« Deduction Heaven | Main | Discussion Topic: Media Bias »

October 15, 2005

Macrame Award: CNN at the Toledo Neo-Nazi Riot

By Pepper of the Daily Pepper, who just saw this on CNN and is teed off enough to post again

CNN just flashed up videos of a riot in Toledo, Ohio. Some citizens were understandably and justifiably agitated by a Neo-Nazi rally that was being staged in that city. So people freak out. A building is set on fire - by whom? I don't know. I don't especially care. Violence goes with a Neo-Nazi rally like peanut butter and jelly.

The LAT quoted one black man who questioned the town's judgment: "They let them [the Neo-Nazis] come here and expect this not to happen?" said White, 29. [Pepper note: Yes, in a strange twist, his last name is "White." That'll annoy the Neo-Nazis.]

But CNN topped themselves - and the AFP and the AP - when they focused on a group of African Americans lunging at a snack hut. CNN's headline? VIDEO SHOWED LOOTERS BREAKING INTO SMALL STORE Uh, how about VIDEO SHOWED STUPID NEO-NAZIS RECEIVING A WAKE-UP CALL? The people rushing the snack hut appeared to be African-American (the camera was far away). I'm sorry about the snack hut, but I care way more that Neo-Nazis are threatening black residents of Toledo, and the protesters were absolutely right to let the Neo-Nazis know they are not welcome.

As for CNN, wow, to go to a Neo-Nazi rally and drop the "looter" bomb on some angry people is poor taste, especially after the "looter" blunder during Hurricane Katrina. Nice job, CNN.

Dr. Pepper had a good question: "Why are they allowed to have a march with police officers in tow?" You know what? If they want to have a march, let 'em. Without any police officers on hand. Let them spread their hateful words and watch in amazement as their hate is reflected back upon them. I'm with Mr. White: What on earth did they expect?

October 15, 2005 in Media | Permalink


TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Macrame Award: CNN at the Toledo Neo-Nazi Riot:


This is, of course, reminiscent of the infamous announcement by Neo-Nazis in 1977 that they intended to March in Skokie, IL - a town in which, at that time, one out of every six of its Jewish residents was a Holocaust survivor. The ACLU fought on behalf of the Neo-Nazis to express their free speech, and won. (In the end, the march never happened, anyway.)

The CNN coverage sounds dire, and Neo-Nazis are, inarguably, a thoroughly repellent group with absolutely nothing of value to say. But they still have a right to say it, and a right to organize. And police officers are always "in tow" when a controversial group wants to demonstrate, specifically to try to stem what is often inevitable violence.

As angry as the black residents of Toledo are, and have every right to be, allowing them to express their feelings through violence is wholly inappropriate. Should gaybashers be allowed to attack marchers in a Pride Parade because they disagree with their message? We can't decide whose speech gets protection based on whether we agree with it or not.

Posted by: Shakespeare's Sister | Oct 15, 2005 4:28:54 PM

The Neo-Nazis never even got to march. They arrived, the group of predominantly black "protestors" were already at the scene of the march. The "protestors" started throwing rocks and eggs at the Neo-Nazis. The police stopped the march before it started and the Neo-Nazis were escorted away. The "protestors" started attacking the police and started rioting. The "protestors" started looting businesses and private homes. Then the "protestors" set at least one building on fire, after they broke thru the barricaded door to that building and looted it.

You are angry that the news covered the looting and rioting instead of the Neo-Nazis!?!

What if a group of Black Panthers wanted to march in a town in the south and a group of "protestors" attacked them. Would you want to see coverage about the racism of the Black Panthers or coverage of the attack and the aftermath?

Posted by: Captain Toke | Oct 15, 2005 4:33:23 PM

Toke: 1
Ezra: 0

Also, CNN: 0. Regardless of the facts that the Nazis have a right to march and the protestors have no right to become violent ("What do they expect"?!? What is that? A Limbaughism?), dropping the "looters" tag and providing little to no context is par for the course in "journalism" these days. And yet another reason why I have no respect for the profession.

Posted by: space | Oct 15, 2005 4:46:50 PM

Yesterday, Toledo's Mayor Ford declared this weekend "Peace Weekend", in anticipation of the Neo-Nazi march and the peaceful protest opposing the Nazi march.

Posted by: Captain Toke | Oct 15, 2005 5:07:48 PM

Apologies to Ezra. The scoreboard should read:

Toke: 1
Pepper: 0
CNN: 0

Posted by: space | Oct 15, 2005 5:10:11 PM

Gawd, I hope this post is a joke.

Posted by: SomeCallMeTim | Oct 15, 2005 5:25:17 PM

Captain Toke and Space: You guys are completely and utterly missing the point. I can only feel sorry for someone who compares the tactics of Nazis, who attempted and nearly completed the extermination of a people, with the so-called "racism" of the Black Panthers, which is a response, however debatable, to historical oppression.

No, and I'm sorry, but the neo-Nazis do not have a priori "right" to march, just as Al Qaeda has no "right" to organize rallies in the United States and solicit charitable contributions from Americans (the giving of charitable funds has been historically protected under the 1st Amendment). What should really be covered here is not some supposed "looting" but the actions of the elected idiot in Ohio who provided a permit and 150 police officers for the defense of a group sworn to pursue the extermination of large segments of the United States. I guess I shouldn't be surprised that right-wingers like you can't even get on the liberal side on this issue. You guys are hopeless.

Posted by: Len | Oct 15, 2005 5:29:29 PM

"the so-called "racism" of the Black Panthers, which is a response, however debatable, to historical oppression."

So some hate groups are OK and others aren't.

"The New Black Panthers, formally known as the New Black Panther Party for Self-Defense, is a U.S.-based group founded by Aaron Michaels in 1989 in Dallas Texas. Many breakaway members of the Nation of Islam were attracted to the organization when former Nation of Islam minister Khalid Abdul Muhammad became the national chairman of the group in the late 90's and remained as such until his passing in 2001. It is currently led by Malik Zulu Shabazz, and espouses a radical black nationalist philosophy. It is loudly anti-Semitic and anti-white, and often considered a hate group. The Southern Poverty Law Center lists the party as a hate group."

Who decides which hate groups can march? You?

"neo-Nazis do not have a priori "right" to march,"

Do pro-Palestinian groups have a right to march? They openly advocate the death of Jews.

You want to silence a group because of their ideology and you call yourself "liberal". You sound more like one of them Nazis to me.

Posted by: Captain Toke | Oct 15, 2005 5:48:29 PM

Toke, Neo-Nazis? In America? No, no, no, no, and never. What is wrong with you?

Shakes, you are right to make the argument for free speech. Yes, they have the right to say it. They can say it all they want, but their agenda endorses the violent act of genocide. A parade translates their statements of violence into an act of violence. And I feel that I must draw the line there. A gay pride parade doesn't endorse violence. The Neo-Nazi group crosses the line. I don't think the march should have been allowed in the first place.

I considered that the march might be an act of free speech, but I feel that groups like Neo-Nazis and the KKK use the right to free speech selectively. They cry "free speech!" when they can't hold their marches. I don't think they really mean it when they say their behavior is free speech, particularly when they wouldn't give the right of free speech to nonwhite individuals. In fact, they know their marches aren't a matter of free speech.

Finally, I do not endorse violence. I don't think it's all right for the protesters to respond violently. If they break stuff and steal stuff and set stuff on fire, they should be arrested. My major intent with this post is to sneer at CNN's response. When I say "I'm sorry about the snack hut," I mean that the CNN coverage's priorities were not in the right place. When I say let the Neo-Nazis march without police protection, maybe they'll rethink their actions. But I still ask, did the Neo-Nazis expect hearts and flowers?

Posted by: Pepper | Oct 15, 2005 5:50:53 PM

"gay pride parade doesn't endorse violence. The Neo-Nazi group crosses the line."

The New Black Panther Party advocates violence, should they be suppressed if they want to march somewhere where they aren't wanted?

Posted by: Captain Toke | Oct 15, 2005 5:59:53 PM

Captain Toke, where did I say that I would "silence" the Neo-Nazis? They can speak all they want to, publish their texts and cry murder in the streets. But they cannot base a claim to organize and solicit police protection on the First Amendment. Shakespeare's Sister unwittingly made my point herself when she characterized these rallies as ending in "almost inevitable violence." A neo-Nazi rally is not speech alone, but "fighting words" - words that immediately and inevitably incite violence. What, are courts not supposed to take a plantiff's utterance of words like "nigger" and "kike" into account if he charges a defendant with attacking him? Is not that speech an action?

You don't address my question about Al Qaeda's right to free speech, and I am sure that all of us could think of innumerable other examples of groups for which speech equals violence. As for the Black Panthers, I'm not going to dispute your right to say whatever you want about them, whether true or not.

Of course, with your ignorance of history, you are willing to boil down all ideologies under the label of either "liberal" or "Nazi," as though the Nazis even cared about your free speech issue. So, ergo, my opinion must of course be that of a Nazi.

Posted by: Len | Oct 15, 2005 6:02:56 PM

I didn't realize that we were talking about the Black Panthers all of a sudden. It seems like that's what you want to make the argument about, eh?

If they endorse violence, then they shouldn't march. Then again, I don't know if they do endorse violence. The last I heard about the Panthers is that they put out a line of hot sauces, which is different from terrorizing neighborhoods on the march.

But the argument isn't about the Panthers. I had a two-part argument: a) It was wrong for the march to be held in the first place. b) It was wrong for CNN to call black people "looters" because they were enraged at the sight of Neo-Nazis.

Posted by: Pepper | Oct 15, 2005 6:04:50 PM

I have not looked up this group's charter (it was a neo-Nazi group foup Virginia I believe), but do you have a quote from their mission statement advocating violence? I don't believe there is such a quote, but I have not checked.

And if you say 'look at what the Nazis did under Hitler', I can say the same about Communists because of what they did under Stalin. Should Communists be restricted from marching? (If you make the 'under Hitler' argument)

"b) It was wrong for CNN to call black people "looters" because they were enraged at the sight of Neo-Nazis."

Now I was watching FoxNews, The Number One Name In News!

Anyway, I watched the whole thing play out. I saw black people looting on live TV. It was right there. I am sure everyone will see replays of it. Fox announced repeatedly that this started out as a protest of a neo-Nazi rally. Maybe CNN isn't 'Fair and Balanced' like Fox.

There were black people rioting and looting, the people were supposed to be protesting. You can't blame CNN for reporting facts.

Posted by: Captain Toke | Oct 15, 2005 6:30:29 PM

foup = from

Posted by: Captain Toke | Oct 15, 2005 6:32:09 PM

Why didn't the police control the situation? Why didn't they allow the firetrucks in to put out the fire... they were shown clearly on the live footage, blocks away. "Protesters" had already dispersed from the area. When the looting began, why didn't the cops move in to stop it? Really simple.

Yes, the "protesters" overreacted - but anyone in their right mind would've not only expected that (unfortunately) but anyone in a position of authority/responsibility should've been prepared to handle any contingency.

The incident was allowed to blossom out of control... plain and simple, thereby providing examples of how wild, dangerous and out of control Blacks are.

Just my $0.02

Posted by: Kevin | Oct 15, 2005 6:53:48 PM

What a phenomenally illiberal post to appear on what is nominally a liberal/progressive blog. When I consider my wholehearted support for free speech, I certainly don't make exceptions for groups that I find distasteful, and this march was clearly an attempt to peacefully communicate a message.

Posted by: Andy | Oct 15, 2005 8:21:32 PM

Did anybody read the entire story? The city of Toledo didn't provide the Neo-Nazis with a parade permit. They turned them down. But you can't stop a group of people from walking down the sidewalk. There's simply nothing the city could have done to stop that.

As for the police protection, of course they provided police protection. Knowing what was likely to happen, does anyone think they should have just pulled out and declared a free fire zone?

Posted by: Kevin Drum | Oct 15, 2005 8:30:12 PM

I support the National Socialist Movement and i am soon to sign up for the Life-Long membership packet, it is not the National Socialist fault it was the blacks and the communists. LOOK HERE- the National Socialist are protesting Black Crime in the city and LOOK HERE--the blacks are looting and rioting. So all of you should quit being childish and immature about this.


Posted by: Kevin Jacoway | Oct 15, 2005 11:03:46 PM

I bet Michael Moore is really torn over this. On the one hand, it is a rally for national socialists, and even though they are Nazis, they are still socialists. On the other hand, the other group was a group of rioting, looting black people. Michael Moore loves black people who riot and loot. He loves any group who is 'sticking it to whitey' (even tho they were destroying their own community).

I bet it broke his heart to see them two groups fight.

Posted by: Captain Toke | Oct 16, 2005 9:05:35 AM

I read with some remorse about the event in Toledo. However, Louis Farakan has his right to have a "milion man march" so why is there not fair and balanced participation from other groups, even if they are Neo-Nazi. Farakan is a racist just as much as the Neo-Nazi's. To say that the Black Panthers reign of violence was a response to years of oppression is bull crap. They were violent gang members, and the violence in Toledo was nothing more than plan old violence. It is interesting that well educated people are embarrassing themselves in the news saying that these protesters to the Nazi's were not violent as they are caught in the act of throwing rocks and bottles, torching buildings and looting. I do not understand the logic. Violence is violence plain and simple.
It is unfortunate that the protesters to the march could not find a peaceful way to put down the march and show it for what it really was, racism. But the Nazi group showed so plainly that they were right, those residents of Toledo who violently protested were nothing but gang members and criminals. The Nazi's let the protesters prove their point and it was so easy to prove. Violence begets violence.

Posted by: John H. | Oct 16, 2005 11:31:52 AM

John H is dead on.

Here's the real problem and why we are even talking about this. Blacks are a protected minority. Anything that shows them in a bad light must be dealt with if you are any kind of liberal at all.

The sad fact, thought, are that black people were seen stealing in New Orleans and Blacks were seen rioting in Toledo. Them's the facts, Jack. The rest of it is either justification or apologies from the left.

Posted by: Fred Jones | Oct 16, 2005 1:14:00 PM

"If black n white didn't argue the most- they could clearly see the government's screwin''em both."

Neo Nazi's vs. the "eviL" black gang Bangers- Live!

CNN! FOX! Reality T.V.!

watch out for al-cia-duh! Be afraid- those, those- no good looters are everywhere I tell ya- gang bangin the whole bunch of em.

One man even responded-"Neo-Nazi's" are similar to a "Gay-Pride" parade?

And if you're Kanye West- you feel Hip-Hop should be more receptive to gay culture?

The most unfornunate of these statistics- 100+ "citizens" arrested by the ensuing riot after "Neo-Nazi's" with a police escort show-up, incite the riot, and then get to leave?

Did these so "called" Neo Nazi's really help the white population of Toledo to feel safer? Did the Police?

The stage is grand. The actors are many.

Left, Left, Left, Right- Left. Doesn't matter.

Violence=Vioilence. Hate=Hate. War=War.

Who wants 2 fight?

Posted by: John Brown | Oct 16, 2005 2:32:13 PM

This is a no-brainer. The nazis have the right, guaranteed under the first amendment, to march. Period. End of story.

Those who hate the nazis (which would include me) have no right to do anything about it except to protest peacefully. There is nothing to debate here.

As Hillel said, all the rest is commentary.

Posted by: DBL | Oct 17, 2005 11:09:02 AM

These Blacks are nothing but the footsoldiers of Bush in his recreation of the Russian Revolution on American soil. White America: BUSH WANTS YOU DEAD FOR ISRAEL!
George Rothschild Bush feasts on the Blood of Goyim!

Posted by: FuckHeebistanAKAAmerica | Oct 17, 2005 5:32:59 PM

The whole point of this march was to protest black-on-white crime in the Toledo area. I don't live too far from there. Blacks have been threatening whites in that low-income working class neighborhood for sometime now. They have even been leaving fliers on white people's doorsteps stating they are "takin' ova".

The media covers this type of thing up all of the time and it is starting to get out of hand. If this site was really about media conspiracy then it would have been said here before.

Thousands of blacks can march on Washington DC and speak about the "evil white race." However, when a few white people want to protest violent crime and place the blame where it is supposed to fall, riots ensue. These white people didn't even get to rally.

We live in a nation of hypocrisy. Groups like the ADL, ACLU, NAACP, Black Caucus, and so forth are the ones that keep racism alive for their cause. They receive grants and funding for battling "racism" and, as such, need "racism" to continue in order to for their organizations to thrive.

The truth about Toledo is that a few whites wanted to stand up for themselves against black crime. It does not matter whether they were National Socialists wearing Nazi uniforms. The fact that hordes of black individuals immediately digressed into violent criminal behavior only proved the NSM point.

It's time for blacks in America to stop blaming "whitey" and start taking responsibility for their own actions. Hey, even Bill Cosby said it, so don't call me a "racist".

Posted by: one_percent | Oct 17, 2005 7:32:05 PM

The comments to this entry are closed.