1, 2, 3, 4, how do you start a race war?

Let’s review the basics of what happened:

  • Two people were shot (one for being stupid, the other probably for being stupid)
  • Race baiters and the ignorant think they know what happened, and that it had anything to do with race: we have zero evidence to support that
  • Some of the worst (such as our President) have made inflammatory comments based on a complete lack of information, and have made the problems worse
  • Many cops have been murdered by the inflamed ignorant herd of haters and followers (up 44% this year, and ambushes are up even more)
  • The only people "winning" in this, are politicians that prey on these ignorant constituencies, Administrations that want to distract from their own problems or Hillary Clinton’s incompetence, but as a society, all evidence is that we’re getting dumber

July, 5th 2016 : Baton Rouge, Louisiana : Anton Sterling

The race-baiters immediately reported that an innocent black guy, "a hardworking loving father of five", who "scraped together a living selling CD’s and DVD’s", was held down and shot by two white cops, for no reason. Just another black man abused by an unjust system (in the fools mind anyways), and that’s where the gullible stopped listening.

What do we know if we kept listening?

  • Anton was a member of the bloods gang, with a lengthy rap sheet (see below) including: assault, battery, sex offender , drugs and weapons charges. He had 5 kids, by a few different women, the first one he impregnated when she was 14 Y/O (he was 20). He owed $25,000 in child support (called a deadbeat Dad if he was white), and he had open warrants because he kept not registering as a sex offender. The police were called because he was threatening people with a gun, while illegally selling bootleg CD’s and DVD’s. You could hardly find a more upstanding member of the community.
  • When the cops got there, they tried to arrest him, he resisted, and they got him to the ground, and were trying to subdue him.
  • Cue video: he’s struggling while having a weapon: (never a good idea).  One cop puts his gun to Anton’s chest and says ‘if you don’t stop, I’ll fire". Anton struggles anyways, may have gotten his hand on his gun, as the other cop says, "gun gun", and the cops fire.
  • As a felon, Sterling is legally prohibited from possessing a firearm — so he was committing the crimes of having an illegal weapon, resisting arrest, previously brandishing a weapon (the fact that he had the weapon implies the call saying he was brandishing it as likely true), and doing so while armed and the cops are trying to arrest you, is functionally suicide by cop.
  • The same identical event happened before (only they were able to subdue him), and he was sentenced to 5 years prison time, and didn’t learn. http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2016/07/13/report-previous-arrest-of-alton-sterling-eerily-similar-to-fatal-police-encounter/

Rather than suing the city, I think the cop should be able to sue his family for the pain and suffering caused by having to kill some thuggish failure at life, in an act that made the average IQ of his community go up by some measurable amount.

If you took race out of it, and it was a white or asian guy that had that rap sheet, was a known gang member, had an illegal weapon, was resisting arrest and fighting with the police while armed, and the cops thought for a nanosecond that he was going for his gun, is there anyone reasonable that thinks he wouldn’t have been shot? Only the BLM crowd.

But the illiteratti ran around making this part of the "no justice, no peace" thing. And if the cops hadn’t of stopped him, and let him continue his rampage, the same folks would have screamed that the Police ignored crime in their part of town, and it was proof of racism as well.

July 6, 2016 –  Falcon Heights, Minnesota – Philando Castile

A woman (Diamond "Lavish" Reynolds) claiming to be the girlfriend of Philando Castile posts a Facebook Video Stream of herself telling a story about how her boyfriend was pulled over for a broken tail light, had a license to carry a gun (and told the cop about it), and then the cop told him to get his ID, and when he reached for it, the cop unloaded and shot him. Because that’s what cops do to innocent black men. Right?

Then the media had a field day reporting everything the family said as fact (without checking them), eulogizing this poor innocent black cafeteria-worker shot by another heartless white cop (only if you read the fine print, the cop was actually Asian). He was murdered in cold blood for following directions, after being pulled over for a broken tail light. And that’s where the gullible stopped listening.

What do we know if we kept listening?

