Archive for the 'Southern Poverty Law Center' Category

Ron Paul Tara Thai was filed at FEC July 2007 before Bill White

December 24, 2007

Bill White has posted a claim that Ron Paul attended a dinner at the restaurant Tara Thai with him and others whom SPLC and others call white nationalist and white supremacist.

Bill White appears to have posted his claim Dec 20, 2007

http://www.vnnforum.com/showthread.php?t=63682

“Ron Paul Lies About Lack Of Involvement With White Nationalists”

Both Congressman Paul and his aides regularly meet with members of the Stormfront set, American Renaissance, the Institute for Historic Review, and others at the Tara Thai restaurant in Arlington, Virginia, usually on Wednesdays. This is part of a dinner that was originally organized by Pat Buchanan, Sam Francis and Joe Sobran, and has since been mostly taken over by the Council of Conservative Citizens.

I have attended these dinners, seen Paul and his aides there, and been invited to his offices in Washington to discuss policy.

There is an FEC Filing from the Ron Paul campaign with a Tara Thai expense dated December 15, 2007. When was it posted?

http://query.nictusa.com/pres/2007/Q3/C00432914/B_PAYEE_C00432914.html

This report on Tara Thai says

Tara Thai 314.59

Generated Sat Dec 15 18:58:38 2007

This link is from Charles Johnson at who credits one of the LGF lizards (Hat tip: Render.)

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=28341_Neo-Nazis_Say-_Ron_Paul_is_One_of_Us&only
Thus it is conceivable that White found this report and used it for the Tara Thai. There may also be previous dinners at Tara Thai and Ron Paul on previous reports as well. In fact, there is one for second quarter filed in July 2007.

http://query.nictusa.com/pres/2007/Q2/C00432914/B_PAYEE_C00432914.html

Tara Thai 143.70

Generated Sun Jul 15 14:43:58 2007

These two Tara Thai dinners, in the December 15 and July 15 reports, appear to be purchases by the entire table not one person. It doesn’t make sense that Ron Paul’s campaign paid for the dinner alleged above by White, he would have paid his own or someone else would have paid. (Note that it was LGF that linked to that expense, not White.) These appear to be dinners by the Ron Paul campaign staff who paid for their entire dinner with a check from the campaign.

There is a third report for First Quarter 2007

http://query.nictusa.com/pres/2007/Q1/C00432914/B_PAYEE_C00432914.html

Tara Thai 39.14

Generated Sat Jul 14 20:04:04 2007

site:query.nictusa.com Ron Paul “Tara Thai”

Thus White could have found these reports from July 14, July 15, or December 15, 2007 and used Tara Thai based on those.

search Ron Paul “Tara Thai”

Tara Thai Arlington, Virginia 22201

4001 Fairfax Dr
Arlington, VA 22203
(703) 908-4999
Get directions

The Ron Paul campaign used the following address for the 3rd quarter report:

3461 Washington Blvd Suite 200
Arlington, Virginia 22201

This address is also listed for mail for the Ron Paul campaign.

http://www.ronpaul2008.com/contact/

By Phone

703-248-9115

By Mail

3461 Washington Blvd., Suite 200
Arlington, VA 22201

It is .2 miles from this Ron Paul address to a Tara Thai restaurant:

http://www.mapquest.com/directions/main.adp?go=1&do=nw&rmm=1&un=m&cl=EN&qq=hltF3hzNT9tNhURP0HLlhh9UYBmHRqyBceg4Gkon14D8uewLk7pjHQ%253d%253d&ct=NA&rsres=1&1y=US&1ffi=&1l=&1g=&1pl=&1v=&1n=&1pn=&1a=3461+Washington+Blvd+&1c=&1s=&1z=22201+&2y=US&2ffi=&2l=&2g=&2pl=&2v=&2n=&2pn=&2a=4001+Fairfax+Dr&2c=&2s=&2z=22203&r=f

So the Tara Thai restaurant is a short walk from Ron Paul’s campaign address as of the third quarter filing. They may have had an office there and still filed the first and second quarter reports using the Texas address, 837 W Plantation Dr
Clute, Texas 77531.

Articles or posts on this story

Justin Raimondo is very good on this here:

http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=12102

Secondly, the man who organized the dinner meetings “Commander” White refers to, Peter Gemma, has this to say:

“I ran those dinners – Ron Paul was never there… If Bill White ever came to the meetings, he didn’t use his real name – he doesn’t even get the name of the restaurant correctly.”

His article or others cited have provided links below.

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2007/12/neonazi_complains_about_ron_pa.html

SPLC bio of Bill White

http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?pid=216

William A. White, 26 | SILVER SPRING, Md. (from 2003)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_White_(neo-nazi)

In late 2003, White moved to Roanoke, Virginia,

Ref on related stories trying to tie Paul to the white right.
http://lonestartimes.com/2007/12/19/rpb3/

http://lonestartimes.com/2007/12/20/want-photos/

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=28341_Neo-Nazis_Say-_Ron_Paul_is_One_of_Us&only

More corroboration of the neo-Nazi’s claim: Extremist Group Announces Speech by Congressman.

Actually this is poorly worded. It doesn’t corroborate the specific claim of a dinner involving Ron Paul and Bill White.

SPLC on Robert Taft Dinner organized by Marcus Epstein for Ron Paul to speak:

http://www.splcenter.org/blog/2007/10/08/extremist-group-announces-speech-by-congressman/

SPLC is trying to prevent whites, whom they seem to target , from associating with whites. They are smearing whites meeting with whites to make whites afraid to meet with or talk to whites. That is the opposite of freedom of association.

That is the reductio ad Civil unRights that PC leads to. Ron Paul pointed out in Meet the Press that you don’t have to submit to home invasion.

The SPLC idea is that if whites meet with whites, the Nazi White Nationalist White Supremacist Bound is passed and this proves they are plotting a white supremacist comeback. Any meeting of whites is suspect in the SPLC inverted rights world.

The SPLC has a comment thread that has many comments that disagree with SPLC on this story.

=Ron Paul on Meet the Press

http://vanishingamerican.blogspot.com/2007/12/ron-paul-on-meet-press.html

See Vanishing American link above for link to Meet the Press Transcript (also below) and Youtube link as well.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22342301/

==

Note that it was LGF that claimed the Tara Thai expense by Ron Paul supported the claim of Bill White.

== More detail here

http://irregulartimes.com/index.php/archives/2007/12/20/tara-thai-ron-paul-and-white-supremacists-fec-report-data/ 

http://irregulartimes.com/index.php/archives/2007/12/20/occams-razor-and-ron-paul-tara-thai-expenses/

http://irregulartimes.com/index.php/archives/2007/12/20/ron-paul-bill-white/

The expenses show that none of the meals was on a Wednesday.  This was the alleged day of the meal.

=Disclaimer

This entire article is draft and preliminary. All statements should be restated as questions or hypotheses. All other disclaimers apply. Comments and corrections welcomed.

Draft Left Defines White Nationalism

November 24, 2007

The left approximately follows the following escalating levels of attack on whites. This doesn’t apply in all cases, but illustrates the phenomenon. We can formulate the following

Leftist Escalation of Attack Words Hypothesis

  1. Bigot or Nativist: Under leftism, any white who speaks up or about what is happening to whites, without using the word white.
  2. White nationalist. When the white uses the word white and just reports or repeats a fact incident, the left calls them white nationalist.
  3. White supremacist. If they say it should stop, the left calls them a white supremacist. If they propose specific action to make it stop, the likelihood of being called white supremacist goes up.

An example is the attacks on Brussels Journal, Vlaams Belang and Paul Belien by some at LGF. They were all attacked as white supremacist for not just saying what was happening to whites in Europe, but that what is happening to whites in Europe should stop.

Lets analyze the above paragraph. LGF reports on what is happening in Europe and condemns it. What is happening to whom? Its being done to white Europeans. But to say that is beyond the pale to LGF. Why does LGF condemn what is done to whites but that to say the victims are white Europeans they condemn? If they condemn what is done to whites, are they not saying it should stop being done to whites? But don’t want to say that explicitly?

Why do they say that stopping what is being done to whites in Europe is white supremacy? Filip Dewinter said he didn’t want his daughter to marry a black, and that is called white supremacism by his critics. But isn’t it rational?

As Steve Sailer documents, regression towards the mean in IQ means that children of black parents regress towards the mean of black IQ which is 85, 15 points below the white average. Thus a child of a white and black parent will, from this effect, tend to have a lower IQ than the white average. LGF condemned Filip Dewinter for wanting to avoid that. Why shouldn’t he?

Isn’t it irrational to want a lower IQ for your grand child? It would seem the definition of rationality would imply preferring high IQ to low IQ. Since marrying a black implies regression towards the black mean of lower IQ of 85 as Steve Sailer points out, this is irrational. Note that the black IQ is 85 in the U.S. In Africa its much lower. Europe has immigration of blacks primarily from Africa, so the black IQ there might be as low as 70. There has also been much less time for mixing there than in the U.S.

Being white and knowing the truth about statistics and data sources already makes you a covert white nationalist in the mind of the left. If you say the word white in relation to the victims identity, the left goes crazy. Even though they publicize hate crimes with black victims, if a white talks about white victims they are a racist to white nationalist to white supremacist. Saying the victims were white as a stand alone sentence is considered racist by many.

==Summary

If you tell what happens to whites in an incident or generally, the left calls you a bigot or nativist. If you use the word white while doing so, they call you a white nationalist. If you say it should stop, they call you a white supremacist. Listen to them. Observe them. This is real not just a joke. They are deadly serious.

==This is real

The EU has made it at least a draft policy to eliminate the white race in Europe and replace it with a mixed race.

http://vanishingamerican.blogspot.com/2007/11/wealth-of-mankind.html

VA quotes the following

EU Proposal for Mestizo Europe

BRUSSELS, July 27 (Reuters) – The European Union should admit up to 75 million immigrants over the next 50 years and be prepared to become a racially hybrid society, according to a paper to be discussed at an EU ministerial meeting on Friday.”

That’s a real government saying this as policy. They are doing it. They are doing it after the attacks in Malmo, London, Madrid, the car burnings in France, etc. After all this, they make it policy to eliminate the white race. This is the real thing. Its happening now. They are open about it.

The EU has taken ownership of London, Madrid, Malmo, the car burnings in France. The EU has said these are their policies. Listen, observe, believe. This is what is happening now. They say so.

==Following was after reading following discussion

http://vanishingamerican.blogspot.com/2007/11/america-people-of-no-race-no-nation.html

So is there something wrong with the term ‘white nationalist‘? I would say only the fact that it is necessary to prefix the term with the word ‘white.’ Old-style American nationalism (which undeniably many people find a negative word, preferring the term ‘patriotism’ which they find more positive) implies an identification with the traditional Anglo-Saxon culture of America.

Tanstaafl

http://age-of-treason.blogspot.com/2007/11/white-nationalism-and-anti-semitism.html

MM identifies Lawrence Auster, Vanishing American, John Savage, New Sisyphus, Age of Treason, and Old Atlantic Lighthouse as white-nationalist blogs.

Mencius Moldbug

http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.com/2007/11/why-i-am-not-white-nationalist.html

I am not a white nationalist, but I do read white-nationalist blogs, and I’m not afraid to link to them. The undisputed champion in this department is Larry Auster. I am also fond of Vanishing American, John Savage, New Sisyphus, Age of Treason, and Old Atlantic Lighthouse. The two central organs of intellectual white nationalism in the US are American Renaissance and VDare. If there is a European equivalent, it is probably Brussels Journal. On all these sites, you’ll find thoughtful, well-written commentary that will expand your mind. I’m not sure all these writers would accept the white-nationalist label – this is just my own description.

..

This is rather academic. Another approach is to say that white nationalism is what people who call themselves “white nationalists” believe. John Savage has a good link summary, featuring a friendly debate between Steve Sailer (who is perhaps best classified as a Sailerist, a label I’m not at all afraid to stick on my shirt) and the editor of American Renaissance, Jared Taylor.

Perhaps the best summary of the white nationalist case I’ve seen, however, is this essay by the Norwegian blogger known only as Fjordman.

==Old Atlantic and White Nationalism?

OA like Vdare does not adopt the term white nationalism. This is a term for discussion. I, like everyone else, am trying to sort this out in my mind as to where we are, where we are going, and what will happen. I appreciate the writing of Vanishing American and the others listed above on this subject.

I do support almost zero immigration, not 250,000 per year. Under the Wright Island Theorem and Immigration Vanishing Survival Theorem that inflow would still result in genetic replacement and zero survival factors for genes, even allowing for some outflow. We are not at a point of circulation.

White nationalism as an idea I consider to be a positive one, not a negative one. I see nothing wrong with those who adopt the term, simply from doing so.

I hope the break up of the U.S. can be avoided. I don’t want to see an Islamic Europe that has British and French nuclear weapons and wants to attack New York City because of the people who live there, or other American cities. This does require people in the West to help each other survive liberalism.

The people of the West do have to wake up. It does need to keep white majorities. There is a reality outside liberal TV shows that can’t be ignored. We do have to say we want to keep white majorities to actually keep them.

Those who want to stop terrorist immigration need to recognize that to do that you have to stop all legal Muslim immigration. Under liberalism, the only way to stop all legal Muslim immigration is to stop all legal immigration.

People have to see an upside to their own efforts. Fighting in wars, being called bigot and racist to stop immigration are not something people will do so that liberals can stay on top calling them names. They will do it for the survival of their own, not just for some abstract principle the writers of All in the Family cherish. The purpose of life is not to avoid being called names by liberals. That is not the purpose of the universe either.

==Mexican and Muslim Nationalism are the real thing

http://vanishingamerican.blogspot.com/2007/11/advice-from-legal-immigrant.html

http://vanishingamerican.blogspot.com/2007/11/preview-of-things-to-come.html

http://www.immigrationwatchdog.com/?p=5148

==Can we test the hypothesis?

Because nativist and bigot are used almost as standard terms for anyone the left disagrees with on immigration, we would expect these terms to dominate the terms “white nationalist” and “white supremacist”. So in looking at results we have to adjust for that.

Note the initial work didn’t look at racist in the searches, but that has been added in some cases. This seems to be the word of choice still. One can consider the hypothesis that the left just uses whatever word is in vogue, and they copy each other and the words they use are not used for their meaning but just because it makes them feel good to say them.

SPLC searches were not done initially but added after the strange Ron Paul results were found.

==Amren

Results 1100 of about 67,000 for amren racist.

amren nativist

Results 146 of 46 for amren nativist.

amren “white nationalist”

Results 1100 of about 23,200 for amren “white nationalist.

amren “white supremacist”

Results 1100 of about 19,900 for amren “white supremacist.

==Jared Taylor

Results 1100 of about 35,200 for “Jared Taylorracist.

“Jared Taylor” nativist

Results 1100 of about 643 for “Jared Taylornativist.

“Jared Taylor” “white nationalist”

Results 1100 of about 11,200 for “Jared Taylor” “white nationalist

“Jared Taylor” “white supremacist”

Results 1100 of about 11,200 for “Jared Taylor” “white supremacist.

==Lawrence Auster

Results 1100 of about 28,500 for Lawrence Auster” racist.

“Lawrence Auster” nativist

Results 1100 of about 677 for Lawrence Auster” nativist.

“Lawrence Auster” “white nationalist”

Results 163 of 63 for Lawrence Auster” “white nationalist.

“Lawrence Auster” “white supremacist”

Results 1100 of about 807 for Lawrence Auster” “white supremacist.

==James Watson

“James Watson” bigot

Results 1100 of about 22,600 for James Watsonbigot.

Results 1100 of about 152,000 for James Watsonracist.

“James Watson” “white nationalist”

Results 162 of 62 for James Watson” “white nationalist.

“James Watson” “white supremacist”

Results 1100 of about 820 for James Watson” “white supremacist.

==Peter Brimelow

Results 1100 of about 27,500 for Peter Brimelow” racist.

Results 1100 of about 9,590 for Peter Brimelow” nativist.

“Peter Brimelow “white supremacist”
Results 1100 of about 995 for Peter Brimelow “white supremacist.

A quote mark was left out after Brimelow, so we can repeat this:

“Peter Brimelow” “white supremacist”

Results 1100 of about 611 for Peter Brimelow” “white supremacist.
Results 1100 of about 41,000 for Peter Brimelow “white nationalist.

==Steve Sailer

Results 1100 of about 108,000 for “Steve Sailer” racist.

Results 1100 of about 25,800 for “Steve Sailer” bigot

Results 1100 of about 745 for “Steve Sailer” “white nationalist.

Results 1100 of about 821 for “Steve Sailer” “white supremacist.

==Virgil Goode

Virgil Goode said stop Muslim immigration. He said nothing about whites or anything about race. But Goode did say stop something. What was he called?

Results 1100 of about 41,800 for Virgil Goode” racist

bigot “Virgil Goode”

Results 1100 of about 20,400 for bigotVirgil Goode”

Islamophobe “Virgil Goode”

Results 1100 of about 972 for Islamophobe “Virgil Goode”.
“white supremacist” “Virgil Goode”

Results 1100 of about 661 for white supremacist” “Virgil Goode”.

“white nationalist” “Virgil Goode”

Results 119 of 19 for white nationalist” “Virgil Goode”.

==Senator George Allen

Results 1100 of about 168,000 for George Allenracist.

Results 1100 of about 71,000 for George Allenbigot.

Results 1100 of about 15,100 for George Allennativist

Results 1100 of about 606 for George Allen” “White nationalist.

Results 1100 of about 15,300 for George Allen” “White supremacist.

George Allen just used the word macaca.

Results 1100 of about 164,000 for George Allen” macaca.

