What actual evidence do you have that the article is slanted?
Edited to add: This isn’t a Trump Rally, so you might have to do a bit more than declare it to be “fake news”.
It quotes SPLC, for starters.
So what? Got anything else, or is that your entire argument?
I don’t think think anyone comparing a racist paramilitary group to the Boy Scouts has a leg to stand on when it comes to complaining about slanted reporting.
The SPLC publishes false information. You may have heard about how they had to pay out millions of dollars last year in a settlement for falsely labeling someone an anti-Muslim extremist. They aren’t an honest broker. They’re biased, and they’ve been busted for it.
I’m here on the SDMB sharing my own opinions on things. I’m not a reporter pretending to write a straight news piece for the paper. See the difference?
ETA: perusing this particular reporter’s previous work shows a pretty clear bias against Republicans / conservatives / right-wingers.
How about the article linked to in post 13?
Bias against? He might be biased against criminal behaviour…but shouldn’t he be?
Try reading the post you quoted. I said exactly who I felt his bias was against there.
Is Matt Shea engaged in “criminal behaviour”? Is Team Rugged?
Yeah, that one quotes SPLC too, so you can probably imagine how I feel about it.
Like you have an excuse to not talk about criminal and/or subversive acts?
One dismissed charge from seven years ago? That has nothing to do with the OP or subject at hand? That’s what you’re going to hang your hat on? Alrighty then. Did someone at Team Rugged get a traffic ticket once too?
We can talk about it, but it’s going to be a conversation along the lines of if someone had posted some Media Matters press release. Sure, we can discuss the subject, but let’s not pretend nor delude ourselves that the source doesn’t have an angle here.
This is a thread about Matt Shea. I didn’t know the OP stipulated time limits on his discussion of Matt Shea. Thanks for setting me straight.
Fair enough. One dismissed charge from seven years ago. Is that the extent of Matt Shea’s “criminal behaviour”? Or is there something else you’d like to present for our consideration?
Speaking of Media Matters, look what Google found:
Were your paintball/airsoft/BB gun bros all hot for the biblical warfare thing?
If you can put aside your “oh-noes! Evil SPLC!!1!” pearl-clutching for a sec, was there anything specific about the SPLC in the article that you took issue with?
The Guardian is yanking our (not you) chains?
Whether Shea is a convicted felon or not, he has a history of very disturbing behavior that extends beyond just edgy political rhetoric.
Granted, it’s not a conviction. And granted, his road rage incident was conditionally dismissed, but the point, Ditka, is that the rhetoric, the violent language in his manifestos, his “civic” activities…are consistent with other allegations of violent behavior.
The rest of us need not prove violence in a court of law to conclude that someone is a violent person. Osama Bin Laden, as far as we know, didn’t personally engage in violence against the United States, but that doesn’t mean he didn’t deal in violence. He promoted it. He paid for it. He had a violent mind and spirit. And so do people like Matt Shea.
By Shea’s own words, the purpose of his camp is to train kids to kill people. Boy Scout camps do not do that. Terrorists do. You know all of those “terrorist training camps” that right wingers are always up in arms about? This is one of them.