BLACK MEN ARE 15xs TO 30xs TIMES MORE LIKELY TO PERPETRATE VIOLENCE!
WATCH THIS VIDEO!
WATCH THIS VIDEO!
WATCH THIS VIDEO!
WATCH THIS VIDEO!
WATTERS ON FRANK R JAMES' STAGGERING RACISM
Watters: How was this guy not on the FBI's radar?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f6FnVhTxYlk
BLACK LIVES MURDER
Police Chief: Illinois ‘Monster’ Beheads 8-Months Pregnant Ex-Girlfriend
https://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2022/06/black-lives-murder-black-ape-beheads-8.html
1,120 people have been shot this year in Chicago and 282 people have been murdered.
On March 29, 2022, Breitbart News pointed out robberies with a gun were up 44 percent in gun-controlled Los Angeles.
LOS ANGELES - TOP RAT INFESTED CITY OF AMERICA
Rats, Public Defecation And Open Drug Use: Major Western Cities Are Becoming Uninhabitable Hellholes
Tucker Carlson: Biden has made things a lot worse
Why are people leaving California?
LOS ANGELES - TOP RAT INFESTED CITY OF AMERICA
Rats, Public Defecation And Open Drug Use: Major Western Cities Are Becoming Uninhabitable Hellholes
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZRYmPLFs4Hs
VIDEO OF DEMOCRAT-CONTROLLED SANTUARY CITY:
Lost Angeles: City of Homeless
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SJt3xuTPRVU
‘Radicals’ Are Racist Criminals
Driving America towards the abyss.
David Horowitz is founder of the David Horowitz Freedom Center and the author of The Enemy Within - Order it HERE.
This article first appeared in the Daily Wire.
The crisis currently facing our nation is a crisis of faith – faith in the Constitution that has shaped our destiny, faith in the rule of law, and faith in the principle of equality before the law. The root cause of the lawlessness that is consuming our country is the monopoly of the executive power in Washington by a political party that has fallen under the control of the radical Left. This Left describes itself as “progressive,” but is focused on the goal of “re-imagining” American institutions and principles, in other words of dismantling the constitutional order that created the prosperity and freedoms that have shaped this country since its beginnings.
Having been born into this political Left and then rejected it, I have acquired an intimate perspective on its nature, and the threat it poses to the American future, which is grave. I was raised by Communists who always referred to themselves as “progressives,” and were sworn enemies of America and its institutions, as was I. We saw ourselves as warriors for social justice, acting on the “right side” of history.
We could not have been more mistaken. The “moral arc” of history is not “bent towards justice,” as progressives like to say. If it were, the 20th Century would be the most enlightened instead of the scene of the greatest atrocities and oppressions on human record. Worse yet, for this progressive myth, these atrocities and oppressions were perpetrated by progressives in the name of “social justice.”
The practical achievement of the revolutionaries was the dismantling of whole societies, and their reconstruction as national prisons, and slave labor camps. Supported by progressives everywhere, Communists bankrupted whole continents while killing more than 100 million people – in peacetime – in order to realize their radical schemes. Their atrocities and failures continued until the day they saw their progressive future collapse under its own weight. This failure was entirely predictable because as every similar attempt to “re-imagine society” and change it by force has shown, it is simply beyond the power of human beings to create a “just” world.
Forty years ago, a series of tragic events that I have described in my autobiography, “Radical Son,” stopped me in my tracks, and caused me to re-evaluate what I had believed until then. These second thoughts turned me against the cause to which I had been devoted since my youth, and which I now saw as a threat to everything human beings hold dear. Most of my generation of radicals, however, chose to continue on their destructive course. Over the next decades I watched the radical movement I was born into infiltrate and then take control of the Democratic Party and the nation’s cultural institutions, until one of its own, Barack Obama, became President of the United States.
From the moment I joined the conservative Right forty years ago, I was impressed – and also alarmed – by the disparity in political rhetoric used by the two sides fighting this fateful conflict. My radical comrades and I always viewed these battles as episodes in a war conducted by other means – even as our opponents did not. Our rhetoric proclaimed our goals to be “peace,” “equality” and “social justice.” But this was always a deception. We used terms that demonized our opponents as “racists,” and “oppressors” because we believed our goals could only be achieved by vanquishing our opponents and destroying America’s constitutional order.
The Constitution valorized political compromise and was built on the defense of individual rights – most prominently the right to own property. America’s founders regarded property ownership as the basis of individual freedom. As radicals, we regarded property as the root cause of the evils that oppressed us. Consequently, the principles we operated under were not the same as those we gave lip service to in order to win public support.
The Bolshevik revolutionary Leon Trotsky explained our attitude in a famous pamphlet called “Their Morals and Ours.” “Their” morals, he denigrated as bourgeois morals. They were morals based on class values that served the oppressors. One can hear the same sophistry today in the Left’s attacks on meritocracy and standards as “racist,” and in their demands for equal outcomes regardless of whether they are earned or not.
While “their morals” served a ruling class, “our morals” served the people, and therefore social justice. Because we believed these propositions, “our morals” were by default Machiavellian: The end justifies the means.
Trotsky’s pamphlet was, in fact, a desperate attempt to avoid admitting that there was anything amoral or immoral in this cynical outlook. He did so by denying the existence of moral principles, claiming instead that all morality was self-interested and designed to serve a class interest. “Whoever does not care to return to Moses, Christ or Mohammed,” i.e., to accept universal moral standards, Trotsky argued, “must acknowledge that morality is a product of social development; that there is nothing invariable about it; that it serves social interests; that these interests are contradictory; that morality more than any other form of ideology has a class character.”
But this is just an admission that “our” morals were indeed accurately summarized as, “the end justifies the means.” The future we imagined we were creating was so noble that achieving it justified any means to get there, which included the lies that hid our destructive purposes, and the atrocities they led to.
The full import of this belief was brought home to me in the spring of 1975 when our so-called “anti-war movement” forced America out of Indo-China, allowing the North Vietnamese and Cambodian Communists to win. For more than a decade, we had claimed to care about the people of Indo-China, championed their rights to self-determination and condemned the war as a case of American imperialism and American racism oppressing Asian victims.
By the time America withdrew from the conflict and abandoned its Indo-Chinese allies, I already knew that Communism was a monstrous evil. But I remained a supporter of the “anti-war” cause, and of the rights of the Indo-Chinese to self-determination. To defend the commitments I had made, I deluded myself into believing that self-determination meant the Vietnamese and Cambodians should be able to choose even this evil if they wanted. This was so much sophistry because I knew that the Communists would not give them an inch of space in which to breathe free. The end that justified my position was that I believed America was the world’s arch imperialist power and its defeat was an absolute good.
What I was not prepared for was the moral depths to which the movement I had been part of had sunk. These depths were revealed in the events that followed the Communist victory. When America left Cambodia and Vietnam, the Communists proceeded to slaughter between two and three million peasants who were “politically incorrect” and did not welcome their Communist “solutions.” It was the largest genocide since Hitler’s extermination of the Jews. In Cambodia they killed everyone who wore glasses on the grounds that as readers they would transmit the oppressive ideas of the past and obstruct the Communist future. But there was no resistance to these atrocities from the “anti-war” Left.
As the genocidal slaughter proceeded, prominent Leftists like Noam Chomsky provided cover for the Communists’ crimes by denying that the atrocities were taking place. More disturbingly, there was not a single demonstration to protest the slaughter by the activists who claimed to be “anti-war” and to care about the Cambodians and Vietnamese. This silence unmasked the true agendas of the movement I had been part of.
My comrades’ abandonment of the peoples they claimed to defend showed in a definitive manner that the anti-war movement was never “anti-war.” It was anti-American. It wanted America to lose and the Communists to win. Progressives had lied about the nature of their movement and its agendas in order to accomplish their real goal, which was the “fundamental transformation” of America and the creation of a socialist state. I had known this to be the case for many years, but had accepted the lies because they served what I imagined was a noble end. But when the lies led to the embrace of genocide, my eyes were opened to the realization that the movement I had been part of my whole life was evil.
On my way out of the Left, I spent several years re-thinking what I had believed, and trying to understand the nature of the cause that I had served. Perhaps, my most profound and certainly most disturbing conclusion was that revolutionaries were by nature – and of necessity – criminals, who would routinely lie and break laws to achieve their ends. Every radical who believed in a “revolution” or a “re-imagining” of society from the ground up, every progressive who believed in a “fundamental transformation of America” as Barack Obama described his own agenda on the eve of his 2008 election, was a criminal waiting to strike.
America’s Constitution includes methods to amend it, and therefore to reform the American social order when and where changes are needed. In making such changes there are procedures to ensure that these changes represent the will of the American people, and are done lawfully. But revolutionaries do not respect a constitutional order created by rich, white men, many of whom were slaveowners. Radicals believe instead that “social justice” requires them to dismantle the social order, and “due process” along with it. Radicals are not “reformers.” In the name of social justice, they refuse to be bound by the laws and procedures that an unjust and oppressive “ruling class” has created. The end justifies the means.
Before President Obama – a constitutional law professor – decided to break America’s immigration laws and grant 800,000 illegals resident status, he admitted to his fellow Americans on 22 public occasions that he had no constitutional authority to do so – none. Creating such an amnesty by executive order was illegal and unconstitutional. And he knew it. But he did it anyway because to him and his party, violating the fundamental law of the land was justified because the system that had created the law was oppressive and unjust – racist. In committing this crime against the nation he led, Obama was guided by a radical ideology that justified the illegal means as a victory for “social justice.”
As a former radical I understood how high the stakes had become with Obama’s election. Since the Right was defending America’s freedoms while the Left was paying lip-service to patriotic pieties but intending nothing less than the destruction of constitutional order, I also understood that the rhetorical disparity between the two factions posed a grave threat to America’s future.
In fighting this cold war, progressives regularly demonize Republicans as racists, white supremacists, insurrectionists, Nazis and traitors. Republicans respond to these reckless attacks by calling Democrats “liberals” and similarly tepid descriptions. For example, they describe Democrats as “soft on crime.” Democrats are not soft on crime. They are pro-crime: Democrat prosecutors have systematically refused to prosecute violent criminals; Democrat mayors and governors have released tens of thousands of violent criminals from America’s prisons, and abolished cash bail so that criminals are back on the streets immediately after their crimes and arrests; Democrat mayors did nothing to prevent the mass violence orchestrated by Black Lives Matter in 220 cities in the summer of 2020, provided bail for arrested felons, de-funded police forces, and instructed law enforcement to stand down in Democrat-run cities, which allowed “protesters” to loot and burn, and criminal mobs to loot and destroy downtown shopping centers.
Democrats regard the criminal riots that took place in the summer of 2020, as social justice. The riots cost $2 billion in property damage, killed scores of people and eventually thousands as their “De-Fund the Police” campaign triggered a record crime wave in America’s major cities. Democrats regard criminal lawlessness and mayhem as understandable responses to what they perceive as “social injustice” – courts and the law be damned. To them, mass lootings are “reparations,” and individual robberies and thefts a socialist redistribution of wealth.
If you are in a battle of words – which is the nature of political warfare – and you are calling your enemies “liberals,” portraying them as not really understanding the gravity of what they are doing, while they are calling you “white supremacists” and “Nazis,” you are losing the war.
Why are Republicans so self-destructively polite? Why do they fail to see, or to identify their opponents as the criminals they are – or, at least, when they are?
Ever since Donald Trump won the Republican Party’s presidential nomination in 2016, Democrats have conducted a verbal war against white America. This war has been so effective that Gallup polls show that 61% of Democrats think Republicans are white racists. At the same time the Biden administration has made “Equity” a centerpiece of its policies and programs. “Equity” is a weasel word to cover a socialist agenda. The White House defines “Equity” as privileging select racial groups with government largesse on the basis of skin color – a policy that is racist, inequitable, unconstitutional, and illegal.
Even when it is the government doing the redistribution and not street mobs, “social justice” – the policy of equalizing outcomes among politically select groups, regardless of merit – is another name for theft. Redistributing income on the basis of race is not equity, it is racism. Joe Biden is the first overt racist to occupy the White House since Woodrow Wilson – who not coincidently was also a progressive Democrat. Yet Republicans avert their eyes from this anti-American travesty. Why don’t Republicans call Democrats out for their racism?
Over the years I gave a lot of thought to these questions, and eventually I came up with an answer that should have been obvious in the first place. The disparity in rhetorical voltage between the two political parties stems from a fundamental disparity in outlooks, and more importantly in attitudes towards the future. The Left’s obvious goal is a “fundamental transformation” of American society. Such a transformation, as I have already observed, requires a dismantling of the existing social order. To justify this destruction, the Left creates narratives that provide it with ways to condemn and delegitimize the present and its defenders, and justify its criminal agendas.
Today’s Left is driven by a Cultural Marxist ideology, which is itself a product of the transformation of America’s universities and schools into one-party training and recruitment centers for the political Left. A similar colonization of America’s philanthropic institutions and corporate cultures has taken place enabling this ideology to become a conventional wisdom nationally and the strategic outlook of the Democrat Party.
Cultural Marxism, also known as Critical Race Theory, and also encapsulated in the historical travesty called “The 1619 Project,” has led to a narrative in which America is portrayed as a white supremacist, systemically racist nation since its inception. Cultural Marxists regard the Constitution as a white supremacist document written by slaveowners, and therefore not to be respected. Worse, according to The New York Times editors who sponsored the 1619 Project, its purpose is to demonstrate that, “nearly everything that has made America exceptional grew out of slavery.” This disgraceful slander against an entire people is an American version of “The Protocols of the Elders of Zion,” which is still used in many parts of the world to justify a genocide of the Jews.
From this script, it is relatively effortless for progressive activists to lift a single negative incident or atrocity from the complex history of the American Republic and frame an indictment of America’s very existence. The script always leads to the same conclusion: America is a society whose institutions are “systemically racist” and must be first demolished, and then “re-imagined” according to the dictates of “social justice.”
Conservatives approach politics from a diametrically opposed perspective. Unlike progressives, conservatives are not wedded to abstract ideologies that imagine a perfect future and use it to delegitimize an imperfect present. Conservatives seek to conserve the values of a remarkable Constitution, whose principles in actual practice have made America the world’s most prosperous, most tolerant and most free nation, and have inspired her to be a beacon of freedom throughout the world.
One consequence of conservatives’ regard for the proven virtues of the U.S. Constitution and the social order it made possible is the very diffidence conservatives and Republicans exhibit in their political battles with progressives. A primary concern of the American founders was the threat of “factions” whose outlooks and agendas did not encompass the well-being of the whole society but merely their own divisive interests and claims. A main theme of America’s founding documents, therefore, is the importance of compromise. The founders regarded attacks on the spirit of compromise as threats to the social order itself. The demonization of opponents by the Democrat Party is therefore anathema – or should be – to anyone who believes in the wisdom of the constitutional order. In other words, conservatives’ instincts are to willfully tie their hands behind their backs in order to support the well-being of the civic whole.
The Electoral College, to take one important example, is an institution the constitutional framers envisaged as a means of forcing compromise between warring political factions. Election by the College, instead of the popular vote, compels contending parties to compete in states where they don’t have natural majorities, and therefore need to compromise their agendas to win victories in “battleground” states. But radicals who abhor compromise are determined to abolish the Electoral College, justifying its abolition by smearing it as “racist.”
Another target of their anti-compromising zeal are the filibuster and the United States Senate which they denigrate as “undemocratic.” Of course, the Senate is undemocratic but that’s what the founders intended it to be. By giving lower population states equal senatorial power with higher population states, the founders ensured that the more populous states would not overwhelm the less populous ones and establish a “tyranny of the majority.” America is not a democracy; it is a republic, and that’s what the founders created –– and that’s why individual freedoms have been protected, and Americans have prospered.
The federal system and decentralization of power, vital to the freedoms Americans enjoy, are also instruments of compromise, and also abhorred by progressives who have been busily proposing legislation to federalize elections and police forces, and put them in the hands of a single centralized faction. The Democrats’ campaign to pack the Supreme Court and destroy the independence of the judiciary is yet another attempt to dismantle the constitutional system and consolidate power in the hands of a single faction. Their assaults on the First Amendment are equally sinister attempts to establish a one-party state.
Conservatives and Republicans are reluctant to use terms like “criminal” and “racist” and “fascist” to describe Democrats whose policies are criminal, racist and fascist because to do so would threaten the constitutional principle of compromise, on which civil peace and civil freedoms depend. Well and good, but in the current crisis defenders of America need to find a way to develop a stronger rhetoric, along with a more realistic attitude towards the enemy they are facing, if America is to survive at all. As long as conservatives continue to respect and enforce “due process” – which the Democrats have abandoned – there is no danger that they will follow in the destructive path the Democrats have chosen.
The principal weapon progressives have developed to advance their destructive agendas is race. But in responding to their attacks, Republicans – and conservatives generally – have displayed an unsteady hand. For example, Republican leaders like Mitch McConnell (R-KY) have referred to slavery as “America’s original sin,” in an effort to provide a compromising view. And they have often conceded that America had a regrettable racist past, and wrung their hands over it. Well and good, but to leave it at that does a grave injustice to the American reality. For there never was a moment in American history when there was not a white movement calling for the abolition of slavery and racism, and even willing to lay down their lives for it.
To put this history in a more accurate perspective: America didn’t invent slavery, and accounted for less than one percent of the global slave trade. If slavery is anyone’s “original sin” it is Africa’s, where slavery existed for a thousand years before a white man ever set foot there. Virtually, every slave shipped to America was enslaved by black Africans and sold to Americans at auctions. America’s founding fathers – Washington, Jefferson, Madison – deplored the slave system but saw no way to abolish it immediately without a war with England and the South, which they would have lost. Eventually their heirs did fight a war to free the slaves that cost more American – mainly white lives – than all America’s subsequent wars combined. Every black descendant of slaves in America owes his or her freedom to white Americans like Thomas Jefferson, even though Jefferson was a reluctant slaveowner, or to Abraham Lincoln and the 360,000 Union soldiers who gave their lives to free the slaves.
Is there in all history a comparable example of one race making such a sacrifice to free another? I am unaware of one. No American, mindful of their history, should turn their backs on this record, or bury it in silence, or compromise its truth.
When America’s racial past is viewed as a whole, Americans have no need to be ashamed. People who demand reparations for a slavery they never experienced, should sue the Confederacy, which fought to preserve it. They should not sue the United States government which made such enormous sacrifices to do the right thing. And no American patriots should make apologies for an American past that was shaped by lovers of freedom who set a standard for ending slavery not only in America, but also in the Western Hemisphere, and finally on global scale. For more than 60 years following the Emancipation Proclamation, America joined white Christian powers like Britain and France who sent gunboats throughout their empires to end the global slave trade. They were opposed by brown and black potentates who defended the institution and refused to free their human chattel. Black and brown slaveowners still thrive in Africa today.
The fact that these facts have been buried by progressives who control America’s cultural institutions, and who have replaced them with slanders worthy of America’s enemies underscores the enormity of the threat we face. The Democrats are now a national lynch mob. They have spent the last seven years in one attempt after another to destroy a president, whose political signature is “America First,” by libeling him, his supporters and the country they love as “white supremacist” and “systemically racist,” when there is no sound basis for either charge. They have broken precedent, tradition, protocol, and the law, and violated the Constitution to hang Donald Trump and demonize his supporters as “domestic terrorists” and “insurrectionists” – traitors – all in order to advance radical policies that have destroyed America’s borders, triggered record crime waves in American cities, and blown up the best economy in our lifetimes.
To defend our country against these radical destroyers, Americans need to get a firm grip on the facts of their heritage and the realities of their present. In particular they need to understand that America never was a racist nation – even during the brief 20-year period when slavery was legal in the North, and the 76-year period when slavery was legal in the South. Not the alleged “400 years of slavery” as its ignorant and malicious enemies like Al Sharpton maintain.
Slavery in America was an English implant and the extension of an African business. There were 500,000 free blacks in America on the eve of the Civil War. That is inexplicable if America was actually a “white supremacist” nation. The slavery issue only became an issue of racial oppression when Southern slaveowners chose to defend their system in a nation dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal, by arguing that blacks were not. What was distinctly American, however, was the declaration of equality, not the racist defense of slavery by soon to be defeated owners of slaves in the South.
Given the prejudices and bigotries that are endemic to human beings of all races, Americans can be proud of their racial past and its contribution to human freedom. The raw facts are these: Slavery was an inherited system, which Americans abolished in little over a generation. There never was a successful revolt by the slaves themselves. If whites had been as universally racist as Leftists maintain, blacks in America would still be slaves, and not the most prosperous, most privileged and free-est blacks in the world today, including all of black Africa and the West Indies.
