I Know This Will Sound Weird, BUT I Think That THIS is Actually For the GOOD!

Sarinya Srisakul

No, NOT the racist sentiments expressed by FF Sarinya Srisakul (“These white boys crying and complaining over this because their white privilege is being messed with. Trying living a life being racially profiled!!!!”), for in that regard, FF Srisakul comes off very much like an old time segregationist, in her support for race/gender preferences (http://nypost.com/2015/06/28/uproar-over-fdny-activists-white-boy-privilege-rant/).

I also don't think the calls for her being fired over "violating the FDNY's social media policy" are NOT at all "GOOD," either.

Such policies are not only harmful to the general discourse, but they tend to be abusive and worse still, unevenly applied. In my view, they should be scrapped altogether, in favor of a single standard (applied the SAME way to ALL) that ONLY those posts that rise to the level of a criminal offense (direct threats, slander, online bullying, etc.) are to be subjected to Departmental review AND, of course, criminal prosecution.

What IS "GOOD," in my view, is that comments like these show that bigotry and intolerance exist on all sides.

I don't merely "think," I KNOW that ridding this country of the segregated standards that various "disparate impact" rulings have brought about is every bit as much a Civil Rights issue as desegregating our public schools & public facilities were and marriage equality is. Those who boldly crow about such segregated standards and voice support for this modern day "Jim Crow" are on the wrong side of history...and the wrong side of Civil Rights.

I support free speech, both my own and that of Ms. Srisakul. The response to bigoted views like hers SHOULD NOT be censorship and punishment, but instead education and outreach. Bigots have to learn that their views aren't merely unpopular, they are immoral and wrong.

But firing such people is NOT the way to teach any such lessons. In fact, such draconian responses only (1) make martyrs out of actual bigots, often making "bad guys," look like "the good guys" and (2) they generate more resentments and create a fertile ground on which more bigotry is fit to grow.

People NEED to talk more...and engage more and challenge more.

"Too Me He Didn't Do No Wrong...He Just Shot a Cop"

Stephanie King (defender of Cop Shooter, Najee Harmon)

(SEE the 1:30 mark of this tape; http://www.wisn.com/news/wisn-12-news-speaks-to-friend-of-najee-harmon/33719528)

THESE are the enemies of society that some public officials like to pretend are "part of the fabric our society." Violent felons and their apologists aren't "part of the fabric of our society," they are pavement...they are fodder. There is no constructive roll such people can play in a society. They have absolutely nothing to offer...except mayhem and madness.

They are NOT "victims of society," we, as a society, are victims of THEM!

Again, freedom ISN'T allowing the poor and dysfunctional to "live as they please," that is "license." In every case LICENSE is the enemy of LIBERTY. The individualism this country was founded on only provides "as much FREEDOM as one's productive efforts can afford."

Those who "don't see it that way," also don't tend to see work/productivity as a basic human mandate. In fact, too many see work as "wage slavery." That's a problem, because it makes that much needed quid pro quo, all that more difficult to enact.

Just as surely as Turkey's Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan is right that, “The term “moderate Islam” is ugly and offensive — Islam is Islam,” there is also ONLY socialism. The one leader who came the closest to making the failed ideology of socialism work was Adolph Hitler, a true socialist, who is infamous for saying, “We are socialists, we are enemies of today’s capitalistic economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak, with its unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility and performance, and we are determined to destroy this system under all conditions.” Those are absolutely disgusting sentiments that no civilized person would subscribe to today.

There is, for better, or for worse, NO economic system in which people are NOT valued according to the value that their productive and/or creative efforts produce.

Progressivism is Corporatism...and Corporatism, like it or not, CAN WORK, whereas the Command Economy CAN’T!

Sure, it is NOT as dynamic and creative as the free market, but it is not nearly as unstable either.

The sad thing is that America’s educational system is so poor and its media dominated by English majors, who not don’t understand math, the foundation of logic. In fact, it’s not just that they don’t like, nor understand math, most of them were deathly afraid of math in College!

Sadly, since virtually EVERY social problem comes down to some very complex quadratic equations (those equations with multiple variables on either side, like “Given that 4X X 17y = 16a + 3b find the values of a, b, x and y,” that aversion to math becomes a pretty big handicap.

As a result, they don’t understand the ideologies they themselves traffic in.

Many seem unaware that Adolph Hitler said much the SAME thing about socialism that Turkey’s Prime Minister said about Islam; "We are socialists, we are enemies of today's capitalistic economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak, with its unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility and performance, and we are all determined to destroy this system under all conditions" (Adolph Hitler, Speech of May 1, 1927)

Nor do they seem to get the fact that "Fascism" was originally a Marxist coinage. Marxists borrowed the name of Mussolini's Italian Party, the Fascisti (Mussolini headed Italy’s Socialist Party before forging the Fascisti Party), and applied it to Hitler's Nazis, in an attempt to gloss over the fact that the Nazis, like Marxism's standard-bearers, the Soviet Communists, were revolutionary socialists. In fact, "Nazi" was (most annoyingly) shorthand for the National SOCIALIST German Workers' Party. European Marxists successfully put over the idea that Nazism was the brutal, decadent last gasp of "capitalism." 

In truth, there is really ONLY one essential difference between the Nazi and Communist ideologies: Their responses to social class. Stalin preached class war and supported and encouraged class consciousness, whereas Hitler wanted to abolish social classes altogether and root out all class-consciousness. Both leaders, as socialists, saw class inequality as a problem but their solutions differed radically.

As proof, everyone, by now, seems to know that Josef Goebbels made a film called The Titanic, most of those in our own media and academia don’t seem to have any idea WHY the Nazis would make a film of the Titanic's fatal voyage in 1912! The reasons behind that film are largely ignored because the film blames the sinking of the Titanic on GREEDY CAPITALISTS, both in the UK and the USA, “who’d wanted to set a "speed record" for a cruise-ship traveling from England to NYC, thinking this would increase profits and the value of the company's stock.”

The fact that the film was made in 1943, the dying days of the Reich, proves that the Nazis were anti-capitalist right to the end, not just during their early days.

Worse yet, they don’t even understand their own history. Most are blithely unaware that it was the Republican, Teddy Roosevelt who founded the first “Progressive Party” (The Bull Moose Party) and ran for President as the 1^st Progressive, or how Herbert Hoover (a Republican) became this nation’s first Progressive President and how that Progressive movement was led by international bankers (Warburg, Morgan, Schiff, Baruch, the Rothschilds). These disgusting people profiteered of wars, engineered recessions and depressions.

Hell, most of those in our media don’t even know the name, Louis McFadden, a Republican Congressman who brought impeachment charges against fellow Republican, President Herbert Hoover and conspiracy charges against the Board of the Federal Reserve back in 1933.

Richard M. Nixon, an avowed Corporatist and close associate of American Nazis, Prescott Bush (Republican) and William Averell Harriman (Democrat), both directors of the Union Bank Company (UBC) and Brown Brothers Harriman, BOTH companies charged under the “Trading With the Enemy Act” during WW II for their dealings with Nazi banker Fritz Thyssen, Hitler’s personal banker (http://www.theguardian.com/world/2004/sep/25/usa.secondworldwar

) completed the long desired unification of the two major American political Parties under the Corporatist/Progressive standard. Nixon’s “Southern Strategy” was designed to chase Conservative ethnic Catholics OUT of the Democratic Party, so that Party could become the Progressive standard-bearer, while the Republican Party, managed by its Corporatist/Progressive “Moderate”/”Country Club Republicans” (like Nixon, “We are ALL Keynesians now”) could play an ongoing game of Kabuki theater (the Corporate Democrats and a very pro-Democratic media ganging up on Republicans, as the Progressive Republicans take credit in “fighting the good fight”) as both Parties move the nation’s policies in an ever more socialist and authoritarian direction.

What’s sadly pathetic is watching dups in the media singing a song they don’t understand (supporting a new segregation – the segregated standards of “Affirmative Action,” ignoring, even denying the wide disparities in black/white violent crime rates and the staggering amount of black-on-Asian and black-on-white violence), apparently believing that they’re somehow “in the club,” when they are merely only useful idiots for the time being, easily swept away when the time comes.

Look hard at Stephanie King. That’s the face of the new “Brown Shirts,” the vanguard of something akin to a “Red Army” here in the USA.

In January of 1918, right after the Bolshevik Revolution, Russia was thrown into Civil War between the White Army (a large Volunteer Army organized by General Lavr Kornilov, consisting of a variety of groups, representing various political views over a wide spectrum from the Cadets (soldiers who wanted to continue the war with the Central Powers), landowners who lost land, factory owners whose properties where nationalized, devout Russian Orthodox Church members who were against the government’s atheism and royalists who sought the restoration of the monarchy. All those groups banned together seeking an end to the Soviet regime for their own purposes.

In 1918, the Soviet government formed via conscription, the Red Army of Workers and Peasants.

Lenin quickly demobilized the old Russian Army and appointed Leon Trotsky, who held the position of Commissar of War, as head of the newly formed Red Army in March of 1918. The Red Army was established rather quickly in response to the formation of the White Army, however, by the end of the Civil war the Red Army had over 5 million men.

The Red Army defeated the White Army and went on to torture and exterminate millions of Russian supporters, often simultaneously hanging people and setting them on fire, forming “human icicles” by stripping people naked, wetting them down and leaving them tied to trees in the sub-zero temperatures.

THAT is the history of Soviet Socialism

Many of the SAME ethnic and class hatreds seem to be playing out here today.

A Portrait of Our Dysfunction

Dylann Roof

A portrait of Dylann Roof is emerging of a marose loner, with few friends, who'd dropped out of H.S. in the 9th grade, couldn't hold a job and descended into a cocoon of bitter hatred that some use to make themselves feel better about poorly lived, or even non-lived lives. (http://www.latimes.com/…/la-na-charleston-shooter-profile-2…)

A few commenters have noted that this is precisely the path that many young schizophrenics follow as they move through their teens, while most of the national media engages in its bizarre, yet habitual exhibitionism, it's perverse compulsion with an auto-eroticism over a 19th Century racial model - black victims and white oppressors. An exhibitionism made even more perverse by the fact that it is promulgated by overwhelmingly Left-of-Center WHITE newsrooms and corporate boards.

There are thousands of dysfunctional people like Dylann Roof from ALL backgrounds in our country today. BUT once they've "detonated," it's already far too late for anything other than a belated and always unfulfilling punishment.

Those who know such people always seem to respond with shocked surprise that this "creepy," "kind of weird guy" finally "went off."

Mental health and law enforcement professionals note that "There's nothing we can do to intervene before such a person either commits a crime, OR "acts out" (often, one in the same).

We've seen this kind of thing numerous times in big cities, often on a much smaller scale, those, almost always mentally ill people pushing others in front of oncoming trains and other mentally defective people who occasionally wreak havoc on the streets.

Jim Boulware (the father of Dallas Police HQ attacker, James Boulware) recently asked, “Where can a white man go for help?” That only shows how ubiquitous the victimization game really is. EVERYONE in America wants to be "the victim" now-a-days.

FACT is, there is no such help for ANYONE in America today. We are loathe to intervene, because we see it as "interfering," with a person's right to freedom of choice. The chronically poor/unproductive and dysfunctional can't deal effectively with freedom of choice, if they could, they wouldn't be dysfunctional.

Deinstitutionalization was both an overreaction and a mistake to the overcrowding and poor conditions well documented in America's mental institutions in the 1970s.

Some people NEED some assistance, intervention/interference BEFORE they spin out of control. The problem isn't one of "eccentricity," or "weirdness," as such things are wholly subjective, BUT of DYSFUNCTION.

Those who cannot (will not) finish school, who cannot (will not) hold a job and who erratically relate to others, if at all, are DYSFUNCTIONAL, not just "eccentric," or "strange."

Dysfunctional people may be harmless for extended periods of time and may not be violent until, or unless a fuse is lit by some fixation on a perverse ideology; white or black supremacy, political Islam, racial or religious hatreds, etc. The problem is that dysfunctional people are often drawn to such movements and the more extreme, the greater the apparent attraction.

The idea that, "There's nothing we can do UNTIL such a person snaps," is absolutely absurd. There have to be strategies in place designed to assist (if possible) dysfunctional people BEFORE they are otherwise "assisted" by some extremist ideology.

For one thing, dysfunctional people harm society merely by their dysfunction. Work/productivity is the price (rent) we all owe for living. Many of these people might be able to contribute to society if they had the proper guidance and direction, others probably need various degrees of institutionalization and we shouldn't wait until the only option for that is prison.

We've done a very poor job of setting up any kind of quid pro quo for those who are chronically dependent, let alone the chronically dysfunctional. Our programs SHOULD be designed to help such people get off such programs and back into work and productive lives, and assisting the dysfunctional to become productive, but instead most of our "social welfare programs" are dependency programs that only inculcate further dependency. There's little incentive to get such people back onto productive tracks.

Until we begin taking serious preemptive measures to assist those who've gone off the rails early in life, we're going to continue to see these kinds of sporadic, albeit horrific mass killings.

Freedom ISN'T allowing the poor and dysfunctional to "live as they please," that is "license." In every case LICENSE is the enemy of LIBERTY. The individualism this country was founded on only provides "as much FREEDOM as one's productive efforts can afford."

Those who "don't see it that way," also don't tend to see work/productivity as a basic human mandate. In fact, too many see work as "wage slavery." That's a problem, because it makes that much needed quid pro quo, all that more difficult to enact.

More's the pity.

Media Inspired Mass Murder?

Dylann Roof





Last night (Wednesday, June 17th, 2015), around 9:05 PM, a lone gunman (Dylann Storm Roof) walked into the Emanuel AME Church in North Charleston, SC and shot 10 people directly after a Bible study session, reportedly leaving one woman as a "witness." So far, 9 of the people shot have died from their wounds (http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2015/06/18/ame-church-shooting-police-have-identified-a-specific-suspect-surveillance-video-and-cctv-captures/).

While ultimately, the primary responsibility for any crime belongs the perpetrator alone, it's hard not to see the inspiration for this kind of violence in media outlets like the utterly race-obsessed CNN and MSNBC.

Yesterday, CNN's Alisyn Camerota discussed Rachel Dolezal's "trans-racialism" with the professional racial raconteur, Charles Blow, along with one of the most odious racial bigots of our time, Tim Wise (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J4pIBN2m70U)!

Sadly, this is standard fare for networks that truck in a false racial violence narrative.

America's national media vigorously defended Trayvon Martin, who'd clearly attacked the wrong guy (a troubled, Hispanic "wannabe cop" and local "Neighborhood Watch Captain"), as though, somehow, in some parralel universe, an individual has the "right" to physically assault someone they perceive to be following them.

Then they even more vigorously defended Michael Brown, about whom it was later proven that he attacked a police officer, was shot in the hand (inside that officer's squad car, while struggling over that cop's gun), then shot again as he charged that Officer (Darren Wilson).

That same national media then gives a forum to overt racial (anti-white) bigots like Tim Wise.

There is a constant drumbeat for a dangerously false narrative, to wit, that the bulk of the inter-racial violence extant today is white-on-black, when in FACT, it is exactly the reverse!

Recently, the Washington Post intoned, "America’s swimming pools have a long, sad, racist history. They’ve long been contested spaces where we express prejudices that otherwise remain unspoken.” (http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2015/06/black_mob_violence_in_swimming_pools_a_long_history.html), the history of swimming pool violence is very, VERY different!

WHY does it take a reported like Colin Flaherty to chronicle the accurate history of inter-racial violence, when the pundits at ALL these major media outlets already KNOW that history?! (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_uZF-hCUE1M).

The painful truth is that white-on-black violence is exceedingly rare, while the reverse, just as is black-on-Asian and black-on-Hispanic, is not very rare at all. Since 1976, African-Americans (12% of the U.S. population) have been responsible for over 50% of all homicides in the nation. Today, homicide is the leading cause of death for black males between the ages of 16 and 36. That is NOT the case for any other group.

While the ultimate responsibility for these 9 murders (6 women and 3 men) rests with the killer, Dylann Roof, it's more than disingenuous for national media outlets to express anything like consternation over such events that their own warped racial narrative has helped inspire.

WHY???

Dylann Roof

WHY?

That's the question I always have when the likes of Dylann Roof, Jared Loughner and James Holmes are taken in alive.

WHY?

It always seems these lowlife mutts surrender meekly to police after their rampages.

