CNN, please compare and explain difference in R. Sanches and L. Dobbs behavior and firings.

We are against all kinds of Hate Speech and believe that for repeat offenders, there should be consequences.

But any rules of sanctions should be fair and equally applied, but so far, CNN is falling far short on the first real test on how just, fair and even handed that news outlet really is.

Our dear friend Cynthia writes this:

CNN firing Rick Sanchez, What do you think about it?

One part of us think:
That Rick should've known better before blabbing out (of all people, against the Jews) in a radio interview (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/10/01/rick-sanchez-jon-stewart-_n_746764.html ) .

Many of us were supporters of Rick originally because he replaced lou dobbs, and he is a nice guy that can be talented, but increasingly his show got goofier when it increased in time; and he filled up the time with silly "lists"; and we became less interested.

Another part of us think:
that it was unfair for CNN to fired Rick so quickly, it only took CNN a few hours to fire Rick, after his controversial radio interview.
In the interview Rick makes some comments that "Jews own CNN and all the media, and that Jews are hardly an oppressed minority, etc."- but because Rick offended the Jews he got fired real quick.

Comparing to what Rick said in just seconds about Jews is roses, to what Lou Dobbs said daily for years and years about Mexicans and Latinos is pure evil. How long did it take CNN to fire Lou Dobbs? better yet, how many YEARS did it take CNN to fire Dobbs? too many years! - and the decision to fire dobbs didn't come from CNN management only, the pressure to fire Dobbs came from us the grass roots and other organizations.

So the conclusion is that once again, it is okay to not only "offend", but is perfectly okay and encouraged to insult, vilify, scapegoat, and demonize Mexicans and Latinos.

We have sent emails to CNN with our thoughts on these, and we urge you to do the same.

``````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````

"Too many people are ignorant of the controlling forces. We should not have to search for accurate information, yet we must"

I'm not surprised that Cynthia more or less had the same thoughts on it that I had.

A made a comment on a Diary at Daily Kos, it was written by a Jewish person who says in his post "Re-instate Rick Sanchez"

"I guess I've always thought people deserve second chances, and I believe that should include Sanchez in this case. As someone who is Jewish and who has also felt insecure because of being an outsider (which I know proves Sanchez's point wrong in itself), I think he's probably learned a lot from this error and might end up being a better newsman because of it. Or not.

But as someone who has every right to be offended by his comment, I just wanted to say I don't think he should be fired.

Does anyone agree with me? I'm guessing my view is probably the minority opinion this time..".

I think the Diarist has good points that I agree with and has a good heart.

But I just couldn't shake to compare in my head, the very long time that it took CNN to do something about Lou Dobbs, who went for years and years attacking the Latino/Mexican Community with lies, innuendos, etc., and he was so insidious and evil as I see it, because he sounded so reasonable and caring while coldly injecting his poison.

And comparing it to what Rick Sanchez did, I can't help to compare, as Cynthia and many other people are doing, what if Lou Dobbs had insulted/attacked/defamed the Jewish people, would it have taken as long and as much pressure to take action that it took to act on his anti Brown People attacks?

Here are my thoughts, written around 3 a.m. after ponderind and wondering if I could be labeled an anti-Semitic by saying what my heart felt and what my head was telling me:

Again, and why did L. Dobbs stayed that long? (4+ / 0-)

Recommended by:

Bri, xndem, Glorfindel, commonmass

Didn't he hammered the Latino, no, more like the Mexican Community with lies and innuendos but it took several campaigns, boycotts and international pressure to get him out of there?

And as for Fox News hosts and Clear Channel's hatemongers, they say the most horrible things, ethnic slurs, lies, et al.

Yes, Rick let his perception go out loudly, but I ask you:

Do you think Low Dobbs would have stayed that long if he had attacked Jewish people?

And I don't think that even Fox minions would outlast for long an anti-Jewish comment, they would be out of there so fast, that....

Michael Savage, Glenn Beck and an army of Right Wing Nuts earn their daily bread by attacking Brown People and they continue to have a job.

Hey, we kind of notice stuff like that, not only that, we protest, petition, what-have-you-not, and nothing happens to them.

Am I Anti-Semitic? I don't think so, but if having a profound dislike of the Jews in the Right Wing of Israel qualifies as being anti-Semitic, then, I am one.

Also, I rail a lot about racists, nativists, etc., who I believe are very dangerous and I have a deep dislike for them, and since Whites have a majority in these groups, am I an anti-White Folk?

What I'm saying is that there is very fast action if someone is just mildly critical of the State of Israel, first thing that happens is the pinning of anti-Semitic label, and if it is a person who is Jewish the one who is verbally attacked, watch out!!!
Abracadabra!!! You are out of here!

And as for Ricky, who I generally like, I feel there should be harsh penaltie$ for $tupidity --

Hey, what an idea, we should have a law that penalize$ $tupidity, then we just hang around Republicans' suckers, i.e., Teabaggers and I bet we could make a big dent in the National Debt.

Just making a comment on this and on what I perceive, Rick has seen it too.

It's past bedtime for me (West Coast), so any comments on my comments, I'll reply in the morning.

Good morning,

"Tolerance is the presumption of superiority, acceptance is a manifestation of love"
-- Aurora

by Tranny on Sat Oct 02, 2010 at 03:21:18 AM PDT

There were a couple of comments on my comment, here they are:

no. you are not anti-semetic (0+ / 0-)

If every one that makes a bigoted comment gets fired, probably not a good idea....at least you know where they stand. I would expect firing for the most offensive remarks. This one is questionable and it makes sanchez look like he was right.

by Slick2009 on Sat Oct 02, 2010 at 04:11:03 AM PDT

Slick2009 makes an excellent point, while I don't subscribe to a "Jewish Conspiracy", I do ponder on how swift and effectively action is taken even on a critique of the State of Israel.

Pat Buchanan once said gays should be... (3+ / 0-)

Recommended by:

kimoconnor, RedPencil, commonmass

incarcerated in camps, to stop the spread of AIDS.

He is still on MSNBC nearly every day. Every Sunday. Opinionating. Respected. Foul.

Feh.

Fasten your seatbelts, it's going to be a bumpy night.

by Glorfindel on Sat Oct 02, 2010 at 06:35:38 AM PDT

At this time a point HAS TO BE MADE, we need to have the FCC and the NTIA to open a docket on Hate Speech, it's forms and standard regulations which should be forcefully and equally applied.

Aurora

Anti-immigrant hate speech

Anti-immigrant hate speech

September 11

The National Council of La Raza announced today that it has revamped its “Can We Stop the Hate” web site. The site spotlights what the group considers objectionable speech in the immigration debate in the media.

Given that dozens of anti-immigrant talk show hots and organizations have descended on Capitol Hill this week, it is especially important that information on what these entities are really all about is readily available to those interested in combating intolerance,

wrote NCLR president Janet Murguia.
Murguia was referring to the lobbying days by groups like the Federation for American Immigration Reform, which on Tuesday released a report on immigration and national security.
The Immigration Policy Center also released a news alert in response FAIR’s lobbying regarding illegal immigrants and crime.

THE IMMIGRATION POLICY CENTER

IMMIGRATION POLICY CENTER

…providing factual information about immigration and immigrants in America

http://immigrationpolicy.org/images/File/factcheck/SettingtheRecordStraightonImmigrantsandCrime9-10-08.pdf

September 10, 2008

From Anecdotes to Evidence:

Setting the Record Straight on Immigrants and Crime

Anti-immigrant activists and politicians are fond of relying upon anecdotes to support their oft-repeated claim that immigrants, especially undocumented immigrants, are dangerous criminals. This mythical claim is usually based on rhetorical sleight of hand in which individual stories of heinous crimes committed by immigrants are presented as "proof" that we must restrict immigration or "get tough" on the undocumented in order to save the lives of U.S. citizens. While these kinds of arguments are emotionally powerful, they are intellectually dishonest. There is no doubt that dangerous criminals must be punished, and that immigrants who are dangerous criminals should not be allowed to enter the United States or should be deported if they already are here. But harsh immigration policies are not effective in fighting crime because—as numerous studies over the past 100 years have shown—immigrants are less likely to commit crimes or be behind bars than the native-born, and high rates of immigration are not associated with higher rates of crime. This holds true for both legal immigrants and the undocumented, regardless of their country of origin or level of education.

Crime Rates in the United States Fell as the Undocumented Population Doubled

Although the undocumented immigrant population doubled to about 12 million from 1994 to 2004, data from the Bureau of Justice Statistics indicates that the violent crime rate in the United States declined by 35.1 percent during this time and the property crime rate fell by 25.0 percent.1 The decline in crime rates was not just national, but also occurred in border cities and other cities with large immigrant populations such as San Diego, El Paso, Los Angeles, New York, Chicago, and Miami.2

According to a 2008 report from the conservative Americas Majority Foundation, crime rates are lowest in states with the highest immigration growth rates.3 •

From 1999 to 2006, the total crime rate declined 13.6 percent in the 19 highestimmigration states, compared to a 7.1 percent decline in the other 32 states.

• In 2006, the 10 "high influx" states—those with the most dramatic, recent increases in immigration—had the lowest rates of violent crime and total crime.

Statistics released by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) in June 2008 indicate that the violent crime rate increased for two consecutive years after 2004, before falling again in 2007 (while the property crime rate declined continuously during this period).4 It is highly unlikely that the brief upswing in violent crimes from 2004 to 2006 was related to immigration given that the rates of both violent and property crime declined significantly during the 1990s at the same time the immigrant population increased dramatically.

PAGE 2

Nationwide, Immigrants are Five Times Less Likely to be in Prison Than the Native-Born

A 2007 study by University of California, Irvine, sociologist Rubén G. Rumbaut, found that for every ethnic group, without exception, incarceration rates among young men are lowest for immigrants, even those who are the least educated. This holds true especially for the Mexicans, Salvadorans, and Guatemalans who make up the bulk of the undocumented population.5

The 3.5 percent incarceration rate for native-born men age 18-39 was five times higher than the 0.7 percent rate for immigrant men in 2000.

• Among male high-school dropouts, 9.8 percent of the native-born were behind bars in 2000, compared to only 1.3 percent of immigrants.

In 2000, 0.7 percent of foreign-born Mexican men and 0.5 percent of foreign-born Salvadoran and Guatemalan men were in prison.

• Among male high-school dropouts, 0.7 percent of foreign-born Mexicans and 0.6 percent of foreign-born Salvadorans and Guatemalans were behind bars in 2000.

New Research in New Jersey and California Finds Immigrants Less Likely to be in Prison

An analysis of data from the New Jersey Department of Corrections and U.S. Census Bureau by New Jersey’s Star-Ledger found that "U.S. citizens are twice as likely to land in New Jersey’s prisons as legal and illegal immigrants." According to the Star-Ledger’s analysis, released in April 2008, "non-U.S. citizens make up 10 percent of the state’s overall population, but just 5 percent of the 22,623 inmates in prison as of July 2007."6

A June 2008 report from the Public Policy Institute of California found that foreign-born adults in California have lower incarceration rates than their native-born counterparts. Based on data from 2005, the report found that "the incarceration rate for foreign-born adults is 297 per 100,000 in the population, compared to 813 per 100,000 for U.S.-born adults. The foreign-born, who make up roughly 35% of California’s adult population, constitute 17% of the state prison population, a proportion that has remained fairly constant since 1990."7

Immigration Violations, Not Violent Acts, Account for Most Immigrants in Federal Prison

Some pundits and policymakers have attempted to back up the claim of immigrant criminality by citing a 2005 report from the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) which concludes that 27 percent of all inmates in federal prisons are "criminal aliens."8 However, the use of this figure as "evidence" that undocumented immigrants are prone to criminality is not only highly misleading—it is simply wrong.

All immigration violations fall under the federal system. Even in cases where an immigrant has not committed a criminal offense, or has committed an offense that is relatively minor, immigration violations are automatically prosecuted under the federal system. As a result, undocumented immigrants in federal prisons may have committed a criminal offense, or they may simply be imprisoned in the federal system because of their lack of immigration status.

The federal prison population is a small share of the total prison population. One cannot make generalizations about the incarceration rates of immigrants based on the immigrant share of the federal inmate population since, according to a 2007 report from the Bureau of Justice Statistics, only about 8 percent of the U.S. prison population was in federal prisons as of June 30, 2006.9

PAGE 3

At the state and local level, where most U.S. prisoners are held, the incarceration rates for immigrants are lower than for the native-born.

The problem of crime in the United States is not caused or even aggravated by immigrants, regardless of their legal status. This is hardly surprising since immigrants come to the United States to pursue economic and educational opportunities not available in their home countries and to build better lives for themselves and their families. As a result, they have little to gain and much to lose by breaking the law.

Undocumented immigrants in particular have even more reason to not run afoul of the law given the risk of deportation that their lack of legal status entails. Public policies must be based on facts, not anecdotes or emotions. And the fact is that the vast majority of immigrants are not criminals.

202-507-7520

Contact: Andrea Nill

Endnotes

1 U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics—Data Online, "Reported Crime in United States—Total, 1960-2006."

2 Ramiro Martínez, Jr., Matthew T. Lee and A. L. Nielsen, "Segmented Assimilation, Local Context and Determinants of Drug Violence in Miami and San Diego: Does Ethnicity and Immigration Matter?," International Migration Review 38(1), March 2004: 131-157; Matthew T. Lee, Ramiro Martínez, Jr. and Richard B. Rosenfeld, "Does Immigration Increase Homicide? Negative Evidence from Three Border Cities," Sociological Quarterly 42(4), September 2001: 559–580.

3 Richard Nadler, Immigration and the Wealth of States (Overland Park, KS: Americas Majority Foundation: January 2008), p. 9.

4 Federal Bureau of Investigation, Preliminary Annual Uniform Crime Report, January-December 2007 (Washington, DC: June 2008), "Table 3: Percent Change for Consecutive Years."

5 Rubén G. Rumbaut and Walter A. Ewing, The Myth of Immigrant Criminality and the Paradox of Assimilation: Incarceration Rates among Native and Foreign-Born Men (Washington: DC: Immigration Policy Center, American Immigration Law Foundation, Spring 2007), p. 6-10.

6 Brian Donohue, "Citizens twice as likely to land in NJ prisons as legal, illegal immigrants," The Star-Ledger, April 12, 2008.

7 Public Policy Institute of California, Immigrants and Crime (San Francisco, CA: June 2008).

8 U.S. Government Accountability Office, Information on Criminal Aliens Incarcerated in Federal and State Prisons and Local Jails, GAO-05-337R (Washington, DC: April 7, 2005), p. 2.

9 William J. Sabol, Todd D. Minton, and Paige M. Harrison, Prison and Jail Inmates at Midyear 2006, NCJ 217675 (Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S. Department of Justice, June 2007), p. 8.

Somos Latinas 100 stand in front of the public entrance to the Schuylkill County Courthouse on Monday in Pottsville.

Demonstrators rally outside courthouse

Demonstrators with Somos Latinas 100 stand in front of the public entrance to the Schuylkill County Courthouse on Monday in Pottsville. Monday

BY STEPHEN J. PYTAK
AND STEPHANIE LASOTA
STAFF WRITERS
spytak@republicanherald.com
slasota@republicanherald.com

Published: Tuesday, August 19, 2008 10:14 AM EDT

Demonstrations at the Schuylkill County Courthouse on Monday morning briefly interrupted court proceedings, incited several verbal clashes and honored a Shenandoah murder victim's fiancee.

More than 40 activists, who arrived about 9 a.m., supporting immigration and civil rights chanted and carried banners outside while a preliminary hearing for three Shenandoah teens charged in the July 14 death of an illegal Mexican immigrant was under way within.Watch the demonstration

Brandon J. Piekarsky, 16; Colin J. Walsh, 17, and Derrick M. Donchak, 18, were facing a preliminary hearing for the beating death of Luis Eduardo Ramirez Zavala, 25, of Shenandoah. Ramirez died July 14 from injuries he suffered in a beating July 12.

As the demonstrators chanted in Spanish, Magisterial District Judge Anthony J. Kilker recessed the hearing at 9:50 a.m. because of the noise. He asked the sheriff's department to control the situation.

"So we asked them to keep it down so the hearing could continue," Schuylkill County interim Sheriff Harold J. Rowan said.

Emma Lozano, executive director of Centro Sin Fronteras, Chicago, Ill., said, "Our goal was not to stop the preliminary hearing, but to show support to Crystal (Dillman, Ramirez's fiancee) and to make a statement against hate crimes. So we did quiet down so they could continue."

The hearing resumed after about five minutes.

"There were a couple in-your-face arguments, but there were no altercations," said Schuylkill County Sheriff's Deputy Maj. Dennis Kane, who patrolled the parking lot during the demonstrations.

"They're peaceful. We anticipated something like this happening and we had no problems," Rowan said.

Members of Somos Latinas 100 and Centro Sin Fronteras, both of Chicago, Ill., the New York-based May 1 Coalition and Pittsburgh Friends of Immigrants said Ramirez's death sparked their visits.

Just after noon, Dillman met with the demonstrators. Somos Latinas 100 presented her with a monetary donation, one of their flags and a round of applause. The group would not release the amount of the donation.

"Thank you," Dillman said, after being applauded by the group.

"She's a white woman who had the courage to say (Ramirez) was a human being," Lozano said.

The demonstrations angered a few other visitors to the courthouse, including Ron Hannivig, Simpson, Lackawanna County, and Debby Rabold, Effort, Monroe County, who said they were concerned about illegal immigration.

"We are in support of the Shenandoah boys," Rabold said.

"What I'm seeing here, I wouldn't wish upon my worst enemy. If there's a standoff here, it's going to get ugly," Hannivig said.

Ceci Wheeler, a member of Pittsburgh Friends of Immigrants, represented her group Monday at the courthouse. She said she's shocked some people aren't recognizing Ramirez's beating as a crime.

"That's inhumane. That's intolerable and we hope the judges serve justice," she said.

"We're not here to judge the youth," said Lozano. "We're here to say that the real criminals that caused this situation are not even on trial: those who created this situation that manipulated young people and other people into thinking they have to fear the Latino community, that it's an invasion and all of this other stuff. And people are starting to believe that."

While members of the May 1 Coalition carried banners, Somos Latinas 100 was fronted by a contingent of 15 women, ages 14 to 27. They dressed in black, wore identical fuchsia-colored berets and marched in time.

Representatives of Somos Latinas 100 would not identify themselves by name, since the organization is about unity and members want to avoid having one individual stand out from the rest.

"They're at war against the hate crimes and racial profiling," Lozano said.

Four male representatives of Somos Latinas 100 carried the flags of Mexico, El Salvador and Puerto Rico.

When asked why they didn't fly an American flag as well, a 21-year-old Somos Latinas representative said: "It wasn't a matter of not being patriotic. It was about uniting people of Latino decent for the Latina campaign."

The May 1 Coalition was formed after millions of people marched on May 1, 2006, in Los Angeles and New York City for basic rights for all immigrants, according to member Arturo Perez, New York.

The group speaks out against Immigration and Customs Enforcement raids, calling the raids a violation of basic civil rights.

Members left New York at 3 a.m. Monday to drive to Pottsville.

Outside the courthouse, members carried signs reading, "Justicia para el Mexicano Luis Ramirez asesinado en Shenandoah" — "Justice for Mexican Immigrant Luis Ramirez killed in Shenandoah."

Heather Cottin, 65, of Long Island, is a white woman and a history teacher at a community college in Long Island. She's also a member of the May 1 Coalition.

"It's not as if this is the latest news — racism. Unfortunately it's in the history of this country," Cottin said. "If you can't potentially love all human beings, then what do you have here?"

She said the U.S. immigration and trade systems are broken and legalized government immigration raids are making it worse.

"It's really a government policy right now to stir up hatred against immigrants," she said.

Mike Gimbel, a delegate to the New York City Central Labor Council, called deportations "vicious bigoted attacks."

Gimbel, a Pennsylvania native living in the Poconos, said real change is needed in rural areas.

"The big efforts have to take place in a rural community like this..." Gimbel said. "The city is more sympathetic to the labor movement."

"We want to unify people of all nationalities, colors and genders. Without unity we can't fight for our rights," Gimbel said.

Wheeler said the Ramirez case prompted Pittsburgh Friends of Immigrants to attend and stand up for all immigrants who have experienced hardship.

"We are all advocates for immigrants' rights ... So anything that happens to members of our immigrant community, we're going to be there," Wheeler said.

Also standing outside were Mickey and Dottie Redmond, Ringtown. They said their 17-year-old son was a witness in the case, but they couldn't get into Courtroom 5 because it was overcrowded.

"I hope they send it to juvenile court, at least," Mickey Redmond said.

About 12:20 p.m., many demonstrators for the Latino community departed, marching clockwise from the courthouse entrance just off Sanderson Street, south on North 2nd Street to a charter bus, waiting on Laurel Boulevard.

Lozano said demonstrators from Somos Latinas 100 and Centro Sin Fronteras were heading to Philadelphia.