Pim Fortuyn update, from the Norwegian Blogger:
Pim Fortuyn was killed by a 32 year old animal rights activist and left-winger, who was offended by Fortuyns suggestion to restart the fur trade. Apparently Fortuyn has actively spoken for removing the ban on fur trading in the Netherlands, something that our animal activist, who has participated in the struggle against medical tests on animals, did not like to hear.
[…]I don’t know, what I do know is that most of my fellow bloggers are myopically focusing on the extreme left wing thing and not noticing the animal rights angle. Animal rights activists like the RSPCA has a legitimate purpose, but extreme groups are simply put a menace, and I think extreme environmentalist groups are as dangerous as extreme left wing groups.
For another take on all this, visit Mac Thomason, who doesn’t think too much of the late Mr. Fortuyn.
Also, check out Reason’s Charles Paul Freund.
It is interesting to note that several law enforcement agencies have been warning (for some time now) about militant animal rights activists. Judging from the experience in the UK (where some of these groups are <b>very</b> violent, it somehow is less than surprising that it should finally come home to roost in such a public way.
Here in the US ALF and ELF (Animal Liberation Front, Earth Liberation Front) are extremely dangerous domestic terrorist groups. A search of the FBI’s website on those two yeilds some interesting information that somehow the papers rarely bother to tells us about.
Myria
From what I’ve heard, since 1990, left-wing terrorists have cammitted far more acts of violence than right-wing terrorists in the United States, and until 9/11, also had the higher body count.
Is that really true, Tatterdemalian? Does the study that proves that say all acts of terrorism are the same, or does distinguish between the Unabomber/McVeigh brand of terrorism and the brick-through-the-McD’s style?
I don’t even remember the name of the study, but generally if more people are dying as a result of left-wing terrorist actions than right-wing ones, it’s pretty certain that we’re not talking about just smashing the windows of Starbucks (while begging them to let you use their toilet).
Well, that’s just it. I can’t remember any left-wing terrorist attacks in the US in the 90s, but I don’t doubt that they might have happened. I <i>do</i> remember that the right-wing nuts McVeigh and the UnaBomber killed lots of people, and I’m wondering if the disparity is a function of my own faulty memory, or actual reality.
The Unabomer was a violent neo-Luddite, which are considered members of the Left.
“The Unabomer (sic) was a violent neo-Luddite, which are considered members of the Left.”
Ah, so you back up a false assertion with a blanket one? Admittedly dated, but would you call Luddites like the <a href=”http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0807103578/”><i>I’ll Take My Stand</i></a> folk Left also? There’s an anti-industrial, anti-technology tradition on both political wings.
Or should I just retort with “The Unabomber was from the crazy state of Montana, which harbors members of the Right”? Of course not.
I loath to interject fact into a debate, but I’ll make an exception. Mr. Kaczynski himself <a href=”http://www.panix.com/~clays/Una/una4.html#section14″>writes</a>, “So even on very general grounds it seems highly improbably that any way of changing society could be found that would reconcile freedom with modern technology.” A Luddite he is. But a Leftist? He <a href=”http://www.panix.com/~clays/Una/una7.html#section26″>says</a>, “ Various thinkers have pointed out that leftism is a kind of religion. Leftism is not a religion in the strict sense because leftist doctrine does not postulate the existence of any supernatural being. But for the leftist, leftism plays a psychological role much like that which religion plays for some people. The leftist NEEDS to believe in leftism; it plays a vital role in his psychological economy. His beliefs are not easily modified by logic or facts.”
Doesn’t sound like the kind of guy I see on the way to class trying to hand me copies of the <i>Maoist International Monthly</i>. In fact, he sounds like–were he not evil and rotten–he would have made a pretty popular blogger.
As for individual incidents, among those committed by right-wing terrorists were the Oklahoma City bombing, several assassinations of abortion clinic doctors, a number of racially motivated killings, the Olympic Park bombing and other bombings attributed to Eric Rudolph, and the bombing of a passenger train by the still-unknown “Army of God.”
Examples of deadly left-wing terrorism included a number of assassinations by members of the Nation of Islam and other black separatist organizations, the Unabomer killings, numerous killings by neo-anarchist groups, and an impressive number of incidents in which fishing boats were destroyed at sea and housing developments and research labs were set on fire by eco-terrorist groups.
The final breakdown came to about 250 left-wing terrorist incidents to about 100 right-wing ones, and around 300 people killed by right-wingers compared to about 350 by lefties.
Your claims that Ted Kaczynski is not a liberal are about as effective as Rush Limbaugh’s claims that Pat Buchanan is not a conservative. If you want to invent your own definition of “liberal” and “conservative,” go right ahead, but don’t expect anyone to understand what you are talking about, because you are no longer speaking common English.
You have to admit, Holland is a wacky country. Here you have a racist, anti-immigrant, and openly homosexual politician, and he was killed by a left-wing animal rights activist. Apparently human rights is not an animal right.
So many mixed metaphors, so many contradictions! That’s the Netherlands! It must be all that pot they smoke so freely and openly.