Banking on far-flung publicity surrounding a Kentucky political candidate’s campaign slogan, “With Jews We Lose,” the anti-Semitic website Daily Stormer has announced plans to distribute fliers with the phrase in New Hampshire ahead of Election Day.
The website is calling the plan an “anti-Jew propaganda offensive” with plans to buy larger signs with a variety of different messages “exposing the Jewish power structure that is destroying America.”
“Even though the Internet is an effective way to spread the message about Jewish control of America, it is also important that we spread this message in the real world,” the Daily Stormer said. About 150 signs will be distributed in southern New Hampshire in the coming weeks “near Jewish institutions and memorials, schools and a variety of other places that will hopefully get people’s attention,” the website reported.
It is not entirely clear why Daily Stormer is targeting New Hampshire. A request for comment were not returned.
Muslim Civil Liberties Group Calls on Mesa High School to Cancel Event Featuring Anti-Islamic Speaker
Bigot issues gun threats before speaking.
“Islam is the most anti-Semitic, genocidal ideology in the world,” she once commented. Geller famously re-posted controversial cartoon images of the prophet Muhammad from a Danish newspaper on her Atlas Shrugs blog, and was involved in the campaign to stop the building of a community center—which she called a “victory mosque”—near Ground Zero. She has claimed that Hitler was inspired by Islam, and she’s bragged about using a copy of the Quran as a doorstop, CAIR says. Geller’s blog was cited by the Norwegian man who killed 69 people in an anti-Muslim attack in 2011. The two organizations Geller founded, Stop the Islamization of America and the American Freedom Defense Initiative, are both on the Southern Poverty Law Center’s list of designated hate groups, and she has been banned from entering the United Kingdom because of her expressed views.
But CAIR has raised another issue in calling for the event’s cancellation: student safety.
In a blog post yesterday, Geller invited fans to attend her talk, which she calls “an evening of education about Islam, the Islamic State, the Middle East and more.” But the invitation wasn’t quite an open one.
“As for the troublemakers and those threats from Islamic thugs and goons—we have armed security, plus it’s a gun state—plenty of patriots with protection, including me,” Geller wrote, adding “Trust me — you are going down first [emphasis Geller’s].”
His exasperation was understandable. On Saturday, Don Surber, the West Virginia paper’s lone editorial columnist, took to his personal blog to offer his thoughts on “police brutality” and the killing of unarmed black teenager Michael Brown.
“This summer I had an epiphany as I watched packs of racists riot in Ferguson, Missouri, in support of a gigantic thug who was higher than a kite when he attacked Ferguson Police Department Officer Darren Wilson, who unfortunately had to put this animal down,” Surber wrote.
By Sunday morning, Surber appended an update to the top of the post and crossed out the final phrase of the sentence.
Don’t give up after the first 10 seconds, you’ll miss the fun. You can see the story behind this little piece of video here, but clicking on that will spoil the surprise.
“I told her straight up ‘you could take that Muslim-loving piece of paper and shove it up your white [expletive],” Kevin Wood said in an interview. “If [students] can’t practice Christianity in school, they should not be allowed to practice Islam in school.”
Kevin Wood, who identified himself as Catholic, denied that he had issued any threats or that he had planned to show up on the La Plata campus Monday.
In a later phone call with Morris, Kevin Wood said he blasted the school for violating his daughter’s “constitutional rights” and said he would contact the media and “bring a [expletive]storm down on them like they’ve never seen.”
Will these librul school administrators ever realize that teaching Islam’s place in world history is the same as forcing kids to attend a mosque?
Douglas MacKinnon, a former aide to President Ronald Reagan who attracted widespread ridicule last week for his suggestion that several Southern states secede and form an anti-gay country called “Reagan,” has been fired from his job as a columnist for the Tampa Tribune, a local blog reports.
The post, highlighted by media critic Jim Romenesko, cites unnamed sources in reporting the news. Tampa Tribune metro editor Dennis Joyce would neither confirm nor deny MacKinnon’s firing, saying only that it was “a personnel matter.”
Last week, MacKinnon made headlines for his appearance on right-wing radio host Janet Mefferd’s program, where he discussed his new book, “The Secessionist States of America: The Blueprint for Creating a Traditional Values County … Now.” Lamenting that the country had been “turned upside down,” MacKinnon decried the advance of gay rights and outlined his vision for “a new republic dedicated to traditional values,” carved out of South Carolina, Georgia, and Florida.
“The interim name for the country, by the way, is Reagan,” MacKinnon told Mefferd.
In the interview, MacKinnon also denounced Abraham Lincoln for “wag[ing] an illegal war” against the Confederacy, which asserted had “seceded legally” and “peacefully.”
Until a few weeks ago, Michael Anthony Peroutka belonged to the League of the South, an Alabama-based group that decries the presence in this country of “hordes of non-white immigrants” and wants the South to secede from the union and return to its “Anglo-Celtic” roots.
He is also the Republican candidate for a seat on the Anne Arundel County Council, facing an inexperienced and little-known Democratic challenger and widely believed to have a good chance of winning the GOP-leaning 5th District on Nov. 4.
Peroutka opposes gay marriage, says he believes in creationism and favors the dismantling of public education, which he has called “a plank in the Communist Manifesto.”
