Titanium Dioxide is one of the oldest pigments for white paint and is used in toothpate and as filler for the pills we take as medicine. Perhaps he just wants to turn his adversaries white.

As repugnant as this character is, there is nothing wrong (or toxic!) with titanium dioxide.

It is one of the purest white dyes one can find, and the primary ingredient in most sunblock lotions.

White phosphorous, that’s another story.

What is the purpose of this public article? If you think he is a security risk, shouldn’t you report that to the DHS and the appropriate military authorities?

What caught my attention was the brief allusion to biological weapons. The Holy Grail of eliminationist racists is some type of bioplague that would target only nonwhites. Though small subgroups have indeed been wiped out by European diseases, such as measles, it is reasonable to assume that there is now no disease to which European-derived stock is immune and all others are not. Our genomes are too overlapping and our worldwide contact too intense for that
But I could picture some mean bonehead, who thinks he knows more about the field than he does, purloining a pathogen and liberating it, to the peril of all, and this guy sounds like a candidate.

” But it is Stortstrom’s top-security clearance job at the U.S. Army research facility on the Aberdeen Proving Grounds in Maryland that is really raising eyebrows.”

Sorry, I can’t agree with the publication of this article. As long as he is not violating the Hatch Act, nor joining groups dedicated to the violent overthrow of the US government, he is free to hold and express whatever opinions please him.

I’m in very much the same position as he is. And I post under my own real name. Always have, always will. And my posts here could very well offend some people in my security division. Should I be afraid of a witch hunt against me, for my legally-held views? Do you want me to be afraid of this?

I don’t want that for me, and so I don’t want that for him either.

If he was Muslim, few would suggest that this article shoud not have been published. Hannity, wold have exposed him on his first day on the job.

Dan,

You have not expressed any racist views as far as I can recall. You seem moderate and reasonable, even when disagreement arises, and I think this would be apparent to most observers.

But there is a critical difference between voicing one’s political views and airing racist ideology, even though both are protected forms of expression. The former has a legitimate place for government employees and contractors. The latter however, has no place in our government or among its contractors, and where racists exist in public service I for one would like to see them weeded out.

No one is saying he has no right to be a racist. But he doesn’t get to be racist and receive my tax money, at least not without censure.

Crazy is as crazy does. The CIA and the FBI and other government groups failed to stop the Boston bomber and now we have our own home grown America Christian Terrorist. Have the mad men taken over our government like Hitler and his buddies did in Nazi Germany? There is no way I am giving up my guns with those nut jobs around.

We can not afford to have anti-government nazis working in the defense industry. It is bad enough that we have a bunch of them in the military. Kudos to One People’s Project and Daryle Lamont Jenkins for uncovering this story.

Goes to show being educated and being intelligent are not always the same thing.

@Sam, he wants to turn his advisaries white?

This is a serious topic, but you’ve managed to make a funny and it is greatly appreciated.

yeah Ned, I think that’s why they tried to contact Don Kennedy, the public affairs officer for the Army at the ECBC Communications Office, did not return a Hatewatch telephone call seeking comment yesterday.

But as they said he didn’t return the phone calls. This is not something that should be swept under the rug. Obviously a great deal of bigotry has been swept under the rug for far too long amongst our Army.

Well Dan, he works for the United States Government and he cannot have affiliations with groups that have a contradictory interests and if the public does not feel safe with him being in that position then the government does need to address it.

Perhaps if there wasn’t such a history of hate groups calling their members to arms and wanting to overthrow the government there wouldn’t be such a negative response to them. But when so members of hate groups go around shooting innocent Americans in their places of worship, and running over innocent Americans because of the color their skin it just doesn’t set well with a lot of peace loving citizens like myself.

Therefore the background check done on this guy should not have gone through given his affiliations. So we need to know what clown gave him the thumbs up.

Rey, Chromotoxins that poison only people of color are a well known entity. I agree that a sensitive, top security job in a place like that should not be held by anyone with such a background. This is SOP military doctrine, and it is not unAmerican. He could probably not work at Toyota either due to their Diversity programs. John Deere, or Blue Bunny Ice Cream would no doubt love to have him.

“Well Dan, he works for the United States Government and he cannot have affiliations with groups that have a contradictory interests and if the public does not feel safe with him being in that position then the government does need to address it.”

The standard is that you cannot have membership in groups that “advocate the violent overthrow of the US government”.

Otherwise, government employees have complete freedom to associate as the please (it’s not clear from this article if the guy is a civil servant or a contractor). The Hatch Act does place some limit on the political activities of federal employees, but the article doesn’t claim he has violated that act.

As far as I can tell, this guy is just an ordinary person. He’s not running for public office. He’s not a spokesman for the government or any organization. His right to express his political views, whether I agree with them or not, _must_ be protected.

Does anyone disagree with that?

Sam, chromotoxins would poison half of Florida, southern California, and the Gulf Coast after a good day at the beach. The point is, this guy might not even care.

The only existing chromotoxins attack hemoglobin, which everyone has. Those which target skin albedo are currently an item of on-line gaming, and, if realized, could be defected by natural variation, suntans, hydroquinone, and possibly even makeup.

Dan Z, no disagreement on the right to expression. Big disagreement on whether or not a bigot is qualified to work in a public capacity.

Dan Zabetakis…

While I agree about Stortstrom having his rights to free speech protected, my concerns regard the membership in groups that “advocate the violent overthrow of the US government” part.

I think, by definition, a white nationalist wants a country where only white people can live, or a least have full rights as citizens.

So therefore, as both our president and attorney general (not to mention many other politicians and government employees) are non-white, doesn’t his concept of society clearly threaten all non-white people? And if his and his group’s ideas are not about using violence (do they use all those guns for shooting bunnies?), then what are they going to do? Nicely ask all the non-white people to leave?

And since he is in the military, his links to the government are more direct than those of the average citizen, giving him more access to be to able to carry out his views, whether violent or not. It’s a tricky issue…

Dan, I agree that a person’s political views should not affect their employment. What gay person has not been run off a job by a Superreligious manager or coalition of such managers? This person belongs to one current hate group and another that has gone toes up. Even the lowest day labor job involves some type of personality evaluation.
“You are late three days in a row. Your supervisor explains that the crew should start at the same time and the next time you are late you will be sent home.
You should: A) kill your supervisor
B) destroy the time clock
C) tell him you will be on time tomorrow.”
The facility in this article is either run by racists or has no functioning HR department.

So you’re saying because he attended a conference open to the public which you personally disagree with, he should be fired from his job and not allowed to work for the government.

What if someone attended a conference put on by the Communist party USA, or the Black Panthers. Should they also be excluded from working from a government job?

If the answer is ‘yes’, then who gets to decide which organizations are legitimate and which are not?

I have reviewed the website of American Renaissance. There’s nothing wrong with it. They sell books and have conferences where people just talk. They’ve never advocated anything illegal, are not a threat, and have never advocated terrorism. I have watched youtube videos of Jared Taylor speaking. There’s nothing wrong with anything I’ve heard him say. He merely has a viewpoint different from the left. Nothing illegal about that.

The posters on this forum are just a bunch of far left wingers who claim to believe in freedom of speech and freedom of association. It’s all lies. When they meet someone who has beliefs different from theirs, they want to destroy the man’s life and get him fired.

You say there’s something “wrong” with American Renaissance. What’s wrong with it? I guess you’d say they’re “racists”. I think there’s no such thing. The word “racist” is just a label invented by the far left.

It is reasonable to inquire whether his potential access to weapons, including bioweapons, constitutes a threat to national security or public safety

“Dan Z, no disagreement on the right to expression. Big disagreement on whether or not a bigot is qualified to work in a public capacity.”

You do not have freedom of expression if you can be hounded out of work by people who disagree with you.

If you consider yourself progressive at all, then you are obligated to defend the rights of everyone, even those who would not extend the same courtesy to you.

This guy isn’t courting publicity, running for office, or acting as a spokesman for anyone. He has the right to be free of witch hunts incited by people who object to his legal opinions and associations.

I object to that and I am shocked and ashamed that everyone else here doesn’t also.

“While I agree about Stortstrom having his rights to free speech protected, my concerns regard the membership in groups that “advocate the violent overthrow of the US government” part.”

No one has accused him of belonging to a group that advocates the violent overthrow of the US government.

All I can see is that people do not like what they presume to be his political views and so want to hurt him.

He has the right to free speech. He has the right to free association. I expect everyone to defend these rights, even if you oppose everything else he stands for…

As much as John’s views disgust me, I must agree with Dan on this.

But I also feel that the SPLC did nothing wrong with publishing this story. John made his views public, and anything public can be reported upon.

As such, should he be fired for his reprehensible views? Hardly.

But are we in the wrong for commenting on them? Once again, hardly.

And I sincerely doubt he has access to any serious pathogens or weaponized chemicals. Edgewood Arsenal is not known for lax security.

“It is reasonable to inquire whether his potential access to weapons, including bioweapons, constitutes a threat to national security or public safety”

Indeed those questions will have been asked. But this article does not make any substantive claims against him except that he may have certain legal political views that other people dislike.

Assuming he has a ‘high level clearance’, and is a civil servant (as opposed to contractor), he will be subject to the following:

a) The Hatch Act, which prohibits certain political activity.

b) Random drug testing.

c) Verification that he has no criminal record. Fingerprints on file.

d) A release on file with his bank that allows government access at will to his financial records.

e) A release on file with his doctors that allows government access at will to his medical records and diagnoses.

f) Possibly subject to polygraph examination (but we all know those don’t work at all).

g) Interview of his neighbors and references.

h) Investigation of his family members and close associates.

i) Mandatory reporting of foreign contacts, travel, etc.

j) Yearly submission of the SF86 questionnaire with many impertinent questions, and periodic reinvestigation.

(There’s more but I’m sick of typing…)

Note that these investigations are done by independent organizations, not your local command.

Dan Z, certainly you are aware there are limits on the freedom of expression, just as with all rights.

Those in public sector jobs are especially restricted (if not legally than socially, because the public can and does excercise its right of free expression too). The issue appears to be where those limits are drawn, and in this case I agree it is a fuzzy one.

So, you are right. I do consider myself progressive, I do feel obligated to defend the rights of everyone (including bigots) and yes I would like to see him hounded out of his job by every progressive activist organization in the country. And I hope he is.

He is perfectly within his rights to be a bigot, and I am perfectly within my rights to express my opinion about it. I would most certainly write a letter to Walmart if I heard an employee use a racial slur, and I would also expect the person to be fired. Why? because racists are bad for business. If a cop, or a bus driver, or a doctor, or a lawyer, or a garbage collector, or a sports icon was racist, I would do the same.

Should the defense industry be any different?

@ aadila, your May 23rd post to Dan was so well put I had to take my hat off to you.

@Samdam….you stated

We can not afford to have anti-government nazis working in the defense industry. It is bad enough that we have a bunch of them in the military.

Finally someone who has stated the truth and I so agree with this statement.

No Dan I do not agree that a Federdal government employee has the right to go around espousing Neo Nazism or White Supremacy. It is a serious conflict of interest to this country.

If he wants to be a Neo Nazi or affiliated with some other group such as that which promotes hate and divide then let him do it somewhere flipping burgers but not while taking tax payer money in a government position that is paid by the hard labor of both whites and minority Americans. I believe that the public has a real problem with that.

And the public would have a bigger problem with the fact that he is working with explosives while subscribing to hate groups. It is a serious conflict of interest that does not serve our government or its people well.

Dan Zabetakis, what you need to further understand is that if this was a Muslim with associations to radical groups he would be out of that position so fast.

Even President Obama was asked to disassociate himself from his previous very controversial reverend that was deemed to be politically radical.

Federal Employees are held to a higher and different standard than others who may get away with this foolishness in the some private sector positions.

So I do not understand your shame, but seriously question how you can believe that someone with affiliations to a radical supremacists group should be afforded more or different liberties than those that would be granted to anyone else in that position such as a Muslim American…

I bet your position would seriously change if a Muslim was there helping to design bombs and having questionable affiliations with radical groups of Islam.

Then how fast would you come to his aid saying that he has a right to free expression regardless of his profession?

@DDB9000, you stated: I think, by definition, a white nationalist wants a country where only white people can live, or a least have full rights as citizens.

Yes I agree and because of this it should be deemed a threat to national security because it most definitely is just that.

The guy is part of the group who designs the biological weapons that the army may use to kill people with and the SPLC is worried about his racist affiliations.

Does the SPLC support Daryle Lamont Jenkins of One People’s Project? He openly supports violence against his political opponents and brags about it on his website. Is this someone that the SPLC should be linking to? Don’t give the racists any ammunition to use against the SPLC. We should be distancing ourselves from people like Mr. Jenkins and the ARA and should stop using their dubious websites as source material.

Dan, in the ordinary case, this man would be entitled to express his opinions, so long as he didn’t harass his fellow workers or oppress his subordinates. No one has the inherent right to work at a high-security military laboratory that deals with means of mass destruction. The citizenry, his ultimate paymaster, has the right to demand his loyalty to the well-being of all of them and to the lawfully-constituted charter. If we, the citizen paymasters, cannot be confident that he will not deploy weaponized Clostridium bacteria at the intersections of major cities, for example, then we have a right to demand inquiry into his fitness for the position.

Sorry, once you take the Queen’s Shilling, you’re in a different place from the average citizen, particularly when you’re in sensitive positions that affect the survival of the country. You are held to a higher standard.

You cannot do things in your private life that put you in a conflict of interest — just as I cannot do private business with a municipal contractor, someone working in a defense research lab should not be involved with organizations that seek to secede from or overthrow the US government.

Dan, this is not the best example to illustrate one’s right to employment regardless of one’s political views. It is a high security job dealing with products that are designed to harm human beings, to save others.

I doubt his political views (=racist ideology for some) will affect the development of titanium oxide grenades, so I see no problems with this. It is not like, say, he is a sympathizer of Black Panthers and is working in DOJ investigating their activity.

It’s a club for firework enthusiasts. Members mostly come from this Mid-Atlantic area to include Maryland. Look who the secretary is. ^[12]

“This guy isn’t courting publicity, running for office, or acting as a spokesman for anyone. He has the right to be free of witch hunts incited by people who object to his legal opinions and associations.”

@ Dan Z

I’m an Army civilian. The motto of the U.S. Army is “This We’ll Defend.” As a Civil Servant, you aren’t your garden variety civilian. You took an Oath and pledged your loyalty to defend this country and it’s citizens equally, regardless of whatever views or opinions against certain citizens you may hold.

Since you have claimed to mirror this guy’s lifestyle, I won’t pose this question to you since the answer would more than likely be disingenious, but you cannot really believe anyone would believe that this guy, with his racist associations, won’t eventually make the decision or manifest the motivations to carry out his racist beliefs later on in life. Truth be told, racist history is against him.

Just because he’s isn’t actively “courting publicity, running for office or acting as a spokesman for anyone”, all of that doesn’t matter because it has been proven, time and time again, that any racist activity is incompatible with government service and values.

I see that I am not getting much support in this thread. What better way to know I am in the right once more. :p

Let me respond to various people as shortly as possible:

“Those in public sector jobs are especially restricted (if not legally than socially, because the public can and does excercise its right of free expression too). The issue appears to be where those limits are drawn, and in this case I agree it is a fuzzy one.”

The restrictions on government employees are not fuzzy. They are contained in the Hatch Act which prohibits certain political activities. There really isn’t much grey area. Note that this guy hasn’t been accused of violating the Hatch Act.

Thus you cannot invoke a nebulous ‘higher standard’ for DoD employees. It’s not nebulous. If he has violated the Hatch Act, I won’t support him. But if he has not then he has every right of expression and association the same as every other citizen. Is this controversial?

“No Dan I do not agree that a Federdal government employee has the right to go around espousing Neo Nazism or White Supremacy.”

He hasn’t been accused of that. The only substantive claim about this guy is that he is VP of a local Republican club. The other claims are vague ‘associations’. We do not know that he approves of (or even knows of) the views of all the people he is being linked to.

” what you need to further understand is that if this was a Muslim with associations to radical groups he would be out of that position so fast.”

I think you will find that there is a single standard for all persons without regard to race, religion, etc. The standard is “membership in a group dedicated to the violent overthrow of the US government.” There different ways of phrasing it, but this is the fundamental standard.

“someone working in a defense research lab should not be involved with organizations that seek to secede from or overthrow the US government.”

No one has accused the guy of that.

” If we, the citizen paymasters, cannot be confident that he will not deploy weaponized Clostridium bacteria at the intersections of major cities, for example, then we have a right to demand inquiry into his fitness for the position.”

Yes, but in my last post, I pointed out that this has already been done (if we are correct that this guy is a federal employee with a ‘high’ clearance). The standards for a National Security position are not a joke. No drug use. No criminal record beyond a rare speeding ticket. No financial problems. No serious mental health problems.

What I like to say is “Everyone I work with is an upright citizen, and can prove it.”

“Since you have claimed to mirror this guy’s lifestyle”

I said I was in a similar position. That is, I’m a DoD civilian in the R&D community. As many people here know (not Reynardine) I am far left rather than far right.

I’m so far left that I will defend the rights even of people I disagree with.

DAnZ

Jake said, ” I think there’s no such thing. The word “racist” is just a label invented by the far left.”

Here on Earth Racism is more than just a word.

@Steve: The guy is part of the group who designs the biological weapons that the army may use to kill people with and the SPLC is worried about his racist affiliations.

Yes the racist affiliations are a matter of importance here in America and his access to that information is a worry towards national security.

I believe not your typical American said: I’m an Army civilian. The motto of the U.S. Army is “This We’ll Defend.” As a Civil Servant, you aren’t your garden variety civilian. You took an Oath and pledged your loyalty to defend this country and it’s citizens equally, regardless of whatever views or opinions against certain citizens you may hold.

This is a lovely idea or ideal but it would be far better manifested in practice. That is not the case with all who take this oath. Some believe that they have the right to exert their hate agenda despite their employment positions and exploit their positions to push their own personal hate agendas. It is these individuals that need to be weeded out.

@kiwiwriter I agree with your May 25th post.

“Does the SPLC support Daryle Lamont Jenkins of One People’s Project? He openly supports violence against his political opponents and brags about it on his website.”

Link please.

Dan,

If you’ll give my posts another glance, you’ll see I am on your side :)

(A least to an extent).

Dan, we’ll have to agree to disagree.

Dan, I have not attempted to place you on the dextrosinistral scale. And security clearance is an ongoing matter. The number of people who have had it and lost it is far greater even than the number of people who have kept it and betrayed it.

I add that a security clearance of even a far less sensitive kind can be lost to as simple a problem as bad credit. My source on that is good, even if unattributable.

:::What if someone attended a conference put on by the Communist party USA:::

I knew that there were some ignorant people in this world, but someone nearly 40 years out of date takes the cake.

According to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1965, Section 703 (f), it is indeed LEGAL to deny people jobs or remove them from their jobs for associating with the Communist Party or Communist-associated groups.

You want to try again, skippy?

“If you’ll give my posts another glance, you’ll see I am on your side :)”

In that case, Aron, we’ll just have to shun, scorn, flame and bully you until you capitulate. Besides, if you agree with Dan Z it will only irritate him.

“I knew that there were some ignorant people in this world, but someone nearly 40 years out of date takes the cake.”

Let me get this straight. You are spouting McCarthyism and Ruslan is the one who’s out of date? Oh, my mortal salts, but that one is rich!

Sorry Aquaria, I jumped the gun. I saw communism and assumed people were picking on Ruslan again, whose daring dos are legendary. Now that I see the context of the comment from “Jake” and realize what you mean, I take it all back because it completely did not follow from what you said. Ugh! Thus my comment deserves an unconditional retraction and apology. My bad. I goofed. You’re right. I’m wrong. I feel like I’m in a Chick Tract ending and the ones going HAW! HAW! HAW! aren’t the good guys. Anyway, there’s enough trolls around here to make anyone jumpy. So, sorry!

Aadila, you must also notice that while I agree with Danny Z, I am not happy to do so.

It’s one of those moral quandaries.

The Council of Conservative Citizens is categorized as a 501(c)(4) organization. Thus it is recognized by the Federal government as a non-profit, tax except, charitable organization, for the promotion of social welfare.