Chillicothe Gazette Conducts Interview With American National Socialist Party Leader Paul Mullet

Since the American National Socialist Party (ANSP) is headquartered in Chillicothe, Ohio, the Chillicothe Gazette decided to conduct an interview with its leader, Paul Mullet. The resultant story, entitled "New 'White Pride' in Chillicothe", was published on April 3rd, 2011, and is more balanced than I expected. The Gazette did call out Mullet for re-publishing too much of the article on his website, so I will only provide an abbreviated summary with one quote here.

In describing the ANSP, Mullet explained that the group's mission is to bring about White Heritage Month and let people see how much the white race is being written out of history. He also believes in strict legality, renouncing violence and proclaiming their intent to expose and remove members who engage in illegal activity. Mullet added that drug use is not tolerated, and each state leader is given $100 per month to buy at-home drug tests to test members.

But what really riles Paul Mullet, and in turn makes Whites more receptive to the racialist message, is the double standard and widespread reverse discrimination such as "historically-Black" colleges and scholarships and racialist venues like Black Entertainment Television. Mullet notes, "If we do exactly what they do, but reverse the roles, we're racist. We're hatemongers. Why? That's a double standard. Stop the double standard. ... What are we going to do about it? We're going to demand the White Heritage Month. We're going to demand that people sit back and look and realize there is heritage in our race, and we don't have to be labeled as racist. All we want is the same damn rights that are guaranteed to us by the Constitution."

Paul Mullet avoids distributing racialist material in Chillicothe out of concern that he might be targeted in return. Since the Chillicothe Gazette has already expressed some concern about too much of its content being re-published, read the rest of the story HERE.

Local reaction: Olie Burton, president of the Ross County NAACP, claims that Black History Month and other similar celebrations are about celebrating culture, not a race of people. But Burton did ask why Blacks should have a designated month but not Whites, and said he'd be willing to meet with Mullet. Both local police agencies, the Chillicothe Police and Ross County Sheriff's Office are keeping tabs on him, and one detective went to Mullet's house to talk to him, but there've been no problems. One former resident of Chillicothe who now lives in Hemet, CA wrote a silly letter to the editor in which she said "I lived in Chillicothe for 37 years and feel they need a reichsfuhrer like a pig needs a bicycle".

Otherwise, a good interview in which all the important points were covered. Paul Mullet did a professional job, and, for that matter, so did the reporter.

Public Policy Polling Survey Of 400 Mississippi Republicans Shows 46 Percent Of Respondents Think Interracial Marriage Should Be Illegal

A Public Policy Polling (PPP) survey of 400 Mississippi Republican "supervoters" shows that 46 percent of respondents believe that interracial marriage should be illegal, with the highest percentages amongst the 18-29 and Older Than 65 demographics.

The initial intent of the poll was to determine supervoter Republican preferences for Republican Presidential candidates as well as which Republican is preferred to succeed Haley Barbour as governor. However, Question #14 is where attitudes about interracial marriage are first probed, and the entire crosstabs section is devoted to the question. The age breakdown is provided on page 17 of the poll. Read the full poll results HERE.

Question for all 400 respondents: Do you think interracial marriage should be legal or illegal?
-- Illegal: 46 percent
-- Legal: 40 percent
-- Not sure: 14 percent

For the 18-29 demographic:
-- Illegal: 54 percent
-- Legal: 31 percent
-- Not sure: 15 percent

For the 30-45 demographic:
-- Legal: 48 percent
-- Illegal: 38 percent
-- Not sure: 15 percent

For the 46-65 demographic:
-- Legal: 49 percent
-- Illegal: 39 percent
-- Not sure: 12 percent

For the Older Than 65 demographic:
-- Illegal: 56 percent
-- Legal: 30 percent
-- Not sure: 14 percent

The response by the oldest demographic is understandable. Most of them grew up under the old system where people were taught to keep it within the racial family. But the fact that the youngest demographic has responded the same way indicates that forced diversity and multiculturalism may be breaking down; perhaps young Whites are getting radicalized against forced diversity and multiculturalism by exposure to misbehaving non-Whites in the public school system.

However, there is no racial breakdown in the poll itself. Since one out of every three Mississippi residents is Black, this means some of the respondents might be Black. On the other hand, Mississippi Blacks are said to be overwhelmingly Democratic, so the number of Black respondents to this poll is probably quite few, perhaps no more than 20-30. But it would show that racial consciousness isn't exclusively a "white thing". This is also the only Presidential poll I've seen where attitudes about interracial marriage have been explored; I'm wondering if the pollsters decided to single out Mississippi because it is a Southern state and they're trying to demonize the South once again.

Public Policy Polling provided some more background on their blog, in which they indicate that Sarah Palin may be perceived more favorably by race-conscious Whites that Mitt Romney (Sarah Palin tends to get more support on Stormfront than Mitt Romney):

Palin's net favorability with folks who think interracial marriage should be illegal (+55 at 74/19) is 17 points higher than it is with folks who think interracial marriage should be legal (+38 at 64/26.) Meanwhile Romney's favorability numbers see the opposite trend. He's at +23 (53/30) with voters who think interracial marriage should be legal but 19 points worse at +4 (44/40) with those who think it should be illegal. Tells you something about the kinds of folks who like each of those candidates.

The left-wing Talking Points Memo picked up the story and, as expected, some commenters are bemoaning the fact that younger Republicans are thinking like the oldsters. More intelligent discussion is taking place on Stormfront.

Dr. David Duke Settles Copyright Infringement Lawsuit With Righthaven LLC Over Denver Post TSA Photo, Terms Not Disclosed

On April 2nd, 2011, the Las Vegas Sun reports that Dr. David Duke has settled the copyright infringement lawsuit brought against him by Righthaven LLC. Terms of the settlement were not disclosed, however, he gets to keep both the DavidDuke.com and the WhiteCivilRights.com domains.

Righthaven typically sues for $150,000 and forfeiture of defendants’ website domain names, but generally is willing to settle out of court for amounts ranging from $3,000 up to $10,000, and will allow settling defendants to keep their websites.

As discussed in this previous post, Righthaven LLC filed suit against Dr. Duke and his European-American Unity and Rights Organization (EURO) organization on February 4th in U.S. District Court in Denver. Righthaven accused Dr. Duke of allowing a Denver Post photo of a TSA officer patting down a passenger at Denver International Airport from November 18th, 2010 to be posted on WhiteCivilRights.com. A Righthaven court exhibit showed the Denver Post photo accompanying a column by James Buchanan complaining about the highly intrusive enhanced TSA screening and pat-down procedures. The exhibit shows the Denver Post was not credited as the source of the photo on Duke's website. The post was entitled "TSA Abuses: Is Flying A Right Or A Privilege", published on November 24th, 2010; the photo has long since been removed.

The RighthavenLawsuits.com website contains a list of media links detailing Righthaven's targeting of individuals, and the Righthaven Victims blog contains more extensive information and commentary.

While it's disappointing that Dr. Duke did not choose to fight the lawsuit, perhaps he either lacked sufficient financial resources, or he decided to take a small hit in order to preserve the bulk of his existing resources towards continuing his civil rights outreach to the worldwide White community. Dr. Duke never did address this issue on either Stormfront or the other two websites, and is likely barred by the terms of the settlement from addressing it now. Too bad, because Righthaven is starting to take some hits in court.