Vanguard News Network
VNN Media
VNN Digital Library
VNN Reader Mail
VNN Broadcasts
Local Blogs
Miscellaneous


Go Back   Vanguard News Network Forum > News & Discussion > General Discussion
Register Multimedia Blogs Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

 
Thread Display Modes Share
Old October 30th, 2012 #1
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 37,007
Blog Entries: 2
Alex Linder
Default Bill White From Prison: How Federal Informants Work

[hand-written essay from BW, also posted in his thread in WN and in FBI thread in Strategy]

HOW FEDERAL INFORMANTS WORK

There was once a time when a group of people could get together, shout "informant" in unison, and slander the reputation of a political activist. With the emergence of the internet, and the easy availability of government records, it has become easy for any person to quickly determine whether someone has rendered substantial assistance to the government. Here, I will explain how federal informants work and how one can access information on them. I also urge people to stop treating this subject so lightly - rehabilitating actual dangerous informants, while using the term "informant" as a smear.

SNITCH CULTURE

The US Department of Justice employs about 10,000 FBI field agents. FBI regulations require each agent to employ at least 4 confidential informants, and suggest 10 as an appropriate mean. This means that approximately 100,000 Americans work as informants for the FBI. When America's other 32 law enforcement agencies are considered, between 600,000 and 12 million Americans -- perhaps one out of every 200 adults -- works fulltime for the federal government reporting on other Americans.

Informants are paid approximately $400/week for their services. Thus, this profession tends to attract those for whom $1730 a month -- $20,800 a year -- is a substantial incentive. People who are not mentally ill or otherwise living on disability and welfare benefits, or people laboring at the lower echelons of drug organizations, tend to be particular recruitment targets, as are those who are otherwise unemployed. Informants also receive a bonus for convicting others -- generally, they receive $100 for every year of sentence a victim receives -- 20 years is a $2000 bonus, for instance.

The method of the informant is usually the instigation of inchoate crimes. The federal government may convict any two people who agree to commit a crime, one of whom has taken an act in furtherance, of conspiracy. There are few restrictions. The government must show a propensity towards the crime -- being previously convicted of drug dealing is enough to allow an informant to target someone with a drug conspiracy; speaking out angrily is enough to justify trying to involve someone in an act of terrorism. The only rule is that the informant may not be one of the two required people.

In cases where the government cannot put two people together, they often try to invite a solicitation. This is how Matt Hale was framed. The government will infiltrate someone into an organization they believe is committing crimes, and try to involve them as "security" or as a "soldier." This person will let the group leader know he is available to commit a crime, and will wait to be solicited. In the case of the Blind Sheik -- and Matt Hale -- the informant may say he is going to commit a crime, and ask for the leader's blessing.

The government targets these inchoate crimes because they are easier to prosecute than actual crimes. The FBI, for instance, has manuals -- playbooks -- of how crimes are to be put together. For instance, in an interstate murder-for-hire, the informant is instructed to tell the target that their codeword will be "to paint the house." This is one way we know the alleged "Iranian" plot to assassinate the Saudi ambassador is a fraud. A few years ago, several White Revolution members were drawn into a plot to rob drug dealers -- stealing and selling fake drugs by robbing a "stash house" is another standard federal script.

Below the level of investigating crimes, federal informants also monitor political and media organizations and shape public discourse. Many newspaper reporters are on the federal payroll, or have a less formal relationship with federal law enforcement. This channel prevents negative coverage of federal cases and allows journalistic information to be funneled to US Attorneys. Within organizations, deeper-cover informants identify targets and help shape discourse -- promoting other informants to leadership positions and doing federal dirty work.

Some examples:

- MP is a mentally ill man in Indiana. He became involved in an anti-immigrant organizing group. He has written he meets monthly at McDonalds with Indiana State Police and the FBI to discuss the white movement. He is not paid -- though he would be if he was smart enough to ask. He's an informant.

In the future, if the government decides he is suitable for a "leadership" role, others will be told to go on white message boards and support him. He may be asked from time to time to speak well, or speak badly, of other white activists. MP may not even realize he is being manipulated -- but he is being used.

- HT ran a radio show on FM radio in New York, and on the internet. On his radio show, he would call for violence against blacks, Mexicans, and federal officials. When a listener would respond, HT would turn them over to the feds -- often for further investigation. His show was a "honeypot."

- Violent skinhead groups were a concern to the feds. One day, a group called VSC was formed. This group declared "war" on all other skinheads. Then, they declared they were not "racist." They would attack other white organizations, beat, stab, or set on fire white activists, and claimed nothing could happen in Indiana without their permission. Every once in a while, a few of their worst members would be arrested and sent to prison.

