This is the vile hatred that the Democrats and leftists are encouraging

shagdrum

Dedicated LVC Member
Joined
Aug 30, 2005
Messages
6,563
Reaction score
41
Location
KS
Threats to AIG: "We Will Get Your Children"
Documents reveal the level of threats against AIG employees

By ANDREW PERGAM

The anger in the threats against AIG executives is palpable.

"Get the bonus, we will get your children," someone identified only as "Jacob the Killer" hauntingly writes in an e-mail.

His is one of dozens of threats against AIG and its employees that were obtained from Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal's office under a Freedom of Information Act request by NBC Connecticut.

Surprisingly, some of those making the threats left their e-mail addresses and phone numbers - making the job of law enforcement officers easier.

Here are some of the highlights (or rather, low-lights). We've cleaned up some of the nasty language, but you can use your imagination:

-- All you motherf***ers should be shot. Thanks for f***ing up our economy then taking our money.

-- Dear Sir: Ya'll should have the balls and come clean and give back the bonuses. I know you would never do this so the gov't ought to take you out back and shoot everyone of you crooked sonofb****es...I would be very careful when I went out side. This is just a warning. If I were ya'll I would be real afraid. Thanks, Bill.

-- I don't hope that bad things happen to the recipients of those bonuses. I really hope that bad things happen to the children and grandchildren of them! Whatever hurts them the most!!

-- You f***ing suck. Paying bonuses to the d*****s that made bad bets losing your company billions of dollars. I want to f***ing puke. Publish the list of those yankee scumbags so some good old southern boys can take care of them.

-- If the bonuses don't stop, it will be very likely that every CEO @ AIG has a bulls-eye on their backs.

-- We will hunt you down. Every last penny. We will hunt your children and we will hunt your conscience. We will do whatever we can to get those people getting the bonuses. Give back the money or kill yourselves.

-- All the executives and their families should be executed with piano wire around their necks --- my greatest hope.

-- You mother-f***ing, c***s***ing, d***l****ers need to be taken out one by one and shot in the head. There's a special place in hell for you pond scum. Watch your backs because someone will come to get you, you can be sure.

-- The Revolution is coming. The family members of your executives are not safe. Your blood will run through the streets in the coming months.

Among the documents is an e-mail from an unknown individual, who may be or may have been an employee: "Just arrived home to several threats on the answering machine. 'Give your money back or else,' terrible things going to happen, etc. Both private caller numbers."

The company presumably provided the threats to support their claim that testifying before a legislative committee Thursday would put their employees at physical risk.

AIG CEO Edward Liddy expressed fear during congressional hearings in Washtington D.C. last week that releasing the names of the executives who scored bonuses would put them at risk of violence from an enraged public.

So far, the only response from citizens angered by the bonus fiasco has come in the form of a small and peaceful protest Saturday in Connecticut at some of the lavish homes of AIG employees. Some executives in Connecticut have hired security firms to guard their homes, the Associated Press reported.

An agreement was reached Wednesday to have Stephen Blake, AIG's head of human resources, testify about the structure of the bonus awards.
 
So, shag, is this an assumption - your headline that you added? This one - This is the vile hatred that the Democrats and leftists are encouraging? The article you posted doesn't make that statement, or support your headline.
 
I think its just people.

Like, if anyone takes this seriously you need to get caught up on the times. I dont really have a link to start you with but a quick google of 4chan in the news will get you started
 
So, shag, is this an assumption - your headline that you added? This one - This is the vile hatred that the Democrats and leftists are encouraging? The article you posted doesn't make that statement, or support your headline.

Who organized the protesters in front of AIG?
Who paid for the buses that toured to the AIG homes?
Who was on those buses that was out to harass the families?

ACORN and the SEIU.
 
So you draw a conclusion about the hateful phone calls and emails from the fact that acorn supplied buses for a peaceful protest?

Once again - the authorities know where those phone calls and emails have come from. It won't be that long before they start cases against those people, and release info. You don't need to jump from A to C, because we will find out 'B' before much longer. Then you can start pointing fingers.

