No products in the cart.

News

Intent Behind WaPo ‘Patriots’ Piece Masked But Still Discernible

Sprit_of_'76.2.jpeg
“Dangerous, delusional and sometimes violent”? (The Spirit of ’76 by A.M. Willard)

For something appearing in The Washington Post, it’s not as overtly hostile as we may have expected. That’s a reaction I’ve seen expressed by colleagues discussing “Primed to Fight the Government,” a profile on the Oregon patriot movement “demanding that the federal government adhere to the Constitution and stop what they see as systematic abuse of land rights, gun rights, freedom of speech and other liberties.”

Who would have a problem with that? And it’s the embedded abusive “officials” who are attacking the government, not citizens insisting that delegated powers not be exceeded, and that authority not be usurped.

“Law enforcement officials call them dangerous, delusional and sometimes violent, and say that their numbers are growing amid a wave of anger at the government that has been gaining strength since 2008, a surge that coincided with the election of the first black U.S. president and a crippling economic recession,” the write-up offers, steering readers to several misdirected conclusions.

First, it’s not all LE officials, but essentially those dependent on political favor for their positions of power and privilege.  Left unacknowledged is the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association, which sides with the patriots. And the bit about “the first black president” is just another way of implying those who object to the fundamental collectivist transformation of the Republic are racists.

But it figures with that bigotry insinuation that they’d bring in the Southern Poverty Law Center on cue. Adding a bit of Alinsky Rule 5 ridicule by referencing pejoratives like “Y’all Qaeda” and “Vanilla ISIS” helps cement the “redneck” meme, so “progressives” can feel superior. It also bolsters another demonizing talking point currently being pushed by totalitarian lobby apologists, that white male “domestic extremists” are a bigger threat than radical Islamists.

Then there were the embedded video with law professor Louis Michael Seidman. What’s interesting is the “legal scholar” makes a totally unsupported assertion that thinking the words mean what they say is not a “natural” interpretation. Curiously, he concedes “it’s not obvious the federal government should own as much land as it does currently,” but turns around and resorts to the familiar stand-by deflection that we just have no way of knowing “what words written 250 years ago” mean, which is refutable, by the way.

It would seem the citizen has a better handle on things than the academic professional. Perhaps it would have been relevant to let the readers know Seidman brings his own biases to the table, having penned an op-ed for The New York Times where he urges “Let’s give up on the Constitution,” and where he makes his contempt for “a group of white propertied men who have been dead for two centuries [and] knew nothing of our present situation” clear.

Funny, we don’t see anyone referring to that subversive proposal as “anti-government,” and we don’t see Seidman presented as an “extremist.” With Opposite Day “progressives,” such labels are reserved for citizens with the temerity to think they can understand what their rights are without establishment-approved academic specialists telling them why black really means white and why up is down.

Appearances of fairness and balance notwithstanding, the WaPo piece created the desired effect among those inclined to look to it for talking points, and for confirmation of their biases.

“The A-10’s will make corned beef hash of these domestic terrorists,” the comment currently at the top of the pile asserts.

Who thinks this sentiment isn’t shared by the real “anti-government extremists,” those intent on removing the last Constitutional impediments to totalitarianism while they represent themselves as “progressives”?

 

0

DavidC

David Codrea blogs at The War on Guns: Notes from the Resistance (WarOnGuns.com), and is a field editor/columnist for GUNS Magazine. Named “Journalist of the Year” in 2011 by the Second Amendment Foundation for his groundbreaking work on the “Fast and Furious” ATF “gunwalking” scandal, he is a frequent event speaker and guest on national radio and television programs.

Oath Keepers Merchandise

20 comments

  1. I saw this a few days ago and had the same thoughts as you. There was a semblance of balance in the article and video while also inserting the familiar talking points which were much more condemning than any positive presented toward the Patriot movement. I was actually surprised that it came from the Washington Post.

    It left me wondering if somehow the truth is actually permeating the core of the leftist agenda. It was such an obvious direction toward the ignorant to interview the ‘Constitutional expert’ that they did. My thoughts were, “Why not ask someone like Judge Napolitano because he is clearly better known and more deeply respected than this guy, and Judge Nap fully supports the Patriot position on the fed land issue.”

    I thought BJ Soper and his family made a good impression but from the standpoint of branding I’d have insisted on tweaking the presentation a bit. WaPo is an obviously failed liberal rag so maybe even THEY are able to adjust when it comes to simple survival as an organization.

    Let’s see what the future brings. You’ve got to remember that a revolution sells a lot of papers. If they can build the ranks of the Patriot supporters then they help stoke the flames of conflict down the road.

  2. Good catch on the subliminal messaging David. I thought the same, although I felt it was balanced enough to use in my blog because of the impression S.J. made…as Bryce pointed out. In the end, there are only so many of us with the fire to stand when and where it counts. Its coming…

  3. David, The post article was a successful honeypot/intel operation. With over 11,341 comments from users that signed in via Facebook, Amazon or using their email address to register. It’s amazing how much intel we provide to team tyranny. Bezos and the Washington Post will never be our ally. They are 100% on the side of team tyranny.

  4. Actually, there was nothing new in the Washington Post article. The same basic party line of dismissal and defamation can be found as a theme sounding in all anti-“militia” propaganda over the last several decades. See, e.g., Robert L. Snow, The Militia Threat: Terrorists Among Us (New York, New York: Plenum Trade, 1999). These people have no imagination…

    1. Exactly, Dr. Vieira.

      I believe that the constitutionally required Militia is the biggest danger those who chose to, or are “just following orders”/”just doing the job”, destroying our nation from within face.

      Not sure if you have ever lectured at, taught, followed, listened to, etc Hillsdale College as it has some free, online decent classes on the US Constitution that most can understand. But even there they do not bring up treason, the Militia (or have not yet). They are not a 501 C3 government owned college for any interested.

      What I did find there is they have two excellent courses, along with others – that would makes things clearer for law enforcement and the military – found under their section on ‘Public Policy from a Constitutional Viewpoint’ regarding immigration (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iya0eNlu9D0) and regulation (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z3lqBaKFUB4).

      Why I bring them up and law enforcement and military is because until those who serve within those areas understand just how corrupted our “laws” are, not just in the way they are written, but because of WHO are writing, enforcing, then judge/jury/executioner against the American people. How, and when, they tossed aside the US Constitution.

      I believe that those that serve within the law enforcement and military do not understand, and may not even be taking, their Oath and the true government they are REQUIRED to protect. That they are Oath and duty bound to the US Constitution. That the Militia is one of the biggest parts of the our government and we let it get mostly dismantled, though it is being started back up. That the Militia is not only constitutionally backed, it is constitutionally REQUIRED. That when, and if, the law enforcement and military ever move against Militias – be they the ones that are just of the people and need educated in the US Constitution, their state Constitution, and trained as the congress requires the military to be trained – or the regulated Militia, they are making war on America. The US Constitution requires the American people to be armed and trained, to be educated in the US Constitution and in American values.

      “The Writings of George Washington”: “It may be laid down, as a primary position, and the basis of our system, that every citizen who enjoys the protection of a free government…, but even of his personal services to the defence of it, and consequently that the Citizens of America (with a few legal and official exceptions) from 18 to 50 Years of Age should be borne on the Militia Rolls, provided with uniform Arms, and so far accustomed to the use of them, that the Total strength of the Country might be called forth at Short Notice on any very interesting Emergency.”

      This is a long convoluted way of asking, any chance you can teach an online Militia class there? I am not sure if they even want one, but they have gone a long way from their beginnings of these online courses, and may now be ready to take that next step.

      God Bless!

      Cal
      If there were never intended to be action to defend the Constitution from those who are domestically attempting to destroy its power and authority, why would each Oath require it of those who take the Oaths?

      Chief Tecumseh: “When it comes your time to die, be not like those whose hearts are filled with the fear of death, so that when their time comes they weep and pray for a little more time to live their lives over again in a different way. Sing your death song and die like a hero going home.”

  5. When I saw the reference to the SPLC I went back and carefully read the piece again. At first I thought it may have been a semi- “awakening” article, and then I carefully re-read it. As you stated, it is a subliminal hit piece that will dovetail with and reinforce the bias of the typical WashPo reader. Let them underestimate us as hicks from the sticks. We are training; they are taking selfies!

  6. You really can’t blame those poor delusional “progressive” bastards for their shameless support of totalitarianism. If the SHTF in the future, they are going to be the first easy targets of opportunity to be wiped out. Their mindless, rigid obedience to a set of communistic ideals and their insistence on spouting their anti-American propaganda readily identifies them for future extermination.

    1. Don’t think for a moment that ‘those poor delusional “progressive” bastards’ aren’t saying the same thing about you. And many of them mean bloody business.

  7. I read this the other day. It was the subtle regressive superiority buried in the article that I found provocative. Interesting though, there seemed to be desperation in the message, as though the author knows they have awakened a sleeping giant.

  8. It is good the misguided libs attack and persecute us, it means hell is writhing in agony. This war was won before it ever started. Mark 13:12 Brother will betray brother to death, and a father his child. Children will rebel against their parents and have them put to death. 13Everyone will hate you because of me, but the one who stands firm to the end will be saved.

    Jesus did not say these times would be easy , they will get worse and the enemy will be deceived and think that victory is theirs , when in fact they are already defeated.

  9. The Black Racist point is total BS. The current POSER in Chief only made it obvious where the “clear and present danger” is. The good point is that the Sleeping Giant has been Awakened and will not surrender passively.
    Until you try to twist the words to suit another agenda, the Constitution is not difficult to understand.

  10. This article with the picture of NJ super on my front page for days. The focus of “the children” intended to portray the family as dysfunctional and submitting the kids to danger. Actually, I grew up around guns, and learned gun safety at a young age, along with my brothers and sisters. Nothing unusual there. Tossing in the Southern Poverty Communist Center was the topping on the cake. Any credibility attempted was lost at that point. I suspect this article’s purpose backfired, many people fed up with the current government now know who to contact and further strengthens the cause to wrestle back control of this country. Those who mock and criticize Patriots….well, you can’t fix Stupid, as they say.

  11. Tyler Durden at ZeroHedge has written an outstanding rebuttal article. Highly recommended:
    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-05-25/truth-behind-surge-conservative-extremism

    Summary:
    “The mob actions and growing madness of the extreme left, instigated and in some cases funded (Ferguson, Missouri) by elitists like George Soros is going to force conservatives into a position of armed reaction. It is only a matter of time. And perhaps this is what the elites prefer — Americans fighting and killing other Americans while they sit back and enjoy the show. After all, the failure of America is a perfect justification for the greater influence of globalism to stem the tide of “nationalist fervor.” And in a totally globalized and collectivized world, conservatism has no place.

    Conservatives are called “extremists” because the establishment needs an excuse to get rid of us. We are a threat, yes, but only to power mongers and their collectivist hordes. More and more of us grow awake and aware of the program each day. As a result of this awakening, we end up becoming more extreme by mainstream definition in order to protect ourselves and our values. Ultimately, to be an extremist conservative is not a crime against humanity as some would have us believe. To be an extremist conservative in the face of open conflagration against the principles of freedom is to be on the right side of history.”

  12. Below is a list of 72 types of Americans that are considered to be “extremists” and “potential terrorists” in official U.S. government documents. To see the original source document for each point, just click on the link. As you can see, this list covers most of the country…

    1. Those that talk about “individual liberties”

    2. Those that advocate for states’ rights

    3. Those that want “to make the world a better place”

    4. “The colonists who sought to free themselves from British rule”

    5. Those that are interested in “defeating the Communists”

    6. Those that believe “that the interests of one’s own nation are separate from the interests of other nations or the common interest of all nations”

    7. Anyone that holds a “political ideology that considers the state to be unnecessary, harmful,or undesirable”

    8. Anyone that possesses an “intolerance toward other religions”

    9. Those that “take action to fight against the exploitation of the environment and/or animals”

    10. “Anti-Gay”

    http://thetruthwins.com/archives/72-types-of-americans-that-are-considered-potential-terrorists-in-official-government-documents

  13. The most effective tool that TPTB have to maintain control is propaganda.

    It is easy for us to spot the propaganda (as seen here) that is directed toward Liberals, which misrepresents us in such a way that causes them to demonize us.

    Are we careful enough to also spot the propaganda which is directed toward us, and misrepresents them?

Comments are closed.