LOUISVILLE, KY – The city of Louisville, Kentucky has been plagued with nights of protests after the Grand Jury recently decided that officers who shot Breonna Taylor did so in self-defense.
The protesters are not happy that a cop was allowed to defend himself against someone shooting at him and show that displeasure in the streets of the city.
Now, a senior Louisville Metro Police Officer who was fed up with the unwarranted protests and referred to members of Black Lives Matter as punks, will soon be out of a job.
How frustrated is @LMPD?
A law enforcement source got me this August message from Maj. Bridget Hallahan to 5th Div. (Highland) officers calling protesters “punks” who “will be the ones washing our cars, cashing us out at the @Walmart or living” with their parents. #BreonnaTaylor pic.twitter.com/X5YhcycgGI
— Philmonger (@phillipmbailey) September 23, 2020
The world in which we all currently live is full of self-entitled, self-important, whiny crybabies that have no tolerance for anyone else’s thoughts or opinions that conflict with theirs.
This same group of people also chooses to believe their own version of the events, which is clearly not true, that happened the night that Taylor sadly died.
Louisville police major Bridget Hallahan on antifa & BLM: ‘They will be the ones washing our cars.’
“Our little pinky toenails have more character, morals & ethics, than these punks have in their entire body,” Maj. Hallahan wrote in an email: @janellefionahttps://t.co/dSpULtkOZ0 pic.twitter.com/Lgm51sZjOH— Shomari Stone (@shomaristone) September 25, 2020
As a result, hundreds or more protesters have filled the streets on a nightly basis. These types of events wear on cops, especially when two of them were shot the first night of the protests.
This may be why soon-to-be former Police Major Bridget Hallahan referred to members of Black Lives Matter as ‘punks.’
Hallahan wrote:
“I know it is hard to keep our thoughts and opinions to ourselves sometimes, especially when we, as a whole or as an individual, become the target of people in the public who criticize what we do without even knowing the facts.
“These ANTIFA and BLM people, especially the ones who just jumped on the bandwagon ‘yesterday’ because they became ‘woke’ (insert eye roll here), do not deserve a second glance or thought from us. Our little pinky toenails have more character, morals, and ethics, than these punks have in their entire body,” the disparaging missive continues.
“Do not stoop to their level. Do not respond to them. If we do, we only validate what they did. Don’t make them important, because they are not. They will be the ones washing our cars, cashing us out at the Walmart, or living in their parents’ basement playing COD for their entire life.
“There is currently no recourse we have for incidents involving the doxing of officers or their families. What we can do is speak up against them and put the truth out there.”
While there may be many of us that believe the words written, allegedly by Hallahan, are right on the money, there are ‘politically correct’ people who have a different opinion.
They believe that she should be terminated immediately for daring to speak out against the protesters. Included in those who feel Hallahan should not have criticized the group is her own acting police Chief Robert Schroeder.
At a press conference, he said:
“We are aware of these emails and we have been looking into them. They were her personal opinions and do not represent the views of this department.”
What he really meant by those comments is that Hallahan had now become a liability for daring to speak her mind. As a result, she was relieved of her duties and seemingly is being forced to retire on Oct. 1.
Louisville City Councilmember Brandon Coan told the Courier-Journal that the comments Hallahan made were out of character for her.
He said:
“I’m disappointed. I think it’s a totally unacceptable attitude of any police officer and extremely poor leadership from a major. I think she owes the community an apology and she’ll have to deal with the consequences of her conduct.”
This editorial is brought to you by a staff writer for Law Enforcement Today from September of 2020
After being revealed, Black Lives matter removes radical ‘What We Believe’ agenda from website
The Black Lives Matter movement is attempting to clear its name of the radical agenda that’s been pushed since its founding, and they are hoping you won’t notice. Recently, the movement removed the ‘What We Believe’ tab from the website as part of their cover up.
Unfortunately, the radical movement failed to realize that the internet lasts forever. Finding what used to be written under the tab is relatively easy and for the ease of readers linked here.
As part of their now-deleted beliefs section, Black Lives Matter outlines their support for different sexualities and genders:
“We are guided by the fact that all Black lives matter, regardless of actual or perceived sexual identity, gender identity, gender expression, economic status, ability, disability, religious beliefs or disbeliefs, immigration status, or location.
We make space for transgender brothers and sisters to participate and lead.
We are self-reflexive and do the work required to dismantle cisgender privilege and uplift Black trans folk, especially Black trans women who continue to be disproportionately impacted by trans-antagonistic violence.
We build a space that affirms Black women and is free from sexism, misogyny, and environments in which men are centered.
We practice empathy. We engage comrades with the intent to learn about and connect with their contexts.”
The section goes on to advocate for the destruction of the nuclear family and ‘heteronormative thinking:’
“We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and ‘villages’ that collectively care for one another, especially our children, to the degree that mothers, parents, and children are comfortable.
“We foster a queer‐affirming network. When we gather, we do so with the intention of freeing ourselves from the tight grip of heteronormative thinking, or rather, the belief that all in the world are heterosexual (unless s/he or they disclose otherwise).”
The attempted cover up by Black Lives Matter raises questions about what they were trying to quietly rectify; a trip to their current website answers this.
Black Lives Matter explains exactly what they aim to do in their “About” section saying:
“We are expansive. We are a collective of liberators who believe in an inclusive and spacious movement. We also believe that in order to win and bring as many people with us along the way, we must move beyond the narrow nationalism that is all too prevalent in Black communities. We must ensure we are building a movement that brings all of us to the front.
“We affirm the lives of Black queer and trans folks, disabled folks, undocumented folks, folks with records, women, and all Black lives along the gender spectrum. Our network centers those who have been marginalized within Black liberation movements.
“We are working for a world where Black lives are no longer systematically targeted for demise.
“We affirm our humanity, our contributions to this society, and our resilience in the face of deadly oppression.
The call for Black lives to matter is a rallying cry for ALL Black lives striving for liberation.”
When comparing the previous belief section and the current about section there are a couple of notable things. First, Black Lives Matter is doubling down on their agenda to help ‘marginalized’ communities. This, according to them, means advocating for criminals and illegal immigrants.
But, the most important thing Black Lives Matter is hoping you won’t notice, is that there is no mention of the nuclear family. The group has gone from wanting to destroy the traditional family structure to being silent about it.
The decision to stop advocating for the destruction of families could indicate an attempt by Black Lives Matter to appeal to the average American. It is the job of citizens to remember the destruction and devastation caused by the movement, then realize that a change to their website doesn’t equate to a change in their values.
The attempted destruction of the nuclear family by Black Lives Matter is nothing new – read more about the effects of their advocacy below.
As I sit down to write an op-ed piece on the destruction of the nuclear family, I am angry. I am angry and I am conflicted because I have so many emotions that are roiling around in my gut and I don’t know if I am eloquent enough to put them on paper.
I was not raised in the traditional nuclear family: biological mom, biological dad and their biological children. I was raised in a more-modern nuclear family: biological parent, step-parent and siblings (biological, half, or step).
When I married, I became a stepmom and created my own modern nuclear family. My husband and I worked hard together. We worked on our relationship, our marriage and our family. We grew into a family unit and raised his children.
When it was time to expand our family, my husband and I sat down to discuss having another child. We looked at our careers, finances and opportunities. When the time was right, we had our daughter. We knew we could afford to have only one more child, as we were currently raising two sons.
We wanted to be able to provide for her the education and experiences she needed. We wanted to go on vacations, send her to private school and contribute to our retirement so we wouldn’t struggle. We wanted to live in a nice house, in a nice neighborhood and have nice things.
And now I am angry because apparently this makes me white privileged and ultimately racist.
Family privilege, a concept coined by Bethany Letiecq, a professor in the Family Science program at George Mason University, claims that the heterosexual white marriages provide unearned and unacknowledged advantages to its members and that our current society values those privileges over all other family types.
Letiecq argues:
“(T)he most effective way to mitigate [this] privilege would be to eliminate the family. Without parents, grandparents, siblings, or any kin relations, we could all become equal.”
Because you don’t have what I have, the only and best course of action would be to take it away from me, because it’s inequitable? That literally makes no sense.
Destroy undeniably the best familial system because it’s not fair that some people have it, but others don’t?
When we look at the statistics of the country as a whole, marriage is a vital institution within a community and despite random media anecdotes, still ever present in today’s society. And because of that, it is causing an issue for Marxist groups like the BLM.
The current divorce rate has fallen more than 25 percent in the past decade and is currently where it was in 1970. There are currently 15 divorces for every 500 marriages.
That’s a far cry from the ‘half of marriages end in divorce’ rhetoric you hear people mutter like good little myna birds.
Statistically speaking, when you look at the economical demographics, 26 percent of poor families are married, 39 percent of working-class families are married, and 56 percent of middle- and upper-class families are married.
I am not a sociologist, but you don’t need a degree to disseminate the outrageous amount of data that correlates to the benefits of being raised in a two-parent household. This is not an argument against same sex marriages, any child will benefit from living in a household with two adults who love and care for each other and the child.
Family scholar Richard Reeves says:
“Modern marriage is not principally about money, sex, or status. It is about children.”
Reeves’ research shows that contemporary adults continue to marry only after they are equipped to teach their children the skills they have learned. Additional research finds that children growing up in two-parent households are likely to develop soft skills like self-control and perseverance, skills that are crucial to school and the workforce.
So how does raising a child in a loving home equate to racial inequity and white privilege?
According to Christina Cross, a postdoctoral fellow at Harvard University:
“Black Americans have the highest rates of single parenthood and nonmarital births in the country, and this divergence from the two-parent family ideal is routinely implicated in the lower levels of educational attainment and higher rates of poverty and unemployment in the black community.”
On average, 70 percent of black children across the country are born to single mothers and those mothers are far more likely to be poor and pass that poverty on to their children. The Children’s Defense Fund, which was created in 1973 to address the needs of low-income children and specifically children of color, claimed in 2004:
“(I)t is morally and economically indefensible to (say) that a black preschool child is three times as likely to depend solely on a mother’s earnings.”
If you are raised in a culture that is used to seeing children growing up without fathers, having grandmas and aunts that care for you and your children, as their grandmas and aunts did before them, then there is no shame creating babies when you are no more a baby yourself.
In a culture where being a ‘baby mama’ is normalized and lyrics are sung by popular artists (“It’s about time we had our own song/Don’t know what took so long/Cuz now-a-days it like a badge of honor/To be a baby mama”), it’s hard to believe that there are other alternatives out there. Alternatives to raising a child alone or with the help of extended family, relying on child support or government assistance because you think the concept of a nuclear family is a racist social construct that is afforded only to the middle-class whites.
You don’t have to subscribe to the minivan, the soccer mom, or even monogamy to understand that the nuclear family is the best option for children. I can assure you that Social Services and therapists don’t have caseloads full of children with parents who are engaged and focused on their kids.
When asked his thoughts on BLM, Wiley said:
“Two things: My family structure is so vital[ly] important to me, not only the one I grew up in but the one I am trying to create right now. Being a father and a husband — that’s my mission in life right now. How do I reconcile that with this mission statement that says, ‘We dismantle the patriarchal practice. We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement.’”
If the nuclear family is so successful at ensuring a child is brought up in a supportive, creative, and loving environment where they have better odds at finishing their education, securing a good job and passing that on to their future offspring, why is it so important to destroy it?
This is where it all gets interesting.
Joyce Ladner, first female president of Howard University, wrote:
“One must question the validity of the white, middle-class, lifestyle from its very foundation because it has already proven itself to be decadent and unworthy of emulation. It’s ‘decadent.’”
It is unclear by which definition of decadent Ladner means: either the middle-class lifestyle is luxuriously self-indulgent, or it reflects a state of moral and cultural decline, neither of which makes much sense.
While it is still hotly contested by those who fail to do their own research, despite the group leaders flat out admitting it, the Black Lives Matter is a Marxist group that is hell bent on the destruction of the nuclear family.
You can argue that they are not, but it was typed in black and white on their website:
“We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure by supporting each other as extended families and ‘villages’ that collectively care for one another, especially our children.”
That in itself doesn’t sound all bad, after all it takes a village to raise a child, right?
Wrong.
_
Want to make sure you never miss a story from Law Enforcement Today? With so much “stuff” happening in the world on social media, it’s easy for things to get lost.
Make sure you click “following” and then click “see first” so you don’t miss a thing! (See image below.) Thanks for being a part of the LET family!
