What They Do And Who They Fund

As the events of 2015 have shown, there is no political left or right. There are power elites who play musical chairs at the levers of power. They are in it for them and you and I are simply pawns to be moved around. The latest example:

With inequality at its highest levels in nearly a century and public debate rising over whether the government should respond to it through higher taxes on the wealthy, the very richest Americans have financed a sophisticated and astonishingly effective apparatus for shielding their fortunes. Some call it the “income defense industry,” consisting of a high-priced phalanx of lawyers, estate planners, lobbyists and anti-tax activists who exploit and defend a dizzying array of tax maneuvers, virtually none of them available to taxpayers of more modest means.

In recent years, this apparatus has become one of the most powerful avenues of influence for wealthy Americans of all political stripes, including Mr. Loeb and Mr. Cohen, who give heavily to Republicans, and the liberal billionaire George Soros, who has called for higher levies on the rich while at the same time using tax loopholes to bolster his own fortune. [My underlines]

And people wonder why Trump is riding so high. The pawns are realizing they are the big losers in the game and life for the pawn is no better on the opposite side of the board.

Some of the biggest current tax battles are being waged by some of the most generous supporters of 2016 candidates. They include the families of the hedge fund investors Robert Mercer, who gives to Republicans, and James Simons, who gives to Democrats; as well as the options trader Jeffrey Yass, a libertarian-leaning donor to Republicans.

So just understand. All this talk about Trump being a fascist, racist, xenophobe is to distract the voter from noticing or even seeing what's going on. Trump told the public in the first debate exactly how this works. Not a one of them could call him a liar.

There’s this notion that the wealthy use their money to buy politicians; more accurately, it’s that they can buy policy, and specifically, tax policy,” said Jared Bernstein, a senior fellow at the left-leaning Center on Budget and Policy Priorities who served as chief economic adviser to Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr.

Did I mention musical chairs?

Digital Money

Last week I saw this post at Takis Mag

“Your kids will not know what money is,” Apple’s CEO, Tim Cook, told U.K. broadsheet The Daily Telegraph in November 2015, predicting that cash itself will disappear within a generation. To be precise: when today’s university students have children. About ten, twelve years?

The article is very good and contains some comments I believe to be very important.

one of them being Yu E Bao, a node of Jack Ma’s Alibaba empire. Their offering Yu E Bao allows customers to have surplus cash invested for them—in low-risk securities—at a 6% annual return rate, double what a physical bank can offer. Yu E Bao is really a money market fund, not a bank deposit. However, for customers there is little difference. And since Alibaba itself is not taking the liquidity risks, it doesn’t need a banking license, neatly avoiding the heavy regulation levied on the industry by central banks. Nonetheless, this a “gray area.” No denying it.

A Reuters Breakingviews report from February entitled “Lend and Pretend,” by John Foley, explains why: “Alibaba isn’t a bank. But for customers it’s getting hard to tell the difference. Users of China’s dominant e-commerce website can now deposit funds, make investments, take out loans and even give out gifts of virtual cash…. Banks typically offers savings, loans and transactions…. Alibaba’s foray into finance has seen it target all three…. While Alibaba doesn’t have a bank’s lending expertise, it does have masses of data on borrowers’ transaction habits.” China’s Amazon.com equivalent had made 170 million yuan worth of loans by February 2015, mainly to small- and mid-size companies on its Taobao marketplace.

Does any of this sound familiar? Anything posted on this blog that this reminds you of? No? Maybe this will help:

If you use an iPhone there’s a good chance you will adopt an Apple banking service sometime, one that might resemble a PayPal lite—the account without the bank transfers. Apple is superbly well positioned to reap the rewards from our cell phones turning into mini banks. It manufactures the hardware, software, and—crucially—the security and identification capabilities that virtual banking will require.

No? Well go refresh your memory about Mpesa In essence the "future of money" is already happening in Africa. Kenya to be exact. One thing you'll note in the 60 minutes piece is the resistance of European countries to adopt MPesa. Now when you read the above you understand why. If an African company owned this space by virtue of international patents on the process, MPesa and by extension Africa would profit greatly on this. This, my friends is real deal White Supremacy. Not that BS the BLM movement is ranting about. My gut says that these big players are watching MPesa, or have watched MPesa and are busy trying to determine how they can implement it worldwide and cut MPesa out or at a minimum keep it a small player where it's customers would be siphoned off into non-African systems in part by making (or maintaining) things like ApplePay as aspirational signifiers of digital wealth. Lets look at more from the article:

The benefits are real: Metro opens accounts and mints fresh plastic debit cards for new clients in 30 minutes (versus five to 10 working days).

MPesa has no need for debit cards. It leverages the phone the client already owns and the cellular network already in existence. +5 for MPesa.

What Apple, and Android, possess is ownership of the consumer at the moment he/she makes mobile purchases. Who needs bank branches and marathon phone-call holding times when Siri’s able to pay a bill for you instantly? Competition lies in the form of digital-only banks, also primed for mobile users, like Germany’s Fidor: a well-established lender, with plans to enter the U.S. market stymied by obstructed access to the big payment systems owned by big U.S. banks. Money is already a turf war, even in cyberspace

Notice the total lack of mention of MPesa. Never mind it was featured on 60 minutes not long ago. I do hope that the people running MPesa understand that the competition is collaborating to leave it out of the market.

The article goes on to discuss Bitcoin. Honestly I haven't spent time researching or using it. However I believe that MPesa could easily be modified to use or include 'coin.

But getting back to my point. MPesa is already here for Africans. In this future of digital money, Africa could take an even more commanding, though largely invisible lead in this change. It would behoove the governments all across Africa to stop being short and non-sighted and aggressively seek to expand it's use before the European and Asian financial giants step in and take over.

Shawn King: NY Daily News Clown

Shawn King is good for many laughs about what passes for informed journalism at the NY Daily News. Indeed the BLM movement has managed to guilt trip many an institution into paying people to "teach" and write things that sully the reputation (assuming there is one to sully) of the hosting institutions. Today we have Shawn King comparing Tamir Rice to Emmett Till.

On Monday, when I received the news — a full 400 days after Tamir Rice was killed by police — that no charges would be filed against the officers who shot him, I was out with my wife and kids at the Center for Civil and Human Rights. We had just walked past an exhibit on 14-year-old Emmett Till, who was brutally tortured and killed by a racist mob in 1955. Nobody was ever held accountable for his murder, even though everybody knew full well who did it.

Are these two incidents comparable in any way other than it involved to black teens? Lets examine:

Emmett Till was lynched because he made a pass at a white woman in a store. We can all agree that not only is making pass at a woman isn't a crime [yet but that's another discussion] but it doesn't warrant a death sentence in the least bit. Even if the lynch mob was offended that Till would make a pass at a white woman, that woman was in no way, shape or form in any physical danger, real or perceived. She may not have liked Till making the pass at her, but liking or not liking the person who makes a pass at you is not grounds for legal action [yet]. Thus the justice denied Till is a clear case of white's covering for their own.

In the case of Tamir Rice, we have a kid playing with what appears to be a real gun in public. He (or one of his friends) removed the bright orange tip that is supposed to let police and others know that the gun is not real. A concerned person called the police to report a young man walking around and waving a gun in public. One could argue that such a call was unwarranted. That's a matter of opinion. We do know that where Tamir Rice was waving his fake gun around is a place where gun related homicides happen often (Some place called Linndale is clearly a war zone). So police have a reason to be alarmed when a call about a man walking around with a gun comes in. Particularly when said gun waver is in a park where children are present.

In the video we see that the officers arrive and shoot Tamir Rice within seconds. We can certainly argue whether the speed with which they shot Tamir was appropriate. However; as I pointed out in my last post, 50-50 chance of not going home today. I don't know about you, but I'm going home. This brings me to a strong position my mother took with me when I was a child: No. Toy. Guns. Period. My mother in her wisdom understood that a toy gun could be mistaken for a real gun with very real circumstances so she forbade me from having one. Tamir Rice is a victim of those very real probabilities that comes with walking around in public with a very real looking gun. And this is why the comparison to Emmett Till is not only inappropriate but sullies the legacy of Till.

Till did not present a danger, real or perceived to anyone. Rice did. It's very unfortunate but that's the fact. As I've been saying all year long, if black people (and Shawn is not black thank you very much) are concerned with the welfare of their children, particularly the boys, they are going to have to change how they socialize them AND what toys they give them to play with. Those orange tops are there for a reason.

Of course Shawn King is entitled to his opinion on the matter. The Daily News is entitled to run a rag of a paper that's only good for local items of interest and celebrity gossip, but I'll lay odds that while they let this clown write for their paper, they don't let their kids run around in public parks with real looking guns.

Did They Follow Directions?

Any long time reader of this blog knows full well that I have a dim view of the BLM movement. With the exceptions of Eric Garner and Sandra Bland's arrest (not suicide), they have attached themselves to people who were engaging in behavior which directly lead to their demise and not a few of them were predators in our communities who should have received no sympathy at all (Freddie Gray comes to mind). To believe the BLM narrative, black men are dying in genocidal proportions at the hands of police officers while these black men are doing nothing at all. Excuses included:

1) He was just walking down the street.
2) He was just walking down the street.
3) He only owed child support.
4) He was only driving away.
5) He only had a sandwich in his hand.
6) He was turning his life around.
and the ubiquitous: He didn't do nothing.

Of course those of us who actually care about the well being of the entire black community and who don't make excuses for criminal behavior (and their outcomes) pointed out the false narratives for what they were. Of course no one is interested in true narratives and true problems because there is a vested interest in shifting all blame and adult responsibility onto white people and keeping the view of black people as children who are incapable of being responsible for themselves. The latter being one of the primary justifications used to keep black folks under Jim Crow.

So the Washington Post posted an article on police involved shootings that quite clearly shows the BLM movement to be the idiot movement that it actually is:

Nearly a thousand times this year, an American police officer has shot and killed a civilian.

Two things about this opener. Consider that there are ~300 million people in the US. 1000 "civilians" is but 0.0003% of the total population. That is a stunningly low proportion. Secondly look at the word "civilians". The post could have simply written "people" but it chose "civilians" because civilians feeds into the "us v them" narrative. Civilians are supposed to be protected from the authorities. This sets a bias in the mind of the reader.

In a year-long study, The Washington Post found that the kind of incidents that have ignited protests in many U.S. communities — most often, white police officers killing unarmed black men — represent less than 4 percent of fatal police shootings.

4%. If you watched any TV in the past year would you have thought the number was that low? Also, let us consider that since we know that black men commit actions that garner police attention 7x more than whites you would expect such a number to be higher no?

Of course the elephantine question here is if unarmed (which does not mean non-threatening) black men are only 4% of those persons shot by police, WHO are the other 96%?

The Post found that the great majority of people who died at the hands of the police fit at least one of three categories: they were wielding weapons, they were suicidal or mentally troubled, or they ran when officers told them to halt.

"At least one of three categories".

Ferguson: Ran when officer told them to halt.
South Carolina: Ran when officer told him to halt, repeatedly.
Illinois: Ran/Walked when officers told him to halt, repeatedly. Had a weapon.
Baltimore: Ran when officers told him to halt.
Ohio: Drove away after being told to get out the car, repeatedly.

Lets call this "failure to follow directions". In each of the cases above, each person would be alive today had they followed the directions given to them. Why is following directions so hard?

Race remains the most volatile flash point in any accounting of police shootings. Although black men make up only 6 percent of the U.S. population, they account for 40 percent of the unarmed men shot to death by police this year, The Post’s database shows. In the majority of cases in which police shot and killed a person who had attacked someone with a weapon or brandished a gun, the person who was shot was white. But a hugely disproportionate number — 3 in 5 — of those killed after exhibiting less threatening behavior were black or Hispanic.

6% of the population has fatal encounters with police. That is hugely disproportionate. I agree. But lets revisit the examples above. How many of these folks failed to follow directions and escalated a situation. It seems to be that the Post's position is that a police ought to beg and negotiate with persons who have decided to flee (and this assumes that's all they did). As any martial art practitioner will tell you, being unarmed does not mean that one is not a threat. A weapon minimizes the effort requires to do fatal harm and allows those with no martial skills to kill with relative ease but a weapon is not required to kill at all. Most importantly though, officers, and civilians, can use deadly force to prevent injury as well as death. So for example, if an unarmed man is attempting to gouge out my eye, I can, under the law, kill that person in order to keep my eye. losing my eye is not a fatal injury, yet I can kill a person to keep my eye. Similarly a police officer may kill a suspect who is fighting the officer and that officer believes that the person is willing to use, or is using enough force to cause serious bodily injury OR if that suspect can reasonably be believed to pose a threat to any third (or fourth) party that the suspect may come across while making his or her escape.

All that is said to point out that the Post would need to inform the reader on the circumstances of the interaction before we can form an opinion on the appropriateness of the action taken by the officer. Simply assuming that "unarmed" = "less threatening" is wrong.

Surveillance video in the Louisiana case shows Ledoux shot Martinez as he reached into a newspaper vending machine in front of a convenience store to retrieve his cellphone. Ledoux said he feared Martinez was reaching for a gun.

Obvious question: Who "stores" their cell phone in a newspaper vending machine?

Seriously though. You are a police officer called to a scene. Suspect is not cooperating and tries to retrieve "something" from a newspaper vending machine. You have a 50-50 chance of not going home when whatever it is appears. I don't know about YOU, but I'm going home. Not guilty your honor.

Below is an example of the mindset of the Monday morning quarterbacks:

“That escalated the situation in Officer Mearkle’s mind,” Benoit said. “Quite clearly, he was eluding the police and she didn’t know why. The prosecutor kept saying this was just over an inspection sticker. But when Kassick went around the other vehicle, he’s fleeing at a high rate of speed on a residential street and kids are coming home from school, so I could see where she’s coming from.”

This is similar to the claims made in South Carolina. There the argument was, "Oh he just owed child support." But the officer doesn't know that. But because of the actions of the person being stopped, the officer has to make a different conclusion. Why are they running from what would be a simple ticket? Moving on:

The research also noted whether victims were mentally ill or experiencing an emotional crisis, a category that came to account for one-quarter of those killed. Officers fatally shot at least 243 people with mental health problems: 75 who were explicitly suicidal and 168 for whom police or family members confirmed a history of mental illness.

The analysis found that about 9 in 10 of the mentally troubled people were armed, usually with guns but also with knives or other sharp objects. But the analysis also found that most of them died at the hands of police officers who had not been trained to deal with the mentally ill.

“Often they have an edged weapon, like a knife, and when officers start yelling, ‘Drop it! Drop it!’ that will not calm them down,” said Chuck Wexler, executive director of the Police Executive Research Forum, a Washington police think tank. “Instead, it increases their anxiety.”

I have a pretty harsh opinion on how these can be handled:

1) Mentally ill persons should simply not be living among the sane. But if they are going to be:
2) If a person calls 911, they should be asked if the person has any mental health issues. if they do then medical personnel should be sent and NOT the police. I don't expect the police to negotiate with violent persons. Nor do I expect that they should have to risk their lives to deal with people who are hallucinating and whatever else.

In most of those cases, police were called by a relative or a neighbor who was worried about a mentally fragile person’s erratic behavior. Yvonne Mote of Alabama dialed 911 in March out of desperation, hoping police could help her brother, Shane Watkins, who suffered from schizophrenia. Instead, he wound up dead. “A week after they killed my brother, there was an armed robbery,” Mote said. “That guy had a gun, and they arrested him without killing him. Why did they have to kill my brother, who only had a box cutter? I still don’t understand.”

You don't understand? Let me help: A box cutter is a weapon that in one slash can cut a major artery in the neck with death coming soon after. If not a slash to the neck, deep lacerations to the leg, arm or torso can lead to serious external and internal bleeding that can lead to death or loss of limbs. Secondly I'm going to guess that the armed robber decided to lay down his weapon. This is not hard you know.

After Las Vegas police in 2009 adopted a use-of-force policy requiring officers to put the highest premium on “the sanctity of human life,” some other departments followed suit. Four years after the change in Las Vegas, the city’s officer-involved shootings had fallen by nearly half.

But crime rates? Not so much So ultimately this report shows that police are the minimal actors in the deaths of black men, armed or not. It also shows that generally speaking it is the failure to follow lawful orders (AKA: Directions) that results in the vast majority of the deaths. This brings us back to the theme of the year: Are Black people children? If so then we are admitting to being inferior to everyone else who apparently can become adults who are responsible for their own behavior and can follow directions. If we are NOT children then it's time we hold those responsible for their own situations accountable for their own actions. And remember, every time you see a report of a black person being killed ask yourself One question: Did they follow directions?

"All you black American people, fuck you all"

It gets better:

…just go to the office and pick up your check,” the supervisor at Hamilton Growers told workers during a mass layoff in June 2009...

The following season, according to a lawsuit filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, about 80 workers, many of them black, were simply told: “All you Americans are fired.”

Those Chemical Weapons Again

So in Sept of 2013 The Ghost reported on Sarin gas getting into Syria. Now it appears that Turkish reporter is being tried for treason for reporting on the matter.

Ankara’s Chief Prosecutor's Office opened the case against Istanbul MP Eren Erdem of Republican People's Party (CHP) after his interview about sarin was aired on RT on Monday.

"Chemical weapon materials were brought to Turkey and put together in ISIS camps in Syria, which was known as the Iraqi Al-Qaeda at that time."

Erdem noted that the chemicals used for the production of weapons did not originate from Turkey. “All basic materials are purchased from Europe. Western institutions should question themselves about these relations. Western sources know very well who carried out the sarin gas attack in Syria,” Erdem told RT.

And "western" likely means NATO members. Shooting planes out the sky and trying members of parliament for treason. Seems the powers that be in Turkey are feeling some kind of heat.

You Need to Understand

When I was much younger I belonged a group of decent people who were very much for the welfare of black folks. And nothing in this entry is to slander those individuals. But I need to make a point. One of the things that was, shall we say "admired" about persons like Mao was the fact that "sellouts" were "taken out". Now I'm not saying that any of these people would have actually killed a person they considered a sellout, but what you need to understand is that such an idea was not considered beyond the pale.

Many of these individuals have by now likely seen the error in that way of thinking but as with any group there are always those who "stick to their guns". Now that we have all aged, some of these people are now in positions of power in various institutions. With the left wing thoroughly esconed in positions of power and their opposition scared of being called racist and suffering the likely gross financial fallout that can accompany such an accusation, these leftists have been feeling more and more bold to advance their more extreme thoughts on how to deal with the opposition.

We already have government mandated "sensitivity" training which is nothing more than re-education camps. These things are mandatory at various state and federal institutions with consequences for not complying going as far as termination. These education camps are a core component of left type organizations. I know because I participated in setting one up. In our case it was a voluntary set of classes that was a pre-requisite for membership, but I would be lying if I said that none of us would have been very happy to have had our program made mandatory for all students and staff. Today however, such things are promoted by various institutions of "higher education" and are run by people who came out of my generation.

Now the reason I brought this up is because of this recent news report about an ACLU member stating that Trump supporters ought to be killed.

A board member for the American Civil Liberties Union of Colorado has resigned after urging people to kill supporters of presidential candidate Donald Trump.

Loring Wirbel’s Facebook post was captured by The Daily Caller – a right-leaning online newspaper.

The post states, “The thing is, we have to really reach out to those who might consider voting for Trump and say, ‘This is Goebbels. This is the final solution. If you are voting for him I will have to shoot you before Election Day.’ They’re not going to listen to reason, so when justice is gone, there’s always force…”

You need to understand that this is the next step. Just like the socialist Nazi party, these individuals believe in a "final solution". They are NOT KIDDING. Back in my day we didn't have Facebook to announce our affinity for "killing the sellouts" so we would never have been caught for holding such beliefs. Today, it is only a matter of time before someone says it in some publicly accessible forum.

You need to understand that the reason this person has been fired is because they have stepped over the current bounds of acceptable public speech. I believe that this person has expressed such views among his associates before and they were ignored because they are generally agreed with by those persons. After all, nobody gets fired for toeing the party line.

You need to understand that the current process of trying to economically destroy the opposition is the current means of "killing the sellouts". Being put on the "racist", sexist", "homophobic", "islamophobic" list is like making the federal no fly list. Once you get on it's damn hard to get off it. Not only that but your rights can be abridged on the whim of those in charge.

You need to understand that facts do not matter to these persons. There is only power and conformity. The rest of you can FOAD (you look it up).

Of Course Not

breaking my self imposed silence to comment on the reaction to Scalia's comments

The top Senate Democrat and a civil rights legend serving in the House both condemned Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia's comments during an affirmative action case on Thursday, when Scalia seemed to suggest that some African-Americans don't belong in top colleges.

Well of course some African-Americans don't belong in top colleges. And guess what? Some European-Americans don't belong in top colleges either.

This is why we have entrance requirements. You must meet the requirements for entry. Not everyone makes the cut. Why is this even controversial?

Rep. John Lewis, who helped lead the civil rights march in Selma, suggested Scalia should consider recusing himself from the case, Fisher v. University of Texas.

"Justice Scalia's evident bias is very troubling to me. It leads me to question his ability to make impartial judgments in this case," the Georgia Democrat said in a statement.

I question John Lewis' intelligence and fitness to be a representative in government.

Lewis said he was "shocked and amazed" by Scalia's remarks. "His suggestion that African-Americans would fare better at schools that are 'less advanced' or on a 'slow-track' remind me of the kind of prejudice that led to separate and unequal school systems -- a policy the Supreme Court declared unconstitutional decades ago," Lewis said.

A liberal who is "shocked and amazed". Imagine that. Why does John Lewis think there are different tiers of colleges? Why does John Lewis think there are academic scholarships to which some, most students do not qualify for? I wonder if John Lewis has ever considered why most of if not all the Supreme Court Justices went to "top tier" graduate schools? I wonder what John Lewis thinks about trade schools and the fact that many educators actually encourage students who are not "college material" to go to them. Actually I wonder if John Lewis actually thinks?

Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid took to the Senate floor to decry Scalia's comments as "racist" -- and sought to tie him to Donald Trump and Republicans.

A liberal calling someone racist for making a comment they don't like in regards to black folks. Imagine that.

"These ideas that he pronounced yesterday are racist in application, if not intent," Reid said.

Yes, they are racist because Harry Reid says so. And if Harry Reid say so then...

Anyway...

"I don't know about his intent, but it is deeply disturbing to hear a Supreme Court justice endorse racist ideas from the bench on the nation's highest court.

Intent isn't the only thing Harry Reid doesn't know. And of course I've already laid out why Scalia's comment wasn't racist but hey facts have never stopped a liberal from declaring something racist.

His endorsement of racist theories has frightening ramifications, not the least of which is to undermine the academic achievements of Americans, African-Americans especially."

Racist theory eh? It's racist that it is a fact that persons of whatever race who are enrolled in a program or college that expects performance that they cannot meet should go to institutions that are a better match for their abilities. Wow. You know, this week has really shown that Democrats and liberals actually live in an imaginary world of their own making in which black people can do no ill and are apparently ALL Ivy League material.

Reid called Scalia "out of touch" with the nation's ideals and called his comments "distressing," saying they were a reminder of a need for vigilance to protect opportunity for Americans.

Firstly the issue of law is not a popularity contest (side note: I blame Kennedy and his made up constitutional rights for adding fuel to this bullshit fire). Secondly the national "ideal" is supposed to be about rewarding people for their performances. If there are students who cannot cut it in a program they either find something else to do or do an easier program. What exactly is "distressing" about that?

And why are Democrats and liberals always emoting? Shocked, amazed and distressed. Get control of your emotions!

"The idea that African-American students are somehow inherently intellectually inferior to other students is despicable," Reid said.

Well sure. If Scalia had said such a thing then I'd be on Reid's side. But Scalia made no such statement. Once again we have a liberal Democrat (I repeat myself) making up comments and sticking them on their opponent.

The idea we should be pushing well-qualified African-Americans out of the top universities into lesser schools is unacceptable."

Again, Scalia did not make this statement. His statement which is actually supported by data, is that if a candidate is not prepared to do work at the level of a school that is offering him admission, it would be better if that candidate went to a school that was a better match for his abilities. This way he does not drop out with debt to pay off or run up debt taking remedial classes and the like at the higher cost of the more prestigious institutions.

Harry Reid's commentary is just as silly as Obama's new Every Student Succeeds plan. I mean really. What wonderland do these folks live in where they think every student will succeed? But politicians like to use cutesy titles for their programs and voters fall for it.

Not every student succeeds but we can help increase the numbers by making sure they are in programs that are best for their skill and intelligence levels. And that's for everybody, not just black people.

*note: The author worked at an admissions office while an undergrad at an Ivy. He also paid close attention to admissions and dropouts of black students while attending a Big Ten school. He has seen first hand how many students are admitted with questionable academic skills who later dropped out or failed to maintain a satisfactory GPA. In every year he kept track, the schools would pronounce how many black students were admitted and every year the black enrollment numbers would shrink as many students would be gone. Meanwhile so called "black activists" would rant about the institution and never considered (at least publicly) that maybe it was simply wrong to admit some of those students in the first place.

Lead Poisoning?

Anyone who has studied IQ results for various peoples on the planet knows that Africans score quite low relative to other groups of people. Africans who are in urban areas tend to score higher than those in rural areas. Last night I came across an article in the NYT that was discussing the growing population of African immigrants in the Bronx and I saw the following:

Last year, a baby boy from Kenya came to the emergency room with lead poisoning. After a month of treatment, he did not get better, Lynette Alvarado, the director of language culture for the hospital, said.

She contacted the Sauti Yetu Center for African Women and Families, and found out the source of the problem had come from Africa. The kitchen utensils brought to the United States by the boy’s parents were decorated with lead paint.

Aside from the obvious question, why is lead paint being used on utensils? The next thing we have to ask is how widespread is this practice? Lead exposure definitely leads to brain development problems.

If this practice of lead painted utensils is widespread we have to ask how this may impact IQ among Africans. The other thing would be to ask what ELSE is either painted with lead or contains lead in other forms. How much of the litter we see in many photo and videos of African towns has is contaminated with lead that is being breathed in by residents?

Rubio Aide Discusses HBD

Marco Rubio was made to defend his stance on H1B workers. The article mentioned a comment made by a Rubio aide in 2013:

In 2013 when the New Yorker’s Ryan Lizza asked why Rubio’s plan contained such large-scale guest worker provisions, a Rubio aide expressed more bluntly what Rubio implied during the CNBC debate.

The Rubio aide said:“One of the problems you have with this, ‘Oh there’s American workers who are unemployed.’ There are American workers who, for lack of a better term, can’t cut it. There shouldn’t be a presumption that every American worker is a star performer. There are people who just can’t get it, can’t do it, don’t want to do it. And so you can’t obviously discuss that publicly because–.”

At which point another Rubio aide jumped in asserting, “But the same is true for the high-skilled worker.” [my underlines]

By saying that there are American workers who "can't cut it". He's not saying anything incorrect. Here's the thing though, since it is true that not all workers are equally skilled or equally intelligent, it means that as lower skilled jobs are removed from the pool of jobs, those persons who "can't do it" will be unemployable. This has implications not only for the current immigration debate, it has huge implications for the increasing automation of jobs. Since human diversity in intelligence will not be going away, what is the government going to do with the increasing number of unemployable people? If you cannot educate them (since clearly not all have the intellectual capacity to do the advanced jobs) any candidate talking about "new job training" is not addressing the problem.

Turkey Shot A Plane Down to Protect....

...All this greenery and what looks to be dirt roads.

Seriously.

There is something very wrong with this story.

The Blue Origin Team

Congrats to the Blue Origin team on their test flight and [especially] landing. Now for the readers. Notice anything "missing" from the above photo?

Was The Downing of The Russian SU-24 a Test of a No Fly Zone?

Woke up this morning. Turned on the news and saw that Turkey shot down a Russian warplane. Turkey is a NATO member and therefore the downing of the plane was as if any other NATO member had done so. You see where I'm going here? But lets look at what has been reported in the NY Times:

Turkish fighter jets on patrol near the Syrian border on Tuesday shot down a Russian warplane that Turkey said had violated its airspace, a long-feared escalation that could further strain relations between Russia and the West.

Question: While I'm certain Turkey has the right to patrol the airspace near it's border, given that ISIS doesn't have any warplanes and Turkey is not at war with Syria, why the itchy trigger finger?

In his first remarks on the incident, President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia confirmed that an F-16 Turkish fighter jet had shot down the Russian jet, a Sukhoi SU-24, with an air-to-air missile. But he insisted that the Russian jet had been in Syrian airspace at the time and had never threatened Turkey’s territory.

Now lets make it a given that Putin is going to insist that his plane was on the Syrian side of the border however his claim that his plane did not pose a threat to Turkey is beyond dispute. Again, Russia is not at war with Turkey and as far as I know has no quarrel with Turkey. Therefore, once again, why the itchy trigger finger?

The Turkish military did not identify the nationality of the plane, but said in a statement on its website that its pilots fired only after repeated warnings to the other warplane. Turkey released a map that it said showed that the plane, flying east, was shot down as it transited a narrow finger of Turkish land less than 2 miles wide that juts down into Syria.

“The aircraft entered Turkish airspace over the town of Yaylidag, in the southeastern Hatay province,” the statement read. “The plane was warned 10 times in the space of 5 minutes before it was taken down.”

Read this carefully. Turkey is saying "unidentified plane" as if we do not know that there are Russian planes flying over Syria. I'm also going to go out on a limb and say that I bet that the Russian planes are NOT unmarked. I call a total lie on Turkey not being able to identify the plane.

Secondly, we are talking about a strip of Turkish land that is two miles wide that is wedged into Syria. Let me put this in perspective. I can run 2 miles in under 13 minutes. A professional runner can run that distance in about 8 minutes. A car moving at 60 MPH will cover that distance in 2 minutes. A plane moving at 200 MPH can cover that distance in less than 30 seconds. Turkey is saying that a plane on a legitimate mission against a warring party on the ground posed a threat to a 2 mile strip of land that takes all of 30 seconds to traverse? Really?

And this plane was warned 10 times in the space of 5 minutes? It doesn't take 5 minutes to traverse this distance? How did a pilot warn a plane for 5 minutes unless that plane was not in Turkish space at the time of the warnings?

A Turkish official repeated that, saying, “In line with the military rules of engagement, the Turkish authorities repeatedly warned an unidentified aircraft that they were 15 kilometers or less away from the border.”

15KM is about 8 miles. 8 miles away? How does Turkey get to warn a plane, flying in Syrian airspace that it will be shot down? Why was Turkey so willing to kill a Russian pilot for allegedly flying over 2 miles of land that takes less than 30 seconds to traverse?

Tensions had been building recently over Russian bombing in the area. Last week, Turkey summoned the Russian ambassador, Andrey G. Karlov, to discuss Ankara’s concerns over the bombing of Turkmen villages in northern Syria and called for an immediate end to the Russian military operation close to the Turkish border, according to a Turkish Foreign Ministry statement.

“It was stressed that the Russian side’s actions were not a fight against terror, but they bombed civilian Turkmen villages and this could lead to serious consequences,” the statement said.

Ankara has long called for the protection of Turkmens, who are of Turkish descent, in Syria.

Aha! Turkey has designs on some of Syria's property. We have seen during the US 2016 debates that there has been calls for no fly zones and claims that Russia is bombing civilians and has no regard for US backed "rebels". The US doesn't want to confront Russia and therefore, IMO, Turkey is being used to test the waters. How Russia responds will set the tone for the future conflict in the region. Even IF the Russian plane was about to on was transiting the two mile strip of land, I cannot see how a state that does not wish to start a war would shoot down such a plane without evidence of some action being taken, about to be taken, or had been taken against it's property. particularly given the situation after Paris, this looks very much like support of ISIS rather than against ISIS. It is all VERY BAD timing.

Remember that if there is no response by Russia, Turkey will be emboldened to be more assertive in that area and may in fact try to claim that it will act in protection of people within the sovereign state of Syria. If Russia takes on Turkey, NATO will have to get involved per its pact. And ISIS will be having a good laugh.

In the realm of unlikely but not totally unexpected: A Turkish plane finds itself downed in Syrian space after "being warned repeatedly of being within 15km of the Syrian border. Putin however is a pretty masterful player on the international scene, I'm sure this scenario is an amateur move to him. I expect something far more devious.

MPesa

Was this on 60 minutes last night.

View More: 60 Minutes News|Live News|More News Videos

Meanwhile In Nigeria....

Two female suicide bombers launched a deadly attack that killed an estimated 15 people at a packed mobile phone market in Kano, Nigeria, on Wednesday. Kano is the largest city in Northern Nigeria. The explosion ripped through Farm Centre market just after 4:00pm local time and comes only a day after a terrorist attack killed 32 and wounded 80 in the Northeast city of Yola.

http://www.breitbart.com/national-security/2015/11/18/female-suicide-bombers-strike-nigeria-second-mass-casualty-attack-two-days/

At least 105 soldiers of the 157 Battalion, including their commanding officer, are feared missing after they came under intense attack from Boko Haram insurgents at Gudunbali, Borno State, on Wednesday, military sources have told PREMIUM TIMES.

http://allafrica.com/stories/201511190671.html

Clearly Nigeria needs more flowers and candles.

"And A Little Child Shall Lead Them"

So there's this video floating about where a "French" man and his son "discuss" the recent happenings in Paris. I put "French" in quotes because the man and his son are clearly Asian. He can speak all the French he wants but his ancestors are not The Gauls. But that's not the point here. The point here is how the son in this video is the onliest one speaking with any common sense. Check the transcript:

Father: No, don't worry, we don't have to move. France is our home.

Boy: But what about the baddies, Dad?

Father: There are baddies everywhere. There are bad guys everywhere.

So far so good. Yes there are baddies everywhere. You don't move because of them. What DO you do?

Boy: They've got guns. They can shoot us because they're very, very bad, Daddy.

Father: They've got guns but we have flowers.

Say what? You have WHAT?

Boy: They've got guns. They can shoot us because they're very, very bad, Daddy.

Father: They've got guns but we have flowers.

Sigh. This wussified so and so. The proper response to this is, "we have guns too son." Meaning "we will defend ourselves." Even the kid knows that the statement is bullshit.

Boy: But flowers don't do anything. They're for... they're for... they're for...

Father: Look, everyone is laying flowers here.

This kid, not yet brainwashed into believing up is down and left is right, knows that flowers ain't shit to a gun. He knows flowers are not a means of defense. See how quick the father tries to cover up his clear cowardice. Look! Flowers!

Father: Look, everyone is laying flowers here.

Boy: Yes.

Father: It's to fight against the guns.

Boy: Is it for protection?

Father: That's right.

Boy: And the candles too?

Father: They're so we don't forget the people who have gone.

Boy: Oh. The flowers and candles are there to protect us?

Father: Yes.

Journalist: Do you feel better now?

Boy: Yes, I feel better.

The boy is saying he feels better because he WANTS to believe that the grown ups aren't lying to him. But they are. HE KNOWS that flowers and candles don't protect anyone. This is why he made his statements earlier. And here's the thing, WHEN the next attack happens this boy will look his father dead in his face and ask about the flowers and candles and the father will know he is full of shit, but will lie to his kid again. This is what liberal socialization is about. Lying to children and not preparing them for the real world. Leaving them defenseless against those who would harm them. This guy is lucky his kid didn't ask him why the policemen have guns.

I'm certain I'm not the only one who noticed this.

RE:Dr. Ben Carson: The Most Dangerous Man in Politics

When I first read this Huffington Post piece I honestly thought it was the work of a black writer. When I was done I scrolled to the top looking to see "who was this Negro here?" But it wasn't. And that annoyed me. Much. First let me get the following out of the way: There are large portions of the piece that I agree with. I do not think Carson is qualified to be president and it has nothing at all to do with his past with a hammer and knife. Nor is it due to inconsistencies or outright lies about offers of scholarships to West Point since I have seen many a President, Senator, Congressperson, Secretary of State, etc. lie on way more substantial matters. So for example I agree with this general statement:

He has compared Obamacare and abortion to slavery. He believes the great pyramids were grain silos.

I'll throw in his complete non-understanding of the Big Bang Theory and the Theory of Evolution. The latter being a major issue due to his alleged expertise in the field of medicine. So on these grounds I agree with the author. Where I depart from the author is the typical "black conservative straw man" arguments.

Carson's popularity among white and black conservatives is a dire threat to racial and social justice. Like Clarence Thomas and other black conservatives, Carson advances the myth that we live in a post-racist society.

While I cannot speak for Justice Thomas I know that Carson does not believe we are in a post-racial society. In fact this meme actually started up by left leaning writers. Carson's position is that while racism definitely exists, it does not excuse what Dr. Claude Anderson referred to as "Inappropriate behavior" exhibited by too many black folks. Carson believes, as I do, that black people are not children and should be held to the same standards of behavior and expectations (academically, socially, etc.) as every other race of people. To think otherwise is to believe in inherent black inferiority. Because if black people are capable of the same things that every other race is doing, then they should be expected todo so. So no, we don't live in a post-racial society, but we are also not living in "back of the bus", "get out of town by sundown", slave patrols and manumission papers times either.

As for oft maligned Thomas I have already pointed out that he has turned out to be one of America's most prophetic voices as it pertains to "high tech" lynchings in the form of crybullying as seen from many left leaning persons and groups. I wrote:

This is of course what Thomas meant when he said:

it is a high-tech lynching for uppity blacks who in any way deign to think for themselves, to do for themselves, to have different ideas, and it is a message that unless you kowtow to an old order, this is what will happen to you.

The events of the past few years would justify modifying this statement to read:

it is a high-tech lynching for uppity [straight, generally male, generally Christian], who in any way deign to think for themselves, to do for themselves, to have different ideas, and it is a message that unless you kowtow to [the new] order, this is what will happen to you.

Isn't this what Steve Nelson is engaging in here? Rather than keep his critique of Carson in the realm of policy, where it belongs, he takes it to dictating what a black man (or woman) SHOULD be thinking. How is this any different than the old "We know what is best for the Nigros" of days past? How is this any different than the teachers that tell/told black boys how they don't want to be doctors because he's good with his hands? In essence Steve in engaging in the well worn "tell negroes what's best for them" habits that have been a hallmark of whites in America.

Aside from embellishments, his genuine rise from poverty to prestige is precisely the kind of narrative that keeps the foot of oppression on the necks of black men and women.

Look at this twisted, upside down vision Steve presents. It is OPPRESSIVE to use yourself as an example to black boys if you overcame disadvantages and bad attitudes to become a super successful neurosurgeon. It is OPPRESSIVE to tell black children that it is better to shun the company of people who aren't about shit, to get and stay in your books, to keep your eye on the long term game, to be respectful of your parents and elders. Better you look at, oh I dont' know...Rappers! Seriously, how does a white man get away with publishing such bullshit? But wait there is more:

His "up by the bootstraps" story is the very rare exception that allows conservatives to deny the rule. If he made it, anyone can. Carson is like a shipwreck's lone survivor who is used to argue that the shoals of injustice don't exist.

Whoah, That many, many, many black folks have overcome circumstances, racism included, to become extremely successful is "very rare"? And it's the 'rule" that black folks can't overcome? That's the RULE? What did I say about having the same expectations of black folks as is expected from every other race? Exactly. Essentially Steve here is saying that as a rule, black folks are failures and that they/we are so incapable of confronting and beating racism (without the help of good white folks). Why doesn't think guy come out and say that Black folks are, as a rule, inferior to everyone else? I won't even get into his "lone survivor" theory and his disappearing of successful black folks that he doesn't know about. And let me be clear, I'm not talking about Oprah successful. If you are self sufficient, taking care of children you created you are successful. One doesn't need to be a neurosurgeon, lawyer or whathaveyou.

Donald Trump trots out "political correctness" whenever diversity or racism is mentioned, but at least we can identify the source: a rich, white, clueless boor who insults everyone. When Carson calls anti-racist work "political correctness," how might one challenge him?

Count me on Donald's side on this one. Often left claims of racism are bogus or way out of proportion to the actual offense (see Mizzou and Yale). Just like Clarence Thomas warned. It is PC and you would be clueless, to use Steve's words, to not recognize it. It's the kind of PC bullshit that claims that black lives are under more threat by police than by other black people. Doesn't square with the facts. In dissident right circles this is referred to "hate facts". Steve hates hate facts so he rather try to sully the character of the messengers.

When Carson says black folks are playing the "victim card," what can be said?

Because black folks don't play victim cards? Ever?

Lastly let me address Steve's [mis]use of a Malcolm X quote:

In 1963, shortly after Martin Luther King, Jr. wrote his famous Letter from Birmingham Jail, the more radical Malcolm X warned about black men whose stature within the white community afforded a level of privilege, a phenomenon going all the way back to slavery. Such a man, he said, "doesn't identify himself with your plight whatsoever," and slows progress toward racial justice.

Increasingly the black with stature "within the white community" is the black liberal. Increasingly the black liberal is advocating and creating environments that are detrimental to the black community. Black feminists join white feminists (and get paid) to say things like all men are rapists and must be taught to not rape. As if by making such statements they don't endanger black men who are already seen, due to their own disproportionate violent behavior, as dangerous.

They advocate education reform that allows black boys and girls to act a total fool in school without fear of repercussion.

They assault democratic ideals such as freedom of speech and association by getting campuses to create and enforce speech codes to protect their feelings. In doing so these people have pushed those of us who have different, and often moderate, views out of the realm of "respectability". They shut down real, fact based debate and leave that ground open to those who are far more extreme. So IF you think Carson is way out in right field, then the blame is with the left who created the environment.

Not The First Time

I was reading this piece in The Guardian about AI and robots and noticed a comment that needed addressing:

However, without rethinking the relationship between work and society, the result could be a growing disparity between economic winners and losers.

“We are in danger, for the first time in history, of creating a large number of people who are not needed,” he said. “The question should be, what sort of economy do you want, and to meet what human needs?”

Actually this is not the first time in history where a large number of people became "unnecessary" economically. When the United States ended slavery and picking cotton was mechanized, African slaves became unnecessary. Although many Africans filled a niche in the auto industry and other relatively low skilled labour areas, as industrial work disappeared African-Americans were hit extremely hard.

Yesterday I posted about the pimp trade in Milwaukee where it was stated that less than half of the adult black male population was "formally employed". Indeed if we want to know what is likely to happen as people are no longer needed or wanted in the "formal" work market, all you have to do is look at various "inner cities". Here's the second thing:

Beijia Ma, the report’s lead author, said that over the past 200 years and more, societies have eventually found ways of turning technological developments to their advantage.

She said the best advice for people fearing the rise of the robots is to polish up their skills. “It’s not meant to be a doom and gloom report: one of the ways we think people could help themselves here is through education.”

The people so motivated and intelligent enough to be [currently] out of reach of AI, will have already done so. John Derbyshire has a piece on "magic dirt". This idea that simply placing people in certain places will make them perform better. The same thing applies here. These people who keep saying that people can re-educate themselves into jobs that AI doesn't do, clearly do not understand how intelligence works or is distributed in any given population.

Why The White Sorority Doesn't Want Black Members

The last post came from Amren which had the following image. I didn't see it in the linked piece but I'm posting it here:

I want to draw the reader's attention to point one. Casting aside the "y'all racist" lets answer the question: There are 3 major "Black" Greek Letter Organizations to which African-American women can join. WHY would they want to join another type of non-academic organization (I purposely left out Scholar societies. Now I think this is a question best directed to black women (and men) who did not grow up in a predominantly black community and were likely one of the only black people in their elementary schools and therefore have developed tastes and affinities that skew heavily white. The Ghost is not your "average negro" by any means, but wouldn't have even CONSIDERED a non black organization to join. But having seen other people who grew up under very different circumstances, I can see how such a question would be puzzling in the least.

"Thug Should Not Be Associated With a Black Person"

This is a case of a person not realizing how glassy the house they live in is.

And not to leave the ladies out:

And a wild card:

Nope. Never associated with a black person. Ever.

She called for more education on “cultural intelligence,” and supported screening of SMU events.

I call for someone to tell her to STFU. [Update!]

He objected to the use of an image of a black man with glasses that reflected stacks of money and black women dancing provocatively.

Because black men ought not get paid? Because black men should be ashamed to show they are paid? Really? Explain this to me.

Because Black women can't dance provocatively if they so choose? Because black men cannot like seeing black women dancing provocatively if they so choose? Look, if Fisher isn't into displaying his wealth and doesn't appreciate "a girl that can fill a pair of jeans" (quick! Name that song.) That's his business. Just as I don't think anyone should dictate to Fisher how to display his wealth and whether he should look at women dancing, I don't think he should be passing judgment on those who do. Just don't participate.

Hub of Human Trafficking: Underground Sex Trade Thrives in Milwaukee

From The Guardian

Unpublished data reported to the Guardian by a local trafficking prevention project, Proactive Outreach for the Health of Sexually Exploited Youth, counted 133 minors who had been trafficked or were suspected of having been trafficked or exploited over the course of 2014.

The youngest child to have been trafficked between 2010 and 2012 was 12, according to a 2013 review of Milwaukee police records by the Milwaukee Homicide Review Division, while most of the 77 young people identified as trafficking victims in that period were between 15 and 17. The vast majority were African American...

While young people face obstacles being heard and supported, O’Leary said, Milwaukee’s “embedded” pimp culture throws up other barriers to escaping it. “In the same way that there are cop bars, there are pimp bars, and people know it.”...

O’Leary described a thriving underground economy, in which people depend on different aspects of the sex trade directly or indirectly. Providing security, driving people, and doing hair for women who work at clubs were all kinds of informal employment O’Leary listed that can be enmeshed with the sex trade. Likewise, when pimps are brought to court, O’Leary said that their supporters will often fill half of the room, which can intimidate a victim’s family and friends

And now comes the kicker of the piece. Now I want you to keep in mind the underlined section above.

Wisconsin was recently found to have the highest African American unemployment rate in the nation. Fewer than half of the adult African American men in Milwaukee, a majority black city, are formally employed.

Adding further to a dismal economic picture, In These Times reported that the city had lost 80,000 jobs in manufacturing since the 1970s while median wages dropped by nearly 22% in the decade between 1999 and 2010.

And this here:

State Representative LaTonya Johnson of Milwaukee has introduced a “safe harbor” bill that would decriminalize sex work for minors, but she acknowledged that even if the bill were to pass, obtaining the funding needed to put the necessary social and health services in place would be “an uphill battle”.

Lets work our way backwards. Less that one half of the adult males are "formally employed" meaning that less than 1/2 of the adult black male population is engaged in work that generates tax revenue. LaTonya Johnson thinks it would be an "uphill battle" to get funding. Where would this funding come from? WHO would this funding come from? Certainly not out of the pockets of the less than 1/2 the adult black male population that is formally employed. What about the informally employed? Well apparently a good number of them are the cause of the problems.

Backing up we see something very sad. The community can create jobs that supports PIMPING but cannot create jobs that provides for stable families and neighborhoods free of crime. Think about that. It may be the case that pimping is a (the?) major job creator in this town. How sad is that?

by this idea of addressing and changing the deep, deep economic inequality that exists in our system. We address it by actually reducing the incidence of sexual violence.”

But WHY is there a "deep economic inequality" in the first place? Lets ask the Garvey question:

Where is your steamship line? Where is your factory? Where are your men of big affairs? Is not the "deep economic inequality" largely to do with the lack of creation by the residents of that area? Factories don't just fall out the sky. Jobs in those factories do not appear out of thin air. People had to come up with an idea, finance it and manage it. If the means of addressing "deep economic inequality" means getting non-black folks to "create jobs" for black folks then that is an admission of inequality of ability.

This is the reason I wrote the piece for Mayweather. It's time for black millionaires and billionaires to start putting money into black communities. And I'm not talking about shelters and non-profit entities and all that non wealth building BS. If black folks cannot or will not employ themselves (Ahem Tidal. Ahem Harpo....) then for those who can see, we look mighty foolish.

Dear Money Mayweather

I saw that you dropped 50 large in a strip club in Miami. I'm not one to tell a man who has far far far more money than I do what he can and cannot do with his earnings. And I can certainly appreciate a man who appreciates the female of the species. I don't engage in strip clubs but I'm not gonna tell any other man or woman where they can and cannot spend their time. However I'd like to take the time out to suggest a few things that you can do with your hard earned money. I paid to see you fight. I haven't paid to see any boxing match until then. I'll not review the fight but I saw the preview videos that featured your history. I saw how you came up in Grand Rapids Michigan. The drug dealing your dad did. The heroin addiction your mom faced. But you faced these, and no doubt other challenges and went to the top. I'm certain you know that not everyone from Grand Rapids or other poor neighborhoods will see such success. You know that only a very few get to play on the professional level of any sport. The odds are long and the slots few. And here we come to the point of this letter.

Now that you have retired from your profession, no doubt you are thinking about your legacy. Yes you have the belts, the cars, the houses and the money. But you're not even at your half life. I don't see you as a man who would be content to sit back and collect dust as people move on to newer and fresher people. How do you avoid this? Become the man who spends his money on institutions rather than the biggest booty in Miami.

The Mayweather Athletic University

This is institution building idea number one. Since you are known as an athlete par-excellence, it would make a lot of sense for you to build a school in Grand Rapids (I was actually thinking Detroit but location is not the biggest deal). Here you would train athletes in a variety of sports. Imagine the next title holder having come through The Mayweather Athletic University? The next Football hall of famer. The next baseball star. The brand spanking new African-American Tour De France team. You see where I'm going with this? You recruit the best in the various fields to teach at your school. Think of the employment opportunities from the lowest to the highest positions. And I'm not talking about some non-profit bullshit either. That's our, black folks, problem. You understand this. I KNOW you understand this.

That's not all. I know you love your cars. I love my cars. I cannot spend anything near what you do on them, but I do what I do. Now instead of [just] spending money on your super cars,how about

The Mayweather School Of Automotive Engineering

Again, located in Grand Rapids (or Detroit), your school could train the next generation of automotive engineers. It could train for all levels. Those who simply want to repair cars would have programs for them. Those who wish to learn to build and fabricate would have programs for them. Those that want to make the next computer interfaces or even create the next electric vehicle could do that there.

Now I have no idea how much these things cost to do. However YOU have The Money Team so I'm certain you could get it done.So this is my proposal. Again, I'm not judging a man for wanting to show his appreciation for Miami's bootifullest. Nor do I wish to knock a man for appreciating fine cars and such. But I'd also like to see Mayweather in the news flaunting his institutions rather than just his assets (depreciating and otherwise). -The Ghost

Beasts of No Nation

Do yourself a favor and watch this movie. If you teach a class, this is good material for discussing child soldiers and charismatic African style leadership.

Jim Goad Defends Trayvon Martin

Unlike many of my peers, I keep a nice look out on alt-right websites. Unafraid of seeing the various "colorful" references to black folk and with the testicular fortitude to glide past other insults that lesser intellects would fold under. Due to this I get access to data that is overlooked by other outlets and persons with very well documented arguments. That said, like every group, many on the alt-right have their own issues with hubris and herd following. One case in particular is that of Trayvon Martin. Just about every person I've read on alt-right circles has accepted the "fact" that Zimmerman was acting in self defense as the "thug" Martin was stalking and then assaulting and trying to kill him. When evidence to the contrary, that is, the known facts of the case, are shown to completely contradict their line of thinking. Every alt-right person I have seen has either given me the "well the jury decided" statement or simply ignored the evidence. Today on TakiMag Jim Goad showed just how blind those on the alt-right are to the facts of the Martin case simply because Trayvon is black. I'm going to intersperse his article with my discussion of the Martin case.

Goad:

Last Tuesday night I was walking down a poorly lit Brooklyn street en route to meet a friend for dinner when suddenly I noticed a black male strolling alongside me.

The Ghost:

The trial showed that Trayvon was on his cell phone talking to his friend Rachel. We know that while on that phone call Trayvon indicated that Zimmerman was following him and that Zimmerman came across as creepy.

Both Goad and Martin were walking along the street, minding their own business when a suspicious person made themselves apparent to them.

Goad:

A block later, I tried crossing the street merely to shake him. He stayed glued to my side. After another whole block, I stopped, looked him straight in the eyes, and said, “What’s going on here? Why are you following me?”

The Ghost:

I have said to many people that if one EVER thinks one is being followed that one should NOT go to one's home. Why would you lead a potential killer to your place of residence? The police say that Trayvon was hiding behind a sign (and/ore bushes) when he finally confronted Zimmerman. In terms of self-defense Trayvon's hiding makes perfect sense...

Looking at it from Trayvon's perspective, as we should, he sees a person following him in a car. He tries to shake the person by hiding and that person leaves their car to follow him on foot. To Trayvon this is potentially life or death situation which has escalated from a person in a car to a person on foot. . He doesn't know Zimmerman. What reason does Trayvon have to believe that the stranger who is following him means him no harm? None!

We know from the testimony presented during trial that Trayvon ran away from Zimmerman. Hence the "these 'punks' always get away.." commentary. Similarly Jim Goad, feeling threatened by the black guy ghosting him tried to escape. You'll note that Goad and Trayvon thought the same thing and tried to do the same thing: Get away from the creepy guy who they felt threatened by. Difference? Martin is black.

We should also note that it was reported that Trayvon asked Zimmerman "why are you following me?" Goad does the same. We can see that Goad and Martin were thinking the same way in regards to the threat.

Goad:

He stopped along with me. His glazed eyes looked straight into mine. He didn’t say a word. He only nodded in the affirmative, even though I hadn’t asked him a yes-or-no question.

The Ghost:

Since we have no video or eyewitness at this point, I have to make assumptions. I think Trayvon probably said BOTH things. I think that Zimmerman flashed his gun while demanding of Trayvon to explain "what he was doing here". I cannot prove it but given his behavior after the trial, we can surely believe that Zimmerman is the type to have brandished his weapon.

As I said in my post, my commentary as to whether Zimmerman flashed his gun or otherwise made it visible is pure conjecture. The point being that I believe that whatever Zimmerman did when confronted by Martin, it did not make Martin feel any safer. Just like Goad's "ghost".

Goad:

I kept him in my visual periphery and breathed deeply as I remembered all the joint locks and leg sweeps I’d learned in martial-arts classes. At one point I reached inside my denim jacket to pantomime that I was concealing a gun, then I pulled my hand out quickly when I realized that if he actually was toting a pistol, I might have been signing my death warrant by reaching for a gun that wasn’t there.