However, aren't you just trying to place blame, and create an atmosphere of 'hate' towards the left, before the evidence is in? And, in this case, there is good hard evidence available. Once again - how about waiting - it is the prudent thing to do. It has happened a lot on this forum. Let's quickly point at the left as being terrible and disgusting, and ride this bandwagon for all we can, because when the evidence is finally in, and it is found not to be a leftist conspiracy, this topic will be long forgotten, but the atmosphere of 'the leftist are to blame' will be continued and fostered.
 
So, shag, is this an assumption - your headline that you added? This one - This is the vile hatred that the Democrats and leftists are encouraging? The article you posted doesn't make that statement, or support your headline.

The article is an example of the outrage the left has promoted through dishonest scapegoating and demonization. While the article itself doesn't connect that outrage to the left, for anyone paying any attention to all this (and not self-delusional), that should not be necessary. However, since you want the connection to be spelled out, here ya go:
  • The Democrats created this mess by creating and passing the legislation that specifically allowed for these bonuses; they passed this with full knowledge and no oversight
  • When the bonuses were paid, Democrats expressed vehement indication that was clearly false because they knew about this all along.
  • They conducted hearings and made sure to publicly demonize there people. The Democrats illegally taxed, threatened to "name names" and generally worked to intimidate and disingenuously marginalize these people through what is basically a witch hunt that the left created.
  • Leftist organizations, like ACORN (who Obama worked for) have seen fit to bus people to these execs houses and protest in front of those homes and at their jobs.
  • Vandalizing has occurred as well death threats as a result of the false indignation of the left here.
  • even internationally, leftist anti-capitalist groups have taken to violent measures to intimidate these people and unjustly punish them.
  • This has caused a number of execs to leave their jobs due, at least in part, to safety concerns. Some of these execs have even received death threats against themselves and their families.

This anger is clearly coming from the left and is diengenuous on the part of the political class in Washington that influences these mobs. When you strip way the pleasant rhetorical veneer of the left, what you get is this ugly irrational vindictive hatred, disingenuous outrage and unethical political opportunism.
 
However, aren't you just trying to place blame, and create an atmosphere of 'hate' towards the left, before the evidence is in? And, in this case, there is good hard evidence available.

No, the evidence is there. The problem is that, once again, your political bias has made you self-delusional. A tendency you have consistently shown and you are now exhibiting by trying to raise the burden of proof, mischaracterize argument to set up strawmen and generally obfuscate so your cherished socialists are not tarnished. You cannot see the truth in front of your face, as usual. :rolleyes:
 
No, the evidence is there. The problem is that, once again, your political bias has made you self-delusional. A tendency you have consistently shown and you are now exhibiting by trying to raise the burden of proof, mischaracterize argument to set up strawmen and generally obfuscate so your cherished socialists are not tarnished. You cannot see the truth in front of your face, as usual. :rolleyes:

Shag - want to point out the evidence in that article? The evidence that points to the Dems and the left? Maybe a bit of cut and paste is in order. ;)
 
Shag - want to point out the evidence in that article? The evidence that points to the Dems and the left? Maybe a bit of cut and paste is in order. ;)

The burden of proof is not on me, it is on you to prove that it is coming from somewhere else. All this hatred is stemming from leftists. You are just unwilling to see it. I have met the "preponderance of evidence" level of proof. You have yet to counter it.

I have shown that this hatred was created and perpetuated by Democrats and leftist organizations, who are literally busing people to these homes. In fact, anti capitalist groups are starting to claim responsibility for the violence.

People on the conservative end of the political spectrum are not anti-capitalist. Even moderate liberals are not too anti-capitalist. Anti-capitalism only comes from the extreme left; it is one of the things that define it.

Answer me this; realistically, where could this anger be stemming from if not the left? The general negative sentiment toward big business and capitalism is a hallmark of the far left. This has Democrat and leftist fingerprints all over it. Who else could it be? Or are you gonna try and cloud the issue so you can dishonestly (as usual) claim that we can't tell?

