And the Walls Came Tumbling Down

And the Walls Came Tumbling Down

http://stuffblackpeopledontlike.blogspot.com/

Former Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick called the black insurrection in 1967 the “1967 Rebellion”; now, in 90 percent black Detroit,  40 percent of the city’s population plans to move within five years.

The ultimate question that must be asked in 2012 America is simply this: with the elimination of all discriminatory laws – Jim Crow – on the book (save those that discriminate against white people); a media and entertainment industry that does everything possible to create the illusion of rampant white racism continuing to hold blacks down, while simultaneously publishing stories and producing movies/television programs that show the promotion of blacks to new jobs and government positions as the purest example of “progressiveness”; with all this in mind, are black people safer in majority black neighborhoods/communities/cities in 2012 or are they safer in majority white neighborhoods/communities/cities in 2012?

The answer to this question can be found in 90 percent black Detroit, the city that explicitly represents the legacy of the civil rights movement in America. Embattled former “hip hop” Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick called the 1967 black riot – that convinced the white residents of Detroit to flee the city – the “1967 rebellion” (blacks rebelling against white rule: to blacks, any white rule is “racist” and must be defeated) in his book Surrendered: The Rise, Fall and Revolution of Kwame Kilpatrick, and article in the Detroit News by Christine MacDonald is a stunning reminder of what 40 years of uninterrupted black political rule will do for a city[Poll: Crime drives Detroiters out; 40% expect to leave within 5 years, 10-9-12]:

Detroit’s crime crisis is prompting such pessimism that 40 percent of residents plan to move within five years, according to a comprehensive poll of Detroiters’ attitudes about their city and leadership.

Residents overwhelmingly believe the city is on the wrong track and have no faith that city leaders have a plan to turn it around. Crime is by far their biggest worry — even higher than finding a job in a city where some put the true unemployment rate as high as 50 percent.

The survey suggests that, unless city officials can combat violence, efforts to halt decades of decline will fail. The city’s population already has fallen by 1 million over the past 50 years, and residents including Michael LaBlanc said they are ready to leave.

“There’s an aura of fear that just pervades the whole neighborhood,” said LaBlanc, 63, who installed a security system at his northeast side home last week because he’s weary of car thieves and gunfire.

“It’s almost like being in prison. We always like to have at least one person home for security sake.”

The survey is believed to be the most authoritative of its kind in years.

Commissioned by The Detroit News and funded by the Thompson Foundation, the survey provided a rare, statistically sound measure of public opinion. Detroiters have been traditionally difficult to accurately poll.

Eight hundred residents were surveyed by land and cellular phone Sept. 22-25 by the Chicago-based Glengariff Group Inc. The survey — which has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.5 percentage points — asked residents’ feelings about city leadership, schools, transportation, quality of life and overall optimism.

The results were stark — and despairing.

Nearly two-thirds, 66 percent, say the city is on the wrong track. The poll found low support for all city officials except Police Chief Ralph Godbee, who retired Monday amid a sex scandal that emerged after the survey was conducted.

The survey’s author said crime is the biggest obstacle to stemming an exodus that has seen Detroit’s population drop to about 700,000. The city lost a quarter of its residents from 2000 to 2010, an average of one every 22 minutes.

“Crime is the pre-eminent challenge facing the residents of Detroit,” said pollster Richard Czuba, Glengariff’s president. “That was a defining element of the survey. It’s absolutely the driving factor.

“It shows a tremendous mindset of exodus. If you want people to stay, you have to deal with crime first. That’s devastating for the future of the city and it needs to be dealt with.”

Nearly 58 percent of respondents said crime is their “biggest daily challenge.” That far surpassed unemployment and the economy at 12.8 percent.

The survey suggests that many residents who remain would like to leave but are stuck: More than half, 50.9 percent, say they would live in another city if they could, while 39.9 percent plan to move in the next five years.

The city of Detroit isn’t to blame for the crime (indeed, black crime rates have always been there, approaching 66 percent of all violent crime in the early 1960s, when the city was nearly 75 percent white); black people committing the crime and a culture of “no snitching” and coddling black criminals is to blame.

Detroit has the largest population of black people of any city outside of Africa, and the regression to the mean  in the hands of almost monolithic black-rule since the election of Coleman Young to the mayor’s office in 1973 offers the type of powerful evidence required to answer the question posed in the opening paragraph.

Detroit News survey: 50.9 % of those living in Detroit “would live in another city if they could”

The black residents of Detroit can’t provide enough tax revenue to ensure adequate police or fire protection, with payroll for the dwindling number of public workers protecting life and property paid for via federal grants. Detroit Fire Fighters Association (DFFA) President Dan McNamara said “nearly 90 percent of the city is experiencing a delayed response time under the city’s current plan. “Every day is Angel’s Night right now,” said McNamara. “We are a free burn zone right now.”

With 9 out of 10 residents of Detroit being black, the remnants of a civilization they were bequeathed when white people (85 percent of the population of Detroit in 1954) fled after the “1967 rebellion” is fair game to arsonists. Opulent homes that once sheltered the families responsible for Detroit ascension to “world-class” city status are now reduced to ash by the unforgiven black majority, no longer fearful of their acts being investigated by a cash-strapped (with the largest percentage of black police of any city in America) police department or a fire department whose every division is on the chopping block. [Wayne County Prosecutor Kym Worthy: Arson unit could be snuffed, Michigan Live, by Gus Burns, 101-12]:

On Friday, Detroit firefighters congregated at the Fillmore Theater in Detroit to watch the documentary “Burn” about the Detroit Fire Department and how its members deal with 30,000 fire calls per year in the cash-strapped city.

(More about “Burn”)

The thousands of vacant homes and buildings are a beacon for firebugs looking to commit arson and account for many of the department’s calls.

Federal Bureau of Investigation-reported arson crime in Detroit increased more than 70 percent between 2009 and 2010 and leveled out thereafter.

Conversely the city’s ability to investigate and prosecute such crime is on the decline.

Personnel to investigate arson in Wayne County Prosecutor Kym Worthy’s office may soon be nonexistent.

“Quite frankly, with the current budget allocation I have been given this office will not be able to maintain an arson unit,” she said Monday. “These cases are complex and time consuming. It would be a disservice to the public and a danger to the community if we lost this important unit.”

90 percent black Detroit is living on borrowed time, fully funded by federal grants. The majority of the black residents, who are directly responsible for the woeful state of the city and the crime they desperately want to flee from, are planning to leave Detroit in the next five years.

These are the sons and daughters, the grandchildren of those who participated in the “1967 revolution” in Detroit — and they want to absolve themselves from the 90 percent black city whose genesis rests in removal of white people from the Motor City.

The Black Undertow of Detroit will attempt to migrate out of the city, exporting the same problems that these black residents flee to whichever city they settle in.

