The Price of Black Man’s Life

Sign in Ferguson as riots erupt.

This decision seems to underscore an unwritten rule that Black lives hold no value; that you may kill Black men in this country without consequences or repercussions. This is a frightening narrative for every parent and guardian of Black and brown children, and another setback for race relations in America.”

Congressional Black Caucus head Rep. Marcia Fudge

Ninety-three percent of blacks are killed by other blacks,” Giuliani said, triggering a heated argument on NBC’s “Meet the Press.” “I would like to see the attention paid to that that you are paying to this.”

“Black people who kill black people go to jail,” Dyson said. “White people who are policemen who kill black people do not go to jail.”

“What about the poor black child that was killed by another black child?” Giuliani asked. “Why aren’t you protesting that?… Why don’t you cut it down so that so many white police officers don’t have to be in black areas?”

“When I become mayor, I’ll do that,” replied Dyson, exasperated.

“White police officers wouldn’t be there,” Giuliani said, “if you weren’t killing each other

Former Mayor of NYC Rudolph Giulani

Those two quotes or a variation of them pretty much encapsulate the debate about Michael Brown, Ferguson and the wider issue of blacks males, crime and the police. The issues are more complicated than those two statements assert but both are partially correct even if not exactly as the quoted intended.

The statistics for young black males are stark. Black males commit and are a victim of homicide at extremely disproportionate rate compared to White males or Asians. We can try to excuse it in a variety of ways but those facts remain. This is where the CBC head is correct, black lives have been cheapened. The acquittal of George Zimmerman in the Trayvon Martin case or the lack of charges by the Grand Jury in the Michael Brown case did not demonstrate that Blacks lives are cheaper, this has been demonstrated for years by ignoring the rampant deaths of thousands of Blacks at the hand of other Blacks for years.

Black people around the country are rioting for the last two days and had been holding protest since August because of the Michael Brown shooting by Officer Darren Wilson but have been silent for the 136 homicide victims in the St. Louis area.  Just last October 19th siblings, 35-year-old Margaree Dixson and 29-year-old Jermaine Jones, were killed by gunshot 2 hours and a few blocks apart.  They were homicide victims number 109 and 110, in a little over month almost 20 other homicides have been committed, few of these ever get solved.

A local news station reported last week that 73% of the more that 136 homicides this year remain open.  A case remains open until an arrest is made but in cases where arrests were made only 8% was there an actual conviction, last year. The same story is repeated nationwide in NYC, LA, New Orleans, around the country.  This is a problem, it not just that Black lives are cheap, is that no one wants to come forward and identify the perpetrators, and they know this. As Nicole Rice, the sister of the two siblings killed explains in the interview:

No answers, no answers, all my answers are to God, I don’t know nothing, I know people talk, and I have clues to what their talking about,” Rice said. I don’t blame the police because they’re doing everything they can do to find out what’s going on, If anyone knows anything, just what you heard, that would give a motive, It goes back to my little niece, well she’s really my cousin, but i call her my niece and her murder has never been solved so you ask me if my brother rand my sisters will be? No. Because no one will talk.

“Snitches get stitches” as DeAndre Joshua, 20 found out he was shot and killed on the first night of rioting. His body was found inside his car, which had also been set on fire. Though no official confirmation has been made, DeAndre fit the description of one of the witnesses that provided testimony to the Grand Jury that heard the evidence in Michael Brown’s case. He is also a close friend of the other person that was accompanying Brown that day, Dorian Johnson. Regardless of whether this was related to any testimony he may have provided or just a victim of opportunity for someone with a grudge against him, he has become just another statistic that will be forgotten in the aftermath of the Riots.

Ms. Fudge is correct that Black lives have been cheapened, they are continually being cheapened everytime that the community hides their criminals from justice. They are cheapened everytime that a riot is started because someone broke their monopoly on killing blacks. Especially when that person was in the act of committing a felony which led to their death. Black lives are cheapened when they excuse all wrong doing by blaming race, poverty or the “white establishment” for every ill in their communities. Children are held to a higher standard of conduct than the one of  many black criminals.

When the Black community celebrates and elevates a petty criminal like Michael Brown, or Trayvon Martin it only ensures that other young Black youths will follow in those footsteps. It also means that because they have been convinced that the law devalues them that they will continue to ignore the law and this never ending cycle will continue. The CBC and Ms. Fudge know this, that is why they are trying as they have done with the Educational system by trying to establish a separate system of grading and disciplining Black students to downgrade aberrant or illegal behaviour.

David P, Goldman describes what is happening with the CBC and the new civil rights movement as follows:

To restate the “civil rights” argument in a clearer way: Young black men are disproportionately imprisoned. One in three black men have gone to prison at some time in their life. According to the ACLU, one in fifteen black men are incarcerated, vs. one in 106 white men. That by itself is proof of racism; the fact that these individuals were individually prosecuted for individual crimes has no bearing on the matter. All that matters is the outcome. Because the behavior of young black men is not likely to change, what must change is the way that society recognizes crime itself. The answer is to remove stigma of crime attached to certain behavior, for example, physical altercations, petty theft, and drug-dealing on a certain scale. The former civil rights movement no longer focuses its attention on supposedly ameliorative social spending, for example, preschool programs for minority children, although these remain somewhere down the list in the litany of demands. What energizes and motivates the movement is the demand that society redefine deviancy to exclude certain classes of violent as well as non-violent felonies.

Which brings us to the quote by Giulani, perhaps ironically is the fact the CBC ( Congressional Black Caucus) were instrumental in pushing for passing legislation that called for more cops and stricter mandatory sentences in the late ’80’s and early 90’s.  During those days crime was rampant, drugs and gang warfare was taking a terrible toll on the communities that they represented. In those days the cries where not about police brutality (though it did exist), but for more cops, tougher sentences, loosening of forfeiture laws. The laws that were passed then did have their intended effect, crime now is at the lowest levels in 40 years but had an unintended effect of targeting criminals which were disproportianately Blacks young males.

Rather than addressing the causes of why young Black males are committing more crime, the civil rights movement and the CBC kept blaming racism and the Establishment for the failures of their own community to address this problem. They still ignore the issue, instead they elevate the violent assaults of Trayvon Martin and Martin Brown  as noble young black male martyrs.

Michael Brown assaulted a police officer and attempted to remove his gun,  what purpose does the supporter of Brown think he was trying to do this? If, this is true do you really want that person in your neighborhood, if attacking a police officer is not out of bounds for him, do you think that attacking someone else would have been? The answer I get when these questions are posed is that he was unarmed and did not deserve to die for stealing cigarillos, but this does not answer the question is just deflects it and since most do not have to live in Michael Brown’s neighborhood it would not affect them either way.

Golda Meir the former Prime Minister of Israel once said about the Palestinian and Israeli conflict:

Peace will come when the Arabs love their children more than they hate us (the Jews).

In many ways the Arab and Israeli conflict is a metaphor for the issues that afflict the Black community. A day will come when Blacks will love their children enough and value their lives enough to stop accepting violent or illegal behaviour as normal and start addressing those issues in their communities. When they realize that all Black lives matter, not just those few that die at the hands of non-Blacks and stop excusing themselves of the problem.

Here’s Police Chief of Milwakee-Police Chief Edward Flynn on the subject.

 

 

The “Good Progressive”

Now in its sixth season the CBS legal, political drama “The Good Wife” is still one of the best reviewed and critically acclaimed series on TV. It is also very Progressive and it is not afraid to let this be known. The series is based in Chicago, the protagonist Alicia Florrick is the wife of now governor Peter Florrick who in the start of the series was a disgraced States Attorney facing charges of corruption and an infidelity scandal. Taking cues from the Clinton and Eliot Spitzer scandals The Good Wife’s creators Robert and Michelle King have woven a series that demonstrates Progressive thinking and displays it for the country to see.

The characters in the show seem a checklist of constituencies for Progressive.  It features Alicia Florrick, the good wife who gave up a promising law career to raise a family and help her husband’s political career, later she stood by him when he was plagued by scandals. Peter Florrick disgraced DA who fails upward, into the Governor’s Mansion, Eli Gold the Jewish lawyer and fixer, a gay brother, a bi-sexual investigator whose methods are questionable, the only Black recurring character was according to the show the largest and ruthless drug-dealer in the city, in this season he is implicated in at least 3 murders.

It is no wonder that Progressive leaders from Valerie Jarrett, Gloria Steinem, Bill DeBlasio and Donna Brazille (3 times) have made cameos on the show but aside of showing how Progressive thinking works in TV land it also shows how easily discarded their principles are. In this season of the show Alicia is running for District Attorney’s office making the show more political than in the past not that the show lacked that aspect before. If you want to see Progressive ideas and thoughts acted in action this is a great place to start.

There has been an uproars in Conservatives sites about Jonathan Gruber, the MIT economist who was instrumental in not just devising Obamacare but in ensuring that the CBO (to whom he is one of its academic advisers) would score it positively.  At the same time he was instrumental in hiding the taxes that were hidden as fees to dupe the people into supporting the bill.

If that was not bad enough, he is seen gloating about how successful he was at this. The condescending attitude he displays rather gleefully as he spikes the football is infuriating to not just Conservatives but to many others including some supporters of the law.  For an economist he puts partisanship above his trade as he is quoted as saying in this Esquire Magazine interview from  November 13:

“What I don’t get is these stupid governors who are turning down the Medicaid expansion,” he said. “This is preposterously stupid. First of all, your low-income people get health-insurance, and you get billions and billions of dollars of stimulus in health-care spending. For example, there are one million uninsured Floridians who are below the poverty line. The federal government is saying we’ll pay to insure them, and, in addition, we’re sending billions of dollars to you. And Rick Scott says no. There is no basis for turning this down except to put your political agenda ahead of the needs of your state’s citizens. They say they’re worried about the federal deficit? Why? They’re governors, for god’s sake. This is one of the criminal failures of our political system. It is an enormous failure.”

He arrogantly sees as a failure for Governors, not all of whom were Democrats of not accepting “Free Money”, but it is really free money? Of course not, and no matter how creative he was in designing the law nothing can hide that. After 2 years those same Governors would have to find the funds on their own to cover the new expensive entitlement program, which seems to be ACA’s only success, expanding Medicaid enrollment. All the other promises decreasing premiums, keeping your doctor, budget neutral have all fallen by the wayside and the law in not fully implemented, yet.

In the The Good Wife, Alicia can sermonize about standing by your man, pretend she is not an atheist, defend a notorious Drug Kingpin, only to drop him as a client because is now a liability as she runs for office of DA, because  everyone is innocent until proven guilty. The show also excuses the illegalities of their own investigator, who bribes, intimidates, break-ins, steals, etc., does anything that she can to help her employers win their cases. The end always justifies the means.

The Legacy Media or MSM as I like to call them, has circled their wagons around Gruber. As Allahpundit reported here:

Those in the center-left press who have deigned to debase themselves by addressing a story of interest to conservatives insist that there is nothing much to see here. Not only was Gruber’s admission that the ACA was designed to hide its true costs and impact on the American economy already widely known, they say, but that the American public is generally to blame for Gruber’s mendacity.

They hate it when they have to hurt you, so don’t make them do it.

The Progressives and only them know what is good for you. The American people are too stupid to understand the nuances of such policies, so it is necessary to lie and hide the effects of those policies. The same can be said about other pet projects of Progressives, Global warming, immigration, minimum wages, unions, common core, etc. They know what is best, they need to get over on those stupid Bible Thumpers as Gruber is quoted on one of the 5 videos that have surfaced so far, the end justifies it.

Progressives wanted Health Care Reform, they got reform, that it has helped some people there no doubt. That it has hurt many others there is also no doubt, that it will negatively affect more people than those that have been help time will tell. As Eli Gold tells Alicia paraphrasing; “Americans don’t want the truth, they want nicely staged events where we tell them what the truth is”. That is how Progressives view Americans a gullible audience waiting to applaud their dressed up product, nothing more.

 

The Michael Brown Case, Update 4.2: The Media, at TTAG

Mike delivers a powerful and concise look at the Michael Brown case. HIs criticism of the media is well-earned and could cost lives. Primer from the linked article:

“If a criminal is willing to attack a cop, what would they do to the next citizen they meet?”

This point seems to be forgotten by those who support Brown and were likely the first to have to deal with the menace that Brown seem to be. Even the Washington Post appears to get it.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/new-evidence-supports-officers-account-of-shooting-in-ferguson/2014/10/22/cf38c7b4-5964-11e4-bd61-346aee66ba29_story.html

 

Stately McDaniel Manor

credit: clashdaily.com credit: clashdaily.com

As bits of pieces of information trickle out in the Michal Brown case, I’m compiling information for a new addition to the articles in that archive. The next article will be posted in the near future. In the meantime, you might want to visit The Truth About Guns, where my weekly contribution this week is something of a primer on the Brown case, the law, and the way the media makes self-defense more difficult for us all.

The article is titled “Practicing the Art of Self Defense–From the Media.”  By the way, please keep in mind that when one contributes articles to the publishing concerns of others, it is the editors of those concerns that usually write the headlines, titles, decide when to publish articles, etc. At the Manor, I wear all the publishing hats and the decisions–and blame–are entirely mine. At TTAG, and the other sites that…

View original post 31 more words

By Hook (race card) or by Crook (cheating)

Once again elections are upon us, and we are again faced with the decision of which way the country will head. If you want to know why so many Americans are repulsed by politics or politicians all you have to do is look at what is happening during this election and feel disgusted. This is something that extends to both parties, Democrat and Republican, though in this one is seems like the Democrats who are facing an uphill battle are pulling no punches in their underhandedness.

By CROOK:

This election the Democrats are in a particularly hard battle to retain the Senate. To many contests with many in States that are normally Republican held areas. Many rode the Obama wave election in 2008 into office but now it is the same Obama Administration that has put them in a bind. As the Administration continues to go from blunder to blunder the fortunes of those seeking re-election get worse, and are not helped by Obama who keeps inserting himself into the campaigns of the beleaguered Senators, whether they want him to or not.

For those Senators who are trying to distance themselves from the Obama Administration and their many “blunders”, what Obama said just the other day in Sharpton’s Radio show could not have come at a worse time.

“The bottom line is though, these are all folks who vote with me; they have supported my agenda in Congress; they are on the right side of minimum wage; they are on the right side of fair pay; they are on the right side of rebuilding our infrastructure; they’re on the right side of early childhood education.”

“These are folks who are strong allies and supporters of me, and I tell them, I said, ‘You know what, you do what you need to do to win. I will be responsible for making sure our voters turn out.’ ”

Talk about a cynical statement, not only is Obama saying that these Senators are with him and by extension share responsibility for his policies but also telling them that it is fine if they LIE to the electorate on their positions or opposition to the President to get elected. Once elected they will come back into the fold and continue as before. Of course, lying about positions and policies is something that the President is intimately acquainted with; you can keep your doctor, Syria red-line, not my decision to remove troops from Iraq, not a smidgen of corruption in the IRS, etc.

In Kansas, the Democrats had their candidate bow out of the election when it became clear that their candidate would lose against the Republican incumbent Senator Pat Roberts.   Greg Orman the Independent candidate a longtime Democrat operative running as an independent was sure to split the vote with the Democratic candidate but was a stronger opponent than Chad Taylor, who won his party’s nomination on the primary. Though Kansas law said that a candidate withdrawn after the primary had to be replaced by the party committee, the Democrat Party choose not to run any candidate in order to give Orman a better chance at defeating Roberts.

Is not just national elections that have their share of underhandedness, in Nevada for instance in a race for State Assembly #34 a candidate who was disqualified from running for not meeting the residency requirements but whose name will still on the ballot, could be seated if she wins, anyway.  The candidate Meghan Smith has been for the past 2 elections a politician in search of a seat. In 2010 she ran in a Republican leaning district and lost. In 2012 she ran in a different district in a Democrat leaning one but lost in the primary-her opponent won her seat. This year an open seat in District #34 produced an opportunity, thing was that she did not live on District #34.

On January 30th she instructed her Realtor to find her a residence within the boundaries of the district but with the deadline of February 12th fast approaching time was of the essence. A condo in the edges of the district was found the next day and negotiations were begun. Before she had even bought the property she proceeded to the state DMV office to get her address changed to the property which was not hers, yet.  She also filed paperwork to run for this seat with the Secretary of State.

Ms. Smith finally purchased the property and moved in March 7th, almost a full month past the residency requirement proscribed by Nevada law. She won the Democratic primary by 15 votes and was set to face the Republican challenger. The Republican challenger sued to have her declared ineligible and won in court after the Judge found in the Republican challenger’s favor. This might be a Pyrrhic victories of sorts, because of the time it took to adjudicate the lawsuit, Meghan Smith’s name will remain in the ballot and Nevada law allows the State Assembly to pick a replacement for disqualified candidates. This means that the Assembly which is controlled by Democrats could name Ms. Smith to the seat, though she was disqualified from the election for not meeting residency requirements. Continued next page.

The Old “Grey Lady” just can help Herself

The “Old” Grey Lady- courtesy of The Daily News

The ‘old’ Grey Lady, the New York Times just can’t help itself. There have been at least 3 stories that have been published in their pages that demonstrate that it can’t just report the news and not show bias.

It finally admitted that yes, there were weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) in Iraq and there may still be some to be found. Despite of years of “Bush lied and people died” and there were no WMD’s in Iraq. it has now decided that there were WMDs and that some may still exist, today.

In a very long article the NYT describes the quantity of WMDs found and relates some instances in which our troops were affected by these weapons. Quoting the article:

From 2004 to 2011, American and American-trained Iraqi troops repeatedly encountered, and on at least six occasions were wounded by, chemical weapons remaining from years earlier in Saddam Hussein’s rule.

In all, American troops secretly reported finding roughly 5,000 chemical warheads, shells or aviation bombs, according to interviews with dozens of participants, Iraqi and American officials…”

So Bush was right there were WMDs in Iraq and there were well hidden that the UN inspectors were not able to locate them. But that is not what the Grey Lady wants to say, instead they disassemble:

The United States had gone to war declaring it must destroy an active weapons of mass destruction program. Instead, American troops gradually found and ultimately suffered from the remnants of long-abandoned programs, built-in close collaboration with the West.

This is just a play on words and does not negate the fact that despite what was repeatedly said, Hussein had a large cache of WMDs at his disposal. The “active” part is real nice touch yet as Gabriel Malor explains that was never the rationale. Not in the sense that the NYT is implying.

Why would the NYT debunk years of Iraq had not WMDs? Well, here is the answer:

Indulgences, forgiveness and moral excuses

Progressives see religion, especially Christianity with disdain. The see those who follow religion as superstitious ignoramuses who are either mislead or worse Conservatives. But for all the disdain and loathing that Progressives aim at the religious they sure like to misuse and misinterpret religious doctrine for themselves.

