A Tweet is Worth a Million Words


A picture may be worth a thousand words but 140 characters may be worth far more than that in displaying just how deranged a right-wing blowhard like Pat Dollard is. Dollard is a former Hollywood agent turned alleged documentary filmmaker and blogger (at Breitbart, among other places). Shortly after the Ft. Hood shooting spree began, when no one had a clue who was behind it or why, he tweeted this:

dollard

Let’s try this on for size:

“If there is even one more bombing of an abortion clinic or one more abortion doctor killed, then time for Americans to start slaughtering Christians in the streets, all of them.”

Nope, still fucking disgusting. Despite massive criticism, he has not backed down a bit. Not that it would matter if he did. He said it and he meant it. Because calls for genocide are totally reasonable.

Comments

  1. eric says

    Despite massive criticism, he has not backed down a bit.

    Given that he hasn’t actually done what he’s called for (thank goodness!), he’s either a coward or insincere blowhard on top of everything else.

  2. raven says

    How about, “If there is one more rightwingnut christofascist act of terror, we slaughter Patrick Dollard in the street”?

    2/3’s of all terrorist attacks or plots in the USA since 9/11 have involved right wingnuts and/or fundie xians.

    The last one was that FBI foiled plot in Texas a week or two ago.

    Since it is guaranteed that there will be another one sooner or later, I’d say Patrick Dollard’s lifespan would be measured in months at the most.

    Not that this is going to happen or be a good idea. We have other ways of dealing with them. It’s called the rule of law and involves police, courts, lawyers, and prisons.

  3. D. C. Sessions says

    Because calls for genocide are totally reasonable.

    Like everything else on the Right, it’s strictly a matter of whose ox is gored. Genocide by the Wrong People is an abomination; genocide by God’s People is a Holy Crusade. Likewise speech (mine is Free Speech, yours is blasphemy, sedition, or suppression of my Free Speech) etc.

  4. says

    Like everything else on the Right, it’s strictly a matter of whose ox is gored. Genocide by the Wrong People is an abomination; genocide by God’s People is a Holy Crusade. Likewise speech (mine is Free Speech, yours is blasphemy, sedition, or suppression of my Free Speech) etc.

    Also, theocracy. Sharia law is horrible; Canon or Biblical law, super.

  5. Alverant says

    Between this and Elmore you have the right wing fantasy about mass killings. It’s parallel to their persecution complex in that if they don’t claims to be soon-to-be-victims of it, they’re advocating it.

  6. says

    Given that he hasn’t actually done what he’s called for (thank goodness!), he’s either a coward or insincere blowhard on top of everything else.

    Well, this most recent Fort Hood shooting wasn’t carried out by a Muslim, but rather a white guy born in Puerto Rico. Perhaps the fact that Dollard hasn’t began slaughtering all white people or Puerto Ricans means he’s insincere.

    Or, perhaps the fact that he blamed Muslims before the shooter’s identity was even known means he’s a bigot looking for an excuse to persecute a disfavored minority.

  7. Randomfactor says

    Sounds like, under “pre-emptive” doctrine, the Muslims would be justified in taking him out.

    Oh, that’s only valid for OUR side?

  8. says

    “Or, perhaps the fact that he blamed Muslims before the shooter’s identity was even known means he’s a bigot looking for an excuse to persecute a disfavored minority.”

    Since when do bigots need an excuse?

  9. pacal says

    If this asshole is sincere than he should realize that incitement to genocide is a crime under international law.

  10. anubisprime says

    As disgusting and putrid as his tweet is the real worry would be…how many right wing christo-fascists are polishing their weapons and oiling the barrel cos when the good lawd’ calls you have to be there.

    As with all these fuckwads…it is not what truly repugnant toxic bile they spew up…it is who agrees with them!

  11. Synfandel says

    I realize that Americans are pretty hard core about their freedom of speech, but is this sort of exhortation to mass murder actually legal?

  12. Kevin Kehres says

    @12: As long as it’s general blowhardedness like this…yes.

    If he was exhorting specific followers with a specific plan to kill a specific person — conspiracy to commit murder. Especially if a follower actually attempted to follow the plan, whether or not it succeeded.

  13. laurentweppe says

    The worst (or funniest, it depends how broken your irony meter is) is that Dollard is still lying. He claims that his genocidal urges are a reaction of islamist terrorism, while in truth, it’s a reaction to the fact that he’s not allowed to treat brown skinned immigrants like cattle and fucktoys like the robber barons of old he idolizes.