And as Detroit’s black population decreases due to this migration, don’t be surprised if the city’s fortunes increase.

Fox 2 News Headlines

Posted by Stuff Black People Don’t Like

Atlanta, Affirmative Action, and White Managerial Elites

Gone With the Wind: Atlanta, Affirmative Action, and White Managerial Elites

stuffblackpeopledontlike.blogspot.com

 

Ronald H. Bayor’s Race & The Shaping of Twentieth-Century Atlanta is one of Disingenuous White Liberal (DWL) scholarly books that blames the current state of the Black Mecca on the lingering vestiges of white racism.

The growth of Atlanta is in predominately white areas

Despite Atlanta – since 1973 – being a city firmly under the iron Black heel when it comes to who controls City Hall and the hiring/firing of public employees (not to mention the creation of the Minority Business Enterprise, which mandates a significant portion of city projects go to minority firms), Bayor’s book places all the blame for The City too Busy to Hate’s shortcomings on white people.

Just as in Detroit, it was white flight from Black criminality to virtually crime free white suburbs surrounding the city that allowed Black people to become the majority of Atlanta by 1970 and elect Maynard Jackson in 1973. This event was the culmination of years of cohesive actions by the Black community in Atlanta:

“The black response to a city being shaped by segregation was to form their own self-help organizations, develop businesses and colleges to serve the African-American community, negotiate for land and housing, fight for political inclusion, and, most important, to continually point out to white Atlantans what should have been obvious: measures that diminished black life in the city also had negative effects on whites. Black Atlanta’s community development, resistance to or bypassing of white policies, and implementation of their own policies after 1973 were some of the shaping aspects of race that one could see in Atlanta.”(p. 257, Race & The Shaping of Twentieth-Century Atlanta)

Black Atlanta did implement their own policies starting in 1973 (minority contracting mandates, which transferred tax-revenue to the Black community) as outlined here:

The election of Maynard Jackson, who has died of a heart attack aged 65, as the first black mayor of Atlanta, Georgia, in 1973 was a major landmark in the southern US city’s history.


It signposted a change of guard in the local political class from white to black; no white person has since been elected mayor.


Jackson, who served three terms in office, was a prominent exponent of affirmative action.


In his first two terms, he rattled Atlanta’s old cosy business relationships, alienating some, but wooing them back in his third term with deft deal-making skills. In 1978, he signed a law requiring 25% of the city’s projects to be set aside for minority firms. The policy, which still operates today, made Atlanta the most hospitable place in America for black entrepreneurs.


He also pushed through an affirmative action program that made it mandatory for contractors to take on minority-owned businesses as partners, and forced the city’s major law firms to hire African-American lawyers. He threatened that “tumbleweeds would run across the runways of Atlanta airport” if blacks were not included in city contracts.

This is the reason Atlanta is known as “The Black Mecca”; an aggressive affirmative action program implemented to enrich Black citizens of Atlanta, that resulted in enticing Black people from around the country to return to the city (and surrounding metro Atlanta area) to get a piece of the pie. An article from Ebony in 2002 notes:

Though Census figures show that Atlanta’s Black population has dipped slightly (it peaked at 282,911 in 1980 and stands at 255,689 today), more than 150,000 African-Americans still moved into the city during the 1990s. The real boom was in the surrounding bedroom communities in DeKalb, Fulton and Cobb counties. More than half a million Blacks swelled the population of those communities in the 1990s. In fact, more Blacks moved to metropolitan Atlanta than to any other metro area in the country during the last decade.

Even in once-segregated strongholds like DeKalb County, which cuts a small swath through the city of Atlanta, Blacks have changed the face of the social and political landscape. In November 2000, DeKalb residents elected 41-year-old Vernon Jones as the county’s first Black chief executive. “The times are definitely changing in and around this metropolitan area,” Jones maintains. “The whole area is just much more diverse, and that’s changing things. There are some glass ceilings, too. We still don’t have a Black senator or a Black governor. But the population is growing. More and more Black people are moving here, affluent Black people. That is making a difference.”

Today, Atlanta boasts more Black-owned companies per capita than any other city in the nation except Washington, D.C., according to the U.S. Department of Commerce. It is home to the nation’s second-largest Black insurance company, Atlanta Life. Citizens Trust Bank, the fourth-largest Black bank, also is based there.

“There are business role models here like Jesse Hill and Herman Russell who allow young people to see what the possibilities are,” says Thomas Dortch, national chairman of 100 Black Men of America.

But the new economic landscape produced by the labor, lobbying and civil rights leadership of Atlantans such as Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., Andrew Young and Congressman John Lewis also has created scintillating opportunities in areas where Blacks previously were shut out. As Atlanta has grown, so too have the fortunes of scores of Black businessmen who have participated in its amazing development. With the backing of Maynard Jackson, who is credited with initiating the building boom that put Atlanta on the map (some call Hartsfield airport “the airport that Maynard built”), business owners like construction magnate Herman J. Russell, whose H.J. Russell & Co. is the 14th-largest Black business in the country, literally paved the way for the unprecedented success of the Black businesses that followed.

Using aggressive affirmative action initiatives, Jackson ushered in an era in which the percentage of the contracts Black businesses received from the city grew from less than one-tenth of 1 percent in 1970 to more than $250 million today. It is said that 90 percent of the contracts that go to minority-owned firms that do business with American airports are at Hartsfield. Herman Russell, along with his partner, pioneering restaurateur James Paschal, operate several of those concessions, but many young Black business owners also have broken into this lucrative territory.

More and more Black people – who are vacating cities they helped ruin during the Great Migration of 20th century – are moving back to Atlanta. Fittingly, there is a correlation to property value drops, lower tax revenue collected – resulting in teacher and public employees layoffs and a lack of funds for improvements in infrastructure (and increased crime) – and further white flight from these counties Black people are settling in.

Attracted by affirmative action policies that helped enrich one segment of the population, one wonders if metro Atlanta’s white population would ever dare unite to defend their interests? The looming showdown over North Fulton vs. South Fulton would lead one to say “yes, they will.”

But its not just affirmative action policies that have helped enrich Black people in the private sector.

In describing Freaknic – a raucous Black spring break event that was eventually evicted from Atlanta – in the opening chapter of A Man in Full, Tom Wolfe writes:

Atlanta was their city, the Black Beacon, as the Mayor called it, 70 percent black. The Mayor was black… and twelve of the nineteen city council members were black, and the chief of police was black, and the fire chief was black, and practically the whole civil service was black, and the Power was black. (p.17)

But going back to that quote from Boyer, one glaring inconsistency with logic sticks out:

to continually point out to white Atlantans what should have been obvious: measures that diminished black life in the city also had negative effects on whites.

Actually, it’s measures that improved Black life in the city that have had negative effects on whites. More importantly, it’s had negative effects on Black people. Despite these affirmative action programs, poverty (and crime, which has no relation to poverty) in the Black community in metro Atlanta is at levels that rival any in all of America:

Atlanta’s status as a haven for African-Americans was greatly reinforced by the election of the city’s first black mayor, Maynard Jackson, in 1973. This accomplishment was due not to the progressive sentiments of the majority of Atlanta’s white population, but rather their departure from the city in big numbers. In the book Imagineering Atlanta: The Politics of Place in the City of Dreams, Charles Rutheiser reports:

He (Jackson) assumed a confrontationalist posture vis-a-vis the white business community, arguing passionately for a greater distribution of the benefit of growth among African-Americans. Ina  showdown over the new airport, Jackson succeeded in establishing a minority business enterprise program that became widely regarded as a model for minority set-asides for municipal contracts. Together, with extensive affirmative action hiring by Atlanta-based corporations like Coca-Cola and Delta Airlines, and an already-established black business community, the set-aside program made Atlanta a nationally known center for African-American economic opportunity in the latter part of the 1970s and 1980s.


Despite economic opportunities for the middle class and a continuous black presence at city hall for two decades, Atlanta was far from being a decent place, much less a paradise, for the majority of its African American residents. By any and every statistical measure, from poverty and unemployment to graduation rates and crime, the quality of life “enjoyed” by the city’s African-American majority plummeted during this period. The percentage of black households living in poverty nearly doubled between 1980 and 1990, to more than a third of all households. Over half of the city’s children lived in poverty. 


Nowhere was the divide between the two black Atlantas more manifest than in the area of crime. Atlanta was nationally renowned for its high crime rate in the late 1960s and early 1970s. Its homicide rate more than doubled between 1965 and 1970, making the city the country’s “murder capital.” Atlanta has retained the dubious honor of being one of the nation’s most violent cities to the present day. The vast majority of these crimes occurred, then as now, in the cities poorest census tracts to the south, east, and west of downtown, areas that are more than 95 percent African American.

Violent crime hasn’t stopped in Atlanta (where Black people have a virtual monopoly on crime), it’s just no longer reported by the police or the Atlanta Journal Constitution.

A simple question has to be asked at this point: who were those white people in power in Atlanta that caused Black people to unite and create cohesive organizations that would – in turn – consolidate political power in their own hands (both in the public and private sector)? Who were these white people that allowed Atlanta to become the Black Mecca?:

An incredibly close-knit group of friends, neighbors, and business partners from the city’s posh Northside, the power structure shared a common history. “Almost all of us had been born and raised within a mile or two each other,” remembered Ivan Allen Jr., a member of the group who would succeed (William) Hartsfield as Atlanta’s mayor from 1962 to 1970. “We had gone to the same schools, to the same churches, tot he same golf courses, to the same summer camps. We had dated the same girls. We had played and worked within our group.” Member of the power structure not only shared a common past and present; they shared a common vision of the future. In Allen’s telling, they were “dedicated to the betterment of Atlanta as much as a Boy Scout troop is dedicated to fresh milk and clean air.”(p. 28, White Flight: Atlanta and the Making of Modern Conservatism, by Kevin M. Kruse)

The actions by the white elite (what can only be described as the white “Managerial Elite” of Black-Run America) from 1940 – 1970 resulted in the vacating of the city by middle class whites (who couldn’t insulate their families from Black crime and integrated schools as the Northside elite could with private schools) and, in turn, resulted in the nightmarish of 2012 metro Atlanta: an entire metro area witnessing property depreciation, increased crime, and staggering costs for commutes.

Interesting that despite government mandated policies of affirmative action, minority contracts, and hiring practices that have turned all public jobs (tax supported) in the metro Atlanta area into a Black vocational program, Black communities there are in complete disarray.

Those areas that stayed white (despite a hostile government, private sector hiring practices that favor non-whites, and an onus on entrepreneurship): thriving. Atlanta has been rebuilt up Georgia 400 to Roswell, Sandy Springs, Alpharetta and Forsyth County.

The tallest buildings in all of suburban America, the 30+ story King and Queen Towers – The Concourse at Landmark Center in Sandy Springs – recently went on the market and analysts predict the sale will rival what the tallest building in the southeast (which was foreclosed), the Bank of America Plaza, went for. The former complex is located Outside the Perimeter, in a city that is majority white; the latter located in downtown Atlanta.

Sandy Springs is one of these primarily white cities in North Fulton that could secede from the county tomorrow and instantly see property values rise dramatically.

More on this later this week.

Since 1973, untold financial investing in the Black Mecca (through primarily white tax-dollars and the appropriation of collected revenue toward minority contracts and the establishment of an entrenched Black monopoly on public jobs) has resulted in the creation of a Black elite in Atlanta, which should now represent a sunk cost. No matter how many private companies enact affirmative action policies in hiring, this too will represent a sunk cost over time.

Atlanta – The City too Busy to Hate – represents a microcosm of how one can look at the entire nation after Black-Run America (BRA) rose to power: The white managerial elite rushing to cede power to Blacks, who have and always will maintain a close racial cohesion. It has been the zeitgeist in America for some time to be seen as “progressive” when it comes to Black America.

The state of 2012 Atlanta and the metro Atlanta area is directly correlated to two things: 1. Blacks moving from around the nation to city to take advantage of affirmative action policies enacted in 1973 that have created the facade of a “Black Mecca” — only because of the misappropriation of tax-dollars by a racially cohesive drive to augment Blacks, and, 2. White people trying to avoid living anywhere near Black people. No matter the distance of the commute, having limited interaction with Black people is preferred.

One will never be able to quantify (nor qualify) what might have been for Atlanta – and metro Atlanta – were a race-based policy not enacted in 1973 and instead, a merit-based policy enshrined into law.

The white managerial elite of Atlanta sold the city to Organized Blackness; as a result, every one has suffered.

Such is the case for all of America.

To look back at what Mr. Boyer stated in his book, it should become clear: the day that white people decide to do any of things he listed as the Black response to “segregation” in Atlanta, is the day BRA ends.

Hilariously, it looks like it will be in the very Northside of Atlanta (North Fulton) that sees secession attempted and a new county created… Look to a forthcoming essay on Vdare to see what this means.

The seeds of BRAs destruction are in the soil of Atlanta.

Race Wars

Race Wars

http://cliffsofinsanity2010.blogspot.com/2012/04/race-wars.html

 

So….Zimmerman will be charged with second degree murder.

What’s next?

Remember this?

And this . . .



and this…



The same template is being played out.

