There is nothing more painful for me at this stage in my life than to walk down the street and hear footsteps and start to think about robbery and then look around and see it’s somebody white and feel relieved.
Reverend Jesse Jackson NY Times, 12-12-93
Profiling is a very unsavory activity, we are told. There are marches against it and laws against it. Let’s consider what profiling is, starting with the definition of three terms relevant to the discussion :
profiling: the act or process of extrapolating information about a person based on known traits or tendencies; the act of suspecting or targeting a person on the basis of observed characteristics or behavior.
discrimination: The ability or power to see or make fine distinctions; discernment.
prejudice: An adverse judgment or opinion formed beforehand or without knowledge or examination of the facts.
“Profiling” and “discrimination” are morally neutral terms. They describe the normal processes of thinking and making judgments. Discernment based on observable characteristic is rationality.
Prejudice can cloud rationality if an adverse opinion is formed without knowledge or examination of the facts. It is prejudice that should be condemned, not making judgments from observable facts.
Here are some observable facts:
Rapes are primarily committed by men.
Major terrorist attacks, worldwide, are primarily committed by young Muslim men.
NBA Basketball teams consist primarily of young black men.
Young black men are 7 times more likely to commit murder, and 8 times more likely to commit robbery than white men.
When you are looking for a rapist, it is rational to target men. When you are screening airline passengers, it makes sense to target those most likely to be a security threat. That would not be little girls and grandmothers. When you are on a dark street, being approached by a group of young men, it is rational to feel safer if it is a group of white men.
These are not foolproof judgments, but they are not prejudiced judgments either. They are simply factual observations. The makeup of sports teams is determined by judgment from observable facts, not from racial prejudice. There is no need to apologize to white people for their lack of representation on NBA teams. The position on the team was earned. The other judgments we are talking about are earned as well. There is no need to apologize for seeing reality as it is. There should be no laws against it.
Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, the NAACP, are calling for more laws against profiling in the wake of the Martin/Zimmerman case. The prosecution, defense and both families agree that this incident was not about race. Yet, Ben Jealous, of the NAACP, said, “We are outraged … and we will not rest until racial profiling in all its forms is outlawed.”
Apparently unaware of the statistics about racial violence and ignorant of the facts in the Zimmerman case, the NEA just launched an anti-profiling campaign. They say, “the case of Trayvon Martin has activated millions of Americans to urgently seek answers to how we can finally end wide-spread, officially-sanctioned, racial profiling and racially motivated violence….”
The campaigns against racial profiling and “Islamophobia” are campaigns against reason. It is unfortunate, but perfectly logical, to have an increased fear of violence from young black men or Islamic Jihadists. We must be clear that those who observe the problem are not the cause of the problem.
Millions of peaceful black men and peaceful Muslims suffer from the acts of the violent members of their group. They suffer directly from black on black and Muslim on Muslim violence, but they suffer indirectly from the bad image created by the violent minority. It is the violent minorities that deserve condemnation, not the people who observe and react to the violence. The observers are the effect, not the cause.
In President Obama’s July 19 black victimology speech, (brilliantly deconstructed here), he discussed profiling as a very significant problem that white folks need to reflect on. He said, with Clinton-like lip biting for effect, that many black men have the experience of walking near a car and hearing the doors lock or otherwise sensing fear from “white folks”. His implication was that this was proof of continuing white racism. It’s not. It’s fear of crime.
If Obama himself did some honest reflection he would see that doors have been unlocked for him for most of his life because he is black. At almost every point in his life it has been a huge advantage for him. This inexperienced Senator from Illinois was a viable Presidential candidate, not it spite of being black, but because he is black.
It’s almost overwhelming, the multitude of absurd race-agitating actions and words coming from those who refuse to accept the facts and law as to the Zimmerman trial.
– William Jacobsen, Professor of law, Cornell –
Something evil is happening in our country right now. We have seen it before. In fact we have seen it many times, but this time the orchestration of evil is especially obvious.
The Racial Grievance Industry is in the business of keeping hate alive. In their quest to foster racial animosity, race hustlers pick cases to publicize to ”prove” that whites are forever racist. This evil enterprise gives them undeserved power, prestige and money. It creates a solid, angry block of voters who do not understand that their “leaders” may be the most destructive force in their culture.
Martin Luther King dreamed about a day when people would be judged by the content of their character and not the color of their skin. Most of us share that dream. The race hustlers have the opposite dream. For them, skin color, racial identity, is everything. And they will not tolerate any judgments about character.
If you look closely at the genesis of the Trayvon Martin story you can see the race hustlers at work. This was a well organized public relations campaign planned by professionals. The primary actors had profited from creating racial grievances in the past and knew just what buttons needed to be pushed to create hate. It was an election year and this activity is called “motivating the base”, or, more accurately, “motivating the base instincts”.
Our Department of Justice played a key role in the beginning by helping in the organization of a completely fake “student protest group” called the “Dream Defenders”. The organizers were not students, but instead were paid activists with ties to ACORN and Occupy. You can see a video and more documentation on this hate group here. The Department of Justice was helping a bogus group create racial animosity. The group marched on the Sanford Police Department and succeeded in getting the police chief fired.
This was just the beginning of the Department of Justice’s many injustices in this case. A team of FBI agents was sent to interview the people who knew George Zimmerman best. They wanted to prove that he was a racist. They found the opposite. They found a man who tutored black children for free, who went to bat for a homeless black man who had been assaulted, whose black friends said he was not in any way a racist. As with other parts of this case, the facts are being completely ignored. The fictional story still takes precedence.
After the verdict, the Department of Justice sunk even lower by opening a hot line to solicit dirt on the man who had just been found not guilty in a court of law. If they can keep the hate alive, they are certainly going to do it.
This is a sick enterprise on two levels. For George Zimmerman, he is the victim of a political persecution based on a collection of lies which are still being promoted at the highest levels. Like the man who made the Muhammad movie, Zimmerman is the recipient of a government organized hate campaign. Rewards have been offered for Zimmerman’s murder and the Department of Justice shockingly does nothing about it except fan the flames.
At a higher level, our country suffers incalculable damage from the never-ending efforts to create racial animosity. The race hustlers teach each new generation of black Americans the following destructive lesson: You are perpetual victims with no chance of success and all of your problems are someone else’s fault. Few things harm black people more than this lesson from their “leaders”. These old leaders need to be rejected and replaced with new leaders who have a positive vision of personal achievement and personal responsibility.
The entire scam that is being used in the Martin/Zimmerman case follows a pattern that is common to other government deceptions. It’s time to unmask the technic. The scam has 3 parts.
1. The Big Lie; Setting the Fire - A racist white man in Sanford chased down and shot a little black boy, demonstrating what a racist country this is. The Benghazi attack was caused by a video. Sarah Palin was responsible for the shooting of Congresswoman Giffords. Etc.. These are fact-free assertions.
2. Fanning the Flames – The lie is widely publicized by those who share the political goals of the liar. We see an explosion of supportive stories. For example, leftist lackeys like NBC are happy to edit tape to support the deception. Those being lied about assume an unjustified defensive position.
3. Moral Posturing by the Arsonists – Those who set the fires now pose as the firemen. There they are, speaking from on high, lecturing about the danger of these fires and calling on us to do some soul searching about our evil ways. Obama and Hillary perform this part of the scam quite well. It’s contemptible behavior.
In the Zimmerman case, you will not understand the enormity of the lies being sold to the public unless you understand the facts of the case. It’s a tragic case but not a complicated case. We know that Trayvon chose to confront Zimmerman, because he had walked home and then walked back to the area of the assault. It seems clear that he threw the first punch (and apparently all the punches) as he straddled ”the creepy-ass cracka” on the ground. Trayvon had no signs on his body that Zimmerman had hit him. Trial witness Rachel Jeantel agrees that Trayvon threw the first punch but says that Zimmerman should have known that Trayvon was just going to administer a little “whoop-ass” and should have known that Trayvon wasn’t going to kill him.
If some strong young man was pounding your head into the concrete, “MMA style”, you may not understand that it was ‘just a little whoop-ass’. And if the young man beating you said, ”You gonna die tonight” that may raise your fear level a bit. Trayvon was not unarmed. He had two arms with fists attached.
The lesson from the Trayvon/Zimmerman encounter is this. Not every whoop-ass ends the way you had imagined. This one ended very badly.
Can you extrapolate from this event that white people in America are racist and are responsible for this assault? No logical person could infer that. But here are some people who can.
Chris Matthews: “Can I just take a second to apologize on behalf of all white people?”
Jesse Jackson is calling for a boycott of Florida which he calls “an apartheid state”. He says, “It’s time to call on the United Nations Human Rights Commission for an in-depth investigation of whether the U.S. is upholding its obligations under international human rights laws and treaties.”
Al Sharpton organized angry divisive rallies across the country. Speaking apparently of white people in general, Sharpton told a Baptist Church audience, “…They saw a young man that was vulnerable and killed him…. we have no rights.”
AP reporter Cristina Silva: “So we can all kill teenagers now?”
Nicki Minaj: ” We just paid to see a murderer walk free after killing an innocent unarmed little boy”
Richard Dreyfuss: “It’s 2013 and an American jury just acquitted a man who admitted to stalking and killing an unarmed child.”
This is all a diversionary tactic to keep you from looking at the real problems. Let’s look at what they want you not to see. The Bureau of Justice Statistics reported that approximately 8 to 9 thousand African Americans are murdered in the U.S. every year. That’s more than the total number of servicemen killed in Iraq plus Afghanistan. 93% of these murders are committed by blacks, mostly young black men.
Some of these victims were unarmed. Some were young. Some were named Trayvon. Some looked like they could have been Obama’s son. Obama could have gone on TV and said, “They could have been me 35 years ago”, but he didn’t. No marches were organized in their honor because no racial animosity could be generated that way. Individual murders matter only to the extent that they suit the truly sinister goals of the Racial Grievance Industry.
Using government crime statistics, Pat Buchanan reported:
“An analysis of ‘single offender victimization figures’ from the FBI for 2007 finds blacks committed 433,934 crimes against whites, eight times the 55,685 whites committed against blacks. Interracial rape is almost exclusively black on white — with 14,000 assaults on white women by African Americans in 2007. Not one case of a white sexual assault on a black female was found in the FBI study.”
Though blacks are outnumbered 5-to-1 in the population by whites, they commit eight times as many crimes against whites as the reverse. By those 2007 numbers, a black male was 40 times as likely to assault a white person as the reverse.
If interracial crime is the ugliest manifestation of racism, what does this tell us about where racism really resides — in America?
The problem is actually worse than the statistics indicate and the Trayvon Martin case is a good illustration. The Miami Dade school District has it’s own police force. Police Chief Charles Hurley, in collusion with school district leadership, launched a plan to lie about crime statistics in the school district. The plan was specifically aimed at under-reporting the crimes of young black males. When Trayvon Martin was caught with stolen jewelry and a burglary tool, the crime was not reported and no attempt was made to see if the jewelry matched a reported robbery. It was all hidden.
Another race based fraud was recently uncovered at Winston-Salem State University. Administrators routinely and fraudulently raised the grades of African-American students. The plan was exposed by a few honest faculty members.
Don’t you think it is time that we stopped this nonsense and faced problems honestly?
Watch Bill Whittle’s forceful commentary on this issue:
Those of you who are following this case have most likely noticed that there are two increasingly divergent stories to follow. There is the evidence of what actually happened and there is The Story of what happened… the narrative invented and pushed by the racial grievance industry.
The persecution prosecution has rested it’s case and it is clear that The Story is a fabrication with no supporting evidence. That out-of-control hateful racist who hunted down and shot a black child for no reason never existed. No evidence of racism was presented, other than Trayvon’s comment to Rachel that a ”creepy ass cracker” was watching him.
It is clear from eye-witness testimony and Zimmerman’s injuries that Trayvon punched the creepy ass cracker in the face, jumped on him and was pounding his head into the concrete, in ”mixed martial arts style” according to the eye-witness with the best view of the assault. Zimmerman was screaming for help. Blood from his broken nose was running down his throat. His airway was further obstructed by Trayvon placing his hand over Zimmerman’s mouth and nose to stop the screaming.
The question before the jury is this: would a reasonable person feel that their life was threatened in this situation? Would self-defense be justified?
The charge of second degree murder does not fit the facts of the case at all. This is a show trial created in a pathetic attempt to appease the real racists who demanded it.
I have not seen evidence that Zimmerman did anything wrong. Volunteering to be part of a neighborhood watch team is certainly not wrong. Calling the police about suspicious behavior is exactly what the citizens in this crime ridden neighborhood were supposed to do. Seeking to find an address, to give the police better directions, took Zimmerman to the area where the assault took place. Zimmerman cannot be faulted for that.
If you think Zimmerman is a nefarious character who deserves punishment, go through the evidence and tell me what Zimmerman did that was wrong. I am not asking what he did wrong in The Story. I am asking about the evidence presented in court by the prosecutors, who were there to prove what an evil criminal Zimmerman was. They have rested their case. What was their case?
There are some very good summaries of the details of this trial here and here. What follows is an excerpt from each link:
“This unraveling of the State’s theory of the case under the relentlessly unfavorable testimony of their own witnesses was the norm, rather than the exception, in this trial. One by one, the State’s witnesses were consistently co-opted to testify favorably to the defense, shown to be substantively lacking in credibility, or at best to testify ambivalently on the events at issue. Witness after witness found themselves subject to the raised, angry voice of State prosecutor Bernie de la Rionda practically shouting at the witness–his own witness!–that in fact they knew nothing about anything, isn’t that true?”
======================
“Before I launch into the news for the week of July 4, readers that have not yet seen George Zimmerman’s reenactment of the events of February 26, 2012, should visit Greta VanSusteran’s blog whereshe has the video. It goes a long way toward putting a human face on the media creation that has, until recently, been George Zimmerman. I suspect that many will be struck by how meek he is, hardly a raging, racist killer. ”
This trial is a horse race where one horse fell and broke it’s leg at the opening gate. Much of the media and the racial grievance industry will still continue to report that it is a close race, but it’s not.
This essay was last published by FrontPage Magazine on Independence Day last year.
I believe that the most useful way to look at political history is to discard the idea of “right” and “left”. There is Liberty and there is Tyranny. For most of human history, men have suffered under tyranny. Our Founders intended to change that…
The Only Real Revolution by Bryce Buchanan
“Happily for America, happily we trust for the whole human race, they pursued a new and more noble course. They accomplished a revolution that has no parallel in the annals of human society. . . . In Europe, charters of liberty have been granted by power. America has set the example . . . of charters of power granted by liberty.”
– James Madison
Throughout history, small groups of men with political power have controlled the masses of men by force. On every continent, stretching back through the centuries, the pattern was essentially the same — a pharaoh, king, emperor or dictator had ultimate control over the lives and fortunes of his subservient followers. The underlings were taught that their proper role was to serve those in power. Whatever small freedoms the common men had were considered to be gifts from the sovereign — gifts which could be taken away if the sovereign chose to do so.
Then, in eighteenth-century America, a group of enlightened men turned the world upside down. They instituted a government that was subordinate to the people. They believed that whatever powers a government has are granted by the people. Government exists to serve the people. People do not live to serve the government.
They declared that each man owned his own life and could act freely in peaceful pursuit of his own happiness. They said the rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are “unalienable” — that is, they are not gifts of government and may not legitimately be taken away. They stated that the sole purpose of a moral government was to secure these fundamental and inherent rights. Thus, they wrote a constitution that was intended to strictly limit the power of government over the lives of free men.
This was the only political revolution in history that was truly revolutionary. It was a total break with the principle that men are mere pawns in the grand design of those in power. It offered a radical new political system. Other revolutions had merely produced a new tyrant — simply a new person to exercise control over men. The true revolution was the one that openly questioned the control.
Eighteenth-century Americans lived and died in the spirit of liberty. Virginian Richard Henry Lee said, “The first maxim of a man who loves liberty should be never to grant to rulers an atom of power that is not most clearly and indispensably necessary for the safety and well-being of society.”
Boston preacher Samuel Stillman said, “We are engaged in a most important contest; not for power but for freedom. We mean not to change our masters, but to secure to ourselves and to generations, yet unborn, the perpetual enjoyment of civil and religious liberty, in their fullest extent.”
Even small encroachments on liberty were met with defiance. When the Stamp Act was passed in 1765 — an act which levied only a very small tax on certain transactions — the strength of the resistance forced a repeal of the law in less than a year. A prominent Boston preacher, Jonathan Mayhew, said that while a few people quietly accepted the stamp tax, most Americans “were firmly united in a consistent . . . plan, to run all risks, to tempt all hazards, to go all lengths, if things were driven to extremity, rather than to submit; preferring death itself to what they esteemed so wretched and inglorious a servitude.”
And we all know how the Sons of Liberty reacted to a two-cent tax on tea. They took their rights — their liberty — seriously. They knew that when a tyrant gets his foot in the door, the rest of the beast is sure to follow. As George Washington said in 1774, “The crisis is arrived when we must assert our rights or submit to every imposition which can be heaped upon us, till custom and use shall make us . . . slaves.”
The contempt felt for those who would not fight for their own liberty was expressed by Samuel Adams: “If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.”
Imagine that men from that era were observing us today. They would see that we send up to 50% of our income to different levels of government, and we are told that this is not sufficient — that our duty is to sacrifice more. (Consider this shocking fact: the colonists paid approximately 1% of their incomes in taxes.) They would see an incredible number of regulations on all types of domestic and foreign commerce. They would see an immense army of bureaucrats to enforce the regulations and another army of real soldiers residing more or less permanently in other countries. It would be clear to them that Jefferson’s statement is unfortunately still true that “even under the best forms [of government] those entrusted with power have, in time and by slow operation, perverted it into tyranny.”
The biggest surprise to our observers would not be that those in power seek to expand their power. They would have expected that. The biggest surprise would be the degraded state of many Americans who have lost the stature that comes from taking responsibility for one’s own life. They would see millions of dependent creatures, comfortable in their dependency, crouching and licking the hands that feed them, and begging for more, asking only that the benefits they get are paid for by the sacrifices of other people.
Can any of us deny that the citizens are primarily to blame for the erosion of their own liberties? Most are traveling the road to serfdom willingly. But the road goes nowhere new. It leads only to the same forms of tyranny that have characterized most societies in history.
There is liberty … and there are thousands of forms of tyranny. There are men’s rights … and thousands of rationalizations for violating them. When it comes to liberty, everything but the real thing is the wrong thing. We must accept no substitutes.
The Trayvon – Zimmerman case is interesting for reasons that go far beyond the case itself. I paid close attention this week as the prosecutors of this second-degree murder case presented their evidence. In varying degrees, each prosecution witness was transformed into a defense witness on cross-examination. Some were devastating to the prosecution even on direct examination. Zimmerman’s story was reinforced, not weakened.
This is a political prosecution, a show trial. The case is in the courts because the professional race-baiters, the leftist politicians and the leftist media want it there. Each of these entities profits in different ways from this unjust prosecution. Each of these entities benefits from stirring up racial animosity.
After this case is over, and Zimmerman is acquitted, the violence and hatred that follows should be blamed on those who turned this case into yet another way to make sure that racial wounds never, ever heal.
Here is a sample of the hatred that is being created by the lies surrounding this case. These are just of few of many comments from the haters:
Matthew Owens
When the Trayvon story was originally crafted, the race hustlers sold the false narrative that a little black child was hunted down and shot just because he was black. In their election year agitation, they whipped up some destructive mobs and created significant racial violence. For example, a group of young blacks in Mobile, Alabama severely beat a white man, Matthew Owens. He was beaten with bricks, brass knuckles, , chairs and pipes. One attacker said, “Now, that’s justice for Trayvon.”
As I have watched the news coverage of the first week of the trial, it is clear that some news outlets are intent on continuing with the fabricated story, regardless of the evidence presented at trial. Their reporting often bears shockingly little resemblance to the actual testimony. This misreporting will increase the outrage among blacks when Zimmerman is acquitted, and will very likely result in more violence and destruction. Will the mob-creators be proud of their accomplishment?
The effort to create and sustain racial animosity is a despicable enterprise. Those who orchestrate the anger, posing as advocates for black people, are doing great harm to both blacks and whites and to the cause of racial harmony. Martin Luther King’s dream of a colorblind society will never occur as long as we give a respectful ear to the professional race-baiters. They are disgraceful and should be treated as such.
In the trial testimony this week, there was evidence of racism in the encounter between Zimmerman and Martin, but it was not the racism the prosecution was hoping for. Rachel Jeantel was on the phone with Martin when Martin noticed a man in a car following him and watching him. Martin told Jeantel that the man (Zimmerman) was ” a creepy ass cracker”.
We do have evidence (not part of court testimony yet) about Zimmerman’s attitude toward blacks. In Zimmerman’s home town, the son of a policeman sucker-punched a homeless black man for the fun of it and the 2010 incident was caught on video. The police department ignored the assault, as though the black man did not matter, and that offended Zimmerman’s sense of justice.
Zimmerman passed out flyers calling for an arrest and calling for the Sanford police chief to be fired. There was an arrest and Chief Tooley was fired. This kind of civic concern for others is what would prompt a man to join the crime-watch team in his neighborhood.
As a side note, Trayvon also had a noteworthy incident involving a homeless man. Trayvon and his friends came upon a homeless man being beaten up by a man who wanted to steal his bicycle. Trayvon filmed the fight with his cell phone. The audio track is Trayvon and his friends laughing as they watch.
Clarice Feldman wrote an excellent column at American Thinker about the Trayvon – Zimmerman case. She starts out like this:
The Trayvon Martin-George Zimmerman case has come to trial this week and the best thing that’s been said about it is from Thomas Maguire: “I’m proud to say I live in a country where the show trials look more like an SNL [Saturday Night Live] skit.
You will enjoy reading the whole thing here. And there is an excellent summary by Mike McDaniel here. It is entitled, “Week 1: The Narrative Spontaneously Combusts”.
——————————————–
The “instructions” can be good or bad; constructive or destructive.
Take just two minutes and watch Bill Murray demonstrate the IRS technic for judging applicants for tax-exempt status. Click here.
If Bill Murray were to later testify before Congress, and if he behaved as the IRS officials and their apologists have behaved, he would say that there was no real bias in his judgments. None at all.
It is clear that the powerful leftist union that runs the IRS has the same sense of fair play that Murray demonstrated. It is also clear that many Democrat leaders openly suggested that “tea party” types should be targeted.
On many occasions, President Obama made it clear that the “tea-baggers” were his enemies. On the campaign trail, Obama said, ”…we’re gonna punish our enemies and we’re gonna reward our friends”. He said, “voting is the best revenge”. Targeting conservatives with IRS intimidation and targeting Fox News reporters are two other forms of ‘revenge’. Are we now Venezuela?
In a story that broke last night, Kimberley Strassel reported on a 2008 Obama campaign strategy that was a precursor to using the IRS directly as a campaign tool. Read it all here. An excerpt:
The Bauer onslaught was a big part of a new liberal strategy to thwart the rise
of conservative groups. In early August 2008, the New York Times trumpeted the
creation of a left-wing group (a 501(c)4) called Accountable America. Founded by
Obama supporter and liberal activist Tom Mattzie, the group—as the story
explained—would start by sending “warning” letters to 10,000 GOP donors, “hoping
to create a chilling effect that will dry up contributions.” The letters would
alert “right-wing groups to a variety of potential dangers, including legal
trouble, public exposure and watchdog groups digging through their lives.” As
Mr. Mattzie told Mother Jones: “We’re going to put them at risk.”
Strassel wrote another great column a few days ago entitled, “The IRS Scandal Started at the Top”. If you missed it, you can read it here.
Peggy Noonan also has an informative column here. An excerpt:
All of these IRS actions took place in the years leading up to the 2012 election. They constitute the use of governmental power to intrude on the privacy and shackle the political freedom of American citizens. The purpose, obviously, was to overwhelm and intimidate—to kill the opposition, question by question and audit by audit.
It is not even remotely possible that all this was an accident, a mistake. Again, only conservative groups were targeted, not liberal. It is not even remotely possible that only one IRS office was involved.
The man who reads the teleprompter says he wants to “get to the bottom of this”. He is just pretending to be angry. Behind the curtain, he is the bottom of this.
This is a woman we will need to learn much more about in the coming weeks. Sarah Hall Ingram is a highly valued employee at the IRS. In the last three years she has received $103,390 in bonuses for her excellent work. She was the Commissioner of the Tax-Exempt and Government Entitles Division. Under her leadership, groups that expressed a fear of large, out-of-control government were systematically crushed by her branch of our large, out-of-control government. They were specifically singled out for harassment for political reasons. Secret information about the conservative applicants was leaked to leftist opposition groups to facilitate further harassment.
This was an organized political operation using State power to silence opposition voices. It is part of every tyrant’s playbook. It tells you everything you
need to know about the current state of our country to see that those who favor
a limited government, the explicit goal of our founding documents, are now considered enemies of the State.
In a 2009 speech, Ms. Ingram explained her approach:
“As a practical matter, we cannot subject every application for tax-exempt status to a painstaking, leave-no-rock-unturned review. Nor can we audit every organization’s 990 every year. Nor would you want us to do so, right? To govern is to choose, and we must choose appropriately which applications or 990s to focus most attention on.”
It is clear now that by “choose appropriately”, she meant to harass the limited-government groups endlessly and let liberal and Islamic groups sail right through the approval process.
The good news is that this woman is no longer in charge of that department. The bad news is that she has been promoted and is now the head of the IRS’ Affordable Care Act office. She and her comrades could have access to all your medical records. They will “choose appropriately” who has trouble with the State controlled medical system and who sails right through. They will decide if it is appropriate to share your medical history with others.
But don’t worry. I heard the outgoing IRS Commissioner say in hearings this morning before Congress that he has reviewed the situation and found that there was “no partisanship” in the years-long practice of singling out conservative groups for IRS harassment. None at all. There is just no reason to think that specifically targeting one side of the political spectrum had anything to do with politics.
And when Commissioner Steven Miller was asked why conservative groups were targeted for prolonged scrutiny, he said that it just happened because people were trying to be efficient. Sure. Months and months of delays with endless demands for more paperwork is the efficient way to go.
Miller was forced to admit that secret information gathered from certain conservative groups was passed along by the IRS to the conservatives direct political opposition. So the IRS illegally gathered information and illegally passed it along for political reasons. Mr. Miller said that these actions were “inadvertent”.
There is more evidence of direct lies from IRS officials in Kevin Williamson’s column, “The Nine Lies of Lois Lerner”. One thing we learn from Williamson’s article is that the current campaign by some officials to act surprised and disappointed by the news of IRS criminality is just a scam to deflect their own culpability. Everyone knew the Inspector General’s report on the IRS was about to be released. The IRS needed to jump ahead of the report and act concerned. They were not concerned for years prior to being caught.
UPDATE – Jeffrey Lord explains why the problem with the IRS is much deeper than the current scandal. Read “The Liberal Union Behind the IRS” and you will see why the IRS has it’s artillery aimed in one direction. They are a powerful battle-group in the leftist army. That will not change until something like the Fair Tax is enacted and the IRS is dismantled.
You remember when that racist white guy gunned down that cute little 12-year-old black boy in Florida last year… shooting him for no reason at all? He just hunted the little boy down “like a rabid dog” and shot him in cold blood.
That’s the story that the race-baiters and most of the media told us about George Zimmerman and Trayvon Martin. All the usual mob creators worked at creating angry mobs. Racial animosity was generated across the country and many rallies ended in the exhortation to register and vote. This is what the despicable professional race-baiters do for a living. This socially destructive orchestrated drama is part of every pre-election season.
Those of us who followed the story closely know that the initially reported story bears almost no relationship to the truth. That this incident was a terrible tragedy is the truth, but the nature of the assailant and victim is quite different from what we were told.
What we know about George Zimmerman, the “white Hispanic” shooter includes the following:
The man is not a racist. He tutored minority children for free. He went to bat for a black man who he thought was treated unfairly by the police. A black friend who has know him for years spoke highly of his character.
Zimmerman’s neighborhood had been hit by many home invasion robberies. He had recently comforted a frightened neighbor after the woman was terrorized by a home burglary. He was concerned about the safety of his own family and was part of a neighborhood effort to be watchful. The sign at the entrance of his neighborhood said, “We report all suspicious persons & activities to the Sanford Police Department”.
Zimmerman did exactly as the sign said when he called the Sanford Police. He wanted the police to handle it. He did not try to run Trayvon down, nor could he have. Trayvon, at 5’11′ and 160 pounds, was much more fit than Zimmerman.
An eyewitness to the fight that led to the shooting was interviewed 90 minutes afterward. The witness said that he saw Martin straddling Zimmerman and violently battering him “MMA” style. The witness also said Zimmerman was the one screaming for help. A second witness also described a person on the ground with another straddling him and pounding his face.
When the police arrived, Zimmerman had a broken nose, two black eyes and cuts on the back of his head. Trayvon had abrasions on his knuckles and a bullet wound.
The real Trayvon that emerges from his own social media sites and from disciplinary records is not quite as palatable as the imaginary version sold to us by the media. The photo of Trayvon here is the photo he chose to represent himself in social media where he called himself ”No_Limit_Nigga”.
No_Limit_Nigga tweeted about his drugs, his “bitches”, his fondness for Mixed Martial Arts, etc., in barely literate conversations. One of his friends, or marijuana customers, tweeted, “damn were you at nigga needa plant”. A cousin heard that Trayvon had punched a bus driver and tweeted, ”Yu ain’t tell me yu swung on a bus driver”.
Trayvon had been suspended from school three times for offenses such as drug use and vandalism. The details of the third suspension are what I want to concentrate on here because they reinforce my point that the world is presented to you in a false way for political reasons.
Trayvon’s third suspension was the result of a school security officer finding Trayvon spraying “WTF” on the schools wall. The officer inspected Trayvons backpack and found evidence of marijuana, a bag of women’s jewelry and a screwdriver, which the officer called a “burglary tool” in his report of the incident. There were at least 12 pieces of women’s jewelry and a man’s watch in the bag.
When this incident was reported in the news after Trayvon’s death, Martins parents and their attorney indicated that the jewelry story was false and was simply a smear to make Trayvon look like a burglar, the very thing Zimmerman had feared that he was. Attorney Benjamin Crump said of the burglary insinuation, “ If it were true, why wouldn’t they call the parents? Why wasn’t he arrested?”
Those questions were answered recently by the bloggers at The Last Refuge. These citizen journalists uncovered an amazing plot to misrepresent facts about crime in the Miami-Dade School District. The plot to hide information from the public involved the School Superintendent and the Police Chief, who has since lost his job.
Because there was a plot to hide criminal behavior, there was no attempt in cases like Trayvon’s to solve the crime and return the stolen property to it’s owner. In Trayvon’s case, the stolen merchandise, which is in a police storage room, will likely be returned. The bloggers tracked down a burglary reported near Trayvon’s school where the stolen jewelry matches the description of the jewelry in Trayvon’s pack. Police have been notified of the apparent match.
Whether the issue is crime statistics, unemployment statistics, the cost of Obamacare, the “hockey stick” proof of global warming, the cause of the attack in Benghazi, the relationship of Islam to worldwide terror attacks, the seriousness of our President in controlling government spending, the relationship between gun laws and crime, etc., the news is filtered, shaped and delivered with a political agenda. Reality is somewhere under and behind the official story.
“He was compassionate. He was caring. He was a lovely, lovely kid”. That’s how neighbor Larry Aaronson described Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, the younger of the two Jihadist psychopaths who carefully packed bombs with nails and ball-bearings to inflict maximum physical damage on men, women and children they did not know. There were more bombs back home, presumably prepared to slaughter other strangers. Lovely, lovely boys.
When the uncle asked the older brother why he had dropped out of school, Tamerlan said, “Oh, I’m in God’s business”. That would be the Jihad business, the killing non-believers business. His YouTube account has a “terrorists” video section and links to his Islamist mentors. It will be interesting to see who paid him for his religious work. Dzhokhar also expressed his higher calling in two tweets last month. “Never underestimate the rebel with a cause”, and “Evil triumphs when good men do nothing.”
Last week, these lovely good men did something… something, in their view, to please God.
Dzhokhar was so comfortable with his actions that on the night of the massacre, he tweeted ” LOL, those people are cooked” and “I’m a stress free kind of guy”. The psychopath attended a party the next night.
As observers, we witnessed the standard rush of the media to name conservatives as the likely perpetrators. It was Patriots Day, Axelrod said, and you know the kind of people those patriots are. In a racist rant, Salon openly wished the bomber was a white man. CNN’s Christiane Amanpour said she “hoped beyond hope that this doesn’t turn out to be what it might be?”
She had that hope because it is becoming increasingly difficult for the media to sell the delusion that radical Islam is not at war with the West.
Our President rushes to judgement in every case where he thinks that will help him politically. With Gates in Boston, Gifford in Arizona, Trayvon in Florida and Benghazi in Libya, false accusations were quickly made, and in the case of Benghazi, maintained against all evidence. Yet, on the night Dzhokhar was captured, Obama was there to counsel us against “jumping to conclusions” and to suggest that we honor “diversity”. He said we must, ”take care not to rush to judgment — not about the motivations of these individuals; certainly not about entire groups of people.” Certainly not.
He has the same problem as Amanpour. Sane people will make rational judgements about this case and others like it.
Sure, we will have to endure weeks of media stories about how America let these poor boys down, how we could have done more, how it is our fault. We will be told that we just don’t know what motivated them. It’s such a mystery.
I don’t think it is a mystery to most Americans. Despite all the ostrich-like foolishness by political and media ‘leaders’, most of us know that war has been declared against us and we do not take kindly to “Death To America” preachers. Fundamentalist Islam is no less a threat to us than any other totalitarian ideology. They want us to submit to the coming worldwide caliphate, or die. I don’t like either option. Tolerance in the face of this open threat is suicide.
Few people understand this more clearly than Andrew McCarthy. His column, “Jihad Will Not Be Wished Away”, is worth reading in its entirety. Some excerpts:
It was in fact the jihad that stubbornly refuses to be wished away. It will have to be defeated. It was never a molehill we were exaggerating into Mohammed’s mountain. After 1,400 years of aggression, we can safely say it is not anytime soon going to evolve into the ballyhooed “internal struggle for personal betterment” — not for the tens of millions of Muslims for whom Islamic supremacism is, quite simply, Islam.
…We are in a war driven by ideology. “Violent extremism,” which is the label the government and the commentariat prefer to put on our enemies, is not an ideology — it is the brutality that radical ideologies yield. Our enemies’ ideology is Islamic supremacism. To challenge and defeat an ideological movement, you have to understand and confront their vision of the world. Imposing your own assumptions and biases will not do. Islamic supremacists do not see a world of Westphalian nation-states. They do not distinguish between Russia and America the way they distinguish between Muslims and non-Muslims. Their ideology frames matters as Dar al-Islam versus Dar al-Harb: the realm of Islam in a fight to the death against the realm of war — which is everyone and everyplace else.
The fact that you think this is nuts, or that I’m nuts for saying it out loud, has nothing to do with whether they believe it. They do — and they don’t care, even a little, what you think.
You do not defeat an ideology by hoping it will change or disappear.”
Many lovely, lovely boys are being trained by leaders of a supremist religion to hate and kill those who oppose their plan for worldwide domination. There is no value in pretending otherwise.
