Posted: March 19th, 2010 by Militant Libertarian
After recovering from the “news” that the new film Camp FEMA is somehow racist, I thought it might behoove me to take another look. Maybe the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) knows something I don’t about “racism.” After exploring their interesting site, it has become even more clear that they are not on the side of We-the-People. In fact, they may have been founded on some very sound principles, but their present-day agenda is profoundly more nefarious.
Indulge me for a minute please…my family has fought racism throughout our generations. My grandfather preached equality for ALL in churches in the South. How easy do you think that was to do? My parents did not allow us to use derogatory words, even going so far as to not allow us to use a person’s skin color to describe them. I am still scarred from a battle I had at a United Methodist church in Louisiana, as a seventeen-year old girl, trying to fight racism and politics. Did the Southern Poverty Law Center bother to ask me any questions? No, they didn’t. Believe me, growing up in the South in the ‘60’s and ‘70’s, I know a thing or two about racism!
Many news outlets use the Southern Poverty Law Center to comment on racial issues. There are several; CBS, FoxNews, CNN, the New York Times, Newsweek, the Washington Post, the Associated Press, and more. A group that focuses on hate, The SPLC issues quarterly “reports” about hate…groups, actions, people. In its Spring 2010 Intelligence Report, they claim to have identified 512 “Patriot” groups in the US. (What is wrong with a “Patriot” group?) In their defense, the SPLC does say that being categorized as a “patriot group” does not mean these “groups” advocate violence or hate. Why, then, list them at all? Are they trying to put something in the public’s mind about these “groups?”
The SPLC, the MIAC Report and the Federal government have perverted the true definition of patriot. The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines a “patriot” as someone “who loves his or her country and supports its authority and interests.” The SPLC says that these groups “define themselves” as “opposed to the ‘New World Order,’ engage in groundless conspiracy theorizing, or advocate or adhere to extreme antigovernment doctrines.”
Shouldn’t Americans be opposed to a “New World Order”? A “New World Order” would be against our sovereignty as both a free country and free individuals. It has also been presented time and again by US officials, as well as foreign leaders, including Gordon Brown of England, who alluded to, and outright commented on, the New World Order many times. In 1991, Former President Bush, Sr. gave a speech in which we would be “forging for ourselves and others a New World Order,” where, oddly enough, he says the “rule of law” will govern. He further talks about the United Nations. The United States has a great “Rule of Law,” the Constitution, yet our elected officials ignore, circumvent, and issue “Presidential Signing Statements” to avoid that law, and have, since the beginning of our country. This idea is not as far-fetched as the SPLC would have you believe and the SPLC would have you look the other way while they defame the true defenders of the “Rule of Law”.
Engaged in “groundless conspiracy theories” is the SPLC’s opinion and lacks the journalistic integrity to be included in an “intelligence report”. Plus, exactly to which “conspiracy theories” do they refer…or are they referring to ANY questioning of the Federal Government as conspiracy theories? I hate to point it out, but in the United States, we are governed by the consent of the people, so the people are supposed to be in charge, and it is our duty to question what we 1) think does not add up, 2) do not understand, and 3) anything else that threatens our inherent rights granted to us by our Creator.
Of course, one of the “theories” to which they refer has to be the questions surrounding September 11, 2001. There are legitimate questions surrounding that particular event, and if the government wanted to shut up these particular “conspiracies,” all they would have to do is provide answers. In a BBC production from several years ago, Former Florida Senator Bob Graham (who co-chaired the Congressional Inquiry into 9/11) said, “I can just state that within 9/11 there are too many secrets, that is information that has not been made available to the public for which there are specific, tangible, credible answers and that withholding of those secrets has eroded public confidence in their government as it relates to their own security.” Graham was/is right, of course, as the numbers of those who have honest questions about 9/11 are still growing.
Another “groundless conspiracy theory” is that surrounding the afore-mentioned New World Order. At the Spring 2009 G20 Summit, England’s Brown pushed the global community into a New World Order. The discussion of our financial system coming under the regulation of the International Monetary Fund had Dick Morris and Sean Hannity realizing that one of the concerns of the “New World Order conspiracy theorists” was actually happening. In affect, these “theorists” had been “right” all along.
Yet another “conspiracy theory” was “Gulf War Illness.” Since the first Gulf War, veterans have been extremely ill and the government steadily denied “gulf war syndrome,” favoring to diagnosing these extremely ill men and women with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). But the government could no longer deny the existence of “Gulf War Illness,” almost 20 years later, when a federal report published in December 2008 acknowledged that there was, indeed, an actual illness related to the 1990/91 Gulf War. From an article revealing the report: “The 452-page report states that ‘scientific evidence leaves no question that Gulf War illness is a real condition with real causes and serious consequences for affected veterans.’”
Let’s move on to the SPLC’s claim of “antigovernment” extremism. One of the things that those so-called “antigovernment” agendas have in common is their love for country, love for freedom and love for our “Founding Documents,” which includes the Constitution. One must wonder how the SPLC can possibly think these groups are antigovernment when they hold so dearly to the Constitution! What these groups are against is an over-reaching, power-grabbing, intrusive government, a government that will not uphold the “rule of law!” What these groups are looking for is the government as defined in the Constitution of the United States of America. What is so wrong with that? It’s what our Founding Fathers fought and died for! Isn’t that the government that spurred the forging and forming of our country?
It is worth mentioning that maybe the SPLC got its definition of “antigovernment” or better yet, “patriot” from the government itself. In 2001, a pamphlet originating from the Phoenix FBI Office shocked people everywhere. This pamphlet tries to make us think that those who “defend the US Constitution” or those who “make numerous references to the US Constitution” are potentially dangerous. Even so, can’t an organization that is looked to for information make an educated decision about who could be dangerous without relying on an out-of-control government?
This brings me to what happened last summer. While the SPLC was investigating organizations like the Oath Keepers, the Liberty Restoration Project and We are Change, or people like Alex Jones, Gary Franchi and others, why wasn’t the SPLC “investigating” the FBI? Did they forget about radio host Hal Turner? Turner was a white supremacist that happened to be an asset to the federal government. When is the SPLC planning to investigate Federal government? If there is one “Hal Turner,” there must be others. Who are they? How many more “Hal Turners” are inciting hate and violence at the Government’s direction? Does the SPLC know the answer? Are they “investigating” that?
Recent comments made by Dr Heidi Beirich lead me to now ask, is the SPLC going to investigate one of their own? Dr. Beirich took the “opportunity” to call Gary Franchi “insane” and Alex Jones a “lunatic” and accuse Jones of “inspiring” the murder of three police officers in Pittsburgh last year. In response, Franchi says, “It is irrational to assume that because you are unhappy with the government you encourage people to become violent towards individual government employees.” When did questioning the government make you racist or a promoter of hate, and, now, someone who inspires murder? AND, what did Turner inspire, BACKED BY the government?
What is SPLC’s real agenda? They obviously do not promote freedom of speech unless you agree with their rhetoric. Maybe I will borrow words from readers of SPLC’s Spring article slamming Camp FEMA and Colorado’s KBDI: “How does wanting a new 9/11 investigation equate to hate speech?” or “What does Camp FEMA have to do with hate? It actually exposes hate” or “Those who feel this is hatred must also feel our founding fathers were bigots” or better yet, if you “don’t like programs that edge towards the truth keep listening to your elected officials and the mainstream media!” (Remembering that the approval rating for both is EXTREMELY low!) People should demand that the Southern Poverty Law Center come clean with their new agenda of pushing hate, because it is clear the SPLC has strayed far from the sound principles of their founding.
Take Back Washington
Active ‘Patriot’ Groups in the United States in 2009
Merriam-Webster Online: Define Patriot
Gordon Brown at the G20 Summit Early 2009
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T-f9jcX9ao4 at about 1:00
Former President George H. W. Bush’s 1991 Speech
“The Conspiracy Files: 911” BBC Sunday, 18 Feb, 9pm on BBC Two
Hannity, Morris agree with Conspiracy People
Gulf War illness is real, new federal report say
FBI, Phoenix Office, Joint Terrorism Task Force Pamphlet
White supremacist radio host Hal Turner was an FBI informant, as hackers claimed a year ago
Special Reality Report: Caught on Tape Dr. Heidi Beirich
Congress Job Rating
Trust in News Media Falls to New Low in Pew Survey