{"id":187092,"date":"2019-04-21T07:40:13","date_gmt":"2019-04-21T07:40:13","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/?p=187092"},"modified":"2019-04-25T05:29:40","modified_gmt":"2019-04-25T05:29:40","slug":"the-fulford-file-black-privilege-is-ultimate-cause-of-minnesota-mall-atrocity","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/?p=187092","title":{"rendered":"The Fulford File: Black Privilege Is Ultimate Cause of Minnesota Mall Atrocity"},"content":{"rendered":"

James Fulford \u2013 The Unz Review April 19, 2019<\/a><\/span><\/h1>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

Emmanuel Aranda, a black man living in Minnesota, is alleged to have thrown Landen Hoffman, a white five year old, off the third floor of the Mall Of America. The boy is still alive<\/a><\/span> but Aranda has been charged with attempted murder. [Boy, 5, Who Was Thrown off Mall of America Balcony Is Making Steps Toward Recovery<\/span><\/a><\/em>, Inside Edition, April 18, 2019] (It\u2019s likely that only a child that young could have survived\u2014an adult who falls forty feet is usually Dead Right There). Significantly, however, this incident not being treated as a hate crime<\/span><\/a> by police or the Main Stream Media. That\u2019s because of Black Privilege<\/span><\/a>\u2014and it means this sort of thing will continue.<\/h5>\n
Emmanuel Aranda is quoted by prosecutors as admitting his guilt, saying that he originally meant to do it to an adult, because he\u2019s been rejected by women he had approached (i. e. harassed) in the mall. Prosecutors failed to say if the women he was harassing were white. Aranda had previously been removed from the mall and had a long record of trouble with the law. [Complaint: Man went to Mall of America intending to kill<\/span>,<\/em><\/a> Canadian Press, April 15, 2019]<\/h5>\n
Aranda is clearly bad, and dangerous person\u2014Steve Sailer\u2019s<\/a> <\/span>response (Maybe We Need More Mass Incarceration?<\/em><\/a><\/span>) is the only correct one.<\/h5>\n
But while Aranda may be guilty of this assault, the people responsible<\/em> are the judge and prosecutor back in his home town of Chicago who failed to put him in jail for his first assault conviction there. In Chicago, however, the justice system<\/a><\/span> is apparently more concerned with not arousing the anger of blacks<\/a><\/span> and \u201cCivil Rights<\/span>\u201d<\/a> organizations than with protecting the public<\/a><\/span>. Call it Black Privilege<\/span>.<\/a><\/h5>\n
All over America, there are \u201cCivil Rights\u201d organizations attacking police for enforcing the law<\/span><\/a>, and attacking victims for calling the police<\/span>,<\/a> backed by a Main Stream Media which thinks that any law enforcement action that falls on a black is ipso facto<\/span><\/em> <\/a>racist.<\/h5>\n
So those Civil Rightsians and \u201canti-racist\u201d crusaders are ultimately responsible for this and many similar attacks\u2014first, by telling whites that it\u2019s wrong to be suspicious of blacks<\/span>,<\/a> and second, by convincing blacks that anything that thwarts them in any way is racist.<\/h5>\n
I once read a novel<\/span><\/a> by Britain\u2019s Gavin Lyall about the problems of maintaining security at military bases\u2014like Fort Hood<\/span><\/a>. He wrote that<\/h5>\n
There isn\u2019t a military organization in the world where a loud enough shout from a high enough rank can\u2019t bypass the most elaborate security arrangements. You can spend as long as you like telling sentries<\/a><\/span> to demand passes, authorizations, identifications\u2014but you\u2019ll always have spent longer telling them to jump when a colonel says jump<\/span>.<\/a><\/h5>\n
What we have is a whole society was telling police and business owners to jump when a member of a minority group cries \u201cRacism!\u201d<\/h5>\n
\"\"<\/a>Take the recent MSM-promoted hatred<\/span><\/a> for \u201cBeckys<\/a><\/span>\u201d\u2014white women express any suspicion of blacks<\/span><\/a>, or who question blacks\u2019 rights to do exactly as they please. One of the earliest was \u201cBarbecue Becky\u201d, a woman who told blacks that they were in a part of an Oakland CA park where charcoal barbecuing was not allowed, and when they refused to leave\u2014because blacks assume being asked to leave is racist\u2014called the police.<\/h5>\n
Now, the point of a \u201ccharcoal barbecue\u201d is that it involves lighting a fire using live coals and accelerant, which could have deleterious effect on the grass and trees seen in photographs of the incident. The point of having fire safety rules is that people die in fires<\/span>.<\/em><\/a> [Woman Calls Police On Black Family For BBQing At A Lake In Oakland<\/span><\/em><\/a> |Their crime? Using the wrong type of grill in a barbecue-designated zone,<\/em> by Carla Herreria, HuffPost US, May 11, 2018].<\/h5>\n
Obviously the barbecuers didn\u2019t believe that, and they definitely didn\u2019t believe that they should listen to a white woman telling them that.<\/h5>\n
They feel this way because they\u2019re sacred in America.<\/h5>\n
\"\"<\/a>In the Philadelphia Starbucks incident, two black males were arrested because they refused to leave a coffee shop after being asked. They were asked to leave because they were sitting there without buying anything, and wanted to use the washroom. (It may be that they both wanted to use a one-person washroom at the same time):<\/h5>\n
\u201cHi, I have two gentlemen in my caf\u00e9 that are refusing to make a purchase or leave.\u201d<\/h5>\n
[Listen: Manager\u2019s 911 Call Before Arrest of 2 Black Men at Philly Starbucks<\/span><\/em><\/a>,<\/em> By NBC10 Staff, April 17, 2018]<\/h5>\n
They wouldn\u2019t leave when asked because they really believe in the \u201cracism\u201d narrative that anyone who asks a black person to leave is a racist, and anyone who refuses to leave is somehow Rosa Parks.<\/h5>\n
Steve Sailer put it this way<\/span>,<\/a> in response to a Washington Post<\/em>article titled Starbucks and the elimination of black people from white spaces<\/span><\/em><\/a>, <\/em>by Karen Attiah (a Ghanaian-American<\/a><\/span>) April 18, 2018]:<\/h5>\n
Isn\u2019t it time that the full might of the state was brought down on the real threat: convenience-store managers, mom-and-pop restaurants, and school officials?<\/h5>\n
So as long as a black person isn\u2019t brandishing, say, an AR-15, they are legally and morally entitled to be wherever they feel like. It\u2019s like how the Zeroth Amendment<\/a><\/span> says that undocumented workers can idle in the United States and citizens can\u2019t do anything about it. The Negative First Amendment says blacks, as long as they aren\u2019t armed, can be anywhere they want for as long as they want, and just because you happen to own the property they are on, you can\u2019t do anything about it, because you are white.<\/h5>\n
The Narrative of Black Innocence and White Guilt Is that any kind of protection of the public is considered racist is blacks are disproportionately affected.<\/h5>\n
This includes stop-and-frisk laws<\/a><\/span>, capital punishment<\/span><\/a>, concealed carry<\/a><\/span> for self-defense<\/a><\/span>, school discipline<\/span><\/a>, and even laws against speeding<\/span><\/a>.<\/h5>\n
But Blacks aren\u2019t disproportionately stopped for speeding because police hope to find drugs on them: they\u2019re disproportionately stopped for speeding because they disproportionately speed<\/em>. In 2002, Heather Mac Donald wrote in City Journal<\/span><\/a><\/em> about a New Jersey study that said black drivers speed twice as much as white drivers. <\/em>[Resetting the profile odometer<\/span>,<\/a> <\/em>by Linda Seebach, Washington Times,<\/em> March 12, 2003 ]<\/em><\/h5>\n
In malls, it\u2019s racist to enforce loitering laws:<\/h5>\n