PDA

View Full Version : Vote at your own risk? DOJ Dismisses Charges Against Black Panthers



blueyonder
05-27-2009, 08:31 PM
THIS IS UNREAL!!!

http://www.thenextright.com/mikeroman/vote-at-your-own-risk-doj-dismisses-charges-against-black-panthers

This past Presidential Election, uniformed, baton swinging thugs were caught on video intimidating voters at a polling place in Philadelphia while hurling racial threats and insults at both black and white voters (see here, here). After investigating the incident, and before the change in Administrations, the Civil Rights Division of DOJ filed a complaint against the New Black Panther Party and several of its members for violations of Section 11(b) of the Voting Rights Act. That Section prohibits any “attempt to intimidate, threaten, or coerce” any voter and those aiding voters.

Neither the New Black Panther Party nor its members responded to the complaint. As a result, the federal district court ordered the Division to file a motion for a default judgment against the Party and its members. When a defendant doesn’t respond to a lawsuit, this is what happens. By this time, however, the new Administration had taken charge. Instead of filing for a default judgment against the Party and its members, the Division VOLUNTARILY moved to dismiss the charges against the Black Panther Party and two of its members.

In other words, the Division voluntarily dismissed an uncontentested lawsuit against an individual who, by the terms of its own complaint, had “made statements containing racial threats and racial insults at both black and white individuals” and who “made menacing and intimidating gestures, statements, and movements directed at individuals who were present to aid voters.” One member, Jerry Jackson, is an elected member of the Philadelphia Democratic Committee and was a credentialed poll watcher. (See Jackson in an interview with FoxNews here).

The Division sought relief only against one member who carried and waived a baton on election day, and sought only to enjoin him from “displaying a weapon within 100 feet of any open polling loaction” in Philadelphia. Nothing about ”statements containing racial threats and racial insults” or ”menacing and intimidating gestures, statements, and movements directed at individuals who were present to aid voters.”

These actions raise a number of troubling questions. For example, why did the Civil Rights Division voluntarily dismiss a lawsuit that they had effectively already won, against defendants who were physically threatening voters? Is the Division concerned that this dismissal will encourage the New Black Panther Party, or other groups, to intimidate voters? Why did the Division seek such limited relief against a defendant who was actually carrying and brandishing a weapon at a polling station on election day?

NJCardFan
05-28-2009, 12:48 AM
Only a black group could get away with this. Had a white hate group done this you would be hearing about it for centuries. These double standards are getting sickening. I guess if I had to vote in that district I'd have to take my H&K .40 cal.

Japandroid
05-28-2009, 05:49 AM
Only a black group could get away with this. Had a white hate group done this you would be hearing about it for centuries. These double standards are getting sickening. I guess if I had to vote in that district I'd have to take my H&K .40 cal.
You might even be able to bag a few darkies on your way to the polling place! Yeehaw!

Lars1701a
05-28-2009, 09:17 AM
You might even be able to bag a few darkies on your way to the polling place! Yeehaw!

Dont respond to the very factual first part of his statment:rolleyes:

I live in this area and remember it well, I dont know why they dropped it.

Zathras
05-28-2009, 11:37 AM
You might even be able to bag a few darkies on your way to the polling place! Yeehaw!

Gee, what a surprise. The DUmbass Japandroid (good name for an Obamabot) has no problem with voter intimidation as long as it's done by people of color. If the people in question had been white he would have been screaming his lungs out in protest. Typical hypocritical liberal with his head up his ass.

Lager
05-28-2009, 03:43 PM
You might even be able to bag a few darkies on your way to the polling place! Yeehaw!

Instead of the standard, template du "race card" answer, why don't you show some original thinking and tell us what you think of the case? I saw nothing racist in his response. I'm guessing that if the Obama supporters were made up of a white motorcycle gang conducting that kind of intimidation, his response might be the same.

noonwitch
05-28-2009, 04:12 PM
It blows my mind that the Black Panthers enjoy such sympathy among liberals.


When I was in college, I had to read Against Our Wills: Men, Women and Rape, by Susan Brownmiller. It's a feminist classic. In the book, she writes about Eldridge Cleaver, who stated that he felt the ultimate revenge against white people is to rape white women. That in itself is offensive enough, but he continued to say that because he feared reprisals, he practiced on black females, first, but never got around to raping the white women.


How any woman, white or black, can put Eldridge Cleaver in the same category as MLK or Malcolm X as civil rights leaders, is beyond me. It's probably not even fair to put Martin and Malcolm in the same category, but Malcolm had revised some of his "white devil" talking points, which is why Elijah Muhammed (and probably Louis F) had him killed.

lacarnut
05-28-2009, 04:21 PM
You might even be able to bag a few darkies on your way to the polling place! Yeehaw!

No, but I would bag your dumb ass in a NY second if you threathened me. Punk.

Odysseus
05-28-2009, 08:27 PM
You might even be able to bag a few darkies on your way to the polling place! Yeehaw!

Let me make sure that I understand your position: A group of thugs block the door to a polling place, brandish weapons and threaten voters and a person on this site expresses concern for her own personal safety if she'd had to vote there, and states that she'd have carried a weapon for protection, and of the two, you find the latter objectionable but have no problem with the former. Does that about sum it up?

NJCardFan
05-29-2009, 12:47 AM
You might even be able to bag a few darkies on your way to the polling place! Yeehaw!
Exactly right. Especially those animals, and that's what they are, animals, intimidating voters. Pull a club out, fine. Then I pull this out:
http://remtek.com/arms/hk/civ/usp/40/usp40.gif
Or better yet, I'll keep it fair and pull this out:
http://www.policespecials.com/images/pr24ebaton.gif
After a 15 second fight, those goons would be picking up their teeth while I go in and vote for the whitest person on the ballot.

AlmostThere
05-30-2009, 01:40 AM
Tonight O'Reilly interviewed a civil rights attorney who I think we can agree is not a right wing zealot. They discussed this issue. I'm sure it will be on-line shortly if not already. And this lawyer was pissed off too. "MLK and Bobby Kennedy didn't die so some thugs can block a voting place entrance with weapons", or something to that effect.

CorwinK
05-30-2009, 06:31 PM
For the same reason that the Duke Lacrosse case was so hyped in the media.

For the same reason that kids learn about Martin Luther King in school, and not George Washington.

For the same reason firefighter tests are dropped when minorities don't pass them.

It was dropped because you are witnessing the gradual state-sanctioning of anti-white discrimination and racial double standards. The government, the media, and public schools are all in on it, so brace yourself; it's only going to get worse.

didn't something similar to this happen back in the 30's when Hitler was trying to come to power and more so after he did?? correct me if im wrong but he eventually had an entire nation hunting the Jews and blaming every problem the country had on them...thus making anti-Jew discrimination ok. whose to say that in 20 years its going to be ok in the eyes of big government to discriminate against white folk...perhaps even encouraged by their ignoring of the issue?