This group is a "false front." It was organized by federal informants as a "honeypot" for violent thugs, but its violence was used by the feds to suppress and control non-violent white organizations. Thus, in addition to social control, physical violence is used to control and suppress political dissent.

- MR joined the Imperial Knights of the Ku Klux Klan. He used a fake name, calling himself JR, because he knew no one would check. One day, he was asked to distribute literature by the Klan boss at a County Fair. While there, he incited two Klansmen he was with to attack a Phillipino youth. The incident was widely reported as a "hate crime," and the two Klansmen were convicted, while the Klan was bankrupted. The media and the feds made claims about a "hate crime" and MR, who manufactured the crime, moved on to another organization.

- BH was a "deep cover" federal informant. He did office work for DD, a prominent white politician, for years. Then he joined a major "Nazi" group. He agitated against the legitimate members, and worked his way to chief security. His major role was reviewing membership applications. he was only revealed when the FBI fired him.

These examples show FBI priorities -- monitoring groups for future targets, establishing media to shape political opinion, establishing groups to use violence to suppress political dissent, inciting "hate crimes" (legal "terrorism") for political purposes, and placing members in leadership positions to guide and monitor organizations.

Also note what the FBI did not do -- and never does. They did not establish any legitimate businesses or organizations or attempt to involve anyone in legal activities. They did not foster charity or attempt to build anything to help other people. And, they never made an effort to legitimately influence the political process through elections.

The FBI always tries to disrupt or control legitimate political and business activity. Their informants are usually -- but now always -- ignorant people without marketable skills. People with professional skills and family ties rarely take the risk of involvement in spying on others -- they are too focused on their own advancement.

My experience is that FBI agents always portray a Jewish caricature of the movements they infiltrate as well. They may play the skinhead thug; rarely will they play the New Right intellectual. This has been changing lately -- the FBI has made efforts to recruit smart people -- but without much success. They average informant believes in nothing; people with beliefs are harder to flip.

PRISON SNITCHES

So far, we have talked about informants in the civilian world. Now, we examine informants in the federal justice system.

The federal justice system is structured to reward informants and guilty pleas. A person pleading guilty in the federal system has their sentence reduced by about 8%. If they "accept responsibility," perhaps by cooperating, their sentence is reduced by one-third. If they receive what is called a SKI reduction for "substantial assistance," their sentence is reduced 50%. They may also receive a "safety valve," voiding a mandatory minimum.

The easiest way to see if a federal inmate provided pre-trial cooperation is to look at their sentence. If their sentence is not within sentencing guidelines -- all federal sentences are controlled by federal sentencing guidelines -- find out why. If they received or asked for a SKI reduction, they cooperated.

After sentencing, an inmate may continue to cooperate. An inmate who provides substantial cooperation after sentencing receives a Rule 35. A Rule 35 is a post-conviction sentence reduction for cooperation.

To determine if someone received these things, use PACER, PACER.gov is the US federal court website. All documents filed in federal court are available here. They may be under seal -- but the type of document will be described. So, you may not be able to read the Rule 35 -- but you can see if it was filed. Further, unsealed pleadings often reference sealed pleadings, or discuss the background of a case.

You can be 100% assured that if a person cooperates on a federal case, you can pull their PACER file and discover evidence of their cooperation. Hearing transcripts are public documents, as are pleadings -- anyone can look these things up.

THE DANGER OF FEDERAL INFORMANTS

The federal government arrests and tortures people for political reasons. To justify its policies, it needs a steady stream of terrorism and hate crimes. Because there is very little real terrorism and few actual hate crimes, the federal government manufactures both. The people it targets are often vulnerable and ignorant -- they are angry people too stupid, sometimes, to understand they are breaking the law, or too disabled, often, by addiction or mental illness to say no. The FBI does not hesitate to coke someone up, drive them to the US Capitol, hand them a bomb, and tell them to shout al-Qaeda, and then use this to justify everything from anti-Islamic repression to aggression overseas. Similarly, they didn't hesitate to give McVeigh and Nichols detonators and then use Oklahoma City to justify gun control and acts against "domestic extremism." The FBI's security actions are a real threat to legitimate and legal political activism.

Because this is a serious issue, treating it like a funny gossiping game is inappropriate. Real federal informants are never rehabilitated -- the feds will continue to approach them 20 or 30 years after the fact. Fake allegations of informing trivialize a serious issue. The federal government is the party who most wants informants rehabilitated and honest activists smeared. Game-players play into federal goals.

Because this is a serious issue, serious evidence should be required. Because our societal institutions are dishonest, all evidence must be treated skeptically. However not all government documents are false, nor are all media reports.

