Government priority and the Return of the White Knights

In an America divided by racial tensions , it seems to some we are seeing a massive resurgence in the so-called " white supremacist " movement , made up of various neo-Nazi terrorist groups and of course , the notorious White Knights of the Ku Klux Klan.Shouldn't the Bush administration be concentrating on domestic policy and be mopping up these thugs instead of pursuing war with foreign nations ?

http://www.bozemandailychronicle.com...ws/01alene.txt

http://www.adl.org/hate-patrol/njs/neonazi.asp

Mind giving sources for this information and some details?

Unless they start carrying out acts of aggression on other people, they have a right to free speech. We can disagree with them all we want, but if somebody wants to badmouth any other race, it's their liberty. So these thugs can't be "mopped up", even if we think they're wrong, because nothing prohibits them from demonstrating.

I agree with Sasquatch here. (For once :p ) I however do want to say that I hate these people with all my heart.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sasquatch

Unless they start carrying out acts of aggression on other people, they have a right to free speech. We can disagree with them all we want, but if somebody wants to badmouth any other race, it's their liberty. So these thugs can't be "mopped up", even if we think they're wrong, because nothing prohibits them from demonstrating.

---

Yep. Legally speaking, the things they say is equal to what people say about the president or anyone else in the world. Morally speaking, it's a different story, but our government should very rarely act as the morals police. If that were changed, there's an excellent possibility that we'd end up being forced to follow someone else's moral code in which wife beating is ok or something like that.

For once, I agree with Sasquatch, for more than once with Nikotine. I mean, well...They have the right to be as stupid as they want if they do not engage in violent action. Of course, neonazi groups at least do engage in violent action...so do you think this racist beatings should be prosecuted more than other violent actions made under a different motivation, such as robbery or gang fights? I personllay think it should, because you know, if you are going to get hurt, you probably did something against someone who may hate you, or you simply refused to hand in the money when threatened. So you know, with other kind of crimes you can somehow attempt to do something to avoid them, while with hate crimes the only things that determines if you get beaten or not is the colour of your skin, and it's not like you can do much about that.

Also, as a little anecdote not directly directed to this, in a city close to Barcelona (in Spain) called Girona- wich is nearly a town, a very nice one, by the way- there is a neonazi group...with a black person. The guy walks around with swastikas everywhere and a tattoo in his arm where you can read "God, forgive me for being black". It's so pathetic I can't even hate him, I just pity his idiocy.

Ok, that's messed up. What I find fun is arguing with neo-nazi's around here. We get surpremicists like other places have punk groupies. Just a bunch of stupid kids rebelling against mommy and daddy, or other such teenie B.S.

Anyways, we get annoying wannabe whatevers, and they like starting fights, and I like ending those fights. Great way to relieve stress and generally pick up my day. Almost feel bad about it. And the problem is, now, I can't get them to fight me anymore :cry:. Anyone know a racist S.O.B. that I can beat up?

As for Bush&Co.- with all the CRAP that they do, are you honestly expecting them to do ANYTHING right... EVER!?!

Quote:

---

Ok, that's messed up. What I find fun is arguing with neo-nazi's around here. We get surpremicists like other places have punk groupies. Just a bunch of stupid kids rebelling against mommy and daddy, or other such teenie B.S.

---

Are you calling punks and white supremicists the same?

One might consider me to be a 'punk', but I am most certainly not a racist, nor am I rebelling against mommy and daddy. I think you should reconsider your thoughts on this sub groupd of people.

Quote:

---

As for Bush&Co.- with all the CRAP that they do, are you honestly expecting them to do ANYTHING right... EVER!?!

---

No.

White supremacists, neo-nazis and skinheads make me sick.

However, they have an inalienable right to make complete sausages out of themselves if that's what pleases them.
The moment they start hurting anyone, though, they cross the line and become illegal. Hopefully it won't come to that.

Sadly, though, I'd rather live in a world with white supremacists and black supremacists than a world where people's social and political views are censored because some people find them repulsive. I don't believe in taking away rights and freedoms because I disagree with what is being said; I do, however, think it's fine to remove those rights from groups that are either causing harm or are out to cause harm.
Such is the case in Germany, where displaying nazi or neo-nazi regalia is illegal.

Wow, somebody agrees with me. Two people. And those two people!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by udsuna

As for Bush&Co.- with all the CRAP that they do, are you honestly expecting them to do ANYTHING right... EVER!?!

---

Regardless of your opinion of the Bush administration, they are obligated not to do anything about groups like these. Whether you think it's right or wrong, or should be allowed or should be punished, these supremacist groups are exercising a Constitutional right and cannot be stopped until they cross a boundary.

As Big D said, it's better to live somewhere where we have the freedom to form groups like that than to live in a place where there isn't that freedom available.

As for "hate crimes", the extra punishments are "thought crimes". They're not punishing just what people do, they're punishing what they're thinking when the do it. If I go kill a guy on the street, I should get the same punishment no matter what color the guy is or why I killed him.

The thing with hate crimes, though, is they are generally perceived as being especially brutal and cruel. If you get in a fight with a black man and you wind up shooting him dead, the punishment would likely be more lenient than if you had chained him to the back of your truck and drove down a dirt road.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DocFrance

The thing with hate crimes, though, is they are generally perceived as being especially brutal and cruel. If you get in a fight with a black man and you wind up shooting him dead, the punishment would likely be more lenient than if you had chained him to the back of your truck and drove down a dirt road.

---

I assume you're referring to that incident back in 1995 ? You know , with the mentally retarded black man was beaten and gagged by a gang of seemingly normal teenagers before being chained to their pickup truck and dragged something like 9 miles down a road.When the police came , they recovered him in pieces ...

Sheer evil.

The way I see it, it doesn't matter if it's a "hate crime" or not, the crime should be illegal, not the motive. If it's particularly cruel, then they can add more charges, but it shouldn't matter who it's against, in terms of skin color.

As far as I had heard, that black guy in Texas that was dragged to death was only attacked by two guys, and both of them got life imprisonment.

First off, James Byrd was attacked by three men. Two of them recieved the death penalty, and one recieved life in prison.

The nation was outraged at his death--this is only right, and the nation should be outraged.

Which is why I want to know--would someone please look up the name Ken Tillery, from Jasper, Texas, and tell me why the nation wasn't outraged then?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sasquatch

The way I see it, it doesn't matter if it's a "hate crime" or not, the crime should be illegal, not the motive. If it's particularly cruel, then they can add more charges, but it shouldn't matter who it's against, in terms of skin color.

As far as I had heard, that black guy in Texas that was dragged to death was only attacked by two guys, and both of them got life imprisonment.

---

OK, say you're of a certain race. One day, another person of your race is beaten to a bloody pulp by a person of another race. The man is charged with murder and put away. However, this happens several more times - members of your race brutally murdered by members of the other race. How do you think you would feel? I would be pretty afraid to interact with any of the other race. If I were the other race, I'd be afraid of some retribution from the first race.

The intent of hate crimes is most often not to kill a person of a certain group, but rather to instill fear and paranoia in the other members of that group. That is why hate crimes should be considered particularly heinous. They do nothing but cause racial tension.