Search Box

Sunday, July 10, 2016

The Dallas shootings

Everybody's taking about Thursday night's shootings in Dallas, and given the other shootings which took place at about the same time in Missouri and elsewhere, it does feel a little as if race war has broken out.

Micah Johnson, the Dallas shooter, stated explicitly that he wanted to kill white people, especially white  police. Yet absolutely no one in the mainstream media has used the word "racist" to describe him. The term "racism" still only applies in only one direction.

The NY Times headline Saturday morning was, "Five Officers Killed as Payback, Chief Says."

This seems to be the Times' version of, "But they started it!" They added the "Chief Says" bit to give themselves cover. You know, the way they normally present the police viewpoint in their headlines.

The subheading said, "Dallas Sniper Said to be Driven by Police Shootings of Blacks."

Evidently we're supposed to react to that by thinking, ah, well, in that case it's understandable.

If a white had shot eleven blacks, killing five of them, as revenge for, say, a couple of black-on-white killings, the media would be screaming the R word from the rooftops. And they would never, ever present it as a tit for tat situation.

But this wasn't Dylan Roof shooting a bunch of blacks, it was the opposite: a black-on-white racial killing. So while the media solemnly talk about the tragic nature of the event, they've generally refrained from editorializing, since this doesn't fit the liberal narrative.

A few have mentioned the "horrible epidemic of gun violence" in passing, but the elephant in the room is simply ignored.

Obama called the shootings "a vicious, calculated, and despicable attack on law enforcement." Which makes it sound as if he's harshly condemning the murders.

But, Obama did not mention the racial nature of the killings, just as he refused to mention the radical Islamist nature of the killings in Orlando. As always with Obama, what he doesn't say speaks much louder than what he does say. Had the Dallas shootings been white-on-black, of course, he would have been all over the racial angle, as he was when Dylan Roof shot those black churchgoers in Charleston.

While Obama may have said the Dallas shootings were despicable, he's actually been subtly inciting this violence all along.

No, he hasn't told anyone to go out and shoot police officers. But he's been doing his best to stoke animosity and make the black community feel aggrieved.

(Here's a great summation of how Obama's words are both misleading and provocative.)

Whenever there are such incidents, Obama, without knowing all the facts, immediately, instinctively sides with blacks. He did it after Harvard professor Henry Gates was arrested, after the Trayvon Martin kiling, and after the Michael Brown shooting. Hours before the Dallas shootings, Obama said, of the recent killings of blacks by police in Minnesota and Louisiana:

"Right now, the data shows that black folks are more vulnerable to these kinds of incidents. There is a particular burden that is being placed on a group of our fellow citizens…When incidents like this occur, there is a big chunk of our fellow citizenry that feels as if because of the color of their skin they are not being treated the same….Regardless of the outcome of such investigations, what's clear is that these fatal shootings are not isolated incidents. They are symptomatic of the broader challenges within our criminal justice system, the racial disparities that appear across the system year after year….As a nation, we can and must do better to institute the best practices that reduce the appearance or reality of racial bias in law enforcement."

If you listen to Obama, you'd be left with the impression that the only reason blacks are arrested and convicted at higher rates than whites is because law enforcement is racist. But again, what he doesn't say speaks much louder: blacks and whites simply don't commit violent crimes at the same rate.

In fact, it's not even close: blacks commit all four of the four major categories of violent crime (aggravated assault, rape, armed robbery, and murder) at a rate six to eight times higher than whites.

As for interracial violence in general, the statistics are similarly lopsided. Black-on-white crime is far more common than white-on-black. Yet to hear the media tell it, you'd think it was the opposite.

As far as police shootings of blacks, in fact the police kill roughly twice as many whites, and studies have shown that police in general are more reluctant to shoot a black suspect than a white one. (Is anyone referring to this difference as "racism"?)

Micah Johnson was an Army reservist, and the Army tries not to accept recruits with IQ's below 92, and an IQ at that minimal level for acceptance would put Johnson 7 points above the black average. So he couldn't have been that dumb. But Johnson couldn't have been that smart, either, or he would have delved into the statistics and seen for himself exactly what they showed.

Johnson was, in a sense, a Manchurian candidate, brainwashed by the constant media drumbeat and the lies of the BLM crowd into thinking that the cops really do go around hunting down young black men for sport. A few hours after the President himself basically said that the cops were racist, Johnson decided to indulge his rage.

One crucial distinction here is between dishonesty and stupidity. It's hard to believe that Obama and Loretta Lynch and Valerie Jarrett and George Soros, as well as the people who originally started the BLM movement, are so dumb that they don't realize that the way they present the police killings are misleading at best.

Which makes them dishonest. (That's the only other choice here.)

It is easy to believe, on the other hand, that the majority of the BLM followers, the Micah Johnson's of the world, after having been told over and over again how the police are trying to hunt them down, actually believe it.

Of course, once the Micah Johnson's and other simpletons explode, the Obama's do their best to distance themselves from those explosions.

But who's the truly bad party in this scenario?

8 comments:

Mark Caplan said...

The Democratic Governor of Minnesota immediately called the shooting of the armed driver a racist attack by the police:

Would this have happened if the driver and the passengers were white? I don't think it would have. This kind of racism exists and it's incumbent on all of us to vow and ensure that it doesn't continue to happen.

