At least they mentioned the attackers race in this article but the euphemisms are all there: "Random" "Senseless Violence". No, it makes perfect sense. He was white they were black. jerry
Colin Powell may have ascended to a high level of power, he may be considered to be a "conservative" black but when you get down to it he still buys into racist illusions. Hey Mr. Powell, next year ask the typical person who Treyvon Martin is and I guarantee 99% will know. Then ask them who Delbert Belton and Christopher Lane are and I guarantee 99% won't remember them. Come to think of it if you ask Mr. Powell right now who those two men were I wonder if he knows. Wouldn't be surprised if he didnt. Yet, he's considered "educated"? Jerry
Yes, not only did the Oregonian follow it's pattern of endangering public safety by not reporting a full description (i.e. race) of shooters, in this case a representative of the Oregonian actually responded in the comments field giving their "justification" of this policy. If you scroll to near the bottom of the comments field, Oregonian representative "Kari Bray" explains the "policy" and a link to a site that explains why they follow it (I know it's on the page but I pasted the 2nd link below anyways). Really doesn't explain anything, her disingenuous response sounds surface reasonable but it's simply designed to deflect the obvious racial bias the Oregonian practices. Of course, it's utterly ridiculous that they don't report race because someone might make a mistake, any kind of description could possibly be erroneous for a number of reasons, a newspaper's responsibility is simply to give the best information available as quickly to alert people of possible danger and while memories are fresh and before trails go cold. As one commenter stated: Just give the description the police have. Simple as that. They won't though, if you read between the lines they won't list race as a policy because of the chance one particular group (I'll give you one guess which one) might feel disproportionately singled out and might be offended. There is no other reason, we know it and they know it, so why don't they just cut the crap and tell the truth? Gives you an insight of just how craven and cowardly most journalists are today. I suspect just about any other major "news" source has a similar policy and rationalization. Jerry
The band plays on.... I just sent a piece on a shooting in which descriptions were omitted - now, practically the next day we have another racially motivated attack on a bicyclist where descriptions again are omitted. I attempted to post a comment on this article and it was quickly deleted, in fact, almost all posting referencing race have been deleted, many commenters are pointing out that the big "O" only deletes race when attackers are black. In the past you used to be able to post comments about it but apparently a new policy is not allowing it. As little respect as I had for the Oregonian I at least gave them credit for allowing some real information in the comment fields but that appears to be no more. jerry
am getting sick over the media barrage of the march on Washington on every radio station and newspaper. Propaganda aimed at convincing us that blacks are victims and are free to harm, maim, steal and murder.
You don't hear much about James Bevel, King's 2nd in command anymore. Not after he was convicted of raping his daughters. That news was back page, short articles right after he was found guilty.
Let's hear more about Bevel, who testified he was sexually orientating his victims, who also happened to be his own children. What about the civil rights of rape and incest survivors? And we're not hearing or seeing Anita Hill today.
James Bevel isn't the only one, look up the name Aswad Ayinde, a black man who impregnated his own daughters. An incredibly heinous crime that only merited brief token mention by the media (wonder why). Interesting the massive media coverage we give to cases like the Garrido/Duggard story or the Ariel Castro kisnappings, now Castro wasn't exactly pure white but I guess he was close enough, had he been black no doubt the story would have been disappeared by the media by now, I still see followup news bits about these cases not to mention the numerous news/talk show features of these cases. We know the drill though, if it involves a black perp the media talking sock puppets won't touch the stories. Jerry
I spotted this headline on originally on the lead MSN homepage, the race apologist psy ops damage control wing is going to work and being given headline coverage. Newsflash: The murder of Christopher Lane was not racist because one of the killers was white! Now prosecutors are making their usual grandstanding statements "IT IS NOT A RACIAL CRIME". Of course they never do this when it is a white on black crime, I know anyone reading this post already knows that but I just had to say it. Clearly prosecutors are more interested in reinforcing their "anti racist" credentials than getting at truth. That a white guy was involved does not mean it wasn't a racially motivated crime, kind of reminds me of those sexual assault cases by black overseas military males, most of the time the perps are black men though sometimes whites are involved, it's almost always the blacks that instigate while their "white boys" go along with it. Unfortunately, there are weak willed white men that are often to cowardly to stand up to black men and end up being their "collaborators". I wouldn't be surprised if this white punk was a pussy whose role was a token "white boy" mascot. I've seen the type before, often aping the mannerism of blacks and reinforcing the stereotype of white boy "wiggers". All their gangsta posing and posturing can't cover up the fact they're just pathetic wimps. Not excusing him. I hope he fries along with his two bosses. Just pointing out that it's very possible that a white guy being with them doesn't mean they weren't acting out of underlying racist motivations. Somehow I don't think the profilers that interview these guys will honestly examine the dynamics of their relationship to find out who the alphas and betas were. Wouldn't fit into the racial PC ideology that infests our society. Jerry
And the DC esp Kaus has done outstanding work on immigration, too. Yet their immigration articles aren't big deals among their own readers?
ReplyDeleteAt least they mentioned the attackers race in this article but the euphemisms are all there: "Random" "Senseless Violence". No, it makes perfect sense. He was white they were black. jerry
ReplyDeletehttp://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/08/23/20145461-wwii-vet-88-brutally-beaten-to-death-in-spokane-wash?lite
Colin Powell may have ascended to a high level of power, he may be considered to be a "conservative" black but when you get down to it he still buys into racist illusions.
ReplyDeleteHey Mr. Powell, next year ask the typical person who Treyvon Martin is and I guarantee 99% will know. Then ask them who Delbert Belton and Christopher Lane are and I guarantee 99% won't remember them.
Come to think of it if you ask Mr. Powell right now who those two men were I wonder if he knows. Wouldn't be surprised if he didnt. Yet, he's considered "educated"? Jerry
http://news.msn.com/crime-justice/colin-powell-calls-zimmerman-verdict-questionable?ocid=ansnews11
Yes, not only did the Oregonian follow it's pattern of endangering public safety by not reporting a full description (i.e. race) of shooters, in this case a representative of the Oregonian actually responded in the comments field giving their "justification" of this policy.
ReplyDeleteIf you scroll to near the bottom of the comments field, Oregonian representative "Kari Bray" explains the "policy" and a link to a site that explains why they follow it (I know it's on the page but I pasted the 2nd link below anyways).
Really doesn't explain anything, her disingenuous response sounds surface reasonable but it's simply designed to deflect the obvious racial bias the Oregonian practices. Of course, it's utterly ridiculous that they don't report race because someone might make a mistake, any kind of description could possibly be erroneous for a number of reasons, a newspaper's responsibility is simply to give the best information available as quickly to alert people of possible danger and while memories are fresh and before trails go cold. As one commenter stated: Just give the description the police have. Simple as that.
They won't though, if you read between the lines they won't list race as a policy because of the chance one particular group (I'll give you one guess which one) might feel disproportionately singled out and might be offended. There is no other reason, we know it and they know it, so why don't they just cut the crap and tell the truth?
Gives you an insight of just how craven and cowardly most journalists are today. I suspect just about any other major "news" source has a similar policy and rationalization. Jerry
http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2013/08/portland_waterfront_shooting_u.html#incart_m-rpt-1
http://www.pbs.org/race/002_SortingPeople/002_00-home.htm
The band plays on....
ReplyDeleteI just sent a piece on a shooting in which descriptions were omitted - now, practically the next day we have another racially motivated attack on a bicyclist where descriptions again are omitted.
I attempted to post a comment on this article and it was quickly deleted, in fact, almost all posting referencing race have been deleted, many commenters are pointing out that the big "O" only deletes race when attackers are black. In the past you used to be able to post comments about it but apparently a new policy is not allowing it. As little respect as I had for the Oregonian I at least gave them credit for allowing some real information in the comment fields but that appears to be no more. jerry
http://www.oregonlive.com/commuting/index.ssf/2013/08/two_bicyclists_injured_in_unpr.html
am getting sick over the media barrage of the march on Washington on every radio station and newspaper. Propaganda aimed at convincing us that blacks are victims and are free to harm, maim, steal and murder.
ReplyDeleteYou don't hear much about James Bevel, King's 2nd in command anymore. Not after he was convicted of raping his daughters. That news was back page, short articles right after he was found guilty.
Let's hear more about Bevel, who
testified he was sexually orientating his victims, who also happened to be his own children. What about the civil rights of rape and incest survivors?
And we're not hearing or seeing Anita Hill today.
James Bevel isn't the only one, look up the name Aswad Ayinde, a black man who impregnated his own daughters. An incredibly heinous crime that only merited brief token mention by the media (wonder why).
ReplyDeleteInteresting the massive media coverage we give to cases like the Garrido/Duggard story or the Ariel Castro kisnappings, now Castro wasn't exactly pure white but I guess he was close enough, had he been black no doubt the story would have been disappeared by the media by now, I still see followup news bits about these cases not to mention the numerous news/talk show features of these cases. We know the drill though, if it involves a black perp the media talking sock puppets won't touch the stories. Jerry
I spotted this headline on originally on the lead MSN homepage, the race apologist psy ops damage control wing is going to work and being given headline coverage. Newsflash: The murder of Christopher Lane was not racist because one of the killers was white! Now prosecutors are making their usual grandstanding statements "IT IS NOT A RACIAL CRIME". Of course they never do this when it is a white on black crime, I know anyone reading this post already knows that but I just had to say it. Clearly prosecutors are more interested in reinforcing their "anti racist" credentials than getting at truth. That a white guy was involved does not mean it wasn't a racially motivated crime, kind of reminds me of those sexual assault cases by black overseas military males, most of the time the perps are black men though sometimes whites are involved, it's almost always the blacks that instigate while their "white boys" go along with it. Unfortunately, there are weak willed white men that are often to cowardly to stand up to black men and end up being their "collaborators". I wouldn't be surprised if this white punk was a pussy whose role was a token "white boy" mascot. I've seen the type before, often aping the mannerism of blacks and reinforcing the stereotype of white boy "wiggers". All their gangsta posing and posturing can't cover up the fact they're just pathetic wimps.
ReplyDeleteNot excusing him. I hope he fries along with his two bosses. Just pointing out that it's very possible that a white guy being with them doesn't mean they weren't acting out of underlying racist motivations. Somehow I don't think the profilers that interview these guys will honestly examine the dynamics of their relationship to find out who the alphas and betas were. Wouldn't fit into the racial PC ideology that infests our society. Jerry
http://crooksandliars.com/john-amato/update-allen-west-daily-caller-fox-fals