Skip to comments.In Florida Racialist Black Leaders Found A Cause.Unfortunately,The Wrong One RE:Zimmerman/Martin
Posted on 03/26/2012 6:30:26 AM PDT by joeclarke
[CORRECTION - FREE REPUBLIC MODERATOR - CAN YOU PULL THE OTHER ONE- SAME TITLE- DOWN?]
Pulitzer Prize winning Eugene Robinson of the Washington Post has joined the fray with black leaders across the country, who are calling for the lynching of Hispanic George Zimmerman for his self-defense shooting of Trayvon Martin. Mr. Robinson, a professorial racialist akin to the likes of Jesse Jackson, Louis Farrakhan, and Al Sharpton, also rushed to judgment in 2006 when multiple white Duke Lacrosse players were falsely accused of the hate crime of raping a black stripper at a college party. Robinson remarked back then, "It's impossible to avoid thinking of all the black women who were violated by drunken white men in the American South over the centuries."
Statistically, it is an extremely rare occasion for a white person to murder a black, as opposed to blacks perpetrating crimes against whites, yet the enormously overlooked crimes of blacks killing blacks are ignored by liberal blacks as well as white liberals, who must presume that black on black crime is a necessary constant that must be accepted and cannot be remedied.
The press has not done well to depict the baby-faced Trayvon as the innocent kid - even as it is now known that one witness has testified that the 6' 2" Trayvon was seen on top of a crying Mr. Zimmerman, flailing away, breaking his nose, and bloodying his head - before he was fatally shot. To racialists it is the perfect storm, but to the rest of the country it is pure and simple media bias of the most disgusting sort.
Saddest part is that the media is either enjoying fanning the flames on this incident, or it has no idea that it is operating under such double-standard biases.
Sure thing, Mr. Greenberg...
To me it looks like the whole thing is being choreographed by the Left to create a race war.
Statistically, it is an extremely rare occasion for a white person to murder a black.
OJ nods with a grin.
They know EXACTLY what they’re doing-It’s all a part of leftist plans to keep whites on the defensive. As for the racist Robinson, he moved to a Carribean island because he felt America was racist, yet he feels entitled to comment on American events. P*** off already.
Its a shame. We have a whole cadre of people looking for any excuse to fail. If they can’t find one they make one up. Yes Mr Jackson black men are under attack...by other black men.... heal you own.
This is all part of the summer voter intimidation plan to keep many away from the pols for fear of violence. It is going to be a very bad year...
They’ve been looking for any excuse, like the Nazis were looking for any excuse to institute Kristallnacht....then some flunky gets shot in Paris, then they had it.
I think you’re right about creating a ‘race war’. The race baiters look at his name and pictures and call him White, though he is Hispanic. I don’t think the new black panthers, SEIU blacks and rev al, je$$e & louie’s racist scum troops would last too long fighting the Cubans, Puerto Ricans, Hondurans and other South Florida Hispanics. My guess is that there are more than a few leftover Bay of Pigs weapons and packs of C4 hidden under floorboards in homes in “Little Havana”.
“This is all part of the summer voter intimidation plan to keep many away from the pols for fear of violence. It is going to be a very bad year...”
It might be like what Obama’s cousin, Raila Odinga, did after narrowly losing the vote for prez in Kenya - he mustered up the Muzzies and others on his side to riot all of the country. A few hours before the rioting started Odinga had called Obama for advice on what to do after losing the vote.
It's primarily because it is Presidential Election time.
We've had the first Black President, Bill Clinton, reminiscing about black churches in Arkansas getting burned down when he was a child (something that was never uncovered by research); George Bush getting blamed for the Jim Byrd tragedy because he was the Governor in Texas; the Second Black President (the Community Organizer), and anyone not voting for him must be a racist; and now we have this media contrived offensive. Yes, it is a tragedy when someone gets killed (as dozens do every day), but this just fit the Media's template for the Presidential election year. Get the plantation slaves riled up so that they'll go to the polls in November.
The Washington Post employee claimed that "It's impossible to avoid thinking of all the black women who were violated by drunken white men in the American South over the centuries."
Some questions for the newspaper employee:
Is it possible to document the numbers?
If it was such a chronic problem how come it's disappeared? Please provide some valid sources to prove that it is still a problem -- contrary to the DoJ single-offender stats below.
Is it possible for black men to stop raping white women? If not why not? (You brought up the racial aspect, call me a racist. It is what you are wont to do no doubt.)
Rape in the United States I often wondered about this.
"The U.S. Department of Justice compiles statistics on crime by race, but only between and among people categorized as black or white. In 2005 there were 111,490 white and 36,620 black victims of rape or sexual assault. In 2005, out of the 111,490 cases involving white victims, 44.5% had white offenders and 33.6% had black offenders, while the 36,620 black victims had a figure of 100% black offenders, numbers of white offenders were estimated to be negligible (extrapolated from a sample size of fewer than 10 instances)."
Though wiki is sometimes wiki graffiti it appears that the above is documented unless I misread this DoJ document that apparently the Obama/Holder Dept. of Just Us has not yet erased See Percent distribution of single-offender victimizations, based on race of victims, by type of crime and perceived race of offender.
A quote from one column (November 19, 2002) of Frum's I post often contains this (the quote is by Karenna Gore) and it's about the 2000 post-election day turmoil. It sure seemed to me that the Dems were ready to spark race riots -- which IMO the MSM would have demanded that Bush concede and bow to the "will of the people" (a phrase often included in MSM reports on the turmoil).
"He [Al Gore] said, 'We have to do what's best for the country, and it is not good for the country to have this kind of divisiveness.' And he was on the phone, really calling off the dogs. There were people who wanted to fan the
the flames of the racial issue and have real unrest. And he was on the phone asking them not to, because of what was best for the country not because of what was best for him politically. And that's really who he is."
There's a unbiased source. /s
He stopped it because who would be blamed for it? Gore.
Have you seen the number of inflammatory, hate-filled, Hitlerian speeches the dipwad has given?
Blatant, blatant propaganda and manipulation. Totally corrupt. That degree of open manipulation is what should be haunting your dreams today - it's a very, very bad sign. You know where it leads...
“Ministry of Truth”.
“Minitrue”. Yep. What’s so creepy is that they don’t care any more if anyone notices.
We haven’t got much longer.
I guess I was remiss in not making the point.. first, I am not a Gore fan. Gore's daughter revealed facts that the Democrats planned to start race riots.
I remember how racial violence was used in the 1960s. The violence was mostly man-made and the man was more often than not white and left of center. We all knew that but there was very little way to question the tactics. No Internet, no modern talk radio.
As for 2000, Gore would not have been blamed for the race riots. On the contrary. Bush was being set up to be accused of not responding to "the will of the people."
It was clear to me at the time -- at the time meaning November 2000 -- that race riots were on the agenda.
The press was blabbing about "the will of the people" -- the riots would have segued into demands for Bush to yield to Gore.
The press would start "reporting" that Bush should acknowledge "the will of the people" and stop the bloodshed and destruction. Gore got the most popular votes, let him be president. No doubt in my mind that was one of the Democrats' schemes. Probably Number One.
Gore stopped it.
IMO the quotes in Frum's column prove it. Thanks to a radio interview a couple of years ago I was able to have the host ask Frum about it; but he did not remember the 2002 column. He said he would check. I have no idea beyond that.
Thank you for the link.
I know Dems planned to start race riots. I have a friend who worked with a Leftist at a computer company who still had friends at her old job working for some major league Leftist, non-profit group (can’t remember the name now) who told my friend that if Bush won there were going to riots.
That’s when I became really concerned and I told all of my friends to get ready.
What do you think happened when Raila Odinga (Obama’s cousin) in Kenya narrowly lost the vote for Kenyan prez? Raila had his Muzzie and non-Muzzie supporters go out and riot killing a large number of people. It was quite obvious who started that.
I’m glad Gore stopped it but it would have been pretty obvious that if Gore had not stopped the possible conflagration it would have been his tacit permission by silence that would allowed it to occur.
Recall that shortly before the 2004 election the “sainted” Lizzy Edwards said that “If the right guy wins there won’t be riots”.
Supporter: Kerry’s going to take PA.
Liz Edwards: I know that.
Supporter: I’m just worried there’s going to be riots afterwards.
Liz Edwards: Uh.....well...not if we win.
(ring a bell?)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.