Outing the Jewish controlled mass media

[Will Williams]

Alex Linder, formerly employed in the mainstream media, had this to say in a thread at his VNN forum entitled "Thinkers vs. Doers": http://vnnforum.com/showthread.php?t=131290 The part about a news organization's style book is fascinating. Dr. Pierce did a show about this once. I'll try to find it and post to this thread.
---

Alex Linder:
...AP [Associated Press] is not really a company where you can go up the chain of command like a local paper. Well, it is, but that's not relevant to the problem in this case. What is AP? A bunch of reporters and 'stringers' who are feeding stories back to a handful of offices where they are hacked, chopped, cut, framed to fit The Template, then fed out worldwide as a branded 'news service' that most papers subscribe to. The papers, who pay a lot for the AP wire, select whichever stories they like off the feed to flesh out their paper. Otherwise, how would a paper in Podunk, Idaho, have "reporting" on what's going on in Washington, D.C., or New York City?

It's not the reporters who are the key. It's their editors, their bosses, and how they decide to cut whatever the stringers give them. These people are basically nameless, but you can tell their politics from the stories they put out.

Check the average small-town paper. The only "real" news is high-school sports and town council meeting. Beyond that, it's mostly AP feed.

The basic problem is ALL the people in the newspaper food chain have the same view of things. So they don't see any problem with their warped view, and they mutually reinforce their prejudices. There just isn't any real way to change this System through complaints. The only complaint that matters is if you're running advertising with them. Otherwise, they don't truly give a fuck what you think, because they have the illiberal ideology. That's drummed into the little idiots in journalism school. Writers are NOT intellectuals. They swallow the garbage they hear, and learn to think the same way. That's why in today's PC world, most journalists are females. Women don't think, they just repeat. Calling something "hate" makes perfect sense to a woman. And the men are really no better.

It truly is a Systemic thing that can't be done about short of taking over the country and shutting these liars down.

I mean, we had a perfect example in England yesterday: cunt reporter interviews guy about riots, and he says they're all black. And she says, "you can't say that."

That's 'journalism' in 2011. The story is pre-determined. What can you say? It's pure partyline Stalinism. They cut reality to fit their agenda, and there's no way to change it unless you can threaten their income by yanking your ads. These media don't even care, the print media, if no one buys their product. Print media has been collapsing for decades, yet if you ever listen to any seminar discussions at the annual editors' gatherings, never ONCE will you find the suggestion that maybe they cater to their actual audience: old white men. No, like Levi's, they don't care who actually buys their product, they want to make things shorter, dumber, and more leftist, in hopes the youth will drop their phone-tv-computer-pads and buy them. But it never works, just more papers go out of business. What they deliver sure as hell aint NEWS, and who wants to pay for their anti-White analysis when it's available everywhere for free?

Alex Linder
August 10th, 2011, 07:01 PM
The way to understand a news org is to get its stylebook. This is sort of mini-dictionary, and quite fascinating. Much of the stylebook deals with the particular way the paper handles certain spellings or grammar points, but a great deal of the stylebook is political: what term can be used for blacks, that type of thing. What you realize is that every last care has been taken to ensure that expressions are seamlessly Correct, so that no reality can break through at any point - the very terms preclude it.

AP = an agenda, coming from the top down, simply cutting out anyone or thing that doesn't conform to and propagate that agenda.

It's not really a news service, because while the specifics may change (date, location, people involved) the story is always the same.

Either your news service is dedicated to reflecting reality as best you can by accurately reporting it - or your news service is actually imitation-news-flavored propanda [Linderism for propaganda].

[Will Williams]

NEWSPAPERS DIRECTED: COVER UP BLACK VIOLENCE
City's epidemic silenced by national 'journalism' society
Published: 2 days ago
COLIN FLAHERTY

(Editor’s note: Colin Flaherty has done more reporting than any other journalist on what appears to be a nationwide trend of skyrocketing black-on-white crime, violence and abuse. WND features these reports to counterbalance the virtual blackout by the rest of the media due to their concerns that reporting such incidents would be inflammatory or even racist. WND considers it racist not to report racial abuse solely because of the skin color of the perpetrators or victims.) Videos linked or embedded may contain foul language and violence.

When a mom and daughter were kidnapped, forced to withdraw money from an ATM, raped, then shot last week, the Indianapolis Star played it by the book: Do not mention the suspects are black.

The “book” in this case is written by the Society of Professional Journalists, headquartered just three miles from the scene of the crime. In last month’s issue of the SPJ magazine, the oldest and largest organization of journalists in America reminded its members how they should report racial violence.

Don’t.

The SPJ story was just repeating what dozens of chapters around the country tell its members in regular seminars: Unless someone is considerate enough to wave around a sign saying, “Kill Honky,” or issue a press release or utter racial expletives in front of lots of witnesses, the fact that the suspects just happen to be black has no bearing on the story.

And if you wonder about it, you are probably a “racist and hater,” said the SPJ.

Never mind that when Indianapolis police dispatchers take a 911 call, one of the first questions they ask is about race.

Never mind when these same dispatchers talk to patrolmen on publicly accessible scanners, one of the first pieces of information they broadcast is the race of the suspects.

Never mind that Indianapolis is the scene of dozens of recent examples of black mob violence, though you would not know it from reading the Indianapolis Star.

Many of these episodes are centered downtown, near the gleaming but increasingly empty Circle Mall. Many are connected to the Indiana Black Expo held every summer. And when police flood the zone to prevent more black mob violence downtown – with helicopters and horses and SWAT teams – the rowdy sometimes take a bus to a local mall and create violence and mayhem there.

Many of these episodes of black mob violence are on video. Many are documented in “White Girl Bleed a Lot: The Return of Racial Violence to America and How the Media Ignore It,” which has an entire chapter on Indianapolis.
To be fair, Indianapolis is not remarkably different from Kansas City, Milwaukee, Minneapolis, Chicago, Baltimore, St. Louis, Philadelphia, Brooklyn, Manhattan, Greensboro, Rochester, Richmond, Miami Beach, Fresno, Louisville, Memphis, Greensboro and more than 100 other centers of regular and intense black mob violence: The papers in those towns are loathe to report it as well. They say they are color blind.

These are the same papers that every day run stories about black caucuses, black churches, black colleges, black TV stations, black expos, black radio, black newspapers, black blogs and on and on.

But black mob violence? Not a thing.

People in Indianapolis are wondering why: They question why the paper is so heavily invested in refusing to let their readers know that black mob violence exists exponentially out of proportion in their town.

Daniel Lee is just one of dozens who left comments at the IndyStar.com and other web sites:
“The Star won’t publish the suspects’ race unless it’s part of a ‘detailed’ description including clothes, hairstyle, Italian or German-style boots, hoop or stud earrings, buttons, snaps or hook-and-eye fasteners, plaid or paisley, earth-tones or vibrant joyful colors, full description of every visible tattoo, etc,” Lee quipped. “It’s their way of avoiding what they consider the racism of calling black suspects ‘black.’”

Johnny West piled on: “It is completely irresponsible for the Star to not have a description of the suspects included in this story. This story is useless to the community without a timely description. If police did not release a description, that should be noted in the story.”

David Hogan noticed a pattern: “I do not understand why the Indy Star will not release a description of the suspects. According to IMPD, 4-5 black male suspects, one of which who was wearing a grey hooded sweatshirt, were involved.

“I got this from the Channel 8 news site. Bill McClerry is the reporter on this story,” Hogan continued. “Hey, Bill, if you are reading these comments, can you please explain why the Indy Star does not release a physical description other than maybe height and age of the possible suspects? I think it would be helpful to get a reason behind this critical omission of facts surrounding this and other stories the paper has reported in the past.”

On and on it went until Alvie Lindsay, the “News and Investigations Director” at the Star stepped in to explain it all.

“Lots of questions here about descriptions of suspects,” Lindsay responded. “We are working to update the story. If and when we have a detailed description of the suspects – and not merely race and gender, but something that could reasonably help the public identify individuals – that information will be included.

“Bill, our reporter, just talked to the IMPD spokesman who said there are no other such details at this point,” Lindsay continued. “It’s actually not clear, he said, how many suspects were involved. No age range has been provided, either.”

After reading the story, several commentators mistakenly came to believe that these details were not available. Or that the victims were not aware of the racial identity of the suspects.

Said Barbara Grasher Howard, “Did you not read the article? It clearly said the victims weren’t able to recall details. Police are hoping they’re more able to do so once the trauma is somewhat past” – which is not true.

But at least the Indy Star allows some comments on the topic. Other daily papers often do not, or close comments altogether when the subject is racial violence.

The Indy Star may refuse to report on racial violence, but lots of people know about it anyway. Abdul Hakim-Shabazz is an Indianapolis attorney and community activist who has heard it all before. Writing in Indiana Barrister, Hakim Shabazz says it is time to take off the blinders and confront the racial roots of the violence and lawlessness in Indianapolis.

“Indianapolis, you have a problem. Your problem is young, black men who are out of control. … It’s time to step up and start making examples out of people,” Hakim-Shabazz writes. “Decent citizens, black and white, should not have to live in fear of urban terrorists.”

Meanwhile, over at the SPJ headquarters, of the 35 people who are staffers and members of the board or directors, none is black.

Black mobs routinely terrorize cities across the country, but the media and government are silent. Read the detailed account of rampant racial crime in “White Girl Bleed A Lot: The Return of Racial Violence to America and How the Media Ignore It.”

WHY ARE MANY NEWS SOURCES INTENTIONALLY HIDING BLACK VIOLENCE?

· They're hiding nothing. There's no problem of black violence
· They just report the news. Race is irrelevant
· It's irresponsible to insert race for no reason. It fuels racism
· They don't wish to ignite a race war
· There's someone powerful pushing censorship of the news
· They're being directed to by fellow journalists who lean to the political left
· Most news agencies are extremely liberal, and don't want this problem known
· Leftist journalists are just blind, they don't see nor want to see the pattern of black violence
· Most journalists have grown so PC self-monitoring, they're just trained not to report bad things about black people
· Because it would make Barack Obama look bad, a sin among journalists
· They're among those who want to transform America, even if it means a race war
· I don't know
· Other
View Results
Bottom of Form

Read more at http://mobile.wnd.com/2013/11/newspaper ... DQzTjbg.99

[Will Williams]

The example of the Indiana Star and practically every other daily newspaper in the United States practice of not reporting the race of minority criminals doesn't touch on the Jewish aspect of reporting of these "Hush Crimes."

Dr. Pierce concentrated much of his efforts over the years to what's left out of that Indianapolis story: Jewish control of the news and entertainment industry in American. In the following essay (American Dissident Voices transcript) from February 2002 he looked inside the incredible control of Canadian media by "the tribe."
---

Journalists and Canadians
by Dr. William Pierce

A few years ago, when I first began describing the lemming phenomenon, I had the naïve idea that lemmings were mostly a pretty dull bunch: grossly overweight couch potatoes who munched snacks while they watched television and believed everything they were told. I thought that intelligence was a reasonably good guarantee that a person wasn't a lemming. Since then I've learned that isn't true. I believe there probably is some correlation between intelligence and the ability to think independently, on the average, but there certainly are many, many intelligent men and women who are just as much lemmings as the dullest couch potato or baseball fan.
Talking to journalists helped me understand that. Many of the journalists with whom I've spoken in the past few years have been at least a little more intelligent, quicker witted, better educated, and generally more knowledgeable than the average member of the population. My estimate is that, on the average, the journalists for the more important mass media are a bit brighter than bus drivers and retail clerks, but I've met many more independent-minded bus drivers and retail clerks than journalists who could think for themselves. As a class, journalists are the most lemming-like professionals I've encountered. Virtually all of them march in ideological lockstep. There may be an independent-minded journalist somewhere, but I haven't yet met him.

When I first began to realize the uniform nature of journalistic thinking I wondered whether it was crookedness instead of lemming behavior I was seeing. I wondered whether journalists are simply a corrupt, mercenary, amoral bunch, who tell whatever lies they are paid to tell and follow whatever party line the owner of their newspaper or television network lays down for them. I suspected that there might be some editorial directive I hadn't seen that instructs newspaper writers and editors that in any story they publish about me the word "hate" must be used at least once in the headline and at least twice in every paragraph of text. There are certain buzzwords that are used so consistently and predictably, "hate" or its derivatives being the most common, that it seems unlikely that every journalist would have hit on them independently and begun using them of his own volition.

Well, to make a long story short, I'm sure that there are plenty of corrupt journalists, but the more experience I have with journalists generally the more I'm inclined to believe that in most cases they really are lemmings. They really believe the nonsense they say on television or write for their newspapers. It's not just that they're paid to do that; they really are incapable of believing anything except the party line. Maybe so many journalists, even bright ones, are lemmings because journalism departments at universities deliberately weed out the independent thinkers.

Well, maybe, but I'm not much of a believer in giant conspiracies, involving many people and crossing ethnic boundaries. If journalism students are selected for their lemming-like characteristics, I suspect that the selection is unconscious rather than calculated. Which is to say, journalism professors are lemmings themselves and they favor the more lemming-like students. More likely, it is the fundamental nature of the profession that guarantees that nearly all of them will think alike. Journalism, after all, is a fundamentally extroverted profession. Journalists spend all their lives talking with other people and writing about other people. They are less private and more highly socialized than the people in most other lines of work.

I've tried to talk about this and related subjects with journalists, but usually I haven't had much luck. So my own writing about the mass media has focused less on what makes Gentile reporters tick so uniformly than on what motivates their employers, the Jewish media bosses. With more than 3,000 years of Jewish history to provide examples, the motivation of the media bosses is easier to understand and to explain.

Last month, however, something came to light that I found very interesting in this regard. As you may be aware, the mass media in Canada are as much under Jewish control as in the United States. The undisputed top media mogul in Canada is Israel Asper, who is commonly known by his nickname "Izzy." With his sons Leonard and David and other family members, Izzy Asper owns CanWest Global Communications Corporation.

A Gentile, Conrad Black, also used to be a major player in the Canadian media, but a little over a year ago Black's Southam News, Inc., was bought out by Izzy. CanWest now owns more than 60 per cent of Canada's newspapers and other media outlets. That's more than 60 per cent of all of Canada's mass media in the hands of one Jew. Included are 14 metropolitan dailies and 128 local newspapers across the country, including the Vancouver Sun, the Vancouver Province, the Calgary Herald, and the Montreal Gazette. CanWest also owns the National Post, which is distributed throughout Canada. In addition Izzy owns media in the United States, Australia, New Zealand, and Northern Ireland.

Last month Izzy issued a written directive to his newspapers, instructing them that from now on they must print nothing critical of Israel or of Israeli actions or policies. This is a rare thing. Usually directives of this sort are oral only, and great care is taken to keep them from coming to the attention of the public. But Izzy, with even more brass than is customary for his tribe, made his directive public. He announced that, beginning three weeks ago, December 12, the editorial content of all of his newspapers would be homogenized, and they all would be pro-Israel.

Now here's the interesting part: if all of Izzy's Gentile underlings were simply corrupt -- were simply paid mercenaries who wrote what they were told to write -- then there would be no controversy; all of the local editors and reporters and columnists simply would follow orders. But there is a controversy. A group of reporters and writers at the Montreal Gazette have rebelled, at least for the moment. One of them, Bill Marsden, an investigative reporter, revealed on a Canadian Broadcasting Corporation radio program called "As It Happens" that his editor at the Gazette had instructed him never to report anything that might reflect badly on Israel. Paraphrasing Izzy's directive, Marsden said:

We do not run in our newspaper op-ed pieces that express criticism of Israel and what it is doing in the Middle East.
Marsden and 54 other reporters at the Montreal Gazette went on strike in protest at what they describe as undue corporate interference with freedom of the press.

Their strike has infuriated Izzy. Izzy's son David characterized the striking reporters as "childish" and "self-righteous." He said:

Why don't they just quit and have the courage of their convictions? Maybe they should go out and, for the first time in their lives, take a risk, put their money where their mouth is, and start their own newspaper.
How's that for chutzpah, as the Jews like to call it? One can read in David Asper's reaction to the reporters the thought, "How dare these mere Gentiles, these mere goyim, question what we, God's Chosen People, decide should be the party line for Canada's newspapers! How dare they!" I mean it's not just that Izzy owns the Montreal Gazette, and so he is entitled to set the editorial policy, and other newspapers can set different policies. Izzy thinks that he is entitled to set the editorial policy for all of Canada's newspapers and determine what all Canadians think.

The man chosen by the Aspers to write the editorials for all of their newspapers is Murdoch Davis. When asked by "As It Happens" whether or not one of CanWest's newspapers would be permitted to buck the party line on Israel, Davis replied:

No. It is clearly the intent that the newspapers will speak with one voice on certain issues of overarching national or international importance.
When asked specifically whether or not one of the Asper newspapers would be permitted to raise the question of Israel's long-standing violation of international law and its defiance of UN resolutions calling for withdrawal from illegally occupied Palestinian territory, Davis again responded in the negative.

So that's the present situation with freedom of the press in Canada: not really very different from the situation in the United States. So what about the mentality of journalists? The fact that the reporters at the Montreal Gazette are protesting Izzy's directive that they can report nothing negative about Israel indicates that they are not entirely mercenary. To me, however, it does not indicate that they are independent thinkers. I believe that they are as much lemmings as the dullest couch potato or sports fan. What caused their protest was the arrogant and contemptuous way in which the Aspers went about reconciling two conflicting elements in the Jewish party line.

On the one hand journalists have been taught that the United Nations is a splendid and admirable organization, whose resolutions should be obeyed. They also have been taught that all races and ethnic groups are equal -- in fact, essentially the same -- but that racial minorities and underdogs generally deserve our special sympathy, and that in any conflict with a ruling group the underdogs are in the right. That's standard liberal dogma. You have to believe that in order to be a journalist. On the other hand, journalists have been taught that Jews are wonderful people who can do no wrong, and that to think otherwise is anti-Semitism, which is as bad as or worse than racism.

It's hard enough reconciling the elevated status of Jews with the concept of racial and ethnic equality, but most journalists by working at it are able to do it -- except where the conflict between Jews and Palestinians is concerned. That requires a special effort and really careful handling by their Jewish bosses.

How do you explain to a journalist who already believes all of the liberal dogma that if Iraq ignores a UN resolution it should be bombed into the Stone Age and then starved into submission with a rigid trade embargo, but if Israel ignores 14 UN resolutions we should respond by sending the Israelis more military and economic aid?

How do you explain to a journalist who has been taught that when South Africa used to be a White country and practiced apartheid, and the South African police sometimes beat information out of captured Black terrorists, it was a terrible thing and had to be condemned in the strongest terms, but when Israel practices apartheid, assassinates Palestinian leaders, and tortures Palestinian prisoners, nothing should be said about it?

How do you explain to a journalist that it is an intolerable threat to the security of the world if some Muslim country develops weapons of mass destruction, and the United States is justified in a preemptive strike to destroy the weapons production facilities, but when a psychotic little country like Israel builds an arsenal of chemical, nuclear, and biological weapons, using materials and technology stolen from us, it's OK, and we should ignore it?

How do you explain to a journalist steeped in the tenets of feminism that he shouldn't say anything about Israel's booming slave trade in girls and women kidnapped from eastern Europe and forced to work as sex slaves?

How do you explain to a journalist who believes wholeheartedly in egalitarianism that it's perhaps regrettable but certainly excusable when Jews rocket Palestinian villages and use Palestinian children for target practice, but it's "terrorism" and completely unjustifiable when the Palestinians hit back?

Believe me, explaining these things is tricky, but it can be done, if it's done with patience and care. It can be done, because when it comes to matters of faith, a lemming really isn't rational. He's quite capable of believing two mutually contradictory things at the same time. The problem that brought on the mini-rebellion at the Montreal Gazette is that Izzy wasn't patient and careful. He was arrogant and contemptuous of his Gentile reporters. But they'll get over it, I'm sure. They always do. They're lemmings.

But, as I said, what is happening now in Canada is interesting. It gives us insight into the workings of journalists' minds, and it also brings out into the open not only the monopoly Jewish control of the Canadian mass media but also the way in which that control is used to slant the news and Canadian public opinion so as to serve Jewish interests to the detriment of Canadian interests.

Do you think that any of these revelations will be of benefit to Canadians? Will the average Canadian say, "Oh, my goodness! I didn't realize that one man, and a Jew at that, controls more than 60 per cent of all the mass media in Canada and is using that control to deceive Canadians as to what is happening in the Middle East. That's terrible! We'd better have our lawmakers do something to break up this media monopoly, so that we will have a better chance to learn the truth about what's happening in the world when we read a newspaper or watch a television news program."

What do you think? I think that about 98 per cent of Canadians won't even look up from their ball games. I think that there's not a politician in Canada who will dare go up against Izzy Asper. This whole tempest at the Montreal Gazette will blow over in a few days, and all of Izzy's newspapers and other media will toe the party line as if nothing had happened.

And now I'm talking only to the two or three or four per cent of Canadians -- and also to the two or three or four per cent of Americans -- who aren't so absorbed in their ball games that they don't notice things like this and don't really care either. I'm talking to the small portion of the White population in both countries -- and in fact, in countries around the world -- who do notice and do care. I want you to understand that this is the way nations lose their freedom. More than that, this is the way races become extinct.

The majority of the population in Canada and the United States and in every country in Europe consists of lemmings, who always have been manipulated by whoever is in power. For approximately the last 100 years the power to manipulate the thinking of the lemmings -- of the masses, if you prefer -- has been shifting from the authority figures in the government and in the churches to the people who control the mass media. These days the people who control the media also control the government for all practical purposes, and the churches have become irrelevant, which is why the Canadian government won't try to break up Izzy's media monopoly and why the politicians in the United States will never go beyond pretending to be concerned about too much sex and violence on television when they have a mock fight with the media.

Controlling a country's mass media doesn't mean just being able to exert a decisive influence on a country's foreign policy, as Izzy Asper is doing in Canada, and as his fellow Jews long have done in the United States. It doesn't mean just getting a country involved in unnecessary wars and subjecting its citizens to retaliatory terrorist attacks. It means influencing immigration policy. It means influencing educational policy. It means influencing social policy. It means being able to control the way most of a country's people think about everything: about race and morality and lifestyles and other countries and freedom and the meaning of life. Most of the degenerative changes that have taken place in America and in Canada since the Second World War have been consequences of Jewish media influence. As that influence continues to grow, the chances of our people being able to throw off the yoke and regain control of our own destiny become smaller and smaller.

In Canada at the moment, Izzy Asper's surfeit of chutzpah has brought to the attention of the public -- that is to the attention of that small portion of the public that cares about such things -- his monopoly control of Canada's mass media and his intent to use those media for Jewish propaganda purposes. Light has been cast on this grave situation because most journalists are lemmings, and a few of them are chattering excitedly now about things such as "freedom of the press." Really, the whole debate is silly. Canada had no freedom of the press even before Izzy got his greedy hands on most of Canada's newspapers. For years it has been illegal in Canada to publish anything considered "racist" or "anti-Semitic" or even Politically Incorrect. When a Canadian buys copies of any of my books and they are mailed to him, the Canadian secret police confiscate them at the border. Publicly challenging the details of the Jewish "Holocaust" story can result in a prison term for a Canadian. Canada's journalists thought all of that -- stopping "hate," as they called it -- was just fine. Pretty soon they will realize that requiring all mass media to say only nice things about what the Jews are doing to the Palestinians is also part of the noble effort to stop "hate," and that also will be just fine with them.

We can't change the nature of lemmings. Someone always will manipulate them. What is of the utmost importance is who it is that manipulates them, because whoever that is will determine the course taken by the whole society, by the nation, by the race. In the past, when it was a king or a pope or a dictator who set the party line, many mistakes were made, sometimes due to selfishness or irresponsibility, sometimes due to ignorance or carelessness or stupidity or prejudice. But at least the people setting the party line for the masses were our people, members of our own race. Now, increasingly, the arbiters of the party line are Jews or people wholly under Jewish influence. And the Jews, as always, are looking out only for their own interests, not for ours. To them we are merely tools to be used in advancing their interests.

And that's at best. At worst they are pursuing policies intended not only to advance their interests, but also to destroy us. Don't try to debate this matter with the Jews; they will, of course, deny it. Just look at the policies they have been pushing for the past 50 years and where those policies have been taking us. Just consider the facts, not their specious arguments designed to keep you demoralized and non-resisting.

My fellow Americans and my fellow Canadians: we are in a bad situation. Let us stop ignoring it. Let us begin deciding what we're going to do about it. I'm doing what I can do in speaking out about it and getting others to speak out. You must decide what you are able and willing to do and then begin doing it.

[Will Williams]

http://nky.cincinnati.com/article/AB/20 ... ck_check=1

Ft. Thomas police investigate assaults on joggers
Nov. 6, 2013
by Chris Mayhew

FORT THOMAS — Police here and in Southgate are investigating reports of a roving group of juveniles assaulting two joggers and swiping a cell phone from the hands of another Sunday afternoon.

The reports – the assaults in Fort Thomas and the theft in Southgate – all happened between 4:15-5:13 p.m. Sunday, Nov. 3, according to police reports.

The random nature of the assaults is uncommon, said Fort Thomas Police Chief Mike Daly.

The reports are all believed to be connected because witness descriptions of the attackers all matched – three male teens described as between the ages of 16-18, Daly said.

