Hate crime charges filed in alleged attack on Muslim woman, child

[NNN0LHI]

http://www.seattlepi.com/local/407916_hatecrime07.html

Tuesday, July 7, 2009

Hate crime and assault charges have been filed against an Auburn man accused of threatening to cut a woman and her infant child at a Seattle health center.

According to police statements, Eric Lee Garner, 24, threatened to harm the woman and her 6-month-old son as she waited in line at the Seattle Indian Health Board office on July 1.

Garner, police claim, began yelling at the woman for wearing a headscarf before displaying a sheathed fixed blade knife and threatening to cut her genitals.

"I'm going to cut you and your baby with this knife!" Garner allegedly said. Police say Garner continued to make anti-Muslim remarks throughout the tirade.

[mmonk]

1. This is what happens when your government runs a campaign of fear

for their political purposes. It's what I was trying to argue in another thread to apologists on our new found practice of holding people found to have not committed any acts of violence, crime, or terrorism against the US.

[JonQ]

5. Not exactly a campaign of fear, if you look at the stats

For instance, Jews are about 3 times more likely to be the victims of a hate crime than muslims. I'd hardly say that is because of our governments policy of imprisoning and murdering jews.

Single stories like this, while tragic, cannot be used to define a trend.

[proud2BlibKansan]

8. Are there more Jews than Muslims?

That could be the reason.

[JonQ]

10. Yes, but I was looking at the per capita rates

which takes that in to account.

Just looking at raw numbers there are about 6 times as many attacks on jews. As there are a little over twice as many jews as muslims in this country that works out to around 3 x as many attacks per/population. I'm rounding of course, but thats the general trend.

[mmonk]

11. What are your feelings about Muslims?

I've seen a trend for 8 damn years.
http://www.civilrights.org/publications/hatecrimes/arab-americans.html
http://pluralism.org/news/article.php?id=3283
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/12/world/americas/12iht-islam.html
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7809537/

[JonQ]

15. Feelings and statistics should not be mixed

What's your feeling about the number 3? Do you feel it is greater or less than 1? Or the same?

I'm talking hard numbers here, and according to the FBI hatecrime database and the US census bureau far more attacks are carried out against jews for being jewish than against muslims for being muslim, both in total number and in relation to their population.

You can feel free to find a competing source, as accurate on the subject as the FBI and census bureau, that shows the opposite trend. But you can't try to bring feelings in to a purely mathematical discussion. And according to the numbers there is not a significant anti-muslim trend in hate crimes compared to other targeted minorities.

[mmonk]

19. There is nothing even remotely inaccurate in my post.

Would a post more or less indicating the rise is not so bad if another hate crime demographic were used? Add to the fact the government hasn't encouraged misinterpretation of other religious groups as well as hasn't been locking up and profiling other religious people. I received a newspaper insert last year with a DVD in it basically pushing all Muslims were terrorists. Do any of us see anything like that concerning other religions or groups of people? Do we hear it on the radio or cable TV? Your response seems a little offensive to me.

[JonQ]

20. You recieved a DVD claiming all muslims were terrorists

from the government?

My concern was with the initial post, seeming to indicate there is some trend against muslims, officially endorsed. That does not stand up to scrutiny.

[mmonk]

25. No, it is from a group politically connected to one of the political

parties in our government. No trend against Muslims officially endorsed? Well, the government isn't going to actually say it. And what about all the silliness during the presidential campaign about Obama being a Muslim as if there would be something wrong with it if he were though he wasn't? No political party in power in the United States government had anything to do with that? But you don't have to look at all the Civil Rights violations by government entities here to notice though it should be evident to many. My statement does stand up to scrutiny.

[Chulanowa]

24. Put into common english, what you're getting at...

Is that you couldn't give a flying fuck about Muslims, because Muslims aren't Jews.

You'd do well over in freerepublic the I/P forum.

[JonQ]

26. Not actually what I said

actually bearing no resemblence to what I said.

My concern was in the misuse of statistics, claiming a trend (that the numbers did not exist) and then using that fictitious trend to draw further conclusions.

But if that description you gave makes you happy by all means stick with it. Certainly easier to make up lies about someone else and argue against those than to try to argue against hard facts.

[Chulanowa]

27. Is that so?

Look, I know how your sort work. You present yourself as coldly factual, dispassionate, and unconcerned with the implications of what it is you're saying. The "just an observer" act. You disconnect from context to make a statement that to pretty much any rational person, is ludicrous and offensive. You then dismiss such concerns by claiming you're "just reporting the facts."

