FBI now classifies far-right Proud Boys as 'extremist group', documents say
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
The FBI now classifies the far-right Proud Boys as an “extremist group with ties to white nationalism”, according to a document produced by Washington state law enforcement.
The FBI’s 2018 designation of the self-confessed “western chauvinist group” as extremist has not been previously made public.
The Proud Boys was founded by the Vice Media co-founder Gavin McInnes. McInnes has insisted that his group is not white nationalist or “alt-right” but the Proud Boys have a history of misogyny and glorifying violence. The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) lists them as a hate group.
The document also says: “The FBI has warned local law enforcement agencies that the Proud Boys are actively recruiting in the Pacific north-west”, and: “Proud Boys members have contributed to the recent escalation of violence at political rallies held on college campuses, and in cities like Charlottesville, Virginia, Portland, Oregon, and Seattle, Washington.”
Tags
Who is online
408 visitors
Soooo, I wonder how long it will be before they declare the Republican Party a hate group and, an extremist group,
About as long as it's going to take to declare the Democrat party a hate group, nee extremist group....
Defending extremists..... Great Job...
Good luck with that.....
See? This is what happens when someone has a "knee Jerk" reaction to something someone posts and, doesn't read the link provided.
Yeah I read the link.... Actually it was the second time I've read it.
My response is directly to your characterization of that link....
If the Republicans are an extremist group then so are the Democrats....
And in that, it is SPOT ON!
Maybe you can enlighten us as to when the federal government classified Antifa as a hate group or, an extremist group and, when they spoke at a Democratic rally or, meeting sponsored by the DNC?
I don't think SPLC is going to classify Antifa as a hate group in our lifetimes... And no they haven't attended any democrat functions, but they do speak to the liberal media who give then wide latitude to express and explain their hate and violence..... Democrat politicians have defended them for their hate and violence and at the minimum excused it.....
The FBI only recently sent out their advisory, have the Proud Boys been invited anywhere since? no they haven't.
So your argument falls apart right there, unless like many of your compatriots you wish to pre date the accusation to before they were classified such..... (but of course politicians and their sycophants do that so well)
Given that little fact, your characterization of the Republicans is just as valid as my characterization of Democrats...... The characterizations are a wash...... (if they are even valid in the first place)
Except as a true expression of hate......
Ok, show me where I said that it should be the SPLC that names them a hate group, I said the GOVERNMENT, as far as I know the SPLC isn't an arm of the government and, if it is, can you tell me when that happened?
So, you admit it is only the Republicans which invited a hate group to come and, speak at an official function. Got it.
That looks like a classic false equivalency.
Except they weren't a hate group per the FBI when they were invited. (which blows your claim right out of the water as a projection of something that has never actually happened)
And do you forget when the FBI was using SPLC as it's definer of Hate Groups?
FBI partners with left-leaning Southern Poverty Law Center on hate crimes
A relationship started under Obama and terminated under T-rump?
And when that was in effect, essentially the SPLC was the governments definition maker/definer of hate groups....
It may not have been an "official" function, but Obama did have BLM in the Oval Office. Yes, BLM is a hate group.
According to the seeded article:
So they WERE indeed designated as an extremist group before the 'event' at the Metropolitan Republican Club and the Club could well have known about the Proud Boy's designation. Once designated, the FBI would undoubtedly be aware of where their 'leader' would be 'performing' and would have informed the NYDP and the venue about the threats of violence.
Secondly, the SPLC have partnered with US intel for decades. Their database, along with that of the Anti-Defamation League, were used by the fledgling DHS to target and data mine extremist groups and were also used to develop COPLINK in the late 90's.
So the relationship between the Federal Government and the SPLC started LONG before Obama took office and I sincerely doubt that it has ended in any meaningful way. It may be on the 'down low' but the SPLC has been far too valuable to Federal law enforcement to reject them merely for political expediency.
According to whom? Please provide a link to an OFFICIAL designation by a reliable organization.
Who says besides you and, the Right Wing?
You see, this is where you messed up....again. This site is nothing more than an opinion site...I gave my opinion.
The thing is, anyone that does not think a group that calls for the killing of cops and whites is not a hate group is a complete idiot.
Please link any representative of BLM who has advocated for the killing of cops or whites. If you can't then I guess that proves who the true idiots are.
They don't advocate killing cops, they do it.
You just intentionally lied. "They", meaning BLM, had NOTHING to do with the killing of police. "They" were peacefully protesting in Dallas.
This is from the article you linked:
"Officials said they had found no evidence that the gunman, Micah Johnson, 25, had direct ties to any protest or political group, either peaceful or violent".
Micah Johnson was a private in the Army reserve and served in Afghanistan. It's far more likely PTSD had more to do with his mental breakdown than any supposed messaging coming from BLM which he had NO ties to.
It's no wonder that the majority of Americans are fed up with the lies and deceit coming from the right wing, and I'm sure you were just parroting some other misinformed right wing pundit because that's what you want to believe. You want to believe all black people are members of BLM, are violent and thus eligible to be attacked, maligned and vilified regardless of the truth. The facts show it's right wing violence that Americans should fear, you're far more likely to be killed by a right wing extremist than you are to be harmed by a Muslim extremist or any member of BLM or even the "New Black Panthers" or Antifa. But that's a fact the bigoted white pieces of shit Proud boys and all their conservative Republican supporters don't want you to know.
This site isn't called Opiniontalkers. When I voice my opinion, I state it as such. Of course, you can do what you want be don't get your panties in a bunch when someone asks you for proof of you assertions.
So is that your opinion too or do you have proof for THAT assertion?
Bugsy said:
DP repiied:
ok, I can agree with that one..... Link? how about video....
I guess Black Lives Matter then qualifies as a hate group by your standards....
"What do we WANT?!... DEAD COPS!....... "When do we WANT IT?!... NOW!!!!"
Cause I personally do not consider either of you as complete idiots....
Dulay said:
There you have it in living color and mono sound, as long as you do not mind the proof coming from me that is....
The methodology for designating a 'hate group':
group
While that video goes a long way to show that during ONE protest, a faction of BLM did call for 'Dead cops', it DOES NOT give evidence that BLM is a 'hate group'.
The SPLC and ADL do NOT designate anyone as a 'hate group' based on ONE action or statement. If they did, the list would be MUCH larger. The FBI's data on 'hate crimes' would also be much more extensive.
It is A-OK to attack people because of who they work for or political beliefs though./s
I can't help but wonder why you cited that as sarcasm.
'Attacking' people because of their political beliefs is a well accepted practice right here on NT. Sweeping generalizations made about 'the left', 'secular progressives' and 'the deep state' being thrown around ad nauseam as the beginning and the end of far too weak arguments.
Do you REALLY want those who 'attack people because of who they work for or political beliefs' to be designated as a 'hate group'?
IMHO, the Trump Administration would qualify under that standard. Hell, Trump even attacked members of his own party for failing to bow low enough.
BTFW, Trump just attacked McRaven based on his unfounded belief that McRaven politically supported Clinton and Obama and his comments were defended here by a plethora of the neo-nationalists. IOKIYAR
I understand their methodology better than most and personally consider their application of said methodology to be the most biased I have ever seen. When a methodology goes completely on one political direction or the other, it is inherently biased... (for anyone willing to be honest and see the truth)
And given the clear political leanings of SPLC and BLM? (which neither organization does anything to hide)
I would never think that SPLC would ever call BLM a hate group... (it would be political heresy for them to do such)
That said, On to my posting. I'm sure you didn't miss the part where I use this standard....
Just because I know the SPLC excuse by heart and you cite it well, and I really do not consider either of them idiots..... Using their standard seemed apropos..
oh and just in case you missed it, I consider BLM a hate group. the plain evidence is simply overwhelming since they use the same tactics and methodologies as the Proud Boys to do what they do.
To me hate is hate the behaviors of such are the same no matter the belief. and according to their actions? BLM is a hate group. Anyone seeking truth cannot deny that fact.
I posted the basics of their methodology and political affiliation is not part of it.
You seem to think that SPLC should seek out a 'balance' when documenting hate group data. What if there is NO balance? Should SPLC and ADL be limited in the number of hate groups that they report on unless they can balance the numbers by 'political affiliation'?
I didn't address those parts of you comment that were addressed to other members.
Your standards don't meet those stated by SPLC, ABL or the FBI.
Utter bullshit.
Again, your standards are yours and not shared by SPLC, ABL or the FBI.
That's quite a sweeping generalization there.
IMHO, those seeking truth are quite capable of coming to different conclusions based on the same facts. There is no need to denigrate those that come to differing conclusions in good faith.
But you have every right to choose to do what you do...
Never claimed they did. But I will say that the FBI has become quite the political police since Bush II took office.
Actually it's not, it's a general opinion, there is a difference you know. Now if it specifically pointed a finger at a specific group or person then yes it would be a sweeping generalization.
I based my statement upon what I consider a hate group and the standard that two of the members gave as their basis..... You will find I don't hold my criticizms from any side. wrong is wrong... the Proud boys is a hate group, but so it the SPLC and affiliation with the FBI does not excuse that. So in essence although we do not agree in judgment, we do agree in ideals in good faith.
Thank you. As do you, and I will defend your right to any position you take as different as that may be from mine, on whatever basis you decide is truth for you....
Peace, good back and forth....
NWM
No. I don't agree with false equivalencies.
And that is an opinion. Which you are entitled to.
The question now is can you rise above arguing petty differences and show a bit of respect for someone who has treated you with the utmost respect?
Because this is what this was all about, can two different people overcome the petty emotions of their respective positions and see the worth of each other?
I know it can be done I have numerous liberal friends here I actually call brother/sister...
Can you be one? do you even want to be one.....
That is the question.....
First of all, I don't think that our differences are 'petty'. They're substantive.
Secondly, I've shown you nothing but respect.
Is it? I need not respect someone as a person to respect their argument and even be swerved by it. I see the worth in everyone, some more than others.
Wow, that's quite a change from your attitude when NV members first joined. Then it was all about 'us' and 'them' and how horrible it was that so many liberals were 'infesting' your site. It's nice to see your change of heart.
It's also refreshing to have a debate that doesn't devolve into name calling. I'm not one to blithely include outsiders into my family circle. I may call you friend but never brother.
Now, I would appreciate it if you answered the questions I asked you in my 1.1.25 post.
No they can report anyone they like.
I remember when they were reporting little mom & pop bakeries and restaurants and flower shops, that seemed to end when the FBI asked them for their unique contribution to the burgeoning hate database. (getting sued and losing didn't help their cause either)
What is important to a discernment of bias is who they are NOT reporting.....
Those that just happen to have the same political beliefs as theirs.... despite what many consider as the same behavior as many other groups they do report.....
Do you remember when they (BLM) ran Bernie Sanders out of Seattle? Interrupted and took over his campaign event and refused to allow him to speak? Simply cause he was white?
Remember what was said when the good ol' boys tried to do that to Dr King?
What's different? The good ol' boys are blatant racists, (and yeah I marched with Dr King in the '60's I know they were and have the scars to prove it)
But what about BLM and their behaviors in doing the exact same thing? They aren't racist haters, NO they are patriots fighting the good fight...
I was a protestor while most of those marching today weren't even dreams in their momma's eyes.....
Enough so I have a pretty good feeling as to what is actual racism and what isn't.....
And what is passed off as racism today? doesn't even come close...
Any group that can express outright race hatred for another are the real racists....
And BLM qualifies and by not counting them as racist haters, SPLC abets their racism....
And that is the truth of it as I see it....
Heck, they have even claimed that someone who expresses that ALL lives matter, is disrespecting them and racist hating them. That speaks volumes to me about their hate.
I look at actual behavior, not intent nor the validity or invalidity of their philosophy or even ideology. Their actual statements/behavior belies any attempt to rationalize away their hate...
But rationalizing away is what one political side does... they are justified in their hate... according to one political side.
Dr King stood for NO HATE!... But then to some any difference in opinion is nothing but hate...
Please provide a link to SPLC or ADL 'reporting little mom & pop' businesses.
I was with you until the last sentence which is bullshit. Your standards for being a 'hate group' now seem to include interrupting a campaign event. That would make the Tea Party a 'hate group'.
What behaviors are you referring to? You talk about marching with MLK. Surely you don't have scars from good ole boys 'interrupting' you.
A group can be racist and still not be designated as a hate group. So just because you think that BLM is racist doesn't mean they qualify as a 'hate group'.
You're making far too many false equivalencies and you're insulting my intelligence. Stop.
Hyperbole.
FBI archives show that the Southern Christian Leadership Conference was indeed viewed as a 'Negro' extremist group. BTW, there are plenty of examples where 'factions' of MLK's followers did some bad shit and said some bad shit, especially at the start. There were plenty of 'hot heads' and 'pissed off people' that were a part of the movement and the Southern Christian Leadership Conference was herding cats at first. There was still 'hate' but they were taught how to harness it for the big picture. It took time, some very dedicated people and tons of organization to get and keep people in line.
False equivalencies? right as always, IYHO!
And as far as insulting intelligence, you do a very good job of it as well.
So why don't we leave it at this point, cause in my experience it goes down hill from here. the only things you know about the marches in the sixties comes from books, I was there I lived it....
After Dr King was assassinated, those hateful spiteful people that you claim were controlled took over the movement... And destroyed it. When Dr King was leading it there was no need to keep people "in line", people came and marched or went home as needed, of their own free will. Afterwards, if you didn't get "in line" you were rejected..... (sometimes in very vicious ways) It was multi racial, multi gender, multi ethnic. Afterwards it was none of that.... And that is why the movement collapsed, it became a racist movement.
Yes. the hate came to the surface once Dr King was gone. And what was a multi racial movement not allied to any political ideology was usurped by politics, the same politics that has control of the movement today. The same politics that tried to usurp occupy, the same politics that tried to usurp the Tea Party.....
So it is best we declare an impasse, cause you are never going accept anything from me as to how it was back then.
IMPASSE
Then you proceed to fulfill you prophesy.
I lived in Chicago in the 50's, 60's and 70's, I was there for the sit its, the marches, the race riots, the riots after Kings assassination, at the 68 convention, at many an anti-war demonstration and at the Skokie anti-Nazi protest.
Stop making uninformed assumptions and spare me your supercilious pontification.
Utter BS. Under Abernathy, they opened up the unions and brought them into the mix, more diverse people participated. Abernathy helped negotiated the deal @ Wounded Knee.
Ya, his leadership was SOOO racist. /s
The Tea Party was political from it's inception.
You obviously have a personal POV and I accept that is how YOU experienced it. From the perspective of a activist POC, my personal experience differs.
So now, go READ the CoC and post a proper IMPASSE.
I think this is what prompted this action at this time....
Deputy fired over Proud Boys sweatshirt
Personally, I think what the officer did was stepping over the line, and deserved a termination....
We don't need radicals in our police forces... She has a right to her opinions, but not to make it appear that the law supports the actions of radicals...
Besides SPLC named the Proud Boys a hate group months ago.... And listening to some of their rhetoric I can see why...
Actually, the seed speaks to that exact issue.
I wonder if now the city council of Portland will rethink their vote to deny the Mayor the power to control these protests...
I can't speak to that as I'm not that familiar with Portland city politics..... But I would hazard to guess it would be much the same as the Seattle city council's position given the same political bent.
They just had a 3-2 vote NOT to let the Mayor try to mitigate the problems with ad nauseam 'protests' by the Proud Boys and Patriot Prayer group. They raise havoc in Portland even though they live in Washington.
What can I say, the insanity has infected both sides....
well this totally must be fake news (do i really need to put the /s on the end ?). I'm told by some conservative minded members on here that it's only the "left" that is violent and extremist - not the "right". Was i lied to again by the conservative minded ?
Yes and they lied to themselves too.