- Spitfire List - http://spitfirelist.com -

FTR #1011 Miscellaneous Articles and Updates

Dave Emory’s entire life­time of work is avail­able on a flash dri­ve that can be obtained HERE [1]. The new dri­ve is a 32-giga­byte dri­ve that is cur­rent as of the pro­grams and arti­cles post­ed by the fall of 2017. The new dri­ve (avail­able for a tax-deductible con­tri­bu­tion of $65.00 or more.)

WFMU-FM is pod­cast­ing For The Record–You can sub­scribe to the pod­cast HERE [2].

You can sub­scribe to e‑mail alerts from Spitfirelist.com HERE [3].

You can sub­scribe to RSS feed from Spitfirelist.com HERE [3].

You can sub­scribe to the com­ments made on pro­grams and posts–an excel­lent source of infor­ma­tion in, and of, itself HERE [4].

This broad­cast was record­ed in one, 60-minute seg­ment [5].

[6]

Pad­dock­’s Weapons

Intro­duc­tion: This broad­cast updates and high­lights pre­vi­ous top­ics of dis­cus­sion, focus­ing large­ly on online/Alt-Right/­Nazi fas­cism and some of the malev­o­lent com­mu­ni­ties that coa­lesce around var­i­ous ide­o­log­i­cal man­i­fes­ta­tions of that phe­nom­e­non.

There has been lit­tle pub­lic recog­ni­tion that many of the mass shoot­ers whose activ­i­ties have dom­i­nat­ed much of the news cycle in recent years,have been immersed in one form or extrem­ist far right ide­ol­o­gy or anoth­er.

The release of ~1,200 pages of doc­u­ments [7] relat­ed to the Las Vegas shoot­ing reveals that Stephen Pad­dock appears to have been “a sov­er­eign cit­i­zen. [8]” . . . . In the doc­u­ments, those who encoun­tered gun­man Stephen Pad­dock say he expressed con­spir­a­to­r­i­al, anti-gov­ern­ment beliefs char­ac­ter­is­tic of the far right . . . . But tan­ta­liz­ing­ly, peo­ple who encoun­tered Pad­dock before his shoot­ing say that he expressed con­spir­a­to­r­i­al, anti-gov­ern­ment beliefs, which are char­ac­ter­is­tic of the far right. . . .”

Pad­dock­’s actions are not unex­pect­ed for some­one with his ide­o­log­i­cal mind­set: [8] ” . . . . In sur­veys con­duct­ed in 2014 and 2015, rep­re­sen­ta­tives of US law-enforce­ment ranked the risk of ter­ror­ism [9] from the sov­er­eign-cit­i­zen move­ment high­er than the risk from Islam­ic extrem­ism [10].”

Naz­i/alt-right cul­ture was a pri­ma­ry influ­ence [11] on accused San­ta Fe (Texas) gun­man Dim­itrios Pagourtzis. ” . . . . Dim­itrios Pagourtzis, the sus­pect­ed gun­man who opened fire at a Texas high school [12] on Fri­day morn­ing, appar­ent­ly post­ed pho­tos of neo-Nazi iconog­ra­phy online, accord­ing to social media accounts flagged by class­mates and reviewed by The Dai­ly Beast. . . . Oth­er images on Pagourtzis’ now-delet­ed Face­book page sug­gest a pos­si­ble inter­est in white suprema­cist groups. Pagourtzis uploaded a num­ber of T‑shirts that fea­ture Vapor­wave-style designs. Vapor­wave, a music and design move­ment, has spawned a relat­ed move­ment called Fash­wave, which bor­rows the same aes­thet­ic but applies them to neo-Nazi sub­jects. Pagourtzis’ Face­book head­er image was the cov­er of an album by musi­cian Per­tur­ba­tor. Perturbator’s music has been co-opt­ed by mem­bers of the Fash­wave move­ment, Buz­zFeed pre­vi­ous­ly report­ed [13]. Neo-Nazi web­site The Dai­ly Stormer fre­quent­ly includes Perturbator’s music in “Fash­wave Fri­days” posts. . . . .”

Ini­tial press reports [14] about the San­ta Fe shoot­ing dis­cuss pos­si­ble accom­plices of Pagourtzis. Was he part of a group of some kind? “. . . . On Fri­day, author­i­ties intend­ed to ques­tion two oth­er peo­ple: One was at the scene and had “sus­pi­cious reac­tions,” accord­ing to the gov­er­nor, and anoth­er had drawn the scruti­ny of inves­ti­ga­tors. . . .”

Pagourtzis, as we saw above, had tak­en to wear­ing a trench coat, even in 90 degree weath­er. Press reports have described him as a “copy-cat” killer, hav­ing imi­tat­ed Dylan Kle­bold and Eric Har­ris of Columbine shoot­ing fame. [15](Pagourtzis was too young to have mem­o­ries of the inci­dent, though he may well have absorbed infor­ma­tion about the Columbine per­pe­tra­tors.)

[16]

Dylan Kle­bold’s Uni­verse

The media have, for the most part, not men­tioned [17] that Har­ris and Kle­bold were heav­i­ly influ­enced by Nazi cul­ture. . . . . Nine­teen days before they were to grad­u­ate, Har­ris and Kle­bold seemed insep­a­ra­ble and trou­ble­some. In Columbine’s hall­ways, they spoke bro­ken Ger­man and referred often to ‘4–20,’ Hitler’s birth­day and the day they chose for their assault. . . . Some Columbine stu­dents said the vio­lent side of Har­ris and Kle­bold became more obvi­ous in recent months. They became obses­sive­ly inter­est­ed in World War II, Nazi imagery, Adolf Hitler. John House, 17, a Columbine senior, told reporters that when he went bowl­ing with Kle­bold, ‘when he would do some­thing good, he would shout ‘Heil Hitler’ and throw up his hand. It just made every­one mad.’ . . . .”

[18]In FTR #995 [19], we exam­ined the Atom­waf­fen Neo-Nazi group. Atom­waf­fen mem­ber Andrew Oneschuk was about to join Ukraine’s neo-Nazi Azov Bat­tal­ion [20]. ” . . . . . . . Andrew, who was one-eighth Ukrain­ian, took to the cause, chat­ting with fight­ers and their allies. He began for­mu­lat­ing a plan to join the Azov Bat­tal­ion, a noto­ri­ous­ly bru­tal band of inter­na­tion­al fight­ers help­ing in the resis­tance against the Rus­sians. . . . Andrew took it fur­ther, even­tu­al­ly adopt­ing the online han­dle “Borovikov,” after a famous Russ­ian neo-Nazi gang leader. That spring, he hung an SS flag in his bed­room as well as a giant swasti­ka. . . .”

Online net­work­ing between resent­ful, sex-deprived men who call them­selves “incels” (a con­trac­tion of  “invol­un­tary celi­bates”) over­lap Naz­i/Alt-Right ele­ments. [21] The ide­o­log­i­cal col­li­sion of the online “incels” and the #MeToo move­ment may well gen­er­ate some tru­ly patho­log­i­cal vio­lence. . . . . The alt-right, right-wing pop­ulism, men’s rights groups and a renewed white suprema­cist move­ment have cap­i­tal­ized on many white men’s feel­ing of loss in recent years. The groups vary in how they diag­nose society’s ills and whom they blame, but they pro­vide a sense of mean­ing and place for their fol­low­ers. And as dif­fer­ent extrem­ist groups con­nect online, they draw on one another’s mem­ber­ship bases, tac­tics and world­views, allow­ing mem­ber­ship in one group to become a gate­way to oth­er extrem­ist ide­olo­gies as well. Today, for exam­ple, posts on Incel.me, an incel forum, debate join­ing forces with the alt-right and argue that Jews are to blame for incels’ oppres­sion. On one thread [22], users fan­ta­sized that if they were dic­ta­tors, they would not only cre­ate harems and enslave women, but also ‘gas the Jews.’ . . . . By divid­ing the world into us-ver­sus-them and describ­ing vast injus­tice at the hands of the sup­pos­ed­ly pow­er­ful, these groups, experts say, can prime adher­ents for vio­lence. . . .”