Hate to break it to you, but the only fucks dumb enough to buy that are also the ones who think "The Bell Curve" is valid science, simply because of its tone and stated dispassion. You, like pretty much every person who would pipe up on a given subject, do have an agenda and an opinion. So let's investigate your context.

mmonk responds to the OP that noting that the government has engaged in a steady campaign of anti-islamism and fearmongering towards arabs and muslims that many Americans do believe that it's "okay" to target them.

Your response is that since more Jews are targeted. Okay, this is factual... But what does it have to do with anything? In all honesty... Nothing. Now that would be enough, really, but then you state "Single stories like this, while tragic, cannot be used to define a trend. " What you miss, mistyr facts and figures, is that this is simply the latest incident (not "stories", this really happened) in a series, a long string of incidents where Muslims have been targeted in America. This single story is no isolated. it is part of the trend, not an indicator. But you chose to focus on this one tree, ignoring the forest, and basically declare that since it's not Jews, doesn't really count.

Now you want a trend indicator? So a little search on your posts, Jon. You obliquely defend Christian terrorists, you argue that a Muslim shooter will not be called a terrorist, you defend Sarah Palin's "honor", and damn near every thread you've posted on has been locked. Here you are dismissing hate crimes against Muslims as "not a trend"

I'd tell you what I think this trend indicates, but I think a smart guy like you can figure it out :)

[JonQ]

29. Did you ever take a course in statistics?

I'm guessing no, or if you did it didn't stick.

A crime, no matter how heinous, does not make a trend. Do you understand this? To claim something is part of an ongoing, statistically significant trend, it . . . well actually has to be part of an ongoing statistically significant trend. When the numbers do not support this then making such a statement is a lie.

At no point did I claim it was ok to kill muslims because jews are being killed. I used them merely as another example of a religous group that is being targeted. The fact that they are being subject to far greater harrassment than muslims discredits the notion that this country is particularly anti-muslim. The numbers don't support this claim.

Its like when we get a few high profile kidnappings and all of a sudden people are furious at a society that encourages and condones this behavior, that has allowed such an increase in these crimes. But then if you look at the actual stats for that year you find there is no upward trend, that it stays mostly the same from year to year and it was all sensationalism and an attempt to drum up hatred and fear. That is essentially what you are doing; using a few cases to define a "trend" that doesn't exist in order to spread fear, hatred and division. Basically you are lying for your own benefit.

And as you have turned to emotion based arguments and personal attacks I suspect you realize this.

[Chulanowa]

31. I'm not attacking your person; I'm attaching your own words and actions to you

You see, JonQ, when a cretin like David Irving starts denying the Holocaust, his first defense is always "I'm just giving figures!" and he, amazingly, gets outraged when people attach his holocaust-denying words back to him.

Now here you are, getting upset when I present your words and agenda back to you, and so much as dare as hold you responsible for saying them.

But you want a personal attack? Okay. You're a liar. A bald-faced, flat-out liar. Hate crimes against Muslims HAVE been increasing over the last decade, with spikes in 2002 and 2005 (2005 saw a 30% increase over 2004's hate crimes). Are they as numerous as hate crimes against Jews? No, and again, that much of what you've said is factual.

But again the problem in you presenting that fact is that you're presenting it in a thread about a hate crime against Muslims. Now, that by itself is a rather clear attempt to belittle the crime written about in the OP - You're insinuating there's some sort of competition for validity there. But then to top that off, you go and make false claims about the trends in violence and crime against Muslims - And of course, you don't even provide any sources for your claims, we're just supposed to assume you're not talking out your ass. In fact when I look for such sources, what tops the list is Daniel fucking Pipes.

I'm not sure how exactly you believe that noting that hate crimes against Muslims have risen sharply "spreads fear, hatred, and division" - Much less how you figure that between the two of us, I'm the liar. For the first, perhaps you're the sort of person who, back in the 30's, would have said enacting anti-Lynching laws would "rile up" the local black community. For the second, I just assume you're a hypocrite.

Have fun with your facts and figures, JonQ. May your plethora of locked threads remain strong.

[Gwendolyn]

32. You are sickening... I hope all fledglings get away from your emotion.

[Chulanowa]

36. I'm glad you think so, means I'm doing something right

Imagine my surprise to see you upset at my not following someone else's anti-Islamic agenda. You, of all people! I was shocked! Truly, a wounding blow to the core of my heart.

[JonQ]

33. Actually, you're lying

Hate crimes incidents by year according to the FBI:
2003: 149
2004: 156
2005: 128
2006: 156
2007: 115



This is what I'm talking about with you not understanding numbers. From 2004 to 2005 there was an 18% drop (not a 30% increase as you claimed), then an 18% increase by 2006, then a drop by 26%.

Since 2003, where you claim there has been a steady increase, there have actually been numerous fluctuations, up and down. With 2007 being 23% lower than 2003.

When I said statistics aren't about what you feel to be the truth, or what you would like to claim, this is what I mean. The numbers do not back your claim. And I suspect you know this, meaning you are a liar. You could claim that hate crimes have gone up 80billion percent, and that is certainly shocking, but that doesn't make it true. What is actually happening is relatively small fluctuations with a more or less constant rate of 140.8. Claiming that small up and down changes that balance each other out, with a final number being lower than the first, is an upward trend is ignorance on display at best, outright lies at worst.

Can you acknowledge that in this case the facts do not support your case, or are you going to continue claiming things that are demonstratively false?

[Chulanowa]

34. That's interesting. I'm lying, you say?

If anything, it would be that my source was incorrect. And I would accept that, as I hold the FBI to be more credible. Of course, this is the first time you actually cited your source. See, now we can actually investigate a little bit.

First off, please note that you are omitting data. The FBI sees fit to record both incidents (That is, bias-motivated activities that are worthy of police attention but aren't themselves crimes) and offenses (bias-motivated events that ARE crimes, such as vandalism, assault, murder). The FBI also collects data on the number of victims. So rather than simply looking at incidents as you are doing (unwittingly, I will presume), let's take a look at the big picture.

From the start.
(I = incidents, O = Offenses, V = Victims. confusing, no?)

Year I O V
1995: 29 39 41
1996: 27 33 33
1997: 28 31 32
1998: 21 22 23
1999: 32 34 34
2000: 28 33 36
2001: 481 546 554
2002: 155 170 174
2003: 149 151 171
2004: 156 293 201
2005: 128 146 151
2006: 156 191 208
2007: 115 133 142

So. For the sake of argument, let's leave 2001 out as an anomalous spike. Can you explain to me then, how the ten time increase in anti-Islamic hate crime between 2000 and 2002 isn't indicative of anything? That the general persistence of this increase is likewise unrelated to anything? or, if you're willing to acknowledge that this increase means something, are you going to tell me it has nothing at all to do with the Bush administration and its orbits pumping the "Muslims are the bad guys" meme?

I can acknowledge that my source was wrong. Can you acknowledge you were misusing your own?

[JonQ]

39. Look at post number 15

I clearly stated "according to the FBI hate crimes database". Failure to read my citations on your part does not equate to a failure to cite sources on my part.

A spike, after 911 that subsided and remained steady is indicative of government sponsored anti-muslim lynchings how?


Also I don't recall any quote of bush saying we should go forth and kill muslims, actually he bent over backwards to call islam a religion of peace every time he mentioned it. I don't agree with him on many things, but you can't attribute that to him.

[mmonk]

40. Bush also said we don't torture.

Bush also said a search warrant is needed to spy on people. Your listing statistics on the issue is designed to dismiss it. The fact targeted populations do not report many instances of hatred directed to them to authorities that tend to single them out for searches and questioning due to the fear factor never crosses your mind either I suppose.

[JonQ]

41. So you're claiming a much higher rate

of hate crimes against muslims, based on unreported instances of which you have no proof? Hard case to make, but go ahead.

[JonQ]

30. Oh, and defending people who have done nothing wrong

who are being attacked merely for being on the other side, in a way that would never be done to them if it weren't for their politics is called having principles, standards, that sort of thing.

I do try to be objective (something you seem to scorn) and judge people, actions, events, etc fairly without immediately throwing on ideological filters (something else you seem to hate).

You know, being reasonable, objective, fair, analytical, etc is not such a bad thing. Some really great people throughout history fit that description.

[UndertheOcean]

38. +1

[RaleighNCDUer]

12. Of course, christianity has been telling everyone to hate Jews for

2000 years. They've only been hating Muslims for 1300 years.

Got some catching up to do.

[JonQ]

14. 2000 years huh?

A bit awkward for those decades when they were still considered a jewish sect then.

[RaleighNCDUer]

16. Quibble, quibble - 1820 years, if it makes you happy.

About the time of Paul deliberately separating christianity from its Jewish roots.

The gospels were written pinning the execution of the rabbi on the Jews, instead of the Romans who actually did it. All because they wanted to prostelytize in the Roman world.

The fact remains, they've been hating Jews far longer than they've been hating Muslim. Had a lot more practice at it.

Doesn't make this any less a hate crime.

[JonQ]

17. Actually that kind of supports my argument

namely that jews are having a harder time than muslims. So to claim muslims face any particular, new violence in this country when the numbers do not support this claim is misleading at best.

[RaleighNCDUer]

21. Wrong again.

Any violence against Jews is engrained in the anti-semitic sub-culture of RW extreme christianity. That has not changed.

Violence against Muslims, however, does not have that long-standing prejudice. What needs to be looked at is not comparing rates of violence against Jews vs rates of violence against Muslims, but CURRENT rates of violence against each compared with rates of violence against each prior to 2000.

I don't have the numbers to hand, but I will bet that the rate of violence against Jews is virtually unchanged, and perhaps even reduced, while the rate of violence against Muslims has increased, at least doubled.

[JonQ]

22. Actually they've both stayed virtually the same

Anti-islam violence peaked in 2001, then immediately dropped and hasn't changed since then. This years numbers aren't out yet of course.

A peak, in response to a specific event, that doesn't continue and in fact drops and plateaus cannot be said to be a significant upward trend.

[Chulanowa]

37. I rest my case, by the way

Next time, don't claim you're nit saying something... then go and say it even more bluntly downthread.

[JonQ]

42. You rest your case on what?

That muslims are being particularly targeted in the US, more so than any other group? Because that is not true.

[get the red out]

2. Bet I know what kind of radio he likes

I wonder if he listens to Hannity and Rush back to back or takes a little break in between to watch Fox News on TV? Probably some leftover tea bags in the back seat of his car too.

[Douglas Carpenter]

3. thank you for posting. Kick and recommended!!

[Ghost in the Machine]

4. It couldn't have been a hate crime... it didn't happen here in the South

A lot of posters here think that hate crimes only happen here, not anywhere else...


:hide:

[Romulox]

6. Washington State has some REDNECKS. I never believed it 'til I saw it with my own eyes.

Not isolated rednecks either. Massive numbers in the interior. :o

[izzybeans]

9. Washington is considered the mecca for white separatists.

[cilla4progress]

13. Fearful yet hopeful

This is eerily very frightening and timely, as well. I LIVE in the dead-center of Washington state (have for 30 years) and I know of what you speak. I'm one of the few Dems / progressives here, and we've managed to establish a firm though minority footing.

We have just been asked and agreed to host for 10 mos. an exchange student from Afghanistan - we are so excited and thrilled to not only give this young woman (16 y.o., same age as my daughter) this opportunity, but also to meet her and learn from her and become enriched from knowing her. However, there is much trepidation for the very reasons of which you speak. She is, of course, Muslim, Afghanistan being essentially 100% Muslim, with Islam the national religion, and she wears a head scarf. I only hope the basic humanity and good will of students and adults in our small strongly Christian fundamentalist community and school will prevail. I believe it will, or I wouldn't bring her here, but I also fear some expressions of discrimination or at least superiority or conversion attempts will pop out.

In the best possible outcome all parties will be enriched and educated, and will find that underneath cultural accoutrements we all aspire to the same things: peace, beauty, love, knowledge.

[NNN0LHI]

23. Check out the Upper Peninsula of Michigan sometimes

Talk about some real rednecks.

Them good old boys up there got a lock on it.

Fenced and barbed wire compounds all over the place.

Beautiful scenery but many of the people are downright scary. And the weird thing was they appeared to hate Republicans just as much as Democrats. They hate everybody. I couldn't wait to get out of there.

Spent most my time hiding out in the local microbrewery until it was time to leave. This one: http://www.thevierling.com/

Don

[Echo In Light]

7. Eric Lee Garner = worthless pussy. Try picking on someone your own size.

[marmar]

18. Selfdelete, intended as OP

selfdelete

[JI7]

28. the bigots are really coming out, did the racist republicans apologize to Napolitano yet ?

[Vektor]

35. What? Christ on a crutch, what he hell is wrong with people?

I wish I could find the words to address, this. I just can't. :-(