Submitted by JosephBaileyOne on Mon, 2008/08/25 - 10:38pm.
Good thing that the Secret Service was yet again, earning their keep, congrats to them but this issue speaks to a broader problem. There are too many people who will reduce this story down to a "white supremacist" one and it goes deeper than that. It does because it is also about the criminal element who will seek to upend what over 18 million citizens in the Electorate have already done, decide who they want as a candidate for President. Also, had they been successful, it would have inflammed racial tensions to no end and I mean no end in this nation.
The problem with these white supremacists groups is that few are able to understand why they exist and how to address them. Add in that opposite groups like the Southern Poverty Law Center is as bad as those they sue, it is no wonder that they white supremacist groups still exist.
The U.S. Constitution, it is what makes us free and makes us American. Let's treat it as such and with care.
"Add in that opposite groups like the Southern Poverty Law Center is as bad as those they sue, it is no wonder that they white supremacist groups still exist."
Now I know you are an joke. I have worked with these folks and I am in contact with them regularly. They realized that white supremacist groups (and especially the white supremacist leaders) are essentially criminal enterprises that are trying to enrich those leaders. So they use the civil courts to do what criminal courts in places like Mississippi won't do: Provide justice. These are folks who are "able to understand why they exist and how to address them." Before you say it: SPLC isn't getting rich as well. Please go away. You are a concern troll. It's getting old.
True happiness is knowing you are a hypocrite. -- Ivor Cutler
Submitted by JosephBaileyOne on Tue, 2008/08/26 - 8:10am.
First, you can save your "troll" comments for someone who is one and your petty name-calling is a joke too.
Second, you are not the only one to "work with" such groups so take your badge of honor and leave.
Third, have you interviewed both sides of this mess called white supremacy? I doubt it and here is why. In July, 1995, at the height of what is known as the Militia Movement and only three months after Oklahoma City, I interviewed one Dr. William Pierce, at his compound in West Virginia, he is also the founder of the National Alliance and author of the book, "The Turner Diaries," the one that inspired McVeigh to blow up the federal building. That same month I interviewed the Director of Klanwatch at your beloved SPLC. Neither one offered much into what they were doing and the SPLC would NOT confirm as to how they collect their information, that they spout off everyone should take as the Gospel truth. In November, 1997, I was co-presenter of these findings at the annual meeting of the American Society of Criminology, with a subsequent publication in "Sociological Focus," in May, 2000.
So, who is the "troll" here I wonder?
The U.S. Constitution, it is what makes us free and makes us American. Let's treat it as such and with care.
Submitted by lovable liberal on Tue, 2008/08/26 - 11:11am.
Uh, JBO, you would be the troll here.
If you want, go ahead and split the difference between an advocate of violent race war and someone who takes down white supremacists with law. Personally, I'll take the lawyers.
Submitted by JosephBaileyOne on Tue, 2008/08/26 - 1:57pm.
No, it is not dumb and should you think so then you find me just one social scientist in this nation that backs up your claim that knowing how information is gathered is "dumb." Just one is all I need.
The U.S. Constitution, it is what makes us free and makes us American. Let's treat it as such and with care.
SPLC doesn't divulge information to just anyone because their sources can be killed for divulging it to them. You did do an IRB for your research at UT in sociology, didn't you?
Also, I read your journal article, coauthored with a professor from Murray State. Did you think I wouldn't run over to the library and pull it because it's not available online? You didn't interview William Pierce for that article. You do cite some literature of his and quote him. Don't bullshit us. I couldn't find a dissertation online with UTK or listed as being on the stacks, so maybe you interviewed him subsequently, but what is available does not mention this. When did you interview him?
True happiness is knowing you are a hypocrite. -- Ivor Cutler
Submitted by JosephBaileyOne on Tue, 2008/08/26 - 2:21pm.
None of my research has anything to do with UT.
Their sources killed huh? That is what they claim but they have 100% of nothing to substantiate that claim. It is just the claim of the SPLC and nothing more.
Answer this question about "sources." How can I drive up and seek out an interview with a man that is considered to have written the manual on domestic terrorism, "The Turner Diaries," and get it but the SPLC cannot release any data on their "sources?" The ADL can, so what makes the SPLC so special? Nothing.
The U.S. Constitution, it is what makes us free and makes us American. Let's treat it as such and with care.
You are listed as "Joey Bailey" a doctoral student in sociology at the University of Tennessee pursuing interests including "the dichotomy of globalization and xenophobia in American society, as well as, political economy* and historical sociology" in the colophon. This article came out in 2000. So, if you were a doctoral student at UT from at least 1997-2000, then you either received your degree or were timed out by the grad school.
I will post the PDF of the article later.
True happiness is knowing you are a hypocrite. -- Ivor Cutler
Submitted by JosephBaileyOne on Tue, 2008/08/26 - 2:30pm.
The article was co-authored with a Professor from Morehead State University, have no idea were you arrived at Murray State. Also, I did interview Pierce for that article, and your inability to note that is your problem, not mine. I interviewed him for one hour at his compound in West Virginia on July 9, 1995, and then was given a tour of the compound, including the publishing arm of his enterprise. There were a great many other interviews done too and as far as the article in question does that was a content analysis of the material from the groups known as the Militia Movement and how so many groups like the media, the SPLC, others were lumping them in with supremacists organizations and they were not necessarily connected to that stuff.
I have not done a dissertation at UT and again, not sure were you are arriving at your ideas about such stuff.
The U.S. Constitution, it is what makes us free and makes us American. Let's treat it as such and with care.
Morehead State. Correct. Rebecca Katz. That's called a testing a subject. You're a great troll. One of our best ever.
Where's that interview in the references? You can say you did whatever, that's fine. But the only thing you produced merely cites the guy from his own works. If you interviewed him and used the material for the interview then where is the citation?
As for maligning the SPLC, they mask their sources for good reason and you know it.
True happiness is knowing you are a hypocrite. -- Ivor Cutler
Submitted by JosephBaileyOne on Tue, 2008/08/26 - 6:17pm.
You must be completely confused is all I know to say to you. Obviously, I have no idea as to what you claim you are reading and then you seek to dispute that I have interviewed Pierce, go figure. If you feel the need to call me a "troll" and question what is factual, then please continue with it but that does not change the truth of what was done in 1995, with the results presented in 1997 and published in part in 2000. I assume that if the program for the presentation at the 1997 meeting of the American Society of Criminology was posted here that you would question that too? Again, I have no idea as to what you claim that you are reading but it is clear that it is not what I am associated with, whatever you have read to date.
The U.S. Constitution, it is what makes us free and makes us American. Let's treat it as such and with care.
You can certainly clear all this up. Just point us to the correct, if there is one/any, article/presentation you wrote up. Surely you have no problem letting us know where it is and how you "collect your information!" I mean you are a big guy who publishes and presents this information with big organizations with lots of words in their names! Surely it is available!
Submitted by JosephBaileyOne on Wed, 2008/08/27 - 8:07am.
You do that and then I suggest that you contact the lead author, still a tenured Professor at Morehead State University and be sure to ask her about her "Right-leaning" political views. Then, please share with us what she says for her reply.
The U.S. Constitution, it is what makes us free and makes us American. Let's treat it as such and with care.
Submitted by JosephBaileyOne on Wed, 2008/08/27 - 8:05am.
Let's see if this post gets removed too.
In response to your question, here is your answer.
Original research conducted from April, 1995 until August, 1996, on what is known as the Militia and/or Patriot Movement. This topic was a hot button issue then in light of the Oklahoma City Bombing and of the alleged connections that Timothy McVeigh had with any of these groups. Also, who were these groups actually and what was going on with them as well as how does a social movement emerge was the focus on the research. It was done while I was a graduate student at Morehad State University and the following items were co-presented and co-authored with a tenured Professor of Sociology at Morehead State University and have NOTHING to do with the University of Tennessee, contrary to what another poster keeps writing.
Co-Presenter at the 1997 annual meeting of the American Society of Criminology, held in San Diego, California, and wherein we were presenters at Session 409-"Militias in America," and the title of our presentation was "The Development of the Militia Movement: Self-Definitions and Perceived Threats." The other presenters (at that time) were Brian Levin-Stockton College, Craig Rivera-University at Albany, Joshua Freilich-University at Albany.
Co-Author of the article, "The Militia, A Legal and Social Movement Analysis: Will the Real Militia Please Stand Up? Militia Hate Group or the Constitutional Militia?" which was published in Sociological Focus, May 2000, Volume 33 Number 2. Sociological Focus is the publication journal of the North Central Sociological Association, based at Ohio University at the time of publication but now out of the University of Cincinnati.
Both of these works were sociological works designed to employ exploratory research, content analysis, field research methods, and were done to determine what type of further research and what method should be used in the future study of "Militias." All of the work was predicated upon original research conducted by me and includes the following. Interviews of leaders of the various militia groups, supremacist groups, and others connected to them. Also, interviews of rep's from organizations like the SPLC, the ADL, and others as well as law enforcement from the municipal level to the federal level and of some media personnel too. Additionally, it includes attendance at militia meetings and an interview with the founder of The National Alliance, done at his compound in Hillsborough, West Virginia, on July 9, 1995. This person, William Pierce, is also the author of the book, "The Turner Diaries," considered by law enforcement as the manual for domestic terrorism in the USA and it is alleged is what inspired McVeigh to do what he did with his bombing of the Murrah Building.
The U.S. Constitution, it is what makes us free and makes us American. Let's treat it as such and with care.
A lot of BS, but I still do not see a link. If she has the wrong article/presentation/pdf, just link to the correct one to clear everything up.
And by the way you replied to her, I think she does have the correct one. Get your story straight. You know, when you lie, you have to keep track of the lies before responding to multiple posts. I suggest using a spreadsheet program like Excel. You are going to need a lot of rows...
Submitted by sugarfatpie on Wed, 2008/08/27 - 9:42am.
