Talk:Political Profiling

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search

"A internet user's postings under either their real life identity of pseudonym may be "profiled" for their ideological convictions based upon editing patterns, interests, subject matter, common references, or declared beliefs. The profile is then pigeon-holed into predetermined character assessments..."

"James, please disclose your political point-of-view along with that of the "scholar". Let me guess: do both of you oppose prayer in the classrooms of public schools? Enough said.--Aschlafly 13:11, 24 May 2007 (EDT)"

Is the above related to what you are saying? Because I am not sure I understand your article.Associate 23:05, 10 June 2007 (EDT)

Are you alleging Andy has cyberstalked, harrassed, and publicly defamed an individual with guilt by association smears, alleging someone holds partisan, extreme, or racist views that the person in reality does not? RobS 23:16, 10 June 2007 (EDT)
I make no allegation about Andy cyberstalking. I just have trouble understanding your article. Either it is a bit obscure, or I am dense, or both.Associate 11:09, 11 June 2007 (EDT)

More evidence

Many frequently-cited examples of "Christian terrorism" are more closely tied to racist ideology promoting white supremacy, such as the Ku Klux Klan. Other groups, such as the Christian Identity movement bridge the gap between racism and religious extremism.

Review the sourcing, [2]

Religion and the Racist Right: The Origins of the Christian Identity Movement University of N. Carolina Press ISBN 978-0807846384

Chip Berlet 2004 A New Face for Racism & Fascism |work = White Supremacist, Antisemitic, and Race Hate Groups in the U.S.: A Geneology Political Research Associates.

This is evidence Conservapedia has been the target of politcal profiling since 16 March. RobS 00:13, 11 June 2007 (EDT)

  • Also, the linking of certain off-color articles and topics, through Google search, is yet another form of poisoning the well.--Sysop-TK /MyTalk 00:24, 11 June 2007 (EDT)
Im not sure what point Rob is making about Christian Identity, but they are self-avowedly racist. They certainly consider themselves Christian, although it would be easy to argue that their beliefs have little to do with Jesus.Associate 01:45, 11 June 2007 (EDT)
Throughout history, there are countless men and women who have called themselves Christians, but their actions state otherwise. Karajou 01:49, 11 June 2007 (EDT)
The point being made is, the sourcing on this material is cited to Chip Berlet and Political Research Associates (PRA)-- the source of many if not most of the defamations cited in this article against specific person and organizations. As to the merits of Christian Identity, I do not intend to discuss it, however, it is patrently obvious within Wikipedia that Berlet & PRA's intention is to link Rev. Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, Dr. James Dobson, and D. James Kennedy to racism, Christian Identity, Christian Fascism, or whatever other defamation are effective. Review this for example from WP regareding Dr. Dobson's Family Research Council,
  • The Southern Poverty Law Center has linked the Family Research Council to racism [3]
This classic language of Mr. Chip Berlet. Laird Wilcox's chapter in Berlet in The Watchdogs, is entitled, Chip Berlet and Political Research Associates, A Sutdy in Links and Ties, pgs. 114 - 131, the link is available at my user page, User:RobS, is RW. RobS 11:35, 11 June 2007 (EDT)


If you could, read this and let me know if I have it right. Thanks. So, certain organizations follow the edits of particular individuals on line and record them and establish a pattern. They then use the pattern of that individual's posts to profile them into a certain category, say, neonazi, etc. If the person's edits don't add up to neonazi, they just call them one anyway, making the data collection moot. Or, if they do add up to neo-nazi,it's bad to tell others because it would smear them? Im just a little lost.Frederick 10:58, 12 June 2007 (EDT)

Thank you

to whoever unlocked the talk page. I agree with many of the comments above, at least the ones i understand. Could someone, like the author, explain this article in simple terms?Massimo 15:55, 13 June 2007 (EDT)

What's your question. RobS 16:20, 13 June 2007 (EDT)