[23]

Com­bat hel­mets of the Azov Bat­tal­ion.

Incel cul­ture is metas­ta­siz­ing into “lone-wolf”/leaderless resis­tance ter­ror­ism. [24]” . . . . In 2014, a gam­ing award cer­e­mo­ny set to hon­or the fem­i­nist crit­ic Ani­ta Sar­keesian received a bomb threat [25]; an anony­mous harass­er threat­ened to det­o­nate a device unless her award was rescind­ed. Before Milo Yiannopou­los was a well-known alt-right fig­ure, fem­i­nists knew him as one of the pri­ma­ry archi­tects of Gamer­gate, a move­ment of young men who harassed and threat­ened women in the videogam­ing indus­try. Two fans of Mr. Yiannopou­los were charged with shoot­ing a pro­test­er [26] out­side of one of his speech­es. . . .”

Nazi killer Anders Breivik [27] embod­ied the over­lap between Alt-Right white suprema­cy and insti­tu­tion­al­ized misog­y­ny: ” . . . . On July 22, Breivik slaugh­tered 77 of his coun­try­men, most of them teenagers, in Oslo and at a sum­mer camp on the island of Utøya, because he thought they or their par­ents were the kinds of ‘polit­i­cal­ly cor­rect’ lib­er­als who were enabling Mus­lim immi­gra­tion. But Breivik was almost as vol­u­ble on the sub­jects of fem­i­nism, the fam­i­ly, and fathers’ rights as he was on Islam. ‘The most direct threat to the fam­i­ly is ‘divorce on demand,’ ’ he wrote in the man­i­festo he post­ed just before he began his dead­ly spree. ‘The sys­tem must be reformed so that the father will be award­ed cus­tody rights by default.’ The manos­phere lit up. Said one approv­ing poster at The Spear­head, an online men’s rights mag­a­zine for the ‘defense of our­selves, our fam­i­lies and our fel­low men’: ‘What could be more ‘an eye for an eye’ than to kill the chil­dren of those who were so will­ing to destroy men’s fam­i­lies and destroy the home­land of men?’ . . . .”

The “psy­cho-polit­i­cal” polar­iza­tion of the #MeToo move­ment and the “incels” misog­y­nist com­mu­ni­ty holds dev­as­tat­ing poten­tial.

Pro­gram High­lights Include:

1a. There has been lit­tle pub­lic recog­ni­tion that many of the mass shoot­ers whose activ­i­ties have dom­i­nat­ed much of the news cycle in recent years,have been immersed in one form or extrem­ist far right ide­ol­o­gy or anoth­er.

The release of ~1,200 pages of doc­u­ments relat­ed to the Las Vegas shoot­ing reveals that Stephen Pad­dock appears to have been “a sov­er­eign cit­i­zen.” [8]

“New Doc­u­ments Sug­gest Las Vegas Shoot­er Was Con­spir­a­cy The­o­rist – What We Know” by Jason Wil­son; The Guardian; 5/19/2018. [7]

In the doc­u­ments, those who encoun­tered gun­man Stephen Pad­dock say he expressed con­spir­a­to­r­i­al, anti-gov­ern­ment beliefs char­ac­ter­is­tic of the far right . . . .

. . . . But tan­ta­liz­ing­ly, peo­ple who encoun­tered Pad­dock before his shoot­ing say that he expressed con­spir­a­to­r­i­al, anti-gov­ern­ment beliefs, which are char­ac­ter­is­tic of the far right.

In a hand­writ­ten state­ment, one woman says she sat near Pad­dock in a din­er just a few days before the shoot­ing, while out with her son. She said she heard him and a com­pan­ion dis­cussing the 25th anniver­sary of the Ruby Ridge stand­off [39] and the Waco siege [40]. (Each of these inci­dents became touch­stones for a ris­ing anti-gov­ern­ment mili­tia move­ment in the 1990s.)

She says she heard him and his com­pan­ion say­ing that court­room flags with gold­en fringes are not real flags. The belief that gold-fringed flags are those of a for­eign juris­dic­tion, or “admi­ral­ty flags”, is char­ac­ter­is­tic of so-called “sov­er­eign cit­i­zens”, who believe, among oth­er things, that the cur­rent US gov­ern­ment, and its laws, are ille­git­i­mate.

“At the time,” her state­ment says, “I thought, ‘Strange guys’ and want­ed to leave.”

Anoth­er man, him­self cur­rent­ly in jail, says he met Pad­dock three weeks before the shoot­ing for an abortive firearms trans­ac­tion, in the carpark of a Bass Pro Shop. The man was sell­ing schemat­ic dia­grams for an auto sear, a device that would con­vert semi-auto­mat­ic weapons to full auto­mat­ic fire. Pad­dock asked him to make the device for him, and the man refused.

At this point Pad­dock launched into a rant about “anti-gov­ern­ment stuff … Fema camps”. Pad­dock said that the evac­u­a­tion of peo­ple by the Fed­er­al Emer­gency Man­age­ment Agency (Fema) after Hur­ri­cane Kat­ri­na was a a “dry run for law enforce­ment and mil­i­tary to start kickin’ down doors and … con­fis­cat­ing guns”.

“Some­body has to wake up the Amer­i­can pub­lic and get them to arm them­selves,” the man says Pad­dock told him. “Some­times sac­ri­fices have to be made.”

Why would some­one be wor­ried about Fema camps? Isn’t Fema there to help in emer­gen­cies?

Yes, but for decades [41] Fema has been incor­po­rat­ed into con­spir­a­cy the­o­ries pro­mul­gat­ed by the anti-gov­ern­ment far right.

Some con­spir­a­cy-mind­ed Amer­i­cans believe that Fema’s emer­gency mis­sion is a cov­er sto­ry. The real pur­pose of the agency is to build and main­tain con­cen­tra­tion camps, which will house dis­si­dent “patri­ots” after a dec­la­ra­tion of mar­tial law. The sup­po­si­tion is that the US gov­ern­ment will turn on its cit­i­zens under the direc­tion of the “New World Order”.

This sounds implau­si­ble. Where did this idea come from?

The short answer is that it has been a sta­ple of the rad­i­cal right for per­haps three decades.

The first ver­sion of the Fema camp con­spir­a­cy the­o­ry was in the newslet­ters of the far right “Posse Comi­ta­tus” move­ment in the ear­ly 1980s. It was an update, or an adap­ta­tion, of the fears of for­eign sub­ver­sion that have ani­mat­ed the Amer­i­can pop­ulist right since the high tide of nine­teenth-cen­tu­ry nativism [42].

Posse Comi­ta­tus, active espe­cial­ly in west­ern states from the late 1960s, believed that the US was con­trolled by a Jew­ish con­spir­a­cy, which it referred to as ZOG (Zion­ist Occu­pa­tion Gov­ern­ment). It also pro­mot­ed “Chris­t­ian iden­ti­ty [43]” the­ol­o­gy, which held that the white race was the lost tribe of Israel, and that Jews were in league with Satan. At some point, they thought, America’s imposter gov­ern­ment would round up and imprison white men.

Apart from devel­op­ing anti-gov­ern­ment beliefs, Posse Comitatus’s crank legal the­o­ries laid the ground­work for a still-flour­ish­ing “sov­er­eign cit­i­zen [44]” move­ment.

But the FEMA the­o­ry real­ly took off dur­ing the rise of the mili­tia move­ment in the 1990s. Move­ment entre­pre­neurs like John Trochmann of the Mili­tia of Mon­tana elab­o­rat­ed the sto­ry in newslet­ters and in his infa­mous “Blue Book”, which was filled with pic­tures alleged­ly show­ing camps, trains loaded with Russ­ian tanks and the arrival of “black heli­copters” in prepa­ra­tion for the sup­pos­ed­ly immi­nent New World Order takeover.

Trochmann and oth­ers also claimed to have pic­tures of the facil­i­ties which would be used as con­cen­tra­tion camps. These turned out to be army train­ing grounds, fed­er­al pris­ons or as-yet unoc­cu­pied bases.

These the­o­ries were nev­er­the­less preva­lent in a move­ment that some schol­ars say had up to 5 mil­lion sym­pa­thiz­ers [45] at its height. Tim­o­thy McVeigh, who killed 168 peo­ple when he bombed a fed­er­al build­ing in 1995, also emerged from this anti-gov­ern­ment milieu. . . . .

1b. Note that mem­bers of the sov­er­eign cit­i­zen move­ment are seen as domes­tic ter­ror­ists:

“Sov­er­eign Cit­i­zen Move­ment;”  [8]wikipedia.org [8]

. . . . Many mem­bers of the sov­er­eign cit­i­zen move­ment believe that the Unit­ed States gov­ern­ment is ille­git­i­mate.[11] [46] JJ Mac­Nab, who writes for Forbes [47] about anti-gov­ern­ment extrem­ism, has described the sov­er­eign-cit­i­zen move­ment as con­sist­ing of indi­vid­u­als who believe that the coun­ty sher­iff [48] is the most pow­er­ful law-enforce­ment offi­cer in the coun­try, with author­i­ty supe­ri­or to that of any fed­er­al agent, elect­ed offi­cial, or local law-enforce­ment offi­cial.[12] [49] This belief comes from the move­men­t’s ori­gins in the white-extrem­ist group Posse Comi­ta­tus [50].[13] [51][cita­tion need­ed [52]]

The Fed­er­al Bureau of Inves­ti­ga­tion [53] (FBI) clas­si­fies some sov­er­eign cit­i­zens (“sov­er­eign cit­i­zen extrem­ists”) as domes­tic ter­ror­ists [54].[14] [55] In 2010 the South­ern Pover­ty Law Cen­ter [56] (SPLC) esti­mat­ed that approx­i­mate­ly 100,000 Amer­i­cans were “hard-core sov­er­eign believ­ers”, with anoth­er 200,000 “just start­ing out by test­ing sov­er­eign tech­niques for resist­ing every­thing from speed­ing tick­ets to drug charges”.[15] [57]

In sur­veys con­duct­ed in 2014 and 2015, rep­re­sen­ta­tives of US law-enforce­ment ranked the risk of ter­ror­ism [9] from the sov­er­eign-cit­i­zen move­ment high­er than the risk from Islam­ic extrem­ism [10]. 

2a. Naz­i/alt-right cul­ture was a pri­ma­ry influ­ence on accused San­ta Fe (Texas) gun­man Dim­itrios Pagourtzis.

“Dim­itrios Pagourtzis, Texas Shoot­ing Sus­pect, Post­ed Neo-Nazi Imagery Online” by Kathy Weill; The Dai­ly Beast; 5/18/2018. [11]

Before alleged­ly killing at least eight peo­ple, he appar­ent­ly post­ed online images of a Nazi medal, a musi­cian favored by the alt-right, and a ‘born to kill’ T‑shirt.

Dim­itrios Pagourtzis, the sus­pect­ed gun­man who opened fire at a Texas high school [12] on Fri­day morn­ing, appar­ent­ly post­ed pho­tos of neo-Nazi iconog­ra­phy online, accord­ing to social media accounts flagged by class­mates and reviewed by The Dai­ly Beast. . . .

. . . . On April 30, Pagourtzis appar­ent­ly post­ed a T‑shirt with “born to kill” print­ed on the front, boast­ing that it was cus­tom-made.

That same day, Pagourtzis post­ed mul­ti­ple pic­tures of a duster jack­et embla­zoned with a vari­ety of sym­bols includ­ing the Iron Cross, a Ger­man mil­i­tary award last giv­en by the Nazis, and oth­er pins. He said he equat­ed the Iron Cross with “brav­ery.” Pagourtzis said a ham­mer and sick­le meant “rebel­lion,” a ris­ing sun meant “kamikaze tac­tics,” and a baphomet meant “evil.” . . . .

. . . . “The sketchy thing is, he wore a full-on black trench coat to school every day,” Thur­man said, adding she hadn’t had a class with him since eighth grade. Mon­temay­or said that in ret­ro­spect, Pagourtzis’ trench coat was odd.

“Why would you wear a trench coat when it’s 100 degrees out­side? When he first start­ed wear­ing that trench coat, it was dur­ing the win­ter.” But in the hot­ter months, Pagourtzis didn’t take it off.

Pagourtzis began wear­ing the coat at the begin­ning of the year.

“It’s like 90 degrees out­side and this guy is still wear­ing a trench coat,” Thur­man said. “It should have been not­ed. That’s a red flag right there.”

Oth­er images on Pagourtzis’ now-delet­ed Face­book page sug­gest a pos­si­ble inter­est in white suprema­cist groups. Pagourtzis uploaded a num­ber of T‑shirts that fea­ture Vapor­wave-style designs. Vapor­wave, a music and design move­ment, has spawned a relat­ed move­ment called Fash­wave, which bor­rows the same aes­thet­ic but applies them to neo-Nazi sub­jects.

Pagourtzis’ Face­book head­er image was the cov­er of an album by musi­cian Per­tur­ba­tor. Perturbator’s music has been co-opt­ed by mem­bers of the Fash­wave move­ment, Buz­zFeed pre­vi­ous­ly report­ed [13]. Neo-Nazi web­site The Dai­ly Stormer fre­quent­ly includes Perturbator’s music in “Fash­wave Fri­days” posts. . . .

2b. Ini­tial press reports about the San­ta Fe shoot­ing dis­cuss pos­si­ble accom­plices of Pagourtzis. Was he part of a group of some kind?

“Look­ing for Motives in a Shoot­ing Sus­pect Whose Past Is a ‘Pret­ty Clean Slate” by Julie Turke­witz and Jess Bid­good; The New York Times; 5/19/2018; p. A12 [West­ern Edi­tion]. [14]

 . . . . By Fri­day after­noon, the sus­pect was in cus­tody at the Galve­ston Coun­ty jail, where he is being held for cap­i­tal mur­der. Fed­er­al author­i­ties are seek­ing search war­rants to find explo­sive devices at two res­i­dences. . . . Police said the gun­man brought sev­er­al of these devices into the school. It was unclear whether any went off. . . .

. . . . On Fri­day, author­i­ties intend­ed to ques­tion two oth­er peo­ple: One was at the scene and had “sus­pi­cious reac­tions,” accord­ing to the gov­er­nor, and anoth­er had drawn the scruti­ny of inves­ti­ga­tors. . . .

3. Pagourtzis, as we saw above, had tak­en to wear­ing a trench coat, even in 90 degree weath­er. Press reports have described him as a “copy-cat” killer, hav­ing imi­tat­ed Dylan Kle­bold and Eric Har­ris of Columbine shoot­ing fame. (Pagourtzis was too young to have mem­o­ries of the inci­dent, though he may well have absorbed infor­ma­tion about the Columbine per­pe­tra­tors.)

The media, for the most part, have not men­tioned that Har­ris and Kle­bold were heav­i­ly influ­enced by Nazi cul­ture.

“Shoot­ing Pair Mixed Fan­ta­sy, Real­i­ty” by Paul Dug­gan, Michael D. Shear and Marc Fish­er; Wash­ing­ton Post; 4/22/1999. [17]

They hat­ed jocks, admired Nazis and scorned nor­mal­cy. They fan­cied them­selves devo­tees of the Goth­ic sub­cul­ture, even though they thrilled to the vio­lence denounced by much of that fan­ta­sy world. They were white suprema­cists, but loved music by anti-racist rock bands.

Eric Har­ris and Dylan Kle­bold were bright young men who became social out­casts at their sub­ur­ban Den­ver high school, and then built their own inter­nal soci­ety by pluck­ing strands from the pop whirl­wind of cyber­space and fan­ta­sy games, the sound­track of Amer­i­can youth, and a nether­world that glam­or­izes Nazi sym­bols and ter­ror­ist vio­lence. . . .

.  . . . An ini­tial sketch of Har­ris and Kle­bold and the Trench­coat Mafia to which they claimed mem­ber­ship emerged yes­ter­day from inter­views with friends, fel­low stu­dents and neigh­bors, and from police and school offi­cials. If the boys left behind any detailed expla­na­tion of their hor­rif­ic final cries, no one has found it yet. . . .

. . . . Nine­teen days before they were to grad­u­ate, Har­ris and Kle­bold seemed insep­a­ra­ble and trou­ble­some. In Columbine’s hall­ways, they spoke bro­ken Ger­man and referred often to “4–20,” Hitler’s birth­day and the day they chose for their assault. . . .

. . . . Some Columbine stu­dents said the vio­lent side of Har­ris and Kle­bold became more obvi­ous in recent months. They became obses­sive­ly inter­est­ed in World War II, Nazi imagery, Adolf Hitler.

John House, 17, a Columbine senior, told reporters that when he went bowl­ing with Kle­bold, “when he would do some­thing good, he would shout ‘Heil Hitler’ and throw up his hand. It just made every­one mad.” . . . .

4. In FTR #995 [19], we exam­ined the Atom­waf­fen Neo-Nazi group. Atom­waf­fen mem­ber Andrew Oneschuk was about to join Ukraine’s neo-Nazi Azov Bat­tal­ion [20].

“All-Amer­i­can Nazis” by Janet Reit­man; Rolling Stone; 05/02/2018 [20]

How a sense­less dou­ble mur­der in Flori­da exposed the rise of an orga­nized fas­cist youth move­ment in the Unit­ed States

Andrew Oneschuk and Jere­my Him­mel­man had been liv­ing in Tam­pa, Flori­da, for two weeks when, on Fri­day, May 19th, 2017, their room­mate Devon Arthurs picked up an AK-47 rifle and shot them at close range. Oneschuk had just turned 18. Him­mel­man was 22. They’d been stay­ing in a lush gat­ed com­mu­ni­ty near the Uni­ver­si­ty of South Flori­da, in a two-bed­room, ter­ra-cot­ta con­do rent­ed by their fourth room­mate, 21-year-old Bran­don Rus­sell, a rich kid from the Bahamas who worked at a gun shop and served in the Flori­da Nation­al Guard. Oneschuk, a prep-school dropout, was hop­ing to become a Navy SEAL. Him­mel­man also con­sid­ered the mil­i­tary, though he was more of a drifter. Eigh­teen-year-old Arthurs, a pale, freck­led kid who some­times called him­self “Khalid,” was unem­ployed and spent most of his time play­ing video games. All four had met one anoth­er online, in forums and chat rooms pop­u­lar with the more extreme seg­ment of the so-called alt-right. . . .

. . . . Increas­ing­ly, Andrew obsessed over issues like cli­mate change and the Syr­i­an refugee cri­sis. He’d also embraced an apoc­a­lyp­tic and con­spir­a­to­r­i­al world­view in which West­ern civ­i­liza­tion was doomed, and he, a white male, was a vic­tim. He was amazed at his par­ents’ com­pla­cen­cy. Didn’t they real­ize blacks were respon­si­ble for 80 per­cent of the crime in Amer­i­ca? he’d false­ly claim, using sta­tis­tics that seemed drawn from nowhere. “Amer­i­ca is shit,” he said. “My gen­er­a­tion is fail­ing.” . . . .

. . . . Andrew, who was one-eighth Ukrain­ian, took to the cause, chat­ting with fight­ers and their allies. He began for­mu­lat­ing a plan to join the Azov Bat­tal­ion, a noto­ri­ous­ly bru­tal band of inter­na­tion­al fight­ers help­ing in the resis­tance against the Rus­sians. In Jan­u­ary 2015, Andrew bought a fake pass­port and a one-way tick­et to Kiev. The day before he was set to leave, hav­ing packed his camp­ing gear and arranged for a lim­ou­sine to Logan Air­port, he casu­al­ly told his moth­er on the way home from school, “I think I’m going to go to Ukraine.” . . . . 

Emi­ly had been con­cerned when Andrew went through his Ger­man-army phase, though some of her friends told her that they’d also thought the SS was cool when they were younger. “I don’t think they under­stood they were actu­al­ly bad guys,” says Emi­ly. “It’s more like the bad guys in Indi­ana Jones with the cool car.” But Andrew took it fur­ther, even­tu­al­ly adopt­ing the online han­dle “Borovikov,” after a famous Russ­ian neo-Nazi gang leader. That spring, he hung an SS flag in his bed­room as well as a giant swasti­ka. . . . 

5. Online net­work­ing between resent­ful, sex-deprived men who call them­selves “incels” (a con­trac­tion of  “invol­un­tary celi­bates”) over­lap Naz­i/Alt-Right ele­ments. The ide­o­log­i­cal col­li­sion of the online “incels” and the #MeToo move­ment may well gen­er­ate some tru­ly patho­log­i­cal vio­lence.

” ‘Incels’ Aren’t Alone In Online Har­vest­ing of Men’s Sense of Loss” by Aman­da Taub; The New York Times; 5/11/2018; p. A5 [West­ern Edi­tion]. [21]

. . . . . ‘Aggriev­ed Enti­tle­ment’

For white men across the West­ern world, spe­cial rights and priv­i­leges once came as a birthright. Even those who lacked wealth or pow­er were assured a sta­tus above women and minori­ties.

Though they still enjoy pref­er­en­tial sta­tus in vir­tu­al­ly every realm, from the board­room to the cour­t­house, social forces like the Me Too move­ment are chal­leng­ing that sta­tus. To some, any steps toward equal­i­ty, how­ev­er mod­est, feel like a threat.

“There’s just this sense that ‘we used to be in charge, and now we’re not the only ones in charge, so we’ve been attacked,’” said Lil­liana Mason, a Uni­ver­si­ty of Mary­land social sci­en­tist who stud­ies group iden­ti­ty and pol­i­tics.

“If you have a sense that you’re owed, that your deserved sta­tus is being threat­ened, then you start to fight for it,” Ms. Mason said.

Often that takes the form of lash­ing out at mem­bers of what­ev­er social group dared to chal­lenge the estab­lished hier­ar­chy.

“You’d think that young men would be treat­ed nice­ly by soci­ety because we are the builders and pro­tec­tors of civ­i­liza­tion,” wrote [58] a user named connorWM1996 on r/MGTOW, a Red­dit mes­sage board for men try­ing to escape what they see as oppres­sion by female-dom­i­nat­ed soci­ety. “But no of course not. We are treat­ed like idiots who aren’t good for any­thing.”