  • Officers Jeronimo Yanez and Joseph Kauser pulled over Philando because he fit the description and looked like someone who had committed a July 2nd armed robbery of a liquor store, stealing the cash in the register and a carton of Newports, and a BOLO had gone out.
  • The officer pulling them over said as much on radio dispatch. (Basically, Philando and the suspect were both tall, skinny, black guys, with dreadlocks, a mustache and wispy beard). When the Family listened to the recording, they implied that it was just racial profiling and pushed the "all blacks look alike" hotbutton.
  • Philando had a long list of driving offenses (over 86 misdemeanors on over 50 pull overs), most of them minor traffic violations like driving on a suspended license (see below). Again, instead of owning any of it, the family claims that was all because he was DWB (driving while black), and pushing hot-buttons again.
  • The cop clearly says,  “I told him not to reach for it! I told him to get his head up!” — but bigots don’t want to consider what both sides are saying, or which is more plausible, they assume that an armed robbery suspect is more credible than the police, even when the evidence contradicts it. (These are probably the same people that believed OJ Simpson was a frame-job by the LAPD, because they hated successful black athletes).
  • SOP (Standard Operating Procedures) for cops, when someone has a license to carry (and the cop has any concerns), is to tell them to NOT move, and then to disarm them before ID (or doing anything else), or having them get out of the car and then disarming before going through the rest of the routine: all to avoid accidents or worse. According to Lavish the cop didn’t do that, told him to get his ID, then shot him for reaching for it. That stretches Lavish’s credibility as much as the, "hands up, don’t shoot" meme that’s long been proven bogus.
  •  Video shows the gun resting on Philando’s leg (a gun that looks like the one used in the robbery). That’s not where you usually keep a gun when you have a license to carry (that’s not how you’re trained). It’s also not where you’d keep one when a cop is coming to your window after pulling you over. It stretches Lavish’s version a bit more.
  • The family started a few Go-Fund-Me Donation sites (1, 2, 3), so far totaling about $250K, and has done everything they can to sensationalize the story and their plight. Lavish can be seen smoking her favorite brand of Newports.
  • There’s also strong suspicion he was a Crips gang member (either past or present). While it’s not proof, and I don’t leap to conclusions based on one post from a secondary news site, there’s reason to think a guy dressed in blue wearing a blue bandana, flashing gang signs, with facebook and twitter liking Crips and referencing them often, and his  girlfriend (Lavish) claiming to love her crips man, might be a member. Even if not, the fact that the media has played up the innocent cafeteria worker angle, and ignored the rest of the backstory and the thugs life references, tells you a lot about their interest in getting to the whole truth. 

I’m NOT saying that we should jump to conclusions, either way. Don’t assume robbery suspects and their families always tell the truth. Nor that the cops don’t make mistakes. You have to avoid jumping to conclusions, and give both the stink test. (Which seems more plausible).

  • Scenario A says a jumpy white cop shot a black guy for being black or reaching for his ID (which was next to his gun), after telling him to get his ID.
  • Scenario B has an armed robbery suspects not following directions of a latino officer and reaching for his gun (or ID, which was behind the gun), and his girlfriend turns on her cell phone to get her academy award in a movie called, "bad shooting lawsuit".

Even then, assuming either the cops are always wrong, or assuming the cops are always right, equally reflect only the bias of the viewer. Thus, we should wait and see. Not demand action based on unreliable testimony from either side. That’s not what the race hucksters and activists did. Don’t get the facts: react!

I love the smell of napalm in the morning…

I don’t blame the families for the drama, and pretending that their kids were Saints of the Hood, and did nothing wrong (ever), and this was a case of police shooting their poor innocent babies. This is their 15 minutes of fame and they know this could result in a fat settlement if people buy their hamming it up for the cameras. And on the less cynical side, their kids just died. Even if it was because they were stupid and couldn’t follow directions, they’re still dead. So I give them a pass and am not real judgy of them. Just skeptical of their purity and honesty when they’re spinning things like a coked up DJ. (Assuming they have no self interests because their kid/family just died is a tad naive). 

What I have a problem with is the irresponsible people on the sidelines, preying on the gullibility of the black community. We know the black community can be especially susceptible to conspiracy theories and delusions of everyone being out to get them. As proven by how many times they’ve been snookered in the past (OJ Simpson, Rodney King, Henry Louis Gates, Trayvon Martin, Michael Brown, Eric Garner, Sandra Bland, just to name a few). So to me, the real problem is those that prey on the gullibility of people too lazy to read and consider before having a protest and looting their own neighborhoods.

