Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission party to Hazleton suit?

Posted Tue, Oct 3, 2006 at 9:08 pm

Stephen Glassman, chairperson (he doesn't like "chairman") of the Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission, claims that his organization - a state agency - is one of the parties suing Hazleton over their IIRA (Illegal Immigration Relief Act). (A previous version of the suit didn't have them on board.)

The article "Panel slams illegal immigration law" contains that claim buried within a description of the biased panel at King's College in Wilkes-Barre, which in addition to Glassman also consisted of a wide range of Latino, church, and other pro-illegal immigration groups.

I haven't confirmed his claim, but it's certainly plausible considering that, as shown by both links, Glassman is a real piece of work. Not just far left, but in a fashion that I as a non-professional would term pathologically so:

Glassman – who during the question-and-answer period said the U.S. was "infected with racism," that institutionalized racism "permeated" the country and that the U.S. couldn't "merely get rid of slavery is a couple of hundred years – claimed PHRC was party to the suit filed against IIRA. He said the commission was confident of winning.
Glassman also took on what he termed "English-only" laws such as Hazleton's.
Noting that Pennsylvania laws used to be printed in both English and German during the 18th and 19th centuries, he said official English laws ran contrary to the commonwealth's "multi-lingual principles." Again, he claimed they were race-based and targeted at Spanish speakers.
"Unfortunately, primarily Hispanics are the ones being vilified, with epithets thrown at them in places like Hazleton," Glassman said, though he did not discuss any specific incident.

The author of the article, L.A. Tarone, oddly enough for the source, appears to get it to a slightly greater degree than larger papers would:

After the forum concluded, a woman who declined to give her name told a Standard-Speaker photographer she wished the panel had been "more balanced."

Note that Glassman was appointed to the PHRC by former Republican governor Mark Schweiker, but he was made "chairperson" by current governor and Democrat Ed Rendell, America's most anti-American governor ("The only ones I want to hear speaking up and complaining about immigration are the Native Americans who we screwed.")

Rendell also appointed both Agapito Lopez ("We will acculturate, we will adapt to your rules, we will follow your laws, but we will never assimilate") and Anna Arias ("[Hazelton is] the first Nazi city in the country") to the Governor's Advisory Commission on Latino Affairs.

Comments

Andy (not verified)

Wed, 10/18/2006 - 09:14

I am sick and tired of having Mexico and other third world countries give their people the wink and nudge and not do anything about ilegal immigration. I myself am mexican-American and find this sort of activity horrible and wrong.

contessa (not verified)

Thu, 10/05/2006 - 11:26

Catholic colleges and universities are hosting these so-called "immigration" (aka "illegal alien love-fests) forums nationwide as directed by the pro-illegal alien Bishops (who apparently reserve their compassion only for illegal aliens and not those law-abiding citizens and legal immigrants who are directly and negatively affected by illegal immigration. Of course, Catholic Charities uses public taxpayer money and parishioner donations to aid/abet/harbor and hire millions of illegal aliens. Think about that the next time they ask you to donate. Stop the insanity!

perroazul del norte (not verified)

Thu, 10/05/2006 - 11:15

Ed Rendell is not only a Red, but he has a long documented history of thuggery.

contessa (not verified)

Thu, 10/05/2006 - 10:06

Agapito Lopez is married to Anna Arias and both "big surprise" are named Latino advisors to Rendell. How come they didn't ask me or members of "You Don't Speak for Me", a national coalition of mainstream American Hispancis who OPPOSE illegal immigration, amnesty, guestworkers that never leave and any rewards of benefits and privileges of citizenship to illegal aliens? We stand with the majority of law-abiding citizens in saying enough is enough with the ethnic, separatist, leftist pro-illegal alien agenda. We want our nation back, we and especially our families didn't come here so that hordes of illegal aliens can turn our communities into third-world like barrios.

ali (not verified)

Wed, 10/04/2006 - 08:31

Not surprising this biased panel was held at King's College. It is, after all, a Catholic school, and a somewhat elite one at that in that the tuition is high.

dchamil (not verified)

Wed, 10/04/2006 - 04:59

They call it racism, I call it national self-defense.

John S Bolton (not verified)

Tue, 10/03/2006 - 22:30

Rendell's dirty statement also sounds leftish, or new leftish, with the Berkeley type foulness and racial centering. At the same time, it resembles the liberal 'nation of immigrants' proposition, with the implication that there are no Americans who could have a say or a vote on whether hostile foreigners, or any foreigners, should settle here.
It implies that every foreigner has the right to commit any act of aggression which facilitates their getting established here, but no American has the right to assert the just claims of the net taxpayer of this country, nor those of any citizen victims of foreigners who come here by any good or bad means.
That they have to use smear methods, where anyone who, or any city which, cards their campesino cannon-fodder of ethnic power-seeking is called nazi, racist etc., means they likely can find no rational approach to support their positions.