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

For The Record  

FTR #972 They Are All Bound on the Wheel: Reflections on Charlottesville

 

Dave Emory’s entire life­time of work is avail­able on a flash drive that can be obtained HERE. The new drive is a 32-gigabyte drive that is current as of the programs and articles posted by late summer of 2018. The new drive (available for a tax-deductible contribution of $65.00 or more.)

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

You can subscribe to e-mail alerts from Spitfirelist.com HERE.

You can subscribe to RSS feed from Spitfirelist.com HERE.

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

This broadcast was recorded in one, 60-minute segment.

Matthew Hale, one of the Nazi killers Greenwald represented pro bono.

Introduction: The title of the program comes from a Robinson Jeffers poem, reproduced at the beginning of this description. It sums up Mr. Emory’s feelings about Charlottesville and much of what has transpired since the ascension of the Trumpenkampfverbande.

With the mainstream media, the so-called “alternative media,” the so-called “progressive sector” and the GOP beating their breasts over Donald Trump’s predictably equivocal reaction to the violence in Charlottesville (Virginia), we highlight the profound complicity with all of these elements with the very white supremacist, Nazi and Neo-Confederate movements that are at the foundation of the events in question.

For the last several years, the mainstream media, the so-called “alternative media,” and the so-called “progressive sector” have manifested an almost erotic obsession with the overlapping activities of Eddie the Friendly Spook (Snowden), Julian Assange and WikiLeaks, Glenn Greenwald and Greenwald’s media financial angel Pierre Omidyar.

All of the focal points of their collective adulation are at one with the very white supremacist, Nazi and Neo-Confederate forces that coalesced on behalf of the preservation of the Confederate memorials in Charlottesville. Key points of discussion and analysis include:

  1. Eddie Snowden’s strong links to the Ron Paul political milieu. Snowden gave money to Paul’s campaign, whose super-PAC was capitalized largely by Peter Thiel, a key Trump supporter.
  2. The fact that Ron Paul has been networking with David Duke for decades. (Duke was prominent at Charlottesville.)
  3. The fact that Snowden’s first attorney (and the attorney for the Snowden family) was Bruce Fein, the chief legal counsel for Ron Paul’s 2012 Presidential campaign.
  4. Fein also networked with the German-based Schiller Institute, run by the fascist organization of Lyndon LaRouche.
  5. Ron Paul is very close to the Neo-Confederate movement and the heavily-overlapped Ludwig von Mises Institute.
  6. Ron Paul aide Walter Block, another of Paul’s supporters and a resident scholar at the Ludwig von Mises Institute is not only supportive of the neo-Confederate movement but advanced a theory of “voluntary slavery.” Voluntary slavery could be viewed as the ultimate collateralized debt obligation!
  7. Julian Assange is also a big Ron and Rand Paul fan. Furthermore, Assange and his fascist aide, doctrinaire Holocaust-denier Joran Jermas (aka “Israel Shamir”) are inextricably linked with a Swedish, Russian and Ukrainian fascist milieu that enfolds Carl Lundstrom, Daniel Friberg and David Duke.
  8. Glenn Greenwald spent years running legal interference for Nazi murderers and the “leaderless resistance” strategy Mr. Fields used to fatally-injure one of the demonstrators in Charlottesville. Greenwald worked pro-bono.
  9.  In addition to lionizing Snowden, Assange and Greenwald–all of whom are, basically, “Alt-Right,” the mainstream media, the so-called “alternative media” and the so-called “progressive” sector have oozed all over Pierre Omidyar and his media undertakings, which have been the foundation for Snowden, Greenwald and Assange’s media presentations.
  10. Omidyar helped finance the coup in Ukraine, which brought OUN/B successor organizations to power and also aided in the rise of Narendra Modi in India. Modi’s BJP Party is a cat’s paw for the Hindu nationalist/fascist RSS, the organization that murdered Gandhi. Roy Prosterman, Omidyar’s primary administrator of his philanthropic undertakings, was a veteran of the Phoenix assassination program in Vietnam.

OUN/B World War II Ukrainian prime minister Jaroslav Stetsko and then Vice-President George H.W. Bush

David Duke

Particularly grotesque is the righteous posturing of the GOP, whose members have scrambled to go “on record” decrying racism and Nazism, intoning that such things are “un-American,” or words to that effect. In fact, the GOP is joined at the hip with the Anti-Bolshevik Bloc of Nations, formed in 1943 by Adolf Hitler as the Committee of Subjugated Nations. A consortium of Eastern and Central European fascist groups, the ABN became a major player in the GOP’s ethnic outreach organization.

The marriage of the GOP and the ABN was effected under the auspices of the Crusade for Freedom, a dual-sided covert operation with the GOP/ABN nexus at the root of a domestic political operation and the combat support afforded guerrillas from the OUN/B and other Eastern European fascist fighting by the Office of Policy Coordination (which morphed into the CIA’s Directorate of plans): . . . . Frustration over Truman’s 1948 election victory over Dewey (which they blamed on the “Jewish vote”) impelled Dulles and his protégé Richard Nixon to work toward the realization of the fascist freedom fighter presence in the Republican Party’s ethnic outreach organization. As a young congressman, Nixon had been Allen Dulles’s confidant. . . .

. . . . Vice President Nixon’s secret political war of Nazis against Jews in American politics was never investigated at the time. The foreign language-speaking Croatians and other Fascist émigré groups had a ready-made network for contacting and mobilizing the Eastern European ethnic bloc. There is a very high correlation between CIA domestic subsidies to Fascist ‘freedom fighters’ during the 1950’s and the leadership of the Republican Party’s ethnic campaign groups. The motive for the under-the-table financing was clear: Nixon used Nazis to offset the Jewish vote for the Democrats. . . .

. . . . In 1952, Nixon had formed an Ethnic Division within the Republican National Committee. Displaced fascists, hoping to be returned to power by an Eisenhower-Nixon ‘liberation’ policy signed on with the committee. In 1953, when Republicans were in office, the immigration laws were changed to admit Nazis, even members of the SS. They flooded into the country. Nixon himself oversaw the new immigration program. [This is a Republican pro-immigration program–D.E.] . . .”

The key figures in the CFF became the cream of the Reagan administration. ” . . . . As a young movie actor in the early 1950s, Reagan was employed as the public spokesperson for an OPC front named the ‘Crusade for Freedom.’ Reagan may not have known it, but 99 percent for the Crusade’s funds came from clandestine accounts, which were then laundered through the Crusade to various organizations such as Radio Liberty, which employed Dulles’s Fascists. Bill Casey, who later became CIA director under Ronald Reagan, also worked in Germany after World War II on Dulles’ Nazi ‘freedom fighters’ program. When he returned to New York, Casey headed up another OPC front, the International Rescue Committee, which sponsored the immigration of these Fascists to the United States. Casey’s committee replaced the International Red Cross as the sponsor for Dulles’s recruits. . . . 

. . . . It was [George H.W.] Bush who fulfilled Nixon’s promise to make the ‘ethnic emigres’ a permanent part of Republican politics. In 1972, Nixon’s State Department spokesman confirmed to his Australian counterpart that the ethnic groups were very useful to get out the vote in several key states. Bush’s tenure as head of the Republican National Committee exactly coincided with Laszlo Pasztor’s 1972 drive to transform the Heritage Groups Council into the party’s official ethnic arm. The groups Pasztor chose as Bush’s campaign allies were the émigré Fascists whom Dulles had brought to the United States. . . . “

1. The program begins with the reading of a poem by Robinson Jeffers, that sums up Mr. Emory’s feelings on the events pursuant to Trump’s election, Charlottesville in particular.

“Be Angry at the Sun” by Robinson Jeffers

That public men publish falsehoods
Is nothing new. That America must accept
Like the historical republics corruption and empire
Has been known for years.

Be angry at the sun for setting
If these things anger you. Watch the wheel slope and turn,
They are all bound on the wheel, these people, those warriors.
This republic, Europe, Asia.

Observe them gesticulating,
Observe them going down. The gang serves lies, the passionate
Man plays his part; the cold passion for truth
Hunts in no pack.

You are not Catullus, you know,
To lampoon these crude sketches of Caesar. You are far
From Dante’s feet, but even farther from his dirty
Political hatreds.

Let boys want pleasure, and men
Struggle for power, and women perhaps for fame,
And the servile to serve a Leader and the dupes to be duped.
Yours is not theirs.

2. Reviewing discussion that has dominated much of the analysis presented in For The Record during the last several years, the program reviews the profound connections between Eddie The Friendly Spook (Snowden), his profound connections to Ron Paul and the latter’s decades-long interface with David Duke (prominent in Charlottesville) and the Neo-Confederate movement. Key elements of discussion are highlighted in FTR #756:

  • Ron Paul’s son Rand Paul is leading the political charge over the Snowden “disclosures” (note the quotes.) Rand Paul is lining up as a GOP Presidential hopeful for 2016, looking to capitalize on libertarian populism as a vehicle for achieving victory. Again, expect to see L’Affaire Snowden play into the Republican theme of Obama/Democrats as sponsors of “big government” etc., etc. (Both the above-mentioned Peter Thiel and Glenn Greenwald–Snowden’s leaking journalist of choice–network with the Koch brothers funded Cato Institute, an epicenter of libertarian ideology.) (See text excerpts below.) Thiel is a major backer of Donald Trump and provided most of the financing for Ron Paul’s super PAC in 2012.
  • We have noted in past discussion that one of the goals of this “op” is to alienate younger, more idealistic voters from the Democratic party. That appears to be one of Rand Paul’s stratagems in his campaign bid.
  • Rand Paul’s key staffer Jack Hunter is a former chairman of The League of the South, a racist neo-Confederate organization that advocates the secession of the South and has links to the milieu behind the assassination of Martin Luther King. Sarah Palin’s political milieu also has links to the League of the South.
  • Jack Hunter is the former blogger for–Ron Paul, Snowden’s Nazi Presidential candidate of choice.
  • Snowden’s father Lon Snowden has formed a political organization with Bruce Fein, a Ron Paul backer in 2008. (See text excerpts below.)
  • Bruce Fein is also, apparently, the lawyer for Edward Snowden as well, handling legal maneuvering for Eddie the Friendly Spook while he is in Russia. (See text excerpts below.)
  • Fein was a counsel for Ron Paul’s Presidential campaign in 2012.
  • Fein’s association with Lon Snowden appears to have derived from the elder Snowden’s networking with Rand Paul’s organization.
  • Fein also networked with the German-based Schiller Institute, run by the fascist organization of Lyndon LaRouche.
  • Fein also works on behalf of Turkish interests, acting in conjunction with forces alleged by Sibel Edmonds to be involved with money laundering on behalf of interests that include Al-Qaeda. The probability is strong that Fein operates in conjunction with the Erdogan government and–possibly–Fetullah Gulen.
  • WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange–joined at the hip with Eddie the Friendly Spook–has endorsed both Ron and Rand Paul.
  • In a post, we note that Ron Paul will be attending a fund-raiser for a fascist splinter sect of Catholicism that endorses Holocaust denial, claims the Jews are trying to exterminate Gentiles and denies that the earth revolves around the sun. Paul’s association with this group goes back to 1998.
  • Another post fleshes out Ron Paul’s racist associates and views.
  • Yet another entry details some of the anti-democratic views of the Ludwig von Mises Institute, as well as its profound links to the neo-Confederate movement. Eddie Snowden’s economic views derive from the Ludwig von Mises Institute.
  • We note that Walter Block, another of Paul’s supporters and a resident scholar at the Ludwig von Mises Institute is not only supportive of the neo-Confederate movement but advanced a theory of “voluntary slavery.” Voluntary slavery could be viewed as the ultimate collateralized debt obligation!
  • The Von Mises Institute honored Otto von Habsburg, heir to the Autro-Hungarian Empire. His son Karl heads the UNPO, which (like the League of the South) seeks the fragmentation of the United States.
  • Otto von Habsburg was a fascist, part of the Freedom for Rudolf Hess Society (Hess was one of Hitler’s top aides.)

 3a. Inextricably linked with “Team Snowden,” Julian Assange is also a big Ron (and Rand) Paul fan. Assange and company are also profoundly linked to the international milieu of which David Duke is a part. We have covered Assange’s fascist and right-wing underpinnings in numerous programs. Some of the basic points of analysis are presented in the “Introduction” FTR #732:

“. . . . In addition to the fact that WikiLeaks’ servers were provided by the Swedish Nazi financier Carl Lundstrom, Pirate Bay is actually incorporated as an offshore front company in the Seychelles Islands. (Pirate Bay was sold to a Swedish gaming company, but the firm went bankrupt. The sale was supposed to be financed by the sale of GGF’s stock–which rose 170% the day before the deal was announced, raising charges of insider trading.)

According to Silicon Valley sources, the Pirate Bay/WikiLeaks relationship would permit the Underground Reich to access everything being sent to WikiLeaks!

In the wake of charges being filed against Assange in Sweden, it developed that WikiLeaks in fact employed individuals connected to the Swedish Nazi/antisemitic milieu! Handling much of their business with Sweden and Russia are Joran Jermas and his son (Johannes Wahlstrom), both anti-Semitic and part and parcel to the same Nazi and fascist milieu to which Carl Lundstrom belongs. . . . ”

3b. Further solidifying the links between WikiLeaks, the Swedish fascist milieu of Carl Lundstrom and the international network of which David Duke is a part, FTR #745 highlights the role of Jermas/Shamir in effecting the links between Assange and Pirate Bay. Note again, Duke’s links to this concatenation. Assange’s eugenicist views are detailed in this program as well.

From the program’s introduction: “Featuring critical information coming to us from the Swedish magazine Expo, founded by the late Stieg Larsson, the broadcast highlights the pivotal nature of the relationship between WikiLeaks, founder Julian Assange and a Nazi/fascist/anti-Semitic network operating out of Sweden.

Far from being “just another journalist” who began moving in the WikiLeaks orbit, Joran Jermas aka “Israel Shamir” appears to have had much to do with establishing WikiLeaks in Sweden. A celebratory Holocaust denier who has stated that it is the duty of all “good Christians and Muslims to deny the Holocaust,” Jermas and his son Johannes Wahlstrom (of similar political orientation) are part and parcel to the same Nazi/fascist milieu as Carl Lundstrom, whose money is the primary financial element in Pirate Bay.

Nor is Jermas/Shamir’s relationship to Assange a casual one. On the contrary, that association stretches back for years, with Assange viewing Jermas/Shamir as “clever” and seeking to employ him under a pseudonym, indicating that Assange knew exactly what sort of creature he was dealing with and how he would be perceived.

Indications are that an individual like Jermas/Shamir would not in any way be anathema to Assange. He has, himself, given indications of a similar mentality, recently engaging in obsessive Jew-baiting of perceived critics (including in-laws of editorial personnel of the BBC and The Guardian.) . . . .”

3c. When, during the 2016 campaign, WikiLeaks emerged as the full-blown, unofficial “cyber-dirty-tricks” element of the Trump campaign, (networking with long-time GOP dirty tricks specialist Roger Stone), Assange, once again, attacked his critics as “Jews.” We discussed this in FTR #917.

From that program’s introduction: “In FTR #’s 724, 725, 732, 745 and 755, we have detailed the fascist and far right-wing ideology, associations and politics of Julian Assange and WikiLeaks.

Lionized by the so-called progressive sector, as well as mainstream media sources like The New York Times and Der Spiegel, Assange’s true colors and fascist politics and associations have emerged on a larger stage.

As the Trump campaign evolves, a major alliance between “The Donald’s” Trumpenkampfverbande and the Assange organization has developed. Obviously serving as a dirty-tricks cadre for the GOP, Assange is working hard to destroy Hillary Clinton with leaked documents intended to torpedo her campaign.

Is this Julian Assange?

Is this Julian Assange?

Assange–not even an American citizen–is manifesting what we termed “technocratic fascism,” arrogating to himself the right to determine the results of the American Presidential election. Quoting from a seminal article by David Golumbia: ” . . . Hack­ers (“civic,” “eth­i­cal,” “white” and “black” hat alike), hack­tivists, Wik­iLeaks fans [and Julian Assange et al–D. E.], Anony­mous “mem­bers,” even Edward Snow­den him­self walk hand-in-hand with Face­book and Google in telling us that coders don’t just have good things to con­tribute to the polit­i­cal world, but that the polit­i­cal world is theirs to do with what they want, and the rest of us should stay out of it: the polit­i­cal world is bro­ken, they appear to think (rightly, at least in part), and the solu­tion to that, they think (wrongly, at least for the most part), is for pro­gram­mers to take polit­i­cal mat­ters into their own hands. . . .”

Beginning with analysis of the alleged Russian authorship of the hack of the Democratic National Committee on the eve of the Democratic Convention in July, we highlight disturbing indications that the hack is actually a false flag operation, setting the stage for some very dangerous developments.

In that context, we recall that one of the terms we have applied to Edward Snowden is “The Obverse Oswald.”  We strongly suspect that Snowden, in Russia and working for a computer firm, may have had something to do with this.

The (frankly lame) framing of Russia for the DNC hack reminds us of the process of “painting Oswald Red.” We have covered this in numerous broadcasts, including The Guns of November, Part 1AFA #15 and FTR #’s 777 and 876. (An excellent book on the JFK assassination that presents an excellent breakdown of “the painting of Oswald Red” is JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters.)

Much of the broadcast highlights WikiLeaks’ efforts on behalf of the Trump campaign, detailing aspects of Assange’s presentation of Hillary Clinton’s e-mails.

We note the powerful resonance between Assange’s presentations and elements of major right-wing attacks on Clinton.

Assange/WikiLeaks’ points of attack on Hillary Clinton:

  • Focus on the Clinton Foundation, synchronizing with Koch brothers’ protege Peter Schweizer’s book Clinton Cash.
  • Imply that Clinton murdered a DNC volunteer named Seth Rich. Trump dirty tricks specialist Roger Stone is writing a book blaming the Clintons for murdering JFK, Jr.–Hillary the murderer!
  • Obliquely endorse Donald Trump.
  • Disclose the Social Security and credit card numbers of Democratic Party contributors, opening them up to retribution. Stone threatened to disclose the hotel room numbers of anti-Trump GOP delegates, implying that they could be subject to violence. The WikiLeaks Clinton e-mail dump: ” . . . .  The emails include unencrypted, plain-text listings of donor emails addresses, home addresses, phone numbers, social security numbers, passport numbers, and credit card information. WikiLeaks proudly announced the data dump in a single tweet. . . .” Might this have had something to do with the murder of Seth Rich?
  • Are apparently being conducted in concert with Roger Stone, with whom Assange is apparently in contact!

Further developing the right-wing, fascist and anti-Semitic aspects of Assange/WikiLeaks, we note that Assange responded to critics of his efforts against Clinton and on behalf of Trump/Stone with an anti-Semitic tweet.

Among Assange’s champions are the fascist National front in France and the U.K. Independence Party, which may well have set the stage for the fragmentation of Great Britain with the Brexit campaign.

It would come as a distasteful surprise to the Bernie Sanders crowd, to whom Assange has catered, to learn that Assange is a champion of free-market economics, synthesizing the Chicago and Austrian schools of economics.

Much of the latter part of the broadcast reviews information about Assange, Snowden and Citizen Greenwald’s right-wing and fascist manifestations.

Program Highlights Include:

  • Comparison of the racist rhetoric of Snowden and Assange Presidential candidate of choice Ron Paul with that of Donald Trump.
  • Citizen Greenwald’s anti-immigrant rhetoric.
  • Review of the back-cover promotion of Serpent’s Walk in the context of the Trump campaign.
  • A bullet-point analysis that connects many of the dots in this concatenation.

4. Like Snowden, Assange and WikiLeaks, Glenn Greenwald would be cast as “Alt-Right” if his true actions and inclinations were honestly evaluated and presented. Before turning to journalism, Greenwald was a lawyer who ran pro-bono legal interference for Nazi murderers.

5a. In addition to lionizing Snowden, Assange and Greenwald–all of whom are, basically, “Alt-Right,” the mainstream media, the so-called “alternative media” and the so-called “progressive” sector have oozed all over Pierre Omidyar and his media undertakings, which have been the foundation for Snowden, Greenwald and Assange’s media presentations.

Omidyar helped finance the coup in Ukraine, which brought OUN/B successor organizations to power and also aided in the rise of Narendra Modi in India. Modi’s BJP Party is a cat’s paw for the Hindu nationalist/fascist RSS, the organization that murdered Gandhi.

5b. 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.

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

6a.We review analysis of the Crusade For Freedom–the covert operation that brought Third Reich alumni into the country and also supported their guerilla warfare in Eastern Europe, conducted up until the early 1950’s. Conceived by Allen Dulles, overseen by Richard Nixon, publicly represented by Ronald Reagan and realized in considerable measure by William Casey, the CFF ultimately evolved into a Nazi wing of the GOP.

The Secret War Against the Jews; by John Loftus and Mark Aarons; Copyright 1994 by Mark Aarons; St. Martin’s Press; [HC] ISBN 0-312-11057-X; pp. 122-123.

. . . . Frustration over Truman’s 1948 election victory over Dewey (which they blamed on the “Jewish vote”) impelled Dulles and his protégé Richard Nixon to work toward the realization of the fascist freedom fighter presence in the Republican Party’s ethnic outreach organization. As a young congressman, Nixon had been Allen Dulles’s confidant. They both blamed Governor Dewey’s razor-thin loss to Truman in the 1948 presidential election on the Jewish vote. When he became Eisenhower’s vice president in 1952, Nixon was determined to build his own ethnic base. . . .

. . . . Vice President Nixon’s secret political war of Nazis against Jews in American politics was never investigated at the time. The foreign language-speaking Croatians and other Fascist émigré groups had a ready-made network for contacting and mobilizing the Eastern European ethnic bloc. There is a very high correlation between CIA domestic subsidies to Fascist ‘freedom fighters’ during the 1950’s and the leadership of the Republican Party’s ethnic campaign groups. The motive for the under-the-table financing was clear: Nixon used Nazis to offset the Jewish vote for the Democrats. . . .

. . . . In 1952, Nixon had formed an Ethnic Division within the Republican National Committee. Displaced fascists, hoping to be returned to power by an Eisenhower-Nixon ‘liberation’ policy signed on with the committee. In 1953, when Republicans were in office, the immigration laws were changed to admit Nazis, even members of the SS. They flooded into the country. Nixon himself oversaw the new immigration program. As Vice President, he even received Eastern European Fascists in the White House. . .

6b. More about the composition of the cast of the CFF: Note that the ascension of the Reagan administration was essentially the ascension of the Nazified GOP, embodied in the CFF milieu. Reagan (spokesman for CFF) was President; George H.W. Bush (for whom CIA headquarters is named) was the Vice President; William Casey (who handled the State Department machinations to bring these people into the United States) was Reagan’s campaign manager and later his CIA director.

The Secret War Against the Jews; by John Loftus and Mark Aarons; Copyright 1994 by Mark Aarons; St. Martin’s Press; [HC] ISBN 0-312-11057-X; p. 605.

. . . . As a young movie actor in the early 1950s, Reagan was employed as the public spokesperson for an OPC front named the ‘Crusade for Freedom.’ Reagan may not have known it, but 99 percent for the Crusade’s funds came from clandestine accounts, which were then laundered through the Crusade to various organizations such as Radio Liberty, which employed Dulles’s Fascists. Bill Casey, who later became CIA director under Ronald Reagan, also worked in Germany after World War II on Dulles’ Nazi ‘freedom fighters’ program. When he returned to New York, Casey headed up another OPC front, the International Rescue Committee, which sponsored the immigration of these Fascists to the United States. Casey’s committee replaced the International Red Cross as the sponsor for Dulles’s recruits. Confidential interviews, former members, OPC; former members, British foreign and Commonwealth Office. . . .

6c. While serving as chairman of the Republican National Committee, the elder George Bush shepherded the Nazi émigré community into position as a permanent branch of the Republican Party.
. . . . . It was Bush who fulfilled Nixon’s promise to make the ‘ethnic emigres’ a permanent part of Republican politics. In 1972, Nixon’s State Department spokesman confirmed to his Australian counterpart that the ethnic groups were very useful to get out the vote in several key states. Bush’s tenure as head of the Republican National Committee exactly coincided with Laszlo Pasztor’s 1972 drive to transform the Heritage Groups Council into the party’s official ethnic arm. The groups Pasztor chose as Bush’s campaign allies were the émigré Fascists whom Dulles had brought to the United States. . . . 

 

Discussion

10 comments for “FTR #972 They Are All Bound on the Wheel: Reflections on Charlottesville”

  1. Oh look at that: It turns out Christopher Cantwell, one of the more prominent and outspoken Nazis at the Charlottesville “Unite the Right” march, who sells t-shirts on his website with the words “Radical Agenda” on the front and a picture of someone being thrown out of a helicopter on the back (presumably a reference the Pinochet government’s murder of leftists), has had articled published by the far-right Libertarian Instituto Mises Brasil think tank funded by Koch Brothers:

    Brasil Wire

    Brasil’s US-Funded “Libertarians” & the Far-Right

    Brasil Wire , August 19, 2017

    On August 18, Vice Brasil journalist and occasional Brasil Wire contributor Marie Declerq, broke the news that the Instituto Mises Brasil think tank, which receives funding from US libertarians, has published articles by Christopher Cantwell, the American Nazi who helped organize the Charlottesville Virginia protests. Cantwell made the news recently when he was filmed in a Vice documentary threatening to kill Jews and blacks, and later appeared in a <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CD4reaHE83Q”>YouTube video sobbing in fear of being arrested.

    News that Mises Institute, founded in 2007 and part of the Libertarian Atlas Network, has published material by Augusto Pinochet fanboy Cantwell shouldn’t actually be that surprising. In 1927, Mises himself argued that Fascism had saved European Civilisation, and “The merit that Fascism has thereby won for itself will live on eternally in history”. Meanwhile, Atlas, which has been built over decades to distort Latin American politics, is funded by the Koch Brothers (a family with their own distinguished Nazi history).

    Following Charlottesville, Cantwell sparked outrage among South Americans by appearing in his own T-Shirt design depicting the murder of leftists in helicopter “death flights” – a common practice in Chile, Argentina and elsewhere during Operation Condor in the 1970s – a US supported cross-border campaign which assassinated thousands of labor union members, opposition activists and intellectuals.

    Although this is a macabre extreme, the interchange of ideas and individuals on the conservative spectrum, between self-defined libertarian groups and the overt Far-Right, is relatively common. Politically, it follows that Libertarians idolise Augusto Pinochet. After the 1973 US- sponsored economic sabotage and coup in Chile put neofascist dictator Pinochet in power, he was visited by libertarian heroes Milton Friedman and Fredrich Hayek. In a Chilean newspaper interview at the time, Hayek expressed an opinion which still seems to be held by many neoliberals and libertarians to this day – that freedom for corporations in developing nations is more important than freedom for individuals – when he said, “Personally I prefer a liberal dictator to democratic government lacking liberalism”.

    US Neo-Nazi obsession with confederate statues finds its parallel in Brazil with Pro-Gun Ownership, Anti-Womens, Racial & Worker’s Rights campaign group Movimento Brasil Livre, which is associated with Mises Institute and Koch’s Students for Liberty. Citing Margaret Thatcher as inspiration, MBL have also openly declared their reverence for the the Bandeirantes – the colonial militia who went out to secure the vast interior of the country, committing genocide against indigenous populations, and are celebrated with an enormous monument in São Paulo’s Ibirapuera.

    MBL is notable that it is fronted not by its original founders, but by ethnically mixed, telegenic young men, some of whom were reportedly media/leadership-trained in the United States. It is accused of doing this to avoid the perception of being a white elite organisation in a country with majority black population. Their opposition to racial quotas and black consciousness day are usually voiced by these frontmen, and their rhetoric has even included a bizarre comparison between Hitler and the historic leader of Afro-Brazilian Quilombos, Zumbi dos Palmares. Some its members also mimic an Anti-Refugee/Muslim xenophobia, which is imported wholesale, without context, from the Far-Right in Europe and the US.

    One of the groups most visible leaders, Arthur Moledo do Vai, known for his video blogs in which he visits left wing protests and lectures people about free market economic dogma, was recently photographed by Antifa trying to disrupt a labor union protest with two neo-nazi skinhead bodyguards.

    MBL, which was/is also funded by Atlas Network, plus the main parties which make up Temer’s Post-Coup Government, operates as an infantile sub-Breitbart fake news site, with a loyal audience who act as an online and offline far-right hate-mob. These predominantly white young men, radicalised by sites such as MBL and similar, gained notoriety by harassing left-wing politicians at their homes, before going on to physically threaten recent high-school occupations for better quality public education – with some supporters even promoting the rape of female protesters on social media. Meanwhile MBL was promoting a McCarthyite campaign against “Communist Indoctrination” by teachers. Elsewhere they talked chillingly of a Ukrainian scenario awaiting Brasil should Dilma Rousseff not fall peacefully.

