Misplaced Pages

Talk:Chip Berlet: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 00:13, 16 January 2005 editSlimVirgin (talk | contribs)172,064 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit Latest revision as of 00:02, 23 November 2024 edit undoAnomieBOT (talk | contribs)Bots6,580,401 edits Adding/updating {{OnThisDay}} for 2024-11-22. Errors? User:AnomieBOT/shutoff/OnThisDayTagger 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{WikiProject banner shell|blp=yes|class=B|listas=Berlet, Chip|1=
==Archive==
{{WikiProject Biography}}
{{WikiProject Journalism}}
}}
{{Old AfD multi|page=Chip Berlet|date=6 July 2005|result='''speedy keep'''|page2=Chip Berlet (2nd nomination)|date2=26 July 2008|result2='''Keep per WP:SNOW / WP:IAR'''}}
{{connected contributor
| User1 = Chip.berlet | U1-EH = yes | U1-declared = yes
| User2 = Cberlet| | U2-EH = yes | U2-declared = yes}}
{{OnThisDay|date1=2024-11-22|oldid1=1258979093}}
{{Archive box|auto=long|bot=lowercase sigmabot III|age=365}}
{{User:MiszaBot/config
| algo = old(365d)
| archive = Talk:Chip Berlet/Archive %(counter)d
| counter = 4
| maxarchivesize = 125K
| archiveheader = {{Automatic archive navigator}}
| minthreadstoarchive = 1
| minthreadsleft = 5
}}
== "verification failed"? ==


Here's the text from Wilcox that supports the section that somebody deleted:
]


Although mainstream figures are legitimately concerned with the LaRouche organization, a good number of his harshest detractors come from extremist ranks themselves. A writer who has spent considerable time on LaRouche is John Foster "Chip" Berlet, of Political Research Associates (PRA) in Boston. His articles on LaRouche go back into the 1970s. Berlet is also a veteran of the 1960s student left, and currently serves as the National Lawyers Guild (NLG) representative to the National Committee Against Repressive Legislation. Harvey Klehr confirms:
==Father Stryokowski==
Current text: "Wilcox has also criticized Berlet over an incident involving the Rev. Francis S. Stryokowski, a 76-year-old Catholic priest, who was forced to resign after Berlet identified him as having attended an anti-communist meeting at which a former Klan leader spoke. The Rev. Stryokowski maintained that he had not realized what kind of meeting it was. ."


"The NLG is an affiliate of the Soviet-controlled International Association of Democratic Lawyers (IADL), founded in 1946. Expelled from France in 1949, the IADL is now headquartered in Brussels.Over the years it has supported every twist and turn in Soviet foreign policy, including the invasions of Hungary, Czechoslovakia, and Afghanistan.The American Association of Jurists, the regional affiliate of the IADL, is headquartered in Havana.Its president, Ann Fagan Ginger, is a long-time NLG activist." 31
Wilcox says a lot of things about me that are dubious.


In 1987, when Berlet moved with his organization to Boston from Chicago, the Chicago Area Friends of Albania gave him a special sendoff, noting that, "Chip was one of our founding members, and a steadfast friend of Albania through thick and thin." <small><span class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 15:34, 6 May 2014 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
Current text: "an anti-communist meeting at which a former Klan leader spoke."


::evidence that the National Lawyers Guild "supported every twist and turn in Soviet foreign policy, including the invasions of Hungary, Czechoslovakia and Afghanistan"? There isn't any, because they didn't.
Actually, while the meeting was indeed antiommunist, it was also run by a group denounced by the Catholic Archdiocese as antisemitic. Their slogan was "Communism is Jewish." Here is how one library describes their newsletter "photocopied newsletter of the Anti-Communist Confederation of the Polish Freedom Fighters in the U.S.A., mainly the product of the anti-Semitic and racist mind of Jozef Mlot-Mroz" .


:This is synthesis. The source does not say that Berlet was doing anything extremist. It says he was a member of a group, then it says that the group was doing certain things. Which does not mean that Berlet was doing those things. ] (]) 15:59, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
Current text: "The Rev. Stryokowski maintained that he had not realized what kind of meeting it was."


::No, it isn't, Binksternet. The copy that you've twice deleted summarizes the point that George and Wilcox make, though it should probably be reworded for clarity. Whether or not Berlet was actively ''doing all the things'' that the NLG and CAFA were doing is irrelevant. He was a member of the organizations which is what the deleted copy states.] (]) 18:15, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
Actually it is spelled Strykowski, and he attended a speech by Bob Miles at the home of Jozef Mlot-Mroz in Salem, MA. Miles is "Described as former KKK leader from Michigan (Jewish Advocate, Boston, 6-12
Nov. 1992) who spoke at a 1988 white supremecist meeting, also attended by
Rev. Francis Strykowski, who was forced to resign as pastor of Boston's St.
John the Baptist Parish, effective Feb 2, 1993 as a result of his attendence
at the meeting" .


Miles was a former Klan leader, but at the time he was also one of the best know neofascists in the U.S., and a leading figure in the neonazi version of the Christian Identity religion


Strykowski had attended and participated in these meeting before, and been exposed in the local media; and the Catholic Archdiocese had already once accepted his claim that he did not know the group was antisemitic. Strykowski was warned to not attend again. I wrote about the Miles speech in a local weekly ("Inside a Fright-Wing Cell," Boston Phoenix, August 19, 1988), but the part about Strykowski was cut for space.


