Consider these facts about recent Muslim extremist attacks in Western countries:
The Boston Terrorist bombing was committed by the children of Muslim refugees and most of the victims were injured in the bombing and not by guns.
The Paris Terrorists in the last two attacks used guns in a country where private gun ownership is completely illegal. In both cases refugees or children of refugees were involved.
The San Bernardino attack involved a Muslim immigrant that was vetted by the same process that the liberal media has claimed would ensure that Syrian refugees are not terrorists.
Liberal Media Conclusion: We to bring in more Muslim refugees and restrict gun ownership.
How is this not a completely illogical conclusion?
Mainstream Democrats need to separate themselves from what has become a very dangerous anti-Western and anti-rational ideology. Liberalism has split from reality and has entrenched itself in deluded fantasy where all conflicts and problems can be placed on its traditional opponents (Western society, White people, guns, capitalism, etc). Liberalism is simply incapable of dealing with the current reality from a rational basis. The liberal refusal to face the statistical reality of Muslims refugees being an unneeded risk reveals a core anti-rational foundation. At the core liberalism is against basic reasoning in the best interest of Western society and especially if it conflicts with liberal egalitarian ideals such as open borders.
Liberals are also woefully ignorant as they have been indoctrinated into a deluded globalist egalitarian ideology that can only be maintained by information control. Liberal ideology dissolves when harsh aspects of reality that contradict core assumptions are exposed. In fact liberalism is so illogically disjointed that its own ideals conflict with each other as they depend on being ignorant of such realities.
I can ask liberals a simple question to reveal this ignorance and the contradictory nature of liberalism:
Should we allow in refugees that do not think they should have to follow our humane slaughter laws and instead want their own slaughter houses that are crueler than even Western 16th century standards?
Liberals will answer this question with a resounding NO as they place the humane treatment of animals as a higher ideal than open borders.
I then follow up with this question:
So we shouldn’t allow in Muslim refugees then?
Liberals will be confused because they have been kept in the dark on this aspect of Islam. Exposing this reality shows how their liberal position of allowing in Muslim refugees as Islam contradicts their belief in the humane slaughter of animals (read about Halal slaughter if you were unaware of this reality). Most liberals have been indoctrinated into believing that their outlook is logical and based on education when it the opposite is in fact true. Liberalism is not only emotional and anti-rational but depends on ignorance. Its contradictory foundation can be exposed simply through the revelation of suppressed information.
Ironically though liberals dominate the education and numerous University departments the greatest threat to liberalism is in fact education and analysis outside of liberal control. Liberals at the highest level have done a master job of convincing the populace that they are for education but this is one of the greatest lies in our society. Liberalism itself relies upon ignorance and only because of the internet is this lie being revealed.
But what does that mean? That the Democrats who have dominated politics in Baltimore for decades are incompetent? Or does he think that Democrats in office there are incapable of changing anything? Which one is it Bernie?
Perhaps the Democrats of Baltimore should run on the message of: Registered Democrat Bernie Sanders doesn’t believe we can’t change anything, but vote for us anyways.
I’m not convinced that Republicans have all the answers for a Black city like Baltimore but they do at least have a valid point of Democrats failing to show any credibility. The murder per capita rate in Baltimore recently hit a record high despite the improving economy which deflates the tired liberal excuse of even violent crimes like murder being purely a matter of economics. This excuse never made sense in the first place when there have always been third world countries with more poverty and lower murder rates than Baltimore. Interestingly Baltimore’s murder rate is higher than that of the average West African country.
The simple truth is that Democrats have zero credibility when it comes to cities with large Black populations. That doesn’t mean that Republicans are correct in all of their assumptions but it does mean that these cities need something other than the status quo. Maybe it is time that Black Americans created their own political parties instead of simply handing local governments to Democrats with every election. When even a Democrat describes the results as being similar to the third world it’s time for a change.
Instead of giving up and legalizing destructive drugs like heroin, pcp and methamphetamine we should actually look at countries that have much lower drug use rates to see what they are doing differently. For Singapore their success has been from stricter laws and not simply giving up and allowing these destructive drugs to be legalized.
One final question: Will liberals and libertarians be volunteering to help out with the inevitable increase in PCP and bath salt attacks that would occur from making these drugs widely available? Are they going to volunteer as Sheriff’s deputies or will they just sit in their homes and let the chaos unfold? I’d bet on the latter.
Tim Swarens, a journalist at the Indy star recently defended the Amanada Blackburn murderers as a creation of our society. He writes:
The fact is these young men are products of our community. They grew in our midst from the innocent children we all are at birth to become the dangerous predators they appear to be today. They attended our schools, lived in our neighborhoods, mingled with the rest of us on our streets.
This is classic blank slate thinking that is popular with liberal journalists, authors, educators, politicians and television writers. The basic idea is that people are born as innocent blank slates that are only turned evil by society. This obviously appeals to liberal egalitarians as it means everyone has equal potential with the right environment (read government programs) but despite its widespread popularity this idea is simply not supported by Psychologists. Not only does blank slate go against common sense (can children of the same family not differ in behavioral attributes?) but twin studies have shown how important genetics are in social outcomes. Furthermore the concept of the psychopath is widely accepted by Psychologists which means that the traditional wisdom of there being “bad apples” is in fact correct. Studies that show a genetic component to psychopathy further undermine the liberal idea that all children are born innocent and it’s society that makes them evil.
Ironically the social sciences are notoriously liberal but liberal journalists like Tim Swarens seem to be unaware their belief in blank slate contradicts modern Psychology. It would behoove them to spend some time reading about twin studies to understand the limits of environmental conditioning. Some people are simply born bad and need to be locked away from general society. That may not appeal to liberal egalitarian idealism but nature exists as it is and not as a liberal construct.
The mainstream media continues to refer to homicide in Baltimore as gun violence with the implication being that the guns are the underlying problem.
If gun access was truly the problem then shouldn’t gun homicides always outnumber non-gun homicides in cities where population size is the same? Interestingly if you compare the cities of Baltimore, Maryland and Portland, Oregon this is not the case.
Extracting from The Baltimore Sun homicide map we get:
2 murders by asphyxiation
12 by blunt force
32 by stabbing
2 counted as other
= 48 non-gun homicides
The reflexive position of the mainstream media to refer to Baltimore’s problems as gun violence is disingenuous and shows a refusal to take a deeper look at the prevalence of crime in the area. Even if the guns did not exist the murder rates of these two cities would be wildly different. Furthermore if the guns did not exist it is likely that non-gun homicides would simply increase. The mainstream media needs to drop their dishonest campaign against guns and face the reality of the situation.
So where are the Black Lives Matters protesters? It seems they only come out when it involves a police officer. Currently they are protesting a police shooting in Minnesota even though few details have been released. But it seems facts and details don’t matter to them and neither do Black lives if they are taken by other Blacks.
I’ve seen a some BLM defenders explain their selective protests around the idea that police are getting away with these shootings. But this implies that Black murderers in Baltimore are are not getting away with murder which is false. The clearance rate in Baltimore murders is around 33% which means the majority are getting away with it. That means around 200 murders have gone unsolved.
So let’s review:
200 murders in Baltimore without a killer brought to justice : No protests.
Shooting of 1 Black person in Minnesota by a police a officer where no one has the details of what happened: Massive protests.
The “group” mentioned is actually a gang called the Greenway Gorillaz. I guess their name is too politically incorrect for the Philly police to mention on camera.
The woman who rips down the flyer in the video claims they aren’t a gang and that education is the problem. Since when is it the job of the schools to teach children that it’s wrong to terrorize your neighborhood? Even more shocking is the man in the video that blames a lack of libraries. Are we really supposed to believe that these gang members would not be shooting people if they only had access to some books and a quiet place to read them?
These are obviously poor liberal excuses that the Blacks in this video are simply repeating as a way of deflecting accountability. Both liberals and Blacks seem to think that Black communities are never accountable and it’s always “lack of education” or some other external variable that ultimately falls upon White people. Not only is it a poor excuse but when schools in Black areas have above average funding like DC where it is actually the highest we don’t see a corresponding drop in Black crime. Homicide is actually up 40% in DC.
Both liberals and Blacks also need to be aware that while the mainstream media won’t fact check these poor excuses the alternative internet media sites can and will.
Interestingly the Democrat Mayor of Chicago has tried to pass mandatory minimum sentences for gun crimes but has been opposed by Black Democrats. They seem to want the status quo where shooting into a live street only gets you a misdemeanor. Now back to the nightly news where we will learn about how gun shows in White suburbs are the problem.
One of the more curious aspects of the stats on Chicago violence kept at heyjackass.com (can the maintainers please get a better name?) is how few homicides are committed by Whites even though they are the largest racial group.
Liberals and the mainstream media constantly make an argument against guns along the basis of Europe doesn’t have guns and look at their low homicide rate. But if mere access to guns was the underlying cause then shouldn’t the White homicide rate be higher?
Also curious is that Black knife homicides outnumber White gun homicides. Is this a problem of knife access or are the perpetrators actually responsible for their actions in these cases?
Of course this is all too politically correct for even Fox news since it displays the cold hard reality of the race factor in Chicago homicides.
Liberals at this point will suggest that these statistics are simply a reflection of poverty and Blacks are simply more likely to be poor. Beyond the fact that there are plenty of third world cities that are less violent than Chicago, the main problem with this theory is that it implies these homicides are all related to economics.
From this Chicago police report we can see that non-gang shootings by Blacks are still significantly higher than other racial groups. Using both stat sources we can see that Black homicides related to domestic disputes alone outnumber all Hispanic homicides. Or in other words even if Black gangs went on vacation there would still be more non-gang Black homicides than gang related Hispanic homicides. Chicago Black simply shoot at each other for all kinds of reasons and these shootings cannot be merely brushed away as gang activity.
This is of course problematic for simplistic liberal explanations of poverty and guns that we see in the mainstream media. Pointing to Europe as a model is a childish and ignorant response by individuals that are unwilling to face the problem in its entirety. If guns were truly the problem then gun homicide rates by White Chicagoans should be far higher. If poverty was truly the problem then random killings should be a component of every poor country. It is simply not normal in third world countries for city workers to be randomly killed while working. Chicago violence is not the result of some simple gun and poverty formula. You do not deserve to call yourself a journalist or political analyst if you do not have the fortitude to face this reality. If you are a journalist then it is your job to ask the difficult questions. Of course our mainstream media is filled with cowardly egalitarians that prefer lies and childish excuses to honest analysis and I do not expect that to change anytime soon.