Oh Breitbart, Where Are You? We Need A New Race Narrative In The U.S.

Justice demands that the killing of Trevon Martin, precisely like any other killing, be fully investigated.   Justice likewise demands that if the facts warrant, his killer, the "white Hispanic" (and registered Democrat) George Zimmerman, should be prosecuted, but, equally, that if the facts don't show Zimmerman's conduct to be culpable, that Zimmerman should not suffer any legal consequence. For all of the facts known to date, Sister Toldjah has an exceptional roll up.

But justice has taken a back seat as the race hustlers have come out in force, calling for George Zimmerman's blood - the facts, investigation and applicable law be damned. All of the problems of the black community are glossed over as the loudest of voices all claim that the biggest problem blacks suffer from is violent white racism. That is about as far from reality as one can get.

The New Black Panthers - the same group calling for the murder of "cracker babies" - put out a "wanted" poster and has now put a bounty out for Zimmerman's capture. Louis Farrakhan - whom you might remember as the man who motivated the Virginia sniper - has called for "retribution." Spike Lee retweeted Zimmerman's address - though he got it wrong - in a clear invitation to vigilante justice.  Jesse Jackson, who recently commented that "“targeting, arresting, convicting blacks and ultimately killing us is big business” in America - has proclaimed that there will be "no peace" until Zimmerman is arrested. MSNBC's resident race hustler, Al Sharpton - the man largely responsible for the Crown Heights riots that ended in the murder of two men by blacks - has made the Martin case his cause celebre, likewise portraying this as a racial incident and calling for Zimmerman's immediate arrest.  According to Democrat Rep. Hank Johnson, that intellectual heavyweight who worried that too many people on Guam might cause it to tip over, Martin was "executed for 'WWB' in a 'GC.' Walking While Black in a Gated Community."  Johnson may be dumber than a tomato, but he knows the language of race hustling.  He has been joined in his obscenities by many other of his fellow black Congressmen and women.

Are you at all surprised that there has not been a single word of criticism from the left - and nowhere near enough from the right - for these outrageous acts, at least several of which amount to a call for a lynching?  On the contrary, the left embraces these scandalous acts, while the right is so used to them that the response is muted.    

Now let's take a look at some of the other race based violence going on in America - most of which is going virtually unreported and unremarked.

Two weeks ago, two 16 year old blacks followed a 13 year old white boy they did not know while he was on his way home from school. At some point, they tossed gas in his face, then lit him on fire while saying "you get what you deserve, white boy."  There was zero mention of it in the national media.  Regardless, to commit this barbaric crime, what kind of hatred must these two blacks have been fed, and who fed it to them?  It turns out that race hatred was being taught to blacks in their Kansas City public school which, as Robert Avrech describes, "teaches and encourages racial constructs that make Nazi Germany look positively multicultural."  Do see his post for the whole stomach churning story.

Though the above described attack was particularly heinous, it is hardly an anomaly. Brutal black race violence is not unusual at all in many places. In Philadelphia, they are seeing "almost weekly racially motivated mob attacks on white people. The media censors all mention of the race and only prints tiny stories calling them “flash mobs.”' This type of black mob racially motivated violence has also appeared in other cities across the U.S. In San Francisco and Oakland, its black mob violence directed at Asians. These are blacks being fed a steady diet of hatred and victimization by the left, and then lashing out.

The above is anecdotal evidence.  Let's review some of the statistics.

- "In 2005, there were more than 645,000 victims of cross-racial violent crimes between blacks and whites in the U.S. In 90% of those crimes, black offenders attacked white victims."

- "Black men are the leading cause of death among young blacks [male and female]”; “1 in 146 black males are at risk of violent death”; and though comprising only 13 percent of the U.S. population, 43 percent of all murder victims are black, compounded by the fact that 93 percent of them are killed by other blacks."

- "There were two and a half times as many white and Hispanic victims of black killers in 2009 as there were black victims of white and Hispanic killers, even though the black population is one-sixth that of whites and Hispanics combined. If Hispanics were removed from the category of “white” killers of blacks, the percentage of blacks killed by Anglo whites would plummet, since a significant percentage of what the FBI calls “white”-on-black killings represent gang warfare between Hispanic and black gangs."

- In "New York City, [b]lacks commit 80 percent of all shootings . . . — as reported by the victims of and witnesses to those shootings — though they are but 23 percent of the population; whites commit 1.4 percent of all shootings, though they are 35 percent of the population. Add Hispanic shootings to the black tally, and you account for 98 percent of all of the city’s gun violence."

- "The life expectancy for black men in prison is higher than the life expectancy for black men outside of prison."

But let's go beyond crime statistics.  One of the single greatest indicators of how a child will turn out - academically, financially, and in virtually all areas of achievement, is whether the child is raised in a single parent household as opposed to a two parent household.  It is also a predictor of violence and criminality.  Today, in the black community, fully "72 percent of Black children are raised in a single parent household."  The much maligned Democratic Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan’s now fifty year old Department of Labor report, “The Negro Family: The Case for National Action," has proven horribly prophetic.

Black poverty is the highest in the nation.  In 2011 it topped 27%, with over 38% of black children being raised in poverty.  There is the direct correlation between education and income, and thus, poverty.  The problems of education in inner city schools are open, obvious, and simply unforgivable.  It is a crisis issue for black America.  For but one example, Detroit, a city that is over 80% black, is America's poorest city, with over 36% of its residents listed as impovrished.  Half of the residents of the city are functionally illiterate.  Yet it is the left, protecting their public sector union piggy banks at all costs, that are the reason for this situation.

So there are huge problems in the black community.  But among those problems, violent racism directed at blacks is at or near the bottom of the list.  And indeed, racism itself of any kind directed at blacks is so absent from our country today that the race hustlers have felt compelled to invent the ludicrous construct of "color blind racism."  Yet no one would know that if they just listen to the rouge's gallery of race hustlers listed at the top of this post.  All of them want to pretend that its 1950 and Bull Conor, that infamous southern Democrat, is using the dogs and the hoses on blacks.  The left teach blacks to feel victimized by whites, to nurse and, indeed, be defined by hatred of whites, and to blame all their troubles on whites.  Not a single one of these "black leaders" is doing a damn thing about the true problems of the black community.  And of course, they are aided and abetted by the left as a whole.  To the left, anything that supports the black victim narrative is acceptable, no matter how unmoored from reality, no matter how obscene and noxious.

Racism has no place in America.  That holds equally true for reverse racism - it too is every bit as repugnant and likewise, has no place in America.  Yet the left has created two standards in America.  They have set a high bar for anyone not a left wing black, all of whom are held to rigid standards of political correctness, and no standards whatsoever for left wing blacks.  The right has acquiesced in this for years.  No more.  Everyone in our country needs to start holding all the race hustlers and their leftist enablers to account.

The acts of the New Black Panthers are illegal and we should be demanding that they be investigated.  (I know, fat chance with Eric Holder, but the demand should be made all the same.)  The same with Spike Lee - who should also face civil action from the people actually living at the address he tweeted.  Louis Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam need to be denounced and treated just as were the KKK - whom they resemble in mirror image.  Moreover, we should be demanding that Nation of Islam "prison ministry" should be shut down in every state.  Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton need to be challenged vociferously for their ridiculous claims about white racism and, equally, about just what have they done to advance the plight of blacks.  It is no secret they have done far more for their bank accounts than their community.  After that, they should be shunned and their appearances protested at every opportunity.  They need to be treated like the vile race hustlers they are.

And just to ask, if the state concludes, as they well may, that Zimmerman acted legally, do you think that there will be violence from black mobs stirred up by these race hustlers?  I think it is inevitable.  And every one of these race hustlers need to be held to account for it. Update: Apparently, a "flash mob" of black high school students found not merely time to rally for Martin, but then also to raid a Walgreens. Because, you know, nothing says racial justice like ransacking and robbing a store. The race hustlers need to be billed.