:::The deleted copy says that Berlet was a member, and then it tries to implicate Berlet with things that the organization did. This gets Berlet's involvement quite wrong. For instance, the Chicago Area Friends of Albania is a group Berlet co-founded so that he could support the Albanian people, who were going through a rough time. He researched the problem of political repression in Albania through his group contacts. Berlet worked against anti-democratic Stalinists through the group, a fairly centrist stance which is exactly opposite of what your text is trying to imply: that he is an extremist. ] (]) 06:34, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
Years later, when a critic of mine made false claims about my attendance at the meeting and my sources of information, there was a public discussion of the 1988 meeting, and when it came out that Strykowski had attended, it again became a media issue, and the Catholic Archdiocese asked him to resign (his parish wa actually in Salem, MA) to avoid having to discipline him formally, which might have resulted in Strykowski losing the equivalent of a pension. I will provide cites for these matters on the PRA website, and then ask for a discussion of the Wilcox criticism. --] 17:33, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)


::::Binksternet, your beef apparently has more to do with the George/Wilcox "take" on Berlet in the first place than on the editorial summary of that take (though, on second glance, I don't see where George and Wilcox ''directly'' call the "Friends of Albania" a Communist front). So your contention here is less about ] or ] than it is about the reliability of George/Wilcox. Do you have anything here beyond your own ] with which to impeach George and Wilcox? ] (]) 15:08, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
:I will corect the spelling of the Rev.'s name, but as far as the rest, I don't think this article needs to go into that level of detail, and if we did we would need to be ''very'' careful not to overemphasize your POV. The situation of you being an editor here, while a positive one, is a potential source of concern and conflict on this article.
:::::The material that was deleted doesn't make any particular allegations about the groups that Berlet belonged to, it simply says he was a member. The source says unambiguously that Berlet "comes from extremist ranks." ] (]) 15:46, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
::::::Wilcox and George do not describe any activities of Berlet with regard to the groups he has been associated with. They do not say Berlet supported the Soviets (which he did not). They do not say that Berlet was anything but a guy coming from the extreme left: {{quotation|1=Although mainstream figures are legitimately concerned with the LaRouche organization, a good number of his harshest detractors come from extremist ranks themselves. A writer who has spent considerable time on LaRouche is John Foster "Chip" Berlet, of Political Research Associates (PRA) in Boston. His articles on LaRouche go back into the 1970s. Berlet is also a veteran of the 1960s student left, and currently serves as the National Lawyers Guild (NLG) representative to the National Committee Against Repressive Legislation.}}
::::::After that bit, Wilcox and George write further about the NLG, but without mentioning Berlet: {{quotation|1=Harvey Klehr confirms: "The NLG is an affiliate of the Soviet-controlled International Association of Democratic Lawyers (IADL), founded in 1946. Expelled from France in 1949, the IADL is now headquartered in Brussels. Over the years it has supported every twist and turn in Soviet foreign policy, including the invasions of Hungary, Czechoslovakia, and Afghanistan. The American Association of Jurists, the regional affiliate of the IADL, is headquartered in Havana. Its president, Ann Fagan Ginger, is a long-time NLG activist."}}
::::::Wilcox and George quote a party invitation which says that Berlet was "a steadfast friend of Albania through thick and thin", which he was—a friend to the Albanian people, not to the repressive Soviet-controlled Albanian government.
::::::Finally, Wilcox and George wind up with a damning indictment of LaRouche groups, saying that the groups have a "primary evil" in "how they treat their opponents and in the vision they maintain of the civil liberties of all Americans. Here the antidemocratic and anti-civil libertarian nature of LaRouche and his followers is manifest, and it is primarily on these grounds that they should be opposed."
::::::Thus we cannot synthesize a position not taken overtly by Wilcox and George. As well, we cannot misrepresent Wilcox and George as being opposed to Berlet rather than being opposed to the LaRouche organization. ] (]) 16:53, 7 May 2014 (UTC)


:::::::The fact that Wilcox and George oppose the Larouche cult can certainly be included in a reworked edit but so, OBVIOUSLY, should Berlet's membership in the ]. That's the primary evidence Wilcox and George present for Berlet being "a guy coming from the extreme left." There's no synthesis here at all. ] (]) 17:36, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
:A similar circumstance has occured on ], wherein Prof. MacDonald has taken issue with various criticisms of his theories. It is important that a similar policy of interaction take place with your opinions being respected, but understood as neccesarilly biased. I hope you can understand that. {{Vip|user=Sam_Spade}} 18:06, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)


:::::::Klehr is quoted about how the NLG is "an affiliate" of the IADL, with the only stated connection being Ann Fagan Ginger's activism in both the IADL and NLG. Nothing here says the NLG is extremist. In fact, most observers call the NLG liberal, progressive or leftist—a much milder position. Berlet's involvement in the NLG is as a liaison to the National Committee Against Repressive Legislation, a group formed to fight McCarthyism. Wilcox and George leave the reader wondering whether it was Berlet's 1960s activism which deserves the label "extremist", or his later NLG membership. We cannot decide ourselves what makes him "extremist" when it is not clear. ] (]) 18:09, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
::I do understand that. I have promised to only engage in discussion on this article. Please look at the text on the page, and then compare it to the article cited, which has more detail.." The text here has been sanitized in a biased way to obscure what really happened, which involved antisemitism, not just anticommunism. Here is what a really NPOV text would look like:
:::::::::My re-write was much closer to the source than Binksternet's. And why am I receiving a warning on my personal talk page about "Edit warring" from the guy who has undone every one of my edits? Is that the pot calling the kettle black? ] (]) 18:12, 7 May 2014 (UTC)


::::::::::Those warnings are just Binksternet being Binksternet. As for the substance here, the whole reason for George and Wilcox bringing up Berlet's NLG membership is to demonstrate Berlet's own radical, front-organization roots; as you might put it, Gators, "the pot calling the kettle black." ] (]) 18:52, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
::"Wilcox has also criticized Berlet over an incident involving the Rev. Francis S. Strykowski, a 76-year-old Catholic priest.." Strykowski was forced to resign by the Catholic Archdiocese after Berlet identified him as leading a prayer blessing a meeting of white supremacists where a leading national neonazi figure, Robert Miles, gave an antisemitic speech. The Rev. Strykowski maintained that he had not realized what kind of meeting it was, but the local media pointed out that Strykowski had been previously warned by the Archdiocese not to attend any more meetings of the group, since it was considered antisemitic."


