Category Archives: Race

UPDATED (1/14/022): Whites Needing Critical Care Sent To The Back Of The Emergency Room

COVID-19, Free Markets, Healthcare, Race, Racism, Republicans, Socialism, The State

Tucker Carlson is the only man in mainstream conservative media to be standing “athwart history, yelling ‘Stop,’ at a time when no one is inclined to do so, or to have much patience with those who so urge it.” (The rest on Fox News should be screened out as so much white noise.)

And Mr. Carlson has cobbled together convincing anecdotes to support his assertion that race will increasingly determine which patient gets critical Covid treatment. In particular, in an existing “equity” based point-system, a patient gets no points for being … white.

Pockets of free-market medicine once enjoyed might have remedied this. But these are clearly drying up due to a tight collusion between the constituent elements of the Pharma State, working to centralize the dispensing of Covid therapeutics, so as to wield scarcity as a political weapon in bringing about compliance.

As to Carlson’s question, “Why are Americans putting up with this?”: That’s more than a bit cynical, sir.

The answer: Most Americans are in denial about the systemically anti-white nature of their society. Too many are in a twisted a state of torpor, too stupid to do anything but turn their wrath on the unvaccinated—sicced like dogs on their neighbors, rather than on the Pharma State.

Above all, “When you aren’t a celebrity host, sir, your power is limited—and your advocates, the GOP, are busy advocating for war in East Europe, aid to Afghanistan, lower taxes, blah, blah.” Get it?

Several weeks ago, for example, the Food and Drug Administration released a factsheet on a monoclonal antibody called sotrovimab.

Sotrovimab is at this point, the only monoclonal antibody treatment that is proven effective against the latest variant of the coronavirus. The F.D.A. provided guidance for physicians in all 50 states telling them how to determine which patients should get this treatment, this critical treatment.

Physicians, the F.D.A. explained should consider quote, “race and ethnicity” as they administer treatments and so physicians are doing that across the country.

In Utah, COVID patients are triaged by a scoring system that determines whether or not they qualify for these potentially lifesaving antibody treatments. Look at this chart, it shows the scoring system. You’ll notice that race often counts more than physical health.

The State of Utah, for example, gives two points to anyone simply for not being white. You win if you’re not white. If you have congestive heart failure at the same time, you get one point. So if you’re a white congestive heart failure patient, that’s not enough for you.

It’s the same story in Minnesota. Minnesota awards two points to so-called BIPOC patients. That means anyone who is not white. If you have high blood pressure and you’re 60 years old, you get one point. So tough luck for you. Imagine if that was one of your parents. It is one of someone’s parents.

In New York, writes Aaron Sibarium, in a shocking new piece for “The Washington Free Beacon,” quote, “Racial minorities are automatically eligible for scarce COVID-19 therapeutics, regardless of age or underlying conditions.” It doesn’t matter what kind of health they’re in, all that matters is their skin color. Whites don’t qualify.

This is not healthcare, its punishment. It is punishment meted out on the basis of skin color.

Now, the justification for all of this, the authorities could not be clearer about it. They’ve taken their ideas directly from America’s colleges, they will tell you why they’re doing this. The justification is history.

The United States has mistreated racial minorities in centuries past, they say, therefore, whites must suffer now. So your ancestors did bad things or people who looked like your ancestors did bad things, so now, we are withholding medicine from you.

They call this equity. It’s not equity. It is collective punishment. It’s the North Korean standard. It’s the definition of evil.

And in case you’re wondering if that’s actually what it is, consider this. A young Haitian man could cross our border illegally today, many have. That person could show up at a clinic in New York tomorrow for COVID treatment, and get preference over an elderly American citizen purely because of his appearance.

Think about that. The Haitian has not suffered from systemic racism in America, whatever that is, he just got here. But he goes to the front of the line anyway. Now, that’s not a criticism of the Haitian, it is not his fault. He didn’t make the rules.

But the Americans who did make the rules clearly didn’t make them on the basis of public health. They made them in an effort to hurt a specific group of Americans and they are succeeding. This is happening everywhere, even in places you would never expect it to happen.

Watch as this man talks to an employee at a Texas medical facility to find out exactly what their policies are.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: So I’m not able to get it today?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Nuh-uh.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Because I don’t qualify.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Yes.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What if I — what if I like smoke and vape? I heard that was okay.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: No.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Okay. But if I were black and Hispanic, then I’d be able to qualify. Okay, I’m being denied medical service because of my race, is that —

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: That’s the criteria.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CARLSON: So you can’t get lifesaving drugs from the government of Texas if you’re the wrong color. Think about that.

We reached out to the Texas Department of Health about this back in November and they denied allocating any healthcare on the basis of race, but of course they were lying. The North Central Texas COVID-19 Regional Infusion Center was created by the Texas Department of Health.

Last year, the Infusion Center’s website which says it is state funded featured an information sheet that explicitly listed race as an eligibility factor for getting antibody therapy. That’s what you just saw there, someone being denied medical treatment because he is the wrong color, without even assessing the relative health risks involved.

The website maintained by the Tarrant County, Texas — by the County of Tarrant in Texas explains that being nonwhite automatically makes you eligible for treatments. So this is still happening on a wide scale.

The question is, why are Americans putting up with this? It’s immoral. We’re used to hearing that your kids can’t get into a certain school if they are the wrong color or get a certain job if they don’t have the right appearance, and apparently they have accepted that.

UPDATE (1/14/022):FDA wants race, ethnicity factored in administering COVID drugs”  If White, Avoid moving to Utah and Minnesota run by racists:

“Risk factors for hospitalization and mortality are now well-recognized and include age, cumulative comorbidities, male gender, shortness of breath, and importantly, but for reasons not well-understood, non-white race/ethnicity,” read state guidelines on the standards of care of monoclonal antibody treatment.
However, Utah has also provided “ethical justification” for its patient selection.
“Utah Data from more than one hundred thousand patients with COVID-19 confirms that even after controlling for age and comorbidities, Utahns who identify from communities of color have a significantly higher risk of severe disease requiring hospitalization,” the guidelines read. “Public health interventions may be used to attempt to mitigate these disparities in COVID-19 by recognizing the structural inequities that underlie them. One way to do this is to include race/ethnicity in the patient selection criteria.”
Minnesota health officials have also urged health care providers to “consider heightened risk of progression to severe COVID-19 associated with race and ethnicity when determining eligibility” for monoclonal antibody treatment of COVID-19.

* Image credit

Of Course Their Race Counts; It Got Them Killed

Crime, Family, Kids, Media, Race, Racism

WRONG, Tucker Carlson: A homeless man didn’t randomly kill a boy, as you had stated.  The slaughter of Ryan Rogers was not “a completely random act,” coward Florida cop. Semmie Williams, black, stabbed Ryan’s white face repeatedly to, very simply, obliterate it.

For every hate crime unidentified making its way into the news under a phony guise, there are countless, daily, black-on-white beatings and acts of bullying in public spaces.

In October alone, there were “32 black-on-white homicides, including five home invasions,” as chronicled on The Unz Review.

Institutionalized rot means that the feral folks have been put in charge, empowered to say and do as they feel. They are fearless. They want to smash all faces that aren’t like theirs. And they’ve been given institutional imprimatur to act out on their envy and hate. A combination of low inhibitions and license to kill has resulted in scenes like these across the country.

This comes courtesy of Ziggs on Odysee:

Then there are the parents. Likely race-related, the murder of this typical innocent do-gooder, Ethan Williams, was masked by media and law enforcement  as a “stray bullet.”

Kids like Ethan are sent into the world wide-eyed and filled with only wonderment. (Read “Sacrificing Kids To PC Pietism,” 2011.) Nary a warning are they issued as to the reality of crime in America—and beyond. Parents are instrumental in these tragic events, having never given their kids “The Talk,” as John Derbyshire called it.

As a neighborhood in which to bunk down, Ethan Williams chose Bushwick, in New York City. Bushwick is known as dangerously and diversely hip. Was this reckless decision not made against the background of a lifelong familial support and backing for such displays of hipness and “openness”?

Pater says the kid was all about “poverty and violence” and “mission work in Rwanda” (as opposed in white, impoverish Appalachia).

Writes his proud father, who seems to have helped cement this delusional, progressive-Christian ideation in his kid’s mind:

Police believe our son’s killer mistook him and his friends for rival gang members. [Yeah, right]. They were instead just a group of Midwestern boys on their first trip to see “the greatest city in the world.” If he had been given the chance, without question Ethan would have embraced his would-be killer, asked his name and hung out on those same steps with him swapping stories deep into the night.

 

FRED REED: Bads, Wads, And The Unlikelihood Of Reason: Thoughts On Two Verdicts

Crime, Critique, Ethics, FRED REED, GUNS, Justice, Law, Race, The South

In both the Rittenhouse and Arbery cases, we have Black Advocates, and White Advocates (Bads and Wads to avoid typing fatigue) squalling at each other

By Fred Reed

Oh God, oh God. Can we humans not contract out our governance to, say, cephalopods and stop trying to manage our own affairs? I mean, really. Girl octopodes are both smart and leggy. They aren’t crazy. What more do we want?

Recently we have had the verdicts in the Rittenhouse and Arbery trials, with which I assume the reader to be at least broadly familiar. If you are not, I congratulate you for avoiding the grocery-store tabloid intellectual level regnant in America.

Today, everything is identity politics, emotion, and herd instinct. Loyalty to one’s herd trumps all else, to include truth. Outside the courtroom, treatment of both trials was racial, ideological and, often, disingenuous if not dishonest. Inside the courtroom, neither was. This pack-instinct politics is an embarrassment.

In both cases, we have Black Advocates, and White Advocates (hereinafter Bads and Wads to avoid typing fatigue) squalling at each other. The Wads have never seen a white man who was guilty and the Bads, one who wasn’t. I don’t think I have ever encountered so much tendentious twaddle in one place, and I have lived in Washington.

But the juries got both right. For a practicing curmudgeon, this is devastating. There may be a hidden underlying vein of reason in the country.

In the Rittenhouse matter, the case, that the kid shot in self-defense, is obvious on the facts.  The jury agreed. In Arbery, the defense of the killers is weak, contrived, and illogical. The jury agreed.

Now, Arbery, briefly: Arbery was a black man who on at least five occasions (is said to have) entered a suburban house under construction, walked around, sometimes on surveillance video, and left without stealing anything. In Georgia, this is called “criminal trespass,” and is a misdemeanor, like littering. No theft, no vandalism, no burglary, no felony.

On the day of his death, Arbery, a known jogger, came out of the house, carrying nothing, not anything stolen, not a weapon, not a cellphone, and ran down the street. The three killers, assuming on no evidence that he must have committed a crime, began chasing him in two pickups. They ran him down in a chase lasting five minutes, used the trucks to force him in desired directions, trapped him on a street between the trucks. Apparently Arbery, exhausted and desperate, cornered, attacked the guy who had a twelve-gauge pump, who killed him with it. One of the three took video during the chase.

They later said they killed him in self-defense and claimed that they were conducting a citizen’s arrest. The latter claim, farfetched and not occurring until well after the event, was the only possible defense a lawyer could come up with. I suspect a lawyer did come up with it.

The self-defense approach doesn’t fly. If you are the aggressors, as for example chasing with pickups a frightened man, and you kill him when he finally fights back, in law you cannot claim self-defense. And when the odds are three men and two guns against an unarmed defender, self-defense is not persuasive.

Here the story becomes sordid. When I heard shortly after the killing that there would be no indictments, I thought, uh-huh, the fix is in. And the fix was indeed in. One of the killers who had worked in law enforcement called his friend, Brunswick District Attorney Jackie Johnson, and got her to  prevent an investigation, for which she was later indicted on a felony charge. The investigation and arrest came months later and only after the video went viral.

The jury found all three guilty of murder, whereupon white advocates called the proceedings a show trial, political, with the jury being intimidated, anti-white, and the like.

None of this is true. (If you have the interest and spare time, here is the prosecutions case in its entirety. Judge for yourself.) In identity politics, a show trial is one in which the verdict is not the one one’s herd wants. The jury is then said to be woke, corrupt, left-wing, right-wing, suborned, racist, white-hating, what have you It can’t be that the jury even-handedly pondered the facts and came to a considered conclusion.

Wads, as much as Bads, just make up evidence.  Various WADs stated as fact that Arbery, who frequently jogged through the neighborhood, did so “casing” it for future theft. Since there is no evidence that Arbery committed burglary, ever, this is invention. There is much innuendo, as for example stating that many thefts had occurred in the neighborhood and inviting the reader to conclude that Arbury was the thief. There is exactly no evidence for this.

In libel law this sort of thing is called “actual malice” or “reckless disregard of truth.” But the dead can’t sue.

Why the desperate attempt to find a felony for Arbery to have committed? Because without one,  the defense of making a citizen’s arrest doesn’t fly. That leaves them having hunted Arbery down and killed him with no authority to do so. This is called “murder.”

Citizen’s arrest: A private person may arrest an offender if the offense is committed in his presence or within his immediate knowledge. If the offense is a felony and the offender is escaping or attempting to escape, a person may arrest him on reasonable or probable grounds of suspicion.

The claim of making a citizen’s arrest smells to high heaven. There was no felony. Arbery came out of the house carrying nothing, as the killers could see. No felony had been committed in their presence since none had been committed at all. Further, statements by the three themselves show that they didn’t think Arbery had stolen anything, or didn’t know whether he had. These gut the defense of citizen’s arrest.

When the sheriff showed up, they would certainly have told him approximately, “We thought he was a burglar and so we wanted to hold him until the police came.” They didn’t. They didn’t tell Arbery they were making a citizen’s arrest.

Many seem not to understand the importance of this. The only question in the trial was whether the three were conducting a legitimate citizen’s arrest. If not, then with no right or authority whatsoever they had chased down a man who had not committed a felony, and killed him. That, ladies and gentlemen, is called “murder.”

Let us consider events from Arbury’s standpoint. He was out for a jog, as he had been many times before. He poked around the building site, as he and others had done before. He stole nothing. He didn’t know that he was a burglar in the eyes of the three paladins of justice. He didn’t know that they were planning a citizen’s arrest. Suddenly, armed white men in a pickup accost him, trying to cut him off. This is terrifying. They don’t tell him why. One says, or later claims to have, “I want to talk to you,” probably not in a chirpy voice with a broad smile. From Arbury’s point of view, this is not promising. Remember, he lives in Georgia. Arbury doesn’t reply, as why should he? He tries to evade, which is exactly what I would do. It is, I suspect, what a white person would do if cut off by armed blacks.

What should he have done, trapped, probably scared witless, with a white man pointing a shotgun at him? What does a black man in these circumstances believe to be the intentions of his pursuers? A beating? A rope? Burning? Death? To a white advocate in northern suburbs these may seem silly questions. To a black in Georgia, they don’t. His decision, to fight, got him killed.

It is interesting here to ask what the identity groups would have said had the races been reversed. For example, if three blacks had run down a white college student in otherwise identical circumstances. Or, if Rittenhouse had been a black kid attacked by Republicans, saying that his intent was to protect the right of BLM to hold lawful demonstrations. I think we all know the answer. And, when a nearly all-white jury in the Deep South convicts three white men of killing a black man, you can bet they believe it.

Guilty as charged.

******************************************

FRED REED describes himself as [previously] a “Washington police reporter, former Washington editor for Harper’s and staff writer for Soldier of Fortune magazine, Marine combat vet from Viet Nam, and former long-haul hitchhiker, part-time sociopath, who once lived in Arlington, Virginia, across the Potomac River from the Yankee Capital.”
His essays “on the collapse of America” Mr. Reed calls “wildly funny, sometimes wacky, always provocative.”
“Fred is the Hunter Thompson of the right,” seconds Thomas E. Ricks in Foreign Policy magazine. His  commentary is “well-written, pungent political incorrectness mixed with smart military commentary and libertarian impulses, topped off with a splash of Third World sunshine and tequila.”

FRED’S BOOKS ARE ON AMAZON, HERE

FRED’S ARTICLES ARCHIVE

 

 

WATCH: Dorsey Out, Even More Woke In; And The OMG! Variant Whacks The West

Britain, Business, COVID-19, Europe, Free Speech, Pseudoscience, Race, South-Africa, Technology

WATCH & SUBSCRIBE: “Dorsey Out, Even More Woke In; And The OMG! Variant Whacks The West”:

David has been banned by Jack Dorsey’s Twitter; ilana is shadow-banned and throttled. But for the Wokerati, Dorsey is just not woke enough. Enter Parag Agrawal. Twitter’s new CEO is even less wedded to the First Amendment of the US Constitution than Dorsey. Agrawal, whose ideas about American liberty come from Stanford, Microsoft and Mumbai, thinks his role is to make public discourse healthier. Oh, for the days when businessmen stuck to their mandate: doing business.


DOWNLOAD To Listen On-The-Go
:

https://hardtruthwithdavidvanceandilanamercer.podbean.com/