The SPLC Refuses to Comment on the Corkins Revelation

This is an update of a story I have been following for the last few hours.  First, I sharedwith you the revelation that Floyd Lee Corkins II, the man who shot up the Family Research Council, specifically stated when he pled guilty to the crime that he picked out the FRC based on the Southern Poverty Law Center’s “Hate Map.”  I then wondered if the media would be as anxious to attack the SPLC as they were to attack Sarah Palin for supposedly inspiring violence.  Then I sharedvideo from SPLC’s Mark Potok where he declared that “there is no exoneration” for hate speech that inspires violence, as a way of further hoisting them on their own petard.

Let me be clear.  I don’t blame the SPLC for this man’s actions, but they blame others for this sort of thing all the time, and so it is worthwhile to hold them up to their own standards and see how they measure up.  And so far they are measuring pretty poorly.

And I mentioned in my last post that I called them and tried to get a statement.  I haven’t heard anything from them (and I will be trying other avenues tonight), but the Washington Free Beacon got an answer.

Contacted for comment, an SPLC spokesperson would not say whether the organization plans to remove the information from its website.

“We are not commenting” on Corkins’ admission, said the spokesperson, who referred the Washington Free Beacon to a statement released in the wake of the last year’s shooting.

That would appear to be this statement at the time:

SPLC: Family Research Council license-to-kill claim ‘outrageous’

By Mark Potok, Senior Fellow

Yes, that would be the same Mark Potok, who said in the last post there was no exoneration for hate speech that leads to violence:

Yesterday’s attack on the Family Research Council and the shooting of a security guard there was a tragedy. The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) deplores all violence, and our thoughts are with the wounded victim, Leo Johnson, his family and others who lived through the attack.

For more than 40 years, the SPLC has battled against political extremism and political violence. We have argued consistently that violence is no answer to problems in a democratic society, and we have strongly criticized all those who endorse such violence, whether on the political left or the political right.

But this afternoon, FRC President Tony Perkins attacked the SPLC, saying it had encouraged and enabled the attack by labeling the FRC a “hate group.” The attacker, Floyd Corkins, “was given a license to shoot an unarmed man by organizations like the Southern Poverty Law Center,” Perkins said. “I believe the Southern Poverty Law Center should be held accountable for their reckless use of terminology.”

Perkins’ accusation is outrageous. The SPLC has listed the FRC as a hate group since 2010 because it has knowingly spread false and denigrating propaganda about LGBT people — not, as some claim, because it opposes same-sex marriage. The FRC and its allies on the religious right are saying, in effect, that offering legitimate and fact-based criticism in a democratic society is tantamount to suggesting that the objects of criticism should be the targets of criminal violence.

As the SPLC made clear at the time and in hundreds of subsequent statements and press interviews, we criticize the FRC for claiming, in Perkins’ words, that pedophilia is “a homosexual problem” — an utter falsehood, as every relevant scientific authority has stated. An FRC official has said he wanted to “export homosexuals from the United States.” The same official advocated the criminalizing of homosexuality.

Perkins and his allies, seeing an opportunity to score points, are using the attack on their offices to pose a false equivalency between the SPLC’s criticisms of the FRC and the FRC’s criticisms of LGBT people. The FRC routinely pushes out demonizing claims that gay people are child molesters and worse — claims that are provably false. It should stop the demonization and affirm the dignity of all people.

Well, of course the problem is that the facts have changed.  If you are inclined to believe that these nutjobs act based on the pronouncements of organizations like the FRC, then there is no question that Corkins acted on the words of the SPLC.  There’s no getting away from it.

Further, if all it takes is a little defamation to make one a hate group---and that is assuming FRC did defame anyone, a subject I haven’t researched in the slightest—then what does the SPLC say to its own defamation of a black History Professor as an apologist for white supremacy, or its defamation of the National Organization for Marriage based on the most flimsy evidence?

And as for its claim that it is immunized by saying it has made it clear that violence is not the answer, a quick search of FRC’s site reveals they have never advocated violence and indeed, work to reduce many forms of violence, including domestic abuse.

No, I think the SPLC needs to explain either 1) why this case is different or 2) how their conduct is going to change so that they do not violate their own stated principles.  But I ain’t holding my breath waiting for either to occur.

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

My wife and I have lost our jobs due to the harassment of convicted terrorist Brett Kimberlin, including an attempt to get us killed and to frame me for a crime carrying a sentence of up to ten years.  I know that claim sounds fantastic, but if you read starting here, you will see absolute proof of these claims using documentary and video evidence.  If you would like to help in the fight to hold Mr. Kimberlin accountable, please hit the Blogger’s Defense Team button on the right.  And thank you.

Follow me at Twitter @aaronworthing, mostly for snark and site updates.  And you can purchase my book (or borrow it for free if you have Amazon Prime), Archangel: A Novel of Alternate, Recent History here.  And you can read a little more about my novel, here.

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

Disclaimer:

I have accused some people, particularly Brett Kimberlin, of reprehensible conduct.  In some cases, the conduct is even criminal.  In all cases, the only justice I want is through the appropriate legal process—such as the criminal justice system.  I do not want to see vigilante violence against any person or any threat of such violence.  This kind of conduct is not only morally wrong, but it is counter-productive.

In the particular case of Brett Kimberlin, I do not want you to even contact him.  Do not call him.  Do not write him a letter.  Do not write him an email.  Do not text-message him.  Do not engage in any kind of directed communication.  I say this in part because under Maryland law, that can quickly become harassment and I don’t want that to happen to him.

And for that matter, don’t go on his property.  Don’t sneak around and try to photograph him.  Frankly try not to even be within his field of vision.  Your behavior could quickly cross the line into harassment in that way too (not to mention trespass and other concerns).

And do not contact his organizations, either.  And most of all, leave his family alone.

The only exception to all that is that if you are reporting on this, there is of course nothing wrong with contacting him for things like his official response to any stories you might report.  And even then if he tells you to stop contacting him, obey that request.  That this is a key element in making out a harassment claim under Maryland law—that a person asks you to stop and you refuse.

And let me say something else.  In my heart of hearts, I don’t believe that any person supporting me has done any of the above.  But if any of you have, stop it, and if you haven’t don’t start.