  • Violence against a black person behaving badly
  • Media suppression of the full story and/or fabrication of facts (or tampering with the entire jury pool on a national level)
  • Race hustlers play on stereotypes to whip up hatred and anger
  • A certain demographic expects death for the accused threatening “no justice, no peace”
  • The jury cannot reach the “correct” verdict
  • Mass riots happen
  • The accused will be hauled into court again and again until the “correct” outcome is determined
  • It’s an election year

Oh wait, was that waaaaacist to actually say that if the verdict doesn’t go a certain way that there will be riots?  Well, when you’ve got a Community Organizer In Chief that springs to the defense of someone like Robert Gates, Jr.-saying that the police acted stupidly, yet sits on the New Black Panther Party voter intimidation in 2008 and is silent on the $10,000 dead or alive bounty placed on Zimmerman’s head, what do you expect?


You think Eric “My People”, “Nation of Cowards” Holder is going to get in the way of that train that his boss is driving?  Eric Holder is nothing more than a Whitney Houston bodyguard (link) to Obama-or a doctor for Michael Jackson if you like.

The job for most handlers is not to protect the celebrity from himself/herself.  The job is to protect the celebrity from reality around them.  Shield them from consequences of their own reckless and stupid actions as well as from any unwashed masses who might touch the hem of their garments.

You are about to witness Rules for Radicals, #13 (Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it) being applied with the full force and weight of Leviathan against one man.  From where he lives, to what he drives, to where he works, to if he is allowed work in certain places, to where he shops, to whether he has any money with which to shop, to where he keeps what little money he will have left, to his church, to his family, to his very soul. They will never forgive him for living and they won’t be satisfied until Zimmerman self-immolates like Thomas J. Ball

Remember me?

And don’t forget the most important point, it’s an election year.  Most candidates for office might consider running on their record, if they actually have one.  Obama’s record is dismal and the country is teetering.  What do they have left?  Just like the Gabrielle Giffords rally, fear and smear. 

But now it’s time to draw contrasts to 1992 template. After all, it is not 1992.

In 1992, the National Guard, the Army and the Marines were eventually sent into L.A. to calm the riots.

“Never let a crisis go to waste”, may also be correctly interpreted as, “Don’t solve the problem too soon.  Wait until it’s big enough to be worth solving.”  Proof? 

In 2010, Barack Obama did everything that he could to hinder the repair and cleanup of the Deepwater Horizons oil mess in the Gulf of Mexico.  That BP was able to finally resolve it at all was irrelevant to Obama.  You remember as well as I do how The Regime handled the symptoms, the problem, and the principals involved.

With that in mind, do you see Obama being the kind of guy who would send in the US Army or Marines to quell rioters in Sanford, Florida-or anywhere else?  Or would it be more in character for him to shackle any and all efforts by police or private citizens to defend themselves and/or restore order?  Would it be more in character to wage lawfare against any and all efforts that are moderately successful at defending persons, property, or restoring order?

Team Obama will do everything that they possibly can to incite, expand, and perpetuate the unrest wherever it begins in America.  And they will do everything they can think of to hinder an end to such unrest.

Oh…and then there’s this blurb,

“As (U.N.) High Commissioner for Human Rights, I call for an immediate investigation,”

It’s pretty rich of the U.N. to be concerned for human rights violations in America given the way that so many other countries treat their people. 

So if it goes to riots and streetfighting, if Obama directs his attention against those who wish to restore order-thus extending the crisis and worsening the damage, then it makes a nice scenario for the blue helmets to suggest that maybe they could “help out”.  Just saying. . .

Remember what Gandalf says, “They are coming.”

Updated:
Continuing to contrast 1992 with today, it’s also worth considering that “climate change” has occurred.  The cry wolf of “racism” and “racist” have been used so many times since 1992 that a good number of Americans simply shrug their shoulders at it and blow it off.  Who could blame them?

Consider this visit by Quannell X and the NBPP to the Houston area in 2007 and the results.

Presumably, X, broadcast his intentions beforehand and folks responded with a “peaceful” rally in support of then 61 year old Joe Horn.  I wonder how it would have gone for folks had the NBPP decided to try and carry out the threats they repeatedly make?

Consider the change in the tools and thoughts of Americans since 1992 or 2007.  Another set of Rodney King Riots may happen again, but the outcome could be very different.

 

 

“Obama’s Son” Nkosi Thadiwe Targeted Brittany Watts for Being White

“Obama’s Son” Nkosi Thadiwe Targeted Brittany Watts for Being White

http://stuffblackpeopledontlike.blogspot.com/

Obama’s Son: Nkosi Tadiwe. Targeted three white girls for being white, reports WSBTV

Brian Nichols wanted to start a race war, believing that Black males were being unfairly incarcerated by an evil society bent on maintaining white supremacy. In actuality, it’s just Black people’s – primarily Black males’ –predilection for breaking the law that sees them incarcerated in such disproportionate numbers.

It appears that the accused killer of Brittany Watts (who also targeted two other white females) had delusions of racial grandeur similar to those of Nichols (Court records show race may be motive in shooting rampage, WSBTV. April 9, 2012):

Channel 2 Action News has learned new information about a possible motive in a deadly midtown shooting from last summer.

Police said a woman was killed and two others injured when a security guard went on a shooting rampage in a parking lot. Channel 2’s Dave Huddleston obtained the 43-page lawsuit from the case that was filed in state court April 5. The documents show that race may have played a role in the shootings.

The sound of gunfire echoed off midtown buildings July 15. When it was over, marketing executive Brittany Watts had been shot in the neck and killed. Police said the shooter, security guard Nkosi Thadiwe, took off in Watts’ car and fired a gun, randomly shooting two more – Lauren Garcia, who was paralyzed, and Tiffany Ferenczy.

Nine months after the shooting, lawsuits have been filed against the defendant, the security company he worked for, Allied Barton, and the owners of the building where the shooting took place.

They said Thandiwe demonstrated an intensely negative attitude toward another race, which was unnamed. About a month prior to the shooting, Thandiwe had an altercation with a visitor with the parking garage.

Documents state he assailed a visiting courier with racial epithets and had to be physically restrained by company personnel from striking and causing harm to visitors.

Company officials, lawyers and shooting victims declined to comment on the matter.

But attorney Musa Ghanayem, who is unaffiliated with the case, gave his legal perspective.

“I saw where there were a couple of instances prior where they have red flags come up; that Mr. Thandiwe has some issues as a security guard,” Ghanayem said.

Thadiwe is still in Fulton County jail. His defense team has asked the court for a mental evaluation. According to documents found before the shooting, there was another act of violence, Huddleston reported.

Black Rage killed Brittany Watts. No one cares nor marches with “hoodies”
For those wondering, Thadiwe is a Black man. He looks like Obama’s hypothetical son. 

Watts is dead and no one cares (save Nick Stix). The story of the murder of Brittany Watts has been buried in the Black hole that is Atlanta in much the same manner as are the continuous assaults on white Georgia Tech students by Black people.
The story of Watts being gunned down hit me hard.