Now I've read all kinds of commentary on Amren, Taki, Vdare, SBPDL, etc. that Martin's "mixed martial arts" head banging was proof that Martin was a thug hell bent on killing Zimmerman, just because he was white. Yet here we have Jim Goad, going over martial arts moves that he could employ on the person he feels threatened by. Furthermore he actually started to act in a manner that suggested he had a weapon. How is Trayvon Martin who not only thought of defending his life from a threat but actually tried to, a thug and Jim Goad NOT A THUG for seriously considering the same actions??

Goad:

White male privilege in 2015 means that if I get into any altercation with someone who isn’t white or male, I am presumed guilty. It’s happened to me with women. And with anti-racist skinheads. And with a black dude who tried breaking into my car. In each case, I was not the instigator, only the one who fought back. But being unapologetically white and male worked against me in every case.

Sorry to burst your pity party Goad, but white male privilege in 2015 and 2014 means that you can act in self-interest against a threat and nobody will call you a thug. But a 16 year old kid being stalked by a man with a gun is simply because he is black. If Jim Goad doesn't like being assumed to be the instigator, then he can START by looking at his story and comparing it to Trayvon Martin. After that he can get around to advocating that the person walking down the street minding his or her own business, who is stalked by someone who presents themselves as a threat, that the person minding their business should be afforded the benefit of the doubt regardless of his race. I won't hold my breath on that though. Why? Because most of these alt-right types are so busy being mad about the stuff happening to them they cannot even see when an injustice is done to someone else who's not one of them.

And for those who are reading and saying that Goad didn't try to kill his would be "soft mugger". That is true. It was a stroke of luck that Goad didn't have a gun. Imagine that he had pulled a gun and the "soft mugger" turned out to be a "hard mugger" and killed him...in self defense? The mugger's argument would have been that he was walking along the street when Goad pulled a gun and tried to shoot him. Dead Goad wouldn't be able to say otherwise. And there would be no witnesses to say otherwise.

What if Goad had decided to try those martial arts moves, lost and ended up dead? Same deal. "Soft mugger" would have said the same thing. He was walking down the street and this guy assaulted him. Dead Goad can say nothing to counter that. No witnesses to say otherwise. But we know Goad is the "good guy" because not only did he not make it physical (because by his own admission he was too scared to do so) but the"soft mugger" never escalated the situation. Goad lived to tell his story. Trayvon didn't. Lucky Goad.

Yes, Black On Black Crime is "A Thing"

A couple of days I ago I ran across this piece on a Black Lives Matter (sic) movement gathering in which the following was said by a Patrisse Cullors in which she made the claim:

Cullors also asserted, “Black-on-black crime is a myth.” She called comments on the phenomenon a “distraction” and “an unnecessary debate,” then encouraged the audience that when a conversation goes in that direction to “shut it down.”

I am still in shock that someone who claims to value black lives would be so cavalier about black on black crime, which most certainly exists. but go so far as to say that the phenomenon is a "distraction". I would agree that it is an "unneccessary debate" in that no one who is informed on the subject would be debating the topic. It exists and the only debate needed is how best to address it. And I'm following in the tradition of Amos Wilson, our ancestor who literally wrote the book on the subject. I know these black lives matter people don't read but I suggest that anyone reading this do themselves a favor and read the book. Now lets move on to the definitive post on black on black crime.

The Source Of The Confusion

Why is it that there are so many people who believe that "black on black crime" doesn't exist? It's because the term "black on black crime" is admittedly a poor choice of words to describe the actual situation and lends itself to confusion. Here's why: As anyone who studies crime statistics can tell you, in general violent crime happens between people of the same race. Generally. And because of this fact, most people jump to the easy conclusion that there is no difference in rates of black and white crimes. That conclusion is false.

The Real Deal

Why is this false? Well we have to keep a number of things in mind. Black people only make up 13 % of the US population. All things being equal you would expect that black crime (particularly violent crime) would be in proportion to the population. It is not. Not by a long shot.

Back in 2005 I wrote a piece in response to Bill Bennett's comments on aborting black babies in order to reduce crime:

White males are represented by 717 male inmates per 100,000 white males. In 1988 the white/black population ratio was 6.44. If we assume this number to still be accurate then our hypothetical white male population would be 128,800,000 people. Doing the math we did for the black population, we would get another 923,496 inmates. If we put these numbers together we get close to the total prison population of the US as of June 2005 (2,131,180). What immediately jumps out is that following Bennett’s logic, if we aborted every white baby, we would see the same drop in crime, since eliminating all white babies or all black babies would produce, mathematically, the same drop in inmates, and the crimes they committed. [note: My apologies to Lashawn Barber. She was right on this subject and I was wrong (and being emotional) ]

The important part is that blacks make up nearly 50% of the prison population yet are only 13% of the total US population. Whenever you have half of your crimes done by less than 15% of your population, you have a population with serious issues.

Furthermore when we look at the leading causes of death we see a similarly disturbing reality:

For black males, Homicide is the second leading cause of death for 10-14 year olds.

10 to 14 years of age.

Homicide is the number one cause of death of African-American males between the age of 15 -34.

15 to 34.

...

White males between the ages of 15 and 19 have homicide as the number 3 cause of death (compared to number one for black males)

White males between the ages of 20 -24 have homicide as the number 3 cause of death (compared to number one for black males).

White males between the ages of 25 and 34 have homicide as the number 5 cause of death (compared to number one for black males).

This data shows that unlike white folks, black males have a far higher chance of being killed. Don't take my word for it. Take the NYPD's word for it:

Murder and non-negligent manslaughter

Ummm does ANYTHING at ALL stand out to you?

Blacks are 62% of those arrested for murder and whites are 3%. Not only are blacks committing more crimes in NYC, but they are over an order of magnitude (times 2) more than whites. But there IS NO BLACK ON BLACK CRIME PROBLEM!

And since so many black women are into feminism...

Rape

Clearly the white frat boys are not the problem they are being made out to be. And notice this:

Though whites are 17% of rape victims they are only 5% of those arrested for rape. So exactly who is doing the other 12% of rapes on white people (mostly thought not exclusively women)?

More..

Felonious Assault

Translation: If you are assaulted it is MOST likely you will be black. It will also be likely that the person assaulting you is black. In both cases if that person is not "black" it's someone named Gonzalez, Ramirez, or some other "ez" or "es". Remember though, this isn't REALLY happening.

Grand Larceny

If you get robbed in NY. You're likely white. The perp is probably black or hispanic (and may be both at the same time. It happens). And lastly:

Shooting Incidents

Do you notice those huge long bars for Black? Victim, Suspect and Arrestee?

Lets look at this chart carefully. In NYC, 75% of the shooting crimes are committed by black persons. Seventy. Five. Percent.

Whites are 1.7% of the shooting victims. Yet are arrested 1.1% of the time. That means almost one half of white shooting deaths were caused by non whites. Blacks are 23% of the population of NYC. Males are about half that. so about 12% of the city's population is likely responsible for half the white shooting deaths.

I don't need to go on because the dataspeaks for itself. Black on Black crime is a real thing. We, those who actually care about black folks, have known this for a long time. Those persons who are claiming that this epidemic in our communities not only doesn't exist but isn't worth "debate" are either ignorant of the facts or have an ulterior motive. Because of the actions of these people, there have been more dead black people in places like Baltimore than at any time since the 1990s. These people most metaphorically have blood on their hands.

It's time for these white media organizations like Huffington Post, Atlantic, Salon, etc. to be held accountable for allowing their mediums to be used to spread outright lies about black people. It's time they stopped giving platforms to black folks who only know sound bites and catch phrases. It's time for universities to stop giving jobs and opportunities to folks who's ideologies and works have lead to actual deaths in black communities. It is time for black media outlets like TheRoot, Ebony, Essence, etc to be called to account for using their platforms to allow for falsehoods.