FBI Removes SPLC as “Resource”

March 26, 2014

In an unexpected and unannounced move, the FBI has apparently dropped the Southern Poverty Law Center from the list of “hate crime resources” on the Bureau’s web site.

Several news sources have speculated that the FBI’s decision was at least partly due to the SPLC’s role in a a recent case of domestic terrorism at the Family Research Council.

In 2012, gunman Floyd Corkins entered the Washington, DC offices of the Family Research Council intent on murdering as many staffers as possible. Fortunately, facilities manager Leo Johnson was able to subdue Corkins before he could embark on his rampage, despite having been shot by Corkins in the scuffle.

While in custody, Corkins admitted that he plotted the attack using SPLC public relation chief Mark Potok’s “Hate Map” fundraising tool.

“Asked by the FBI how he picked FRC to attack, Corkins stated, “It was a, uh, Southern Poverty Law, lists, uh, anti-gay groups. I found them online. I did a little bit of research, went to the website, stuff like that.”

Hopefully other law enforcement agencies will follow the Bureau’s example and purge their offices of all of Mr. Potok’s spurious fundraising propaganda.

Though long, long overdue, Watching the Watchdogs commends the Bureau’s decision.

Asked by the FBI how he picked FRC to attack, Corkins stated, “It was a, uh, Southern Poverty Law, lists, uh, anti-gay groups. I found them online. I did a little bit of research, went to the website, stuff like that.”
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2014/03/fbi-scrubs-key-hate-crime-partnership/#tcoxTIJm5i0izCW6.99

Asked by the FBI how he picked FRC to attack, Corkins stated, “It was a, uh, Southern Poverty Law, lists, uh, anti-gay groups. I found them online. I did a little bit of research, went to the website, stuff like that.”
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2014/03/fbi-scrubs-key-hate-crime-partnership/#tcoxTIJm5i0izCW6.99

SPLC — Bribing Teachers into Indoctrination

March 12, 2014

A recent news story in the Hawaii Reporter exposes the Southern Poverty Law Center’s latest indoctrination scheme: Pay teachers $250 bucks a head to attend “Teaching Tolerance” training sessions.

“Teaching Tolerance” is the SPLC sub-unit that purports to promote diversity in the K-12 classroom. As we’ve reported here for years, “Teaching Tolerance” has been led by “whites only” since its inception in 1991.

Fortunately, State Rep. Bob McDermott got wind of the dubious scheme and has filed an ethics complaint against the Hawaii Dept. of Education.

“Are Hawaii teachers being bribed to promote a specific point of view in these materials to their students?” McDermott asked.”

This story bears watching.

SPLC 2014 — The “Hate Group” Bubble Pops!

March 9, 2014

It’s no secret that America has witnessed a decline in manufacturing over the decades. Apparently the Southern Poverty Law Center’s manufactured “hate groups” are no longer immune to market forces either. Their latest “Hate Map” fundraising tool, purporting to identify the SPLC’s list of “hate groups” for 2013 indicates a 6.6% decrease from the previous year.

While 6.6% may not seem like much in the real world, it is nearly unprecedented in the history of the SPLC. Considering the fact that there is no legal definition for “hate group,” the SPLC’s Public Relations Chief, Mark Potok, has simply manufactured as many as he needed each year to maintain the organization’s ongoing fear campaign. Last year he lowered his “hate group” count by half a percent voluntarily and now a second, much larger cut. What gives?

Since the “supply” of hate groups has never been a problem for Mr. Potok, we can only assume that the recent downward trend represents a collapse in “demand” for his dubious product.

[NOTE: In the spirit of full disclosure, last year we remarked that the 2012 decline in "hate groups" was the first in SPLC history, but as Mr. Potok's own graph below indicates, there was a mysterious, and short-lived,  14% drop recorded in 1999. We stand corrected. WTW]

Click image to enlarge (Source: www.splcenter.org)

Click image to enlarge (Source: http://www.splcenter.org)

Mr. Potok acknowledges the drop in his annual “Year in Hate and Extremism” screed, but as we’ve pointed out on numerous occasions, his claims of “spectacular growth” since the election of President Obama have never held much water.

“After four years of spectacular growth driven by the 2008 election of President Obama and the nearly simultaneous collapse of the economy, the radical right in America saw its first significant decrease in 2013.”

2009: The first full year of the Obama Administration and the worst year of the Great Recession returned “spectacular growth” of .6%

2010: Mr. Potok adds 70 new “hate groups” to his map, but at the same time the number of “homeless hate groups,” those Mr. Potok cannot locate on any map, including his own, jumped by 99, for a net loss of 2.9%

2011: Mr. Potok adds 16 new “hate groups” to his Hate Map for a mighty increase of 1.6%. That same year Mr. Potok states: “But Potok said the [Ku Klux] Klan has disintegrated. “There is no Klan now,” he said, only a collection of squabbling organizations. (www.sanluisobispo.com, March 23, 2011)

Doesn’t it seem a little odd that Mr. Potok would proclaim the disintegration of the KKK at the height of his alleged “hate group” boom? Or maybe “bubble” is a more accurate term. After a “spectacular growth” of -.6% for the first Obama Administration, Mr. Potok’s “hate groups” went into the visible decline of the past two years. The market can only absorb so much.

“Ah, well,” will say the Faithful, “There are still 939 “hate groups” on the Hate Map, [940, by our count, there's one skulking in Alaska-- WTW], which obviously proves that Mr. Potok and the SPLC are on to something!” Well, not so much.

Click image to enlarge

Click image to enlarge

If you paste Mr. Potok’s “hate group” data into a spreadsheet, which you can download here, you’ll find some glaring “irregularities.”

If you sort the spreadsheet by Location (Column C), you find that Mr. Potok has no idea where 220 of his 940 groups are hiding. We know they are really, really there because Mr. Potok says they are really there. That’s 23% right off the top. THIS is “hard data”?

