gungadin09
Posts: 3232
Joined: 3/19/2010 Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri Here's something I did "like" about the guys that were caught. They were white. So, at least 5 white guys were caught attacking a supposed white pride group. That speaks to their stance against racism. Are you really saying white guys can't be against white supremacy? But, here's what they were charged with: Five of the attackers were caught and have now been charged with aggravated battery, mob action and criminal damage to property, all felonies. Well, yes. Now, I could be wrong, but racism was at the heart of these attacks, right? I think you are wrong. Coming out against racism isn't itself racist. What reason do you have to attribute these attacks to the victims' race, rather than their political views? Nevermind, I'll answer that myself. None, apparently, because many of the people charged with this assault against white supremists were themselves white, as you said yourself. Doesn't that qualify these attacks as "hate crimes?" In my opinion, any assault is a "hate crime". However, the hate, in this case, seems to be based on politics, and not on race. There was no mention of hate crime accusations, though it is clearly a case of an attack because of racism. Because an attack "because of racism" (as heinous as it may be) is neverthetheless NOT a "hate crime", at least by the Justice Department's definition of the term "hate crime": "Hate crime is the violence of intolerance and bigotry, intended to hurt and intimidate someone because of their race, ethnicity, national origin, sexual orientation, or disability. (You will notice that "political views" is NOT on the list." http://www.justice.gov/crs/pubs/htecrm.htm Lastly, where are the "Reverends" Sharpton and Jackson? Probably too smart to endose assault, no matter who it was against. My vote is for: NOT ironic. Just sad. Pam
< Message edited by gungadin09 -- 5/23/2012 11:01:53 PM >
_____________________________
[link] www.youtube.com/watch?v=DlvDnbFOkYY [/link]
|