6 December, 2007

Not a Race Crime?

Posted by Socrates in 'hate' crimes, AmeriKwa, double standards, Socrates at 9:10 pm | Permanent Link

The word “gringo” was used, but it wasn’t “racially fueled”: [Article].


  • 3 Responses to “Not a Race Crime?”

    1. TSman Says:
      7 December, 2007 at 5:34 am

      Where did he go to eat, Taco Bell?

    2. Mark Says:
      7 December, 2007 at 12:20 pm

      As typical a group of non-whites attacked a white, saying gringos don’t belong on their turf. Obviously a racially motivated attack, which he tried to avoid but they followed him with intent to do harm. They stabbed him in the chest twice, but it wasn’t “life-threatening.” Nothing to see here, move along. And the white guy doesn’t seem bothered by it, he just doesn’t want to miss a few days of work. Take it up the ass whitey and like it. Sick world.

    3. Bill Daniels Says:
      7 December, 2007 at 3:39 pm

      The White American peoples really need to start to speak out on issues like this. Luckily we don’t need to sound like babies crying about sensitivity or offensiveness. But if you can’t speak out, you’re not going to be able to strike back either.

      A goup of European Americans has pioneered a new way to talk about anti-white slurs, and it is NOT to complain, whine, or cry.

      The strategy is to look at and talk about slurs as ways to address the state of mind of the person making the slurs (not the feelings of the person slurred). Sounds simple, but in one-on-one conversation you can make points.

      Using this technique, gringo can be nailed as a slur based on a minimum of two concepts. First, that it is a name imposed by one group on members of our group with a motive to smother our diversity. (Use the left’s buzz words.)

      Second, that it is an example of a claim to supremacy when slurs are imposed on us…only a supremacist would claim the right to name us.

      Using this approach means you avoid the white slackers standing around saying “it doesn’t bother me.” This way, properly thought through and properly argued, can be very persuasive.

      =============

      By the way, getting involved in a discussion with a reporter or cop about whether the above incident is a hate crime is a loser. Of course it is, but if the eye is taken off the fact that it was a multiple assailant attack on our guy with racial slanders thrown in, the discussion degenerates into a debate about what a hate crime is, and we cannot win that.

      It’s good enough to simply say it’s a Mexican multiple assailant gang attack on a European American who was verbally attacked as well in a display of supremacy and hatred for our diversity…at least as a starting point. Make the Mexican’s mind the one to examine.