The Los Angeles and related riots mark a new era in American cultural, political, and economic life. We now know that we are under assault from thugs and revolutionaries who hate Euro-American civilization and everything it stands for: private property, material success for those who earn it, and Christian morality.
Ten thousand stores and other buildings looted and burned, thousands beaten and otherwise seriously injured, 52 people dead. That was the toll of the Los Angeles riots in which we saw white men pulled from their cars and trucks and shot or brutally beaten. (In every case, the mob was not too enraged to pick the victim's pocket.) We saw Korean and white stores targeted by the mob because they "exploited the community," i.e., sold products people wanted at prices they were willing to pay. Worst of all, we saw the total breakdown of law enforcement, as black and white liberal public officials had the cops and troops disarmed in the face of criminal anarchy.
In San Francisco and perhaps other cities, says expert Burt Blumert, the rioting was led by red-flag carrying members of the Revolutionary Communist Party and the Workers World Party, both Trotskyite-Maoist. The police were allowed to intervene only when the rioters assaulted the famous Fairmont and Mark Hopkins hotels atop Nob Hill. A friend of Burt's, a jewelry store owner, had his store on Union Square looted by blacks, and when the police arrived in response to his frantic calls, their orders were to protect his life, but not to interfere with the rioting.
Even though the riots were aimed at whites (in L.A. at Koreans who had committed the crime of working hard and being successful, and at Cambodians in Long Beach), and even though anti-white and anti-Asian epithets filled the air, this is not considered a series of hate crimes, nor a violation of the civil rights of whites or Asians.
The criminals who terrorize our cities--in riots and on every non-riot day--are not exclusively young black males, but they largely are. As children, they are trained to hate whites, to believe that white oppression is responsible for all black ills, to "fight the power," and to steal and loot as much money from the white enemy as possible. Anything is justified against "The Man." And "The Woman.' A lady I know recently saw a black couple in the supermarket with a cute little girl, three years old or so. My friend waved to the tiny child, who scowled, stuck out her tongue, and said (somewhat tautologically): "I hate you, white honkey." And the parents were indulgent. Is any white child taught to hate in this way? I've never heard of it. If a white child made such a remark to a black woman, the parents would stop it with a reprimand or a spank.
But this is normal, and in fact benign, compared to much of the anti-white ideology in the thoroughly racist black community. The black leadership indoctrinates its followers with phony history and phony theory to bolster its claims of victimology. Like the communists who renounced all that was bourgeois, the blacks reject all that is "Eurocentric." They demand their own kind of thinking, and deny the possibility of non-blacks understanding it.
The insurrectionist and revolutionaries intended to destroy large sections of Los Angeles. Why did the ghetto youths so furiously rage together? Was it because they have been neglected? Hardly. Welfare has transferred $2.5 trillion from white middle class taxpayers to welfare programs in the last 30 years. And if we adjust that figure for 1992 dollars, the total is more like $7 trillion. Are blacks being denied economic opportunity? The cities could have freer markets, but so could the rest of the country, where there is no rioting and little streetcrime. Are black killers and looters responding to racism? Japanese Americans were treated far worse in California than blacks. They were even put in concentration camps by Earl Warren, John J. McCloy, and Franklin D. Roosevelt, yet Japanese-Americans have never rioted. Korean-Americans, hated by blacks, never riot, and in fact are some of the most productive people in America (the reason for black hatred).
The cause of the riots is plain: barbarism. If the barbarians cannot loot sufficiently through legal channels (i.e., the riots being the welfare-state minus the middleman), they resort to illegal ones, to terrorism. Trouble is, few seem willing to do anything to stop them. The cops have been handcuffed. And property owners are not allowed to defend themselves. The mayor of Los Angeles, for example, ordered the Korean storekeepers who defended themselves arrested for "discharging a firearm within city limits." Perhaps the most scandalous aspect of the Los Angeles riots was the response by the mayors, the media, and the Washington politicians. They all came together as one to excuse the violence and to tell white America that it is guilty, although the guilt can be assuaged by handing over more cash. It would be reactionary, racist, and fascist, said the media, to have less welfare or tougher law enf orcement. America's number one need is an unlimited white checking account for underclass blacks.
Rather than helping, all this will ensure that guerrilla violence will escalate. There will be more occasional eruptions such as we saw in Los Angeles, but just as terrifying are the daily muggings, robberies, burglaries, rapes, and killings that make our cities terror zones.
The rioters said they were acting out their frustration over the acquittal of four L.A. policemen accused of using excessive force when arresting Rodney G. King, but in fact, they were looking for an excuse to kill, burn, and loot. Nonetheless, it is important to understand why the jury decided not to convict, whether or not we agree with their verdict.
The California highway patrol began chasing drunk driver Rodney King, a black man with a long arrest record, and his two passengers on the night of March 3, 1991. He was recklessly driving at speeds up to 115 mph for almost eight miles. They raced on the highway until King turned off to drive through traffic lights and stop signs on residential streets (families could have been killed). The L.A. police department came to assist in the high-speed chase with lights and sirens on. One of King's passenger s asked him to pull over. King initially refused, driving faster, but he finally complied. When the cops approached the car, suspecting armed criminals, the two black passengers immediately stepped out of the car and fell flat on their stomachs with arms stretched out, as instructed. They were handcuffed. King could have done the same. But he chose a different route. He refused to get out of the car. He stalled for a minute, and several times, stepped out of the car and then back into it. The police wo ndered if he was searching the car for a gun. Once King stopped this game, he was told by cops with guns pointing at him to put his belly down on the ground with arms outstretched. Instead, King began to do a crazy dance and laugh freakishly. He taunted the police and even the helicopter buzzing above him. This is why the police thought he was on PCP.
Despite police orders, King continued to dance, grabbing his buttocks to make lewd gestures at a female cop. Sgt. Koon approached him and warned that he would be stung with a Taser gun. King got down on his hands and knees, but refused to lay flat. He was again warned, but King refused. Officer Powell put his knee on King's back to get him down on the ground so he could be handcuffed. King went down to the ground, but bounced back up, shaking off all the police who were trying to get hold of him. Fina lly, Koon stung him with the gun, delivering 50,000 volts of electricity, and King fell to the ground again. But again he bounced up, prompting Koon to deliver another 50,000 volts. King fell again, this time into the proper position. Not a single baton blow had been delivered and the cops thought everything was over.
At this point, the video camera started to tape the action. Officer Powell approached King to put handcuffs on him, but King, weighing 250 pounds and standing 6'4" tall, shocked everyone by springing into action again from his flat position. Like a professional linebacker, he charged Powell, who thought King was going for his gun. That's when Powell started using the baton. At one point, Powell thought King was subdued, put away the baton and reached for the cuffs. But King started to stand up again. Remembering how King rushed him before, he put away his cuffs and brought out the baton again. One officer even tried to put his foot on King's neck to prevent him from getting up again so he could be cuffed.
In all, he was hit 56 times, and even in the end he refused to comply. He had to be cuffed in an odd position that risked the lives of the cops. The hospital reported that King had suffered an injury on the face from when he fell to the ground and minor injuries to his leg. He was never hit on the spine or the head, which would have violated regulations. And he was not beaten nearly to death, as some have claimed. The jury concluded that at every point of that night's action, King was in control. He could have complied at any time and stopped the beating. Whether we agree or disagree with the juries verdict--that the cops did not use exxcessive force--it is instructive to know what they saw and what the media still refuses to tell us or show us. None of the major networks showed the video scene when King rushed Officer Powell after the first Taser jolt. Only CNN showed it, one time. And no major paper even mentioned it. Neither did any major paper or network tell of the two passengers who complied and were peacefully arrested. Why? We were shown the section of tape where the cops hit King as a metaphor for white racism. Shown it
...
In article <-030893114...@UH.EDU> @UH.EDU (ONLY THE MESSENGER) writes:
>LOS ANGELES RACIAL TERRORISM
> Ten thousand stores and other buildings looted and burned, thousands >beaten and otherwise seriously injured, 52 people dead. That was the toll >of the Los Angeles riots in which we saw white men pulled from their cars >and trucks and shot or brutally beaten. (In every case, the mob was not too >enraged to pick the victim's pocket.) We saw Korean and white stores >targeted by the mob because they "exploited the community," i.e., sold >products people wanted at prices they were willing to pay. Worst of all, >we saw the total breakdown of law enforcement, as black and white liberal >public officials had the cops and troops disarmed in the face of criminal >anarchy.
D'OHHHH come on now this is the african american channel! You can't say this kind of stuff here! Number one, they'll tell you it didn't happen, and number two, if they admitted it did happen, they'll tell you that the innocent people who lost businesses, or even their lives, should have died because this is a racist society, blah blah blah.
> In San Francisco and perhaps other cities, says expert Burt Blumert, >the rioting was led by red-flag carrying members of the Revolutionary >Communist Party and the Workers World Party, both Trotskyite-Maoist. The >police were allowed to intervene only when the rioters assaulted the famous >Fairmont and Mark Hopkins hotels atop Nob Hill. A friend of Burt's, a >jewelry store owner, had his store on Union Square looted by blacks, and >when the police arrived in response to his frantic calls, their orders were >to protect his life, but not to interfere with the rioting.
It is the agenda of the "black liberation" movements to dismantle capitalism and bring Communism here.
> Even though the riots were aimed at whites (in L.A. at Koreans who had >committed the crime of working hard and being successful, and at Cambodians >in Long Beach), and even though anti-white and anti-Asian epithets filled >the air, this is not considered a series of hate crimes, nor a violation of >the civil rights of whites or Asians.
Of course not! Only whites can be racist! You forget, this is the african american channel, where no crime on Earth is too horrible as long as White AmeriKKKa can be put on the opposite end of the scale. You'll die an old man waiting for a black liberal to decry the actions of the rioters in LA. And your kids and grandkids will die of old age also, before they see such a thing.
> The criminals who terrorize our cities--in riots and on every >non-riot day--are not exclusively young black males, but they largely are. >As children, they are trained to hate whites, to believe that white >oppression is responsible for all black ills, to "fight the power," and to >steal and loot as much money from the white enemy as possible. Anything is >justified against "The Man." And "The Woman.' A lady I know recently saw a >black couple in the supermarket with a cute little girl, three years old or >so. My friend waved to the tiny child, who scowled, stuck out her tongue, >and said (somewhat tautologically): "I hate you, white honkey." And the >parents were indulgent. Is any white child taught to hate in this way? I've >never heard of it. If a white child made such a remark to a black woman, >the parents would stop it with a reprimand or a spank.
Remember: hatred is only hatred when it comes from a White man. When it comes from a black man, it's "expressing his/her anger towards White AmeriKKKa."
> But this is normal, and in fact benign, compared to much of the >anti-white ideology in the thoroughly racist black community. The black >leadership indoctrinates its followers with phony history and phony theory >to bolster its claims of victimology. Like the communists who renounced all >that was bourgeois, the blacks reject all that is "Eurocentric." They >demand their own kind of thinking, and deny the possibility of non-blacks >understanding it.
Who needs to understand this "black community" ? As an african american myself, I think it needs to be shipped to another planet. They are hatefully, in fact VIRULENTLY intolerant, and as proven by the LA Riots, they are willing to KILL everything in sight, if they can. There's a black man out there somewhere thinking of killing YOU for saying all this, right now. So much for watching my back against white hatemongers.. Now I have to look both ways.
> The insurrectionist and revolutionaries intended to destroy large >sections of Los Angeles. Why did the ghetto youths so furiously rage >together? Was it because they have been neglected? Hardly. Welfare has >transferred $2.5 trillion from white middle class taxpayers to welfare >programs in the last 30 years. And if we adjust that figure for 1992 >dollars, the total is more like $7 trillion. Are blacks being denied >economic opportunity? The cities could have freer markets, but so could the >rest of the country, where there is no rioting and little streetcrime. Are >black killers and looters responding to racism? Japanese Americans were >treated far worse in California than blacks. They were even put in >concentration camps by Earl Warren, John J. McCloy, and Franklin D. >Roosevelt, yet Japanese-Americans have never rioted. Korean-Americans, >hated by blacks, never riot, and in fact are some of the most productive >people in America (the reason for black hatred).
Can we say "Rushdie"?
> The cause of the riots is plain: barbarism. If the barbarians cannot >loot sufficiently through legal channels (i.e., the riots being the >welfare-state minus the middleman), they resort to illegal ones, to >terrorism. Trouble is, few seem willing to do anything to stop them. The >cops have been handcuffed. And property owners are not allowed to defend >themselves. The mayor of Los Angeles, for example, ordered the Korean >storekeepers who defended themselves arrested for "discharging a firearm >within city limits." Perhaps the most scandalous aspect of the Los Angeles >riots was the response by the mayors, the media, and the Washington >politicians. They all came together as one to excuse the violence and to >tell white America that it is guilty, although the guilt can be assuaged by >handing over more cash. It would be reactionary, racist, and fascist, said >the media, to have less welfare or tougher law enf orcement. America's >number one need is an unlimited white checking account for underclass >blacks.
I'd spit in the face of these bastards, but the election of a Republican mayor in Los Angeles, will suffice. :^)
> Rather than helping, all this will ensure that guerrilla violence will >escalate. There will be more occasional eruptions such as we saw in Los >Angeles, but just as terrifying are the daily muggings, robberies, >burglaries, rapes, and killings that make our cities terror zones.
I say we get a mob next time these riots occur, and start shooting BACK at the rioters. We outnumber them and, with guns, we outgun them also. How CAN they win, over and over again, like this?
My hat goes off to those valiant Koreans. They fought back like true, brave Americans, to defend what they worked HARD to build.
> The rioters said they were acting out their frustration over the >acquittal of four L.A. policemen accused of using excessive force when >arresting Rodney G. King, but in fact, they were looking for an excuse to >kill, burn, and loot. Nonetheless, it is important to understand why the >jury decided not to convict, whether or not we agree with their verdict.
UUUGGGHH it makes me so sick just to look at another member of my own race now, seeing what they did in LA.
> At this point, the video camera started to tape the action. Officer >Powell approached King to put handcuffs on him, but King, weighing 250 >pounds and standing 6'4" tall, shocked everyone by springing into action >again from his flat position. Like a professional linebacker, he charged >Powell, who thought King was going for his gun. That's when Powell started >using the baton. At one point, Powell thought King was subdued, put away >the baton and reached for the cuffs. But King started to stand up again. >Remembering how King rushed him before, he put away his cuffs and brought >out the baton again. One officer even tried to put his foot on King's neck >to prevent him from getting up again so he could be cuffed.
Watch these fascists on this newsgroup, delete this from their responses. It's the only way to give them a valid argument. Mark my words, this will be deleted or ignored.
> Ten minutes later, the police got their first report of trouble. >Blacks were throwing beer cans at passing cars. When the police showed up, >the crowds had gotten much bigger. Cops tried to control them, but realized >they were outnumbered. Realizing that they could not use their guns or even >look cross-eyed at a black, a video recorded a policeman saying: "It's not >worth it. Let's go." Indeed it wasn't worth it. The cops could only have >put themselves on trial and had their lives ruined too.
> Ironically, they were being filmed and are now denounced. But it was >the Establishment's reaction to the Rodney King verdict that set the >precedent that black criminals always have the benefit of the doubt over >white police. At 5:45, the field commander in the area where the riots >began ordered that no police go into the area. "I want everybody out of >here. Get out. Now." He wanted to protect his police force, which could >take no action without media criticism and legal action, from rioters who >vastly outnumbered them and were sometimes better armed. The blacks >started to attack cars driven by whites and light-skinned Hispanics with >crowbars, rocks, bottles, and even a metal traffic sign. At the last >minute, some police officers rescued a woman abandoned in her car and were >pelted by
> In San Francisco and perhaps other cities, says expert Burt Blumert, >the rioting was led by red-flag carrying members of the Revolutionary >Communist Party and the Workers World Party, both Trotskyite-Maoist.
> The criminals who terrorize our cities--in riots and on every >non-riot day--are not exclusively young black males, but they largely are. >As children, they are trained to hate whites, to believe that white >oppression is responsible for all black ills, to "fight the power," and to >steal and loot as much money from the white enemy as possible. Anything is >justified against "The Man." And "The Woman.' A lady I know recently saw a >black couple in the supermarket with a cute little girl, three years old or >so. My friend waved to the tiny child, who scowled, stuck out her tongue, >and said (somewhat tautologically): "I hate you, white honkey." And the >parents were indulgent. Is any white child taught to hate in this way? I've >never heard of it. If a white child made such a remark to a black woman, >the parents would stop it with a reprimand or a spank.
> The cause of the riots is plain: barbarism. If the barbarians cannot >loot sufficiently through legal channels (i.e., the riots being the >welfare-state minus the middleman), they resort to illegal ones, to >terrorism.
> Not long after this incident, King was found trying to pick up a >transvestite prostitute, and when caught, tried to run over the cops who >intervened.
> Indeed, it is shocking to consider the uniformity of opinion among >blacks in this country. Opinion polls consistently show that only about 5% >of blacks have sensible political opinions >Given the inefficiencies of what D.C. laughingly calls the "criminal >justice system," I think we can safely assume that 95% of the black males >in that city are semi-criminal or entirely criminal.
> If similar in-depth studies were conducted in other major cities, who >doubts that similar results would be produced? We are constantly told that >it is evil to be afraid of black men, but it is hardly irrational. Black >men commit murders, rapes, robberies, muggings, and burglaries all out of >proportion to their numbers.
> Perhaps the L.A. experience should not be surprising. The riots, >burning, looting, and murders are only a continuation of 30 years of racial >politics. The looting in L.A. was the welfare state without the voting >booth. The elite have sent one message to black America for 30 years: you >are entitled to something for nothing. That's what blacks got on the >streets of L.A. for three days in April. Only they didn't ask their >Congressmen to arrange the transfer.
> Blacks have "civil riqhts," preferences, set-asides for government >contracts, gerrymandered voting districts, black bureaucracies, black >mayors, black curricula in schools, black beauty contests, black tv shows, >black tv anchors, black scholorships and colleges, hate crime laws, and >public humiliation for anyone who dares question the black agenda.
> Two years ago, in a series of predictions for the 1990s, I said that >race riots would erupt in our large cities. I'm now predicting this will be >the major problem of the 1990s.
>Taken from the Ron Paul Political Report, 1120 NASA Blvd., Suite 104, >Houston, TX 77058 for $50 per year. Call 1-800-766-7285.
In article <-030893114...@UH.EDU> @UH.EDU (ONLY THE MESSENGER) writes:
> Several days after the violence ended, we learned that there would >have been blacks on the King jury--if the NAACP hadn't engaged in jury >tampering by telling potential black jurors that it was their racial duty >to convict the cops. The blacks admitted this to defense lawyers, and were >rightly excluded from jury. This is a serious crime, but the NAACP will not >be prosecuted.
Because there's nothing to prosecute them for. What happened was that someone *claiming* to be from the NAACP did make such remarks to prospective Black jurors, but this person was in fact not even a current NAACP member - let alone an offical or spokesman.
The article posted by Stephen A. Chaney would have been more appropriately placed in a soc.culture.white supremacy, soc.culture.war (white aryan resistance) or soc.culture.kkk news group instead of here. That way, I would not have seen it, since I am not interested in any type of white-backlash dialogue.
Wonder why he bothers to read this particular news group. He and others of like mind should form their own news group (hint, hint).
In article <CBCK49....@sybase.com> ashe...@kailas.sybase.com (Angela Shelby) writes: >The article posted by Stephen A. Chaney would have been more appropriately >placed in a soc.culture.white supremacy, soc.culture.war (white aryan >resistance) or soc.culture.kkk news group instead of here. That way, I would >not have seen it, since I am not interested in any type of white-backlash >dialogue.
Yeah and your comments need to go to soc.culture.black.nazi or soc.culture.communism. You have no evidence that anything I said, supported white supremacy. None. I make a living out of challenging the power of liberalism, and you just made yourself a juicy target. You're a liar, or you are an utter blockhead. Repost what I said and show SPECIFICALLY where I supported white supremacism.
You have been challenged, and I know darned well you don't have the guts to back up what you said. I've never been wrong when I attack liberals.
>Wonder why he bothers to read this particular news group. He and others of >like mind should form their own news group (hint, hint).
Nope, I like to come here and say things that aren't approved by the Black Communist Party. Komrad.
"Tell you one thing I do believe.. shit happens." - PREDATOR 2 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- _/_/_/_/ _/ _/ _/_| _/ _/ _/ _/_/_/_/ _/_/_/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _| _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/_/_/ _/ _/ _/ _| _/ _/_/_/_/ _/_/_/_/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _|_/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/_/ _/ _/_/_/_/ _/ _| _/ _/ _/_/_/_/ _/_/_/ Blame it on Steve Chaney <chane...@nextnet.ccs.csus.edu> Not on California State University, Sacramento :^)
Is that all you people can do? When I place my opinions on here and then add some facts to back it up, all you can do is whine and call me a white supremacist (by suggesting I take it to "soc.culture.war", etc.) ?
You can't even post facts. You did exactly as I said you would - delete EVERYTHING and then call me a white supremacist and suggest I take my "white backlash" elsewhere. I swear to God the average logic on this channel couldn't get one out of kindergarten without a government handout. And when one of you DOES try and jump off with some "media bias and PC are the dreams of the Right Wing," I have to truncate the contradicting evidence just to save bandwidth.
With people like Angela Shelby around, it's easy to prove how monolithic this movement is, and how fiercely it enforces that condition. I hope she goes on welfare groaning "Reagan did this, Reagan did this" like the rest of her liberal left wing I-hate-capitalism-and-whites-and-America mongering zombies.
Grow up, kids, and start using some logic instead of grabbing a post, stamping "NAZI" on it, and hoping everyone else will cringe at the power of your dogma.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: ashe...@kailas.sybase.com (Angela Shelby) Subject: RE: LA RIOTS: CAUSES Message-ID: <CBCK49.Hq8@sybase.com> Sender: ashelby@kailas (Angela Shelby) Organization: Sybase, Inc. Date: Fri, 6 Aug 1993 16:50:32 GMT Lines: 12
The article posted by Stephen A. Chaney would have been more appropriately placed in a soc.culture.white supremacy, soc.culture.war (white aryan resistance) or soc.culture.kkk news group instead of here. That way, I would not have seen it, since I am not interested in any type of white-backlash dialogue. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
All I gotta say is, it's here in this newsgroup and every time one of you pops off with your racial hate masked as equal rights advocacy, etc., there's a chance I or someone better will be around to call you up on it. Now what are your plans? Maybe you can talk to Avalon on alt.irc and get his advice on getting me banned from the newsgroup :^) (shhh don't tell him you can't ban people off a newsgroup.. he might look at you in shock as it was his ingenious invention of an idea..)
---------------------------------------------------------------------- _/_/_/_/ _/ _/ _/_| _/ _/ _/ _/_/_/_/ _/_/_/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _| _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/_/_/ _/ _/ _/ _| _/ _/_/_/_/ _/_/_/_/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _|_/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/_/ _/ _/_/_/_/ _/ _| _/ _/ _/_/_/_/ _/_/_/ Blame it on Steve Chaney <chane...@nextnet.ccs.csus.edu> Not on California State University, Sacramento :^)
In article <CBCK49....@sybase.com> ashe...@kailas.sybase.com (Angela Shelby) writes: >From: ashe...@kailas.sybase.com (Angela Shelby) >Subject: RE: LA RIOTS: CAUSES >Date: Fri, 6 Aug 1993 16:50:32 GMT >The article posted by Stephen A. Chaney would have been more appropriately >placed in a soc.culture.white supremacy, soc.culture.war (white aryan >resistance) or soc.culture.kkk news group instead of here. That way, I would >not have seen it, since I am not interested in any type of white-backlash >dialogue.
Chaney talks a lot about Black conservatives, and I assumed he was Black. I think he is and if this is true, he is one messed up cat and proves that stupid, like ugly knows no color. I agree, he really needs a place of his own. Nice rubber walls, plastic utensils....
>Wonder why he bothers to read this particular news group. He and others of >like mind should form their own news group (hint, hint). >...in the ways of Maat, >a.
