jonolan on Have A Bloody Sunday: “Yep! One of my favorites too. And, it’s apparently a thing now. There’s bars/restaurants doing the whole Bloody Mary meal…” May 19, 09:34 on Asian Beauty: “That's good. More of us – and, by that, I mean all of us – need to do so. I…” Mar 28, 13:04
on Asian Beauty: “I am glad to do my part. Let us thrust ever onward towards freedom for the women of China!” Mar 28, 11:11
Nope! That’s Racist And An Example Of White Privilege
The cartoon above is a new addition to the annals of failure. Only someone blessed with White Privilege would ever consider it to be other than inherently racist…because it’s White.
Tags: America | Blacks | Cartoons | Fail | Humor | Political Correctness | Prejudice | Racial Politics | Racism | Sarcasm | Society | White Privilege | Whites
Th Gods forfend that you should ever speak out against Islam and its Muslims. You will be instantly branded as an ignorant, intolerant, bigoted Islamaphobe and reminded stridently and harshly that no all Muslims are Jihadis and/or terrorists.
Islam’s apologists are actually correct in their claims that the majority of Muslim are not violent jihadis and/or terrorists. While the vast and overwhelming majority of terrorism and theocratic violence in modern world is carried out by Muslims, the majority of Muslims are not taking part in carrying it out. Islam and its Muslims are not monolithic; they have layers.
The Layers Of Islam and Muslims
Islam and its Muslims are not monolithic; they have layers as does any sect or ideology. Indeed, Muslims run the gambit from violent extremists to largely uninvolved, quasi-secular individuals.
At the core of the problem that is Islam is its innermost circle of Muslims. These are the small but powerful minority of violent jihadis such as the Taliban, ISIS, Al-Qaeda, Boko Haram, and other groups, and the “lone wolves” that are to be found on every single continent except Antarctica.
The next and significantly larger circle of Islam is the political Islamists who forsake taking direct, violent actions themselves in favor of suborning the political and legal processes the advance the cause of Islam. The OIC, CAIR, and MPAC are example of such groups that use lawfare and paper terrorism to attack others in the name of Islam instead of guns and bombs.
Then there is the circle of Islam in which the Muslims don’t care enough about the political aspects of Islam to lend material and comfort to either of the two inner circles, but who practice many activities and espouse many ideas that are generally found reprehensible and atavistic by the peoples of the Civilized World.
And, lastly, on the periphery of Islam, we have the largely uninvolved and, at least, functionally assimilated fringe elements of Muslims. In many ways they are essentially equatable to the “fallen away” or “Sundays and Holidays” Christians. They’re not such “moderate Muslims” as Muslims who are moderate-to-lackadaisical in their religious practices and views.
It the duty of all right-thinking men and women of the Civilized World reject the binary argument of the Muslims and their enablers and apologists that that are merely the rare jihadis and terrorist and the “good” Muslims. It is also our duty to reject and condemn those who make such arguments.
It is true that not all Muslims need to be dealt with using high levels of armed force. That doesn’t by any means, however, that most of them do not need to be dealt with in some manner.
Tags: Bigotry | CAIR | Caliphate | Islam | Islamists | Islamophobia | Jihad | Lawfare | Muslims | Paper Terrorism | Politics | Prejudice | Religion | Terrorism
There’s one thing aside from arrogance, lack of propriety, and pathological mendacity that the American people can always trust Obama to do and do well – use race- or classed-based fear, hatred, and envy to stir up the Democrats’ key constituencies. The weight of the history of the boy’s efforts in these arenas cannot and should not be ignored by the American people, who are the ones targeted for reprisals by Obama.
And, of course he can find fecund ground for his screeds, being wise enough to stick to- and tailor his hate-speech to easily manipulated demographics. As an example, I present excepts of Obama’s recent remarks to the Congressional Black Caucus.
During the course of Obama’s speech his “took on” the grave issue of Ferguson and what it was indicative of…in a manner, of course, that set very well with the thugs-in-suits that make up the CBC.
Firstly, Obama tacitly excused the rioting and looting by the Blacks in Ferguson, MO. He made their feral response to the situation to be a possibly sad but definitely worthwhile thing since it sensationalized the mistrust between Blacks and the Police.
Now, I won’t comment on the investigation. I know that Michael’s family is here tonight. I know that nothing any of us can say can ease the grief of losing a child so soon. But the anger and the emotion that followed his death awakened our nation once again to the reality that people in this room have long understood, which is, in too many communities around the country, a gulf of mistrust exists between local residents and law enforcement.
Of course, this was expected and the only way that Obama could mention the Ferguson race riots while standing in front of the CBC. Hence, it could almost be excused since condemning the CBC’s constituencies for engaging in the “time honored” Black pursuit of rioting and looting would have been foolish. Nor is this a new rhetorical position for the boy.
What was equally expected but far worse was Obama’s misplacing of that distrust between Blacks and law enforcement and the blame for such pervasive and endemic distrust.
Too many young men of color feel targeted by law enforcement, guilty of walking while black, or driving while black, judged by stereotypes that fuel fear and resentment and hopelessness. We know that, statistically, in everything from enforcing drug policy to applying the death penalty to pulling people over, there are significant racial disparities. That’s just the statistics. One recent poll showed that the majority of Americans think the criminal justice system doesn’t treat people of all races equally. Think about that. That’s not just blacks, not just Latinos or Asians or Native Americans saying things may not be unfair. That’s most Americans.
And that has a corrosive effect — not just on the black community; it has a corrosive effect on America. It harms the communities that need law enforcement the most. It makes folks who are victimized by crime and need strong policing reluctant to go to the police because they may not trust them. And the worst part of it is it scars the hearts of our children. It scars the hearts of the white kids who grow unnecessarily fearful of somebody who doesn’t look like them. It stains the heart of black children who feel as if no matter what he does, he will always be under suspicion. That is not the society we want. It’s not the society that our children deserve. Whether you’re black or white, you don’t want that for America.
How about the mistrust the “Black community” sows in police officers who have to patrol or respond to those hoods? What Obama ignores, willfully or through cultural blindness, is that every single time a law enforcement officer enters the hood, he or she is entering what amounts to a foreign and enemy land. Effectively, they’re “in country” and forced by basic survival instincts to behave as such.
Tags: America | Blacks | CBC | Crime | Ferguson | Ghetto Thugs | Insurrection | Law | Mistrust | Obama | Police | Politics | Prejudice | Race Baiting | Racial Activism | Racial Politics | Racism | Riots | Violence | Whites
US Supreme Court Justice is rarely right about things, hence why her opinions are based upon perceived or hoped for outcomes rather than the law. She can, however, be right about the fact from time to time. A case in point being her tirade during an interview with the The National Law Journal. She was and is right about this.
“What’s amazing is how things have changed,” Ginsburg said, recalling the landmark 1971 decision of Griggs v. Duke Power Co., in which the Supreme Court unanimously held that employer policies that look neutral on paper can still constitute discrimination if they disproportionately harm minorities in practice. “It was a very influential decision and it was picked up in England. That’s where the court was heading in the ’70s.”
— Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg
And, to our nation’s shame, that was exactly where the court was heading in the ’70s. It was heading at a headlong pace towards enabling special race-based privileges for non-Whites and forcing everyone to make race as the overriding factor in all decisions due to “disparate impact.”
What most aside from Blacktivists don’t know is that the employer policy being lambasted in Griggs v. Duke Power Co. was Duke Power’s requirement that employees in more demanding positions had to either have a high school diploma or scores on standardized IQ tests equal to those of the average high school graduate. As Blacks have a long-standing history, which hasn’t changed to this day, of graduating from high school far less often than Whites, this was considered by the Burger Court to be both discriminatory and a violation of Blacks’ civil rights.
And following along with that High Court ruling and creation of the “disparate impact” framework is exactly the path to Hell that America was taking until the Roberts Court finally started to make inroads against this race-based legal framework.
So, as she so often is, Ginsburg has her facts in order but draws the wrong conclusion. Hardly shocking since she’s SCOTUS justice in the first place only due to Affirmative Action.
Tags: Affirmative Action | America | Blacks | Civil Rights | Ginsburg | History | Law | Politics | Prejudice | Racial Activism | Racial Politics | US Supreme Court
I love living in New York but I freely admit that there’s a lot of things in NYC that are not so great to see. This is especially true of Times Square if one is un-thrilled with in-your-face mercantilism and marketing. This is what makes CAMERA’s billboard, placed in Times Square just outside the offices of the New York Times‘ newsroom, such a great joy to behold.
Not Surprising At All
And the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America (CAMERA) is 100% correct. It neither surprising that hate-filled Muslims that make up the jihadist terrorist group, Hamas attack Israel with rockets not that the Lamestream Media, exemplified by the New York Times, attacks Israel with their pens. Jihad is jihad – whether it’s the honestly violent Jihad as-sayf (jihad of the sword) of the Muslim terrorists or the more cowardly Jihad bi-al-Lisan (jihad of the tongue) and Jihad bi-al-Qalam (jihad of the pen) of America’s ever-antisemitic MSM.
How could it be surprising when the Lamestream media and the Liberals and Progressives they pander to are nothing but the other side of the coin of the Muslims’ genocidal jihad? Hamas wouldn’t exist if these anti-Semites didn’t consistently support them. Hamas certainly wouldn’t be using their own children – supposed noncombatants – as human shields if the MSM wasn’t eager to sensationalize the deaths of the children and blame Israel, and Israel alone, for their deaths.
Tags: America | Antisemitism | CAMERA | Gaza | Hamas | Islam | Israel | Jews | Jihad | Judaism | Liberals | Media Bias | Muslims | New York | NY Times | NYC | Palestine | Prejudice | Progressives | Terrorism | Terrorists
