Changes

'''Political profiling''' is an activity certain "watchdog" organizations engage in on various [[computer]] bulletin boards, chat rooms and wikis.  An internet user's postings under either their real life identity or pseudonym may be "profiled" for their ideological convictions based upon editing patterns, interests, subject matter, common references or declared beliefs.  The profile is then pigeonholed into predetermined character assessments published by the watchdog organizations.  Political profiling has been referred to as the rough equivalent of profiling all black males on the grounds that a certain percentage may commit violent crimes. In the sense that targeting minorities for special surveillance is called “racial profiling,” the so-called "watchdog organizations" engage in "political profiling."  Some watchdog groups hold law enforcement conferences, seminars and training sessions and publish manuals on this “profiling” behavior.  

'''Political profiling''' is an activity certain "watchdog" organizations engage in on various computer bulletin boards, chat rooms and [[wiki]]s.  An internet user's postings under either their real life identity or pseudonym may be "profiled" for their ideological convictions based upon editing patterns, interests, subject matter, common references or declared beliefs.  The profile is then pigeonholed into predetermined character assessments published by the "watchdog organizations".  Political profiling has been referred to as the rough equivalent of profiling all black males on the grounds that a certain percentage may commit violent crimes. In the sense that targeting minorities for special surveillance is called "racial profiling," the so-called watchdog organizations engage in "political profiling."  Some "watchdog groups" hold law enforcement conferences, seminars and training sessions and publish manuals on this “profiling” behavior.  

==Introduction==

==Introduction==

Some watchdog organizations have been criticized for the misuse of journalist shield laws to mask their domestic spying operations.  Robert J. Friedman of the ''[[Village Voice]]'' commented:

Some watchdog organizations have been criticized for the misuse of journalist shield laws to mask their domestic spying operations.  Robert J. Friedman of the ''[[Village Voice]]'' commented:

{{Cquote|Journalists place information in the public domain where they are held accountable for falsehoods, distortions and libel. And for the most part, journalists don’t share their files with domestic police agencies... many of [the "watchdog" agency] files are not open to public scrutiny, false information collected by ideologically biased researchers cannot be corrected.<ref>Robert J. Friedman, ''The Anti-Defamation League is Spying On You'', The Village Voice, 11 May 1993.</ref>}}

{{Cquote|Journalists place information in the public domain where they are held accountable for falsehoods, distortions and libel. And for the most part, journalists don’t share their files with domestic police agencies... many of [the "watchdog agency"] files are not open to public scrutiny, false information collected by ideologically biased researchers cannot be corrected.<ref>Robert J. Friedman, ''The Anti-Defamation League is Spying On You'', The Village Voice, 11 May 1993.</ref>}}

Wilcox observes the watchdog's publications are designed to support the ideological agenda of a like minded group, and not provide “news.”  Their publishing activities are only a small part of its program, most of which is fundraising, lobbying, and maintaining enemies lists.<ref>Laird Wilcox, ''The Watchdogs'', 1999, pgs 54-56.</ref> Wilcox, who is cited by the ''Military Law Review'' as one the "foremost expert analysts of right and left-wing extremism",<ref>MAJ Walter M. Hudson, [http://www.loc.gov/rr/frd/Military_Law/Military_Law_Review/pdf-files/277C75~1.pdf ''Racial Extremism in the Army''], The Military Law Review, Vol 159 (Mar 99), pg. 7, Department of the Army, Washington, DC. Army Pamphlet No 27-100-159.</ref> and has published numerous books and articles on various extreme groups in America since the early 1960s, including ''American Extremists: Militias, Supremacists, Klansmen, Communists and Others'' by Prometheus Books, chronicles the excesses of the watchdog industry, and asks, "Who is watching the Watchdogs?"

Wilcox observes the watchdog's publications are designed to support the ideological agenda of a like minded group, and not provide “news.”  Their publishing activities are only a small part of its program, most of which is fundraising, lobbying, and maintaining enemies lists.<ref>Laird Wilcox, ''The Watchdogs'', 1999, pgs 54-56.</ref> Wilcox, who is cited by the ''Military Law Review'' as one the "foremost expert analysts of right and left-wing extremism",<ref>MAJ Walter M. Hudson, [http://www.loc.gov/rr/frd/Military_Law/Military_Law_Review/pdf-files/277C75~1.pdf ''Racial Extremism in the Army''], The Military Law Review, Vol 159 (Mar 99), pg. 7, Department of the Army, Washington, DC. Army Pamphlet No 27-100-159.</ref> and has published numerous books and articles on various extreme groups in America since the early 1960s, including ''American Extremists: Militias, Supremacists, Klansmen, Communists and Others'' by Prometheus Books, chronicles the excesses of the watchdog industry, and asks, "Who is watching the Watchdogs?"

The following two subsections, "[[Theocratic]]" and [[Wise use]], are taken from ''Understanding the Right Wing'', by Scot Nakagawa <ref>Scot Nakagawa, [http://cc.msnscache.com/cache.aspx?q=8210562338425&lang=en-US&mkt=en-US&FORM=CVRE ''Understanding The Right Wing''], When Democracy Works, n.d.</ref> written about 1999 and lists various groups classified as "right wing" and "proto-fascist".  This list and accompanying search engine terms have been expanded in the following years.  Nakagawa accredits [[Political Research Associates]] ([[Chip Berlet]], Surina Khan, and [[Jean Hardisty]] [retired]), the Coalition for Human Dignity (Jonathan Mozzochi, Steven Gardiner, and Gillian Leichtling), [[People for the American Way]], The Institute for First Amendment Studies, Sara Diamond, and the Western States Center (Tarso Ramos).

The following two subsections, "[[Theocratic]]" and [[Wise use]], are taken from ''Understanding the Right Wing'', by Scot Nakagawa <ref>Scot Nakagawa, [http://cc.msnscache.com/cache.aspx?q=8210562338425&lang=en-US&mkt=en-US&FORM=CVRE ''Understanding The Right Wing''], When Democracy Works, n.d.</ref> written about 1999 and lists various groups classified as "right wing" and "proto-fascist".  This list and accompanying search engine terms have been expanded in the following years.  Nakagawa accredits [[Political Research Associates]] ([[Chip Berlet]], Surina Khan, and [[Jean Hardisty]] [retired]), the Coalition for Human Dignity (Jonathan Mozzochi, Steven Gardiner, and Gillian Leichtling), [[People for the American Way]], The Institute for First Amendment Studies, Sara Diamond, and the Western States Center (Tarso Ramos).

All these groups and the person associated with them have been the target of "political profiling", as discussed by Laird Wilcox.  Dr. Dobson and Paul Weyrich, among several others, have been viciously smeared in Wikipedia, in violation of Wikipedia's own policies on Neutral Point of View {NPOV}, WP:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT), WP:Attribution, and a host of other policies.  Wikipedia claims immunity under Sec. 230 of the Internet Decency Act of 1998 which exempts a hosting facility from liability for content.

All these groups and the person associated with them have been the target of "political profiling", as discussed by Laird Wilcox.  Dr. Dobson and Paul Weyrich, among several others, have been viciously smeared in Wikipedia, in violation of Wikipedia's own policies on Neutral Point of View {NPOV}, WP:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT), WP:Attribution, and a host of other policies.  Wikipedia claims immunity under [[Sec. 230]] of the Internet Decency Act of 1998 which exempts a hosting facility from liability for content.

==="Theocratic"===

==="Theocratic"===