"The ends do not justify the means"

Not sure I agree with everything in Mr. Abdul-Jabar's article about MLK, but this part is spot-on:

He [MLK] would have also been disturbed by the violence and rioting that has occurred during these protests. We must remember that Dr. King’s cause was not just equality for all people, but achieving that equality through nonviolence. The ends do not justify the means; the means and the ends are the same. Violence insults his legacy. To him, anything won through force is not won at all — it is loss. He wanted equality achieved through love because he wanted to win over his enemies, not defeat them. As he said: “Love is the only force capable of transforming an enemy into a friend.” His goal was to cleanse the community, not to cleave it.

Amen to that.

"There is no greatness in murder!"

I saw this before Christmas, and I loved it. It is full of great quotes like "President Obama... play your position," and "Stop attaching your emotions to your job," and "Al Sharpton... stands for nothing at all." It is not safe for work. Lots of bad language. Lots. But also a lot of truth and wisdom.

This Honestly Speaking lady sounds more like MLK here than Sharpton, Jackson and all their ilk.

Cops save black lives

Lee Habeeb argues that cops have a right to be angry at the false witness being born toward them, and I agree. Excerpt:

New York cops are mad at Mayor de Blasio in particular because he failed to mention that 2013 ended with the lowest number of fatal shootings by the police in 40 years in their city. Only eight people died from police gunfire, with a police force of over 30,000. And all of the victims were armed with either a gun or a cutting instrument. But none of those leaders bothered to report these narrative-busting facts — nor did the media.

And no one bothered to mention that New York City is on track in 2014 to have the fewest murders in 50 years. As of the beginning of December, there had been 290. That’s down from 2,200 in the early 1990s. The majority of lives saved were black, because the overwhelming majority of murder victims in the city are black. Do the math. Tens of thousands of black lives have been saved in the past two decades by cops in New York, but Mayor de Blasio couldn’t manage to share that fact in his heartfelt speech.

Cops save black lives. Sensible people see this truth.

I wonder, though, how eager a policeman will be to rush toward 911 calls in some neighborhoods now, knowing that they may face a decision between having either his life or his career ended. Or, will he even feel like patrolling those neighborhoods? Will there be some time in the future when patrolling the worst neighborhoods will be given to the C-average cops? This already is somewhat the case now, or at least there is anecdotal evidence which seem to confirm this. Nobody disputes that some policemen are better or smarter than others, or that some policemen are downright corrupt.

We shouldn't forget that these men know and are fully aware that they may be killed or hurt badly every time they suit up. But we as a nation need to support the police. Sea of Blue is an attempt to counter the lies and support good men (and women) in the police force. If we didn't have company on Saturday I would have gone downtown to add my support.

The war on the police

I've noticed a number of articles by liberals since the double assassination which downplay any type of danger to police from these protestors in New York and Ferguson. Dan Gainor corrects this notion. Excerpt:

The same sentiment spread on Twitter as some were gleeful about the murders. One asked: "Am I the only one happy about this breaking news 2 cops getting shot"? She wasn't. The hashtag #F---12 overflowed with hate for #pigpolice.

Now, many protesters, like White House favorite and MSNBC host Al Sharpton, claim they aren't anti-police, they are pro-justice. 

They lie.

Union organizer Robert Murray was "arraigned on charges of assaulting an officer, resisting arrest, rioting and obstruction" for an attack on two New York police lieutenants during one "justice" protest two weeks ago, according to CBS. Two Bronx public defenders appeared in a rap video with the lyrics, "For Mike Brown and Sean Bell, a cop got to get killed." In Philadelphia, a paramedic posted a photo showing two black men pointing a gun at a police officer and describing police as "our real enemy."

All this acting up and foul rhetoric bespeaks a desire to be at war, to make war on the police. There's a propaganda aspect where anything good the police do goes unreported and every time they screw up the incident gets relentlessly trumpeted. The media are complicity in this. Fortunately it seems like there is an effort on the part of many other media groups, albeit smaller outlets, to report good news about things that policemen do to save lives and protect the citizenry. However, this is only a "hedge" if you will; most people know that police aren't evil, vicious murderers longing for the chance to kill someone.

