Wednesday, March 3, 2010

NBC finally runs the interview, with a big dollop up front of the "Narrative of 1995."



What? You didn't know McVeigh was representative of "militia thinking"? You're right. He wasn't. But that fact doesn't stop NBC-13 from being SPLC's megaphone.

Go here.

Mike
III

LATER: OK, I was exhausted last night when I put this up but with a rocky night of interrupted sleep behind me, here's some of my thoughts.

The bias of the reporter, who I never met, by the way, is obvious. I was interviewed by the producer. She asked some of the obligatory questions (such as "Are you a racist?") but she was also far more fair minded. I was amazed that they let me fully answer some questions and the final interview ran to about 50 minutes. The result was better than I anticipated, For no reasons other than there is a built-in bias based on the received wisdom of the press (almost all of whom believe the Narrative of 1995 as if it were religion -- "What SPLC says MUST be true. They're in my Rolodex."), and the fact that ALL reporters are essentially intellectually lazy and have an attention span of 2.4 nanoseconds, this piece was destined to turn out the way it did. However, it could have been worse.

The contrived statistic -- "244% rise in militia groups" -- which Potok pulled out of his ass is typical of the Southern Preposterous Lie Center's modus operandi. From year to year there's ALWAYS a "244% rise" because SPLC desperately needs to be needed if the cash is to continue flowing. The truth is that there has been a far greater rise in both numbers of Constitutional Militia participation (individuals and groups) as well as neighborhood defense organizations here in Alabama. The actual number of groups listed by SPLC is laughable, including as it does Oath Keepers and the John Birch Society. It is not even logically consistent, given the JBS' long-time allergy to citizens' militias. But whenever SPLC says ANYTHING you must remember to ask the Bard's question: "Who hath measured the ground?"

Unfortunately, none of my comments on their lack of veracity made it into the piece (are we really surprised?) and although at the moment I have only a ten-minute segment that does cover that subject which Zoe took on our camera before the memory chip ran out, I will try to download it and post it here later today (if I can figure out how to work the damn thing). -- MBV

ADDENDUM from Irregular JT

Hey Mike,

Just FYI. I broke down the interview in regard to time given to you vs. SPLC. Raw data attached.

General Summary

Pro Patriot or III’per: 34%
Pro SPLC/right wing nut talk: 57%
Neutral: 9%
Total: 100%

25 comments:

tjbbpgobIII said...

Mike, I watched your interview tonight on channel 13. I thought you handled yourself really well. I also think they gave a lot more credence to potak though. I can't watch video on my pc so I will just assume they left a lot of you on the cutting room floor. Is that right? I am going to try to address myself to the interview on their comment section as soon as I can write something printable.

John Robert Mallernee said...

Thank you for risking everything by putting yourself on the line in the cause of Liberty.

I really liked your comments.

I copied and embedded this video on my own personal blog, OUR ETERNAL STRUGGLE.

The URL is:

http://writesong.blogspot.com/

Again, your selfless efforts are greatly appreciated.

Diesel said...

Mike, I hope you had your own camera along, so you can post the interview in it's entirety.

John Robert Mallernee said...

I also shared this on the FACEBOOK web site.

Fat, Balding, Caver (ret) said...

Mike, you come accross really well in that.

From that showing of Potok, I wouldn't trust him as far as I could spit him, he comes across as a nasty vindictive little conspircy theorist.

I know who I'd rather have a beer with!

Crustyrusty said...

I'm surprised they let you open your mouth, Mike....

No bias here, folks, move along....

B said...

I was pleasantly surprised at the quality of that piece. I believe both points of view were clearly presented. Mike, you did well even if your protagonist isn't willing to understand. That IS what we are willing to fight for.

B
III

GunRights4US said...

It disgusts me to no end that the SPLC has the media and government's ear so completely.

It also disgusts me that the color of the president's skin is so trumpeted as "the cause" of the right's discontent. I can think of half a dozen black men or women I'd vote for in a HEARTBEAT!

It's the ideology, not the skin color....stupid!

GunRights4US said...

I sent the producer the following email:

I watched your Rise of the Militias video clip and felt compelled to comment on it.

First of all, let me address the comment made by the reporter at the beginning where the president’s skin color is offered as being a major factor in right-wing discontent. Ma’am, that is NOT reporting. It’s offering someone’s opinion as the news. I realize it’s done all the time, but that doesn’t make it right. And in this instance, it’s as wrong as wrong ever gets.

If you knew me, you would label me as the prototypical angry, right-wing, white male. And on the surface, you’d be right. But you folks rarely stop at the surface. Instead, like in this video clip, you try ascribe to us your own view of “what makes us tick”. And I am here to tell you that it isn’t the president’s skin color at all. Not only do I deeply resent the smear attempt by labeling me a racist, but I know that it’s off the mark. I would WHOLEHEARTEDLY vote for Alan Keyes, Jennifer Carroll, Thomas Sowell, and any one a dozen other black men and women because I agree with their worldview as it relates to Liberty and the Constitution.

On the other hand, I detest Obama because he is a socialist whose agenda is the antithesis of everything this nation was founded on. It’s just that simple! So jumping on the simple answer of “they must be racist” is lazy reporting at the very least, or disingenuous at worst.

The other point I want to make concerns the SPLC. Ma’am… if EVER there was a group that trafficked in hate and discontent, it’s the SPLC. By granting them a forum to spew lies and utter nonsense, you become complicit in their deceit. Why did no one challenge that 244% figure they threw out as if it was pure gospel? Are you even vaguely aware of the SPLC’s history and leadership? They masquerade as a civil rights group, but they are race-baiting hucksters and con artists right down on the level of Al Sharpton or Jesse Jackson. And you and the rest of the lazy media continue to grant them legitimacy they don’t deserve. They purport to expose hate groups when they themselves ARE a hate group. Do you know what it takes to get on their hate group list? It’s very simple: disagree with their leftist, socialist worldview and you’re there! What you have done here with the SPLC is analogous to reporting the KKK’s platform on race relations as if it were the unmitigated truth.

Ms. Jones, if you harbor any illusions of being objective in your search for the truth, you will do a better job of evaluating your sources before you elevate them to the status of being authoritative. Otherwise you and your station will be just another propaganda mouthpiece for a rotten and corrupt government (both parties) and as such deserve no claim to legitimacy yourselves.

Good day
GunRights4US

Andries said...

You look older and somewhat less dodgey than I imagined. Good work.

Anonymous said...

Well done Mike, I can't wait to see what you have of the interview.
You came across as the calm sane patriot, while the castrato came across as a frantic, nervous dweeb who got beat up a lot in high school.

Michael

Anonymous said...

Potak's bait-and-switch shtick is evident in these conflicting statements:

"...not black people, not the Jews, not white people or another group of people [are seen] as the enemy but the federal government [is seen] as the primary enemy."

"... a very important driver of the growth of these ["anti-government"] groups has been nonwhite immigration that kind of culminates in the election of Obama."

While the anti-government (sic) groups do not perceive "another group of people as the enemy," "non white immigration" has been driving the growth of anti-government sentiment.

Translation: Anti-goverment sentiment is covertly racist as demonstrated by their opposition to a black President.

This debating trick will go unnoticed by most viewers and the seeds of doubt concerning the organizations monitored by SPLC will HAVE been planted.

You have to give this devil his due; he is adept at the audacity of deceit.

MALTHUS

MPA dragon said...

GunRights4Us -

Nice letter! Probably didn't make it through the intern filter, but I enjoyed reading it anyway.

Mike - excellent excellent. Thought you were very articulate and other than the tricks they played with lighting to screw with the reflection in your glasses (Mondale debate in 84 anyone?) I thought they treated things fairly: You come across as an American Gentleman, and the idiot over at the Scummy Pinko Leftist Centra comes across as an inarticulate cokehead.

jon said...

harper's dealt with SPLC. scroll down to the part about how they have more money than tonga's GDP figure (and remember governments get to cheat when they report those numbers, accounting for production that did not happen).

The Center earns more from its vast investment portfolio than it spends on its core mission, which has led Millard Farmer, a death-penalty lawyer in Georgia, to once describe Morris Dees, the SPLC's head, as “the Jim and Tammy Faye Bakker of the civil rights movement” (adding, “I don't mean to malign Jim and Tammy Faye”).

Anonymous said...

While playing the video from the link to NBC, I noticed some subliminal talking in the background. Anybody else notice this?

James said...

Well done Mike! You looked and sounded way more professional than Potok.

James
III

Anonymous said...

Could someone please post a link to the interview?

Anonymous said...

The fact that Potok is still around to carry on his sodomite ways is a testament to the considerable restraint of those he slanders.

Would be amusing, though, if he got "martyred" in a false-flag operation at Chairman Obama's indirect behest.

I wonder also whether the SPLC is obligated to report in detail on its securities portfolio. Would be interesting to take a look at its relative performance and any suspicious correlates of insider information.

-S
III

Grumpyunk said...

Nice job in a gamed interview, Mike. You came across well. And damn you're easier to look at and listen to than that damn Potok.

There was a link here awhile back with a big bunch of info on the SPLC. History and back story things most folks don't know about these ...... people.

If anyone has that link I'd appreciate it.
Thanks.

johnnyreb said...

Great job Mike.

atexan said...

I agree, Great job Mike!

TPaine said...

Been a big fan of yours for awhile now, and I think you did a good job with what was given you on TV. Especially on the 3% description.

I've got your RSS feed on my site. Keep up the good work, for all of us.

Anonymous said...

I'd like to know what you said after 4:40 when they cut the audio...

Potok is his usual disgusting self - nothing to say except "potok" should become a generic noun for anything disgusting or sickening.

"Man - I went to use the head and you wouldn't BELIEVE the potok spread all over in there..."

Personally I *LIKE* him squeaking about the OKs - makes him look like the looney he is...

One more question: Did you give the reporter all the truth about the SPLC?

Anonymous said...

You are so close to the mark:

http://translate.google.com/#cs|en|potok

"Dammit, Bob! Don't be gettin' any of that potok on my boots..."

-S
III

III more than them said...

Potak lives in a fantasy land. Unfortunately, the bastard has a big voice, and is helped along by media types with big antennae.

Does anyone out there fact-check anymore? Slow-Track Potak tosses percentages about (any one see the irony in that? LOL!), and they are reported as if they are accurate, true, and maybe even God's own words.

Speaking of God's words.... Mike, did you notice that they aired your comment about God, the Founders and the Constitution? I'm absolutely SURE it wasn't because they agreed with you, or were trying to be fair and balanced, unstable as they are. I'm sure they are expecting their viewers (blessed be they for viewing... blessings my children, blessings....) to react negatively to your lack of respect for "Separation of church and state". But with the way you presented it, it came off just as it should.... honest, true and a comfort to those with understanding.

Poor SPLC slob. I think he showed HIS colors quite clearly.