I am reading the next chapters in this upcoming novel already. A 13% minority can’t win a Tutsi/Hutu-level tribal/racial civil war. That much is clear.
So why are the MSM and the ‘Rats provoking Those Hip Urban Guys (thugs) into what will surely result in many shoot-on-sight situations?
If the “Reginald Denny” scenario is repeated often enough (whites dragged from cars and beaten to death), then proactive tactics will be applied to groups of blacks loitering at intersections. That is, firepower will be applied to disperse the mob before the mob is close enough to hurl bricks at a car. This will happen.
It will be very dangerous for groups of black men to be seen anywhere near a potential “ambush site.” Whites will not suicidally drive into ambushes. If they can’t make an early U-turn, they will drive full speed over the mob, or open fire from 100+ yards away to disperse the mob.
It will be this “white backlash” that will suddenly be the critical problem, and reason enough for a martial-law type clampdown.
Naturally, there cannot be elections during a race war. Naturally, the federal govt will have to do something about those white maniac murderers and their millions of guns.
So why whip up a race war that blacks will lose, badly? They are using black anger like the trim tab on a rudder, to power up the big move from the other side. According to the MSM and the Rats, the white reaction to black mob violence will be the main story, the main threat to civil society.
That’s my theory of “why.” And it fits with their “Fast And Furious” modus operandi, ie, cause a massacre over here, to effect a political result over there.
Black ops at their finest, by Gangster Govt, Inc.
I remember well the Reginald Denny incident. I remember my first thought was "WTF did he get out of the truck?" If that had been me, they'd still be picking bones out of my front grille.
As it was, I had a little encounter of my own in Oakland during the Rodney King riots, and if I hadn't been prepared beforehand, I would be dead.
“A 13% minority can’t win a Tutsi/Hutu-level tribal/racial civil war. That much is clear.”
They can when only 13% of the other side opposes them. Nearly 100% of blacks would ban together. Maybe 13% of the remaining population would stand against them. It would be nearly an even match as far as numbers but just who would perform the most violence to win is another matter. All hypothetical, of course; just saying not to discount a 13% minority if they act together against an opposing force where only 13% participate.
“It will be this “white backlash” that will suddenly be the critical problem, and reason enough for a martial-law type clampdown.”
Are there enough people in the police and military with the values like the group Oathkeepers to not confiscate firearms?
No wonder Obama wants a civilian police force as strong as the military.
Perhaps he will deputize New Black Pampers and the rest of “Holder’s people” as Federal police to create his own ghettostapo.
Crackers are the new Juden in America’s Warsaw ghetto.
If the war turns Civil, the side fighting for state’s rights will be on the right side this time.
I do not see another election fixing this Republic anyway, so such a good crisis should not go to waste.
Inspector Callahan said:
“There is nothing wrong with a little shooting, as long as the right people get shot.”
The problem with war is that too many of the wrong people end up getting shot. Jefferson understood this when he commented on the watering of liberty’s tree.