Left-wing bloggers quickly went to work to make political hay from Wednesday’s near-tragedy in Silver Spring, Md., and find a way to blame the Discovery terrorist’s deeds on the right.
Andrea Nill, a reactionary blogger on thinkprogress.org, conveniently ignored 10 other anti-human eco-rants that the terrorist had written to focus on the one that railed against immigrants in particular.
For Nill, that one was plenty of evidence to lay his crimes at the feet of conservatives, despite far more evidence to the contrary.
“The alleged hostage-taker … calls for the elimination of ‘anchor baby filth’ and ‘immigration pollution’,” Nill wrote while the standoff was still going on, apparently eager to disregard all the leftist ingredients in the man’s screed.
Respondents were just as quick to vilify conservatives.
“The right sows hate. This is the result,” the first respondent claimed.
“He’s clearly an undercover teabagger,” another concluded.
On huffingtonpost.com, Mark Potok, director of the Southern Poverty Law Center’s Intelligence Project blazed this headline (except that I delete the terrorist’s name): “Apparent Eco-Terrorist Hostage-Taker Zeroes in on Immigrants.”
Potok wrote that “ … unlike earlier eco-terrorists like Unabomber Ted Kaczynski, (the terrorist) zeroed in on immigrants as a primary evil. He spoke of ‘anchor baby filth,’ a reference to babies born in the United States to undocumented immigrants.”
The terrorist was clearly anti-human, not just anti-immigrant. This self-glorified gunman and bomber was against war – “Not because it’s morally wrong, but because of the catastrophic environmental damage modern weapons cause to other creatures,” he wrote.
Here are a few other gems from his warped mind:
“Saving the Planet means … stopping the human race from breeding any more disgusting human babies.”
“Civilization must be exposed for the filth it is. That, and all its disgusting religious-cultural roots and greed.”
“The humans? The planet does not need humans.”
If that’s “zeroing in on immigrants,” I must be on the wrong planet (gallows humor intended).
I offer those quotes not to make the case that this would-be savior of the planet was a left-wing wacko, tempting though the idea is. My guess is he could have driven himself to fatal obsession with any particular line of thought, but he happened to choose the eco-terrorist costume in which to admire his own self-glorified reflection.
Bottom line? Whatshisface wasn’t a left-wing wacko or a right-wing wacko – just a wacko.
Contact Daily Journal Oxford Bureau reporter Errol Castens at (662) 281-1069 or email@example.com.
Errol Castens/NEMS Daily Journal