crime and violence


Though Reuters is certainly not the only organization to engage in hate-mongering against whites, two recent articles illustrate its double standard when reporting interracial crime. Here’s one of the two articles, where the defendant was a white man:

JACKSONVILLE Fla. (Reuters) – Michael Dunn, a middle-aged white man, was sentenced to life in prison without parole, plus 90 years, by a Florida judge on Friday for killing an unarmed black teenager in an argument over loud rap music.

Reuters makes absolutely certain we all know that the murderer is white, while his victim was black. But when the perpetrators are black, and the victims of another race (such as Asian), Reuters is silent about the race of the perpetrators – as we see here:

(Reuters) – Two men accused of fatally shooting a pair of Chinese graduate students at the University of Southern California were charged on Tuesday with capital murder, making them eligible to face the death penalty if convicted, prosecutors said.

The only reason the (implied) race of the victims is mentioned is that the crime caused an international incident. Given that rap is primarily a black thing, and that incident #1 involved a white man who objected to loud rap, one could argue that the race of both parties was relevant enough to mention. However, we can make a similar argument regarding the second incident. The neighborhood was crawling with dangerous feral black “youth,” and the Chinese students were neither warned, nor prepared, for this. USC essentially killed them with political correctness – by withholding important information about blacks, and by not making John Derbyshire’s essay, “The Talk: Nonblack Version” available to them. When American universities accept students from safe parts of the world, it’s their responsibility to enlighten them as to the realities of life in the ghetto.

In fact, the second article continues:

Earlier this month the two Chinese students’ families filed a wrongful death lawsuit accusing the school of misrepresenting the area where they were shot as safe and failing to provide security patrols.

By and large, people are shallow creatures. They “know” whatever information is fed to them. They believe what they are told, and their blind obedience to trends and fashions allows certain industries to milk them like cattle, making countless billions of dollars in the process.

When the hoi polloi is fed a constant stream of media clips, which insidiously imply white guilt and black victimhood, reasoned argument cannot shake them from their resulting faith. It becomes ingrained in them.

I don’t know all the facts, but at first blush, the cop shown in this video is out of control and should never have been put in such a position of authority. His actions, as seen in the video, are an embarrassment.

Naturally, a lot of people are pointing to the above video and saying things like these comments:

I thank God every day I am not black, and this the exact reason why. These guys have it hard and I feel for them.

It’s about time they do the right thing. From my observation, It’s sad to admit and see that blacks are mistreated. I would not want to be black. I feel for the black people. Stop the hate.”

I can’t wait for all the usual suspects to come forward and say “The police would NEVER shoot an unarmed black man with his hands in the air !” Oh wait there was a dash cam this time !

None of us know whether the victim’s race had anything to do with this officer’s aggression, but let’s assume that it did.

Though the corporate media would have us believe that the only reason police dogs tend to bite blacks and Hispanics more is “institutional racism” on the part of whites, it seems more likely that these dogs are conditioned, by the reality on the ground, to assume that blacks/Hispanics are criminals – and act accordingly. Both men and dogs are subject to conditioning, and it’s unrealistic to expect either to act in exactly the same way when confronted with members of more criminal groups versus less criminal groups. Do cops behave the same way when dealing with little old ladies as they do when dealing with powerful young men? Would we want them to?

Blacks are more dangerous than whites, and police officers are exposed to this reality on a daily basis. Obviously, this will affect their behavior toward each group. But even though both men and dogs are subject to conditioning, we should demand a certain degree of professionalism from men. It would appear that officer Groubert, shown in the video above, lacked such professionalism.

Back in 1996, 35 people were gunned down in Tasmania. As a result of this tragedy, the Australian government instituted new gun-control laws. Among them was a compulsory buyback program. Since then there has been much debate over how this affected violent crime rates in Australia.

Gun rights advocates have, for the most part, been claiming that violent crime actually increased after the buyback. Anti-gun advocates argue that such claims are flawed, and that violent crime went down after the buyback. Each side accuses the other of using flawed, or meaningless, statistics.

If we are to address the issue of post buyback crime rates at all, the burden of proof must fall on the anti-gun crowd. Regardless of what the Australian Constitution says, or does not say, about gun ownership, people have a natural right to defend themselves. Our natural rights are not contingent upon any government-issued piece of paper. The right to defend oneself against violence is primal. Therefore, if we are to argue that the Australian government was justified in stealing its citizens’ firearms, the burden of proof is on us to show that such a measure is necessary and effective.

But we cannot simply point to a decrease in violent crime and assume that it’s due to the buyback. Correlation does not equal causation. Similarly, we cannot assume that an increase in violent crime is due to the buyback. There are many, constantly changing, factors that influence crime rates. I would argue that the very complexity of the issue renders such claims (on either side) practically meaningless.

I would also argue that, even if it could be shown that gun confiscation does decrease violent crime, this still does not give people the right to steal guns from other people.

Consider the case of motorcycles. Why not make recreational motorcycle riding illegal? Such a law would certainly save lives; there’s no doubt about it. While it’s true that the person most at risk, with motorcycles, is the rider himself, the same could be said about guns. Suicide rates are much higher than homicide rates.

Most people understand that we must accept certain risks if our lives are to worth living at all. If it’s worth risking our lives for fun, how much more so for self-defense.

My brother just got back from a prolonged trip to Australia. He tells me that the Australians he spoke to were very pleased with their strict gun laws. There seems to be an assumption that living in Australia makes one an expert on Australian crime and gun laws. Thinking back on my own visit there, I don’t think this is the case. My impression is that many, if not most, Australians are heavily indoctrinated by their left-leaning government and press – the same as Americans and Europeans.

I recently overheard a conversation between two of my friends. They were talking about the recent shooting in Troutdale, Oregon. I’m familiar with Troutdale, since I often visit that area during the summer. It’s only about 45 minutes from my house. My friends were citing this incident as justification for gun-control. It’s funny because Troutdale was also the scene of a “wilding” a couple of years ago. Here’s a video of the incident:

… but I don’t remember calls for diversity-control after that. Perhaps this is because of selective reporting by the corporate-owned media. People hear about lone gunmen, but they’re less likely to hear about black mob violence. I would wager that the average American is much more likely to become a victim of black violence than he is to become a victim of a lone white gunman – but the powers that be, in order to serve their own political agenda, aggressively publicize white gunmen (even if they’re only part white) while ignoring black violence as much as possible.

Ethnic diversity leads to a degradation of our culture. Hence, even when the culprit is a white high school student, some of the blame can be laid at the feet of “diversity.” What we need is diversity-control, not gun-control.

Some people are just crazy; it doesn’t take much to provoke them into committing acts of violence. Most of us need a lot of provocation before we resort to bloodshed; everybody has his snapping point.

I don’t claim to know whether Frazier Glen Miller is a natural-born psychopath. Unlike the $PLC or the ADL, I don’t claim to be an expert. But, according to the Washington Post:

The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), a respected activist organization that tracks hate crimes and racist activities, said the man arrested and identified by police as Frazier Glenn Cross is actually Frazier Glenn Miller. Miller, the SPLC said, founded and ran the Carolina Klan before he was sued by the SPLC “for operating an illegal paramilitary organization and using intimidation tactics against African Americans.”

He later founded another Klan outfit, the White Patriot Party, which put him in violation of the terms that settled the suit brought by the SPLC. He was found in criminal contempt in 1986 and served six months in prison. He moved underground while out on bond and was caught in Missouri with other Klansmen with a reserve of weapons, the SPLC stated.

The next year, he pleaded guilty to a weapons charge. He was indicted for plotting to obtain stolen military weapons, and for planning robberies and the assassination of the SPLC founder Morris Dees. As part of a plea deal, he testified against other Klan leaders and received a five-year sentence. He served only three years, the SPLC stated.

Considering the history of black violence against whites, it’s absolutely necessary to defend ourselves against blacks. Firearms are a crucial component of any such defensive measures. There is nothing unreasonable or hateful about this; it’s a matter of survival – and this appears to be what Miller was doing (feel free to correct me if I’m wrong).

But this is not acceptable to organizations such as the $PLC. The “Southern Poverty Law Center” is an anti-white organization, and Miller was (at least in his own mind) a pro-white activist. The $PLC has a lot more money, and political power, than Miller – so it set about persecuting Miller. It would appear that Miller was hounded by this anti-white hate-group for years.

The “Southern Poverty Law Center” is largely Jewish. So is the ADL. Both organizations had caused Miller a lot of grief over the years, and now this bitter 70-year-old man chose to go out with a bang and take his revenge against “The Jooz.”

It’s a pity that Miller, his murderous mind now shrunken with age, didn’t focus his attention on the real culprits: The $PLC and the ADL. Had he eliminated some of them, we might owe him a debt of gratitude. Instead, he chose a soft target and murdered 3 innocent people.

Perhaps the victims’ survivors should sue the $PLC and the ADL for pushing Miller over the edge. The “Southern Poverty Law Center” is probably the most significant source of fuel for Jew-haters world-wide. They most certainly have blood on their hands.

Unfortunately, Miller’s cruel rampage will feed the $PLC’s coffers even more. The beast will become ever more bloated, and generate even more hatred and bloodshed. And so the cycle continues.

jabba the hutt

 

 

Mary Elizabeth Williams, of Salon, is upset because of a “sexist” handbook for the Oakland Raiders cheerleaders. Williams writes:

In a section of the book about fraternization, it acknowledges, “There have been a few relationships between the two groups that have resulted in a few happy marriages and lovely children,” but goes on to warn, “HOWEVER, we have also had more situations where, quite frankly, the Raider organization and the Raiderettes narrowly escaped ruined reputations.” It goes on to elaborate: “One such example concerns a player who gave Halloween parties every year and many of the Raiderettes attended. This same player was suspended from the team for drug use but also arrested for date rape. For you on the squad who have attended those parties, just think how narrowly you missed having your photo in all the local papers and/or being assaulted.” And/or. Whatever. But mostly, think upon how you might have sullied the team’s good name by getting in the papers. For being raped. Oh and by the way, the definition of date rape is rape. It’s even in the state penal code! 

But the handbook may be alluding to the late defensive tackle Darrell Russell, who in 2002 was accused, along with two other men, of drugging and raping a woman Russell had been “casually dating.” The case was eventually dropped because it couldn’t be proved beyond reasonable doubt.

Here’s the accompanying photo of the cheerleaders:

raiders_cheerleaders-620x412

Needless to say, the team itself is heavily black (not that its white players are necessarily safe to be around either) and the cheerleaders predominantly white. With the mostly white Raiderettes, and the mostly black Raiders – and calls for the former to be wary of the latter, it’s a wonder Williams didn’t call the handbook “racist.”

As this handbook “scandal” has been making the rounds on the internet, I’m reminded of John Derbyshire’s talk that got him fired from the National Review. This author probably knew better than to mention anything about race; that way, if she found herself the subject of criticism, she could plead the lesser charge of sexism and keep her job.

A while ago I wrote a post titled A black answer to black-on-white rape statistics. There are now 72 comments. Some of them are by a persistent character who calls himself “move.” Apparently he’s made it his life’s mission to find white-on-black rapes and then use them to disprove the FBI’s statistics, which show vastly more black-on-white rapes than the other way around. Despite the fact that the FBI is clearly biased AGAINST whites, as evidenced by their habit of including Hispanics as “whites” when they commit crimes, but as “Hispanics” when they’re victims, move insists that the FBI is actually biased in favor of whites. His evidence? He’s managed to find some white-on-black rapes and other crimes.

I know of nobody who denies that there are bad apples among whites. Out of the tens of millions of whites, who still inhabit the U.S., we’re bound to find some very unsavory individuals. In any event, I’ve listed his most recent points, as presented in his comments there, and provided my responses.

1) “White man confessed to sexual assault, kidnap of of 7 year old black girl”
http://www.fox8live.com/story/22525206/deputies-say-kenner-man-has-confessed-to-sexual-assault-and-kidnap-of-girl

You make it seem like your quote is from the article, that the article identifies the girl as black. In fact, it doesn’t. Not only that, but I could find no source on the web revealing the race of the victim. Obviously, it’s a heinous crime regardless of the victim’s race.

2) 16 year old Black Boy Raped And Beaten To Death By White Men Over Drug Money
http://www.fox19.com/story/24108789/dione-payne-dies-geldrich-watson-arrested

The article states that the boy was beaten to death. Nowhere does it mention that he was raped. He was, however, black. So this is a rare case of white-on-black murder – which is not the subject of this post.

3) “Sixty percent of the men exonerated by the Innocence Project are blacks wrongly convicted raping largely white women.”
http://www.hartfordinfo.org/issues/documents/Crime/htfd_courant_040707.asp

From the article:

The New York-based Innocence Project has identified the real criminal in 40 percent of its cases, Neufeld said. And in almost every one, that person has committed multiple crimes.

I’ll bet dollars to donuts that all those “real criminals” were also black – but the article conveniently leaves out the racial statistics here. Are you naive enough to believe that had those 40% been largely white men, the article would have somehow neglected to tell us? White women are being raped by black men, and sometimes they then point their fingers at the wrong black men. This shouldn’t surprise us.

4) According to the FBI, about 95,000 forcible rapes were reported in 2004. Based on the statements and studies cited above, some 47,000 American men are falsely accused of rape each year. These men are disproportionately African-American.

Of course they’re going to be disproportionately black men; if real rapists are disproportionately black men, then naturally the fake ones will be too. Let’s take your line of reasoning to its logical conclusion regarding another group: Men in general. Would you be surprised if I told you that most people who are falsely accused of rape are men? This being the case, would you then conclude that women are just as likely to be rapists as men? According to your reasoning, this would have to be the case – since men are so often wrongly accused.

5) “More than 86 percent of rapes against Native American women are carried out by non-native men, most of them white, according to the Justice Department.”
http://iowaindependent.com/39760/king-votes-against-bill-to-help-protect-native-americans-from-rape

Yes, but bear in mind that “white,” when it comes to perpetrators of crime, includes Hispanics. Either way, this is not surprising. Native American women are dispersed throughout the population – a population that is still largely white. If they hang out with white men, date white men, and live next to white men, when they’re raped, it’s probably going to be by a white man. In this case, it’s their dispersion that’s to blame – unless you’re insinuating that white men are sneaking into Indian reservations to rape Indian women. But I seriously doubt this is the case. Native women are raped mostly by white men for the same reason white women are mostly raped by white men: They live around white men.

It’s a big world out there, and you have a lot of free time, so you were able to find a handful of white-on-black rapes. It happens. I don’t deny it. But it’s still a statistical rarity. I’d scour the internet, as you did, to compose my own list – but I don’t have to; others have already done so. Here’s on website that lists white victims of black crime. It’s in chronological order and you can knock yourself out cataloging them as “rape” or “non-rape” crimes if you want:

White victims of black crime

I’m sure my readers will be happy to contribute many black-on-white rape cases, and lists, for your perusal.

 

Today and tomorrow I’ll be reblogging a couple of recent articles that impressed me. Tonight’s reblog is from “Those Who Can See”. She never disappoints and her research is top-notch. I’m sure you’ll enjoy this post as much as I did:

Afros-and-transport-today-and-yesterday

Next Page »

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 149 other followers