The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Hate Hoaxes Ought to be Hate Crimes
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

With the news that hate hoaxer Jussie Smollett is getting off with two days of community service and a $10k fine, here’s a relevant passage from my Taki’s Magazine review a few weeks ago of Wilfred Reilly’s book Hate Crime Hoaxes:

Reilly endorses David Kopel’s mooted reform of recognizing that hate hoaxes, comic as they often are, should be no laughing matter legally. Instead, hate hoaxes spread fear and loathing of the targeted race and therefore should be punished as the hate crimes that they are. Kopel writes:

To the extent that arguments in favor of special hate crime laws are persuasive, the arguments for special anti-hate-crime-hoax laws are at least as persuasive. Hate crime laws are promoted under the theory that they send a message…that such crimes are especially heinous. Precisely the same can be said about hate crime hoaxes—which are often treated quite offhandedly by the authorities.

Of course, this raises the old arguments of whether the category of “hate crime” should exist at all.

I’ve come around to the belief that it’s not unreasonable for society to especially try to deter crimes motivated primarily not by basic sins such as rage, greed, or lust but by animus against a demographic category.

Similarly we tend to distinguish between crimes of passion and crimes of calculation—e.g., a man who kills his wife’s boyfriend upon discovering them in flagrante delicto will generally be treated by the law somewhat less harshly than a hired hit man who cold-bloodedly kills the lover for money.

Likewise, it’s not particularly controversial that certain categories of victims, such as children, police officers, and political candidates, are protected by stiffer sentences. The state of Louisiana treats policemen as a group protected by hate crime laws, which in the wake of the Black Lives Matter assassinations of recent years seems rational.

Similarly, it’s not unreasonable that crimes unmotivated by any personal beef, but simply by animosity toward an entire demographic group, are particularly obnoxious and threatening to the public peace and thus should be deterred by higher penalties. …

But this concept also means that the law should distinguish between “hate crimes” in which animus against a group rather than a person was the motivation and “anger crimes” in which the aggressor’s motivation was to harm a particular individual. That would mean that punishing a criminal additionally for, say, shouting a racial epithet in the heat of a fight would not be considered a hate crime.

It’s essential for the sake of justice that hate crimes be defined objectively rather than making it a hate crime for, say, a white person to “punch down” at a black but not for a black person to “punch up” at a white. Violence motivated by animus toward a racial group should be punished equally no matter who punches whom.

This, however, is considered a highly controversial point of view by the ACLU.

If the goal of hate crime legislation is not merely to punch up at whites but to deter crimes that increase society’s overall level of racial animosity, then interracial hate hoaxes should be punished especially hard.

This raises the question of whether motivations in lying to the cops should be carefully assessed, or whether interracial hoaxes should simply be treated as offenses against public order no matter what the reason. For example, how much does it matter what Susan Smith’s or Jussie Smollett’s motives were in making up their stories about attackers of another race?

Smith likely wasn’t trying to make blacks looks bad; she was instead trying to get away with murdering her children. Blaming a black man was a handy lie for her. But it was a bad thing to do (even beyond the child-murdering).

Targeting whites for opprobrium was probably more central to Smollett’s conspiracy, but he might phrase his motivation as more that of helping his friend Sen. Kamala Harris replace the hated Donald Trump as president.

But perhaps it isn’t helpful or necessary to try to untangle the confused thinking of a Smith or a Jollett? Maybe we should just automatically increase the penalty for lying to the cops if the lie crosses racial lines? If you are going to make up a criminal who victimized you, at least make up one of your own race. It’s less bad for everybody that way.

This logic leads to another idea, one I associate with Jared Taylor: Perhaps all crimes should be punished more severely if their victims are of another race. If you like to rob or brawl, stick with people of your own kind.

I’m not sure that I’m ready to go that far, but growing diversity may lead us to these kinds of laws simply to preserve the peace.

 
Hide 90 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Off topic.

    During the obscensity known as the Kavanaugh hearings, I made statements about the United States that must have been offesive to many American Sailerites.

    I apologise.

    What I am experiencing in New Zealand today is ten times worse that the Kavanaugh hearings.

    A period of national mourning (because what happened was terrible) has been turnied into a circus and a witch hunt.

    The country has disgraced itself.

    We have ceased to be a demogracy and have a de fact Gestapo operating out of Canterbury University called, I kid you not, ProjectLoveNZ.

    If a ProjectLoveNZ operative is reading this post, please be so kind as to seek out a fetid sewer somewhere, crawl into it and die!

    • Replies: @Tiny Duck
    @22pp22

    You are a monster and should be incarcerated for your hatred

    I only wish that America could produce a strong leader let us the prime minister of new zeal and

    Replies: @Bruce County

    , @J.Ross
    @22pp22

    The only disgraceful thing is you expecting your enemies to commit suicide because you asked nicely.
    No government listens to its people while they sit quietly and watch TV.
    Nobody cares who you are until you put on the vest.

    Replies: @22pp22

    , @guest
    @22pp22

    At least they were savvy enough not to call it Miniluv.

    , @Kiwikiwikiwi
    @22pp22

    Well as long as Ardern brings back those F-16s I do not care.

    , @duncsbaby
    @22pp22

    I remember your comments and although I wasn't especially hurt by them I did think that New Zealand was just as in danger of being ruled by insane feminists as America was. I appreciate the mea culpa on your part. I do not envy you though what is going on.

    , @Bragadocious
    @22pp22

    Well, they always called NZ a country of sheep-shaggers and now we see you are sheep and you're getting shagged.

    , @Diversity Heretic
    @22pp22

    How in the world did New Zealand end up with an obviously mentally unbalanced Prime Minister?

    Replies: @Whiskey, @J.Ross

    , @Don't Look at Me
    @22pp22

    "What I am experiencing in New Zealand today is ten times worse that the Kavanaugh hearings.

    A period of national mourning (because what happened was terrible) has been turnied into a circus and a witch hunt."

    Could you give us some examples?

    Replies: @22pp22

  2. Mr. Smollett was innocent as he was exonerated

    I thought you guys respected the rule of law?

    Most People of Color knew the truth

    Hate hoaxes don’t exist in significant numbers

    On the other hand violent rhetoric such as this site leads to violence like the new zeal and horror

    This is why this site will be shit down in a few years

    • Troll: IHTG
    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    @Tiny Duck


    the new zeal and horror
     
    Plenty of new zeal, and horror, in your comments.

    This is why this site will be shit down in a few years
     
    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=sTUmSMTB5Po
    , @Nicholas Stix
    @Tiny Duck

    Racist liar.

    , @dr kill
    @Tiny Duck

    I heard VDH say he felt the DA made the correct decision to forgo the trial because of jury nullification.
    The trial would have been a farce, Chicago prosecutors would be exposed as stupid as Darden, Clark and Furman, And OJ Smollet would have been found not guilty. Demonstrations,riots, who needs this?
    I'm a fan of jury nullification (Bundy) and I have to think that not every Black American who feels the same way about American Justice as I do ( but for different reasons ) is wrong.

    Replies: @J.Ross

  3. “Of course, this raises the old arguments of whether the category of “hate crime” should exist at all.”

    Exactly. And considering that for most of US History, the category did not exist in the law. At least in written statues, murder was murder, period, regardless of skin color. If a crime is committed according to historically understood categories of said crimes (e.g. murder; rape; theft; etc) then the perpetrator should be prosecuted accordingly; as far as establishing guilt or innocence, the skin color is irrelevant, but establishing guilt or innocence is all that matters. By making new distinctions in the law, it is establishing precedence that some felonious crimes are more severe than others simply because of skin color.

    Although, doesn’t this go vs. the Left’s shibboleth that there’s no such thing as race, except as a social construct? Apparently in the law establishing guilt or innocence, it would appear that some crimes do concede that race does in fact exist.

  4. Anonymous[427] • Disclaimer says:

    Of course, this raises the old arguments of whether the category of “hate crime” should exist at all.

    I’ve come around to the belief that it’s not unreasonable for society to especially try to deter crimes motivated primarily not by basic sins such as rage, greed, or lust but by animus against a demographic category.

    Except that it is unreasonable, even if it were enforced fairly. It’s a dangerous concept, along the lines of “the truth is no defense”. The truth is ALWAYS a defense in a rightly run system of justice. If you are accused of shooting someone in your living room, it makes all the difference in the world whether he broke in and attacked you or you coldbloodedly invited him over and assassinated him.

    If you killed a person of another race because he “made a racist comment”, you are a murderer, or at the very least a manslaughterer. If you kill him for absolutely no discernible reason, he’s just as dead. On the other hand if he brandishes a weapon and states his intent to kill you, and you shoot him you have acted in proper self defense.

    Murder, rape, assault, robbery, should be punished as they are. Not as a lesser crime to “hate crime”. I mean, if the perpetrator LOVED the victim, he would not have perpetrated the crime, it seems to me.

    The second thing is that in practice it will never be enforced fairly.

    “Civil rights laws were not passed to apply to White men and do not protect them”

    –Mary Francis Berry, former chair of the US Civil Rights Commission.

    Was Mary Francis Berry negatively impacted in any way for this statement? Of course not.

    Mary Frances Berry (born February 17, 1938) is an American Historian; she is the Geraldine R. Segal Professor of American Social Thought, and the Professor of History at the University of Pennsylvania. She is also the former chairwoman of the United States Commission on Civil Rights, and the former board chair of Pacifica Radio. She is a past president of the Organization of American Historians, the primary professional organization for historians of the United States.

    At Penn, Berry teaches American legal history. Before coming to Penn, Berry was provost of the College of Behavioral and Social Science at University of Maryland, College Park, and chancellor of the University of Colorado at Boulder. She received Ph.D. and J.D. degrees from the University of Michigan.

    The Jussie Smollett case-the outcome of which, I’m sorry to admit, slightly surprised even me-should be proof that the current power structure is incorrigible and will never change. It may be removed, but the details seem to make Mr. Sailer queasy so I will skip those. But even that isn’t going to happen in the lifetime of most readers under, say, 35 or 40, and it will be unpleasant for all concerned. I’m old enough and have significant medical issues I doubt I’ll be impacted, but it will be bad.