This movement won't end until it runs out of steam and funding like the Occupy crowd did. I hope it happens soon. Of course it would be great if the people at the top were arrested and jailed, but I'm not hopeful of that.

"I don't know, honestly"

J-Pod puts the Eric Garner case in perspective

Podhoretz calls the decision inexplicable, and I tend to agree with him. Policing strategies and tactics need to change with the landscape. This is a much different case than Ferguson. Excerpt:

What happened to Eric Garner was certainly not deliberate, but rather the result of a series of horrible choices. First, by Garner, to resist, and then by Officer Daniel Pantaleo to immobilize Garner by using a choke-hold, which New York City cops are trained not to use (but which is not in fact illegal). It strikes me as understandable that a grand jury would look at the events and not see something they would call a murder.

But a murder charge was not the only choice open to them, or so we are being told right now. There are gradations of illegality involving the unnecessary death of someone, and it seems likely that (as was the case with the 1994 choke-hold death of Anthony Baez) the federal government will secure some kind of charge now that it has involved itself in this matter.

The real question that is going to be asked, now, is just how aggressive law enforcement can and should be in an era of low crime, which is what we’re in now. If you defang cops, you are inviting a return to trouble. As I wrote last week, “if we send police officers the message that it is safer for their careers and reputations to stand down, stand down they will. We are the ones who will have to reckon with the results.” At the same time, no civilized society can view the tape showing Garner’s desperate pleading and not ask some very difficult questions of itself.

I can see why people would protest this case because Garner's death seems like a completely disproportionate result of his noncompliance. He wasn't trying to kill Pantaleo like Michael Brown was evidently attempting to kill Darren Wilson. And I don't feel bad for Pantaleo who is probably going to lose his job. He made a bad choice, whereas Wilson wasn't even given a choice.

Something I've been thinking of for the last few weeks with regard to the whole Ferguson fiasco, and especially after Michael Medved echoed my thoughts on his show about a week ago, saying something like "Why this case? Why Michael Brown? What is there about this case which has everybody so excited?" My theory is that the race-hustlers like Sharpton and Holder know that in order to achieve their desired level of chaos they need to have the maximum amount of divisiveness and polarization about an incident. A black man who is innocent being killed wouldn't work for the purposes of demonstrating systemic injustice because everybody would agree on the injustice of the event. Obviously disproportionate responses on the part of police would also get more of a unanimous condemnation, thus precluding any type of claims of enduring racism and injustice. My theory is that if you want to cause maximum chaos, pick an incident which divides people along racial, demographic or ideological lines. Then you can easily create the perception that the system is utterly unjust and biased in favor of the rich, the white or those nasty conservative people. One side says "Michael Brown was a criminal thug and Darren Wilson was forced to act in self-defense. Everything else is irrelevant." The other side says "Michael Brown was a young black man and a white cop, Darren Wilson, harassed him for no reason. Everything else is irrelevant." The lines are drawn, time to go to war.

This is only a theory, and doesn't sound particularly strong to me, but I'm not a psychopath like Al Sharpton so I can't mimic his thinking exactly. There is an interesting comment at the end of this piece along the lines of my thinking:

But it is interesting how the Ferguson situation has calloused people like me who would normally be dismayed by the Garner grand jury verdict. Ferguson is a tipping point.

We have to resist the urge to say "OK, you don't like the police, fine. We won't send them to your neighborhoods anymore." That would just punish the silent, innocent majority, and I think it would give CNN and the race-hustlers just what they want: more chaos. This is why I tell people I had to move out of the City of Cleveland. I felt like if I stayed, I might become a racist.

Speak and remove all doubt

I was reviewing this post from August 19, 2014 a little bit, especially looking at the comments. Most of the commenters—other than Chad, Peggy and Benjamin 2.0—look pretty foolish now.

For example, Mike Blackadder appeals to the authority of South Park to make his point.

That Brown would rush Wilson through a stream of gunfire because Wilson was maybe accusing him of committing a crime that he had just committed? It sounds like the South Park 'it's coming right for us' explanation for shooting him down. I'm not saying that I know it didn't happen, just wouldn't bet on it.

Yes; it's best not to bet either way with regards to a straw man scenario which you've concocted. Then we have Jroberts548, the most prolific commenter on the thread, explaining things in terms of unique dumbness

For it to be self-defense, and the cops not to have said anything yet would require the cops in Ferguson to be uniquely dumb. It is a clear case of murder, unless the cops are literally the dumbest cops in America.

...and the fact that the Ferguson Police Department is "just ran by morons".

With each day, the possibility that the killing was justified and the ferguson PD is just ran by morons does seem slightly more plausible.

Finally cmfe—of whose gender I'm not certain since his/her avatar is Bugs Bunny in drag—chimes in with this piece of brilliance:

Yes, by all means, let's get back to business as usual long as we don't have to worry about our own children getting gunned down.

Well, if business as usual for your children is smoking weed, robbing small businesses and attacking cops, then they will most likely get gunned down at some point. Sorry.

And I feel sorry for everyone who commented on the case in a prejudicial manner since they will be taken less seriously now that we have the facts in the case alongside their incredibly bad guesses as to what might have happened.

The centrality of myth for progressive ideology

Andrew McCarthy is spot on in his analysis of the Ferguson narrative believed by everyone on the hard left. How could they not believe that Michael Brown wouldn't hurt a soul and Officer Darren Wilson is a hateful, racist killer? These are articles of faith. Evidence can't disprove articles of faith. Excerpt:

For the American Left, a bedrock myth is that white cops kill black kids. It derives from the overarching myth that casts racism as our indelible national sin. As Heather MacDonald explains, citing exhaustive criminology studies, it flows seamlessly from the quackery that dismisses the disproportionately high incidence of violent crime in African-American communities as an illusion — as the product of police racism and the consequent hyper-targeting of black boys and men, rather than of racial differences in patterns of offending.

Darren Wilson was a white cop and Michael Brown was a black teenager killed in a violent confrontation with Wilson. Therefore, Brown was the victim of a cold-blooded, racially motivated murder, Q.E.D. That is the myth, and it will be served — don’t bother us with the facts.

Another good point:

....Factually, the chatter about “conflicting testimony” falsely implies that all testimony is created equal. In reality, accounts given by anti-Wilson witnesses, where not patently fabricated, tended to be discredited by forensic evidence. The forensics, instead, corroborated the exculpatory testimony — much of which came from African-American witnesses, a fact that undermines the myth and therefore goes largely unnoticed. The grand-jury rules are more permissive than those that govern criminal trials, but prosecutors are still ethically barred from asking the grand jury to rely on testimony they believe is false, inaccurate, or unconvincing.

Emphasis mine. Blacks who are tired of the idiocy of other blacks get the worst treatment. Their voice is ignored whenever they cannot be intimidated.

Help Natalie Dubose get her bakery back!

This lady had her business demolished by the mob looters in Ferguson. Here's a page where you can help her out, or click the picture



I just gave.

People in Ferguson are going to need a lot of cakes, cookies and celebrations to get the taste of wretchedness out of their mouths.

Update: When I posted this around Noon I think the amount contributed was around $89,000.00. Now it is up to $112,000.00! It is an amazing country we live in.

Sentiment should make us angry

After reading Laura Turner's fallacy-ridden sermon yesterday (in which she got fairly well pwned in the comments by many clear thinking people), I needed a palate cleanser.

In the wake of a grand jury’s divisive decision not to charge Ferguson, MO police officer Darren Wilson in the shooting death of unarmed black teenager Michael Brown, a weary American populace told reporters Tuesday that they are not sure if they can take another bullshit speech about healing. “If I have to watch some politician, law enforcement official, or pretty much anyone regurgitate the same meaningless platitudes about setting aside our differences and coming together as a nation, I might just lose it,” said Atlanta resident Samantha Hubbard, echoing the sentiment of hundreds of millions of Americans who are uncertain if they can stomach even a single empty call for respect and civility. “I honestly don’t know if I’m physically capable of listening to another community leader recite the same unbearable garbage about how it’s time for an open and honest dialogue. I swear to God, if I hear even one goddamn person assert there’s more that unites us than divides us, I will immediately blow my brains out.” At press time, the nation was particularly apprehensive at the prospect of a bullshit speech that declared words were not enough.

Yes, I know. It's the Onion. But it proves Sid Caeser's statement about comedy and the truth. It's true that we shouldn't "set aside our differences" because what makes me different than a mindless, violent, unemployed low-life actually makes me a better person. It would be sinful to set aside that which makes me different from these people. The people in the angry lynch mob obviously don't want an open and honest dialogue since they are intent on shouting and burning and they tell and believe lies.

It's true that there should be more that unites us than divides us. But this is not the case, so let's not pretend it is. A close analogy would be a scenario where two people are walking along a high road together for miles, but then one leaves the path for no discernible reason and descends into a dark valley where he becomes lost. Soon the travelers are very far apart. The protestors believe that laws may be set aside on a whim, that the appetite is the master of the intellect and that their narrative trumps the inconvenient reality even when the latter is reinforced by mountains of evidence.

When what we need is the Truth, sentiment should make us angry. It's like being given a bag of Halloween candy when you need a good hot meal. Obama's impotent healing speech after the verdict was about 15 minutes too long at least, and most of his unnecessary rambling sounded like code for "Burn this bitch down".

Ferguson Witness Dorian Johnson Lied

It's OK to lie about what happened at a crime scene because, you know, white people. They're scum; down with 'em! If your lie ends up starting the avalanche whereby your entire town is destroyed... oh well, I guess.

Riots broke out in Missouri this past week in large part based on the eyewitness testimony of Dorian Johnson, who saw his friend Michael Brown shot and killed by local police. According to USA Today, Johnson claims Brown was fleeing and the officer shot him in the back.

According to Johnson, the officer pursued Brown and fired another shot. which struck Brown in the back. He said Brown turned and faced the officer with his hands raised.

However, this testimony contradicts the autopsy report by New York City’s former chief medical examiner, Dr. Michael Baden. Dr. Baden told The New York Times the autopsy found that Brown was struck 6 times — four shots in the right arms and two in the head. The final bullet hit Brown in the top of the head indicating his head was bent forward.

Baden said, “It can be because he’s giving up, or because he’s charging forward at the officer.”

If you watch the entire USA Today video you see that he isn't just lying, but he's crafted an entirely different story about the events than what most likely happened. Did the policeman really use the F word? Doubtful. Also you have to notice the crocodile tears near the end of the clip. I call fake. This Dorian Johnson character absolutely failed his audition.

Juan Williams Inadvertantly Predicted the Attacks on Bill Cosby

Juan Williams wrote this on August 19, 2014, ten days after the Michael Brown incident:

Ten years ago Bill Cosby gave a speech that fits today's racial troubles in Ferguson, Mo. "People getting shot in the back of the head over a piece of poundcake," the now 77-year-old black comedian said at an NAACP event commemorating the 50th anniversary of the Supreme Court's Brown v. Board of Education decision. "And then we all run out and we're outraged—'The cops shouldn't have shot him!' What the hell was he doing with the poundcake in his hand?"

The 18-year-old shot and killed on Aug. 9 by Ferguson police was not caught with poundcake. Michael Brown had shoplifted cigars from a convenience store. On Aug. 15, the police released a video of the theft and the 6-foot-4-inch, nearly 300-pound teen violently shoving, shaking and threatening the store clerk.

Mr. Cosby is not the only black person to ask about the troubling excuses that so many civil-rights leaders are making for criminal behavior. In 1993, Jesse Jackson told organizers in Chicago: "There is nothing more painful to me at this stage in my life than to walk down the street and hear footsteps and start thinking about robbery. Then look around and see somebody white and feel relieved."

Am I crazy to wonder if the impending Ferguson riots and the narrative that the left wants to promote has to do with a number of women suddenly remembering that Bill Cosby raped them?

This is how crazy people on the left, like Amanda Hess, see Bill Cosby.

Cosby’s modern activism takes the form of a conservatism that discounts rap and blames black men for their subjugation. If we see Cosby’s sexual-assault allegations as a relic of the past, it’s partly because we also see Cosby that way.

Now I know you're thinking "Well, Bill Cosby's is not really a conservative." Right, and I'll add that if he really was, he would have been character-assassinated long before now. But my theory is that the time is ripe for the left to destroy him before his now-canceled Netflix special gave him any more press spots where he could continue to contradict the established Ferguson narrative even more than he already has.

By the way, I'm not saying Cosby is innocent at all. But the timing of these revelations tell you everything you need to know about their objective. This media fire-storm has all the markings of a concerted effort to squelch free speech from someone known to make unpopular comments about the problems in the black community.

Ferguson Protest Leader Has Car Stolen During “F*ck the Police” Rally

Too, too funny.

Elizabeth Vega is one of the Ferguson protest leaders. She protested at sports venues and attempted a banner drop. She co-led the St Louis Symphony interruption, was arrested at the pumpkin smashing, yelled at the St Louis Post Dispatch protest, and helped block traffic with her freakshow in Clayton yesterday.

While yelling “F*ck the Police!” apparently her car got stolen.
Do you think she’ll file a police report requesting they help her now?

Her tweets expressing anger that Nixon called a state of emergency in part due to the rising crime and criminal elements associated with the protests are interspersed with others decrying the car theft.

No justice? Well at least you get poetic justice.

It was probably a white person who did this. I mean, most of the pictures on the Grand Theft Auto game are of white people.

Ferguson protestor: "St. Louis is going to burn."

Whoa! I told you these Ferguson protestors aren't going to crawl back under their rocks if Wilson isn't indicted. They are not going to let a crisis go to waste, that's for sure. Conn Carroll from Townhall.com seems to agree with me. Excerpt:

"This is not a black and white thing," Ferguson activist Angela Whitman told CNN after The New York Times story Friday, "this is about what's right and wrong. St. Louis is in trouble, because if this is what Darren Wilson said, and they believe him, St. Louis is going to burn."

Whitman's let it burn attitude seemed to be the prevailing sentiment among Brown supporters this Sunday when they harassed people outside a St. Louis Rams game, holding the American flag upside down, while punching and spitting on passers by.

Will the violence at the next Rams game be worse or better now that it is becoming clearer Wilson will not be indicted? If it does get worse, it is hard to see how more leaks could possibly prevent a full blown riot.

I suppose some commendation should be given for this "leak strategy" which is attempting to let the air out of the anger balloon a little bit at a time. But what if that isn't the way this kind of blind rage works? What if this will just give everyone more time to recruit their old OWS buds from years back for when the big news hits?

People can gripe about how "oh, the authorities mishandled this" all they want but in the end, this is all about an idiot who was so high he thought he could take on an armed policeman.

Feel the love for CNN in Ferguson (Language Warning)

"CNN lied on Occupy Wall Street!"

"Hey! you're all run by Zionists!"



"Shut it down!! Just like we shut down Walmart!"

Wait, what are you guys doing here? I thought you were in Ferguson protesting an innocent man being shot? What's all this about Palestinians and Occupy Wall Street?

When the cop is not convicted or is not even indicted will these clowns "go gentle into that good night"? I don't think so.

I must admit it is sort of gratifying to see a CNN reporter get "mugged by reality" as the saying goes.

Michael Brown's hands were not up

The Daily Caller has the story.

Michael Brown did not have his hands over his head when he was shot by Ferguson, Missouri police officer Darren Wilson, a self-identified eyewitness told the grand jury investigating Brown’s death.

The eyewitness recounted his firsthand observations to the St. Louis Post-Dispatch late Wednesday after speaking to the grand jury this week. The grand jury’s decision about whether or not to indict Wilson is expected in mid-November.

Brown had his arms at his sides during at least one phase of his confrontation with officer Wilson, but he never raised his hands over his head at any point, according to the witness. Brown continued to approach Wilson against police orders and stood about 20 to 25 feet away from the officer when he was fatally shot, the witness said.

But will this keep the protestors from doing that "hands up don't shoot" chant? Probably not. But hopefully it will take the wind out of their lying sails.

Furthering the Police Brutality Narrative

This is a pretty pointless article, and this was the most ridiculous part:

A grand jury, meanwhile, is examining evidence to determine whether Darren Wilson should stand trial for shooting Michael Brown. The grand jury, originally impaneled until this month, has had its term extended to January—a date that not only falls after upcoming elections, but well into the winter, when cold weather might diminish the likelihood of rioting if there is not an indictment. Last week, the Missouri secretary of state’s office announced that more than three thousand people in Ferguson had registered to vote in the aftermath of the shooting. The next day, officials reversed themselves and said that they’d made an error: the actual number was a hundred twenty eight. The revision, in an already tense environment, inspired suspicions that the keepers of the status quo were somehow manipulating the numbers.

Italics mine. A little poking around shows the reason for the initial mistake in the original reported number of 3,287: this number included all name and address changes, marriages plus voters tagged in some kind of recent recount.

The part that cracks me up is the part about the manipulations of the evil "keepers of the status quo". This characterization would make sense if the status quo had under-reported the number and had to correct itself upward. But if their are any suspicions to be taken from the downward correction they would properly be that the agitators are doing the manipulation. And, to my mind, it was probably just a mistake.

However to people determined to create conspiracies and the perception of victimization from an unfortunate event, everything which happens plays into the grand narrative of police brutality and the attempt to cover it up. If there was any violence on the part of Officer Wilson the public has yet to see evidence of it.

Do black people break the law more than white people?

Wait! Don't answer that question out loud. You might get in trouble.

Heather MacDonald asks a bunch of controversial questions which shouldn't be controversial in this article. We're also told that it is a good idea to ask questions, even though they might be rhetorical questions, about problems in our society. Don't you think? Liberals also like to question authority, they usually think "questioning the official statement" is a positive thing. Maybe they're right. I certainly like the questions that MacDonald asks with regard to the official preconceptions which we are told to have about Ferguson. Excerpt:

Example: Ferguson issues fines for traffic violations; 20 percent of its municipal budget comes from such receipts. If people with outstanding fines or summons don’t appear in court, a warrant for their arrest is issued. Conclusion: this is a racist system. The city is deliberately financing its operations on the backs of the black poor. The only reason that blacks are subject to fines and warrants, according to the media, is that they are being hounded by a racist police force. “A mostly white police force has targeted blacks for a disproportionate number of stops and searches,” declared Time on September 1. What is the evidence for such “targeting?” Time provides none. Might blacks be getting traffic fines for the same reason that whites get traffic fines—because they broke the law? The possibility is never contemplated. The most frequently summonsed traffic offense is driving without insurance, according to the New York Times’s “exposé” of Ferguson’s traffic-fine system. Perhaps the Times’s editors would be blasé about being hit by an uninsured driver, but most drivers would be grateful that the insurance requirement is being enforced. Might poor blacks have a higher rate of driving without insurance than other drivers? Not relevant to know, apparently.

The next highest categories of driving infraction are blasting loud music out your car and driving with tinted windows. Attend police-community meetings in poor areas and you will regularly hear complaints about cars with deafening sound systems. Should the police ignore such complaints? Are they ignoring similar complaints in white areas because they want to give whites a pass? Do Ferguson’s white and black drivers blast loud music from their cars at the same rate? We never learn. Tinted windows pose a possibly lethal threat to the police during traffic stops, since they prevent officers from assessing the situation inside the car before approaching. Ignoring this infraction puts officers’ lives at risk. Should the police nevertheless do so? Such is the implication, if doing so would mean fewer fines for black motorists. The New York Times quotes a victim of the racist Ferguson traffic-enforcement system, who was fined for driving without a license. Why was his license suspended—was he driving drunk? Did he hit someone? We will never know. What is the crime rate in the black areas of Ferguson? Also something that the mainstream press is not interested in finding out.

"Do Ferguson’s white and black drivers blast loud music from their cars at the same rate?" If you indignantly say "That's a stupid question," then, well, you've already sort of answered it.

But the most ubiquitous “Ferguson is racist” meme was the most familiar: the police force is too white. Four of Ferguson’s 53 officers are black. This imbalance must be the result of racism and must itself cause racist enforcement activity. How many qualified black applicants to the force applied and were rejected? Not an interesting question, apparently.

But interesting to me and other conservatives. Finding answers to these questions would be real journalism. We might even be able to coin a new term for that: Investigative Journalism. What a concept.

MacDonald's conclusion is chilling: "Whether or not an uncontested account of the incident will ever emerge, it is certain that the media spin on Ferguson itself has been driven by facile and ultimately dangerous preconceptions."