    Another campaign spread the outright lie that Hitler was a leftist, and Brasil is still gripped by an idiotic debate over this fallacy – not helped by a recent BBC Brasil article which concluded that the Nazis were neither right nor left, because they were “totalitarian”.

    It was a curious feature of the period leading up to Dilma Rousseff’s impeachment that MBL received more coverage abroad during its campaign than any Brazilian political party or social movement. It was given free-reign in advertorials published by a range of magazines and newspapers such as the the Economist, Time and the Guardian, in which they declared that Brazil needed to “get over” the 64-85 Neofascist Dictatorship. One of the group’s front men is now a city councillor in São Paulo for the ‘Democratas’ party (Formerly Liberal Front), which is the principal descendent of ARENA – the Dictatorship-era’s Government.

    Far-Right elements at São Paulo’s Anti-Dilma protests of 2015 & 2016, organised in part by these “grassroots” free-market organisations, were distinct and visible, with their flags and banners, calling for Military Intervention, adorning a fleet of 20 sound trucks alongside those of MBL and parallel corporate-funded Pro-Impeachment group VemPraRua.

    For the most part, the demonstrations evident proto-fascist tendencies – which went against the narrative of a youthful, grassroots organisation demanding economic liberalism and an end to corruption – were overlooked. Media at that time also failed the basic test of scrutinising the money behind MBL’s campaign, with the Guardian allowing them to state unopposed that they were funded by the sales of “t-shirts and stickers” despite the money trail to Pro-Impeachment groups from US Libertarian Think-Tanks being already well documented in 2015.

    As the connections between the US “Alt-right”, corporate-funded think tanks and fascism in Brasil become clearer, the anglo media & business groups who blindly supported its rise will have some important questions to answer.

    ———-

    “Brasil’s US-Funded “Libertarians” & the Far-Right by Brasil Wire”; Brasil Wire; 08/19/2017

    “News that Mises Institute, founded in 2007 and part of the Libertarian Atlas Network, has published material by Augusto Pinochet fanboy Cantwell shouldn’t actually be that surprising. In 1927, Mises himself argued that Fascism had saved European Civilisation, and “The merit that Fascism has thereby won for itself will live on eternally in history”. Meanwhile, Atlas, which has been built over decades to distort Latin American politics, is funded by the Koch Brothers (a family with their own distinguished Nazi history).

    Yep, the Koch network has been quietly financing and promoting fascism and Libertarian in Brazil for years. And it’s not just through the Instituto Mises Brasil think tank. The proto-fascist Movimento Brasil Livre is also part of the network, along with Students for Liberty:


    US Neo-Nazi obsession with confederate statues finds its parallel in Brazil with Pro-Gun Ownership, Anti-Womens, Racial & Worker’s Rights campaign group Movimento Brasil Livre, which is associated with Mises Institute and Koch’s Students for Liberty. Citing Margaret Thatcher as inspiration, MBL have also openly declared their reverence for the the Bandeirantes – the colonial militia who went out to secure the vast interior of the country, committing genocide against indigenous populations, and are celebrated with an enormous monument in São Paulo’s Ibirapuera.

    Students for It’s also worthing recall that Edward Snowden spoke at a Students for Liberty conference in 2015.

    And in case in wasn’t obvious that these “pro-Freedom” groups are only interesting in freedom for fascists and oligarchs, note the talk of a “Ukrainian scenario” in Brazil if Dilma Rousseff didn’t leave office:


    Following Charlottesville, Cantwell sparked outrage among South Americans by appearing in his own T-Shirt design depicting the murder of leftists in helicopter “death flights” – a common practice in Chile, Argentina and elsewhere during Operation Condor in the 1970s – a US supported cross-border campaign which assassinated thousands of labor union members, opposition activists and intellectuals.

    Although this is a macabre extreme, the interchange of ideas and individuals on the conservative spectrum, between self-defined libertarian groups and the overt Far-Right, is relatively common. Politically, it follows that Libertarians idolise Augusto Pinochet. After the 1973 US- sponsored economic sabotage and coup in Chile put neofascist dictator Pinochet in power, he was visited by libertarian heroes Milton Friedman and Fredrich Hayek. In a Chilean newspaper interview at the time, Hayek expressed an opinion which still seems to be held by many neoliberals and libertarians to this day – that freedom for corporations in developing nations is more important than freedom for individuals – when he said, “Personally I prefer a liberal dictator to democratic government lacking liberalism”.

    One of the groups most visible leaders, Arthur Moledo do Vai, known for his video blogs in which he visits left wing protests and lectures people about free market economic dogma, was recently photographed by Antifa trying to disrupt a labor union protest with two neo-nazi skinhead bodyguards.

    MBL, which was/is also funded by Atlas Network, plus the main parties which make up Temer’s Post-Coup Government, operates as an infantile sub-Breitbart fake news site, with a loyal audience who act as an online and offline far-right hate-mob. These predominantly white young men, radicalised by sites such as MBL and similar, gained notoriety by harassing left-wing politicians at their homes, before going on to physically threaten recent high-school occupations for better quality public education – with some supporters even promoting the rape of female protesters on social media. Meanwhile MBL was promoting a McCarthyite campaign against “Communist Indoctrination” by teachers. Elsewhere they talked chillingly of a Ukrainian scenario awaiting Brasil should Dilma Rousseff not fall peacefully.

    And, of course, during the drive to push Rousseff out of office it was MBL that was getting more media attention in the international press than almost anyone else:


    It was a curious feature of the period leading up to Dilma Rousseff’s impeachment that MBL received more coverage abroad during its campaign than any Brazilian political party or social movement. It was given free-reign in advertorials published by a range of magazines and newspapers such as the the Economist, Time and the Guardian, in which they declared that Brazil needed to “get over” the 64-85 Neofascist Dictatorship. One of the group’s front men is now a city councillor in São Paulo for the ‘Democratas’ party (Formerly Liberal Front), which is the principal descendent of ARENA – the Dictatorship-era’s Government.

    So will Cantwell get to write moor columns for Koch network now that he’s facing prison time? We’ll see, but if not, there’s still plenty more like-minded people ready and willing to spread the gospel of Koch-style freedom.

    Posted by Pterrafractyl | September 7, 2017, 12:03 pm
  2. My adventure being slandered in USA Today thanks to the Underground Reich backed German Marshall Fund and It’s Alliance for Securing Democracy. Spitfire List was also featured on their Hamilton 68 Project. Also The Nazi groups that made up Charlottesville are discussed.

    http://anti-imperialist-u.blogspot.com/2017/09/exposing-underground-reich-part-3.html

    Posted by Hugo Turner | September 22, 2017, 10:48 am
  3. A great interview with Stephen Singular on the Order the Murder of Alan Berg, Trump and Charlottesville.
    https://porkinspolicyreview.com/2017/09/20/porkins-policy-radio-episode-109-stephen-singular-talked-to-death-the-murder-of-alan-berg/

    Posted by Hugo Turner | September 22, 2017, 10:51 am
  4. Oh what a surprise: It turns out Roy Moore – the far-right theocratic former Alabama Supreme Court Justice who was removed from the state Supreme Court twice (in 2003 for refusing to remove a Ten Commandments statue he placed in the court house and again in 2016 for continuing to enforce a state ban on same-sex marriage) and who just won the GOP primary in the race to fill Attorney General Jeff Sessions’s old seat – hosted a pro-Confederacy ‘Secession Day’ event at his foundation. For two years in a row:

    CNN

    Pro-Confederate activists held ‘Secession Day’ event at Roy Moore’s foundation two years in a row

    By Chris Massie and Andrew Kaczynski, CNN

    Updated 8:26 PM ET, Wed September 27, 2017

    (CNN)Pro-Confederate activists twice held events to commemorate Alabama’s 1861 secession from the United States at the headquarters of the foundation led at the time by Roy Moore, the new Republican nominee for US Senate.

    The events, held at the Foundation for Moral Law’s building in 2009 and 2010, promoted a history of the Civil War sympathetic to the Confederate cause, in which the conflict is presented as one fought over the federal government violating the South’s sovereignty as opposed to one fought chiefly over the preservation of slavery.

    Speakers at the events included Franklin Sanders, who is a board member of the League of the South, an organization that advocates for a “free and independent Southern republic,” and Rev. Chuck Baldwin, who has written that he believes “the South was right in the War Between the States” and that Confederate leaders were not racist. Most academic scholars identify slavery as a central cause of the war.

    At the time of the events, Moore, who on Tuesday won a runoff race to become the Republican nominee for US Senate, was the president of the Foundation for Moral Law, a Christian legal nonprofit he founded in the early 2000s. Moore stepped down as president in 2013 when he was elected to the Alabama Supreme Court, but still retains the title president emeritus. His wife, Kayla Moore, currently serves as the organization’s president

    Moore’s association with the “Secession Day” event first came under scrutiny during his failed 2010 campaign to be Alabama’s governor. At the time, the Associated Press reported on the 2010 event taking place at Moore’s foundation. The executive director for the foundation, Rich Hobson, now Moore’s campaign manager, told the AP that he was the one who approved the event and that Moore didn’t know about it.

    “While the Foundation for Moral Law owns the building, it is not involved in the meeting,” Hobson told the AP.

    However, according to event organizer Patricia Godwin, Moore allowed the events to be held at his foundation. In an invite for the 2009 event reviewed by CNN’s KFile, Godwin writes, “I have been frantically trying to find an appropriate venue for our event for months now…thankfully, Judge Roy Moore has afforded us the ground floor of the building where the offices of The Foundation for Moral Law are.”

    Godwin also writes in the invitation that there would be an opportunity to donate to the foundation “in appreciation to Judge Moore for affording us a place to hold this event.” Reached by phone, Godwin told CNN that Moore did not “sponsor”or “endorse” the event but that he did approve the use of the foundation’s building in both 2009 and 2010.

    Godwin said that the event was not “an event held to advocate for secession in today’s times. It was a historic day in Alabama, in the South and in this country.” She added that part of its goal was to “educate people about our Constitution.”

    Asked whether Moore was aware of the content of the event when he gave his approval, Godwin replied, “He’s not gonna let just anybody come in there. And he did not charge us a dime.”

    Photos from the event show Alabama’s 1861 secession flag and a banner “in memory of the men in gray” who fought to maintain “the principles of the Constitution” in the Civil War. A four-minute video of the 2010 gathering from the Montgomery Advertiser features attendees repeatedly arguing that the South was fighting for freedom in the Civil War and had a right to secede.

    Among those in the video was John Eidsmoe, who was hired to join the foundation’s legal team in 2008 and is still listed on its website as the senior counsel and resident scholar, alongside Moore’s wife as the only other staff member. When he was hired in 2008, Moore praised Eidsmoe as “an exceptional constitutional scholar who is well versed in history and America’s Christian heritage,” according to a release from the foundation announcing the decision.

    At the 2010 Secession Day event, Eidsmoe argued of the Southern states, “Our belief is that it was their constitutional right to secede.” He later added, “I support the Constitution of the United States of America. I took an oath to defend it. But I also believe that Jefferson Davis and John C. Calhoun understood that Constitution better than did Abraham Lincoln and Daniel Webster.”

    Eidsmoe did not respond to a request for comment.

    Godwin said that Eidsmoe had attended the event in a personal capacity, not as a representative of the foundation, because he was a friend of hers.

    In her interview with CNN’s KFile, Godwin echoed the other attendees’ sentiments about the Constitution, saying that it was Moore’s understanding of the nation’s founding text that led her to support his current campaign for Senate. She added that there hasn’t been a Constitution since President Barack Obama was elected, saying, “It’s been a theoretical document rolled up on the shelf of the archives just like President Davis said that Abraham Lincoln did to it.”

    “I want people like Mitch McConnell and the NRA and CNN and Donald Trump to stay out of our business down here,” Godwin said. “That’s the problem. You Yankees, you have done nothing but stick your freakin’ nose in our business down here in the South. We don’t want you down here in the South, don’t you understand that? I would love to see every Yankee go back to Massachusetts and to New York City, you know it?”

    ———-

    “Pro-Confederate activists held ‘Secession Day’ event at Roy Moore’s foundation two years in a row” by Chris Massie and Andrew Kaczynski; CNN; 09/27/2017

    “The events, held at the Foundation for Moral Law’s building in 2009 and 2010, promoted a history of the Civil War sympathetic to the Confederate cause, in which the conflict is presented as one fought over the federal government violating the South’s sovereignty as opposed to one fought chiefly over the preservation of slavery.”

    Surprise.

    And of course, this “Secession Day” event didn’t just include far right figures like Chuck Baldwin (who railed against ‘Zionist control of America’ in 2015), but also a board member of the League of the South:


    Speakers at the events included Franklin Sanders, who is a board member of the League of the South, an organization that advocates for a “free and independent Southern republic,” and Rev. Chuck Baldwin, who has written that he believes “the South was right in the War Between the States” and that Confederate leaders were not racist. Most academic scholars identify slavery as a central cause of the war.

    The South was right and Confederate leaders weren’t racist. That’s Chuck Baldwin, a pre-‘Alt-Right’ master far-right troll.

    And note how these events first came to light when Moore was running for Governor. He apparently thought this was good politics at the time. And the guy who was head of Moore’s foundation that owned the building that hosted the event is now Moore’s campaign manager:


    Moore’s association with the “Secession Day” event first came under scrutiny during his failed 2010 campaign to be Alabama’s governor. At the time, the Associated Press reported on the 2010 event taking place at Moore’s foundation. The executive director for the foundation, Rich Hobson, now Moore’s campaign manager, told the AP that he was the one who approved the event and that Moore didn’t know about it.

    It makes you wonder what kind of extremist events Moore’s is going to be hosting this time around. He’s not going to be lacking options.

    Posted by Pterrafractyl | September 27, 2017, 9:11 pm
  5. With Tropical Storm Nate threatening to become Hurricane Nate and careening towards the coast of Alabama, the obvious question to ask at this point is whether or not God is angry at Alabama for some reason? It’s an obvious question not because it’s a reasonable question. No, it’s an obvious question because the new GOP Senate nominee, Roy Moore, is the same guy who said 9/11 may have been diving punishment upon America for allowing homosexuality and abortion. So now that Alabama might be facing a hurricane, we’re forced to ask, did Alabama do something to upset God?

    Well, remember those reports about Alabama GOP Senate nominee Roy Moore’s foundation hosting “Secession Day” events back in 2009 and 2010? Talking Points Memo has a long new piece on Moore’s ties to the secessionist/neo-Confederate movement and it turns out his ties to the movement are a lot deeper than just hosting those two events. How deep? So deep that Moore’s top financial supporter over the course of his political, who has donated more than $600k to Moore’s races, is Michael Peroutka of the League of the South, a group dedicated to secession and creating a theocratic white supremacist Confederacy 2.0.

