Black365 and Non-White Supremacism

James Edwards had a piece recently about McDonalds and their promotion of a program and web site named black365 "celebrating Black culture ...".

McDonalds pioneered multicultural advertising decades ago, particularly supporting a strong pro-Black identity. We should start a new healthy restaurant chain called MacDonalds catering to Whites. The golden arches could be replaced by a big White W. :)

I fully agree with James Edwards' point about the massive double standards employed by multinational corporations and other institutions that promote non-White identity while NEVER doing the same for Whites. About the only time corporations or advertisers explicitly mention White identity is to mock or subvert it, e.g. Whites can't dance or Whites are uptight.

Far more common is the implicit treatment of Whites through subtexts which serves three major functions. First, they constantly denigrate White identity, history, culture, attitudes, character and peoplehood, unlike non-White groups, which are respected and shown positively (the only exception being Arabs and Muslims who are sometimes demonized: guess why?). The goal is clearly to destroy any explicitly White group identity and self-esteem. Second, they illustrate "proper" thinking and behavior to define the bounds of accepted White identity. Whites not accepting their assigned safe and submissive role are shown as evil and contemptible (nazis, klansmen, haters, militia "nuts", etc). Everyone gets the message, if only subconsciously. Third, they train non-Whites, including recent immigrants, to see Whites as a hated class to be attacked and displaced in the future.

The only accepted "traditional" White identity is to be a patriotard tool of warmongering Zionists and globalists who push other people around in their own countries because the whole world really, really wants to be like America! Support "democracy"!!!

These subtexts are literally millions of subtle cues embedded throughout the totality of "our" cultural and entertainment programming. Even though no one sees all or even most of the full set of programming, the average person grows up seeing at least tens of thousands of these anti-White subtexts in thousands of different programs. They become signficant because instead of being randomly distributed in a balanced way, they are systematically biased against Whites. Just watch TV on a typical night and you'll see dozens of examples.

The anti-White bias is obvious by comparing the corresponding treatment of non-Whites and Jews (Jews are exquisitely sensitive to the slightest of slights) using the "identity interchange" test. If the commonly accepted anti-White subtexts had the identities exchanged with a non-White, the non-White advocates would be livid with rage at the racist propaganda being spread about their people! It's great for Whites though!

Ultimately they want to program Whites (and non-Whites) to behave as servants to their agendas. Our children are cut off from the brilliant accomplishments of their ancestors and the heights and nobility of a healthy White culture and society. Instead they're encouraged to be docile little consumers buying corporate junk manufactured overseas from corporate retail zones next to corporate-built suburbs mostly built with cheap illegal alien labor. These suburbs are meant to be a tacit place of safety using wealth as a barrier instead of ethnocentrism, until the next round of immigration and Black criminal subclass resettlement starts the process over again, leading to fat profits for the controllers managing the process.

Isn't modern America such a wonderful land of opportunity? Our founding fathers would be so proud!

These constant media images of Whites are a crucial pillar in creating and enforcing anti-White double standards in our "civil society". The news, entertainment and advertising propaganda machines wield massive influence over most sectors of our society including a significant fraction of our intellectual elites.

One current repulsive example of White-demeaning advertisting is this AT&T commercial where a gay-seeming White guy apparently lives in a big house in a suburban neighborhood surrounded by a carefully chosen multicultural crew consisting of a normal Asian man and three children: a Latino boy and White girl who are silent, and an Asian girl, the center and leader of the children. The Asian girl plays the role of a ghetto-speaking Black woman from a soap opera because the gay White guy has asked the neighborhood kids to help him "catch up on his soaps" because he's already apparently recording two other shows during the airtime of the soaps.

This is the ideal White man according to our cultural programmers: one who won't reproduce, will happily acquiesce in his people's displacement (and isn't even aware he's part of a people other than "American"), is happily multiculturalist, lives a hedonistic lifestyle, is practically a women (and won't be hunting, fishing, owning guns or have any survival skills) and enthusiastically submits to brainwashing by our elite masters.

Why do we give our money to these anti-White corporations?

Isn't it great that Whites have such a great sense of humor that they're OK with being constantly ridiculed unlike all the other groups that demand respect?

No it's not. It's because Whites are cowed into submission by an evil, anti-White, uncivil society that despises them but that controls most levers of power and uses them aggressively to oppress Whites, attacks their identity, legally steals their wealth and transfers it to non-White colonizers, ungrateful Blacks or various corrupt forces, and then tars any White dissenters and resisters as "racists", "bigots", "fascists", "neo-nazis" and "white supremacists".

