The Montana Human Right Network takes it's cue from this radical leftist organization. PS
By Debbie Morgan, staff writer, www.TakeBackWashington.com,
Edited by Gary Franchi www.RestoreTheRepublic.com
"March 18, 2010 - 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."
Full Story Here:
Original SPLC story here:
I am proud to say that Lincoln County Watch made this list. When you are telling the truth it's powerful, and when you are really getting something done you will incure the wrath of the radical left. Thanks SPLC for spreading our name around the country. As PT Barnum said "Any publicity is good publicity"
Don't stop now. Truth always goes through three stages.
1. It's denied and disbelieved.
2. It's violently opposed
3. It's finally accepted for what it is.
Thanks again SPLC. We are in good company with the other organizations you listed, such as "Celebrating Conservatism, The John Birch Society, The Constitution Party, Militia of Montana, Oath Keepers, We Are Change, and We the People, and that is just in Montana.
It must be frustrating for you to see all the people rising up and throwing off your propaganda. As more and more truth comes out you will lose your influence just like the newspapers that are going broke across American because they won't tell the truth.
LEGAL NOTICE: The Authors specifically invoke the First Amendment rights of freedom of speech and of the press, without prejudice, on this website. The information posted on this website is published for informational purposes only under the rights guaranteed by the First Amendment of the Constitution for the United States of America. Images, text and logic are copyright protected. ALL rights are explicitly reserved without prejudice, and no part of this website may be reproduced unless by written consent. You hereby have written consent to post any individual post from this website containing this copyright to any other blog or email only if you post the whole and unaltered article including this copyright, and give proper credit to the author, and a link back to this blog at http://www.paulstramer.net/. This applies only to articles written by Paul Stramer. ©2005-2010 by Montana Business Communications (PDS) All rights remain in force. Removing this notice forfeits all rights to recourse. Copyright strictly enforced © The videos are third party and not covered by this legal notice.
Are you looking for Solutions for America in Distress
You are in the right place to find out about what is really going on behind the scenes in the patriot movement in America, including solutions from Oathkeepers, Anna Von Reitz, Constitutional Sheriffs, Richard Mack, and many more people who are leading the charge to restore America to freedom and peace. Please search on the right for over 2800 articles.
You will find some conflicting views from some of these authors. You will also find that all the authors are deeply concerned about the future of America. What they write is their own opinion, just as what I write is my own. If you have an opinion on a particular article, please comment by clicking the title of the article and scrolling to the box at the bottom on that page. Please keep the discussion about the issues, and keep it civil. The administrator reserves the right to remove unwarranted personal attacks. Use the golden rule; "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you."