Flushing a Qur'an in the privacy of your own home is not the same as doing it in a place where it will create a "hostile learning environment."
Or at least so says CAIR (thanks to War On Hate).
"We commend the NYPD for its appropriate handling of this case," said CAIR-NY Civil Rights Coordinator Aliya Latif. "We must all be concerned when any actions cross the line from protected free speech to acts designed to intimidate. Just as there is a difference between someone burning a cross in their own backyard and burning that same cross in the yard of an African- American family, there is a difference between desecrating a religious text in a private setting and doing so in a setting that will create a hostile learning environment."
CAIR announced no plans at Pace or elsewhere to establish any programs among Muslims to teach against the jihad ideology and thus do their part to diminish any "hostile learning environment" that the Qur'an-flushing may have created. Nor did they say anything about the "hostile learning environment" that may have been created by the relentless barrage of Islamic jihad terror attacks, all perpetrated in the name of Islam, and the tepid, mealy-mouthed, and responsibility-evading response of Muslim groups in America and elsewhere.
OH REALLY???
So using that same (lame) analogy, flag-burning, bible-burning, urine-soaked crucifixes, and murdering orthodox jews in such places like Manhattan & Philadeliphia are also "hate vandalism", thus hanging yourself on your own words.
What say you NOW "cair"?
"We must all be concerned when any actions cross the line from protected free speech to acts designed to intimidate."
--CAIR
To which I say: Stop protecting the "free speech" of this murderous cult called Islam which masquerades as a religion. The genocidal, Judeophobic/humanophobic, misogynistic threats contained in that demented treatise called The Koran point a dagger straight at the heart of The United States of America.
Outlaw Islam.
My apologies for being off topic:
Muslims protest over pet food factory that could 'rain down' pork
Ummah News Links
The intention of the entire Koran is to intimidate!
What camel dung has this doofus been smoking?
Robert, you tipped War on Hate, do they have a site?
Well said, Robert Spencer.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HO74GwUTZj4
is_LAME posted this on another thread. So this is acceptable?
CAIR says: "We must all be concerned when any actions cross the line from protected free speech to acts designed to intimidate."
Uh-huh.
I mean really. Speaking of hypocrites. Muslims wrote the book on "intimidation." Just think back to the "cartoon" riots in which every publisher in North America feared "offending Muslims," and as a consequence the cartoons weren't re-published. Now, just why was that? Could that be because Muslims engaged in (to quote CAIR) "acts designed to intimidate"?
What hypocrisy. Disgusting.
Then there's the whole Islamic system of Dhimmitude...designed to create through intimidation submission and subjugation to Muslim overlords. Not to mention that slavery still exists (is NOT condemned) in much of the Islamic world -- the subjugation and humiliation of women, ethnic and religious minorities, etc,. What is the jizah tax/payment designed to do if not to intimidate non-Muslims?
What does the koran say about the teaching/treatment of girls mr. hostile learning environment? And a University, notorious for protests of all kinds, protests that they have encouraged for 30+ years is not your yard. I know you think it is but it isn’t. Although I am relatively certain that your coantagonists have hijacked the meditation room at Pace and driven all other religions out to the parking lot. That’s a wager I would take to Vegas and win big on.
"We must all be concerned when any actions cross the line from protected free speech to acts designed to intimidate."
--CAIR
Such as loudly saying prayers and shouting aloha snackbar before boarding a plane, or asking for seatbelt extenders that you don't need, speaking to each other in arabic, or possibly changing seats to imitate the seating arrangement of the 9/11 perps. Or better yet, how about suing John Does for complaining about said actions? Should we be concerned about those actions Mr. Hooper?
The detective in the case was Muslim.
...there is a difference between desecrating a religious text in a private setting and doing so in a setting that will create a hostile learning environment
Just as there is a difference between practicing a religion (no matter how abhorrant) in a private setting, and doing so in a setting that will create a hostile public environment...like a public university.
Who was the flusher intimidating? Was it a Muslin only stall?
This is the same Pace University where the administration applied pressure on the local Hilel group to cancel the screening of the movie "Obsession" last year. When a student from Hilel who came to administrative office to discuss this tried to object, the administration cowards got downright ugly with him. When he stood up to protest the pressure, dean Clark (I forgot the scoundrel's first name), repeatedly pushed him down into the chair. This is happening in Manhattan, just blocks from Ground Zero. And at the once "premier" Columbia University, also near Ground Zero, "professor" of Middle Eastern studies, Joseph Massad, a Palestinian from Jordan, routinely harrassed and insulted Jewish and Israeli students. When a student approached him after class with a question pertaining to studies and inroduced himself as a student from Israel, Massad refused to listen to his question interrupting him with a question of his own: "Did you serve in the military?". When the student said yes, and tried to ask his question, Massad interrupted again: "How many Palestinians have you killed?". His "teaching" consisted of rabid hate ranting against Israel. When a female Jewish student asked a mild question: "But don't the Israeli troops warn civilians before taking a military action?". He exploded at her, screaming: "I will not have anyone here who makes excuses for Israeli atrocities!". He, his Iranian, Egyptian and Pakistani collegues canceled classes and led captive students to rabid anti-Israeli jihad rallies. The campuses in this country are enemy-occupied.
Ruslan.
J.S.,
The jizya is necessary in case any Arabian princesses want to go shopping in Milan, then realize they can't sit next to other men in first class and then get kicked off the plane. They have to have a way to get back home. Otherwise, they'd have to shop at J.C. Penneys and Walmart, like the rest of us.
". . .hostile learning environment. . ."
Lets take the phrase apart shall weeee.
What is hostile? The learning environment is teaching hostility? Hostility is the nature of the learning environment? Learning results in being hostile to the environment?
Apart from the free speech issue (which I agree with 100%+). Learning comes about many different ways and through many experiences. I learned my best from the hand and belt of my father. I would call that HOSTILE. Learning has something to do with facts or truth last I heard.
So this slime-ball of a spokesmen's statement is completely inappropriate because he does not know the first thing about learning in a free society. He is just giving us the PC pablum that he learned from the left wing media.
More thought control redefined words. Its the environment not ISLAM.
"Flushing a Qur'an in the privacy of your own home is not the same as doing it in a place where it will create a "hostile learning environment."
This is the language of hate crime laws, "hostile learning environment." The constitution doesn't protect anyone from a "hostile learning environment," but it does protect freedom of speech. Never mind, though, the new and improved version of the constitution, as defined by the federal courts in this country in upholdind hate crime laws, does allow for trumping freedom of speech with "hostile learning environment" and diversity arguments.
I am just wondering. Did any talk radio stations or Fox News mention this case so far?
Capitalist Gig,
You may be onto something, seriously. If we staged a protest to help this student and it was organized and happened in several cities across America, are they going to arrest all of us? What if everyone here bought a koran and asked five friends to do the same and then we go to the same places that Muslims congregate to burn our flag and let the barbeque begin. I think that would really be fighting fire with fire. Enough is enough.
Vandalism? Tell us, CAIR, what was vandalized?
Sounds like a constitutionally protected right to me--If I have a fetus, it's mine and I can kill it.
If I have a flag, it's mine and I can burn it.
And if I buy a koran, I can do whatever I choose with it. Hey this is the America of Pelosi, Reid and Keith Ellison. Get used to it, muslim scum.
And those scoundrels, Walt and Mearsheimer, in their so-called "study", wrote that in this country, the academia is "policed by Zionists". It is more like policed by Islamists and their lowly local Quislings. The only thing missing are calls to Muslim prayer loudly bellowing from loudspeakers throughout Pace University (which is already the case in a number of colleges in the UK). And at Columbia, its president Lee Bollinger actually braggs about "academic freedom" there! On March 26, 2003, Nicholas De Genova, an "anthropology professor" at Columbia held a "teach-in" there, and loudly praised the deadly "Black Hawk down" ambush in Mogadishu that killed 18 American GI's and wounded 84. "I personally want one million Mogadishus", he told the cheering audience. Calling for the murder of 18 million Americans is De Genova's and Bollinger idea of "academic freedom", but try to say one kind word about Israel there!
Ruslan Tokhchukov.
CAIR=more dangerous than Al Qaeda
"We must all be concerned when any actions cross the line from protected free speech to acts designed to intimidate. Just as there is a difference between someone burning a cross in their own backyard and burning that same cross in the yard of an African- American family, there is a difference between desecrating a religious text in a private setting and doing so in a setting that will create a hostile learning environment."
This CAIR spokesman naturally infers that the action of this student was to "intimidate". The student could perfectly well argue that his action was a legitimate protest against Islam and its teachings.
He could also argue that the Koran itself is an intimidatory instrument that encourages open-ended warfare, discrimination, anti-Semitism, etc., etc.
The irony here is that CAIR's high-profile, heavy-handed intervention has created far more hostility than the Koran-flushing student. Indeed, its behaviour has been intimidating in the extreme.
I also look forward to CAIR's denunciation of public rallies which use as their modi operandi Nazi imagery, the defacing of The Star of David and the burning of American flags. By CAIR's logic, such actions are "designed to intimidate", no?
So, they talk about hate at school, but they find it ok to bash Jews and Christians on college campuses? That is ok to them?
I think a lot of the fault lies with the college administrations to stop that and I have written to the UC system's president. I have no idea if he reads his emails though.
But, muslims think they can basically do anything they want to us and when we toss a slice of ham, or toss a koran down the toilet they should call out the FBI, homeland security and/or get the courts involved? this is equity?!
I always get a kick out of how Muslims when screaming foul seem to come up with the example of burning crosses on African Americans lawns.
These guys always have to throw their silly bombs while complaining trying to somehow equate Christians in the same light as Muslims.
The sole purpose of saying this is for the benefit of the moral relativists out there that are always looking for excuses to bash Christians.
The Islamic propaganda machine is a piece of work to say the least.
CAIR, with fewer than 2000 members is funded directly by the Saudis.
How do you say foreign intervention ?
How do you say enemy propaganda ?
How do you say the institution of sharia ?
How do you say the funding of more Wahhabi imams and the incitement of jihadi bastards ?
Why aren't we shutting these guileful snakes down ?
Interestedinconundrum
Yeah and Hooper really gives a toss about the Bible.
Somebody should repeat the crime with a bible and demand the same punishment.
'acts designed to intimidate'....
Burning the American flag intimidate's me.
Displaying the Bible in piss in a New York art gallery and calling it art intimidate's me.
Pictures of muslims on the streets of America 'protected under free speech' with posters that call for the overthrow of our goverment intimidate's me.
"Flushing a Qur'an in the privacy of your own home is not the same as doing it in a place where it will create a "hostile learning environment.""
What? Is Pace University holding classes in the bathroom stalls or something?
wpuld it constitue a mysoginist hate crime if a feminist activist dropped a porno magazine into a toilet?
is it a hate crime to post anti-islamic sentiments on this site?
OT,
Guys check this 2 clips out. Too funny!
We can all do with a laugh now and then.
http://sheikyermami.com/2007/07/30/way-to-go-i-wanna-be-like-osama-the-musical/#comment-11040
CapitalistGig-
I think interestinconundrum means the agent provocateur above, going by the name "Barry Laden" (the name of a living English dramatist who is unlikely to approve). "Barry" seems ready to promote a Mohammedan-esque genocide, while the topic at hand is defending free speech.
Methinks a CAIR-ful fellow posing clumsily.
commend the NYPD for its appropriate handling of this case," said CAIR-NY Civil Rights Coordinator Aliya Latif. "We must all be concerned when any actions cross the line from protected free speech to acts designed to intimidate. Just as there is a difference between someone burning a cross in their own backyard and burning that same cross in the yard of an African- American family, there is a difference between desecrating a religious text in a private setting and doing so in a setting that will create a hostile learning environment."
Really? So CAIR is worried about a hostile learing environment? Well, you can see from Malkin link above that the Muslims at Pace, before the Koran flushing, by threatening police action, were able to get the Pace administration to prevent the Jewish club Hillel from showing the film "Obsession".
So on the one hand, if you want to show the film "Obsession", muslim threats to the school admnistration get that banned. But that's not a "hostile learning environment" that prevents actual discussion of different viewpoints, also known as learning, according to CAIR.
On the other hand, if you get rightly pissed off by this, and throw the Koran, a book that calls for the beheading of non-muslims as an obligation to God, in the toilet, then all of a sudden YOU are the one who created a "hostile learning environment" and you get charged with a hate crime.
MEMO TO CAIR: If muslims act like normal human beings and let people watch whatever movies they want to watch, Korans are less likely to get thrown into toilets by non-muslims to whom muslims are trying to dictate what movies to watch.
This situation is analogous to Nazi group at a University in the 30's succesfully preventing a Jewish group from showing an anti-nazi film, then some one getting pissed and throwing the nazi group's copy of Mein Kampf into the toilet as a result, and then getting charged with a hate crime.
Did I miss something and we're under shariya here in the US ALREADY?
P.S. As far as the African American analogy, CAIR misses one important point: African-Americans were SLAVES, muslims are and were SLAVERS, big difference, you don't get to claim victimhood if you are a SLAVER.
Vandalism? Tell us, CAIR, what was vandalized?
Sounds like a constitutionally protected right to me--If I have a fetus, it's mine and I can kill it.
If I have a flag, it's mine and I can burn it.
And if I buy a koran, I can do whatever I choose with it. Hey this is the America of Pelosi, Reid and Keith Ellison. Get used to it, muslim scum.
The problem is that the person committing the desecration wasn't the owner of the Koran in question. The Koran was the property of Pace University, which makes the desecration an act of vandalism. But the fact that it was apparently done out of hostility to Islam led the authorities to bump the offense up a notch, as apparently New York law allows them to, to a felony. The ever-observant Eugene Volokh suggests that this is really a backdoor way of criminalizing thoughtcrime: http://volokh.com/posts/1185832897.shtml In other words, there was a real act of vandalism, which is and should be a crime, but the circumstances of this case suggest that the actual crime was really just a hook that enabled the authorities to pursue their real agenda: punishing beliefs and attitudes they don't like.
Oh yeah, and by the way a few years ago in the St. Patrick's cathedral in New York City, the catholics were holding Sunday mass and one of the militant gay rights group chose to protest during the mass. They were rude and disruptive, and the worst incident was that one of their number went up as if to receive communion (the actual body of Christ according to catholic teaching), took the Host from the priest, then threw it on the ground and proceeded to trample on it.
Think the NYPD charged him with a hate crime? Hell no, actually not much of anything happened to tha guy. Actually NYPD didn't do much to prevent any of the other disruptive behaviour during mass either....
So...
Infiltrating a catholic mass, throwing the host (which catholics believe is the actual body of Christ) on the ground, trampling on it - no big deal, not designed to intimidate, not a hate crime according to NYPD - simple freedom of speech, apparently.
but, throwing a Koran in the toilet = hate crime
Double standard, anyone?
I hate to admit this, but CAIR has it right in this case, albeit not for the reasons that it states.
If you read the charge sheet, the Koran's Shmulevich flushed were somebody's else's property (apparently Pace University's). So he's arrested for vandalism and charged with Criminal Mischief in the Fourth Degree.
The hate crime element has been added in accordance with New York's Hate Crimes Act 2000.
Vandalism of other people's property is a criminal offence, and Shmulevich's utterly daft admittance to being motivated by anger against a group of Muslims has added the hate crime part.
He may have had a defence under free speech if he'd flushed a Koran that he'd owned, but flushing Pace's property leaves him wide open.
Seamus-
But Islam, by its playbook The Koran, vandalized Judaism and Christianity in its plagiarism and mutilation of its sacred texts.
Islam is the uber-vandal.
Stan S. needs to counter-sue, and to accuse the accusers, whose crime is a billion times more serious than his trivial protest.
"Where are the original Jews and Christians of Saudi Arabia?"
This should be his first cross-examinational question?
And:
"Didn't the Muslims, following the Koran's preachments of hatred and intolerance, vandalize their homes, behead their men, enslave their children, rape and force their women into harems, destroy their synagogues and churches, and forbid them from openly practicing their faith in their Saudi Arabian homeland, all because of the teachings of the arrogant and violent Koran?"
Stan S. needs to stock up on such ammo.
"Creating a hostile learning environment"? Like any of the number of campuses where groups such as the Muslim Students' Association have made life hell for numerous students and the authorities wink an eye to it?
CapitalistGig, when anyone calls for "genocide" or "kill them all" it goes into search engines as linked to Jihadwatch, something RS does NOT endorse.
He said he was angry, so anger=hate=crime. Regulating your emotions, heck defining your emotions and the supreme court signed off on this? Wow, with Americans like that who needs al kayda? I think we went totalitarian without even realizing it. They kept pointing at Bush, Cheney, look look totalitarians! Meanwhile they paraded down the road to burning the Constitution. Run down students at a University and say you are angry and they make excuses for you. Toss a book in the toilet because you are angry (all the killing backed up by sighting the koran) and they will throw the book at you, the koran. Used to be, use a gun go to prison now we have, get angry go to prison. Ladies and Gentlemen we have a sick republic on our hands.
This is just...Bullshit!
Really, there must be something that can be done to this!
In my university, in London, there is, every end of the year some stupid thing about Islamic Awareness Week, while I have nothing against it, is just plain wrong to do it in a university campus, if they do this, then there should be a Hindu Week, Christian Week, Pagan Week, Jewish Awareness Week, and believe me, the Jewish really need to do that, to try and eliminate the horrible propaganda against the jews!
I'm an atheist, but even an heretic depraved infidel like me knows something!
"I hate to admit this, but CAIR has it right in this case, albeit not for the reasons that it states. "
In my opinion, it doesn't, because what is happening here is Pace unconstitutionally blocked the Jewish groups right to show the film "Obsession", but then the authorities came down hard on the REACTION.
This is in fact a very dangerous precedent.
Fast forward to a time where muslims reach a higher percentage in the US where violent jihad is more feasible, or look to a country like Indonesia. This type of double standard by the authorities translates to the government refusing to provide protection to Christian churches or to prosecute muslims that commit acts of terror on Christians, but then coming hard down on the Christian reaction (as with the Christians facing the death penalty after the muslims attacked the Christians, while the Bali bombers get pardoned). Technically, they are right in the sense that the Christians involved may have committed assault and murder in defense of their churches, but that was a REACTION to government refusing to protect the Christians from assault and murder in the first olace.
Same principle here. The student threw the Koran in the toilet, but that was a REACTION to the government refusing to enforce his right to watch whatever movies he wants to (as long as they are legal), free of intimidation by muslim student groups. Basically, he rightly stood up to the government in this case, and he is getting smacked down for it.
Presidential elections, 2008: Elect your candidate carefully: http://www.teamtancredo.com
Eugene Volokh has a good post discussing "The perils of hate crime laws":
http://volokh.com/posts/1185832897.shtml
HATE THE TRUTH CRIMES
Uh oh. Somebody better tell Rage Boy that burning those Bibles and declaring "Death to America" and "Death to Israel" is now considered a crime. Oh yeah, I forgot, those hate crimes laws only apply against Christians. Sorry. My mistake. Carry on with your Anti-Christ demonstrations, I'll just sit over here with the duct tape over my mouth...
Good video of Glen Beck explaining the "flying imams plot".
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=kVYEdeYYEMQ&mode=related&search=
Dumb and Dumber (Hannity and Colmes) both came out on the side of the Qu’ran tosser. First media coverage I’ve seen. The detail that the arresting officer was a Muslim didn’t make the cut.
This one's a winner.
Another aspect here -- and CAIR is indicted by their own words! CAIR states: "there is a difference between desecrating a religious text in a private setting and doing so in a setting that will create a hostile learning environment." Well, are WASHROOMS private?? or are they, according to CAIR, a "public" "learning environment"?? Since WHEN are WASHROOMS "public, learning environments??"! Good Grief. Grow Up You Whining Muslims.
PC at its very worse. It will be the death of the USA if this continues.
If only we could flush Islam down the toilet - once and for all rid the world of this scourge.
Seen interview of Bridgette Gabrial on the flying princesses and British Airways.
Posted by: godfreyofbouillon
The student threw the Koran in the toilet, but that was a REACTION to the government refusing to enforce his right to watch whatever movies he wants to
The relevant fact, godfrey, is that the student threw somebody else's Korans in the toilet. Free speech allows you to burn the flag, but it doesn't allow you to burn my flag - that's destruction of my property.
That Shmulevich allegedly admitted that he was motivated out of anger against a group of Muslims then made it, under New York State law, a hate crime.
I must admit this case fascinates me, so I dug up the relevant statute law and posted it in another thread. I don't want to post across threads, so you can find it here:
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/017582.php
The fact is, if convicted, even if he has no priors, the offences still carry a maximum sentence of FIVE YEARS IN PRISON. If the case goes to court, he needs a good lawyer. Is Alan Dershowitz still practicing?
According to this article in the NYSUN . . .
http://www.nysun.com/article/41944
CAIR called in the NYPD . . .not the university. Something stinks.
Also note this incident from FIRE:
http://rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0geu66Hm65GqUYBTpFXNyoA;_ylu=X3oDMTFhOGE2NjhnBHNlYwNzcgRwb3MDMTYEY29sbwNhYzIEdnRpZANGOTAwXzEwMgRsA1dTMQ--/SIG=1262eds97/EXP=1185934599/**http%3a//www.thefire.org/index.php/article/7690.html
Yet they recognize MSA? A student group representing the most intolerant belief system facing mankind meets the "considered welcoming" standard?
INSANITY CUBED.
O'Reilly had a segment about it tonight. Unfortunately he does not get the treat and the free speech aspect of the issue. Most of the media talking heads (left and right) don't know who the enemy is. It is based on pre 9/11 days thinking when we wanted to be inclusive.
Like Robert and most everyone else posting and commenting understand the treat the ISLAM is the our society.
In our post-modernist world, moral absolutes are frowned upon and awkward for anyone (other than, well, you know who) to propound.
But I have to say, CAIR is evil. This is an evil organization with an anti-human and completely wicked agenda. So the only word for CAIR is evil.
The KKK burned crosses to instill fear. There is no evidence that this guy wanted to instill fear by flushing a Koran. Perhaps he wanted to offend and perhaps that behaviour is punishable with expulsion from the school. He also stole the $10 Korans, so he is a petty thief. None of this compares to the KKK and CAIR is silly to say these sorts of things.
As for burning crosses, the Muslim equivalent is beheading. It is used to instill fear by destroying the dignity of the person. It is like lynching and CAIR has connections with people who behead. CAIR is more like the KKK than this guy who wanted to offend Muslims by stealing and destroying their holy book.
What really annoys me with many Muslim spokesmen is the lack of ethical balance. For example, collateral damage of civilians when NATO tries to kill the Taliban who hide amongst women and children, is not the moral equivalent of killing South Korean medical volunteers. Taliban spokesmen made this comparison. It is only understandable coming from a rabidly supremicist worldview where the life of a Muslim is worth more than a non-Muslim. Islam is the only major religion that teaches this lie. Although a misnomer, Muslims are the most racist people on the planet and the worst at human rights. They have no respect for minorities and justice does not mean anything given how they treat Christians and Jews in their lands.
Lets see if this post stays up!
Please, please, PLEASE...
Please organize a Day of Outrage to
demonstrate our freedom of speech and
expression with the symbolic destruction,
burning, shat upon, pissed upon or otherwise
humiliate the Recipe of Hate aka the koran.
I'll be there with bells on.
originally Posted by docgary at July 30, 2007 7:20 PM
Matamoros
All, or most of the facts surrounding this case seem to be out now.
The fact that the flushed Koran was owned by Pace makes the criminal mischief/vandalism charge. Destroying property of another. If it was his own Koran (it was not, contrary to Sean Hannity on air tonight) there would be no case. The difference between the felony and the misdemeanor charge is the $250 threshold. There were 2 seperate incidents, with enough time between the two incidents to disallow combining the value of two Korans to jump over the $250 threshold. Thus, he is probably looking at 2 misdemeanor vandalism charges. It is highly unlikely that has to worry about 5 year jail term.
If I am correct that the charges he would eventual face at a trial were misdemeanors that means a JUDGE trial, not a jury trial (unless NY allows jury trials for misdemeanors. I think that highly unlikely. There would be a 5 year logjam to have your average DUI case resolved)
His exposure at criminal sanctions is minimal. A fine, maybe community service at most if he pled guilty and he has no record, he could get expungement of his record at a later date, as long as he stays out of trouble.
If I wasn't 900 miles from NYC and was living back in the metropolitan NYC area, I would take this case pro bono.
Schmulevich has an opportunity to make a bigger statement in this case. He should be able to put the entire Koran on trial, expose CAIR and the danger of muslims in metro police departments, and the double standards imposed in colleges based on PC. A media hound like Dershowitz might find this irresistable.
We are in a war of ideas right now. Anything that grabs the attention of the public so they start to pay a little more attention is exactly what is needed. Even A. Colmes said tonight that he thought this ought not be a crime.
I hope he does not cave in with some plea deal. Even if he loses the trial would be followed in the news. I think it can only help our side in the long run.
Mert makes a good point above. Doing the same thing to a bible might expose the muslim bias of this case.
Someone should go to a Pace library & locate a bible and put it in a hard to locate place within the library. Go to B & N and buy identical version of that bible, keep reciept. Bring the new book back to Pace library with a witness, maybe with video rolling, and tell the librarian you hate christians and are going to flush Pace's bible down the toilet. Go to bathroom and flush your new bible. Call police.
See if you get arrested.
If not, relay your story with video the Schmulevich's attorney.
If you do, depending on your risk tolerance, determine at what point you would show the flushed book was really yours, not Pace's. Have reciept as proof the flushed book was yours and retrieve the one you hid in the stacks.
End result, no charges, no crime, show that arrest of Schmulevich has to do entirely with the over sensitivities of muslims and the charges have nothing to do with desecration of a religious book, and everything to do with the politics of the day. It is a perfect illustration to show what Schmulevich is really being charged with, i.e., a THOUGHTCRIME. Not really what he did, but what someone else believes he was thinking.
oh yeah..one more thing...bring rubber gloves with you to the library...eeewwwwwwwww
is it a hate crime to post anti-islamic sentiments on this site?
It's not yet, leonthepigfarmer, but it won't be all that long before it is.
These kinds of crimes are never enforced all at one time. They are enforced in increments. One year it might be "creating a hostile environment on a university campus or work place", but nothing more. But, few years later, after the American public become accustomed to seeing their fellow citizens prosecuted for saying or doing something to creats a "hostile environment", then the courts rachet it up to mean even more. In time, you can bet, sites like Jihadwatch, will be fighting for their lives.
It's just a matter of feeding the American people a little bit at a time instead of forcing it down their throats all at once.
It all started when Americans accepted the passage of "hate Crime" laws. They couldn't see the danger, so they didn't try to fight them. So now, what appeared to be a pretty straight foreward definition of a "hate crime", has been racheted up to mean throwing a Koran into a toilet because it creats a hostile environment.
There's still a lot of racheting up to do, though. And yes, Jihadwatch, is somewhere in the line of fire. It's just a matter of time.
I would volunteer to flush all the korans down my toilets but I would be afraid of fouling the city's sewer system.
M.O.T.
Since when is a manual-4-murder a "religious text"?
"We must all be concerned when any actions cross the line from protected free speech to acts designed to intimidate."
--CAIR
CAIR..you can kiss my royal red buns!!!I am surprised American's are not raising up and taking control of what is happening in America.
Islam can take it's koran book and head on over to desert. The next time I see anyone destroying a Bible or American Flag..im gonna be bitching so much...that somebody will take notice.
We got stupid government...we got ignorant ACLU...we got a group of "nuts" known as Cair, we got sleeper cells in America..we got Black Muslims scattered about supporting terrorists! No body doing anything about them....but they so damn worried about a book being in a commode? Give me a dang break...you pussy foot police in NY..bunch of whimps!
When American is taken over by a bunch of hoodlums (Muslims) and dang police be running scared themselves cause they lost control..WELL..stupids..what you gonna do when they come for you!
This bull has totally peeved me off!
CAIR - GO HOME!!!
Flush flush flush flush.. flush flush KLOran!!!!!
FYI.. Toilet = KLO in German
The koran is the perverted sex manual composed by a paranoid schizophrenic pedophile. The toilet is it's natural habitat. That being said, I hope the kid who did this is being provided adaequate security. There are a lot of muslims in NY and its vicinity.
I'm sitting on the [K]Loo right now.. my big FAT white German ASS facing meca.. and unlike the mooftees.. WE know how to calculate precisely.. :-)
To all who CAIR to know.. I am about to W.I.P.E.
Why do I feel so scatological when it comes to [SH]itslam??!!
WHY oh WHY do I bother?
And I have a KLOran my super's assistant [while my 'real' super was on a 'lenghty holiday'] gave me handy for toilet paper..
Can my FAT WHITE GERMAN ASS handle such a nasty paper for cleaning?
Well, my ASS will have to SACRIFICE for the GOOD of ALL MANKIND!!!
Sorry for the visuals, but I've been reading some stuff on my German sites and blogs and I AM ROYALLY PISSED OFF!!!
PUCK FIGSLAM!!!!!!!
Sort of on-topic.. They're trying to sue the KKKoran in German Courts for being in Viollation of the "Basic Law", ie. the German Constitution.
They're going to sue simultaneously in multiple courts. If this works, it will AT THE VERY LEAST generate publicity for the CAUSE of the RESISTANCE!
We should try to do similar things here.
The German law suit is based on direct conflict of the KKKoran with German laws and contemporary islamist statements that German Law is against the KKKoran.
I wonder WHY ANY judge would accept that a foreign 'religious' text should claim to trump national Law?!
Be it in Germany or the US of A!! or Britain.. or France or... or or.......
WHAT SAY YOU...???!!!!
>> They're trying to sue the KKKoran in German Courts for being in Viollation of the "Basic Law", ie. the German Constitution
S.I.A.D.
Which stands for (Stop the Islamisation of Denmark) is a small DANISH political party they are starting a court case against the Koran saying it is against the Danish Constitution and they want it banned they need money. Here is their website. There is an English section.
http://www.siad.dk/
If any of you would like to send a small donation I am certain it would appreciate it. It seems funny to me that a small insignificant country in Scandinavia have got the testicular fortitude to try and do something about it while countries like my own, Britain, it is no longer Great, France and the U.S.A. cower. Remember if S.I.A.D. Wins the DANES will be able to flush that disgusting so called piece of literature down the toilet with impunity. So please put your money where your mouth is and help out. Here is where you can send your donations too.
From Abroad
IBAN D78 9860 8890006451
Swift code: FIONDK 22
Somebody, is there a defense fund for this guy being set up? I would gladly donate to a crusade to defend not only Mr. Shmulevich but also freedom as we know it! Fight CAIR on this hill and on any other one they choose to raise their crescent banner on!!! God Willing, it could be the straw that breaks the camel's back and destroys CAIR once and for all.
Isn't funny how CAIR never denounces the hateful rhetoric that eminates from Mosques all over North America and Europe every Friday? Is that not hate speech? Is that not a hate crime? Flags burned in the street, is that not a hate crime? Efigies burned and bibles destroyed, is that not a hate crime?
"Bomb,Bomb UK - Bomb, Bomb USA!" Yes, we've all heard it but that's just freedom of speech. Protected in these Western societies which have so graciously opened their doors to the Muslim Ummah.
No, they would rather claim "hate crime" for nonsense like this in order to garner the mournful tisk-tisks of a softened America. Pray for the poor persecuted Muslims!
Pathetic!
Islam is a hate crime and the Qur'an is its manual.
Does anyone have a link to any video record of ISM "protesters" chanting "Hamas, Hamas, all Jews must go to the gas"?
It's just that as I recall, that was hate speech directed against an identifiable sector of society, in the public domain. perhaps a case should be brought before the statute of limitations runs out on that one.
Does anyone have a link to any video record of ISM "protesters" chanting "Hamas, Hamas, all Jews must go to the gas"?
It's just that as I recall, that was hate speech directed against an identifiable sector of society, in the public domain. Perhaps a case should be brought before the statute of limitations runs out on that one.
I've read from this site and many others that muslims do not consider an english translation of the koran as a "true" Koran.. couldn't this be used in court by a defence attorney? How can it be a hate crime if it truly wasn't a koran? And if muslims are worried about religious intimidation perhaps they need to drop the stones before they are ready to throw them at someone else's glass house.
Matamoros,
I just took a look at the article and I did not see anythng about Pace owning a Koran that the person has flushed. Are you sure that Pace had owned that Koran in the first place in question and that CAIR even has got this one right? Please do back this up with any information URL links with detailed information. Until then, I MUST cast doubt on this one. Thanks.
“there is a difference between desecrating a religious text in a private setting and doing so in a setting that will create a hostile learning environment."
You see, you are permitted to have hostile thoughts – and even to speak with hostility – “in a private setting”, but not in public. After all, the latter would be free speech, and we certainly can’t have that!
Furthermore, of course it’s we who will define what’s “hostile”. For example, if the speech is hostile to us, then obviously it’s hostile. On the other hand, if it isn’t hostile to us, then obviously it isn’t hostile. Clear enough?
And as for “leaning environment”, well, since everyone knows that the whole world is a learning environment, therefore…
The toilet didn't back up, or did it?
Then its not vandalism, its a plumming problem!
No chance of success in any liberal dhimmocracy? If Germany can ban Scientology, then the precedent exists. The Calcutta petition provides a lot of the groundwork. It was not a wasted effort. NEVER GIVE UP, NEVER GIVE IN.
*****
Interesting point. IIRC, the evidence includes security video with the suspect leaving a 'meditation room' with this 'university' property.
NOTE: MEDITATION ROOM, not prayer room or chapel.
When was this university common area designated as a 'meditation room' and under what circumstances? Was this space previously identified as a 'prayer' room or 'chapel'? As a 'meditation room' why was there a University sanctioned copy of the koran there? Was there an ample supply of relgious reading material for Bhuddist, Jewish, Christian, and Hindu students to use for 'meditation'? There is also a bit of curiosity about this 'security' video. When was this security video cam placed in or near the 'meditation' area. . .by request? by who? Why?
As mentioned above,
There appears to be a university sanctioned effort to by supplying a koran to a common 'meditation' room while blocking both Christian interests as well as the interests of Campus Hillel request to present the documentary "Obsession".
Equal protection under the law? Some groups are more equal than others? Sounds like PACE should be facing a discrimination suit.
Matamoros: "That Shmulevich allegedly admitted that he was motivated out of anger against a group of Muslims then made it, under New York State law, a hate crime."
I agree that this is the most damaging aspect of the case. But the key word here is "allegedly". What is the source of that claim? And was Mr S informed of his Miranda rights before allegedly making the statement?
Also - from your link on the previous thread:
"This freedom of expression, however, can cause some confusion as to where free speech ends and hate crime begins. Although the line may appear to be blurred, it boils down to this: Offensive or hateful speech is still just speech and is protected. However, a hate or bias crime is a criminal act that is motivated by hate."
Is an act motivated by anger the same thing as an act motivated by hate? No. He could have been angry at the group of Muslim students for what he perceived as their intimidation of jewish students on campus and the "hostile learning environment" created. He could have been protesting their intimidation. That's not hate.
Whatever statements he allegedly made about his motivation, it seems to me that much more could be said. Even if he allegedly made those statements their meaning could have been misconstrued by whoever took the statements down. Motivation is a complicated thing. Maybe Mr S didn't have time to extrapolate on the full meaning of whatever he said at the time of his arrest. And since it appears that whether or not this is a hate crime or not turns on the motivation - the defense needs to focus on this.
Why any US citizen would listen to and take advice from any CAIR-affiliated person at this point in time is beyond me.
Surely this is a perfect opportunity to fight tooth and nail in court this case and put this vile excuse for a religion firmly in its place? Surely there's enough support for this young man who merely expressed contempt for a book that contains the most racist and bigoted views ever put into words? Surely this is the time great minds like our Mr Spencer, Mr Steyn, Mr Pipes, Mr Winn, Ms Gabriel, Mr Sina, Mr Davis, Ms Hirsi Ali, Ms Bat Ye'or, Mr Bostom, and countless others, hell! We could even let Mr Fitzgerald out of his cage to rip'em to shreds. When all these knowledgeable men and women around the world gather together just watch the prosecution drop this hot potatoe quick time, but this is surely the time to go for the jugular??? Set up a paypal account for donations and go full bore, I'm in...
My advice for future qu-ran flushers? Make sure the pipes are big enough so the evidence disappears :)
Let's plan a March on DC
http://thepugilstick.blogspot.com/
Someone has to start it.
Why risk clogging your pipes when a fireplace is available.
"The Calcutta Quran petition".
An idea that unfortunately was way ahead of its time.
"The Calcutta Quran petition".
An idea that unfortunately was way ahead of its time.
I would think that the authorities approach to this is likely to cause more Korans to be bathed in toilet water - where can I get one?
Posted by: bigcatgirl13106
Matamoros, I just took a look at the article and I did not see anythng about Pace owning a Koran that the person has flushed. Are you sure that Pace had owned that Koran in the first place in question
Unfortunately, Pace's ownership of the Korans appears to have been established beyond doubt. If you read the complaint sheet, you'll see that Tom Tresselt, a security manager at Pace, states that he is a "a custodian of said property" - indicating that they were in all likelihood university property.
http://michellemalkin.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2007/07/crimcomplaint.jpg
The next sentence, where he confirms that the defendant [Shmulevich] did not have the authority or permission to deface or destroy said property, satisfies the requirements under New York State law for a charge of Criminal Mischief in the Fourth Degree.
The alleged flushing the Korans was therefore a criminal act, as they were somebody else’s property. Under New York’s Hate Crimes Act 2000, a hate crime is “any offense or unlawful act that is motivated in whole or part by a person's, a group's or a place's identification with a particular race, religion, ethnicity, sexual orientation, disability, gender or age”.
Using that definition, even lowly misdemeanours such as these can be classed as a hate crime, if, as the complaint sheet claims, Shmulevich admits to have committed them out of anger towards a group of Muslim students.
You don’t have to feel hate, or even anger, for a crime to be classed as a hate crime. The crime simply has to be motivated by the other person’s race, religion, ethnicity etc. A non-Muslim student punching a Muslim student isn’t a hate crime. A non-Muslim student punching a Muslim student because he’s a Muslim is a hate crime. And vice-versa.
If Shmulevich had flushed his own Korans because he was angry at a group of Muslims, there would not have been any charges. That's free speech. If Shmulevich had flushed the university's Korans and not mentioned his anger at the group of Muslims, that would have been a misdemeanour. But by allegedly admitting to both, he's opened himself up to an additional hate crime charge on top of the Criminal Mischief charge.
It comes down to proving his motivation. The UK has recently introduced a similar law, which sees the penalty for a crime doubled if it is a hate-motivated crime. But prosecutors have to prove beyond reasonable doubt that race, religion, disability or sexual orientation was the accused’s motivating factor when committing the crime. If they cannot prove that, then the sentence doubling does not come into effect.
Here’s two examples. The first is the killing of a gay barman, at a notorious gay cruising site, by two men who told a witness to the crime that: “We don’t like poofters here and that’s why we can kill him if we want to.” This, and the fact that they’d attacked another gay man in the same area two weeks previously, established the “hate” factor and their sentences were doubled to 28 years.
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/law/public/article675712.ece
In this example, two students were found guilty of desecrating a Jewish cemetery, damaging 35 graves. One was said to have had an obsession with Nazism, and books on the Hitler and the SS, along with neo-Nazi DVDs, had been found in his home. However, both denied any anti-Semitic motives. Now it’s pretty obvious what their likely motivation was, but because they denied it and it could not be proved, then it was classed as criminal damage, not religiously-motivated criminal damage.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/low/england/derbyshire/6343219.stm
My rather long-winded point is this - surely the same burden of proof applies in US law? Surely the prosecutor in this case would need to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the crime was motivated by another group’s religion for the defendant to be found guilty of a hate crime? Or would a conviction on the initial criminal charge, along with Shmulevich’s alleged admittance of motivation, be enough to convict on the additional hate crime charge?
My own personal feeling is that this won’t make court. Shmulevich will plead out, under the threat of possible jail time, in order to receive a lesser penalty - likely a small fine or community service (probably in an Islamic centre, if the judge has a perverse sense of humour).
But this case presents a fascinating legal opportunity. It offers the chance to challenge, in court, the limit of the citizen’s right to protest, hate crime legislation, and most importantly the words of the Koran itself. For a Jewish defendant to face hate crime charges for flushing copies of the Koran, a book that is riddled with hateful anti-Jewish verses, and that has inarguably encouraged more widespread hatred of Jews than Mein Kampf, The Protocols of the Elders of Zion and David Duke put together - that reads like a Law and Order scriptwriter’s wet dream.
If Shmulevich does eventually face trial, and if he can find a first-class lawyer to take his defence, then any subsequent court case could be anti-Islamism's version of the Scopes Monkey Trial.
Clarence Darrow, we need you now…
Matamoros - in the first case, there is an onvious victim of the crime - the gay man. So that case seems pretty clear.
The more interesting question concerns cases of vandalism and the issue of who is the victim of a property crime - say defacing a Jewish cemetary (or spraying swastikas on a synogugue). In both of the latter cases, it is the Jewish victim's property which is being damaged in the course of the crime. So the object of hate is also the victim of the crime.
But in this case, the Koran did not belong to the Muslim student group. It belonged to Pace University, which is not a Muslim group. So Pace University is the victim of the crime, not the Muslim group. Add to that, your point that it would have to be proved beyond a reasonable doubt that he was motivated by hate towards Muslims (a point I agree with) - and I would think this would be hard to convict on).
(Imagine a case in which someone threw into the toilet a book that had nothing to do with islam and also didn't belong to the Muslim group - say a chemistry book) and at the same time, the defendant claiming that he had thrown said chemistry book in the toilet out of anger towards the Muslim group. Would that be a hate crime? How is that any different since the chemistry book is also Pace University's property?
Or is this more about defacing a Koran? In which case, this is actually about being forced to respect this particular book.)
This should be considered a vandelism issue at best. Besides any form of violent crime against anyone are really hate crimes when one thinks of it. What is writen out as hate crime law(s) are simply are punishing thoughts.
In fact, coming back to the fact that the Muslim group was not the owner of the Koran and therefore not the victim of the crime - we seem to have 2 almost unrelated incidents - one incident where Stan S vandalizes Pace property and another incident where he allegedly expresses anger towards a Muslim group. if the book had been a chemistry book and someone had heard him say that he put a chemistry book owned by Pace University in the toilet because he was angry at the Muslim group on campus - would he have been charged with a hate crime? No - because he is allowed to say that he is angry at a Muslim group and the hypothetical chemistry book would have belonged to Pace University. So how is it different with this Koran. If the Koran had belonged to the Muslim group, then it would be different and more along the lines of defacing a jewish cemetary. But it didn't belong to the Muslim group so they aren't a victim of this crime. AND - and this is crucial - nothing in our laws mandates us to treat a Koran any differently from a chemistry book so he can not be punished additionally just because this happened to be a Koran rather than a chemistry book.
Just a quick reality check please. Here below are two scenarios. Pick which one you think is most likely to happen due to this flushing at Pace:
1.) Canada has a large influx of emigrants from NYC, all seeking political refugee status, claiming that they all fear for the their lives due to Qur'an flushings.
2.) Riots in Pakistan, Bangladesh, Gaza and Malaysia, 23 dead, 63 wounded and an embassy burnt to the ground from protesters chanting "Death to America" by followers of the "Religion of Peace". Cities were the riots occur come to a standstill.
Folks remember two things. First, it's a book. Books do not flush well. Second, use your left hand to wipe when using its pages, that's Islamic. But all things being the same, I shan't give up my Charmins.
Shalom,
Theosebes
1 & 2
Most hate-crime law interpretations are obviously un-Constitutional to begin with. This case is opening eyes to that.
So, burning an American flag isn't "creating a hostile environment" but flushing a Qur'an is. Interesting.
Now, why is that?
Hmm.
I could get all long-winded here but there's no reason for it.
The average American non-Muslim is never going to be a threat when confronted with non-violent protest.
However, the average Muslim in America on our college campuses will just as often be from another country as from the USA, and therefore we know that the possibility of Sudden Jihad Syndrome exists.
So, the "hostile environment" isn't about something that will hurt the Muslims, it's about what the Muslims might do once they are offended.
And how do we all know this "hostile environment" is real?
Anyone who can read newspaper headlines or the Internet or a TV screen knows....
So, my question is simple. If we're this frightened of creating "hostile environments" anywhere near Muslims because Muslims themselves are typically the catalyst for "hostile environments", why are we continuing to act as if Islam isn't the problem and that Muslims are somehow exempt from ridicule or examination, but all non-Muslims are not?
Dhimmis abound. Fear-ridden, lackluster lemmings.
Islam is the problem.
Islam IS the problem.
ISLAM creates the "hostile environment", not acts of defiance against the lies of Muhammad.
It won't be much longer before I suppose I'm arrested for speaking out.
Good luck.
To matamoros, profitsbeard, atheling -
go for it!
I hope to God that, were something like this happening in my country and it was someplace I could get to, I'd find some friends and get to work.
Sure: as others have pointed out: pinching and then flushing someone else's book, any book, be it the Bible or the Kama Sutra or a Harlequin bumper romance collection or the Compleat Harley Davidson Owner's Manual, then a. it's petty theft and b. if it in fact clogged the plumbing, it's petty vandalism. (Suppose a feminist had stolen, and flushed, a bunch of porno mags, or a volume of the Marquis de Sade, and had explained that she did it because she was overwhelmed with wrath at the offence to womanhood contained therein? ). Settle the business without a fuss - a month or so helping the janitor clean toilets? + pay back the value of the stolen book to the owner, or provide a replacement copy?
But since the 'hate crime' charge has been made, the question should be asked: where is the anger coming from, that drove a JEWISH student to do something like this, and what is more, to ADMIT to that anger? And, in the case of this particular book, the Quran, and as regards Muslim treatment of the Jews, a well-informed lawyer, who has read, say, the Quran, the Hadiths concerning Jewry, and Bat Ye'or's and Andrew Bostom's books, should be able to argue that the Jewish boy's anger (though rashly expressed to the detriment of private property and plumbing) is entirely understandable and constitutes a mitigating circumstance.
Might be interesting to tack up, on public noticeboards all over Pace U and around NY City, printouts featuring the nastiest Jew-hating surahs of the Quran and the Hadiths, fully-referenced, and some of the historical accounts (Jewish, Muslim, Christian) that describe the myriad laws and myriad deeds by which the Empire of Islam grossly abused dhimmi Jewish populations - one might cite, for instance, the multiple accounts of medieval, renaissance period and modern period pogroms by Muslims against Jews, and, verbatim, the legislation from Yemen in the 1920s which revived the provision that fatherless Jewish children must be forcibly removed from their families and forcibly converted to Islam.
Perhaps a small group might care to sit down outside the courthouse during the trial and read these materials out loud for the benefit of passersby? Or provide handouts?
Or a group could bring their own copies of the Quran (with records of sale), sit down on courthouse steps: one after another, read out in clear, pleasant voices, the many passages that are offensive to Jews - and Christians - and to all Infidels; then get up and say, all together, no heat, cool and calm, 'look, there's only one place fit for this stuff!', and, all together, march to nearest city rubbish bin and unceremoniously drop the Qurans in, one after the other, with the same dispatch that one would employ for a dead rat - and ostentatiously wash hands feet and faces AFTERWARDS!
Have a few copies of Mein Kampf and The Protocols of the Elders of Zion handy during the protest/ teach-in, and read some of the nasty passages from same, the ones that are most similar to Mohammed's diatribes. Pitch them in the garbage at the same time. That way, if someone kicks up a stink, you can point out that so far as you could see, there was little difference between the Quran and the other two books, and that if Mein Kampf and the Protocols belong in the garbage, so does the Quran.
Is anyone writing letters of support to Mr Shmulevich and his family? Are they associated with a synagogue? Does he have a rabbi?
A comment posted regarding the Pace "hate crime" story at Hot Air:
"Since “national origin” is a protected class, is it illegal to intimidate Americans on the basis of their being American?"
Heh, heh, heh! OK, let's sue! Where to start..?
- - - - - -
But really: in order to have a "hate" crime, somebody has to assume what the perpetrator was thinking, and tie that "bad thought" to a crime to prove that the person "intentionally commits the act or acts constituting the offense in whole or in substantial part because of a belief or perception regarding the race, color, national origin, ancestry, gender, religion, religious practice, age, disability or sexual orientation of a person, regardless of whether the belief or perception is correct."
What if this Shmulevich wasn't trying to offend "Islam" as a whole; what if he was only upset at the "subset of Islam" that is responsible for terrorism? or the subset of Islam that he had the prior disagreement with? or the subset of Islam that is in his sociology class at Pace? Is it possible to have a "hate crime" targeting only red-bearded glasses-wearing Islamists associated with CAIR? How small a group can you target and still have a "hate crime"?
(I agree with those who say "Crime is crime: it doesn't matter if you murder someone because he's Jewish/gay/left-handed, he's still just as dead. If someone is murdered without being "hated", is he less dead? Is the crime less offensive? Punish the act committed.")