Evidence begins with an individual's own statements. Individuals cooperating with the FBI usually know to keep their cooperation secret -- but some don't. MP has openly discussed his regular meetings with law enforcement. In my case, an individual, VB, openly went on message boards discussing information he provided on me to the federal government. When others discuss meetings with the FBI, it should cause some concern. Not everyone visited by the FBI is guilty of cooperating -- but the best way to approach an FBI visit is to say "I'm represented by counsel," to give the name of an attorney you know, and refuse to speak without that counsel present. Any other response is unwise.

The real danger, though, comes from paid informants pushing the FBI agenda. It is hard to tell these types apart from honest weirdos sometimes. Certain behaviors, though, are suspicious. One is making allegations about others without specifics or evidence. When evidence is presented, truth can be discerned -- when an individual will not make a specific, disprovable allegation, and is not open to reason, they are suspicious.

For instance, I sat in KS' trial. I watched a nine year old girl and her mother testify KS was hiding in the bushes outside the girl's school, and saw the receipt for the pink angora sweater KS sent her -- and I've seen Stanley Kubrick's Lolita and I know what the sweater means. I saw the photos of Lamb and Lynx Gaede Photoshopped onto lesbian porn. I know KS is a pedophile.

Those are specific allegations -- I give details of what I know, how I know, and why I believe as I do. Someone else could get the court record and disprove it. No one does, because it's true.

Compare that to all the world's other allegations. I've learned over the years not to say something unless I have reason to believe it's true -- and to withdraw it and apologize if I'm wrong. For instance, I have been reasonably told Jared Taylor's wife Evelyn Rich is not Jewish, and received a good explanation of how the ADL misused a paper she wrote. I have apologized for this allegation. I still dislike Taylor's politics -- but I withdraw my ad hominem as incorrect.

Evidence continues with first-person accounts. First person accounts may be wrong. They are often not objective. They should be investigated and substantiated. For instance, I disliked KS before his arrest for child porn. My first hand account should be corroborated. Other white activists should have attended his trial. However, there are media accounts and there are court records. There is also KS' guilty plea.

First-person accounts should be considered a jumping off point for further investigation. We should ask for details and investigate why someone believes something -- then gather evidence. The FBI opened a "Terrorism Enterprise Investigation" into me in 2007 because a police detective in 1996 said I had been involved in an arson. An FBI investigation into the arson concluded there was "no evidence." The agent who used the report took the allegation without the investigation report to justify "getting me" within FBI rules. White activists often do the same thing -- take one allegation without investigation, and assert it as true.

In most cases, there are documents and records to justify or deny an allegation. I have made myself a promise never to again accuse someone of anything without reasonable proof. This is why I seek documents and witnesses. I didn't accuse HT of involvement in my case until he was alleged to have said at his trial he accused me of plotting to assassinate Obama with a truck bomb. I then obtained his trial transcript, and read the evidence presented. Later, a report on his statements was released to my trial counsel in Chicago. Similarly, I attended KS' trial to find the truth.

In contrast, at one point, an effort was made to persuade me DJ and PA were informants. At first, I wrongfully believed this. Later, I read the FBI reports and determined they were not informants. I heard PA testify at trial. I have publicly apologized to DJ. There was an allegation, I jumped to conclusions without proof, and I retracted and apologized.

There are many people I dislike in the white movement. HS is one example. HS once argued KS was okay because a sexual interest in pre-teen girls was normal. I disagree. HS often makes a point of calling me names on message boards, or making false allegations. I suspect HS is a pedophile -- and so I often mention his professed interest in little girls. I do not call HS a Jew or an informant. He denies he made these statements; I direct people to the archives and I block him. This is an appropriate way to deal with bizzarity.

So, allegations without evidence have to stop -- as do efforts to deny or obfuscate evidence. Certain characters decade after decade seek to "return" to the movement by tearing down those who know the truth about them. All one can do is repeat the truth and move on.

THE "SO WHAT" FACTOR

There is also the question of -- if an allegation is true, so what?

Informants are dangerous because they often lie to manufacture crimes, and the FBI's internal files are like an internet message board where the accused can not only not respond, but can be jailed and tortured based on rumor.

However, there is the "so what" factor. One example.

GJ is a homosexual. He is also a very intelligent guy who has produced a lot of good white material and who "gets" Savitri Devi and Tradition. He has also launched a successful and needed publishing operation. Should he be driven out of the white movement?

My thought on this was no, until GJ stole money and the membership list of CMS and then blackmailed them into not complaining. He then moved on to try to scam money from a friend of mine, and, I discovered, he had scammed others. This made me think he was not acceptable for the white movement.

My question is this -- homosexuality is a sign of a mental disorder. Homosexuals, like other mentally ill people, are often less honest than other people. Thus, should homosexuality be seen as a warning sign for theft? Should we exclude homosexuals altogether, even when they are discrete about it, as GJ is?

