Tuesday, August 18, 2015

America’s Dirty War

Re-posted by Nicholas Stix

The Race War of Black Against White
October 19, 2009

(N.S.: I just found this essay here, at the Australian Web site, The Realists. Although it sounds like me, I didn’t write it. Of course, there are millions of American whites who could have written the same words. The interesting part is that the author, Paul Sheehan, is an Aussie—apparently of Irish descent—a columnist for the Sydney Morning Herald. However, I very much doubt that Sheehan—not to be confused with leftwing American propagandist Neil Sheehan—would be able to get away with writing such an honest essay today. Except for the essay’s first clause, all emphases and hyperlinks were added by me.)

By Paul Sheehan
The Sydney Morning Herald, 20 May 1995

The longest war America has ever fought is the Dirty War, and it is not over. It has lasted 30 years so far and claimed more than 25 million victims. It has cost almost as many lives as the Vietnam War. It determined the result of last year’s congressional election. And it helps explain the paranoid undertow of American politics that found its most gruesome expression in the Oklahoma City bombing.

Yet the American news media do not want to talk about the Dirty War, which remains between the lines and unreported. In fact, to even suggest that the war exists is to be discredited. So let’s start suggesting, immediately.

No matter how crime figures are massaged by those who want to acknowledge or dispute the existence of a Dirty War, there is nothing ambiguous about what the official statistics portray: for the past 30 years a large segment of black America has waged a war of violent retribution against white America.

And the problem is getting worse, not better. In the past 20 years, violent crime has increased more than four times faster than the population. Young blacks (under 18) are more violent than previous generations and are 12 times more likely to be arrested for murder than young whites.

Nearly all the following figures, which speak for themselves, have not been reported in America:

• According to the latest US Department of Justice survey of crime victims, more than 6.6 million violent crimes (murder, rape, assault and robbery) are committed in the US each year, of which about 20 per cent, or 1.3 million, are inter-racial crimes.
• Most victims of race crime — about 90 per cent — are white, according to the survey “Highlights From 20 Years of Surveying Crime Victims”, published in 1993.
• Almost 1 million white Americans were murdered, robbed, assaulted or raped by black Americans in 1992, compared with about 132,000 blacks who were murdered, robbed, assaulted or raped by whites, according to the same survey.
• Blacks thus committed 7.5 times more violent inter-racial crimes than whites even though the black population is only one-seventh the size of the white population. When these figures are adjusted on a per capita basis, they reveal an extraordinary disparity: blacks are committing more than 50 times the violent racial crimes of whites.
• According to the latest annual report on murder by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, most inter-racial murders involve black assailants and white victims, with blacks murdering whites at 18 times the rate that whites murder blacks.

These breathtaking disparities began to emerge in the mid-1960s, when there was a sharp increase in black crime against whites, an upsurge which, not coincidentally, corresponds exactly with the beginning of the modern civil rights movement.

Over time, the cumulative effect has been staggering. Justice Department and FBI statistics indicate that between 1964 and 1994 more than 25 million violent inter-racial crimes were committed, overwhelmingly involving black offenders and white victims, and more than 45,000 people were killed in inter-racial murders. By comparisons 58,000 Americans died in Vietnam, and 34,000 were killed in the Korean War.

When non-violent crimes (burglary, larceny, car theft and personal theft) are included, the cumulative totals become prodigious. The Bureau of Justice Statistics says 27 million non-violent crimes were committed in the US in 1992, and the survey found that 31 per cent of the robberies involved black offenders and white victims (while only 2 per cent in the reverse).

When all the crime figures are calculated, it appears that black Americans have committed at least 170 million crimes against white Americans in the past 30 years. It is the great defining disaster of American life and American ideals since World War II.

Apologists for black crime have always argued that such crime is largely economic, not racial; whites have the money, while blacks have the poverty. This rationalisation is only partly true. Unfortunately, the racist character of the Dirty War is obvious every day in a cascade of large and small animosities.

It is the more than 1,600 murders of whites by blacks each year, hundreds of them overtly racial, such as the killing of 19-year-old Michael Westerman in Tennessee, who was shot to death in January by four black youths because he was flying a confederate flag on his truck.

It is the belief held by a dominant majority of black Amer¬icans that O. J. Simpson should be acquitted of charges of murdering two white people, despite a superhighway of DNA evidence linking him to the murder scene, despite his long record of violence against women, and despite his complete absence of an alibi.

It is the naked racism and anti-Semitism of the black news media (which goes unchallenged by the mainstream media). Typically black newspapers and radio stations threw their support behind Colin Ferguson last year, arguing that he went on a rampage, shooting 19 whites, because he was deranged by “black rage”, a symptom caused by white racism.

It is the atavistic rhetoric of the Rev Louis Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam, whose rallies attract 20,000 people cheering Farrakhan’s calls for violence against the white devils.

It is my own experience with black Americans in the past decade, which includes attempted murder, assault, theft, bottle-throwing, being showered with beer, and being called “cracker”, “honkey”, “motherf. . .er”, “white trash”, and “blue-eyed devil”.

The general debauching of the civil rights movement is the great undercurrent of American politics today. It expresses itself in a multitude of code terms substituted for black violence and black failure. It was the well-spring of the Republican election triumph last year, a triumph whose velocity the American media completely failed to foresee.

Now the US is confronting the spectre of violent white reaction. Tellingly, the prime suspect in the Oklahoma City bombing, Timothy McVeigh, is virulently anti-black. And the militia movement from which he sprang despises the Federal Government’s aggressive preferences for blacks in jobs, education and civil rights.

This fury is not confined to the margins of society. The National Rifle Association, with its 3.5 million members and power in the Republican Party, is constantly harping about “jackboot tactics” by the Federal Government and its anti-government rhetoric in the wake of the Oklahoma bombing even prompted former President Bush to resign his membership.

Black America, too, has its own paranoid, anti-police, armed groups – hundreds of them, with tens of thousands of members. These are called gangs. It is no coincidence that the city with the highest concentration of gangs, Los Angeles, was in a state of virtual civil war in 1992 during the Rodney King riots, which the black community still describes as an “uprising”.

All these are facts, yet by simply writing this story, by assembling the facts in this way, I would be deemed a racist by the American news media. It prefers to maintain a paternalistic double-standard in its coverage of black America, a lower standard.


Anonymous said...

Great article. That is a world-class assessment. And the war has gotten a lot worse since then.

Anonymous said...

Agree with anonymous.But if you give your opinion the media detonates a censorship bomb to wipe out true discussion.Personally I have to say I m very proud that after a 10 blacks on 1 white beating in my town, I started blogging some very strong opinions on blacks.But the blogsite, a TV station, deleted my comments (basically describing various ghetto streets in my town and what was going on),banned me and others.I switched email addresses and got back on...pushing the limit, without being offensive.We just had a big crime wave of black on black murders which I commented on often.The great part was when they removed the entire blogsite for all their stories.The blacks had been flagging them in bunches.As I replied often, if you re going to delete my comments--why have a blogsite at all.Now they don t.The moral is-free speech is only a concept--not reality(a twist on Robin Williams---lol).

Anonymous said...

Unless white people change their attitudes we are going to lose the war or be forced into the country, which is still appeasing the blacks..Laws must get tougher..crime cannot be tolerated...repeat offenders must be separated from those who want to live decent lives.

Anonymous said...

Well, there is no doubt whatsoever that the purpose of the Cosmopolitan's gun control laws is so that the State can directly back Black Mayhem (BM) to keep Whitey in their place. The MSM cannot refer to BM without being referred to by the standard "YOU RACISTS!"

They use the magician's trick of rhetorical redirection: it's NEVER "Felonious Black Gunfire" (FBG) when some Military Age Male (MAM) is shot in the 'hood. Uh uh. No way.
The talking head MUST use the 24/7 "Gun Violence" because that way the perps' race is whitewashed.

Anonymous said...

"The blacks had been flagging them in bunches"

Maybe not merely blacks. Shills of the SPLC for instance?

Anonymous said...

I never cease to be amazed at the lengths that blacks and their enablers will go to to stop the dissemination of true, objective, factual speech. And then to act as if they've won a great moral victory by depriving someone of their ability to speak the truth, because they dislike that truth and don't want other people to know it.

The whole point of free speech is that, short of someone making criminal threats or disclosing state secrets, it's just too damn bad if a statement offends you. The right of someone to speak their mind is more important than your desire to not be offended by what someone says.

If it were speech everyone agreed with and was pleased by (i.e., "Puppies are cute!"*), it obviously wouldn't need to be protected as a right.

*No disrespect intended toward those who despise or are terrified by puppies.

Anonymous said...

Absolutely right.

Anonymous said...

Shots rang out... gunfire erupted... the streets claimed another victim... always in the passive and/or impersonal sense, to draw your attention away from or soften the fact that actual, real people who can be held accountable for their actions — and not chimeras like "drug violence" or "institutional racism" — have made the conscious and deliberate decision to shoot at other people.