Spitfire List Web site and blog of anti-fascist researcher and radio personality Dave Emory.

For The Record  

FTR #793 Miscellaneous Articles and Updates

Dave Emory’s entire life­time of work is avail­able on a flash drive that can be obtained here. (The flash drive includes the anti-fascist books avail­able on this site.)

Listen: MP3

Side 1  Side 2

Quandt Family Values: BMW heir Harald Quandt (in uniform) with his in-laws

Introduction: As the title indicates, this program updates previous topics of discussion and presents information not previously introduced. Updating FTR #791, the program notes the death of Cornelius Gurlitt, the son of prominent Nazi art dealer Hildebrand Gurlitt. The younger Gurlitt was found to be in possession of a vast trove of artworks, valued at at $1.35 billion by some accounts.

A Wall Street Journal article maintains that the elder Gurlitt was to be the director of Hitler’s Fuehrermuseum. Never built, the art for that intended institution comprised much of the art alleged by authors Simon Dunstan and Gerrard Williams to be at the center of the deal between Allen Dulles and Martin Bormann.

Cornelius Gurlitt left his art trove–valued at around one $1.35 billion–to a Bern, Switzerland art museum. Switzerland was and is, of course, a major repository for much of the Bormann flight capital. One can but wonder if this museum has connections with the Bormann group.

Notice, also, that Gurlitt had a second residence in Salzburg, Austria. As discussed in FTR #791, the German authorities had no record of Cornelius Gurlitt. In a country where every citizen must register with the police of his or her residential area, this is unthinkable and indicative of some high-level chicanery.

Recent news has offered up a grimly instructive juxtaposition. As Glenn Greenwald and his associates in the Snowden “op” garnered journalistic prizes, Frazier Glenn Miller, a veteran neo-Nazi and associate of The Order [allegedly] killed three at a Jewish community center in Kansas.

As we have seen in FTR #754 and several posts, Greenwald was a fellow-traveler of some of murderous Nazi and white supremacist groups. In addition to defending Matthew Hale against solicitation  of murder charges, Greenwald ran interference for the “leaderless resistance strategy.”

Leaderless resistance is an operational doctrine through which individual Nazis and white supremacists perform acts of violence against their perceived enemies, individually, or in very small groups. Acting in accordance with doctrine espoused by luminaries and leaderls in their movement, they avoid infiltration by law enforcement by virtue of their “lone wolf” operational strategy. What Miller [allegedly] did is pre­cisely the sort of thing advo­cated by the “Lead­er­less Resis­tance” strategy.

The Turner Diaries and Hunter, published by Greenwald's client, the National Alliance

Serpent's Walk: Forecasts a Nazi takeover of U.S. in mid-twenty-first century, after WMD terrorist attacks.

The advo­cates of this sort of thing, such as Cit­i­zen Greenwald’s client The National Alliance (pub­lisher of  The Turner Diaries,” which pro­vided the oper­a­tional tem­plate for Miller’s bene­fac­tors The Order) have been shielded (to an extent) from civil suits hold­ing them to account for their mur­der­ous advo­cacy.

We can give thanks to Greenwald.

National Alliance’s books are specifically intended as instructional vehicles. Hunter is dedicated to Joseph Paul Franklin, who was close to Miller. The shootings of which Miller is accused were on Franklin’s birthday. Although not legally liable for such killings, Greenwald does bear political, moral, philosophical and “karmic” responsibility. The sycophants and fools who celebrate him enjoy similar status.

Miller is also an admirer of Ron Paul, the Presidential candidate of choice for Greenwald’s benefactor Eddie “the Friendly Spook” Snowden. The “Paulistinian Libertarian Organization” is at the foundation of the Greenwald/Snowden milieu.

Much of the balance of the program highlights the growing control of American media outlets by doctrinaire fascist organizations with a heritage evolving from World War II.

With our media already demonstrating a compulsion to fundamentally misrepresent events in an overtly ideologized fashion (as we are seeing with regard to the Ukraine situation), the inroads of Muslim Brotherhood, SS-linked Bertelsmann and elements linked with the Unification Church is something to be feared.

Program Highlights Include:

  • The creation of a giant publishing outfit, merging Bertelsmann and Penguin into a corporate entity that will be controlled by Bertelsmann.
  • Bertelsmann has also acquired full control of BMG, expanding their participation in the music business.
  • Review of the Nazi and SS heritage of Bertelsmann.
  • The Unification Church background of the publisher of the revived Newsweek. Note that the Unification Church controls UPI and The Washington Times.
  • A number of articles about Al-Jazeera’s effective control by the Muslim Brotherhood.
  • The resignation of Egyptian Al-Jazeera staff after being ordered to give favorable coverage to the Brotherhood during the overthrow of Morsi.
  • Qatar, the government of which runs Al-Jazeera, actively subsidized the Morsi regime.
  • Egyptian journalists expelled Al-Jazeera reporters from a professional gathering, because of the network’s overt Brotherhood bias.
  • Al-Jazeera’s billeting of exiled Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood members in hotels in Qatar.
  • Discussion of BMW withholding ads from The Atlantic whenever the magazine would review a book about the Holocaust or World War II.
  • Control over the Bavarian Motor Works firm by the heirs of Joseph Goebbels.

1. Updating FTR #791, the program notes the death of Cornelius Gurlitt, the son of prominent Nazi art dealer Hildebrand Gurlitt. The younger Gurlitt was found to be in possession of a vast trove of artworks, valued at at $1.35 billion by some accounts.

A Wall Street Journal article maintains that the elder Gurlitt was to be the director of Hitler’s Fuehrermuseum. Never built, the art for that intended institution comprised much of the art alleged by authors Simon Dunstan and Gerrard Williams to be at the center of the deal between Allen Dulles and Martin Bormann.

“German Art Collector in Nazi Loot Uproar Dies at 81 — Update” by Mary M. Lane; The Wall Street Journal; 5/6/2014.

Cornelius Gurlitt, the octogenarian son of one of Adolf Hitler’s major art dealers, died in his Munich home on Tuesday morning, leaving the fate of his roughly 1,400 artworks unclear.

Legal questions now swarm surrounding how–and even if–looted works in the collection can now be restituted to Holocaust victims and their heirs.

Mr. Gurlitt, 81 years old, stepped from complete obscurity into world-wide prominence last fall after German media reports surfaced that Bavarian tax authorities had confiscated in early 2012 what is regarded as the largest-ever trove of Nazi-looted art in private hands.

The fact that the find remained unreported for nearly two years and the government’s refusal to put pressure on Mr. Gurlitt to return any looted artwork to heirs of their original owners drew international criticism of Germany from the U.S., France and Israel.

Mr. Gurlitt died in the presence of his doctor and caretakers, a few weeks after requesting that he return home from a Bavarian hospital where he had undergone intensive heart surgery, his spokesman said on Tuesday afternoon. The collector, who was never married and had no children, leaves no direct heir or known next of kin.

The trove included many unremarkable works on paper but also several valuable paintings. One of those, an Henri Matisse portrait that Matisse dealers say could fetch up to $20 million at auction, is being chased by the heirs of the late French art dealer Paul Rosenberg, including Anne Sinclair, a prominent journalist and ex-wife of former International Monetary Fund head Dominique Strauss-Kahn.

That painting and several other artworks were looted from Holocaust victims during World War II. It is unclear how the works ended up in the collection of Mr. Gurlitt’s father, Hildebrand, a successful Nazi-era dealer whom Hitler had tapped to lead his unrealized Führermuseum in Linz, Austria after the war.

German authorities came under fire from major Jewish leaders, including Ronald Lauder and Israeli and American officials because the trove, though confiscated in early 2012, the was kept secret for two years–even from the Bavarian justice minister–in violation of international norms on art restitution.

At the time, Bavarian tax authorities justified the decision to keep the works’ existence a secret because of their continuing investigation into Mr. Gurlitt’s finances. The Augusburg prosecutor’s office in charge of the investigation didn’t answer calls seeking comment.

Although that investigation will lapse now that Mr. Gurlitt is dead, fresh hurdles abound, mainly surrounding a simple question: who has inherited Mr. Gurlitt’s estate?

Christopher Marinello, a lawyer for the Rosenberg heirs, says the family will continue pursuing the case, but that “we’ll have to wait for the estate process to run its course.”

It is unclear, though, whom Mr. Marinello should even contact or who will be handling the estate process.

Given Mr. Gurlitt’s perpetually frail state of health, a German court appointed Munich-based lawyer Christoph Edel as his legal guardian late last year. But Mr. Edel’s position was “voided as soon as Mr. Gurlitt died,” his spokesman, Stephan Holzinger, told The Wall Street Journal.

Mr. Holzinger says he doesn’t even know if Mr. Gurlitt has a will and that his own contract will only continue for “the next few days.”

“The only guy who could give orders in [restituting art] was Mr. Edel, but now his job has ended,” said Mr. Holzinger. “The job right now is to find out what’s in the will–if there is a will.”

The lack of certainty about a finished will may in part be due to the tensions that have plagued Mr. Gurlitt’s own legal team since it came together earlier this year.

In January, The Journal reported that Mr. Gurlitt was willing to negotiate the return of works of art within the collection, but Mr. Gurlitt’s lawyer, Hannes Hartung, was fired soon afterward

Several families, including the Rosenberg heirs, complained that Mr. Hartung was unwilling to rule out a demand for monetary compensation for returning Nazi-looted art.

Last month tax authorities announced they would return Mr. Gurlitt’s artwork. Through his legal guardian, Mr. Gurlitt responded to international complaints by giving the government-appointed task force that had already been examining the provenance authority to spend a year researching it and helping arrange restitution for works that it determined were looted.

But even that task force is uncertain now with whom it should coordinate since Mr. Gurlitt is dead.

“We want to fulfill our duty to research this work as seriously as before,” said task force spokesman Matthias Henkel. “We are still working on determining with whom to speak now.”

2. Cornelius Gurlitt left his art trove–valued at around one $1.35 billion–to a Bern, Switzerland art museum. Switzerland was and is, of course, a major repository for much of the Bormann flight capital. One can but wonder if this museum has connections with the Bormann group.

Notice, also, that Gurlitt had a second residence in Salzburg, Austria. As discussed in FTR #791, the German authorities had no record of Cornelius Gurlitt. In a country where every citizen must register with the police of his or her residential area, this is unthinkable and indicative of some high-level chicanery.

“‘Nazi Art’ Hoarder Gurlitt Makes Swiss Museum Sole Heir”; BBC News; 5/7/2014.

German Nazi-era art hoarder Cornelius Gurlitt, who died on Tuesday, has made the Bern Art Museum in Switzerland his “sole heir”.

The reclusive son of Adolf Hitler’s art dealer is estimated to have amassed a collection worth up to a billion euros.

The museum said the news struck “like a bolt from the blue”, given that it had had no relationship with Mr Gurlitt.

The collection was the subject of a long legal dispute over works that may have been taken illegally by the Nazis.

The Bern Art Museum said that it was delighted at the news that it had been made Mr Gurlitt’s “unrestricted and unfettered sole heir”, but added that the bequest also posed some questions.

“The Board of Trustees and directors of Kunstmuseum Bern are surprised and delighted, but at the same time do not wish to conceal the fact that this magnificent bequest brings with it a considerable burden of responsibility and a wealth of questions of the most difficult and sensitive kind, and questions in particular of a legal and ethical nature”, it said in a statement.

Mr Gurlitt’s father, Hildebrand Gurlitt, was ordered to deal in works that had been seized from Jews, or which the Nazis considered “degenerate” and had removed from German museums.

The priceless collection was confiscated in 2012 by Bavarian authorities from the apartment of his son.

After initially refusing to give up the paintings, Mr Gurlitt changed his position, agreeing to co-operate with the German authorities on establishing the paintings’ provenance, and returning them if they were shown to be stolen.

‘Wild speculation’
Mr Gurlitt, who had no close relatives, wrote the will within the last few weeks shortly before undergoing heart surgery, according to his spokesman, Stephan Holzinger.

“It now falls to the probate court to determine if the will is valid and whether a contract of inheritance exists,” he told the BBC earlier on Wednesday.

“I can understand that there is now wild speculation, but I don’t want to comment on that at this stage.”

The German government said earlier that the collector’s death would not affect the investigation into ownerships claims on the paintings.

Mr Gurlitt’s collection only came to light after a routine check found he was carrying wads of cash on a train from Switzerland, triggering a tax inquiry.

Investigators found more than 1,400 works in his flat in Munich in February 2012 – though they only revealed the discovery in late 2013 – and a further 60 in his house near Salzburg, Austria, earlier this year.

Among them were works by Pierre-Auguste Renoir, Pablo Picasso, Marc Chagall, Emil Nolde and Max Liebermann.

The collection is estimated to be worth up to a billion euros (£850m; $1.35bn).

Under German law, Cornelius Gurlitt was not compelled to return any paintings because the incidents happened more than 30 years ago.

3a. Recent news has offered up a grimly instructive juxtaposition. As Glenn Greenwald and his associates in the Snowden “op” garnered journalistic prizes, Frazier Glenn Miller, a veteran neo-Nazi and associate of The Order [allegedly] killed three at a Jewish community center in Kansas.

As we have seen in FTR #754 and several posts, Greenwald was a fellow-traveler of some of murderous Nazi and white supremacist groups. In addition to defending Matthew Hale against solicitation  of murder charges, Greenwald ran interference for the “leaderless resistance strategy.”

Leaderless resistance is an operational doctrine through which individual Nazis and white supremacists perform acts of violence against their perceived enemies, individually, or in very small groups. Acting in accordance with doctrine espoused by luminaries and leaderls in their movement, they avoid infiltration by law enforcement by virtue of their “lone wolf” operational strategy.

What Miller [allegedly] did is pre­cisely the sort of thing advo­cated by the “Lead­er­less Resis­tance” strategy.

The advo­cates of this sort of thing, such as Cit­i­zen Greenwald’s client The National Alliance (pub­lisher of  The Turner Diaries,” which pro­vided the oper­a­tional tem­plate for Miller’s bene­fac­tors The Order) have been shielded (to an extent) from civil suits hold­ing them to account for their mur­der­ous advo­cacy.

We can give thanks to Greenwald.

National Alliance’s books are specifically intended as instructional vehicles. Hunter is dedicated to Joseph Paul Franklin, who was close to Miller. The shootings of which Miller is accused were on Franklin’s birthday.

Although not legally liable for such killings, Greenwald does bear political, moral, philosophical and “karmic” responsibility. The sycophants and fools who celebrate him enjoy similar status.

Miller is also an admirer of Ron Paul, the Presidential candidate of choice for Greenwald’s benefactor Eddie “the Friendly Spook” Snowden. The “Paulistinian Libertarian Organization” is at the foundation of the Greenwald/Snowden milieu.

Idle thought number 219–“old German families” in Latin America helped finance The Order, which gave money to Miller (among others).  Matthews’ group certainly robbed armored cars and gained financial support in so doing.

In that regard, we wonder to what extent The Order may actually have been a vehicle for laundering funds from those “old German families in Latin America?”

3b. 1988: Neo-Nazi Group Founds Pub­lish­ing House, Pub­lishes Book to Inspire White Assas­sins; His­tory Commons

. . . .William Pierce, the founder of the neo-Nazi National Alliance (see 1970–1974) and the author of the inflam­ma­tory and highly influ­en­tial white suprema­cist novel The Turner Diaries (see 1978), over­sees the cre­ation of a pub­lish­ing firm for the Alliance, National Van­guard Books. It will pub­lish a num­ber of works, most promi­nently a reprint of The Turner Diaries and Pierce’s sec­ond novel, Hunter, which tells the story of a white assas­sin who kills minori­ties, par­tic­u­larly inter­ra­cial cou­ples. He ded­i­cates Hunter to Joseph Paul Franklin, con­victed of the sniper mur­ders of two African-American men (see 1980). Pierce will later tell his biog­ra­pher that he wrote Hunter as a delib­er­ate moti­va­tional tool for assas­sins, say­ing, “From the begin­ning with Hunter, I had this idea of how fic­tion can work as a teach­ing tool in mind.” In 2002, the Cen­ter for New Com­mu­nity will write, “Like The Turner Diaries, the book has inspired sev­eral real-life acts of racist ter­ror” (see Jan­u­ary 4, 2002 and After). In 1991, National Van­guard will expand into releas­ing audio­tapes, which by Decem­ber 1992 will spawn a radio show, Amer­i­can Dis­si­dent Voices. In 1993, it will begin pub­lish­ing comic books tar­geted at chil­dren and teenagers. . . .

3c. Broth­er­hood and Mur­der by Thomas Mar­tinez; Google Books; p. 234.

. . . .The per­former also said ” . . . Some very old Ger­man fam­i­lies [in South Amer­ica] were giv­ing Bob [Matthews, leader of The Order] some money.” . . .

. . . For exam­ple, as long ago as 1978, Man­fred Roeder, who headed the rem­nants of the Ger­man Nazi Partytrav­eled to Brazil, where he met with Josef Men­gele and other Nazi lead­ers. Imme­di­ately after­ward, Roeder trav­eled to the United States, where–according to the ADL–he met with Dr. William Pierce, among others. . . .”

3d. “Bullets, Blood and Then Cry of ‘Heil Hitler'” by Steve Yaccino and Dan Barry; The New York Times; 4/14/2014.

. . . . In recent years, Mr. Miller has also been a devoted pen pal to incarcerated white supremacists, among them Joseph Paul Franklin, a convicted murderer who was executed in Missouri in November. Ms. Beirich, of the law center, said that Mr. Miller was very close to Mr. Franklin, whose birthday was Sunday, the day of the shooting. . . .

3e. “Frazier Glenn Miller”; Southern Poverty Law Center

Date of Birth:
Spring­field, Mo.
Ku Klux Klan

Fra­zier Glenn Miller, also known as Fra­zier Glenn Cross, is the for­mer “grand dragon” of the Car­olina Knights of the Ku Klux Klan, which he founded and ran in the 1980s before being sued by the South­ern Poverty Law Cen­ter for oper­at­ing an ille­gal para­mil­i­tary orga­ni­za­tion and using intim­i­da­tion tac­tics against African Amer­i­cans. After sub­se­quently form­ing another Klan group, the White Patriot Party, he was found in crim­i­nal con­tempt and sen­tenced to six months in prison for vio­lat­ing the court set­tle­ment. He went under­ground while his con­vic­tion was under appeal but was caught by the FBI with a weapons cache in Mis­souri. He served three years in fed­eral prison after being indicted on weapons charges and for plot­ting rob­beries and the assas­si­na­tion of SPLC founder Mor­ris Dees. As part of a plea bar­gain, tes­ti­fied against other Klan lead­ers in a 1988 sedi­tion trial. On April 13, 2014, Miller was arrested in the shoot­ing deaths of three peo­ple at a Jew­ish com­mu­nity cen­ter and nearby retire­ment com­mu­nity in Over­land Park, Kansas.

Crim­i­nal His­tory:
In 1986, Miller was con­victed on a fed­eral con­tempt of court charge after vio­lat­ing the terms of a con­sent order that set­tled a law­suit filed against him and his Klan group by the South­ern Poverty Law Cen­ter. He was sen­tenced to a year in prison, with six months sus­pended. How­ever, he dis­ap­peared while out on bond await­ing an appeal and was later caught in Mis­souri along with four other Klans­men and a cache of weapons.

In 1987, he pleaded guilty to a weapons charge and to mail­ing a threat through the mail. He had been indicted along with four other white suprema­cists for con­spir­ing to acquire stolen mil­i­tary weapons, and for plan­ning rob­beries and the assas­si­na­tion of SPLC founder Mor­ris Dees. In an agree­ment with fed­eral pros­e­cu­tors, he received a five-year prison sen­tence in exchange for his tes­ti­mony against 14 white suprema­cist lead­ers in a sedi­tion trial. He served three years of that sentence.

Fra­zier Glenn Miller is the founder and for­mer leader of both the Car­olina Knights of the Ku Klux Klan and the White Patriot Party, both of which were oper­ated as para­mil­i­tary orga­ni­za­tions in the 1980s.

Miller quit high school as a senior to join the U.S. Army. In 1979, he retired from the Army as a mas­ter sergeant after 20 years of active duty, includ­ing two tours in Viet­nam and 13 years as a mem­ber of the elite Green Berets.

Miller claims he read a racist news­pa­per for the first time in the early 1970s when his father gave him a copy of The Thun­der­bolt, pub­lished by Ed Fields of the racist, anti-Semitic National States’ Rights Party. Accord­ing to Miller, within two min­utes of brows­ing through the tabloid, he knew he “had found a home within the Amer­i­can White Move­ment. I was ecsta­tic.” He joined the National States’ Rights Party in 1973, but soon left because, he later tes­ti­fied, it was “made up mostly of elderly peo­ple who were not that active.”

He then joined the National Social­ist Party of Amer­ica, a Nazi group whose mem­bers attacked and killed marchers asso­ci­ated with the Com­mu­nist Work­ers Party in Greens­boro, N.C., in 1979. The fol­low­ing year, due to his involve­ment with the Nazi group, the Greens­boro shootout, and death threats against him and his fam­ily, his wife left him and moved with their chil­dren to Chicago.

Miller was forced to retire from the Army due to his Klan-related activ­i­ties. He enrolled in John­ston Tech­ni­cal Col­lege in Smith­field, N.C., and also bought a 25-acre farm in Ang­ier, N.C., near Raleigh. It was there, in late 1980, that he formed the Car­olina Knights of the Ku Klux Klan and began to amass ille­gal weapons and con­duct mil­i­tary train­ing with the help of active-duty sol­diers. Miller wanted to model the Car­olina Knights on Hitler’s Nazi Party. “I would try to emu­late Hitler’s meth­ods of attract­ing mem­bers and sup­port­ers,” he wrote in his auto­bi­og­ra­phy. “In the years to come, for exam­ple, I placed great empha­sis on stag­ing marches and ral­lies. It had been suc­cess­ful with Hitler.”

Miller rep­re­sented a new, mil­i­tant breed of Klan lead­ers in the 1980s, pre­fer­ring fatigues over the tra­di­tional Klan robe and train­ing his troops in mil­i­tary tac­tics. He was not averse to pub­lic­ity and began hold­ing ral­lies and marches on a near-weekly basis up and down the Atlantic Seaboard. He announced his goal was to cre­ate a Car­olina Free State, which would be an “all-white nation within the bounds of North and South Car­olina.” He said his ene­mies were “nig­gers” and Jews. He boasted of hav­ing sup­port­ers at Fort Bragg, the nearby Army base that was home to a large con­tin­gent of U.S. spe­cial forces.

In 1983, after a black prison guard, Bobby Per­son, filed a dis­crim­i­na­tion suit against the North Car­olina prison sys­tem, mem­bers of the Car­olina Knights began to intim­i­date the plain­tiff. They also harassed, threat­ened and intim­i­dated other African Amer­i­cans in the area. The SPLC, led by Mor­ris Dees, sued Miller and his group in June 1984 – demand­ing they stop their cam­paign of intim­i­da­tion and cease all para­mil­i­tary activity.

The SPLC lawyers did not know it at the time, but Miller had ties to The Order, a white nation­al­ist ter­ror­ist orga­ni­za­tion whose mem­bers assas­si­nated Den­ver talk show host Alan Berg just 13 days after the SPLC filed suit. The leader of the group, Robert Math­ews, had given Miller $200,000 in cash that was part of the $3.8 mil­lion stolen dur­ing an armored car rob­bery. It was later revealed that Dees was at the top of The Order’s hit list. Miller tes­ti­fied in the 1988 trial of other white suprema­cists that Math­ews told him “they were think­ing about killing” Dees.

In Jan­u­ary 1985, the SPLC reached a con­sent agree­ment with Miller that pre­vented the Knights from oper­at­ing as a para­mil­i­tary group and from harass­ing, intim­i­dat­ing, threat­en­ing or harm­ing any black per­son or white per­son who asso­ci­ated with black per­sons. A month later, how­ever, Miller announced the for­ma­tion of a new Klan group, the White Patriot Party. His goal was the same: the “uni­fi­ca­tion of white peo­ple.” He vowed to oper­ate peace­fully – unless the fed­eral gov­ern­ment infringed on his rights, in which case he would resort to “under­ground rev­o­lu­tion­ary tac­tics … with the armed resources at our disposal.”

It took less than a year for Miller and the White Patriot Party to vio­late the con­sent order. The SPLC obtained pho­to­graphic evi­dence of active-duty Marines help­ing train his mem­bers. In a July 1986 trial, in which Dees acted as a spe­cial pros­e­cu­tor to assist fed­eral pros­e­cu­tors, Miller was found guilty of crim­i­nal con­tempt. One wit­ness tes­ti­fied he had pro­cured weapons and explo­sives, includ­ing 13 armor-penetrating anti-tank rock­ets, from mil­i­tary per­son­nel on behalf of Miller, after the set­tle­ment. He also said he received a duf­fel bag full of cash as pay­ment to con­duct train­ing intended to help “cre­ate a para­mil­i­tary guer­rilla unit for later use in estab­lish­ing a White South­land.” Miller was sen­tenced to a year in prison, with six months of that term sus­pended. He was also ordered to dis­as­so­ci­ate him­self from the White Patriot Party and avoid con­tact with white supremacists.

In Octo­ber of that year, while out on bond await­ing an appeal of his con­vic­tion, Miller wrote to North Carolina’s gov­er­nor, ask­ing for an appoint­ment to the Governor’s Task Force on Racial, Reli­gious and Eth­nic Vio­lence and Intim­i­da­tion. He said he would be will­ing to pub­licly dis­cour­age racial vio­lence and act as a liai­son to “the many White groups in North Carolina.”

But, in 1987, while still out on bond, Miller dis­ap­peared and went under­ground. He mailed a “Dec­la­ra­tion of War” to sup­port­ers, exhort­ing “Aryan war­riors of The Order” to kill “our ene­mies,” and estab­lished a point sys­tem for each kill. The tar­gets were: “Nig­gers (1), White race trai­tors (10), Jews (10), Judges (50) Mor­ris Selig­man Dees (888).” He signed the state­ment “Glenn Miller, loyal mem­ber of ‘The Order.’”

The FBI caught up with Miller and four other Klans­men in Spring­field, Mo., where he was tear-gassed out of a mobile home. Author­i­ties found hand grenades, auto­matic weapons, thou­sands of rounds of ammu­ni­tion, the explo­sive C-4, and $14,000 in cash. He and the oth­ers were indicted for con­spir­acy to acquire stolen mil­i­tary weapons, explo­sives and equip­ment, and for plan­ning rob­beries and the assas­si­na­tion of Dees. Miller pleaded guilty to a weapons charge and to send­ing a threat through the mail. He served three years in fed­eral prison, mostly in Otisville, N.Y. As part of his plea deal, he agreed to tes­tify against 14 lead­ing white suprema­cists in a sedi­tion trial.

Miller has ties to Kevin W. Harpham, a neo-Nazi who was con­victed of attempt­ing to bomb a Mar­tin Luther King Jr. Day parade in Spokane, Wash., in 2011. Although Harpham pleaded guilty, Miller was con­vinced that Harpham’s lawyers deceit­fully con­vinced him that he would be found guilty regard­less of his inno­cence. Through­out his trial pro­ceed­ings, Miller was a reg­u­lar pen pal with Harpham, who was sen­tenced to 32 years in prison.

3f. “LISTEN: Alleged Kansas Gunman Frazier Glenn Miller Discusses the Tea Party, Obama, and Ron Paul” by Tim Murphy and Dana Liebelson; Mother Jones; 4/14/2014.

In a 2010 radio interview, Frazier Glenn Miller, the man suspected of killing three people Sunday at a Jewish community center and a Jewish retirement center in Kansas, said he was interested in the tea party, voiced support for then-Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and spoke approvingly of Ron Paul, the Texas Republican congressman and presidential candidate. In late April 2010, Miller, a former Ku Klux Klan Grand Dragon, was a guest on The David Pakman Show, a nationally syndicated left-of-center radio and television program. At the time, Miller was running for US Senate as an independent in his home state of Missouri with the slogan “It’s the Jews, Stupid,” and Pakman pressed Miller on his extreme views. . . .

. . . . Not surprisingly, Miller denigrated most American politicians, but cited one positively: “If I had my way [all US senators] would be in jail right now for treason, if not hung from a sturdy oak tree…Ron Paul is the only independent politician, representative in Washington.” . . . .

4a. In numerous posts and programs, we have discussed another of the National Alliance books–Serpent’s Walk. In that text, the Third Reich and the SS go underground, grow their wealth, buy into the opinion-forming media, and–after the U.S. is devastated by a series of terrorist attacks using WMD’s–they take over the country.

In the context of Serpent’s Walk, we have discussed the advance of Bertelsmann in the corporate media world.

The former supplier of books for the SS is wielding larger influence. Bertelsmann will dominate a new Random House/Penguin merged unit, which will control 25% of the world’s publishing business.

Formerly headed by SS man Heinrich Mohn, Bertelsmann shows every indication of maintaining its Nazi character and obscuring them at the same time. Its official house historian published books blaming World War II on Franklin Delano Roosevelt, U.S. imperialism and Jewish control of the U.S. news media.

With Bertelsmann continuing its efforts in the music business and other Underground Reich media entities like Al Jazeera gaining in the American media market, we expect the scenario presented in Serpent’s Walk will come to pass.

“Random House and Penguin Merger Creates Global Giant” by Eric Pfanner and Amy Chozick; The New York Times; 10/29/2012.

The book publishing industry is starting to get smaller in order to get stronger.

The announcement on Monday that Random House and Penguin would merge narrows the business to a handful of big publishers, and could set off a long-expected round of consolidation as the industry adapts to the digital marketplace.

John Makinson, the chief executive of Penguin who will serve as chairman of the new company, said that with consolidation inevitable, “we decided it was better to get in early rather than be a follower.”

In announcing the agreement, the European owners of Random House and Penguin — Bertelsmann and Pearson, respectively — said Bertelsmann would control 53 percent of the combined entity and Pearson 47 percent. In a statement, Bertelsmann said the deal would most likely conclude in the second half of 2013, after approval from regulators.

The merger will create the largest consumer book publisher in the world, with a global market share of more than 25 percent and a book list that includes contemporary best-sellers like Random House’s “Fifty Shades of Grey” and Penguin’s backlist of classics from authors like George Orwell. . . .

4c. “Bertelsmann’s Revi­sion­ist” by Her­sch Fis­chler and John Fried­man; The Nation; 11/8/99. 

. . . . Rewrit­ing his­tory, he [Bertelsmann house historian Dirk Bavendamm] stated that Roo­sevelt, not Hitler had caused World War II. He also wrote that Amer­i­can Jews con­trolled most of the media,’ and he claimed they gave a false pic­ture of Hitler. Did the book impress [Heinrich’s son Rein­hard] Mohn, then the major­ity share­holder of Ber­tels­mann? The firm hired Baven­damm as its house his­to­rian, and in 1984 he com­pleted a his­tor­i­cal study, 150 Years of Ber­tels­mann: The Founders and Their Time—with a fore­word by Mohn.

