Home  |   Jihad Watch  |   Horowitz  |   Archive  |   Columnists  |     DHFC  |  Store  |   Contact  |   Links  |   Search Friday, July 20, 2018
FrontPageMag Article
Write Comment View Comments Printable Article Email Article
Are You a Hate Criminal? By: Richard Poe
FrontPageMagazine.com | Thursday, August 30, 2001

ARE YOU a hate criminal?


Of course not, you say. You’re a lawabiding citizen. You have black friends. You’ve never said the "nword" in your life. You even vote Democrat.

Unfortunately if you’re white, none of those factors will protect you from hate crime prosecution.

Someday, quite unexpectedly, you may find yourself facing a violent black criminal. Should you hurt or even insult your attacker, you may end up doing hard time in the slammer on hate crime charges.

Lonny Rae of Idaho. Last October, when a black man physically manhandled Rae’s wife, Rae threatened the man, using the "nword." No blows were struck. Yet, Rae now faces a possible five years in prison. The black man who allegedly started the fracas has not been charged.

Today’s fastgrowing hatecrime bureaucracy can target virtually anyone. Just ask Carl Williams, former superintendent of the New Jersey State Police.

In February 1999, Williams told the Newark StarLedger that, while he did not approve of racial profiling, race was obviously a factor in drug crime.

"Today… the drug problem is cocaine or marijuana," Williams explained. "It is most likely a minority group that's involved with that. If you're looking at the methamphetamine market, that seems to be controlled by the motorcycle gangs, which are basically predominantly white. If you're looking at heroin and stuff like that, your involvement there is more or less Jamaicans."

Williams was simply stating what every cop knows. However, thenGovernor Christie Whitman denounced his words as, "inconsistent with our efforts to enhance public confidence in the State Police."

Williams was fired and branded a racist.

Four months later, Jeffrey Goldberg, a reporter for the New York Times Magazine, pointed out to Whitman that the Web site of Barry McCaffrey, Bill Clinton’s drug czar, made statements very similar to those of Williams.

The Web site noted that "minorities, Mexican nationals" sell heroin in Denver, while, in Trenton, "crack dealers are predominantly AfricanAmerican males, powdered cocaine dealers are predominantly Latino."

Was it fair to fire Williams for simply echoing the words of the president’s own drug czar?

"His comments indicated a lack of sensitivity to the seriousness of the problem," Whitman responded.

"But was he wrong on the merits?" Goldberg pressed.

Whitman replied: "If he said, 'You should never use this solely; race could be a partial indicator, taken in concert with other factors…"'

Goldberg notes that Whitman paused, at this point, in midsentence, perhaps seeing "the road down which she’s heading." In fact, Williams had said precisely that race was only a partial factor.

"But you can’t be that broadbrushed," Whitman concluded abruptly.

Williams sued for $21.8 million. But the "hatecrime" ideology is deeply entrenched in our judicial system. In July of this year, the state Supreme Court of New Jersey refused to hear Williams’ case, giving no explanation for its decision.

Williams lost far more than his job. As a publicly acknowledged "racist," Williams lost many of the basic rights of citizenship.

Most notably, he lost the right to defend his life against physical attack.

Let me explain.

Suppose Williams is attacked by a black criminal. And suppose he wounds or kills his assailant. What do you suppose would happen next?

Can anyone doubt that Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson would immediately clamor for his prosecution on hate crime charges?

The case would be a shooin. After all, Williams has been publicly branded a racist.

It doesn’t take much to earn the title of "bigot" nowadays.

In 1994, the Department of Housing and Urban Development cast an entire community of upscale New Yorkers under suspicion of bigotry.

After learning of plans to build housing for the mentally ill homeless in their neighborhood, residents of Manhattan’s Gramercy Park launched a petition drive.

The feds responded with a reign of terror.

Charging housing discrimination, HUD investigators ordered protesters to turn in phone messages, membership lists of their groups, and even personal diaries.

HUD backed down under pressure from the press and the ACLU. But God help any of those petitioners should they someday have a physical confrontation with a member of some protected minority.

The fact that they were once investigated for bigotry will hang over their heads, like a Sword of Damocles, for life.

"Whites are just getting what they deserve," some black readers may retort, "a taste of their own medicine."

But, as Dr. Frankenstein learned, monsters have a way of turning on their creators. Those who cheer on the thought police today may well be their victims tomorrow.

We have implemented a new commenting system. To use it you must login/register with disqus. Registering is simple and can be done while posting this comment itself. Please contact gzenone [at] horowitzfreedomcenter.org if you have any difficulties.
blog comments powered by Disqus

Home | Blog | Horowitz | Archives | Columnists | Search | Store | Links | CSPC | Contact | Advertise with Us | Privacy Policy

Copyright©2007 FrontPageMagazine.com