IMAGINE THE IRONY, A LYNCH MOB SCREAMING “NO JUSTICE, NO PEACE” (Part 2 of a 3-part series, “Revisiting a few media narratives prior to the Brown case”) In yesterday’s post, I tried to point out that the liberal media has a long history of slanted news reporting in matters concerning race, especially as it relates to interracial violence, when blacks are the victims of such violence, at the hands of whites. The news reports are slanted regardless of the circumstances of the interracial violence, when blacks are the victims, and that includes even when whites are exercising the right to self-defense. The media does not report on interracial violence, consistently, in fact, unless the victim is black, and the person, not victimized, is white. In such cases, one can count on the circumstances to, either, be misstated, understated, or not stated at all. In such cases, one can expect to be led to the conclusion of the victim’s innocence, being a “gentle giant,” for instance. Blacks are innocent, in these situations, based upon the media’s narrative. And when their innocence cannot be promoted, as a given, the press simply ignores the case. This media behavior, I must say, and will say, insults the statistics on interracial violence in this country, since blacks attack whites much more often than whites attack blacks, which holds true in all categories of violence. Blacks also attack each other more than whites do. And to those who excuse this violence by pointing out that whites attack whites, more often than others do, too, I would answer, “Let’s consider proportionality, of such violence, which brings us to a discussion of the percentiles of this violence, for a clearer view. I sought to show, yesterday, in part 1, that, in liberal news reports, the impression has been willfully, and deceitfully, given that blacks are under siege in this country, which is false, specifically by the police, first and foremost, which is also false, a view which is projected in subtle ways, in the liberal media, which presents the police as a kind of Klan outfit in blue, while also presenting the false view that blacks are under siege, in general, in this country, by “white America.” Whites make up a majority in this society. If blacks were under siege by whites, in this country, more blacks would be killed by whites, in numbers at least approximating the numbers in which blacks kill each other. The numbers tell the story. Between 1968 and 2011, 292,000, blacks were killed by other blacks most of whom were killed by blacks who were in some kind of group, at the time, or belonged to a gang. This statistic, certainly, is not a reflection of all the black folks in the country, but reflects a hoodlum element in the black community which is doing most of this killing. If it were the case, otherwise, the numbers, as high as they are, would be even higher. Blacks are approximately 13% of the population in this country. If just 13% of blacks were involved in this fratricide, the death totals would be much higher. As it is, the number of deaths listed in the preceding paragraph, although appalling, which is not to say unacceptable since blacks say nothing about these numbers, occurred over a 46-year period of time, but before getting more comfortable with the figures, let me run another statistic by you. Whites, today, account for between 62%-67% of the total population, in the United States (counting the illegal aliens in this country), which is a lower percentage of the total population than was the case between 1882-and 1952, which covers the years in which statistics were being noted by Tuskegee Institute, about the number of blacks lynched in this country, totaling less than 5,000, over the course of 70 years, 24 years less than the time quoted above, in the case of blacks killing other blacks. How is one to understand, then, that whites, who made up approximately 85%-90% of the population, during that time, accounted for approximately 60 % fewer deaths of blacks, over a period of time that was 24 years longer than the time which chronicled the figure of blacks killing other blacks, cited above? What explains it, is simple, the gang called the Ku Klux Klan. If it had been whites, in general, killing blacks, blacks would have been exterminated in this country a long time ago. The liberals, who are engaged in this racial framing, defended by everybody on the Left (which is why they are on the Left, in the first place, viewing themselves as blacks’ savior, rather than as what they really are, blacks’ worst nightmare), should be told, when offering a defense of their past, as well as their present, to, simply, rest their case, when you understand the statistics, and the historical evidence, concerning the racial narrative in this country. So-called black scholars, on the Left, should not be let off the hook, describing the racial paradigm in this country in hysterical terms, as a society being consumed with racism because of a genetic predisposition on the part of whites to be contemptuous of blacks, because of color envy, and a fear of genetic annihilation. No person can be considered a scholar projecting this utter nonsense. It is asking one to forget how mixed the population is in this country, as it is everywhere else on the globe. There are no pure races on this planet, and tell modern-day Adolph Hitlers I said so, in whatever complexion they come in, today, some of whom are most certainly black, who can be found, mainly, among the finger pointers. When individuals act as a group, they are acting out of some group self-interest, as viewed by the group. To say that racism is based upon a fear of genetic annihilation, and it is this fear that explains whites’ predisposition toward racism, would have to then explain what its cause is, when racism is found among blacks, who have more melanin in their skin, those who have more color, such as Eric Holder, for instance, who is as racist as anyone, presently, in the national spotlight, and I am not exaggerating in the least. There is a problem with the media’s, and these pseudo-intellectuals’ narratives on the main reason for interracial violence in this country, namely the lack of any discernible evidence that the narrative, in each case, is true. So, how has the liberal media handled this glaring problem, created by an all but total absence of facts? One obvious way it has done so is by falsifying its reports, of course, but another way, more visible, which is not necessarily to say more discernible, is the media’s saturation of coverage of incidents in which the victim, in cases of interracial violence, for instance, is black, and the person, on the other side of the racial divide, is white, as in the Michael Brown case. Given the rarity of such cases, the media compensates by looping the story, endlessly. The reason the media has stayed on the Michael Brown case, so long, and, also, why demonstrators are still out there, in the street, in Ferguson, Missouri, in changing weather, but, notably, they have not changed locations, is because they don’t have anything else to go to, to lodge a racial complaint, at least nothing else that the likes of Al Sharpton would be interested in, or that would prick the interest of the liberal media, such as blacks killing other blacks, for instance. The reason for this saturation, of coverage is clear; blacks, according to the Left’s mentality, must only be projected as victims, in cases where there is interracial violence, which is to say, as being victimized by whites, the statistics be damned. The rarity of these episodes explains, in fact, why it was necessary, in the Trayvon Martin case, to project George Zimmerman as white, a kind of media-induced racial assimilation, or, if you will, an amalgamation conjured up by the liberal media. You will recall that George Zimmerman, who shot Trayvon Martin, was first thought to be Jewish, because of his name. Some in the liberal media, thinking they had a double whammy, on their hands, the use of an event which could not only be used to spread racial animus, but also to further another liberal festish, excuse the Jihadist acts of violence, in this country by showing that all religions are engaged in killing “others.” Christianity had already been subjected to this fate, even if it took reaching back to the time of the Crusades in Europe, to show equivalency to today’s Muslim head dispatchers. This part of the media parade came to a close, however, when, doggone-it, Zimmerman’s ancestry didn’t cooperate, so the media’s “front-up” plan was invoked, exclusively, “white” was used in the media’s description of George Zimmerman, later “white Hispanic,” although the media would have preferred the “white Jew” connection. [The liberal media is also anti-Semitic.] It is to be remembered that, initially, pictures of George Zimmerman did not appear in news reports, the public having to take the media’s word for the racial identity of the individual involved. While getting Martin’s race down to a science, with no problem in showing pictures of Trayvon Martin, the media’s bias was orchestrated in another distractive manner, instead, the projection of Trayvon Martin as a 12-year-old. Zimmerman, the carefully hidden “white person,” on the other hand, was left lurking in the shadows, in order to project the false narrative that a white person, George Zimmerman, had acted, out of racial malice, in killing Martin, an innocent-looking, twelve year old child, if one could believe the liberal media’s initial reports. But, as the story unfolded, George Zimmerman’s picture was published, and when it met the public’s eye, it was more than “Houston” that had a problem; the liberal media, and liberal establishment, in general, had a problem. Zimmerman’s features were clearly not those of a white person, since skin color is not the only characteristic that is used in determining one’s race. The late Carol Channing, for instance, was black, and President Barack Obama, as I have said on previous occasions, is a white American, not a black American. As such, in Obama’s case, he is not only a political impostor, but, also, a racial impostor, posing as a black American, which is impossible since Obama’s American mother was white. Do I need to remind you that Obama’s Kenyan father was the one who was black? President Obama’s father, as one can clearly see, has absolutely nothing to do with Obama’s American citizenship. I only bring this up, in this narrative, to show the tenuousness of skin color as an indication of one’s race, and to indicate the complexities involved in using only skin color to describe race, something the liberal media is well aware of, without question. The liberal media knew all along that they were framing the issue, in the Trayvon Martin case, and they knew all along that they were trying to frame George Zimmerman, knowing that it meant putting this man in jail for his crime of being depicted in the media as being white. That’s all folks. Yes, indeed, the liberal media knew what it was attempting to do. The liberal media was not engaged in an aberration, in this case; it was business as usual. The plot was thought out, which was what allowed it to be fully employed, until caught at it by the six jurors, who had sworn to consider the facts. [Notice, that these jurors deliberated for hours, and hours, in what was an open and shut case. The jurors’ difficulty can be explained by the fact that they were trying to reconcile the evidence, which they had been introduced to, during the trial, with the information they had been introduced to, during the public trial, that had been, previously “held” in the liberal media. Without the media’s role, there would not only have been a briefer time for deliberations, but there would not have been a trial in the first place. This trial was a liberal media-directed event, consciously engaged in by liberal psychopaths. Mention any names; none are excluded! I’ll give you just two of many examples to show that the liberal media was conscious of its efforts, doing so in order to show how ruthless, and despotic, the liberal media is, in an attempt to expose the media, for what it is, and get you to take off the blindfold, open your eyes, and wake up. I mean, just imagine, as hard as it might be to believe that someone could be low-down, and dirty enough, as to be willing to frame a man, and cause him to spend the rest of his life in jail, for a “crime” conjured up, totally, in the news media, completely fabricated. Look at this folks! You are dealing with Satan, Himself, here! The media knew, after listening to the tape, and looking at the physical evidence, that Zimmerman was innocent. The media knew, without a shadow of a doubt, that it was Zimmerman’s voice on that tape, with Zimmerman screaming for his life. They knew it, because they knew that Trayvon Martin didn’t have a single mark on his body, except for the gunshot wound, and the bruises on his knuckles, which explained why all the bruises were on Zimmerman, and why Zimmerman was out there screaming, that night, overlooked because of noting more than liberal despotism. For another example of this despotic impulse, on the Left, look at the members in the Obama administration, including Hillary Clinton, who was willing to incarcerate a man for making a video, that had absolutely nothing to do with the deaths of four Americans, in Benghazi. The Obama administration was willing to incarcerate a man, and did so, in fact, in order to cover up what amounts to a hidden agenda. I mean for you to look at this, folks; I intend for you to look at this pure evil, at work. Open your eyes!! In the Trayvon Martin case, NBC doctored the tape of the 911 call made by Zimmerman to a police dispatcher. In the conversation, one comes to understand that Zimmerman was on the phone, talking to the dispatcher, while seeking to keep Trayvon Martin in his sight, so as to be able to give a more detailed location of where Martin was, when the police arrived. Let me pause right here, to say that this fact, alone, indicates that this was no vigilante pursuit, as depicted by the liberal media, and later framed by Zimmerman’s prosecutors (persecutors), but a very disciplined pursuit of a person who was acting, in Zimmerman’s mind, suspiciously. Of course, no one else, in the universe, sitting in the comfort of their own homes, would have had any suspicions about a person wearing a hoodie, at night, in a gated community, where there had been a number of break-ins, acting suspiciously, so the responsible thing to do, from the safety of being in another State, entirely, according to all of the Monday evening quarterbacks, carefully, and clandestinely, guided to the conclusion by the media, would have been to just “walk on by,” while listening to the song, by that name, melodiously rendered by Dionne Warwick. IS THIS THING ON?! If one is to believe the liberal media, it was Zimmerman who had a problem. No one should ever be suspicious, apparently, of anybody wearing a hoodie at night, in a gated community, which is gated because it is seeking safety from those outside the gate, since it is a community which has had problems with burglars, in the past. Not only that, despite particular precautions that had been taken, additional steps had to be taken which explains why community watchdogs had been designated to look out for potential burglars, which would certainly include anyone who was deemed to be acting suspiciously. Put me down as one who is suspicious of anybody wearing a hood at night. There was nothing to see here, of course, in Trayvon Martin’s case, at least not after altering George Zimmerman’s pedigree, just a bit, so that no one would trace his ancestry back to Peru. Martin was killed because he was black, and this was to be known because Zimmerman was white. The hoodie was just Zimmerman’s excuse for first following Martin, and, then, in cold blood, shooting him. Certainly, the above was the subliminal suggestion given by the media, and accepted, allegedly, by those, who, incredibly, thought they were showing solidarity with Trayvon Martin by putting on hoodies themselves, some even going to the expense of buying a hoodie, to do so. Since we are dealing with irony, in this 3-part series, just think of the irony of the proposition, here. A person had been killed, presumably (although erroneously presumed to have been killed), because he was wearing a hoodie. So, others, not yet killed, put on hoodies, which we, in the general public, are supposed to believe, that they believed, caused Trayvon Martin’s death. The above behavior causes me to pause, once again, at least long enough to make another point along the way to the conclusion of part 2, of this narrative, to ask the following: “How many people do you know who, when they believe there is an imminent danger, run in the direction of that danger?” I ask the above question, of course, in reference to the relevance to the ones you know, who are not insane. Assuming sanity as a premise, that being said, there are only two conclusions to be drawn, as to why others put on hoodies, after Trayvon Martin’s death, supposedly under the guise that the hoodie Trayvon Martin wore was the reason Martin was killed, the hoodie, somehow, initiating the attack, the premises, therefore, being: 1) Those wearing hoodies, in the aftermath of Trayvon Martin’s death, to show solidarity with the deceased, were exhibiting a form of insanity, or at least a distortion in consciousness, or 2) The ones putting on hoodies, in the aftermath of Trayvon Martin’s death, did not feel endangered, which is to say did not really believe wearing a hoodie was the central issue, in Trayvon Martin’s death, in which case those wearing hoodies were acting as hypocrites. [I lean toward both propositions.] Tomorrow, I will complete this 3-part narrative, “The litmus test for officials, involved in the Michael Brown case.”
Posted on: Thu, 23 Oct 2014 22:07:10 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015