Posted on 07/02/2009 7:43:35 AM PDT by mudblood
Holder: Whites and Ministers will not be protected by proposed hate crimes legislation. Attorney General Eric Holder testified to the Senate Judiciary Committee on June 25 and gave startling testimony that means Christian ministers and whites will not be protected under the hate crimes statute proposed by the Department of Justice. Holder says that the proposed statute would only protect “traditional” victims of hate crimes, and then he goes on to name a series of Democratic Party constituencies.
You can either launch the video here or click the webstream link here to see his testimony for yourself.
Senator Sessions asks Holder about the scope of the protected classes. (Beginning at 58:43 – running through 60:09) Sessions presents a hypothetical where a minister gives a sermon, quotes the Bible about homosexuality and is thereafter attacked by a gay activist because of what the minister said about his religious beliefs and what scripture says about homosexuality.
Holder: “Well the statute would not necessarily cover that. On the other hand, I think the concern that actually has been expressed is if the action was reversed. . . . We are talking about, if in fact the person, we are talking about crimes that have a historic basis. Groups who have been targeted for violence as a result of their skin color, sexual orientation, that is what this legislation is designed to cover. The fact that someone might strike somebody as a result of pure speech, again, . . . we don’t have the indication that somebody was motivated to strike at somebody because they were in one of these protected classes. That would not be covered by the statute.”
Later, Senator Tom Coburn asks Holder if the muslim radical who killed army recruiter Pvt. Long committed a hate crime. Holder’s equivocation was disturbing. “There is a certain element of hate in that, I suppose.” He would suppose. You can see him “suppose” at minute 73:00.
Then Holder goes on to list the only groups intended to be protected by the proposed law. This is racial identity politics taking a sinister turn. Holder explicitly says the proposed law only protects classes “where there is a history” of violence against those groups. “What we are looking for here in terms of expansion of the statute are instances where there is a historic basis. See, groups of people who are singled out for violence perpetrated against them because of who they are. I don’t know if we have the same historical record to say members of our military have been targeted in the same way that people who are African American, people who are Jewish, people who are gay, have been targeted over the many years.” (minute 73:00-74:00)
Based on Holder’s testimony, it is clear that the law would not protect white victims who were attacked because of their race by racial minorities. Holder’s testimony explicitly excluded prosecution of the gay activist who attacks a Christian minister or priest because of his sermon on homosexuality, but the legislation protects the gay activist when he is attacked. This is a dangerous development to our laws and our nation. One of the most fundamental principles in the founding of this nation was that all are created equal. A bloody Civil War was fought to sustain it. No group enjoys privileged status over the other. Once the Department can decide to protect certain individuals for crimes, and not others, those not protected will lose faith in the system. Loss of faith in the system is more than a simple inconvenience. Confidence that laws are enforced fairly and equally preserves peace and prosperity. Lawlessness ensues when the law is perceived as a weapon against certain groups for the benefit of other groups. It is not enough to simply point to a bundle of statistics or history, or to Matthew Sheppard, to justify unfairness in the law.
“What we are looking for here in terms of expansion of the statute are instances where there is a historic basis”
Like Jews, but because they pick themselves up, they are not considered a politically correct group.
By the way, haven't the moslems been slaughtering the Christians and people of other faiths since their inception?
The killing of anyone is a hate crime.
No one is more deserving than another!
Henry is out scouting hog farms. The time is soon coming.
It’s no longer about logic. It never has been with racial politics.
Our government becomes more and more illogical and irrational. That’s a hallmark of fascism.
I don’t look forward to that day, but I don’t see any way to make an argument that it’s not coming.
I’ll deal with it, when it comes, as I must.
I just sent a message to my Senator.
The Obama’s Adminstration three R’s-Retribution,Redistribution,Reparations.
How soon until we have to start wearing little yellow crosses on clothes, and have a number stamp to be allowed to buy and sell?
Thanks, I better do the same.
What country am I in?
Find me the Wizard, I need to find my way to the USA.
Then on the local level, rape, rob, and if you can think of a third I would appreciate it.
Rappin’
Unconstitutional under the 4th amendment. We don’t need hate crimes laws anyway. It is already against the law to physically attack someone, regardless of the reason. I see no instance, ever, of a physical attack on someone being a love crime. Hate crimes are just another way to make privileged class in America. As I said, it is an unconstitutional law under the 4th.
He should be fired.
Nah, I really do look forward to it, because quite obviously, it’s an extreme event that is necessary to wake things up in this country. Most people are not paying attention to what is happening, or they don’t have the capacity to figure out the future ramifications of what is being done right now. But boy oh boy, when 9-11 hit, President Bush had 95% approval ratings for six months because everyone woke up.
Especially since the FBI actually prosecutes hate crimes against whites...well, they used to, anyway, that is until they get Holder’s memo...
http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/hc2005/table1.htm
Well, then, Rev Wright’s sermons could be used as evidence of hate speech against whites, as could all the negative press for Pro-lifers and Veterans by the DoHS. All we need to do is cry real loud.
Excellent.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.