top of page

Extremism... A subjective phrase peddled by neocons and Anti-Americans in the name of Idaho Values


There is a world of confusion out there. In an effort to try to overcome such confusion as I always try to do and for the sake of this post, I wish to classify people into two groups. Those that don't see anything wrong and those that do.


To those that have no clue, I have no answers but those that do, I would like to say that these are the people realizing this country is in trouble. The sad part is that, at the same time, many realized, in the beginning, they didn't know what they needed to know so if they are anything like I was, they frantically became educated and involved and learned along the way. As we embarked on this journey, it didn't take long to see that the harder many of us worked to learn, the faster and worse things got. It was evident to me in this education fight, commonly called the information war, that there are several reasons to why this is.


First there are those that are intentional in what they do. Second, there are those that don't understand what they do but agree with whom sold them...we will call dupes. Thirdly there are those that know enough to know what is happening and wish to act and fourthly, those that don't care either way. The hard part, for me anyway, is wrongly blaming and assuming which catagory people were in. Unlike others that just like the blame things on others, I in no way ever wanted to be that way because I knew I would be wrong, at least part of the time. Should we assume that people that don't know better are the same as those that do? Well then, if this is true, if you are a concerned American and maybe don't know what I know, perhaps you should be aligned with those that are intentionally evil? Hardly. So, if we are to know our enemies and ourselves, it would be important not to mischaracterize people in separating your friends form your enemies. Although frustrating, it is all part of the process of seeking and finding the truth. Part of this process means asking far more questions than making statements.


Some time ago I fell upon a Facebook page and website called Idaho Leaders United. (I hope they thank me for free advertising.)This is yet, one more group that was formed seemingly to advance the "extremist" narrative. It would also seem they are intentional and believe what they are saying. The question for me though is which of the 4 I listed above does this group fall under? While we try to figure it out, it is important to know a few things.


When I first reviewed their webpage and their Facebook page they make lots of claims but they also stated the desire for respectful dialogue so I thought I would ask them to dialogue with me. In all of my posts, I thought they would be willing to talk in person or on the phone and since they didn't, I thought they were hypocrites. What I didn't consider was that with every post they made and I made to counter their's, they never once deleted my posts. As I thought about it, I was thankful they didn't. And although they may be unwilling to dialogue with me personally, they have, at least, for the time being, allowed me to express my thoughts on their posts and not delete them. I should at least thank them for that.


I will say that although I can offer thanks where it is due no matter what anyone believes, it doesn't mean I don't have serious concerns about their mission. One of the most major concerns I have is that although their message may appeal to some, on the surface, it may also appeal to the ignorant, which I argue is how American's got here in the first place.


All it takes is a bad idea that may sound good to be supported by a few people, well intentioned or otherwise to create horrific situations that may be irreversible. Afterall, governments have duped their citizens since the beginning of time and have usually resulted in the enslavement of those that bought the lies. Why would today, somehow be any different- because the government or those that support the narrative say so? Who would buy this unless they were ignorant?


I would also hope no one would want to create such horrific scenarios on purpose but you know like I do, people like that do exist. What is that saying: "Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely?"


The reason for this post is to help inform others see things from a perspective they may be unaware of or to those that are unaware of groups or narratives just like this and there should be red flags. Firstly, as stated earlier, beware of any information you get, even mine. Also question any group that tows the govenrment/media/academic narrative. You should be concerned. Secondly, The greater concern for me isn't necessarily what they say that is inconsistent and innaccurate, it is to whom this group would appeal to and how much traction they can get advancing this false narrative. Thirdly, what will a group or groups like these do once they have enough power to advance the narrative? Who will they target? What is the extent of that target and what is that goal and how will they get there and who will get caught in the cross-hairs? Will they become like the ADL or SPLC or both? Maybe the Republican's democrats or other mainstream group?


It is for this reason I have decided to call that page home by not only continuing to comment and to encourage others to do the same but to inform you that such groups exist, so you can inform others and not only understand how dangerous they can be to Liberty but to challenge them and expose them if needed to question them to define, in detail, the purpose of their mission. I also wanted to alert others about the dangers of unchecked power and the importance of making sure if a lie is perpetrated that it is countered with the truth or an alternate perspective that will at least clearly expose any ambiguity that needs to be challenged. In summary, no one should be allowed to characterize a political belief as crimminal unless crimes are committed. If this country believes in supporting the persecution of a political class or belief, we have willingly accepted what the Founders detested, which I argue makes us Un-American.


I should also mention that this ILU group includes the typical neocon 'establishment" characters like Ex-Ada county Sheriff, turned fed, Brigadiere Generals, Ex-gubernatorial candidates and developers, CEO's of Hospitals and good 'ol ranchers, that probably wouldn't know anything about any of this anway. All with major community influence and financial backing. These association I believe to be a recipe for disaster so I thought I would bring it to your attention to see if you felt the same way. The best way to help people understand two sides, is to post them both and allow readers to decide.


