A Hate Group That Claims To Be Fighting Hate

Last week I posted an article about a donation given to the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) by George and Amal Clooney. The donation was made in response to the events in Charlottesville, Virginia, and was given ‘to combat hate groups. As I explained in the article, according to the SPLC, a hate group is any group of people who do not share the same beliefs as the SPLC. That is the danger of designating hate groups–there may be a few we all agree on, but there is also a lot of room for disagreement.

PJ Media posted an article yesterday reporting that the SPLC is being sued by some of the groups it has designated as hate groups.

The article reports:

Now, some of the groups slandered by this organization have begun to fight back — and it’s not just Christian groups like D. James Kennedy Ministries and Liberty Counsel.

“The SPLC, who made their money suing the KKK, were set up to defend people like me, but now they’ve become the monster that they claimed they wanted to defeat,” Maajid Nawaz, a British politician and founder of the anti-Islamist organization the Quilliam foundation, declared in a video announcing his lawsuit against the SPLC for defamation.

“They have named me, alongside Ayaan Hirsi Ali, on a list of ‘Anti-Muslim Extremists,'” Nawaz said. “I am suing the SPLC for defamation and I need your help to win.”

The article notes:

In June, the charity navigation website GuideStar adopted the SPLC “hate group” list, marking each profile of the targeted organizations as a “hate group.” ABC and NBC  parroted the SPLC’s “hate group” label against Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) last month, and CNN published the group’s “hate map” online.

But the SPLC does not deserve this widespread trust, support, and publicity. The organization is a “cash-collecting machine” that spreads libels against religious organizations and has been connected to two domestic terror attacks.

There have been two domestic terror attacks that have connections to the SPLC. The first was the shooting of Representative Steve Scalise (R-La.) early this summer (James Hodgkinson had liked the SPLC on Facebook. The SPLC had attacked Representative Scalise for giving a speech to a white supremacist group.) The second attack occurred in 2012 when Floyd Lee Corkins III broke into the Family Research Council (FRC), aiming to kill everyone in the building. The article reports that during an FBI interrogation, the shooter said he targeted FRC because it was listed as an “anti-gay group” on the SPLC website.

The article at PJ Media centers on the lawsuit by Maajid Nawaz, a British politician and founder of the anti-Islamist organization the Quilliam foundation.

The article reports:

In the video announcing his lawsuit, Nawaz declared that “placing my name on a list like this not only smears my name, but also puts me in physical danger.” He noted that “the Left has descended into violence, whether that’s punching people on the street, throwing explosives and attacking people in protests and riots or assassination attempts on Right-wing politicians by leftist fans of the SPLC.”

Whatever their intention was at their inception, the SPLC has become a political hate group that has discovered a way to make money through lawsuits and gifts from people who want to feel good about ‘combating hate.’ It is my hope that a few lawsuits will convince them to find other ways of making a living.

Please follow the link above to the PJ Media article. It is chilling that an organization that claims to be fighting hate can be so misused by the political left. At the moment, the SPLC is being used as a weapon to stifle Christian beliefs and conservative speech. That is not a direction America should be moving in.

In What Universe Is This Logical?

The New York Daily News is reporting today that ESPN is changing its announcer for the VirginiaWilliam & Mary football game this season. The announcer originally scheduled to cover the game was an Asian man named Robert Lee.

This is one explanation of the decision:

Are we so immature that allowing this man to announce a football game is a problem? Obviously he is not related to Robert E. Lee, nor should it matter if he were. Robert E. Lee lived more than a hundred years ago. He’s been dead a long time. How is he relevant to a football game?

I would have believed this story if it had been posted by The Onion, but it is hard to believe that it is true. What has happened to the maturity level of the average American?

Despite The Media, There Are Still Rational Americans

Breitbart posted an article yesterday about a National Public Radio poll that provides hope among the current chaos. The poll convinces me that many of our political leaders and the mainstream media have totally lost touch with the American public.

The article reports:

Asked, “Do you think statues honoring leaders of the Confederacy should remain as a historical symbol,” 62 percent of those polled said yes, including 44 percent of Democrats, 82 percent of Republicans, and 61 percent of Independents.

Asked if they should “be removed because they are offensive to some people,” only slightly more of the Democrats agreed, at 47 percent. Only six percent of Republicans agreed, and 27 percent of Independents.

The poll showed that the issue was divisive among African American respondents — 44 percent believed the statues should remain and 40 percent believed they should be removed.

The poll showed that white and Latino respondents felt similarly — 67 of white and 65 percent of Latino respondents believed the statues should stay; 25 percent of white and 24 percent of Latino respondents believed they should be removed.

The poll was taken after the tragedy in Charlottesville. Despite the attempt by politicians and the news media to use that event as a springboard for destroying monuments to American history and attempting to destroy President Trump, very few Americans were impressed. It is interesting to see that despite the fact that some political figures are screaming to remove our history, most Americans disagree.

 

Some Insight From Someone Who Understands What Is Behind The Unrest

David Horowitz is what is called a ‘red-diaper’ baby. His parents were admitted communists who taught in the New York City schools. He was one of the founders of the New Left in the 1960s and an editor of its largest magazine, Ramparts. In the 1990’s, after an incident during which he learned the true character of the Black Panthers, David Horowitz began moving toward more conservative thought. His story is told in his book Radical Son. Because of his involvement in leftist political causes as a young man, he understands how the political left works. Today he posted an article about the events in Charlottesville at Newsmax.

Here are a few of his observations from the article:

The tragedy in Charlottesville, Virginia, could have been an occasion to stop and consider how the tolerance for politically correct violence and politically correct hatred is leading the nation toward civil war.

Instead, the media and the political left have turned this incident into the biggest fake news story of the summer, transforming its real lessons into a morality play that justifies war against the political right, and against white people generally.

The organizers of the “Unite the Right” demonstration in Charlottesville were repellent racists.

But they came to defend a historic monument honoring a complex man and cause, and not to attack it or, presumably, anyone else.

They applied for a permit and were denied. They re-applied successfully in a petition supported by the local ACLU.

If they had come to precipitate violence, why would they have gone to the tedious trouble of applying for a permit?

Not unlike the Nazis who marched in Skokie, Illinois, years ago, they had the right to march. No one had to agree with them, but had they been left alone, they probably would not have even made the news.

The article further notes:

What “Unite the Right” actually demonstrated was that the assortment of neo-Nazis, pro-Confederates, and assorted yahoos gathered under the banner of the “Alt-Right” is actually a negligible group.

This supposed national show of strength actually attracted all of 500 people.

Compare that to the tens of the thousands who can readily be marshaled by two violent groups of the left — Black Lives Matter and Antifa — and you get an idea of how marginal “white supremacists” are to America‘s political and cultural life.

Yet “white supremacy” and its evils became the centerpiece of all the fake news reporting on the event, including all the ludicrous attacks on the president for not condemning enough a bogeyman the whole nation condemns, and that no one but a risible fringe supports.

Talk about virtue signaling!

Omitted from the media coverage were the other forces at work in precipitating the battle of Emancipation Park, specifically Black Lives Matter and Antifa, two violent left-wing groups with racial agendas who came to squelch the demonstration in defense of the monument.

Unlike the Unite the Right demonstrators, the leftist groups did not apply for permits, which would have been denied since there was another demonstration scheduled for that park on that day.

One major conclusion reached in the article:

Once the two sides had gathered in the same place, the violence was totally predictable.

Two parties, two culpabilities; but except for the initial statement of President Donald Trump, condemning both sides, only one party has been held accountable, and that happens to be the one that was in the park legally.

What is taking place in the media accounts and political commentaries on this event is an effort by the left to turn the mayhem in Charlottesville into a template for their war against a mythical enemy — “white supremacy” — which is really a war on white people generally.

The ideology that drives the left and divides our country is “identity politics” — the idea that the world consists of two groups — “people of color” who are guiltless and oppressed, and white people who are guilty and oppressors.

This is the real race war.

The media is playing a major role in tearing America apart. I can’t help but wonder if they will like the results if they are successful in separating us into warring groups and stealing our history and identity as Americans.

Who Is Antifa?

One way to subvert a political movement is to plant radical people in it to make the entire group look bad. This happens in political campaigns all the time when candidates are forced to return a donation from a fringe group they may have been unaware of or a candidate is invited to give a speech somewhere that turns out to be a questionable set-up. The alt-right is a name the media has associated with racism, hatred, and general radicalism. If you carefully watch the way the media uses the term, you can see an attempt to expand the term alt-right to anyone who opposes the liberal agenda of the media. The media would like to convince you that believing good things about America and its future is unacceptable, racist, and radical. Meanwhile, a group called antifa pretty much gets a pass on anything they do.

Who is antifa? Antifa was started after World War II in Germany to counter the fascism that Hitler had brought to the country.

A website called jacobinmag describes the roots of antifa as follows:

Yet despite its failure to stop Hitler in 1933 and veritable dismantling in subsequent years, Germany’s socialist labor movement and its decidedly progressive traditions outlived Hitler in the factories of its industrial cities, and began gathering up the fragments as soon as open political activity became possible.

These groups, oftentimes launched from the aforementioned housing estates, were generally called “Antifaschistische Ausschüsse,” “Antifaschistische Kommittees,” or the now famous “Antifaschistische Aktion” – “Antifa” for short. They drew on the slogans and orientation of the prewar united front strategy, adopting the word “Antifa” from a last-ditch attempt to establish a cross-party alliance between Communist and Social Democratic workers in 1932. The alliance’s iconic logo, devised by Association of Revolutionary Visual Artists members Max Keilson and Max Gebhard, has been since become one of the Left’s most well-known symbols.

Essentially antifa is a communist group.

The article goes on to discuss how antifa should “fight a resurgent far right in the Trump era.” Obviously I disagree with that statement. There is nothing ‘far right’ about wanting to preserve America‘s history. There is nothing ‘far right’ about wanting to preserve the values of our Founding Fathers. I don’t believe that America is destined to become a communist country despite the efforts of groups like antifa. However, if we don’t get back to teaching our children the heritage of America and the extraordinary character and wisdom of our Founding Fathers, we could be in danger of losing the freedoms so many Americans have fought and died for.

Not every American in Charlottesville protesting the removal of historic statues was a racist, neo-nazi, etc. I am sure there were some people there who simply objected to the removal and eventual rewriting of American history. Those people had a permit to allow them to march. Antifa did not. Violence is unacceptable, but protest marches are legal. Who brought the violence? The violent incident caused by a neo-nazi has been widely reported. Has anyone reported the violence on the part of antifa?

The news media has taken sides against political conservatism (and American history). They did that a long time ago. The reporting on Antifa and the trouble they have caused in recent years (Berkley, Charlottseville, various G20 summits, etc.) has been limited and will probably continue to be so. The reporting on any extremes on the political right has been put on the front pages above the fold. Americans need to understand that they are being played.

 

I’m Not Sure The News Is Reporting This Honestly

I need to say up front that I have no direct information on this incident. I am, however, very suspicious about the way it is being reported. There was a rally today in Charlottesville, Virginia, that turned ugly. The rally was sponsored by a group called #UniteTheRight. Basically the purpose of the rally was to protest the tearing down of statues that are part of American history that some people have decided are offensive. The people the statues represent may or may not be offensive, but these people are part of American history. Like most of the rest of us, they tried to do what they considered right within the circumstances of the time in which they lived. A little tolerance is in order. It is totally unfair to judge those who lived more than a hundred years ago by the standards of today. How do you think future generations will judge the black genocide in America that is the result of government policies regarding abortion? The media is reporting the rally as a white nationalist rally. First of all, since when is nationalism white?

The dictionary defines nationalism as follows:

loyalty and devotion to a nation; especially :  a sense of national consciousness (see consciousness 1c) exalting one nation above all others and placing primary emphasis on promotion of its culture and interests as opposed to those of other nations or supranational groups

Nationalism under normal circumstances is a good thing. Americans need to be proud of their country and its culture. We were pioneers in personal freedom and responsibility. We made mistakes, but there were many things we did right. Women vote, minorities vote, and in spite of what you have heard, when honestly calculated, women are paid as much as men. We still have equal opportunity in America, and we still have the freedom to voice opinions that may differ from the majority.

We need to ask why this rally turned violent. We also need to look at the way the rally is being characterized in the media. I am not sure that we will get any honest answers as to what actually happened from the media in the coming days, but as I said in the beginning of this article–I remain skeptical. I don’t see any difference between the Ku Klux Klan, the neo-Nazis and the antifa. I don’t agree with any of them, but all of them have the right to protest–none of them have the right to be violent.

It would be interesting to know where the protesters on both sides were from. How did they get there? Were they paid? Were any expenses paid for them? Who planned this rally? Who planned the protest? What were the instructions given to those attending? What is the news story that is not on the front page because this rally is taking center stage? It is time to be skeptical and assume that we are simply not being told the entire story and that the story we are being told may not be the truth.