Concerned about recent hate incidents around town targeting Black, Jewish and Asian residents, members of Palo Alto's Human Relations Commission recommended asking the Federal Bureau of Investigation for help in fighting the trend.
The Rev. Kaloma Smith, who chairs the commission, warned at the Thursday, March 10, meeting that the recent incidents are "deadly serious" and could lead to violence if left unaddressed. The incidents include multiple threats that someone made last year against a pastor at First United Methodist Church, flyers with anti-Semitic messages that were dropped off last month at various Palo Alto locations and, prior to that, racist comments that a customer of Fuki Sushi made toward the restaurant owner.
Smith noted that houses of worship in Palo Alto, which should feel safe for everyone, are now on high security.
"We've been dealing with people in our community for 24 months that have been defaming black, Asian and Jewish people and this is dangerous now," Smith said.
One approach that he and his colleagues had recommended was reaching out to the San Francisco Division of the FBI, which last year launched a new strategic initiative on hate crimes and hate incidents. A key component of the initiative is spreading awareness about and educating communities and local law enforcement agencies about how to report and address these incidents.
"In Palo Alto, we have to actively have ways that we are tracking hate incidents," Smith said. "We need a way to clearly state to the public … if they see something, report something."
Most of his colleagues agreed with the approach and supported his motion to both invite FBI staff for community engagement on hate crimes and hate incidents and to devote more local resources to spreading awareness about this trend. Commissioner Michelle Kraus lamented the fact that all local synagogues now feel they need to have security guards at the door during services.
"Imagine going to your church and having to walk by an armed guard," Krauss said.
The only dissenter in the 4-1 vote was Commissioner Patti Regehr, who alluded to the FBI's checkered history in race relations. This includes the long reign of former FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover, who directed the agency targeted civil rights activists and organizations like the Black Panthers.
"In the social movement, when the federal government stepped in, it wasn't the FBI that helped the social movement," Regehr said.
Council member Greer Stone, who serves as liaison to the commission, agreed that the city needs to do more do combat hate incidents and called the recent anti-Semitic flyers that were distributed last month a "disgusting display of ignorance and bigotry." Similar incidents were reported in other cities and states.
"I know that's not Palo Alto, but the terrible fact remains that bigots continue to be a stain on our community and our nation," Stone said. "This just re-emphasizes the work that this commission, the City Council and the community do to stay vigilant and continue to educate and make people feel safe and inclusive."
Comments
Registered user
Menlo Park
on Mar 14, 2022 at 11:44 am
Registered user
on Mar 14, 2022 at 11:44 am
The most common hate/bias crimes in the South Bay Area are exercised against people who have the appearance of being homeless, with the implication that most people who discriminate in this way believe homeless people are either mentally ill, drug addicted, or engaged in criminal activity.
There are multiple parties of people in the South Bay Area who engage in a practice of investigating or reporting hate crimes where they premeditate staged interactions with a suspected racist in public, then wait for the suspect to express their hate in a moment of embarrassment or frustration. These tactics amount to jumping out of the bushes and scaring someone, then reporting the fearful reaction as being irrational. [Portion removed.]
Registered user
Embarcadero Oaks/Leland
on Mar 14, 2022 at 12:06 pm
Registered user
on Mar 14, 2022 at 12:06 pm
It was just reported today that there's a bill in the works to up the penalties for hate speech and hate symbols. Web Link
Maybe Palo Alto can do something similar now.
"Under the bill, AB 2282, using the symbols to terrorize a person would be a felony offense punishable by a fine of up to $15,000 and up to one year in county jail or up to three years in state prison. The bill would also limit the symbols from being used for terrorizing purposes on private property; at primary, junior and high schools; at public parks; at public facilities; in public spaces; at places of worship; at cemeteries; and at places of employment.
“They are equally repulsive and hateful and so this bill aligns those penalties and how they’re applied,” said Levine, a Democrat who lives in Greenbrae.
Existing law considers using nooses as a misdemeanor, using swastikas as a felony only on a third offense and burning crosses as a felony. The law also varies on where these symbols are allowed to be used, with swastikas being the least regulated."
Registered user
Stanford
on Mar 15, 2022 at 10:24 am
Registered user
on Mar 15, 2022 at 10:24 am
How will this proposed bill affect minors who are engaged in graffiti as there is a difference between a prank and a bonafide hate crime.
Registered user
Old Palo Alto
on Mar 15, 2022 at 1:00 pm
Registered user
on Mar 15, 2022 at 1:00 pm
The other side of the coin is: words without action are just words. Does this mean we are going to make certain words illegal to use? There should be Legal publication put out by Biden of illegal words, also known as censorship words never-to-use-or-you-will pay-a-price $$$, Along with her prices perhaps. Then suppose you have a group of LGBGT’s (or Asians, Jews, whatever) who have their own jargon they don’t like, and their primary life purpose is to promote their sexuality -/ so everything they hear sounds like a threat, and who’s to say somebody actually says something intentionally negative or they just “hear” or interpret it that way, thereafter they collectively (gang up w their pals) & claim so-and-so said something “hateful” to us because you might’ve looked at them crosseyed or something (at least in their mind) Or perhaps ignored them all together and they desire attention or acknowledgment from you. Now somebody who is just minding their own business has a problem because collectively a group of one type or another “minorities” for lack of better term, declare together that you said some thing which you never did.
Words are pretty minor, actions speak louder than words so are we going to be instituting a censorship on words that incur financial or imprisonment penalties on potentially innocent non-acting persons?
Sounds more like greater bi-polarization brought about by extreme politics or entities looking for not justice, but some kind of exemplary status.
Also Sounds fairly Incongruous that a pastor would be getting anti-Semitic verbiage, Perhaps a rabbi?
Finally if words are going to be illegal carrying financial or imprisonment penalties they need to be published On every level so every person understands which words cannot be used, or which words cannot be used in their “languages” or against a type, Or be used as adjectives, e.g. she’s behaving very “queerly” for someone who just graduated with honors. (Queer is an ancient term non
Registered user
Midtown
on Mar 15, 2022 at 1:55 pm
Registered user
on Mar 15, 2022 at 1:55 pm
I think a jury can figure out when words are used in a hateful way and when they're benign. There's no way to create a list of words that are hateful. It's all in the context - My wife and my daughter were separately subjected to hateful speech soon after Trump was elected even after making it clear what a low, disgusting bigot he was, sending a message to other bigots that it was OK to harass people for no good reason. My wife was asked if she intended paying for the groceries she was buying at TJs and when she asked the bigot to come and check, he said "go back to where you came from". My daughter was called "N-----, muslim". No such thing ever happened to us in the last 32 years we've lived in the U.S. BTW, please read the article correctly. The pastor was NOT subject to Anti-semitic speech.
Registered user
Old Palo Alto
on Mar 15, 2022 at 7:21 pm
Registered user
on Mar 15, 2022 at 7:21 pm
One little step towards monitoring speech is a big step towards thought police routinely controlling your thoughts and ideas. It’s bad enough that activists are pushing acceptance of 68 flavors of gender and trying to keep you from thinking about ‘illegal’ (law breaker) when referring to people who sneak across our borders. It’s bad enough that people are trying to control language. It’s bad enough that an idea or conviction conflicts with whatever Woke has decide is proper thought for everyone. How did THEY take control of free speech? Now, some want to punish impure or alt thought. Where is this going? What kind of society will that be?
“Hate” has always been far too vague as a legal concept. Those who want to expand it’s laws and punishments should not be trusted. It’s a waste of the FBI’s time to enlist them as consultants or active thought police.
Registered user
Adobe-Meadow
on Mar 16, 2022 at 6:24 am
Registered user
on Mar 16, 2022 at 6:24 am
[Post removed.]
Registered user
another community
on Mar 16, 2022 at 10:04 am
Registered user
on Mar 16, 2022 at 10:04 am
"The other side of the coin is: words without action are just words. "
This is a key consideration as actual actions speak far louder than words.
Verbal insults should not be taken seriously unless physical violence is also involved.
Just consider the source and move on.