I thought racism was “a belief in the inherent superiority or inferiority of a race”. Merriam-Webster defines racism as “a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race; racial prejudice or discrimination”. Oxford’s definition is “Prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one’s own race is superior; the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races”.

So according to me, Merriam-Webster and Oxford, racism is an individual trait. Anyone can be racist if they believe their race is superior to others. This would seem true, since people of every race have committed horrible crimes based on racial hatred. I’ve personally had the misfortune to meet whites who hate blacks and Hispanics, Hispanics who hate blacks, and blacks who hate whites and Christians. I know an Asian raised by hillbillies who told me Asians consider pretty much everyone else inferior. I know a Hispanic man who refuses to have anything to do with his own grandchild because she’s half black. I met a Hispanic college professor who asked “what kind of a f**king Mexican marries a white woman?” Once I walked past a white child in a grocery store who suddenly blurted “You’re colored!”, then got really nervous when I stopped to talk to him about it. In Kosovo I had a very depressing conversation with someone who advocated killing every last member of an opposing ethnic group: “The adults committed crimes against us, the old ones used to commit crimes against us, and the young ones will commit crimes against us. So they should all be killed, from one until the end.” And I knew a lot of people from the other ethnic group felt the exact same way.

Racism, to me, seemed to be an individual trait that could be held by anyone. However, SJWs (social justice warriors) tell me I’m wrong about racism. Racism has been “redefined”, and now must include “systemic”.

A few days ago a comedian and CNN commentator explained to Stephen Colbert that blacks are literally incapable of being racist:

“We can be prejudiced, but racism implies power and institutions behind it. I can be prejudiced, I can be like, ‘I don’t like white people,’ but I can’t, like, not hire them or not give them their voting rights — you know what I’m saying? So it’s a very different thing.”

This isn’t racist. And you’re racist if you think it is! P.S., the guy’s shirt says “Unlearn white skin as the default”.

When I started researching the new definition, I ran across this 2009 Daily Kos article:

“Therefore, according to this institutional power definition, it is not possible in this country for black people to be ‘racist’.  Yes we have a black president, and a few second/third generation black leaders in majority black areas, but African Americans and people of color do not have institutionalized power, established over centuries, to impose their prejudices and preferences on the majority culture.” [emphasis in original]

Even before that, the University of Delaware was teaching students that whites are automatically racist, while minorities are incapable of racism:

“A RACIST: A racist is one who is both privileged and socialized on the basis of race by a white supremacist (racist) system. The term applies to all white people (i.e., people of European descent) living in the United States, regardless of class, gender, religion, culture or sexuality. By this definition, people of color cannot be racists, because as peoples within the U.S. system, they do not have the power to back up their prejudices, hostilities, or acts of discrimination. (This does not deny the existence of such prejudices, hostilities, acts of rage or discrimination.)”

So minorities hold no institutional power, which means they cannot be racist no matter what they personally believe, because racism is systemic. If it’s not systemic it’s prejudice, or discrimination, but not racism. Clear enough?

The new “systemic” definition of racism seems to be taught as unquestionable truth on some college campuses. And a LOT of white people are not just accepting it, but embracing it. Just in my personal experience, quite a few whites have told me that since I’m Hispanic I can’t be racist no matter what, but they can be since they’re white, and they probably are racist but just don’t know it, and they’re sorry for their white privilege, and if they don’t fight white privilege they’re just as guilty of racism as any white supremacist. On the extreme edge of that white guilt are people like these, in a video made by a flamboyantly annoying black racial activist.

(If you think that video is too insane to be real, think again. As near as I can tell, the “Uhuru Solidarity Movement” is a thing. If you’re white and want to “join and pay reparations,” please visit their site.)

The backstory on the following video is a little murky, but it pretty clearly seems to be two minority college students challenging white college students to explain why their lives matter. “Our argument is that white life is wrong. Our argument is that we should never affirm white life.” Remember, telling a white person their life doesn’t matter, because they’re white, isn’t racist.

So this whole redefinition of racism got me thinking. If only whites can be racist, what do you call a black person who actually calls for genocide of white people?

I find it sorta difficult to understand how someone can say white people should be killed, and even specifically talk about killing white infants, yet not be considered racist.

This man, a member of the New Black Panther Party named “King Samir Shabazz”, also said, “We gonna need preachers going into the cracker churches throwing hand grenades on early Sunday morning when the cracker got his hands up, ‘please white Jesus!’ Well we gonna throw a bomb in that God damn church, burn up the cracker, burn up the cracker Jesus, and burn up some cracker white supremacy…drag some of these god damn rusty dusty ass crackers out of their homes, skin their asses alive, hang their asses up by some damn rope in some trees, drag them up and down the streets by God damn trucks, sick the pit bulls on them, pour acid on their asses, dump them in a God damn river, bring them back up, bust them in the head with a rock.”

But remember, that’s not racist. According to our friendly SJWs, even if King Samir Shabazz al-Qaddafi X (or whatever name he gave himself) actually did throw hand grenades into a white church while busting a white infant’s head with a rock and yelling “Kill all white people!” it wouldn’t be racist.

But Shabazz was just speaking hypothetically. So let’s look at a real case of racially-motivated murder that wasn’t racist (honest!).

In San Francisco in 1973 and 1974, a group of black radicals murdered at least fifteen people, almost all whites, and tried to murder eight more. One of these white victims was kidnapped, bound, and dismembered while still conscious. Two more victims, a husband and wife, were kidnapped and hacked with a machete after the kidnappers fondled the wife. The group responsible was “a splinter group of the Nation of Islam, called the Death Angels, [which] required the murder of several ‘blue-eyed white devils’ for membership.”

Wrap your mind around this: according to the modern redefinition of racism, the black radicals who kidnapped, bound, and chopped a conscious man’s limbs off because he was white weren’t racist.

Since racism must be systemic or it isn’t racism, I’m curious about something. If a KKK Grand Dragon is kidnapped, put on a plane and dropped into downtown Tokyo, is he no longer racist? After all, there is no systemic racism again the Japanese in Tokyo. Presto, Mr. Grand Dragon is no longer racist. Right?

I’m Hispanic, a minority which automatically “has no power”, and can’t be racist. So I could change my name to Chris Herndriotti, claim I’m Italian, join the Klan, burn crosses and lynch black people, but I still wouldn’t be racist. Right?

If a black man named John Smith and an otherwise-identical white man named John Smith joined forces to beat an Asian man to death while yelling “We hate Asians!”, did the white John Smith commit a racist murder but the black John Smith didn’t?

What about biracial people? Is President Obama automatically racist because he’s half white, or automatically never racist because he’s half black?

I’m so confused!

What I love (and by that I mean hate) about the SJW movement is its desperate quest to define people by racial, ethnic or religious identity. The very same people who say they oppose treating people a certain way because of their race treat people differently because of their race. Non-white SJWs have defined away their own racism, while white SJWs have embraced their own irrational white guilt and labeled themselves practitioners and beneficiaries of racism even if they personally have done nothing wrong. Individual actions and beliefs mean nothing to these people.

Perhaps these SJWs have a valid point hidden somewhere in the stupidity; maybe they’re reasonably pointing out that blacks have suffered worse than others, and that many whites don’t recognize advantages most of them have. Those things are true. But SJWs, like activists everywhere, dilute their own message with hysterical overreach and hyperbole, and create conflict where none is needed.

I’m not educated. I’m just a community college non-graduate who spent almost 27 years in the military and is still a cop after over twenty years. I’ve lived with, worked with, and served in combat shoulder to shoulder with people of different ethnicities, religions and races, in several countries. And here’s what I’ve learned:

Racism is an individual belief. Redefining racism so that “no minority can be racist” is a transparent, convenient, self-serving way for minorities to be racist without having to admit it. Minorities who hold all whites accountable for past wrongs are just as racist as a hillbilly Klansman with a swastika tattooed on his neck. Yes, systemic racism exists, and blacks have historically borne the brunt of it in America. Yes there are white racist douchebags. Real racism, especially systemic racism, needs to be exposed and defeated.

But plenty of “oppressed minorities” are also racist, and the endless search for a white racist under every rock only perpetuates racial tension we don’t need. Dammit, can’t we admit things have gotten better? Can’t we at least acknowledge that we’ve come miles from the systemic racism of the Jim Crow era, light years from slavery, and that all whites aren’t the eternal enemy of all of us with darker skin? The experience my parents had in the 60’s in north Texas, when they were kicked out of a restaurant – while my father was serving in the Air Force – because “we don’t serve Mexicans here”, hasn’t and won’t happen to me. And if it did, the public backlash would be so intense the restaurant would shut down. This country is better now than it was then.

I’m grateful that my country is better. I’m grateful to all the people, even the whites, who fought and sacrificed to make it better. I won’t poison my children’s minds with the lies that the system is rigged against them, or that all whites are their enemies. And I damn sure won’t tell them that if they become racist, they’re somehow better than white racists.

Chris Hernandez is a 22 year police officer, former Marine and recently retired National Guard soldier with over 25 years of military service. He is a combat veteran of Iraq and Afghanistan and also served 18 months as a United Nations police officer in Kosovo. He writes for BreachBangClear.com and Iron Mike magazine and has published three military fiction novels, Proof of Our Resolve, Line in the Valley and Safe From the War through Tactical16 Publishing. He can be reached at [email protected] or on his Facebook page (https://www.facebook.com/ProofofOurResolve).

We aren’t blind to the past.

Yes, many Americans have suffered horrible, unforgivable racism. Some Americans continue to suffer today. Yet we two soldiers, one black and one Hispanic, chose to risk our lives for this country. We served in combat, alongside soldiers of other races, against an enemy who cared nothing of the color behind the American flags on our sleeves.

We didn’t do it because we believe America is perfect. We deal in brutal realities, and we know those realities. One of us grew up with a family legend about Texas Rangers executing a great-great grandfather and his brothers. One of us was introduced to racism by being a rare minority in a majority-white school, and dealing with racial epithets. One of us had his parents kicked out of a restaurant, while his father was serving in the military, because “we don’t serve your kind here.”

We acknowledge those sins. But we don’t believe, for a moment, that those sins define our country today. We refuse to poison our children’s minds with the lie that their race lessens their value as citizens, or restricts their boundless opportunities. We choose to embrace what we know to be right about America, rather than dwell on what was wrong.

Let’s discuss facts. Slavery was terrible. But no white person in America alive today owned or sold African slaves. Jim Crow was terrible. But most of those responsible for Jim Crow are dead, and those few who aren’t wield no power. Holding any white person today responsible for the wrongs of the past is not just illogical, it’s wrong and stupid. Redefining racism as “systemic,” effectively giving a pass even to those minorities who openly advocate murders of innocent whites, isn’t just wrong and stupid. It’s wrong, stupid, and pathetic.

You want to be considered equal? Then demand to be held to the same standard as whites. And live by that same standard.

Over fifty years after the 1964 Civil Rights Act, it is clear that race relations have regressed rather than progressed, particularly with racial subcultures who more often than not opt to self-segregate in cultural, political, and day-to-day fashions. Homogenization is the antithesis of American multiculturalism; America is about osmosis of culture, of appreciating and celebrating our differences while realizing we’re in the same boat and must work together to advance as a nation and a culture-at-large. People so focused on the past that they actively blame people today, for yesterday’s mistakes, are actively opposed to the American “melting pot.”

To that end, there are people, of multiple races, who seek to “erase” the past and its symbols. Those people should stop. Seeking to ban symbols one may not fully understand only serves to foment racial tensions and deepen the chasm.

One thing that actually closes that chasm is what we two authors have in common: military service. The military is one of the greatest mechanisms for making people realize we’re all Americans. The kind of people listed in the two paragraphs above would not fare well in the military, particularly if they were to work outside the wire (as we authors have). There is something about an enemy trying to kill you that hammers home a message: we’re all Americans of the same cloth and we must work together, not only for advancement, but for self-preservation. That may come off as a cavalier sentiment, but it is one to which any combat vet will attest.

Of course, there are several reasons why people join the military: family tradition, college benefits, thirst for adventure, what have you. But at the end of the day, it is rare that a veteran hangs up his uniform for the last time without a sense of patriotism. Regardless of their race or any other background factor, they come to appreciate that the sweat, blood, and tears they and their mates spilled counted for something greater than themselves.

The lessons learned patrolling dusty third-world streets and dodging gunfire in remote valleys carry over to civilian life. Those who fail to study the past are doomed to repeat it, but we should have more sense than to blame people in the here and now for mistakes of yesterday. We study those mistakes as a form of after-action review: how can we do better and move forward? That’s not just for blacks to move forward, or for Latinos to move forward, or whites, or Asians. We’re concerned with how Americans can move forward.

We’re concerned with how Americans can move forward because we believe in the principles established by the Founding Fathers. We believe in the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. We believe in the rugged individualism embodied by our Constitution. We acknowledge that our government has not always abided by those principles in practice, but we know the American people, through the work of people like Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and Rosa Parks, have eventually held the government accountable to those promises.

We also fervently believe in defending what has been built, in defending the progress our nation has made. To that end, both authors have put on a uniform, picked up a weapon, and answered the nation’s call to service. We are not the first. The Japanese internment was one of our nation’s greatest mistakes, yet the Japanese-Americans of the 442^nd Regimental Combat Team answered the call during the Second World War because they believed in the nation’s principles, even if the government failed to live up to them. Over nine thousand Purple Hearts, eight Presidential Unit Citations, and twenty-one Medals of Honor were awarded to the 442^nd, a testament to the ferocity with which they defended their nation.

The 332^nd Fighter Group (also known as the Tuskegee Airmen) also answered that call during the Second World War. At the height of Jim Crow these men opted to not only serve their country, but did so by breaking color barriers, proving that blacks were just as competent at dogfighting as their white counterparts.

A more recent example is Team 2/6, Company F, 51^st Infantry LRP (Airborne), a Long Range Reconnaissance Patrol that consisted entirely of black men in Vietnam. In a time where the ghost of Jim Crow was still extremely strong and Muhammad Ali refused to serve because “no Viet Cong ever called [him] nigger,” these men not only answered the call but volunteered for Airborne and then for the LRRPs, one of the most dangerous combat roles in the Vietnam War. They believed in their nation and believed in defending it and its principles from the enemy, even as the nation struggled to live up to those principles.

Our nation has made many mistakes in the past, some minor and some grievous. We can acknowledge mistakes made and still love this country. Unlike the “blame America first” crowd, we know our nation has done more good than harm. We love our nation. We love the principles upon which it was founded. We embrace the amazing accomplishments of previous generations, and stand on the shoulders of those who came before us.

Hernandez with Mr. Richard Overton, America’s oldest known WW2 veteran

So here’s our message to America’s grievance merchants: while you’re busy with your desperate quest to find racial offense, we two are busy living happy, fulfilling lives with fellow Americans of all races…even white ones whom you automatically consider evil.

We are certain some will view us as Uncle Toms or “sellouts to the white man” for our opinions, for daring to think for ourselves, for the stark offense of being Americans first and color-indifferent rather than aligning on racial fault lines. To those people, in closing, we have a quote:

“We must not seek to use our emerging freedom and our growing power to do the same thing to the white minority that has been done to us for so many centuries. Our aim must never be to defeat or humiliate the white man. We must not become victimized with a philosophy of black supremacy. God is not interested merely in freeing black men and brown men and yellow men, but God is interested in freeing the whole human race. We must work with determination to create a society, not where black men are superior and other men are inferior and vice versa, but a society in which all men will live together as brothers and respect the dignity and worth of human personality.”

Did you find yourself saying that the quote must be from an Uncle Tom sellout?

It’s from Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., a man who endured more hardship and injustice than anybody claiming grievances in the here and now. Dr. King obviously felt that racial supremacy was wrong, and humans banding together for self-betterment was the answer.

We two authors have chosen to band together for self-betterment. Others, of all races, have chosen the path of the racial supremacist. If the racist shoe fits, wear it. But don’t expect us to believe you want fairness, equality, or progress.

Authors:

Chris Hernandez is a 20 year police officer, former Marine and currently serving National Guard soldier with over 25 years of military service. He is a combat veteran of Iraq and Afghanistan and also served 18 months as a United Nations police officer in Kosovo. He writes for BreachBangClear.com and Iron Mike magazine and has published two military fiction novels, Proof of Our Resolve and Line in the Valley, through Tactical16 Publishing. He can be reached at [email protected] or on his Facebook page (https://www.facebook.com/ProofofOurResolve).

Steven Hildreth, Jr. is an author, Iraq War veteran and firearms enthusiast who has written for Ranger Up’s Rhino Den and the Force 12 Media Network. He resides in Tucson, Arizona.

http://www.amazon.com/Steven-Hildreth-Jr/e/B009D4YTRO

People of several different races are having a public event. Two people of one specific race show up to cover the event. Someone at the event says, “We don’t want that race here.” The two race-offenders are escorted out of the event, despite the fact that they had personally done nothing wrong. They were journalists, and were kicked out of the event simply because of their skin color.

Now let’s say there was a backlash. The event organizers took some heat for barring one race from the event. You might think the event organizers would apologize, promise sensitivity training, insist the two people were kicked out because of one person’s mistake instead of any discriminatory policy, and claim the entire thing was just a misunderstanding. Or maybe they’d immediately fire/exile/expel/charge whomever kicked people out because of their race. Isn’t that what always happens when an organization does something blatantly racist?

ryersonian.ca

In this case, no. This event was at Canada’s Ryerson University, hosted by the Racialised Students’ Collective (and the mentality displayed by the “Racialised Students” would be at home on any number of American universities). The people kicked out were white journalism students. So no harm, no foul, no widespread outrage.

http://www.ryersonian.ca/white-students-barred-from-funded-rsu-student-group-event/

It gets better than that. Shortly after the somehow-not-racist-event, the Huffington Post published an essay from Ryerson journalism student Aeman Ansari titled “Ethnic Minorities Deserve Safe Spaces Without White People”.

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/aeman-ansari/ethnic-safe-spaces_b_6897176.html

In her essay, she makes a few interesting points:

“These [safe] spaces, which are forums where minority groups are protected from mainstream stereotypes and marginalization, are crucial to resistance of oppression and we, as a school and as a society, need to respect them… Segregation was imposed on people of colour by people of privilege, not the other way around. The very fact that individuals organizing to help each other get through social barriers and injustices are being attacked and questioned for their peaceful assembly is proof that they were right to exclude those [white] students… Racialized people experience systemic discrimination on a daily basis, on many levels, and in ways that white people may never encounter. The whole point of these safe spaces is to remove that power dynamic.”

She also says, “I am a person of colour and a journalist and so there are two conflicting voices inside my head. But in this case one voice, that of a person of colour, is louder and my conscience does not allow me to be impartial. I have to take a side.” This is a sentiment I strongly suspect many journalists with “social justice” indoctrination share. Perhaps that’s why they shy away from any story that might reinforce negative stereotypes about a minority, yet embrace any story that portrays whites as racist. “Hands up don’t shoot”, anyone?

As a minority and supposed “person of color” (if I ever actually use that phrase to describe myself, please punch me), I guess I should be thrilled that my fellow coloreds are now free to put white people in their place. I should cheer the Racialised Students and embrace my dark-skinned sister for being courageous enough to accuse – in the Huffington Post, where blatant racial pandering is never welcome (yuk yuk) – all white people of being oppressors.

Long live the revolution. Kill whitey. Power to the people. Four hundred years of oppression. Whoop.

But I just ain’t feelin’ it. Maybe I wasn’t oppressed enough as a child; I grew up in Texas, “the America of America”, in a mixed white and Hispanic neighborhood. I was around whites all day every day. We played, went to school, and grew into adulthood together. I’m obviously Hispanic, but somehow was never oppressed by whites (or maybe I just didn’t notice). At seventeen I joined the Marines and served with men and women of all colors, but most were white. As a cop I’ve risked my life with and for whites, and whites have risked their lives for me (likewise with blacks, Asians and others). As a soldier in Iraq and Afghanistan I experienced the same thing.

Were some whites I knew racist? Of course. So were some blacks. So were some Hispanics. My parents were discriminated against, as were my grandparents. One family story even had the Texas Rangers murdering my great-great-grandfather and his brothers in retaliation for one of Pancho Villa’s raids. If the story is true, I’m pretty sure the Rangers who committed the murders are dead, as are most of the people who discriminated against my parents and grandparents. The country has changed, for the better.

I embrace that change. I see Americans of all colors treating one another as equals every day. And I heard of this guy once, who said something like, “Don’t be a dumbass and judge someone just because of what color they are.” That actually applies to whites too, not just supposedly oppressed minorities.

And whites shouldn’t be viewed as the world’s only oppressors. Slavery among blacks was so common in Africa it remained legal in Nigeria until 1932, in Ethiopia until 1942, in Niger until 2003 and in Mauritania until 2007; even now a huge portion of Mauritania’s population is still believed to be slaves. Black Africans were heavily involved in capturing and selling slaves, and some historians estimate “… Africans captured and then sold to Europeans around 90% of those who were shipped in the Atlantic slave trade” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_in_Africa).

Here in America, where our default is “whites were slave owners, blacks were slaves and that’s the end of it”, free blacks owned slaves as far back as 1654. Free black slave owners in Louisiana even requested, and were granted, permission to serve in the Confederate Army (http://www.theroot.com/articles/history/2013/03/black_slave_owners_did_they_exist.html). And Arabs, now automatically considered oppressed, were well-known and enthusiastic slave traders for centuries. Here’s just one example: “Periodic Arab raiding expeditions were sent from Islamic Iberia to ravage the Christian Iberian kingdoms, bringing back booty and slaves. In a raid against Lisbon in 1189, for example, the Almohad caliph, Abu Yusuf Yaqub al-Mansur, took 3,000 female and child captives, while his governor of Córdoba, in a subsequent attack upon Silves in 1191, took 3,000 Christian slaves” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_slave_trade).

Native Americans, our most revered “peaceful” population, weren’t always so peaceful and non-oppressive either. I’m not just referring to Native American attacks on whites: “…among the indigenous peoples of the Americas, only 13% did not engage in wars with their neighbors at least once per year. The natives’ pre-Columbian ancient practice of using human scalps as trophies is well documented. Iroquois routinely slowly tortured to death captured enemy warriors… at Crow Creek in South Dakota, archaeologists found a mass grave containing the remains of more than 500 men, women, and children who had been slaughtered, scalped, and mutilated during an attack on their village a century and a half before Columbus’s arrival (ca. 1325 AD).” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_Before_Civilization)

With this historical context, how does anyone arrive at the “white = oppressor, nonwhite = victim” conclusion so beloved by Aeman Ansari and Ryerson’s Racialised Students? Maybe I’m breaking the inviolable Oppressed Minority Code of Silence by saying this, but every race has its share of historical horrors. White people shouldn’t defined by past slave ownership any more than African blacks should be.

I’d also like to point out an inconvenient fact: If all white people are evil because of slavery, then all white Americans are heroes for ending it.

Maybe I’d be the only person on the typical University campus who’d know this, but in America we actually fought a really bad war to end slavery. Over 350,000 white Americans died fighting to end slavery. White Americans burned white American cities to the ground to end slavery. White Americans completely destroyed other white Americans’ ways of life and forced them to abandon slavery. American slaves weren’t powerful enough to rise up and free themselves; white people freed them. Why do whites seem to get all the blame for historical oppression, but none of the credit for fighting it?

Yes, I realize it’s pathetically stupid to credit all whites for the actions of those who fought to end slavery. And it’s just as stupid to condemn all whites for the actions of those long dead. I’m not saying all white people are great; plenty are absolutely scumbag (I’ve arrested a LOT), and many are racist. But those people should be judged on their own merits. Am I wrong to view whites, or anyone else for that matter, as individuals who should be judged as individuals?

When I was in Kosovo I had a conversation with a local about her ethnic enemies. “The adults commit crimes against us. The old ones used to, and the young ones will someday. So they should all be killed, from one until the end.” It was a stupid, destructive mindset that always, always, does horrible damage to those who hold it. In modern America, and Canada, everyone should reject the notion that all people of any race are the same. Or that we need to keep any race out of our “safe spaces”.

Oddly enough, this is one thing I loved about being in combat; under fire, you are who you are. Nobody cares about race. All that matters is whether or not you can do your job and cover your brothers’ and sisters’ backs.

On its website, the Racialised Students’ Collective says it “…opposes all forms of racism.” Then it excludes students for being white. I’m sure the Racialised Students don’t see the irony in that. Aeman Ansari, I’m sure, tirelessly campaigns against racism. Then she supports keeping white students away from minorities, because a white person’s mere presence allegedly makes them unsafe. I’m sure she sees no irony. The Huffington Post published Ansari’s essay praising racism against whites, then added a slideshow to the page showing “9 people who think casual racism is okay.” But they didn’t add Ansari or the Racialised Students to the slideshow.

The Huffington Post probably doesn’t see the irony either.

Chris Hernandez is a 20 year police officer, former Marine and currently serving National Guard soldier with over 25 years of military service. He is a combat veteran of Iraq and Afghanistan and also served 18 months as a United Nations police officer in Kosovo. He writes for BreachBangClear.com and Iron Mike magazine and has published two military fiction novels, Proof of Our Resolve and Line in the Valley, through Tactical16 Publishing. He can be reached at [email protected] or on his Facebook page (https://www.facebook.com/ProofofOurResolve).

http://www.amazon.com/Line-Valley-Chris-Hernandez-ebook/dp/B00HW1MA2G/ref=pd_sim_kstore_1?ie=UTF8&refRID=09XSSHABSWPC3FM8K6P4
http://www.amazon.com/Proof-Our-Resolve-Chris-Hernandez-ebook/dp/B0099XMR1E/ref=pd_sim_kstore_1?ie=UTF8&refRID=0S6AGHBTJZ6JH99D56X7

Recently I had a conversation with a friend about my last “Knockout Game” post (https://chrishernandezauthor.com/2013/11/21/a-loudmouth-female-police-cadet-trayvon-martin-and-the-knockout-game/). My friend made a statement that I think many people are saying in private: she’s worried about becoming a potential KO Game victim, but is also afraid that she’ll seem racist if she encounters a group of “thug” looking black teenagers and tries to avoid them.

Her worry meshed with a comment I received on my KO Game post. A reader named Joe was concerned with this statement I made: “And if we’re someday confronted by an unarmed scumbag who looks like he could beat us to death, or if we spot the signs that we’re about to become a playtoy for the ‘Knockout Game’, we’re going to draw, aim, and engage as necessary.” He thought it might be a suggestion to shoot anyone who “looked like” the kind of person who would play the KO game.

I gave both Joe and my friend the same answer. When we’re talking about spotting potential KO game players, we aren’t just looking at appearance. Appearance can matter, but more importantly we’re looking at behavior, at pre-assault indicators.

Many different actions can be pre-assault indicators. Generally speaking, these indicators seem harmless when viewed outside of the overall situation. The trick is to recognize them in context.

For example, if someone puts on a hood, that means nothing by itself. Simply looking around at their surroundings means nothing either. And if they cross a street, so what? But let’s say you’re walking down a sidewalk toward your car, late on a clear night after businesses have closed, and see a young man walking toward you on the other side of the street. The man looks around (possibly checking for witnesses or people who would interfere), puts on a hood (possibly trying to make himself harder to identify), and crosses the street toward you (the businesses are all closed; he’s not going toward them, he’s possibly directly targeting you).

Now you have a choice. Should you take evasive action, maybe change direction or head toward the nearest well-lit area? Should you maybe pull a small flashlight and shine it at him if he gets close? Should you put your hand on your concealed pistol, ready to draw and fire if he makes a threatening move?

Or, if the man is a minority, should you ignore his actions and blindly keep walking, because you’d rather risk death than seem racist?

Several years ago a cop friend and I were in New York City visiting a friend. We were in a subway station waiting for a train when I saw a young black man with a young Hispanic man walk toward us. Both men were wearing baggy clothes and hoods, but it was cold; they didn’t look all that different from anyone else. And there were blacks and Hispanics all over NYC. That didn’t catch my attention either. What raised my alert level was where the two young men came from. They walked out from the train tunnel, where people aren’t supposed to go, stepped over the tracks and climbed onto the platform.

I immediately bumped my cop buddy and motioned toward the two men. His guard went up also. We kept our eyes on the two men and readied ourselves. The men noticed us watching them, and kept going.

Was it racist for us to be wary of the young black and Hispanic men? Nope. My cop buddy was black; we were the same racial makeup as the men we were watching. It was their actions that caught our eye, not their race.

In the KO game assault videos I’ve seen it wasn’t the physical appearance of the young black males that indicated danger. It was their behavior. Yes, someone’s appearance certainly can indicate danger, and this is the point where people usually scream “That’s racist!” But a threatening appearance isn’t limited to any one race.

How would you react if you were on a bus and a young white man with a shaved head, “trouble gangster” and “wicked ways” tattooed around his eyes, “Aryan Brotherhood” and a swastika tattooed on his neck, sat next to you? Regardless of his actions, would his appearance suggest he’s a possible threat? I’d say yes. I’d say the same thing about a black man wearing a red ball cap, red pants and a red “Thug4Life” t-shirt with a “Money Over Bitches” tattoo on one arm and “Half-Dead Fry Head” on the other. And about a young Hispanic male with blue shirt and shoes, gang tattoos on both arms, and tattoos depicting a drive-by shooting and a robbery on his chest.

At this point, I’m sure some readers nodded in agreement about the white power guy, but felt uncomfortable at my description of the black and Hispanic gang members because talking about minority criminals is “racist”. All I can say is, describing reality isn’t racism. I stopped that tattooed white parolee one night in a mostly black and Hispanic neighborhood. He was one of the most polite, cooperative people I’ve ever stopped, but I still viewed him as a threat. I arrested a black gang member who was high on “fry” (a joint dipped in formaldehyde or PCP) and had a tattoo of a half skull-half face with a joint in its mouth that announced he was a “Half Dead Fry Head”. He didn’t fight or run from us, but yes, his appearance suggested he was a threat. And I stopped a Hispanic male with a robbery scene and drive-by shooting tattooed on his chest. He was also polite and cooperative, but was a dedicated, hardcore gang member. Yes, he was a threat.

If you see someone who is advertising their criminal tendencies and your alert level goes up, that doesn’t make you racist. It means you’ve got some sense, you don’t ignore obvious signs of danger and you’re being situationally aware. If you spot an obvious threat like those I’ve described, then identify pre-assault indicators, you may have just saved your life.

Once again, I’d like to point out that I ain’t no expert on nuthin’. But in almost 20 years as a cop, I’ve learned a little about pre-assault indicators. Some of this knowledge was gained the hard way, and I’d like to share it with you. Keep in mind that I’m discussing situational awareness in general, not only discussing the KO Game.

Now I’d like you to watch this short video, which most of us have seen several times already.

Note that the victim in this assault does not appear to be paying any particular attention to his surroundings. He’s simply walking down what appears to be an alley, face forward, minding his own business. He doesn’t seem to give a second thought to the fact that the young black males approaching him are spread out almost all the way across the alley, leaving him only a small gap to pass through. And he takes no action at all when one of the young males moves sideways toward him. My guess is that the victim never recognized any signs of impending danger. In this case the young males don’t, by appearance alone, seem to be threatening. But some of their behavior before the attack certainly suggests a threat.

Let’s look at the first indicator I mentioned. The young males are spread out, taking up most of the alley. While that might just mean those kids are selfish jerks, it could also be an intentional effort to channelize the victim into what we soldiers call a “choke point”: an area where a victim’s freedom of movement and action are restricted. When soldiers plant land mines, dig ditches and emplace concrete obstacles, it’s not to simply stop enemy vehicles. It’s to force them into a specific area, like a narrow mountain pass, where they can be easily ambushed. Those attackers did the same thing to their KO game victim.

Now take another look at the video, right around the 00:21 mark. Even in the blurry, distant video you can see the attacker make an obvious, deliberate move to his left just prior to throwing the punch. While it might seem that the victim had almost no time to react before being punched, he actually had more than enough. If he had noticed the signs, he could have stopped and waited for the group to pass. He could have kept his eyes on the young men, giving the non-verbal clue that he was watching them as closely as they were watching him. Even if he had walked into the choke point they created, he still could have ducked or sidestepped once he saw the punch about to be thrown. Any of those countermeasures could have kept him from laying facedown and unconscious on the pavement.

But here are my questions: did the victim walk blindly into an ambush even though he felt uncomfortable when he saw the group of young black males approaching him? Did he intentionally disregard signs of danger, because he didn’t want to appear racist?

One night I arrested a murder suspect. He had stabbed someone to death at a bar, and I found him the next night as he was hurriedly loading possessions into a truck prior to his planned escape from town. I snuck up and surprised him in his front yard; when I ordered him to put his hands up and lay on his stomach he ignored me, protested his innocence and started walking toward me.

I repeated the order. He ignored it and kept coming. He wasn’t cursing, he wasn’t saying “I’m going to kill you”, his demeanor suggested he was friendly. But his actions told a different story. He kept ignoring my commands. He kept walking toward me, despite the fact that he could easily hear me from where he was. He kept talking over me, trying to appear casual. He was about to attack.

Because my flashlight was in his face, he couldn’t see my pistol pointed at him. Despite his apparent friendliness, I knew he was “innocently” closing distance. I expected him to go for a knife, and was ready to shoot him. The sudden appearance of another officer made the suspect stop.

But here’s the twist. The suspect was an illegal alien. He was speaking Spanish as he protested his innocence. Was I being “insensitive”, not considering that he may have been confused rather than uncooperative? Was I stereotyping by assuming he had a knife? Should I have given him the benefit of the doubt and not kept my pistol on him?

It turned out I had arrested the suspect once before, and he had been verbally aggressive and threatening. When I saw him in court later he cursed me out. His friendliness was just an act. Had I given him the benefit of the doubt, and if I hadn’t had backup, I have no doubt he would have stabbed me.

One night I had to run a mental patient off from a truck stop. He had been there for hours bothering customers. I didn’t realize he was a mental patient until I saw the sunglasses he was wearing (at night) still had the “Made in China” sticker on a lens. That, and when I told him he had to leave his first question was, “But then where will I get refreshments?”

I asked for his name and date of birth, then called in a warrant check. The man hadn’t been threatening before that. But as soon as he heard give his name over the radio, he went silent, dropped to one knee, hung his head and covered his face.

I backed away, drew pepper spray and made sure I had space to go sideways if he came at me. When he suddenly sprang back to his feet, angrily demanding to know why I was harassing him, I was prepared for an attack. But he didn’t come at me, maybe because he saw my stance and intermediate weapon in my hand. He left peacefully.

He was black. His race had nothing to do with it. I saw black customers in that truck stop all night, every night; nobody called the police on them and I didn’t run them off. But his behavior made the employees call the police, and his unmistakable pre-assault indicator made me take defensive measures.

On another night I stopped two black men in an area known for narcotics trafficking. The passenger looked like a crackhead. The driver was well-dressed, polite and articulate, but was nervous as hell. I asked the driver to step out and walk to the hood of my car.

The driver and I had a pleasant conversation. Until I asked for consent to search his pockets. Then he stiffened up, went silent for a few moments. When he turned around and put his hands on the hood, his back was rigid and head held way high. I could feel his heart racing as I checked his front pockets. But I also noticed something else, which was even more threatening. His passenger, still sitting in the car, was turned almost all the way around, watching us intently. He was waiting for something to happen.

I broke off the search. The driver was probably about to fight, and the passenger would likely have joined in. I was by myself, with backup at least a couple of minutes away. I chose discretion over valor.

Later that night, I found the driver again. His passenger wasn’t with him. I went ahead and searched the driver that time. And he resisted, because he had about ten rocks of crack in his pocket.

Was I racist for asking to search the driver, or for suspecting he was about to fight? No. I recognized behavioral clues. But one night on another call, I totally missed the signs.

A friend and I arrived on a disturbance call in the projects. The call wasn’t serious, and we detained a “suspect” who wasn’t acting the least bit threatening toward us. He was about 19, tall and thin, wearing saggy, loose-fitting running pants with a drawstring. We asked him to sit on the curb. He complied, and my friend stayed by him while I went to the patrol car’s computer to check him for warrants. As I got in the car, I absentmindedly noticed that the young man had pulled his pants up and was tying the drawstring.

The young man was wanted for violating probation on a felony charge. I walked back to the young man and tried to grab him. From his sitting position, he bolted. We lost him.

That kid knew he had a warrant. When I went to my car he knew I would see the warrant hit. He casually tied his drawstring so his sagging pants wouldn’t interfere when he ran. I missed that obvious clue, and was lucky it was a “pre-run” rather than “pre-assault” indicator.

So what did I learn from the above examples? I learned that watching for clues is much more important than looking at race. Yes, race can matter; I doubt anyone would argue that black victims of Klan assaults in 1950’s Alabama shouldn’t have paid attention to certain white males around them. But race isn’t the most important indicator, and isn’t what I would tell anyone to watch for.

Look for behavior. Look for nonverbal clues. Ask yourself why someone is taking the actions they’re taking. Don’t be afraid to take steps to protect yourself, whether they’re small steps like changing direction or big steps like drawing a weapon. Remember that for all the media attention paid to the Knockout Game, the chances of you becoming a victim are infinitesimally small. Remember that KO Game players can be multiracial. And remember that being aware of your surroundings, looking for pre-assault indicators and exercising good judgment does not make you racist.

Available in print and as an ebook from Amazon.com and Tactical16.com. Available electronically from iTunes/iBooks and Barnesandnoble.com.

Oprah Winfrey has been taking a lot of heat lately for her “racists just need to die” comment.

“‘There are still generations of people, older people, who were born and bred and marinated in it, in that prejudice and racism, and they just have to die,’ she said.” (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/11/15/oprah-racists-die_n_4280460.html)

Many people are expressing outrage at her and those who agree with her. I’ve kept quiet about it thus far, but have decided to speak out.

Because I, too, am a victim of racism. Woe is me.

I grew up in San Antonio. Money was a constant worry for my parents, and there were many things we went without. Sometimes we were the stereotypical Hispanic family, seven of us jammed into a two door Chevy Nova on a six hour road trip to visit my grandparents who lived in the worst part of another Texas town. We weren’t poor, but we weren’t far from it, either.

Still, San Antonio was so ethnically mixed I never felt like an outsider. There were occasional racial comments, but nothing serious. Whites and Hispanics seemed to live and work together everywhere I went, and the relatively few blacks around didn’t appear to be shunned by the larger community. I thought everything was pretty much under control, racism-wise.

Then, when I was 19, I experienced something that proves Oprah’s recent words true. Racism is alive and well in America. And it’s being passed down generation to generation, just like she said it was.

A high school friend of mine had gotten his own apartment, and one Saturday afternoon invited a few buddies over to go swimming. Several friends showed up, and we headed to the pool together. I think I remember exactly who was there; three of us were Hispanic, one white, two mixed white and Hispanic, and one Jewish.

This was a warm, sunny day. Scores of people were out in the large recreation area, swimming and barbecuing. The residents of the apartment complex were racially diverse, and no problems were evident between them.

My friends and I swam, looked at women, made fun of each other, did the usual things teenage boys do. We stayed to ourselves and didn’t bother anyone. Even though we were teenagers, we were also not long out of Catholic school, and I was a Marine reservist. We weren’t the troublemaker type.

Everything was fine for about half an hour. Then, with absolutely no provocation, we were racially targeted.

I have no idea what brought it on, or why we were harassed while others were left alone. Maybe it was because three of us were obviously Hispanic, maybe someone knew our friend was Jewish, maybe someone didn’t like “race mixing” in even a benign social setting. Whatever the reason, a pleasant afternoon swimming with friends turned into an ugly racial incident, almost a hate crime. And it was caused by exactly what Oprah recently talked about; the people who harassed us had been taught by previous generations to hate us, and to hate us for nothing more than our skin color. They had been programmed to do it. The racial hatred Oprah spoke of was blindingly evident in everything they said to us.

As my group of friends screwed around in the pool, another group slowly approached us. We didn’t even notice at first, until the other group began intentionally speaking loud enough for us to hear their comments. Once we heard their hateful insults, we looked toward them and saw them staring at us. As soon as our eyes met, they began insulting us directly rather than just talking about us.

My friends and I were a little stunned. We quickly mumbled agreement between ourselves, “Let’s just go to another part of the pool.” None of us wanted a problem, and it was a huge pool. It was best to just avoid the other group. So we swam to the other side of the shallow end.

Minutes later they moved toward us again, still insulting and cursing us. I had never experienced anything like this, and though I wasn’t exactly in disbelief, I was dumbfounded by it. We were literally doing NOTHING wrong. We hadn’t spoken a cross word to anyone except each other, and that was jokingly. I accepted that some people didn’t like me because of my skin tone, but couldn’t these people just leave it alone while everyone was having a good time at the pool?

My friends and I swam to the deep end. The other group watched us and kept running their mouths. And sure enough, within minutes they were coming toward us again.

They had to pull themselves along the edge of the pool to get to us, though. They couldn’t swim in deep water. They were little black girls, about 8 or 9 years old.

“F**k you white boys! We ain’t afraid of you white boys!”

My friends and I shook our heads, decided “Screw it, let’s go back to the apartment,” and climbed out of the pool. As I dried off, I saw a black man by a barbecue pit call one of the girls over. She climbed out, ran to him and listened as he said something I couldn’t hear. I could only make out part of her response: “But those white boys were. . .!”

I have no idea what she accused us of. But I guarantee you that we weren’t out there insulting or harassing little girls, of any color.

So I’m with you, Oprah. I know horrible, entrenched racism is alive in America. I experienced it myself. I’m certain those little girls didn’t have such horrible experiences with white people, or Hispanics who they thought were white, that they uncontrollably lashed out at any white people they saw. I’m sure someone told them to hate white people, whether whites did anything to them or not. I’m positive they were simply repeating what they heard others say, and mimicking what they saw others do.

Just like Oprah, and Al Sharpton, and Jesse Jackson, and every other member of the racial grievance industry, my life was profoundly changed by my close encounter with racism. I was spiritually damaged, depressed, distrustful of everyone the same color as my attackers, despondent at the realization that some people would always judge me solely by my race. I was an emotional wreck.

Then about thirty-seven seconds later, I laughed it off and went to lunch with my friends.

I didn’t associate those little girls, or the people who raised them to be racist, with blacks I knew. One of my black high school friends was in the Naval Academy at the time; he had nothing to do with the racism those girls expressed. The blacks I knew in the Marine Corps didn’t act like that. I didn’t blame all blacks for those girls’ actions.

In my fairly short life I’ve learned a few things about people. I know that racism is not simply “whites oppressing blacks”. I’ve heard Hispanics talk about how much they dislike whites. I’ve heard whites talk about how much they dislike Arabs. I’ve heard Iraqis talk about how much they hate Egyptians. I knew a Pashtun who talked about how much he hates Tajiks. I heard Albanians talk about how much they hate Serbs. I heard Greeks talk about how much they hate Albanians. I had a drunken Hispanic gang member, when he saw my name tag as I arrested him, blurt out, “You are a f**king disgrace to the Mexican race!” And I was racially harassed and insulted by a group of little black girls.

So. Freaking. What.

Every day I work and live among many different races and ethnic groups. As a cop and soldier I’ve risked my life with and for people of different races, and they risked their lives for me. My children go to school in ethnically diverse schools. My son in law is the tallest white kid you’ll ever meet and my granddaughter is mixed white and Hispanic. I don’t walk the streets fearful of other races. I don’t raise my children to view one group as “oppressors” and other groups as “victims”. I teach my children that in this country, the greatest country that has ever existed, anyone can earn their way to success. I’m just a regular guy who didn’t come from money, I’m not a college graduate, all I’ve been is a Marine, cop and soldier, yet my family is happier and living far more comfortably than most people in the world will ever dream of. Because this is America and my last name and skin color don’t dictate how successful I’ll be.

No matter what I or anyone else thinks of President Obama, the fact is he’s half black and still got elected by mostly white voters. Oprah, for all her angst over racism, is the most powerful woman in the entertainment industry. She complained about a saleswoman who questioned whether or not she could afford a $38,000 purse, citing latent racism, without seeming to realize her race hasn’t kept her from being able to buy a $38,000 purse. My first house only cost $45,000.

The little racist girls who harassed us are somewhere around their early 30’s now. I bet they don’t consider their actions “racist”. I’m positive they’re in full agreement with Oprah’s wish that those darn racists would just die off, without realizing they’re actually talking about themselves. And when Oprah made that comment, I’m sure she had no idea that some of those people she wants dead, the people “born and bred and marinated in racism”, are the same color she is.

Available in print and as an ebook from Amazon.com and Tactical16.com. Available electronically from iTunes/iBooks and Barnesandnoble.com.

So who could I be referring to? Are black gang members the last evil people in America? Absolutely not. Sure, they’ve killed thousands more blacks than the Klan ever tried to. Sure, they’re responsible for fear, crime and murder plaguing many black neighborhoods nationwide. But that doesn’t mean they’re evil. We know they’re not evil because Sheila Jackson Lee, the most intelligent woman ever elected to congress, recently proclaimed, “Don’t blame the gang bangers. Blame the guns.” (Before you ask, yes I did throw up in my mouth a little bit when I sarcastically accused Lee of being intelligent.)

So what about Mexican cartel members and their American associates? No, they’re not evil either. They’re only satisfying the insatiable American demand for drugs. They only engage in brutal firefights on Mexican streets because the U.S. is supplying them with weapons. Yes, they torture and murder opponents, and dump their dismembered bodies in public parks. They abduct beautiful young girlfriends of law enforcement officers, then videotape themselves torturing, raping and murdering the women. But gosh darn it, it’s not their fault. If it wasn’t for us damn Americans, they wouldn’t do any of those things. If we weren’t all doing drugs and sending guns to Mexico, those poor misguided cartel guys would never commit such crimes. Nevermind that most Americans don’t use drugs, or that many of the weapons in Mexico are military-issue weapons and explosives that aren’t available on the American market. It’s still our fault, not the cartels.

So who are the last truly evil people in America? White male conservatives, of course. You guys are inherently evil. And if you don’t believe me, just ask almost any media or far-left personality who spoke publicly after the Boston bombing.

In the immediate aftermath of the Boston Marathon attack, many theories were floated about who was responsible. The usual conspiracy theorists popped up with claims about a “false flag” attack, screamed “revolution!” and excitedly fantasized about being guerilla warriors fighting the American government. A few people took notice of the target location and date. Boston, the heart of the American Revolution. April 15th, tax day and “Patriots’ Day.”

I’m no expert, but I’m more than a little familiar with terrorism. I considered the possibility that right-wing extremists had carried out the attack, and decided it was extremely unlikely. Generally speaking, right-wing wackos don’t target the American population. McVeigh killed a lot of innocent Americans, but his target was a government building. Bombings intended to kill masses of random people aren’t the usual style of the far right. There have been exceptions such as Eric Rudolph, but my gut told me this attack wasn’t right wing terrorism.

The attack did, however, bear the signature of Islamic terrorism. Multiple, simultaneous attacks are a hallmark of bombings in the Middle East. When the FBI said the bombs had been made from explosives in pressure cookers, I was almost positive the bombers were Muslim. In Afghanistan, pressure cooker IEDs were extremely common.

But as I said, I wasn’t 100% positive. I have no inside information about the investigation, and know better than to reach any conclusions based solely on media reports. I made an initial assessment, understood I might be surprised, and waited for more information. But what did some of our public, especially the extremely liberal part, decide about the bombers?

Just after news of the bombing broke, Michael Moore, a man whose genius and objectivity is rivaled only by the great Congresswoman Lee, tweeted “2+2=”. Later he tweeted, “Tax day. Patriots day”. Actor Jay Mohr decided “the 2nd amendment has to go”. On CNN, Peter Bergen (among others) gave several reasons why the bombers were likely right wing extremists. Peter O’Donnell blamed the NRA for slowing the investigation. Chris Matthews talked about domestic terrorists being from the far right.

But Salon.com outdid all of those lightweights with this: “Let’s hope the Boston bomber is a white American”. (http://www.salon.com/2013/04/16/lets_hope_the_boston_marathon_bomber_is_a_white_american/)

In this essay, author David Sirota claims that “white privilege” means we lump all Muslims together whenever a Muslim carries out a terrorist attack, but we don’t do the same when a white person commits a crime. Sirota pleads, “That means regardless of your particular party affiliation, if you care about everything from stopping war to reducing the defense budget to protecting civil liberties to passing immigration reform, you should hope the bomber was a white domestic terrorist. Why? Because only in that case will privilege work to prevent the Boston attack from potentially undermining progress on those other issues.”

Sirota’s essay mentioned nothing about the brutal murders of a child and two innocent young women. No words were wasted hoping for successful recovery of the horribly injured. There wasn’t even a reasonable call for the public to withhold judgment until the investigation produced objective results. There was only a blatant appeal to white guilt over alleged “white privilege”.

What type of worldview must an American have to hope an American was responsible for bombing innocent American civilians? I have to admit, I had a bias as well; I hoped the bomber wouldn’t be American. I hate the thought of one of my countrymen murdering other countrymen for ideological reasons. I initially thought the Oklahoma City attack was the work of Muslim terrorists; when McVeigh was identified as the bomber, I added a sense of betrayal to the horror and sorrow I already felt. To my mind, there is nothing positive about Americans murdering Americans. Sirota apparently feels differently. A white American blowing up other Americans is reason to celebrate, because it helps his causes.

Salon.com, which hadn’t taken Sirota’s essay down as of yesterday, isn’t exactly a fringe, ultra-far left web site. My impression is that Salon is a fair representation of liberal thought. I seriously doubt Salon would ever publish an essay titled “Let’s hope the Boston bomber is a black American”, or Arab American, or Hispanic American, or Asian American. David Sirota would probably drown himself in patchouli oil before insulting any minority. But publicly hoping a white American was responsible is fine. Because you white conservative guys are the last truly evil people in America. You’re fair game.

The media and far-left America are extremely concerned that we’ll blame all minorities for the actions of a few. This is reasonable. But the same people have no problem blaming all of white conservative manhood for a multitude of crimes, committed by whites or not. Maybe I’m crazy, but that strikes me as hypocritical.

I think we need to call a spade a spade here. If you’re a white conservative male, much of the liberal world, which includes most of the media, hates your freaking guts. They feel no need to show you any respect. They don’t think twice before suggesting you’re responsible for horrible crimes (such as when ABC’s Brian Ross suggested the Aurora theater shooter was a member of the Tea Party). Even when the hoped-for right wing bomber turns out to be a pair of Muslims, you white guys still get blamed (the overwhelmingly white, conservative and male NRA is delaying the bombing investigation!). James Holmes and Adam Lanza weren’t conservative, but white conservative males who believe in gun rights are responsible for the massacres they carried out. No, seriously. Some far-left people actually believe that.

Of course, David Sirota’s wishes have been partially answered. One of the bombers was in fact a white American. Dzhokhar Tsarnaev became a citizen last September 11th, and you can’t get more Caucasian than being from the Caucasus. The media and far left probably wanted to dance a victory jig when the bombers’ pictures were released, and I heard a few commentators focus on the “young white male” description. Unfortunately for Sirota, the bombers are also Muslim and Chechen. They’re white, but darn it, not the right kind of white.

This threw a monkey wrench into the media and far left’s plans. I’m sure they wanted to gloat and howl about an evil white conservative male bomber, which would by extension prove all white conservative males are evil. But since the bombers turned out to be darkish Muslims, now they have to shift gears and show that two Muslim bombers DON’T prove all Muslims are evil.

This leads me to believe the media and far left are racist as hell. But in far-left America, hating white conservative males isn’t just permitted, it’s encouraged. Maybe it’s even mandatory.

Just as I know too many good Muslims to let anyone’s prejudice change my view, I also know too many good white conservative males to let the media or far left change my view. As a matter of fact, a lot of white conservative males risked their lives running toward the blast sites to help victims. Many others risked their lives chasing down the bombers. Much of the media and far left was completely wrong about white guys carrying out the attacks, and failed to give any credit at all to white guys who, along with many others, rendered invaluable assistance at the bombing site and during the investigation.

Don’t get me wrong. I’m not claiming all white conservative guys are angels. When one does something evil, I want the media to report it, as they should with any other horrible crime. But be objective about it.

Maybe the people who hate white conservative males finally learned a lesson. Maybe, when the inevitable next tragedy happens, they won’t default to the standard “It’s the white conservative guy’s fault”. Maybe they’ll step back, take a breath and say, “Hey, if all Muslims aren’t responsible for the actions of two bombers, maybe all white guys aren’t responsible for the actions of a few wackos.”

Long ago we as a nation learned not to yell “A black guy did it!” whenever an unknown suspect committed a crime. After 9/11, we rejected the notion that all Muslims were responsible for the actions of a few. Someday the media and far left might decide that opposing racism actually means not being racist, even toward white males. Maybe they’ll stop praying, and hinting, that white conservative males are evil, murderous monsters.

It’s not likely. But we can always hope.