The article doesn't need to point explicitly to the left for it to be considered an example of the hatred coming from the left. I have already connected the dots between the left and the anger being directed at AIG in post #6 from other sources. I will repeat it for you in this post:
  • The Democrats created this mess by creating and passing the legislation that specifically allowed for these bonuses; they passed this with full knowledge and no oversight
  • When the bonuses were paid, Democrats expressed vehement indication that was clearly false because they knew about this all along.
  • They conducted hearings and made sure to publicly demonize there people. The Democrats illegally taxed, threatened to "name names" and generally worked to intimidate and disingenuously marginalize these people through what is basically a witch hunt that the left created.
  • Leftist organizations, like ACORN (who Obama worked for) have seen fit to bus people to these execs houses and protest in front of those homes and at their jobs.
  • Vandalizing has occurred as well death threats as a result of the false indignation of the left here.
  • even internationally, leftist anti-capitalist groups have taken to violent measures to intimidate these people and unjustly punish them.
  • This has caused a number of execs to leave their jobs due, at least in part, to safety concerns. Some of these execs have even received death threats against themselves and their families.

The article only serves as a prime example of the anger directed toward AIG. Other sources have already shown that the anger stems from leftist groups and actions Democrats in both the legislative and executive branch took.

Trying to limit the sources to the article alone is the type of dishonest and deceptive arguing tactic that we have come to expect of you. You are in denial and are trying every which way to rationalize that denial. :rolleyes:
 
Tsk tsk, fox, here you come whining as usual, but what you're defending is indefensible.
 
Always nice to see a christian take the high road. Really inspires.
Ah, another whiner. As though you're looking for inspiration. :rolleyes:

Are you going to attack my Christianity every time you respond to me, even if the thread doesn't address it? If so, then you're a troll.

I'm more of the old school of Christianity, you know, "An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth."

If you can't handle it, then be sure to scurry away with your tail between your legs.
 
The article is an example of the outrage the left has promoted through dishonest scapegoating and demonization. While the article itself doesn't connect that outrage to the left, for anyone paying any attention to all this (and not self-delusional), that should not be necessary. However, since you want the connection to be spelled out, here ya go:


  • The burden of proof is not on me, it is on you to prove that it is coming from somewhere else. All this hatred is stemming from leftists. You are just unwilling to see it. I have met the "preponderance of evidence" level of proof. You have yet to counter it.

    :bsflag:

    You claim the threats against AIG employees are comming from the left and they want to see it and encourage it.
    Its up to you to prove it you posted it.
    Good luck :rolleyes:
 
Shag, within that article is nothing that supports the headline - or am I missing something? I am asking for proof, within the article, that supports your headline. Headlines usually are tied to the article - the actual headline for the article is what you should have used... The burden of proof is on you - you were the one that created the new 'headline' for the article. You need to show where, within the article, that statement is supported. Otherwise you are just speculating - and poorly at that. There has been absolutely no proof that the phone calls or emails were put forth by the far left.

Shag you are playing connect the dots - by saying there are only two dots - the phone calls/ emails as one, and the 'left' as the other.

There are lots of 'dot' possibilities.

The calls and emails could easily be coming from people who are out of a job. Perhaps people who are angry with wall street in general. People who have taken pay cuts or have seen their own bonuses disappear within the companies that they work at. People who have done a good job, and have never gotten a bonus. Perhaps this is a class war, and not a political war - they are very different. There are plenty of good republicans who voted for McCain/Palin who have lost their jobs as well. Who are just as angry with what they see as unjust bonuses.

Oh, above - this article is about a British problem - your first link... about the anti capitalists

Haven't you and I both said that the bonuses had to be given because they were were allowed, under contracts, that were in place as of March of 2008 - so the Congress had to allow the bonuses to happen - it would have been illegal for them to have voided them. I don't understand this whole line of thought.

The article only serves as a prime example of the anger directed toward AIG. Other sources have already shown that the anger stems from leftist groups and actions Democrats in both the legislative and executive branch took.

Oh, the Republicans are on the taxing bonuses bandwagon too... Regarding the bill that is in the senate...
But the sponsorship of Iowa Republican Sen. Charles Grassley, the ranking minority member of the Senate Finance Committee, gives the measure strong momentum. "Using bailout dollars for bonuses after companies have been run into the ground adds insult to injury against taxpayers," Mr. Grassley said when introducing his bill, co-written with Senate Finance Chairman Max Baucus of Montana. - from the WSJ

And in the house - almost 1/2 (85 for, 87 against) of the Republicans voted for taxing bonuses.

Shag, the article you posted doesn't place blame. You are reading between the lines once again in your never ending quest to besmear the left.

What is wrong with waiting to see who is to blame for the phone calls and emails? I know what is wrong - because then we might find out it is angry people who have lost their jobs - across party lines.

But, rather than looking at this as a political problem, why not look at it as a class problem? Don't you think that this could be caused by the disparity of the haves and have nots? Obviously the 85 Republicans in the House - and the republican co-author of the bill in the Senate (and additional co-sponsors) are looking at this bonus tax as something that their voters will identify with positively. Could it be that they have people across party lines who are angry with the bonuses?

There are 'poor' and out of work Republicans too. Angry ones.

Oh, Foss, Exodus - we were suppose to discount that 'old law' right? Sort of goes with thou shalt not suffer a witch to live... heck they are in following chapters - eye for an eye - 21:24 - witch - 22:18 -
 
Joey,

I propose you make a "Democrat & Liberal hate/evil/villainy" thread and make it a sticky, be easier than having so many of these types as individual threads. Just an idea.
 
You claim the threats against AIG employees are comming from the left and they want to see it and encourage it.
Its up to you to prove it you posted it.
Good luck :rolleyes:

Now you are distorting what I say as well!! Not to surprising considering the source. I never said the the threats were coming from the left. Read the title of the thread again; "This is the vile hatred that the Democrats and leftists are encouraging". I never tied the specific actions to the left; I only tied them to the populist anger the left is encouraging. I did also point out one specific example of leftist anti-capitalists taking admitting to taking violent action.

As to proving it, I did prove the sentiment stems from the left in both posts 6 and 9.

As usual, all you can offer are distortions, smears and lies. :rolleyes:
 
Now you are distorting what I say as well!! Not to surprising considering the source. I never said the the threats were coming from the left. Read the title of the thread again; "This is the vile hatred that the Democrats and leftists are encouraging". I never tied the specific actions to the left; I only tied them to the populist anger the left is encouraging. I did also point out one specific example of leftist anti-capitalists taking admitting to taking violent action.

As to proving it, I did prove the sentiment stems from the left in both posts 6 and 9.

As usual, all you can offer are distortions, smears and lies. :rolleyes:

Tell me Shag what is the point of the thread ?
Just to smear the left ?
Most people are upset over AIG mess.
You love to say how the left smears...then you post this crap.
Again I say :bsflag:

The point of the whole thread is to smear...
 
Shag, within that article is nothing that supports the headline - or am I missing something? I am asking for proof, within the article, that supports your headline.

I am not trying to prove the notion that, " This is the vile hatred that the Democrats and leftists are encouraging". I am accepting it as a forgone conclusion and simply citing this as an example of that hatred in action. You asked how that is connected to the left, and I spelled it out for you. The dots are connected.

Now you are trying move the goalposts and say that the only acceptable evidence has to come from within the article itself. Why does it have to come from within the article itself? Give a logical reason, because this is pretty obviously a fallacious argument:
Moving the goalpost, also known as raising the bar, is an informal logically fallacious argument in which evidence presented in response to a specific claim is dismissed and some other (often greater) evidence is demanded.​

Shag you are playing connect the dots - by saying there are only two dots - the phone calls/ emails as one, and the 'left' as the other.

No, you are mischaracterizing me. I am saying that these threats stem from sentiment ginned up by the left. If you wanna view these as "dots", you have three dots; the leftists ginning up populist anger through duplicitous means and due to distorted reasons , the people duped by those means, and the threats.

Oh, the Republicans are on the taxing bonuses bandwagon too... Regarding the bill that is in the senate...
But the sponsorship of Iowa Republican Sen. Charles Grassley, the ranking minority member of the Senate Finance Committee, gives the measure strong momentum. "Using bailout dollars for bonuses after companies have been run into the ground adds insult to injury against taxpayers," Mr. Grassley said when introducing his bill, co-written with Senate Finance Chairman Max Baucus of Montana. - from the WSJ

And in the house - almost 1/2 (85 for, 87 against) of the Republicans voted for taxing bonuses.

And I have said numerous time that anyone voting for these unconstitutional taxes, regardless of political party, should be imediately removed from office.

The fact that some republicans are foolish enough and/or cowardly enough to support this doesn't mean that the sentiment is not being ginned up by the left. The most vocal people out there on this are leftist; Fwank, Pelosi, Ried, Schumer, Biden, Obama, etc., etc. The organizations pushing this are leftists, in fact, mostly tied to ACORN.

But, rather than looking at this as a political problem, why not look at it as a class problem?

Because that is not what this is. The leftist are working to turn it into that. It is dishonest propaganda technique called class warfare.

To characterize it as a struggle between the "have's and the have not's" is to create a false premise. It assumes that wealth is "zero sum", which history has shown to be false. While the rich get richer, the poor get richer as well (at a slower rate), at least in a free market society. The rich are not taking money from the poor, they are creating more wealth which inevitably trickles down to the lower classes. When the rich suffer economically, everyone suffers economically.

The left is actively working to drive a wedge between the rich and the lower classes to bring about this type of populist anger so they can grab more power in the form of taxes and regulations. Their view is based on flawed and disproven Marxist assumptions, but it fans their elitist egos by centralizing power in their hands while making them feel noble that they are doing something to better society.

C.S. Lewis wrote:
...a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. IT would be better to live under robber barons then under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own goodwill torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.​
 
Tell me Shag what is the point of the thread ?
Just to smear the left ?
Most people are upset over AIG mess.
You love to say how the left smears...then you post this crap.
The point of the whole thread is to smear...

Smear, in this sense, means spreading dishonest or unsubstantiated claims. There is nothing dishonest or unverified in what I have said or argued. However, you have distorted my argument, which is dishonest and then implied that I didn't prove my argument when I had in both post #6 and post #9.
 
Oh, Foss, Exodus - we were suppose to discount that 'old law' right? Sort of goes with thou shalt not suffer a witch to live... heck they are in following chapters - eye for an eye - 21:24 - witch - 22:18 -

I forgot that Fossten has his own version of Christianity where you can pick and choose the bits you like and conveniently forget the bits you don't. We already know that Catholics and Mormons are not Christians. I expect the same holds true for Russian Orthodox, Greek Orthodox, The Armenian Church and many others. Maybe Fossten and a couple of his buddies are the only real Christians.
 
Oh, Foss, Exodus - we were suppose to discount that 'old law' right? Sort of goes with thou shalt not suffer a witch to live... heck they are in following chapters - eye for an eye - 21:24 - witch - 22:18 -
Once again, you show your gross ignorance of the Bible. :rolleyes:
 
Once again, you show your gross ignorance of the Bible. :rolleyes:

King James Version:

Passage Exodus 21:24:
24 Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot,


Passage Exodus 22:18:
18 Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live.

So your group have their own version of the Bible. That's convenient.
 
I am not trying to prove the notion that, " This is the vile hatred that the Democrats and leftists are encouraging". I am accepting it as a forgone conclusion and simply citing this as an example of that hatred in action. You asked how that is connected to the left, and I spelled it out for you. The dots are connected.
Shag - you have to prove to me that the left is encouraging vile hatred - I don't accept it as a forgone conclusion. Do you have the quotes where the left is encouraging hateful phone calls? Threatening emails?
Now you are trying move the goalposts and say that the only acceptable evidence has to come from within the article itself. Why does it have to come from within the article itself? Give a logical reason, because this is pretty obviously a fallacious argument:
And as far as coming from the article - yes it does shag. You posted the article as I guess as some sort of 'proof' regarding your headline. Or else, answer me - why did you post it? In hopes that people would associate the article with the left? Nowhere in the article is the left or Democrats mentioned at all. How does it support your 'assumption' stated in 'your' headline?

And, in order to save space, please do not define all your college boy points of debate - I do know them. They are crutches used by students, and in this case do not further the debate. I am not moving the goalposts - you provided the goalpost in your headline - and the article failed to support your headline. You fell short in meeting the minimum requirement, show in the article where you support your postulation as stated in the headline.

No, you are mischaracterizing me. I am saying that these threats stem from sentiment ginned up by the left. If you wanna view these as "dots", you have three dots; the leftists ginning up populist anger through duplicitous means and due to distorted reasons , the people duped by those means, and the threats.

Heck, I thought that Inhofe (R-OK) did a good job 'ginning up' the people...
How can you give out bonuses when the US taxpayer has to rescues you from sudden failure? What are these bonuses for exactly? I understand bonuses to be a reward for a job well done. It’s pretty clear that when you get bailed out by taxpayers, you’re not doing a good job. What could possibly justify these bonuses?

I normally would not support having the government try and micromanage pay packages in any industry. But these are not normal times. AIG has received almost $180 billion--$180 billion—in US taxpayer bailouts. The US government owns 80% of the company. How the executives as AIG do not get the fact that these are not normal times is absolutely beyond me.

... I don’t know how someone at AIG giving out or receiving a bonus right now can look themselves in the mirror, but I and my colleagues in Congress can look you in the eye right now and say, if we don’t see action on this and action on it soon from the Administration, you can be sure that we will do all we can to right this wrong and get these bonuses back. But above all, we need the people to demand a change in course when it comes to the financial rescue approach we've been taking.

You point to the left as creating an atmosphere. The left didn't have to manufacture anything shag - the modern day robber barons have made the reality.

The left is actively working to drive a wedge between the rich and the lower classes to bring about this type of populist anger so they can grab more power in the form of taxes and regulations. Their view is based on flawed and disproven Marxist assumptions, but it fans their elitist egos by centralizing power in their hands while making them feel noble that they are doing something to better society.

Shag - the left doesn't have to drive a wedge between the haves and have nots. The 'haves' are doing a great job on all their own.

We are becoming a nation of haves and have nots. That causes revolutions. Ones that topple financial oligarchies. This isn't about politics at this point - and there are plenty on both sides of the fence that realize that. That is what the 50% of the Republicans were doing when they voted for the bonus tax. They are seeing the dividing of this issue not along political lines, but along economic lines.

Look at your robber barons shag - they created a class war - and unions were built. A revolution. The only way to battle the concentration of wealth was numbers. The progressive movement was created.

So, on the heels of deregulation, junk economics, wealth that was created on 'wealth', will there be another revolution? With unemployment on the rise, and wages being cut, the 'working class' is beginning to look a little like the working class during the era of the robber barons.

For most of the past century, CEOs earned roughly 20 times as much as the average employee.... Today, however, average public company CEO compensation is 400 times that of the average employee

And I have said numerous time that anyone voting for these unconstitutional taxes, regardless of political party, should be imediately removed from office.

Got the constitutional source for this shag? I would like to see it. Bill of Attainder doesn't work - the number of people involved is too big, there isn't a specific, small 'guilty' group named. Ex post facto only works in criminal cases. Impairment of contract - state level only - not federal.

it is wrong - but I don't believe it is unconstitutional. I really would like to see your constitutional source.

Ah, Foss - "If you find yourself in a hole, (then) stop digging."
 

Members online

Back
Top