ADLs kike exclusive "hate Bill" takes it up the ass!

CYBERBULLYING HEARING GOES BADLY FOR LIBERALS


By Rev. Ted Pike


The House Subcommittee hearing today on two "anti-cyberbullying" bills went very poorly for the Anti-Defamation League, architect of these bills, and their two primary sponsors, Rep. Linda Sanchez and Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz. Sanchez sponsored the Megan Meier Cyberbullying Prevention Act, HR 1966, and Wasserman Schultz the AWARE Act (Adolescent Web Awareness Requires Education), HR 3630. AWARE is meant to facilitate the cyberbullying act's pro-homosexual educational program in America's public school system.

The hearing began with a strong statement by Rep. Louis Gohmert (the only Republican Judiciary member present) that he endured much bullying as an undersized boy and has only empathy for any young person bullied on the schoolyard or in cyberspace. Yet, he said, cyberbullying is a symptom of a larger problem of lack of values among America's youth. Such moral deficiency, he said, should be addressed on the local levels -- not by federalizing an already "overcriminalized" justice system. Gohmert said the cyberbullying bill encroaches on protected speech. "Do we need $125 million of Chinese money" (the five-year cost of AWARE) for the federal government to attempt to solve what should be dealt with through education on the grassroots level?

Sanchez and Wassermann Schultz argued that cyberbullying of teens is a national crisis that can only be solved through federal criminalization and educational funding through the Department of Justice. They were followed by Professor Robert O'Neill, veteran of 47 years of teaching Constitutional law. He thought it "worth a try," considering the seriousness of the cyberbullying problem, to broaden unprotected speech under HR 1966 to include "intentional infliction of emotional distress" through internet communication. But he felt a very high bar of truth (higher than the bill provides) should be required, to establish that real, demonstrable trauma had occurred. O'Neill was followed by Judi Westberg Warren, director of Web Wise Kids, an internet advocacy group. She supports federal funding through AWARE, plus massive private funding.

Trial lawyer and free speech authority Harvey Silverglate spoke next. In powerful and compelling language, he said the cyberbullying bill is extremely vague, impinging on free speech. In his book The Shadow University he documents how thousands of college students are already harassed and intimidated by college "speech crime" codes. He said such hate law terms as "intimidation," "emotional distress," and "harassment" are so vague they will criminalize annoying speech and deter speech which should be protected. He said true harassment is already amply protected under state and common law. The cyberbullying bill, he asserted, would criminalize existing torte law and federalize state law and so confuse citizens that they would be reluctant to say anything risky on the internet or anywhere else.

Silverglate's excellent objections were followed by commonsense reasoning from Nancy Willard, director of The Center for Safe and Responsible Internet Use, another internet advocacy organization. She said every author of a book about cyberbullying opposes HR 1966. She described the cyberbullying bill as epitomizing the "techno panic" of liberal politicians who want to pass more speech-threatening legislation before the actual problem is fully elucidated. Like Gohmert and Silverglate, she encouraged local private educational solutions. The majority of teens, she stressed, use the internet responsibly.

The last witness was John Palfrey of Harvard Law School, chair of the Internet Safety Task Force and co-author of Born Digital: Understanding the First Generation of Digital Natives. He also said the solution is not in federal criminalization of cyberbullying but lies with local educational programs, teachers and parents.

A very lively question-and-answer period ensued between Chairman Bobby Scott and these authorities. The effect of their high-level intellectual objections and agreement was to virtually exclude from the discussion Reps. Sanchez and Wassermann Schultz, sponsors of the bills. Even federal hate bill supporter Scott expressed repeated concern that the cyberbullying bill, in its present configuration, falls short of passing Constitutional muster.

In fact, Professor O'Neill—who initially favored the bill—by the end clearly agreed that the Megan Meier cyberbullying bill, HR 1966, lacks legislative viability.


We Changed History!


Today's hearing was clearly a victory for free speech, made possible by divine intervention and YOUR phone calls this week, which lit a fire under Judiciary Republicans. Especially important were your last-minute warnings against AWARE and its danger as the educational "enforcer" of the cyberbullying bill throughout America's public education over the next five years. Calls were heavy against all four new hate bills on Monday. Such calling has continued, especially against AWARE; it has saturated offices such as that of Rep. Judiciary minority head Lamar Smith.

Without your intense activism in response to my weekend emergency alert, this hearing might have ended as dismally as the ENDA hearing last week in the Committee on Education and Labor, with only one Republican speaking out against it. But several days of vigorous encouragement undoubtedly stimulated Gohmert and the Republicans to marshal opposition and summon favored expert witnesses. For a change, advocates of free speech were on the offensive!

