Damian Wilson
The idea that the murderous rampage that left six dead when career criminal Darrell Brooks plowed through a holiday crowd in his SUV was ‘accidental’ shows just how twisted and self-serving the world of woke has become.
Across the mainstream media, the incident in Waukesha, Wisconsin that left dozens more injured after sex offender Brooks drove through the parade is referred to as a ‘crash’.
It wasn’t a crash. It was a massacre. And if you take into account the content of Brooks’ social media account, his admiration of Hitler and his loathing of white folk, Jews and even fellow black people, you’d be on safe ground calling it a domestic terror attack.
So why the cop-out? Why is the MSM insisting on portraying a calculated and cold-blooded attack on an unsuspecting parade of regular people out enjoying themselves as some sort of ‘accident’?
The slaughter was as accidental as the 2016 attack along the Promenade des Anglais in Nice, France, which left 86 dead and 458 injured after Islamic extremist Mohamed Lahouaiej-Bouhlel drove a 19-tonne lorry into Bastille Day revellers.
It was as much an accident as Islamist terrorist Khalid Masood driving his hire car into pedestrians on London’s Westminster Bridge in 2017, killing six and injuring 50 more. Or Tunisian jihadist Anis Amri mowing down shoppers at a Berlin Christmas market in 2016, killing 12 and leaving 49 injured.
In all these cases, the lorries, cars and even SUVs have been used as lethal weapons aimed at innocent civilians, with more than 100 people murdered. So why is everyone so timid about labelling Brooks as a terrorist?
Even the most cursory glance at this nutjob’s social media shows a man angry at everyone; black, white, Jewish, capitalist, the police, you name ‘em, Brooks hates ‘em, so much so that it’s quite easy to conclude that the collection of memes, smartphone rants and rap videos starring himself amount to the expression of a political stance, or a deeply held conviction, even though it’s hard to extract exactly what the 39-year-old career criminal is railing against.
I mean, here is a black man who expresses admiration for Adolf Hitler.
Maybe a clue is in the all-powerful narrative that surrounds race in the USA. To call a black man who has clearly struggled to engage with the rest of society in any meaningful way for nearly 40 years ‘a terrorist’ is to deny him victimhood that, even as an active member of the criminal underclass, he is afforded by the proponents of critical theory on race.
To some, Brooks is the victim here. So they’ll just call this unfortunate incident in Waukesha a ‘crash’, a mistake, an accident, because after all, Brooks was allegedly simply fleeing from a scene of domestic violence – albeit as the aggressor – before inadvertently driving through the middle of a holiday parade. Someone in this socio-economic mire deserves a break, don’t they?
This is the idiotic progressive thinking that can inform reports around an incident such as Waukesha. Tip-toeing through the language minefield lest a class of people identified by a shared race, gender or socio-economic category take umbrage, so that reality is grossly distorted, the truth buried beneath a steaming pile of political correctness.
It’s the sort of cluelessness that has led so-called ‘criminal experts’ in California – I know, I know – suggest that the media and law enforcement stop using the term ‘looting’ to describe a recent spate of brazen smash-and-grab raids on luxury stores in the state because somehow the term is ‘racist’ and intentionally politicises the crimes. I dunno, it just seems like the wrong word in this case, because looting is usually the term applied in cases where a state of emergency exists, and that is not the case here. But who am I to step in the middle of a nonsense argument?
That’s how easy it is to offend when you’re not up to date with the nuances of the English language as it is (mis)understood in Woke, USA.
But like so many modern debates, whoever sets the terms of engagement and the language that is used to define an argument, is usually the winner. It just so happens that the losers in Waukesha are not a bunch of entitled, self-absorbed West Coast academics, they are six innocent people whose lives were cut short by a murderous lunatic in an attack that most certainly was no ‘crash’.
To state otherwise denies the dead and those they leave behind the justice they deserve.
Jim, I was in and out of the Raw Deal today and will have to watch the replay on BitChute…but are you now leaning toward it being staged?
Not Kenosha but possibly Waukesha and (certainly) the Aubrey verdict was completely unfounded and inappropriate. More to come.
Yes…I get it…I meant Waukesha…looking forward to that Raw Deal VID on BitChute….I hope.
Re the Raw Deal from Monday. Danny made some interesting observations. There is something about that drone footage from Waukesha that does not ring true. First, why is it of such low quality and out of focus? Secondly, those missing frames once the SUV hits those on the left side? That comes across like a second take. It had to be some kind of edit. The cell phone footage of the aftermath in which those groups of four five and six people are supposedly surrounding the injured simply comes across as staged. As Danny mentioned, there seemed to be no real medical care taking place, no blood (in how many ffs have we seen that, eh?), bodies were not visible (shades of the Boston debacle) and those surrounding the bodies seemed to indicate no urgency….looking at the camera. Danny mentioned the buildings being different in the cell footage, but that could well be the video was just from a different angle or place than the original drone vids. It’s hard to say, but that particular point is refutable.
If Brooks is the vicious killer he’s made out to be, would he not have driven right down the middle of the marching band and taken out many more than he did? Also in regard to that, at least from the videos that have popped up…drones and cells….did anyone here actually see 60 plus hit and injured? I did not. That short cell phone footage sure didn’t show that many on the ground.
As usual, when one gets over the initial shock and starts to look more closely, things are not as they are portrayed/staged (?) It could be we have to face that those pulling off these events are learning from previous mistakes. It’s quite sad to realize we are actually teaching them to do it better each time.
As always, I just don’t know.
Does anyone?
My take: The event was real but the after-shots (of those huddling over the bodies) was not. Perhaps there were some legal constraints on broadcasting victims of a crash? they needed footage and faked it? That part does not look real to me. We see no bodies. Only those who are covering them up. There was no surge of EMTs and, as at Sandy Hook and Boston, no string of ambulances to rush them to hospitals. Very odd,
Jim….What about that glitch right after the start of the drone footage? Does that not give you pause? It just seems that had to be some sort of edit. Would not that footage be continuous?
For Toni:
************************************************
Having just listened to the Raw Deal on Jim’s bitchute channel, I’m
amused that the veracity of the Rittenhouse trial is in question and the
evidence is ‘greenscreen’. I’ve seen the deputy’s foot drop out; it’s a
video compression artifact not a greenscreen anomaly. There was one pool
feed from the courtroom for everyone to broadcast; that’s how they do
it. It could have been done better. I noticed all kinds of video
distortions during the televised trial. The video was compressed,
meaning that algorithms in the compression software made instantaneous
decisions as to which frames of video were dispensable, in this case it
was the deputy’s foot.
This is ironic because it was a big issue in the Rittenhouse trial
itself. The defense objected to certain video evidence because they
were concerned about the ability of software to algorithmically add or
delete information from video evidence. The software decides, and not
always well, as in the deputy’s foot.
Look it up – a greenscreen anomaly does not look like that. But if
you’re not convinced by the difference between video motion compression
artifacts and greenscreen anomalies, think about the logic of it. If the
trial is fake, why not just record it in an existing courtroom, or
courtroom set? You would not need any special effects. It would be
cheaper and easier to hire a security guard and put him on set. If
‘real’ is what you’re after, special effects would only complicate things.
Toni, you nailed it. Most logical explanation I have heard so far. This has caused much debate and emotion the last few days. I think you settled it. The trial was real, but as usual, the MSM spun it to their advantage, but in this instance, they failed. As a result, many are onto them and their audience will continue to drop IF it can go much further down. We all owe Kyle a debt of gratitude and I hope he sues the hell out of everyone….especially the demented Brandon.
Calling the mowing down of a parade an accident is like saying Jeffrey Dahmer was just really hungry. Next they will try to outlaw comedy.
Again, it is of MAJOR importance to not allow the main stream narrative of creating an us/them paradigm/reality take hold. We are being “worked” by very brilliant narcissistic psychopaths who have had the take over of humanity planned for many decades and perhaps a century or more.
Try to remember what your life was like in 2019 and before and attempt to create that personal “energy” today. The false flags and tragedies will continue to wear on the public to create a mind set of acceptance of the Great Reset and who knows what else. Invest in your well being.
Set aside your egos and listen to my latest song, consider my songs as significant as any “alt” article posted out in blogoland.
A PSYCHIC EPIDEMIC * https://www.bitchute.com/video/1hqeShieZ2jY/
OR
GET OFF THE PHONE * https://www.bitchute.com/video/2QbsxZOkIYjA/