Thus I have problems with BLM (Black Lives Matters), the Black Panthers (or New New Black Panthers), Sharpton, Jackson, Obama, Clinton and other race hucksters. Heck, BLM was founded on the stupidity that Brown said, "Hands up, don’t shoot", the facts that it never happened, and they gullibly took the word of a guy because he was black, instead of common sense, says all you need to know about that hate-group. They prey on the gullibility of the least educated subgroups, that somehow the intitutions themselves are racist, when they are: usually the inner city institutions (police, government, prisons, etc) are OVER-represented by minorities and democrats, not under. (The usual democrats blame institutions, those with a clue blame the actions on the behavior/individual). Fortunately, they and their base aren’t paying attention, or they might notice that they/Democrats control the very institutions they complaining about.

In regards to BLM, I realize not all racists are haters, some are just fools. But you can’t have a movement trying to profess the interests of one race over the others (or attacking the institutions they control), and not attract the haters too. It’s like the difference between White Supremacists and Neo-Nazi’s. Sure, the former will claim they’re different/better, in that they don’t wish harm on minorities, they just want to live apart. (They’re basically White Panthers). While that’s true, it’s kinda hard to filter separatists, segregationists and violent bigots: that net snags many breeds of fish. So you see some BLM folks doing good things and screaming, "peace, not violence" at an offensive poster/protestor or stuff like that. But for each of those, you have many others doing stuff like the following (inciting violence). Which is why non-bigots want to stay as far away from these groups as possible.

If only our President was smart enough to do that. Instead we have an attention troll that inflames these situations by jumping in before we have the facts, assuming the cops guilt, then inciting the ignorants hate (by validating it) with comments like the following:

All Americans should be deeply troubled by the fatal shootings of Alton Sterling in Baton Rouge, Louisiana and Philando Castile in Falcon Heights, Minnesota. We’ve seen such tragedies far too many times, and our hearts go out to the families and communities who’ve suffered such a painful loss.

That’s not what you say to cops who were forced to defend themselves from stupid people drawing weapons on them, or if you’ve reserved any doubt as to what’s happened (and want to cool the situation).

A guy can call cops and tell them he’s shooting up a gay-bar for ISIS and Allah, and Obama says, "We have no idea what his motives are". Worse, a the shooter in Dallas whose Facebook page is littered with likes for black activism, and he says what his motivate before he dies, and Obama is clueless about what this could be about. Really? But some black activists posts a fable about a shooting and it doesn’t matter if it disagrees with logic, the cop, and physical evidence, and Obama is immediately doing what he can to divide us, take the accusers side against the police.

And the results are? Ask yourself if race relations are better now, or were better before our agitator-in-chief took the reigns of power.

Hillary Clinton is out there race-baiting for votes as well:

Identity politics results in identity hatred

Let’s remember the facts: something our leaders should be screaming to moderate hate, instead of playing community organizer/agitator.

  1. Every day there are hundreds (if not thousands) of armed people pulled over by cops, and they don’t end up dead (even black ones). Ever wonder how that can happen if the nation is neck deep in trigger happy racist cops? How come? Most aren’t stupid and can follow directions:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZOkFoRgoiC8
  2. Whites are killed by cops at twice the rate of blacks (despite whites committing far less crimes). Every few days a white guy gets killed by cops, and no one cares. If you took race out of the Anton or Philando stories above, and didn’t report their race or reported them as white, no one would care. There would be no riots or retaliation. Which proves that those protesting/rioting/responding are racists. Heck, "Black Lives Matter" is racist in the very title.http://www.redflagnews.com/headlines-2016/cops-shoot-white-guy-in-fresno-nobody-pays-attention

To buy into Black Lives matter premise, you have to be ignorant or a bigot.

Some quick numbers according to the census and DOJ from 1980 to 2008 show that blacks are under-represented in police shootings compared to whites. It’s whites that should be pissed. But you’ll never hear these facts from a BLM supporter:

The chances that a cop will be killed by a black person is 8x greater than being killed by a white (40.6% of the police officers murdered in the line of duty from 2009-2012 were killed by black males, despite them being only 6.6% of the population). These are up about 44% over prior years (which had been trending down prior to the Obama administration).

Worst of all is kind of killings, ambush killings were about 6 per year, thanks to Obama’s policies, last year they were up to 8, this year 11 so far (at the half way mark). We don’t know if this an outlier, or a trend yet, but seems worth noting. 

Last year 258 black men (38 unarmed) were killed by cops, compared to 4,472 black men killed by other black men (that number is also low, since it doesn’t factor in "race unknowns" or black women). That means a black man is over 172 times more likely to be killed by another black man than by a cop. And these numbers aren’t out of whack with whites where 494 white men (32 unarmed) were killed by cops.

Studies show that cops are more reluctant to pull the trigger on blacks than on whites. (Again, the numbers play this out). The latest/largest Roland G. Fryer study, also found cops slightly less likely to shoot, but also tried to conclude that the cops are slightly more handsy with blacks. Yet the second part was looking at only NYC during stop and frisk: that’s not a national policy so irrelevant to national conclusions. And there’s way too few details in that one cities data to be considered very reliable. (Though the finding sounds plausible). 

There’s a few counter studies that show blacks as "overrepresented", but only when put through "models", and model is code name for filters/constructs that disagree with raw numbers, logic, and common sense. 

Cops have very very few significant incidents of complaints compared to the number of interactions they have. And most of those complaints turn out to be false. We have a 670K sworn police officers, and an average of 53M interactions (contacts) per year (≈80/officer/year). 26K complains (0.49% of all contacts), 8% were sustained (92% had no provable validity or were dropped), which is 2K sustained complaints. Compared to 84K rapes or 14K murders, meaning you were 7x more likely to be murdered or 42x more likely to be raped that have a valid problem with a cop. But it turns out that criminals don’t like the police because the police interfere with their criminal activities: so you expect more complaints in high crime areas. That’s not symptoms of a problem, it’s a symptom that it’s working: 

Those that don’t know this are either uninformed, or don’t care about the facts. See every piece of material BLM and the Democrats have put out on these topics, meant to create identity anger, in hopes that they’ll turn out to vote for the party that’s lying to them, and promises to make things better. Just like they did for cities they control like Chicago, D.C., Detroit, and all the highest crime and murder rate places to live. The Dallas Police Chief recognizes them as a hate group, and is frustrated that the federal government does not: 

Black Panthers, Obama administration and Louis Farrakhan are rooting it on:

And the Obama administration who always takes time out of their day to lecture conservative or libertarian groups about the dangers of what they say based on dog-whistle innuendo that only they can hear. But are always silent when it comes to their allies outright calling for violence or ending it,“BY ANY MEANS NECESSARY!”

After nurturing the confirmation bias of the ignorant, that this was part of a larger pattern of "racist white cops shooting blacks for no reason" and getting away with it, what were the fruits that these hate mongers sowed?

Micah Xavier Johnson – BLM

Enter, Micah Xavier Johnson, Black Lives Matter member, part of a black power organizations (including Black Panthers). He goes out and shoots at "white people", especially cops, to get them back for an imagined injustice that he’s too ignorant to know the math on. Of course the guy was discharged from the military under less than great circumstances, there were some warnings of his trending fanaticism/racism, but since it was black racism, it would be racist to recognize it as racist. 

Of course the press also got the gun type he used wrong, and reported it as an assault rifle. It was a 70 year old SKS, which has no features in common with the dreaded assault rifle. But who expects the Press to get the basic facts right any more, especially when there’s an opportunity to divide us on something else: believing in the Constitutional recognized liberties?

Well Micah was a "lone shooter". An outlier. No pattern here. It doesn’t count. Something they’d never say if it was a conservative or NRA member. But it’s not really true if you look at how many other officers were targeted in Tennessee, Kansas, Louisiana, Georgia and Missouri for the same misguided reasons. Even Micah’s sister was rationalizing the radicalization that got her brother killed. It’s not a coordinated attack, but it’s still for the same reasons. (Ignorance and hate). 

Conclusion

The rational have been warning for years. If your politics is based on preying on the ignorance and hate of a group of racists, you’re irresponsibly inciting violence. Turns out Identity politics results in identity hatred. And that’s what we’re getting.

The race baiters like the Jackson and Obama, and others, make the problems worse, and lead to hostile and ignorant mobs like the BLM crowd, because they don’t understand math, and don’t care to. They want to believe these problems are unique to just their tribe, and if you want to see everything as injustice against your kind, you can find plenty of confirmation bias, no matter what the stats and facts say. But the more you encourage that hate and divisiveness, the more we as a society will reap the rewards, like will probably be happening all summer.

References

Anton’s Highlights

Rap sheet summary:

  • 9/09/96 – Aggravated battery
  • 10/31/97 – 2nd degree battery
  • 1/06/98 – Simple battery
  • 5/04/00 – Public intimidation
  • 9/20/00 – Carnal knowledge of a juvenile
  • 9/04/01 – Domestic violence
  • 5/24/05 – Burglary of an inhabited dwelling place
  • 7/11/05 – Receiving stolen things
  • 9/12/05 – Burglary of inhabited dwelling place
  • 3/17/06 – Simple criminal damage to property, simple robbery, simple theft, drug possession, misrepresentation during booking, simple battery, aggravated battery
  • 4/12/06 – Aggravated battery, simple criminal damage to property, disturbing the peace, unauthorized entry
  • 4/04/08 – Domestic abuse battery
  • 6/03/09 – Resisting an officer, drug possession, receiving stolen things, possession of stolen firearm, illegal carrying of a weapon with CDs, sound reproduct without consent
  • 10/12/09 – Illegal carrying of weapon, marijuana possession
  • 8/13/15 – Failure to register as a sex offender
  • 4/08/16 – Failure to register as a sex offender
  • 6/14/16 – Ecstacy and marijuana possession

Loving dad, posing with his kids brandishing guns like little hoods in training:

Philando Castile Highlights

  1. Violate instr permit: dismissed
  2. No proof of insurance: guilty
  3. Basic speed: guilty
  4. Driving after suspension: dismissed
  5. No proof of insurance: guilty
  6. No seat belt use: dismissed
  7. No proof of insurance: guilty
  8. Impede traffic: dismissed
  9. No Minnesota driver’s license: amended charge guilty
  10. Driving after suspension of driver’s license: Convicted
  11. No proof of insurance: dismissed
  12. No proof of insurance: convicted
  13. Driving after revocation: Dismissed
  14. Driving after suspension: Dismissed
  15. No proof of insurance: guilty
  16. Speeding: dismissed
  17. Driver’s license: failure to obtain new: dismissed
  18. Muffler required: dismissed
  19. Driving after revocation: guilty
  20. Operation of motor vehicle after loss of license prohibited: dismissed
  21. Dangerous public road/water: convicted
  22. Driving after revocation: convicted
  23. No proof of insurance: dismissed
  24. Driving after revocation: convicted
  25. Seat belt violation: dismissed
  26. Driving after revocation: convicted
  27. Proof on insurance: Dismissed
  28. Driving after revocation: convicted
  29. Driving after revocation: convicted
  30. Driving after revocation: convicted
  31. Seat belt required: convicted
  32. Seat belt required: convicted
  33. Driving after revocation: convicted
  34. Driving after revocation: convicted
  35. Driving after revocation: convicted
  36. Driving after revocation: convicted
  37. Driving after revocation: convicted
  38. Driving after revocation: convicted
  39. Stop/stand/park vehicle at any place where official signs prohibit stopping: convicted
  40. Expired registration: dismissed
  41. Snow emergency parking restrictions: convicted
  42. Stop/stand/park vehicle on any street/ally, at the same location, for more than 48 consecutive hours: convicted
  43. Abandon motor vehicle on any public/private property without consent: convicted
  44. Stop/stand/park vehicle on any street/ally, at the same location, for more than 48 consecutive hours: convicted
  45. Driving after suspension: guilty
  46. Driving after revocation: convicted
  47. Display altered/fictitious insurance card: dismissed
  48. Driving after revocation: convicted
  49. Seat belt required: dismissed
  50. Uninsured vehicle: convicted
  51. Driving after revocation: dismissed
  52. Seat belt required: dismissed
  53. Impromper display original plate: convicted
  54. Seat belt required: convicted
  55. Possess marijuana in motor vehicle: dismissed
  56. Drugs: possess over 1.4 grams of marijuana in motor vehicle: dismissed
  57. public nuisance – interfere/obstruct/render: convicted

Seen stenciled around Santa Cruz (what the BLM movement has wrought): 

One Reply to “1, 2, 3, 4, how do you start a race war?”