Saturday, March 31, 2012

Who benefits...?


So, I'm reading this over at Brock's place and it makes me think... (scary, I know)

Why is the media keeping the Trayvon Martin case alive for so long? There has been no obvious miscarriage of justice. The media and the race baiters are keeping it alive for their own selfish reasons.

There have been no charges filed, no arrest, and no trial. There is a reason for that, at this point in time. The evidence doesn't point to any wrongdoing. Will an impartial investigation lead to charges against Zimmerman, or will it conclude that there was no crime committed under the laws of the state of Florida? Now that Holder and the DOJ are involved, can there be an impartial investigation, or will a preplanned outcome prevail?

Will there be an investigation, trial, and, if found guilty, punishment, for the major media outlets that "modified" the recordings of the 911 call to fit their need? I think it's been pretty well proven that that occurred :) It's helping keep the fire burning.

There are a lot of threats being tossed about. Idiots like Al Sharpton, JJJr., Louis Farrakhan, Maxine Waters, Spike Lee, NBPP, and Oprah Winfrey (Notice that all of these people are black millionaires. What do you suppose would happen if a white person acted and spoke as incite-fully as these folks have?) are demanding that George Zimmerman be arrested, tried, convicted, and put to death. If the law won't do it, they will. They want their pound of flesh, whether it is deserved or not, and they will do anything to get it. Of course, they won't do it themselves. They will run their mouths until someone in "their" community does it for them. The outcome is the same. They are just as guilty as the guy who pulls the trigger, tosses the brick, or wields the knife.

The escalation of the rhetoric from the black "leaders" can only lead to one outcome. The inciting of violence. I wish I could say that this falls under the Law of Unintended Consequences, but it doesn't. They know exactly what they are doing. They can safely assume that if they continue with their hateful commentary that it will lead to racial violence. Probably on a large scale. Whom will that benefit? :)

The only option they give is to arrest, try, and convict George Zimmerman. It doesn't matter whether he is guilty or not. There doesn't even need to be any further investigation. They want to dispense with all the formalities and get to the execution. The retribution. The revenge.

Are their motives altruistic? Hardly. They are all self promoters. I don't think that anyone can argue that. They are all well versed in self-promotion. It has made all of them rich and powerful. Well, perhaps not powerful, but influential. What they are doing now by demanding "justice for Trayvon" is attempting to increase their street cred. That's all. If things get ugly they will sit back and say "y'all shoulda listened". They'll wash their hands of their involvement. They are untouchable. As untouchable as the politicians and bankers who have brought this country to the brink of financial disaster. These people can do or say whatever they want, without fear of consequences. I wonder why that is?

It seems that it all comes back to racism. It benefits them to keep racism alive. It makes them rich. What else can one believe after watching and listening to these rich black people?

They don't want you to know who rounded up their black brothers and sisters in Africa and sold them to the slave traders all those years ago. They don't want you to know that soooo many more of their brothers and sisters were sold into slavery to be shipped to Europe and South America than were ever brought to this country. They'd like you to believe that slavery was unique to the United States and that white Americans caused slavery. They want you to believe that white Americans of two and three centuries ago were evil and that white Americans are still evil today. They don't want you to realize that slavery in the United States ended when the War Between The States ended, almost 150 years ago. They keep racism alive by demanding special treatment for blacks in every aspect of life because their ancestor's ancestors sold their fellow blacks into slavery. This all occured between 7 and 15 generations ago. Slavery ended in this country 7 generations ago! Wrap your mind around that. They are promoting racism and strife and are actively preventing normal human discourse amongst the people of all races in this country. We can never get to a state of racial equality in this country as long as the race baiters continue to keep racism alive. Who does this benefit? :)

They promote racism and the blame the racism that they create on "Whitey". Pretty neat trick, if you can get away with it.

Why is it that blacks who have "white" friends, blacks who live in "white" neighborhoods, and blacks who have made the effort to educate themselves and make a good life for themselves are seen as outcasts. They are seen as traitors to their race. Tell me why?

Wouldn't the world be better off if, instead of sowing the seeds of hate and racial division, the race baiters spent their time and energy teaching their followers that there is a set of behavioral rules that must be followed to survive on your own and to achieve success in this world? If the race baiters would teach their followers that everything given to you comes with a price? Personally, I don't think that the race baiters care about these things. I think they care about getting richer and more influential. I think they like the power and I think that the people that they are keeping in chains are an easy target for them.


What does the media gain from all of this? They get ringside seats to the big show. They get to choose whom to interview from the sidelines to get the message that they want to convey out to the people. They get to sell advertising between scenes of death and mayhem. They will make lots and lots of money. They are the whores to the political class. That's another story for another time.

What? You thought that they reported only the truth and only for the good of the people? That there is nothing in it for them other than the satisfaction of sharing the truth? That they are motivated by some altruistic ideal? Kinda like politicians?

I'm currently reading "Injustice: Exposing The Racial Agenda Of The obama Justice Department" by J. Christian Adams. Mr. Adams was an attorney in the Voting Rights section of the obama Justice Department.

Let me quote a few lines from the Introduction of this book:

"For much of his life, Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. carried around something peculiar. While most people carry cash, family photos, and credit cards in their wallets, Holder revealed to a reporter in 1996 that he keeps with him an old clipping of a quote from Harlem preacher Reverend Samuel D. Proctor. Holder put the clipping in his wallet in 1971, when he was studying history at Columbia University, and kept it in wallet after wallet over the ensuing decades.

What were Proctor's words that Holder found so compelling?

Blackness is another issue entirely apart from class in America. No matter how affluent, educated and mobile (a black person) becomes, his race defines him more particularly than anything else. Black people have a common cause that requires attending to, and this cause does not allow for the rigid class separation that is the luxury of American whites. There is a sense that every black man is as far from liberation as the weakest one if his weakness is attributable to racial injustice.

When asked to explain the passage, Holder replied, "It really says that ... I am not the tall U.S. Attorney, I am not the thin United States Attorney, I am the black United States attorney. And he was saying that no matter how successful you are, there's a common cause that bonds the black United States attorney with the black criminal or the black doctor or the black homeless person."

Has anyone ever asked Holder what exactly is the "common cause" that binds the black attorney general and the black criminal? More important, what should the black attorney general do about this common cause? Should the black criminal feel empathy for the black attorney general, or more likely, do the favors flow in one direction?

Holder's explanation of Proctor's quote offers some key insights into our attorney general's worldview. First, being "more particular" than anything else, skin color limits and defines Americans-in other words, race comes first for Holder. Second, despite Americans' widespread belief in trans-racial principles such as individual liberty and equal protection, blacks are expected to show solidarity with other blacks. And third, black law enforcement officers are expected to show this solidarity with their racial compatriots, including black criminals."

You can read more of the Introduction over at

And then there is barack obama who believes the Critical Race Theory teachings of his professor, the late Dr. Derrick Bell. Critical Race Theory teaches that all of the problems befalling blacks are the fault of, and attributable to, the white man. No personal responsibility, no individual accountability.

Read more on Dr. Bell and CRT here.

Here are obama's feelings on The Constitution from a 2001 NPR interview and repeated almost verbatim during a Barbara Walters interview in October of 2008:

"If you look at the victories and failures of the civil rights movement and its litigation strategy in the court. I think where it succeeded was to invest formal rights in previously dispossessed people, so that now I would have the right to vote. I would now be able to sit at the lunch counter and order as long as I could pay for it I’d be o.k. But, the Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth, and of more basic issues such as political and economic justice in society. To that extent, as radical as I think people try to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn’t that radical. It didn’t break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the founding fathers in the Constitution, at least as its been interpreted and Warren Court interpreted in the same way, that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties. Says what the states can’t do to you. Says what the Federal government can’t do to you, but doesn’t say what the Federal government or State government must do on your behalf, and that hasn’t shifted and one of the, I think, tragedies of the civil rights movement was, um, because the civil rights movement became so court focused I think there was a tendency to lose track of the political and community organizing and activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalition of powers through which you bring about redistributive change. In some ways we still suffer from that."

Anyway... The Trayvon thing is a distraction.

You may want to stop by and wish Ken and Miss Lisa the best on the happy occasion of their marriage.

Link here.

No comments:

Post a Comment