Social The Southern Poverty Law Center Has Lost All Integrity, Yet More Profitable Than Ever Before.

Really? What's the evidence for this?
That they're jewish?
That's not controversial. From wikipedia:
The Anti-Defamation League (ADL; formerly known as the Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith) is an international Jewish non-governmental organization based in the United States. Describing itself as "the nation's premier civil rights/human relations agency," the ADL states that it "fights anti-Semitism and all forms of bigotry, defends democratic ideals and protects civil rights for all", doing so through "information, education, legislation, and advocacy."[1][2]
That their focus is Israel. From wikipedia again, but you can check independent sources:
Mark Arax, a former Los Angeles Times writer and current Salon writer of Armenian descent, strongly criticized the role of the ADL in American Armenian Genocide denial. In 2007, he spoke with Abraham Foxman, who said:[114]

Our focus is Israel. If helping Turkey helps Israel, then that's what we're in the business of doing. Was it genocide? It was wartime. Things get messy. The Turks and Armenians need to revisit their past. The Jewish community shouldn't be the arbiter of that history. And I don't think the U.S. Congress should be the arbiter, either.

"Our focus is Israel."
They basically denied that the Armenian genocide was a genocide, something a civil rights group was supposed to do, because it would help Israel.
Read a bit about Abraham Foxman, that lovely character.

The ADL/Foxman even attacks Jews that are against Israel policy. Like Norman filkenstein and Tony Judt.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/08/AR2006100800817.html
And I quote:
More recently, the ADL repeatedly accused DePaul University professor Norman G. Finkelstein, who is Jewish and strongly opposes Israeli policies, of being a "Holocaust denier." These charges have proved baseless.

The SPLC isn't nearly as bad and doesn't describe itself as such but it was also founded by jewish americans and mostly staffed by them.
Both have defended other civil rights cases but they focus mostly on anti-semitism or more specifically anti-zionism as they have no problem throwing jews that don't agree with zionism under the bus. And don't condemn Israeli atrocities.
 
My current girlfriend is half American Indian, and I had a black girlfriend a few years ago, but that didn't stop me from apparently being a white supremacist. I don't even know what it takes to be a white supremacist, but I think just being white is close enough.

I don't think anybody ever took the Southern Poverty Law Center seriously. I think the Young Turks source it a bunch, but that's about it.
It's unfortunate but supposedly serious newspapers like the NYtimes use SPLC references on their articles.
 
DEFPcBiVoAA-vfS.jpg:large
 
The SPLC isn't nearly as bad and doesn't describe itself as such but it was also founded by jewish americans and mostly staffed by them.
Both have defended other civil rights cases but they focus mostly on anti-semitism or more specifically anti-zionism as they have no problem throwing jews that don't agree with zionism under the bus. And don't condemn Israeli atrocities.

So what's their angle in smearing Ali and Nawaz?
 
Maher wants to be a part of lawsuit against Southern Poverty Law Center
by Sean Higgins | Jun 24, 2017



Talk show host Bill Maher said Friday he would like to join a crowd-funded lawsuit against the Southern Poverty Law Center. The host of the HBO show "Real Time" said the civil rights group "were being assholes" by including British activist Maajid Nawaz on its list of "anti-Muslim extremists."

Nawaz, a former Islamist and founder of a think tank called the Quilliam Foundation, said on Maher's show that he was "sick and tired" of such criticism from "well-meaning liberals" and would mount a crowd-funded defamation suit against the SPLC.

"I'd like to be part of the crowd," Maher said.

In its "Field Guide to Anti-Muslim Extremists" the SPLC says, "the evidence suggests that Nawaz is far more interested in self-promotion and money than in any particular ideological dispute. He told several different versions of his story, emphasizing that he was deradicalized while in Egypt — even though he in fact continued his Islamist agitation for months after returning." SPLC's principle argument against Nawaz appears to be that his organization supports broad intelligence gathering measures, including monitoring people not accused of crimes, if doing so can prevent future terrorist attacks.

The guide points to comments by Nawaz such as "the ideology of non-violent Islamists is broadly the same as that of violent Islamists; they disagree only on tactics" and "in fact, academic institutions in Britain have been infiltrated for years by dangerous theocratic fantasists. I should know: I was one of them" as proof of his extremism.


Also cited as proof in the guide was that in 2014 "Nawaz tweeted out a cartoon of Jesus and Muhammad — despite the fact that many Muslims see it as blasphemous to draw Muhammad. He said that he wanted 'to carve out a space to be heard without constantly fearing the blasphemy charge.'"

Nawaz said being listed as such by the SPLC potentially endangered his safety. "We know what happens when you list heretics. They end up dead," he said.