Some of these men may go in search of more extreme ide­olo­gies that make sense of their feel­ings of anger and loss, and seem to pro­vide a solu­tion. Oth­ers mere­ly stum­ble into them.

“Plen­ty of peo­ple feel like they don’t have sta­tus and don’t revolt about it,” Ms. Mason said. “But the peo­ple who do revolt are peo­ple who feel that they are owed sta­tus, and they’re not being giv­en the sta­tus that tra­di­tion­al soci­ety should give them.”

The incel move­ment tells its adher­ents that society’s rules are engi­neered to unfair­ly deprive them of sex. That world­view lets them see them­selves as both vic­tims, made lone­ly by a vast con­spir­a­cy, and as supe­ri­or, for their unique under­stand­ing of the truth.

Greasing Extremism’s Rails

Extrem­ism has always exist­ed, but until recent­ly its spread was lim­it­ed. To begin with, there was the basic chal­lenge to any col­lec­tive action: how to find and gath­er like-mind­ed peo­ple dis­persed across great dis­tances. Beyond that, there was the social stig­ma against any ideas per­ceived as out­side the mainstream.Social media has low­ered both of those bar­ri­ers.

Now, men look­ing for a way to explain — and jus­ti­fy — their anger need only a few clicks to encounter entire com­mu­ni­ties built up around promis­es to restore male pow­er and con­trol. In the past, those might have been rel­e­gat­ed to a few bars or liv­ing rooms, but now they exist in dark­er cor­ners of some of the most pop­u­lar social net­work­ing sites. . . .

. . . . The alt-right, right-wing pop­ulism, men’s rights groups and a renewed white suprema­cist move­ment have cap­i­tal­ized on many white men’s feel­ing of loss in recent years. The groups vary in how they diag­nose society’s ills and whom they blame, but they pro­vide a sense of mean­ing and place for their fol­low­ers.

And as dif­fer­ent extrem­ist groups con­nect online, they draw on one another’s mem­ber­ship bases, tac­tics and world­views, allow­ing mem­ber­ship in one group to become a gate­way to oth­er extrem­ist ide­olo­gies as well.

Today, for exam­ple, posts on Incel.me, an incel forum, debate join­ing forces with the alt-right and argue that Jews are to blame for incels’ oppres­sion. On one thread [22], users fan­ta­sized that if they were dic­ta­tors, they would not only cre­ate harems and enslave women, but also “gas the Jews.”

By divid­ing the world into us-ver­sus-them and describ­ing vast injus­tice at the hands of the sup­pos­ed­ly pow­er­ful, these groups, experts say, can prime adher­ents for vio­lence. . . .

6. Incel cul­ture is metas­ta­siz­ing into “lone-wolf”/leaderless resis­tance ter­ror­ism.

“When Misog­y­nists Become Ter­ror­ists” by Jes­si­ca Valen­ti; The New York Times; 4/26/2018. [24]

. . . . Lat­er, after Mr. Rodger’s 140-page man­i­festo [59] was released — out­lin­ing his fury over still being a “kiss­less vir­gin” — his name became syn­ony­mous on misog­y­nist forums with revenge on women who reject men. Chris Harp­er-Mer­cer [60], who shot and killed nine peo­ple at Umpqua Com­mu­ni­ty Col­lege in Ore­gon in 2015, men­tioned Mr. Rodger by name in a man­i­festo he wrote in which he com­plained about being 26 years old with “no girl­friend, a vir­gin.”

And now, in the after­math of the attack in Toron­to, men on incel com­mu­ni­ties are hail­ing the killer as a “new saint [61],” with com­menters chang­ing their avatars to Mr. Minassian’s pic­ture [62] in trib­ute.

Fem­i­nists have been warn­ing against these online hate groups and their propen­si­ty for real-life vio­lence for over a decade. I know because I’m one of the peo­ple who has been issu­ing increas­ing­ly dire warn­ings. After I start­ed a fem­i­nist blog in 2004, I became a tar­get of men’s‑rights groups who were angry with women about every­thing from cus­tody bat­tles to the false notion that most women lie about rape. In 2011 [63], I had to flee my house with my young daugh­ter on the advice of law enforce­ment, because one of these groups put me on a “reg­istry” of women to tar­get.

I was far from the only one. In 2014, a gam­ing award cer­e­mo­ny set to hon­or the fem­i­nist crit­ic Ani­ta Sar­keesian received a bomb threat [25]; an anony­mous harass­er threat­ened to det­o­nate a device unless her award was rescind­ed. Before Milo Yiannopou­los was a well-known alt-right fig­ure, fem­i­nists knew him as one of the pri­ma­ry archi­tects of Gamer­gate, a move­ment of young men who harassed and threat­ened women in the videogam­ing indus­try. Two fans of Mr. Yiannopou­los were charged with shoot­ing a pro­test­er [26] out­side of one of his speech­es.

Part of the prob­lem is that Amer­i­can cul­ture still large­ly sees men’s sex­ism as some­thing innate rather than deviant. And in a world where sex­ism is deemed nat­ur­al, the misog­y­nist ten­den­cies of mass shoot­ers become after­thoughts rather than pre­dictable and stark warn­ings.

The truth is that in addi­tion to not pro­tect­ing women, we are fail­ing boys: fail­ing to raise them to believe they can be men with­out inflict­ing pain on oth­ers, fail­ing to teach them that they are not enti­tled to women’s sex­u­al atten­tion and fail­ing to allow them an out­let for under­stand­able human fear and foibles that will not label them “weak” or unwor­thy.

Not every attack is pre­ventable, but the misog­y­ny that dri­ves them is. To stop all of this, we must trust women when they point out that receiv­ing streams of death threats on Twit­ter is not nor­mal and that online com­mu­ni­ties strate­giz­ing about how to rape women are much more than just idle chat­ter. There is no rea­son anoth­er mas­sacre should hap­pen.

7. Nazi killer Anders Breivik embod­ied the over­lap between Alt-Right white suprema­cy and insti­tu­tion­al­ized misog­y­ny:

“Lead­er’s Sui­cide Brings Atten­tion to Men’s Rights Move­ment” by Arthur Gold­wag; [27]Intel­li­gence Report [South­ern Pover­ty Law Cen­ter]; 3/1/2012. [27]

A lit­tle-noticed sui­cide last year focused atten­tion on the hard-lined fringe of the men’s right move­ment. It’s not a pret­ty pic­ture.

After 10 years of cus­tody bat­tles, court-ordered coun­sel­ing and immi­nent impris­on­ment for non-pay­ment of child sup­port, Thomas James Ball, a leader of the Worces­ter branch of the Mass­a­chu­setts-based Father­hood Coali­tion, had reached his lim­it. On June 15, 2011, he doused him­self with gaso­line and set him­self on fire just out­side the Cheshire Coun­ty, N.H., Cour­t­house. He was dead with­in min­utes.

In a lengthy “Last State­ment,” which arrived posthu­mous­ly at the Keene Sen­tinel, Tom Ball told his sto­ry. All he had done, he said, was smack his 4‑year-old daugh­ter and bloody her mouth after she licked his hand as he was putting her to bed. Fem­i­nist-craft­ed anti-domes­tic vio­lence leg­is­la­tion did the rest. “Twen­ty-five years ago,” he wrote, “the fed­er­al gov­ern­ment declared war on men. It is time to see how com­mit­ted they are to their cause. It is time, boys, to give them a taste of war.” Call­ing for all-out insur­rec­tion, he offered tips on mak­ing Molo­tov cock­tails and urged his read­ers to use them against cour­t­hous­es and police sta­tions. “There will be some casu­al­ties in this war,” he pre­dict­ed. “Some killed, some wound­ed, some cap­tured. Some of them will be theirs. Some of the casu­al­ties will be ours.”

For peo­ple who asso­ciate the men’s and fathers’ rights move­ments with New Age drum cir­cles in the woods, the feroc­i­ty of Ball’s rhetoric, the hor­ror of his act, and, in par­tic­u­lar, the wide­spread and bla­tant­ly misog­y­nis­tic reac­tion to it may come as some­thing of a rev­e­la­tion. When the fem­i­nist Aman­da Mar­cotte, a bête noire of the men’s rights move­ment, remarked that “set­ting your­self on fire is an extreme­ly effec­tive tool if your goal is to make your ex-wife’s life a liv­ing hell,” a poster at the blog Misandry.com went bal­lis­tic. “Talk about the pot call­ing the ket­tle black,” he raged. “She is evil and such a vile evil that she is a dis­ease that needs to be cut out of the human [con­scious­ness] just like the rest of the fem­anazi ass harpies.”

Ball’s sui­cide brought atten­tion to an under­world of misog­y­nists, woman-haters whose fury goes well beyond crit­i­cism of the fam­i­ly court sys­tem, domes­tic vio­lence laws, and false rape accu­sa­tions. There are lit­er­al­ly hun­dreds of web­sites, blogs and forums devot­ed to attack­ing vir­tu­al­ly all women (or, at least, West­ern­ized ones) — the so-called “manos­phere,” which now also includes a trib­ute page for Tom Ball (“He Died For Our Chil­dren”). While some of them voice legit­i­mate and some­times dis­turb­ing com­plaints about the treat­ment of men, what is most remark­able is the misog­y­nis­tic tone that per­vades so many. Women are rou­tine­ly maligned as sluts, gold-dig­gers, temptress­es and worse; over­ly sym­pa­thet­ic men are dubbed “mang­i­nas”; and police and oth­er offi­cials are called their armed enablers. Even Ball — who did not direct­ly blame his ex-wife for his trou­bles, but instead depict­ed her and their three chil­dren as co-vic­tims of the author­i­ties — vil­i­fied “man-hat­ing fem­i­nists” as evil destroy­ers of all that is good.

This kind of woman-hatred is increas­ing­ly vis­i­ble in most West­ern soci­eties, and it tends to be allied with oth­er anti-mod­ern emo­tions — oppo­si­tion to same-sex mar­riage, to non-Chris­t­ian immi­gra­tion, to women in the work­place, and even, in some cas­es, to the advance­ment of African Amer­i­cans. Just a few weeks after Ball’s death, while scorch marks were still vis­i­ble on the side­walk in Keene, N.H., that was made clear once more by a Nor­we­gian named Anders Behring Breivik.

On July 22, Breivik slaugh­tered 77 of his coun­try­men, most of them teenagers, in Oslo and at a sum­mer camp on the island of Utøya, because he thought they or their par­ents were the kinds of “polit­i­cal­ly cor­rect” lib­er­als who were enabling Mus­lim immi­gra­tion. But Breivik was almost as vol­u­ble on the sub­jects of fem­i­nism, the fam­i­ly, and fathers’ rights as he was on Islam. “The most direct threat to the fam­i­ly is ‘divorce on demand,’” he wrote in the man­i­festo he post­ed just before he began his dead­ly spree. “The sys­tem must be reformed so that the father will be award­ed cus­tody rights by default.”

The manos­phere lit up. Said one approv­ing poster at The Spear­head, an online men’s rights mag­a­zine for the “defense of our­selves, our fam­i­lies and our fel­low men”: “What could be more ‘an eye for an eye’ than to kill the chil­dren of those who were so will­ing to destroy men’s fam­i­lies and destroy the home­land of men?”

‘The Home­land of Men’

The men’s rights move­ment, also referred to as the fathers’ rights move­ment, is made up of a num­ber of dis­parate, often over­lap­ping, types of groups and indi­vid­u­als. Some most cer­tain­ly do have legit­i­mate griev­ances, hav­ing endured prison, impov­er­ish­ment or heartrend­ing sep­a­ra­tions from gen­uine­ly loved chil­dren.

Joce­lyn Crow­ley, a Rut­gers polit­i­cal sci­en­tist and the author of Defi­ant Dads: Fathers’ Rights Activists in Amer­i­ca, says that most men who join real (as opposed to vir­tu­al) men’s rights groups aren’t seek­ing to attack the fam­i­ly court sys­tem so much as they are sim­ply strug­gling to nav­i­gate it. What they talk most about when they meet face to face, she says, are strate­gies to deal with their ex-part­ners and have bet­ter rela­tion­ships with their chil­dren.

But Mol­ly Dragiewicz, a crim­i­nol­o­gist at the Uni­ver­si­ty of Ontario Insti­tute of Tech­nol­o­gy and the author of Equal­i­ty With a Vengeance: Men’s Rights Groups, Bat­tered Women, and Antifem­i­nist Back­lash, argues that cas­es in which fathers are bad­ly treat­ed by courts and oth­er offi­cials are not remote­ly the norm. The small per­cent­age of divorces that end up in lit­i­ga­tion are dis­pro­por­tion­ate­ly those where abuse and oth­er issues make joint cus­tody a dubi­ous propo­si­tion. Even when a woman can sat­is­fac­to­ri­ly doc­u­ment her ex-husband’s abuse, Dragiewicz says, she is no more like­ly to receive full cus­tody of her chil­dren than if she couldn’t.

The men’s move­ment also includes mail-order-bride shop­pers, unre­gen­er­ate bat­ter­ers, and wannabe pick­up artists who are eager to learn the secrets of “game”—the psy­cho­log­i­cal tricks that sup­pos­ed­ly make it easy to seduce women. George Sodi­ni, who con­fid­ed his seething rage at women to his blog before shoot­ing 12 women, three of them fatal­ly, was one of the lat­ter. Before his 2009 mur­der spree at a Pitts­burgh-area gym, he was a stu­dent — though clear­ly not a very apt one — of R. Don Steele, the author of How to Date Young Women: For Men Over 35. “I dress good, am clean-shaven, bathe, touch of cologne — yet 30 mil­lion women reject­ed me over an 18 or 25-year peri­od,” Sodi­ni wrote with the kind of pathos pre­sum­ably typ­i­cal of Steele’s read­ers.

Some take an inor­di­nate inter­est in extreme­ly young women, or fetishize what they see as the ultra-fem­i­nine (read: docile) char­ac­ter­is­tics of South Amer­i­can and Asian women. Oth­ers, who have inter­nal­ized Chris­t­ian “head­ship” doc­trine, are des­per­ate­ly seek­ing the “sub­mis­sive” women such doc­trine cel­e­brates. Still oth­ers are sim­ply sex­u­al­ly awk­ward, and non­plussed and befud­dled by society’s chang­ing mores. The com­mon denom­i­na­tor is their resent­ment of fem­i­nism and of females in gen­er­al.

“It’s iron­ic,” the fem­i­nist writer Aman­da Mar­cotte observes. “These [misog­y­nist Web] sites owe their exis­tence to feminism’s suc­cess­es. At some point in the last cou­ple of years, the zeit­geist hit a tip­ping point where female pow­er — Hillary Clinton’s, Rachel Maddow’s, even Sarah Palin’s — stopped being ques­tioned. Being sex­ist has become less accept­able than it used to be. This makes some men par­tic­u­lar­ly anx­ious.” At the same time, of course, domes­tic vio­lence and sex crimes are much more like­ly to be pros­e­cut­ed than they were even a decade ago. Shel­ters, social ser­vices and legal aid are more avail­able to most bat­tered women than in the past.

But some experts argue that men’s rights groups have been remark­ably suc­cess­ful. The groups, says Rita Smith, direc­tor of the Nation­al Coali­tion Against Domes­tic Vio­lence, “have tak­en over the way courts deal with cus­tody issues, par­tic­u­lar­ly when there are alle­ga­tions of abuse,” large­ly by con­vinc­ing them that there is such a thing as “Parental Alien­ation Syn­drome” (PAS). (PAS is a sup­posed clin­i­cal dis­or­der in which a child com­pul­sive­ly belit­tles one par­ent due to indoc­tri­na­tion by the oth­er — fre­quent­ly lev­el­ing false alle­ga­tions of abuse. It is not rec­og­nized as a clin­i­cal dis­or­der by either the Amer­i­can Psy­chi­atric Asso­ci­a­tion or the World Health Orga­ni­za­tion.) Cit­ing stud­ies that show that false domes­tic abuse accu­sa­tions against men are far less com­mon than men’s groups and PAS enthu­si­asts claim, Smith says the groups nev­er­the­less have “been able to get cus­tody eval­u­a­tors, medi­a­tors, guardians ad litem and child pro­tec­tive ser­vice work­ers to believe that women and chil­dren lie about abuse.”

Threats and Abuse

One kind of abuse that is unde­ni­able is the vil­i­fi­ca­tion of indi­vid­ual women on cer­tain men’s group web­sites. The best exam­ple of that may be Reg­is­ter-Her, a reg­istry of women who “have caused sig­nif­i­cant harm to inno­cent indi­vid­u­als either by the direct action of crimes like rape, assault, child molesta­tion and mur­der, or by the false accu­sa­tion of crimes against oth­ers.” The site was set up by Paul Elam, the blog­ger behind A Voice for Men, less than two weeks after Ball’s sui­cide. “If Mary Jane Rot­ten­crotch decides to false­ly accuse her hus­band of domes­tic vio­lence in order to get the upper hand in a divorce,” Elam boast­ed on his Inter­net radio show, “we can pub­lish all her per­son­al infor­ma­tion on the web­site, includ­ing her name, address, phone num­ber … even her routes to and from work.”

Under a head­line read­ing, “Why are these women not in prison?” the site fea­tures pho­tos and infor­ma­tion about some 250 alleged male­fac­tors, includ­ing noto­ri­ous women like Lore­na Bob­bitt and Tonya Hard­ing, although Elam hasn’t made good on his threat to pub­lish home address­es or phone num­bers. Many of those list­ed received prison sen­tences for var­i­ous crimes, but large num­bers were acquit­ted in court, while oth­ers were nev­er accused of any law­break­ing. A well-known fem­i­nist, for exam­ple, is list­ed for “anti-male big­otry,” which is com­pared to racism.

Elam’s site can be fright­en­ing to its tar­gets. In one case, he offered a cash reward to the first read­er to fer­ret out a pseu­do­ny­mous fem­i­nist blogger’s real name. In anoth­er, Elam sin­gled out a part-time blog­ger at ChicagoNow who describes her­self as a “veg­e­tar­i­an park activist with two baby girls.” The woman’s mis­take was to write about her dis­com­fort with male adults help­ing female tod­dlers in the bath­room at her daughter’s preschool. The blog­ger con­ced­ed that she was being sex­ist, but wrote that “I’d rather be wrong than find out if I’m right.”

After the woman was list­ed, she was wide­ly attacked on men’s move­ment sites. “I don’t always use the word ‘cunt’ to describe a woman,” one poster raged, “but when I do it’s because of rea­sons like these.” Shocked, the “Mom­my blog­ger” took down her orig­i­nal post and apol­o­gized for her “demo­niza­tion of men.”

It wasn’t enough. “You tar­get­ed fathers, and just fathers,” Elam rebuked her. “It strikes me that you have nev­er real­ly been held to account for any of your actions in life. It is quite like­ly that the con­cept of com­plete, self­less account­abil­i­ty is just com­plete­ly for­eign to you.” Over at the Red­dit Mens Rights forum, anoth­er poster fumed: “This entire episode should be a warn­ing to all those male hat­ing fem­i­nists out there who believe that they are safe scream­ing their hate mes­sages on the web. Final­ly, they are held account­able for their hate mes­sages and final­ly the rest of the world will find out exact­ly what type of depraved peo­ple they real­ly are.”

“I don’t know if Thomas James Ball ever vis­it­ed this site,” Elam wrote on his blog when he start­ed Reg­is­ter-Her. “What I do believe is, though, that he, if con­vinced to stay alive, would have been a hell of a sol­dier in this war.”

Sol­diers in the War

The first shots in this so-called war on fem­i­nism were fired 22 years before Tom Ball’s sui­cide. On Dec. 6, 1989, Marc Lépine, a trou­bled 25-year-old com­put­er stu­dent, strolled into the Ecole Poly­tech­nique in Mon­tre­al, Cana­da, car­ry­ing a Ruger Mini-14 semi-auto­mat­ic rifle and a hunt­ing knife. He walked into a class­room, ordered the men to leave, and lined the women up against a wall.

“I am fight­ing fem­i­nism,” he announced before open­ing fire. “You’re women, you’re going to be engi­neers. You’re all a bunch of fem­i­nists. I hate fem­i­nists.”

By the time he turned the gun on him­self, 14 women were dead and 10 were wound­ed; four men were hurt as well. The sui­cide note in Lépine’s pock­et con­tained a list of 19 “rad­i­cal fem­i­nists” he hoped to kill, and this: “I have decid­ed to send the fem­i­nists, who have always ruined my life, to their Mak­er. … They want to keep the advan­tages of women … while seiz­ing for them­selves those of men.”

Today, that kind of rage is often direct­ed at all women, not only per­ceived fem­i­nists. “Women don’t need the pow­ers-that-be to get them to hate and use men,” the blog­ger Alcuin wrote recent­ly. “They have always used men; maybe they have always hat­ed us too.” Added anoth­er blog­ger, Angry Har­ry: “There are now, lit­er­al­ly, bil­lions of dol­lars, numer­ous empires, and mil­lions of jobs that depend on the pub­lic swal­low­ing the idea that women need to be defend­ed from men.”

“A word to the wise,” offered the blog­ger known as Rebuk­ing Fem­i­nism. “The ani­mals women have become want one thing, resources and genes. … See them as the ani­mals they have become and plan … accord­ing­ly.”

And many are quick to endorse vio­lence against women. “There are women, and plen­ty of them, for which [sic] a sol­id ass kick­ing would be the least they deserve,” Paul Elam wrote in an essay with the provoca­tive title, “When is it OK to Punch Your Wife?” “The real ques­tion here is not whether these women deserve the busi­ness end of a right hook, they obvi­ous­ly do, and some of them deserve one hard enough to leave them in an uncon­scious, innocu­ous pile on the ground if it serves to pro­tect the inno­cent from immi­nent harm. The real ques­tion is whether men deserve to be able to phys­i­cal­ly defend them­selves from assault … from a woman.”

For some, it’s more than just talk. In 2006, Dar­ren Mack, a mem­ber of a fathers’ rights group in Reno, Nev., stabbed his estranged wife to death and then shot and wound­ed the fam­i­ly court judge who was han­dling his divorce.

That kind of vio­lence con­tin­ues right up to the present.

In Seal Beach, Calif. last Oct. 12, a day after Scott Evans Dekraai and his ex-wife had been in court to fight over cus­tody of their 8‑year-old son (Dekraai had 56% cus­tody but want­ed full cus­tody and “final deci­sion mak­ing author­i­ty” on mat­ters of the child’s edu­ca­tion and med­ical treat­ment), Dekraai walked into the hair salon where his ex-wife worked armed with three hand­guns. There, he alleged­ly shot sev­en women, six of them fatal­ly; he also is accused of killing two men — the salon’s own­er, as he attempt­ed to flee, and a man in a car out­side.

8a. Ronan Far­row wrote the New York­er piece that launched the Har­vey Wein­stein take­down.

From  Aggres­sive Over­tures to Sex­u­al Aggres­sion: Har­vey Weinstein’s Accusers Tell Their Sto­ries” by Ronan Far­row; The New York­er; 10/23/2017. [28]

8b. An impor­tant detail about Ronan Far­row, who played a fun­da­men­tal role in break­ing the Har­vey Wein­stein case [28], con­cerns his back­ground in the State Depart­ment [64], spe­cial­iz­ing in Afghanistan and Pak­istan. Far­row is the son of Mia Far­row and Woody Allen.  ” . . . .  Post-law school: Lands a job at the State Depart­ment [34], as a spe­cial advi­sor focus­ing on con­flict in Afghanistan and Pak­istan. . . .”

Far­row’s back­ground strong­ly sug­gests intel­li­gence com­mu­ni­ty involve­ment.

“Ronan Far­row: From State Depart­ment to Twit­ter Leg­end to MSNBC Host (a Time­line)” by Emi­ly Yahr; The Wash­ing­ton Post; 2/24/2014. [33]

 . . . .  Post-law school: Lands a job at the State Depart­ment [34], as a spe­cial advi­sor focus­ing on con­flict in Afghanistan and Pak­istan. . . .

8c. Far­row con­tin­ued his work for State [65] in 2011. ” . . . . 2011: Starts work­ing along­side Hillary Clin­ton with a lengthy title: Spe­cial Advi­sor to the Sec­re­tary of State for Glob­al Youth Issues and direc­tor of the State Department’s Glob­al Youth Issues office. . . .”

Har­vey Wein­stein was a major donor to the Democ­rats [66], includ­ing Hillary Clin­ton. Might Far­row have been doing oppo­si­tion research on Clin­ton while  work­ing for her State Depart­ment?

“Ronan Far­row: From State Depart­ment to Twit­ter Leg­end to MSNBC Host (a Time­line)” by Emi­ly Yahr; The Wash­ing­ton Post; 2/24/2014. [33]

. . . . 2011: Starts work­ing along­side Hillary Clin­ton with a lengthy title: Spe­cial Advi­sor to the Sec­re­tary of State for Glob­al Youth Issues and direc­tor of the State Department’s Glob­al Youth Issues office. . . .

8d. Far­row also co-wrote the New York­er arti­cle that took down New York Attor­ney Gen­er­al Eric Schnei­der­man, a major Trump oppo­nent who presided over the law­suit against Trump Uni­ver­si­ty.

“Four Women Accuse New York’s Attor­ney Gen­er­al of Phys­i­cal Abuse” by Ronan Far­row and Jane May­er; The New York­er; 5/7/2018. [35]

8e. Schnei­der­man was active­ly going after oth­er mem­bers of the oli­garchy as well.

“Will This Man Take Down Don­ald Trump?” by David Freed­lan­der; Politi­co; 2/3/2017. [36]

. . . . Schnei­der­man took up the state’s exist­ing case against Trump University—New York want­ed the school to drop the “uni­ver­si­ty” from its name, since it was not char­tered as an insti­tu­tion of high­er learn­ing and lacked a license to offer instruction—and as he pur­sued it over the next five years, he became the tar­get of a relent­less series of per­son­al attacks from the Trump camp. Trump filed an ethics com­plaint alleg­ing that Schnei­der­man offered to drop the suit in exchange for dona­tions; he went on tele­vi­sion to denounce Schnei­der­man as a hack and a light­weight, and said he was wast­ing mil­lions of tax­pay­er dol­lars when he should have been going after Wall Street. (Nev­er mind that Schnei­der­man had already been declared “the man the banks fear most” by the lib­er­al mag­a­zine “The Amer­i­can Prospect.”) “The whole scorched-earth strat­e­gy towards those who would chal­lenge him, we got a pre­view of,” says Schnei­der­man.

The Trump Uni­ver­si­ty suit even­tu­al­ly was set­tled for $25 mil­lion days after the elec­tion, despite the then president-elect’s repeat­ed pledges nev­er to set­tle. Schnei­der­man could have left it at that. But Schnei­der­man has let it be known that Trump is still in his crosshairs. In the days since Novem­ber 9, Schnei­der­man fired off a let­ter warn­ing Trump not to drop White House sup­port of Obama’s Clean Pow­er Plan, intro­duced a bill in the state Leg­is­la­ture to give New York­ers cost-free con­tra­cep­tion if the Afford­able Care Act is dis­man­tled, threat­ened to sue after Trump froze EPA fund­ing of clean air and water pro­grams, and joined a law­suit that argues that Trump’s exec­u­tive order on immi­gra­tion is not just uncon­sti­tu­tion­al and un-Amer­i­can, but it brings pro­found harm to the res­i­dents of New York State.

He has a record of going not only after Trump, but going after peo­ple now in Trump­world. He’s on the oppo­site side of the Clean Pow­er Plan fight from Okla­homa Attor­ney Gen­er­al Scott Pruitt, since named head of the EPA, and who Schnei­der­man labeled a “dan­ger­ous and unqual­i­fied choice.” He’s gone after Rex Tiller­son, who as CEO of Exxon­Mo­bil defend­ed his com­pa­ny from a Schnei­der­man inves­ti­ga­tion; since the elec­tion he’s begun inves­ti­gat­ing a reverse-mort­gage busi­ness once led by Steven Mnuchin, the nom­i­nee to be the next Trea­sury sec­re­tary. . . .

8f. Pri­or to his pro­fes­sion­al demise, Schnei­der­man was inves­ti­gat­ing the NXIVM cult, with its many con­nec­tions to pow­er­ful peo­ple, includ­ing Trump/GOP dirty trick­ster Roger Stone, who sig­naled the #MeToo take­down of Sen­a­tor Al Franken. Might he have been linked to the take­down of Schnei­der­man?

“Faces of NXIVM: An Alleged Cult’s Inner Cir­cle and Beyond” by Joyce Bas­sett; Time­sUnion; 4/24/2018. [37]

. . . The Times Union report­ed on March 25 [67] that New York Attor­ney Gen­er­al Eric Schnei­der­man’s office was con­duct­ing a sep­a­rate inves­ti­ga­tion of a non­prof­it foun­da­tion asso­ci­at­ed with NXIVM that alleged­ly spon­sored brain-activ­i­ty and oth­er human behav­ioral stud­ies with­out any appar­ent over­sight, accord­ing to court records. That inves­ti­ga­tion has been sus­pend­ed due to the fed­er­al crim­i­nal inves­ti­ga­tion, offi­cials said. . . .

. . . . The for-prof­it cor­po­ra­tion NXIVM is based on a self-improve­ment cur­ricu­lum called “Ratio­nal Inquiry.” Oth­er high-pro­file names — includ­ing Repub­li­can cam­paign strate­gist and self-described polit­i­cal “dirty trick­ster” Roger Stone. . . .  have tak­en NXIVM’s exec­u­tive suc­cess cours­es or were found to have ties to the orga­ni­za­tion, accord­ing to Times Union report­ing. . . .