Tuesday, April 19, 2011


"It's troubling when the only way we find out about a hate crime on campus is by word of mouth"

Fake Racism
One of the worst crimes a human can commit against another is rape. It is such a fundamental violation of trust and respect, such a brutal act of cruelty, turning the beauty of physical love into a hateful attack that it is universally condemned and punished through history and across borders. Why rapists are not put to death has never made sense to me.

However, a crime nearly as bad as rape is the false accusation of rape. This turns the tables, with the woman brutally violating a man's life, reputation, and standing in the world. For most men, having a strange woman sexually attack him is hardly a horrific thought, but having his entire world crumble because people think he's a rapist scumbag is ghastly. A man accused of rape, even if cleared, is permanently stained, many wonder if he didn't do it but get off on some technicality - the mere accusation is proof enough.

Both of these crimes are so awful at least in part because of their violation of trust, because they take advantage of an unspoken contract between people to be honest and trustworthy. What then are we to make of hate crimes that were not true?'

The entire reason the "hate crime" label exists is because of a presumption that society owes certain people greater protection due to their position in a culture or their historical background. Yet that's not enough, because a "hate crime" has to have a motivation and intent of intimidation, cruelty, and oppression. If a black man beats up another black man because he thinks the guy looks funny and is lazy, that's just violence. If a white man beats up a black man for those reasons, its a "hate crime."

Faked SlursSo the motivation and intent is the key here, like terrorism. Simply blowing up a car isn't terrorism unless its intended to manipulate public opinion, government policy, and spread fear.

If a hate crime is suspected, people become sympathetic toward the alleged victim, call for greater tolerance, and mutter grim things about their political opponents and how doubtlessly their thoughtless and provocative radio shows contributed to the event. Police, even federal officers are called to the scene and great care is taken to investigate.

If someone is caught committing a "hate crime" then the penalties are usually worse than merely committing that same crime without the "hate" motivation. Take, for example, an event at University of North Carolina, courtesy Right Wing News.
Freshman Quinn Matney told police he was outside his South Campus dorm April 4 when he stopped to speak with an acquaintance. As he stood on a foot bridge near his Craige Residence Hall, he had said another college-age man nearby approached him, called him an anti-gay slur, and pressed a hot piece of metal to his left wrist.

The university planned to report the incident as a hate crime to the federal government. The assault was apparently motivated by Matney’s sexual orientation, Thorp said in a statement Monday. “As a university community, we condemn this act of violence,” Thorp wrote. “Our Department of Public Safety will bring the strongest possible charges against the attacker.”
If this has been simply assault, it would have been treated as aggravated assault and not reported as a "hate crime." The UNC chancellor stated, "Our Department of Public Safety will bring the strongest possible charges against the attacker."

However, the event turned out to be false, an invention of the gay man for unclear reasons.

This has hardly been the only such fake hate crime to be reported on in recent years. There's been a whole string of them, each one treated very seriously and each one turning out to be false.
  • Crystal Gail Magnum, stripper and hooker falsified a rape against her by lacrosse players
  • Kerry Dunn, a prof at Claremont Mckenna College, spraypainted her own car with racial slurs
  • Allison Jackson scrawled a racial slur on her dorm room door because she wanted to change rooms
  • Leah Miller at the same school did the same thing to be "part of something."
  • Jaime Alexander Siade claimed racial slurs were scratched into his wall and he was held at knifepoint over his race, but later admitted that never happened.
  • A black female student mailed out racially threatening letters and later admitted she'd done so because she was homesick and wanted her parents to think it was a dangerous place.
  • Ahmad Saad Nasim faked racial attacks on him after 9/11 to the glee of the leftist media.
  • Michelle Malkin compiles several events that are lumped into the alleged "hate crime" label without being criminal or elevating to hate, such as nervous looks and little kids mocking someone's turban.
  • Safia Jilani claimed a whole series of hate crimes, from swastikas on her locker to "die Muslim" on the bathroom mirror, and even a gun held to her head. All if it turned out to be false.
  • Floyd Elliot claimed he'd been held down and had the word "fag" carved into this forehead by men with knives, but the word was spelled backward and he admitted he'd done it.
  • Sarah Marshak carved swastikas into doors and claimed she had only done so after seeing someone else had done so to draw attention to the crime.
Each one of these was looked into by authorities, roundly condemned by the press and general public, and even held up as an example of cruelty against minorities, oppression, and a statement about modern society and especially the dangers of right wing ideology. Most of them go unpunished for their fake crimes, troublemaking, and publicity. Statements slandering the right and white people are never retracted or apologized for.

Faked SwastikasIts bad enough that this basically is like crying wolf and discredits real events of cruelty, but it also demonstrates a serious problem with credibility and credulity. All it takes is a protected minority complaining of a hate crime, and everyone leaps on the bandwagon without questioning - indeed, questioning the event is considered suspect and likely racist in its self.

If your goal is sympathy and attention, then faking a hate crime against you is a sure way to get it. Your fellow students will hold candle light vigils, protests, the national press will arrive, cops will drop by, even feds may show up. You can get celebrities to show up, school policy changes, special treatment by the faculty, and even likely get romantic attention from the opposite sex. Even after the fake is revealed to have been so, some will believe it was just a coverup, that the man is protecting the white oppressor.

And even after the event is proven to be fraudulent, colleges and universities will hold awareness events, marches, and change policy. It could have been true, and that reveals a climate of hate, you see. Like finding out that Representative Giffords' shooter was a left-leaning pot smoking loony didn't stop the rhetoric about right-wing hate speech, the left will never let an opportunity of that sort slide.

Like how rape damages society, women, men, relationships, trust, and culture - but so does a false accusation of rape - so does a false accusation of a "hate crime." I'd say it does at least as much damage to society and culture, trust and relationships as an actual hate crime because of the predictable politicized reaction of the left. Every single time a real such cruel crime takes place or these fake ones happen, the immediate reaction is for all the usual suspects to take the opportunity to attack Rush Limbaugh, Andrew Breitbart, James O'Keefe, Sarah Palin, or whatever right-leaning public figure is most in the media at the moment. Which further divides the nation on ideological lines, fracturing the union into little easily divided and conquered pieces.

I consider the "hate crime" designation a violation of justice and a leftist scheme to control language and the general narrative of news reporting and analysis. These false hate crimes show, in my opinion, the falsehood of the entire designation. A crime is a crime based on absolute principles of justice and ethics, not based on who is the victim and who is the perpetrator. Scratching swastikas in a door is vandalism, not a "hate crime." Falsifying it and causing so much attention, reaction, and costing so much money is a far worse crime than a symbol on a door.

"Hate Crimes" are an attempt to criminalize hurting someone's feelings or making them feel afraid, and these fakes are protected and downplayed because they damage the narrative. If too much attention is paid to the fakes and they are punished consistently then people might start to hear that cry of wolf. The press all works together on this, not out of conspiracy but out of an unspoken and unshared agreement: don't cover the falsehood as much as the alleged crime, and drop it as soon as possible. To do otherwise damages the narrative.

And so, they assist the fakers by helping them avoid punishment and helps the next faker know they will face little trouble and great gain by their deeds.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

leticia olalia morales of 15501 pasadena ave #8 tustin ca 92780 submitted fake documents and paid 5000.00 dollars to obtain a US tourist visa. she is now applying for citizenship.