Thoughts on America — Thanksgiving 2014 (During the Ferguson riots)
The posts below are some of the better ones I’ve seen. I feel sorry for the poor and the Blacks trapped on the Government plantation by liberal policies. Long ago and far away my mother used to be a Welfare Director in one of the NE towns — it didn’t used to be that way, but the Great Society turned the system over to a mindless bureaucracy and destroyed Black Families. Others have recognized this. Allen West’s book has an excellent section on this, but now it is politically incorrect and “racist” (West is a Black American, of course) for anyone to dare mention this.
Guardian of the Republic: An American Ronin’s Journey to Faith, Family and Freedom
A Black youth assassinated: Was Murdered Ferguson Man a Grand Jury Witness?DeAndre Joshua was shot in the back of the head, and his body was set on fire. Unexplained death prompts speculation about retribution killing.
by Paul Joseph Watson | November 26, 2014
Questions are swirling over the unexplained murder of DeAndre Joshua, found dead in his car on Tuesday morning, with some speculating that the 20-year-old may have been the victim of a retribution killing for testifying in front of the grand jury in the Michael Brown shooting case. Joshua was found dead inside a parked car near Ferguson’s Canfield Green Apartments around 9 a.m. Tuesday, just two blocks from where Brown was gunned down by Officer Darren Wilson.
According to one resident, four individuals were overheard discussing plans to kill somebody on Monday night. The New York Daily News reports that Joshua’s family is, “positive his death is tied to the demonstrations over a grand jury’s decision not to indict Michael Brown’s killer.”
Joshua was described as a “good kid” who was not into drugs and had a steady job.
“DeAndre Joshua, 20, fits the social profile of an eye-witness who gave a police/FBI statement and testified before the Grand Jury in the Mike Brown shooting case,” writes the Conservative Treehouse blog. “He was an employed black male, with no history of drug use or illicit behavior. He was also a friend of Dorian Johnson who is currently under protection.”
A Facebook post by Johnson, who was with Michael Brown at the time of the shooting, appears to confirm that the two knew each other. The blog also claims that many witnesses who gave testimony to the grand jury which confirmed Officer Wilson’s version of events “were threatened by the local Canfield Greens community.” This is confirmed by police reports (page 20) which include interviews with residents such as one female eyewitness who said she was apprehensive in talking to detectives “for fear of retaliation.”
“While officials would not say if Joshua was in fact, a witness to the shooting death of Michael Brown, nor if he actually provided testimony to the grand jury which ultimately cleared Officer Darren Wilson of any wrongdoing in the shooting, his murder does point to a retribution-type killing,” reports UFP News.
In a separate incident linked to unrest in Ferguson, two FBI agents were shot after they responded to a situation where a person had been barricaded inside a home. FBI agents were sent to Ferguson in advance of the grand jury decision in part to “assist with threats to federal employees.” Was Joshua the victim of a retribution-style killing for giving testimony which absolved Officer Darren Wilson of murder? The case remains unexplained, but the fact that someone living a stone’s throw away from where Brown was killed, in addition to being a friend of Dorian Johnson, being the only fatality after two nights of violence, suggests that Joshua may not merely have been the victim of a random act.
Facebook @ https://www.facebook.com/paul.j.watson.71
FOLLOW Paul Joseph Watson @ https://twitter.com/PrisonPlanet
The “Big Mike” incident – Trayvon 2.0. “If Obama had a son….”
Posted on Amazon Nov 26, 2014 11:24:34
O’Reilly raised the issue of the “Disintegration of the African American Family.” He makes a lot of good points about that.
Daniel Henninger in today’s Wall St Journal takes another angle on Ferguson while noting as cannot helped but be noticed the tremendous irony of Ferguson happening on the 50th Anniversary of Lyndon Johnson’s War on Poverty–right down to the day Johnson signed his opening shot of that misbegotten War on August 20, 1964:
50 years after the Civil Rights Act of 1964, a Ferguson doesn’t need to happen.
“It has been 50 years since Congress passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Across that half century, the condition of inner-city black life in America has consumed immeasurable amounts of the nation’s public and private spending, litigation, academic study, cultural output and opinion. And yet everything about Ferguson is familiar.
A poor neighborhood has erupted over a police killing, protesters are in the streets, civil-rights leaders are everywhere, local businesses have been looted and cameramen are recording the most familiar image of all-young black men in a state of rage. Eventually Ferguson will subside as a daily news story, and then life in this small town in the middle of the country will return to being what it was.
We will leave it to others to plumb the riddles of whether racism and injustice create the Fergusons of America. A question more open to the possibility of an answer is: Why don’t more young guys in places like Ferguson have a job to occupy their days?
The short answer is, they don’t work because there is no work. And anyway, who would hire them? President Barack Obama explained all this in February when he announced the “My Brother’s Keeper” Initiative.
“As a black student,” Mr. Obama said, “you are far less likely than a white student to be able to read proficiently by the time you are in fourth grade. By the time you reach high school, you’re far more likely to have been suspended or expelled.” And the future? “Fewer young black and Latino men participate in the labor force compared to young white men. And all of this translates into higher unemployment rates and poverty rates as adults.” All indisputable.
The goal of “My Brother’s Keeper,” Mr. Obama said, is to find out “what works,” and then build on what works.
But we know what works. The build-out is simply waiting for a head contractor to get the job done.
The article also noted the massive shortfall in educational preparedness: “Just 5% of African-American students meet the ACT’s college readiness benchmark in all four subject areas: English, reading, math and science.”
Connect the dots: What younger black men need is a decent job and the education necessary to get and hold that job. Absent that, normal life is impossible, for them or for their neighborhoods.
The post-recession growth rate for the first five years of the Obama presidency was below 2%, and joblessness for young black men is unprecedented. Something, obviously, isn’t working.
Good growth is half of what works. Without a functional education, holding a job, or improving on the one you’ve got, is nearly impossible. Ferguson’s school system, the Washington Post’s visiting reporters noted Tuesday, “is crumbling.”
The decline of inner-city public schools is the greatest, most bitterly ironic social tragedy in the 50 years since passage of the liberating civil-rights acts. But what works here is no longer an unsolvable mystery. It is the alternatives that emerged to the defunct public system-charters schools and voucher-supported parochial schools. Over the past 20 years, these options, born in desperation, have forced their way into the schools mix. Freed of politicized, sludge-like central bureaucracies, they’ve proven they can teach kids and send them into the workforce.
Economic growth is nonpartisan. But inner-city public education is totally partisan. Democratic politicians made a Faustian bargain with the teachers unions, and the souls carried away have been the black children in those doomed schools.
What America’s Fergusons need – -from L.A. to Detroit to New York — is a president, and a party, obsessed with growth and messianic about giving a kid what he needs to hold the job that growth provides. Maybe by the 100th anniversary of the Civil Rights Act.”
Daniel Henninger–Wall St Journal; August 21, 2014
No jobs to work. Who would hire them? 5% ready for college. 50 years of plowing TRILLIONS of dollars into bricks, mortar and teachers’ unions. Crumbling inner city schools? Souls carried away?
Like O’Reilly, Henninger fails to address the fact that what he and we see right in front of our faces and what we can all describe adequately–after all our noses are being rubbed in it — is all BY DESIGN.
Ferguson is the end product of what Sarah Palin calls “felled” Socialist Policies. 50 years of “felled” Socialist Policies aimed at destroying the Family, thereby rendering children incapable of succeeding in school, and in the process stripping them of the cultural, moral and spiritual tools that a man or a woman needs to function in Judeo-Christian Western Civilization.
The economy — the jobs thing — the “New Normal” of De-Growth–is also the result of deliberate Marxist planning.
The economy has been strangled by 50 years of Macro Prudential Policies of Big Nanny Welfare State that has left us with the highest corporate tax rate in all the Developed World, Corporations rushing to “Invert” themselves into foreign entities, a devastated, fake, fraudulent capital markets that are no longer “free” and no longer function to fuel a free capitalist economy where wages and prices are determined by human beings freely interacting for mutual benefit.
A fake prosperity for a few elites made possible by direct Government and Federal Reserve intervention into the equity and credit markets to produce the “illusion” of a sustained never ending bull market that will never be allowed to correct itself. A Political Economy where winners and losers are determined by access to Washington’s corrupt politicians. An ever growing cascade of rules and regulations at all levels of Government that make it practically impossible for entrepreneurs to start a business or take a risk.
We made it profitable for the manufacturers to skip the country and make profits in all the jungles of the “Emerging Economy”.
Henninger is right. There are no jobs for Ferguson’s young, illiterate, fatherless men who look to crime, vice, drugs, the Penal System and the U.S. Federal Government for their sustenance and well being. As will we all–especially our children– sooner or later and for exactly the same reasons plaguing the unemployed hopeless in Ferguson.
It’s not enough for the O’Reillys and the Henningers and the FOX analysts, and the rest of us to simply look at the wounded and the dead of the War on Poverty strewn all about the Ferguson battlefield, the Detroit Battlefield, the Chicago Battlefield and all the other traumatic places destroyed in the War on Poverty.
It’s not enough to say there are no jobs. The Schools stink. The criminals are running loose in the Streets. It’s not safe in the neighborhoods. It’s not enough to cry “Behold!”
We have to ask the question: Why?
The problem is we can’t handle the Truth. We can’t handle the answer to the question. It would require us ALL to do something about it.
Better to blame it on some racist cops. We can fire them.
We need a program. A Federal Program. We need a budget. We need a Director and a Deputy Director. An Assistant Deputy Director. An Associate Assistant Deputy Director. And some contractors. Lots of contractors.
The beat goes on. Another generation of fatherless children stripped of discipline, structure, a chance to learn and the love of Family and God doomed to scream out a rage of frustration and hopelessness that nobody will listen to because we can’t handle the Truth.
But they will be exploited by the Alinskyites. You can bet your bottom dollar on that. Agitated, polarized and manipulated to go vote against the racist Devil responsible for all their problems.
And so it goes. Where will it end?
OBAMA’S WAR ON COPS, by John Nantz
Conflict, agitation, and aggression are the Obama administration’s stock-in-trade. It is the thug life costumed in a tailored suit. This boorish behavior from the White House shouldn’t come as a surprise; during the 2008 election campaign, Obama incited his saucer-eyed fans to bully anyone who would dare to disagree with his policies by “[arguing] with them” and by “[getting] in their face.”
Obama’s political life subsists on class and race conflict. Race is the Obama administration’s unified field theory. It is the prism through which his race-hustling administration views every societal interaction. For Obama, this is extremely convenient, since he’s America’s first half black president, race is a tailor made catalyst for him and he eagerly feeds the mob their nihilist creed, “I hate; therefore, I am.” It would be a hilarious irony if it were not so tragic.
Michael Brown and Eric Garner are the latest manufactured martyrs in Obama’s theatre of class struggle. First on Obama’s list of protagonists are Cops. Law enforcement is always the target of revolutionary and counterculture movements, since law enforcement is charged with keeping the peace and peace is the mortal enemy of the Bolshevist. When Obama says “change” he really means revolution. And, he will employ any politically viable means necessary to achieve his well known objective of fundamental transformation.
History is only a manifestation of Obama’s racial dialectic in which American history is reduced to the absurd characterizations of oppressive colonial racists and imperialist depredation. Of course, it’s all a lie, but since when did truth matter to the mob or to Obama? Barack Hussein Obama is a creature of power and truth stands as an immovable object in the path of his seemingly irresistible and all consuming force.
So, when the president meets with community and law enforcement “leadership” to discuss the incident in Ferguson, he is engaging not in a quest for truth or for honest solutions, but rather is advancing an agenda. Obama only needs to appear to be involved in bringing about resolution when he is, in fact, agitating for aggression.
Obama’s entire community oriented plan is based on the presupposition that law enforcement is the problem. The criminality of Michael Brown is the three hundred pound gorilla in the room that Sharpton, Holder, and Obama refuse to acknowledge. They feign ignorance because sustaining the rage of black America fuels their machinery of power, influence, and greed. U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder has gone so far as to compare law enforcement officers with an “occupying force.” This kind of rhetoric only serves to stoke the infernal furnaces of class animosity and ensures Obama’s beatification as a social justice savior.
The President’s silly little summit on Monday, December 1st produced the desired effect. He appeared to be doing something while propagating a list of inanities. The Obama brain trust thinks that burdening law enforcement officers with body cameras represents a step forward. As a response to Ferguson, it’s completely asinine. First, if Officer Daren Wilson had been wearing a body camera it would not have deterred Michael Brown, who was so high that he perpetrated his attack on officer Wilson in broad daylight in front of dozens of witnesses. Second, any audio or video of the incident from a body camera would have done nothing to prevent the rioting, vandalism, and theft perpetrated by the inflamed mob. In fact, race-hustlers like Al Sharpton agitated and incited for protest irrespective of the grand jury’s decision. All the evidence presented to the grand jury was released to the public almost immediately following the disclosure of the decision, a veritable avalanche of exculpatory evidence, far more significant than a video of the incident. This was and continues to be completely ignored by racist elements in the black community.
Obama’s pseudo-summit also blames racial tensions on law enforcement’s “militarization.” Again, with reference to Ferguson, this has no application. Officer Wilson was in a standard patrol car and wearing the uniform common to police departments and sheriff’s offices around the country. Officer Wilson carried a semiautomatic Sig Sauer pistol chambered for the.40 caliber cartridge, standard in the law enforcement community. No “militarization” there.
Perhaps Officer Wilson’s badge was deemed to be provocative by Brown and inflamed his homicidal passions? The word “militarization” is really just a pavlovian trigger meant to send libertarians into inchoate, anarchist rants and prompting racially confused black americans into autonomic spasms of “Hands up don’t shoot” or “I can’t breathe.”
Obama’s think tank, turned septic tank, issued a slurry of statements concluding that trust was at issue between law enforcement, generally, and the communities they serve. Trust is hardly enhanced when this nation’s leaders choose to lionize the memory of a teenage, pot smoking, robber and thug; a would-be homicidal maniac who attempted to perpetrate a capital murder, while demonizing the lawful and appropriate use of force by a law enforcement officer in the performance of his duty. Trust is not enhanced by compelling officers to wear body cameras to ostensibly prevent them from routinely trampling on the civil rights of black citizens. Nor is trust promoted by describing law enforcement officers as militarized goons tossing hand grenades like candy at a 4th of July parade.
Cops are the good guys. They’re the guys in the white hats. They’re the men and women who you call when you’re too afraid to see what goes bump in the night. The men and women of local, state, and federal law enforcement stand in the gap every day and every night thwarting the local convenience store robber and the international terrorist alike. These are the same people in the Norman Rockwell paintings, the same people who stop and offer assistance when you’re stranded on the side of the road, and the same people who find your lost kids at the mall. We’ve seen what a major city looks like without the presence of the thin blue line. New Orleans sank into bestial anarchy after Hurricane Katrina incapacitated the New Orleans Police Department. It was a literal Thunderdome, complete with roving and ravaging bands of rapacious criminals. The images broadcast on television hardly did justice to the magnitude of human depravity. And, for nothing more than cheap political gain, for power, for filthy lucre Obama, Sharpton, Jackson, and Holder besmirch the honor of a noble profession and of noble men and women.
Obama and his minions hope to make scapegoats out of cops when the real and much harder issue in Ferguson concerns the character of black america, with the epidemic of single parent homes, and with the glorification of thug culture in music, art, and movies. Ferguson is about the failure of Barack Obama and massive unemployment among young black Americans. Ferguson is about Holder’s cowardice and refusal to identify Brown’s criminality as the proximate cause of his own death. And, Ferguson is about the avarice of Al Sharpton and Jessie Jackson who always seem to show up just in time to collect a heavy purse of blood stained coins.
I have a relative that is a city police officer in a large metropolitan city. He and another squad officer were responding to a reported shooting. The other officer recognized the place as one he had been at earlier that day because of an earlier complaint. The place was dark and as such they approached it very carefully. They had their light protective gear on. Someone began firing on them. They both fired back. Both officers fired a total of six shots. They called for SWAT back up.
When SWAT entered the house they found the man in the entry room floor. He had crawled back in the house, from the porch, where he had started firing his AK-47, firing on them from in a prone position. He had his AK-47 along with other small arms. The house had shotguns, hand guns, and rifles, all with excess ammunition supplies, behind barricades both up stairs and down. Their protective gear would not have stopped the AK-47 round. The ruse was a set up over several days to lure police to be assassinated.
The review board found that if the two experienced officers had not conducted them selves as skillfully as they had, the department would have had police funerals that next week. The man had been hit just below his eye. The bullet went down through his neck and into his lung. As the police use .223 semi auto rifles and don’t use the AK-47 size round.
That man did not stop to think that police officers are exceptionally well trained line officers, often conditioned in war, and not some emotional nut case that thinks he is John Wayne with a six shooter. A really bad scenario for that fool.
SO… what is the public going to accomplish with their riots,… cause the police to have, untrained inexperienced officers, when there are no longer those with the will put their life on the line for them,…. when nut jobs knock on their front door? People like ex-Senators are not helping this nation solve race problems by making outrageous unreasoned assertions any more than the Power Whining Bleached Blonds on TV (the PWBB crowd).
As you might guess,…. I found your emails and posts interesting.
Is it Time to Disarm the Police?
Dec 8, 2014 by Dr. Gary North —17 Comments
I begin with an insight offered by Professor Carroll Quigley (1910—1977), who taught history to Bill Clinton at Georgetown University. He had such a profound impact on Clinton that Clinton referred to him in his 1992 nomination acceptance speech. Quigley is famous among conservatives for his book, Tragedy and Hope (1966), in which he devoted 20 pages to the connections between Wall Street banking firms and American foreign policy, which has been dominated by the liberal left (pp. 950ff). But Quigley was also an expert in the history of weaponry. One of his books, Weapons Systems and Political Stability: A History, was printed directly from a typewritten manuscript and is known only to a handful of specialists, was a 1,000-page history of weaponry that ended with the Middle Ages. In Tragedy and Hope, he wrote about the relationship between amateur weapons and liberty. By amateur, he meant low cost. He meant, in the pejorative phrase of political statists, Saturday-night specials.
In a period of specialist weapons the minority who have such weapons can usually force the majority who lack them to obey; thus a period of specialist weapons tends to give rise to a period of minority rule and authoritarian government. But a period of amateur weapons is a period in which all men are roughly equal in military power, a majority can compel a minority to yield, and majority rule or even democratic government tends to rise. . . .
But after 1800, guns became cheaper to obtain and easier to use. By 1840 a Colt revolver sold for $27 and a Springfield musket for not much more, and these were about as good weapons as anyone could get at that time. Thus, mass armies of citizens, equipped with these cheap and easily used weapons, began to replace armies of professional soldiers, beginning about 1800 in Europe and even earlier in America. At the same time, democratic government began to replace authoritarian governments (but chiefly in those areas where the cheap new weapons were available and local standards of living were high enough to allow people to obtain them).
According to Quigley, the eighteenth-century’s commitment to popular government was reinforced — indeed, made possible — by price-competitive guns that made the average colonial farmer a threat to a British regular. Paul Revere’s midnight warning, “The regulars are out!” would have had no purpose or effect had it not been that the “minute men” were armed and dangerous.
With this in mind, let me present my thesis.
THE SECOND AMENDMENT IS FAR TOO WEAK
The Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution asserts the right — the legal immunity from interference by the State — of American citizens to keep and bear arms. This means a rifle strapped to my back and a pistol or two strapped to my hip, day or night.
It doesn’t go far enough. It leaves guns in the hands of a subculture that has proven itself too irresponsible to carry them: the police.
If I were called upon to write the constitution for a free country, meaning a country no larger than Iowa, I would require every citizen to be armed, except members of the police. A policeman would have to apply for an on-duty gun permit. He would not be allowed to carry a gun on duty, just like England’s bobbies are not allowed to carry them.
Every child, male and female, beginning no later than age six, would be trained by parents regarding the moral responsibility of every armed citizen to come to the aid of any policeman in trouble. Unarmed people deserve protection.
Children would be also taught that the first person to pull a gun to defend an unarmed policeman or any other unarmed person deserves the lion’s share of the credit. Late-comers would be regarded as barely more than onlookers. This is necessary to offset the “Kitty Genovese phenomenon.” In 1964, this young woman was attacked and murdered in full view of 38 onlookers, in their Queens, New York, neighborhood. Despite her screams for help, no one even bothered to call the police. This is the “who goes first?” problem.
Anyone so foolish as to attack a policeman would be looking down the barrels of, say, a dozen handguns. “Go ahead, punk. Make our day!”
A policeman would gain obedience, like James Stewart in Destry Rides Again, through judicial empowerment. He would not threaten anyone with immediate violence. He would simply say, “Folks, I’ve got a problem here. This person is resisting arrest. Would three of you accompany me to the local station with this individual?”
He would blow his whistle, and a dozen sawed-off shotguns accompanied by people would be there within 60 seconds.
Every member of society would be trained from an early age to honor the law as an adult by being willing to carry a handgun. Everyone would see himself as a defender of the law and a peace-keeper. Guns would be universal. Every criminal would know that the man or woman next to him is armed and dangerous. He would be surrounded at all times by people who see their task as defending themselves and others against the likes of him.
The only person he could trust not to shoot him dead in his tracks for becoming an aggressor would be the policeman on the beat. The aggressor’s place of safety would be custody.
There would be another effect on social life. When every adult is armed, civility increases. In a world of armed Davids, Goliaths would learn to be civil. The words of Owen Wister’s Virginian, “Smile when you say that,” would regain their original meaning.
The doctrine of citizen’s arrest would be inculcated in every child from age six. Then, at the coming of age, every new citizen would take a public vow to uphold the constitution. He or she would then be handed a certificate of citizenship, which would automatically entitle the bearer to carry an automatic. Note: I did not say semi-automatic. . . .
SELF-GOVERNMENT UNDER LAWFUL AUTHORITY
Unarmed police, now fully deserving of protection by gun-bearing citizens, would gain immense respect. They would rule by the force of law, meaning respect for the law, meaning widespread voluntary submission by the citizenry. This is properly called self-government under lawful authority. The policeman’s word would be law. He just wouldn’t be armed.
A criminal would not escape from the scene of the crime by shooting the cop on the beat. He would not get 20 yards from the cop’s body.
Citizens would regard a law enforcement officer as they regard their mothers. They would do what they were told with little more than rolling their eyes. If anyone physically challenged a police officer, he would risk facing a dozen Clint Eastwoods who have been waiting for two decades to get an opportunity to make their day.
To make this system work, the courts would have to enforce strict liability. Injure the wrong person, and (assuming you survive the shoot-out) you must pay double restitution. Kill the wrong person, and you must pay the ultimate restitution: eye for eye, life for life. But no faceless bureaucrat hired by the State would do the act. A group of armed citizens will execute you under the authority of the court. Remember, the police are unarmed.
The fact that citizens in no society think this way is evidence of how well the defenders of State monopoly power have done their work. They want their agents armed and the rest of us unarmed. A free society would reverse this arrangement.
There are those who will reply that my proposal is utopian, that civilians do not have sufficient courage to come to the aid of an unarmed policeman. Furthermore, they will complain, the common man is not sufficiently self-disciplined to live under the rule of law as I have described it. Both objections have validity. I can only respond by pointing out that a society in which its citizens possess neither courage nor self-discipline is not a free society. I am not here proposing a technical reform that will produce a free society. Rather, I am describing why freedom has departed from this nation ever since, for lack of a better date, 1788.
[Gary North is the author of the 31-volume An Economic Commentary on the Bible and scores of other books. He publishes daily at his subscription site GaryNorth.com. This article originally appeared in expanded form as “Disarm the Police,” LewRockwell.com, August 18, 2003.]