Some things are so horrific, they are beyond my ability to contemplate rationally. My only reaction is visceral horror and a corresponding desire to erase the perpetrators from the face of the Earth. Here is one such event:
A mother murdered her own son after a pattern of torture and abuse:
Toddler Liam Fee was found dead at his home near Glenrothes in Fife in March 2014, having suffered a ruptured heart as a result of severe blunt force trauma to his body.
His mother, Rachel Fee, 31, and her partner Nyomi Fee, 29, denied killing him but were convicted of murder following a seven-week trial at the High Court in Livingston.
The jury had heard that after the youngster’s leg was broken, the Fees went online and Googled ‘can wives be in prison together?’
The court heard that Liam later suffered heart injuries similar to those found on road crash victims after receiving blows to his chest and abdomen.
The pathologist who examined his body also found more than 30 external injuries on the toddler’s body and fractures to the boy’s upper arm and thigh.
And it that wasn’t enough, a second child was only saved in the nick of time, most likely because of the attention brought on by the first child’s death. But worse is the reaction the father had to the entire affair:
The women showed little emotion as the two verdicts were returned. Liam’s father Joseph Johnson was in tears as he left the court.
Anybody who argues that women should be given automatic custody of children should refer back to this case. The level of hatred and contempt these women had for the boys in their care is beyond horrific. The pictures of torture implements, cages, and chains tell the story well enough. These lesbian women hated the boys. They had no regard for them whatsoever. Whether or not this was driven by general man-hating misandry, or a more specific form of hatred, I can’t say — though misandry seems very likely.
Radical Lesbian Feminists often say that lesbians are a superior moral and intellectual breed of human — this ought to disabuse anyone of that foolish notion.
It’s time to revisit an issue that has probably wandered back into the dark recesses of the average American’s limited intellect. Police departments are still considered by your typical Social Justice advocate to be barely one step above the Nazi SS. And this article featured on Gawker exposes the idiotic mental hoops one has to jump through to believe that narrative.
In recent weeks, the White House has reaffirmed its commitment to strengthening “community policing” around the country.
Whatever. The speechwriters and a bunch of Blue Ribbon, fact-finding commissions told the White House to “reaffirm” some goodthink to the public at large. Tomorrow, Obama will express solidarity with the African dung beetle. The day after, with the victims of transphobic genderqueer oppression. Why is this news?
The suggestions for building better “relationships” and boosting “trust” are comprehensive but, for a national crisis brought on by the killing of unarmed black people, there’s one thing conspicuously absent from the public policy solutions: the acknowledgement of racism.
That’s because it doesn’t exist. Oh, I’m sure there are individual racist police officers (hint: not all of them are White, either). But the police departments do not have any institutional racism codified in their headquarters. Mein Kampf is not circulating the halls of your local Sheriff’s office. There is no policy saying “go forth, officers of the law, and murder as many Black people as you can.”
Rates of violent crime are down and have been falling sharply for more than 20 years. In fact, since the early 90s, the national homicide rate has fallen by 51 percent, forcible rapes have declined by 35 percent, robberies have decreased by 56 percent and the rate of aggravated assault has been cut by 45 percent. And black Americans have contributed to the decline. For blacks, rates of robbery and serious property offenses are the lowest they’ve been in more than 40 years. Murder, rape, assault, domestic violence—all down.
Gawker contradicts itself here. It basically just made a case for how effective more aggressive policing has been in the last two decades, and is then arguing for us to stop doing it, because it’s racist. That’s lunacy. I mean, just why do they think that drop in crime happened?
However, much of the statistical portion of the article is true, if misused and twisted. Remember how bad New York was, at one time? Aggressive policing brought the crime rate down considerably. Crime, overall, has dropped considerably in recent years. You see, a nation with a serious crime problem essentially has two options, both of them bad. Aggressively enforce the law, stop & frisk, profile, post cameras and cops everywhere, etc… Or it can choose to change the culture of (or simply remove) the community producing the criminals. It’s an uncomfortable truth, but we know which community produces the most violent criminals. Read this report on The Color of Crime.
In fact, nearly half of white Americans polled believe that violent crime has increased in the last 20 years. Another 13 percent believe that it’s stayed the same. Less than a quarter of whites realize there are less violent crimes today than there were in the 90s when the crack epidemic and gang violence were at their height. Even more, whites overestimate just how much blacks are involved in “serious street crime” and, on average, believe that black people commit a larger proportion of crime than whites do.
Notice the intellectual sleight of hand here. They say that, on average, Whites believe Blacks commit a larger proportion of crime than Whites do. then they imply that this is somehow an unfounded notion. This is, in fact, a true belief. On a per-capita basis, Blacks are seven (7) times more likely to commit violent crimes. Worse, most of the victims of these crimes are also Black! Gawker is, in a roundabout way, arguing for more Black deaths. A bit racist, perhaps?
The way the author wrote this, to steer around and imply things that are left deliberately unsaid, tells us that he knows this. In simple terms, the author is a lying charlatan trying to construct a false narrative, but doing so in a way that leaves room for plausible deniability if caught.
In a country that has identified black people as its criminal element, public safety (and perceived security) is more tied to the suppression of blacks than it is to the suppression of crime. And as long as the public insists on its myth of black criminality—almost as an article of faith—police practices will be impossible to reform.
It isn’t a myth. Even Black officers of the Law know this. Black cops don’t want to be responsible for Black neighborhoods, and I don’t blame them. Sending them in to police those areas alone (a suggestion that crops up from inane Social Justice advocates from time-to-time) would result in more Black officers being shot. Again, racist.
This police officer understands the problem.
A grand jury believed it. A great many Americans find the story believable—most without ever even having to hear it from Wilson’s lips or read the transcript.
Gawker is arguing for the Grand Jury’s ruling in the Wilson/Brown affair to be overturned. They won’t say so openly, of course. In Modern American discourse, everything is implied rather than openly stated. Most people writing on these issues are intellectual cowards.
The thing about the Wilson/Brown affair is that the whole thing rapidly grew larger than life. Battle-lines were drawn even before testimony and evidence came out. Nobody cared about the ruling per se. They only cared if the ruling justified their own preconceived notions about Race in America. If a White officer shoots a Black suspect, the presumption of innocence on behalf of the officer is thrown right out the window. It’s a presumption of guilt that the media forces the officer to disprove. It’s wrong.
“…And knowing that identity is not simply defined by what we are, but what we are not, can it be that our police help give us identity, by branding one class of people as miscreants, outsiders, and thugs, and thus establishing some other class as upstanding, as citizens, as Americans? Does the feeling of being besieged serve some actual purpose?”
The thing of it is, a good many Blacks are these things. No, not all of them. The Youtube video I posted is proof there are good Blacks. Thomas Sowell is, in my opinion, the greatest living economist in the world. He’s a Black man. Despite all that, the Color of Crime data tells it to us straight. Blacks are seven times more likely to be those things than the rest of America.
Why is it that Asians, who also suffered severe discrimination at various points in American history, do better than Whites in almost every metric, including criminal stats? Why is it that Latin Americans, while not doing as well as Whites in these areas, are still far better than the Black community?
Charles Barkley, of all people, gives us a hint:
Thug culture is destructive, of that there can be no doubt. And yet, this culture is glamorized and held up as a model for young Blacks. Furthermore, as Larry Elder notes frequently, Black families have been destroyed in recent decades. Over 70% of Black children are born out of wedlock. There are many single mothers on welfare. This has terribly damaged the Black community. Whatever Leftists tell you about single parenthood, it is, at best, a deficient condition (though some mothers manage anyhow). Children generally do better with two parents. That’s common sense. The formula of glorified Thug Culture plus a number of unruly teens in single-parent households is a recipe for disaster.
White Americans of good conscious will have to confront their boogeyman head on. Because the truth is that there can be no “community policing” in black communities without engaging the community, without engaging black people and our distortion in the American imagination.
This notion of “community policing” is idiotic. Police officers go where there is crime and attempt to stop said crime through enforcement efforts. Not all cops are paragons of virtue. And I’m not a fan of how police departments have been overstepping Constitutional bounds in many cases. But, consider the alternative to their efforts. It would look something like inner-city Detroit – a place most cops don’t go anymore. Yeah. I wouldn’t want to live there either.
People like the author of Gawker’s piece ensure that no meaningful culture change in the Black community will ever happen, because they think even identifying the problem is racist. And so, failing that, aggressive enforcement is the best we can do. But they’ll complain endlessly about that, too. Again, racism.
One gets the idea that they actually want more dead Blacks on the streets to serve their Progressive narrative.
I'm a DJ, developer, amateur historian, would-be pundit, and general pain in the ass. I still cannot decide on the wisdom of the Oxford Comma. These are my observations on a civilization in decline, a political system on the verge of collapse, and a people asleep at the wheel as the car turns toward the jersey barrier.