And now, the second battle of Atlanta begins. This time, we wage war with a pen.

Brian Nichols hoped to start a race war, yet this was not covered by the Mainstream Media (MSM). Thadiwe targeted three white girls in Midtown (Atlanta) because of their race, and the silence of that same MSM – even the Atlanta press – while outrageous is tragically expected.

The privilege of being white indeed.

Brittany Watts will never have the chance to enjoy being a wife; a mother; a grandmother. How many other voiceless, now lifeless, citizens of Atlanta are in the same position?

She could have been any white girl who grew up in the metro Atlanta area, safe in one of the Whitopia’s that surround the Black Mecca of America. Moving to Atlanta to start her career and family, her life was taken in a moment of racial hate that doesn’t fit the politically correct narrative for a “hate crime” in Black-Run America (BRA).

The Asymmetry of America

The Asymmetry of America

John Derbyshire and the unNational nonReview

During Easter Christians like to remember the crucifixion of an innocent man for his words, so it was entirely appropriate that John Derbyshire was sacked at this time from the National Review for innocently writing an article for another magazine that intruded on America’s central taboo of race. But there was more to it than that. This case also helped to reveal some of the “uncomfortable truths” (notice how these two words increasingly go together) about America and the decline of the national discourse once represented by the likes of the National Review.

This wasn’t the first time Derbyshire had expressed “politically incorrect” views on race. In the past he has even admitted to being a “tolerant racist,” so one has to wonder about the timing of his dismissal. Perhaps it was because his latest article came too close to the canonization of America’s latest saint, Saint Trayvon of Sanford, the patron saint of Skittles, or perhaps it was the fact that Derbyshire’s face was an increasingly bad fit among the growing ranks of wet-behind-the-ears, multicultural, Israel-loving Neo-Cons who have now ‘occupied’ the National Review.

Probably it also had something to do with the fact that paying readers are no longer as important in terms of generating income as they once were, as Derbyshire seems to have been one of NR’s most popular writers. Magazines now increasingly rely on advertising income and online operations, which means that the puritanical PR demands of companies not to be associated with anything “offensive” become disproportionately important. This represents something of a challenge, because, in order to remain interesting, magazines have to skate pretty close to the thin ice of offensiveness to keep up interest. For several years, Derbyshire’s writing seemed to be a good fit for NR, being interesting without being needlessly offensive.

Whatever reasons lie behind his sacking, the event itself was notable for a several reasons. First, there was the concerted “shitstorm.” This started with reliably leftist heavyweight publications, like The Atlantic and The Guardian in the UK, flagging up the article in the lowly Taki’s e-zine. This was then followed by a massive surge of anti-Derbyshire comments at Taki’s and elsewhere denouncing Derbyshire’s “racism” from people who had obviously never visited the site before and seemed to be using cut-and-paste garbage from some liberal/ leftist trollbook.

Given the time in the canonical calendar, this was all a bit reminiscent of the mob baying for Jesus’s blood. Next, Judas-like, National Review colleagues started leaving little messages on the internet, distancing themselves from Derbyshire, one-by-one, followed up by a coup-de-grace at the hands of Caiaphas himself, Richard Lowry the National Review’s editor.

When the magazine was set up in the 1950s, the case could still be made that America was a nation, and that because it was a reasonably coherent entity, there was some sense in establishing a Conservative political magazine that sought to review it as a whole; hence the magazine’s dull but descriptive name. Reviewing, by the way, means to look at, examine, and analyze something so as to offer opinion, insight, and enlightenment. Something to bear in mind in the present age.

Over several decades, however, the nation that the magazine was set up to review changed so spectacularly that there is no longer any certainty that it is an actual nation with a unified culture and identity. The most obvious of the many divisions that have arisen is that Blacks are no longer held to the same standards as the rest of the country, with the result that a great many of them have simply given up trying to live in a way compatible with Whites. While some see this as a disaster for the “Black family,” it can also be seen as the rejection of what are essentially Northern European modes of behaviour, and the reassertion of the tribal and extended family patterns inherent in African populations.

The changes that America has undergone are not only significant in themselves, they also have severe journalistic repercussions. These have beeb clearly revealed in the Derbyshire case. While the old National Review could critique the nation as a whole and examine the most important issues, including race, with a degree of frankness and honesty, the present day mainstream media do so at their peril.

With the recent sacking of Pat Buchanan from MSNBC and now Derbyshire many will say we are moving into a zone of growing intolerance and political correctness. This is partially true, but the real reason is that the changing nature of America means it can no longer bear the strain of being honestly debated by its own mainstream media. To do this honestly and frankly, as Buchanan and Derbyshire did, emphasizes the fault lines and threatens to rip them apart.

This creates a major difficulty because you can’t understand America or any of its aspects without bringing a frank discussion of race into the picture. For example, in the case of education, how do you deal with the problem of a failing public school system without looking at the real problem, the inherently lower IQs of a significant part of the population? To understand an entity like America without addressing the issue of race is simply unthinkable, but to bring race into it also unleashes the kind of emotions that makes a sensible debate practically impossible. Catch 22!

But America is not the only multicultural or multiracial society. There are scores throughout the world, and the truth is that most of them handle race a lot better than America does. For example, Switzerland with four separate languages is clearly a multicultural country, but there the different cultural groups can deal with their differences and common interests without claiming that Romansch, German, French, or Italian are “social constructs” or resorting to stupid platitudes about the content of each man’s character.

Malaysia is a multiracial society with quite different racial groups, each with its own interests, but through an honest racial dialogue they have managed to create a society where the cleverness of the Chinese can be partially balanced by affirmative action that benefits the indigenous Malays and allows the two groups to create a reasonably effective symbiosis.

An examination of Spain, Lebanon, India, Russia, and Egypt will reveal countries that admit and deal with significant cultural and racial differences. It’s not always pretty and there are often problems, but in none of these countries is race consigned to the realm of taboos as it is in America.

Compared to these states, America has a special problem. These other countries are largely the result of “organic” historical processes that pushed their different populations together. America, by contrast, is much more the product of far-ranging economic processes, like Trans-Atlantic emigration from Europe and the African slave trade overlaid with modern mass immigration. Because of this different racial elements have been thrown together, and are much more disparate in character. This creates much greater ‘asymmetry’ in the differing racial characteristics, especially between Blacks and Whites.

In Switzerland the German Swiss and French Swiss are different but there is a rough equivalence that allows them to work together with mutual respect, deal with differences, and strike deals that are mutually acceptable. The same can be said for Castilians, Catalans, and Basques in Spain, and Hundus, Sikhs, Muslims, Gujaratis, and Bengalis in India. These groups are all different, but the differences are not so great or one-sided as to render them completely asymmetrical. Where goodwill exists, the different groups can represent their racial and cultural interests and address problems in a quid pro quo manner without denying race as the American establishment does.