Ultimately, it's perfectly reasonable that Jews, Blacks and others feel racial solidarity and behave ethnocentrically and even that powerful organizations pander to them.

What's NOT OK is that Whites engaging in logically equivalent beliefs and activism are falsely smeared as Nazis, Klansmen or White supremacists by non-White supremacists, especially by powerful and wealthy Jewish and crypto-Jewish organizations and their toadies throughout our "civil society", including the government, corporations, advertising, Hollywood, the MSM and the educational industrial complex. And for almost everyone in the US the propaganda machine has reinforced THOUSANDS of times that those labels represent the worst possible evil.

Whites must stop tolerating these double standards against us and only us. We need to make it crystal clear that anything but full acceptance of White advocacy and ethnocentrism while all others are both tolerated and encouraged is NON-WHITE SUPREMACISM. I googled this term a while back and found a few scattered references to it so this is an existing but rare concept. It deserves to become just as mainstream as "white supremacism".

We must start calling things by their true names instead of participating in the swarm of lies and obfuscations that enable the anti-White Matrix to pass itself off as a colorblind society that is supposedly just.

Colorblind is a con.

America is anti-White and non-white supremacist.

Try these on for size: Black supremacism, Jewish supremacism, Hispanic Supremacism, Asian supremacism. When non-White advocates believe they have more rights than Whites they are SUPREMACISTS. They need to start hearing this accurate description of their rhetoric and behavior. Oppressed Whites need to learn this tool of understanding and self defense.

While the anti-White activists bring up false anti-White doctrines like "White Privilege" the reality of our society, when normalizing for ability and behavior, is "non-White Privilege", especially Black and Jewish Privilege. Whenever anyone tries to fling the pathetic accusation of White privilege, Whites should immediately point to the success of groups like Blacks, Asians and Jews which typically have better outcomes than Whites per capita, especially Jews, whose outcomes are staggeringly higher than Whites in terms of wealth, elite education, media ownership and influence, academic position, campaign finance, elite government positions, etc. Hmmm, how come stories about Jewish influence NEVER EVER appear in the mainstream media while LOTS of anti-White or White-critical stories DO? It must be all that White Privilege typically taught by Jewish or non-White professors and activists. It was enlightening to see the Whiteness Studies conference that had a Shabbat dinner on Friday night in their official schedule as well as a roster containing a majority of Jewish and non-White participants.

When a large enough group of Whites drop out of the anti-White Matrix and create alternative institutions that empower and protect Whites, their identity, history, culture and peoplehood, the existing institutions will be forced to either adapt or reveal their raw hatred and oppression of Whites. This large group must be led by a vanguard. Some early pioneers have been at it for decades. Now more of us are joining their efforts. We need to keep widening the circle and to tolerate different kinds of pro-Whites, including the shaky ones in the middle starting with pro-White training wheels.

Part of the problem is that Whites have been so deracinated (cut off from their roots) and indoctrinated in White-self-hatred that our culture and identity is a shambles for the vast majority of our brethren. We probably can't fully recover what we once had but we can draw from the best of our heritage and forge a new spirit and culture for our people. We also might not be able to create a monolithic, unitary culture, but if we have several White cultures that mostly share a core of common values across different belief systems, that will be infinitely preferable to our current atomization and deracination. The largest split among pro-Whites is probably between Christians and non-Christians. We should not worry about all Whites having to fit some specific ideology or set of values. Support pro-White diversity!

Some Whites will always be implacable enemies. Fine. Let them pursue their suicidal path in their own spaces and we can pursue our destiny separately. Good riddance. Divorce is the solution.

In time we can create a White Renaissance.

It will take much time and effort to counteract the massive 24x7 anti-White control program that's been operating unimpeded for many decades.

Essentially every piece of our "civil society" must have alternative institutions by and for Whites promoting our interests. I've already discussed alternative institutions in detail regarding higher education in a non-racial manner and alternative media promoting White advocacy. I also explored White separation.

We also need institutions and organizations that subvert the existing ones while not being rabidly or even overtly pro-White. We need to recruit Whites from the middle and take them a step at a time to full-blown White advocacy, ethnocentrism and nationalism. A major attack vector are those areas of our "civil society" that promote lies, anti-White bias or non-White supremacism. Trust in these institutions is already low. When average people see professional quality stories with fully documented details available that expose the lies, distortions and propaganda of the current system, cynicism and distrust will strengthen dramatically and faith and trust will be transferred to the new alternative sources. Anti-White crime is an massive opportunity that needs to be exploited to destroy trust in the current lying system. It wouldn't be an issue if they weren't such vicious lying anti-White bigots so they deserve no sympathy.

A major barrier to building pro-White institutions is the current dominance of anti-White racism by "civil society". Budding pro-Whites are assaulted by powerful and wealthy groups like the ADL and $PLC and many other groups coordinated with allies in Hollywood, the MSM, academia, government, corporations and other commanding heights in our society. It will be a long-term struggle to gain our rights and justice. We already have some organizations working for our interests, so let's support them however we can, even if only to spread awareness through personal connections.

There are other areas I'd like to discuss, including my long-promised alternative cultural post, which is one of the most important alternatives needed because it is the most powerful force brainwashing most Whites. The sheer repetition of anti-White and pro-multicultural ideology over the full lifetime of most citizens, including the numerous subtle subtexts, is difficult for most people to escape. But imagine a full offering of cultural programming that is pro-White with many of the subtexts and meta-messages inverted from their anti-White bigotry. I believe when many Whites are exposed to hundreds and thousands of hours of pro-White cultural programming, White advocacy will become a mass movement including both our average and cognitive elite populations.

It can happen in stages too, where a small nucleus of Whites create and distribute this pro-White content and then gain an modest audience that then grows as the truth, hope and justice of our side inspire more and more Whites to escape their brainwashing.

We must build our institutions and their broad acceptance piece-by-piece from the bottom up. We can use our talent and spirit to create something authentic even if we have limited resources compared to our oppressors. Some of these pieces are already in place, like some of the organizations I link to. We must start within our own families, friends and communities. We must contest the universally accepted anti-White bigotry and those who promote it.

The future is uncertain. We must work to prepare ourselves for any contingency that comes our way.

We'll know we're made progress when large business interests start fearing the anger the White community and pander to us the way they pander to non-Whites.

nativeamerican365, black365, jew365, raza365, asian365 are all fully supported by "our" "civil society".

white365 must be too.

An Outstanding Documentary: A Conversation About Race

I've just seen the new documentary A Conversation About Race by first-time film maker Craig Bodeker. Wow! What a fantastic exploration of the anti-White double standards surrounding "racism" in modern America. Please purchase a personal copy, show it to family and friends and consider giving it as a gift. The movie costs $20, including shipping and handling. It looks like you can watch it free online as well.

I believe this documentary will help awaken some of the brainwashed Whites to the unfairness of our "civil society" and make them receptive to Whites openly pursuing their interests as much all other groups.

This is exactly the sort highly intelligent, fair-minded and thoughtful film maker we need to articulate the White side of story that is never shown by the mainstream media or Hollywood (except to condemn White advocates). I have great hopes for Mr. Bodeker's future works, some of which will hopefully explore issues from a pro-White perspective, including various topics never discussed honestly by the MSM and Hollywood.

Hopefully many other White advocates will follow Mr. Bodeker's lead and create additional works spanning the full range of news and cultural products to counter the pervasive anti-White propaganda of our ruling elites.

Whites have tremendous talents and resources which are mostly being misdirected against our long-term interests. By breaking out of the "anti-White matrix" and creating more "red pills", there will be a positive feedback effect recruiting more and more Whites to awaken, some of whom will become activists and contributers.

Just two years ago I myself was a fairly conventional, colorblind, neoconned, pro-Jewish conservative.

Not anymore, thanks to the red pills on the internet.

Thank you Mr. Bodeker for manufacturing a giant batch of red pills!

Hopefully the rest of us can help spread them around and produce more in our own modest ways.

Updated 2009-07-29: fixed a grammar error and added a bit more

Prophets of Doom and the Need for Organization

Have you ever watched prophets of doom like Peter Schiff, Gerald Celente or Alex Jones? My perception is that Peter Schiff is the least extreme while Alex Jones is a full-blown conspiracy theorist (not that there's anything wrong with that if he mostly turns out to be right!). Gerald Celente is intermediate being around half or two-thirds of a full-blown conspiracy theorist.

I can't help noticing that each of the three appear to gain fame and make their livelihoods through their pessimistic rhetoric. Peter Schiff's company, Euro-Pacific Capital, sells services based on his theories, he publishes best-selling books and he apparently consults for the rich and powerful (e.g in the UAE). Gerald Celente sells a newsletter and makes many paid appearances while Alex Jones hosts a radio show and produces a lot of DVDs. Both Peter Schiff and Gerald Celente have appeared in many MSM shows in spite of their somewhat anti-Establishment messages. Despite these potential conflicts of interests, many of their claims seem plausible and deserve a fair hearing, especially given their recent predictions of our economic troubles with lucid explanations when the other pundits belittled them while predicting smooth sailing as far as the eye could see.

The doomsters share some commonalities in their predictions, particularly in believing a major depression is coming. Peter Schiff seems to believe it's more a matter of incompetence, while Gerald Celente believes they are inflating a final bubble, the "bailout bubble" to succeed the previously popped dot.com and housing bubbles, which will ultimately burst with no further bailouts possible, and that powerful interests will use these turbulent times to bring in more authoritarian control, likely launching a war to distract from total economic collapse. Alex Jones seems to have an intricate conspiracy theory about this being a long-standing plan to create a totalitarian world government with most people becoming highly controlled slaves and around 80% of the population being killed using bioweapons. In spite of the seeming outlandishness of some of Alex Jones' beliefs, some of what he says seems quite reasonable, particularly giving the creeping totalitarianism and police state structures. I get the sense that during some of Alex's most agitated rants he is being a bit of a showman, kind of like Glenn Beck periodically comes across as phony, except that Glenn Beck seems a lot more phony than Alex Jones. I've heard maybe around 15 hours of Alex Jones and perhaps 10 hours of Glenn Beck, so I'm no great expert on these guys.

I haven't carefully researched much of what these guys say (e.g the alleged misdeeds of the Federal Reserve), but much of their message seems plausible. In particular I strongly suspect that the US economy has been managed badly, e.g. by encouraging speculation over long-term investment, allowing looting by the executive class, losing advanced manufacturing and not properly protecting our markets in balance with how our trading "partners" protect their markets, and that the phony economy will soon come crashing down. Some excellent writers discussing this are Pat Buchanan and the Irish economics writer, Eamonn Fingleton. I strongly recommend Mr. Fingleton's book In the Jaws of the Dragon which discusses how the East Asian Economic and Political System is not compatible with Western style capitalism, at least how it's practiced in the US currently.

Whether there is a New World Order (NWO) conspiracy to impose totalitarian control on the US and ultimately the entire world is such a disturbing question that deserves a full and fair investigation even if it is likely false.

Unfortunately there are many issues needing a similar thorough analysis by fair and objective observers, while most of us can only devote a little time on the side to explore these issues. One goal is for us to eventually create think tanks with full-time scholars and support staff to investigate issues and think creatively about the problems facing us. This is something for White advocates to aim for in the future although we have the beginnings of this. Another approach that can be started sooner and with minimal resources is harnessing the power of thousands of part-time activists over the internet by intelligently combining their efforts to enable these sorts of detailed investigations. Many of these investigations can be done with other groups because many of the topics aren't directly related to White advocacy.

An example of how important work can be done by non-scholarly activists working part time would be an audit of references in academic works. One controversial example is Kevin MacDonald's books which probably have over 500 references per book. Imagine if a team of volunteers tracked down each and every source that Dr. MacDonald cited and did a fair-use scan of the full context of each citation. These could then be posted on a web site that had special software designed to support this sort of research and criticism. This software could be open-source and could integrate with existing software, like open-source portals or content management systems. Then users could judge whether Dr. MacDonald's books accurately quote and interpret each source. Statistics could be compiled about his accuracy. The critical point is that because everything is open, each assertion can be audited and each viewer can examine the full evidence to see who is reliable or not. For example, if it turned out that Dr. MacDonald was deceptive with 20+% of his references that would reflect badly upon his honesty, while if there were just minor nitpicks and no major duplicitous distortions, then his scholarly honesty would pass the first hurdle.

Note that this sort of detailed checking of hundreds of different references is a massive effort for one person, but would be easily doable by a few hundred people donating a few hours per person or by dozens of people giving 20-30 hours per person.

With his treatment of sources analyzed, scrutiny could be given to the rest of his text and the validity of his other facts and logic. Links to other sources could be developed in determining the truth. The ultimate result would be a detailed exploration of the truth or falsehood of the book and the underlying issues it discusses. Eventually the same sort of analysis can be applied to other sources with related things linked together for easy navigation to further human knowledge and understanding.

Many other authors, journalists, politicians, academics and organizations have works, predictions and promises deserving a careful accounting. Consider all the free trade propaganda that has turned out to be absolutely false. We don't currently have a systematic way to rate pundits and talking heads who've been wrong, very wrong and extremely wrong, yet are still invited back to deceive the public with special-interest propaganda. We desperately need this sort of accountability system to keep our "civil society" honest. Imagine how useful it would be for TV viewers to automatically see a side window pop up when a pundit was talking that had a summary of their historical accuracy, their affiliations, etc. If the viewer desired, then could drill down into the details with arbitrary depth. Ultimately this should encourage greater accuracy and less overt propaganda in the MSM. Here I'm assuming that the next generation or two of TVs will essentially be computer/TV hybrids that are hooked up to the internet, or that cheap devices with this capability will plug into the TVs.

By intelligently organizing our efforts we can create virtual think tanks that let us each make a small contribution that synergizes with hundreds or thousands of others to produce a much more powerful result than floundering around in isolation with our efforts having near zero impact. Our scholars could get virtual support staffs to aid their research efforts while channeling the energy of activists that would likely otherwise be wasted. This sort of organization can be applied to many kinds of activities beyond fact and logic checking.

This system could be applied to study a variety of other problems and issues. For example various facts, values and arguments could be explored. Evidence could be supplied or pointed to. The goal is a robust exploration of topics that tries to coherently and comprehensively explore issues from all perspectives. Dissenting viewpoints can be integrated into the exploration, in fact, ideally, the system would allow many different factions to concurrently articulate their strongest arguments and counterarguments all using the same system, i.e. everybody from the far left to the far right with all viewpoints in between, including off-the-wall ones. Hopefully by letting each side present its arguments and marshall its facts using the same system, areas of agreement or dissent can be clarified and rational dialog can be encouraged. The resulting explorations would also be excellent learning resources for readers wanting to explore different sides of complicated issues.

There would need to be features to fight those that try to subvert the purpose of open dialog, e.g. by creating lots of clutter and disinformation. I believe this can be done while not suppressing free speech. One approach would be that such trolls would eventually be rated by other people that you trust as trolls, so their contributions could be hidden by default. This could be overridden on a case-by-case basis when trusted voters believe the particular contribution adds value. Even though the trolls' contributions would normally be hidden, they would still be accessible so people could check whether or not they are actual trolls or if their viewpoint is being suppressed. Different factions may have different views of who adds value and one feature would let users explore the structure from different perspectives, e.g. what does the exploration look like from the perspective of a revolutionary far-leftist versus a neoconservative versus a White advocate, among dozens or even hundreds of different views.

We should fully reject the popular tactic of demonizing speakers, usually using ad hominem attacks, to avoid confronting their arguments. The neocons are notorious for this extreme intellectual dishonesty. Everyone's arguments should be considered in good faith and any flaws pointed out using facts and logic or by highlighting differences in values. In many ways obsession over the left-right divide or partisan party differences is con game designed to intellectually disarm us by limiting our thinking and to have us cheer for "our team", not noticing that both teams are tools of the elites. Instead of mindlessly rejecting anything leftists say, we should thoughtfully consider their points. In some cases they might be correct and we should adapt our viewpoint. We should be reading Chomsky, Nader and others, even though we may disagree with some of their values and beliefs.

By creating this enhanced "public institutional memory", those who use dishonest rhetoric will eventually damage their own reputations, while those operating honestly and in good faith will gain trust.

I believe we need much more free speech and open investigation while our "civil society" and elites are pushing for the opposite. Just look at the recent flood of articles and op-eds calling for stringent "hate speech" laws to weaken what's left of our Constitutional rights and the coordinated Jewish effort to get Pat Buchanan fired from his television job. I suspect one major cause of conspiracy theory and paranoia is the suppression of free and unhindered discussion. Ultimately our elites are undermining our "civil society" but perhaps this is intentional.

It's become clear that our "civil society", including academia, think tanks and the MSM, is not trustworthy in many ways and our government has likely succumbed to corruption through lobbying, cultural Marxist infiltration and other influences. Therefore we need to create alterative watchdogs to provide an independent audit of our existing institutions. Some of these alternatives may already exist or do part of the job, but there is a need for much more, particularly those that follow the approach I described above using sophisticated tools to create open research and criticism with full auditing of the facts, logic and values.

When we encounter lies or slander we can harness a community to produce detailed rebuttals with full proof if they don't already exist. Once detailed analyses of different questions exist, they can be referenced while making arguments, and if new information and perspectives arise, they can be integrated into the exploration.

I'm curious what other folks think of the doomsters and their messages as well as the rest of the post. I'd be interested in your comments or email.

PS.

Apologies for the delay in coming out with my alternative culture post, which is my next big article. Hopefully it will be ready within one or at most two weeks. I do have a list of those future posts I've mentioned in previous articles and hope to write one or two per month.

Anti-White Bias: Ignoring Voter Intimidation

Updated 2009-05-31 (below original post).

Here's a typical example of the anti-White bias of our "civil society" as well as the increasingly brazen corruption of the Obama administration.

From the Washington Times: (emphasis mine)

Justice Department political appointees overruled career lawyers and ended a civil complaint accusing three members of the New Black Panther Party for Self-Defense of wielding a nightstick and intimidating voters at a Philadelphia polling place last Election Day, according to documents and interviews.

The incident - which gained national attention when it was captured on videotape and distributed on YouTube - had prompted the government to sue the men, saying they violated the 1965 Voting Rights Act by scaring would-be voters with the weapon, racial slurs and military-style uniforms.

Career lawyers pursued the case for months, including obtaining an affidavit from a prominent 1960s civil rights activist who witnessed the confrontation and described it as "the most blatant form of voter intimidation" that he had seen, even during the voting rights crisis in Mississippi a half-century ago.

The lawyers also had ascertained that one of the three men had gained access to the polling place by securing a credential as a Democratic poll watcher, according to interviews and documents reviewed by The Washington Times.

The career Justice lawyers were on the verge of securing sanctions against the men earlier this month when their superiors ordered them to reverse course, according to interviews and documents. The court had already entered a default judgment against the men on April 20.

...

To support its evidence, the government had secured an affidavit from Bartle Bull, a longtime civil rights activist and former aide to Sen. Robert F. Kennedy's 1968 presidential campaign. Mr. Bull said in a sworn statement dated April 7 that he was serving in November as a credentialed poll watcher in Philadelphia when he saw the three uniformed Panthers confront and intimidate voters with a nightstick.

Inexplicably, the government did not enter the affidavit in the court case, according to the files.

"In my opinion, the men created an intimidating presence at the entrance to a poll," he declared. "In all my experience in politics, in civil rights litigation and in my efforts in the 1960s to secure the right to vote in Mississippi ... I have never encountered or heard of another instance in the United States where armed and uniformed men blocked the entrance to a polling location."

Mr. Bull said the "clear purpose" of what the Panthers were doing was to "intimidate voters with whom they did not agree." He also said he overheard one of the men tell a white poll watcher: "You are about to be ruled by the black man, cracker."

He called their conduct an "outrageous affront to American democracy and the rights of voters to participate in an election without fear." He said it was a "racially motivated effort to limit both poll watchers aiding voters, as well as voters with whom the men did not agree."

...

The Washington Times has a good editorial discussing this case:
Protecting Black Panthers: The Obama administration ignores voter intimidation

The simple identity interchange test of double standards clearly proves this is yet another example of anti-White bias so beloved by our "civil society". If White men had been outside a polling station dressed like the defendents, intimidating Black voters and using language like "You are about to be ruled by the white man, nigger", then our "civil society", including the media, academia and the government, especially the Department of Justice, would've gone ballistic and almost certainly those White men would've been prosecuted to a felony conviction, including hate crimes, and would've served jail time. If the prosecution had failed, they would've found some "civil rights" law trick to overturn the explicit Fifth Amendment right of protection against double jeopardy, until they got their White men.

But naturally, if Blacks are the aggressors and Whites the victims, then the rules change. If Sonia Sotomayor is appointed to the Supreme Court, no doubt she'll happily enshrine just these sort of double standards as precedents in "CON-stitutional Law".

Yeah, we get it. F*** Whitey and f*** the color-blind society!

In looking through Google News, the only mainstream media hits are for the Washington Times, which broke the story, and Fox News, the neoconservative-dominated network. The rest of the hits are for some conservative web sites. The MSM has no problem quickly covering emerging stories that adhere to their preferred, politically correct narrative, but obviously they're reluctant to give this story oxygen, especially when the Obama administration is already busy engaging in obvious corruption, like screwing over the Chrysler bondholders by ignoring established bankruptcy law, only closing Chrylser dealers that were Republican donors, pressuring California to bow to SEIU demands or lose federal stimulus money, the bailouts and their unaccountability, porkulus money for favored clients like ACORN, the education ripoff complex, etc, etc, etc.

It will be interesting to see if the MSM gets around to covering this story over the next few days or if they try to squelch it like most other politically incorrect stories.

From bartleby.com:

A unidentified lady at the Constitutional Convention in 1787:
“Well, Doctor, what have we got—a Republic or a Monarchy?”

Benjamin Franklin:
“A Republic, if you can keep it.”

We lost it.

Zimbabwe and South Africa, here we come!

Yes We Can!

UPDATE: 2009-05-31

Two days after my original post only ONE additional MSM article has appeared in Google News: this CNN story:

Let's see how the "professionals" at CNN cover the story:

May 28, 2009
Justice Department drops charges in voter intimidation case
Posted: 07:00 PM ET

From CNN Senior Producer Kevin Bohn

WASHINGTON (CNN) – The Justice Department is dropping charges against the New Black Panther Party for Self-Defense and two of its members who were allegedly involved in voter intimidation on Election Day at a Philadelphia, Pennsylvania polling station.

A Justice spokesman said the department decided to take this action after winning an injunction earlier this month against a third member, Samir Shabazz, that prevents him from ever brandishing a weapon outside a polling place again as he was charged with doing last November.

Shabazz was one of the three persons, along with the New Black Panther Party for Self-Defense, charged with voter intimidation last January in a lawsuit filed under the Voting Rights Act. Shabazz will not face any jail time or a fine.

“Claims were dismissed against the other defendants based on a careful assessment of the facts and the law,” DOJ spokesman Alejandro Miyar said in a statement. “The Department is committed to the vigorous prosecution of those who intimidate, threaten or coerce anyone exercising his or her sacred right to vote.”

On Election Day, two men in uniforms stood outside the polling station with one of them holding a police-style baton weapon and saying he was providing security there. Justice has alleged that person was Shabazz.

In January, Justice said in a criminal complaint that the chairman of the New Black Panther Party for Self-Defense confirmed its members were stationed at that location as part of a nationwide effort to deploy people at polling stations.

The Justice Department says The New Black Panther Party for Self-Defense is distinct from the well-known Black Panther Party of the 1960's.

UPDATE: Malik Shabaaz, chairman of the New Black Panther Party for Self-Defense, told CNN Friday that Samir Shabaaz is no longer a member of the organization, and that his organization does not support voter intimidation.

"We want to thank President Obama and his administration for dropping charges against us that were vindictively brought by the Bush administration," Malik Shabaaz told CNN. "We don't condone any type of illegal activity at polling stations."

Shabaaz said the members in Pennsylvania were not acting under the direction of the national party.

(Updated at 4:30 p.m. on Friday, May 29 with New Black Panther Party response)

Notice that this story completely ignored the affidavit given by Bartle Bull and it completely ignores the explicity anti-White racial facet of the incident. Even if CNN didn't know this aspect of the story when it was first published on the 28th, which is extremely doubtful, it certainly knew about it after the Washington Times published their detailed article on the 29th well before this story was updated at 4:30pm on the 29th, which was used to further undermine the real issue by quoting a New Black Panther Party leader acting as if the entire incident was some sort of illegitimate persecution of their poor, innocent selves.

Notice how this article frames the story as if Justice Department had won some great victory in "winning an injunction ... that prevents him from ever [sic, according to Washington Times story] brandishing a weapon outside a polling place again ...".

Then the DOJ spokesmen is given the floor so he can TELL us that "The Department is committed to the vigorous prosecution of those who intimidate, threaten or coerce anyone exercising his or her sacred right to vote.". Hahahahaha!!! More bulls*** constructed reality! That is exactly what they are NOT doing by treating this serious attack against our supposed civil society so lightly BECAUSE Black activists were culpable. The critical point: would they have behaved the same if the identities were interchanged between Black and White? Answer: No way!!!

This is just business as usual for our corrupt, worthless and elite-and-corporate-interest-controlled MSM.

Hopefully "change we can believe in" is coming soon.