Echo what Chip Sez...NOT in anyone’s 'best interest' to speak to agents of pain. 

When the police pull you over and say: "Do you know how fast you were going?" NEVER answer, even if you want to admit to 1 or 2 miles over the limit. Technically THAT is an admission of guilt, and therefore a chargeable offense.

The SPLC only want to officiate their report with your words.

The ‘flip side’ to this would be to wear a wire, bring a cameraman and turn the tables on them, pinning them down with YOUR INTERVIEW and get it all on tape. I’d LOVE to assist you on that endeavor!

Please remember that the SPLC receives stipend funds from the FBI (and perhaps others) to accumulate intelligence data that the FBI itself is prohibited by law to gather. The quid pro quo is that SPLC agrees to give the FBI complete and full access to its intelligence files,...giving the feds cover from scrutiny or prosecution for getting around prohibitions of spying on U.S. citizens and maintaining dosiers on people not suspected  of any criminal activities. 

Thusly, the only reason the SPLC is interested in talking to you Ernie, is because they have already decided that you shall be in their files and given a certain label. Your fate, with them, is already determined. Therefore, no extra justification or rationalization is needed. They do not wish to talk with you because they wonder if they have misunderstood you. It is because they already believe they know exactly who and what you are (for their purposes) that they now seek to interview you to gain quotable snippets of conversation for later use in or submission courts and/or investigators (who they already believe will one day have reason to be hunting you).

There is no benefit in talking to these enemy agents. The advantage in such a situation is all theirs. The entire affair is not intended to be one of intellectual exploration or exchange, but a linguistic trap, secured for later manipulation and editting at their convenience for their purposes as they see fit.

fun. 

Heidi Beirich is research director for SPLC; an unconventional warfare surrogate for the Feds, and their beneficiaries.  Interviewing with her must be considered equivalent to an interview with Janet Napolitano's "Snappy Black Uniform" folks.  Think "Martha Stewart".

Why are these comments anonymous?

OOH! OOH! OOH! OOH! I can't wait to hear this! I know you are supposed to be the interviewee, but perhaps you can ask Heidi why anyone who favors a smaller government than  Obama has been branded a "terrrrrrrist" by the SPLC and their friends at Fatherland Security.