General

Andrea Widburg: If you believe that sociopaths are in charge, you’re right

/7 Comments/in /by

All that’s missing is a breakdown of the demographics of this poll. It’s often noted that Jews provide around 75% of the funding for the Democrats (and probably 40% for the GOP). And this is a group whose ethic is basically “what’s good for the Jews,” so cheating in order to advance what they see as Jewish interests would not raise ethical issues.

Andrea Widburg, in American Thinker

Anyone with a brain knows that there was epic cheating behind Biden’s “win” in 2020, ranging from official cheating (e.g., mail-in ballots, drop boxes, and ballot harvesting) to unofficiaHowdy, Kevin MacDonaldl cheating (e.g., delayed vote counts, faked ballots, and illegal registrations). Pollster Scott Rasmussen has discovered something very disturbing about all that cheating: While ordinary Americans want fair elections, the “elite”—that is, the rich, powerful, and connected—don’t. They want only to win.

According to the Issues and Insights editorial board:

Earlier this year, pollster Scott Rasmussen asked voters a simple question: “Would you rather have your candidate win by cheating or lose by playing fair?

The answers he got back were, as he put it in a Daily Signal podcast last week, “the most terrifying poll result I’ve ever seen.”

Among all Americans, just 7% said they would want their candidate to win by cheating. As Rasmussen put it, he’d rather see that number lower, but that’s not bad.

But more than a third of the elite 1% he surveyed would condone cheating. And among those who are “politically obsessed” – meaning that they talk about politics every day – that number shot up to 69%.

The same editorial notes that this 1% of “elites” is almost entirely Democrat. Credentialed people (i.e., college and university graduates) are more likely to be Democrats, as are the wealthy. These are the people who control the levers of power in society, so the fact that almost 70% of those who are most concerned with politics think cheating is a fine way to win is a terrifying thought.

And what do these powerful sociopaths intend to do with the power they attain through cheating? Nothing good:

  • Nearly 60% say there is too much individual freedom in America – double the rate of all Americans.
  • More than two-thirds (67%) favor rationing of energy and food to combat the threat of “climate change.”
  • Nearly three-quarters (70%) of the elites trust the government to “do the right thing most of the time.”
  • More than two-thirds (67%) say teachers and other educational professionals should decide what children are taught rather than letting parents decide.

…

Crowley & Wong: How and why the US gives billions of dollars of weapons to Israel every year

/5 Comments/in /by

This appeared in the mainstream media in Australia, The Sydney Morning Herald. 

You may have thought that U.S. aid to Israel was dependent on the proposed $14 billion aid for Israel proposed since the start of the Gaza war and held up in Congress, but not true. And Secretary of State Blinken has had  a major role in skirting U.S. requirements:

“At least three of the new Israeli orders have crossed the threshold required for congressional review – and Secretary of State Antony Blinken bypassed that twice. In December, Blinken invoked a rare emergency authority to avoid legislative review and push through two of those orders worth $US253 million in total, for tank ammunition and for artillery shells. The Pentagon then drew from US stockpiles to send those quickly to Israel.”

And:

“After Israel submitted its assurances last month [on compliance with international law], officials in the two State Department bureaus that focus on human rights and on refugees raised concerns with Blinken about Israel’s commitment, a US official said. But Blinken accepted Israel’s assurances.”

… At the time [2016], the agreement [to provide #3.8 billion/year in military aid] was uncontroversial. It was a period of relative calm for Israel, and few officials in Washington expressed concern about how the US arms might one day be used.

Now, that military aid package, which guarantees Israel $US3.3 billion a year ($5 billion) to buy weapons, along with an additional $US500 million annually for missile defence, has become a flashpoint for the Biden administration. A vocal minority of lawmakers in Congress backed by liberal activists are demanding that President Joe Biden restrict or even halt arms shipments to Israel because of its military campaign in the Gaza Strip.

Biden has been sharply critical of what he on one occasion called “indiscriminate bombing” in Israel’s war campaign, but he has resisted placing limits on US military aid.

The United States and Israel have had tight military relations for decades, stretching across multiple Democratic and Republican administrations. Israel has purchased much of its critical equipment from the United States, including fighter jets, helicopters, air defence missiles, and both unguided and guided bombs, which have been dropped in Gaza. Legislation mandates that the US government help Israel maintain force superiority – or its “qualitative military edge” – over other Middle Eastern nations.

“The problem with this American largesse is that it has bred a sense of entitlement among Israelis over the years.”

Martin Indyk, Obama administration special envoy for Israeli-Palestinian negotiations

The process of arms delivery to Israel is opaque, and the pipeline for weapons to the country is long. The United States has sent tens of thousands of weapons to the country since the October 7 killings by Hamas attackers, but many were approved by Congress and the State Department long ago and funded with money mandated by the Obama-era agreement, known as a memorandum of understanding.

“At any given time, delivery on these sales is constantly taking place,” said Dana Stroul, who recently departed as the Pentagon’s top official for Middle East affairs.

Biden has the power to limit any foreign arms deliveries, even ones previously approved by Congress. Far from cutting off Israel, however, he is pushing a request he made shortly after the October 7 attacks for $US14 billion in additional arms aid to the country and US military operations in the Middle East. The money has been stalled in Congress amid disputes over Ukraine aid and US border security and faces growing Democratic concern.

Because of a legal loophole, the State Department does not have to tell Congress and the public about some new arms orders placed by Israel since October 7 since they fall below a certain dollar value. Congressional officials have criticised the secrecy, which stands in contrast to the Biden administration’s public fanfare around arms deliveries to Ukraine.

Since the Hamas attacks, State Department officials have continued to authorise arms shipments to Israel that are tranches of orders, or what officials call “cases”, approved earlier by the department and by Congress – often years ago, and often for delivery in batches over a long period. Officials describe this step as pro forma. The authorisations have occurred almost daily in recent weeks and are in line with Biden’s policy of giving full support to Israel.

Biden has hinted about a possible shift. In a phone call with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Thursday, he warned that US policy could change if Israel did not take more action to protect civilians and aid workers in Gaza, according to a White House summary of the conversation.

Israel regularly receives arms from the US Defence Department, as well as directly from American weapons makers. The largest arms orders are often filled over years in smaller groups of specific items. For such cases, arms buyers such as Israel come to the US government saying they are ready to pay for part of an order.

When the Defence Department is supplying the arms – which includes the most expensive weapons systems – the State Department then tells the Pentagon to issue a letter of acceptance to the buyer. That authorisation is often a pro forma step, and a buyer signing it means there is now a legal contract to fill that part of the larger order.

The State Department’s Bureau of Political-Military Affairs, which manages foreign defence relationships and arms transfers, typically acts within two days of hearing about a buyer’s fulfilment request to tell the Defence Department to issue the letter. If defence officials decide to fill the case by placing an order with a US weapons maker, the assembly and shipment would normally take years.

For Israel’s immediate needs since October 7, defence officials have drawn from US military stockpiles, including one in Israel.

Since October 7, Israel has placed new orders. The State Department only needs to notify Congress when a price tag is above a certain threshold. That amount varies by country and the type of military aid. If Israel orders a major weapons system, the department only tells Congress if the tranche is valued at more than $US25 million.

Congressional officials are pushing the State Department to give them more information on orders that fall below the price tag threshold.

At least three of the new Israeli orders have crossed the threshold required for congressional review – and Secretary of State Antony Blinken bypassed that twice. In December, Blinken invoked a rare emergency authority to avoid legislative review and push through two of those orders worth $US253 million in total, for tank ammunition and for artillery shells. The Pentagon then drew from US stockpiles to send those quickly to Israel.

The State Department told Congress in January about a third one – a $US18 billion order of F-15 jets that Israel placed after October 7. The department is seeking approval from four lawmakers on two congressional committees with oversight of arms transfers. Two Republicans approved the order in January, a US official said, and two Democrats apparently have not so far.

The Biden administration is pressuring the Democratic lawmakers to approve the order, after which the State Department would officially notify it. The order is one of the biggest from Israel in years. The first jets would not be delivered until 2029 at the earliest, one official said.

And Israeli officials are expected to place an order for F-35 jets soon, US officials said.

If the administration tried to ram an order past informal congressional review, lawmakers could seek to block that through a super-majority joint resolution during the formal notification period. But even if such a resolution passed in both chambers, the president could veto it.

…

Within the State Department, there has been some dissent about the arms transfers, reflected in three cables sent to Blinken last fall and in an internal exchange after a recent White House move.