Usually, this is not a question. White nationalism attracts a large number of homosexual men and extreme S&M fetishists. Usually, these characters are very extreme and very forthright. Many uniformed "National Socialist" marches are, for many, a species of "gay pride" parade. People who cannot keep extreme sexual perversions -- homosexuality, urine and feces obsessions, extreme brutality -- quiet should not be in white organizations. People who are keeping them quiet should not be in public roles.

In contrast:

AP ran a prominent white record company. His project was successful and contributing to the white movement, but he was a little swarthy. One day, a Jewish homosexual group exposed the fact that his birth certificate said he was half-mestizo. The white movement ran the guy out. This was wrong. We should have said "so what?"

We know that 22,000 genes -- 2% of our DNA -- is primarily responsible for our physical development. There are an average 2200 points of difference between whites and blacks. There are an average 900 points of difference between whites and yellows or browns. If AP was half-mestizo, merely being mestizo means at least half-white and half American indigenous. He would have had about 225 points of difference with an average white- less than someone who was one-eighth black. He is approaching the normal range of variation between white ethnicities and individuals.

Given the contribution, did the vice overwhelm it?

True National Socialists are attracted to NS because they seek goodness in a corrupt world. Many become too enthused and become too obsessed with moral purity. I've been in this category. When one strives for virtue, it is easy to reject flawed mankind. However, our excessive surface "purity" and our movement's inner corruption has paralyzed white activism.

Thus, in addition to demanding evidence, the white movement needs to start asking "so what?" DD is a womanizer -- but an amazing organizer, writer, and speaker. So, we ask ourselves -- does the womanizing matter? RP is a coward -- he publicly disavows us -- but holds public office and furthers our goals. Should he be shunned for that?

These are difficult questions -- but they belong in a broader discussion of baseless allegations. In addition to demanding evidence -- we have to also ask, if true, do these allegations matter? Are they within an acceptable range of human error and fallibility, given what needs to be done.

CONCLUSIONS

I reduced names here to initials to avoid attacking anyone. Perhaps a publisher will want to use fake names. The names, in this context, do not matter.

I am no longer involved in white political activity. If the white movement wants to destroy itself -- insofar as further destruction is possible -- that is its busienss. But, I believe in the vision of Adolf Hitler -- in a beautiful, orderly world that promotes life and human happiness -- and I am saddened to see the same-old same-old predominate as the world dies.

What should be a beautiful celebration of iove has been polluted and turned into a celebration of degeneracy and hate. The FBI directs white activism into criminal activity and Jewish groups direct white power parodies into white ranks. Many of the most cynical have abandoned NS ideals to support the "new right wing" -- Zionism -- and many others seem to be talking just to earn their government check.

I urge people to set fantasy aside and to focus on evidence, on reality, and on what can be demonstrated. There are many resources available to us to sustain the gossip and rumor-backed communities of 20 years ago. These efforts, often sponsored by people trying to harm white people, ultimately lead nowhere. //
__________________

If we exterminate termites because they destroy the foundations of our houses, how much more lenient should we be in our treatment of jews, who destroy the foundations of our society?

Last edited by Alex Linder; October 30th, 2012 at 02:42 PM.
 
Old October 31st, 2012 #2
Jethro
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 591
Default

My guesses ...

DD = David Duke
KS = Kevin Alfred Strom
HT = Hal Turner
BH = Wild Bill Hoff
HS = Hadding Scott
GJ = Greg Johnson

Everyone knows these people. Who is MP from Indiana though?
 
Old October 31st, 2012 #3
Ryan Smith
Social Nationalist
 
Ryan Smith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 233
Ryan Smith
Default

Interesting and good article.
 
Old October 31st, 2012 #4
James Hawthorne
Senior Member
 
James Hawthorne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 4,586
Blog Entries: 86
James Hawthorne
Default

Looks like this is the Feds answer to that article by Bill.

Quote:
Former Neo-Nazi Bill White Faces 10 More Years Of Prison After 7th U.S. Circuit Court Of Appeals Reinstates Conviction On Solicitation In Chicago

If you thought former national socialist activist Bill White was getting out of prison in July 2013, think again. White now faces up to an additional 10 years in prison after the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals essentially reinstated White's original conviction on solicitation, which had been overturned on White's initial appeal by Judge Lynn Adelman. Furthermore, the appeals court ruled White is not entitled to a new trial.

-- Read the court's 30-page opinion HERE. It's Case No. 11-2150. Here's the key excerpt from the opinion (links embedded within the excerpt are mine):

William White was charged with soliciting the commission of a violent federal crime against a juror in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 373. The alleged solicitations at issue were messages that White posted to a website that he created to advance white supremacy, which included White’s 2005 statement that “[e]veryone associated with the Matt Hale trial has deserved assassination for a long time,” and his 2008 publication of information related to the foreperson, “Juror A,” of the jury that convicted Hale. The 2008 post disclMosed Juror A’s home address and mobile, home, and work phone numbers, though it did not contain an explicit request for Juror A to be harmed.

White was tried and convicted by a jury. White then filed a Rule 29 motion for entry of a judgment of acquittal, arguing that the evidence was insufficient to convict him of solicitation. The district court granted the motion, finding that the government failed to present sufficient evidence for a reasonable juror to conclude that White was guilty of criminal solicitation, and that White’s speech was protected by the First Amendment. The government appeals that ruling, and White has filed a cross-appeal urging a new trial if we reverse the judgment of acquittal. After reviewing the trial record, we conclude that a rational jury could have found beyond a reasonable doubt that, based on the contents of the website, its readership, and other contextual factors, White intentionally solicited a violent crime against Juror A by posting Juror A’s personal information on his website. Criminal solicitation is not protected by the First Amendment, and so we reverse White’s acquittal and reinstate his conviction. Also, because White is not entitled to a new trial, we remand for sentencing.

Juror A was previously identified publicly as Mark Hoffmann, a gay Jew who was involved in a homosexual relationship with a Negro male. White now faces an additional prison term of up to 10 years, though a sentencing date hasn't been set. He is currently serving the last months of a prison term that arose from a separate conviction for intimidation as well as three additional months for violating parole, and had expected to be released by July 2013.

White's attorney Nishay Sanan sharply criticized the ruling, saying the judges were swayed by his client's widely reviled racial and political views rather than sound legal theory. He believes the judges were influenced by personal hatred of his client. Sanan favors an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, saying he would argue that the First Amendment protects Internet postings such as White's. But he said White would make the final decision about further legal action.

How in hell Bill White's supposed to raise the money necessary for a Supreme Court ruling is beyond imagination, since White has been virtually bankrupted by his legal troubles so far. With as much trouble as Don Black has in raising $7500 every month for Stormfront's operation, do you really think White racialists are going to contribute funds for the defense of the much less popular Bill White?

Oh, and let's not forget that according to a letter by Bill White dated October 9th, it was Hal Turner who set all of these events in motion. White said that Turner, out of personal spite, contacted the U.S. Marshals and, with the help of other informants, falsely claimed he was going to assassinate Barack Obama with a truck bomb in order to cause White's arrest on false pretenses. The Feds told White they wouldn't press charges if White rolled over and became a snitch, but White refused. The rest is history.

The Bill White Trial blog has published their own analysis of the ruling. No reaction from White himself has been published yet.
http://whitereference.blogspot.com/2...es-10.html?m=1
 
Old October 31st, 2012 #5
Kievsky
Senior Member
 
Kievsky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 4,229
Kievsky
Default

It's good to know that, except in the case of Matt Hale, people actually DID real stuff that got them in trouble. One thing that used to scare me was the idea that they just make stuff up out of whole cloth and then charge us and get it to stick.

In Matt's case, I think they went after him becuase of the Ben Smith thing. that's basically what he's in prison for. they couldn't pin it on him, so they used Tony Evola to make something up.

What I learned from Matt Hale case is to not tolerate people who fantasize about violent acts.
__________________
Godzilla mit uns!
http://mindweaponsinragnarok.wordpress.com
 
Old October 31st, 2012 #6
Jimmy Marr
LOLocaust Survivor
 
Jimmy Marr's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Rep Bunker
Posts: 2,240
Jimmy Marr
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kievsky View Post
What I learned from Matt Hale case is to not tolerate people who fantasize about violent acts.
Inasmuch as violent fantasies are probably a universal characteristic of the human imagination, you may find that you need to refine this strategy somewhat to make it useful.
 
Old October 31st, 2012 #7
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 37,007
Blog Entries: 2
Alex Linder
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by James Hawthorne View Post
Looks like this is the Feds answer to that article by Bill.
Unfortunately the guy who runs that blog is extremely loose with the facts, as I know from stuff he has written about that I was involved in.
__________________

If we exterminate termites because they destroy the foundations of our houses, how much more lenient should we be in our treatment of jews, who destroy the foundations of our society?
 
Old October 31st, 2012 #8
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 37,007
Blog Entries: 2
Alex Linder
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kievsky View Post
It's good to know that, except in the case of Matt Hale, people actually DID real stuff that got them in trouble. One thing that used to scare me was the idea that they just make stuff up out of whole cloth and then charge us and get it to stick.
I draw the opposite conclusion. The feds turn nothing into something, and a little bit into the whole world.

The FBI are a violent criminal gang. They solve some meaningless non-political crimes, such as bank robberies, but their real mission is destroying legal political and business operations that threaten to empower some group hostile to the basis of the Zionist Occupational Regime.
__________________

If we exterminate termites because they destroy the foundations of our houses, how much more lenient should we be in our treatment of jews, who destroy the foundations of our society?
 
Old October 31st, 2012 #9
Jimmy Marr
LOLocaust Survivor
 
Jimmy Marr's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Rep Bunker
Posts: 2,240
Jimmy Marr
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jethro View Post
Everyone knows these people. Who is MP from Indiana though?
Matt Parrott?
 
Old October 31st, 2012 #10
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 37,007
Blog Entries: 2
Alex Linder
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimmy Marr View Post
Matt Parrott?
Interesting, that was the one that I couldn't guess. But now that you mention it, maybe you're right. I didn't think of Matt Parrott as someone White knew, as White's been off the scene a few years in prison.

I was interested in the GJ stuff. There was some airing of whatever happened at CMS among Greg Johnson, 'Hunter Wallace,' 'Yggdrasil' and Sam Dixon (sp?) on the 1000-post Majority Rights thread last fall. I sided with GJ at that point, but it has become clear to me over the last year, from a number of sources, that Greg Johnson is not the man I thought he was. I still say that in his dealings with me as a writer for VNN, under various names, he was helpful and his stuff excellent.
__________________

If we exterminate termites because they destroy the foundations of our houses, how much more lenient should we be in our treatment of jews, who destroy the foundations of our society?
 
Old October 31st, 2012 #11
Jimmy Marr
LOLocaust Survivor
 
Jimmy Marr's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Rep Bunker
Posts: 2,240
Jimmy Marr
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jethro View Post
My guesses ...

DD = David Duke
KS = Kevin Alfred Strom
HT = Hal Turner
BH = Wild Bill Hoff
HS = Hadding Scott
GJ = Greg Johnson

Everyone knows these people. Who is MP from Indiana though?
I don't know anything about Bill Hoff, but BH also bears resemblance to what I know of Brian Holland.
 
Old October 31st, 2012 #12
James Hawthorne
Senior Member
 
James Hawthorne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 4,586
Blog Entries: 86
James Hawthorne
Default

Article from WSLS-TV 10 on the Chicago reinstatement.

Quote:
Neo Nazi Bill White's Chicago conviction reinstated

By: MICHAEL TARM, Associated Press | WSLS-TV 10

Published: October 26, 2012
Updated: October 26, 2012 - 7:22 PM

CHICAGO (AP) - A white supremacist solicited violence against a juror by posting the man's address, phone number and other personal details on his extremist website, an appellate court ruled on Friday, overturning a lower court's decision to toss the neo-Nazi's conviction on the grounds that his posts were protected by the First Amendment.

The 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago concluded that the posts by William A. White - who gained notoriety in 2008 for seeming to invite the assassination of then-presidential candidate Barack Obama on the same website - were not subject to the shield that the U.S. Constitution extends to most speech.

Even though White didn't explicitly instruct anyone to attack the juror when he posted the data on the website, the appellate judges said White's loyal readers would have known that was just what he meant in the context of other threats, including against Obama.

The juror White singled out served as the foreman in a 2005 trial that convicted another white supremacist of soliciting the murder of a federal judge in Chicago.

In its unanimous 30-page ruling, the three-judge panel agreed that the First Amendment "protects even speech that is loathsome." But the judges said "criminal solicitations are simply not protected."

White, from Roanoke, Va., should proceed to sentencing and not get a new trial, the judges wrote.

He faces a prison term of up to 10 years, though a sentencing date hasn't been set. He is currently serving the last months of a prison term that arose from a separate conviction for intimidation.

An attorney for the self-professed leader of the American National Socialist Workers Party sharply criticized Friday's ruling, saying appellate judges were swayed by his client's widely reviled racial and political views, not by sound legal theory.

"I think they used hatred towards my client to apply the facts as they wanted to apply the facts," Chicago-based attorney Nishay Sanan said in a telephone interview.

Sanan favors an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, saying he would argue that the First Amendment protects Internet postings such as White's. But he said White would make the final decision about further legal action.

In 2011, White was convicted of one count of solicitation for publishing the juror's name, photograph, home address, phone numbers and sexual orientation on his website; he even posted the name of the juror's cat. Prosecutors had said his threats against the juror had struck at the heart of the U.S. justice system.

U.S. District Judge Lynn Adelman reversed White's conviction later in 2011, finding that his posts weren't explicit enough to cross the line into unprotected speech. But the appeals court said Friday that White's followers would have immediately understood he wanted the juror to be harmed, precisely because White had recently threatened Obama and others.

"Readers of (White's website) were not casual Web browsers," the ruling states. "But extremists molded into a community by the Internet - loyal and avid readers who, whether or not they remember every specific solicitation to assassination, knew that (the website) identified hateful enemies who should be assassinated."

The posting about Obama included a photograph of him with swastika-shaped crosshairs superimposed over his face and the words, "White people must deny (him) the presidency ... by any means necessary." White was never charged in relation to those postings.

White's website regularly attacked nonwhites, Jews and homosexuals and expressed approval for acts of violence. But he no longer has control of postings to the website.

http://www2.wsls.com/news/2012/oct/2...ed-ar-2313996/



Last edited by James Hawthorne; October 31st, 2012 at 11:54 AM.
 
Old October 31st, 2012 #13
Craig Dillard
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 33
Craig Dillard
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex Linder View Post
Interesting, that was the one that I couldn't guess. But now that you mention it, maybe you're right. I didn't think of Matt Parrott as someone White knew, as White's been off the scene a few years in prison.
I, Matt Parrott, am definitely MP. If you've been reading his stuff and familiar with him for as many years as you have, and still breathlessly give him the benefit of the doubt in episodes like this, then I don't know how to reach you.

BW from Virginia knows me and strongly dislikes me. He also strongly dislikes the Vinlander crew. His tiff with them was going on well before I became active and has nothing to do with the government.

I'm not mentally ill. I had a white-collar career for several years until I lost that immediately after the antifa terrorism episode. I have a healthy nuclear family, a supportive extended family, a decent share of real life friends, and a sober writing style. If I am "mentally ill", I do a splendid job of hiding it.

I did have a brief contact with law enforcement immediately after the antifa terrorism episode. I insisted that I would only discuss my antifa intel with them and that's all that I did. Concerned that I might end up entrapped or or something, I contacted a couple trusted movement "friends" about the incident to ask for advice to ensure I was handling it appropriately.

Big mistake, as it got around to BW in Virginia that I had "worked with the feds". As you know from your personal experience, it's a lose/lose situation. If you keep the incident a secret, then you're being shady with your comrades. If you honestly discuss the incident with your comrades, their imaginations spiral out of control and your enemies do shit like this to you.

Oh, and fuck you, Jimmy. I disagree with you on a Majority Rights thread and you think it's cool to speculate that I'm a fed? Stay classy.
 
Old October 31st, 2012 #14
Jimmy Marr
LOLocaust Survivor
 
Jimmy Marr's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Rep Bunker
Posts: 2,240
Jimmy Marr
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Craig Dillard View Post
Oh, and fuck you, Jimmy. I disagree with you on a Majority Rights thread and you think it's cool to speculate that I'm a fed? Stay classy.
I speculated that you were MP.

You confirmed it, and gave your explanation of it.

Does my being correct make me your enemy?

Think about it, Matt.
 
Old October 31st, 2012 #15
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 37,007
Blog Entries: 2
Alex Linder
Default

Conviction Is Reinstated for Neo-Nazi Who Posted Juror’s Photo and Address

Posted Oct 31, 2012 10:03 AM CDT
By Debra Cassens Weiss

A Chicago-based federal appeals court has reinstated the conviction of a self-avowed neo-Nazi who posted a jury foreperson’s photo and home address on a white supremacy website.

In a per curiam opinion (PDF), the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reinstated the conviction of William White for soliciting the commission of a violent federal crime against the juror. The court found sufficient evidence that White intended to solicit harm and said the crime of solicitation is not protected by the First Amendment.

The targeted juror was among those who convicted white supremacist Matthew Hale in 2004 for soliciting harm to a federal judge. White did not specifically call for harm to the juror when he posted the identifying information in 2008 at overthrow.com, though he had written in 2005 that everyone involved in Hale’s trial should be assassinated.

White’s website was specific about his desire for harm to other individuals, the appeals court said. One post advocated the murder of a Canadian civil rights lawyer, according to the opinion. Another, featuring a photo of then-presidential candidate Barack Obama, was headlined, “Kill This N-----?”

A federal judge had reversed White’s conviction for posting the juror information, saying that his intent to harm the juror had not been proven and his post was protected by the First Amendment. The 7th Circuit disagreed. A rational jury could have convicted White “based on the contents of the website, its readership, and other contextual factors,” the opinion said. Tramslation: a federal judge says it's perfectly ok to convict White because you don't like his politics, even though he didn't actually violate a law.

“Readers of Overthrow.com were not casual Web browsers, but extremists molded into a community by the Internet—loyal and avid readers who, whether or not they remember every specific solicitation to assassination, knew that Overthrow.com identified hateful enemies who should be assassinated,” the opinion said. Really? So how many people had these Overthrow 'extremists' assassinated? Answer: none. This is purely one judge going beyond the law to say that you can throw people in prison if you disagree with their politics.

“Though the government did not present a specific ‘solicitee,’ it was unnecessary to do so given the very nature of the solicitation—an electronic broadcast which, a reasonable jury could conclude, was specifically designed to reach as many white supremacist readers as possible so that someone could kill or harm" the juror.

Hat tip to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel blog Proof & Hearsay.

http://www.abajournal.com/news/artic...o_and_address/
__________________

If we exterminate termites because they destroy the foundations of our houses, how much more lenient should we be in our treatment of jews, who destroy the foundations of our society?

Last edited by Alex Linder; October 31st, 2012 at 01:31 PM.
 
Old October 31st, 2012 #16
Craig Dillard
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 33
Craig Dillard
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimmy Marr View Post
I speculated that you were MP.

You confirmed it, and gave your explanation of it.

Does my being correct make me your enemy?

Think about it, Matt.
Fair enough. Hatchet buried.
 
Old October 31st, 2012 #17
Donnie in Ohio
Pussy-Bünd bassist
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Fort Keifer
Posts: 8,585
Blog Entries: 11
Donnie in Ohio
Default

So BW is now looking at a possible 10 year sentence for a conviction that was previously reversed?

No wonder he took off.
__________________
“Violence isn't always evil. What's evil is the infatuation with violence.”- James Douglas Morrison
 
Old October 31st, 2012 #18
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 37,007
Blog Entries: 2
Alex Linder
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Craig Dillard View Post
I, Matt Parrott, am definitely MP. If you've been reading his stuff and familiar with him for as many years as you have, and still breathlessly give him the benefit of the doubt in episodes like this, then I don't know how to reach you.

BW from Virginia knows me and strongly dislikes me. He also strongly dislikes the Vinlander crew. His tiff with them was going on well before I became active and has nothing to do with the government.

I'm not mentally ill. I had a white-collar career for several years until I lost that immediately after the antifa terrorism episode. I have a healthy nuclear family, a supportive extended family, a decent share of real life friends, and a sober writing style. If I am "mentally ill", I do a splendid job of hiding it.

I did have a brief contact with law enforcement immediately after the antifa terrorism episode. I insisted that I would only discuss my antifa intel with them and that's all that I did. Concerned that I might end up entrapped or or something, I contacted a couple trusted movement "friends" about the incident to ask for advice to ensure I was handling it appropriately.

Big mistake, as it got around to BW in Virginia that I had "worked with the feds". As you know from your personal experience, it's a lose/lose situation. If you keep the incident a secret, then you're being shady with your comrades. If you honestly discuss the incident with your comrades, their imaginations spiral out of control and your enemies do shit like this to you.
Fair enough. I believe you. Bill White has been banned here for years. I believe he is being treated unjustly by the federal government, and as he has no other way to communicate but letters, I will post his side of the legal battles with the feds. The left publishes rightist addresses all the time, and nothing is done about it. In my view, White's reinstated conviction is an example of the double standards of the criminal regime oppressing us, and that must be made clear to the world.

As for White's claims about WN, I would certainly not take them at face value. Perhaps it's wrong of me even to post them, but I'm going to let people make up their own minds. I think we're dealing with a known entity, so take his words with a grain of salt.
__________________

If we exterminate termites because they destroy the foundations of our houses, how much more lenient should we be in our treatment of jews, who destroy the foundations of our society?
 
Old October 31st, 2012 #19
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 37,007
Blog Entries: 2
Alex Linder
Default

Here's the PDF of the decision by the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals:

http://www.abajournal.com/files/neo-nazi.pdf
__________________

If we exterminate termites because they destroy the foundations of our houses, how much more lenient should we be in our treatment of jews, who destroy the foundations of our society?
 
Old October 31st, 2012 #20
Heather Blue
Senior Member
 
Heather Blue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,820
Heather Blue
Default

Good lord, is the white race that disorganized? White men knifing other white men in the back? White men working against each other for the FBI? White men so weak and dishonest they can't trust each other?

I know money talks, but do they get that much out of it? For that matter why would the FBI be against the American people? It's not exactly a branch of the Israeli government. I do know white nationalists were framed by government agents. For what reasons I can't imagine. Since when have we had any power that would be a cause of concern? Heck, it goes on in local government, as well - petty employee railroad jobs.

Is all this nefarious business what the taxpayer is paying for? Maybe, funds to these spy organizations should be severly restricted.

I hardly know what to make of the whole business.
__________________
You know what, white person? You hate Jews, you just don't know it, yet - Alex Linder

The only reason Jews influence our society is because they, absolutely uniquely, were allowed to live.
 
Reply

Tags
bill white, fbi, informants, prison, snitches

Share


Thread
Display Modes


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:30 AM.
Page generated in 0.15273 seconds.

VNN on Twitter