Was he his own worst enema?

Posted on November 7, 2013 by jewamongyou

Most of y’all have probably already read about the recent horrific case in New Mexico. To summarize:

The incident began on Jan. 2 as David Eckert was leaving the local Walmart in Deming, N.M. He reportedly failed to make a complete stop at a stop sign, prompting police to pull him over.

The officers asked him to step out of the vehicle and claim the man appeared to be clenching his buttocks, Eckert’s attorney, Shannon Kennedy, told TheBlaze. It is unclear why police removed him from the vehicle in the first place. However, because the cops believed he was clenching his buttocks, they took it as reason to suspect him of hiding narcotics in his anal cavity.

Police officers detained Eckert after a narcotics sniffing dog allegedly issued a “hit” on Eckert’s car seat. Meanwhile, they sought a search warrant for an anal cavity search…

Upon securing the warrant, Deming police officers took the man to an emergency room, but hit their first snag when a doctor refused to perform the anal cavity search because he believed it to be “unethical.”

So police tried again at the Gila Regional Medical Center in Silver City, N.M., where doctors agreed to the search…

1. Eckert’s abdominal area was X-rayed; no narcotics were found.

2. Doctors then performed an exam of Eckert’s anus with their fingers; no narcotics were found.

3. Doctors performed a second exam of Eckert’s anus with their fingers; no narcotics were found.

4. Doctors penetrated Eckert’s anus to insert an enema. Eckert was forced to defecate in front of doctors and police officers. Eckert watched as doctors searched his stool. No narcotics were found.

5. Doctors penetrated Eckert’s anus to insert an enema a second time. Eckert was forced to defecate in front of doctors and police officers. Eckert watched as doctors searched his stool. No narcotics were found.

6. Doctors penetrated Eckert’s anus to insert an enema a third time. Eckert was forced to defecate in front of doctors and police officers. Eckert watched as doctors searched his stool. No narcotics were found.

7. Doctors then X-rayed Eckert again; no narcotics were found.

8. Doctors prepared Eckert for surgery, sedated him, and then performed a colonoscopy where a scope with a camera was inserted into Eckert’s anus, rectum, colon and large intestines. No narcotics were found.

And then the hospital had the audacity to bill Eckert for “services!”

Mangan has already pointed out that most of the guilty officers are Hispanic, while the victim is white. It’s unclear whether ethnic animus had anything to do with this sordid story, but the fact remains that Eckert has experienced two evils that have been foisted upon us by our government: The War on Some Drugs and “diversity”.

A commenter at Mangans, by the name of Porter, pointed out that one of the two offending doctors was Okay Odocha, from Nigeria. The other doctor, Robert Wilcox,was white. I don’t know which doctor was the main culprit in this crime, but it’s fair to wonder if Odocha’s Nigerian values had anything to do with this flagrant violation of the Hippocratic oath. Though I’m sure there are many fine people from Nigeria (and I’ve known a few), the country is well known for its crime and corruption; it has a bad reputation even in Africa. I don’t have an explanation for Mr. Wilcox, other than very poor judgment.

As for the War on Some Drugs, ridiculous laws lead to ridiculous police behavior. It was only a matter of time before incidents such as this would grace our news sources.

I’ve wondered if, prior to his misfortune, Mr. Eckert vocally opposed the War on Some Drugs. I wonder if he spoke out against “diversity”. If not, or if he voted for politicians who support population replacement policies, or who support the War on Some Drugs, then Mr. Eckert is partly responsible for his own tribulations.

People are supposed to be more intelligent than animals. We shouldn’t have to be bitten by every evil thing on the planet before we recognize it for what it is and speak up against it. If Mr. Eckert supported these evils, through his voting habits or through his silence, then he’s as much a perpetrator as a victim.

Posted in crime and violence, immigration/ Hispanics, libertarian thought | 5 Comments

The insidious advance of "hate-speech" laws in the U.S.

Posted on November 6, 2013 by jewamongyou

Two recent incidents illustrate how the enemies of liberty on the left work to deny us our freedom of speech. In the first incident, a woman was fired from her (presumably private sector) job due to leftist/black activism against an “offensive” online photo she had posted. According to blackamericaweb.com:

To the mom who thought  it was cool for her kids to dress up like Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman for Halloween, we’re glad karma has come to bite you in the butt.
According to reports, Caitlin Cimeno has been fired from her job for posting racially-insensitive photos of her sons, William Filene and Greg Cimeno, with the caption: “Happy Halloween from Zimmerman & trayvon (insert smiley face emoji here.)”
The Massachusetts woman failed to realize that you can be easily tracked down if you post your full name, photos of your children at school, shots of your car with the license plate and selfies at work (duh!). After one Instagram user wrote, “You ruined your life by posting those pics,” Caitlin quickly changed her profile name and deleted the racist shots. But sadly for her, it was too late.

Since I believe that discrimination should be legal in the private sector, her employer (if private) had the right to hire her, or fire her, for any reason he saw fit. Of course, those who oppose employment discrimination based on, among other things, political affiliation, should have a problem with this. Of course, while they have no problem with whites being persecuted for perceived insensitivity toward their favorite groups, they would have serious problems with somebody getting fired for showing insensitivity toward whites or men or straight people.
But given the rapid expansion of government, and taxes, into our lives, the lines between “private sector” and “public sector” are getting blurred. When private sector jobs are getting harder and harder to find, while government jobs sometimes remain the only option for many people, it becomes less and less justifiable to deny “public sector” employees their freedom of speech.
In the second incident, a public security guard is under attack for posting pro-Hitler photos, and disparaging comments about blacks and Jews on social media. In this CBS video, we see reporters hounding the security guard for getting paid with taxpayer money even as he violates social taboos online. Though I think the security guard showed poor taste and a lack of discretion by posting those images, in all likelihood, this was just his way of rebelling against an increasingly oppressive regime of political correctness. Perhaps he’d been forced to attend too many “diversity training” seminars and this was simply his way of venting, of defiling the gods of his oppressors and pissing on their alters. As a security guard, he’s probably very much aware of the black propensity for violence, and the liberal Jewish propensity for silencing those who would speak of it.
The actions of CBS, and black/leftist activists, are calculated to make it a de facto crime to violate the dictates of political correctness. On the one hand, they support an ever-expanding government. On the other, they deny those who work for said government the right to express themselves as they see fit. In their “perfect world” everybody would work for the government to one extent or another – and we’d all be subject to politically correct speech codes. After all, we’re “being paid with taxpayer dollars.”
On a positive note, this is a good opportunity to use the freedom of speech we do have left, and to draw attention to an online force we can use to our advantage: truthrevolt.org. I especially want to encourage y’all to sign this petition:

Tell Advertisers to Stop Backing Al Sharpton

Posted in freedom of speech issues, libertarian thought | 5 Comments

What would be the reaction in France?

Posted on November 4, 2013 by jewamongyou

I found this on alarabiya:

Ad depicting U.S. soldier and Muslim wife met with mixed reactions

soldier with muslim

Paul Crompton, Al Arabiya

An advertisement picturing a U.S. solider and a fully-veiled Muslim woman in an embrace has provoked mixed reactions on the internet.
The billboard promotes sleeping aid brand SnoreStop and aims to show how its medication can benefit couples by enabling them to have a tranquil, snore-free night’s sleep.
Muslims concerned that the ad promotes the message of a couple sleeping together outside of wedlock need not be worried – the ad shows the woman wearing a wedding ring…
Social media users responding to the ad’s twitter hashtag #betogether had mixed feelings about the billboard, with many praising its message of equality and diversity while retaining its shock value.
“What an amazing ad. I wish more companies represented couples like this,” wrote twitter user Hooverr1.
Another twitter user, @Shahkaal said that it was “great to see diversity in Ads” while @KarimiScreamy wrote that the ad was a “good sign of tolerance.”
However, some individuals felt that the ad was “bigot-baiting” and “ignorant.”
Facebook user Debbie Herrera wrote that she liked the ad’s “diversity but… I also think this is in poor taste… I would think this would be offensive to Muslim’s [sic].”
Twitter user @uncolonisedmind wrote that the ad’s usage of a niqabi (a women who wears a face-covering veil) was “ignorant and stereotypical.”

Muslims do not form a major power bloc in the Los Angeles area. At least they’re not powerful enough to demand that infidels stay away from their women, while they act with impunity toward non-Muslim women. But this is not the case in much of Western Europe. It seems to me that such a billboard, if erected in a place like France, for example, would elicit immediate negative reactions. It would be taken down within days.
Various reasons for the outrage would be given – but few would come out and state the real reason: Underdogs contribute the females, while overlords contribute the males. European Muslims feel entitled to native women because they are allowed to be the overlords while the native population is subjugated. A billboard such as this implies the opposite. As such, it would be considered offensive. In fact, it would probably even be illegal.
 

Posted in miscegenation, Muslims, shenanigans of the Left and of non-white activists | 19 Comments

Mudshark gets stabbed by a black man…

Posted on November 3, 2013 by jewamongyou

In this story, posted on ABC news, we read about a pregnant white woman who was stabbed by a black intruder:

Rachel Poole, 31, gave birth to her daughter, Isabella, at University Medical Center in El Paso, Texas, following a successful cesarean section, her stepfather, Gary Jones, told ABCNews.com.
Poole’s mother, Rebecca Jones, declined to comment to ABCNews.com on her daughter’s condition, but said the baby girl “is in good health.”
Poole was taken to the hospital on Wednesday evening after she was “brutally attacked” by a 19-year-old who broke into her home and stabbed her repeatedly with a knife, according to an El Paso Police Department news release.
Corey Bernard Moss, of Fort Bliss, Texas, was charged with criminal attempted capital murder after he attacked Poole, who was nine months pregnant, in her kitchen while she was on FaceTime with her husband, El Paso Police Department spokesman Det. Mike Baranyay told ABCNews.com.
Moss, who had gone to confront Poole about money he owed her, reportedly entered the woman’s home through a rear door and waited for her to return, according to an arrest affidavit.
When the woman arrived home, she was using FaceTime to speak with her husband, Justin Poole, who is deployed overseas, the affidavit said. Poole was video-chatting with her husband when Moss allegedly attacked her from behind and repeatedly stabbed her with a stainless steel folding knife.

Here’s the accompanying photo of perpetrator and victim:
poole the foolHere are a couple of comments from that article:

1) Before you rant about races, know that Poole’s husband, Justin, is black.
2) They are a biracial family. Justin has repeatedly asked for people to leave race out of the equation. Instead of bringing up race let’s see how we as humans and citizens can ease their pain. Which is respect their wishes and keep race out of the topic of conversation.
While, in this case, it’s true that the mudshark’s actual husband didn’t stab her, this doesn’t make race irrelevant at all. I’ll quote myself, from my very first post on this blog:
Even today, when you marry somebody, you are not marrying just the man.  You are also, in a sense, marrying his family, his friends and his life history.  So you found a black man who bucked the trends.  That’s wonderful.  Did his brothers, cousins and uncles, who come to visit sometimes, also buck the trends?  Did his friends also buck the trends?  Will your mixed children buck the trends?  Will his (as of yet unknown) criminal history, child support obligations, or health problems become your burden as well?
The moment this woman chose to marry a black man, even a decent and law-abiding black man, she also chose to attach herself to other blacks. In this case, her choice proved almost fatal. Had she died, she could have been a contender for the Darwin Awards.
Posted in Africa and blacks, crime and violence, miscegenation | 8 Comments

Who's the loudest of them all?

Posted on November 1, 2013 by jewamongyou

I recently traveled on the Portland MAX (our version of the subway that’s mostly above ground). Among the various signs posted above us was this one:
max
Let’s forget, for a moment, that people rarely have loud telephone conversations in public anymore; they text each other instead.  Are white women offended by such signs? Of course not – because they know such accusations are ridiculous. Everybody knows that white women are not a major source of annoying noise on urban public transportation. But let’s say, hypothetically, that the sign had the black man yammering away on his phone, and the white woman being annoying. The uproar would be instantaneous. It would be national news, and the City of Portland would quickly grovel in front of the likes of Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson. Representing racial reality the way it actually is, or even displaying a sign that has a basis in racial reality, is offensive.
But we should be offended. The City of Portland could easily have depicted two race-neutral individuals of the same gender. That way, the sign couldn’t be construed as being hateful toward any particular group. But not only did they turn this into a racial scenario, they even made the extra effort to make sure her eyes were blue. Brown eyes just wouldn’t do; somebody might have mistaken her for Mexican or Asian.
Why did they make the offender female? My guess is in order to have the sign include more diversity. This was more important to them than risking upsetting women – which wouldn’t happen anyway in this case. Also, race trumps gender.

Posted in examples of propaganda, shenanigans of the Left and of non-white activists, Uncategorized | 17 Comments

Jury nullification

Posted on October 31, 2013 by jewamongyou

For many white advocates, the term “jury nullification” has negative connotations. It brings to mind black murderers and rapists who are set free for want of a jury of their peers that will convict them. It reminds us of horrific murders where justice was not served.
But jury nullification is a tool that can be used for great good. American colonists rebelled against British tyranny in Bushel’s Case, where William Penn was found “not guilty” by a jury of his peers – even though there was no dispute that he had violated the law. Thus, jury nullification was among the important foundations of the United States.
Just as the British judge in Bushel’s Case was infuriated, so too are his spiritual descendants today. Washington DC prosecutors and judges are concerned that some modern Americans might follow the Bushel’s Case example and vote according to their conscience. From the Washington Times:

The illuminated billboard in the Judiciary Square Metro station near the F Street entrance was strategically placed.
Prospective jurors who take the subway to D.C. Superior Court and exit near the National Building Museum see these words: “Good jurors nullify bad laws” and “You have the right to ‘hang’ the jury with your vote if you cannot agree with other jurors.”
Since the billboard went up this month, District prosecutors have been worried that the message could sway their cases. In the past week alone, they have asked judges in three ­cases to ensure that jurors had neither seen nor been influenced by the billboard.
The billboard is part of a growing national campaign to encourage jurors who disagree with a law, or think a punishment is too harsh, to vote for acquittal. Kirsten Tynan of the Montana-based Fully Informed Jury Association, whose name and Web address is included on the billboard, said the nonprofit group generally challenges crimes it calls “victimless,” such as vandalism by graffiti or gun possession.
James Babb, a Philadelphia-based graphics artist who organized a fundraising campaign to put up the billboard, said he raised $3,000 in about a week through Facebook and other ­social-media sites. He said he is concerned about laws that he thinks are too restrictive.

Tynan and Babb have my utmost respect for their actions, performed like true Americans. I’ve never had the opportunity to practice jury nullification; I’ve never been picked. Perhaps I’m on a blacklist of people who aren’t allowed to serve on juries. But no doubt some of you readers will be picked some day. When that day comes, remember to vote “innocent” if the law is unjust or the punishment is unjust.

Posted in activism, libertarian thought | 3 Comments

The reasonable silent black majority?

Posted on October 27, 2013 by jewamongyou

An intelligent, well-spoken, black person can make a living simply by being a conservative. Whites who oppose “affirmative action” are among the quickest to practice it themselves when they see an opportunity to attach themselves to a “person of color” who holds similar values. They’ll trip over themselves to show their support for conservative blacks, while barely even acknowledging equally qualified whites. They want to show their leftist overlords (or themselves) that they’re not racist. I’ve done it myself in the past. Not so much to show anybody else that I’m not racist, but partly because I wanted to show myself that I’m not racist. In other words, to show myself that I’m capable of being friendly with people of any background. But that was a long time ago. These days I’m well  past that stage. Last night I shopped at Safeway, and the woman behind the counter sported a wide smile and a good attitude. It didn’t matter to me that she was black; I gave her that smile and attitude right back. I’m a happier person that way, and I don’t need to prove anything to anyone.
Some racialist bloggers, of the sort that usually rant against “the Jews,” will link to me now and then. I’m sure most of them simply agree with what I have to say (or disagree, as the case might be), or want to show their support because we’re in the same camp. But some of them probably also use me as a way of saying, “See! I’m not an anti-Semite; I even have a Jewish friend.” They’re giving me “affirmative action.” I don’t blame them one bit. Ranting against “the Jews” doesn’t mean one is full of hatred for ALL Jews, and they’re simply emphasizing that point. Nothing wrong with that. I sometimes rant against “the blacks,” but I don’t hate any individual just because he’s black. I think a lot of leftists are incapable of making such distinctions.
I was reading an article today, on Yahoo News, about a celebrity named Julianne Hough (I’d never heard of her until then):

Looks like Julianne Hough learned the hard way that some people take offense in the 21st century when white starlets wear black face.

Yet there she was, dressed up as the African-American inmate Crazy Eyes, so memorably portrayed by Uzo Aduba on “Orange Is the New Black.” The actress was attending the Casamigos Tequila Halloween party in Hollywood with friends, who also went as characters from the buzzy new Netflix series.

The internet was not amused. To her credit, the “Dancing With the Stars” winner and “Rock of Ages” actress quickly apologized on Twitter for her choice of costume.

Here are a couple of comments:

Mich

Hello world! African American man here. I have a hunch that a good majority of my race is not “outraged” by this…AT ALL. We actually couldn’t care less. IT’S NOT THAT SERIOUS lol. It’s the media who makes a big deal out of it. So PRETTY PLEASE stop thinking it is African Americans who are actually that darn sensitive. This bothers us not. (804 thumbs up).
jenean p

People really need to get a grip. Not that speak for all black people but I’m black and I didn’t find her costume offensive. I do find it offensive, however, when racism is assumed where it was never intended. (2.6k thumbs up).
With that many thumbs up, is it unrealistic to hope that the editors at Yahoo will take note and wake up from their racial marxist coma? If so many people, both white and black, think the paranoia over supposed “white racism” is overblown and counterproductive, why can’t they rise up and overthrow the leaders of the status quo?
I suspect that, while many blacks are fully aware that “white racism” is, for the most part, a bogey man, they have no incentive to make it go away. On the contrary, they have every reason to maintain the status quo; that’s how they get their goodies: Government handouts, programs and institutional racism in their favor (affirmative action). Nevertheless, I’m encouraged by comments such as the above. It’s a good start.
I’m not convinced that Mich’s hunch (first comment above) is correct – that a majority of blacks are not hypersensitive about hyped up “racism.” I don’t think there’s any way to know for sure; people aren’t always honest in surveys. If there is such a majority, then they need to be more vocal. They need to organize and openly fight against the media “making a big deal out of it.” So far, I don’t see this happening.

 

Posted in Africa and blacks, shenanigans of the Left and of non-white activists | 19 Comments

The Perils of an Ideological Approach

Posted on October 23, 2013 by jewamongyou

Men’s rights spokesman Karen Straughan has a mastery of the English language that few can rival. Her powers of analysis are also impressive. Here we see this astute woman exposing the flawed mindset of the feminist movement.
Watch the video here.
A lot of what she says applies equally to racial issues. If she avoids racial issues, it would probably be because of the “non-overlapping camp effect”. In other words, she would alienate some of her men’s rights supporters, and weaken her clout, by weighing in on other controversial issues. Each controversial issue a person takes on will diminish his influence within other camps. They say, “I don’t associate with so and so, because he supports this or that and it would tarnish our image.”
She’s smart enough to know the truth about race, but her focus is elsewhere. Please give her a thumbs up.

Posted in feminism and men's issues | 2 Comments

Jewish domination of the slave trade

Posted on October 14, 2013 by jewamongyou

I just watched the following Youtube video by David Duke:
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GUE0si2llTY&w=560&h=315]
I couldn’t find part two, but I had a few quick thoughts on the matter I wanted to share with y’all.
First of all, nobody alive today should be apologizing for American slavery. Just as whites needn’t apologize for the long-ago actions of a few, so too should Jews not have to.
Taking Duke’s statistics at face value, I can think of two reasons that slave ownership would have been higher among Jews:
1) Jews were wealthier and more of them could afford slaves
2) Jews have a moral defect that persists to this day
I think it’s a combination of these two factors. Speaking from personal experience and my own observations, the Jewish moral defect is actually two defects. The first is a more general moral defect that afflicts religious people of all faiths. When people are given a code to live their lives by, over time they equate adherence to that code as “morality” and violation of that code as “immorality.” That is to say, any action would surely have been prohibited by God if it were truly immoral. The fact that Scripture endorses slavery must mean that there is nothing wrong with it. In this worldview, there is little room for moral scruples outside of what has already been condemned by the word of God. We find a similar attitude in today’s America regarding the law. So many new laws have been passed that there is often an assumption that anything that is legal must also be moral. If it were truly immoral, “they” would surely have already passed a law against it. In either case, it’s a childish way to live one’s life. I think this is the moral defect that was at work in the times of slavery.
Some rabbis recognized this problem and tried to address it. The result was the Musar movement in 19th century Eastern Europe. Books of musar are studied in yeshivas to this day. In a sense, they serve as an artificial conscience and I think they are helpful. I don’t think they can make a bad person good, but they do serve to remind those on the edge that there is a wider morality. Had the musar movement taken root among the wealthy Sephardic Jews of early America, it’s likely that they would have been less active in the slave trade.
The second Jewish moral defect is more relevant today. Judaism served as our moral compass for many centuries. When that compass was taken away, but the moral compass of the dominant, Christian, majority had not yet had time to take root, it created a moral void. This is one reason Jews have been so prominent in the more trashy aspects of Western culture, including the movie industry. We often find ourselves living in a moral no-man’s land. The first half of the 20th century saw millions of Jews being estranged from their ancestral culture. This is also the time when secular Jewish debauchery reached its peak, with those who had reached leadership positions lingering to this day. Today, even though the root cause of the darkness has diminished, we still suffer from a new status quo that it created. Liberalism has imposed its own infantile form of morality upon society, a “morality” that brings more harm than good. Meanwhile, traditional morality feebly struggles to find its footing again. Hopefully, a meaningful moral code, other than Islam, will assert itself before the damage is too great.
By the way, the text displayed on Duke’s video is from the Book of Esther. I’m not sure how that pertains to slavery; he should have used something more pertinent in my opinion – unless he’s equating himself with Haman (which would be rather funny).

Posted in Jewish stuff and Israel, politics and attitudes of the pro-white movements | 25 Comments

How did I know it was a black man?

Posted on October 10, 2013 by jewamongyou

When I saw this headline earlier today, but was not able to read the details, I assumed the culprit was a ghetto black (a nigger). The story appeared on Opposing Views:

Video: Blind Man Beaten in Broad Daylight While No One Helps

Philadelphia police are looking for a man who pushed a blind man over, punched him, kicked him repeatedly and then stole his bag, according to the Daily Mail. The entire incident was caught on surveillance video.
Cameras also caught at least two people who were there and did nothing during the attack.
The 33-year-old victim is shown walking past a deli in Germantown, Philadelphia just after noon on Oct. 2 before being pushed over from behind. The attacker punches the victim twice and kicks him numerous times. The attacker then goes to a shop, taking the man’s backpack with him…
Police described the attacker as a 20-year-old black man wearing a tan baseball cap, tan shirt and khaki pants.

I could have been wrong; whites have been known to do horrible things too – but this sort of behavior has “nigger” written all over it.  Actually, it’s insulting to even call such a being a “man” at all. If I were black, I would not want him to be called a “black man.” I’d much rather call him a “nigger” in order to distinguish between decent black folk and the likes of him.

Posted in Africa and blacks, crime and violence | 10 Comments