What about what the white man fears?

If you want your fair share of hilarious reading, pick up AHCC's hate crime report. Who is AHCC, you ask? Why, its the Alberta Hate Crimes Committee.

Oh, I used to be a part of them! It was fun for a while, but eventually we couldn't really come up with any original hate crimes, so I went freelance.

Er, not quite, Jimmy. They are a group led by Dr. Valerie Pruegger, who doesn't sound like a white person. She is white, as it so happens -- very few "anti racism" demonstrators and assorted freaks are members of visible minorities, mostly they are whites who feel ashamed that they look so dankable with the blonde hair and the smooth complexion, but she sure doesn't sound very white. We shall see.

First thing to know about this study is that its such inane and useless drivel that the PDF file has been protected against copying: in other words, I can't just cut and paste some of its assorted claptrap and idiocy. This is a classic defense mechanism when your report is so fundamentally flawed you don't want anybody able to easily forward via email your outrageous claims to be instantly discredited across the planet.

Second thing to know is that the hateful and overtly biases messages contained within this report have been paid for by you, the hapless Alberta taxpayer. Below is a little clip of who contributed to this "report". Feel free to write angry letters to their executive. (click the image to view it full size)

Then we can get into the meat and potatoes of this exercise. Remember to go to the top of this post to read the original yourself: its located at http://www.naarr.org/images/stories/pdf/AHCC%20Hate%20Crime%20Report_2009_FINAL%20br.pdf

Lets start on page 8, where we see 600 different wordings all saying basically the same thing. Note that Edmonton Police Services, who commits their own fair share of hate crimes against those in the city who pay their salaries, don't like using the word "crime" or "criminal" when discussing offenses they classify as 'hate crimes'. This should surprise no one, really: Third Edge of the Sword reported in November 2006 (a story you still exclusively can read here) that a dozen or so EPS officers (some of whom are sodomites themselves) spent an entire day trying to apprehend a man who was hanging anti-faggot posters around the Whyte Avenue area. Not, one may not, an actual criminal offense. For those wishing to keep score, on page 9 this racist committee decides they like EPS's definition best, and basically adopt it.

This is important, so follow along: "hate crimes" have been defined in such a way to include things which are not actual criminal acts. Do this to your lawyer, you're scot free. Do this to an asian and you're off to jail.

Page 11 is where this document pretty much dives off the deep end, never to recover. There's a little photocopy of a newspaper article entitled "Muslim leader praises cop action on hate". At 65.7% zoom it seems pretty innocent. Here's what we see when I blow it up to 150% to make it clearly readable: (click the image to view it full size)

That's right, your friend and mine Imam Syed Soharwardy! I've written about him here (I called him a pillow-biter). Ezra Levant has written about him extensively, if there's anything you should read its this recent bit about his anti-Jew efforts in Calgary. He's the poster boy for aryan doctor Valerie Pruegger! Seriously? Seriously?? This just keeps getting better and better.

Page 12 is another example of AHCC's need to keep people cutting and pasting their garbage: one of the bullet points where police find difficulty with hate crimes is: "the high burden of proof necessary to prove these charges in court". No shit. We also see that EPS has the only two hate crime prosecutions lately, which may be because they have a dozen personnel working on finding a guy putting up posters. Where were they when the "Rock Against Bush" ones were going up?

Page 15 is where this whole segment really jumps the shark. It goes onto page 49, and somebody else can really start picking apart the latter 2/3rds of this document. I'll do page 49, and then pages 16-48 can be the realm of somebody else. I have Christmas pies to bake in the morning.

I have done a full screencapture of Page 15 and highlighted a few of the flaws in this document for you to follow along. (click the image to view it full size)

Let's start at the top: its the line that motivated the title for this blogpost. Aboriginals, it says, "fear re-victimization by police and justice system". Lets briefly ignore the irony that this paper was partly assembled by EPS, which does its own actual victimization of natives (along with some 'racist emails' that don't actually matter in the grand scheme of things but would bug the piss out of AHCC and groups like it. What do white men fear? What do huge numbers of people in downtown Edmonton fear? Being assaulted by natives. Why do they fear this? Because natives seem to commit a lot of crimes! If AHCC was so colourblind as they claim, then they would note that non-natives make up some 95% of people in Alberta. Ergo, there are numerically a lot more people worried about getting mugged over change than worried that they may be "re-victimized" (whatever that means) when they whine to a cop that somebody called them a mean name.

This leads us to our next note, the big red box about 2/5ths the way down the graphic: basically it says that homeless should be another group 'protected' by hate crimes legislation. Yeah, that's the big worry of homeless people: not that they are without homes, or without jobs, or suffering addictions, but their feelings have been hurt when called an uncouth name by a person they came up begging for charity from.

Now, remember above when I said that despite looking like a member of the Hitler Youth, Dr. Valerie Pruegger sure doesn't sound white? Well, here it is: "In the 2006," she starts off a sentence. Oh come on! I've read emails from Nigerian bank scammers who have a more capable grasp of syntax than this Psychology prof!

Now what's the thing that happened "in the 2006"? Well that's our next underline: black persons represented almost half of police-reported incidents in Canada. My quick response would be...so? If black persons want to stop being so represented in discrimination in nightclubs, perhaps they should tackle and turn in these criminals in their own communities who keep causing shit in nightclubs! You know, the same criminals who are known to everybody in the community. Hmm, that sounds like work: much easier to just whine to Mia Dauvergne.

Now to the next line, the "neo-Nazi propoganda" of the Aryan Guard, and the huge throng of counter-demonstrators fighting back the notion that there can be a white pride. As kustom noted in the CalgaryStreetRides forum:

The Aryan guard no matter what their views are have a valid point if they want to have a white pride march then so be it, Calgary has a gay Pride march do we have anti homos come out and try to kick the shit out fags, not that I have seen.

In my point they should have just let them do their march and not interfere they weren't hurting anyone so in respects to the Aryan Guard it wasn't them who caused the trouble it was the anti protesters that came out.
Also contrast with our old buddy Syed, who remember was happily quoted in this same report. Again, take it away Ezra Levant:
The Muslim Council of Calgary and Syed Soharwardy teamed up earlier this year for a pro-terrorist rally in the heart of the Jewish community. Here is some of my coverage of it at the time; here's a picture of them flying the flag of the terrorist group, Hezbollah -- a group deemed a criminal organization in Canada.

You'll notice that, in addition to the terrorist flag, there is a swastika.

I've lived in Calgary Southwest for most of my life, and my parents and grandparents live there, too. None of us has ever seen swastikas in the neighbourhood until the Soharwardy/MCC protests. They didn't just wave swastika signs, they left anti-Semitic graffiti on a wall, too: (image)

To this day you can still see where that graffiti has been painted over.

Week after week the anti-Semites from the MCC and Soharwardy's group came back to the mall in the center of the Jewish neighbourhood. At first, they only waved the terrorist flag furtively. When they saw, though, that the police did nothing to stop them -- but rather accosted any pro-Israel counter-protesters -- the anti-Semites got bolder and bolder, to the point where they parked their cars in the Jewish Centre across the street -- on their way to a Jew-bashing rally! -- and spat on a rabbi passing by.

It was only when the owners of the mall got a restraining order against Soharwardy, the MCC and the other protesters, did the weekly festival of Jew-hatred retreat back into their holes -- oh, except the graffiti.
Yeah, its those damned Aryan Guard members. Damn them.

Okay, we're almost done. Lets just look at page 15 again, refresh your memory:

The bottom line is another curiosity: racial crimes are 'inspired' by anti-immigrant crimes. Hmmm, is it possible, just possible, that the next rendition of this document will be all up in arms about "anti-immigrant" sentiments? After all, why on earth should the residents of a nation-state hold a higher regard to the citizens of said nation state. What kind of goofball idiocy is this....?

With that, we draw page 15 to a close. It's been fun, its been a good run. These people are clearly idiots: they make these silly little powerpoint presentations and hope the rest of us just gloss over the details and don't understand the biases and bigotry and hatred they couch in the language of academia. Dr. Valerie Pruegger and her ilk may care about this crap, but you and me and the average working stiffs of this province are more concerned about being assaulted, being robbed, and being persecuted for cheering on Switzerland.

Okay, finally, here's a couple little bits from page 49: first, let's again see who's sponsoring this claptrap. You pay their salaries. Congrats, you've spent money on crap.

Secondly, you can see the 7-year-old mindset of these people: "we all look the same inside". So? We all look different outside. Why should one be discounted while the other isn't?

Thank you for enjoying our enjoyment of this document. It could be worse, right? It could accept as gospel the hate-filled ramblings of well known internet racist Ricard Warman, for example. That would make it just complete claptrap.

Oh, wait, sorry. Page 41: