New Details on the Jena Six Case

This, from the Associated Press:

"-The so-called "white tree" at Jena High, often reported to be the domain of only white students, was nothing of the sort, according to teachers and school administrators; students of all races, they say, congregated under it at one time or another.

-Two nooses - not three - were found dangling from the tree. Beyond being offensive to blacks, the nooses were cut down because black and white students "were playing with them, pulling on them, jump-swinging from them, and putting their heads through them," according to a black teacher who witnessed the scene.

-There was no connection between the September noose incident and December attack, according to Donald Washington, an attorney for the U.S. Justice Department in western Louisiana, who investigated claims that these events might be race-related hate crimes.

-The three youths accused of hanging the nooses were not suspended for just three days - they were isolated at an alternative school for about a month, and then given an in-school suspension for two weeks.

-The six-member jury that convicted Bell was, indeed, all white. However, only one in 10 people in LaSalle Parish is African American, and though black residents were selected randomly by computer and summoned for jury selection, none showed up."

Protesting injustice is the responsibility of all Americans, but the above facts further illuminate how embellished this controversy is.

Mr. Moore, I Remember Whom You Slept With

From my archive (8/10/06), the hypocrisy of Michael Moore:

In his most recent letter on his website entitled, "It's All About Who You Sleep With...A Cautionary Note from Michael Moore," he writes the following:

"I realize that there are those like Kerry and Edwards who have now changed their position and are strongly anti-war. Perhaps that switch will be enough for some to support them. For others, like me -- while I'm glad they've seen the light -- their massive error in judgment is, sadly, proof that they are not fit for the job. They sided with Bush, and for that, they may never enter the promised land."

Anyone remember whom Moore supported for president in 2004? That's right--it was Kerry/Edwards. Matter of fact, when I went to his rally in Boca Raton, he insulted those who were not supporting Kerry, even if their candidate of choice was anti-war. Michael Moore: pro-choice for abortion, not so for elections.

Why are Kerry and Edwards not "fit for the job" now? Why can they "never enter the promised land?" Moore had no problem fighting to make sure they won the presidency two years ago, and insulting anyone who disagreed with him. Has Moore now "seen the light" and recognized that it was a mistake to insult those who stood resolute in their desire to vote for someone who opposed the war from the beginning? If so, he doesn't say so in his letter. Many argue, and I don't think I'd disagree, that he actually did more harm to Kerry than good, because the last person Kerry (who had his own issues with straightforwardness) needed to be associated with was a hypocrite. If Kerry and Edwards were good enough for Moore in 2004, then he shouldn't denounce them simply because, with Joe Leiberman's loss to Ned Lamont, it's politically expedient to do so now. However, I'm not surprised--he did the same thing by supporting Ralph Nader in 2000 and then quickly jumping on the Nader-bashing bandwagon.

Any future candidate who receives Michael Moore's endorsement should be wary.

Judging the Jena Six

Yesterday, thousands marched in protest in Jena, Louisiana, holding signs which read: "Free the Jena 6." The Jena six are black high school students who are accused of beating up a white student. They were initially charged with attempted second-degree murder and conspiracy, but these charges were later lessened. The outrage rests upon the perceived injustices between the punishments of these students and—here is a key point—three white students (of which the beaten teen was not one) who committed the vile-but-not directly related act of hanging nooses from a tree at their school and suffered only brief suspensions for this incorrectly labeled "prank." The case is more complex than this quick summary, and there is enough evidence to convince me that there is definite racism in Jena. However, that doesn't mean that the rhetoric being used in the Jena march is not absurd.

The Rev. Al Sharpton, that squeaky-clean purveyor of right and wrong, fairness and equality, proclaimed the Jena demonstration the beginning of the 21st century civil rights movement. (What exactly delineates this civil rights movement from the 20th century one, I'm still unclear on--but perhaps Sharpton will illuminate us at his next grandstanding event.) Sharpton's reverend-in-arms, Jesse Jackson, was also there to issue (or, in his case, mumble) his own proclamation: "There's a Jena in every state." I can't say for sure, but he may be right about this--I googled "Jena" and "Florida" and guess what--it exists!

Jackson has a knack for symbolic hyperbole, but do he, Sharpton, the marchers, and the millions of Jena six supporters have a point?

Let's return to the first sentence of this piece: the marchers are demanding that the Jena six be freed. Should they be? Well, did they commit a crime? Why, yes, they did. Unless the protesters think that six people ganging up on a person, knocking him unconscious, and badly bloodying and swelling his face is not a crime (it's claimed but not proved that the teen was uttering racial epithets against the Jena six, but understand—words alone do not give anyone the right to violence). Let's be clear. The victim of this case is the beaten teenager, not the Jena six.

The lost logic which I see the protesters following is this: because three white students committed a foul act symbolizing racist violence (but not violent in itself) and served only brief suspensions for it (and they definitely should have suffered more), this excuses the violent act committed by six black students against a white one and thus they should be freed. No, sorry. Whatever mistake made in punishing the white students does not bear on the black students. The incidents are separate. What does it say about our legal system, and our civilized society, if someone can get jumped and beaten unconscious and then millions of people demand the release of the aggressors?

This incident is not one of race. It's one of justice. Free the Jena six?

Absolutely not.