Posted on 06/08/2014 6:30:50 AM PDT by Impala64ssa
Amanda Kijera was on a humanitarian trip to Haiti, when she was violently raped by a black man. The act was both coincidental and devastating, as Kijera was actually in Haiti to dispel the “myths” that violence against women on the island was overstated by women’s rights organizations.
The intention of Kijera’s trip was to push back on the portrayal of black men as “savages” in the media. Her hope was that she would eliminate misconceptions and push back against common views imposed by “the man.”
However, Kijera’s trip took a turn for the worse when one of the men she had worked to protect cornered her on the rooftop, and raped her numerous times.
“The experience was almost more than I could bear,” Kijera wrote about the incident, “I pleaded with him to honor my commitment to Haiti, to him as a brother in the mutual struggle for an end to our common oppression, but to no avail. He didn’t care.”
According to Kijera, she eventually stopped fighting him, claiming that there was nothing she could do to stop him from raping her repeatedly. After the tragic experience, she placed the blame on a very unexpected course.
“Women are not the source of their oppression; oppressive policies and the as-yet unaddressed white patriarchy which still dominates the global stage are,” she explained. She also went on to argue that it is up to the United Nations to support people who are forced to bear the brunt of black male aggression.
Kijera makes the outrageous claim that dependency on white people causes them to act out against them. She alludes that this was the reason for her attack.
While the circumstances Kijera were forced to endure were unacceptable, her commits make the unspoken conclusion that the incident would not have happened if it weren’t for white men.
What do you think of Kijera’s statements?
Why is this important now? This happened years ago and yes, she immediately blamed white men.
what a flippin idiot
Think Amy Biel.
I guess giving it away as comfort woman for black men wasn’t an option?
Yes, this was in the news April 2010. She was an idiot then, and she’s still an idiot now!
If Obama succeeds in causing a race war in this country, the Democrats will be common victims in that war. They’re white, they’re foolish, they are unarmed. When the mob comes, the mob won’t ask, “Who’d you vote for?”
Isn’t this old?
The lady doth protest too much, methinks.
“Kijera makes the outrageous claim that dependency on white people causes them to act out against them.”
There is a small bit of truth to that. Forced dependency breeds contempt.
http://www.inlander.com/spokane/paying-something/Content?oid=2136224
According to the Tax Policy Center, 76 million tax filers (46 percent of all tax filers) will pay no income tax in 2011. Meanwhile, the top 1 percent of all taxpayers pays 40 percent of all income taxes. So 54 percent of all tax filers are “carrying” the 46 percent who pay nothing. That’s fundamentally unfair and has led over time to inequities and a dependency on government that is unhealthy for a free society.
Forced dependency ultimately breeds contempt, and even as Americans subject to reliance on benevolent government programs are grateful for a “safety net,” eventually that gratitude can yield to resentment. Then resentment can yield to anger at those responsible for dependency programs in spite of the good intentions of social policy advocates. Psychologists will even tell us that it helps an individual’s self-worth to be free — to have control over one’s destiny, no matter how small that morsel of freedom is.
Arguably, social policy imposed with good intentions to help those in need in America — the truly poor and otherwise disadvantaged — has created a growing culture of Americans who’ve benefited but also suffered from such dependency. Too many Americans became dependent on government programs starting with the Great Depression (the one in the 1930s); many have remained dependent ever since. Government housing programs that “warehoused” poor Americans in many big cities since the 1960s put a roof over their heads, but created a culture of angry residents and unsafe neighborhoods throughout urban America that remain today — largely in squalor.
But that’s what benevolent governments and liberal policymakers often do — spend federal money creating programs fostering inescapable dependency on government that consigns good and creative people to a life of reliance on government and programs that imprison them with little opportunity to break free. Of the trillions in taxpayer dollars that government has invested in the poor, one would expect ample evidence of progress to release the poor from government dependency and lives of poverty. Sadly, poverty levels of 12 percent in 1969 have grown to 15.1 percent today, hardly a ringing endorsement for the government’s ability to free citizens to “pursue happiness.” Besides, being in poverty is demeaning.
For her next stunt maybe she should walk through Chicago unarmed at night to protest the “myth” that strict gun control laws do not make you safe.
With what I just posted maybe the solution to Haiti’s problems is for Whitey McCracker-Honkey to stop giving the Haitians handouts.
Of course, she would be rail against that move and blame their violence again on Whitey for such.
This is more evidence that liberalism is a mental illness.
What media is she watching? The one I watch portrays black men as brilliant, dedicated professionals who live in the suburbs in beautiful houses (often burgled by white men) and who drive nice cars and barbecue in the back yard for their adorable, well-behaved kids and lovely wives, while still taking time to educate and correct their dumb, clumsy, doofus white neighbors.
This woman is foolish.
She actually thought that a man crazed by criminal lust would listen to her plea to honor her, " commitment to Haiti, to him as a brother in the mutual struggle for an end to our common oppression?"
I do not think I have ever read much that was more utterly insane.
This woman is also mentally ill.
After this crime occurs against her person, and this brute did not listen to her pleas...to then blame what he did on, "unaddressed white patriarchy?"
Clearly this woman has been traumatized...and I feel for her and hope she heals.
But, as I say, she is also afflicted with a serious mental disorder called progressive liberalism. Apparently not even the act of a criminal brute, who had criminal lust for her body and was willingly to violently abuse her rights to satisfy such criminal cravings was enough to open her eyes.
God preserve us from such.
ROFL
Yep. If that speech doesn't kill the mood, nothing will. I thought it was satire at this point, but apparently not?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.