Today’s USA Today carries a letter from a member of Occupy Wall Street in response to that paper’s editorial, headlined “‘Occupy’ movement fading out in a whimper.” The letter’s author — a “self-employed massage therapist” from Austin, Texas — suggests that the movement should turn to violence, rendering their “occupation” a little more akin to those we’ve seen historically:
USA TODAY’s editorial is right to say that Occupy might lack clear goals on how to move forward, but the movement has accomplished its main original goal: to protest these injustices, not by simply holding a rally and going home, but by keeping the rally going to underscore the seriousness of this problem. Your piece accuses the protesters of sitting around and doing nothing. So maybe they should take up their Second Amendment-sanctioned guns and storm Wall Street and our nation’s capitals. If our country doesn’t change, it could very well come to that one day.
The media responses to the tea party rallies and the Occupy movement could not be more different. When a black, law-abiding citizen who was complying with the law turned up to a healthcare town hall in Arizona, MSNBC’s Contessa Brewer flew off the handle, seeing insurrection in the air: “There are questions about whether this has racial overtones…white people showing up with guns,” she said. (The man was actually black, but why let the facts get in the way of hysteria?) Her colleague, Toure, added, “there is tremendous anger in this country about government, the way government seems to be taking over the country, anger about a black person being president…we see these hate groups rising up and this is definitely part of that.” (This is definitely part of that?) The story was cycled hour after hour.
But when a young man writes a letter to a national newspaper predicting a revolution in which the government and the banks are overthrown by gun-toting “occupiers” — then, what? Earlier this month, the FBI warned of the threat from “anti-government extremists.” From Reuters:
Anti-government extremists opposed to taxes and regulations pose a growing threat to local law enforcement officers in the United States, the FBI warned on Monday.
These extremists, sometimes known as “sovereign citizens,” believe they can live outside any type of government authority, FBI agents said at a news conference.
Based on my time in Zuccotti Park, “sovereign citizen” is a perfect description of the Occupiers’ conceit that they can live outside of the law. Where is the outcry?
I have no liking for the occupiers, but one nutty remark by one nutty individual does not a national story make. Unless, of course, he's from Lake Jackson, Texas. Cordially, Bill
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI think you missed the point of this post, Bill.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseHow about 10 nutty remarks (I'd call it a 'threat') by 10 nutty individuals? 100? What's the OWS threshold for National News? (We all know the Tea party threshold is not even 1 - it's the strictly possible if not at all plausible chance that something might become a threat).
Part 2: just how many instances do you reckon we're already up to? I'm thinking there's enough to warrant a national story, if only to explain to those of us wondering why this ISN'T a threat in the way that, say, loud voices in a public meeting were.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseLook! A Catholic hospital not distributing abortifacients! Haters!
(Whew, don't want the narrative to lose its utility.)
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI think folks in the Occupy movement might want to think for a couple of seconds before talking about guns since I'm thinking that those who think they are wrong are more likely to have them.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse"Where is the outcry?"
Well, good grief, dude. You yourself just "outcried". And, since it's a free country and you are allowed to post on a website that is accessible to most anyone in the Union with a computer and a connection to the Internet, you can "outcry" all you want and rest assured that folks can, if they wish, read whatever you have to say.
And if something else happens that you want to "outcry" or that you don't want to "outcry", you're free to "outcry", or not, as you see fit.
Other persons have no obligation to "outcry" that which makes you want to "outcry" or to refrain from "outcrying" that which you don't think is worthy of such a reaction.
So "outcry" away. But whining about others not joining you just makes you sound silly, pushy and like a bit of a busy-body.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse