“We cannot let color-blindness become myopia which masks the reality that "many" created equal" have been treated within our lifetimes as inferior both by the law and by their fellow citizens.” ~William J. Brennan, Jr.
The U.S. Commission on Civil Rights said the department's reversal in the case indicates that its Civil Rights Division is failing to protect voters and is "at war with its core mission of guaranteeing equal protection [under] the laws for all Americans.''
License to Kill Black Men!
And Now White Men, Too.
We now see a pattern of law emerging, from both the state and federal courts that grant police departments across the nation, a license to kill black men. In virtually every case that has made its way before the court involving the killing of unarmed black men by police officers, the court has found legal precedent to justify such killings. The publice record demonstrates that not one police officer in America has been convicted of killing an unarmed black man. In one of the most egregious cases, New York Police Officers shot an unarmed black man fifty (50) times. Every officer involved in this shooting of Sean Bell was exonerated by a court.
"Current federal hate crimes law permits the federal prosecution of a hate crime only if the hate crime was motivated by bias based on race, color, religion, or national origin and the assailant intends to prevent the victim from exercising a "federally protected right" such as Speech."
Back when I was on the receiving end of racial discrimination, it was to me not simply a personal misfortune, or even the misfortune of a race, it was a moral outrage. But not everyone who went through such an experience sees it that way.
When it comes to subjecting other people to the same treatment in a later era, some have no real problem with that. They see it as pay-back.
One of the many problems of the pay-back approach is that many of the people who most deserve retribution are no longer alive. You can take symbolic revenge on people who look like them but this removes the whole moral element. If it is all right to discriminate today against individuals who have done you no harm, then why was it wrong to discriminate against you in the past?
These are not just abstract questions. These are serious, real world questions.
Some judicial nominees have had racial bias attributed to them, despite their years of unwavering support of civil rights for all-- Judge Robert Bork and Judge Charles Pickering being striking examples. But the current Supreme Court nominee is the first in decades to explicitly introduce racial differences in their own words, along with the claim that their own racial or ethnic background makes them better qualified.
Attempts to claim that Judge Sonia Sotomayor's words were isolated remarks-- a slip of the tongue "taken out of context"-- have now been discredited by further information showing that she has repeatedly expressed the same ideas, in virtually the same words, at other times and in other contexts.
Moreover, her deeds-- including years of participation in group identity politics-- are perfectly consistent with her words. So too was her vote on the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals to summarily dismiss the appeal of white firefighters who did not get the promotions they had earned by passing a required test, because not enough minority firefighters passed to provide racial "diversity."
The Supreme Court of the United States found that appeal worth hearing, even if Judge Sotomayor did not.
The warm and genial image of Sonia Sotomayor presented on television, during President Obama's introduction and afterwards, is in sharp contrast with what attorneys who have appeared before her in court have said.
A poll of such attorneys showed them rating her worse than other judges in her treatment of those who appeared before her. A tape of Judge Sotomayor's abusive behavior in court backed up the attorneys' picture. It is also consistent with someone in pay-back mode.
A confirmation decision on a Supreme Court nominee is not like deciding whether someone is innocent or guilty of a crime. It is right in criminal cases that the burden of proof is on those making an accusation, and that the accusation be proved "beyond a reasonable doubt."
Judge Sotomayor is not in jeopardy of either criminal or civil penalties. So there is no reason why either the criminal standard or proof "beyond a reasonable doubt" or the civil standard of "the preponderance of evidence" is required for determining whether she is the right person to be given a lifetime appointment to the highest court of the land.
It is hundreds of millions of Americans-- current and future-- whose fundamental rights are at stake whenever any nominee is being considered for the Supreme Court of the United States. It is the American people as a whole who are entitled to the benefit of the doubt.
"will provide police and sheriff's departments with the tools and resources they need to ensure that entire communities are not terrorized by hate violence."
Opponents of the bill, including conservative religious groups, argued that it infringes on states' rights and could intimidate free speech.
Supporters countered that prosecutions under the bill can occur only when bodily injury is involved, and no minister or protester could be targeted for expressing opposition to homosexuality, even if their statements are followed by another person committing a violent action.
To emphasize the point, the Senate passed provisions restating that the bill does not prohibit constitutionally protected speech and that free speech is guaranteed unless it is intended to plan or prepare for an act of violence.
Better question is why did this F.B.I. agent and the Department Of Justice allow the agent to lie to the people they are sworn to serve that there was never an investigation? Did they play cover up for the L.A.P.D.? Or even worse, did the L.A.P.D. cover up for the F.B.I.? And who killed JFK, RFK and MLK
Thu Mar 19 1998 18:49:40 Received: from redrivernet.com (redrivernet.com [22.214.171.124]) by atlas.earthlink.net (8.8.7/8.8.5) with ESMTP id JAA29238 for <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Death from Above <email@example.com>
Organization: Death from above Inc.
Subject: Felling Saucy
The next time you feel bad. Or the next time you feel like killing a cop maybe if the next time you take your sad sorry excuse for a human being you just might find me and few of my freinds at your door...... Then your worthless self will be dead and I will personaly smash your computer after I delete your web page. Is'nt freedom of speech great... XOXO Death from Above
COMMENT FROM KILLERCOP.COM:
Spell Checker is great, freedom of the speech is priceless.
The supreme race does the right thing.
Sat Apr 11 19:57:39 1998 Return-Path: <firstname.lastname@example.org>Received: from smtp3.erols.com ([126.96.36.199]) by diane.netcbc.com (post.office MTA v2.0 0813 ID# 0-14094) with ESMTP id AAA273 for <email@example.com>
I still don't understand why people whine when the supreme race does the right thing and puts niggers in their place. Somalia was probably the best time of my life. Everyday we got to bust some niggers. Man, a .300 Win Mag opens there head up like a watermelon dropped on the sidewalk. Ah, but not long before we get to do the same thing here.
But shoot straight nigger (yeah right) cause we don't miss. Hope ur enjoying ur collard greens and fried chicken,
You are truley a sick person... You have nothing more to do but bring a bad name to those people who try to protect us from the the people out there who try to do us so much warm...
It would be real easy for someone like you who does not protect us from these people to judge those who do. Maybe instead of trying so hard to promote the killing of these police officers and spend a few of those dollars in a education, maybe you should try to become a police officer and see if your intentions of killing would be the same.
I think you represent the moral decline that troubles this society... How would you feel if we started to kill all owners of cats that go outside and shit on the ground that we walk on.... would you feel threatened by that...
KILLER COPS REPLY: In answer to the question, in
the fiction, of the cats, my only worry and question back for you is this,
"Do the "owners" of the cats have the right of the bearing of the
Arms in the defense from the killers of the cats?
If your answer is yes, I
would have no problem with killing the owners of cats. Let them fend for
themselves like the rest of the counrty. Lord knows the cops won't help
them...they're too busy shooting unarmed people and cats!!
i hope some cops kid fucks your mother
Tue Mar 31 21:12:58 1998 Return-Path: <C2O2P3@aol.com> Received: from imo13.mx.aol.com ([188.8.131.52]) by diane.netcbc.com (post.office MTA v2.0 0813 ID# 0-14094) with ESMTP id AAA363 for <firstname.lastname@example.org>;
you are were you deserve to be........i wish you come to my city you piece of garbage.....i dont eat donuts and dont beat people just for fun ....however with you i can make a reason to change this......if you were inocent you would be out .....if there was no evidence you would be out .......you have a 12 gauge ......i have my handsand i wouldn't even use my gun ...i just beat the shit out of you with my hands.......later you piece of shit.....i hope some cops kid fucks your mother then your old lady gives them aids so they can die slow ...then he fucks your sister and they have a kid..who then runs into you one day and blows you the fuck away ......
welcome to new york
Tue Mar 31 18:11:46 1998 Return-Path: <email@example.com> Received: from hvis1.hvi.net ([184.108.40.206]) by diane.netcbc.com (post.office MTA v2.0 0813 ID# 0-14094) with ESMTP id AAA231 for <firstname.lastname@example.org>;
welcome to new york - where we dont like people who advocate the killing of police officers - i see that you dont have any sponsors or ads on your site - nice - and as soon as the trace comes back we will all know who or what you were - have fun with your idea that backfired in hindsight.
I can take a .45 Glock and put 10 rounds into you
Wed Apr 01 07:07:58 1998 Return-Path: <email@example.com> Received: from Telemann.inoc.dl.nec.com ([220.127.116.11]) by diane.netcbc.com (post.office MTA v2.0 0813 ID# 0-14094) with ESMTP id AAA259 for <firstname.lastname@example.org>;
I'll make you a bet. I'll bet that if you come to DFW in Texas, that I can take a .45 Glock and put 10 rounds into you, and no one in Texas will indict me...... Since I can't go through the secured area armed, please advise what flight you will be on, and what you'll be wearing. Then we'll see.....
Tue Mar 31 18:11:53 1998 Return-Path: <email@example.com>Received: from hotmail.com ([18.104.22.168]) by diane.netcbc.com (post.office MTA v2.0 0813 ID# 0-14094) with SMTP id AAA259 for <firstname.lastname@example.org>; Originating-IP: [22.214.171.124]
Tue Mar 31 17:34:56 1998Return-Path: <NascarDEE3@aol.com>Received: from imo15.mx.aol.com ([126.96.36.199]) by diane.netcbc.com (post.office MTA v2.0 0813 ID# 0-14094) with ESMTP id AAA155 for <email@example.com>
Sat Apr 11 12:49:26 1998 Return-Path: <SergtRock@aol.com>Received: from imo15.mx.aol.com ([188.8.131.52]) by diane.netcbc.com (post.office MTA v2.0 0813 ID# 0-14094) with ESMTP id AAA242 for <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Maybe some day I will get to level my glock at you....
Mon Apr 06 19:18:02 1998 Return-Path: <JCoburn235@aol.com> Received: from imo27.mx.aol.com ([184.108.40.206]) by diane.netcbc.com (post.office MTA v2.0 0813 ID# 0-14094) with ESMTP id AAA93 for <email@example.com>
Contemptible police tactics - Cops raid the home of a licensed medical marijuana provider in Washington, handcuff the fourteen year old son and put a gun to his head, and search the nineteen year old daughter and take the contents of her mickey-mouse wallet.
How To Survive Traffic Stops in America, Submit, Instantly! - What the cops want is immediate obedience and submission. Many cops are ex-military and view the civilian motorists of America about like they viewed the hapless peasants of Iraq and Afghanistan, that is, with contempt, not as fellow citizens deserving of civility and respect. It is a possibly lethal mistake to do anything other than submit, instantly and obey! Or be ready to shoot first. But aim high.