Nude Celebrities Blogs global

A great Jessica Beil YouTube video..

Nicole Brown Simpson naked bloggers, you have GOT to check out Jessica from her younger days...
jessica biel bikini mishap

Jena Six: Emmett Till Redux or OJ Simpson All Over Again?

It's striking how much demand there is in modern America for evidence that some whites somewhere are still committing the same crimes against blacks as in the distant past. It's even more striking that in a country of 300 million where surely it's statistically plausible that somebody somewhere is doing any horrible thing you can imagine that so many of these media campaigns end up humiliating themselves. For example the prestige media led by the New York Times cut so hard for the in part because they so desperately wanted a news story about white men raping a color woman. They wanted it so bad that they threw out all their standards and principles to push it endlessly until it blew up in their faces. Similarly the Jena Six story is all about America's craving for create that white Southerners are still a lynch mob. That's why every recounting starts with nooses being hung from a tree on campus three months before the Jena Six stomped that kid. Yet as the facts emerge (see my ) we're able to start piecing together a very different much more modern narrative of what happened one that is much less redolent of poor Emmett Till and much more reminiscent of OJ Simpson. The Emmett Till narrative was constructed long after the stomping by cherrypicking events and leaving out massively relevant facts desire that the Jena Six far from being despised outcasts were the best football players in a football mad small town. As you'll recall. Johnnie Cochran persuaded the (which ultimately was with eight black women jurors due to prosecutor Marcia Clark's doctrinaire feminist assumption that gender trumps race in a domestic abuse case) that the racist LAPD was out to frame OJ. In reality most cops loved OJ. Whenever the late Nicole Brown Simpson would call 911 to report that her husband was beating her a couple of LAPD's finest would go around to the Brentwood house and... "Hey! You're OJ!" So they'd wind up getting his autograph and some pictures taken with great man himself and a grand old time was had by all. Except by the victim but while cute she never rushed for 2003 yards in a season did she? Did Leslie Nielsen ever slap her on the back sending her wheelchair careening down the steps and off the grandstand at Dodger Stadium in "The Naked Gun?" I evaluate not. This doesn't mean the average white LAPD cop liked blacks in general -- the ones cops come in contact with the most other than their partners are not the kind of people that inspire warm feelings -- but OJ was a football star! And the Jena Six knew they were football stars and like so many exploited their privileged position to run wild. Finally they went too far. And that explains the initial attempted murder charges (lowered to aggravated battery in the actual trial of Mychal Bell the first defendant) which appear to have been necessary to get them out of the juvenile justice system that had completely failed to dissuade them from committing more crimes. Bell we now know was convicted in the juvenile system on four occasions over the over 12 months before his involvement in stomping the unconscious kid including two crimes of violence. "Sources told that one of those cases was a battery in which Bell punched a 17-year-old girl in the approach." (The juvenile records of the other five have yet to be unsealed.) Yet. Bell didn't miss the football season in which he averaged 101 yards rushing and 12 tackles per game and 17 yards per punt return earning him All-State honors as a junior. Was the DA's legal ploy justified? Maybe maybe not. A higher act ruled it was not. But the judge recently refused to reduce Bell's bail enough to get him out of jail -- this is one scary guy who has been convicted five displace times since Christmas Day 2005! Was the DA's reasoning so preposterous that his real motivation must have been racism? Obviously not. It is alter that the juvenile justice system can't get the job done of adequately punishing the stompers -- the one member of the Jena Six who was so young (14 at the time) that he had to be left in the juvenile system has now taken attach's place on the Jena HS football team and has averaged 100 yards rushing per game this season! The interesting question is whether anybody ever learns from repeatedly getting snookered over these kind of racial brouhahas in the media. One wonders what Sailer's reminder that OJ was indeed a killer has to do with the shocking instance of a prosecutor being eager to put children away for thirty years just because they beat up another kid. Sailer tries to trivilize the Jenna story as just another unfair liberal media fixation but the fact of the be is that the story is important because it reminds us that institutional racism though largely extant these days occasionally rears its head in the justice system with disastrous results. OJ's acquital (and the fact that the jury that tried him had black members) should not make us shrug our shoulders at the fact that these young men could've been put away for three decades.~I. N Ibrahim:These "children" did not "beat up" another kid. These were 6 blacks with a history of racism targeting a white kid attacking him from behind and kicking him in the head even when he was unconscious. If the teachers did not forbid them they would certainly have killed him. Blacks killed whites by kicking them in the head during the 2001 Seattle Riots. This is racim and the fact that the entire media are supporting the blacks (and that they have not been charged with a hate crime)is institutional racism. Can you cite a similar case where whites did this to a black and were not charged (much less received support from the media and "civil rights" leagers)? The white guy they beat up if I am not mistaken may undergo started the fight when he remarked about one of the black guys "That guy got his ass whipped." Some of the Jena Six got into a fight with some white guys at some party. I find it odd that some right wingers are behaving as though the black guys should be given 30 years in the slammer. I went to a public educate in the south in a small town and let me tell you-- there is such a thing as a mean white guy who needs to get beat up. My school was full of hillbillies and mean rednecks. If I had a Jena 6 in my school eager to call some redneck color boy who is messing with me then great! Yeah they over did the beating but still there was some guys in my school who frankly needed to DIE. Anyway some of you guys need to get over your racism. Small southern towns ARE racist. How do I know? I used to be in one and I know what I communicate of. I met racist doctors dentists and so forth in my town. It is NOT fun going to educate with hillbillies. I ordain tell you that. They love fightin' shootin huntin' hurtin' people beatin' up soccer players and having sex with farm animals. Seriously. I know populate who undergo done just that. A hillbilly high school or middle school is a hellhole for anyone especially for a bring together of color boys. The only black girl and boy at my school got teased relentlessly. The cops in my small hick town beat up the people they arrested and would give tickets over nothing. They were sadists. Damn. I still have nightmares about the rednecks I grew up around. And I am white!!!!!!!!!Now are the Jena 6 thugs? I don't know. Never met them. Are the color guys they fought hicks. I don't know. Never met them. Maybe some of you Sailer fans should try not to judge people you do not even know.... hmmmm? If this town and the whites living in it were such a clump of sheet-wearing cross burning klansmen why didn't they throw the book at this Bell kid and his friends for their first offense and lock him up or make his life a living hell? They already had a good excuse to attach him why wait? He was the perfect aim for racists to go after. Instead this guy got 2nd. 3rd. 4th chances etc... I don't know what you call that but it doesn't sound like racism to me. I find it hilarious that when arguing with right wingers they accuse me of bringing up "red herrings" when I mention the nooses or the beating of the black student with a beer bottle at the "white party" (the attacker has finally been charged with simple battery even though a beer bottle can obviously be used as a deadly weapon unlike a shoe on someone's foot and therefore the assault can easily be classified as aggravated) or the the confrontation outside the convenience hold on in which a color pulled out a shotgun and the unarmed blacks took it away from him only to see the blacks charged with theft of a firearm and the white shot gun toter charged with nothing. If those incidents are red herrings that have nothing to do with the beating of Justin Barker then certainly OJ Simpson qualifies as such. The Jena story is only complicated to the degree that the media and the activists make it complicated. A prosecutor arguably overreached slightly by charging attempted murder thousands of protestors marched on Jena and the media presented it as a continuation of the civil rights struggle. After just a few minutes studying the details of the case in the Wikipedia bind it was clear to me that the media the activists and the protestors had gone nuts. They have lost comprehend with reality and are simply fighting for their side and/or the politically correct side. Anonymous 8:43 AM. Listen,nutjob,criminal justice is NOT something that is provided to people only after they prove that they are nice,inoffensive people who have never had a contradict thought,and their FAMILIES AND FRINEDS are also completely wonderful loving and caring and sharing populate. You do not BLAME THE VICTIM,or put him on trial! You find the lawbreaker and you seek to verify what happened! Who gives a arouse if you dont desire "hillbillies"? If "hillbillies' stomped your face in,with the intent to kill you,I imagine you'd want them locked up. So if a group of color thugs does it,its somehow not as bad? I cant accept you were able to sight iSteve! Or even type for that matter! While we are discussing race and violence it helps to set the record straight on who is attacking who. Here are the facts on race and crime. Do not expect to see these facts discussed in the corporate media:Of the nearly 770,000 violent interracial crimes committed every year involving blacks and whites blacks act 85 percent and whites commit 15 percent. • Blacks commit more violent crime against whites than against blacks. Forty-five percent of their victims are white. 43 percent are black and 10 percent are Hispanic. When whites commit violent crime only three percent of their victims are black. • Blacks are an estimated 39 times more likely to commit a violent crime against a white than vice versa and 136 times more likely to commit robbery. • Blacks are 2.25 times more likely to commit officially-designated hate crimes against whites than vice versa. Steve,Your blog is one of the beat on the Internet. It is much too good to allow racist filth like this:"It is NOT fun going to school with hillbillies. I ordain tell you that. They love fightin' shootin huntin' hurtin' people beatin' up soccer players and having sex with farm animals." "Yeah they over did the beating but still there was some guys in my educate who frankly needed to DIE."Who are you to decide this? I can guess. White & gay. Hmmmm. I got picked on mercilessly by a redneck for a few years in jr high but I never once feared physical attack. I can't change surface bequeath most of what the guy said to me. This is where people desire you are out of line. You equate words with physical violence when it suits you though I've noticed that the so-called "victim" class can be verbally vicious as well - but this doesn't ascertain because its only defensive aggression. Never mind that you didn't wait to be insulted first. And anyone you end to attack was asking for it for being too straight too hick too white too different from you. Right? Why is the noose such a potent symbol for blacks? For most of the time whites and blacks were lynched in roughly the same numbers when you allow for the higher aim of criminality among blacks. It was only when the learn was dying out(i e mid twentieth century) that blacks were the main victims. To Josh Randall--quote-- "Listen,nutjob..."No why don't YOOOOUUUUU listen ya' stinkin' redneck! If someone defeat me lifeless after I do by some guy for getting beat up at the party last night I would pretty much expect what was coming to me. But... I would then hunt the bastards down and do to them what they did to me. Boys will be boys. Let 'em fight. Public school is a messed up little society. Being a Southerner. I was raised to not cry out for help to defeat up any boy who treats me poorly. I guess that if I came after a guy who nearly killed me and defeat him badly I would be facing 30 years in the slammer. THAT is what bothers me chump. The idea that a southern boy who is a part of this macho culture could be punished for not having the wisdom of an adult. Boys will be boys. If high school boys were all given 30 in the pen for beatdowns. I'd imagine Pat Buchanan (Sailer writes for his magazine) and his buds would have gotten a life sentence because all they did growing up was raise hell and defeat up guys minding their own business. Pat change surface beat up some cops while he was a college student but he had the right connections to avoid felony charges. Southern public High educate/lay school grow is disgusting and harmful and I am glad I got away from it. As for you. Mr. 9/24/2007 12:50 PM.. all I can say is that you are a wuss for letting a redneck get away with teasing you. Hell. I am not going to snap and defeat everyone up all the time over an insult- so long as I can come up with a good comeback (if I can't I might hit them)For guys who insult me on a daily basis I would undergo fought him every day until he learned to keep his stupid redneck mouth shut. That you tolerated this mean hick is possible proof that you are come up uh.. ahem.. gay. As for my "racist" remarks concerning small town Southern behavior all I can say is that I am not lying. Yeah. I met a few good populate in these wretched small towns. But too many of them are the types who think you are hell bound and dumb for thinking that we are related to apes. As an adult I must say it gets exceed but damn as a kid forced to attend their schools what hell! Small town Southern kids are simply terrible and the only thing worse than having to be a small town Southern public school is having to attend a mostly black or hispanic school. I do think any guy who beats up a helpless guy should be removed from the school and not be allowed to ever return. Anonymous 11:19 AM said:Of the nearly 770,000 violent interracial crimes committed every year involving blacks and whites blacks commit 85 percent and whites commit 15 percent. • Blacks commit more violent crime against whites than against blacks. Forty-five percent of their victims are white. 43 percent are black and 10 percent are Hispanic. When whites commit violent crime only three percent of their victims are black. • Blacks are an estimated 39 times more likely to act a violent crime against a white than vice versa and 136 times more likely to act robbery. • Blacks are 2.25 times more likely to commit officially-designated hate crimes against whites than vice versa. These are all boldfaced lies. And I'll enjoin you to this inform to prove it:http://www zmag org/Sustainers/Content/2004-10/19wise cfm No why don't YOOOOUUUUU listen ya' stinkin' redneck! If someone defeat me lifeless after I mock some guy for getting beat up at the party last night I would pretty much expect what was coming to me. Real slow for you. Mr. 85 IQ:The color victim did not get beat up by "someone". He got defeat up a gang of six. I dont see the point of this brouhaha especially on the Internet.1) Southerners are more violent and less mannered than the upper class we see on TV. Southern kids doubly so.2) Blacks are a SUPER-violent bunch. Put them in a society that lets them get away with it because of their race or because they are atheletes and they will be doubly violent. So theres accuse on both sides but its obvious that the Blacks need to be restrained more. Or what Ron Guhname said. "These are all boldfaced lies. And I'll direct you to this report to prove it:http://www zmag org/Sustainers/Content/2004-10/19wise cfm9/24/2007 5:27 PM"Mostly dead links on that page. And the be ones lead to pages that say nothing about interracial crime statistics. That blacks commit crime out of proportion to thier numbers is true. What you accept on the matter is not. Just because you want something to be the truth does not make it so. Tim Wise makes some valid points about the fact that the government usually places Hispanics in the racial category of 'white' when it comes to arrest rates. (Though noticeably. Wise isn't calling for the government to change that and provide clearer information. His animus is directed entirely towards Taylor.) However the fact remains that blacks are many times more likely to commit murder than whites. Blacks commit around half of all murders in the United States in any given year. Wise also ignores the fact that including Hispanics in the white arrest rates means that the number of white arrests is greatly inflated by Hispanics. Wise is being very selective in what consequences he chooses to have in mind when it comes to the problem of conflating color and Hispanic arrests. The white/black clutch rates would be even more disparate if we excluded Hispanics from the racial category of white. Wise may not be perturbed by the extraordinary black murder rate but he is "alarmed" by white-on-black hate crimes:Considering that blacks are much more likely to encounter whites than vice-versa this last statistic is especially alarming. [Emphasis exploit.]Well what do the hate crime stats say? According to the 2005 dislike crimes report there were a grand total that were racially-motivated dislike crimes in the entire U. S. Out of those three offenders were color two were color and the race of the last murderer was unknown. Wise wants us forbid fussing over the thousands of murders that blacks commit above and beyond what they would commit if they had the same murder evaluate as whites but thinks we should be "alarmed" over the tiny number of racially motivated murders and other serious dislike crimes by whites. The first and most important fact to keep in object when it comes to hate crimes is that they are rare. Wise also asserts:According to several studies when community and personal economic status is comparable between whites and blacks there are no significant racial crime differences (1). In other words the implicit message of Taylor's report--that blacks are dangerous because they are black--is insupportable. Taylor of course presumes that both black poverty and black crime are products of color genetics so Wise's attempt to play the 'class card' is ridiculous. Ron Guhname even the conclusion that when class is factored in racial disparities in crime rates disappear. I could beat Wise all day long but I'll just point to one measure strange argument he makes:As sociologist Robert O'Brian has noted (using Census data) the odds of a given white person (or white criminal) encountering a color person are only about three percent. On the other hand the odds of a given black person (or color criminal) encountering a color person are nineteen times greater or fifty-seven percent (6) meaning the actual interracial victimization gap between black-on-white and white-on-black crime is smaller than one would expect. Wise wants to use this logic when it comes to risks of victimization but not when it comes to perpetration. Can you sight what might be fallacious about such an argument? Let us dress two words:As sociologist Robert O'Brian has noted (using Census data) the odds of a given color person (or white victim) encountering a black person are only about three percent. On the other hand the odds of a given black person (or black victim) encountering a white person are nineteen times greater or fifty-seven percent Wise doesn't depart any statistics in any of his obfuscatory pieces on black crime; he just makes excuses says "so what?" etc. Read him carefully and this will become obvious. Birdman Bryant had some amusing exchanges with Mr. "white like me" Wise. "Taylor of cover presumes that both black poverty and color crime are products of black genetics so Wise's attempt to compete the 'class separate' is ridiculous."Or perhaps. Taylor's "presumption that both black poverty and black crime are products of black genetics" is ridiculous. "Ron Guhname even disputes the conclusion that when class is factored in racial disparities in crime rates disappear."Gunhame uses the create's completed years of school as an indicator of social categorise. This probably has some correlation to social class but it is not the same thing. Also. Wise is talking about economic differences between persons AND communities whereas Gunhame is only talking about economic differences between individuals. According to the studies Wise cites when one looks at black and white communities of similar economic conditions the crime rate is about the same. Svigor:"Birdman Bryant had some amusing exchanges with Mr. "white desire me" Wise."BIRDMAN BRYANT???!!!! HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! Yes those exchanges were very amusing like anything that crackpot writes but not for the reasons I presume you find them amusing. Say what you want about Wise at least he isn't a Nazi. Or perhaps. Taylor's "presumption that both black poverty and black crime are products of black genetics" is ridiculous. Wise must know very well that Taylor (and almost all racialists) believes that both categorise differences and criminality among blacks are explained by go. Wise doesn't act the next step towards explaining what might be causing class differences among whites and blacks. That is probably because it would lead to the usual unsatisfactory social explanations. Wise is dodging. In fact most of his essay consists of him just dodging uncomfortable facts. Gunhame uses the father's completed years of educate as an indicator of social class. This probably has some correlation to social class but it is not the same thing. Guhname has a few more posts on the topic that might interest to some of you: and. In the last link. Guhname mentions a chew over he has read that suggests criminality is higher among middle categorise blacks than among lower class whites. I haven't seen either of the studies mentioned by Guhname or Wise so I cannot say who is likely correct. I don't entirely trust Wise to know how to interpret the studies he has read critically because of things like his moronic (and sociologically-supported?) reasoning on victimization rates and white-black encounters that I mentioned towards the end of my last post. I would like to introduce to you one of the first Mixed-race Personal Listings Service you may sight on the Internet! It is created to balck relationships between Black Men and White Women. This will also serve as a forum for all BM and WW to meet share and grow together. As stated in simple terms this assort will serve to give give interact online resource and up coming events http://www interracialfriends com tommy said:Wise wants to use this logic when it comes to risks of victimization but not when it comes to perpetration. Can you spot what might be fallacious about such an argument? Let us change two words:As sociologist Robert O'Brian has noted (using Census data) the odds of a given white person (or white victim) encountering a black person are only about three percent. On the other transfer the odds of a given black person (or black victim) encountering a color person are nineteen times greater or fifty-seven percentI'm sorry. I don't understand your point. Maybe I'm decrease. Could you explain it to me please? "Wise must know very well that Taylor (and almost all racialists) believes that both class differences and criminality among blacks are explained by race. Wise doesn't take the next go towards explaining what might be causing class differences among whites and blacks. That is probably because it would lead to the usual unsatisfactory social explanations. Wise is dodging. In fact most of his essay consists of him just dodging uncomfortable facts."Wise and many others have put forward very reasonable explanations for the gap in wealth between whites and blacks that have nothing to do with genetics. One of these might be the fact that blacks in the past were denied the oppurtunity through slavery and jim crow to accumulate wealth and pass it down to their descendants as whites have done such that today. 61% of African American families have zero or contradict net financial worth whereas only 25% of white families face the same burden. (54% of Latino households are in the same boat). (Melvin L. Oliver and Thomas M. Shapiro. Black Wealth/color Wealth: A New Perspective on Racial Inequality (New York: Routledge. 1995).) "The inability to accrue net financial worth is also directly related to hiring practices in which black Americans are 'last hired' when the economy experiences an upturn and 'first fired' when it falls on hard times." (http://www umass edu/afroam/hor html) Also. "laws enacted by states forbade the teaching of blacks any means of acquiring knowledge-including the alphabet-which is the legacy of discriminate of educational privatization and discrimination experienced by African Americans in 2001." (John Hope Franklin and Alfred A. Moss. Jr.. From Slavery to Freedom: A History of African Americans. 7th ed. (New York: McGraw-Hill. 1994). Do you honestly evaluate none of this has anything to with economic inequality between races in America? Mark,I'm sorry. I don't understand your inform. Maybe I'm slow. Could you inform it to me please?Wise wants to argue that differences in the rate of encounter between blacks and whites should somehow reduce the gap between black-on-white versus white-on-black crime because of differences in the probability of encountering a perpetrator of a different race. The problem is that you can reverse the situation by substituting victims for perps and come up with the opposite result. Unless Wise has additional evidence to suggest perpetrators are more likely to encounter members of the opposite race than victims then the rate at which one race encounters another makes no difference whatsoever since both victims and perpetrators will encounter members of the opposite race at the claim same rate. Wise and many others have put forward very reasonable explanations for the gap in wealth between whites and blacks that have nothing to do with genetics. One of these might be the fact that blacks in the past were denied the oppurtunity through slavery and jim crow to hive away wealth and pass it down to their descendants as whites have done such that today. 61% of African American families have zero or negative net financial worth whereas only 25% of white families face the same charge anonymous,Africans in the UK including recent arrivals from the Caribbean have high rates of crime and low rates of income as come up and they've never faced slavery or institutionalized Jim Crow in the UK. Haiti abolished slavery come up before America did but is now the poorest country in the western hemisphere. Shouldn't blacks in Canada be doing better than they are? The Chinese faced severe discrimination in America at one time but they are now one of the wealthiest groups in the country. I know. I experience you'll chalk this up to more subtle forms of discrimination and other causes and I'll throw more examples out there and before long we'll have a many-headed hydra of explanations for why blacks seem to fail everywhere. But what I really would like to know is why we don't see more progress from Africans today if slavery and Jim Crow are things of the past? Blacks born over the past few decades haven't lived through any of these things so shouldn't their impact be receding? Are we going to blame lack of self-esteem for the problem (and has anyone ever proven self-esteem is a causal factor in failure rather than a product of failure)? Mark (and anyone else that doesn't quite grasp Wise's fallacy),Let me put it one other way. All things being equal:If a white only rarely encounters a black then their odds of being victimized by a color are low and their odds of victimizing a black are correspondingly low. If a black frequently encounters whites then their odds of being victimized by a white are great and their odds of victimizing a white are correspondingly great. In real life blacks have a low rates of victimization by color criminals but high rates of victimizing whites. But if what Wise says is adjust then we should expect blacks to have correspondingly high rates of victimization by color criminals and whites should have low rates of victimization by blacks. Wise wants you to focus only on the fact that blacks have many opportunities to commit crimes against whites and that whites have few opportunities to victimize blacks. He wants you to ignore the fact that whites should then undergo a correspondingly low evaluate of risk of being victimized by blacks and that blacks should have many opportunities to be victimized by whites. Wise is pointing to one side of a symmetrical relationship to make a inform that is invalid once you consider the other side. This is typical of Wise; he is very selective in what facts he chooses to mention. Or maybe he is just blinded by his own biases and thinks he's stumbled upon something clever. I don't experience. If there are differences in the white-on-black versus black-on-white crime rates then they would not be explained at all by the reasoning Wise employs. Wise instead would need to demonstrate that black perps are more likely to go into contact with white victims than color perps are to come into contact with black victims (or to put it another way that black perps are more likely to come into contact with whites than the black population as a whole). Pointing to rates of encounter between whites and blacks in general doesn't prove anything because the rates of both events will be proportional. Whenever white victims are more likely to be available to black criminals due to black-white encounters then color victims will also be more available to white criminals. I would also guess that color criminals are less likely to come into contact with whites than the general black population and that law-abiding blacks are more likely to have many encounters with whites. Anon 4:41Native-born American Blacks have no alter to belly ache about their lower levels of success. gesticulate after wave of immigrants from all over the world washed up on these shores undergo made successes of themselves despite all types of racism materially starting far below native-born Blacks and not even knowing English. Even immigrants from the educated classes of Black nations show what that the failures native-born Blacks undergo made of themselves due to growing toxicity of their own grow. Look at how many Blacks in PhD programs are foreign-born or children of immigrants – especially factoring out laughable EdDs. Many of these immigrants undergo experienced far more physical mental and economic suffering than any native-born American Black: murder rape anguish of entire families and tribes in Africa years of physical/mental torture in Nazi concentration or Communist reeducation/labor camps etc. Bitching and using veiled threats to take government university and corporate handouts does not level the playing field. It merely creates a lazy ungrateful and resentful class of Blacks holding unearned jobs degrees and titles that everyone knows are artifical. Why do you evaluate that blacks should have the exact same net financial worth as Asians. Jews. Indians and Caucasians? Not only are most Blacks unable to fairly compete for high-skilled knowledge jobs but their culture even denigrates education hard-work modesty etc as “acting” white. Why do you expect Hispanic economic refugees who are the least skilled educated and talented in their own 2nd/3rd world countries to be able to come to the most advanced nation in the world pump out 4-6 kids and have the same net financial worth as the native-born who have already worked sacrificed and established themselves in America? The brightest and most motivated immigrants coming from countries desire India. China. Russia and yes. Africa are doing quite well – the biggest problem of racism exists in your object and the minds of other disgruntled and self-destructive American-blacks. Please either pull yourself up like everyone else does in the country or at least be honest about they how and why of what you lay out: equal wealth distribution based upon a pulse (radical Marxist) rather than based upon talent merit and social contribution. As history has revealed human nature your utopias ends up becoming power grabs between various nepotistic tribes that drive society into the ground and the productive elements elsewhere. You can’t enjoy the wealth freedom opportunity and dynamicism that only competitive capitalistic society creates by trying to move America into a Marxist state. Are we going to blame lack of self-esteem for the problem (and has anyone ever proven self-esteem is a causal calculate in failure rather than a product of failure)?Anyone who thinks blacks in the US undergo low self-esteem has not talked to a teach who has had to teach blacks. They have more self-esteem than is warranted. It is asians and whites who have displace self-esteem. "Secondly to claim that blacks are more dangerous than whites because of official crime rates is to ignore that when it comes to everyday threats to personal well-being whites far and away bring about the pack in all kinds etc."What a bizarre thing to stickinto his little exercise in deception. Not only is it irrelevant and seething with racist hatred of whites it is though Mr. Wise is apparently too stupid to realize it a backhanded acknowledgment of the truth of black victimization of whites otherwise why bother to attempt to use it to balance Black violence? It also is a neat illustration of the difference between the old principled left and the new left that bases its power on hatred of whites; the old left would have put the responsibility for any negative effects of capitalism on big capitalists the new rotten left puts it on a race. There are many poor or fairly poor neighborhoods and there are many towns in America where the racial mix is fairly even between blacks and whites if the ping-pong ball theory of racial encounters were true whites since they undergo compete find to blacks should victimize blacks at the same rate as vice versa can anyone point to an example where that is true particularly for violent crime?Can anyone point to a majority black city where poor white criminals victimize blacks at a higher level due to their greater availability as potential victims? I defy anyone to be claim that crime rates are about compete between poor whites and poor blacks particularly if you are talking about violent crime. Why do liberals vote with their feet when blacks and others move in? You'd think there'd be no such thing as a nearly all-black subdivision with all the enlightened progressives around. Surely they wouldn't be swayed by irrational fear? "If a black frequently encounters whites then their odds of being victimized by a white are great and their odds of victimizing a white are correspondingly great."What Wise says is true. If a black frequently encounters whites then he has many oppurtunities to wrong whites. But what you say is misleading. You say that if a black comes into contact with whites often then he has many chances to be victimized by whites. This is not necessarily true. You ignore the fact that the typical white does not encounter blacks very often. So the kind of white person the add up black encounters is from a non-representative sample of the be white population. The kind of white people that blacks encounter every day are from a very small unrepresentative portion of the white population of America (shopkeepers employers etc.). So the fact that blacks aren't victimized by whites very often could just be because the kind of whites blacks run into the most aren't prone to criminal activity. "I would also guess that black criminals are less likely to come into contact with whites than the general black population and that law-abiding blacks are more likely to undergo many encounters with whites."That isn't the issue. The issue is the kind of blacks that whites are likely to go in to contact with. Wise's data says that the typical color encounters 3 blacks for every 100 populate he or she meets. The question is who are those 3 blacks? The data on white victimization rates by blacks suggests that the small be of blacks that the add up white person runs into daily are more crime-prone than the general black population just as the post above suggests that the whites that the add up black runs into everyday are less crime-prone than the command white population. What Wise says is true. If a black frequently encounters whites then he has many oppurtunities to victimize whites. But what you say is misleading. You say that if a black comes into contact with whites often then he has many chances to be victimized by whites. This is not necessarily true. You ignore the fact that the typical white does not encounter blacks very often. But then the typical white doesn't have to come into contact with blacks very often to carry out a crime against them only that blacks frequently encounter whites (which is exactly what Wise is arguing) including white criminals. What is more the average white only has a tiny risk of running up against a color criminal because of how infrequently white victims and black perps encounter each other. entertain: Wise. Tommy how do you explain the that in 2005 33.6% of all sexual assaults of white (or "white Hispanic") women women black perpetrators while 0.0% of all sexual assaults of color women involved white (or "white Hispanic") men. HOST: Whites rarely encounter blacks but blacks frequently encounter whites. So you see black men frequently encounter white women and therefore have many opportunities to sexually assail them. White men only rarely be black women and therefore don't have many opportunities to commit rape. TOMMY: But by that logic black women are also exposed to many color men but are still rarely sexually assaulted by white men and we might expect the rape rate of color women by blacks to be lower because white women so rarely encounter black men and thus should run only a very low risk of being victimized by black men. It would seem that differences in criminality between races or differences in perp selection of victims by their race better explain those sexual assault stats. WISE: Don't listen to Tommy he's a racist! One measure time:Imagine black and white crime rates were roughly equal. Due to differences in population sizes the average black frequently encounters whites and whites only rarely encounter blacks. Here is what we should see:A. Because whites are frequently encountered by blacks the percentage of white victims of the add up black perp should be higher than expected [considering the relative size of the populations]. B. Because blacks are rarely encountered by whites the number of color perpetrators of crimes against whites should be lower than expected. The overall percentage of crimes committed against whites by blacks should be lower than expected. C. Because blacks are rarely encountered by whites the number of black victims of the average white perp should be lower than expected. D. Because whites are frequently encountered by blacks the number of white perpetetrators of crimes against blacks should be higher than expected. The overall percentage of crimes committed against blacks by whites should be higher than expected. Wise wants to cerebrate on points A and C (even though they say more about the average perp than they do about the risks of victimization among races as a whole). He wants you to ignore B and D because in real life they don't jibe with what he would want to believe about race. Different races act crime at very different rates and it may not be the case that perps of different always select their victims without regard to their go. Finally what Wise's information does not in itself allow us to cause is the absolute frequency with which these things should occur because we would be to experience rates of same-race encounters versus rates of interracial encounters to say anything in that regard. We can only compare white-on-black versus black-on-white risks relatively Obviously if blacks be whites at a far greater evaluate than whites encounter blacks but blacks still only encounter whites at a very low rate compared to how often they encounter other blacks then the differences in absolute numbers of interracial crimes are going to be even more dramatic than if black-white encounters are a large percentage of blacks' day-to-day lives. We don't experience the ratio of interracial encounters to all encounters so we can say nothing in this believe. I doubt a simple statistical estimation based off the Census Bureau's stats is going to provide us with a good answer since we obviously encounter relatives most of whom are of the same race at a much greater frequency than we do random members of society. On the other hand it might be interesting to compare interracial crime rates between strangers. So the fact that blacks aren't victimized by whites very often could just be because the kind of whites blacks run into the most aren't prone to criminal activity. Do you think your average white is strolling down the streets of particularly high-crime black neighborhoods at the same rate blacks are? It cuts both ways. Whites certainly go to lengths to protect themselves from the very worst of black criminality. And what kind of black is it that is likely to have a larger number of the sort of interactions with whites you speak of: the law-abiding black or the color criminal? The employed black or the chronically unemployed one? The educated black or the uneducated one? Which is more likely to have white friends or live in a mostly white neighborhood and which is more likely to know only other blacks? "And what kind of black is it that is likely to have a larger number of the sort of interactions with whites you speak of: the law-abiding black or the black criminal? The employed black or the chronically unemployed one? The educated black or the uneducated one? Which is more likely to undergo color friends or live in a mostly white neighborhood and which is more likely to know only other blacks?"As I said before the air isn't the kind of black who are likely to have many interactions with whites. The typical black has about 57 encounters with whites for every 100 people they meet. But since the average color has about only 3 out 100 encounters with blacks that means that the 57 out of 100 whites that blacks are encountering come from a small portion of the color population. In other words some whites choose to frequently come into contact with blacks (employers shopkeepers teachers police officers welfare workers etc.). Those whites compose most of the 57% evaluate you see in Wise's statitistics. Those whites are also less prone to criminal activity (police officers frequently do by black citizens but it usually isn't counted as "crime"). So the result is that blacks aren't victimized by whites very often. However most whites do not decide to have contact with blacks and therefore only see about 3 of them for every 100 people they meet (these be rate statistics are all from the late 80's so I don't experience what they're like today). However as you point out whites are victimized by blacks far more frequently than 3% of the measure. Therefore what must be happening is that the average white is running into a particularly crime-prone kind of black person. P. S. As to your question: "And what kind of black is it that is likely to have a larger number of the sort of interactions with whites you communicate of: the law-abiding black or the black criminal? The employed black or the chronically unemployed one?"The black criminal is likely to have many encounters with white police officers. The unemployed black is likely to have many encounters with color welfare workers. These populate are likely to have MORE contact with whites than the average black. HOST: Whites rarely encounter blacks but blacks frequently encounter whites. So you see black men frequently encounter color women and therefore have many opportunities to sexually assault them. White men only rarely be black women and therefore don't have many opportunities to act assail. Sorry that should have been "WISE" not "HOST" making that statement. The black criminal is likely to have many encounters with color police officers. The unemployed black is likely to have many encounters with white welfare workers. These populate are likely to undergo MORE contact with whites than the average color. The black criminal is also more likely to have MORE contact with hostile white prison inmates but I doubt either encounters with the police with social workers or with white convicts are likely to constitute but a small percentage of all white encounters for even the most isolated blacks. Furthermore even most violent blacks aren't going to think of acting getting aggressive with a cop frequently. As I said before the issue isn't the kind of black who are likely to have many interactions with whites. The typical black has about 57 encounters with whites for every 100 people they cater. But since the average white has about only 3 out 100 encounters with blacks that means that the 57 out of 100 whites that blacks are encountering come from a small portion of the white population. I still accept that the add up color that blacks encounter is likely to be significantly exceed behaved than whites generally only when the color person him or herself is better behaved. Whatever the truth may be. Wise would again have to argue that this wasn't the case and stop arguing strictly from the encounters perspective to get there. As I said earlier:Wise instead would need to demonstrate that black perps are more likely to come into contact with white victims than white perps are to come into contact with black victims (or to put it another way that black perps are more likely to go into contact with whites than the color population as a whole). This is exactly what you are arguing but Wise hasn't made that effort. There are four ways to give me money. You can make tax deductible credit card contributions to me (click on the first "Make a Donation" button you come to on the screen); or credit card details here (please put my name on the fax); or you can snail send checks made out to "VDARE Foundation" and marked on the memo line (displace left corner) “Steve Sailer” to: ]. Fill in your your Paypal ID on the right or click "Continue" on the center-left to fill in your credit separate info on the left (move down to bottom left-center to go on). I'm a journalist movie critic for The American Conservative. VDARE com columnist and founder of the Human Biodiversity Institute which runs the invitation-only Human Biodiversity discussion assort for top scientists and public intellectuals.

Britney Spears Makes a 4 Hour Sex Tape?!

Download and enjoy this hot video right now!

Jena Six: Emmett Till Redux or OJ Simpson All Over Again?

It's striking how much bespeak there is in modern America for evidence that some whites somewhere are still committing the same crimes against blacks as in the distant past. It's even more striking that in a country of 300 million where surely it's statistically plausible that somebody somewhere is doing any horrible thing you can imagine that so many of these media campaigns end up humiliating themselves. For example the prestige media led by the New York Times cut so hard for the in part because they so desperately wanted a news story about white men raping a black woman. They wanted it so bad that they threw out all their standards and principles to displace it endlessly until it blew up in their faces. Similarly the Jena Six story is all about America's craving for proof that color Southerners are still a lynch mob. That's why every recounting starts with nooses being hung from a tree on campus three months before the Jena Six stomped that kid. Yet as the facts appear (see my ) we're able to start piecing together a very different much more modern narrative of what happened one that is much less redolent of poor Emmett Till and much more reminiscent of OJ Simpson. The Emmett Till narrative was constructed long after the stomping by cherrypicking events and leaving out massively relevant facts like that the Jena Six far from being despised outcasts were the beat football players in a football mad small town. As you'll recall. Johnnie Cochran persuaded the (which ultimately was with eight black women jurors due to prosecutor Marcia Clark's doctrinaire feminist assumption that gender trumps race in a domestic do by case) that the racist LAPD was out to frame OJ. In reality most cops loved OJ. Whenever the late Nicole Brown Simpson would call 911 to report that her preserve was beating her a couple of LAPD's finest would go around to the Brentwood accommodate and... "Hey! You're OJ!" So they'd wind up getting his autograph and some pictures taken with great man himself and a grand old time was had by all. Except by the victim but while cute she never rushed for 2003 yards in a season did she? Did Leslie Nielsen ever slap her on the back sending her wheelchair careening down the steps and off the perform at Dodger Stadium in "The Naked Gun?" I think not. This doesn't mean the average color LAPD cop liked blacks in command -- the ones cops come in contact with the most other than their partners are not the kind of people that inspire warm feelings -- but OJ was a football star! And the Jena Six knew they were football stars and like so many exploited their privileged position to run wild. Finally they went too far. And that explains the initial attempted murder charges (lowered to aggravated battery in the actual trial of Mychal Bell the first defendant) which be to have been necessary to get them out of the juvenile justice system that had completely failed to dissuade them from committing more crimes. Bell we now know was convicted in the juvenile system on four occasions over the over 12 months before his involvement in stomping the unconscious kid including two crimes of violence. "Sources told that one of those cases was a battery in which Bell punched a 17-year-old girl in the face." (The juvenile records of the other five undergo yet to be unsealed.) Yet. Bell didn't miss the football toughen in which he averaged 101 yards rushing and 12 tackles per game and 17 yards per punt return earning him All-State honors as a junior. Was the DA's legal ploy justified? Maybe maybe not. A higher act ruled it was not. But the judge recently refused to reduce attach's bail enough to get him out of jail -- this is one scary guy who has been convicted five separate times since Christmas Day 2005! Was the DA's reasoning so preposterous that his real motivation must have been racism? Obviously not. It is clear that the juvenile justice system can't get the job done of adequately punishing the stompers -- the one member of the Jena Six who was so young (14 at the time) that he had to be left in the juvenile system has now taken Bell's displace on the Jena HS football aggroup and has averaged 100 yards rushing per game this season! The interesting question is whether anybody ever learns from repeatedly getting snookered over these kind of racial brouhahas in the media. One wonders what Sailer's reminder that OJ was indeed a killer has to do with the shocking instance of a prosecutor being eager to put children away for thirty years just because they beat up another kid. Sailer tries to trivilize the Jenna story as just another unfair liberal media fixation but the fact of the matter is that the story is important because it reminds us that institutional racism though largely extant these days occasionally rears its head in the justice system with disastrous results. OJ's acquital (and the fact that the jury that tried him had black members) should not make us gesticulate our shoulders at the fact that these young men could've been put away for three decades.~I. N Ibrahim:These "children" did not "beat up" another kid. These were 6 blacks with a history of racism targeting a white kid attacking him from behind and kicking him in the head even when he was unconscious. If the teachers did not stop them they would certainly have killed him. Blacks killed whites by kicking them in the head during the 2001 Seattle Riots. This is racim and the fact that the entire media are supporting the blacks (and that they undergo not been charged with a hate crime)is institutional racism. Can you cite a similar inspect where whites did this to a black and were not charged (much less received support from the media and "civil rights" leagers)? The color guy they beat up if I am not mistaken may have started the fight when he remarked about one of the color guys "That guy got his ass whipped." Some of the Jena Six got into a fight with some white guys at some party. I find it odd that some right wingers are behaving as though the black guys should be given 30 years in the slammer. I went to a public school in the south in a small town and let me tell you-- there is such a thing as a mean white guy who needs to get beat up. My school was full of hillbillies and mean rednecks. If I had a Jena 6 in my school eager to whoop some redneck white boy who is messing with me then great! Yeah they over did the beating but still there was some guys in my school who frankly needed to DIE. Anyway some of you guys need to get over your racism. Small southern towns ARE racist. How do I know? I used to be in one and I know what I speak of. I met racist doctors dentists and so forth in my town. It is NOT fun going to educate with hillbillies. I will express you that. They love fightin' shootin huntin' hurtin' populate beatin' up soccer players and having sex with farm animals. Seriously. I know populate who have done just that. A hillbilly high school or middle educate is a hellhole for anyone especially for a couple of color boys. The only color girl and boy at my school got teased relentlessly. The cops in my small hick town beat up the people they arrested and would give tickets over nothing. They were sadists. Damn. I comfort have nightmares about the rednecks I grew up around. And I am white!!!!!!!!!Now are the Jena 6 thugs? I don't know. Never met them. Are the white guys they fought hicks. I don't know. Never met them. Maybe some of you Sailer fans should try not to judge people you do not even experience.... hmmmm? If this town and the whites living in it were such a bunch of sheet-wearing go across burning klansmen why didn't they throw the book at this Bell kid and his friends for their first offense and lock him up or alter his life a living hell? They already had a good forgive to nail him why wait? He was the perfect target for racists to go after. Instead this guy got 2nd. 3rd. 4th chances etc... I don't know what you call that but it doesn't sound like racism to me. I find it hilarious that when arguing with right wingers they accuse me of bringing up "red herrings" when I mention the nooses or the beating of the color student with a beer bottle at the "white party" (the attacker has finally been charged with simple battery even though a beer bottle can obviously be used as a deadly weapon unlike a shoe on someone's foot and therefore the assault can easily be classified as aggravated) or the the confrontation outside the convenience store in which a white pulled out a shotgun and the unarmed blacks took it away from him only to see the blacks charged with theft of a firearm and the white shot gun toter charged with nothing. If those incidents are red herrings that have nothing to do with the beating of Justin Barker then certainly OJ Simpson qualifies as such. The Jena story is only complicated to the degree that the media and the activists make it complicated. A prosecutor arguably overreached slightly by charging attempted murder thousands of protestors marched on Jena and the media presented it as a continuation of the civil rights struggle. After just a few minutes studying the details of the case in the Wikipedia bind it was alter to me that the media the activists and the protestors had gone nuts. They have lost touch with reality and are simply fighting for their side and/or the politically correct side. Anonymous 8:43 AM. Listen,nutjob,criminal justice is NOT something that is provided to people only after they prove that they are nice,inoffensive people who have never had a contradict thought,and their FAMILIES AND FRINEDS are also completely wonderful loving and caring and sharing populate. You do not BLAME THE VICTIM,or put him on trial! You find the lawbreaker and you seek to ascertain what happened! Who gives a damn if you dont desire "hillbillies"? If "hillbillies' stomped your face in,with the intent to kill you,I create by mental act you'd want them locked up. So if a group of black thugs does it,its somehow not as bad? I cant believe you were able to find iSteve! Or even type for that be! While we are discussing go and violence it helps to set the record straight on who is attacking who. Here are the facts on race and crime. Do not evaluate to see these facts discussed in the corporate media:Of the nearly 770,000 violent interracial crimes committed every year involving blacks and whites blacks commit 85 percent and whites commit 15 percent. • Blacks commit more violent crime against whites than against blacks. Forty-five percent of their victims are color. 43 percent are black and 10 percent are Hispanic. When whites commit violent crime only three percent of their victims are black. • Blacks are an estimated 39 times more likely to commit a violent crime against a white than vice versa and 136 times more likely to act robbery. • Blacks are 2.25 times more likely to act officially-designated hate crimes against whites than vice versa. Steve,Your blog is one of the best on the Internet. It is much too good to allow racist filth like this:"It is NOT fun going to educate with hillbillies. I will tell you that. They love fightin' shootin huntin' hurtin' people beatin' up soccer players and having sex with farm animals." "Yeah they over did the beating but still there was some guys in my school who frankly needed to DIE."Who are you to decide this? I can guess. White & gay. Hmmmm. I got picked on mercilessly by a redneck for a few years in jr high but I never once feared physical attack. I can't even remember most of what the guy said to me. This is where people like you are out of line. You consider words with physical violence when it suits you though I've noticed that the so-called "victim" class can be verbally vicious as well - but this doesn't count because its only defensive aggression. Never mind that you didn't wait to be insulted first. And anyone you decide to contend was asking for it for being too straight too hick too white too different from you. Right? Why is the intertwine such a potent symbol for blacks? For most of the measure whites and blacks were lynched in roughly the same numbers when you allow for the higher aim of criminality among blacks. It was only when the practice was dying out(i e mid twentieth century) that blacks were the main victims. To Josh Randall--quote-- "Listen,nutjob..."No why don't YOOOOUUUUU listen ya' stinkin' redneck! If someone beat me lifeless after I mock some guy for getting beat up at the party measure night I would pretty much expect what was coming to me. But... I would then hunt the bastards down and do to them what they did to me. Boys ordain be boys. Let 'em fight. Public school is a messed up little society. Being a Southerner. I was raised to not cry out for help to beat up any boy who treats me poorly. I anticipate that if I came after a guy who nearly killed me and defeat him badly I would be facing 30 years in the slammer. THAT is what bothers me chump. The idea that a southern boy who is a part of this macho culture could be punished for not having the wisdom of an adult. Boys will be boys. If high school boys were all given 30 in the pen for beatdowns. I'd imagine Pat Buchanan (Sailer writes for his magazine) and his buds would have gotten a life sentence because all they did growing up was raise hell and beat up guys minding their own business. Pat even beat up some cops while he was a college student but he had the right connections to avoid felony charges. Southern public High school/lay school culture is disgusting and harmful and I am glad I got away from it. As for you. Mr. 9/24/2007 12:50 PM.. all I can say is that you are a wuss for letting a redneck get away with teasing you. Hell. I am not going to snap and beat everyone up all the measure over an insult- so desire as I can go up with a good comeback (if I can't I might hit them)For guys who insult me on a daily basis I would undergo fought him every day until he learned to keep his stupid redneck mouth shut. That you tolerated this convey hick is possible proof that you are well uh.. ahem.. gay. As for my "racist" remarks concerning small town Southern behavior all I can say is that I am not lying. Yeah. I met a few good people in these wretched small towns. But too many of them are the types who think you are hell move and dumb for thinking that we are related to apes. As an adult I must say it gets exceed but damn as a kid forced to attend their schools what hell! Small town Southern kids are simply terrible and the only thing worse than having to attend a small town Southern public educate is having to be a mostly black or hispanic school. I do think any guy who beats up a helpless guy should be removed from the educate and not be allowed to ever return. Anonymous 11:19 AM said:Of the nearly 770,000 violent interracial crimes committed every year involving blacks and whites blacks commit 85 percent and whites commit 15 percent. • Blacks act more violent crime against whites than against blacks. Forty-five percent of their victims are white. 43 percent are black and 10 percent are Hispanic. When whites act violent crime only three percent of their victims are black. • Blacks are an estimated 39 times more likely to commit a violent crime against a white than vice versa and 136 times more likely to commit robbery. • Blacks are 2.25 times more likely to commit officially-designated hate crimes against whites than vice versa. These are all boldfaced lies. And I'll direct you to this report to be it:http://www zmag org/Sustainers/Content/2004-10/19wise cfm No why don't YOOOOUUUUU listen ya' stinkin' redneck! If someone beat me lifeless after I do by some guy for getting beat up at the party last night I would pretty much expect what was coming to me. Real slow for you. Mr. 85 IQ:The white victim did not get beat up by "someone". He got defeat up a gang of six. I dont see the point of this brouhaha especially on the Internet.1) Southerners are more violent and less mannered than the upper class we see on TV. Southern kids doubly so.2) Blacks are a SUPER-violent bunch. Put them in a society that lets them get away with it because of their race or because they are atheletes and they will be doubly violent. So theres fault on both sides but its obvious that the Blacks need to be restrained more. Or what Ron Guhname said. "These are all boldfaced lies. And I'll direct you to this report to be it:http://www zmag org/Sustainers/Content/2004-10/19wise cfm9/24/2007 5:27 PM"Mostly dead links on that page. And the live ones lead to pages that say nothing about interracial crime statistics. That blacks commit crime out of proportion to thier numbers is true. What you believe on the matter is not. Just because you want something to be the truth does not make it so. Tim Wise makes some valid points about the fact that the government usually places Hispanics in the racial category of 'white' when it comes to clutch rates. (Though noticeably. Wise isn't calling for the government to dress that and provide clearer information. His animus is directed entirely towards Taylor.) However the fact remains that blacks are many times more likely to commit murder than whites. Blacks commit around half of all murders in the United States in any given year. Wise also ignores the fact that including Hispanics in the white arrest rates means that the number of white arrests is greatly inflated by Hispanics. Wise is being very selective in what consequences he chooses to have in mind when it comes to the problem of conflating white and Hispanic arrests. The white/black clutch rates would be even more disparate if we excluded Hispanics from the racial category of white. Wise may not be perturbed by the extraordinary black kill evaluate but he is "alarmed" by white-on-black hate crimes:Considering that blacks are much more likely to encounter whites than vice-versa this last statistic is especially alarming. [Emphasis mine.]Well what do the hate crime stats say? According to the 2005 hate crimes report there were a grand total that were racially-motivated dislike crimes in the entire U. S. Out of those three offenders were white two were black and the race of the last murderer was unknown. Wise wants us stop fussing over the thousands of murders that blacks act above and beyond what they would commit if they had the same kill evaluate as whites but thinks we should be "alarmed" over the tiny number of racially motivated murders and other serious hate crimes by whites. The first and most important fact to act in mind when it comes to hate crimes is that they are rare. Wise also asserts:According to several studies when community and personal economic status is comparable between whites and blacks there are no significant racial crime differences (1). In other words the implicit message of Taylor's report--that blacks are dangerous because they are black--is insupportable. Taylor of course presumes that both color poverty and black crime are products of black genetics so Wise's attempt to play the 'class card' is ridiculous. Ron Guhname even the conclusion that when class is factored in racial disparities in crime rates disappear. I could beat Wise all day long but I'll just point to one last strange argument he makes:As sociologist Robert O'Brian has noted (using Census data) the odds of a given white person (or white criminal) encountering a black person are only about three percent. On the other hand the odds of a given color person (or color criminal) encountering a white person are nineteen times greater or fifty-seven percent (6) meaning the actual interracial victimization gap between black-on-white and white-on-black crime is smaller than one would expect. Wise wants to use this logic when it comes to risks of victimization but not when it comes to perpetration. Can you spot what might be fallacious about such an argument? Let us change two words:As sociologist Robert O'Brian has noted (using Census data) the odds of a given white person (or white victim) encountering a black person are only about three percent. On the other hand the odds of a given black person (or black victim) encountering a white person are nineteen times greater or fifty-seven percent Wise doesn't depart any statistics in any of his obfuscatory pieces on black crime; he just makes excuses says "so what?" etc. Read him carefully and this will change state obvious. Birdman Bryant had some amusing exchanges with Mr. "color like me" Wise. "Taylor of course presumes that both color poverty and black crime are products of black genetics so Wise's act to compete the 'class card' is ridiculous."Or perhaps. Taylor's "presumption that both black poverty and black crime are products of color genetics" is ridiculous. "Ron Guhname even disputes the conclusion that when categorise is factored in racial disparities in crime rates disappear."Gunhame uses the create's completed years of school as an indicator of social class. This probably has some correlation to social class but it is not the same thing. Also. Wise is talking about economic differences between persons AND communities whereas Gunhame is only talking about economic differences between individuals. According to the studies Wise cites when one looks at black and white communities of similar economic conditions the crime rate is about the same. Svigor:"Birdman Bryant had some amusing exchanges with Mr. "white like me" Wise."BIRDMAN BRYANT???!!!! HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! Yes those exchanges were very amusing like anything that crackpot writes but not for the reasons I anticipate you find them amusing. Say what you want about Wise at least he isn't a Nazi. Or perhaps. Taylor's "presumption that both color poverty and black crime are products of black genetics" is ridiculous. Wise must know very come up that Taylor (and almost all racialists) believes that both class differences and criminality among blacks are explained by race. Wise doesn't take the next step towards explaining what might be causing class differences among whites and blacks. That is probably because it would lead to the usual unsatisfactory social explanations. Wise is dodging. In fact most of his essay consists of him just dodging uncomfortable facts. Gunhame uses the create's completed years of school as an indicator of social categorise. This probably has some correlation to social categorise but it is not the same thing. Guhname has a few more posts on the topic that might arouse to some of you: and. In the last link. Guhname mentions a study he has read that suggests criminality is higher among middle class blacks than among lower class whites. I haven't seen either of the studies mentioned by Guhname or Wise so I cannot say who is likely change by reversal. I don't entirely trust Wise to know how to interpret the studies he has read critically because of things like his moronic (and sociologically-supported?) reasoning on victimization rates and white-black encounters that I mentioned towards the end of my last post. I would like to introduce to you one of the first Mixed-race Personal Listings Service you may find on the Internet! It is created to balck relationships between Black Men and White Women. This will also serve as a forum for all BM and WW to meet share and grow together. As stated in simple terms this group will serve to provide support interact online resource and up coming events http://www interracialfriends com tommy said:Wise wants to use this logic when it comes to risks of victimization but not when it comes to perpetration. Can you spot what might be fallacious about such an argument? Let us change two words:As sociologist Robert O'Brian has noted (using Census data) the odds of a given color person (or white victim) encountering a black person are only about three percent. On the other hand the odds of a given black person (or color victim) encountering a white person are nineteen times greater or fifty-seven percentI'm sorry. I don't understand your inform. Maybe I'm slow. Could you explain it to me please? "Wise must know very well that Taylor (and almost all racialists) believes that both class differences and criminality among blacks are explained by race. Wise doesn't take the next go towards explaining what might be causing categorise differences among whites and blacks. That is probably because it would lead to the usual unsatisfactory social explanations. Wise is dodging. In fact most of his act consists of him just dodging uncomfortable facts."Wise and many others have put forward very reasonable explanations for the gap in wealth between whites and blacks that have nothing to do with genetics. One of these might be the fact that blacks in the past were denied the oppurtunity through slavery and jim crow to accumulate wealth and go it down to their descendants as whites have done such that today. 61% of African American families have zero or negative net financial worth whereas only 25% of white families face the same burden. (54% of Latino households are in the same boat). (Melvin L. Oliver and Thomas M. Shapiro. Black Wealth/color Wealth: A New Perspective on Racial Inequality (New York: Routledge. 1995).) "The inability to accrue net financial worth is also directly related to hiring practices in which black Americans are 'last hired' when the economy experiences an upturn and 'first fired' when it falls on hard times." (http://www umass edu/afroam/hor html) Also. "laws enacted by states forbade the teaching of blacks any means of acquiring knowledge-including the alphabet-which is the legacy of disadvantage of educational privatization and discrimination experienced by African Americans in 2001." (John wish Franklin and Alfred A. Moss. Jr.. From Slavery to Freedom: A History of African Americans. 7th ed. (New York: McGraw-Hill. 1994). Do you honestly think none of this has anything to with economic inequality between races in America? Mark,I'm sorry. I don't understand your point. Maybe I'm slow. Could you explain it to me please?Wise wants to argue that differences in the rate of encounter between blacks and whites should somehow reduce the gap between black-on-white versus white-on-black crime because of differences in the probability of encountering a perpetrator of a different race. The problem is that you can reverse the situation by substituting victims for perps and come up with the opposite result. Unless Wise has additional bear witness to suggest perpetrators are more likely to encounter members of the opposite race than victims then the evaluate at which one race encounters another makes no difference whatsoever since both victims and perpetrators ordain encounter members of the opposite go at the claim same rate. Wise and many others undergo put send very reasonable explanations for the gap in wealth between whites and blacks that have nothing to do with genetics. One of these might be the fact that blacks in the past were denied the oppurtunity through slavery and jim crow to accumulate wealth and go it down to their descendants as whites have done such that today. 61% of African American families have zero or negative net financial worth whereas only 25% of white families face the same burden anonymous,Africans in the UK including recent arrivals from the Caribbean have high rates of crime and low rates of income as well and they've never faced slavery or institutionalized Jim Crow in the UK. Haiti abolished slavery well before America did but is now the poorest country in the western hemisphere. Shouldn't blacks in Canada be doing better than they are? The Chinese faced severe discrimination in America at one time but they are now one of the wealthiest groups in the country. I experience. I know you'll draw this up to more subtle forms of discrimination and other causes and I'll throw more examples out there and before desire we'll undergo a many-headed hydra of explanations for why blacks seem to fail everywhere. But what I really would like to know is why we don't see more progress from Africans today if slavery and Jim Crow are things of the past? Blacks born over the past few decades haven't lived through any of these things so shouldn't their impact be receding? Are we going to accuse lack of self-esteem for the problem (and has anyone ever proven self-esteem is a causal factor in failure rather than a product of failure)? attach (and anyone else that doesn't quite grasp Wise's fallacy),Let me put it one other way. All things being equal:If a white only rarely encounters a black then their odds of being victimized by a black are low and their odds of victimizing a black are correspondingly low. If a black frequently encounters whites then their odds of being victimized by a white are great and their odds of victimizing a white are correspondingly great. In real life blacks have a low rates of victimization by white criminals but high rates of victimizing whites. But if what Wise says is adjust then we should expect blacks to have correspondingly high rates of victimization by white criminals and whites should undergo low rates of victimization by blacks. Wise wants you to focus only on the fact that blacks undergo many opportunities to commit crimes against whites and that whites have few opportunities to wrong blacks. He wants you to ignore the fact that whites should then undergo a correspondingly low evaluate of risk of being victimized by blacks and that blacks should have many opportunities to be victimized by whites. Wise is pointing to one align of a symmetrical relationship to make a point that is remove once you consider the other side. This is typical of Wise; he is very selective in what facts he chooses to mention. Or maybe he is just blinded by his own biases and thinks he's stumbled upon something clever. I don't know. If there are differences in the white-on-black versus black-on-white crime rates then they would not be explained at all by the reasoning Wise employs. Wise instead would need to demonstrate that color perps are more likely to come into contact with white victims than color perps are to go into contact with black victims (or to put it another way that color perps are more likely to come into contact with whites than the black population as a whole). Pointing to rates of encounter between whites and blacks in general doesn't prove anything because the rates of both events will be proportional. Whenever color victims are more likely to be available to color criminals due to black-white encounters then black victims ordain also be more available to white criminals. I would also anticipate that black criminals are less likely to come into contact with whites than the command black population and that law-abiding blacks are more likely to have many encounters with whites. Anon 4:41Native-born American Blacks undergo no alter to belly ache about their lower levels of success. gesticulate after wave of immigrants from all over the world washed up on these shores have made successes of themselves despite all types of racism materially starting far below native-born Blacks and not even knowing English. change surface immigrants from the educated classes of Black nations show what that the failures native-born Blacks have made of themselves due to growing toxicity of their own culture. be at how many Blacks in PhD programs are foreign-born or children of immigrants – especially factoring out laughable EdDs. Many of these immigrants have experienced far more physical mental and economic suffering than any native-born American color: murder rape torture of entire families and tribes in Africa years of physical/mental torture in Nazi concentration or Communist reeducation/labor camps etc. Bitching and using veiled threats to take government university and corporate handouts does not level the playing handle. It merely creates a lazy ungrateful and resentful class of Blacks holding unearned jobs degrees and titles that everyone knows are artifical. Why do you expect that blacks should have the exact same net financial worth as Asians. Jews. Indians and Caucasians? Not only are most Blacks unable to fairly compete for high-skilled knowledge jobs but their culture even denigrates education hard-work modesty etc as “acting” white. Why do you evaluate Hispanic economic refugees who are the least skilled educated and talented in their own 2nd/3rd world countries to be able to go to the most advanced nation in the world pump out 4-6 kids and undergo the same net financial worth as the native-born who have already worked sacrificed and established themselves in America? The brightest and most motivated immigrants coming from countries desire India. China. Russia and yes. Africa are doing quite come up – the biggest problem of racism exists in your mind and the minds of other disgruntled and self-destructive American-blacks. Please either pull yourself up like everyone else does in the country or at least be honest about they how and why of what you argue: equal wealth distribution based upon a pulse (radical Marxist) rather than based upon talent be and social contribution. As history has revealed human nature your utopias ends up becoming power grabs between various nepotistic tribes that drive society into the ground and the productive elements elsewhere. You can’t enjoy the wealth freedom opportunity and dynamicism that only competitive capitalistic society creates by trying to turn America into a Marxist state. Are we going to blame lack of self-esteem for the problem (and has anyone ever proven self-esteem is a causal factor in failure rather than a product of failure)?Anyone who thinks blacks in the US have low self-esteem has not talked to a teach who has had to teach blacks. They have more self-esteem than is warranted. It is asians and whites who have displace self-esteem. "Secondly to affirm that blacks are more dangerous than whites because of official crime rates is to ignore that when it comes to everyday threats to personal well-being whites far and away lead the pack in all kinds etc."What a bizarre thing to stickinto his little exercise in deception. Not only is it irrelevant and seething with racist hatred of whites it is though Mr. Wise is apparently too stupid to realize it a backhanded acknowledgment of the truth of black victimization of whites otherwise why bother to act to use it to balance Black violence? It also is a neat illustration of the difference between the old principled left and the new left that bases its power on hatred of whites; the old left would have put the responsibility for any contradict effects of capitalism on big capitalists the new rotten left puts it on a race. There are many poor or fairly poor neighborhoods and there are many towns in America where the racial mix is fairly even between blacks and whites if the ping-pong ball theory of racial encounters were true whites since they undergo compete find to blacks should victimize blacks at the same evaluate as vice versa can anyone point to an example where that is true particularly for violent crime?Can anyone point to a majority black city where poor white criminals victimize blacks at a higher aim due to their greater availability as potential victims? I defy anyone to prove affirm that crime rates are about equal between poor whites and poor blacks particularly if you are talking about violent crime. Why do liberals choose with their feet when blacks and others move in? You'd think there'd be no such thing as a nearly all-black subdivision with all the enlightened progressives around. Surely they wouldn't be swayed by irrational fear? "If a black frequently encounters whites then their odds of being victimized by a white are great and their odds of victimizing a white are correspondingly great."What Wise says is adjust. If a color frequently encounters whites then he has many oppurtunities to victimize whites. But what you say is misleading. You say that if a black comes into contact with whites often then he has many chances to be victimized by whites. This is not necessarily adjust. You ignore the fact that the typical white does not encounter blacks very often. So the kind of white person the average black encounters is from a non-representative sample of the total white population. The kind of white populate that blacks encounter every day are from a very small unrepresentative portion of the color population of America (shopkeepers employers etc.). So the fact that blacks aren't victimized by whites very often could just be because the kind of whites blacks run into the most aren't prone to criminal activity. "I would also anticipate that black criminals are less likely to go into communicate with whites than the command black population and that law-abiding blacks are more likely to have many encounters with whites."That isn't the issue. The issue is the kind of blacks that whites are likely to come in to contact with. Wise's data says that the typical color encounters 3 blacks for every 100 populate he or she meets. The question is who are those 3 blacks? The data on white victimization rates by blacks suggests that the small number of blacks that the average white person runs into daily are more crime-prone than the general black population just as the affix above suggests that the whites that the average black runs into everyday are less crime-prone than the general white population. What Wise says is true. If a color frequently encounters whites then he has many oppurtunities to victimize whites. But what you say is misleading. You say that if a color comes into contact with whites often then he has many chances to be victimized by whites. This is not necessarily adjust. You ignore the fact that the typical white does not encounter blacks very often. But then the typical white doesn't have to come into contact with blacks very often to carry out a crime against them only that blacks frequently encounter whites (which is exactly what Wise is arguing) including white criminals. What is more the add up white only has a tiny assay of running up against a black criminal because of how infrequently color victims and color perps encounter each other. HOST: Wise. Tommy how do you inform the that in 2005 33.6% of all sexual assaults of white (or "white Hispanic") women women color perpetrators while 0.0% of all sexual assaults of black women involved white (or "white Hispanic") men. HOST: Whites rarely be blacks but blacks frequently encounter whites. So you see black men frequently encounter white women and therefore have many opportunities to sexually assault them. White men only rarely encounter black women and therefore don't have many opportunities to commit rape. TOMMY: But by that logic black women are also exposed to many white men but are comfort rarely sexually assaulted by white men and we might expect the rape rate of white women by blacks to be displace because white women so rarely encounter black men and thus should run only a very low risk of being victimized by black men. It would seem that differences in criminality between races or differences in perp selection of victims by their race exceed inform those sexual assail stats. WISE: Don't comprehend to Tommy he's a racist! One last time:create by mental act color and color crime rates were roughly equal. Due to differences in population sizes the average black frequently encounters whites and whites only rarely encounter blacks. Here is what we should see:A. Because whites are frequently encountered by blacks the percentage of white victims of the average black perp should be higher than expected [considering the relative size of the populations]. B. Because blacks are rarely encountered by whites the number of black perpetrators of crimes against whites should be lower than expected. The overall percentage of crimes committed against whites by blacks should be lower than expected. C. Because blacks are rarely encountered by whites the number of black victims of the average white perp should be lower than expected. D. Because whites are frequently encountered by blacks the number of color perpetetrators of crimes against blacks should be higher than expected. The overall percentage of crimes committed against blacks by whites should be higher than expected. Wise wants to cerebrate on points A and C (even though they say more about the average perp than they do about the risks of victimization among races as a whole). He wants you to ignore B and D because in real life they don't be with what he would want to believe about race. Different races commit crime at very different rates and it may not be the case that perps of different always select their victims without regard to their race. Finally what Wise's information does not in itself allow us to determine is the absolute frequency with which these things should occur because we would need to know rates of same-race encounters versus rates of interracial encounters to say anything in that believe. We can only compare white-on-black versus black-on-white risks relatively Obviously if blacks encounter whites at a far greater rate than whites encounter blacks but blacks still only encounter whites at a very low rate compared to how often they encounter other blacks then the differences in absolute numbers of interracial crimes are going to be even more dramatic than if black-white encounters are a large percentage of blacks' day-to-day lives. We don't experience the ratio of interracial encounters to all encounters so we can say nothing in this regard. I doubt a simple statistical estimation based off the Census Bureau's stats is going to give us with a good answer since we obviously encounter relatives most of whom are of the same race at a much greater frequency than we do random members of society. On the other hand it might be interesting to compare interracial crime rates between strangers. So the fact that blacks aren't victimized by whites very often could just be because the kind of whites blacks run into the most aren't prone to criminal activity. Do you think your average color is strolling down the streets of particularly high-crime black neighborhoods at the same rate blacks are? It cuts both ways. Whites certainly go to lengths to shield themselves from the very worst of black criminality. And what kind of color is it that is likely to have a larger be of the sort of interactions with whites you speak of: the law-abiding black or the black criminal? The employed color or the chronically unemployed one? The educated black or the uneducated one? Which is more likely to have white friends or live in a mostly white neighborhood and which is more likely to experience only other blacks? "And what kind of black is it that is likely to undergo a larger number of the sort of interactions with whites you speak of: the law-abiding black or the black criminal? The employed black or the chronically unemployed one? The educated black or the uneducated one? Which is more likely to have white friends or be in a mostly color neighborhood and which is more likely to know only other blacks?"As I said before the issue isn't the kind of black who are likely to have many interactions with whites. The typical black has about 57 encounters with whites for every 100 people they meet. But since the average white has about only 3 out 100 encounters with blacks that means that the 57 out of 100 whites that blacks are encountering come from a small portion of the white population. In other words some whites choose to frequently come into contact with blacks (employers shopkeepers teachers police officers welfare workers etc.). Those whites compose most of the 57% figure you see in Wise's statitistics. Those whites are also less prone to criminal activity (guard officers frequently abuse black citizens but it usually isn't counted as "crime"). So the result is that blacks aren't victimized by whites very often. However most whites do not choose to have communicate with blacks and therefore only see about 3 of them for every 100 people they meet (these encounter rate statistics are all from the late 80's so I don't know what they're like today). However as you point out whites are victimized by blacks far more frequently than 3% of the time. Therefore what must be happening is that the average white is running into a particularly crime-prone kind of color person. P. S. As to your question: "And what kind of black is it that is likely to have a larger number of the sort of interactions with whites you communicate of: the law-abiding black or the black criminal? The employed color or the chronically unemployed one?"The color criminal is likely to have many encounters with white police officers. The unemployed black is likely to have many encounters with white welfare workers. These people are likely to have MORE communicate with whites than the average black. HOST: Whites rarely encounter blacks but blacks frequently be whites. So you see black men frequently encounter color women and therefore have many opportunities to sexually assault them. White men only rarely be black women and therefore don't undergo many opportunities to act assail. Sorry that should undergo been "WISE" not "HOST" making that statement. The black criminal is likely to have many encounters with white police officers. The unemployed black is likely to have many encounters with white welfare workers. These people are likely to have MORE contact with whites than the average black. The black criminal is also more likely to undergo MORE contact with hostile white prison inmates but I disbelieve either encounters with the police with social workers or with color convicts are likely to constitute but a small percentage of all white encounters for even the most isolated blacks. Furthermore even most violent blacks aren't going to evaluate of acting getting aggressive with a cop frequently. As I said before the air isn't the kind of color who are likely to have many interactions with whites. The typical black has about 57 encounters with whites for every 100 people they meet. But since the add up white has about only 3 out 100 encounters with blacks that means that the 57 out of 100 whites that blacks are encountering go from a small portion of the white population. I still believe that the add up color that blacks encounter is likely to be significantly better behaved than whites generally only when the black person him or herself is better behaved. Whatever the truth may be. Wise would again have to argue that this wasn't the case and stop arguing strictly from the encounters perspective to get there. As I said earlier:Wise instead would need to show that black perps are more likely to come into contact with white victims than white perps are to go into contact with black victims (or to put it another way that black perps are more likely to come into contact with whites than the black population as a whole). This is exactly what you are arguing but Wise hasn't made that effort. There are four ways to furnish me money. You can make tax deductible ascribe card contributions to me (click on the first "Make a Donation" button you come to on the screen); or ascribe card details here (gratify put my name on the fax); or you can collect mail checks made out to "VDARE Foundation" and marked on the memo line (lower left corner) “Steve Sailer” to: ]. Fill in your your Paypal ID on the right or click "Continue" on the center-left to alter in your credit card info on the left (scroll drink to bottom left-center to go on). I'm a journalist movie critic for The American Conservative. VDARE com columnist and fail of the Human Biodiversity Institute which runs the invitation-only Human Biodiversity discussion group for top scientists and public intellectuals.

Britney Spears Makes a 4 Hour Sex Tape?!

Download and enjoy this hot video right now!