MEN'S NEWS DAILY HOME PAGE


Wednesday, October 26, 2005

Obedient Corpses for Bush?

By Nicholas Stix The 2000th American serviceman has died in Iraq, but the talking points are full of life. My colleague, J. Grant Swank, Jr. just wrote a defense of George W. Bush, arguing
The far-left ‘Progressives’ rarely get reality. This is one of those significant historical moments when they really don’t get reality. The plain truth is that if these 2000 brave servicemembers — as well as many more yet to willingly lay down their lives — did not see through their commitment to the military, the Islamic killers international would romp about New Iraq, taking all into bloodbath maximum. Then they would move on to neighboring countries, particularly laying low every freedom-based nation for Allah’s sake.”
And what would those “freedom-based nation[s]” be? Kuwait? Saudi Arabia? Swank writes, “It surely is not a day to call it quits in New Iraq, though this evening’s major networks proclaimed as much with their showing of caskets after caskets. That story in itself was a slap in the face to every body lying in those caskets, though the liberals continue to be so unreal as not to realize it.” With all due respect to Grant Swank, I fail to see how showing caskets is a slap in the face to the soldiers, Marines, sailors and airmen in them. Would it be more respectful to the dead to hide their caskets and their names? As I’ve previously written, Pres. Bush’s prosecution of the war in Iraq appears to be governed by multicultural cowardice and confusion. But I could be wrong. The apparent confusion and cowardice could just be a façade hiding the false sophistication of a man who, in playing too many angles and trying to fake out everyone, is too clever by half. Pay me no mind. For all you know, I may just be a sleeper who spent 25 years attacking Marxists as a front, just waiting for the right moment to sink my red sickle deep into the heart of the patriotic, running-dog capitalists, on behalf of the communist New Internationale. Pace Lawrence Auster, overheated rhetoric cannot compensate for Pres. Bush’s current malaise. Blind obedience to Mr. Bush has little value for our fighting men or our nation. There was a time when I would have written "for him" between "fighting men" and "nation," but I no longer give a good goddamn about the welfare of George W. Bush. I just want to limit the harm he may do to my country, and cheerleading for him is the last thing that will achieve that. Bruno Bettelheim once wrote about the concept of the "gehorsame Leiche" (“obedient corpse” – a man so subservient, that he resembled a zombie more than he did a living human being), that was operative in the Imperial Army of Germany’s Kaiser Wilhelm II in World War I. But free men are not “obedient corpses,” and George W. Bush is not the Kaiser. To paraphrase George S. Patton Jr., American boys should not be “willingly lay[ing] down their lives,” but willingly laying down the enemy's life. Since having recently concluded that George W. Bush lacks all integrity, I'm no longer willing to give him the benefit of the doubt … in anything. And I'm sure as heck not willing to sacrifice the lives of American fighting men for the sake of talking points, or so as not to lose face in front of Leftists.


Thursday, October 20, 2005

Lest We Forget: Remembering the Zebra Victims

By Nicholas Stix

If heinous crimes are forgotten or disappeared, a second injustice is added to the original crimes.

Like homicide detectives, journalists speak for the dead.

October 20 marks the 32 nd anniversary of the beginning of the “Zebra Killings” in San Francisco.

Know ye, these dead:

Quita Hague, hacked to death….

Frances Rose, her face blown apart by close-range gunshots.

Saleem Erakat, tied up and executed.

Paul Dancik, shot down at a public telephone….

Marietta DiGirolamo, thrown into a doorway and shot to death.

Ilario Bertuccio, killed while walking home from work….

Neal Moynihan, shot down while taking a teddy bear to his little sister.

Mildred Hosler, shot down while walking toward her bus stop.

John Doe #169, kidnapped, tortured, butchered, decapitated.

Tana Smith, murdered on her way to buy blouse material.

Vincent Wollin, murdered on his sixty-ninth birthday.

John Bambic, murdered while rummaging in a trash bin.

Jane Holly, murdered in a public Laundromat….

Thomas Rainwater, shot down on the street as he walked to a market….

And Nelson Shields IV, shot three times in the back as he was straightening out the cargo deck on his station wagon.

The above passage is from Clark Howard’s 1979 book, Zebra: The true account of the 179 days of terror in San Francisco. I inserted ellipses, because Howard’s list contains both those who were murdered and those who were grievously wounded in San Francisco. I separated the groups into two lists. Herewith the wounded:

Richard Hague [Quita’s husband], his face butchered.

“Ellen Linder,” [a pseudonym Howard devised to protect her privacy], raped, ravaged, threatened with death.

Arthur Agnos [who would later be elected mayor], surviving after his insides were ripped up by bullets.

Angela Roselli, surviving with nerve damage in her back.

Roxanne McMillian, surviving but paralyzed from the waist down.

Linda Story, surviving with nerve damage in her back.

Ward Anderson, surviving but in serious condition after being shot down at a city bus stop.

Terry White, also surviving, also in serious condition, after being shot down at the same bus stop.

And courtesy of Julia Scheeres, at Court TV’s crimelibrary.com,

Robert Stoeckmann, grazed in the neck by a shot fired by Leroy Doctor.

Howard repeats the list again and again and again, throughout the book; the publisher, Richard Marek, repeats it on the book jacket. Some people may find that tiresome. But Howard did not want those names forgotten; neither do I. And so, if some should find me tiresome, so be it. They can switch to a different, less tiresome Web page.

The nine wounded victims survived due to the incompetence of the Zebra killers, and in Ellen Linder and Robert Stoeckmann’s respective cases, thanks to their own resourcefulness. Linder psychologically maneuvered her attacker, Jesse Lee Cooks, into letting her live. Stoeckmann ducked from Leroy Doctor’s gun as the latter fired, and then, when Doctor shoved the revolver into Stoeckmann’s gut to finish him off, grabbed the cylinder (which one can only do with a revolver), so that it could not fire. Stoeckmann swung the gun away, it skittered away, and he won the chase for it. When Doctor continued after him, Stoeckmann shot him three times. Doctor was convicted of assault with a deadly weapon, but was not charged in any of the Zebra killings.

Jesse Lee Cooks would seek to “atone” for his act of “mercy” in the case of Ellen Lindner, by blowing the face off of Frances Rose.

Arguably the most resourceful of all of the Death Angels’ (in this case, Jesse Lee Cooks, Larry Green, and Anthony Cornelius Harris’) intended victims were the first whom they targeted on October 20, 1973 -- Michele Denise Carrasco, and Marie and Frank Stewart. When the Death Angels attempted to kidnap them with a van, in order to murder them, all three ran away. Plucky Michele Denise Carrasco was but 11 years old, Marie Stewart was 12, and Frank was 15.

All of the 24 victims were targeted for death for the same reason: They were white. Their attackers were all members of the black supremacist Nation of Islam (NOI), then primarily known as the Black Muslims, and acted on its behalf. They were members of the “Death Angels,” a branch of the NOI which existed for the sole purpose of murdering white people. The Death Angels had a scoring system, whereby they got more points for murdering women and children than grown men; their pathological cowardice had a numerical system. Clark Howard writes,

“Death Angels wings were awarded to each man who killed four white children, five white women, or nine white men. Upon completion of the required quota, a new member’s photograph was taken and a pair of black wings were drawn extending from the neck. The photo was mounted on a board along with pictures of other successful candidates, and the board was displayed on an easel at the loft meetings” at Black Self Help Moving and Storage.

The Death Angels were nurtured on a steady diet of NOI theology – that whites were “blue-eyed devils, “white devils,” and “grafted snakes,” a wicked race that had been created anywhere from 1,000-6,000 years ago by an evil black scientist named Yacub. Actually, “the Myth of Yacub” was a rip-off of black journalist George S. Schuyler’s classic, 1931 racial satire, Black No More. Schuyler had been influenced by H.G. Wells.

Eight members of the NOI in San Francisco were arrested for the Zebra killings, but only four were prosecuted; all of the latter were convicted. They were Jesse Lee Cooks, J.C. Simon (aka J.C.X. Simon), Larry Green and Manuel Moore. The NOI paid for the defense of all but Cooks. The NOI wrote Cooks off as a traitor, because he alone confessed to a crime, the murder of Frances Rose. A black Moslem is never permitted to confess to a crime “in the white man’s court.” The police also had Cooks for the rape of Ellen Linder, and each crime could have gotten him a maximum life sentence. Prosecutors agreed --- with Linder’s permission -- to drop the rape charge, if Cooks would confess to the Frances Rose killing. (Cooks was caught minutes after the Frances Rose killing, mere blocks away, with the murder weapon in his waistband.)

Tom Manney, the manager of Black Self Help, and Dwight Stallings were also arrested but released, for lack of evidence. I have not been able to determine the names of the other two suspects who were released. For some peculiar reason, Howard refers to one by the pseudonym, “Jasper Childs.” All but one of the arrestees worked for the black Moslem business, Self Help Moving and Storage; Cooks worked for the Black Muslim-owned, Shabazz Bakery.

The convictions of J.C. Simon, Larry Green, and Manuel Moore were secured almost entirely through the testimony of one of their accomplices, Anthony Cornelius Harris.

Harris responded, as the authorities had hoped someone would, to enhanced reward money that was offered from a variety of public and private sources, for information leading to the arrest of the Zebra killers. The catalyst for Harris’ initiative, however, was a police artist’s sketch of two suspects, one of whom clearly was Harris.

Harris denied to police that he had committed any killings, but he obviously had been present at many of them, and thus an accomplice, and Clark Howard concluded from interviews with various Zebra killers and inspectors, and police reports, that Harris had murdered John Bambic. Harris also sought and got immunity, and new identities for himself, his girlfriend, and her child.

A note on the term “Zebra.” In the context of the NOI’s genocidal campaign, “Zebra” has been considered by many blacks to be controversial, and even racist. They are offended by the term’s black-on-white imagery. The term was employed by the SFPD, because the Department reserved radio frequency “Z” for all broadcasts related to the specific killing spree at hand. Killings were considered a part of the spree that were committed execution-style by a black against a white, using a .32 gun. (Only after Anthony Harris came in, did police discover that the machete killing of Quita Hague was a Zebra killing. Police also did not associate the Hague killing with the Zebra killings that followed it, because Jesse Lee Cooks sexually molested Quita Hague, and robbed the couple.) For clarity’s sake, all military and police organizations use a term for each letter in the alphabet. Thus, when one refers to “A Company,” one instead says, “Alpha Company”; for “B Company,” “Bravo Company,” and so on. One proceeds similarly when reading off a license plate number to a police dispatcher. For Z, one says “Zebra.”

But consider the blacks’ perspective. A black death squad is roaming around San Francisco, murdering whites in cold blood for no other reason than that they are white. It’s only natural that black folks would ignore the genocide in their midst, and focus on their feelings of racial slight, at the term used for the radio frequency police were using to try and solve the killings. The poor dears.

Note that this was over thirty years ago. Black sensitivities have since become much more refined. “Refugees,” anyone?

Howard recounts how local newspaper reporters interviewed blacks all over town, but could not find a single one who expressed any sorrow or sympathy for the victims. In fact, black San Franciscans were angry! After all, weren’t police focusing solely on black men? One black newspaper reporter even sought to embarrass police officials at a press conference, by insinuating that they should not be focusing on black men. In a show of common sense that today could spell career suicide, a police official reminded the scribe that all of the suspects were black men.

As some black residents commonsensically responded to a reporter’s question as to whether they felt afraid on the streets, no; the killers were only targeting whites.

But there’s more.

On the night of January 28, 1974, the Death Angels dramatically upped the ante, shooting five whites, four of whom died, in five separate attacks.

The SFPD responded by circulating artists’ sketches of two suspects, and began stopping and questioning youngish, clean-cut black men who resembled the sketches.

Howard writes, “The police began issuing specially printed ‘Zebra Check’ cards: identification cards about the size of a driver’s license, containing space for an individual’s name, address, driver’s license number, Social Security number, and the date, time, and location where he was stopped. The officer making the stop had to sign the card and note his badge number. If the person was stopped again, all he had to do was show the card along with his identification, and he was allowed to proceed without further delay.”

“The black organizations were not satisfied. They were determined to interfere with the police effort in any way they could.”

I believe the legal term is, “obstruction of justice.”

The only black community leader who showed any decency was Dr. Washington Garner, a member of the three-man police commission, who reminded blacks that in the case of the Nob Hill serial rapist, in which the suspect was white, police had proceeded in identical fashion, stopping hundreds of white men for questioning.

Black organizations ignored Dr. Garner. The NAACP sued, and local Rev. Cecil Williams threatened a race war – as if the race war were not already in progress.

Officer Jesse Byrd (spelled Bird by some sources), the president of the segregated, black SFPD officers’ organization, Officers for Justice, also demanded an end to the street stops.

The local newspapers did show some gumption that they have long since lost. As Howard recounts, the San Francisco Examiner supported the stops, though in diplomatic language, while the San Francisco Chronicle was adamant in support of them.

“The Zebra murders have brought out the police on highly visible, and reassuring patrols of the streets. The patrols are called ‘extreme measures’ by Mayor Alioto, who invoked them, and since their purpose is to involve police in stopping and questioning black men who may resemble a Zebra suspect, the procedure has created a certain amount of restiveness and complaint from black citizens and organizations. It is, however, hard to accept such complaints as justifiable. If the killers are black, there would be no point in stopping white men for questioning….”

According to SFPD homicide Inspector (many other cities call the same rank, “detective”) Gus Coreris, who with his partner, Insp. John Fotinos, ran the case, at least one black officer conspired with the NOI to murder the one witness without whom no one besides Jesse Lee Cooks could ever have been prosecuted. (Cooks was apprehended minutes after he murderered Frances Rose, in the vicinity of the killing.

Inspectors Coreris and Fotinos secreted away Anthony Harris, his girlfriend, Debbie, and her baby in a motel. One day, while Harris in the shower, Debbie called her NOI minister’s wife. The wife asked Debbie where she was staying, and Debbie told her. Within minutes, a squad of NOI assassins showed up to kill everyone. Coreris and Fotinos were able to sneak Harris and family out of the motel only seconds ahead of the NOI assassins, who, aware yet indifferent to the presence of the two inspectors, were conducting a room-to-room search of the motel.

After Harris and family were moved to a hotel, the NOI hit squad continued its fevered search for him.

When Insp. Coreris got back to his office the evening after rescuing Anthony Harris, there was a message waiting for him from a black police officer. The officer came to visit Coreris, and ask him for the new address where Anthony Harris was being secreted. The officer admitted to Coreris that members of the NOI had asked him to get the information. Coreris told the officer that the information was none of his business, and that Coreris would report him to his superiors.

Thus, a black police officer – at least one – conspired with the NOI to obstruct justice and murder a government witness.

And what happened, you may ask, to the rogue cop? Nothing.

Note that the Zebra killings were not the stuff of a tiny conspiracy. At least one dozen NOI member/killers attended regular Death Angel meetings at Black Self Help Moving and Storage. And at the NOI’s San Francisco headquarters, Mosque #26, the existence of the Death Angels, though not the exact identity of all of its members, was common knowledge.

The NOI’s local goal was to run all whites out of the city by the bay, and establish San Francisco (though surely with a new name) as America’s first Moslem city.

But these devils and their works were not limited to San Francisco.

As Howard writes, already by October 20, 1973, “there were 15 accredited Death Angels in California.” With the dozen aspiring Death Angels in attending the loft meetings at Black Self help, that makes for 27. But there may have been as many as 50 Death Angels.

The California attorney general’s office had compiled a list of 71 execution-style murders committed around the state, either with a machete or a pistol, in which the killer or killers was always a well-dressed and groomed youngish black man, and the victim always white. In addition to San Francisco, the murders were carried out in Oakland, San Jose, Emeryville, Berkeley, Long Beach, Signal Hill, Santa Barbara, Palo Alto, Pacifica, San Diego, Los Angeles, and in the counties of San Mateo, Santa Clara, Los Angeles, Contra Costa, Ventura and Alameda. The NOI genocide campaign had actually begun approximately three years before the San Francisco killings.

State police also acted in the professional manner of a bygone era. Dick Walley, of the state California Department of Justice’s Intelligence Analysis Unit (IAU), requested and got permission to “establish a central repository for all information pertaining to homicides with the following modus operandi: hackings, unprovoked street attacks, hitchhike kidnappings; all unexplained homicides of a similar nature, and all black-perpetrator/white-victim homicides.”

Imagine how large such a database would be today!

According to Clark Howard, however, the true number of Zebra murders was “just under 270.” And all of the Zebra killers but the four convicts and Anthony Harris have remained at large, ever since.

Lou Calabro, a retired SFPD lieutenant who was a sergeant at the time of the San Francisco killings, has labored for years to keep the memory of the Zebra killings alive, and to keep the convicts, who periodically come up for parole, in jail. In a recent telephone interview, Calabro told me that a team effort is required to ascertain the identities of all of the Zebra victims throughout the State of California. Calabro is the president of the European American Issues forum.

Since the NOI had revealed itself to be the deadliest domestic terrorist organization in American history, you’d expect that the FBI would have launched a national campaign against it dwarfing its campaign against the Ku Klux Klan. But you’d be wrong. There was no FBI campaign. Indeed, it is the NOI that launched a campaign against the FBI, insisting that the Bureau had orchestrated the assassination of Malcolm X (Malcolm Little), who was in reality murdered by NOI assassins.

Zebra is one of the best books you can’t buy, except used. And it’s not for lack of interest. It was printed once in hardcover and once in paper, and in spite of its fame and popularity, never reprinted. Peculiar, that.

You’d think that movies would have been made about it, but you’d be wrong. There is a move afoot to make a movie about the killings, only with a black policemen-hero, in the stead of inspectors Gus Coreris and John Fotinos.

You’d think that such a heinous campaign of murder would be taught across the generations, so that no one would ever forget. But you’d be wrong. According to crime writer Julia Scheeres, few San Franciscans today are aware of the Zebra killings. Imagine it is the year 2031, and few New Yorkers are aware of 911.

I guess that after preaching against the evils of white, heterosexual males, the San Francisco public schools just don’t have any time left to teach about the Zebra killings.

Meanwhile, San Francisco journalists today are either silent about the Zebra killings, or have diminished and revised them beyond recognition, not even mentioning their racial character. And in academia, alleged historians have actively covered up the history of the Zebra killings. And when anyone seeks to give students even indirect access to learn about the murders, the “historians” seek to destroy him.

But the unwriting of the Zebra murders is a topic for another time.

After reading this report, you may wonder, “Could Zebra happen again?” What makes you think it hasn’t?

Quita Hague

Frances Rose

Saleem Erakat

Paul Dancik

Marietta DiGirolamo

Ilario Bertuccio

Neal Moynihan

Mildred Hosler

John Doe #169

Tana Smith

Vincent Wollin

John Bambic

Jane Holly

Thomas Rainwater

Nelson Shields IV

Richard Hague

“Ellen Linder”

Arthur Agnos

Angela Roselli

Roxanne McMillian

Linda Story

Ward Anderson

Terry White

Robert Stoeckmann

And their attackers: Jesse Lee Cooks, J.C. Simon (aka J.C.X. Simon), Larry Green, Manuel Moore, Leroy Doctor and Anthony Cornelius Harris.


Tuesday, October 18, 2005

Love, Unrequited

By Nicholas Stix My relationship to black folks is like my relationship to onions; I love them, but they don’t love me.


Gang Wars in Our Nation’s Capital

“Nothing pleases Washington More than conservative-on-conservative crime.” Former Republican Cong. J.C. Watts on Hannity & Colmes, on Fox News, October 12, on the internecine conservative battle over the Harriet Miers Supreme Court nomination.


Friday, October 14, 2005

Did Whites Blow Up Levees in Black New Orleans Neighborhoods?

By Nicholas Stix

That’s the question being asked by blacks across the country. But the question is merely rhetorical; what blacks repeating it really mean is: WHITES BLEW UP LEVEES IN BLACK NEW ORLEANS NEIGHBORHOODS!

Most whites first heard this racist nonsense from Min. Louis Farrakhan, the head of the Nation of Islam. I know there are people who will say, ‘Don’t be so heavy-handed, Stix. Try and at least appear even-handed and reasonable, as you go through the claims.’

When someone says “The Earth is flat,” “The moon is made of cheese,” or more to the point, “White doctors infected blacks with AIDS,” you don’t humor him or mislead third parties, by giving the impression that you are dealing with someone sane or honest. You either get out the straitjacket or the handcuffs, or you say to the despicable race hoaxer, “You’re a despicable race hoaxer.”

Min. Louis Farrakhan is a despicable race hoaxer.

As Charlotte, NC’s WCNC and other outlets have reported, Farrakhan said, "I heard from a very reliable source who saw a 25 foot deep crater under the levee breach. It may have been blown up to destroy the black part of town and keep the white part dry."

“Gilton Balanos lived in the very neighborhood Farrakhan was talking about.

"‘I think that's ludicrous,’ Balanos said. ‘When this happened we were caught by surprise. Individuals, the government and everybody were caught by surprise.’”

More recently, in a Time magazine Web interview released on Friday, October 14, Farrakhan employed the forked-tongue style which he switches to when he wants to back away from one of his trademark, fire-and-brimstone statements.

“TIME: Did race or class issues play into the slow U.S. response to Hurricane Katrina?

“Farrakhan: I was not there but the feeling is that race played a part. There are some I heard on TV saying that levee was purposely busted so that the water would come in on that side. They haven't verified the truth of that but some people think that, and that perception is real until truth either verifies it or dispels it.”

(Time was kindly assisting Min. Farrakhan in publicizing his “Millions More Movement,” the Nuremberg-style gathering marking the anniversary of his 1995 Million Man Movement, which begins today in Washington, DC. Isn’t that special?)

First of all, Min. Farrakhan did not say originally that he had heard about the “crater” on TV, anymore than James Dobson said he heard that Harriet Miers would be good for Evangelicals on TV. That means that in at least one of his statements, he lied. (And in the other statement, he may simply have been talking about news reports that mentioned his scurrilous charges.) Second, it is not the case that “perception is real until truth either verifies it or dispels it.” If someone makes dramatic charges without any evidentiary basis, we are under no obligation to listen to him. Indeed, the more extraordinary a charge, the more and stronger the evidence that is required to back it up. Farrakhan’s statement is not “real”; it is his racist fantasy.

Just for the record, let us recall that at the time Katrina hit, New Orleans was a black-run city, as it had been since 1978. Black mayor, black police chief, black DA, and so on, down the line.

One of Farrakhan’s house propagandists, Cedric Muhammad, has expanded on the Minister’s original charge. In his October 3 article, “ The Intentional Destruction of Levees in New Orleans – A Conspiracy Theory? Not In The Light Of History,” Muhammad writes,

“Minister Farrakhan’s teacher, The Honorable Elijah Muhammad, wrote, in part, beginning in the 1930s, ‘Of all our studies history is the most attractive and best qualified to reward our research, as it develops the springs and motives of human actions and displays the consequences of circumstances which operates most powerfully on the destinies of human beings.’ His statement has been repeated over the years by many of his students, perhaps most famously by Minister Malcolm X.”

I shall return to the NOI’s respect for history.

Muhammad maintains that the book, Rising Tide: The Great Mississippi Flood of 1927 And How It Changed America by John M. Barry, chronicles that in 1927, various New Orleans business leaders, with the support of public officials, illegally blew up the levees. Muhammad’s argument is, ‘Because there is a precedent for our charges, you cannot say that our charges are untrue.’

Oh, yes I can. The NOI “logic,” or lack thereof, reduces to:

  • ‘Because an injustice happened once upon a time, it could happen again.
  • And because it could happen, you cannot deny that it did happen.
  • Therefore, it happened!’

Such illogic only has a political effect, because influential whites run away from it, like dogs with their tails between their legs, while influential blacks spread it for the sake of making money and influencing people. I say that not, however, to let the average black adult off the hook: Any black adult that promotes such nonsense is just as despicable as Farrakhan.

Since the dawn of humanity, men have committed every sort of evil imaginable. But the mere fact that someone once committed “X” is irrelevant to the question as to whether someone else has now committed a similar crime. You cannot jump form past injustice to present injustice, or from possibility to reality.

Anyone over the age of, say, 30, will recognize in such illogic the “intellectual” basis of all black race hoaxes. The real basis of such hoaxes, however, is white cowardice.

In 1988, after it had become clear to everyone that with her claim to have been kidnapped and gang-raped by “white cops,” Tawana Brawley had perpetuated the mother of all race hoaxes, a white socialist New York political operative told me, “You can’t expect blacks to participate as equals in public debate.”

In English, that translates as “They’re subhuman.”

Often, the “precedent” that supposedly justifies the “possibility” is itself a hoax. For instance, racist blacks rationalized the Brawley hoax, based on the lie that groups of white lawmen had in the past kidnapped and gang-raped black girls. Likewise, racist blacks rationalized the hoax that claimed that white (or Jewish) doctors injected black babies with the AIDS virus, based on the “Tuskegee syphilis experiment.” In the Tuskegee hoax, white doctors supposedly injected black men with the syphilis virus, and then refused them treatment, in order to see, Nazi-style, how their bodies would react.

But in fact, the truth was benign. The black men in the Tuskegee experiment were past the treatment stage; their conditions were in the latency stage. Besides, no effective treatment existed at the time. All the doctors could do was monitor the patients’ conditions, and treat nay other illnesses to which they fell prey.

“Anthropologist Richard Shweder of the University of Chicago has just published a detailed analysis of the Tuskegee study in which he shows that virtually every popular assumption about it is false. (Tuskegee re-examined, January 8, 2004)

“The study was undertaken by ‘progressives who wanted to fight a disease that afflicted many blacks, it had the full support of black medical authorities to the end, and—most important—it probably caused no harm to the 140 men (not 400) who took part.”

And so, we have the logic of so many black race hoaxes: Project one lie on to the past, tell a second one about the present, and then join the two. An additional element is that racist blacks take an event in which whites went out of their way to help blacks, and recast it as a case of whites deliberately harming blacks.

“Plan B”

All black race hoaxes are based on “Plan B” demagoguery. The term “Plan B” was made famous by white producer-writer David E. Kelley, on his long-running TV show, The Practice. Faced with an overwhelming case against their guilty-as-hell looking client, the defense lawyers who were the show’s stars would resort to “Plan B”: They would engineer a ridiculous, despicable attempt, with no evidentiary basis whatsoever, to cast guilt on someone else, so as to put “reasonable doubt” in jurors’ minds. It was even a running joke on the show, early on, that the firm’s motto was, “Reasonable doubt for a reasonable fee.”

According to the defense lawyer’s ethos in our adversarial justice system, some seemingly unethical practices are justifiable, though no ethical real-world judge (don’t laugh; there are some) would have tolerated many of Kelley’s TV stunts. (I’m not sure which group Kelley hates more – lawyers or white clergymen. For some reason, he loves black clergymen.)

But at least Kelley showed his fictional defense attorneys – even the black one – as feeling remorse, and even hating themselves, for what they did for a living; the all-too-real Min. Farrakhan appears to have no conscience.

I don’t even know for a fact whether New Orleans’ levees were dynamited in 1927, or even whether author John M. Barry said they were. However, not even Muhammad claims that the levees were dynamited in 1927, in order to harm blacks.

In any event, the question as to whether the levees were dynamited in 1927 is irrelevant. All that matters is whether anyone can provide physical evidence that the levees were dynamited after the passing of Katrina. That’s right: After.

The NOI insists that the levees weathered Katrina just fine, and that only after she passed, did they break. If they were better liars, they would have said that the levees were dynamited as they were hit by Katrina. Perhaps they considered that lie, and decided that people would then have figured that it was Katrina, rather than the dynamite, that broke them. Perhaps I am just giving the NOI’s propagandists too much credit.

That a pathological liar like Min. Farrakhan would claim that someone “saw” a crater is, if anything, grounds to disbelieve his charge. Heck, if Louis Farrakhan told me the sun was shining outside, I’d refuse to leave the house, without my umbrella.

Why am I so lacking in tolerance for the good Minister and his organization? I’m glad you asked. Let’s look at their respective resumes.

The NOI was founded in Detroit in circa 1930 by Wallace Fard, who told his followers that he would pay the passage to Mecca of anyone who murdered a white, or as he called them, “white devil.”

Fard “disappeared” circa 1933, and was replaced by his follower, “the Honorable Elijah Muhammad” (aka Elijah Poole, 1897-1975). Muhammad/Poole spent most of World War II in jail for draft evasion and sedition – he spoke out on behalf of our Japanese enemies. (If only the feds still enforced the Sedition Act!)

Ever since Muhammad/Poole, the NOI has taught that whites are “white devils,” “grafted snakes,” who were created by an evil black scientist, Yacub (“the myth of Yacub”). The NOI stole that idea from black journalist George S. Schuyler’s racial satire, Black No More. Schuyler, in turn, was working a variation on H.G. Wells. But since the NOI had no sense of irony, they butchered Schuyler’s work, and turned satire into Nazi-style pseudo-science.

The last years of Muhammad/Poole saw the NOI swimming in a sea of blood. Beginning circa 1970, the organization undertook a campaign of genocide against California whites, known as the “Zebra Killings.” According to the State of California, the NOI murdered 71 California whites. Most people, if they know of the Zebra Killings at all, know only of the NOI’s roughly six month reign of terror, beginning on October 20, 1973, in San Francisco. During that period in the city by the bay, they murdered 15 whites, and maimed or raped at least nine others. According to crime writer Clark Howard, however, author of the book, Zebra: The true account of the 179 days of terror in San Francisco, the NOI murdered “just under 270” whites across the golden State.

One of the NOI’s goals was to terrify whites into leaving San Francisco, so that they could make it the nation’s first Moslem city.

At about the same time, NOI members were murdering other members in a series of internecine killings. As Arthur Magida chronicles in Prophet of Rage: A Life of Louis Farrakhan and His Nation, under Muhammad/Poole’s leadership, NOI members murdered other members on a regular basis, with the pace of the killings accelerating during the early-to-mid 1970s, particularly in 1973. Magida wrote, “Violence was indispensable to the culture of the Nation of Islam. It was not only in the environment, it was the environment.”

(And yet, Magida contradictorily maintained that only a small minority of the NOI was violent, and he sought to absolve Muhammad/Poole of responsibility for the bloodshed.)

With his levee hoax, Min. Farrakhan was simply projecting his own genocidal wishes onto white folks.

Now, let’s look at Min. Louis Farrakhan’s own record.

When Malcolm X (Malcolm Little) broke with Elijah Muhammad/Elijah Poole in 1964, Farrakhan said, “Such a man deserves to die.” Soon enough, an NOI assassin squad murdered X/Little in the Audubon Ballroom in Manhattan’s Washington Heights (not in Harlem as widely misreported by black activists) area.

Other the years, Min. Farrakhan has announced that “Judaism is a gutter religion”; that he was beamed up to a “Mother Wheel” in outer space, where he met the dead Elijah Muhammad, who told him that Colin Powell was planning to wage war on black Americans; demanded that the U.S. give blacks a separate state if their own, and billions of dollars in “reparations”; and once when he became violently ill, he announced that whites had poisoned him. Once, Min. Farrakhan announced that he would receive hundreds of millions of dollars from America’s enemy, Libyan dictator Moammar Khadafy. To do so would have been a criminal act: The State Department told Min. Farrakhan, ‘Oh no, you won’t!’

And now, Mr. Farrakhan claims that whites dynamited the levees.

Let us now recall Cedric Muhammad’s words,

“Minister Farrakhan’s teacher, The Honorable Elijah Muhammad, wrote, in part, beginning in the 1930s, ‘Of all our studies history is the most attractive and best qualified to reward our research …’”

Don’t make me laugh!

Interestingly, a point that the NOI’s Cedric Muhammad made in his argument that whites had previously dynamited the levees was that the dynamiting took an entire week.

Let’s see. We are supposed to believe that after the storm had passed, and tens of thousands of residents who had refused to leave the city were still living in sight of the levees, that munitions technicians spent days, and perhaps an entire week wiring the levees with explosives, and set off a gigantic blast, yet there were no witnesses?

Case closed.

(When I say “witnesses,” I am not talking of perjurers who weren’t even there, who will now magically materialize to say they saw “everything.” You’d never know it but there was a time no so long ago, when such perjurers went to prison.)

When black folks say, “Whites dynamited the levees” or spread any other race hoax (“Tawana told the truth!” “O.J. was framed!”) they aren’t making factual statements at all. They only seem factual. What they are really saying is, ‘I hate whites to the depths of my soul, and so I will seize upon any current or even ancient event to express that hatred, and thus intimidate white elites and other cowards, and bond with other black racists, and keep hate alive.’ They don’t say it because they believe it is true, but because they know it to be a lie.

Gregory Kane

You may be saying to yourself, ‘Big deal. The NOI is from the lunatic fringe. No one listens to them.’

Would only that it were so. Although only a tiny percentage of American blacks are members of the NOI, millions of black Americans find the NOI ahem, useful.

Even moderate-to-conservative blacks, such as Baltimore Sun columnist Gregory Kane, are echoing Min. Louis Farrakhan, though Kane does not cite Farrakhan by name.

In a column, “Just When and How Did New Orleans’ Levee Break? And Who’s Asking?,” Kane too suggests that whites authorities may have blown holes in the levees.

He doesn’t offer any evidence that the levees were blown up, but rather a series of bizarre segues.

Kane begins by condemning the behavior of the police in nearby Gretna, LA. A bridge connected New Orleans to Gretna. As was widely reported at the time, Gretna police refused to let New Orleanians enter Gretna. Town officials said that the little town was in no position to handle the influx of refugees and would have been overwhelmed.

But that behavior is proof for Kane of a possible genocidal white conspiracy. He even suggests that the very police officers who turned back the New Orleans refugees might have dynamited the levees that sent the people towards Gretna.

Either Greg Kane has taken temporary loss of his sanity and morality, or he has decided to become a “race man,” and permanently given up on decency and honesty.

Let’s look at the situation facing the folks in Gretna. Thousands of people want to descend on your small town. And unlike the national media and the cities across the nation which ended up taking on refugees, as next-door neighbors of New Orleans, you know what is coming your way: Some of America’s worst riffraff. One city that did criminal background checks on New Orleans refugees determined that 54.7 percent of the adults, male and female alike, had criminal records. Over fifty-four percent!

I’m not saying that I would have been that strong. I might have weakened and engaged in what Kane calls “Human Decency 101.” But the police are sworn to serve and protect. Had they permitted the New Orleanians to pass, the latter would have destroyed everything that the citizens of Gretna had worked their entire lives to build, and the officers would have violated their oath. But what the heck, it was just the property of a bunch of predominantly working-class and middle-class white folks. Who cares about them?

Thus Kane:

“It occurred to me that folks who think that way certainly wouldn’t have a problem with sabotaging one of the levees surrounding New Orleans if they could be assured many residents would drown.”

Kane jumps from that racist fantasy to another, in which because a black New Orleans’ resident’s home was not destroyed by Katrina’s initial onslaught, sinister factors must have been at work.

Kane closes by calling for five black-commissioned studies to determine what caused the crevasses in the levees. Fine with me, as long as he really means for black folks to pay for it. I hope you’ll pardon me, however, if I find it more likely that the idea is ultimately to have white folks foot the bill.

Spite TV

And now comes word that Spike Lee is planning on making a fictional “documentary,” arguing that whites blew up the levees. Black folks won’t pay for that, either. Lee owes his entire career of racist, anti-Semitic agitprop to the kindness of white folks. And so it is with his “documentary,” which is being paid for by Lee’s white benefactors at HBO.

The NOI, Gregory Kane, and Spike Lee. That’s the way it is, today, as black civil rights groups, moderates, and NOI and non-NOI black supremacists increasingly join hands in support of black race hoaxes and black criminality. I call it the mainstreaming of genocidal black supremacy – with white help, of course.

Fictional documentaries, and lying, racist sermonizing function to distract people from the truth. Since so many black Americans insist on getting racial and collectivist, let’s get racial and collectivist. Post-Katrina New Orleans was black America’s darkest hour, and white America’s finest. Black Americans didn’t leave town when they could have; they looted; they raped; they murdered; they had their hands out. Black leaders were variously hysterical (Mayor Ray Nagin and Police Chief Eddie Compass); lied (Min. Farrakhan); and tried to shake down whites as DeKalb County CEO Vernon Jones sought to shake down the Red Cross; and so many black leaders spread racist hatred. Meanwhile, those white devils risked their lives to save blacks; sacrificed their time and pay checks to volunteer to help black refugees; donated hundreds of millions of hard-earned dollars to charity (the Red Cross, etc.); and tens of billions of dollars of their precious tax dollars to clean up and rebuild black neighborhoods.

If blacks want a real post-Katrina reckoning, whites end up looking like angels, and blacks …

The more generosity whites show to blacks, the more they can expect blacks to vilify them.


Wednesday, October 12, 2005

The Bush Betrayal

By Nicholas Stix Do you think it would be possible to have Pres. Bush arrested, say for spitting on the sidewalk? When the cops want to get a guy really badly, that’s what they do – follow him around until he spits on the sidewalk. Then they arrest him. Or they just lie, and say they saw him spit on the sidewalk. And that’s how I feel right now about the Ivy Leaguer (Yale and Harvard) currently occupying the Oval Office. Hell hath no fury like that of a voter scorned. I don't think that Harriet Miers nomination was such a dramatic matter so much as she was the straw that broke the camel's back. Reforming the Supreme Court was all that Bush had left. He had fumbled the previous seat with John Roberts, just the sort of respectable conservative who will go along with mushy, (socialist) decisions having no basis in the Constitution, and Bush had no intention of doing any better with the next vacancy. He chose Miers because she's an Evangelical -- as a bone to the base -- and a crony. No crony of George Bush will be a strict constitutionalist, because Bush is no more one than Bill Clinton is, his claims to the contrary notwithstanding. (Heck, if conservative Constitutional principles, not to mention diversity meant so much to him, he never would have left Miguel Estrada to twist in the wind.) That talk about choosing a strict constructionist in the mold of a Scalia or Thomas was just that. You have to keep in mind that this is a man whose idea of a solon, who he really wanted to nominate to the Supreme Court, is Attorney General Al Gonzales, who doesn’t seem to have ever read the U.S. Constitution. I wasn’t the only observer who not too long ago hoped Bush would nominate Justice Janice Rogers Brown to the court, possibly even for chief justice. But no, our Fearless Leader said, ‘To hell with the Constitution!’ After alibiing for him and cutting him slack for four years-and-change, the Miers nomination rubbed conservatives' noses in the crap. It was a personal humiliation, because it wiped away all the makeup that had obscured the true face of Bushism as an unprincipled regime of cronyism and plutocracy. And so, the anger so long suppressed about affirmative action, legal and illegal immigration (particularly his Amnesty plan), spending, big government, his racial pandering/War on Poverty II proposal following the savagery in New Orleans, and a host of other matters is coming out in a package as part of the opposition to Harriet Miers. Some GOP pundits think Bush will be forced to withdraw this nomination, but he’ll do no such thing. He’ll ram it through. And he'd better enjoy it, too, because it's going to be his last bit of fun for a while. I don't know about you, but I feel like I've been played for a fool by George W. Bush. Millions of conservatives have to stop identifying with the GOP, and see it merely as more or less useful. That means withholding votes (or staying home on Election Day), voting for candidates from other parties, if they seem more promising (say on immigration), and concentrating on direct, independent action such as local activism, state referenda, and Minute Man-style interventions. (Some will doubtless give into the temptation to break there law. After all, Bush called the perfectly legal, not to mention heroic work of the Minutemen “vigilantism,” all the while explicitly condoning and encouraging all manner of illegal behavior.) For many, it may also mean tending their own garden, and saying the hell with politics. Maybe my memory will be washed away in a few years by the treachery of so many later politicians, but the way things look to me right now, I'll never forget the Bush betrayal.


Monday, October 10, 2005

The Great New Orleans Media Cover-Up

by Nicholas Stix Were journalists lying in their reports during the post-Katrina savagery, or are they lying now, in denying it ever happened? Can you put toothpaste back in the tube? We have now come to a pass, whereby the racial socialists of the MSM, and their erstwhile opponents among neoconservatives and libertarians (themselves usually mortal enemies) have seen fit to create a grand alliance whose goal is to hoodwink the American people about what happened in New Orleans following Hurricane Katrina. As sociologist Robert Merton once observed, there is no necessary connection between the broadest consensus and the truth. Already on September 5, before order had even been restored in “NOLA,” Steve Sailer predicted that the same media that via reporters and photographers on the ground had depicted the savagery that overran the city, would orchestrate a campaign to convince the American people to disbelieve their “lyin’ eyes” (not to mention ears). Sailer spoke, citing a letter from a reader whose doctor father had been on duty at a Detroit hospital during the Motor City’s 1967 race riots, and been targeted by snipers, and seen phony undercounts of killings, how the authorities always undercount the casualties of anarchy. He observed that when the authorities find waterlogged, decomposed corpses, they are not going to search too hard for bullet holes, as opposed to marking the death up to, say, drowning. Sailer only had to wait three weeks to see his prediction come true. On September 26, an alleged report by Brian Thevenot and Gordon Russell of New Orleans’ Times-Picayune appeared, that through being cited constantly on TV network news and on the Web would shortly become the single most influential article on post-Katrina New Orleans. Thevenot and Russell denigrated the dire reports from early September as having been based on wild exaggeration, rumor-mongering, and outright fabrication (a tip o’ the hat to Your Lying Eyes and .) In “Reports That Conditions in NOLA Were Exaggerated are Exaggerated,” Your Lying Eyes came up with three straw man arguments that have figured in the cover-up: 1. Conjuring up incredibly exaggerated reports of murder victims that were supposedly in circulation earlier, even though no one can recall hearing at the time, and counterposing them to extremely low “true” body counts; 2. Denying that anarchy and violence reigned at the Superdome. (Your Lying Eyes argues that the informant, a Sgt. 1st Class Jason Lachney, who was stationed in the Superdome, confused conditions at the “Terrordome” with those at the Convention Center; based on what I’ve read, I simply don’t believe Lachney’s denial); and 3. Double-talk: “Four weeks after the storm, few of the widely reported atrocities have been backed with evidence. The piles of bodies never materialized[what piles of bodies?!], and soldiers, police officers and rescue personnel on the front lines say that although anarchy reigned at times and people suffered unimaginable indignities, most of the worst crimes reported at the time never happened….” And as Your Lying Eyes showed, in some cases, such as that of Times-Picayune alleged reporter Brian Thevenot, the same person claiming that the earlier stories were exaggerated had earlier told the most dramatic story of all, the you-are-there report, “Bodies found piled in freezer at Convention Center.” “09/06/05 ‘Nola’ -- -- Arkansas National Guardsman Mikel Brooks stepped through the food service entrance of the Ernest N. Morial Convention Center Monday, flipped on the light at the end of his machine gun, and started pointing out bodies. “‘Don't step in that blood - it's contaminated, he said. ‘That one with his arm sticking up in the air, he's an old man.’ “Then he shined the light on the smaller human figure under the white sheet next to the elderly man. “‘That's a kid,’ he said. ‘There's another one in the freezer, a 7-year-old with her throat cut.’ “He moved on, walking quickly through the darkness, pulling his camouflage shirt to his face to screen out the overwhelming odor. “‘There's an old woman,’ he said, pointing to a wheelchair covered by a sheet. ‘I escorted her in myself. And that old man got bludgeoned to death,’ he said of the body lying on the floor next to the wheelchair. “Brooks and several other Guardsmen said they had seen between 30 and 40 more bodies in the Convention Center's freezer. ‘It's not on, but at least you can shut the door,’ said fellow Guardsman Phillip Thompson.” Brian Thevenot has not, to my knowledge, publicly disowned his earlier reporting. Either he was lying then and is now telling the truth, or was telling the truth then, and is lying now. A third possibility, that Thevenot was never in the food service area at the Convention Center with National Guardsmen Mikel Brooks and Phillip Thompson, but fell for a hoax, would still involve Thevenot’s having misrepresented himself as having witnessed the story first-hand. In any case, his credibility as a journalist is shot. The link I provided is for the cache of Thevenot’s original September 6 story; with the beating he is taking in the Blogosphere, I’m not sure how much longer the Nola Web page will be available. To my knowledge, Thevenot has, in the time-honored practice of hack politicians and journalists, merely acted as if he’d never written the dramatic earlier report. Note that at the beginning of the savagery (“anarchy” is too antiseptic a word) the Times-Picayune – a Democrat, New Orleans daily -- led the pack with cheap shots against Pres. George W. Bush, blaming him for the chaos, while refusing to criticize New Orleans Mayor Nagin and Louisiana Gov. Kathleen Blanco, even though it was Nagin and Blanco who failed to execute their own evacuation plans, and who refused Bush’s entreaties to impose a mandatory evacuation until it was too late. By September 26, however, the Bush-bashing had had the desired effect, and so the paper could do a 180-degree turn, and deny that the chaos that had supposedly been Bush’s fault, had even occurred. Somehow, however, the Times-Picayune’s editors and “reporters” forgot to apologize to Bush for their earlier attacks on him. The Uses of Hysteria As Steve Sailer observed, by the time of the Times-Picayune’s “exaggeration” story, the media was in lynch-mob mode, looking to make an example of any prominent figure that made the mistake of telling the truth about black savagery in New Orleans, or failing that, who said anything that any black or leftist could find “racially insensitive.” What followed was an exercise in the uses of hysteria. Two main types of hysteria were in play: Offense and defense. Hysteria on offense began at the height of the savagery, and was engaged in by black leaders and activists to try and intimidate whites; defensive hysteria came later, as whites sought to appease the team on offense. For hysteria on offense, the best example was Mayor Ray Nagin, who after he had fumbled the ball by failing to implement his own evacuation plan, screamed for Washington “to get up off their asses.” There were also blacks’ charges early on, that it was “racist” to depict black looters as “looters” or to speak of refugees as “refugees.” (See also: “niggardly.”) You always have to keep whites on the defensive. Many of the worst stories came from blacks. Mayor Nagin and his then-Police Chief, Eddie Compass, were telling stories on TV shows, of young girls and even babies in the Superdome getting raped and their throats slit. But there were countless others, as well. Randall “Reparations” Robinson, spread the canard that black folks were engaging in cannibalism. Meanwhile, lefty bloggers attacked as “racist” any white folks who might look down on cannibalism. Not to be outdone, Min. Louis Farrakhan, the head of the domestic terrorist organization, the Nation of Islam, spread the race hoax claiming that there was a huge crater under the levees by the black section of town, where whites had detonated explosives, in order to commit genocide against New Orleans’ black inhabitants. (I refer to the NOI as a terrorist organization due to its genocidal campaign in California of circa 1970-1974, known as “the Zebra murders,” during which NOI squads of “Death Angels” murdered anywhere from 71 to “just under 270” whites. At the time, the NOI was led by “the Honorable” Elijah Muhammad (1897-1975).) Call that one a case of Farrakhan projecting his own genocidal fantasies. Some of the MSM’s early behavior, rather than falling on one side or the other of the offense-defense-line, was real hysteria – the media equivalent of a free-for-all in which one team’s quarterback has thrown an interception, the defensive back who snatched the pass has fumbled the ball, and in the mad scramble for the ball, there is no more “offense” or defense.” Early on, the MSM gave a pretty clear picture of New Orleans’ savagery (“chaos” is too neutral a word). In fact, because of their political loyalty towards blacks, initially the media exclusively showed the travails of blacks. And so we saw blacks suffering, and whites helping them out (or trying to). Since whites were doing almost all of the good deeds, it was impossible to cut them entirely out of the picture. Already then, the media sought to minimize the reality: They quoted an officer in charge as saying that the blacks firing on rescue workers were “frightened.” (No, the rescue workers were frightened.) Or they explained, helpfully, that the folks were just shooting at rescue workers to get their attention. But then the same reporters in New Orleans remembered their dog-eared script, and started screaming that blacks were doing all the suffering, and the government wasn’t doing enough to help them. Whites were suffering plenty outside of New Orleans, but the media had made them invisible (only days later would the media remember that there were tens of thousands of whites whose homes were destroyed). And unlike New Orleans’ blacks, whites did not expect the government to rescue them. Thus, the media created a self-fulfilling prophecy of disproportionately suffering blacks. Some leftwing bloggers such as Slate’s Jack Schaefer claimed that the MSM reporters on the ground who hysterically called on the government to do more for New Orleans’ blacks were heroically reacting to the government’s “lies,” when in fact they were just following their usual script: ‘The government never does enough for blacks.’ By late September, as Sailer had predicted, the revisionist bandwagon had started its tour. We began to hear denials of the reports of atrocities, media figures insisting that the crimes we had heard about early in the month had never occurred, that rumors had run amok and dominated news coverage, indeed, that the same white racism that withheld aid from needy blacks had also wanted to believe the worst about them. There are at least five problems with the new talking points: 1. Many of the worst stories about “blacks behaving badly” came from blacks, not whites (Mayor Nagin, Chief Compass, Randall Robinson); 2. Already at the height of the savagery, the MSM had sought to muffle the truth, with incredible claims that the blacks shooting at white rescuers were actually “frightened” or just trying to “get their attention,” and that the federal government was at fault for everything; 3. Early on, the MSM engaged in propaganda to counter the images: CNN had reporters racially demagoguing on the air, and media outlets broadcast and repeated black rage over black looters being described as “looters,” and refugees being described as “refugees”; 4. Many of the revisionist stories were bald-faced lies that were easily exposed, by people who had been present at the atrocities or anyone familiar with the story. (A National Guardsman was originally reported as having been shot in the leg by an attacker with his own weapon, after the attacker had hit the Guardsman’s female partner over the head, and the partner had run away. In the Newspeak version, the Guardsman suffered a “self-inflicted” wound, and there is no more mention of the attacker or the Guardette. If you are attacked and while in a life-or-death struggle with your attacker your weapon goes off and wounds you, the wound does not count as self-inflicted.); 4a. The “rumors” were not rumors (which always refer to what someone claims to have heard from someone else), but testimony by specific people who gave their names, or stories directly from reporters on the ground; the witnesses (and in many cases, reporters) were either telling the truth or lying, but they were not spreading “rumors”; 5. The American MSM, to my knowledge, had refused all along to tell many of the horror stories, especially those involving black racial terror towards white and Asian refugees, or to report on the casual contempt black refugees had for white victims of black racism. For such stories, one had to go, as blogger Scoopster did (and did, and did, to the BBC, London Times, Glasgow’s Herald, ABC (Australian Broadcasting Corporation), The Australian, Sidney’s Herald Sun, Melbourne’s The Age, and other Anglo foreign sources; and 5. Cases like that of Brian Thevenot, where the same person who had earlier told dramatic stories now insisted that such stories – from other reporters, anyway -- were exaggerated. (For links to additional stories the American media refused to report on, see one, two, three, four and five.) * * * On September 4, Scoopster also published an interview between Dr. Charles Burnell and Fox News’ Greta Van Susteren about conditions in the Superdome. Burnell, who’d “been tending to the sick and wounded inside the New Orleans Superdome for the last two days described a horrific scene Thursday night. Asked about the level of violence among the 20,000 displaced residents who sought shelter inside the giant stadium,” he told Fox News Channel's Greta Van Susteren: "We had three murders last night. We had a total of six rapes last night. We had the day before, I think, there were three or four murders. There were half-a-dozen rapes that night. We had one suicide last night. We had one military policeman shot." The Perjurer’s Paradox Inspired by the case of David Brock, I call the New Orleans revisionism a case of the Perjurer’s Paradox. In the Perjurer’s Paradox, an application of the Liar’s Paradox, a person admits to having been an inveterate liar, but says that we should now believe him. David Brock is the former reporter who in a 1992 article and bestselling, 1993 book exposed Anita Hill (who owed her career to the help of Clarence Thomas, yet sought to destroy him, when he was nominated to the Supreme Court), and who in a 1994 article broke the story about the Arkansas troopers (Troopergate) who variously pimped for and covered for Bill Clinton, when he was governor of Arkansas. That story, which broke while Clinton was in the White House, introduced the world to a “Paula” (Jones), and led inexorably to Clinton’s impeachment. In 1997, after having ripped off Republican publishers for millions, Brock converted to the Democrat Party, and now works as a well-paid Party hit-man/media activist. The irony with David Brock is that he actually was telling the truth when he was doing muckraking research on Anita Hill and the Arkansas Troopers who pimped for Bill Clinton, but is now lying when he tells us not to believe his earlier work. Brock’s problem, however, is not logical but moral. He simply hasn’t any integrity. There are even many lefties who refuse to grant him any credibility. Curiouser and Curiouser Eric Scheie of the blog Classical Values, wrote on the matter of Brian Thevenot in late September, and on October 1 reported receiving an e-mail from Thevenot, in which the alleged reporter complained, “Did you somehow miss the portion of the follow-up story in which I debunked my own myth about the 40 bodies in the freezer? Did you not bother to read the whole story? I admitted my own mistake, under my own byline, and in again in interviews with news stations and newspapers that interviewed me about myths at the Dome and Convention Center. And now you purport to expose me after I exposed myself?” Eric Scheie observed that he could not find any public retraction published under Thevenot’s name, or the imprimatur of the Times-Picayune. On the contrary, he quoted the Times-Picayune’s proud, “proprietary” attitude towards the entire Katrina story, and noted that Thevenot’s new Katrina story headlining in the October-November Columbia Journalism Review, “Apocalypse in New Orleans,” repeated his original, September 6 story of murder and mayhem at the convention Center, and had been neither retracted nor corrected. “My crying bout that morning had been hardly unique, for myself or for the rest of the New Orleans-based crew. I had watched a woman die on the street. Arkansas National Guardsmen had carted her body away to put with the others inside the food service entrance at the rear of the Convention Center. They'd been murdered, or they'd perished, like the woman in front of me, from simple lack of food, water and medicine – here in America, here in my hometown.” Checking Google News under “Brian Thevenot,” there were only ten stories from around the country, all of them celebrating Thevenot’s supposed debunking of the wild “rumors” that had dominated the early reporting from New Orleans. I found nothing remotely like a retraction or a correction. Over at Reason magazine, Matt Welch went beyond the call of cover-up. Welch’s story consists of a credulous interview with “Major Ed Bush, public affairs officer for the Louisiana National Guard.” Twice, Major Bush plugs Thevenot, without ever mentioning Thevenot’s original story, even though he had to be familiar with it. Bush: “Yeah, and you know what? I need your help. I just got off the phone with a Washington Post guy....Brian Thevenot, the Times-Picayune reporter, was on CNN and was interviewed on Fox, and now we're getting all these inquiries again, coming back around, because I think a lot of folks are feeling a little bit guilty because they passed along the same old s--t…. Reason: “Have you gone back and tried to trace any of the roots of some of these wild rumors?” Bush: “Nah, I'm going to leave that to y'all. “Brian Thevenot, the Times-Picayune reporter, did the most in-depth backtracking that I've seen, and I think it got him national recognition in the blink of an eye. I mean, he found nothing. And I think he got a whole lot of people going, ‘Oh jeez, you know, OK: I'm guilty of it.’ “And I'm not going give any of them a break. Because if you're in a position of leadership, you need to be able to think through what you're saying. And there's nothing wrong with saying, "You know what? I don't really know what the condition is in the Dome, let's go down and talk to 'em. Let's go down and see. “That might have made things a lot better for all of us. Certainly, it wouldn't have changed how quick help arrived. Because quite honestly, I heard that help stayed away—I had heard that FEMA stayed away because it was too dangerous. Well, then you can certainly connect some dots and say that perhaps FEMA would have been quicker in if we hadn't heard all these urban myths about shootings and rapes and deaths and killing and bodies everywhere. Reason: “I had heard that when the National Guard came into the Convention Center...they came in with basically overwhelming force, and were surprised to see that everyone was just happy that they were there. Bush: “Yeah. One of my good friends, Col. Jacques Thibideaux, led that security effort; that's his guys. He is an MP and he's a cop. That was his baby, and they said "Jacques, you gotta get down here and sweep this thing." And he said he was braced for anything. And he encountered nothing. Other than a whole lot of people clapping and cheering and so glad that they were here.” * * * Everybody was “clapping and cheering.” Just like in Iraq. Right. Matt Welch was familiar with the MSM’s “the atrocities were all urban myths” story, but showed no familiarity with the stories the new story is meant to erase. He never mentioned Thevenot’s original “bodies in the freezer” story, much less did he cite National Guardsmen Mikel Brooks and Phillip Thompson, or the “several other Guardsmen” in Thevenot’s original story. Or the authority figures who themselves tried to explain away the shooting at rescue personnel. Or the angry people around the country and around the world, who insist that they witnessed atrocities (like murders) with their own two eyes. He didn’t ask Major Bush a single skeptical question. From the interview, you’d never know that a “public affairs officer” is a propaganda officer, as in chief bs-er in charge. I’ve been dealing with these guys at the NYPD for over ten years, and I only get two kinds of answers from them: 1. Nothing; and 2. Lies. When I’ve covered stories on network TV shows, I never even got lies, because the PR reps had apparently never watched the shows they for which they were responsible. I’ve referred to them as privatists rather than publicists – they wouldn’t say spit, if they had a mouthful. Just take a look at the interview’s phony title: “Echo Chamber in the Superdome A Louisiana National Guardsman explains how he dealt with false rumors being piped into Ground Zero of Hurricane Katrina.” A “National Guardsman.” As for why a libertarian magazine would want to push the story that everything was hunky dory down in New Orleans, that’s a subject for a separate column. A lot of folks think they can just order us to disregard all the different stories from all the different sources, and all the eyewitness accounts, including that of Brian Thevenot. Either they’re peeing on our pants legs, and telling us that it’s raining, or they think that they can turn hysteria and credulity on and off, like a light switch. But it’s too late: The toothpaste is most definitely out of the tube.


Thursday, October 06, 2005

An Exercise in Shameless Self-Promotion

by Nicholas Stix Yesterday (Wednesday), VDARE published my article, "Diversity is Strength! It's Also ... Police Corruption." Enjoy!


Wednesday, October 05, 2005

Correcting Fox News

By Nicholas Stix Minutes ago, Brit Hume closed his Special Report program with a Harriet Miers joke from David Letterman. After noting that Miers has never expressed a opinion on anything, Letterman asked, “Wow! Where do you find a woman like that?” Hume identified Letterman as “a graduate of Ball State University in Muncie, Indiana.” David Letterman briefly have attended Ball State, but he is a certifiable college dropout, part of that great American tradition of successes who never graduated from any institution of higher education.


Tuesday, October 04, 2005

The Color of Crime

By Nicholas Stix Imagine if one demographic group in America were 33 times more prone to commit crimes than another group. How would you feel about the relatively crime-prone group? The relatively crime-free group? Wouldn’t you want to know about such differences? But we don’t have to imagine anything. The above contrast was not a hypothetical case, but rather the statistical relationship of black to Asian crime in America, as detailed in the ground-breaking new report, The Color of Crime, released by the New Century Foundation, the organization that sponsors American Renaissance magazine. * “… between 2001 and 2003, blacks were 39 times more likely to commit violent crimes against whites than the reverse, and 136 times more likely to commit robbery.” * Between 2001 and 2003, blacks committed, on average, 15,400 black-on-white rapes per year, while whites averaged only 900 white-on-black rapes per year. * “Of the nearly 770,000 violent interracial crimes committed every year involving blacks and whites, blacks commit 85 percent and whites commit 15 percent.” But there are five-and-one-half as many whites as blacks. If anything, the numbers should be reversed. After all, as leftists always tell us, all groups are supposed to be equally represented in all categories, for good or ill. (Well, not really. Leftists never call on the NBA and NFL to institute racial parity for white players.) * Nationally, youth gangs are 90 percent non-white. “Hispanics are 19 times more likely than whites to be members of youth gangs. Blacks are 15 times more likely, and Asians are nine times more likely.” * The only crime category in which Asians are more heavily represented than whites is illegal gambling. * “Blacks commit more violent crime against whites than against blacks. Forty-five percent of their victims are white, 43 percent are black, and 10 percent are Hispanic. When whites commit violent crime, only three percent of their victims are black.” But how can that be, when for years commentators of all political persuasions have insisted that the majority of the victims of black crime were themselves black? But it has been true for some time, because blacks increasingly target whites based on the color of the latter’s skin. The commentators have been guilty variously of lying and laziness. * Far from being guilty of “racially profiling” innocent blacks, police have been exercising racial bias on behalf of blacks, arresting fewer blacks than their proportion of criminals: “… blacks who committed crimes that were reported to the police were 26 percent less likely to be arrested than people of other races who committed the same crimes.” * “… police are determined to arrest non-black rather than black criminals.” (I have seen this practice in operation on the streets and subways of New York.) * “[Blacks] are eight times more likely than people of other races to rob someone, for example, and 5.5 times more likely to steal a car.” Well, as everyone knows, innocent blacks get rounded up by the police all the time, so we can safely ignore such statistics. After all, isn’t that what the NAACP, Village Voice, New York Times, and countless black “activists” and prominent academics have been saying for years? After all, although the folks insisting on racial profiling have no facts to back up their claims, they enjoy political prestige and moral authority. The Color of Crime, meanwhile, is based merely on lowly facts. As we shall see, prominent people are already saying that we should ignore The Color of Crime, because it wasn’t produced by the right sort of people. (And of course, “the right sort of people” doesn’t tell the truth about race and crime.) * Charges of racial profiling, which maintain that police target innocent black motorists for traffic stops notwithstanding, a 2002 study by Maryland’s Public Service Research Institute found that police were stopping too few black speeders (23%), compared to their proportion of actual speeders (25%). In fact, “blacks were twice as likely to speed as whites” in general, and there was an even higher frequency of black speeders in the 90-mph and higher range. * “… the only evidence for police bias is disproportionate arrest rates for those groups police critics say are the targets of bias. High black arrest rates appear to reflect high crime rates, not police misconduct.” * Blacks not only commit violent crimes at far higher rates than non-blacks, but their crimes are more violent than those of whites. Blacks are three times as likely as non-blacks to commit assault with guns, and twice as likely as non-blacks to commit assault with knives. * Blacks not only commit violent crimes at far higher rates than whites, but blacks commit “white collar” offenses -- fraud, bribery, racketeering and embezzlement, respectively -- at two to five times the white rate. * The single greatest indicator of an area’s crime rate is not poverty or education, but race and ethnicity. Even when one controls for income and education, the black crime rate is much higher than the white rate. Things are actually much worse than the above notes suggest. As The Color of Crime notes, the feds inflate white crime statistics by counting Hispanic offenders as white; at the same time, “Hispanics are a [hate crime] victim category but not a perpetrator category. If someone attacks a Mexican for racial reasons, he becomes a Hispanic victim of a hate crime. However, if the same Mexican commits a hate crime against a black, he is classified as a ‘white’ perpetrator. Even more absurdly, if a Mexican commits a hate crime against a white, both victim and perpetrator are reported as white.” Thus, the number of white perpetrators is bloated, while the number of white victims is constricted by the federal double-standard. But things are even worse than the study shows. It fails to note, with black-on-white male prison rape an institutionalized sport among black inmates, that hundreds of thousands of white men have thus been victimized but never counted by the government. Meanwhile, white-on-black male prison rape is virtually non-existent. Some of the study’s many sources were the FBI’s uniform crime reports (UCRs); the feds’ National Crime Victimization Study (NCVS), in which 149,000 people across the country, in statistical proportion to all demographic groups, were called; the National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS); Supplemental Homicide Reports (SHRs); State Court Processing Statistics (SCPS); National Youth Gang Survey; Federal Justice Statistics Program (FJSP); and National Corrections Reporting Program (NCRP). The succinct report slays dragons in the course of mere footnotes, such as its nailing of tenured California State University criminology professor Phyllis B. Gerstenfeld, who in her book Hate Crimes: Causes, Controls and Controversies, the reality of interracial violence be damned, depicted whites only as perpetrators, and not as the victims of hate crimes. The Color of Crime – not to be confused with a 1998 piece of propaganda of the same name by tenured University of Maryland professor of criminology, Katheryn K. Russell -- is the most scientifically rigorous research on crime and race available. It’s the state of the art. The mainstream media will surely be anxious to publicize and discuss The Color of Crime. After all, hasn’t the public been inundated since the late 1990s (and ultimately, since the 1960s) with dubious charges of racism (“racial profiling”) against law enforcement and the justice system? And don’t the MSM always tell us that they will report on anything newsworthy? After all, the New York Times claims to be “the newspaper of record.” In a future column, we shall see just how the MSM has responded to The Color of Crime. In any event, the report gave in precise numbers what any sentient being over the age of twenty and living in the United States has long known. A 75-year-old Irish neighbor of mine is a retired nurse who was run out of a once-lovely Brooklyn neighborhood forty years ago by “integration” (read: brazen black crime in broad daylight). During a friendly conversation during a quiet morning on our peaceful street last spring she said, “The problem is … you know what the problem is.”


Saturday, October 01, 2005

Lest We Forget: An Unnamed Soldier and the Father Who Grieves for Him

By Nicholas Stix One of my wife’s nursing home patients just lost his son, who was serving in Iraq. The young man died in an accident. The father has always been one of her nicest patients; of sound mind, if not body. The man loved all of his children, but the son was clearly his favorite. “He was his heart,” she observed. You’re supposed to love all of your children equally, but rules like that fly in the face of the human heart. Some parents love one child more, simply … because they do, even though they do love the others. Others do so out of pure evil, loving one child while despising one or more among their other children. Yet other parents’ motives are hopelessly mixed. I believe that the majority of parents of two or more children have a favorite, though most would never admit it (I hope that they would never admit it). My wife heard today that the man was muttering, “It’s alright.” But it’s not alright. He’s on “one-on-one” care, a polite euphemism for suicide watch. My wife was glad she wasn’t on duty on the father’s floor; she’s sure she would have broken down and cried. She wouldn’t have been alone. …. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us -- that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion -- that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain -- that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom -- and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth. Abraham Lincoln Gettysburg Address November 19, 1863 Mr. Bush, don’t let Mr. Lincoln’s words degenerate into mere talking points.


Site Meter