This very encouraging development dovetails with possible abandonment of the previously scheduled Safe Schools Improvement Act, HR 2262, which would criminalize "persistent or persuasive" criticism of homosexuality in the public schools as "violence." It may be that ADL concocted AWARE, introduced last Wednesday to deliver pro-homosexual indoctrination in a less threatening way. But after today, AWARE also may be in trouble.

Will HR 1966 and HR 3630 continue forward to markup? Probably. But the precedent established by today's rout of the Democrats may give Republicans opportunity to demand significant compromises that could water down or even largely neutralize HR 1966's threat to free speech.





~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~



Let the Anti-Defamation League teach you how they have saddled 45 states with hate laws capable of persecuting Christians, and spearhead attempts to pass the federal hate crimes bill: http://www.adl.org/99hatecrime/intro.asp.

TALK SHOW HOSTS: Interview Rev. Ted Pike on this subject. Call (503) 631-3808.

Duke Faggot Pedophile LOVES The Anti-Hate Laws!

DUKE UNIVERSITY PEDOPHILE WOULD BENEFIT FROM HATE BILL

By Rev. Ted Pike

My parents were pioneer Christian, conservative leaders and broadcasters. In the late fifties after the aborted 1956 Hungarian Revolution, they met a number of passionately anti-communist Hungarian exiles. These refugees related how in 1918 Jewish Bolshevik Bela Kun, after overthrowing the Hungarian government, imposed homosexuality and its values on all levels of Hungarian society, down to kindergarten. Kun's goal was to break Christian, anti-communist resistance. He wanted to remake Hungary's youth into mindless fodder for socialism and revolution. After all, Lenin (whose mother was Jewish) said, "A revolutionary is a youth devoid of morals."

Today, Jewish activists of the Anti-Defamation League continue the work of their spiritual and political ancestor, Kun; they forcefeed society and the youngest children with pro-homosexuality. Three monstrous ADL hate bills (including recently introduced ENDA, The Employment Non-Discrimination Act, HR 3017) are moving forward in Congress. (See, New ADL Hate Bills Attack America) ADL's legislation gives it the same behind-the-scenes federal power to corrupt America that Kun wielded over Hungary.

In Senate Judiciary hearings last week, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder boldly testified that the federal hate bill, S. 909 will not protect all citizens of differing races, religions and genders from violent hate crimes, as it claims to do. Whom did Holder say it was designed to truly protect? Homosexuals. This includes homosexual pedophiles.

Here's an example of one such pedophile S. 909 would rush to assist if it were law today. Last week the FBI and Washington D.C. police announced arrest of homosexual Duke University administrator Frank Lombard for trying to persuade an undercover police officer to have sex with Lombard's six-year-old adopted black son. The affidavit said Lombard sexually molested the child, describing himself as a "perv dad for fun." The boy was reared by Lombard and his homosexual partner. (See, Gay Duke U. Official Attempts to Sell Black 5-Year-Old Son for Sex: MSM Out to Lunch. NewsBusters.org 06/29/2009)

Attorney General Holder testified that the federal hate law would give homosexuals, regardless of their guilt or innocence, preferential rights and importance over the majority of "straight" Americans. This means that if the officer lost his cool and called Lombard a faggot, striking him, and Lombard screamed, "Hate crime!" the whole federal, state, and county law enforcement and justice establishment would be obligated to come to the aid of Lombard with triple speed.

But police officers, as Holder testified, have no special rights under the hate crimes bill. Instead of being charged with simple assault, the undercover officer would face a federal felony rap which could total ten years in prison. After spending at least $10,000 for the best attorney he could find, the officer could spend tens of thousands in legal fees if the case dragged on or was appealed.

On the other hand, if Lombard learned the officer's identity and struck him, crying "Pig!" the officer would have no special status as the member of a federally group. He could not scream "Hate crime!", but would have to find justice through conventional law.

Who is Really Intimidated?

ADL and Holder say they want S. 909 to end "intimidation" of persecuted homosexuals. Actually, S. 909 is designed to intimidate the rest of us -- white Christian "straight" Americans.

In 1918, Bela Kun proved a whole nation could be subjected and a generation corrupted under united, unrestrained pro-homosexual federal power. That's the terrifying agenda ADL's three pending hate laws envision for America.

ADL'S FEDERAL HATE LAW S. 909, MAKING ALL THIS POSSIBLE, HAS PASSED THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES AND COULD PASS THE SENATE NEXT WEEK. FIGHT BACK!

The best way to fight is to call members of the Senate (names HERE at www.truthtellers.org) and ask staffers to watch our new NPN video "Holder Admits: No Equality under Hate Bill." Video footage of the Senate Judiciary hearing shows Holder testifying that the hate bill gives special services and protection to homosexuals, not the rest of us.

