NPR: ‘Patriots’ Are Dangerous to Our Government

For Advertising Info, Write.
rwnews@blogads.com

Premium Left blogad

Left Blog Ad

Permalinks

NPR: ‘Patriots’ Are Dangerous to Our Government

Written By : Warner Todd Huston

Public supported National Public Radio (NPR) posted a report on March 17 during its “All Things Considered” radio show that warns its listeners that “patriot groups” are dangerous and are apparently increasingly prone to attacking government officials and facilities. Oddly the two examples it uses to prove its case have no ties whatsoever to any “patriot groups.”

Headlined, “Hostility Against Federal Workers Troubles Officials,” NPR blames “patriot groups” on these attacks and worries that “anti-government hate groups” are on the “upsurge.” And what does NPR use to prove its case? Nothing but the say so the left-wing Southern Poverty Law Center and a misconstruction of two recent attacks on government facilities by disturbed individuals.

NPR ominously begins its report with this:

Three attacks on U.S. government employees this year, along with an upsurge in anti-government hate groups, have officials in Washington concerned about the safety of federal workers.

The piece goes on to report that this sort of violence is a “troubling trend” and lays it all at the feet of “patriot and militia groups.”

NPR then tries to prove its case by discussing the two most recent sensational attackers on government facilities; Joe Stack and John Patrick Bedell.

Joe Stack, a disturbed man who crashed his small plane into an IRS building in Austin, Texas back in February, was not known to have any ties to any tea party group, any “patriot” group, or other right-wing groups. His manifesto reads like a confused communist rant with hate for the U.S. government and George W. Bush liberally sprinkled throughout. But NPR lumps this nut in with the right with claims that they are all dangerous to government officials and facilities.

NPR similarly uses as proof of these dangerous patriots the disturbed actions of John Patrick Bedell who opened fire on officers near the Pentagon on March 4. Bedell was an anti-war protestor, heavy marijuana user, and exhibited paranoia for which he refused to seek medical help. Bedell also has no known ties to tea party groups, any political organizations, or NPR’s frightening “patriot groups.”

Yet NPR put forth both of these sick-minded men as examples of “patriots” that have become dangerous and unstable. If NPR wasn’t saying so why include them in this report?

Naturally for its “expert” on dangerous patriots NPR turns to Mark Potok, the director of the liberal Southern Poverty Law Center. As always, Potok cites claims of a “huge growth in the so-called patriot movement that includes militias out there.” Not that NPR offers any actual proof other than Potok’s say so, of course.

“We’ve seen in particular a huge growth in the so-called patriot movement that includes militias out there,” Potok says. “And I think that some of the violence that we’ve seen, such as the Pentagon shooter and the IRS, are at least in some way a reflection of that rage.”

Potok says there are now more than 500 patriot and militia groups active in the U.S., more than triple the number in 2008.

Again, NPR trots out Potok to warn of those evil, evil right-wing patriots and tries to back his claims up with two crazy people that have no ties at all to those same right-wing patriot groups that are being blamed for this “upsurge” in violence.

What NPR doesn’t tell you is the sort of people that work wt. the SPLC. Chip Berlet, for instance, is one of those people. Berlet has all sorts of extremist, left-wing associates (like anti-American billionaire financier George Soros) and is a member of other far left organizations such as the Socialist Workers Party. Here is an entry on Berlet in discoverthenetwork.org nestled in a page about the left-wing Tides Foundation:

Berlet is a senior analyst for Political Research Associates, and has had affiliations with the American Civil Liberties Union, the American Friends Service Committee, the Christic Institute, the Socialist Workers Party, the National Lawyers Guild, and the Southern Poverty Law Center.

To show how unbiased SLPC’s Chip Berlet is, he once wrote that, “right-wing foundations and think tanks support efforts to make bigoted and discredited ideas respectable.” Not too biased there, eh?

Discoverthenetwork.org also has a page on the SPLC itself.

So, for its expert on those monstrous patriot groups, NPR turns to a group that has ties to the Socialist Workers Party, George Soros, and the anti-Christian ACLU and then expects us to think such an organization should be accepted as an unbiased news source! Apparently NPR does expect us all to accept as gospel its left-biased report on how dangerous those “patriots” are, but I hope America is more skeptical than that.

Remember folks, our tax dollars support NPR.

Jack Schite

Simple minded conspiracy theories help you explain a world you don’t understand.

NPR is listener and corporate supported. The govt as the primary support of NPR ended before you were born.

Conservatives spend more time attacking the messenger than they do ideas, because conservatives like ideas.

Calling the president a foreign born Marxist who wants to socialize and destroy the country is not only patently shamefully ignorantly completely stupid, it gives license to warped individuals to do stupid things that kill innocent people and don’t solve anything, like the examples cited.
Jack Schite

Conservatives don’t like ideas, they lack ideas.

Conservatives like, love, embrace ignorance.
tblrk2006

Posted by Jack Schite
2010-03-18 14:24:33

Posted by Jack Schite
2010-03-18 14:26:33

Gettin scared arent you? You had your oportunity to try and govern, and you failed miserably. To add insult to injury your now trying to userp the vote to get your agenda pushed. Lots of people are watching.

Back to topic.

Funny how the title is “……dangerous to our govt.” Not dangerous to our freedom, or dangerous to our citizens…..no, dangerous to the govt! Your damn right we are dangerous to tyranical govts.
http://PatriotPost.US bthewolf

http://www.tvsquad.com/2007/07/22/congress-saves-public-television-from-massive-funding-cuts/

Tax payer dollars support public broadcasting whether it’s a majority or not is not important Jack Auff. And no where does WTH state it’s a MAJORITY of the funding. It’s your complete ignorance in projecting it self in your every post.
fiscal_conservative

Warner,
“NPR blames “patriot groups” on these attacks.” I read the link provided. Where did it say this? This isn’t even good spin. NPR accurately quotes a person interviewed, not leaving out contextual verbage, and you take this and interpret this as an attack on the right. Unless it was written in very small font, at no point did they mention the right.
Hotspur

Posted by fiscal_conservative
2010-03-18 15:02:29
It insinuates it by quoting from those who try to implicate “patriot movements”. Try again.

Posted by Jack Schite
2010-03-18 14:26:33

And that has what to do with the topic? True to form, Jack: Can’t beat’em? Ad hominem.
tblrk2006

Posted by fiscal_conservative
2010-03-18 15:02:29

Janet, you haveing a hard time figuring out what they mean when they say “patriot groups?” You gloss over the fact they attach a photo of the IRS bomber, a left winger, with the article about patriots?
impulse910

People shouldn’t be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people.
Jack Schite

“You had your oportunity to try and govern, and you failed miserably”

yeah in spite of republican obstructionism we are making important changes to health care and euthenizing all conservatives at the same time.

“Your damn right we are dangerous to tyranical govts.”

You mean “you’re” and our government was freely elected by a majority of voters, you dumb shit.
http://Kingfisher Kingfisher

yeah in spite of republican obstructionism we are making important changes to health care and euthenizing all conservatives at the same time.

Yeah, the Republican supermajority really put you guys on the defensive! (/sarc)
fiza

Wow, get this!

“What NPR doesn’t tell you is the sort of people that work wt. the SPLC. Chip Berlet, for instance, is one of those people. Berlet has all sorts of extremist, left-wing associates (like anti-American billionaire financier George Soros) and is a member of other far left organizations such as the Socialist Workers Party. Here is an entry on Berlet in discoverthenetwork.org nestled in a page about the left-wing Tides Foundation:

“Berlet is a senior analyst for Political Research Associates, and has had affiliations with the American Civil Liberties Union, the American Friends Service Committee, the Christic Institute, the Socialist Workers Party, the National Lawyers Guild, and the Southern Poverty Law Center.”"

What is wrong with being associated with George Soros? Something wrong with that, Mr. Huston? Tell us why?

The author of this topic quoted from discoverthenetworks.org on Chip Berlet. Why is discoverthenetworks.com bashing Berlet? Here is what Chip Berlet says about David Horowitz, who runs discoverthenetworks.com:

“Chip Berlet, writing for the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), an organization devoted to “combat racism and promote civil rights through research, education and litigation,” identified the CSPC (now DHFC) as one of 17 “right-wing foundations and think tanks support[ing] efforts to make bigoted and discredited ideas respectable.” Berlet accused Horowitz of blaming slavery on “‘black Africans … abetted by dark-skinned Arabs’” and of “attack[ing] minority ‘demands for special treatment’ as ‘only necessary because some blacks can’t seem to locate the ladder of opportunity within reach of others,’ rejecting the idea that they could be the victims of lingering racism.”[4]

Responding with an open letter to Morris Dees, president of the SPLC, Horowitz stated that his reminder that the slaves transported to America were bought from African and Arab slavers was a response to demands that only whites pay blacks reparations, not to hold Africans and Arabs solely responsible for slavery, and that the statement that he had denied lingering racism was “a calculated and carefully constructed lie.” The letter said that Berlet’s work was “so tendentious, so filled with transparent misrepresentations and smears that if you continue to post the report you will create for your Southern Poverty Law Center a well-earned reputation as a hate group itself.”[5] The SPLC refused,[16] and subsequent critical pieces on Berlet and the SPLC have been featured on Horowitz’s website and personal blog.[6][7]”

The above quite was taked from Wikipedia’s entry on Chip Berlet. Thank you, Wikipedia!
Jack Schite

Well David Horowitz is full of shit about the African slaves and in general. He’s better left ignored, like Glenn Beck. Horowitz is rightfully called in on his typically ignorant revisionist history that is unsupported by any scholarly research. What an asshole.

You have to be a pretty big fuckwad, a limbaugh sized fuckwad on prescrption drugs, to dismiss the SPLC, which does tremendously important and in depth research and legal work, like when they delegated racist Tom Metzger to the historical cesspool where he belongs.

Can you name anything Horowitz has done since he became a conservative to advance the cause for anyone less fortunate then himself?
Jack Schite

Horowitz is on wife number four.

There’s someone a republican would trust.
Hotspur

Posted by Jack Schite
2010-03-18 17:23:54

Slavery in the east
However, Europe did not have a monopoly on slavery. Muslim traders also exported as many as 17 million slaves to the coast of the Indian Ocean, the Middle East, and North Africa.

Link: Here’s your proof
————————————
Horowitz is on wife number four.

There’s someone a republican would trust.
Posted by Jack Schite
2010-03-18 17:26:39

Liberal motto: Can’t beat’em? Ad hominem.

Try again, troll.
Hotspur

Just copy and paste the link, Jack… if you can manage that.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/1523100.stm
tblrk2006

Horowitz is on wife number four.

There’s someone a republican would trust.
Posted by Jack Schite
2010-03-18 17:26:39

HAHA….now this is funny. Do i need to start with obama and biden?
http://TheNixonTape.Blogspot.Com Dick_Nixon

Fiza the exploiter of illegal aliens is here pointing fingers? Surely not.

And the SPLC is a liberal organization to its core, a dangerous groups of cranks who like to point fingers. Ol Morris has made a mint from it over the years as well.
http://networdblog.blogspot.com/ Christopher_Taylor

I think they really believe this trash, just like the DHS believes that retarded “right wing domestic terrorist” report. Witness the trembling terror that even more stable left wingers like Huck had when they thought of the Tea Party. They think every conservative is a raging maniac barely restrained by the law and society’s pressure or something. Its really sad.
fiza

“Slavery in the east
However, Europe did not have a monopoly on slavery. Muslim traders also exported as many as 17 million slaves to the coast of the Indian Ocean, the Middle East, and North Africa.”

Posted by Hotspur
2010-03-18 17:50:48

What does your quote above have to do with slavery in America, the land of democracy and the free, where all men are created equal?
How was a slave counted in America? Was it 3/5 of a white man?
http://www.getclassichardwood.com charliehall3

TOTALLY OFF-TOPIC HERE:

Who the f*ck is charliehall3? It ain’t me! I go to sign in on this web-site and it tells me I’m “logged in as charliehall3.” Is he some dick who’s piggybacking on my wireless, or what?

I had this same problem with “StaninTexas.”

Who ARE these goddamned people?!

RKae (NOT charliehall3)
http://TheNixonTape.Blogspot.Com Dick_Nixon

fiza, perhaps you can explain how your Democratic party supported the institution of chattel slavery until the GOP led Union ended it once and for all time.

Then, explain Kleagle Byrd.
Hotspur

Posted by fiza
2010-03-18 19:07:58

Wow, great rebuttal.

Except for the fact that if they didn’t do that slavery would have lasted longer, since the South was counting slaves as full citizens in the Census. Thus, the South would have had more representation in Congress. Which, in turn, would have meant that the South would have controlled pretty much anything since in some states the slaves outnumbered the white citizens. Yes, it wasn’t ideal. But it could and would have been much worse.

Try again.
fiza

fiza, perhaps you can explain how your Democratic party supported the institution of chattel slavery until the GOP led Union ended it once and for all time.

Then, explain Kleagle Byrd.
Posted by Dick_Nixon
2010-03-18 19:39:20

As you well know, the Democratic party principles changed over the years. Are you claiming that the majority of the Democrats in the 1950′s and 1960′s were anti civil rights, or even pro slavery?
Excepting the southern state Democrats, what party fought for and passed the civil rights laws in the 1960′s? What president ORDERED the US armed forces to integrate? How many southern Democratic politicians and citizens who normally supported the Democrats switched to the Republican party?

Yes, Byrd was a member of the KKK. Now let’s talk about Strom Thurmond. Didn’t he run for president as a segregationist? What was Strom’s famous filibuster about? What was that party that willingly accepted Strom when he bolted from the new Democratic party. Wasn’t Strom one of the most powerful and influental Republicans in the senate?

PS, do you want me to dig up some of your hero Nixon’s racial remarks? Huh?
http://networdblog.blogspot.com/ Christopher_Taylor

Yeah the Klan was all Democrats, no denying that. And the Democrats today oppose school choice which blacks want so much, support gay marriage that blacks oppose so strongly, support abortion to the point of wanting federal funding for it which disproportionately affects blacks, and want to continue and increase the policies which have been so destructive to blacks in the inner cities and black families. Seems like they really haven’t changed at all.

Not really sure what the hell all this has to do with the left freaking out about patriotism and calling right wingers murderous terrorists for loving their country, though.
http://www.publiusforum.com Warner Todd Huston

…”NPR is listener and corporate supported. The govt as the primary support of NPR ended before you were born. ”

This is not exactly true. Yes, NPR only gets about 2% of its budget from direct federal grants, but it makes a large part of its $ from payments and fees from the various NPR affiliated radio stations that broadcast its junk. And guess what? THOSE stations are often in universities and paid for by… you guessed it… government grants. So, because NPR doesn’t have to pay as much for broadcasting facilities THAT adds a ton of government supported value to its operations.

But it is ALSO not correct to say it gets its “primary” support from corporations because corporate donations only make up about 23% of its budget.

But the truth of the matter is NO government money AT ALL should go to this endeavor. None. Not one red cent. Nada. Zippo. It is an illicit expenditure of tax money. Period.
http://guardian.blogdrive.com/ CavalierX

As you well know, the Democratic party principles changed over the years.

Yeah, they went from keeping blacks enslaved by force to teaching them to enslave themselves.
fiza

“Yeah the Klan was all Democrats, no denying that.”

Posted by Christopher_Taylor
2010-03-18 21:25:04

Now they are ALL far right wing Republicans. Not a single one is a Democrat. No denying that either!
tblrk2006

Now they are ALL far right wing Republicans. Not a single one is a Democrat. No denying that either!
Posted by fiza
2010-03-19 10:40:21

Byrd
tblrk2006

Oh you said now……….go ahead and prove that anyway.
http://PatriotPost.US bthewolf

Posted by fiza
2010-03-19 10:40:21

PROVE IT!!!!
jack

Strom Thurmond ran for president as a ‘dixiecrat’–a Democrat splinter party. He thought that the racist policies of the Democrats of the time (Jim Crow, ‘seperate but equal’) weren’t racist enough.

When he renounced his racism, he left the party of slavery.

Robert Byrd, a former Exalted Cyclops of the Ku Klux Klan, fought against Civil Rights. He took part in one of the longest filibusters in history against treating black people just like everyone else. This avowed racist stayed with the party of slavery and they rewarded him with the unofficial title ‘the Conscience of the Senate’.

Like the rest of the avowed racists in the party of slavery, he made no leap to the Republican party after passage of the Civil Rights Act, he stayed right where he was.

David Duke tried to whitewash himself into a republican. While running for election against Edwin Edwards, a convicted felon and Democrat, in Louisiana, the GOP supported, and suggested it’s members support Edwards over Duke.

The Republicans would rather have a criminal than a klansman.

For the Democrats, a klansman is one of their most revered members.
http://networdblog.blogspot.com/ Christopher_Taylor

What’s funny is that this fool leftist is all worked up that Strom Thurmond was a Republican. He thinks that being a southern segregationist is a horrible, racist past that cannot be forgiven and not only permanently blights Thurmond but his entire party.

So… if that’s all true, what does Byrd, a KKK leader do to his entire party?
fiza

Posted by jack
2010-03-19 12:49:36

Are you actually so naive to think that the modern Democratic party of the 1950′s and 1960′s was still the party of slavery? When President Truman put civil rights reform goals in the party platform, Thurmond, as you well know, could not accept that and ran for president as a SEGREGATIONIST. Get that? Except for the southern holdouts like Thurmond and the rest of the so-called Dixiecrats, the Democratic party was pro civil rights. If you can’t see that, you are totally hopeless. After Johnson’s successful push for civil rights laws, the segregationist Dixiecrats considered their fellow southerner a traitor, a traitor who once opposed Truman’s civil rights platform. The Republican party, which actually didn’t hold the same views of the disgruntled, pro-segregation Dixicrats, welcomed them anyway. I’ll give them that much. Strom Thurmond was welcomed into the GOP party of Lincoln in 1964. Wow, a segregationist being welcomed by the GOP! Anything for more votes in the south and it worked.
If Johnson reformed, maybe Thurmond and Byrd could have reformed too. Both, as you should know, opposed and filibustered against civil rights legislation. Too bad Byrd didn’t change parties. Then y’all would forgive and love him, just like you just love o’l Strom.
http://networdblog.blogspot.com/ Christopher_Taylor

Who says anyone loves and forgives Strom? I thought he was a worthless dinosaur who should have been tossed from office long before he died. Its the left that loves Byrd, ex-klan leader and honored by the Democratic Party and leftists everywhere. They call him the “conscience of the Senate” for God’s sake.