Je Ne Suis Pas Belgium

In the past I have been very sympathetic to the European countries and victims of the terrorist activities. I was under the very mistaken impression that these folks had little idea what their "leaders" had been doing to their countries. I thought they didn't quite understand what the EU was doing to their once sovereign states. I was very mistaken.

Any sane people would not invite persons hostile to their culture and peoples to live among them in large numbers. They would not allow them to create "no-go" areas of insular communities where the police are afraid to enforce the national laws. If you don't believe me look at Japan. Look at China. Look at Hungary. Look at Poland. The leadership of these places understand exactly who they represent. They are not afraid to be proud of who they are and they do what they must to maintain their identity. To be blunt, they are not traitors.

The French leadership and a large percentage of their population are traitors to their own countries. I'm not going to beat around the bush with this. Let us state it plainly and clearly. The French got what they had coming to them. The Belgians have gotten what they had coming to them. The Germans, and all those countries who have invited hostile persons to leech off their governments while large numbers of their people assault and rape citizens. Each of them will continue to get what they have coming to them until they are either made to completely submit or they rise up.

After the mass killings in France, the political elite of that country banded and conspired to prevent the National Front, the only party with the interest of the French nation at heart from getting majority votes in places it was doing extremely well in the first polling. But it would be a mistake to place all the blame on the elites. The French people saw what the parties were doing and went along with it. The majority of the French people conspired with the "leadership" to deny FN wins. Why? Because they didn't want to be seen as racist. This desire is so strong in these people that they are completely willing to have their fellow French citizens, their countrymen killed. If they care so little about their nation and people then I I could care even less.

That the killers were living in Belgium and freely travelled between countries and their neighbors knew who they were and did nothing to cooperate with the authorities in the country they supposedly called "home". makes it clear that these people are hostile inhabitants that should be removed. I'm sure some idiot reading this is thinking Japanese internment. I'll note that as far as is known, no Japanese in the US during WWII were randomly blowing themselves and other people up. They weren't running up into dance halls and concert halls killing people. To me that difference matters. A lot.

Beyond that the so called leadership of Belgium has even gone to the extent of not funding arts by actual Belgians because it is "too white". This pathological hatred of Europeans by their own kind is unprecedented in history. Certainly Europeans did some extremely bad things in their time, but the pendulum has swung to such an extreme opposite that Europeans as a collective seem to have no sense of basic national self-respect.

And the citizens have apparently decided that it is more acceptable to live in what amounts to a police state with military personnel wandering around with high power automatic weapons and giving the state more and more surveillance powers than to be "right wing" and do the one thing that would provide for their safety and liberties: Remove the threatening population.

When the first reaction of the press after Islamic terrorism is to warn about Islamophobia and how Syrian refugees are not a problem you know that the people are lost. So no, I am not Belgium. Belgium doesn't even want to be Belgium. They made their bed. The bedbugs are now biting.

So You Want $15/Hour?

While I am certainly sympathetic to the idea of living wages I am not ignorant of the very real consequences of paying extremely low skilled workers relatively high wages for work. One of the reasons is that unlike when Socialism and Communism first reared their heads, there is a mode of labour that threatens everybody's jobs in the near future: Automation and artificial intelligence.

There are only two things that stop automation from taking off: Technological development and cost of product. As Moore's law is being smashed to bits the cost of product as well as it's ability to perform has been come down dramatically. As the costs of human labour increases, automation becomes increasingly "profitable". As those machines become profitable humans see themselves unemployed. Last year I pointed out to the building disaster that the minimum wage advocates are creating:

Hibbs says that the $15-an-hour minimum wage will require a staggering $80,000 in extra revenue annually. “I was appalled!” he says. “My jaw dropped. Eighty-thousand a year! I didn’t know that. I thought we were talking a small amount of money, something I could absorb.” He runs a tight operation already, he says. Comix Experience is open ten hours a day, seven days a week, with usually just one employee at each store at a time. It’s not viable to cut hours, he says, because his slowest hours are in the middle of the day. And he can’t raise prices, because comic books and graphic novels have their retail prices printed on the cover.

You would be tempted to say that this is not an issue of automation and you'd be right. But imagine if that store owner could run his store entirely with robots and leave it open 24/7? Well lets look at what Carls Jr. is looking to do:

Carl’s Jr. CEO Andy Puzder believes that fully-automated eateries are the future since his visit to Eastsa, one such establishment located in Canoga Park, California.

"If you're making labor more expensive, and automation less expensive — this is not rocket science," Puzder told Business Insider.

Apparently rocket science to some people.

The average fast food employee is 29 years old with a high school diploma, many of whom are single parents, The Washington Post reported. With a median pay of $8.92 an hour, one fifth of fast food employees’ families live below the poverty line – costing the US government $7 billion in welfare payouts.

Puzder believes that raising the minimum wage will be worse for fast food employees in the long run.

Single parents you say? There was a time when "single parents" was a rare thing and teens were the usual employees. What happened? Starts with a "f".

Whether or not the minimum wage is increased, Puzder makes a case for moving over to fully automated restaurants for other reasons. "They're always polite, they always upsell, they never take a vacation, they never show up late, there's never a slip-and-fall, or an age, sex, or race discrimination case," says Puzder of the benefits of machines versus man.

Imagine. No insurance for employees. No workers comp. No paying for employees who are not actually working (sick and vacation days). I'm not saying that workers shouldn't have these things. I'm saying that these things cost. This last part was particularly instructive:

"Millennials like not seeing people," the Carl’s Jr. CEO said. "I've been inside restaurants where we've installed ordering kiosks ... and I've actually seen young people waiting in line to use the kiosk where there's a person standing behind the counter, waiting on nobody."

The very behavior of the next generation is ushering in their own employment demise.

Try Working

Half marathon race done. Blogging is back on. The below underscores a huge problem with certain black communities. It is reminiscent of the father that told me that his son, who died while being detailed by customers of a store he was trying to steal from, is just like any other son. And that all black boys steal at some point in their lives and therefore condemning his actions and acknowledging that his son's actions are directly responsible for his own death is "wrong." I called and continue to call bullshit on that. But he's not alone. From Miami:

On Thursday, police say Johnson burglarized a home south of 79th Street near I-95 — just blocks away from where he lives. The 54-year-old woman told police her surveillance system alerted her to the break-in of her home. She said she rushed home and found the teen climbing out of a window. “She observed a subject leaving the home through the rear,” said police Det. Dan Ferrin.

Just like Michael Brown of Ferguson fame, Even being caught on camera in the act of committing a crime is not enough for folks to shut up. But what marks this as an egregious case of fucked up parenting is this:

“You have to look at it from every child’s point of view that was raised in the hood,” said Harris. “You have to understand… how he gonna get his money to have clothes to go to school? You have to look at it from his point-of-view.”

So as long as you were brought up "in the hood" you should be excused from the consequences of criminal behavior. In fact you shouldn't be held to any standard of civilized behavior because you gotta get that money and clothes so you can get this hoes.

IS Child Soldiers

Continuing our weekend of children, a report on child soldiers of the Islamic State:

In the past six months, IS propaganda has featured 12 child killers. According to the researchers, between 1 August last year and 9 February this year, they identified a total of 254 events or statements featuring images of children. In an effort to put brutality into their daily routine, the group encourages youths to hold up decapitated heads or play football with them. IS uses intimidation as a recruitment tool, warning that those who refuse to obey will be tortured or raped.

And

Less than a month ago, IS released a new disturbing clip showing a British boy, nicknamed 'Jihadi Junior' and thought to be aged four, blowing up three prisoners. The child wearing an IS headband is seen pressing a button on a remote control device seconds before a car containing alleged “British spies” explodes

Kenya's Child Prostitutes

And

UN "Piece" Keeping

This is not the first report of this kind of behavior and certainly will not be the last.

the neighborhood is a patchwork of low-slung buildings scorched and looted at the height of the civil war, a place where the United Nations was supposed to come to the rescue. But in a number of homes, women and girls are raising babies they say are the children of U.N. troops who abused or exploited them.

“Peacekeeper babies,” the United Nations calls such infants.

“A horrible thing,” says an elfin 14-year-old girl, who describes how a Burundian soldier dragged her into his barracks and raped her, leaving her pregnant with the baby boy she now cradles uncomfortably.

Wanted to comment on this:

The Washington Post interviewed seven women and girls who described contact with peacekeepers that violated U.N. regulations against sexual exploitation and abuse. Five of them said they exchanged sex for food or money — sometimes as little as $4 — while their country was rocked by civil war and families were going hungry.