He sang “Dixie” at a League of the South conference in 2012, calling it “the national anthem.”
Hooray, Pennsylvania state Senate! You came close to doing a solid for our animal friends — you passed a bill that would result in a prison sentence for anyone who “[breeds,] keeps, sells, offers for sale or transfers a dog or cat for the purpose of human consumption.” Good on ya! And Pennsylvania actually needed that, seeing as how state SPCA investigators found a number of operations where people actually were doing that. Even Republican Gov. Tom Corbett was expected to sign it, because really, who wants dogs and cats being bred as food?
Oh, yes, of course: the National Rifle Association. They aren’t really all that big on dog and cat eating, actually, but the animal cruelty bill got killed in the Pennsylvania House because it also included a provision that would have banned “pigeon shoots,”
And what exactly are pigeon shoots?
the Philadelphia Inquirer’s Amy Worden describes thusly:
a practice where live pigeons are launched from electronic boxes while shooters fire rounds at short distance. Injured birds that land in the shooting circle get their necks broken - often by teenagers. Wounded birds by the hundreds fly off to die slow deaths.
That’s not hunting. That’s an activity for psychopaths who feel shooting clay targets doesn’t cause enough suffering to get them off.
After being pummeled for nearly a year by a band of disgruntled former NA members seeking to knock him out of power with a $2 million civil lawsuit, accusing him of “a myriad of instances of malfeasance, misfeasance, illegalities and irregularities,” Gliebe essentially told the Gloucester County Circuit Court judge presiding at a status hearing for the case “no mas” and announced he had quit the neo-Nazi group he has led for 12 years.
Erich Gliebe (left) and Will Williams outside the courthouse where Gliebe announced his resignation.
“I have resigned all my positions with the National Alliance,” Gliebe told the court, standing at the defense table in a black suit and blue shirt. “I am no longer director or chairman.”
It was, however, a split decision for Gliebe’s bitter courtroom opponents, a gang of six who call themselves the National Alliance Reform & Restoration Group, or NARRG.
Jesse Lee Peterson is one of those anti gay, pro big business Republicans ( or at least I’m guessing he’s a Republican, I’m not sure, but he’s definitely far right. )
Attempting to defend the “rights” of business owners, Jesse Lee Peterson said one of the dumbest things I’ve heard someone say trying to defend an absolute free market. As Right Wing Watch pointed out,
Last month, Jesse Lee Peterson wrote a column for WND suggesting that if anti-gay Christian business owners are going to be required to serve gay customers, they ought to do so by informing any gay customers “upfront that they would take their money and donate it to a conservative Christian law firm to fight against same-sex marriage.”
Shortly after posting that column, Peterson discussed this “solution” on his radio program and, during the course of that discussion, declared that business owners should be free to discriminate against anyone they choose. As such, Peterson said, it was wrong civil activists to launch sit-ins and protests against racially discriminatory business owners during the Civil Rights Era.
Yeah that’s why blacks in the south only did sit ins at private business because their feelings were hurt by signs that said whites only. Yeah that explains why freedom riders were willing to go to jail and risk their lives, to put an end to segregation. If Peterson actually did live in the south during Jim Crow, he must have either been too young to remember or he must have had it better than most African Americans had it. Also unlike Peterson, I hope the day comes very soon when its also illegal not to serve gay people on the grounds that they’re gay.
There’s actually a pretty good commentary about why we need anti discrimination laws that was posted on Troy Media website. Its about anti discrimination laws in Canada, but much of what it says applies to the US as well.
To understand why Canadians place such a high value on equality, we must understand the good that anti-discrimination laws seek to achieve. They are intended to protect human dignity, personal security and social inclusion. They also seek to ensure equal access to various services and material goods, without discrimination based on race, religion, sexual orientation, and the like.
Imagine that you are denied a job or an apartment because of your skin colour, ethnic origin or sexual orientation. We can all recognize that this is unfair; anti-discrimination laws are the expression of this basic realization.
Because human dignity is difficult to pin down, some people suggest that anti-discrimination law should focus only on the material harm that arises from lack of equal access to goods and services. While it may be difficult to define exactly what wounds personal dignity, we should not minimize damage to our sense of self-worth. Human experience teaches there is little that is more painful than being denied your individuality, which is what discrimination is all about.
Off course Peterson would tell you that’s not a big deal, and in the case of the gays he seems to think its a good thing that they would be denied service or employment based only on them being attracted to people of the same gender.
He probably agrees with Bryan Fischer’s nonsensical belief that private business owners being required serve gays is “slavery,” minus the “mark of the beast thing” maybe. Kyle Kulinski had a pretty good response to that, and what he said about the unfairness and unjust nature of allowing anyone to arbitrarily discriminate against anyone also applies here.
Peterson would rather see signs outside of private business that say “no coloreds” than have the day come when private business are required to take down their “no gays” signs. He would also rather have “no coloreds” signs than have the government interfere with the private sector at all. It is amazing on one level how he as a black man, who grew up in a place and a time, when anti black racism was not only tolerated but required by law, and doesn’t see how much better things are now that we are much less tolerate of people being mistreated based on their race. He would rather we live in a country, where he could be denied service anywhere, based only on the fact that he’s black. At least he’s more logically consistent than other homophobes who want us to make a special exception for their anti gay bigotry but nothing else.