The Feline Warrior

a cat’s random thoughts, unpopular opinions, and casual cynicism about the human society

Around the block on the sidewalk, 415 Man is there

On this scorching hot day in Los Angeles Pedestrians cover their noses as they walk by Disgusted at the sight of his very existence — One surrounded by decomposing litter, degeneracy and despair

His skin and muscle, riddled with Dust, grease and needle marks His shopping cart, loaded with Heavy baggage from his heavy past His face, hidden beneath the untrimmed beard Displaying a cynical smirk the world cares not to see

Few would bother to know, that his hope has been lost long ago That he has too much pride, yet too little faith That he no longer wants to live, but isn’t quite ready to die

His eyes gazing into the crowd

A knife in his left hand, a metal stick in another, And some whitish powder in his windpipes Which he has just ingested moments ago

His blood flows, through his lungs, into his brain And he can no longer contain himself

He feels that he is under attack That his heart is set on fire That his skin is peeled off That his head is about to explode

And he must stand up, he must fight

He must defend himself against the assailant, the imaginary monster Because though he no longer wants to live as a loser, he isn’t quite ready to die as one either

A knife in his left hand, a metal stick in another Anguish and rage reflected in his pupils

He lets out a deep growl, followed by a loud grunt He raises the knife over his chest And swings the metal stick in the air

Stab, miss Stab, miss Stab, miss

Deeper each time, he repeatedly pushes the knife Into the imaginary monster he’s struggling against

He watches bystanders turning themselves into mayhem Drowning in their own helpless and powerless screams, they flee To the direction of the sirens a few blocks away

Sound of sirens, louder and louder Closer and closer

But as a young lady crosses his path Her eyes glued on her freshly-purchased, overpriced smartphone Oblivious enough to not notice what is taking place around her And defiant enough to ignore 415 Man’s worldly existence

Stab, hit Stab, hit Stab, hit

Gravity dragging her body to the ground She coughs up a mouthful of liquid, dark-crimson in color Her bowels partially dangling in the air, adjacent To a Snapchat message typed but not yet finished And to a nameless pop song continuing in her headphones

The man takes a step closer, rejoicing at the thought — That he’s about to defeat the imaginary monster at last That he’s about to be not a loser anymore That he’s about to defeat the imaginary monster at last That he’s about to be not a loser anymore That he’s about to take his life back at last That he’s about to be not a loser anymore

He lets out a deep growl, followed by a loud grunt

Once more he raises his knife and metal stick, Above the young lady’s disfigured mortal being

Once more he raises his knife and metal stick, Aiming for the imaginary monster’s heart Aiming for the imaginary monster’s chest Aiming for the source of all his misery and suffering —

Pow Pow Pow

Right before he could slice the young lady’s heart in half 415 Man now joins her on the sidewalk instead

“Fuck!” A young-, inexperienced-looking uniform shrieks “Oh fuck! Shots fired! Shots fired…fuck!” His voice, his right hand and his Glock trembling in fear

He stands still, transfixed, deathly motionless As his colleague calmly speaks into the radio — “Code 3…10-71…two down, stabbing and GSW, requesting two RAs”

As 415 Man keeps her company Lying on the cold, cemented sidewalk On this scorching hot day in Los Angeles

于時,初春令月,氣淑風和,梅披鏡前之粉,蘭薰佩後之香。

「萬葉集」(347–759年)


是日也,天朗氣淸,惠風和暢,仰觀宇宙之大,俯察品類之盛。

王羲之『蘭亭序』(353年)


於是,仲春令月,時和氣淸,原隰鬱茂,百草滋榮。

張衡『歸田賦』(138年)

Note from The Feline Warrior: The following article is written by Ms. Tatiana Menaker and was first published on the FrontPage Magazine on December 3, 2003. The original author and publisher retain copyright over this article. Everything here is reposted as-is, with minimal modifications to a small number of punctuation marks.


After arriving in the United States with a diploma from Leningrad University (a university with such alumni as Vladimir Lenin, Ayn Rand and President Vladimir Putin), I realized that I had the extremely unmarketable skills of a Marxist-Leninist philosophy professor. Moreover, English was not my strong suit. So I became a staff writer for a Russian newspaper in San Francisco and free-lanced for émigré publications in New York and Los Angeles. Eventually, I decided “To bring my English to the level of my Russian” (as the Russian-born American novelist Vladimir Nabokov quipped) and enrolled at San Francisco State University. I majored in creative writing.

I couldn’t believe what I found.

Imagine the utter amazement of a refugee from a Communist country, where Marxism was forced on all students, now having to sink in a puddle of socialist propaganda again — but this time in the middle of an American university!

Imagine the astonishment of a person who, after fighting the KGB and being a refusenik, finally comes so close to her dream of receiving a real education instead of indoctrination, only to find herself, once again, in the middle of a socialist brainwashing machine — but this time in San Francisco.

Unfortunately, at San Francisco State University, meeting with members of the monolithic left-wing faculty, who are still soaked in the delirium of the Marxist-Socialist utopia, is an everyday necessity for the average student.

Very few SFSU faculty members separate their political platforms from the professor’s podium. When a professor in the Philosophy department teaches Marxism with the zealotry of a new convert, it is totally understandable; but when a Linguistics professor pushes socialist ideas instead of explaining sentence structure, or a Geography professor slaps slogans of the extreme left-wing organization International ANSWER on her office door (paid for by taxpayers with differing political views), it becomes another matter altogether.

Obviously, being busy with teaching and promoting world change, these professors have overlooked the well-known fact that Marxist ideology failed the test in every country where it was applied. Completely unchastened by the failure of socialism, these individuals still harbor the dream of a Union of American Socialist Republics. It is not my duty to enlighten them about the events of modern history or to correct their outdated ’60s-era radical political views. But unfortunately, their obsession affects their job performance and ruins education systems all across the county.

These academics assume that all the students have the same anti-American and anti-Bush opinions they uniformly hold. So instead of the material listed in the syllabus, they present soliloquies about American imperialism.

Last summer, one of my professors started every class with Orwellian “Five-Minute Hate” condemnations of President Bush. The instructor did not understand how ridiculous he looked: a 50-year-old guy in sandals and a worn-out jacket with hanging threads, who didn’t make it to an Ivy League university, giving hysterical speeches calling President Bush “a moron” and “a good for nothing idiot.”

This confused me. Was the professor referring to the George W. Bush who was elected governor of Texas and then the president of the richest and most powerful country in the world? Was he referring to the George W. Bush who graduated with a B.A. from Yale and an M.B.A. from Harvard, who made $14 million in the baseball business, who was a military pilot and acted with courage and nobility as a leader during one of the worst moments of American history on September 11?

“What is this?” I asked myself.

At least this professor can be credited for giving me my well-deserved grade of C. Another professor, who hated President Bush because he, like Bush, also graduated from Yale, gave me an F with a note saying that I would never overcome the language barrier.

I couldn’t help reflecting that, at the same age as Bush, this professor had achieved little more than a few divorces and five children spread all over the country — information that he poured on us before even learning our names, which, by the way, he never managed to do.

Considering how irritated he was by my essay, which ridiculed his leftist views, this professor was not conducting himself in a fair and unbiased manner. Obviously, I was not the only student who complained about my grade. As a result, the English department quickly changed my grade of F to “no credit.” The following semester, I repeated the same class with a famously tough teacher, receiving a B+ and many compliments on my writing. It seems that I had overcome my allegedly insurmountable “language barrier” after all.

I noticed a recurring pattern in SFSU’s anti-American professors: the degree to which a professor condemned American “imperialism” was usually in direct proportion to his lack of personal hygiene and steady decline in personal appearance.

I was especially fascinated by one middle-aged guy who had alcoholism written all over his face, in bathhouse flip-flops revealing dirty overgrown toenails, and with his belongings stuffed in a plastic grocery bag. If I hadn’t seen him behind the teacher’s desk, I would have mistaken him for one of San Francisco’s deranged homeless, lost on the campus having wandered from the neighboring shower program. Instead of his subject, African Studies, he was teaching that America was rich only because it dishonestly made money on rebuilding Europe after WWII. If not for that lucky strike, he argued, this country would be even more terrible than it is now. He never had notes or a clear structure for his lectures; he just improvised on his well-worn, beloved topic of anti-Americanism.

Over time I found the inverse proportion worked as well: the more well-kept and professional the teacher was, and the harder he worked, the less inclined he was to get himself into the mess of quasi-political discussions instead of the work he was paid to do: teach.

One female instructor, who had no idea how to fill the three hours of class, used to spend 40 minutes taking attendance and often started her lectures with the sentence, “In this country…” Instead of discussing literature, she would consistently praise socialism and what she considered to be the Soviet workers’ paradise. Only my cobra-like gaze and “rude” remarks made her choke on her words. For this offence, I received a D, even though my essays were so good that she told me she didn’t believe I was the one who wrote them.

Immediately before the war in Iraq, I watched two different kinds of professors at SFSU: both of them, naturally, antiwar. Some of them did their work with professional integrity even though their hearts were on the antiwar side, trusting students to make their own political decisions. Some others not only served as ideologues to the anti-American mob organized under their patronage, but also agitated and incited students to leave classes for antiwar demonstrations.

This pointed out the major difference between my education in the Soviet Union and my education at SFSU. When I wanted to transfer credits from my Leningrad University degree to SFSU, I was told by the International Admissions Office that it couldn’t be done, because as a professor of Marxist-Leninist philosophy, I had only gone through “indoctrination.” I find this fascinating, because the difference between Leningrad University and SFSU is that my professors in Leningrad were forced to teach socialist propaganda for fear of brutal punishment; here a bunch of aged hippies, who put students through forced indoctrination instead of academic work, were materially rewarded for their radical activism.

Not only am I as amazed as Alice in the Socialist Wonderland of San Francisco State University, but I feel as though I need to attend a third university to receive a real education. At SFSU, I’ve merely had my second Marxist indoctrination.


Comment from The Feline Warrior: I am reposting this not because I agree with all opinions expressed in this article — especially in regards to, inter alia, George W. Bush — but because what’s described here as the author’s personal experience is so strikingly and disturbingly similar to that of my own (albeit in a different state and a different university).

To Ms. Sara Thornton (Chair of National Police Chiefs’ Council, U.K.), in response to her call for laws to allow “positive race discrimination.”

Let’s be honest: There are very serious inequalities in the British criminal justice system.
When we analyze the data and statistics, it is abundantly clear that such inequalities are by no means isolated incidents, but rather institutional and systematic injustice.

Common sense tells us that males take up about 50% of the population in the U.K.
(In fact, there are slightly more females than males — the male-to-female ratio is estimated to be 0.99.)

And yet, nearly 95% of the British prison population is male.
95%!

Men are, without any doubt, very disproportionately prosecuted, convicted and incarcerated.
They are being locked up at a rate so grossly disproportionate to their population that is shocking and disturbing to anyone who cares about gender equality.

No evidence can be more painfully obvious in demonstrating that the British criminal justice system does, indeed, purposefully target and discriminate against men.
Because, well, how else can you explain that men make up 50% of the country’s population, but 95% of the prison population?

This disgraceful trend of disproportionate incarceration must be stopped, and it must be stopped now.
This is why we, more than ever before, need some groundbreaking reforms to address the gender-based discrimination within the criminal justice system.

And this is why I’m proposing a bold plan: the Solution To Unequal Prosecution, Injustice and Disproportionality (S.T.U.P.I.D.).

This is how S.T.U.P.I.D. is going to be implemented:

  • During roll call before every shift, every police officer in the U.K. will be briefed and provided with the latest statistics: how many people have been arrested this week so far in their jurisdiction, and the male-to-female gender ratio of these arrestees.
  • If they find that females and males each constitute about 50% of arrests, they may carry on with their police duties as usual.
  • But if they find that male arrestees have already exceeded (or are about to exceed) 50%, the following protocol is to be followed:
    1. Temporarily halt the apprehension of all known male fugitives, even if they are armed and dangerous and pose a threat to public safety. Because, well, equality comes first.
    2. If an officer encounters a crime-in-progress committed by a male perpetrator, the officer must make every effort to avoid making an arrest.
    3. If an officer unintentionally detains or arrests a male suspect, the suspect must be immediately released as soon as his gender identity is confirmed, and the officer must immediately report to their supervisor and face possible disciplinary actions.
    4. Officers must make every effort to bring the male-to-female ratio of arrestees to an equal level by the end of the day, even if this means they have to arbitrarily arrest females without legal justification. Because, well, equality comes first.
    5. If all else fails, the Crown Prosecution Service must refuse to prosecute male suspects, while arbitrarily prosecuting females who are in fact innocent, until the male-to-female ratio of suspects is brought to an even 50-50.

Bottom line: since men are 50% of the total population, they are supposed to make up 50% of the prison population, too.
They do not deserve to be overrepresented in prisons, no matter what, period (or, as you Brits would say, “full stop”).

The Feline Warrior: The following article is written by Messrs. Andy Ngo and Wael Taji and was first published on The Spectator on January 11, 2019. The original authors and publisher retain copyright over this article. Everything here is reposted as-is.


On December 30, seven-year-old Jazmine Barnes was killed in a brazen drive-by shooting in Houston while in her family car, driven by her mother. Barnes’s teenage sister provided the sole description of the shooter to media and police: ‘He was white and had blue eyes.’ In interviews, the family expressed fears that they had been targeted because of their race. The response was immediate: national media, celebrities, politicians, and activists launched a crusade to find the racist white killer.

Within days, activist Shaun King and his attorney Lee Merritt used social media to raise $100,000 as reward money for information leading to an arrest. Houston Texans star wide receiver DeAndre Hopkins committed one of his paychecks to the Barnes family. Shaquille O’Neal pledged to pay for the funeral. A GoFundMe page raised over $82,000 — far surpassing its initial goal of $6,500. On Twitter, celebrities and racial justice activists tweeted about the murder using the hashtag #JusticeforJazmine and #SayHerName.

The public outcry had an impact. Over the weekend, Harris County police announced a major breakthrough in the case: two men had been arrested — one charged — on suspicion of murder. Yet neither have blue eyes, nor white skin. Both are black. Whereas the family believed they were victims of a hate crime, suspect Eric Black Jr. admitted before investigators that mistaken identity was to blame. What’s more, in the wake of this surprising turn of events, those who made the loudest cries for justice became conspicuously quiet. Others maintained their outrage by resorting to a conspiratorial tone, sometimes questioning the police’s sequence of events.

It’s clear why the narrative around Jazmine’s murder should attract so much furor. The life of a black child being taken by a racist in a post-Charleston, post-Pittsburgh America should anger us. Yet it’s less clear why this furor should suddenly desist upon the revelation that the suspected killer is not white, but black. Black lives do matter — but the backlog of ignored tragedies in Houston similar to Jazmine’s case suggests that attention given to black lives by some within the activist movement is more selective than it seems.

In February 2017, eight-year-old De’Maree Adkins was killed by bullets that struck her while she slept in the backseat of her mother’s car. In June 2017, Messiah Marshall, a 10-month-old baby, died in his father’s arms after being shot outside his family’s apartment complex. The next month, 14-year-old O’Cyrus Breaux was shot and killed at his own birthday party. Within days, he was joined by 14-year-old Jaquan Neal. Then in January 2018, 16-year-old Stephen Verdell Jr. was shot and killed after leaving the Victory Prep Academy. In March, eight-year-old Tristian Hutchins became the victim of a drive by shooting while sitting in a car with his sister. She survived with a bullet injury in the leg, but Tristian died after a month-long battle at Memorial Hermann Hospital.

Though all similar to Jasmine’s case and in proximity to one another, these murders garnered a different response — if there was a response at all. National media didn’t provide blanket coverage. They were never mentioned by Mr King. Their names didn’t trend on Twitter. Activists didn’t crowdsource investigations. And their families didn’t receive any donations from celebrities. Why don’t these black children matter to ‘racial justice’ activists? Because without exception, their killers are also known or believed to be black.

Racial violence is a fact American society contends with, and over recent decades the media has made strides in responsibly reporting on cases involving historically marginalized groups. Yet, in today’s share-first-read-later world of social media, this interest toward racial issues has produced a perverse incentive. It is race, not our common humanity, that now plays a central role in galvanizing outrage over tragedies. Thus with black suspects in custody and the ‘white-on-black crime’ aspect gone, there’s nothing left to care about — leaving public interest to quickly evaporate.

It is bad enough that those with influence only stood by Jazmine as long as the racial narrative seemed true. It is worse still that this failure is perpetuated repeatedly throughout an informational ecosystem that exploits our issue-centric concerns and short attention spans. The easiness — and profitability — of manipulating our fears over racist violence has serious consequences for social tensions, particularly in a nation so bitterly divided as America in 2019.

This has been manifestly true for Jazmine’s case, where discussions of the murder frequently carried a tone of racially charged aggravation. A Salon column by University of Baltimore Professor D. Watkins called for ‘white America’ to accept responsibility for the ‘terrorist murder’ that took Jazmine’s life. Representative Sheila Jackson Lee (D., Texas) urged the public to treat the killing as a ‘hate crime’ before any motive was established. Meanwhile, relatives of a white man misidentified by Mr King as a possible suspect were left in fear for their lives after being threatened on Facebook: ‘Someone is going to rape, torture, and murder the women and children in your family.’ Although racialized reporting may be good for clicks, it has dangerous consequences for those caught by the backlash.

There is a balance to be struck between standing forthrightly by victims of racism, and proceeding cautiously when coverage can have serious social implications. It’s not just the facts that are at stake, but our social fabric too.

To Ms. Sarah Jeong


“Sighted men are bullshit,” declared Ms. Activist.

Oh, look at her, Ms. Activist at it again. So elegantly, so gracefully, so eloquently said.

Yes, indeed, can’t you tell? She’s a warrior, a fighter, a tough soldier relentlessly combating against the evil of ableism. Can’t you tell, oh, my friend, can’t you tell?

“Sighted people have stopped breeding. You’ll all go extinct soon. That was my plan all along.” I gasp at how forceful these words really are. For that never have I ever come across something so beautifully uttered.

Well, at least not since MLK’s speeches, which are almost — yes, almost — as powerful as hers: You know, about how people should “not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character”; Or about how “darkness cannot drive out darkness” and “hate cannot drive out hate.”

But she and her words are just so infinitely better than MLK. So much more intelligent, so much more brilliant, so much more remarkable. Her words absolutely deserve to remain forever on the shiniest page of history.

“Dumbass fucking sighted people marking up the Internet with their opinions like dogs pissing on fire hydrants.” Music to my ears. Preach, Ms. Activist, please carry on preaching.

Justice, of course, it’s all for justice’s sake.

Why, do you not agree with her? Do you dare to question her? She is disabled. She is blind. Therefore she can never be wrong. Disabled people can never be wrong. Oppressed people can never be wrong. Don’t you ever forget.

Do you not understand her? Her rage, her anger, her fury, her ressentiment against the able-bodied, the sighted, the devilish oppressors? Then you must be one of the billions and billions of ableist bastards too, no questions asked, no refutations accepted.

#CheckYourPrivilege, yo. If you haven’t gone through what she’s been through, then shut the hell up. No, freedom of speech does not apply to you, you privileged able-bodied scum.

“#CancelSightedPeople.”

Hear, hear! Exterminate sighted people! Yes! Exterminate them! Every. Single. One. Of. Them.

Because it’s the sighted that created eugenics against the blind; it’s the sighted people that tried to purge the blind during the Holocaust; and it’s always the sighted that kill the blind by driving drunk because they’re too distracted by their damn phones.

And you know what that means? That means the sighted are guilty as hell. Every single one of them is guilty as hell. All sighted people from the past, all sighted people from the present, all sighted people from the future. All of them. Every. Single. One. Of. Them. No exceptions. No questions.

Who cares if it’s a newborn baby who just so happens to be sighted? Who cares if it’s a life-long donor to the NFB or the AFB or that local Braille library? Who cares if it’s someone who is almost borderline legally blind, but still not quite? And who cares if sighted people make up over 97% of the American population?

Do you not know that? Being sighted, in and of itself, is enough to make you a sinner. And being blind, in and of itself, is enough to make you a saint. So get ready to burn in hell, you sighted scum.

Because, oh yes Ms. Activist you are so right, blind people are simply genetically superior, and deserve the best things in the world. Sighted people, in the meantime, are “genetically disposed to burn faster in the sun, thus logically being only fit to live underground like groveling goblins.” Hey, that’s why they wear baseball caps and sunglasses whenever the sun comes out, no?

Exactly. Hail Ms. Activist. My hero, my idol, my role model.

Hail Ms. Activist.

“Fuck sighted women lol.”

Hail Ms. Activist.

Unarmed Muslim Man in His Own House Slain by US Military

Friends call him “good guy,” outraged and demanding answers
His son was also killed by the U.S. military three months ago

An unarmed Muslim man was killed by the U.S. military on Thursday while in his own house in eastern Afghanistan, multiple sources have confirmed.

The slain Mullah Fazlullah was among the numerous men and women fallen victim to the U.S. military, which has been continuously targeting predominantly-Muslim Middle Eastern nations in its “War on Terror” since the 9/11 attacks in 2001.

Mohammad Radmanish, a spokesperson of the Afghan Defense Ministry, told Reuters in the early morning on Friday that the U.S. state-sanctioned killing took place within the jurisdiction of Afghanistan. He was killed in Marawera district of Kunar, a remote province bordering Pakistan, the spokesman confirmed.

At least two other Muslims in the same area may also have been bombed and killed by the U.S. military drones. They were all unarmed and in their own houses when they died, some witness accounts suggest.

A witness spoke about the killing on the condition of anonymity, fearing possible retaliation.

“I can’t believe what I saw, and I feel that I need to tell the tale — because people need to know what’s really going on here, what the Americans are really doing here. The world needs to know,” the witness said.

Another witness described the scene of death, which he called “absolutely horrific.”

“He was barely awake — it was a bit past nine o’clock in the morning when it all happened,” the witness said, discernibly emotional and still in shock. “Why did he have to be killed when he was holding no weapons, lying in his own bed, in his own house, and in a country that’s thousands of miles away from America?”

A group of people who only wish to be identified as “Mullah Fazlullah’s close friends” gathered earlier today to remember a man they call a “good guy.” According to the vigil attendees, the deceased 43-year-old was a devout Muslim who loved his family and had a strong sense of justice.

“We all love Mullah and we’ll always remember Mullah,” one of the grieving friends wept at the tragic news. “And I know we’re going to get justice for him — because we’ll carry on his legacy and keep fighting for justice, in his name and for his sake.”

Outrage has also spread in the U.S., where activists denounced the government’s actions and demanded answers. Some of them suspected the military operation to be racially and religiously motivated.

Dr. Rita R. D. McCommy, a professor from the School for the Studies of Justice and War and an expert on this issue, agrees.

“This murder of an unarmed Muslim person of color is anything but an isolated incident. It has once again shed light on the grievous systemic racism, injustice and oppression that the U.S. continues to perpetuate, both at home and abroad,” the scholar and active social justice advocate commented.

She cited racism and Islamophobia as two of the potential motives behind the death.

“Had he been white, had he been Christian, he’d still be alive today. But he was neither, and to America, that’s enough to warrant him being murdered. And because of this, we’ve seen so many Muslim families torn apart and devastated over and over again, including right here in America,” said Dr. McCommy, referring to the unpopular and unsuccessful “Muslim bans” last year that immediately sparked demonstrations at airports nationwide.

Airports across the U.S. saw a massive number of protesters in January 2017, when travelers from predominantly-Muslim Middle Eastern countries were denied entry, detained, or deported as ordered by President Donald Trump. They had been since released when the executive orders were blocked by federal judges.

A Seattle-based group of self-described anti-fascist activists have offered condolences and announced their plan to demonstrate and march in protest of the unarmed man’s killing.

Meanwhile, although the U.S. military did confirm that an air-strike near the Afghan-Pakistani border had been carried out, as of Friday afternoon, the White House has made no statements regarding Fazlullah’s death. Secretary of Defense James Mattis was not immediately available to respond to an interview request.

Fazlullah is survived by his son Muhammad Hakim. The other descendant he had, Abdul Basit, was killed by the U.S. military three months ago.

Geez, this shit is just getting so ridiculous.

Say what?

More surveillance cameras. They’re putting up more. I just read it on the news.

Oh god, that’s crazy. As if we didn’t have enough surveillance already — fuck this sick police state, man.

Yeah. Hey, speaking of police state, did you know that the national budget for police is actually higher than military?

Ha? You gotta be kidding me. Like, we already spend a ton on the military — and you’re telling me the police gets even more funding?

Yup, 100% serious. It’s like, um, 534 billion for military, 549 billion for police. But of course they won’t say that — they always use euphemisms, like, “national security defense” for military and “societal stability maintenance” for police, you know.

Damn. This country is so fucking insane.

That reminds me. You know about that woman who got locked up for, you know, a text message to her friend?

What the…? What could she possibly be saying? Like she’s bin Laden’s wife or something?

Hell no, nothing like that. So the story is basically like, she got a parking ticket and she was pissed, so she texted her friend and was like, “fuck the police.” Three words, plus a photo of the ticket. That’s all she sent. And she got locked up for saying that.

What the actual fuck?! Are you fucking serious?! That’s what got her locked up? This is, god, blowing my fucking mind. They’re so, so motherfucking corrupt. Aren’t they supposed to protect, like, freedom of speech or something like that? It’s in the constitution, no?

You damn right it is written in the constitution. Of course it is.

Can’t believe this. Jesus Christ.

Yeah, but what can you do. I mean, it’s not like people like me have a say in this anyway. Voting never meant anything anyway.

Oh yes, you’re totally right on that. Like, that ballot isn’t even good enough for wiping my ass, goddammit.

It’s just ludicrous…I mean, every time there’s an election coming up, you know damn well they have already decided the result like five years ago.

In other words, it’s all fake. This so-called democracy shit is all fake. Faker than Kim Kardashian’s ass.

Ha. But seriously though, what disgusts me the most is how people are okay with this bullshit. Well, I guess there are some that aren’t necessarily “okay,” but even those people don’t say jack, they don’t do jack.

Why do you think that happens?

Duh, after over a decade’s brainwashing — intensive indoctrination in school, I mean — vast majority of people won’t be thinking for themselves anymore.

That makes sense, I suppose.

Yup, that’s the school system in a nutshell. Or as I’d say, “sheeple factories.” From pre-K to college, it’s all the same shit.

Sigh. They definitely are fucked up. You know, everything in this country’s pretty damn fucked since that motherfucking clown was elected.

Wait, what did you just say…?

I said, America is a literal shithole nowadays, now that we are under Trump’s reign.

Trump? Wait wait wait, hold on for a sec. I…I wasn’t talking about the U.S. at all. I was talking about China.

…oh, okay. I thought you were talking about America all this time.

Nah, I wasn’t at all. I kinda just assumed that you knew what I was referring to.

My bad, man.

It’s all good. But yeah, I totally agree that the entire China’s pretty fucked up, like you said.

Um…I mean…like…um…not necessarily, you know, I didn’t mean that.

What do you mean?

Not necessarily…not completely, I mean, not…um, you know, you can’t just be saying, like, everything in China is fucked up. That can’t…you know, that just can’t be the case. There…there’s gotta be lots of good things, lots of great things in China too, you know.

Yeah but —

Look, man, you can’t be just, like, talking about a whole country like that. It’s not fair. Chinese people are pretty awesome, you know, and I mean, I could tell your implicit bias was showing when you said stuff like that. You know there’s this thing called implicit bias, and it’s racist and White supremacist —

Yes, I know what that is, but when the hell did I talk about the Chinese people? I was just talking about the government —

Yeah, but you see, the thing is…um…it’s like, culture, you know, it’s a different culture and we gotta respect that. It’s not fair to, like, impose our culture, our American values on them. America, you know, America has problems too, so we can’t be judging them like that. You know there’s this thing called cultural imperialism, and it’s racist and White supremacist —

Wait — what? But I thought wasn’t talking about the Chinese culture either, I was just —

Here, I know you weren’t but, um…they just, you know, they just choose to do things in a different way, like…like a different lifestyle, right? See, we can’t just decide what’s “civilized” and what’s “barbaric” based on our prejudices, like, you know, like Columbus and, um, the other colonizers did. You know there’s this thing called neo-modern colonialism, and it’s racist and White supremacist —

…um, but, China has never been a colony. Certain parts of it, yes, but the country as a whole has always —

Okay, you’re right on that but…look…um…you know, you can’t just be bashing China like that ’cause…you know…you can’t just call an entire country fucked up. You can’t just like, um, label an entire country like that, that’s — um, that’s racist and —

But didn’t you just say the exact same thing about the U.S. like a minute ago? Anyway, listen, I’m not racist, but—

Ah ha! There you go! I knew it! I fucking knew it! Every time someone says “I’m not racist but…,” they most definitely always are, let me tell you that. So you’re just a racist motherfucker after all, that’s it! Yup, case closed! That’s why you’ve been talking shit about China all this fucking time!

…but —

Don’t you fucking try to talk to me, you Trump-loving wall-building pussy-grabbing GOP-voting Chinese-hating racist Nazi piece of shit! Go suck Richard Spencer’s dick you son of a bitch, and hey, don’t forget to swing by Walmart and buy a cross for yourself, ’cause I know you’ll need a new one to burn tonight!

…but—

Go fuck yourself you fucking Nazi, get lost before I fucking punch you in the fucking face!

…but…oh, oh well. Wasn’t expecting that much of a reaction from him…but I wonder, hmmm…I wonder if he just forgot that, um, that I’m actually from China?

“Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!”

— Isaiah 5:20 (KJV)


“He that justifieth the wicked, and he that condemneth the just, even they both are abomination to the Lord.”

— Proverbs 17:15 (KJV)


Three similar incidents

To start off, let’s first look at three recent police officer-involved shooting (OIS) incidents.

North Little Rock, AR

January 7, 2018, around 1 a.m.

When officers of the North Little Rock Police Department pulled over a vehicle in which Charles “CJ” Smith Jr. (17 y. o.) was a passenger, they asked for permission to search (and the permission was given).
Smith, at the time of this incident, had been charged with seven counts of armed robbery — facing up to 40 years in prison — and was out on bond awaiting trial. (His accomplices would later plead guilty to the robbery charges.)

Shortly after Smith and others exited the vehicle, officers patted Smith down for weapons as he repeatedly ignored orders of “quit reaching, partner.”
But a scuffle broke out between Smith and the officers as a handgun — unlawful for him to carry, for obvious reasons — was found on the 17-year-old, who could be heard screaming “I can’t go to jail!

The wrestle on the ground ensued, with at least one policeman exclaiming, “Get your fucking hand out! It’s a fucking gun!
One officer attempted a less-lethal option, using a stun gun (Taser) on his leg but to no avail; Smith still managed to pull out his handgun and opened fire, narrowly missing his own friends sitting on a sidewalk nearby as well as the officers.

Still trying to subdue him without resorting to deadly force, another officer could be seen delivering a few strikes to Smith’s head, in an attempt to knock him unconscious and force him to let go of the gun.

Yet even then, Smith still refused to surrender and instead chose to cock his gun again, preparing to fire another bullet.
This is when the officers opened fire to stop the threat, fatally wounding Smith.

San Francisco, CA

March 6, 2018, around 10:30 p.m.

Officers of the San Francisco Police Department were flagged down by two robbery victims, who told the officers that they had just been robbed at gunpoint and gave them descriptions of the suspects.

Shortly after, officers spotted a vehicle that matched the description. They pulled over the vehicle and ordered the driver out.
The driver complied and followed instructions, and was arrested without incident (i.e., no injuries were sustained, and no physical force was used).

Officers then noticed a man, later identified as Jesus “Adolfo” Delgado (19 y. o.), hiding in the vehicle’s trunk. Numerous orders — including “Don’t reach!” and “Let me see your hands!” — were given in both English and Spanish, but one hand of Delgado remained concealed inside the trunk.

More than 10 minutes had passed since officers began to de-escalate the situation by trying to talk Delgado into surrender. On a megaphone, an officer continued to give instructions in Spanish, ordering Delgado to show both of his hands.
Officers then fired a non-lethal beanbag round (similar to a rubber bullet), attempting to subdue the suspect without using deadly force.

Nevertheless, Delgado suddenly pulled out his handgun with his concealed hand and opened fire.
Officers returned fire to stop the threat, fatally wounding Delgado.

Seattle, WA

February 20, 2018, around 4:20 a.m.

Officers of the Seattle Police Department responded to a report of a car prowl in progress. Upon their arrival, the suspect — later identified as Jason Seavers (44 y. o.) — fled on foot and officers started chasing him.
During the foot chase, Seavers shot at the officers and officers returned fire, though no one was hit at this point.

An hour later, while officers were still actively searching for him, Seavers was reported to have broken into a home nearby and robbed the residents of their car at gunpoint (thankfully, the residents were unharmed).
The suspect then fled and sped away in this stolen car, but ended up crashing into a patrol car.

With their service pistols drawn, officers approached the suspect who had just shot at them earlier. More than a dozen orders of “Stop reaching!” were given, but Seavers ignored and continued to reach the backseat of the vehicle.

Judging from the totality of the circumstances, it became obvious to the officers that he was reaching for his firearm (which he thought was in the backseat, but had in fact fallen onto the floorboard).
As the numerous attempts of persuading him to surrender turned out to be unsuccessful, officers opened fire to stop Seavers from accessing his weapon, fatally wounding Seavers.

Different reactions

The three OIS incidents are incredibly similar.
Every one of the decedent had committed crimes, was armed with a handgun, refused to follow police commands, and fired at police officers.

The Court of Public Opinion, on the other hand, treated them very differently.

Let’s see a few examples —

North Little Rock, AR

  • KATV (ABC affiliate) reported on the incident right after its occurrence, interviewing Smith’s brother who was also in the vehicle. The witness was quoted saying:
    • They say he resisted, but he wasn’t moving. He was talking. He wasn’t doing [anything].” (Aside from…I don’t know, shooting at the police, maybe? As a witness who’s seen every moment of the incident, shouldn’t you know better?)
    • Why did y’all shoot him? Y’all got tasers. Use them tasers. Why did y’all have to kill him?” (Yes they tried that…if only Tasers work that well all the time.)
    • He also said, according to KATV, that he “never knew” Smith as someone who would carry a gun.
  • A vigil was held for Smith which about 100 people attended. In a quite sensationalized tone, Fox16 (Fox affiliate) reported on the vigil, quoting Smith’s family members and acquaintances:
    • [The officers] need to go to prison for what they did.” (Well, speaking of prison…remind me who was screaming “I can’t go to jail!” again?)
    • We want justice for him. I’m sick to my stomach right now.
    • He was a good kid, he was a happy kid.” (Yes, because a good kid would totally be roaming around at 1 a.m. — which, by the way, was in violation of his court-mandated curfew — while illegally carrying a gun. That’s totally, without doubt, what “good kids” do.)
    • When describing the vigil, Fox16 even commented: “Showing love takes light and hope but it also reminds you of happier days.
  • A GoFundMe fundraising page was set up, which has since collected more than 1,000 dollars.
    • The GoFundMe page read: “What should have been a routine traffic stop turned into 17 year old [sic] CJ being shot 5 times in his back. There are lies being told to cover the wrong doing [sic] of those who are suppose [sic] to protect our children and serve our community” and “He was a great kid, loving, funny, full of life and talent and because someone chose to use excessive force and ended his life, we will NEVER know just how great he would have been.” (Well, at least the “there are lies being told” part is accurate.)
    • After the police camera footage was released, proving the aforementioned claims blatantly wrong, a short update was added: “Although a video has been released there is more to the story and it is under Investagation [sic].
  • THV11 (CBS affiliate) also reported on the incident, quoting Smith’s family members and acquaintances:
    • The story doesn’t even add up, but we’re going to get justice.
    • All of this wasn’t called for. Everybody out here knows he was a good person. The most uplifting thing about him was his smile.
    • Long live CJ. You have plenty of love out here; we care about you. And prayers to your family.
  • In yet another report, THV11 reported that Smith’s friends and family were “seeking answers” to the shooting, even after they watched the camera footage that captured Smith’s last moments. And THV11 even managed to find more acquaintances of Smith to interview:
    • We’re not protected and we don’t know how we’re going to be protected. A traffic stop turns into an execution, it’s scary.
  • He was a beloved son and student — pulled over by police for a routine traffic stop. Friends say the stop was classic racial profiling,” tweeted activist Shaun King, implying that Smith was shot for no reason (other than his race) while conveniently leaving out all the “inconvenient” facts. His tweet has since gained more than 30,000 retweets and 40,000 likes.

San Francisco, CA

  • Protesters marched in the streets almost immediately after the incident, protesting what they considered an unjustified shooting by chanting:
    • No justice, no peace, no racist police!
    • Hands up, don’t shoot!” (Which, ironically, was also the command the police repeatedly gave Delgado — one that he refused to follow till the very end.)
  • A vigil was held for Delgado, and a makeshift memorial was set up where the incident occurred, with signs that read:
    • You will be missed” (…probably not by the robbery victims, I suppose.)
    • Rise in Power
    • Justice 4 Jesus Delgado
  • The San Francisco Examiner reported on the incident by quoting intensively Delgado’s family members and acquaintances:
    • It was the most horrific thing I have ever seen in my life. It was a firing squad to me.
    • He said he was going home, and I trusted it. He was with a good person.
    • He would stay at home a lot and not come out. Whenever he did come out, it was always a treat, and he was the life of the party.” (Well, if only he’d stayed home, or at least left his gun at home on that fateful day…)
    • In the first paragraph, the newspaper called Delgado “a young man whom friends described as a hard worker, with a unique sense of humor and a bright smile.” (The choice of words is so nice that it almost sounds more like a church chorister than a felony suspect.)
  • Teen Suspect Dies Inside Car Trunk As San Francisco Cops Unleash Barrage Of Bullets”, Vibe.com reported on the incident with a quite sensationalized title. More quotes can be found in the article:
    • SFPD murdering undocumented kids of color in the Mission is gentrificaction’s [sic] death drive. #FTP [fuck the police].” (“Show me your U.S. passport or you’re getting shot!” — that must’ve been what the cops said, no?)
    • I don’t know why they start [sic] shooting. It doesn’t make sense. They should have let him get out.” (Yes, they have indeed tried to get him out — repeatedly — and it worked on his accomplice, but didn’t work on him.)
    • It was sad, because the video shows everything, of [sic] how he died, and he didn’t even deserve it.
    • Even after the police video footage was released, which clearly showed Delgado opening fire first, Vibe.com nevertheless still insists “Police said they found a handgun in the trunk, but it is still unclear if that weapon was used during the incident.”
  • A town hall meeting was organized a week later, on which SF Weekly ran a lengthy, highly sensationalized coverage, titled “Mission Residents Furious Over Another Fatal SFPD Shooting”:
    • He was one of the first kids in that door every morning, and one of the last kids to go home. Some of the first field trips we took were for him to walk on the Golden Gate Bridge for the first time. To ride a bike for the first time. To go on his first college tour. He believed in the program so much that he convinced his parents he wanted to spend more time there.
    • We are the Mission. We are Adolfo. We are all one community, we are all one Mission. This is our kid, we claim him and everything about him.” (If you really do claim “everything” about him, including his crimes and wrongdoings, then…perhaps you’re also a part of the problem.)
    • Attendees of the town hall meeting, indeed furious as the report says, were at one point heard yelling “murderers!” to the police officers (whom SF Weekly described as “calm and firm, fairly emotionless”).

Seattle, WA

  • The Seattle Times reported once after the incident occurred, once after the police dashcam footage was released, and once after the decedent was identified.
    • The Seattle Times’ attempts to contact Seavers’ family were unsuccessful. No activists, politicians, or acquaintances of Seavers were interviewed.
    • All three reports are fairly brief, and the language seems fairly neutral and not sensationalized. No follow-up coverages seem to be available.
  • No protests, vigils, town hall meetings or city council discussions seem to have ever been organized.

Why?

Yellow journalism

After both the North Little Rock case and the San Francisco case, the news media immediately publicized not only facts known to them but also interviews with the decedents’ families and acquaintances — and mingled them together.
The narratives in such interviews are, however, highly emotionally charged and often turn out to be factually incorrect — which shouldn’t be surprising: it’s perfectly understandable and even expectable that, regardless of what really happened, a grieving family would almost always side with the family member they’ve just lost.

Still, there’s no reason the reporters and journalists, being professionals in the field, would not understand that such narratives tend to be unreliable for this very reason.
Yet in both cases, their coverages relied heavily on these narratives anyway, some of them prolonged and highly sensationalized.

Because it sells well.

Welcome to the era of “post-truth” politics and mass media, where facts and evidence no longer matter but are constantly trumped by feelings, emotions, biases and agendas.
That’s why these news reports would easily turn into biased, one-sided coverages, and accordingly, the Court of Public Opinion would’ve already decided on its verdict long, long before the facts come out:

What the poor grieving family said must be right — he was an innocent victim, he didn’t deserve to die, and the police were wrong.

And how many people would actually bother to follow up on the cases, after the Court of Public Opinion has already rendered its verdict?
Not many, indeed.

“A lie travels around the globe while the truth is putting on its shoes.”

Race to the top

You may wonder why the Seattle case was covered and reacted to so differently than the other two.

Remember, three cases were incredibly similar: criminal drew a gun and shot at cops; cops returned fire and the criminal is now dead.

But there are differences too:

  • Smith, in the North Little Rock case, was Black.
  • Delgado, in the San Francisco case, was Latino (also a Mexican national and without lawful immigration status in the U.S.).
  • Seavers, in the Seattle case, was White.

When a White man gets shot, since it doesn’t fit into the “racist police” narrative, the Court of Public Opinion would treat it as an isolated, individual incident (and never say “he didn’t deserve it” — surely, no news media ever called Seavers a “victim”).

But when a Black or Latino man gets shot, the bullets alone are enough to confirm and reinforce the “racist police” narrative, regardless of what may have preceded the gunfire.
So the Court of Public Opinion would make sure to call him a “victim,” quote their acquaintances calling him “a good kid,” and inflame the public to anger and outrage.

Yet strangely enough, the same group of “racist” police officers “murdered” Smith “just because he was Black,” but for some reason never even laid hands on other people in the car — who are also Black.

And right before “murdering” Delgado “just because he was Latino,” the very same group of “racist” police officers somehow miraculously talked his accomplice — who is also Latino — into surrender, successfully taking him into custody with no force used at all.

Strange, no?

Who to blame?

In the San Francisco case, there seem to be people who, even after reviewing the footage, still think that the shooting was avoidable and the police were in the wrong.

In other words, they’re basically saying:

He can rob people at gunpoint, point a gun at the police and shoot, but it’s still the police’s fault for returning fire.

What world do you all live in?

No matter what country on this planet you are in (yes, including Mexico where Delgado was born), when you shoot at a group of trained, competent, armed police officers, there’s a 100% chance that they’ll return fire.
Or what else do you expect them to do? Run toward your gun, dodge your bullets, and wrestle the gun out of your hand?

Don’t get me wrong — I’m only analyzing and discussing these three individual incidents on a case-by-case basis, with no intention to sugarcoat or oversimplify any complex social issues.
The point is, no matter how I look at them, there’s no way I could say that these particular cases could’ve been avoidable had the police handled them differently.
(At least not until fully bulletproof robo-cops are invented.)

Also.
While it is perfectly reasonable for family members to mourn and grieve for the deceased, as for the rest of the community — the upright, law-abiding citizens — perhaps you should think about this before you get “furious” over what you see on the news:

Who are the real bad guys? Who should really be blamed for ruining your community?
Those who endanger everyone’s lives by committing robberies, burglaries, sexual assaults, drive-by shootings and other violent crimes?
Or those who are trying to stop them?

And if you always choose to side with the former and always rush to their defense, unthinkingly and unconditionally “claiming everything about them,” what message will that send to your children?
Will they be able to tell the right from wrong anymore?
Will they begin to see those criminals as innocent victims, martyrs, or worse yet — God forbid — role models?

Another grieving mother

A similar incident also occurred in Cleveland, OH.

On October 25, 2017, a known drug dealer and convicted felon named Antonio Levison (33 y. o.) attempted to flee from police officers, engaged in a gunfight with them, accidentally dropped his first handgun and was fatally shot as he aimed a second handgun at them.

His mother, still overcome with incredible pain and grief, told the Cleveland 19 (CBS affiliate):

“I told my son [on Sunday] I’m not trying to identify your body. Here it is Wednesday, I’m identifying my son’s body. That’s a message right there.”

“It’s not [the officers’] fault. They were doing their jobs. They had to do what they had to do. My son pulled the gun on them. So that’s what happened. They had to do what they had to do to protect themselves.”

“I didn’t want it to end like this. I wanted to hear my son’s laugh… October 25, 2017 is when my son’s life was taken from him, because he was being real ignorant. And I’m sorry to say that. And I love my son.”

I have no doubt that she must’ve tried everything she possibly could to raise him right — to stop him from living as a criminal — and yet, regrettably, her son still failed her.

And her message to those who lead a similar lifestyle like his son did:

“Please put these guns down. Take it from a mother that knows… It’s not worth losing your life running from the police, shooting at the police. You’ve got families… My son was a street person. It’s not worth it. It’s not worth your life. Trust me.”

While still grieving over the heartbreaking loss of her own son, this mother was still so unbelievably wise and rational.

I pray that she can find peace for the rest of her life.
And I think we all have one thing or two to learn from her.

The script, written a century ago Remains unchanged and unchallenged today Near the playwright’s gravestone Fresh footprints can still be seen “This show must go on at any cost” The ambitious actors have so decided Yet one theater after another Not once has the show succeeded onstage

“I blame the actors, for they are incompetent,” “I blame the audience, for they expect too much” “I blame the stages, the curtains, the illumination and audio systems” Those self-important and self-righteous critics commented Even though they’ve never seen the play in person

Never mind the audience is already so fed up After wasting so much money on the tickets Never mind the show has failed for dozens of times On stages of all places, by actors of all sorts

“But the script is so perfectly written! It can’t be the script’s fault!” Cried those self-important and self-righteous critics

“This show must go on at any cost” And so have they decided