:::the description of the National Lawyers Guild and Berlet's connection with it is entirely scurrilous, repeating shopworn lies first circulated by Joseph McCarthy and J. Edgar Hoover, whom the NLG opposed. While the NLG certainly defended victims of McCarthyism, including communists, to say that it is or was an arm of the Soviet government is false. Moreover, the assertion that they supported the soviet invasions of Hungary and Czechoslovakia is pure fabrication. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 13:36, 22 August 2014 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
::I plan to post the published cites for my claims on the PRA website on Monday.--] 18:37, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)


== Secondary sources and BLP problems ==
:::I'm pretty sure Robert Miles isn;t a leading neo-nazi figure, unless your refering to ''this'' ]. ;) He certainly seems to be less famous than you, we have dozens of wiki articles on neo-nazi's great and small. Maybe you might like to write up an article on him, if he is of such a level of signifigance? {{Vip|user=Sam_Spade}} 20:20, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)


This article was substantially cleaned up during the spring, but now it's creeping back to being a mirror site for Berlet's own websites. If Berlet said something worth putting in Misplaced Pages, it will also be covered in secondary sources, so people should stop putting in stuff sourced only to Berlet. This is particularly the case for Berlet's accusations against public figures, even LaRouche: BLP policy says If you cannot find multiple reliable third-party sources documenting the allegation or incident, leave it out. ] (]) 16:08, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
::Good idea. I am very sure that the late ] (of Michigan) was a leading white supremacist and antisemite who worked closely with Aryan Nations. He was convicted of conspiring to blow up school buses in Michigan to stop integration of the public schools. We can quibble over the term neonazi. But please tell me if there is some special way to create a page for a name that duplicates another in the Misplaced Pages collection? --] 22:17, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)
:::FYI, if a subject has the same name as another subject, the alternative is to add a jobtitle, locality, or other npov identifier after their name in parentheses. Thus, an alternative might have been "Robert Miles (pastor)". -] 02:56, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
::::When I did a little research I discovered he generally called himself Bob Miles, but his real name was Robert E. Miles. I could change the entry to Bob Miles if you think that is better. I am still trying to learn the intricacies of style here. --] 03:30, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)


:It is easy to find third party sources that describe the LaRouchites as antisemitic and anti-Jewish, and LaRouche himself an antisemite, a neofascist, a neonazi, and even a "small time Hitler". It is also easy to find third party sources that describe in detail LaRouche's conviction for financial and tax crimes. That I have written about these facts is itself a fact that is easy to document. What is the issue here?] (]) 17:24, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
==Three Catholics rob a bank...==
::As ] said, third-party sources are needed to establish the notability of your views. If you wrote that your favorite cookies are chocolate chip - well, Misplaced Pages doesn't really care. --] <sup>]</sup> 18:25, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
Is the ''Three Catholics rob a bank'' simile relevant to Berlet specifically? Reading the article it sounds to me as if Wilcox is referring to others besides Berlet, namely commentators on the Oklahoma Bombing and the militias. -] 18:12, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)
:::Or more accurately, since this article is about Chip not LaRouche, to show that his views on LaRouche are significant to this article, which I have now done. ] (]) 20:13, 29 October 2014 (UTC)


:I agree that if someone said something, that we should use secondary or tertiary sources that report it, as was done with the mention of Ralph Nader. However the claims made about LaRouche are mentioned in ''Hate Crimes: A Reference Handbook'', pp. 88-89, which is already used as a source in the article. I will therefore restore the text and add this source. ] (]) 18:17, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
:It seems relevant, if barely. It illustrates the guilt by association fallacy which Berlet appears to make, at least in the accusations against him. {{Vip|user=Sam_Spade}} 18:19, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)
::Actually, the citation you used was not from the source per se. It is from a bio of Berlet which appears in the preface, a bio which was probably provided by Berlet. ] (]) 19:49, 8 November 2014 (UTC)
:::A ] "is an introduction to a book...written by the work's author." No idea why you not consider prefaces to have the same reliability as the books. Do you have any policies or guidelines? And who cares where sources get their informaton? We expect writers of reliable sources to use judgment, fact-checking, double-sourcing, etc. We ourselves do not do that, but rely on why reliable sources report. ] (]) 21:02, 8 November 2014 (UTC)


== External links modified ==
::OK, but I'm going to reword the intro to the remark to make it clear that Wilcox is speaking of watchdog groups in general when making that criticism. -] 18:32, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)


Hello fellow Wikipedians,
:::I took out "watchdog" for being POV. Can you think of a better term to describe them? (I admit I could not) {{Vip|user=Sam_Spade}} 18:42, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)
::::I used it because it is Wilcox's term: ''But Mr. Wilcox says what most watchdog groups have in common is a tendency to use what he calls "links and ties" to imply connections between individuals and groups. "It's kind of like three Catholics hold up a...'' -] 19:03, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)
::::Sam, I don't think that "''Mr. Wilcox says Political Research Associates and other "watchdog groups" have a tendency to use what he calls "links and ties" to imply connections between individuals and groups:''" is a correct characterization of the quote. Wilcox does not mention PRA specifically in that context or regarding the Oklahoma bombings. He is quoted as saying "most watchdog groups", not "PRA and other watchdog groups." If it is a quote, it should be accurate. -] 20:03, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)


I have just modified {{plural:1|one external link|1 external links}} on ]. Please take a moment to review . If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit ] for additional information. I made the following changes:
:::::OK, I tried to clean it up a bit. {{Vip|user=Sam_Spade}} 20:01, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050106165725/http://www.uua.org/ga/ga99/418.html to http://www.uua.org/ga/ga99/418.html
::::::Thanks. I moved the PRA over to make it a little clearer that the quotations don't refer specifically to it, but to "watchdog" groups in general. -] 20:26, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)