Results 1100 of about 783 for George Allen” macaca “white supremacist

The hate against George Allen and Virgil Goode was a national obsession. The instant association of both with white supremacism and white nationalism is extreme. The searches could be repeated with -ism instead of -ist. Both Allen and Goode are from Virginia.

==Vdare

Results 1100 of about 157,000 for Vdare racist.

Vdare nativist

Results 1100 of about 9,320 for Vdare nativist.

“white nationalist” Vdare

Results 1100 of about 10,100 for white nationalist” Vdare.

Vdare “white supremacist”

Results 1100 of about 12,300 for Vdare “white supremacist.

Vdare has used the word white, said what is happening to whites using the word white, said to stop it and proposed specific action. They are called white supremacist more than white nationalist.

==Lou Dobbs

Results 1100 of about 379,000 for “Lou Dobbs” racist.

nativist “Lou Dobbs”

Results 1100 of about 52,300 for nativist “Lou Dobbs”.

Lou Dobbs does not describe his victims as white and does not propose remedies for preserving whites qua whites. He emphasizes amnesty but also discusses guest worker programs as harming Americans, independent of being white or not.

“Lou Dobbs” “white nationalist”

Results 1100 of about 734 for “Lou Dobbs” “white nationalist.

“Lou Dobbs” “white supremacist”

Results 1100 of about 32,200 for “Lou Dobbs” “white supremacist.

“Lou Dobbs” Nazi site:splcenter.org

Results 133 of 33 from splcenter.org for “Lou Dobbs” Nazi.

Results 124 of 24 from splcenter.org for “Lou Dobbs” “white supremacist”.
Some results talk about guests on Lou Dobbs show. But it seems that we are seeing the emergence of support for a hypothesis that they don’t stop at calling someone white nationalist but move right up to white supremacist.

== Pat Buchanan

Results 1100 of about 262,000 for Pat Buchananracist.

“Pat Buchanan” nativist

Results 1100 of about 42,500 for Pat Buchanannativist

“Pat Buchanan” “white nationalist”

Results 1100 of about 10,400 for Pat Buchanan” “white nationalist.

“Pat Buchanan” “white supremacist”

Results 1100 of about 24,400 for Pat Buchanan” “white supremacist.

Results 154 of 54 from splcenter.org for “Pat Buchanan” Nazi.

Results 135 of 35 from splcenter.org for “Pat Buchanan” “white supremacist”.
Pat Buchanan has explicitly talked about what is happening to whites and the West and said it should stop. The results in his case are that he is called white supremacist more than white nationalist. So this supports the hypothesis.

==Tom Tancredo

Results 1100 of about 530,000 for Tom Tancredo” racist.

Results 1100 of about 83,900 for Tom Tancredo” bigot.

Results 1100 of about 45,800 for Tom Tancredo” nativist.

Results 1100 of about 808 for Tom Tancredo” “white nationalist.

“Tom Tancredo” “white supremacist”

Results 1100 of about 33,300 for Tom Tancredo” “white supremacist.

Results 113 of 13 from splcenter.org for “Tom Tancredo” “white supremacist”.

Results 139 of 39 from splcenter.org for “Tom Tancredo” Nazi.

==Brussels Journal

Results 1100 of about 182,000 for Brussels Journalracist.

Results 1100 of about 30,300 for Brussels Journalbigot.

Results 1100 of about 801 for Brussels Journalnativist.

Results 1100 of about 21,400 for Brussels Journalindigenous.

Results 175 of 75 for Brussels Journal” “white nationalist.

Results 1100 of about 793 for Brussels Journal” “white supremacist.

We see that there is almost immediate escalation from white nationalist to white supremacist.

==BNP

Results 1100 of about 702,000 for BNP racist.

Results 1100 of about 17,800 for BNP “white supremacist.

Results 1100 of about 24,300 for BNP “white nationalist.

Results 129 of 29 for BNP Ballerinawhite nationalist

Results 162 of 62 for BNP Ballerinawhite supremacist.

==Ron Paul

Results 1100 of about 234,000 for “Ron Paulbigot.

Results 1100 of about 37,600 for “Ron Paulnativist.

Results 1100 of about 1,550,000 for “Ron Paulracist.

“Ron Paul” “white nationalist”

Results 1100 of about 51,100 for “Ron Paul” “white nationalist.

Results 1100 of about 58,200 for “Ron Paul” “white supremacist.

How did Ron Paul get labeled with over 1 million hits on racist and over 50,000 hits on White Supremacist? He is not even a particularly strong advocate for immigration restriction relative to the other Republican candidates. He is against amnesty, but has supported H-1B and legal immigration. The most he has done is be against anchor baby.

Hypothesis: The enormous number of hits on Ron Paul shows its being white and not part of the establishment that gets you labeled. It doesn’t matter what you really say or do. White, non-“mainstream” and you are racist and white supremacist to them.

“Ron Paul” site:splcenter.org

One of the hits:

Extremist Group Announces Speech by Congressman | Hatewatch

Ron Paul is not necessarily a racist for one speech with this group, The SPLC should come to a Ron Paul New York meetup group meeting or listen to those
http://www.splcenter.org/blog/2007/10/08/extremist-group-announces-speech-by-congressman/
Hypothesis: This is smear by association. Ron Paul will talk to anyone as a person and not call them names but say what he thinks without telling them what they want to hear. This makes him racist and “white supremacist”. The failure to condemn those he should condemn, and treating everyone with civility and talking to them on an equal level using logic and facts is all that it takes to be named racist and white supremacist.

“Ron Paul” Nazi site:splcenter.org

Results 14 of 4 from splcenter.org for “Ron Paul” Nazi.

==Christian

Results 1100 of about 627 from splcenter.org for Christian Nazi.

SPLCenter.org: Christian Identity

Christian Meeting Turns Into Attack on Gays. BRIEFS. NSM Attack Sparks Rift · KKK Suit Ends With Award to Victims · Neo-Nazi Financier Arrested
http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?aid=632 – 40k – CachedSimilar pages
Christian Nazi site:splcenter.org

Results 1100 of about 306 from splcenter.org for Christian “white supremacist”.

SPLCenter.org: The Big Lie

Murder victim Channon Christian was the focus of a rally by white parroting the key white supremacist talking point, characterizing the Christian-Newsom
http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?aid=819 – 51k – CachedSimilar pages

One of the hypotheses was that just to know the truth and speak the truth would get you attacked.

==Jesus

Results 161 of 61 from splcenter.org for Jesus “white supremacist”.

Results 183 of 83 from splcenter.org for Jesus Nazi.

==God

God Nazi site:splcenter.org

Results 1100 of about 143 from splcenter.org for God “white supremacist”.

Results 1100 of about 290 from splcenter.org for God Nazi.

==

Results 1100 of about 813 from splcenter.org for “white Supremacist”.

Thus a little more than 1 in 6 times that “white supremacist” is used by SPLC on their website, God is associated with it.

Results 1100 of about 1,720 from splcenter.org for nazi.

Thus a little more than 1 in 6 times that Nazi is used by SPLC on their website, God is associated with it.

==

God, then Christian and Jesus were searched at SPLC after the Ron Paul results were found and then others checked at SPLC for Nazi and “White Supremacist”.

==Analysis

The original hypothesis has some support but is clearly only partly valid. The main problem is that the left in general and SPLC in particular want to ramp up to Nazi and white supremacist rather quickly. The term racist is still the preferred term for any comment from the right on the topic of immigration, crime, etc. The Delaware State and Washington public school programs that teach all whites are racist also prefers that term to saying say that all whites are Nazi or all whites are white supremacists.

Despite the randomness in the use of these words, there is still some tendency to escalate in rhetoric in the way the original hypothesis outlined. If you talk about what is happening, say its happening to whites, say it should stop, and say the white race deserves to live and to continue, and that its appropriate to act to do so, you are almost certain to be called a bigot or nativist, and have a good chance of being called a white nationalist or white supremacist. Distinguishing between white nationalist and white supremacist may be something only specialists do. It seems once they go for “white nationalist” they immediately go to “white supremacist”.
Those who call for ending the white race are usually cheered. Its very rare they are criticized. Nor is any term like white ethnocide or racecide, whitecide or white zeroist used to describe this in any standard way. Even though its openly advocated, planned, and announced by the EU as draft policy.

Bill Clinton also cheered it and in effect admitted that it is the policy of the U.S. government to make whites a minority in the U.S. Since the US engages in affirmative action and other acts, this amounts to making whitecide US government policy. This is because the cumulative effect of this policy is to reduce European white fertility to below replacement, which it is now world wide in almost every country if not every country.

If you listen to what they say about whitecide, repeat it, say you disagree with that policy, say you want to oppose the policy and propose specific action to stop whitecide, then they say you are a white nationalist or white supremacist with a good probability. It would be interesting to check what SPLC and ADL use for these individuals on their websites. This can be done by adding site: and the name of the website.

Basically, if you speak up, say what is happening, say its happening to whites, say whites have a right to survive and propose specific measures to stop it, then they are going to go after you as a white supremacist. They also will go quickly from nativist and bigot right through white nationalist to white supremacist without pausing. They are ready to pounce on anything a party or well-known person says to immediately push them all the way to white supremacist. Bottom line, if you speak up and out they are going to target you and they want to escalate to white supremacist. Other searches would be on Nazi, which likely has similar results.

==

Genetics. 1979 January; 91(1): 163–176.

The Island Model with Stochastic Migration

Thomas Nagylaki

Department of Biophysics and Theoretical Biology, The University of Chicago, 920 East 58th Street, Chicago, Illinois 60637

http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1213928

The island model with stochastically variable migration rate and immigrant gene frequency is investigated. It is supposed that the migration rate and the immigrant gene frequency are independent of each other in each generation, and each of them is independently and identically distributed in every generation. The treatment is confined to a single diallelic locus without mutation. If the diploid population is infinite, selection is absent and the immigrant gene frequency is fixed, then the gene frequency on the island converges to the immigrant frequency, and the logarithm of the absolute value of its deviation from it is asymptotically normally distributed.

The above implies that if you have two genes in some frequency in the immigrant population, that under one way migration that frequency becomes the frequency on the island.

From PDF, conclusion:

http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/picrender.fcgi?artid=1213928&blobtype=pdf

We investigated various cases of the island model with stochastic migration. If the population is infinite, the immigrants have a fixed gene frequency and the alleles are neutral, the gene frequency on the island converges to that of the immigrants.

https://oldatlanticlighthouse.wordpress.com/category/island-model/

=

If the EU bothered to read science articles on the internet, they would find out the end result of their actions is not a new race of white and non-white, its just elimination of whites. That is what the math says. Its a theorem.

== Random, Emotion, Civility, Failure to Condemn Hypotheses

The above analysis and searches leads to some new hypotheses to consider.

Hypothesis: Racist is the preferred term for attacking whites who talk about any subject involving race, immigration, etc. If the person says something like macaca, stop Muslim immigration, don’t use the Koran for oaths, etc. they will be deluged with racist.

Hypothesis: The use of the words white nationalist, white supremacist is almost random and independent of what the person said. Instead, these terms reflect the emotion of the leftist.

Hypothesis: Nazi is also a word that just means the leftist is too angry (or full of hate) to stop at racist and has to say more.

Hypothesis: The attack on Ron Paul and association with racist and white supremacist shows intent to smear. Ron Paul is a very mild mannered man. His main issue is smaller government. He is also anti war. He is for immigration restriction. He is anti big government in all forms. He treats everyone with civility. He will, if he has time, talk to anyone about anything, listen to them, and treat them with civility and as serious whatever the person says. He does not condemn people. Ron Paul then says what he thinks and tries to use reason and facts to persuade those he disagrees with instead of calling them names. This whole set of attributes produces an extreme reaction of what might be called hate but definitely fear. His civility and rationality, fairness and openness to everyone threatens the whole rule by smear and fear official information complex.

Hypothesis: There is no strategy to keep from being called white supremacist, white nationalist, Nazi, racist, bigot, nativist, etc. if you want to say anything that is non-establishment or if you will treat anyone with civility and not condemn them as a person for what they say. If you adopt civility towards all, are willing to listen to anyone, and will respond with civility and reason, they will go ballistic and start calling you racist, Nazi, white nationalist and white supremacist.

Hypothesis: There are funded groups that try to organize attacks on leaders like Lou Dobbs, Ron Paul, Tom Tancredo, as well as Lawrence Auster, Jared Taylor, Peter Brimelow, the BNP Ballerina, etc. These attacks follow a script and the script ends up calling them Nazi, white nationalist, white supremacist. The script doesn’t call for waiting at white nationalist, but as the numbers indicate, once they use white nationalist, they go to white supremacist. Racist is used without any compunction as an entry level word.

Hypothesis: Attacks using Nazi, white nationalist and white supremacist may be used partly to get attention from search engines. The use of the word racist doesn’t get enough identification. SPLC has a high revenue stream. Just using words like racist or bigot isn’t going to get as much attention in search engines as Nazi and white supremacist. They may want to use stronger terms to get more attention and then more funding. This also may be why God and Nazi go together so much at the SPLC website.

This is draft and preliminary. All statements should be restated as questions or hypotheses. This is subject to revision. All comments welcome. All other disclaimers apply.

Virginia Dare’s Birthday at Vdare

August 18, 2007

James Fulford at Vdare discusses Virginia Dare’s birthday and links to articles at Vdare on that topic and the founding of Vdare.com by Peter Brimelow. Virginia Dare was born August 18, 1587.
http://vdare.com/fulford/070817_fulford_file.htm

Peter Brimelow’s book, Alien Nation (available for download) was published in 1995.

Peter Brimelow, Lawrence Auster, Roy Beck, Dan Stein, and many others were fighting this fight in the 1990’s and even in the 1980’s in some cases.
Fairus was founded in 1979. Fairus publications are here. Center for Immigration Studies was founded in 1985.

Dan Stein Report, where can post comments.

Lawrence Auster published “The Path to National Suicide” in 1990 (download here). Auster works. VFR.

Wiki on Auster.

Numbers USA “Our lost future” graphic. Jordan Commission 1994 report. Other Jordan Commission info. Roy Beck Case Against Immigration 1996.

Vanishing American reviews the Virginia Dare story with links to articles on Virginia Dare including the Saturday Evening Post article in 1941 on the Virginia Dare Stones:

http://vanishingamerican.blogspot.com/2007/08/virginia-dare-lost-colony-and-us.html

Vanishing American does a great job in bringing forward the contribution of many blogs on stopping immigration completely, not simply vague reform.

DHS Immigration Statistics.

http://www.dhs.gov/ximgtn/statistics/

33 million illegals and counting:

http://vanishingamerican.blogspot.com/2007/08/prospects-for-west-part-ii.html

Fred Elbel at American Resistance

http://www.theamericanresistance.com/ref/illegal_alien_numbers.html

Steve Sailer in 2005 reported that the Mexican government at that time estimated 20.64 million Mexicans living in the US.

http://www.vdare.com/Sailer/050821_chavez.htm

A Vdare reader estimates 40 million illegals in the US.

http://www.vdare.com/letters/tl_081407.htm

Above Replacement level Immigrants and their descendants since 1970 number about 50 million according to Roy Beck at Numbers USA.

The cost of post 1965 immigrants and their descendants may be 3/4 to 1.5 trillion per year. This top down estimate is discussed here. That estimate is based on 41 million foreign born. That includes legal and illegal.

http://www.census.gov/population/www/socdemo/foreign.html

http://www.migrationinformation.org/datahub/acscensus.cfm

http://www.cis.org/topics/currentnumbers.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virginia_Dare

http://the-lost-colony.blogspot.com/

http://www.lost-colony.com/

==Vdare’s Fan Club

Southern Poverty Law Center aka Southern Poverty Love Center

vdare site:splcenter.org

“Keeping America White”

“At a meeting of ‘paleoconservatives,’ former Forbes editor Peter Brimelow and others sound the alarm on non-white immigration”
By Heidi Beirich and Mark Potok

http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?pid=285

Note that its a mathematical theorem that sustained one way migration will cause extinction of all genes in America or Europe or Australia or Canada. Thus one way migration is genetic extinction of all whites, as well as anyone else in those regions, and with a lag, everyone who comes there. This is in SPLC’s way of thinking, “normal”, and objecting to it by those in these lands is “racist”. See the Immigration Vanishing Survival Theorem:

https://oldatlanticlighthouse.wordpress.com/2007/06/04/immigration-vanishing-survival-theorem/

http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?pid=286

Other SPLC Love targets

Taylor and the Pioneer Fund are attacked in the article on Peter Brimelow.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jared_Taylor

Taylor founded American Renaissance in 1990. Archive from 1990.

Pioneer Fund

http://www.pioneerfund.org/

http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?pid=105

“Into the Mainstream An array of right-wing foundations and think tanks support efforts to make bigoted and discredited ideas respectable”
By Chip Berlet

The Nativists
Around the country, an anti-immigration movement is spreading like wildfire. An array of activists is fanning the flames.
by Susy Buchanan and Tom Kim

https://oldatlanticlighthouse.wordpress.com/2007/06/30/population-genetics-island-model-one-way-migration/

Genetics. 1979 January; 91(1): 163–176.

The Island Model with Stochastic Migration

Thomas Nagylaki

Department of Biophysics and Theoretical Biology, The University of Chicago, 920 East 58th Street, Chicago, Illinois 60637

http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1213928

The island model with stochastically variable migration rate and immigrant gene frequency is investigated. It is supposed that the migration rate and the immigrant gene frequency are independent of each other in each generation, and each of them is independently and identically distributed in every generation. The treatment is confined to a single diallelic locus without mutation. If the diploid population is infinite, selection is absent and the immigrant gene frequency is fixed, then the gene frequency on the island converges to the immigrant frequency, and the logarithm of the absolute value of its deviation from it is asymptotically normally distributed.

Prof Nagylaki didn’t make the 2005 list of Nativists compiled by SPLC, but maybe he can make the 2007 list? SPLC can search Wright Island Model.

“Results 1100 of about 1,990,000 for wright island model.”

Look at that, almost 2 million nativists, or a smaller number who are beavering away. Nativists seem to congregate in biology departments.

SPLC should compile a list of bigoted theorems.

Stalin’s henchmen also opposed genetics and biology in the 1940’s. See “Stalin and the Bomb: The Soviet Union and Atomic Energy, 1939-1956: Books: David Holloway by David Holloway.” for a discussion of some of the strange goings on in Soviet science.

See this discussion of Lysenko, a true hero of PC thinking under Comrade Stalin.

The Soviet leadership sought an indigenous theory to counter the “capitalistic” works of Mendel and Charles Darwin and to separate evolution from genetics.

After this interruption for great moments in Stalinism, we now return to SPLC.

genetic site:splcenter.org

http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?aid=361

Race and ‘Reason’
Academic ideas a pillar of racist thought
By Barry Mehler

Does SPLC think there is any genetic basis for intelligence in biological organisms at all? Does SPLC think humans have a genetic difference in intelligence with other species? Does SPLC think that if humans differ from other species, that within humans there is perfect uniformity in a genetic basis of intelligence? If humans are not uniform, does the variation correlate to race? Does SPLC say that such statistics are bigoted and therefore false? Does Lysenko live in Montgomery Alabama in that SPLC building which is maintained, in part, by donations based on plagiarism of Colorado Media Matters research?

search Darwin bigot

Darwin site:splcenter.org

http://www.splcenter.org/intel/map/hate.jsp?S=MI&m=5

No one dared challenge Lysenko until 1964 – 9 years after Stalin died – even when he claimed, between 1948 and 1953, that wheat plants can produce seeds of rye. But, as the Encyclopedia Britannica observes, “he and his followers, however, long retained their degrees, their titles, and their academic positions and remained free to support their aberrant trend in biology.”

http://globalpolitician.com/articles.asp?ID=1228&print=true

Maybe SPLC should be called part of the “Lysenko Nation” and should be called Lysenko Nationalists. Example, the Lysenko Nationalists at SPLC have mounted another fund raising smear against Peter Brimelow.

creationism site:splcenter.org

SPLC attacks whites who are against evolution as creationist Christian cretins. SPLC attacks whites who are for evolution as white nationalist bigots. Which is it? They don’t care, as long as they pay for that nice building? They have one box for donations against whites for evolution and another box for donations against whites against evolution. Pecunia non olet, money has no smell.

The more things change, the more the Stalinist left stays the same.

Blood on the Border

With racist rhetoric heating up and the American economy on unsteady legs, more anti-immigrant violence looms

Anti-Immigration Groups

SPLC plagiarism? SPLC appears to have used Colorado Media Matters research on its own webpage without citation in its dispute with Lou Dobbs on immigration bringing disease to the US, in particular leprosy. CMM and SPLC both compete for the same donations from the left. SPLC has a big building and brings in more more money to itself than CMM.

== Plagiarism of CMM?

search leprosy colorado media matters

leprosy site: colorado.mediamatters.org

leprosy site:splcenter.org

leprosy colorado media matters site:splcenter.org

“Your search – leprosy colorado media matters site:splcenter.org – did not match any documents.”

SPLC never cited CMM, despite apparently using its work. A comparison of the CMM and SPLC articles on leprosy, Lou Dobbs, the Peter Boyles Show, etc. shows that CMM was beating this horse long before SPLC and that SPLC appears to have used some of the same info. CMM is also more honest in linking to data that teaches away from its point of view, in particular a graph that labeled the big bulge of leprosy cases from South Asian immigrants related to post Vietnam asylum. SPLC didn’t cite that link because it teaches that legal immigration is the alternative cause to the spike in leprosy in the US instead of illegal immigration.

SPLC holds itself out as a public interest donation supported law firm. That is an ethical claim to a standard of ethics above a broadcaster like CNN that is for-profit. CNN reporters don’t hold themselves out as experts on leprosy. They also have little time for each story, and have to make nightly deadlines. SPLC has no nightly deadlines. They can take as long as they like to work on one of their pieces. They represent themselves as spending all the time required for a story, not doing the best they can subject to tight news deadlines.

Following have additional points on 60 Minutes and SPLC mining CMM research on the web w/o citation on this story.

https://oldatlanticlighthouse.wordpress.com/2007/05/07/leslie-stahl-60-minutes-lou-dobbs-7000-leprosy-cases-dispute/

https://oldatlanticlighthouse.wordpress.com/2007/05/08/part-2-leslie-stahl-60-minutes-lou-dobbs-7000-leprosy-dispute/

Also a note on SPLC here:

https://oldatlanticlighthouse.wordpress.com/tag/allison-kunhardt/

Editor’s note: Based on evidence compiled by the Intelligence Report, the Southern Poverty Law Center is adding VDARE to its list of hate sites on the Web.”

Based on blatant plagiarism, the post-Lysenko Russian Academy of Sciences, Russian intelligence and Moscow State University are adding SPLC to their list of establishment plagiarism sites on the web, including Harvard University? Please send inquiries, and greetings on his 70th birthday, to Academician Valery Makarov at the New Economic School, Moscow.

More on SPLC

Other early voices to stop immigration.

Buchanan Speech in 1992 at Republican National Convention

http://www.buchanan.org/pa-92-0817-rnc.html

http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Patrick_Buchanan’s_Speech_to_1992_GOP_Convention

http://www.buchanan.org/blog/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Tancredo

Tancredo opposed bilingual education in the 1970’s.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bay_Buchanan

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Sailer

Internet rankings: (To be used, not believed.)

http://www.quantcast.com/fairus.org

http://www.quantcast.com/vdare.com

http://www.quantcast.com/blog.vdare.com

Lou Dobbs joined the fight in 2003?

http://www.quantcast.com/keyword:lou+dobbs

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lou_Dobbs

He also regained the helm of the newly renamed Lou Dobbs Moneyline (which became Lou Dobbs Tonight in June 2003).

http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=2867

http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1162

In Jan 2004, Dobbs started to be the target of hate profiles.

Extra! January/February 2004

Dobbs’ Choice
CNN host picks immigration as his ax to grind

By Peter Hart

With all the attention paid to the near-overt partisanship of the Fox News Channel, it’s important to remember that skewed reporting wasn’t invented by Rupert Murdoch’s cable operation.

In the last few months of 2003, CNN‘s Lou Dobbs Tonight

The selection of topics, the slanted sourcing and the occasionally inaccurate or incomplete information conveyed on the program all seemed calculated to convince the viewer that the U.S. is in the midst of a crisis that is, according to Dobbs, “changing the very nature of this country” (9/30/03). The title of a series on immigration, “Broken Borders,” conveyed Dobbs’ political position; immigrants were also routinely featured on his show’s regular “Great American Giveaway” segment.

devoted abundant broadcast time to what anchor Dobbs described as an influx of “illegal aliens who not only threaten our economy and security, but also our health and well-being. Millions of aliens crossing our borders.”

http://www.american.com/archive/2006/november/lou-dobbs

In December 2003, the show was reaching an average of 463,000 households a night; by August 2006, it was reaching 646,000 families, according to Nielsen Media Research. Dobbs’s audience share is only one-tenth as large as the average nightly news show on ABC, NBC, and CBS, and less than two-thirds’ the size of the competing Fox News program at 6 p.m. eastern time, “Special Report with Brit Hume.” Still, Dobbs reaches nearly twice as many homes as Chris Matthews, and Dobbs—unlike Hume and Matthews—has an audience that’s powerfully growing.

Casual channel surfers aren’t the only ones tuning in. Members of Congress say that Dobbs’s acerbic positions on his latest fascination, illegal immigration, have become increasingly influential on Capitol Hill. “I’d have to give him pretty strong points for being one of the singular figures to drive this agenda item in Congress,” said a prominent free-trade Republican congressman. Meanwhile, Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-Colorado), whose views on immigration are similar to those of Dobbs, says he regularly overhears his colleagues telling each other, “If you do this Dobbs will go after us, or if you do this it will play well on Dobbs.”

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20060828/eviatar

http://www.motherjones.com/news/qa/2005/02/lou_dobbs.html

Since 2003, his CNN news show Lou Dobbs Tonight has featured a recurring segment in which Dobbs and his team report on corporations sending jobs overseas. He has compiled an online list of outsourcers

Part 2 Leslie Stahl 60 Minutes Lou Dobbs 7000 Leprosy Dispute

May 8, 2007

Lou Dobbs and Christine Romans of CNN stood by their report of 7,000 cases in the last 3 years on Monday May 7, 2007. They reported they reviewed the Cosman article and were standing on that article.

The article by Madeleine Pelner Cosman is below:

http://www.jpands.org/vol10no1/cosman.pdf

If you open this pdf in another window and go to search or find and enter leprosy, you can click through the different instances of it. It appears in the text and some footnotes, one of which is the NYT article linked to below.

The Cosman piece is not doing a good job distinguishing stock and flow. Here is the NYT piece

New York Times February 18, 2003, “While there were some 900 recorded cases in the United States 40 years ago, today more than 7,000 people have leprosy, or Hansen’s disease, as it is now called.”

The Cosman article turns the 900 cases recorded 40 years ago into “in 40 years only 900 people were afflicted”. (page 3 right column 2nd paragraph) So what was a stock of 900 in the NYT piece turned into a flow of 900 in the Cosman article.

Just before that sentence, Cosman says, “Suddenly, in the past 3 years, America has more than 7,000 cases of leprosy.” This mixes stock and flow language in the same sentence. When combined with the prior sentence it makes it sound like a flow of 900 cases for 40 years and then a flow of 7,000 over 3 years to have a stock at the end of the 3 years of 7,000 cases.

However, this is not correct. The Colorado Media Matters article is a well researched job that brings out the raw flow numbers per year and makes clear that 7,000 or 6,500 is the stock number. The problem with the Colorado Media Matters article is that its written as a hit job instead of to try to explain why its targets misunderstood.

Colorado Media Matters wants to say that the right wing people pushing the 7,000 number as a 3 year flow are evil, not to say that they misunderstood the Cosman text and failed to go back to original sources cited by Cosman. The NYT piece, although not a numbers piece in focus, has the data to help reorient, but not as much as what Colorado Media Matters itself assembled.

However, in the Colorado Media Matters piece you have to read it closely enough to find the numbers in the midst of the real hate. A hate piece is not a teaching piece. So, one can see how the Colorado Media Matters has failed to register in people’s minds. Its so eager to say that the ring wing pundits are evil that its data is poorly presented and they don’t articulate the stock and flow confusion. This is because they don’t want to understand how the error happened. They think they know that, people on the right are evil and lie.

However, its really a stock flow confusion that arises from careless wording in the Cosman article. The Cosman article was not a numbers article, nor a leprosy one. That was not its focus. It has 98 footnotes in a 5 page pdf. This was just one point among the many points in the article and is not even the lead. So Cosman was not focused on this issue either.

The same is true of the Leslie Stahl CBS 60 Minutes piece. They too were not interested in understanding the source of the error. It seems likely they found the CMM piece and just copied its hit job approach for Lou Dobbs and Christine Romans as the targets. This is also the emotion that Lou Dobbs and Christine Romans picked up on. 60 Minutes didn’t come to them as colleagues to explain this stock and flow confusion or try to show them the CMM piece and talk about it. They were practicing gotcha journalism, and concealing the numbers from the CMM article deliberately. But until you see the CMM article, you can’t reorient yourself from the Cosman paragraph that takes you in the wrong direction on stock and flow issues. 60 Minutes had the same bad intentions as CMM, to get its target.

In the process, both 60 Minutes and CMM failed to do their real obligation, teach their viewers or readers what the source of confusion was and what the correct way to understand the issue is. At the end of their pieces, readers and viewers don’t understand the numbers, and don’t understand the stock and flow issues. They only hear that Lou Dobbs, Christine Romans, The Peter Boyles Show, etc. are evil bigots. Its likely that CMM and 60 Minutes were both so eager to get the people they hated that they didn’t try to understand the math. The numbers became weapons to use, not data to understand and put together into a bigger picture.

This is the emotion that Lou Dobbs and Christine Romans picked up on. They were not being treated fairly or decently. If 60 Minutes had shown them the CMM piece, instead of plagiarizing it, and Christine Romans sat down with 60 Minutes with the Cosman piece, then together they could have figured out that the Cosman paragraph, buried in the article, had mixed up the stock and flow numbers from the New York Times article of 2003. Then with the CMM links, they could have figured out the stock and flow analysis.

That would have shown 900 cases in 1963 as a stock. (Even if that number is confused, its so close to zero relative to 7,000 it doesn’t matter.) So by 2003, 40 years, the stock of cases was about 7,000. The flow was 200 to 250 per year. The NYT piece makes it clear that the source of this is immigration:

according to a New York Times report from February 18, 2003, “While there were some 900 recorded cases in the United States 40 years ago, today more than 7,000 people have leprosy, or Hansen’s disease, as it is now called.”

But, in the past six years, Dr. Levis and his colleagues have proved that a handful of his patients — including a 73-year-old man from Queens who had never been out of the country and an elderly Jewish man from Westchester — have contracted leprosy here.

As a result, the disease is now officially endemic to the Northeastern United States for the first time ever. (Cases of leprosy transmission in the Southeast date as far back as the turn of the 19th century.) And leprosy experts think that even some foreign-born people with the infection may have acquired it in immigrant communities here.

Dr. Levis has tried to increase other physicians’ awareness of the disease through mailings, telephone calls and lectures.

So the conclusion is that 40 years of legal and illegal immigration brought leprosy to the North East where it had never been before. This was not the conclusion that CMM or 60 Minutes wanted. They wanted to say that their targets, Lou Dobbs, Christine Romans, The Peter Boyle Show, the Washington Times, WND, Lonewacko, etc. were evil and hate illegals because they are bigots. The conclusion for 60 Minutes and CMM is that these right wingers are bigots who lie. Because of that 60 Minutes and CMM both deceived their readers and perhaps themselves as to the true story, that 40 years of legal immigration from the 1965 Immigration Act caused these 7,000 cases of leprosy. The NYT piece goes into the detail, these cases come from immigrants and are spread by them.

As a result, the disease is now officially endemic to the Northeastern United States for the first time ever. (Cases of leprosy transmission in the Southeast date as far back as the turn of the 19th century.) And leprosy experts think that even some foreign-born people with the infection may have acquired it in immigrant communities here.

Not only did 60 Minutes deceive its viewers out of its own bias and hatred of Lou Dobbs, it also deceived them on the real source of disease to its viewers, the last 40 years of legal immigration. Those 40 years brought the disease. Cosman, Lou Dobbs, Christine Romans, The Peter Boyle Show, Lonewacko, World Net Daily, Frosty Wooldridge, the Washington Times, etc. all have the big story right, immigration is bringing disease here and killing Americans.

Just as America is responsible as a collective for its acts, and can be sued in court, so “big” immigration as a collective is responsible for its acts, and can be held to account in a moral court. This is not to bash immigrants, but immigration can be held responsible as a collective process. There is no other way to evaluate a collective process such as immigration, or war, except in terms of the consequences implied. Those who support or cause a collective process, like “Big Immigration” can be held responsible for it.

Motive for repeated acts is ascribed to those who did them or praised them. Immigration can be a weapon in the hands of the elites as much as a knife or gun in the hands of an individual. When the elites support it after every killing or death caused by it, we can infer they intend those deaths to continue, especially when they say its inevitable. We can infer that when they say we can’t stop it, and that if we try, that we are bigots. We can infer they intend us harm from a pattern of such statements linked to our deaths by killing or disease.

“Big” immigration killed Americans on 9-11 and in street crime. We are allowed to evaluate “Big Immigration” and decide if we want it. That’s not bigotry, that’s informed consent. 60 Minutes and CMM want “Big Immigration” to keep rolling. We can evaluate their motives towards us when we die over and over and their solution is that we don’t ask why or ask for it to stop.

If “Big Immigration” kills us, and they say be quiet, bigot, then we can infer that they are the real haters. We are allowed to infer from that behavior that it’s us they hate. They say the opposite, that they are here to inform us and help us. But if every time we are killed they call one of us bigots, we can infer that they have an intent to harm us. We can infer that this is the big lie that is being covered up and that it is being covered up by 60 Minutes and CMM in these pieces. We can infer that it is not even much of a cover up if they have to call us bigots to silence us.

We can infer that when they call us bigots, they take ownership of the crime against us. We can infer that if the “solution” is we keep on dying, that they take ownership of the future, past and current crime against us. When our wages go down and they say the solution is more immigration to keep our wages down, we can infer that they take ownership of our low wages now, in the past, and in the future. When we die of disease and they call Lou Dobbs a bigot and conceal that its 40 years of legal immigration as well as illegal immigration that caused the disease, then they take ownership of the disease, past, current and future.

Go back and reread the statements of 60 Minutes and CMM. Are their words the words of teachers explaining a math error and confusion? Did 60 Minutes and CMM teach the real answer? What is their goal, teach stock and flow distinctions, or to smite Lou Dobbs, Christine Romans, The Peter Boyle Show, and so forth. What solution for leprosy did they propose? Did they think the problem was Americans getting leprosy, or was the problem Lou Dobbs and Christine Romans?

–Following is more argumentative. In addition, the paragraph refuses to break w/o this.
Are their words ones of hatred with bits of math used as weapons, without even really understanding it properly? All they bothered to learn, was just enough to use it as a weapon. They didn’t learn all, because then the conclusion is that 40 years of legal immigration caused the leprosy in the US today. The real conclusion is that to save us, they need to admit legal immigration for the last 40 years harmed us by disease and that we have to stop legal immigration and send the illegals home.

The real hate comes out in names like “The Nightly Nativist”. The real hate comes out in the Nation’s attack on Lou Dobbs. Ken Auletta also attacks Dobbs, using some overlapping material from the Nation. I don’t recall him citing the Nation either on Charlie Rose when he discussed Dobbs. In the New Yorker article he mentions the Nation once, but doesn’t attribute any of the ideas or charges he makes, which may have some overlap. (But this is not verified at this point.) Auletta is more subtle than Daphne Eviatar in the Nation in her article, “The Nightly Nativism.”

The MSM hate Lou Dobbs, WND, The Peter Boyle Show, Joe Guzzardi at Vdare, etc. for telling the truth, immigration kills. It killed on 9-11. It kills when it takes people’s jobs. It kills when it keeps down wages. It kills when people lose their benefits. It kills from disease. It kills from street crime.

The MSM have lied us into being killed by immigration. Lying about what kill us is evidence of malice and intent. This is shown by the above analysis. The real goal of 60 Minutes and CMM was to cover up that legal immigration for the last 40 years, not just illegal immigration has caused leprosy to become a recognized disease in the North East for the first time ever.

When they lie about what causes our disease, then we are their target. Their job as media is to warn us on disease, not cover up that 40 years of legal immigration causes us to die. When they lie about that, we owe it to ourselves to infer that their intent towards us is malice. We need to stop being polite, while they call us bigots. They engage in acts and lie about them that cause us to die. We have to infer malice and intent. We owe it to ourselves.

They aren’t for us, they are against us. They hate us because they harm us. They hate us because they lie to us. The real hate they have is for us. They want us dead, and they keep succeeding. They made a Red Crescent Memorial for 9-11 that honored the hijackers.

On 9-11 itself, on their media programs, they said to us that we were bigots if we wanted to stop immigration. They brought them here to kill us. Why can we infer that? Because they say repeated attacks are a certainty and continue to bring in immigrants and call bigots those who say stop. That shows they intend that immigration will kill more, and say stopping it is bigotry.

This shows that the real haters are the MSM. The 19 hijackers killed with airplanes, but the elites used the 19 hijackers as a weapon, as shown by their Red Crescent Memorial and to their statements that it was bigots who wanted to stop immigration, and not the 19 hijackers. Those who celebrate with a Red Crescent Memorial have taken ownership of the hate of the killing itself. The 19 hijackers were never called bigots, nor was 9-11 called a hate crime. Why? Whose hate was it not being called out?

When the MSM lies that immigration kills, it shows intent and malice. When they lie about what kills us, as here, the last 40 years of legal immigration, it shows they want it to continue. When they want us to continue to die, its evidence they hate us. Every time immigration kills us, they call us bigots, never the direct agent. This shows that these are their instruments, and that when we are killed through immigration, its an instrumentality of their intent. Their lies before and after are evidence of their intent to harm us by the act on the screen.

When they call the victims bigots, it shows they had malice towards them and us. When the victims are silenced, as they have tried to silence the 9-11 families, by threatening to call them bigots, it shows they intended the harm. When they prevent the solution, stopping immigration, it shows they intended the harm of the immigration. When they say its bigotry to identify the cause, it shows they are the ultimate cause. They take ownership of the act and are the cause.

When we catch them doing what they did in this case of disease, cover up that its 40 years of legal immigration that caused it, then we fail morally if we just laugh at them without drawing the conclusion. Like the 9-11 families, we have a moral obligation to ourselves, our children, and our community.

When we let 60 Minutes and CMM get away with covering up what is causing us to die, when we should infer malice on their part, then its our failure. We are letting them kill our brothers, our sisters, our parents, our children, and our grandchildren. We have an obligation to hold the MSM accountable for their lies. We have an obligation to hold them accountable for calling us and their victims, bigots. This is what the 9-11 families learned.

Because we let them off is why the MSM keep doing it. When we die, they call us bigots. Every time some of us are shown dead on the screen, the MSM call us bigots. They threatened the 9-11 families that way, and they threaten us that way. Its not enough to laugh it off, we have to hold them to account specifically for malice and intent to kill us by disease and by future terrorism and by losing our jobs and the rest by immigration.

Every time, that we are killed by big immigration, they threaten to call us bigots. What is the solution when we are killed by terrorism? By disease? By low wages? The solution is that we die just the same and don’t ask for answers to the question, why is this happening to us? Who is responsible for the series of harmful events, not just each one in isolation?

Who is championing the process that involves our repeated death? They say to ask such questions is bigotry towards immigrants. But isn’t it they who are in control of “Big Immigration” as a process? Isn’t it their motives that are revealed by serial killings against us by different people?

Who asked for this death? When did we give consent to it? Why can’t we stop it if we consented to it? When did we give consent to die and give up any right to stop what is causing it? When did we consent that “big” immigration was the all important goal and not us? When did they say that? Is that what Kennedy said in 1965? That we would die from big immigration? Or did he lie and say the opposite? Why shouldn’t they be held to have malice when they lie about what kills us?

Its no accident that CMM went after the Peter Boyle Show on the issue of illegal immigration causing disease. Its no accident that 60 Minutes copied the CMM attack piece and tried it on Lou Dobbs. They didn’t pick some error about something else, its this. And its no accident that the truth is that its legal immigration that is killing us, not just illegal immigration and that they covered that up.

Every time the MSM call us bigots or call us bigots through calling Lou Dobbs a bigot or the Peter Boyle Show a bigot, they are showing their intent. When they call us bigots, its because they hate us. When one of us dies, another of us is called a bigot. That happens every time. That shows they hate us. Because this happens over and over, the killing and the calling us bigots, it shows they intend the killing. Calling us bigots, or Lou Dobbs a bigot, when we die from disease, shows they hate us and intend us to die. That’s evidence. We need to infer that is what their intent is and what their motive is. Trials convict for intent based on circumstantial evidence.

The same killings over and over, and the same calling us bigots if we try to stop the killings by stopping immigration is more proof of intent to kill us than almost any trial. The MSM say it to our face every time. The killings go on. The calling us bigots goes on. That’s more evidence than in the Scott Peterson case or other cases of intent for double homicide or multiple homicide.

You be the jury like its the Scott Peterson case. But now, instead of one incident, they come over and over, and the calling us out as bigots comes over and over. You be the jury. Aren’t they more guilty than Scott Peterson? Of more killings? Of more lies? Of more hate speech in calling us bigots?

For you as the jury, your charge is as follows. By hiding that legal immigration causes disease, do 60 Minutes and CMM take ownership in the people harmed by that disease? Is hiding that legal immigration causes disease evidence of malice?

Did both CMM and 60 Minutes read the New York Times article cited by CMM that indicated that it was immigration, legal as well as illegal that was responsible for the rise of disease in the US? Did both ignore the rest of the Cosman article with its over 90 footnotes?

Is calling Lou Dobbs and by extension Christine Romans, bigots over the narrow issue of illegal v. legal immigration and 3 years immigration v. the immigration since the 1965 Immigration, and using that as a smoke screen to take attention away that its immigration that causes the rise in leprosy show intention to deceive?

Is that a violation of their representation to us to protect us by news, not harm us by falsehood?

Is calling out Lou Dobbs and Christine Roman for 3 v. 30 and illegal v. legal but hiding that its immigration since the 1965 Immigration Act that is responsible for leprosy in the Northeast for the first time ever show intent to deceive us and show malice?

Do CBS and CMM take ownership of the disease by their actions?

Does this show they hate us? Do the MSM hate us without knowing us as individuals? They don’t know our names. Do they hate us anyhow? Is that bigotry? Are CBS and CMM bigots?

Leslie Stahl 60 Minutes Lou Dobbs 7000 Leprosy Cases Dispute

May 7, 2007

Leslie Stahl of 60 Minutes interviewed Lou Dobbs in a segment broadcast on Sunday May 6, 2007. She says Christine Romans of Lou Dobbs reported 7,000 cases of leprosy in the last 3 years v. 7,000 cases in the last 30 years.

Note that there is a stock and flow issue here. Does 7,000 mean a flow, i.e. new cases, or does it mean 7,000 people have it at a point in time, a stock? Different people might read the same document or hear of it, and interpret 7,000 cases to mean 7,000 new cases as a flow or there exist 7,000 cases. Even the authors of a document might be careless in explaining this issue, because “its obvious” to them what they meant. Nurses might tell us that’s how doctors always write.

We first review a media watch dog group that has several references on this issue. That group Colorado Media Matters states

according to a New York Times report from February 18, 2003, “While there were some 900 recorded cases in the United States 40 years ago, today more than 7,000 people have leprosy, or Hansen’s disease, as it is now called.”

But, in the past six years, Dr. Levis and his colleagues have proved that a handful of his patients — including a 73-year-old man from Queens who had never been out of the country and an elderly Jewish man from Westchester — have contracted leprosy here.

As a result, the disease is now officially endemic to the Northeastern United States for the first time ever. (Cases of leprosy transmission in the Southeast date as far back as the turn of the 19th century.) And leprosy experts think that even some foreign-born people with the infection may have acquired it in immigrant communities here.

Dr. Levis has tried to increase other physicians’ awareness of the disease through mailings, telephone calls and lectures.

As the entire NYT piece shows, its immigration that has caused this disease to spread to Americans in the North East for the first time ever. In fact, Dr. Levis in New York had to teach other doctors in the the US to look out for this disease, because these other doctors didn’t know it existed in America. The reason is that the disease is caused in the US by legal and illegal immigration since the 1965 Immigration Act. The only error that Lou Dobbs and others may have made is to attribute this to recent illegal immigration instead of to the entire path of legal and illegal immigration since Ted Kennedy told us the 1965 Immigration Act wouldn’t change America and wouldn’t harm Americans at all. (Something he tells all his dates.)

Thus the stock 40 years prior to 2003, i.e. in 1963 was 900. The stock in 2003 was 7,000. Colorado Media Matters references reports consistent with this and that state the flow of new cases is about 200 to 250 per year, although it peaked in the 1980’s. If we take 1963 to 2003, at 200 per year, we get 8,000 new cases. Some people die in 40 years, so 200 to 250 new cases per year starting from 900 could leave 7,000 outstanding.

So what happened to cause this? Legal immigration. The 1965 Immigration Act created massive legal immigration. Illegal immigration also increased in that period. Unlike Eisenhower, who removed the illegals with no problem, the US has amnestied them since and gotten more. In 1963 after 40 years of immigration restriction, the stock of cases was 900. Note this wouldn’t be the flow in 1963, since new cases per year don’t get that high even today.

So it was legal immigration that caused the rise of leprosy. With no immigration, the stock of cases was only 900. It was legal immigration that changed this, along with illegal immigration.

What 60 Minutes has helped us learn from this is that we must halt all legal immigration, not just send the illegals home to stop disease coming here. This is a valuable contribution by 60 Minutes, Colorado Media Matters, Lou Dobbs and others who have written on this such as Lonewacko, WND, etc.

More from Colorado Media Matters

Further, HHS’s Hansen’s disease “Frequently Asked Questions” webpage states that there are a total of “approximately 6,500″ registered cases in the United States and that 200-250 new cases [are] reported to the registry annually” [emphasis added]:

In the United States there are approximately 6,500 cases on the registry which includes all cases reported since the registry began and still living. The number of cases with active disease and requiring drug treatment is approximately 600. There are 200-250 new cases reported to the registry annually with about 175 of these being new cases diagnosed for the first time.

Similarly, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) stated in a June 16, 2006, report, “Summary of Notifiable Diseases — United States, 2004,” that “[t]he number of reported cases of Hansen disease (HD) in the United States peaked at 361 in 1985 and has declined since 1988.”

This data all confirms that 40 years of legal immigration, and illegal, produced a rise in the stock of cases from 900 in 1963 to 7,000 in 2003. This represents 200 up to 361 new cases per year, and some people died, some illegals perhaps left, and we are left with 7,000 in 2003. Note this is reported cases in these databases. Actual numbers are higher.

The 60 Minutes website Transcript has the following:

“Lou Dobbs, “Advocacy” Journalist?
Lesley Stahl Interviews The Outspoken CNN Anchor On “60 Minutes””

One of the issues he tackles relentlessly is illegal immigration. And on that, his critics say, his advocacy can get in the way of the facts.

Following a report on illegal immigrants carrying diseases into the U.S., one of the correspondents on his show, Christine Romans, told Dobbs that there have been 7,000 cases of leprosy in the U.S. in the past three years.

60 Minutes checked that and found a report issued by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, saying that 7,000 is the number of leprosy cases over the last 30 years, not the past three. The report also says that nobody knows how many of those cases involve illegal immigrants.

“We went to try and check that number, 7,000. We can’t…,” Stahl says.

“Well, I can tell you this. If we reported it, it’s a fact,” Dobbs replies.

“You can’t tell me that. You did report it,” Stahl says.

“I just did,” Dobbs says.

“How can you guarantee that to me?” Stahl asks.

Says Dobbs, “Because I’m the managing editor. And that’s the way we do business. We don’t make up numbers, Lesley.”

“That’s a strange attitude for a reporter to have, ‘I don’t need anymore facts. I know what the truth is,'” says Mark Potok, who monitors hate groups for the Southern Poverty Law Center.

Like Colorado Media Matters and others, 60 Minutes misses the point that their own research shows its legal immigration from the 1965 Immigration Act along with illegal immigration that has caused the rise in the stock of leprosy cases from going from 900 in 1963 to 7,000 in 2003.

Presumably, 60 Minutes found the Colorado Media Matters webpage and used that in researching their piece? If so, they might note that on their webpage. CMM goes after several people in the same way as 60 Minutes did Lou Dobbs. Did 60 Minutes copy this CMM tactic, but without disclosing CMM as their source or idea for that part of the segment?

CMM goes after Frosty Wooldridge, and World Net Daily, and talk radio 630 KHOW-AM’s The Peter Boyles Show. In each case, CMM harps on the issue of illegal immigration. But as the NYT piece shows, its legal and illegal immigration since the 1965 Immigration Act that are to blame. Ted Kennedy lied about its harmful impact then just as he lies about the disease from new legal immigrants today, as well as illegals. We must halt legal immigration to zero to stop disease coming in from immigration. That is a tautology, which means its true. (Some liberals may not be able to handle the difference between a true tautology about the need to stop legal immigration and bigotry. Sweden and Finland seem to have that problem in 2 recent cases.)

It is, perhaps, unfair to blame any one person for this confusion in stock and flow, since none of those involved explicitly went into this issue quite in these terms, although CMM gets close in providing the information. The term cases itself is not telling you if its new cases per year or the stock of cases, so its easy for people not to know what is meant. In addition, the distinction of stock and flow may be emphasized more in the economics literature than in the disease demography literature. Macroeconomics in particular, emphasizes the distinction between a flow variable like GDP or income and a stock variable like wealth.

CMM still failed to reach the complete and correct answer, that legal immigration from the 1965 Immigration Act is to blame along with illegal immigration. In 1963 after 40 years of immigration restriction we had 900 cases. In 2003 after 40 years of Kennedy’s 1965 legal Immigration Act we had over 7,000 cases. As the NYT piece showed, this came from legal immigration and illegal immigration. As the NYT piece stated, “the disease is now officially endemic to the Northeastern United States for the first time ever”. Thus the conclusion is that we must stop all legal immigration and send all illegals home to stop the inflow of disease.

==Appendix Some webpages consulted in researching this piece. Some duplicates.

Of particular interest is the following which has some perspective on the whole segment.

“60 Minutes versus Lou Dobbs…and the Winner Is…”

[Joe Guzzardi] @ 10:48 pm [Email author] [Email This Article] [Print This Article]

http://blog.vdare.com/archives/2007/05/06/60-minutes-versus-lou-dobbsand-the-winner-is/

search leprosy 7000

Picks up a copy of a WND article

http://journals.aol.com/beezsignal/the-floor/entries/2007/01/15/is-leprosy-creeping-into-the-us/1589

http://minnsirproject.blogspot.com/2007/03/attack-on-our-health.html

These search pick up the name John Levis, lets try this search on google:

leprosy 7000 “John Levis”

Results 127 of 27 for leprosy 7000 “John Levis”.

Media Matters tries to debunk the 7000 figure in the last 3 years:

http://colorado.mediamatters.org/items/200609250001

Copy of New York Times piece from 2003

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9406E0D81E3AF93BA25751C0A9659C8B63&sec=health&spon=&pagewanted=1

http://www.stevequayle.com/News.alert/03_Disease/030226.leprosy.in.US.html

http://lonewacko.com/blog/archives/006629.html

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=43275

“Lou Dobbs, “Advocacy” Journalist?
Lesley Stahl Interviews The Outspoken CNN Anchor On “60 Minutes””

leprosy 7000

Results 1100 of about 91,300 for leprosy 7000.

leprosy 7000 “3 years”

Results 1100 of about 16,100 for leprosy 7000 “3 years.

http://eforum.reviewjournal.com/lv/showthread.php?t=1740

“As per Fox news this morning there are 7000 new cases of lepersy in the US , mainly among immigrants ,” from usa today Banned member.

http://lonewacko.com/blog/archives/002902.html

which references Madeleine Pelner Cosman:

http://www.jpands.org/vol10no1/cosman.pdf

Although last, this final reference is worth reading.

%d bloggers like this: