July 6, 2012 at 10:06 am

“The left, the media, the president, other politicians, etc. turned against Zimmerman because he’s white”

a “white guy” does a crime against a black person and everybody (ie: them “ni**er lovers”, commies and libberels) is out to “git ‘im” because he’s white. that is standard neo-nazi, white supremacist bigotry.

but like most of the white supremacist’s heroes of the far right:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/16/george-zimmerman_n_1676729.html

the out of the ordinary thing here is it wasn’t a young boy who was molested by the great white hope.

“Hate crime” — the potent multiplicative result of racial hate and “mere” crime is one of the many granddaughters in the large family of Special Suffering.
The matriarch is Anti-semitism and she taught them all the basic principles:
Jews who died in concentration camps represented, not the “innocenticide” Irving talked about, but a much worse crime than the deaths of all others who perished there because “only they were KILLED FOR BEING JEWS.”
Victimhood is not an equalizer, on the contrary, there is general, undifferentiated victimhood and then there is special victimhood.
Nevertheless regular victimhood has its uses for special victimhood, provided the applicants understand their second-class status:
Blacks must be not only defended by selfless, progressive jews, but LED by them (see NAAACP) like the inexperienced victims they are, understanding that their slavery and suffering of a couple of centuries is trifling compared to the jews’ millenary suffering.
As is the case with the Palestinian movement, the blacks are also lucky to have jews guide them because that “kosherizes” them against accusations of anti-white racism. It is a great formula because it works in all cases.

The police initially let Zimmerman go. Then a trial by Facebook started, and Obama, Clinton, Sharpton and the media joined the mob. The word ‘racism’ has been thrown around like confetti, despite a lack of evidence of it.

Prosecutor Corey said “We do not prosecute by public pressure”, but congresswoman Wilson was more truthful: “The outcry helped bring the case to justice. This case would never have been brought without that outcry. It was a case that almost slipped through the system without the public ever knowing about it”.

“The left, the media, the president, other politicians, etc. turned against Zimmerman because he’s white, and Martin was black”

and you know that for a fact…

BTW, Deadbeat, I’m not sure I follow you. The left, the media, the president, other politicians, etc. turned against Zimmerman because he’s white, and Martin was black, though there is no evidence of racial intent in the shooting. I hope you’re not suggesting that society should make the same assumption of guilt, but label Zimmerman Jewish instead of white.

This is misleading. There were several suspects, black and white, in the murder of Mary Phagan. Obviously all of the other suspects “walked”. Also, I would have liked to have seen you site a reference more neutral then the ADL.

Ariadna Theokopoulos writes …
Like “hate studies” it is another example of “special” categories promoted by the jewish left and used to make any “anti-semitic” manifestation the queen of ‘special’ hate. In that regard, to argue that hate studies neglect zionism is to argue that the field is a good idea that needs improvement.

I totally agree with you. Rather than wasting cycles in a pseudo-scientific attempt to disprove “hate crimes” and thereby legitimize the whole canard, the whole rhetoric of “hate crime” should be discredit.

This is all B.S. with a “left-wing” veneer to gain support for laws that will strip away the 1st Amendment and regard any confrontation against Jewish supremacy to be a “hate crime”.

Chip Berlet should be outed as the fraud that he his. He’s made a career attacking the Right and labeling recklessly labeling white gentiles as “racists”.

I understand what Jay is doing by pointing out a “contradiction” because it is clear that the pseudo-Left will work hard to defend Zionism against charges of racism but in the end they control the media and academia and will continue to promote “hate crime” rhetoric that will eventually lead to legislation.

This rhetoric is dangerous and not be giving legitimacy. That is why the pseudo-Left jumped onto the whole Trayvon Martin tragedy and identify George Zimmerman as “white” or “Hispanic” but not “Jewish”.

“are we not men?”

“Christian Identity Ministries is holding a three-day conference for so-called “white Christians” who contend they have been treated unfairly, the Rev. Mel Lewis told local TV station WSFA. Lewis, the organizer and keynote speaker, says they have the right, like any other Americans, to worship how they wish.

Ku Klux Klan flags and white supremacy slogans surround the conference, which will conclude with a cross being set on fire Friday night. Organizers say it’s not a cross-burning, but rather sacred Christian cross lighting.”

The category called hate crimes is a worthwhile topic for sociologists and psychologists but I have a problem with it as legal concept.
Like “hate studies” it is another example of “special” categories promoted by the jewish left and used to make any “anti-semitic” manifestation the queen of ‘special’ hate. In that regard, to argue that hate studies neglect zionism is to argue that the field is a good idea that needs improvement.

I see no reason why a murder should be punished less than one declared “hate murder.” The law has available (in the US) such a thing as “aggravating circumstances” (e.g., a heinous and cruel murder, like that of the black man dragged behind a car) to differentiate between one murder and another and, if the murder was committed by accomplices–more than one person–there is the additional charge of “conspiracy to commit murder.” Those are distinctions worth making.
To set aside a special category — hate crimes– based on the victim’s race, religion, nationality or sexual orientation is to imply that some lives are more worth protecting than others and/or that it is possible to ascertain with any degree of certainty a murderer’s true.

The newly create discipline of hate studies is in the same category as ‘women studies,’ ‘women literature,’ black history,’ and ‘gay whatever.’
They are academic disciplines created with an agenda to manipulate public perception, increase fragmentation, deflect attention (as Jay indicated) and present “hate” as an almost self-standing phenomenon, a weed that grows on its own, a CAUSE of societal conflict, not a REACTION.

[Yes, yes, I know "numbers don't prove anything," and "maybe jews are better at it than gentiles, just like in banking, and "this is binary thinking" but the filed of hate stuiodes is so thoroughly kosher as to make a gentile timid..]

Within the much larger and legitimate field of ethnic identity studies (see MacDonald) it is understandably necessary to study conflicts and mutual perceptions between ethnic an other groups, but to set aside a discipline to study “hate” is tendentious and deceiving.

Cool