Now, I can understand that the police may not be 100% certain they have the right guy, BUT since these guys are so intent on killing, they should have the guts to fire upon those who can and will fire back.

But they never seem to do that.

Maddeningly, there always inevitably follows thousands of pages of psychoanalysis as to why some scumbag...acted like a scumbag. A complete and utter waste of time.

Worse yet, are those who'd blame an inanimate object, like a gun, for the actions of a psychopath.

Someone who shoots in self defense deserves a medal! The store owner or homeowner who kills an intruder is a hero, just as much as the lowlife who shoots & kills in the commission of a crime, is a scumbag. How hard is that to understand?

Guns are NOT the problem, dysfunctional people are. My understanding ias that Dylann Roof was already a felon (drug possession and other crimes) BEFORE this attack. Not only should he have been barred from purchasing a firearm, anyone who gifted him one, or otherwise helped him get one, committed a serious crime in doing that.

Who cares what demons infected Dylann Roof? Who cares WHY he killed all those people?

The focus SHOULD be on punishing Roof, NOT "figuring him out."

And jail isn't an appropriate punishment. In a more sensible society, Dylann Roof would face death by however many bullets he fired into those people that night.

But he has no fear of that happening here. No, here he'll get "treatment" & protective custody...and probably cake and ice cream and free cable TV.

It's a real shame, in every way, that he was taken in alive.

Rachel Dolezal, the Poster Child for the Bullying “Victim”

Rachel Dorezal

There’s something I’ve viscerally disliked about Rachel Dolezal from the start and that aversion has only grown as more and more information has come out over her sordid “back story.” (http://www.politico.com/…/rachel-dolezal-no-biological-proo…)

Over the past half century we’ve witnessed a mad rush to the highly valued and widely preferred “victim’s status.” That gold rush to victim’s status is behind the increasing balkanization of American society. In its name, race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation all become currencies, worse still, they’ve become a weapon which the allegedly “oppressed” are able to wield against their alleged “oppressors.”

Oddly enough, there are NO “oppressors,” and there aren’t any actual “victims” around today - no former slaves, and women of working age today, have grown up, NOT in an age when women have had to fight to have a chance to get into some fields, but in an age when females have been preferred. White women have historically been the biggest beneficiaries of affirmative action’s preferences, primarily because too few blacks have been able to meet even the minimum standards to take advantage of those preferences, which is why such preferences haven’t helped many low-income blacks at all, instead going to the scions of African-American physicians and attorneys and white women.

Likewise, individuals never initiated the discriminations of the past, government did. Private businesses and industry historically fought against such government policies. The Abolitioonist Movement was led primarily by northern whites, who fought unsuccessfully with an intransigent government.

So, in effect, the SAME straight white males who once initiated segregation, Jim Crow laws, barred women from vioting and anti-sodomy statutes are also the SAME straight white males who ended all those things.

Still, that hasn’t stopped the professionally aggrieved from seeking advantage in any way they can.

On that score, Rachel Dolezal is a true champ.

By all accounts Ms. Dolezal grew up in a very comfortable home amidst a very socially liberal family in the Pacific Northwest.

Her parents later adopted four African-American children and somewhere along the line, young Rachel decided that claiming a different racial classification might well enhance her “victimhood.” Instead of merely being just another plain vanilla (no pun intended) female, she could, with a few minor “enhancements,” become a coveted “two-for.”

But before, she fully developed her “trans-racial” act, she took Howard University to court for...(you probably guessed it)...discrimination. To be specific, she took the historically black College to court for discriminating against a pregnant, white woman.

Apparently, as far back as 2002 Rachel Dolezal had seen the benefit in claiming multiple victim’s roles to bully others.

She lost that court case, but that apparently only emboldened her own personal “victim’s status” crusade.

In recent interviews, Ms. Dolezal appears to have convinced herself that no matter how much of a bully she is toward others, it is SHE, who is the “real victim.” With that personal worldview, the NAACP, a professional grievance entity, had to be a perfect fit for a fellow professionally aggrieved “victim.”

Organizations like the NAACP and the national Action Network use the poorest and most ignorant urban blacks as cannon fodder for their own gain. None of the well-connected beneficiaries seem to have any problem allowing scores of young, urban blacks to get arrested and often injured (or worse) to boot, in violently resisting arrest, for their own personal gain.

They KNOW that none of those marchers they promise to pay $10 to $15 per hour are going to get any of the jobs they attempt to wrangle out of the companies they shake down, those go to their well-connected and generally better educated friends. Theirs amounts to a shell game, pointing at the poor inner city teen, while wrangling a 2nd or 3rd (consulting) position for a well-off and well-connected attorney or other staffer who’s worked for the entity.

Yes, the “victim’s status” game has long been a scam and worse than that, it’s allowed the weak, the incompetent, the less competitive and less productive to bully stronger, more competent, more productive people by cashing in on their claimed “victim’s status” with the help of our sympathetic courts.

ALL of that has had a disastrous impact on America’s economy over the past few decades and it’s something that must stop, as it has the seeds of its own destruction sewn into the very fabric of its design.

Just how much of a bully has Rachel Dolezal been? She apparently, according to her parents, made up sexual abuse claims against her own biological brother (Joshua Dolezal) in order to bolster her claim to adopt one of her adopted African-American brothers as her "son." (http://www.ijreview.com/…/346321-nothing-wrong-with-this-…/…) In 2013, Joshua was charged with four felony counts of sex abuse of a minor. The incidents, according to an affidavit made public, happened at his parents’ home in Colorado “in 2001 or 2002.” The victim “was 6 or 7 years old,” and Joshua Dolezal was “19 years older.”

The abuse was reported in 2013 and Joshua was arrested in 2014. According to the affidavit, the victim came forward because Joshua has a young daughter who the accuser claims "didn’t want to see victimized." Dolezal will be tried in August.

Mr. and Mrs. Dolezal have alleged that Rachel “orchestrated” the allegations against her brother to legally adopt her adopted black brother Izaiah as her own son. Izaiah lives with Rachel in Spokane and was present along with her biological son from her marriage to Kevin Moore (which ended in 2004).

She also may have falsified death threats to herself!

At the end of February this year, Rachel Dolezal claimed to have received packages containing documents outlining death threats against her. It was reported locally in the Spokane media, as KREM2 shared the story early in March.

As reported by KREM2 on March 10th – “Spokane Police said that this is an ongoing investigation and a top priority, but cannot comment on the case and how long it make take to finish. Members of the Spokane Human Rights Commission want to keep talking about the case until then.

“The people who sent in the package have still not been caught, police are still investigating who they are or what group they belong to.”

The original threats were sent and received in February (reported in early March).

In May the second package arrived, clearly postmarked from Oakland California, and was identified as being the same origin as the February threat.

In a subsequent investigation begun by a Spokane Mayor’s ethics commission, tasked with determining whether Ms. Dolezal violated policy for a city Police Ombudsman’s Commission position last year by lying about race on her application, the taxpayer funds she used to travel have now been subject to review and possible reimbursement.

The first trip Dolezal took on the taxpayer dime as part of her Ombudsman Commission responsibility was a February training session for Risk Management in Law Enforcement. Within those travel documents (receipts for reimbursement and now public record) we find Ms. Dolezal took her first taxpayer funded trip, in February, to visit to OAKLAND CALIFORNIA.

So, now publically available documents now show that Ms. Dolezal was in the same place the original threatening package was mailed from, just shortly before that original package arrived in her NAACP office. Hmmmmm, that seems more than merely curious.
(http://theconservativetreehouse.com/…/rachel-dolezal-visit…/)

Clearly, Ms. Dolezal appears to be a woman with a long and troubled emotional history. Maybe “liberalism”/“progressivism” really IS an emotional disturbance!”

Still, there just might be a silver lining in Rachel Dolezal’s trans-racial narrative. Perhaps there is something to the idea of trans-racialism, something that can be used to the good.

After all, many of our colleges now teach that it’s wrong to even talk in “hetero-normative” terms (assuming everyone has a Mom & Dad, etc.), or “cis-normative” terms (assuming that everyone identifies with the gender that they present), perhaps we could take a very real step toward shutting down the entire ethnic/racial grievance industry by making it taboo to even talk about race and racial oppression as that is “race-normative,” (assuming that everyone identifies with the race that they present)! 

Obviously some people don’t.

There certainly are worse things to ponder.