Wednesday, October 13, 2004
Brownshirts
Brownshirts.
That word brings up images of Hitler. Brownshirts were the thugs of Adolf Hitler and his National Socialist German Workers Party (NSDAP).
Are we seeing the birth of a new brownshirt movement?
Look at these events:
<source >
This did not happen in Germany the 1930s. This happened in America in 2004.
Phil Brennan reports: Consider: "Protesters ransack a Bush campaign headquarters in Orlando, Florida," wrote Wednesday on the Web columnist Kim Weissman. "Bush campaign workers are assaulted in Miami. Shots are fired into Bush campaign offices in Knoxville, Tennessee and Huntington, West Virginia. Republican headquarters in Bozeman, Montana are vandalized, for the second time in a week. The window of the Bush campaign headquarters in Bellevue, Washington is smashed, the office burglarized and computers containing campaign plans are stolen; cars with Bush bumper stickers are vandalized and campaign signs are painted with swastikas and burned."
This is happening now, almost on a daily basis. Why isn't it a scandal being called for what it is by the press, in the nightly news, screaming from newspaper banners nation wide?
What do you think the reaction would be if followers of Bush were doing it? Why should it matter whose followers are doing it?
Shame on you, American press! How can you function properly when you take such obvious sides?
That word brings up images of Hitler. Brownshirts were the thugs of Adolf Hitler and his National Socialist German Workers Party (NSDAP).
The SA, or Sturmabteilung, also called 'Brownshirts' were Nazi terrorists in uniform dedicated to intimidating and brutalizing any groups or individuals who stood in their way.
They are of course long since dead, most having been butchered by Hitler's new corps of thugs, the SS, after the SA had outlived their usefulness.
Are we seeing the birth of a new brownshirt movement?
Look at these events:
* Thugs storm campaign headquarters, intimidating staffers and refusing to leave.
* Campaign signs are vandalized, stolen, and set on fire in front of peoples' homes.
* The word "Nazi" is spray painted on the sidewalk in front of a home, along with swastikas.
* Shots are fired through the window of campaign headquarters.
* An eight-foot swastika is burned into a home's front lawn.
<source >
This did not happen in Germany the 1930s. This happened in America in 2004.
Phil Brennan reports: Consider: "Protesters ransack a Bush campaign headquarters in Orlando, Florida," wrote Wednesday on the Web columnist Kim Weissman. "Bush campaign workers are assaulted in Miami. Shots are fired into Bush campaign offices in Knoxville, Tennessee and Huntington, West Virginia. Republican headquarters in Bozeman, Montana are vandalized, for the second time in a week. The window of the Bush campaign headquarters in Bellevue, Washington is smashed, the office burglarized and computers containing campaign plans are stolen; cars with Bush bumper stickers are vandalized and campaign signs are painted with swastikas and burned."
This is happening now, almost on a daily basis. Why isn't it a scandal being called for what it is by the press, in the nightly news, screaming from newspaper banners nation wide?
What do you think the reaction would be if followers of Bush were doing it? Why should it matter whose followers are doing it?
Shame on you, American press! How can you function properly when you take such obvious sides?