Take the use of indulgences, what are indulgences? From the Vatican site:

“An indulgence is a remission before God of the temporal punishment due to sins whose guilt has already been forgiven, which the faithful Christian who is duly disposed gains under certain prescribed conditions through the action of the Church which, as the minister of redemption, dispenses and applies with authority the treasury of the satisfactions of Christ and the saints.”

“An indulgence is partial or plenary according as it removes either part or all of the temporal punishment due to sin.” Indulgences may be applied to the living or the dead.

In Medieval times indulgences were paid to the Catholic Church to wipe/minimize or atone for the sins committed during their lifetime. This doctrine as with many others got corrupted to the point the indulgences were sold to the highest bidder. Doing penance for your sins, if you could build a new wing to the cathedral an official certificate would be given for your penance. Your parents are long dead but they may not have been able to receive last rites or a confession to be absolved of their sins before dying, you could now pay or buy an indulgence for them and spare them the suffering in purgatory or in some cases Hell.

In Search of Meaning, why do they do it?

When Polish Jew, Henri Tajfel, left Poland to study Chemistry in Sorbonne, France he did not know that when he returned that none of his immediate family and few of his friends would be alive. The Second World War would find in France, where he volunteered in the French Army and later would become a prisoner of war a year later.

He would face a dilemma, announce to his captors deny he was a Polish Jew or claim to be a French citizen. In the end he admitted to being Jewish but claimed French citizenship. This act probably saved his life as he survived the war in a series of POW camps. This experience also embarked him on a quest to find out the reasons for prejudice and intergroup relations.

After the war he worked with a Jewish organization helping to resettle Jewish orphans and the UN’s refugee Organization, but it was his work in social psychology that is the most influential to this day. After moving to the UK to study psychology and graduating his research examining different areas of social psychology, social judgment, nationalism and prejudice that I want to talk about.

Mass Media as a Weapon

Whether Randolph Hearst actually said “You furnish the pictures and I’ll furnish the war”, or it is just a made up story that help further increase his persona, there is no question that his newspaper’s coverage leading up to the Spanish-American War was influential as a weapon influencing our decisions leading to the conflict.

This was not the first use of media to build support for or influence governmental action but it is an example how Mass Media can be used to manipulate the populace into supporting such actions. Prior to Hearst’s concerted effort in support of the Cuban Revolution it was a little known conflict with few casualties, of mainly the wealthy educated Cubans trying to get rid of the Spanish Crown.

Today no one newspaper has that amount of influence by itself, but concerted efforts like the group of left-leaning journalist “Journolist“, played a great role in the 2008 Presidential Election of Barack Obama and its support of Obama’s policies meant that he would be re-elected as well. The suppression of the vetting process that all candidates go through was subverted, there are still many Americans who are surprised to hear about the racist views Rev. Wright or his dealing with former weatherman Akers.

Conversely, the media can also act as a blanket by omitting facts that they have determined are inconvenient. In the ‘Journolist’ case they both acted as cheerleaders and protection for President Obama. The Mass Media frequently omits the political affiliation of Democrats in cases of corruption and the races of perpetrators in crime cases. Lately, the Media are hiding the religious affiliation of perpetrators of acts of terrorism (Reuters has a policy of not using the word terrorist, at all), or as is the case of the Rotherham sexual assaults misnaming them altogether.

By using the term South Asians or just plain Asians as the perpetrators it tried to hide that those accused of the mass sexual abuse of some 1400 predominantly White young girls were Muslim men from Pakistan. This has enraged other South Asians that live in England, primarily those that originated from India and are not Muslims.

Can anyone think of a politician any party that was treated by the Media as Sarah Palin? From calls that she was a dumb whore to allegations that her young son Trig should have aborted or that he was her older daughter’s child the treatment that the Media gave the ex-Governor of Alaska was shameful. Some of the things for which she was pilloried were true, you can see Russia from parts of Alaska, and would invade Ukraine if we did not adjust our thinking about them and the opportunity arose.

Palin has not only weathered those attacks but has tried in her own way to strike back, as for her holding any office… that part of her political career well that is over, though I know there are many that still believe.

The Tea Party, is another group that has been under incessant attack by the Media. The members of the Tea Party have been called racist, homophobic, xenophobic, religious fanatics to a degree that it has become an accepted fact that if you support the Tea Party your are all those things.

On the opposite end the short-lived OWS movement was the Media’s darling. The glowing coverage of the movement meant that the Media would not report on the crimes that the movement’s followers were committing. I remember how fawning the Media was with the married mother of 2 who left her husband with the kids and went to New York to sleep in the park with the other occupiers. The daily rapes, mass consumption of drugs that the occupiers were engaging in barely got mentioned.

