No Mere “Hate Crime”

WPTV JCC shooting suspect_1397419397369_4064091_ver1.0_320_240Former KKK leader Frazier Glenn Cross’s Sunday shooting spree that left three dead outside a Jewish retirement home and a Jewish community center in the Kansas City, Mo., suburbs was a heinous atrocity, and the reflexive “hate crime” label being applied to it diminishes the true scope of the evil at its core. 

Calling Miller’s acts hate crimes trivializes anti-Semitism, the evil that was Nazism and the monstrosity that was the Holocaust. The “hate crime” designation is over-relied on nowadays and this overuse has diluted its meaning. Spray-painting graffiti on a church or defacing a statue can be considered hate crimes.

The bar has been set so low that refusing to bake a wedding cake for a same-sex couple is a hate crime in the eyes of many left-wingers. Miller’s acts hardly belong in the same category.

Although all three apparently randomly selected victims were Christians, not Jews, the feds appear to be leaning in the direction of a hate crime prosecution. The attack “strikes at the core fundamental freedoms … of how our country was founded and what we live by every single day,” said FBI agent Michael Kaste. “We’ve now determined that the motivation behind this was a hate crime. The acts that this person committed were the result of beliefs … that he had.”

Interviewed in 2010, the now 73-year-old Miller was asked whether he hated Jews or African-Americans more. He replied, “Jews. A thousand times more. Compared to our Jewish problem, all other problems are mere distractions.”

Miller complained that Jews were running the U.S. government, mass media, and the Federal Reserve Bank. “And with those powers, they’re committing genocide against the white race,” he said. Miller also said he had “a great deal of respect for Muslim people” and referred to Adolf Hitler as “the greatest man who ever walked the earth.”

People like Miller “praise Hitler and they praise [Nation of Islam leader Louis] Farrakhan and of course Farrakhan was one of this guy’s heroes along with Hitler and David Duke,” said Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz, reacting to the events of Sunday.

Dershowitz seemed to suggest that the very idea of a hate crime is constitutionally dubious. It’s an Orwellian concept wherein the ideological component of an ordinary crime is singled out for special punishment over and above the underlying crime itself.

In other words, even in America, with its extraordinary protection for free speech and freedom of conscience you can be prosecuted for your ideas and beliefs. No matter how odious or unpopular those ideas and beliefs may be, it is unjust for courts to pass judgment on them.

“When we were kids we learned sticks and stones will break your bones but names will never harm you,” Dershowitz told MSNBC’s Ronan Farrow. “That’s a lie. Names hurt. They are horrible, and we shouldn’t be tolerating them in society. But the law under our Constitution can’t move against people simply for expressing views.” 

For his part, President Obama condemned the attacks, saying the right things as he pretended to be religious for the benefit of the assembled media.

“We have to keep coming together across faiths to combat the ignorance and intolerance, including anti-Semitism that can lead to hatred and to violence, because we’re all children of God.”

It was “all the more painful” because the attacks came as Jews were preparing to celebrate Passover and Christians were observing Palm Sunday. “Nobody should have to worry about their security when gathering with their fellow believers. No one should ever have to fear for their safety when they go to pray.”

Obama’s words may have comforted some people, but they ring hollow.

Some of the president’s best friends are terrorists and Jew-hating Islamists. It was just a few days ago that Obama attended a New York rally hosted by longtime anti-Semite Al Sharpton and his thug protest group, National Action Network, whose inflammatory motto is, “No justice, no peace.”

And it was President Obama who tried to steer aid to an al-Qaeda affiliate in Syria last year and who threw his support behind former Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi, leader of the genocidally anti-Semitic Muslim Brotherhood, who called Jews the “descendants of apes and pigs.” 

Miller’s views aren’t markedly different from those held by Morsi, former Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Islamic scholars, Louis Farrakhan, or President Obama’s longtime pastor, Jeremiah Wright. Their hatred is derived from a common, age-old bloodlust that, if not challenged, metastasizes in horrific ways. Unfortunately, the disease appears to be once again on the rise.

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.

Subscribe to Frontpage’s TV show, The Glazov Gang, and LIKE it on Facebook.

  • DaCoachK

    Hate crimes-Thought control. Racism, whether one likes it or not, is opinion, yet there are huge penalties for one holding these views. The same for anti-Jews views. Even the new member of the “diversity-is-our-strength-club”–homosexuals–has its own protectors calling for hate-crime laws to protect homosexuals.America has become a ridiculous nation where hurt feelings are somehow protected by the Constitution. We are not a serious country anymore.

