ELEANOR PAGE 2
  

HOME PAGE

FROM  EDITOR

SITE CONTENTS

COMM_WORTHY

PREVNTG._ISLAM.

GRAPHICS

THEY SAID IT

RECOMMENDED

ARCHIVES

BLOG: Brushfires

BLOG:NewEnlight.

BLOG:NousAmerican

BLOG: Proj.Ed.Renov.

BLOG: Eleanor

ABOUT US

Our colleague Eleanor now writes her own outstanding blog called Eleanor Duckwall's Spotlight.  She has been up and running since early April 2007 and has already put up a large collection of topflight articles.  To follow are four of those articles she has published.  Also on this page are A Bustling Hate-Crime Industry, H.R. 1592 'Hate Grandma' bill coming up for vote, and "Hate-Crime/Thought" Vote Result.

 

U.S. Muslim speaker urges understanding, acceptance

 

"Understanding"..."acceptance," both words that Americans proudly uphold as legacy of hundreds of years of struggle against intolerance and oppression, and for fairness won after two civil wars, the first during the 18th century against the values of the British establishment which we call the War of Independence, or The Revolutionary War, and the second, a sectional war which pitted the values of section of the territorial United States against the values of another U.S. section, roughly along north/south lines.

The struggle to implement and maintain these values has relentlessly continued through the entire history of the republic, and is still being waged. With an eye on the hard-worn freedoms and liberties that are spelled out in the document that is supposed to unite diverse peoples into one proud and free-thinking people, Americans look on immigrants with a jaundiced eye, wondering what positive benefit each will offer to uplift the Union and how the integration will enrich the weft and warp of the United States of America.

With profound disappointment, we are discovering that various groups are coming to the United States, not with the hope of becoming of integral to the social fabric as envisioned by the mainstream, but something else, preferring to remain apart or to rend and shred the fabric to their own vision.

Americans are now understanding that purpose of Islam is to rip asunder the United States with the goal of Islamizing the population for eventual joining to the body of the Ummah. Americans would no longer live in liberty with the various freedoms under the Constitution, but under the repressive and intolerant Shari'a law taken from the Koran created through the visions of Mohammed, and imposed with fire and the sword on millions during more than a thousand years of conquest.

Thus, the words of a U.S. Muslim "urging underderstanding and acceptance of Islam and Muslims in the U.S." ring hollow and disingenous:

Missourian via JihadWatch
Since Sept. 11, 2001, an ongoing debate has been waging about the role of Muslims in the U.S. A prominent voice in this debate has been Arsalan Iftikhar, the legal director of the Council of American Islamic Relations, the largest Muslim advocacy group in the country.

Iftikhar spoke to a group of about 30 people in MU’s Ellis Auditorium on Friday afternoon about the future of Muslims in the West.

The 8 million Muslims in the U.S. faced a new duality after Sept. 11,” Iftikhar said. “Not only was our country attacked, but our faith, our way of life and our standing in the U.S. were also attacked.”

 

Note: The number of Muslims in the U.S. is under dispute, varying from 2 to 6 million. Even IF the number is 8 million, the total population is 300 million and growing through natural increase and immigration. Do the math. The political footprint of Muslims is larger than it should be because of lobbying and propaganda, such as that produced in this news article.

According to an FBI report released in 2002, hate crimes against Muslims in 2001 increased by 1,600 percent from the previous year. Muslims, Iftikhar said, have been under “a cloud of suspicion.”

Note: A "hate" crime as defined by CAIR could be anything from a dirty look on the street, to the "defacing of a Koran," which are not crimes in the United States, to mail, graffiti, and arson, which are crimes. However, all these "crimes" are reported to the FBI. The amount of time which the FBI is forced spend on these piddling little "crimes," some which aren't is ridiculous.

The passing of the Patriot Act on Sept. 15, 2001, only helped to foster a presumption of guilt toward the Muslim community, Iftikhar said.

“There is definitely a personal feeling of paranoia or being watched by the government,” said Nabihah Maqbool, an MU student who attended the speech. “You can’t feel comfortable to practice free speech.”

The Patriot Act, which was renewed in 2006, eases restrictions on law enforcement’s usage of surveillance and allows agencies to obtain financial records, library records and e-mails of private citizens without a grand jury subpoena. It also broadens the definition of domestic terrorism.

 

Certainly the Patriot Act targets anyone with suspicious behavior. Once in a while a non-Muslim is found to be committing a crime identified by the FBI as suspicious or as terrorism. The bulk of those indentified by the Act and later indicted and prosecuted are Muslim. This isn't rocket science.

“These policies have a residual effect on all Americans,” Iftikhar said. “The U.S.A. Patriot Act doesn’t just affect brown people, it affects all of us.”

Lynsea Garrison, an MU student who attended the lecture, said she agrees.

“The Patriot Act is an invasion of First Amendment rights,” Garrison said. “It is an intrusive tool that normalizes and excuses racial profiling.”

 

Sorry, Muslim is not a race. Thus, thus the Patriot Act does not "normalize and excuse racial profiling." Islam is a world view that supposes that eventually all of the world's people must and will live under the stifling yoke of Islam. The Patriot Act helps Americans to root out those that are bent on using violence to achieve that goal.

However, Islam is not spread by violence alone. Rather, Muslims and their enablers and useful fools use peaceful means: education, commerce, outreach, and other means. The Patriot Act does not go far enough as it does not address these vehicles of invasion and transformation.

Iftikhar referenced a USA Today/Gallup poll of 1,007 Americans that found 58 percent of those surveyed had never met a Muslim and if they had, they did not know it. It also found that 22 percent of those surveyed did not want Muslims as neighbors.

One does not have to personally know a Muslim to understand the danger which we all face: One only has to examine Islamic doctrine and the application by Muslim followers as depicted in the community at home an abroad. Personal relations with individual Muslims will give further insight into veracity of the knowledge that Islam is dangerous to the West.

“The integral issue is further integrating Muslims in their respective societies,” Iftikhar said, “On a local level, people need to demystify Muslims and Islam.”

Exactly! Demystifying Islam is essential. The danger is that the process will present a white-washed version and will not discuss how Islam affects the freedoms and liberties of non-Muslims.

 

Liberty and freedom, when applied to Islam and Muslims, mean those freedoms allowed Islam and the liberty to exercise Islam. Anyone who has studied Islam knows that Islam represses the rights of non-Muslims which look nothing like the freedoms that are outlined in the U.S. Constitution or in the common practice of Europeans which has evolved over centuries. The claim that Islam is compatible with European and Muslim values is disingenuous and hypocritical.

The issues Muslims are facing now, Iftikhar said, are “the next page of a long chapter of civil rights movements our country has gone through.”

Another false claim. All citizens are allowed to vote regardless of color, ethnic background, or religious creed. The "civil rights" he speaks about is the "free exercise of religion" regardless of how such an exercise will impinge upon the free exercise of the rights of non-Muslims. As mentioned above, Islam denies rights to non-Muslims. The reason is that "Allah must legislate" and non-Muslims have no right to interfere in the affairs of man, and definitely no right to have authority over Muslims. These are the "civil rights" to which Iftikhar is referring.

On a local level, Iftikhar said he encourages people to inform themselves on the issues and get involved.

“It’s a struggle and people need to work hard to promote this dialogue,” said Omar Waheed, the President of MU’s Muslim Student Organization.

“The future of America is intertwined with everyone in it.”

 

Exactly! Our entire future is dependent on whether or not we can stop the Fabian-style graudalized transformation of America to an Islamized society. To understand what that will be like, one only has to view what is happening in Europe. The final outcome can be seen in the Muslim tribes and clans of the Balkans and the long-term societies found on the Arabian Peninsula and points south and east, including parts of India,Pakistan, Bangladesh, parts of Africa, East Asia, and parts of Pacifica which have been over run and bullied into accepting Islam.

Every part of the earth that has received a Muslim footfall has lost liberty and freedom.

Garrison said she feels the problem often is that people are apathetic and don’t take the time to educate themselves.

“People don’t care and that fosters misunderstanding and racism,” she said. “Soon America will have another target group, and so my hope from this is that we rise above acts of blatant prejudice so when that happens again another minority demographic doesn’t fall victim to this cycle.”

 

People are not apathetic. They are tired of Muslims trying to impose themselves, attempting to run roughshod over the Constitution. They expect that Muslims do the same as have every other immigrant or migrant group: conform to America, rather than the other way round.

If Muslims are unable to do so, they should leave for a more appropriate cultural setting.

 

~~~~~

 

A Bustling Hate-Crime Industry

Hate-crime and hate-thought laws already and wreaking havoc in the EU and Australia. Forty-five states already have such laws, and the recent Don Imus scandal shows that societal pressure can be brought to bear on individuals and groups that violate societal norms.

It seems to me that "hate"-thought law are only useful when governments are attempting to control the behavior of masses of people in favor of special-interest groups which will result in resentment and "creative" ways of discriminating against the groups being protected as citizens find their freedom of speech and personal liberty being curtailed.

Policy Objections: (There are six.)

George Will at the Washington Post:

Political entrepreneurship involves devising benefits to excite or mollify niche constituencies. Hence HR 1592, the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2007, which has passed the House, trailing clouds of sanctimony -- lots of members announced their hatred of hate.

Hate crime laws -- 45 states already have them; Congress does not mind being duplicative -- mandate enhanced punishments for crimes committed because of thoughts that government especially disapproves of. That is, crimes committed because of, not merely accompanied by, those thoughts. Mind-reading juries are required to distinguish causation from correlation.

 

The federal hate crime law enacted in 1968 enhanced punishments only for crimes against persons engaged in a federally protected activity, such as voting. HR 1592 would extend special federal protections to persons who are crime victims because of their race, color, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, gender, gender identity or disability. But there are many other groups, so there will be other hate crime bills.

Hate crimes are seven one-hundredths of 1 percent of all crimes, and 60.5 percent of them consist of vandalism (e.g., graffiti) or intimidation (e.g., verbal abuse). Local law enforcement organizations favor HR 1592, which promises money. Among the more than 200 organizations supposedly ardent for the bill are the American Music Therapy Association, the Aplastic Anemia Foundation of America, Catholics for a Free Choice, Easter Seals, Goodwill Industries, the International Dyslexia Association, Rock the Vote, and the Women's Alliance for Theology, Ethics & Ritual. Who knew?

Hate crime laws are indignation gestures. Legislators federalize the criminal law in order to use it as a moral pork barrel to express theatrical empathy. They score points in the sentiment competition by conferring special government concern for more and more particular groups.

Laws hold us responsible for controlling our minds, which should control our conduct. But government increasingly wants to inventory and furnish our minds, removing socially undesirable desires. Law has always had the expressive function of stigmatizing particular kinds of conduct, but hate crime laws treat certain actions as especially wicked because the actors had odious (although not illegal) frames of mind.

This draws government steadily deeper into stigmatizing certain thoughts and attitudes, which incites more and more groups to clamor for inclusion in the ranks of the especially protected. And Timothy Lynch of the Cato Institute notes that prosecutors of supposed hate crimes must pry into defendants' lives -- books and magazines read, Internet sites visited, the nature of his or her friends -- to uncover evidence of unsavory thinking.(...)

 

Not all "shock jocks" are Caucasian. However, the excuse given for their potty mouths and racial stereotype is...get this, the effect of colonialism and racial self-hatred. NPR claims that there aren't any, even though some are included on this list.

Shouldn't they ALL be held to the same standard?

~~~~~

 

H.R. 1592 'Hate Grandma' bill coming up for vote

Contact Your Legislators About H.R. 1592

Coupon3
H.R. 1592 the "Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2007" sponsored by Michigan's Frank Conyers and a whole host of others is intended to protect the rights of homosexuals. But like everything else, the law of unintended consequences projects consequences for so-called "hate-crimes" or even "hate-speech" against other protected groups.

For instances, according to Janet Folger at WND, this bill will allow violent criminals to serve less jail time if the target is someone other than a homosexual. The point isn't that homosexuals should be hurt more than anyone else, but that Congress is setting up yet another "protected class," and the law will have other consequences.

Imagine law enforcement hanging around your kid's school corridors, waiting to grab up students who get into a shouting match in which one calls another a "fag." Under this bill, the deputy or school resource officer could legally haul to jail underaged students for making that and other remarks.

Targeting "juveniles" to "prevent hate crimes"? We know what that looks like in action because we've seen it before at the state level: Junior Thought Police trained to roam the school hallways looking for verbal "offenses." No kidding. Not sure if they were issued brown shirts. Former U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno and the National Association of Attorneys General spearheaded a program of training students to police the halls for "violators" in Maine, Massachusetts and West Virginia.[i] Other states with representatives on this task force included Tennessee, Pennsylvania, Florida, Mississippi, and New Jersey. [ii]

The West Virginia Office of Civil Rights has organized teams of middle and high school students and teachers – three students per grade plus one or two faculty advisors – who are to report harassment, which in their definition includes "homophobic slurs," to law enforcement officers. [iii] Throwing the First Amendment by the wayside the manual provides sample scenarios that illustrate how a "victim" may rightfully feel threatened (which would constitute a crime) if the alleged perpetrator is perceived as "more powerful," has a "hostile tone" of voice, or "stands too close," etc. [iv]

Let's say two students get into a disagreement which escalates into a close-standing hostile-sounding argument. One is a homosexual and one is a Christian who disagrees with him. Both have done the same thing, but only one is a criminal. Yeah, that would be the Christian kid. Say the Christian kid happens to be tall, then he's got a triple violation going for him because he's: a "more powerful," "close-standing," "hostile sounding" disagreer with the homosexual agenda. Call the police! Oh, they will.

[...]

Even more disturbing are descriptions of typical offenders outlined in the curricula. Types of bias crime perpetrators for police to watch for include the "mission" offender. This person "believes he has been instructed by a higher order (God, the Fuhrer, …)" (p. 20).[vi] Of course the belief in God is as suspect as those who place their beliefs in the Fuhrer – just part of the Government training already in place. No cause for alarm, this bill would just mandate these programs nationally.

The manual also lists "homophobia" as one of the identifying characteristics to spot "hate groups." These suspect groups also "include apocalyptic Christianity in their ideology and believe we are in, or approaching, a period of violence and social turmoil which will precede the Second Coming of Christ" (p.22). [vii] So if you are a Christian who believes what the Bible has to say about homosexual behavior you're a suspect. If you've noticed that reading the paper is strikingly similar to reading the book of Revelation, you are also on a police "most wanted list" of potential criminals. All to be federally funded with your tax dollars if H.R. 1592 becomes law.

 

Other examples of possible "hate-speech" defined as a crime:

Before you answer, let's say the name was really mean, like being called "Four-eyes!" I played on the public school playground, used to wear glasses and have been victimized personally by such horrific verbal assaults. They hurt my feelings. And there ought to be stiff penalties for something like that. Stiff like 23 years behind bars? I don't think so. But the state of New Hampshire does.

Before you answer, let's say the name was really mean, like being called "Four-eyes!" I played on the public school playground, used to wear glasses and have been victimized personally by such horrific verbal assaults. They hurt my feelings. And there ought to be stiff penalties for something like that. Stiff like 23 years behind bars? I don't think so. But the state of New Hampshire does.

[...]

So, if speech turns a three-year sentence into a 30-year sentence for a state "hate crime" violation, just what might H.R. 1592 do on the federal level? As Rep. (and former Judge) Louie Gohmert, R-Texas, pointed out on the House Judiciary Subcommittee, if passed, H.R. 1592 is going to put pastors in prison. Pointing to Title 18 of the US Criminal Code, Section 2 (a):

(a) Whoever commits an offense against the United States or aids, abets, counsels, commands, induces or procures its commission, is punishable as a principal. –18 USC Sec. 2

 

And the City of San Francisco that equates condemnation of homosexuality to murder:

Think this is a stretch? Think again. In 1998, I oversaw the national "Truth in Love" campaign, which expressed hope for change for those struggling in homosexuality – something for which I was accused of murder. Here's a sample of one of the full-page "Truth-in-Love" campaign ads that caused all the commotion. One ad pictured 850 ex-homosexuals with the headline, "We're standing for the truth that homosexuals can change." Brace yourself for "hateful," "bigoted" and "intolerant" speech said to be responsible for murder. (Note: If you're under 18, you may want to ask your parents before reading it.):

We believe every human being is precious to God and is entitled to respect. But when we see great suffering among homosexuals, it's an inherent Christian calling to show compassion and concern.
Wow. With words like "precious," "respect," "compassion" and "concern," you can understand why the city of San Francisco would be prompted to accuse us of murder:

It's not an exaggeration to say that there's a direct correlation between these acts of discrimination, like Matthew Shepard, such as when gays and lesbians are called sinful, and when major religious organizations say they can change if they try, and the horrible crimes committed against gays and lesbians.

– City of San Francisco Board of Supervisors, Oct. 19, 1998.

 

H.R. 1592 isn't about hate. It isn't about crime. It's about silencing speech.

I'm in favor of protecting everyone from violence and crimes against property, but sometimes legislation goes overboard. Legislations often says one thing, but means another because law-encorcement agencies will be forced to act upon them according to the subjective interpretation of district attorneys and courts. Even the Supreme Court has sometimes changed its own rulings depending on who is sitting at that time.

Unfortunately, what a bill says and what it means are often two different things. A law "meant to protection homosexuals" will end up hurting us all.

Would this be considered a crime?

~~~~~

 

"Hate-Crime/Thought" Vote Result

Dymphna at Gates of Vienna reports. Let's hope the President will veto this "wrong-headed notion of 'justice' based on special privilege."
On Thursday, the House of Representatives voted 237-180 to extend existing federal “hate crimes” laws to protect certain groups against crimes which are motivated by the victim’s gender or disability or sexual orientation.

In choosing its politically correct favorite victims, 237 representatives explicitly refused to acknowledge the vulnerability of the military as targets, even though there are established cases of hatred toward those in uniform. Old people were also voted off this bill, even though they are often the targets of crime because of their age or infirmity.

 

H.R. 1592 : Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2007 is a despicable bill. Were it to be enacted, it would swell an already bloated federal government just that much more. It would cost you and me more money, for no discernibly better outcome. It would lengthen trials and cost local governments more money as prosecutors and defenders argued the “true” motives of an assault against those special someones on the endangered list.

When you stop to think about it, this piece of legislation has much in common with Sharia laws: they both say that some of us are more equal than others. We know whom H. R. 1592 protects, and whom it leaves in the dust. Compare it with Sharia law where Muslim men are compensated at a higher level because they are worth more than Muslim women, and infidel women rate lower than infidel men. It’s a case of diminishing punishment depending on how far up the food chain you are.

Here's a hint: white heterosexual men almost disappear off the list. I know: my straight white son was beaten by a group of black “youths” who broke his ribs for fun. The police took a report and shrugged. End of that hate crime...except for his ribs, which are still mending.

Now in America if you’re a homosexual victim and the feds can prove your attacker went after you because of your sexual orientation and not because you were wearing a Rolex and he wanted it, then you get a higher rate of return on your vengeance than would an old person whose purse containing her Social Security check was ripped off her shoulder, causing her to fall and break her hip.

And that’s progressive law in a nutshell: some victims are more equal than others, and any situation where the federal government can stick its nose is now an improvement over local law enforcement.

Fortunately, the President will veto this wrong-headed notion of “justice” based on special privilege. Fortunately, too, the House doesn’t have enough votes to override his signature.

This is a cynical piece of work. The Dems can use it to campaign on their tough attitude toward hate crimes — hmm… are there any love crimes? — and the Republicans can use it to taunt the Dems for trying to blow the federal balloon just that much bigger.

Do you know how your representative voted? Below the fold is a list of the Republicans who voted for this despicable waste of time and resources. If your rep appears on this roll, I strongly urge you to give him or her a nudge, even if you think it’s a hopeless cause. Perhaps especially if you think your representative is nothing but a quintessential pol… they’re the ones who don’t want to hear your dissent, so be sure to share it. Be polite and firm. Tell him why his vote for something that is unconstitutional — i.e., that we are purportedly all equal in the sight of the law — will motivate you to campaign against his continued presence in the halls of Congress.
- - - - - - - - - - -
You can find the addresses and emails here. Don’t use snail mail for the Washington office as it is quarantined. If you want to send a letter use a district office address instead. Most representatives maintain more than one district office, especially if it covers a large geographical area. Emails and phone calls work fine, too, especially if you know you won’t get around to posting a letter.

Don’t bother to contact a representative outside your district. They seem to take great pleasure in reminding you that you’re not in their district, so they don’t have to listen to you. Even Mrs. Pelosi does this, despite her position as the national Speaker of the House.

Now, let’s see what they drag up next. Harry Reid has some ideas about old legislation.

Seems like this group can’t do much but wash, rinse, repeat….

California CA-45 Bono, Mary
Connecticut CT-04 Shays, Christopher
Delaware DE-00 Castle, Michael
Florida FL-21 Diaz-Balart, Lincoln
FL-25 Diaz-Balart, Mario
FL-18 Ros-Lehtinen, Ileana
Illinois IL-13 Bigger, Judy
IL-10 Kirk, Mark
IL-18 LaHood, Ray
Louisiana LA-04 McCrery, James
Maryland MD-01 Gilchrist, Wayne
Nevada NV-03 Porter, Jon
New Jersey NJ-07 Ferguson, Michael
NJ-11 Frelinghuysen, Rodney
NJ-02 LoBiondo, Frank
NJ-03 Saxton, H.
New York NY-29 Kuhl, John
NY-25 Walsh, James
Ohio OH-15 Pryce, Deborah
Oregon OR-02 Walden, Greg
Pennsylvania PA-15 Dent, Charles
PA-03 English, Philip
PA-06 Gerlah, Jim
PA-19 Platts, Tod
Washington WA-08 Reichert, Dave
 

 

Use the link to the President at the sidebar to encourage his veto.

And here's a flashback: Abolishing America (contd.): Muslims and Multiculturalism

 

Home ] Site Contents ] Authors ] Eleanor Page 1 ] [ Eleanor Page 2 ] Archives ]

Updated: 22 May 2007

Copyright (c) 2004 - 2007 6th Column Against Jihad--All rights reserved