    So is nominating someone like that as a majority party Senate nominee enough to prompt a divinely nasty storm? It’s the kind of question we shouldn’t actually have to ask, but now that Moore is the nominee and might actually become a US senator we kind of have to ask it:

    Talking Points Memo
    DC

    Roy Moore’s Neo-Confederate Sugar Daddy Has Deep Ties To Secessionists

    By Cameron Joseph
    Published October 6, 2017 6:00 am

    Alabama Republican Senate nominee Roy Moore’s top supporter is a hardline Confederate sympathizer with longtime ties to a secessionist group.

    Michael Anthony Peroutka (pictured on the right above, with Moore in 2011) has given Moore, his foundation and his campaigns well over a half-million dollars over the past decade-plus. He’s also expressed beliefs that make even Moore’s arguably theocratic anti-gay and anti-Muslim views look mainstream by comparison. Chief among them: He’s argued that the more Christian South needs to secede and form a new Biblical nation.

    The close connections raise further questions about the racial and religious views of Moore, the former Alabama supreme court chief justice and the front-runner to become Alabama’s next U.S. senator.

    There’s a long history of southern conservative politicians playing footsie with fringe groups that hold controversial views on race. But that’s become more fraught in recent years as the advent of YouTube, camera phones and campaign trackers has made it harder to keep those meetings quiet. It’s also become more controversial to speak to Confederate groups in recent years as parts of the South have changed and in the wake of murderous racist violence in Charleston and Charlottesville. But even by the old standards, Moore’s deep ties to Peroutka — and Peroutka’s views — stand out, as most of those groups weren’t actively calling for the South to secede again.

    Peroutka, a 2004 Constitution Party presidential nominee who in 2014 won a seat as a Republican on the county commission in Anne Arundel County, Maryland, spent years on the board of the Alabama-based League of the South, a southern secessionist group which for years has called for a southern nation run by an “Anglo-Celtic” elite. The Southern Poverty Law Center designates the League of the South as a hate group (a designation Peroutka regularly jokes about). That organization, after Peroutka left, was one of the organizers of the Charlottesville protests last summer that ended in bloodshed.

    During his 2004 presidential run, Peroutka made it clear to the League of the South which side of the Mason-Dixon Line he stood on.

    “I come from Maryland, which by the way is below the Mason-Dixon Line. … We’d have seceded if they hadn’t of locked up 51 members of the legislature. And by the way, I’m still angry about that,” he told the group to applause.

    In that speech, Peroutka praised his daughter for refusing to play the Battle Hymn of the Republic in her school band, called a visit to Confederate leader Jefferson Davis’ grave “beautiful,” praised his son for calling the Confederate rebel flag the “American flag” and said he’d wished that those in the room had been there during the Civil War fighting for the South.

    “We could have used you, there should have been more of us in 1861,” he said.

    And he made it clear that his anti-union views weren’t just in the past.

    “Of course the South is this remnant of a Christian understanding of law and government where there is a God and government is God-ordained. That stands right in the way of this pagan understanding that the state, the new world order, is God,’” he continued, warning that secularists were out to destroy the South.

    The League of the South broke its tradition against involvement in a federal political system they normally reject and endorsed Peroutka’s campaign.

    Moore’s Own Views

    Moore himself has addressed some extremist groups and made some racially charged comments — in addition to his inflammatory views that Muslims shouldn’t be allowed in Congress, that Sharia law is already being implemented in parts of the Midwest and that “homosexual conduct should be illegal.”

    Moore led the charge against a 2004 state referendum to remove segregationist language from the Alabama state constitution, claiming that the amendment would somehow open up the state to possible education tax increases. The League of the South was also involved in helping to defeat the amendment, which fell by a narrow margin.

    As Buzzfeed reported in 2015, back in 1995 Moore gave a keynote address to the Council of Conservative Citizens — a white supremacist group that Charleston mass murderer Dylann Roof would cite as a key influence two decades later.

    “I did not consider the Council of Conservative Citizens to be a ‘white supremacist’ group when I spoke to them 20 years ago,” Moore said in 2015, pointing out that other prominent Republicans like former Sen. Trent Lott (R-MS) had also spoken to the group. “I obviously highly regard the fundamental principle stated in the Declaration of Independence that ‘all men are created equal.’”

    As CNN recently reported, Moore’s Foundation for Moral Law hosted the League of the South’s annual “Secession Day” event in 2009 and 2010.

    Rich Hobson, then the Foundation’s head and now Moore’s campaign manager, told the AP in 2010 that he’d been the one to grant the space to the League, not Moore, and said Moore’s foundation “is not involved in the meeting.”

    Moore’s office is adorned with a portrait of Jefferson Davis and busts of Robert E. Lee and Stonewall Jackson, though he’s claimed that’s because they’re fellow West Point graduates and not because they led the Confederacy.

    Even during his current Senate campaign, Moore hasn’t shied away from racial controversy, continuing to question whether President Obama was born in the United States and referring to “reds and yellows” in the same breath that he lamented racial division. And Moore’s Facebook page shared memes claiming Obama was Muslim, as well as ones like this:

    [see image]

    The League of the South has also helped to organize pro-Moore protests both times he was being removed from the Alabama supreme court, according to contemporaneous reports. But in spite of that visible support from the League of the South, his foundation hosting them while he was its president, and his deep ties to Peroutka, Moore has denied knowing about Peroutka’s and the group’s views.

    When a Montgomery Advertiser reporter confronted him about Peroutka’s big donations to his state supreme court campaign in 2012, Moore denied he supported secession but refused to disavow Peroutka’s views because “I don’t know anything about it to be concerned or not concerned, but I have no idea what was said or what they stood for.”

    Those who have closely watched Moore and Peroutka are skeptical.

    “The fact that they are so close and Roy Moore promoted Peroutka, took him out of obscurity and helped him become the presidential candidate of the Constitution Party, says a lot,” Frederick Clarkson, an author with the liberal think tank Political Research Associates who has monitored Moore and Peroutka for decades, told TPM.

    “League of the South is a violent secessionist group rooted in the theology of Christian Reconstructionism, states’ rights and white supremacy. There’s no question what they’re up to.”

    The Maryland Confederate

    Peroutka has been explicit about his support of the Confederacy — and his views haven’t exactly softened over the years.

    In 2012, speaking at the League’s annual convention, Peroutka laid out his view that the South needs to rise again while praising the group’s even more hardline leader, Michael Hill.

    “I don’t disagree with Dr. Hill at all that this [national political] regime is beyond reform. I think that’s an obvious fact and I agree with him. However, I do agree that when you secede or however the destruction and the rubble of this regime takes place and how it plays out, you’re going to need to take a biblical worldview and apply it to civil law and government,” he said. “I don’t want the people from the League of the South to for one minute think that I am about reforming the current regime and studying the Constitution is about reforming the regime. I, like many of you and like Patrick Henry, have come to the conclusion that we smelled a rat from the beginning.”

    In case there was any confusion about his views, Peroutka closed his speech by asking the crowd to “stand for the national anthem” — and then played “Dixie.”

    He’s also argued the Civil War was about “consolidating power into the hands of a few people” like Washington politicians and New York bankers, not slavery.

    Peroutka explicitly said he wasn’t a racist during his 2014 run — though in a press conference to prove it he twice dodged questions about his earlier secessionist comments.

    Kindred Spirits

    Peroutka and Moore share similar Christian Reconstructionist views of government. Both Moore and Peroutka have long questioned the basic right of the federal government to dictate what local officials do, arguing that’s beyond the power God and the Constitution grants to it, though Peroutka has gone much further, openly talking about secession.

    They believe that America is a Christian nation, that government is limited to enforcing those rights bestowed by God, and anything else it attempts to do is fundamentally wrong and should be disregarded by the people and officials. That explains Moore’s refusal to follow the rule of law in both occasions he was forced to leave the state supreme court. Both explicitly reject the common interpretation of the separation of church and state, blame America’s woes on an abandonment of their theocratic view, and harken back fondly to a hazy earlier era where devout Christians alone ruled the land.

    More than a decade ago, Peroutka found a kindred spirit in Moore, who had become a hero on the religious right by erecting a monument to the Ten Commandments at his courthouse and rejecting higher courts’ rulings to remove it. Moore was suddenly without a job after being kicked off the Alabama supreme court — and Peroutka seemed to have a perfect way to help him fill his days.

    Soon, the two were barnstorming the country, with Peroutka giving Moore $120,000 for a speaking tour. The well-known Moore was being courted by members of the fringe Constitution Party as a presidential candidate, and often spoke at the same events as his previously little-known benefactor. When Moore announced he wouldn’t run, Peroutka stepped up — a self-funder who’d helped Moore travel the country and in return got to share his spotlight and boost his profile.

    That was the first of many donations, most of them made through the Elizabeth Stroub Peroutka Foundation, a group run by Peroutka and his brother: $60,000 to Moore’s now-defunct Coalition to Restore America, and $249,000 from 2006 through 2014 to Moore’s Foundation for Moral Law.

    Peroutka also gave a combined $45,000 to Moore’s two failed gubernatorial runs, and a total of $143,000 for his successful 2012 comeback to the state supreme court, according to the National Institute of Money in State Politics, roughly one-tenth of his total money for the race.

    The sum total of Peroutka’s donations to Moore, his causes and campaigns: at least $622,000 since 2004.

    Peroutka has also honored Moore on numerous occasions — including in 2007 when he had installed a replica of Moore’s Ten Commandments memorial on his Maryland farm and dubbed the area “Roy S. Moore Field.” Flying at the ceremony: the state flags of Alabama and Maryland, and the Confederate national flag. The stars and stripes were nowhere to be seen, according to coverage and photos from the liberal secular Americans United for Church and State and the liberal blog JewsOnFirst.

    The two seem to have remained close. Peroutka maxed out to Moore’s current Senate campaign and appeared onstage at Moore’s primary victory rally in late September. Moore embraced him backstage after shouting an exuberant “This guy, this guy! Michael,” upon spotting him (it can be seen at 33 minutes into the Moore campaign’s Facebook livestream of the event).

    As recently as 2015, Moore participated in a promotional video for Peroutka’s “Institute on the Constitution” — an organization set to teach a biblical view of the Constitution — calling Peroutka his “good friend.”

    The League of the South’s Dark Record

    Peroutka has used his personal wealth to fund a number of right-wing causes over the years, from various anti-abortion and anti-gay groups to money to maintain Confederate monuments and grave sites to $1 million to the Creation Museum for the fossilized skeleton of an Allosaurous dubbed “Ebenezer.”

    But his League of the South support has drawn the most ire. It convinced now-Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan (R) and other local Republicans to disavow Peroutka’s candidacy in 2014.

    The group and its leader Michael Hill (the “Dr. Hill” Peroutka was referring to in his 2012 remarks) have become more openly militant in recent years, shortly after Peroutka left the group.

    Hill has recently suggested organizing a violent “Southern Defense Force” militia in preparation for “guerrilla war,” predicted “race war,” and attacked “Organized Jewry.” He was a scheduled speaker at the white nationalist rally in Charlottesville alongside former KKK head David Duke, and members of his group were caught on camera brawling during the violent protests there that ended up with a white nationalist ramming a car into a group of anti-racist protestors. In its aftermath, he wrote a Facebook post titled “Fight or die White man.” The group has had billboards reading “Secede” posted across the South since 2014.

    While Peroutka repeatedly praised Hill in speeches as recently as 2012, he left when he was gearing up for a 2014 run for office, claiming he’d just found out top members opposed interracial marriage. He recently denounced as “outrageous” and “inappropriate” Hill’s pledge “to be a white supremacist, a racist, an anti-Semite, a homophobe, a xenophobe, an Islamophobe and any other sort of ‘phobe’ that benefits my people.”

    But while the group has grown more extreme, its basic tenets haven’t shifted all that much since Peroutka was first involved. At the same 2012 League conference that Peroutka spoke, Hill made it crystal clear what he and the group stood for. It’s apparent Peroutka was listening, as he referred back to parts of Hill’s speech in his own.

    “We want out and we want them out of here,” Hill said about the federal government, calling for a “New southern republic,” speaking out against interracial marriage and for the “Superiority of the Christian West.”

    “If you can’t be proud of the fact that God created you as a white southerner and you can’t defend your patrimony then you ain’t much,” he said. “Look around. You all look like me. … You cannot deny when you look around in this room who makes up this movement.”

    From the start, the group had long had ties with white supremacists. A founding board member, Jack Kershaw, was an ardent segregationist who’d served as the attorney of Martin Luther King’s assassin, erected statue of early KKK leader Nathan Bedford Forrest in Nashville, and repeatedly argued that slavery had been good for black people.

    Longtime observers of the group called laughable Peroutka’s seeming shock about the group’s views.

    “It’s pretty transparent bullshit that he couldn’t see racism in the League of the South until he ran for office,” said Miranda Blue, who has long tracked Peroutka and the League for Right Wing Watch and the liberal group People for the American Way.

    And much as Peroutka’s claim he didn’t know about the League of the South’s motives is questionable, observers say Moore’s close ties with Peroutka are telling.

    “These are the moral and political choices Roy Moore made with his close friend and financial backer, Michael Peroutka,” said Clarkson. “If he didn’t share substantial portions of the vision, why did he do those things?”

    ———-

    “Roy Moore’s Neo-Confederate Sugar Daddy Has Deep Ties To Secessionists” by Cameron Joseph; Talking Points Memo; 10/06/2017

    “The sum total of Peroutka’s donations to Moore, his causes and campaigns: at least $622,000 since 2004.”

    $622,000 since 2004. And yet when confronted about Peroutka’s views and big donations Moore claimed to know nothing about who Peroutka was or what he believes:


    When a Montgomery Advertiser reporter confronted him about Peroutka’s big donations to his state supreme court campaign in 2012, Moore denied he supported secession but refused to disavow Peroutka’s views because “I don’t know anything about it to be concerned or not concerned, but I have no idea what was said or what they stood for.”

    Those who have closely watched Moore and Peroutka are skeptical.

    “The fact that they are so close and Roy Moore promoted Peroutka, took him out of obscurity and helped him become the presidential candidate of the Constitution Party, says a lot,” Frederick Clarkson, an author with the liberal think tank Political Research Associates who has monitored Moore and Peroutka for decades, told TPM.

    “League of the South is a violent secessionist group rooted in the theology of Christian Reconstructionism, states’ rights and white supremacy. There’s no question what they’re up to.”

    Taking hundreds of thousands of dollars from secessionists and then laughably lying about. This is the guy who just won the GOP Senate nomination by acting like he was the ‘anti-Establishment’ candidate.

    And Moore isn’t the only one to publicly disavow Peroutka and the League of the South’s views. Peroutka himself tried the same old song and dance during his *successful* run for a county commission seat in Anne Arundel County, Maryland as a Republican. All of a sudden:


    The group and its leader Michael Hill (the “Dr. Hill” Peroutka was referring to in his 2012 remarks) have become more openly militant in recent years, shortly after Peroutka left the group.

    Hill has recently suggested organizing a violent “Southern Defense Force” militia in preparation for “guerrilla war,” predicted “race war,” and attacked “Organized Jewry.” He was a scheduled speaker at the white nationalist rally in Charlottesville alongside former KKK head David Duke, and members of his group were caught on camera brawling during the violent protests there that ended up with a white nationalist ramming a car into a group of anti-racist protestors. In its aftermath, he wrote a Facebook post titled “Fight or die White man.” The group has had billboards reading “Secede” posted across the South since 2014.

    While Peroutka repeatedly praised Hill in speeches as recently as 2012, he left when he was gearing up for a 2014 run for office, claiming he’d just found out top members opposed interracial marriage. He recently denounced as “outrageous” and “inappropriate” Hill’s pledge “to be a white supremacist, a racist, an anti-Semite, a homophobe, a xenophobe, an Islamophobe and any other sort of ‘phobe’ that benefits my people.”

    But while the group has grown more extreme, its basic tenets haven’t shifted all that much since Peroutka was first involved. At the same 2012 League conference that Peroutka spoke, Hill made it crystal clear what he and the group stood for. It’s apparent Peroutka was listening, as he referred back to parts of Hill’s speech in his own.

    From the start, the group had long had ties with white supremacists. A founding board member, Jack Kershaw, was an ardent segregationist who’d served as the attorney of Martin Luther King’s assassin, erected statue of early KKK leader Nathan Bedford Forrest in Nashville, and repeatedly argued that slavery had been good for black people.

    Longtime observers of the group called laughable Peroutka’s seeming shock about the group’s views.

    “It’s pretty transparent bullshit that he couldn’t see racism in the League of the South until he ran for office,” said Miranda Blue, who has long tracked Peroutka and the League for Right Wing Watch and the liberal group People for the American Way.

    ““It’s pretty transparent bullshit that he couldn’t see racism in the League of the South until he ran for office,” said Miranda Blue, who has long tracked Peroutka and the League for Right Wing Watch and the liberal group People for the American Way.”

    Yep, that’s a pretty transparent giant pile bullshit Michael Peroutka is hiding behind. A pile stacked on top of the transparent pile Roy Moore is using for cover to hide the fact that he wants to use religion to break up the US and create a brutal white nationalist theocracy.

    That sure sounds like a reason for Alabama fear some divinely directed high winds. At least, it’s a reason according to Roy Moore’s logic.

    Posted by Pterrafractyl | October 6, 2017, 7:40 pm
  6. @Pterrafractyl–

    The thing that continues to stick in my craw about all of this is the fact that Snowden/Assange/Greenwald et al are inextricably linked to these same forces.

    They are, of course, “shocked, shocked” at the recent events at Charlottesville.

    Progressive physicians, heal thyselves.

    Best,

    Dave

    Posted by Dave Emory | October 7, 2017, 2:19 pm
  7. Here’s another fun chapter from Roy Moore’s political history: That time he led the charge against removing language about “separate schools for white and colored children” and allowing poll taxes from the Alabama constitution. And won. In 2004. It’s not exactly ancient history.

    But Moore and his defenders want you to know that he didn’t oppose removing the language for racist reasons. No, Moore opposed removing the language from Alabama’s constitution because that would have also involved removing language saying no Alabaman has a constitution “right to education or training at public expense.” Moore asserted that stripping this language out was a going to lead to tax increases. Yes, concerns that kids would possibly gain a right to a public education was the nice explanation for why Moore and his allies fought against removing the segregationist language from Alabama’s constitution:

    Talking Points Memo
    DC

    Roy Moore Led Charge Against Removing Segregation From Alabama Constitution

    By Cameron Joseph
    Published October 13, 2017 6:00 am

    In 2004, a bipartisan coalition of Alabama leaders moved to eliminate sections of the state constitution mandating school segregation and poll taxes. They assumed it’d be an easy feat — until Roy Moore got involved.

    Democrats and Republicans led by then-Gov. Bob Riley (R) worked together on an amendment to remove language in the state constitution mandating “separate schools for white and colored children” and allowing poll taxes, Jim Crow-era requirements that people to pay to vote that disenfranchised most black people.

    The changes were purely symbolic — all of the state constitutional language had already been struck down by state and federal courts — but civil rights and business leaders saw it as a way to heal old wounds and make the state more attractive to big business.

    The opposite happened instead, and Moore’s fierce opposition likely made the difference.

    “He had a huge impact. It was a measure that was set to pass without much opposition and then because he got involved it changed the dynamic completely,” said Susan Kennedy of the Alabama Education Association, the state public teachers’ lobby that supported the amendment.

    At the time, Moore, who is currently the GOP nominee and the front-runner to become Alabama’s next U.S. senator, had recently been booted from the state supreme court for defying higher court orders to remove a Ten Commandments statue from in front of his courthouse. That fight had made him a superstar in the religious right both in the state and nationally.

    When conservative evangelical activists including the Alabama Christian Coalition began warning about adverse effects of the segregation amendment he stepped up to be the amendment’s most prominent foe — a move that kept his name in the headlines as he geared up for a 2006 primary challenge against Riley and sent the amendment down to a narrow defeat.

    “This amendment is a wolf in sheep’s clothing and the people of Alabama should be aware of it,” Moore told the Birmingham News in 2004, warning it would “open the door to an enormous tax increase” — one of many broadsides he issued.

    His argument worked. The statewide measure failed by about 2,000 votes, out of 1.4 million cast. Every subsequent attempt to remove the language since that initial failure has failed, most recently in 2012.

    Moore’s stance against the amendment was one of many of his efforts over two decades that has built him a fiercely loyal following on the religious right. That base wasn’t enough when he ran against Riley in 2006, but it powered his primary victory over Sen. Luther Strange (R-AL) last month and has him favored to win the Dec. 12 general election. It’s also one in a long line of racially charged episodes in Moore’s career.

    Moore faces former U.S. Attorney Doug Jones, who is best known for successfully prosecuting, decades later, Ku Klux Klan member responsible for the 1963 Birmingham church bombing that killed four young black girls.

    Alabama’s state constitution still contains the following language:

    “Separate schools shall be provided for white and colored children, and no child of either race shall be permitted to attend a school of the other race.”

    A ‘Black Eye’ For Alabama

    The battle over removing segregationist language is part of a much larger effort that has pitted reformers, civil rights groups and many in the business community against Old South traditionalists and some other conservatives in the state for much of the last two decades.

    The amendment was a part of Riley’s push to modernize the state constitution, a sprawling, racist document dating to 1901 that codified Jim Crow and created a strong state central government.

    “Federal and state court rulings have struck down a lot of these [clauses] as unconstitutional, but it was viewed by many as a black eye for the state,” Toby Roth, who served as Riley’s chief of staff during the constitutional fights, told TPM.

    The amendment to remove segregationist language sailed through the Democratic-controlled state legislature with strong bipartisan support, and supporters expected it to pass when put to a statewide vote. But lawmakers also added a provision that would have stripped a 1956 amendment passed in the wake of the 1954 Supreme Court decision desegregating schools. That amendment said Alabamans had no constitutional “right to education or training at public expense.”

    Moore and hardline conservatives pounced to argue the removal of that language would allow for a backdoor tax increase by judges who would see it as granting a constitutional right to an education, warning it would hurt taxpayers and threaten private schools and homeschoolers.

    Lawmakers were caught off-guard by the heated opposition. But while they’d had past success in removing other racist language, even in those efforts it’d been clear that not everyone in Alabama was ready to let go of the Old South: A 2000 amendment to remove language banning interracial marriage had passed, but by a closer-than-expected 60 percent to 40 percent margin.

    This amendment got caught in a more recent fight over education funding as well, an issue that’s both racially charged and far from symbolic for many voters in the state.

    In 1993, a state judge had struck down the education language as unconstitutional while ruling that the state needed to spend more on schools. The state supreme court struck down that ruling in 2002, with Moore on the court. Many white Alabamians had pulled their kids out of public schools during desegregation, creating a new de facto segregated school system in parts of the state and leaving little incentive for white Alabamians, especially wealthier ones, to pay to improve schools that in parts of the state were heavily black.

    “People were afraid that it would reignite the [school] equity argument that was sued over in the 1990s,” said Kennedy. ”

    Many voters’ opposition to more school funding was and is ideological and financial, not purely racially driven. But civil rights groups argue that the effect is the same.

    “When you talk about not guaranteeing or taking away the language from the Constitution not guaranteeing the right to a public education, that’s racist,” Southern Christian Leadership Conference President Charles Steele Jr., a former Alabama state senator, told NPR at the time.

    The most prominent politician besides Moore battling the amendment was his protege and former staffer, Tom Parker, who was running for the Alabama Supreme Court at the time. During that campaign, Parker spoke at an event celebrating Nathan Bedford Forrest, the Confederate general and Ku Klux Klan leader, hosted by opponents of the civil rights movement, and handed out Confederate battle flags at the funeral of a woman believed to have been the last living widow of a Confederate soldier.

    The battle over the amendment came just a year after the Christian Coalition had helped defeat a Riley-backed push to increase state taxes to invest more on education and infrastructure.

    The ongoing tax fights had made many conservatives wary of any constitutional changes, with a faction that simply opposed any tweaks.

    “You do have a more conservative wing of the Republican Party that’s always suspicious of any constitution changes as a backdoor attempt to raise taxes,” Roth said.

    Parker and Moore explicitly made that argument.

    Moore told the Associated Press that the amendment was “another attempt to open the door for a court-ordered tax increase without the consent of the people” after they’d defeated the earlier amendment, while Parker ran radio ads saying that it would create “a new right to education for citizens of all ages” and warning “liberals will use this to pressure judges into raising your taxes.”

    Parker won by a narrow margin even though he was heavily outspent in the race.

    Moore’s Motivations

    Those who supported the amendment are split about Moore’s reason for taking on the fight.

    Most don’t think his views are rooted chiefly in the racial politics that conservative Alabama politicians in both parties have exploited for years. But while some see a purist ideologue, others see an opportunist who’s fine making common cause with more fringe figures to further his own ambitions.

    “I can’t say at this point what drove Roy Moore other than his own self-interest,” University of Alabama Law Professor Bryan Fair, who is black and serves on the board of the Southern Poverty Law Center, told TPM.

    Fair argued Moore’s involvement may have been crass opportunism.

    “It was perceived as a racial issue by significant parts of the population, especially the African American population, who very much wanted to see this language removed,” he said. “Roy Moore didn’t use the N word but one doesn’t have to use the N word to be a racist or act with racial motives or with a callousness or indifference towards racial inequality.”

    Others think Moore and his allies on this fight were purists driven by an ideological opposition to state-funded education — one critic who asked not to be named in order to speak frankly described him as “a religious nut” and a “zealot” but not a racist. Moore has often railed against public schools and even once wrote that public pre-school was an “unjustifiable attempt to indoctrinate our youth” and compared it to Nazi indoctrination programs.

    “I would not go so far as to say the Moore camp had racist motivations. It would be completely consistent with them being suspicious of activist judges trying to raise revenues from the bench. Could you find someone who had racist motivations who was on his side on this? I’m sure you could. But I’ve disagreed with Judge Moore on several things and I would never ascribe his personal motivations to a racist agenda,” said Roth, Riley’s former chief of staff.

    “There is a philosophy that any additional services offered by the state government will cost additional money and there is a constituency that wants to leave a cap on that. The segregationist language was secondary to that concern for them,” said Kennedy.

    Others think both are true — that Moore is an ideologue driven by theocratic, anti-government views who is also a savvy politician willing to make common cause with racists, even though racial animus doesn’t drive his own views.

    “Moore spoke to some crazy groups in the past like the League of the South but that wasn’t race-based, it was a lot more about groups that buy what he’s saying,” said another former Riley staffer. “Moore is not a George Wallace racial demagogue guy. He’s a demagogue on a lot of things, race just isn’t one of them.”

    ———-

    “Roy Moore Led Charge Against Removing Segregation From Alabama Constitution” by Cameron Joseph; Talking Points Memo; 10/13/2017

    The most prominent politician besides Moore battling the amendment was his protege and former staffer, Tom Parker, who was running for the Alabama Supreme Court at the time. During that campaign, Parker spoke at an event celebrating Nathan Bedford Forrest, the Confederate general and Ku Klux Klan leader, hosted by opponents of the civil rights movement, and handed out Confederate battle flags at the funeral of a woman believed to have been the last living widow of a Confederate soldier.”

    Yep, the most prominent politicians other than Moore battling the amendment, Tom Parker, was Moore’s protege and former staffer. Parker was running for a seat on the Alabama Supreme Court at the time and won. And he’s still around, announcing his intentions to run for Chief Justice of Alabama Supreme Court in April of this year.

    But note how even the two former staffers of GOP governor Bob Riley want to assure us that Moore isn’t really a racist. He’s just more than happy to court the backing of the racists. No, Moore is just an anti-tax ideologue who hates taxes so much he had to defend segregationist language to do it. And that gives us a hint at the defence Moore is going to use when all these things from his past are brought up on the campaign trail: He’s not a racist…he just hates taxes so much that is might sometimes come across as racism:


    I would not go so far as to say the Moore camp had racist motivations. It would be completely consistent with them being suspicious of activist judges trying to raise revenues from the bench. Could you find someone who had racist motivations who was on his side on this? I’m sure you could. But I’ve disagreed with Judge Moore on several things and I would never ascribe his personal motivations to a racist agenda,” said Roth, Riley’s former chief of staff.

    Others think both are true — that Moore is an ideologue driven by theocratic, anti-government views who is also a savvy politician willing to make common cause with racists, even though racial animus doesn’t drive his own views.

    Moore spoke to some crazy groups in the past like the League of the South but that wasn’t race-based, it was a lot more about groups that buy what he’s saying,” said another former Riley staffer. “Moore is not a George Wallace racial demagogue guy. He’s a demagogue on a lot of things, race just isn’t one of them.”

    “I’m not a racist! I just hate that Big Government!”

    That’s going to be the GOP’s cover-story for Moore. The same old cover-story the GOP has been whistling for decades…

    Posted by Pterrafractyl | October 16, 2017, 3:12 pm
  8. just watched Citizen 4. Eddy is such a nice boy, like a puppy!

    Posted by Ken Lee | October 26, 2017, 8:28 am
  9. @Ken Lee–

    Puppies, however, don’t say things like this: The elderly “wouldn’t be fucking help­less if you weren’t send­ing them fucking checks to sit on their ass and lay in hos­pi­tals all day.” (http://spitfirelist.com/for-the-record/ftr-831-the-elderly-wouldnt-be-fucking-help%C2%ADless-if-you-werent-send%C2%ADing-them-fucking-checks-to-sit-on-their-ass-and-lay-in-hos%C2%ADpi%C2%ADtals-all-day-the-gops-as/)

    Bad Dog!

    Best,

    Dave

    Posted by Dave Emory | October 26, 2017, 1:35 pm
  10. Here’s an interesting analysis of the available evidence of the influences and possible motive behind the recent shooting if the Capital Gazette newspaper in Annapolis, Maryland. The shooting was carried about by Jarrod Romas, a man with a long history of grievances with the newspaper going back to the paper’s reporting of a legal case against Ramos. Surprise! It looks like Ramos was influenced by the theocratic neo-Confederate ideology espoused by League of the South.

    Ramos also previously interacted with the author of the following piece, Jonathan Hutson. Hutson, a former investigative journalist, had a story written about him in 2015 in the Capital Gazette about how Hutson had observed threats made on Twitter about by a white supremacist in Montana against the communications director for the Brady Campaign and Center to Prevent Gun Violence. The threats escalating to threatening to shoot up a school and kill Jewish leaders. Hutson compiled the threats and informed the FBI. Ramos began harassing Hutson in response to that story. Hutson had also been researching and writing about the League of the South.

    Hutson has continued to examine Ramos’s social media feeds and made a number of observations that would appear to give insights into what drove Ramos to do the shootings. First, it appears that Ramos is a believer in the kind of worldview expressed by League of the South leaders Mike Peroutka and Michael Hill, where a Biblical fundamentalist interpretation of the Bible is the only REAL law and individuals have a right to righteously enforce their interpretation of Biblical law on their own.

    Hill has also called for the formation of death squads to target journalists, elected officials, and other members of “the elite”. Hill has also called for young men of “Christendom” to become “citizen-soldiers” to destroy the “galloping tyranny” of our time.

    Mike Peroutka was, until recently, a locally elected official on the Anne Arundel County Council, and one of the only politicians Ramos tweeted about (he was supportive of Peroutka). The other politician was Donald Trump (who Ramos was also supportive of).

    Intriguingly, the author notes a possible pair of events that may have catalyzed the shooting: Three days before the shooting, President Trump once again demonized member of the media as “enemies of the people,” at a big outdoor rally in California. The next day, Mike Peroutka lost his 2018 re-election bid in the Republican primary. So while we don’t know if these events helped catalyzed Ramos, as Hutson makes clear, Ramos’s years of tweets and comments make it clear that Ramos was an ideological fellow travelor of Peroutka and believes that “elites” like journalists deserved to be killed according to a ‘higher law’.

    Hutson also one one additional key influence Ramos’s social media posts reveal: the “Berserk” bloody anime movie. He made numerous references to Berserk in his posts, including the last tweet made minutes before the shooting. He even described himself as playing a role in the world of “Berserk”, a world that includes vigilante “hands of God”.

    So while Ramos was obviously an unhinged individual, the nature of his extremism wasn’t immediately clear. But when you take a closer look at the guy, all the evidence indicates he was inspired by ideologies that exalt the idea of righteous lone wolf vigilantes killing those who violate God’s law, which just happens to be the ideology of the League of the South:

    Salon

    Exclusive: Inside accused Annapolis shooter’s alt-right theology of mass murder
    Jarrod Ramos had connections to vengeful right-wing theology, and a hero complex drawn from violent anime

    Jonathan Hutson
    July 22, 2018 10:00am (UTC)

    When news broke of an active shooting at the Capital Gazette, my local newspaper in Annapolis, Maryland, I tweeted editor Rick Hutzell to ask if he was safe, and how I could help. When police announced the arrest of 38-year-old Jarrod Ramos as the suspect in the mass shooting, I, like many others, delved into his Twitter accounts.

    I was shocked when I realized that Ramos – whom a grand jury just indicted on 23 charges, including five counts of first-degree murder – had contacted me two years ago. He taunted me in response to the Capital’s March 2015 report about how I had helped law enforcement thwart a mass shooting threat made on Twitter against grade school kids and Jews in Kalispell, Montana, by a man named David J. Lenio.

    What I learned about Ramos, as I followed his Twitter trail, reveals as strange a worldview as one could imagine informing a mass-murder scenario. There are at least two main influences evident in Ramos’ tweets. One is a worldview taken from the theocratic wing of the alt-right, and the other comes from a violent anime subculture centered around a popular manga, anime and film series titled “Berserk.” Taken together, they provide a Rosetta Stone that allows us to translate the significance of two religious visions, in relation to each other, as they existed in Ramos’ mind.

    I believe these mutually informing visions allowed Ramos to cast himself as a vigilante hand of God. His theocratic worldview, combined with his immersion in the world of “Berserk,” helps to solve the mystery of his cryptic, final tweet and illuminate his possible motive for mass murder.

    For all of Ramos’ vividly imagined righteousness, this story begins with a woman-hating, angry man. That there is a misogynist root to Ramos’ rage-filled rampage is no surprise. Numerous male mass murderers have backgrounds of stalking and harassing women, especially online. Ramos’ beef with the Capital goes back to his ill-conceived defamation suit against the paper, its publisher and a columnist for reporting on his guilty plea for the online harassment of a woman he had known slightly in high school. In court documents he objected to the Capital’s report that, after he had not heard from the woman in months, he told her, “Fu ck you, leave me alone.” Ramos told the judge that he felt it unfair that the reporter had not allowed him to offer an explanation. He complained to the judge, “That carries a clear implication that something is wrong inside my head, that I’m insane.”

    Whether Ramos is sane is a matter for the court to determine. But there is an explanation for these hostile words – which he cribbed from the protagonist in “Berserk” – and it has to do with Ramos’ worldview, which needs to be more clearly understood.

    The alt-right half of the Rosetta Stone

    I believe Ramos contacted me initially because the Capital had reported on my connection to David Lenio, a white nationalist who had tweeted threats of a possible mass shooting, and also because I was researching and writing about ties between a local politician named Michael Peroutka and a right-wing group called the League of the South.

    The League is a theocratic, secessionist organization whose leader, Michael Hill, had called for the formation of death squads targeting journalists, elected officials and other members of “the elite.” In his essay “A Bazooka in Every Pot,” Hill described such an assassination campaign as part of “fourth-generation warfare,” a style of decentralized conflict that blurs the lines between war and politics, combatants and civilians.

    Hill wrote: “To oversimplify, the primary targets will not be enemy soldiers; instead, they will be political leaders, members of the hostile media, cultural icons, bureaucrats, and other of the managerial elite without whom the engines of tyranny don’t run.”

    That was not Hill’s only overt call to violence. He followed up with another essay calling for young men of “Christendom” to become “citizen-soldiers” to destroy the “galloping tyranny” of our time.

    As for Peroutka, he is a neo-Confederate theocrat who thinks that the wrong side won the Civil War and that our real national anthem is “Dixie.” He is also a former board member of the League, which had endorsed his successful 2014 campaign for a seat on Maryland’s Anne Arundel County Council, running as a Republican. This is the same League that helped organize the infamous torch-lit Unite the Right march in Charlottesville, Virginia, last summer.

    Over a period of nearly seven years, Peroutka is one of only two politicians whom Ramos tweeted about – the other being Donald Trump, who has repeatedly vilified journalists.

    Jarrod Ramos is not affiliated with any political party, and there is no evidence that he was politically motivated or that he acted on anyone’s orders. On the other hand, as Salon’s Paul Rosenberg has reported, he was influenced by the rhetoric and ideology of the racist alt-right. And like Hill, Ramos showed bold belligerence toward managerial elites whom he viewed as enemies.

    For example, Ramos wrote in his @EricHartleyFrnd Twitter bio (which he named in apparent mockery of a former Capital columnist whom Ramos had sued unsuccessfully for defamation), “Dear reader: I created this page to defend myself. Now I’m suing the shit out of half of AA County and making corpses of corrupt careers and corporate entities.”

    Justice and public safety require that we consider the context, including multiple influences and possible triggers, when a suspect faces mass murder charges. Therefore, it is fair and necessary to ask whether President Trump’s demagoguery against journalists could trigger some lone nut to murder them. As researcher Chip Berlet has written, sociologists call such a violent response to coded rhetoric “scripted violence” – and “heroes know which villains to kill.” Followers thus don’t require specific orders, but gather a sense of validation and righteousness in carrying out a violent campaign of societal purification against people designated as corrupting influences.

    This suspect had a simmering feud for seven years with the Capital, its former publisher and Eric Hartley, the former columnist whom he had sued unsuccessfully. Ramos created a website on which he posted documents and communications about his case, describing himself as an agent of “the Inquisition” and “a crusader” who answered to a “Higher Authority” than civil government and who meted out literal “carnage” to his foes.

    Ramos wrote of his perceived enemies: “The authority that permits their power also stands poised to punish its abuse. Even kings must answer to God, and a modern day Inquisition is at hand. The potential judgement is no less severe; the carnage differs only in literal terms. As this search for Truth commences, a crusader they could not kill approaches.”

    His crusade targeted court officials as well as journalists, whom he considered dishonest. For example, Ramos tweeted a quote from German poet Paul Gerhardt: “When a man lies, he murders some part of the world.” Ramos concluded, “Time to slay some murderous shitbag esquires.” In another tweet criticizing “inequity in the MD justice system,” he said: “Here’s to Higher Authority hearing and #hurting.”

    To Ramos, defamation is a violation of common law but, more important, a violation of God’s law that is worthy of hellfire.

    For example, he once tweeted: “Catholicism still says liars go to hell.”

    He also tweeted, without attribution or citation, a quote from a 16th-century church court case: “Again, my unruly tongue, if it were not punished, it would not only set more of you on fire, but it would bolden others to do the like.” This quote is from a confession to defamation in Mitford v. Shaw, an ecclesiastical court case from 1569-70. Church courts in England had jurisdiction over cases of defamation when the plaintiff’s claim was not for money damages but for the correction of a sin. (Common law courts oversaw claims for money damages.) Church courts sentenced violators to do public penance, on pain of excommunication.

    In the Mitford case, when the church court found Charles Shaw guilty of slander, he did penance by standing up in church, wearing linen apparel, and reading his confessional statement, which equates slander to murder, worthy of divine retribution.

    Shaw stated, “I acknowledge thus to slander my Christian brother is an heinous offence, first towards God, who hath straightly forbidden it in his holy laws, accounting it to be a kind of murdering of my neighbor, and threatening to punish it with hellfire and the loss of the kingdom of heaven.”

    Modern-day theocrats, such as Peroutka, would like to see ecclesiastical courts replace the American judicial system. At a 2016 Summer of Justice rally in Wichita, Kansas, which took place the same week as the Republican National Convention in Cleveland, Peroutka called on his fellow Christian nationalists to “take dominion over these positions of civil authority” in order to “interpose” against laws that don’t square with their notion of God’s law.

    Peroutka claimed that the only valid laws are ones which adhere to this fundamentalist vision of the Constitution and the Bible. “What if the Congress did pass a law allowing abortion? And then what if a sitting president signed it and a sitting court validated it?” he asked. “Would it be the law? No, of course not.” Then he slung on his guitar and filmed the crowd for a video for his new song, “Courts cannot make law.”

    Near the end of the Summer of Justice, the anti-abortion group Operation Save America staged a kangaroo “ecclesiastical court” which declared that Supreme Court rulings on abortion rights, LGBTQ rights, marriage equality and the removal of government-sponsored prayer in schools were contrary to God’s law. Eight “judges” took turns reading “charges” against the Supreme Court and then declared their decisions “null and void.”

    The judges included the Rev. Matt Trewhella, leader of the Milwaukee-based Missionaries to the Preborn, who had signed a statement in 1993 declaring that the murder of abortion providers was “justifiable homicide.” Convicted murderers Paul Hill and Michael Griffin later unsuccessfully used “justifiable homicide” defenses in their trials for killing abortion providers.

    Ramos’ tweets make clear that in his theological view, journalists who had allegedly framed him and court officers who had supposedly lied about him were as guilty as murderers and would ultimately answer to God. He saw himself as an agent of divine retribution. He was not subtle about how he would punish the sin of defamation.

    He tweeted: “Awaiting reprisal, death will be their acquisition.” This is a misquoted lyric from a thrash metal song by Slayer, “Raining Blood.” The actual line is: “Awaiting reprisal, death will be their acquittance.” The song ends with a vision of victims’ blood deluging a revenge-driven killer: “Raining blood from a lacerated sky, bleeding its horror, creating my structure. Now I shall reign in blood!”

    “Ramos came to see himself as some kind of vigilante for righteousness, casting himself for example as a ‘crusader’ and gunning down innocent people in a newsroom,” Political Research Associates analyst Frederick Clarkson told Salon. This vision was “not unlike the militaristic, millennial vision of Michael Hill,” he continued. “Last year [Hill] rallied what he calls the Southern Defense Force, which he envisions as not just a modern Confederate army but the ‘Army of the True Living God.’”

    So it makes sense that Ramos, who has metaphorically casts himself as a Christian holy warrior, would identify with Peroutka, a dyed-in-the-wool theocrat who has argued that civil servants must disobey any laws believed to be contrary to God’s law. Ramos tweeted three times in defense of Peroutka, once to crow to Rema Rahman, a journalist at the Capital, about Peroutka’s 2014 election to the Anne Arundel County Council. He tweeted: “Peroutka won and you lost @remawriter. Get over it. You’re already going to Hell, so why not concern yourself with more relevant matters?”

    He tweeted again to tell Rahman to “shut the fu ck up” after she wrote a piece reporting that illegal robocalls might have helped put Peroutka’s campaign over the top. He said: “It’s not your place, so shut the fu ck up @capgaznews. Peroutka’s columns don’t get the pickled shit sued out of him.”

    He also tweeted: “Why are they so obsessed about Peroutka @capgaznews?” He added the hashtag #CapDeathWatch.

    Ramos, who nursed grievances against perceived injustices, and who had sued a newspaper for defamation, also identified with Donald Trump. In response to an opinion column in the Capital that questioned Trump’s qualifications for the presidency, he tweeted a warning: “Referring to @realDonaldTrump as ‘unqualified’ @capgaznews could end badly (again).” His tweet linked to a Wall Street Journal article about Trump’s lawsuit against Univision, claiming breach of contract and defamation.

    The next day, Ramos tweeted: “Fu ck you, leave me alone,” and linked to a Maryland appellate court document upholding the dismissal of his defamation case against the Capital. It is reasonable to assume that this angry comment was directed at the journalists and newspaper who had bested him in court, and perhaps also at attorneys and judges.

    The embittered suspect with a vendetta against a local newspaper the justice system had been simmering since 2011. What triggered him in 2018? I don’t know. But shortly before the massacre, two things happened that could have been factors. Three days before the shooting, Donald Trump had pointed out members of the news media at a big outdoor rally in South Carolina, demonizing them as “enemies of the people.” This is a phrase that demagogues throughout history, from the French Revolution to Nazi Germany and Stalinist Russia, have understood and used as an incitement to violence. A day later, Peroutka was defeated in his 2018 re-election bid, losing to a female candidate in the Republican primary.

    The “Berserk” half of the Rosetta Stone

    The other, seemingly unrelated element of Ramos’ worldview is drawn from the world of anime, the source of his final, cryptic tweet, approximately three minutes before the shooting began. It was a peculiar expression he had used before: “Fu ck you, leave me alone.” This world of manga and anime informed the suspect’s hero-versus-villain worldview and also the way he expressed it through language and religious symbolic imagery. While his tweets referenced mainstream sci-fi touchstones, such as “Star Wars” and “Star Trek,” his primary influence was the universe of “Berserk,” a blood-and-guts manga, anime and movie series that has also inspired several video games.

    Ramos tweeted numerous references to “Berserk” characters, paraphrased quotes from them, and used symbolism drawn from the series. He described himself as playing a role in the world of “Berserk” and hinted that an understanding of its fictional world was key to understanding his “psyche.” Indeed, in a letter he wrote stating his intention of “killing every person present” in the Capital newsroom, he quoted from “Berserk.” As mentioned above, he did so again in his final tweet before the shooting began.

    Ramos tweeted to ask whether Eric Hartley, the former Capital columnist, was “Ordained to Be Murdered by the God Hand?” In “Berserk,” the God Hand is a group of the five most powerful demons. The photo on Ramos’ Twitter avatar was the face of Hartley, with a Berserk symbol pasted over it – a brand that marks victims for demonic sacrifice.

    He tweeted, “Judge Nick doesn’t believe in the God Hand. I play a well-established part of that system by tweeting of it.” It appears that Ramos identified with the world of “Berserk” and saw himself as playing a part in it.

    Ramos also marked former Capital Gazette publisher Thomas Marquardt — whom he nicknamed “Evil Tom” — with the demonic brand, in the banner image for the Twitter account @EricHartleyFrnd. To Ramos, the brand signified that it was “Open Season” to hunt and kill. He tweeted, “Another stooge @capgaznews says Evil Tom is going on his own terms? That mark on his head is called Brand of Sacrifice; or now, Open Season.” He also tweeted a YouTube link to the song “Murder” from the “Berserk” soundtrack.

    He repeatedly referenced a vampire character from “Berserk,” Nosferatu Zodd, and tweeted an image of Zodd. He tweeted: “If you think this man [wants to be] your friend, know this: when his ambition crumbles, death will come for you — a death you cannot escape.” This is a paraphrased quote from Zodd, who said, “If you consider this man your true friend, and regard him as a brother, then know this. When this man’s ambition crumbles, it is your destiny to face your death. A death you can never escape!”

    Ramos also identified with “Berserk” characters on several other occasions. He tweeted, “I told you once. I will have my own kingdom. Nothing has changed.” This is a close paraphrase of a quote from the character Griffith, who said, “I told you once, I will get my own kingdom. Nothing has changed.”

    He tweeted, “I’m Femto. I can also do whatever I want. I will have my own kingdom. I will choose the place you die,” adding a link to a trailer for “Berserk.” Griffith dies and is reborn as Femto, a member of the God Hand, who is undeterred by moral inhibitions. Femto becomes the spearhead of the God Hand’s schemes.

    Ramos tweeted the anime cover art from “Berserk – The Golden Age Arc Movie Collection” on DVD, which features the protagonist Guts. He twice quoted Guts, a swordsman motivated by revenge whose left forearm is replaced by a prosthetic which can be fitted with a cannon. Guts kills many enemies, including his primary antagonist, Bishop Mozgus, who is a demon spawn with angelic wings. Before delivering the coup de grâce, Guts tells Mozgus, “If you meet your God, say this for me … Leave me the hell alone!”

    The latter is one of the most popular quotes among “Berserk” fans. However, some translate the quote, or paraphrase it differently. For example: “If you meet your God, tell him to leave me the fu ck alone!”

    Or, as Ramos tweeted, some three minutes before the shooting: “Fu ck you, leave me alone.” He then added another of his Twitter handles, @JudgeMoylanFrnd, which features the face of Charles Moylan, the judge who had dismissed his defamation case, marked with the brand of sacrifice.

    Guts’ message for Mozgus to take to his god is a familiar trope in action movies, the sort of comment that a protagonist makes before dispatching a villain, such as “I’ll see you in Hell,” “See you on the other side,” or “Hasta la vista, baby.” However, this “Leave me alone” message is not meant for the people whom the protagonist is about to kill; it is for them to carry to their god.

    In light of Ramos’ having previously tweeted this same language in anger at both the Capital and Maryland court officials, and that this closely tracks what Guts tells his primary antagonist before delivering the killing blow, Ramos was making clear his intent to kill. In the context of scripted violence, as when a politician uses his office to demonize journalists, individuals who view themselves as holy warriors or heroes motivated by a sense of grievance know which villains to kill.

    Ramos, who represented himself in his defamation case against the Capital, insisted that he was sane and that he had not been merely fantasizing online about being a predator. He wrote on his website, “I’ve been learning law for a different kind of game. It’s no publicity stunt, nor clinical insanity, nor predatory Internet fantasy, but very dangerous indeed.”

    In the same document, he wrote, “Much like a life, what is the price of a name? Are these even two different questions?” Like the 16th-century English penitent who confessed to defamation in Mitford v. Shaw, calling it a kind of murder, Ramos equates the loss of his good name with the loss of a life. This is akin to the reasoning of those who kill abortion providers: If, according to their understanding of God’s law, abortion is murder, then those who provide abortions are subject to death. Likewise, if a theocrat believes defamation to be a kind of murder, then what is the penalty?

    After years of build-up, Ramos became a self-righteous, avenging character he had invented for himself, and announced his intent to kill, writing to the newspaper’s former attorney and to Maryland court officials that he was on his way to the Capital newsroom “with the objective of killing every person present.” They received the letters after the massacre. In a letter to Judge Moylan, he wrote, “Welcome, Mr. Moylan, to your unexpected legacy: YOU should have died.” He signed off, “Friends forever, Jarrod W. Ramos.”

    Here again, Ramos is quoting from Berserk.

    Guts’ adoptive father Gambino blames him for the death of his wife. So he tries to kill Guts, while telling him, “You should have died.” In self-defense, Guts kills Gambino. But he feels guilty and conflicted about this deed. A recurring nightmare of an army of skeletons haunts him, their eyeless orbs glaring as they chant over and over, “You should have died.”

    This message is not for the people whom the protagonist has killed, nor for the people he would have liked to kill. It is for Guts himself – a killer who felt justified but also conflicted and guilty even as he killed.

    Ramos seems to be suggesting that, like the “Berserk” protagonist he referenced in his final tweet, he felt conflicted about killing. It appears that just prior to the mass murder, Ramos signaled his realization that, like Guts, he would feel guilty about it. This suggests that he knew right from wrong, and therefore supports the argument that, as Ramos himself has insisted, he was sane. While his final tweet indicates a rationale that he must defend himself from perceived oppression and injustice (“Leave me alone”), his letter to the judge indicates that he anticipates feeling haunted by the consciousness of guilt (“You should have died”).

    Lessons learned

    As our family members, friends and colleagues die in one mass shooting after another, we urge ourselves to understand what we could do differently as a society. Why did this suspect do what he did? Each time, we come away with at least as many questions as answers. I don’t claim to know the right questions, let alone the answers. We all have a lot of work to do. But I have learned a few things from my research into Jarrod Ramos’ world. One of them recalls Maya Angelou’s famous quote, “When someone shows you who they are, believe them the first time.”

    Ramos showed himself to the world before he acted. He collected a grab bag of grievances out of which he tried to forge a rationale, arguably a theology, that would give his revenge tale a transcendent meaning: It would be the story of his life. He revealed himself often; society chose not to see or was unable to, or at any rate did not take him seriously. He recognized this fact. After the mass murders, his letters reminded us all, “I told you so.

    Ramos’ worldview is clearly derived from multiple, esoteric sources – sources he may not have accessed all by himself. This does not mean that he did not act alone; it does mean that he did not come to such sources as 16th-century ecclesiastical court records by himself. Someone pointed him in this direction. Ramos is probably not the only one who has been directed to such material in search of the will of God in the 21st Century and one’s role in God’s plan.

    Ramos called himself “an arrogant auto-didact,” with reference to how he learned how to represent himself (however unsuccessfully) in court. There is a rich history on the far right of individuals — including self-proclaimed “sovereign citizens” and theocrats advocating Higher Law — who defend themselves by cobbling together supposed legal precedents, divine authority and ill-conceived justifications for illegal and sometimes violent acts.

    There are also Christian nationalist think tanks, such as Michael Peroutka’s Institute on the Constitution, that peddle books and courses to self-taught advocates on how to “defend against those in opposition to God’s Word.” However out of the mainstream they may be, such people should be properly understood and taken seriously. They say what they mean; they mean what they say. When someone speaks out about meting out carnage in service to Higher Authority, let’s all pay attention.

    Ignoring an injustice collector who views himself as the hand of God doesn’t work. Ignoring the women he harasses doesn’t work. Coddling him in the courts despite his overt law-breaking doesn’t work. Ignoring the multiple cultural influences that shape and validate his viewpoint doesn’t work.

    ———-

    “Exclusive: Inside accused Annapolis shooter’s alt-right theology of mass murder” by Jonathan Hutson; Salon; 07/22/2018

    “What I learned about Ramos, as I followed his Twitter trail, reveals as strange a worldview as one could imagine informing a mass-murder scenario. There are at least two main influences evident in Ramos’ tweets. One is a worldview taken from the theocratic wing of the alt-right, and the other comes from a violent anime subculture centered around a popular manga, anime and film series titled “Berserk.” Taken together, they provide a Rosetta Stone that allows us to translate the significance of two religious visions, in relation to each other, as they existed in Ramos’ mind.

    Neo-Confederate theocratic lone wolf vigilantism of the League of the South and a passion for bloody anime involving vigilantes dealing righteous justice from the hand of God. It’s quite a combination of major worldview influences. But that’s what one finds when you examine Ramos’s social media content. He was sharing this with the world, even if he wasn’t explicit about it:


    I believe these mutually informing visions allowed Ramos to cast himself as a vigilante hand of God. His theocratic worldview, combined with his immersion in the world of “Berserk,” helps to solve the mystery of his cryptic, final tweet and illuminate his possible motive for mass murder.

    For all of Ramos’ vividly imagined righteousness, this story begins with a woman-hating, angry man. That there is a misogynist root to Ramos’ rage-filled rampage is no surprise. Numerous male mass murderers have backgrounds of stalking and harassing women, especially online. Ramos’ beef with the Capital goes back to his ill-conceived defamation suit against the paper, its publisher and a columnist for reporting on his guilty plea for the online harassment of a woman he had known slightly in high school. In court documents he objected to the Capital’s report that, after he had not heard from the woman in months, he told her, “Fudck you, leave me alone.” Ramos told the judge that he felt it unfair that the reporter had not allowed him to offer an explanation. He complained to the judge, “That carries a clear implication that something is wrong inside my head, that I’m insane.”

    Whether Ramos is sane is a matter for the court to determine. But there is an explanation for these hostile words – which he cribbed from the protagonist in “Berserk” – and it has to do with Ramos’ worldview, which needs to be more clearly understood.

    As Hutson points out, the killing of journalists is something League of the South leader Michael Hill has openly called for as part of his call for the formation of death squads to kill journalists, elected officials, and “the elite”:


    The alt-right half of the Rosetta Stone

    I believe Ramos contacted me initially because the Capital had reported on my connection to David Lenio, a white nationalist who had tweeted threats of a possible mass shooting, and also because I was researching and writing about ties between a local politician named Michael Peroutka and a right-wing group called the League of the South.

    The League is a theocratic, secessionist organization whose leader, Michael Hill, had called for the formation of death squads targeting journalists, elected officials and other members of “the elite.” In his essay “A Bazooka in Every Pot,” Hill described such an assassination campaign as part of “fourth-generation warfare,” a style of decentralized conflict that blurs the lines between war and politics, combatants and civilians.

    Hill wrote: “To oversimplify, the primary targets will not be enemy soldiers; instead, they will be political leaders, members of the hostile media, cultural icons, bureaucrats, and other of the managerial elite without whom the engines of tyranny don’t run.”

    That was not Hill’s only overt call to violence. He followed up with another essay calling for young men of “Christendom” to become “citizen-soldiers” to destroy the “galloping tyranny” of our time.

    As for Peroutka, he is a neo-Confederate theocrat who thinks that the wrong side won the Civil War and that our real national anthem is “Dixie.” He is also a former board member of the League, which had endorsed his successful 2014 campaign for a seat on Maryland’s Anne Arundel County Council, running as a Republican. This is the same League that helped organize the infamous torch-lit Unite the Right march in Charlottesville, Virginia, last summer.

    Over a seven year period of tweets, Ramos only references two politicians: Mike Peroutka and Donald Trump:


    Over a period of nearly seven years, Peroutka is one of only two politicians whom Ramos tweeted about – the other being Donald Trump, who has repeatedly vilified journalists.

    And while Ramos doesn’t appear to be affiliated with any political party, that shouldn’t be too surprising when we learn that he was immersed in ideologies that promotes lone wolf violence. He probably wasn’t going to be very interested in party politics:


    Jarrod Ramos is not affiliated with any political party, and there is no evidence that he was politically motivated or that he acted on anyone’s orders. On the other hand, as Salon’s Paul Rosenberg has reported, he was influenced by the rhetoric and ideology of the racist alt-right. And like Hill, Ramos showed bold belligerence toward managerial elites whom he viewed as enemies.

    For example, Ramos wrote in his @EricHartleyFrnd Twitter bio (which he named in apparent mockery of a former Capital columnist whom Ramos had sued unsuccessfully for defamation), “Dear reader: I created this page to defend myself. Now I’m suing the shit out of half of AA County and making corpses of corrupt careers and corporate entities.”