In 2012, a man walked into the DC office of the Family Research Council, a Christian conservative group, and shot a guard, part of an apparent attempt to target the council's officials. The attacker, who later plead guilty to assault with intent to kill and other crimes, said that he targeted the nonprofit group because he wanted to intimidate opponents of gay rights. He was carrying 15 Chick-fil-A sandwiches in a backpack at the time. FRC is well-known for its opposition to gay marriage and gay rights in general. SPLC had labeled it a hate group and placed it on a list including Neo-Nazi and white supremacist groups. The FRC alleged that the SPLC's listing was a key factor in its being targeted. The center has said the council deserved the listing based on comments its officials have made.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/m...t-southern-poverty-law-center/article/2627000
 
Last edited:
The SPLC has no moral authority becaue they attack and smear critics of a virulent fascist ideology: Islam.

The SPLC , like soo many Islam apologists , deliberately conflate criticism of Islam as an attack on Muslims.
 
Maher wants to be a part of lawsuit against Southern Poverty Law Center
by Sean Higgins | Jun 24, 2017



Talk show host Bill Maher said Friday he would like to join a crowd-funded lawsuit against the Southern Poverty Law Center. The host of the HBO show "Real Time" said the civil rights group "were being assholes" by including British activist Maajid Nawaz on its list of "anti-Muslim extremists."

Nawaz, a former Islamist and founder of a think tank called the Quilliam Foundation, said on Maher's show that he was "sick and tired" of such criticism from "well-meaning liberals" and would mount a crowd-funded defamation suit against the SPLC.

"I'd like to be part of the crowd," Maher said.

In its "Field Guide to Anti-Muslim Extremists" the SPLC says, "the evidence suggests that Nawaz is far more interested in self-promotion and money than in any particular ideological dispute. He told several different versions of his story, emphasizing that he was deradicalized while in Egypt — even though he in fact continued his Islamist agitation for months after returning." SPLC's principle argument against Nawaz appears to be that his organization supports broad intelligence gathering measures, including monitoring people not accused of crimes, if doing so can prevent future terrorist attacks.

The guide points to comments by Nawaz such as "the ideology of non-violent Islamists is broadly the same as that of violent Islamists; they disagree only on tactics" and "in fact, academic institutions in Britain have been infiltrated for years by dangerous theocratic fantasists. I should know: I was one of them" as proof of his extremism.

Also cited as proof in the guide was that in 2014 "Nawaz tweeted out a cartoon of Jesus and Muhammad — despite the fact that many Muslims see it as blasphemous to draw Muhammad. He said that he wanted 'to carve out a space to be heard without constantly fearing the blasphemy charge.'"

Nawaz said being listed as such by the SPLC potentially endangered his safety. "We know what happens when you list heretics. They end up dead," he said.

In 2012, a man walked into the DC office of the Family Research Council, a Christian conservative group, and shot a guard, part of an apparent attempt to target the council's officials. The attacker, who later plead guilty to assault with intent to kill and other crimes, said that he targeted the nonprofit group because he wanted to intimidate opponents of gay rights. He was carrying 15 Chick-fil-A sandwiches in a backpack at the time. FRC is well-known for its opposition to gay marriage and gay rights in general. SPLC had labeled it a hate group and placed it on a list including Neo-Nazi and white supremacist groups. The FRC alleged that the SPLC's listing was a key factor in its being targeted. The center has said the council deserved the listing based on comments its officials have made.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/m...t-southern-poverty-law-center/article/2627000

Some days it feels to me like Bill Maher is single-handedly trying to save the Democratic party from itself. It would be nice if an actual politician among them had balls the size of his.
 
They, much like the ADL, have zero credibility left. They list Muslim reformers and liberal ex-Muslims as "anti-Muslim extremists". They're a fucking joke. I feel sorry for true liberals, for disaffected liberals. They're great people and they deserve better. Hell, I would count myself in that camp.
 
Scumbags, Propagandists, Lapdogs (of Islamists), Cowards. Fuck the SPLC. Whether you like Maajid Nawaz or not, labeling him an "anti-Islamic extremist" is beyond retarded, and almost seems like they're trying to get him killed. Here's their write-up on him on their bullshit field guide:



https://www.splcenter.org/20161025/journalists-manual-field-guide-anti-muslim-extremists#nawaz

If some of that stuff is true, you could call him kind of a sleazy guy or a publicity whore, etc. But how the hell do you get anti-Muslim extremist out of that? These people are fucked. It's clear that they targeted him because he speaks out against Islamist groups. For fuck's sake, they included the fact that he tweeted out a picture of Muhammad (piss be upon him) as proof that he's some dangerous Islamophobe. Here's the "extremist" tweet:



Does the SPLC enforce Sharia-based blasphemy laws now? The fact that they included that is shameful, and discredits their entire organization imo. Which is a shame because it has a proud history and had done a lot of good work over the years. This BS about Charles Murray just confirms that they've been blinded by ideology and are pursuing a toxic agenda.


@Zankou

Oh shucks, Majid made a visual representation of the prophet. Clearly he is an Islamophobe. It doesn't matter that there actually have been a few visual depictions of Muhammed's face in the distant past. What matters is kowtowing to contemporary Muslim tantrums.

From the left leaning Guardian
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jan/10/drawing-prophet-islam-muhammad-images

"To many Muslims, any image of the prophet Muhammad is sacrilegious, but the ban has not always been absolute and there is a small but rich tradition of devotional Islamic art going back more than seven centuries that does depict God’s messenger."

Oh my gawd!! Princeton is displaying pre-modern images featuring a visual depiction of Muhammed's face.
http://scholar.princeton.edu/nhussen/galleries/oldest-images-prophet

 
Last edited:
Some days it feels to me like Bill Maher is single-handedly trying to save the Democratic party from itself. It would be nice if an actual politician among them had balls the size of his.
Frankly I wish there emerges a great schism within Liberals/ Dem party apparatchik and liberals who are fed up with the formers' philoIslamism.
 
Frankly I wish there emerges a great schism within Liberals/ Dem party apparatchik and liberals who are fed up with the formers' philoIslamism.

If the Center Left and Center Right teams up for a Centrist party, one that's willing to call a spade a spade despite of political leanings, I'd sign up in a heart beat.
 
If the Center Left and Center Right teams up for a Centrist party, one that's willing to call a spade a spade despite of political leanings, I'd sign up in a heart beat.
source.gif
 
In its "Field Guide to Anti-Muslim Extremists" the SPLC says, "the evidence suggests that Nawaz is far more interested in self-promotion and money than in any particular ideological dispute. He told several different versions of his story, emphasizing that he was deradicalized while in Egypt — even though he in fact continued his Islamist agitation for months after returning." SPLC's principle argument against Nawaz appears to be that his organization supports broad intelligence gathering measures, including monitoring people not accused of crimes, if doing so can prevent future terrorist attacks.​

The guide points to comments by Nawaz such as "the ideology of non-violent Islamists is broadly the same as that of violent Islamists; they disagree only on tactics" and "in fact, academic institutions in Britain have been infiltrated for years by dangerous theocratic fantasists. I should know: I was one of them" as proof of his extremism.
This seems accurate, and imo he's very likely a charlatan at heart today, just like he was before. The problem is the SLPC translating this into blacklisting him, which really does promote violence against him as he claims.
 
It's amazing that they haven't repealed the charge against Nawaz yet and just admitted that they completely fucked this one up + that they as an institution know fuck-all about Islam and Islamic reform. It remains a damning indictment of the institution. I consider it the left wing equivalent of when right wingers cite Muslim reformists to justify their anti-Muslim attitudes ... for SPLC, Islam primarily exists as a mechanism for white people to convict other white people of bigotry relative to non-whites, essentially an occasion for virtue signaling rather than a real religion that much of the world follows. Thus we have the surreal situation in which for SPLC any brown-skinned person engaged in serious criticism of Islamic religion = hate-filled racist. Criticism of one's own religion is only permitted for 'white' religion. Criticism of 'brown' religion, even if one is brown, is racism. Weird AF, and fundamentally racist itself.

It's as strange as any of the bizarre sectarian disputes that you'd find in medieval religion.
 
The fact that they know how bad this makes them look but they still won't just admit that they fucked up and remove Maajid says to me that they're getting some serious $ from Islamist organizations. They're just throwing away their credibility and people don't usually do that for cheap.
 
Tbh I don't think they're that wrong about Hirsi Ali. Calling her an extremist is a bit much but she's not more than an anti-Islam polemicist and not this great public intellectual some on the right want her to be because of her views.
 
Tbh I don't think they're that wrong about Hirsi Ali. Calling her an extremist is a bit much but she's not more than an anti-Islam polemicist and not this great public intellectual some on the right want her to be because of her views.

Agreed, she is so over-the top unrelenting in her demonization of Islam that it loses seriousness as an actual critique. She also doesn't seem to distinguish between types of Islam.

The entire idea of 'extremist' is racially charged for the SPLC. It would not dream of drawing up a list attacking everybody who was vehemently anti-Christian as an 'extremist.' Extremism and bigotry, for SPLC, seem to be entirely derivative products of white supremacy. Which is why Islam becomes interpreted as little more than a potential vehicle for SPLC to attack white supremacy, converting all those who attack Islam into honorary white supremacists. They no longer exist as individuals, they are strictly evidence of SPLC's greatness and moral virtue. Christian identity movement = monstrous evil by white racists, Islamic identity movement = oppressed by monstrously evil white racists. Human reality divides into two camps, those penitent of white racism (superior!), and those who are not (inferior ...).

It's oddly reminiscent of Nazi and Communist campaigns to designate people as 'Jewish' or 'Fascist' simply because they oppose Nazism or Communism. Again, the closest equivalent is medieval heresy hunters, who seek to convict people of belonging to the Group of Evil, and care little about whether their charges make any sense relative to any given person. Simply resisting the Inquisition is proof of your membership in the Group of Evil (or, at very least, you seem to be a sympathizer or facilitator ... so, basically, evil).
 
Back
Top