Posts

DOJ Charges Far-Left SPLC with Fraud, Money Laundering, ‘Manufacturing Racism to Justify Its Existence’

The Department of Justice (DOJ) announced that the far-left Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) was charged with fraud and money laundering involving “violent extremist groups.”

In a press release from the Office of Public Affairs for the DOJ it was revealed that the SPLC was charged by an Alabama grand jury “with 11 counts of wire fraud, false statements to a federally insured bank, and conspiracy to commit concealment money laundering.”

According to the press release, an indictment says that “starting in the 1980s, the SPLC began operating a covert network of individuals who were either associated with violent and extremist groups, such as the Ku Klux Klan”:

According to the indictment starting in the 1980s, the SPLC began operating a covert network of individuals who were either associated with violent and extremist groups, such as the Ku Klux Klan, or who had infiltrated violent extremist groups at the SPLC’s direction. Unbeknownst to donors, some of their donated money was being used to fund the leaders and organizers of racist groups at the same time that the SPLC was denouncing the same groups on its website.

The SPLC also allegedly “funneled more than $3 million donated funds to individuals who were associated” with groups such as the National Socialist Movement, United Klans of America, and the Aryan Nations affiliated Sadistic Souls Motorcycle Club, between 2014 and 2023, according to the press release. (Read more from “DOJ Charges Far-Left SPLC with Fraud, Money Laundering, ‘Manufacturing Racism to Justify Its Existence’” HERE)

GOP Calls for Amazon to Explain Reliance on SPLC

GOP members of the House of Representatives Committee on the Judiciary sent a letter to Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos concerning the Southern Poverty Law Center’s relationship with Amazon Smile, a charity program that lets customers donate money to any of the acceptable nonprofits listed on the website.

In the letter, the Reps. Jim Jordan, Matt Gaetz, Mike Johnson, Ken Buck, and others determined that Amazon’s reliance on the SPLC to decide which charities may become eligible for the Smile donation program confirms that “Big Tech is biased against conservatives and censors conservative views.”

“The exclusion of these conservative groups from Amazon’s heavily-trafficked digital platform leads to less exposure for these groups and fewer opportunities for donations,” the letter reads. “In this way, Amazon’s reliance on the SPLC as a barometer to determine the eligibility of charitable organizations on AmazonSmile serves to discriminate against conservative views.”

The letter also outlines why the SPLC is unreliable, claiming that its willingness to place some conservative groups in the same category as “actual extremist organizations” proves its untrustworthiness and unreliability. (Read more from “GOP Calls for Amazon to Explain Reliance on SPLC” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Southern Poverty Law Center, Which Frequently Targets Conservatives, Reels From Harassment, Intolerance Claims

Amid a departure of top executives at the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), a new report details allegations of sexual misconduct and racial discrimination against those very individuals at the progressive nonprofit which frequently has targeted conservative groups.

A report from the New York Times on Monday detailed several complaints by both current and former employees that indicated a “climate of intolerance” in the workplace — complaints including sexual harassment and a lack of diversity based on race and gender.

In recent years, the center has drawn criticism from Republicans and conservatives who have accused the SPLC of unfairly labeling people and groups with conservative viewpoints as bigots. Republican lawmakers have also questioned the working relationship between the SPLC and the FBI.

On Friday, SPLC President Richard Cohen announced he would be stepping down from the civil rights organization amid the harassment and diversity allegations.

“We’re going through a difficult period right now, and I know that we’ll emerge stronger at the end of the process that we’ve launched with Tina Tchen,” he said speaking of the Chicago-based attorney and onetime chief of staff for former first lady Michelle Obama who is conducting a review of the nonprofit. (Read more from “Southern Poverty Law Center, Which Frequently Targets Conservatives, Reels From Harassment, Intolerance Claims” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

How Long Will Media Use SPLC’s Garbage Hate List to Smear People?

Like other mainstream publications, Roll Call regularly stoops to citing the thoroughly discredited Southern Poverty Law Center as a credible source for labeling “hate” groups. One recent such article was titled “Among the ‘Jewish groups’ Trump cites, one with neo-Nazi ties.” The author had worked for House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, and this was clearly part of Democrats’ effort to cover Pelosi and derail criticisms of Ilhan Omar for anti-Semitism.

I work with both of the “hate” groups named in the article, the Center for Security Policy and ACT for America. SPLC’s characterization of them is fraudulent, like most of what it does. It is thus little surprise to anyone who knows anything that SPLC recently jettisoned founder Morris Dees over accusations of racism and sexual assault.

Despite years of takedowns of SPLC’s business model from both sides of the aisle, major media companies such as Amazon, PayPal, Twitter, the Washington Post, Facebook, Google, The New York Times, and more cite them and use their determinations for business decisions such as Amazon’s nonprofit donations program. When will this ever end? How many lawsuits and lies will it take?

The SPLC’s Hate Group Definitions Are Garbage

ACT does not now, nor did it ever have, ties to any “neo-Nazi.” Both ACT and the Center are long-established organizations whose leaders and scholars seek to inform and warn America about the subversive goals of Islamic radical groups in the United States, not everyday Muslims. Everyday Muslims are often as much the victims as others.

Most of the prominent Islamic organizations in the United States are either Muslim Brotherhood (MB) fronts or tied to the Deobandi movement of South Asia (which also has ties to MB). Both are aggressive, subversive organizations that engage in terrorism throughout the world.

In the United States they generally use subversion as a more effective strategy, and have insinuated their allies and agendas into the U.S. government, media, Hollywood, public schools and universities. This is helping encourage the recent rise of anti-Semitism in the United States.

They also engage in terrorism. The 2015 San Bernardino, California attack that killed 14 and wounded 22 was carried out by followers of Deobandi. Terrorists of the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas attack and murder Israeli Jews and even Arabs on an almost daily basis in the West Bank, and—note to border wall opponents—in Israel proper before Israel built its wall.

Hamas is a branch of the Muslim Brotherhood, whose U.S. front is the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR). Why doesn’t SPLC mention CAIR?

CAIR was an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation terrorism financing trial, and only avoided trouble because the Obama Justice Department under Eric Holder discontinued prosecutions of organizations named in the case. CAIR is also a subversive wrecking bar against the U.S. Constitution, conducting nonstop lawfare against America. CAIR’s Chicago branch—one of 27 in the United States—brags a tally of more than 5,200 lawsuits against U.S. governments.

Smearing People Is Big Business

Many of the “hate” groups on SPLC’s list are simply those it disagrees with politically. Rather than engage in legitimate debate, the SPLC seeks to destroy its political enemies with defamatory smear tactics. The Russian Communist Vladimir Lenin advocated this strategy, saying, “We must write in a language that inspires hate, revulsion and scorn among the working class toward those who disagree with us.”

Frankfurt School Communist Herbert Marcuse developed that idea into what came to be known as “partisan tolerance”: tolerance only of leftist ideas, individuals, and groups, and a wholesale effort to discredit and silence opponents. Marcuse and other Communists worked closely for years with SPLC co-founder Julian Bond.

The SPLC regularly consorts with Communist organizations. In his pamphlet, “Rules for Radicals,” Saul Alinsky advocated the tactic of accusing opponents of hate, but SPLC was the first to institutionalize it. It has since spread far and wide, in media, universities, Hollywood, and in mindless chants of leftist protesters. Apparently now it reaches even into the editorial staff of Roll Call.

The SPLC never criticizes even the vilest leftist groups. For example, Antifa, which uses violence and increasingly expresses vitriolic, obscenity-laced hate and anti-Semitism, earns no criticism or “hate” designation from SPLC. Instead, the SPLC defends groups like Antifa against the big, bad Proud Boys!

When Occupy Wall Street Black Bloc activists attempted to bomb a bridge in Ohio and blow up the GOP convention in 2012, SPLC was asked why Black Bloc was not listed among its “hate” groups. “We’re not really set up to cover the extreme Left” was the lame response.

The oldest Muslim Brotherhood front is the Muslim Students Association. It is responsible (along with the left) for the rise of anti-Semitism on college campuses. It never gets a mention by the SPLC.

There are countless other examples. The SPLC has singled out and destroyed numerous individuals and organizations using these smear tactics. It is a form of political terrorism.

SPLC’s Targets Have Begun to Fight Back

SPLC lost a $3.5 million lawsuit last year against Maajid Nawaz, a moderate Muslim the SPLC labeled an “extremist,” because he spoke out against Islamic extremism and terrorism. You literally can’t make this stuff up.

Now about 60 organizations have either sued or are considered suing the SPLC for its fraudulent smears. It’s about time. Thousands more could join in. It should be stripped of its 501(c)3 “nonpartisan” tax-exempt status and sued into penury. A dedicated prosecutor could easily make a claim that they are a continuing criminal enterprise and seize their assets under racketeering statutes.

The SPLC shows its extreme partisanship every day. Even liberals like Dana Milbank, Alexander Cockburn, and Stephen Bright have labeled the SPLC a fraud. It spends more than 20 percent of its income on fundraising and has amassed almost half a billion dollars in assets, some of which is squirreled away in overseas accounts.

Less than half of its revenues last year were needed to cover expenses, while its overtly socialist executives earn very capitalist salaries, and live like kings. Must be nice to be such conscience-free hypocrites.

Media Act as Megaphones for SPLC Smears

The Roll Call article cast both ACT and the Center as “hawks” on national defense, as if that were somehow further evidence of bigotry or some other evil. That is idiotic, but “hawks” isn’t even applicable.

The Center for Security Policy staff, for example, includes former CIA officers, military and law enforcement specialists, and other national defense experts. These people take positions based on a careful evaluation of each situation, not some knee jerk “hawk” response to everything. The only knee-jerk reactions seem to be coming from the pages of Roll Call and other mainstream outlets that continue to give the SPLC credibility, like Facebook and The New York Times.

It is tragic that large outlets like these have joined the ranks of leftist smear merchants who have reduced political discourse in the United States to little more than infantile name-calling. The SPLC is one of the nastiest hate groups on the planet. It deliberately provokes division and anger in America on a daily basis to advance its extreme left agenda and rake in millions in donations.

Roll Call, Amazon, Twitter, Facebook, Google and all the others need to drop the SPLC as a consultant on “hate” groups, but since they are all of the same stripe, they probably won’t. (For more from the author of “How Long Will Media Use SPLC’s Garbage Hate List to Smear People?” please click HERE)

_________________________________________________________

James Simpson is an economist, author and investigative journalist. His latest book is “The Red Green Axis: Refugees, Immigration and the Agenda to Erase America.” Follow Jim on Twitter and Facebook.

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Southern Poverty Law Center Slapped With Racketeering Suit

The Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) has filed a lawsuit against the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), claiming that SPLC operators Richard Cohen and Heidi Beirich have violated the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) by “falsely designating CIS as a hate group.”