A year later, Baven­damm edited the firm’s offi­cial his­tory, which set forth the untrue story that the firm had resisted the Nazis and had been closed down by them. Mohn also asked Baven­damm to write the autho­rized his­tory of the Mohn fam­ily, pub­lished in 1986 under the title Ber­tels­mann, Mohn, Scip­pel: Three Families—One Com­pany. In a sec­ond book, Roosevelt’s War (pub­lished in 1993, reis­sued in 1998), Baven­damm accuses the U.S. Pres­i­dent of enact­ing a plan to start World War II. In the same book he sug­gests that Hitler’s threats in early 1939 against Euro­pean Jewry were a reac­tion to Roosevelt’s strat­egy against Ger­many.

After the rev­e­la­tions about Bertelsmann’s Nazi past appeared, the com­pany announced that it had asked ‘the his­to­rian and pub­li­cist Dr. Dirk Baven­damm to look at the new infor­ma­tion and begin to rein­ves­ti­gate the role the pub­lish­ing house played in those days’ and defended his work. . .

4c. Bertelsmann is also forging ahead in the music industry:

“Bertelsmann Acquires Full Control of BMG Music Company” by Ben Sisario; The New York Times; 3/1/2013.

Bertelsmann, the 178-year-old German media giant that has been trying to remake itself for the digital age, announced on Friday that it would take control of BMG Rights Management, the music company it restarted in 2008, in a deal that values BMG at $1.4 billion.

Bertelsmann said it would buy the 51 percent of BMG that it did not own from its partner in the venture, Kohlberg Kravis Roberts. The companies did not disclose financial terms, but a person with direct knowledge of the deal, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, said the purchase price was $700 million to $800 million, including the assumption of debt.

The deal signals a full return to the music business for Bertelsmann, whose other media properties include Random House and the magazine publisher Gruner & Jahr. After building the first incarnation of BMG, which stood for Bertelsmann Music Group, into a global powerhouse in the 1980s and ’90s, Bertelsmann sold most of its music holdings through a series of deals with Sony and Universal in the mid-2000s.

“We are bringing the music home to our group,” Thomas Rabe, Bertelsmann’s chairman and chief executive, said in a statement.

BMG was revived in 2008, and the next year, K.K.R. made the first of its $270 million of investments in the company. BMG has made a string of acquisitions in music publishing, the side of the business that deals with copyrights for songwriting, and built a catalog of more than one million songs by artists like Johnny Cash, Carly Simon and Frank Ocean and Will.i.am of the Black Eyed Peas. . . . .

5. David Jang, whose business enterprises control both Newsweek and The International Business Times, has a background in the Unification Church, formerly headed by the Reverend Sun Myung Moon.

An intelligent analysis of the apparent methodology of The Community, the Christian organization Jang now operates, suggests the possibility that that organization MIGHT actually be a clandestine Moonie front–it uses some tactics similar to Unification Church practices. The evidence was NOT sufficiently strong to convince a Japanese court of that allegation in a lawsuit filed against The Community.

In FTR #291, we examined the Unification Church as an extension of the Japanese Patriotic Societies, that brought fascism to Japan through a program of political assassination and propaganda.

“Who’s Behind Newsweek?” by Ben Dooley; Mother Jones; May/June 2014.

Two days after Barack Obama won reelection, I met a young Chinese woman, whom I will call Anne, in the basement café at the San Francisco Public Library. Anne worked part time and gave a large portion of her earnings to a group she called “the Community,” a Christian sect led by a charismatic Korean pastor named David Jang. After joining the group in her late teens, Anne had spent more than seven years working in its ministries—organizations and businesses run by Jang’s disciples. With short hair and large glasses, Anne was now in her late 20s but looked younger. She said she rarely had enough money for small luxuries like coffee. We chatted with a mutual friend while we waited for her husband, Caleb, who also worked for a ministry: the International Business Times [2], the flagship publication of an eponymous online news company that would, nine months later, become the new owner of Newsweek [3] magazine.

Caleb was running late because he was translating Obama’s victory speech into Chinese for IBT, which publishes 11 editions in seven languages.. . .

. . . . [David] Jang also has a history with Moon’s Unification Church. In 2013, a Japanese court resolved an almost six-year-long libel case that Christian Today, a Jang-founded website, filed against Makoto Yamaya, a Salvation Army major. Yamaya had claimed the Community was part of the Unification Church and that Christian Today had mind-controlled its employees; the court found that these charges had no basis. But it also found that Jang joined a Unification Church student group as a young man, eventually rising to the rank of executive director of another church-affiliated student organization. He then went on to a church-run theological institute, and helped manage the transition when it became Sun Moon University in 1993, subsequently leaving the church. Four former members tell me that Jang often spoke of his time in Moon’s church, including his marriage by Moon in a 1975 mass wedding, an event also affirmed by the Japanese court. . . .

6. In past articles, we have noted the close relationship between the Al Jazeera network and the Muslim Brotherhood.  (The Brotherhood is an Islamic fascist organization allied with the Axis in World War II and nurtured in the postwar period by Western intelligence services and Persian Gulf oil kingdoms as anti-communist and anti-Israeli proxy warriors.)

Based in Qatar (which is utilizing I.G. Farben’s Fischer/Tropsch process), the network is growing its presence in the United States.

In addition to its purchase of Al Gore’s “Current TV” and resulting entry into the U.S. cable TV market, Al Jazeera has been broadcasting for some time on the Pacifica Radio network, which caters to the so-called progressive community.

(In past posts, we have noted that Al Jazeera/Muslim Brotherhood’s benighted presence in American media, along with that of Bertelsmann, corresponds to a tee to the Serpent’s Walk scenario we have discussed for many years.)
One place where Al Jazeera’s influence is NOT waxing is Egypt.  (See text excerpts below.) In addition to the fact that many of their journalists have resigned in protest over the network’s blatant pro-Brotherhood bias, the Egyptian army has been arresting some of its staff in the crackdown on Morsi’s supporters.
In addition, Al Jazeera correspondents have been barred from news conferences by fellow journalists, because of the network’s pro-Brotherhood stance.

In an update, we note that the Egyptian government continues to be at loggerheads with the network.

6a.  “Al-Jazeera Egypt Staff Resign Over Orders To “Favor” The Muslim Brotherhood” by gmbwatch; Global Muslim Brotherhood Daily Watch; 7/9/2013.

Gulf media is reporting that 22 members of the Al-Jazeera Egyptian bureau have resigned in protest over what they say were instructions from the management to “favor the Muslim Brotherhood.” According to a Gulf News report: The news channel Al Jazeera Mubasher Misr saw 22 members of staff resign on Monday in Egypt over what they alleged was coverage that was out of sync with real events in Egypt.

Anchor Karem Mahmoud announced that the staff had resigned in protest against what he called ‘biased coverage’ of the events in Egypt by the Qatari broadcaster.

Mahmoud said that the resignations had been brought about by a perceived lack of commitment and Al Jazeera professionalism in media coverage, adding that ‘the management in Doha provokes sedition among the Egyptian people and has an agenda against Egypt and other Arab countries.’

Mahmoud added that the management used to instruct each staff member to favour the Muslim Brotherhood.

He said that ‘there are instructions to us to telecast certain news’.

Haggag Salama, a correspondent of the network in Luxor, had resigned on Sunday accusing it of ‘airing lies and misleading viewers’.

He announced his resignation in a phone-in interview with Dream 2 channel.

Meanwhile, four Egyptian members of editorial staff at Al Jazeera’s headquarters in Doha resigned in protest against what they termed a ‘biased editorial policy’ pertaining to the events in Egypt, Ala’a Al Aioti, a news producer, told Gulf News by phone . . .

In 2009, Egyptian authorities were reported to be in the process of revoking Al-Jazeera’s license to broadcast and that the network was planning to close its bureau office in Cairo.

Leaked US State Department cables indicate that Al-Jazeera, based in Qatar and funded by the Qatari government, operates as an arm of Qatari foreign policy which has recently been strongly supportive of the Muslim Brotherhood and the recently deposed Mohamed Morsi. . . .

6b.  Note that the government of Qatar subsidized the Morsi regime. It is no surprise, therefore, that Al-Jazeera, also subsidized by the Qatari government, manifested a strong pro-Brotherhood/pro/Morsi bias.

RECOMMENDED READING: “Why Does Al Jazeera Love A Hateful Islamic Extremist?” by gmbwatch; Global Muslim Brotherhood Daily Watch; 7/11/2013.

Bloomberg columnist Jeffrey Goldberg has published an article titled “Why Does Al Jazeera Love a Hateful Islamic Extremist?” that summarizes recent developments adverse for Global Muslim Brotherhood leader Youssef Qaradawi. The article begins:

So, it hasn’t been the best week for Al Jazeera, the television network owned by Qatar’s despotic ruling family, for the same reason that it hasn’t been a great week for the despotic ruling family itself: the ouster of Egypt’s president, Mohamed Mursi, the bumpkin fundamentalist.

Qatar pumped a lot of money into Mursi’s Muslim Brotherhood government, and for what? The Qatari royal family should sue the Brotherhood for malfeasance. So much hope was riding on Mursi’s experiment in political Islam. Although Qatar spreads risk around a bit — it has provided millions of dollars to Islamists in Syria and to the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas (now there’s an investment in the future) — Mursi represented its main chance to advance the cause of Islamic fundamentalism.

And now, to add insult to financial injury, Saudi Arabia just promised post-Mursi Egypt $5 billion, and the United Arab Emirates, another of Qatar’s main rivals, has kicked in $3 billion.

As for Al Jazeera, which is scheduled to introduce its American network next month in place of Al Gore’s hapless Current TV, well, let’s put it this way: It will certainly be more popular among Americans than it is among Egyptians. Which isn’t saying much.

Journalists Protest

The millions of Egyptians who rose up against Mursi’s rule also aired their feelings about Al Jazeera’s breathless pro-Muslim Brotherhood coverage. The harsh criticism directed at the network prompted Egyptian reporters to expel Al Jazeera reporters from a recent news conference, and led several journalists to quit Al Jazeera’s Egypt operation, apparently to protest its obvious bias.

One of the correspondents who quit, Haggag Salama, accused his ex-bosses of ‘airing lies and misleading viewers.’ The journalist Abdel Latif el-Menawy is reported to have called Al Jazeera a ‘propaganda channel’ for the Muslim Brotherhood. It’s possible that some of the journalists who quit did so as a matter of self-preservation; the Egyptian military is behaving in predictably heavy-handed ways toward journalists it doesn’t like. But it’s also entirely plausible that they quit because they couldn’t abide Qatari government interference in their reporting. . . .

6c.  “RECOMMENDED READING: Al Jazeera Faces Criticism In Egypt Over Its Coverage Of Muslim Brotherhood”; Global Muslim Brotherhood Watch; 1/8/2014.

The Washington Post has featured a story titled “Al Jazeera Faces Criticism In Egypt Over Its Coverage Of Muslim Brotherhood” which looks at criticism of Al Jazeera over its relationship to the Muslim Brotherhood. The story begins:

“Ever since the military’s ouster of Egyptian president Mohamed Morsi in July, Al Jazeera, the pioneering Arab-language news broadcaster, hasn’t shrunk from calling his removal something the American government won’t: a coup.

That highly loaded declaration, as well as its relentless and, critics say, sympathetic coverage of Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood movement, has turned Al Jazeera into a virtual enemy of the state in Egypt. Its journalists have been harassed and banned, and five remain in custody, including three who were arrested last week for allegedly harming national security. Al Jazeera’s local TV studios in Egypt, though not its transnational satellite transmissions, have been shut down, forcing its few remaining Egyptian journalists to work from makeshift facilities, such as a Cairo hotel room. . . .

. . . . Since then, Egyptian authorities and Al Jazeera’s critics — including some of the network’s own employees — have accused it of being a mouthpiece for Morsi and the now-outlawed Muslim Brotherhood.

Al Jazeera has given a lot support to the Muslim Brotherhood. There’s no doubt about that,’ said Hugh Miles, a freelance journalist in Cairo and the author of ‘Al-Jazeera: The Inside Story of the Arab News Channel That Is Challenging the West.’ . . .”

. . . . The GMBDW reported earlier this week that Egypt had summoned the Qatari Ambassador to the Egyptian foreign ministry in order to object to Qatari criticism of the crackdown on the Brotherhood as well as to Qatari broadcaster Al-Jazeera’s coverage of events.

The GMBDW reported in September 2013 on the ongoing conflicts regarding Al-Jazeera’s coverage of events in Egypt. In July 2012, the GMBDW had reported on the resignation of the 22 members of the Al-Jazeera Egyptian bureau in protest over what they say were instructions from the management to “favor the Muslim Brotherhood.” In 2009, Egyptian authorities were reported to be in the process of revoking Al-Jazeera’s license to broadcast and that the network was planning to close its bureau office in Cairo.

Leaked US State Department cables indicate that Al-Jazeera, based in Qatar and funded by the Qatari government, operates as an arm of Qatari foreign policy which has recently been strongly supportive of the Muslim Brotherhood and the recently deposed Mohamed Morsi. Our predecessor publication extensively covered the role of Qatar as a supporter of the Global Muslim Brotherhood and was the first to report on the strong ties to the Global Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas of Wadah Khanfar, the former Director-General of Al-Jazeera who resigned in 2011 after serving for eight years. . . . .

6d. After the coup in Egypt, Al Jazeera has been paying for hotel rooms for exiled Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood members, who had fled to Qatar.

“Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood Finds Havens Abroad” by Abigail Hauslohner; The Washington Post; 11/5/2013.

. . . . Cast out by — or, perhaps, saved from— the harshest political crackdown in recent Egyptian history, a handful of Muslim Brotherhood and other Islamist leaders found refuge here in the Qatari capital, while others traveled to Istanbul, London and Geneva.

The exiles’ community is small, disorganized and ideologically diverse, ranging from relatively moderate Islamist politicians to hard-line Salafists — groups that less than two years ago competed against each other in Egypt’s parliamentary and presidential elections.

Now, as they push back against the July coup that toppled their country’s first democratically elected president, Mohamed Morsi, they are on the same team.

At the same time, an exile leadership is starting to take shape here among the shimmering high-rises of Doha. Several of the exiles live temporarily in hotel suites paid for by Qatar’s state-run Arabic satellite network Al Jazeera — and it is in those suites and hotel lobbies that the future of Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood and, more broadly, the strategy and ideology of political Islam in the country may well be charted. . . .

7a. In a series of comments on a blog, there was an exchange about BMW withholding ads when The Atlantic reviewed a book about the Holocaust or WWII. BMW is owned by the Quandt firm, headed for years by Joseph Goebbels’ son-in-law.

7b. In addition to detailing that fascism wasn’t some kind of freak occurrence, we’ve noted the spawning of the Bormann capital network from the political and economic forces underpinning Nazi Germany. Controlling the German core corporations as well as powerful interests around the world, the Bormann group is preeminent on the world economic landscape.

Noting that BMW is controlled by the heirs of Joseph Goebbels (whose stepchild inherited the Quandt industrial empire), the Bloomberg story notes that Mercedes-Benz also has significant capital participation by the Quandts.

“Nazi Goebbels’ Step-Grandchildren Are Hidden Billionaires” by David de Jong; Bloomberg News; 1/28/2013.

In the spring of 1945, Harald Quandt, a 23-year-old officer in the German Luftwaffe, was being held as a prisoner of war by Allied forces in the Libyan port city of Benghazi when he received a farewell letter from his mother, Magda Goebbels — the wife of Nazi propaganda minister Joseph Goebbels.

The hand-written note confirmed the devastating news he had heard weeks earlier: His mother had committed suicide with her husband on May 1, after slipping their six children cyanide capsules in Adolf Hitler’s underground bunker in Berlin. . . .

