It is currently Mon Dec 16, 2019 7:13 am

SPLC and other "anti-White hate groups" vs. NA & McKorkill

  • Author
  • Message
User avatar

Will Williams

  • Posts: 2335
  • Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 9:22 am

SPLC and other "anti-White hate groups" vs. NA & McKorkill

PostTue Jan 20, 2015 8:35 pm

I like Alex Linder's no nonsense analysis {blue] of the SPLC's and other Jews' corruption of Canada's laws and her courts, and their blocking a man's last will to leave his estate to the National Alliance upon his decease.

[outright thievery in canada, as jews influence/intimidate judge into stealing quarter million from NA]

From Canada, With Love

By Mark Potok, Senior Fellow

A Canadian court this June struck down a bequest valued at about $220,000 that was left by a citizen of that country to the National Alliance (NA), a neo-Nazi group based in the United States that has long promoted violence against minorities (this is simply a lie - and in fact, it's probably a legally actionable lie, had NA the money to pursue it). The presiding judge found the bequest violated Canadian law and public policy.

“The evidence before this court convinces me that in the case of the NA the purpose for which it exists is to promote white supremacy through the dissemination of propaganda which incites hatred of various identifiable groups which they deem to be non-white and therefore unworthy,” wrote Justice William T. Grant of St. John, New Brunswick. “Those purposes and the means they advocate to achieve them are criminal in Canada and that is what makes this request so repugnant.” (Again, how is it the responsibility of the judge to offer his opinion about the the moral quality of bequest? It's not his money. And it's not going to anyone in his jurisdiction. Is the NA not allowed to receive money? Of course it is. It has received money its entire existence. The judge breaks the law to enforce his (or the jew standing behind him's) politics against the will of the man who owns the property. This is outrageous. This is a pure power play by the
jews, yet we have to listen to people talk about how we're committing suicide, or doing it to ourselves. I will create an enemy activity thread, and this will be example number one. Yeah, we dumb ol' whites should be our breasts. We're so incompetent to organize. We just have no idea how to do it, or raise funds, or anything else. It's all our fault.)

The judge permanently enjoined any transfer of funds or other parts of the estate, which includes a collection of ancient Greek and Roman coins, to the NA. Instead, he ordered it distributed to the brother and sister of Harry Robert McCorkill, a chemist who reportedly spent time at MIT, collector of historic artifacts, and longtime Canadian NA member who died in 2004. McCorkill’s sister, Isabelle Rose McCorkill, initially challenged the bequest, and she was later joined by two Jewish human rights groups in Canada as well as the provincial attorney general. (love that "later" part, which is complete bs. You can bet the jews gave her the idea. Notice how authority always does what the jews want, not what the white man wants. Even when it comes to the dispersal of HIS OWN PROPERTY. We're not living under a jewish dictatorship? What ever gave you that crazy idea?)

In July, NA lawyer John Hughes filed a notice that the group would appeal Justice Grant’s decision, which it characterized as rife with judicial errors.

In his June decision, the judge brushed aside claims by NA representatives that the group had been unfairly tarred in affidavits from the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) and others that quoted the group’s foundational documents as well as other materials produced by its officials. "All of these publications can only be described as racist, white supremacist and hate-inspired," the judge wrote.

"They are disgusting, repugnant and revolting." Your opinion matters - why? You don't like a man's politics, so you can take and redistribute his money and materials as you see fit? What part of that is repugnant and dictatorial?

The court decision comes at a time when the NA, which a little over a decade ago was the dominant hate group in America, is struggling to survive. It has gone from an organization that once brought in about $1 million a year and had some 1,400 dues-paying members to a group that is nearly bankrupt and has only a smattering of supporters left. The group’s current leader is trying to sell much of its West Virginia headquarters compound to raise money, and he has sold off much of the wood on the site to logging companies for the same reason. A faction led by the brother of the group’s late founder has sued the NA in civil court in an attempt to regain control of the organization. And virtually all of the major personalities in the group, many of whom enjoyed serious movement prestige, have left.

