Tuesday, December 22, 2015

Jessica Chambers update

The story big media will not cover.  White girl murdered by black gang is not news

From local media:

PANOLA COUNTY, Miss. -- The FBI spent the morning rounding up suspected gang members.

There is a total of 17 people facing charges under Operation Bite Back.

Nine people were picked up Tuesday. The others were already in custody on other charges or had been arrested under this operation and bonded out.

FBI agents targeted suspected members of the Black Gangster Disciples, Vice Lords, and Sipp Mob street gangs.

"The charges range from drug, weapon, child endangerment, counterfeiting, et cetera, so it's a variety of charges," said Special Agent in Charge for the State of Mississippi Donald Alway.

The Jessica Chambers murder investigation tipped off investigators to gang issues in Panola County. A year-long investigation into gangs led to Operation Bite Back.

"We started the deep interrogation with the Jessica case, and people began to volunteer information to us and things like that, and we realized right away that something had to be done," said District Attorney John Champion.

Panola County Sheriff Dennis Darby stressed that the suspected gang members' charges have nothing to do with the Chambers case but agreed that her case encouraged investigators to dig into Panola's gang issue.

Most of Tuesday's suspects were found in Batesville.

BACKGROUND -- from a year ago:

The truth about murder and race in Mississippi may prove reducible to black and white after all, as with fifty years ago in the infamous “Mississippi Burning” case.  Breaking, bombshell social media evidence in the Jessica Chambers case suggests the dynamic is reversed, but similar.

In trying to follow and sort out the details surrounding the grisly immolation death of the white former cheerleader two weeks ago, one encounters a cast of very shady characters a country mile long and wide, with the sordid backstory of small-town police corruption in Panola County, and a troubled family tale, all of it murky and convoluted almost beyond belief.

Nailing the actual guilty party, however, could turn out to be not all that complicated.  That’s because some black terrorists in the victim’s immediate circle have left a rather obvious trail of specific, racially-oriented murder threats.

For readers familiar with the concept of Occam’s Razor, what seems to be an incredibly tangled mystery might instead just fit the boilerplate template of what I’m calling Occam’s race war.

One week before, and on just the day before Jessica Chambers was carjacked and burned to death, certain blacks among her intimate circle and acquaintance were involved in Facebook exchanges wherein calls for the rape and burnings of white women and children, especially the families of white police officers, were posted. 

Although not a police officer himself, Jessica Chambers’ father is an employee of the Panola County sheriff’s department, in the vehicle maintenance section.

You’ll need to grab a cup of coffee or an energy drink to slurp on, while you try to get a grip on what follows.

In the first Facebook comment in question, on November 30th, a woman using the name “Teapooh Itiswatitis Latrice” reacts to a fake news story carrying the headline “Cop Shoots 1Yr Old Black Baby After Mistaking Pacifier For Gun.”

“Teapooh,” apparently not being very bright, looks to have shared the story without realizing it was actually absurd satire, typical of incendiary internet hoax sites.  In sharing the bogus article, “Teapooh” typed the comment, “Somebody need to rape all his kids in front of him then sit(sic) the house on fire an watch them burn….i bet he was a white man SAD”

She shared it via the Facebook timeline of a woman named Sandy Rudd (now please bear with me for a minute while I outline some crucial connections before giving you the rest of the specific, criminal threat).

Sandy Rudd is the aunt of Bryan Rudd, Jessica’s abusive, criminal ex-boyfriend and local gang member.  Sandy, who gave the false name of  “Cassandra Market” to a reporter in an interview, is herself alleged to be a member of at least one notorious criminal gang —  she denies it, even though at least one picture of her has surfaced showing her making gang signs in a group picture with others, all of them defiantly throwing gang signs.

Sandy Rudd acknowledges that she is the one at the gas station who asked Jessica Chambers for a cigarette, when Jessica is seen on the store surveillance video walking over to someone who is off-camera.

Jessica lived with Bryan Rudd and his mother, Theresa Rudd Fleming, for two years in the period leading up to her murder, before a brief stay in a Christian-run rehab/shelter for troubled women.  Bryan Rudd has since moved away, to Iowa.

Now get this:  “Teapooh” is, according to the “hacktivists” who have accessed various social media accounts of the people involved, actually Teanna Rudd, the wife or live-in girlfriend of a man named Brejuan Buyers.

Brejuan Buyers is the man seen on the gas station’s surveillance video with the gas can in the hours just prior to Jessica being burned over 98% of her body.  He rode with Sandy Rudd in her car to the gas station, on that same night the murder victim is seen at the store — while he is filling the gas can at the pump — only 90 minutes before she is found burned.

“Teapooh” made more than just that one murderous comment on Facebook.  On the day before Jessica’s murder, on December 5th,she shared a video via someone posting as “Derrick Jaxn” (Jessica’s last word, uttered to a first responder, is reported to have been “Eric” or “Derrick”).  The post was accompanied by her comment, “Somebody needs to rape all they(sic) kids in front of them then set them on fire there(sic) learn then white bitches need to be dead”

Britain to send women soldiers into close combat for the first time

Women soldiers will be allowed to serve in ‘close combat’ roles within 12 months, David Cameron signalled yesterday.  He has told Defence Secretary Michael Fallon to prepare to welcome servicewomen into the new roles by the end of next year.

Mr Cameron’s intervention is designed to speed up historic plans to allow women in the UK forces to fight in combat roles alongside men for the first time.

A review on the potential ‘physiological demands’ on women from combat is due to report next summer.

But ahead of that, Mr Cameron threw his weight behind the plan. He said: ‘The Defence Secretary and I are united in wanting to see all roles in our Armed Forces opened up to women in 2016.

‘We’ve already lifted a number of barriers in our Armed Forces with the introduction of female submariners and women reaching the highest ranks in all Services.

‘We should finish the job next year and open up ground combat roles to women.’

No 10 said that women could begin training for combat service as early as next autumn.

The new move would mainly affect roles in the Infantry along with the Royal Marines, Royal Armoured Corps and the RAF.

However, there have been warnings that women lacked the killer instinct to fight on the front line.

Colonel Richard Kemp, former commander of British forces in Afghanistan, said last year female fighters would harm the ‘warrior ethos’ and damage the Forces’ capabilities.

But Downing Street said the move would bring the UK in line with other nations such as Australia and the US which earlier this month announced it would open all jobs with combat roles to women.

Mr Fallon has already said that Armed Forces roles ‘should be determined by ability and not gender’.

Women are already allowed to serve on the front line but not where the primary aim is to ‘close with and kill the enemy’.

Hundreds of women served in the front line in Britain’s long and bloody campaign against the Taliban in Helmand province, Afghanistan. They patrolled with troops in war zones – with some of them coming under fire.

But their primary responsibility was not to kill the enemy but to serve in a medical or communications capacity.

The Prime Minister’s intervention follows an earlier six-month study into whether women were suitable for the rigours of frontline combat.

In preparation for a final decision on the plan, Government officials are already putting in place procedures to ensure that women are aware of the new opportunities and able to take them up.

Women make up just over one tenth of the military’s staff. More than 80 per cent of jobs across the Armed Forces are currently open to women.


Rev. Graham: Islam Is Not Compatible With American Values

Noting how Islamic law, sharia, contrasts with the U.S. Constitution and how women are treated under sharia, Rev. Franklin Graham said he did not believe that Islam is compatible with American values, and added that all immigration should halt “until we have a proper system to vet people.”

On CNN’s Newsroom on Dec. 15, host Carol Costello asked Rev. Graham, “Is Islam compatible with American values?”

Reverend Graham, son of world-renowned evangelist Billy Graham, said, “I don’t think so.”

When Costello remarked that Muslims claim such “rhetoric” is “hurting them,” Graham responded, “Well, you asked me a question and I answered you. But I don’t go out and preach against Islam. I don’t go out and preach against Muslims. I don’t. And I certainly welcome them.”

“But our Constitution certainly, the way we treat women, the way we treat all people – Islam doesn’t do that under sharia law,” he said.

Costello then claimed one could say the same about “Catholicism,” and moved on to ask about Donald Trump’s proposal to monitor radical mosques in the United States.

“Let me play Devil’s advocate just a little longer,” said Costello.  “Donald Trump thinks that some mosques should be shut down. Do you agree with that?”

Rev. Graham said, “Well, I don’t know, I haven’t heard what Donald Trump has said. I know that in France they have certainly shut down some mosques that were preaching hatred and violence against the people in France, so the French government has shut down some mosques. I don’t know how many it is, but I know they have done it there.”

Costello then asked, “Does that mean we should do it here?”

The reverend answered, “We might have to at some point. I don’t know. We need – our country’s broken right now, our borders are broken. We need to get it fixed. We need to get immigration fixed. We need to know who’s coming in to this country.”

“We can’t just open up our arms and just say ‘everybody come,’ because there’s people out there that want to destroy our nation, and want to destroy you and our way of life,” said Rev. Graham. “We have a responsibility, our government, the president, our Congress has a responsibility to protect all Americans.”

Franklin Graham is the president of the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association and also runs the international Christian aid group Samaritan’s Purse, which is working with refugees from the Middle East.

In relation to that work, earlier in the interview on CNN, Rev. Graham said, “I don’t believe in banning Muslims from coming [here], I think we should put a halt on immigration because our borders are broken, until we have a proper system to vet people. All immigration, but especially people – all people but especially those coming from the Middle East right now.”

“Carol, I’m working  in Greece,” said the reverend.  “We have people on the islands. As people [refugees] come out of those little rubber boats, I have people there helping them. They’re not just Syrian [refugees]. They’re Syrian, Iraqi, they’re also Iranians, they’re also Afghans coming into Greece.”

“We see a lot of families and, no question, they are fleeing for their life,” said Rev. Graham.  “They’re wanting a better life. But we see a lot of young men, who are military age, by themselves, coming in that way as well. And we don’t know who these people are and there needs to be some proper way to vet them.”

“So, I think we should be putting a halt on any immigration from that part of the world until our government has a system in place where we can vet them,” he said.


Tony Blair Isn’t Politically Correct When Talking About Islam and Terrorism

Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair strode into Washington last week speaking urgently about the need to have a long-term strategy to defeat Islamist extremism on the ground as well as ideologically, with both superior military force and confident Western values.

It was as if he were a visitor not from the U.K., but from another planet. Washington is not exactly what you’d call a bustling wartime capital.

The Obama administration is, in fact, making the case that the proper response to current threats from ISIS is to tighten gun control laws, reduce carbon emissions, and double down on political correctness. These ideas are, moreover, being actively promoted by ideological allies in the media and the culture.

Such an approach is—to nobody’s surprise—failing spectacularly to rally the nation, which appears more divided than ever. Conservatives are stunned that anyone would want to disarm the citizenry at this point, that there are people who actually believe that climate change causes terrorism, and that a society can battle a jihadist ideology without proudly asserting an alternative, in this case the values of liberal democracy.

There would be some hope of a national conversation, a large Socratic dialogue of sorts, if sides were listening to each other. Very few liberals, however, listen to talk radio, watch Fox News, or read National Review or the editorial pages of The Wall Street Journal or The Federalist. They have no idea how divorced from reality their proposals can sound.

Conservatives, by contrast, are much better aware of the other side’s arguments. They are surrounded by NPR; The New York Times; and CBS, NBC, and ABC. They consume them as well, never mind the culture. Thus their consternation at what they are hearing, watching, or reading.

Blair, prime minister from 1997 to 2007, is no conservative; rather, he is a former Labour leader. He knows, however, what it’s like to fight a long war and, after many mistakes, be able to hand his successor a stable Iraq, which Vice President Joe Biden in 2010 referred to as the “greatest achievement.”

In his speech at the Library of Congress Thursday night, Blair did not go out of his way to pick a fight with President Obama or his administration, but neither did he shrink from answering questions forthrightly.

Asked by the moderator, former ambassador Martin Indyk, why he dares speak about Islamist terrorism and extremism, given that the Obama administration insists that such mentions will alienate all adherents of the religion, Blair simply smiled and said, “Because that’s what it is.”

“Those who believe in concepts of the caliphate and the apocalypse—so much part of Daesh [ISIS] propaganda—stretch deep into parts of Muslim societies,” Blair said. “A belief in innate hostility between Islam and the West is not the preserve of the few.”

“In many Muslim countries, large numbers also believe that the CIA or Jews were behind 9/11. Clerics who proclaim that non-believers and apostates must be killed or call for jihad against Jews have Twitter followings running into millions. … The ideology has deep roots. We have to reach right the way down and uproot it.”

At times, Blair’s criticisms of President Obama were indirect, as when he said that “sustained engagement over a period of time is preferable to a vacuum.”

“They have to be eliminated on the ground … to destroy the so-called caliphate.”

But it was when he spoke up for the all-important battle for ideas that Blair seemed to be more at odds with an administration and a president who seems to be apologetic at best and condemnatory at worst of Western civilization.

“We have to explain to our citizens and those coming in why our values and our way of life matter to us, and why we will defend them to the last,” said Blair. “We must recover our own confidence in our own belief system.”

Far from fearing being too strong lest the West alienate Muslims, Blair considers the reverse the real threat. “A continued failure to recognize the scale of the challenge and to construct the means necessary to meet it, will result in terrorist attacks potentially worse than those in Paris, producing a backlash, which then stigmatizes the majority of decent, law-abiding Muslims,” he said.

“Force alone will not prevail—the Islamist ideology also has to be confronted,” Blair added.

The chasm between this approach and the ideological pieties being espoused by the administration could not be wider. Obama’s comment that this week’s massacre in San Bernardino by terrorists who pledged allegiance to ISIS were “another tragic reminder that here in America it’s way too easy for dangerous people to get their hands on guns” and Attorney General Loretta Lynch’s remark that her “greatest fear” is anti-Muslim rhetoric seem downright dangerous.

As the Heritage Foundation’s Middle East scholar Jim Phillips put it Friday, “the long string of ISIS victories have given it an aura of invincibility” that has enabled it to attract 25,000 recruits from 80 countries.

President Obama’s decision to pull troops out of Iraq in 2010, against the military’s advice, has undermined what looked set to be a real achievement. Continuing not to take ISIS seriously or pay heed to Blair will only replicate the failure so far. As Pete Wehner put it this week, the president “may be hermetically sealed off from facts that are inconvenient to this worldview,” but “by ignoring the reality of things, he makes everything worse.”



Political correctness is most pervasive in universities and colleges but I rarely report the  incidents concerned here as I have a separate blog for educational matters.

American "liberals" often deny being Leftists and say that they are very different from the Communist rulers of  other countries.  The only real difference, however, is how much power they have.  In America, their power is limited by democracy.  To see what they WOULD be like with more power, look at where they ARE already  very powerful: in America's educational system -- particularly in the universities and colleges.  They show there the same respect for free-speech and political diversity that Stalin did:  None.  So look to the colleges to see  what the whole country would be like if "liberals" had their way.  It would be a dictatorship.

For more postings from me, see TONGUE-TIED, GREENIE WATCH,   EDUCATION WATCH INTERNATIONAL, FOOD & HEALTH SKEPTIC, AUSTRALIAN POLITICS and  DISSECTING LEFTISM.   My Home Pages are here or   here or   here.  Email me (John Ray) here


No comments: