Actually, I consider Atlas more like "LOVEWATCH! Keeping the world safe for lovers and other strangers."
More lying from the Islamist tools who whore themselves out to Islamic supremacists and oppressors. The Southern Poverty Law Center has kicked off its Goebbels-like propaganda campaign against me here. I equate the Southern Poverty Law Center coming out for Islamic supremacists with them coming out for nazis. What's the difference, and why doesn't the SPLC even have a category for Islamic jihadi groups? Not one. The greatest threat facing our nation, our people, our world, and they are shilling for them.
Now they are linking me with "White Supremacists" (defamation of character). Their piece is awful. This is an obvious ploy to keep politicians away from our September 11 rally against the Ground Zero mega-mosque and any jihad-related issue. Trust me, the folks at Stormfront, whom I've monitored for years (they were the very first hate site to hit the web back in 1994), can't stand Jews or Israel or me, and it would be obvious to ANYONE that IF there are posts there supporting my work, then this is a manifestation of Sun Tzu's strategy from the Art of War (deliberately planting misinformation from the 'other side'). White supremacists and neo-Nazis actually hate Jews and Israel, and love Islam and jihad. The idea of neo-Nazis who love Israel and hate Islamic jihad is a figment of the left's imagination.
Further I have never supported Eugene TerreBlanche, but I have railed against the Boer genocide in South Africa. Is the SLPC advocating for genocide now? Here is everything I wrote on South Africa, and here is a piece I penned from American Thinker, Genocide in South Africa. And it's same thing with Milosevic. I have never supported him in any way, shape or form. It is the Serbs I stand with as they stand against the jihadists in the Balkans. Here are all my posts on the Balkans. Read for yourself. Think for yourself. Decide for yourself.
Of course, Hamas funder, Muslim Brotherhood front CAIR has sent out an alert with this vile garbage. The irony is that if SPLC were tracking real "hate groups," CAIR should be on its list. That's the Orwellian world in which we live.
A little while back, a reader write that he saw that the Southern Poverty Law Center had FDI/ SIOA in its crosshairs. He thought we should see this brief correspondence he had a year ago with Mark Potok here. Reader Bob wrote, "I started out by looking on their website for a definition of the term 'hate group' fully expecting that Islam would fit any reasonable definition. When I couldn't find such a definition (still can't today) I inquired per below."
Check this out:
Subject: Comment on the Center's Work
I was looking on your site for a definition of the term "hate group" and how it is determined which groups qualify. I was not able to find that. Can you please point me to that or else just respond back with the definition you use?
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 11:27:43 -0500
Subject: Re: Comment on the Center's Work
Here's what our Intelligence Project director wrote about this:We do not list "hate groups" on the basis of criminality, violence, or some kind of judgment as to potential for violence. We list them strictly on the basis of their ideology, as expressed in their platform and/or the writing and speeches of their leaders. The test is: Does the group denigrate or attack a whole other group of people based on that group's class characteristics (i.e., all blacks are criminals, all whites are blue-eyed devils, all Jews are... you get the idea). Groups like the New Black Panther Party clearly fit that definition -- they're wildly anti-white, anti-Semitic, anti-gay, etc.
Probably the great majority of groups we list have not been associated with > hate crimes. In any event, hate crimes are generally committed by individual > members of groups, as opposed to the group itself.
Hope this explains it for you.
Southern Poverty Law Center
400 Washington Ave.
Montgomery, Alabama 36104
Subject: RE: Comment on the Center's Work
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 11:30:05 -0600
Hi Penny - Thank you for your prompt response. Let me cut to the chase as for my reason for asking, since your description of hate groups is in line with what I thought it would be and should be (and with which I completely agree).
Obviously neo-Nazi groups fit the definition, but Nazism itself might not, simply because it is an ideology, and not a group. It is a "hate-filled ideology" which, if adopted by an individual or group would qualify that person or group as "haters." So far so good?
I have become aware of an ideology which seems to obsess over Jews (but not so much blacks or other racial or ethnic minorities, unusual though that may be), with leaders who refer to Jews as "swine" "depraved" "merciless and heartless" wishing "evil" for others, "feel[ing] pain to see others in happiness and are gleeful when others are afflicted with a calamity" etc.
Its literature insists that Jews are "swine" "corrupt" and "corruptors" "ignomous" and "doomed in the Hereafter" etc. People who subscribe to this ideology are, as far as I can tell, united in these feelings (and worse, much worse) towards Jews, but sometimes, depending on the time and place, are PC enough to keep that under wraps while in public and just vent against "Israel and Zionism, but not the Jews personally."
I am not trying to be cute here, but this ideology, in case you hadn't already guessed, is Islam. The comments in its literature (the Koran of course, but also the words and actions of Muhammad, whose example is considered sacred without exception) and by its leaders (mullahs, sheiks, and ayatollahs) are all but impossible to distinguish from the sentiments expressed by Hitler, Goebbels, Himmler, Heydrich, Streicher, etc. As best I can tell, Islam fits any reasonable definition of a "hate-filled ideology." As far as I can tell, it easily meets the straight-up definition you gave me. So while I see that the "Nation of Islam" is prominently featured on your site as a hate group (I should note, for other reasons than what I cite above) do subscribers to Islam in general also qualify as "haters" or not? If not, on what basis? If so, are they listed on the site?
I realize that because Islam cloaks itself in the veneer of religion and has a lot of adherents who consistently prove their willingness to resort to any and every form of threat, thuggery and blood-curdling violence (hate-group characteristics if ever there were any), it seems to have succeeded in quelling any thought of calling it out for what it is: a hate-filled, deeply antisemitic ideology disguised as an uplifting religion. Am I wrong on this? I would appreciate your thoughts.
PS - backup for the citations listed and many others are available on request.
On 6/16/09 11:07 AM, Bob wrote:Hi Penny - I was wondering if you had had a chance to think about my question. If there is someone else at SPLC who you think might be better positioned to respond, by all means please forward it.
On 6/16/09 2:46 PM, "Penny Weaver" <Penny.Weaver@splcenter.org> wrote:
I forwarded your original e-mail to Mark Potok, director of our Intelligence Project, but he has been incredibly busy with the aftermath of the Holocaust Museum shooting and probably hasn’t had a chance to read your message.
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 2009 11:48:00 -0500Subject: Re: Comment on the Center's Work
Thanks for the note. I think one could make similar arguments for lots of religions, and that’s not a road I think we should go down. After all, the Old Testament calls for stoning to death adultresses (but not adulterers), homosexuals and others.
With regard to monitoring radical jihadists, we have made a pragmatic decision to leave that mainly to the major Jewish NGOs, which do a good job and have some real expertise that would likely take us years to develop. Still, we do cover black Muslim extremists and have written about such matters as the connections between radical Muslims and neo-Nazis.