Above all, conservative, patriotic Americans need to stop compromising the truth to appease their political enemies who want to destroy them and the country they love.
Report – Man Charged in Robberies After Mom Tips Off Chicago Police: ‘Don’t Mess with Mama’
An 18-year-old man was reportedly charged in a pair of robberies after his mother spotted his face on a bulletin and notified Chicago law enforcement.
Trequan Jackson Young is facing charges of armed robbery, aggravated robbery, and misdemeanor criminal damage to property following three different incidents, CWB Chicago said Thursday.
An image captured on a surveillance camera showed the suspect wearing blue flip-flops, grey pants, and a black and white jacket:
“Don’t mess with mama,” one social media user replied, while another said, “Mama for Mayor.”
The outlet detailed the case:
The first robbery occurred on a Red Line train near 47th Street around 2:26 a.m. on June 6. Prosecutors said a 23-year-old man was riding home when four men, including Young, stood near him and one of the men asked to use his vape cigarette. The victim obliged, but the man refused to return the vape, and the entire group closed in on the victim when he asked for it.
All four offenders began beating the victim in the face and patting him down for valuables, Steven Haamid, an assistant state’s attorney, said. One of the robbers took the victim’s wallet. The group continued to beat the man in the face as they tried to wrestle away his fanny pack, but the man refused to give it up.
Haamid said the victim, who was bleeding from his face, hit the train’s emergency button and went to the conductor for help. While the victim waited on the platform, one of the offenders returned and lunged at him repeatedly with a knife, but the victim evaded the attack and was not stabbed, according to Haamid.
Law enforcement posted surveillance images of the suspects last week. Haamid added that Young was spotted wearing the black and white jacket.
“Young’s mother recognized him and notified the police, according to Haamid,” the CWB Chicago report said.
Meanwhile, Democrat-controlled Chicago, Los Angeles, and New York City were at the forefront of urban residential decline, recent U.S. Census Bureau estimates found, according to Breitbart News.
“[I]nner city crime is a common factor in major cities across America, with the problems besetting Chicago emblematic of how widely spread the problem of violence is,” the outlet said.
Per the CWB Chicago article, Young allegedly took part in another robbery on Saturday and was arrested Tuesday after snatching his girlfriend’s phone. His bail was set at $80,000.
Young had been out on a recognizance bond regarding a misdemeanor weapons charge; however, prosecutors reportedly dropped the charge.
Report: D.A. George Gascón’s Directive Makes L.A. County Pay for Cop Killer’s Funeral
A directive issued by Los Angeles County District Attorney George Gascón in 2020 means the county must pay for the funeral of the suspect who killed two El Monte police officers Tuesday.
The suspect who killed the officers was a gang member who was out on the streets because Los Angeles District Attorney George Gascón’s office presented him with a plea deal that gave him just ten days in jail, instead of three years, on a gun charge.
Moreover, the Los Angeles Times indicated that the suspect was free because of L.A. District Attorney George Gascón’s policy undercutting the state’s “Three Strikes” law.
The Washington Examiner reported that a December 7, 2020, directive issued by Gascón means Los Angeles County will cover the costs of the cop killer’s funeral.
According to the outlet, the directive “funds funerals, burials, and mental health services for ‘individuals killed by police,’ among others.
The suspect who killed the two El Monte officers, Cpl. Michael Paredes and Officer Joseph Santana, was afterward killed by police, which means his funeral is covered by Gascón’s directive.
Former LA County district attorney Steve Cooley told the Examiner, “It is so far from my way of thinking [that] I can’t imagine such a concept. This is beyond disgusting. It insults the memories of the two fallen officers. Shame on Gascón.”
AWR Hawkins is an award-winning Second Amendment columnist for Breitbart News and the writer/curator of Down Range with AWR Hawkins, a weekly newsletter focused on all things Second Amendment, also for Breitbart News. He is the political analyst for Armed American Radio and a Turning Point USA Ambassador. Follow him on Instagram: @awr_hawkins. Reach him at awrhawkins@breitbart.com. You can sign up to get Down Range at breitbart.com/downrange.
'Peace Circles' Instead of Prisons Lead to Shootouts in Chicago
It’ll take a hell of a peace circle to raise the dead.
Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is an investigative journalist and writer focusing on the radical Left and Islamic terrorism.
1,120 people have been shot this year in Chicago and 282 people have been murdered. Yesterday, four people were shot and killed in four hours in just another Wednesday.
Good thing the city has “peace circles”.
Police defunders have been tasked with coming up with “restorative justice” alternatives to the three P’s, police, prosecutors, and prisons, that ask criminals to apologize to their victims.
That’s the principle of the “peace circle” in which the thug meets with his victim, says “sorry” and then leaves a free man to shoot, stab, or kill.
Chicago's pro-crime politicians eagerly embraced "peace circles". There are peace circles in schools and a whole lot of "trained facilitators" have hung up their shingles. While pro-crime activists claim that peace circles come from Indian culture, they’re actually one of the stupidly disastrous ideas promoted by Howard Zehr, a white leftist who went to a black college on a minority scholarship, and helped inflict the concept of “restrorative justice” on the country.
The Circuit Court of Cook County has a salaried Restorative Justice Community Court Peace Circle Keeper. And dangerous criminals keep being diverted from prison to peace circles.
That's what happened when cops caught Ojani Cruz with a gun during a traffic stop. Prosecutors wanted him locked up, but one judge let him out on his own recognizance while another sent him to have his arrest record expunged at a peace circle.
"They say, 'Peace, peace', when there is no peace," Jeremiah prophesied.
A month after being enrolled in the peace circle treatment, Cruz opened fire on a couple sitting in a minivan. He "circled the vehicle" and "kept firing until he ran out of bullets". When it was all over, a 20-year-old woman was shot in the back and left paralyzed from the waist down.
Prosecutors have charged Cruz with first degree murder and the judge denied bail, but it's too little too late. Had the justice system been allowed to do its job, Cruz would have been locked up. But instead Chicago’s restorative justice and peace circles claimed another victim.
“We cannot prosecute our way out of the kinds of crimes," Cook County Chief Judge Timothy Evans falsely claimed. “People who hurt people have generally been hurt themselves.”
Evans, a Chicago alderman for nearly two decades, has spent another disastrous three decades on the Cook County bench, and even Democrat officials have had enough.
Mayor Lori Lightfoot blasted Evans for "making Chicago neighborhoods less safe.”
“There is no dispute that people charged with murder and other crimes of violence are out in communities with zero supervision, both adults and juveniles."
Klevontaye White was let loose with nothing more than an ankle monitor after 15 counts of aggravated sex assault with a firearm, he cut off his bracelet and then engaged in a shootout with police. The police didn’t bring their peace pipes. They shot back and won the fight.
And Newsweek put Klevontaye on its list of “black people killed by police”.
7-year-old Jaslyn Adams was shot and killed at a McDonald's by a group of thugs, one of whom had been out with an ankle monitor despite being accused of robbery, manufacturing/delivery of cocaine, and aggravated unlawful use of a weapon. This has become typical of Chicago’s pro-crime policies where even the worst monsters can freely walk the streets.
"I have about 100 people on home monitoring who are charged with murder," Cook County Sheriff Tom Dart said.
"Two brothers who murdered a person 11 bullets into them, in front of witnesses,” Lightfoot argued. “And at least one of them was out on another gun charge, on electronic monitoring. This isn’t working. We need to have trials and we need to put dangerous people behind bars so that the community is actually safe.”
But Judge Evans still loves peace circles and restorative justice for violent thugs. “We thought, if somebody is on drugs or stealing television sets or cell phones or whatever it was, all we had to do was arrest them, prosecute them, convict them and send them to jail," he rambled.
Now Evans preaches the gospel of freeing as many criminals as possible.
In 2021, Cook County had the most murders in almost 30 years. In May 2022 it was reported that downtown shootings were up 64%.
“This is just the start,” Evans announced to cheers, while opening a "restorative justice" court. “Englewood, we are on our way! Roseland, we are on our way!”
It was more of a threat than a promise.
Englewood has racked up 23 murders and 102 wounded this year. Roseland is lagging behind with 6 murders and only 29 wounded.
The peace circles keep growing and people keep dying because the justice system in Chicago, like those in cities where pro-crime policies prevail, stands on the side of the criminals.
Judge Evans claimed that in the new system, “we are focusing on punishment, but on healing”.
But there’s no healing for the family of Jaslyn Adams, for the woman shot and paralyzed for life by a peace circle alum, or any of the other victims being protected by the peace circles.
In Chicago, there’s no peace for the people, only for the politicians and the criminals, who are often one and the same.
Judge Patricia Spratt, who presides over the North Lawndale Restorative Justice Community Court, said that the court is about "repairing harm. Not being retributive and sending you to jail".
How will Chicago’s pro-crime judges repair the harm they have caused to crime victims?
It’ll take a hell of a peace circle to raise the dead.
Police Chief: Illinois ‘Monster’ Beheads 8-Months Pregnant Ex-Girlfriend
An Illinois man is accused of murdering his “on-and-off” eight-months pregnant girlfriend, Liese Dodd, and her unborn child before discarding her decapitated head in a dumpster.
“What was observed, what was learned, what was found, is absolutely terrible,” said Alton Police Chief Marcus Pulido, as the St. Louis Dispatch reported. “She was decapitated by a freaking savage monster.”
Liese Dodd, 22
DeUndreá S. Holloway Jr., 22, who Pulido said “had on-and-off dating relationship” with 22-year-old Dodd in the past couple of years, per the Dispatch, was arrested the same day and is facing several multiple murder charges, as KDSK reported:
In all, Holloway, a Litchfield resident, was charged with two counts of murder, two counts of intentional homicide of an unborn child, dismembering a human body, concealing a homicidal death and possession of a stolen vehicle. The two counts of murder will be combined into one count as the investigation continues, as will the two counts of intentional homicide of an unborn child.
Dodd’s headless body was discovered by her mother, identified by KMOV as Heidi Noel, on the afternoon of June 7 at a horrific scene in Dodd’s Boliver Street apartment in Alton, Illinois, the St. Louis Dispatch reported. Noel visited the residence as she had grown concerned after not having contact with Dodd.
The victim’s neighbor, April Wooten, told KSDK that police soon flooded the scene.
“Her mom looked so broken, she looked so broken,” she explained. “She turned around, she looked at us, me and my boyfriend were standing in the door way and she said, ‘He [expletive] killed her.'”
The St. Louis Dispatch noted:
Two hours after Dodd was found dead, Gillespie police were investigating a bicycle theft about 30 miles away from Alton, in their small town of 3,000 residents. The bike’s owner gave police a description of the man pedaling away on the stolen bike, and police arrested Holloway based on that description.
Dodd’s due date for her baby girl was July 27, and Noel told KMOV that friends and family were set to throw a baby shower for the soon-to-be mom, who was in school with the aspiration of becoming a nurse:
We were planning her baby shower for the end of this month. I had just sent out invitations the prior Saturday for the baby shower. We were just excited and gathering the items you need to have a baby. She wasn’t set on a name yet. [She] said ‘my little bean.’ So, we essentially were calling the baby, ‘baby bean’.
“Baby Bean” was to be the Dodd’s first child, Pulido told the Dispatch.
“She was just a bright light that cared for everyone. she had a big heart,” Noel told KMOV. “She’d do anything for anyone. She’d go out of her way to help people.”
Three Black Males Arrested For Beating, Stomping Death Of White 17-Year-Old Ethan Liming
THE APES: TYLER STAFFORD, DONOVAN JONES, DESHAWN, JR.
Masters, of course, is right that it’s black people behind the crime wave. FBI crime data shows that blacks were responsible for 56.5% of all murders in 2020 where a suspect was identified. The true number is probably higher when accounting for unsolved murders. The media branded Masters a racist for simply stating this obvious truth.
THE VICTIM AND THE APES WHO PERPETRATED THE VIOLENT MURDER:
I recall walking onto campus at the black-majority high school I attended 50+ years ago seeing three or four black males stomping the head of a white boy into the sidewalk. Such violence against white students was common. That was over 50 years ago. Things don't change.
The 17-year-old didn't live to see adulthood. He was fatally beaten; allegedly by three black males near an outdoor basketball court in Ohio, who have now been arrested.
Police found Ethan Liming in the parking lot of the I Promise School in Akron. The school was reportedly founded by pro-basketball star, LeBron James.
I recall walking onto campus at the black-majority high school I attended 50+ years ago seeing three or four black males stomping the head of a white boy into the sidewalk. Such violence against white students was common. That was over 50 years ago. Things don't change.
"Liming was lying on the ground in the parking lot when police arrived, officials have said. They were unable to save him, and he was pronounced dead at the scene," according to the New York Post: Three arrested in connection to fatal beating of Ohio teen Ethan Liming By Sam Raskin, June 12, 2022.
The Great Replacement Now Drives American Political Discourse
Earlier: The Great Replacement: Cat Out Of Bag, Democrats Frantic
House Democrats condemned the Great Replacement this week. No, not the immigration policies that are leading to the dispossession of the Historic American Nation. Instead, they just denounced those who have Noticed what’s going on. Every Republican voted against resolution, but only two Democrats (Maine Rep. Jared Golden and Michigan Rep. Elissa Slotkin). It claimed the Great Replacement “has been used to falsely justify racially motivated, violent acts of terrorism domestically and internationally” and committed Congress to “combating White supremacy, hatred, and racial injustice.” “The Great Replacement myth is a racist, antisemitic, Islamophobic, xenophobic, nativist and hateful lie,” said New York Rep. Jamaal Bowman, right, the resolution’s sponsor [House Democrats Pass Resolution Condemning ‘Great Replacement Theory’, by Mychael Schnell, The Hill, June 8, 2022]. But the condemnation can’t suppress the truth. It’s just more evidence that the Great Replacement now drives the political discourse in America–and Democrats can only look on in shock.
Rep. Bowman is one of those in shock. He admits Great Replacement, which he calls “Nazi thinking,” is now mainstream. “These are no longer fringe elements of our society,” the black congressman said. “'Great Replacement Theory has gone mainstream thanks to rightwing Republicans like Tucker Carlson who have mentioned this theory more than 400 times on the most-watched news network in the country.” [Democratic Rep Jamaal Bowman calls Great Replacement Theory 'Nazi thinking veiled as political banter', by Morgan Phillips, Daily Mail, June 8, 2022].
He’s right, of course. VDARE.com Editor Peter Brimelow charted the Great Replacement (“The Pincers” —see our featured image) in his book Alien Nation back in 1995, but Tucker Carlson is certainly responsible for waking up millions of Americans to this civilizational problem.
And concern over the Great Replacement is now shared by a majority of Republicans.
Three new polls show the widespread belief in this obvious fact. YouGov asked respondents last week: “Do you personally believe that in the U.S., Democrats are trying to replace white Americans with immigrants and people of color who share Democrats’ views?” Seventy-three percent of Trump voters, 61 percent of Republicans overall, and 33 percent of independents said yes. Seventy-six percent of Trump voters, 67 percent of Republicans, and 38 percent of independents say immigration is a very serious problem. Fifty-five percent of Trump voters, 52 percent of Republicans, and 31 percent of independents say immigrants have a negative effect on America.
A YouGov survey from last month also shows similar results. In that poll, 61 percent of Trump voters, 58 percent of Republicans, and 36 percent of independents believe whites are being replaced by non-whites. Sixty-three percent of Trump voters, 59 percent of Republicans, and 30 percent of independents believe racial diversity will weaken American customs and values. (Interestingly, only 43 percent of Democrats believe it will strengthen American customs and values.) Fifty-five percent of Trump voters, 54 percent of Republicans, and 34 percent of independents believe racial diversity will lead to more racial conflicts. Roughly 40 percent of Trump voters and Republicans believe it’s a bad thing that America will no longer be a majority-white country. Just nine percent of Trump voters and 12 percent of Republicans think it will be a good thing.
Most Democrats are the opposite of Republicans but, again, their enthusiasm for the Great Replacement isn’t that great. Fifty-seven percent say immigrants have a positive impact on America, 43 percent say immigrants will strengthen American customs and values, and 44 percent say America no longer being majority-white is a good thing. It’s hardly an overwhelming majority.
Other polls are finding similar results. The Southern Poverty Law Center conducted a poll in April that also showed most Republicans believe in the Great Replacement. In the communist group’s survey, 47 percent of Republicans believe it’s negative that America will no longer majority-white (just 28 percent see it as a positive); 53 percent believe changing demographics pose a threat to whites, their culture, and values; and 68 percent believe the recent demographic changes in our country are driven by progressives wanting to replace white conservative voters [SPLC Poll Finds Substantial Support for ‘Great Replacement’ Theory and Other Hard-Right Ideas, by Cassie Miller, Southern Poverty Law Center, June 1, 2022].
It’s clear the Republican base is gravely concerned about being replaced. They know it threatens their way of life and their values. They know it will lead to more conflict among the races and weaken America. This is no longer a “fringe” idea.
As I highlighted last month, more and more Republican leaders are also Noticing the Great Replacement. From Elise Stefanik to Blake Masters, serious GOP lawmakers or candidates are speaking out about how Democrats want to replace Americans with foreigners. And some of these candidates are starting to notice other racial problems.
Masters, the Trump endorsed Arizona Senate candidate, recently acknowledged the color of crime. “We do have a gun violence problem in this country, and it’s gang violence,” he said during an April podcast appearance. “It’s people in Chicago, St. Louis shooting each other. Very often, you know, black people, frankly. And the Democrats don’t want to do anything about that.” [Blake Masters Blames Gun Violence on ‘Black People, Frankly’, by Roger Sollenberger, Daily Beast, June 5, 2022]
Masters, of course, is right that it’s black people behind the crime wave. FBI crime data shows that blacks were responsible for 56.5% of all murders in 2020 where a suspect was identified. The true number is probably higher when accounting for unsolved murders. The media branded Masters a racist for simply stating this obvious truth.
Thankfully, he chose to ignore the controversy and did not issue any mealy-mouthed apology.
Democrats are very worried that the American people are becoming aware of their dispossession. But instead of doing anything to address the causes of dispossession, they’re utilizing state power to crack down on those who dare mention it.
The Associated Press reported last week that federal officials are directing more resources to monitoring social media for alleged “white nationalist” threats. The AP claims “white supremacists are riling up thousands on social media.” Free speech is not a crime—yet—but the Regime Media and left-wing bureaucrats behave as if it is:
White nationalists and supremacists, on accounts often run by young men, are building thriving, macho communities across social media platforms like Instagram, Telegram and TikTok, evading detection with coded hashtags and innuendo.
Their snarky memes and trendy videos are riling up thousands of followers on divisive issues including abortion, guns, immigration and LGBTQ rights. The Department of Homeland Security warned Tuesday that such skewed framing of the subjects could drive extremists to violently attack public places across the U.S. in the coming months.
…
They signal their beliefs in other ways: a Christian cross emoji in their profile or words like “anglo” or “pilled,” a term embraced by far-right chatrooms, in usernames. Most recently, some of these accounts have borrowed the pop song “White Boy Summer” to cheer on the leaked Supreme Court draft opinion on Roe v. Wade, according to an analysis by Zignal Labs, a social media intelligence firm. [White Supremacists Are Riling Up Thousands on Social Media, by Amanda Seitz, Associated Press, June 10, 2022]
This extremely mild behavior apparently requires the primary attention of Homeland Security and the FBI. The collapse of the southern border is just not as important as alleged racists talking about “White Boy Summer” on Telegram.
There’s also DHS’s infamous Disinformation Governance Board. This project, which has since gotten a new leader in former Bush official Michael Chertoff, is dedicated entirely to monitoring right-wing speech on the internet. Leaked documents reveal that the board was particularly concerned with “falsehoods surrounding U.S. government immigration policy.” Translation: any information that discredits Open Borders or points out the reality of the Great Replacement.
The documents said that DHS looked to work with Twitter and other social media platforms to target “disinformation” [GOP Senators Release Documents Showing Biden Admin Lied About Disinfo Board, by Michael Ginsberg, Daily Caller, June 9, 2022]
But it’s unlikely these efforts will succeed. The federal government can’t take Tucker Carlson off the air, nor can they blind ordinary people to the dramatic changes they see all around them.
Regular Americans know the Great Replacement isn’t a conspiracy theory–it’s a fact of life. And they want it stopped.
Washington Watcher II [Email him] is an anonymous DC insider.
No comments:
Post a Comment