Let’s take New England, for example, sorted by State (Column D):

Click image to enlarge

Click image to enlarge

Mr. Potok designated 32 “hate groups” for New England but he has no idea where 20 of them are hiding. That’s 33% off the top for Massachusetts, 66% for Vermont and New Hampshire (IHM and the Immaculate Heart of Mary are located in the same building in flyspeck Richmond, population 1,100 and change), 80% for Connecticut, and an incredibly ridiculous 100% for Maine and Rhode Island.

Again, friends… THIS is hard data?

Observant readers will note that while Mr. Potok fastidiously assigned every New England state its own chapter of the Klan, he doesn’t seem to know where any of them are located.

Click image to enlarge

Click image to enlarge

In all fairness to Mr. Potok, it should be noted that the Loyal White Knights are an entirely new Klan group and the problem of locating them goes far beyond the rocky shores and granite hills of New England. Of the 51 chapters of the Loyal White Knights Mr. Potok has assigned to the entire United States, he is not able to locate 36 of them, or 70%.

Click image to enlarge

Click image to enlarge

No wonder they call themselves “The Invisible Empire.”

Granted, it’s not just new Klan groups that are hard to find. Mr. Potok has misplaced entire groups of Neo-Nazis:

Click image to enlarge

Click image to enlarge

White Nationalists:

Click image to enlarge

Click image to enlarge

And more Racist Skinheads than you can imagine:

Click image to enlarge

Click image to enlarge

And even when Mr. Potok does assign a city or town to one of his designated “hate groups” it still gives us absolutely no evidence that most of these groups even exist.

In 1998, respected investigative journalist Laird Wilcox, who describes himself as a Liberal, pointed out this lack of verifiable evidence in his seminal work, The Watchdogs.

When the SPLC releases their list, either in print or on the Internet, it fails to contain actual addresses that might be checked by journalists or researchers. Several listings refer to “unknown group” and the name of a city or town.” — The Watchdogs, p. 79

Mr. Wilcox set the standard for identifying Conservative and right-wing groups through a series of guides he published through the 1990s:

Click image to enlarge

Click image to enlarge

Mr. Wilcox engaged in actual research and fact-checking, something no one in the modern media will bother to do, to provide usable information that could be cross-checked, verified or debunked:

Click image to enlarge

Click image to enlarge

Mr. Wilcox even did something unthinkable, by Mr. Potok’s standards: He documented Progressive and left-wing groups as well as the Radical Right:

Click image to enlarge

Click image to enlarge

Click image to enlarge

Click image to enlarge

The Southern Poverty Law Center doesn’t really see much of a problem with the Radical Left. As Mr. Potok explained to Madeleine Morgenstern a couple years ago, “We’re not really set up to cover the extreme Left.”

And why would they be? There’s not nearly as much money in it.

Granted, many of the entries in Mr. Wilcox’ guides give little more than a P.O. box, but even that information is useful in helping the public and the Media judge the real potential threats of Mr. Potok’s alleged “hate groups.”

If Laird Wilcox could come up with this much information working on a shoe-string budget and using 1991 technology, why can’t Mark Potok do the same using the Internet and the SPLC’s hundreds of millions of cash on hand?

The simple fact is that he doesn’t have to. Visit your favorite online news aggregator and do a simple keyword search for “hate groups” and you’ll receive hundreds of recent hits, all referring to Mr. Potok’s Hate Map fundraising tool and very, very few contesting his spurious claims.

Last year, well-meaning donors believed Mr. Potok’s phony numbers and sent the SPLC $37,503,858 donor-dollars, or just over $103,000 every single day. This is why Mr. Potok, who is a public relations guy and not an attorney, received an annual compensation package in excess of $163,000 last year.

It makes no difference if Mr. Potok designates 800, 900 or 1,200 “hate groups” in a given year. His gullible donors will swallow any line he feeds them and Media will never say a word.

SPLC 2013 — Another Year of Record “Non-Profits”

February 24, 2014

Spring is in the air which means that the Southern Poverty Law Center is releasing its financial numbers for the previous year. This year is no exception and the first reports out of this venerable “non-profit” indicate that… wait for it… business has never been better.

According to the SPLC’s own bookkeepers, the SPLC’s bloated “Endowment Fund,” aka “The Morris Dees Legacy Fund” earned nearly $36 MILLION in tax-free interest in 2013. Don’t take our word for it. You do the math:

Click image to enlarge

Click image to enlarge

Click image to enlarge

Click image to enlarge

Here, let’s do the math together:

   $281,123,473
-  $245,280,476
     $35,842,997

Let’s not be coy here, $35.8 MILLION is a sweet chunk o’ change for any outfit, especially for an alleged “non-profit.” This number does not include the $36,765,041 in tax-free donations the SPLC took in from well-meaning donors last year (roughly $4,200 every hour). In fact, last year’s $35.8 million is almost double what the bloated “legacy fund” generated in 2012.

So what exactly is the purpose of the “legacy fund”? According to the SPLC’s annual report, “The SPLC builds for the future by setting aside a certain amount of its income for an endowment, a practice begun in 1974 to plan for the day when nonprofits like the SPLC can no longer afford to solicit support through the mail because of rising postage and printing costs.”

Got that? The “legacy fund” was created to offset the costs of printing and mailing fundraising materials. Let’s take a closer look at those costs. First off, it’s pretty much a no-brainer that the advent of the Internet and email has greatly reduced the cost of sending a message to potential donors. Just ask the nearly-bankrupt U.S. Postal Service.

Next, let’s look at just how much of the SPLC’s annual budget goes toward fundraising. According to CharityNavigator.org, the white millionaires who run the SPLC spend about 31% of their annual budget on fundraising. For you donors, that means that for every $100 dollar check you send the SPLC, they spend $31 dollars getting you to send the next hundred dollar check.

Click image to enlarge

Click image to enlarge (Source: Charity Navigator)

For 2013, that 31% came to $12,379,629. Over all, the SPLC reports that its operating costs for 2013 were $39,678,300.

Subtract the SPLC’s fundraising costs from that and it cost them $27,298,671 to keep the doors open in 2013.

Subtract that $27 million from the $35.8 MILLION in interest the SPLC’s bloated “legacy fund” generated in 2013 and you’re left with a “non-profit” of $8,544,326.

If the purpose of the “legacy fund” is to generate funds in excess of annual operating costs it has achieved it’s goal in spades.

But the fundraising continues.

In 1995, SPLC founder Morris Dees promised his donors:

“The Law Center will continue to raise money until it reaches $100 million, Mr. Dees said.  The charity could then operate off the interest from investments.  “We believe that will make it so we won’t have to (stay) in this tough business of raising money to keep our programs going,” Mr. Dees said in a recent speech to a Montgomery civic club. In the meantime, Mr. Dees said he must raise money for current operating costs.”

Click image to enlarge

Click image to enlarge

In 2002, the SPLC’s “Endowment Fund” neared the $100 million mark, but the fundraising continued. By 2007, the fund had topped $200 million, but the fundraising continued. In fact, Mr. Dees has spent the last few years hiring several high-priced fundraising professionalsto join our growing major gifts team.”

Mr. Dees  obviously has no intention of “living off the interest.” In 2013, the SPLC hired a new “Planned Giving Officer” tasked with the ghoulish job of getting the nearly-dead to sign over some of their assets to the SPLC. No wonder Mr. Dees calls it his “legacy fund.”

That same year, Mr. Dees advertised for a “Development Associate,” whose “primary job functions” included:

“Provides friendly and courteous customer service to SPLC’s best donors”

Really? Some SPLC donors are better than others? Those are Mr. Dees words, not ours. Our guess is your puny 3- and 4-digit donor checks don’t quite gain you access to the Winner’s Circle. What is it the guy said about “How sharper than a serpent’s tooth?”

It sure seems like Mr. Dees has every intention of staying in the “tough business” of gulling the gullible no matter how many tax-free millions his “legacy fund” generates.

Think about that the next time you cut a check to the Southern Poverty Law Center. Your donor dollars could do a whole lot more good closer to home. Do the math. We did.

SPLC — Anatomy of a Marketing Ploy

January 26, 2014

As mentioned in an previous post, the master fundraisers at the Southern Poverty Law Center have targeted the LGBT community in their latest marketing scheme. A little digging, very little digging, reveals just how flimsy this campaign really is from the get-go.

Visit the SPLC’s homepage and click on the “LGBT Rights” link on the left.

Click Image to enlarge

Click Image to enlarge

The LGBT Rights page makes the following claim: “Our work on LGBT issues spans decades.” Really?

Click image to enlarge

Click image to enlarge

If the SPLC has been fighting the good fight for the LGBT community “for decades,” why did they not even have an LGBT Rights page until 2011? Certainly there must be dozens of important LGBT cases to which the SPLC can point with pride.

Fortunately, the SPLC keeps a meticulous list of all of their court cases which one can access easily from their home page.

Click image to enlarge

Click image to enlarge

They even provide a handy drop-down menu that sorts the cases by type.

Click image to enlarge

Click image to enlarge

Sorting by LGBT Rights returns a total of 8 cases, which seems rather skimpy for a civil rights law firm that has been in business for nearly 43 years. Scrolling down to the oldest case, Hoffburg v. Alexander, we do indeed find that this case goes all the way back to 1980. Hoffburg, it turns out, wasn’t even the SPLC’s own case. It was an appeal filed by the American Civil Liberties Union.

Click image to enlarge

Click image to enlarge

Glancing up, however, we find that the next time the SPLC went to bat for the LGBT community was in 2011!

Click image to enlarge

Click image to enlarge

Apparently, there were no cases of anti-LGBT civil rights violations worthy of the great institution’s note for 31 years!

In this case, the SPLC threatened to sue a high school if it didn’t allow two female students to march in a pep rally as the school’s Snow King and Queen. Fighting the good fight doesn’t come much harder than that.

Scrolling up the list, we find that it was only a few months after the pep rally case that the SPLC threatened to sue the same school district.

Click image to enlarge

Click image to enlarge

The SPLC claims it was contesting a “gag policy” that prevented teachers from discussing LGBT issues in the classroom. The actual policy read that teachers could discuss LGBT issues at an age appropriate level, if the subject was germane to the class work and remained entirely neutral on the subject, neither endorsing or denigrating it.

Neutrality wasn’t good enough for the civil rights center, and so, having as much spare cash on hand as any other public school system facing a multimillion dollar law firm, Anoka-Hennepin simply gave in. Another hard fought legal battle that never went to court.

Higher up the list, we find Hill v. Public Advocate, the simple copyright infringement case of a New Jersey gay couple whose engagement photo was used in a Colorado political flier without their permission, or that of their photographer, who holds the copyright. None of the plaintiffs are indigent, the case is being handled by one of the premier intellectual property law firms in the business and the term “civil rights” never appears once in the complaint.

Click image to enlarge

Click image to enlarge

Soon after Hill, the SPLC jumped on another non-civil rights case, Ferguson v. JONAH. In this case, a group of gay Jewish men in New York City are suing an organization that promised to “cure” their homosexuality.

Click image to enlarge

Click image to enlarge

This is a classic fraud suit, no different than thousands of similar suits filed every day, and the case is being brought forward by one of the best fraud law firms in NYC, none of the plaintiffs are poor and, once again, the term “civil rights” never appears once in the actual complaint.

If there are no civil rights issues in these otherwise cut-and-dried civil suits that are being handled by some of the best lawyers in the business, what exactly does the SPLC bring to the table?

In a word: Publicity.

In return for this free publicity, the SPLC’s master Public Relations Guru, Mark Potok, can claim that his outfit is out there fighting for gay rights.

The most recent case, as of this writing and described in a previous post, is a perfect example of Mr. Potok’s cynical marketing ploy.

Click image to enlarge

Click image to enlarge

In this case, Mr. Potok and Co. are suing a poor, mostly Black junior high school where a 16-year old 8th grader named Destin Holmes claims she was verbally and mentally abused because she is a self-described lesbian.

Let’s be crystal clear here, nobody, in any of these cases, deserves to be subjected to any form of discrimination by anyone at any time or any place. Those of us who have been through junior high are still all too well aware of the juvenile stupidity that goes on in those institutions, by both the students and the staff, and that in no way explains or justifies it. Obviously, this is a bad situation that demands immediate investigation, but is bringing a federal law suit against one of the poorest performing schools in one of the poorest performing states the best way to fix the system?

Click image to enlarge

Click image to enlarge

Or is it little more than another classic Potok-ian publicity stunt?

Ironically, the complaint against Magnolia Junior High makes no mention of the fact that, while 78% of the student body is non-white, and both the principal and assistant principal, who have been named as defendants, are African American, Ms. Holmes is white.

Can anyone imagine the SPLC overlooking those facts if the races were reversed?

Again, no one should be discriminated against because of their sexual orientation, but when you look the SPLC’s paltry LGBT cases, almost all of which only date back to 2011, how much bang are the donors getting for their donor bucks?

There was one major anti-gay organization that appeared to have flown below the SPLC’s radar for over a decade. In 2000, the Boy Scouts of America went to the U.S. Supreme court to protect their right to actively discriminate against gay Scouts and Scout Leaders (Boy Scouts of America et al. v. Dale), something it had done since its inception in 1910.

In 2002, the BSA issued a press release reaffirming its belief that “an avowed homosexual” lacked the “moral character” to be a Scout or Leader.

Click image to enlarge

Click image to enlarge

The Southern Poverty Law center completely ignored this blatant anti-gay discrimination for over a decade. You will find no mention of the BSA’s discrimination on the SPLC’s web site until 2012, and, even then, that has to be possibly the most tepid response to a genuine “hate-group” in the SPLC’s entire history.

Click image to enlarge

Click image to enlarge

SPLC co-founder Joe Levin was wheeled out of retirement to announce that “Twelve years ago, the Southern Poverty Law Center stopped participating in the Montgomery, Ala., United Way Campaign because the organization chose to fund the Boy Scouts of America.”

That was it? One of the “largest youth-serving organizations in America,” whose primary mission is to build the characters and mold the minds of millions of American boys, actively discriminates against gay men and boys for a century, and the best the SPLC, that bastion of LGBT rights, can come up with is to stop donating to the United Way and say absolutely nothing about it for twelve years??

But wait… it gets even better… Joe Levin continues:

Click image to enlarge

Click image to enlarge

“DOESN’T INTEND TO ENCOURAGE BIGOTRY”??? Mr. Levin, the BSA took its case to the Supreme Court of the United States precisely to preserve its perceived right to discriminate. It doesn’t get any more intentional than the US Supreme Court!

Notice the softball language Mr. Levin uses when dancing around the hard facts: “Embraces anti-LGBT prejudice” and “Doesn’t intend to encourage bigotry.” Where is the SPLC’s patented “Hate Group” brand? The term never even appears in Mr. Levin’s pathetic apologia. Where was the SPLC’s multimillion dollar public relations machine for all those years? Can you imagine the pressure that could have been brought to bear against the BSA’s blatant discrimination?

As it turns out, the BSA did reverse itself on its gay Scout policy effective Jan. 1, 2014. That decision was made based entirely on the protracted negative publicity campaign carried on by dozens of real LGBT support groups and major media outlets. The BSA’s Supreme Court decision still stands, but they finally gave in when public opinion turned on them and said that enough was enough. It was a movement in which the Southern Poverty Law Center’s role was precisely and exactly nothing.

And yet the SPLC has been fighting for LGBT rights “for decades,” right?

Well, not so much. Thanks to the magic of the Internet Archive’s “Wayback Machine,” anyone can wander back in time to view millions of websites as they appeared in the past, going back to the year 2000. It can be slow, and sometimes cantankerous, but it’s always free and a little patience can pay off big dividends.

In 2009, the SPLC issued a downloadable version of its latest “Hate Map” fundraising tool (Note: the “Hate Map” always reflects the previous calendar year):

Click image to enlarge

Click image to enlarge

A closer look at the icon key reveals an astonishing fact. There were no anti-LGBT “hate groups” as late as 2009. Not one.

Click image to enlarge

Click image to enlarge

In fact, the first anti-LGBT “hate groups” do not appear on Mr. Potok’s all-encompassing “Hate Map” until 2011, forty years after the SPLC opened for business.

Furthermore, while the Hoffburg case appears chronologically on the latest version of the SPLC’s case docket list, right between Brown and Wilkins

Click image to enlarge

Click image to enlarge

Thanks to the Wayback Machine, we find Ms. Hoffburg’s case, the case that allows the SPLC to crow that its “work on LGBT issues spans decades” is conspicuously absent from the 2010 case docket!

2010 Case Docket

Click image to enlarge

Hoffburg never made the case docket list in more than 40 years because the SPLC didn’t even consider it worthwhile.

Once the white millionaires who run the SPLC decided to target the LGBT community though, Mr. Potok had to come up with something to show that they had not totally ignored the issue since opening shop in 1971. Hoffburg wasn’t much, but no one in the media will follow the simple steps outlined in this post, so no one would ever know the difference.

Well-meaning donors sent Mr. Potok more than $40 million donor dollars in 2012 because they believe him when he cries “hate group” and they believe him when he says how dedicated the SPLC has been to fighting anti-LGBT discrimination “for decades.” As usual, some simple, primary fact-checking of the SPLC’s own documents proves, once again, that Mr. Potok’s claims are meaningless.

Yet again, nobody should suffer discrimination due to their orientation, and any effort is better than none, but suing poor public school districts over pep rallies and yearbook pictures is pretty low-hanging fruit for an alleged “civil rights” law firm with nearly a quarter-billion dollars in cash on hand.

Click image to enlarge

Click image to enlarge

If you want to contribute to a non-profit that has truly been in the fight against LGBT discrimination you need only do a little homework and ignore Mark Potok’s latest fundraising ploy.

SPLC — Where’s Joe Levin?

January 10, 2014

While doing some research on the Southern Poverty Law Center’s website recently, we became aware of an interesting factoid: SPLC co-founder Joseph J. Levin, Jr., seems to have retired, yet he’s still drawing a six-digit salary from the donation bucket.

According to his SPLC bio, which refers to him in the past tense, he stepped down as SPLC President (a position Morris Dees called “largely honorary” in his autobiography) in 2003, and served as board member until 2009, but he continues to draw compensation worth over $185,000 a year.

Odd, that, considering all of the other board members are paid nothing.

Click to enlarge image

Click to enlarge image

The SPLC’s most recent IRS Form 990 tax return lists him as “general counsel” but other clues from the website imply that Joe isn’t around much these days.

Click image to enlarge

Click image to enlarge

Mr. Levin is conspicuously absent from the SPLC’s list of senior staff, even though he is paid more than half of them (all women, ironically):

SeniorStaff

Click image to enlarge

His Board of Directors photo refers to him as “emeritus,” which Merriam-Webster defines as “one retired from professional life but permitted to retain as an honorary title the rank of the last office held.”

Click image to enlarge

Click image to enlarge

Of course, if he is retired he’d hardly be the first to putter around with a part-time job, so maybe he does legal work for the SPLC on the side. Oddly, the LexisNexis legal database hasn’t placed Mr. Levin in a courtroom since 1991.

What exactly does Mr. Levin do around the office to earn his $3,500 a week?

The SPLC did call on Mr. Levin to issue one of the most pathetic apologies for the Boy Scouts of America in 2012. While the BSA has actively discriminated against gay men and boys since 1910, the best Mr. Levin could do was to gently chide the BSA in 2012 for “embracing prejudice” and “encouraging bigotry” (something Mr. Levin claims that the BSA does unintentionally…).

Mr. Levin couldn’t even bring himself to use the term “hate group.”

As pathetic as it was, it was the first comment the SPLC ever made about the BSA’s blatant discrimination. It seems that a “hate group” isn’t really a “hate group” if many of your donors are former members or the parents/grandparents of current members.

“Fighting hate” is all well and good until it cuts into the bottom line.

Speaking of the bottom line, one would think that the SPLC’s donors would be concerned that so much of their money is going to pay the salary of a guy who doesn’t seem to do much for the company anymore.

Your $100 donation will pay Mr. Levin’s absentee salary for about an hour and ten minutes. Not much bang for the buck when you think about it.

 

 

SPLC — More LGBT Pandering

December 19, 2013

As the Southern Poverty Law Center’s traditional donor base grows older and fewer people buy into the SPLC’s perennial “hate group” hype, the fundraisers in Montgomery have set their sights on a younger, often-Progressive and often-affluent LGBT demographic.

Earlier this year, Watching the Watchdogs noted how the SPLC was involved in two ham-fisted publicity stunts featuring LGBT plaintiffs in New York and New Jersey.

One case was a simple copyright infringement case where a political group in Colorado used a gay couple’s engagement photo in its literature without permission from the couple or the photographer, who holds the copyright to the photo.

The other case involved former clients of counseling outfit that promised Jewish men that it could “cure” them of their homosexuality. Basically, a cut-and-dried malpractice suit.

In both cases, the plaintiffs were not indigent and the actual cases were being handled by two of the top copyright and malpractice law firms in the NYC area. The term “civil rights” does not appear in either complaint filed by the SPLC, which is not even licensed to practice law in either state.

All the SPLC brings to those cases is publicity, and they will spin that publicity into donor-gold by the hands of their long-time Public Relations guru, Mark Potok.

This week’s court filing continues the SPLC’s newest fundraising scheme, pandering to the LGBT community, as well as one its older favorites, suing impoverished school districts in the Deep South.

Pretty low-hanging fruit for one of the nation’s “leading civil rights organizations,” but the media, and therefore the donors, will lap it up, as usual.

On December 17, 2013, the SPLC filed a law suit against Magnolia Junior High and the Moss Point School District on behalf of Destin Holmes, a 17-year-old, self-described lesbian who claims she was bullied and harassed by students and staff at the school “on account of her gender expression and sexual orientation.”

Obviously, nobody deserves to be bullied or harassed for any reason in any setting, and just as obviously, nearly everybody DOES get bullied and harassed in the special corner of Hell known as junior high. That in no way makes Ms. Holmes’ ordeal any less painful, but it should be considered in order to keep the case in perspective.

Ms. Holmes states that she was harassed every day by students, faculty and even administrators, who would call her names like “dyke,” “dyke-ass freak” and “lesbian” and make comments about her clothing. It also did not help that Ms. Holmes was 15 or 16 when she began her 8th grade year, making her stand out even more.

Again, nobody should ever be bullied, but as junior high school fare goes, is this really a job for a multimillion-dollar law firm with more than a quarter-billion dollars in cash on-hand?

Magnolia Junior High School is typical of the kind of target the SPLC prefers to go after: Southern and impoverished.

Click image to enlarge

Click image to enlarge

Click image to enlarge

Click image to enlarge

Interestingly, the SPLC is making no mention of the fact that Ms. Holmes is white, while the majority of her classmates, the assistant principal and principal, LaJuna and Durand Payton, (both of whom are named in the complaint as making repeated homophobic slurs against Ms. Holmes), are black.

Click image to enlarge

Click image to enlarge

Can anyone seriously imagine the SPLC ignoring this fact if the races were reversed?

The law suit is already buzzing around the Blogosphere and is getting big press in the LGBT media, its intended audience. No doubt Mr. Potok is rubbing his hands in anticipation of yet another record donation year, one that will top the $40 million tax-free donor-dollars he ballyhooed last year.

Hopefully, the LGBT community will be savvy enough to figure out that it is being carefully targeted by the white millionaires who run the SPLC.

In the end, the school district will concede defeat. Scarce budget dollars will be reallocated to create sensitivity training for everyone and who knows, it may actually turn junior high students into rational human beings. It could happen.

Again, nobody should be bullied or harassed. We wish Ms. Holmes the best in her freshman year at high school, another teenage milestone that has never been known for its humanity.

SPLC – The [white] Beat Goes On…

September 19, 2013

Today the SPLC proudly announced the accession of Lisa Sahulka to the six-digit salary post of Chief Operating Officer for the esteemed “civil rights” organization.

sahulkajpg-35e5f784fd577ce2

 

Ms. Sahulka perpetuates a FOUR-DECADES-LONG policy of hiring only white candidates to the esteemed “civil rights” organization’s Executive Suite.

When the SPLC’s hometown newspaper, the Montgomery Advertiser, had the temerity to ask SPLC founder Morris Dees why there were no minority executives working at the famed “civil rights” organization as late as 1994, (23 years after Mr. Dees opened the doors of the esteemed institution…), Mr. Dees replied, “It is not easy to find black lawyers. Any organization can tell you that.”

Apparently, nearly 20 years later, it’s not easy to find black executives, fundraisers or computer programmers either, which is why the Southern Poverty Law Center’s Executive Suite is as lily-white today as when Mo Dees opened the doors in 1971.

It reminds us of the NFL/NBA’s hollow protests for forty years that “Well, we would hire black General Managers, only there aren’t any…”

Some things just don’t change in Montgomery, and if Morris “Atticus Finch” Dees has any say in the matter, they never will.

Remember folks, send the SPLC all the money you can afford, early and often. They’re down to their last quarter-BILLION tax-free dollars.

 

 

 

SPLC – The Gospel According to Mark (Potok)

May 14, 2013

The Southern Poverty Law Center’s public relations chief, Mark Potok, is a paid spokesman whose primary function is to perpetuate the SPLC’s decades-long fear campaign in the Media. The SPLC gave Mr. Potok a $10,000 dollar raise in 2012, bringing his compensation package to $162,000 a year because of his great skill at convincing their mostly elderly donor base that “hate groups” were everywhere.

Potok is the Media’s “go-to” guy on “hate,” despite the fact that he has no legal or law enforcement experience, and so Mr. Potok spends a lot of his time giving his repetitious “hate” spiel, but every so often the “Senior Fellow” forgets to follow the “hate groups are everywhere!” script and it’s always informative to hear what he really thinks.

Most recently, as of this writing, Mr. Potok made an astounding admission to CNN  that nearly mirrors what Watching the Watchdogs has been telling readers for years about the SPLC’s lucrative “hate group” marketing tool:

“Mark Potok,  a center spokesman, says there’s no shared definition of what constitutes hate speech.

“There is no legal meaning. It’s just a phrase,” Potok says. “Hate speech is in the ear of the beholder.”
(May 5, 2013, CNN.com, “When Christians become a ‘hated minority‘”)

Mr. Potok, there’s no shared definition of a “hate group” either. No legal meaning. It’s just a phrase. A “hate group” is entirely in the eye of the beholder (or marketer).

And because the SPLC is the sole arbiter of the “hate group” label, a “hate group” is whatever they say it is and they can designate as many as they want for fundraising purposes. The SPLC receives no external review or oversight and the Media makes no attempt whatsoever to vet Mr. Potok’s claims.

And what exactly are Mr. Potok’s exacting standards when it comes to applying the lucrative “hate group” stamp of disapproval? According to Mark Potok:

“…a “hate group” has nothing to do with criminality… [or] potential for violence…” Rather, as Potok put it, “It’s all about ideology.”

Futhermore:

“Listing here does not imply a group advocates or engages in violence or other criminal activity.” (SPLC “Hate Map” legend, http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/hate-map)

No crime, no violence, just “wrong thinking.”  Potok further claims that:

“All hate groups have beliefs or practices that attack or malign an entire class of people, typically for their immutable characteristics.” (SPLC “Hate Map” legend, http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/hate-map)

Since Mr. Potok has already ruled out crime and violence, which would immediately be considered hate crimes and rightly turned over to the police, all of these malignant “attacks” must then be considered “hate speech,” which Mr. Potok so elegantly defined above.

Get the picture?

Potok also admits that even the FBI cannot monitor “hate group” based solely on their ideology (but somehow his private fundraising company can?):

“The FBI does not monitor groups just because they have “hateful” ideology. There must be some evidence of criminal wrongdoing. (www.usatoday.com, May 17, 2002)

Despite Potok’s feckless disclaimer that being listed on his “Hate Map” tool in no way implies violence or criminality, that is precisely what the map is intended to do . That’s why Mr. Potok created it in the first place. The “Hate Map” is a branding tool, in both the marketing and social senses of the term.

Much like Hawthorne’s scarlet A, Mr. Potok’s scarlet H is designed solely to demonize, dehumanize and stigmatize its targets, effectively stifling all discussion or debate. Who would want to talk to a hate group, after all?

So, if these people aren’t out there breaking laws left and right, what exactly are they doing to earn the “hate group” label?:

“Hate group activities can include criminal acts, marches, rallies, speeches, meetings, leafleting or publishing.” (SPLC “Hate Map” legend, http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/hate-map)

Aha! Now we’re getting somewhere! Marches, speeches, meetings, publishing… there are laws regarding such things!:

Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. (First of ten amendments to the U.S. Constitution, a.k.a. The Bill of Rights)

Is it really right for an alleged “civil rights group” to deliberately conflate six of the most fundamental, Constitutionally protected civil rights with “criminal acts” and “hate group activities”?

If these groups are exercising their legal rights to Free Speech, regardless of how distasteful some may find that speech, what would you call someone who arbitrarily interprets the Laws of the Land by his own subjective standards?

Vigilante: noun : a member of a volunteer committee organized to suppress and punish crime summarily (as when the processes of law are viewed as inadequate); broadly : a self-appointed doer of justice. (www.merriam-webster.com)

That pretty much sums up the SPLC’s M.O. in a nutshell. Too bad the IRS didn’t take a hint from the Feds…

Maybe Senior Fellow Potok knows things the rest of us do not? After all, the SPLC has paid the man more than $2,000,000 dollars since 2000 for his expertise, right?:

“Mark Potok, who has directed the SPLC’s Intelligence Project for 12 years, said the report relies on media, citizen and law enforcement reports, and does not include original reporting by SPLC staff.” (www.postcrescent.com, July 6, 2009)

Well, okay, Mr. Potok’s Intelligence Report is based on second- and third-hand information, informants and hearsay, but at least he must have a solid handle on how many people are involved in these nefarious “hate groups,” no?:

“The Southern Poverty Law Center in Montgomery, Ala., estimates more than 100,000 followers among the various hate groups, though a spokesman [Mark Potok] concedes that the tally – from periodicals, news reports and police – is approximate. (Arlene Levinson, “Hate Groups, Crimes Said Rare in US,” Associated Press, July 8, 1999)

“Approximate,” eh? Hmmm. Mr. Potok claims there were 602 “hate groups” in the US in 2000, so that averages out to about 166 haters per group. That sounds a bit high to us. Would you care to qualify your estimate, Mr. P.?:

[Update, June 19, 2013: An article published in the Charleston (WV) Gazette dated March 5, 2013, quotes Mr. Potok claiming that "There could be 200,000 to 300,000 people involved in hate groups today." Given that Mr. Potok has designated just over 1,000 "hate groups" for 2012, that works out to 200 to 300 "haters" per group. Really...]

“The numbers are absolutely soft,” said Mark Potok, a Southern Poverty Law Center spokesman. “We are talking about a tiny number of Americans who are members of hate groups – I mean, infinitesimal.” (Arlene Levinson, “Hate Groups, Crimes Said Rare in US,” Associated Press, July 8, 1999)

“Infinitesimal”?? How much is that in more monosyllabic terms?:

in·fin·i·tes·i·mal

adjective

1.indefinitely or exceedingly small; minute: 
2.immeasurably small; less than an assignable quantity: to an infinitesimal degree.
(www.dictionary.com)

Well, in all fairness, Mr. Potok made his “infinitesimal” estimate back in 1999 when he was still new on the job. Surely his powers of prognostication have improved with time:

“Potok acknowledged that some of the groups may be small and said it is impossible for outsiders to gauge the membership of most of the groups.” (David Crary, Associated Press Online, March 10, 2008)

The groups may be small? With over a hundred members each? How many members comprise a group, Mr. Potok? Especially a “hate group”?:

“Potok says inclusion on the list might come from a minor presence, such as a post office box.” (www.sanluisobispo.com, March 25, 2009)

When Watching the Watchdogs had the opportunity in 2011 to ask Mr. Potok directly about the accuracy of his “hate group” numbers, on camera, the Senior Fellow was amazingly candid in admitting that his figures were “anecdotal,” “an imperfect process” and “a very rough estimate.”

Too bad the tens of thousands of suckers who sent the SPLC $40 million donor-dollars last year, based on Potok’s “hate group” numbers, didn’t realize the fellow was merely guessing. Well, no harm done, we suppose.

The important thing to remember is that even though Mr. Potok assigned his “hate group” label to people who were breaking no laws, and, even though he’s not especially concerned over just exactly how many people (or P.O. boxes) make up a “group,” we can all rest assured that “hate groups” are the biggest threat to domestic tranquility today:

“And I would say as a general matter, it is extremely unusual these days for an organization to plan and carry out a criminal act where mainly for the reason that they are so likely to get caught.

So what we really see out there in terms of violence from the radical right is by and large what we would call lone wolves, people operating on their own or with just one or two partners. As opposed to, you know, being some kind of organizational plan.” (October 30, 2008, NPR.org,  Assessing White Supremacist Groups in the US)

“Still, [Potok] said the public should remain vigilant about the activities of hate groups, even though individuals are responsible for the majority of hate crimes in America. (www.courier-journal.com, July 21, 2009)

Well Mr. Potok, if “lone wolves” and individuals are the ones committing all these alleged hate crimes and acts of domestic terrorism, why do you focus solely on law abiding “hate groups”?? Why not just publish the names and addresses of these “lone wolves” in your next Intelligence Report and be done with it? It’s not like you don’t have enough third-hand gossip and self-appointed vigilante informants on the ground to get the information, right?

At the end of the day, Mr. Potok and his SPLC have no more power to identify the next mentally ill individuals to go on a murder spree than you do. That’s not the point of the exercise, however. Mr. Potok’s job is to perpetuate his endless fear campaign and convince his mostly-elderly, mostly-Progressive donor base to send him more money. They sent him more than $4,500 dollars every single hour last year and it did nothing to prevent Sandy Hook or Aurora, but it did contribute directly to a crazed “lone wolf” who used Mr. Potok’s “Hate Map” fundraising tool to select the target for his botched shooting spree at the Family Research Council.

These facts, these numbers, Mr. Potok’s own public contradictions will do little to dissuade the SPLC’s donors, because the Master Public Relations man knows how to play the con to the hilt. In a 2007 speech to an “anti-hate” group in Michigan, Mark Potok laid out his personal thoughts on these “wrong thinkers” and his views on their fundamental humanity and civil rights:

“I don’t think there’s any doubt that these are human beings and it’s a mistake to regard them as just a bunch of sociopaths… though most of them are.”

“Let me say… our aim… sometimes the press will describe us as monitoring hate groups and so on. I want to say plainly that our aim in life is to destroy these groups. Completely destroy them.”

The only thing more chilling than the sneering way in which Mark Potok deliberately dehumanizes people who are exercizing their Constitutional rights is the roar of laughter and thunderous applause it drew from the tolerant, inclusive and progressive “anti-haters.”

All facts to the contrary be damned, they came to hear what they wanted to hear… the Gospel according to Mark.

SPLC — 2013 — Still No Minorities at the Top After 42 Years

March 22, 2013

Last week, Watching the Watchdogs examined the Southern Poverty Law Center’s latest “hate map” fundraising tool and broke the amazing, astounding, unprecedented news that for the first time in history the number of alleged “hate groups” designated by the SPLC’s Public Relations chief, Mark Potok, (something even the FBI cannot do…), actually DECLINED!!

While this inconceivable turn of events left many investigators gasping in amazement, a quick head-count of the SPLC’s top executives reveals a caucus as Caucasian as it was the day Morris Dees opened the doors of the company in 1971. There are still some unbroken traditions that one can count on in this mad, mad world.

This seeming incongruity was brought to the attention of Mr. Dees 19 years ago by journalists Dan Morse and Greg Jaffe in their week-long exposé in the SPLC’s hometown newspaper, the Montgomery Advertiser, in 1994.

Click image to enlarge

Click image to enlarge

Dan Morse noted in his article, “Equal treatment? No blacks in center’s leadership“:

“Inside, no blacks have held top management positions in the center’s 23-year history, and some former employees say blacks are treated like second-class citizens.”

Last week the SPLC released its IRS Form 990 tax return for 2012, listing the names and compensation packages for its top executives (see pages 7-8). And the winners are:

Click image to enlarge

Click image to enlarge

Richard Cohen — President/CEO — $340,923
Morris Dees — Founder and Chief Trial Counsel — $344,771
Joseph Levin — Director and General Counsel — $185,102
Mary Bauer — Legal Director — $168,819
Teenie Hutchinson — Secretary — $162,644
Wendy Via — Development Director — $166,760 (+$19,582)
Mark Potok — Senior Fellow — $162,206  (
+$10,814)
David Utter — Director — Miami – 
$158,013

And a new (white) face for 2013:
Sheila Bedi — Deputy Legal Director –  $129,893

Not shown is Michael Toohey, the SPLC’s Former COO, $234,309 (+$4,428).  If anyone knows of a public photo of Mr. Toohey, please pass the info along to Watching the Watchdogs.

Click image to enlarge

Click image to enlarge

 

And what was Morris Dees’ response to Morse and Jaffe’s observations? “It is not easy to find black lawyers. Any organization can tell you that.” Not to get nit-picky, Mr. Dees, but lawyers make up only about half of the SPLC’s highest paid executives. Apparently, it’s not easy to find black accountants, administrators, computer experts or public relations people in 2013, either.

Conspicuously absent from the latest monochromatic rogue’s gallery, yet again… is Dr. Heidi Beirich, the SPLC’s new “Intelligence Director.” Dr. Beirich replaces “Senior Fellow” Mark Potok as the chief fundraiser and go-to media “expert.” Beirich and Potok both started working at the SPLC in 1999, both are public relations pros, though Dr. Beirich boasts two Masters degrees and a Doctorate to Mr. Potok’s B.S. in Poli-Sci, yet Dr. B has yet to be paid as much as her male counterpart.

Beirich

Also missing from the list is Lecia Brooks, the SPLC’s Outreach Director and highest paid minority, though not as highly paid as her white colleagues. In fact, when the Form 990 included salaries as paltry as $70,000, (they are a “non-profit” after all), our Ms. Brooks was nowhere to be found. As Outreach Director, Lecia Brooks’ primary concern is fundraising and she has no influence over the running of the company.

Hopefully, she got a 5-digit raise like the SPLC’s other prime fundraisers, Mark Potok and Wendy Via. It was a record-breaking year, after all.

Click to enlarge

Click to enlarge

Lecia Brooks does hold one unique distinction, though. She was allowed to serve as “Interim Director” of the SPLC’s “Teaching Tolerance” program for several months. As Dan Morse noted in his 1994 “Equal Treatment” article:

“The Law Center’s ambitious new project, Teaching Tolerance, which is designed to promote racial and cultural justice throughout America’s schools, is produced by an eight-member all-white staff according to the Law Center.”

“Teaching Tolerance” continued to be led by “whites only” until 2009, when Ms. Brooks was tapped to keep the seat warm during the interregnum until her successor could be selected, the highly diverse Maureen Costello:

Click image to enlarge

Click image to enlarge

No report on the all-white nature of the SPLC’s leadership would be complete without mentioning the company’s first president, Julian Bond, and its diverse Board of Directors. As Dan Morse pointed out in his 1994 article, “Friendly board: friends, associates fill board,” the SPLC’s board consists of friends and cronies of Morris Dees who rubber-stamp whatever is put before them by Dees. Some of the board members Morse mentioned in 1994 are still on the board today, as is at least one lingerie mogul.

All of the board members are unpaid, which is not unusual in the so-called “non-profit” sector, and almost all of them are located hundreds or thousands of miles from Montgomery. In short, they may be diverse on paper, but they are not highly paid and they have no influence on the day-to-day operations of the SPLC. It’s a classic case of “brownwashing” to dupe the donors.

Click image to enlarge

Click image to enlarge

And as we’ve mentioned numerous times, Morris Dees wrote in his autobiography, A Season For Justice, that he only offered Julian Bond the “largely honorary position of president” in exchange for the use of Bond’s name on the SPLC’s first fundraising letters. Last year, Watching the Watchdogs produced short video for Youtube that describes the history of the all-white leadership of the SPLC, Teaching Tolerance, the Bond paid endorsement and the rubber-stamp Board of Directors.

The only thing more difficult to believe than the fact that an alleged “civil rights” group headquartered in Montgomery, Alabama, sitting literally in the back yard of Dr. Martin Luther King’s own Dexter Avenue Baptist Church, could remain lily-white at the top for more than 40 years is the incredible fact that well-meaning people sent the SPLC more than $40 million donor dollars last year.

What could that money have done for real charities closer to home?


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

%d bloggers like this: