Does anyone here even know the difference between racism and prejudice??

I thought so.

Why don’t you people do something better, like questioning why Jewish communities are the most segregated in the world?

“They are total hypocrites and their only rebuttal to Craig is to call him racist…”

That is because he is. To say that he is not, when he is, is in fact misinformation.

His film rings truths,

That is the venus flytrap of racism worshippers in this country: the flytrap is the want to not be labeled a racist and the fly, the truth.

Craig makes all sorts of crazy claims that he’s been misquoted, taken out of context, or have had quotes inserted into his behalf that he did not say.

He’s allowed to post here, but he does not specifically say just what we did wrong with the quotes – he does not cite a SINGLE instance. Despite the opportunity and even asking by me here to do so.

Why am I not surprised? We all know why he doesn’t proceed further; he’s in the wrong, but doesn’t want to say so.

Give him any scrutiny and everything he says crumbles down like a house of cards.

Yeah, kind of like Susy Buchanan of the SPLC who writes racist articles like this one?

http://www.splcenter.org/intel.....sp?aid=721

“From the beginning, white Americans have brutalized American Indians. Half a millennium later, the hate goes on.”

So the SPLC has no problem broadly painting an entire race to be racist…then claims to be an “anti-hate” group?

I think the SPLC means that they are an “anti-white” group. A double standard which Craig brilliantly pointed out. No doubt he is offended by the tactics used by groups like the SPLC and has responded with emotion. It’s hard to realize you have bought into an agenda that is racist towards whites and bought into it for so many years.

Perhaps if the SPLC wishes to eliminate racism and emotional tactics, they can stop employing them themselves. Yet as this very blog entry shows, they continue to do so. Pot, meet kettle.

Now Playing

Having said that – I can’t believe we are still so very far from “post racism”. I wish The Southern Poverty Law Center would be forced to close it’s doors soon – because of lack of cases to try/lessons to teach. I wish that at the very least they would soon be called just The Southern Law Center…….as I believe fear and economics to be a big part of racism. But wishing does not make it so – therefore we must be every vigilant – especially of educated, intelligent people who seem harmless at first yet promote divisive, hateful views.

The point is that Craig Bodeker is against “reverse racism” and double standards, yet displays himself as an extreme racist.

That’s a conflict of interest and an untenable position that he continues to try to pretend and intellectualize despite his failures.

Is that really too tough to understand?

You also forget to ask him(Craig), that not only are white women being equally raped by the white man, but the vast majority of these rape victims *KNEW* their attackers(according to another rape study which I can post if needed). It didn’t matter if they were just dates, neighbors, co-workers, friend of a friend etc. They knew them. And he’s telling us that all these white women are race mixing w/ the Negro? Hath, the white supremacist lost all control of their white women?

How about start by telling us what is wrong with his documentary? This should be no problem at all if Craig is “racist” as you claim, yet I seem to doubt anyone on here has a stable definition of what that even means.

Now Playing

I wish people would understand however that those of us in the pro-white camp are human too, and we have our irrational and resentful moments. That doesn’t mean that we are always being hateful when we make our political arguments, or that we are incapable of non-hateful feelings towards non-whites or rational discourse with them. Just as Jeremiah Wright’s hateful comments can be seen as a reaction to the racism that he allegedly suffered earlier in his life, Bodeker should be cut just as much slack because of his personal experiences and because of the general climate of intolerance and hate that he and others who intellectually dissent from officially sanctioned viewpoints related to racial issues face whenever they are honest about their views.

Here Craig refers to people as n*gg*rlovers. He uses a slightly modified term to avoid being banned from YouTube.

http://img48.imageshack.us/img48/5893/timwise.jpg

As you can see, the quotes used in this blog are not only accurate, but WORD FOR WORD, VERBATIM!

http://img18.imageshack.us/img.....purity.jpg

http://img377.imageshack.us/img377/9225/fag.jpg

http://img514.imageshack.us/img514/954/monkeyg.jpg

http://img35.imageshack.us/img.....ones1r.jpg

http://img35.imageshack.us/img.....jones2.jpg

P.S. I thought about posting the direct YouTube links, but will not do so yet because what will happen is Craig will then go over to those links and delete his own posts.

So tell us – what was the specific, alleged “misquote?” We’ll be glad to listen.

The reason why you point to none is because NO MISQUOTES EXIST!!

http://www.amren.com/mtnews/ar.....eker_r.php

On October 8th, and again on October 9th, Sonia Scherr, of the Southern Poverty Law Center, published two separate and scathing attacks on me, and my documentary film; A CONVERSATION ABOUT RACE, on their HATEWATCH website. Ms. Scherr made eight specific points regarding the film’s “errors,” before concluding that I am, in fact, a “racist.”

Most critics agree the film does an excellent job pointing-out the vagueness of that term, and that how it has recently morphed into the intellectual equilivent of calling me a “poopyhead.”

But I will still address Ms. Scherr’s eight points here.

• Point 1
……“Bodeker never says whether he believes that discrimination found by courts and government commissions also doesn’t “really amount to anything.””

That’s because I don’t. What’s more real to you? Spontaneous answers from real people, or proclamations issued by courts and government commissions?

• Point 2
……“He makes no effort to examine the scientific findings on intelligence and race, which have yet to produce convincing evidence that IQ differences are caused by genetics.”

That’s because neither myself, nor any of the supjects, said anything about causality. Nearly every interview-subject stated clearly that they believe blacks outscore whites in basketball, but that whites outscore blacks on standardized tests, and that Asians outscore whites on those same tests. Are these “beliefs” really radical and bigoted? Or are they mainstream?

• Point 3
……“After trying to get interviewees to admit that blacks are more criminal than whites…….”

See the film. I don’t “try” to get anyone to admit anything. Each subject was chosen for their candor.

• Point 4
……“What he neglects to mention is that it’s unclear how many, if any, of the black-on-white rapes were hate crimes — that is, motivated at least in part by racial bias.”

According to the Justice Department report cited in the film, blacks sexually-assaulted white women over 37,000 times in 2005. Whites sexually-assaulted black women less than ten times. 37,000 to 10. How “random” does that sound to you?

• Point 5
…..“Moreover, Bodeker asserts that Latinos are deliberately taking away whites’ majority status. “If we object to the stated agenda of replacing whites as the racial majority in America with Hispanics, it’s us who get called the racists,” he says, “not the people who are openly and actively working to change the racial makeup of our country.””

I don’t really see the criticism here. Have they heard of La Raza?

• Point 6
…..“The South Carolina Council of Conservative Citizens— a white supremacist group whose national conference Bodeker attended in June in Mississippi — recently hosted a big-screen showing of the movie in three locations.”

And they told me they were Conservative Citizens…! (I did actually ask the organizer if the CofCC was a “white Supremacist” group. He said absolutely not.) According to the SPLC, white organizations cannot be trusted to accurately stereotype themselves..

• Point 7
…..“Since the documentary’s release last year, Bodeker has given interviews to the Romanian National Vanguard News Agency (motto: “International News for People of European Descent”), Mark Dankof (a radio broadcaster who also contributes to the anti-Semitic American Free Press), and The Political Cespool, an overtly anti-Semitic, racist show whose guests have included former Klan boss David Duke, neo-Nazi April Gaede and Holocaust denier Mark Weber”

How dare I seek publicity for my documentary! Why don’t I just calmly wait ‘til CNN or PBS calls me to air it..? Seriously though, am I now to be held personally responsible for every word ever uttered, by the staff, or even by the guests, of any radio-show that I’ve appeared on? I accepted the generosity of those few in today’s media that actually understand the concept of free speech; warts and all!

• Point 8
…..“On The Political Cesspool’s Jan. 31 show, for instance, one of the hosts asserts that “everything that is good about civilization — just about everything that is good, from literature to works of art to law is something that came from our [white people’s] minds.” Bodeker’s response? “I have to agree.””
What part of “just about” don’t you understand…?

On the next day, October 9th, Ms. Scherr released her follow-up attack.

But rather than offer any stronger, or legitimate criticisms of, A CONVERSATION ABOUT RACE, she chose a different tactic. She relied upon an anonymous cyber-stalker to gather “quotes” attributed to me from the comments section of unrelated political videos from Youtube. She called this piece of journalism;

“A Peek Behind the Curtain: Views of a Racist Filmmaker…”

Some pretty strong statements were quoted; -As well as MISS-quoted, surgically and deceptively edited,, taken out of context, and even made-up! And once again, these “quotes” that represent proof of my “racism,” were found on the comments section of Youtube.

Have any readers ever been to the comments section on Youtube? Does anyone NOT KNOW what a mosh-pitt of “free expression” it is? There are, sometimes, actual screaming-matches, even though they’re conducted in written form. Sometimes people say harsh, mean things there, in that last remaining refuge of Free Speech. Am I to assume that the SPLS’s Sonia Scherr has never made a sarcastic comment? Or even a distasteful one? Or that anyone who EVER has should be stereotyped, marginalized and disenfranchised? This seems to be what the SPLC suggests….

Most who have viewed A Conversation About Race, say it succeeds because of it’s fairness and clarity. American Thinker’s Larry Miller, said in his positive review of the film“… People in America have no idea how to define “racism.” The word flits about like an evil spirit in our national vocabulary — but none of us knows exactly what it means.”

So I will take it as a compliment, that the Southern Poverty Law Center, after viewing A Conversation About Race, (no doubt through a legal microscope) cannot find any genuine aspects of it to criticize, and end up instead having to resort to that same, tired conclusion; “Craig Bodeker is a Racist.”

Call me optimistic, but I see that as progress. They cannot refute the film’s basic premise, even though it contradicts the very essence their stated mission!

So instead they call me a poopyhead.

Craig Bodeker
A CONVERSATION ABOUT RACE

So, you have a problem with Patriots who want to keep the oaths they have taken to protect and follow our Constitution? What does that make you guys?

BTW, I’m a minority woman who is proud to be an American and supports the Oath Keepers.

God Bless America!

http://news.ronatvan.com/2009/.....bout-race/