The White Supremacist Links to Mainstream Anti-Immigration Organizations


For over a year I’ve been trying show you how to connect the dots between anti-immigration, zero-population growth, planned parent-hood, pro-abortion supporters, conservative “Born Again” Christians, white supremacists, the KKK and the Pioneer Fund.  Not only are we dealing with white supremacists who are deeply involved in Holocaust Denial, protection of White European Christians, the salvation of the English language in the US but the most blatant pro-abortion forces ever.  First these people helped establish the abortion laws in this country.  The made it possible for MILLIONS OF BABIES TO BE MURDERED.  Now they want to delete the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, then the 17th Amendment, and deport anywhere from 8 to 12 million people.  The one thing I find absolutely remarkable is the determination of the anti-abortion right to look the other way when dealing with these people.  That’s one thing, but how the you know what can you look the other way when it comes to the fact that these people are Holocaust deniers?

Today in the WTimes we are treated to the heart-wrenching story about a faithful Vet – a hero doctor who refused to treat illegal aliens who did not need emergency medical care.  He bucked the system, stood up for Truth, Justice & the American Way!

“…Ironically, when Dr. Rogers, 67, took the position of medical director for the indigent services program back in 1999, he arrived in the Central Valley with hardly a clue (let alone an opinion) about illegal immigration and its impact on social services. He had one goal: to provide the best care possible for those who need it most.

As the years went by, however, that egalitarian perspective began to be tinged with cynicism as he watched poor citizens get squeezed out of the system even as illegal immigrants gleefully manipulated it, all while bureaucrats facilitated the rampant violations of the very laws they were entrusted to enforce.

“I’ve seen cases and case histories of patients who essentially have come up from Mexico for the express purpose of being treated here, and then leaving to return home,” Dr. Rogers said. “I’ve watched illegal immigrants brazenly demand free, non-emergency health care that was meant for our poorest citizens. I’ve heard them and their families complain. They feel entitled to it.” Dr. Rogers filed a lawsuit in 2003 after county officials “stonewalled” him when he questioned why they were cutting budgets while still providing non-emergency medical treatment to people who have no legal right to be in the country.”

Then – and this is the clincher, we learn the heartbreaking article is penned by
Mark Cromer is a senior writing fellow for Californians for Population Stabilization.

You don’t know how much I’m loving this.  This is a population control agency.  Back in April CNS News published an article about the organization calling for population control to stop global warming!

“…No matter how clever and inventive human technology can be, it will be overwhelmed by the explosive multiplication of unrelenting population growth,” asserted Randy Alcorn, a senior writing fellow at Californians for Population Stabilization.

”While it may be beneficial to replace incandescent light bulbs with fluorescent light bulbs, it would be more effective towards salvaging the planet to turn on light bulbs in minds darkened by political expediency and religious dogma,” he said.

”Those who surrender reason to religious and political doctrine and push the rubble of their misguided convictions into the path of prudent population reduction policies are complicit in condemning an entire planet to doom,” said Alcorn.

Oberlink criticized environmental groups for not addressing population growth.

”Today, major environmental groups seldom discuss population growth,” he said. “They have become increasingly politically correct and increasingly ineffective in protecting the environment.

”It’s easier to single out targets like Big Oil and Big Detroit instead of calling for changes in personal behavior or taking on a tough issue like population growth with its concomitant connection to volatile issues like immigration or access to birth control,” Oberlink said.

Environmental Defense, the World Resources Institute and the Union of Concerned Scientists did not respond to invitations to react to the criticism of green campaign groups.

But pro-family organizations take issue with the population control arguments.

”While there is growing consensus that the earth is warming slightly, there is no consensus that humans are the main cause,” the Family Research Council said in a statement.

”Those pushing global warming are proposing a radical agenda as the solution to a problem that is not yet fully understood,” it said.

”In part, this solution calls for population control, which is code for abortions, condom distribution and mass sterilization,” said the FRC….”

The Family Research Council is decrying the idea of population control.

“…the Family Research Council said in a statement.

”Those pushing global warming are proposing a radical agenda as the solution to a problem that is not yet fully understood,” it said.

”In part, this solution calls for population control, which is code for abortions, condom distribution and mass sterilization,” said the FRC….”

BUT – according to the SPLC, the FRC takes a hard line view against immigration.

“…A powerful image, but Maruskin’s position is far from dominant on the religious right. In a FRC member poll conducted last spring, 90% of respondents chose forced deportation as the appropriate fate for America’s estimated 11 million-12 million undocumented immigrants. This response aligns the FRC base with fire-breathing hard-liners like U.S. Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-Colo.), the evangelical co-sponsor of an immigration reform bill notable for its criminalization of those who “aid and abet” illegal immigrants, something many religious leaders and laymen see as a Christian duty.

So it wasn’t surprising that Maruskin’s social-gospel message received a tepid response from the FRC audience. Heartier applause greeted the conservative Catholic journalist John O’Sullivan, who followed Maruskin to the podium and scoffed at her liberal “proof-texting” of Scripture. Arguing that such selective quotation did not “contribute to the debate,” he tried to debunk the argument for amnesty and dismissed Maruskin and her ilk as “moral bullies.”

“The fact is,” said O’Sullivan, “most Christians are more hard-line when it comes to immigration than their Church leaders. Are all of these people going to hell?”

A better question might be: When did immigration assume a place next to abortion and traditional marriage as a “family” issue for the religious right? And is this new and highly charged issue a threat to that movement’s much-vaunted “culture war”? Or is it a legitimate part of it?…”

Evidently deporting illegal aliens is more important than preventing abortions.   Yet this same organization that slips into bed with pro-abortion groups when it comes to immigration is more important than going after Planned Parenthood.

Californians for Population Stabilization receive a bad rating from Charity Navigator.

Don’t be seduced by their mild mannered exterior.  It is an organization that has as its Advisory Board Emeriti the late Garrett Hardin, of the Pioneer Fund and John Tanton’s mentor.  Also on the board is Richard Lamm.  Yep, just another John Tanton Flunkie Group.  When Garrett Hardin and his wife committed murder/suicide in 2003, CAPS released this statement.

“…Garrett Hardin, professor emeritus at UC Santa Barbara, was the author of 27 books and over 350 articles. He was originally trained as an ecologist and microbiologist and brought his original and meticulously reasoned ideas to the environmental and population movements. “The Tragedy of the Commons,” a widely-regarded contribution to ecology, population theory, economics and political science, introduced the idea that human misery would increase greatly if we do not recognize that livable space on Earth is finite. Referring to natural resources, he believed we had a right to give away our own possessions, but not those of posterity.

Garrett was the bravest of men because he said many true but unpopular things. In a crowded world, he said, we need the ecological concept of “carrying capacity” if we are to minimize suffering in the long run. He thought Western man had pretty well locked himself into a suicidal course by clinging to a “time blind” ethical principle-the absolute sanctity of life. He also questioned “promiscuous” philanthropy believing that it often did more harm than good in the long term.

His most controversial books were “Living on a Lifeboat,” and “The Limits of Altruism: An Ecologist’s View of Survival.” Garrett’s interest in immigration developed from the idea that the “lifeboat” of the West is filled with the equivalent of family members-and that kinship altruism is the source of moral behavior. Both extend the idea that resources shared in common are exploited by some, whenever there is either crowding or conditions of scarcity.

Hardin pointed out how the sentimental path was often at odds with the ethical one. 
Questioning the wisdom of mass immigration more than 20 years ago, he called “distributive justice” a ruinous system and described why this was so important in a series of articles and books. The Hardins helped found CAPS (Californians for Population Stabilization) and remained close to the organization for the rest of their lives. 

They were also dedicated to population stabilization through both family planning and reduced immigration. Garrett was a member of the board of directors, (later emeritus) of the Federation for American Immigration Reform. They were also longtime supporters of Planned Parenthood….”

About Garrett Hardin (with the Tanton connection) from the SPLC

“…Federation for American Immigration Reform Washington, D.C.
 Founded in 1978 by John H. Tanton, the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) is one of the country’s best-established anti-immigration groups — and the richest beneficiary among them of the largesse of the infamous Pioneer Fund.

The Fund, which has long subsidized dubious studies of the alleged links between race and intelligence, awarded FAIR $1.2 million between 1985 and 1994, according to the Institute for the Study of Academic Racism. FAIR now says that it has severed its links to the controversial Fund.
Today, FAIR claims a staggering 70,000 members, although that number is almost certainly inflated. Tanton remains on FAIR’s board and also is the publisher of The Social Contract Press, which sells racist anti-immigrant tracts.

Dan Stein, the group’s executive director, has warned that certain immigrant groups are engaged in “competitive breeding” aimed at diminishing white power. Rick Oltman, FAIR’s western representative, has spoken before and worked with the racist Council of Conservative Citizens.

Garrett Hardin, a FAIR board member, has argued that aiding starving Africans is counterproductive and will only “encourage population growth.” Overall, FAIR blames immigrants for crime, poverty, disease, urban sprawl and increasing racial tensions in America, and calls for a drastic cut in the numbers of those allowed in….”

Unfortunately it appears that only liberals seem interested in this subject, connecting the little racist dots.  The Committee on Women, Population, and the Enviroment does a very good job with this piece. They succently point out where the funding for all of this anti-immigration rhetoric, and funding the organizations comes from:

“…The Pioneer Fund is described as “a New York organization that finances research seeking proof of the genetic superiority of the white race,”(San Francisco Chronicle, 3/30/94) and also as a “neo-Nazi organization closely integrated with the far Right in American politics.”(London Sunday Telegraph, 3/12/89) 

The Pioneer Fund was established in 1937 by Wycliffe Draper, a textile millionaire who advocated sending Blacks back to Africa, and crusading eugenics advocate Harry Laughlin, honored for his contributions to Nazi eugenics and “racial hygiene.”(Discovery Journal, 7/9/94; Irish Times, 5/23/94) Eugenics is the “pseudo-science embraced by the Nazis that seeks to improve the human race through selective breeding.”(Los Angeles Times, 9/29/97) The Pioneer Fund has consistently contributed to the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR)..’’’

You might want to note that Hardin did not fight for his country during WWII.   Hardin was a major supporter of abortion rights.

“…I got a phone call from a woman, and she asked, “Where can I get an abortion?”. I never thought of that. I was just taking this as an abstract, interesting fact, you see, but I realized I really had some responsibility for going through this. So I put her off and said, “Look, call me back Friday, and I’ll see if I can find out,” and then I had the problem of what to do because I knew two or three doctors in town that I was sure gave abortions. But I cannot give their names, because if I do that, sooner or later, the police are going to come in with an undercover agent, and then we’re all in trouble. The doctor’s in trouble, I’m in trouble. So I found – I don’t know what I found, but I think someone in Mexico – and gave the women in need that information. Presently I became part of an apparatus in southern California headed, thank God, by a minister, Hugh Anwyl, a Welshman, who was concerned with getting good abortions for people in Mexico. His organization had the same feeling – that they should not give anybody the name of a doctor in the United States. In Mexico, it was illegal too, but Mexico didn’t pay much attention to laws anyway. So, we had several people who’d go down to Mexico and case the doctor as to whether he had a clean place and so on, and that the price was reasonable. He would be the doctor we would recommend, give out his address and so on. Typically what happened, the price would go up and up and presently we would have to find another Mexican doctor. They tried to take advantage of us; we had to constantly get new ones. We occasionally sent somebody to Japan, but that wasn’t very satisfactory. One or two to Sweden. That wasn’t satisfactory. In Sweden, they took forever. They wanted to drag everything out before granting an abortion, but the baby might be nine-months old by the time … Whereas in Japan, they easily granted abortions. The Japanese approved of abortion, but not of contraception, and the reason was that abortion brought more money to the doctor. And you always paid money, never wrote a check. We had to warn our clients about that…”

Garrett Hardin Interview with Otis Graham

GRAHAM: Well this 1980 is interesting. You mention that year and you’re feeling that ZPG at least was hopeless from your point of view on certain tough issues. It’s just a couple of years before that that John Tanton has come to the same experience with ZPG. I don’t know if you knew him. I’d like to ask you if you did, but he founded the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) in 1978. What’s your background on John Tanton?
HARDIN: On John Tanton? I must have met him in 1973, the year I gave the talk in San Francisco on “Living on a Lifeboat.”
GRAHAM: Who was John Tanton? When you met him, who was he?
HARDIN: He was just a doctor in Michigan.
GRAHAM: And you met him at a meeting where he heard you speak?
HARDIN: I think he heard me speak, but at any rate, we spoke in the hallway quite a bit, I can’t remember the details, but that was the first contact that I had with him. Of course, gradually, I came to realize what he was doing.
GRAHAM: So you had known him, and you knew that FAIR was founded in 1978 or so?
HARDIN: Oh, yes, I knew from the beginning about it, and I joined it very early, I’m sure.
GRAHAM: Followed its work?
HARDIN: Yeah, that’s right. See, from 1980 to 1981, I was in Washington, D.C., I agreed to be the acting chief executive officer of …
GRAHAM: The Environmental Fund.
HARDIN: Environmental Fund, that’s right, and later it became Population/Environment Balance. I agreed to take that job on a temporary basis while we looked for a permanent executive director. I got acquainted with the FAIR people then, Roger Connor and others in Washington.
GRAHAM: When did you join the FAIR board?
HARDIN: Well, it was 1984, 1985.
GRAHAM: In the middle of the decade.
HARDIN: That’s right, yes.
GRAHAM: Just before the first reform law was passed?
HARDIN: I joined the board. They asked me to attend the June meeting as my first meeting, but I said I couldn’t because I had to host the Environmental Fund meeting in Santa Barbara. So I joined FAIR, but I didn’t attend my first board meeting until the fall.
GRAHAM: And you served about 10 years on the FAIR board?…
…GRAHAM: He had the same situation. Let me ask you then, what comes to your mind during your years on the FAIR board, that the organization – what with turning points, big events, big decisions, tough decisions – one of the salient moments? You’ve got a decade at least of this immigration reform battle, and there were some big issues.
HARDIN: Well, more and more we became involved in trying to influence congress, which I think was right. So that has been the biggest change. We haven’t been very effective, but then nobody’s been effective, and that’s the tragedy at the present time. The majority of the people in this country literally want immigration to be clamped down on, and congress won’t do anything.
GRAHAM: What’s your explanation of this peculiarity that the poll results on immigration for a very long time have shown a large majority of Americans wanting lesser numbers and yet we don’t get … ?
HARDIN: I like the phrase that John Vinson introduced at the American Immigration Control Foundation (AICF). He spoke of the iron triangle of the business people who want cheap labor; the politicians who want to get elected and have to have money; and the third group, the idealists who have other fish to fry and are opposed to limiting immigration.
GRAHAM: You know, that’s in many ways a strange coalition over there on the other side.
HARDIN: I know it is, but that’s the reason it’s so powerful.
GRAHAM: Would you agree that it’s a bit of a strange coalition on the reform side?
HARDIN: Oh sure. In other words the ordinary distinction between conservative and liberal, or conservative and radical, cuts across both camps.
GRAHAM: Would you say in your observation of these at least 10 years that you were paying attention long before? How’s it going, the effort?
HARDIN: Oh, I don’t think we’re making any decided progress, and I think (well this is the sort of thing that maybe it’s impossible to predict) maybe some event, I don’t know what, may touch things off. One thing that might happen would be a real scandal over the welfare payments and so on, the realization that this is all getting out of hand. Welfare plus socialized medicine and the costs…”


Do you understand who is involved in FAIR? These are people who believe in euginics.  They believe in abortion on demand.  What is fair about that? Look at the Board of Fair and their National Advisors.  Then compare it to CAPS.

Dr. Virginia Abernethy mentions her view of Garrett Hardin, Steve Camorata, etc. when correcting her Wikipedia entry. Note how she also discusses immigration as an environmental issue.

“…The SPLC’s enmity arises from my long-held view that mass immigration is a dire threat to the people of the United States of America. Both the SPLC and Wikipedia omit discussion of the basis for my views on immigration, and therein lies the crux of the demonization effort.  Since no plausible arguments refute my own [and others’] opposition to mass immigration, Wikepedia and especially the SPLC resort to slanderous labels.

In many publications, I have clarified that the United States population size has already exceeded the nation’s carrying capacity [water, topsoil, and energy are principal resources at risk].  Carrying capacity refers to the environment’s ability to sustain a population at its size and level of consumption over the long term. [Sources are the late Dr. Garrett Hardin, Dr. Albert Bartlett of the University of Colorado and Dr. David Pimentel of Cornell University, among others.]

I have also discussed the effect of mass immigration on the labor force.  Both the middle class and lower class are deeply harmed by immigration’s effects of displacing American workers and depressing wages. [Sources include Dr. George Borjas of Harvard University , Dr. Vernon Briggs of Cornell University, and Dr. Sum of Northeastern Univeristy.]

I have also reported the fiscal effects of immigration.  Beginning with Dr. Don Huddle of Rice University, analysts have shown that the net cost of immigration to tax-payers is upwards of $92 billion dollars annually, net of taxes that immigrants pay. [Recent analysts who roughly concur are Dr. Robert Rector of the Heritage Institute and Dr. Steven Camarota of the Center for Immigration Studies.]…”

Do you know who this woman is?

Abernethy was directly involved in PAN (Protect Arizona Now).  She worked directly with the CofCC.  Also, there are KKK allegations against Abernethy.
“…Actually, it’s not just us dark folks Abernethy and her cronies hate. They’re not fond of Jews either.
Abernethy serves on “The Occidental Quarterly” editorial board, which the Center for New Community notes is a “virtual who’s who” of white supremacist, anti-Semitic writers, including “… an individual who has published over a dozen articles for a Holocaust denial magazine called the Journal for Historical Review.”

For instance, the Occidental Quarterly articles “Understanding Jewish Influence I (and II): Background Traits for Jewish Activism” argue that the Inquisition and the Holocaust were “defensive measures” against Jewish “aggression.”

PAN’s association with racial separatists and hate mongers is not limited to Abernethy and the CCC. To pay people to gather petition signatures, PAN received $305,000 from the Federation for American Immigration Reform and the American Immigration Control Foundation. In turn, the latter groups have received more than $1.2 million from the Pioneer Fund, a foundation established in 1937 to, among other things, promote white racial superiority….”

I suppose the WTimes running an article like this is no surprise.  We just go back to George Archibald’s article last week and see that this fits the editorial stance of the WTimes.