BEWARE THE Center for New Community. They are Liars.

[ALIPAC]

I guess Communists have an overdeveloped sense of who qualifies as a white nationalist, xenophobe, nativists, etc...

In truth most communists see all Americans as white nationalists, racists, xenophobe, nativists.

When you are that far off the left scale, the rest of the whole world looks right wing to ya I suppose.

W

[JohnB2012]

Has everyone seen this guys web site.

http://www.newcomm.org/

They lost all credibility with me when I started checking it out. On their home page they announce a new report on the Minutemen.
http://bdi.newcomm.org/shellgames.pdf
In the second paragraph they begin using the phrase anti-immigrant and then directly refer to the Minute Man Project as anti-immigrant. I haven't seen anything that would indicate that. They are anti-illegal alien.

You are considering joining the MinutemanHQ not because of bias towards people from another country, but rather because you feel your government owes the citizens of the United States protection from people who wish to take advantage of a free society.

http://www.minutemanhq.com/hq/aboutus.php

Next on their home page they announce a new report on FAIR.

http://www.newcomm.org/fair2004.pdf

According to the cover page this report is from November 2004. Hardly "new".

Their third "new" report "New Report Details White Nationalist Staffing US Immigration Reform PAC" has a bad link.

http://bdi.newcomm.org/content/view/5/2/

Pretty sloppy work.

Lastly, if some of us like the idea of a "time out" or "suspension" of all immigration until the system has a better handle on it, I don't see anything wrong with that. If that makes us anit-immigration in their eyes, I could car less. That is just their opinion. I haven't read every single post here but I do not recall any that call for a flat out end to all immigration.

[JuniusJnr]

is newcomm short for new communists?

looks to me like they are promoting hate through their criticism of Americans seeking to preserve the USA.

Mr. Burghart's posts come across as someone beating a dead horse, to me, with the same points brought up over and over again prefaced by several excerpts from William's posts.

Odd duck, this Devin Burghart.

[ALIPAC]

Hey Mr. Burghart. Is the John Birch Society a bunch of white nationalists too? I know very little about them, but they have done some research on you.

It appears to be legitimate, but after seeing your work we all know how appearances can be deceptive.

Here is what they say about you Mr. Burghart....


Flag-Waving Terrorists?
by William Norman Grigg
The New American Magazine
Vol. 17, No. 27
December 31, 2001

Patriotic, constitutionally-minded citizens are being demonized by leftist "watchdog" groups and elements of the Justice Department as domestic allies of international terrorists........


The source of the "Geography of Hate" map, as well as the statistics on "hate groups" breathlessly cited by newspapers and wire services across the country, is a report entitled "State of Hate: White Nationalism in the Midwest, 2001-2002," produced by a Chicago-based leftist group called the Center for New Community (CNC). The chief author of that report is Devin Burghart, director of the CNC's "Building Democracy Initiative" and former research analyst for a Seattle-based "watchdog" group called the Coalition for Human Dignity. Not surprisingly, Burghart has been extensively cited as an expert on the supposed danger of "right-wing" terrorism in the wake of Black Tuesday.

Burghart's debut as one of the media's favorite "experts" came in early 2001, when he released a report alleging that former Missouri Senator John Ashcroft, who is now attorney general, harbored secret "neo-Confederate" sympathies. "The Senate Judiciary Committee should focus on Sen. Ashcroft's endorsement of Southern Partisan [magazine]," declared Burghart in a press release. Accusing Ashcroft of giving "legitimacy to one of the leading white nationalist groups in the country," Burghart insisted that "Southern Partisan and its publisher have a long history of promoting bigotry."

Whatever one thinks of the relative merits of Southern Partisan (which, in fact, does not promote bigotry of any variety), it is worth noting that Burghart made these accusations at about the same time one of Britain's most notorious left-wing journals published an article he co-wrote with Leonard Zeskind, a veteran Marxist agitator.

Zeskind is a spokesman for the Atlanta-based Center for Democratic Renewal (CDR), which orchestrated - and profited handsomely from - the "black church arson" hoax of 1996. Prior to 1986, the CDR was called the National Anti-Klan Network, which in 1982 was described by a rival left-wing group as a "loose coalition" of radical leftist groups organized around a nucleus of "pro-Peking Stalinists." Zeskind himself was an organizer of the Sojourner Truth Organization, a 1970s-era revolutionary group that sought to create "schools of communism" throughout the midwestern United States. One of the group's organizing manuals, "Towards a Revolutionary Party: Ideas on Strategy and Organization," described the group's work as that of "linking [the] fragmentary autonomous elements and socializing them into a new culture of struggle."