The loss of the bequest could help finally destroy the remnants of the once-storied NA. The group seems unlikely to survive without a source of new funds.

The court’s initial decision thrilled human rights activists anti-white hate groups in Canada.

The Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs, which intervened in the case along with B’Nai Brith Canada, said the ruling was “a strong statement. Today, we are fortunate that the National Alliance is a severely diminished group barely holding onto its shrinking membership. The threat was that an injection of about a quarter of a million dollars might have breathed new life into this dying organization.”

“Justice Grant’s judgment was very direct in his findings of fact that the National Alliance is a neo-Nazi group and that their hate propaganda and stated goals of genocide and ethnic cleansing violate Canadian law six ways to Sunday,” added Richard Warman, a Canadian attorney who has brought 16 successful legal cases against hate groups and racist individuals in that country.

The Canadian bequest was first brought to public attention in June 2013, when the SPLC revealed that NA officials appeared close to settling the probate matter and forwarding the proceeds to the NA. Shortly after that, McCorkill’s sister, who like a second brother was estranged from her radical sibling and did not even know he was alive do you get how ridiculous this is? jews joined this process "later" - yet the person suing "did not even know he was alive" - are you kidding me? this is how brazen these liars are. They are nothing but highwaymen, and deserve the fate of same., filed suit, saying that she did not want to see the money go to a neo-Nazi group and that she also hoped to keep the coin collection in Canada. She didn't know the guy was alive, until organized jews came to her and told her they needed her for a front in a lawsuit.

The case against the bequest could never have been made under American law, which has unusually strong free speech and association protections. But Canadian law has a much fuller concept of the public good, and its foundational Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms allows speech and other “reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.” Canadian law also makes public “incitement of hatred” — “willfully promot[ing] hatred against any identifiable group” — a criminal offense. Except the gift is going to someone in America, not Canada, so the judge has no jurisdiction. That's just the most obvious fraud here. NA is a legal group, and it's not up to a Canadian judge to decide which groups in foreign countries people are allowed to give money to.

Erich Gliebe, chairman of the NA, claimed in affidavits submitted to the court that the SPLC and others were trying to “smear” the organization by quoting its foundational documents and later statements from Gliebe and others. But Grant found that the NA had done nothing to distance itself from those documents.

And they were hair-raising. The affidavit submitted to the court by the SPLC quoted the group’s “What is the National Alliance?” essay as saying that the 
NA would do “whatever is necessary” to achieve “a White living space” and that it would not be deterred by any “temporary unpleasantness.” The document went on to call for “the racial cleansing of the land” and “a long-term eugenics program involving at least the entire populations of Europe and America.”

The SPLC affidavit also quoted an NA bulletin written by the group’s founder celebrating racial violence as “a healthy, red-blooded response to the current situation in America’s cities.” “Ultimately,” the document read in a particularly candid passage, “we will win the war only by killing our enemies.” In yet another document, the group spoke of packing “the homosexuals, racemixers, and hard-case collaborators” into cattle cars and plunging them into abandoned coal mines.

Although Gliebe tried to suggest that the NA had evolved into a kinder, gentler organization since the 2002 death of founder William Pierce, Grant pointed out that Gliebe alleged in a 2011 radio broadcast that “the Jews have lied for decades about the Holocaust,” which he described as a “money-making scheme.”

“[T]here is nothing ‘dated’ about the anti-semitic rantings of Mr. Gliebe, the current Chair of the National Alliance, in his 2011 broadcast,” the judge wrote. “Neither is there any evidence before the court that the NA has distanced itself from its ‘dated’ foundational documents,” a reference to “What is the National Alliance?”

All completely irrelevant. Canada is a jewish dictatorship with bought/intimidated judges. That's the bottom line.

Grant repeatedly referred to the strength of the case. The evidence “consistently show[s] that the National Alliance stands for principles and policies, as well as the means to implement them, that are both illegal and contrary to public policy in Canada,” the judge wrote. “[W]hat it stands for, anti-semitism, eugenics, discrimination, racism and white supremacy, violates numerous statutes and conventions that have been passed by Parliament and the [provincial] Legislatures and endorsed by the Government of Canada, including the Criminal Code.”

The judge also mocked Gliebe’s attempts to portray the NA as a cultural organization interested in European civilization, saying these “feeble protestations only call to mind the attempts by the Nazis in Hitler’s Germany to mask their true intentions through organizations like the Hitler Youth. History tells us that behind the mask lurked some of the worst evil ever visited upon the human race.”

Grant isn't a judge, he's a despot.


Re: SPLC and other "anti-White hate groups" vs. NA & McKorki

PostTue Jan 20, 2015 9:35 pm


Is this Canadian "judges decision" currently being appealed?

Obviously, this decision based upon "public policy" is bogus
and would effect and affect the "property rights" of all both
in Canada and even in the USA, thereby.

Yet another "power grab by the Usual Suspects" in any event.

Best regards,

User avatar

Will Williams

  • Posts: 2335
  • Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 9:22 am

Re: SPLC and other "anti-White hate groups" vs. NA & McKorki

PostThu Mar 19, 2015 8:25 pm

McCorkill Appeal Delayed as Judge Recuses Herself for Having Accepted Leonard Foundation Scholarship 40 Years Ago

Posted on March 18, 2015

Just 48 hours before the New Brunswick Court of Appeals was to hear CAFE’s appeal against the decision of Justice William Grant, one of the three member panel Madame Justice Margaret E. Larlee recused herself. Her reason was that some 40 years ago she’d received a scholarship from the Leonard Foundation which offered assistance to White Protestant applicants.
Madam Justice Margaret Larlee

The appeal is crucial as Justice Grant of New Brunswick’s Court of Queen’s Bench overturned the will of Robert McCorkill who willed the bulk of his estate of old coins and artifacts to the National Alliance in the U.S. The appeal is vital to freedom of belief and property rights.

In May, 2013, after the anti-free speech U.S. group the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) protested the bequest, the long estranged sister, Isabelle McCorkell came forth and made an application (nine years after her brother’s death) to have the will overturned, as the bequest to a White nationalist organization was, she argued, “contrary to public policy.” This property rights cancelling argument was raised by Ottawa lawyer Richard Warman who echoed the SPLC complaint. Ms McCorkell was supported by some high powered and well financed interveners, the Attorney-General of New Brunswick, the Center for Israel and Jewish Affairs and the League for Human Rights of B’nai Brith.

CAFE intervened on behalf of the executor of the estate, “This is a vital freedom of speech, freedom of belief and property rights issue,” says CAFE Director Paul Fromm.

The decision came down the same week three Mounties were gunned down in Moncton. Mr. Justice Grant nullified the bequest. “He put a shotgun blast through freedom of belief and property rights when he overturned the will,” Mr. Fromm added.

CAFE appealed.

This morning (March 17) the parties were advised: ” The Honourable Madame Justice Larlee has decided to recuse herself from the panel for the Appeal, which is scheduled in the above-noted matter on Thursday March 19, 2015. The matter will therefore need to be rescheduled by the New Brunswick Court of Appeal.”

Somewhat earlier the Court Registrar advised all parties: “This is to inform the parties in this case that in the early 1970’s while a student at UNB Law School Madam Justice Larlee received a Leonard Foundation Scholarship. The Foundation was challenged some 10 years later in The Leonard Foundation Trust case, a case that will be cited in the one under appeal. If any of you have any misgivings about Madam Justice Larlee sitting on this case because of an apprehension of bias, please inform me immediately so that appropriate steps may be taken.”

CAFE’s lawyer received no notice of any objection.

Lieutenant Colonel Reuben Wells Leonard
(1860-1930) was a civil engineer, mine developer,
soldier and philanthropist. He saw action in the
Northwest Rebellion in 1885 and in World War I.
In 1916, he established the Leonard Foundation.

