Let Them Wither on the Vine...By Ben Klassen

They are not our kind,
they are not our brothers,
and they are not our concern!

It has been my experience when being interviewed by reporters, talk-show hosts and race mixing liberals in general, the prime question they will usually zero in on is this: – Since you want to get rid of the mud races, just what are you going to do with them? Do you want to kill them all?
This is a tricky question, and a loaded question. It implies that we Creators are haters, killers, and bent on genocide. It Is Important that this question need be answered directly and in the correct context of our creed.

Our answer to the question is this:

– No, we don’t want to kill anybody. Nowhere in our books or our literature do we say we plan on killing anybody. If you have taken the time to read our Bibles, you will find that instead of being prone to violence, as our enemies would like to portray us, our creed and program is fully committed to law and order, to the constitution and to obeying the law. We want to point out that nowhere in the U.S. Constitution does it say that we, the White working people of America, who pay most of the taxes, have any obligation to subsidize, feed and carry on our backs all the freeloaders, the shiftless parasites and the scum of the world, both at home and abroad.

We demand that our government stop sending foreign aid to all and every of the some 126 countries of the world, most of whom are our enemies, are hostile to us, and hate us with a passion. None of them show any gratitude. We see no reason why we should, for instance, send some four billion dollars of aid a year to the parasitic state of Israel, who has done nothing for us, but has permanently poisoned the friendly relationship we once had with the Arab nations of the world. We see no reason why we should subsidize Egypt to the tune of several billions a year just so it will remain friendly towards Israel. (We deem this as sheer blackmail.) We see no reason why we should ship millions of tons of food each year to India, which does nothing but expand Its wretched population and proliferate the unending misery that exists in that country, as it does in Pakistan, in Ethiopia, in Sudan, and dozens of other mud countries. We are not responsible for their problems, nor is there anything we can do about their inherently wretched social and genetic deficiencies. Nature has made them the way they are, and so be it.

As a result of our governments idiotic policies of robbing the White productive American taxpayer in order to subsidize and feed all the parasites and all the scum of the world, we are witnessing an explosion of the mud population, the likes of which the world has witnessed never before. This “our” Jew-controlled government has done deliberately in their sinister program in order to overwhelm, crush and exterminate the White Race, not only in America, but throughout the world. (Read again “Proliferating the Misery” in R.L. No. 22.)

The program of the Church of the Creator is reasonable, nonviolent and legal. We demand that we, the White Race, worldwide stop subsidizing the mud races, wherever they are. Since they are incapable of competing with the White Race in culture, technology and productivity, and incapable of feeding themselves, we will just let Nature take care of them, as it has in the past for thousands of years. Their populations will then revert back to their natural levels before the United States adopted its insane policy of subsidizing all the scum of the world some forty years ago.

In short, our non-violent policy is to take care of our own, and let the mud peoples shift for themselves, both at home and abroad. Our deliberate and unflagging policy is to stop subsidizing the mud peoples of the world, and let them wither on the vine. We should never have disrupted Nature’s plan in the first place. In the future, let Nature take care of the mud races on their own merits, and Nature will properly reduce their numbers to where they will never again pose a threat to the survival of Nature’s Finest. (Read again our Booklet No. 103 “Operation Rip-off – the World’s Ultimate Patsy - the White American Taxpayer is the prime target for all the scum, freeloaders, pirates and thieves of this hungry and overcrowded world.”)   Operation Rip-Off.... By Ben Klassen

Ben Klassen
Founder Church Of The Creator

                         ARTICLE TAKEN FROM RACIAL LOYALTY # 60
                                                    JUNE 17AC (1990)

EMPIRE FALLS....Day of the Rope (Video)

                                Banned on You Tube # 8
                         EMPIRE FALLS....Day of the Rope

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Rev Matt Hale(Civil Case) ...Memorandum Order

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Chief Judge Marcia S. Krieger

Civil Action No. 14-CV-0245-MSK-MJW

REVEREND MATT HALE,

Plaintiff,

v.

FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS,

Defendant.

           

                                                MEMORANDUM ORDER

THIS MATTER comes before the Court on the Plaintiff’s Motion to Deny Costs (# 222), the Defendant’s response (# 231), and the Plaintiff’s reply (# 232); the Plaintiff’s motion for Relief From Judgment (# 229), the Defendant’s response (# 233), and the Plaintiff’s Reply (# 240); the Defendant’s Motion to Restrict Access (# 236), the Plaintiff’s response (# 238), and the Plaintiff’s reply (# 244); and the Plaintiff’s Motion to Strike (# 238). For the reasons that follow, the Plaintiff’s motions are denied and the Defendant’s motion is granted.

The Court assumes the reader’s familiarity with the underlying facts in this litigation, thus the factual description is brief. Mr. Hale is an inmate at the Administrative Maximum facility in Florence, Colorado (ADX). Mr. Hale is/was the leader of “Creativity”, which he describes as a religious group.

In this action, Mr. Hale asserted a number of claims,1 four of which the Court determined by grant of summary judgment to the Federal Bureau of Prisons (## 212, 213).  Mr.  Hale originally brought 11 claims, seven of which were dismissed. (# 66).  

Those claims were: (1) that the BOP violated Mr. Hale’s right to practice his religion by imposing mail bans from July 2010 to January 2011 and January 2013 to August 2013 and by refusing to provide him a special diet; (2) that the mail bans and refusal to provide a special diet violated Mr. Hale’s religious-freedom rights under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act; (3) that the BOP imposed the mail ban in retaliation for Mr. Hale’s exercise of his First Amendment rights; (4) that the BOP violated Mr. Hale’s First Amendment right to free speech when it prohibited him from having a copy of a book. Following entry of judgment, costs were taxed against Mr. Hale (# 226).

A. Motion for Relief From Judgment

The Court construes this Motion as a motion for reconsideration governed by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60. Rule 60(b) permits the Court to reconsider an order due to, among other things, a substantive mistake or law or fact by the Court, newly discovered evidence that, with reasonable diligence, could not have been discovered earlier, or as a result of any other reason that justifies relief. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)(1)–(2), (6); Yapp v. Excel Corp., 186 F.3d 1222, 1231 (10th Cir. 1999). Reconsideration under Rule 60(b) is extraordinary, and may only be granted in exceptional circumstances. Rogers v. Andrus Transp. Servs., 502 F.3d 1147, 1153 (10th Cir. 2007). Reconsideration is not a tool to rehash previously-presented arguments already considered and rejected by the Court, nor is it properly used to present new arguments based upon law or facts that existed at the time of the original argument. FDIC v. United Pac.Ins. Co., 152 F.3d 1266, 1272 (10th Cir. 1998); Van Skiver v. United States, 952 F.2d 1241, 1243–44 (10th Cir. 1991).

Mr. Hale seeks reconsideration under Rule 60(b)(3), alleging fraud, misrepresentation, or misconduct by the BOP. Specifically, Mr. Hale contends that his Creativity texts were  confiscated by prison personnel after entry of judgment in this case. From this, he contends that the BOP lied to the Court when it represented that Mr. Hale is permitted to keep such texts in his cell. The BOP responds that the texts were temporarily seized and searched in response to a security threat, and that once the search was complete, eight books (in accordance with ADX regulations) were returned to Mr. Hale. Of the eight books, Mr. Hale chose to keep only one Creativity text.

It is not clear that any misrepresentation has been made by the BOP. It represented in this action that Mr. Hale would be allowed to have Creativity texts in his cell. Indeed, he has been allowed to do so — he can have eight such books pursuant to ADX regulations, but he has chosen only to have one. Moreover, the appropriateness of the ADX regulation limiting Mr Hale to eight books at any given time was not the subject of this lawsuit. It concerned whether Mr.  Hale can have Creativity texts, not how many of them he may physically have in his cell at a given time. Indeed, at the time of entering judgment, the Court noted that the BOP would be within its discretion to confiscate such books from Mr. Hale in appropriate circumstances. Thus, the actions of the BOP do not constitute new evidence relevant to the determination in this matter. The motion is denied.

 

B. Motion to Deny Costs

The Defendants filed a Bill of Costs (# 218) seeking $5,226.35 in taxable expenses, and the Clerk of Court taxed costs (# 226) of the same amount in the Defendant’s favor. Mr. Hale seeks denial of the award of costs for four reasons: (1) the BOP repeatedly asserted privilege to obstruct Mr. Hale’s discovery requests; (2) the BOP acted in bad faith when its employees lied to the Court about Mr. Hale’s address at ADX when it “accidentally” left out a sentence from his press release; (3) the question he raised — whether Creativity is a religion — was a close and  difficult question; and (4) he is indigent, so imposing costs upon him would create a chilling effect on civil-rights litigants (# 222). Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54 provides that costs are awarded to a prevailing party as a matter of course unless the Court directs otherwise. Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(d)(1).

 Denying costs is a severe penalty, so there must be a legitimate reason penalize the prevailing party. Marx v. Gen. Revenue Corp., 668 F.3d 1174, 1182 (10th Cir. 2011). The Tenth Circuit has set forth six instances when it is proper to deny costs to a prevailing party: “(1) the prevailing party is only partially successful, (2) the prevailing party was obstructive and acted in bad faith during the course of the litigation, (3) damages are only nominal, (4) the nonprevailing party is indigent, (5) costs are unreasonably high or unnecessary, or (6) the issues are close and difficult.”

Debord v. Mercy Health Sys. of Kan. Inc., 737 F.3d 642, 659–60 (10th Cir. 2013). Only the second, fourth, and sixth instances arguably apply here.

Mr. Hale’s argument about the BOP’s assertion of privilege falls within none of the exceptions to an award of costs. The invocation of privilege is a proper, routine, and important part of the litigation process. Mr. Hale does not show that the BOP’s assertion of privilege was not authorized or was manifestly improper so as to constitute bad faith.

Mr.Hale’s assertion that the BOP lied to the Court is based upon two assertions: (1) that the BOP misrepresented the Mr. Hale’s address to the Court; and (2) that the BOP misrepresented the contents of a press release made by Mr. Hale when he was housed in another facility. As to the first alleged misrepresentation, the Court finds upon review of Mr. Hale’s prior submissions, that no misrepresentation was made to the Court about his address — any misstatement by the BOP was to third parties, and such misstatement had no bearing on the merits of this case. The second instance also is of limited import. Mr. Hale argues that the BOP quoted only a portion of his press release made when he was at FCI Terra Haute. The press release criticized the appointment of the attorney who had been prosecutor in Mr. Hale’s his case to a federal judicial position. In the press release, Mr. Hale stated:   
Hale Persecutor (Prosecutor) Appointed Federal Magistrate Judge!

I’m sure he’ll do great there for the federal, Jewish tyranny that presently rules over us and help consign some more innocent people to a prison cell for decades like he did me. [He] is living proof of why people would have the silly idea that the Nazis would try to kill six million Jews, for in my particular case he prosecuted a man he knew to be innocent all along only so that a critic of the

Jewish domination of our country could be silenced. He caused enormous grief to me, my family, and my church. Well, in any case, it is my hope that [he] will one day receive his comeuppance. # 186 at 95.

Mr. Hale complains that the BOP failed to include language that explained his meaning of the word “comeuppance”. Again, it is difficult to see a misrepresentation here. The BOP stated to the Court that Mr. Hale meant “legal comeuppance” and it is with that understanding that the Court issued its opinion. # 212 at 26. Mr. Hale fails to explain how such clarification was inadequate. Thus, even if the original quotation was inaccurate, it had no effect on the determination in this matter.

The Court appreciates that its long opinion may create the impression that this matter raised “close and difficult” issues. But that the constitutional issues raised by Mr. Hale were important and deserving of thorough consideration did not mean that they were “close and difficult”. With regard to whether Creativity is a “religious” belief system, the Court noted that multiple district courts had addressed the issue between 2002 and 2011 and none had found it to be so. Applying Tenth Circuit precedent in United States v. Meyers, 95 F.3d 1475 (10th Cir.1996), the Court reached the same conclusion finding that four out of the five factors mentioned weighed against Creativity being considered a religion. The Court’s analysis on the mail restrictions was equally as clear. Even if the Court had determined that Creativity was a valid religion it found that the restrictions on Mr. Hale’s correspondence were justified by a compelling interest and were narrowly tailored to meet that interest.

Turning to Mr. Hale’s indigence, he is correct that indigence must be considered and there is no dispute that he is indigent. But, in the Tenth Circuit, indigence alone is not dispositive. Rodriguez v. Whiting Farms Inc., 360 F.3d 1180, 1190 (10th Cir. 2004). The Court is mindful that the Rules presume that costs will be awarded in most cases, and indeed, Congress has specifically provided that litigants proceeding in forma pauperis shall be liable for costs in the same manner “as in other proceedings.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(f)(1); Sandle v. Principi, 201 F. App’x 579, 583 (10th Cir. 2006).

Ultimately, the question of whether it is fair to assess costs against an indigent party,2 and in this regard, the Court makes several observations. First, as noted above, Rule 54(d) and various other legislative enactments represent a general societal preference that the costs of unsuccessful litigation should be borne by the losing party, even if that party may be indigent. If Congress intended to abrogate and modify a prevailing party's presumptive entitlement to costs when the losing party was indigent, it could have done so in the in forma pauperis statute. The fact that Congress directed that indigent litigants will generally be liable for costs “as in other proceedings” strongly suggests that Congress does not consider indigence, alone, to be particularly strong cause for refusing to award costs.

Second, the Court notes that Mr. Hale initiated this suit with full appreciation of the 2 Mr. Hale makes much of the difference in size between him, the indigent party, and the BOP, arguing that it is unfair to award costs to the BOP given its vast resources. The Court cannot find any authority to suggest that the relative resources between the parties are relevant in considering the nonprevailing party’s indigence. possibility of incurring costs. He is a law school graduate and has litigated many matters.

Indeed, he has filed multiple suits in federal court not including any post-conviction review.3 Though none of these suits has proceeded far enough to result in an award of costs, the possibility of incurring costs has not deterred Mr. Hale from asserting his rights. Accordingly, while the Court acknowledges Mr. Hale’s indigence as a circumstance weighing against awarding costs to the BOP, the Court finds that on balance, he has failed to overcome the general presumption that costs should be awarded to the prevailing party.

C. Remaining Motions

The BOP seeks Level 1 restriction on the unredacted declaration of Lieutenant Amy Kelley (# 234) because it quotes Mr. Hale’s writings, which it says could potentially spur his followers to violence. A minimally redacted copy of the declaration exists on the docket without restriction (# 233-1). The public interest is adequately served by this small redaction.

Mr. Hale asks the Court to strike the BOP’s response (# 233) to his Motion for Relief From Judgment because he never received it. As his reply brief thereto indicates (# 240), he did eventually receive the response. Accordingly, this motion is denied as moot.

3 See Hale v. Ashcroft, No. 06-CV-0541 (D. Colo.); Hale v. Lefkow, 239 F. Supp. 2d 842 (C.D. Ill. 2003) (02-1420); Hale v. Cmte. on Character & Fitness for the State of Ill., No. 01-CV-5065, 2002 WL 398524 (N.D. Ill. Mar. 13, 2002), aff’d 335 F.3d 678 (7th Cir. 2003); Hale v. Schaumburg Twp. Dist. Lib., No. 01-CV-2220 (N.D. Ill.).


 D. Conclusion

For the foregoing reasons, the Plaintiff’s Motion to Deny Costs (# 222) and Motion for Relief From Judgment (# 229) are DENIED. The Plaintiff’s Motion to Strike (# 238) is DENIED AS MOOT. The Defendant’s Motion to Restrict Access (# 236) is GRANTED. Docket # 234 shall remain at Level 1 Restriction.

Dated this 2nd day of October, 2018.

BY THE COURT:

Marcia S. Krieger Chief United States District Judge


 

We Don't Need Any Mugwumps in Our Camp...By Ben Klassen

White Man, make up your mind!

The mugwump is a dirty bird which sits on the fence with its mug on one side and its wump on the other. It can never make up its mind which side of the fence it is on. In fact, it can never make up its mind, period. It prefers to straddle the fence forever and a day.

There are a lot of good people in the racial movement who act as pusillanimous as does the mugwump. They are the kind that can’t quite make up their mind what racial organization they should join and support, and as a compromise they contribute a drib here and a drab there. I know of some people who proudly point to the fact that they "belong" to a dozen different "racialist" organizations.

We Creators abhor such a polyglot, blunderbuss, scattered and fragmented approach in trying to build a powerful force with which to smash a unified, fanatic, well-entrenched Jewish conspiracy. No mugwump or collection of mugwumps has ever achieved anything, no matter how numerous they might be. Only a unified, well organized and highly dedicated army of militants can effectively counter and destroy the powerful and sinister Jewish Tyranny that now holds the world in its thrall. Although there are other lesser examples, we point with pride to the formation of Hitler’s Nazi party during the 1920’s and 1930’s.

After World War I, approximately 2000 Nationalist parties sprang up in war-devastated Germany during the next decade. As a conglomerate they were totally ineffective in ousting the decadent, Jew-controlled postwar government and in stemming the Jewish-Communist tide. It was not until the members of these bickering and polyglot organizations dropped their petty parties and joined with Adolf Hitler that the German people finally had the clout to take over their government and take back their own country.

We believe that the same principle applies to the dilemma in America today, if we are ever to wipe Judaism off the face of the earth. What is different today is that it must now become a global battle in which the total White Race, informed, aroused and organized, takes on the perfidious foe and exterminates it once and for all. In order to do so we must mobilize all our resources. We must utilize every weapon the White Race can possibly assemble – religious, economic, political, moral, educational and every other means available to us and then concentrate our fire. We are further convinced that only the C.O.T.C. with its comprehensive, all embracing creed of the global White Racial Religion – Creativity – is geared to do that awesome job. In the one and only, true and revolutionary White Racial Religion – Creativity, we have the total program, the final solution, the ultimate creed for the salvation and redemption of the White Race.

We urge every good White Man and Woman to stop being mugwumps, to make up their minds as to which organization they believe is best fitted to do the job that urgently needs to be done, and then concentrate on that one organization and give it your all. We don’t want mugwumps. We want angry, militant tigers.

RAHOWA!

Ben Klassen
Founder... Church of the Creator

                                ARTICLE TAKEN FROM RACIAL LOYALTY # 60
                                                              JUNE 17AC (1990)