Did The Media Change James von Brunn’s Wardrobe?
(Is the Right about to be blamed for the Left’s dirty linen?)
by Al Benson Jr.
Where to begin? By now everyone has heard about James von Brunn’s brutal shooting spree at the Holocaust Museum in Washington. Almost before the smell of the gun smoke had died away the usual flotsam from the managed media began to appear. It almost seems as if the prostitute press was just waiting in the wings for the fireworks to go off so they could begin their spin on it before anyone else realised what was happening.
The New York Post was probably among the first to get something out on the shooting. They posted an article at 3:10 am on June 11th, complete with a photo of a man who looked like he was mad at the world and had been for decades. Interestingly, the Post article described von Brunn thusly: "Dressed in a natty business suit, von Brunn only got steps into the building when he started firing off rounds from a .22 calibre rifle." "Dressed in a natty business suit" and carrying a rifle? And no one noticed? Even if he parked his car right in front of the building (and one account said he did) he still had to traverse the distance from car to front door with a rifle in his hand. I find it interesting that you had a rifle-toting man on a street in Washington and no one seems to have noticed that–or did they? If he went through the front door with other people wouldn’t someone have noticed the rifle. If he went in alone I would have thought the guards would have noticed it. Just makes me wonder.
Anyway, all that soon changed. By June 12th a columnist for the Pittsburgh Post Gazette Tony Norman, wrote: "Wearing a Confederate hat, and carrying a .22 Winchester rifle, the alleged killer spent an inordinate amount of time on the Internet…" Now, a day later, we have a Confederate hat added to the wardrobe. I read still another article that claimed von Brunn was wearing a Confederate hat and a long coat, probably to cover the rifle. I can’t imagine anyone wearing a long coat this time of year in Washington. So which is it–natty business suit or Confederate hat and long coat? We have two media versions of the same man, which, needless to say, hardly match. And don’t you just get that ever-so-subtle feeling that you already know which one the managed media is going to run with???
A political science professor here in Louisiana, at the University of Louisiana in Monroe (Monroe News Star June 15th) has already conveniently labelled von Brunn as a "right wing extremist," one of a long recent line. Wonder who else he’s referring to. I guess this is what passes for political science at ULM. If this professor did any real homework he should have realised that, if anything, von Brunn is much closer to the left side of the political spectrum than he is to the right side. But, then, most on the left are much more interested in the "spin" they can give a story or event than they are with the real facts. If the facts get in the way of the "spin" they are simply omitted, or bent to fit the situation because, after all, for them, the ends do justify the means.
According to a World Net Daily article for June 11th, von Brunn thought Charles Darwin was just great, he hated Christians and the Bible and advocated the socialist polices of Hitler. Hardly the criteria for a right winger, but not to worry, the media will take care of all that for us. Columnist Kathy Shaidle noted on Examiner.com that: "The anti-Semitism of von Brunn is the first thing one notices when visiting these bizarre websites. However, like those of most white supremacists’ , many of von Brunn’s political view track Left rather than Right." She continued on and said that von Brunn "…isn’t the mainstream conservative and/or rightwinger currently being depicted on leftwing blogs and by liberal commentators. In short, von Brunn’s connection with conservative thought and action today–be it talk radio or ‘tea parties’–is tenuous. Those trying to puff up such ‘connections’ are acting in bad faith, out of blind partisanship…"
And Bobby Eberle on www.gopusa.com has also noted: "Following the shooting at the museum, left-wing ‘journalists’ came out of the woodwork to paint the incident as some kind of larger movement among members of the ‘far right’. It didn’t matter to the media that this man has been unstable for decades…long before Obama came on the scene. If they can group all of us together as ‘wackos’ they will do it." You better believe they will–in spades!
Those with a proper understanding of the political spectrum will realise that socialism, any kind of socialism, communism, Nazism, fascism, or whatever, belongs on the political left. These represent the drive for total government control of everything. Have any of you noticed that sort of trend in the present administration, or, for that matter, in the past few administrations?
So, if von Brunn believed in the theories of Hitler and he hated Christians, then that puts him squarely over on the left, NOT on the right. For decades many of us have heard all the political blather about "right wing fascists." There ain’t no such animal. Fascists are leftists. By the same token, if the left represents total government, then the right, if you take it far enough, represents no government–anarchy if you will–every man doing that "which is right in his own eyes." That’s not so great either. Holy Scripture recognises that, due to man’s sinful nature, some very limited government is necessary–and it does need to be limited. Government is supposed to protect people’s lives and property. If you stated that "Human rights are property rights" you’d be pretty close to the mark. The concept of private property is biblical. Socialists and fascists of whatever stripe don’t recognise that fact. Unfortunately, neither does the prostitute press anymore as they seek, in print, to get Congress to implement Karl Marx’s program as outlined in The Communist Manifesto. And, undoubtedly, they will seek to lobby Congress, via the editorial page, due to situations like this one with von Brunn, to remove from us even more of our private property–our firearms.
So you have this von Brunn situation, and just recently you had the situation where that abortion doctor was shot in his own church. No sane person condones either of these acts, but I can’t help but wonder what all this is building toward. Are we on the edge of a really big push to remove our firearms–our last real line of defence against tyrannical government? How many gun control bills are presently sitting in the hallowed halls of Congress–waiting for some hot button issue to move them all forward despite the protests of the American people?
The specifics of the von Brunn situation look a little dicey to me. As that Christian patriot, Patrick Henry once said "I smell a rat."
Copyright © 2006-2009 Al Benson, Jr.
On The Web: www.albensonjr.com/vonbrunn.shtml
