FMJRA 2.0: [This Space Intentionally Left Blank]

Morgan Hood is a worthless backstabbing whore who, perhaps not coincidentally, attends the University of Tennessee. While it would probably be unfair, even by the trash-talking standards of SEC football rivalry, for me to say that all Tennessee girls are worthless backstabbing whores, I think every Alabama fan will agree that Ms. Hood is typical of the caliber of coeds at Knoxville. It’s like the old joke:

Q. Why didn’t the University of Tennessee have a Christmas play?
A. They couldn’t find three wise men and virgin.

If you’re not from the South, you perhaps don’t understand how college football is imbued with moral values down home. When your team wins, you feel personally vindicated by this proof of your collective superiority, whereas when you lose . ,. . Well, go ask Tennessee fans how that feels.

When was the last time Tennessee beat a ranked team? I don’t know, but this year the Vols lost their home opener to Georgia State, a Sun Belt conference team, which is pretty humiliating for any SEC school. In the past three seasons, Tennessee has lost three times to Georgia, by a cumulative total of 122-26. Florida has won 14 of its last 15 games against Tennessee and as for Alabama, well, this year’s freshmen at UT were only 4 years old the last time the Crimson Tide lost to the Volunteers.

Yet the shameful state of Tennessee’s football program had not reached its absolute nadir until this week, thanks to a worthless whore:

Hundreds of thousands of social media users have watched University of Tennessee quarterback Brian Maurer’s ex-girlfriend celebrate dumping him on TikTok.
Morgan Hood, a sophomore at the school, recently took to the social media platform to share a humorous but scathing video about the end of the couple’s relationship, in which she indicates that she’s much better off without him.
The TikTok quickly went viral — but has led to the young Nashville native being brutally trolled on Twitter. . . .;

Wait a minute — you post an online video humiliating your ex-boyfriend, and then you’re surprised at “being brutally trolled”? But Morgan Hood is phenomenally stupid, even by Tennessee standards:

Morgan participated in a hot TikTok trend in which newly single women lip-sync to a portion of the song ‘All You Wanna Do’ from the West End musical Six.
In Morgan’s video, a montage of photos of her with 18-year-old Brian appear on the screen before she pops up in the foreground.
There’s a snap of them at a football game, a FaceTime call, and pictures of Brian in uniform — including one falling on his face during a game against Mississippi State on October 12.
‘Yeah, that didn’t work out,’ she lip-syncs. ‘So I decided to have a break from boys. And you’ll never guess who I met.’
While other TikTok users often uses the point to introduce new romances, Morgan takes the opportunity to list on screen all of the ways her life is better now that she’s single.
These include ‘better grades,’ ‘hydrated [because] less crying,’ ‘no more girls in my dms telling me he’s cheating, ‘my real friends,’ ‘sleep,’ and ‘less people asking how he is ???’
She then answers the question of ‘who she met’: Me, Myself, and I.
Brian, who Morgan dated for at least a year, responded with a dismissive reply: ‘Girls do anything for they 15 seconds of fame.’
But other commenters have been even harsher in condemning Morgan. . . .
Morgan has since deleted the video on TikTok and responded with a message on Instagram.
‘I did not intend for any of this to happen,’ she said. . . .
‘I simply made a TikTok that hundreds of other girls have made. I didn’t make it as a crazy ex seeking revenge, and anyone that has ever seen a TikTok should know this.
‘All of it has been blown extremely out of proportion. . . .
‘Trust me when I tell you that having people troll you and say mean things is not fun. It is hard to realize there is another human being on the receiving end of your words.’

Oh, the worthless whore who deliberately humiliated her ex-boyfriend — who just happens to be the quarterback of her university’s football team — wants to remind everyone she’s a “human being.”

This is why no decent football player wants to go to Tennessee. All the girls there are worthless backstabbing whores like Morgan Hood. And as for those “girls in my dms telling me he’s cheating” — who are these girls, Morgan? Please post their names to your social media, so that everybody on the campus in Knoxville knows who they are. Social media makes it easy to spread this kind of gossip, and the people who are targeted by such character assassins usually have no idea who is doing it to them. Whether or not Brian Maurer was cheating, to publicize this kind of gossip is as bad or worse than doing a victory dance at the expense of your ex-boyfriend. What you have done by your beastly behavior, Ms. Hood, is to prove that you are not a human being. You’re a wicked monster, and no decent person would ever associate with you.

The only joy I take in this is the knowledge that (a) this embarrassment has so humiliated and demoralized Brian Maurer that his football career is effectively over, and (b) seeing what trashy whores attend the University of Tennessee will likely encourage more of the state’s top athletes to attend the University of Alabama instead. Roll Tide!

Category: Football, Tennessee

In The Mailbox: 12.13.19

Posted on | December 13, 2019 | No Comments

— compiled by Wombat-socho

OVER THE TRANSOM
Locomotive Breath: High School Blocks Student From Forming Club Deemed “Too Christian”
EBL: Happy Birthday, Frank Sinatra!
Twitchy: #Impeached Is Trending And Resistance Buzzkill Looms Because Of What Didn’t Happen Today
Louder With Crowder: UK Independent Writes “How To Leave UK” Guide For Sore Socialist Losers
According To Hoyt: Imagine There’s No Nations
Monster Hunter Nation: MHI Role Playing Game Is Out & Book Signing In Utah Saturday
Vox Popoli: Boris Takes Two Scalps, also, The Ride Never Ends

RIPPED FROM THE HEADLINES
Adam Piggott: Friday Hawt Chicks & Links – The You Know You Want To Edition
American Conservative: Red China’s Dangerous Chokehold On Our Medicines
American Greatness: Teen Hospitalized After Being Savagely Attacked On FL School Bus For Wearing Trump Hat, also, Boris Johnson’s Conservatives Win In A Landslide, Labour & Liberal Democrats Crushed
American Thinker: It’s Not A Coup. It’s Civil War.
Animal Magnetism: Rule 5 Soft Targets Friday
Babalu Blog: Cubans Aren’t The Only Ones In Latin America Buried In A Socialist Dungheap
BattleSwarm: LinkSwarm For December 13
Cafe Hayek: Two Can Play This Game – Externalities Edition
CDR Salamander: How Did Our Navy Reward Service In Afghanistan? also, Fullbore Friday
Da Tech Guy: Massachusetts’ Draconian Transportation Funding Proposals, also, British Election Thoughts Under The Fedora
Don Surber: Why Did Putin Want To Make America Great Again?
First Street Journal: House Judiciary Committee Approves Two Articles Of Impeachment
The Geller Report: Jersey City Terrorists Inspired By Nation Of Islam’s Farrakhan, also, Corbyn’s Loss Is A Gain For Jews, Israel, & Humanity
Hogewash: Team Kimberlin Post Of The Day, also, Pulsar Geography
Hollywood In Toto: Bombshell Shreds Ailes, Trump, & Storytelling 101
JustOneMinute: We’re Doing Everything!
Legal Insurrection: UK Conservatives Crush Labour In Massive Landslide, also, Oakland CA Considers Moving Homeless Onto Cruise Ship
The PanAm Post: Why Macri Can’t Complain About Betrayal, also, Argentina’s New President Lifts Sanctions Against Maduro
Power Line: No One Actually Believes The Global Warming Hype, also, The Fake News Media Strikes Again
Shark Tank: Florida Loses Latest Water War With Georgia
Shot In The Dark: Is She Perchance Samoan?
STUMP: Mortality With Meep – Student Deaths At A Large University
The Political Hat: Merry Christmas & Happy New Year, also, Twelve Posts Of Christmas 2019
This Ain’t Hell: Valor Friday, also, Navy SEAL Running For Congress Kicks Off Campaign In Wrong District
Victory Girls: Fusion GPS Blames Russia For UK Election Results
Volokh Conspiracy: Short Circuit – A Roundup Of Recent Federal Court Decisions
Weasel Zippers: Dem Rep Admits Judiciary Committee Delayed Vote Until Morning For Better TV Ratings, also, Dem Rep Blames Voters For Impeachment Opposition – “Don’t Want To Listen To Rationale Arguments”
Megan McArdle: It’s Time For Remainers To Admit They Lost
Mark Steyn: Boffo Boris, also, Hulu Uprising

Amazon Warehouse Deals

Category: Linkagery

‘A High Value Woman’

Posted on | December 13, 2019 | No Comments

Niki Marinis is a Southern California woman who calls herself a “comedian.” She recently got dumped by her boyfriend, who calls himself a “musician.” Neither of them is really successful in these endeavors, but in Southern California, aspirational self-definition is everything. If your dream is to make it in show business, what you do to pay the rent is not who you are. Your day job may be pulling orders in a warehouse, but if you do a weekend stand-up gig once or twice a month, you call yourself a “comedian,” in the same way that I was “rock star” when I was bouncing from one garage band to another back in the day. Eventually, of course, you either make it or you don’t, and accepting failure is a lot easier if you can get yourself a nice day job, a home, marriage, children, etc. — the American Dream of bourgeois suburban respectability.

That’s basically my story. Some kids may grow up dreaming of a career as a journalist, but I wasn’t one of those kids. No, my career plan involved gold records, world tours, marrying Brooke Shields and retiring by age 30 to live off my lucrative royalties. Didn’t happen, but I’m OK with that, because I somehow lucked into a day job writing for a newspaper and did pretty good for myself. But I digress . . .

What brought Niki Marinis to my attention was not her aspirational career as a “comedian” (because like 99.99% of Americans, I never heard of her before) but rather something she wrote in her capacity as a “relationship” columnist at a blog called P.S. I Love You.

You may be wondering, who would take relationship advice from an unsuccessful comedian who can’t even make a relationship work with an unsuccessful musician? And the answer to that question is, I don’t know, but there are a lot of people on the Internet who pretend to be experts about “relationships” despite their own sad history of failure, so why shouldn’t Niki Marinis join the online herd of advice peddlers?

“Why You’re Not Attracted to Nice Guys” was the headline on the column that caught my attention, and actually it’s not all bad. Marinis offers some insight on the basic failures of the “Nice Guy” type:

A Nice Guy won’t come out and tell you exactly what he wants. He’s afraid of rejection so he frames things in a way where he won’t feel the sting, should it come. . . .
Nice Guys don’t clarify their intent. They tap dance around the subject hoping to get lucky. They’re flirting with you unless you’re not OK with that and then they totally weren’t.
They’re desperate to avoid accountability for their choices. They have no confidence that you’ll say yes so they feel they have a better shot if they trick you, or drop bread crumbs.
They want to be vague so if you don’t like what they’re offering then they never meant it that way so it’s not their fault that you read them wrong.

This kind of passive-aggressive approach is rooted in a lack of confidence that manifests itself as risk avoidance. One of the great truths about love is, “Nothing ventured, nothing gained.” A guy has got to be willing to take a chance — make your move, even if you know the odds are you’ll be rejected — or he will be doomed to solitude. So a certain reckless attitude is necessary, but such an attitude is very hard for the typical middle-class white guy to develop, because he has been taught all his life to avoid risk.

Here’s my advice to guys: Stop playing games. Don’t imagine that you’re deceiving her about your intent. When a guy starts chatting up a girl, she knows what he’s after, so why pretend otherwise?

Social custom requires men and women engaged in the courtship ritual to dissimulate to a certain extent in regard to the desired outcome. Ultimately the question is, to borrow a Shakespearean phrase, whether the object of your pursuit is willing to make “the beast with two backs” (Othello, Act I, Scene 1). From the moment a guy introduces himself to a girl he considers a potential partner, this is the implied subtext of their conversation, no matter how much they politely pretend otherwise. And the important thing for guys to understand is that a woman makes her decision about your suitability within a few seconds of your first meeting. So if she’s not immediately sending you “green light” signals, move on. Don’t imagine you’re going to persuade her to like you by continuing the conversation, if her initial reaction isn’t encouraging.

In order to get any clear signal from her, however, a guy has to muster the courage to let his intentions be known, to stop pretending that he would be satisfied with mere friendship. This is what gives rise to the “Beta orbiter” syndrome, where the pretty girl finds herself surrounded by friendly “Nice Guys” who just hang around hoping that friendship will somehow magically be converted into romance. Good luck with that, pal. I’m not saying it never happens, but it’s time-consuming and generally counter-productive, since what your “friendship” does is give her the validation of male attention at no cost, as simply the fee you must pay for being allowed in her presence. The “Nice Guy” is like one of those hopeful beaus who flocked around Scarlett O’Hara at the Twelve Oaks barbecue. If a guy wants to be the romantic hero, however, he must study and emulate (to the best of his feeble ability) Rhett Butler.

Scarlett: “Sir, you … you should have made your presence known.”
Rhett: “In the middle of that beautiful love scene? That wouldn’t have been very tactful, would it? But don’t worry. Your secret is safe with me.”
Scarlett: “Sir, you are no gentleman.”
Rhett: “And you, miss, are no lady. Don’t think that I hold that against you. Ladies have never held any charm for me.”
Scarlett: “First you take a low, common advantage of me, then you insult me!”
Rhett: “I meant it as a compliment. And I hope to see more of you when you’re free of the spell of the elegant Mr. Wilkes. He doesn’t strike me as half good enough for a girl of your — what was it, your passion for living?”
Scarlett: “How dare you! You aren’t fit to wipe his boots!”
Rhett: “And you were going to hate him for the rest of your life.”

What is so brilliant about Rhett’s repartee with Scarlett in the famous library scene is that he obviously knows she will be offended by his insinuating manner, but this doesn’t bother him. He reacts to Scarlett’s indignation with laughter, and why? Because he doesn’t care. Rhett is a man who is not suffering from a shortage of female companionship. He doesn’t hide the fact that he is attracted to Scarlett, but he knows he’s not going to win her heart by playing the game by the customary rules.

Rhett is a shrewd calculator of the odds, as any gambler must be, but he is also decisive, willing to shove “all in” if his hunch tells him he’s got the winning hand in the game. But I digress . . .

Niki Marinis accurately identifies some basic problems of the “Nice Guy” approach, but seems to lack self-awareness about her own problems. Consider, for example, this telling remark:

I saw a game show clip where the question asked was something like, “100 single men were polled and asked how many sexual partners should a woman have before she marries?”
The top answer was 5. Oh, sweet Jesus. Sadly, in some fantasy world most nice guys would agree with this answer.

Really? What Ms. Marinis is suggesting here is that she has already had many more than five sexual partners — she’s in double digits, no doubt — but doesn’t think this reflects negatively on her. Yet the game-show question was related to marriage, and what Ms. Marinis doesn’t want to admit is that premarital promiscuity (by men or women) increases the likelihood that any eventual marriage will end in divorce. A young person who develops a habit of going from one partner to another with some regularity will find that this behavioral pattern is not easily broken. The woman who has had a dozen affairs before marriage is likely to become bored with the routine of monogamous domesticity, and such boredom — resulting from the frustration of her appetite for new sexual adventures — will predictably manifest itself in harmful ways.

This problem does not seem to have occurred to Ms. Marinis, who may not be familiar with the relevant social-science data and who probably has bought into the mythology of “sex-positive” feminism, which tells young women that it is “empowering” to screw around. The question of whether sexual empowerment leads to happiness is never asked, because feminism is a totalitarian ideology that considers power the only important value. Totalitarians don’t care about happiness. Was Stalin “happy”? Was Pol Pot “happy”? If liquidating your enemies is your idea of “happiness,” then being a totalitarian is the way to go, but feminists seldom consider the downside of their ideology of “empowerment.”

Feminists regard men as their enemies, and thus Niki Marinis views criticism of her promiscuity as evidence of male inferiority:

Questions nice guys ask that should send your radar on high alert:

When was the last time you had sex?
How many men have you slept with?
Have you ever had sex with someone outside your race?
How sexually experienced are you?

Get ready! You’re about to be judged. It’s a no win question.
I’ve had guys ask me all these questions on a first date. That immediately tells me two things: they’re only interested in sex and they’re incredibly insecure about their own experience and abilities.
Maybe it’s his Nice Guy syndrome that’s caused him to have fewer sex partners than you and he feels lame. When you tell them the truth and they think that number is high, they can’t get past it.
Nice Guys expect you to uphold their expectations. They feel safer knowing you have less to compare them to.

You see? Leave aside the social ineptitude exhibited by “Nice Guys” in asking such questions on a first date. Instead, focus on how Ms. Marinis turns this into an occasion to (a) insult men as “incredibly insecure” for even being interested in her prior relationships, and (b) declare that her sexual history is off-limits to any judgment whatsoever. What she apparently can’t see is how her feminist thinking leads to a double standard: Men are to be judged very harshly by women — he must be “insecure,” and probably “feels lame” about his relative lack of sexual experience — but women are never to be judged at all.

In what Rollo Tomassi calls a “feminine-primary social order,” women are never confronted about the moral contradictions of their behaviors because (a) all women are expected to show solidarity to the sisterhood — never expressing doubt that women are inherently entitled to have whatever their fickle hearts might desire — and (b) any man who criticizes a woman’s behavior is condemned as a misogynist. Feminism’s hegemonic influence in our culture produces a sort of echo chamber within which skeptical voices are never heard. Inside this echo chamber, criticism of sexual “empowerment” is impermissible as heresy. A feminist never doubts the value of “empowerment” in the same way no one in the Heaven’s Gate cult ever doubted that they would soon be aboard that spaceship arriving with the Hale–Bopp Comet. A cult mentality prioritizes belief in the “cause” over any factual evidence that can be gained from observation or experience, so that no matter how often her own relationships with men end in misery and failure, the feminist never questions the basic premises of her ideological faith. Men are always to blame, she is always innocent of wrongdoing, and most of all, her failures are never to be interpreted in a way that might reflect negatively on her.

Keep in mind that it is not my purpose to defend “Nice Guys.” Life has a way of sorting people into two large categories — winners and losers — and if the “Nice Guy” ends up as a loser, far be it from me to dispute the verdict. He has been “weighed in the balance and found wanting,” and who is to blame for his failure? Not me, because if he had asked my advice, he might have stood a chance to win, but instead he followed a path of his own choosing, and that’s not my fault. Selah.

What leads the tragic hero to his doom, as any student of Aristotle knows, is hubris — the pride that proverbially goeth before a fall — and his arrogance causes the foolish protagonist to ignore the counsel of wisdom. Are we to suppose that no one has ever advised the “Nice Guy” what’s wrong with his attitude? But if so, isn’t this because the “Nice Guy” is so foolishly confident in himself that he never bothers asking for advice?

The criticism Niki Marinis makes against the “Nice Guy” would be more helpful if she were willing to question her own judgment, and to ask whether her approach to relationships is fundamentally flawed. However, notice the hubristic language she repeats in her column:

High value women are well aware of the low value behaviors of Nice Guys. . . ..
If he judges you on your past or your sexual history you shouldn’t feel bad, you should feel turned off. A high value woman won’t feel the need to justify herself by answering these questions [i.e., about her past sexual experiences]. . . .
A good man gives without expectations and a high value woman shows her appreciation without having to be asked, because she feels safe to do so. . . .
You aren’t crazy to not be attracted to these so called Nice Guys. It’s normal. It’s your gut screaming at you. High value women learn to listen to and trust their intuition. . . .
A high value woman recognizes the difference between a Nice Guy and a Good Man and won’t feel the need to justify her lack of attraction.

Niki Marinis might believe that her “intuition” as a “high value woman” is somehow vindicated by the fact that her boyfriend dumped her, but the rest of us are permitted to be skeptical of her claims to expertise. Dare I suggest that she is not as “high value” as she imagines?

See, this gets back to her objection to guys asking about her sexual history. Because of my skill as an interviewer, I sometimes find that people will tell me all sorts of things about themselves without me even bothering to ask directly. There are a few tricks to this, but you see that what really offends Ms. Marinis is the idea that a man would judge her based on her (presumably) above-average number of sexual partners.

Yet doesn’t a person’s sexual past tell us something about their character? This is true whether you are male or female. Like, maybe Denise Richards believed she could break Charlie Sheen of his bad habits, but experience has shown that belief to have been sadly mistaken. Even if you are not a moralistic prude, wouldn’t you agree that a promiscuous past shows an inability (or unwillingness) to sustain a long-term relationship? Probably most folks would be understanding of a young woman who, for example, had broken up with her high-school sweetheart — things just didn’t work out, for whatever reason — and then “played the field” for a few months before getting into her next serious relationship. Suppose that, during her time between these first two serious relationships, she hooked up with three or four different guys, so that now her cumulative total of sexual partners is five or six. That’s rather a commonplace scenario in 21st-century America, but what happens if that second serious relationship also ends in failure? If she repeats this cycle of “playing the field,” she’ll soon be in double-digit territory and doesn’t such a sexual history suggest that she might not be a good prospect as “wife material”?

If Niki Marinis were truly a “high value woman,” wouldn’t one of her previous boyfriends have done whatever it took to keep her? That’s just one reason why a person’s cumulative number of previous sexual partners is relevant in evaluating them as a romantic prospect. Anyone might have bad luck once or twice, but when they’ve acquired a substantial history of failed relationships (usually interspersed with a series of casual hook-ups), there’s probably more than just bad luck to it.

Human nature involves predictable patterns of behavior, and one of these patterns is the way we deploy mental defense mechanisms to rationalize our own flaws, failures and disappointments. People don’t want to admit responsibility for the problems in their own lives, and so we construct explanations that exculpate us. This is natural and, to some extent, necessary to protect our egos from negative feedback, but when someone steadfastly refuses to accept objective evidence of their own wrongdoing, the reliance on defensive rationalization can develop into a pattern that is self-destructive and dangerous — a sociopathic attitude.

How many failed relationships do you have to go through before you finally admit that the common denominator in these failures is you?

That’s the kind of admission that Niki Marinis seems unwilling to make, and her repeated assertions that she is a “high value woman” might be interpreted differently by a competent psychotherapist.

Get help, ma’am. Crazy People Are Dangerous, you know.

Category: Sex Trouble

Yes, Operation Crossfire Hurricane Was Wrong and Corrupt From the Start

Posted on | December 13, 2019 | No Comments

The pretext the FBI used to spied on the Trump campaign was fraudulent — that’s the bottom line of the report Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz delivered this week. Among other things, the IG’s report vindicated Republican Rep. Devin Nunes, who in February 2018 issued a memo detailing the many abuses involved in the FBI’s investigation of “Russian collusion.” After the Mueller report and now the IG report, we can say with certainty that (a) “collusion” was a paranoid fantasy manufactured by Trump’s enemies, and (b) the FBI’s reliance on Fusion GPS and the so-called “Steele dossier” was, at the very least, a mistake. At worst, it was a deliberate deceit, and I’m not in a mood to give the FBI the benefit of the doubt. Ed Morrissey at Hot Air finds the Washington Post‘s Aaron Blake attempting to spin the IG’s findings as favorably as possible to the FBI, and failing:

The point, however, is that the FBI misrepresented [information about Steele’s leaking to the media] to the court in order to protect its surveillance warrant on Page. These are a series of corrupt acts that go to the heart of whether Operation Crossfire Hurricane was a corrupt investigation. That is precisely the issue about which Nunes warned in his memo, and the Horowitz report corroborates each of the factual claims Nunes made in that warning.
It certainly looks as though Nunes can claim a very large amount of vindication. The media, on the other hand, should be asking itself why it found Schiff so credible in his defense of secret surveillance of a US citizen by counterintelligence operations on the basis of a discredited oppo research file. Is it that they just preferred Schiff’s anti-Trump narrative above all other considerations?

Yes, that’s exactly what it was — the anti-Trump media has always been willing to believe the worst about Trump, and thus were culpable in helping to manufacture the “Russian collusion” myth, which they then sought to defend against all critics. Aaron Blake still doesn’t want to admit this, because it proves the Washington Post is “fake news.”

Category: Corruption, Donald Trump, Media Bias, Russia

In The Mailbox: 12.12.19

Posted on | December 12, 2019 | No Comments

— compiled by Wombat-socho

OVER THE TRANSOM
357 Magnum: SFPD Cooks The Books On 911 Response Time
EBL: Horowitz Testimony
Twitchy: CNN’s Chris Cillizza Explains How Joe Biden Got His Groove Back & People Have Questions
Louder With Crowder: Dem Rep Rashida Tlaib Blames White Supremacy For Jersey City Killings

RIPPED FROM THE HEADLINES
Adam Piggott: For The Sake Of Your Man Points, Get Off Social Media
American Conservative: Why Did Saudis Kill American Sailors While Three Others Filmed It?
American Greatness: Wray Doesn’t Seem To Care That The FBI Deceived The Court, also, Hell Yes There Was Bias
American Thinker: The Truth About The Horowitz Report
Animal Magnetism: Animal’s Daily Golden Rice News
Babalu Blog: Cuba Slides Further Back Into The Stone Age As Reliance On Horses, Oxen Increases
BattleSwarm: Blue Alert For A Cop Killer
Cafe Hayek: Marvelous Properties
Camp of the Saints: On The So-Called Silent Moderates
CDR Salamander: REFORGER Is Back
Da Tech Guy: Entertainment Under The Fedora, also, Quick Baseball Thoughts
Don Surber: Chris Wallace & The Thin-Skinned Press
First Street Journal: The Federal Reserve Finally Catches Up To The First Street Journal
The Geller Report: Twenty Muslims Arrested In Denmark – Jihadi Terror Plot Foiled, also, President’s Support Among Orthodox Jews Soars To 89%
Hogewash: Team Kimberlin Post Of The Day, also, UK Election Results
Hollywood In Toto: Jumanji – The Next Level Shrewdly Stays The Course
JustOneMinute: We Interrupt Comey’s Victory Lap
Legal Insurrection: Rashida Tlaib Deletes Tweet Blaming White Supremacy For Jersey City Murders, also, WaPo Punctures Elizabeth Warren Narrative
The PanAm Post: How Cuba Is Meddling With The OAS, also, Juan Guaido’s Political Suicide
Power Line: If This Is Exoneration…, also, Only A Pawn In Their Game
Shark Tank: Rep. Brian Mast Rips VA For “Limping From Scandal To Scandal”
Shot In The Dark: Mode$t Propo$al$
The Political Hat: Academic Excellence – Twerking, Racist Sandwiches, & Eating Bugs
This Ain’t Hell: Thursdays Are For Cooking, also, It’s Racist To Mention Illegal Alien Problems In Occasional Cortex’s District
Victory Girls: Harvey Weinstein’s $25 Million Settlement Deal Will Leave Accusers Empty-Handed
Volokh Conspiracy: Assessing Some Criticisms Of The Administration’s EO On Antisemitism
Weasel Zippers: Pelosi Admits The Democrats Have Been Planning Impeachment For Years, also, Louie Gohmert Drops The Whistleblower’s Name

Amazon Warehouse Deals

Category: Linkagery

‘A Familiar If Odd Accent to City Life’

Posted on | December 12, 2019 | No Comments

Daniel Greenfield at FrontPage Magazine:

The New York Times called them “sidewalk ministers” who practice “tough love.” The paper quoted Heidi Beirich of the Southern Poverty Law Center who described them as victims of racism and claimed that they were non-violent.
The Washington Post, in its own puff piece on the Black Hebrew Israelites, also falsely described them as non-violent, and concluded that, “Israelite street preaching in parts of D.C., Philadelphia and New York is commonplace, a familiar if odd accent to city life.”
The odd accent to city life in Jersey City came amid a hail of bullets as two members of the racist black nationalist hate group opened fire in the JC Supermarket. Despite initial claims by the media and the authorities that the Jewish market had not been targeted, David Anderson and Francine Graham ignored passerby on Martin Luther King Dr, to get to the store and kill as many Jewish people as they could.
When the shooting had ended, Moshe Hersh Deutsch, a yeshiva student who was known for helping distribute food packages to the needy, Mrs Leah Mindel Ferencz, a mother of 3 who helped her husband run the grocery store, and Miguel Jason Rodriguez, the father of an 11-year-old daughter and a parishioner at an Assemblies of God church, were all dead.
Anderson, who left behind anti-Semitic and anti-police writings, had also killed Detective Joseph Seals, a father of 5, and wounded Officer Ray Sanchez and Officer Ferenella Fernandez.
The black nationalist terrorist had hated cops and Jews. He managed to kill both.

Greenfield makes a point that my brother Kirby made yesterday. Kirby showed me the Google Map of the area, and anyone can see that, after they murdered Det. Seals at Bayview Cemetery, the killers had an easy and obvious escape route — Chapel Avenue to Garfield Avenue to Bayview Avenue and then onto Interstate 78, where they could have fled in either direction. That they did not seek to escape the area is important, and what did the suspects do instead? They drove their stolen U-Haul vehicle directly to JC Kosher Supermarket. We have video that shows the killers ignored every other establishment in that neighborhood, and charged directly into this Jewish-owned business, guns blazing.

There is no doubt that the killers deliberately targeted Jews, as this kosher market was described as part of “a small Orthodox Jewish community of nearly 100 families, most of whom moved from the Williamsburg section of Brooklyn over the past few years”:

According to locals, the JC supermarket is the only kosher one of its kind in the area. It serves basic groceries, sandwiches and salads. Next door is Khal Adas Greenville, a building with a synagogue on a lower level and a yeshiva for children on the upper level.
“It’s a beautiful tight-knit community, very kind people, and it’s devastating that something like this happened,” said Rabbi Shmully Levitin, a Chabad rabbi who lives in this city across the Hudson River from New York.

Dismayed by the high cost of housing in Brooklyn, these Orthodox Jewish families seeking cheaper homes moved across the river to Jersey City, and their presence in this predominantly black community must have been apparent to the black racist David Anderson. Here’s an interesting report from (of all places) The New Yorker:

On Tuesday, each explanation for the shooting offered its own horrors, but, even after the scene was brought under control and the number of dead and injured known, some explanations were apparently more horrifying than others. In an Uber, on the way to the site of the shooting, my driver said, “They’re saying it’s not terrorism. Thank God.”
Except, as it turned out, there appeared to be a more insidious motive behind Tuesday’s violence. A few years ago, sixty-two Hasidic families moved into Greenville, refugees of high Brooklyn rents. . . .
Recently, old tensions had begun to simmer in the neighborhood. Some residents have complained about the insularity and new influence of the Hasidic community over the local real-estate market. The Hasidic community, meanwhile, has chafed at local politicians who told them their new shul was violating zoning laws. The shul sits next to the site of the shooting.

These Jews were not invisible; they did not blend into the community. This neighborhood, known as Greenville (ZIP code 07305), is about 45% black, 25% Hispanic and 17% Asian, so that the total white population is less than 15%, and these are ultra-Orthodox Jews, the men with beards, etc. They were highly visible targets, and this kosher market was next door to their synagogue. This was an act of terrorism, and we have extensive evidence of the terrorists’ motive:

David Anderson, the 47-year-old man accused in the Jersey City mass shooting attack, likely used the identity Dawada Maqabath and other alter egos on social media and online, NBC News is reporting. Heavy.com has reviewed multiple posts made by that identity on the Internet; Maqabath and another identity attributed to Anderson made numerous extremely anti-police comments on various obscure social media and online video pages, glorified Baton Rouge police shooter Gavin Long, unleashed anti-Semitic and anti-Christian vitriol, and called non-black Jewish people “imposters.” . . .
Heavy has unearthed many of those postings, including the Instagram page mentioned by NBC, and you can see screenshots later in this article. The most recent post reads, “Revelations 1:13-15. Jesus comes from the tribe of JUDAH!!!!!!!!!!!! Yall n*gguz better wake the f*ck up before its too late. America has NOTHING for us but DEATH …”
He wrote on another page, “Revelation 2:9 ‘Blacks ARE Jews, the ‘jewish’ are imposters. Our ethnic identity crisis is fueled by the synagogue of satan (amalek) and wicked Israelites who love darkness as a cover for their wickedness. This lying profane blasphemous bastard. Ata lo yahudi, lo, ata mumzer. Ata goyim.”

The bizarre beliefs expressed by Anderson are directly derived from those propagated by the Black Hebrew Israelites cult, who claim that Africans are the authentic “chosen people” and that modern Jews have somehow stolen the identity of ancient Israelites. Whenever you encounter such a belief, you know that it is rooted in profound ignorance, but it is difficult to discern how dangerous this ignorance is in any individual case. There are actually lots of black people on the Internet ranting against cops, against white people, against Jews, so how can you tell which of these hateful people is a serious threat of violence? If you want to understand the size of this problem, consider the local black people in this Jersey City neighborhood caught on video blaming the Jews for this attack.

SHOCKING VIDEO: As Jewish bodies were still laying in cold blood after being murdered by terrorists in Jersey City, a rep of @AmericansAA captured spontaneous antisemitic tirades blaming Jews for their own murder & ppl cheering it on!

Antisemitism, a bigger problem than appears. pic.twitter.com/WHmLtxANAE

— Dov Hikind (@HikindDov) December 11, 2019

This is astonishing, and we ought to be deeply concerned about it. However, Democrats and the media have their own agenda:

When gunfire erupted Tuesday afternoon in Jersey City, cable news networks provided live coverage as police engaged in a standoff with the armed suspects. Liberals on Twitter began emitting their predictable rhetoric in such circumstances, blaming the National Rifle Association and smearing Republicans as somehow culpable for the shooting. At that time, little or nothing was known about the perpetrators, and there was no reason to believe the suspects were NRA members or Trump supporters, but the Left’s explanation for armed violence is a prefabricated narrative in which their political enemies are always the villains. Whenever the facts don’t fit this narrative, Democrats and the media (but I repeat myself) immediately change the subject, and thus we can predict the Jersey City shootout will be quickly forgotten by CNN and other left-wing outlets.
It turns out that Tuesday’s deadly attack was perpetrated by two black people, David Anderson, 47, and Francine Graham, 51, who were reportedly connected to the so-called “Black Hebrew Israelites” cult. . . .

Read the rest of my latest column at The American Spectator.