When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the ''checked'' parameter below to '''true''' or '''failed''' to let others know (documentation at {{tlx|Sourcecheck}}).
==...also criticized for accusing the ADL...==
I followed the link in the footnote of this sentence:
:Berlet was also criticized for accusing the Anti-Defamation League, in an op-ed piece for the New York Times in 1993, of down-playing the right-wing threat while focusing on left-wing groups.
The only person who seems to be criticizing Berlet for the ADL attack is the piece's author, William Norman Grigg. If so, we should characterize the speaker. The implication otherwise is that Berlet is being criticized by the "left", while Grigg is definitely on the "right" (I believe he is senior editor of the John Birch Society magazine, among other things). Whether the critic is Grigg or not, whomever it is should be identified. -] 19:53, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)


{{sourcecheck|checked=true}}
:well, this Chip Berlet seems to get it from al directions. Perhaps we can provide some better understanding (neutral of course) as to why he is so broadly contentious? {{Vip|user=Sam_Spade}} 20:04, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)


Cheers.—] <span style="color:green;font-family:Rockwell">(])</span> 16:57, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
::Gee, do you think it's a mystery why the John Birch Society would criticize Berlet for criticizing the ADL for not going after right-wing groups? I think the real question would be why there is so much discord between Berlet/Brande/Wilcox/et al. But I doubt we'd be able to answer it. Folks in politics often seem to get into the biggest fights with those who seem to be the most closely allied. In any case, until someone discerns another critic of Berlet vis a vis the ADL, I've added JBS as the critic. -] 20:25, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)
:] (]) 22:02, 21 June 2017 (UTC)


==Red links== == External links modified ==
I like the changes to this article, particularly the Criticism of the left and Criticism of Berlet separate sections, and the new Resumé section. I added another quote from Wilcox, which explains why there is discord between these researchers. That quote is also in The New American journal, which I added is published by the John Birch Society. And I found a link for the Daniel Brandt quote, which I've added, inline and in the References section. I saw someone had added a lot of red links. I've removed them because it made the text overwikified and hard to read; and it's also unlikely that most of the red-linked groups or people will ever have a Misplaced Pages entry; if they do, we can come back and wikify then. Hope the changes are okay. ] 21:14, Jan 8, 2005 (UTC)


Hello fellow Wikipedians,
:I take it you havn't seen my note on your talk page yet? I added, and replaced the red links. These links are very important, they let other wiki's know what articles need created. there is a even a "most wanted" listing for potential articles w the most red links. {{Vip|user=Sam_Spade}} 21:24, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)


I have just modified one external link on ]. Please take a moment to review . If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit ] for additional information. I made the following changes:
Hi Sam, sorry I haven't seen my note. Misplaced Pages is very slow for me today, and I haven't seen able to get my Talk page to load yet. Please don't keep adding red links. They make the article hard to read. Very few, if any, of the phrases and groups you're linking will ever have an article. Also, over-wikifying (whether red or blue) is generally discouraged. If you look at the Featured Articles, you'll rarely see any red links or too many blue links in those.
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060715145651/http://www.wpunj.edu:80/newpol/issue29/hawkin29.htm to http://www.wpunj.edu/newpol/issue29/hawkin29.htm


When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
I saw Chip's comments above about the Rev, and so I have added his rejoinder, as follows: "In response to Wilcox's comments about the Rev. Strykowski, Berlet said that Wilcox had mischaracterized PRA's activities. "Laird Wilcox is not an accurate or ethical reporter," Berlet told the Washington Times. "He simply can't tolerate people who are his competition in this field."


{{sourcecheck|checked=true|needhelp=}}
You may feel it's not appropriate to have a rejoinder from Chip in the "Criticism of Berlet" section, because otherwise we could have rejoinders of all the criticism, then rejoinders of the rejoinders . . . So feel free to take it out if you'd rather. ] 21:36, Jan 8, 2005 (UTC)


Cheers.—] <span style="color:green;font-family:Rockwell">(])</span> 02:50, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
:I don't have any objection about the rejoinder, nor your other edits, but we deeply disagree about the red links. I feel that removal of red links of ''this'' sort, links which both have bearing on the article and use to the reader, and which I feel quite strongly ''do'' merit articles written, is in direct opposition to both the spirit, and the policy (unspoken or otherwise) of the project. If you saw something written somewhere which you felt encouraged such actions, please alert me to its location so that I can change it forthwith. Don't get me wrong, I perceive your positive intent, but I profoundly disagree with your reasoning on ''this'' matter. {{Vip|user=Sam_Spade}} 21:58, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)
:good work, BotBrain. ] (]) 21:59, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
::FWIT, I agree with Sam. I guess it's another category of editors: redlinkers versus bluelinkers. Cheers, -] 23:22, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)


==Update Request==
:::Okay, I'll hunt down some pages about red links. It may not be today however, as one of the LaRouche activists is busy reverting and Misplaced Pages is very slow for me. But as soon as I've found something, I'll put it here. There may be something in the Featured Article standards. Part of my objection is that these are very obscure organizations. If one of you wants to go and write the articles, then the links wouldn't be red anymore, which would be a solution, but my guess is you wouldn't want to because some of them, at least, are so obscure and may not exist anymore. Also, I wonder about the point of wikifying words like "photojournalist," because everyone knows what that is. Also, wikifying FBI twice in successive sentences is unnecessary. Anyway, I will look for pages about this and we can discuss further. ] 23:35, Jan 8, 2005 (UTC)
Admitted self-serving request warning:

https://www.crcpress.com/Trumping-Democracy-From-Reagan-to-the-Alt-Right/Berlet/p/book/9781138212497
==What's the critisism bit for?==
I have a new edited collection that was just published. :-)
Berlet is journalist. Journalists
In penance I will go update a few pages that have no connection to me.
tend to critisize people It's their job.
--] (]) 15:45, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
People critisized will defend themselves saying the critisism is unfair. That's obvious. Why is it interesting?
:{{re|Chip.berlet}} seems to be my week to update bibliographies. I'ved added it to your bibliography article. ] ] 17:20, 26 December 2019 (UTC)
I'm new to Wikki so maybe there is something I'm missing. ] 22:08, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)
::] 🌹 ] (]) 21:11, 30 August 2023 (UTC)

::] Thanks ] (]) 21:00, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
:Criticism provides balance. Why even have an article at all, if its going to be onesided? {{Vip|user=Sam_Spade}} 22:25, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)
:That reads to me like you are saying that ballance requires that anything positiv be balance with something negativ. I suspect that's not what your mean but then what? But my real question was why are these details of impotant? A journalist critisizes a public figure. Public figure answers back. Both one and the other are behaving exactly as one might expect.] 23:45, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Dejvid, this article was developed after a protracted discussion about how it could be presented in a fair way. The previous version was very biased against Chip Berlet, because it was written by some of the people he has criticized during his career as a journalist. For that reason, it was rewritten to make it more neutral. However, that doesn't mean that all criticism can be deleted. Misplaced Pages policy is NPOV, which means a number of different points of view should be represented: not all (e.g. very minority views need not be mentioned), but all majority and significant minority views have a place. See ]. Best, ] 23:52, Jan 8, 2005 (UTC)

: Okay I think I understad the score a bit better. I'm here because of the Request for Comment so forgive me if I'll need a little time to get ajusted. I will read up the orginal versions but I'm still skeptical as to whether this sort of thing will be of interest beyond the people Berlet has critisized.] 00:24, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Dejvid, see for the version before the clean-up started. ] 01:34, Jan 9, 2005 (UTC)

== high times placement ==

An anon. moved Berlet's stint at ''High Times'' out of the investigating-government-abuse section, which Wally reverted. I have retained Wally's revert on the reasoning that, most likely, Berlet's work in Washington for ''High Times'' included a fair amount of investigation into government abuse, so it seems like fine placement to me.

:Hi Dan, an IP address only one digit away from that one has been used before by a LaRouche editor. Could be a cooincidence, of course. I saw you wrote something on your edit summary indicating maybe you had trouble saving, though I can't get in to check because the page won't load. Just so you know: there is a software or server problem causing some saves not to "take" and sometimes only partially to take, which is weird, but several users have reported it. It's slow as treacle for me today. I think I may have to give up shortly. Best, ] 21:18, Jan 9, 2005 (UTC)

::The edit by 198.81.26.73 was not mine, but it looks legit to me (see also below under "Neologism".) Let's face it -- Chip was not just writing stories for ''High Times'', he was bureau chief. And ''High Times'' is a magazine for dopers -- I mean, it is a magazine that caters to proponents of recreational drug use. You don't lump it in as a apple attempting to blend in with the oranges. If ''Soldier of Fortune'' publishes a recipe, it doesn't become ''Better Homes and Gardens.'' ] 02:05, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)

:Yup. ''High Times'' caters to recreational drug users and, best I know, Berlet was bureau chief. Generally speaking, recreational drug users are particularly concerned with civil liberties and abuses by law enforcement, as these are issues which affect them directly. If anything, the fact that it was ''High Times'' and not the ''Podunk Review'' reinforces its grouping in that paragraph. Why shouldn't it be there? ] 00:40, Jan 13, 2005 (UTC)

==Neologism?==

Of course, the fact is, LaRouche is simply wrong. Neither Dennis King nor I invented the word "conspiracism," which has been used in scholarly writing for decades.

:Regardless of whether you agree with LaRouche, that is the only quote I have ever seen where he specifically mentions Chip Berlet in print. If LaRouche is to be mentioned in this article, a quote would be appropriate.

:It seems odd to me that Berlet wants to downplay his role as a LaRouche critic in this article, and meanwhile constantly inserts his name in all the LaRouche articles, presenting himself as the fearless leader of the crusade against LaRouche. ] 02:07, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)

::Gee, I have this thing about facts. LaRouche has mentioned me in print repeatedly, and his publications have attacked me dozens of times. This particular quote just happened to appear to be based on the faulty notion that the term conspiracism is new, or that King or I invented it.--] 03:30, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)

The LaRouche quote was "LaRouche has commented on 'a fruity neologism, ''conspiracism'', now recently adopted by such conspiratorial denizens of the Internet's left bank as Dennis King crony John Foster "Chip" Berlet.'" He doesn't say that you invented it; he says you adopted it. And, the Merriam-Webster definition of "neologism" is

#a new word, usage, or expression
#a meaningless word coined by a psychotic

--] 15:53, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)

:According to Mintz, "conspiracism" denotes "belief in the primacy of conspiracies in the unfolding of history" (1985: 4). "Conspiracism serves the needs of diverse political and social groups in America and elsewhere; it identifies elites, blames them for economic and social catastrophes, and assumes that things will be better once popular action can remove them from positions of power. As such, conspiracy theories do not typify a particular epoch or ideology" (1985: 199).

::Mintz, Frank P. 1985. ''The Liberty Lobby and the American Right: Race, Conspiracy, and Culture''. Westport, CT: Greenwood.
:--] 17:06, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)

:: HK, that attempt at an insult was uncalled for.

:: I did notice a couple of things about the article, which might bear fixing. Firstly, there's no note in the background or resume whether Berlet ever received a degree, or what he studied during college (in addition to what he received a degree in if he did so). Also, I'm not sure "trade unionist" is an appropriate word to have in the article &mdash; I've never heard it used in an American context before. Although I may well be wrong.

:: One final thing: do we really need so many links and citations and etc.? Part of me wonders if you can't be ''too'' thorough.

::Otherwise, I would like to add my opinion that the article is a ton better after ] and ] reworking than it was before. I will pitch in where I can as soon as I am able to clear my computer of a rather nasty bug that inserts hyperlinks to vendors for certain keywords whenever I try to edit an article (which I first discovered attempting to fix a typo in this article two days ago, which Willmcw thankfully reverted. If anyone knows of such a phenomena and knows of a way to clear it, such knowledge would be appreciated. My anti-spyware and anti-virus programs have been ineffective. In sum, a bang up job. ] 22:22, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
:::I can't take credit for either the editing (Slim) or the revert (Dankeshet). But I agree that it's a better article now, and would be even better with more basic biographical info. Cheers, -] 23:35, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Wally, thanks for the kind words. I wondered what that odd hyperlink was that Dan reverted. It seemed to be an ad for something to do with Amazon. I'm afraid I don't know how to fix such things.

