Arizona shooting victim issues death threats

[spidey07]

The ironing is getting pretty damn thick here and the backfire continues as the "teabaggers rhetoric is the problem" isn't sticking and we're learning it's the left who holds the violent crazies. Well here you have a liberal douchebag who was there, got shot, and he is the one issuing death threats.

http://www.kgun9.com/Global/story.asp?S=13849741

Toward the end of the town hall meeting Saturday morning, one of the shooting victims, J. Eric Fuller, took exception to comments by two of the speakers: Ariz. state Rep. Terri Proud, a Dist. 26 Republican, and Tucson Tea Party spokesman Trent Humphries.

According to sheriff's deputies at the scene, Fuller took a photo of Humphries and said, "You're Dead."

Deputies immediately escorted Fuller from the room.

Pima County Sheriff's spokesman Jason Ogan said later Saturday that Fuller has been charged with threats and intimidation and he also will be charged with disorderly conduct.

-edit-
Title changed. I can't tell if he did the death threats before or after the shooting.

 

[DominionSeraph]

Liberals don't have a media empire trying to make money and gain control by having its viewership kill 9 year old girls.

Individual != masses controlled by amoral, ends-justify-the-means propaganda machine.

 

[Siddhartha]

The ironing is getting pretty damn thick here and the backfire continues as the "teabaggers rhetoric is the problem" isn't sticking and we're learning it's the left who holds the violent crazies. Well here you have a liberal douchebag who was there, got shot, and he is the one issuing death threats.

http://www.kgun9.com/Global/story.asp?S=13849741



-edit-
Title changed. I can't tell if he did the death threats before or after the shooting.

How do you know he is a "liberal"?

 

[spidey07]

How do you know he is a "liberal"?

You have got to be kidding me. The dirt on this guy is all over the Internet. He's a flaming liberal douchebagger.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

How do you know he is a "liberal"?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/14/eric-fuller-tucson-palin-beck-angle_n_809309.html

Eric Fuller, 63, who was struck by a bullet in the hail of gunfire in Tucson that killed six and wounded 13 on Saturday, claimed Thursday that conservative figureheads such as Sarah Palin, Glenn Beck and Sharron Angle were to blame for the violence in Arizona.
"How many more demented people are out there? It looks like Palin, Beck, Sharron Angle and the rest got their first target," Fuller, a former campaigner for Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.), told Democracy Now.
"Their wish for Second Amendment activism has been fulfilled -- senseless hatred leading to murder, lunatic-fringe anarchism, subscribed to by John Boehner, mainstream rebels with vengeance for all, even nine-year-old girls," he added, reading from comments he said he had written down while being treated for his wounds.
Fuller was taking part in Giffords' "Congress on Your Corner" meet-and-greet when he was shot in the back of the knee and grazed in the back.
In the wake of Saturday's shooting, the debate over the need for possible self- or legally-imposed limits on political rhetoric has largely revolved around criticism of language used by Palin, Beck, Angle and other conservatives, a contention that some on both sides of the aisle have vehemently rejected.

 

[Darwin333]

How do you know he is a "liberal"?

The same way the left knew he was a teabagger, he is pulling it out of his ass.

For the last time, it doesn't matter what side of the political isle he agrees with. He is batshit fucking crazy, both sides have batshit fucking crazy people that do batshit fucking crazy shit. Guess what the common denominator is between the lefts batshit crazy fuckers and the rights batshit crazy fuckers? THE BATSHIT FUCKING CRAZY PART!!

 

[Harvey]

The ironing is getting pretty damn thick here and the backfire continues as the "teabaggers rhetoric is the problem" isn't sticking and we're learning it's the left who holds the violent crazies. Well here you have a liberal douchebag who was there, got shot, and he is the one issuing death threats.

http://www.kgun9.com/Global/story.asp?S=13849741



-edit-
Title changed. I can't tell if he did the death threats before or after the shooting.

Spidey -- You're really full of belligerant wingnut bullshit. You're talking about one guy, possibly still traumatized from being shot, mouthing off in a public meeting in front of a lot of armed sheriff's deputies, who promptly, and quite properly, took him into custody.

In your warped mind, somehow, you think this means the "teabaggers rhetoric" isn't a problem, and "it's the left who holds the violent crazies." You are one sick puppy!

1. As of the moment, we have no indication that the shooter, Loughner, is anything more than a lone whack job with no clearly defined political agenda or affiliation.

2. No responsible politicians or journalists have tried to assign blame for his acts on anyone's rhetorical references to violence.

3. What HAS been said by those from both left and right is that it's worth looking at whether references by those who would presume to be leaders to violent acts as valid courses of political action is engendering a climate in which disturbed individuals or groups could take such speech as encouragement, or even permission, to commit such acts.

4. Then, there's the specific case of Sarah Palin's ill conceived attempt to hijack a national tragedy and make it her own personal pity party. Hell! She's catching as much or more flack from the saner elements of the right as she is from the left.

5. Finally, there's you, trying to make a small amount of something out of an extremely large amount of nothing. Go home and practice. :\

 

[CPA]

Spidey -- You're really full of belligerant wingnut bullshit. You're talking about one guy, possibly still traumatized from being shot, mouthing off in a public meeting in front of a lot of armed sheriff's deputies, who promptly, and quite properly, took him into custody.

In your warped mind, somehow, you think this means the "teabaggers rhetoric" isn't a problem, and "it's the left who holds the violent crazies." You are one sick puppy!

1. As of the moment, we have no indication that the shooter, Loughner, is anything more than a lone whack job with no clearly defined political agenda or affiliation.

2. No responsible politicians or journalists have tried to assign blame for his acts on anyone's rhetorical references to violence.

3. What HAS been said by those from both left and right is that it's worth looking at whether references by those who would presume to be leaders to violent acts as valid courses of political action is engendering a climate in which disturbed individuals or groups could take such speech as encouragement, or even permission, to commit such acts.

4. Then, there's the specific case of Sarah Palin's ill conceived attempt to hijack a national tragedy and make it her own personal pity party. Hell! She's catching as much or more flack from the saner elements of the right as she is from the left.

5. Finally, there's you, trying to make a small amount of something out of an extremely large amount of nothing. Go home and practice. :\

1.Tell that to the folks bashing Palin, those pushing again for the Fairness Doctrine and the media the first 3 days after the shooting

2. I see you slyly included the word "responsible".

3. Spin

4. So defending yourself against unwarranted attacks that continue to this day is now considered throwing yourself a pity party. Got it.

 

[Siddhartha]

Spidey,

Didn't you advocate that the Secret Service drop their protection on Mr Obama?

 

[Jaskalas]

Title changed. I can't tell if he did the death threats before or after the shooting.

If you read the article you linked it is quite clearly post-shooting.

 

[spidey07]

Spidey,

Didn't you advocate that the Secret Service drop their protection on Mr Obama?

Way to deflect. A leftist nutjob issues death threats and this is all you have?

"Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake."

Keep doing what you're doing liberals. Please.

 

[spidey07]

If you read the article you linked it is quite clearly post-shooting.

In that case it's very clear he is being influenced by liberal hate reporting, editorials under the guise of information and rhetoric. Glad he was arrested. Maybe they can catch his mental illness of liberalism before it forces him to violence. The signs are all there.

And for good measure, FUCK OBAMA. This is why the claims from liberal ring so hollow, it is THEY who incite violence and hatred with their vitriol and hatred. Evidence this libtard douchebag. Thank god his was arrested. And fuck obama.

 

[Thump553]

Enemies?

Thanks for once again pointing out the gist of what is wrong with you wingnuts.

 

[Harvey]

1.Tell that to the folks bashing Palin, those pushing again for the Fairness Doctrine and the media the first 3 days after the shooting

I can't say more than I said, before, about Palin. She's a pathetic attention whore who attempted an ill conceived attempt to hijack a national tragedy and make it her own personal pity party for which she's catching as much or more flack from the saner elements of the right as she is from the left.

2. I see you slyly included the word "responsible".

I see you're not so slyly trying to discredit what I said by claiming my reference to "responsible" politicians or journalists is somehow "irresponsible."

Or are you trying to claim that we should follow the calls of "irresponsible" Or are you trying to claim that there aren't irresponsible politicians or journalists calling for acts of violence to achieve their political ends?

< cough > Sharron Angel < cough > "Second amendment remedies."

< cough > Sara Palin < cough > "Don't retreat, reload." < cough > Rifle sites over political enemies.

Good thinking, there, chappy.

3. Spin

Prove it. Hell! Even Darth Rupert, the dark lord of the darkest haunt of wingnuttery, Faux News, has publicly instructed his droids to tone it down. I don't believe he means it, but it's nice to see the public statement.

4. So defending yourself against unwarranted attacks that continue to this day is now considered throwing yourself a pity party. Got it.

See reply #1. She is NOT the issue. She's just trying to make herself the issue. Even traditional righties are blasting her for it.

Most from the more rational elements of the left and the right are taking the occasion to call for introspection and thought about how we conduct our public discourse. Far too many wingnuts are looking at it as an opportunity for fund raising. :thumbsdown:

 

[Infohawk]

2. No responsible politicians or journalists have tried to assign blame for his acts on anyone's rhetorical references to violence.

I love how you keep adding qualifications to the statement that nobody is trying to assign blame for the shooting... now's it just no "responsible politicians or journalists". LOL.

 

[IBMer]

Lets play spin the bottle to see which side is crazier!

 

[Harvey]

I love how you keep adding qualifications to the statement that nobody is trying to assign blame for the shooting... now's it just no "responsible politicians or journalists". LOL.

I take it you and others who object to me qualifiying my statement prefer to follow those who are irresponsible. Figures.

 

[spittledip]

Wow. Fuller really is hopeless. Hopefully he is just acting out of the recent stress brought about by the shooting. He probably should not have attended the event.

 

[Infohawk]

I take it you and others who object to me qualifiying my statement prefer to follow those who are irresponsible. Figures.

What are you talking about? Who are you suggesting I follow?

What I'm talking about is that you're so desperate to criticize Sarah Palin that you tried to argue that nobody was saying right-wing rhetoric was linked to the attacks. When faced with evidence that a variety of people do in fact claim right-wing rhetoric is linked to the attack, you try to back-track.

Spidey's antics are just the flip-side of the partisan coin.

 

[Harvey]

What are you talking about? Who are you suggesting I follow?

Anyone you want to follow. Your post criticized my references to the voices of responsible politicians and journalists. That suggests you're more into following those who are irresponsible.

What I'm talking about is that you're so desperate to criticize Sarah Palin that you tried to argue that nobody was saying right-wing rhetoric was linked to the attacks. When faced with evidence that a variety of people do in fact claim right-wing rhetoric is linked to the attack, you try to back-track.

BULLSHIT!! First, you criticize me for referring to the words from "responsible" public figures and and journalists. Then, you try to twist those same words to mean that I was arguing that "nobody was saying right-wing rhetoric was linked to the attacks."

Which is it? You can't have it both ways.

And desperation is not a requirement to find legitimate reasons to attack Palin. She's her own veritable gusher of reasons to shred her. All she has to do is open her mouth or post a tweet or article on her site. She's a fooking idiot who only opens her mouth to change feet.

Spidey's antics are just the flip-side of the partisan coin.

More bullshit. Spidey started this thread, and his OP is just falacious misdirection and finger pointing stating that "we're learning it's the left who holds the violent crazies."

Uh-huh... That's really the flip side of referring to the voices of responsible politicians and journalists from both left and right... in some other imaginary universe. :\

 

[Infohawk]

You have a short memory Harvey.

http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=31073570&postcount=9

You claimed

"No one has accused Palin of directly causing this particular lunatic to try to assassinate Giffords or shoot up her gathering."

I pointed you to a blog article that summarized a variety of opinions of people who were blaming Palin. Then you whined about how it was a British website and didn't matter. I called you out on that BS and you smartly bailed from the thread.

Clearly we have a Democratic partisan in the story blaming the right-wing again. So now you're backtracking from "no one" to "no responsible journalist or politician." Hey that's fine. Irrelevant but fine. I'm still gonna' point out your backtracking though.

All this stems from your odd unwillingness to admit that people are trying to blame the incident on right-wing rhetoric and Sarah Palin.

 

[feralkid]

This is just awful.

Between this and all the hooting and whistling at the memorial, I'd have to say that Tucson should never be allowed to host another massacre.

 

[dmcowen674]

Lets play spin the bottle to see which side is crazier!

It's called crazy now but down the road history will just look back at all this as the start of a new American Revolution.

 

[Harvey]

You have a short memory Harvey.

http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=31073570&postcount=9

You claimed

"No one has accused Palin of directly causing this particular lunatic to try to assassinate Giffords or shoot up her gathering."

I pointed you to a blog article that summarized a variety of opinions of people who were blaming Palin. Then you whined about how it was a British website and didn't matter. I called you out on that BS and you smartly bailed from the thread.

No, I'm afraid you're the one who's reading and memory challenged. If you don't like the fact that, at the time, I didn't qualify the words, "no one" more precisely with terms like "responsible," you would have been all over me, then, just as you tried to do in this thread, and your post was just as much bullshit, then, as it is, now.

As for your link, my reply, then, still applies:

That's not an article. That's one jackass Brit blogger's opinion, and he's as wrong as you are. For all of his fear mongering, he doesn't manage to include one concrete example of anyone stating that Palin's words were a direct cause of the shooting.

I just reread that blog. Nothing has changed. It's a blog, one guy's freaking opinion, and it doesn't contain ONE (count 'em on one finger) citation of ANYONE stating that Palin's words were a direct cause of the shooting.

Clearly we have a Democratic partisan in the story blaming the right-wing again. So now you're backtracking from "no one" to "no responsible journalist or politician." Hey that's fine. Irrelevant but fine. I'm still gonna' point out your backtracking though.

Clearly, you're just a right wingnut demagog looking to point fingers anywhere except at the truth. All you can find is what you want to read into words you can't understand as written, even in your own links to sources that fail to support your biases.

 

[Infohawk]

Harvey, I'm "all over you" because you're being intellectually dishonest and still acting like nobody's blaming Palin and right-wingers for this incident. Maybe you're not discussing it, but that's what many Americans are.

What the hell are you ranting about demagogues for? Do you understand what that means? I'm on an internet forum. I'm not some public figure. Who am I pointing fingers at? I'm merely pointing you out to be intellectually dishonest here. What do you think my biases are? Do you think I'm a Sarah Palin fan? Please feel free to dig yourself deeper in a hole.