Between Blacks and Whites in the USA, this is simply impossible, because whenever racial issues are addressed the enormous “racial asymmetry” instantly becomes an issue. But what does this “racial asymmetry” consist of? In concrete terms it refers to the entirely lopsided relationship between two races. In the case of Blacks and Whites in America it includes the fact that Blacks on the negative side of so many indices compared to Whites. They are much poorer, more criminal, imprisoned in much greater numbers, less educated, depend much more on welfare, have much less conventional family stability, and report much lower IQ rates than Whites. By all the standards that matter in a modern society, Blacks trail disastrously behind Whites. It is this asymmetry that makes an honest discussion about race an impossibility in modern America.

Instead we get a dishonest discussion about race: Back in the 1950s and 60s, round about the time the National Review was getting on its feet, nice, kind White liberals popularized an explanation for all the above phenomena that tied them all together in a series of causes and effects in a manner that was not overly insulting and offensive to Black people. Basically it said that Blacks were suffering from slavery and racism and that once racism was removed they would soon catch up with Whites.

Interestingly, this face-saving explanation of racial asymmetry, which I will call the “Face-Saving Racial Myth,” has now become the dominant racial narrative across the entire mainsteam media and most of the political spectrum, not because it is true. Indeed, everybody secretly knows it is untrue in the same way that everybody secretly gives their kids exactly the same kind of advice that John Derbyshire said he gave his. No, this Fairy Godmother explanation of racial asymmetry is favoured simply for reasons of short-term political and economic expediency because America is a political entity and collection of economic entities that all run on short-term political and economic expediency.

The basic racial asymmetry between Blacks and Whites means that the “Face-Saving Racial Myth” must never be challenged, for when it is the already tattered national fabric starts ripping apart. Wherever you have a marked racial asymmetry, honest discussion of it will do two things. First it will be immensely offensive to the disadvantaged race and those who claim to speak for them. This doesn’t mean that they are right, but they can’t help feeling the way they do. They will be well and truly pissed. This is not an argument to placate them. It is just a statement of fact.

The second thing that will happen is that White people, who have nothing but goodwill for Blacks, will notice that the longer they honestly and frankly discuss race the more they will end up sounding exactly like “White supremacists” and so-called hard-line “racists.” This is not because they have “inherent racism” as leftists like to imagine, it is simply because the facts of the debate will push them in that direction.

Derbyshire’s article is a perfect example of both of these effects. Far from being hateful or racist, the tone of the article was one of stoical regret that things had to be the way they are, but that, because of undeniable facts, certain precautions were advisable to safeguard one’s children. Writing with his usual honesty and thoroughness, it wasn’t long before he was unwittingly saying things that couldn’t help but be offensive to Blacks, while nevertheless being completely true.

The direction that the debate goes was revealed on the on-line comment boards at Taki’s and several other publications that got involved in the fight. Where these weren’t censored, the debates all served to highlight the great racial asymmetry between Blacks and Whites. After Black crimes rates were mentioned, the debate tended to move on to why Blacks commit so much more crime than Whites, leading to issues of poverty, low IQs, and the failure of Blacks to progress since “racism” ended. This then led to the corruption, chaos, and devastation of Black-run areas, with countless examples, usually mentioning Detroit and occasionally Haiti, as well as African countries.

Against a plethora of hard facts and hard experience all that the defenders of Blacks have is the “Face-Saving Racial Myth,” creaking, ragged, and ridiculous from constant overuse since the early 1960s, and a flood of Nazi, klan, and hillbilly jibes to cover up the vacuum where there arguments and evidence should be.

In short, the more that race is honestly discussed the more insulting it inevitably becomes for Blacks, and the more Whites will find themselves slipping unwittingly into “supremacist” language and attitudes, simply because of the underlying racial asymmetry. As for discussing, in a mutually polite and respectful way, topics like the 20-point IQ gap, Black-on-White crime (with stats and examples), and racial profiling. Forget it!

Personally I have no wish to bang on about White “supremacy,” and I’m sure that John Derbyshire didn’t either, but when you have a frank, open, and honest discussion about race in America this is one of the inevitable by-products, and this is exactly why the National Review has stopped reviewing the nation, and fired the last writer on its books capable of living up to the magazine’s title.

 

 

 

The Kerner Report as Blueprint for Black-Run America (BRA)

http://stuffblackpeopledontlike.blogspot.com/search?updated-max=2012-03-26T18:58:00-07:00&max-results=7

It’s time to reject the Kerner Report
The days of democracy in the Black metropolis of Detroit are dwindling, denoting a truth that pierces the heart of the esteemed Walter Williams theory that liberalism is at fault for the failure of Black people. Portland, Austin (Texas), Boulder (Colorado), Silicon Valley (California), Seattle, and Burlington (Vermont) all thrive while they have the same progressive liberalism that Williams believes is the root cause for the collapse of Black-run cities like Philadelphia, Cleveland, and Detroit.
But these Stuff White People Like (SWPL) run cities aren’t mismanaging hundreds of millions of dollars in state grants over a 20-year period; they aren’t having their credit rating downgraded by Fitch Ratings and Moody’s Investor Services; no, they are some of the nicest places in America to live, in spite of the overwhelming whiteness and liberalism found in these cities.
In Detroit, the most homogenous big city in America (89 percent Black – at it’s height in 1950, it was 80 percent white), the state of Michigan is on the verge of repossessing the city:

A state-appointed review team unanimously agreed Wednesday that a “severe financial emergency” exists in Detroit and that some form of a consent agreement is necessary, but did not recommend a specific plan.
 The Rev. David Murray, a former Detroit school board member, said he feels sorry for the state panel because they are being used. 

“It’s a racist attack. I don’t care what color face they put in front of us,” the Rev. Murray said. “We don’t want a review team (or) a financial manager. We want our money. I’m asking if you will stand up against this tyranny and resign.”

What money? Detroit lost all of its wealth-producing tax-base after the 1967 Rebellion, when 10 percent of Detroit’s 500,000 Black population joined in the five-day riot that cost the lives of more than two score people, convincing the white citizens that it was time to evacuate the city.
Since, Detroit has limped along via generous federal grants to sustain a city where the sons and daughters of those who comprise the majority of the police, fire fighters, civil servants, city employees, and government officials produce the lowest standardized test scores in all of the nation.
This is what happens when you have an entire city whose political power is entirely in the hands of Black people, with massive affirmative action policies in place since the early 1960s replacing actual merit-based hiring.
One need only look at the student’s performance in Detroit Public Schools (DPS) to get a glimpse of the intelligence of those actually running the city’s government and in charge of sustaining the economy.
But why was all of this allowed? Why is all of this tolerated? The Detroit Riot of 1967 (described proudly as an “insurrection” or “rebellion” by the Black residents against the occupying white political establishment, though Black people were the ones who colonized the city via wave after wave of The Great Migration and eventually forced whites out because of high levels of crime) was one of hundreds of Black uprisings in the 1960s, largely due to the perceived police brutality the Black communities in cities with nearly all-white police forces faced.
The reason for this extra-scrutiny: Black people were the ones, just as now, committing the vast number of the crimes:

Throughout December 1960 and January 1961 both the Detroit Free Press and The Detroit News focused heavily on “black crime.” The News reported, for example, that although “blacks con- stituted 26 percent of the city’s population, they were responsible for almost 65 percent of serious crime.” The paper also blamed African American leaders and their communities for not doing enough to stop crime.

When white cops (95 percent of cops in Detroit were white in 1967) raided a speakeasy in late July 1967, Black people in Detroit protested the incursion of law into a lawless part of their neighborhood.
“This is a racial incident… it represents one simple thing: black people want control of black communities,” the Rev. Albert Cleage, a Detroit religious leader proclaimed.
Well, Rev. Cleage got his wish; white people ceded power to Black Detroiters by voting with their feet. Now, the state of Michigan wants Detroit back because Black people defaulted on Martin Luther King’s dream. They have been judged by their collective inability to display quality fiduciary character (the average credit score in Detroit is 619) in administering the budget and maintain the infrastructure of the first major American Black metropolis – thankfully built by white people who only needed a riot and continued high rates of Black criminality to convince them all to leave.
But what keeps people from admitting the true reason for the failure of Detroit, and instead has them blame “liberalism” when this same ideology is practiced and espoused by the primarily white citizens of Boulder, Colorado as they walk down the pristine avenue of Pearl Street?
Why does Walter Williams continue to blame “Liberalism” for the failure of Detroit, when other cities flourish under the same political mindset?
To state otherwise, that the Black citizens of Detroit are responsible for the fate of the city, would invalidate the official mission of the United States of the America since the smoke was still clearing in The Motor City in 1967.
Lyndon B. Johnson, having already spent billions to improve the lives of Black people in major cities throughout the nation, commissioned a report on the root cause of the Black riots that swept America in the 1960s.
The Kerner Report.
To understand why we live in what we have dubbed Black-Run America (BRA), the starting point for researching why Black people’s failures (especially why the complete collapse of Black-run Detroit) must never be blamed – and their choices, actions, decision, and thinking – on them can be traced to this one document.
What does the Kerner Report actually state?:

“This is our basic conclusion: Our nation is moving toward two societies, one black, one white – separate and unequal. Reaction to last summer’s disorders has quickened the movement and deepened the division. Discrimination and segregation have long permeated much of American life; they now threaten the future of every American.”

The future for every American is jeopardized because of the existence of what we call BRA; to continue to live under the delusion that Black people aren’t responsible for their actions threatens the future competitive nature of the United States, because of the misallocation of trillions of tax-dollars to fight so-called “white racism” as the fundamental cause of Black failure. This is what the Kerner Report blamed Black failure upon:

Despite the complexities, certain fundamental matters are clear. Of these, the most fundamental is the racial attitude and behavior of white Americans towards black Americans. Race prejudice has shaped our history decisively; it now threatens to affect our future.
 White racism is essentially responsible for the explosive mixture which has been accumulating in our cities since the end of World War II. Among the ingredients of this mixture are:  1.  Pervasive discrimination and segregation in employment, education, and housing, which has resulted in the continuing exclusion of great numbers of Negroes from the benefits of economic progress.
2.  Black in-migration and white exodus, which have produced the massive and growing concentrations of impoverished Negroes in our major cities, creating a growing crisis of deteriorating facilities and services and unmet human needs.
3.  The black ghettos where segregation and poverty converge on the young to destroy opportunity and enforce failure. Crime, drug addiction, dependency on welfare, and bitterness and resentment against society in general and white society in particular are the result.

 The document offers the blueprint for which our entire society has been based upon, going so far as to blame undesirable nature of the jobs available to Black people as the cause of poverty (instead of their intellectual ability, when the current vocations with the highest rate of Black employment 43 years after affirmative action went into overdrive to promote Black people above their station include barber, postal worker, taxi driver, and bellhop); blaming slavery and long periods of unemployment for the “Negro” family structure to be more matriarchal; and the criminality found in Black areas completely on poverty.
How many more cities must we lose?
From the ashes of American cities, the fires started by Black people upset that white police dared focus extra-attention on their communities because of higher rates of crime found within, spawned this report which findings still permeate throughout every level and operation of both the public and private sector life.
In 1988, The New York Times published an expose on how progress had been made to curb that white racism which was to blame for Black kids throwing bricks through windows and looting businesses all across the nation (burning them to the ground after absconding with stolen goods):

The National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders, headed by Gov. Otto Kerner of Illinois, blamed ”white racism” for the ”continued polarization” of American society, and argued that only a ”compassionate, massive, and sustained” Government effort could reverse the overall trend. 

Cleveland and other American cities show the mixed record that has been compiled over the two decades. The worst-case prognosis of the Kerner report – the division of American into separate but unequal societies – has not come about, but the general direction predicted by the report and the stubborn persistence of the race problem in America have endured.
 Black progress is a difficult thing to measure, particularly in the current paradoxical situation, where some succeed as entire communities descend deeper into failure. But among the ingredients of change most often noted by scholars is the extraordinary increase of black political power, in Congress and other parts of the Federal Government and especially in the major cities.About 300 cities, including many of the nation’s biggest, have black mayors. The Rev. Jesse Jackson is a serious Presidential candidate. Mayor Andrew Young of Atlanta was the United States representative to the United Nations under President Carter. Representative William H. Gray 3d, a Pennsylvania Democrat, is chairman of the important Budget Committee.

Those big cities that Black people became mayor of have all largely collapsed (outside of Denver).
The New York Times would publish another article that relied heavily on the finding of the fabled Kerner Report to explain the Los Angeles Riots of 1992:

One of the report’s most famous and controversial findings was its conclusion that: “White racism is essentially responsible for the explosive mixture which has been accumulating in our cities since the end of World War II.” 

To some critics, the emphasis on racism, in both the report and the national civil rights debate, has obscured the degree to which the answers to the problems of the ghettos must come from within. 

“The assumption was that white America was the problem and therefore white America was the solution,” said Robert Woodson, a black who heads the National Center for Neighborhood Enterprise in Washington, which calls for conservative, self-help solutions to inner-city problems. “It set up the proposition that the destiny of black America rested with what white America did.” 

Representative Gary Franks of Connecticut, the only black Republican in Congress, said welfare dependency, crime and drugs are far more of a threat to the urban poor than white racism.

The destiny of America rests in the hands of the continued application of the findings of the Kerner Report or the outright rejection of them. It is Black individuals choice to take drugs, became a welfare dependent, or commit a crime; not the looming specter of white racism or slavery.
Black people were victorious in the 1967 Battle of Detroit, with white people fleeing the ashes of their city and awarding the Black rebels (colonizers would be the apt word) with the keys to “The Paris of the West” their parents and grandparents helped build.
It is in the decaying remnants of that city, one whose infrastructure that Black people were incapable of sustaining – even after they achieved total political power – that we see the fallacious nature of the Kerner Report findings.

But political power didn’t translate into economic success. 
Brick by brick that falls to the ground in neglect while Black people complain of persistent racism for the failure of Detroit under their control is demonstrative that the Kerner Report got it wrong.
Completely wrong.
America has been held hostage by Disingenuous White Liberals and Black Rage (think Organized Blackness) for too long. To abandon the official position of the American government as delineated in The Kerner Report, which ascribes all Black failure to the legacy of white racism and slavery, would represent a complete capitulation to the reality that the past 44 years of attempted social programming to the deny that nature does trump nurture would represent an event on par with the collapse of the Soviet Union or the Cultural Revolution in China.
The dogma of equality dies with the fall of Black-run Detroit.

The Kerner Report acted as a shield to hide the truth that nature consistently throws back in our face with each report of racial disparities in any measurable test (save the 40-yard-dash for NFL skilled position players).
Had Detroit flourished in the absence of white people and under the august and benevolent rule of Black people, we’d have to conclude the Kerner Report was correct. Blaming barriers to education, housing, and employment all died when the city became more than 80 percent Black in the 1980s.
Black people should have flourished economically without the impediment of white racism keeping them from reaching their potential; the only thing that flourished in Detroit post-1967 Rebellion was Black crime.
But the city did not.
Democracy dies in Detroit, with the impending appointment by the state of Michigan of an emergency manager to preside of the budget of “The Mogadishu of the West.”
Not only Democracy dies, but the Kerner Report has been invalidated.

The legitimacy of BRA has always been through the voluntary belief that eventually Black people would succeed; for BRA to continue, millions of people will have to be involuntary forced to believe this now.

Trayvon And Zimmerman—It’s All About Race Now

 If it had been a white teenager who was shot, and a 28-year-old black guy who shot him, the black guy would have been arrested.

So assert those demanding the arrest of George Zimmerman, who shot and killed Trayvon Martin.

And they may be right.

Yet if Trayvon had been shot dead by a black neighborhood watch volunteer, Jesse Jackson would not have been in a pulpit in Sanford, Fla., howling that he had been “murdered and martyred.”

Maxine Waters would not be screaming “hate crime.”

Rep. Hank Johnson would not be raging that Trayvon had been “executed.” And ex-Black Panther Bobby Rush would not have been wearing a hoodie in the well of the House.

Which tells you what this whipped-up hysteria is all about.

It is not about finding the truth about what happened that night in Sanford when Zimmerman followed Trayvon in his SUV, and the two wound up in a fight, with Trayvon dead.

It is about the exacerbation of and the exploitation of racial conflict.

And it is about an irreconcilable conflict of visions about what the real America is in the year 2012.

Zimmerman “profiled” Trayvon, we are told. And perhaps he did.

But why? What did George Zimmerman, self-styled protector of his gated community, see that night from the wheel of his SUV?

He saw a male. And males are 90 percent of prison inmates. He saw a stranger over 6 feet tall. And he saw a black man or youth with a hood over his head.

Why would this raise Zimmerman’s antennae?

Perhaps because black males between 16 and 36, though only 2 to 3 percent of the population, are responsible for a third of all our crimes.

In some cities, 40 percent of all black males are in jail or prison, on probation or parole, or have criminal records. This is not a product of white racism but of prosecutions and convictions of criminal acts.

Had Zimmerman seen a black woman or older man in his neighborhood, he likely would never have tensed up or called in.

For all the abuse he has received, Geraldo Rivera had a point.

Whenever cable TV runs hidden-camera footage of a liquor or convenience store being held up and someone behind the counter being shot, the perp is often a black male wearing a hoodie.

Listening to the heated rhetoric coming from demonstrations around the country, from the Black Caucus and TV talkers—about how America is a terrifying place for young black males to grow up in because of the constant danger from white vigilantes—one wonders what country of the mind these people are living in.

The real America is a country where the black crime rate is seven times as high as the white rate. It is a country where white criminals choose black victims in 3 percent of their crimes, but black criminals choose white victims in 45 percent of their crimes.

Black journalists point to the racism manifest even in progressive cities, where cabs deliberately pass them by to pick up white folks down the block.

That this happens is undeniable. But, again, what is behind it?

As Heather Mac Donald of the Manhattan Institute has written, from January to June 2008 in New York City, 83 percent of all identified gun assailants were black and 15 percent were Hispanics.

Together, blacks and Hispanics accounted for 98 percent of gun assaults.

Translated: If a cabdriver is going to be mugged or murdered in New York City by a fare, 49 times out of 50 his assailant or killer will be black or Hispanic.

Fernando Mateo of the New York State Federation of Taxi Drivers has told his drivers, “Profile your passengers” for your own protection. “The God’s honest truth is that 99 percent of the people that are robbing, stealing, killing these guys are blacks and Hispanics.”

Fernando Mateo is himself black and Hispanic.

To much of America’s black leadership and its media auxiliaries, what happened in Sanford was, as Jesse put it, that an innocent kid was “shot down in cold blood by a vigilante.”

Yet, from police reports, witness statements, and the father and friends of Zimmerman, another picture emerges.

Zimmerman followed Trayvon, confronted him, and was punched in the nose, knocked flat on his back and jumped on, getting his head pounded, when he pulled his gun and fired. That Trayvon’s body was found face down, not face up, would tend to support this.

But, to Florida Congresswoman Federica Wilson, “this sweet young boy … was hunted down like a dog, shot on the street, and his killer is still at large.”

Some Sanford police believed Zimmerman; others did not.

But now that it is being investigated by a special prosecutor, the FBI, the Justice Department and a coming grand jury, what is the purpose of this venomous portrayal of George Zimmerman?

As yet convicted of no crime, he is being crucified in the arena of public opinion as a hate-crime monster and murderer.

Is this our idea of justice?

No. But if the purpose here is to turn this into a national black-white face-off, instead of a mutual search for truth and justice, it is succeeding marvelously well.

 Patrick J. Buchanan needs no introduction to VDARE.COM readers; his book State of Emergency: The Third World Invasion and Conquest of America, can be ordered from Amazon.com. His most recent published book is Churchill, Hitler, and “The Unnecessary War”: How Britain Lost Its Empire and the West Lost the World,reviewed here by Paul Craig Roberts. His new book Suicide of a Superpower: Will America Survive to 2025? was released October 18, and is rocketing up the charts.