0 comment Wednesday, September 17, 2014 | admin
The recent events at the Iowa state fair are known to all of you, I'm sure. The attacks by a group of 30 to 40 blacks on White individuals was at first said to be 'unconnected to race,' then 'possibly racially motivated' and today, spokesmen are denying that any real evidence of racial motives is present.
Apparently the report written by a police officer is now being questioned; the victim's account is being discounted, seemingly.
The officer says
"I�m color-blind when it comes to preparing my police reports," Murillo said. "Any and all information that comes from a credible source that I believe may be pertinent or relevant to a follow up investigation of a serious crime is always included in my police reports because that�s the way I�ve been instructed to prepare them for 32 years."
Police Chief Judy Bradshaw stood behind Murillo�s handling of the matter. She said she regrets that some details of the report were misinterpreted and led some to think the information came from the victim, who told police he did not see his attackers and could not provide a description.''
The officer appears to have a Hispanic name so surely he cannot be thought guilty of White bias in reporting what happened. But it is hard not to believe that political correctness is driving the reporting of this case. We know that this happens. We know the media are hopelessly and shamelessly leftist and 'pro-diversity' in their reporting. We know that police departments, too, are under the sway of the 'diversity' dogma, just as our military. Think about the way the Fort Hood massacre was handled by our military, with Gen. Casey's remarks that the worst tragedy would be if our commitment to diversity were sacrificed or words along those lines. As if loss of life is trivial compared to ''diversity.''
Meanwhile, the victim alluded to in this piece is in the hospital, suffering from serious injuries. But heaven forbid that anybody sully the name of holy diversity. We can't have that.
I am going to say that anybody who is so diversity-besotted as to actively try to push it on their area bears some responsibility for any harm that comes to innocent people as a result of their misguided efforts.
I will say right here that the officials in Iowa who pushed and lobbied and pleaded for ''diversity'' in their state should be called to account.
Shouldn't some of the people of Iowa start to question whether there was a 'need', as their pandering officials claimed, to make the state more 'diverse'? Anybody who lives in a diversity-enriched area could tell them that this kind of wanton violence is one of the undiscussed consequences of diversity. Yet every day we are told by our officials and our 'news' media and our academics how 'diversity' is a must in the so-called global marketplace, and that we are in need of enrichment by it.
We could call the victims of these assaults, and so many others like them, 'collateral damage,' in the struggle for sacred diversity.
Sam Francis wrote a piece way back in spring, 2001 about the 'diversity' obsession on the part of Iowa's officials.
''Last September, the state�s Democratic governor, Tom Vilsack, was infected with the idea that what Iowa really needs are more immigrants�namely 350,000 of them�to be imported from Third World countries to help poor, backward, white Iowa "diversify." For all the pompous rhetoric about the holy mantra of "diversity," the real reason behind the governor�s plan was much more mundane. Iowa, a mainly rural state, is losing population and needs more people to boost its economy. The governor�s plan had the support of what at the time were called "business and civic leaders"�that is, those who directly profit form the cheap labor that more immigration brings.
But those who don�t so profit�the vast majority of Iowans � didn�t care much for the governor�s plan. Some 58 percent thought Iowa was already diverse enough and expressed opposition to the proposal. A more recent poll, released this month by the pro-immigration Des Moines Register, shows that number hasn�t changed and also that some two-thirds of the citizens of Des Moines think their city "has enough racial, ethnic and cultural diversity for their needs and preferences."
As suggested above, the invocation of "diversity" has become a kind of dogma that is never explained or subjected to scrutiny. It would be interesting to know how one is supposed to decide how much "diversity" is enough and how much is too little. For that matter, it would be nice to know why "diversity" is a good thing at all. How exactly does Iowa suffer from not having more "diversity"? What benefits of civilized life is Iowa lacking today because it is not sufficiently "diverse"? Alas, no one seems to know, or, if they know, don�t say.''
Spring, 2001, seems so very long ago. That was before 9/11, and it was about, oh, 10 or 15 million immigrants and refugees ago. Have we learned nothing since then?
I suppose we can let the Iowan citizens off the hook, and say they were hoodwinked by their elected officials, but then we have to explain away their voting patterns in the 2008 election. Iowa was one of the erstwhile 'lily white' states that embraced The One. It appears the average Iowan must still be infatuated with their new-found diversity.
