And there you are. I wonder what race she'd claim on a census form. And if arrested, I bet she'd be classified as black.*not_secure_link*4.bp.blogspot.com/-qPQmrOGOpUs/T2NaU2cLe-I/AAAAAAAAQew/LwaorjBUKuA/s1600/blackgangstersc.jpg

 

Thank you Distant Lover, after your informational forum on " The Age of the Aggressive Incompetent Negro "I am more inclined than ever to profess that yes, I am black and proudly so. I will also say that the responses to this post were very intelligent and eloquently stated.

 

She would be listed as mixed race.

 

DL you had some valid objective points. However, reading further, I feel that your connotations towards blacks and Muslims are very negatively biased and become more subjective. You continuously refer to obviously less affluent blacks and demographically black neighborhoods. You make no mention of those who are educated professionals or even middle class and upper middle class blacks who live within the same economical class of middle and upper middle class working whites. No make no mention of the Crimes and living conditions of impoverished whites who do the same type of impoverished petty crimes ( kill to steal, drink and drugs). There are plenty of Muslims living amongst you, I and everyone else, who simply want a decent life, to be respected and to take Care of their families. Not all Muslims are extremist with plans to blow up America.

 

Also, you attempt to counteract any positivity spoken about blacks and Muslims with adversity. The bombing of Pearl Harbor did not come from a peaceful nation of people with peaceful intent.

 

I voted yes, not for racial issues, but for accuracy in the press. Another reason would be the apprehension of the perpetrator in the event he or she is still at large. I like factual information on any subject, not censored information.

 

Most Muslims are not terrorists. Most blacks are not criminals. I have stated that a number of times on this forum. Nevertheless, Muslims are much more likely to be terrorists than are people of other religions. Blacks have a significantly higher crime rate than whites and Orientals.

For a number of years I lived in a neighborhood where most of the residents were poor Orientals. I cannot remember reading in the local newspaper of an Oriental criminal suspect, or of an Oriental who had been arrested or convicted of a crime, although I imagine it happened on occasion. In the black majority city where I live now, black crime is constantly in the news, even though the local newspaper has a policy of not printing the race or races of criminal suspects.

In my previous city I could walk anywhere at any hour of the night. I cannot do that now without risking my life.

I have read that when income is held constant, blacks still have a crime rate that is two and a half times the white rate. It is difficult to find information on this on the internet. Writing a PhD thesis on this kind of thing is not the way to advance an academic career.

I have found this:

During the 1960s, for instance, the residents of San Francisco's Chinatown were among America's poorest people—with the most unemployment, the worst housing conditions, the least education, and the highest rate of tuberculosis in their city. Yet despite such hardships, only five people of Chinese ancestry went to jail in the entire state of California in 1965.[1]

Similarly, Jewish immigrants to America during the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries also repudiated criminality despite having to face extreme economic deprivation. Historian Max Dimont describes them:

"The majority of these immigrants had arrived penniless, all their worldly belongings wrapped in a bundle.... Most of [them] arrived in New York. Some made their way into other cities,... but the majority remained in New York, settling in the Lower East Side of Manhattan, [which was] a neighborhood of the poor. Sociologists, with their impressive charts showing the number of toilets (or lack of the), the number of people per room, the low per capita income, paint a dismal picture of the Lower East Side Jewish slum. But their charts do not capture its uniqueness. Though it bred tuberculosis and rheumatism, it did not breed crime and venereal disease. It did not spawn illiteracy, illegitimate children, or deserted wives. Library cards were in constant use."[2]
*not_secure_link*www.discoverthenetworks.org/viewSubCategory.asp?id=1636

 

Shooter smirks

"YA THINK??!!

 

I have been talking about differences in civil crime rates, not national aggression.

Japanese aggression from the late nineteenth century to 1945 was out of character. The only other example of Japanese aggression was a brief attempt to conquer Korea from 1592 to 1598. It failed.

 

All the same old silly nonsense we've had to hear, and refute, yet again. If in fact there were a racial distinction to be made for intelligence and/or the predisposition to violence, we would not see any race suddenly and for a prolonged period act contrary to their genetic programming. Might as well ask a human to breathe water.

So, come on old dog; explain how a society can ignore it's genetic programming and become murderous butchers.

Or, if that is beyond your ability, explain how it is that you ignore the war crimes statistics and only rely on fallible and questionable crime statistics to arrive at your conclusion.

 

Incorrect! See census bureau rules about race classifications, then pick again

 

Wow. Nice try. You been talking about RACIAL differences. Now, you wanna talk "civil crime rates". Nope. Not getting away with it.

Japanese aggression out of character...............really?
So the question remains; why? How is it they so enthusiastically were able to ignore their own genetic code?

Let me help you find a more realistic explanation than you've been offering. You may consider offering any of the following;
1) It was like the Japanese hit puberty.
2) It was like they were premenstrual
3) All lies; the Japanese never did any of this
4) They got a collective bonk on the head
5) Diet. You know, they ate bad fish

 

when you think about "white collar" crime reporting, how often do you ever hear of investigations seeking the capture of CEO's, corrupt politicians/civil servants etc describing their race?
it seems a strange idea, but why do we compare these men in a different light to street criminals when the crimes of these men affect victims on even a global scale?

if we are to make an honest attempt to compare the statistics of crimes comitted by different races, it needs to include all crimes, and all races, and how the races compare in comitting all the different crimes. that would be the scientific method.
i agree with this report, in that to focus on only certain groups or certain types of crime is a misdirection of the true issue.

 

DL it's so unfortunate that your personal experiences have caused you to fear blacks and Muslims. It prohibits cultural growth and understanding and promotes close minded beliefs. I simply could not imagine having so much disdain for a culture or religion that it force's fear into my everyday agenda, affecting how I live. I have to wonder about your economical status. I do not want to assume, but it sounds as if you tend live in poorly diverse and lower income neighborhood's. The higher up the economical ladder you are, the better you can afford "safe" neighborhood's. Crime has no preference and no face. However a better neighborhood, even with a few minorities and Muslims might make you feel more protected when walking down the street.

 

I agree! A crime is a crime. What's the difference between the crackhead who steals $40 from the convenient store than the high profile banker who steals 1cent from each customer over a 10 year period........making him a millionaire. The difference........one was more patient lol.

 

The genetic programming of a race influences tendencies, not unchanging characteristics that always prevail.

 

It certainly is true that affluent whites are shielded from black crime. This usually gives them an unrealistically favorable opinion of the race. Nevertheless, upper middle class white liberals avoid sending their children to public schools if the nearest public school has a large black student body. This is true, even when the public schools in the area are well funded.

Lower middle class white liberals usually become lower middle class white conservatives after a few experiences with black crime. This was the reason the New Deal coalition broke up during the late 1960's, and why the Republican Party has dominated the United States ever since.

The website no longer exists. Nevertheless, there was a website that I posted several times on this forum that demonstrated that in 2003 in Washington, DC the public school system was more expensive per student than public school systems in each of the 50 states. It also demonstrated that the black student population in D.C. public schools was the highest, and that test scores in D.C. public schools were the lowest.

Washington, D.C. has lots of white liberals. Nearly all of them send their children to nearly all white private schools.

 

The hypocrisy of upper middle class white liberals regarding blacks has been noticed by whites who cannot afford to send their children to private schools, and who cannot afford to move away from dangerous black neighborhoods.

It has also been noticed that the same black and white liberals who call for a conversation on race have made an honest conversation difficult. They have made it dangerous to criticize blacks, even when the criticisms are well documented, as mine are.

Nevertheless, it is perfectly safe to complain about white racism, and police brutality against blacks.

 

Exactly why is it perfectly safe to criticize white racism and police brutality against blacks? Wouldn't some crazy conservative activist organize marches in the street? What about violent protests by those evil tea party people? Surely there would be some out cry from MSNBC. After all racism is racism, surely it does not matter to the media which group is being discriminated against? You can't possibly mean good men like Chris Matthews would condone racism of any kind? After all these media people are highly educated, and surely must be sincere in promoting the truth. Do you know something I should be made aware of?