“This kind of assault is unacceptable,” said Daly. “And our police department, the guys were out there looking for this thing in a strong way yesterday after it happened. And this is not something that is acceptable for this community. And we’re not going to put up with as a police department or city.”

Fort Thomas Police received a report of a 14-year-old boy being punched in the face at about 4:20 p.m. while jogging south with his father along South Fort Thomas Avenue at Grand Avenue. The teen waited until reaching home to report the incident at 5:13 p.m., said Fort Thomas officer Derek Faught.

“The father passed a group of juveniles, three juvenile males and two juvenile females, and they kind of muttered something under their breath to him,” Faught said. “He didn’t think much of it, I mean he’s a full grown man.”

The man’s 14-year-old son was jogging a few minutes behind his father.

“And the son wasn’t really paying attention to them and one of them just came up and punched him in the mouth and busted his lip,” Faught said.

Police received a report at 4:59 p.m. of another assault in the 800 block of Highland Avenue.

This time, three juvenile males reportedly harassed a woman as she jogged on the Highland Avenue overpass over I-471 and then assaulted a man trying to help stop the harassment, Faught said.

One of the juveniles “... slapped her on the behind and was kind of doing, I don’t know, I guess grinding on her to make fun of her and agitate her,” Faught said.

A man stopped his car and got out to help, he said.

“The young male slugged that guy in the mouth,” Faught said.

Both injuries were minor and neither victim was taken to the hospital, he said.

The assaults happening so close together seem to be more than coincidence, Faught said. The male juveniles seem to have been walking north from Fort Thomas to Southgate, he said.

“It seems like they were just walking on foot. No one ever gave a description of them coming from a vehicle,” Faught said.

Police in Southgate received a report at 5:12 p.m. of a group of three male juveniles taking a cell phone from a man jogging on the sidewalk along U.S. 27 in front of St. Therese Church, said Dan Johns, an officer for Southgate Police Department.

“He was walking or running, and he, of course, had his head phones in, and they came up behind him and grabbed the cell phone out of his hands,” Johns said.

The incident was reported as a theft by unlawful taking because there was no physical altercation, he said.

“They just plucked it out of his hand and took off,” Johns said.

The man told police he chased the juveniles for a few moments, and stopped when he thought they dropped the phone. The man found the headphones, but not the phone, Johns said.

Descriptions of the clothing worn by the suspects were also similar in each case, Johns said.

Police are asking anyone with information about the reports of assault or thefts on joggers to call Campbell County’s police dispatch at 859-292-3622.
---

What every reader of this ridiculous news story is left to wonder: Were the "juveniles" Negroes? Witnesses described the "youths'" clothing, but not their race? Sure. The first question cops ask witnesses is what is the perpetrators' race. Another hush crime -- Shhhhh!

[Will Williams]

VanguardNewsNetwork.com is not particularly friendly to the National Alliance, but Socrates, who runs VNN's main page, likes the Alliance and has given us a little boost with our New Year's Project: http://www.vanguardnewsnetwork.com/2015 ... merica/---
---

27 December, 2015
New Year’s Project: Help Update “Who Rules America?”
Posted by Socrates in National Alliance, jewed culture, Socrates, jewed media, Who Rules America?

The National Alliance’s famous essay “Who Rules America?” is very important. It can change minds – it certainly changed mine. But sadly, the essay has not been updated since about 2004 – that’s a long time to go without an update. Well, why not help update it, all of you WNs out there? Read the essay [1], then search the internet (or go to a library) and find out which Jews control which media companies in 2015. Be thorough and careful with your research and make sure an actual Jew really controls “x” media company and not a gentile who “looks like a Jew.” Then, send the information that you find, along with the necessary URLs, to the NA ( [email protected] ) or, you could also post it below, so that NA people can vet the info and add it to the essay. White people everywhere will thank you later. Please help if you can.

[1] [Here]

One Response to “New Year’s Project: Help Update “Who Rules America?””

Will Williams Says:
28 December, 2015 at 6:57 pm
Thank you for putting up this notice, Socrates. Well done. The email address is good, but the Hillsboro, WV, addresses given at the bottom of the linked WRA? http://www.vanguardnewsnetwork.com/who-rules-america/ are not where snail mailed correspondence should be sent. Those Hillsboro POBs should be changed to read:

National Alliance
POB 172
Laurel Bloomery, TN 37680

We appreciate your help with this worthwhile project, friend.