Like I said read my OP, if you want to debate something else start your own thread, but don’t try to hijack my OP. Having trouble getting your head around my OP, fine, don’t post, but don’t tell me what my OP is or is not.
So, are you conceding that they have a history of domestic terrorism and having such history they are a terrorist organization?
Lastly, since when did you become a moderator, the arbiter of what topics go where?
No. The reporter on one story about Rep. Schakowski labeled tham as a “domestic terror group.” There is no indication that Schakowski used that terminology. (And Schakowski comes off, in the piece, as a bit of a dim bulb, so I wouldn’t base too much on her opinions, either. While the reporter comes off as using inflammator language to sell his news story. Name-calling is not the same as providing evidence.)
Having a history does not make a current reality. Have you protested Democratic support for Segregation, recently?
Your OP is fairly clear–and demonstrably wrong. The KKK has no recent participation in terrorist acts and the FBI has acknowledged that they are using methods within the law.
In all fairness to Rep. Schakowsky, that news clip was from one of Sean Hannity’s interviews, the ones where he doesn’t give the subject time to finish their sentences or clarify what they just said, and he usually ends up making everybody come off sounding like a dimbulb. And then of course NewsMax is going to put the worst possible, and most newsworthy, spin on it… Carl Limbacher wrote this:
But if you look further down the transcript, this was the actual exchange:
Hannity never gave her a chance to finish what she was going to say about Thurmond and Helms–how does Carl Limbacher know that she was going to say “Thurmond and Helms were in the Klan”? He doesn’t. He’s just assuming that’s what she meant, from the way that Hannity apparently assumed that was what she meant and jumped all over her.
Limbacher finishes:
This serves to reinforce the reader’s impression that Schakowsky had actually said that Thurmond and Helms were in the Klan, but that wasn’t what she said.
Jan Schakowsky represents the 9th Illinois congressional district, which includes Skokie
In 1999, she asked e-Bay to remove KKK paraphernalia from their website. She does not refer to the KKK as a terrorist group.
In 2000, she delivered the following statement concerning a Klan rally in Skokie.
She did not refer to the KKK as a terrorist organization here, either. As far as I can tell, she isn’t on record anywhere as referring to the KKK as a terrorist organization.
Yes, I’ve already said that their past history was evil, reprehensible, and I wouldn’t quibble that what they were doing in the 1870s and the 1920s and the 1960s would count as “terrorism”.
Um, noooooo. :rolleyes: They stopped being any kind of a terrorist organization about 20 years ago. They are now a political organization. Even the FBI admits this. Why is this so hard for you?
What an amazingly stupid thing to say. :rolleyes: Being a poster with experience at what the mods are likely to do, and being a poster with experience at what threads are considered to go where, and then expressing an opinion on what the mods are likely to do when they see what counts as a duplicate thread doesn’t constitute “setting oneself up as a moderator”. Geeez. :rolleyes:
And you’re accusing me of hijacking your thread, by insisting that you remain on topic? Geeeeeeeeez. :rolleyes:
Seems that what EasyPhil wants us to believe is that the KKK are terrorists and that relative to other groups are being ignored or treated favorably, for whatever reason (Diogenes would have us think that it’s due to racist motives on the part of the government).
EasyPhil has presented no evidence that the KKK is currently committing terrorist acts*, or that government agencies are slack in dealing with it. So his OP and followup consist of pointless insinuation.
*Given its history of repeated cycles of power and collapse, I wouldn’t rule out the possibility of a future incarnation of the Klan engaging in violent/terrorist acts to some significant degree. The activities of people who identify themselves with the Klan deserve continuing scrutiny.
This link has been previously posted. The report is from 1998, but it is from the current FBI website It directly addresses the issue of whether or not the FBI considers the KKK to be a terrorist group and a threat to national security:
http://www.fbi.gov/congress/congress98/threats.htm
Under the section entitled DOMESTIC TERRORISM, there is a sub-heading entitled “Right-Wing Extremist Groups.” In this section, you will find a reference to the Klan and their plans to blow up the gas facility (mentioned previously).
If the FBI no longer considers the Klan to be a terrorist organization that is a threat to National Security, please offer a more current cite from the FBI itself.
The only issue that I am addressing in this post is whether or not the FBI considers the Klan to be a terrorist group.
I have previously admitted that they don’t have the bite and sting that they used to have.
I have no information on what the Klan has done today, January 6, 2003.
:rolleyes:
Well- they WERE. We all agree to that, eh? But there is nothing real current- OK?
But- are they just lying low? Have they commited acts that they haven’t been caught at? Is there anything in their acts or literature which would say that they have changed, and that they repudiate their acts of past terrorism? Doesn’t seem to be.
Thus, they certainly WERE. And they might currently be. I agree with Jackmannii’s *.
Now- is this a GD? Well, even if we all agree that they WERE, I have seen several issues “debated” without a single poster on the “other side”. And- no Mod closed them down. However, the only active disagreement seems to be “are they currently”? …and the arguement as to what is “current” or “terrorism”.
“They” were four whole people in a splinter group that had rejected the Klan as “too soft” and were conspiring to blow up the facility as part of a robbery–not a terrorist act. That has already been established.
Well, Burnham’s testimony that they are moving toward more legitimate political involvement and away from violence comes from your link to a 2001 discussion, which is subsequent to the 1998 information that only mentions the splinter faction the True Knights of the KKK–who have already been shown to be outside the general movement of the 70 or so Klan groups in existence.
Part of the trouble is that “The Klan” isn’t a single organization. There are many racist groups that use the word “Klan” in their name, but just because they do doesn’t mean that they are connected except philosophically. If the Animal Liberation Front blows up research labs and is a terrorist organisation, that doesn’t mean that the Front for the Liberation of Animals is also a terrorist group.
The luster has gone out of the Klan name for the really radical white supremicists. It seems to me that the currently active terrorist racist groups don’t give themselves the Klan name…they call themselves Christian Identity, or Aryan Nations, or some such. But even so, if a group calls itself “The Klan”, and wears white sheets and burns crosses, it doesn’t neccesarily make them responsible for the terrorist acts of some OTHER organization that wears white sheets and burns crosses and also commits terrorist acts.
There is no such thing as “The” Klan. There are “Klans”, but no “The Klan”.
But that particular statement fails to address whether or not the KKK is still considered a terrorist group by the FBI. Saying that they are “moving away from violence” does not equate to “they have stopped their violence.” As I have previously documented, Burnham does acknowledge that they are still considered by the FBI to be a terrorist group when answering this question in the same interview.
My link to Burham’s comments was in response to the comment by DDG:
Burnham also says in that same response to the question about terrorism, “And what we are also starting to see entwined with that is religious extremists - the Christian Identity movement. We’re seeing more and more of that in some of the militias.”
The Klan is certainly part of the"Christian Identity Movement" – even by their own admission.
Why would Burnham address the conclusions of the FBI if they do not continue to keep them under surveilance? Why would they keep them under surveilance if they have become a harmless organization?
I repeat my request: If the FBI no longer considers the Klan to be a terrorist organization that is a threat to National Security, please offer a more current cite from the FBI itself.
Nope, it just means that they’re splitters. 
Sua
Well the Front for the Liberation of Animals could be a store or a laundromat.
The Southern Poverty Law Center provides state by state information on hate crimes. An Edit/Find search for Ku Klux Klan documents what Klan leaders, members and groups have been up to.
http://www.splcenter.org/intelligenceproject/ip-index.html
Click on “Hate Incidents.”
If it walks like a duck…
Well, I don’t think anyone is disagreeing with that, are they? If a particular Klan group is actually a criminal conspiracy–either a terrorist group, or just a group bent on bank robbery–they should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. Groups which aren’t criminal conspiracies, however repellent their political views, have the right to hold meetings and put up web sites and so on and spout their racist or otherwise evil views. This applies equally to the Klan, and to some radical Muslim group which wants to establish a world-wide Islamic theocracy governed along the lines of the Taliban’s Afghanistan.
I guess the only debate would be over the extent to which the FBI should monitor those groups: browsing their websites, getting on their mailing lists, subscribing to their newsletters, attending their public meetings, sending people to infilitrate and join their groups under false pretenses, opening their mail and intercepting their e-mail.
Things like opening mail or otherwise reading non-public communications I would say should require some sort of warrant or court order or judicial permission. It would be perfectly OK for a concerned citizen or private group to browse the web sites and read the newsletters and attend the public meetings of an organization. Is it wrong for the federal government to do those things?
You should take the time to actually read the page.
One Klan leader held a TV camera team hostage in his own home (with no explanation of the event).
One Klan leader was charged with phone harrassment of a reporter (with no context provided).
One pair of punks assaulted a biracial child after a Klan rally–with no indication that their activity was supported by the Klan or that they were even members of the Klan.
And there were three cases of grafitti vandalism that included the letters KKK (that could have been left by any twit vandal).
Every other Klan reference was to the Klan gasp holding a rally or placing pamphlets on peoples’ property! The Horrors! There are bad people exercising their rights to free speech and peaceful assembly! (None of the rallies was identified as having involved violence by the Klan.)
Nobody denies that the Klan is hateful.
There is no evidence (provided in this thread) that they currently constitute a terrorist group–and that includes the page providfed by the SPLC (a group I support, financially).
**I already did. Here it is again.
http://www.fbi.gov/congress/congress02/watson020602.htm
On February 6, 2002, Dale L. Watson, the Executive Assistant Director of the FBI’s Counterterrorism and Counterintelligence Unit, acting as the official spokesperson for FBI director Robert S. Mueller, put on his best suit and sat down before a table full of microphones in a meeting room somewhere in the Capitol, and delivered an Official Report from the FBI’s Counterterrorism and Counterintelligence Unit to the U.S. Congress’ Senate Select Committee on Intelligence on the current state of terrorism and terrorist groups in America.
He mentioned the following right-wing groups by name as “representing a continuing terrorist threat”.
[ul][li]the Animal Liberation Front (ALF)[/li][li]the Earth Liberation Front (ELF)[/li][li]the National Alliance[/li][li]the World Church of the Creator (WCOTC)[/li][li] the Aryan Nations.[/ul][/li]The KKK was not mentioned.
This was not a mere speech. This was not a simple interview. This was an Official Statement, going on the record, from a very important and powerful federal agency to a very important and powerful Senate Committee, and thus to the People of the United States of America.
However, the FBI’s interest in making this statement was not only to be accountable to the People of the United States of America, but also to cover their asses should the domestic terrorism situation suddenly explode in their faces the way the international terrorism situation did on 9/11. “Boy, we sure didn’t see that one coming, and are our faces ever red!” But, by golly, they’re gonna be sure, this time, that if the Earth Firsters or the Aryan Nation blow up the Golden Gate Bridge or put LSD in the Schoharie Reservoir, that it’s on record somewhere that they TOLD the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence exactly who the possible domestic terrorists were, “way back in February of 2002…”
Hence this official statement.
I would also say that a warrant or a court order should be required for things that are not public. I do have a reservation about the infiltration of groups. In the past the the FBI has infiltrated groups and the infiltrators were the ones that were advocating the violence. This happened with the Black Panthers and with other groups. An interesting story about FBI infiltration is the original WTC bombing. They knew the bomb was being built, the informant was assisting the the terrorist.
tomndeb, although our information from the FBI is somewhat contradictory, I have yet to see anything which indicates that they are not, as a group, still officially on the FBI’s domestic terrorist list.
We agree that the Klan is not as powerful as it once was and that it is pursuing more legitimate ways of achieving their goals.
I disagree that a “splinter group” implies withdrawal from the Klan.
I was invited to a fund-raiser for the SPLC and, on a one time basis, gave them financial support. I do have a lot of respect for their pursuits and opinions. Apparently they think that the Klan still bears watching too or they wouldn’t be keeping records.
I assume that you are aware that even legal means can be used for the purpose of intimidation. I am, however, also a supporter of the ACLU and recognize the “right” of the Klan to exercise freedom of speech.
Do you agree with Duck Duck that the Klan has had “a clean bill of health” for the last thirty-two years?
Duck Duck Goose said:
Are you saying that those five groups are the only ones considered to be a threat? That report also did not mention about 195 other organizations considered to be potentially threatening.
I can’t recommend this book highly enough. If it’s anything to go by, the idea that the modern day Klan are terrorists is laughable - they are pretty much as Testy describes them.
Given their undeniably terrorist past it would be prudent of the FBI to keep a close eye on them, but I’m not surprised to learn that they seem to have been downgraded to a mere ‘hate group’.