Friday, December 05, 2014

Angels With Dirty Faces, Things That Never Happened

Reader participation wanted. Why is it that every martyr or hero of the left is a scumbag in reality? Why do the sensationalized pro-narrative crimes always fizzle out? One event had to have been real in the last 50 years. Let's review the recent run of leftist friendly who/whom media events.

Mike Brown - The gentle giant who was a piece of crap.
Trayvon Martin - The angel who was a piece of crap.
Matthew Shepard - Homo martyr killed for being gay who really was killed by an ex-lover and most likely over drugs.
UVa Gang Rape - Retracted, most likely concocted by rape activists on campus and a journalist.
Duke Lacrosse Rape - Never happened. Stripper looking to shake down a rich guy frat. Accuser now in jail for killing a man.
Tawana Brawley - A bunch of KKK members raped her, uhhh, turns out it was false.
Rodney King - Guy high on PCP resists arrest and cops subdue him using harsh methods. The last couple hits were excessive supposedly. Found dead in a shallow end of a pool.
Countless campus race/sex/homophobia attacks - Self-inflicted hoaxes usually.
The annual Super Bowl sex trafficking stories - Not true.

When was the last pro-narrative event true? Who was the last pro-left angel without a dirty face? Help me out here. I can easily find victims of horrible crimes, but they never make the national news because of the anti-Left "Who/whom". A murder happens every 30 minutes in America and a rape every 6 minutes or so. I can find examples of real horrors like the phony ones above but with the wrong who/whom for the media. Sex trafficking: Rotherham, grisly racial hate crime: the Newsom and Christian horror rape/murder, gang rapes: your page 4 newspaper crime story that hides the victim and criminal's races. These do not matter because they represent the political opponents of the communists in control. The left has to manufacture these events, and like all media shows, the illusion can trick the marks only so long. If anything, this failure to spotlight true victims is indicative of the coalition of scumbags that make up the voting power of the left and the sick, twisted media mandarins that run the show.

23 comments:

Klaydiss said...

Serial killers like Dahmer & Bundy tend to support the narrative as "diabolical white guys" who pick off women/men of a certain type.

Aspergery nerds like Sandy Hook guy and Pittsburgh gym guy are spree killers who tend to support the notion that some dudes who can't get laid eventually will go postal.

The real question is what causes a story from local crime to media sensation. The answer likely lies in shitlibs like Brian Ross of ABC wanting to rub the faces of flyover country white ppl in shit and never paying a price for being wrong (i.e., their megaphone getting taken away).

Scott's Bluff said...

How about James Byrd? I wasn't old enough to know about it then, but apparently that event is on the short list of crimes committed against PoCs by white men that fit the narrative.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_James_Byrd,_Jr.

And it IS a short list if I remember correctly; just a hand full of media-promoted crimes/victims that fit the narrative for say the past 30 yrs or so.

Haven't read much about the event btw, just throwing it out there as the one I know about.

Anonymous said...

Byrd's maybe a best-case example, although he had a prison record for stuff like theft and forgery. But I've never heard an explanation for that one other than the Narrative, i.e., three drunk white guys with prison records decided to kill them a black guy they didn't know in a gruesome manner. No claim of provocation or anything. You don't have to have any great love for the Left's pet race to think those dudes deserved the chair (which two of them got).

Also doesn't prove the Narrative version that this sort of thing happens all the time in America or the South or Texas. (BTW, the town where it happened had a black mayor at the time, that's how oppressed blacks were.)

Or I guess there were probably some decent people among the people Pinochet whacked. Probably. Don't ask me to name any.

Anonymous said...

Eliot Rodgers did commit mass murder due to toxic masculinity, but not in the way the left views it.

If the narrative doesn't reflect reality, nothing true can shine on it.

peppermint said...

If Michael Brown's father had met Trayvon Martin's father in the early '90s, none of it would have happened. Brown's father was a Blood, Martin's father had a Crips tattoo modified when he became famous. I bring this up not just because it's an amusing anecdote but because these pieces of garbage owed their short existence to pro-crime policies that stretch back before the landmark Civil Rights Act of 1964.

I'm interested in the differences between society before and after 1964 and also the continuity, both because of the question of scale, whether the last 50 years and the Jews are the most interesting, or the last 500 and the Protestants, or the last 5000 of humanity and its socialist phenomenon, but also because that Civil Rights Act, instituted a decade after the end of the Red Scare, is the most important tool of red terror in the United States today.

PA said...

This goes way back:

Emmit Till: son of a convicted rapist, cornered a married woman in her store.

Martin Luther King, Jr.: plagiarist, whoremonger, tool of CPUSA, communist

Rosa Parks: tool of CPUSA, communist

Anonymous said...

these episodes do start to make me wonder which of the famous historical outrages from the south were real. emmett till comes to mind. his father was memorialized in an ezra pound poem, perhaps that made him more sympathetic to the left. i guess civil rights means fighting for the right for people to make unwanted sexual advances on white women. progress! and you wonder why rotterham happens.

undoubtedly, political correctness is a way to cow the white majority in the USA, the question is who benefits.

the unreported crimes in america area really mind boggling. just months before the UVA fake-rape, there was a real rape homicide. the real gang rapes that have occured recently will make you sick to your stomach. think there was one such event in wichita.

PA said...

i guess civil rights means fighting for the right for people to make unwanted sexual advances on white women

Civil Rights was NEVER about civil rights -- things like Bill of Rights, due process, privacy, conscience, or community. It was always about destroying civil society and ultimately replacing all forms of citizens' autonomy with a tyrannical central government. Civil Rights was America's Bolshevik Revolution.

On another note, I am laughing about the Portland cop who hugged a black kid, which ended up being a widely propagated photo. Well, turns out he is now in lib limbo because he 'liked' and "I am Officer Wilson" post on Facebook.

As I keep saying, libs give you no incentive to compromise. Just as the perfect anti-racist new diversity man George Zimmerman was framed as a neo-klansman, so is the hug-happy liberal cop now under scrutiny.

And the kicker? he distances himself from Darren Wilson by mewling something about supporting police solidarity, not that horrid baby-killer Wilson.

Limp-wristed Portlandian, please. Blubbering won't save you. Lesson to others: don't hug blacks. And if you 'like' a FB post, own it, bitch, don't backpedal and throw a comrade under the bus. Coward.

Eastern European communism has seen its share of vile, repulsive, hateful men, I know a handful personally, one now dead and another rich and old. But whatever you say about that communism, it did not produce many ridiculous human beings the way American communism does.

With the thoughts you'd be thinkin said...

They are starved of deserving targets to bestow their kindness due to decay of the populance, to indoctrinated to realize suspect the truth and the ideologues they have aren't as smart or a part of a unified culture anymore. The one of the Martin, Rice and Garner they needed to play was Rice then possibly Garner. Rice is the only one who can attract sympathy and potentially has no record or a justifiable to the public record.

Anonymous said...

As to the James Byrd case, one of the killers claimed he had become racist after being raped in prison by blacks. I wonder how many of the few real racists have stories of dreadful persecution beneath the surface. I'd wager what we get to see is just what supports the narrative.

nikcrit said...

undoubtedly, political correctness is a way to cow the white majority in the USA, the question is who benefits.

I've been asking 'who benefits?' too, but no one gives me a clear answer on that one.

And like you, they too are utterly confident that p.c. is a way to 'cow the white majority.'

I say it does that, and is often manipulatively used to do that. But the sentiment itself arises from many different sources------- some related to my personal interests, some not.

PA said...

I've been asking 'who benefits?' too, but no one gives me a clear answer on that one.

Your liberal White nature makes you concern-troll handwringer. Your Black half makes you an all-talk no-listen babbler.

Peterike answered your question by pointing to Jewish tribalism. I answered your question upthread by saying that the purpose of liberalism is to destroy civil society and replace it with a centralized tyranny. Many of us have also answered your questions repeatedly for years at GLP.

nikcrit said...

Your liberal White nature makes you concern-troll handwringer.

corrected translation:

"Your biracial no-race-land nature makes you a respectful antagonist toward alt-right blog dogma."

As for my question and alleged poor listening: I contend you have NOT suitably answered that question; paranoid nonsense is not a reply; but even if there was some mysterious all-powerful force intent on 'destroying' civil society, you still never pointed out'Why?'

The alt-right needs to better-hone-and-define its enemy: that would also help facilitate its legitimacy and influence.

FWIW, e.g., my five-cents worth: that sorta paranoia and vague blame, combined with the fringier holocaust-denying element, keeps the alt-right from being a threat, because, as is, it can be so easily ridiculed.

(I can imagine it gets annoying at times, to have a white racial and political movement be criticized by some de-racinated tricksta half-breed ---- but, I'm telling you, multi-culti America could learn a few things from us racial canaries in the coal mine: sometimes i truly believe i can seee the folly on both sides. For all the depth of the divide, blacks and whites have a lot of things in common, even in terms of their grievances; for instance, a lot of alt-righters disgruntlement is a pitch-perfect parody of those who are always whining about racial and sexual discrimination.)

nikcrit said...

p.s.-----

re. 'the question'; i responded to peterike's unfortunate non-answer at the end of the tamar rice thread; actually, his answer, which you cited here, is a perfect example of what i meant when I said the alt-right holds itself down and presents a bad image. (yes, there's a SWIPPLE and Jewish class arrogance and disdain toward more working-class goyim, but that is not a driving force when you add forces such as globalism and immigration to the analysis; it's personal resentment that's balooned into delusion that affects clear thinking, IMHO.)



Anonymous said...

(1) It's the Jews. The International Jew, article 74, What Jews Attempted where they Had Power documents a case 100 years ago in which a lecturer was fired for mentioning the Jewish question. The Jews later got that ultimate instrument of Red terror Civil Rights Act passed. The Jews began trying to pass immigration reform as soon as they showed up.

(2) it's stupid White liberals and the socialist phenomenon

(3) Those White liberals are miseducated because certain perspectives are totally withheld. Moldbug asked why there is no Confederate Racist Television network. The answer is the Civil Rights Act, schemed for by the Jews.

(4) Basically, what kind of country do we want? Do we want a White country - one where the Jews are by default not welcome? Or do we want a multi-ethnic country, in which White privilege is abolished, and the Jews are allowed to control everything? The host and the parasite have this fundamentally irreconcilable difference that drives their debate regardless of whether it is noticed.

Lauren said...

My best guess would be Michael Donald. Can't find a lot of information on him personally, though.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Donald

PA said...

For a bit of beauty, for a change, consider listening to the Beatles' "Across the Universe." Lennon's original version is sublime.

However, I have this thing that I like to check out cover versions of good songs, both by professional recording artists and by Youtube amateurs. The best cover I found was by Laibach.

Here is a beautifully done, raw, live version:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i7qFcaQODKM

Here is an earlier Laibach version, studio-recorded and sang by a different female vocalist:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_q5mlb3Bjzs

The magical part of the song, vocally, is when they do the Sanskrit incantation "Jai Guru Deva, Om." To me, a satisfying cover draws out the "Om" either by backup singers or by the main vocalist.

Podsnap said...

"Who Benefits" ?

Don't come the raw prawn with me Nikcrit (as Australians used to say). You have been hanging around alt right forums for years now....

At a very simple level it's just a group thing.

In one sense it is a social war within the white class structure. White upper class libs are trained and incentivised to help the 'other', and they gain social credit by despising their own working class.

In another sense it is a social war within the nation. Some groups consider themselves part of the nation, those groups side with like minded groups. Other groups consider themselves outsiders - they side with other outsider groups against the insiders.

You're Brazilian, right ? You must know this.....

Podsnap said...

One reason why it is hard to find any white on minority outrages is that whites just don't act violently in groups any more.

The nature of an 'outrage' is some sort of disparity in power between the offenders and the victim. That disparity can only be fulfilled by the white offender being in a position of authority or a group of whites acting together.

White authority figures have been so cowed by PC, training, and the fear of merciless punishment for any mistreatment of minorities over the last few years that it is pretty rare that they fuck up. Volpe/Louima is a bit of an outrage - but Volpe got THIRTY years.

And white gangs don't really exist. Whenever I hear a story about a white rape gang (outside of possibly a sporting context) I know it's bullshit. If I was a white rapist there is no way I would be trusting any of my friends to back me up.

nikcrit said...

In one sense it is a social war within the white class structure. White upper class libs are trained and incentivised to help the 'other', and they gain social credit by despising their own working class.

Yes, as is the case eventually for any given class, race or distinctive group that, for whatever reason, finds itself 'on top' in a given ethnic or other social order.

I understand this; I wasn't trying to be coy or disingenuous; i was trying to make the point rhetorically that 'anti-racism,' in all its forms and postures, is a multi-sourced concept in how it manifests and has both psychological as well as practical-political motives in its latency.

I just get tired of the 'Da Jews!" line of reasoning; of course, it's that in instances; but that is also the most convenient, blame-free and non-psychological reason to be sourced by alt-righters, the explanation that coincidentally involes the least amount of self-reflection.

I also understand that these blogs serve a dual purpose; part of it is just piss-n-vinegar bonding and venting among whites who need a break from the larger-societal p.c. sanctimonies and witchhunts, etc.; and in those such moments, i try to make myself absent and let things be.
But there are many other moments in which real, objective debate prevails, and in those such instances, i'll bring up points like the one i made the last couple of days, etc.

Btw: not Brazillian; just a Rustbelt-bred B-W biracial with a music and journalistic pedigree who's now working as a administrator in public eduction, K-12 but primarily in high-school environments.

nikcrit said...

However, I have this thing that I like to check out cover versions of good songs, both by professional recording artists and by Youtube amateurs.

this is among my favorite two-or-three Youtube Beatles covers:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HtFvQPkao0o

If you like, checkout some of the other songs and videos of this performer, who goes by 'Bertolf;' very nimble player and charismatic singer.

Anonymous said...

And white gangs don't really exist.

Yeah, no longer in the US or even England. But of course they still exist in the former Soviet bloc:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OXz8qFaFfdg

NZT said...

I'd add one more to your list: Tyler Clementi, the Rutgers student who was supposedly bullied to suicide by his roommate over his homosexuality (roomie went to prison IIRC), but a little investigation revealed he had a history of mental health issues and depression, and e-mails showed he hadn't actually been all that bothered by the "bullying" when it happened (he comes across as mildly annoyed at best).