How easy it is round these parts to get ‘likes’! You only have to pluck the strings of certain cliches and move hearts to get little ‘like’ hearts.

This piece you have written is vile. It is entirely rhetorical and its connection with ‘reality’ vague and tenuous. Yet it is typical not only of much writing — and serious journalism — but of irrational and mass sentiments that are moving through the population now. This needs to be examined very carefully.

Your entire piece functions through vague accusation and twisted semiotics: White privelage, silver spoons, predatory intentionality toward ‘Black time’, the British aristocratic class, and the bizarre assertion that somehow Whites have more sand in their ‘proverbial' hourglass. It does not merely reek rhetorically, it drips.

There is really no part of this ridiculous and maliciously-false piece that cannot be taken apart, and it requires a concerted deconstruction.

First, you have adopted, without criticism, a view that the two recent homicides were murders. Homicide means the killing of a person. That can happen under a variety of circumstances and homicide does happen in the course of police work. But you have stated that these were murders, and with this you have jumped on an emotional wagon with millions of other people who desire to frame the homicides that occur in the course of police work as murder. And by establishing this emotionally-based assertion you allow yourself to play into a dangerous meme which is communicated from person to person resulting in a sentiment that, facing murder, armed resistance and offensive action is morally justifiable. If you are being ‘murdered’ you are justified in attacking the threat.

Brock Turner is also linked mystically here. Since white privilege is what you are decrying, and since Brock Turner is of that privileged class, then surely in the minds of gullible readers his image can be trotted out here and dragged around in effigy for full effect. Except that when one examines in detail, carefully, the facts of that case, a very different narrative emerges.

I have devoted time to reading the 50-plus pages of the police report and examining other materials, you clearly have not nor will you ever. None of that is necessary for your ‘project’. It is a fact that his conviction was attained strictly on the basis of his honest and truthful report of what went on that night between himself and that woman. Hd he not incriminated himself there would have been no case and no conviction. But he chose the honesty route. He described a voluntary tryst. That they were both drinking. That she allowed him access with his hand and that she enjoyed it. A typical, a common, and a non-offensive and consented encounter. But she had a history of drinking and blacking out when intoxicated. She did black out and she herself had no memory of anything that occurred that evening after a certain point. Zero.

What Turner revealed of his encounter was subsequently interpreted in a certain way, and the woman was coached by a rape crisis representative to frame her story in a certain way, to turn it into a very different sort of encounter than what it was in fact. He inserted his finger. And that was the extent of his sexual assault.

But none of this matters. You and a million other people, and for your own reasons, frame these issues as you wish them and desire them to be framed. It may happen that you ruin a man’s life, that you totally destroy his reputation and mark him for the rest of his earthly incarnation, and in your unconscious and blind rage, directed really against an abstract force through your cellphone and your Tweet-consciousness, you attack something in your imagination; you vent your righteous fury and you do not care one iota for the consequences!

This is dangerous mass-hysteria in operation. You do it under the protection of some ‘social justice’ motivation, and you do feel completely justified, and yet when one examines the phenomenon, as I am suggesting be done here, one encounters a dark and a dangerous intentionality.

The same thing is being done with these police killings. This does not mean that police in the US are not, comparatively, more intense than in other countries. Indeed they are. And they are no less intense when it comes to encounters with white suspects and white criminals. But because you are actively involved in establishing, in nourishing and embellishing, a narrative that describes police as murderers, you are yourself engaging in malicious and hateful activity. You are distorting reality and reframing it inaccurately. The next step for you will be, I assume, firing shots at the murdering police from a rooftop? According to your established narrative you’d be justified, wouldn’t you?

Each of the two homicides you mention have complicating circumstances. The couple in Minnesota, as it appears, was stopped because they matched the description of a man and a woman involved some days earlier in a hold-up of a convenience store. You can access and listen to the recording over the police radio. This only indicates that the stop had a basis in typical police protocol.

I would also suggest that you access some of his GFs FaceBook posts some days prior to this event. It provides some background to their shared state of mind. This is not to slander them but only to provide more information to be examined. As often is the case there is more to these cases than meets the eye.

This is not an attempt to explain away a tragic event. But no one of us can second-guess the police officer and what he understood he was dealing with, and we have to wait and resist the temptation to frame an issue according to our own will and desire until the entire episode can be viewed dispassionately. And you have no right whatever to irresponsibly, and with such twisted rhetoric, so muddy and pollute how these issues are seen before a truthful and accurate assessment can be made.

Yet you do precisely that.

(There is much more in this ridiculous piece of writing of yours that can easily be taken apart and revealed for what it is — rhetoric-porn! — but I have no more time left to do it.)