How long before the media & Antifa have to pay the piper?
On July 13, a man armed with a rifle and Molotov cocktails attacked a government installation. He set a car on fire. Police killed him in a shootout.
If he had been a white nationalist, this would be the biggest news story of the month. Journalists and government officials would scrutinize everyone tangentially associated with the shooter. The Anti-Defamation League and other groups would call it another example of “white nationalist terrorism.” They’d blame us for “radicalizing” him. Let us not forget that identitarian leader Martin Sellner was raided by Austrian police because he received a donation from the Christchurch shooter—a man he never met.
Most of the corporate media ignored this attack. Newsbusters reports the broadcast networks did not cover it—aside from 17 seconds on ABC’s Good Morning America. In the closing words of the terrorist’s manifesto, he bragged his weapon was a “ghost”—or unregistered—AR-15 with six magazines—yet there’s been no outcry from gun controllers.
The attacker also called for “comrades” to “arm themselves” and follow his path. This is incitement. Liberals don’t care.
Why? The terrorist was Willem Van Spronsen, a self-described anti-fascist activist, who attacked an ICE facility. In recent years, antifa have enjoyed positive coverage from corporate media, despite repeated physical attacks on journalists. Some “journalists” are antifa themselves.
Just last month, CNN’s W. Kamou Bell hosted a television show promoting the antifa groups Puget Sound John Brown Gun Club and Redneck Revolt. In the promotional material on Twitter, Mr. Van Spronsen appears at the four second mark.
This Sunday at 10pm ET / 7pm PT on @CNN, #UnitedShades features @PugetSoundJBGC, a bunch of liberal 2nd amendment advocates. Yup, you read that right! Tune in! #2A pic.twitter.com/utXOdLeo3G
— W. Kamau Bell (@wkamaubell) May 3, 2019
There’s also a documentary about Redneck Revolt available on Amazon Prime. In both features, reporters let activists make their arguments. They got much less hostility than Jared Taylor got from Fareed Zakaria. It’s impossible to imagine corporate media giving neutral—let alone positive—coverage to white nationalist militias.
Mr. Van Spronsen had a difficult divorce and may have wanted to commit suicide by cop, but he’s a hero to many Twitter users. Among them was Shaun King, a leading Black Lives Matter activist. In since-deleted tweets, Mr. King called Van Spronsen a “martyr” who was “murdered.” Mr. King also called Van Spronsen’s manifesto a “beautiful, painful, devastating letter.” Mr. King had previously made arguments just like Van Spronsen’s. On June 29, Mr. King tweeted that immigrants held in “concentration campus” should be “liberated” “by any means necessary.” He has not taken down this tweet.
Van Spronsen’s manifesto is a call to action: “It’s time to take action against the forces of evil.” He claims “we are living in visible fascism ascendant” designed to benefit the rich, including Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos, and George Soros. (All of these men have deplatformed or funded opposition to nationalists.)
Countless people defended Van Spronsen’s tactics and some explicitly called for violence.
“Puget Sound Anarchists” said they found his actions “inspiring.” “Let no one say it is ‘violent’ to attack the infrastructure of ICE and the mercenaries who maintain it,” said Crimethnic. Kim Kelly of Teen Vogue called him a “heroic comrade” and claimed he was merely engaging in “righteous sabotage”—though one of Mr. Van Spronsen’s friends told the Seattle Times his actions were essentially “suicide.” Corporate outlets such as BuzzFeed calmly covered the attack, and let antifa make their arguments without rebuttal.
Van Spronson used the words “concentration camp” four times in his manifesto, and Rebel News naturally wanted to know if Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez—who has brayed about “concentration camps” more than anyone—would condemn the attack. She refused. Congresswoman Ilhan Omar also refused. The idea that someone might have created “an atmosphere of hate” seems to have occurred to no one.
The corporate media mostly ignored, downplayed, or subtly defended the attack. Not so, after the ill-fated 2016 Unite the Right protest. Groups that had nothing to do with the event, including VDARE.com and American Renaissance, were promptly deplatformed. When an independent report found local and state government officials deliberately provoked the violence in Charlottesville, there was no scandal. Instead, Joe Biden implicitly blamed President Trump.
Even more remarkably, President Trump’s own Department of Justice has not investigated the Democratic officials who deliberately drove protesters and counter protesters together. The DOJ has also done nothing to investigate antifa. Instead, it has aggressively prosecuted President Trump’s supporters. Three members of the Rise Above Movement were just sentenced to 27 to 37 months in prison for “incitement to riot.”
Who “radicalized” Willem Van Spronsen? Corporate media and Democratic politicians. Yet the Department of Justice enabled it. Since literally the first day of President Trump’s term, the federal government has done very little to prevent leftist political violence. Now, there are attacks on law enforcement officials, cheered on by a nationwide network. What did the DOJ think would happen after years of tolerating lawlessness?
A government is the monopoly of force within a territory. If President Trump’s DOJ refuses at least to investigate antifa in the wake of Van Spronson’s attack, it has ceded that monopoly. Already, President Trump has proven himself unable or unwilling to enforce America’s immigration laws. Now, he seems indifferent to attacks on public servants. Rather than tweeting, he should act. Tolerate political violence and it will escalate. This attack is surely a harbinger of more. If President Trump won’t defend immigration law enforcement officials, they won’t defend America.
Source with links…