Category Archives: Law

UPDATE II: Treatment of Trayvon Travesty Masks Brutal Realities Of Crime

Crime, Criminal Injustice, Justice, Law, Left-Liberalism And Progressivisim, Media, Race, Racism

Is balance so much to ask for in the Trayvon Martin case? By balance I do not mean “Fair and Balanced” a la Fox News, or Andy Cooper’s “Keeping them Honest” deal.

What I mean is this: The deceased youth, Martin, appears to have been targeted unfairly. The facts of the shooting should be reviewed impartially. But for every Trayvon victimized by an Hispanic (if this is indeed the case), thousands of whites are brutalized by a sinecured black, criminal class, members of whom never get called out for what are crimes rooted in racial hatred.

Courtesy of “Suicide of a Superpower” come the FBI’s crime figures for 2007: “Blacks committed 433,934 violent crimes against whites, eight times as many as the 55,685 that whites committed against blacks. Interracial rape is almost exclusively black-on-white, with 14,000 assaults on white women by African American males in 2007. Not one case of white sexual assault on a black female was found in the FBI study.” (Page 243.)

Not so long ago, the slaughtering of twenty-one-year-old Channon Christian and twenty-three-year-old Hugh Christopher Newsom in Knoxville, Tennessee, in 2007, was dismissed as a racially neutral, garden-variety murder and rape.

Read my description of the crime in Into the Cannibal’s Pot, and explain to me how white America can thus forsake its children by accepting the racial innocence of their defilers:

Five blacks—four men and a woman—anally raped Hugh, then shot him to death, wrapped his body in bedding, soaked it in gasoline and set it alight. He was the lucky one. Channon, his fair and fragile-looking friend, was repeatedly gang raped by the four men—vaginally, anally and orally. Before she died, her murderers poured a household cleaner down her throat, in an effort to cleanse away DNA. She was left to die, either from the bleeding caused “by the tearing,” or from asphyxiation. Knoxville officials would not say. She was then stuffed in a garbage can like trash. White trash. (pp. 35-36)

There are quite a few like it every year. Here’s one. Here is another. And still another. Want more? You got it. The name of the black rapist and killer of an 85-year-old lady: Tyrone Dale David. Oh, but this wasn’t racial subjugation, only sexual attraction, right? Yeah, right.

Are you sending your kids to school with this deranged, raging, sick-with-racism maniac? A “black Coed Threatens to Murder ‘10,000 Whites’ and White Prof; Attacks White Student and Security.” You probably are.

An even treatment of the Trayvon travesty would recognize and dignify the reality of crime in this country, and the daily black-on-white brutality, much of it rooted in a deep racial hatred, animus nurtured by the media and the political and academic cognoscenti.

UPDATE I: In reply to a Facebook reader: The racial extravaganza—show of brute force from race hustlers—is most certainly an issue here. Thus, to encourage an examination of the facts of the case, sans hysteria, one has to discount the circus. To do that, one has to discuss the reality of crime; who, on aggregate, brutalizes who in this country. To do that, you have to dispense with the idea that blacks are habitually victimized. They are not. Then you go on to deal with the offender in this case as an atypical offender.

UPDATE II (March 24): A doff of the hat to our reader for providing information that has emerged since Zimmerman’s public vilification began. It confirms that all information has to be gathered and processed before public pronunciations are made:

Witness: Martin attacked Zimmerman: MyFoxTAMPABAY.com

“The guy on the bottom who had a red sweater on was yelling to me: ‘help, help…and I told him to stop and I was calling 911,” he said.
Trayvon Martin was in a hoodie; Zimmerman was in red.
The witness only wanted to be identified as “John,” and didn’t not want to be shown on camera.
His statements to police were instrumental, because police backed up Zimmerman’s claims, saying those screams on the 911 call are those of Zimmerman.
“When I got upstairs and looked down, the guy who was on top beating up the other guy, was the one laying in the grass, and I believe he was dead at that point,” John said.
Zimmerman says the shooting was self defense. According to information released on the Sanford city website, Zimmerman said he was going back to his SUV when he was attacked by the teen.
Sanford police say Zimmerman was bloody in his face and head, and the back of his shirt was wet and had grass stains, indicating a struggle took place before the shooting.

[Via My Fox Tampa Bay]

Is the Progressive West Perverse, Or What?

Crime, Criminal Injustice, Democracy, Law, The West

Citing Tom Fleming, the post “In A Perverse Way, Afghan Justice Is Less Perverse” raised the perverse topic of restorative justice (which is, for the most, no justice at all) that has come to dominate Western criminal justice systems. Citing Imanuel Kant, Fleming wrote:

Judicial punishment can never be used solely as a means to promote some other good for the criminal himself or for society, but instead must in all cases be imposed on a person solely on the ground that he has committed a crime….woe to him who rummages around in the winding paths of a theory of happiness looking for some advantage to be gained by releasing the criminal from punishment or by reducing the amount of it….

Not a day goes by when examples of this crookedness don’t present themselves. While French SWAT teams were taking days to bring to an end a stake-out at a Toulouse apartment building in southern France—they were waiting on the killer of three French paratroopers, a rabbi and three children to “surrender” or kill more innocent bystanders—a cabinet minister told RT that the purpose of democracy was to capture criminals alive, not kill them.

Given the ever-expanding remit of democracy, the French official is probably correct. All I know is that the purpose of a just government is to protect the lives and property of non-aggressors.

Next, on the grounds that “capital punishment is wrong in principle and should be abolished,” and that a worldly, wise authority should enforce this universal understanding—the perverse EU is threatening Belarus’ Lukashenka regime “with sanctions … listing 21 judges and top police officers who face travel bans and asset freezes in the EU.”

“Lukashenka had last week refused to pardon the two men, Dzmitry Kanavalau and Uladzislau Kavalyou, both aged 26, who were convicted last year for a number of offences, including a deadly attack on the Minsk metro,” in which 15 people were killed and over 200 injured.

It’s one thing to question the quality of justice and due process in Belarus, and advocate for judicial review of proceedings in the trial. But it is quite another to have demanded that the two men be pardoned (as Human Rights Watch has done)—they have since been executed for the massacre in the metro station of the Belarusian capital—no less, and the death penalty repealed, which is what these arrogant internationalists are demanding.

In a Perverse Way, Afghan Justice Is Less Perverse

Christianity, Crime, Justice, Law, Middle East, Military, Morality, Natural Law

“As a Christian,” reasons Thomas Fleming, in his highly recommended Mail-Online blog, “I can say plainly that Afghans have a truer sense of justice than the catechisms of most Christian churches today. As post-Christian savages without a sense of justice, we were quite wrong to conquer this primitive people.”

“The Afghans do not pretend to see beyond the end of their nose or outside the limits of their settlement. Their simple and wholesome ethic is: You kill my people, I kill you. They are demanding nothing less than the transfer of the killer to Afghan jurisdiction. After a speedy trial and conviction, he will be turned over to the relatives of the victims to kill in whatever way they see fit.”

“Americans may pretend to understand this demand as a temporary outburst of grief and rage, but, when they do not relent, in a few weeks we can expect to hear condemnations of the primitive Afghan understanding of justice. We shall be reminded of the Talibans’ mass executions in sports stadiums. ‘They don’t want justice,’ we shall cry, ‘only vengeance,’ and no one will spend half a minute explaining what the difference is.”

“Here in the enlightened West,

we know that the purpose of a criminal justice system is two-fold: to rehabilitate the criminal and protect the public. It was not always so. The ancients believed that a criminal act–murder, assault, robbery, rape–put the universe out of joint. The purpose of punishment was to put it right again. Killers are killed, robbers robbed, beaters beaten.
It was not always so simple as “an eye for an eye,” and Roman and Christian law made allowances for motives, circumstances, and appropriateness of punishment, but they never forgot the primary purpose of punishment was retribution or, to use a simpler word, vengeance.
Leftist Christians will howl in protest, citing, “Vengeance is mine, saith the Lord,” little understanding that the same Lord, according to St. Paul, delegates the power to punish evil to the rulers of the world. Not in vain, Paul declared in an authoritative chapter of Romans, does the ruler hold the sword, nor is it a terror to the good but only to the wicked. It follows that a ruler who casts away the sword on a humanitarian whim is no longer a legitimate ruler. The Church always begged for mercy in specific cases, but never disputed the right and duty of kings and parliaments to execute criminals.
Even Imanuel Kant, who got most things wrong, saw through the lies of all the liberal theories of punishment:
“Judicial punishment can never be used solely as a means to promote some other good for the criminal himself or for society, but instead must in all cases be imposed on a person solely on the ground that he has committed a crime….woe to him who rummages around in the winding paths of a theory of happiness looking for some advantage to be gained by releasing the criminal from punishment or by reducing the amount of it….

MORE.

The Incredible Dr. Kerwick, The Cannibal & ‘Intellectual Conservative’

Classical Liberalism, Ilana Mercer, Intelligence, Law, Political Philosophy, Race, Reason, South-Africa

After a while, when interviewers and reviewers would request an interview or ask me about “Into the Cannibal’s Pot: Lessons for America,” I’d reply with little enthusiasm:

“What in particular about The Cannibal would you like to cover?”

The replies would invariably be these: “Oh, how relevant it is to the US.” “Diversity, multiculturalism, affirmative action, immigration, quality of life before and after “freedom”; this or the other population index.”

“Since you must have read my book,” I’d retort—initially, in hope—“how about discussing the often frayed thread of natural vs. political rights that runs throughout? Let’s look at the origins of Apartheid? Did you know these were firmly rooted in existential, largely non-racial, considerations? I really like the section about the ‘Colonialism Canard’ in the context of Chapter 5, the ‘Root-Causes Racket.’ Also a favorite of mine is the examination of case studies in current South African jurisprudence as an example of the “indigenization” of what was once a Western system of law. Oh, and my absolute best: the moral questions floated in the sections, “Intra-Racial Reparation” and “Recompense or Reconquista.”

Needless to say, the focus of the reviewer or interviewer was always so foreign to how I understood my book—that I lost interest in speaking about it, or concluded that my points had not been picked up due in some measure to my failures.

Enter Jack Kerwick, Ph.D. (Who never even requested a review copy of The Cannibal.) The fact that Kerwick levitates in level of abstraction and understanding above most might not be a good thing for his career as a popular writer, but I’m enjoying it.

Dr. Kerwick’s “Reflections on Ilana Mercer’s ‘Into the Cannibal’s Pot: Lessons for America from Post-Apartheid South Africa'” appeared in Intellectual Conservative. Once again, Kerwick exposes the tortured tension vis-a-vis natural rights that I experienced and, apparently, Burke did too. As does he commend the absence of biological reductionism, a textual strength that drew derision from racialist quarters (I reject reductionism, in most spheres.)

The neglect with which this book has been treated is as sore as it is tragic. Cannibal is a woefully underappreciated book. A not inconsiderable number of otherwise astute reviewers seemed to have missed its main significance. This work is not primarily about “diversity,” “democracy,” “egalitarianism,” or “collectivism.” And it is certainly not about any conflicts within the Jewish community (Mercer is herself a Jew who remarks upon the role that South African Jews, including her father, played as critics of apartheid, as well as the role that Israel assumed as a stalwart ally of the Old South Africa). Cannibal isn’t even a book about inter-racial conflict.

….Neither, however, does Mercer countenance any reductionist biological accounts of black-white differences … Such an approach is problematic for more than one reason, but especially because it would, ultimately, amount to but one more “root-cause.” …

…Mercer’s thought is distended between universal natural rights and particular cultural traditions, it is true. Yet as is the case with so many works of genius, this tension is as much one of Cannibal’s strengths as it is a weakness, for from it there springs an energy that is notable for its sense of urgency.

… Like Burke before her, Mercer, it is clear, is on a mission. Burke was consumed with the conflagration of the French Revolution that he believed threatened to tear European civilization asunder. Far from obscuring his ethical vision, I believe that much of the passion that informed it stemmed from a conflict in Burke’s consciousness between a recognition of both the universal demands of morality and the partiality that we owe to “the little platoons”—our local attachments—from which we derive our individual identities. This, though, is precisely the same war that rages within Mercer, and as it aided Burke in his contest with the evil of the French radicals, so too does it aid Mercer in her contest with the wickedness of the African National Congress and its supporters.

The complete review, “Reflections on Ilana Mercer’s ‘Into the Cannibal’s Pot: Lessons for America from Post-Apartheid South Africa,'” is on Rachel Alexander’s Intellectual Conservative.