Friday, May 13, 2005


An Arkansas-based white supremacist group plans to protest a Holocaust remembrance event Sunday at Faneuil Hall and appear in nearby communities, prompting security preparations by officials in Lexington and Somerville, as well as in Boston, authorities confirmed yesterday. `'This white supremacist group has no business being in Boston,' said Mayor Thomas M. Menino. `'They should go home and let us have a service to commemorate the individuals who gave their life in the Holocaust. They have no place in Boston or anywhere in this world.' (Boston Globe, May 6, 2005)

Now while what Mumbles Menino said may be true, I find it ironic that the same liberals who champion free speech are so thin-skinned that they will stop at nothing to deny someone else theirs. We may be talking about Arkansas Nazis here, but until that is an offense that can result in loss of citizenship, they must be given the same American rights of protest as Act Up or any of the anti-war groups who carried signs through the streets calling our president a Nazi, war criminal, terrorist, Hitler, Bushsh*t, and the like. How many times has the left produced people like University of Colorado professor Ward Churchill who wrote after 9/11 that the people in the World Trade Center who, in some cases, incinerated or crushed to death in the imploding buildings, were "little Eichmanns" that had it coming. Nazi bureaucrat Adolf Eichmann, was a chief facilitator of "Hitler's Final Solution" leading to the execution of millions of Jews in concentration camps.

White Revolution's chairman, Billy Roper, said in a telephone interview last night that he and another group member from Arkansas plan to connect with supporters from New England this weekend. He said he hopes to draw about 100 people to protest near the Holocaust memorial for two to three hours Sunday afternoon despite not having a permit as the city requires for protests. 'One doesn't need a permit to practice the First Amendment,' Roper said. (Boston Globe, May 6, 2005)

Roper was hoping for a hundred; fifteen showed up. Oops.

As I previously said in one of my radio rants, while Churchill does have the right, within reason, to say whatever he wants, his paper should meet the modern definition of "hate speech." I mean, c'mon, if someone said that doctors burning to death in an abortion clinic had it coming, the proverbial waste-matter would hit the fan. But since he's an ultra-liberal tenured college professor bashing Jews, his words must never be silenced as political correctness only targets offenders as defined by liberals. Since college campii are supposedly places where all ideas are embraced (college conservatives and guest lecturers would disagree), speech no matter how controversial must be allowed. That is unless your name is Ann Coulter, David Horowitz, Larry Summers, Michelle Malkin, or any number of people whose views differ with the "progressive" mindset of professors and those with whom they indoctrinate through the power of their positions of authority. Those speakers are encouraged to be heckled and even potential assault is revered.

We also have college professors, many American and from the Middle East who are openly pro-Palestinian (thus anti-Israel), who consistently make anti-Semitic statements on campus and their speech is proudly protected. With that, I find it extremely ironic that a protest of, what turned out to be, 15 skinheads would bring out a hundred or more protesters and hundreds of Boston Police tasked with keeping them off of Arkansas' finest.

Ten to 15 members of the Arkansas-based White Revolution arrived in downtown Boston about an hour after the start of the event to commemorate the 60th anniversary of the liberation of Nazi concentration camps and the 10th anniversary of the New England Holocaust Memorial in Boston. The group was escorted by hundreds of police officers on foot, motorcycle and horseback, to a holding area across from the event. The officers, many in riot gear, formed a barricade between the protesters and about 100 people who angrily shouted at them to leave Boston.

`Today of all days, to have white supremacists come here from Arkansas, is most disappointing, disgusting, and I wish they'd go back home where the came from and bury themselves under the rocks that they crawled out from,' said Gov. Mitt Romney, who attended the Faneuil Hall event. (Boston Globe, May 8, 2005)

Now while Mitt Romney should watch to whom he tells to bury themselves under the rocks that they crawled out from, from all television reports that I saw, the ceremony within Faneuil Hall went on completely undisturbed by the events outside. No one shouted down any of the speakers inside, no one ran onto the stage and threw pies at the speakers. The event within the hall was given the respect it deserved. Funny, these same free speech liberals show none of that kind of respect to those they disagree with, yet they DEMAND their opinions be heard undisturbed.

At one point, the crowd opposing the white supremacists surged forward, causing police to use their batons to keep them at bay. These very same people who constantly preach non-violence were the ones who prompted the police into action. While brave male liberals will storm a stage and hurl pies at an Ann Coulter who must weigh all of 95 pounds, it took hundreds to make fifteen "White Revolution" idiots look like victims who needed to be gently escorted away.

They behaved and staged a peaceful protest. The left looked like the rabid animals they call everyone they disagree with. Free speech in liberal America is a myth. What else is new..?



Washington state cannot favor minority-owned firms in awarding road-building contracts because it hasn't proved minority contractors have faced discrimination, a three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled yesterday. Western States Paving of Vancouver, Wash., sued the state Department of Transportation, Clark County and the city of Vancouver after losing several road-paving contracts to minority-owned firms with higher bids. The company argued that federal law allowing states to give preference to minority firms was unconstitutional, and that the state did not properly follow federal guidelines.

A U.S. District Court judge ruled against Western States Paving, but the three-judge appellate panel disagreed in part. The federal guidelines -- part of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century -- were affirmed, but the panel disputed the way the state enforces them. The appellate panel sent the case back to U.S. District Court for a ruling on damages for Western States Paving.

The law allows use of race- and sex-based preferences in federally funded transportation contracts, but only if a state has proved there has been bias against minority contractors. The three-judge panel said the Department of Transportation did not provide enough evidence that minorities suffer or have ever suffered discrimination in transportation contracting. "We have previously expressed similar concerns about the haphazard inclusion of minority groups in affirmative-action programs ostensibly designed to remedy the effects of discrimination," the opinion said.

Gary Lofland, a Yakima attorney representing Western States Paving, said the company was pleased with the decision and believes the court followed existing law, calling for evidence of past discrimination before approving race-based preferences. "Throughout the proceeding, the state has acknowledged it never had that evidence," Lofland said. He said the lower-court discussion of damages would include the contracts cited in the lawsuit, plus any previous or subsequent instances in which Western States lost a bid. State officials declined to comment yesterday, saying they had not yet read the 9th Circuit opinion.


No comments: