Activism, BLM, Law, Politics, Recommended

Police Violence and the Rush to Judgment

In the days and weeks following George Floyd’s death in May, activists flooded the streets with placards and slogans to denounce racism and police violence. But the zeal with which they mobilized support for their cause frequently clouded complex issues and events that demanded greater scrutiny than conviction and piety provide. For partisans on social media, hearsay and rumor became grist to ideological mills and facts were only relevant if they were politically useful. An inquisitorial climate developed in which everyone was expected to take a side without unseemly hesitation. Are you on the side of social justice or are you on the side of racial oppression? Silence on this question is violence, we were told. As a result, a rush to judgment is disfiguring how we consume and understand reports of events unfolding rapidly in confusing circumstances. The political biases of the loudest voices may be obvious and their manipulations may be crude, but doubt and restraint risk accusations of callousness and racism, which is often motivation enough to declare one’s allegiance before the facts are in.

When a white police officer named Rusten Sheskey shot a 29-year-old black man named Jacob Blake in Kenosha, Wisconsin on August 23rd, a viral video of the incident sparked immediate protests and riots. As nuances began to emerge that placed the shooting in its proper context, they were either dismissed as unimportant or ignored entirely. The police, it turned out, were responding to a call from Blake’s girlfriend Laquisha Booker, who dialed 911 to report that Blake was on her property in violation of a restraining order and that he had stolen her car keys. The restraining order had been issued following an incident on May 3rd, during which Blake had broken into Booker’s home at 6am (ostensibly to collect his belongings) and allegedly sexually assaulted her by penetrating her with his fingers. Before the officers arrived at the scene, the dispatcher had notified them of Blake’s outstanding warrants for felony sexual assault, trespassing, and disorderly conduct.

The account of the subsequent escalation between the cops and Blake is presently incomplete, but several crucial details have come to light. Raysean White, who recorded the shooting, said he saw Blake scuffling with the officers and heard the officers yell, “Drop the knife! Drop the knife!” White also claimed he “didn’t see any weapons in [Blake’s] hands; he wasn’t being violent.” Police union lawyer Brendan Matthews has since stated that Jacob Blake “fought with the officers, including putting one of the officers in a headlock.” After both officers failed to subdue Blake with tasers, they followed him with their firearms drawn as he walked to the driver’s side of a gray SUV and opened the door. As he leaned into the car, Officer Sheskey grabbed Blake’s tank top and fired seven times. Four of those shots struck Blake in the back. Three of his children were in the car at the time.

At a press conference on August 26th, Wisconsin Justice Department’s Attorney General Josh Kaul revealed that a knife was in fact recovered from the driver-side floorboard of the SUV. Kaul also revealed that Blake had “admitted that he had a knife in his possession” during the initial interaction. The Wisconsin Department of Justice expects to complete its high-profile investigation “within 30 days,” and in the meantime questions remain. Was Jacob Blake reaching for a knife? Was he holding it at the time he was shot? And did Officer Sheskey have a reasonable fear for his own safety—or the safety of others—when he shot Blake? Emerging details appear to support the officer’s story, but unanswered questions remain critical to our understanding of the altercation. We simply don’t yet have enough facts to conclude whether the shooting was definitively justified or not.

Notwithstanding the revelations of Blake’s criminal history and noncompliance at the scene, many remain sympathetic to him. Being shot multiple times in the back at such close range does seem excessive, even if the officer had reason to fear for his own safety. Some have objected that the officers should have found a way to de-escalate the situation before a recourse to potentially deadly violence became necessary. However, Officer Sheskey did not know if Blake had a gun or some other weapon concealed in the car, nor what he planned to do with such a weapon had he been allowed to retrieve it. And had Blake been allowed to get into his car and drive away in defiance of the officers’ attempts to take him into custody, the possibility remained of a high-speed chase which could have put many more lives at risk, including those of his three children.

Instead, Blake was paralyzed from the waist down after the bullets shattered his vertebrae. The shooting occurred in front of his sons, who are aged three, five, and eight. No doubt they will be traumatized by what they saw. Millions of people have since watched Raysean White’s recording of the incident. The video naturally evokes moral repulsion, but that shouldn’t determine our interpretation of the facts. In its reporting of the Blake shooting, much of the media has discarded careful analysis and due process. They sought to capture and define the moment with headlines like CNN’s “Jacob Blake’s shooting shows America has a long way to go in its journey toward a racial reckoning.” The day after the shooting, David A. Graham, a staff writer at the Atlantic, flatly declared that, “It’s nearly impossible to imagine any way that his shooting was justified.”

Wisconsin governor Tony Evers, meanwhile, told the press that “The previous protests across the state of Wisconsin are absolutely evidence that we’ve got 400 years of systemic racism in this country.” On Twitter, he announced that Blake is “not the first Black man or person to have been shot or injured or mercilessly killed at the hands of individuals in law enforcement in our state or our country.” He also condemned the “excessive use of force” applied to black Americans. Wisconsin Lt. Gov. Mandela Barnes told a press conference that “we don’t need an investigation to know that Blake’s shooting falls in a long and painful pattern of violence. And this is a pattern of violence that happens against black lives too often across this country.” Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden tweeted “Once again, a Black man—Jacob Blake—was shot by the police. In front of his children. It makes me sick. Is this the country we want to be?” Not to be outdone, his running-mate Kamala Harris blithely announced that “the life of a black person in America has never been treated as fully human.”

Reactions extended well beyond the realm of politics. Blake’s shooting influenced the Milwaukee Bucks to boycott their scheduled first-round game 5 matchup against the Orlando Magic. This triggered the postponement of a number of scheduled sporting events, with staged boycotts by athletes in the NFL, MLB, NHL, MLS, and WNBA. The NFL’s Baltimore Ravens demanded that the officer who shot Blake and those who killed other African Americans must be brought to justice as a way to “accept accountability and acknowledge the ramifications of slavery and racial injustice.” Perhaps the most astonishing statement came from tennis player Naomi Osaka, the highest-paid female athlete in the world, who took to Twitter to condemn what she called the “continued genocide of Black people at the hand of the police.” (According to Washington Post and National Weather Service data, an unarmed black man is more likely to be struck by lightning than killed by the police.)

A number of performers in the 2020 Video Music Awards took the opportunity to participate in some social justice activism of their own. Rapper DaBaby stomped on the roof of a police car onstage in front of a burning cityscape, and several popular figures commented on the Jacob Blake shooting. Rapper 50 Cent described it as “attempted murder.” In a tweet that hasn’t aged well (and it’s only days old) comedian Kevin Hart complained that Blake “could have been tased” instead of shot. In a letter for Vogue, prominent singer-songwriter Demi Lovato opened up about her “privilege” as a white person and lamented: “I hated that I shared the same skin color as the people accused of committing heinous crimes against Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, George Floyd and many, many other Black lives… So here I am, sitting in a home that I was able to afford with the money that I have from singing, while people of color are fearing for their lives every day.”

Those demanding that everyone speak up and speak out may not like what they hear. Observers who reserve judgment until the facts emerge do not always end up ratifying received wisdom, because tidy political narratives rarely reflect the complexities of reality. It is worth remembering that, in the wake of the 2014 shooting death of Michael Brown at the hands of police officer Darren Wilson, it was generally agreed that Brown died while trying to surrender, his hands raised as he begged the officer not to shoot him. But “hands up, don’t shoot” did not happen. Wilson was cleared of all charges in two state investigations and by Barack Obama’s Justice Department because the evidence supported his version of events. The truth of what happened in Ferguson remains disputed to this day by those whose biases preclude a fair-minded assessment of the facts. On August 9th, Joe Biden tweeted, “It’s been six years since Michael Brown’s life was taken in Ferguson—reigniting a movement. We must continue the work of tackling systemic racism and reforming policing.”

On May 25th, George Floyd died as four officers from the Minneapolis police department tried to take him into custody. Cell phone footage of his last moments appeared to show that he had been suffocated by racist cops as he begged for his life. Massive nationwide protests against police brutality and racism spontaneously erupted, some of which quickly escalated into riots. In response to demands for immediate justice from across the political spectrum, Minneapolis authorities charged Officer Derek Chauvin with third-degree murder and second-degree manslaughter within four days of Floyd’s death. Days later, the first charge was upgraded to murder in the second degree and Chauvin’s colleagues were charged with aiding and abetting that crime.

To most people (myself included), Chauvin’s conviction initially looked to be a foregone conclusion—the crime had, after all, been committed in broad daylight in front of multiple witnesses, one of whom had recorded it and broadcast it on social media. But this narrative has been complicated as more information has become available. The toxicology results included in the Hannepin County Medical Examiner’s Report revealed that Floyd had taken a potentially lethal amount of an extremely powerful opiate the day he died. Dr. Andrew Baker, the Hennepin County Medical Examiner, concluded that the autopsy “revealed no physical evidence suggesting that Mr. Floyd died of asphyxiation,” that Floyd’s level of fentanyl was “pretty high” and was potentially at a “fatal level.”

According to the medical examiner’s autopsy report, Floyd subsequently died of cardiopulmonary arrest, a not uncommon consequence of fentanyl overdose, an outcome possibly aggravated by the discovery that Floyd was suffering from two underlying cardiac conditions: arteriosclerotic heart disease (described as “multifocal” and “severe”) and hypertensive heart disease. In a June 1st memo, the attorney general declared that “[Baker] said that if Mr. Floyd had been found dead in his home (or anywhere else) and there were no other contributing factors he would conclude that it was an overdose death.” The officers’ body cam footage, meanwhile, has revealed that when Floyd was approached by officers called to the scene after he passed a counterfeit bill in a convenience store, he was acting erratically, resisting arrest, foaming at the corners of his mouth, and complaining of respiratory distress before he was restrained on the ground. Furthermore, the “conscious neck restraint” technique used to subdue Floyd was in fact permitted in Minneapolis under such circumstances by the official use of force policy.

Now, on present evidence, one may reasonably contend that the cops were nevertheless negligent in failing to heed Floyd’s distressed pleas and continuing to restrain him after he lost consciousness. But there is as yet no clear evidence of racist motivations (the officers at the scene were a racially diverse quartet), nor of brutality. That an uncooperative and intoxicated suspect died in police custody does not necessarily mean he was murdered. We do not yet have a complete account from the officers of their own decisions, which will no doubt be revealed at trial. But it will be the jury’s task to examine the particular facts of what happened that evening, not to adjudicate grand media narratives about systemic racism, even though that is how this case was tried in the media.

When Rayshard Brooks was fatally shot by Atlanta PD officer Garrett Rolfe on June 12th, the media once again concluded the killing had been motivated by racism before any evidence supporting that conclusion had emerged. MSNBC, CNN, and the Daily Mail all described Brooks as “unarmed,” but the facts tell a different story. Brooks wrestled with and assaulted two officers during a routine DUI inquiry, stole a taser, and fired it at the officers as he fled. In a detailed New York Times video investigation, Brooks can be seen with his body tilted towards Officer Rolfe with the taser still pointed directly at him, when Rolfe fired. Impervious to these crucial details, demonstrators burned down the Wendy’s restaurant where the shooting took place, set fire to several nearby cars, and an 8-year-old girl called Secoriea Turner died in the subsequent rioting when the car she was in was shot at by someone at the scene of the protest. Yet, few will have heard Turner’s name since her death doesn’t indict systemic police racism.

They may not have heard the name of David Dorn either, a 77-year-old African American retired police captain fatally shot by a looter during the Floyd protests in St. Louis. In the same city, Officer Tamarris L. Bohannon (who was also black) was shot in the head and killed last Sunday in the line of duty after tracking a shooting suspect. On August 30th, the same day Bohannon died, two officers in Chicago were shot during a traffic stop. Police Superintendent David Brown said the officers spotted a gun in the vehicle and broke the windows when the suspect refused to comply with their commands. According to the police statement, “While attempting to place the individual into custody, a struggle ensued, and the offender fired multiple shots, striking both officers.” Mayor Lori Lightfoot pointed out that this incident challenges the notion that “defunding” the police department is a particularly smart idea. This tragedy followed an August 5th shooting in which another Chicago PD officer was shot and injured while responding to a domestic dispute. Statistically, an American cop is shot nearly every day in the line of duty, and officers often have to make critical, split-second decisions when their own lives—or the lives of others—are imperiled.

On August 10th, 2020, hundreds of people rioted in downtown Chicago. The mob was likely incited by a false rumor circulating on social media that police officers had just killed a 15-year-old black kid. It took the police hours to restore order, and Superintendent David Brown declared, “This was not an organized protest. Rather, this was an incident of pure criminality. This was an act of violence against our police officers and against our city.” The actual event that triggered this riot was not the shooting death of a 15-year-old, but the shooting of 20-year-old Latrell Allen, who allegedly fled from the authorities and fired at them. When two officers returned fire, they hit him five times but didn’t kill him because all five bullets missing his vital organs.

Outrage does not bring about justice; it does precisely the opposite. The reaction to the shooting of Jacob Blake was immediate and intense. A riot has engulfed Kenosha in violence, and two protesters were killed as they rushed an armed teenager from Illinois. Kenosha is a small city of around 100,000 people, and in the wake of “protests” that CNN notoriously described as “fiery but mostly peaceful,” millions of dollars’ worth of damage has been done to public property, and tens of millions in damage has been inflicted upon private property. Car Source, a dealership owned by an Indian immigrant, was attacked by a mob. Car windows were smashed and vehicles were set alight. Over $2.5 million of damage was done, and the insurance company might not cover these losses, since it may decide that the destruction was “domestic terrorism.” In a heartbreaking interview, the owner stated “I’m a minority too. I’m a brown person. I have nothing to do with this.” He added: “This is not the America I came into.” The city’s large-scale damage will have long-term ramifications. Kenosha Mayor John Antaramian said the city will request $30 million in aid from the state to help rebuild. Other cities such as Chicago, have lost an estimated $60 million to physical damage in the downtown area, contributing to the crime-plagued city’s historic $1.2 billion budget shortfall, which will undoubtedly lead to funding cuts that only exacerbate racial inequality.

In contrast to the rioters and looters on the street, Jacob Blake’s mother Julia Jackson has comported herself with great dignity and restraint in the aftermath of her son’s shooting. “I want it to be known that I have the utmost respect for our police departments, and I don’t believe that all police officers are monsters or anything like that,” Jackson told MSNBC. “There’s a few bad apples in every walk of life. And people make bad decisions, and they have a horrible job. And it’s scary, I get that.” She added, “I just wish there was more training, more something that they would choose better and learn how to diffuse a situation instead of shooting people when not necessary. In some cases, it may be necessary, but in this case, and several, several others, it was not. So I’m not trying to, just for the record, I’m not trying to demonize police. I have some officers that I am very close to and have a good relationship with them.” Jackson also condemned violence and looting without equivocation: “My family and I are very hurt and quite frankly disgusted. And as his mother please don’t burn up property and cause havoc and tear your own homes down in my son’s name.”

On September 1st, Jacob Blake’s family held a community gathering, including a clean-up of the wreckage in ravaged segments of the town. Those closest to the victims of alleged police brutality are often more averse to riots (as with George Floyd’s family and many others) and looting than social justice activists who demonstrate on the streets.

And yet we are seeing the fraying of order, reason, and due process as radicals and arsonists attempt to burn down the supposedly endemically racist structures of American society. Regions such as Portland and Seattle, and now small-town Kenosha, are suffering from the complete collapse of the rule of law as weak and cynical politicians and ideologically motivated pundits exploit anarchy for political advantage. It wasn’t long ago that Barack Obama declared he had “no sympathy” for violence and sent 1,500 National Guard troops into Missouri to quell riots in the aftermath of Ferguson. But today, partisan local officials obstinately reject federal aid and President Trump adds gasoline to the fire by lambasting Portland mayor Ted Wheeler on Twitter. On a cultural level, emphatic condemnation of riots has become heretical even in mainstream journalistic and educational circles. Under the guise of social justice activism, “Destroying property, which can be replaced, is not violence,” according to the New York Times‘s Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Nikole Hannah-Jones.

Three new incidents have emerged in recent days in Los Angeles, Rochester, and Washington, D.C. Once again, determinations are being made by commentators and activists about excessive force, racist motives, and systemic causes before the facts are in. The time has come for a serious conversation about police brutality, criminal justice reform, and how political polarization prevents progress. Until due process is enshrined in our political zeitgeist and lawlessness is tamed, the disintegration of civil society will only amplify racial inequality, embolden extremists on both sides, and exacerbate ideological tensions.


Rav Arora is an independent writer based in Vancouver, Canada. His writings on popular music, race, and criminal justice have featured in the New York Post, the Globe and Mail, Foreign Policy magazine, and City Journal. You can follow him on Twitter @Ravarora1.


  1. We simply don’t yet have enough facts to conclude whether the shooting was *definitively* justified or not.

    The author believes we need to wait to learn whether or not there was indeed a knife in the car (or a gun, a grenade, a bomb, nunchucks, a flamethrower, an RPG).

    In fact, it does not matter. A police officer must assume the person under arrest is reaching for a deadly weapon. Whether or not there is in fact a deadly weapon is utterly meaningless and irrelevant.

  2. The thing that really gets my goat is that all these idiotic activists and protesters keep pushing narratives that have been proven false. You still hear chants of ‘hands up don’t shoot’ amongst other falsehoods.

  3. Well that’s an easy answer. They’re not interested in the truth, they’re interested in fundamental change of American society. They think we’re irredeemably depraved and must be destroyed (i.e. deconstructed). They don’t use facts and logic because facts and logic are tools of oppression. No, really. James Lindsay (of the Grievance Studies hoax) explains:

    “Debate and conversation, especially when they rely upon reason, rationality, science, evidence, epistemic adequacy, and other Enlightenment-based tools of persuasion are the very thing they think produced injustice in the world in the first place. Those are not their methods and they reject them. They believe the whole conversation and debate game is intrinsically rigged against them. Debate is a no-win for them. And, yes, they really think this way.”

  4. It’s funny, but if you read up on Scientology, the faith draws a lot of parallels with woke ideologues. People who aren’t Scientologists are regarded as SPs (suppressive persons). Engaging with them on a deeper level is seen as dangerous. Also, Scientology believe in Fair Game, that is that you can use any dirty trick to punish a Scientology critic. The woke have the same tendency for religious purity. To even entertain dialogue with an SP is blasphemy, and infidels are not to be tolerated.

  5. What do these people have in common?

    1. Javar Harrell
    2. Dave Patrick Underwood
    3. Chris Beaty
    4. Dorian Murrell
    5. Italia Kelly
    6. Marquis M. Tousant
    7. Marvin Francois
    8. John Tiggs
    9. Jose Gutierrez
    10. Victor Cazares Jr.
    11. David Dorn
    12. Horace Lorenzo Anderson
    13. Tyler Gerth
    14. Antonio Mays Jr.
    15. Secoriea Turner
    16. Jessica Doty Whitaker
    17. Aaron Danielson

    1). They were all murdered by rioters and looters in the BLM protests.
    2). Some were black but their lives don’t matter.
    3). Not a peep from CNN & co. about them.

  6. “Destroying property, which can be replaced, is not violence,” according to the New York Times ‘s Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist [Nikole Hannah-Jones]

    The scariest sentence in a scary piece. Violence isn’t violence. Non-violence is violence.

    Hannah-Jones claims the right to redefine words at will and the NYT says “go right ahead”.

    The NYT must find the backbone to sack these fantasists. They stand against everything it once stood for.

  7. No, she wants to stay in her nice home buying nice things for herself while people she is far removed from get hurt and killed. Those people will die for an all important cause: her having empty things to say.

  8. There is also a University of Southern California professor who was suspended for using the Chinese word for “this” (phonetically it sounds like “nigger”). Right on cue, five black MBA candidates (MBA candidates!) cited extreme mental anguish. Dean did the usual unmitigated apology. I am of the opinion that universities are where you send your kids if you want them to become stupider.

  9. Great article. It shows how those who are committed to an ideological cause can construct a metanarrative which is at odds with objective reality and the empirical evidence on the ground. Does American policing need reform, especially on areas like training, the mental health of officers and deescalation? Of course it does- any training or other measures which reduces tragedies at the hands of those endowed with the authority of the State is to be encouraged, and paid for, because ultimately, all policing is by consent.

    But where activists go wrong is in imagining that these things don’t happen to White people. Sure, there is around a three-to-one disparity if one looks at the demographic level- but all the more reputable studies, which factor in disparate rates of offending and violent crime, show that disparities by race disappear when we take these factors into account. And the videos are available online, with examples like Tony Timpa proving that these problems with policing are no way confined to any one particular race.

    The real problems with the American Criminal Justice system occur at a far higher pay grade than the average beat cop. In a move which is becoming so familiar to our broken discourse, the availability heuristics which made the 2% of nutjob judges at either end of the political spectrum seem far more common than they actually were, pushed politicians to enact Criminal Justice reforms like the three strike rule and mandatory minimums, which rendered the one person capable of exercising impartial discretion, the Judge, impotent. At the same time, the quite frankly lunatic reform programs of a few liberal extremists, discredited reform-based approaches as a whole, which have proven to be so effective in many European countries, especially with youthful offenders.

    Meanwhile top-down Government has applied incentives at the federal level, which have distorted the practice of Law Enforcement across the board, for reasons as varied as the War on Drugs to Mothers against Drunk Driving. This process is corruptive, as are all incentives which are not carefully thought out. The systemically unfair balance of resources between prosecutors and public defenders, has meant that poor people are far more likely to be on the receiving end of rough justice when innocent, which, given the disparate rates of poverty between Blacks and Whites has only convinced the public at large that the Courts are unfairly biased against Blacks- when a lack of effective legal counsel is the real root cause.

    Similarly, the introduction of algorithm-based systems to evaluate risks of recidivism, like COMPAS (Correctional Offender Management Profiling for Alternative Sanctions), have shown Judges and Prosecutors routinely overestimated the risks of re-offending by Black defendants. However, the well-established risk factors also routinely disfavour individuals from poor, high crime communities, in public housing or who have expressed negative views towards police, all of which weighs heavily against Black defendants. What desperately needs to happen is that, scientific data from psychologists and brain scans needs to be brought into the process, so that high risk individuals who fall at the extreme end of the ASPD (antisocial personality disorder) spectrum no longer taint the Courts opinions of those who don’t manifest these aberrant behaviour profiles- effectively separating the wheat from the chaff.

    And there’s the rub, because even then we will still find disparities by race. To be sure, poverty and a general lack of economic opportunity within specific locales is a real source of criminality, especially for property crimes- but the real root cause of higher rates of violent crime lies with an absence of fathers within a community. Independent studies into different areas have shown that a high rate of fathers within a community is vital to social mobility, just as lower rates of fathers lead to an increase in juvenile violence, which often metastasizes into criminality as teenagers mature into adulthood.

    The easiest way to fix all this would be to offer free vocational training, pitched at an appropriate level, to all young males growing up in father-deprived neighbourhoods, which also almost always happen to be the 2% of districts where 50% of all violent crime happens in America. A significant increase in the numbers of reasonable well-paid young men within these communities, would massively increase the number of fathers in these communities- because all the evidence shows that whilst a young woman might sleep with an attractive young man who is popular amongst his friends, and even bear his child, she will only commit to marry or cohabit if he is a productive and responsible potential mate.

    This investment would pay itself back through the tax system far more efficiently than public funding for higher education. It would reduce crime and repair communities. It would also address an area of the economy where there was, until recently, a desperate shortage of skilled manpower. It would grow GDP and the broader economy. And it would finally dismantle any claims of historical grievance and diffuse talk of never-ending reparations, because it would ultimately bring incomes by race closer together. It would fundamentally address the real cause of differences in family wealth between Blacks and Whites- it simply isn’t possible to build intergenerational wealth as a single parent- for that that you need two incomes and two parent families.

    But most importantly to would reduce the negative reinforcement which is an implicit part of being a Police Officer. Many Police Departments have become quite good at screening candidates for potential biases before training begins, but what they can’t insure against is the risk that negative encounters on the job will tend to accumulate over time. When a young Police Officer routinely finds that young Black men are six or seven times more likely to be involved in violent crime, it will colour their judgement, especially when the phenomenon is largely absent from the 60% of Black neighbourhoods which are middle class, and highly concentrated in economically devastated communities almost completely bereft of fathers.

    When many of an Officers interactions are disproportionately negative by race, filled with unfounded accusation of racism, and often devolving into spitting, kicking and occasional violent resistance, it’s easy to see how prejudice might store up and tarnish their interactions with individuals who have done little to deserve their ire. Ultimately, the investment in more capable young men within these communities could pay dividends over the long run. It could repair much of the damage tearing at the social fabric of America and completely undermine negative stereotypes of young Black men within a decade.

    But the real reason why Republicans are well-placed to deliver a coup de grace against Democrats in this area, is because Democrats have been slow to acknowledge the real reasons behind inequalities between the races. A policy like this effectively hands the Republicans a bazooka in a knife fight. Recently, a Hill Harris poll placed Black approval of Trump at 24%, a historical high, especially given the current media narratives.

    By offering many young Black men real and substantial access to economic opportunity, especially when many have been ill-served by a failing, but well-funded, public education system, it should be enough the win over the critical mass of support within the African American community, to banish the Democratic Party to the waste bin of history. A number of more violent father-deprived White communities would benefit from the program, so this would diffuse criticisms of bribery. Recently, African Americans have been asking the Democratic Party what have you done for me lately? Donald Trump is well placed to give the right answer.

  10. The problem with Democrats is that the only blacks they are interested in is militant blacks. They don’t factor in blacks who simply want to get through life like the rest of us. Truly, Democrats are warped, since they have a truly warped idea of what a black person is supposed to be. They think they will gaze upon Kamala Harris with awe and wonder. No, they will think what many whites thought when they saw Hillary: “what a bitch.”

  11. Describing what is occurring as a rush to judgement, is being unnecessarily generous. This is about intentionally creating a false narrative.

  12. Every time a media outlet goes out of business or a “reporter” loses their job, an angel earns their wings.

  13. My view of cops changed during my EMT training. Once you’ve seen 2 cops and a paramedic struggling to hold down a 12 year old high on PCP so you can strap him to a backboard and you realized they have to deal with this stuff every day you feel a lot more respect for those willing to do such a crappy job.

  14. I am sure you have seen this clip of Sam Harris taking apart Ben Affleck’s claim which is pretty close to how I read yours about the ‘vast majority of Muslims’, etc… The problem is that the religion itself, IF you adhere to its precepts (remember, only 8th century) is problematic. Judaism and Christianity do not have that problem. Yes, many Muslims step over those, but en masse the religion has not gone through a reformation, which Christianity and Judaism have done to continually work the bugs out so that the religion and freedom in the Western society are able to co-exist. And you know Sam isn’t defending Judaism or Christianity, which removes the possibility of me sending it just because of my Christian bias.
  15. @Miss_Satire

    622 AD: Mohammed sets out from Medina to conquer the Christian world for Allah. He captures more territory to the East than Alexander the Great.

    732 AD: Charles “The Hammer” Martel drives Muslims from their high water mark of Poitiers France back into Spain.

    1453 AD: Constantinople falls to the Muslims.

    1492 AD: Islamic armies driven from Spain into N. Africa.

    1540 AD: Protestant Reformation causes sultans to realize that Christian world is no longer unified and N. Europe will not fight to protect Catholics to the South.

    1550 AD: Muslims plan long term offensive to retake Europe by land and sea, sponsored mostly by the Turks.

    1565 AD: After epic siege, Muslims navy repelled from the island of Malta.

    Don Juan of Austria, brother of the King of Spain, plans to lead large fleet to preemptively destroy threatening Muslim fleet.

    1571 AD: Muslim fleet led by Ali Pasha seeks to destroy Christian dominance of the Mediterranean all the way up to Venice.

    Another Muslim force led by Alfa Mustafa conquers Cyprus and Venetian outposts of Nicosia and Famagusta.

    At Famagusta the 15,000 defenders are led by General Bragadino. On 8/1/1571 after agreeing to surrender all surviving 350 defenders are beheaded. General Bragadino is brutalized as is his corpse.

    Don Juan secures ships mostly from Spain and Portugal. His plan is to catch the Muslim fleet before it can attack.

    Venetians outraged by the treatment of General Bragadino pledge additional ships. Also Venice is upset about the loss of their outposts at Nicosia and Famagusta. Venice is the ship building capital and gunnery of the world.

    Genoa contributes ships led by Admiral Andrea Doria. The Christian fleet consist of 250 ships, compared to the Muslim fleet of 350 ships.

    Christian fleet contains 6 new modern ships called “galleases” which were not built for ramming like other ships but rather blasts on coming ships with cannon fire.

    Oct. 7, 1571: Led by galleases Christians rout Muslims in 4 hours near their home port of Lepanto. Lepanto is located in the Gulf of Corinth off Western Greece.

    Naval battle at Lepanto is witnessed by the author, Miguel de Cervantes who was wounded.

    Over 40,000 men are killed and Ali Pasha is beheaded.

    Church bells ring throughout Europe. Pope Pius the 5th declares Oct. 7th “Feast of Mary, Queen of Victory”. Never again does a Muslim fleet pose a threat to Europe.

    Siege of Vienna Sept. 1683:

    Sultan Mehmet the 4th chooses Kara Mustafa to command all his forces and to conquer Hungary, Slovakia and South Poland. Mehmet warns Mustafa not to try to take Vienna. In July 1683 Mustafa leads his forces towards walled and heavily fortified city of Vienna.

    Viennese defense is led by General Lubomirski. The city manages to hang on long enough for 4 columns of reinforcements led by King Sobieski from Catholic Germany and Poland to arrive.

    SEPTEMBER 11, 1683:

    Led by King Sobieski reinforcements attack. Mustafa’s forces laying siege to Vienna. By Sept. 12th the rout is on and the Christian army pursues the retreating Muslims down through Hungary.

    The date September 11th was not chosen because of the emergency number 911. It is of a date of historical significance to Muslims. It is a day of victory for Christians, that Muslims want to reverse. This is the history Muslim children know and western children do not. Muslim memories run deep as does their imperative to conquer the world for Allah.

Continue the discussion in Quillette Circle

548 more replies