The Left’s Moderation of Conservative Media


In case you were unaware, the online publication BuzzFeed is a lying Left-Wing Internet rag hugely responsible for spreading Leftist propaganda, disinformation, misinformation and even tipping toward downright lies. In essence BuzzFeed is the Prince of notorious Fake News. Of most infamy is the publication of the discredited Steele Dossier used as a Dem pretext to exact a silent coup against President Trump via the mechanizations of a Left-dominated Federal bureaucracy in the DOJ and various Intelligence Agencies.

 

Looking at BuzzFeed’s infamous notoriety for Leftist hit pieces, Mark Alexander in his Thursday column openly wonders about Buzzfeed’s interest in the operation The Patriot Post.

 

JRH 7/18/19

Your generosity is always appreciated:

Please Support NCCR

SUPPORT The Patriot Post

**********************

The Left’s Moderation of Conservative Media

They are relentless and use Gestapo tactics.”

 

By Mark Alexander

July 17, 2019

The Patriot Post

 

“If by the liberty of the press were understood merely the liberty of discussing the propriety of public measures and political opinions, let us have as much of it as you please. But if it means the liberty of affronting, calumniating and defaming one another, I, for my part, own myself willing to part with my share of it.” —Benjamin Franklin (1789)

 

Digital Media Monitors

 

Sometimes I am able to plan a topic more than 48 hours ahead of my deadline. This started as one of those weeks. But as with the best-laid plans, sometimes it’s necessary to alter them. (I’ll say a bit more on that original topic at the end of this column.)

 

The Patriot Post has become the target of a thinly veiled effort to undermine the reach of our conservative voice. That effort was launched by one of the biggest entertainment/news tabloids on the Web, BuzzFeed, with a review claiming that we’re “the biggest mystery in conservative media” and raising questions about the team “behind one of the oldest conservative” online news organizations.

 

BuzzFeed’s media editor, its resident expert on “fake news” (I know, the irony is rich), has used that platform for his inquiry. When a Leftmedia outlet with a budget hundreds of times the size of our small grassroots organization targets us — a “David versus Goliath” contest, if you will — it creates a quandary.

 

We have a longstanding Patriot Post policy: “Don’t swap spit with a jackass.” But when the accuser has a huge platform, as one of our editors noted, “to leave misinformation uncontested is tantamount to suggesting that it’s true.” And while it’s likely that none of you, our readers, are even aware of the BuzzFeed accusations, rebut we must.

 

Sometimes criticism is intended to be constructive.

 

Last week, for example, I wrote about the rise of a new genre of digital-media arbiters of truth, in which I mentioned a new media accountability effort, NewsGuard, and explained how it worked. I further noted that whenever humans render opinions about the world around them, they inevitably bring a bias to that perspective.

 

However, undergoing NewsGuard’s process of evaluation was helpful to our team. It employs a battalion of professional journalists, which we have never claimed to be, and their questions and suggestions helped us improve what we do.

 

On the other hand, sometimes criticism is intended to be destructive. With BuzzFeed, and the leftist academic social-media “expert” who pointed them at us with a clear agenda, their intent was something other than constructive.

 

The inquiries about The Patriot Post started with BuzzFeed’s “fake news expert,” Toronto-based Media Editor Craig Silverman. He seems like a decent person whose left-of-center bias is mostly the byproduct of being caught in a Leftmedia echo chamber.

 

The timing of Silverman’s appointment to his current position is ironic, as it came just before BuzzFeed’s Leftmedia hacks published the infamous fake “Russian Dossier,” a completely fabricated opposition-research document funded by the Democrat Party and Hillary Clinton’s campaign. That provided the fodder that mainstream-media outlets like CNN and MSNBC needed to promote as the basis for the Democrat/MSM propaganda machine’s bogus two-year Trump/Russia collusion investigation, a ruse to obstruct Trump’s MAGA agenda.

 

Suffice it to say that the fake dossier has since been completely debunked, but not before BuzzFeed issued yet another bombshell fabrication, prompting special prosecutor Robert Mueller to take the unusual step of calling out the BuzzFeed report as fake news. Buzzfeed will never shed the ethical malpractice for this partisan “fake news” charades. (See “Beyond BuzzFeed: The 10 Worst, Most Embarrassing U.S. Media Failures on the Trump-Russia Story.”)

 

For his part, Silverman now distances himself from the term “fake news,” because Donald Trump has successfully hung that moniker where it belongs: around the necks of the Leftmedia. And while it’s entirely possible that Silverman really wants to eradicate the purveyors of misinformation, he’s leading that charge from one of the most prolific propagators of misinformation on the Web.

 

As you may know, BuzzFeed is having serious problems.

 

Founded in 2006 by Left Coast native Jonah Peretti, the company had over $300 million in revenues in 2018. Notably, $84 million of that was from Facebook, Google, Amazon, and Netflix, and yet, according to The New York Times, “the company still loses money.” Amid a decline in traffic, BuzzFeed is laying off hundreds of its news staff because, as Silverman told me, the profit is on the entertainment side.

 

As for BuzzFeed’s collaboration with Facebook, it is notable that the latter was just issued a $5 BILLION fine for breaches of privacy, which is why nobody should trust such platforms with any personal information.

 

When he inquired about The Patriot Post’s unusual model of accepting no advertising, Silverman said, “Refusing ads is a notable policy given that email lists are huge moneymakers … and The Patriot Post’s has been built up over more than 20 years.”

 

As for our principled reasoning for refusing advertising, I referred him to our About page, which explains, “Our website pages and emails are certified ‘Ad Free.’ Because we do not depend on a single penny of ad revenue, we focus solely on providing you content that is actually newsworthy — worthy of your time — rather than constantly churning the ubiquitous topics which now dominate the Leftmedia’s relentless 24/7 recycled spin.” Additionally, “We are not sustained by any political, special interest, or parent organization, and we do not accept advertising to ensure our advocacy and editorial content is not restrained by commercial influence — as is the case with all mass media outlets. Our website and email editions are free of advertising clutter.”