We have read and know the statistics about how Blacks are 13 percent of the nation’s population, they account for more than 50 percent of homicide victims. If the homicide rate of Blacks was that of White, 14.1 versus 1.9, the US would be one of the safest countries in the World. Minus the homicide rate only Japan and Canada have lower rates of violent crime. (Sources were the OECD Index, FBI Crime statistics).

Due to the recent shooting of Michael Brown much have been made by the Media about police discrimination and particularly police shooting of Blacks by police. The USA Today reported that the police were involved in 400 killings per year only 92 were Police shootings of Blacks. There is no break-down as to the circumstances that led to shootings or other information available. The article does point out that only 750 Law Enforcement agencies contribute the statistics to the FBI which compiles the reports, but it does not mention that while there 17000 different LE agencies nationwide the 750 that do report their statistics are the largest and cover 95% of the population. Small or rural agencies do not report to the FBI but most of them crime is rare, murder, rape or other violent crimes are usually handled by their neighboring larger agencies.

Another problem with the article and other like it is the lack of context, if out 400 yearly LE shootings only 92 are involving Blacks that squares with the crime statistics as Blacks are 13% of the population but commit 38.6% of the crimes according to the FBI. If anything this shows that LE is less likely to shoot at Blacks than Whites by a 38% crimes committed only 23% of those shoot by LE. Regardless the Media will reported as another attack on the besieged Black community, instead of acknowledging the problems and as Walter Williams says: “Blacks must confront reality”.

 

Th090214_2313_MassMediaas3.jpgere is another area where the Media has disproportionate and mostly negative influence, that is the ME and specifically Israel. As Matti Friedman, a former AP correspondent calls it; “the Most Important Story on Earth“. It is an essay on how the Media obsession with Israel, Hamas and the whole issue of the Palestinian question transforms and infects with its bias the discussions in the area. In essence the Media is the biggest obstacle to a mutual settlement between Israel and Palestine.

The Mass Media wields tremendous power, though it is being diluted by Social Media which offers an alternative to the monopoly it once had, when it only competed with niche publications that appealed strictly to a few people. The Media has an important role is a free society, and I would never advocate its censorship. Mass Media has been weaponized by the Left, which controls most of the traditional Media. When Media abandons its principal role of watchdog and assumes the role of activist the effect on society can be and has been historically detrimental and this failing can lead to disastrous consequences.

President Obama recently complained that Social Media was responsible for the perception that the World was in chaos, which is ironic as his whole ascent to the Presidency was aided by Social Media and Mass Media’s love for him. I don’t know which is scarier that the President would say it or that he really believes it. For 6 years the Media was a weapon against those that opposed the President, now that some of that Media are noticing how incompetent he really has been, he is complaining that they are not doing enough to shield him!090214_2313_MassMediaas4.jpg

Obama was a media construction, now it has become media nightmare, as it has exposed something that they have denied for years that they have a Left-Leaning tilt and have for decades. As a once Democrat supporting Hearst might have said; “You furnish the stories, I get you the Presidency”, but can he govern?

 

 

 

Diversity- contd

Mark Steyn’s has a new post on his site that touches on the subject in my previous post. His is entitled: The Reformation of Manners, though manners have very little to do with the issue. A primer:

“Underneath the watchful eyes of the digital panopticon, however, the Islamization of the west will continue. Not every Muslim wants to chop your head off. Not every Muslim wants to “groom” your 11-year-old daughter. But these pathologies nest within Islam, and thrive at the intersection of Islam and the west. As long as Islam is your biggest source of population growth – to the point where Mohammed is now the most popular boy’s name in Oslo – you’re not “tackling” the issue, and certainly not “head on”.

“In a bizarre column even for the post-Conrad National Post, Afsun Qureshi suggests the best thing you could do to lessen the likelihood of being set upon by Muslims is to learn to recite the shahadah, “a testimony to the identity of Allah as the one true God, and Muhammad as his prophet”. She might be right. Wearing a burqa might help, too. Or the shalwar kameez. On the other hand, most of those Syrian men paraded through the desert in their BVDs to their rendezvous with death knew the shahadah, and a fat lot of good it did”

The last paragraph a reference to an article in the National Post, one of Canada’s leading newspapers who an article that must be read to be believed.  Wether willingly or unknowingly is proposing that we pretend to be Muslims in order to co-exists with Muslims. This plays into the same message that groups like ISIS are using to recruit impressionable recruits; Inevitability. They all preach that “Allahu Akbar”, their God is Greater, join us or be else.

Steyn concludes as follows;

So now, in the new multiculti Britain, the child sex trade is back, as part of the rich, vibrant tapestry of diversity – along with Jew-hate, and honor killings, and decapitation porn. The solutions to the internal contradictions of multiculturalism are (a) David Cameron’s expanded security state; (b) Afsun Qureshi’s universal prostration before Islam; or (c) an end to mass Muslim immigration. The last is too obvious for any viable western politician ever to propose it.

Read the whole thing.

A failure of ideology is driving the ME and Ferguson

 

⇒UPDATE⇐

 

 

The picture shows a map of the 5 year plan of ISIS/ISIL. Eventually they want the whole World under their flag and their religion, Islam. This is their plan, this is what they tell their recruits all over the World. We can argue all we want about whether ISIS/ISIL really represents Islam or not but this is what they are aiming for. The White House and the State Department spokespersons twist themselves into pretzels trying to explain that this is not what the Muslims religion is about or that we are not at war with Islam, yet what we say had little relevance to what they (ISIL) believes. Despite denials to the contrary and the revisionist history that is taught in today’s schools the spread of the Muslim faith was achieved mostly at the end of a sword, smaller versions of the knifes that being used to decapitate people today.

It is true that most major religions have had dark pasts, where religion was used as a justification for many barbaric deeds, but I find it extremely misleading this great campaign that is going on to pretend that Islam is nothing but a “peaceful” religion, ergo any atrocities committed in the name of Islam by its followers means that they are not truly “Muslim” or not part of its teachings. It is true that most Muslims are not violent or extreme fundamentalist in beliefs that only wish to worship and follow their religion in peace but denying that there are some that are some that feel differently is naïve, and dangerous. The very term “extreme fundamentalist” entails that it is the same religion only an extreme (strict) fundamentalist (earlier, primary, core) version of the religion. Pretending that because the Muslim faith has change into a more moderate version of its earlier self, those that follow the more fundamentalist version are not practicing the same religion is spurious.

The Telegraph in the UK has an article titled “British jihadists: How Britain became the Yemen of the West”, which offers one prescription with dealing with the European jihadists that have joined the fight in the ME, but the article fails in other areas because it is at fault of the same problems that others are having failing to see the influence of religion on the matter, and why it is appealing to some many. The article states the following;

“Dreadful as the murder video of the journalist James Foley was, it is by no means the worst thing posted online by, or involving, British and Western jihadists this week. In the jihadists’ theatre of savagery, Britons and Westerners have for several months taken principal speaking parts. The Foley video’s real significance, perhaps not fully understood in the general shock, is different. Until now, the Islamic State (Isil) has shown little interest in threatening the West. In that video, this started to change, with “John the Beatle” promising the “bloodshed of your people”. The ransom demand sent to Mr. Foley’s family, published yesterday, is even more explicit: “Today our swords are unsheathed towards you, government and citizens alike,” it says.”

This, ignores all the previous threats as non-existent, of course the public way in which it was carried out was bound to get attention. Until now those that have died or believed to have died were all considered a sort of collateral damage to the hostilities in the area. This was very clear into its extent and its message. But, in our secular society everything is viewed through a secular lens and this is where the article fails. The article explains the appeal of the jihadists this way, it was our fault;

“Britain’s key failing is that it was tough where it should have been liberal, and liberal where it should have been tough. It extended detention without trial and stop-and-search: sweeping measures that affected everyone and left Muslims, most of whom are completely blameless, feeling under attack. At the same time, it was ridiculously tolerant and indulgent towards a small minority of Muslim radicals.”

And then dismissively,

“Throughout history, bored, maladjusted and sexually frustrated young men have sought excitement and identity through violence. Where a non-Muslim adolescent might only have the outlet of gang fights in shopping centres or punchups in pubs, young Muslims have the glamour, thrill and wider meaning of Middle East combat. The connections they can make online, with others far away, and the ease of travel in the globalised world complete the picture.”

Kids will be kids, maybe we can create a “time-out” corner for this young adults Kids, to go to so that they won’t join those fighting, killing, raping and bombing with ISIS, but as the author warns we have to be careful so as not to radicalize more susceptible young ones. Now the prescription as the author sees it, is to let the educate the possible recruits,

“A potential British Isil recruit may not be too bothered that he could end up dead. But around half of the Britons who have died so far in Syria and Iraq were killed not by the regime-infidel enemy but by their own side through in-fighting, and if that same potential recruit knew that, it might put a different complexion on it.

If young men in Bradford and east London heard stories from disillusioned British Isil fighters who felt they were treated as cannon fodder that would do 20 times more good than any number of heartfelt condemnations from middle-aged politicians or “community leaders”.


A young man goes to the ME and if he survives and returns we will use him to tell other young men not to go, this is assuming that the young returning will be so disillusioned with their jihad that they will be willing to do so, and completely forgets those that return and tell a completely different story or that want to pursue or start their own jihad closer to home. Winning strategy! Ok, sarcasm off. This is not exactly a new strategy, something similar has been tried here with gang members but for all the hoopla it has had limited success. That has not stop us from trying as Chicago is attempting use past gang members to help its runaway gang problem, again after an earlier initiative in 2012 failed to deliver and crime spiraled out of control. Other cities, Atlanta, Detroit, Charlotte, Houston, Oakland, Cleveland, Little Rock, Memphis, Dallas, to name a few have tried the same approach all with little or limited success as they fail to address core issues that cause the gangs to be attractive, in the first place, to young man. All this amounts to be what St. Augustine described as the “cruel optimism” of people: our desire to believe the best in people and if we just tell them why something is wrong them will stop doing it.

Charles C. W. Cooke writing in the National Review writes, “H. G. Wells’ famous prediction that the First World War would be the “war to end all wars” was met with skepticism by the British prime minister. “This war, like the next war,” David Lloyd George quipped in the summer of 1916, “is a war to end war.” History, he sighed, is not shaped by wishful thinking.”

He continues,

“This week, responding to the news that an American journalist had been executed in Syria by the Islamic State, President Obama contended that the group “has no place in the 21st century.” One wonders: What can this mean? Is this a statement of intent, or is it a historical judgment? Certainly, insofar as Obama’s words indicate a willingness to extirpate the outfit from the face of the Earth, they are useful. If, however, they are merely an attempt to shame the group by explaining that in 2014 the good guys no longer behave in this manner, it is abject and it is fruitless. As a matter of regrettable fact, IS does indeed have a place in the 21st century — and, like the barbarians who hypothetically had “no place” in the Roman Empire, it is presently utilizing that place to spread darkness and despair. Assurances that “our best days are ahead of us,” I’d venture, are probably not going to cut it with the mujahideen.”

“Many among us seem incapable of believing that it is. On Reddit, users are furiously debating whether the footage was faked. Elsewhere, others are seeking explanations as to what might have pushed Foley’s killers to such extraordinary lengths. Perhaps, they ask, IS’s behavior is the fault of something else. The United States’ invasion of Iraq, maybe? Or the legacy of colonialism, or of global inequality? Do these men just need running water? This instinct is folly, the product of the mistaken conviction that man is perfectible and his nature pliant, and that there is something intrinsically different about our age. “The lessons of history endure,” Oklahoma University’s J. Rufus Fears observed beautifully, “because human nature never changed.” “All the human emotions,” Fears added,

 

Are the same today as in Egypt of the pharaohs or China in the time of Confucius: Love, hate, ambition, the lust for power, kindness, generosity, and inhumanity. The good and bad of human nature is simply poured into new vehicles created by science and technology.

That is the false ideology that must be countered, that because we have become more “civilized” that we have seized to be human, that those instincts and feelings that drove humanity 10,000 years ago or 14 years ago are now different, why? Especially when at the same time we are sending a completely different message as our culture becomes more primitive, when the desires of the flesh are more important, when we excuse those that loot, rob and steal as innocents and denigrate those that try to be productive as evil. We are still human, we can redistribute happiness or success. The thought that if we allowed the Islamist to have their own country will be enough to satisfy them and leave other be is the same wrong ideology as that of those that believe that if we give more to certain groups will satisfy them and lead them to happiness and advancement. History can teach a lot about human nature, what it cannot do is make us listen.

UPDATE

MSNBC host Chris Matthews questioned Monday why ISIS is not grateful to the United States instead of threatening this country, noting “we did their work for them” by removing secular dictators like Muammar Gaddafi and Saddam Hussein.  H/T  The Daily Caller

““What did we do against ISIS except allow them to exist by breaking up the Iraqi government under George W. Bush?” Matthews asked. “We created their opportunity. How are we their enemy? I don’t get it. What did we do to them, to ISIS?”

Mohyledin tried to explain the broader regional context, noting the long-standing support of many secular Arab governments by the United States. But he was quickly cut off.

“Wait a minute, we helped knock off Gaddafi, we took a pretty strong stand against Syria, we knocked off Saddam Hussein,” Matthews interjected. “We knocked off all the secular leaders. Why aren’t the Islamists happy with us?”

“Factually, we did their work for them,” the MSNBC host asserted. “We pulled the rug out from under all these people who were secularists so that these Islamists could grab those countries. What’s the knock, what’s the knock on us?”

 

He does not understand why the US is being targeted after all not only did we provided the opportunity, but we removed the opposition yet they are not satisfied by our stumbling benevolence. This is a perfect example of the thinking that if we give extremist something that they should be grateful and go on about themselves, but ignoring that root cause of the issues by just addressing one. This is willful ignorance as well as arrogance in that we are in essence saying, here you go young wild child here a country now go play and leave me alone. The problems in the ME date far back, it is not because of Israel, the Palestinian lack of a State,  US involvement in the region or British colonialism (though the latter did make a mess of things), they date to the early days of Islam when several tribes in the desert in Arabia and went on to conquer everyone in their path until they were stopped.