Biden issued a national security memorandum in February requiring all recipients of US military aid to provide written promises that their forces abide by international law. The move was intended to defuse growing pressure in Congress.

Critics say the exercise adds little to existing US requirements that military aid recipients observe international and humanitarian law.

After Israel submitted its assurances last month, officials in the two State Department bureaus that focus on human rights and on refugees raised concerns with Blinken about Israel’s commitment, a US official said. But Blinken accepted Israel’s assurances.

Speaking in general terms, Matthew Miller, the State Department spokesperson, said last month that when it comes to Israel, US officials “have had ongoing assessments about their compliance with international humanitarian law”. …

A Serious Jew Considers the Rise in Post-Gaza Anti-Semitism

/3 Comments/in /by

A peek into the mindset of a hyperethnocentric Jew on the backlash against the Gaza war. No context on the war in Gaza—not a peep about the oppression of the Palestinians, the land grabbing, the blockade of Gaza and the overwhelming majority of Gaza war casualties being women and children, the aggression of the West Bank settlers, etc. But the usual flabby analyses of anti-Jewish attitudes—”not all Jews are rich,” presumably as an argument against the idea of disproportionate Jewish influence and its effect on the American European-derived population; and “not all Jews are White,” presumably as an argument that Jews are not particularly ethnocentric or that there is no basis for a genetic commonality among the vast majority of Jews, despite repeated population genetic studies showing otherwise, not to mention general Jewish racialism toward non-Jews. And of course, her obligation to propagandize about the six million (for a contrary Israeli view, see here). …

 

American Jews Should Become a Little More Israeli

Instead of playing defense, we should learn how to stand up for ourselves better

BY

DIANA FERSKO
This article is part of Hamas’ War on Israel.
See the full collection →︎

On Dec. 4, I attended a special session at the United Nations called “Hear Our Voices—Sexual and Gender-Based Violence in the Oct. 7 Attack.” …

At one point, the organizers showed a video. Immediately, instinctively, I looked down. Yes, I was there to hear testimony, but I wasn’t ready to see a video. I just couldn’t watch whatever it was going to be, so I lowered my head and covered my eyes. But at one point during the video, I glanced up, in front of me were two of my dear friends, both Israeli women. Rather than burying their heads as I had done, they were not only watching the video, they both had their phones out, recording the video—presumably so that others could watch as well.

That was one of the many moments since Oct. 7 when I realized that American Jews, myself included, have a long way to go in understanding what it is going to take to stand up for ourselves. I had tried to hide from the horror, but my Israeli friends knew better. They understood that to stand up for ourselves, we would have to go to horribly uncomfortable places. They understood more deeply and more quickly than Jewish Americans about the denialism, the traumatic invalidation, and the blatant antisemitism that was on its way to Jewish people around the globe.

I’m a rabbi. I’m the author of a book on antisemitism. I was raised in an active Jewish home. So, I thought I knew how to speak up for myself and for the Jewish people. But that moment at the U.N. taught me that even I didn’t know how to do those things well enough. It was one of many moments since Oct. 7 when I decided to really fight antisemitism in the United States, I needed to try to become a little bit Israeli. Maybe you should, too.

My Israelification began months before the U.N. session. Like many American Jews, on Oct. 8, I found myself emotionally paralyzed. I was frozen, in shock and disbelief. I could not believe that Hamas had penetrated the border. I could not believe that they had murdered over 1,200 civilians. I could not believe the barbarism or the kidnapping. I could not believe I was witnessing a pogrom. I couldn’t really move except to cry. I sat there, stunned, barely able to make a sound. But while I was processing, the Israelis in my community were acting. My phone filled with WhatsApp notifications. Ding: Someone’s nephew needed a Kevlar vest. Ding: Can you house a reservist on his way back to Israel? Ding: Does anyone have access to large quantities of boots? …

Not all Jews are rich, I tell people. I explain that about 20% of Jewish New Yorkers live below the poverty line. On the one hand I’m trying to show that the conspiracy theory about us is factually incorrect. But on the other, what if most Jews were rich? Would that mean that we actually were controlling the world? That the conspiracy theory of antisemitism was true?

Not all Jews are white, I tell people. I explain that about 70% of Jews in Israel certainly aren’t from European descent. On the one hand, I’m trying to explain to people that Jews have lived around the globe for centuries and that we are beautifully diverse. But on the other hand, what if we were all light-skinned? Would that make Jews guilty of racism or oppression? Would that “prove” the conspiracy theory? Or at least validate it?

And worst of all, we are genocide survivors, I tell people. I explain that 6 million Jews were murdered in living memory, including 1 million children. On the one hand, I’m trying to teach Jewish history. I am fighting for facts. A significant percentage of millennials believe that 2 million or 3 million Jews were murdered in the Shoah rather than 6 million. It’s my obligation to fight against these falsehoods. But on the other hand, am I also begging people not to hate us by reminding them we are victims?

Jewish Americans around the country are doing a similarly defensive dance: defending a war, defending a state, defending Zionism, defending Jewish existence in universities, on boards, in justice work, and in civil society. Defending the existence of Jews itself.

All this defense leads me to a core philosophical question: What would it look like if American Jews decided to play philosophical offense? The conspiracy theories of antisemitism aren’t true; rather they are a series of boundaryless lies. But we will also never be able to prove they are wholly false because they are not driven by rationale or reason. So, what if instead of defensively saying what we aren’t, we took a different approach and we chose to assertively say what we are?

It might look something like this: Jews are experts in civil disagreement—we have thousands of years of lived experience and documented evidence. …

Paul Joseph Watson on Scotland’s Hate Crime Law

/4 Comments/in /by

As predicted, Police Scotland was deluged with nearly 4,000 complaints in the first day alone after the passage of an absurd new hate crime law, proving the legislation is being weaponized by activists.

Under the new legislation, anyone deemed to have been verbally ‘abusive’, in person or online, to a transgender person, including “insulting” them could be hit with a prison sentence of up to seven years.

Transgender activists have been busy making lists of people they are waiting on to make such comments, including Harry Potter author JK Rowling herself.

Although it was announced yesterday by police that Rowling wouldn’t be investigated, the mere fact that she has been reported could create a ‘hate incident’ file on her that will remain in perpetuity.

“Calum Steele, the former general secretary of the Scottish Police Federation, said he understood that around 3,800 cases had been lodged over the previous 24 hours,” reports the Telegraph.

That figure is likely to now be almost doubled as deranged shitlibs feverishly report anything they deem offensive via an online form and a 101 non-emergency number.

Authorities are now being swamped with vexatious complaints exactly as the legislation’s critics predicted, with resources that would have been available to tackle real crime directed elsewhere to patrol speech.

Indeed, as we previously highlighted, Police Scotland admitted that the new law could create “additional demand”and create a “resource implication” for police.

This followed a trial of a separate program set to be implemented across the country to stop investigating crimes like theft and criminal damage, which authorities acknowledge will help criminals. … [Entire article is here.]

Does The New York Times Actually Care About Mass Shootings?

/6 Comments/in /by

Does The New York Times Actually Care About Mass Shootings?

Did you know there was a mass shooting in Indianapolis over the weekend? I briefly saw it on a news crawl, but didn’t hear another word about it, so, by Monday, I assumed I had dreamt it.

     Nope. There was a real mass shooting, sending seven kids aged 12 to 17 to the hospital, one in critical condition. The gunfire came from a group of juveniles gathered outside a shopping mall in downtown Indianapolis Saturday night.

The New York Times didn’t report the shooting, which I found odd, because the gunmen were almost certainly black, meaning it was the gun’s fault.

I say “almost certainly black” because kids as young as 12 were out on a downtown city street, unsupervised, at 11:36 p.m. the night before Easter; a Google search of “Indianapolis mugshots shootings” looks like Gemini’s artificial intelligence version of a “Founding Father”; and also — the Times didn’t mention it.

Luckily for the kids, police were on the scene in about 10 seconds. Twenty-five officers happened to be patrolling downtown on account of this being the third consecutive weekend in Indianapolis with a mass shooting.

The previous weekend’s gunplay left one man dead and five wounded; the earlier shooting also killed one and wounded five. The Times didn’t report those incidents either.

By contrast, last August, the Times was all over a shooting at a Jacksonville, Florida, dollar store. I’m not sure why …

Subhead: “Three people, all Black, were fatally shot in a dollar store before the gunman, a white man, killed himself.”

First sentence: “A white gunman shot and killed three Black people in a Dollar General store in Jacksonville, Fla., on Saturday afternoon. He then shot and killed himself.”

Indeed, the article mentioned “white” eight times, even throwing in an extraneous story of evil Whites from 63 years ago. (“Sunday was the 63rd anniversary of Ax Handle Saturday, when white supremacists severely beat a group of mostly Black civil rights activists.”)

A Times’ compilation of some of the mass shootings in 2022 listed 24 gunmen in 19 separate incidents. Of the 24 mass shooters, 17 were black, five were white (one nonbinary and one in a dress), one was Asian and one was Hispanic. The Times gave the race of only two of the perpetrators.

GUESS WHICH ONES. Yes, White and White. Is there any chance the Times’ list excluded any mass shootings with white gunmen?

I’m not even counting the shootings that any normal person would assume, unless informed otherwise, were perpetrated by Whites, such as one at a Walmart, one at the University of Virginia and one at “a community event and car show in the small Arkansas farming community.” C’mon, that last one has to be a white guy!

In fact, all three gunmen were Black. But the Times decided the race of the perpetrator wasn’t relevant in those cases.

What is the point of this deception? To allow clueless Times’ readers to keep telling themselves that most mass shooters are White men?

E.g.:

–The Chicago Tribune: “Why are mass shooters overwhelmingly white men?”

–Maria Shriver’s Sunday Paper: “Mass Shooters Are Almost Always White Men.”

— The Conversation: “[M]ass shooters tend to be young white men.”

Leave it to NBC News to dress up the lie with gratuitous insults:

— NBC: “‘White heterosexual male entitlement fuses with downward mobility, subordinated masculinity, and other disappointing life course events’ to lead mass shooters to carry out their attacks.”

Do liberals actually care about mass shootings or do they just hate White men?

The coddling of Black criminals in response to the BLM movement has been a blood-soaked disaster — and I’m not only talking about Hollywood movies being put out by the new DEI hires.

So far, the main accomplishment of #BLM has been to inspire a mind-boggling surge in Black violence, creating thousands more murdered Americans than before #BLM. Four thousand more, in 2020 alone, according to researchers.

Although Black people have traditionally committed about half of all murders in the United States, after the racial reckoning, their percentage of known murder offenders rose to an unprecedented 60%, according to FBI crime reports. (This statistic has since been wiped from the FBI’s website, but is still available in a number of academic papers.)

Arguably, liberals’ BLM hysteria isn’t really helping Black lives inasmuch as it’s getting so many additional Blacks killed.

Any Black person who is more worried about his child being killed by the police than another Black is an idiot. But I don’t believe any normal Black person does believe that. Joy Ann Reid probably believes it. Yamiche Alcindor believes it. And everyone who reads The New York Times believes it.

So the killings will go on. And so will the cover-up.

     COPYRIGHT 2024 ANN COULTER

Is NeoCon Billionaire Paul Singer Buying Democrats A House Majority To Ban Trump From Ballot?

/2 Comments/in /by
Editorial note: This is yet another aspect to two deeply disastrous issues in American politics: Jewish money.  1: Neocon hate-Trump, left-on-social-issues, war-mongering money. 2: The likely corruption of Republican politicians willing to sell their soul for a nice sinecure after leaving office. Of course, they never really had a soul. Like most politicians, it’s all about the money and a nice career.
We have quite a bit on Singer, including on his vulture capital fund by Andrew Joyce (here and here),, and this article on Singer’s activism for homosexuality by John Graham. Includes a little plug for my neoconservatism article toward the end.

H/T the always indispensable Revolver News for drawing my attention to EXCLUSIVE: The RINO Plan To Ban Trump From The 2024 Ballot Is Underway, by Troy Smith, Slingshot.News, March 24, 2024.

 

 

Recently, a slew of Republican Representatives have not only been announcing their retirement from the House but have also been actually leaving early. Last week it was Wisconsin’s Mike Gallagher, the previous week Colorado’s Ken Buck, and of course in December ex-Speaker Kevin McCarthy.

Consequently,

…the Republican Party is just one retirement away from losing their majority in the House

While this might be thought just an act of peevish spite towards their colleagues and constituents, Slingshot News has plausibly uncovered a different dynamic.

The Neocon Never Trumper Billionaire Paul Singer seems to have financial links to almost these Congresscritters.

A dedicated social liberal, Singer has a long record of pulling the GOP in the wrong direction. Michelle Malkin went into detail on this in Beware Elise Stefanik’s Moneyman, Open Borders Plutocrat Paul Singer. 

Quite often this has been in indirect ways. In 2013, James Fulford reported on him funding an open-borders religious front group. This is in keeping with his activist business habits.

This cycle, he gave $5 million to Nikki Haley as late as December 18, 2003.

Slingshot.News intelligently points out:

The Supreme Court definitively stated in that ruling that Congress, not the individual States, had the right to bar an individual from access to the Presidential ballot….

Should the Democrats regain control of the House before the 2024 Election, the prospect of President Trump being removed from the Presidential ballot becomes an almost certain possibility.

The Democrats already maintain a slight majority in the Senate…

and asks

Is Paul Singer influencing Republicans to retire from the House of Representatives in yet another attempt to derail former President Donald Trump?

Could he be spearheading the mass retirement of GOP officials heading into 2024, ceding control of the House to the Democratic Party, and setting up Trump to be removed from the Presidential ballot prior to the election?

These Neoconservative billionaires have become a lethal threat to the Republic and the Historic American Nation.

See And So Farewell To Sheldon Adelson—Zionist Activist; Immigration Enthusiast (But Only For U.S.); Chinese Asset?

NYC Subway: Where Safety Is Job No. 319 or So

/2 Comments/in /by
NYC Subway: Where Safety Is Job No. 319 or So

   I’m excited to announce a new acquisition for my New York Times museum! It’s an article from the March 24 edition titled, “What Would Make the Subway Feel Safer? Experts Have 5 Suggestions.”

     Appropriating from mid-20th-century works, when the streets ran with blood, none of the “experts” suggested locking criminals up. (Studies show that DOESN’T WORK.) Encouragingly, only two experts suggested making subways safer by reducing their carbon footprint.

The motif of the work is the idea that District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s declared refusal to prosecute offenders for any but the most infamous crimes — such as murder or overstating the valuation of property in a bank loan application — has had no effect on criminals.

Only the public’s “perception” of crime has changed.

E.g.:

— “[S]ome New Yorkers [are] on edge.”

— “Gov. Kathy Hochul deployed National Guard members … to make riders feel safe.”

— News about subway crime “undermined officials’ message, supported by data, that the subway is safe.” Plus, it ruined the surprise for subway riders who were later assaulted, raped or murdered.

Thus, the experts’ ideas were not aimed at actually reducing crime — which to be fair, is impossible if you’re not allowed to put criminals in prison — but to “ease riders’ fears about the subway.”

Isn’t that the worst of all possible worlds? The subway won’t be any safer, but will feel safer, so you’ll let your guard down.

One big idea for giving passengers this false sense of security is: Increase lighting! Or, as subway rapists sometimes call it, “mood lighting.”

The Times optimistically reports that the MTA has already announced that it will “convert all 150,000 fluorescent light fixtures in the system to LED lighting.” Of course, considering how well the MTA maintains its platform cameras, the conversion should be completed around the year 2067. (April 2022 headline: “Questions raised on why NYC subway cameras didn’t work during mass shooting.”)

On the other hand, lighting has done absolutely nothing to impede violent crazies, as evidenced by the vast collection of well-lit videos showing monstrous crimes being committed on the subway. The last video I saw of an Asian man being punched and choked on a subway was so well-shot it could have been nominated for best cinematography.

Other nominees include:

— Video of a psychopath attempting to rape a woman on a Lexington Avenue subway platform at 11 a.m. one Saturday.

— Video of a psychopath smashing human feces into a woman’s face at a Bronx subway station.

— Video of a psychopath punching and kicking a woman in the face at a subway stop in Jamaica Queens (leaving her blind in one eye).

— Multiple videos of psychopaths shoving bystanders onto the train tracks — in the Bronx, at the Times Square station, at the Union Square station, at the Hunter College station, at the 53rd and Fifth Avenue station, etc.

Thanks to the well-lit videos, the suspects are usually apprehended within hours, as soon as facial recognition software connects them to their previous mugshots. (The phrase “previous mugshots” is a big, juicy clue if you’re tackling the “how to stop crime” challenge.)

For example, the broad-daylight rapist had already been arrested at least 14 times. Each time, D.A. Bragg simply let him go. The feces assailant had a slew of arrests for assault, theft and hate crimes, but the Bronx D.A., Darcel Clark, also kept unleashing him on the public for more rollicking fun.

 Editorial note: Presumably this is the man. As is so often the case, mainstream conservatives and White people in general refuse to face the reality of Black crime, but, happily; Coulter does imply that it’s mainly non-Whites, but doesn’t mention Blacks being the main problem. Same thing in the “Knockout game” which has recently returned to New York. Here Paul Joseph Watson has several videos of White women talking about these attacks but not being willing to describe the perpetrator. Finally, after repeated questioning two of the victims said he was Black. 

The Times Square subway shover has racked up a half-dozen prior arrests for things like beating and kicking a 57-year-old woman in the face, scratching a woman in the eye, stealing a woman’s cellphone, repeatedly punching an 18-year-old woman in the face and biting her. Released, released, released, sentenced to death and released again. One of those is fake.

Just this Monday, a 52-year-old man was stabbed in the neck on a J train; a 21-year-old woman was stabbed at the Franklin Avenue station; and, at 7 p.m., a 54-year-old man was killed at the 125th Street station after being pushed onto the tracks of an incoming subway train by career criminal Carlton McPherson. Odd that government officials are having trouble easing riders’ fears about the subway. Maybe if they gave out tote bags with slogans like, “Boy, are subways getting safer all the time now or what?”

Editorial insert: Carlton McPherson

Having soft-launched his one-man crime wave as a teenager, McPherson has numerous prior arrests for assault, fare evasion and burglary. (These are all currently legal in New York.) His latest arrest was a mere six months ago. He was due back in court in July, which I’m sure he had marked carefully in his Palm Pilot.

Unless it’s rape or murder, New York City is determined to get criminals back on the streets as quickly as possible. The only way to make this clearer to criminals would be to literally install actual revolving doors at the entrance to every police precinct and courthouse.

Another expert, Anastasia Loukaitou-Sideris, interim dean at UCLA’s Luskin School of Public Affairs, suggested that New York “strengthen gun checks” and suggested using “sensors” to detect them.

It doesn’t take a gun to push someone in front of an oncoming train, but on the other hand, there have already been seven shootings on the subway so far this year — and we’re not even three months in.

Unfortunately, there are no magical “sensors” to detect guns, except the ones that exist in police officers’ heads.

As explained by Mayor Michael Bloomberg about a year after he’d left office, having driven the crime rate in New York City to unimaginable lows:

“People say, ‘Oh, my God, you are arresting kids for marijuana that are all minorities.’ Yes, that’s true. Why? Because we put all the cops in the minority neighborhoods. Yes, that’s true. Why do we do it? Because that’s where all the crime is.

“And the way you get the guns out of the kids’ hands is to throw them up against the wall and frisk them. And then they start, they say, ‘Oh, I don’t want to get caught.’ So they don’t bring the gun. They still have a gun, but they leave it at home.”

But we can’t do that anymore, because it would be “racist.”

[Trump’s response to Bloomberg’s statement of the obvious: “WOW, BLOOMBERG IS A TOTAL RACIST!” Trump’s black vote in the 2020 election: 8%.]

The Times, being the Times, had formulated a trick question for the experts. How do you solve a problem after we’ve ruled every plausible solution “racist”?

Other ideas from “experts” consisted of doing exactly what we’re doing now, but harder. Specifically: Be even nicer to criminals and blame the victims. Passengers should be more alert! Also, it’s not enough to release suspects — give them a hug and a juice box, too.

The only expert interviewed by the Times who had any remotely relevant experience was Dorothy Schulz, a retired captain with the Metro-North Police. Not surprisingly, her solution was the same as Bloomberg’s, delivered without the vivid imagery. Position officers at subway turnstiles, she said, and frisk every fare-beater. “You’ll pick up a lot of weapons and a lot of people with warrants.”

That will get the guns and knives out of the subway, but not the rapists, the violent assailants, the shovers and the feces-throwers (except maybe for an hour, before the prosecutor cheerfully releases them). We won’t be safe from psychopaths in the subway until we’re rid of the psychopaths in the D.A.s’ offices.

But at least passengers in New York’s well-lit subways will feel safer. Right up until the moment they’re assaulted, raped, murdered or, God willing, just smeared with human feces. All aboard!

     COPYRIGHT 2024 ANN COULTER