I'm not sure JBO is a concern troll.
from wikipedia:
A concern troll is a false flag pseudonym created by a user whose actual point of view is opposed to the one that the user's sockpuppet claims to hold. The concern troll posts in web forums devoted to its declared point of view and attempts to sway the group's actions or opinions while claiming to share their goals, but with professed "concerns". The goal is to sow fear, uncertainty and doubt within the group.
JBO is a hard-headed nationalist who likes to debate with straw-men (mostly Liberals).
But that doesn't make him a "concern troll". I don't think he is pretending to be anything he isn't.
JBO is at best troll-like (especially given the length of his responses), in that he says inflammatory things, and when challenged to back them up, blames the challenger for not understanding his deeper motives, which are nationalist.
Submitted by JosephBaileyOne on Tue, 2008/08/26 - 6:58pm.
I've already explained why the SPLC is as it is but let me go into your question about supremacist groups. I am going to use The National Alliance as the example here.
Although the founder of The National Alliance is now deceased the groups still exists and continues to promote it ways. Ways which are founded in a racist ideology that embraces bigotry and prejudicial views, something that you and other Liberals fail to grasp. Say you were sitting in a room with rep's from that group and you were to denounce them for their ways. What you fail to understand is that such a denouncement would be a badge of honor for them. Their founder, William Pierce, had a PhD in Physics and taught at the University of Oregon, and many of them now have quite the extensive working of their ideology. Thus, calling them racists, which Liberals think is worse than murder, is only affirming their ideology and way of life.
Also, they are not "white supremacist" per se and are instead outright Nazi, not even "neo-Nazi" really as they see their group's function to bring about what the Nazi's did not finish in the 1940's. I should know, I was in the office of William Pierce on July 9, 1995, with his AR-15 by his desk and the 16 x 20 poster of Hitler on the wall behind his desk along with seeing his troops practice their survival ways at his compound. Furthermore, when I asked Pierce about this he affirmed that was his group's main function, to bring about a change wherein society is founded upon racial forms. They do not feel guilty about this outlook on life and in fact, have an elaborate network of beliefs to support it.
First, they believe in a Nordic Mythology that most Liberals and probably even Conservatives would dismiss as myth. Well, they look to the hero's of Nordic Mythology as the typology of a hero and embrace stories of Thor and Odin as either real or at least inspirational. They do because those hero's are white, blond-haired, and fair-skinned hero's of the rugged North.
Second, they then intertwine Evolutionary Biology in a way that seems logical on the surface. Stating that the human species is in fact, made up of several races and that the white one has evolved the farthest to date. In fact, Pierce often would say that putting whites all over Africa and removing the blacks there would make Africa the best continent on the planet. The evolution imperative of Natural Selection demands, in their view, that whites embrace their whiteness and be proud that they must fight a coming race war. A race war that they argue is wholly dictated by Evolution.
Third, they view racism as the first trait and the most important one of their ideological system. It is what allows them to evolve and to maintain racial purity and being a "racist" in their world is an affirmation of your race, your culture, your everything and one is to be very proud of it. This is why when dealing with a group like this that "condemning" them for being racist will not work but will instead affirm their membership.
Now you can dismiss what I have written, as some others on this site have done, or you can think about it and how to approach these groups. The key to dealing with them is to deconstruct their entire ideology and foundation for their system. Name-calling and denouncements will not accomplish that and it is as the Sheriff of Hillsborough County told me on July 8, 1995, they are not easily swayed of the wrongness of their beliefs. This is another reason why that Liberals have so much difficulty with these groups. Liberals want to have "diversity" but fail to understand that such an idea only goes so far. There are wrong systems of beliefs and there are limits to tolerance and diversity. The ability to state and explain why a given system is WRONG is what hinders Liberals and leaves Conservatives scared to come out and say that for some systems and things, it is just WRONG.
The National Alliance is just wrong and is not only because they espouse what Liberals decry as the great sin, bigotry/prejudice, but they are totally un-American. This group does not care for the US Constitution, ideas of Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness, Live Free or Die, and how that America is a nation of citizens, not a nation of languages/skin color/ethnicity, so forth. A nation wherein the only requisite for citizenship is simply to be a citizen is an anathema to The National Alliance. So, that is why it is so important to focus on being an American when it comes to this group and other such groups like them. Contrary to what their propaganda says, they represent everything that is NOT American and that needs to be the focus on dealing with them and finding ways to bring their members out of those groups.
The U.S. Constitution, it is what makes us free and makes us American. Let's treat it as such and with care.
A race war that they argue is wholly dictated by Evolution.
Their interpretation of evolutionary theory is fundamentally flawed. The evolutionary health of a species is a function of diversity, so our species is actually growing stronger as races mix. Intentionally limiting human diversity is the opposite of what science recommends.
Submitted by JosephBaileyOne on Wed, 2008/08/27 - 9:03am.
Well, sticking to the discussion of The National Alliance, their interpretation may be flawed but the issue is how Evolution would justify a "race war." Contrary to what is said about them, they see it as a good thing if there were a "race war" that was genocidal and ended with the deaths of non-whites and really only what they define as "white" too. In that way, "racial purity" would finally be achieved and the what they terms as the flaws of Evolution corrected.
The U.S. Constitution, it is what makes us free and makes us American. Let's treat it as such and with care.
In that way, "racial purity" would finally be achieved and the what they terms as the flaws of Evolution corrected
Yes, I understood that from the beginning. I'm not sure why you feel the need to simply restate their case. My point is that their case has no relationship to the actual science of evolution. The capitalized word 'Evolution' you/they are using is not the same thing scientific evolution. In other words, their attempt to justify their murderous philosophy using science fails spectacularly. Their ideas are irrational and dangerously immoral.
The SPLC does not advocate genocide and is therefore not "as bad as" groups like the National Alliance. In fact, the two are hardly even comparable, and your attempt to equate them defies comprehension.
Stating that the human species is in fact, made up of several races and that the white one has evolved the farthest to date.
Well, there is one huge flaw. DNA has shown we all descended from the same people. Humans are one race.
So since we whiteys evolved the farthest, that must be why we were the first to come up with algebra, written word, irrigation, gunpowder.... oh wait.
In fact, Pierce often would say that putting whites all over Africa and removing the blacks there would make Africa the best continent on the planet.
Only if we built a bunch of plants to make sunblock. If they believe in evolution, they should understand there is a reason why the indigenous people of Africa have dark skin.
Now you can dismiss what I have written...
Funny, we seem to be doing just that. I would really need a chart and diagrams to get into it. That is just some of the dumbest crap I have ever read. I am scared I lost IQ points just skimming it. When I looked at the picture of the supremacists the arrested in Denver, I thought they looked dumb. Turns out they didn't just look dumb.
Submitted by JosephBaileyOne on Wed, 2008/08/27 - 7:47am.
Assuming that this post will not be removed your argument is with the Group in question. I suggest that you reread what I wrote about them and learn more about this issue of how to deal with these groups instead of some quaint little comment about them.
The U.S. Constitution, it is what makes us free and makes us American. Let's treat it as such and with care.
You are the one trolling with the info. I pointed out serious flaws. Your presentation of your "research" has serious flaws as well. You evade, but do not answer concerns on point. You are getting to be very boring.
Concerning your opening tripe about "Assuming that this post will not be removed...," that is complete BS and a very wingnut disclaimer before posting. I think it shows your true colors. I know of no comments that have ever been removed from this website- and I have posted some of the most obnoxious. The site owner would never remove any comments for having a different opinion, however misguided, illogical and untrue that opinion may be. In fact, the websites that remove the largest number of comments are "wingnut" sites, like FreeRepublic, which I am sure you are very familiar with. However, most "wingnut" sites do not even allow comments.
SO quit trying to be cute. You only make yourself look that much worse.
Submitted by JosephBaileyOne on Wed, 2008/08/27 - 10:16am.
I posted two replies to your question last night and they were gone this morning. Thus, I had to repost it so please, do not tell me that they were not removed. Also, I am not familiar with what you claim I am and I am only on this site because a friend recommended it to me.
So, stating how the research was done, how it was presented at a formal professional meeting and then published is "trolling?"
What are the serious flaws of the research? Please, I would like for you to state it loud and clear for all to hear and read.
The U.S. Constitution, it is what makes us free and makes us American. Let's treat it as such and with care.
I posted two replies to your question last night and they were gone this morning.
I had a post vanish too. It was a result of the site upgrade the owner warned us about, not a conspiracy. It affected several threads and anyone who was posting during the upgrade last night.
I posted in agreement that the police who stopped these people are heroes. It is stupid to blow off this plot as "just some druggies." They had precision rifles equal to their intentions.
Submitted by JosephBaileyOne on Wed, 2008/08/27 - 11:33am.
I did not state that there was any "conspiracy." I was merely reiterating a point that two posts not been posted and contrary to what many think, there are many glitches that happen with the Internet or a given computer and that is all that it is, not a conspiracy.
The U.S. Constitution, it is what makes us free and makes us American. Let's treat it as such and with care.
Submitted by sugarfatpie on Wed, 2008/08/27 - 7:46am.
OK, so your point is that there should be limits to tolerance based on nationalism?
I am developing a bit more appreciation for the fine points of what you are trying to get across here, though your constant polarization of the world into Liberals and Conservatives really works against your main point.
You seem to simply be saying that we need to better understand racism and extremism, not condemn it.
But then you go on to condemn anything not based on the constitution? This is kind of like fundamentalist Christians saying all non-Christians are going to hell.
Have you ever studied anyone elses constitution? Ever tried to appreciate any other nations lofty ideals? If you ever do you will see that our constitution is one excellent and inspiring document among many. That condemning someone for being un-American really isn't much of a condemnation at all. That the rest of the world doesn't suck, and there are parts of it that are just as nice, pleasant, beautiful, law abiding, safe, diverse, and liberty-protecting, as our good ol' USA.
OK, count down to the first response to this that tells me to move out of the USA...1,2,3...
Submitted by JosephBaileyOne on Wed, 2008/08/27 - 8:50am.
First, your reply is exactly why it is so difficult to have a discussion with a Liberal. It is because you want to digress, make assumptions that have no bearing on the subject at hand, and go off on tangents as well as label, accuse, deride, and generally not have a productive discussion. I recommend that you stick to the topic at hand and not try to make the discussion something other than it is and then you will understand what we are discussing.
Second, it is that "polarization" that is part of the problem and like many on the Right, your inability to see through your Liberal blinders prevents you from grasping what are the main issues of these radical groups.
Third, in order to deal with extremism, for the most part, one does need to understand it. I mean, using the medical analogy, can a Physician diagnose a prescription to a condition that he does not understand? When I read of what Liberals have to say about these kinds of groups I don't know whether to laugh at the complete, and I mean complete and 100% ignorance they show or cry at it. All of these groups point to a larger issue in society, power relations. Take "racism," for example. There is no racism in the world, only bigotry/discrimination/prejudice and all of that is usually a socially constructed reality developed and fostered by one power over another. The only way for a human to be "racist" is if a Martian landed and lived here as there is only one human race on this planet. Any differences of that one human race are secondary to us all being of one race of species.
Fourth, how do you know that I have not read plenty of other constitutions? This is another example of the total arrogance of the Left, you assume that you need to educate me instead of accepting that I am there and gone already. Also, I did not bring in the rest of the world, those are your words, when I discussed how to deal with extremist groups in America. A question that you, by the way, had asked of how I would deal with them and I replied but you want to turn the discussion to points that have no relevance at all to the question at hand. The issue and the only issue is how to integrate extremist groups in America into not being extremist, not what the rest of the world is or is not doing. Also, why do you bring in a religious statement that has nothing to do with the question that you asked of me?
I suggest that you reread my first reply and get it in your head that the answer is about dealing with American extremist groups and stick to that topic and nothing else.
The U.S. Constitution, it is what makes us free and makes us American. Let's treat it as such and with care.
Submitted by sugarfatpie on Wed, 2008/08/27 - 9:26am.
I AM talking about your way of dealing with American extremist groups.
If, as you state, you are really only concerned with integrating white supremacists into American society, then the applicability of your analysis stops at our borders. Thats a pretty limited way of thinking in this age of globalization. If you base your standard for civil society on the ideals of the US constitution, then you can then say nothing about the problems that other countries face with extremists, or even about extremism in general. Nationalism hobbles your perspective.
Focusing on the constitution may do fine if you only want to speak to US law enforcement about extremists, but as the GOP has often argued, a law-enforcement mentality may be inadequate as a way of dealing with extremism. Instead of the military mentality favored by the GOP, I favor a broader humanist approach not limited by the ideals (wonderful as they may be) of the US constitution.
Calling extremists wrong/un-American because they don't respect the constitution...that is setting nationalism, not humanism, as the standard for tolerance. Is the constitution your standard for acceptance into a civil society? If so, then you are driving a nationalist agenda. Ironically, your nationalism would put you out of favor with our "founding fathers", who were humanists.
Submitted by JosephBaileyOne on Wed, 2008/08/27 - 10:12am.
First, in dealing with a problem, one needs to define it. Defining extremist groups in America as an American problem is the best way to deal with them. Using information that is not relevant or applicable does not matter and worrying about the rest of the world for an American problem obfuscates and distorts the solution. One can certainly see how extremist groups in other areas of the world are a problem but right now, this discussion is about American ones.
Second, you asked me about how to deal with these extremist groups here in America, and I answered you. Taking what I write and then manipulating it is wrong of you. Dealing with these groups has to have a distinctly American approach or whatever is done will not work. Just because I offer a recommendation to dealing with them that is different from your Liberal-blinder-mindset does not change the fact that I know from experience how to deal with them. Furthermore, learn the definition of nationalism before you continue to post about what I write. I am not talking about nationalism and were you to know its exact definition you would see how far off the mark you are with your posts. Other nations need solutions conducive to their extremist groups and there is no one-size-fits-all solution to this and should you doubt me, contact the Behavioral Sciences Unit or VICAP at Quantico and see what they tell you about it.
Third, using the Constitution as the basis for civil society is what this nation has done for 200 plus years, where have you been? Your statements about a humanist perspective are all fine and dandy and they are your beliefs but in dealing with American extremist groups-THE FOCUS HERE, NOT THE WORLD-one has to have a distinctly American basis for deconstructing their ideology or you will fail at your task. Also, this goes way beyond the GOP, the Dem's, and attempting to turn this into said discussion only demonstrates that you need to be more informed about this subject before you continue to write about it.
What has driven this discussion is the fact that regardless of what the news media says the government says, it looks as if there was a bonafide assassination attempt that was to have been made on Obama's life come this Thursday. Fortunately, it was thwarted but the reality is that the alleged suspects may belong or at least be influenced by an extremist group-an AMERICAN ONE-at that. Dealing with these groups so that they one day go out of existence is what I have been discussing, not saving the world-that can be in another thread. Thus, when you can get beyond your blinders then perhaps you will see how that dealing with these groups is necessary because the truth is that if Obama wins the general election, there will no doubt be an extremist group that will feel threatened enough to seek another attempt on his life. Now besides the fact that a man and his family would be in danger of physical harm, the other aspect is that engaging such an act nullifies the votes of the American Electorate and by what foundation does an assassin have that right? None and they need to be made to see it that way.
The U.S. Constitution, it is what makes us free and makes us American. Let's treat it as such and with care.
Submitted by JosephBaileyOne on Wed, 2008/08/27 - 10:40am.
In one word, CONTEXT. Do you deal with a radical Muslim terrorist the same way that you deal with a member of FARC? Context is how you deal with issue such as this or you will employ a solution that is not applicable to the problem.
What do the Klan and al-Qaeda have in common? They seek to use terror to achieve a specified end. However, what will you appeal to when engaging a member of the Klan versus a member of al-Qaeda? The answer to that is about context and context is what allows for a solution to such a problem as extremist groups to work.
The U.S. Constitution, it is what makes us free and makes us American. Let's treat it as such and with care.
Submitted by sugarfatpie on Wed, 2008/08/27 - 10:54am.
Thats all fine if all you are doing is talking to your research subject. But what about the rest of the world? You seem to have no broader perspective beyond your signature line "The U.S. Constitution, it is what makes us free and makes us American. Let's treat it as such and with care."
Do you think nationalism is a sufficient basis for serious scholarship?
Submitted by JosephBaileyOne on Wed, 2008/08/27 - 11:38am.
I've already answered your question about the "rest of the world." If you need to save the world and can do that, lay it on it but I don't have that capacity and have learned to make a difference were and what I can do.
My signature line is a political line in a political thread, good grief, get a grip. Your assumptions and then subsequent statements about what I write because I happen to care about the US Constitution are just plain arrogant, get a life.
Also, as I recommended already, please learn the definition of nationalism as you are writing about it in a way that makes you look ignorant and blinded to your hatred of America.
The U.S. Constitution, it is what makes us free and makes us American. Let's treat it as such and with care.
Submitted by tennesseevalues... on Tue, 2008/08/26 - 8:00am.
Good lord I should know better than to even engage in this with our newly-minted "Independent" poster Joe Bailey, but I can't let this stinking pile pass by without some sort of comment:
Add in that opposite groups like the Southern Poverty Law Center is as bad as those they sue, it is no wonder that they white supremacist groups still exist.
Blaming the SPLC for the existence of white supremacist groups? Really? What's next? Blaming football referees for unsportsmanlike conduct penalties? Blaming park rangers for poachers and highway patrolmen for speeders? Blaming Roman Christians for the lions? Blaming Harriet Tubman for slave catchers? Blaming the Weisenthal Center for Nazi fugitives?
You must have to do so much mental gymnastics every day to justify your own conflicting thoughts it's a wonder you didn't bring home a gold medal in Beijing. Probably couldn't stick the dismount.
There are too many people who will reduce this story down to a "white supremacist" one and it goes deeper than that.
Okay, then. Well please enlighten me on the "deeper" story. So far, your only commentary loops right back to white supremacists and your apologies for them via your attempt to equalize their objectives with the SPLC.
Submitted by lovable liberal on Tue, 2008/08/26 - 11:14am.
Them damn uppity dark people ain't quiet enough to keep from offending fine upstanding white supremacists. If they'd just know their place and keep their mouth shut, we could all git along.
Submitted by JosephBaileyOne on Tue, 2008/08/26 - 2:15pm.
First, please show were I have written that the SPLC is to blame for the existence of white supremacists? Also, please show me were I have "apologized" for any supremacist group. Please show me, I would like to know.
Second, the SPLC is just another interest group with an agenda, the same as the Klan, the National Alliance, so forth, and seek to convert followers to their cause.
Third, this nation had better wake up to these interest actors or the day will come when it will split apart and forget what it means to be an American. The sole purpose that groups such as the Klan, National Alliance, other radical groups (right or left) exist is that they cannot integrate their belief system into a larger one. Finding a way to see that happen and move beyond the tribal nature and mindset that is now planting itself in America is necessary to ensure the continued existence of this Republic. All of these groups can be integrated into what it means to be an American and experience the American Dream, and doing so will save this nation a lot of headache and trouble but when groups like the SPLC exist, they foment as much trouble as they can to justify their continuing existence in their struggle for righteousness. Thus, the groups that need to be integrated are not and the SPLC and others can rant about it. Who loses? America.
Fourth, my "conflicting thoughts" (your words, not mine) are based upon firsthand research were I interviewed the leaders of the Militia Movement, the leader and founder of the National Alliance, the leaders and rep's from those who watch them, and other participants in that movement and then made my presentation of findings at a professional meeting, have you done that? Have you set down from across these white supremacists and in their compounds as well as content analyzed their material and documents? Then have you been published in a formal professional journal, Sociological Focus, explaining your research? It is from that experience that I make the basis for my opinion and statements on the SPLC.
During that time, I did find that the ADL will come clean about their methods of data collection and seek to make their case as transparent as possible. What they publish they can back up and they are afraid of being interviewed either to discuss their work. Thus, when the ADL releases a publication then it is legitimate and worthwhile reading.
The U.S. Constitution, it is what makes us free and makes us American. Let's treat it as such and with care.
Submitted by JosephBaileyOne on Tue, 2008/08/26 - 6:20pm.
You can digress, attempt to change the subject, attack me for stating what my personal experience has been with the SPLC, but that does not change the truth of it. I know the difference and what I am talking about due to firsthand experience, what experience do you have?
The U.S. Constitution, it is what makes us free and makes us American. Let's treat it as such and with care.
Submitted by Bbeanster on Mon, 2008/08/25 - 11:16pm.
Add in that opposite groups like the Southern Poverty Law Center is as bad as those they sue, it is no wonder that they white supremacist groups still exist.
The SPLC shut down ALabama Klan by winning a huge judgment for the mother of a lynching victim.
So who'd the SPLC lynch, seeing as how they're "as bad as those they sue..." ?
Tom Eagleton was exactly the kind of VP candidate that Muskie or Humphrey would have chosen: a harmless, Catholic, neo-liberal Rotarian nebbish from one of the border states who presumably wouldn't make any waves.
...and the SPLC would NOT confirm as to how they collect their information...
They would not tell you how they got their information, so they are as bad as a white supremacist groups? WTF? Are you nuts? Or are you just fun-ing us on?
Submitted by JosephBaileyOne on Tue, 2008/08/26 - 2:00pm.
No, I was conducting research that was later presented at the American Society for Criminology and when a group like the SPLC is going to make claims about other groups and everyone is to take their word on it that is nonsense. Transparency in being able to show why they are legitimate is what makes them legitimate.
The U.S. Constitution, it is what makes us free and makes us American. Let's treat it as such and with care.
Did you ever think they thought you were just another fruitcake with an agenda, and felt no to share with you? I mean, they just might not have thought you were as big as a deal as you obviously think.
Trust me. If you read this article of his, you will realize that all of that crap from the Right that they spew about not being able to get published in academic journals is exactly that, crap.
Taking this dude's views in account (obsession with 2nd Amendment as guaranteeing all other rights and mewling about what it means to be American) and giving it a re-read is pretty chilling. He basically got an article published that says that the militia movement is not necessarily white supremacist using data from two militia newsletters and a militia "field manual."
True happiness is knowing you are a hypocrite. -- Ivor Cutler
Submitted by Andy Axel on Wed, 2008/08/27 - 7:25am.
Let me guess - this was some sort of apologia for the "heritage, not hate" revisionist crowd?
____________________________
Tom Eagleton was exactly the kind of VP candidate that Muskie or Humphrey would have chosen: a harmless, Catholic, neo-liberal Rotarian nebbish from one of the border states who presumably wouldn't make any waves.
Submitted by JosephBaileyOne on Wed, 2008/08/27 - 7:44am.
It is clear that you are stalking and removing posts that I am making about this issue. I find it astonishing that you are unaware that a tenured Professor was the prime author of that article, using exploratory research-do you know what that is-on that issue of "Militia." Also, have I ever "spewed" anything about not getting published? If so, please quote it here for all to see.
Do you know what Content Analysis is? I doubt it very seriously due to your comments in your post. The article was a Content Analysis of what was published by groups claiming to be "Militia," and was follow up research from what was presented at the American Society of Criminology meeting. It was exploratory research showing how and why a social movement develops, what makes them embrace their identity, and how society labels such groups. Classic sociological research, of which it is 100% you have no idea of what that is.
I tell you what, why don't you contact the lead author and ask her what her "views" are and she what she says about it. Then tell us what you find about who is of the "Right."
The U.S. Constitution, it is what makes us free and makes us American. Let's treat it as such and with care.
I can't remove posts. I am not a moderator. As for knowing what content analysis is, dude, I've got Nvivo on this here computer thing I am working on.
I think that what's really up with all of this horseshit from you is exactly your "classical sociological" research, which I think you may be participating in at our expense. As # 9 would say, there's a lot of "tells" in your posts. I think you were poking around looking for a place to try out some sort of "social experiment."
Here's one clue:
Continued attempts to turn the conversation back to keywords (Freedom, America, Rights, etc.)
True happiness is knowing you are a hypocrite. -- Ivor Cutler
Submitted by JosephBaileyOne on Wed, 2008/08/27 - 10:32am.
A definition of Content Analysis from "The Practice of Social Research," 7th Edition, Earl Babbie, 1995.
"Content Analysis is a social research method appropriate for studying human communication. Besides being used to study communication processes, it may be used to study other aspects of social behavior."
Your comments about "expense" shows your paranoia and what I have already stated in another post about you, are you a member of The National Alliance? What "experiment?" Please elaborate as I am only here talking about the attempted assassination of Obama and how to deal with extremist groups to prevent such an act.
The U.S. Constitution, it is what makes us free and makes us American. Let's treat it as such and with care.
Submitted by JosephBaileyOne on Wed, 2008/08/27 - 11:40am.
Well, most members of the National Alliance don't care for visits from the ATF, interesting that you are offended by that. You have still to answer the question, are you a member of the National Alliance posing as a Liberal on this website?
The U.S. Constitution, it is what makes us free and makes us American. Let's treat it as such and with care.
Submitted by lovable liberal on Wed, 2008/08/27 - 11:50am.
Hey, dipshit, Metulj has been around here for a long time. His user number is even lower than mine. He used to post on SKB, the predecessor site. Was he just waiting for you to arrive to spring his diabolical National Alliance trap on someone as hugely important as you?
Submitted by JosephBaileyOne on Wed, 2008/08/27 - 9:08am.
So, when a graduate student that completely identifies himself and has the necessary information that any organization can check and verify his statements is "fruitcake?" I wonder what the thousands of grad students and professors now doing research of some kind or another would think that they are all "fruitcake?"
Thank you, however, for providing yet another example of how when someone has nothing to say worthwhile they resort to name-calling and derogatory statements.
The U.S. Constitution, it is what makes us free and makes us American. Let's treat it as such and with care.
Submitted by JosephBaileyOne on Wed, 2008/08/27 - 10:24am.
I was a graduate student at Morehead State University, when the original research was conducted, which I have stated in previous replies to you. However, you are the one that keeps bringing up information that has no bearing or relevance to the discussion here about these extremist groups.
Are you one of them? Have you been on here disguised as a Liberal when in fact, you are a member of The National Alliance? It would not be the first time I have to deal with someone who is a member of that organization pretending to be someone else. They have never quite gotten over how I would not be a spokesman for them after my interview with Pierce was granted and every so often one of them pops up where I may be involved in a discussion about them. I see no real picture, no real name, as I am using, so please, can you clear this up for me?
The U.S. Constitution, it is what makes us free and makes us American. Let's treat it as such and with care.
Submitted by lovable liberal on Wed, 2008/08/27 - 11:51am.
They have never quite gotten over how I would not be a spokesman for them after my interview with Pierce was granted and every so often one of them pops up where I may be involved in a discussion about them.
Maybe the SPLC's reluctance to reveal its methods to you has something to do with this. Or is this just more self-aggrandizement?
You took an M.A. from Morehead State (update: according to you). Which professor "convinced" you that you and a Ph.D. were incompatible?
I didn't suggest all grad students were fruitcakes. I suggested you were one. "[C]ompletely identifies himself and has the necessary information that any organization can check and verify" would be your opinion. They may have found it well below any threshold they require. They may have looked at what you presented them and decided you were indeed a fruitcake. Your opinion that you are important does not mean everybody else thinks so. Your opinion of yourself likely has little to do with reality.
Submitted by JosephBaileyOne on Wed, 2008/08/27 - 10:19am.
So, I guess the Department of Sociology Chair that was directing the research was and is a "fruitcake" too?
This is typical of what Liberals do when they are confronted with the facts of an issue. They resort to name-calling and personal attacks instead of dealing with facts.
The U.S. Constitution, it is what makes us free and makes us American. Let's treat it as such and with care.
Submitted by Brian A. on Tue, 2008/08/26 - 11:16am.
"It's premature to say that it was a valid threat or that these folks have the ability to carry it out," said a U.S. government official familiar with the investigation.
Looks to me like it might just be a few druggies popping their mouths off rather than an immediate assassination threat.
Submitted by redmondkr on Tue, 2008/08/26 - 12:06pm.
...and the SPLC would NOT confirm as to how they collect their information...
Isn't it irritating when a person with such impressive credentials is denied access to information?
I know Y-12 has a similar policy. They simply refuse to share their methods with every Tom, Dick, and JosephBaileyOne. It's right there in the Plan of the Day.
Look at the bright side, you're still welcomed at Target, Wal-Mart, Home Depot . . .
Submitted by redmondkr on Wed, 2008/08/27 - 11:19am.
I had a post vanish too.
Same here.
Last night I posted a note about Second Amendment delusions, cashes of dried beans, rice, MREs, weapons, fascination with Wagnerian opera, and a little boy's need to repeatedly boast about what may well have been a minor contribution to a report for a prestigious institution.
It was brilliant!
I have spent the morning, popcorn in hand, watching you guys play this troll like a fiddle.
Submitted by redmondkr on Wed, 2008/08/27 - 12:23pm.
It is clear that you are stalking and removing posts that I am making about this issue.
Let's see if this post gets removed too.
I was merely reiterating a point that two posts not been posted and contrary to what many think, there are many glitches that happen with the Internet or a given computer and that is all that it is, not a conspiracy.
People who understand that 'there are many glitches that happen with the Internet or a given computer' frequently accuse others of stalking them and removing posts. I know I do it all the time.
Congrats to the Denver, etc. law enforcement. Keep up the good work. Don't let your guard down.
White supremacists. Whoda thunk it?
True happiness is knowing you are a hypocrite. -- Ivor Cutler
Good thing that the Secret Service was yet again, earning their keep, congrats to them but this issue speaks to a broader problem. There are too many people who will reduce this story down to a "white supremacist" one and it goes deeper than that. It does because it is also about the criminal element who will seek to upend what over 18 million citizens in the Electorate have already done, decide who they want as a candidate for President. Also, had they been successful, it would have inflammed racial tensions to no end and I mean no end in this nation.
The problem with these white supremacists groups is that few are able to understand why they exist and how to address them. Add in that opposite groups like the Southern Poverty Law Center is as bad as those they sue, it is no wonder that they white supremacist groups still exist.
The U.S. Constitution, it is what makes us free and makes us American. Let's treat it as such and with care.
this issue speaks to a broader problem
Using the Second Amendment to guarantee the right not to have three-fifths of a President?
"Add in that opposite groups like the Southern Poverty Law Center is as bad as those they sue, it is no wonder that they white supremacist groups still exist."
Now I know you are an joke. I have worked with these folks and I am in contact with them regularly. They realized that white supremacist groups (and especially the white supremacist leaders) are essentially criminal enterprises that are trying to enrich those leaders. So they use the civil courts to do what criminal courts in places like Mississippi won't do: Provide justice. These are folks who are "able to understand why they exist and how to address them." Before you say it: SPLC isn't getting rich as well. Please go away. You are a concern troll. It's getting old.
True happiness is knowing you are a hypocrite. -- Ivor Cutler
First, you can save your "troll" comments for someone who is one and your petty name-calling is a joke too.
Second, you are not the only one to "work with" such groups so take your badge of honor and leave.
Third, have you interviewed both sides of this mess called white supremacy? I doubt it and here is why. In July, 1995, at the height of what is known as the Militia Movement and only three months after Oklahoma City, I interviewed one Dr. William Pierce, at his compound in West Virginia, he is also the founder of the National Alliance and author of the book, "The Turner Diaries," the one that inspired McVeigh to blow up the federal building. That same month I interviewed the Director of Klanwatch at your beloved SPLC. Neither one offered much into what they were doing and the SPLC would NOT confirm as to how they collect their information, that they spout off everyone should take as the Gospel truth. In November, 1997, I was co-presenter of these findings at the annual meeting of the American Society of Criminology, with a subsequent publication in "Sociological Focus," in May, 2000.
So, who is the "troll" here I wonder?
The U.S. Constitution, it is what makes us free and makes us American. Let's treat it as such and with care.
Uh, JBO, you would be the troll here.
If you want, go ahead and split the difference between an advocate of violent race war and someone who takes down white supremacists with law. Personally, I'll take the lawyers.
Liberty and justice for all.
My home
the SPLC would NOT confirm as to how they collect their information
You do realize how dumb that is to complain about, don't you?
no, he probably doesn't.
No, it is not dumb and should you think so then you find me just one social scientist in this nation that backs up your claim that knowing how information is gathered is "dumb." Just one is all I need.
The U.S. Constitution, it is what makes us free and makes us American. Let's treat it as such and with care.
SPLC doesn't divulge information to just anyone because their sources can be killed for divulging it to them. You did do an IRB for your research at UT in sociology, didn't you?
Also, I read your journal article, coauthored with a professor from Murray State. Did you think I wouldn't run over to the library and pull it because it's not available online? You didn't interview William Pierce for that article. You do cite some literature of his and quote him. Don't bullshit us. I couldn't find a dissertation online with UTK or listed as being on the stacks, so maybe you interviewed him subsequently, but what is available does not mention this. When did you interview him?
True happiness is knowing you are a hypocrite. -- Ivor Cutler
None of my research has anything to do with UT.
Their sources killed huh? That is what they claim but they have 100% of nothing to substantiate that claim. It is just the claim of the SPLC and nothing more.
Answer this question about "sources." How can I drive up and seek out an interview with a man that is considered to have written the manual on domestic terrorism, "The Turner Diaries," and get it but the SPLC cannot release any data on their "sources?" The ADL can, so what makes the SPLC so special? Nothing.
The U.S. Constitution, it is what makes us free and makes us American. Let's treat it as such and with care.
You are listed as "Joey Bailey" a doctoral student in sociology at the University of Tennessee pursuing interests including "the dichotomy of globalization and xenophobia in American society, as well as, political economy* and historical sociology" in the colophon. This article came out in 2000. So, if you were a doctoral student at UT from at least 1997-2000, then you either received your degree or were timed out by the grad school.
I will post the PDF of the article later.
True happiness is knowing you are a hypocrite. -- Ivor Cutler
The article was co-authored with a Professor from Morehead State University, have no idea were you arrived at Murray State. Also, I did interview Pierce for that article, and your inability to note that is your problem, not mine. I interviewed him for one hour at his compound in West Virginia on July 9, 1995, and then was given a tour of the compound, including the publishing arm of his enterprise. There were a great many other interviews done too and as far as the article in question does that was a content analysis of the material from the groups known as the Militia Movement and how so many groups like the media, the SPLC, others were lumping them in with supremacists organizations and they were not necessarily connected to that stuff.
I have not done a dissertation at UT and again, not sure were you are arriving at your ideas about such stuff.
The U.S. Constitution, it is what makes us free and makes us American. Let's treat it as such and with care.
Morehead State. Correct. Rebecca Katz. That's called a testing a subject. You're a great troll. One of our best ever.
Where's that interview in the references? You can say you did whatever, that's fine. But the only thing you produced merely cites the guy from his own works. If you interviewed him and used the material for the interview then where is the citation?
As for maligning the SPLC, they mask their sources for good reason and you know it.
True happiness is knowing you are a hypocrite. -- Ivor Cutler
You must be completely confused is all I know to say to you. Obviously, I have no idea as to what you claim you are reading and then you seek to dispute that I have interviewed Pierce, go figure. If you feel the need to call me a "troll" and question what is factual, then please continue with it but that does not change the truth of what was done in 1995, with the results presented in 1997 and published in part in 2000. I assume that if the program for the presentation at the 1997 meeting of the American Society of Criminology was posted here that you would question that too? Again, I have no idea as to what you claim that you are reading but it is clear that it is not what I am associated with, whatever you have read to date.
The U.S. Constitution, it is what makes us free and makes us American. Let's treat it as such and with care.
You can certainly clear all this up. Just point us to the correct, if there is one/any, article/presentation you wrote up. Surely you have no problem letting us know where it is and how you "collect your information!" I mean you are a big guy who publishes and presents this information with big organizations with lots of words in their names! Surely it is available!
I'll post it once I get copyright clearance from my library.
Signed,
Stalky Stalkerton
True happiness is knowing you are a hypocrite. -- Ivor Cutler
You do that and then I suggest that you contact the lead author, still a tenured Professor at Morehead State University and be sure to ask her about her "Right-leaning" political views. Then, please share with us what she says for her reply.
The U.S. Constitution, it is what makes us free and makes us American. Let's treat it as such and with care.
Done.
True happiness is knowing you are a hypocrite. -- Ivor Cutler
Let's see if this post gets removed too.
In response to your question, here is your answer.
Original research conducted from April, 1995 until August, 1996, on what is known as the Militia and/or Patriot Movement. This topic was a hot button issue then in light of the Oklahoma City Bombing and of the alleged connections that Timothy McVeigh had with any of these groups. Also, who were these groups actually and what was going on with them as well as how does a social movement emerge was the focus on the research. It was done while I was a graduate student at Morehad State University and the following items were co-presented and co-authored with a tenured Professor of Sociology at Morehead State University and have NOTHING to do with the University of Tennessee, contrary to what another poster keeps writing.
Co-Presenter at the 1997 annual meeting of the American Society of Criminology, held in San Diego, California, and wherein we were presenters at Session 409-"Militias in America," and the title of our presentation was "The Development of the Militia Movement: Self-Definitions and Perceived Threats." The other presenters (at that time) were Brian Levin-Stockton College, Craig Rivera-University at Albany, Joshua Freilich-University at Albany.
Co-Author of the article, "The Militia, A Legal and Social Movement Analysis: Will the Real Militia Please Stand Up? Militia Hate Group or the Constitutional Militia?" which was published in Sociological Focus, May 2000, Volume 33 Number 2. Sociological Focus is the publication journal of the North Central Sociological Association, based at Ohio University at the time of publication but now out of the University of Cincinnati.
Both of these works were sociological works designed to employ exploratory research, content analysis, field research methods, and were done to determine what type of further research and what method should be used in the future study of "Militias." All of the work was predicated upon original research conducted by me and includes the following. Interviews of leaders of the various militia groups, supremacist groups, and others connected to them. Also, interviews of rep's from organizations like the SPLC, the ADL, and others as well as law enforcement from the municipal level to the federal level and of some media personnel too. Additionally, it includes attendance at militia meetings and an interview with the founder of The National Alliance, done at his compound in Hillsborough, West Virginia, on July 9, 1995. This person, William Pierce, is also the author of the book, "The Turner Diaries," considered by law enforcement as the manual for domestic terrorism in the USA and it is alleged is what inspired McVeigh to do what he did with his bombing of the Murrah Building.
The U.S. Constitution, it is what makes us free and makes us American. Let's treat it as such and with care.
A lot of BS, but I still do not see a link. If she has the wrong article/presentation/pdf, just link to the correct one to clear everything up.
And by the way you replied to her, I think she does have the correct one. Get your story straight. You know, when you lie, you have to keep track of the lies before responding to multiple posts. I suggest using a spreadsheet program like Excel. You are going to need a lot of rows...
I'm not sure JBO is a concern troll.
from wikipedia:
A concern troll is a false flag pseudonym created by a user whose actual point of view is opposed to the one that the user's sockpuppet claims to hold. The concern troll posts in web forums devoted to its declared point of view and attempts to sway the group's actions or opinions while claiming to share their goals, but with professed "concerns". The goal is to sow fear, uncertainty and doubt within the group.
JBO is a hard-headed nationalist who likes to debate with straw-men (mostly Liberals).
But that doesn't make him a "concern troll". I don't think he is pretending to be anything he isn't.
JBO is at best troll-like (especially given the length of his responses), in that he says inflammatory things, and when challenged to back them up, blames the challenger for not understanding his deeper motives, which are nationalist.
-Sugarfatpie (AKA Alex Pulsipher)
"X-Rays are a hoax."-Lord Kelvin
OK, I'm primed for your insights on how we should understand and address white supremacists?
And why is the SPLC so bad?
-Sugarfatpie (AKA Alex Pulsipher)
"X-Rays are a hoax."-Lord Kelvin
I've already explained why the SPLC is as it is but let me go into your question about supremacist groups. I am going to use The National Alliance as the example here.
Although the founder of The National Alliance is now deceased the groups still exists and continues to promote it ways. Ways which are founded in a racist ideology that embraces bigotry and prejudicial views, something that you and other Liberals fail to grasp. Say you were sitting in a room with rep's from that group and you were to denounce them for their ways. What you fail to understand is that such a denouncement would be a badge of honor for them. Their founder, William Pierce, had a PhD in Physics and taught at the University of Oregon, and many of them now have quite the extensive working of their ideology. Thus, calling them racists, which Liberals think is worse than murder, is only affirming their ideology and way of life.
Also, they are not "white supremacist" per se and are instead outright Nazi, not even "neo-Nazi" really as they see their group's function to bring about what the Nazi's did not finish in the 1940's. I should know, I was in the office of William Pierce on July 9, 1995, with his AR-15 by his desk and the 16 x 20 poster of Hitler on the wall behind his desk along with seeing his troops practice their survival ways at his compound. Furthermore, when I asked Pierce about this he affirmed that was his group's main function, to bring about a change wherein society is founded upon racial forms. They do not feel guilty about this outlook on life and in fact, have an elaborate network of beliefs to support it.
First, they believe in a Nordic Mythology that most Liberals and probably even Conservatives would dismiss as myth. Well, they look to the hero's of Nordic Mythology as the typology of a hero and embrace stories of Thor and Odin as either real or at least inspirational. They do because those hero's are white, blond-haired, and fair-skinned hero's of the rugged North.
Second, they then intertwine Evolutionary Biology in a way that seems logical on the surface. Stating that the human species is in fact, made up of several races and that the white one has evolved the farthest to date. In fact, Pierce often would say that putting whites all over Africa and removing the blacks there would make Africa the best continent on the planet. The evolution imperative of Natural Selection demands, in their view, that whites embrace their whiteness and be proud that they must fight a coming race war. A race war that they argue is wholly dictated by Evolution.
Third, they view racism as the first trait and the most important one of their ideological system. It is what allows them to evolve and to maintain racial purity and being a "racist" in their world is an affirmation of your race, your culture, your everything and one is to be very proud of it. This is why when dealing with a group like this that "condemning" them for being racist will not work but will instead affirm their membership.
Now you can dismiss what I have written, as some others on this site have done, or you can think about it and how to approach these groups. The key to dealing with them is to deconstruct their entire ideology and foundation for their system. Name-calling and denouncements will not accomplish that and it is as the Sheriff of Hillsborough County told me on July 8, 1995, they are not easily swayed of the wrongness of their beliefs. This is another reason why that Liberals have so much difficulty with these groups. Liberals want to have "diversity" but fail to understand that such an idea only goes so far. There are wrong systems of beliefs and there are limits to tolerance and diversity. The ability to state and explain why a given system is WRONG is what hinders Liberals and leaves Conservatives scared to come out and say that for some systems and things, it is just WRONG.
The National Alliance is just wrong and is not only because they espouse what Liberals decry as the great sin, bigotry/prejudice, but they are totally un-American. This group does not care for the US Constitution, ideas of Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness, Live Free or Die, and how that America is a nation of citizens, not a nation of languages/skin color/ethnicity, so forth. A nation wherein the only requisite for citizenship is simply to be a citizen is an anathema to The National Alliance. So, that is why it is so important to focus on being an American when it comes to this group and other such groups like them. Contrary to what their propaganda says, they represent everything that is NOT American and that needs to be the focus on dealing with them and finding ways to bring their members out of those groups.
The U.S. Constitution, it is what makes us free and makes us American. Let's treat it as such and with care.
A race war that they argue is wholly dictated by Evolution.
Their interpretation of evolutionary theory is fundamentally flawed. The evolutionary health of a species is a function of diversity, so our species is actually growing stronger as races mix. Intentionally limiting human diversity is the opposite of what science recommends.
It is also murderous and genocidal.
You dirty liberal how dare you let facts get in the way with TRVTH.
True happiness is knowing you are a hypocrite. -- Ivor Cutler
Well, sticking to the discussion of The National Alliance, their interpretation may be flawed but the issue is how Evolution would justify a "race war." Contrary to what is said about them, they see it as a good thing if there were a "race war" that was genocidal and ended with the deaths of non-whites and really only what they define as "white" too. In that way, "racial purity" would finally be achieved and the what they terms as the flaws of Evolution corrected.
The U.S. Constitution, it is what makes us free and makes us American. Let's treat it as such and with care.
In that way, "racial purity" would finally be achieved and the what they terms as the flaws of Evolution corrected
Yes, I understood that from the beginning. I'm not sure why you feel the need to simply restate their case. My point is that their case has no relationship to the actual science of evolution. The capitalized word 'Evolution' you/they are using is not the same thing scientific evolution. In other words, their attempt to justify their murderous philosophy using science fails spectacularly. Their ideas are irrational and dangerously immoral.
The SPLC does not advocate genocide and is therefore not "as bad as" groups like the National Alliance. In fact, the two are hardly even comparable, and your attempt to equate them defies comprehension.
Well, there is one huge flaw. DNA has shown we all descended from the same people. Humans are one race.
So since we whiteys evolved the farthest, that must be why we were the first to come up with algebra, written word, irrigation, gunpowder.... oh wait.
Only if we built a bunch of plants to make sunblock. If they believe in evolution, they should understand there is a reason why the indigenous people of Africa have dark skin.
Funny, we seem to be doing just that. I would really need a chart and diagrams to get into it. That is just some of the dumbest crap I have ever read. I am scared I lost IQ points just skimming it. When I looked at the picture of the supremacists the arrested in Denver, I thought they looked dumb. Turns out they didn't just look dumb.
Assuming that this post will not be removed your argument is with the Group in question. I suggest that you reread what I wrote about them and learn more about this issue of how to deal with these groups instead of some quaint little comment about them.
The U.S. Constitution, it is what makes us free and makes us American. Let's treat it as such and with care.
You are the one trolling with the info. I pointed out serious flaws. Your presentation of your "research" has serious flaws as well. You evade, but do not answer concerns on point. You are getting to be very boring.
Concerning your opening tripe about "Assuming that this post will not be removed...," that is complete BS and a very wingnut disclaimer before posting. I think it shows your true colors. I know of no comments that have ever been removed from this website- and I have posted some of the most obnoxious. The site owner would never remove any comments for having a different opinion, however misguided, illogical and untrue that opinion may be. In fact, the websites that remove the largest number of comments are "wingnut" sites, like FreeRepublic, which I am sure you are very familiar with. However, most "wingnut" sites do not even allow comments.
SO quit trying to be cute. You only make yourself look that much worse.
I posted two replies to your question last night and they were gone this morning. Thus, I had to repost it so please, do not tell me that they were not removed. Also, I am not familiar with what you claim I am and I am only on this site because a friend recommended it to me.
So, stating how the research was done, how it was presented at a formal professional meeting and then published is "trolling?"
What are the serious flaws of the research? Please, I would like for you to state it loud and clear for all to hear and read.
The U.S. Constitution, it is what makes us free and makes us American. Let's treat it as such and with care.
I posted two replies to your question last night and they were gone this morning.
I had a post vanish too. It was a result of the site upgrade the owner warned us about, not a conspiracy. It affected several threads and anyone who was posting during the upgrade last night.
I posted in agreement that the police who stopped these people are heroes. It is stupid to blow off this plot as "just some druggies." They had precision rifles equal to their intentions.
I did not state that there was any "conspiracy." I was merely reiterating a point that two posts not been posted and contrary to what many think, there are many glitches that happen with the Internet or a given computer and that is all that it is, not a conspiracy.
The U.S. Constitution, it is what makes us free and makes us American. Let's treat it as such and with care.
OK, so your point is that there should be limits to tolerance based on nationalism?
I am developing a bit more appreciation for the fine points of what you are trying to get across here, though your constant polarization of the world into Liberals and Conservatives really works against your main point.
You seem to simply be saying that we need to better understand racism and extremism, not condemn it.
But then you go on to condemn anything not based on the constitution? This is kind of like fundamentalist Christians saying all non-Christians are going to hell.
Have you ever studied anyone elses constitution? Ever tried to appreciate any other nations lofty ideals? If you ever do you will see that our constitution is one excellent and inspiring document among many. That condemning someone for being un-American really isn't much of a condemnation at all. That the rest of the world doesn't suck, and there are parts of it that are just as nice, pleasant, beautiful, law abiding, safe, diverse, and liberty-protecting, as our good ol' USA.
OK, count down to the first response to this that tells me to move out of the USA...1,2,3...
-Sugarfatpie (AKA Alex Pulsipher)
"X-Rays are a hoax."-Lord Kelvin
First, your reply is exactly why it is so difficult to have a discussion with a Liberal. It is because you want to digress, make assumptions that have no bearing on the subject at hand, and go off on tangents as well as label, accuse, deride, and generally not have a productive discussion. I recommend that you stick to the topic at hand and not try to make the discussion something other than it is and then you will understand what we are discussing.
Second, it is that "polarization" that is part of the problem and like many on the Right, your inability to see through your Liberal blinders prevents you from grasping what are the main issues of these radical groups.
Third, in order to deal with extremism, for the most part, one does need to understand it. I mean, using the medical analogy, can a Physician diagnose a prescription to a condition that he does not understand? When I read of what Liberals have to say about these kinds of groups I don't know whether to laugh at the complete, and I mean complete and 100% ignorance they show or cry at it. All of these groups point to a larger issue in society, power relations. Take "racism," for example. There is no racism in the world, only bigotry/discrimination/prejudice and all of that is usually a socially constructed reality developed and fostered by one power over another. The only way for a human to be "racist" is if a Martian landed and lived here as there is only one human race on this planet. Any differences of that one human race are secondary to us all being of one race of species.
