Tuesday, September 29, 2009

Shepard's Killer: Dislikes Gays and "No Remorse for Matt "
Al Q Uses Body Cavity Bomb in Attempt on Saudi Prince
Secret Service Eyeing Facebook Survey on Killing Prez
AP: Alleged NY Bomb Plotter to Be Arraigned in Bklyn
Anti-Disability Attacks By Gangs Preceded Mom's Murder Suicide in UK
ELF Issues Warning (Hat Tip AH)
NYPD Hate Crime Unit Investigating Anti-Gay Incident After Initial Response Questioned
Tx Gay Group's Office Attacked
CA Resolution Condemns Hate Speech
Anti-Gay Hate Alleged in ON
Team America Founder Slams Civil Rights Group Over Immigration
SPLC Report: Suburban NY Pols Fanned Anti-Immigration Hate
CA College Teacher Quits After Hate Letter Found
Video: Nazi's March in Riverside
"God Hate Fags" Preachers Protest NY Church & Temples

Sunday, September 27, 2009

New Video 0f '95 OKC Bombing Aftermath Released
8 Neo-Nazis March in Calif
Center Director on Census Taker Death on CNN's Anderson Cooper
(Transcript Below)
MN Family Grapples With Hate Crime Accusations
Latino Deli Vandalism in the Bronx, NY
Dead Census Worker Remembered in KY
NY Plot Examined
Conservative Pulitzer Writer Safire Dead at 79
Harvey Milk Day Rejected By OC Calif. School Board
Center Director Discussed KY Census Taker Death on CNN's Anderson Cooper 360
Let's dig deeper. Joining us now Brian Levin, director of the Center for the Study of Hate and Extremism in California State University in San Bernardino. Brian, we don't know why somebody would have killed this man or exactly what happened to this man. What do you see now given the AP's report about duct tape and gags and the word "Fed" being scrawled on his body? What are the options in terms of what could have happened?
BRIAN LEVIN, DIRECTOR, CENTER FOR THE STUDY OF HATE AND EXTREMISM: Great question. And initially, look, we're looking at several things. Someone with just a severe violent disorder, could be just an amorphous anger.
An anti-government extremist -- that's another person that's looking more and more likely. But again, there's a lot that we don't know.
Third, it could be someone who's an illegal drug runner, pot farmer in the rural area who felt that this guy was somehow getting too close to their illegal operations.
And lastly, it could be someone with some personal animus against Mr. Sparkman who is trying to cover it up by suggesting a political motivation for it. So those are, you know, the four basic things we could look at. But at this point, this was such a symbolic and personal anger, that I'm led to lean towards someone who has severe anti-government feelings, perhaps someone who's seeking revenge. Maybe they were audited or had some problem with some kind of government official.
COOPER: Ok, to display the victim in this way seems, I mean, telling one way or another. I mean, there's clearly something to that.
LEVIN: It's a lynching [corrected], I mean, quite simply, it's a lynching. The issue is was this something that, you know, is a politically-motivated lynching? Or was there some other nefarious personal motive playing into this picture here? And, again, you could have someone who's an illegal operator of a pot farm who is also an anti-government extremist.
But again, I mean, this was a highly symbolic act. And if these facts that are alleged are true, it causes me to lean towards some kind of anti-government extremist. But, again, everything's on the table. We let the evidence take us where we're going, not the analyst.
COOPER: Brian Levin, I appreciate you being on. There is a lot we do not know. We're being very cautious on what we're reporting on this and what we are saying. Brian, I appreciate your time, thank you.

Thursday, September 24, 2009

CO Man Faces Additional Charge in Alleged Al Q Bomb Plot
NC Terror Deft. Allegedly Targeted Quantico Marine Base
Jordanian Teen Arrested in Alleged Plot Against Texas Office Tower
IL Man Arrested in Federal Car Bomb Case
Census Worker's Killing Prompts Concern, Victim Overcame Illness
Justice Ginsburg Hospitalized
G20 Protests in PA
Civil Rights Reporter Gets 500K Genius Grant
NY Bldg Vandalism Investigated As A Hate Crime
Feds File Conspiracy to Use Mass Weapon Charge Against Zazi in CO
Authorities Investigate Hanging of Census Worker in KY
Hate Crime Murder Victim's Parent's Share Story at USF
Injunction in MA Homophobic Hate Case

Wednesday, September 23, 2009

UK, US, Canada Walk Out of Ahmad Speech
Pres. Obama UN Speech: All Nations Have Responsibility
Libya's Gadhafi Rambles at UN
Anti-Semitism Charges Hamper UN Nominee
Jury Selected in Controversial UT Case

Friday, September 18, 2009

25 Dead In Pakistan Suicide Bombing
Iran Official & Opposition Rallies; Ahmad. Says Holocaust "Myth"
Suspect Sought in Transgender Murder in Los Angeles
NSM to March in Riverside Against "Illegal Immigrants" on 9/26
Mary Travers, Singer, Civil Rights Advocate Dies at 72

Thursday, September 17, 2009

FBI Searches CO Home in Al Q Probe
Rape Charges Against 4 NYC Men At Hofstra Univ. Men A Hoax
Troubles Mount for Acorn
FBI Investigating Cracker Barrel Beating As Possible Hate Crime
FL Authorities Find No Threat to Teen Over Conversion to Christianity
2 UT Neo-Nazis Busted After Hi Speed Chase
FL Commissioner Was KKK Leader
OR Man Gets Life for Al Q Training Camp
Al Q Plotter Killed in Somalia
Indonesia Al Q Leader Dead
Internet Hate Undergoes Psych Eval
Militia Leaders Make Alaska Push (Hat Tip MM)
Eco Saboteurs Target Hummers
Speculation Mounts That Yale Murder Could Have Animal Rights Angle

Friday, September 11, 2009

Appeals Court Overturns Eco-Terror Conviction


A 9/11 Remembrance: One Extraordinary Life Out of Many


A 9/11 Remembrance: One Extraordinary Life Out of Many

Brian Levin, J.D.

Brian Levin, J.D.

Posted: September 11, 2009 05:10 AM
On 9/11 the worst terrorist attack perpetrated against America left over 2970 dead, including 343 firefighters and 72 law enforcement officers. The full story, however, is not about hijacked airliners, intelligence failures, fanatic murderers or conspiracy theorists. Its about lives well lived that were cut painfully short and the endurance of the human spirit. One way to begin to understand the magnitude of a numbing mass tragedy like 9/11, is not in numbers, but rather, in stories. Today’s focus here is one story of many that demand to be told. One life. One set of hearts that were unfairly broken. Out of the mosaic of thousands of colorful remembered lives today are countless stories of loves lost and heroes big and small. Too often at the wrenching intersection of good and evil, we expend too much time on the latter—but not today.
The only thing Staten Island native son FDNY Lt. Chuck Margiotta didn’t achieve in his 44 years was a long life. As his young daughter clutched her father’s service helmet at a New York Catholic church eight years ago she heard from another kind of hero, her schoolteacher Uncle Mike, who from that day to this diligently watches over his extended family like a lion over his pride. Mike Margiotta summed up the spirit of this day for many Americans:
According to Webster, "bravery" is defined as combining confidence with firm resolution in the presence of danger. "Courageous" however is more than brave! It adds a moral element. The courageous man steadily encounters perils to which he may be keenly sensitive at the call of duty. At no time do either of these definitions mention being fearless. Fearless is just the inability to recognize danger.
On September 11th, Chuck had fears…recognized them…called home…and then performed his job with Bravery and Courage; as did all our firefighters and police officers. We thank them all and love them all for being heroes every day.
Packed into those compressed decades of Chuck Margiotta’s time on Earth were a love of people and an unquenchable, if not dizzying, zeal for accomplishment. It’s hard to believe everything this veteran firefighter crammed into his way too short life: Ivy League football stand out at Brown University, substitute public school teacher, church leader, philanthropist, youth sports coach, television and movie actor and stuntman (Hannibal, Malcolm X, Law and Order), family man, and don’t forget-gardener and voracious reader. His brother Mike observed to a reporter, “He wasn't happy unless he was doing four things at once, plus one more thing."
It was that one more thing that took him from us. On 9/11 the devoted married father of a beautiful son, 11, and daughter, 13, had just completed a 24 hour shift in Brooklyn filling in for another firefighter. As he was safely headed home, he saw the orange flames engulf the World Trade Center, turned around, and instinctively went to the nearest firehouse. There he immediately hopped on to Staten Island’s Rescue 5 FDNY truck as it sped to save civilians from the chaotic scene. Right before he reached the inferno he phoned his mother to tell her what turned out to be his last words to her: “Ma, it's bad, I love you. I'll call you later."
Even before 9/11 Chuck was a beloved fixture on the family friendly borough of Staten Island. After impressing Staten Islanders with his football prowess at Monsignor Farrell High School, Chuck attended Brown University, easily one of the nation’s most selective universities. After helping Brown win its first of only two Ivy League football championships in 1976, he graduated in 1979 with two degrees—one in English and one in Sociology. He and his team eventually ended up in the Brown Sports Hall of Fame. Like he always promised, he came back to New York to be a firefighter and graduated, not surprisingly, at the top of his 1981 FDNY class.
He left his big footprints all over New York City. Twenty years as a firefighter, fifteen in Harlem, with several years as a running back for the acclaimed FDNY football team. Even after he rose in rank to Lieutenant, he ruffled a few bosses because he was more comfortable with the rank and file folks.
For twenty years, on top of his fire duties, he substitute taught at least two days a week. He was also a private investigator for two decades. He was CYO Athletic Director at his parish and coached kids in four different sports. He was a key organizer of innumerable charity events. He did acting and stunt work across New York in numerous television and movie productions, while still finding time to plant a garden at his firehouse.
As busy as he was, he was devoted to his family. He’d check on his parents—who lived next door, just about every day to make sure they were all right. The hole in his parents’ hearts never really healed. His dad misses the family vacations in the mountains, watching sports on television, as well as the tailgate gatherings at Giants games. His mom even misses cleaning up the constant stream of pretzel crumbs he would leave after helping with chores or home repairs. He adored his wife and kids.
Chuck Margiotta at about 6 feet and over 200 muscled pounds, was simply put, one of those old school New Yorkers who really was bigger than life--the kind of stunningly handsome renaissance guy who is better suited for a lyric by his musical idol, Bruce Springsteen, than this short web posting.
While terrorists, steel, and concrete extinguished his life; Chuck’s spirit, like those of others lost that day, is very much alive in his parents, wife, kids and others. A garden he planted flourished, and years later his bother Mike, raises thousands in a scholarship in his name for a deserving student at his old high school. His children and nephew and niece all went to college and follow Chuck’s zeal for education, music, and public service. Violence harms the innocent, but as shown here it does not define them. As Bobby Kennedy said the night of Martin Luther King’s death, who coincidently shares Chuck’s January 15thbirthday:
Let us dedicate ourselves to what the Greeks wrote so many years ago: to tame the savageness of man and make gentle the life of this world.

Thursday, September 10, 2009

Your Mother Should Know: 50 Most P0werful Women in Biz
Charlie Sheen: 9/11 Is A Fraud
Buffalo News: It Was A Hate Crime
MI Black on Muslim Attack Called Hate Crime
Media War Over Gaza Civilian Casualty Report
Report 429 Women/Minors Killed in Gaza War
NGO Monitor Alleges Bias of Group Over Nazi Memorabilia Collector
Full Text of President Obama's Health Care Speech

Complete Segment of Van Jones Intvw on MSNBC Feb. 19, 2003 Abrams Report

WEDGEWOOD: Well, in a common sense way it's very much like assisted suicide. There's a very strong principle in the law of war that whether or not you agree with the purpose of the war, you should still allow the war to be fought the right way, and the distinction between military targets and civilians is fundamental. So, it is a war crime to deliberately place civilians around a military target in order to shield that target. It's not a legitimate way of protesting the purpose of a war.

ABRAMS: Van Jones, what do you make of that?

VAN JONES, ATTY, PEACE AND JUSTICE NETWORK: Well, first of all, I disagree. There are two things that we have to be clear about. First of all, there is no specific provision of the War Crimes Act that these people are violating. So, just because Rumsfeld doesn't like it or somebody in that White House doesn't like it doesn't make it unlawful.

So, first of all, we have to be very clear that they aren't violating any law that pertains to them. The Geneva Accords apply to states. The U.S. War Crimes Act applies to individuals. They aren't violating any provision of that.

Number two, even if there were a law created for this purpose, it would be unconstitutional. These people are expressing their First Amendment rights to the expression of association in travel.

Third, even if such a law were not unconstitutional, which this law doesn't even exist, if one were to create it, and it were to pass constitutional muster, these people have a defense and the defense is the defense of necessity, the necessity to prevent a greater harm, which in this case is the murder of, you know, thousands of innocent Iraqis.

ABRAMS: You know the necessity defense would be rejected, though, right? I mean, let's assume for a minute that you know that no court, no jury would accept the necessity defense...

JONES: But there's no law that they can be charged with violating...

ABRAMS: Separate issue...

JONES: They're not violating...

ABRAMS: Right.

JONES: ... they're not violating any U.S. law now. And one problem that we have...

JONES: ... just to finish -- we -- you know, Rumsfeld wants to throw out the international law to attack Iraq, he wants to throw out domestic law to attack U.S. citizens, and he's wrong on both counts.

ABRAMS: All right, go -- I know both of you want to jump in. Go ahead Jay.

JAY SEKULOW, AMERICAN CTR. FOR LAW & JUSTICE: Yes, let me say this first, there's no First Amendment issue here. I do a lot of work with the First Amendment and this is not a First Amendment case. They're overseas, they're in a hostile territory and basically, they're giving aid and comfort to the enemy, which, by the way, under the definitions of law is treason, so that's number one.

Number two, the Geneva Convention states, and I'm going to read from Article 28, Section 4, in international conflicts civilians may not be used to protect areas from military operations. If...

SEKULOW: If the leadership of these groups is working in hand, toe-to-toe so to speak, with the leadership of Iraq, I think they do have Geneva conflict violations here...

SEKULOW: ... and let me say third, with regard to the issue of enemy combatants here, if, in fact, they take any aggressive action, I mean aggressive, it could be, you know, trying to block tanks entering into Baghdad, U.S. troops involved, they are then putting themselves at risk to be enemy combatants. And as we've talked about on this program before, that raises a whole host of issues and the fact that they're U.S. citizens does not shield them.

JONES: Well first of all, the government has already taken off the table whether or not the human shields are combatants. They've already declared them to be noncombatants, so that's off the table. The other thing, which you have to deal with is you're misreading the Geneva Accords. What you just read applies to states. It does not...


JONES: ... apply to individual...

SEKULOW: But it also applies...

ABRAMS: All right...

ABRAMS: ... let me let the professor answer that one. Hold on -- that issue, I'll get back to you, Mr. Jones, I promise. Ruth Wedgewood, what about that? I mean, people do interpret the Geneva Convention as applying to states and not individuals, so the argument goes, according to...

WEDGEWOOD: That's not right.

ABRAMS: ... Mr. Jones, you can't apply it to individuals.

WEDGEWOOD: Treaties are signed by states, but they govern everybody who's on the territory of the state signatory and you cannot shield a military. Whatever your motivation, however...

WEDGEWOOD: ... conscientious, you can't shield a military target with a human...

JONES: You're leaving the noun out. A state can't do it, but individual...

SEKULOW: No, but individuals working with the state that are working with...


SEKULOW: ... are violating the Geneva Convention.

ABRAMS: But Jay...

ABRAMS: But Jay, the problem -- we're going to take a break here, but I'm going to ask Jay about this after the break. The problem is and this may sound like a legal technicality, but it's important...


ABRAMS: ... is how do you relate the fact -- you have to prove that they're working with Iraq as opposed to working with some, you know, group out there who wants to stick these people in these sensitive sites to prevent some war. I think they're going to have a hard time with that. They may not have a hard time, though, charging these -- I think they might have an easier time charging them with treason. Anyway, we're going to come back. More on this topic, human shields, take a break.


ABRAMS: Coming up, why City Council should stop wasting their time passing resolutions about Iraq. And who will be charged with crimes if and when the American human shields get killed in Iraq, and what if they make it back alive? That's coming up.



RUMSFELD: These are not tactics of war. They are crimes of war. Deploying human shields is not a military strategy, it's murder, the violation of the laws of armed conflict and a crime against humanity, and it will be treated as such.


ABRAMS: All right, it's obvious that that applies to Saddam Hussein. If Saddam Hussein uses human shields and he's captured alive, he's going to be tried as a war criminal, as will anyone who works with him in that effort. The question we're asking hereis, what about these Americans, these Europeans who are sending over these American and European human shields?

JONES: They're heroes.

ABRAMS: Could that -- well, all right.

JONES: They're not criminals, they're heroes.

ABRAMS: All right, Van, before I even get to the intro, Van Jones is jumping in, describing them as heroes. But Ruth Wedgewood, look, apart from the fact that almost everyone doesn't view them as heroes at all, and everyone in this country particular views the idea of them getting into soldiers' ways -- soldiers' way in Iraq is extremely disturbing to say the least. Is it a crime, again, Van makes the point that generally this applies to states. I want to know can these organizers, yes or no, be charged with some sort of war crime for sending these people over to Iraq to serve as human shields?

WEDGEWOOD: Well, it's new territory, but what you keep in mind that the actions they're taking are going to be carried out in Iraq. So it's not simply federal, criminal law that would apply, whatever the 1996 War Crimes Act provides or not, there's going to be a war crimes tribunal in Iraq. And the dilemma that they put servicemen in is the attempt to force them to hold their fire on a legitimate military target by putting themselves as a moral target in front of that...

ABRAMS: Yes...

WEDGEWOOD: ... valid military target...

ABRAMS: ... and Jay, you and I talked yesterday about the idea of the human shields themselves. I was just -- I just felt that they should be charged with something if they make it back to this country and they in any way interfere with our soldiers there. But what do you make of this issue of the organizers, the people who are in effect deploying them there?

SEKULOW: I think the reason it could fall within the Geneva Convention and the War Crimes Act generally is the fact that we know that if American citizens go to Iraq that the Iraqi regime under Saddam Hussein is not going to let them just run throughout the land. They're going to control where they are, the government will deploy them, and the leadership, then, of these groups is in cohort. They're working with them and that violates the Geneva Convention.

Remember, it was the illegal underground in some of the Nazi cases where the Nazis had not just their armed troops and their uniform troops that were tried in the war crime, the war tribunal...

ABRAMS: Van Jones, that's a very interesting point, and I think a good point, and that is that Saddam Hussein is going to in effect be signing off on wherever these human shields are going and that sounds to me like they're in cahoots with Saddam, war crime.

JONES: Well that's not -- my understanding is that they actually are not in cahoots with Saddam Hussein. Why are these young people there? First of all...

ABRAMS: But that's a separate issue...

ABRAMS: It is a separate issue of why they're there.

JONES: ... the young people are not there to support Saddam Hussein. The young people are not there because they're fans of Saddam Hussein.

ABRAMS: But why they're going is not the issue...

ABRAMS: It is not the issue. If they are there...

ABRAMS: ... and they're interfering with the soldiers, the question I want to know, are the people who are sending them there, who are organizing this, who are deploying them, Jay makes a very good point -- that is Saddam Hussein controls this country. They are not going to be able to walk at their leisure on the streets of Baghdad.

JONES: What we do know about -- right now this is our conjecture -- what we do know about these young people is this. They are the only voice of sanity that we have heard for quite a while in this debate. We have been crushed between the rush to violence by Bush and the rush to violence...

ABRAMS: You're not answering my question...

JONES: And what these young people represent is a third way out for the whole human...

SEKULOW: But this is not a First Amendment case.

SEKULOW: This isn't about the First Amendment.

JONES: Well first of all...

SEKULOW: They're not exercising First Amendment rights in Iraq. I assure you, they don't have a First Amendment freedom of speech protection.

SEKULOW: They're interfering with possible military action, and that is serious and is criminal.

WEDGEWOOD: Dan, if I can add, you're not allowed to veto a war by shielding military targets.

JONES: It's not a question...

WEDGEWOOD: If Saddam is shooting at us, and we can't shoot back because some unhappy young soul has put himself in front of the military target, that is...

JONES: Well Professor Wedgewood...

WEDGEWOOD: ... asymmetric conflict, it's not considered...

JONES: Professor Wedgewood...

JONES: ... when I was a student of yours at Yale, you were a lot more precise with your language than you are on this program. You and I both know that the state of -- the United States has to consider proportionality and necessity when there are civilians who are potentially targets in a U.S. bombing run or...

ABRAMS: Hang on -- wait a second...

ABRAMS: Let him finish.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Let's talk law.

JONES: The presence of civilians does not prevent the -- any military action. It does raise the question of proportionality and necessity.

ABRAMS: All right...

JONES: The reality is that the reason that Rumsfeld is so upset is that he knows that he is going to be launching...

ABRAMS: All right...

JONES: ... missiles at civilian targets.

ABRAMS: All right, let me...

ABRAMS: ... let professor...

ABRAMS: Let me let your...

ABRAMS: ... let me let your professor respond because I'm almost out of time. Professor, tell your student what the real deal is here.

WEDGEWOOD: No, in real life, indeed, you have to make a judgment about proportionality, i.e. the relative military value of the target and the relative damage to civilians every time you target. But by trying to up the ante and putting, say, 500 civilians to shield a tank...

JONES: It's not a crime.

WEDGEWOOD: ... it's weighting that unfairly and...

JONES: That's not a crime.

WEDGEWOOD: ... private action is covered under the laws of war. It's customary...

SEKULOW: It's certainly treason.

WEDGEWOOD: ... law as well as treaty law.

SEKULOW: ... giving aid and comfort to the enemy...

SEKULOW: ... which is a standard of treason.

JONES: Not under the...

ABRAMS: I think it may be...

ABRAMS: I -- well, maybe not, but I think...

ABRAMS: ... it may actually become treason...

ABRAMS: I think it may become treason as Jay Sekulow points out. All right, Ruth Wedgewood, Jay Sekulow, Van Jones, thank you all very much...

SEKULOW: Thanks Dan. ABRAMS: ... for coming on the program. We appreciate it. (CROSSTALK)WEDGEWOOD: Bye Dan.