RSS
Earlier this week, Hampden County, Massachusetts District Attorney Anthony Gulluni held a dramatic press conference announcing that he was charging six white Southwick middle school students for witness intimidation and violating the civil rights of blacks after they allegedly made racist jokes in a Snapchat chatroom. If found guilty of these crimes, the students could be sentenced to juvenile incarceration.
Courts have begun eroding the rights of children in recent years. In Mahanoy Area School District v. B.L. (2021), the Supreme Court ruled 8-1 to overturn the First Amendment protections provided to left-wing students during the Vietnam war in Tinker v. Des Moines (1969), with Jewish Justice Stephen Breyer writing in his majority opinion that Tinker did not give school administrators sufficient power to punish off-campus speech.
Though a setback for the cause of student’s rights, the Supreme Court has not yet done away with the First Amendment more broadly, which is universally understood to protect “hate speech.” Legally speaking, a group of 13-year-olds sharing images with racial slurs about their peers, in the absence of a connected crime, does not fall within the purview of law enforcement.
In the example of DA Gulluni, who throughout his career has eagerly volunteered to help lead statewide “hate crime” task forces spearheaded by powerful entities like the Anti-Defamation League and his local Jewish Federation, the decision to prosecute these children was only made after a full month of ceaseless lobbying from various media outlets and racial agitation NGOs. That is not how criminal law is supposed to work.
Following the announcement of criminal charges, NAACP president Bishop Talbert W. Swan praised Gulluni’s “courageous decision” to send cops after the white kids, even as the NAACP campaigns to remove police and School Resource Officers from violent minority schools in other parts of Massachusetts. As Gulluni exhausted police resources looking for novel ways to weaponize the criminal justice system against white 7th graders for impolite comments, a gun battle broke out during a gang melee inside a 90%+ non-white high school in a different part of his county.
Allyson Lopez, the aggrieved mother of one of Southwick Regional School’s alleged black victims, has also praised the police’s involvement on her behalf. Lopez has been vocal in accusing the white parents, students, and administrators of the school of being racists, but regardless of the merit to her accusations or lack thereof (the students in question had already suffered severe 45-day suspensions), these are circumstances she has actively sought out. Despite residing in the overwhelmingly black and Puerto Rican city of Springfield, Lopez used Massachusetts’ school choice system to avoid the majority-minority school — where her daughter would presumably be safe from white “hate speech” — and opted instead for the supposedly racist 90% white school 45 minutes away.
On social media, many of Gulluni’s constituents are decrying the DA’s behavior and priorities. One commentator on Facebook wrote, “Hate speech isn’t a thing. Has anyone read the constitution? These kids getting charged are gonna get some nice settlements from this corrupt govt and school.” On Twitter, similar sentiments are being expressed. Gulluni, who typically runs unopposed as a Democrat, has casually ignored these concerns. So far, no civil liberties group has expressed interest in defending these students.
Prosecutors in these cases are emboldened by the closed nature of juvenile courts, which prevents the general public from accessing evidence and proceedings and thus grants crusading anti-white officials the power to characterize these incidents however they want. If one were to go by either the media or Gulluni’s version of events, we would come away with the conclusion that these white kids were conspiring to sell their black classmates at a slave auction.
The idea of subjecting a 13-year-old to a criminal trial for saying something on the internet would be met with laughter or horror by most of the world, but in America this is becoming the norm. Since the 2020 George Floyd race riots, cases similar to the Southwick one have occurred in Connecticut, Louisiana, and elsewhere. In most of these incidents, the racial comments or slurs are shared privately among friends or in jest.
With so many videos circulating of white students being beaten and killed by blacks at school, as well as the alarming rise in racial attacks on white teachers, the contrast in America’s two-tiered, racialized criminal justice system could not be more stark.
Blacks who engage in interracial homicides have already become increasingly difficult to convict in the United States, but this is even more true for offenders under 18. In the land of the free, a barely pubescent white child blurting out a racial slur on social media is, to some of the sick people in power, the graver offense.
English
Arabic
Chinese (Simplified)
Dutch
French
German
Hebrew
Hindi
Italian
Japanese
Korean
Persian
Polish
Portuguese
Russian
Spanish
Swedish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Only result of this lawfare will be vigilanteism. Get your kids out of public schools. Private not that much better since curriculum is set by DOE so it’s definitely propaganda and compliant voter training.
Liberal prosecutors are seeking increasingly novel ways to do an end run around the First Amendment.
And maybe this story will convince some cuckservatives to reconsider their idiotic “school choice” idea.
“The idea of subjecting a 13-year-old to a criminal trial for saying something on the internet would be met with laughter or horror by most of the world, but in America this is becoming the norm.”
Google Adam Goodes and the 13-year-old girl who called him an ape from the sidelines at an Aussie Rules game in 2013. The ensuing trial by media was something to behold. Goodes was awarded Australian of the Year in 2014.
Lawfare is Jewfare(or cuckfare).
The Second Amendment is to protect the First Amendment, people have been telling (fairy tales?);
If my sons would get jailed, Mister Gulluni & Cons would need to jail me too.
You must be American. Which other country has free speech guarantees?
In Canada, Britain, in Germany, Brazil, and Muslim countries, all these would prosecute people for “offensive” “hate speech”.
Not sure about the 13 year olds, in Germany, Brazil they could get away with murder for being too young. But probably could not get away with hate speech against “minorities”
I recall reading about that at the time. No criminal trial, but administrative action (thrown out and banned from viewing games live for a long time). As you say, also trial by media.
Goodes had invented an ancient Abo tribal war dance, which he enjoyed displaying.
Anyway, he was deeply hurt by a thirteen-y. old girl calling him an ape, so he had to be made ‘Stryan of the Year’ to comfort his poor delicate soul. Didn’t stop him later behaving as an arsehole at all.
Where is the cut out in the Constitution for alleged “hate speech”?
Defendents need to remember this-
18 U.S. Code § 242 – Deprivation of rights under color of law
Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, ….shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; ….
Read it yourself here-
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/242#:~:text=Whoever%2C%20under%20color%20of%20any%20law%2C%20statute%2C%20ordinance%2C,or%20both%2C%20or%20may%20be%20sentenced%20to%20death.
Not legal advice, just info.
We are team “Freedom and Democracy” btw, just in case anyone forgot.
interesting report. but the question is this and should always be this: given the situation, what can we do to prevent this from happening again?
what can be done about all this?
organizing a political party is a start, though i think the fascist emblems and stuff will prevent such a party from gaining adherents. too many white nationalists are detached from the majority of their own white americans and do not understand white americans.
instead of doing retro fascist stuff, do something new that speaks to white people in the now. give people not merely “whiteness” to defend, but a belief to drive them forward towards something.
Blacks are legally sacred in America. Black males are free to impregnate and abandon as many White women as they wish. When a White man in America objects to his own racial extermination, he’s the one punished. In other words, White genocide is a civil liberty in America whereas hurting the feelings of the sacred and holy blacks holds serious consequences. America sucks for White people. It’s a third world shithole.
Remember Scott Adams:
“I don’t want to have anything to do with them,” Adams added. “And I would say, based on the current way things are going, the best advice I would give to White people is to get the hell away from Black people, just get the fuck away…because there is no fixing this.”
He lost his job for this.
Germany and Canada, among many other countries, prosecutes elderly people who refuse to submit to the false jewish religion known as “holocaustianity™”.
Here are a few names:
Monika Schaefer
Ursula Haverbeck
Ernst Zundel
Sylvia Stolz
David Irving
…and many others who have been indicted, prosecuted and imprisoned for daring to question “that which may not be questioned” most successful grift of the twentieth and twenty-first centuries, the so-called “jewish holocaust™”.
The last figures I remember on this abuse are 10,000 or so “legal” court trials per year in Germany to bring to heel the doubters and skeptics. Don’t recall how many of them get imprisoned.
The cost in time and money to the individual thus abused is staggering, even if the charges are finally dismissed.
The process is the punishment.
Once expression of any idea has been criminalized, dissidents with others become much more vulnerable.
As Mr. Unz confirmed afterward, C. J. Hopkins left TUR’s author roster several years ago because, as a resident of Germany, he could be prosecuted under a theory that he was supporting a website publishing the forbidden words of others. But he’s since been preposterously charged under those laws because he made rhetorical comparisons to the COVID tyrannies. And, to your point, has been financially bludgeoned in the process.
Once free speech loses out as a core principle, things quickly go from bad to worse, including through ostracism and self-censorship that don’t even require state sanction. I wouldn’t have been able to share Hopkins’ story except that I wanted to keep reading what he had to say and found his website. (I don’t remember his prosecution being noted by any of his former fellows authors here at TUR. Does anyone else?)
Given the takeover of the modern West by ‘refugee minorities’, who are actually invading majorities dispossessing indigenous minority whites, murder is barely prosecuted any longer while voicing any inconvenient observation or protest at the imminent dispossession of Western countries has suddenly become worse than murder. When will the power brokers in DC come to their senses and realize that the days of JFK liberalism are long gone n that blacks have become a privileged ethnicity that is immune to criticism by speech or prosecution by the courts? Melanin is now the mark of privilege and sacredness and ‘white privilege’ is code for uppity whites who don’t yet realize they are a class of Untouchables with zero legal rights. Anyone who objects is simply arrested. Look at South Africa to see America’s future.
Your kid bet me a million dollars he could jump from the swings to the sandbox. Per the courts, this should be a binding contract.
He failed. Pay up, or I put a lien on his future earnings.
It starts out as protection for people of color, but the true goal of hate speech legislation is to normalize moral panics related to Jews.
https://ottawa.ctvnews.ca/ottawa-police-investigating-swastikas-painted-on-montreal-road-atm-1.6812179
The jews paint their own swastikas on their own buildings themselves to evoke sympathy and to claim that everyone “hates” them.
If and when “caught”, they are never prosecuted for inflicting “hate crimes” on themselves.
Of course, they usually paint the swastikas backwards (points to the left).
>Mahanoy Area School District v. B.L. (2021)
The entire opinion, including the dissent by Clarence Thomas, is available here:
AHANOY AREA SCHOOL DIST. v. B. L.
It includes this passage of interest (‘aggravated’):
So it’s an ‘aggravating issue’ that today speech (or generally any form of expression) can be widely promulgated, e.g. via the internet — of course it’s an ‘issue’ only for those who want to control speech or other forms of expression.
The background case:
Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District
Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, 393 U.S. 503 (1969)
Some may recall that Ketanji Brown Jackson recently ‘raised eyebrows’ with her remark ‘My biggest concern is that your view has the First Amendment hamstringing the government in significant ways in the most important time periods.’
Though I don’t approve of your publishing here, I started opposing hate crime laws in 1997. I am happy to share a quarter century of research with you, unless you’re an anti-semite. Ironic? No. I have worked with many Jews who oppose hate crime laws just as we do. The point is to not ratify identity politics.