I agree that more biographical info would improve it, and I also wondered about the degree subject or studies, but couldn't find anything online, and we're not supposed to take information directly from Cberlet unless it's published somewhere (original research). By all means, ask him if you want to, because there might be something published he can refer you to. I wasn't sure what you meant by the list of links and citations. If you mean References, these were all used in the creation of the article and so are supposed to be listed in a References section according to Misplaced Pages policy. I used more than I normally would have in case the contents were challenged. If you mean the Further reading list, I agree that these links are unnecessary. They were in the previous version and I didn't want to be accused of removing them for no reason. I think I may have removed one or two of the dodgier ones, but felt I should leave most of them. I would not object if you were to delete them.

The word "trade unionist" I took from a published source about Berlet. I have no problem if you change it to what you feel is the more common expression in America. Best, ] 00:53, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)

== Good work ==

I restored a number of important wikilinks that had been removed, and read the article. It has much improved since my last reading. I think it provides not only more well rounded information, but also a greater degree of balance on the subject of controversies surrounding this man. {{Vip|user=Sam_Spade}} 01:14, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

:Thanks for that, Sam. It's been a useful collaborative effort. We feel there should be a bit more biographical info, but hopefully we'll find it soon. I did find the policy page about red links by the way. It's ] and the policy is below for future reference. ] 02:50, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)

:Do not make too many links. An article may be considered overlinked if any of the following is true (with the exception of dates, which should always be linked):
::10% of the words are contained in links
::it has more links than lines
::a link is repeated within the same screen (40 lines perhaps) of text that appears in paragraphs.
::more than 10% of the links are to articles that don't exist.

Geez, how much more biographical information do you need? I confess. I was an Eagle Scout and Order of the Arrow Lodge Chief. I have a small pond with Shubunkin goldfish. My wife and I go fishing for bass and I go fly fishing for trout. I build my own computers from parts. And for those waiting for this tidbit, I have no academic degree, but began writing scholarly articles in the late 1990s at the invitation of sociologists studying neofascist and fundamentalist movements. Oh, and an article I wrote about LaRouche won a journalism award. --] 03:48, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

:I'd like to say what you studied, which article won the journalism award, and which award it was. I think we can probably leave out the Eagle Scout and goldfish . . . :-) ] 04:18, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)

:: Actually, we could put in the thing about Eagle Scouting. It is a major American pasttime for kids. ] 00:27, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)

:::And a ] gold fish pond? Thats clearly noteworthy ;) {{Vip|user=Sam_Spade}} 00:41, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)

::Studied sociology with a journalism minor. Award:
:::The Free Press Association, Mencken Awards, For outstanding journalism in support of liberty, Chip Berlet, 1982 Mencken Awards Finalist in the Best News Story Category, "War on Drugs: The Strange Story of Lyndon LaRouche," High Times.
::Transcribed from the framed award on my wall.--] 23:12, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Thanks, Chip. I've added that information, and also removed the word "trade unionist" which someone felt was not a commonly used expression, so it now just says "shop steward". Anyone who wants to should feel free to change it back again. ] 00:39, Jan 13, 2005 (UTC)

:Trade unionist is way better than shop steward IMO, but its not something I am motivated to tangle about. Who thought trade unionist was uncommon? {{Vip|user=Sam_Spade}} 00:41, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)

::Wally felt it wasn't a common expression in America. I have no problem with either term. ] 00:45, Jan 13, 2005 (UTC)

==LaRouche quote==

Since LaRouche is listed as critic, there should be a quote from him. If someone would like to propose a representative quote from him as an alternative to the "neologism" quote, fine. Otherwise, the "neologism" quote should be used. ] 01:35, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Why do we need another Larouche attack on me here? Just link to one of the many attacks on the LaRouche pages. (p.s. National Lawyers Guild internal link requires removal of the apostrophe).--] 02:37, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)

:I agree that another quote isn't entirely needed. Which one did you have in mind tho, just to be fair? {{Vip|user=Sam_Spade}} 03:59, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)

::Er, I had in mind the "neologism" quote, because it is the only quote I have ever seen where LaRouche personally mentions Berlet. Maybe there is another that I am not aware of.

::Now, I just looked at the "LaRouche" articles to find all those attacks on Berlet that Berlet says we could link to, and I don't find any. There is a mention of Berlet's participation in one of the John Train meetings, but nothing that could be considered an "attack." Is Berlet referring to the LaRouche pages on Misplaced Pages, or more generally those on the web? ] 21:38, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)

==need to add a cite & link==
I think the mention that Bellant, King and I issued a statement about the LaRouche organization belongs here, but it very much needs to be cited to balance the LaRouche cite/link in the lines below it. This would provide balance and evidence of a source. Could someone consider adding it please? I swore I would not touch the page itself.--] 17:58, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)

http://www.publiceye.org/larouche/Bellant_Berlet_King.html

:Chip, I'm pondering the wisdom of that. It's relevant and it's cited, so it can be added, but the more you add about LaRouche, the stronger the argument the LaRouche editors will have that they should be allowed to rebut. As this page has settled down, I'm wondering if it's worth disrupting it. Let me know what you think.

:On another note, Wally was saying that the Eagle Scouts could be added to your article (I think he meant it as a joke) because they're a big thing for kids in the States. I just noticed, in fact, that there's been a call for page protection for ] because of an edit war. . Misplaced Pages never ceases to amaze . . . :-) ] 19:14, Jan 14, 2005 (UTC)

::Well, on the LaRouche stuff, out of fairness, if Wiki is going to say the three of us accused the LaRouche people of something, it should be be cited so people can see what we said. Then, after the line:

:::The political movement headed by controversial American fringe politician Lyndon LaRouche has also published material critical of Berlet.

::A critical quote from LaRouche would be fair, but try to find one that does not contain easily refuted claims such as the neologism quote. Mintz apparently coined the term "conspiracism", not me. Otherwise, just edit out the reference to the group statement, and say I am a critic.--] 19:57, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I count 5 individual attacks attributed to Berlet on the two main LaRouche pages, and most of them were put there by editor CBerlet (i.e. Berlet). He accuses LaRouche of being a bigot, an anti-Semite, and a neofascist. Compared to that, LaRouche calling Berlet a "crony of Dennis King" and a "denizen of the internet's left bank" is pretty tame. And as Herschel already observed, LaRouche's quote does not say you coined the term; it says you adopted it. Here's the quote again:

:LaRouche has commented on "a fruity neologism, ''conspiracism'', now recently adopted by such conspiratorial denizens of the Internet's left bank as Dennis King crony John Foster "Chip" Berlet."

] 21:25, 15 Jan 2005 (UTC)

You're looking at the current versions of these articles. Go back into the histories and read the versions, including ] and ], that you and Herschel wrote, if you want to see unverifiable attacks. Then go back into the archives and check out all the insults produced by you and Herschel on the Talk pages, and I mean all of them, going back months before Cberlet became an editor. These are cached by Google and therefore "published". There are personal attacks aplenty there, on Cberlet, on King, on other editors, and most of them come from you and Herschel. ] 00:13, Jan 16, 2005 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 00:02, 23 November 2024

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is rated B-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject iconBiography
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Misplaced Pages's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
WikiProject iconJournalism
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Journalism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of journalism on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.JournalismWikipedia:WikiProject JournalismTemplate:WikiProject JournalismJournalism
???This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
Articles for deletionThis article was nominated for deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:
The following Misplaced Pages contributors may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view.
  • Chip.berlet (talk · contribs) This user has contributed to the article. This user has declared a connection.
  • Cberlet (talk · contribs) This user has contributed to the article. This user has declared a connection.
A fact from this article was featured on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the On this day section on November 22, 2024.
Archiving icon
Archives
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3
Archive 4

This page has archives. Sections older than 365 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present.

"verification failed"?

Here's the text from Wilcox that supports the section that somebody deleted:

Although mainstream figures are legitimately concerned with the LaRouche organization, a good number of his harshest detractors come from extremist ranks themselves. A writer who has spent considerable time on LaRouche is John Foster "Chip" Berlet, of Political Research Associates (PRA) in Boston. His articles on LaRouche go back into the 1970s. Berlet is also a veteran of the 1960s student left, and currently serves as the National Lawyers Guild (NLG) representative to the National Committee Against Repressive Legislation. Harvey Klehr confirms:

"The NLG is an affiliate of the Soviet-controlled International Association of Democratic Lawyers (IADL), founded in 1946. Expelled from France in 1949, the IADL is now headquartered in Brussels.Over the years it has supported every twist and turn in Soviet foreign policy, including the invasions of Hungary, Czechoslovakia, and Afghanistan.The American Association of Jurists, the regional affiliate of the IADL, is headquartered in Havana.Its president, Ann Fagan Ginger, is a long-time NLG activist." 31

In 1987, when Berlet moved with his organization to Boston from Chicago, the Chicago Area Friends of Albania gave him a special sendoff, noting that, "Chip was one of our founding members, and a steadfast friend of Albania through thick and thin." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 55 Gators (talk • contribs) 15:34, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

evidence that the National Lawyers Guild "supported every twist and turn in Soviet foreign policy, including the invasions of Hungary, Czechoslovakia and Afghanistan"? There isn't any, because they didn't.
This is synthesis. The source does not say that Berlet was doing anything extremist. It says he was a member of a group, then it says that the group was doing certain things. Which does not mean that Berlet was doing those things. Binksternet (talk) 15:59, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
No, it isn't, Binksternet. The copy that you've twice deleted summarizes the point that George and Wilcox make, though it should probably be reworded for clarity. Whether or not Berlet was actively doing all the things that the NLG and CAFA were doing is irrelevant. He was a member of the organizations which is what the deleted copy states.Badmintonhist (talk) 18:15, 6 May 2014 (UTC)


The deleted copy says that Berlet was a member, and then it tries to implicate Berlet with things that the organization did. This gets Berlet's involvement quite wrong. For instance, the Chicago Area Friends of Albania is a group Berlet co-founded so that he could support the Albanian people, who were going through a rough time. He researched the problem of political repression in Albania through his group contacts. Berlet worked against anti-democratic Stalinists through the group, a fairly centrist stance which is exactly opposite of what your text is trying to imply: that he is an extremist. Binksternet (talk) 06:34, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
Binksternet, your beef apparently has more to do with the George/Wilcox "take" on Berlet in the first place than on the editorial summary of that take (though, on second glance, I don't see where George and Wilcox directly call the "Friends of Albania" a Communist front). So your contention here is less about verification or synthesis than it is about the reliability of George/Wilcox. Do you have anything here beyond your own WP:OR with which to impeach George and Wilcox? Badmintonhist (talk) 15:08, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
The material that was deleted doesn't make any particular allegations about the groups that Berlet belonged to, it simply says he was a member. The source says unambiguously that Berlet "comes from extremist ranks." 55 Gators (talk) 15:46, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
Wilcox and George do not describe any activities of Berlet with regard to the groups he has been associated with. They do not say Berlet supported the Soviets (which he did not). They do not say that Berlet was anything but a guy coming from the extreme left:

Although mainstream figures are legitimately concerned with the LaRouche organization, a good number of his harshest detractors come from extremist ranks themselves. A writer who has spent considerable time on LaRouche is John Foster "Chip" Berlet, of Political Research Associates (PRA) in Boston. His articles on LaRouche go back into the 1970s. Berlet is also a veteran of the 1960s student left, and currently serves as the National Lawyers Guild (NLG) representative to the National Committee Against Repressive Legislation.