. . . Quandt was released from captivity in 1947. Seven years later, he and his half-brother Herbert — Harald was the only remaining child from Magda Goebbels’ first marriage — would inherit the industrial empire built by their father, Guenther Quandt, which had produced Mauser firearms and anti-aircraft missiles for the Third Reich’s war machine. Among their most valuable assets at the time was a stake in car manufacturer Daimler AG. (DAI) They bought a part of Bayerische Motoren Werke AG (BMW) a few years later.

While the half-brothers passed away decades ago, their legacy has endured. Herbert’s widow, Johanna Quandt, 86, and their children Susanne Klatten and Stefan Quandt, have remained in the public eye as BMW’s dominant shareholders. The billionaire daughters of Harald Quandt — Katarina Geller-Herr, 61, Gabriele Quandt, 60, Anette-Angelika May-Thies, 58, and 50-year-old Colleen-Bettina Rosenblat-Mo — have kept a lower profile.

The four sisters inherited about 1.5 billion deutsche marks ($760 million) after the death of their mother, Inge, in 1978, according to the family’s sanctioned biography, “Die Quandts.” They manage their wealth through the Harald Quandt Holding GmbH, a Bad Homburg, Germany-based family investment company and trust named after their father. Fritz Becker, the chief executive officer of the family entities, said the siblings realized average annual returns above 7 percent from its founding in 1981 through 1996. Since then, the returns have averaged 7.6 percent.

“The family wants to stay private and that is an acceptable situation for me,” said Becker in an interview at his Bad Homburg office. “We invest our money globally and if it’s $1 billion, $500 million or $3 billion, who cares?” (Italics added.) . . .

7c. In FTR #155, we presented Paul Manning’s research indicating that the Bormann network features the heirs of key Third Reich officials and military officers, hierarchically structured along lines deriving from the power structure of the Third Reich itself.

The Quandt story excerpted below provides significant depth to Manning’s reportage on the Bormann group and the Underground Reich.

We also noted (in AFA #3) that Quandt served as the corporate cover for Eichmann deputy Alois Brunner’s postwar work for the Gehlen spy outfit. (The August, 1944 document detailing the Third Reich’s plans to go underground provided for German heavy industry to give accused war criminals jobs to help them survive.)

Martin Bormann: Nazi in Exile by Paul Manning; pp. 26-27.

. . . . A smaller con­fer­ence in the after­noon was presided over by Dr. Bosse of the Ger­man Arma­ments Min­istry. It was attended only by rep­re­sen­ta­tives of Hecko, Krupp, and Rochling. Dr. Bosse restated Bormann’s belief that the war was all but lost, but that it would be con­tin­ued by Ger­many until cer­tain goals to insure the eco­nomic resur­gence of Ger­many after the war had been achieved. He added that Ger­man indus­tri­al­ists must be pre­pared to finance the con­tin­u­a­tion of the Nazi Party, which would be forced to go under­ground, just as had the Maquis in France. (Italics added.) . . .

. . . . From this day, Ger­man indus­trial firms of all rank were to begin plac­ing their funds—and, wher­ever pos­si­ble, key manpower—abroad, espe­cially in neu­tral coun­tries. Dr. Bosse advised that ‘two main banks can be used for the export of funds for firms who have made no prior arrange­ments; the Basler Han­dels­bank and Schweiz­erische Kred­i­tanstalt of Zurich.’ He also stated, ‘There are a num­ber of agen­cies in Switzer­land which for a five per­cent com­mis­sion will buy prop­erty in Switzer­land for Ger­man firms, using Swiss cloaks.’

“Dr. Bosse closed the meet­ing, observ­ing that ‘after the defeat of Ger­many, the Nazi Party rec­og­nizes that cer­tain of its best known lead­ers will be con­demned as war crim­i­nals. How­ever, in coop­er­a­tion with the indus­tri­al­ists, it is arrang­ing to place its less con­spic­u­ous but most impor­tant mem­bers with var­i­ous Ger­man fac­to­ries as tech­ni­cal experts or mem­bers of its research and design­ing offices. (Italics added.)  . . .





6 comments for “FTR #793 Miscellaneous Articles and Updates”

  1. Doggart allegedly mentioned to a confidential FBI source that he’d set a deadline of April 15 to carry out the attack in accordance with the plans of a private militia group he’d been working with, according to information in the plea agreement. Doggart said that on that date, the militia, identified only as “OAF,” was “gonna start a civil war”:

    TPM Muckraker
    Ex-Congressional Candidate Plotted To Get Militia To Attack Muslim Group
    By Catherine Thompson
    Published May 18, 2015, 2:03 PM EDT

    Former Tennessee congressional candidate Robert Doggart didn’t think it would take much to attack a Muslim community in upstate New York: a small group of gunmen with assault rifles, some Molotov cocktails or a demolitions expert and, just in case, a machete.

    “If it gets down to the machete, we will cut them to shreds,” Doggart said on a call intercepted by the FBI, according to a criminal complaint.

    The recently unsealed criminal complaint, dated April 13, alleged that Doggart had threatened to burn down several buildings in a Muslim community near Hancock, New York, nicknamed by its residents as “Islamberg” — and even kill residents if it came down to that. He planned to enlist the help of members of a militia called “OAF” to carry out the plot.

    Federal marshals arrested Doggart on April 10. He ultimately signed an agreement under which he would enter a guilty plea to a single charge of interstate communication of a threat and was released from custody on $30,000 bond.

    Prior to his arrest, Doggart’s claim to fame was running an unsuccessful campaign against ultra-conservative Rep. Scott DesJarlais (R-TN) as an independent in 2014.

    From March through April, Doggart allegedly discussed his plans to burn down a mosque, a school and a cafeteria in Islamberg with other individuals in Texas and South Carolina both in person and by phone, according to the complaint. Court documents showed Doggart discussed employing a variety of weapons in the attack, including M-4 military-style rifles, pistols, Molotov cocktails, explosives and the aforementioned machete.

    He also allegedly attempted to recruit people to participate in the attack through Facebook, referring to Islamberg as “Target 3.”

    “The Operation in mind requires but <20 expert gunners,” one post read, according to the complaint. “Target 3 is vulnerable from many approaches, and must be utterly destroyed in order to get the attention of the American People. If you are volunteering, and can show for a face-to-face meeting of these patriots, then we would welcome your skill set.”

    The complaint showed that Doggart’s communications were often full of such fiery, soaring rhetoric.

    “Our small group will soon be faced with the fight of our lives,” Doggart wrote in another Facebook post. “We will offer those lives as collateral to prove our commitment to our God. We shall be Warriors who will inflict horrible numbers of casualties upon the enemies of our Nation and World Peace.”

    The complaint also referenced an intercepted phone call in which Doggart told a woman: “When we meet with this state, the people that we will seek will know who we are. We will be cruel to them. And we will burn down their buildings.”

    Doggart allegedly mentioned to a confidential FBI source that he’d set a deadline of April 15 to carry out the attack in accordance with the plans of a private militia group he’d been working with, according to information in the plea agreement. Doggart said that on that date, the militia, identified only as “OAF,” was “gonna start a civil war.”

    Posted by Pterrafractyl | May 18, 2015, 2:39 pm
  2. Details are starting to emerge about the man that killed nine members of a prayer group at one of the oldest African American churches in the US. Surprise! He’s basically a Nazi:

    The Daily Beast
    Everything Known About Charleston Shooting Suspect Dylann Roof
    The man accused of killing nine inside a black church wore pro-apartheid flags, held ‘strong conservative beliefs,’ and made a ‘lot of racist jokes.’

    Katie Zavadski
    06.18.15 11:19 AM ET

    Police said they have arrested Dylann Storm Roof, the suspected killer of nine people at an historic black church in Charleston. Roof, 21, is from Lexington, South Carolina, and was taken into custody in Shelby, North Carolina. At a press conference, Charleston Police Chief Greg Mullen said a citizen’s tip led police to Roof’s car. He would not comment on whether weapons were found in the vehicle, but said Roof was “cooperative.”

    Mullen refused to comment on whether Roof admitted to the shooting.

    Roof was previously arrested on April 26 on a trespassing charge and was awaiting moderation. He was also recently arrested for possession of a controlled substance on March 3.

    A sparse Facebook page shows an image of Roof in a jacket with the flags of apartheid-era South Africa and Rhodesia (now Zimbabwe).

    Another Facebook photo of Roof sitting on the roof of his car shows an ornamental license plate with a Confederate flag on it. Charleston police say the South Carolina license plate is LGF 330.

    Roof’s father gave him a .45-caliber pistol for his birthday, according to uncle Charles Cowles. The uncle said he recognized Roof from the police photo and “described him as quiet and soft-spoken,” according to Reuters.

    John Mullins, who went to high school with Roof, told The Daily Beast that he remembers him as being “kind of wild.”

    “He used drugs heavily a lot,” Mullins said. “It obviously harder than marijuana. He was like a pill popper, from what I understood. Like Xanax, and stuff like that.”

    White Knoll High School had a mix of black and white students. Mullins says they occasionally mixed, and the school had “a lot of preps, a little bit of gang members, and a lot of outcasts.” But Roof wasn’t one of the outcasts, Mullins said.

    Yet Roof did have a reputation for spouting racist messages.

    “I never heard him say anything, but just he had that kind of Southern pride, I guess some would say. Strong conservative beliefs,” he said. “He made a lot of racist jokes, but you don’t really take them seriously like that. You don’t really think of it like that.”

    But now, “the things he said were kind of not joking,” Mullins added.

    Many of Roof’s Facebook friends, including those from his high school, are black. The cousin of the church’s pastor who was killed quoted a survivor who said Roof told the church: “I have to do it. You’re raping our women and taking over the country. You have to go.”

    Note that Roof’s assertion that “I have to do it. You’re raping our women and taking over the country. You have to go,” is basically the same argument Frazier Glenn Miller made in court last week in defense of his shooting of a Jewish Community Center. So that gives us a little more insight into the kind of guy Roof grew up into.

    Part of what makes this incident extra tragic is that, if there’s one ray of hope shining in the US at this point for a better future, it’s that the younger generations appear to be developing an immunity to the racism mind-virus that’s infected so much of humanity throughout history. Obviously that’s not always the case, but a rejection of racism ideas appears to be a real, lasting trend. And why wouldn’t it? Once racism stopped getting officially or unofficially sanctioned by society, there’s no reason to assume kids growing up in a highly multiethnic society are going to grow up into a bunch of racists. So, in a twisted way, the shooting in Charleston is a sign of progress…so much progress that the bigots are basically driven to acts of homicidal suicide.

    At the same time, the very fact that so many people are rejecting America’s racist traditions is exactly the kind of thing that’s going to cause the remaining racists to freak out and go on shooting sprees. So domestic terrorism of this nature could end up becoming more common as the racist worldviews that used to be prevalent in the US fade into history.

    That’s all why we probably shouldn’t be too surprised if shootings like this actually increase in frequency in coming years. And that’s why it’s going to be important to keep in mind that Roof doesn’t just appear to be the type of person that many would characterize as a twisted loser. His whole worldview is losing a generational battle for hearts and minds, he must know it, and that’s obviously going to fill him with a deep sense of both anger and despair.

    So you have to wonder how much of Roof’s murder spree reflected an anger at the African American community specifically vs how much it reflects a combination of both anger at society at large for increasingly rejecting the hate he inherited and despair from the knowledge that his desired Hateocracy is unlikely to come to fruition any time soon. Anger is no doubt a very powerful motivator, but as any parent with an out of control toddler can tell you, there’s nothing quite like anger and despair. It’s one of those traits many humans never outgrow.

    Posted by Pterrafractyl | June 18, 2015, 1:06 pm
  3. @Pterrafractyl–

    Indeed. One of the things to remember about this incident is the fact that this type of behavior is PRECISELY the action advocated by the books of the National Alliance.

    “Hunter” specifically advocates that “lone wolf” operatives undertake to kill “racial enemies,” so-called race mixers, in particular.

    The book is dedicated to Joseph Paul Franklin, with whom Frazier was friendly.

    What Glenn Greenwald did was to obtain legal decisions that will insulate the crafters of this type of document against civil damages.

    This is NOT a question of outlawing free speech. When the ACLU defended the American Nazi Party against an injunction against marching in Skokie, Illinois (a Chicago suburb with a considerable Jewish population), it did so on the grounds of constitutionally protected free speech.

    Pre-Greenwald, advocating violence along the lines of what National Vanguard Books (the NA’s publishing arm) does was still legal.

    However, IF someone was advocating violence against minorities, “racial enemies,” etc. and someone can be demonstrated to have acted on the basis of such exhortations, the author of the exhortation to violence could be held responsible for the consequences of their actions.

    The consequences were considerable legal damages.

    This is good law. It doesn’t say you can’t say such things, however if you do, and that causes harm or death to others, you ARE RESPONSIBLE.

    If someone leaves a rake on their property with the teeth facing upward and someone steps on it and is injured, the property owner bears civil liability for their actions.

    That is the legal principle under which the National Aliiance, et al were being sued.

    Greenwald ran interference for them. That son-of-a-bitch bears partial responsibility for what happened in Kansas (Frazier) and what happened in South Carolina.

    His (Greenwald’s) actions are truly evil and he did it all for FREE!

    Again, I wonder if his partner at the time, an Austrian-born lawyer named Werner Achatz may have been more than just a romantic/sexual companion?

    I wonder if he was some kind of handler or case officer?

    This case goes directly to the heart of what Citizen Greenwald did and places the evil of his actions in bas relief.

    BTW–have you found anything about the guy Boulware, who shot up the police station in Dallas?

    I wonder if he was one of these “Sovereign Citizen” types?

    Keep Up the Good Work!


    Posted by Dave Emory | June 18, 2015, 5:38 pm
  4. @Dave: Regarding James Boulware and the shooting of the Dallas police station, based on reports there aren’t any clear indications that the guy was a white supremacists. He appears to have been quite interested in the typical generic anti-government conspiracy theories that you find held amongst many white supremacist circles but nothing that plenty of non-racists might also subscribe to. And he appears to have voiced a rather low opinion of religions, calling out both Jews and Christians to his family, but there’s no indication of whether that was part of a generic rejection of religion or some sort of specific sectarian hatred. The general view that emerges of the guy is that he was was a mentally unhinged individual with a history of violence, including a 2013 threat to kill his family members and shoot up churches and schools that was also slurping up plenty of anti-government rhetoric from somewhere.

    So if more info comes out indicating the guy was a neo-Nazi it won’t be particularly surprising given his mental state, but at this point he mostly appears to be just a violence-prone unstable individual that was more of a ticking time-bomb out for revenge against the police for the loss of custody of his son than a wannabe revolutionary like Dylann Roof. He seems more like a mix between Jared Loughner and Joseph Stack.

    It’s also going to be very interesting to see just how “leaderless” Roof’s ambitions were given the new information trickling out about the guy. For instance, according to his roommate, Roof was hoping his attack would start a civil war and he’s been planning it for the last 6 months:

    ABC News
    Charleston Shooting: A Closer Look at Alleged Gunman Dylann Roof
    Jun 18, 2015, 3:41 PM ET
    By EMILY SHAPIRO via Good Morning America

    Dylann Roof, the alleged gunman authorities say is responsible for killing nine people in a predominantly black Charleston, South Carolina, church Wednesday night, had been “planning something like that for six months,” according to his roommate.

    Dalton Tyler, who said he has known Roof for seven months to one year, said he saw the white, 21-year-old suspect just last week.

    “He was big into segregation and other stuff,” Tyler said. “He said he wanted to start a civil war. He said he was going to do something like that and then kill himself.”

    Tyler said he met Roof, a Lexington, South Carolina native, through a good friend. He also said Roof’s parents, with whom he said the suspect was “on and off,” had previously bought him a gun but never allowed him to take it with him until this past week.

    So whether or not Roof was planning his terror attack entirely on his own or with assistance, he definitely wasn’t the only one to know about it. And he certainly wasn’t hiding his white supremacist views. As another friend made clear in a recent interview, when Roof recently contacted him after five years they used to hang out in high school all he wanted to talk about was the need for someone to “do something” about black people “taking over the world”:

    Friend says church shooting suspect ranted about race

    Jun. 19, 2015 12:02 AM EDT

    LEXINGTON, S.C. (AP) — In recent weeks, Dylann Storm Roof reconnected with a childhood buddy he hadn’t seen in five years and started railing about the Trayvon Martin case, about black people “taking over the world” and about the need for someone to do something about it for the sake of “the white race,” the friend said Thursday.

    On Thursday, Roof, 21, was arrested in the shooting deaths of nine people during a prayer meeting at a historic black church in Charleston — an attack decried by stunned community leaders and politicians as a hate crime.

    In the hours after the Wednesday night bloodbath, a portrait began to take shape of Roof as someone with racist views and at least two recent run-ins with the law. On his Facebook page, the young white man wore a jacket with the flags of the former white-racist regimes of South Africa and Rhodesia.

    In an interview with The Associated Press, Joseph Meek Jr. said he and Roof had been best friends in middle school but lost touch when Roof moved away about five years ago. The two reconnected a few weeks ago after Roof reached out to Meek on Facebook, Meek said.

    Roof never talked about race years ago when they were friends, but recently made remarks out of the blue about the killing of unarmed black 17-year-old Trayvon Martin in Florida and the riots in Baltimore over the death of Freddie Gray in police custody, Meek said.

    “He said blacks were taking over the world. Someone needed to do something about it for the white race,” Meek said, adding that the friends were getting drunk on vodka. “He said he wanted segregation between whites and blacks. I said, ‘That’s not the way it should be.’ But he kept talking about it.”.

    Meeks said Roof also told him that he had used birthday money from his parents to buy a gun and that he had “a plan.” He didn’t elaborate on what it was, but Meeks said he was worried — and said he knew Roof had the “Glock” — a .45 caliber pistol — in the trunk of his car.

    Meek said he took the gun from the trunk of Roof’s car and hid it in his house, just in case.

    “I didn’t think he would do anything,” he said.

    But the next day, when Roof was sober, he gave it back.

    Meek said that when he woke up Wednesday morning, Roof was at his house, sleeping in his car outside. Later that day, Roof dropped Meek off at a lake with his brother Jacob, but Roof hated the outdoors and decided he would rather go see a movie.

    Jacob said that when he got in the car, Roof told him he should be careful moving his backpack in the car because of the “magazines.”

    Jacob said he thought Roof was referring to periodicals, not the devices that store ammunition.

    “Now it all makes sense,” he said.

    Joseph Meek said he didn’t see his friend again until a surveillance-camera image of a young man with a soup-bowl haircut was broadcast on television Thursday morning in the wake of the shooting. Meek said he didn’t think twice about calling authorities.

    “I didn’t THINK it was him. I KNEW it was him,” he said.

    The Southern Poverty Law Center, a civil rights group that tracks hate organizations and extremists, said it was not aware of Roof before the rampage. And some other friends interviewed said they did not know him to be racist.

    “I never thought he’d do something like this,” said high school friend Antonio Metze, 19, who is black. “He had black friends.”

    Roof used to skateboard while growing up in the Lexington area and had long hair back then. He attended high school in Lexington and in nearby Columbia from 2008 to 2010, school officials said. It was not immediately clear whether he graduated.

    “He was pretty smart,” Metze said.

    Meek’s mother, Kimberly Konzny, said she and her son instantly recognized Roof in the surveillance camera image because Roof had the same stained sweatshirt he wore while playing Xbox video games in their home recently. It was stained because he had worked at a landscaping and pest control business, she said.

    “I don’t know what was going through his head,” she said. “He was a really sweet kid. He was quiet. He only had a few friends.”

    Roof displayed a Confederate flag on his license plate, according to Konzny, but that is not unusual in the South.

    His Facebook profile picture showed him wearing a jacket with a green-and-white flag patch, the emblem of white-ruled Rhodesia, the African country that became Zimbabwe in 1980. Another patch showed the South African flag from the era of white minority rule that ended in the 1990s.

    In Montgomery, Alabama, the president of the Southern Poverty Law Center, Richard Cohen, said it is unclear whether Roof had any connection to any of the 16 white supremacist organizations the SPLC has identified as operating in South Carolina.

    But Cohen said that based on Roof’s Facebook page, he appeared to be a “disaffected white supremacist.”

    In a statement, Cohen said the church attack is a reminder that while the post-Sept. 11 U.S. is focused on jihadi terrorism, the threat of homegrown extremism is “very real.” Since 2000, the SPLC has seen an increase in the number of hate groups in the U.S., Cohen said.

    “The increase has been driven by a backlash to the country’s increasing racial diversity, an increase symbolized for many by the presence of an African American in the White House,” hed said.

    So Roof’s Facebook page made him look like a “disaffected white supremacist” and one of the first things he talks about with an old friend from five years ago is about the need to do something about black people. If he was trying to not get caught he wasn’t very good at it! And yet, based on his high school friends’ statements, Roof wasn’t like this at all in high school, although we can’t forget the claims from another high school student that Roof was known for spouting racist jokes.

    On top of all that, “He apparently told people that he was involved in groups, racist groups,”:

    The Wall Street Journal
    Charleston Shooting Suspect Dylann Roof Became a Loner in Recent Years
    Relative says he told people he was involved in racist groups; ‘he just fell off the grid somehow’

    By Jennifer Levitz and Jon Kamp

    Updated June 18, 2015 7:02 p.m. ET

    About a month ago, Dylann Roof’s family was concerned. The once-quiet, bright boy from a middle-class South Carolina family was espousing troubling racist views.

    “He apparently told people that he was involved in groups, racist groups,” .said a woman who said she was the mother of Mr. Roof’s former stepmother.. “He was kind and sweet and polite to my daughter. He didn’t even want her to know what kind of things he was doing. She told him she didn’t approve.”

    Mr. Roof, 21 years old, was the son of a contractor, did well in school in early years and loved animals, his relative said. But he stopped going to high school and was adrift, she said.

    “He turned into a loner in the last couple of years and no one knew why,” she said. “He just fell off the grid somehow,” she said. The woman was reached at the home of Mr. Roof’s former stepmother, who couldn’t be reached to comment.

    Mr. Roof repeated ninth grade at White Knoll High School in Lexington, S.C., and left in 10th grade in February 2010, a spokeswoman for Lexington County School District One said. A month later, Mr. Roof enrolled as a ninth-grade student at Dreher High School in Columbia, S.C., according to Richland County School District One. He attended through May of 2010 but didn’t return, a district official said.

    Police said Mr. Roof fatally shot nine people who had gathered Wednesday evening at a historic black Charleston church for a prayer meeting. They called the shooting a hate crime and said Mr. Roof had shouted antiblack sentiments at his victims.

    He was arrested Thursday in Shelby, N.C. Mr. Roof’s last known address was in Eastover, S.C., a rural community about 15 miles southeast of Columbia, the state capital. The property has two homes, and people at both homes declined to comment.

    Mr. Roof lived off and on with his father, Ben Roof, in Columbia, a family friend said. He described the father as a hard-working, friendly, churchgoing man who had recently expressed concerns about his son’s lack of direction, the friend said. He was trying to get his son to be productive, to stop playing as many video games and stay employed, said the friend.

    The friend described the suspect as a lanky young man who looked younger than his age, and a loner who rarely smiled. “You could see that he was troubled,” he said.

    The elder Mr. Roof has a racially diverse set of friends, and wouldn’t have taught his son racial intolerance, the friend said. “There are African-Americans over at that home all the time,” he said.

    A photo of Mr. Roof on what appears to be his Facebook page shows him wearing patches representing South Africa’s apartheid-era government and the former white-ruled country Rhodesia.

    Todd Blodgett, the former co-owner of a now-defunct record label that produced hate music, said the patches were often sold at white-supremacist rallies.

    “They were sold at National Alliance, Aryan Nation, and Ku Klux Klan events,” he said.

    In both police reports, Mr. Roof gave his middle name as Storm, which is popular among white supremacists and could derive from stormfront.org, a website frequented by so-called white racialists, according to Mr. Blodgett, who said he co-owned the record label for opportunist reasons and never personally harbored racist views.

    So Roof was, in his own words, involved with hate groups and those patches on his jacket were the kind of things sold at white power events.

    That’s part of why it’s going to be very interesting to learn about the extent of Roof’s influences were and the far-right contacts he had in the lead up to this attack. Given Roof’s open, enthusiastic embrace of the white supremacy movement, and given the steady drip of useful idiots willing to kill others and themselves for any sort of Serpent’s Walk-style of “Leaderless Resistance” movement to succeed, you have to wonder if he was actively recruited for this. After all, the whole point strategy appears to revolve around the simple tactic of:
    1. Have one person after another commit a horrible act in the name of white supremacy or whatever.

    2. When the government inevitably responds to this trend with increased gun control laws or whatever, make as much noise as possible about government oppression and the need to start a race war.

    3. Rinse and repeat until the desired civil war gets underway.

    And as long as you have a steady flow of useful idiots that do thus on their own, like the man that tried to start a revolution by shooting up the Tides foundation and ACLU after listening to too much Michael Savage, the strategy can continue. But any lull in the attacks weakens the strategy since the tempo of terror is a key component of getting the desired response.

    So while it could easily be the case that Roof was just drawn to this kind of act on his own, it’s worth keeping in mind that, given the shockingly high rate of mass murder sprees over the last 6 years, maintaining that high rate of domestic terror could actually become an increasingly important factor for the neo-Nazi underground. As Gary Brecher pointed out last year, when ISIS gets a useless recruit, they turn him into a useful idiot suicide bomber, and Roof sure didn’t seem like a charismatic rising-star in the white power movement. So you have to wonder if he made himself “useful” on his own, or had some more active, direct help.

    Posted by Pterrafractyl | June 18, 2015, 9:49 pm
  5. So Dylann Roof left a manifesto. It’s pretty much a standard white nationalist rant about why various races suck (except he seems like like East Asians) and why slavery wasn’t so bad and a race war is long overdue. It’s like a blend of the kind of openly hardcore white supremacist stuff you might find on stormfront.com, but blended with the kind of language found in more “respectable” white nationalist publications like vdare.com or American Renaissance. There’s also an explanation for how Roof came to his white supremacist “awakening”: it sounds like he started binge-reading the websites of groups like the Council for Conservative Citizens in the wake of the Trayvon Martin shooting, and it was all downhill from there:

    The Washington Post
    Charleston shooting suspect left racist manifesto on Web site, authorities say

    By Lenny Bernstein, Sari Horwitz and Peter Holley

    June 20 at 3:50 PM

    Authorities said Saturday that the man accused of killing nine African Americans in a venerable Charleston, S.C., church left a racist manifesto targeting blacks, Jews and Hispanics on his Web site, a white supremacist broadside that also appears to offer a rationale for the shootings.

    The lengthy declaration, loaded with offensive racial characterizations of blacks and others, includes the conclusion that “someone has to have the bravery to take it to the real world, and I guess that has to be me.”

    “I have no choice,” states part of that final section, titled “An Explanation.” “I am not in the position to, alone, go into the ghetto and fight. I chose Charleston because it is [the] most historic city in my state, and at one time had the highest ratio of blacks to Whites in the country.”

    Law enforcement officials said that the site belonged to Dylann Roof, the 21-year-old accused of gunning down nine people at a Bible study in Charleston’s historic Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church on Wednesday night, and that it reflected his views. The site also included 60 photos, most of which showed Roof.

    The Web site domain was registered on Feb. 9 to Roof, according to a law enforcement official. Another official said the material on it was last modified late Wednesday afternoon, just hours before Roof allegedly attacked the Bible study group at the church. In its penultimate paragraph, the manifesto states: “Unfortunately at the time of writing I am in a great hurry and some of my best thoughts, actually many of them, have been … left out and lost forever.” The last line apologizes for typos.

    As the investigation continued, a church deacon said that Emanuel would be open

    Roof was arrested Thursday about 250 miles north of Charleston, in Shelby, N.C., and is being held on $1 million bond. He has been charged with nine counts of murder and one count of possessing a firearm while committing a violent crime. He is in solitary confinement in the Charleston County jail and, according to county police, is on a suicide watch.

    The manifesto unearthed Saturday states that “the event that truly awakened me was the Trayvon Martin case,” which, a friend of Roof’s said Saturday, is a theme Roof has spoken of before. Martin, an unarmed African American high school student, was fatally shot in 2012 by George Zimmerman in a racially charged case in Florida. Zimmerman, who said he acted in self-defense, was found not guilty of second-degree murder.

    But the vast majority of the rant, which displays some unusually sophisticated language if all of it was written by Roof, a ninth-grade dropout, reveals a deep hatred of minorities — particularly blacks — and a strong belief in racist stereotypes.

    “Negroes have lower Iqs, lower impulse control, and higher testosterone levels in generals,” the manifesto declares. “These three things alone are a recipe for violent behavior.”

    It observes that “if we could somehow destroy the jewish identity, then they wouldn’t cause much of a problem” and that there are “good hispanics and bad hispanics,” many of whom, it says, “are White.”

    “But they are still our enemies,” the section on Hispanics concludes.

    The manifesto also condemns whites who have moved to the suburbs in search of better schools and neighborhoods, which, it declares “is just a way to escape [blacks] and other minorities.” That passage used an epithet for African Americans.

    “I hate with a passion the whole idea of the suburbs. To me it represents nothing but scared White people running. Running because they are too weak, scared and brainwashed to fight,” the manifesto states. It also spurns patriotism as “people pretending like they have something to be proud while White people are being murdered daily in the streets.”

    One passage acknowledges “great respect for the East Asian races,” who “are by nature very racist” and could be “great allies” of whites.

    Authorities and people who have spoken to survivors of the massacre have said that Roof spent an hour with the Bible study group in the landmark Charleston church before methodically executing nine of its members with a handgun. He stopped to reload five times and spared one woman so she could tell the story of what he had done, according to some. Two people, a woman and a 5-year-old girl, escaped.

    “I have to do it,” the shooter told his victims, according to Sylvia Johnson, cousin of a pastor who died in the attack, who spoke to a survivor. “You rape our women, and you’re taking over our country. And you have to go.”

    According to a state lawmaker who had been briefed by police, Roof told authorities that he “almost didn’t go through with it because they were so nice to him.”

    Roof lived on and off with several friends in a trailer in Red Bank, S.C., before the shooting. Court records indicate that he had a fractured family life and that his father divorced twice. Detailed records of the second divorce case, obtained by Britain’s Daily Mail, showed a volatile and abusive relationship between Roof’s father, Franklin Roof, and his stepmother, Paige Mann. Their divorce was finalized about the time that Roof dropped out of high school.

    Franklin Roof answered the door to his home Saturday and told a reporter to leave. Mann could not be reached for comment. A close relative of Mann’s, who declined to give his name because of safety concerns, said the family situation was a “mess.”

    “But did anybody see this coming?” he said. “Doubtful.”

    The 60 photos on the Web site are mostly portraits of Roof, many of which appear to have been taken at South Carolina historic sites. There are photos of Roof — clad in camouflage pants and combat boots — posing among the gravestones in a Confederate cemetery, crouching amid the hanging moss of a plantation and standing in front of former slave quarters.

    There also are more provocative images, such as Roof wearing all black and standing on an African burial site; burning an American flag; holding a Confederate flag; and posing shirtless in a bedroom with a handgun pointed at the camera.

    In one photo, Roof is shown standing in front of a Confederate history museum in Greenville, S.C. Telephone calls and an e-mail to the museum director were not returned.

    In another photo, Roof scowls at the camera on a beach, where he’s written “1488” in the sand. The numbers, according to the Anti-Defamation League, are a combination of two white supremacist numeric symbols. The number 14 is shorthand for the “14 Words” slogan: “We must secure the existence of our people and a future for white children.”

    The number 88 stands for “Heil Hitler,” according to the ADL, because H is the eighth letter of the alphabet.

    “Together, the numbers form a general endorsement of white supremacy and its beliefs,” according to a statement on the ADL’s Web site. “As such, they are ubiquitous within the white supremacist movement — as graffiti, in graphics and tattoos, even in screen names and e-mail addresses.”

    Pat Hines, the South Carolina state chairman of the League of the South, an organization that wants Southern states to secede from the United States, said Roof did not appear to belong to any white supremacist groups and could have been indoctrinated on the Internet.

    “I think [his view] was probably heavily influenced by what he read online,” Hines said. “He’s not in any of our rolls or directories, nor are his parents.”

    The League of the South, which calls for a white-led society, is one of the 19 organizations in South Carolina classified as a hate group.

    “I cannot ever see the League of the South encouraging anybody to do anything so bizarre,” Hines said. “It only accomplishes the heartache of these families. It doesn’t advance the standing of the Southern people. We’re sorry it happened in South Carolina.”

    Among neo-Confederate and white nationalist groups, Zimmerman’s shooting of Martin was a major event. In its aftermath, a Web site operated by the Council of Conservative Citizens, another alleged hate group, received more than 170,000 page views in a single day.

    The manifesto says the group’s Web site was the first one encountered in a Google search for “black on White crime.”

    “I was in disbelief,” it states. “At this moment I realized that something was very wrong. How could the news be blowing up the Trayvon Martin case while hundreds of these black on White murders got ignored?”

    On Saturday, the CCC’s Web site appeared to have been taken down. A description on the group’s Facebook page says that its members believe that the United States is a Christian nation and that Americans are part of the European people. The page, which has 558 members, notes that its members also believe in “racial integrity.”

    Over the years, the council’s conservative causes­ have also included strict opposition to immigration and forced busing for school desegregation.

    In the past, the Southern Poverty Law Center has accused the CCC of having ties to the Ku Klux Klan and the National Association for the Advancement of White People, both “openly white supremacist organizations.”

    The CCC’s Web site has run pictures comparing pop singer Michael Jackson to an ape and referred to black people as “a retrograde species of humanity,” according to the SPLC.

    Founded in 1985 by Gordon Baum, a personal injury lawyer, the CCC had more than 1 million members at its height, including bankers, business people, judges, newspaper editors and politicians, according to the SPLC.

    Baum died in March of an undisclosed illness at age 74, the SPLC reported.

    This is probably a good time to remind ourselves that the Council of Conservative citizens hasn’t just been inspiring folks like Dyllan Roof over the years. It’s got a much larger audience:

    The Washington Post
    Sen. Trent Lott and a Troublesome Tie

    By Kevin Merida
    Washington Post Staff Writer
    Monday, March 29, 1999; Page C1

    Everywhere he speaks, Julian Bond unfurls the refrain: “Where are the senators?”

    He did it in Connecticut, in Florida, in Tennessee, in Louisiana, in Georgia, in Indiana, in Virginia. Named names, too.

    “They were there for Khallid Muhammad. Where are they on this?”

    Khallid Abdul Muhammad is the former Nation of Islam lieutenant whose hateful rantings to a group of college students were condemned by the U.S. Senate in 1994 on a 97-0 vote. That kind of senatorial unanimity is hard to come by. But who’s going to vote against denouncing racism, bigotry and antisemitism?

    So the chairman of the NAACP wants to know where these same senators are when it comes to the Council of Conservative Citizens, which promotes the preservation of the white race and whose Web site features articles warning that the nation is turning into a “slimy brown mass of glop.” Sen. Trent Lott once addressed this group’s national board, welcomed its leaders to Washington, had photos taken with them in his office and then said he didn’t know what they were about. The CCC’s directors wink and nod at that. One of them was a county chairman of Lott’s ’94 reelection campaign. One of them is his uncle.

    Asked recently during an impromptu news conference why he couldn’t support a resolution condemning the CCC, Lott’s face conveyed that it was not the kind of question he yearned for.

    “I think if anybody wants to have a resolution condemning any groups that advocate white supremacy or racism, then we should support that,” he said. “But when you start naming one group or another group or this group or that group, the list is going to get to be pretty long.”

    Lott was reminded that he was one of the 97 senators who condemned the speech by Khallid Muhammad, in which he called the pope a “cracker,” talked of killing white South Africans, demeaned black social commentators and labeled Jews the “blood suckers of the black nation.”

    “That was one individual, and then are we going to start doing that repeatedly and naming individuals?”

    Lott was asked if it might be seen as hypocritical to condemn Muhammad but not the CCC.

    “No, that doesn’t seem hypocritical to me.”

    Then the Senate majority leader turned away. Next question, please.

    Defining Experiences

    Sometimes in American politics there are stories that start small, grow slowly, never quite die. They become nettlesome because they are about more than a set of easily understood facts. This is one of those tales. It’s about a 57-year-old Republican leader whose defining experiences with race occurred in the segregated South, about the protective culture of the Senate and about how even a symbolic condemnation of bigotry can get mired in politics.

    Last week, for instance, the House quarreled passionately about how to put itself on record against racism. Republicans offered language that enveloped the universe of hatemongers but cited no culprits. Specificity, they argued, only made racism smaller. Most Democrats viewed that position as more strategy than heart, a ruse designed to shield Republicans who had been tarnished by their associations with the CCC.

    Which brings us back to Lott.

    The Council of Conservative Citizens, which was founded in 1985, was not even on the national radar screen before December, when it was disclosed that Rep. Bob Barr (R-Ga.) had spoken before the group. Then The Washington Post revealed that Lott also had addressed the organization and it was reported in Mississippi that he was even a member.

    He initially denied any “firsthand knowledge” of the group’s agenda and added through his spokesman that he didn’t consider himself a member (Lott’s uncle says he paid his nephew’s dues). A week later, Lott’s office was told of a 1992 CCC newsletter that pictured the senator delivering a speech to the group’s national board in Greenwood, Miss.: “The people in this room stand for the right principles and the right philosophy.”

    At that point, Lott renounced the group but continued to decline interviews on the subject. The group claims 15,000 members nationwide and its largest following is in Lott’s home state. Lott had his spokesman explain that he wasn’t aware of the CCC’s views on white supremacy, that he deplored those views and that he wouldn’t have anything to do with the group now or forever more. In January, Lott put out a two-sentence statement saying that use of his name by the CCC “is not only unauthorized – it’s wrong.” Recently, he sent the Anti-Defamation League a letter of further clarification:

    “I think of these matters in personal, not political, terms. I could never support – or seek support from – a group that disdained or demeaned my friends, my neighbors, my staffers, or my constituents because of their race or religion. I grew up in a home where you didn’t treat people that way, and you didn’t stand with anyone foolish or cruel enough to do so.”

    Receiving CCC leaders in his office, the letter continued, was an innocent act. “I have always made a point of seeing, however briefly, as many of my home-state visitors to Washington as possible. . . . It’s just not possible to research the backgrounds of all these folks, and I don’t think anyone would want me to.”

    Lott figured that would end the controversy, but it keeps hanging around. He declined to be interviewed for this article. His press secretary, John Czwartacki, said his boss is not eager to engage in a discussion of his racial views. “He doesn’t see what necessarily good would come of it.”

    While other politicians have spoken to the CCC, Lott is by far the most prominent. As the highest-ranking Republican in the land, he has drawn darts from the left and right. Conservative columnist Arianna Huffington called on him “to end any speculation that he has ongoing ties with that group” by introducing a Senate resolution condemning it. Tom Cosgrove, a longtime Democratic consultant, established Citizens for Tolerance, which asked the Senate Ethics Committee to investigate Lott’s CCC ties.

    Wade Henderson, executive director of the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, calls the situation “deeply troubling.”

    “The issue is the continuity of Senator Lott’s relationship with the CCC and what it says about the group’s access to mainstream power and influence in American life,” he says. “It’s more than just one speech.”

    But these criticisms are gnats that Lott dismissively swats away. From his peers, in the regal setting where he makes his living, there has been not a whisper.

    Which is why Julian Bond has been on this crusade. It’s not a huge campaign, but he is persistent. One day, he happened to be on the same train from D.C. to Philly as Arlen Specter, and when the train pulled into the station he approached the Republican senator from Pennsylvania.

    “What are you going to do about Lott?” Bond asked.

    “What about him?” Specter replied. He hadn’t heard about Lott’s ties to the CCC, he said. “I’ll speak to him about it.”

    That was Jan. 16. Bond followed up with a letter and a packet of news clippings about the controversy. Never heard a peep back.

    Then on Feb. 12, Bond ran into Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) in the Detroit airport. He asked McConnell the same question. McConnell also said he was unaware of Lott’s associations. Bond sent him the same clippings. No response.

    But he’s not surprised.

    “To talk about it, for these senators, is to admit that they themselves are complicit,” says Bond. “For them to condemn one of their fellows is an admission to them that this virus exists among them, and they can’t bring themselves to do that. And I’m not just talking about Republicans, it’s Democrats too.”

    No Comment

    Chris Dodd (D-Conn.), the former Democratic chairman, hasn’t taken up the campaign. Neither has Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.), who, an aide explained, needs Lott’s goodwill if he’s to be successful with his minimum wage and managed care legislation. Bob Kerrey (D-Neb.) has been busy, his spokesman says. Jim Jeffords (R-Vt.), who co-sponsored the condemnation of Khallid Muhammad, is worried about being involved in a partisan hunt for Lott’s head.

    Pete Domenici (R-N.M.)? “I don’t have any comment on that.”

    Strom Thurmond (R-S.C.)? “What they want to censure them for?”

    Paul Coverdell (R-Ga.)? “I need to first look at it. I don’t even know where their office is headquartered at.”

    What about Lott’s association?

    “My understanding is he didn’t know what they stood for,” said Orrin Hatch (R-Utah). “He just thought they were a conservative group. We all sometimes get caught in speaking to groups that we are not fully aware of.”

    “I’m not going to take a pot shot at Sen. Lott on this,” said Thad Cochran (R-Miss.).

    Specter did have his chat with Lott, just as he promised Bond. “And Trent doesn’t support their ideas.”

    Then why not condemn the CCC on the Senate floor?

    “My instinct is we would give them more exposure and more publicity,” Specter explained. “The way to beat them is on the battlefield of ideas.”

    Hatch said he could support a condemnation if . . .

    “If I could get all the information that is available that shows to me it’s a racist group, yeah, you bet your life. But I’d have to have more information than I have now because I really don’t know that much about them.”

    “No, let’s not get into that business,” said Bob Bennett (R-Utah).

    Weren’t you around when the Senate condemned Khallid Muhammad?

    “Yeah, and I probably voted for it. Yeah, yeah, so, okay, I’m not being consistent. Well, I guess on that basis I’ll maybe take a look at it. But I don’t like to go down that road.”

    Finally, a question for Richard Lugar (R-Ind.). It is the question Julian Bond keeps asking: Why haven’t more of Lott’s peers challenged him about his ties to the CCC? “Largely, probably, because there are an endless number of issues. If each one of us was busy censuring each other every day on every meeting we have attended or not attended it would be a long day.”

    This issue, Lugar added, “has not been a central focus for the Senate or public life in America.”

    Yes, those were indeed troublesome ties to the CCC for the GOP back in 1999. And, as the SPLC taught in in 2004, those are the kinds of ties that don’t sever easily:

    Southern Poverty Law Center Intelligence Report
    Mississippi Senator Trent Lott and Georgia Congressman Bob Barr Have Connections to White Supremacist Group Council of Conservative Citizens

    When a race hate scandal engulfed a right-wing group in 1998, politicians ran for cover. They didn’t stay away long

    By Heidi Beirich and Bob Moser

    Fall 2004, Issue Number: 115

    Though it had deep roots in Southern politics and claimed 15,000 members — more than the Ku Klux Klan has boasted for decades — the white-supremacist Council of Conservative Citizens (CCC) was a mystery to most Americans until 1998. Late that year, a scandal erupted over prominent Southern politicians’ ties to the brazenly racist group.

    At first, even the politicians in question claimed they didn’t know what this Council was all about. Sen. Trent Lott of Mississippi, who had spoken to the group five times, once telling its members they “stand for the right principles and the right philosophy,” claimed he had “no firsthand knowledge” of it.

    Congressman Bob Barr of Georgia, who touched off the brouhaha by delivering a keynote speech at the CCC’s national convention in June 1998, said he had “no idea” what the organization stood for.

    Those explanations wouldn’t suffice for long. An Intelligence Report investigation (see Sharks in the Mainstream, Issue 93), picked up by several network newscasts and major newspapers, made it crystal clear what the CCC was: a hate group that routinely denigrated blacks as “genetically inferior,” complained about “Jewish power brokers,” called gay people “perverted sodomites,” accused immigrants of turning America into a “slimy brown mass of glop,” and named Lester Maddox, the baseball bat-wielding, arch-segregationist former governor of Georgia, “Patriot of the Century.”

    Denunciations flew fast and furious, with embarrassed conservatives taking the lead. “Lott and Barr gave legitimacy to this racist organization by speaking before them,” wrote right-wing columnist Armstrong Williams. Peggy Noonan, Ronald Reagan’s former speechwriter, said that anyone associated with a group like the CCC “doesn’t belong in a leadership position in America.”

    As evidence of widespread association between Southern GOP officeholders and the CCC mounted, Republican National Committee Chairman Jim Nicholson took the unusual step of asking party members to resign from the group because of its “racist views.” A resolution moved through the U.S. Congress “condemning the racism and bigotry espoused by the Council of Conservative Citizens,” although it ultimately failed.

    Barr and Lott issued statements attempting to distance themselves from a group that was fast becoming political poison.

    In January 1999, the Miami Herald reported that it wasn’t just governors, senators and congressmen who’d dallied with the group. According to the CCC’s own Citizens Informer newspaper, more than 20 state lawmakers — 17 of them from Mississippi — had met with chapters of the hate group in 1997 and 1998. Some politicians claimed they’d been lured to CCC gatherings by members who covered up the extremist nature of the group.

    Still, after months of headlines exposing the group’s views, “no one should be duped into believing that they are mainstream conservatives” any longer, said Anti-Defamation League national director Abraham Foxman.

    But five years later, Southern lawmakers are still meeting with the CCC — and still pleading ignorance. According to an Intelligence Report review of the Citizens Informer, no fewer than 38 federal, state and local elected officials who are still in office today have attended CCC events since 2000, most of them giving speeches to local chapters of the hate group.

    Another 38 former elected officials and candidates for office have addressed CCC groups during the past four years. Of the 38 current office-holders who’ve attended CCC events, 26 are state lawmakers — most of them, 23, from Lott’s home state of Mississippi (see See No Evil).

    That roster includes such leading lights as Mississippi’s governor, Haley Barbour, and the presiding justice of the state Supreme Court, Kay Cobb. It excludes 12 local officials.

    Though the vast majority of these politicians are Republicans — 23 of the 26 current state lawmakers, to be exact — the Republican National Committee, so forthright five years ago, now declines to condemn the CCC. No member of either party has been sanctioned or reprimanded for maintaining ties to the Council.

    Only half of the 26 state lawmakers responded to repeated phone calls, faxes and e-mail messages from the Intelligence Report, asking why they would openly associate with one of America’s best-known racist organizations. State Rep. Jim Ellington, who addressed the Great Southern CCC this February in Jackson, Miss., was among those who did respond — with a familiar story.

    “They invited me to come to a dinner to speak to their group and I don’t know a thing about them,” Ellington said. Asked whether he was aware that the CCC was considered a hate group, Ellington replied, “They seem like normal people to me.”

    But what about the raw racism on their Web site, which once compared singer Michael Jackson to an ape in side-by-side photos? “Well, I don’t condone anything like that,” Ellington said.

    The ‘Uptown Klan’ Reborn
    Political influence has always been a point of pride for the Council of Conservative Citizens. Founded in 1985 by Gordon Baum, a worker’s compensation attorney and longtime white-power activist, the CCC rose from the ashes of the Citizens Councils of America (CCA), a coalition of white-supremacist groups formed throughout the South to defend school segregation after the Supreme Court outlawed it in Brown vs. Board of Education.

    Unlike the “white trash” KKK, the CCA groups — commonly called “White Citizens Councils” — had a veneer of civic respectability, inspiring the nickname “Uptown Klan.” While there were plenty of bare-knuckles racists attracted to the Councils’ anti-integration slogan, “Never!” the members also included bankers, merchants, judges, newspaper editors and politicians — folks more given to wearing suits and ties than hoods and robes.

    Many of them, including Trent Lott’s uncle, were elected to state and local offices. Some were even more powerful: governors, congressmen, U.S. senators.

    During the White Citizens Councils’ heyday, the groups claimed more than 1 million members. Though they weren’t immune to violence — Byron De La Beckwith, who murdered civil-rights leader Medgar Evers in 1963, was a member — the Councils generally used their political and financial pull to offset the effects of “forced integration.”

    One tactic was particularly effective: The Councils raised millions of dollars to fund “white academies,” private schools throughout the South that gave parents the option of keeping their children segregated.

    Though the CCA groups presented themselves as civic organizations akin to the Kiwanis and Civitan clubs, they left no doubt where they stood on race. “Integration represents darkness, regimentation, totalitarianism, communism and destruction,” wrote Robert “Tut” Patterson, the legendary white supremacist who founded the CCA and still writes columns for the Citizens Informer.

    “Segregation represents the freedom to choose one’s associates.”

    Once the segregation battle was lost, the air went out of the White Citizens Councils. The councils steadily lost members throughout the 1970s and 1980s. Sensing the need for a new direction, Baum, formerly the CCA’s Midwest field director, called together a group of 30 white men, including former Georgia Gov. Lester Maddox and future Louisiana Congressman John Rarick, for a meeting in Atlanta in 1985.

    They cooked up a successor organization: the Council of Conservative Citizens.

    Like the White Citizens Councils, the CCC is made up of local chapters — some of them active in civic affairs that have little to do with the national group’s racist agenda. But the group’s “uptown” days are largely gone; by 1985, there was precious little “respectability” left in joining an unabashedly white-supremacist organization.

    And with the CCC, as with the White Citizens Councils of the 1950s and ’60s, rabid extremism is never far from the surface.

    ‘Death By Multiculturalism’
    Earlier this year, while President George W. Bush went to Topeka, Kan., to celebrate the 50th anniversary of Brown vs. Board of Education, the CCC’s Web site published a story about the historic impact of the decision. The writer was Edgar Steele, one of America’s most vociferous anti-Semites.

    “Just a lousy fifty years,” Steele lamented. “After hundreds of thousands, even millions, of years of evolution, it took just fifty years [for America] to devolve into something on par with Senegal.”

    Since the 1999 scandal stripped much of the remaining varnish off the CCC’s mainstream pretensions, the extremist views expressed on its Web site and in its newspaper have become increasingly direct, even crude. “What do you call … four blacks, three hispanics, three Russian Jews, and one white guy?” the CCC home page asked last year. “The FBI’s Most Wanted List!”

    Another home page ran photos of accused Beltway snipers John Muhammad and John Malvo, 9/11 conspirator Zacharias Moussaoui and shoe-bomber Richard Reed. “Notice a Pattern Here?” asked a caption underneath the four photos. “Is the face of death black after all?”

    After the NAACP declared its boycott of South Carolina because the state continued to fly the Confederate battle flag over the Capitol dome, the CCC distributed a mock advertisement proclaiming, “South Carolina Now Has Whiter Beaches!” The ad urged Caucasians to vacation in South Carolina and “enjoy a civil liberty that has been denied to them for many years at hotels, restaurants and beaches: the freedom to associate with just one’s own people.”

    In 2002, the Web site featured a photo of Daniel Pearl, the “Jewish Wall Street Journal reporter” who had just been decapitated by Islamic terrorists. In the photo, Pearl was shown with his “mixed-race wife, Marianne.” The headline above the couple’s picture read: “Death by Multiculturalism?”

    The danger “of race-mixing” has been a consistent theme since the days of the White Citizens Councils. “God is the author of racism,” according to a story on the CCC’s Web site in 2001. “God is the One who divided mankind into different types. … Mixing the races is rebelliousness against God.” Along with such theological arguments, Citizens Informer has published countless stories detailing “scientific” evidence for white people’s inherent superiority.

    Writing about Brown vs. Board of Education last spring, contributor Michael Polignano noted that many commentators were using the anniversary to talk about “how far America still falls short of racial equality.”

    According to Polignano, that lack of progress “should surprise no one, because racial inequality is genetic and cannot be changed by social programs. … Blacks are on average probably less intelligent than Whites and more aggressive, impulsive and prone to psychopathologies.”

    Flexing Their Muscles
    The CCC’s increasingly bald extremism hasn’t just been rhetorical. This spring, national officer Sam Dickson, an attorney, represented the Council at neo-Nazi David Duke‘s prison-release party in New Orleans. Along with leaders of America’s neo-Nazi and Holocaust-denial movements, Dickson signed Duke’s “New Orleans Protocol,” pledging to work with other hate groups to achieve their collective dream of a white America.

    Even though it has largely left “respectability” behind, the Council still wields a big political stick in Mississippi, where it claims some 5,000 members. The Council helped organize opposition to a 2001 referendum to change Mississippi’s state flag to a less Dixie-fied design (the flag included a miniature representation of the Confederate battle flag). The referendum’s thumping defeat in a racially polarized vote — 64% to 36% — was a major victory for the CCC.

    The Council also flexed some muscle in last year’s gubernatorial election, which pitted incumbent Democrat Ronnie Musgrove — who led the fight to change the Mississippi state flag — against Republican Haley Barbour. During the campaign, the CCC Web site ran a photograph of Barbour posing with Council luminaries at the Black Hawk Barbecue, a CCC fundraising event for “private academy” school buses.

    When the photo caused a stir, Barbour was quick to call the CCC’s segregationist views “indefensible.” But he refused to ask that his picture be taken down from the Web site. It was a matter of principle, Barbour explained. “Once you start down the slippery slope of saying, ‘That person can’t be for me,’ then where do you stop?” he asked. “Old segregationists? Former Ku Klux Klan?”

    That statement at the end by CCC member, and former Mississippi governor Haley Barbour pretty much summarizes the strange space occupied by groups like the CCC, where the neo-Nazis and “respectable” mainstream politicians:

    “Once you start down the slippery slope of saying, ‘That person can’t be for me,’ then where do you stop?” he asked. “Old segregationists? Former Ku Klux Klan?”

    And that’s part of why it’s going to be so grimly fascinating to see how the mainstream right-wing media and politicians handle the outcry over the terrorism in Charleston: Condemning Roof’s actions is easy. And casual condemnations of the most extreme elements of Roof’s worldview, like his advocacy of slavery, is also going to be politically risk-free. But the far more thorough condemning Roof’s, including his simpleton analysis of history and reality that sees the “white race” as somehow being on the verge of losing everything to hordes of minority invaders, would the political equivalent of burning a bridge that the GOP’s plutocrats have been building and maintaining with the white nationalists for decades. Roof may have been an murderous nut job, but if you removed the racial epithets and calls for a white insurrection that reimposes slavery from his manifesto, Roof’s diagnoses for what’s wrong with America starts to sound awfully close to what many in the right-wing media are spewing every day.

    So, who knows, maybe Roof will end up doing the US a favor: By committing an act so over the top evil in the name of white nationalism and then leaving a manifesto that makes it pretty damn clear that the ideas that led him to do such a thing aren’t wildly different from what passes as mainstream right-wing rhetoric across the media today, perhaps a bit of self-reflection within the right-wing mediasphere is on the way. At least, let’s hope that’s the case, but there’s probably going to be a lot of resistance to that kind of positive path forward.

    Posted by Pterrafractyl | June 20, 2015, 6:39 pm
  6. The Guardian took a look at the history of campaign donations by Earl Holt, president of the Council of Conservative Citizens which Dylann Roof cited as his initial source of knowledge about black-on-white crimes. The Guardian also found a number of interesting comments made by Mr. Holt over the years and let’s just say that if any of the many GOP candidates Mr. Holt has donated to over the haven’t already returned his donations, they’ll be returning that money now:

    The Guardian
    Leader of group cited in ‘Dylann Roof manifesto’ donated to top Republicans

    Council of Conservative Citizens cited on site linked to Charleston suspect
    Ted Cruz campaign tells Guardian it will ‘be making a full refund’
    FEC shows Earl Holt gave to 2016 hopefuls Santorum, Paul and others

    Jon Swaine in New York

    Monday 22 June 2015 09.03 EDT

    The leader of a rightwing group that Dylann Roof allegedly credits with helping to radicalise him against black people before the Charleston church massacre has donated tens of thousands of dollars to Republicans such as presidential candidates Ted Cruz, Rand Paul and Rick Santorum.

    Earl Holt has given $65,000 to Republican campaign funds in recent years while inflammatory remarks – including that black people were “the laziest, stupidest and most criminally-inclined race in the history of the world” – were posted online in his name.

    After being approached by the Guardian on Sunday, Cruz’s presidential campaign said it would be returning all money the senator had received from Holt.

    Holt, 62, is the president of the Council of Conservative Citizens (CofCC), a Missouri-based activist organisation cited by the author of a manifesto-style text that was posted on a website registered in Roof’s name along with photographs of the gunman. The FBI said on Saturday it was investigating the website.

    The manifesto’s author, who has been widely reported but not verified as Roof, recounted learning about “brutal black on white murders” from the CofCC website.

    In a statement published on Sunday, Holt said it was “not surprising” that Roof was apparently informed by the group’s website as it reported race relations “accurately and honestly”. However, he added: “The CofCC is hardly responsible for the actions of this deranged individual merely because he gleaned accurate information from our website.”

    Reached by telephone at home on Sunday evening by the Guardian, Holt said he was busy and hung up.

    Holt has since 2012 contributed $8,500 to Cruz, the Texas senator running for the Republican presidential nomination, and his Jobs, Growth and Freedom Fund political action committee, according to Federal Election Commission (FEC) filings. On some filings Holt’s occupation was listed as “slumlord”.

    He has also given $1,750 to RandPAC, the political action committee of Paul, the Kentucky senator and presidential contender, and he gave $2,000 to the 2012 presidential campaign of Mitt Romney.

    A further $1,500 was donated by Holt to Santorum, the former Pennsylvania senator and 2012 Republican presidential primary runner-up, who is running for president again in the 2016 race and attended Sunday’s memorial service at Emanuel AME Church.

    In response to questions from the Guardian, Rick Tyler, a spokesman for Cruz, said in an email: “Upon review, we discovered that Mr Holt did make a contribution. We will be immediately refunding the donation.”

    Tyler said Cruz’s own campaign and leadership Pac would “be making a full refund”.

    On Monday morning Paul’s presidential campaign said he, too, would be forfeiting the money contributed by Holt.

    “RandPAC is donating the funds to the Mother Emanuel Hope Fund to assist the victims’ families,” said Doug Stafford, his chief strategist.

    Matthew Beynon, a spokesman for Santorum, said in an email: “Senator Santorum does not condone or respect racist or hateful comments of any kind. Period. The views the Senator campaigns on are his own and he is focused on uniting America, not dividing her.”

    A series of racist statements have been posted over the past four years to the website of The Blaze, a conservative news outlet, by a user going by Holt’s full name, Earl P Holt III. The user referred to Longview, Texas – which is where Holt lives – as his hometown. A commenter using the same screen name on various other news websites has identified himself as a member of the CofCC.

    Jared Taylor, a close associate of Holt and former director of the CofCC, who said Holt had asked him to handle media inquiries relating to the massacre, said in an interview: “If there’s a statement that is ‘Earl P Holt III’, he probably made it.”

    Several of the comments referred to black people as “Africanus Criminalis”, a faux-Latin label also used in an online message for which Holt reportedly apologised in 2004. Holt, then a radio host in Missouri, referred to black people as “niggers” five times in the message.

    In June 2012 the poster “Earl P Holt III” stated that he had bought and become proficient in “a great many weapons” to ensure that being white did not “get me murdered” by non-white people. Two months earlier the same user responded to an article about the New Black Panther Party with a request for advice on buying ammunition “Does anyone know where I can get 180 grain .308 NATO rounds with a polymer tip?,” he wrote

    Under a February 2014 article, the same user warned other readers that black activists would “kill you, rape your entire family, and burn your house to the ground”. According to an account of a report by a witness, Roof complained to his victims in Charleston last week: “You rape our women.”

    One comment said of black people: “One can extricate them from the jungle, but one CANNOT purge the jungle from THEM”, while another said: “I do wish they’d keep their violence and savagery within their own communities”.

    The commenter using Holt’s name also complained under a story about white privilege about his taxes being distributed “to every baby-daddy, baby-momma, welfare cheat, drug-dealer, Oprah-watcher, felon, alcoholic, drug-addict and deadbeat in America”.

    Holt has also distributed tens of thousands in campaign contributions among prominent Republicans in congress, such as Representative Steve King of Iowa ($2,000), Senator Tom Cotton of Arkansas ($1,500) and Senator Jeff Flake of Arizona ($1,000). He also gave $3,200 to the former Minnesota congresswoman and presidential candidate Michele Bachmann.

    And yes, you read that right, While Mr. Holt decried Dylann Roof’s act of violence, the CCC does assert that Roof had “legitimate grievances”:

    TPM Livewire
    Group That May Have Influenced Charleston Killer: He Had Some ‘Legitimate Grievances’

    By Catherine Thompson
    Published June 22, 2015, 11:12 AM EDT

    A white nationalist group that may have influenced the suspected gunman in last week’s massacre at a historic black church in Charleston, South Carolina said Sunday in a statement that it believes he had “legitimate grievances” against black people.

    “The C of CC unequivocally condemns [Dylann] Roof’s murderous actions,” the spokesman, Jared Taylor (pictured), said in the statement posted on the group’s website. “However, the council stands unshakably behind the facts on its website, and points out the dangers of denying the extent of black-on-white crime.”

    In a manifesto that surfaced Saturday and appeared to be written by Dylann Roof, the white, 21-year-old man who killed nine people Wednesday night at Emanuel AME in downtown Charleston, the Council of Conservative Citizens was credited with opening the author’s eyes to black-on-white crime in the wake of the 2012 Trayvon Martin shooting.

    “The first website I came to was the Council of Conservative Citizens,” the manifesto read. “There were pages upon pages of these brutal black on White murders. I was in disbelief. At this moment I realized that something was very wrong. How could the news be blowing up the Trayvon Martin case while hundreds of these black on White murders got ignored?”

    The manifesto goes on to defend segregation and lament that white people are faulted for slavery and other “bad” acts that race has committed throughout history. In his statement, Taylor said the manifesto outlined “legitimate grievances” without specifying what those grievances were.

    “In his manifesto, Roof outlines other grievances felt by many whites,” Taylor said. “Again, we utterly condemn Roof’s despicable killings, but they do not detract in the slightest from the legitimacy of some of the positions he has expressed. *Ignoring legitimate grievances is dangerous*.”

    The president of the group, Earl Holt III, also issued a statement that disavowed Roof’s crime while asserting that the information Roof got from his organization was “accurate.”

    Read both statements below in full:

    Spokesman for Council of Conservative Citizens Available to Speak to Media about Dylann Roof and Charleston church killings.

    In a manifesto widely attributed to Dylann Roof, he cites the Council of Conservative Citizens ( C of CC) as the organization that first drew his attention to black-on-white crime.

    C of CC spokesman, Jared Taylor, welcomes media inquiries about the council’s positions and how they relate to Dylann Roof.

    The C of CC unequivocally condemns Roof’s murderous actions.

    However, the council stands unshakably behind the facts on its website, and points out the dangers of denying the extent of black-on-white crime.

    Every year, there are about 500,000 violent, interracial crimes. Of these, about 85 percent are committed by blacks against whites.

    Every year, there are some 20,000 rapes of white women by blacks, but rapes by white men of black women are so unusual, they scarcely appear in crime statistics.

    If these figures were reversed—if there were wide-spread white-on-black rape and violence—it would be constant national news. Instead, the true nature of interracial violence is ignored.

    This is dangerous. Our society’s silence about these crimes—despite enormous amounts of attention to “racially tinged” acts by whites—only increase the anger of people like Dylann Roof. This double standard *only makes acts of murderous frustration more likely*.

    In his manifesto, Roof outlines other grievances felt by many whites. Again, we utterly condemn Roof’s despicable killings, but they do not detract in the slightest from the legitimacy of some of the positions he has expressed. *Ignoring legitimate grievances is dangerous*.

    For further commentary on Roof, please contact Jared Taylor at 703-716-0900. Taylor is a former board member of the Council of Conservative Citizens, and frequent speaker at council conferences.

    Message from the CofCC President:

    It has been brought to the attention of the Council of Conservative Citizens that Dylann Roof — the alleged perpetrator of mass murder in Charleston this week — credits the CofCC website for his knowledge of black-on-white violent crime.

    This is not surprising: The CofCC is one of perhaps three websites in the world that accurately and honestly report black-on-white violent crime, and in particular, the seemingly endless incidents involving black-on-white murder.

    The CofCC website exists because media either “spike” such stories, or intentionally obscure the race of black offenders. Indeed, at its national convention some years ago, the Society of Professional Journalists adopted this tactic as a formal policy.

    The CofCC is hardly responsible for the actions of this deranged individual merely because he gleaned accurate information from our website.

    We are no more responsible for the actions of this sad young man, than the Olin Corporation was for manufacturing the ammo misused by Colin Ferguson to murder six whites on the Long Island Railroad in 1993.

    The CofCC does not advocate illegal activities of any kind, and never has. I would gladly compare the honesty and law-abiding nature of our membership against that of any other group.

    Earl Holt III, President, CofCC

    So the GOP is running from the CCC, and the CCC is running from Roof, but the CCC is also standing by the worldview Roof articulated, especially regarding black-on-white crime, and is basically begging society to engage in a debate over whether or not its views on black-on-white crimes are valid and backed by sound data and analysis. That’s going to complicate the GOP’s flight from the CCC rather significantly given that the CCC’s views on these topics are probably pretty much in line with the GOP and mainstream right-wing media.

    So denunciations of Roof are guaranteed by everyone. And denunciations of the CCC appear to be the GOP’s blanket response. But what about denunciations of the CCC’s worldview, especially regarding black-on-white crime? How’s that going to play out?

    That’s going to be a rather critical question going forward, because if there really is a wide swath of American society that largely agrees with the CCC’s views, at least its views regarding black-on-white crime, that’s important. It’s important to acknowledge, confront, and correct. And, as should be very apparent given the history of the GOP, its relationship to the CCC, and its larger history of engaging in using dog-whistle politics for decades now, A LOT of Americans really do share the CCC’s view that white Americans are experiencing an epidemic of black-on-white crimes, in part due to the efforts of groups like the CCC and the mainstream right-wing media, but in part due to society at large not too long ago:

    Pando Daily
    Baltimore & The Walking Dead

    Two decades ago, after Los Angeles exploded in the worst American riots of the 20th century against years of police brutality against minorities, the political establishment responded by doubling down and ramping up all the wrong ideas that are blowing back today in places like Baltimore and Ferguson. President Bush blamed the LA riots on liberal anti-poverty programs from the 1960s and 1970s, which he claimed destroyed black families and a sense of responsibility in their communities. Candidate Bill Clinton talked “tough on crime” while squirting a few crocodile tears in public, all part of his New Democrat program. Libertarian Party nominee for president Andre Marrou vowed he would “send in troops right away” as his solution to the Los Angeles riots and grievances. Meanwhile, “principled” libertarian Ron Paul wrote in his newsletter after the riots that he taught everyone in his family, including his son Rand Paul, to use a gun because “the animals are coming.”

    Mark Ames
    May 1, 2015

    As with Baltimore, there was an enormous amount of long pent-up anger in South-Central LA, where the notoriously violent police under Daryl Gates had been waging a kind of counter-insurgency campaign against poor minority residents for well over a decade . . . and no one, liberals least of all, wanted to hear about it. The riots—in response to an all-white jury acquitting four LAPD officers who were filmed savagely beating a black motorist, Rodney King—left over 50 dead, 2000 injured, and over 10,000 arrested.

    The political response to the 1992 riots makes for some infuriating, sickening reading—all the more so when you realize that most of the same names, parties, and bankrupt ideologies who had the solutions in 1992 are now hustling us again, promising that they have the answers, if we just trust them one more time.

    Hillary Clinton is one obvious example of this: Her husband’s mass incarceration policies, which she supported, are policies she’s just now decided to campaign against. In her book “It Takes A Village,” Hillary 1.0 boasted about her husband’s tough on crime policies as if they were her own (h/t Zaid Jilani):

    “As part of a ‘zero tolerance’ policy for weapons, drugs, and other threats to the safety of teachers and students, the President signed an executive order decreeing that any student who comes to school with a gun will be expelled and punished as a condition of federal aid.

    As for Jeb Bush’s father—President Bush blamed the 1992 LA riots on liberal social welfare programs in the 1960s and 70s, and the breakdown of the family structure in black communities. While for Vice President Dan Quayle, the LA riots were his moment to shine. And shine he did, blaming the uprising on a popular TV character Murphy Brown, and single mothers everywhere (not too different from Rand Paul’s latest analysis, come to think of it). Quayle produced some startling insights into the causes of the Los Angeles uprising, such as:

    “Illegitimacy is something we should talk about in terms of not having it.”

    And in what stands as perhaps Quayle’s single most coherent moment of his vice presidency, he declared:

    “I have been asked who caused the riots and the killing in L.A., my answer has been direct and simple: Who is to blame for the riots? The rioters are to blame. Who is to blame for the killings? The killers are to blame.”

    So when Rand Paul went on Laura Ingraham’s radio program to blame Baltimore on black culture and values and "lack of fathers," the libertarian whom Time called “the most interesting man in politics” was merely rehashing 25-year-old mainstream Republicrat bigotries, the very same bigoted, wrong assumptions that led to all the disastrous policies we’re now paying for today.

    Which brings me to the Libertarians of 1992.

    After Ferguson exploded last year, Libertarians positioned themselves as the only political force that had no blood on their hands, the only political force that was “principled” enough throughout the past few decades to offer the right analyses — and the right solutions — to the problems faced by people now rising up in Baltimore.

    In 1992, the most famous libertarian of all, Ron Paul, was still between Congressional stints when Los Angeles erupted, but he did run a profitable libertarian newsletter, “The Ron Paul Political Report,” to keep his ideas alive. Shortly after the LA riots, Ron Paul put out a “Special Issue on Racial Terrorism” offering his libertarian analysis of what he termed black “terrorism”:

    “The criminals who terrorize our cities—in riots and on every non-riot day—are not exclusively young black males, but they largely are. As children, they are trained to hate whites, to believe that white oppression is responsible for all black ills, to ‘fight the power,’ to steal and loot as much money from the white enemy as possible.

    “The cause of the riots is plain: barbarism. If the barbarians cannot loot sufficiently through legal channels (i.e., the riots being the welfare-state minus the middle-man), they resort to illegal ones, to terrorism. Trouble is, few seem willing to stop them. The cops have been handcuffed.

    “The rioters said they were acting out of frustration over the acquittal of four L.A. policemen accused of using excessive force when arresting Rodney G. King. In fact, they were looking for an excuse to kill, burn, and loot.

    “Order was only restored in L.A. when it came time for the blacks to pick up their welfare checks three days after rioting began. The ‘poor’ lined up at the post office to get their handouts (since there were no deliveries)—and then complained about slow service.” Dr. Paul, in his “special report,” repeatedly described blacks as “terrorists,” “racists,” and criminals:

    “We are constantly told that it is evil to be afraid of black men, but it is hardly irrational. Black men commit murders, rapes, robberies, muggings, and burglaries all out of proportion to their numbers.”

    “I think we can safely assume that 95% of the black males in [major U.S. cities] are semi-criminal or entirely criminal.” Not only are blacks inveterate criminals, but they’re also commies at heart, according to Dr. Paul:

    “Opinion polls consistently show that only about 5% of blacks have sensible political opinions, i.e. support the free market, individual liberty, and the end of welfare and affirmative action.

    “…The advice some libertarians give—‘don’t vote, it only encourages them—applies here. We must not kowtow to the street hoodlums and their sanctimonious leaders.” A few months later, in October 1992, Dr. Paul explained how he taught his own family—presumably including his favorite son, Rand Paul—how to defend themselves and even murder what Dr. Paul called “hip-hop” carjackers, “the urban youth who play unsuspecting whites like pianos”:

    “What can you do? More and more Americans are carrying a gun in the car. An ex-cop I know advises that if you have to use a gun on a youth, you should leave the scene immediately, disposing of the wiped off gun as soon as possible. Such a gun cannot, of course, be registered to you, but one bought privately (through the classifieds, for example.).

    “I frankly don’t know what to make of such advice; but even in my little town of Lake Jackson, Texas, I’ve urged everyone in my family to know how to use a gun in self defense. For the animals are coming.” Imagining scenes like this—Ron Paul sitting his family down, teaching them how to fire guns, warning them of “animals” coming to steal their cars, and offering vigilante advice on how to get away with murdering black kids— puts Rand Paul’s grubby Confederate outbursts into new light. Unless you block it from your mind, which most of Rand Paul’s progressive fanboys tend to do.

    Moving on down the Libertarian line: Andre Marrou, the Libertarian Party candidate for president in 1992, had been Ron Paul’s running mate on the Libertarian ticket in 1988. Marrou’s Libertarian solution to the LA riots: more troops, more quickly, as he explained to Larry King:

    “Send troops in to stop the looting. It’s something that [Gov. Pete] Wilson waited 24 hours for, and [Los Angeles police chief] Daryl Gates of course withdrew his troops of police. They ran away when the rioting started. That’s what we would’ve done—we would’ve sent the troops in to stop the looting.”

    So what distinguishes the Libertarians from the old two-party responses is their hair-trigger in bringing in troops to suppress the uppity minorities. Beyond that, the Libertarian Party’s political solution to African-American poverty and injustice was to abolish all welfare programs, public schools, and anti-discrimination laws like the Civil Rights Act. This was the solution promoted by an up-and-coming libertarian, Jacob Hornberger—who this week co-hosted an event with Ron Paul and Glenn Greenwald. Hornberger believes that 19th century antebellum slave-era America was “the freest society in history”. . . and after the LA riots, he offered this solution:

    “the repeal of: (1) every law that takes money from some people and gives it to others; (2) all regulations that interfere with peaceful exchanges between consenting adults; (3) all drug laws; and (4) all compulsory-attendance laws and school taxes.”

    And then there’s libertarian philosopher Murray Rothbard’s response to the LA riots. Rand Paul credits Rothbard as “a great influence on my thinking”; and Rothbard blamed the LA riots not on racism and black grievances, but rather on slow and insufficient police response and “the moral and esthetic nihilism created by many decades of cultural liberalism.”

    As for solving the problem, Rothbard, who had come out in support of former Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke, wrote in 1992:

    “Sending in police and troops late and depriving them of bullets, cannot do the job. There is only one way to fulfill the vital police function, the only way that works: the public announcement—backed by willingness to enforce it—made by the late Mayor Richard Daley in the Chicago riots of the 1960s—ordering the police to shoot to kill any looters, rioters, arsonists, or muggers they might find. That very announcement was enough to induce the rioters to pocket their ‘rage’ and go back to their peaceful pursuits.”

    And in case Rothbard’s anarcho-libertarian solution wasn’t clear enough, he reiterated it once again:

    “Devotion to the sanctity of person and property is not part of their value-system. That’s why, in the short term, all we can do is shoot the looters and incarcerate the rioters.”

    On the mainstream side of libertarianism, Reason magazine editor Virginia Postrel denounced “the hate-filled politics of Rep. Maxine Waters,” and proposed as solutions to South-Central LA’s problems private policing in the form of “citizen patrols” on foot, like “private security firms” who patrol “wealthy enclaves.” In other words: Stand Your Ground and vigilante groups:

    “Certainly citizen patrols would need more than community spirit; they would require police training, extra supervision, probably pay, and possibly weapons.”

    Along with armed private patrols, Reason’s editor proposed turning inner city blacks into private jitney bus drivers, reasoning that since blacks in South Africa do it, blacks would be happy doing it in South Central too:

    “If South Africa can let black entrepreneurs make it big in the jitney business, so can L.A.”

    These same zombies are still with us today, still walking the earth—or at least, America—snarling and snapping their jaws at us every night, trying to infect the mortals with their rancid, deadly zombie politics—liberalism, libertarianism, doesn’t really matter anymore. For some of us, the goal is to avoid getting bitten and turned into one of them; for others, the hope is just to avoid getting your neck snapped.

    So that happened. A mere 23 years ago. And it wasn’t just Republicans that seemed to view the African American community as some sort of alien invasion requiring a military response. Politicians from both parties joined in the fray. That was just what America was like back in the 90’s: if you wanted to get elected to office, you pushed ‘tough on crime’ policies which were obviously focused on the black community. And it applied to both parties. In other words, the lethal policing tactics that have garnered so much public attention and scrutiny in over the last year, have largely been a reflection of criminal policies the majority of Americans have called for and endorsed for decades. They’ve mostly just been following orders. Public orders.

    Of course, times have changed, as evidence by the fact that Bill Clinton has called his own “tough on crime” policies a mistake and Hillary’s platform calls for a reversal of some of those very same policies. But, as evidences by the number of GOP politicians racing to give back their CCC donations, times haven’t changed enough.

    And that’s why it’s actually pretty important that the US basically take the CCC’s bait and explore the bases of its “legitimate grievances”. When the CCC asserts that Roof had “legitimate grievances”, the CCC isn’t just talking about Roof’s grievances. Its referring to perceptions about the black community that were so widely held in America that catering to those “legitimate grievances” was how politicians from both parties got elected less than two decades ago. And for a substantial portion of the electorate, dog-whistling to the CCC’s worldview is how some politicians still try to get elected today. It’s a legitimately egregious situation.

    Posted by Pterrafractyl | June 22, 2015, 2:37 pm

Post a comment