Burghart and Zeskind collaborated on an article published in the February 2001 issue of Searchlight, a British publication dedicated to "anti-fascist" activism. Searchlight was founded in the 1970s by Maurice Ludmer and Gerry Gable. Ludmer was a former reporter for the Daily Morning Star, the English Communist Party newspaper; Gable was a former member of the Young Communist League, a former Communist Party political candidate, and a convicted felon. Clearly, using Burghart's own standards as applied to John Ashcroft's trivial association with the Southern Partisan magazine, we would have to conclude that Burghart has lent "legitimacy" to individuals with a "long history" of promoting Marxist subversion and crime.

But the content of the article co-written by Burghart is even more revealing than the publication that carried it. Burghart and Zeskind lamented the fact that with Ashcroft's confirmation as attorney general, "anti-fascist groups" - that is, hardcore Marxist groups who seek to criminalize conservative activism - "failed to find a voice inside DC [and] also failed to mobilize their own constituencies in the Northwest, Midwest and South into active opposition." As a result, "anti-fascist-type groups have yet to develop an adequate national fight-the-right apparatus."

The crisis that began with the Black Tuesday terrorist attack gives Burghart and his comrade "watchdogs" a new opportunity to build their "national fight-the-right apparatus" - even if it means cooperating with a Justice Department under the direction of John Ashcroft.

----------------------------------------------------


Is this guy really a Marxist? Did you really co-author an article with a communist Mr. Burghart?

W

[JuniusJnr]

Ohhhhhhhhhh! Now I get it! The New Community is an ACLU wannabe!

[ALIPAC]

Junius,

New Community and Burghart are using the term White Nationalist to supplant the word Nazi. There are a lot of different groups that are considered white nationalists including Aryan Nation, Christian Identity, etc....

A lot of them are the same kind of groups that most of our families fought to defeat in WWII.

Burghart is trying to make a point, poorly, that those of us (our families) that defeated the fascists in Europe and Japan are now the fascists / racists / etc....

W

[ALIPAC]

Burghart's not answering.

We need a researcher to determine if this allegation that Devin Burghart and a confirmed Marxist agitator have been writing articles together.

PM me if anyone is interested.

W

[Bootsie]

Frankly, I think that Mr. Burghart's EXTENSIVE research on ALIPAC just gives us MORE credibility. I think he's doing us a big FAVOR! Obviously, if we were not making a difference, he would not concentrate so much of his time trying to DISCREDIT us. We must be a huge threat to his off-the-deep-end leftist philosophy supported by his "New Community". The only way he can attempt to give his own organization any credibility is by trying to bring ours down to his level. AND, it won't work.

It is patently obvious that he is way out of the mainstream because statistics show that his position on immigration are in direct opposition to that of a HUGE majority of the American people. He is just one of those people who must drag the oppostion down in order to elevate his own agenda.

I will defend MY position on making English the official language of our country until I no longer draw a breath. I don't know what planet this man is living on but the last time I checked, this was AMERICA and ENGLISH IS the language of our country. I don't care HOW MANY LEGAL immigrants come to our country as long as they come here with the express purpose of ASSIMILATING. AND, that would START with learning our language. It is just complete lunacy to think that we should accomodate every immigrant from every country in the world by making everything available to them in THEIR language. I wonder if he has learned to speak ARABIC??? Or German? Or French? Or Urdu?? HE is the one who is discriminating because the only language HE is concerned about is SPANISH. What about all of the other countries who are represented in our LEGAL IMMIGRANT population?? Are THEY the only ones who should speak English??

So, MY position is that, if any person comes to our country to avail themselves of the opportunities here, they should WANT to learn our language. AND, I would support my tax dollars going to centers all over the country which taught English to these immigrants. It is NOT the responsibility of our government to make every document or every service available to every immigrant from every country in the world. WE are a SOVEREIGN NATION and, in order to protect our sovereignty, it is essential that we have ONE LANGUAGE and not FIFTY.

Another idiotic question that he posed was DEMANDING to know our position on homosexuals!! As long as I've been a member of ALIPAC and as frequently as I have posted on our forums, I have NEVER seen that topic even brought up. WHY would we be discussing someone's sexual preferences on a forum that is dedicated to ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION???
Our group is made up of people of all beliefs, people from different countries and different nationalities, people with varied political affiliations and beliefs but the one thing we have in common is that we are fed up with our government sitting back and letting lawbreakers take over our country. For every member of our group, one can find differences of opinion on EVERY OTHER TOPIC. But, his accusation that we are some far-right group just flies all over me. I can speak for myself as well as OTHER MEMBERS who are INDEPENDENTS. I would be willing to guess that the majority of our members are right in the middle of the political spectrum. We may have SOME who are more to the right and we probably have FEW who are to the left but MOST of us are just smack in the middle on most issues. I would NEVER be a member of any group that was FAR RIGHT because I feel about them almost the same as I do about Mr. Burghart and his NEWCOMM! No--that would be going too far. I can empathize with people who are more conservative than I but I CANNOT empathize with a group like his which APPEARS TO BE flat-out COMMUNISTIC.