CIS describes itself as “an independent, non-partisan, non-profit, research organization” that “pursue[s[ a single mission – providing immigration policymakers, the academic community, news media, and concerned citizens with reliable information about the social, economic, environmental, security, and fiscal consequences of legal and illegal immigration into the United States.”

The SPLC, on the other hand, describes itself on its website as “dedicated to fighting hate and bigotry and to seeking justice for the most vulnerable members of our society. Using litigation, education, and other forms of advocacy, the SPLC works toward the day when the ideals of equal justice and equal opportunity will be a reality.” . . .

“CIS’s much-touted tagline is ‘low immigration, pro-immigrant,’ but the organization has a decades-long history of circulating racist writers, while also associating with white nationalists,” SPLC continues. . .

“SPLC and its leaders have every right to oppose our work on immigration, but they do not have the right to label us a hate group and suggest we are racists,” (CIS Executive Director Mark) Krikorian said. “The Center for Immigration Studies is fighting back against the SPLC smear campaign and its attempt to stifle debate through intimidation and name-calling.” (Read more from “Southern Poverty Law Center Slapped With Racketeering Suit” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

SPLC Finally Held Responsible for Falsely Labeling People as ‘Extremists’

After being sued in April by Islamic reformer Maajid Nawaz and his organization, the Quilliam Foundation—over being listed as an “anti-Muslim extremist” in the Southern Poverty Law Center’s “Field Guide to Anti-Muslim Extremists”—the SPLC has announced that they reached a settlement with the liberal Islamic reformer, agreeing to pay Nawaz and Quilliam $3.375 million “to fund their work to fight anti-Muslim bigotry and extremism.”

“The Southern Poverty Law Center was wrong to include Maajid Nawaz and the Quilliam Foundation in our Field Guide to Anti-Muslim Extremists. Since we published the Field Guide, we have taken the time to do more research and have consulted with human rights advocates we respect,” SPLC president Richard Cohen said in a statement. “We’ve found that Mr. Nawaz and Quilliam have made valuable and important contributions to public discourse, including by promoting pluralism and condemning both anti-Muslim bigotry and Islamist extremism. Although we may have our differences with some of the positions that Mr. Nawaz and Quilliam have taken, they are most certainly not anti-Muslim extremists. We would like to extend our sincerest apologies to Mr. Nawaz, Quilliam, and our readers for the error, and we wish Mr. Nawaz and Quilliam all the best.

The list, which was published in 2016 and deleted shortly after Nawaz filed the suit, was reportedly intended to serve as a resource for journalists. The deletion of his inclusion as an “extremist”—a very serious accusation—came nearly two years the Muslim reformer first demanded the organization retract. The fact that it took litigation before he was removed from the list, despite requesting to be taken off of the list two years earlier, reveals the organization almost certainly had no intention of removing him without legal challenge.

“It’s a shame that it took impending litigation for the Southern Poverty Law Center to finally set the record straight and admit it was wrong all along,” Megan Meier, a partner at Clare Locke, the law firm that represented Nawaz, said in a statement provided to National Review. “Quilliam and Mr. Nawaz do admirable work, and we are honored to have restored their reputations and achieved this victory on their behalf.”

Therein lies the problem, as critics say that the SPLC operates as more of a partisan progressive hit operation than an actual civil rights watchdog group, and nefariously utilizes its position as an arbiter of hatred by including legitimate partisan ideologues as “extremists” alongside white supremacists in an effort to rile up its liberal donor base as it simultaneously pushes a partisan political agenda.

The SPLC has previously included Senator Rand Paul and Housing and Urban Development Secretary Ben Carson on extremist lists (Paul for suggesting private businesses shouldn’t have to adhere to the Civil Rights Act and criticizing the Fair Housing Act; Carson for his views opposing same-sex marriage), according to Politico.

Carson was eventually removed from the “extremist watch” list and the group issued an apology after the absurdity of his inclusion became a widespread topic of derision across the conservative media spectrum. But the entire episode led to a more clear realization of the intrinsically politicized nature of the SPLC.

“Time and again, I see the SPLC using the reputation it gained decades ago fighting the Klan as a tool to bludgeon mainstream politically conservative opponents,” Cornell Law Professor and critic of the SPLC, William Jacobson said. “For groups that do not threaten violence, the use of SPLC ‘hate group’ or ‘extremist’ designations frequently are exploited as an excuse to silence speech and speakers. It taints not only the group or person but others who associate with them.”

The controversial group similarly branded Ayaan Hirsi Ali, a Somali- and Muslim-born critic of the religion, as an “extremist” for advocating the abolition the atrocious practice of female genital mutilation, which she herself was subject to as a child.

The SPLC’s targeting of Nawaz, who is a former Islamist turned anti-extremism advocate and recognized human rights advocate, even sparked critical coverage in The Atlantic—a publication founded by abolitionists.

But perhaps the most critical problem is the legitimacy given to the SPLC by four of the world’s biggest tech platforms, as revealed in an exclusive investigation by the Daily Caller News Foundation, which showed Facebook, Amazon, Google and Twitter all utilize the SPLC, which routinely labels conservative organizations as “hate groups,” to police their platforms for “hate speech.”

The investigation revealed that while Amazon gives the SPLC the most direct authority over its platform, all of the aforementioned tech companies give the progressive organization a significant amount of influence within their platforms.

“We remove organizations that the SPLC deems as ineligible,” an Amazon spokeswoman told the DCNF.

Amazon grants the SPLC that power “because we don’t want to be biased whatsoever,” the spokeswoman said. However, she could not say whether Amazon considers the SPLC to be unbiased.

Consequently, Christian legal groups such as Alliance Defending Freedom—which recently successfully represented a Christian baker before the Supreme Court—are banned from using the Amazon Smile program, while openly anti-Semitic groups are allowed on the platform, according to the report.

“Charitable organizations must meet the requirements outlined in our participation agreement to be eligible for AmazonSmile. Organizations that engage in, support, encourage, or promote intolerance, hate, terrorism, violence, money laundering, or other illegal activities are not eligible. If at any point an organization violates this agreement, its eligibility will be revoked,” an Amazon spokeswoman said in an additional statement.

“Since 2013, Amazon has relied on the US Office of Foreign Assets Control and the Southern Poverty Law Center to help us make these determinations. While this system has worked well, we do listen to and consider the feedback of customers and other stakeholders, which we will do here as well,” the spokeswoman added.

Additionally, the Daily Caller report went on to note that Google uses the SPLC to police “hate speech” on YouTube:

Google uses the SPLC to help police hate speech on YouTube as part of YouTube’s “Trusted Flagger” program, The Daily Caller reported in February, citing a source with knowledge of the agreement. Following that report, the SPLC confirmed they’re policing hate speech on YouTube.

The SPLC and other third-party groups in the “Trusted Flagger” program work closely with YouTube’s employees to crack down on extremist content in two ways, according to YouTube.

First, the flaggers are equipped with digital tools allowing them to mass flag content for review by YouTube personnel. Second, the groups act as guides to YouTube’s content monitors and engineers who design the algorithms policing the video platform, but may lack the expertise needed to tackle a given subject.

The SPLC is one of over 300 government agencies and nongovernmental organizations in the YouTube program, the vast majority of which remain hidden behind confidentiality agreements.

So, we have an organization that has no issues with putting Rand Paul on a list of “extremists” being given control of the modern informational gateways of society. If this group is willing to classify people like Ben Carson and Paul as “extremists,” they cannot be realistically trusted to determine what is “hate speech” worthy of removal—also referred to as censorship.

Essentially, what you have is a partisan ideological organization masquerading as a legitimate civil right group that has operationalized as a censorship mechanism for the masses. By simply equating a person or organization with “extremism,” the SPLC—in concert with the big tech companies—has the ability to effectively delegitimize them across the mass media spectrum, which will dutifully report whatever the SPLC deems as truth. (For more from the author of “SPLC Finally Held Responsible for Falsely Labeling People as ‘Extremists'” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

In Devastating Blow to Credibility, Southern Poverty Law Center Pays Millions for Labeling Activist an Extremist

By Washington Times. The Southern Poverty Law Center took a devastating hit to its credibility and reinforced its reputation for unfairly wielding the “hate” label Monday by agreeing to pay millions of dollars to an organization previously included on a list of “extremists.”

In a stunning settlement, SPLC President Richard Cohen issued an apology and agreed to pay $3.375 million to the British-based Quilliam Foundation and founder Maajid Nawaz after they appeared in a since-deleted 2016 journalists’ guide to “anti-Muslim extremists.”

The agreement, reached after Mr. Nawaz threatened to sue, prompted the center’s many critics on the right to reissue calls for media outlets and companies, which include Google and Amazon, to stop relying on the center for neutral “hate group” assessments.

Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, one of 954 groups listed on the SPLC’s “hate map,” argued that the settlement terms “leave the media and big business with no excuse in continuing to use the SPLC as an objective, independent source.”

“The Southern Poverty has long been the Left’s pit bull — resorting to smears and a hate map to advance its liberal political agenda,” Mr. Perkins said in a statement. “But its falsehoods and dangerous tactics have finally caught up with them — with the group doling out millions in a defamatory settlement.” (Read more from “In Devastating Blow to Credibility, Southern Poverty Law Center Pays Millions for Labeling Activist an Extremist” HERE)

____________________________________________________

SPLC Apologizes, Pays Settlement to Islamic Reformer It Wrongly Labeled ‘Anti-Muslim Extremist’

By National Review. The Southern Poverty Law Center has reached a settlement with liberal Islamic reformer Maajid Nawaz and his organization, the Quilliam Foundation, for wrongly including them on its now-defunct list of “anti-Muslim extremists.”

The SPLC announced Monday that it has agreed to pay Nawaz and Quilliam $3.375 million “to fund their work to fight anti-Muslim bigotry and extremism.” The settlement was the result of a lawsuit Nawaz filed in April over his inclusion on the SPLC’s “Field Guide to Anti-Muslim Extremists.”

The list, which was published in 2016 and was intended to serve as a resource for journalists, was deleted shortly after Nawaz filed the suit. The deletion came roughly two years after Nawaz first demanded a retraction. (Read more from “SPLC Apologizes, Pays Settlement to Islamic Reformer It Wrongly Labeled ‘Anti-Muslim Extremist’” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

The Southern Poverty Law Center: Institution of Weaponized Hate

Since the election of Donald Trump as 45th President of the United States, the leftist underground has surfaced in an unprecedented, full-throated effort to neutralize his historic victory. This underground includes violent communist, socialist and anarchist street thugs from groups like Refuse Fascism (the Revolutionary Communist Party), Antifa (Anarchists and Anarcho-syndicalists) and Black Lives Matter (Socialists). But it also includes many Democrat politicians, judges and bureaucrats at all levels of government, for example judges essentially governing from the bench with unconstitutional restraint orders, elected officials erecting sanctuary policies in direct defiance of the federal government, and a media willing to give them all rhetorical cover.

Running interference are groups like the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), who have joined the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) in an unholy alliance to attack and silence the Left’s critics. This war on speech has been going on for a long time, but over the past 17 months has reached a fever pitch. While we see Islamic terrorist attacks on Western targets almost daily now, CAIR literally threatens venues, organizers and speakers who discuss the threats from Islamic terrorism and the Islamic supremacy doctrine of Shariah.

And while CAIR goes on the warpath, the SPLC assists by labeling individuals and groups “bigots,” “racists,” “xenophobes,” “Islamophobes” and “haters.” The SPLC can claim responsibility more than any other for popularizing the “hate” narrative, now ubiquitous in the popular press.

The SPLC claims to target “right-wing extremists,” “white supremacists,” and other varieties of “haters.” It publishes a “Hatewatch” list and an annual “Year in Hate” publication. It’s website includes a “Hate Map” showing where all these supposed “hate” groups are located.

But most of the SPLC’s targets are not hateful or even extreme. Last Spring, as GOP members of Congress practiced for a baseball game in Alexandria, Virginia, extreme leftist democrat James Hodgkinson attempted to gun them down. Rep. Steve Scalise almost died of his injuries and is still recovering. Hodgkinson, like so many radical leftists, was filled with irrational hate toward Republicans based on the provocations of the SPLC and other extreme Left smear shops like Media Matters and MoveOn.org.

The Family Research Council is a mainstream conservative Christian organization. As the focus of SPLC’s “hate” list, it inspired Floyd Corkins, a homosexual activist, to attempt a mass shooting at FRC’s headquarters in 2013. Corkins said he was motivated to “kill as many people as possible,” after he saw the SPLC’s list, which labeled FRC “anti-gay.” The FRC remains on the SPLC list.

Capital Research Center is a DC think tank focusing on non-profit organizations and foundations. Center President, Scott Walter, says, “Hate is the issue here. When you talk about hate groups, you’re talking about a group that is a threat because of its violent tendencies and racism. It’s an outrageous lie that some mainstream Christian group is a threat in terms of violence and racism.”

The SPLC recently added the Center for Immigration Studies, a highly-respected DC immigration think tank, to its list. CIS produces fact-based studies on problems with illegal immigration and our overall immigration system — which few argue is in need of major overhaul. But that fact is irrelevant to the SPLC.

For years the SPLC has been at war with any immigration policy group that advocates any restrictions on immigration at all. It does not discriminate between legal and illegal immigrants. They all deserve “justice” in the eyes of the SPLC.

SPLC even attacks the Remembrance Project, which advocates for victims of illegal alien crime. SPLC claims the Project inflates illegal alien crime statistics, a claim directly refuted by official government data. In so doing, the SPLC dishonors the hundreds of thousands of families impacted by the illegal alien crime epidemic, including tens of thousands killed.* It goes without saying that with controlled borders, many fewer would be victimized.

The SPLC’s targets do not all lean to the right either. Their sole sin seems to be that they disagree with the extreme Left or Islamic radicals. Maajid Nawaz, a moderate British Muslim reformer who was held as a political prisoner in Egypt, was stunned to learn he had been listed in SPLC’s 2016 Field Guide to Anti-Muslim Extremists:

Through the counter-extremism organisation Quilliam that I founded, I have spent eight years defending my Muslim communities in Europe, Pakistan and beyond from the diktats of Islamist theocrats. I have also argued for the liberal reform of Islam today, from within… In a monumental failure of comprehension, the SPLC have conflated my challenge to Islamist theocracy among my fellow Muslims with somehow being “anti-Muslim.” The regressive left is now in the business of issuing fatwas against Muslim reformers.

Also included in the anti-Muslim list is Somali former Muslim, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, an author and former member of the Dutch parliament who speaks out against Muslim suppression of women, especially the barbaric practice of female genital mutilation. In SPLC’s description, it even acknowledges that her friend, filmmaker Theo van Gogh, was murdered by a Muslim and her name was pinned to his body with a knife. But she’s the hater?

The SPLC never criticizes any organization of the Left, no matter how extreme. The SPLC even admits it, making plain that the “extremist” designation is related to the political positions staked out by those it labels. In an interview with NBC’s Chris Matthews, SPLC spokesman, Mark Potok, stated:

Well, let me say for starters that our—when we name groups “hate groups,” that has nothing to do with any allegation of criminality or some kind of measure of expected violence. It‘s purely about ideology.

At a public speaking event, Potok was even more pointed:

Sometimes the press will describe us as monitoring hate crimes and so on … I want to say plainly that our aim in life is to destroy these groups, to completely destroy them…

In another notorious example of this bias, National Review columnist Charles Cooke confronted the SPLC about the violence of an Ohio Occupy Wall Street group, noting that, in the name of anarchy, it sought “the wholesale destruction of Cleveland, Ohio,” and “to blow up the Republican convention.” The SPLC representative responded, “They were Anarchists… We’re not really set up to cover the extreme Left.”

The Language of Hate

Unlike most of its targets, the SPLC is the organization that genuinely expresses hate. In fact, hatred is its stock-in-trade. The SPLC’s goal is to identify and discredit, or even, in Potok’s words “completely destroy” those organizations and individuals it disagrees with. It does so by attempting to label them “racist,” “homophobic,” “Islamophobic,” “xenophobic,” etc. — name your phobe.

To reconcile the SPLC’s often contradictory, and usually false narratives, one must understand that its constant vilification of political enemies is entirely tactical. The terms “hater,” “bigot”, “racist,” and so forth are frequently misunderstood as a spontaneous, visceral reaction to policies the Left opposes. Those with more political savvy recognize it as an application of Saul Alinsky’s Rule #13: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.