    • Myrtle Linder

      Hate:great display of dislike of the truth, GOD, HIS SON JESUS CHRIST and HIS people, who teach only love for each other.. If we could destroy this source of hate, the world would be a peaceful place.

      1 John 2:9-11 Geneva Bible
      9. He that saith that he is in that light and hateth his brother, is in darkness, until this time.
      10. He that loveth his brother, abideth in that light, and there is no occasion of evil in him.
      11. But he that hateth his brother, is in darkness and walketh in darkness, and knoweth not whither he goeth, because that darkness hat blinded his eyes.

  • Tina Trent

    This killer’s admiration for Louis Farrakhan, and David Duke
    alike tells much about this subculture: they are an impressively
    multicultural bunch of ostracized losers egged on by radio shock jocks and so-called “opposition-researchers.” Attention from these quarters is the only encouragement they receive: oppo researchers and law enforcement are the only audience for their blogs and rallies, while decent people across the political spectrum have nothing to do with their world.

    Still, the murderer is the only person responsible for his crimes, not the shock-jocks nor anyone at the SPLC, though they have been intimately involved with Glenn Miller for decades, suing him, monitoring him, and relentlessly fundraising off his existence — a symbiotic relationship but not one that creates culpability.

    Miller might have been stopped if he had he been given a longer prison sentence when he committed previous crimes, but nobody will look into that.

    If only we had a justice system that treated all victims equally, rather than a system warped by hate crime laws that assign different values to different people’s lives based on increasingly corrupt calculations of the political value of the crime.

    Authorities are investigating this as a hate crime, but they did not do so for the thousands killed on 9/11, the dozens of victims of the Boston Marathon attack, the victims of Maj. Hasan, the million mugged and beaten and murdered by people shouting apparently “acceptable” types of hatred, nor the hundreds of thousands raped and murdered by serial offender picking one woman, or child, or man after another to victimize.

    Better that we should recognize the equal worth of every human life — rather than assigning them a place on a sliding scale based on identity, as Glenn Miller has apparently done.

    • Johnny

      The whole hate crime thing is a crock and always has been. Traditional law enforcement had a number of elements in it that sought to keep from demonizing the accused. The point of which was to try to get a trial that had some semblance of fairness. The whole point of using the word ‘hate’ is to demonize the accused in advance. It amounts to an effort to politicize law enforcement and it has been a partial success, to our detriment.

      • Tina Trent

        True, though you cannot blame the police. It is the determination by higher-ops who choose to charge hate or to demand that police look for signs of it. Cops have nothing to do with that choice which is, yes, deeply political. Many cops are cynical about these laws. They’ve seen too much real suffering to want to waste time on frivolous identity politics. Everyone bleeds red.

  • Demetrius Minneapolis

    If America was run by the Jews, Israel would have been given carte blanche years ago to nuke Syria, Egypt, etc into oblivion. Unless they are the Shimon Peres type, then I stand corrected.

  • Gee

    Excerpt from the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Genocide

    “Article II: In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

    (a) Killing members of the group;
    (b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
    (c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
    (d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
    (e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group. Article III: The following acts shall be punishable:

    (a) Genocide;
    (b) Conspiracy to commit genocide;
    (c) Direct and public incitement to commit genocide;
    (d) Attempt to commit genocide;
    (e) Complicity in genocide. “

  • BS77

    Why elevate or universalize this incident to some greater meaning or whatever???…the guy is a pile of garbage…a mentally defective, stupid, hateful jerk…end of story.

  • Chris Shugart

    “Hate Crime” is an arbitrary label that incorrectly presumes that justice and law enforcement people know what motivates criminals. It’s a fallacious progressive concept.

    • Bastiat

      Yes, there is no such thing as a “hate crime”. It is a made up term that is used for political purposes.

      • MrUniteUs1

        I believe Fraser Glen Cross would disagree with you. He was vocal about his hatred of Jews for years. He committted murder 3 times based on that hatred. He killed a 14 year old boy, his grandfather, and, an elderly woman because he thought they were Jews.

        • Bastiat

          So what? Who doesn’t commit a crime out of “hate” for someone?

          • MrUniteUs1

            Do you think Bernie Madoff hated the people he ripped off? His motivation was greed not hatred.

          • Bastiat

            Wow one example of a non-hate crime. Do you think Ted Bundy hated the people he killed? If so why weren’t his crimes considered to be “hate crimes”?

