Race Relations... yet again

     Race Relations.

    So here we are again with yet more Race Relations / Racism in the news. The Daniel Penny acquittal has all manner of blm 'Officials' in a dither. As I understand it this woman I cant find her name anywhere being interviewed is a leader of the blm. I don't know how many blm leaders there actually are. It seems that the blm leaders have taken over for al sharpton with their ability to be in front of a podium when there is a black person who has been wronged. My mistake big al can be found here As I mentioned before no matter the offense. As I understand this situation there was a drug addled homeless man, jordan neely on a New York subway car yelling at and threatening the riders on the car. At some point a Mr. Daniel Penny stood up and took action. He subdued Jordan Neely with a choke hold which contributed to his death. This blm leader woman is contending that the whole of the jury is/was racist by finding Mr. Daniel Penny innocent. She would seem to be saying that the whole of New York is racist since the jury selected for this trial is made up of New Yorkers. I don't pretend to know the intricacies of the situation. I am trying to keep from getting consumed by the news or what passes for news any more.

[UPDATE]   In the video where in the blm man is calling for there to be "black vigilantes" vigilantes who would fight against white people and 'arguably' to choke OUT any white person that any black person feels is 'oppressing' them. This blm man is opening up the scope of the need for actual physical self defense to repel an actual act of violence as apposed to some nebulous notion of oppression. There is a HUGE difference between standing up to an individual who is openly threatening the lives of people, on a subway car, a closed and confined and a place where, if Mr. Neely were to start to make good on his threats to kill the individuals would have no opportunity to escape, and the very nebulous idea of Oppression. Oppression is in the eyes of the beholder so to speak. Which opens the idea of 'physical self defense, vigilantism' for an action as slight as a stare, a glare or even the rolling of eyes all the way up to calling the offended black person some out of pocket derogatory 'name'.   Which brings up another bone of contention for me but that is an other essay entirely.   But ANYTHING that falls even remotely SHORT of screaming threats of violence and death right in their face, especially in a confined and contained space with no easy avenue of escape, Not So Much. I do hope that blm will someday be found to be accountable for 'inciting' violence. I hope that the corrupt organization of blm will be forced to dissolve and all those persons who are living high on the blm monies be incarcerated.

    But At what point do WE declare that WE the royal/collective WE have the right to defend ourselves. When do we allow that it might be beneficial for a citizen to step in and take action when NO Police or other institutional authority is near enough to preserve life or property. When do we allow ourselves to be free of the Systemic institutional Guilt that pervades America now. According to blm Every White person must be caused to be at risk of theft and bodily harm because of this thick cloud of Guilt. All but the black person must shoulder this guilt and hang their head in shame. Because everybody but black people have oppressed the black person. I am not advocating for rampant vigilantism. But this blm leader does call for vigilantism. It seems odd that this and all of the blm types decry the oppression of the black man but somehow they are dressed much better than I am. I do, however, declare that there must be some level of "adequate" public protection. In the wake of the crazy notion that WE need to de-fund the police some other authority needs to take their place. The blm types are advocating for the de-funding of the Police but that only serves to exacerbate situations like this. When We can no longer feel safe or protected because the Police have been de-funded what is the blm's answer to this? The WE on the subway car should have just sat by while jordan neely continued to make threats of violence waiting for neely to make good on his threats? What would have been the scenario if neely had indeed made good on his threats and injured or killed someone on that subway car? Would the injured or the family of the dead victim had any recourse in the eyes of the Law or more importantly blm? Would blm be made to pay for neely's victims hospital bills or in the event that his victim died, what then? How would blm stand on that situation? Or would they just throw up the same tired old excuse, that it is 'society' or the 'systemic racism' in America is to blame and that neely was not culpable of any wrong doing because of his race? In the eyes of the blm people are ALL black people innocent by dint of race? It sounds like blm is advocating for a complete separation of the races. Jee where have I seen that before? It seems to me that some very Good people stood up against this very sort of separation not too long ago. Maybe I am missing something here.

    I am reminded of the events on the Flight 93 on September 11 2001. Should the passengers just sat idly by while the al-Qaeda terrorists crashed the airliner into what ever target they had in mind. I don't think so. The term 'Sheeple' comes to mind. I think that is not the answer.