Wouldn't it be great if everything we heard included two sides of an issue? Well, you won't find that on ILU's page unless I comment on it or unless you do. Again, to help understand, I have pasted below a post from their group as well as my rebuttal from yesterday or the day before. Since they don't post very often, the post should be easily seen. You tell me if you see and feel what I do or if I am seeing things that just aren't there. I have made slight changes here to help clarify my position and offer a few more details I didn't include in the original post, only because I felt they warranted those changes. So, here is ILU's post and below my rebuttal:


Idaho Leaders United: The history of extremism and the white nationalist movement has deep roots in Idaho. In 1974, Richard Butler relocated to Hayden Lake, Idaho, intending to establish a "white-only homeland." This initiative led to the formation of the Aryan Nations in 1977. Since then, Idaho has become home to 54 extremist hate groups espousing racist, anti-Semitic, homophobic, and other ideologies. As recently as 2022, a disconcerting incident occurred when 31 members of the Patriot Front were apprehended in Coeur d'Alene. They were en route to the Pride in the Park event in the back of a Uhaul dressed in riot gear. Such events are not in alignment with the values cherished by Idahoans. Idahoans hold dear values of respect, empathy, and security. Allowing hate and extremism to permeate our state detracts from the very principles that truly define its greatness, fostering an atmosphere of discord rather than inclusion.


ME: As I re-read your post, I thought I would point out some things that people should be aware of in case they missed it. Is it a crime to desire a Mexican only homeland? If it is, why is LaRaza not on the extremist list? What about a homeland controlled by the UN? If so, why is the UN not even on the radar since it can be proven that they desire world govenrment? Would support of these be extreme?


In my view, well, yes and no. The problem is how it is done. Since extremism can't really be defined, your argument is based on opinion not fact. Did you bother to say the feds attacked a compound without authority? If they did, wouldn't that be extreme since they are the law breakers more than those on the compound? Was murder or women and children justified according to what is lawful? You go on to say there are 54 extremist groups and the best thing you have done in months was to clarify what you think extremism is, which is why I have called your group dangerous as you seem to adhere to media/government narratives that you clearly can't define.


So is racism extremist? Is being "homophobic" and "Semitic" racism or have you hijacked the words to apply it to justify your existence? You also use the term hate group but seem to fail to see that everyone hates, even you. Does this make you hypocrites? I think it might. If everyone hates something then the world is a hateful place and you are part of the problem not part of the solution. You see, even according to law, it is okay to hate anything...as long as a crime is not committed because there is no lawful charge unless social justice courts bastardize the system you say you wish to protect which is also hypocritical.


Let's talk Semitism. The word today wants you to think it means anti-jewish, which in 2 seconds of reseach you would know this not to be true if you cared enough to understand the biblical foundation which is where the word you use actually comes from. I would argue if you are not religious, you couldn't use such words because you would be relying on our worldview.


Second, let's look at being "homophobic." Phobic means fear of a thing. Are you expecting people to believe the true definition of the word or that is should be acceptable to bastardize that word too to advance your inconsistent narrative? I don't know anyone that is fearful of "homos" (which is where the word comes from.) What most of us know that are concerned about the Agenda is how it undermines the stregth of the tradtional family and it is worth mentioning people like me don't hate anyone, we disagree with the agenda, there is a difference.


It is a lot like you hating "extremism" but since you feel like you have control of the narrative, you can determine who the enemy is and what the words mean? Finally, in your short inconsistent diatribe, you also admit without saying that conspiracies don't exist when we can prove they do. The problem here is that people that don't believe in conspiracies either can't recognize them or can't define them to even know if what I say is true.


These "apprehended" groups you speak of may or not have been plants to achieve a desired end. Of course you would say they weren't but you wouldn't have any more proof than I would but in your adherance to a narrative, you seem to wish to ignore the possibilities that very well could have existed because you simply need to find an enemy to hate? The words you post and adherance to the narrative remind me so much of the federal govenrment. You, like them, create a problem, and according to the Hegelian Dialectic, you also create fear then magically come up with a solution and also consistent with the govenrment narrative, it is no solution at all. All in all though, I am thankful that you still allow me to post on your page without deleting them because if this is as close to a dialogue as we can have, I guess I will take it.


People are taking sides. When uninformed people take sides, they don't really know what they have sided with until they see it with their own eyes. This pattern of thought isn't just related groups like this one, it has managed to permeat political parties, politicwal movements and amazingly enough, every govenrment, at every level around the globe and people don't see a global orchestrator?


If something is created, there was a creator in that something never came from nothing. To deny this simple fact, shows not only the inconsistency of ones worldview but the lunacy of ones thinking. There are questions and there are answers. There are multiple questions and even mulitple answers, its just that not every answer is the right one to the question being asked because there are truths and there are lies. Which of these would you prefer?

21 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All

Commentaires


bottom of page