NAMs Kill NAMs, and They Blame the Pilgrims
12th July 2012
John Derbyshire, Patron Saint of Dyspepsia, with some more inconvenient truth.
Back in 1982 a faction of Lebanese Arabs massacred Palestinian Arabs at two refugee camps in Beirut. The Israeli army, in the neighborhood at the time, was accused of turning a blind eye to the killings. Hearing of this, Menachem Begin famously muttered: “Goyim kill goyim, and they blame the Jews.”
Hence my title. NAM is an abbreviation for “Non-Asian Minority” commonly used among us wicked people who notice What Should Not Be Noticed.
July 12th, 2012 at 06:43
For folks who consider themselves to be of Greater Intrinsic Worth, conservatives sure seem to spend a lot of time worrying about what NAMs think of them.
July 12th, 2012 at 09:49
Of course, not a word Derbyshire wrote in that column either (1) signaled or otherwise indicated that he thought he or any other “conservative” was of “Greater Intrinsic Worth” or (2) that he was “worried” or otherwise engaged in the slightest with the concept of what any NAM anywhere – or anyone anywhere, NAM or no – “thought” about him or any other conservative. An utterly dishonest observation: that added aroma of raw mendacity enhances the stench of over & above the usual pile of Leftist talking points Denny deposits here for our perusal, like Rover vomiting half-digested sardines on his host’s carpet, as opposed to the usual dog’s breakfast of puppy chow.
Putting aside the troll commentary and moving on to the article: the Police Superintendent’s ridiculous assertion that the Pilgrims are somehow responsible for the nightly mayhem in Englewood have radiated across the blogosphere, and this isn’t the first time I’ve run across them.
Second City Cop, a blog I follow (link here: http://www.secondcitycop.blogspot.com/ ) has posted in depth regarding these ridiculous comments, including a hilarious “Community Alert” poster for police to be on the lookout for a Pilgrim suspected of “multiple homicides” in the city of Chicago. But we see in this absurdity once again the operative principle of modern liberalism at work: when the facts don’t square with The Narrative, simply change the subject – and make some crap up.
Another good article by Mr. Derbyshire.
July 12th, 2012 at 10:14
The ‘leftist’ in the room isn’t afraid to ask the obvious question: If one isn’t concerned about what NAMs think, then why bother to write about it?
The focus of the article seems primarily to be to point out how laughably Inferior the stupid NAMs are and, by implication, how Superior is the Knowledgable Author (and those worthies who agree with him). And this self-aggrandizement is a hallmark signifier of an inferiority complex, wherein in order to feel Superior one must make someone else seem Inferior. (The parallels with your own post are too obvious to require expansion.)
BTW, I love the Rover analogy. Well played. I’m going to steal it and use it without ascription. Your use of the language is pure gold. Sadly, the ‘ideas’ couched within it are pure dross. Rather like an elaborate picture frame enclosing a finger-painting.
July 12th, 2012 at 11:20
It’s not necessary to be concerned about what NAMs think in order to write about it — obviously, he’s concerned about what non-NAMs think, and is drawing their attention to a problem that too few of them seem to appreciate. The focus of the article is quite obviously the tendency on the part of certain NAMs (certainly the race pimps and their enablers in the Guilty White classes) to point the finger in every direction except where it belongs, back toward themselves.
It would be late in the game for you to go back to school and learn how to read, but you might consider it.
July 12th, 2012 at 11:30
“why bother to write about it?” Comic relief. Kinda, sorta the same thing you provide around here.
July 12th, 2012 at 11:39
No: what the ‘leftist’ in the room is doing is making a phony observation, swaddling it in that old-time favorite of the dishonest troll – the Sweeping Rhetorical Question – and then pretending to be some kind of singular, brave voice in the so doing (“…isn’t afraid to ask…”).
The very language you use to make your phony observation is telling: “seems primarily to be…and, by implication…”*. This is followed up with another old standby of the dishonest troll – and you are every bit of that; both dishonest, and a troll – the online psychoanalysis: “his self-aggrandizement is a hallmark signifier of an inferiority complex”.
Of course, the rejoinder to this is the only actual “obvious” thing on tap here, so obvious, in fact, that to state it is to take the time to further feed that trollish appetite of yours; but in for a penny, in for a pound, to coin a phrase:
1. John Derbyshire has offered his opinion on a matter that involves NAMS-Behaving-Badly in Chicago, and the starting point of his commentary were the moronic statements of a police superintendent in city of same that blamed said bad behavior off on the Pilgrims (among other absurdities). To have and express an opinion on that matter is not to care what a person or group of persons “think” about the author of that opinion himself; and it has been shown that Mr. Derbyshire, in point of fact, expresses no such concern in any manner whatsoever in his article. All you are left with in counter-reply are weasel words like “seems” and “by implication,” etc., which is as groundless as the day is long. That, and your silly online Freud routine, draped with psycho-babble such as “wherein to feel Superior”. So your phony observation is just that: phony, and false.
2. Your phony observation(s) were typed with the sole intention to needle and irritate, not add anything useful to the discussion of the article in question, of course. Believe it or not, you’re not the first pseudo-savant-cum-troll since 1994 to indulge in such pedestrian efforts on the big, badz webz. What I find amusing is the ongoing need to double-down on the original phony observation: the laughable attempts to make it seem like a legitimate observation. The manifest idiocy of “if one isn’t concerned about what X thinks why write about Y?”
needs no further parsing, and even you realize this despite all the airy bluster to the contrary your fingertips continue to churn out regarding the matter. It adds spice to the usually tedious business of straightening out the rank dishonesty of a dedicated Leftist posting nonsense on a conservative website, aka “feeding a troll.”
July 12th, 2012 at 11:40
*all emphases added (left that off in my post immediately above).
July 12th, 2012 at 13:05
An effusion of verbiage amounting to not much. You must have a lot of time on your hands. And for someone who purports to eschew ad hominems, you certainly indulge in a lot of them.
Let’s for the moment discard the fig-leaf of ‘NAM’, shall we? The article discusses black-on-black murders. But it doesn’t focus on the murders, or demonstrate any concern for them. Instead, the bulk of it focuses on the ignorance of people ascribing said murders to Pilgrims (which the quote cited did not, if you bother to read it in context). Boiled to its essence, it is a long and elaborate way of saying, “See how dumb they are?”
Since he is going to such pains to demonstrate said ‘dumbness’, it must concern him. QED.
The rest of your rant is not worth bothering with.
July 12th, 2012 at 16:34
Yet another dishonest, non-responsive reply; yet more doubling down on a phony observation that got called out for the manifest absurdity it was. And it hits some of those stock troll-phrases that have become so hackneyed from overuse as to be cliches: “…a lot of time on your hands…[followed by complaints about “ad hominems” (Sic) ]…read it in context…your rant is not worth bother with…”
The stuff of cat’s laughing.
One thing you should really look into is the proper use of “QED” (Sic): although it’s supposed to make you look, like, educated and all, appending a Latin abbreviation to the end of a reply as if you’ve just “proved” something, it doesn’t mean what you apparently think it does. I always know I’m dealing with a personality who probably didn’t make it out of East Popcorn State community college when I see it used on the internet in a discussion thread.
Pro-tip.
July 14th, 2012 at 17:35
When someone in an position of authority or influence says something like this, it is a lesson in how empty their heads really are. And I have to wonder, did he think of that answer before hand or was that pulled from transverse colon (way up there).