 

Silverman actually lamented that BuzzFeed’s model is built on churning news to bait “viral” clicks and ad views to generate revenue. I appreciated his candor. (I would note that, unlike BuzzFeed, our unconventional model has kept us operating in the black since our first year on the Web — a decade before the advent of BuzzFeed and its brand of entertainment media.)

 

Regarding Silverman’s inquiry, one of his followers asked a good question: “What was the point … to inform us a conservative news platform uses pseudonyms and doesn’t accept ad revenue? Okay … thanks for the info?”

 

GRYGIEL AND WARREN CELEBRATING ‘GAY’ MARRIAGE

 

To help answer that question, I asked Silverman who first brought The Patriot Post to his attention and why. He responded, “Professor Jennifer Grygiel” of Syracuse University, a leftist colleague who “tracks partisan media” and “teaches a course about BuzzFeed. … I previously spoke to her class.” He said he promised to give her a byline if he published a story about The Patriot Post.

 

So this inquiry did not originate at BuzzFeed. It started when a hard-left LGBT activist, an assistant professor of communications from upstate New York, who promotes herself as a social-media expert, fed Silverman the story. He says it was because of our social-media growth. But there are thousands of social media pages that are growing, so why is Grygiel so interested in The Patriot Post, and how many others has Silverman written about?

 

A few weeks ago, there was a complaint lodged against our Facebook page about a meme, which correctly asserted that there are only two genders. This resulted in a takedown and penalty from Facebook. Suspiciously, following that complaint, Grygiel contacted Silverman.

 

Grygiel, who prefers the pronoun pseudonym “they,” identifies her areas of expertise as social media, memes, media regulation, police media, social justice, LGBTQ youth advocacy, race, and gender, but her specific expertise appears to be how to get social-media outlets to restrict content that doesn’t comport with her political and social views.

 

In short, Grygiel and her ilk are forming the new front against the First Amendment.

 

When I asked Silverman if he was aware of her political views, he responded. “I don’t know Grygiel’s political views.” Given their collaborative history, that reply seemed somewhat less than candid.

 

To be fair, though, I also asked him what his impression of The Patriot Post was, and he responded, “I looked at recent issues of the digest and found them to be filled with interesting information and commentary. … So when it comes to your core product my personal opinion [is that] it seems to be of pretty high quality.”

 

He and Grygiel clearly did, however, find other Patriot Post viral memes offensive: “One meme mocking vegans,” they (by which I actually mean the two of them) reported, “generated more than 2.9 million shares, reactions, and comments, and another chiding Parkland, Florida, shooting survivor David Hogg attracted more than 2.1 million engagements.”

 

Anti-Vegan – Anti-Hogg TPP Humor

 

My response? The vegan meme was intended as humor, but most Leftists are humorless. And let me state emphatically, the assertion that Hogg is a “shooting survivor” does a disservice to actual survivors, like my friend and Patriot Post writer Roger Helle, who, as a Marine in Vietnam, survived being blown up, shot on two different occasions, and bayoneted — three Purple Hearts. He, not Hogg, is a real “survivor.”

 

When I asked about the motive for and objective of his collaboration with Grygiel, Silverman insisted “straightforwardly there is no intent to reduce your publication’s reach or undermine you.” Their next move will establish if that is true.

 

Another major point of contention in Silverman’s inquiry was our writers’ and editors’ use of pseudonyms, the “Publius” model from The Federalist Papers. This is another unconventional practice, like not taking advertising, which he simply could not grasp.

 

I explained that, since our inception, as noted on our About page, “As was the case with The Federalist (Papers) in 1787, the premier resource for understanding the Liberty and Rule of Law enshrined in our Republic’s Constitution, and from which we derive much of our constitutionally constructionist editorial inspiration, The Patriot Post is published under the pseudonym ‘Publius,’ and many of our editors and advisors are listed likewise.”

 

I noted that as we’ve grown over the years, I began offering new grassroots contributors the opportunity to choose a pseudonym or use their legal name. Some have chosen the latter.

 

Based on his fascination with pseudonyms, I asked Silverman if he’d written about how his publication’s CEO had set up fake websites under the names of real people in order to slander them, including one that attacked Second Amendment advocate John Lott (which Peretti admitted in a legal settlement, including his apology).

 

Silverman responded, “I’m not familiar with the examples … you cited and couldn’t comment on them without more research.”

 

(OK, let me make The Patriot Post research easy for the leftist inquisitors: We are actually a Russian front operated by Markovich Alexanderovich. We set up shop two decades before Trump announced his 2016 candidacy, so we could ensure he would defeat Hillary Clinton.)

 

Another point regarding our decision not to promote personalities… President Ronald Reagan, on his Oval Office desk, kept a small engraved plaque with the words, “There is no limit to what a man can do … if he does not mind who gets the credit.” That simple axiom defined how Reagan conducted his presidency: It was about the ideas, not about him.

 

That same plaque sits in front of my office computer today — where it reminds me, it’s about Liberty, not about us. That’s the “Publius” model, the Reagan principle, and our practice. But again, the MSM self-promoters can’t begin to fathom that principle.

 

Silverman also asked if I would put him in touch with some of the conservative leaders who provided favorable comments about The Patriot Post in years past. I contacted them, and predictably, nobody expressed an interest in talking with anyone associated with BuzzFeed.

 

However, the most widely known of those who offered praise for The Patriot, responded, “They are relentless and use Gestapo tactics.” But these speech-suppression methods are more akin to Stalinist tactics, which are also the inspiration for the “antifa movement” — the self-styled anti-fascists who are actually fascists.

 

The effort of leftists to silence Christians and conservatives, especially grassroots Patriots who promote Liberty, is relentless.

 

But as another notable stalwart advised me to tell our team, “We’re all in this together. Onward!” And onward we go.

 

There was a surfeit of other “misinformation” and “contextual omissions and errors” in the BuzzFeed inquiry.

