift in the party and would create the kind of conflict seen during the 1968 Democratic Convention.
FRAMESHOP: DID LIMBAUGH TRY TO INCITE VIOLENCE? by Jeffrey Feldman, May 7, 2008
Outright Barbarous: How The Violent Language of the Right Poisons American Democracy
For weeks, now, Rush Limbaugh has been trying to incite political violence by giving on-air military-sounding orders, effectively 'commanding' his listeners to wage war against the U.S. electoral...
Calls To Incite Violence vs. Calls For Acts of Violence
During the Rwandan genocide of 1994, radio broadcasts called for direct acts of violence to be committed by one faction of the Rwandan public against another. These broadcasts drew considerable attention because (1) radio was the major source of information for the listeners in question, (2) the audience was largely non-literate, and (3) there was an ongoing nationalist struggle into which the broadcasts fed (emphasis mine):
In March 1992, Radio Rwanda was first used in directly promoting the killing of Tutsi in a place called Bugesera, south of the national capital. On 3 March, the radio repeatedly broadcast a communiqué supposedly sent by a human rights group based in Nairobi warning that Hutu in Bugesera would be attacked by Tutsi. Local officials built on the radio announcement to convince Hutu that they needed to protect themselves by attacking first. Led by soldiers from a nearby military base, Hutu civilians, members of the Interahamwe, a militia attached to the MRND party, and local Hutu civilians attacked and killed hundreds of Tutsi (International Commission 1993: 13–14).
(from "Hate Media in Rwanda")
The broadcasts in Rwanda, thus, were directly engaged using false reports as propaganda, the goal of which was to encourage listeners to commit acts of violence. The effort worked, and subsequent investigations linked the violent language to the actual deaths, thereby including the broadcasts within the framework of the genocidal action both legally and morally.
In stark contrast, Limbaugh's broadcasts were removed from encouraging direct acts of violence, focusing instead on creating the conditions for violence--what Limbaugh described as 'chaos.' In this transcript (Apr 23, 2008), Limbaugh explains how his broadcasts are intended to incite political violence. Notice how he describes creating conditions for violence rather than actual violence (emphasis mine):
This is about chaos. This is why it's called Operation Chaos! It's not called Operation Save Hillary. It's not called Operation Nominate Obama. It's called Operation Chaos! The dream end... I mean, if people say what's your exit strategery, the dream end of this is that this keeps up to the convention and that we have a replay of Chicago 1968, with burning cars, protests, fires, literal riots, and all of that. That's the objective here. And there has been nothing that's happened on the battlefield for my vision of this to change just because Hillary won. We got what we wanted last night, and people want me to change course now? "We got what we wanted, okay, now time to support Obama." No. If Obama runs the table with the rest of these primaries, it's over, and the superdelegates are going to have a much easier choice choosing him, because he'll end up with a big lead.
(from "Why It's Called Operation Chaos")
So the goal of the 'operation' for Limbaugh is not to encourage his listeners to commit acts of violence, but encourage his listeners to commit acts of politics that 'end' in Democrats committing acts of violence on each other.
and on civil war & violence in the US:
RUSH: Oh, it was worse! It was worse. The problem is not "discourse." Discourse is productive. It's people debating ideas. The problem in America is too much liberalism. The problem in America is too many liberals, too many people are ignorant. Our most expensive commodity in this country is ignorance, not discourse, not uncivil discourse. There are too many ignorant people who have been short-changed by our education system. In a more balanced and educated society, liberalism would be but 20% of the elected seats in this country. But they have for 50 years weaned a bunch of people away from self-reliance, created a bunch of dependents among every demographic group out there, and that's how they profess to get elected. But they are destroying the country. They are destroying the institutions and traditions that made the country great. Everything liberals try to fix gets worse. The most recent example, we are now producing food for fuel, and we have food riots around the world. We have starvation around the world.
(from "Operation Chaos and 'Civil Discourse'")
Limbaugh's argument here is profoundly disturbing. While he invokes the Civil War to claims that his efforts to incite violence are all part of good healthy debate of ideas, he then suggests that Liberal ideas have led to the destruction of American institutions and mass starvation--an situation his listener might naturally interpret as a pretext for civil war.
Limbaugh's argument, in other words, is simple: it is not his broadcasts that incite violence, but Liberal ideas.
and he concludes:
Conclusion: Limbaugh Broadcasts Violence
When a prominent radio figure begins systematically calling for his listeners to engage in acts that intended to bring about political violence, citizens have a responsibility to examine the implications of such a development.
In Limbaugh's case, the comparison to Rwandan hate radio shows the right-wing pundit's differences and similarities to past uses of broadcast media to incite violence. Limbaugh does not call for direct violent action, but he defines the American Left in ways that suggest violent action against them may be warranted.
Moreover, Limbaugh specifically claims that calling for citizens to create chaos leading to violence is a healthy part of the Democratic process, but that holding Liberal political views is a threat to democracy's survival--thereby leading his listeners to see the political opposition as a civil enemy.
Should Limbaugh be free to continue these broadcasts? Of course. But that freedom does not release journalists from analyzing Limbaugh's violent-rhetoric in a broader context and discussing the implications it holds for Americans.
and see: Part 1: Hate media in Rwanda Call to genocide: radio in Rwanda, 1994 Alison Des Forges at The International Development Research Centre (IDRC)
Radio Rush, The Daily Doubter My 13, 2008
on Limbaugh see:
Rush Limbaugh: Leader of Obama's opposition :Popular conservative radio show host targeted for seeking new president's 'failure'
Steve Holland, Reuters : , March 05, 2009 National Post.com
Where Swine Flu Lurks, Propagandists Rush In Extremist Propaganda by David Holthouse at Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) April 28, 2009
and see: Limbaugh Blames Sanford's Affair On Obama, Because Why Not? by Jason Linkins at Huffington Post , June 25, 2009
No comments:
Post a Comment