ADL reverses stance
> CHICAGO, July 7 (UPI) — The holiday weekend shooting spree that left
>former Northwestern basketball coach Ricky Byrdsong and a Korean Indiana
>University graduate student dead has prompted the Anti-Defamation League
>to change its position on whether white supremacist Matthew Hale
>deserves a law license.
> The ADL had supported granting the license on free speech grounds,
>but has reversed its position, saying Hale must take responsibility for
>the murderous spree allegedly committed by one of his supporters.
> Hale, 27, of East Peoria, Ill., is the leader of the World Church of
>the Creator, a white-supremacist organization that seeks a separate
>religion for whites and preaches hatred of other races.
> Among its members was Benjamin Nathaniel Smith, 21, whom police
>suspect in a series of shootings that began Friday night in Chicago and
>spread as far as Bloomington, Ind. Two people — Byrdsong and Won-Joon
>Yoon, 26, of Bloomington, Ind. — died. Nine others were wounded — all of
>them Orthodox Jews dressed in traditional garb, and blacks.
> Funerals were scheduled for today.
> The shootings began after Hale was denied a law license for the
>second time Friday although investigators are reluctant to tie the two
>together as yet.
> Despite Hale’s statements that the church preaches hatred, not
>violence, CBS News is reporting the FBI now suspects church members were
>involved in a series of hate crimes, including attacks on three
>synagogues in Sacramento, Calif.
> The ADL, the world’s leading organization in the fight against anti-
>Semitism, says it is withdrawing its support of a law license for Hale.
>ADL general counsel Harlan Loeb, paraphrasing Supreme Court Justice
>Oliver Wendell Holmes, says, “Matt Hale has lit the match and he must
>accept responsibility for the ensuing fire.”
> The Jewish Federation of Chicago Tuesday urged its 40,000 Chicago-
>area members not to be intimidated by the weekend shooting spree. In an
>unusual mass-mailing, the federation said though the shootings were
>directed at easily identifiable minorities, “Friday evening’s violence
>was directed against the entire Jewish community, and that the entire
>community stands together as one in response to it.”
> Rabbi Menachem Rosenfeld, director of the Chicago Rabbinical Council,
>says, “People should not be afraid of going to their synagogues or
>patronizing Jewish institutions. This event was hopefully very unique
>and will not repeat itself in our lives. Life must go on.”
Take out the garbage to reply
From: [email protected] (Barbara)
Subject: ADL changes position on Matthew Hale
Date: Thu, 08 Jul 1999 05:32:15 GMT
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Complaints-To: [email protected]
NNTP-Posting-Date: 8 Jul 1999 05:33:43 GMT
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.5/32.452
Xref: hub.org soc.culture.jewish:390036
From: [email protected] (Orac)
Subject: Re: Church of the Creator assasin
Sender: [email protected] (News Administrator)
X-Spam-Bait: Send all spam to [email protected]
Organization: The most advanced computer in the universe
X-Newsreader: MT-NewsWatcher 2.4.4
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
Date: Thu, 8 Jul 1999 17:35:59 GMT
Xref: hub.org alt.revisionism:538754
>I’m not so sure. In fact, I’m coming down on the Illinois Bar
>Association’s side on this one.
>Consider what Matt Hale says in the WCOTC membership manual:
> Make no mistake, my Brothers and Sisters: as stated in The White
> Man’s Bible, should the Jewish Occupied Governments of the world
> use force to violate our right to freely practice our religion;
> to peacefully assemble; to peacefully organize; to distribute
> our publications; to use mails and any other prerogative in
> promoting and expanding our legal religious organization and
> the full practice of our religion, then we have every right to
> declare them as open criminals violating the Constitution and the
> highest law of the land. They then obviously are the criminals,
> and we can treat them like the criminal dogs they are and take
> the law into our own hands. We hope that this day doesn’t come,
> but should it happen, it will be clear from events and expressly
> stated either by myself or by my successors.
>Source: http://www.wcotc.com/extra/manual/index.html (menu frame link
>”Legality”) (page does not exist)
>These are Matt Hale’s own words.
>It is unfortunate that a candidate for the Illinois Bar arrogates to
>himself the right to decide who is a criminal and uses the words “take
>the law into our own hands,” if only on his express orders.
Good point. I had not come across this little tirade from Matt Hale
before. It would indeed appear that Hale advocates “taking the law into
his own hands” if he deems it necessary, which is contrary to everything a
lawyer is supposed to stand for. That statement may be one of the “other
reasons” I speculated about besides Hale’s racism and anti-Semitism as
possible reasons for the Illinois Bar Association’s rejection of Hale’s
application. If Hale’s stupid enough to put such things on a web site
accessible to anyone, then what other writings of his may have been placed
into evidence for his application to the Bar?
>While no one could quarrel with the idea that civil disobedience is an
>appropriate response to unjust laws, I don’t recall which section of
>the US Constitution gives Matt Hale the right to decide who is a
>criminal and to act outside of the legal system. Matt Hale doesn’t
>say, “if the Jewish Occupied Government decides to violate our
>constitutional rights, we will fight them by every legal means.” If
>he had, then I don’t think the Illinois Bar Association would have
>much reason for blocking Hale’s membership. But his statement
>indicates that he has a weak grasp of “the highest law of the land.”
Which just goes to show that even graduating from law school and passing
the bar exam does not guarantee that someone actually understands the
“highest law of the land.” One wonders what Hale was doing during his
years in law school that he would make such statements.
Orac |”A statement of fact cannot be insolent.”–Orac
David Gorski|”If you cannot listen to the answers, why do you
| inconvenience me with questions?”–Orac again