XPost: alt.politics.nationalism.white, rec.arts.tv, alt.news-media   
   XPost: talk.politics.guns   
      
   The book is simply a series of reports of Black flash mobs   
   crashing into stores, grabbing, insulting, robbing, beating, and   
   occasionally sending whites to hospital or to the morgue. On one   
   level, this book is quite boring, for it is the same story told   
   and retold again. It is the same story in Philadelphia, San   
   Francisco, New York, Miami, Myrtle Beach, Indianapolis,   
   Charlotte, Texas, New Jersey, Milwaukee, etc. The stories are   
   variations on the same theme, how can young Blacks humiliate   
   whites, destroy their property, steal, beat, and then run away.   
   Black racism, Black on white hatred, Black on white crime, Black   
   on white violence is an epidemic in America. This part of   
   Flaherty's book is solid.   
      
   Unfortunately, the response to these crimes is usually as   
   repetitious as the crimes themselves. Local newspapers generally   
   refuse to identify the race of the perpetrators. The author is   
   able to do so by using Youtube videos, often posted by the   
   criminals. They are proud of their violent crimes against whites   
   (sometimes, against Asians). One amazon reviewer dismissed the   
   content of the book, maintaining it was anecdotal and not accord   
   with the FBI's hate crime statistics. In Milwaukee on July 3,   
   2011, a groups of Blacks ransacked a gas station's convenience   
   store. They then rampaged in a nearby park beating and stealing   
   from whites, who were there to view the fireworks. Police were   
   called and came to the scene. However, because of the   
   politically correct sensitivity to minorities, even sensitive to   
   those engaging in crime, the officers refused to file reports of   
   the crimes. If there are no police reports of the Blacks   
   attacking whites, then the crimes do not exist, and these crimes   
   are not included in FBI or any other statistics. Does one expect   
   the Eric Holder Justice Department (the one that dropped the   
   voter intimidation case against the New Black Panther Party) to   
   investigate possible anti-white racism in a police department   
   that permitted them to ignore the violent crimes by Blacks   
   against whites? Only after some of the whites were treated at   
   hospital and called talk radio did local TV reports begin to   
   expose the Black racist assaults. Finally, [white] Police Chief   
   Ed Flynn conceded that some "fights" had occurred. Flaherty   
   snidely commented, "'fights,' which is a curious way to describe   
   a race riot where some of the victims actually tried to defend   
   themselves."(p. 120) One of the white gals was slugged so hard,   
   that her blood evoked the comment that inspired the title of   
   this book. Mayor Tom Barrett, a liberal Democrat, and Chief   
   Flynn, an import from New York, denied these were hate crimes,   
   assured the city that crime was colorblind, and decried those   
   who sought to "sensationalize" the occurrences.   
      
   Flaherty has amassed a book of crimes - crimes by Blacks against   
   whites, and a few of Blacks against Asians. Flaherty recounts   
   page after page of Black on white hostility, insults, theft,   
   beatings, some of which may have led to emergency treatment, and   
   sometimes to the grave. Page after page. Boring to read; painful   
   to read, distressing to read of such injustice perpetrated so   
   often by violent, Black racists, depressing to read how the   
   crimes are not reported in the press, or not reported as racist   
   crimes.   
      
   Josef Stalin, the Soviet dictator, observed that the death of   
   one person is a tragedy; the death of a million is a statistic.   
      
   Unfortunately, in the US it becomes harder to acquire accurate   
   statistics of Black on White crime. If you simply read the local   
   newspaper accounts of most of these incidents, all of the racial   
   animosity and motivation is removed, deleted, expunged,   
   censored. Why are Americans not supposed to read about the   
   massive hatred and violence against whites committed by Blacks?   
      
   Black mobs are not identified as such; they are roving groups of   
   "youths," "teens," "young people," indulging in unseemly   
   behavior. These are not hate crimes, and race has little or   
   nothing to do with it. Of course, the reality is NOT what is   
   reported. The reality is that young Blacks engage in insulting,   
   threatening, beating, and robbing whites. But the major media do   
   NOT want to reveal this basic fact. Flaherty finds the facts -   
   on Youtube, where the color of the crime is visible and often   
   posted by the proud Black racist criminals themselves.   
   Why do the national and most local media cover up the   
   criminality of Black mobs? On this question Flaherty is silent.   
   He clearly exposes the media cover-ups, but fails to ask why.   
      
   To answer this question, an older book might be more helpful,   
   William McGowan's Coloring the News: How Crusading for Diversity   
   Has Corrupted American Journalism. Beginning with the large-   
   scale Black riots in hundreds of American cities in the mid- to   
   late-1960s, the liberal analysis of events was encapsulated in   
   the report of the Kerner Commission. Basically, the blue-ribbon   
   panel blamed the riots on white racism, excused the rioters, and   
   urged changes to prevent future outbreaks. Universities, which   
   became the think-tanks of the Left developed theories to   
   exculpate Black violence; they were "culturally deprived," they   
   were victims of institutional racism, and their outbursts were   
   simply a means to cope with such oppression. Furthermore, Blacks   
   could not, by definition, be racists. They might show prejudice,   
   but racism required power, and since Blacks in America lacked   
   power, they were incapable of being racist. Only white racism   
   was the problem. Of course, if you walk alone on a street at   
   night, who has the power, a Black with a pistol, or you? And in   
   the era of President Obama and Attorney General Holder, who does   
   have the power? Moreover, if this definition made any sense and   
   were applied elsewhere, then Afrikaners, by definition, can no   
   longer be racists in the new South Africa.   
      
   The Left-wing theories of race spun by academics were   
   popularized by the media. In the journalism and communications   
   departments of universities, students were taught that as   
   reporters they were to comfort the afflicted and afflict the   
   comfortable. Objective reporting was deemed not merely old   
   fashioned, but immoral. The reporter was to take the side of the   
   oppressed. And in race reporting, that meant coloring the news   
   for the benefit of Blacks, who were by definition, the   
   oppressed. And so academe and the media melded into the   
   academedia complex.   
      
   Other issues were also fused with the new, politically correct   
   mission of the communication majors. For example, as the method   
   of affirmative action became clearer in practice, (basically a   
   way to give the job or scholarship to a lesser qualified or   
   unqualified minority and deny it to the best qualified, if he   
   were white.) To justify these practices of denying equal   
   opportunity to whites, the Left developed the theory of "white   
   male privilege." According to this, all whites were privileged,   
   and to create a level playing field, preferences had to be   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)