Archive for the ‘MDHR’ Category

Last week, the hate crimes discussion that was cancelled 2 months ago was finally held. According to this SCTimes article, “[the] panel discussing hate crimes was held after security concerns led to a two-month delay at St. Cloud State University Wednesday at the Miller Center Auditorium.” Actually, there weren’t any legitimate security concerns, as I’ve written about here.

The myth of security concerns was likely started by the Minnesota Department of Human Rights, aka MDHR. Over 3 hours after the event had gotten cancelled, MDHR issued a statement saying “Hate is not a value in St. Cloud or in any part of our state. Our community deserves better,” says MDHR Commissioner Rebecca Lucero. “I am heartbroken by the attempts to silence discussion on hate crimes. The goal of the forum was to discuss the community we want to create. One that is full of dignity and joy.”

The event was officially announced as cancelled at 1:16 pm. The protesters didn’t show up until after 2:00 pm. Further, the St. Cloud Times wrote “despite the ‘public safety concern’ cited by the human rights department, St. Cloud Assistant Police Chief Jeff Oxton said Wednesday the department received no reports of threats related to the event.

The panel was originally planned to be held Sept. 18 at the St. Cloud Library, but was canceled “due to safety concerns,” according to a release from the Minnesota Department of Human Rights.

On that day, demonstrators with the Freedom Speaks Coalition protested the Council on American-Islamic Relations’ involvement. On their website, the group claims that the Council on American-Islamic Relations is affiliated with terrorist organizations.

Shame on the Times for soft-pedaling that. It isn’t a claim. It’s a finding of fact from “the terror-finance trial against the Holy Land Foundation and its former officials.”

Assistant Attorney General Ronald Weich “included trial transcripts and exhibits ‘which demonstrated a relationship among CAIR, individual CAIR founders, and the Palestine Committee. Evidence was also introduced that demonstrated a relationship between the Palestine Committee and HAMAS, which was designated as a terrorist organization in 1995.'”

CAIR’s reputation as a Muslim civil rights organization is tarnished:

CAIR wasn’t founded after 9/11. It was started in the 1990s. It’s difficult to take CAIR seriously an organization that’s promoted by propagandists like Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib.

The SC Times’ latest guilt trip article is worth highlighting. It isn’t worth highlighting because the content. It isn’t worth highlighting because the writing was exceptional. It’s worth highlighting because the picture of hateful graffiti spray-painted on a business’s windows is from July, 2010.

How big of a problem are hate crimes when the most recent hate crimes picture is 9 years old? With the number of hate crimes event scheduled for St. Cloud since Labor Day, you’d think that St. Cloud was the hate crimes capitol of Minnesota. While hate crimes have risen slightly statewide, the numbers simply don’t bear out the notion that St. Cloud is a hotbed of hate crimes. The chart in this article highlights hate crime incidents per bias motivation in 2017. According to the statistics compiled by the FBI, the number of hate crimes in St. Cloud totaled 2, 1 based on the person’s race, ethnicity or ancestry. The other hate crime was based on the victim’s religion.

According to the St. Cloud Times’ article, a “new three-part series of forums is planned to replace an event on Dismantling Hate Crimes that was abruptly cancelled Sept. 18 ‘because of safety and logistical concerns,’ according to the St. Cloud Area Human Rights Commission.” That’s, at best, misleading. When I wrote this post, I quoted “a statement by St. Cloud Assistant Police Chief Jeff Oxton. The Times wrote that ‘Despite the public safety concern’ cited by the human rights department, St. Cloud Assistant Police Chief Jeff Oxton said Wednesday ‘the department received no reports of threats related to the event.‘”

Since St. Cloud’s Chief of Police was participating in the event, it’s likely that the St. Cloud PD was monitoring the chatter. At the time, there was lots of speculation that the cancellation was part of a hoax. What I found was that the event’s cancellation was posted on the St. Cloud Human Rights Commission’s Facebook page at 1:16 pm on the day of the event. The ‘protesters’ were mostly just concerned citizens who showed up after 2:00 pm, well after the event had gotten cancelled.

Further, the Minnesota Department of Human Resources issued a statement after 4:30 pm. I wrote in this post about how the Minnesota Department of Human Resources tried belittling the protesters:

“Hate is not a value in St. Cloud or in any part of our state,” Minnesota Department of Human Rights Commissioner Rebecca Lucero said in a news release issued just over an hour before the planned start of the event. “Our community deserves better.”

“I am heartbroken by the attempts to silence discussion on hate crimes. The goal of the forum was to discuss the community we want to create. One that is full of dignity and joy,” she said.

MDHR is full of it. There were 2 groups of protesters at the event. The smaller group was protesting the event. The other group was actually praying for the Persecuted Church. Neither group attempted “to silence discussion on hate crimes.”

The best proof of that came in the form of Jaylani Hussein, who showed up at 6:30, which was half an hour after the event was scheduled to start. He held an impromptu event at the site that was deemed too dangerous. It went off without a hitch. The Times wrote this late in the article:

The St. Cloud Human Rights Commission and Minnesota Department of Human Rights initially planned a forum on hate crimes in September and cancelled it. A group opposed to the Council on American-Islamic Relations’ involvement in the panel planned a protest of the event and showed up even after it was called off.

I’d be surprised if the handful of protesters and people praying for the Persecuted Church were monitoring the St. Cloud Human Rights Commission’s Facebook page. The way that paragraph was written made it sound like the people had something nefarious planned.

While the lineup of speakers has changed, the goal remains the same — convince people that there’s a hate crime epidemic sweeping through St. Cloud. Last time, the event was titled “Dismantling Hate Crimes” before it was cancelled amidst a ton of controversy. Last time, the dishonest thugs at the Minnesota Department of Human Rights whined that they were upset that protesters had tried to silence a discussion of hate crimes. That’s a bunch of BS. Jeff Oxton, St. Cloud’s assistant police chief, “said Wednesday the department received no reports of threats related to the event.”

Minnesota Department of Human Rights Commissioner Rebecca Lucero issued a statement that said, in part, “Hate is not a value in St. Cloud or in any part of our state. Our community deserves better. I am heartbroken by the attempts to silence discussion on hate crimes. The goal of the forum was to discuss the community we want to create. One that is full of dignity and joy.”

I pointed out that the event was cancelled before the dozen or so protesters arrived. I also highlighted the fact that no threats were received that day or that week. In other words, the statement was BS.

This time, instead of CAIR’s Jaylani Hussein and MDHR’s Lucero, they’ll have police hating AG Keith Ellison, a former skinhead and career politician wannabe Dan Wolgamott. What this has to do with St. Cloud is beyond comprehension. St. Cloud doesn’t have a hate crimes problem. We definitely don’t have a skinhead problem. Unfortunately, we have a crisis with wannabe career politicians.

According to this article, “Hate crimes and white nationalism will be the focus of a St. Cloud listening session Tuesday night. Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison will be joined by District 14B Rep. Dan Wolgamott and former violent extremist Christian Picciolini from 6-7:30 p.m. Tuesday at Atwood Memorial Center ballroom at St. Cloud State University. Ellison will hear concerns about hate crimes and seek community-based solutions, according to a press release from his office.”

This event is scheduled to last 90 minutes. If it was based on truth, it would last 15 minutes maximum. I don’t understand why a former skinhead’s input makes sense. Frankly, I don’t think it’s relevant. It’s disturbing that Keith Ellison is Minnesota’s AG. He’s a former Nation of Islam activist. He’s also been photographed with Antifa handbooks. Antifa is now classified as a domestic terrorist organization.

Then there’s this:

Keith Ellison is the last person Minnesotans should listen to about hate crimes. Ellison has appeared at a fundraiser for Assata Shakur, a convicted cop killer who escaped from a New Jersey prison and is believed to be exiled in Cuba.

What this bunch of hoaxers have to say on hate crimes and white supremacists is difficult to imagine. Considering Ellison’s history of hate, I wouldn’t think his thoughts on hate crimes was worth much.

It’s time to call out the St. Cloud Times for protecting their leftist cronies. This Our View Editorial is disgusting. It’s about the postponed Dismantling Hate Crimes event from this past Wednesday. Here’s the opening of the SCTimes’ article:

Sadly, people driven by fear are still driving the public agenda. Witness about two dozen people who showed up Wednesday at the St. Cloud Library to protest a panel discussion about dismantling hate crimes because, well, spreading hate and fear is their go-to.

Shame on the Times for publishing this trash. This isn’t worthy of a college newspaper, much less worthy of a once-respectable newspaper. This editorial is cringeworthy for its sloppiness and fact gathering.

First, the St. Cloud Human Rights Commission published a postponement notice on their Facebook page Wednesday afternoon. The timestamp for the post is 1:16 pm on Sept. 18th:

Next, 2 groups were there at the Library that might’ve been considered protest groups. One was a group who prayed for the Persecuted Church. The other organization is called the “Freedom Speaks Coalition.”

One of the groups applied for and received a permit to use a room in the Public Library from 2:00 pm-4:00 pm September 18. The Dismantling Hate Crimes event didn’t start until 6:00 pm. The Times’ hit piece continues:

First, though, many of the picketers (who showed up despite the cancellation that came soon before the event was to begin) would not stand up for their beliefs in the most basic way possible, by putting their names to their convictions. Offered the opportunity by journalists from the St. Cloud Times and other news outlets to explain their point of view, many offered their thoughts but most refused to provide their names.

Why would a sane person give the Times their name considering the Times Editorial Board’s penchant for smearing its political opponents? The Times is a media organization. Do they think we don’t know that they’re aware of Antifa protests on college campuses against conservatives and Christians? Am I supposed to believe that they aren’t aware of the violence that #BlackLivesMatters has perpetrated? Democrat-affiliated thugs like Antifa, #BlackLivesMatter and CAIR shouldn’t be trusted.

Notice that the Times trusted MDHR’s and CAIR’s narrative that the event was cancelled because some peaceful protesters showed up at the event. What the Times didn’t mention is that the event was postponed before the protesters arrived at the Library. Notice that the Times omitted the fact that Assistant Police Chief Jeff Oxton told Times reporter Jenny Berg that they hadn’t received any threats regarding the event.

Does the Times actually think that this postponement is legitimate? The SC Chief of Police was scheduled to participate in the discussion, as was an FBI supervisor. Also, 2 St. Cloud police officers were there. To think that CAIR and the Minnesota Department of Human Rights would get frightened by these protesters is foolish.

I’m tired of the Times Editorial Board either watering down their editorials to protect their political favorites or ignoring major facts. (Think Jeff Oxton’s statement.) The Times is supposed to be a news-gathering organization. It’d be nice if their work product reflected that. This video by Marni Hockenberg lays out pretty much the same facts that I laid out in this post:

In the stranger-than-fiction category, it’s apparent that the official statement issued by Commissioner Rebecca Lucero are spreading nationwide. These media outlets accept as Gospel Commissioner Lucero’s non-truths. For instance, this article quotes Lucero when she said “Hate is not a value in St. Cloud or in any part of our state.” The article continues, saying “Lucero says she is ‘heartbroken by the attempts to silence discussion on hate crimes.'”

No attempt was made to stifle free speech. Commissioner Lucero shouldn’t spread lies about people exercising their right to speak freely about matters of religion and government. I don’t know what’s worse — Commissioner Lucero spreading propaganda or the Minnesota Department of Human Rights attempting to criticize people exercising their right to free speech.

The right to free speech doesn’t just apply to Democrats. A wise man once said that ‘the law protects everyone or it doesn’t protect anyone.’ How can the Human Rights Commissioner in Minnesota dispute that.

The sad part is that Commissioner Lucero’s propaganda is spreading like wildfire. The AP article stripped out things like the fact that Jeff Oxton, the St. Cloud Assistant Police Chief, said that they were monitoring things but that they hadn’t received any threats concerning the event. Why didn’t the AP keep that part of the SCTimes article in the AP article? It’s like the AP intentionally did that just like the NYTimes’ editors omitted the part about the supposed victim doesn’t recall the incident and isn’t talking to anyone.

The more articles I see with Commissioner Lucero’s highly inaccurate quote, the more certain I am that the Dismantling Hate Crimes event was nothing more than a Democrat publicity stunt. Our commissioners don’t just serve the governor. They’re supposed to serve We The People, too. I don’t know how they can do that when they turn a blind eye on a special interest’s propaganda. That’s what CAIR did with Jaylani Hussein’s rhetoric.

Hussein said that CAIR is a civil rights organization in one breath, then insists that groups like “Freedom Speaks Coalition is a hate group.” This is the USA, where that type of organization can criticize organizations like CAIR or politicians like Commissioner Lucero. Apparently, CAIR didn’t learn that in Civil Rights 101 when it was in law school. Perhaps they were attending a Farrakhan rally the day they taught that.

Then again, they might not have learned that because CAIR is really just Hamas DBA as CAIR in the USA:

It’s one thing for CAIR to spread their propaganda. It’s quite another when a commissioner that works for us puts out a statement that accuses her bosses, aka We The People, of committing hate crimes. That’s quite a prejudice for a human rights department.

Things have changed pretty dramatically since the last time I wrote about last night’s scheduled event on “Dismantling Hate Crimes.” First, the event was scheduled to start at 6:00 pm Wednesday night. Sources close to the event have told me that the event was postponed at 3:30 pm, well in advance of the event. But i digress. This afternoon’s updated article was significantly modified from yesterday’s article.

Yesterday’s article started by saying “the panel on dismantling hate crimes scheduled for 6 p.m. Wednesday was postponed over safety concerns, according to Taylor Putz, communications director for the Minnesota Department of Human Rights. Putz told the St. Cloud Times Wednesday afternoon that the department postponed the event due to ‘logistical concerns’ and a ‘larger public safety concern’ due to the number of people expected to attend the forum.”

Today’s article starts by saying “A panel on dismantling hate crimes scheduled for 6 p.m. Wednesday was postponed over safety concerns, according to Taylor Putz, communications director for the Minnesota Department of Human Rights. Putz told the St. Cloud Times Wednesday afternoon that the department postponed the event due to ‘logistical concerns’ and a ‘larger public safety concern’ due to the number of people expected to attend the forum. ‘We want to make sure the space is safe and accessible,’ Putz said.”

In this afternoon’s article, greater emphasis was put on villainizing the protesters:

“Hate is not a value in St. Cloud or in any part of our state,” Minnesota Department of Human Rights Commissioner Rebecca Lucero said in a news release issued just over an hour before the planned start of the event. “Our community deserves better.”

“I am heartbroken by the attempts to silence discussion on hate crimes. The goal of the forum was to discuss the community we want to create. One that is full of dignity and joy,” she said.

For the record, the ‘protesters’ held what I’d consider one of the mildest protests in American history. The ‘protesters’ held signs that criticized CAIR but they certainly didn’t threaten anyone there for the Dismantling Hate Crimes event. Most of the people there spent most of their time praying for “the Persecuted Church.”

Jaylani Hussein

I don’t know what Commissioner Lucero is talking about when she insists that the protesters silenced the “discussion on hate crimes.” If I had to guess, I’d bet that this is a PR stunt that didn’t turn out the way CAIR-MN and the ACLU of Minnesota hoped it would. The MDHR has a reputation for being racist or, at minimum, having a biased perspective on racial issues. This article highlights MDHR’s bias. This is the most paragraph in the entire article:

Despite the “public safety concern” cited by the human rights department, St. Cloud Assistant Police Chief Jeff Oxton said Wednesday the department received no reports of threats related to the event.

In other words, the postponement of the event was due to factors having nothing to do with the protesters. Let’s put that storyline to rest forever. As I told Ox on his program this afternoon, it isn’t a secret that the Twin Cities elitists don’t have a high opinion of people living in rural Minnesota.

Let’s be clear about this. The protests were peaceful, mild even. There weren’t altercations, brawls or confrontations. The day after the cancellation, though, the MDHR has issued a statement, saying that they’re working with “community partners, local law enforcement and the FBI to plan a future forum that is safe.”

This is purely spin. Jeff Oxton, the assistant chief of police stated quite clearly that the department received no reports of threats related to the event. Further, the police weren’t called to the event to break up any altercations.

That leads to a simple, important question. Why is the Minnesota Department of Human Rights playing this up like there was a major confrontation at the Dismantling Hate Crimes event? Clearly, there wasn’t a basis for cancelling the event from a public safety standpoint.

The Minnesota Department of Human Rights is filled with far left ideologues who think that there should be limits on disciplinary actions against minority students. I’ve called MDHR the ‘dog-whistle department’ because they see racism where it doesn’t exist.

UPDATE: The SCTimes has taken down their article on the event, leaving only a video of Marni Hockenberg leading a peaceful rally. The link has changed, too. The good news is that you can still find their article by clicking on the link in this post. I don’t know why they’ve hidden this story. If anyone gets the hardcopy version of the Times, please check the paper and let me know if the article is in that version.
UPDATE II: Now it’s back again. Go figure. All I did was email the reporter and told her that her article had disappeared.

This St. Cloud Times article reports that an event titled ‘Dismantling hate crimes’ was postponed. The SCTimes article starts by saying the “panel on dismantling hate crimes scheduled for 6 p.m. Wednesday was postponed over safety concerns, according to Taylor Putz, communications director for the Minnesota Department of Human Rights. Putz told the St. Cloud Times Wednesday afternoon that the department postponed the event due to ‘logistical concerns’ and a ‘larger public safety concern’ due to the number of people expected to attend the forum.”

That sounds rather ominous, doesn’t it? How can you argue against postponing an event over “larger public safety concerns”? I’ll be the proverbial skunk at the garden party by highlighting a statement by St. Cloud Assistant Police Chief Jeff Oxton. The Times wrote that “Despite the ‘public safety concern’ cited by the human rights department, St. Cloud Assistant Police Chief Jeff Oxton said Wednesday the department received no reports of threats related to the event.

Of course, the Times used some interesting editing techniques for this story. The MNDHR concerns about the alleged “larger public safety concerns” were positioned in the first 2 paragraphs. By comparison, Jeff Oxton’s statement that no threats related to the event wasn’t found until the 16th paragraph of the Times’ article. It’s almost as if the Times wanted its readers to think that the threat was averted at the last minute. It’s as if the Times didn’t want readers to know that there weren’t any threats related to the event.

Panelists scheduled to participate were:

  1. Blair Anderson, chief, St. Cloud Police Department
  2. Jaylani Hussein, executive director, Council on American-Islamic Relations
  3. Rebecca Lucero, director, Minnesota Department of Human Rights
  4. Michael Melcher, supervisory special agent, FBI
  5. Teresa Nelson, legal director, American Civil Liberties Union of Minnesota

What’s interesting is that the event was scheduled for the day after the third anniversary of the terrorist attack at Crossroads Mall. Another thing that’s interesting is that the propagandists, aka CAIR-MN and ACLU of Minnesota, were afraid of people praying for the Persecuted Church.

This is smelling more and more like a setup. This article is quite illuminating:

“Hate is not a value in St. Cloud or in any part of our state. Our community deserves better,” says MDHR Commissioner Rebecca Lucero. “I am heartbroken by the attempts to silence discussion on hate crimes. The goal of the forum was to discuss the community we want to create. One that is full of dignity and joy.”

Panelists would have had the opportunity to define hate crimes, explain criminal and civil responses and discuss prevention.

Commissioner Lucero’s statement is as phony as a $3 bill. If she thinks that 2 dozen activists praying for the Persecuted Church are a threat to the community, then that isn’t the type of community I want anything to do with. Then there’s this KSTP article:

“We remain committed to advancing a community dialogue focused on dismantling hate crimes,” Chair of the Regional Human Rights Commission Eunice Adjei said in the release. “While the decision to postpone the forum was unfortunate, we have renewed energy to ensure this community discussion takes place.”

Based on St. Cloud Assistant Police Chief Jeff Oxton’s statement, the decision to postpone didn’t have anything to do with threats received by the St. Cloud PD. The more I read about this postponement, the more I think it’s likely that this is based on fiction.

Kevin Lindsey, the current commissioner of Minnesota’s Department of Human Rights, is on a collision course with the US Supreme Court. According to this article, Carl and Angel Larsen, the owners of Telescope Media Group, want to “use their wedding cinematography [business] to reanimate the hearts and minds of people about the goodness of marriage between a man and a woman.”

Standing in their way is the Minnesota Human Rights Act, which “mandates that if the Larsens make films celebrating marriage between one man and one woman, then they must make films celebrating same-sex marriages as well.”

The Minnesota Human Rights Act is likely unconstitutional, thanks in large part to a Supreme Court ruling from this past summer that said that a baker didn’t have to bake cakes for same-sex marriages.

There’s likely a First Amendment argument to be made, too. Government shouldn’t have the authority to tell businesses what they have to write.

State officials have repeatedly threatened to prosecute expressive business owners who decline to create speech promoting same-sex marriages. And there are steep penalties for violating the law, including payment of a civil penalty to the state, triple compensatory damages, punitive damages up to $25,000, and even up to 90 days in jail.

The Larsens can’t comply with Minnesota’s speech-compelling law. Telling stories that celebrate a same-sex marriage would violate their religious beliefs and directly contradict the very message about marriage they desire to express. But they also don’t want to be investigated, prosecuted, and possibly jailed simply for exercising their First Amendment rights.

Whether you’re for or against same-sex marriage, the heart of the matter is that government shouldn’t have the authority to tell individuals or companies what they have to write.

According to the WCCO video, the Larsens won their appeal in the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals. If Lindsey appeals the Eighth Circuit’s ruling, which is likely, he’ll likely lose in the Supreme Court. Simply put, the DFL should stop passing laws that aren’t constitutional.

What wasn’t written in Kathy Kersten’s latest article on Minnesota education is that the principles of implicit bias and restorative justice are destroying what’s left of education in Minnesota.

First, the article talks about how “MDHR also announced the filing of ‘charges’ of ‘educational discrimination’ against the St. Louis Park School District and Walker-Hackensack-Akeley School District. Apparently, these two districts declined sufficiently to bend to the department’s will, though a St. Louis Park school official told MinnPost that the district is, in fact, ‘seeking to enter into an agreement’ with the department.”

What’s particularly frightening is the fact that school districts that don’t heed the MDHR’s threats are faced “with a choice: enter into an agreement with the department to come up with a plan to address [discipline] disparities, or face litigation.” In other words, do it our way or we’ll destroy you with expensive litigation. The DFL hasn’t explained how that isn’t oppressive. The DFL hasn’t explained why these threats of intimidation and financial ruin aren’t based on official complaints instead of statistical disparities.

For districts and charters that have chosen to enter into a collaborative agreement with the Department, all have submitted three-year plans that outline the specific strategies they’ll be implementing. These strategies include a broad range of things like professional development trainings to help educators address the “implicit bias that influences perceptions of student behavior” and ways to increase student and community engagement.

This is insane. How can you fight something that exists only in the minds of the most whacked-out liberals? Let’s see if you can spot the flawed thinking in the opening paragraph of this article:

Ten Minnesota school districts and charter schools have reached a pact with the state Department of Human Rights to fix racial disparities in student discipline.

I’m betting everyone reading that noticed the flawed thinking that deals with discipline disparities, not behavioral disparities. Next, notice Commissioner Lindsey’s statement:

“I’m encouraged. There was some good ideas that came out of the conversations with the school districts and charter schools. They are going to drive change and we will see positive results in Minnesota because of their efforts.”

Next, check out this sentence:

State leaders say the discipline disparities amount to human rights violations.

Commissioner Lindsey didn’t define what is acceptable or unacceptable behavior. Until that’s defined, his declarations are subjective. Next, check out this video on implicit bias:

How many people think that “for like 75% of white Americans, it’s hard to put black and good together”? I don’t buy that for a split-second. I know that’s a phony ‘statistic.’ This isn’t the way to achieve justice. FYI- the definition of justice is “the quality of being just; righteousness, equitableness, or moral rightness.” Righteousness isn’t situation-based. It’s defined by the Word of God, who is never-changing.

Just like other progressive social experiments, restorative justice and implicit bias will fail. The only question left is how much society will be harmed.

Technorati: , , , ,