21st Century Wire says…
In a shocking admission on the Greta Van Susteren Show, one of the Martin family attorneys, Jasmine Rand, of law firm Parks & Crump, stated that she holds a larger role as a ‘social engineer‘ outside of her duties as an attorney…
As more information has come to light, there seems to be evidence of a social agenda or manipulation surrounding the Zimmerman case. It appears as if a highly organized apparatus has been culled together to challenge the moral fabric of this country, intentionally creating division.
In the video below, attorney Jasmine Rand is seen undermining the court system with her harsh criticism of the jury in the Zimmerman trial…
Attorney Jasmine Rand: “I have a greater duty beyond being an attorney and that’s to be a social engineer.”
Rand’s social engineering around this case has been impressive to say the least. Her phrase, “Not guilty does not mean innocent”, has now been parroted across the media and is now officially part of the America’s amateur legal lexicon.
Her phrase appears to be customized for this particular case, but it’s appeal is general, and is designed to rebuke the decision of the jury, and delegitamize the local court’s decision. More than any other, this phrase has empowered tweeting mobs.
Rand’s actions were appalling and worse, it appears she played a critical role in a public relations campaign to attack Zimmerman’s character. Just recently, she was seen on CNN wearing a hoodie, only fueling the national reaction after the verdict in the Zimmerman trial.
MSM BANNED IMAGE: The public image of Trayvon Martin has been characterised as that of a 14 yr old innocent child.
‘Justice for Trayvon’: Engineering politically correct mobs
This case is many times more relevant to both racial profiling and stand your ground laws – than the Zimmerman case, but neither the White House, nor the corporate media have thrown their resources at it. Engineering political correctness requires enforcement over the most marginal of cases – where politically correct ideas and beliefs take precedent over empirical facts.
In November of 2012, a 17 year-old young black man named Jordan Davis was said to have been gunned down by a 46 year-old white male named Michael Dunn. The shooting occurred over a dispute at a convenience store, as Dunn claimed his life was threatened and that he thought the teen had brandished a firearm. According to Police, they were not able to obtain evidence to support Dunn’s claim. Dunn’s case is still in its early stages, as there have been several judges who have had to step down from overseeing the trial so far.
So why was the Trayvon Martin shooting chosen by the establishment as the vehicle for a national race war, and not Davis?
Why haven’t Obama, the DOJ, Al Sharpton, or MSNBC politicized the tragic death of Jordan Davis? Is his story not sexy, controversial – or worthy enough, in order to warrant all the resources which have been invested into the national Trayvon campaign?
Is this proof that high level media operations have steered the public outcry, thus engineering a particular public reaction over specific events?
For social engineers keen on enforcing group-think compliance to new politically correct standards of thought, it would be a greater victory to over-inflate a marginally damning case like Trayvon-Zimmerman, rather than to target an obvious case like that of Jordan Davis. More political capital can be extracted from Zimmerman case precisely because it is a house of cards, of which politically correct mobs will say and do anything in order to keep it from collapsing.
The fact that George Zimmerman is not even white, but has been portrayed as “white” by party leaders, media and the mobs – should tell observers all they need to know about the social engineering present in this media-driven campaign.
Partisan Mobs and their Party Leaders
Today we saw the lust for gaining Democrat Party political capital ‘over race’ reach dizzying new lows, as DOJ head Eric Holder, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and professional agitator Al Sharpton took to the road, speaking to ‘Justice for Trayvon’ crowds, and playing their part to fan public dissent over the ‘not guilty‘ verdict in the Zimmerman trial.
In a recent article by Crystal Wright for the Guardian, entitled, “Beyond George Zimmerman: Where’s the outrage about black on black crime?” we see a closer look at crime statistics in the Chicago inner city, shedding light on the criminal bias by government agencies:
“Why aren’t so-called black leaders outraged and marching over the recent shooting rampage in Chicago. During the 4 July holiday weekend, including the Wednesday leading up to it, 62 people were wounded by gun violence in Chicago and 12 others killed. The holiday shooting spree raised Chicago’s homicide tally to 200 for the year. Last year about 500 people were killed, and most of those killing and being killed in Chicago are black. According to the Chicago Tribune, “blacks make up about 33% of the city’s population, they accounted for nearly 78% of the homicide victims through the first six months of 2012”.
Continuing, Crystal Wright added: “With the mainstream media’s national attention on the Zimmerman murder trail, I think it’s stunning that scant, if any, attention was given to the violence raging in Chicago or other cities across the country. As I’ve said many times during this case, Americans, especially black Americans, have come to accept blacks killing other blacks as normal.”
We need to challenge the group think of society and learn to see the motivations and machinations of political opportunists. Social manipulation comes in many forms.
Make no mistake – the Justice for Trayvon campaign is ultimately about Gun Control in America. Watch this space, because that is where this discussion will ultimately be driven by the radical leftists in Washington DC and White House-run TV broadcaster MSNBC.
Right now, riotous rage is boiling over in cities all over America, but why hasn’t America’s “first black President’ stepped up to either calm mobs, or to condemn such actions?
The answer to that question should be self-explanatory.