I think Mr. Burghart has way too much time on his hands if he can't find anything better to do than attack someone with whom he disagrees. I think most of us respect everyone's right to believe what they believe because this is America and people have that right. I don't respect ANYONE who tries to cram ANY AGENDA down my throat. That goes for the far right as well as the far left as well as ANY position on which we disagree.

Does Mr. Burghart live in a COMMUNE?? I just think he is out of sync with the times. He appears to be someone who would have been perfectly comfortable as a FLOWER CHILD. He is swimming upstream and he's not making much progress so he chooses to dedicate his time and effort to dragging someone with whom he disagrees down to his level. It's not going to work so he might as well GIVE IT UP.

I will also defend William and ALIPAC against the accusation that they allow racism or discrimination on the forums. Personally, I've been the receiving end of having something I said on the forums edited out because I "crossed the line" in statements I made so I KNOW that William goes out of his way to make sure that we do NOT say things that could be construed as racist, xenophobic or bigoted. I've also had a topic locked when we wandered into controversial territory that had nothing to do with immigration and about which people with different beliefs would be offended. It would be almost impossible, with a discussion forum as active as ours, to monitor and control EVERY SINGLE WORD that is posted but I must say, William and our moderators do a damn good job in overseeing our discussions.

Mr. Burghart's assertions that we have white supremacists in the group is almost laughable but, even if we did have some of those, that would NOT BE ALLOWED in discussion groups. There is just NO WAY UNDER THE SUN that everyone in any given group would share the exact same beliefs on EVERY SUBJECT. If that were the case, I would say that would be a group of STUPID SHEEP. He surely doesn't believe that all of the members of HIS group agree with EVERY position in which he believes. At ALIPAC, the only COMMON POSITION we have is that we are against ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION. PERIOD. I don't think you could find anyone in our group who believes exactly like any other member of our group. We are a very diverse group of people who come together for a common cause and that is that we want a STOP to illegal immigration. VERY SIMPLE CONCEPT. We might DISCUSS other issues and we also might DISAGREE on those issues but we are united in our desire to put a stop to a problem that has gotten out of control.

I have serious concerns about Mr. Burghart and his group because they seem to have no problem with defending lawbreakers. I take issue with he assertion that we ASSUME that every Hispanic who breaks a law is an ILLEGAL. I speak from PERSONAL EXPERIENCE on this issue because, when I was investigating a case in my area of an Hispanic who was accused of MULTIPLE charges of rape, felony breaking and entering and other serious charges, William cautioned me to make SURE that this person was illegal before I made that allegation. And, that's exactly what I did. I spent DAYS investigating this case before I made that statement because William had cautioned me NOT TO ASSUME that this person was illegal just because he was an Hispanic CRIMINAL. It follows reason though, that people who break one law when they cross that border illegally, are not above breaking ANY law. Over time, and with a LOT of research, I have found this to be the case. Right here in my own state, we have MANY crimes that are committed by illegals. There are definitely a disproportionate number of crimes committed by ILLEGALS in our state. All statistics bear that out. The prison population in our country bears that out. BUT, we NEVER make a statement about any Hispanic being illegal until we have thoroughly researched their status.

Mr. Burghart needs to come to terms with what is going on in our country and get OUT of his state of DENIAL. He has obviously not done his research on the drain these illegals are causing on every system in our country. If we adopted HIS philosophy, we would be living in a state of ANARCHY within 10 years. I wonder if he remembers the Tower of Babel?????

[Bootsie]

This quote from Teddy Roosevelt says it all:

http://www.newswithviews.com/Wooldridge/frosty103.htm

YOU CAN’T PUT YOUR FOOT IN TWO SHOES

By Frosty Wooldridge
November 28, 2005
NewsWithViews.com

Theodore Roosevelt 1907, "In the first place we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the man's becoming in very fact an American, and nothing but an American. There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag, and this excludes the red flag, which symbolizes all wars against liberty and civilization, just as much as it excludes any foreign flag of a nation to which we are hostile. We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language. We have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people."

[Bootsie]

Mr. Burghart is going to have a VERY difficult time arguing this almost 100-year old policy. It just really defies his MELTING POT theory. So, this philosophy of ours is not new and it is the basis upon which our country was built and the commonality upon which this country has survived.