(((The New York Times))) subtly warns pro-black race war film BIRTH OF A NATION has potential to iincite violence toward whites
Back in 1988, a movie called Mississippi Burning was released.
Why? The goal was obviously to induce white guilt in those white people who saw it and black rage in those black people who viewed the film.
Both worked.
A New York Times review of Mississippi Burning—a movie that the screenwriters admitted was mostly the work of fiction— wrote it “literally crackles with racial hate.”
Why is this important to note? Because a number of black people who saw the film acted on that racial hate.
This group of black people, enraged from seeing Mississippi Burning – remember, a work of fiction— said “Do you all feel hyped up to move on some white people?’ “`You all want to f*ck somebody up? There goes a white boy; go get him”, and chased down 14-year-old Gregory Reddick (after counting to three, a macabre timer for racial revenge) and “beat him severely, and stole his tennis shoes. The boy was rendered unconscious and remained in a coma for four days.” [Wisconsin v. Mitchell (92-515), 508 U.S. 47 (1993).]
Why is this important to even bring up?
This is why.
So the New York Times has just published a story basically washing their hands of any racial hate the movie Birth of a Nation creates among blacks, and whatever racial violence the movie motivates against white people.
The United States of America is basically ceasing to exist as a nation before our eyes, and it would be foolish at this point for any white person to believe it can be salvaged.
In fact, it’s important to note our Federal Government, media, entertainment industry, academia, and private sector now view Nat Turner as the hero—and not the villain.
vdare.com
archive.fo