"Gun-Toting White Males" in race-war, says The Nation

[JohnBT]

"Vanden Heuvel was born in New York City, New York, the daughter of Jean Stein, a best-selling author and editor, and William vanden Heuvel, an attorney, former diplomat, businessman and author. Her maternal grandparents were Music Corporation of America founder Jules C. Stein and Doris Babbette Jones (originally Jonas). Through her maternal grandmother, vanden Heuvel is a distant cousin of actor/comedian George Jessel.[1]"

"Vanden Heuvel is editor and publisher of The Nation magazine. She is also an owner of The Nation, being one of a handful of investors brought together in 1995 by then-editor Victor Navasky in a for-profit partnership to buy the magazine — then losing US$500,000 a year more — from investment banker Arthur Carter. This group of investors included, among others, former Corporation for Public Broadcasting Chairman Alan Sagner, novelist E.L. Doctorow, actor Paul Newman, and Peter Norton, creator of the Norton Utilities software."



In other news, her first name is Katrina.

 

[ArmedBear]

LOL - race war?

Whois shooting all those [strike]black gangbangers[/strike] urban youths in our cities, anyway? It's not white people.

Tragic maybe (if you can really think of murderers being shot by other murderers as "tragic"), but interracial it is not.

What's really sad is that we have generations of young men who grow up to be violent criminals who either never see 30, or never see it except from behind bars, and all people like Vanden Heuvel and a host of other American "progressives" in politics, "journalism" and academia really want to do is use the situation to get attention so they can amass more money, power, or both, for themselves. The last thing they'd really want is for this to be fixed.

 

[MagnumDweeb]

Kin of mine in Baton Rouge and Lafayette(not sure about spelling on that one, been awhile), got to enjoy ol'Katrina. And kin of mine are unfortunately affiliated with the Klan be it through business (sells cars to members, does taxes for them and CPA work, and providing medical services, odd how a bunch of folks who hate jews do business with them when the money is right or are better at treating their mom or dad then the folks at the free clinic).

The white supremecists of today arent' out there making trouble, they are sitting in basements and living rooms talking and planning, abiding by the law and finding their niche for business purposes, oh they might buy guns and 'train' with their buddies on the weekends playing paintball but they know their bread don't get buttered right if they make too much trouble. It's those boys in prison that are the most trouble.

After Katrina folks that were behind in the rural areas or limited urban areas for the most part minded their own as my kin tells me. Yeah did my cousins go ahead and stay awake at night with a cup of coffee and shotgun, or maybe even stand on their porch with a rifle within quick grabbing distance, making a point folks were watching their own. I did the same when the hurricanes came here to Central Florida in 2004, my parent's neighborhood got hit particularly bad and me and a couple of neighbors had long arms slung on us or handguns in holsters on our hips or in shoulder holstser for the gawkers to see. Those folks who were vultures looking to get paid to help old folks pickup their yards or drove by real slow trying to look mean(looked constipated to me).

We all pretty much know this story is hogwash, but if a neighborhood decided it didn't want any part of New Orleans, didn't want any of its people at it's doors, I couldn't blame them. Only two kinds of folks live in New Orleans largely, speaking as someone who's done Mardi Gra there (Lafayette is so much cleaner and nicer) and has family that commutes their to work that there are two kinds of folks: those who commute to work and get the hell out before dark, and those who invite crime (be they criminals themselves, or part of the whole "Don't Snitch" culture). And for some reason we are trying to rebuild this place.

 

[Cel]

This type of thing is exactly why gun owners of all races should be banding together. These "race war" stories and reports are just bait to keep people hating one another. It's sickening. I don't care if they were white or black, if someone feels the necessity to protect their family then so be it. The police down there sure didn't seem to be helping at the time, with the gun confiscations and such. The owners of these newspapers feel they can let their opinions be known since they usually don't have to deal with anything like this behind the gated walls of their communities. Same thing with the hunting rifle and 'assault' weapon debate. Some gun owners don't think we should be able to own 'assault rifles'. Nevermind that we have a RIGHT. They can't just conquer us, so they try to divide us first.

 

[mljdeckard]

I'm very much with JWarren. I think it's fabricated from top to bottom. The GOVERNMENTAL abuses upon the people of New Orleans are a well documented catastrophe. The doctors who were convicted for euthanizing patients got national coverage. Where was the coverage of this WHEN IT HAPPENED?

 

[TCB in TN]

Sad fact is that poor folks (black, white, mixed, or other) have been committing crimes against one another for the entire history of the human race. The real problem with the race war is the media's continued insistence that it exists and their insistence on pointing towards it as an explanation for every evil thing that happens. It encourages ignorant individuals from both sides to act out on it making a story where there shouldn't be one.

 

[mordechaianiliewicz]

It is almost impossible to know exactly what happened in New Orleans. There are accounts that police sniped people trying to cross a bridge at 600 yards. There are accounts of this here. There are accounts of "urban youth" (to borrow a French expression) robbing and raping rich white folks. And a report I read of folks killing "anyone black" who came to their neighborhood.

Problem is, people start racking up bodycounts the way many (liberal) newspapers say, and you have to ask, "Why aren't they in jail?" Same question applies to blacks, whites, whoever.

Truth is this: There were attrocities if you will, everywhere. That is what happens when there is a breakdown of law and order.

Where there some bad shoots (whether armed citizen or cop)? Yes. Were there black criminals roving about robbing and raping? Yes. Was any of this nearly as dramatic as the news made it out to be? No.

Most of the folks in inner city New Orleans who found themselves running for the hills had little interest in stopping the the NOLA suburbs. Those black folks knew the whites there were armed, and that many of them wouldn't want poor black refugees coming to their neighborhood. Plus, they didn't paticularly want to stay in an area that could flood over anyway.

The thing is this, in the minds of many libs (who tend to gravitate to those vaunted journalist degrees), white men with guns defending their homes is analogous to KKK members burning crosses or black churches. They have little critical thinking skills when a metaphoric reference arrises. And white man with a gun is one of their most powerfull boogeymen.

PS

Should have read JWarren's post first

 

[BBQLS1]

IMO, the story was written to inflame, but there are some sick/evil people out there as well. It's hard to know what really went on, but I wouldn't discount everything. I might take it with a grain of salt. You and I know there are evil people out there; it's one of the reasons we cling to our guns and CCW no?

 

[Gun Slinger]

Hmmm...

"The Nation" has decided to make the sweeping and completely ridiculous generalization that all white males are engaged in some sort of "clandestine race war" against all blacks.

Correct me if I am wrong, but engaging in such irrational misperceptions and misbeliefs (such as this baseless, unsupported allegation) against a group of people based solely upon the color of their skin is what constitutes racist thought and committing those baseless allegations to action (like putting such a ridiculous story in print) is what constitutes racism itself.

Unfortunately, the First Amendment permits "The Nation" (and the rest of the news media) to print such drivel if they see fit, however I am hopeful that the American public will see it exactly for what it is. Either way, methinks that "The Nation" has "painted" themselves (editors/writers) as sensationalists at best and racists at the worst. Fortunately, the First Amendment is also quite the handy tool for finding those who are all too willing to engage in hate mongering since those so inclined feel compelled to impart their valuable "wisdom" to the rest of the world.

Or put more sucinctly: What a bunch of "poops".

 

[rojocorsa]

You'd think that the man in the picture would have shown his "wound scars." If he probably had any.

 

[Mannlicher]

The Nation? Why are you reading that garbage in the first place

 

[Golden Hound]

I just grabbed it from the rack because of the cover story...I wanted to see how many stupid gun mistakes were in it.

They didn't get any of my money.

 

[The Lone Haranguer]

Is Katrina vanden Heuvel (sp?) still on the editorial staff?

 

[amprecon]

I was told by a previous supervisor of mine who worked for the U.S. Embassy in Cote-d'Ivoire (Ivory Coast), that a robbery crime is not the fault of the offender there, but the fault of the one that enticed the "offender" by having shown something of value.
The careless act of not hiding something of value was the initiating cause for the confrontation, people should know how criminals will act and should act accordingly by not inticing them, insinuating everyone is a criminal.
It almost appears in some cases that this country's perception of crime is not that far off from those of Cote-d'Ivoire.

 

[ar10]

Before passing any judgment or comment read the Nation article, I did and here's what I came up with:
1. NOPD, DA, Mayors office, State/Federal government collapsed.
2. One of the very few high spots, (not flooded) was Algiers Point.
3. The majority of people living in Algiers Point are predominately white middle class.
4. The surrounding area known as Algiers. was also repeatedly mentioned as the "hood" by "The Nation".
5. The residents of Algiers saw what was happening afterward, they knew the political structure completely collapsed and public services evaporated. The residents decided to protect what they had left with the available resources they had.
6. "The Nation" stated there were B/E's taking place and actually mention a boarded up market being broken into.
7. What was not mentioned by "The Nation". when referencing the vigilante shootings was the term "LOOTING". (Look up the difference and decide for yourselves).
8. "The Nation" mentions "live" interview" with two of Algiers Point black residents one of whom was a registered member of the Black Panther organization.

I could go on but won't. However, I did look up the chief editor of "The Nation" to check her background. What came out of the complete editorial, in my view, is they actually supported the vigilante group protecting their property. What those "White Men" with guns did was completely justified.

I probably follow the same policy if, for any reason), our structure collapsed.

 

[Golden Hound]

What came out of the complete editorial, in my view, is they actually supported the vigilante group protecting their property.

Who? Who supported what?

The article is clearly biased against those who were protecting their property.

If the racial situation were reversed the article would have made them out to be heroes instead of vigilantes.

I would be curious to know the statistics of black gun ownership and how they compare with whites and other ethnic groups, actually. I wonder if they are similar.

 

[ar10]

The article is clearly biased against those who were protecting their property.

That's my point exactly, she attempted make it look like the vigilante group were nothing more and gun carrying morons but it didnt' work.

 

[Golden Hound]

Well, it would "work" for the average reader of The Nation who is most likely a self-hating white liberal, in an urban environment, upper-middle-class, and utterly consumed with "white guilt" and a self-defeating mentality towards those who would do evil to them. The kind of people who think Robert Mugabe is a hero for overthrowing the evil racist white racist Rhodesian racists, but are willing to completely overlook all of the hellish devastation that savage has created since.

The kind of people who would hold a fundraiser for the Black Panthers even if the Black Panthers raped their daughters and set their houses on fire.

Also the type of people who think the American government is fascist, evil, racist, and oppressive, but are paradoxically against private gun ownership. Because private gun ownership to them means "redneck white males" and they would rather gleefully slit their own throats and those of all of their children than even take the chance of being anywhere near THAT label.

 

[mbt2001]

They air brushed / photo-shopped a gun out of this pic (did a bad job), but it is clear that he is holding one.

Caption

"A vigilante shot Donnell Herrington twice shortly after Hurricane Katrina struck New Orleans."

 

[22-rimfire]

You loot and I shoot.

 

[Golden Hound]

THEY air brushed / photoshopped a gun out of this pic (did a bad job), but it is clear that he is holding one.

I don't think it's clear.

Why would the photographer take a picture of him holding a gun and then have it airbrushed out instead of just taking a picture of him NOT holding a gun in the first place?

 

[ar10]

It looks a lot like a small revolver, .38sp or ,22 to me. Look at his right hand you can see the butt of "something" he's holding.

 

[Golden Hound]

No I think it's a two-tone cell phone. I have one just like it. The silver part is encased by black rubber.

The physical shape of a revolver or other handgun would not fit with the shape of whatever is in his hand and the angle it's being held at. I'm pretty sure if they didn't want a picture of a guy holding a gun in their magazine, they wouldn't have taken a picture of a guy holding a gun.

 

[hqmhqm]

The article covers a topic that was the subject of some posts on AR15.com.
One of the 'white people' was a man who was attacked by a looter and hit in the head with a wrench; the looter came to ask for help, and then smashed the guy's head and stole his van.

Strangely, the 'journalist' ignores this, and acts like the man had no justification for arming himself and patrolling the neighborhood, as if being smashed in the head is not attempted murder.

 

[notorious]

That's classic socialist playbook... disrupt the fabric of society, engage the people in class warfare so they are too busy fighting among themselves to notice the government taking power. The liberal media is just too eager to play along with the liberal government who gives them the access to all the juiciness.