  14. Synfandel says

    So, urging your buddy, Jim, to murder, say, Dave Chappelle because he’s a Muslim is illegal, but urging millions of people to murder millions of other people because they’re Muslims is protected speech. Got it.

  15. D. C. Sessions says

    Well, this most recent Fort Hood shooting wasn’t carried out by a Muslim, but rather a white guy born in Puerto Rico.

    Whatever — he’s brown.

    And as for “international law” — that doesn’t apply to us. American Exceptionalism, remember?

  16. caseloweraz says

    Dollard’s tweet: If there is even one more act of Muslim terrorism, it is then time for Americans to begin slaughtering Muslims in the streets, all of them.”

    I notice he doesn’t restrict himself to acts on American soil — which only makes it worse. He could have fitted that into 140 characters, with a little thought.

    Of course, the whole point of Twitter is immediacy; nuance and careful composition have little value. This is why, although I have a Twitter account, I have never used it. (However, unlike the Gollux, I have been known to titter.)

    Dollard, thou art a dullard.

  17. caseloweraz says

    Synfandel: So, urging your buddy, Jim, to murder, say, Dave Chappelle because he’s a Muslim is illegal, but urging millions of people to murder millions of other people because they’re Muslims is protected speech. Got it.

    Situations like this are what prompted the comment, “The law is an ass.”

    Or, as Heinlein put it, “Straining at gnats and swallowing camels” is among the first things taught in law school. (Can’t remember the entire quote. It refers to Teapot Dome — Secretary Fall being convicted of taking a bribe that Doheny was acquitted of paying, or vice versa.)

  18. says

    “If there is even one more bombing of an abortion clinic or one more abortion doctor killed, then time for Americans to start slaughtering Christians in the streets, all of them.”

    You should Tweet this and see if it gets Colbertized.

  19. says

    Synfandel said:

    So, urging your buddy, Jim, to murder, say, Dave Chappelle because he’s a Muslim is illegal, but urging millions of people to murder millions of other people because they’re Muslims is protected speech. Got it.

    Yep. Presumably the rationale is that the former is actually theoretically likely to result in an actual crime, whereas the latter is both vague and impossible for the speaker to actually accomplish and so is judged to be comparatively harmless.

    Which it is. It tells you that Pat Dollard is an insufferable bigot; not that he’s likely to become a murderer or directly cause someone else to become one.

    Death threats aren’t an exception to freedom of speech because they’re odious speech– they’re an exception because they’re death threats.

  20. Trebuchet says

    Well, this most recent Fort Hood shooting wasn’t carried out by a Muslim, but rather a white guy born in Puerto Rico.

    I’ve actually been quite surprised not to have seen nutjobs accusing him of being an illegal immigrant. Probably just not looking hard enough.

  21. says

    Whatever — he’s brown.

    Actually, if you look at pictures of him, he’s indistinguishable from the average white guy.

    Not that this will probably make any difference in wingnuttia. They seem to think that genetics are so powerful that even nationality and religion are coded for in your genes — and they absolutely determine your behavior.

  22. sinned34 says

    “If there is even one more bombing of an abortion clinic or one more abortion doctor killed, then time for Americans to start slaughtering Christians in the streets, all of them.”

    Ed, you should know that is exactly what wingnuts hear anytime a liberal calls for greater gun control measures, requests a solution for financial inequality, or asks to pass the salt.

  23. D. C. Sessions says

    Actually, if you look at pictures of him, he’s indistinguishable from the average white guy.

    $HERSELF has blue eyes and light skin. Before an illness thirty-plus years ago, she was a redhead. Under Jim Crow, she’s black thanks to a runaway slave in the family tree (not mentioning the ancestors who were in Montana before Lewis and Clark came through.)

    It takes more dilution to erase spiritual “brown” than it does to fade the pigmentation.

  24. dan4 says

    Dollard’s, ahem, “solution” here indicates that he only has a problem with the “Muslim” part of “Muslim terrorism.”

  25. says

    “This could have been written by a colonial administrator or ideologue 60 years ago, 100 years ago,…”

    Tweeted by Circumcisionless Maximus circa 30CE :

    “The next time a wall of King Herodt’s palace is found covered with “The Peoples Front of Judea” graffiti, we should slaughter every member of the Judean Peoples’ Front.”

    “Dollard, thou art a dullard.”

    He would need several years of remedial instruction to reach the level of “dullard”.