Race hustling and reverse racism need to go the way racism itself in America.  It is long past time we need to start disrupting the race narrative with actual facts.  For the benefit of every single person in this nation, it is long past time that we start holding the black left to the same standards of conduct as everyone else.  Is there any doubt that if Breitbart were alive, he would be leading the charge on this.  He left us far too soon.  It is left up to us.

Tweet

Read More...

Summary only...

Double Standards & A Curious Mountain From A Jerusalem Molehill

I have never been to Ramat Shlomo, but as I understand it, it is in northern Jerusalem on land not disputed by the Palestinians. While Joe Biden was visiting Israel last week, two things occurred. The first was that Israel's housing authority announced approval to build some 1600 new housing units in Ramat Shlomo. The second was that the PLO dedicated a town square in the West Bank to a brutal terrorist. So why should announcing new building permits in Ramat Shlomo, whether during Biden's visit or not, have elicited anything more than a yawn? And why should the PLO's incredibly provocative act have escaped even a mention, let alone the full measure of condemnation and withholding of aid it deserves?

The Obama administration has acted as if Israel, with its approval of new housing in Ramat Shlomo, just committed a major act of aggression. And unlike actual major acts of aggression - such as those by Iran, North Korea, or the Palestinians - the Obama administration is doing something about this one. They are making a huge show of castigating Israel. Someone tell me again, why do Jews largely vote Democrat?

Until now, I haven't blogged on this mountain from a mole hill created by the Obama administration, waiting to see if some rational explanation would percolate to the surface. Some have speculated that this is the natural anti-Israel anti-ally bias of Obama showing through yet again - and given the track record of these Keystone Cops of foreign policy, I find that explanation at least plausible. Indeed, such acts happen so often and with such frequency that forecasting that the Obama administration, on any given matter of foreign policy, will act against the interests of our traditional allies is rapidly attaining the degree of statistical certainty so as to qualify it as a law.

Others have speculated that there is no love loss between Obama and Netenyahu and this is Obama's way of trying to influence the next election in Israel. Again, this is something I would not put beyond team Obama. Indeed, it would be in keeping with their Chicago brand of thug politics.

Over at Q&O, McQ speculates that this may be a response to a recent briefing from Gen. David Petraeus that Arab nations are complaining that Obama is afraid or unwilling to stand up to Israel. McQ speculates that this is Team Obama reacting primarily to Petraeus's report. If so, the Arab nations must be having a great laugh at the moment.

Assuming that there is some truth to this, just how naive is Obama? To begin with, other than the Palestinians themselves, none of the other governments in the Middle East have a practical interest in the Israel-Palestine dispute. If Israel disappeared tomorrow, it would make not one practical bit of difference for all of the other Arab regimes. The simple truth is that the Muslim States' single goal as to Israel is its destruction. It is the truth against which all complaints from Muslim states as regards Israel must be evaluated. And as long as Muslim states see the destruction of Israel as even a remote possibility, they will work around every edge to make it an eventual reality - making one complaint or outrageous claim after another. And in Obama, the Muslim States have found a useful idiot indeed.

Meanwhile, Robert Avrech at Seraphic Secret points out that on the West Bank, the PLO just renamed a town square in honor of a Dalai Mughrabi. Her claim to fame came in 1978:

Let's take a look at the bloodbath these savages choose to honor:

On the morning of March 11, 1978, [Dalai] Mughrabi and her Palestinian unit of eleven members, including one other woman, landed on an Israeli beach, killed an American photographer named Gail Rubin and hijacked a taxi, killing its occupants. They proceeded along the coastal highway shooting at traffic along the way. They next hijacked a bus and later a second bus, from which the passengers were transferred to the first one. The bus was finally stopped at a police roadblock. A shooting battle ensued. Eventually, Mughrabi blew up the bus which became a large deathtrap of fire. Many of the passengers were killed. In total, Mughrabi and her team killed 37 people, including at least 10 children. Some 71 people were wounded. Mughrabi and several other attackers died.

There's a role model for Palestinian children - not to mention an act likely to further the cause of peace with Israel. Yet that gets ignored by the Obama administration. Why? What possible excuse could there be for such a double standard?

There will never be peace in the Middle East with the Obama administration pretending that Israel is part of the problem. There will never be peace in the Middle East until the problems of Iran's theocracy and Saudi Arabia's export of Wahhabism are dealt with - brutally and harshly. And there will never be peace in the Middle East until the animals that teach hatred of Jews, who honor terrorists, and who propagandize for the destruction of Israel are held to the same standards as the rest of humanity. Anything and everything else is an Arab version of Kabuki theatre. Obama is the one on stage wearing the fool's mask. He is the one who doesn't seem to realize that the destruction of Israel isn't the the end goal, merely an interim one.

Read More...

Summary only...

The Changing Democratic Meme on Iraq & Efforts to Legislate Defeat

Dr. Sanity has an exceptional post today that addresses several issues of note. The first is the changing Democratic talking points on Iraq in order to justify legislating withdrawal, highlighted by a quote from Victor David Hanson:

We will soon hear that the war, while granted that it may be winnable, was not worth the commensurate cost, from liberal critics who have embraced much of the realist and neo-isolationist creed of the past (at least apart from Darfur). That is a legitimate debate—as long as opponents accept that it is a fallback position, and Harry Reid was mistaken when he announced the war “lost”.

Also expect Democrats to find ways to exaggerate the aggregate costs (like counting the rise from 20-100 dollars a barrel for oil entirely due to the Iraqi war without notice of the new Chinese/Indian demand, unrest in Africa, and declining production from the UK to the US), . . .

We have in fact already seen that with Chuckie Shumer and the recent release of a report that claims the "hiddens" cost of the war in Iraq to be double the actual costs to date.

The second point raised in Dr. Sanity's post is by Gaghdad Bob, who notes the intellectual dishonesty and hypocrisy of the moral double standard that the neo-liberals apply to America as opposed to its enemies:

On Labor Day I watched Saving Private Ryan again. In the beginning, there was a scene in which a few Germans wanted to surrender, but the American GIs casually shot them and chuckled about it. Now, it would take a far better -- or possibly worse -- man than I to have not done the exact same thing. After all, these were men who, just moments ago, were creating all the carnage on the beach below, leaving your living and breathing friends to die on the sand and in the water.

Today, because of the insane "moral perfectionism" of the left (which we have been discussing in recent posts), the behavior of these American GIs would have, in the words of Senator Dodd, given Hitler the "moral high ground." After all, Dodd and his ilk insist that the Islamofascists can claim the moral high ground based upon our three instances of waterboarding terrorists, while the New York Times published dozens of front page articles about the hijinks at Abu Ghraib, explicitly arguing that we had morally sunk beneath our enemies.

Again, it is not hyperbole to say that these people are literally morally insane.

Dr. Sanity agrees, doing us all the service of reminding us of days past when the neo-liberal left were still more concerned with our national security and intellectual honesty than in attaining partisan political advantage at whatever the cost to our nation:

Indeed, Moral Insanity is the perfect phrase to describe the behavior of the leadership in Congress; in the Media and on the political left these days.

Let's recall, shall we, what the likes of Pelosi, Kennedy, Kerry and Rockefeller said a few short years ago (assembled from Power Line and an earlier post of my own):

Nancy Pelosi, December 1998:

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."

Ted Kennedy, September 2002

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."

John Kerry, October 9, 2002:

I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force -- if necessary -- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security.

Jay Rockefeller, October 10, 2002:

There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction.

And, how about those Democratic presidential wannabes past and present:

Hillary Clinton, October 10, 2002:

In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members .. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons.

We could go on and on, but I'll close with one more from

John Kerry, January 23, 2003:

Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real...

That was then, I guess, and this is now. Democrats seem to have short memories.

John Edwards, 2002

“I think Iraq is the most serious and imminent threat to our country. And I think Iraq and Saddam Hussein present the most serious and most imminent threat.”

Al Gore, September, 2002:

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country" and "Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."

As I have mentioned before, the Democratic Party has lost whatever anchor it once had in the real world and is blowin' randomly in the wind. It has become the party of nothing; led by vapid nothings, who stand for nothing, and whose opportunism appears to know no bounds. They have said and will say whatever they happen to think in any given moment is necessary in order to obtain or keep political power.

As they continue to intellectually approach the complete moral and intellectual bankruptcy of the leftist base they pander to, we will have the continuing pleasure of watching these moral pygmies, currently even more intoxicated with power because they have a majority in Congress, as they actively undermine (all with the help of their media propaganda wing) any and all American interests around the world; impede and vilify US military actions (while saying they "support" the troops), and generally behave as prototypical leftists are wont to do--all, of course, in the name of "peace".

. . . Snatching defeat from the jaws of victory is just another day's work for the Democrats who suffer from a compulsion to lose the war at any cost.

Read the entire post - and do see the cartoons at the bottom of the post, they are hilarious.

But can you imagine if the Democrats could succeed in legislating defeat - especially given the reality on the ground in Iraq today. What would the effect would be throughout the Muslim ummah?

The radical Islamists would certainly claim it as a victory "by the hand of Allah" that would likely take on mythical and mystical qualities, given that the U.S. military has all but destroyed al Qaeda in Iraq. It was the belief that Islam had defeated the "super power" of the Soviet Union that drove the growth of radical Islam through 2000. Today, even bin Laden admits that al Qaeda has failed and been defeated, declaring the "the darkeness" in Iraq to be "pitch black." But what if our national leadership hands them the opportunity to delcare victory despite the facts on the ground. That would clearly be portrayed as the intervention of Allah on the side of the radical Islamists. God help us all if that occurrs. Radical Islam will take on a new life not heretofore imagined. And, as the world's premier Orientalist, Bernard Lewis has stated, in such an event "the consequences--both for Islam and for America--will be deep, wide and lasting." That is an understatement.

Since Dr. Sanity posted this morning, the NYT has reported:

Senate Republicans today easily blocked an effort by Democrats to act on a war spending bill that would have provided $50 billion for operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, but would have required that troop withdrawals from Iraq begin within 30 days.

The bill had numerous other strings attached a well, including a goal of completing re-deployment from Iraqby mid-December 2008 and a narrowing of the Iraq mission to focus on counter-terrorism and training of Iraqi security forces.

There is such a complete disconnect with reality in the efforts of the Democrats it defies belief. Even their bill itself, requiring as it does that we begin "withdraw within 30 days" of some combat troops wholly ignores that a brigade of "surge" troops began redeployment to the US earlier in the week. That highlights just how much this legislation, moreso than anything else, is designed simply to allow the Democrats to claim that they forced withdraw and that the Iraq War is a defeat for America at least on par with Vietnam.

With the defeat of their bill, Harry Reid now intends to play politics with military funding. When our military desperately needs to repair itself and its forces, Harry Reid is quite content to let the year pass without any additional funding. Robert Gates, the Secretary of Defense, has articulated the consequences of such an action:

"With the passage of the Defense Appropriations Act, there is a misperception that this department can continue funding our troops in the field for an indefinite period of time, through accounting maneuvers, that we can shuffle money around the department." Gates said.

"The high degree of uncertainty on funding for the war is immensely complicating this task and will have many real consequences for this department and for our men and women in uniform," he said.

That is not Reid's concern. The degree of neo-liberal perfidy is beyond disgrace.

Read More...

Summary only...