Join the Discussion

Reply
Report this post

Ma'am;...Mr. Mahammid will get a lesson in the law...If it is legal, the law does it, and the process by which people are killed legally, is, after a long legal process culminating at some point where those people no longer have rights and may be killed with impunity... I will not defend killers... Mr. Von Brunn gives all people who hate Jews a bad name... I am not much of a hater; but I do not like all they do, and I certainly do not like each and every one of them...Now; I see from the opinions listed above that people feel Mr. Von Brunn is an example of a democrat, or a liberal... Maybe; but is that not beside the point??? It is the willingness to strike out at our enemies because we perceive that the government does not deliver the truth, or justice is the problem, and it is not one easily fixed... If We think some little thing like majority rule is enough excuse to deprive people of their rights, their property, their futures, and their freedom then we should think twice... When the South felt its majority was slipping away, even when that majority was based upon the injustice of slavery; they followed up one injustice with another...I know what justice is...Justice is what people agree to with their own authority...If you have to force anyone to accept anything because you have the greater numbers, then you are sealing injustice with a triffling legality... Then; by that logic, everything the majority demands is law..And that is true, that the people are the law; but it is the whole people, a consensus of opinion... We want some things byond the control of the majority... That is why we give so much weight to property rights... Is there such a thing??? The South found it could be removed from its property in slaves when it would not accept simple limits on those rights... Does anyone believe that the rights of property should not be paid for with property??? Everyone with property seems to believe just that...And because they think they have the moral authority, they will kill to defend what is their right...People are punished by the thousands in this land for attacking the right of property, and it is more people without property who are forced to pay for their arrests and incarcerations..Who believes these people deprived of wealth and property will long respect the rights of property???.We are reaching a point in this land where the vast majority do not have the means to support themselves, and the commonwealth cannot support them because the government does not have the courage to tax those with all the means...What do you do??? What does any one do under such circumstances??? People find that their government, isolated and intransigent is no good what so ever to them...It does not do their will; neither does it offer a place of dialogue... Have we ever had a discussion in this land about Israel, or the influence of Jewish people on our institutions and economy???.Why are we making enemies of the whole Muslim population of the world for the benefit of this particular group???We do not ask, and we do not know; and so people Like Mr. Von Brunn grow in number every day... I do not care if the Jewish people hold every post in government if they do their jobs... But if government does not function, then the people begin to think every man is for himself, and is a law unto himself, and is justified in anything they do... Mr. Mahammid considered his actions justified...Mr. Von Brunn considered his actions justified...This only means that our government has lost moral authority for both right and left...This would be a good time to start talking to each other, and not at each other... It would be great if government facilitated our conversations...But people who seem to think of the ownership of government as an end, and a means to an end, will simply not allow this... No one could dare suggest that Jewish people might be seeking a dominant role in our society...To say that might sound too anti-semetic...What if it is obviously true even if not provably true??? Does that mean people will not believe so, and act on their beliefs??? The same thing might well be said of the Catholics, or the Protestant Christians...They are organized... They have money...They have property, and they are willing to use and construe the law in defense of their prerogatives...There is a reason the government cannot reach its goals or serve our needs...It was always too easy to control all with a majority...What the majority does it takes a super majority to overcome... So, those who make the laws have the advantage...Naturally, I believe the thing is beyond correction...And I do not think the Von Brunns and Mahammids have the answer...People on the right and left should have the courage to make an issue of government...They should make a stand and not cooperate with government... And they should respect all rights that can be defended, and not defend any right that cannot be respected...In other words, they should reform their government under new rules...Thanks...Sweeney

Reply
Report this post

Re: Nick_in_Virginia;....There is little doubt about what side of this issue you stand on... "Slaughter" sort of give you away...I guess that means you do not like abortions... So does that mean you have a pregnant woman under your roof, or an unwanted child??? It is so easy to change a law... All you need to do is to get the majority to accept that your law does not attack a basic human right... We might well argue that the babies have the right to their own lives, but we have not yet shown that such a law would not attack the basis of all right at their root, at the rights of the individual in regard to their own affairs and body...There is a sort of metaphysical conception of mankind wrapped up in your thinking that goes back to the Greeks who were notorious for exposing unwanted children, especially girls to the elements...I suppose it is inevitable that we should conceive of ourselves spiritually, but whether or not we are so conceived in nature is unknowable... For such things faith maintains a control over us, but such faith is not enough to justify the taking of rights, or the killing of doctors... The fact is, that we are made by our parents out of the same stuff their parents made them with...In a traditional understanding of law, no one is more injured by the death of a person than their near relatives, and if the near relatives are responsible, what concern is that of ours???If the state makes itself everyones family then, are they not responsible to look after their general welfare, as well as the welfare of the unborn??? That is the problem in a nutshell, that you care for people in the womb where they are already being cared for, and when some mother seeks to protect her child from you, from your demands against freedom without responsibility; then you get bent..It is because every dead embryo tells the truth about us, and our society....If you wish to care for people, care for the living, and the unborn will take care of themselves...To think you can abandon the poor to their misery, and that to have everything good you can reserve for them everything that is bad; and that they will still want to share that existence with children is daft....You may some day be able to force people to have children, but they will be a thorn in your heart... Children raised in poverty and hatred suffer a poverty of spirit, and a hatred of life...So if you want people to breed, first teach them love, and make a community around them to protect them and love them...That is the way good societies work...Thanks...Sweeney

Reply
Report this post

I don't consider Tiller's murder to fall into the category of "terrorism". This was a personal issue, not a blind attack (as both the Pvt. Long killing and the killing of Mr.Johns, the guard at the Holocaust Musem, were) based on some ideological belief. The man who murdered Pvt. Long had no idea who he was, just a member of the U.S. military. The man who killed Mr. Johns just wanted to go out and kill Jews; I don't even know if Johns was Jewish. But Scott Roeder, the man who killed Tiller, did it because of what Tiller himself was doing (slaughtering 60,000 babies and bragging about it). I haven't followed the story that closely, but given that they went to the same church, they may have even known each other. Granted, the results may be the same (3 dead people), but this is more a case of people (liberals) re-defining a long-used term for their own attempt at political gain.

Reply
Report this post

Ms. Saunders, You wrote.... "Von Brunn probably thinks he is a patriot, too — but that doesn't mean anyone should call him a patriotic extremist. If anything, von Brunn seems to have arrived at the very fringe where far left and far right unite." I continually read the words "Left-Wing Extremist" and Right-Wing Extremist". I rather tire of the suggestion that being a Moderate - one who is neither Left nor Right but somehow a thoughtful mix - is somehow to superior. That said, would it be more accurate to label von Brunn a "Moderate-Wing Extremist"?

Reply
Report this post

James Von Brunn, a registered democrat, Like Most Holocaust Deniers is From the Left not the Right.

Reply
Report this post

Two major facts have been left out of this article - von Brunn considered himself to be anti-Christian. Von Brunn also considered himself to be a socialist. Hence he is a LEFT-wing extremist. Call it what it is.