Domestic Terror?: Killer targeted church for liberal views.

Domestic Terror?: Killer targeted church for liberal views.

www.msnbc.msn.com

An unemployed man accused of opening fire with a shotgun and killing two people at a Unitarian church apparently targeted the congregation out of hatred for its liberal social policies, police said Monday.

Knoxville Police Chief Sterling Owen IV said a letter had been been recovered from the SUV of Jim D. Adkisson, 58, by investigators seeking clues about the motive behind the attack.

(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
www.cnn.com
www.reuters.com
news.bbc.co.uk

Related AboveTopSecret.com Discussion Threads:
Conservative Terrorist opens fire at Church
Activists: 9 Iranians Convicted of Adultery Set to Be Stoned to Death

Apparently this individual targeted a Unitarian Church due to their avowed social liberalism. This should be a reminder to those who equate Islam exclusively with terrorism: it's not just one particular faith that spawns terror and murder, it is fanaticism itself.

After a decade or so of far-right talk radio and media personalities spewing hate rhetoric at their political opposition, describing them as 'traitors" who "hate America" and the like, frankly I am quite surprised we do not see more of this type of thing.

www.msnbc.msn.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

I disagree. This wasn't terrorism, it was purely a guy going of the deep end and snapping. I'm in no way trying to defend the dude, he deserves to swing from the end of a rope, but there's a huge difference between one man losing it and going after liberals and entire training camps of hatred and genocidal rhetoric.

He described his violent plans in a four-page letter found at his home, which also explained that his age and "liberals and gays" taking jobs had worked against him.

Another recent setback was that Adkisson's allotment of government-issued food stamps had been reduced, Owen said.

I don't think the liberals are downsizing companies to increase profits or failing to hire older workers. Most people tend to point to liberals for supporting programs like food stamps. I think he is very confused.

I agree he was a lone nut.

However, had it been a Muslim that targeted a church, even a lone nut, we would have had people here coming out of the woodwork to herald it as proof that Islam is "inherently evil"...

I think it's clear too that this guy went out intentionally to target what he saw as "liberals" (the Unitarians are a famously liberal denomination), whom he blamed for all his problems in life.

I think it's a bit silly to claim that a decade or more of Limbaugh, Coulter, Hannity etc. demonizing liberals as treasonous enemies of the Republic out to subvert and destroy the country - and if you've ever heard these people you know I'm not exaggerating, especially in Coulter's case - had no effect on this guy.

I think we'll see more of this kind of thing, especially if it starts looking like Obama will win the election.

The far right has driven itself to a fever pitch trying to portray Obama as a stealth Muslim or a stealth Communist. Some of them seem to know these accusations are just moves in a political game, but some of these people seem to really believe this stuff.

And hypothetically, if you really believed every Obama supporter was trying to impose a Communist/Islamist regime on you... what might you do?

As for myself, even though I am Obama supporter this year, I do not consider myself strongly either liberal or conservative. My positions tend to be on specific issues, and driven by simple principles, I don't hold strongly to any ideology in particular any longer.

But, that said, the increasingly strident & hateful tone of the far right over the past decade or so worries me. There is really almost no equivalent on the left these days. As typified by the personalities I mentioned before and sites like Free Republic and WND, the far right has gone from defining it's opponents as "wrong" to defining them as national enemies.

Once you define everyone who disagrees with you as a "traitor" or an "enemy" (much like Islamist radicals do) you begin treading very dangerous ground...

Originally posted by xmotex
I agree he was a lone nut.

However, had it been a Muslim that targeted a church, even a lone nut, we would have had people here coming out of the woodwork to herald it as proof that Islam is "inherently evil"...
I think it's a bit silly to claim that a decade or more of Limbaugh, Coulter, Hannity etc. demonizing liberals as treasonous enemies of the Republic out to subvert and destroy the country - and if you've ever heard these people you know I'm not exaggerating, especially in Coulter's case - had no effect on this guy.
...

First of all, this guy being a lone nut is easy to come to because he isn't a member of a fantical religion responsible for most all the terrorist attacks that have happened in the world during my life time.

Secondly, Is it so hard to think that liberals made this guy want to kill liberals instead of Rush making him want to kill liberals? I know I've thought of strangling a bunch of you, but I don't think Anne Coulter has anything to do with that...

reply to post by xmotex


See, I'm a member of that far right you speak of (although I'm not talking this neo-con garbage...) I can tell you that I do believe liberalism is destroying America. But I also will tell you that I'm not half as angry at the liberals as I am at the "moderates" and "conservatives" (wolves in sheep's clothing) who have sat by and allowed it to happen. This presidential election is a great example... the GOP isn't conservative anymore nor are they "far right", they ran a handfull of what might be called conservatives back East but are clearly liberal minded jackasses to us in the West out for the primaries.

Anyway, without going too far off topic on this, I see your point even though I don't fully agree with it. Hannity, Coulter, and Rush aren't clerics, shamans, or religious leaders... they're entertainers and Pez heads who flip their tops and distribute little candy coated nuggets of diatribe designed to make people keep their dials tuned through the commericals. Encouraging them to become "angry Americans" is one way they do that. Every so often you're gonna get someone who snaps and goes postal like we have here. The difference is, this will require a person to either snap or be mentally unstable from the start, whereas with radical Islam it's begun at birth and the justification is far stronger than revenge. This horse's ass just believed he'd "show them!" a suicide bomber believes he'll recieve great riches and blessings in Heaven for his deeds. Now, if Rush ever converts "talent on loan from God" into "Promised rewards given to the listener from God" and starts piping his program into pre-schools, I'll be the first to join you in laying the blame for this crap at his feet.

When people talk of things negatively and point fingers to the cause, and people who are unhappy, hurting or feeling victimized hear them, then sometimes these tragic events are going to happen. It may not be the speakers total fault but he surely plays his part. A bit like inciting a mob.

It's the thin line of freedom of speech.

Is it so hard to think that liberals made this guy want to kill liberals instead of Rush making him want to kill liberals? I know I've thought of strangling a bunch of you, but I don't think Anne Coulter has anything to do with that...

I'm sure Osama Bin Laden feels the same way about us Americans in general, that doesn't make him right

As far as the "you" in your post goes, I'm afraid they kicked me out of the "liberal" club a long time ago for supporting nuclear power and opposing gun control, among other things.

It's sad, I miss the free punch and pie

As for the strangling, feel free to give it a shot - but I'm not a pacifist either

I find it sad that someone would attack one of the most peace loving and caring communities around these days. I've been a Unitarian Universalist for many years now, though I must admit it's been awhile since I've made it to fellowship.

UU's are about as liberal as any congregation can get. We don't care what God you worship, If you are peaceful and searching than we're happy to help in any way we can.

Lee Greenwood had a song out several years back, those who live in the U.S. have probably heard it. It's called, "Proud to be an American." Now take the tune to that song and apply these lyrics:

"I'm proud to be a Unitarian, where at least I know I'm free

And i won't forget the heretics, that gave that right to me

And I'll proudly stand up, next to you

As to different Gods we pray

For their ain't do doubt I love this church...

God bless the UUA....."


My prayers are with my fellow UUA members in this sad time.

Wupy

There will be people who will say he's not a terrorist, even though he committed terrorism by causing terror.

Had a Muslim done what he did, he would automatically have been labeled as a terrorist.

Of course he was a home grown terrorist. Just ask the congregation that he wanted to murder for their "liberal beliefs". Do you think they felt terror when he pulled the shotgun out the guitar case. Belonging to a group isn't what determines weather you are a terrorist or not; it's the intent.

I agree with xmotex. I'll bet he never missed a Rush, Sean or Savage program. The right wing "entertainers" have a lot more influence on weak angry minds than you can imagine. A steady diet of hate against
liberals and dembs can manifest itself in violence. As evidenced by some
of the hateful, vitriolic post here on ATS.

I personally was threatened with violence in a U2U. I say bring it, I'm not
a pacifist either. The conservative rightwing nuts that try and protray the
liberals as a bunch of tulip walking, cumbyyah singing, sissy's might be in for a shock.



[edit on 28-7-2008 by whaaa]

If this had been a muslim we would have been at terror alert level orange/red!!!

Tell me that Rush, Sean, Bill, Mike Savage etc do not bear some responsibility for encouraging hate, violence, and insanity!!

[edit on 28-7-2008 by Leo Strauss]

Dead social "liberals" isn't exactly a bad thing.

Shooter was definitely an Ahole and deserves death, but its not like he whacked upstanding members of the community.

Ah well lookey here...

From AFP:

"Adkisson told Still that 'he could not get to the leaders of the liberal movement that he would then target those that had voted them in to office.'

"Adkisson told officers he left the house unlocked for them because 'he expected to be killed during the assault.'

"Inside the house, officers found 'Liberalism is a Mental Health Disorder' by radio talk show host Michael Savage, 'Let Freedom Ring' by talk show host Sean Hannity, and 'The O'Reilly Factor,' by television talk show host Bill O'Reilly."

reply to post by Leo Strauss


Link?

The AFP website doesnt have any headlines pertaining to this.

Dead social "liberals" isn't exactly a bad thing.

Thanks for proving my point.
I would qualify as a "social liberal" in most ways.
Be warned, I shoot back


Anyway nice find Leo Strauss.
I shouldn't have left out Savage, he is absolutely the worst of the bunch.

Of course there are others on the right I respect, who have an approach that is more thoughtful and less hateful: I'm thinking of people like Neal Boortz, the late Bill Buckley (R.I.P.) and some others.

I even admire a few of the paleocons when they're not waving clubs at me

The best critiques of neoconservatism come from the paleoconservative types for some reason.

[edit on 7/28/08 by xmotex]

reply to post by xmotex


I'm right with ya Xmotex.. check the link in my Signature.


Basically it's like this.

The guy was just like any islamic terrorist EXCEPT he wasn't being manipulated by any particular evil guy to overthrow a government.

He was the following:

1. Delusional
2. Hated a particular political movement (Liberals)
3. Hated homosexuals
4. Acted on all of these when he lost his job
5. Attacked the place of worship most frequented by who he saw as the reason for all that was going wrong with the world


He was motivated by the EXACT same things that motivate Islamic terrorists. The only difference is that instead of imams in Madrassas teaching him to hate, it was mostly likely right wing radio pundits who fueled his anger towards liberals.

Now admittedly, these radio pundits don't intend for the anger they stoke to result in physical violence, but political action instead. However, blinded by rage of losing a job, this person who shot up a Church took matters into his own hands, like any terrorist.


[edit on 28-7-2008 by Quazga]

Originally posted by Leo Strauss
Ah well lookey here...

From AFP:

"Adkisson told Still that 'he could not get to the leaders of the liberal movement that he would then target those that had voted them in to office.'

"Adkisson told officers he left the house unlocked for them because 'he expected to be killed during the assault.'

"Inside the house, officers found 'Liberalism is a Mental Health Disorder' by radio talk show host Michael Savage, 'Let Freedom Ring' by talk show host Sean Hannity, and 'The O'Reilly Factor,' by television talk show host Bill O'Reilly."

Amazing...

Conservative Terrorism... I rest my case.

Terrorism is ignorant people acting out social and financial frustrations toward political and religious groups of civilians and fueled by the rhetoric and monies of an extreme view.

THIS is why the war on terror has often been called the war on extremists.

And THIS is why we MUST BRING CIVILITY BACK TO POLITICS.

Honestly, it is not a stretch to suggest that Savage, O'Reilly and Coulter are partially responsible for this. To fill up the heads of the undereducated and despairing with a bunch of lies, and follow the distortions of truth with vile hatred and a target? slackerwire seems infected by this disease as well. Seems like the above three might be considered domestic terrorists by the governments current definition
There are no liberals or conservatives, only the asleep and the awake.
Anyone game enought to drop a dime on them in a blanket suit?