SPLC began with one mission: destroy KKK. They pretty much succeeded. Then they moved on to other pastures and created false enemies.
Talked to a family member who was around when this began and lived in Montgomery at that time. He said that the original leader (Morris Deas) was sincere and successful. In the last profits,or so, it has gone downhill --and, like so many non-profits, started out with a good mission and intentions and then explodes into an organization concentrated on sustaining itself.
Deas was pushed out a few years ago. There were accusations of sexual harassment. There is no question, however, that his leadership of the organization achieved great results. Not sure if he had anything to do with the extreme deviation from the original mission.

They have sown more hate than stopped it over the last decade.

Am I living in some upside down world? It seems like people have forgotten how informants work. Someone pinch me.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Paid agitators and agent provocateurs — and under cover law enforcement — are in every viral political movement.

Sure, but SPLC was supposed to be (and I thought it was) a good organization dedicated to eliminating racism, not provoking or trying to cause more of it.

There is no allegation in the indictment that they provoked anyone or paid anyone to be an agitator. They paid informants who already worked in these organizations to inform on what the organizations were doing, so that any criminal activity could be reported to law enforcement.

Even the tweet that keeps getting highlighted in this thread says only that one of the informants was someone who organized transportation to an event. It doesn’t allege that he used money from the SPLC to do any of that. It’s also not alleged that he acted as an agitator at the event, which, as you know, was the Unite the Right Rally that President Trump declared was perfectly innocuous and not racist.

+1

But MAGAs are always about vibes over facts.

Not smart to say always about anything.

Anonymous wrote:

Alex Jones prompted people to harass parents of dead children, even send a letter saying they peed on their dead child's grave.

Alex Jones, is, and always will he, a piece of sh*t who will rot in Hell. You are also a piece of sh*t for even trying to give that man credit.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Paid agitators and agent provocateurs — and under cover law enforcement — are in every viral political movement.

Sure, but SPLC was supposed to be (and I thought it was) a good organization dedicated to eliminating racism, not provoking or trying to cause more of it.

There is no allegation in the indictment that they provoked anyone or paid anyone to be an agitator. They paid informants who already worked in these organizations to inform on what the organizations were doing, so that any criminal activity could be reported to law enforcement.

Even the tweet that keeps getting highlighted in this thread says only that one of the informants was someone who organized transportation to an event. It doesn’t allege that he used money from the SPLC to do any of that. It’s also not alleged that he acted as an agitator at the event, which, as you know, was the Unite the Right Rally that President Trump declared was perfectly innocuous and not racist.

+1

But MAGAs are always about vibes over facts.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Paid agitators and agent provocateurs — and under cover law enforcement — are in every viral political movement.

Sure, but SPLC was supposed to be (and I thought it was) a good organization dedicated to eliminating racism, not provoking or trying to cause more of it.

Create extremist hoaxes and false flag psy ops to go viral, get more traction, generate more money. A classic racket.

Nothing in the indictment supports this. You are lying.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Paid agitators and agent provocateurs — and under cover law enforcement — are in every viral political movement.

Sure, but SPLC was supposed to be (and I thought it was) a good organization dedicated to eliminating racism, not provoking or trying to cause more of it.

There is no allegation in the indictment that they provoked anyone or paid anyone to be an agitator. They paid informants who already worked in these organizations to inform on what the organizations were doing, so that any criminal activity could be reported to law enforcement.

Even the tweet that keeps getting highlighted in this thread says only that one of the informants was someone who organized transportation to an event. It doesn’t allege that he used money from the SPLC to do any of that. It’s also not alleged that he acted as an agitator at the event, which, as you know, was the Unite the Right Rally that President Trump declared was perfectly innocuous and not racist.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Paid agitators and agent provocateurs — and under cover law enforcement — are in every viral political movement.

Sure, but SPLC was supposed to be (and I thought it was) a good organization dedicated to eliminating racism, not provoking or trying to cause more of it.

Create extremist hoaxes and false flag psy ops to go viral, get more traction, generate more money. A classic racket.

The Southern Poverty Law Center is a clear, bipartisan voice in a sea of hate. They work for what is good and fair in the USA, by weeding out hate groups and exposing them.
Apparently, Trump has decided they don’t fit his agenda of division for the USA. He can’t destroy us if they exist.

Guess where I learned about the SPLC? In church, with my kids. To fight hate and injustice we need education and accountability.

Anonymous wrote:Paid agitators and agent provocateurs — and under cover law enforcement — are in every viral political movement.

Sure, but SPLC was supposed to be (and I thought it was) a good organization dedicated to eliminating racism, not provoking or trying to cause more of it.

Paid agitators and agent provocateurs — and under cover law enforcement — are in every viral political movement.

Anonymous wrote:

The text excerpt does not indicate "major role" whatsoever so that tweet is certainly intentionally inflammatory.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wake up, people.

This is part of the Administration’s plan to discredit and dissolve nonprofits.

They are distorting the facts for soundbites to shock people.

Anyone with half a brain realizes their tactics were aimed at infiltrating and disrupting hate groups…which they succeeding at. They obviously don’t—and weren’t—supporting hate groups.

This is so ridiculous. When will this madness end?

If they polled donors, they would undoubtedly support the tactics to disrupt hate groups. Duh.

DOJ should be ashamed.

Congress needs to step up.

1. I totally agree.

2. SPLC was nuts to do this. Very, very poor judgment, especially given the amounts allegedly involved. If I were a donor, I’d be furious.

I don’t trust the amounts are correct.

Anyone in Dcumlandia work at a nonprofit that did or still does receive federal funding?

In short:

The Admin is targeting/harassing nonprofits by alleging misconduct based on wrong or completely made up “facts.” IYKYK

ICYMI: the Admin’s goal is to dismantle the nonprofit infrastructure—particularly any that have perceived power (noting the ones with lawyers are big targets for this Admin).

All the Admin has to do is file a lawsuit to stir up trouble and tie an org up in litigation. Since SPLC relies on donations, alleging fraudulent use of donor dollars is a smart (albeit evil) tactic. To be clear: the admin wants to destroy the org’s reputation.

Bottom line: I have zero confidence in any numbers presented by the DOJ in any filing during this admin. Honestly, it’s hard to tell if their bad numbers are derived from lying or their incompetence. After all, the politicals and short bench of leftovers at most fed agencies aren’t the best.

Now is the time to rally for SPLC and other nonprofits targeted by the Admin.

Don’t let the bastards grind you down.

Anonymous wrote:

And yet, Trump rushed to defend Unite the Right. Maybe he shouldn’t be such an easily fooled reactionary?