But it actually comes from a very specific tactic first articulated 100 years ago by Vladimir Lenin, the first leader of the Soviet Communist Party, who said:

We must be ready to employ trickery, deceit, law-breaking, withholding and concealing truth… We can and must write in a language which sows among the masses hate, revulsion, and scorn toward those who disagree with us.

In the Soviet Union under Lenin and Stalin, individuals so vilified could face a death sentence. But the tactic was urged on party members everywhere, as suggested by this 1943 Soviet message broadcast to the world’s communist parties:

“Members and front organizations must continually embarrass, discredit and degrade our critics. When obstructionists become too irritating, label them as fascist or Nazi or anti-Semitic… constantly associate those who oppose us with those names that already have a bad smell. The association will, after enough repetition, become `fact’ in the public mind.”

Does that not sound like what is going on today? Does it not sound exactly like what the SPLC does?

Lenin and his Bolsheviks also believed silencing critics was essential to their cause. He said:

Why should freedom of speech and freedom of the press be allowed? Why should a government which is doing what it believes is right allow itself to be criticized? It would not allow opposition by lethal weapons. Ideas are much more fatal things than guns.

The SPLC and Repressive Tolerance

The German Communist Herbert Marcuse further developed Lenin’s idea in his 1965 essay “Repressive Tolerance.” Marcuse was one of the better known members of the so-called Frankfurt School. Founded in Frankfurt, Germany in 1923 as the Institute for Social Research, the school was disbanded when Hitler rose to power, and its professors – all Jewish Communists – fled. Most came to America. The Frankfurt School was reinstituted at Columbia University. Marcuse taught there before heading to Harvard, Brandeis — where he was fired for being too radical — and finally the University of California, San Diego.

Marcuse mentored Angela Davis, the black American Communist who later became involved with the Black Panthers, first at Brandeis, then at UC San Diego, which she attended specifically because he was there. Davis also attended the reestablished Frankfurt School in Germany at Marcuse’s suggestion, where she studied with other Frankfurt School scholars, and remained in touch with Marcuse throughout. Davis described Marcuse as having “a profound influence on my life and work.”

Marcuse and his fellow Frankfurt School Marxists created Critical Theory, an intellectual tool to deconstruct the West through constant criticism. Today it is commonly referred to as Cultural Marxism or Political Correctness, but few are aware of its radical and truly malevolent source. Echoing the Soviets, Frankfurt School teaching relentlessly accused Western societies of being “the world’s greatest repositories of racism, sexism, xenophobia, homophobia, anti-Semitism, fascism, and Nazism.”

Our First Amendment allows for the free exchange of ideas, even radical ones. Marcuse claimed that despite this apparent “tolerance,” an oppressive imbalance exists in Western societies, which he said, “favors and fortifies the conservation of the status quo of inequality and discrimination.” To correct this imbalance, he followed Lenin’s lead, suggesting that leftists had a special right to lie, suppress truth, engage in violence and law-breaking to get their way:

Under the conditions prevailing in this country, tolerance does not, and cannot, fulfill the civilizing function attributed to it by the liberal protagonists of democracy, namely, protection of dissent… I believe that there is a ‘natural right’ of resistance for oppressed and overpowered minorities to use extralegal means if the legal ones have proved to be inadequate… If they use violence, they do not start a new chain of violence but try to break an established one.

In the sphere of public debate this meant:

Not “equal” but more representation of the Left would be equalization of the prevailing inequality… Given this situation, I suggested in “Repressive Tolerance” the practice of discriminating tolerance in an inverse direction, as a means of shifting the balance between Right and Left by restraining the liberty of the Right, thus counteracting the pervasive inequality of freedom (unequal opportunity of access to the means of democratic persuasion) and strengthening the oppressed against the oppressors…

Marcuse further described the types of people who needed to have their freedom curtailed:

[It] would include the withdrawal of toleration of speech and assembly from groups and movements which promote aggressive policies, armament, chauvinism, discrimination on the grounds of race and religion, or which oppose the extension of public services, social security, medical care, etc.

In Marcuse’s formulation anyone who criticizes, for example, programs like social security or Medicaid, is by definition a racist, sexist, etc. and should have his/her voice and activities silenced. Do “aggressive policies” include anarchist violence? As with the SPLC, apparently not. Read what he says about education:

Moreover, the restoration of freedom of thought may necessitate new and rigid restrictions on teachings and practices in the educational institutions which, by their very methods and concepts, serve to enclose the mind within the established universe of discourse and behavior–thereby precluding a priori a rational evaluation of the alternatives.

Doesn’t this sound like what is happening in education today? However, leftist ideas have never been excluded from discussion in schools and colleges. To the contrary, the educational establishment has been marinating in extreme Left ideology for decades, and while tuition costs skyrocket, liberal arts students emerge from college with fewer and fewer skills to justify it.

The SPLC and Communists

Marcuse’s Repressive Tolerance was read widely and his tactics readily adopted by the Left, including the SPLC, for which Marcuse’s formulation became its raison d’etre. Marcuse directly influenced the SPLC through his collaboration with SPLC co-founder and lifelong radical Socialist (and probable Communist), Julian Bond. They got to know each other through work on the National Conference for New Politics, an event Bond helped organize. Late Senator James Eastland described the NCNP as “working hand-in-glove with the Communist Party” to foment “revolution in the United States.” In 1976 Bond and Marcuse were also co-founders of the radical journal In These Times.

In 1965 Bond was vice-chairman of the National Committee Against Repressive Legislation, a Communist Party USA front. In 1970, Bond joined the Democratic Socialist Organizing Committee which ultimately became Democratic Socialists of America. He also co-founded the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee, later led by black separatist Stokeley Carmichael and H. Rap Brown, who advocated guerrilla warfare in the U.S. Between 1998 and 2010, Bond was also chairman of the board of the NAACP.

Though elected to the Georgia legislature, the body refused to seat Bond three times because of his agitation against the Vietnam War. In response, Bond called on communist lawyer Leonard Boudin to represent him. Boudin’s other clients included the government of Fidel Castro, Soviet agent of influence Paul Robeson, and Pentagon Papers leaker Daniel Ellsberg. Boudin’s daughter, Kathy, was a Weather Underground terrorist who served 25 years for her participation in the 1981 Brinks robbery that left two policemen and one Brinks guard dead. Kathy’s son, Chesa Boudin, was adopted by Weather Underground leaders Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn while Kathy was in prison. Chesa has spent time in Venezuela, and consulted Communist leader Hugo Chavez while he was alive.

Bond and Marcuse also shared an interest in Marcuse’s protégé, Angela Davis. Davis was a member of Bond’s SNCC. When she was jailed for her alleged role in the Black Panther murder of a California Judge, she recruited attorney Howard Moore, Bond’s brother-in-law, who had also helped represent Bond in his battle to be seated with the Georgia legislature. In 1982, Davis and other members of the Communist Party USA founded the National Alliance Against Racist and Political Repression, which Bond endorsed. Bond later wrote the foreword to Davis’ book, If They Come in the Morning: Voices of Resistance.

Psychological Terrorism

The SPLC has many other connections to communism and communists as well. Mark Potok and the SPLC have been featured numerous times in the Communist Party news magazine People’s World. Quoted in a 2009 article, Mark Potok charged that the Center for Immigration Studies, the Federation for American Immigration Reform and Numbers USA — which he claimed were all the brainchild of “an extreme white nationalist and anti-immigrant culprit” — had caused the “demise of comprehensive immigration reform in 2007.” Was that a crime? Apparently so, according to Potok. In another article, Morris Dees was cited as warning the U.S. Congress that neo-Nazi groups were infiltrating the military, which then could be inadvertently training future would-be domestic terrorists.

In 2011, Potok authored a People’s World article, “Coming to Terms with the Confederacy,” in which he criticized events that recognize confederate history. When questioned by a reporter about the appropriateness of writing for the communists, Potok claimed ignorance of the article’s placement, saying instead that they sometimes wrote for an organization called Otherwords, which was responsible for article placement.

Otherwords, however is a project of the Institute for Policy Studies, an extreme left Washington, DC think tank created with monies provided by Samuel Rubin, creator of Faberge perfumes and a Soviet COMINTERN (Communist International) agent.53 The SPLC is listed as an Otherwords Partner on its website.

Former SPLC board member James Rucker55 co-founded Color of Change in 2005 with self-described communist Van Jones. Before that, Rucker was grassroots organizing director at the Soros-funded leftwing activist group MoveOn.org.

In short, the SPLC has a sordid history of collaborating with, being inspired and even led by American Communists, and has employed Communist vilification techniques to intimidate and silence political opponents. It has caused SPLC targets to be discredited in the public eye, lose jobs, be refused speaking engagements and other economic damages, and has even inspired attempted mass murder. SPLC’s tactics are a type of psychological terrorism.

Conclusion

The SPLC, in collusion with an extreme Left, anti-American press, radical Islamists, and politicians motivated by ideology, money, fear, or some combination, has elevated defamatory smear tactics to high art. In so doing it has debased the political dialog to little more than infantile, elementary school, name-calling — but weaponized it to destroy its enemies. It The SPLC is the consummate definition of a hate group.

It is a national disgrace. But the most shameful aspect of its transparent behavior, is that the political class has given it legitimacy simply by refusing to call it what it is. And for that reason, it has become dangerous. Left unchallenged, its lies become truth, and encourage even more outrageous lies and disinformation. That in turn allows its practitioners to believe they can get away with anything. They flout laws and are becoming ever more aggressive and brutish in their oppression of political enemies. We see this today with the leftist brownshirts, who mask their identity then attack Trump supporters and others with chains, bats and mace. Will guns be next?

It is a predictable path, as witnessed too many times already in the past century, with the Nazi extermination of the Jews and communist mass murder that has killed more citizens in times of peace than have died in all the wars in history combined.

This path is charted in the 10 stages of genocide. Don’t laugh. We are currently between stages 3 and 4, where institutions like the SPLC seek to increasingly dehumanize their political foes:

At this stage, hate propaganda in print and on hate radios is used to vilify the victim group.”

Because:

Dehumanization overcomes the normal human revulsion against murder.

And while conservatives are furiously attacked for the most circumspect criticism of the Left, at the same time we see leftists routinely advocating murder. Kathy Griffin’s infamous photo is only one example. This is the impulse of unrestrained, compulsive despots. They define themselves by their behavior.

The thugs of Antifa, Black Lives Matter, Refuse Fascism, CAIR and all the others, are the ugly face. But behind them are the propaganda mills that give them their justification. More than any other, the SPLC is devoted to this single purpose. What happens if this unholy alliance gains unchallenged power? Unchallenged barbarity.

Some groups are finally hitting back. Coral Ridge Ministries is suing the SPLC for defamation, claiming that it falsely labeled Coral Ridge a “hate” group, simply because its beliefs on homosexuality and gay marriage are biblically based. “It’s ridiculous for the SPLC to falsely tag evangelical Christian ministries as ‘hate groups’ simply for upholding the 2,000-year-old Christian consensus on marriage and sexuality,” Ministries spokesman John Rabe said.

The Southern Poverty Law Center is an extreme Left, communist-inspired, if not communist led, influence operation designed to rationalize demonizing and silencing critics of the far Left’s agenda for America. This agenda is no less than fundamental transformation of our Constitutional Republic into a Soviet-style, one-party Socialist state. The SPLC’s tax-exempt status should be immediately revoked, its assets seized under RICO statutes and its leaders investigated for participating in a continuing criminal enterprise to subvert America.

Southern Poverty Law Center Refuses to Label Antifa a Hate Group

The Southern Poverty Law Center refuses to label the left-wing extremist organization antifa a hate group.

The SPLC’s “hate map” features groups and organizations that it classifies as hateful according to its own criteria. On this map, people can find the U.S. Border Patrol and the Family Research Council.

However, the antifa label is nowhere to be found, The Washington Times reported.

Although there are countless videos demonstrating the left-wing extremist organization’s violent behavior and rhetoric, SPLC president Richard Cohen believes that antifa doesn’t demonstrate hate.

“If you are familiar with our work, we write about antifa often,” Cohen said Thursday in a testimony he gave to the House Homeland Security Committee. “We condemn their tactics — I’ve said so publicly and we do so always — but antifa is not a group that vilifies people on the basis of race, ethnicity, religion and the like.”

Pennsylvania Republican Scott Perry told the SPLC during Cohen’s testimony on domestic terrorism that the SPLC “reduces” their “credibility” by refusing to add antifa to their list of hate groups.

“So you’re OK with antifa as long as they don’t say things that you don’t agree with, but it’s OK if they hit people on the head with a bike lock or set things on fire or riot and flout the law by wearing face masks and incite riots — you’re OK with that?” Perry asked.

Cohen responded by stating: “We condemn groups like antifa, we write about them often. We don’t list them as hate groups.”

When asked about why the SPLC doesn’t include groups such as the Students for Justice in Palestine who have reportedly advocated for violence against Jewish people on their list, Cohen responded with the following.

“I don’t know about that particular group,” he said. “We try to call hate as we see it. We limit our list not by left versus right but by groups that vilify others for factors such as race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, religion or the like.”

Virginia Republican Rep. Thomas Garrett then pointed out that leaders of the SPLC almost exclusively donate to Democrats, prompting the possibility that liberal influence may seep its way into the SPLC’s decision making processes.

“The liberal tradition is an inclusive one,” Cohen said. “Hate is the opposite of that liberal tradition of inclusivity. So it’s not surprising to me that people at the SPLC, people at other inclusive organizations tend to give money to liberal organizations. It seems obvious to me.”

Although Cohen and the SPLC have refused to label antifa as a hate group, there have been multiple examples of its members espousing extremely violent behavior and rhetoric.

In the video that can be seen below, an antifa member identified as Eric Clanton can be seen hitting a Trump supporter with a bike lock.

Michael Isaacson, a professor at John Jay College and self-proclaimed antifa member, also tweeted a horrific statement aimed at his students.

“Some of ya’ll might think it sucks being an anti-fascist teaching at John Jay College but I think it’s a privilege to teach future dead cops,” Isaacson wrote, as reported by the New York Post.

Isaacson was reportedly suspended in September after pressure was put on the college to dismiss him. (For more from the author of “Southern Poverty Law Center Refuses to Label Antifa a Hate Group” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Do You Count As An Extremist ‘Patriot’? A Closer Look At The SPLC Report (+video)

Photo Credit: mrsdkrebsToday’s report by the left-leaning Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) claiming that anti-government, radical “patriot” groups are on the rise has sparked an avalanche of “I Told You So” comments from the left. There’s also been a great deal of consternation among conservatives, especially as regards to the SPLC’s assertion that concern over gun rights is a mark of “patriot” groups, and the persistent terminological position of the SPLC that the groups in question count as “far right.”

To be sure, the group’s report is worded in a bizarre fashion, and includes several passages that could be easily denounced as partisan. This one in particular sticks out:

Even before the Dec. 14 shootings at Sandy Hook Elementary School, gun and ammunition sales shot up in the wake of the re-election of the country’s first black president, the result of shrill conspiracy theories about Obama’s secret plans to confiscate Americans’ guns. When the killings actually did spark gun control efforts that clearly had not been in the Obama administration’s plans, the reaction on the political right was so harsh that it seemed to border on hysteria.

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) proposed a law that would nullify any executive gun control actions by Obama, accusing the president of having a “king complex.” U.S. Rep. Trey Radel (R-Fla.) said the president could be impeached for those actions. State lawmakers in Arizona, Mississippi, South Carolina and Tennessee proposed laws that sought to prevent federal gun control from applying to their states.

Richard Mack, a former Arizona sheriff who sued the Clinton administration over the Brady Bill’s imposition of background checks on gun buyers, claimed that of 200 sheriffs he’d met with, most “have said they would lay down their lives first rather than allow any more federal control.” Matt Barber of the anti-gay Liberty Counsel said he feared that the nation, which he described as already on the brink of civil unrest, was headed for “a second civil war.” “Freedom ends. Tyranny begins,” tweeted Fox News Radio host Todd Starnes. “Get ready,” TeaParty.org said. “Right now government gun grabbing plans are being covertly organized.”

Read more from this story HERE.