It’s been a few days since the May 5 incident where students were disciplined for wearing t-shirts bearing the image of an American Flag on Cinco de Mayo. I have paid close attention to the reports, commentary and punditry in the aftermath, and I am astounded that no one has yet made the points I am about to expound upon. Once you consider them, you may also find it surprising that such obvious conclusions could be so easily overlooked!

The school has demonstrated offensive prejudicial “racism” against its Hispanic students!!

Huh? Come again?

Yes, That’s what I said, and when you think about it, I think you’ll agree!!

In the statements of the District Superintendent, as he trotted out the Principal’s supposed apology, he stated quite matter-of-factly that the school’s ostensible justification for demanding the flag shirts be turned inside out was to “maintain order and prevent fights”.

So, then, the school was presuming that:

1) The Hispanic population of the school is unwilling to accept the culture of the United States even to the point of respecting the flag of the nation in which they choose to live. They expected the Hispanics to take offense to the US Flag, though many of the Hispanic students were themselves US Citizens!

2) Still more offensive, the school acted on the presumption that the Hispanic students would respond to this anticipated offense by resorting to thug-like violence.

Isn’t this a wee-bit prejudicial? Might it even fall under the banner of “racial profiling”? After all… isn’t the presumption of anticipated behavior on the basis of one’s ethnicity the very DEFINITION of racial profiling which the Left is SO vocally opposed to?

Furthermore, the school seems to be implying that the US should be modifying its culture to accommodate its immigrant population rather than expecting our immigrants to become PART of that culture and participate in the “great melting pot” that has characterized the American Experience since our founding. Is this the message our schools should be imparting to our young people?

So it seems the “apology” is as offensive as the act toward the flag-wearing students itself!

[Ed Note: Just out of curiosity; if I wear a flag shirt on St Patricks Day… should I expect violence from our Irish population? I would think not, as the Irish-American population has generally become an “AMERICAN” population. While even non-Irish Americans join in the celebration of St Paddy’s Day, (Heck – we ALL love a reason to have a party and drink a beer – and really isn’t that the REASON Cinco de Mayo is celebrated in the US anyway… a marketing ploy of Corona Beer?), there is no duality of cultures between the Irish and the rest of the nation’s populace.]

Some are calling for the firing or resignation of the Principal. It would not seem to me to be inappropriate for this individual to depart the position. Unfortunately, however, this would do little to diminish the pervasive, endemic problem of progressivist politically correct thought found throughout public education today!

Still… I would be remiss if I did NOT point out the hypocrisy of those who claim to be DEFENDING these Hispanics against so-called racism – by presuming they are separatist La-Raza type reconquistadores prone to violence!

Was I right? Are you amazed no one recognized this before now?

Copyright © 2010 by Doug Edelman

Doug Edelman is a conservative political analyst and commentator, and has been a contributing editor for The Conservative Voice. His work is also seen on Western Front American, Small Government Times, Western Journalism, News By Us, The American Daily, The Post Chronicle, New Media Journal, Capitol Hill Coffee House and more. Mr. Edelman is also an IT Consultant/Contractor and owner of a Computer Services Business.  He has taught PC Maintenance & Repair and Networking at his local Community College, and maintains a blog at http://starboard.blogtownhall.com.

 

WesternFront America

I came across a July 17 blog shilling for race hoaxer Henry Louis “Skip” Gates Jr., “So, Is A Prominent Havard [sic] University [sic] Being Charged With Owning-A-Home-In-A-Good-Neighborhood-While-Black.” It was written by Sandy Gholston, proprietor of The Gholston Post, which he calls “A Blog For The People.”

I bring up the blog essay because it is a generic defense of Gates.

Henry Louis Gates Jr. one of the most respected scholars in the United States of America, may have become the latest victim of racial profiling. Essentially, it appears that Gates was harassed by police officers because he forced his way into his own home a woman reported seeing “two black males with backpacks on the porch” with one “wedging his shoulder into the door as if he was trying to force entry.” Ah, the infamous two black males accusation. Apparently, two black males look a little bit more suspect in an upscale neighborhood, huh?…

It’s a disturbing tale because it does make (or should make) a person wonder would white guys trying to get into a house have been perceived the same way….

Yeah, why would a guy be upset about being harassed by police for trying to get into his own house and having a dime dropped on him by someone worried about the two black guys? The police come and harass a man getting into his own house and then arrest him on his own property for disorderly conduct. How much of an insult/slap in the face is that? I think most people would have “exhibited loud and tumultuous behavior” (how broad a description is that?) if they found themselves in a similar situation.

The quotes from Gholston are wrapped around a story by the AP’s Melissa Trujillo, “Black scholar’s arrest raises profiling questions,” which quotes unchallenged assertions by a couple of Gates’ fellow tenured, Harvard race hustlers that “the arrest is part of a pattern of racial profiling in Cambridge.”

Police didn’t “harass” Gates, Gates racially harassed and abused the white policeman.

By the admission of Gates’ own lawyer, Gates and the cabby were trying to break into the home. Thus, the 911 call and the police response were entirely justified.

Gates does not own the home, Harvard does, so Gholston’s premise is false, and his title misleading.

White guys would have been treated the same way, but it is highly unlikely that they would have reacted as Gates did.

I recall breaking into my apartment in the middle of the night once, circa 1987, when I had forgotten or lost my keys, and my roommate was out for the night. As I climbed the fire escape to my kitchen window, I was scared to death that someone would call the police, and I’d get shot. So, there is no justification whatsoever for Gates’ racist abuse of, and refusal to cooperate with Sgt. Crowley. Had a white man reacted to a black police sergeant in the same racist, abusive, tumultuous way that Gates did, the Cambridge PD and Middlesex Prosecutor’s Office would not have dropped the charges.

Gholston’s racism is showing.

Note that Gholston accepts the report that Gates and his driver were attempting to force entry into the residence. As far as he is concerned, one may not call the police if one sees black men breaking into a residence. Thus, like Gates, he supports black criminals.

Gholston’s racist attack on witness Lucia Whalen for calling the police is part of a widespread campaign of vilification against her, designed to intimidate whites out of notifying the police about apparent crimes in progress committed by black boys and men.

From 1962, when James Baldwin began laying the pseudo-intellectual groundwork for the black racial profiling myth, through 1999, when the engineers of the racial profiling hoax enjoyed their breakthrough and beyond, black racists and their white supporters had always been careful to insist that police were variously arresting, assaulting, or murdering innocent blacks who had merely been minding their own business. Because Gates’ supporters acknowledge, as does his own lawyer, that Gates was attempting to break into the home that Harvard provides him, yet still assert that he was a “victim” of “racial profiling,” the Gates race hoax thus represents a new level of confidence and thus of racist evil on the part of black supremacists.

How many additional innocents must be murdered by black felons, in crimes that could easily have been prevented, had the authorities and ordinary people alike not surrendered to the felons’ black supremacist supporters?

Over four weeks after posting his support of Gates’ race hoax, Gholston still hasn’t corrected the mistakes in his title, let alone those of logic and morality in his essay. Gholston has a handsome-looking blog. Unfortunately, as the United Negro College Fund says, “A mind is a terrible thing to waste.”

© Nicholas Stix

 

WesternFront America