 

Update: Regarding the Silverman/Grygiel article, as one might expect from tabloid media, they doxed the location of our humble storefront, despite the fact (or because) they knew that created risks to our staff and their families. (They have since removed that information from the article.) They doxed the names of my family members even though they knew there were no financial or material connections with The Patriot Post. (While we know who the Silverman and Grygiel families are, mentioning them would be far beneath our ethical standards.) They implied that we had misused two short quotes about The Patriot Post obtained 15 years ago, but they did not contact the individuals who were quoted. And they implied that our use of pseudonyms is nefarious, despite the fact I have always been easily identifiable through public media interviews, which ironically, is how Silverman knew who to contact. Likewise, the ownership of our company, Publius Press, Inc., has always been a matter of public record. Again, the “Publius principle” has never been about not revealing individuals, but about not promoting individuals.

 

Finally, about my original topic…

 

AF Master Sgt. Israel Del Toro & Marine Sgt Dakota Meyer

 

In stark contrast to Silverman, Grygiel, and their stripe, the evening their inquiries began to post across the Web, I was with friends and colleagues raising support for Honoring the Sacrifice, headed by my young friend Andrew Smith. Andrew also makes the wooden flags we sell to support OEF and OIF disabled vets.

 

Among other wounded veterans helping with this effort were former AF Master Sgt. Israel Del Toro, and Medal of Honor recipient and former Marine Dakota Meyer.

 

I commend for your consideration supporting Honoring the Sacrifice.

 

As always, we ask your prayers for the Lord’s blessing for the protection of and provision for our uniformed Patriots and veterans and their families.

 

Semper Vigilans Fortis Paratus et Fidelis
Pro Deo et Libertate — 1776

___________________________

*PUBLIUS*

 

The Patriot Post is protected speech, as enumerated in the First Amendment and enforced by the Second Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America, in accordance with the endowed and unalienable Rights of All Mankind.

 

In God we trust. Copyright © 2019 The Patriot Post. All Rights Reserved.

 

SUPPORT The Patriot Post

 

The Truth Will Set You Free Revisited


Justin Smith takes a walk down the memory lane of a past essay applicable to today’s current events pertaining to Left-Speak and protecting culture-destroying Islam.

 

JRH 5/25/18

Please Support NCCR

**************************

The Truth Will Set You Free Revisited

 

By Justin O. Smith

Sent 5/23/2018 5:35 PM

 

(Author’s Note: I am sending this out as a reminder of what America still faces today.)

 

Many of my community’s fine patriots, many of them U.S. Armed Forces Veterans, were all protesting against the building of a 52,000 sq. ft. mosques in Murfreesboro, TN, in 2009, and Muslim appeasers and apologists, who were ignorant of the machinations of the ideology of Islam, such as Eric Allen Bell came in from California and attacked us as bigots and racists. He came with a TV camera and later sold his footage to CNN. And his rabble- rousing, misrepresentations of fact and outright lies did more harm to our cause than I can fully explain, since he had ties to Leftist propaganda media, like CNN, and he used them.

Needless to say, for a litany of other reasons and many other factors too, like the Obama administration Department of Justice interceding in the matter on the side of Islam and Murfreesboro’s Muslims, the mosque was built; and, now we have an abundance of Muslims in the area, with known ties to known terrorists, which I myself, along with other investigative journalists such as Steve Emerson have proven, since we started proving it, as soon as We knew who the sponsors of this mosque were.

Supposedly, after all was said and done, Bell went back to California and during a conversation with a Coptic Christian who had experienced the evil of Islam first hand, Bell came to see the truth of Islam. But this rings hollow and FALSE in my ears, because we were all armed with the truth, documentation and verified and authenticated photographs that we showed Bell at the time, and still, he attacked us and aided the commies and Muslim apologists who entered our community from across the country and worked night and day against Us.

Bell is also an atheist and he regularly trashes Christianity in his numerous articles.

 

After our battle in Murfreesboro, Bell sold his footage to CNN which used it in a documentary, ‘Unwelcome: Muslims Next Door’, put out by Soledad O’Brien.

 

(I can be seen at the 13 second, 7:57 and 8:05 marks saying “I didn’t say to hate them… I just said we didn’t need them here”

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4JRzeZMw6LM

 

[VIDEO: CNN’s Unwelcome – Muslims Next Door – Soledad O’Brien

 

Posted by Justin Case

Published on Jan 24, 2012])

 

He profited from his own lies and the lies he perpetuated against our community, since our stance was never anti-Arab and we understood that many Arabs were also Chaldean, Coptic and Assyrian Christians and Yazidis; our stance was always that Islam is an evil and violent ideology, not “a religion of peace”, and it should not be allowed to grow and spread in America.

 

Essentially, our opposition was continually and consistently silenced and pushed out of any public forum from inside the government, due to the undue sympathetic coverage from Gannett Press, The Tennessean and The Daily News Journal, although Fox News (Newspaper, Businesses Feud in Tennessee Over Claims of ‘Hate Rhetoric’) did try to give a somewhat “fair and balanced” view of our fight. On the flip side, disingenuous statements by Muslims such as Lema Sbenaty [her bio at very bottom of webpage HERE] and representatives of the Council on Islamic Relations [CAIR] were given wide and constant coverage and presented as virtually the gospel facts, even when rife with lies.

 

This very same tactic is being utilized today in regards to each and every important topic of the day that is split along Conservative — often Christian — American Patriot vs Communist “Progressive” Democrat lines, from the weaponization of the FBI and intelligence agencies in the attempt to take down a president to the continuation of blocking any effort to halt Muslim immigration, as seen in the activist Court’s rulings even against common sense national security travel measures; and groups like the fascist ANTIFA are held up by the media as “anti-fascists” and “warriors for justice”.

 

Try speaking out in Your community at any City Council or Town Hall meeting or getting any ‘Letter to the Editor’ published and just watch how quickly the “progressive” illiberal “liberals” move to squash and silence anything You say or write; the proof is unfolding even on our university campuses as Antifa, BLM, La Raza and many others act violently against anything and anyone who attempt to counter their false victimhood narratives and their demands for what they mistakenly call “justice”.

 

The Leftists of America wouldn’t recognize Justice if it bit them square on the ass.

 

Do Not Sit Down. Do Not Shut Up. In The Face Of Any Adversity.

