A Brief Examination of the Dindu Narrative

Recently, officer Michael Brelo of the Cleveland police department was acquitted of two counts of manslaughter regarding a shooting occurring on November 29th, 2012. According to the narrative, a couple of innocent, church-going African-Americans (read: crack-smokin’, bix-noodin’ dindu nuffins) by the names of Jimmy Timothy Russell and Malissa [sic] Williams were brutally murdered in a hail of gunfire for no reason by paranoid racist police officers in Cleveland, Ohio. At least, that’s what the mainstream media would have you believe. What really happened was that the aforementioned dindus were cruising down the street in what I can only assume was their six-fo’, jocking bitches, slapping hoes and practicing other important elements of their vibrant culture and history. The no-doubt unmaintained car backfired outside the police headquarters, and seeing as the beat-up Chevy Malibu contained no less than two negros, the police assumed they were under attack and responded by trying to pull the car over. It really should come as no surprise to any of us now, but the dindus decided to take flight instead of pull over and so the police force sent 100+ officers in 62 cars to try and pull them over. This really isn’t unreasonable when you consider the fact that as far as the police knew, this couple had fired at them. After a 22 mile-long chase, the car finally stopped and Officer Michael Brelo fired 15 shots at the dindus while standing on the hood of their car (which, by the way, is pretty badass.) All in all, the dindus were shot more than twenty times each (Brelo wasn’t the only one shooting) and the police discovered: a crack pipe in their car, past convictions of receiving stolen property, robbery, drug-related charges, attempted abduction, and a history of fleeing the police.

Now, this story, on its own, really isn’t that interesting to us. Oh boy, a couple of negros dindu nuffin. We know this. This isn’t really news to us here at TRS. The reason I’m interested in this case is because it is another piece of the grand liberal narrative of darkie good, whitey bad. The story follows a predictable pattern that we’re familiar with:

  1. Wild negro(s) commit crime
  2. Police (or in the case of the Zim Zam, a citizen) respond with appropriate force
  3. Dindu dies
  4. Chimp out follows

We’ve got Trayvon Martin, Michael Brown, Eric Garner, Walter Scott, these new dindus Timothy Russell and Malissa Williams, and we’re going to see more and more dindus in the future. The liberal media has gotten these race-baiting bullshit stories down to a science. Let’s examine this article by Fox News (who as we know are bonafide right-wing psychopathic misogynistic Nigger Haters™ just like us).

Right off the bat, the article begins by telling us that 71 people were arrested after “protests” begun following the acquittal of Brelo. Recall that the shooting incident happened in late 2012 – these liberals didn’t really care at the time, and only now that the officer has been acquitted is it time to start rioting. The narrative requires that there be a conflict. This story would receive no coverage and there would be no outrage regarding the alleged brutality or unlawful killing if Brelo had been convicted. If there is no conflict, no pushback, the narrative has nothing to grab onto in order to guilt us. In fact, liberals would prefer that there is an acquittal, as without it, they couldn’t agitate as easily and use the blacks as a bludgeon against white people.

All throughout the article, the writer refers to the activities of the upset dindus as “protests” and describes them as “peaceful” as the rule, and violent as the exception. They are never agitators, never rioters: only protesters. This legitimizes their activity, no matter what they actually do. The language used is more important than what the “protesters” do. Even when referring to the chimping out (“some who pepper-sprayed patrons sitting at outdoor cafes downtown…”, “Williams said that another protester threw a restaurant sign at a patron, striking him in the head.”), they are still referred to as simply protesters. In this way, they can be legitimized as citizens exercising their God-given right to free speech, and the mayor, Frank Jackson, makes this explicit by saying he “will continue to help demonstrators exercise their First Amendment rights…” Pretty much all the actions committed by “protesters” are disruptive in some way: violently attacking bystanders, congesting traffic and making a nuisance of themselves, breaking property. Yet they are still merely “protesters”, “exercising their First Amendment rights.”

Another important element of the narrative is that even if the mechanisms of justice (i.e. a criminal trial) are carried out as they are supposed to be and the outcome is not the politically correct one, than it cannot be justice. Even though Brelo was acquitted of any wrong-doing in his actions, the police department is still considering administrative charges against him. Why weren’t there any charges called for almost 3 years ago, when the incident happened? It wasn’t until May 30th, 2014 that Brelo was actually placed on unpaid leave while the case was examined. That’s damn near two years later. The Department of Justice said Saturday it plans to "review all available legal options." We all know that they wouldn’t be doing this if Brelo was found guilty. If he was to be found guilty, there would be no backlash because the preconceived, politically correct verdict was already decided, and so action is only taken when whitey doesn’t do what Hebrew: Masters of the Dildoverse and the hordes of dindus tell him to.

The article goes on to explain that a civil rights investigation into the department has revealed that there were cases of officers “who unnecessarily fired guns, hit suspects in the head with weapons, and punched and used Tasers on people already handcuffed.” This is also important to the narrative. If they can “prove” that the department has a history of violating civil rights, then they can extrapolate that out to this case and say that it was a case of civil rights violation as well. In reality, those other cases are irrelevant to this one, but the writer is trying to lead the reader to believe that they are.

This article goes on to bring up other controversial police shootings of dindus. Tamir Rice, the 12-year-old niglet who was emulating the surrogate father figures that famous rappers have become by waving a pellet gun around and threatening bystanders, was shot to death by police because he appeared to be a credible threat to public safety. They reference the Ferguson “protests” after Dindu Supreme Michael Brown was shot to death for his remarkably short-sighted attempt to kill Officer Darren Wilson. At the end of the article, they bring up another case in which a black woman died while in police custody, most likely due to a chimp out but called a “mental health crisis” by the writer. All of these cases are brought up to reinforce this idea: evil, racist, oppressive, white man intentionally kills innocent black person.

Here’s the kicker. This is the line that made me decide to stop shitposting in the comments and actually write an article:

“The city of Cleveland has paid the families of Russell and Williams a total of $3 million to settle a federal civil rights lawsuit.”

There it is. It all comes together here. This is just another part of the enormous gibsmedat scheme. The families don’t give a shit about the deaths of their relatives. They just want whitey to gib dem more dat.
To summarize, the narrative is composed something like this:

  1. Liberals win because they hate white people. These shootings and subsequent acquittals and lack of indictments are ammo for them to fire at white America and increase the guilt factor. Each triumph of the legal system over >muh feels and white guilt strengthens their white privilege narrative. It is actually good for their narrative when the obviously innocent cops/neighborhood watchmen are acquitted. The better they can dress up their Negroah Shoah, the easier it is to further emasculate whites and convince them that they are morally inferior to non-whites. This makes it easy to convince them to increase immigration and further other culturally Marxist ideas such as the celebration of homosexuality and the break-down of nuclear family structure.
  2. The dindus win because they are allowed to riot, break shit, loot free stuff, and their white-taxpayer-funded system of gibsmedat is preserved and enhanced by white guilt.

This may seem like grim prospects for us, but we must remember that for now, the legal system will still protect us when it is carried out properly. You can’t flim-flam the Zim-zam, there’s no scarin’ the Darren, and now, you can’t mellow the Brelo.

Author image
He may like hammers, but get that sickle outta here.