Saturday, March 14, 2015

Refusal to Accept the Truth

(UPDATE: 3/21/15 - My apologies to those I have tricked!!! The statistic used in the opening paragraph stating that 90% of Americans are gun owners is not true. It was only featured to prove how statistics can be manipulated to uphold obviously false ideas, but make them seem believable by backing the fallacy with misrepresenting data. The statistic of 34% that is included in the second paragraph is a more accurate figure. I proved the point just a little too much!!!)

America loves guns. Over 90% of Americans are gun owners. A link to a worldwide study is included so you can compare our high volume of gun ownership to the rates of the rest of the world.

But even if that number is 100% accurate, anyone with a sense of critical thinking would say that this is an example of a statistical fallacy. I have another survey that contradicts the 90% claim. The Pew Research Center found that only 34% of Americans have a gun in their household.

The first example of 90 guns per 100 Americans does not take into account that a significant number of Americans own more than one gun. It’s a matter of compiling statistics that are relevant to the conclusion.

Welcome to the world of the US Department of Justice! The Obama Department of Race Baiting.

If the First Fallacy Fails, Try Another

FORMER police officer Darren Wilson has been completely exonerated of any wrong doing by a grand jury and an intensive investigation conducted by the Department of Justice.

The summary of the DOJ report states, “Wilson did not willfully violate Brown’s Constitutional right to be free from unreasonable force”. Furthermore it concludes that, “Wilson’s conduct in shooting Brown as he advanced on Wilson, and until he fell to the ground, was not objectively unreasonable and thus not in violation of 18 US U.S.C. 242”.

However, the violence in Ferguson continues. Why? There has not been one single grain of evidence proving that Wilson racially profiled Mike Brown.

Since President Obama and Attorney General Holder could not find any wrongdoing by police officer Wilson they decided to publish a second report that is rife with statistical fallacies used to accuse the city of Ferguson of discriminating against the rights of African Americans.

Thanks to this second report tensions in Ferguson have escalated. The attempted assassination of two police officers marks a new chapter in the violent protests in Ferguson.

This unprecedented audit of the city of Ferguson was a witch hunt that subjected the tiny city of 21,000 to intensive scrutiny. A similar audit of any city in the whole country would produce similar results.

The report states that the city is 67% black, but blacks comprised 85% of the traffic stops and 93% of the arrests. These statistics are no more evidence of racism than the fact that the NBA is racist because 76% of its athletes are black, but blacks only comprise 12.6% of the total population.

The DOJ report doesn’t take into account that the black population is younger than the white population. This is significant because 80% of prisoners in state and federal correctional facilities are between ages 20 to 49 years old. That accounts for a small slice of the discrepancy.

Then you must take into account the rates in which blacks commit crimes compared to other races. From 2011 to 2013 the FBI records that 38.5% of people arrested for murder, manslaughter, rape, robbery, and aggravated assault were African American. So even though the black population comprises only 12.6% of the population, they are over represented in these statistics by 25.9%. That can generously explain the rest of the difference in the DOJ’s misleading report.

Where Are the Indictments?

Bullshit is a term used to describe exaggerated or foolish talk. It is especially descriptive of deceitful or pretentious talk. There is no other possible characterization of this report.

In the summary it states “This investigation has revealed a pattern or practice of unlawful conduct within the Ferguson Police Department that violates the First, Fourth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the US Constitution, and federal statutory law”.

If this was true then why have there been no indictments? Until there are arrests we can be sure of one the following:

1) The US Department of Justice is negligent in its duties because it has uncovered “a pattern or practice of unlawful conduct within the Ferguson Police Department”, but allows lawbreakers to go unpunished.

- or -

2) The US Department of Justice is lying. There are no serious violations of the law. The DOJ is abusing statistics and has fraudulently used its considerable resources to misrepresent the failings of this small town police department.

Guilty Despite Innocence

One thing is painfully certain. The DOJ has failed to support police officer Wilson who stood unjustly accused. This is a calculated dereliction of duty.

When Attorney General Holder went to Ferguson he talked about how he felt that he was racially profiled because he was pulled over for speeding in Washington DC. He sent a team of over 50 FBI agents and forensic specialists to the scene of Mike Brown’s shooting. Judging from his own words they were clearly there to build a discrimination case against Officer Wilson.

This was impossible because the evidence positively vindicated the persecuted officer. Yet Holder prejudged Wilson as guilty and because he was thwarted by the evidence he found another way to incriminate the innocent police officer.

President Obama, Attorney General Holder and the US Department of Justice have let down the people of our country. It has been a great injustice that has cost tremendous damage to the city of Ferguson

Sunday, March 08, 2015

Shampoo and Conditioning

British illusionist, Derren Brown, has made a career out of his obsession with subliminal messaging. In the video below he displays a stunning example of how easily we can be influenced. I don’t want to spoil the video for you so I will let you see for yourself. It is amazing…

Now that you have watched the video; I have one word for you, “Islamophobia”. For years we have been conditioned into believing that attacks on Al Qaeda, Baathists, and the Taliban are heavily influenced by our prejudice against Islamic people. We are continually taught that terrorists attack us because of our prejudices.

It was no accident that the Obama Administration bizarrely obsessed over a false narrative regarding the Benghazi attacks on a US “diplomatic compound” in that city. Against a mountain of evidence the Administration continued to insist that the attacks were the result of a fabricated protest against a video that made fun of the Prophet Mohammed.

The YouTube video, “Innocence of Muslims”, was made by an Egyptian-American. It led to violent protests in Cairo that later spread around the world. Even though the Pentagon, the State Department, CIA, FBI and the President of Libya disagreed, the Obama Administration continued to mislead the American people.

In order to promote this absurd view point Obama stated;

What we do know is that the natural protests that arose because of the outrage over the video were used as an excuse by extremists to see if they can also directly harm U.S. interests.”

NATURAL PROTESTS?! If there had been similar protests against the “Piss Christ” there is no way Obama would have described them as “natural”. (The Piss Christ was a federally funded artwork that shows a crucifix with Jesus Christ immersed in a glass of the artist’s urine.) Obama is conditioned to embrace the belligerent anger of Muslims and ignore or condemn any similar Christian sentiment (you know, the ones who “cling to guns and religion”).

On September 16th, 2012 Libyan President Mohamed Yousef El-Magariaf confirmed on the CBS show ‘Face the Nation’ that the Benghazi attack was a planned operation and it was organized months before the video protests.  He stated;

It was planned definitely, it was planned by foreigners, by people who … entered the country a few months ago, and they were planning this criminal act since their… arrival.”

Yet Susan Rice continued the Obama Administration’s lie on the same show.  She declared;

based on the best information we have to date, what our assessment is as of the present is in fact what began spontaneously in Benghazi as a reaction to what had transpired some hours earlier in Cairo where, of course, as you know, there was a violent protest outside of our embassy.”

Libyan President El-Magariaf was a Sunni Muslim, but still felt no need to attack American Islamophobia and link it to this attack. Like most Americans he clearly understood that the attack was an organized operation that had nothing to do with the Cairo protests, while the Obama Administration continued to push a false narrative.

Missing in Action

In view of Obama’s preoccupation with Islamophobia, it was no surprise that he was not interested in one of the largest political rallies in French history. On Sunday, January 11th 3.7 million people and over 40 world leaders marched in Paris and other French cities to condemn recent terrorist attacks on a French newspaper and a kosher supermarket.

Despite the large scale attendance of Muslims and Muslim religious leaders, Obama had little interest in promoting moderate Islam on this occasion. Instead he stayed home and watched football.

The White House claimed that since planning for the event had begun only 36 hours before, there wasn’t enough time to organize security for the President. However, over 40 presidents and prime ministers (including Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu) attended the event. Are we to believe that the Secret Service could not match the security services of 40 other countries, including Israel?

This bald-faced lie is completely in character for the Obama Administration. To understand what really happened take a good look at one of the targets of the terrorist attack, Charlie Hedbo magazine.

God Damn the 1st Amendment

In 2006 Charlie Hedbo republished the Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons that had previously ignited deadly riots around the world. The magazine’s right to free speech was upheld by a French court when the editor was acquitted of the crime of “abusing a group on the grounds of their religion”.

This sort of free speech does not fit President Obama’s vision of the “future”. Around the time he was falsely blaming the Benghazi attack on an imaginary protest, Obama pushed his cherished talking point on the UN General Assembly.  He infamously proclaimed:

The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam”.

In the space of one minute he placed Americans who exercise their freedom of speech on the same level of 1) the terrorists who kill Coptic Christians in Egypt and 2) the dictator of Syria, who slaughters his own people with crude chemical weapons. Obama said:

1) “The future must not belong to those who target Coptic Christians in Egypt.”
2) “In Syria, the future must not belong to a dictator who massacres his people.”

I’m sorry. My future shouldn’t be threatened because I don’t believe that Mohammed was a prophet. It is my right not to believe and my right to express my right not to believe. I am not an “obstructionist”.  I am exercising my right to free speech.

Obama has allies in his fight against the defamation of the prophet of Islam. In Pakistan a Christian mother of five, Asia Bibi, was sentenced to death for “defiling the name of the Prophet Mohammed”.

It is interesting to note that the charges were brought against her by Pakistanis who were discriminating against her faith. Bibi’s fellow field workers refused to drink out of a bucket of water that she touched because she wasn’t Muslim. An argument ensued and now she is condemned to death. Several prominent politicians in Pakistan have been assassinated for speaking out on Bibi’s behalf (including the only Christian member of the Cabinet).

In Bangladesh a cartoonist, Arifur Rahman, was jailed for six months because he made an innocent, a-political joke naming a cat “Mohammed”. Under pressure from Islamists Bangladesh has also persecuted bloggers for insulting Mohammed. Writer, Asif Mohiuddin, was murdered last week for defending them. This has become a regular pattern in that country.

When an Egyptian social studies teacher, Demiana Emad, said that the former Coptic Christian Pope Shenuda III was a better man than Mohammed she was jailed for six months and forced to pay a heavy fine.

We can go down the list such as; Indonesia, Iran, Jordan, Kuwait, Malaysia, Nigeria, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Turkey, UAE, Yemen, etc… but you get the idea. The most relevant case is the death sentence for seven Egyptian Christians for their roles in the movie “Innocence of Muslims”.

As his allies in Egypt were busy building a death penalty case, Obama was trying to persuade Google and YouTube to pull down the video. Although he failed, the video was later taken down for reasons that had nothing to do with insulting the Prophet.

The funny thing about some Americans is that they really do treasure the freedom of speech. It’s not just words…

The Future of Those Who Slander the USA

When a bully is looking for an excuse he will always find another one.  So if we surrender our freedom of speech Islamic terrorism will still continue. The conspiracy theories that fuel the hatred of Islamists are not even the sole domain of just Islamists. Westerners themselves are often the first to blame western imperialism.  We give them the reasons to justify their holy war against us.

On the other hand, I refuse to censor 9/11 Truthers and other conspiracy nuts no matter how much they offend me.  I also reserve the right to criticize them in return.

In protests we have turned a blind eye towards those who urge soldiers to assassinate their officers.

Anti-war activists protested at Walter Reed Medical Center, where injured soldiers were recovering from their wounds. They carried signs such as, “Enlist Here and Die for Halliburton” and “Maimed for Lies”.

However, there is no way in the world that I would demand that they be censored.  I will condemn their hateful propaganda until my last breath, but I am proud that my country tolerates such foolishness so that we can protect EVERYONE who expresses unpopular opinions.

Almost everyone “condemns” the violence of Islamists, but we often hear the caveat that cartoonists and amateur movie makers should behave themselves. So if a sacrilegious artwork such as the Piss Christ can be federally funded, how can anyone who approves of that object to publishing privately funded artwork such as the Mohammed cartoons? (Or is government approved blasphemy OK? Just kidding comrades)

The Elephant in the Room

Thanks to “Islamophobia” and our self-loathing bias we are blind to what is really happening in the world.  We know very little outside of anti-American talking points. The only reason we are familiar with the opposing point of view is because we are very familiar with the talking points that form the criticisms of them.

As an example, Gwen Ifill conducted a PBS interview of an author who traveled to the Islamic State to report on what is happening there. It was almost amusing to watch her confusion over the fact that the author was not beheaded when he traveled to ISIS territory.

It stands to reason that if you are a journalist covering international events you would understand the motivations of the subjects of your interview. Even before I pressed play to watch the video I knew the answer to Ifill’s lack of understanding.

The author that Ifill interviewed is a German named “Jürgen Todenhöfer”. Without any research I immediately realized that he was an anti-war activist. How is it possible that she can’t figure this out?

Todenhöfer was proud to criticize the ICC indictment of Sudanese President Omar Hassan al-Bashir for genocide in the Darfur region of western Sudan. The Sudanese government and its Janjaweed militias destroyed 400 villages, displaced 2.5 million people and instigated a genocide that cost 400,000 lives (and countless rapes).

In an open letter to the ICC prosecutor, Todenhöfer argued that if President Bush or Prime Minister Blair has not been indicted by the court then they should not indict the Sudanese President. So HELLO Gwen Ifill, it’s obvious why the Islamic State let this man into their territory without beheading him.

We Are Useful Tools

Todenhöfer seems like a really nice guy, like a friendly grandpa... But very friendly with terrorists and dictators and a complete tool. The problem is that he knows this. That is why he reiterates over and over that he criticizes the Islamic State. I’m sure he does, but he didn’t make too many criticisms during the interview.

Regardless, the Islamic State doesn’t care when Todenhöfer criticizes their brutality or their dictatorial nature. They actually want him to report those things. They rule through terror so they don’t want the message to go out that they are reasonable and accommodating liberals.

Most of all they want Todenhöfer and other likeminded Westerners to continue their propaganda. He has no sense of history outside of anti-Americanism. Only a pronounced bias can lead to this claim by Todenhöfer;

If you send your troops, even your best troops, I think they would have little chance to fight in a guerilla war in a big city. Because an American soldier, even your best soldiers the Marines or Special Forces, they want to come home, they want to survive. But these people want to die. They want to win and they are ready to die.”

He conveniently forgets the tenacity that US troops have shown over the years. This is nothing new to our soldiers.  In the Battle of Iwo Jima during World War II the Japanese commander, General Kuribayashi, issued an order forbidding his troops to commit suicidal Banzai charges because they always failed against US firepower. The Banzai charge was replaced by kamikazes, but the US still defeated the Japanese Empire.

During the Battle of the Surge US Marines also used superior firepower against a suicidal enemy with success. Al Qaeda suffered a great defeat. Todenhöfer knows this, but he feels that he needs to propagandize against the US to help prevent us from being what he considers to be warlike and foolish.  The Islamic State counted on that when they issued him a guarantee of protection.

That is why they offered Todenhöfer the opportunity to try on a suicide belt. During another interview with CNN he blurted out that, “…these belts are very small, very easy to wear… I wore one… it’s a horrible feeling…”

In the video you can see that Todenhöfer realized he shouldn’t have admitted that on camera. He becomes visibly uncomfortable and looks down away from the camera as he grasps for words. Thankfully for him it is CNN and the interviewer bails him out by changing the subject. Soft interviews are a given when you have the right talking points.

In actuality the Islamic State doesn’t really need Todenhöfer.  There is enough anti-American propaganda in the Western world. However, he posed no threat for them and they felt they could use him anyway.

As long as we tell the world that Americans are racist warmongers and that is why we invade other countries, they will never believe anything we say (other than when we say bad things about ourselves). When Obama suffers from the Karzai Dilemma and tells the UN that the US is racist, the Muslim world will not believe him when he claims to be bombing the Middle East for humanitarian reasons.

To them it’s no different than a bank robber who rats on his accomplices. And just imagine if the leader of the gang tries to blame the other robbers. Who is going to believe him?

The cognitive dissonance will only be overlooked by those who claim to be American patriots, but are conditioned to believe that America’s foreign policy has always been primarily motivated by bigotry and greed.

Friday, February 20, 2015

Stuck In The Karzai Dilemma

More and more people are finally beginning to see the truth about Islamist terrorism. Recent attacks against our “intellectual superiors” in Europe have created a backlash. No matter how much our biased media wants to blame the West for terrorism, they cannot allow a threat to their livelihood to go unanswered.

Chris Matthews had a fascinating interview with State Department spokesperson, Marie Harf. As a member of the “Obama Department” and a former campaign advisor, Harf is completely insulated against reality. She repeatedly demonstrated her ignorance during the interview.

This ignorance exists from the top to bottom. President Obama recently said,

“…I reject a notion that somehow that (Islamist extremism) creates a religious war because the overwhelming majority of Muslims reject that interpretation of Islam. They don’t even recognize it as being Islam. I think that for us to be successful in fighting this scourge it is very important for us to align ourselves with the 99.9% of Muslims who are looking for the same thing we are looking for…”

So if al-Zawahiri and al-Baghdadi are not Muslim, what religion do they belong to? It’s not just wishful thinking, Obama is really just a compulsive propagandist. .1% doesn’t come anywhere near the support base for Islamist extremism. The Pew Research Center did a study which revealed that 15% of US Muslims between 18 to 29 years old thought that suicide bombing was justified. Keep in mind that the average age of a suicide bomber is in the early twenties.

Regardless, Obama would never say that the term “White Supremacy” is a problem because it is supported by only .1% of whites. Such an argument could be used to justify the rebranding of the term “White Supremacy” to something like “Misrepresentative Cross Section of Unnamed Master Race”.

You can see the hollowness of this rhetoric when Chris Matthews asked Marie Harf how can we stop terrorism. She replied;

“…We cannot win this war by killing them. We cannot kill our way out of this war. We need in the medium to longer term to go after the root causes that leads people to join these groups, whether it’s lack of opportunity for jobs…” Harf then doubled down on this nonsense by saying, “We can work with countries around the world to help improve their governance. We can help them build their economies so they can have job opportunities for these people…”

This lack of understanding by intelligent people can only be explained by denial. The resulting rationalizations just cloud any attempt to define solutions.

The Myth of Oppressed Terrorists

Over a dozen years ago I had a Jewish business associate who traveled extensively in the Middle East. I made a comment that since he dealt with educated people he probably didn’t have to worry that much about religious prejudice. His reply stunned me. He said that educated people in the Middle East were more indoctrinated than the uneducated.

Newsweek supports this observation with a quote from terrorism expert, Walter Laqueur, who stated that terrorists are, “relatively well educated and gainfully employed”.

At the University of Pennsylvania, Dr. Marc Sageman, was concerned about our lack of knowledge concerning terrorism. He conducted a survey of 162 terrorists. His study (that was conducted over a decade ago) would stun the ill-informed Obama Administration today.

  • About two-thirds of the terrorists went to college, in an area of the world where only about 10 percent of young men get a post-secondary education

  • About 87 percent came from generally secular backgrounds (most of the other 13 percent, who studied at the Muslim schools known as madrassas, were Indonesians)

  • Most came from middle or upper-middle class households

We can still help Muslim countries build their economies, BUT WE WILL ALSO NEED A PLAN TO COMBAT TERRORISM!!!

The Trap of the Karzai Dilemma

Former Afghan President, Hamid Karzai, owed his political power to the United States. Operation Enduring Freedom helped him gain political office. During his presidency our country was his primary financial and military supporter.

Yet Karzai’s relationship with the US was very strained, particularly with President Obama. Back in 2011 Karzai had a public meltdown. US air strikes (the preferred military reaction of the Obama Administration) had killed and wounded some innocent Afghan civilians.

(Before continuing I would like to make it clear that while I am criticizing the Obama Administration, I am not attacking our military. Airstrikes in a warzone against armed combatants are legal under the Geneva Conventions. However, friendly fire incidents show that if friendly military units can be accidently targeted, then innocent civilians are also at risk. Their deaths are not necessarily intentional and are often caused by the fog of war.)

Getting back to the point, Karzai reacted to American air strikes by declaring;

With great honor and with great respect, and humbly rather than with arrogance, I request that NATO and America should stop these operations on our soil… …This war is not on our soil. If this war is against terror, then this war is not here, terror is not here.”

Despite his dependence on the US, this was just one of many anti-American tirades by Karzai. It betrays another dependency. In order to stay relevant to his people Karzai had to use Anti-Americanism to distance himself from his ally.

Anti-Americanism is the Problem

President Obama rose to prominence thanks to the political power of his church, Trinity United Church of Christ. It was led by his mentor; Pastor Jeremiah Wright, who is infamous for his anti-American sermons. His declaration of, “God Damn America”, is a testament to how deeply Pastor Wright felt he could pay tribute to anti-Americanism.

Obama’s debt to anti-Americanism is constantly being repaid. Last September Obama made a speech to the UN urging them to fight against ISIS. He switched gears for a moment in an amazing display of the Karzai Dilemma.

I realize that America’s critics will be quick to point out that at times we too have failed to live up to our ideals; that America has plenty of problems within our own borders. This is true. In a summer marked by instability in the Middle East and Eastern Europe, I know the world also took notice of the small American city of Ferguson, Missouri – where a young man was killed, and a community was divided. So yes, we have our own racial and ethnic tensions. And like every country, we continually wrestle with how to reconcile the vast changes wrought by globalization and greater diversity with the traditions that we hold dear.”

I would like to translate that into plain English for you. He is basically saying that, “I may sound like a George Bush warmonger, but I am as anti-American as you”.

In the Middle East the media and schools teach only that America killed the Indians, oppresses minorities, props up Israel and colonizes the planet. They know nothing but the bad that our country has done (or what they claim we have done). Populist Democrats preach the same thing. Islamist and Populist propaganda converge in Anti-Americanism.

President Obama would like to destroy ISIS, but leave anti-Americanism intact. That is impossible.

The only way to defeat Islamic Terrorism is to disarm the reason for its existence. Anti-Americanism helps to radicalize and recruit new members. It also helped to rationalize the justifications for the beheadings of James Foley, Steven Sotloff, and Peter Kassig.

The Karzai Dilemma leaves President Obama powerless because he must always kowtow to anti-Americanism while fighting America’s enemies.

  • Whenever President Bush was responsible for an airstrike that resulted in collateral damage (real or imagined), Obama could ride his high horse.

  • Whenever President Obama is responsible for a similar airstrike it raises uncomfortable questions. So he fishes for sympathy by slyly insinuating to the listener that he is a black man and the US oppresses his race. His UN speech was a classic example of unstated assumptions used as propaganda. 

It gives me no pleasure to watch him squirm. These airstrikes are often necessary. I wish collateral damage did not exist, but I do not subscribe to a populist ideology that promises a perfect world. I support President Obama’s war on ISIS, but I know the truth. His anti-American populist ideology is a part of the problem.

If you really want to win the war against ISIS you must change Mr. President. You can still preach about the racism of America’s past, but do not forget that it is not just America’s history. It is the history of the world and a part of human nature.

Blaming the sins of the world on the US ignores the great history of our representative democracy and the present day triumphs of civil rights. The solution can’t be found by fabricating white racism, when the problem is truly black racism against whites. (White racism does exist, but it was not a factor in the violence between police officer Darren Wilson and Blood gangster Mike Brown.)

Many countries in Africa, Asia, South America and the Middle East don’t have the diversity from global immigration that we have. For many of them free speech and equal rights are only a dream. And they often suffer from terrible corruption that snuffs out struggling businesses. We are a white majority country with a black President and more equality than any populist hustler will ever sincerely admit.

Mr. President you rode the tiger and don’t want to get off. If you really want a great legacy here is your chance. Work to destroy anti-Americanism and the associated victimhood rackets. That will help rot away the foundation of Islamic terrorism…

Friday, December 19, 2014

Do The Dance

Race relations in the United States have nosed dived in the last decade. It is ironic that in the entire history of the United States African-Americans have never had the opportunities that they have now. To underscore this point we have elected our first black President. Why is this not enough?...

The Answer is clear, the militant Socialist ideology that lost the Cold War still fights on. Its blind followers are bitter over their loss.

There are many different brands of Socialism and other groups that are heavily influenced by Socialism. This includes Communists, Democratic Socialists, Anarchists and many more. They all have different goals, but when they view America they have one common purpose… to destroy the idea that America has any value without promoting some form of a militant Socialist agenda.

I am not asserting that these groups are united. A Stalinist is as liable to fight a Trotskyist as he or she would fight a Republican. In the Spanish Civil War the massacre of Anarchists by their Socialist allies marked the end of the fragile unity of the embattled Republic.

Ideologies that are heavily influenced by Socialism are compelled to have confrontational and intolerant relations with other activist groups. When such revolutionary groups seize power they become reactionaries with a revolutionary zeal (something along the lines of permanent revolution).

On the other hand, moderate Democratic Socialists are usually well-meaning activists who only hope to covertly use class warfare to undermine their Conservative enemies. They are committed to democratic representation, but encourage forces they cannot hope to control. The Occupy Movement and recent race rioting are prime examples.

No better lesson can found than the Iranian Revolution. Liberal and secular democracy activists were delusional in their alliance with the fanatical Islamists under Ayatollah Khomeini. After the fall of the Shah’s oppressive regime, they formed a new government uniting Leftist Democrats and Islamist Theocrats. In the end, many Leftists were betrayed, only to be executed and/or persecuted by their former Islamist allies.

I am not saying that Iranian dissidents were wrong to oppose the Shah. I am saying that Leftists are blind to the forces that they ally themselves to. In return for the short-term benefits of such alliances they unleash the destructive forces of anti-Americanism. Iran found itself with a far worse regime than the Shah’s dictatorship. Human rights abuses and regional instability dramatically increased.

A Divided Country

There is a very important rule that must be followed in order to learn how to love other people. You must love yourself before you can love anyone else. Yet our society has been slowly developing a pronounced self-loathing anti-American bias. We are commonly using terms that I was never familiar with before such as “white privilege” and “criming while white”.

The irony is that our President would have never been elected if he didn’t reject his white heritage. He most certainly wouldn’t have been elected if he married a white woman. When Obama pathetically stated, “if I had a son, he'd look like Trayvon”, he was doing what he has done for his whole life… promote his blackness and scorn his whiteness.

In the 21st Century it is permissible for our country to have a President who openly expresses a racial bias, as long as it is a socially acceptable form of self-loathing bigotry.

Four Holy Men and One President
“Hymietown” - Reverend Jesse Jackson, “Crackers” - Reverend Al Sharpton, “Typical White Person” - President Barack Obama, “The white race is a race of devils” - Minister Louis Farrakhan, “God Damn America” - Reverend Jeremiah Wright

This bigotry knows no limits. Black police officers face hatred because they are seen to be collaborating with whites. Former police officer, Noel Leader, wearily admits that black officers are despised by African Americans. He states, “We’re called things like Uncle Toms and traitors to our community”.

AP ran a story on the subject with the bizarre headline, “Black officers torn between duty and race”… The idea of race-traitors in the black community shows how deep such prejudice has become. Invariably, these articles write about how much police departments need to reach out to the black community, but no amount of reaching out will make a difference to irrational minds full of inflammatory hatred.

That brings us back to the premise of how this race war is an extension of the Cold War. Let’s take a look at an eye-opening example. Operation Infektion, a Soviet-bloc disinformation campaign from the 1980s that continues to reverberate today.

The KGB initiated the campaign with the assertion that the AIDS virus was a man-made creation of the US and was used as an ethnic weapon. They provided disinformation to a host of journalists and academics who fulfilled their roles as “useful idiots”.

However, the AIDS virus began to spread to the Soviet Union and the US refused to help Russia as long as they continued their disinformation campaign. So the government newspaper, Izvestia, officially rejected the conspiracy theory that the virus was man-made. After the fall of the Soviet Union the Russian intelligence agency (SVR) publicly admitted the role of the KGB in this affair, yet the idea has persisted to this day.

Our current President has been deeply influenced by this sort of propaganda. During the Presidential elections Obama’s mentor, Reverend Jeremiah Wright, became a huge embarrassment. Obama needed the white vote because over 70% of the country’s population is white. He had to partially disown Rev Wright when the preacher stood by his accusation that, “The government lied about inventing the HIV virus as a means of genocide against people of color. Governments lie.”

A study in 2005 by Oregon State University revealed that nearly 50% of African Americans believe that AIDS was man-made.

This paranoia has also wounded South Africa were it is estimated that 343,000 deaths could have been prevented between 1999 and 2007. The government obstructed the treatment of AIDS patients out of fear of these conspiracies. Long after the end of the Soviet empire black communities continue to suffer from this race-baiting paranoia. They are collateral damage in the war against anti-Socialist America.

Modern McCarthyism

During the height of the Cold War Senator Joe McCarthy became infamous for his witch-hunt of Communists in the State Department and US military. While Operation Infektion shows how devious Communist espionage could be, McCarthy did serious damage to representative democracy and anti-Communism.

Look at the parallels. Socialism promises a simple solution to poverty, a problem that has never been solved in the history of humankind. In the process of implementation it attacks the most productive segment of society. The efforts to redistribute wealth cause more problems than it fixes.

McCarthyism operated on a similar basis. It attempted to fix a problem with no obvious solution by attempting to identify Communists in the US government. Senator McCarthy’s tactics were closer to Stalinism than any American ideology. It doesn’t matter if McCarthy was right about Communist subversion because his tactics led to false accusations against innocent people.

But today we suffer from a witch-hunt of another kind. Activists and the media hunt for racists. Like Communists, racists seek to suppress the rights of other citizens. This type of justification fuels many persecutions.

So ponder this… Senator McCarthy falsely accused Fred Fisher, a junior lawyer representing the US Army, of being a Communist. Fisher’s superior, Joseph Welch, famously retorted, “Let us not assassinate this lad further, Senator. You’ve done enough. Have you no sense of decency, sir?”. Fisher was certainly leftwing, but there was no evidence that he had ever been a Communist.

Now in 2014 police officers are accused of being racist without any evidence at all. The reason two grand juries could not indict them was because there was NO evidence proving that they carried out their duties with criminal intent. In both cases they were confronted by aggressively violent men and in both cases they were almost overwhelmed by the hostile actions of men who happened to be black.

No racial slurs were uttered. No racial profiling was done. There is nothing connecting racism to these incidents, only the conspiracy theories of a well-oiled propaganda machine.

So when Rev Wright shouts “God Damn America”, demand to know what America did to him. He is a wealthy and privileged citizen thanks to his race-baiting church. Wright and others like him divide our country and enrich themselves at our expense. How many more cities have to burn before we put an end to this hatred?

Friday, November 28, 2014

Should We Burn This Bitch Down?

Luis Head was in a lot of emotional pain when he incited protesters to commit arson. The ultimate blame for his transgression belongs to a ravenous race-baiting machine that has been exacerbating racial tension for 30 years. Michael Brown’s grieving family has suffered enough and I blame the agitators who provoke racial hatred in order to enjoy the media spotlight.

After the greatest accomplishments in the history of the civil rights movement these agitators need racism to stay relevant. For 30 years Al Sharpton is still exploiting any opportunity to race-bait the country and sour race relations. He has taken a leading role representing the protesters and family of Michael Brown.

With a great deal of impudence Sharpton told the media that, “I've never seen a prosecutor hold a press conference to discredit the victim, where he went out of his way to go point by point in discrediting Michael Brown Jr., who could not defend himself.”

But hold on, Sharpton is an expert on the subject! In 1987 Harry Crist Jr committed suicide hours after his girlfriend broke up with him. He was also distraught because he had recently found out that his dream of becoming a fulltime police officer would never come true. Sharpton exploited Crist’s death and falsely accused him of raping Tawana Brawley, a black teenager. He knew that a dead person could never defend himself. When Prosecutor Steven Pagones provided an alibi for Crist, the Prosecutor was also accused of the rape!

Both of the accused were cleared of any wrong doing and Pagones successfully sued Al Sharpton for defamation. The court found that there was no evidence that Brawley was raped and she faked her own abuse. When Sharpton says that a dead man cannot defend himself he knows what he is talking about from his own personal initiative. The family of Crist never recovered from the additional pain that he caused them.

Al Sharpton has an activist organization named, “The National Action Network (NAN)”. Some press conferences on the subject of the Michael Brown shooting have been made under its banner. Unfortunately, the organization sometimes uses the slogan, “No Justice, No Peace”. Back in 1991 it was chanted during the infamous Crown Heights Riots when Sharpton led protesters in response to a car accident that killed a black boy. An innocent Jew from Australia was murdered during three days of violent rioting. This is “No Justice, No Peace” in action. It is a close relative of “An Eye for an Eye”.

Michael Brown’s father has repeatedly worn shirts with the same slogan during press conferences. It is a rare glimpse of honesty that sheds light on the deception of modern race-baiting. While activists may claim to have peaceful intentions, some only intend to be peaceful as long as their demands are met. The meaning of “No Justice, No Peace” is clear.

Martin Luther King Jr and Ghandi would disagree with the provocative use of that slogan.

There is a self-lynching going on in Ferguson, Missouri. It is African-Americans that are bearing the brunt of the violence. Many looters just use this cause to enrich themselves.

As Al Sharpton goes from town to town there is a storm cloud that follows him. From Tawana Brawley to the Crown Heights riots, to the massacre at Freddy’s Fashion Mart, to the Jena 6 beatdown, the Duke Lacrosse Lie and more… There is a bloody trail that lies in the wake of Sharpton’s dishonest “activism”. Many lives have been destroyed. How have black communities benefited from this?

To highlight the problem of violence in the African-American community right-wingers have taken to pointing out statistics of black on black crime, but let’s look at black vs white crime instead. These statistics were pulled from the FBI and Census websites…

Even though blacks comprise only 12.6% of our population they have still killed over 50% more whites than whites have killed blacks. This is a staggering number! If I use the simpleminded race-baiting model to interpret this inequality I would be just jumping to conclusions. It is hard to quantify what percent of these lopsided statistics are due to the racism of blacks against whites. What we can say is that there is an epidemic of criminal activity in our African American communities. This is indisputable.

As the riots in Ferguson shows; the biggest victims of race-baiting are not the white targets, but the black community. Black youths are constantly told that they are kept poor by white oppression. They are instructed to believe that their color is the reason for all of their problems. So race-baiting con-artists paint a picture in which blacks have no control over their own lives. It is no wonder there is so much anger. This feeling of hopelessness is inevitably expressed in violence.

When you add a violent gang culture such as the Bloods, throw in rampant out-of-wedlock births (72.1 percent among blacks in 2010), and a dash of unemployment, you have a disaster in the making.

Protesters try to bully their politics on our country and hurt black neighborhoods as collateral damage. They are destroying black peoples' hearts by telling them that they must hate other races in order to be free from oppression. Our media must look past its bias and lead the way to discredit this dishonest activism. It will save black lives and bring back real hope.

UPDATE 11/30/14: The death of a violent gangbanger who assaulted a police officer is becoming a call to arms for a wide variety of radical groups. Louis Farrakhan, leader of the Nation of Islam, is agitating for a bloody race war. He was captured in a video where he declared, “…we’ll tear this goddamn country apart!”

It was the splitting image of the sermon by Obama’s mentor, Reverend Wright, in which he declared, “God Damn America”. In both cases the congregations exploded with cheer to embrace their leaders’ anti-American message.

Farrakhan’s speech demanded “retaliation” and he quoted the bible saying, “an eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth and a life for a life”. With a smile on his face he said, “we are going to die anyway. Let’s die for something”. But unless he gets his race war, Farrakhan will be leaving this world on a bed of silk sheets. You see, this man of self-righteous fury has a net worth of $3 million dollars. He leads a life of privilege way beyond anything you or I can ever hope for. How many of his followers will have to sacrifice their lives so he can reach $4 million?

At the end of the speech Farrakhan’s followers chanted “Allahu Akbar”. Meanwhile the Islamic State terrorist group has offered assistance to the protesters in Ferguson. There have been a number of messages sent out on Twitter. Junaid Hussain; a jihadist from the UK, proclaimed,“We hear you and we will help you if you accept Islam and reject corrupt man-made laws like democracy and pledge your allegiance to Caliph Abu Bakr and then we will shed our blood for you and send our soldiers that don’t sleep, whose drink is blood, and their play is carnage”.

In August a previous wave of tweets were sent out encouraging the protesters. Amreeki Witness wrote, “May be time to organize the Muslims in America upon haqq and mobilize to #Ferguson. Defend the oppressed, start jihad here.”

In other news, members of the Communist Party led protests in St. Louis calling for a Communist revolution. They also cried out for the murder of former police officer, Darren Wilson.

I am ashamed that I once was in the habit of calling policemen, “Pigs”. I apologize for this and wish all the best to the men and women who risk their lives to protect me. Forgiveness is more important than ever…

Thursday, January 14, 2010

Is It Really Ted Kennedy's Senate Seat?

What is it about the Democratic Party and Senate seats?

First it was Illinois governor, Rod Blagojevich, who was convicted for abuse of power when he tried to sell President Obama’s former U.S. Senate seat. You might remember that as the governor of Illinois he had the power to appoint a replacement for Obama after the president-elect vacated his former U.S. Senate seat for the White House. Blago was caught when the FBI wiretapped his home and recordings were made of him attempting to sell the seat to the highest bidder.

Children throughout the state of Illinois are getting prepared to celebrate the first annual “Obama Senate Seat Day” on January 29th. It is hailed as the anniversary of Blago’s conviction (just nine days after Obama’s inauguration!). The Chicago corruption machine vows that no child will be left behind without a Senate seat.

Anyway… Something even worse than the Blago disaster is happening. Now a Republican has the ‘nerve’ to run for the Senate seat left vacant by the Democratic Party’s demigod, Ted Kennedy. Except for a gap of two years, this seat has been in the hands of the Kennedy family since 1953, when John F. Kennedy first won it. (Benjamin A. Smith II, a Kennedy loyalist, kept JFK’s seat warm for two years until Ted was old enough to take over.)

Remember how Blago had the power to fill a U.S. Senate vacancy by appointment? Get ready for some heavy-handed irony.

In 2004 Ted Kennedy was instrumental in helping to push legislation that would have prevented Mitt Romney, the former Republican governor of Massachusetts, from appointing a replacement to John Kerry’s U.S. Senate seat if Kerry had won the presidential election.

In August 2009 Ted Kennedy made another appeal to change the law once again. At the time Kennedy was terminally ill and worried about his soon be vacated seat. However, Massachusetts now had a governor who was a Democratic Party loyalist, Deval Patrick. Kennedy wanted to change the law so that the governor could choose an interim replacement. This would give the Democratic Party the 60 votes they needed to pass their health care bill. Otherwise the seat would be vacant under the law Kennedy fought to pass in 2004.

The law was duly changed thanks to the Democratic Party’s majority in the Massachusetts Legislature. So they got their 60 votes when a Kennedy loyalist was appointed as the interim replacement. That means blue-blooded legislators can just change the law when they don’t want a Republican to be seated in the Senate and change the law when they want a Democrat seated. The arrogance seemed limitless…

However, it is now the turn of the voters of Massachusetts to strike back. Scott Brown, the Republican candidate for the Senate seat that has been held by the Kennedy family for 54 years, has came from out of nowhere to become a serious contender. This is despite the fact that it is one of the Democratic Party’s most loyal voter districts.

Here is an example of why Brown is making such an impact on the election. In a recent debate the biased moderator from CNN, David Gergen, led with this query;

“Mr. Brown, let me ask you this question, it’s on a lot of people’s minds. You said you’re for health care reform, just not this bill. We know from the Clinton experience that if this bill fails, it could well be another 15 years before we see health care reform efforts in Washington. Are you willing under those circumstances to say, ‘I’m going to be the person. I’m going to sit in Teddy Kennedy’s seat and I’m going to be the person who’s going to block it for another 15 years’?”

Brown brilliantly replied;

“Well with all due respect it’s not the Kennedys’ seat, and it’s not the Democrats’ seat, it’s the people’s seat. And they have the chance to send somebody down there who is an independent voter, and an independent thinker and going to look out for the best interests of the people of Massachusetts. And the way that this bill is configured, I’d like to send it back to the drawing board because I believe people should have insurance. Not just this particular bill because it’s not good for the entire country. You’re talking about another trillion dollars in costs, a half a trillion dollars in Medicare cuts, military people, if you’re veterans, you’re going to have cuts in Tricare, and it’s not good. We need to go back to the drawing board. Nobody has confidence in this bill right now.”

As Gergen admits, he “got stuffed”. The arrogant sense of entitlement that defines such anti-democratic talking heads is becoming unglued.

Wednesday, January 06, 2010

The Three Wise Men - Part 2

In ‘Part One’ I wrote about Al Sharpton and his divisive role in race relations over the years. There was way too much material to include President Obama and Tiger Woods in the same post. That’s OK because splitting it into two sections works better. There are similarities and eye-opening contrasts between Obama and Tiger that makes it logical to include them in their own post.

The inspiration for this commentary was an article that addressed what is obvious to me since I grew up in an African-American community. Associated Press revealed how African-Americans look unfavorably at Tiger Woods because he chooses to chase after white women.

As revelations of Tiger’s infidelities began to surface; an African-American radio show host, Tom Joyner, lambasted the golf champion:

“Thankfully, Tiger, you didn’t marry a black woman. Because if a sister caught you running around with a bunch of white hoochie-mamas, she would have castrated him...

…The question everyone in America wants to ask you is, how many white women does one brother waaant?”

I understand that this is an attempt at humor, but Joyner went too far. Why is it that fellow radio show host Don Imus got suspended in a similar situation and Joyner gets a free pass?

It is particularly disturbing when you consider that in 2008 Joyner was inducted into The International Civil Rights Walk Of Fame. This is a monument that is housed in the Martin Luther King Jr. National Historic Site in Atlanta. Supporters give it this description:

“The International Civil Rights Walk of Fame was created to give recognition to those brave soldiers of justice who sacrificed and struggled to make equality a reality for all. This extraordinary display has become one of the most visited tourist attractions in the city of Atlanta and has enriched the heritage of the civil rights movement.”

Joyner’s behavior is not what I would expect from a “brave soldier of justice” struggling “to make equality a reality for all”.

Unfortunately, this goes deeper than just a joke. Author, Pearl Jr., writes about issues for African-American women. Her focus is on “exposing the conspiracy to keep black women without love”. It is a part of what she refers to as the “current status quo of the division of power based on race”. Even though she promotes herself as an “Equality Activist” (or maybe because of that), she completely snapped in response to Tiger Woods’ taste for white women. A website, was created to express her frustrations. She asked;

“Are you sick of our black men that leave our race and marry outside our race profiting off the black community while they in turn, turn their backs on us?”

[A screen print of a frame from the website]

Now lets be honest. If a white person set up a website to convince white women not to marry African-American men, would you consider that to be racist? Make no mistake Pearl Jr. is quite clear about her feelings. She goes on to write, “Are you ready to speak up and out in order to ask our black people to stay together; stick together because we need each other?! We are asking our black men to come home because we need you here...helping us rebuild our communities!”

Another author of books for African-American women, Denene Millner, confirms the reservations African-American women have about such interracial relationships. “We’ve discussed this for years among black women… Why is it when they get to this level... they tend to go directly for the nearest blonde?”

Millner claims that she was quoted out of context, however she still admits to saying that statement. Her argument centers on the fact that, “neither I nor a whole lot of the African American women I know are bothered by interracial relationships like we used to be”. She should be commended for moving past her intolerance towards interracial relationships, but it is unfair that she misquotes the journalist who interviewed her (Jesse Washington). He never wrote that Millner was still prejudiced (although she admits that she was in the past). Washington quoted her on how African-American women view such interracial relationships. As Pearl Jr shows, it still holds true whether or not Millner has seen the errors of her own intolerance.

This intolerance is not just limited to African-American women. Books such as John Johnson’s “It Ain’t All Good: Why Black Men Should Not Date White Women” and Rajen Persaud’s “Why Black Men Love White Women” reveal a disturbing portrait of prejudice against interracial relationships. I doubt that would sell a book entitled, “Why White Women Should Not Date Black Men”.

While Millner’s assertion that she had a change of heart is welcome, the manner in which she did it was a bit questionable. This is due to the fact that Millner added the following caveat, “I was neither shocked nor cared about Tiger’s choice in women because he’s never seemed to identify with the “bl” in his “Cablinasian” racial make-up anyway”.

So how is that for an “either you are with us or against us” moment?

“Cablinasian” is a term coined by Tiger to define his ethnicity:

“Ca” – Caucasian
“Bl” – African-American Black
“In” – American Indian
“Asian” – Chinese and Thai

His use of this term has not endeared him to the African-American community. A columnist for FanHouse, Terence Moore, reacted to Tiger’s recent troubles with vindication. He pointed out that the African-American community unconditionally supported other prominent African-American athletes who got into trouble;

“Those other athletes had one of the world’s most supportive casts. They had an overwhelming number of folks in the African-American community standing firmly and loudly behind them -- no matter what. They had Jesse and Al waiting to pounce in the background, if they hadn’t done so already. They had black ministers across the country asking for special prayers in their name. They had folks in barbershops throughout African-American communities talking about conspiracies.

Mostly, despite everything those in black America had seen or heard about the events surrounding O.J., Vick, Iverson and the rest, they had unconditional love.

For Woods, not so much.

Actually, not at all, and Woods has nobody to blame but Woods.

It goes back to April 1997 when he famously took a nine-iron to the face of blacks by telling Oprah Winfrey on her couch that he wasn’t black. He said he wasn’t white, either. He said, given that his father is black and that his mother is Asian, he spent his youth inventing a word for himself called “Cablinasian”.

Just like that, in the hearts of many African-Americans, Woods was on his own…”

Moore makes it clear that he has always felt this way. He proudly dug up an article that he wrote 12 years ago. The piece was written to chastise Tiger when the golfer first publicly used the term “Cablinasian”;

“Tiger, you’re not green. You’re not yellow. You’re not purple. You’re not Asian. You’re not Cablinasian. You’re black.”

Why is it so important that Tiger must declare that he is exclusively African-American? His mother, Kultida Woods complained that, “To call Tiger black is to deny my existence”. She is half Thai, a quarter Chinese, and a quarter Dutch. Tiger’s father is one-quarter Native American, one-quarter Chinese, and half African-American. That means Tiger has more Asian heritage than African-American (one-half Asian, one-quarter African-American, one-eighth Native American and one-eighth white).

With that in mind, it is time to write about Barack Obama. He is a great comparison because Obama is also a prominent American with a mixed race background that includes African heritage. Unlike Tiger, he has exclusively embraced his African ancestry.

Despite the fact that Obama was raised by a loving white family and abandoned at a young age by his African father, he rejects his white heritage. In his autobiography “Dreams From My Father” he declared, “I ceased to advertise my mother’s race (white) at the age of twelve or thirteen, when I began to suspect that by doing so I was ingratiating myself to whites.”

While we should take into consideration the pain that his abandonment probably caused, Obama revealed that he shrewdly evaluated the political benefits of “race loyalty”;

“I wondered whether, for now at least, Rafiq wasn’t also right in preferring that that anger be redirected; whether a black politics that suppressed rage towards whites generally, or one that failed to elevate race loyally above all else, was a politics inadequate to the task.” (Rafiq was a friend of Obama’s who was a member of the Nation of Islam, it is not believed to be his real name.)

This was how Obama chose the path that ensured he could be defended by “folks in barbershops throughout African-American communities talking about conspiracies” (As Terence Moore put it and conversely Pearl Jr shows that race traitors can also be victimized by conspiracy theories). It insults us in the face of all the progress that we have made in race relations over the years.

On the other hand, this delights Pearl Jr who emphasizes that Obama has a “black wife” and lets out a little cheer to show her approval. In contrast she condemns the sexual preferences of Tiger;

“…Its all these white women, white women, white women and not a black one in the bunch and not even an Asian in the bunch. So Tiger Woods I think that you have been exposed, even to white people you must admit, that Tiger Woods is a White Supremacist. Tiger Woods is racist against black women.

And as far as his buddies Charles Barkley and Michael Jordan is concerned, guess what, they must have their little cult… their little black men with non-black women parties. Black women must not be allowed in their little parties and it needs to be exposed because the racism against black women in the lives of rich black men has gotten out of control.”

So it is no surprise when Johnson Cooper, a 26-year old African American from NY, declares that, “Had Barack had a white wife, I would have thought twice about voting for him”. Obama’s rejection of his whiteness was the key to jumpstarting his political career.

As an unknown community organizer with no roots in the African-American community, Obama decided to join a radical African-American church (Chicago’s Trinity United). It was a calculated move to give him ‘street-cred’ and the politics of the church was exactly what he was looking for. Trinity was also a powerhouse in the community thanks to its well-connected congregation. Oprah Winfrey was the most prominent member. She would prove to be a very useful ally to Obama when he ran for president. A University of Maryland study estimated that Oprah’s support was worth one million votes. After Obama left the Illinois state senate another member of Trinity, Kwame Raoul, filled his seat. That is how the wheels of power turn.

When Obama’s divisive church became a liability during the 2008 presidential campaign, he just dumped it. Since then Obama still doesn’t attend any church regularly and is leisurely “looking” for one to join. Religion served its purpose. Eventually, as his poll numbers continue to plummet, he will have to find another church. In the meantime Obama didn’t attend any religious services when Christmas came along. As an atheist I don’t have any bone to pick with his religious views, it is his intellectual dishonesty that is bothersome.

Today is Three Kings Day. The tradition states that the three kings visit all good children to give them presents. Well, these three kings have given you a lump of coal, but they have taught us a valuable lesson about the sad state of racial relations today. It’s unfortunate that it doesn’t have to be this way. We let it happen.

Feliz Dia de los Reyes…

Monday, December 28, 2009

The Three Wise Men - Part 1

A Story of Race Relations in the United States

American “liberal” ideology relies on race baiting to keep it relevant. To this day playing the race card is a valuable part of the Left’s playbook. That is true despite the disasters which have befallen the hucksters of race baiting politics such as Reverend Al Sharpton. Although he built his reputation as a civil rights activist, Sharpton was successfully sued for defaming the white victim of rape and kidnapping allegations made by an African-American teenager, Tawana Brawley. The accuser’s hoax made such an uproar that the judge was moved to declare;

“It is probable that in the history of this state, never has a teenager turned the prosecutorial and judicial systems literally upside down with such false claims. The cost of the lengthy, thorough and complete grand jury investigation was reportedly estimated at one-half million dollars…

…The total costs and expenses of the lengthy trial before this Court must be staggering. All of this was presumably unnecessary had Brawley come forward to cooperate with authorities. Even absent initial cooperation, once the Grand Jury report was released and it revealed in detail that Brawley had been personally observed by a credible witness crawling into the garbage bag, it would have been most appropriate for Brawley as a young teenager to come forward, admit the allegations were not true and apologize for the pain and upset she had caused Pagones, the Crist family and State Trooper Scott Patterson by her false accusations.”

The punch line was even better;

“At the end of the trial this Court stated, “Let us hope after 10 ½ years, the Tawana Brawley matter is finally laid to rest and we can move forward at last to promote healing and racial harmony.” Unfortunately, the continuing rhetoric by Brawley and her supporters refusing to accept the verdict does nothing to further racial harmony. In fact, in this particular case it is a disservice to the African-American community since it diminishes credibility and may adversely affect other viable complaints. This Court recognizes that it is perfectly proper in appropriate circumstances to speak out against any legitimate racial injustice. In this case, the injustice was against those wrongfully accused of heinous crimes that never occurred. The jury did justice by righting that wrong. Brawley and her supporters have no right to claim that justice was not accomplished by this jury.

These are not rational people that we are dealing with. Take for example, Sharpton’s lawyer and co-defendant in the defamation lawsuit, Alton H. Maddox Jr. His accomplishments are sickening;

1) After filing complaints of racial discrimination against the state of New York, he was ordered to repay the state for legal costs incurred while defending itself from Maddox’s accusations. The judge stated that his complaints had “no factual or legal basis”.

Maddox had filed the lawsuit claiming that he had to apply for permission to represent an indigent defendant, J. Ricardo Burgos, in a murder trial while two white lawyers were appointed to represent Burgo’s co-defendant without having to apply first.

The lawsuit fell apart when the state provided evidence that the two white lawyers did apply to represent their client. However, when Maddox was given an application, he filed a discrimination lawsuit instead of following through the application process. It is another example of using the race card to abuse our justice system.

2) In 1997 a white English teacher filed a complaint with NY’s Commission on Human Rights. The teacher protested that she was discriminated against when she was denied entry to a meeting of the United African Movement, a group led by Maddox. The Commission fined the African Movement $10,000 after it concluded that the teacher was denied entry due to her race. When she was barred from the meeting she was told that, “this place is only for African people”.

3) “Alton Maddox, alluding to Farrakhan’s use of the term “bloodsuckers” to describe Jews and others, said: “You’d better be glad that the only thing we are doing is calling you bloodsuckers.” He added: “This ain’t about ceremony, this is about blood. The price of victory is blood.... You got to spill some blood if you want to be free.”

Despite years of high profile Jewish activism in the Civil Rights Movement and their current high profile activism for “liberal” causes, there has been a great deal of hostility from the African-American community against Jews. During the Crown Heights riots in 1991 Sharpton made the following threat, “If the Jews want to get it on, tell them to pin their yarmulkes back and come over to my house”. Sharpton had called for protests in response to the death of a Guyanese-American child who was killed when a Jew lost control of his car after an accident with another vehicle. In retaliation for the death African-American “protesters” killed an innocent Jewish visitor from Australia, Yankel Rosenbaum. Over a period of four nights the protesters targeted local Jews, businesses and police in an orgy of hate crimes.

In 1995 Al Sharpton was protesting against New York Jews again and there would be even more blood this time. The African-American owner of a Harlem record store, Sikhulu Shange, was facing eviction by a Jewish businessman, Fred Harari. Shange recruited Sharpton for help and he became the most publicly visible negotiator on behalf of Shange.

Protests erupted outside the business owned by Harari (Freddy’s Fashion Mart). The protesters expressed anti-Semitic hate speech and threats of violence such as:

“Get out Jew bastards”

“Bloodsucking Jews”

“Burn and loot the Jews”

Protesters warned that they would have “a coffin for Freddy”

One protester by the name of ‘Shabazz’ exclaimed, “I will be back to burn the Jew store down -- burn, burn, burn.”

Sharpton claimed that he didn’t control the protesters, but he certainly supported them and encouraged people to join the protest. On a radio show Sharpton made this disturbing statement:

“We will not stand by and allow them to move this brother so that some white interloper can expand his business on 125th Street. We’re asking our black community to go down there, and I’m going to go down there, and do what is necessary to let them know that we’re not turning 125th Street back over to outsiders.”

Another protest leader, Morris Powell, used the same radio station to broadcast his own call to action:

“We’re not going to stand idly by and let a Jewish person come in black Harlem and methodically drive black people out of business... We gonna see that this cracker suffer.”

Both the NYC Police Dept and the Human Rights Commission investigated the protests, but never intervened. The results were tragic. One protester, Roland J. Smith Jr., was aroused to commit a massacre at Freddy’s Fashion Mart. He used a handgun to shoot up the store and paint thinner to burn it down. Including the gunman, eight people were killed and four wounded. The death toll topped the slaughter of six people murdered in the Long Island Railroad Massacre, which was yet another racially motivated mass murder perpetrated by an African-American.

After years of threats to murder whites; Colin Ferguson, an African-American born in Jamaica, carried his handgun and a canvas bag full of ammunition onto a Long Island Railroad commuter train. It was a premeditated hate crime. Sharpton was worried that the public perception of “Black and Hispanic dissatisfaction” would be undermined by this incident. He complained that, “the people in the media who attempted to demonize black and Hispanic dissatisfaction by saying this man was inspired or condoned by us when he did a very sick and perverted act is unfair.”

The protection of the leftwing victimhood racket was his main concern. Years later Sharpton would go on to join a campaign on behalf of African-Americans who committed a violent crime against a white person. The Jena 6 were African-American high school students who attacked an unsuspecting white student, Justin Barker, and beat him until he was unconscious.

Activists spread the rumor that Barker had been hurling racial epithets before the attack. However, five of the defendants admitted that such accusations were untrue:

“To be clear, not one of us heard Justin use any slur or say anything that justified Mychal Bell attacking Justin nor did any of us see Justin do anything that would cause Mychal to react.”

[Victim, Justin Barker, in the hospital after being attacked. Photos of two Jena-6 supporters flank his picture. The one to the left is a well meaning, but misguided protester. The one on the right calls for further violence until a perverted brand of justice is achieved.]

Of course our media has short-term memory loss when it comes to anything that contradicts the consensus of our “liberal” upper-class. Talk show host, Bill O’Reilly, is almost universally derided as a rightwing extremist, so check out his contentious but almost amicable exchange exchange with Al Sharpton.

Although Sharpton is generally well respected in our leftwing media, he really comes off as hopelessly biased, while O’Reilly is rational. They discuss the Duke Lacrosse case in which three white athletes from Duke University were falsely accused of rape by an African-American stripper.

The case against the athletes was so weak that the prosecutor became the first sitting district attorney in North Carolina history to be disbarred. It was an “unprecedented and historic moment”, one that was quickly forgotten by our media. Unfortunately the wrongly accused students suffered badly, but they represent acceptable collateral damage to keep alive the leftwing race-baiting machine.

Race relations in our country are beset with difficulties. Unfortunately some prominent leftwing activists provoke race baiting for political profit and throw their uncritical support to hucksters around the country. Times have changed so that all too often it is the race baiting activism of the Left, which intentionally inflames racial tension.

In the next post (Part 2) we will examine how President Barack Obama and Tiger Woods perceive race relations in the United States and the effect that they have had on our nation.

Wednesday, November 04, 2009

Time to Make a Stand

President Obama Fiddles While the World Burns

In Iran the most amazing things are happening. Every year on the anniversary of the 1979 storming of the U.S. embassy in Iran, pro-government demonstrators march in front of the embassy to denounce America. This year Democracy activists are counter-protesting and appealing to the U.S. for help. It is an amazing turn of events which reveals that Obama Administration has been neglecting Iran’s Democracy movement for too long.

Many protesters gathered in chants of, “Obama, Obama — either you’re with them or you’re with us”. Obama’s culture of self-loathing anti-Americanism is being challenged like never before. His foreign policy of playing nice with our enemies and tough with our friends is not paying off. The leftwing ideology of anti-Americanism is cracking at the seams.

President Obama has been dithering for too long. His policy of ignoring the truth about the Iranian regime in order to foster dialog with them is angering Iranians who long for freedom. While the Mullahs of Iran are helping to kill American troops, support further instability in the Levant, oppress their citizens and stall efforts to prevent its nuclear proliferation… Obama does nothing.

Obama and His Generals

It is an all too familiar pattern. After some early hope that Obama would live up to his hawkish campaign promise to focus on the battle against terrorism in Afghanistan, the President has become negligent towards what he once referred to as the “central front” in the War on Terror (or rather what used to be called the War on Terror). Judging by the way he has always shunned our top generals in the field, it was inevitable.

On January 10, 2007, Obama was quoted on MSNBC as saying the following about the Iraq Troop Surge:

“We cannot impose a military solution on what has effectively become a civil war. And until we acknowledge that reality - we can send 15,000 more troops, 20,000 more troops, 30,000 more troops, I don’t know any expert on the region or any military officer that I’ve spoken to privately that believes that is going to make a substantial difference on the situation on the ground.”

Considering the success of the Surge it would be logical to wonder which military officers Obama was talking to.

In May of 2008 Vets for Freedom released an ad challenging Presidential candidate Barack Obama to meet one on one with General Petraeus, whom he had been reluctant to consult with. It was a part of a firestorm of criticism that forced Obama to visit Iraq and meet directly with Petraeus.

So Obama didn’t sit down to meet with General Petraeus, one on one, until July 2008. Therefore he never properly consulted Petraeus (the principal architect of the Surge) before condemning the operation. Furthermore, he had to be shamed into directly meeting with the general through determined political pressure. Obama didn’t speak privately with any military officer who believed that the Surge would make a substantial difference on the ground because he was not interested in meeting with military leaders that would express such sentiments. His consultations with military leaders were dictated by his desire to shape his military policy according to his own political agenda and so he consulted only with military leaders who he felt would support his preconceived conclusions.

This is not an isolated trend. In August of this year the Obama Administration shelved a report from General Stanley McChrystal asking for a troop increase in Afghanistan. By the end of September it became known that the President didn’t meet with McChrystal in person since the general took over command of Afghanistan in June and only spoke to him on one occasion during that time. Once again, after concerted political pressure, Obama was shamed into meeting our top commander who was in charge of our most critical war zone.

President Obama is not as interested in winning the war in Afghanistan as much as he is interested in promoting himself politically. I don’t doubt that he would like to win the war, but he has other priorities ahead of that goal. His non-stop political campaigning takes precedence. Obama is running for the 2012 presidential election now, just like he spent much of his only term in the U.S. Senate running for President in the 2008 election.

When Obama finally met McChrystal, the general had to fly to Denmark where the President was campaigning to have the 2016 Olympics hosted in his hometown! McChrystal was lucky that Obama was able to squeeze in 25 minutes to meet him. He was third down in the list of the President’s priorities.

Associated Press related that Obama originally turned down several requests by the Chicago bid committee when they asked him to take part in Chicago’s presentation to the IOC. Despite Obama’s long commitment to Chicago’s bid, he professed that he was too deeply involved with the debate on health care. Ultimately the lure of Chicago politics won out and Obama decided that one day wouldn’t jeopardize his work on health care “reform”. The meeting with McChrystal was added at the last minute to a schedule that was put together at the last minute. It was a measure of Obama’s appreciation for his top general in Afghanistan.

Note: You have to cringe at the first paragraph of the AP article… (sorry the link is already dead and I can't find another respectable link.)

In a quick dash of salesmanship, President Barack Obama is in the Danish capital, putting his personal powers of persuasion on the line to boost Chicago’s Olympics bid.

Without the colorful embellishments of the American media, Obama’s exaggerated powers of persuasion really don’t amount to much in the real world.

With the haphazard meeting out of the way, the media could now turn its attention to attacking McChrystal. The same tired arguments that were shown to be false during the Iraq Troop Surge are being regurgitated in Afghanistan.

As mentioned above, Obama predicted at the beginning of the Surge that it would fail. The popular sentiment was that an increase of American troops in Iraq would lead to more violence. Yet the opposite was true. This is because ever since the Vietnam War our society has cultivated a misconception of war and occupation. There is no evidence after the success of the Surge that the sentiment of the Iraqi public dramatically changed to the point that they overwhelmingly “loved” their occupier. What happened was more realistic and is the cornerstone of COIN strategy. Our allies in Iraq felt more protected and our enemies felt more threatened. This was how the Surge was so successful.

Where is our Afghan Strategy?

When the Obama Administration ordered the deployment of 17,000 troops to Afghanistan in February 2009, the increased troop levels were expected to last three to four years. Yet in September Obama said that we need an Afghan strategy before sending more troops. He stated, “I just want to make sure that everybody understands that you don’t make decisions about resources before you have the strategy ready.”

So why did he order troops to go to Afghanistan in February if he didn’t have a strategy? Its bad enough that President Obama neglects to consult with his top commanders and has to be shamed into meeting with them one on one... but he just completely neglects our troops in Afghanistan so he can campaign for healthcare “reform”, promote Chicago’s Olympic bid, play golf and fight a war against Fox News.

This was his greatest mistake. By using his Alinsky tactics of attacking and attempting to isolate Fox News, Obama has offended his most prized ally, the media. Now they are starting to see the Obama Administration for what it is.

So President Obama... You have no choice, but to abandon your rhetoric of self-loathing anti-Americanism. Iranian protesters need you. Your top generals deserve your ear. Afghanistan has to have more troops to defend its people who are isolated by mountainous terrain and victimized by a terrorist enemy who can slip through a porous border. Do something… you are the leader of the free world and you cannot sit on the fence any longer.