Wikipedia explains: “Under the Leonard Foundation terms, [scholarships/grants] were made available to students who were white, British subjects, and Protestant and no more than one-quarter of the moneys could be awarded to females. The goal was to provide financial assistance to needy students who showed the promise of becoming leading citizens of the British Empire. A complaint filed against the Leonard Foundation under the Ontario Human Rights Code in 1986 prompted litigation. The Ontario Court of Appeal held in 1990, that the trust’s exclusionary terms relating to race, religion, nationality, and gender were contrary to law.”

CAFE lawyer Andy Lodge of St. John called the decision and timing “extraordinary.”

The appeal will be rescheduled to May or June.
User avatar

Will Williams

  • Posts: 2335
  • Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 9:22 am

Re: SPLC and other "anti-White hate groups" vs. NA & McKorki

PostTue Feb 23, 2016 11:54 am

While everyone waits to see if the Canadian Supreme Court will hear the case about Dr. McKorkell's bequest to the National Alliance being denied by lower courts, here is another case in Canada that is related:

A Doctor’s Will Dictated Money Be Given to White, Heterosexual Students For Scholarships. A Canadian Judge Just Struck It Down.

FEBRUARY 22, 2016

Dr. Victor Priebe’s will dictated that two white, single, heterosexual students receive scholarships with his money after his passing. A judge from Ontario, Canada denied the request, deeming it discriminatory and a clear offense to the interests of the state.

"Eccentric" Dr. Victor Priebe

The former radiologist’s will "asked the trustee to set up bursaries for students planning studies in science, including medicine, genetics, biology, chemistry, physics and pharmacology.”

One of the scholarships was directed to be set up for a “Caucasian (white), male, single, heterosexual students,” and the other for a “hard-working, single Caucasian white girl who is not feminist or lesbian.”

“Administrators of the scholarship should make sure yearly that the students remained single,” reports the National Post.

Justice Alissa Mitchell claimed that although the will did not explicitly state “white supremacist, homophobic and misogynistic views,” she could personally tell that these were "no doubt" Priebe’s views—which could not be tolerated. Thus, Mitchell struck down the wishes as a clear offense to the interests of the state, citing an 80-year-old judgment as precedent.

“Although it is not expressly stated by Dr. Priebe that he subscribed to white supremacist, homophobic and misogynistic views … (the will’s statements) leave no doubt as to Dr. Priebe’s views,” she said.

The will was first flagged as discriminatory by Ontario’s Office of the Public Guardian and Trustee. Brendan Crawley, a spokesman for the office, explained that “[o]ne of the office’s roles is to oversee charitable gifts, and it’s well-established that those gifts cannot violate the Ontario Human Rights Code."

A Toronto lawyer, Laura Cardiff, who specializes in estate law, weighed in: “People are allowed to be eccentric…It’s fairly stringent, these requirements. It’s the ‘safety’ of the state that (has to be) at risk, and it’s a universally recognized risk, not just that a few people might disagree with what this person is doing.”

“Although it is not expressly stated by Dr. Priebe that he subscribed to white supremacist, homophobic and misogynistic views … (the will’s statements) leave no doubt as to Dr. Priebe’s views."

Based on Cardiff's stated rationale, Justice Mitchell deemed that the “safety of the state” was at risk if two white, straight, single students were to be awarded scholarships subsequent to a deceased man’s personal wish with his own hard-earned money.

"But Priebe may have gotten the last word. Another provision in his will said the bursaries would be cancelled if a court voided the controversial provisions," notes the National Post.
--- ... stigiacomo

Jack Pogrom

Re: SPLC and other "anti-White hate groups" vs. NA & McKorki

PostTue Feb 23, 2016 3:33 pm

So in other words Single White heterosexuals are enemies of the State in Canada. Wow!
User avatar

Will Williams

  • Posts: 2335
  • Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 9:22 am

Re: SPLC and other "anti-White hate groups" vs. NA & McKorki

PostThu May 18, 2017 9:35 pm

12 Ways The Southern Poverty Law Center
Is A Scam To Profit From Hate-Mongering

Stella Morabito, The Federalist, May 17, 2017

Morris, be honest for once. Did you just expel the gas? (Credit Image: © Buchan/Rex Shutterstock via ZUMA Press)

1. It’s a Big-Money Smear Machine

The SPLC’s main role is as a massively funded propaganda smear machine. The following information on the SPLC, provided by Karl Zinsmeister of Philanthropy Roundtable, is an eye-opener: “Its two largest expenses are propaganda operations: creating its annual lists of ‘haters’ and ‘extremists,’ and running a big effort that pushes ‘tolerance education’ through more than 400,000 public-school teachers. And the single biggest effort undertaken by the SPLC? Fundraising. On the organization’s 2015 IRS 990 form it declared $10 million of direct fundraising expenses, far more than it has ever spent on legal services.”

2. The Center’s Work Has Incited Violence

The SPLC website keeps tabs on designated bad guys with a Hate Map of the United States and an invitation for readers to #reporthate. The SPLC’s hate list includes the Family Research Council in Washington DC, and the 2012 shooting at FRC headquarters was inspired through the influence of SPLC agitprop, according to the gunman himself. He would have committed mass murder if he wasn’t stopped.

The recent mob violence in response to social scientist Charles Murray’s talk at Middlebury College, and the assault of a faculty member there, were products of the SPLC’s smear of Murray as an “extremist.” The list goes on.

3. SLPC Uses Emotion-Laden Images to Spread Innuendo

SPLC uses emotion-laden images with nary any evidence to “spread stigma just by innuendo.” Zinsmeister from Philanthropy Roundtable notes: “Over the years, numerous investigators have pointed out that most of the scary KKK and Nazi and militia groups that the SPLC insists are lurking under our beds are actually ghost entities, with no employees, no address, hardly any followers, and little or no footprint.”

But “hate groups” and “extremist organizations” are great copy, especially for fundraising. So the SPLC list of storm-troopers-in-our-midst is catnip for journalists looking for dramatic stories.

4. The FBI Stopped Citing SPLC as a Resource

Two years ago, the FBI deleted the SPLC from its website’s list of legitimate resources on hate crimes. This is a promising sign of growing clarity that the SPLC’s designations for hate groups lack legitimacy.

5. People On Its Political Team See the Problems, Too

Even leftist Washington Post columnist Dana Milbank wrote that the SPLC’s labeling of the Family Research Center as a hate group was a reckless act.

6. Its Nonprofit Status Masks Highly Political Fundraising

The SPLC operates far more as a political action committee than as the nonprofit it claims to be. The hyper-partisan nature of the SPLC’s operations makes its nonprofit status seem like a joke. In a recent letter to Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin, the Federation for Immigration Reform argued that the SPLC’s tax-exempt 501(c)3 status should be revoked because in the 2016 elections, the SPLC clearly violated the Internal Revenue Service requirement that prohibits “participating in or intervening (including the publishing or distributing of statements), in any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office.”

7. Its Public Activities Are a Ruse for Fundraising

The SPLC is little more than a “cash collecting machine” rooted more deeply in fund-raising opportunism than in any do-gooder impulse. The SPLC was founded in 1971, after much of the heroic heavy lifting of the civil rights era was already over and the Ku Klux Klan was pretty much beyond its death throes. But invoking the imagery of pointy white hoods still seems to be an irresistible fund-raising ploy for the SPLC.

Again, Zinsmeister at Philanthropy Roundtable calls it out: “The SPLC is a cash-collecting machine. In 2015 it vacuumed up $50 million in contributions and foundation grants, a tidy addition to its $334 million holdings of cash and securities and its headquarters worth $34 million. ‘They’ve never spent more than 31 percent of the money they were bringing in on programs, and sometimes they spent as little as 18 percent. Most nonprofits spend about 75 percent on programs,’ noted Jim Tharpe, managing editor of the SPLC’s hometown newspaper.

8. Its Founder Is a Direct Marketing Guru

SPLC founder Morris Dees was inducted into the Direct Marketing Hall of Fame in 1998. That should tell you a lot. Dees’ experience as an ultra-successful direct mail marketer well precedes his SPLC days. Perhaps he employed those skills while working on George Wallace’s 1958 gubernatorial campaign in Alabama and as finance director for George McGovern’s 1972 presidential bid, as well as campaigns of Jimmy Carter and Ted Kennedy.

9. Civil Rights Activists Say Its Founder Is ‘A Con Man’

Bona fide civil rights activists have described the SPLC founder as “a con man and a fraud.” A 2000 Harper’s Magazine article by Ken Silverstein quotes anti-death penalty activist Millard Farmer on Dees’ apparent fund-raising monomania: “He’s the Jim and Tammy Faye Bakker [notorious televangelists] of the civil rights movement, though I don’t mean to malign Jim and Tammy Faye.”

10. The Center Is Advertising For New Revenue-Raisers

SPLC is now advertising for help in “developing theories” to support its litigation projects. The following is from a current appeal to recent law school graduates at the Ivy League University of Pennsylvania: “Penn Law and the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) have created a new, two-year, post-graduate fellowship for a new or recent graduate to work with the SPLC’s Special Litigation Practice Group. . .The Penn Law Civil Rights Fellow will serve as an integral member of the SPLC’s legal group, conducting legal research and analysis and developing theories to support new litigation projects and advocacy campaigns …” (emphasis mine). If you need to develop a “theory” to support an argument intended to condemn those you’ve labelled as haters, there probably isn’t any there there.

11. SPLC Propaganda Seems to Encourage Hoax Hate Crimes

SPLC propaganda seems to encourage hoax hate crimes. There has been a recent surge of hoax hate crimes. In part, I believe this is due to the far reach of the SPLC’s propaganda and agitation machine, which has maligned legitimate think tanks and advocacy centers like the Family Research Center, Alliance Defending Freedom, and the Center for Security Policy. It also has smeared eminent scholars like Murray and Ayaan Hirsi Ali as well as pediatric neurosurgeon (now secretary of Housing and Urban Development) Ben Carson.

This indiscriminate free-for-all creates an easy climate in which hoaxes can thrive.

12. Its Blacklist Foments the Campus Anti-Speech Movement

The SPLC is no doubt heavily invested in the campus anti-speech movement. It stands to reason that to control “hate speech,” one must control all speech. That’s a major reason any speaker on a college campus who is unapproved by the SPLC can end up shut down in riotous fashion as Murray at Middlebury or Milo Yiannopoulos at Cal Berkeley or Gavin McInnes at New York University. If you plan to attend such an event, you’ll notice that even lesser-known speakers often need police escorts after the SPLC has blacklisted them. ... mongering/ (from The Federalist)
User avatar

Wade Hampton III

  • Posts: 2091
  • Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 10:40 pm
  • Location: Pontiac, SC

Re: SPLC and other "anti-White hate groups" vs. NA & McKorki

PostFri May 19, 2017 6:32 am

Perhaps it was a blessing in disguise in that once the renegade Erich Gliebe was resigned
to acceptance that the bequest was out of his personal reach, he was willing to relinquish
control of NA. Now he will have to look for alternative avenues of finance for child support
and new Land Rovers somewhere else.
User avatar

Jim Mathias

  • Posts: 1508
  • Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 8:48 pm

Re: SPLC and other "anti-White hate groups" vs. NA & McKorki

PostSun May 21, 2017 2:18 am

12. Its Blacklist Foments the Campus Anti-Speech Movement

The SPLC is no doubt heavily invested in the campus anti-speech movement.

A bad move. That it will backfire on them amongst the thinking part of the population (it already has, really) will tarnish their reputation for the worse forever. Oh sure, they have a large warchest full of fiat dollars, but even that is inconsequential compared to reputation.
Contact me via PM to obtain quantities of the "Send Them Back" stickers.

Return to "Hate" Watchdogs & Pressure Groups

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests