Prejudice in Goverment

You need a Java enabled browser!

Prejudice within the US Department of Justice and Government

(The Reign of the Bureaucratic Ghouls)

FEDERAL HIRING AND DENIGRATION OF OUR GOVERNMENT

DOJgov.net Newswire September 29, 2003 - The OPM report was supposed to be about "Federal Equal Opportunity, But it has nothing to do with equal opportunity. It is about massive overhiring of protected racial groups. Analysis by Tim Fay, Executive Director Adversity.net, shows that the federal government continues to hire a far higher percentage of minorities than their proportion in the civilian work force. The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, for example, has employed 614% more blacks than their proportion in the civilian workforce, and the U.S. Department of Education employed 473% more blacks.

The protected minority groups include blacks, Hispanics, Asians/Pacific Islanders, Native Americans, and women. The OPM Report for 2003 shows that, of the new federal jobs created, only 22.9% were filled by white males and other "non-minorities." Tim Fay comments, "It wasn’t a very good year for white guys to apply for a federal job."

While there is obviously no such thing as "overrepresentation" for the protected or preferred minorities, there is such a thing as "underrepresentation." And that’s what gets the press attention. Federal Times newspaper ran a story under the headline, "New Push for Diversity: OPM Moves To Address ‘Underrepresentation’ in Senior Ranks." The story noted that, "Overall, percentages of blacks, Asians and American Indians in virtually all federal pay grades meet or exceed those of the national work force overall. But in the Senior Executive Service and equivalent senior pay grades, all minority groups are underrepresented as compared with their percentage in the national work force overall."

The terms "meet or exceed those of the national work force overall" reflect what Tim Fay calls overhiring. But rather than focus on that, the media now wants to push for ever more hiring of minorities, to the detriment of white males and other "non-minorities," in senior ranks. And the Bush administration is behind such a push, even though continued placing of ethnicity over qualifications will further reduce whatever efficiency remains in our federal bureaucracy .

Tim Fay points out that, "In order to push minorities into those positions the feds have to bypass a really enormous group of whites who should get the senior jobs. The only way to do that is to reduce qualifications and/or to practice outright discrimination against the white guys and often against Asian Americans as well." So the reverse racism that is now being practiced may get worse in the years ahead. And the results of these decisions may very well be reflected in even more successful terrorist slaughter of more innocent Americans.

AFFIRMATIVE ACTION KILLS 10 IN MARYLAND AND VIRGINIA

www.DOJgov.net October 29, 2002

What have we learned from our government’s response to the murder spree of a Nation of Islam pro terrorist murderer and his sociopathic illegal immigrant boy toy?

According to the Washington Post (Oct 27, 2002) Authorities in the Washington region spotted their same faded blue 1990 Chevrolet Caprice and recorded its New Jersey plates on at least 10 different occasions this month, but saw no reason to link it to the sniper attacks.

"We were looking for … white people, and we ended up with … black people,'' said Washington, D.C., Police Chief Charles Ramsey, whose department ran the Caprice's license Oct. 3, just hours before a fatal shooting in Washington that has been tied to the sniper suspects, John Allen Muhammad, 41, and John Lee Malvo, 17.

In an Oct. 13 interview on CNN, Affirmative Action Montgomery Police Chief Charles Moose was asked about the report of a Caprice leaving the scene of the slaying in Washington. Moose said task-force investigators were aware of the sighting, but he played it down, saying there was "not a big push for public feedback on that.''

Of course not! In America, there is only one group that is fair game for persecution … the middle and working class white gentile males, with high achieving male Caucasian Jews and Asian rim Chinese/Koreans equally laid bare to a politically safe ethnic hunt.

In point of fact, we have reached a point in America where the bureaucracy that runs this nation and the progressive elite have become our Pavlovian dogs, salivating at the thought of sacrificing members of non-protected groups for the sake of expediency and dogma.

Everyone was looking for a white car with white people, said one high ranking police source. Muhammand and Malvo are black males."

In a piece noticed by the Boston Phoenix’s Seth Gitell, Michelle Malkin noticed this trend early on. Of the Many experts called on to predict the nature of the sniper, many of them simply assumed that he (or they) were white.

New York University’s Dr. Michael Welner, profiled the shooter as "white, male, single, 20s-30s… [with a] longtime fascination with hunting and shooting." Chris Whitecomb, former FBI agent, informed NBC that "satistically, it’s going to be a white male." Brian Levin, director of the Center for the Study of Hate and Extremism, stated confidently that the killer "is kind of a wallpaper white male, a disenfranchised, disrespected man who’s getting back at society."

The interesting question is: can you imagine these kinds of comments being made about a black Man?

In a politically correct feeding frenzy, the establishment discarded the fact that not since Dallas Texas, almost one half century ago, has a white serial killer randomly murdered. It’s not their way. Almost exclusively, white male serial killers choose targets of a particular group. It may be dark haired woman, blue eyed men or a particular ethnicity. And let's not forget that like the notorious Jeffrey Dahmer, many white male serial killers are homosexuals. But we can't talk about that because homosexuals are also protected.

Five witnesses pointed out that the suspects were of dark complexion. Yet, so fearful of social retribution are those sworn to protect us that they used the American public as sacrificial lambs in order to be Politically Correct. And because of this attitude, people of all races were destroyed on the funeral pyre of Affirmative Discrimination.

EEOC forces airport security to hire foreign Arabs from terrorist nations

WASHINGTON, DC Dec 5 2001 -- If the U.S. government really wants to protect us from murderous terrorists, why did it force an airline security company to hire non-citizen Muslims from terrorism-friendly nations to operate airport metal detectors?

And can we expect more of those kinds of wacky "anti-discrimination" rulings now that the federal government has taken over airport security?

"Anti-discrimination laws have gone too far if they make it illegal to discriminate against potential foreign terrorists," said Steve Dasbach, the Libertarian Party's national director. "You have to ask: How many American lives are federal bureaucrats willing to risk because of their ever-growing, crazy patchwork quilt of anti-discrimination laws?"

According to a copyrighted story on WorldNetDaily.com, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) forced Argenbright Security, Inc. to rehire seven Muslim women.

The women, who worked at security checkpoints at Dulles Airport, had filed a religious-bias complaint with the EEOC after they were fired in 1999. Four of the women were from Sudan, a nation on the State Department's terrorist blacklist. Another woman was a citizen of Afghanistan; another was from Egypt.

Argenbright Security said it fired the women because they refused to take off their traditional Arab head-coverings while operating airport metal detectors and X-ray baggage-screening devices. The company said it had received complaints from customers who were nervous at the sight of Middle-Easterners staffing airport security stations after the two 1998 African embassy bombings.

The EEOC forced Argenbright Security to rehire the women, give them a written apology, pay them $2,500, and schedule Muslim "sensitivity training" for all employees.

Ironically, Argenbright Security is now under investigation by the Justice Department, following the September 11 terrorist attacks, for failing to properly screen its security personnel. Given the Argenbright Security case and current anti-discrimination laws, what can we expect once the airport security workforce is completely federalized?

We may get a bureaucracy that is more interested in protecting potential Arab terrorists against alleged religious discrimination than protecting the lives of Americans, said Dasbach.

"It sounds crazy, but it's true," he said. "In the past, the EEOC has ruled that employers can face a $300,000 fine if they fire an illegal immigrant with discriminatory malice (even though it is against federal law to hire illegal immigrants in the first place); that it is illegal to fire employees for being mentally ill or emotionally unstable; that it is illegal to refuse to hire ex-convicts; and that it is illegal to ask prospective employees if they are former drug addicts or current alcoholics.

"In other words, thanks to the EEOC, your last line of defense against murderous terrorists may soon be immigrants from terrorist nations who have been hired as baggage screeners at your local airport. And now that these airport screeners have been made federal employees (with a 60% increase in salary and federal protection against being fired), the ultimate undermining of airline security has been codified by Congress.

Labor Department to Require Racial Profiles

Labor Sec'y Alexis Herman's definition of due process. Racially profile the entire workforce of all federal contractors. If they don't meet the magic racial numbers they are guilty of discrimination.

(Courtesy www.Adversity.net)

Nazi Nuremberg Laws in the US Census

There is no category on the Census 2000 form for multi-racial and interracial individuals to identify their race/ethnicity. In the 1990 census there was at least a box for "other" race / ethnicity, but that has been eliminated from Census 2000.

The government is so opposed to the notion of collecting and tabulating "interracial / multi-racial" data that the OMB has ruled that if, on the census 2000 form, someone checks "black" AND another race that individual will automatically be counted as "black or African-American'' with no acknowledgment of the "other" racial / ethnic heritage the citizen was trying to report.

This is known in protester-circles as "the one-drop rule", i.e., if you have one drop of black blood in your veins (or African American blood, if you prefer) then you are black. Doesn't that sound just a tad racist?

In the 1990 census, individuals wishing to report multi-racial or interracial heritage were forced to check the "other" box -- and over 10 million Americans did check the "other" box in the 1990 census. But black civil rights leaders strongly objected, saying that collection of such data "diluted" their political influence. Thus, the so-called "one drop of black blood rule" is in effect for Census 2000: If you have one drop of black blood, and attempt to report it by checking "black" in addition to any other racial category, Census 2000 will count you as "black"!

NOTE: Due to lobbying by the racial special interests, particularly Mfume and Jackson, as well as the Congressional Black Caucus, and most democratic legislators, the "other" box has been eliminated from the Census 2000 form!

The government does NOT want Census 2000 to count multi-racial / interracial / multi-ethnic individuals because to do so would dilute the significant influence of the current, vested racial interests (mostly black) on Capitol Hill. (Courtesy www.Adversity.net)

Caryl Leventhal v. Janet Reno & US Department of Justice - USDOJ JEWISH EMPLOYEE with MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS BRUTALIZED, MADE CRITICALLY ILL and FORCED OUT because of WHAT SHE WAS.

The US Department of Justice... A Rogue Agency out of Control

The week of September 25, 2000 marked a bellwether in the way the US Department of Justice viewed the people of the United States. In the past, brutality and callous over-reaction were masked behind actions against people and groups spun by USDOJ party liners as "out of the mainstream" or somehow "not like us." But Caryl Leventhal couldn't be pigeonholed into these groups. Caryl called herself "the farm girl come to New York." She was a middle class hard working American with a main stream private sector track record. She was married to a technology professional and a reserve officer holding the rank of Lieutenant Colonel. Her husband was even decorated for bravery, risking his life while in uniform to save a civilian at a crime scene. By all standards, these were "normal" Americans, "unassailable" by the indecency of the USDOJ Spin Machine.

But Caryl Leventhal made one mistake... she began working at the USDOJ's Immigration and Naturalization Service 26 Federal Plaza, NYC. Thrown into an environment of corruption and cruelty, her vulnerability due to Multiple Sclerosis (in Remission for years) was used as a bludgeon to get her out as Reprisal for her attempting to stop on-site criminal activity. Her acceptance of the Jewish Faith made her a pariah to a bigoted manager, overseeing a department where some 20% were subsequently arrested for conducting this on-site criminal activity.

For four years, Ms. Leventhal fought the USDOJ. This battle was not to secure money. It was to secure an apology. Forced into a federal suit by USDOJ's refusal to tell a terminally ill woman that they were sorry for her mistreatment, US Attorney legal motions and objections kept crucial information from the jury. This evidence included an anti-Semitic death threat recorded on tape and evidence of the USDOJ's main witness overseeing a department overtly selling green cards to the highest bidder. This evidence subsequently appeared in Newsday, The New York Times, The New York Post, Congressional Reports and even USDOJ investigative material. None the less, brutality and lies against Caryl became part of the public record (99CIV.10405) through testimony of Ms. Brenda Grant, the US Attorney's main witness.

But the USDOJ wasn't happy with squandering at least $1,000,000.00 in their four year battle to shut Caryl up. Some three days prior to this civil trial, Alan R. Kaufman, Chief of the US Attorney's Criminal Division phoned Caryl's lawyer and had him deliver a threatening message to her husband. Such is the scorn the USDOJ has for the American people and the US Constitution that they actually "rigged" a trial through terror. Such is their contempt for liberty that Janet Reno's USDOJ now feels they are above decency and the law.

Caryl Leventhal vows to continue her battle to receive a simple apology for an obviously hostile work environment. She will do this through Congressional action, an appeal to George W. Bush's Administration and through a personal appeal to John Ashcroft, the incoming Attorney General.

In an ageing Brooklyn NY apartment, a slowly dying woman named Caryl Leventhal lives in a state of siege. She exists in constant fear of break-in by Kevlar helmeted, submachine gun wielding "troopers" of the USDOJ. She knows they will neither forget nor forgive. And with this attitude in the chief law enforcement agency of the federal government... none of us are safe. (Courtesy www.Justice-Denied.net.)

RACIAL & SEXUAL DISCRIMINATION IN THE MILITARY

For a period of years now, promotions within the US Military have been tinged with racial and sexual bias against women, Anglo males, Hispanics and others. This is true in the highest levels of promotions, whether they be NCO's (E-5 Sergeants through E-8), or Field Grade Officers (Majors, Lieutenant Colonels and "Bird" Colonels). On several occasions, federal courts have come to their aid.

Typical were Lieutenant Colonel (LTC) Michael Ashie, Jay Jupiter and MAJ James Waldeck. In August 1999 they filed suit in US District Court (Washington) that they were denied due process rights under the Fifth Amendment of the constitution.

Usually, out of court settlements are agreed upon to shut them up, such as that done with LTC G. Allan Sirmans and Ronald Buchholz. In these instances, they were to be reconsidered for promotion.

The process of making racial and gender reality reach "goals" ... actually quotas ... were designed to provide preference to women (sub-graded in preference by race/ethnicity) and specific races.

Military promotions based on selected races or gender are in the worst tradition of a military that should be attempting to secure, retain and promote the most qualified people.

BILL LANN LEE ... Acting Head of the Dept. of Justice Office of Civil Rights...THE "NATIONAL SOCIALIST" of THE US DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Among other things, The Senate (who refused to approve appointment of Bill Lann Lee as head of the USDOJ's Office of Civil Rights) asked Mr. Lee for his interpretation about the landmark Supreme Court ruling in "Adarand Constructors, Inc. v. Peña" (Supreme Court 1995). Lee told the Senate Committee that in his opinion, the Adarand decision really meant that racial preference programs "can be appropriate if they are conducted in a limited and measured manner." In fact, however, the actual Supreme court ruling in Adarand held that all federal race-based preference programs are unconstitutional.

In both the Croson and the Adarand decisions, the Supreme Court established a "strict scrutiny test" which requires that any government program that makes racial distinctions must be "narrowly tailored"—using the means that are the least intrusive necessary—to achieve a "compelling" governmental interest.

In the application of the "strict scrutiny test", the Supreme Court has almost never found the government’s interest "compelling" enough nor the government's racial programs "narrowly tailored" enough to meet the requirements of this test. Since the 1940s, not one legislatively or administratively created racial preference program (as opposed to a judicially created remedy) has been upheld by the Supreme Court. The only racially discriminatory action ever upheld under the the high court's strict scrutiny test has been the Court’s shameful acceptance of the internment of Japanese Americans during World War II.

Affirmative Action -- This is a nice, warm-fuzzy sounding term, but it has two very different definitions! Never use this term without indicating the version you are using!

Definition 1: Race-neutral, gender-neutral assurance against actual discrimination. This is the type of Affirmative Action contemplated by President Lyndon Johnson's Executive Order 11246, in which he sought to ensure that individuals are treated WITHOUT regard to their race, sex, or ethnicity. Not only does that sound fair, but it is fair. This version is consistent with the worthy goals of the original Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Definition 2: Racial-preferences and gender-preferences for the correct races and genders. Under this defintion, Affirmative Action is comprised of programs and policies that grant favorable treatment on the basis of race or gender to government-defined "disadvantaged" individuals. Under this definition, racial or gender preference must be granted even when the favored / aggrieved minority has no actual proof that a company, boss, individual, or government agency has discriminated against them due to their race or gender.

Regrettably, Defintion 1 (race and gender neutral) has died a slow, horrible death at the hands of the incessant lobbying of the professional quota industry and Definition 2 has risen to take its place.

The "preferences" definition (Definition 2) has become the underpinning of today's corrupted version of Affirmative Action.

Thus, in current practice, the government defines Affirmative Action as "good" racial and sexual discrimination against those of us who are not on their approved list of historically disadvantaged. By inference, the government also prosecutes "bad" racial and sexual discrimination when the same principles of race and gender preference are applied to individuals who are NOT on the official list of historically disadvantaged.

If and when affirmative action is divorced from government-mandated racial and sexual discrimination against the "right" (or against the "wrong") genders and races, it may once again become a defensible and worthy program.

(Note: Affirmative Action, Equal Opportunity, and Equal Employment Opportunity -- AA, EO, and EEO -- are used interchangeably and today all of these terms stand for "preferences" or "reverse discrimination".)

Sidebar: In Bill Clinton's Dec. 1997 "town meeting" on affirmative action he asked his pre-selected, fawning audience "Do you support Affirmative Action?" What he did not have the courage to ask them was "Do you support race-based and gender-based hiring or promotion?" Now that would have been a great question!

See President Lyndon Baines Johnson's Executive Order 11246 ordering race-neutral Affirmative Action

With Thanks to Tim Fay and www.Adversity.net. A site well worth looking at, whether you agree with it or not.

(Note: This page is only one section of this very diversified site. For more in depth information on how the concept of equal treatment is being debased by federal authorities and the USDOJ in particular, it is suggested that you go to www.adversity.net. For ongoing events in an actual current federal suit concerning brutality and bigotry, it is suggested that you go to www.justice-denied.net.)

[USDOJ Watch] [Government Watch] [Editorial Page] [10 Most Wanted] [Bigotry] [WACO] [Carnivore] [Legislate Tyranny] [Surrender to Govt] [Second Amendment] [Personal Technology] [Office of Homeland Security]

For those using music capable Internet Explorer or AOL, text accompanied by Jim Croche's "Bad Bad Leroy Brown"