The more I look at Connecticut, and the gun confiscation confrontation looming, and as I see the government increasing it’s sharp rhetoric and criticism of all who dissent, I keep thinking Reichstag Fire. I wrote about that in 2010…
If the title of this post confuses you, here is some background…
Göring and Goebbels, with Hitler’s approval, then hatched a plan to cause panic by burning the Reichstag building and blaming the Communists. The Reichstag was the building in Berlin where the elected members of the republic met to conduct the daily business of government.
By a weird coincidence, there was also in Berlin a deranged Communist conducting a one-man uprising. An arsonist named Marinus van der Lubbe, 24, from Holland, had been wandering around Berlin for a week attempting to burn government buildings to protest capitalism and start a revolt. On February 27, he decided to burn the Reichstag building.
Carrying incendiary devices, he spent all day lurking around the building, before breaking in around 9 p.m. He took off his shirt, lit it on fire, then went to work using it as his torch.
The exact sequence of events will never be known, but Nazi storm troopers under the direction of Göring were also involved in torching the place. They had befriended the arsonist and may have known or even encouraged him to burn the Reichstag that night. The storm troopers, led by SA leader Karl Ernst, used the underground tunnel that connected Göring’s residence with the cellar in the Reichstag. They entered the building, scattered gasoline and incendiaries, then hurried back through the tunnel.
So, they found a “deranged” man, who is now thought to have been mentally retarded, and encouraged him to start the fire. To make sure that he did not fail, storm troopers helped him.
At a cabinet meeting held later in the morning, February 28, Chancellor Hitler demanded an emergency decree to overcome the crisis. He met little resistance from his largely non-Nazi cabinet. That evening, Hitler and Papen went to Hindenburg and the befuddled old man signed the decree “for the Protection of the people and the State.”
The Emergency Decree stated: “Restrictions on personal liberty, on the right of free expression of opinion, including freedom of the press; on the rights of assembly and association; and violations of the privacy of postal, telegraphic and telephonic communications and warrants for house searches, orders for confiscations as well as restrictions on property, are also permissible beyond the legal limits otherwise prescribed.” (Emphasis mine)
OK, why discuss that, and what does it have to do with the present time? I think we might see something like this in the near future. I suggest this because there has been a buildup to this very thing, as well as the fact that the “progressives” have floated these ideas before. Let’s take a few moments and take a look.
- After the Oklahoma City bombing, the left and the MSM pushed hard to blame the attack on Rush Limbaugh and talk radio as a whole. Remember the “Vast Right Wing Conspiracy,” and the “politics of personal destruction? They portrayed Limbaugh, in particular, as an evil puppet master that was encouraging “hate.” Fortunately, their claims did not build sufficient traction to allow them to take any sort of action.
- The left started the racist narrative almost immediately when Obama began his campaign. The objective? Frame any opposition to his policies as racism. This narrative has continued until this day.
- Starting with the MIAC Report, the government has been defining any opposition to the “progressive” with domestic terrorism, racism, and the like. Note that this report was largely referenced from the SPLC.
- After the MIAC report was widely denounced, and withdrawn, I predicted that the same information would be parroted by DHS. I’m not claiming any prescience; it was simply a predictable move, as a narrative must be repeated in order to be effective.
- The infamous DHS report parroted the same points as the MIAC Report. Even though DHS was forced to admit that nothing had actually happened, they stuck to their guns so to speak.
- Then, the MSM predicted violence at the Tea Parties. Then, they overlooked leftist violence, not only at the Tea Parties, but at other protests as well.
- Then came the infamous MSNBC “gun video” in which a man was observed carrying what appears to be an AR 15. The MSNBC talking heads proclaimed it a sure sign of racism and impending violence. Of course, the only showed the gun, and neglected, intentionally, to show that the man carrying the gun was not only black, but also quite welcome at the event.
- Over the last year, there were several acts of violence, especially the man who flew his private plane into a government building. The claims that he was a right-winger came almost immediately, until, that is, that it was discovered that he was an anti-capitalist.
- Then, there was the case of the ‘OMG right wing militia,” who, as it turns out, was shunned by actual militia groups. That story died when it was disclosed that a government agent/ informant was actually the one planning or encouraging violence (sound familiar?).
- As for the very latest, there are some in the MSM and among the lefty bloggers, which are blaming Glenn Beck for the gun battle between Byron Williams and elements of the CHP and Oakland PD. Williams, a convicted bank robber, did the following.
GROVELAND, CA – The mother of a Groveland man who opened fire on California Highway Patrol officers during a traffic stop in Oakland early Sunday said her son was upset with the government and had a difficult time rebuilding his life following a prison term.
Janice Williams said Sunday that she had not been contacted by authorities Sunday following the early morning shootout on Interstate Highway 580 between a body-armored man carrying multiple weapons and CHP officers.
But Williams said she knew the gunman was her son, 45-year-old Byron Williams.
“I have no doubt it is him,” Williams said. “I looked in my driveway. My truck was gone, and then went to my gun safe and my guns were gone.”
CHP officers say the license plate of the white Toyota pickup truck stopped for speeding and weaving through traffic at the Harrison Street on-ramp to 580 just after midnight Sunday morning did belong to Janice Williams. CHP Sgt. Trent Cross eventually confirmed Williams was the gunman late Sunday afternoon.