The "racist" cop was Jeronimo Yanez, a Mexican American who the media bizarrely first said was Asian.

John Craig said...

Mark --
I first read that the cop was Asian, too, and though, oh no, another panicky Asian like the NYC Housing Authority cop who panicked and shot that innocent guy in the stairwell. Next I read "Hispanic name" and I thought, oh, Filipino. Then I read Hispanic. The initial stories that come out are often inaccurate.

Certain guys, who are prone to panic, shouldn't be cops. This Minnesota incident is one of the few where it was obvious pretty much from the start -- despite the media getting the cop's ethnicity wrong -- that the man who was killed was entirely innocent. It goes, sadly, into the "accident" category. And it's probably true that the cop was more scared because the driver of the car was black. I can't blame cops for being more afraid of black people, just like most people are.

But, the BLM crowd did get this one right.

The Ambivalent Misanthrope said...

Great post --- I was looking forward to what you'd say on the incident. You make a great analysis of the liberal media spin, which is extremely slippery and deceptive. So much of the populace seems completely brainwashed by it. I have white friend's who are total BLM warriors for the cause. And Obama's shamelessness in his comments!

I never heard about the engineering of BLM by the current administration. Interesting.

Still, the particular flavor of liberal media spin goes much further back than the Obama administration. There has been a wholesale attack on the Western tradition (and white race) going back decades. And inexplicably -- to me -- whites are complicit in this self-annihilation.

John Craig said...

Ambivalent Misanthrope --
Thank you. Yes, it's pathetic how easily a lot of people are brainwashed. AND how shameless and deceptive the purposeful liars are.

Oh, I wasn't saying that the Obama administration created BLM, I meant, AND the people who created the BLM movement, as in, a separate group. Reading it now, I can see how you got that impression. I'll change it to make it clearer, thanks.

And yes, you're right, this typeof spin has been in place for a long time, though it seems to keep getting crazier with the passing of time. And yes, only whites are crazy enough to participate in their own destruction this way.

Taylor said...

You may have already seen this (it was originally published in February, then again today), but I enjoyed reading it in the WSJ today:

http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-myths-of-black-lives-matter-1455235686

This weekend I had my first real encounter with BLM protesters. First they showed up to a food festival I was at, and effectively shut it down by preventing anyone from buying anything. I'd already been there a little while so I just left.

Later, as I was walking home somewhat late at night I encountered them again. This time a very large looking mob marching down one of Chicago's downtown streets. As there was no path around them to get home, I couldn't easily avoid them this time. Though honestly I also wanted to see what was happening, despite being a little cautious about whether I should go near them. As I got closer I wasn't sure if I should feel safer or not when I also encountered about four dozen cops in riot gear, quickly catching up to the protest. Followed by more and more police after that. I suppose the story is a bit anti-climactic... they eventually made their way past and I made my way home.

Apparently, however, it did turn a bit violent and 19 arrests were made.

Its hard to sympathize with a movement that does annoying things, like shutting down events, blocking highways etc.. But it's easy to hate a movement that manifests itself in angry mobs coming to my neighborhood and making me feel unsafe. I generally agree with race realism, and I certainly get frustrated about certain aspects of society, but I've never felt hatred about this type of thing until now. I can't imagine what it's like to be a cop and deal with this type of thing.




John Craig said...

Taylor --
Nothing like a little personal contact to open one's eyes. I'd have been scared in that situation too. Being surrounded by an angry, somewhat mindless mob SHOULD scare anyone.

Richard Pryor once had a comedy routine in which he talked about having visited a penitentiary. At first he was dismayed to find that it was full of black people, but then he talked to a few of them, and found out about the various crimes they were in for. He said he tiptoed away saying to himself, "Thank god for penitentiaries." I feel the same way about cops; yes, there are bad apples, and yes, they make mistakes. But if it weren't for them we'd have anarchy.

Rona said...

John, I knew you would post interesting take on the incident. It's funny how it's actually no longer necessary to point out double standard when it comes to media depictions of these things. It's so blatant now that media and politicians persist in presentation of events that is almost complete opposite of reality.

Take, for example this quote "Attorney General Loretta Lynch on Friday encouraged protesters not to allow the “heinous violence” that occurred in Dallas to silence their “important” voices." Is there anyone sane who doesn't see this as approval and support for what is essentially a terrorist movement of black supremacists.

I would love to see poll asking members of BLM their thoughts on this 'heinous violence'. I have a feeling it would come out like those where Muslims in Europe are asked about Islamic terrorists.

Yesterday I checked Ramzpaul's channel expecting usual satirical portrayal of the news and was struck by his entirely understandable, but barely suppressed rage and incredulity about the incident. I mean, this is a normal funny guy, with a pragmatic view of things and a laid back attitude to life, who has finally been driven to call for Whites to organize themselves, called media and president liars and collaborators and called out government as illegitimate.

When normal people are having this response to situation in the country, my mind wanders to another country where people were fed up and, according to modern narrative, went from the most civilized to genocidal because 'inexplicable irrational hatreds'.

John Craig said...

Anon --
Thank you.

I hadn't heard that about Lynch. Amazing. She has shown herself fin a short period of time to be every bit as political as Eric Holder; both have been shams as AG. Since when is it an AG's job to encourage protesters? That's mind-boggling.

I have the feeling that the backlash is already spreading, though you'd never know it from listening to the media.