0 comment Sunday, October 5, 2014 | admin
After my previous quick post, I thought it would be good for me to try to clarify what I was thinking when I posted it, lest people think I am defending indefensible behavior.
If the incident in question was something I had heard about from someone who was there, someone trustworthy, my reaction would have been that the man who was beaten was stupid to have provoked the trouble, and that he probably was someone who makes bad choices in life all the way around, not someone with whom I would feel a great deal of sympathy. He may in fact, if what is reported in the media is true, be a troublemaker and misfit.
If, however, I had heard about this incident from an acquaintance of opposite political views, or from someone lacking a reputation for veracity, I would take the report with a big grain of salt, and wonder what the real facts were, or where the rest of the story was.
But there are a lot of 'ifs' in the above paragraphs. That's the situation we are in with our lying, biased, left-wing, tale-bearing media. Almost everyone to the right of center realizes that the media do not tell the truth, except by accident. Everything with them is agenda-driven. Everything is politicized and racialized. They have so misused and abused terms like 'racist', 'extremist' and related words that it's a foregone conclusion that the 'extremists' about whom they write are people we would see as sane and rational, people who see through the lies, and who actually identify with their own people, not our enemies.
Then we have the fact that in so many incidents, the charge is made that 'racial slurs' or 'racial epithets' were hurled. This is alleged in most such cases. Is it any wonder that some of us have just stopped believing in these allegations of verbal racial abuse? Truth be told, my default response is disbelief, thanks to the many instances of minorities crying wolf. There have been many 'hate crime' allegations which have proven to be hoaxes and lies. Why should we believe any of them, absent solid proof?
In general when these allegations are made, I prefer to give our folk the benefit of the doubt, until it is clear that the charges are true.
We are told in the article that the White man followed and made threats toward the black man who then beat him. And how many of us have been 'followed' and/or 'threatened' in racial abuse incidents? I have, and such things are shrugged off by authorities -- depending on who the victim is. Some victims are more equal than others.
One more thing that rubbed me the wrong way with this story was the way in which White people are quick to gloat or cheer about what happened. Regardless of the lack of respectability of the man who was beaten, regardless of his unpopular associations, does he not have the same rights as anyone else?
The police alluded to this man as having been questioned in the past about his 'extremist' associations. Do they do this with MS-13 members, or other such people? Or is this kind of thing only of interest to police when the suspect is White?
Did this man 'deserve' a beating? Who decides what is a deserved beating and what is legitimate self-defense, and what is assault? It seems to me that the media and the politically corrected police too often are acting as judges and juries, and our folk (at least as represented by the FReepers) are cheering against their own, right along with the SPLC and their ilk.
Regardless of the merits of this particular incident and the people involved -- about which we know few details -- there is something wrong in the overall trends we see here.
If the incident in question was something I had heard about from someone who was there, someone trustworthy, my reaction would have been that the man who was beaten was stupid to have provoked the trouble, and that he probably was someone who makes bad choices in life all the way around, not someone with whom I would feel a great deal of sympathy. He may in fact, if what is reported in the media is true, be a troublemaker and misfit.
If, however, I had heard about this incident from an acquaintance of opposite political views, or from someone lacking a reputation for veracity, I would take the report with a big grain of salt, and wonder what the real facts were, or where the rest of the story was.
But there are a lot of 'ifs' in the above paragraphs. That's the situation we are in with our lying, biased, left-wing, tale-bearing media. Almost everyone to the right of center realizes that the media do not tell the truth, except by accident. Everything with them is agenda-driven. Everything is politicized and racialized. They have so misused and abused terms like 'racist', 'extremist' and related words that it's a foregone conclusion that the 'extremists' about whom they write are people we would see as sane and rational, people who see through the lies, and who actually identify with their own people, not our enemies.
Then we have the fact that in so many incidents, the charge is made that 'racial slurs' or 'racial epithets' were hurled. This is alleged in most such cases. Is it any wonder that some of us have just stopped believing in these allegations of verbal racial abuse? Truth be told, my default response is disbelief, thanks to the many instances of minorities crying wolf. There have been many 'hate crime' allegations which have proven to be hoaxes and lies. Why should we believe any of them, absent solid proof?
In general when these allegations are made, I prefer to give our folk the benefit of the doubt, until it is clear that the charges are true.
We are told in the article that the White man followed and made threats toward the black man who then beat him. And how many of us have been 'followed' and/or 'threatened' in racial abuse incidents? I have, and such things are shrugged off by authorities -- depending on who the victim is. Some victims are more equal than others.
One more thing that rubbed me the wrong way with this story was the way in which White people are quick to gloat or cheer about what happened. Regardless of the lack of respectability of the man who was beaten, regardless of his unpopular associations, does he not have the same rights as anyone else?
The police alluded to this man as having been questioned in the past about his 'extremist' associations. Do they do this with MS-13 members, or other such people? Or is this kind of thing only of interest to police when the suspect is White?
Did this man 'deserve' a beating? Who decides what is a deserved beating and what is legitimate self-defense, and what is assault? It seems to me that the media and the politically corrected police too often are acting as judges and juries, and our folk (at least as represented by the FReepers) are cheering against their own, right along with the SPLC and their ilk.
Regardless of the merits of this particular incident and the people involved -- about which we know few details -- there is something wrong in the overall trends we see here.
Labels: Ethno-Loyalty, Media Dishonesty, Political Correctness