Race on DH (again)

Teacher in sex photo trial discovered deadOn trial for alleged inappropriate photos, found dead in car with engine on

Updated: 3:42 p.m. PT Jan 11, 2007



BETHLEHEM, Pa. - A suspended teacher on trial over charges of photographing teenage boys in revealing clothing was found dead in a car idling in his garage, authorities said.Police went to the home of Keith Snyder, 55, after he failed to appear in court Wednesday. Judge F.P. Kimberly McFadden announced the death and sent the jury home. She did not provide any other details.

An autopsy was scheduled.

Snyder was suspended from teaching at Southern Lehigh High School shortly after he was charged in 2005 with corruption of minors, solicitation of a minor to pose nude and evidence tampering.

Several teenage boys who were Snyder’s former students testified this week that Snyder paid them extra if they performed chores at his home while bare-chested or wearing skimpy bathing suits or wrestling singlets.

“We felt this defendant committed crimes that negatively impacted young boys. Our office vigorously prosecuted the case, but on a human side, whenever a life is lost it is tragic,” said District Attorney John Morganelli.Snyder’s attorney, Bohdan Zelechiwsky, declined to comment.

California law violates gays' rights, ex-priest says

Michael Stephen Baker, who was defrocked in 2000 and faces trial on molestation charges, contends it's easier to prosecute homosexuals.


By John Spano, Times Staff Writer
March 8, 2007


A former Roman Catholic priest said in court Wednesday that the rights of homosexuals have been violated by a state law that makes it easier to prosecute gay pedophiles than heterosexual child molesters.

It apparently was the first time that gay rights had been introduced into the ongoing prosecution of current and former Catholic priests alleged to have molested children.

The state law in question imposes no time limits on prosecuting heterosexuals who force intercourse. But gays are subject to prosecution for sex acts with a child without limit regardless of whether the allegations involved forced or consensual sex.

Defrocked priest Michael Stephen Baker, 59, said the provision denies equal protection of the law to gay people. He cited a provision of the U.S. Constitution that has been used to advance racial and gender equality.

Baker, appearing in court with a trimmed gray beard, is awaiting trial for allegedly molesting two boys — one who was unconscious — during weekend Catholic youth trips.

Baker's case is the one Cardinal Roger M. Mahony has said "troubles" him the most. Baker confessed to Mahony his interest in children 20 years ago. He was sent for treatment, allegedly molested more children, and was defrocked by Mahony in 2000.

Baker's lawyer, Donald H. Steier, pointed to a state Supreme Court decision last year that struck down a provision of the law that required gay child offenders to register for life while imposing less stringent registration requirements on heterosexual offenders.

A staff attorney for the Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund, the premier group lobbying for the legal rights of gays, said the sexual orientation of an abuser is irrelevant.

"People don't have the right to abuse children regardless of their sexual orientation," said Tara Borelli, a Lambda staff attorney. "Abuse by a gay priest isn't a gay issue; it's about abuse of power."

Baker is awaiting trial on 13 charges of molesting the two boys from 1994 to 1998.

"Had [Baker] been engaged in heterosexual intercourse with a female of the same age, he could not have been charged," Steier said.

Steier suggested that Baker's victims consented to the contacts — a claim that prosecutors denounced.

"To characterize sexual contact between a priest and a student as consensual, let alone as 'consensual, mutual, gentle, homosexual contact' or a 'romantic relationship' as the defense does, is not only profoundly inappropriate, but odious and offensive," according to court papers filed by Los Angeles County Dist. Atty. Steve Cooley's office.

Five years ago, Baker was charged with molesting an altar boy at St. Paul of the Cross Church in La Mirada. But that case and a dozen others Cooley had filed were dropped after a U.S. Supreme Court decision voided a California law that allowed the prosecution of older child abuse cases.

The church investigated the current case — though one of the youths denied any improprieties — in 1996, according to a lawyer for the Los Angeles Archdiocese.

Baker is charged with sex with a minor, and sex with a boy who was unconscious.

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-baker8mar08,0,6900808.story?coll=la-home-headlines

Blinded by the White: Crime, Race and Denial in America
By Tim Wise




Imagine if you will the following: The place is a quiet, suburban community. The kind commonly referred to by its residents as a "nice place to live and raise children." It's a community known for civic pride, affluent families, and schools where the students score well above the national average on aptitude tests. It's also 93 percent white.

Now imagine that at this community's high school, a handful of black students who say they feel like outcasts begin talking openly about how they hate everyone. They start dressing alike--perhaps wearing the same colors, or leather jackets, or black berets--and referring to themselves as the "dashiki posse."

Furthermore, they show off their gun collection in a video, which they produce for a class project. In this video, they act out the murders of dozens of their fellow students and teachers.

In addition to all this, the students are known to operate a website which espouses hatred and violence, and on this website they have been known to post what amounts to hit lists--letting everyone know who they hate most, and intend to kill first. One of the targets of their hatred discovers the list, tells his father, and the two of them inform police of the thinly veiled threat.

Let's imagine these black students are fond of a particularly "violent" form of music--say, gangsta' rap--and are known to paint viciously anti-white slogans and symbols on their clothing, and sing the praises of a particular black mass murderer--say, Colin Ferguson.

Now, let us answer the following question: How long would it take, based on the above information, for school officials, teachers, and parents to make sure these kids were expelled from school and perhaps prosecuted? How long would it take for their families to be run out of town on a rail? Does anyone believe this scenario would have been met with apathy, cautious indifference, or even amusement?

Of course not. But that's exactly what happened in the real world when at this same school, in this same community, two white students from "good families" began dressing alike, saying they hated everyone, calling themselves the "Trenchcoat Mafia," listening to "shock-rock" and the sometimes violent lyrics of white musical artists, showing off their guns and murder fantasies on film, operating a website which praised Hitler and advocated violence, painting swastikas on their clothes, and naming the people they wanted to kill over the Internet. Still seen as "basically normal kids" by their families, friends, and teachers, these two would be ignored. Ignored that is until last week, when they would go on a killing rampage reminiscent of the previous seven that have occurred at schools around the country in the past two years.

No one really thought they'd do anything," said some of their classmates. "We thought it was all talk," said others. Of course. These were white kids, with BMW's, whose families make six figures or more. These are the beautiful people. They never do anything wrong.

We moved from the city to get away from things like this." The statement rings in my ears with a burning familiarity. It's the same thing heard after Paduchah, Pearl, Fayetteville, Jonesboro, Edinboro, Springfield, and now Littleton. Some people never get it. Some people are so caught up in their race and class stereotypes about what "danger" looks like, they still insist "things like this just don't happen here."

Oh yeah? Well, where do they happen? I have yet to hear of one black or Latino kid in even one inner-city high school plotting, let alone carrying out mass murder. Just where does an urban-dweller go to build 30 bombs anyway? Where can they sit around sawing off shotguns without someone noticing? Christ, if these kids had been black they would have been followed around the hardware store for so long that they would never have been able to buy any pipes, let alone the other ingredients needed for the kind of explosives Klebold and Harris concocted.

So in light of what's happened, not only in Littleton, but in other "nice, quiet" suburbs all around the country lately, one must ask: just what were these folks trying to get away from in the cities? Must not have been violence. Must have been black and brown people (except, of course, for the handful that can afford to live among them in style), and poor folks generally. How sad. Once again, the racialization of crime and deviance has allowed us to let down our guard to the greatest threats to our safety: not people of color (if we're white), but our own white children, white parents, white neighbors, white husbands, white lovers, and white friends.

We have been so conditioned to see deviant and destructive behavior as a by-product of melanin or "defective" black culture, that commentators can, without any sense of irony continue to remark about how, well, remarkable it is when things like this happen.

It reminds me of something James Baldwin once said about the Holocaust--a much bigger paroxysm of white violence no doubt, but which nonetheless resonates here--"They did not know that they could act that way. But I doubt very much whether black people were astounded."

The white American myth of innocence, decency, morality, and the cowboys who never fired on an "injun" unless it was self-defense, have all been laid bare for those willing to see. That people of color always knew the myths to be bullshit, while the dominant majority refused to listen and look at themselves only makes the situation more tragic. But not a damn bit more shocking. Of course, that the mass killers in the schoolyards have all been white as of late has gone without mention in the media. Oh sure, we hear about the similarities between the Columbine High tragedy and the others--well, at least some of the similarities: all the shooters were boys; all the shooters used guns; all the shooters talked openly about violence; all the shooters played violent video games; all the shooters ate Cheerios at some point in the last ten years--you get the picture. In other words, the racial similarities between all these gun-lovin', trash-talking, dark-clothes wearing, `Doom'-playin,' Cheerios-eatin,' Marilyn Manson-listenin' bundles of testosterone are irrelevant. While we can rest assured these kids would have been "raced" had they come from black "ghetto matriarchs" in the `hood, it seems as though no one can see the most obvious common characteristic among them: namely, their white skin. This, I guess, is what folks mean when they say they're color-blind: they can see color all right, it's white they have a problem with.

Typical, typical, typical. White folks go off, killing wholesale like there's a frickin' closeout on semi-automatic ammunition, and we get fifty "explanations" from the so-called experts who are called in by the media to make sense of it all.





People of color do something horrific or commit random acts of retail violence and the whole world lines up to blame one of three things: their black families (particularly their black single mommas); their black DNA (as in the rantings of The Bell Curve); or their "defective" black culture and inverted value system. Whatever the case, their blackness never, and I mean never, gets overlooked.




Gang violence in the cities heats up and we've got U.S. News and World Report running a cover story entitled: "A Shocking Look at Blacks and Crime," and every nighttime news program running stories asking "what's wrong with the black family (as if there's only one); what's wrong with these people in the "ghetto underclass."





But when Charles Manson, John Wayne Gacy, Ted Bundy, and Jeffrey Dahmer go out and do their thing, no one thinks to ask what it is about white folks that makes them cut babies out of their mothers' wombs, torture young men and bury them under the house, kill two dozen or more women for the hell of it, or consume human flesh. White deviants are afforded the privilege of individualization--"that's just crazy Charlie, ignore him, he's a potted plant"--while those of color get to represent the whole community and become exhibit A in David Duke and Charles Murray's eugenic fantasy. You say 90 percent of modern serial killers have been white? Well, isn't that puzzling. Next question.

You'll never even hear the term "white crime" uttered in polite conversation. White collar crime, maybe; but to suggest that the collar might not be the only thing lacking color, would be dogma non grata in mainstream discussion. "White-on-white violence?" What the hell is that? Never heard of it. Even in the wake of these massacres. Even as white folks are killing other white folks in Kosovo (and still other white folks are bombing them to get them to stop).

The media and politicians have done such a fine job making sure everyone knows who to fear (namely the dark and poor) that we forget how whites are disproportionately likely to engage in all kinds of destructive behavior, from drunk driving, to drug use as teenagers, to animal mutilation, to fratricide, to cutting corners on occupational safety standards and pollution control, which then result in the deaths of twice as many people as are murdered each year.

We forget that when it comes to violent crime, whites are four times more likely to be victimized by another white person than by a person of color, and that only sixteen-thousandths of 1 percent of the white community will be killed by a black person in a given year.

It all leads one to wonder: how many of the white families with kids at Columbine would have moved away, or at least taken their kids out of the school if, say, 50 or 100 black families had moved in and enrolled their children there? If other suburban communities and other white folks are any indication, the answer is quite a few. Study after study for 25 years has found that whites begin to leave an area and disenroll their kids from the local schools when the community becomes as little as 8 percent black. As the numbers get higher, the slow trickle becomes a mass exodus. Why? Well, to get away from crime, of course. I'm pretty sure this is the textbook definition of irony.




Even more hilarious is the tendency to act as if young white people were ever innocent, upstanding citizens compared to the rest of the country. Even as far back as 1966, a national survey of 15 to 17 -year-old whites found that "virtually all" had committed numerous criminal offenses, from breaking and entering, to minor property destruction, to armed robbery.

I've decided that's why all those shows like "Leave it To Beaver," "Father Knows Best," and "The Brady Bunch" were so popular: not because many people actually lived like that, but because they didn't, and could escape into this unreal fantasy life via the television. After all, why watch a program that looks just like your daily routine? That would be boring. So just as with westerns that allowed (mostly white) kids to fantasize about a more exciting life, these wholesome family programs allowed (and still allow in syndication) mostly white viewers to ignore the dysfunction which is really all around them, and always has been, long before the first black kid set foot in their schools, and long before the "Godless" humanists bounced prayer from homeroom.




Unfortunately, I have no doubt this kind of thing will happen again. In fact, had it not been for a few folks informing on plots they knew about, we would already have added a Milwaukee suburb to the list of white teen angst killing fields, and a week after Columbine would have gotten a look at what kind of explosives Caucasians in Texas are capable of putting together. And still, according to my morning paper, less than half of all teens and their parents (mostly white if modern survey techniques are any guide) think their schools are at risk for this kind of violence.

Yeah, well, just keep telling yourself that. Keep watching "COPS" and "Real Stories of the Highway Patrol," and "America's Most Wanted," where most of the bad guys fit the more comfortable profile to which we've grown accustomed. I can hear the dialogue now: "Why look at how menacing the large Negro is honey! My, oh, my, we sure are glad we moved out here to Pleasantville. Me, my lovely wife, and our son. Speaking of whom, honey, where is Waldo anyway? I don't think I've seen him all week. Is he on that computer of his again? That scamp. Such a hard worker. Oh, and honey, what was that sawing sound coming from the garage last night?"

Tim Wise is the Director of the newly formed Association for White Anti-Racist Education (AWARE), in Nashville, Tennessee.




Link:
http://www.zmag.org/ZMag/articles/wise.htm

supreme_ian wrote: ahahahah holy shit ...ahahahah JAH your wildin ahahahah

I LOVE your photos Ian!

Carnivore wrote:
In the 2006 U.S. census, whites made up 80% of the U.S. population. So your figures suggest that whites are less likely to serve time for violent crimes against children than others. And I thought your original point was that whites were more likely to be "sexual predators" (meaning sweet tea, an adult, would have to fear them walking down the street). You haven't addressed that at all. You've totally pulled a KWAC here, and posted a bunch of anecdotes and pretended they're statistics.

THEY DON'T MAKE STATS THAT LOOK BAD AGAINST WHITES WHAT PART YOU DON'T OVERSTAND?

I posted news articles from valid sources. A boy raping his mother? All the white priests and bishops molesting children?

You gonna see what you want to see so continue to enjoy your shit colored glasses.

Carnivore wrote: [quote=JAH]THEY DON'T MAKE STATS THAT LOOK BAD AGAINST WHITES WHAT PART YOU DON'T OVERSTAND?

I posted news articles from valid sources. A boy raping his mother? All the white priests and bishops molesting children?

You gonna see what you want to see so continue to enjoy your shit colored glasses.

Bullshit.

I am calling bullshit on you too. If it's bullshit then show me even one example of a single set of stats skewed against whites about any subject from anywhere. You can't as they don't exist.

Carnivore wrote:
This is stupid. So now statistics are racist? Yes people can lie with statistics by framing questions in deceptive ways, and yes the can be biased reporting of statistics, but your point is just ridiculous.

Counter-example:
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/66496.php

It is common knowledge that whites use and manufacture the most drugs.

Em26 wrote:
I know what you meant. It's understandable.

You weren't the one to break out the expired crayons and continue to color like crazy.

you are exhibiting alot of bitchassness