  26. StevoR : Free West Papua, free Tibet, let the Chagossians return! says

    The statement on Twitter calling for slaughtering Muslims is wrong. Wrong, wrong WRONG!,

    However, given the history and past events and cases of Jihadist terorism such as 9-11, the Boston bombings, the Bali bombings, the attacks on the Kenyan embassy’s, the butchering of Lee Rigby with a car and machetes on the streets of London, and other Jihadist atrocties ad nauseam .. it is understandable (NOT justifiable , understandable) as an emotional reaction of the rage and fear that terroism evokes.

    Among a small set of people terrorism seems to inspire something akin to Stockholm syndrome. (That set is prominent on left wing blogs like FTB.)

    Among most people (the court’s proverbial woman on the Clapham bus or reasonable person) – terrorism evokes not so much the Terror they seek although some of that too but well-justified fury and loathing of the ideology that drives approximately two -thirds of the world’s (major) terrorism.

    This tweet goes way too far and is wrong – and not really seriously intended I suspect – but a heat of the moment expression of emotion vented, of the hate and loathing for Islam that Islamic terrorists generate by their own appalling bloodthirsty atrocities.

    Its a human emotional reaction and I’m pretty sure for all the sanctimony expressed by so many, a lot of y’all will have felt at least something similar although you’d no doubt phrase it better being the ethical paragons y’all are.

    Mea culpa : I know I’ve felt & made the mistake of expressing my similar emotions in the past. As you may have noticed I no longer do so or would say stuff like that anymore.

  27. StevoR : Free West Papua, free Tibet, let the Chagossians return! says

    PS. Oh and have younoticed I said that tweet was WRONG?

    Because although the emotion towards Jihadists is understandable as a human reaction, it isn’t logical or fair to the majority of non-violent non-Jihadist Muslims.

  28. StevoR : Free West Papua, free Tibet, let the Chagossians return! says

    @14. laurentweppe

    The worst (or funniest, it depends how broken your irony meter is) is that Dollard is still lying. He claims that his genocidal urges are a reaction of islamist terrorism, while in truth, it’s a reaction to the fact that he’s not allowed to treat brown skinned immigrants like cattle and fucktoys like the robber barons of old he idolizes.

    Just how precisely do *you* know that he’s lying and that’s what he really thinks laurentweppe?

    Are you telepathic and able to judge other people’s souls and minds from a distance or suchlike crap eh?

    How else do you know he’s supposedly not telling the truth about what he thinks and why?

    What extraordinary evidence do you have for your extraordinary claim there? Citation badly needed.

  29. says

    StevoR said:

    Its a human emotional reaction and I’m pretty sure for all the sanctimony expressed by so many, a lot of y’all will have felt at least something similar although you’d no doubt phrase it better being the ethical paragons y’all are.

    If by “human emotional reaction” you mean that a homo sapiens said it…..well, sure. But what of that?

    The rest of that sentence is absolute bullshit.

    It’s not “understandable,” and it’s not very likely at all that “a lot,” let alone many, let alone a few, of the people who post here regularly have ever felt that genocide would be a good idea.

    Stop projecting, Steve.

  30. StevoR : Free West Papua, free Tibet, let the Chagossians return! says

    @ ^ Gretchen :

    If by “human emotional reaction” you mean that a homo sapiens said it…..well, sure. But what of that?

    That its a natural human emotional response that instinctively occurs to many – if not all of us – and so maybe is not worth quite so much OTT outrage and condemnation. Its wrong and OTT* itself thus Pat Dollard should have expressed his anger at Muslim Jihadist terrorists better but still.

    The rest of that sentence is absolute bullshit. It’s not “understandable,” …

    Yes it is. Just because I disagree with you doesn’t make me wrong here.

    .. and it’s not very likely at all that “a lot,” let alone many, let alone a few, of the people who post here regularly have ever felt that genocide would be a good idea.

    You missed the point. It wasn’t a serious advocation for genocide but instead a figure of speech expressing fury at something that people do – and should find provokes rage. Its like when a parent says “I’ll kill that kid ” when xe does something awfully wrong or infuriating – it doesn’t seriously mean the child’s life in danger just that the parent is really mad at them.

    You might be right about how many here feel such anger – or maybe not. I see plenty of “rage”and “hulk smash” type responses to various news items and comments here. I doubt an accurate survey could or will be conducted of FTB readers and commenters to quantify their anger and thoughts it provokes so its probably impossible to prove one way or the other.

    * OTT = Over The Top, disproportionate.

Leave a Reply