- Spitfire List - http://spitfirelist.com -

FTR #888 Compendium on Citizen Greenwald: A Shiller for Killers

Dave Emory’s entire life­time of work is avail­able on a flash dri­ve that can be obtained here. [1] The new dri­ve is a 32-giga­byte dri­ve that is cur­rent as of the pro­grams and arti­cles post­ed by late spring of 2015. The new dri­ve (avail­able for a tax-deductible con­tri­bu­tion of $65.00 or more) is com­plete through the late spring of 2015.

WFMU-FM is pod­cast­ing For The Record–You can sub­scribe to the pod­cast HERE [2].

You can sub­scribe to e‑mail alerts from Spitfirelist.com HERE [3]

You can sub­scribe to RSS feed from Spitfirelist.com HERE [4].

You can sub­scribe to the com­ments made on pro­grams and posts–an excel­lent source of infor­ma­tion in, and of, itself HERE [5].

This pro­gram was record­ed in one, 60-minute seg­ment [6].

[7]Intro­duc­tion: We have cov­ered Cit­i­zen Green­wald in numer­ous pro­grams and posts. Since those entries were spread over a peri­od of time, some lis­ten­ers have voiced frus­tra­tion that it is dif­fi­cult and time con­sum­ing to go back and access all of that mate­r­i­al. For that rea­son, we offer a com­pendi­um of the unsa­vory real­i­ty of Glenn Green­wald’s activ­i­ties. Far from being the altru­ist he is said to be, Green­wald is a mon­ster, a tru­ly evil man who has been what jour­nal­ist Mark Ames terms “a shiller for killers.”

QUICK: who said this? “The parade of evils caused by ille­gal immi­gra­tion is wide­ly known, . . . ille­gal immi­gra­tion wreaks hav­oc eco­nom­i­cal­ly, social­ly, and cul­tur­al­ly; makes a mock­ery of the rule of law; and is dis­grace­ful just on basic fair­ness grounds alone. . . . unman­age­ably end­less hordes of peo­ple  pour over the bor­der in num­bers far too large to assim­i­late, and who con­se­quent­ly have no need, moti­va­tion or abil­i­ty to assim­i­late. . . [they pose a threat to] mid­dle-class sub­ur­ban vot­ers.”

Don­ald Trump, right? Wrong–it was Glenn Green­wald and that is alto­geth­er in char­ac­ter for him.

CORRECTION: The man who killed him­self after being cor­ralled by police was Bart Ross, who shot him­self to death after a traf­fic stop, not after being chased by police in Chica­go, as dis­cussed in the audio por­tion of the pro­gram.

In order to bet­ter under­stand this “shiller for killers,” we begin by tak­ing a look at Cit­i­zen Green­wald’s legal prac­tice, before he turned his efforts to jour­nal­ism. As a young attor­ney with Wachtell Lip­ton, he ran inter­fer­ence [8] for Big Tobac­co, pres­sur­ing whistle­blow­ers into silence about the cig­a­rette indus­try’s cyn­i­cal­ly lethal mar­ket­ing prac­tices. Note that he worked to sup­press jour­nal­is­tic truth in this instance!

After work­ing for Wachtell Lip­ton and sup­press­ing whistle­blow­ers attempt­ing to reveal the truth about Big Tobac­co, Green­wald estab­lished his own legal prac­tice.

Solid­i­fy­ing his role as “a shiller for killers,” Green­wald worked pro-bono for Nazi mur­der­ers. As we have seen in FTR #754 [9] and sev­er­al posts [10], Green­wald defend­ed Matthew Hale [11] against solic­i­ta­tion of mur­der [12] charges. Green­wald ran inter­fer­ence [13] for the “lead­er­less resis­tance strat­e­gy.” [14]

In par­tic­u­lar, Green­wald pro­vid­ed appo­site legal assis­tance for the Nation­al Alliance [15]. 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 lead­ers in their move­ment, they avoid infil­tra­tion by law enforce­ment by virtue of their “lone wolf” oper­a­tional strat­e­gy.

What Dylann Roof [alleged­ly] did when he shot up an African-Amer­i­can church in South Car­oli­na 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 [16], which pro­vided the oper­a­tional tem­plate for the Nazi ter­ror group The Order) have been shield­ed (to an extent) from civ­il suits hold­ing them to account for their mur­der­ous advo­cacy.

Nation­al Alliance’s books are specif­i­cal­ly intend­ed [17] as instruc­tion­al vehi­cles [18]Hunter [19] is ded­i­cat­ed to con­vict­ed mur­der­er Joseph Paul Franklin and was specif­i­cal­ly designed as a “How To” man­u­al for lone-wolf, white suprema­cist killers like Roof.

Note, also, that the “four­teen words” of Order mem­ber David Lane are the inspi­ra­tion [20] for “Com­bat 14,” the para­mil­i­tary wing of the Ukrain­ian fas­cist group Svo­bo­da [21], one of the OUN/B heirs that came to pow­er as a result of the Maid­an coup of 2014. Lane drove the get­away car when “The Order”–explicitly inspired by “The Turn­er Diaries”–murdered Den­ver talk show host Alan Berg.

The “four­teen words” were also an influ­ence on Roof.

We should note that what Green­wald did is NOT a ques­tion of out­law­ing free speech, as he implied. 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 sound 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.

While defend­ing Matthew Hale against a suit brought by vic­tims of Matthew Hale’s foot­sol­diers, Green­wald sur­rep­ti­tious­ly taped peo­ple he inter­viewed [22], earn­ing a rebuke from the judge. His oppo­si­tion to illic­it inter­cep­tion of pri­vate com­mu­ni­ca­tions is high­ly selec­tive.

When one of Hale’s fol­low­ers [23] post­ed Judge Lefkow’s [24] address, a map to her house and pic­tures of fam­i­ly mem­bers, the judge returned home to find her fam­i­ly mur­dered. We are sup­posed to believe that Green­wald believes in inter­net pri­va­cy. Appar­ent­ly that did not apply to Judge Lefkow.

Green­wald has con­tin­ued to rub elbows with neo-Con­fed­er­ates [25], white suprema­cists and Nazis [26], even after his jour­nal­is­tic beat­i­fi­ca­tion.

” . . . 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 [April of 2015–D.E.] co-host­ed an event [27] with RON PAUL and GLENN GREENWALD. Horn­berger believes that 19th cen­tury ante­bel­lum slave-era Amer­ica was “the freest soci­ety in his­tory” [28]. . . ”

Pro­gram High­lights Include: 

  • Green­wald’s view of the vic­tims of Matthew Hale’s fol­low­er’s shoot­ing as “odi­ous.” [22]
  • His char­ac­ter­i­za­tion of Hale’s solic­i­ta­tion of Judge Lefkow’s mur­der as a “mis­un­der­stand­ing.” [24]
  • Hale fol­low­er Paul Craig Cob­b’s asso­ci­a­tion [23] with the Nation­al Alliance.
  • Cob­b’s anti-immi­grant [23] ide­ol­o­gy, at one with that of the attack­ers of the Mex­i­can day labor­ers [29].
  • Green­wald’s intel­lec­tu­al cham­pi­oning [30] of vir­u­lent “anti-immi­grant” ex-Repub­li­can Rep­re­sen­ta­tive Tom Tan­cre­do.
  • Green­wald’s shilling [31] for peo­ple asso­ci­at­ed with the Mus­lim Broth­er­hood.

1. In order to under­stand the obvi­ous, dis­turb­ing fact that Glenn Green­wald is the exact oppo­site of what he rep­re­sents him­self as being, it is essen­tial to exam­ine his career as a lawyer. As a young attor­ney with Wachtell Lip­ton, he ran inter­fer­ence for Big Tobac­co, pres­sur­ing whistle­blow­ers into silence about the cig­a­rette indus­try’s cyn­i­cal­ly lethal mar­ket­ing prac­tices. Note that he worked to sup­press jour­nal­is­tic truth in this instance!

“Shillers for Killers” by Mark Ames; Pan­do Dai­ly; 7/7/2015. [8]

. . . . Between 2005 and 2030, about 176 mil­lion peo­ple [32] will die from smoking—77 per­cent of them in devel­op­ing coun­tries, a mas­sive rever­sal from a few decades ear­li­er. In Rus­sia, smok­ing rates for men and women tripled in just 15 years from 1985 to 2000—to two-thirds of men and one-third of women. In Mex­i­co— where the rich­est man in the world (and New York Times own­er) Car­los Slim aligned his cig­a­rette empire with Philip Morris—60,000 peo­ple die a year from cig­a­rettes. Com­pare tobacco’s legal death toll with the war on ille­gal drugs’ death toll—a total of 60,000 killed [33] in the six worst years, 2006–2012. In oth­er words, it took six years for the drug war in Mex­i­co to kill as many as legal tobac­co kills every year. That drug war is taper­ing off, while tobacco’s legal death toll is set to soar.

The ABC-TV exposé in 1994 on how the tobac­co com­pa­nies were ramp­ing up sales and mar­ket­ing to vul­ner­a­ble devel­op­ing coun­tries was nev­er shown. ABC-TV got a box full of secret Brown & Williamson files leaked by whistle­blow­er Mer­rell Williams short­ly after air­ing their first con­tro­ver­sial show. But thanks to the Philip Mor­ris law­suit filed by Wachtell Lip­ton, ABC-TV’s lawyers pan­icked and imme­di­ate­ly seized all the leaked files from their jour­nal­ists, seized the copies of those leaked files, seized and impound­ed their reporters’ hard dri­ves, and pro­hib­it­ed their reporters from talk­ing about “the sin­gle most impor­tant pieces of paper in the his­to­ry of tobac­co ver­sus pub­lic health.”

When Frontline’s Daniel Schorr asked one of the ABC-TV reporters, Walt Bog­danich, if it was true that ABC had the Brown & Williamson leaks—and scoop—long before any­one else, Bog­danich, a Pulitzer Prize win­ner, answered:

“Well, there’s a lot I’d like to say about that top­ic. Unfor­tu­nate­ly, I can’t. My com­pa­ny has tak­en the posi­tion that no one is to speak about this and since I work for the com­pa­ny, I’ve got to respect that.”

That was in 1996, mean­ing Bog­danich was still gagged more than two years after receiv­ing the leaks.

So it was thanks to Wachtell Lipton’s vicious and aggres­sive law­suit on behalf of Philip Mor­ris that TV jour­nal­ism was kneecapped, that 60 Min­utes was too fright­ened to take on tobac­co, that a mass Amer­i­can audi­ence nev­er learned of Big Tobacco’s plans to bring their mass-mur­der busi­ness to the more vul­ner­a­ble regions of the devel­op­ing world—and that the biggest whistle­blow­ers of the 1990s were gagged from show­ing their face or hav­ing their name men­tioned on the most pop­u­lar TV show in Amer­i­ca . . . even man­ag­ing to gag a whistle­blow­er from talk­ing to his own attor­ney, under threat of prison.

And this is where whistle­blow­er-irony becomes so dense, it col­laps­es on itself: Because one of Wachtell Lipton’s young asso­ciates work­ing on the Philip Mor­ris law­suit against ABC-TV was a lawyer by the name of…. Glenn Green­wald.

We know Green­wald worked at Wachtell Lipton’s New York office at the time of Wachtell’s law­suit because Green­wald him­self [34] has talked about work­ing for Wachtell, begin­ning in 1993 as a sum­mer asso­ciate, then join­ing out of law school in 1994, and stay­ing on until the end of 1995.

But, of course, that isn’t nec­es­sar­i­ly evi­dence of hypocrisy. Per­haps Green­wald had no idea that the law firm he chose to work for was rep­re­sent­ing Philip Mor­ris in the most talked about case of 1994. That even though his own boss, Hen­ry Wachtell, was a reg­u­lar on nation­al TV news [35] defend­ing their tobac­co clients, he was still obliv­i­ous. Green­wald per­haps didn’t watch tele­vi­sion.

Or read news­pa­pers?

As the Wall Street Jour­nal report­ed at the time in an arti­cle titled “More Young Lawyers Want To Just Say No to Tobac­co Indus­try [36]”:

Unpop­u­lar clients have always posed prob­lems for lawyers, but the tobac­co industry’s need for lit­i­ga­tors is ris­ing to unprece­dent­ed lev­els just as anti­smok­ing sen­ti­ment, par­tic­u­lar­ly among young lawyers, is reach­ing a crescen­do. As a result, more firms are find­ing that tobac­co work can cause prob­lems rang­ing from con­flicts with oth­er clients to dif­fi­cul­ty in hir­ing. [...]

Wachtell, Lip­ton, Rosen & Katz is one exam­ple. The firm, which pre­vi­ous­ly worked for tobac­co com­pa­nies only on cor­po­rate mat­ters and secu­ri­ties lit­i­ga­tion, recent­ly took the job of rep­re­sent­ing Philip Mor­ris in a high-pro­file libel law­suit against Cap­i­tal Cities/ABC. The New York law firm is now han­dling the No. 1 cig­a­rette maker’s law­suit seek­ing to pre­vent Mass­a­chu­setts from try­ing to recoup the costs of smok­ing-relat­ed ill­ness­es.

It’s rea­son­able to assume Greenwald—ever the dili­gent researcher—must have joined Wachtell ful­ly aware that they were help­ing gag whistle­blow­ers and threat­en­ing jour­nal­ists: Green­wald says that he chose to work for Wachtell in 1994 after being recruit­ed [34] by over a dozen top law firms. But of course that doesn’t nec­es­sar­i­ly mean he worked on the spe­cif­ic Philip Mor­ris case.

Except that a billing ledger dis­cov­ered in the tobac­co library shows Greenwald’s name [37] in a Wachtell Lip­ton bill to Philip Mor­ris....

. . . . Oth­er Wachtell Lip­ton mem­os show Greenwald’s name promi­nent­ly dis­played on the let­ter­head [38] in aggres­sive, threat­en­ing let­ters against ABC-TV, against whistle­blow­er Jef­frey Wigand [39], and against whistle­blow­er Mer­rell Williams...

One Wachtell let­ter to ABC’s lawyers with Greenwald’s name up top, dat­ed Decem­ber 14, 1995, warns that Wigand’s tes­ti­mo­ny in a Mis­sis­sip­pi tobac­co tri­al is “in direct defi­ance of a Ken­tucky Court order”— and demands that ABC turn over their source’s pri­vate tes­ti­mo­ny to Wachtell Lip­ton. The pur­pose of course is to threat­en Wigand and ABC and thus to muz­zle them.

Greenwald’s name appears on the Wachtell Lip­ton let­ter­head of threat­en­ing legal let­ter after letter—targeting ABC-TV and tobac­co whistle­blow­ers . While it would be a stretch to say that Greenwald’s name appear­ing on the let­ter­head of so many Wachtell Philip Mor­ris legal threats means Green­wald was work­ing on that case right up through late 1995, one would have to stretch much fur­ther to believe that Green­wald was com­plete­ly unaware of what his own law firm was doing in the most famous legal case in the coun­try — a case he worked on.

The ques­tion isn’t that young Glenn Green­wald was a named play­er in the law­suits which destroyed broad­cast TV jour­nal­ism and gagged the most con­se­quen­tial whistle­blow­ers in his­to­ry; the ques­tion is, why has he nev­er said peep about Wigand and Mer­rell Williams? Green­wald styles him­self as the most fear­less out­spo­ken defend­er of whistle­blow­ers today—and yet he has absolute­ly noth­ing to say about the most famous whistle­blow­ers of the 1990s, a case he worked on from the oth­er side. . . .

2a. Green­wald even­tu­al­ly launched his own legal busi­ness, rep­re­sent­ing “unpop­u­lar clients,” includ­ing neo-Nazis. For five years, Green­wald defend­ed Matthew Hale, head of the World Church of the Cre­ator, cur­rent­ly serv­ing a 40-year prison term [22] for plot­ting against the life of a judge.

(We’ve spo­ken of the World Church of the Cre­ator in FTR #‘s 168 [40]222 [41]633 [42].)

We high­light a num­ber of con­sid­er­a­tions in light of Green­wald’s efforts on behalf of Nazi blood­let­ters:

  • As is the case with Snow­den’s embrace of Nazi Ron Paul for Pres­i­dent [43], this asso­ci­a­tion negates any pre­tense on the part of Green­wald as being “for human­i­ty.”
  • In his defense of Matthew Hale (being sued by shoot­ing vic­tims, who were set upon by one of Hale’s foot sol­diers) Green­wald vio­lat­ed legal ethics by tap­ing wit­ness­es [22]. Appar­ent­ly, Green­wald’s belief in the incor­rect­ness of sur­rep­ti­tious record­ing of pri­vate com­mu­ni­ca­tions is high­ly selec­tive!
  • Green­wald labeled and insult­ed the plain­tiffs in the case in very strong terms, call­ing them “odi­ous.” What was so “odi­ous” about them? That they were African-Amer­i­can, Asian-Amer­i­can or Jew­ish? Or that they got in the way of his clients’ foot­sol­dier’s bul­lets?
  • We won­der about Green­wald’s lover of some 11 years–an Aus­tri­an-born lawyer named Wern­er Achatz [44]. Might he have been Under­ground Reich [45]? Might Achatz have recruited/assisted Green­wald? Green­wald’s legal rep­re­sen­ta­tion of Nazis was large­ly pro bono. How was he pay­ing his bills? Did he have mon­ey saved up? Were oth­er “unpop­u­lar clients” more fis­cal­ly forth­com­ing?

“How Glenn Green­wald Became Glenn Green­wald” by Jes­si­ca Tes­ta; buzzfeed.com; 6/26/2013. [11]

 . . . . Green­wald also spent rough­ly FIVE YEARS defend­ing the First Amend­ment rights of neo-Nazis, includ­ing Matthew Hale, the “Pon­tif­ex Max­imus” of the Illi­nois church for­mer­ly known as the World Church of the Cre­ator [42], one of whose dis­ci­ples went on a mur­der­ous spree in 1999 [40].

“I almost always did it pro bono,” Green­wald said. “I was inter­est­ed in defend­ing polit­i­cal prin­ci­ples that I believed in. I didn’t even care about mak­ing mon­ey any­more.” . . .

2b. In his defense of Matthew Hale (being sued by shoot­ing vic­tims, who were set upon by one of Hale’s foot sol­diers) Green­wald vio­lat­ed legal ethics by tap­ing wit­ness­es [22]. Appar­ent­ly, Green­wald’s belief in the incor­rect­ness of sur­rep­ti­tious record­ing of pri­vate com­mu­ni­ca­tions is high­ly selec­tive!

“Glenn Green­wald Uneth­i­cal­ly Taped Wit­ness­es While Work­ing for Matt Hale, White Suprema­cist; Demo­c­ra­t­ic Under­ground. [22]

. . . .Case in point:

Glenn Green­wald made a choice to defend Matthew Hale in a series of civ­il law­suits that Hale faced after he encour­aged shoot­er Ben­jamin Smith to go on a two-state shoot­ing ram­page.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benjamin_Nathaniel_Smith [46]

If you don’t know who Hale is, well, he’s a pret­ty famous white suprema­cist who is cur­rent­ly serv­ing 40 years for solic­it­ing the mur­der of a fed­er­al judge who ruled against him in a trade­mark case. Who put him away? Patrick Fitzger­ald. (Yes. And Mr. Green­wald got an FBI vis­it regard­ing the pass­ing of cod­ed mes­sages by Hale while under SAMS restric­tions.)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matthew_F._Hale [47]

Mr. Hale, for his role in the shoot­ings, was sued by a num­ber of sur­vivors. This includ­ed a case filed by two teenage Ortho­dox Jew­ish boys. And anoth­er case filed by a Black min­is­ter. These peo­ple were select­ed by Ben­jamin Smith because they looked like the religious/ethnic minori­ties they are.

And Glenn Green­wald called them ‘odi­ous and repug­nant’ for suing his client–

Indeed the Cen­ter’s suit appears to link Hale’s rejec­tion into the bar to Smith’s “ram­page.” In late June, the state bar’s Com­mit­tee on Char­ac­ter and Fit­ness again denied Hale’s peti­tion to join the bar. Smith, who had tes­ti­fied as a char­ac­ter wit­ness for Hale that April, began shoot­ing two days lat­er. “Imme­di­ate­ly after the Illi­nois State Bar’s deci­sion and as part of the World Church of the Cre­ator’s war, Smith ... began a ram­page of geno­ci­dal vio­lence,” the law­suit states.

And while Hale him­self has linked the shoot­ings to his bar appli­ca­tion in the past, he said Tues­day that it’s ridicu­lous to think he had any con­trol over Smith.

SNIP

Fur­ther, Green­wald said, “I find that the peo­ple behind these law­suits are tru­ly so odi­ous and repug­nant, that cre­ates its own moti­va­tion for me.”

The first suit, filed in state court by Chica­go attor­ney Michael Ian Ben­der on behalf of two Ortho­dox Jew­ish teens shot at in Rogers Park, is pend­ing, though a cir­cuit judge in Chica­go threw out alle­ga­tions that Smith’s par­ents were some­how respon­si­ble for the shoot­ings.

http://www.rickross.com/reference/hale/hale33.html [48]

It was­n’t enough that Glenn took the case, which was his right to do. No–he had to insult the Plaintiffs–shooting vic­tims. And then, he uneth­i­cal­ly taped the wit­ness­es he sub­poe­naed, even direct­ing their state­ments. A court found that he vio­lat­ed TWO sep­a­rate rules–

“The mag­is­trate judge grant­ed both motions, find­ing defense coun­sel’s con­duct uneth­i­cal under two sep­a­rate rules: Local Rule 83.58.4(a)(4), pro­hibit­ing “dis­hon­esty, fraud, deceit or mis­rep­re­sen­ta­tion;” and Local Rule 83.54.4, stat­ing “a lawyer shall not ... use meth­ods of obtain­ing evi­dence that vio­late the legal rights of person.”“ANDERSON v. HALE 159 F.Supp.2d 1116 (2001)

http://www.leagle.com/xmlResult.aspx?xmldoc=20011275159FSupp2d1116_11178.xml [49]

He also attempt­ed to manip­u­late the wit­ness state­ments, per the mag­is­trate’s find­ings of fact-

“A 52-page tran­script of one con­ver­sa­tion showed defen­dants’ coun­sel steered the con­ver­sa­tion by elic­it­ing par­tic­u­lar respons­es to detailed ques­tions, lead­ing to more detailed ques­tions, to lure the wit­ness into damn­ing state­ments for lat­er use.” Ander­son v. Hale, 202 F.R.D. 548 (N.D.Ill. 2001),

That’s right–Glenn Green­wald, self-pro­claimed civ­il rights lawyer, vio­lat­ed the civ­il right of wit­ness­es. The New York Bar lat­er wrote a clar­i­fy­ing opin­ion on the ethics of said tap­ing, ref­er­enc­ing this case–

http://www2.nycbar.org/Publications/reports/show_html.php?rid=122 [50]

And of course, Glenn Green­wald thinks Matthew Hale is wrong­ly impris­oned by Pros­e­cu­tor Fitzger­ald.

“Mr. Green­wald, who said he believed that Mr. Hale was wrong­ly impris­oned, said he did not recall the exact mes­sage Ms. Hutch­e­son relayed to him, or the per­son it was intend­ed for, but that he had declined to deliv­er it. He called the mes­sage “a car­i­ca­ture of what a cod­ed mes­sage would be.””

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/09/national/09hale.html?pagewanted=print&position= [51]

3a. In addi­tion to Hale, Green­wald also rep­re­sent­ed a con­sor­tium of neo-Naz­i/White Suprema­cist groups, includ­ing the Nation­al Alliance [15].

Being sued for incit­ing two white suprema­cists to attack Lati­no day-labor­ers [52], they were rep­re­sent­ed by Green­wald. It was Green­wald’s con­tention that he was moti­vat­ed by the need to pre­serve the free speech rights [29] of these groups.

“The Day the Blog­gers Won” by Eric Boehlert; salon.com; 5/19/2007. [53]

. . . . His work was at times polit­i­cal in the sense that he took on unpop­u­lar clients in free speech cas­es that spot­light­ed the prac­ti­cal ten­sions between the rights of indi­vid­u­als and the col­lec­tive urges of the com­mu­ni­ty. In 2002 he defend­ed a stri­dent anti-immi­gra­tion group, Nation­al Alliance, in a New York civ­il rights law­suit after two Mex­i­can day work­ers were beat­en and stabbed on Long Island by two men pos­ing as con­trac­tors in search of labor­ers. The vic­tims claimed that the anti-immi­gra­tion rhetoric of Nation­al Alliance, which urged racist vio­lence against Lati­no immi­grants and oth­er racial minori­ties, was part­ly to blame for the beat­ings. Green­wald argued that the case rep­re­sent­ed a mis­guid­ed attempt to impose lia­bil­i­ty and pun­ish­ment on groups because of their polit­i­cal and reli­gious views. A fed­er­al judge threw out the case. . . .

3b. More about the attack on the Mex­i­can day-labor­ers and Green­wald’s defense of the Nation­al Alliance.

“Anti-Immi­grant Groups Can’t Be Held Liable for Attack” [AP]; First Amend­ment Cen­ter; 9/16/2002. [29]

A fed­er­al judge has dis­missed a civ­il rights law­suit that held sev­en anti-immi­gra­tion orga­ni­za­tions part­ly respon­si­ble for the bru­tal Sep­tem­ber 2000 attack on a pair of Mex­i­can day labor­ers.

But work­ers Israel Perez and Mag­daleno Estra­da can still pur­sue civ­il rights claims against the two men con­vict­ed of beat­ing them, U.S. Dis­trict Judge Joan­na Sey­bert ruled on Sept. 13.

In her deci­sion, Sey­bert said the sev­en groups did not vio­late the two immi­grants’ civ­il rights by mak­ing anti-immi­grant state­ments. A lawyer for one of the groups, the Farm­ingville-based Sachem Qual­i­ty of Life, praised the rul­ing. . . .

. . . Perez and Estra­da were beat­en and stabbed by Christo­pher Slavin and Ryan Wag­n­er in Sep­tem­ber 2000. The pair had posed as con­trac­tors look­ing for day labor­ers.

Both attack­ers were con­vict­ed of attempt­ed mur­der, and sen­tenced to 25 years in prison. . . .

. . . . The news­pa­per also report­ed that the law­suit claimed that the phi­los­o­phy of white suprema­cist orga­ni­za­tions — includ­ing the West Vir­ginia-based Nation­al Alliance and Amer­i­can Patrol in Sher­man Oaks, Calif. — urged racist vio­lence against Lati­no immi­grants and oth­er racial minori­ties. News­day report­ed that Brew­ing­ton said the group’s urg­ings prompt­ed the attacks.

“The law­suit was a very dan­ger­ous attempt to start impos­ing lia­bil­i­ty and pun­ish­ment on groups because of their polit­i­cal and reli­gious views,” Glenn Green­wald, a Man­hat­tan attor­ney rep­re­sent­ing the Nation­al Alliance and oth­er groups, was quot­ed by Newsweek as say­ing. “If you can be liable for the actions of oth­er peo­ple who hear your views, then you would be afraid to ever express any views that were ever uncon­ven­tion­al.”

3c. Green­wald’s was run­ning legal inter­fer­ence for the “lead­er­less resis­tance” strat­e­gy. The Nation­al Alliance pub­lish­es its books specif­i­cal­ly designed to moti­vate racial vio­lence!

1988: Neo-Nazi Group Founds Pub­lish­ing House, Pub­lish­es Book to Inspire White Assas­sins;  [17]His­to­ry Com­mons [17]

. . . .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 [54]. In 1993, it will begin pub­lish­ing com­ic books tar­get­ed at chil­dren and teenagers. . . .

3d. More about The Turn­er Diaries and its direct, pur­pose­ful inspi­ra­tion of vio­lent acts [54]:

“The Turn­er Diaries, Oth­er Racist Nov­els, Inspire Extrem­ist Vio­lence” by Camille Jack­son; South­ern Pover­ty Law Cen­ter Intel­li­gence Report; Fall 2004, #115. [18]

Few works of fic­tion have moved read­ers to action quite like The Turn­er Diaries. [The book was writ­ten with exact­ly that in mind!–D.E.] Writ­ten under a pseu­do­nym by William Pierce, late founder of the neo-Nazi Nation­al Alliance, the bloody race-war nov­el has been dubbed the “bible of the racist right” by the FBI.

Pub­lished in 1978, The Turn­er Diaries has fueled some of the last two decades’ most infa­mous out­breaks of extrem­ist vio­lence, includ­ing Tim­o­thy McVeigh’s bomb­ing of the Mur­rah Fed­er­al Build­ing in Okla­homa City. Although The Turn­er Diaries may be the most famous such nov­el, it is nei­ther the first nor the last nov­el­ized ver­sion of dire con­spir­a­cies and dras­tic solu­tions.

Pierce told his sem­i­nal sto­ry through two years of diary entries by his white-suprema­cist hero, Earl Turn­er. Turn­er car­ries out orders for the Orga­ni­za­tion, an under­ground group strug­gling against the Sys­tem — an anti-white, anti-gun U.S. gov­ern­ment that con­tin­u­al­ly puts more restric­tions on its cit­i­zens.

Using “det­o­na­tors, timers, ignit­ers and oth­er gad­gets” built by Turn­er, the Orga­ni­za­tion spawns vicious war­fare between blacks, Jews and whites as it takes over the coun­try, city by city.

Despite Pierce’s stilt­ed prose — a holdover, maybe, from his career as a physics pro­fes­sor — the vio­lence is unfor­get­tably vivid. Turn­er describes slic­ing the throat of a Jew­ish shop own­er “from ear to ear,” mur­der­ing a Wash­ing­ton Post edi­tor with two shot­gun blasts, and watch­ing starv­ing blacks bar­be­cue and eat white chil­dren.

By the nov­el­’s end, Turn­er is work­ing for an elite sur­vival­ist group called the Order and plot­ting a sui­cide mis­sion — fly­ing a crop-duster plane strapped with a war­head into the Pen­ta­gon, the Sys­tem’s last remain­ing mil­i­tary strong­hold. “Two-thirds of the troops around the Pen­ta­gon are nig­gers,” Turn­er writes in his jour­nal, “which should great­ly enhance my chances of get­ting through.”

Pub­lished by Pierce’s own Nation­al Van­guard Press, The Turn­er Diaries did­n’t exact­ly rock­et up the best-sell­er lists when it first appeared. But Pierce cer­tain­ly got through to Bob Math­ews.

A neo-Nazi fol­low­er, Math­ews orga­nized a real-life group called The Order, based on Pierce’s fic­tion­al Order, which com­mit­ted a series of armored car heists and plot­ted seri­ous racist vio­lence before ambush­ing and mur­der­ing Jew­ish radio talk show host Alan Berg in 1984. . . .

4a. Above, we have dis­cussed Cit­i­zen Green­wald’s legal work [12], in which he spent years run­ning legal inter­fer­ence [9] for Nazi mur­der­ers and doing most of the work pro bono [10]. One of his legal vic­to­ries involved aid­ing two white suprema­cists [13] who had attacked two Lati­no day labor­ers.

In the past, Cit­i­zen Green­wald has had some deeply inflam­ma­to­ry things to say in the past con­cern­ing “ille­gal immi­grants.” [55] We won­der if his stat­ed views on the evils of ille­gal immi­gra­tion might be relat­ed to his work defend­ing the attack­ers of the day labor­ers? In his intem­per­ate remarks about immi­grants (which he lat­er uncon­vinc­ing­ly recant­ed), he also defend­ed for­mer Col­orado con­gress­man Tom Tan­cre­do, an asso­ciate of the Tea Par­ty [56] and a fel­low trav­el­er of some noto­ri­ous white suprema­cists [30]. [30]

Tan­cre­do’s asso­ciates include Don Black, David Duke asso­ciate and cre­ator of the Storm­front web­site. Black is among the numer­ous white suprema­cist and Nazi asso­ciates of Edward Snow­den’s Pres­i­den­tial can­di­date of choice, Ron Paul. [57] Tan­cre­do’s fel­low trav­el­ers also include mem­bers of the neo-Con­fed­er­ate move­ment and the League of the South, also net­work­ing ele­ments of Ron Paul.

“Would You Feel Dif­fer­ent­ly About Snow­den, Green­wald, and Assange If You Knew What They Real­ly Thought?” by Sean Wilentz; The New Repub­lic; 1/19/2014. [55]

. . . . Greenwald’s oth­er clients includ­ed the neo-Nazi Nation­al Alliance, who were impli­cat­ed in an espe­cial­ly hor­ri­ble crime. Two white suprema­cists on Long Island had picked up a pair of unsus­pect­ing Mex­i­can day labor­ers, lured them into an aban­doned ware­house, and then clubbed them with a crow­bar and stabbed them repeat­ed­ly. The day labor­ers man­aged to escape, and when they recov­ered from their injuries, they sued the Nation­al Alliance and oth­er hate groups, alleg­ing that they had inspired the attack­ers. . . .

. . . . On cer­tain issues, though, his [Green­wald’s] prose was suf­fused with right-wing con­ceits and catch­phras­es. One exam­ple was immi­gra­tion, on which Green­wald then held sur­pris­ing­ly hard-line views. “The parade of evils caused by ille­gal immi­gra­tion is wide­ly known,” Green­wald wrote in 2005. The facts, to him, were indis­putable: “ille­gal immi­gra­tion wreaks hav­oc eco­nom­i­cal­ly, social­ly, and cul­tur­al­ly; makes a mock­ery of the rule of law; and is dis­grace­ful just on basic fair­ness grounds alone.” Defend­ing the nativist con­gress­man Tom Tan­cre­do from charges of racism, Green­wald wrote of “unman­age­ably end­less hordes of peo­ple [who] pour over the bor­der in num­bers far too large to assim­i­late, and who con­se­quent­ly have no need, moti­va­tion or abil­i­ty to assim­i­late.” Those hordes, Green­wald wrote, posed a threat to “mid­dle-class sub­ur­ban vot­ers.” . . . .

4b. Tan­cre­do’s asso­ciates include Don Black, David Duke asso­ciate and cre­ator of the Storm­front web­site. Black is among the numer­ous white suprema­cist and Nazi asso­ciates of Edward Snow­den’s Pres­i­den­tial can­di­date of choice, Ron Paul. [57] Tan­cre­do’s fel­low trav­el­ers also include mem­bers of the neo-Con­fed­er­ate move­ment and the League of the South, also net­work­ing ele­ments of Ron Paul.

“For­mer Con­gress­man Tan­cre­do to Address White Suprema­cists” by Ryan Lenz;  Hate Watch [South­ern Pover­ty Law Cen­ter]; 6/19/2012. [30]

. . . . The for­mer Repub­li­can con­gress­man from Col­orado, known for his bit­ing anti-immi­gra­tion rhetoric and cam­paign ads sug­gest­ing Lati­no immi­grants are rapists and drug deal­ers, is sched­uled to be the lun­cheon speak­er at next month’s annu­al con­fer­ence for the white suprema­cist Coun­cil of Con­ser­v­a­tive Cit­i­zens (CCC). [Tan­cre­do wound up canceling–D.E.] The theme of the con­fer­ence? “Mul­ti­cul­tur­al­ism – the Death of Amer­i­ca.”

Shar­ing the dais with Tan­cre­do will be a rogue’s gallery of the racist right, includ­ing James Edwards, who hosts the white nation­al­ist Polit­i­cal Cesspool radio show; Don Black, the for­mer Klans­man best known for cre­at­ing Stormfront.org, the first major Inter­net hate site; and Leonard Wil­son, a long­time seg­re­ga­tion­ist and Alaba­ma com­man­der for the Sons of Con­fed­er­ate Vet­er­ans, a neo-Con­fed­er­ate group that, like Tan­cre­do, staunch­ly oppos­es immi­gra­tion.

For those who have watched Tan­cre­do go through end­less con­tor­tions to dis­tance him­self from his racist friends, speak­ing at a CCC con­fer­ence seems to be a turn­ing point. The time has passed to apol­o­gize for the com­pa­ny he keeps.

And what com­pa­ny it is.

Tan­cre­do was already hon­orary chair­man of Youth for West­ern Civ­i­liza­tion (YWC), an ultra­con­ser­v­a­tive stu­dent group that has active­ly cul­ti­vat­ed rela­tion­ships with white nation­al­ist orga­ni­za­tions such as the racist League of the South (LOS), whose leader Michael Hill recent­ly penned an essay describ­ing how white peo­ple are endowed with a “God-ordained supe­ri­or­i­ty” and pro­fess­ing that it was a “mon­u­men­tal lie” that all men are cre­at­ed equal. In 2006, Tan­cre­do deliv­ered an anti-immi­grant speech and sang “Dix­ie” at a bar­be­cue adver­tised by the South Car­oli­na chap­ter of the LOS. . . . .

5a. Recent­ly there has been sig­nif­i­cant media cov­er­age of Craig Paul Cobb [58] (with the mid­dle and first names some­times reversed in some sources) and his attempts at buy­ing a small, North Dako­ta town that he envis­ages as a Nazi/white suprema­cist com­mu­ni­ty.

Cob­b’s appar­ent role [23] in the cir­cum­stances sur­round­ing the mur­der of the fam­i­ly of Judge Joan Lefkow has received less cov­er­age.

Also receiv­ing less cov­er­age is Glenn Green­wald’s rep­re­sen­ta­tion of World Church of the Cre­ator [24] head Matthew Hale in this case.

(In past posts, we have not­ed Glenn Green­wald’s pro-bono [10] rep­re­sen­ta­tion of Hale and the Nation­al Alliance [13], with which Cobb was also affil­i­at­ed.)

A num­ber of things come to mind as we pon­der Green­wald’s role in this:

  •  Con­vict­ed of solic­i­ta­tion of the mur­der of Judge Joan Lefkow, whose hus­band and moth­er were mur­dered in her home a few weeks after Cobb exer­cised what Green­wald would char­ac­ter­ize of his right of free speech on the inter­net, Green­wald’s client Hale char­ac­ter­ized his orga­ni­za­tion as being at war [24] with Judge Lefkow. (See text excerpts below.)
  • Cobb post­ed Lefkow’s name and address on the inter­net. Her moth­er and hus­band were mur­dered a few weeks lat­er. Cobb was overt­ly, explic­it­ly pleased by that fact [23]. ” . . . What was I feel­ing? Emo­tions are not yet ille­gal. I was just fine with it. I think it was well done.”[1] (See text excerpts below.)
  • Cob­b’s actions epit­o­mize the “lead­er­less resis­tance strat­e­gy,” for which Green­wald ran legal inter­fer­ence in his law prac­tice.
  • Green­wald’s client Hale was taped by an under­cov­er FBI infor­mant [59] who pro­vid­ed; ”  . . . . an email from Hale solic­it­ing Lefkow’s home address, and a tape record­ing of a dis­cus­sion between the two about Lefkow’s mur­der. On the tape, Evola said, “We going to exter­mi­nate the rat?” Hale replied, “Well, what­ev­er you want to do basi­cal­ly.” Evola said, “The Jew rat.” Hale then said: “You know, my posi­tion has always been that I, you know, I’m going to fight with­in the law… but that infor­ma­tion has been pro­vid­ed. [by Cobb]… If you wish to do any­thing your­self, you can.” Evola replied, “Con­sid­er it done,” and Hale respond­ed, “Good.” . . . . 
  • Green­wald’s com­ments [24] on the case are very, very reveal­ing. “. . . . . Attor­ney Glenn Green­wald, rep­re­sent­ing Hale, says he believes the charge against Hale stems from what he calls a mis­in­ter­pre­ta­tion of Hale’s state­ment that “we are in a state of war with Judge Lefkow.” Green­wald says: “They are prob­a­bly try­ing to take things he said along the lines of polit­i­cal advo­ca­cy and turn it into a crime. The FBI may have inter­pret­ed this pro­tect­ed speech as a threat against a fed­er­al judge, but it’s prob­a­bly noth­ing more than some heat­ed rhetoric.” Dur­ing Hale’s incar­cer­a­tion, spe­cial admin­is­tra­tive mea­sures will be imposed to reduce his abil­i­ty to com­mu­ni­cate with his fol­low­ers. . . .”

Green­wald alleges that an attempt by Hale’s moth­er [24] to have Green­wald give a cod­ed mes­sage to one of Hale’s fol­low­ers was unsuc­cess­ful. Note that the U.S. Attor­ney in the case not­ed that free­dom of speech does not include solic­i­ta­tion of mur­der. Green­wald appears to have prob­lems with that inter­pre­ta­tion.

“New Neighbor’s Agen­da: White Pow­er Takeover” by John Eligon; The New York Times; 8/29/2013. [58]

The beard­ed man with thin­ning, gray-and-bleach-blond hair flap­ping down his neck first appeared in this tiny agri­cul­tur­al town last year, qui­et­ly and incon­spic­u­ous­ly roam­ing the crack­ly dirt roads.

Net­tie Ket­ter­ling thought noth­ing of it when he came into her bar to charge his cell­phone in an out­let beneath the mount­ed head of a mule deer. To Ken­neth Zim­mer­man, the man was just anoth­er cus­tomer, bring­ing his blue Dodge Duran­go in for repairs. Bob­by Harp­er did not blink when the man appeared in front of his house and asked him if he had any land to sell. And the may­or, Ryan Schock, was sim­ply extend­ing a civic cour­tesy when he swung by the man’s house to intro­duce him­self.

Their new neigh­bor, they thought, was just anoth­er per­son look­ing to get clos­er to the lucra­tive oil fields in west­ern North Dako­ta known as the Bakken.

But all that changed last week.

The South­ern Pover­ty Law Cen­ter and The Bis­mar­ck Tri­bune revealed that the man, Paul Craig Cobb, 61, has been buy­ing up prop­er­ty in this town of 24 peo­ple in an effort to trans­form it into a colony for white suprema­cists.

In the past two years, Mr. Cobb, a long­time pros­e­ly­tiz­er for white suprema­cy who is want­ed in Cana­da on charges of pro­mot­ing hatred, has bought a dozen plots of land in Lei­th (pro­nounced Leeth) and has sold or trans­ferred own­er­ship of some of them to a cou­ple of like-mind­ed white nation­al­ists. . . .

5b. Cobb was a fol­low­er of Matthew Hale, one of Green­wald’s Nazi clients (whom he rep­re­sent­ed pro-bono.) Cobb post­ed Judge Lefkow’s address, a map to her home and pho­tographs of her fam­i­ly on the inter­net. Sub­se­quent­ly, she returned from work to find her hus­band and her moth­er (who lived with her) mur­dered.

We are to believe that Green­wald is con­cerned with peo­ple’s inter­net pri­va­cy. That appar­ent­ly does NOT include Judge Lefkow.

“Craig Cobb”;  [23]Wikipedia [23]

. . . . Cobb is report­ed to have grown up in a wealthy fam­i­ly and attend­ed a pri­vate school in Boston, Mass­a­chu­setts where he grad­u­at­ed in 1968.[6] Cobb says he grew up a Chris­t­ian, but has since renounced Chris­tian­i­ty, say­ing “I don’t under­stand Chris­tians. They have a need to be moral­ly supe­ri­or than the next guy...They are very threat­ened by any­thing with racial cohe­sion.” [7] After serv­ing in the armed forces, he moved to Edmon­ton, Cana­da for five years then relo­cat­ed to Hawaii where he lived for anoth­er 25 years and earned a liv­ing as a taxi dri­ver. In 2003 he relo­cat­ed to Frost, West Vir­ginia where he opened a gro­cery store and sub­se­quent­ly reg­is­tered a busi­ness called “Gray’s Store, Aryan Auto­graphs and 14 Words, L.L.C.” Dur­ing this time he was involved in unso­licit­ed inter-state deliv­er­ies of a neo-Nazi news­pa­per pub­lished by Alex Linder,[8] dis­tri­b­u­tion of Project School­yard CDs to local children,[9] and attend­ed an invi­ta­tion-only lead­er­ship con­fer­ence of the Nation­al Alliance. . . .

. . . . Cobb uses the online pseu­do­nyms “No 1965 Chain Immi­grants” (on Storm­front) and “Chain” (on Pod­blanc), which ref­er­ences to the abo­li­tion of the Nation­al Ori­gins For­mu­la in the Immi­gra­tion and Nation­al­i­ty Act of 1965. While his inter­net activ­i­ties cen­ter upon “tire­less propaganda”[30] for Pod­blanc he is also active in far-right dis­cus­sion boards where, after the arrest of Matt Hale in 2003 for solic­it­ing the mur­der of U.S. Dis­trict Judge Joan Lefkow, Cobb post­ed the judge’s home address, fam­i­ly pho­tographs and a map to her house. Lefkow’s hus­band and moth­er were sub­se­quent­ly mur­dered. In reply to a reporter’s ques­tion “What were you feel­ing when the dou­ble mur­der hap­pened?” Cobb stat­ed “What was I feel­ing? Emo­tions are not yet ille­gal. I was just fine with it. I think it was well done.”[1]  [This is the very essence of the “Lead­er­less Resis­tance” strat­e­gy for which Green­wald ran legal interference–D.E.] . .

5c. Cobb dis­trib­utes Nation­al Alliance mate­r­i­al and was affil­i­at­ed with the group. Note that Green­wald’s client was solic­it­ing Judge Lefkow’s address and that Green­wald was approached by Hale’s moth­er with a cod­ed mes­sage to deliv­er to one of her son’s fol­low­ers. Green­wald claims that he did­n’t deliv­er the mes­sage. It should be not­ed that he has been caught lying in his teeth in the past.

“Pro­file: Matthew Hale”;  [24]His­to­ry Commons.org [24]

. . . . Avowed white suprema­cist Craig Cobb (see Octo­ber 31, 2005) moves to Esto­nia and founds Pod­blanc, an Inter­net-based videoshar­ing Web site. It is sim­i­lar to YouTube, but Cobb and his sup­port­ers refuse to use that facil­i­ty, call­ing it “Jew Tube” because its oper­a­tors cen­sor racist and anti-Semit­ic con­tent. Pod­blanc offers over 1,000 chan­nels of video con­tent, includ­ing com­bat hand­gun train­ing, bomb-mak­ing tuto­ri­als, a descrip­tion of secu­ri­ty mea­sures at three north­ern Cal­i­for­nia syn­a­gogues, and an audio record­ing of The Turn­er Diaries, the infa­mous race-war fan­ta­sy nov­el (see 1978). The most pop­u­lar video on the site shows Russ­ian neo-Nazis behead­ing and shoot­ing Asi­at­ic immi­grants; oth­er pop­u­lar videos show skin­heads attack­ing ran­dom Jew­ish and minor­i­ty vic­tims. Cobb was a mem­ber of the vio­lent World Church of the Cre­ator (WCOTC) until its col­lapse after its leader, Matthew Hale, was arrest­ed for solic­it­ing the mur­der of a judge (see Jan­u­ary 9, 2003 and 2004–2005). Cobb post­ed the name and home address of the judge on the inter­net, which may have led to the mur­der of her hus­band and moth­er (see Feb­ru­ary 28, 2005). Cobb has also attend­ed events spon­sored by the neo-Nazi Nation­al Alliance (see 1970–1974) . . . .

. . . . Matthew Hale, the leader of the World Church of the Cre­ator (WCOTC—see May 1996 and After), shows up for a con­tempt of court hear­ing in a Chica­go court­room based on his refusal to give up his group’s name after los­ing a trade­mark infringe­ment law­suit (see Novem­ber 2002). When Hale appears, he is arrest­ed for solic­it­ing the mur­der of the judge who presided over the law­suit, Fed­er­al Dis­trict Court Judge Joan Humphrey Lefkow. Hale recent­ly claimed Lefkow was prej­u­diced against him because she is mar­ried to a Jew and has chil­dren who are bira­cial. Law enforce­ment offi­cials with Chicago’s Joint Ter­ror­ism Task Force say Hale asked anoth­er per­son to “forcibly assault and mur­der” Lefkow. FBI spokesman Thomas Kneir says: “Cer­tain­ly free­dom of speech and free­dom of reli­gion are impor­tant in our soci­ety here in Amer­i­ca. But the threat of phys­i­cal vio­lence will not be tol­er­at­ed.” US Attor­ney Patrick Fitzger­ald adds, “Free­dom of speech does not include the free­dom to solic­it mur­der.” Hale is accom­pa­nied in the court­room by about a dozen fol­low­ers, many of whom raise their fists in what they call a Roman salute but that is more wide­ly known as a Nazi salute. . . . .

. . . . . Matthew Hale, the leader of the World Church of the Cre­ator (WCOTC—see May 1996 and After), is con­vict­ed of one count of solic­i­ta­tion of mur­der and three counts of obstruc­tion of jus­tice in regards to his attempt to solic­it the mur­der of a judge (see Jan­u­ary 9, 2003). Hale nev­er tes­ti­fied on his own behalf. Defense coun­sel Thomas Antho­ny Durkin called no wit­ness­es, say­ing the prosecution’s evi­dence was the weak­est he had seen in a major case, argu­ing that Hale was set up by an FBI infor­mant. Durkin says he will appeal, and will prove that pros­e­cu­tors have been “out to get Hale” because of his sus­pect­ed involve­ment in a shoot­ing spree by WCOTC mem­ber Ben­jamin Smith five years ago (see July 2–4, 1999; the jury heard audio­tapes of Hale laugh­ing about Smith’s mur­ders and mock­ing the vic­tims)[The civ­il suit against Hale by Smith’s vic­tims was the first case in which Green­wald rep­re­sent­ed Hale pro bono.–D.E.] US Attor­ney Patrick Fitzger­ald, the lead pros­e­cu­tor in the case, says the trial’s out­come proves “that we will not wait for the trig­ger to be pulled” before tak­ing action. . . .

. . . . The press will lat­er learn that Hale solicit­ed the mur­der from FBI infor­mant Antho­ny Evola, a Chica­go area piz­za deliv­ery man who was asked by Hale to dis­trib­ute racist and anti-Semit­ic pam­phlets to school­child­ren. Evola instead called the Chica­go Pub­lic Schools to warn them about the racist mate­r­i­al, and was lat­er asked to become an FBI infor­mant. In the months that fol­lowed, Evola became chief of Hale’s “White Beret” secu­ri­ty squad and fre­quent­ly trav­eled with Hale. Evola pro­vid­ed FBI offi­cials with an email from Hale solic­it­ing Lefkow’s home address, and a tape record­ing of a dis­cus­sion between the two about Lefkow’s mur­der. On the tape, Evola said, “We going to exter­mi­nate the rat?” Hale replied, “Well, what­ev­er you want to do basi­cal­ly.” Evola said, “The Jew rat.” Hale then said: “You know, my posi­tion has always been that I, you know, I’m going to fight with­in the law… but that infor­ma­tion has been pro­vid­ed.… If you wish to do any­thing your­self, you can.” Evola replied, “Con­sid­er it done,” and Hale respond­ed, “Good.” . . . .

. . . . . Attor­ney Glenn Green­wald, rep­re­sent­ing Hale, says he believes the charge against Hale stems from what he calls a mis­in­ter­pre­ta­tion of Hale’s state­ment that “we are in a state of war with Judge Lefkow.” Green­wald says: “They are prob­a­bly try­ing to take things he said along the lines of polit­i­cal advo­ca­cy and turn it into a crime. The FBI may have inter­pret­ed this pro­tect­ed speech as a threat against a fed­er­al judge, but it’s prob­a­bly noth­ing more than some heat­ed rhetoric.” Dur­ing Hale’s incar­cer­a­tion, spe­cial admin­is­tra­tive mea­sures will be imposed to reduce his abil­i­ty to com­mu­ni­cate with his fol­low­ers. . . .

. . . . . . Hale’s attor­ney Glenn Green­wald reveals that six to eight weeks before the mur­ders, Hale’s moth­er asked him to pass what was clear­ly a cod­ed mes­sage from Hale to a WCOTC fol­low­er. [Green­wald claims he did not for­ward the message–D.E.] . . . .

6. AndrewAuerenheimer [60]Even after his jour­nal­is­tic beat­i­fi­ca­tion by the drool­ing syco­phants of the so-called “pro­gres­sive” sec­tor, Green­wald con­tin­ues to rub elbows with Nazis, chum­ming around with Andrew Auern­heimer, a “white-hat” hack­er who is a Nazi, alleged­ly con­vert­ed fol­low­ing a prison term.

Note that–from his own rantings–his con­ver­sion to the Nazi world­view took place before his incar­cer­a­tion: ” . . . I’ve been a long-time crit­ic of Judaism, black cul­ture, immi­gra­tion to West­ern nations, and the media’s con­stant stream of anti-white pro­pa­ganda. . . .”

Note, also, his anti-immi­grant point of view–an ele­ment of com­mon­al­i­ty that runs through­out many of the points of analy­sis in this pro­gram.

“iPad Hack­er Released From Jail, Par­ties with Glenn Green­wald, Pub­lishes Neo-Nazi Screeds” by Bob Cesca; The Dai­ly Ban­ter; 10/09/2014.

 Way back in 2010, a so-called “white hat” hack­er named Andrew Auern­heimer, known online as “Weev,” exploit­ed a secu­rity loop­hole on Apple’s iPad and acquired the names of 114,000 AT&T cus­tomers who sub­scribed to the iPad 3G data ser­vice. Fol­low­ing an inves­ti­ga­tion, Weev, who had “stolen” (his words) the user data was pros­e­cuted and con­victed. To his cred­it, Weev informed AT&T of the secu­rity flaw and the com­pany quick­ly but­toned it up. But back in April of this year, Weev’s con­vic­tion was over­turned because he was evi­dently tried in the wrong state (New Jer­sey). He was sub­se­quently released from Pennsylvania’s Allen­wood Fed­eral Cor­rec­tional Com­plex on April 11, 2014. The indict­ment remains, but the con­vic­tion no longer stands.

Dur­ing his time in jail, Weev appar­ently became a neo-Nazi, com­plete with a tat­too not unlike Edward Norton’s tat­too in Amer­i­can His­tory X — a giant swasti­ka on his right pec­toral. After his release, he post­ed a series of racist and anti-Semit­ic remarks on a web­site called The Dai­ly Stormer [61], a white-suprema­cist site not to be con­fused with The Dai­ly CallerThe Dai­ly Beast or The Dai­ly Ban­terVia Gawk­er [62], here are some choice pas­sages:

I’ve been a long-time crit­ic of Judaism, black cul­ture, immi­gra­tion to West­ern nations, and the media’s con­stant stream of anti-white pro­pa­ganda. [Note this state­ment. It would seem to indi­cate that Auern­heimer’s con­ver­sion took place a long time before he went to prison. Note, also, the anti-immi­grant theme.] Judge Wigen­ton was as black as they come. The pros­e­cu­tor, Zach Intrater, was a Brook­lyn Jew from an old mon­ey New York fam­i­ly.[...]

The whole time a yarmulke-cov­ered audi­ence of Jew­ry stared at me from the pews of the court­room. My pros­e­cu­tor invit­ed his whole syn­a­gogue to spec­tate.[...]

They took con­trol of our sys­tems of finance and law. They hyper­in­flated our cur­rency. They cor­rupted our daugh­ters and demand­ed they sub­ject them­selves to sex work to feed their fam­i­lies. These are a peo­ple that have made them­selves a prob­lem in every nation they occu­py, includ­ing ours. What’s sad­dest is that we are the enablers of this prob­lem. The Jews abused our com­pas­sion to build an empire of wicked­ness the likes the world has nev­er seen.

No gray area there. Weev clear­ly hates Jews, African-Amer­i­cans and any­one he per­ceives as “anti-white.”

Oh, and in addi­tion to his con­ver­sion to the neo-Nazi cause as well as his seem­ingly pro­lific online hate speech, Weev attend­ed a par­ty [63] in New York soon after get­ting out of jail. The par­ty was held by none oth­er than Glenn Green­wald and Lau­ra Poitras to coin­cide with the cer­e­mony in which the duo received the Polk Award for their report­ing on Edward Snow­den and the Nation­al Secu­rity Agency.

Unless he crashed the par­ty, he was obvi­ously an invit­ed guest. But for a moment let’s assume Green­wald didn’t know Weev was invit­ed. Long before the par­ty, Green­wald had pre­vi­ously defend­ed Weev in The Guardian back in March, 2013, months before the author/reporter rose to inter­na­tional acclaim. Indeed, Green­wald named Weev as a “hack­tivist” who was being wrong­fully per­se­cuted by U.S. author­i­ties.

Just this week alone, a US fed­eral judge sen­tenced hac­tivist Andrew “Weev” Auern­heimer to 3 1/2 years in prison for exploit­ing a flaw in AT&T’s secu­rity sys­tem that allowed him entrance with­out any hack­ing, an act about which Slate’s Justin Peters wrote: “it’s not clear that Auern­heimer com­mit­ted any actu­al crime”, while Jeff Blag­don at the Verge added: “he cracked no codes, stole no pass­words, or in any way ‘broke into’ AT&T’s cus­tomer data­base – some­thing com­pany rep­re­sen­ta­tives con­firmed dur­ing tes­ti­mony.” But he had a long record of dis­rup­tive and some­times even quite ugly (though legal) online antag­o­nism, so he had to be severe­ly pun­ished with years in prison.

For a moment, let’s set aside the whole neo-Nazi thing. Let’s also not re-lit­i­gate the past in which Green­wald, dur­ing his law-prac­tice days, defend­ed [64] a com­pletely dif­fer­ent neo-Nazi. The fact that Green­wald con­tin­ues to blur the line between hack­ing and activism [65] is utter­ly baf­fling. The man­ner in which he ratio­nal­ized Weev’s actions is a gross illus­tra­tion of gra­tu­itous spin and dan­ger­ous over­sim­pli­fi­ca­tion.

7. Recent news has offered up a grim­ly instruc­tive jux­ta­po­si­tion. As Glenn Green­wald and his asso­ciates in the Snow­den “op” con­tin­ue to bask in the glow of pro­fes­sion­al awards grant­ed them, Dylann Roof has put into action the type of behav­ior advo­cat­ed by Green­wald’s legal clients.

A big sup­port­er of George W. Bush in the ear­ly part of the last decade, Green­wald became an attor­ney for, and a fel­low-trav­el­er of, some of the most mur­der­ous Nazis in the coun­try.)

Exem­pli­fy­ing Green­wald is his asso­ci­a­tion with Ron Paul (Snow­den’s Pres­i­den­tial can­di­date of choice) and neo-Con­fed­er­ate apol­o­gists.

“Bal­ti­more & The Walk­ing Dead” by Mark Ames; Pan­do Dai­ly; 5/1/2015. [25]

. . . . So when Rand Paul went on Lau­ra Ingraham’s radio pro­gram to blame Bal­ti­more on black cul­ture and val­ues and “lack of fathers,” [66] the lib­er­tar­ian whom Time [67] 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 [the riots in] 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” [68]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. . . .

. . . .“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.”A few months lat­er, in Octo­ber 1992 [69], 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.).

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 [27] with RON PAUL and GLENN GREENWALD. Horn­berger believes that 19th cen­tury ante­bel­lum slave-era Amer­ica was “the freest soci­ety in his­tory” [28]. . . 

8. The Pierre Omid­yar-fund­ed [70] “Inter­cept” fea­tures an arti­cle [71] by Nazi fel­low-trav­el­er Cit­i­zen Green­wald [9] in which he runs inter­fer­ence for Mus­lim Broth­er­hood oper­a­tives. The group includes CAIR co-founder Nihad Awad [72], who blamed the 1993 World Trade Cen­ter bomb­ing on the Mossad and Egypt­ian Intel­li­gence, as well as Faisal Gill, a pro­tege of Grover Norquist [73] and very much in the Al-Taqwa orbit.

Green­wald has also been a keynote speak­er for CAIR [74], which–far from being the civ­il rights orga­ni­za­tion it is sup­posed to be–is inex­tri­ca­bly linked with the Mus­lim Broth­er­hood.

Omid­yar has sup­port­ed [75] bru­tal micro-finance pro­grams in the Third World (act­ing in con­junc­tion with Phoenix Pro­gram vet­er­an Roy Proster­man), helped finance the fas­cist coup in Ukraine in 2014 [76] and assist­ed in the elec­tion of Hin­du nationalist/fascist Naren­dra Modi [77] in India. Next week, we will present a com­pendi­um on Omid­yar, Cit­i­zen Green­wald’s finan­cial angel.

“Meet the Mus­lim-Amer­i­can Lead­ers the FBI and NSA Have Been Spy­ing On” by Glenn Green­wald and Mur­taza Hus­sain; The Inter­cept; 7/9/2014. [31]

. . . .Accord­ing to doc­u­ments pro­vid­ed by NSA whistle­blow­er Edward Snow­den, the list of Amer­i­cans mon­i­tored by their own gov­ern­ment includes:

• Faisal Gill, a long­time Repub­li­can Par­ty oper­a­tive and one-time can­di­date for pub­lic office who held a top-secret secu­ri­ty clear­ance and served in the Depart­ment of Home­land Secu­ri­ty under Pres­i­dent George W. Bush;

• Asim Ghafoor, a promi­nent attor­ney who has rep­re­sent­ed clients in ter­ror­ism-relat­ed cas­es;

• Hooshang Ami­rah­ma­di, an Iran­ian-Amer­i­can pro­fes­sor of inter­na­tion­al rela­tions at Rut­gers Uni­ver­si­ty;

• Agha Saeed, a for­mer polit­i­cal sci­ence pro­fes­sor at Cal­i­for­nia State Uni­ver­si­ty who cham­pi­ons Mus­lim civ­il lib­er­ties and Pales­tin­ian rights;

• Nihad Awad, the exec­u­tive direc­tor of the Coun­cil on Amer­i­can-Islam­ic Rela­tions (CAIR), the largest Mus­lim civ­il rights orga­ni­za­tion in the coun­try. [CAIR is very close­ly linked to the Mus­lim Brotherhood–D.E.]. . . .