 

Stand Up. Speak Out And Stand Firm. Keep Fighting the Good Fight And Keep The Faith.

 

de Oppresso Liber ___ Voire Dei ___ In Liberty ~~~ Justin O Smith

 

++++++

Printed in ‘The Rutherford Reader’
August 18, 2011

The Truth Will Set You Free

 

No apologies should ever be made for hating something, because certain people, activities and ideologies have full well earned any hatred directed towards them. The term “hate-speech” is the Progressive Democrats’/Communists’ catch-phrase assault on the Truth, when the Truth exposes one of their nefarious agendas or allies. And I hate with a passion, and I love with a passion, as is my God-given right to think as I believe and feel about issues as I choose. It is a part of all human psyche to hate and to love, as well as to experience anger and joy. No thought police will ever keep me from speaking my mind through their own hypocrisy in the use of the term “hate-speech”!

 

This definition is from ‘Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary’ (1977):

 

hate 1a: intense hostility and aversion usually from fear, anger or a sense of injury

 

2a: extreme dislike or antipathy. I fear very little, so my hatred stems from anger, a sense of injury and an extreme dislike. The poet Maya Angelou shouts: “Be angry. It is right to be angry. It is healthy.”

 

Do I hate?…Damn straight I hate! Psalms 97:10: You who love the Lord hate evil!

 

I hate the small-minded miniature Joe Stalins who are stealing ‘The Rutherford Reader’ from its racks, in order to prevent it from reaching the community, and I hate those others trying to persuade business owners to boycott it, because they do not like or agree with some of the opinion columns. These people exemplify the liberals’ hypocrisy, because they are not interested in arriving at solutions through debate and free-flowing information, a free society or even a democratic society; they are of the same ilk as know-nothing Sen. John Kerry who recently suggested to MSNBC that the media should not report the “absurdities” from the Tea Party, even though the majority of Americans currently support Tea Party initiatives. These thieves and liars are symptomatic of a Leftist mindset that seeks to censor and completely squash conservative and Christian speech through intellectual terrorism.

 

I loathe those Muslims and Muslim sympathizers who advocate the spread of Sharia Law across the entire U.S., such as Dalia Mogahed (Advisor to the Pres.) and Harold Koh (Head of Legal Counsel-U.S. State Dept.). Sharia Law is evil; Islam is not a religion, because it has little to do with God and primarily promotes Mohammed’s doctrines and policies. Psalms 119:104: I gain understanding from Your precepts; therefore I hate every false way.

 

Eric Bell, Anthony Mijares and Rick Bennett cannot cogently debate any topic truthfully, and they often omit and misrepresent the facts. Bell has accused Mr. Pete Doughtie (‘Reader’ editor/owner) of endangering Mijares by calling him a “terrorist”; Mijares was actually referred to as an “economic terrorist” due to his boycott efforts directed at ‘The Rutherford Reader’. These misinformed, misguided “citizens” use a certain verbal nimbleness rather than actual evidence and logic in their assertions. They use this talent to hide from the reality of many impending crises rapidly descending upon the U.S., and they would not recognize the Truth if it was sitting in their laps!

 

Romans 8:35: Who can separate us from the love of Christ (or keep us from loving America)…can affliction or anguish…persecution…or nakedness or danger or sword? Because of the Progressive Communists, the Muslim sympathizers and these men are we simply to await slaughter by the Islamic fascists entering America daily?

 

Due to the Obama Administration’s refusal to name Islam and its Sharia Law doctrines as an ideology diametrically opposed to the U.S. Constitution and an enemy to America and freedom, and its further refusal to profile, Muslims live in the heart of America, for the most part and until just the past few years, without having their differences questioned, without checking their bad intentions, and without being penalized for their sullen fanaticism. When pointing out the fascism inherent in Islam to those like Bell, Mijares and Bennett, they are like the idiot in Mao Tse Tung’s proverb:

 

“If you point at the Moon with a finger, the idiot looks at the finger and sees the finger, not the Moon.”

 

If by chance they see the Moon, it’s the same because not having the guts to oppose the intellectual terrorism of the liberals and their conformity, or agreeing with it, they pretend to see the finger. Point at Islamofascist threats to America and all the idiots see only a finger.

 

The Progressives, Muslims and Communists of the world can mock Christianity, the Virgin Mary or Jesus and nobody touches their right of thought or expression, but if myself or Pete Doughtie or anyone else simply states facts concerning Islam. the Koran and the Prophet Mohammed, we are called bigots, xenophobes and racists. Progressive Democrats/Communists and Code Pink can yell anti-American slogans, call our soldiers “murderers” and “baby-killers”, fly the Mexican or any other nationality flag over the U.S. flag or even burn our beloved American flag and nothing happens; but if anyone does the identical thing against Islam, all Hell breaks loose! This conflict is ideological and has no racial quality whatsoever.

 

If we can condone Islamofascism and Sharia Law within the U.S. in the name of broadmindedness, understanding and pluralism, why did we fight Hitler, Mussolini and Stalin? Why did we organize the Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba? Why did we go to Korea and Vietnam? Why does the U.S. send soldiers, such as Seal Team Six, to kill and die in wars declared against the enemies of freedom, of democracy and of civilization? Are these principles valid in certain cases only, with certain nations only? Aren’t Islamic tyrannies as unacceptable as the communist and fascist ones? I’ve had enough of this Leftist duplicity, ambiguity and hypocrisy! I am a free spirit, a free individual, and I refuse any form of tyranny such as Islamic Sharia; I refuse to listen to the clamor for the Theocratic State.

 

The Leftists and the Muslim sympathizers would exterminate the right of dissent within our representative democratic Republic. They would see us punished and our admonishments against Islam made criminal, just as the case in Europe, where we witnessed numerous notable people, such as Bridgette Bardot and Geert Wilders, prosecuted for “hate-speech” against Muslims. They would silence America’s children, hand them to the enemy and abandon them to a minority that swaggers and blackmails as it re-establishes heresy and burns the free minds on the stake. They would build a non-democracy…a deceit…a lie!