    Justice and public safety require that we consider the context, including multiple influences and possible triggers, when a suspect faces mass murder charges. Therefore, it is fair and necessary to ask whether President Trump’s demagoguery against journalists could trigger some lone nut to murder them. As researcher Chip Berlet has written, sociologists call such a violent response to coded rhetoric “scripted violence” – and “heroes know which villains to kill.” Followers thus don’t require specific orders, but gather a sense of validation and righteousness in carrying out a violent campaign of societal purification against people designated as corrupting influences.

    This suspect had a simmering feud for seven years with the Capital, its former publisher and Eric Hartley, the former columnist whom he had sued unsuccessfully. Ramos created a website on which he posted documents and communications about his case, describing himself as an agent of “the Inquisition” and “a crusader” who answered to a “Higher Authority” than civil government and who meted out literal “carnage” to his foes.

    Ramos wrote of his perceived enemies: “The authority that permits their power also stands poised to punish its abuse. Even kings must answer to God, and a modern day Inquisition is at hand. The potential judgement is no less severe; the carnage differs only in literal terms. As this search for Truth commences, a crusader they could not kill approaches.”

    His crusade targeted court officials as well as journalists, whom he considered dishonest. For example, Ramos tweeted a quote from German poet Paul Gerhardt: “When a man lies, he murders some part of the world.” Ramos concluded, “Time to slay some murderous shitbag esquires.” In another tweet criticizing “inequity in the MD justice system,” he said: “Here’s to Higher Authority hearing and #hurting.”

    Ramos’s tweet in reference to a 16th century church court case, Mitford v. Shaw, that found defamation a violation of God’s law, was particularly telling about what motivated the attack on the Capital Gazette given that Ramos’s primary complaint was that they defamed his character:


    To Ramos, defamation is a violation of common law but, more important, a violation of God’s law that is worthy of hellfire.

    For example, he once tweeted: “Catholicism still says liars go to hell.”

    He also tweeted, without attribution or citation, a quote from a 16th-century church court case: “Again, my unruly tongue, if it were not punished, it would not only set more of you on fire, but it would bolden others to do the like.” This quote is from a confession to defamation in Mitford v. Shaw, an ecclesiastical court case from 1569-70. Church courts in England had jurisdiction over cases of defamation when the plaintiff’s claim was not for money damages but for the correction of a sin. (Common law courts oversaw claims for money damages.) Church courts sentenced violators to do public penance, on pain of excommunication.

    In the Mitford case, when the church court found Charles Shaw guilty of slander, he did penance by standing up in church, wearing linen apparel, and reading his confessional statement, which equates slander to murder, worthy of divine retribution.

    Shaw stated, “I acknowledge thus to slander my Christian brother is an heinous offence, first towards God, who hath straightly forbidden it in his holy laws, accounting it to be a kind of murdering of my neighbor, and threatening to punish it with hellfire and the loss of the kingdom of heaven.”

    And that desire to see ecclesiastical courts replace the American judicial system just happens to be part of Peroutka’s and Hill’s worldview. They believe church courts are the only valid court (as long as they enforce their particular interpretation of Biblical law):


    Modern-day theocrats, such as Peroutka, would like to see ecclesiastical courts replace the American judicial system. At a 2016 Summer of Justice rally in Wichita, Kansas, which took place the same week as the Republican National Convention in Cleveland, Peroutka called on his fellow Christian nationalists to “take dominion over these positions of civil authority” in order to “interpose” against laws that don’t square with their notion of God’s law.

    Peroutka claimed that the only valid laws are ones which adhere to this fundamentalist vision of the Constitution and the Bible. “What if the Congress did pass a law allowing abortion? And then what if a sitting president signed it and a sitting court validated it?” he asked. “Would it be the law? No, of course not.” Then he slung on his guitar and filmed the crowd for a video for his new song, “Courts cannot make law.”

    Near the end of the Summer of Justice, the anti-abortion group Operation Save America staged a kangaroo “ecclesiastical court” which declared that Supreme Court rulings on abortion rights, LGBTQ rights, marriage equality and the removal of government-sponsored prayer in schools were contrary to God’s law. Eight “judges” took turns reading “charges” against the Supreme Court and then declared their decisions “null and void.”

    The judges included the Rev. Matt Trewhella, leader of the Milwaukee-based Missionaries to the Preborn, who had signed a statement in 1993 declaring that the murder of abortion providers was “justifiable homicide.” Convicted murderers Paul Hill and Michael Griffin later unsuccessfully used “justifiable homicide” defenses in their trials for killing abortion providers.

    Ramos’ tweets make clear that in his theological view, journalists who had allegedly framed him and court officers who had supposedly lied about him were as guilty as murderers and would ultimately answer to God. He saw himself as an agent of divine retribution. He was not subtle about how he would punish the sin of defamation.

    He tweeted: “Awaiting reprisal, death will be their acquisition.” This is a misquoted lyric from a thrash metal song by Slayer, “Raining Blood.” The actual line is: “Awaiting reprisal, death will be their acquittance.” The song ends with a vision of victims’ blood deluging a revenge-driven killer: “Raining blood from a lacerated sky, bleeding its horror, creating my structure. Now I shall reign in blood!”

    “Ramos came to see himself as some kind of vigilante for righteousness, casting himself for example as a ‘crusader’ and gunning down innocent people in a newsroom,” Political Research Associates analyst Frederick Clarkson told Salon. This vision was “not unlike the militaristic, millennial vision of Michael Hill,” he continued. “Last year [Hill] rallied what he calls the Southern Defense Force, which he envisions as not just a modern Confederate army but the ‘Army of the True Living God.’”

    So it makes sense that Ramos, who has metaphorically casts himself as a Christian holy warrior, would identify with Peroutka, a dyed-in-the-wool theocrat who has argued that civil servants must disobey any laws believed to be contrary to God’s law. Ramos tweeted three times in defense of Peroutka, once to crow to Rema Rahman, a journalist at the Capital, about Peroutka’s 2014 election to the Anne Arundel County Council. He tweeted: “Peroutka won and you lost @remawriter. Get over it. You’re already going to Hell, so why not concern yourself with more relevant matters?”

    He tweeted again to tell Rahman to “shut the fu ck up” after she wrote a piece reporting that illegal robocalls might have helped put Peroutka’s campaign over the top. He said: “It’s not your place, so shut the fu ck up @capgaznews. Peroutka’s columns don’t get the pickled shit sued out of him.”

    He also tweeted: “Why are they so obsessed about Peroutka @capgaznews?” He added the hashtag #CapDeathWatch.

    And other than his tweets defending Peroutka, the only other politician Ramos tweeted about, and defended, was President Trump:


    Ramos, who nursed grievances against perceived injustices, and who had sued a newspaper for defamation, also identified with Donald Trump. In response to an opinion column in the Capital that questioned Trump’s qualifications for the presidency, he tweeted a warning: “Referring to @realDonaldTrump as ‘unqualified’ @capgaznews could end badly (again).” His tweet linked to a Wall Street Journal article about Trump’s lawsuit against Univision, claiming breach of contract and defamation.

    The next day, Ramos tweeted: “Fu ck you, leave me alone,” and linked to a Maryland appellate court document upholding the dismissal of his defamation case against the Capital. It is reasonable to assume that this angry comment was directed at the journalists and newspaper who had bested him in court, and perhaps also at attorneys and judges.

    And as Hutson observes, three days before the attack on the Cpatial Gazette, President Trump once again called the media the “enemy of the people” and the next day Mike Peroutka lost his primary bid:


    The embittered suspect with a vendetta against a local newspaper the justice system had been simmering since 2011. What triggered him in 2018? I don’t know. But shortly before the massacre, two things happened that could have been factors. Three days before the shooting, Donald Trump had pointed out members of the news media at a big outdoor rally in South Carolina, demonizing them as “enemies of the people.” This is a phrase that demagogues throughout history, from the French Revolution to Nazi Germany and Stalinist Russia, have understood and used as an incitement to violence. A day later, Peroutka was defeated in his 2018 re-election bid, losing to a female candidate in the Republican primary.

    So that all is probably the best explanation we’re going to get for understanding what drove the guy to attack a newspaper. It certainly explains the motivation.

    Then there’s there other influence that clearly shaped Ramos: “Berserk”, a bloody anime show and movie series that features “hand of God” vigilante assassins. Three minutes before the attack, he tweeted out a reference to Berserk:


    The “Berserk” half of the Rosetta Stone

    The other, seemingly unrelated element of Ramos’ worldview is drawn from the world of anime, the source of his final, cryptic tweet, approximately three minutes before the shooting began. It was a peculiar expression he had used before: “Fu ck you, leave me alone.” This world of manga and anime informed the suspect’s hero-versus-villain worldview and also the way he expressed it through language and religious symbolic imagery. While his tweets referenced mainstream sci-fi touchstones, such as “Star Wars” and “Star Trek,” his primary influence was the universe of “Berserk,” a blood-and-guts manga, anime and movie series that has also inspired several video games.

    Ramos tweeted numerous references to “Berserk” characters, paraphrased quotes from them, and used symbolism drawn from the series. He described himself as playing a role in the world of “Berserk” and hinted that an understanding of its fictional world was key to understanding his “psyche.” Indeed, in a letter he wrote stating his intention of “killing every person present” in the Capital newsroom, he quoted from “Berserk.” As mentioned above, he did so again in his final tweet before the shooting began.

    Ramos tweeted to ask whether Eric Hartley, the former Capital columnist, was “Ordained to Be Murdered by the God Hand?” In “Berserk,” the God Hand is a group of the five most powerful demons. The photo on Ramos’ Twitter avatar was the face of Hartley, with a Berserk symbol pasted over it – a brand that marks victims for demonic sacrifice.

    He tweeted, “Judge Nick doesn’t believe in the God Hand. I play a well-established part of that system by tweeting of it.” It appears that Ramos identified with the world of “Berserk” and saw himself as playing a part in it.

    Ramos also marked former Capital Gazette publisher Thomas Marquardt — whom he nicknamed “Evil Tom” — with the demonic brand, in the banner image for the Twitter account @EricHartleyFrnd. To Ramos, the brand signified that it was “Open Season” to hunt and kill. He tweeted, “Another stooge @capgaznews says Evil Tom is going on his own terms? That mark on his head is called Brand of Sacrifice; or now, Open Season.” He also tweeted a YouTube link to the song “Murder” from the “Berserk” soundtrack.

    He repeatedly referenced a vampire character from “Berserk,” Nosferatu Zodd, and tweeted an image of Zodd. He tweeted: “If you think this man [wants to be] your friend, know this: when his ambition crumbles, death will come for you — a death you cannot escape.” This is a paraphrased quote from Zodd, who said, “If you consider this man your true friend, and regard him as a brother, then know this. When this man’s ambition crumbles, it is your destiny to face your death. A death you can never escape!”

    Ramos also identified with “Berserk” characters on several other occasions. He tweeted, “I told you once. I will have my own kingdom. Nothing has changed.” This is a close paraphrase of a quote from the character Griffith, who said, “I told you once, I will get my own kingdom. Nothing has changed.”

    He tweeted, “I’m Femto. I can also do whatever I want. I will have my own kingdom. I will choose the place you die,” adding a link to a trailer for “Berserk.” Griffith dies and is reborn as Femto, a member of the God Hand, who is undeterred by moral inhibitions. Femto becomes the spearhead of the God Hand’s schemes.

    Ramos tweeted the anime cover art from “Berserk – The Golden Age Arc Movie Collection” on DVD, which features the protagonist Guts. He twice quoted Guts, a swordsman motivated by revenge whose left forearm is replaced by a prosthetic which can be fitted with a cannon. Guts kills many enemies, including his primary antagonist, Bishop Mozgus, who is a demon spawn with angelic wings. Before delivering the coup de grâce, Guts tells Mozgus, “If you meet your God, say this for me … Leave me the hell alone!”

    The latter is one of the most popular quotes among “Berserk” fans. However, some translate the quote, or paraphrase it differently. For example: “If you meet your God, tell him to leave me the fu ck alone!”

    Or, as Ramos tweeted, some three minutes before the shooting: “Fu ck you, leave me alone.” He then added another of his Twitter handles, @JudgeMoylanFrnd, which features the face of Charles Moylan, the judge who had dismissed his defamation case, marked with the brand of sacrifice.

    Guts’ message for Mozgus to take to his god is a familiar trope in action movies, the sort of comment that a protagonist makes before dispatching a villain, such as “I’ll see you in Hell,” “See you on the other side,” or “Hasta la vista, baby.” However, this “Leave me alone” message is not meant for the people whom the protagonist is about to kill; it is for them to carry to their god.

    In light of Ramos’ having previously tweeted this same language in anger at both the Capital and Maryland court officials, and that this closely tracks what Guts tells his primary antagonist before delivering the killing blow, Ramos was making clear his intent to kill. In the context of scripted violence, as when a politician uses his office to demonize journalists, individuals who view themselves as holy warriors or heroes motivated by a sense of grievance know which villains to kill.

    Ramos, who represented himself in his defamation case against the Capital, insisted that he was sane and that he had not been merely fantasizing online about being a predator. He wrote on his website, “I’ve been learning law for a different kind of game. It’s no publicity stunt, nor clinical insanity, nor predatory Internet fantasy, but very dangerous indeed.”

    In the same document, he wrote, “Much like a life, what is the price of a name? Are these even two different questions?” Like the 16th-century English penitent who confessed to defamation in Mitford v. Shaw, calling it a kind of murder, Ramos equates the loss of his good name with the loss of a life. This is akin to the reasoning of those who kill abortion providers: If, according to their understanding of God’s law, abortion is murder, then those who provide abortions are subject to death. Likewise, if a theocrat believes defamation to be a kind of murder, then what is the penalty?

    After years of build-up, Ramos became a self-righteous, avenging character he had invented for himself, and announced his intent to kill, writing to the newspaper’s former attorney and to Maryland court officials that he was on his way to the Capital newsroom “with the objective of killing every person present.”. They received the letters after the massacre. In a letter to Judge Moylan, he wrote, “Welcome, Mr. Moylan, to your unexpected legacy: YOU should have died.” He signed off, “Friends forever, Jarrod W. Ramos.”

    Here again, Ramos is quoting from Berserk.

    So, thanks to Hutson’s research in Ramos, we have a much better idea of what motivated this attack. It appears to have been driven by a toxic mix of personal grievance and religous zeal. A religious zeal shared and promoted by figures like Hill who has called for death squads to murder journalists they disagree with.

    Posted by Pterrafractyl | July 23, 2018, 12:53 pm

Post a comment