Call now and leave this message: "Attorney General Holder testified in Judiciary that the hate crimes bill discriminates and will not protect all Americans against hate crimes. Please ask your staff and Senator to watch Holder's shocking testimony in the 10-minute video at www.truthtellers.org." (See video at the top of truthtellers.org) Call toll-free 1-877-851-6437 or toll 1-202-225-3121. Don't be daunted if some Senate staffers don't let you finish this message. It proves they are getting the message big time! Keep calling next week.

The arrest of homosexual pedophile Lombard is a wake-up call to the fact that pedophiles deeply infest the homosexual community and we must make sure they don't acquire special federal protection under S. 909. Wake the Senate this week by persuading every Senate office to watch NPN's blockbuster video.

The child you save from a pedophile may be your own.

The Heretical Two and the Hate Crime Laws

What The Heretical Two Case Says About The Federal “Hate Crimes” Bill

June 5, 2009 · Print This Article

By Nicholas Stix

Any day now, unless the American public wakes up and contacts its Congressthings, the Englishmen who have dubbed themselves “The Heretical 2″— writer Stephen Whittle (pen name Luke O’Farrell), and his publisher, Simon Sheppard—will be deported back to the UK, where they will be imprisoned for up to seven years.

I wrote in July, September, and again on May 18 about this pair, who had been convicted in England of thoughtcrimes, specifically of “publishing racially inflammatory written material” on the internet. (In January, Sheppard was also convicted of five more counts in absentia). They fled the UK for the U.S. last July, and upon arrival trustingly notified the authorities that they were seeking political asylum.

It made perfect sense. They have been convicted of a purely political offense, which is not a crime in the U.S.—yet. (Indeed, Whittle has persuasively argued that, based on English jurists’ expansive reading of U.K. “hate crime” statutes, even VDARE.com writers could be arrested on “hate crime” charges, should they ever so much as change planes in England.) The U.S. gets tens of thousands of asylum applications a year. Virtually all are let in on their own recognizance. A very high proportion end up staying here, with asylum or not.

The sometimes brilliant, sometimes sophomoric Sheppard and Whittle are plenty inflammatory, alright. They are typically referred to as “Holocaust-deniers,” though Whittle has rejected my characterization of them as such. On that point, we’re going to have to agree to disagree.

Sounds like a hot story, no? And yet, the American MainStream Media have given them the silent treatment. (The first major story has only just appeared: Men bedeviled in bid for sanctuary, by Dana Parsons, Los Angeles Times, June 3, 2009).

Why do Sheppard and Whittle matter, and why do they matter so much?

Because the U.S. government’s treatment of them is of a piece with its treatment of white Americans with the “wrong” sort of views—views which are increasingly being criminalized, the Constitution be damned.

The federal government permits people to immigrate here by the millions whose beliefs are incompatible with the U.S. Constitution, and who routinely commit acts as part of their “culture,” such as female genital mutilation, polygamy, slavery and honor killings (also here and here), which are crimes here. Sheppard and Whittle made a classic asylum argument, showing that the actions for which they were convicted in the UK are not crimes here. Why do the feds welcome criminals, while refusing asylum to men whose actions violated no American laws?

The answer is that Sheppard and Whittle are unapologetically white, and pro-Western. In contrast, our elites seek out and welcome Somalis, Sudanese, and other African Bantu and Moslems etc, because those groups are unapologetically non-white, and anti-Western.

Consider federal prosecutor Michelle Myers’ kangaroo court reasoning in the Heretical 2’s asylum case. Whittle: “[T]hat as U.S. Asylum laws were designed to protect refugees and we criticized refugees, we could not possibly be protected under said laws”.

Myers also implied she supported EU crackdowns on freedom of speech, discreditable to her but irrelevant to American law.

My hunch: Myers is so used to “making her cases” through wielding the coercive power of the state like a brickbat, that she is incapable of making a legal argument. And since she had a like-minded judge, Rose Peters, she didn’t have to. The logic of the Heretical 2’s case meant nothing. (In contrast, in 2004, Judge Peters refused to allow the US government to deport an IRA man convicted of abetting the murder of two British soldiers.)

The EU-style crackdown on free speech is coming here. Militant homosexuals, illegal immigrants, racist blacks and their totalitarian supporters are presently championing a new, enhanced “hate crime” law, the “Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act” (LLEHCPA—H.R. 1913/S. 909) which, if passed, will degrade civil liberties in America to the level rest of the planet. (For more VDARE.COM coverage, see here and here).

Earlier, the bill was called the “Matthew Shepard Act”. Matthew Shepard, 21, was a homosexual college student in Laramie, Wyoming, who in 1998 was robbed, tied to a fence, and pistol-whipped by white heterosexuals. Shepard later died.

The MSM and Hollywood have exploited Shepard ever since, asserting that he was somehow representative of an entire besieged demographic group whose persecutors were getting mere wrist slaps.

In fact, Shepard’s killers are currently each serving two consecutive life sentences, in one case without the possibility of parole, i.e., as much or more punishment than they would have gotten under a hate crime law.

“Huh. Well…what injustice is this Matthew Shepard Act preventing, exactly? I thought it was just barely illegal to kill and torture gay people…but shockingly, it seems that the existing laws against murder and violence ALREADY cover gay people as well, and ostensibly, even handicapped people.” [Preventing Another Great Travesty of Justice by The Kvetcher, May 13, 2009.]

Shepard’s murder provided no rationale for a new law. But homosexuals wield incredible power within the MSM. In William McGowan’s landmark 2001 book, Coloring the News: How Crusading for Diversity Has Corrupted American Journalism, he juxtaposed the MSM’s treatment of the Shepard murder with the 1999 rape-torture-murder, committed in Rogers, AK, by homosexual pedophiles against 13-year-old Jesse Dirkhising. In the first month after the Shepard murder, 3,007 stories were devoted to the case. In contrast, the Dirkhising rape-torture-murder story was “spiked”, with only 46 stories appearing the first month after the murder.

The reason was simple: the Shepard case cast homosexuals in the role of victims. But the Dirkhising case cast homosexuals as the villains, which political correctness forbids.

Another notorious crime which was exploited by the “hate crime” lobby was the 1998 torture-dragging murder, in Jasper, Texas, of black James Byrd Jr., 49, by three white supremacists. (All four men were ex-cons, and had “served jail time together.”) During the 2000 presidential campaign, the NAACP illegally campaigned on behalf of Democratic candidate Al Gore, running TV ads condemning then-Texas Gov. George W. Bush for not supporting “hate crime” legislation, which supposedly would have achieved justice for Byrd and black victims of similar crimes.

But as Bush pointed out at the time, one of Byrd’s killers had been sentenced to life in prison, the maximum he could have gotten under the proposed legislation, and the other two had been sentenced to death. Thus, the claim that heinous crimes committed by heterosexual white men against blacks were being inadequately punished was a lie.

With all due respect for the memory of James Byrd, a white Texan named Ken “Bimbo” Tillery was murdered near Jasper in 2002 in a similar fashion by three racist blacks. And I routinely report on black rape-torture-murders of whites so gruesome that they make the Byrd case look like a tea party. However, the MSM and political activists pushing for “hate crime” laws suppress news about the white victims of racist black killers; failing that, they deny that the whites were victims of “hate.”

Critics point out that LLEHCPA will lead to the inflation of non-crimes and misdemeanors into felonies, the multiplication of charges and sentences upon conviction, the criminalization of (white) Christians and other people, based solely on their opinions, and will violate the First, Fifth, and Fourteenth amendments to the U.S. Constitution.

The militants counter that the critics are crazy homophobes, and that the legislation will have no such effect. But that’s what militant homosexuals said in England and Canada. And once those countries enacted “hate crime laws,” Christians were persecuted for acting, or merely speaking as Christians. Militant homosexuals here speak fondly of those draconian laws. (Indeed, extant “anti-discrimination” laws in America have already been used to persecute Christians.)

Consider the ongoing hate campaign that California homosexual militants orchestrated, beginning last November, against whites who had financially contributed to the successful campaign for Prop. 8, which affirmed yet again, that marriage is between a man and a woman. (Never mind that it was black Christian support that carried the referendum.) Considering how hate-filled the militants already are, do we really want to put the power of Leviathan in their hands?

LLEHCPA also applies to the fictional category of “transgenders,” those poor, deluded souls who are convinced that they are sexually the opposite of that which God or nature made them, and who have their bodies butchered and re-formed like so much chopped meat. Critics of the bill call it the “Pedophile Protection Act,” arguing that it would also confer protected minority status on practitioners of anywhere from 30 to 547 sexual perversions (“paraphilia”), including incest, pedophilia, necrophilia, voyeurism and exhibitionism.

The bill’s supporters have accused opponents of dishonesty. Yet its sponsors have refused to define “sexual orientation,” and rejected an amendment expressly denying pedophilia status as a “sexual orientation.”

An equally crazy consequence of LLEHCPA would be to codify the presently illegal practice by scores of cities and two states of granting sanctuary to illegal foreign invaders. Under LLEHCPA, illegal aliens would have superior status to Americans in federal law simply by virtue of being part of a “protected class”.

“Hate crime” statutes are a logical consequence of the civil rights movement. The 1964 Civil Rights Act, which was supposed to guarantee equality under the law, was instead converted, via bureaucratic alchemy, into legal privileges for blacks (racial quotas), and later for other groups. And when a group gets one legal privilege, it soon demands more.

The civil rights laws created a parallel legal system of Shadow Law, which contradicted and usurped the U.S. Constitution. The Shadow Law system sees certain groups (e.g., blacks, Hispanics, homosexuals) as “protected classes,” legally superior to non-protected classes (e.g., heterosexual whites, particularly heterosexual white boys and men). The notion of “protected classes” violates the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause, and inexorably leads to additional, cascading abuses.

LLEHCPA also puts its favored groups above the law. A member of a “protected class” can assault a member of an unprotected class, and claim that he had merely responded to “hate speech” from the actual victim.

Such crimes have already been rampant for years. In virtually any large American city, racist blacks daily commit countless racially motivated attacks on whites and Asians, particularly in the public schools, which are typically racist torture centers. (See my chapter on education in the NPI report, The State of White America-2007, which is downloadable here.) Often, they shout racial epithets at their victims. And yet not only are the racist black criminals rarely arrested for their crimes (and virtually never for “hate crimes”), if their white victims defend themselves, the latter are often arrested.

Based on an unspoken agreement between racist blacks and white elites, the false claim by a black assailant that his white victim called him the “n-word” often serves as a “get-out-of-jail-free” card (see section, “The Magic Word” in my post on the Atlanta courtroom incident.)

LLEHCPA would also bury what is left of the prohibition against double jeopardy, which is anchored in the Fifth Amendment of the Bill of Rights, and goes back to 355 B.C. in ancient Athens.

Over the past generation, federal civil rights prosecutions have routinely violated this prohibition, by taking someone who had been acquitted of a crime at the state level, and prosecuting him all over again at the federal level, under a different statute, under the sophistic theory of “dual sovereignty”. According to “dual sovereignty” theory, each citizen owes allegiance to two sovereigns, state and federal. Because of the change in sovereignty, and because federal and state statutes are different laws, even though the identical act is again being prosecuted, one power may prosecute someone who has already been acquitted or convicted in the other power’s court. Except that, under this theory, the two prosecutions are not for the identical act, because “a defendant who violates the laws of two sovereigns, even if by a single act, has committed two distinct offenses, punishable by both authorities.”

Such casuistry effectively eliminates the prohibition against double jeopardy. But since prior to the 1960s there were relatively few federal laws, dual sovereignty theory was unable to cause much mischief. Beginning in the 1960s, however, Congress decided to remake America through massive, continuous legislating.

The Fifth Amendment provides three different protections against double jeopardy: Against being re-tried for a crime, after being acquitted of it; against being re-tried for a crime, after being convicted of its commission; and against being punished again for a crime for which one has already been punished. Civil rights prosecutions began the unconstitutional tradition of violating the first protection; LLEHCPA will eliminate the other two.

LLEHCPA provides for federally re-prosecuting—and thus re-punishing—someone who has already been convicted of the same crime at the state level, if prosecutors believe that he wasn’t punished harshly enough the first time! Buried in the bill’s labyrinthine subsections, in SEC. 6. PROHIBITION OF CERTAIN HATE CRIME ACTS.: ‘Sec. 249. Hate crime acts: 3(b)2(D), we find as a justification for a federal “hate crime” prosecution,

‘(D) the verdict or sentence obtained pursuant to State charges left demonstratively unvindicated the Federal interest in eradicating bias-motivated violence.

LLEHCPA is thus paradise for federal prosecutors.

America is the only country with a First Amendment, which forbids criminalizing ideas, as opposed to actions.

Unfortunately, few judges or prosecutors appear to have read that document. Since VDARE’s 1999 founding, it has chronicled the illegal imprisonment of Americans for exercising constitutionally-protected speech in Michigan, Idaho, Maryland and Louisiana.

And those were the good, old days of the creeping totalitarianism under Bill Clinton and George W. Bush! Today we are faced with the galloping totalitarianism of Barack Obama and Co. who, with help from our old friends the $PLC, have defined all political opponents to their right—i.e., millions of patriotic Americans—as “potential terrorists,” as shown by the recent, $PLC-influenced MIAC and DHS reports on “Rightwing Extremism.”

LLEHCPA’s institutionalized violation of the First Amendment would have a chilling effect even on social policy debate. Consider a case which would appear to have nothing to do with First Amendment law: The Minority Mortgage Meltdown. And yet, as Steve Sailer wrote on May 17, “[T]he root cause [of the minority mortgage meltdown] was the elite’s intoxication with the concept of diversity—and its concomitant suppression of dissent.”

Any honest statement about diversity made by a member of a non-protected group —regarding racial and ethnic differences in education, illegitimacy, crime, creditworthiness, etc.—could be charged as a “hate crime”, based on some member of a protected group, somewhere, having been assaulted, following the statement.

The next, inevitable step will be for the mere honest statement about diversity to be redefined into a “verbal assault” against all members of a protected class, and thus a “hate crime.” Multiculturalists in academia and the MSM have worked for over 20 years to institutionalize the notion of “verbal assault,” for just such a purpose.

Nat Hentoff titled one of his First Amendment books, The First Freedom because, if it is lost, all other freedoms will also be lost in its wake. Meanwhile, Obama and his comrades embrace real bomb throwers and the adherents of a philosophy determined to destroy Western Civilization.

Keep in mind that while I have enumerated some of the apparent problems with LLEHCPA, every law is inevitably extended and abused beyond its written meaning in ways that cannot be foreseen.

Thus, this bill is best thought of as a contemporary “Enabling Law”, which would give Obama unlimited power.

Stephen Whittle and Simon Sheppard will probably be deported back to the UK and jail.

But how many American Sheppards and Whittles will there soon be?

Nicholas Stix [email him] lives in New York City, which he views from the perspective of its public transport system, experienced in his career as an educator. His weekly column appears at Men’s News Daily and many other Web sites. He has also written for Middle American News, the New York Daily News, New York Post, Newsday, Chronicles, Ideas on Liberty and the Weekly Standard. He maintains two blogs: A Different Drummer and Nicholas Stix, Uncensored.

Source: VDARE.com.

ADL FINANCING THE HATE CRIMES LAWS

BIAS MOTIVATES 'ANTI-BIAS' LAWS

By Rev. Ted Pike

If a federal hate bill is passed, it would empower vast federal sweeps against Christian haters. You don't believe that could happen in America? It is happening right now under the Anti-Defamation League's British hate law. Homosexual website www.pinknews.co.uk says "one hundred people were arrested today as part of a police sweep on hate crimes in London. The Metropolitan Police Service began a series of raids on addresses across the capitol this morning to crack down on domestic, homophobic, transphobic, race and other forms of hate crime"Operation Athena is being carried out to mark International Day Against Homophobia and Transphobia ("100 Arrested in Hate Crimes Raids across London," by Jessica Geen, May 20, 2009)

In England as in Canada, it is not necessary to actually commit a crime or act of violence against members of federally protected groups to be considered "a dangerous and prolific offender", the type of person being rounded up in London. A pastor giving "homophobic" sermons from Biblical "hate literature" or even a person wearing a cross in England today can be considered an illegal, judgmental "hater", holding up non-Christians to hatred or contempt.

Don't think that alleged checks and balances in US state or federal hate laws will keep you safe. ADL's Pennsylvania hate law stipulated that it could be enforced only if bias motivated a crime. But that didn't keep ADLs national executive board member and Philly DA Lynne Abraham from arresting 11 Christians in 2004 for the "hate crime" of witnessing to homosexuals. In court, Philadelphia's prosecuting attorney argued that Philly 11 leader Michael Marcavage's biased words through the megaphone (an instrument of crime) met the state’s hate law criteria. He called for a verdict that would have imprisoned five of them, including a 17-year-old girl, for 47 years each!

For the Founding Fathers, civil rights protection was a simple idea: "All men are created equal" endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. Constitutional amendments and civil rights legislation have complicated that idea. Today, hate crime laws increasingly protect a relative few from "bias" while withholding constitutional rights rights of the majority.

The federal hate bill, S. 909, seems to guarantee special protection against hate crimes, not just to homosexuals but to everyone. All of us are included within "race, color, religion, national origin, gender" On paper, that suggests equal protection for white, Caucasian, Christian American males. It also could mean the bill's pseudo-class "sexual orientation," which includes both homosexuals and heterosexuals, should give the "straight" person, attacked because of his or her sexual orientation, the same protection as the "gay" victim. On paper, it could also mean that if a heterosexual is attacked out of bias the government is obligated to punish their attacker with the same enhanced punishment of three levels higher afforded homosexuals.

In practice, these rights or provisions guaranteed to everyone are not worth the paper they are written on. They were put in the bill for only one reason: window dressing to disarm critics and persuade wary legislators. In reality, hate laws were crafted to exalt favored minorities, particularly blacks, Jews, and homosexuals, while denying free speech and action to the Christian/conservative majority. Few pieces of legislation in U.S. history have been as discriminatory as S. 909, now in the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Ascent of Bias Laws

Irrespective of its motives, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 began the trend toward “anti-bias” legislation. It did more than just enforce equality to blacks; it gave them special, federally protected status and privilege over whites (affirmative action in violation of the 14th Amendment). Now homosexuals and other minorities clamor for the same special rights, not only in America but in most western nations.

The architect of these new bias crimes statutes, the Jewish Anti-Defamation League, never meant their hate laws to equally protect members of the above majority. Over the past 40 years, there exists virtually no record in hate law countries that such dominant groups have found justice or protection through hate laws. In fact, it is taken for granted by the liberal justice systems of all western nations that Christians and members of the political right are the proper objects of hate law prosecution—not protection. A Christian subjected to anti-Christian bias or violence is not defended as a hate crime victim. Nor is a white when he is the object of a racially motivated attack by a black or Latino. Or a heterosexual when assaulted because of bias by a homosexual, or a male by a vengeful feminist. This is true despite the fact that hate laws, from Iceland to Sweden to Australia, contain exactly the same written protections for the majority as the minority! It is simply taken for granted by law enforcement that hate laws will be enforced to the advantage of less than 5 percent of the population and the disadvantage of the other 95 percent.

ADLs Sinister Intent

What motivated ADL to conceive and enforce such discrimination?

The twisted enforcement of hate laws manifests the ancient ambitions of Talmudic Judaism to weaken and subdue all elements of Christian civilization. Claiming status as those who have suffered most from Christian oppression over the last 2000 years, such Jews have brought together other disgruntled groups. Armed with real, exaggerated or imagined claims to victimhood, they orchestrate bias crime laws that amount to massive perpetual reparations from the Christian-oriented west.

If a federal hate law is passed, ADL will have a free hand to revive Judaism’s ancient desire, initially recorded in the Book of Acts, to legally and systematically persecute Christians into extinction. Federal hate laws exalt Jews as a federally protected minority while empowering persecution of their ancient rival, Christianity.

In the New Testament, the Book of Acts documents more than 20 violent persecutions, revealing the Pharisaic determination to destroy the fledgling church. The destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD and final expulsions of all Jews from Palestine on pain of death, after failure of the Bar Kochba revolt in 132 AD, put an end to this Pharisaic dream. But it never died. It has been smoldering in the hearts of the most convinced and embittered Talmudists for 2000 years, waiting until ascendant Jewish power is strong enough to rekindle it. That time is come, and hate laws are the instrument to fulfill that malevolent ambition.

If a federal US hate law is passed, it will hasten coordinated persecution of Christians from Washington, then internationally, and ultimately from Jerusalem. Already, ADL’s Dept of Global Anti-Semitism in the U.S. State Department defines Bible-believing Christians as “classic anti-Semites” (See, Bible is Hate, says U.S. Government). ADL’s Abe Foxman says New Testament Christianity is the seminal cause of anti-Semitism over the past 2000 years, plunging the Jewish people into a living hell of unimaginable suffering. He says Christian evangelism to Jews today is anti-Semitism. (See, ADL's Foxman: New Testament is Anti-Semitic) Christian evangelism in hate law countries like Canada and England is increasingly considered a hate crime punishable by prison if repeated.

Hate laws are perverse, ingenious instruments of perpetual persecution of Christians as well as all who are determined to think and speak independently. Although endorsed and promoted by the American Jewish community in general, they are not the product of the Jewish people. (See, Jewish Left, Christian Right Square Off for Hate Bill Battle) They are the brainchild of a sinister, left-wing, yet often religiously orthodox cabal within Judaism, a minority of Jews consisting of ADL and B’nai B’rith International (with chapters and lodges in 56 nations).

Christians must open their eyes and realize that, as Rabbi Daniel Lapin warned, they "are under relentless attack" from this minority of leftist Jews who promote homosexuality, same-sex marriage, pornography, abortion, media corruption of our morals, removal of public symbols of Christianity, as well as wars in the Mideast in defense of Israel -- anything to weaken Christian America. (See, Rabbi Lapin: Christians Under 'Relentless Attack' by 'Secular Judaism')

Ancient Fountain of Wickedness

What kind of people write and pass laws that promise to protect all but actually only do so for a select few?

The kind the prophet Isaiah contested in his day: the esteemed, yet corrupt Jewish priests and leaders. They were "those who decree unrighteous decrees." (Is. 10:1) He proclaimed woe unto them!

The kind Jesus said "sit in Moses' seat" as exalted lawgivers to the Jews "that appear righteous unto men, but inwardly are full of ravening and wickedness and dead men's bones" -- the Pharisees.

The kind who today are praised by presidents and honored by the legal profession, academia, legislators and who describe themselves as "the world's leading organization fighting anti-Semitism." Yet, with colossal ingratitude, they promote every despicable perversion and deception in order to destroy the Christian nation and civilization which has given freedom and safety to their people, the Jews, to a degree unimagined in previous ages.

What kind of people produce and will enforce legislation as discriminatory, and ultimately enslaving, as federal hate bill S. 909? A group of hypocrites known and feared worldwide by a simple acronym: ADL.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Call all members of the Senate and demand hearings on S. 909, 1-877-851-6437 toll free and 1-202-225-3121. Call repeatedly (every other day), especially call the 19 members of the Senate Judiciary Committee. The names are available on the Action Page at truthtellers.org.

Tell the Senator: "Please hold hearings on the pedophile-protecting hate bill S. 909. If the Senator votes for this bill, my friends and I will never forgive or forget."

The next scheduled action by the Senate Judiciary Committee is June 3 and is about immigration, not the federal hate crimes bill. At that time the bill -- originally intended to be passed quickly by the Senate Democrats -- will have been stalled nearly five weeks.

The reasons are now clear. There has been spirited protest from the Christian/conservative right. Perhaps more significantly, Judiciary Democrats are reluctant to publicly defend the special rights and protections the hate bill grants not only to pedophilia but 546 other sexual deviancies. This conflict has powerfully slowed the momentum of S. 909. Lovers of freedom must explore its potential to destroy the hate bill completely!

Judiciary Democrats most fear Rep. Steve King’s proposal to name a category of sexual deviants and exclude them from preferential treatment under the hate bill. If one category is successfully removed by a Republican amendment, then so could a second, third, and many more illegal paraphilias. The whole fabric of the hate bill’s determination to protect all homosexuals would unravel. The hate bill would be gutted.

The list of illegal paraphilias threatened with removal by Republicans is extensive. Here are some examples, specifying the fetishes of such deviants:

Necrophilia - corpses
Nepiophilia - infants
Biastophilia - assault and rape
Erotophonophilia - murder
Entomophilia - small animals, including insects
Zoosadism - causing pain to animals
Urophilia- urinating in public
Sadism - causing pain to others
Exhibitionism - exposing oneself sexually to others
Frotteurism - rubbing against a non-consenting person

Men, rather than women, are primarily attracted to such deviancies. Homosexual men are most likely to branch into these perversions and hundreds more in their desire for increasingly perverse stimulation. Of all paraphilias, pedophilia is arguably the worst. In a recent radio interview, Jack McLamb (most highly decorated police officer in Phoenix, Arizona history) described to me the many times he has carried little boys and girls to the emergency room to be sewn up after being raped by pedophiles. He says the average pedophile successfully rapes 100 children before he is finally caught.

Rep. Alcee Hastings says the supposed danger posed by any group of sexual deviants is loudly exaggerated by Republicans, and he mocked Republican attempts to exclude them. He asserted that sexual deviants should be protected as harmless people free to express their sexuality as they see fit. If the hate bill is passed, he said, pedophiles will "no longer have to live in fear because of who they are." By agreeing that pedophiles should not be specifically excluded, Senate Judiciary Democrats agree with Hastings’ perverse and outrageous claims!

As I stated in my previous article "Is the Hate Bill in Trouble?" May 21, 2009, the only way forward for Judiciary Democrats may be to boldly propose their own broad amendment stipulating that no illegal paraphilias will be protected. They will be careful not to name any specific paraphilia. Such an amendment would be a fraud, contradicting the bill's broad provision of general "sacred cow" status to all homosexuals. Even worse, S. 909 would give homosexual pedophiles special entitlement to preliminary police and justice system rights and services if the pedophile screamed "Hate crime!" after an irate parent defended their son or daughter from rape.

Nevertheless, accompanied by very rapid movement of the hate bill through the Senate, this subterfuge could be successful. If Democrats do adopt such an amendment, then no matter how fast the hate bill shoots forward, we must protest even faster. At that time, we'll have to overwhelm the Senate, telling members not to believe any amendment denying that the hate bill protects pedophiles. It does! It gives them preferential rights and services, especially if they claim to be victims of a hate crime.

Our Top Priority Now

Senate Judiciary Democrats are stalling in hope that protest from the conservative right will decline. Democrats may be willing to wait a long time. Four years ago, they waited nine months for controversy to die down before suddenly passing the hate bill in the House in only 45 minutes! We cannot give them hope by letting up on protest.

Call all members of the Senate and demand hearings on S. 909. Call repeatedly (every other day), especially the crucial 19 members of the Senate Judiciary Committee. The names are available here on the action page at www.truthtellers.org. Tell the Senator: "Please hold hearings on the pedophile-protecting hate bill S. 909. If the Senator votes for this bill, my friends and I will never forgive or forget." Also, encourage staffers to watch NPN's alarming video "Stop the Pedophile-Protecting Hate Bill" on the home page at www.truthtellers.org.

Possible Senate hate bill hearings will be the most dangerous moment in hate bill passage thus far. If we continue to protest now, there is still a chance they will never be held and S. 909 will die in committee.

The term "sexual orientation" (contrived by the Anti-Defamation League) covers every sexual perversion known to depraved humanity. We must persuade Democrats that its inclusion as a defining concept in any legislation (including the upcoming Employment Non-Discrimination Act, ENDA) is going to result in massive opposition. The term is bankrupt; it cannot be clearly defined and is constitutionally indefensible. The best course of action for Judiciary Democrats is to give up trying to make "sexual orientation" viable and abandon the hate bill which coheres around it.

The federal hate bill is the flagship of the “Obama Armada” of similar freedom-stealing anti-Christian legislation to come. Evidence that all is not well with the hate bill should encourage us more than ever to call repeatedly and finish it off. If the hate bill goes down, we may well (as in the previous Congress) bring legislative disaster to a host of Orwellian bills.