 

Upon their death, I full well suspect that all Progressive Democrat/Communists will plunge headlong into Hell and down Lucifer’s throat due to multiple un-repented sins, but especially their intellectual terrorism. They presume and assume to hold the Truth in a dogmatic manner; if you do not think as they do, you are an idiot and an outcast. And now, Hollywood, public education, university professors and pseudo-intellectuals have poisoned the minds of two generations, as they work on the third. Let’s state facts. The mendacious pacifists who disseminate the most obtuse illiberalism and the most bullying fascism were spawned by the Left; anti-Americanism originated with the Democratic Party, and now they are engaging in an even more despicable sin, as they foster Islamism and Sharia Law in America!

 

What kind of freedom would allow us to be invaded or muzzled or prevented from thinking, speaking or rebelling? What kind of freedom would allow Americans to live in fear of being prosecuted and convicted as criminals for the fiction of “hate-speech”? What kind of freedom seeks to censor my thoughts and feelings, to decide whom I must love and whom I must hate, so that if I hate my country and my fellow Americans I go to Heaven and if I hate Muslims I go to Hell? A non-freedom, I say…a mockery…a farce!

 

Like love, hate belongs to human nature…to Life…and cannot be forbidden by some article of some penal code. It can be judged, adversed or condemned, but only on a moral basis. I have the right to love whom I want, and I also have the right to hate whom I want. Let’s start with those who hate me. Yes, I hate the Bin Ladens, the Zawahiris and the kamikazes and suicide bombers who blow our people up; I do hate the bastards who smear the facades of churches and urinate on them. I do hate the Michael Moores, the Ward Churchills, the Noam Chomskys, the George Soroses, Cloward and Pivens, the Barack Obamas, their accomplices and the domestic traitors who sell us to the enemy. I do hate them as much as I hate the Ayatollah Khomeini, Putin, Ahmadinejad, Hu and Chavez. I hate them as I always hated any murder of Freedom. It is my sacrosanct right…my sacrosanct duty.

 

John 8:32: You will know the Truth, and the Truth will set you free. Millions of American patriots, such as myself, Pete Doughtie, Kevin Fisher, Lou Ann Zelenik, Rebecca Bynum, Pam King, Sam Solomon, Bill Warner, Jerry Gordon, Frank Gaffney and Bill Ketron, have led the battle against the introduction of Sharia Law and Islamofascism within the U.S. through the use of honest facts. All of us are fulfilling a very difficult, a very grievous duty…the duty of speaking the Truth. And in speaking the Truth, giving voice to the voiceless!

 

by Justin O. Smith

____________________________

Edited by John R. Houk

Source links are by both Justin Smith and the Editor. Text embraced by brackets are by the Editor. Bold emphasis is by the Editor. I chose not to source Justin’s 2nd half he dated as 2011 in The Rutherford Reader.

 

© Justin O. Smith

 

 

SPLC Labels the Right all inclusively as Haters


Ergo Agenda 21 Portrait Flawed

splc-propaganda - Mark Potok foto

John R. Houk

© July 5, 2014

 

Have you heard of United Nations Agenda 21 (usually written as Agenda 21)?

 

Anti-Agenda 21 Conservatives/Conspiracy Theorists look at the original documents that led to the formulation of Agenda 21. The documentation smacks of a New World Order mentality enveloped in Enviro-Marxism and disguised with positive sounding words designed to gain public support in voluntarily implementing the guidelines of Agenda 21. Yup, I am biased against Agenda 21.

 

Pro-Agenda 21 Liberals/Leftists/Progressives defend the agenda by first of all trying to smear the character of Anti-Agenda 21 activists as Right Wing Nut jobs that see an absurd unmerited conspiracy under every rock that are allegedly designed to benefit the collective society of humankind. Then the Pro-Agenda 21 typically justify the agenda with the same flowery word descriptors designed to make individuals amenable to changes that allegedly will better the quality of living of humanity collectively.

 

A good example of what I am writing about can be found in the once great but now Left Wing organization known as the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC):

 

At the conclusion of the June 3-14, 1992, United Nations Conference on Environment & Development in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, President George H.W. Bush and the leaders of 177 other nations signed a document known as Agenda 21. At the time, it was seen as a perfectly sensible planning paper, a nonbinding statement of intent aimed at dealing with sustainability on an increasingly crowded planet.

 

But in the 22 years since that day, at the hands of groups like the John Birch Society, Agenda 21 has been transformed in much of the American public mind into a secret plot to impose a totalitarian world government, a nefarious effort to crush freedom in the name of environmentalism. And it isn’t only extremists pushing this conspiracy theory — in January 2012, the Republican National Committee bought into the propaganda, denouncing Agenda 21 in a resolution as a “destructive and insidious scheme” that is meant to impose a “socialist/communist redistribution of wealth.”

 

 

To listen to such groups, Agenda 21 will lead to a “new Dark Ages of pain and misery yet unknown to mankind.” It is “a comprehensive plan of utopian environmentalism, social engineering, and global political control,” the “most dangerous threat to America’s sovereignty” yet. It will “make our nation a vassal” of the UN, result in “the destruction of our lives,” force rural areas’ “population [to be] decimated,” and lead to having “90% of the population murdered.” The end, these critics all agree, will be the imposition of “a collectivist world government.”

 

Agenda 21 is not a treaty. It has no force of law, no enforcement mechanisms, no penalties, and no significant funding. It is not even a top-down recommendation, seeking instead to encourage communities around the world to come up with their own solutions to overpopulation, pollution, poverty and resource depletion. It is a feel-good guide that cannot force anyone, anywhere, to do anything at all.

 

 

The fears generated in such places are ridiculous to the point of utter absurdity, but they have had an important real-world impact. …

 

Virtually none of the outlandish claims about Agenda 21 are true. Yet, as with all such baseless pro-Propaganda, the hysteria over it has had the effect of poisoning any kind of rational discussion of the very real challenges we face — challenges that are essential to tackle head-on in an increasingly complex and stressed world.

 

It’s time to finally call out the conspiracy theorists. The politicians who spread falsehoods about Agenda 21 and its effects need to be shamed by other politicians, by editorial boards and other commentators, and by the citizenry at large. … (AGENDA 21: The UN, Sustainability and Right-Wing Conspiracy Theory; By staff of Intelligence Project of the SPLC – www.splcenter.org; April 2014; © Southern Poverty Law Center. All rights reserved.)

 

The rest of the document is more a smear campaign against the proponents of anti-Agenda 21 activists (aka the Right-Wing Conspiracy) than a refutation of anti-Agenda accusations; i.e. other than the typical justification of the typical amenable nice sounding descriptor words. The primary targets of the SPLC are Tom DeWeese, Senator Ted Cruz and Glen Beck.

 

This from the executive summary of the SPLC document. In the “About the Report” heading more specific information is given as to who the “staff” is led by in formulating the SPLC document:

 

This report was principally researched and written by Heidi Beirich, with contributions by Mark Potok, Janet Smith and Don Terry, who wrote about the plan in Baldwin County, Ala. It was edited by Potok. Russell Estes and Sunny Paulk designed the report.

 

The SPLC in my opinion was once a bastion of civil rights in America, especially during the formative years of the civil rights movement that has led to greater socio-political equality among non-White Anglo-American Protestants. Arguably there still is some racial tension, yet racism is more the acceptance than the rule in American society. In the 21st century the SPLC has joined America’s Fringe Left that has successfully transformed America AWAY from Christian moral principles that this great nation was formed upon. This explains the SPLC’s stance of promoting anti-American denigration of Free Speech, Religious Freedom and Constitutional issues loved by Conservatives in the Bill of Rights and loathed by America’s Left who choose to nullify or transform the Bill of Rights into a moldable Living Constitution that can be adjusted as needed by Leftist utopian principles.

 

This is the same SPLC that encourages Leftists to silence Conservatives by shouting misleading lies ending with making ALL Conservatives into Right Wing Nutjobs on the same level as the fringe Right (e.g. the KKK, Skinheads, Neo-Nazis, Aryans, White Supremacist organization and you get the idea). This means Family Rights groups promoting Biblical Christian morality, Biblical Christian Churches, Traditional Roman Catholics, Conservative organizations promoting Original Intent Constitutional issues especially the Tea Party movement and so on; are on the same level as actual Right Wing racists.

 

And thus the SPLC vilifies Conservatives that view the Agenda 21 path as a threat to the U.S. Constitution as Right Wing Conspiracy Theorists.

 

Since the SPLC engages in unwarranted character assassination to justify their labels Conservatives, let’s look at the nature of the SPLC’s actual character:

 

An academic study has accused the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) of having an anti-Christian bias in its reporting on hate groups in America.

 

Once considered the “gold standard” in reporting on violent anti-government or racist groups in America, the Southern Poverty Law Center’s reputation has begun to wither as it has started targeting conservative Christian groups including the Family Research Council (FRC) for what SPLC claims is anti-gay animus.

 

SPLC says FRC gins up hatred and possible violence against gays because it has reported certain ideas that are taboo to SPLC: that hate-crimes laws will be used to stifle preachers; that because of HIV-AIDS and other diseases gays may not live as long as others; that gay parenting is not as good for children as more traditional parenting; that same-sex attraction is not inborn; and that gays can stop being homosexual. Believing or espousing any of these ideas makes you eligible for the SPLC hate list. [Full disclosure: the Catholic Family and Human Rights Institute, of which I am president, was just placed on SPLC’s hate list for espousing some of these ideas.]

 

Professor George Yancey of the University of North Texas says he is not arguing one way or the other about FRC’s inclusion on the list but merely demonstrating SPLC’s outrage is subjective, selective, and never reckons progressive groups guilty of the same things of which READ THE REST(STUDY: SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER IGNORES LIBERAL HATE; By AUSTIN RUSE; Breitbart – Big Government; 3/10/14)

 

Christian groups are celebrating with the news that the Federal Bureau of Investigation appears to have scrubbed the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) from its hate crimes webpage, where the controversial group was listed as a resource and referred to as a partner in public outreach.

 

A letter to the U.S. Department of Justice, drafted by Lieutenant General (Ret.) William G. Boykin, Executive Vice President of the Family Research Council (FRC), calls such an association “completely unacceptable.”

 

Signed by fourteen other conservative and Christian leaders, the letter calls SPLC “a heavily politicized organization producing inaccurate and biased data on ‘hate groups’ – not hate crimes.” It accuses the SPLC of “providing findings that are not consistent with trends found in the FBI statistics.” Where the FBI has found hate crimes and hate groups declining significantly in the past ten years, SPLC claims hate groups have increased READ THE REST (FBI DUMPS SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER AS HATE CRIMES RESOURCE; By Austin Ruse; sreaves32 blog – Originally Breitbart; 3/28/14)

 

When I checked out Heidi Beirich via Google I have to admit in full disclosure a slew of websites and blogs with a White Supremacist and Antisemitic bent came up prior to anything critical of her journalism. I say GO Heidi in exposing those nefarious organizations; nonetheless she too also groups non-hate groups particularly Christians and Counterjihad writers as hate groups while failing to report on Left Wing terrorism and Radical Islamic American individuals-groups as well Islamic terrorist organizations.

 

Apparently Heidi Beirich was the primary writer of the collated data of the staff of the publication Intelligence Project under the auspices of the SPLC. Beirich as a SPLC writer seems to be the interviewer/interrogator for the Intelligence Project. She has no disguise in her press questions of interviewees.

 

Heidi Beirich

 

VIDEO CLIP:  http://www.mrctv.org/videos/cnn-hypes-exploding-number-extremist-anti-govt-groups

 

 

CNN let the liberal Southern Poverty Law Center brand many right-wing “patriot” groups as “extremist” and racist on Friday afternoon. CNN host Brooke Baldwin simply listened to the SPLC talking points and concernedly asked what was being done to “combat” the “paranoia” of “anti-government activism.”

The SPLC had previously placed the Family Research Council alongside Klan members and neo-Nazis in a list of “hate” groups, but CNN did not question their study then. They continued to accept their liberal “expertise” on Friday, not challenging whether certain groups belonged in the “extremist” category.

 

Baldwin reported the “exploding” number of “patriot” groups – as labeled by the SPLC – and did not ask how the SPLC determined what constituted an “patriot” group. Included in the list of “extremist” groups were Constitution Parties and militia groups of multiple states.

The SPLC’s Heidi Beirich insinuated that racism was alive and well in these groups, without being challenged as to whether some of the groups in the list were really racist. “Obama is an African-American. So there are all these crazy racial theories that you hear about Obama, that he’s not really a citizen, that he’s maybe a secret Muslim,” she noted.

“And all of this has created an incredible amount of paranoia on the far, far right – which is expressed in these kinds of – in this kind of anti-government activism,” explained the SPLC’s Heidi Beirich.”

“So what, if anything, is being done to combat some of this paranoia?” Baldwin worriedly asked.

A transcript of the segment, which aired on March 9 on Newsroom at 3:10 p.m. EST, is as follows:

READ THE REST(CNN Hypes ‘Exploding’ Number of ‘Extremist’ Anti-Gov’t Groups; By Matt Hadro; News Busters; 3/9/12)

Mark Potok is a Senior fellow with the Southern Poverty Law Center and pertaining Conservative DTN states he says, ‘… the Tea Party “and similar groups” are “shot through with rich veins of radical ideas, conspiracy theories and racism”’.

 

… Potok and SPLC give a free pass to left-wing groups that advocate on behalf of illegal immigrants and open borders, no matter how hateful or race-obsessed those groups’ agendas may be. One such entity is MEChA—a “Chicano Students” organization that calls for the people of Mexico to annex the American Southwest, and vows to repel the “brutal ‘gringo’ invasion of our territories.” Not even MEChA’s slogan—which translates to “For the race, everything; Outside of the race, nothing”—draws the ire of Potok, who says: “[W]e have found no evidence to support charges that [MEChA] is racist or anti-Semitic.”

 

 

According to Laird Wilcox, a researcher specializing in the study of political fringe movements: “In private [Potok] concedes that there’s no overwhelming threat from the far right, and in public [he] says something altogether different.” This, says Wilcox, is because “professionally [Potok] is just a shill. It’s his job. That’s what he’s paid for.” In 2010, Wilcox reported that after having reviewed a list of 800-plus “hate groups” published by Potok and SPLC, he had “determined that over half of them were either non-existent, existed in name only, or were inactive.”

 

 

Potok and SPLC routinely conflate racist extremists on the one hand, with respectable conservative scholars, researchers, and journalists on the other. For example, the Intelligence Report‘s “30 New Activists” article featured numerous profiles of Klansmen, skinheads, white nationalists, and neo-Nazis. Co-mingled with these profiles was one devoted to Frank Gaffney, Jr., founder and president of the Center for Security Policy. Though Gaffney is a scholar devoted to meticulous research and a lucid, reasoned presentation of verifiable facts, the Intelligence Report derided him as “the anti-Muslim movement’s most paranoid propagandist.”[1]

Just as Potok and SPLC conflate individual hatemongers with respectable conservatives, so do they lump hatemongering groups together with legitimate organizations that happen to hold conservative political views. In late 2007, for instance, SPLC labeled the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR)—whose mission is to “improve border security” and “stop illegal immigration”—as a “hate group.” “What we are hoping very much to accomplish is to marginalize FAIR,” Potok candidly confirmed at the time. “We don’t think they should be a part of the mainstream media.”

 

SPLC likewise began listing the conservative Family Research Council (FRC) as a hate group in 2010 because, Potok explained: “it has knowingly spread false and denigrating propaganda about LGBT people … [and has made] demonizing claims that gay people are child molesters and worse—claims that are provably false.”

For additional information on Mark Potok, click here.

 

READ ENTIRETY (MARK POTOK; From Discover The Networks [DTN])

 

Further info on Mark Potok

 

http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/john-perazzo/mark-potok-hatemonger/

 

http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/john-perazzo/mark-potok-hatemonger/2/

 

Janet Smith

 

Smith is a Research Analyst for the Intelligence Report, the Intelligence Project’s quarterly magazine that exposes extremists groups in the U.S. Smith has tracked white nationalist, neo-Confederate, and Holocaust denial groups. Her most recent work has focused on the activities of the anti-immigration, militia/patriot, sovereignty, and tea party movements in the U.S.

 

Co-director of the UNA Women’s Center, Dr. Anna Lott, invited Janet Smith to speak at UNA.

 

“We invited her to tell her story about what she has done, and what is still going on. I don’t think people are aware of it,” said Lott. “I think she is an inspiration.” (Member of the Southern Poverty Law Center to speak at UNA; From University of North Alabama; 10/7/09)

 

Don Terry

 

Don Terry is a senior writer at the Southern Poverty Law Center and has previously worked for the Chicago Tribune, the Chicago Sun-Times and the New York Times, where he was part of a team of journalists awarded the 2001 Pulitzer Prize for the series “How Race Is Lived in America.” (Brief bio found at bottom page of “Agenda of Fear: The Right-Wing Threat to Urban Planning Everywhere”)

 

Russell Estes

 

Design Director Russell Estes (From Acknowledgements – “Agenda of Fear: The Right-Wing Threat to Urban Planning Everywhere”)

 

Mr. Estes appears to be more a tech guy than a political polemicist (LinkIn Profile).

 

Sunny Paulk – Designer

 

Also a person who seems more techy than political.

 

Of course then in essence the SPLC has become a Left Wing propagandist tool in which the organizations integrity is now questionable.

 

The founder of the SPLC Morris Dees has also crept into the realm of Leftist polemicist but worse. Dees is a Leftist for profit. See this profile by Charlotte Allen writing for the Weekly Standard (but posted at John Tanton).

 

JRH 7/5/14

Please Support NCCR

********************************

Agenda 21 – In one easy lesson

Earth Summit Agenda 21

 

By Tom DeWeese

The United Nations Agenda 21

 

What is Sustainable Development?

 

According to its authors, the objective of sustainable development is to integrate economic, social and environmental policies in order to achieve reduced consumption, social equity, and the preservation and restoration of biodiversity. Sustainablists insist that every societal decision be based on environmental impact, focusing on three components; global land use, global education, and global population control and reduction.  Social Equity (Social Justice) Social justice is described as the right and opportunity of all people “to benefit equally from the resources afforded us by society and the environment.” Redistribution of wealth. Private property is a social injustice since not everyone can build wealth from it. National sovereignty is a social injustice. Universal health care is a social justice. All part of Agenda 21 policy.

Economic Prosperity?

Public Private Partnerships (PPP). Special dealings between government and certain, chosen corporations which get tax breaks, grants and the government’s power of Eminent Domain to implement sustainable policy. Government-sanctioned monopolies.


Local Sustainable Development policies Smart Growth, Wildlands Project, Resilient Cities, Regional Visioning Projects, STAR Sustainable Communities, Green jobs, Green Building Codes, “Going Green,” Alternative Energy, Local Visioning, facilitators, regional planning, historic preservation, conservation easements, development rights, sustainable farming, comprehensive planning, growth management, consensus.


Who is behind it?

ICLEI – Local Governments for Sustainability (formally, International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives). Communities pay ICLEI dues to provide “local” community plans, software, training, etc. Addition groups include American Planning Council, The Renaissance Planning Group, International City/ County Management Group, aided by US Mayors Conference, National Governors Association, National League of Cities, National Association of County Administrators and many more private organizations and official government agencies. Foundation and government grants drive the process.

 

Where did it originate?

The term Sustainable Development was first introduced to the world in the pages a 1987 report (Our Common Future) produced by the United Nations World Commission on Environmental and Development, authored by Gro Harlem Brundtland, VP of the World Socialist Party. The term was first offered as official UN policy in 1992, in a document called UN Sustainable Development Agenda 21, issued at the UN’s Earth Summit, today referred to simply as Agenda 21.

 

What gives Agenda 21 Ruling Authority?

 

More than 178 nations adopted Agenda 21 as official policy during a signing G.H.W. Bush on Agenda 21ceremony at the Earth Summit. US president George H.W. Bush signed the document for the US. In signing, each nation pledge to adopt the goals of Agenda 21. In 1995, President Bill Clinton, in compliance with Agenda 21, signed Executive Order #12858 to create the President’s Council on Sustainable Development in order to “harmonize” US environmental policy with UN directives as outlined in Agenda 21. The EO directed all agencies of the Federal Government to work with state and local community governments in a joint effort “reinvent” government using the guidelines outlined in Agenda 21. As a result, with the assistance of groups like ICLEI, Sustainable Development is now emerging as government policy in every town, county and state in the nation.

Revealing Quotes From the Planners

“Agenda 21 proposes an array of actions which are intended to be implemented by EVERY person on Earth…it calls for specific changes in the activities of ALL people… Effective execution of Agenda 21 will REQUIRE a profound reorientation of ALL humans, unlike anything the world has ever experienced    ” Agenda 21: The Earth Summit Strategy to Save Our Planet (Earthpress, 1993). Emphases – DR

 

Urgent to implement – but we don’t know what it is!

The realities of life on our planet dictate that continued economic development as we know it cannot be sustained…Sustainable development, therefore is a program of action for local and global economic reform – a program that has yet to be fully defined.” The Local Agenda 21 Planning Guide, published by ICLEI, 1996.

No one fully understands how or even, if, sustainable development can be achieved; however, there is growing consensus that it must be accomplished at the local level if it is ever to be achieved on a global basis.” The Local Agenda 21 Planning Guide, published by ICLEI, 1996.


Agenda 21 and Private Property
:

Land…cannot be treated as an ordinary asset, controlled by individuals and subject to the pressures and inefficiencies of the market. Private land ownership is also a principle instrument of accumulation and concentration of wealth, therefore contributes to social injustice.” From the report from the 1976 UN’s Habitat I Conference.

Private land use decisions are often driven by strong economic incentives that result in several ecological and aesthetic consequences…The key to overcoming it is through public policy…”Report from the President’s Council on Sustainable Development, page 112.

Current lifestyles and consumption patterns of the affluent middle class – involving high meat intake, use of fossil fuels, appliances, home and work air conditioning, and suburban housing are not sustainable.” Maurice Strong, Secretary General of the UN’s Earth Summit, 1992.


Reinvention of Government
:

We need a new collaborative decision process that leads to better decisions, more rapid change, and more sensible use of human, natural and financial resources in achieving our goals.” Report from the President’s Council on Sustainable Development

Individual rights will have to take a back seat to the collective.” Harvey Ruvin, Vice Chairman, ICLEI. The Wildlands Project

We must make this place an insecure and inhospitable place for Capitalists and their projects – we must reclaim the roads and plowed lands, halt dam construction, tear down existing dams, free shackled rivers and return to wilderness millions of tens of millions of acres or presently settled land.” Dave Foreman, Earth First.

What is not sustainable?

Ski runs, grazing of livestock, plowing of soil, building fences, industry, single family homes, paves and tarred roads, logging activities, dams and reservoirs, power line construction, and economic systems that fail to set proper value on the environment.” UN’s Biodiversity Assessment Report.

Hide Agenda 21’s UN roots from the people!

Participating in a UN advocated planning process would very likely bring out many of the conspiracy- fixated groups and individuals in our society… This segment of our society who fear ‘one-world government’ and a UN invasion of the United States through which our individual freedom would be stripped away would actively work to defeat any elected official who joined ‘the conspiracy’ by undertaking LA21. So we call our process something else, such as comprehensive planning, growth management or smart growth.” J. Gary Lawrence, advisor to President Clinton’s Council on Sustainable Development.

__________________________

SPLC Labels the Right all inclusively as Haters

Ergo Agenda 21 Portrait Flawed

 

John R. Houk

© July 5, 2014

_______________________

Agenda 21 – In one easy lesson

 

Tom DeWeese the publisher/editor of The DeWeese Report and is the President of the American Policy Center, a grassroots, activist think tank headquartered in Warrenton, Virginia.

 

The United Nations Agenda 21