Enter your keyword

Showing posts with label Black Lives Matter. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Black Lives Matter. Show all posts

Monday, December 21, 2020

When Black Lives Matter Means Profiting from African Child Slavery

By On December 21, 2020
It was a cold December day in Washington D.C. and Neal Katyal, Obama’s Solicitor General, was arguing with Justice Clarence Thomas, the great-grandson of a freed slave, about slavery.

Katyal was representing Nestle, the American subsidiary of a Swiss multinational, being sued by freed African child slaves for profiting from slavery, and Justice Thomas wasn’t having it. The two men, the consummate Democrat legal operative, who had been there for Bush v. Gore and defended ObamaCare before the Supreme Court, and the court’s only black justice descended from slaves, debated corporate liability for child slavery for a social justice company.

Nestle USA had responded to the Black Lives Matter race riots with "mandatory unconscious bias training" for its employees before going on to defend the company’s cocoa business from a lawsuit by freed child slaves who had been forced to work on plantations between the ages of 12 and 14, and were brutally beaten when they tried to escape.

The leadership of Nestle's UK branch had urged, "I want people talking about race, about inequality and about why it should ever be called into question that black lives matter."

Nestle’s version of black lives mattering allegedly meant African child slaves working fourteen hours a day on cocoa plantations, given "scraps of food to eat", "beaten with whips and tree branches", "forced to sleep on the floor", and to "drink urine" if they tried to run away.

Coca Cola, which met the BLM riots by pouring money into black nationalist groups and rolling out a, “Together We Must” slogan, joined in the defense of Nestle by filing its own brief. Coke was also recently caught lobbying against a bill that would crack down on slave labor in China.

Black Lives Matter means Obama’s former lawyer lecturing a descendant of freed slaves about immunity for African child slavery and a corporation forcing its employees into humiliating critical race theory struggle sessions while benefiting from slavery, not in 1619, but now.

Katyal’s defense of Nestle depended, among other things, on Nazi gas chambers.

Nestle’s Supreme Court brief argues that, “even the firm that supplied Zyklon B gas, which the Nazis used to kill millions, was not indicted.” That's fortunate for Nestle which didn't make Zyklon B, but did pay out $14.6 million over the use of Jewish slave labor during the Holocaust.

"As the legal successor of such corporations, Nestle nevertheless accepts its moral responsibility to help alleviate human suffering," Nestle declared in a statement.

That’s big of Nestle, which had helped finance the Swiss Nazi Party and became an exclusive supplier of chocolate to the Wermacht. Helmut Maucher, Nestle's longtime CEO and honorary chairman, had served in the Wehrmacht. But that’s all water under the national socialist bridge.

Nestle went from profiting from Jewish slave labor it claimed it couldn’t do anything about to profiting from African slave labor it claims it can’t stop.

But Obama’s lawyer, who’s being touted for a position with Biden, is an even better story.

The Supreme Court brief on behalf of the former slaves notes that a study “conducted by Tulane University and funded by the U.S. Department of Labor found that the total number of children engaging in cocoa production, child labor, and hazardous work in cocoagrowing areas in West Africa increased more than thirty-eight percent from 2008–2009 to 2013–2014.”

Those dates overlap with the glory days of Katyal’s former boss: Barack Hussein Obama.

Why would child slavery have dramatically increased under Obama? The slaves in the Nestle case were trafficked from Mali to Côte d’Ivoire, the country at the center of the cocoa business and child slavery, which underwent a Muslim-Christian civil war in Obama’s first years in office.

When Muslim rebels, many of them illegal migrants, rigged the 2010 election, Obama backed the Muslim north over the Christian south. The French and the UN intervened militarily to subjugate the indigenous Christians to Muslim rule. Since then, Alassane Ouattara, a descendant of Muslim rulers, dubiously won the latest presidential election by 83%.

And Côte d’Ivoire is slowly being Islamized and is turning into a slave nation.

Côte d’Ivoire’s indigenous population was concentrated in the richer forests of the south, allowing the migration of Islamic tribes to occupy the drier north. Cocoa is the black gold of the Ivory Coast with most of the economy being geared around exporting the lucrative crop.

Allowing the Muslim forces to take over Côte d’Ivoire was just a brief interlude for Obama before launching the Arab Spring, and invading and removing Libya’s ruler. The resulting war allowed the Muslim Brotherhood, Al Qaeda and later ISIS to gain a foothold in Libya. Tuareg Islamists, who still held a grudge over losing their slaves, invaded Mali and brutally imposed Islamic law.

The Tuaregs were among the few to still maintain a very public trade in slaves. A State Department report from last year found that black slavery was still rife among the Tuaregs and that, “Malian children endure forced labor on cotton and cocoa farms in Cote d’Ivoire”. The freed slaves at the center of the Supreme Court lawsuit had originally been trafficked from Mali.

Cote d’Ivoire’s boom in cocoa production was built around slave labor under brutal conditions. The beneficiaries of that slave labor are the multinationals who preach social justice, as long as it doesn’t raise the price of cocoa. It’s one thing to chant Black Lives Matter and support the racist hate group burning and looting stores, and another to actually stop profiting from black children being sold into slavery for $60 and then watching them being tortured and beaten.

According to the allegations in the lawsuit, Nestle dispensed “personal spending money to maintain farmers’ loyalty as exclusive suppliers” to the men running the slave plantations.

But this nightmare was put into place by the former boss of the lawyer shilling for Nestle.

The fallout from the Arab Spring had devastated Africa. The Middle East was better able to correct some of the damage from Obama’s empowerment of Islamists. Africa, poorer and more wounded, suffered far more. Obama’s backing for Islamist takeovers in Cote d’Ivoire, Libya, and Nigeria was little short of genocide, and, among its other effects, led to a boom in slavery.

Obama had done more than any other politicians to mainstream both black nationalism and black slavery. That’s only a paradox for those who don't remember Malcolm X admiring Muhammad Ahmad, the Mahdi who brought back slavery, before heading to Sudan to embrace its Islamists, or Stokely Carmichael shilling for brutal Muslim dictator Ahmed Toure.

America’s black nationalists don’t admire democracy or freedom. They reserve their veneration for strongmen and thugs. And the regimes they admire oppress and kill other black people.

Black nationalism has a way of ending in Islamist rule and the enslavement of black people.

While Black Lives Matter leaders get cash from woke corporations, those same corporations profit from slavery in Asia, where lives don’t matter, but also in Africa, where they supposedly do. While the Times serve up the 1619 Project, and the statues of anyone who ever had anything to do with a slave centuries ago are toppled, real African slavery continues today.

And it goes on much the same way it always had. It just no longer takes place in America.

America was never built on slavery, but woke corporations, from Nike to Apple, from Coca Cola to Nestle, who force their employees to chant, “Black Lives Matter”, are built on slavery.

Their commitments to social justice, to equity and BLM, are a distraction from the real slavery.




Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is an investigative journalist and writer focusing on the radical Left and Islamic terrorism.

Sunday, December 20, 2020

Police Defunding, Like Communism, Can’t Fail

By On December 20, 2020
“I guess you can use a snappy slogan, like ‘defund the police.’ But, you know, you lost a big audience the minute you say it," Barack Obama complained.

Obama was pretending that there had never been a serious push to get rid of the police, and after spending eight years mainstreaming black nationalism and the pro-crime politics of police defunding was trying to pretend it was just an edgy slogan calling for “criminal justice reform”.

That would have come as news to Minneapolis residents, the birthplace of the third wave of Black Lives Matter riots, where the city council had embraced police defunding, before backing off as the city tottered under an unprecedented wave of murders, assaults, and robberies.

"It’s not a slogan but a policy demand," Rep. Ilhan Omar, the antisemitic Islamist adultress accused of marrying her brother, snapped.

“With all due respect, Mr. President—let’s talk about losing people," Rep. Cori Bush, the latest member of the socialist squad, ranted. "It’s not a slogan. It’s a mandate for keeping our people alive. Defund the police.”

The year isn’t over yet, but murders in Minneapolis are up 62%, twice as many people, over 500, have been shot this year as in 2019, and the city is on track for 5,000 violent crimes.

A women’s shelter opposed police defunding proposals and described women sleeping with their feet to the windows out of fear that a stray bullet will strike them in the head.

“I have relived that night many times, hearing the sounds of the bullets hitting my radiator and drywall spraying everywhere,” a South Minneapolis resident told councilmembers at a hearing, and called police defunding a, “sociology experiment that obviously doesn’t work.”

But you can say the same thing about virtually any left policy from soda taxes to Communism.

Councilman Jeremiah Bey Ellison, the son of Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison, argued that police defunding wasn’t working because it had never been tried. His father had previously suggested that police shouldn’t respond to rape calls. But police defunding has indeed never been properly tried because the Minneapolis City Council failed to formulate any kind of plan.

Ellison blamed the huge surge in crime, including a 537% increase in carjackings in the birthplace of police defunding, on “conventional wisdom” and the “century-long failure to create a public safety system that is not police-only.” The public safety system isn’t ‘police only’. It already includes a huge component of social services. The reason we have the police is that the billions that are already thrown at social services rarely stop crime. Billions more won’t fix it.

The obvious problem with police defunding or abolition is that its proponents have no plan for dealing with crime beyond telling victims to suck it up and offering the perps social services.

Real police defunding calls for getting rid of the police, prosecutors, and prisons, before replacing them with therapy sessions for criminals under the name ‘restorative justice’. When the godmother of police defunding tried it out with a Black Lives Matter rapist, he kept on raping.

When CNN’s Wolf Blitzer asked Minneapolis City Council President Lisa Bender who would respond to an active shooter, after repeatedly talking about replacing the police, she and her colleague responded that it would be the job of the police. There’s still no better answer.

Police defunders insist that crime is caused by an unjust society and will go away when enough money is invested into the welfare state, affirmative action, and critical race theory training.

Minneapolis Democrats can’t answer who would deal with an active shooter because their ideology tells them that active shooters won’t exist once they finish reforming society. This is a familiar enough argument from leftists explaining how Communism was going to function. Those same theoreticians would then go on to explain that real Communism had never been tried.

The Soviet Union, Castro’s Cuba, and Maoist China, were never true Communism.

The advocates of police defunding will go on holding up their imaginary utopia as an ideal while claiming that like Communism, it never failed because it had never been properly implemented.

Even if some city is insane enough to actually abolish the police and prisons, and put the entire budget into social services, it still won’t be enough because the entire system will still be centering whiteness. Get rid of all the white people and there’ll be internalized whiteness.

And defunding advocates, like Omar, Tlaib, and Bush, will go on arguing that it was never tried.

But no city will go that far. There are police union contracts and chambers of commerce to contend with. Instead police budgets will be cut leading to limited enforcement and crime spikes. That’s already underway in Minneapolis and in cities across the country. The police will keep their heads down until, as in Minneapolis, public outrage leads politicians to ask for their help.

America has been living on this policy seesaw for seventy years, as cities switched between permissive pro-crime policies to crackdowns on criminals without learning from the past. Once crime is under control, the pro-crime arguments about brutal police and the cost of mass incarceration start sounding reasonable to people who forgot what living with crime is like.

But the idea that crime springs from an unjust society, instead of a tainted mind, will never die.

Police defunding shows why a fundamentally stupid idea that is at the root of our social problems won’t go away because, like most utopian nonsense, it can’t be disproven. Or at least it can’t be disproven to the satisfaction of the sorts of lefties who look at millions dead in Russia and China, or a double-digit rise in homicide rates in major American cities, and shrug.

It hasn’t really been tried. Not properly. This time it’ll work.

Criminal justice is one of those areas where there’s a fundamental philosophical difference about the nature of humanity that translates into completely incompatible policies. The fundamental question here is the familiar one of free will. Are criminals free agents or victims?

Asking Minneapolis Democrats who supported police defunding what they plan to do about an active shooter is a meaningless question within their ideological frame of reference because it presupposes that the active shooter has free will and can be stopped by direct intervention. In their holistic view of society, violence causes violence, and the active shooter only exists because we have armed police, fight wars, and let little boys play ‘cops and robbers’.

But that’s much the same answer you get when asking a leftist why there’s alcoholism, wars, or hurricanes. The messianic response in all cases is that these are problems caused by society that will go away when lefties are given enough power to fundamentally transform society.

You don’t give political power to people who think that way or ask them to solve any problems.

Abolishing the police, like abolishing rent, student loans, free speech, religion, and private property, all ideas currently being advocated by the American Left, is just another way of saying that all of our problems are caused by society and will go away when our society goes away.

Police defunding, like Soviet collective farms or socialized medicine, is only the latest lunatic leftist proposal to run aground on the shores of reality while being defended as untested.

The police can never be defunded. They must exist, if only to arrest people who erase Black Lives Matter graffiti or fill in ponds on their own property, and their existence keeps police defunding alive as an enlightened ideal that has never been truly implemented. Like abolishing private property, its absurd impossibility makes it compelling, and keeps the nightmare alive.

Every now and then another attempt will be made to defund the police, leading to hundreds and thousands of deaths, and more assaults, robberies, and rapes than even the FBI can count. Like the Soviet Union or the Minneapolis City Council, the whole thing will fall apart on its own, but its memory will linger as an inspiration to the next bunch of radicals who will try it again.

And the bodies of the people sacrificed to that experiment will linger, forgotten, in cemeteries.





Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is an investigative journalist and writer focusing on the radical Left and Islamic terrorism.

Monday, October 19, 2020

Statues of Lincoln are Being Torn Down Because He Hanged Rapists and Child Killers

By On October 19, 2020
The names of small children don't often appear on monuments, but Edward Baumler's name is there among those of many other children who were murdered in the massacre at Milford.

Edward was only 3 years old when he was shot to death by Dakota raiders. His brother, Heinrich, who died alongside him, killed with a tomahawk, was 7 years old.

Their baby sister was murdered with an arrow.

The Baumler children were among a dozen other children, and twice as many women, killed by the tribal child murderers and rapists who assaulted the immigrant German township of Milford.

Now a statue of President Lincoln was toppled in Portland and the University of Wisconsin-Madison student government voted to remove his statue because he punished the killers of Milford’s children and the killers of the other seventy children under 10 years old.

The massacre at Milford was not unique. Entire communities were wiped out by bands of Indians pretending they had come asking for water. Women and girls as young as twelve years old were raped, mutilated, and murdered. Little boys were beaten to death. Survivors hid in piles of corpses, awaiting death while surrounded by the dead bodies of their loved ones.

Minnesota settlements in the 1860s were a haven for German, Norwegian, and other immigrants who had fled political oppression and limited opportunities to come to America. They had little to do with the causes of the conflict between the Dakota and the United States.

The Dakota massacres were so easily accomplished because the German and Norwegian settlers, unlike the English settlers of another era, were unarmed and weren’t ready to fight. That’s why the “warriors” initially avoided attacking the local fort and instead went after them.

When Little Crow’s War ended, trials were held and 303 fighters were sentenced to be hanged.

President Lincoln was uncomfortable with the speedy trials and the large number of tribal fighters who would have been executed. Despite heavy political pressure from survivors and Minesottans, he personally decided to review the trial records for every single case.

Lincoln had been a talented lawyer, but he was in the middle of the Civil War, and there were 303 cases. The Union depended on the support of Minnesota, and of the German immigrant community, who played a major role in the fighting, to pursue and win the war with the South.

Nevertheless, Lincoln personally reviewed the trial records for each case, and commuted the sentences of 88% of the convicted tribal fighters, agreeing to hang only 39 of them.

The men whose hanging Lincoln approved were both the worst of the lot and those whose guilt he believed absolutely proven. He discarded those who had participated in the general fighting and selected those who had attacked small farms and committed atrocities against individuals, especially women and children. In this, he relied on the testimony of survivors and other fighters because the perpetrators had boasted of the crimes committed against women and children.

As he told the Senate, he had first ordered “the execution of such as had been proved guilty of violating females” and then those “proven to have participated in massacres”.

Even though Lincoln had been as liberal as he could possibly be and more, the hangings still weighed on him. He offered a last minute pardon to another of the condemned men, issued a special warning not to hang yet another man, and warned that the other prisoners should not be subjected to “unlawful violence”. And in the end, only 38 of the convicted were hanged.

Lincoln’s liberal approach met with outrage in Minnesota. 1862 was an election year and Republicans paid the price. Told that the election would have gone better without his pardons and commutations, he retorted, “I would not hang men for votes.”

Now in Portland, leftist rioters declared an “Indigenous Day of Rage" for Columbus Day and tore down a statue of President Lincoln, along with one of President Theodore Roosevelt, and smashed up the Oregon Historical Society.

They spray painted "Dakota 38" on the Lincoln statue in support of the child-killers and rapists.

A member of the University of Wisconsin-Madison's student government has claimed that President Lincoln's statue should be removed because "he ordered the largest execution on American soil: 38 Dakota peoples."

In truth, Lincoln limited the scope of the executions as much as possible. He resisted political pressure from survivors, the military, abolitionists, his own party, and the entire state. In the middle of the most decisive war the country had ever known, he personally spent time poring over transcripts of court records and commuted and pardoned every one he could.

But no amount of liberalism is ever enough for the radicals and racists who hate America.

The campaign against Lincoln isn’t new.

Even before the Emancipation Monument had been taken down in Boston, the 38 rapists and child killers had been used by leftists to attack Lincoln’s legacy. Black Lives Matter racists had vandalized statues of Lincoln in Buffalo, New York, Sioux City, Iowa, and other Democrat cities.

This isn’t about litigating a conflict that took place over a century and a half ago.

Little Crow’s War was typical of many such conflicts, the familiar factors, greed, rage, and radically different worldviews, were all there and led to deadly results. Lincoln, in equally familiar fashion, deplored the violence, but had trouble grappling with the reality of the military conflicts he was repeatedly thrust into, and unable to make the reforms that had caused him to run for public office, substituting for them with speeches and gestures that were both grand and hollow.

That was the tragedy of his career and of the entire awful era that claimed so many lives.

Lincoln was morally serious in the granular, but incapable of bringing that moral seriousness to bear on the tactics and resolution of the Civil War. The Dakota trials was typical of Lincoln at his most morally granular, weighing the lives of the accused men heavily while so many died elsewhere. But, looking at those court records, Lincoln felt a sense of control. In a massive conflict that was raging beyond any control, he could do justice to these particular lives.

The Lincoln statue vandals claim that they want “justice”. But that would include justice for Edward Baumler, his brother and his baby sister. And the many other children killed then.

It would include justice for a young mother who carried the decomposing corpse of her child for over two months, for children who watched their brothers and sisters beaten to death before their eyes, and for every horror and atrocity committed in Little Crow’s War.

Nearly entire families, many of them immigrant, were wiped out through treachery. Others left behind descendants that are keeping their stories and their fight for justice alive today.

History is complex. There was a great deal of unfairness in the collision between the settlers from the east and the west who had both crossed an ocean and found a bountiful new land.

The simplistic narrative pitting “indigenous people” against “settlers” is wrong and was always so. The German settlers massacred in Minnesota were the same sort of immigrants that leftists claim to advocate for today, and their killers were sometimes not even Indian, but like so many “Indians” today, descendants of settlers, slaves, and immigrants who could pass for Indian.

Unarmed immigrants, many of them fleeing persecution, came to the door for Indians asking for water. And then the butchery began. Men who called themselves warriors beat little boys to death, the bodies of little girls were found stripped naked, and that is what the Left celebrates.

That is what the toppling of Abraham Lincoln’s statues is about.

The topplers claim that President Lincoln represents injustice. They would rather not discuss the sort of justice they have in mind. The fallen children can speak to that as well as the fallen statues. They want to tear down Lincoln, and put up 38 rapists and child killers in his place.





Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is an investigative journalist and writer focusing on the radical Left and Islamic terrorism.

Wednesday, October 14, 2020

While Cuomo Targets Orthodox Jews, Muslim Mass Gatherings Go On

By On October 14, 2020
Every year, Shiite Muslims in Flushing, Queens conduct the Arbaeen, a procession in honor of Mohammed's grandson whose death at the hands of a Sunni caliph marked the pivotal break between Shiites and Sunnis, slapping their faces and chests for their beheaded Imam Hussein.

Queens now has a large Muslim population, and regular fall processions of wailing crowds.

The coronavirus didn’t change that.


In early October 2020, videos show a huge knot of Muslim men packed closely together in circles, not wearing masks or with masks down, chanting and furiously beating their chests in memory of Hussein’s martyrdom. Some are shirtless in the traditional fashion. The slaps are meant to be hard enough to cause real pain and there’s plenty of reddened skin on display.

The Shiite procession marches down Flushing’s Main Street, past rows of Chinese stores without a police officer in sight. The media also doesn’t stop by to document the event.



It’s one of a number of Shiite mass gatherings in New York and New Jersey, including more mourning events for Imam Hussein on Manhattan’s Park Avenue in August, where few of the participants wear masks, and another in Kensington, Brooklyn around the same time.

Unlike the Orthodox Jewish prayers of the High Holy Days and the Sukkot celebrations, these Shiite Muslim gatherings were not written up by the New York Post, the New York Daily News, or the New York Times as a public threat. Governor Cuomo and Mayor Bill de Blasio did not blame Muslims for the spread of the virus or declare a crackdown that would close mosques.

The Ashura Jaloos event took place in late August in the Kensington 11218 zip code which is listed on the "orange zone" on De Blasio's coronavirus watchlist. The Queens procession took place in another watchlist neighborhood where coronavirus rates have been rising.

At the end of August, Governor Cuomo threatened to crack down on Orthodox Jewish weddings and blamed the “Jewish community” and the “Catholic community” for spreading the coronavirus, but made no mention of any action against Muslim events like the one in Manhattan that had taken place a few days before his threats against Orthodox Jews.

On October 4th, the Queens procession took place. A day later, Cuomo held his infamous antisemitic press conference in which he threatened, “I have to say to the Orthodox community tomorrow, ‘If you’re not willing to live with these rules, then I’m going to close the synagogues.’”

To bolster his argument that Chassidic Jews were to blame for the spread of the virus, Cuomo used a photo of a funeral from 2006. Once again, he made no reference to Muslim mass gatherings taking place even right before the release of the new data and his press conference.

The media widely and wrongly claimed that the outbreaks were only taking place in zip codes with large Orthodox Jewish communities. This was false, especially when it came to Queens.

There are plenty of mosques to be found in the targeted zip codes in Brooklyn and Queens, in the red, the orange, and the yellow areas, on De Blasio’s watchlist. Some are quite large and in the red zone, but Orthodox Jews made a good target. Muslims make a politically incorrect one.

No Democrat would be caught dead threatening Muslims or shutting down mosques.

And the same papers that scold, sneer, and mock at men in fur hats would never dream of ridiculing shirtless Muslim men slapping their chests in public. That would be racist.

Like the Black Lives Matter riots and the Sharpton 50,000 rally in Washington D.C., Islamic religious rituals somehow don’t spread the virus. Not even when they’re taking place in areas on the watchlist. Orthodox Jewish prayers, like Trump rallies, are blamed for spreading it.

The same hypocritical doublethink extended not only to the rituals, but to the reactions.

When a group of Chassidic Jews protested the discriminatory restrictions by Governor Cuomo and Mayor Bill de Blasio, by burning masks and waving Trump flags, the media was furious.

"Brooklyn’s Orthodox Jews burn masks in violent protests as New York cracks down on rising cases," a Washington Post headline blared. That's the same paper which has repeatedly described Black Lives Matter riots that wrecked entire cities as being "mostly peaceful".

Rep. Jerrold Nadler, who had falsely claimed that Antifa violence was a myth, and expressed support for Black Lives Matter, despite the repeated riots, demanded that, “those responsible must be held to account for such violence” and expressed support for Cuomo’s crackdown.

Nadler also tweeted a petition of support for Cuomo and De Blasio’s crackdown on Jews from “300 Rabbis” representing something called the New York Jewish Agenda which had been created earlier this year to fight for “social justice.”

The letter was headed by Sharon Kleinbaum of Congregation Beit Simchat Torah, a gay temple, much of whose membership defected when it decided to pray for Hamas terrorists.

“Recent events have demonstrated that CBST is far more committed to a progressive political agenda than to the Jewish people,” Bryan Bridges, a former board member, wrote. “I couldn’t imagine raising a child in this congregation, and have that child hear, just before we recite Kaddish, the names of people who are trying to kill her grandparents.”

But, to give Sharon Kleinbaum credit, she doesn’t limit her antisemitism to Jews in Israel.

Kleinbaum supported providing space to Queers Against Israeli Apartheid, but is quite happy to see apartheid implemented by her Democrat political allies against Orthodox Jews in America.

The differing treatment meted out to Orthodox Jewish and Shiite Muslim religious gatherings is a troubling demonstration of how antisemitism is baked into the intersectionality of the Left.

It’s not about Israel. And it never was.

Pierre Leroux, who coined the term ‘Socialism’, wrote, “Every government having regard to good morals ought to repress the Jews”. This was a century before the rebirth of the modern State of Israel. It wasn’t Zionism that the founder of Socialism was objecting to, but Judaism.

Is it any wonder that Leroux’s socialist successors like Bill de Blasio are taking him at his word?

There is no systemic racism in America. But there’s no question that when you look at the very different treatment for Black Lives Matter rallies, Shiite Muslim gatherings, and Orthodox Jewish events, that systemic antisemitism is alive and well. Especially among New York Democrats.

"My message to the Jewish community, and all communities, is this simple: the time for warnings has passed," Bill de Blasio had tweeted in April.

There was no such warning for Muslims who, unlike the Chassidic Jews of Brooklyn, were not harassed or threatened in any way. They went on conducting Islamic events with no interference. The New York Post did not spy on their weddings, the New York Daily News did not ridicule their religion, and the mayor and governor did not threaten to come after them.

Cuomo threatened to close synagogues. He did not threaten to close mosques. Nor did he display any pictures, like the one above, of mass Muslim religious gatherings. Instead, he found a photo of a Jewish funeral from 2006 to suggest that Jews were spreading the coronavirus.

Systemic racism is a lie. Systemic antisemitism is real. Just ask Cuomo.








Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is an investigative journalist and writer focusing on the radical Left and Islamic terrorism.

Tuesday, October 13, 2020

Black Lives Matter Wants to Send a Black Man to Jail

By On October 13, 2020
Black Lives Matter 757, a Virginia ally of the national racist hate group, has spent four months trying to send a black man to jail.

Even though the racist organization had demanded the dismantling of the Virginia Beach Police and its judicial system, it had dedicated its Shut Down the Oceanfront 2.0 rally on Independence Day to demanding that the police, whom they wanted to eliminate, arrest Manny Wilder.

“We are calling for Hampton Police & Virginia Beach Police to get this menace off of the streets IMMEDIATELY!” the hate group had posted.


The lines of Black Lives Matter radicals, most of them white, crowded the street demanding that the police arrest and put away a black man. A skinny white girl in an oversized Black Lives Matter t-shirt brandished a pricey cell phone while screaming at a tired police officer. An obese white man wearing a stretched BLM shirt mumbled incoherently through the folds of a mask.

And then everyone, white hipsters and occasionally black people, marched down the boardwalk screaming, “Black Lives Matter”.

Except for the life of Emanuel “Manny” Wilder.

Black Lives Matter 757’s Facebook post complained that “MannyWilder is still a free man on minimal charges”. And Manny was one black man they didn’t want to see roaming the South.

“Virginia Beach Police Department Needs help (Ironic right) - But the Virginia Beach Police need help finding #MannyWilder,” Black Lives Matter 757 had posted at the end of September.

Manny was one of many drivers to be caught in the tide of Black Lives Matter violence. And, like many of those drivers, he made a run for it, past the racist mob that was coming after him.

“I was creeping forward. I wasn’t going to stop because we were under attack. I mean look at my arm. We were getting attacked. They literally knocked my dog out. They hit my fiancé with a bottle as she was riding in the back of the pickup," he told a reporter a day after the attack.

Even though video showed Manny being attacked by one of the Black Lives Matter rioters and photos showed that his arm was bloodied and his truck battered, none of the BLMers were busted. Instead the authorities came after the “white male” who had confronted them.

Black Lives Matter 757’s leader claimed that Manny had been “yelling racial slurs”. Media accounts falsely described Wilder as a “white male”. There was just one problem.

Manny’s mother is black and his father is Mexican.

The media had assumed that Manny was a white male because his truck was flying American flags. Who, except a white racist, the media concluded, would have American flags on his truck? Anyone flying the flag and getting into a fight with Black Lives Matter must be a white male.

And four months later, most media accounts still haven’t acknowledged who Manny is.

The Virginia resident is not the first black driver to end up in a confrontation with Black Lives Matter thugs. In the worst incident to date, Secoriea Turner, an 8-year-old black girl, was shot and killed at the Black Lives Matter protest for Rayshard Brooks in Atlanta while her mother was trying to make a U-turn around the barricades erected by the violent racist hate group.

The alleged gunman’s lawyer claimed that he was protesting “peacefully.”

But at least Secoriea was safely out of it and couldn’t be arrested for interfering with a Black Lives Matter riot. The same was not true for Manny or other black drivers similarly arrested trying to escape the illegal roadblocks and violent assaults of the racist hate group.

Manny’s story is a familiar one. He tried to evade the Black Lives Matter bigots, came to a stop when one of them blocked his vehicle, was assaulted, and then did his best to escape. The hate group accused the black man of shouting racial slurs at them and trying to run them over. The media echoed the BLM narrative, falsely claiming that the hate group members barely survived.

The familiar narrative became, “Driver runs into crowd of Black Lives Matter protesters”.

And Manny, who is black, was turned into a white male who shouted racial slurs at the rioters.

“Of course people are going to get upset. This is a protest. It is very clear what we are doing. You shouldn’t even been on the street, which you were,” a Black Lives Matter 757 organizer ranted.

So much for the peaceful protests.

“If I was going to run over people, why wouldn’t I start with the female protestor standing in front of me as I was trying to leave? I wouldn’t run her over, but she was standing in front of me,” Manny asked. “I stopped the car. My goal was never to hit anyone, my goal was never to run anyone over. My goal was to leave.”

But while Manny’s Black Lives Matter attacker wasn’t charged, he was hit with charges of reckless driving, disorderly conduct, disturbing the peace and abusive language. Black Lives Matter 757 was right that these were “minimal charges”. These weren’t real criminal charges because the black driver targeted by the racist hate group hadn’t done anything illegal.

Manny was just one more sacrifice that local authorities had to make to the racist lynch mob.

Meanwhile, Black Lives Matter activists and supporters had widely circulated Manny’s name and address, along with pictures of his fiance, on Facebook and Instagram. And despite the social media company’s eagerness to censor militia groups, it did nothing to stop the doxxing.

"See you soon," a Black Lives Matter supporter messaged Manny on Instagram.

"Yes sir, see you then. Wanna beer when you come?" Manny asked.

"Put it on your head, I'll play target practice," was the reply.

"Anybody know where #MannyWilder is hiding out at? I’d like to pay him a visit," a white supporter of the BLM hate group posted on Facebook, and then added Manny’s address.

A white political science student boasted of having “screenshotted his location”.

Yet another white BLM supporter commented, "why does he look like a coconut", a racial slur implying that a black man acts white, followed by three skull emojis.

The media, in its typically biased fashion, failed to report on the harassment or death threats.

Instead of staying to face the lynch mob, Manny got out of Virginia Beach, was tracked down and arrested in Florida, before being sent back to the local authorities and the BLM lynch mob. He was only arrested in Florida because he “fit the description of the person they were looking for, but he ended up not being the suspect”. The irony of the profiling should be obvious.

Manny’s back in Virginia Beach now and faces a biased system aimed at lynching him.

The irony of Black Lives Matter organizing a lynch mob to hunt down a black man, and then dispatching white protesters to demand that the police and justice system they claim represents white supremacy do the lynching for them is also abundantly obvious and obscene.

Virginia Beach isn’t going to all this trouble during a pandemic and the breakdown of law and order to secure a suspect from another state for using “abusive language”. It’s doing it to appease the Black Lives Matter lynch mob and keep them from spoiling another weekend.

There are lynch mobs roaming in the South again. But its members wear Black Lives Matter shirts and its diverse members shout, “Black Lives Matter” while hunting down a black man.

“I was flying the American flags. Everyone wants to stand for what they represent, ” Manny had told a reporter. “I represent patriotism. I stand for the unity of one. I support Black Lives Matter, but I do not support the violence.”

Manny’s Instagram account now carries a different message, “Better to be judged by 12 then carried by six.”





Thursday, October 01, 2020

Black Lives Matter Leaders Support Violent Riots, Biden Won’t Condemn Them

By On October 01, 2020
After the recent toll of mostly peaceful Black Lives Matter rioting wrecked cities and tilted the polls toward Trump, Joe Biden and even Kamala Harris began condemning “violence”.

Biden has said meaningless things like "we condemn the violence", and "I condemn this violence unequivocally" as if violence were an independent entity. Condemning violence, like condemning war, is either pacifism or evasion. Since Biden isn’t a pacifist, he’s evading.

Violence is a concept. You don’t condemn a concept: you condemn its perpetrators.

The Democrats embraced Black Lives Matter, they even fundraised on behalf of the rioters and looters. Senator Kamala Harris tweeted out a link to the Minnesota Freedom Fund which bailed out rioters and looters, and Jaleel Stallings, who was accused of shooting at police officers.

According to police officers, Stallings had crouched near a car during the riots and opened fire on them. He faced two counts of attempted second-degree murder and the bail fund backed by Kamala Harris and several Biden staffers still bailed out the alleged wannabe cop-killer.




Once Biden goes into details, then his condemnation of “violence” actually turns out to be a condemnation of cops and conservatives. Or, as he put it, “I have condemned all forms of violence – police violence, lawless violence and violence perpetrated by extreme, right-wing militia groups.” When he condemns “violence”, he really means he’s condemning the police.

The closest that Biden comes to condemning the violence by Black Lives Matter, a racist domestic terrorist group which has devastated entire cities, is condemning the “lawless”. And he does it so vaguely as not to offend BLM and its supporters while giving the shopkeepers whose lifetime of work, his supporters burned to the ground, the false impression he stands with them.

Biden’s toothless condemnations of “violence” are a meaningless cowardly evasion of moral responsibility. He’ll even occasionally condemn “looting or destroying property or burning churches” without naming who’s going around looting, destroying, and burning churches.

Burning churches is a bad thing. But not so bad that Biden will name the church burners. And when Biden fails to condemn Black Lives Matter, he supports its violent riots.

Even while the media falsely claims that the riots are peaceful, the hate group’s co-founders, Patrisse Cullors, Alicia Garza and Opal Tometi, have not been asked to condemn it. On the rare occasions when they’ve been asked about it, they’re deflected or dismissed the violence.

Ask BLM’s co-founders about the hate group’s violent riots and they’ll typically reframe the question by dismissing it as a mere issue of property and claim that they value life more. That’s despite the fact that hundreds of first responders and civilians have been wounded in the riots.

Speaking at a Penn State virtual event, Cullors described rioters as "expressing righteous rage" and suggested that society needs to avoid situations where "people feel like they have to be so desperate that they disrupt people’s businesses.” Not only didn’t the Black Lives Matter co-founder condemn her movement’s violence, she justified it, while denouncing capitalism.

Cullors, who has in the past been paid $10,000 to appear at virtual college events, is represented by CAA, the top talent agency in the country which was accused of complicity in Harvey Weinstein’s abuses, and whose clients include Tom Cruise and Robert De Niro.

She’s also the author of “When They Call You a Terrorist: A Black Lives Matter Memoir”, with an introduction by Angela Davis, a domestic terrorist who endorsed Biden, and an opening quote from Assata Shakur, a black nationalist cop-killer listed by the FBI as a most wanted terrorist.

That quote from the fugitive cop killer, "It is our duty to fight for our freedom" has become a BLM chant It appears in Shakur’s biography just after she indirectly mentions the shootout that killed Trooper Werner Foerster and hails the “guerrillas” of her Black Liberation Army terrorist group.

The phrase just before the chant is, “We must gain our liberation by any means necessary”.

After the chant is a dedication to, among other black nationalist terrorists, Mark Essex, a racist killer who opened fire on New Year’s Eve in New Orleans killing, among others, a honeymooning couple. Betty Steagall was shot in the back of her head while embracing her murdered husband. Essex left a Black Liberation flag lying near the corpses of the doctor and his wife.

This is not the chant of a peaceful movement, but of a violently racist terrorist organization. And it’s been utilized by Democrats, including the Arizona Senate Democrat caucus.

“I just don’t equate the loss of life and the loss of property,” Alicia Garza, another BLM co-founder, replied, when asked about the violence. “We want to value our love of people over property.”

Not only did Garza fail to condemn the violence, she reduced it to a question of property, while reframing the violent riots as a love of people over property. Property, like violence, is an abstraction, a way to avoid confronting what happens when people are terrorized, when the small shop they’ve poured their life and dreams into goes up in flames, while BLM’s founders get tens of thousands of taxpayer dollars to condemn capitalism and defend the looting.

When the National Guard was sent to Baltimore, Garza complained that the soldiers were “standing between Black people and access to resources, they are protecting property”.

"I’ll be really honest: I’m not really concerned about broken glass," Opal Tometi, the third BLM co-founder, argued. "Property can be replaced, people cannot."

Not only do all of Black Lives Matter’ co-founders find ways to justify the violent riots, but some local chapters, which have more control, have been more direct about supporting the violence.

After the massive outbreak of looting in Chicago, Black Lives Matter Chicago issued a press release describing looters as protesters, and claimed that the products in the stores were "hoarded" wealth. The official press release ranted that "black lives are and always will be more important than downtown corporations" and claimed that, "when protesters attack high-end retail stores that are owned by the wealthy and service the wealthy, that is not 'our' city."

Black Lives Matter Chicago organizer Ariel Atkins called the looting, “reparations", claimed that, “winning has come through riots,” and declared, "I will support the looters."

“Anything they want to take, take it,” she said.

Hawk Newsome, the Greater New York Chair of BLM, refused to condemn looting and instead claimed that America is based on looting.

“People just manifested it in different ways. Some people there just raised their fists and said 'I stand with the masses.' Other people were there to destroy things,” Newsome had said earlier of the Minneapolis BLM riots.

Melina Abdullah, the lead organizer of Black Lives Matter in Los Angeles, whose chapter has collaborated with Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam, had its rally lead to multiple attacks on Jewish synagogues and businesses complete with antisemitic chants and graffiti.

Before the rioting began, her daughter, and the co-founder of the BLM Youth Vanguard, ranted, “I know you want to tear some s___ up... if you want to set some corporations on fire, you know what? I don’t care about Target burning. I don’t care that capitalism burns. I don’t care that white people in their f____ office buildings are upset."

Abdullah, like her hate group’s co-founders, dismissed the rioting. “The looting is not as violent as the police violence that is the source of the protesting. Focusing on broken windows is a deliberate decision.”

Much like Kristalnacht.

The media has repeatedly mischaracterized Black Lives Matter riots as “mostly peaceful” as long as there is a prologue during which the racists at the rally chant slogans before the violence begins. This is a fundamental distortion of the truth. A peaceful march ends peacefully. A violent rally ends violently. A mostly peaceful march is really a violent riot.

Would you go out and meet someone if they told you it would be a mostly peaceful encounter?

A peaceful event has to be peaceful all the time. Or it’s violent. A mostly peaceful event is like a mostly non-toxic toothpaste, a mostly safe ladder, or a mostly solid bridge. Mostly counts when it comes to statistics, not when it comes to harm and danger. Most serial killers were mostly peaceful. They spent less than 1% of their time hunting and killing their victims.

That’s not what peaceful means. Like Biden’s condemnations of violence, it’s an evasion.

Nobody in the media bothers to ask or discuss whether the Black Lives Matter philosophy and ideology is peaceful. That’s because there’s a large body of evidence that shows it isn’t. Instead the media nods along as BLM leaders pull the same tired old trick of reframing their movement’s violence as an affirmation of the value of black lives and reduce their victims to “property”.

Black Lives Matter violence springs directly from the violent ideology of black nationalism. The movement’s leaders make no secret of drawing their inspiration from domestic terrorists like Assata Shakur and Angela Davis. Democrats and their media choose to ignore these facts.

After the poll numbers turned against both Black Lives Matter violence and the movement, Joe Biden began condemning the violence, as if it exists apart from its perpetrators, without condemning the violent movement whose rioters were carrying out the violence.

Anyone can condemn an abstract evil. The challenge is condemning the perpetrators.

Joe Biden refuses to condemn Black Lives Matter. He can’t. They’re part of his base. While Americans are increasingly turning against the racist hate group, Democrats still back it. After months of rioting, support for Black Lives Matter has dropped 12% among Americans, but only 4% among Democrats, 92% of whom still support the violent black nationalist movement.

And so Joe’s trying to have it both ways. He’s condemning the violence while allying with the violent. He won’t disavow BLM or his endorsement from Angela Davis, while claiming to oppose violence. He’s refusing to condemn the perpetrators, while condemning the outcome.

That’s as worthless as his career and his candidacy.

If you support the violent, you support the violence. If your campaign and your veep help fund bail for a group bailing out rioters and an attempted cop-killer, you can’t claim, as Biden does, to oppose violence “across the board”. Until Biden publicly breaks with the Black Lives Matter movement and condemns its violence by name, he’s complicit in every burned store, every wounded cop, every terrorized child, every lost job, and every broken American city.




Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is an investigative journalist and writer focusing on the radical Left and Islamic terrorism.

Tuesday, September 29, 2020

The Godmother of Police Defunding Tried Restorative Justice, But He Kept Raping

By On September 29, 2020
"Yes, We Mean Literally Abolish the Police," Mariame Kaba's New York Times op-ed blared.

The debate over defunding the police was underway and Kaba, the godmother of police defunding, wanted to make her position clear. Essence had called Kaba a "modern day abolitionist". Black Lives Matter Chicago traces its roots to her. Every lefty media outlet from NBC News to The Intercept had promoted her. And now Kaba was taking her message of getting rid of prisons and police, and turning over the streets to the criminals, to the Times.

But what would replace prisons and the police? That's the question that media talking heads, intrigued by this exciting new political program of not enforcing the law, were asking.

"Towns could use restorative-justice models instead of throwing people in prison," Kaba briefly noted.

Kaba didn't bother to define what "restorative justice" meant, but sensing that the only crime that the Times' liberal readers could ideologically care about was rape, dismissed the idea that the justice system could stop rapists, and then urged more subsidized housing and food spending, as if the average mugger was looking to buy a meal or a home in the suburbs. Questions about how the needs of rapists would be met under Kaba’s redistribution program went unanswered.

Pro-crime activists like talking about restorative justice, but they don’t like defining it.




There’s a very good reason for that. Imagine you get beaten to a pulp outside a bank by three muggers. After you’re released from the hospital, the muggers, who were out all this time, are called in to a restorative justice session in which they apologize for breaking your nose in three places, and you’re told to apologize for your role in perpetuating capitalism, and then they leave.

Until they do it again.

Five years ago, Kaba had tested her theory when a leader of the Black Youth Project 100, a black nationalist group set up in the wake of the Trayvon Martin case, was accused of rape.

BYP100 has been at the forefront of the pro-crime and police defunding movement.

“We do not have a criminal justice system,” BYP100 leader D’atra Jackson recently claimed. “We have a capitalist system that provides a process for deciding who gets punished.”

Malcolm London was a co-chair of BYP100, and a successful community organizer, who had been arrested for assaulting a police officer, and was then released by Chicago Democrats.

His victim, "Kyra", another Chicago activist, was working as a sexual assault educator on campus. According to Kyra, he "told me sexual violence prevention was something he was really passionate about".

And then he sexually assaulted her.

BYP100 quickly announced that it had been "made aware of a sexual assault allegation involving a BYP100 leader" and that it was launching "a transformative and restorative justice process, rooted in compassion, accountability and a belief that no one is disposable."

These terms are euphemisms for a process in which all the perpetrator really needs to do is apologize because he’s not “disposable” and he needs “compassion” for his crimes.

That’s when BYP100 brought in Mariame Kaba to lead the process.

At the end of the 15 month "restorative justice" process, everyone involved decided to make public statements to show how this alternative to prisons and police could work in the real world.

Kaba sniffed at the "uninformed takes and commentaries” about “CA and transformative justice” while stating that among the things that mattered to her was making “sure that Malcolm was supported in making personal changes”. Malcolm’s statement hailed the “engaging” bi-weekly conversations that allowed him to discuss his toxic masculinity problem and occasionally cry.

“I was already indebted to Mariame Kaba before I began this process and will forever be thankful for her commitment to community,” Malcolm concluded.

Then Malcolm was accused of rape. Again.

"After a year and a half long accountability process, Malcolm made the choice to continue raping Black women," Kyra complained in a follow-up statement last month. “The process had many goals, but the main hope was that at the very least Malcolm wouldn’t rape anyone else.”

So much for that.

"In the coming months and years after our process ended, other people came forward to share their own stories of sexual harm involving Malcolm," Kaba noted in her own statement.

Instead of warning other potential victims, Malcolm's restorative justice process was treated as a success story. And then the black nationalist activist allegedly raped a woman in 2018.

“Accountability is not only about self-reflection, apology and repair for a particular incident. It is also making sure not to repeat the same behavior. On that front, he has failed,” Kaba griped.

Two months earlier, Kaba had accused “white people” of being unable to imagine that a world without police would be less violent than one with it. “As a society, we have been so indoctrinated with the idea that we solve problems by policing and caging people that many cannot imagine anything other than prisons and the police as solutions to violence and harm,” she argued.

Malcolm’s case showed just how important caging criminals to reduce violence and harm is.

There is a reason why we lock up criminals. Especially career criminals. It’s to protect victims. When you insist, as BYP100 did, that criminals aren’t disposable, their victims then become disposable.

BYP 100 is currently running a "She Safe, We Safe" campaign to put an end to violence against "black women, girls, femmes and gender non-conforming people". It might want to start at home.

In Unapologetic: A Black, Queer, and Feminist Mandate for Radical Movements, Charlene Carruthers, a key BYP100 and anti-police figure, described this process as embodying black queer feminism. The embodiment of black queer feminism is letting rapists rape black women.

Around the same time that Kaba’s op-ed calling for the elimination of the police ran in the New York Times, Carruthers was pushing police defunding and a shift to “community solutions” on PBS without caring how badly the “community accountability” process for Malcolm London had ended.

Malcolm London, the accused rapist, is still listed as a TED talk speaker, and involved with a variety of organizations. He’s also available for corporate events, birthdays, and fundraisers.

The whole point of community accountability is its lack of accountability.

The criminal justice system has countless flaws, but offers accountability. Restorative justice and the entire portfolio of euphemisms attached to it is little more than a struggle session for rapists. And when those rapists are members of oppressed groups, it’s even easier for them to play the game.

Confess to your toxic masculinity, invent a legacy of abuse, apologize, and then do it again.

The purpose of the criminal justice system is not, despite a common misunderstanding, to rehabilitate criminals. Only people can rehabilitate themselves. And they need a reason to do it. Engaging biweekly conversations on toxic masculinity for 15 months is a free therapy session for sociopaths that does nothing to prevent a serial sexual abuser from doing the same thing again.

Kaba’s process proved that some people really do need to be caged. Or everyone ends up caged.

How many people are afraid to leave the houses because of Black Lives Matter riots? How many families, mostly black, are afraid to let their children play outside because of how many children have already been shot by gang members in Democrat cities where they no longer have to fear prison?

That’s what being caged is actually like.

Public safety is a binary. You cage gang members or you cage 8-year-olds at risk of being hit by a stray bullet. You cage muggers or you cage the grandmother lying on the pavement with a bloodied head. You cage rapists or you cage the women they rape. It comes down to who matters more.

“No one should be discarded or disowned, and we had to decide to stick with both Kyra and Malcolm,” Carruthers wrote.

But you can’t choose both the rapist and his victim.

“Many people have invested countless hours and emotional labor to support Malcolm in taking full accountability. Unfortunately, he has let them down. He has also given critics of CA processes fodder which is enraging,” Kaba complained.

It’s a shame when letting a sexual predator go on doing his thing makes abolishing police look bad.

The world that Kaba would make is laid out on her site which is funded by George Soros’ Open Society Foundations. The site, Transform Harm, rails against what it calls Carceral Feminism

One article complains that, “our country has an ugly history of using police and prisons to stop sexual violence”, another falsely insists that, “locking people up won’t help combat sexual violence.”

A Brooklyn sociologist talks up having rapists write apology letters.

Aya Gruber, a feminist legal theorist, insists that police shouldn’t arrest domestic abusers.

“Sexual harassment and assault are pervasive in our society because extravagant wealth and absolute poverty are pervasive,” a Jacobin editor argues.

Alison Phipps, a professor of gender studies at the University of Sussex, claims that sending Larry Nassar, who had sexually abused some 250 girls, to prison and throwing away the key embodies "political whiteness" which is the belief that "rape is perpetrated by ‘bad men’ who should be exposed. That police exist to catch these men, and courts to do justice on them."

If you think rapists are bad people who should be locked up, you’re guilty of “political whiteness”. And if you’re a black woman who wants her rapist to go to jail, you’re a white supremacist.

It’s easy for most people to dismiss these views, but they have the backing of a billionaire who finances much of the activist Left, and has planted his own DAs in major cities across America.

The world that Soros’ DAs, that the various Black Lives Matter groups, and their Democrat backers are determined to bring into being is a place where women have no rights, and where criminals enjoy the utter freedom to do anything they want to anyone, as long as they don’t use hate speech.

And it would be one long unrelenting nightmare for women.

Among all its utter horrors, the pro-crime policies of restorative justice would roll back much of modern feminism which relies on the criminal justice system to punish everyone from wife-beaters to rapists, while insisting that the solution to the abuse of women is in higher taxes and more welfare.






Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is an investigative journalist and writer focusing on the radical Left and Islamic terrorism.

Thursday, September 24, 2020

Black Mayors and Police Chiefs are Being Accused of White Supremacy

By On September 24, 2020



“I would have so much more respect for the Bail Fund if they had bailed him out and then let him stay in one of their homes,” Suffolk County District Attorney Rachael Rollins blasted the Massachusetts Bail Fund.

A statement from a DA blasting the MBF for freeing a rapist wouldn't usually be extraordinary, except that Rollins, whose campaign was backed by George Soros, was supposed to be different. Not only had Rollins run on a pro-crime platform promising not to prosecute shoplifting, breaking and entering, and resisting arrest, but she had reacted to the Black Lives Matter riots with a hysterical rant about her rage and the white community.

Rollins had dismissed the damage from Black Lives Matter riots because it "could be fixed".

And then the Massachusetts Bail Fund freed Shawn McClinton, a convicted sex offender, who had been accused of raping a woman a few weeks after he was let go, leading Rollins to snap.

The Massachusetts Bail Fund, whose motto is “Free them all”, really meant it.

The problem that Rachael Rollins, the first black DA of Suffolk County, a pro-crime black nationalist activist, ran into is a familiar one for a new generation of leftist politicians, many from an identity politics slate, who learned the hard way that they will always be out-radicaled.

It’s no longer enough to just support riots and property crimes, you have to support rapists too.

The Black Lives Matter wave destroyed the credibility and leadership of a new wave of identity politics Democrats who had seemed exciting until they were actually tested and failed miserably.

A few years ago, Jenny Durkan was being hailed as the first lesbian mayor of Seattle. Then she was besieged by a Black Lives Matter mob, and, after hailing CHOP as a new Summer of Love, had no choice but to shut it down. Carmen Best, Seattle’s first black police chief, was forced to resign after facing police defunding budget cuts that decimated her department.

Chief Danielle Outlaw, formerly Portland's first black police commissioner, who got away from the city's perpetual riots to become Philadelphia's first black female commissioner, discovered that there's no escaping the violence. Many of the cities at the center of the violence have tried appointing black police leaders and electing black DAs only to realize that doesn’t appease.

“The fact that I, as a very obvious African American female police chief, have been accused by those within that group or those who support that group, as being a supporter and protector of those who are believed to be white supremacists—if that's even the case—is ridiculous. Right?” Chief Outlaw had wondered back in Portland.

Chief Outlaw may have thought that she would leave that kind of craziness behind when she left Portland, but she was soon being accused of white supremacy in Philly when the police didn’t crack down on white business owners protecting their businesses from BLM rioters.

"We do not condone any acts of violence, and as an agency we don't take sides," she argued.

Lori Lightfoot’s victory was supposed to calm the radicals in Chicago who had bedeviled Rahm Emanual. The city, for the first time in its history, had a number of firsts, a black female lesbian leader, who represented everything that the identity politics slate wanted or could possibly want.

But the pandemic and the riots left her hopefully outmatched and outclassed. Like many other leftist city leaders, Mayor Lightfoot was forced to ban BLM rioters from rallying on her block.

Black Lives Matter activists were soon accusing Lightfoot of "creating problems in black and brown communities to protect white people" and having "bloodied people for their disobedience to white supremacy", by which they meant taking the minimum possible steps to stop the riots.

And so the black lesbian mayor of Chicago had officially become a white supremacist.

The speed with which the ‘firsts’ who break glass ceilings become the enemy is breathtaking.

Los Angeles DA Jackey Lacey went from being hailed as "the first woman and first African-American to serve as Los Angeles County District Attorney" to having her house besieged by Black Lives Matter racists and when her husband waved a gun to get them to leave, he, like the McCloskeys, was charged by the connivance of the Democrat machine.

Rep. Schiff, Mayor Eric Garcetti, and other Democrats quickly pulled their endorsements from Lacey. The first black female DA was now officially a racist oppressor of black people.

“A lot of the cases that people shout the loudest at me about are those cases where the man who was killed had a gun or was shooting someone or harming someone,” Lacey pointed out.

But, like the right to rape in Suffolk County, harming and shooting someone is a right in LA.

You can be the first black DA of Los Angeles, the first gay mayor of South Bend, the first lesbian mayor of Seattle, the first black female police chief of Portland, Philadelphia, or Seattle, you can even be the first black lesbian mayor of Chicago, and you still won’t be radical enough.

You can even run on a pro-crime platform backed by George Soros and it’s still not enough.

That’s because the problem isn’t racism: it’s radicalism.

If the problem really were racism, it would be solvable. But radicalism has no stopping point. As soon as a mayor, a DA, or police chief seems to fit the bill, they’re not radical enough.

Mayors, DAs, and police chiefs who try to actually do their jobs are the first to fall.

Just ask Danielle Outlaw, who was hounded out of Portland, or Carmen Best, who was forced to resign in Seattle. Checking the right identity politics boxes doesn’t matter if you’re not a radical.

But no amount of radicalism is ever enough. Just ask Rachael Rollins.

History is full of examples of revolutions where the radicals ate each other. The story of CHOP and of Portland’s over 100 days of rioting, the guillotines and people’s committees, is the familiar one of the French and Russian revolutions, of the radicals killing anyone less radical until there’s no one left except either a tyrant or a populace who is tired of the endless violence.

What the revolutionaries want is a society so unlivable that it even horrified a Soros DA.

When they say that they want to free all the criminals, they really mean it. And when they say that they want to defund the police, they mean that too. These aren’t bold slogans for anything more moderate as their defenders among the Democrats and the media have falsely insisted.

The most obvious symptom of a political movement’s descent into extremism is its inability to describe the problem. Extremism has no language for criticizing its own extremism except by warning that it’s undermining the larger cause. And that’s been the Democrat response. The riots and the crime, they keep warning, are eating into Biden’s lead in some swing states.

That’s a compelling argument for those making it and a contemptible one to those it’s made to.

Not only the Democrats, but even the Left, and even the radicals are losing control of a movement that is turning on them for not being radical enough. And no amount of identity politics can stop the crackup of a movement that has lost its mind and its brakes.




Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is an investigative journalist and writer focusing on the radical Left and Islamic terrorism.

Tuesday, September 15, 2020

Black Lives Matter Led to Record Number of Mass Shootings

By On September 15, 2020



Even as gun violence breaks records in New York City, Chicago, and Philly, the Democrats don’t have much to say about the epidemic of shootings or their pet cause, gun control. While activist Democrat prosecutors like Attorney General Letitia James have neglected to deal with the violence and are instead targeting the NRA, they aren’t really talking about gun control.

Mass shootings are rarely mentioned anymore even though there are more of them than ever.

A Washington D.C. mass shooting at a cookout last month that wounded 20 people was treated as another local crime story. And there are a lot of these local crime stories as shootings rise.

New York City has blown past 1,000 shootings, of all kinds, individual and mass, Philly hit 1,300, and Chicago is approaching 3,000 shootings.

3 Democrat cities alone will soon account for some 5,000 shootings.

These are the kinds of numbers we used to see out of Iraq. Now we see them in America.

The Gun Violence Archive recently tweeted that it "had never totaled more than 60 mass shootings in a single month - it has now eclipsed that number for four straight months, and September is on pace to do the same."

From 2014 to 2019, there was an average of 348 mass shootings. 2020 is far from over, but there have been 438 mass shootings, and the Gun Violence Archive estimates it will hit 590.

In just the first 8 days of September, there were 21 mass shootings.

And these mass shootings are inescapably tied to the Black Lives Matter violence that crippled police, wrecked public safety, and led Democrats to call for an end to cops.

Every full month in which Black Lives Matter riots and rallies took place has recorded more mass shootings than the first three months of the year combined.

There were 25 mass shootings in January and 95 mass shootings in June, the first full month of Black Lives Matter riots.

There were a total of 70 mass shootings in the first three months of the year and a total of 260 mass shootings in the previous three months which were filled with BLM violence.

Beyond the violence of the riots, which have included firebombs, shootings, stabbings, and multiple assaults on police officers, random drivers, shopkeepers, and anyone in the way, the Democrat political movement led cities to pull back police or tied up officers with the riots.

Gang members got the message and ramped up looting and territorial battles.

Between 2008 and 2018, murder was the leading cause for black men between the ages of 15 to 34 with over 55,000 dead. That’s over 10 times the numbers of US casualties in Iraq.

These are not normal numbers and they’re what we don’t talk about when it comes to gun violence. Gun control activists are eager to make suburban school shootings into the face of gun violence. Gun violence doesn’t come out of suburban schools, but urban ganglands.

That’s why the Democrats aren’t talking about gun control during the worst epidemic of gun violence in years. That and the reality that gun violence is associated with their support for BLM.

Cities that had fairly low levels of crime and were at the epicenter of the riots, Portland, New York City, and Austin, have achieved staggering increases in shootings and murders.

In Portland, where there have been over 100 days of Black Lives Matter riots, shootings shot up from 299 for all of 2019 to 488 for the year so far. In the first month of BLM protests, shootings nearly doubled from 31 in 2019 to 61. In August, the shootings nearly tripled relative to 2019.

In Austin, the murder rate rose 67%. At the end of August, the city recorded 3 murders in 24 hours. A homeless woman was shot when 60 hurricane evacuees began fighting in the street and shooting each other.

"We know we have at least 23 rounds discharged last night,” Chief David McKichan mentioned at one press conference.

In New York City, shootings rose 140% since the period roughly overlapping with BLM riots. And murders rose by over 50%. Behind those numbers are 90 murder victims. They’re part of the political price that Mayor Bill de Blasio and New York Democrats paid for their support for BLM.

In the first full month of Black Lives Matter rallies and riots, the number of daylight shootings in New York City more than tripled. Daylight shootings are a mark of brazen gang violence.

By August, 43 people had been shot in 48 hours, and 3 people had been killed in one day.

Democrat leaders have responded to the wave of violence by decriminalizing it and attributing it to the effects of the pandemic and to social inequities.

“Gun violence is a symptom of social ills," Portland City Commissioner Jo Ann Hardesty, who had falsely blamed police for setting fires, insisted.

“It’s been an exhausting 100 days for our city. But may I remind everyone just how exhausting it is to live while Black in America. Let me remind folks that the civil rights movement lasted a lot longer than 100 days and make no mistake – today’s struggle against police violence and creeping fascism is the new civil rights movement,” she wrote, cheering 100 days of BLM terror.

Exhausting is one way of putting it. July was Portland's deadliest month in three decades.

The BLM riots aren’t just a struggle session or cancel culture. They’re doing a lot more than terrorizing diners or burning down stores. The BLM riots and movement are killing people.

Democrats had spent years falsely claiming that guns, rather than criminals, kill people. Now they’ve moved on to blaming gun violence on social ills that will be remedied by defunding police and shifting even more money into the same broken and corrupt welfare state.

Crime, like homelessness, will just become another fact of life, if they have their way. Every increase in crime will be met with more welfare spending and less police until every major city becomes an unlivable war zone where only the poor and the foolhardy still make their home.

Even now the cities that have gotten behind police defunding are suffering massive violence.

Not all that long ago, the Democrats ran on vowing to stop mass shootings. Now they don’t want to talk about them. And who can blame them? Few murderers want to confess their crimes.

Democrats lied about crime and the cops, and thousands of people were wounded or died.





Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is an investigative journalist and writer focusing on the radical Left and Islamic terrorism.

Wednesday, September 09, 2020

Who's Really Looting America?

By On September 09, 2020


A hardcover copy of "In Defense of Looting" will run you 21 bucks at Amazon and 28 bucks at Barnes and Noble. That’s just how capitalism works for the distribution and sales of a product from one of the biggest publishing companies in the world that’s part of the Lagardère empire.

Why is the largest publishing company in France pushing what Publishers Weekly called, “a provocative, Marxist-informed defense of looting” to Americans? Because it makes money.

Learn why private property is just a social construct for only 21 bucks.

"In Defense of Looting" quickly ended up a major topic of conversation on social media.

And that means Arnaud Lagardère, the head of the French empire that swallowed Little, Brown and Company, adds to his $220 million net worth and keeps the model he married, half his age, in the style she expects at his country estate. So what if a whole bunch of small businesses, many owned by immigrants and black people, get trashed and put out of business.

"In Defense of Looting" was published by Bold Type Books, a Lagardère subsidiary imprint in partnership with what used to be Nation Books. The Nation, a hard lefty magazine, is partly owned by Katrina vanden Heuvel, the daughter of an MCA heiress who was worth over $38 million when she jumped out of her apartment window.

And then there's Vicky Osterweil, the author of “In Defense of Looting”, who graduated magna cum laude from Cornell, where he tried to make his own movie, before moving to Brooklyn to live out the hipster dream of playing in a punk rock band while aspiring to become a novelist.

Two years later he was being profiled in the New York Times attending an Upper East Side party. Such are the hobbies of the worthless dilettante brats of the New Left.

The son of a professor and a producer from a wealthy suburb of Boston, Willie, his original name joined the Park Slope Food Coop, and scribbled terrible movie reviews, “capitalism is built on the bones of the witch, her magic the first threat against capitalist rationalization”, followed by equally terrible leftist screeds for The Paris Review, Jacobin and The Nation. In 2011, he was in Barcelona, taking part in protests there as training for his work on Occupy Wall Street.

Fast forward to the present, Willie had married Sophie Lewis, a British lesbian feminist who has two degrees from Oxford, had translated “Communism for Kids”, and had her own book “Full Surrogacy Now: Feminism Against Family”, which attacked the existence of the family. Willie, her new “wusband”, now appeared to be Vicky Osterweil.

The happy young white couple both had major books with radical Marxist premises.

Sophia was calling for the elimination of the family and Vicky was defending looting. And the upscale couple was doing it in the name of destroying capitalism.

"Want to Dismantle Capitalism? Abolish the Family," The Nation headlined a review of her book.

All of this made marriage a little awkward, but there was nothing that couldn’t be overcome.

A splashy Vice profile mentions that at their wedding, instead of vows, the happy couple gave speeches disavowing the institution of marriage and the biological family.

And then they headed to Boston where Willie's mother wanted a more traditional wedding.

You can disavow the institution of marriage, but you’re still going to get married. And you can write a book attacking the existence of the biological family, but when your ‘wusband’s mommy wants a traditional wedding she can invite her friends to, you drop the nonsense and go.

It’s unknown what Sophia’s parents, journalists who had given birth to her in Vienna and raised her in Switzerland and France, places that speak to her oppressed background, thought.

Sophia might be gay and Vicky might be transgender but they were a conventional enough couple living the hipster dream in a gentrified area of West Philly, and touting a gift certificate to an antique shop that they had received as a wedding present. The sort of thing you do when you’re trying to smash capitalism, and abolish the family along with private property.

Right after you get married and pick up something nice at the antique shop.

The Black Lives Matter riots and the looting trashed parts of West Philly, but it doesn't seem to have done much to disturb their idyllic world of community gardens, social justice yoga studios and punk hair salons. And even if it did, unlike their proprietors, Vicky and Sophia can move on.

The ugly truth about Marxist capitalism-smashing hipsters is that they are the least exposed to the consequences of their theories. When a third of Philly pharmacies were robbed in a coordinated campaign by gangs coming in from outside the city, it had a major impact on black senior citizens getting their prescriptions, but not on an upscale white hipster power couple.

Spending your twenties and thirties deconstructing everything is the luxury of the upper class. It’s the hobby of people who don’t really have jobs or a family depending on them for support. That’s why the deconstruction is fundamentally unserious. After writing a book calling for the abolition of the family, Vicky and Sophia got married. Vicky’s living in West Philly where the riots and the looting are going on, shopping for antiques, and writing a book in defense of looting.

As F. Scott Fitzgerald wrote in The Great Gatsby, "They were careless people, Tom and Daisy—they smashed up things and creatures and then retreated back into their money or their vast carelessness."

A generation of upscale leftists is smashing up everything while knowing that they can retreat to the pricey suburbs that spawned them, to their country estates and condos, while the chaos and destruction happen to someone else. Tom might be calling himself Thomasina and Daisy might be calling herself a lesbian, but they’re still playing games and amusing themselves at other people’s expense in the vast carelessness of theoretical reasons for destroying it all.

Willie/Vicky originally wrote an article titled “In Defense of Looting” in 2014 during the Ferguson riots filled with 1619 Project style nonsense like "American police forces evolved out of fugitive slave patrols", while insisting that, "the idea of private property is just that: an idea."

Of course every idea is an idea. Including the sacrosanct nature of human life and liberty.

Dismissing fundamental concepts on which your existence depends as mere ideas is a privilege. Violence, disorder, and chaos can take away that privilege and show their value.

Leftists deconstruct everything until they realize how badly they need those ideas. But it takes far longer for them to be affected by the destruction than the poorer and more vulnerable people whose lives have been turned upside down for a sensational new talking point at one of Katrina vanden Heuvel’s fashionable parties.

While countless small businesses have been destroyed, Amazon’s business model is booming.

The massive corporation, where many lefties will be shopping for copies of “In Defense of Looting” doubled its quarterly profits. Amazon controls 38% of the e-commerce market and when Black Lives Matter looters burn their way through neighborhoods, more retail moves away and goes online. Small business owners decide that it’s better to be a third party seller for a massive corporation than to try and keep going during the lockdowns and race riots.

Amazon can make money from “In Defense of Looting” and from the actual looting.

The small businesses that Vicky Osterweil ridicules provide their owners with some measure of independence. The looters turn them into subjects of the same sort of massive corporate monopoly that Osterweil claims to hate, yet ultimately champions and makes his money from.

Osterweil preaches in defense of looting in the name of the black community. But the death of small businesses hits black communities hardest. Shopping online is a lot easier if you have a credit card or a checking account. Portions of the black community have neither. Wiping out street retail in urban areas not only guts neighborhoods, it turns retail into wealth privilege.

Upscale areas will still have street level retail once the Black Lives Matter riots die down. But the poorer black areas hardest hit by them won’t. The white leftists promoting looting will still have their quaint cafes, punk hair salons and social justice yoga studios that Vicky and Sophie rave about, they’ll also have local supermarkets like Whole Foods, owned by Amazon, groceries, restaurants, boutiques, coffee shops, and the rest of the hipster detritus of gentrification.

That’s because they have the money and spend the money to make street retail profitable.

When the rioting is done, there will be burned out neighborhoods ripe for real estate speculators to move in, renovate, and peddle to the wealthy white hipsters who want to live there.

Promote enough looting and you too can cash in when the market is right.

There is more than one kind of looting. There are the organized gangs smashing up Philly pharmacies and heading away in vans and trucks. There’s the Soros DA who lets crime happen. And there are the professional white activists who keep shouting Black Lives Matter while promoting the destruction of black neighborhoods to sell their books on Amazon.

While Vice lavishly promotes looting and Marxist deconstructionism as radical chic, its parent company is partly owned by Disney, a private equity firm, and Soros Fund Management.

The street looting is paralleled by an even more massive looting at the top with hipster Marxist deconstructionists as ideological foot soldiers in the trashing of America. Some of the biggest social justice corporations in the country are funding the attacks on capitalism and the country.

Meanwhile in August, Soros Fund Management raised its stake in Amazon by 102%.





Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is an investigative journalist and writer focusing on the radical Left and Islamic terrorism.

Popular

Categories

Follow by Email