The unindicted co-conspirators pull off another coup. Hot Air has details and video.
Only in a public square suffused with the anti-Western self-hatred that is political correctness and multiculturalism could this kind of thing happen: an advocacy group that has been linked to terror groups, that has leaders who have advocated Islamic supremacism and other officials who are doing time on terror charges, says "Jump," and law enforcement officials, the people who are supposed to be protecting us, say, "How high?"
Now there is a lawsuit that I could take advantage of.
We should be telling CAIR and our police forces "how high to jump".
Land of the free?
If this case ever goes to trial, which I doubt,the jury is acquit, and the defendant will end up with a pretty good lawsuit against CAIR, the police department, the university and, possibly, the city. If the "{flushed Koran" was his own property, which I believe it was, you add "false imprisonment" to the case, as he has the right to do pretty much what he wants to with his own property, including flushing it. The only charge in that case would for fouling up the sewer system!
Hold the phone! The police can only apply whatever penal code that defines the specific violation. The police will take the initial report, The detective bureau will usually review the specific charge to see if it applies to the penal code and that all evidence and witness information has been obtained. The report is then submitted to the district attorneys office and they make the determination as to whether to go forward with a prosecution based on established requirements under the penal code...
The silver lining in this cloud could be that all the publicity that will surround this case, assuming it goes on, will further deepen animosity towards CAIR and Islam as a whole. Let's hope so.
I want to know where the riots are?
Are they waiting until its cooler?
C.A.I.R - "Cowards Again Irritate Reason"
Wellington - I'm sure that will happen just because most people won't have the patience to follow the intricacies of the legal case. All they'll take in is the fact that people are allowed to burn the American flag and desecrate Christian religious symbols (the average Joe probably knows by now that our government funded that as "art") while this guy gets charged with a hate crime for putting a Koran in the toilet. That's all they'll see and they'll be royally pissed off.
The woman prosecutor from the video clip is a primary example of how people don't even understand the constitution anymore. Hate-crimes legislation are an affront against the 1st Amendment. I can't believe she actually believes the concept of thought policing that she is verbally promoting.
The Hot Air post is fascinating. It takes off from the point that Eugene Volokh made about the fact that the Koran belonged to Pace rather than to the Muslim group.
"...is it a hate crime if the defendant intended to intimidate a person or group by committing a crime against someone else or must the crime be committed against them personally?....
Where I think this is wrongly worded by Hot Air is is that the original hate crimes provision doesn't actually say that there must be an "intention to intimidate", because if that were the case, I would think that Stan S could beg off that pretty easily by simply saying that he had no intention to intimidate anyone (even if he did alledgedly admit that he was angry at a group.)
But leaving "intention to intimidate out of it", the central point is the decoupling of the actual victim of the crime from the supposed victim of "hate".
How weird is that?
So if i throw a stone through the local (heterosexual, married and with 4 kids) dry cleaners window because I'm drunk as a skunk and right after doing that I yell - "Homosexuality is an abomination" - I can be charged with a hate crime even though there wasn't a homosexual in sight? But if I just stand on a street corner in a public protest and say "Homosexuality is an abomination!" - that's free speech?
That's insane. Decoupling the actual victim of the crime from the supposed target of the hate is dangerous as hell!
I note that the way Hot Air presents points A and B, it's not a matter of BOTH A and B needing to be true - it's just a matter of EITHER A or B being true. So B alone says,
"(b) 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."
AGE?? GENDER?? So I have a huge fight with my boyfriend because he's cheating on me and so I get drunk and go over to his lover's house and I start throwing eggs at her house and she calls the cops and the cop comes to drag me away and in my anguish over the situation with my boyfriend, I say "God - I hate men!" - The victim is a woman but I'm throwing eggs at her house because I hate men and their cheating ways. Do we have the basis for a hate crime because I said that I hate men even though I'm vandalizing a woman's house?
I really could see this case going all the way to the Supreme Court.
(BTW - I can't view the video, so I am only basing my comments on the text. Every time I try to watch a youtube video from home - even if I "allow" the site and "allow" youtube - it shuts down my computer. The whole thing freezes up. I just tried it again and same old, same old result. So I only have the half of the story I can read.)If anyone would like to summarize the video, I'd be grateful.
Something doesn’t smell right. Question, if he up and decides to plead guilty wont that be used as precedent by islamists in the future? From the number of times he did it, twice, in front of a camera. The shadowy involvement of msa/cair, the interesting assignment of faisal Kahn the investigating cop, the refusal to run obsession recently, purported anti Semitism on campus, hate crime charges. I smell a rat but I am not sure which hole the rat is hiding in yet so keep your eyes and ears peeled.
I avoided commenting on this story so far since I was unaware of the context behind it, and whether Shmulevich drenched his own Quran or someone elses. However, hearing about the background of this case from Michelle in the video - Jewish students wanted to watch the video Obsession, Muslim students objected and in course of their objections had swastikas painted about the Jews who wanted it - none of which was registered as hate crimes. But the moment this student puts a Quran into a toilet, the you-know-what hits the fan.
I do think that Shmulevich could have done this in a more legally foolproof way by getting some of his friends to together purchase a Quran, incinerate most of the pages in it and then shut the book, thereby smothering the flames, but leaving ashes, and then flush the ashes, videotaping every step of it. That way, he wouldn't have been guilty of damaging someone else's property (since it wouldn't have been), nor would he have been guilty of vandalism, since the burnt book could have been flushed, without blocking the drainage.
But those technicalities aside, while I support him anyway for doing what he did, given the fact that the Muslim thugs in Pace U were trying to shut down a viewing of 'Obsession' and that was what led to this, I strongly believe that even those among us who disagree with him for burning a 'community' Quran, or for blocking the drainage, ought to stand by him, if only for the reason that not doing so would be an implicit endorsement of Muslim student attempts to silence any showings of movies exposing their cult.
The worst message one could send them.
Funny how they shred Bibles in Saudi Arabia and no outcry.
Frankly, CAIR is the enemy within!!
Things like this make me think that we should have a nation-wide flush a thon with the Qu'ran. This would be a good statement to CAIR that we are not weak and no Sharia law in America!!!
I think his Qu'ran flushing was only a statement to the extremist who want to replace our constituion with Sharia law and not moderate Muslims who believe in a pluralistic society. His was an act of frustation more than an act of hate.
If CAIR Truly wants to replace our sacred constition with, like the globalist do with International law, Sharia law then they are traitors.
Caroline,
Right on. Spot on. This decoupling thing is insane. And I'm gonna guess it could be argued on grounds of legislative intent that it wasn't what the legislature intended. It's pretty clear from the legislative findings, which are part of the legislative history, that the "person" referred to in the text of the law that talks about "belief about a person" is supposed to be the victim of the crime. I think the legal team should really press on that one.
Mind you, I think the very existence of such laws are an affront to reason and to the principles of our country. But if they don't go as far as CAIR wants them to go, that has to be pointed out in court, before we're off to the races. This kid committed an extremely minor crime against Pace U., who owned the book he stole and damaged. Pace U doesn't even _have_ a race, gender, or religion, and it isn't "a person." The whole thing should be thrown out of court, especially since this interpretation will apparently mean that even the most minor damage to _university_ or other _group_ property (writing a message in pencil on a wall, for example) can apparently be turned into a state _feloney_ if it's supposed to have been motivated in this way. Bad, bad news.
I should add, though: I'm not sure the headline is correct. It was a Muslim cop who brought the charges, and he's a member of some sort of Muslim policeman's asso. And a rep. of Pace _says_ that it was the cops who decided to bring the hate crime charges. Now, I'm betting maybe the truth is even worse than the cops' caving to CAIR. I'm betting maybe the cops have some sort of Muslim-dominated "hate crimes division" whose job it is to find excuses to bring hate crimes charges, and that this is exactly what they did here, all on their politically correct own initiative, without needing any special prompting from CAIR.
Here is Wikipedia's definition for HATE CRIME. Hopefully it's factual.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_crime_laws_in_the_United_States
After reading the hate crimes law, the general idea is that it has to be against a person who is engaging in about six acts that are federally protected - like voting.
Lydia: "And I'm gonna guess it could be argued on grounds of legislative intent that it wasn't what the legislature intended. It's pretty clear from the legislative findings, which are part of the legislative history, that the "person" referred to in the text of the law that talks about "belief about a person" is supposed to be the victim of the crime. I think the legal team should really press on that one."
Lydia - now I think You're spot on! If you read part B: "(b) 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."
...given the emphasis on "belief" and "perception", I'm going to guess that the purpose of this clause is to handle cases in which someone assaults say a Sikh, thinking they're a Muslim, or assaults a heterosexual, thinking they're gay. The clause may be intended to say - sorry - just because your perception was mistaken doesn't mean you're going to get off since your action was motivated by the mistaken belief that this was in fact a Sikh or a homosexual.
If it's important in this case whether Stan S believed the Koran belonged to the Muslim group vs knowing when he committed the crime that it actually belonged to Pace University - he should state that he was quite aware that the Koran belonged to Pace University.
As Savage has pointed out someone may pt a crucifix in urine and that is protected speech, but someone puts a Qu'ran (with all its Jew hating, etc.) in a toilet and that's a "hate crime". What CAIR doesn't realize is that people are fed-up with their supremacist hustle. Once the Flying Imams videos are released the indictment of CAIR will not be far behind-LOL.
Lydia - just to add something about your post -
- I think you've REALLY REALLY hit the nail on the head with your comment about "legislative intent". As a non-lawyer, it's not a term I'm terribly familiar with, but either you're actually a lawyer or you stayed in a Holiday Inn Express last night!
"Legislative intent" re section B of those provisions exactly! The legislative intent obviously (well - obvious to you and me apparently) wasn't meant to decouple the actual victim from the object of the hate. It was apparently meant to mitigate against cases of "mistaken identity" when the actual victims of hate crimes were not whom the perpetrators thought they were.
(But again, that is why I think it could be important to Stan S's defense that he make clear that he knew that those Korans were the property of Pace University, since "victims" could also be victims of property crime.)
Since the Koran is full of hate ( which can easily be demonstrated by opening it to Suras 9:5 and 9:29-30, and many, many other verses) this act is an anti-hatecrime.
Countering hate cannot be a hatecrime.
Destroying a volume of terroristic threats cannot be a threat.
Except to terrorists.
This just in from:
Why are we so scared of offending Muslims? - By Christopher Hitchens
The whole thing is worth reading.
As Savage has pointed out someone may pt a crucifix in urine and that is protected speech, but someone puts a Qu'ran (with all its Jew hating, etc.) in a toilet and that's a "hate crime". What CAIR doesn't realize is that people are fed-up with their supremacist hustle. Once the Flying Imams videos are released the indictment of CAIR will not be far behind-LOL.
Posted by: Frank [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 31, 2007 6:39 PM
Wow! That resonates exactly with a point I made earlier on this thread:
"Wellington - I'm sure that will happen just because most people won't have the patience to follow the intricacies of the legal case. All they'll take in is the fact that people are allowed to burn the American flag and desecrate Christian religious symbols (the average Joe probably knows by now that our government funded that as "art") while this guy gets charged with a hate crime for putting a Koran in the toilet. That's all they'll see and they'll be royally pissed off.
Posted by: Caroline [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 31, 2007 4:45 PM "
But hey - I'm not complaining. The average Joe on the street still has an amazing radar for the broad differences between right and wrong. That's precisely why our justice system relies upon a 12-member jury of our peers.
The thing we should worry about the most is all the potential factors that could corrupt that central rock of our legal system which could include everything from the sheer ignorance of our jurists due to laziness understanding the law - to outright malevolence - like when we have a bunch of Muslims sitting on our juries who don't at all share the basic underlying assumptions of our legal system. That latter is a scary thought indeed.
In Europe, where Islamist "civil rights" organizations are not as established, nor find such fertile ground for taking route, Jihad seems to have taken a more violent form. With the exception of 9/11 and a few other incidents in the US, it seems that the instruments of Jihad take a more legal turn. The US does not seem any less infiltrated with JIhadis, it's just that they are more sophisticated and take advantage of the generous civil rights protections and litigation-favorable environment. Which is more dangerous ultimately, the suicide bomber or the legal Jihadi?
CAIR, the MSA and other organizations in the US are engaged actively and consciously in a legal and judicial JIhad against Americans. They browbeat all weak institutions, including universities and schools, local police forces and local governments, into submission, with threats of lawsuits, going public to generate bad PR and civil rights arguments to force their extremist agenda on the society. Not only that, but there is evidence that they pressure the FBI and federal agencies as well. They insist upon Muslim sensitivity training when even they think a legal case cannot be built but they can exploit liberal guilt to force submission upon their enemies.
It may be a stretch, but this case could be a watershed. A silly immature guy flushes some Korans down the toilet. Instead of ignoring this unimportant event, they push and push until a big case is made out of it. The case falls apart, as it will, and sets a precedent for others to tune out this kind of Sharia-engendered rabble rousing. Sure, school administrations will always be afraid of their own shadow, but once this case is thrown out, police departments will no longer be so inclined to treat childish pranks like hate crimes just because CAIR makes some waves.
The days are numbered when a few Muslims go to their local MSA, which gets their co-conspirators, CAIR, involved in Gestapo tactics to go after anyone offensive.
CAIR will soon be a well-funded irrelevance. Despite its deep Gulf State money-engorged pockets, there will soon be little downside to bureaucrats just ignoring CAIR.
CAIR over-reaches, which is the pathology of all fascists, they move too soon, too fast, and end up waking up those who would have continued appeasing them had they been just a little more low key.
The sleeping giant (of average people with common sense) has been awakened.
Here's a question about that 'community' Quran. . . according to the reports I read, this community property was removed from university property identified as a "Meditation Room". Not a chapel or 'prayer room' . . .a 'meditation room'.
When did this university space receive this designation? Under what circumstances.
Why was a University owned 'quran' in this meditation room? Unless there was a bookshelf or table with offerings for Hindu, Christian, Jewish, or Bhuddist beliefs . . .what pray tell was a quran doing there?
Recall recent controversies about such rooms designated once as prayer rooms, contemplation rooms, community rooms, and now 'meditation' rooms . . .University of Michigan-Flint , Ryerson, University of North Carolina ,George Mason University, and even in the UK at East Berkshire College's Langley Campus(not to mention, our own State Dept.), it just goes on and on and on ad nauseum.
Why is a room identified as a 'meditation room' supplied by this University with a University owned quran?
Another question. The reports I've read indicate that there exists security video capturing this individual's image with this University owned quran. Where was this security camera located? Was it in or near this 'meditation room'? Why? Who placed it there? Was it placed there before or after the room received the designation of 'meditation room'? If after, how long before or after the quran was placed in this 'meditation room'?
We now know that CAIR is thickly involved with this case - and denying it.
Pace U Denies CAIR Contacts - CAIR Held Meeting at School
Problem for this unindicted co-conspirator is, the internet also provides historic documentation of it's involvement with this case. Two parties can play this game.
It bothers me that previous reportsspecifically state:
indicating that CAIR and the MSA approached the PACE AND the NYPD yet CAIR tries to lead us to believe that the university contacted NYPD.
Noting the identity of the officer (Faisal Khan)filing this report certainly raises questions about conflicting interests. CAIR/MSA/FAISAL KHAN
Note that CAIR has a history of filing claims - bogus ones, all in the hopes of gaining credibility as a persecuted group.
NPR Slams CAIR On Bogus Hate Crimes Reporting
*Fake Muslim Hate Crimes: Where's The Apology, CAIR?
*The Muslim Hate Crime That Wasn't
CAIR's Hate Crimes Nonsense
Frank.....
Go back 30 years ago and look at the ACLU and what people were saying. Everyone was saying the 'people were not going to put up with them any longer' and 'they cannot push their beliefs on us' and 'they can't take that away'.
30 years later the ACLU is here and more of an accepted way of life. And really the ACLU did get 'you' 'me' or 'us' to do anything, they used the courts to do it. Americans do what the courts tell us to do. Liberals know that and use it.
In 30 years from now CAIR will be here or not and it will not be because people are 'fed-up', it will be because courts have ordered them out (or not). But I don't believe that will happen. I also don't believe that the flying imans videos will be made public, the MSM and the ACLU will not condone that.
America will only prevail in the court room. The mass public cannot make a decision without being told what that decision will be.
Shouldn't ACLU come out in the support of this guy?
Since Koran promotes non-Muslims hatring, flushing it cannot be called a hate crime but a legitimate protest.
Moreover, the anti-Israeli propaganda and more generally the Islamist propaganda made by CAIR are the real hate crimes.
Caroline, I'm neither a lawyer nor do I play one on TV, but I do follow a bit how the courts tend to interpret law. Basically, when it comes to the Constitution, the courts don't care about intent at all (unfortunately). They make the Constitution mean whatever they want it to. But when it comes to statutory law, like this one, they're usually at least somewhat concerned with what the legislature intended by what was written.
The student now, according to LGF, has a pro bono legal team, so we'll see how they do.
Really, IMO, this law should be rethought big-time. Just the bumping of a misdemeanor up to a felony ought to sound alarm bells in people's minds. "Okay, so extremely minor vandalism becomes a _felony_ when this hate crimes stuff is brought in. Hold on a cotton-pickin' minute!" Maybe it will lead to the law's being repealed or to other states' being more hesitant to pass them.
But meanwhile, the present law governs this case, and I hope they can get this kid out of the soup.
Here's what I've been wondering:
Don't most educational facilities have internal processes for handling bad behavior on the part of their students?
Why wasn't this guy suspended, expelled, censured, or anything like that, by the Pace U Dean? Why did the cops have to be involved? No one was injured. No threats were made. I don't understand why the police had to be called in.
If I leave my door unlocked, and come home to find that my copy of Gone With the Wind has been dumped into my toilet, by someone associated with a black supremacist group (or someone who really just hates that book), is that a matter for the police? Or, is it indicative of my responsibility to keep my doors locked, when I'm not home?
The so-called meditation room was obviously open and unlocked. Why wasn't it shut up, after hours? There's a term we use in Florida, when a toddler falls into someone else's pool, or when older kids play in condemned houses. Such places are said to be "attractive nuisances". An open meditation room, with valuable items inside it like an oh-so-very-precious Qur'an, might qualify as an attractive nuisance.
Abscedere...Around here it is called an attractive hazzard. Hazzardous material fits the Quran very well. Problem is it's against the law ro flush hazzardous material down the drain/toilet.
This hate crime/speech stuff is getting out of hand. It does not bother me that the police/authorities enforce the law, but it does bother me that they are doing it lopsided. And often gleefuly.
Equal protection under the law should also mean
equal prosecution under the law. The cross in pzz artist should be in jail, and so should anyone who distributes hate material(Quran).
I wonder if you lined your birds cage with the Quran, and the bird pooped on it, would the bird get arrested. They arrest squirrels in Iran, so why not.
Lock the little buggers up.
Things are really getting screwy...
justamomof4
You raise some good questions about whether the 'meditation room' in question had books of Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism, Confucianism, et al. Also, from what I understand, Meditation rooms are rooms where people can assemble to meditate i.e. pray silently, contemplate things if they aren't religious, and is different from a prayer room in that since they are silent, people of different denominations can pray without disrupting each other.
Given how Islamic prayers run - which are generally anything but silent, I fail to see how a meditation room - the way it's understood - can ever be of any use to Mohammedans.
I still say that someone could propose a stunt to announce a Public defiling of a Quran BUT pull a fast one on CAIR and the Police.
Just get ahold of a few Free-Qurans from CAIR and remove the covers with the Arabic print titled "Quran" , then get a few old Bibles and do them same but then take the binded pages of the Bible and wrap them with the Quran hard-cover after gluing the spine to make them stick .
Next place a few bacon strips at random between pages so the strip hangs out to show it's a Pork product .
This will set the stage for a paradoxical-irony with Hooper and his Jihad-friendly buddies because instead of the Osama effigee stunt where it was hung at a certain for the Media to film it , this stunt will bring out the Police and CAIR to demand Arrests for a Hate-Crime related to defacing a Quran .
Fast-forward to the Police Station after all the MSM outlets and CAIR have expressed outrage for this attack on a Holy book , now we hear the Desk-Sargent go public with the evidence and Charges except he humbles himself by telling the Public that the content of the Quran's were really BIBLES with Quran written on the outside or actual Quran covers used to wrap a Bible.
Now just sit back and watch Hooper and the Police squirm over what to do about a Bible being defiled and a Hate-Crime as well for laying Charges.
I'll tell you what I know will happen.
1.
Christians won't riot and murder 50 civilians world-wide
2.
Most Christians will be forgiving and point out that God doesn't live inside the paper and ink.
3.
CAIR will still find an Islamic link to cry
Racism.
4.
The Police will insist they need an actual crime or valid complaint by a citizen from a Oppressed group that objects to this treatment to a Bible.
5.
If this still goes to Court as a Social issue to be Judge for what we deem as a Hate-Crime , a Bible will be used to Swear on and now the Judge will squirm over how to appease Hooper and the Peaceful Muslims in America by exclusion of the bible from a Hate-Crime yet using a Bible to Swear on to assert a witness respect God and is telling the Truth.
Ohhhhhh the irony in this and what a paradox for CAIR, they can't give up the outrage once it's a Bible that's discovered , but if they do stop the protests it confirms all of what people have been warning us about Islam wanting to Dominate the Globe and subjecate any non-Muslim.