Michelle Malkin » Which of these is a crime in America? Update: Criminal complaint added.

Which of these is a crime in America? Update: Criminal complaint added.

By Michelle Malkin • July 30, 2007 01:57 PM

Bumped–originally posted July 29, 2007 @ 22:07

Update: LGF has background about the arresting officer. Allah has more legal analysis based on the complaint. And Christopher Hitchens weighs in:

Before me is a recent report that a student at Pace University in New York City has been arrested for a hate crime in consequence of an alleged dumping of the Quran. Nothing repels me more than the burning or desecration of books, and if, for example, this was a volume from a public or university library, I would hope that its mistreatment would constitute a misdemeanor at the very least. But if I choose to spit on a copy of the writings of Ayn Rand or Karl Marx or James Joyce, that is entirely my business. When I check into a hotel room and send my free and unsolicited copy of the Gideon Bible or the Book of Mormon spinning out of the window, I infringe no law, except perhaps the one concerning litter. Why do we not make this distinction in the case of the Quran? We do so simply out of fear, and because the fanatical believers in that particular holy book have proved time and again that they mean business when it comes to intimidation. Surely that should be to their discredit rather than their credit. Should not the “moderate” imams of On Faith have been asked in direct terms whether they are, or are not, negotiating with a gun on the table?
The Pace University incident becomes even more ludicrous and sinister when it is recalled that Islamists are the current leaders in the global book-burning competition.

Update: Here’s the criminal complaint.

***
A pictorial pop quiz for you. Which of these is a hate crime in America?

A) Submerging a crucifix in a jar of urine.

B) Burning the American flag.

C) Putting a Koran in a toilet.

Each is offensive and tasteless in its own way. But only one is a hate crime in the eyes of the law — C) — and 23-year-old Stanislav Shmulevich of Brooklyn faces jail time for it. He’s a Pace University student arrested on Friday on hate-crime charges after he threw a Koran in a toilet at Pace University on two separate occasions, according to police.

Charles Johnson at LGF has been in contact with Shmulevich. He reports that the student has been charged with two felonies, criminal mischief and aggravated harassment. Allahpundit has a thorough legal review.

Mark Steyn muses about the flushed Koran: “Obviously Mr Shmulevich should have submerged it in his own urine, applied for an NEA grant and offered it to the Whitney Biennial.”

Actually, no. The NEA would have turned Shmulevich in to the police, too. Now, if he had submerged a Bible in urine or coated a Torah in cow dung and submitted it for a federal grant, he’d be sitting pretty–and facing rave New York Times editorials instead of time behind bars.

***

More reax…

Phil Orenstein at The Democracy Project has “been involved over the past year battling the censorship and outrages of the film police at Pace, where the administrators caved in to Muslim Student Association’s pressure and threatened police action against Hillel if they showed the film Obsession.” Orenstein notes the “double standard lurking at Pace, throughout academia and trickling down throughout the body politic where Muslims and certain identity groups get preferential treatment while others are spurned.”

There is no right in a democracy not to be offended although the threats and bullying tactics of CAIR and MSA have forced the hand of Pace administrators and New York’s Police Department to do their sinister bidding.

Andrew Bostom digs deeper:

Western discourse must move well beyond condemnation of clumsy acts of disapproval, such as Koran flushing, and their aggressive prosecution under pressure by Muslim avatars of real hatred, and abettors of murderous jihad terrorism, such as CAIR—to more fundamental and unnerving questions: What role do Koranic injunctions themselves—eternal and beyond criticism (least of all by non-Muslims)—play in inciting “criminal mischief and aggravated mischief”, and much more heinous crimes against humanity, including jihad genocide, and the destruction of non-Muslim religious, cultural, and political institutions?

Rick Moran:

The Korans Mr. Shmulevich threw in the toilet were school property taken from a “meditation room” on campus. Now I’m not a lawyer and will make no attempt to analyze the legal issues regarding this case. But Allah has the language of the statutes under which Mr. Shmulevich is being charged with a hate crime and to these layman’s eyes, it is perplexing to me why the prosecutor would be charging Mr. Shmulevich under either of these statutes. Instead, it appears to be a case where the prosecutor files more serious charges in hopes the defendant will plead to lesser ones.

Charge him with stealing the Korans, yes. Perhaps even charge him with a misdemeanor for vandalizing school property. But charging the man with two felony counts under dubious circumstances smacks of prosecutorial overkill.

Posted in: Danish Cartoons, Sharia

Send to a Friend
Printer Friendly

comments (162)

trackbacks (56)

See what others have said

Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.

Trackbacks

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: « 1 [2]

#101

On July 30th, 2007 at 4:06 pm, PBoilermaker said:

Yes, this is all a bunch of BS, but is anyone surprised? Honestly?

Question is, what can be done about it?
#102

On July 30th, 2007 at 4:13 pm, chapoutier said:

To I am saved: Caveat: Not a criminal attorney, but “criminal mischief in the fourth degree” sounds about right for this sort of theft and/or vandalism, i.e that was the underlying crime of taking the book and flushing it.

Fact is there is no such thing as being convicted of a free-standing “hate crime”. There has to be some sort of underlying other crime that was motivated by the hate.
#103

On July 30th, 2007 at 4:17 pm, 24Klady said:

chaputier #98 - What if it’s a Bible or Torah that’s damaged, destroyed or burned? Would the crime then apply to it’s monetary value or is it also to be deemed a felony? For that matter, why must it be a book with any religious relationship. Been a long time since I was in school, but seem to remember that for a lost, stolen, maimed, or damaged book you or your parents were sent a bill and that was the end of it. Not trying to deliberately miss the point here, but I’m getting more suspicious this has a lot more going on than reported. Either the book chucking student had an agenda or the group pressuring the school has an ever bigger one. Either way, it will be the students of tomorrow that pay the ultimate price.
#104

On July 30th, 2007 at 4:25 pm, 24Klady said:

Apology chapoutier, spelled your nic as chaputier #103. I promise not input anything further suffering an overdose of caffeine!
#105

On July 30th, 2007 at 4:25 pm, PBoilermaker said:

or the group pressuring the school has an ever bigger one. Either way, it will be the students of tomorrow that pay the ultimate price.

Bingo. It is a preemptive strike and it appears to be working.
#106

On July 30th, 2007 at 4:27 pm, chapoutier said:

To 24 Klady: If a bible or torah were damaged or destroyed in the way it was here, and the perpetrator admitted to doing it out of a hatred for christians or jews, and the jurisdiction had a hate crime statute, as they did here, then I would hope for the same treatment.

But that is not what happened with the artwork (term used loosely) that MM cites, nor is it the same situation as flag burning. Despite what those action’s reflect of the actor’s hatred, there is no underlying crime (at least not yet) and therefore a poor comparison.

Again, I’m not a fan of any hate crime legislation, but apparently its the law in that jurisdicition and should be upheld fairly. If you have evidence that the “hate crime” part is being unevenly utilized there against one group and not against another, then that is a whole different story. But until then all this is speculation and bluster.
#107

On July 30th, 2007 at 4:43 pm, bear1909 said:

The Pace University judicial code for students more than likely addresses what the penalty is for stealing, vandalizing, or destroying University property.

Yes, chapoutier, the student stole the book (probably has a replacement value of under $30.

The point is that the University has arbitrarily set the value of this particular piece of property so high as to: 1) defer to the NYPD jurisdiction over the matter; 2) completely violate its own terms of its code of conduct for students by abdicating its role of arbiter of these matters; and, 3) judging that an Islamic text should receive protection not afforded other religious texts which have been defaced with obscenities, alteration of “holy pictures”, and soiled with human DNA in various forms (these acts are merely alluded to in secular terms in the student conduct code using words such as “refrain from destroying” “respect the resources of the University”..blah blah blah.

My concern here is that the President is being pressured to man up and be PC at a campus that has only in the past five years tracked “campus climate” issues involving harassment of protected groups.

THis has been the normal evolutionary process of PC control of college life on many many college campuses.

Pace is five years into the process.

Believe me, there have been worse acts perpetrated against racial groups which campus judicial systems across the country have had to deal with- and students weren’t being charged with felonies because somebody’s religious views were offended or transgressed.

There is a good possibility this wont get any traction because there is too much precedent to allow it to get any.

For example, a campus i worked on in New England (major school with major reputation) was the scene of a firebombing of a shanty town erected by students of color on the main campus green.

Felony charges were discussed but in the end the campus handled the matter by retaining its jurisdiction (full investigations by campus police and reviews by many hearings and meetings across the campus community).

The firebombers were lucky students werent sleeping in the shanties when they threw their molotov cocktails. The structures were erected on university property and were therefore university property.

It violated the code of conduct and the rights of students of color practicing their right to dissent.

The symbolism of the structure was clearly defined by the students as a symbol of racial inequities perceived, real, and imagined by the dissenting students.

The firebombing was racially inspired because its end was to end the dissent of a specific group of students with precise racial and ethnic identities.

There is a good possibility that the higher ups who hired this weak President at Pace will pull him into the back room and let him know he needs to get control of the situation *and* get control of the students.

The President will get ahold of the VP for Student Affairs and chafe their necks or else. And from there, the student groups, namely MSA, will be monitored as to what they are doing around campus with their own brand of mischief.

If things can’t be calmed down, there will be a semi-violent student protest (a student led takeover of the admin building)and it will be led by MSA who will then be exposed as the perps they are.

Notice in the article I cited that they interviewed a scared Muslim female student. They didn’t interview any of the leadership of the MSA….who tend not to be female students.

The MSA is behind the whole thing.
#108

On July 30th, 2007 at 4:51 pm, bear1909 said:

it is not all necessarily bluster, chapoutier.

The document MM published refers to the confessant having a disagreement with a “group of students”.

The hate crime laws of the state of New York are not being cited. Criminal mischief charges are being leveled. And the hub-bub over this is being referred to as a “hate crime”. At least my understanding of the charges, as outlined in detail at the Captain’s blog Captain’s last nite, leads me to see the distinction being made.

The key question still remains- and 24kLady alludes to it in her #103- why is this being handled by the NYPD and not the normal student judicial disciplinary channels for stealing and vandalizing university property?
#109

On July 30th, 2007 at 4:55 pm, PBoilermaker said:

The key question still remains- and 24kLady alludes to it in her #103- why is this being handled by the NYPD and not the normal student judicial disciplinary channels for stealing and vandalizing university property?

It is agenda-driven hype. That’s why.
#110

On July 30th, 2007 at 4:56 pm, 24Klady said:

Has the book chucker admitted he did this out of “hatred” for Islam, Islamic students, or the Koran? Or simply, dislike? To subject all students to sensitivity training after the alleged incident smacks of 1938, and should scare all of us.
#111

On July 30th, 2007 at 5:02 pm, chapoutier said:

Bear:

A fine post and I guess I don’t really disagree that this may have been an overreaction on the school’s part or the result of pressure from a campus group. However, we are not talking about someone spray painting some childish obscenities on the bathroom wall. This is something, like cross-burning that is meant to express explicit hatred for one group. The perp in this instance admitted as much. No matter what group that is directed toward, that is a dangerous thing for a school to ignore and exposes them to great liability if something worse were to happen. So can’t say as I blame the school that much for getting the police involved.

My original point was:
1. that MM throws up this article and then points to a couple of totally unrelated items as “proof” that hate crime laws are prosecuted unfairly.
2. setting aside one’s opinions on how Pace or law enforcement reacted here, until one shows me that the parties involved have in the past or would have handled it differently if it someone would have, for example left burning bibles at the door of the right-to-life chapter, I am a little skeptical on how this incident provides much basis for her assertion either.
#112

On July 30th, 2007 at 5:05 pm, On-my-soap-box said:

On July 30th, 2007 at 4:27 pm, chapoutier said: If a bible or torah were damaged or destroyed in the way it was here, and the perpetrator admitted to doing it out of a hatred for christians or jews, and the jurisdiction had a hate crime statute, as they did here, then I would hope for the same treatment.

There you have it. Most people can say (because of what we have seen done to the Bible, Torah, Mary…) the answer would be no. The best we can hope for is we can “hope for the same treatment”.
#113

On July 30th, 2007 at 5:10 pm, chapoutier said:

On my soap box….

Most people can say (because of what we have seen done to the Bible, Torah, Mary…) the answer would be no.

Again, what examples of this inequitable treatment are you using? As I recall there was plenty of rage about the urine cross, etc…but obviously no hate crime allegations could be brought because there was not a crime committed in those cases.

So where is the inequity in treatment? Please give me some real examples
#114

On July 30th, 2007 at 5:16 pm, twoninerkilo said:

In my humble opinion, I think all korans should be thown in the crapper.Of course that is my opinion, not the opinion of this webb site.
#115

On July 30th, 2007 at 5:20 pm, AlohaGuy said:

Go to the American Muslim Law Enforcement Officers Association and note that Det. Faisal Khan is nominated for a board position
http://www.amleoa.com/events.html
#116

On July 30th, 2007 at 5:21 pm, chapoutier said:

Most people can say (because of what we have seen done to the Bible, Torah, Mary…) the answer would be no.

And what an enlightened opinion that you and EWT have. Thank you for sharing that pearl. Way to really add to the discussion.
#117

On July 30th, 2007 at 5:25 pm, gayle said:

Don’t get me riled up.
You’ll get a thrashing! LOL!
#118

On July 30th, 2007 at 5:26 pm, tmitsss said:

I can’t help but compare and contrast this to an current controversy in Asheville NC. A deputy sheriff recently arrested someone on a Flag desecration charge. Of course the flag desecration in constitutionally protected as free speech. So its the Deputy who’s in trouble

Citizen Times

Editoral
#119

On July 30th, 2007 at 5:29 pm, gayle said:

In comparison, the South Korean Christians being slaughtered, far outweighs anything about a dang koran!

Let’s hear about that on the news.
#120

On July 30th, 2007 at 5:30 pm, chapoutier said:

And of course gayle I meant that if you were to take someone else’s koran and do whatever you did to it, that is and should be punishable.

I fully support your right hate islam or to do whatever you want to any koran that has come lawfully into your possession. Except throw it at me. Please don’t do that.
#121

On July 30th, 2007 at 5:31 pm, On-my-soap-box said:

On July 30th, 2007 at 5:10 pm, chapoutier said: examples of this inequitable treatment

Exactly my point, there are no examples and never will be any. All kinds of unimaginable things have been done to the Bible and the American flag. A movie was made about assonating the current President. We have people during a time of war calling for the impeachment of our President. Since none of this is considered “hate crime” and is much more vile than what this person did, we can (as you put it yourself) only “hope for the same treatment”. Unless, of course, the person admitted they did the things I listed out of hate then, it is a slam dunk.
#122

On July 30th, 2007 at 5:33 pm, gayle said:

Don’t misquote me.
I did not say anything about “HATE”.

Gee, does any liberal READ?
#123

On July 30th, 2007 at 5:35 pm, chapoutier said:

In comparison, the South Korean Christians being slaughtered, far outweighs anything about a dang koran!

Let’s hear about that on the news.

And you are right….ANYONE being slaughtered because of their religous beliefs far outweighs this Koran debate.

And actually, gayle, this is a good example of why I don’t “take my liberalism elsewhere.” For all my disagreements politically and otherwise with MM, she is provocative and interesting and does cover things (like this south korean hostage situation) that I would have otherwise missed.
#124

On July 30th, 2007 at 5:35 pm, On-my-soap-box said:

Oh, and chapoutier, do not like me with people who want to flush or burn any book.
#125

On July 30th, 2007 at 5:36 pm, On-my-soap-box said:

Sorry - link, just a little ticked!
#126

On July 30th, 2007 at 5:37 pm, gayle said:

Just for the record, the only thing I ever burned besides trash, was a bad report card in 8th grade.

Of course, my parents DID find out the truth!
#127

On July 30th, 2007 at 5:40 pm, chapoutier said:

Oh please, on-my-soap-box. I have been criticized here (I think maybe even by you) for taking a topic that has nothing to do with Bush, and trying to turn it into an indictment of him. Now you are doing the exact same thing, except in reverse (if that makes sense). Those things you mentioned have absolutely nothing to do with hate crimes. NOTHING. Argue those things on their own merits.
#128

On July 30th, 2007 at 5:42 pm, chapoutier said:

Exactly my point, there are no examples and never will be any.

So your proof is that there isn’t any proof? And what if there was proof? By your logic would this proof then refute what it was proving?
#129

On July 30th, 2007 at 5:47 pm, chapoutier said:

And gayle, I tried to hide certain pieces of homework that I had done poorly on from my folks, but a whole report card? How did you think you could get away with that?
#130

On July 30th, 2007 at 5:58 pm, On-my-soap-box said:

On July 30th, 2007 at 5:40 pm, chapoutier said:
Oh please, on-my-soap-box. I have been criticized here (I think maybe even by you) for taking a topic that has nothing to do with Bush, and trying to turn it into an indictment of him. Now you are doing the exact same thing, except in reverse (if that makes sense). Those things you mentioned have absolutely nothing to do with hate crimes. NOTHING. Argue those things on their own merits.

Excuse me. I am NOT trying to do anything that you suggest here (especially turning this topic into your indictment of Bush). I am citing examples of what I (that is to say me, myself) think of as a hate crime. If wanting to impeach the President during a time of war is not hateful (and seditious bordering on treason which is a crime) than forgive me. I cited examples which are far more offensive, which are not crimes, only to prove there are no examples and – I will say it again – only give us the option, which you have said yourself, to “hope for the same treatment”.
#131

On July 30th, 2007 at 6:11 pm, bear1909 said:

chapoutier, thanks for the precision you are adding to our discussion. In that spirit I’d like to take a look at something here I think is important:

“This is something, like cross-burning that is meant to express explicit hatred for one group.”

I respectfully agree.

The student who put the Koran in the loo may have communicated to the authorities how he “feels” about Muslims and why he chose a certain course of action to express it. He stole a Koran and tossed it into a dirty loo. But it is a stretch to say that this is like cross-burning.

Cross burning was not done to express hatred. It was meant to subjugate black people through violence and the threat of violence to the norms and conditions of political white supremacy.

Cross-burning, by members of secret, organized racist vigilante groups, was a ceremonial testament to the values and beliefs of that specific organization sworn to *eradicate* “freed” Black people in their midst.

There are differences in kind and differences by degree.

A non-Muslim student who had a disagreement with Muslim students on a college campus, who declared he “hates them”, then tosses the Koran into a dirty toilet, is he acting with any agency that is even remotely similar in kind to the legacy of the burning cross?

It is a convenient declaration for Muslim students to make on that campus how a Koran in the loo is the same thing.

(I am not saying they are yet, but they have in cases of campus harassment they have spoken about in the past.)

They are using the struggles and hardships of American blacks to gain traction- and liberals fall for it.

Muslims have already hijacked “civil rights” with their frivolous claims around the country, because they do not know the history of the Black civil rights struggle in North America.

What they do know is that liberal courts and social institutions will act out of guilt over America’s past in those struggles (the price of cultural narcissism, the “Not me” syndrome).

I am urging caution against making statements which allow one group to usurp the meaning of legacy of another group’s struggle and equate it to something in their own struggle which has neither the violent ramifications –or- the potential to incite lethal acts of violence, or the threat of violence of such acts.

For example, liberals in this country equating the plight of the so-called Palestinians with the history of American Indians in this country.

And they insist the morality of their cause is what it is because what happened to American Indians was wrong.

Whoops. The similarities are specious at best. The US government wasn’t paying billions to our Chiefs back then to keep us on reservations; nor were our own Chiefs slaughtering us by hiding behind us against external enemies; nor was there a privileged class of American Indians who ran their own sovereign nations while repositing unwanted Indians to squalor in some foreign land *by law*.

This example is given to illustrate how usurping the legacy of one group to edify the moral cause of one’s own makes for some pretty screwy politics.

Thank you for reading.
#132

On July 30th, 2007 at 6:14 pm, bear1909 said:

Muslim aggressors against the West must feign victimhood (lie) in order to deflect attention from (at best) or rationalize (at worst) their murderous conduct *ALL* *AROUND* *THE* *FREAKIN* *WORLD* *24/7*.

Our enemy never sleeps.
#133

On July 30th, 2007 at 6:18 pm, On-my-soap-box said:

Ya know bear1909 - I love ya man!
#134

On July 30th, 2007 at 6:24 pm, PBoilermaker said:

I respectfully disagree.

Fixed it for you, bear.
#135

On July 30th, 2007 at 6:29 pm, 24Klady said:

Bear1909 - hope you’re keeping copies of your writings, great stuff. Thanks.

Charles @LGF has up an article by Hitchens that is politically incorrect, but hits a home run.
#136

On July 30th, 2007 at 6:32 pm, jferg49 said:

No one that I have ever heard of has been arrested for any crime when they show their hatred for anything christian. But let some knucklehead throw a Koran in the toilet…and bingo…big crime, a big hate crime…if it were a real hate crime, he’d have thown a muslim in the toilet…
#137

On July 30th, 2007 at 6:38 pm, bear1909 said:

Image: Bear1909 with little green visor, quill in paw, cigar ash precariously long on the rope in the other holding down the parchment

Thanks for fixin that slip PBoilermaker (are you a Pur_Don’t Grad? i like the way Purdue University decals can be reconfigged to read “Undue Perversity”)

OnMySoapBox: thanks for the kind words.

24KLady- I do. I save everything. Thanks. I will look at LGF right now. Hitchens is consistently good at what he pitches.

Time for another ‘gar….and a BOHICA!!! lol
#138

On July 30th, 2007 at 6:47 pm, bear1909 said:

24kLady:

That hitchens piece rocks. Thanks for the tip.
#139

On July 30th, 2007 at 6:48 pm, gayle said:

Cigar? You wouldn’t be Rush by chance?

Nawwwwwwww………..

???
#140

On July 30th, 2007 at 6:58 pm, katieanne said:

This is appalling. Aside from the fact that if it were a Bible, there would be no outrage but it would be considered Freedom of Speech. How long is it going to be that any criticism of a Muslim or Islam will get someone in trouble with the law? Is the US becoming a Muslim state? Dangerous precedent here.
#141

On July 30th, 2007 at 6:59 pm, katieanne said:

When is CAIR going to come to this site, see our comments and attempt to sue us?
#142

On July 30th, 2007 at 7:16 pm, bear1909 said:

Gayle#139: Nope. Rush lives in Florida. I live in Berkeley California. Rush smokes Macanudos, among other types of gars. I grow my tobacco and roll em…all in moderation of course.

Katieanne#141: I would welcome a CAIR rep coming to this site.

IMAGE: Ibrahim Hooper transforming into the “Taz” as he reads the views of the Glorious Malkinis, spinning his little noggin into a tizzy in front of his puter.
#143

On July 30th, 2007 at 7:17 pm, chapoutier said:

I too thank you bear for seriously addressing my comments. Your posts are always well reasoned, lucid and relevant, which is I am sure what MM would want of this forum rather that the “let’s just dump all the korans in the toilet” crowd.

And I think you are right in retrospect. The cross-burning example was not fair, though I think less in kind and more as a matter of degree (admittedly an extreme degree per your post). But I think the point stands that his actions were meant to send some sort of message of hate, or at least could be reasonably perceived as such. And again, he admitted to such.

Whether this was just a childish overreaction to some isolated incident or a reflection of more deep-seeded hate, who knows. But I don’t think that that has any bearing on whether or not the school was reasonable in referring this to the police. I would guess, perhaps others know more, that campuses are particularly on edge right now for any sort of warning signs of trouble or mental instability in the wake of the VATech tragedy. Whether this has caused the pendulum to swing too far one way, such that any little tic is going to set off alarms and cause the police to get involved, is a perfectly fair question to ask.

Now, that issue aside, whether or not this rises to the level of a hate crime, as defined by statute, or whether there was some bias on the part of the muslim police officer in referring to it as such, I don’t know. Hell, I will come right out and say I think so-called hate crime legislation is stupid and this is clearly an gross overreaction to what is essentially a molehill. That does nothing to change my original issue with the blog post which was….

that MM took this and compared it to irrelevant things to try to make a point. Maybe there truly is a bias when it comes to hate crime prosecution. I don’t know, but to answer Michelle’s original query “Which of these is a crime in America?” I say simply, “the one in which the law was broken.” As distasteful as you may find certain art or flag burning, they are not crimes.
#144

On July 30th, 2007 at 7:17 pm, PBoilermaker said:

Thanks for fixin that slip PBoilermaker (are you a Pur_Don’t Grad? i like the way Purdue University decals can be reconfigged to read “Undue Perversity”)

Yes, I am a Purdue grad. There were always a few students who would get the decals and rearrange the letters on their cars in said manner to be “edgy” and stupid.

You must be an IU or ND fan, huh?
#145

On July 30th, 2007 at 7:27 pm, bear1909 said:

ND ‘77
#146

On July 30th, 2007 at 7:33 pm, gayle said:

You are a cigar smoker?!?

FOR SHAME!

You are a true conservative! LOL!

Speaking of Rush, I would love to meet him in a small quiet location and have a serious conversation about politics.

I find him fascinating and funny.
I could just vent and vent and vent!
Oh! The freedom of it all!

LOL!
#147

On July 30th, 2007 at 8:27 pm, deepdiver said:

#143chapoutier said:
I don’t know, but to answer Michelle’s original query “Which of these is a crime in America?” I say simply, “the one in which the law was broken.”

Your point is taken in regards to the fact that in this case a crime, ie theft/destruction of property, was committed and such a crime was not committed in the cases she references. However, you do leave out something in your above comment. While MM’s headline did ask which is a crime in America, the body of the post makes clear that she intended to query which is a hate crime in America. “Each is offensive and tasteless in its own way. But only one is a hate crime in the eyes of the law.”

The problem with your request for proof that hate crimes are prosecuted differently is that you are asking for proof of a negative. I think absence of a case wherein a non-white has been charged with a hate crime against a white, heterosexual male is in and of itself prima facia evidence that the hate laws are not equally prosecuted. Think of recent cases of Muslims driving into crowded campus quads, entering a Jewish center while stating a hatred of Jews and shooting people, running down people in a heavily Jewish section of SF and the like where we have not seen hate crime charges. Yet here a stupid college student throwing a Quran in the loo warrants such charges?

When anyone is more equal under the law than someone else in this country, we have a serious problem.
#148

On July 30th, 2007 at 8:36 pm, PBoilermaker said:

bear1909: ND ‘77

Surprise of surprises.

You’re OK in my book regardless.
#149

On July 30th, 2007 at 8:59 pm, Gabe said:

I’m trying to figure out where the “hate” is in this incident.

If I were an undergraduate and I saw how thuggish, intolerant Muslims had hijacked a “meditation room” like they have at George Mason University at taxpayer expense, I would be very tempted in a spirit of protest to snatch a Koran from the room and flush it down the toilet. I have nothing against Muslims and have even lived a Muslim country (Malaysia) where I liked the people. However, I don’t like Muslims coming to our country and showing no tolerance or respect for our traditions.

So where is the “hate” for it to be a hate crime? And how is this a felony offense?

Yet Chaputier is telling us this can be considered a hate crime. What a joke.

I wonder how many people are charged with felonies for taking a missalette, Bible, or hymnal out of a Catholic Church.

It seems the Muslim arresting officer has a lot more hate than Shmulevitch.
#150

On July 30th, 2007 at 9:00 pm, chapoutier said:

While MM’s headline did ask which is a crime in America, the body of the post makes clear that she intended to query which is a hate crime in America. “Each is offensive and tasteless in its own way. But only one is a hate crime in the eyes of the law.”

No where in MM’s post does she state that there was an actual crime, albeit petty, committed in only one of them. She in fact goes out of her way to try to make the Pace U. situation comparable to some weirdo making bad art, which it simply is not. Her clear implication was “Hey everybody, look! Exact same situation but different results! Must be anti-Christian bias!” and that is just disingenuous. I am not going to rehash all my arguments again, but I do have to stress, for a “hate crime” to have occurred, there has to be an underlying crime (i.e. the theft and vandalism). With art and flag burning there is no crime under our laws as they currently are, so to compare the lack of hate crime prosecution in those cases to the existence of it with the Pace situation is just not right.

As for the rest of the post, I am perfectly willing to look at stats that say there are inordinate number of hate crime prosecutions brought against whites/christians/whatever and if presented with such would be happy to admit that there is an unfair bias. What I am not willing to do is extrapolate such a conclusion from MM’s shoddy logic as presented above.
#151

On July 30th, 2007 at 9:04 pm, LC said:

A few of the (applicable) Communist Goals (of which there were 45 identified at this time), as read before the US Congress HOR in 1963:

16. Use technical decisions of the courts to weaken basic American institutions by claiming their activities violate civil rights.

17. Get control of the schools. Use them as transmission belts for socialism and current Communist propaganda. Soften the curriculum. Get control of teachers’ associations. Put the party line in textbooks.

18. Gain control of all student newspapers.

19. Use student riots to foment public protests against programs or organizations which are under Communist attack.

Anyone else think some of these “goals” are more applicable today than then? I sure do. Some may believe that these are a far stretch, I’m am not one of them.

For those that are interested, you can read the full text here: http://www.uhuh.com/nwo/communism/comgoals.htm
#152

On July 30th, 2007 at 9:07 pm, chapoutier said:

Yet Chaputier is telling us this can be considered a hate crime. What a joke.

You are wrong, wrong, wrong.

I quote myself:

Hell, I will come right out and say I think so-called hate crime legislation is stupid and this is clearly an gross overreaction to what is essentially a molehill.

The only thing I said nearly to that effect was that it may be a hate crime under the law. As is so often brought up on this board, our judicial system should enforce the laws as written, not make up their own to suit their agenda. Seriously, lets just say that this guy fulfilled every aspect of the hate crime statute as written. Do you want some judge refusing to uphold the law, just because he doesn’t believe in hate crimes?

If you don’t like the law, I suggest that you do everything in your power to change it.
#153

On July 30th, 2007 at 9:14 pm, deepdiver said:

chapoutier said: No where in MM’s post does she state that there was an actual crime, albeit petty, committed in only one of them.

Agreed, which is why I said:

Your point is taken in regards to the fact that in this case a crime, ie theft/destruction of property, was committed and such a crime was not committed in the cases she references.

I was simply drawing attention to the fact that the word “hate” prior to the word “crime” is important for the context of the conversation and that I think MM intended it in the title. I agree that extrapolating unequal treatment under hate crime enforcement is not valid from MM’s post. However, I’ll reiterate, when people have commented that hate crimes are not equally prosecuted you have essentially requested them to prove a negative. The very absence of any knowledge or stats of hate crime charges against someone assaulting a white, heterosexual male among this rather erudite group of commentors, most of us newshounds to varying degrees, lends credence to the perception, if not the fact, that such laws are unequally prosecuted against certain perceived majority or privileged group and rarely if ever against a perceived minority or underprivileged group.
#154

On July 30th, 2007 at 9:29 pm, chapoutier said:

I don’t think i am asking anyone to prove a negative. One could, and probably has done an analysis of hate crime prosecutions as to race, religion, or whatever other factor.

I’m not asking anyone to rush off to the library to hunt down said source, cause really…

My final thought on this very interesting topic is this: You said

I agree that extrapolating unequal treatment under hate crime enforcement is not valid from MM’s post.

All I am saying is it seems clear to me that this is exactly what MM wanted us to extrapolate from her post, and I think that is wrong. If you don’t think that was what she was trying to say, then we’ll agree to disagree.
#155

On July 30th, 2007 at 9:33 pm, Gabe said:

LC- That is very interesting. Thanks for the link. A few people have written about how “multiculturalism” is simply the cultural wing of communism and it follows the same lines and tactics as economic communism. It is no surprise why communists and Muslims have been so tight. They both have mutual desire to destroy the culture of the West.
#156

On July 30th, 2007 at 9:51 pm, bear1909 said:

The ideologues driving much of the anti-racist movement in this country are avowed Marxists. Destroying *capitalism* is the only way, according to them, to bring a multi-ethnic society “justly” into existence.

To them, racism is an arrangement which determines legitimate access to wealth, privilege and power using “White” as the model for humanity.

To them, the USA must be brought down in order to rectify the inequities of its creation.

Does that sound like it overlaps with the Islamic jihadist agenda?
#157

On July 31st, 2007 at 4:45 pm, gunslingerpatriot said:

Funny thing is that this is one thing my g-friend warned me about not doing this my koran after my political thought class at U of M.
However, I threw the satanic book away.
So did I commit a hate crime by throwing it away in the trash can?

“Dhimitude or Freedom?-Your Choise…”
#158

On July 31st, 2007 at 8:21 pm, keving said:

The complaint reads that the charges are ‘Criminal Mischief in the Fourth Degree as a Hate Crime’. Allah points out that the fourth degree charge of criminal mischief is a misdemeanor. Does the ‘Hate Crime’ addition make it into a felony?
#159

On July 31st, 2007 at 8:34 pm, The Raging Republican said:

I think it is a crime that he didn’t flush.
#160

On August 2nd, 2007 at 1:12 pm, JJwclink said:

I like how the book is well centered in the toilet, as if he shot line to make perfect 90 degree angles.
#161

On August 4th, 2007 at 2:12 pm, JohntheChristian said:

Eh forget them. They burn our Scriptures, we’ll flush theirs. The circle of Life.

Hypocrites
#162

On September 3rd, 2007 at 5:24 am, Uillis said:

Excuse me if someone else has already mentioned this; but, the Qur’an is only “holy” and the true Qur’an when it is in its Arabic form. Any translation of the book is no longer considered a Qur’an. So, no hate crime or crime against Islam is possible when the text is not in Arabic.

Comment pages: « 1 [2]

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Mark Steyn acquitted in Canadian sharia case

October 10, 2008 03:24 PM by Michelle Malkin

70 Comments | 10 Trackbacks

“In the matter of the human rights code…”

Tyson Foods in Tennessee: Replacing Labor Day with Eid al-Fitr

August 4, 2008 12:44 AM by Michelle Malkin

92 Comments | 19 Trackbacks

Not without my daughters (and son)

July 26, 2008 08:21 AM by see-dubya

53 Comments | 0 Trackbacks

Deported “Al Qaeda first stringer” is holding his Ohio-born children in Yemen.

The Dallas honor killings revisited

June 20, 2008 11:39 AM by Michelle Malkin

61 Comments | 3 Trackbacks

“I don’t believe any of it,” Amina told Eddie, “because I see how their women are treated. They have to walk behind the men. They beat up their wives.”