    • Replies: @SMK
    @Anonymous

    How depressing that Steve Sailer would endorse "hate crime" laws. Such laws should be abolished, and should never have been enacted. The purpose of "hate crime" laws is to expose the "systemic" evil of "white racism" -blacks can't be "racists, of course- and punish the small minority of whites who assault, rape, gang-rape, murder, brutalize, and terrorize blacks far more severely than the large minority of blacks who assault, rape, gang rape, murder, brutalize, and terrorize whites. Almost every violent crime that blacks commit against whites is motivated to some degree by hatred of whites generally, a hatred that is induced, provoked, sustained, justified, and often extolled by black "leaders," politicians, and demagogues and their white left-liberal myrmidons, apologists, and sycophants. Has a single black ever been arrested, prosecuted, and convicted of a "hate crime" against a white victim(s)?

    , @MarkU
    @Anonymous

    I agree with you, I was opposed to the concept of 'hate crime' from the outset. It seems to me axiomatic that legally responsible adults should be treated equally according to the law in each and every circumstance, regardless of race or gender. A crime is a crime regardless. The introduction of 'hate crime' laws was a terrible mistake, much like 'affirmative action', it writes different treatment for different races into the law. In my opinion it actually exacerbates racial tensions rather than lessening them.

  5. This is like a Scott Turow novel from the early 90s, base corruption that’s going to be exposed in such a hilarious way that it will embody the truism that truth is stranger than fiction.

    Further developments that surely will come out:

    1. The prosecutor Foxx, the first black lady to hold the office in Cook County (Chicago)!!!, got something illegal to let Smollett off.

    2. Foxx handpicked the judge who agreed to seal the file because she had something on the judge, or otherwise offered something that more-or-less constitutes illegal bribery.

  6. Hate Crime Hoaxes Ought to be Hate Crimes

    Charleston shooter Dylann Roof was radicalized in part by the media/political hate crime hoax about Trayvon Martin and “white Hispanic” George Zimmerman.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dylann_Roof#Motivation

    The manifesto states that its author was “truly awakened” by coverage of the shooting of Trayvon Martin:

    “I read the Wikipedia article and right away I was unable to understand what the big deal was. It was obvious that Zimmerman was in the right. But more importantly this prompted me to type in the words “black on white crime” into Google, and I have never been the same since that day. The first website I came to was the Council of Conservative Citizens. There were pages upon pages of these brutal black on white murders. I was in disbelief. At this moment I realized that something was very wrong. How could the news be blowing up the Trayvon Martin case while hundreds of these black on white murders got ignored?”

    If Jussie skates and the whole case gets legally buried, there’s likely gonna be more ‘bowlcuts’ popping up.

    Cry “wolf,” attract wolves.

    • Replies: @Mr McKenna
    @Jenner Ickham Errican


    "this prompted me to type in the words “black on white crime” into Google, and I have never been the same since that day."
     
    This is a prime justification for the 'sanitizing' that Google now practices.

    Control of 'information' is control of just about everything.

    , @reiner Tor
    @Jenner Ickham Errican


    there’s likely gonna be more ‘bowlcuts’ popping up.

    Cry “wolf,” attract wolves.
     
    They want Dylan Roof style "wolves" to appear, as many as possible, so that they can refocus on those.
    , @stillCARealist
    @Jenner Ickham Errican

    Then why didn't he go all Death Wish and hunt down black criminals? Why go into a church and shoot women during a Bible Study?

    sorry, that guy was a crazy killer and should be headed for execution. I'm waiting to see if that Fort Hood killer will actually be executed.

    Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican

  7. There were pages upon pages of these brutal black on white murders.

    Exactly. They may be lots of things, but news they’re not.

  8. I see this happening in the Nordics…..and Holland, even Belgium is slipping.

  9. @22pp22
    Off topic.

    During the obscensity known as the Kavanaugh hearings, I made statements about the United States that must have been offesive to many American Sailerites.

    I apologise.

    What I am experiencing in New Zealand today is ten times worse that the Kavanaugh hearings.

    A period of national mourning (because what happened was terrible) has been turnied into a circus and a witch hunt.

    The country has disgraced itself.

    We have ceased to be a demogracy and have a de fact Gestapo operating out of Canterbury University called, I kid you not, ProjectLoveNZ.

    If a ProjectLoveNZ operative is reading this post, please be so kind as to seek out a fetid sewer somewhere, crawl into it and die!

    Replies: @Tiny Duck, @J.Ross, @guest, @Kiwikiwikiwi, @duncsbaby, @Bragadocious, @Diversity Heretic, @Don't Look at Me

    You are a monster and should be incarcerated for your hatred

    I only wish that America could produce a strong leader let us the prime minister of new zeal and

    • LOL: James Speaks
    • Replies: @Bruce County
    @Tiny Duck

    I went and read your past 1500 comments... You really need to get a life. When was the last time you crawled out of your mommies basement and saw the light of day?? I do also suggest switching to a healthier diet, starting with Diet Kool-Aid. And lay off the Pizza Pops!!!. You really need to open your eyes and expand your knowledge base. Get some Kersey Love into you buddy. Now theres the real truth!!

    Replies: @Ozymandias, @J.Ross

  10. Identity politics are supported and funded by the ruling class because it insures nothing outside the status quo can ever be done. Pretty neat trick really.

    • Agree: Cortes
  11. even if Hate hoaxes were considered felony hate crimes in Illinois , the politicians would never prosecute….they could have prosecuted Smollett but chose to do nothing….it appears the feds will also refuse to prosecute Smollett for his federal crimes ….making hoaxes a federal crime will not change this , the perpetrators of these hate hoaxes will never be indicted for their crimes, writing more laws will not change the results as long as we keep electing Republicans and Democrats

    • Agree: reiner Tor
    • Replies: @Mr McKenna
    @Travis

    Exactly right. If the laws are toughened up, then the punishments will be too, but both will in practice only be meted out to 'Badwhites' and never to Chosenites or POCs.

    , @Prodigal son
    @Travis

    Agree , we need fewer laws but better prosecutors. Additional hate hoax laws would have had zero impact on Jussie Smollett. Additional laws will only be used to punish bad whites.

    What occurred in Chicago is just a glimpse of the future of American Justice. Whites will be a minority in a few years , white Christians are already a minority among the under 21 population.

  12. @22pp22
    Off topic.

    During the obscensity known as the Kavanaugh hearings, I made statements about the United States that must have been offesive to many American Sailerites.

    I apologise.

    What I am experiencing in New Zealand today is ten times worse that the Kavanaugh hearings.

    A period of national mourning (because what happened was terrible) has been turnied into a circus and a witch hunt.

    The country has disgraced itself.

    We have ceased to be a demogracy and have a de fact Gestapo operating out of Canterbury University called, I kid you not, ProjectLoveNZ.

    If a ProjectLoveNZ operative is reading this post, please be so kind as to seek out a fetid sewer somewhere, crawl into it and die!

    Replies: @Tiny Duck, @J.Ross, @guest, @Kiwikiwikiwi, @duncsbaby, @Bragadocious, @Diversity Heretic, @Don't Look at Me

    The only disgraceful thing is you expecting your enemies to commit suicide because you asked nicely.
    No government listens to its people while they sit quietly and watch TV.
    Nobody cares who you are until you put on the vest.

    • Replies: @22pp22
    @J.Ross

    I tried that in England. I was alone

  13. I was thinking to myself that this would be my last post on the Jussie thing, but I was, of course, lying to myself.

    Looking at this rationally, the ‘victims’ in this case are Trump voters (mostly whites), and possibly the producers he was looking to exploit for more money, but that seems to be in doubt with the writers of that show spiking the football on news of his victory over justice. That’s 63 or 64 million people, which goes back to Stalin’s saying that one death is a tradgedy and a million is a statistic.

    If a particular person was wrongfully fingered for the alleged crime, it might have been a different story. Big emphasis on the ‘might,’ though. Lots of other hate and rape hoaxes were seen as bullshit early on, and the perpetrators of those got off either scott free, or with the mildest of legal admonishions (the stripper and Nifong in the Duke case should have receieved the death penalty in my opinion).

  14. To endorse the concept of hate crime is to endorse the concept of thought crime and /or hate speech. There should be no law against something that cannot be objectively proved. Was Jussie motivated by hate? How would you know? I think he did it to advance his career.

    • Agree: Joseph Doaks
    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    @WorkingClass


    To endorse the concept of hate crime is to endorse the concept of thought crime and /or hate speech. There should be no law against something that cannot be objectively proved.
     
    I agree. Legally enshrining the concept of "hate-crime" is a step towards making hate itself illegal. And any thoughts that are deemed "hateful" by others. We are already seeing moves in that direction.

    Hate is a natural human emotion. You have a right to hate whomever you want for whatever reason or for no reason at all. You have a right to hold opinions of other people that they might deem to be hateful, even if they aren't.

    Replies: @Travis

    , @SMK
    @WorkingClass

    His ludicrous "hate crime hoax" was clearly motivated by hatred of Trump and whites generally, especially the tens of millions, the "basket of deplorables," who voted for Trump, and by an urgency to expose the "systemic racism" of Trump and whites generally and, hopefully, to help Kamala Harris, his close friend apparently, win the Democratic nomination for president and then defeat the orange-haired "white supremacist" in 2020 and become the first women and second "black" president.

    The purpose of "hate speech" laws is to expose and vanquish the evil of "racism" by punishing whites for criticizing and telling the truth about black violence and criminality, average black intelligence, the pernicious consequences of massive non-European immigration, overwhelming Mestizo and Amerindian in the U.S. and black African and especially Muslim in the UK and Western Europe, and to silence all such criticism, honesty, realism, and opposition to white dispossession. And also to send far more whites to prison to reduce the "racist" disparities in white and black incarceration rates.

  15. Perjury ought to be like knocking in gin rummy. You should get 10 points plus whatever your opponent had in his hand if he fails.

  16. Hate Hoax Crime
    Hate Crime Hoaxes
    Inverse Hate Crime
    Hate Crime on the Flippy-dippy
    Hate Is Hate, Don’t Discriminate
    #OneHate

  17. @22pp22
    Off topic.

    During the obscensity known as the Kavanaugh hearings, I made statements about the United States that must have been offesive to many American Sailerites.

    I apologise.

    What I am experiencing in New Zealand today is ten times worse that the Kavanaugh hearings.

    A period of national mourning (because what happened was terrible) has been turnied into a circus and a witch hunt.

    The country has disgraced itself.

    We have ceased to be a demogracy and have a de fact Gestapo operating out of Canterbury University called, I kid you not, ProjectLoveNZ.

    If a ProjectLoveNZ operative is reading this post, please be so kind as to seek out a fetid sewer somewhere, crawl into it and die!

    Replies: @Tiny Duck, @J.Ross, @guest, @Kiwikiwikiwi, @duncsbaby, @Bragadocious, @Diversity Heretic, @Don't Look at Me

    At least they were savvy enough not to call it Miniluv.

  18. Anonymous[378] • Disclaimer says:

    • Replies: @guest
    @Anonymous

    I dunno if Jussie Dindu will make it back on the show, but they'll hafta write an episode where a Person of Color is actually assaulted by white thugs in red caps, and a judge lets them off the hook because they're in the Klan together or something.

    They'll work sex in there somehow, too.

    Replies: @Mr McKenna, @dr kill

  19. istevefan says:

    Similarly, it’s not unreasonable that crimes unmotivated by any personal beef, but simply by animosity toward an entire demographic group, are particularly obnoxious and threatening to the public peace and thus should be deterred by higher penalties. …

    The interesting point in this passage is that if you think about it, you come away understanding that hate crimes, as defined above, primarily exist in multicultural societies. Yet we are forever being told that diversity is a strength. But apparently that strength is so weak that hate crimes legislation must be mandated to prop up that strength. That doesn’t seem too strong to me.

    Also, our elite who pass these laws know exactly why they are passing these laws. Yet they are the very ones who preach about diversity being a strength and demand moar immigration of the most dissimilar tribes. So much so that they created the visa lotto in 1990 to ensure just that.

    The supreme function of statesmanship is to provide against preventable evils” – Enoch Powell

    • Agree: TTSSYF, GermanReader2
    • Replies: @guest
    @istevefan

    Well, Diversity is a strength, but Whitey cancels out that strength with his weakness.

    , @Reg Cæsar
    @istevefan


    So much so that they created the visa lotto in 1990 to ensure just that.
     
    The visa lotto would have done some good had it been joined to a tight cap on total immigration. That way, no one group could get large enough to cause trouble. Each New Guinean would mean one fewer Mexican.


    If the traditional population is still a majority, it's better that the non-traditional portion be broken into as many groups as possible. Let them deal with the coalition problems.
    , @Redneck farmer
    @istevefan

    I understand the intelligence community has a lot to do with the diversity lottery. A chance to get agents with legitimate foreign passports.

  20. I’m not sure that I’m ready to go that far, but growing diversity may lead us to these kinds of laws simply to preserve the peace.

    Go that far.

  21. istevefan says:

    That would mean that punishing a criminal additionally for, say, shouting a racial epithet in the heat of a fight would not be considered a hate crime.

    People need to realize when you are in a fight you often resort to calling your opponent by some name that aptly describes him from your point of view. So a normal sized man fighting an overweight fellow is probably going to call that guy a “fat f*ck” at some point during the fight. An ethnic English kid would probably call an Italian kid he was fighting a ‘Guinea’ or ‘WOP’ or something along those lines. That’s the nature of it. I’m sure most of us have resorted to calling someone by some name we thought would draw metaphorical blood when we were young and involved in a playground fight.

    • Replies: @South Texas Guy
    @istevefan

    You pegged it. If in the midst of a heated confrontation in a parking lot, if I said "let's go n#$%er" as an invitation to fight, It'd be a hate crime on me. Since even blacks regard slurs such as whitey or honky as extremely corny, they are unlikely to use them as a way of getting someone's goat. But yet if I was accosted, and then later attacked obviously because I was white, no hate crime additional penalty. Several (two in particular to iSteve and Derb readers) had the local DAs and politicos expressly deny race had anything to do with them.

    Hate crimes are about getting whitey. Everyone knew that back in the 90s when they started coming into vogue, but no one expressly made that argument. Conservatives, real and the TV type, were arguing that every crime is a hate crime, and for that they win a no-shit award. What they should have been insisting on are equal prosecutions for blacks, latinos, indians, somoans, etc. Hasn't happened.

    I grew up in South Texas in the aftermath of the Chicano takeover. If you think I didn't get into fights because people didn't like the color of my skin you're crazy. But there's no register of that. If were to suddenly get super famous, Barbara Walters will not come out of retirement to offer me a softball interview and ask me, 'Tell me about the troubles you had growing up as a person of different color?'

    , @guest
    @istevefan

    Reminds me of an episode of It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia where the gang went to arbitration over possession of a lottery ticket. Somehow it all came down to whether one man shouting "f***ot" at a possibly closeted man in order to save his life from a falling piano constituted a hate crime.

    If he's truly gay, it's a hate crime. If he's straight, the other guy is a hero.

    , @TTSSYF
    @istevefan

    You need your own blog. Your comments are so dead-on accurate and well-expressed.

    Replies: @J.Ross

  22. anon[335] • Disclaimer says:

    If we take assault seriously there isn’t a need to punish racially motivated assaults more than others. We will already be punishing all assaults to the maximum.
    The only way to define a hate crime is by the speech that goes with it. Assault + racial epithet = hate crime. Hate crime laws are in essence laws criminalizing speech.
    I say punish all assaults harshly and let us keep our freedom of speech.

  23. Hate crimes, which are subjectively defined and charged, ought not to exist: they are just another weapon the Establishment wields against Whites — the proper takeaway from the Smollett business is this: ‘muh Constitution’ — every aspect of civic order will be at risk in a majority non-white America.

    (Holder famously declared before Congress that Whites are not meant to be a protected group under federal ‘hate crime’ law.)

    • Replies: @eah
    @eah

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D2mOW9-WkAgMrut.png

    Replies: @Clyde

  24. @eah
    Hate crimes, which are subjectively defined and charged, ought not to exist: they are just another weapon the Establishment wields against Whites -- the proper takeaway from the Smollett business is this: 'muh Constitution' -- every aspect of civic order will be at risk in a majority non-white America.

    (Holder famously declared before Congress that Whites are not meant to be a protected group under federal 'hate crime' law.)

    http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-IKOo-RVYVuw/UTHmR00KRII/AAAAAAAADjM/7CW87rl2I18/s1600/Eric+Holder+LIES+about+'HOMEGROWN+TERROR+THREAT'+to+justify+Neo-Con+DICTATORSHIP+powers+Feb+2013.PNG

    Replies: @eah

    • Agree: reiner Tor
    • Replies: @Clyde
    @eah

    https://twitter.com/westland_will/status/1110797149296459776

    Replies: @guest, @eah

  25. @Anonymous
    https://twitter.com/EmpireWriters/status/1110562098310873094

    Replies: @guest

    I dunno if Jussie Dindu will make it back on the show, but they’ll hafta write an episode where a Person of Color is actually assaulted by white thugs in red caps, and a judge lets them off the hook because they’re in the Klan together or something.

    They’ll work sex in there somehow, too.

    • Replies: @Mr McKenna
    @guest

    Of course, and millions more will watch that (and a thousand other similar shows) than will ever have familiarized themselves with the details of Jussie's stunt. Keep in mind that the MSM version of that stunt is very different from the facts of the case.

    , @dr kill
    @guest

    Gay sex. I hope. Gay sex with two Nigerian weightlifters. wearing nothing but nooses and MAGA hats. On a cold and gray Chicago morning. I'm embarrassed I didn't think of Elvis until today.


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aRfITydVZ7A

  26. @istevefan

    That would mean that punishing a criminal additionally for, say, shouting a racial epithet in the heat of a fight would not be considered a hate crime.
     
    People need to realize when you are in a fight you often resort to calling your opponent by some name that aptly describes him from your point of view. So a normal sized man fighting an overweight fellow is probably going to call that guy a "fat f*ck" at some point during the fight. An ethnic English kid would probably call an Italian kid he was fighting a 'Guinea' or 'WOP' or something along those lines. That's the nature of it. I'm sure most of us have resorted to calling someone by some name we thought would draw metaphorical blood when we were young and involved in a playground fight.

    Replies: @South Texas Guy, @guest, @TTSSYF

    You pegged it. If in the midst of a heated confrontation in a parking lot, if I said “let’s go n#$%er” as an invitation to fight, It’d be a hate crime on me. Since even blacks regard slurs such as whitey or honky as extremely corny, they are unlikely to use them as a way of getting someone’s goat. But yet if I was accosted, and then later attacked obviously because I was white, no hate crime additional penalty. Several (two in particular to iSteve and Derb readers) had the local DAs and politicos expressly deny race had anything to do with them.

    Hate crimes are about getting whitey. Everyone knew that back in the 90s when they started coming into vogue, but no one expressly made that argument. Conservatives, real and the TV type, were arguing that every crime is a hate crime, and for that they win a no-shit award. What they should have been insisting on are equal prosecutions for blacks, latinos, indians, somoans, etc. Hasn’t happened.

    I grew up in South Texas in the aftermath of the Chicano takeover. If you think I didn’t get into fights because people didn’t like the color of my skin you’re crazy. But there’s no register of that. If were to suddenly get super famous, Barbara Walters will not come out of retirement to offer me a softball interview and ask me, ‘Tell me about the troubles you had growing up as a person of different color?’

  27. Oh, and OT, and most of you have probably already seen it. But here’s something else to raise your blood pressure.

    https://dailycaller.com/2019/03/26/kavanaugh-doxx-feinstein-plea/

    • Replies: @Mr McKenna
    @South Texas Guy

    Hadn't seen it. Thanks. Sort of.

  28. @istevefan

    That would mean that punishing a criminal additionally for, say, shouting a racial epithet in the heat of a fight would not be considered a hate crime.
     
    People need to realize when you are in a fight you often resort to calling your opponent by some name that aptly describes him from your point of view. So a normal sized man fighting an overweight fellow is probably going to call that guy a "fat f*ck" at some point during the fight. An ethnic English kid would probably call an Italian kid he was fighting a 'Guinea' or 'WOP' or something along those lines. That's the nature of it. I'm sure most of us have resorted to calling someone by some name we thought would draw metaphorical blood when we were young and involved in a playground fight.

    Replies: @South Texas Guy, @guest, @TTSSYF

    Reminds me of an episode of It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia where the gang went to arbitration over possession of a lottery ticket. Somehow it all came down to whether one man shouting “f***ot” at a possibly closeted man in order to save his life from a falling piano constituted a hate crime.

    If he’s truly gay, it’s a hate crime. If he’s straight, the other guy is a hero.

  29. @istevefan

    Similarly, it’s not unreasonable that crimes unmotivated by any personal beef, but simply by animosity toward an entire demographic group, are particularly obnoxious and threatening to the public peace and thus should be deterred by higher penalties. …
     
    The interesting point in this passage is that if you think about it, you come away understanding that hate crimes, as defined above, primarily exist in multicultural societies. Yet we are forever being told that diversity is a strength. But apparently that strength is so weak that hate crimes legislation must be mandated to prop up that strength. That doesn't seem too strong to me.

    Also, our elite who pass these laws know exactly why they are passing these laws. Yet they are the very ones who preach about diversity being a strength and demand moar immigration of the most dissimilar tribes. So much so that they created the visa lotto in 1990 to ensure just that.

    The supreme function of statesmanship is to provide against preventable evils" - Enoch Powell

    Replies: @guest, @Reg Cæsar, @Redneck farmer

    Well, Diversity is a strength, but Whitey cancels out that strength with his weakness.

  30. @istevefan

    Similarly, it’s not unreasonable that crimes unmotivated by any personal beef, but simply by animosity toward an entire demographic group, are particularly obnoxious and threatening to the public peace and thus should be deterred by higher penalties. …
     
    The interesting point in this passage is that if you think about it, you come away understanding that hate crimes, as defined above, primarily exist in multicultural societies. Yet we are forever being told that diversity is a strength. But apparently that strength is so weak that hate crimes legislation must be mandated to prop up that strength. That doesn't seem too strong to me.

    Also, our elite who pass these laws know exactly why they are passing these laws. Yet they are the very ones who preach about diversity being a strength and demand moar immigration of the most dissimilar tribes. So much so that they created the visa lotto in 1990 to ensure just that.

    The supreme function of statesmanship is to provide against preventable evils" - Enoch Powell

    Replies: @guest, @Reg Cæsar, @Redneck farmer

    So much so that they created the visa lotto in 1990 to ensure just that.

    The visa lotto would have done some good had it been joined to a tight cap on total immigration. That way, no one group could get large enough to cause trouble. Each New Guinean would mean one fewer Mexican.

    If the traditional population is still a majority, it’s better that the non-traditional portion be broken into as many groups as possible. Let them deal with the coalition problems.

  31. “Cook County State’s Attorney spokeswoman Kiera Ellis said in a statement that Fox ‘did not formally recuse herself or the [State’s Attorney] Office based on any actual conflict of interest. As a result, she did not have to seek the appointment of a special prosecutor.’

    When Fox publicly announced that she had recused herself ‘it was a colloquial use of the term rather than in its legal sense,’ Ellis said.”

    https://patch.com/illinois/chicago/did-top-prosecutor-break-law-cutting-deal-jussie-smollett

  32. Strong punishment against hate crime hoaxes would deter them being repeated. That would be detrimental to those who benefit from the hoaxes.

    So disregard for serious accountability for Jussie Smollett’s crime should not come as a surprise.

  33. @Tiny Duck
    Mr. Smollett was innocent as he was exonerated

    I thought you guys respected the rule of law?

    Most People of Color knew the truth

    Hate hoaxes don't exist in significant numbers

    On the other hand violent rhetoric such as this site leads to violence like the new zeal and horror

    This is why this site will be shit down in a few years

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar, @Nicholas Stix, @dr kill

    the new zeal and horror

    Plenty of new zeal, and horror, in your comments.

    This is why this site will be shit down in a few years

  34. @22pp22
    Off topic.

    During the obscensity known as the Kavanaugh hearings, I made statements about the United States that must have been offesive to many American Sailerites.

    I apologise.

    What I am experiencing in New Zealand today is ten times worse that the Kavanaugh hearings.

    A period of national mourning (because what happened was terrible) has been turnied into a circus and a witch hunt.

    The country has disgraced itself.

    We have ceased to be a demogracy and have a de fact Gestapo operating out of Canterbury University called, I kid you not, ProjectLoveNZ.

    If a ProjectLoveNZ operative is reading this post, please be so kind as to seek out a fetid sewer somewhere, crawl into it and die!

    Replies: @Tiny Duck, @J.Ross, @guest, @Kiwikiwikiwi, @duncsbaby, @Bragadocious, @Diversity Heretic, @Don't Look at Me

    Well as long as Ardern brings back those F-16s I do not care.

  35. @Jenner Ickham Errican

    Hate Crime Hoaxes Ought to be Hate Crimes
     
    Charleston shooter Dylann Roof was radicalized in part by the media/political hate crime hoax about Trayvon Martin and “white Hispanic” George Zimmerman.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dylann_Roof#Motivation

    The manifesto states that its author was "truly awakened" by coverage of the shooting of Trayvon Martin:

    “I read the Wikipedia article and right away I was unable to understand what the big deal was. It was obvious that Zimmerman was in the right. But more importantly this prompted me to type in the words “black on white crime” into Google, and I have never been the same since that day. The first website I came to was the Council of Conservative Citizens. There were pages upon pages of these brutal black on white murders. I was in disbelief. At this moment I realized that something was very wrong. How could the news be blowing up the Trayvon Martin case while hundreds of these black on white murders got ignored?”
     
    If Jussie skates and the whole case gets legally buried, there’s likely gonna be more ‘bowlcuts’ popping up.

    Cry “wolf,” attract wolves.

    https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/1098004521933070337/VVcK1X1t_400x400.png

    Replies: @Mr McKenna, @reiner Tor, @stillCARealist

    “this prompted me to type in the words “black on white crime” into Google, and I have never been the same since that day.”

    This is a prime justification for the ‘sanitizing’ that Google now practices.

    Control of ‘information’ is control of just about everything.

  36. @guest
    @Anonymous

    I dunno if Jussie Dindu will make it back on the show, but they'll hafta write an episode where a Person of Color is actually assaulted by white thugs in red caps, and a judge lets them off the hook because they're in the Klan together or something.

    They'll work sex in there somehow, too.

    Replies: @Mr McKenna, @dr kill

    Of course, and millions more will watch that (and a thousand other similar shows) than will ever have familiarized themselves with the details of Jussie’s stunt. Keep in mind that the MSM version of that stunt is very different from the facts of the case.

  37. Many people in the Hate Crime Industry (HCI) have their snouts in the trough. Do not expect the industry to soon die out.

  38. @eah
    @eah

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D2mOW9-WkAgMrut.png

    Replies: @Clyde

    • Replies: @guest
    @Clyde

    English jurisprudential. Who came up with that catch phrase? Was Joe avoiding use of "Anglo" because the brown base no like?

    , @eah
    @Clyde

    Not sure how/why my previous comment appears as if it was posted by "Clyde" -- ?

    Replies: @Clyde

  39. @Travis
    even if Hate hoaxes were considered felony hate crimes in Illinois , the politicians would never prosecute....they could have prosecuted Smollett but chose to do nothing....it appears the feds will also refuse to prosecute Smollett for his federal crimes ....making hoaxes a federal crime will not change this , the perpetrators of these hate hoaxes will never be indicted for their crimes, writing more laws will not change the results as long as we keep electing Republicans and Democrats

    Replies: @Mr McKenna, @Prodigal son

    Exactly right. If the laws are toughened up, then the punishments will be too, but both will in practice only be meted out to ‘Badwhites’ and never to Chosenites or POCs.

  40. Perhaps all crimes should be punished more severely if their victims are of another race. If you like to rob or brawl, stick with people of your own kind.

    I don’t know if I like the idea (I’m not totally opposed to it), but it’d always favor minorities, especially small high income low crime minorities, because they would be protected from everyone else, while violence within the community would be next to nonexistent. While it’d disproportionately punish functional blacks.

    Are we sure we want to grant a privilege to Jews (I guess they’d be considered a separate group for that purpose) and Hindu Brahmins, while punish functional blacks?

    The other issue is that it’d be distorted and selectively enforced anyway, so probably black criminals would get leniency when attacking whites (but not when attacking anyone else), so all crime against anyone else would be channeled against whites.

    Obviously, if it was strictly enforced, whites would be among the winners, with blacks (both functional and ghetto blacks) the biggest losers.

  41. Good Laura segment with Rafer Weigel:

  42. @South Texas Guy
    Oh, and OT, and most of you have probably already seen it. But here's something else to raise your blood pressure.

    https://dailycaller.com/2019/03/26/kavanaugh-doxx-feinstein-plea/

    Replies: @Mr McKenna

    Hadn’t seen it. Thanks. Sort of.

  43. Two excerpts from the RT story on Jussie. As usual, RT is a far more level-headed and dependable source for what happens in America than America’s own mass media:

    Smollett’s initial story captivated outrage-hungry politicians and media figures. 2020 presidential candidates Sen. Kamala Harris (D-California) and Sen. Cory Booker (D-New Jersey) called the supposed attack a “modern day lynching,” Rep. Adam Schiff (D-California) called it an “act of hatred and bigotry,” and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-California) called it “an affront to our humanity.”

    All of these Democrat leaders deleted their tweets when Smollett himself was arrested and charged in February.

    After the charges against him were dropped on Tuesday, the case files were sealed from the public.

    Smollett’s attorneys said that their client “was a victim who was vilified and made to appear as a perpetrator as a result of false and inappropriate remarks made to the public causing an inappropriate rush to judgement.”

    Prosecutors dropped the case after “reviewing all of the facts and circumstances,” and taking into account Smollett’s volunteer service in the community. His lawyers, without a trace of irony, called the case “a reminder that there should never be an attempt to prove a case in the court of public opinion.”

    https://www.rt.com/usa/454806-criminal-charges-dropped-smollett/

    Now why exactly, pray tell, were the case files sealed? And separately, as a mental exercise: Imagine that Jussie were a white man and he perpetrated a similar hoax against blacks or jews.

    • Replies: @Joseph Doaks
    @Mr McKenna

    Is there any chance that sealed case files can be unsealed? If never, then why not destroy them since no one will ever see them?

    Replies: @Trevor H.

  44. @Clyde
    @eah

    https://twitter.com/westland_will/status/1110797149296459776

    Replies: @guest, @eah

    English jurisprudential. Who came up with that catch phrase? Was Joe avoiding use of “Anglo” because the brown base no like?

  45. @22pp22
    Off topic.

    During the obscensity known as the Kavanaugh hearings, I made statements about the United States that must have been offesive to many American Sailerites.

    I apologise.

    What I am experiencing in New Zealand today is ten times worse that the Kavanaugh hearings.

    A period of national mourning (because what happened was terrible) has been turnied into a circus and a witch hunt.

    The country has disgraced itself.

    We have ceased to be a demogracy and have a de fact Gestapo operating out of Canterbury University called, I kid you not, ProjectLoveNZ.

    If a ProjectLoveNZ operative is reading this post, please be so kind as to seek out a fetid sewer somewhere, crawl into it and die!

    Replies: @Tiny Duck, @J.Ross, @guest, @Kiwikiwikiwi, @duncsbaby, @Bragadocious, @Diversity Heretic, @Don't Look at Me

    I remember your comments and although I wasn’t especially hurt by them I did think that New Zealand was just as in danger of being ruled by insane feminists as America was. I appreciate the mea culpa on your part. I do not envy you though what is going on.

  46. @istevefan

    Similarly, it’s not unreasonable that crimes unmotivated by any personal beef, but simply by animosity toward an entire demographic group, are particularly obnoxious and threatening to the public peace and thus should be deterred by higher penalties. …
     
    The interesting point in this passage is that if you think about it, you come away understanding that hate crimes, as defined above, primarily exist in multicultural societies. Yet we are forever being told that diversity is a strength. But apparently that strength is so weak that hate crimes legislation must be mandated to prop up that strength. That doesn't seem too strong to me.

    Also, our elite who pass these laws know exactly why they are passing these laws. Yet they are the very ones who preach about diversity being a strength and demand moar immigration of the most dissimilar tribes. So much so that they created the visa lotto in 1990 to ensure just that.

    The supreme function of statesmanship is to provide against preventable evils" - Enoch Powell

    Replies: @guest, @Reg Cæsar, @Redneck farmer

    I understand the intelligence community has a lot to do with the diversity lottery. A chance to get agents with legitimate foreign passports.

  47. what about false rape claims? should they be a crime too?

    somehow i don’t see hoaxes or false rape claims becoming serious crimes. the free shots will continue. they get to take a free shot at you, if they miss, no harm no foul. that’s how it’s gonna go. who whom.

    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    @prime noticer


    what about false rape claims? should they be a crime too?
     
    I think false accusations should carry the exact same sentence as the crime which they falsely accused someone else with. So, falsely accusing someone with rape should normally carry the same sentence as the rape itself.
    , @guest
    @prime noticer

    Already illegal. That would be filing a false police report, making false statement, possibly perjury and obstruction of justice.

  48. @Jenner Ickham Errican

    Hate Crime Hoaxes Ought to be Hate Crimes
     
    Charleston shooter Dylann Roof was radicalized in part by the media/political hate crime hoax about Trayvon Martin and “white Hispanic” George Zimmerman.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dylann_Roof#Motivation

    The manifesto states that its author was "truly awakened" by coverage of the shooting of Trayvon Martin:

    “I read the Wikipedia article and right away I was unable to understand what the big deal was. It was obvious that Zimmerman was in the right. But more importantly this prompted me to type in the words “black on white crime” into Google, and I have never been the same since that day. The first website I came to was the Council of Conservative Citizens. There were pages upon pages of these brutal black on white murders. I was in disbelief. At this moment I realized that something was very wrong. How could the news be blowing up the Trayvon Martin case while hundreds of these black on white murders got ignored?”
     
    If Jussie skates and the whole case gets legally buried, there’s likely gonna be more ‘bowlcuts’ popping up.

    Cry “wolf,” attract wolves.

    https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/1098004521933070337/VVcK1X1t_400x400.png

    Replies: @Mr McKenna, @reiner Tor, @stillCARealist

    there’s likely gonna be more ‘bowlcuts’ popping up.

    Cry “wolf,” attract wolves.

    They want Dylan Roof style “wolves” to appear, as many as possible, so that they can refocus on those.

  49. Hate crimes ought to not exist in the first place. The last thing we need is another statute enabling their use.

  50. @istevefan

    That would mean that punishing a criminal additionally for, say, shouting a racial epithet in the heat of a fight would not be considered a hate crime.
     
    People need to realize when you are in a fight you often resort to calling your opponent by some name that aptly describes him from your point of view. So a normal sized man fighting an overweight fellow is probably going to call that guy a "fat f*ck" at some point during the fight. An ethnic English kid would probably call an Italian kid he was fighting a 'Guinea' or 'WOP' or something along those lines. That's the nature of it. I'm sure most of us have resorted to calling someone by some name we thought would draw metaphorical blood when we were young and involved in a playground fight.

    Replies: @South Texas Guy, @guest, @TTSSYF

    You need your own blog. Your comments are so dead-on accurate and well-expressed.

    • Replies: @J.Ross
    @TTSSYF

    Agree. However, of course you'll have to change your name while maintaining your audience.

  51. “I’m not sure that I’m ready to go that far, but growing diversity may lead us to these kinds of laws simply to preserve the peace.”

    They’ do not wish to keep the peace. And ‘They’ features the class of Globalist billionaires, white Gentile as well as Jew and Mohammedan.

    ‘They’ is the contemporary phase of total war against Christendom in all its most faint vestiges. Because Christendom was created and run by white men, white men are the co-#1 object of wrath, object to be exterminated from any sense of power. Even white men who are multiple generations past any familial sense of belonging to Christendom are a threat and must be exterminated or neutered, because any populist revolt could become something much more important.

    So ‘They’ intend for this all to keep getting worse, slowly.

  52. @prime noticer
    what about false rape claims? should they be a crime too?

    somehow i don't see hoaxes or false rape claims becoming serious crimes. the free shots will continue. they get to take a free shot at you, if they miss, no harm no foul. that's how it's gonna go. who whom.

    Replies: @reiner Tor, @guest

    what about false rape claims? should they be a crime too?

    I think false accusations should carry the exact same sentence as the crime which they falsely accused someone else with. So, falsely accusing someone with rape should normally carry the same sentence as the rape itself.

  53. @Clyde
    @eah

    https://twitter.com/westland_will/status/1110797149296459776

    Replies: @guest, @eah

    Not sure how/why my previous comment appears as if it was posted by “Clyde” — ?

    • Replies: @Clyde
    @eah


    Not sure how/why my previous comment appears as if it was posted by “Clyde” — ?
     
    An Unz software miscue.
  54. So, do we have a two-, three-, or multi-tiered system of justice? Did Smollet get a pass because he is a FOO (Friend of Obama), because he is famous, or because he is black? Will Lori Laughlin and Felicity Huffman get a walk on offences that are far less inciteful of public discord?

    Would any of us commenting here get comparable treatment?

  55. @Mr McKenna
    Two excerpts from the RT story on Jussie. As usual, RT is a far more level-headed and dependable source for what happens in America than America's own mass media:

    Smollett’s initial story captivated outrage-hungry politicians and media figures. 2020 presidential candidates Sen. Kamala Harris (D-California) and Sen. Cory Booker (D-New Jersey) called the supposed attack a “modern day lynching,” Rep. Adam Schiff (D-California) called it an “act of hatred and bigotry,” and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-California) called it “an affront to our humanity.”

    All of these Democrat leaders deleted their tweets when Smollett himself was arrested and charged in February.
     


    After the charges against him were dropped on Tuesday, the case files were sealed from the public.

    Smollett’s attorneys said that their client “was a victim who was vilified and made to appear as a perpetrator as a result of false and inappropriate remarks made to the public causing an inappropriate rush to judgement.”

    Prosecutors dropped the case after “reviewing all of the facts and circumstances,” and taking into account Smollett’s volunteer service in the community. His lawyers, without a trace of irony, called the case “a reminder that there should never be an attempt to prove a case in the court of public opinion.”

    https://www.rt.com/usa/454806-criminal-charges-dropped-smollett/
     

    Now why exactly, pray tell, were the case files sealed? And separately, as a mental exercise: Imagine that Jussie were a white man and he perpetrated a similar hoax against blacks or jews.

    Replies: @Joseph Doaks

    Is there any chance that sealed case files can be unsealed? If never, then why not destroy them since no one will ever see them?

    • Replies: @Trevor H.
    @Joseph Doaks

    Very good question. Next it'll be prosecuting anyone who talks about it.

  56. @Tiny Duck
    @22pp22

    You are a monster and should be incarcerated for your hatred

    I only wish that America could produce a strong leader let us the prime minister of new zeal and

    Replies: @Bruce County

    I went and read your past 1500 comments… You really need to get a life. When was the last time you crawled out of your mommies basement and saw the light of day?? I do also suggest switching to a healthier diet, starting with Diet Kool-Aid. And lay off the Pizza Pops!!!. You really need to open your eyes and expand your knowledge base. Get some Kersey Love into you buddy. Now theres the real truth!!

    • Replies: @Ozymandias
    @Bruce County

    "I went and read your past 1500 comments… You really need to get a life."

    Hmmm...

    , @J.Ross
    @Bruce County

    >i sat through 1500 obvious troll comments
    >but you are the one who needs to hear irrelevant ad hominems and get a life

  57. @Travis
    even if Hate hoaxes were considered felony hate crimes in Illinois , the politicians would never prosecute....they could have prosecuted Smollett but chose to do nothing....it appears the feds will also refuse to prosecute Smollett for his federal crimes ....making hoaxes a federal crime will not change this , the perpetrators of these hate hoaxes will never be indicted for their crimes, writing more laws will not change the results as long as we keep electing Republicans and Democrats

    Replies: @Mr McKenna, @Prodigal son

    Agree , we need fewer laws but better prosecutors. Additional hate hoax laws would have had zero impact on Jussie Smollett. Additional laws will only be used to punish bad whites.

    What occurred in Chicago is just a glimpse of the future of American Justice. Whites will be a minority in a few years , white Christians are already a minority among the under 21 population.

  58. SMK says: • Website
    @Anonymous

    Of course, this raises the old arguments of whether the category of “hate crime” should exist at all.

    I’ve come around to the belief that it’s not unreasonable for society to especially try to deter crimes motivated primarily not by basic sins such as rage, greed, or lust but by animus against a demographic category.
     
    Except that it is unreasonable, even if it were enforced fairly. It's a dangerous concept, along the lines of "the truth is no defense". The truth is ALWAYS a defense in a rightly run system of justice. If you are accused of shooting someone in your living room, it makes all the difference in the world whether he broke in and attacked you or you coldbloodedly invited him over and assassinated him.

    If you killed a person of another race because he "made a racist comment", you are a murderer, or at the very least a manslaughterer. If you kill him for absolutely no discernible reason, he's just as dead. On the other hand if he brandishes a weapon and states his intent to kill you, and you shoot him you have acted in proper self defense.

    Murder, rape, assault, robbery, should be punished as they are. Not as a lesser crime to "hate crime". I mean, if the perpetrator LOVED the victim, he would not have perpetrated the crime, it seems to me.

    The second thing is that in practice it will never be enforced fairly.


    "Civil rights laws were not passed to apply to White men and do not protect them”

    –Mary Francis Berry, former chair of the US Civil Rights Commission.
     
    Was Mary Francis Berry negatively impacted in any way for this statement? Of course not.

    Mary Frances Berry (born February 17, 1938) is an American Historian; she is the Geraldine R. Segal Professor of American Social Thought, and the Professor of History at the University of Pennsylvania. She is also the former chairwoman of the United States Commission on Civil Rights, and the former board chair of Pacifica Radio. She is a past president of the Organization of American Historians, the primary professional organization for historians of the United States.

    At Penn, Berry teaches American legal history. Before coming to Penn, Berry was provost of the College of Behavioral and Social Science at University of Maryland, College Park, and chancellor of the University of Colorado at Boulder. She received Ph.D. and J.D. degrees from the University of Michigan.
     
    The Jussie Smollett case-the outcome of which, I'm sorry to admit, slightly surprised even me-should be proof that the current power structure is incorrigible and will never change. It may be removed, but the details seem to make Mr. Sailer queasy so I will skip those. But even that isn't going to happen in the lifetime of most readers under, say, 35 or 40, and it will be unpleasant for all concerned. I'm old enough and have significant medical issues I doubt I'll be impacted, but it will be bad.

    Replies: @SMK, @MarkU

    How depressing that Steve Sailer would endorse “hate crime” laws. Such laws should be abolished, and should never have been enacted. The purpose of “hate crime” laws is to expose the “systemic” evil of “white racism” -blacks can’t be “racists, of course- and punish the small minority of whites who assault, rape, gang-rape, murder, brutalize, and terrorize blacks far more severely than the large minority of blacks who assault, rape, gang rape, murder, brutalize, and terrorize whites. Almost every violent crime that blacks commit against whites is motivated to some degree by hatred of whites generally, a hatred that is induced, provoked, sustained, justified, and often extolled by black “leaders,” politicians, and demagogues and their white left-liberal myrmidons, apologists, and sycophants. Has a single black ever been arrested, prosecuted, and convicted of a “hate crime” against a white victim(s)?

    • Agree: Travis
  59. @Jenner Ickham Errican

    Hate Crime Hoaxes Ought to be Hate Crimes
     
    Charleston shooter Dylann Roof was radicalized in part by the media/political hate crime hoax about Trayvon Martin and “white Hispanic” George Zimmerman.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dylann_Roof#Motivation

    The manifesto states that its author was "truly awakened" by coverage of the shooting of Trayvon Martin:

    “I read the Wikipedia article and right away I was unable to understand what the big deal was. It was obvious that Zimmerman was in the right. But more importantly this prompted me to type in the words “black on white crime” into Google, and I have never been the same since that day. The first website I came to was the Council of Conservative Citizens. There were pages upon pages of these brutal black on white murders. I was in disbelief. At this moment I realized that something was very wrong. How could the news be blowing up the Trayvon Martin case while hundreds of these black on white murders got ignored?”
     
    If Jussie skates and the whole case gets legally buried, there’s likely gonna be more ‘bowlcuts’ popping up.

    Cry “wolf,” attract wolves.

    https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/1098004521933070337/VVcK1X1t_400x400.png

    Replies: @Mr McKenna, @reiner Tor, @stillCARealist

    Then why didn’t he go all Death Wish and hunt down black criminals? Why go into a church and shoot women during a Bible Study?

    sorry, that guy was a crazy killer and should be headed for execution. I’m waiting to see if that Fort Hood killer will actually be executed.

    • Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican
    @stillCARealist

    I’m not applauding Roof’s choice of targets. I’m making a point backing up Steve’s article.

  60. @WorkingClass
    To endorse the concept of hate crime is to endorse the concept of thought crime and /or hate speech. There should be no law against something that cannot be objectively proved. Was Jussie motivated by hate? How would you know? I think he did it to advance his career.

    Replies: @Mr. Anon, @SMK

    To endorse the concept of hate crime is to endorse the concept of thought crime and /or hate speech. There should be no law against something that cannot be objectively proved.

    I agree. Legally enshrining the concept of “hate-crime” is a step towards making hate itself illegal. And any thoughts that are deemed “hateful” by others. We are already seeing moves in that direction.

    Hate is a natural human emotion. You have a right to hate whomever you want for whatever reason or for no reason at all. You have a right to hold opinions of other people that they might deem to be hateful, even if they aren’t.

    • Replies: @Travis
    @Mr. Anon

    Certainly the current "hate-Crimes" statutes are unconstitutional. They criminalize specific ideologies which are protected by our constitution and discriminate against specific thoughts while allowing certain minorities to avoid facing charges based on Hate.

    Thus Burning the American flag is protected free speech but burning the Mexican Flag is a "hate-Crime". Pissing on a crucifix is "protected" free speech , yet desecrated the star of David will result in criminal hate crime charges.

    Replies: @Trevor H.

  61. @22pp22
    Off topic.

    During the obscensity known as the Kavanaugh hearings, I made statements about the United States that must have been offesive to many American Sailerites.

    I apologise.

    What I am experiencing in New Zealand today is ten times worse that the Kavanaugh hearings.

    A period of national mourning (because what happened was terrible) has been turnied into a circus and a witch hunt.

    The country has disgraced itself.

    We have ceased to be a demogracy and have a de fact Gestapo operating out of Canterbury University called, I kid you not, ProjectLoveNZ.

    If a ProjectLoveNZ operative is reading this post, please be so kind as to seek out a fetid sewer somewhere, crawl into it and die!

    Replies: @Tiny Duck, @J.Ross, @guest, @Kiwikiwikiwi, @duncsbaby, @Bragadocious, @Diversity Heretic, @Don't Look at Me

    Well, they always called NZ a country of sheep-shaggers and now we see you are sheep and you’re getting shagged.

  62. @22pp22
    Off topic.

    During the obscensity known as the Kavanaugh hearings, I made statements about the United States that must have been offesive to many American Sailerites.

    I apologise.

    What I am experiencing in New Zealand today is ten times worse that the Kavanaugh hearings.

    A period of national mourning (because what happened was terrible) has been turnied into a circus and a witch hunt.

    The country has disgraced itself.

    We have ceased to be a demogracy and have a de fact Gestapo operating out of Canterbury University called, I kid you not, ProjectLoveNZ.

    If a ProjectLoveNZ operative is reading this post, please be so kind as to seek out a fetid sewer somewhere, crawl into it and die!

    Replies: @Tiny Duck, @J.Ross, @guest, @Kiwikiwikiwi, @duncsbaby, @Bragadocious, @Diversity Heretic, @Don't Look at Me

    How in the world did New Zealand end up with an obviously mentally unbalanced Prime Minister?

    • Replies: @Whiskey
    @Diversity Heretic

    Because that's 85% easy of White women.

    Hate hate hate of White men is baked into White women. They expected Brad Pitt and got ... us.

    For that they can neither forgive nor forget.

    White men best case are slaves or serfs. Worse case exterminated. Look at the party of women. Dems.

    , @J.Ross
    @Diversity Heretic

    There's something of a story behind this. I don't have all tbe details but she was placed in charge as a weak compromise amid a lot of political scandals, ie, she wasn't elected directly after public campaigning, she fell up as people around her failed.
    Wiki has:


    Ardern became Leader of the Labour Party on 1 August 2017, after Andrew Little resigned from the position following a historically low poll result for the party.[6] She is credited with increasing her party's rating in opinion polls. In the general election of 23 September 2017, the Labour Party won 46 seats (a net gain of 14), putting it behind the National Party, which won 56 seats.[7] After negotiations with National and Labour, the New Zealand First party chose to enter into a minority coalition government with Labour, supported by the Greens, with Ardern as Prime Minister.
     
  63. SMK says: • Website
    @WorkingClass
    To endorse the concept of hate crime is to endorse the concept of thought crime and /or hate speech. There should be no law against something that cannot be objectively proved. Was Jussie motivated by hate? How would you know? I think he did it to advance his career.

    Replies: @Mr. Anon, @SMK

    His ludicrous “hate crime hoax” was clearly motivated by hatred of Trump and whites generally, especially the tens of millions, the “basket of deplorables,” who voted for Trump, and by an urgency to expose the “systemic racism” of Trump and whites generally and, hopefully, to help Kamala Harris, his close friend apparently, win the Democratic nomination for president and then defeat the orange-haired “white supremacist” in 2020 and become the first women and second “black” president.

    The purpose of “hate speech” laws is to expose and vanquish the evil of “racism” by punishing whites for criticizing and telling the truth about black violence and criminality, average black intelligence, the pernicious consequences of massive non-European immigration, overwhelming Mestizo and Amerindian in the U.S. and black African and especially Muslim in the UK and Western Europe, and to silence all such criticism, honesty, realism, and opposition to white dispossession. And also to send far more whites to prison to reduce the “racist” disparities in white and black incarceration rates.

  64. @Tiny Duck
    Mr. Smollett was innocent as he was exonerated

    I thought you guys respected the rule of law?

    Most People of Color knew the truth

    Hate hoaxes don't exist in significant numbers

    On the other hand violent rhetoric such as this site leads to violence like the new zeal and horror

    This is why this site will be shit down in a few years

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar, @Nicholas Stix, @dr kill

    Racist liar.

  65. Maybe we should just automatically increase the penalty for lying to the cops if the lie crosses racial lines?

    What happens when they define hate facts as lies?

    Also, what happens when science proves that hate facts are actually true, so the lies people told are shown to be lies?

  66. @Diversity Heretic
    @22pp22

    How in the world did New Zealand end up with an obviously mentally unbalanced Prime Minister?

    Replies: @Whiskey, @J.Ross

    Because that’s 85% easy of White women.

    Hate hate hate of White men is baked into White women. They expected Brad Pitt and got … us.

    For that they can neither forgive nor forget.

    White men best case are slaves or serfs. Worse case exterminated. Look at the party of women. Dems.

  67. @stillCARealist
    @Jenner Ickham Errican

    Then why didn't he go all Death Wish and hunt down black criminals? Why go into a church and shoot women during a Bible Study?

    sorry, that guy was a crazy killer and should be headed for execution. I'm waiting to see if that Fort Hood killer will actually be executed.

    Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican

    I’m not applauding Roof’s choice of targets. I’m making a point backing up Steve’s article.

  68. @eah
    @Clyde

    Not sure how/why my previous comment appears as if it was posted by "Clyde" -- ?

    Replies: @Clyde

    Not sure how/why my previous comment appears as if it was posted by “Clyde” — ?

    An Unz software miscue.

  69. BTW, “Smollett” is the new term for when you create the incident that makes you the victim

  70. @Anonymous

    Of course, this raises the old arguments of whether the category of “hate crime” should exist at all.

    I’ve come around to the belief that it’s not unreasonable for society to especially try to deter crimes motivated primarily not by basic sins such as rage, greed, or lust but by animus against a demographic category.
     
    Except that it is unreasonable, even if it were enforced fairly. It's a dangerous concept, along the lines of "the truth is no defense". The truth is ALWAYS a defense in a rightly run system of justice. If you are accused of shooting someone in your living room, it makes all the difference in the world whether he broke in and attacked you or you coldbloodedly invited him over and assassinated him.

    If you killed a person of another race because he "made a racist comment", you are a murderer, or at the very least a manslaughterer. If you kill him for absolutely no discernible reason, he's just as dead. On the other hand if he brandishes a weapon and states his intent to kill you, and you shoot him you have acted in proper self defense.

    Murder, rape, assault, robbery, should be punished as they are. Not as a lesser crime to "hate crime". I mean, if the perpetrator LOVED the victim, he would not have perpetrated the crime, it seems to me.

    The second thing is that in practice it will never be enforced fairly.


    "Civil rights laws were not passed to apply to White men and do not protect them”

    –Mary Francis Berry, former chair of the US Civil Rights Commission.
     
    Was Mary Francis Berry negatively impacted in any way for this statement? Of course not.

    Mary Frances Berry (born February 17, 1938) is an American Historian; she is the Geraldine R. Segal Professor of American Social Thought, and the Professor of History at the University of Pennsylvania. She is also the former chairwoman of the United States Commission on Civil Rights, and the former board chair of Pacifica Radio. She is a past president of the Organization of American Historians, the primary professional organization for historians of the United States.

    At Penn, Berry teaches American legal history. Before coming to Penn, Berry was provost of the College of Behavioral and Social Science at University of Maryland, College Park, and chancellor of the University of Colorado at Boulder. She received Ph.D. and J.D. degrees from the University of Michigan.
     
    The Jussie Smollett case-the outcome of which, I'm sorry to admit, slightly surprised even me-should be proof that the current power structure is incorrigible and will never change. It may be removed, but the details seem to make Mr. Sailer queasy so I will skip those. But even that isn't going to happen in the lifetime of most readers under, say, 35 or 40, and it will be unpleasant for all concerned. I'm old enough and have significant medical issues I doubt I'll be impacted, but it will be bad.

    Replies: @SMK, @MarkU

    I agree with you, I was opposed to the concept of ‘hate crime’ from the outset. It seems to me axiomatic that legally responsible adults should be treated equally according to the law in each and every circumstance, regardless of race or gender. A crime is a crime regardless. The introduction of ‘hate crime’ laws was a terrible mistake, much like ‘affirmative action’, it writes different treatment for different races into the law. In my opinion it actually exacerbates racial tensions rather than lessening them.

  71. @Mr. Anon
    @WorkingClass


    To endorse the concept of hate crime is to endorse the concept of thought crime and /or hate speech. There should be no law against something that cannot be objectively proved.
     
    I agree. Legally enshrining the concept of "hate-crime" is a step towards making hate itself illegal. And any thoughts that are deemed "hateful" by others. We are already seeing moves in that direction.

    Hate is a natural human emotion. You have a right to hate whomever you want for whatever reason or for no reason at all. You have a right to hold opinions of other people that they might deem to be hateful, even if they aren't.

    Replies: @Travis

    Certainly the current “hate-Crimes” statutes are unconstitutional. They criminalize specific ideologies which are protected by our constitution and discriminate against specific thoughts while allowing certain minorities to avoid facing charges based on Hate.

    Thus Burning the American flag is protected free speech but burning the Mexican Flag is a “hate-Crime”. Pissing on a crucifix is “protected” free speech , yet desecrated the star of David will result in criminal hate crime charges.

    • Replies: @Trevor H.
    @Travis

    In short: who/whom. The third world "system" of "justice" and hence appropriate for where we're headed.

  72. Making a false crime report is a crime almost everywhere, already. People get arrested, based on these types of reports often. Because the police take accusations of criminal activity seriously, usually. The perspective is better safe than sorry. Circumstances vary for a myriad of reasons – there is not one ethic and practice that is uniform across the country.

    But in most of these false reports, the consequence has been more impactful on the person arrested that belong to certain groups. That’s just the record. But overall, those making false reports are not generally prosecuted and when they are, it’s usually a minor offence — again, no singular practice.

    But unfortunately, for one segment of the population when one of them is accused correctly or incorrectly, the response has a been a round =house round up of that segment of the population by comparison, Mr Smollet’s issue did not result in any such round up and generally that is the case in issues when the hues of the accused reflect the dominant population. While egregious and made a national for “black hoaxing” for lack of a better term, it simply pales in consequence and magnitude – even to Mr Smollet’s alleged hoax.

    It is vexing to have the tide turned in some respect that the dominant population no longer gets the free pass it once had on such issues. It is unlikely, that whites are going to become the legal whipping posts of the african americans — certainly not in any way shape or form as reflected in the history of blacks in the US.

    ———————-

    I have not come to any conclusions about 12 or 13 year old Tawany Brawely’s incident and subsequent circus.

    ———————–

    Again, I will re-affirm my belief that you have a constitutional right to hate whomever you wish, the crime is what one does with it — regardless of how they feel about the other.

  73. @TTSSYF
    @istevefan

    You need your own blog. Your comments are so dead-on accurate and well-expressed.

    Replies: @J.Ross

    Agree. However, of course you’ll have to change your name while maintaining your audience.

  74. @Diversity Heretic
    @22pp22

    How in the world did New Zealand end up with an obviously mentally unbalanced Prime Minister?

    Replies: @Whiskey, @J.Ross

    There’s something of a story behind this. I don’t have all tbe details but she was placed in charge as a weak compromise amid a lot of political scandals, ie, she wasn’t elected directly after public campaigning, she fell up as people around her failed.
    Wiki has:

    Ardern became Leader of the Labour Party on 1 August 2017, after Andrew Little resigned from the position following a historically low poll result for the party.[6] She is credited with increasing her party’s rating in opinion polls. In the general election of 23 September 2017, the Labour Party won 46 seats (a net gain of 14), putting it behind the National Party, which won 56 seats.[7] After negotiations with National and Labour, the New Zealand First party chose to enter into a minority coalition government with Labour, supported by the Greens, with Ardern as Prime Minister.

  75. @J.Ross
    @22pp22

    The only disgraceful thing is you expecting your enemies to commit suicide because you asked nicely.
    No government listens to its people while they sit quietly and watch TV.
    Nobody cares who you are until you put on the vest.

    Replies: @22pp22

    I tried that in England. I was alone

  76. “Hate Hoaxes Ought to be Hate Crimes”

    As if anyone will be punished for the first example, the “Holocaust”, much less any of the proceeding.
    Though the 9th Commandment might carry some weight, if Moses wasn’t bullchitting.

    “I’m not sure that I’m ready to go that far, but growing diversity may lead us to these kinds of laws simply to preserve the peace.”

    Dude, you’re already several generations of diversity too late.

  77. @Joseph Doaks
    @Mr McKenna

    Is there any chance that sealed case files can be unsealed? If never, then why not destroy them since no one will ever see them?

    Replies: @Trevor H.

    Very good question. Next it’ll be prosecuting anyone who talks about it.

  78. @Travis
    @Mr. Anon

    Certainly the current "hate-Crimes" statutes are unconstitutional. They criminalize specific ideologies which are protected by our constitution and discriminate against specific thoughts while allowing certain minorities to avoid facing charges based on Hate.

    Thus Burning the American flag is protected free speech but burning the Mexican Flag is a "hate-Crime". Pissing on a crucifix is "protected" free speech , yet desecrated the star of David will result in criminal hate crime charges.

    Replies: @Trevor H.

    In short: who/whom. The third world “system” of “justice” and hence appropriate for where we’re headed.

  79. @Tiny Duck
    Mr. Smollett was innocent as he was exonerated

    I thought you guys respected the rule of law?

    Most People of Color knew the truth

    Hate hoaxes don't exist in significant numbers

    On the other hand violent rhetoric such as this site leads to violence like the new zeal and horror

    This is why this site will be shit down in a few years

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar, @Nicholas Stix, @dr kill

    I heard VDH say he felt the DA made the correct decision to forgo the trial because of jury nullification.
    The trial would have been a farce, Chicago prosecutors would be exposed as stupid as Darden, Clark and Furman, And OJ Smollet would have been found not guilty. Demonstrations,riots, who needs this?
    I’m a fan of jury nullification (Bundy) and I have to think that not every Black American who feels the same way about American Justice as I do ( but for different reasons ) is wrong.

    • Replies: @J.Ross
    @dr kill

    Blacks cannot be allowed to have jury nullification any more than we can let them be district attorneys. We can have our legal traditions or this kind of diversity but not both. One way or another it will be discovered that a thousand years of Roman, English, and American legal thinking and bloody history conclude that blacks are above the law.

  80. @guest
    @Anonymous

    I dunno if Jussie Dindu will make it back on the show, but they'll hafta write an episode where a Person of Color is actually assaulted by white thugs in red caps, and a judge lets them off the hook because they're in the Klan together or something.

    They'll work sex in there somehow, too.

    Replies: @Mr McKenna, @dr kill

    Gay sex. I hope. Gay sex with two Nigerian weightlifters. wearing nothing but nooses and MAGA hats. On a cold and gray Chicago morning. I’m embarrassed I didn’t think of Elvis until today.

  81. @prime noticer
    what about false rape claims? should they be a crime too?

    somehow i don't see hoaxes or false rape claims becoming serious crimes. the free shots will continue. they get to take a free shot at you, if they miss, no harm no foul. that's how it's gonna go. who whom.

    Replies: @reiner Tor, @guest

    Already illegal. That would be filing a false police report, making false statement, possibly perjury and obstruction of justice.

  82. @22pp22
    Off topic.

    During the obscensity known as the Kavanaugh hearings, I made statements about the United States that must have been offesive to many American Sailerites.

    I apologise.

    What I am experiencing in New Zealand today is ten times worse that the Kavanaugh hearings.

    A period of national mourning (because what happened was terrible) has been turnied into a circus and a witch hunt.

    The country has disgraced itself.

    We have ceased to be a demogracy and have a de fact Gestapo operating out of Canterbury University called, I kid you not, ProjectLoveNZ.

    If a ProjectLoveNZ operative is reading this post, please be so kind as to seek out a fetid sewer somewhere, crawl into it and die!

    Replies: @Tiny Duck, @J.Ross, @guest, @Kiwikiwikiwi, @duncsbaby, @Bragadocious, @Diversity Heretic, @Don't Look at Me

    “What I am experiencing in New Zealand today is ten times worse that the Kavanaugh hearings.

    A period of national mourning (because what happened was terrible) has been turnied into a circus and a witch hunt.”

    Could you give us some examples?

    • Replies: @22pp22
    @Don't Look at Me

    Re ProjectLoveNZ

    https://www.whaleoil.co.nz/2019/03/whos-afraid-of-projectlovenz/

    Normalization of organised crime, as long as it isn't white. Mangu Kaha and the Mongel Mob are the two big organised crime syndicates in New Zealand. They have taken time off pushing drugs to kids to take part in this circus.

    https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=12215359

    Banning of Jordan Peterson's book by the country's biggest bookseller (since reinstated, but that's only because he is so well known).

    https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/entertainment/2019/03/jordan-peterson-claims-victory-over-whitcoulls-after-book-reinstated.html

    An elderly lady in our small town (bit of a pain in the rear end but that is not the point) kicked off FB for posting in the mildest terms possible that the Christian God and Allah are not one and the same deity.

    Main opposition party reversing its opposition to the UN Migration Pact.

    Ten years in jail for owning Brent Tarrant's manifesto and fourteen for the video. You don't get that for murder. Eighteen-year-old arrested for posting video and denied bail.

    I am sure there is much more, but I have stopped reading the NZ media. I have just found this website. I don't know if it's any good.

    https://truebluenz.com/2019/03/20/hysteria-and-insanity-in-the-aftermath-of-the-christchurch-mosque-killings/

  83. @Don't Look at Me
    @22pp22

    "What I am experiencing in New Zealand today is ten times worse that the Kavanaugh hearings.

    A period of national mourning (because what happened was terrible) has been turnied into a circus and a witch hunt."

    Could you give us some examples?

    Replies: @22pp22

    Re ProjectLoveNZ

    https://www.whaleoil.co.nz/2019/03/whos-afraid-of-projectlovenz/

    Normalization of organised crime, as long as it isn’t white. Mangu Kaha and the Mongel Mob are the two big organised crime syndicates in New Zealand. They have taken time off pushing drugs to kids to take part in this circus.

    https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=12215359

    Banning of Jordan Peterson’s book by the country’s biggest bookseller (since reinstated, but that’s only because he is so well known).

    https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/entertainment/2019/03/jordan-peterson-claims-victory-over-whitcoulls-after-book-reinstated.html

    An elderly lady in our small town (bit of a pain in the rear end but that is not the point) kicked off FB for posting in the mildest terms possible that the Christian God and Allah are not one and the same deity.

    Main opposition party reversing its opposition to the UN Migration Pact.

    Ten years in jail for owning Brent Tarrant’s manifesto and fourteen for the video. You don’t get that for murder. Eighteen-year-old arrested for posting video and denied bail.

    I am sure there is much more, but I have stopped reading the NZ media. I have just found this website. I don’t know if it’s any good.

    https://truebluenz.com/2019/03/20/hysteria-and-insanity-in-the-aftermath-of-the-christchurch-mosque-killings/

  84. @dr kill
    @Tiny Duck

    I heard VDH say he felt the DA made the correct decision to forgo the trial because of jury nullification.
    The trial would have been a farce, Chicago prosecutors would be exposed as stupid as Darden, Clark and Furman, And OJ Smollet would have been found not guilty. Demonstrations,riots, who needs this?
    I'm a fan of jury nullification (Bundy) and I have to think that not every Black American who feels the same way about American Justice as I do ( but for different reasons ) is wrong.

    Replies: @J.Ross

    Blacks cannot be allowed to have jury nullification any more than we can let them be district attorneys. We can have our legal traditions or this kind of diversity but not both. One way or another it will be discovered that a thousand years of Roman, English, and American legal thinking and bloody history conclude that blacks are above the law.

  85. I can’t wait to watch the Law & Order version of this. I wonder what blond haired, blue eyed, white guy they’ll get to play Jussie.

  86. @Bruce County
    @Tiny Duck

    I went and read your past 1500 comments... You really need to get a life. When was the last time you crawled out of your mommies basement and saw the light of day?? I do also suggest switching to a healthier diet, starting with Diet Kool-Aid. And lay off the Pizza Pops!!!. You really need to open your eyes and expand your knowledge base. Get some Kersey Love into you buddy. Now theres the real truth!!

    Replies: @Ozymandias, @J.Ross

    “I went and read your past 1500 comments… You really need to get a life.”

    Hmmm…

  87. @Bruce County
    @Tiny Duck

    I went and read your past 1500 comments... You really need to get a life. When was the last time you crawled out of your mommies basement and saw the light of day?? I do also suggest switching to a healthier diet, starting with Diet Kool-Aid. And lay off the Pizza Pops!!!. You really need to open your eyes and expand your knowledge base. Get some Kersey Love into you buddy. Now theres the real truth!!

    Replies: @Ozymandias, @J.Ross

    >i sat through 1500 obvious troll comments
    >but you are the one who needs to hear irrelevant ad hominems and get a life

  88. • Replies: @MEH 0910
    @MEH 0910

    https://twitter.com/conor64/status/1111483623121670144

    https://twitter.com/conor64/status/1111484859917033473

    https://twitter.com/conor64/status/1111486307669168135

    https://twitter.com/conor64/status/1111487119971606528

    https://twitter.com/conor64/status/1111487692108263424

    https://twitter.com/conor64/status/1111489189336371200

    https://twitter.com/conor64/status/1111490299237273600

    https://twitter.com/conor64/status/1111491174278164480

    https://twitter.com/conor64/status/1111491704224251906

    https://twitter.com/conor64/status/1111494466508984321

    https://twitter.com/conor64/status/1111495250504093696

    https://twitter.com/conor64/status/1111497137647284224

    https://twitter.com/conor64/status/1111498185736753152

    https://twitter.com/conor64/status/1111499536629825537

    https://twitter.com/StruggleScholar/status/1111500407770152960

    https://twitter.com/StruggleScholar/status/1111501387639279616

    https://twitter.com/StruggleScholar/status/1111502314303565824

    https://twitter.com/StruggleScholar/status/1111505976891461633

    https://twitter.com/StruggleScholar/status/1111510182251687937

  89. @MEH 0910
    https://twitter.com/TheAtlantic/status/1111479963310571520

    https://twitter.com/conor64/status/1111358627170799616

    Replies: @MEH 0910

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS