I have little to no patience with the 9/11 Troofers — I’ve spent too much of my career debunking crazy-ass conspiracy theories not to consider them roughly the left-wing equivalents of the OKC and New World Order conspiracy theorists (and they have their strands of right-wing nuttery thrown in for good measure, like most of these folks) — but earlier this week another right-wing nutcase — radio talk-show host Michael Reagan — went completely ’round the eliminationist bend in attacking them:
There is a group that’s sending letters to our troops in Iraq … claiming 9/11 was an inside job — oh, yeah, yeah — and that they should rethink why they’re fighting. Who — we ought to — excuse me, folks, I’m going to say this: We ought to find the people who are doing this, take them out and shoot them.
Really. Just find the people who are sending those letters to our troops to demoralize our troops and do what they are doing, you take them out, they are traitors to our country, and shoot them. You have a problem with that, deal with it. But anyone who would do that doesn’t deserve to live. You shoot them. You call them traitors — that’s what they are — and you shoot them dead. I’ll pay for the bullet.
Later on, he adds:
How about you take Mark Dice out and put him in the middle of a firing range. Tie him to a post, don’t blindfold him, let it rip and have some fun with Mark Dice.
Just on the face of it, this is vile and threatening speech that should earn Reagan his immediate removal from the airwaves; it clearly violates basic FCC standards. You can complain to the FCC here.*
But there’s a bigger issue at stake. I couldn’t disagree more strongly myself with the targets of Reagan’s eliminationism, but if they are engaging in treasonous communications, well, there are laws against that. If Michael Reagan wants to urge their criminal prosecution, he might be able to make a case for that; but urging people to take the letter-senders out and shoot them is another ball of wax.
Much as we might object to them, they are exercising their basic free-speech rights. Once you start deciding that we should start shooting people because you think they are "traitors" based on free speech we disagree with, then it suddenly becomes a lot easier to expand the definition and start shooting lots more people.
Especially when you start adding into the equation Bill O’Reilly and Ann Coulter and the rest of the right-wing gang that’s already shown an easy predilection for calling all liberals and antiwar protesters traitors. As Jeff Feldman says: Americans everywhere are tired of this.
We all remember Radio Rwanda, don’t we? Michael Reagan just brought us one step closer. If the public fails to stand up against this kind of violent hate talk, it will become a permission-giving precedent.
*Instructions for filing a complaint at the FCC site:
– Click on the button for "Broadcast (TV and Radio), Cable, and Satellite Issues."
– At the next page, click on the button for "Unauthorized, unfair, biased, illegal broadcasts (does NOT include Obscene, Profane or Indecent material)" [because this complaint involves threatening speech, which is illegal]
– Select whichever form of complaint filing method you prefer on the next page and proceed.



66 Comments












Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
He and Ann Coulter.
Okay, now I’m off to file my complaint. Thanks for keeping us informed…I wouldn’t listen to Michael Reagan, but I’m glad someone does so that we can be informed.
David,
Certainly, I agree that Michael Reagan’s broadcast was an inexcusable breach of FCC standards.
But I am not as ready as you to dismiss the “9/11 Troofers” by lumping them all together in one stereotype. The 9/11 Commission Report was far from adequate, and I think the questions raised by David Ray Griffin and others, based on concrete evidence, deserves an impartial follow-up investigation– A kind of 9/11 Commission, Part II. There are too many loose ends.
Bob in HI
just WOW!
Agreed. The 9/11 Commission was inadequate. That doesn’t mean I think it was an inside job, or that those jetliners didn’t really crash into the Pentagon or Twin Towers … etc.
I happen to be one of these conspiracy theorists, sorry, we know as a fact the president was given precise information, where, when, who, how, the general area and the specific targets
and yet he took vacation, I think it’s bizarre anyone thinks this was not a conspiracy
Bob, you’re right, there are too many loose ends. Please read Matt Taibi on the subject of those loose ends.
I’m trying to log a complaint. What is the company that broadcasts his show?
First, you have to grant that these people were competent to pull off such a complex, unnecessarily convoluted caper. Then you have to posit that none of the many many people necessary to carry out the plot would be willing to keep their mouths shut.
Nope, not gonna happen.
Matt Taibbi (who will be doing Book Salon today) discusses this in his book. You might want to raise the question with him. (And if you haven’t read The Great Derangement yet, I recommend it highly.)
they didn’t keep their mouths shut, we know all about it, and we know as a fact they were told it was going to happen, when where how, who, the actual buildings
and a president who was not whisked away from his advertised venue even when his ss is informed we are under attack
sorry
I happen to believe it’s bizarre anyone thinks this was not a conspiracy
yep. and how could they have better looted the treasury? first, you lobotomize the public via shock then you extract the cash and power.
Regardless of whether you’re right or wrong, perris, I think that no one has any business urging people like you be silenced by shooting them.
This brings around to other Book Salon’s on Jeffery Feldman’s “Outright Barbarous” where he discusses the hate & violent speech towards the left…
the 911 Truth movement is BIG here in Phoenix BUT they do not advocate bringing down our government, or anarchy which the wackos over on the far right … the militia/black helecopter groups…… They just have lots of questions and would like some answers besides “your a wacko” and tossed to the curb…..
It doesn’t matter WHO the violent speech was directed at OR why….. the issue is that it was directed PERIOD…. Tomorrow it could be you or me….
Filed my complaint just now. Reagan is a nut case and should never have been on the radio in the first place. In my complaint I said that if a member of the Democratic Party said such a thing that they would be off air in about 20 minutes and that I am sick of the bias. Thanks for the link to do this. We should never let them get away with anything.
of course that’s true, nor urging anyone to kill at all, I will be clicking through of course david
Per the Manning paper, via Vincent Bugliosi, Bush is perfectly capable of planning false flag attacks…so I don’t rule anything out…until we have an independent investigation, we will never know the truth about the planning and execution of the events on 9/11.:
“Manning wrote that Bush was so worried, so upset, over the failure of the UN inspectors to find weapons of mass destruction, that he talked about three ways to, quote, “provoke a confrontation with Hussein,” one of which, Bush said, was to, quote, “fly U2 aircraft, reconnaissance aircraft, over Iraq, falsely painted in United Nations colors,” and Bush said if Hussein fires upon them, this will be a breach of UN resolutions and justify war.“
Of course, 9-11 was an inside job financed by Saudi’s. The money for the attack was laundered through, neo-cons Jonathon Bush and the Allbritons. Zelikow is guilty of treason, and says in the 9-11 Report, that the financing of the attacks is not important. You can always watch the videos of the Twin Towers exploding, or the controlled demolition of WTC 7.
We need to consider the next “False Flag” attack. Sibel Edmonds says the neo-cons have given “Al Qaeda” nuclear technology. Apparently, Darth Cheney has tried to provide Iran with plans for a nuclear weapon, and Halliburton has sold Iran nuclear technology. Also, there is always “Main Core”, if you doubt their total criminality.
Yep, it’s why I referenced Feldman. Outright Barbarous is spare but excellent.
Denial…
Sadly, much more than a river in Eygpt.
As to the supposed ‘incompetence’ of BushCo.
Price of oil today: $134 and change….
Price of oil when Bush took office: $20.00
They are stealing the shirt off you back, your house and your kid’s chance at a college education and you are standing around saying.
‘Oh, Bush…he and Cheney are too incompetent to organize 9/11…’
Hey….what do I know. But the facts seem to indicate that Bush’s ‘I am a moron’ ploy worked….
[Mod: edited to remove personal insult]
David is right, whether some of us disagree with him regarding 9/11…the point is, Michael Reagan is trying to provoke people into murdering someone.
He needs to be locked up, pronto.
Folks, please — we’re not here to discuss the validity of the various theories about 9/11. It’s entirely peripheral to our topic.
Central point and very, very true.
You could make the case that the country was founded on this one principle:
‘No, Kos…No Bowers…No Marshall…No, Barry… I DO NOT HAVE TO SHUT UP!’
HELLO… the issue is the what….. Reagan’s violent speech… NOT the who….. the who issues can be debated at another time…
THE issue is the violent and hate speech directed at the left which gets passed over and never addressed by the MSM and rebuked far and wide….
IF this isn’t stopped it will ratchet up over the next few months… the more it is expressed…. the more “some people” will think it is acceptable to act on it…
Will the FCC do anything about it? Who was the last person they punished?
WOW we must be on the same wave linking today….. ok… need to finish my remodel job…..
Link
as if that alone wasn’t enough to impeach these friggin morons
My guess is that the FCC will do nothing about Mr. Reagan until he has a “wardrobe malfunction.” Apparently nipples are more to be feared than hate speech in this day and age. Of course, I would probably be arrested if I advocated that type of violence against someone, but I’m a DFH…
Thanks, David, for reminding us to stay alert.
I wonder if Michael Reagan has ever stopped to consider that if society were allowed to operate under his standards, there might be might be quite a few people around that think that HE would be an appropriate recipient of the treatment he suggests. I suppose not; people of his ilk only craft their sick little paradigm worlds to run in their favor, not to their detriment.
When is Matt Taibbi going to be on? I read his book and tried to write him at what appears to be his blog, smirkingchimp.com with reservations I have about 9/11. i.e. you can’t use cell phones on a plane. He never answered. Perhaps he will today.
Scheduled for 5 PM Eastern time, about 20 minutes from now, hosted by Jane. (Notification on the right side, near the top, right under the tool box.)
He’ll be here at 2 pm FDL (5 pm EDT).
Here is a Halliburton Nuke linkie.
Michael Reagan is attacking as part of a neo-con conspiracy. Psychological Operations against American citizens by our Government? That would be shocking! But Newt Gingrich hopes for another catastrophic and catalytic terror attack. Crazy Ann Coulter praises Kommander Guy for preventing other attacks. But there was an Anthrax attack also, using weapons grade anthrax made in some bio-weapons lab. Then there were the two British terrorists who were murdering Irakis, and had to be rescued by a British tank.
According to the notice on the front page, the Taibbi Book Salon is today at 5PM EDT.
But I don’t think the ban on using cell phones on planes has anything to do with 9/11 since they’ve been banned for much earlier. IIRC, it is due to concerns with EMI (electro-magnetic interference) and the possible affects on the plane’s electronics.
I’m probably naive (well, yeah, I know I am) — but how is it that Reagan is still on the air after a rant like that? That’s hate speech if I’ve ever heard it.
Michael Reagan has deepseated anger issues that are all misdirected….consider this per Wiki:
“One childhood story he has told that introduced him to politics was how he at the age of eight asked his father for a raise in his allowance. At the time, around 1953, his allowance was $1.00 a week. His father told him since 90 percent of his earnings were taxed by government, he wasn’t able to increase Mike’s allowance. His father further said that when the President of the United States would give him a tax cut, then he could give his son an increase in his allowance.”
It’s always someone else’s fault when things don’t go his way or if others have different ideas….in his case…it seems to be a matter of life and death as an adult.
IOKIYAR.
There was a recent post about wackos with guns. This is exactly the group Reagan stirs up. The ‘unheard’ – the ‘victims with an urge’ — how can he be allowed to incite violence? Plus, he’s not very bright anyway.
I’m also not “textual’ — I wikied — gotcha
I say it’s time for our friend Spocko. What do you think, folks?
No, it’s because the FCC has trouble with cell phones and their ability to roam. I understand that airborne cell phones can actually cause cell tower to malfunction, if they are not set up correctly.
The “electronics” thing is sort of a crock… most of the avionics are not affected by low-wattage/negligible transmissions, hell there is so much EMI out there that it’s like a soup. The shielding and reliability are good to excellent, and the need to not have devices in use is more of a safety issue (loose stuff in the cabin when taking off/landing).
The FCC, as some have pointed out, is inadequate and painfully slow.
If someone at DKos or FDL was to post these types of threats they would be immediately be punished. The mods here would never allow those words to be directed at someone. The following statements would also be considered psychopathic and deranged and conspiratorial.
It’s amazing how much stuff today is OKIYAR… Stuff that will be absolutely horrendous and to be decried and howled about as soon as a Democrat is in the White House. Just you wait and see… 220 days from now.
Michael Reagan is yet another voice declaring the far right’s disdain for the rule of law. He’s not so far from John Ashcroft’s post 9-11 dire warnings to “be careful what you say,” nor all that far from Bush’s “As commander in chief, I decide what is legal, and I want these folks locked up at Gitmo.”
Whatever the reason, it is a blessing that they’re not allowed for use in transit.
Bad enough all the yammering of folks just before take-off and just after landing, it would be worse to have it in your ear the entire flight.
It was annoying as hell when I had to listen to folks hollering on Amtrak for miles with every other sentnece being “Hello? Can you hear me? Are ya there?”
There does seem to be a subset of the population that believes that cell phones work on pneumatic pressure…
I was just shocked when I heard Ashcroft say that, on the floor of the Senate no less.
Where’s someone with a spine when you need them?
Jane is hosting Matt Taibbi upstairs with Book Salon
A friend tried to use a cell phone on a plane several times without success. I remember the New Yorker cartoon showing a dog at a computer remarking to his friend “On the Internet no one knows you’re a dog” so people claiming expertise may not be experts, but one (unfortunately I don’t have the link) claims you can’t use cell phones because the plane’s speed interferes with the handshaking that takes place as the call passes from tower to tower. The point of the cell phone controversy is that it explains the plane that crashed in PA. The passengers were alerted to the plot via cell phone and took over. Suppose, though, the amateur pilots got lost and for various reasons having nothing to do with passenger revolt, the plane crashed. Suppose also that plane was to have hit the third tower. Since it didn’t, it is difficult to explain the third tower collapsing when it apparently suffered comparatively minor damage.
When i was on Amtrak last month i just did a lot of texting instead of actually talking on the cell. Was a lot easier in the long run and didn’t disturb anyone. At least, when i had signal. We a couple of ‘no man’s land’ areas on the way to Chicago.
Um, those were Airphones i believe.
Matt Taibbi is upstairs wondering if anyone wants to chat with him.
Cellies on a plane
http://www.privateline.com/Cel…..lines.html
http://www.sciam.com/article.c…..on-a-plane
http://electronics.howstuffwor…..ion230.htm
Michael Reagan must be an endless embarrassment to his step-family. Even his own sister is probably spinning in her grave. I can take some comfort only in the knowledge that he is one of the dumbest of the anti-intellectual bloviators and perhaps has gone so far that maybe he gets fired. I won’t hold my breath.
The Rwanda reference is too on point, j’ai peur
Radio America
And we are battling the “terrorists” because they are bloodthirsty killers, right? Is this what “projection” is?
Bob in HI
Voltaire!
Well, the truthers writing to Iraq troops are right about one thing – the Iraq war was sold as being payback for 9/11 and Iraq didn’t do 9/11.
But if someone wants to take them to court, why don’t they?
“Discovery”.
[This is a response to Matt Taibbi’s comment @ 55 which I was going to post on his Book Salon thread, but decided not to, because it has nothing to do with his book, which I think is applicable here]
Matt:
I agree with that. And also this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vmj6JADOZ-8
I usually read this blog for reasoned, rational debate and acceptance of other points of view, with a back and forth intellectual exchange, but sadly I’m getting a condescending, mocking tone through the last two threads that is to put it mildly, disheartening. Much of the mocking tone is sadly the same type as freeper types use to debunk issues by labeling them as “conspiracy theories” such as the Plame Affair; voting machines irregularities (2000 and 2004 editions); Iraq … and so on
I think I’ll have to go outside and get some fresh air, and come back when a more reasoned, less mocking tone is the rule
So when a right winger can’t stand the truth and can’t stand the fact that our troops are hearing the truth, then the right winger’s answer is to shoot the messenger? Wow. I bet the right wingers when they were babies would drop to the floor and throw hissy fits of rage until they passed out.
The only thing Michael Raygun is got going for himself is his name. RAYGUN. ~~~ModNote: Edited for content.~~~
The conservanazis, like Raygun, are losing grip on power AGAIN. They will become more vicious in their attacks on Democrats and anyone else they view as their mortal enemies. I’m glad to know now that most conservanazi christians view hate as a christian virtue. Or am I getting confused listening to their nazi propaganda?
Conservanazi republikans are subtly racist and overtly anti-feminist. Now, with a black man running for President as a Democrat, the conservanazis will be more overtly racist.
They will be showing their TRUE COLORS.
BTW, buck fush!
I agree with you.
Personally, I believe the Fairness Doctrine would have been a good thing to prevent this from happening. Sadly, Democratic congressman gave into to Corporate America’s demand for greater controversy and Reagan’s (Republican’s) desire for an obvious Right ward tilt to our broadcast media).
This should be on Obama’s agenda if he should get elected (still a distant ‘if’)