Trayvon Martin: Objections Overruled

An Appeal to Reason and Evidential Foundations

…by Jonas E. Alexis

Since intellectual and reasonable power can hardly be the sole reason why false claims about the Martin-Zimmerman case still exist, to expose all those false claims here is beyond the scope of this article.

But to expose some of those fallacies will require more than a merely intellectual exercise. To this end, the reader is asked to put on his or her thinking cap in order to examine the issues raised here.

Emotion, by the way, is not part of our thinking cap. While emotion can be a good virtue, if used properly, when it comes to truth, facts, and rationalism, emotion should take a back seat.

Unfortunately, emotion has been one of the driving forces—perhaps the driving force—that posts beneath the conclusions and reactions of many people right after the Martin-Zimmerman verdict.

We must also keep in mind that when emotion takes precedence over reason and logic, wild reactions are going to be the engines that push people off limit, and evidence will be ignored or suppressed.

Another vitally important point that must be emphasized here at the outset is that on many occasions, when emotion is in charge, reason is largely abandoned. When emotion takes the driver’s seat, reason is handcuffed in the back. Emotion also tends to forget other vitally important cases which contradict prevailing visions and worldviews. Consider this:

“14,000 murders take place every year in America. In just one city, Chicago, President Barack Obama’s adopted hometown, murders are on pace to reach around 400, down 27 percent from last year but on par with 2011. In 2012, only 26 percent of homicides were ‘cleared,’ meaning the case was closed, with or without the killer being arrested or charged.

“Most homicides are same-race crimes. Most black killers kill other blacks. Most white killers kill other whites.”[1]

If you are driven by emotion to quickly condemn Zimmerman, you will have to dismiss all of that and vacuously argue that the Martin-Zimmerman case is unique and represents racism in America. As it has been propounded over and over by the media, politicians and a number of journalists, Trayvon Martin is dead because he was black.

This exuberantly weak and perennial argument suffers very badly precisely because it implicitly and collectively ignores other crimes that seem to give us a far more draconian picture than the Martin-Zimmerman case itself. If that sounds strange, I would challenge any reader to pick up Colin Flaherty’s White Girl Bleed A Lot: The Return of Race Riots to America and read it.

If people are too exhausted to read that small book, consider this:

“An analysis of ‘single offender victimization figures’ from the FBI for 2007 finds blacks committed 433,934 crimes against whites, eight times the 55,685 whites committed against blacks. Interracial rape is almost exclusively black on white — with 14,000 assaults on white women by African Americans in 2007. Not one case of a white sexual assault on a black female was found in the FBI study…Though blacks are outnumbered 5-to-1 in the population by whites, they commit eight times as many crimes against whites as the reverse. By those 2007 numbers, a black male was 40 times as likely to assault a white person as the reverse.”[2]

If you are of the truth, or if truth is as important to you as being angry about the Martin-Zimmerman case, then you will have to ask the deeper questions: “Why have all these facts been hidden or suppressed by the media? How is it that the media has not been fair at all?”

There is an even more sinister enterprise when the media reports some of the facts and ignore other important details. As Thomas Sowell puts it,

“Where the violence is too widespread and too widely known locally to be ignored, both the local media and public officials often describe what happened as unspecified “young people” attacking unspecified victims for unspecified reasons. But videos of the attacks often reveal both the racial nature of these attacks and the racial hostility expressed by the attackers.

“The Chicago Tribune has publicly rationalized its filtering out of any racial identification of attackers and their victims, even though the media do not hesitate to mention race when decrying statistical disparities in arrest or imprisonment rates.

“Such mob attacks have become so frequent in Chicago that officials promoting conventions there have recently complained to the mayor that the city is going to lose business if such widespread violence is not brought under control.”[3]

Thomas Sowell, once again, is right on target here, but he cannot tell us who is manipulating the media or who controls the whole system. To say things like Jewish revolutionaries control the media will cost him too much. After all, Sowell writes for the Jewish World Review.

Once again, Sowell has some good things to say, but on many occasions he does not ask the deeper questions. It is like talking about King Kong without the monkey.[4]

Consider these cases. In 1987, black-on-black crime was so high that it eventually got the attention of black leaders, including Mayor Derryl Benton. He said, “we will wake up some morning and we’ll be short a generation of people.”[5]  Benton’s fear was not without some evidence. In 1985, the Orlando Sentinel declared that “Black-on-black crime has become the No. 1 killer of blacks in the 16-44 age group.”[6] The article went on to say,

“Let’s put some horrifying statistics in perspective: From 1965 to 1974, during the Vietnam War, 274,937 blacks served the U.S. armed forces. Of those, 5,681 were killed in the jungles, hamlets and cities of Vietnam. In 1981 in the United States, about 6,000 blacks were killed in black-on-black violence — more than during the entire war.

“Statistics are equally grim at the local level. In 1983 in the predominantly black areas of Orlando, 8 percent of the strong-arm robberies and 19 percent of the rapes were classified as black on black. In 1984 in Orlando, black-on-black strong-arm robberies increased to 39 percent, while rapes increased to 22 percent.”[7]

This did not just happened in Sanford. Other places like Kissimmee had the same problem.[8] The report cited Benton saying,

“And if that happens, blacks can blame no one but themselves. A planned back-to-school party for about 150 black teen-agers in Eustis nearly turned into a riot… One boy’s jaw was broken and a girl was slightly injured when she was grazed by a bullet during brief gunfire before deputies and the Eustis Police Department arrived.

“The next night, in an unrelated incident, a woman was shot outside a bar and later died at a local hospital. andguns, drugs and alcohol were involved at the back-to-school party on Wall Street that turned into a brawl between blacks from Eustis, Mount Dora and Umatilla. Benton said Eustis police statistics ‘’unfortunately show that most crimes in black communities are committed by blacks.”[9]

Alzo J. Reddick, who served as a Representative in the House of Representative in Florida, was cited in the Orlando Sentinel saying that “blacks killing blacks is the leading cause of death among young black people. He said statistics show blacks are more likely to be victims of violent crime.”[10]

Jesse Jackson himself lamented almost two decades ago, “We talk 30 years ago about genocide [in the black community]. It’s now fratricide. At this point, the Klan is not nearly the threat that your next neighbors are.”[11]

These sentiments were echoed by numerous black activists and authors, including Marian Wright Eldelman of the Children’s Defense Fund, who declared, “We have a black child crisis worse any since slavery.”[12] These scary feelings were not without foundations:

“According to the 1999 Index of Leading Cultural Indicators, African Americans, though 13 percent of the population, are responsible for 42 percent of all violent crimes and over half of the murders in the United States.”[13] Similar data is found at different times and different places.[14]

By 2011, the crimes committed by black teenagers are far more prevalent than any other ethnic group in America, but the data also shows that older black folk—from 35 to 75 years—commit a lot less crimes than any other ethnic group.[15] The problem is among teenagers and people who are below 35 years of age.

In other words, the problem, as the data seems to indicate, is not “white racism,” but a lack of parental discipline and guidance. As we shall see, “Nearly 72 percent of the births to black women were out of wedlock.”[16]

What if Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton and other so-called leaders focus on this problem and the solution to the problem? What if Jackson stops exploiting people and starts taking things seriously? When Barbara A. Reynolds wrote a book on how Jesse Jackson was exploiting people,[17] she “had to hire bodyguards after receiving death threats from Jackson supporters.”

A few years ago, Bill Cosby messed things up when he psychoanalyzed some of the things that many black youth and parents were doing. He said to a particular audience, “These people are not parenting. They are buying things for their kids—$500 sneakers for what?” Cosby was so stunned by the language that they used that he declared,

“You can’t be a doctor with that kind of crap coming out of your mouth!… These are people going around stealing Coca-Cola. people getting shot in the back of the head over a piece of pound cake and then we run out and we are outraged, [saying] ‘The cops shouldn’t have shot him.’ What the hell was he doing with the pound cake in his hand?”[18]

 Of course that did not line up with the prevailing vision. Cosby was chewed up by people like Michael Eric Dyson and others,[19] while he was praised by others like Thomas Sowell.[20]

Stand to Reason

In 2011, the New York Times reported that an 11-year old girl was brutally and sexually raped by 18 males. “The suspects range in age from middle schoolers to a 27-year-old.”[21]

Upon inspection, the girl happened to be Hispanic and the males were exclusively black, though the New York Times never identified the ethnicities of both the victim and the victimizers due to fear.

In April of 2012, right in Sanford, Florida, “Two men were arrested in Sanford on attempted murder charges after trying to kill another man with a hammer, the Seminole County Sheriff’s Office said on Monday.”[22]

Upon inspection again, the victim happened to be white and the victimizers happened to be black. The names of the victimizers were Julius Bender, 18, and Yahaziel Israel, 19.  The article did not even mention the name of the victim! The inquiring mind has to go somewhere else to pursue the research further.

The article declared, “The victim’s name was not released.”[23] Sure.

“Investigators said Bender and Israel beat a 50-year-old man with a hammer inside his vehicle and then took him into the woods near Beardall Avenue and Lincoln Street, where they continued to attack him.”[24]

But had the victim happened to be black and the victimizers happened to be white, the news would have spread like a virus all over the world. What we are indirectly witnessing here is reverse discrimination

Going back to Zimmerman: “Zimmerman had a swollen, if not broken, nose, cuts on the back of his head and black eyes.”

All of that means nothing to emotion.  Reason, on the other hand, would declare that, “Hey, we need to look at this case more closely. Could it be that Zimmerman was acting in self-defense? If so, what kind of evidence are we willing to accept?”

 Emotion would simply dismiss the self-defense argument out of hand without the slightest reasonable reflection. But reason would also say that “We need to look all the evidence, including Trayvon Martin telling his friend Rachel Jeantel before the fight that a “‘creepy-ass cracker’ was following him.”

 One can say that wild reactions largely started after President Obama declared that “If I had a son, he’d look like Trayvon. When I think about this boy, I think about my own kids.”[25] Attorney General Eric H. Holder moves to slam self-defense laws as outrageous.[26] Our beloved president piles up nonsense after nonsense when he continued to say,

“I think it’s important to recognize that the African-American community is looking at this issue through a set of experiences and a history that — that doesn’t go away. There are very few African-American men in this country who haven’t had the experience of being followed when they were shopping in a department store. That includes me.”[27]

Is he really serious? As it has been argued, “Georgetown is an elitist enclave of a national capital that has been ruled by black mayors for half a century. It’s never had a white mayor. Is Holder saying we’ve got racist cops in the district where Obama carried 86 percent of the white vote and 97 percent of the black vote? And his son should fear the white cops in Washington, D.C.?”[28]

More nonsense from the president: “You know, when Trayvon Martin was first shot, I said that this could have been my son. Another way of saying that is Trayvon Martin could have been me 35 years ago.”[29] Keep in mind that our beloved president is a lawyer, and he simply cannot see that this cuts both ways. What about thousands upon thousands of cases where white victims have been brutally raped by black victimizers? The president is simply not helping here. He is indirectly provoking anger among decent folks.

The president continued to bring reproach upon himself when he declared, “Am I wringing as much bias out of myself as I can; am I judging people, as much as I can, based on not the color of their skin but the content of their character? That would, I think, be an appropriate exercise in the wake of this tragedy.”[30]

Once again, that cuts both ways. Why was the Hispanic girl we saw earlier brutally raped by 18 black males? Based on Obama’s argument, a good case can be made that the girl was raped based on the color of her skin.

I had a good laugh earlier when I read the title of an article in the New Times: “Transcript: Obama Speaks of Verdict Through the Prism of African-American Experience.” In other words, the verdict should not be seen through the prism of logic and reason and evidential foundation, but through the prism of one ethnic group. You can forget about white girls being raped at an astronomical rate.

It has been reported that “the Obama administration sent Justice Department investigators to Sanford, Fla., and also used taxpayers’ money to finance local activists who agitated for Zimmerman to be arrested. Political intervention did not end with the federal government. The city manager in Sanford intervened to prevent the usual police procedures from being followed.”[31]

This claim is not without evidence:

“Judicial Watchannounced today that it has obtained documents in response to local, state, and federal records requests revealing that a little-known unit of the Department of Justice (DOJ), the Community Relations Service (CRS), was deployed to Sanford, FL, following the Trayvon Martin shooting to help organize and manage rallies and protests against George Zimmerman.”[32]

That is not all. Last year “Members of the New Black Panther Party are offering a $10,000 reward for the ‘capture’ of George Zimmerman.”[33]

Walter E. Williams once noted that “There are some ideas and feelings that sound plausible but given just a wee bit of thought can be shown to border on lunacy.”[34] The argument that Martin is an unharmed teenager sounds plausible, but given just a wee be of thought can be shown to the border on lunacy.

In a nutshell, emotion must never be the primary arbiter of truth, logic, and rigorous testing and investigation. Here are some classic examples:

“Last May [2007], firefighters at a Baltimore, M.D., fire station came under scrutiny for displaying a deer with an afro wig, gold tooth, gold chain and a cigarette hanging from its mouth. Marvin ‘Doc.’

“Cheatham, president of the Baltimore chapter of the NAACP, went ballistic, charging, ‘There is now and has been a culture of racism and white supremacy within the Baltimore City Fire Department.’ As it turns out, it was a black fireman who dressed up the critter…

“In Nov. 21, a hangman’s noose was found at the fire station with a note, ‘We can’t hang the cheaters, but we can hang the failures. No EMT-1, NO JOB.’ The noose and note turned up on the heels of an investigation into allegations of cheating on the test that emergency medical technicians must take for certification

“Baltimore Mayor Sheila Dixon, a black, in a written statement said, ‘I am outraged by this deplorable act of hatred and intimidation. Threats and racial attacks are unacceptable anywhere, especially in a firehouse.’ Doc Cheatham said, ‘We’re going to demand that this be handled as a hate crime. This thing really needs to end here in Baltimore city.’ The incident prompted a federal investigation.

‘Last week, Donald Maynard, a black firefighter-paramedic, confessed to having placed the noose, note and drawing depicting a lynching on a bunk in the firehouse. City officials said Maynard was recently suspended, prior to his confession, from the department Friday for failing to meet requirements for advanced life-saving training. 

“In response to Maynard’s confession, NAACP President Cheatham still blamed white racism, saying, ‘It really saddens us to hear that evidently things have reached a stage that even an African-American does an injustice to himself and his own people as a result of a negative culture in that department.’”[35]

More importantly, and believe it or not, this polarization in America didn’t happen until a few years after the Civil Rights era. Consider this:

“Most black children were raised in two-parent homes, even under slavery, and for generations thereafter. Freed blacks married, and marriage rates among blacks were slightly higher than among whites in the early twentieth century.

“Blacks also had slightly higher rates of labor force participation than whites in every census from 1890 to 1950. While 31 percent of black children were born to unmarried women in the early 1930s, that proportion rose to 77 percent by the early 1990s.

“When tragic retrogressions in all these respects became painfully apparent in the second half of the twentieth century, a ‘legacy of slavery’ became a false explanation widely used, thereby avoiding confronting contemporary factors in contemporary problems.”[36]

When the family was strong, students were also strong. The result was phenomenal—and people who ignore history will simply not believe this:

“Over the entire 85-year history of academic success in [Dunbar High School], from 1870 to 1955, most of its graduates went on to higher education. This was very unusual for either black or white high-school graduates during that era. Because these were usually low-income students, most went to a local free teachers’ college or to relatively inexpensive Howard University, but significant numbers won scholarships to leading colleges and universities elsewhere…

 “At one time, the reputation of Dunbar graduates was such that they did not have to take [an] entrance examination to be admitted to Dartmouth, Harvard, and some other selective colleges.

“When Robert N. Mattingly graduated from the M Street School in 1902, he entered Amherst College, receiving credit for freshman mathematics and first-year college physics—and he graduated in three years, Phi Beta Kappa. Yet, far from being one of the elite, Mattingly was, in his own words, ‘At Amherst on a shoestring.’”[37]

During these flourishing years at Dunbar, “Latin was taught throughout the period from 1870-1955, and in the early decades, Greek was taught as well.”[38]

These were productive years—and this educational renaissance happened before the Civil Rights era.

Yet as the years went by, Dunbar’s excellent performance crumbled:

“Now, as inadequately educated, inadequately motivated, and disruptive students flooded into the school, teachers began retiring, some as early as 55 years of age. Dunbar quickly became just another failing ghetto school, with all the problems that such schools have, all across the country. Eighty-five years of achievement simply vanished into thin air…

“During the years of Dunbar’s success, it was starved for funds and some of its classes had more than 40 students. As a failing ghetto school today, Dunbar has a finer physical plant than it ever had when it was an academic success.”[39]

 “The school was in operation more than 40 years before it had a lunchroom, which then was so small that many children had to eat lunch out on the street. Blackboards were ‘cracked with confusing lines resembling a map.’ It was 1950 before the school had a public address system.”[40]

Who Killed Trayvon Martin?

Every single individual is precious. Every human life is precious, and no one should be left behind when it comes to justice and truth. What we certainly do not want to do at this hour is to abandon reason and embrace irrationalism.

We are currently at war with Bolshevism and subversive ideology, which have subtly morphed into modern Zionism and neoconservatism and which Jewish revolutionaries have brought upon much of the West. The Civil Rights movement, as we shall see in due time, was largely a Jewish movement. The NAACP was largely a Jewish movement.  “Feminism” was and still is largely a Jewish movement.

And the Martin-Zimmerman case also shows the media certainly has a hand in which much of America is loused up. Thomas Sowell himself declared,

“One of the first things presented in the media was a transcript of a conversation between George Zimmerman and a police dispatcher. The last line in most of the transcripts shown on TV was that of the police dispatcher telling Zimmerman not to continue following Trayvon Martin

“That became the basis of many media criticisms of Zimmerman for continuing to follow him. Only later did I see a transcript of that conversation on the Sean Hannity program that included Zimmerman’s reply to the police dispatcher: ‘O.K.’

“That reply removed the only basis for assuming that Zimmerman did in fact continue to follow Trayvon Martin. At this point, neither I nor the people who assumed that he continued to follow the teenager have any basis in fact for believing that he did or didn’t.

“Why was that reply edited out by so many in the media? Because too many people in the media see their role as filtering and slanting the news to fit their own vision of the world. The issue is not one of being ‘fair’ to ‘both sides’ but, more fundamentally, of being honest with their audience.

“NBC News carried the editing even further, removing one of the police dispatcher’s questions, to which Zimmerman was responding, in order to feed the vision of Zimmerman as a racist”[41]

The media even manipulated Zimmerman’s 911 call in order to make him look a racist! Here is the actual transcript:

Dispatcher: Sanford Police Department. …

Zimmerman: Hey we’ve had some break-ins in my neighborhood, and there’s a real suspicious guy, uh, [near] Retreat View Circle, um, the best address I can give you is 111 Retreat View Circle. This guy looks like he’s up to no good, or he’s on drugs or something. It’s raining and he’s just walking around, looking about.

Dispatcher: OK, and this guy is he white, black, or Hispanic?

Zimmerman: He looks black.”[42]

What did the media do with the transcript? Did they report it properly? No. They remove some of the crucial points in the conversation. For example, they never cited that it was the dispatcher who asked Zimmerman whether the suspect was white or black or Hispanic. What was repeated over and over was that Zimmerman said the suspect “is black.”

Second, the simple fact is that it was raining and Zimmerman said the suspect “looks black,” which means he could not really identify the suspect from a distance. After all, the suspect wore a hoodie. Moreover, the media never mentioned that Martin called Zimmerman a “creepy-ass cracker” before the fight.

Yet America’s most popular rabbi, Shmuley Boteach, responded by saying that Zimmerman probably “saw a hooded black man walking through a neighborhood at night and immediately thought, in the words of Zimmerman himself, that the youth was “‘up to no good. He is on drugs or something?’

“I live in a community comprised largely of orthodox Jews and African-Americans. People have a right to walk through a neighborhood and look at homes, which is what Zimmerman is alleged to have said of Martin.”[43]

Boteach shot himself in the toes by saying, “Neighborhood watch volunteer means just that. You watch. You study. You report. You don’t take the law into your own hands. You don’t become judge and jury as to a person’s intent.”[44]

The simple question is this: how do you watch? If someone looks suspicious around your neighborhood and turns around a corner, do you just stay at your post and say, “Oh well”? How does Boteach explain the fact that there were indeed a lot of break-ins in the neighborhood and that Zimmerman was rational to be suspicious?

How would you like to be a police officer and do not act if you see something around your neighborhood that needs more clarification? Moreover, Boteach’s statement assumes that Zimmerman physically attacked Martin first, and Boteach gives us no evidence for this.

What does the Martin-Zimmerman implicitly tell us? The media, which is largely Jewish, manipulates serious issues for ideological purposes and seems to love it when ethnic conflict takes place in America. Right after the verdict, all hell seemed to have broken loose:

“Protesters ran through Los Angeles streets Monday night, breaking windows, attacking people on sidewalks and raiding a Wal-Mart store, while others blocked a major freeway in the San Francisco Bay area in the third night of demonstrations in California over George Zimmerman’s Florida acquittal in the killing of Trayvon Martin.

“Fourteen people were arrested after multiple acts of vandalism and several assaults in Los Angeles’ Crenshaw District. One man was seen in the street with a head injury and a TV crew received minor injuries in an assault.

“More than 300 officers were called to the scene and were at first slow to directly engage protesters in an attempt to allow a peaceful end to the demonstration, police Chief Charlie Beck told a press conference”[45]

The LA Times reported, “Police estimated that 80 to 150 people were engaged in lawless activity along Crenshaw as they jumped on top of vehicles and appeared to assault bystanders. Some protesters ignited fireworks in the middle of Crenshaw.”[46]

What those protesters could not see was that this whole situation is largely media manipulation. The neoconservatives have a smart way of evading the issue as well. Mark Tapson the neoconservative FrontPage Magazine blames the “race-obsessed left”[47] for much of what happened after the verdict was pronounced.

Tapson could not bring himself to the fact that the Left was and is largely another Jewish subversive movement.[48] The Left took over the major academic centers in the 1920s and many of its leading figures such as Irving Kristol gradually morphed into neoconservatism.[49]

David Simon, Riots, and Manipulation

David Simon, whose father is a public relations for B’nai B’rith, declared that he is “ashamed to call himself an American.”[50]

He continued to propound, “You can stand your ground if you’re white, and you can use a gun to do it. But if you stand your ground with your fists and you’re black, you’re dead.”

Then Simon drops the bomb that literally shows how Jewish revolutionaries are willing to manipulate blacks and in the process turn them to revolutionaries:

“If I were a person of color in Florida, I would pick up a brick and start walking toward that courthouse in Sanford. Those that do not, those that hold the pain and betrayal inside and somehow manage to resist violence — these citizens are testament to a stoic tolerance that is more than the rest of us deserve. I confess, their patience and patriotism is well beyond my own.”[51]

I guess the good reverend Al Sharpton and others were paying attention to Simon. Michael Eric Dyson, a professor of sociology at Georgetown University, pronounced, “White Americans and others will feel that this was a justifiable verdict, this is how things happen. Not until, and unless, the number of white kids die that approximate the numbers of black and other kids who die, will America see.”[52]

Stevie Wonder boycotted the state of Florida because of the verdict.[53] During one of her recent performances, Beyonce “dedicated the encore to Trayvon Martin, calling for a moment of silence mere hours after George Zimmerman was found not guilty by a Florida jury.”[54]

Citing Sharpton, the Associated Press declared that Sharpton “will lead a national ‘Justice for Trayvon’ day in 100 cities this weekend to press for federal civil rights charges against George Zimmerman.”[55] Other people began to take the laws into their own hands.

“Baltimore police say they are investigating a witness account that a group of black youths beat a Hispanic man near Patterson Park Sunday while saying, ‘This is for Trayvon.’”[56] These events were simultaneously happening in other places.

“A man who says he was jogging alongside of a road when three black men abducted and beat him claims the alleged attack was in retaliation for George Zimmerman’s acquittal, police in Senatobia, Miss. told Fox News.

“Police Chief Steve Holts told Fox News the alleged victim, who is white, was jogging Sunday night along Highway 51 when, he said, the suspects pulled over and ordered him to get inside their car.

“‘One of them asked, ‘Do you know who Trayvon Martin was?’ Holts quoted the man as saying.  At that point, the men in the vehicle allegedly attacked him. The man, who the chief described as a young resident of the area, was treated  at a local hospital.”[57]

In a nutshell, the only people who always end up benefiting either politically or financially from subversive activities are Jewish revolutionaries. For more than 30 years the Communist Party has tried to turn blacks into revolutionaries.

Writers like Richard Wright joined the Communist Party but later expelled in the 1930s.[58] Harold Cruse also joined the movement but later found out that the Party was using blacks as remote control. Cruse turned things upside down with his book The Crisis of Negro Intellectuals, in which he denounced the Communist Party as subversive.

I have no plan to write more articles on the Martin-Zimmerman case. I really sympathize for the parents who have lost their child, as much as I sympathize for the many thousands of other people who have been brutally raped, sexually harassed and beaten by gangsters and thugs. Shame on people like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton.

What I will say to all is simply this: do not let the Zionist media do the thinking for you! Our youth and children deserve better. Make truth and reason your ultimate foundation and be ready to embrace the truth wherever it may be found. Only then will you be truly free at last.

Jonas E. Alexis, Assistant Editor

Jonas E. Alexis has degrees in mathematics and philosophy. He studied education at the graduate level. His main interests include U.S. foreign policy, the history of the Israel/Palestine conflict, and the history of ideas. He is the author of the new book Zionism vs. the West: How Talmudic Ideology is Undermining Western Culture. He teaches mathematics in South Korea.

• Read Jonas Alexis’s latest posts here >>>