Suspects arrested in robbery gone wrong of Megan Boken; and now the police and media categorize black-on-white murders
are 18 year old cousins. It’s not known yet whether they will be charged for robbery gone wrong in the first degree or robbery gone wrong in the second degree. (See earlier entry
on Megan Boken’s death.)
Jonathan Esters and Keith Perkins
The Daily Mail’s
on the arrest says that Megan Boken’s “attacker opened her driver’s side door and fired multiple times at close range—hitting her in the neck and chest.” This is what the St. Louis Police Department spokesman called “a robbery gone wrong.”
Which led me to formulate the police/media protocols for categorizing black-on-white violence:
- If a black initiates an armed robbery of a white, and then deliberately and gratuituously murders the white,—for example, opening the victim’s car door and shooting her multiple times at close range, as was done to Megan Boken—it is a “robbery gone wrong.”
- If a black, prior to gratuituously killing a white, does not initiate a robbery, but simply launches a homicidal assault on a white who happens to be in his vicinity, as a black stabbed Denise McVay 30 times at a self-serve carwash then slit her throat, then it is a “random attack.”
- If a mob of blacks knock a white pedestrian to the ground and proceed to rain blows on his head and body causing him grave injuries, and if the perpetrators tell police that they did it because they were “bored,” then it becomes, not a racial attack or a hate attack, but an “act of boredom.”
- If a mob of blacks attack whites in a park, and later tell the police they did it for “fun,” then it becomes, not a racial attack or a hate attack, but just “youths having fun,” “youths on a lark.”
- If a mob of blacks surround a car containing two white reporters and throw rocks at it, and if when the driver gets out to talk to them they assault him and severely injure him, it is not a racial attack or a hate attack or a mob attack, but a “street altercation.”
The Negro-Liberal Complex has all the bases covered.
- end of initial entry -
David B. writes:
Megan Boken was murdered on a Saturday afternoon just after 2 p.m. in a “safe” area near a college campus. There were eyewitnesses who probably without thinking tried to spin what they saw. The witnesses said Miss Boken was “arguing” with her killer and “seemed to know him.” This implies she was killed by a “boyfriend,” or in some way brought it upon herself.
Miss Boken’s parents were enraged by this as it made it look like she “hung around with thugs.” This angle was dropped but it is revealing that witnesses would say this and reporters would repeat it.
The police, reporters, and everyone else fell back on the tried and true “Robbery Gone Wrong.”
Robert B. wrote:
The witnesses said Miss Boken was “arguing” with her killer and “seemed to know him.” This implies she was killed by a “boyfriend,” or in some way brought it upon herself.
My guess would be that when asked for her valuables, she refused and they shot her. I do wonder, though, that given the types of black-on-white murders we are seeing, if this isn’t some new form of the “Angles Of Death” such as was visited on California and other parts of the country in the early 1970s by the Nation Of Islam. See this article on the Zebra killings. In almost all cases, the victims were women, children or otherwise weak—old and disabled. Some 240 victims in California alone.
Which brings me to my main point. Given that, in reality, there has been a black-on-white war going on in this country for 40 years or more, both on the streets and in our schools, I have a guess as to why whites no longer get enraged and instead refer to these incidents as “tragic,” etc. and shed tears. Average whites instinctively know that they are not being protected by the authorities. The political class says nothing and the media whitewashes over it. But hardly anyone does not know someone that has not been preyed upon by the black “undertow.” Thus, over the past 45 years and now several generations of exposure, they have come to see themselves as helpless. They see themselves as being cut loose from the normal social mechanisms of protection. They are fearful of speaking out due to the threat of PC retaliation if they should. This has been reinforced in the public schools since at least the mid 1970s in the form of “history” being taught, lack of accountability for black behavior, etc. They have nowhere to turn to and they know it. They have been turned into Eloi via social conditioning for more than 40 years.
Robert B. writes:
You know, Lawrence, it hit me when I was reading your list of police/media responses to black-on-white violence. The media has been and is conditioning us. The schools condition little children in multiple ways—first, by teaching them how evil the white man is, and second, by doing nothing or even blaming the white students for the blacks’ behavior. A favorite refrain is “What did you do?” as if a white has got to have done something to deserve Sudden Savage Syndrome. All of society for more than 40 years has been built around the ideas you have spoken on—that somehow it is always the white man’s fault. But it isn’t being done to favor blacks, it is being done to disarm whites. The proper response to this young woman’s murder—as with all the other black-on-white murders, is rage. That is what our grandfathers would have felt and they would have done something about it. A lynching? Perhaps. But at the least they would have demanded a crackdown on the blacks by the authorities. Of course the Warren Court made any natural and human responses illegal. The Warren Court set the standards by which white America would be re-conditioned into being Eloi.
See the entry where I point to Robert B.’s thought-provoking comments.
Terrry Morris writes:
Interesting. Paul says in Romans 2:14:
For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves: which show the work of the law written in their hearts …
Rule 10(r) of VFR’s Rules on how to protect yourself from black violence and white political correctness concludes with this:
Being aware of race, in any context outside of fulsome praise [for nonwhites], is tantamount to racism.
Accordingly, and following Paul’s prescription from Romans, while simultaneously applying Robert B.’s insightful explanation of white passivity in the face of black violence, one might say:
For when whites, who have not Rule 10(r), do by nature the things contained in Rule 10(r), these, having internalized the rule without the rule, are a Rule 10(r) unto themselves: which show the work of the rule written in their hearts …
Here’s what I mean. Like the Gentiles of which Paul speaks in Romans, whites who have internalized the conclusion of Rule 10(r), without reference to a written rule, but by the conditioning which has revealed to them the spirit of the rule, have become a rule unto themselves. This seems to me consistent with what Robert B. is saying concerning white passivity in the face of black savagery. They simply follow the rule written on their hearts, a rule they know nothing of in written form but have internalized nonetheless, due to the environment surrounding them. The difference, perhaps, being that the Gentiles were following the law for the good of the society, whereas modern white Eloi follow the dictates of the rule in question as a matter of self protection. It’s not the good of society they’re after, but their own safety at the expense of the larger society.
Mr. Morris’s parallel between Rule 10(r) and Romans 2:14 raises a profound question. Let us consider again our subject: the friends and relatives of Megan Boken who express sorrow for her death, by, for example, circling trees with blue ribbons, and talking sadly about what a fantastic person she was, but who express no outrage, no indignation, toward her killers; as Laura Wood writes, “Megan could have been killed by a bolt of lightening, so anodyne is the reaction to her death.” Now do these people act this way because, as Robert B. suggests, they have been conditioned and forced by our entire liberal system to act this way, i.e., they are following the “law” of liberalism? Or, as Mr. Morris suggests, do they act this way because they just naturally have the “law” of liberalism in their hearts? In other words, do the mourners of Megan have impulses of righteous outrage within them, which, because of the PC intimidation that Robert speaks of, they suppress? Or are they simply devoid of any normal human impulse of righteous outrage, and so do not need the liberal “law” because they naturally and instinctively follow the liberal law?
I don’t know the answer, but I tend to think that in at least half the cases, the answer is the latter. Today’s whites are devoid of any impulse of outrage about these racial killings, devoid of anger, devoid of any normal sense of justice. Perhaps, to start with, they had to be conditioned to be this way, as Robert says, but by now the conditioning has become their nature. Which I guess was Mr. Morris’s point.
I realize there’s some ambiguity and confusion in my last comment, because Mr. Morris was saying that his point was the same as Robert B.’s point, while I am suggesting that their points were somewhat different.
Take a look at this story from the UK I just posted at my blog. It jibes quite nicely with Robert B.’s comment about the liberal “conditioning” of whites towards bad black behavior:
Twelve year old Oliver Pettman was in a picturesque English park (complete with a church in the background) when he and his friend were surrounded by seven boys (either black or Arabs) who began taunting them and stole some food from them. One of the ringleaders armed with a BB Gun accused Pettman of being “Racist”. When Pettman disputed this claim he was shot in the head and leg at close range. When Oliver returned home he informed his father Stuart Pettman, 43 of what happened. Later that evening while walking down the street with his father, Oliver saw and pointed out the 14 year old boy who had shot him. Pettman senior approached the boy and marched him to the local police station.
The following day, Pettman senior received a phone call from the police station, and he himself was placed under arrest for suspicion of assault and possesion of a deadly weapon! All on the word of the boy who shot Oliver! It seems the 14 year old accused Mr. Pettman of threatening him with a hack saw. Mr. Pettman, a successful Internet service provider, is now moving his family to Singapore. Way to go UK! You just lost a great family and citizens, not to mention an actual producer of wealth, tax money and jobs. Also notice how we would never have known that the little thugs were minorities except for the accusation of racism tip off. Just some future advice Oliver. If you are ever accused of being a racist, don’t even bother answering it. It is a game that you can never win. If you are white, you are a racist in their eyes. Period.
The murdered volleyball player grew up where I did. She was from Wheaton, Illinois (home of John Belushi), and I am from Glen Ellyn (home of Bill Ayers), just to the east. I know this environment. She was brought up in a milieu of “understanding” and “compassion.” My guess is that she never saw the threat until the gun was fired.
These suburbs lie on the west spur of the metro train system, and she was probably warned not to go south of the Chicago terminal, but not why she should stay away from there. At least not in direct terms. Although the people of these suburbs tend to be conservative about economic issues, they comfort themselves on their “compassion” for the less fortunate, a subject you cover on a regular basis.
My neighbors used to have a black teenager from the city reside in their home each summer, despite the fact that they had two beautiful daughters who were at risk. These, now, women have since learned a bit of reality, as the younger daughter lost her best friend in a brutal murder by a black guy, in a suburb of Minneapolis fifteen years ago. But they still voted Democratic in 2008; even murder can’t trump an upbringing of liberal BS.
I just want to repeat what you said:
Posted by Lawrence Auster at August 25, 2012 11:26 AM | Send
“My guess is that she never saw the threat until the gun was fired.”