Maybe they are a microcosm of America, at least of heartland America in the age of political correctness; it remains to be seen whether they or the country at large will learn from experience, or continue to embrace delusion.
Apparently the report written by a police officer is now being questioned; the victim's account is being discounted, seemingly.
The officer says
"I�m color-blind when it comes to preparing my police reports," Murillo said. "Any and all information that comes from a credible source that I believe may be pertinent or relevant to a follow up investigation of a serious crime is always included in my police reports because that�s the way I�ve been instructed to prepare them for 32 years."
Police Chief Judy Bradshaw stood behind Murillo�s handling of the matter. She said she regrets that some details of the report were misinterpreted and led some to think the information came from the victim, who told police he did not see his attackers and could not provide a description.''
The officer appears to have a Hispanic name so surely he cannot be thought guilty of White bias in reporting what happened. But it is hard not to believe that political correctness is driving the reporting of this case. We know that this happens. We know the media are hopelessly and shamelessly leftist and 'pro-diversity' in their reporting. We know that police departments, too, are under the sway of the 'diversity' dogma, just as our military. Think about the way the Fort Hood massacre was handled by our military, with Gen. Casey's remarks that the worst tragedy would be if our commitment to diversity were sacrificed or words along those lines. As if loss of life is trivial compared to ''diversity.''
Meanwhile, the victim alluded to in this piece is in the hospital, suffering from serious injuries. But heaven forbid that anybody sully the name of holy diversity. We can't have that.
I am going to say that anybody who is so diversity-besotted as to actively try to push it on their area bears some responsibility for any harm that comes to innocent people as a result of their misguided efforts.
I will say right here that the officials in Iowa who pushed and lobbied and pleaded for ''diversity'' in their state should be called to account.
Shouldn't some of the people of Iowa start to question whether there was a 'need', as their pandering officials claimed, to make the state more 'diverse'? Anybody who lives in a diversity-enriched area could tell them that this kind of wanton violence is one of the undiscussed consequences of diversity. Yet every day we are told by our officials and our 'news' media and our academics how 'diversity' is a must in the so-called global marketplace, and that we are in need of enrichment by it.
We could call the victims of these assaults, and so many others like them, 'collateral damage,' in the struggle for sacred diversity.
Sam Francis wrote a piece way back in spring, 2001 about the 'diversity' obsession on the part of Iowa's officials.
''Last September, the state�s Democratic governor, Tom Vilsack, was infected with the idea that what Iowa really needs are more immigrants�namely 350,000 of them�to be imported from Third World countries to help poor, backward, white Iowa "diversify." For all the pompous rhetoric about the holy mantra of "diversity," the real reason behind the governor�s plan was much more mundane. Iowa, a mainly rural state, is losing population and needs more people to boost its economy. The governor�s plan had the support of what at the time were called "business and civic leaders"�that is, those who directly profit form the cheap labor that more immigration brings.
But those who don�t so profit�the vast majority of Iowans � didn�t care much for the governor�s plan. Some 58 percent thought Iowa was already diverse enough and expressed opposition to the proposal. A more recent poll, released this month by the pro-immigration Des Moines Register, shows that number hasn�t changed and also that some two-thirds of the citizens of Des Moines think their city "has enough racial, ethnic and cultural diversity for their needs and preferences."
As suggested above, the invocation of "diversity" has become a kind of dogma that is never explained or subjected to scrutiny. It would be interesting to know how one is supposed to decide how much "diversity" is enough and how much is too little. For that matter, it would be nice to know why "diversity" is a good thing at all. How exactly does Iowa suffer from not having more "diversity"? What benefits of civilized life is Iowa lacking today because it is not sufficiently "diverse"? Alas, no one seems to know, or, if they know, don�t say.''
Spring, 2001, seems so very long ago. That was before 9/11, and it was about, oh, 10 or 15 million immigrants and refugees ago. Have we learned nothing since then?
I suppose we can let the Iowan citizens off the hook, and say they were hoodwinked by their elected officials, but then we have to explain away their voting patterns in the 2008 election. Iowa was one of the erstwhile 'lily white' states that embraced The One. It appears the average Iowan must still be infatuated with their new-found diversity.
Maybe they are a microcosm of America, at least of heartland America in the age of political correctness; it remains to be seen whether they or the country at large will learn from experience, or continue to embrace delusion.
Labels: Demographics, Diversity, Multicultists, Propaganda