Friday, May 29, 2009

Anti-White Bias: Ignoring Voter Intimidation

Updated 2009-05-31 (below original post).

Here's a typical example of the anti-White bias of our "civil society" as well as the increasingly brazen corruption of the Obama administration.

From the Washington Times: (emphasis mine)

Justice Department political appointees overruled career lawyers and ended a civil complaint accusing three members of the New Black Panther Party for Self-Defense of wielding a nightstick and intimidating voters at a Philadelphia polling place last Election Day, according to documents and interviews.

The incident - which gained national attention when it was captured on videotape and distributed on YouTube - had prompted the government to sue the men, saying they violated the 1965 Voting Rights Act by scaring would-be voters with the weapon, racial slurs and military-style uniforms.

Career lawyers pursued the case for months, including obtaining an affidavit from a prominent 1960s civil rights activist who witnessed the confrontation and described it as "the most blatant form of voter intimidation" that he had seen, even during the voting rights crisis in Mississippi a half-century ago.

The lawyers also had ascertained that one of the three men had gained access to the polling place by securing a credential as a Democratic poll watcher, according to interviews and documents reviewed by The Washington Times.

The career Justice lawyers were on the verge of securing sanctions against the men earlier this month when their superiors ordered them to reverse course, according to interviews and documents. The court had already entered a default judgment against the men on April 20.


To support its evidence, the government had secured an affidavit from Bartle Bull, a longtime civil rights activist and former aide to Sen. Robert F. Kennedy's 1968 presidential campaign. Mr. Bull said in a sworn statement dated April 7 that he was serving in November as a credentialed poll watcher in Philadelphia when he saw the three uniformed Panthers confront and intimidate voters with a nightstick.

Inexplicably, the government did not enter the affidavit in the court case, according to the files.

"In my opinion, the men created an intimidating presence at the entrance to a poll," he declared. "In all my experience in politics, in civil rights litigation and in my efforts in the 1960s to secure the right to vote in Mississippi ... I have never encountered or heard of another instance in the United States where armed and uniformed men blocked the entrance to a polling location."

Mr. Bull said the "clear purpose" of what the Panthers were doing was to "intimidate voters with whom they did not agree." He also said he overheard one of the men tell a white poll watcher: "You are about to be ruled by the black man, cracker."

He called their conduct an "outrageous affront to American democracy and the rights of voters to participate in an election without fear." He said it was a "racially motivated effort to limit both poll watchers aiding voters, as well as voters with whom the men did not agree."

The Washington Times has a good editorial discussing this case:
Protecting Black Panthers: The Obama administration ignores voter intimidation

The simple identity interchange test of double standards clearly proves this is yet another example of anti-White bias so beloved by our "civil society". If White men had been outside a polling station dressed like the defendents, intimidating Black voters and using language like "You are about to be ruled by the white man, nigger", then our "civil society", including the media, academia and the government, especially the Department of Justice, would've gone ballistic and almost certainly those White men would've been prosecuted to a felony conviction, including hate crimes, and would've served jail time. If the prosecution had failed, they would've found some "civil rights" law trick to overturn the explicit Fifth Amendment right of protection against double jeopardy, until they got their White men.

But naturally, if Blacks are the aggressors and Whites the victims, then the rules change. If Sonia Sotomayor is appointed to the Supreme Court, no doubt she'll happily enshrine just these sort of double standards as precedents in "CON-stitutional Law".

Yeah, we get it. F*** Whitey and f*** the color-blind society!

In looking through Google News, the only mainstream media hits are for the Washington Times, which broke the story, and Fox News, the neoconservative-dominated network. The rest of the hits are for some conservative web sites. The MSM has no problem quickly covering emerging stories that adhere to their preferred, politically correct narrative, but obviously they're reluctant to give this story oxygen, especially when the Obama administration is already busy engaging in obvious corruption, like screwing over the Chrysler bondholders by ignoring established bankruptcy law, only closing Chrylser dealers that were Republican donors, pressuring California to bow to SEIU demands or lose federal stimulus money, the bailouts and their unaccountability, porkulus money for favored clients like ACORN, the education ripoff complex, etc, etc, etc.

It will be interesting to see if the MSM gets around to covering this story over the next few days or if they try to squelch it like most other politically incorrect stories.

A unidentified lady at the Constitutional Convention in 1787:
“Well, Doctor, what have we got—a Republic or a Monarchy?”

Benjamin Franklin:
“A Republic, if you can keep it.”

We lost it.

Zimbabwe and South Africa, here we come!

Yes We Can!

UPDATE: 2009-05-31

Two days after my original post only ONE additional MSM article has appeared in Google News: this CNN story:

Let's see how the "professionals" at CNN cover the story:

May 28, 2009
Justice Department drops charges in voter intimidation case
Posted: 07:00 PM ET

From CNN Senior Producer Kevin Bohn

WASHINGTON (CNN) – The Justice Department is dropping charges against the New Black Panther Party for Self-Defense and two of its members who were allegedly involved in voter intimidation on Election Day at a Philadelphia, Pennsylvania polling station.

A Justice spokesman said the department decided to take this action after winning an injunction earlier this month against a third member, Samir Shabazz, that prevents him from ever brandishing a weapon outside a polling place again as he was charged with doing last November.

Shabazz was one of the three persons, along with the New Black Panther Party for Self-Defense, charged with voter intimidation last January in a lawsuit filed under the Voting Rights Act. Shabazz will not face any jail time or a fine.

“Claims were dismissed against the other defendants based on a careful assessment of the facts and the law,” DOJ spokesman Alejandro Miyar said in a statement. “The Department is committed to the vigorous prosecution of those who intimidate, threaten or coerce anyone exercising his or her sacred right to vote.”

On Election Day, two men in uniforms stood outside the polling station with one of them holding a police-style baton weapon and saying he was providing security there. Justice has alleged that person was Shabazz.

In January, Justice said in a criminal complaint that the chairman of the New Black Panther Party for Self-Defense confirmed its members were stationed at that location as part of a nationwide effort to deploy people at polling stations.

The Justice Department says The New Black Panther Party for Self-Defense is distinct from the well-known Black Panther Party of the 1960's.

UPDATE: Malik Shabaaz, chairman of the New Black Panther Party for Self-Defense, told CNN Friday that Samir Shabaaz is no longer a member of the organization, and that his organization does not support voter intimidation.

"We want to thank President Obama and his administration for dropping charges against us that were vindictively brought by the Bush administration," Malik Shabaaz told CNN. "We don't condone any type of illegal activity at polling stations."

Shabaaz said the members in Pennsylvania were not acting under the direction of the national party.

(Updated at 4:30 p.m. on Friday, May 29 with New Black Panther Party response)

Notice that this story completely ignored the affidavit given by Bartle Bull and it completely ignores the explicity anti-White racial facet of the incident. Even if CNN didn't know this aspect of the story when it was first published on the 28th, which is extremely doubtful, it certainly knew about it after the Washington Times published their detailed article on the 29th well before this story was updated at 4:30pm on the 29th, which was used to further undermine the real issue by quoting a New Black Panther Party leader acting as if the entire incident was some sort of illegitimate persecution of their poor, innocent selves.

Notice how this article frames the story as if Justice Department had won some great victory in "winning an injunction ... that prevents him from ever [sic, according to Washington Times story] brandishing a weapon outside a polling place again ...".

Then the DOJ spokesmen is given the floor so he can TELL us that "The Department is committed to the vigorous prosecution of those who intimidate, threaten or coerce anyone exercising his or her sacred right to vote.". Hahahahaha!!! More bulls*** constructed reality! That is exactly what they are NOT doing by treating this serious attack against our supposed civil society so lightly BECAUSE Black activists were culpable. The critical point: would they have behaved the same if the identities were interchanged between Black and White? Answer: No way!!!

This is just business as usual for our corrupt, worthless and elite-and-corporate-interest-controlled MSM.

Hopefully "change we can believe in" is coming soon.

No comments:

Post a Comment