When blacks kill, beat or rape whites, the media does everything in its power to hide it or downplay it. Race is rarely mentioned and “hate-crimes” are rarely considered. But it seems that when some white folks get uppity and decide to “even the score” by killing some blacks, their reaction is quite different. According to ABC news:
Local and federal investigators are searching for a lone white male in a pickup truck who went on a shooting spree in Tulsa, Okla., early Friday morning, killing three pedestrians.
Five black males were shot, three fatally, in four separate incidents during a span of less than two hours on the same side of town and not far from one another, police said. Two males were critically wounded in the shooting spree. All of the victims were targeted while they were out walking.
The suspect is reported to be white, but the crimes have yet to been deemed racially motivated. The task force’s job will be to determine whether federal hate crime laws were violated, Tulsa World reported.
The FBI and the U.S. Marshals are assisting in the investigation.
Police Chief Chuck Jordan said “logic would lead you to believe that” these are hate crimes, but the police haven’t yet assessed all of the evidence to make that determination.
What a far cry from the reporting we get when the perpetrators are black and the victims white! Would “logic lead you to believe” that the thousands of black-on-white “random” murders and rapes are hate crimes? Apparently not, since they never point it out in those cases. Incidentally, they caught two suspects in those shootings; one is white and the other mixed Native American.
I would never condone indiscriminate killing. I do wonder, however, if those killings were indiscriminate. There is a difference between a “race war” and a “race massacre”. What we’ve been witnessing, over the past few decades, is a “race massacre” with whites and Asians almost always being on the receiving end of crime. During the course of those decades, the media has done its utmost to deny a voice to the aggrieved parties.
It’s no secret that when a group is persistently persecuted, denied recourse and silenced, extremism and radicalism will likely result. This is what the Left did to the South during the so-called “civil-rights era”. Here is an excerpt from an old American Renaissance article:
At the time, Selma had a population of 29,000 people, of whom 15,000 were black. It took only a small crowd to paralyze the town, and at the height of the demonstrations approximately 11,000 outsiders were swarming the streets. Selma’s mayor, Joe Smitherman, complained that for three months he spent three quarters of his time dealing with out-of-town demonstrators. Selma police were swamped with complaints of thievery, and townspeople were soon heartily sick of the visitors, many of whom were drunk and left garbage wherever they went.
Some Northerners came just to have a good time. Many were “beatniks,” who drifted across the country from one demonstration to another. They had no money for hotels which were, in any case, commandeered by the hundreds of journalists covering the demonstrations. Many whites of both sexes found accommodation in black churches and in the George Washington Carver Homes, the black housing project.
Intimate mixing of the races in this fashion was unheard of in the rural South, but even more shocking to the people of Selma was the public sexual behavior of the demonstrators. If the accounts of what can only be described as public debauchery were not given in sworn affidavits by citizens, state troopers, and national guardsmen, they would be difficult to believe (see following story). Residents of Selma could be forgiven for beginning to wonder whether the demonstrations were as much about public interracial copulation as they were about voting rights. Many of the journalists were disgusted by what they saw, and complained that candid accounts of the demonstrators’ behavior were edited out of the stories they filed.
Language as well as behavior was edited. On one occasion, James Forman, secretary of the Student Non-violent Coordinating Committee (SNCC), spoke at the Beulah Baptist Church in Montgomery. Addressing a mixed-race group that included many ministers, nuns, and church women, he said: “If the Negro isn’t given his place at the table of democracy … it’s time for us to knock the f***ing legs off the table.” Some of the ministers expressed surprise at this language, but Forman offered no apology.
A few minutes later, Ralph Abernathy tried to smooth things over by saying, “I’m sure that God will forgive him, that the television crews will delete it from their films, and newspapermen will not print it.” A beatnik came to Forman’s defense: “What’s wrong with ‘f**k’,” he asked; “It’s a good old American word, and expressive.”
There were demonstrations in Montgomery during this period as well. On March 10, at about 8:00 p.m., approximately 100 people were being harangued on a well-lit street a short distance from the state capitol. One of the black leaders of the group then said in a loud voice, “Everyone stand and relieve yourselves.” Practically the entire crowd, male and female, young and old, black and white, did as they were told, as rivulets ran almost to the next block. Two blacks were arrested for, according to a bystander, “particularly lewd and offensive exposure of their private parts.”
Adding to public revulsion for the demonstrators was the sight of men and women in religious garb drunk in public and fondling each other. The civil rights movement had always draped itself in religion, and King made a point of giving ministers and priests very visible roles. The presence of clerics was so useful that some of the demonstrators dressed as priests or nuns appear to have been impostors.
This may have been the case during a small demonstration in Montgomery on March 16th. A group of 34 men, most dressed as priests, arrived at the capitol late in the evening and insisted on praying on the capitol steps. Finally, at 3:00 a.m. the police let them say the Lord’s Prayer on the bottom step. As they broke up to leave, two photographers came running across the street. One of the men dressed as a priest said to one, “You stupid son-of-a-bitch, after all this time here, you didn’t get a picture of us saying a prayer on the bottom step.” An Alabama state policeman said that many of the “priests” swore like sailors and that he doubted more than half were authentic.
It may have been the disgraceful behavior of false clerics that prompted one of the three killings associated with the Selma demonstrations. On March 8th, a white Unitarian minister from Boston, James Reeb, was brutally clubbed to the ground as he left a restaurant, and died two days later. The night before Reeb died, the demonstration leaders held an all-night, out-door vigil to pray for his recovery. Disgusted journalists noted that a number of young couples at the rear of the crowd fornicated during the services.
About this time, Jimmie Lee Jackson, a black civil rights leader, was shot and wounded in an altercation with police. Activists swept him away, medical treatment was delayed, and the man died. The Chief Deputy Sheriff of Dallas County thought the delay was deliberate. “I believe they wanted him to die,” he said; “They wanted to make a martyr out of him …”
What the Left did to the South back then (provoking it until some sort of violent backlash was inevitable), it is now doing to all of America. We are faced with an ugly choice: Let them continue to pick us off one by one or fight back and give them more ammunition to demonize us.
In the racial/ideological war we find ourselves in, the foot-soldiers of the left wear uniforms so that we can distinguish between a black person and a nigger, between a white person and an “antifa”. The uniform of the antifa is a kerchief over the face. The uniform of niggers is ghetto attire. In times like these, those who wish to remain neutral should be careful how they dress. Unfortunately for us, our enemies consider our race to be enough of a “uniform” to make us fair targets.