    • MrUniteUs1

      The murder shouted “heil Hitler” when he was arrested.
      What do you suppose his motivation was?

      • Chris Shugart

        I can suppose a lot of things. I have a pretty good imagination. But suppositions are a weak basis for writing law.

        • MrUniteUs1

          I was being sardonic.

      • A Z

        There should be a different penalty if someone kills a person because of the religion versus some one who kill a convenience store clerk because they wanted money?

        Dead is dead. DP in both cases. But what does a hate crimes prosecution have that a regular prosecution have. More of an opportunity to grandstand, impugn and politic.

        There is no reason why this guy can be tried convicted and his appeal run out in 3 to 5 years after which a public hanging should be held.

        • MrUniteUs1

          Let’s say someone sprays some non specific graffiti on a wall. Is that same as spraying swastika on a Jewish Center or synagogue? Should the sentencing be different.

          • A Z

            Yes, in the first case you have a property crime. It costs to remove the graffiti. it takes time, money & effort that could be spent do other things. It affects aesthetics. If aesthetics were not important than the rich would not live in Aspen, Robert Redford would not have a ranch in sun valley, Restaurants would not advertise scenic views, etc.

            In the latter case there are already laws on the book for intimidation, threats and what not. so we do not need more laws. Also people are tired of hate crimes being prosecuted according to a double standard. There are 2 problems with hate crime laws.

          • MrUniteUs1

            Asians, Blacks, Caucasian, and Hispanic criminals have been convicted of the crime. I think some people are tired of the myth that only “whites” are convicted of hate crime, and that it’s a huge number. Most people don’t care.

          • A Z

            Not from where I am sitting do I see it. From high profile cases and from Eric Holder’s statements I see quite the opposite.

            From Eric Holder’s statements the only defense is because we are demanding it, he will not do it even though he was inclined to do it of his own volition.

            They could make that argument but it would be a weak one.

          • MrUniteUs1

            From 2012 FBI Hate Crimes statistics.

            Of the 5,331 known offenders, 54.6 percent were white and 23.3 percent were black. The race was unknown for 11.5 percent, and other races accounted for the remaining known offenders.

          • A Z

            Still not buying it. Need to drill down into the data further.

            Holder did not prosecute the Black panthers intimidating people at the Philadelphia polling places.

            I have seen too many cases in the news, where they were not prosecuted. Were those 23.35 a result of local law enforcement & prosecutors doing what the (In)justice department would not do?

            Kind of like how Obama banned drilling on federal land but took credit for increased drilling overall.

            Are those prosecutions taken because the offenders were caught on video tape and there is no way not to prosecute them?

          • MrUniteUs1

            So now you believe the FBI just made up the statistics?
            Commence the digging.

            The Bush adminstration did not prosecute the NBP. Why do you give them a pass? Not one person from the precinct claim to be intimidate. One of the men lived in the building and was certified poll watcher. The other had a billy club and left when he was told to do so. He was prosecuted and banned from poling paces during the next election,

          • A Z

            The elections were in November. The new president gets sworn in January 20th. You are talking 77 days. From the time the complaint gets filed to January 20th and there might be less than 77 days, it might be 60 days or 70 days.

            Rank & file workers at the Justice department know who the new boss is going to be and their political leanings. It would not take too much for them to let any investigation die. Coming at the tail end of the bush administration I do not see that it is that administration’s fault. I blame Holder.

    • Judahlevi

      I agree that there is no need for anything to be considered a “hate” crime. No matter who is murdered, the murdered should be punished without any additional punishment because of the kind of person they murdered.

      No one should be elevated above others either in a positive manner or a negative one.

  • jtrollla

    Name one type of crime that does not involve hate at some level. So-called “hate crimes” are redundancy. Every single “hate crime” statute should be repealed. The real reason progressives have invented “hate crimes” is that they can be applied to thoughts, words, and beliefs or which progressives disapprove.

    • ahad_ha_amoratsim

      Many crimes of theft are the result of simple greed coupled with a lack of respect for law and society, as opposed to hatred for the victim. I agree with the rest of your comment, though.

    • Nabukuduriuzhur

      You have a point. It’s contempt for other people, a “milder” form of hatred, that allows the criminal to steal, murder, mug, rape, and other crimes. Whether the criminal is the President or the lowest petty thief, that contempt for people is at the heart of it.

  • DogmaelJones1

    The concept of “hate crimes” is a dangerous one. It purports to get inside an individual’s head to find “bad” thoughts that may have caused the individual to commit a crime. But, thought is “free,” even for criminals. One may despise what a criminal may think, but, from the standpoint of law, thought itself is not a crime, nor should it be deemed one. It’s their actions that are provable and open to prosecution, not their thoughts. I can think of a hundred ways I’d like to punish Frazier Glenn Cross, Barack Obama, Harry Reid, and Nancy Pelosi (and a few dozen more politicians who’ve helped to destroy this country but who are indemnified against civil or criminal suits), but are those thoughts “crimes”? No. But by today’s standards and practices, should I be arrested for just thinking about what justice I’d bring to all the aforementioned individuals? The article’s author is right: the concept of “hate crime” trivializes the actual crime, that is, the action taken, and focuses instead on what a criminal’s motivation is. And that’s if an action is truly a crime at all, such as burning a Koran or giving Obama the finger is not. The people who introduced the concept of “hate crime” into American jurisprudence was no Perry Mason.

    • MrUniteUs1

      People are free to think what they want. For instance you may fantasize about having sex with a 12 year old. That’s not a crime. However if you have sex with the 12 year old, that’s a crime. For a hate crime to exist, there first has to be a crime. Crimes come with motivation. It’s important to know the motivation of the crime. Greed, money, jealousy, and hatred against a group of people are just few examples.

  • antioli

    A man walks up to a Teller and says “give me all the Money or my bag blows up”
    . He gets caught, there is no gun no bag no explosive and refuses the money. and pleads ‘freedom of speech.
    what should be the out come?

    • ahad_ha_amoratsim

      Asking that question betrays a total ignorance of freedom of speech, and the difference between thought crimes, threats of violence and actual violence. Such a question is meant to derail discussion, not advance it.

      • laura r

        yelling fire in a crowded theatre is not free speech

        • Softly Bob

          It is if there really is a fire!

          • ahad_ha_amoratsim

            Can an architect be arrested for adding a foyer to a crowded theater?

          • Softly Bob

            Can you be arrested for shouting ‘Farrah’ in a screening of old TV ‘Charlie’s Angels’ episodes in a movie theater?

            Sorry that was really bad!

        • ahad_ha_amoratsim

          Exactly. Neither is saying “Give me your money or I will hurt you.” But saying “You *&%$#$%!! miserable no good [insert ethnic slur of your choice]” is, even though it is rude, disgusting, uncivilized, anti-social and (in my view) un-American.

          How come you grasp the first but not the second or the third? And why should the third become a crime simply because it occurred during or immediately before or after an act that is a crime? Would your example be any more or less of a crime if the perp had said “”give me all the Money or my bag blows up, you *&%$#$%!! miserable no good [insert ethnic slur of your choice]”?
          This is not really all that hard.

  • MrUniteUs1

    Mayor ‘Kind Of Agreed’ With White Supremacist Accused Of Killing 3 At Jewish Centers

    “Kind of agreed with him on some things but, I don’t like to express that too much,” Clevenger told KSPR, which noted the mayor had expressed his views before:

    That hasn’t always been the case. Nearly a decade ago, Clevenger wrote a letter to the editor of the Aurora Advertiser.

    “I am a friend of Frazier Miller helping to spread his warnings,” wrote Clevenger. “The Jew-run medical industry has succeeded in destroying the United State’s workforce.”

    The letter continued.

    “Made a few Jews rich by killin’ us off.”

    He also spoke of the “Jew-run government backed banking industry turned the U.S into the world’s largest debtor nation.”

    • ahad_ha_amoratsim

      Yes, and the gunman also said he was inspired by the work of Max Blumenthal a disgusting lying, Israel-bashing ASHamed Jew.

      • MrUniteUs1


  • Douglas Mayfield

    Tyrants seek to control the thoughts of those whom they rule. ‘Wanna be’ tyrants in Washington and in state and local governments use ‘hate crimes’ as a wedge against, a ‘stalking horse’ for snuffing out, freedom and individual rights.
    The idea that in thinking bad thoughts, or in expressing my bad thoughts by calling someone a slur or epithet, I have committed a crime is a tyrant’s way of first legitimizing, and then institutionalizing, making absolutely everything criminal.
    Why? Because the law operates on precedent. If you establish the precedent that unappealing thoughts and speech are criminal, what then is not a criminal act?
    And be sure that the legal definition of what thoughts are criminal will be in the hands of those who want to rule the resulting police state.

    • MrUniteUs1

      Tyrants seek to control the thoughts of those whom they rule

      You mean like talk show hosts, that brag about having, ditto head, and hannitized followers. .

      • Hilda

        MrUniteUs1 you are missing the point. See DogmaelJones1 comment below

        • MrUniteUs1

          Actually Limbaugh and Hannity sell there influence over the audience to groups like the Heritage foundation.

  • MrUniteUs1

    I have no sympathy for criminals. So if the guy who murdered 3 people at the Jewish Centers in Kansasm get’s charged with a hate crime. I have no sympathy, I do have much sympathy for the family and friends that were murdered, and the Jewish families that were the intended targets of the murderer.

  • A Z

    “The bar has been set so low that refusing to bake a wedding cake for a same-sex couple is a hate crime in the eyes of many left-wingers. ”

    If we go a little further along this path, when you pass a gay guy and don’t say hello, it is a hate crime.

    If you say hello to the gay guy but it is not hearty enough, it is a hate crime. Is that not similar to North Korea, where people are thrown in concentration camps for not clapping loud enough after his speeches?

    • MrUniteUs1

      That’s silly. Refusing to bake a wedding cake is not a hate crime. Not if the wedding cake baker, went around physically attacking and killing
      same-sex couples that’s a hate crime.

      • laura r

        sorry but baker gets sued for discrimination. the gay lobby calls it “hate”

        • MrUniteUs1

          Then why wasn’t the baker charged with a hate crime?

          • laura r

            they were sued.

          • MrUniteUs1

            Thank you Laura, That’s what I figured happen.

        • Bastiat

          Yes “hate crimes” are politically invented. They have nothing to do with improving society. They just create different classes of victims.

          • Brian_Joness

            The victims are already different classes, otherwise they wouldn’t have been victims at all. That is why it is a particularly heinous crime.

          • Bastiat

            A heinous crime? Yes it was. A hate crime? No, no such crime really exists.

  • truebearing

    The Left added a qualifier to crime, ie “hate,” that has a decidedly subjective aspect to it. That was by design. It gives the Left extra power to intimidate and oppress anyone they deem undesirable.
    The Left is expert at hate and they are, once again, manipulating words to leverage power. A “hate crime” is a politically correct concept that carries extra punishment for those who commit such a crime against a special class of people. It is a part of the Left’s version of Sharia.

    It is ominous indeed that miller’s evil comes only a few days ahead of the announcement today that armed pro-Russian groups are telling Jews in Ukraine that they need to register…or else. The same evil behind Nazism has risen again and this is just the beginning.

    • MrUniteUs1

      Do you believe Miller intended Jews and committed a hate crime?

      • truebearing

        I believe he intended to kill Jews but I believe that any crime committed because of malice is a hate crime, regardless of the target. The fact that he hated Jews doesn’t mean there needs to be a special category of crime. Ist degree murder is 1st degree murder. Hate is involved in most 1st degree murders. Hate is involved in most rapes, too, but there are penalties for rape, and we don’t need to create special victim classes so that the Left can buy votes.

        Have you heard of any love crimes?

        • MrUniteUs1

          I think it’s foolish to ignore any motivation for crime including hatred. Maybe the Nazi holocaust could have been avoided if people had taken action earlier. Instead many German Jews, and Gentiles remained in denial.
          I don’t understand why charging Miller with a hate crime upsets you so. There are many special categories of crime. For instance, there’s assault, aggravated assault, assault, with a deadly weapon, assault with intent to kill, sexual assault, child molestation, bestiality, manslaughter, vehicle manslaughter, fraud, theft, grand theft, murder 1 murder 2, and many more. Which one of these special categories, would you like to see eliminated. Or do you just have a thingy against the hate crime category. I don’t understand the buy vote angle.

        • MrUniteUs1

          Love crimes. Crimes of passion, jealous rage.
          Illegal immigration according to Rand Paul.

        • Brian_Joness

          Motivation is a VERY important factor in any criminal prosecution.

  • truebearing

    I can’t help what you don’t understand.

    • MrUniteUs1

      No worries. Happy Easter.

  • Christopher Riddle

    Feeling a need to “Label”certain”Crimes”as”Hate-Crimes”shows an apparent UNWILLINGNESS To Prosecute Crimes In General!It’s not Enough to commit a Crime:It Has To Have A”LABEL”???????

  • apophis

    This guy is white. Holder will deal with him quickly.

  • Mark N Starla Traina





    Virtually all violent
    interracial crimes involving a white and a black have a white victim and a
    black perpetrator. This is something the media not only hides, they actively
    attempt to portray the opposite.