We might think that $4 is "little" but in those countries 4 US dollars is a big deal. For example, as of this writing $4 is 3712.00 Congolese Francs, 2401.34 CA CFA Francs, 246.17 Haitian Gourds and 485.68 Jamaican Dollars.

Dr. Perry Whines Some More, Takes Her Ball Home. For Now

Since the video produced by the Princeton PD has been released showing how deferential the police were when dealing with her, Dr. Perry has tried to avoid the criticism she has received from many corners of the net and media. Unable to refute the critics and unwilling to be self-critical and take responsibility for her own choices, Perry has decided to write what she deems to be the final chapter on the matter. Lets examine it.

. I wasn’t a no show! I’d called and asked to postpone the meeting Although I honestly can’t be certain that this information was communicated to me correctly, it felt like yet another effort to discredit me.

So let me understand. Here we have a person with a PhD. Who teaches at an Ivy League university who is "not certain" as to whether she communicated effectively in regards to if and when she would follow up on a complaint of misconduct against a police officer?

Exactly how hard is it to communicate that you cannot meet on such and such a date therefore how about we meet on such and such date and time? How hard is that? People make appointments all. The. Time. This is not hard. either you scheduled an appointment or you didn't. Full stop. This is hard for a Ivy League PhD professor?

I shared several tweets about my experience being arrested last week. The arresting officer told me he was arresting me for a three year old parking ticket. I am an African American female professor at Princeton. As a result, the episode soon spiraled into a media event, which I attempted to avoid engaging at every turn. So I wrote a public statement rather than accepting the countless requests for

No, no and no. Perry was arrested because there was a warrant out for her arrest that was the result of her NOT PAYING a parking ticket. She was also driving on a suspended license as a result of NOT PAYING a parking ticket. And because Ms. Phd teaching at an ivy League university is not broke (as far as we know), she can't claim that she didn't pay because she couldn't afford it. She simply did not feel that the law applies to her.

Secondly SHE brought attention to her arrest by announcing it on social media. All she had to do was pay her ticket and go about her business with a lightened wallet. But nooooo, she played the race and gender cards. She talked about how scared she was and the usual symps went for it.

I do not believe municipalities should generate revenue by using the police power to arrest. Taxes and fines should not be executed through physical coercion. As the justice department challenges Ferguson, Missouri to cease such practices-- ones that create modern day debtors prisons in poor communities-- it is worthwhile to raise questions about the practice generally, including in affluent suburbs.

Well it's nice that Dr. Perry thinks this way. I don't think that highway tolls should be in place. I don't get to drive through tolls without consequences. And this is why I say Perry thinks the laws do not apply to her. And you see how she talks about Ferguson. Never mind that Perry is not poor. The parking ticket would have a negligible effect on her net worth. One may argue that the tickets used in Ferguson are a hardship on poor residents, but Perry is not poor. Pay your ticket miss.

I was terrified when I was pulled over, and then when I was arrested, because in this country police practices are racially discriminatory.

You know black people are paranoid about the wrong things. Could a police office in Princeton decide to kill Perry because she is black? Certainly. Was it remotely possible that such a thing would happen to Perry? Not even. In fact, as a black female she is only behind white women when it comes to risk of death. But see, when you live in the racial fantasy world that many of these educated negroes live in, you get shook over bullshit.

Moreover, over the past year and a half as a nation we have watched the footage of multiple deaths of unarmed African Americans at the hands of police officers.

And in almost ALL of the cases the African-American MEN, were either engaged in criminal behavior just prior to their death, were engaged in criminal behavior at the time of their deaths OR failed to follow lawful directions of a police office. Surely Dr. Perry has kept up with research and knows that the data shows this.

Did Perry intend to do what these MEN did? Apparently Perry decided to do as she was told and had no problems. Just like millions of people do all over the US.

The majority of the time there is no remedy for these deaths.

Because as the data shows, justifiable homicide.

This effectively grants police the authority to act with impunity. It may be hard to imagine for people who are not Black and/or Latinx, but this social reality produces terror for many of us when we encounter police officers, regardless of how they behave.

Well no, Akai Gurley, Oscar Grant (to an extent). The social reality is the fantasy bubble that encourages black people to be paranoid when engaging with the police. No one likes to have an unintended encounter with police, but 95% of the time there is no harm and how one is treated is directly related to how one acts.

While I disagree with a number of the statements made by the Princeton Police about what transpired,

Such as?

and the video footage that the police chose to share with the general public failed to show most of what I objected to,

That would be the handcuffs (standard op) and the search by a male officer, because as we know, men cannot search women because VAGINA.

. I am removing myself from all engagements that sustain that distraction. Additionally, the officers have emphasized that their actions were consistent with standard protocol. But I don’t disagree with them on that point. I never did.

Translation of first sentence: I don't want to answer for my bullshit so I'm going into hiding.

Translation of second sentence: The laws and rules shouldn't apply to me. Even if I'm treated equally I have a problem because I don't want equality I want exceptions for me and my kind.

My point is this: regardless of whether it is consistent with standard procedure and protocol, I should not have been handcuffed to a table for a parking ticket.

Wahhhhhhh! My feeeelz! And once again it was because Perry had an arrest warrant. For x amount of days after receiving the ticket Perry was free as a bird. No one would have arrested her. All she had to do was pay her ticket. When she FAILED to do so, then she was what we call "in contempt of court". You flip the bird to the court, the court sics the dogs on you. Simple. So she was arrested because she chose to not pay her shit. Period. Why doesn't she understand this is her own fault? And she was driving on a suspended license. People get arrested and their cars towed and impounded for stuff like that. Say, did they impound her vehicle?

Moreover, if it were five parking tickets I should not have been handcuffed to a table. A parking ticket is not an indication that a person poses a physical threat.

Again, here she is trying to tell other people how to do their jobs. You know, most of the time, people who are handcuffed to a table aren't a threat to themselves or others. Every so often though, someone flips out and the cuffs keeps them in line. Also because everyone wants equal treatment, it means that "non-threats" get the same treatment as threats so later on, a lawyer can't say "but your honor, they don't cuff everybody..." So just like we all gotta take off our shoes at the security theatre that is TSA, You get to get cuffed to a table. Next time pay your parking ticket.

The “pat down” for weapons that I experienced at the hands of a male officer also did not make sense as I did not pose a physical threat and I was not stopped on suspicion of posing a violent threat to anyone.

When anyone is arrested they are searched. Not only for weapons but for other contraband. See, some people don't pay tickets and the like because they simply do not care about the law. The police don't know you. But here we have Perry explaining why she should get [more] deferential treatment.

And here is the point that goes far beyond my story: Perhaps if police officers were not authorized and encouraged to arrest people for small violations then Eric Garner and Sandra Bland would still be alive.

A) Sandra Bland hanged herself. Her family didn't give a shit that she needed 500 dollars and left her in that jail over the weekend. Her mother is now shilling for Hillary Clinton, while the short memory fools don't even recall that SHE left HER DAUGHTER in jail over 5 hundred dollars.

B) Eric Garner was killed under a liberal administration looking to "protect the children". But more to the point, had Garner simply cooperated, he'd be alive. Garner knew what he was doing was illegal and decided to do it anyway. We know the saying: Do the crime, do the time. Man up when the police come for you for what you know you did.

It was once against the law for my ancestors to read, to own property, to sit in the front of the bus. Hence, rules must be evaluated as to whether they meet standards of justice. Warrants for parking tickets do not meet such standards.

Translation: The laws should not apply to me and other black people because slavery, Jim Crow and all that.

We have evidence that warrants for violations are issued across the country in racially discriminatory fashion.

Yeah yeah, but YOU were doing 20 MPH over the speed limit, with a suspended license and a warrant out for your arrest due to YOU not paying YOUR ticket. What does the alleged "racially discriminatory fashion" have to do with YOUR PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY?

Note: I have never said that in my case that there was necessarily racial bias at work. I could not possibly know whether that was at issue. But I do know that I belong to the racial group to which this happens more frequently than any other.

Well she did say:

"I was treated inappropriately and disproportionately. The fact of my blackness is not incidental to this matter.''

That last part is what we call "high falutin'" talk for "I was arrested 'cause I'm black."

Moreover, as a consequence of the attention my words received in the media I have been subject to hundreds upon hundreds of racial slurs, gender slurs, threats and insults on social media, by telephone, on conservative blogs, and via email.

I will say this, I too have seen many many racial slurs sent Dr. Perry's way. Not even surprised by it. Won't even defend it. I have seen gender slurs directed her way. I won't denounce all of them because Perry herself made gender an issue when she discussed the topic. If she's going to use "vagina logic", then you get the insults you have coming to you. I don't agree with any threats to Perry's person in any way and encourage her to report those persons to the proper authorities. But I want to make note that she noted "conservative blogs". It is a damning commentary that she did not note that she was critiqued by those on "liberal blogs." There is simply no excuse for liberals to back Perry on her complete abandonment of her own personal responsibility in this matter. To use herself and her self created situation as some kind of example of black victimhood should not go unchecked by her so called supporters. Perry is and was *dead wrong* on all points and the people in her circle need to tell her so. Publicly.

Professor Perry Doesn't Pay Her Ticket, Gets Arrested, Blames Racism

Dr. Imani Perry of Princeton University is a prime example of the problems that black folks make for themselves that they then blame white people for. Let's review: 1) Perry has PA plates but apparently lives in NJ. If you change residency you are supposed to change your license to the state that you currently live in. Now a LOT of people don't bother with that and Perry wasn't arrested for that, but she could have been ticketed.

2) Perry received a parking ticket some 1-3 years ago that she failed to pay. I've gotten tickets I didn't pay, and you know what happens? They send you a notice that your license has been suspended. They may even put a warrant out for your arrest for contempt of court/failure to pay. Either way, you get a notice. If you don't want a cop pulling you over, you hop to and pay your ticket. Now Dr. Perry works for Princeton University. She's making decent money and is driving a rather newish Acura SUV. So she cannot use the Ferguson excuse that she is broke unless she's very bad with her finances. Instead of owning up to the fact that she got a ticket and failed to pay it. Instead of owning up to the fact that she DID get a notice that her license was suspended and a warrant was issued for her arrest, she decided to blame the police for following the directions.

Now I watched the video of the arrest and that was perhaps the most accommodating arrest I have witnessed. Ever. The officer was practically apologizing for having to follow protocol. This is something that is unlikely to have been done had Perry NOT been black, female and employed at Princeton U. What did Perry have to say after so much accommodation?

‘Yesterday, on my way to work, I was arrested in Princeton Township for a single parking ticket three years ago,’ she said in the statement. ‘The police refused to allow me to make a call before my arrest, so that someone would know where I was.

‘There was a male and a female officer, but the male officer did the body search before cuffing me and putting me in the squad car. I was handcuffed to a table at the station.

‘At any rate, I was afraid. Many women who look like me have a much more frightening end to such arrests.

‘But the larger point is that I'm working to move from being shaken to renewing my commitment to the struggle against racism & carcerality.'

So much bullshit, so little time. Note how Perry is appalled that she is actually being held responsible for a parking ticket she got for not following the parking rules somewhere. Would it have been so hard to accept responsibility for getting the ticket and failing to pay it in a timely manner? Is this the kind of example she sets for her students?

Secondly the officer asked her more than once if she had anyone she could contact so that they could take possession of her vehicle. That was an invite to a phone call. She declined. Oh. The. Fuck. Well. After declining to contact anyone to "let them know where she is" she complains that she was not allowed to call anyone. Well guess what? You get a call AFTER reaching the jail. That's the legal standard. But I suppose Dr. Perry thinks that she should be excepted from the rules (see parking ticket).

As to the body search, that was done off camera so I cannot say whether it was done properly or not. I suppose that searching by the female officer could have been done, but had that officer been with a male partner or no partner she was going to get searched anyway. And how sexist is she to act like a man cannot search a woman with taking advantage.

As for being cuffed to a table, I suppose Dr.Perry finds "Jail" to lowbrow to watch but if she spent time away from her fantasy world she would know that this is standard procedure when someone is arrested. They do not want you to hurt yourself or others, and yes people are known to get quite violent when arrested.

Dr. Perry was "afraid". Awww....I suppose the idea of being held responsible for your failure to follow the law can be a frightening experience and normal people would say to themselves and others: "Next time I get a ticket, I'm paying that shit quick!" But Perry was scared. Awwwww. But look at her trolling for concern. Many women who look like her have what?

Look, women see the inside of a police station as an arrested person very infrequently relative to men. Black women who are as educated as Dr, Perry and who live and work in relatively upscale neighborhoods rarely if ever see the inside of a police station much less the backseat of a cruiser so Dr. Perry ought to lean off the melodrama. While we can agree that Sandra Bland ought not have been arrested (much less ticketed for making way for a police cruiser), her death was at her own hands and largely because like Dr. Perry, she failed to control her emotions about her situation.

In a larger sense Dr. Perry is damseling. It was the big bad white cop against little black female me. Why couldn't he leave me alone? I thought these liberal professors were against damseling? *shrug*

Lastly, if Dr. Perry is so much against racism and carcerality (an academic term which I'm chuckling about), she would have taken this event as an example of HOW not to let race fuck up your day. She could have used her platform to show that if you are not hostile with the police, they are likely to not be hostile to you even if they have to arrest you. She also could have explained to young black people that if they break the law, including getting parking tickets, that they should be responsible and pay them. And if they cannot afford the entire ticket to make arrangements with the court. She could advise black folks that when they ignore the consequences of their law breaking (such as license suspensions and arrest warrants) that it isn't racism, it's their own irresponsibility and they need to own that.

Had Dr. Perry done so, she would have done far more to fight racism and "carcerality" than her whining, complaining and lack of responsibility for her own actions. The sadder part about this is that she is shaping young minds and Princeton is lending their reputation to such irresponsibility.

Interesting chart

Just saw this chart while perusing the web. Assuming that it is correct then the argument that fatherless homes and single parenting are a major contributor to crime is wrong. Iceland, Sweden and Norway have very low crime rates. A good portion of their crime rates are the result of actions of non-natives.

Akai Gurley Gets Justice

The Brooklyn DA did what the Queens DA failed to do in the case of Sean Bell. This is a model for future prosecution of police misconduct and negligence.

I learned from the Sean Bell case that many of us, including me at the time, considered every homicide to be a murder. We did not understand that a homicide can be many things including murder but that murder requires criminal intent. Unlike the common citizen,a police officer takes an oath to uphold the law and apprehend those engaged in criminal activity. The very job description makes it very hard to prove criminal intent when a police officer kills someone in the line of duty or under the color of law. One of the few ways you can prove such intent would be to run a sting and catch a police officer stating in no uncertain terms that what he or she is doing is against the law and they simply do not care.

Since very few police are dumb enough to get caught making such a clear statement of criminal intent, it is next to impossible to convict a police officer of murder. This is why even though Isnora shot two clips into Guzman (which IMO showed intent) he could get away with the argument that he feared for his life and all that jazz.

Hence when you go after a police officer in court you hit him with a charge that only requires neglect or disregard for life, etc.

Manslaughter and/or criminally negligent homicide is when you don't have the intent to kill anyone but through one's actions someone is dead. Furthermore it is reasonable to believe that you should have known that the actions would have lead to the death of an individual. This is the charge that Liang was found guilty of and it fits. Let's understand why:

Liang, a rookie officer who was on stairs patrol, discharged his weapon in a stairwell that is used by residents and their guests, when he heard a sound. He was startled and pulled the trigger which his finger was already on.

“I heard something on my left side ... It startled me (then) the gun just went off,” Liang testified during the trial.

Firstly, as I've said many times, guns are inanimate objects, they do not "just go off". Liang is STILL not taking responsibility for pulling the trigger. Also as others have said: if this individual was so nervous about the job, he should not have been there. After the shooting, Liang and his partner argued about who would call the shooting in and failed to give first aid to Gurley as he lay bleeding to death.

Liang said he initially thought he’d accidentally fired his weapon but not hit anyone. He and Landau bickered over who should report the screwup, and Liang eventually called his sergeant’s cell phone — instead of reporting it over the radio, which is recorded.

This would be an attempt to cover up the shooting. Liang and his partner showed a reckless disregard for the lives of residents when they let this nervous rookie walk the darkened staircase with a nervous trigger finger. As someone who often uses stairs simply because I like the exercise, I could easily have been a victim of such disregard for public safety. I'm certain that the jurors (at least some of them) could see this as well.

At this point I'd like to point out that comparisons to Eric Garner are NOT appropriate. Garner, whether we like it or not, was engaged in behavior that under NY law would lead to arrest. While we can agree that he should not have been put in a choke hold AND that laws against selling "loosies" are of questionable value, Eric Garner was going to be arrested whether he wanted to or not because he broke the law. In the case of Gurley, there were no laws broken. There was no reason for him to have any contact with a police officer and ought never have met a bullet in the staircase. He was as innocent as you get.

Slowly They Wake

Reading Vincent Emmanuel's piece in Counterpunch entitled The Cures and Failure of Identity Politics reminded me of how I woke up to the growing cancer in left policies. I woke up to the issue of identity politics when Obama was running for office. By all merit based measures H. Clinton should have won the presidency. She had the experience that Obama lacked, whether you agreed with her or not. Obama, on strict merit shouldn't have made it past his first primary. Yet millions of people backed Obama because he was black. It was identity over experience. It was the logical conclusion of Race First ideology.

Now coming from a Garveyite such a comment on Race First as an ideology may sound strange. Indeed there is a time and place for Race First programs. There are also times and places where it does no good. Garveyism isn't about Race First as much as it is a nationalist ideology. Nationalism is not predicated on race. To run a nation you need rules and you need to enforce them. Hence Race First is really Race somewhere down the line when you REALLY think on it. Anyway in the liberal (I will no longer refer to any of them as "progressive") side, identity politics has become the religion above all religions. It's absurd notions that only those in a certain identity can speak about that identity or that certain identities, usually the most fringe of them are not only above critique but are to be favoured is starting to wear thin on those who are willing to examine.

I think we’ve all had enough of the bullshit: identity politics has been a curse to leftist movements in the U.S. for far too long. How could anyone argue otherwise?

Yes. Thanks. Welcome to 2006. At least for me anyway.

During the Obama years, leftists were chastised for their critiques, with many, including myself, being accused of racism. Racism, really? I’ve spent the last ten years of my life dedicated to progressive social movements, yet I’m a racist because I think that Barack Obama is an imperialist scumbag? Piss off…

I saw a lot of people who were anti-war and anti-imperialist suddenly become war apologists and imperialists as soon as Obama took office. In fact I was so disgusted by their clear hypocrisy on the matter that I no longer even deal with such persons. And of course we have the idea that one must be racist to disagree with Obama is patently false.

Today, the same is happening in the context of Hillary Clinton’s run for U.S. President. Any and all critiques of Hillary are deemed “sexist” by HRC’s bootlickers.

Because vagina of course.

The best part of the interview was Bertha’s statement that, “If you want to see a revolution, then elect a female president!” Indeed, Bertha may be right: under Thatcher, the U.K. underwent quite a revolution, although not the type of revolution leftists would like to see.

Yes, this is the trope that women can do no harm and that all things wrong in the world are the doing of men. Oh and of course the revolutionaries who don't even know the first thing about hand to hand combat but love to have the state (that they are revoluting against I suppose) use it's monopoly on violence to get what they want.

However, the Curse of Identity Politics isn’t relegated to the electoral sphere: I’ve been told by activists that the U.S. can’t pull out of Afghanistan because women will be treated worse.

Imperialism anyone?

And I’ve been told that because black and brown people overwhelmingly support Democrats, I too should support the “lesser of two evils.”

Black and brown people also kill at astronomical numbers, should he do that too?

When I sat on the board of directors of an national antiwar organization, we talked about meeting ethnic, racial and gender quotas as much as we talked about ending wars and militarism

Because this is what they are about. They are not building anything, they just want to do a numbers game. That is there thing and they aren't even good at math.

In fact, during one strategy retreat in Chicago, we started out each day by exploring what pronouns each of us would prefer to use. Yes, this is what modern activism, for some, has turned into.

Well when you don't have to worry about survival you can spend time on that kind of bullshit. Also when you are supporting bullshit like trans-genderism, you spend time on that kind of bullshit. See in the sane world there are "he" and "she" and persons with medical conditions (physical or mental).

Young women are tired of hearing about the first female U.S. President – they’re interested in policies that will actually help the vast majority of females in the U.S., not bourgeois feminism aimed at the dwindling white middle-class.

Let me translate this for race. Black people are waking up and will get tired of hearing about police brutality- they are interested in policies that will actually help the vast majority of black poor in the US who suffer from epidemic levels of crime. Not college educated wanna be revolutionaries who think anti-white is pro-black and is doing any good.

The real question is: how long are we going to play the identitarian game? In 2020, will we have to go through the same song and dance with a centrist Latino or LGBTQ candidate? I sure hope not.

As long as those in power are too weak to say "no" to these bully groups and deal with them forcefully.

I would argue that the more the identitarians try and play their identitarian games, the more they will lose support and standing in progressive communities

I agree 100%. What drove me to be hostile to feminism was the entire Black Male Privilege nonsense with the cherry on top being the total acceptance of "rape culture - teach men not to rape" bullshit. The more they do this the more people will leave. I'll see them on the other side of the court.

Already, young black activists with Black Lives Matter and various other community organizations are challenging the dominant liberal narrative that having people of color in powerful positions will automatically result in better conditions for people of color.

The BLM group is perhaps the most ill informed group among the identity set. That information has been known by actual black scholars and nationalists for a long ass time. This is what happens when you let the children take over.

As a result, my black activist friends are not interested in replacing a white police chief with a black police chief.

I'll go out on a limb and say his black friends are not all that informed. If they were they'd be concerned with why there needs to be a police chief in black neighborhoods at all. Once they figured that out, they'd be not very concerned with the police chief at all.

In many ways, the identitarians have already lost the ideological battle. After all, Latinos are being deported in record numbers, African Americans are worse off today than they were prior to Obama taking office, and women are facing unprecedented attacks from religious conservatives.

And here we see that Vincent has not fully come to understand the problem. He still has to think he's "progressive". See Latinos should be getting deported in record numbers, because Latinos have been entering the country illegally in record numbers. This is what a sovereign nation does: protect it's borders and looks out for the welfare of it's citizens.

I remember a YouTube video posted by some black guy back when Obama was first elected to office. In that video he said that he bets that black folks would be worse off after Obama than before. look, you can't have high levels of illegal (and legal) immigration and improved job prospects for black folks at the same time. You cannot have high levels of illegal and legal immigration and have improved political representation prospects at the same time. You cannot have high levels of illegal and legal immigration of non-English speakers and have increased funding for predominantly black schools. Thinking black folks know this.

And lastly exactly what "unprecedented attacks" have women had by religious conservatives is this guy talking about? Religious conservatives have lost major rights in the past 8 years. Being made to fund birth control they do not agree with. Made to cater weddings of gay couples when they have a moral objection to doing so. Being told by state agencies that they will be fined for calling a man a man and a woman a woman. Schools tossing the constitutional rights of males accused of sexual assault. These are unprecedented alright!

Vincent is beginning to see what is wrong with his chosen ideology but doesn't quite yet understand that it is the ideology that is the problem. Identity politics is but one of the fruits of this ideology. As of this writing vincent is like someone who doesn't like the taste of the apples but thinks it has nothing to do with the tree.

The Problem With Implicit Bias

Social scientists have come up with a thing called "implicit bias". What it tries to show that you can predict behavior based on the biases of a subject. So if a subject says they think that everyone is the same, implicit bias will "reveal" that they actually don't think so and act in a manner consistent with that bias. This is similar to what we refer to as "revealed preferences".

In revealed preferences we look at what people actually do as opposed to what they say they will do or say the prefer. So for example liberals who claim to highly value diversity are often shown to actually live in very not diverse places. They say they believe in diverse schools, but when their children arrive, they quickly move to neighborhoods with very little diversity or diverse as in "lots of Asians".

But back to implicit bias. What the current SJW thinking [sic] tells us is that people act in accordance to their biases when in fact people often act in opposition to their biases, particularly when life and death are not in consideration.

The finding suggests that while white officers may have an “implicit bias” to associate blacks more quickly with danger, they hesitated longer to react, explained Lois James, lead researcher and assistant professor at the university's College of Nursing.

“That’s the driving message of our paper, implicit biases do not predict how people will behave,” James said.

There it is.

The Year Of The Monkey

Yesterday began the Chinese New Year which is the year of the Monkey. I guess that in some way this is a sign of how things have gone. What do I mean? Well lets start with this:

The Sacramento Kings basketball team had to cancel giving away Lunar New Year shirts celebrating the Year of the Monkey on Monday after a player noted the shirts could be deemed offensive during Black History month.

Could be deemed offensive? By whom? Imbeciles who are so ignorant that they are unaware of how the Chinese lunar calendar works and are so self centered that they think anything that is offensive in one context is racist in all contexts. But it's bad enough that this imbecile kicked up a fuss about something that wasn't racist n the least bit, but that the Sacramento Kings so called "leadership" caved to the imbecile.

'I walk into the building and DeMarcus Cousins calls me over to an animated discussion he's having with Kings operations people. He [asks] me, "Olskool, what you think about this T-shirt? Told him a little insensitive on first day of Black History Month." They pulled the shirts,' said Johnson on his Facebook page.

Who decided that this imbecile was the go to person on black issues? And how does black hypersensitivity trump thousands of years of Chinese culture?

'We all need a lesson in sensitivity,' Kings president Chris Granger said, according to the Sacramento Bee.

No, We need leadership willing to say "no" to self centered, self-important groups that make issues of things that are not issues.

In an effort to celebrate Chinese New Year, we had some concerns about the T-shirt giveaway, so we pulled them all before the doors opened. Certainly we don't want to offend anybody, and we acted as soon as we heard the concern,' he added. Johnson commended Cousins for pointing out the potential offense the shirts could have caused. 'Good move Kings. Year of Monkey Tees on 1st day of Black History Month not a good look. Thanks DeMarcus...,' Johnson tweeted along with a photos of the staff taking away the shirts.

This is a sad case of giving in to ridiculous claims. Anyone who would have been offended are stupid *cencored* who should have been ridiculed in all corners. Meanwhile in Chicago:

CHICAGO — The nation's third largest city recorded 51 homicides in January, the highest toll for the month since at least 2000...here were also 2,900 shootings, 13% more than the year prior, according to police department records.

But, Year of the Monkey.

This highlights the problem. The real deal issues affecting black folks are given little to no attention by the leadership. When attention is paid to the real deal issues affecting black folks, the blame is externalized, the solutions are externalized. Black folks are held to no adult standards and are denied agency in the creation and solutions to their problems. Instead, like the non-controversy that is the Year of the Monkey, liberal white folks allow the whiney children (that would be black folks) to get what they want (externalized blame and lack of self control) and everybody else has to tip toe on eggshells.

Meanwhile, 51 dead and 2900 shootings. Not important in the least bit. Better to discuss the kid shot 16 times while high on drugs, with a deadly weapon who cannot follow directions.

Meanwhile other minorities have just learned that imbeciles hold a veto power over their cultural celebrations. How long until they start to see black people as the enemy?

Boko Haram Burns Kids Alive

A survivor hidden in a tree says he watched Boko Haram extremists firebomb huts and heard the screams of children among people burned to death in the latest attack by Nigeria's homegrown Islamic extremists.

And,

The violence continued as three female suicide bombers blew up among people who managed to flee to neighboring Gamori village, killing many people, according to a soldier at the scene who insisted on anonymity because he is not authorized to speak to journalists.

It was not known how many scores of people were killed because bodies still were being collected, including from the surrounding bushes where the insurgents hunted down fleeing villagers, according to Abba Shehu, a security guard helping collect corpse [my underlines]

I'm going to ask the question: Were any of the 3 women the "missing girls"? If so, did they blow themselves up or were they remote detonated? If they blew themselves up were they under threat of death?

Lastly; I'm sure somewhere in some university a professor is blaming some white person somewhere, or maybe the explosives. Yahoo News

Lead Poisoning in Baltimore

A few months back I mentioned the use of lead paint on products from China in Africa. The Guardian has an article on the high levels of lead paint and poisoning in mostly black Baltimore.

But Saul Kerpelman, a lawyer who has handled thousands of lead cases, says these numbers don’t really show the extent of the problem. Those numbers, he said, are calculated based on a blood lead level (BLL) of 10 micrograms per deciliter (mg/dl). But the CDC has recently determined that any amount of lead in a child’s blood can immediately and irreversibly cause brain damage. Kerpelman said that if you cut the BLL number in half to the current threshold number of 5 mg/dl, there could be as many as 4,000 cases in Baltimore last year and if the acceptable lead level were set to zero, it could be as many as 10,000 exposed children. Kerpelman said that out of the more than 4,000 cases he has dealt with, “99% are black”.

And who owns the property?

Many of the same absentee landlords come up in these cases over and over again. “If you type Stanley Rochkind into Maryland case search, his name comes up over 500 times,” Kerpelman said. One of those cases was a suit filed by Freddie Gray, who lived in a Rochkind-owned home as a young boy and tested with a blood lead level of between 11 and 19 mg/dl. He suffered from the effects of lead poisoning, which studies have linked to decreased IQ and short and long-term memory impairment, causing numerous related social problems.

Rochkind? The same Rochkind in this 2010 article?

“The consistency needs to be there in terms of fining these property owners. Honestly, some of them should be in jail. When you break a law enough times you should run the risk of coming before the judge who says you’re done,” she said.

Agreed 100%.

What I'm wondering about here is whether there is/was a situation whereby if a residence was found to have lead paint, it would mean that the occupants would have to leave. I do know that in some cases, like in Detroit with the water issues, inspectors and social workers would not report on conditions that would lead to removal (particularly of children) in order to not create a homeless situation.

On the other hand if the inspections would not result in a loss of occupancy (though I don't see how as the old paint has to be removed before new paint can be applied and anyone who's watched an HGTV show knows, you don't live in a residence while that kind of stuff is going on) then the inspector must be protecting the property owner. If that is the case, then I'd think that there could be RICO statute involvement.

Either way, Baltimore is suffering enough from low IQ persons causing mayhem. We don't need lead paint caused low IQ adding to the problem.

The Donald Strikes Back

Establishment media and politicians are shocked and awed that Donald Trump has decided to skip the last debate before the Iowa Caucuses. They are trying to say that this shows that Trump can't handle the media and therefore cannot handle being head of state. As usual the establishment is wrong.

Last week the establishment went out of it's way to go against the Republican front runner. The National Review has endangered it's 501c3 status by publishing a collection of essays AND editorializing against Trump. Many other establishment outlets have allowed their outlets to be used to do an "anybody but Trump" blitz. So what does Trump do?

In a stroke of daring genius Trump has said that if the establishment wants to shit on his candidacy then they won't be making free money off him. All the Republican debates with Trump in them have been maga hits for ratings. This means that they are very good sources of advertising revenue for the hosts. Why should Trump allow them to make money off of him while they do everything they can to stop him from winning?

Don't be distracted by the Megyn Kelly reporting. That's not the real deal here. Kelly is a useful idiot in this drama. This helps Trump among any group that is tired of the establishment status quo. With this move Trump shows that he's willing to go large when he goes against his adversaries. This is real alpha male leadership. This is leadership that doesn't respond to polls it determines the polls. To put a sports analogy out there. Trump is skating to where he wants (or sees) the puck to be, not where it is or has been.

What Is Apple's Incentive?

A few days ago I posted on the Apple Shareholder proposal about diversifying it's board and executive team. Here' the thing:

Good afternoon, everyone, and thank you very much for joining us. Today, we’re reporting Apple’s strongest financial results ever. We generated all-time record quarterly revenue of 75.9 billion dollars in the December quarter, in line with our expectations, and have 2 percent over last year’s blockbuster results.

Apple has just had it's "all time record quarterly revenue" with the "diversity" it has. What incentive does it have to make any changes whatsoever? I'm not arguing that black folks ought not be hired by Apple or aggressively recruited by Apple. What I am saying is what financial leverage, what performance leverage can the diversity crowd have to show that if Apple doesn't do what it asks, that Apple will suffer?

This is the stark, hard core, stone cold fact that many have to deal with. Without the blacks and the women, these companies make large bank and great products (when they do). When companies ride the SJW bandwagon they get like, oh, Twitter. Who wants to be the one who runs their company into the ground while saying "I was doing the right thing"?

Even the people who made that the latest Star Wars. The companies are practically 100% white. Bodega may be on screen but folks who look like him are STILL absent in the animation companies. Why? Again I ask: What is the incentive?

Because We Don't Expect Negroes To...

last year I made it a point to make it clear that Liberals generally speaking do not see black people as fully grown, responsible people. They claim that they believe in the equality of persons yet their actions show that this is not the case. The NY City Council has given us the latest example:

“We know that the system has been really rigged against communities of color in particular,” said Ms. Mark-Viverito, who has promoted such reforms and is the main sponsor of the bills. “So the question has always been, what can we do in this job to minimize unnecessary interaction with the criminal justice system, so that these young people can really fulfill their potential?”

Rigged against communities of color? Say what kinds of laws are these?

. Instead, they focus on several types of offenses covered by the city’s administrative code, including littering, public urination, public consumption of alcohol, excessive noise and breaking certain park rules.

Because negroes cannot be expected to not pee in pubic. Seriously. Had this woman simply wanted to remove offenses because she thought them to simply be unnecessary then she would have said so. But no, Laws against peeing in public are "rigged against communities of color" because? Negroes cannot be expected to not pee in public. That's the only reason you can give for the statement "rigged against communities of color"

You know what a "rigged" law is? Man-spreading. Which of course a "person of color" was the first to be fined for.

But laws against littering? Well everyone knows that Negroes can't help but litter. It's RACIST to expect Negroes to not litter and pee in public. Oh and park rules. EVERYBODY knows Negroes aren't capable of understanding "closed at dusk" signs in parks. And because of the systemic, institutional racism, they can't stay home and do shit like:

Homework
read
Interact with children they may have
work

Stuff like that. But no, it's racist to expect Negroes to follow the law. Those laws are racist and made by white heterosexual men with the purpose of "rigging" against "communities of color."

Since these folks allegedly wish to "fulfill their potential". How about insisting and expecting that they follow the law? Not pee in public, smoke in public, drop shit in the street and stay out the park after dark?

Jews Leave France in Record Numbers

Ashdod, Israel (CNN)Yoav Krief remembers the day he knew it was time to move to Israel: January 9, 2015.

It was a Friday. Four Jews had just been killed in the Hyper Cacher, a kosher supermarket in Paris, two days after the Charlie Hebdo attack. One of them was Krief's friend.

"I was not good, really not good," Krief says of how he felt at the time. "I talked to my mom, and I said, 'We must go to Israel. We need to go to Israel.'"

CNN Two points:

1) These same media outlets like to tell us that the greatest threat to France and the french is FN.

2) BLM folks in America. If it's so bad, why haven't they moved to any Caribbean country or Africa? Taking the example of the Jews in France. People who find a situation intolerable, move to places where they feel safer, so do BLM people REALLY feel so threatened by police?

Here there is a feeling of security that no longer exists in France. Twenty years ago, maybe yes. But since the year 2000, there no longer is that feeling of security in France."

Say, what has been happening to the population of France since around 2000? Who knows, maybe it's not the FN that are the real anti-semites. Oui?

Diversity For Thee

I've commented on how certain tech companies like to talk about diversity when their leadership isn't. Apple is one of those companies. Today I read that it feels that the call to diversify it's ranks with colored people is an "unduly burden".

Last year, Apple CEO Tim Cook sang the praises of a diverse workforce. He said diversity is a "readily solvable issue" that can be fixed.

I'm sure he had a Staples "easy" button with him when he said it too.

but Apple's board of directors opposes a new proposal to increase diversity among its board and senior management.

The proposal, submitted by Apple shareholder Antonio Avian Maldonado, would require an accelerated recruitment policy to change the company's organizational makeup.

I haven't seen the actual proposal so I can't comment on the actual details of the proposal but it is worth noting the following:

Apple's executive team, like many of the other major tech firms, is overwhelmingly white and male. Out of 18 positions, there are three women -- two of whom are black. The other 15 roles are filed by white men.

One should note that the two black female executives are in HR and "Environment, Policy and Social Initiatives". Decidedly non-technicalroles in the tech company. And I'm quite certain that the latter position is a newly created one. This isn't to diminish the work that these women do, but it follows the pattern I have seen, including in my own employment, where the leadership of technology services and products are filled by Europeans or Asians. Mind you there are data related reasons for this. Europeans and Asians make up the vast majority of those with computer degrees and their share increases as you move into the more advanced degrees. Also in Apple's case not a few of the people on the executive team are long time employees who, in all fairness, earned their positions. For the complexion of Apple's executive team to change, there would have to be a long term hiring and promotion plan for non-whites and non-Asians. Good luck with that.

More Deadly Than An ISIS Inspired Shooting

These were not police involved shootings. These were not the result of "over militarized" police. These were not the result of white supremacists rolling through the hood seeing who they could lynch. These were not the results of a mentally unstable man who read up on black crime statistics. This is worse than the big two attacks by Islamic radicals in France.

On April 19, Freddie Gray’s death touched off protests and civil unrest in Baltimore. In May, the city had 42 homicides — which at that point, was among its deadliest months in decades. There were 29 homicides in June and another 45 in July. For the rest of the year, Baltimore averaged 31 homicides a month. [my underlines]

In what society is a killing a day acceptable? Where are the protests?

Statistics show that 320 victims of homicide in Baltimore were black, 19 were white, three were Hispanic and two were listed as other. There were 22 women killed.

In all, 322 adults and 22 juveniles were killed in 2015, including 10 children under the age of 10, and 12 children and teenagers from 10 to 17. Ninety-one of the homicide victims were from 18 to 24 years old, 133 were from 25 to 34, and five were 60 years old or older.

320+19+3+2+22=366. One person dead. Every. Day. And these people in the Black Lives Matter movement claim that there is no such thing as "black on black crime" as an epidemic.

The ISIS killers in France killed 128 people . Black people in Baltimore, and we're only counting Baltimore killed that many people over 5 months and doubled that number by the end of the year AND will likely do so again.

Why do we tolerate this? Today is the observation of MLK Jr's birthday. A man who said that people should be judged by the content of their character. What kind of character, both individual and group, is more outraged, is more moved to action by the death of a single person, who sold drugs in our community, while in police custody, than the genocidal levels of killings at the hands of our own children?

Now some may say "genocidal levels" is a bit strong. People often equate "genocide" with "extermination". That is not necessarily the case. One can use genocidal techniques to control a population. Genocide only requires the murder of large numbers of a given population.

In 2012 the average class size in Baltimore was 34 students. Think about that. Every month, on average and entire classroom full of black people were killed. That's worse than the worst school shooting in American history, which took the lives of 20 children.

If we look at the results and only examine the persons of school age (including college) we get 22 "juveniles" and 91 "18 to 24 year olds". That's a total of 113 persons of school age. That's 3/1/3 classrooms of dead future fathers husbands, workers, etc. gone. Poof! If we add in the 133 25-34 year olds, persons in what we consider the prime living years, that's another 4 classrooms gone. And that's THIS YEAR ALONE and in ONE CITY!

If you are a parent or a teacher, when you go to school tomorrow with your child (or to teach them), I want you to imagine that 7-8 of those classrooms full of energetic children being gone. And then imaging knowing that another 7-8 of them will be gone next year. Doesn't that bother you? Are you now seeing why the BLM has everything WRONG?

Examining Sabrina Fulton's Endorsement of H. Clinton

Everybody has a right to endorse whomever they want for president (or any other elected office). They can do so for any reason they want as well. Personally, I am of the opinion that your voting decisions ought to be private. The reason for this is that some people will attempt to bully others for not sharing their preferred candidate. In some countries, support for the "wrong" candidate can get one killed. On the other hand, I think that if you are going to publicly declare your support for a candidate your public statements as to the reasons are fair game. To this end I have to discuss the issues with Fulton's endorsement of Clinton.

Of course we know why she was picked rather than say the family of Kate Steinle. Don't know who she is? Well that's partially the point ennit?

So lets get on with it.

(CNN)Today, throughout many communities of color, our young people go about their lives feeling as if they are a target in their country. It's become a sad fact of life that senseless gun violence can strike with little or no warning, either from neighborhoods that have become flooded with firearms, or police who are too quick to resort to deadly force.

"A target in their country"? Target of whom? Isn't that a relevant question? guns do not "commit" violence. People use guns to commit violence. Who are the people committing these acts of senseless violence. The statistics, as we have shown that police are the least likely agent of death of black males in the US. Statistics also show that the vast majority of the time the people who are killed by the police were either involved in a crime or failed to follow directions. Therefore, they, the dead, are often directly responsible for their own demise by the decisions they made.

Gun violence is an epidemic that kills 33,000 men, women, boys and girls every year. On top of those needless deaths, law enforcement agencies in America kill more people in a month than many other countries' police forces kill in years.

How does Mrs. Fulton know what all 33,000 persons killed did not "need" to happen? Does Ms Fulton think that those who take a life to defend their own are wrong for doing so? And that includes police who are tasked with dealing with people whom the vast majority of us are too scared to deal with. As for other countries, we should note a few things:

1) The US has the highest level of violent crime of all western countries when we do NOT account for immigrant/refugee crimes. Where there is less crime there is less interaction with police, where there are less interactions with police there are less chances of a suspect/criminal to be killed.

2) As we have seen in Rotherham and Germany and Sweden and France, etc. European police, at the orders of their governments have been not enforcing laws when certain non-white groups commit them. In some cases police have given up on policing certain places.

3) In places such as Japan, you do not have many persons there who are not the native population AND you have a shame culture that discourages much of the criminal activity that we witness in the US. Of course in America, if you discuss cultural roots of crime you are labeled a racist/sellout depending on your ancestry.

4) Has Ms. Fulton seen the crime stats out of South Africa? Continuing:

Losing a child is any parent's worst fear. As a mother who has had to live that horrible nightmare in a very public spotlight, I hope that by speaking out, it will help focus some of that light onto a path that can help our nation find its way out of this darkness.

People who's worst fear is to lose a child does everything in their power to make sure the environment that they live in is safe and that their kids are properly socialized. Fact is that for a lot of parents in "communities of color" their worst fear is their kid being "soft".

Last week, President Barack Obama took some important steps that included strengthening the background check system for purchasing guns without diminishing our Second Amendment rights. I was glad to see these actions put in place, and was moved by the tears of not just our President but of a father who clearly understands my anguish.

None of the "actions" taken by Obama would have changed a single shooting, including the one that took Ms. Fulton's son's life. Of course in the case of San Bernadino, that shooting could have been prevented, and SHOULD have been prevented by a sane immigration policy. Kate would be alive today if those elected officials did their job and removed illegal immigrants from their states. Of course Ms. Fulton doesn't mention any of that, after all, her dead son is more important than some dead white chick or workers at a party.

As for the "diminishing" second amendment rights, I saw similar arguments over the weekend. People like Fulton seem to be unaware of gradualism. We have had cases in Conn and NY where there were new gun laws passed, usually in speedy sessions with little if any public input in which the population is compelled to turn in guns that they legally purchased. Many of the citizens have rightfully refused to give up their arms and munitions. This is how "rights are diminished". It's like a cancer. Cancer ALWAYS starts out small. A single mutated cell. You don't even KNOW the mutated cell is there and a threat to your life. In many cases, by the time you notice the cancer, it's already too late. Oh you might get lucky and get a bit of extra time with some medication, but most times, in spite of all the commercials you see, you're soon dead.

Those of us who understand the nature of gradualism know the danger of "small laws". Just as importantly, these laws, that simply punish the law abiding, which is the vast majority of us, and do nothing to address the criminal class who, hint hint, don't care about the law. For example, a lawmaker was talking about guns brought from gun shows "down south" that make their way to Connecticut and are used in crimes. He said they trace those guns to those shows. Well we have a law against purchasing a gun that is not for yourself. That's called a straw purchase and it is illegal. There's a law for that.

But next year we will have a new president. And everything Obama has done -- even common-sense reforms that a majority of gun owners agree with -- will be overturned if that president is a Republican. In fact, the Republican candidates have vowed to roll back all of these sensible measures. And many of them have shown open contempt for the simple notion that Black Lives Matter.

I'm not a Republican and I have contempt for the Black Lives Matter movement. The BLM movement has shown itself to be opposed to facts and they ought to be treated with the contempt that is owed to those who peddle in lies. See, I'm not one of those people who fall in line because someone uses the phrase "common sense". This is because most of the time those who claim to be using "common sense" don't have any. Common sense says that if black lives matter and black lives are 95% taken by other blacks, that the issue isn't police but blacks. But doing so means we can't be making excuses for our failures. As I've said before the BLM movement is like the alcoholic who insists that his problem is the bar and the bartender. The fact of the matter is that unless the second amendment is repealed there are no constitutional gun laws that will reduce homicides in black communities (or suicides in white ones).

With so many of our children's lives on the line or taken, we simply can't afford to elect a Republican who refuses even to acknowledge the problem of senseless gun violence. The rising generation of our young people need a president who will stand up to inaction from Republicans and indifference from the National Rifle Association.

Because Republicans are responsible for black men shooting other black men.

This is the most assinine statement so far. It's not black folks fault that we shoot each other at 7x the white population. It's the fault of Republicans, most of whom do not live in, do business in or otherwise interact with our people. And if you believe that Republicans do no acknowledge the problem of gun violence you really shouldn't be allowed to vote. Seriously. Not even allowed in the place of polling. What Republicans generally don't agree with is the idea that law abiding people should be restricted and punished for those who are determined to commit crimes.

I believe that person is Hillary Clinton.

Well you can believe in Santa Clause too if you want.

I know Clinton is tough enough to wage this fight. I've seen her do it for years. As first lady, she advocated for the Brady Bill and convened meetings on school violence. As a senator, she voted to extend the assault weapons ban and against an immunity law that protects irresponsible gun makers and dealers from liability.

What exactly is an "irresponsible gun maker"? Are we talking about product liability? Is this like if a gun is poorly manufactured and kills someone as a result? Or is this trying to displace blame for a homicide onto a lawfully operating business?

n spending some time with her in person, I also found a mother and a grandmother who truly heard me, and understood the depth of my loss.

Because leadership should be based on feelings.

She knew all the statistics. But like so many, I've long since grown numb to the numbers. So instead, we talked about Trayvon and other families who have lost a loved one to gun violence.

If she "knew the statistics" then she was looking at you like a damn fool. But I wont comment negatively on Trayvon since the facts as I know them point to him defending himself against an armed stalker who killed his target. But I wouldn't pass a law over that.

And knowing we can never get them back, we discussed how to prevent more moms from losing their sons to gun violence.

Ahh the perpetual liberal fantasy pitch. There will be a world where people don't die and are not raped. We can pass enough laws to make it so. It's the liberal version of "When We All Get To Heaven". No wonder so many people describe liberalism as a religion.

Just as importantly, Clinton also wants to address the larger, systemic problems. She has a plan to begin to heal the distrust and divide that too often exists between law enforcement and the communities they serve.

Simple solution to the "distrust". "Snitch" and stop making heros out of criminals.

She has called for key reforms -- from better training for officers to eliminating racial profiling and investing in body cameras for every police department. She sees what I see: a criminal justice system that is not always just. A system that has contributed to creating a reality where just selling cigarettes, playing loud music, looking at a cop the wrong way or walking home from the store are now activities that can get you killed.

Now if she had said an end to "stop and frisk" I would have been on board. But when black males are committing crimes at 7X the rate of whites and in some cities are responsible for 100% of gun homicides, a level of profiling is going to happen. It is good policing. There are ways to profile that do not violate the constitution, but acting as if everyone is committing the same crimes at the same rates is wishful thinking.

The reference to Eric Garner is a good example of liberal laws gone bad. Selling loosies affects two things liberals go for:

1) Taxes on cigarettes. This goes to raise money for the state. You want all those social programs? You gotta find money for them. So the state goes after untaxed cigarette sales in order to make sure they get that money. So take that up with the governors.

2) "Think about the kids": This is the other argument agains the sales of loosies. Supposedly those selling cigarettes on the street are leading minors into cigarette smoking, heavily frowned upon by liberals (I do not smoke). So the enforcement of these laws are to protect the vulnerable children. Is Fulton FOR endangering the lives of children?

People need to think about the laws they pass. The state WILL use force, including deadly force, to enforce the laws passed by legislative bodies. If you won't kill to enforce a law, then don't pass it. Recently in NY a "person of color" was arrested for "manspreading" on a subway. You can thank a feminist liberal from criminalizing how man sit. Hillary for president indeed.

If you look at the numbers, America is missing 1.5 million men of color -- lost to a system of violence and mass incarceration that seems to have long since forgotten them, but we haven't.

Keys go missing. People who commit crimes and end up in jail because of them are not "missing". We know where they are, why they are there and often when they will be released. The biggest problem with statements such as the above is that it is so passive. Violence and "mass incarceration" just "happen" to black men. Like they woke up one morning, stepped out their homes and got grabbed up by masked men in a dark van and rendered to some black site (well that has been happening in Chicago but that's another discussion).

Here's the problem with this endorsement: It is Democratic Party talking points set in an essay. It externalizes the problems facing black people and externalizes the solutions. It fails to hold the Democratic governors, mayors and legislators (among others) for their multiple failures and asks us to ignore all that and vote for another Democrat. It is emblematic of the serious problem with current American politics. It isn't fact based. It is emotion based. Emotion based governance is getting people killed. Time to put a stop to it.

This Is Not Blackface

People need to get a life. Chick needs to put the picture back up. Say "No" to the lefty bullies who live to be offended. If you need to know what Blackface is, I explain it here

Blackface "minstreling" was done with the sole purpose of employing white persons to play the white supremacist idea of a "common" black person for the sole purpose of entertainment of white persons at the expense of the humanity of black persons. THAT is the defining characteristic of Blackface performance.

If you can't be bothered to make distinctions then shut your hole.

The Baltimore Sun and the Revealed Preferences Of White Liberals

A while back I got into contact with the authors of a paper about what white people thought about diverse neighborhoods. Their "research" revealed that white people generally were very positive about diverse neighborhoods (with the assumption that non-diverse neighborhoods were "bad"). When I contacted the authors I asked one question:

How many of the respondents actually live in a "diverse" neighborhood? And wouldn't you think that what the respondents actually did with their money (or living arrangements) be more representative of their preferences than what they told some random person on the phone?

I never got a reply. I wonder why.

Revealed preferences is nothing new to those of us who have been paying attention. Many people on the left say they think that black people are "equal" and yet are keen to run programs and pass laws and protest in ways that make it clear that they think black people are, by and large, children who are in need of benificent white guidance or in at the least, less rigorous standards and expectations of behavior. Mike Brown mad about being asked to not walk down the middle of the street? We shouldn't expect him to respect authority. "Authority" is triggering.

Black man asked to stay in his car while the police run the plates on the car he's driving? Oh no! The black man should be excused for running, after all he has to deal the prison industrial complex that is trying to get him into jail for no good reason at all.

Black folks shooting each other? Clearly it's the fault of white people who don't live anywhere near them and the gun itself. I mean black people cannot help themselves but to shoot each other when a gun is present. I mean it's a GUN!

Yes, when we look at what left leaning folks say about black people, it reveals exactly what they think of us. Now the Baltimore Sun provides us with the first(?) example of the new year.

I'm less afraid of the criminals wielding guns in Baltimore, I declared as we discussed the issue, than I am by those permitted gun owners.

You know, there are times when I am writing blog entries where I get to a point where I write something that completely discredits the entire piece. They live on as drafts. My general philosophy is that if I cannot construct a proper argument then I don't post the piece. Tricia Bishop ought to abide by such thinking. What she has said here is that she is more afraid of permitted, meaning legal, owners of guns than she is of people who are not permitted. She may as well just declared that she is a jackass. Why is she less afraid of criminals in Baltimore?

I know how to stay out of the line of Baltimore's illegal gunfire; I have the luxury of being white and middle class in a largely segregated city that reserves most of its shootings for poor, black neighborhoods overtaken by "the game." The closest I typically get to the action is feeling the chest-thumping vibrations of the Foxtrot police helicopter flying overhead in pursuit of someone who might be a few streets over, but might as well be a world away. [my underlines]

Translation: I made damn well sure to live away from black folks so I could feel safe from the crime they commit. In order to not feel guilty about it, I pop shit about my white gun owning neighbors who don't commit crimes.

There was a time in the US when it was assumed that every household had at least one gun (unless the occupant was a pacifist vegetarian) and that any child with reasonable thinking skills knew how to use it/them. Now about half the country not only does not know how to use a gun but are scared to the point of irrationality of them. What the hell happened?

But I don't know where the legal gun owners are or how to ensure that their children, no matter how well versed in respecting firearms, won't one day introduce that weapon to my daughter.

Generally speaking children of gun owners do not "show and tell" with guests. Children who do so are generally in household who ought not have a gun (most likely illegally purchased) or the owner was very lax in not only securing the firearm but of educating their children on when it is appropriate for them to touch it (much less use it). To add to he level of paranoia this woman is showing is that among whites, death by gun is usually the result of suicide and child involved shootings (usually accidental) are extremely rare.

ut how about adding something immediately useful: a gun owner registry available to the public online — something like those for sex offenders. I'm not equating gun owners with predatory perverts, but the model is helpful here; I want a searchable database I can consult to find out whether my kid can have a play date at your house.

1) You just did compare the two.
2) Why does this chick think that she should have a right to know what a private citizen owns?
3) Why doesn't this chick not care enough about the "poor blacks" in her "segregated city" to ask that the names and locations of convicted gun crime felons be posted online for them to know who to look out for? After all, in America, we punish and take the rights away from the convicted, not the innocent and law abiding.

My folks were taught how to handle guns and use them safely. But that doesn't do much to allay my fears; it's the simple presence of the weapon in the home and the possibilities it presents that terrify me.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: those persons who are truly "terrified" of a weapon are in need of professional help and ought not be writing for a "reputable" news organization. There are many desensitization programs out there that can help her with her phobia. Besides, generally speaking, in normal people mastery of an inanimate object leads to less anxiety. This chick is clearly not normal. Note to Baltimore Sun: Please give this woman some sick leave. She needs it.

U.S. toddlers were accidentally shooting people — including themselves — at the rate of one per week last year.

That's 52 toddlers. In the same space of time over 300 people in Baltimore were killed. Not to mention those who were shot and survived. She's like the BLM folks: Lets talk about the minor issue and act like the big one doesn't exist.

And most of the guns used in the last 15 unpredictable mass shootings — including San Bernardino; Umpqua, Ore.; and Marysville, Wash., where a 15-year-old used his father's Beretta to kill four fellow high school students — were purchased legally.

Two points here. First: San Bernardino was entirely preventable. A proper immigration policy would have kept those persons out of the country. Secondly; no law short of a repeal of the second amendment will prevent someone who legally purchased a fire arm to one day flip his or her lid and murder someone. And all the repeal of the second amendment would do is cause gun ownership to go underground. I wont even get into the hell that would be the attempted confiscation of firearms.

Of course many of the commentary I've seen on this piece discusses her database suggestion. I think the real info is where she lives and who she claims to be scared of.

Guardian 2016: Same SJW Nonsense. Different Year

It arrived in my inbox bright and early this first day of the new year:

Young black men killed by US police at highest rate in year of 1,134 deaths

It may as well have said:

Niggaz Gettin'Shot For No Reason Yo!

You know your in SJW wonderland when the subhead is:

Final total of people killed by US police officers in 2015 shows rate of death for young black men was five times higher than white men of the same age

This is standard SJW argumentation. They THINK that people of different groups ought to be doing behavior at the same proportion as their population. They think that because someone said "all men are created equal" that it means they do the same things to the same extents. So they think that there is some conspiracy why black folks are 2% of tech companies while studiously ignoring why Asians are way overrepresented in the same. Surely black and white people commit the same amount of crimes that draw the attention of police and if they do they should be getting shot the same amount to. Of course the reality is that you don't compare populations, you compare activity engaged in by members of each group. Once you do that, it is entirely plausible and expected that a group that commits violent crimes at rates of 7x the white population would also find itself killed by police at nearly 5x the rate of whites.

Young black men were nine times more likely than other Americans to be killed by police officers in 2015, according to the findings of a Guardian study that recorded a final tally of 1,134 deaths at the hands of law enforcement officers this year.

Did I mention the 7x rate of violent crime?

Despite making up only 2% of the total US population, African American males between the ages of 15 and 34 comprised more than 15% of all deaths logged this year by an ongoing investigation into the use of deadly force by police. Their rate of police-involved deaths was five times higher than for white men of the same age.

Did you know that for the age range of 15 and 34 the number one cause of African-American males is assault or homicide? The Guardian apparently doesn't think this is important.

Paired with official government mortality data, this new finding indicates that about one in every 65 deaths of a young African American man in the US is a killing by police.

“This epidemic is disproportionately affecting black people,” said Brittany Packnett, an activist and member of the White House taskforce on policing. “We are wasting so many promising young lives by continuing to allow this to happen.”

Epidemic you say? I dunno. I am FAR more concerned about the 64 of 65 deaths of African-American men who were NOT killed by police. That's a fucking epidemic! THAT is a waste of "promising young lives".

Speaking in the same week that a police officer in Cleveland, Ohio, was cleared by a grand jury over the fatal shooting of Tamir Rice, a 12-year-old African American boy who was carrying a toy gun, Packnett said the criminal justice system was presenting “no deterrent” to the excessive use of deadly force by police. “Tamir didn’t even live to be 15,” she said

Firstly Rice was playing with a real looking toy gun with the "toy gun" marker purposely removed while in a park in a city that suffers from a lot of violent crime, often committed by guns that bear a striking resemblance to the "toy" Rice was playing with, outdoors, in a public part. I think it appropriate to ask why a 12 year old wasn't taught that his actions could have deadly consequences, and not only from police.

Protests accusing law enforcement officers of being too quick to use lethal force against unarmed African Americans have spread across the country in the 16 months since dramatic unrest gripped Ferguson, Missouri, following the fatal police shooting of 18-year-old Michael Brown by a white officer.

Ahh yes Ferguson where even the DOJ came to the conclusion that the shooting was justified and Brown did in fact try to rob a store. But hell, why not come to the defense of violent folks. Who gives a damn about folks trying to live their lives around these folks.

Overall in 2015, black people were killed at twice the rate of white, Hispanic and native Americans. About 25% of the African Americans killed were unarmed, compared with 17% of white people. This disparity has narrowed since the database was first published on 1 June, at which point black people killed were found to be twice as likely to not have a weapon.

[Edit: This part is wrong. The Washington Post article's 4% claim is for unarmed Black men shot by White Police officers rather than by police in general. The larger point still stands: That unarmed black males are rarely shot by white police] This claim contradicts the report given by the Washington Post:

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.

Both items cannot be correct at the same time. Someone is lying.

[End Edit] The rest of the article is much like the Washington Post's piece so I wont go over it again. You know what the Guardian needs to do? They need to do a report on the number of black men killed by other black men across the country by state and by month. Put the results next to the killings by police and let the public judge what the real problem is.