As officers approached the truck, they saw firearms in the vehicle and gunfire was exchanged as the officers moved back to their car and called for backup, Cross said.
Now, this is how the Washington Post’s Dana Milbank discussed the same event.,,
When California Highway Patrol officers stopped him on an interstate in Oakland for driving erratically, Byron Williams, wearing body armor, fired at police with a 9mm handgun, a shotgun and a .308-caliber rifle with armor-piercing bullets, Oakland police say. Shot and captured after injuring two officers, Williams, on parole for bank robbery, told investigators that he wanted “to start a revolution” by “killing people of importance at the Tides Foundation and the ACLU,” according to a police affidavit. His mother, Janice, told the San Francisco Chronicle that her son had been watching television news and was upset by “the way Congress was railroading through all these left-wing agenda items.”
But what television news show could have directed the troubled man’s ire toward the obscure Tides Foundation, which sounds as if it’s dedicated to oceanography, or perhaps laundry detergent, but which is in fact a nonprofit that claims to support “sustainability, better education, solutions to the AIDS epidemic and human rights”?
A week after the incident, the mystery was solved. “Tides was one of the hardest things that we ever tried to explain, and everyone told us that we couldn’t,” Fox News host Glenn Beck told his radio listeners on Monday. “The reason why the blackboard” — the prop Beck uses on his TV show to trace conspiracies — “really became what the blackboard is, is because I was trying to explain Tides and how all of this worked.” Beck accuses Tides of seeking to seize power and destroy capitalism, and he suggests that a full range of his enemies on the left all have “ties to the Tides Center.” On Monday, he savored the fact that “no one knew what Tides was until the blackboard.”
She ended the article with this…
Beck has prophesied darkly to his millions of followers that we are reaching “a point where the people will have exhausted all their options. When that happens, look out.” One night on Fox, discussing the case of a man who killed 10 people, Beck suggested such things were inevitable. “If you’re a conservative, you are called a racist, you want to starve children,” he said. “And every time they do speak out, they are shut down by political correctness. How do you not have those people turn into that guy?”
Here’s one idea: Stop encouraging them.
Again, as you see, the narrative continues.
So, I think I’ve laid the foundation to say that the “progressives” have been building a narrative. That foundation, of course, features the claim that Conservatives are not only racists, but also potential terrorists. No matter what happens, they return to the
That is one of the ingredients of the Reichstag Fire scenario. The other is the willingness to stage something. If they cannot encourage someone to cause a massacre or other infamous crime, they will have to stage one. Have folks from the left staged crimes, or other events before? Read on…
Kindly consider this from Michelle Malkin…
I called out GOP fake hate crime perpetrator Ashley Todd last year and have documented a long list of hoax crimes across party, racial, and gender lines for nearly two decades.
So, the latest case of so-called progressives vandalizing a Democrat headquarters in Denver comes as no surprise. And neither does the initial attempt by Colorado Democrats to blame “hate” by “the other side” and to shamelessly tie the crime to town hall protesters.
Another non-surprise: Schwenkler was paid by the SEIU-related front group CCC, according to Colorado blogger El Presidente.
And here is another, from the master himself.
“Alinsky himself employed this method, quite deviously. Alinsky biographer, Sanford D. Horwitt provides an anecdote using precisely this same diabolical tactic to deceive the people. From Horwitt’s Let Them Call Me Rebel:
“…in the spring of 1972, at Tulane University…students asked Alinsky to help plan a protest of a scheduled speech by George H. W. Bush, then U.S. representative to the United Nations – a speech likely to include a defense of the Nixon administration’s Vietnam War policies. The students told Alinsky they were thinking about picketing or disrupting Bush’s address. That’s the wrong approach, he rejoined, not very creative – and besides causing a disruption might get them thrown out of school. He told them, instead, to go to hear the speech dressed as members of the Ku Klux Klan, and whenever Bush said something in defense of the Vietnam War, they should cheer and wave placards reading, ‘The KKK supports Bush.’ And that is what they did, with very successful, attention-getting results.”
Also, we see that groups allied with the administration aren’t afraid to send infiltrators into the Tea Parties to discredit it.
And, we see that the tolerant and kind “progressives” aren’t afraid to do something, and then blatantly lie to the police about it….
So, where does this leave us? I’d say that we have two patterns here. The first is the propaganda that prepares the public to believe a certain set of “facts.” The second is the willingness to stage events or crimes to “prove” the propaganda. My fear is that these two will converge.
We are dealing with a political ideology that does not believe in truth, debate, or even reality. Their objective is victory, and they aren’t afraid to lie, or even commit crimes to achieve their ends. If a faction, like SEIU goons, or some other group, decided to stage an serious crime, like a bombing, and managed to pull it off, the other side of the equation is all too eager to blame it on talk radio, FOX News, and bloggers. We already have documented that many in the administration would like to regulate bloggers, or the content of news broadcasts. As we have seen in other nations, that regulation usually consists of banning any information that runs counter to the state. To achieve control over the flow of information has always been a goal for the left. What better way to achieve that than to “prove” your narrative to be “correct?”
I freely admit that this is conjecture on my part. It just strikes me that these two factors have been in operation for some time. Combine that with historical precedent, and it becomes a scary scenario waiting to happen. Whenever there is a group that believes that the ends justify the means, you have a recipe for disaster and totalitarianism. I hope that they are not able to encourage an unstable individual to do something terrible. I also hope that they don’t decide to do it themselves.