Fourth, how do you know that I have not read plenty of other constitutions? This is another example of the total arrogance of the Left, you assume that you need to educate me instead of accepting that I am there and gone already. Also, I did not bring in the rest of the world, those are your words, when I discussed how to deal with extremist groups in America. A question that you, by the way, had asked of how I would deal with them and I replied but you want to turn the discussion to points that have no relevance at all to the question at hand. The issue and the only issue is how to integrate extremist groups in America into not being extremist, not what the rest of the world is or is not doing. Also, why do you bring in a religious statement that has nothing to do with the question that you asked of me?
I suggest that you reread my first reply and get it in your head that the answer is about dealing with American extremist groups and stick to that topic and nothing else.
The U.S. Constitution, it is what makes us free and makes us American. Let's treat it as such and with care.
I AM talking about your way of dealing with American extremist groups.
If, as you state, you are really only concerned with integrating white supremacists into American society, then the applicability of your analysis stops at our borders. Thats a pretty limited way of thinking in this age of globalization. If you base your standard for civil society on the ideals of the US constitution, then you can then say nothing about the problems that other countries face with extremists, or even about extremism in general. Nationalism hobbles your perspective.
Focusing on the constitution may do fine if you only want to speak to US law enforcement about extremists, but as the GOP has often argued, a law-enforcement mentality may be inadequate as a way of dealing with extremism. Instead of the military mentality favored by the GOP, I favor a broader humanist approach not limited by the ideals (wonderful as they may be) of the US constitution.
Calling extremists wrong/un-American because they don't respect the constitution...that is setting nationalism, not humanism, as the standard for tolerance. Is the constitution your standard for acceptance into a civil society? If so, then you are driving a nationalist agenda. Ironically, your nationalism would put you out of favor with our "founding fathers", who were humanists.
-Sugarfatpie (AKA Alex Pulsipher)
"X-Rays are a hoax."-Lord Kelvin
First, in dealing with a problem, one needs to define it. Defining extremist groups in America as an American problem is the best way to deal with them. Using information that is not relevant or applicable does not matter and worrying about the rest of the world for an American problem obfuscates and distorts the solution. One can certainly see how extremist groups in other areas of the world are a problem but right now, this discussion is about American ones.
Second, you asked me about how to deal with these extremist groups here in America, and I answered you. Taking what I write and then manipulating it is wrong of you. Dealing with these groups has to have a distinctly American approach or whatever is done will not work. Just because I offer a recommendation to dealing with them that is different from your Liberal-blinder-mindset does not change the fact that I know from experience how to deal with them. Furthermore, learn the definition of nationalism before you continue to post about what I write. I am not talking about nationalism and were you to know its exact definition you would see how far off the mark you are with your posts. Other nations need solutions conducive to their extremist groups and there is no one-size-fits-all solution to this and should you doubt me, contact the Behavioral Sciences Unit or VICAP at Quantico and see what they tell you about it.
Third, using the Constitution as the basis for civil society is what this nation has done for 200 plus years, where have you been? Your statements about a humanist perspective are all fine and dandy and they are your beliefs but in dealing with American extremist groups-THE FOCUS HERE, NOT THE WORLD-one has to have a distinctly American basis for deconstructing their ideology or you will fail at your task. Also, this goes way beyond the GOP, the Dem's, and attempting to turn this into said discussion only demonstrates that you need to be more informed about this subject before you continue to write about it.
What has driven this discussion is the fact that regardless of what the news media says the government says, it looks as if there was a bonafide assassination attempt that was to have been made on Obama's life come this Thursday. Fortunately, it was thwarted but the reality is that the alleged suspects may belong or at least be influenced by an extremist group-an AMERICAN ONE-at that. Dealing with these groups so that they one day go out of existence is what I have been discussing, not saving the world-that can be in another thread. Thus, when you can get beyond your blinders then perhaps you will see how that dealing with these groups is necessary because the truth is that if Obama wins the general election, there will no doubt be an extremist group that will feel threatened enough to seek another attempt on his life. Now besides the fact that a man and his family would be in danger of physical harm, the other aspect is that engaging such an act nullifies the votes of the American Electorate and by what foundation does an assassin have that right? None and they need to be made to see it that way.
The U.S. Constitution, it is what makes us free and makes us American. Let's treat it as such and with care.
"Defining extremist groups in America as an American problem is the best way to deal with them."
Why?
"Dealing with these groups has to have a distinctly American approach or whatever is done will not work."
Why?
"one has to have a distinctly American basis for deconstructing their ideology or you will fail at your task."
Why?
-Sugarfatpie (AKA Alex Pulsipher)
"X-Rays are a hoax."-Lord Kelvin
In one word, CONTEXT. Do you deal with a radical Muslim terrorist the same way that you deal with a member of FARC? Context is how you deal with issue such as this or you will employ a solution that is not applicable to the problem.
What do the Klan and al-Qaeda have in common? They seek to use terror to achieve a specified end. However, what will you appeal to when engaging a member of the Klan versus a member of al-Qaeda? The answer to that is about context and context is what allows for a solution to such a problem as extremist groups to work.
The U.S. Constitution, it is what makes us free and makes us American. Let's treat it as such and with care.
Thats all fine if all you are doing is talking to your research subject. But what about the rest of the world? You seem to have no broader perspective beyond your signature line "The U.S. Constitution, it is what makes us free and makes us American. Let's treat it as such and with care."
Do you think nationalism is a sufficient basis for serious scholarship?
-Sugarfatpie (AKA Alex Pulsipher)
"X-Rays are a hoax."-Lord Kelvin
I've already answered your question about the "rest of the world." If you need to save the world and can do that, lay it on it but I don't have that capacity and have learned to make a difference were and what I can do.
My signature line is a political line in a political thread, good grief, get a grip. Your assumptions and then subsequent statements about what I write because I happen to care about the US Constitution are just plain arrogant, get a life.
Also, as I recommended already, please learn the definition of nationalism as you are writing about it in a way that makes you look ignorant and blinded to your hatred of America.
The U.S. Constitution, it is what makes us free and makes us American. Let's treat it as such and with care.
I hate America? Oh now that is just too rich. Please substantiate.
You are also avoiding the question. Do you think nationalism is a sufficient basis for serious scholarship, yes or no?
And here's your definition of nationalism.
The term nationalism can refer to an ideology, a sentiment, a form of culture, or a social movement that focuses on the nation
Link...
-Sugarfatpie (AKA Alex Pulsipher)
"X-Rays are a hoax."-Lord Kelvin
...I don't have that capacity...
How true that statement, and how widely it applies...
Good lord I should know better than to even engage in this with our newly-minted "Independent" poster Joe Bailey, but I can't let this stinking pile pass by without some sort of comment:
Add in that opposite groups like the Southern Poverty Law Center is as bad as those they sue, it is no wonder that they white supremacist groups still exist.
Blaming the SPLC for the existence of white supremacist groups? Really? What's next? Blaming football referees for unsportsmanlike conduct penalties? Blaming park rangers for poachers and highway patrolmen for speeders? Blaming Roman Christians for the lions? Blaming Harriet Tubman for slave catchers? Blaming the Weisenthal Center for Nazi fugitives?
You must have to do so much mental gymnastics every day to justify your own conflicting thoughts it's a wonder you didn't bring home a gold medal in Beijing. Probably couldn't stick the dismount.
There are too many people who will reduce this story down to a "white supremacist" one and it goes deeper than that.
Okay, then. Well please enlighten me on the "deeper" story. So far, your only commentary loops right back to white supremacists and your apologies for them via your attempt to equalize their objectives with the SPLC.
Them damn uppity dark people ain't quiet enough to keep from offending fine upstanding white supremacists. If they'd just know their place and keep their mouth shut, we could all git along.
[/snark]
Liberty and justice for all.
My home
First, please show were I have written that the SPLC is to blame for the existence of white supremacists? Also, please show me were I have "apologized" for any supremacist group. Please show me, I would like to know.
Second, the SPLC is just another interest group with an agenda, the same as the Klan, the National Alliance, so forth, and seek to convert followers to their cause.
Third, this nation had better wake up to these interest actors or the day will come when it will split apart and forget what it means to be an American. The sole purpose that groups such as the Klan, National Alliance, other radical groups (right or left) exist is that they cannot integrate their belief system into a larger one. Finding a way to see that happen and move beyond the tribal nature and mindset that is now planting itself in America is necessary to ensure the continued existence of this Republic. All of these groups can be integrated into what it means to be an American and experience the American Dream, and doing so will save this nation a lot of headache and trouble but when groups like the SPLC exist, they foment as much trouble as they can to justify their continuing existence in their struggle for righteousness. Thus, the groups that need to be integrated are not and the SPLC and others can rant about it. Who loses? America.
Fourth, my "conflicting thoughts" (your words, not mine) are based upon firsthand research were I interviewed the leaders of the Militia Movement, the leader and founder of the National Alliance, the leaders and rep's from those who watch them, and other participants in that movement and then made my presentation of findings at a professional meeting, have you done that? Have you set down from across these white supremacists and in their compounds as well as content analyzed their material and documents? Then have you been published in a formal professional journal, Sociological Focus, explaining your research? It is from that experience that I make the basis for my opinion and statements on the SPLC.
During that time, I did find that the ADL will come clean about their methods of data collection and seek to make their case as transparent as possible. What they publish they can back up and they are afraid of being interviewed either to discuss their work. Thus, when the ADL releases a publication then it is legitimate and worthwhile reading.
The U.S. Constitution, it is what makes us free and makes us American. Let's treat it as such and with care.
the SPLC is just another interest group with an agenda, the same as the Klan,
Well, the Humane Society and the National Cancer Society have agendas too. Are they the same as the Klan?
Until you can see the difference you're just too ridiculous to talk with any longer.
You can digress, attempt to change the subject, attack me for stating what my personal experience has been with the SPLC, but that does not change the truth of it. I know the difference and what I am talking about due to firsthand experience, what experience do you have?
The U.S. Constitution, it is what makes us free and makes us American. Let's treat it as such and with care.
Add in that opposite groups like the Southern Poverty Law Center is as bad as those they sue,
The SPLC is as bad as white supremicists who want to assassinate Barack Obama???
Apologies to Randy, but - ok then.
The SPLC shut down ALabama Klan by winning a huge judgment for the mother of a lynching victim.
So who'd the SPLC lynch, seeing as how they're "as bad as those they sue..." ?
More great thoughts from the newest "independent" on the block, now sounding like a spokesman for the CCC.
And apologies to metulj, but countdown to the first Freeper who insists that this whole thing was staged by the Obama campaign in 3... 2... 1...
(post #48 is the winnah!)
____________________________
Tom Eagleton was exactly the kind of VP candidate that Muskie or Humphrey would have chosen: a harmless, Catholic, neo-liberal Rotarian nebbish from one of the border states who presumably wouldn't make any waves.
Father-in-law asserted as much last night. What a joke.
True happiness is knowing you are a hypocrite. -- Ivor Cutler
We all know it is a plot by the Clintons.;)
...and the SPLC would NOT confirm as to how they collect their information...
They would not tell you how they got their information, so they are as bad as a white supremacist groups? WTF? Are you nuts? Or are you just fun-ing us on?
No, I was conducting research that was later presented at the American Society for Criminology and when a group like the SPLC is going to make claims about other groups and everyone is to take their word on it that is nonsense. Transparency in being able to show why they are legitimate is what makes them legitimate.
The U.S. Constitution, it is what makes us free and makes us American. Let's treat it as such and with care.
Did you ever think they thought you were just another fruitcake with an agenda, and felt no to share with you? I mean, they just might not have thought you were as big as a deal as you obviously think.
Trust me. If you read this article of his, you will realize that all of that crap from the Right that they spew about not being able to get published in academic journals is exactly that, crap.
Taking this dude's views in account (obsession with 2nd Amendment as guaranteeing all other rights and mewling about what it means to be American) and giving it a re-read is pretty chilling. He basically got an article published that says that the militia movement is not necessarily white supremacist using data from two militia newsletters and a militia "field manual."
True happiness is knowing you are a hypocrite. -- Ivor Cutler
Let me guess - this was some sort of apologia for the "heritage, not hate" revisionist crowd?
____________________________
Tom Eagleton was exactly the kind of VP candidate that Muskie or Humphrey would have chosen: a harmless, Catholic, neo-liberal Rotarian nebbish from one of the border states who presumably wouldn't make any waves.
It is clear that you are stalking and removing posts that I am making about this issue. I find it astonishing that you are unaware that a tenured Professor was the prime author of that article, using exploratory research-do you know what that is-on that issue of "Militia." Also, have I ever "spewed" anything about not getting published? If so, please quote it here for all to see.
Do you know what Content Analysis is? I doubt it very seriously due to your comments in your post. The article was a Content Analysis of what was published by groups claiming to be "Militia," and was follow up research from what was presented at the American Society of Criminology meeting. It was exploratory research showing how and why a social movement develops, what makes them embrace their identity, and how society labels such groups. Classic sociological research, of which it is 100% you have no idea of what that is.
I tell you what, why don't you contact the lead author and ask her what her "views" are and she what she says about it. Then tell us what you find about who is of the "Right."
The U.S. Constitution, it is what makes us free and makes us American. Let's treat it as such and with care.
I can't remove posts. I am not a moderator. As for knowing what content analysis is, dude, I've got Nvivo on this here computer thing I am working on.
I think that what's really up with all of this horseshit from you is exactly your "classical sociological" research, which I think you may be participating in at our expense. As # 9 would say, there's a lot of "tells" in your posts. I think you were poking around looking for a place to try out some sort of "social experiment."
Here's one clue:
Continued attempts to turn the conversation back to keywords (Freedom, America, Rights, etc.)
True happiness is knowing you are a hypocrite. -- Ivor Cutler
A definition of Content Analysis from "The Practice of Social Research," 7th Edition, Earl Babbie, 1995.
"Content Analysis is a social research method appropriate for studying human communication. Besides being used to study communication processes, it may be used to study other aspects of social behavior."
Your comments about "expense" shows your paranoia and what I have already stated in another post about you, are you a member of The National Alliance? What "experiment?" Please elaborate as I am only here talking about the attempted assassination of Obama and how to deal with extremist groups to prevent such an act.
The U.S. Constitution, it is what makes us free and makes us American. Let's treat it as such and with care.
"Content analysis: The study of recorded human communications, such as books, Web sites, paintings, and laws. See Chapter 11." [emphasis mine].
From Babbie, E. (2004). The Practice of Social Research. 10th Ed. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth-Thompson Learning.
I have books too.
BTW, thanks for threatening me with a visit from the ATF in your private message to me. Nice touch.
True happiness is knowing you are a hypocrite. -- Ivor Cutler
Well, most members of the National Alliance don't care for visits from the ATF, interesting that you are offended by that. You have still to answer the question, are you a member of the National Alliance posing as a Liberal on this website?
The U.S. Constitution, it is what makes us free and makes us American. Let's treat it as such and with care.
So you admit that you threatened me in a private message.
Where are you a graduate student again?
True happiness is knowing you are a hypocrite. -- Ivor Cutler
Hey, dipshit, Metulj has been around here for a long time. His user number is even lower than mine. He used to post on SKB, the predecessor site. Was he just waiting for you to arrive to spring his diabolical National Alliance trap on someone as hugely important as you?
Liberty and justice for all.
My home
Muwhahahahahahaha!
True happiness is knowing you are a hypocrite. -- Ivor Cutler
So, when a graduate student that completely identifies himself and has the necessary information that any organization can check and verify his statements is "fruitcake?" I wonder what the thousands of grad students and professors now doing research of some kind or another would think that they are all "fruitcake?"
Thank you, however, for providing yet another example of how when someone has nothing to say worthwhile they resort to name-calling and derogatory statements.
The U.S. Constitution, it is what makes us free and makes us American. Let's treat it as such and with care.
Where are you a graduate student? What's your current research project?
True happiness is knowing you are a hypocrite. -- Ivor Cutler
I was a graduate student at Morehead State University, when the original research was conducted, which I have stated in previous replies to you. However, you are the one that keeps bringing up information that has no bearing or relevance to the discussion here about these extremist groups.
Are you one of them? Have you been on here disguised as a Liberal when in fact, you are a member of The National Alliance? It would not be the first time I have to deal with someone who is a member of that organization pretending to be someone else. They have never quite gotten over how I would not be a spokesman for them after my interview with Pierce was granted and every so often one of them pops up where I may be involved in a discussion about them. I see no real picture, no real name, as I am using, so please, can you clear this up for me?
The U.S. Constitution, it is what makes us free and makes us American. Let's treat it as such and with care.
Wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!
True happiness is knowing you are a hypocrite. -- Ivor Cutler
Dude, they are so out to get you! Don't take that tinfoil hat off!
They have never quite gotten over how I would not be a spokesman for them after my interview with Pierce was granted and every so often one of them pops up where I may be involved in a discussion about them.
Maybe the SPLC's reluctance to reveal its methods to you has something to do with this. Or is this just more self-aggrandizement?
You took an M.A. from Morehead State (update: according to you). Which professor "convinced" you that you and a Ph.D. were incompatible?
Liberty and justice for all.
My home
Have you been on here disguised as a Liberal when in fact, you are a member of The National Alliance?
Dude, you're nuts. Metulj has been around here pretty much forever, and many of us know who he is IRL (I suspect he's glad you don't).
Trying to win the argument by suggesting he's some kind of a double agent is a cute tactic, but it ain't gonna get you anywhere.
I didn't suggest all grad students were fruitcakes. I suggested you were one. "[C]ompletely identifies himself and has the necessary information that any organization can check and verify" would be your opinion. They may have found it well below any threshold they require. They may have looked at what you presented them and decided you were indeed a fruitcake. Your opinion that you are important does not mean everybody else thinks so. Your opinion of yourself likely has little to do with reality.
So, I guess the Department of Sociology Chair that was directing the research was and is a "fruitcake" too?
This is typical of what Liberals do when they are confronted with the facts of an issue. They resort to name-calling and personal attacks instead of dealing with facts.
The U.S. Constitution, it is what makes us free and makes us American. Let's treat it as such and with care.
So, I guess the Department of Sociology Chair that was directing the research was and is a "fruitcake" too?
No, I just called you one. However, they were under no requirement to give a
Department of Sociology Chair any info either.
This is typical of what Liberals do when they are confronted with the facts of an issue. They resort to name-calling..
The irony is hilarious! You accuse others of resorting to name calling, and then go around calling others "Liberal," a name your type try to demonize.
For the record, I am liberal and damn proud of it.
Looks to me like it might just be a few druggies popping their mouths off rather than an immediate assassination threat.
Brian A.
I'd rather be cycling.
Looks to me like it might just be a few druggies popping their mouths off rather than an immediate assassination threat.
That is entirely too rational. But you are correct.
In the end you were right.
Isn't it irritating when a person with such impressive credentials is denied access to information?
I know Y-12 has a similar policy. They simply refuse to share their methods with every Tom, Dick, and JosephBaileyOne. It's right there in the Plan of the Day.
Look at the bright side, you're still welcomed at Target, Wal-Mart, Home Depot . . .
Visit us at
The Home
Same here.
Last night I posted a note about Second Amendment delusions, cashes of dried beans, rice, MREs, weapons, fascination with Wagnerian opera, and a little boy's need to repeatedly boast about what may well have been a minor contribution to a report for a prestigious institution.
It was brilliant!
I have spent the morning, popcorn in hand, watching you guys play this troll like a fiddle.
Visit us at
The Home
You consume disputes?
Visit us at
The Home
People who understand that 'there are many glitches that happen with the Internet or a given computer' frequently accuse others of stalking them and removing posts. I know I do it all the time.
Visit us at
The Home
_________________________________________________
"You can't fix stupid..." ~ Ron White"
"I never said I wasn't a brat..." ~ Talidapali
The staff have barely scratched the surface of this patient's pathology and you want to discharge him.
Visit us at
The Home
Might give you a nasty rash.
_________________________________________________
"You can't fix stupid..." ~ Ron White"
"I never said I wasn't a brat..." ~ Talidapali