After that bit, Wilcox and George write further about the NLG, but without mentioning Berlet:

Harvey Klehr confirms: "The NLG is an affiliate of the Soviet-controlled International Association of Democratic Lawyers (IADL), founded in 1946. Expelled from France in 1949, the IADL is now headquartered in Brussels. Over the years it has supported every twist and turn in Soviet foreign policy, including the invasions of Hungary, Czechoslovakia, and Afghanistan. The American Association of Jurists, the regional affiliate of the IADL, is headquartered in Havana. Its president, Ann Fagan Ginger, is a long-time NLG activist."

Wilcox and George quote a party invitation which says that Berlet was "a steadfast friend of Albania through thick and thin", which he was—a friend to the Albanian people, not to the repressive Soviet-controlled Albanian government.
Finally, Wilcox and George wind up with a damning indictment of LaRouche groups, saying that the groups have a "primary evil" in "how they treat their opponents and in the vision they maintain of the civil liberties of all Americans. Here the antidemocratic and anti-civil libertarian nature of LaRouche and his followers is manifest, and it is primarily on these grounds that they should be opposed."
Thus we cannot synthesize a position not taken overtly by Wilcox and George. As well, we cannot misrepresent Wilcox and George as being opposed to Berlet rather than being opposed to the LaRouche organization. Binksternet (talk) 16:53, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
The fact that Wilcox and George oppose the Larouche cult can certainly be included in a reworked edit but so, OBVIOUSLY, should Berlet's membership in the National Lawyers Guild. That's the primary evidence Wilcox and George present for Berlet being "a guy coming from the extreme left." There's no synthesis here at all. Badmintonhist (talk) 17:36, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
Klehr is quoted about how the NLG is "an affiliate" of the IADL, with the only stated connection being Ann Fagan Ginger's activism in both the IADL and NLG. Nothing here says the NLG is extremist. In fact, most observers call the NLG liberal, progressive or leftist—a much milder position. Berlet's involvement in the NLG is as a liaison to the National Committee Against Repressive Legislation, a group formed to fight McCarthyism. Wilcox and George leave the reader wondering whether it was Berlet's 1960s activism which deserves the label "extremist", or his later NLG membership. We cannot decide ourselves what makes him "extremist" when it is not clear. Binksternet (talk) 18:09, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
My re-write was much closer to the source than Binksternet's. And why am I receiving a warning on my personal talk page about "Edit warring" from the guy who has undone every one of my edits? Is that the pot calling the kettle black? 55 Gators (talk) 18:12, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
Those warnings are just Binksternet being Binksternet. As for the substance here, the whole reason for George and Wilcox bringing up Berlet's NLG membership is to demonstrate Berlet's own radical, front-organization roots; as you might put it, Gators, "the pot calling the kettle black." Badmintonhist (talk) 18:52, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
the description of the National Lawyers Guild and Berlet's connection with it is entirely scurrilous, repeating shopworn lies first circulated by Joseph McCarthy and J. Edgar Hoover, whom the NLG opposed. While the NLG certainly defended victims of McCarthyism, including communists, to say that it is or was an arm of the Soviet government is false. Moreover, the assertion that they supported the soviet invasions of Hungary and Czechoslovakia is pure fabrication. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.243.148.28 (talk) 13:36, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Secondary sources and BLP problems

This article was substantially cleaned up during the spring, but now it's creeping back to being a mirror site for Berlet's own websites. If Berlet said something worth putting in Misplaced Pages, it will also be covered in secondary sources, so people should stop putting in stuff sourced only to Berlet. This is particularly the case for Berlet's accusations against public figures, even LaRouche: BLP policy says If you cannot find multiple reliable third-party sources documenting the allegation or incident, leave it out. 55 Gators (talk) 16:08, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

It is easy to find third party sources that describe the LaRouchites as antisemitic and anti-Jewish, and LaRouche himself an antisemite, a neofascist, a neonazi, and even a "small time Hitler". It is also easy to find third party sources that describe in detail LaRouche's conviction for financial and tax crimes. That I have written about these facts is itself a fact that is easy to document. What is the issue here?Chip.berlet (talk) 17:24, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
As 55 Gators said, third-party sources are needed to establish the notability of your views. If you wrote that your favorite cookies are chocolate chip - well, Misplaced Pages doesn't really care. --NeilN 18:25, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
Or more accurately, since this article is about Chip not LaRouche, to show that his views on LaRouche are significant to this article, which I have now done. TFD (talk) 20:13, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
I agree that if someone said something, that we should use secondary or tertiary sources that report it, as was done with the mention of Ralph Nader. However the claims made about LaRouche are mentioned in Hate Crimes: A Reference Handbook, pp. 88-89, which is already used as a source in the article. I will therefore restore the text and add this source. TFD (talk) 18:17, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
Actually, the citation you used was not from the source per se. It is from a bio of Berlet which appears in the preface, a bio which was probably provided by Berlet. 55 Gators (talk) 19:49, 8 November 2014 (UTC)
A preface "is an introduction to a book...written by the work's author." No idea why you not consider prefaces to have the same reliability as the books. Do you have any policies or guidelines? And who cares where sources get their informaton? We expect writers of reliable sources to use judgment, fact-checking, double-sourcing, etc. We ourselves do not do that, but rely on why reliable sources report. TFD (talk) 21:02, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Chip Berlet. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:57, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

GangofOne (talk) 22:02, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Chip Berlet. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:50, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

good work, BotBrain. GangofOne (talk) 21:59, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

Update Request

Admitted self-serving request warning: https://www.crcpress.com/Trumping-Democracy-From-Reagan-to-the-Alt-Right/Berlet/p/book/9781138212497 I have a new edited collection that was just published. :-) In penance I will go update a few pages that have no connection to me. --Chip.berlet (talk) 15:45, 19 December 2019 (UTC)

@Chip.berlet: seems to be my week to update bibliographies. I'ved added it to your bibliography article. Doug Weller talk 17:20, 26 December 2019 (UTC)
@Doug Weller 🌹 2607:FB91:D79:3EC:98F1:C7BE:A42A:7384 (talk) 21:11, 30 August 2023 (UTC)
@Doug Weller Thanks 2607:FB91:D79:3EC:2819:947A:A6EA:3D44 (talk) 21:00, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
Categories: