SPLC mocks white victims of Genocide in South Africa.

SPLC mocks white victims of Genocide in South Africa.

http://cofcc.org/

Don’t worry, says SPLC, black people are only killing whites because they want to steal from them. It’s not hatred or genocide. The dead guy is a victim of a love crime!

SPLC posts absurd and hate filled rebuttal to the numerous protests against South African Genocide.

What did you expect from a group that equated the American Family Associated to the Ku Klux Klan and says Lord of the Rings is a racially offensive movie?

The radical left-wing SPLC denied claims by major International Human Rights organizations that whites face genocide in South Africa. The SPLC lays out it’s alternative explanation. You see blacks in South Africa only want to steal from whites and sometime kill them in the process. The SPLC suggests that the whites are not victims of hatred or genocide, but victims of robbery. Then the SPLC cites ANC propaganda that white people caused it all. The ANC is the very organization that is actively promoting and encouraging hatred against white people. This includes singing songs like “Kill the Boer (white people)” at huge ANC rallies.

This is nothing new. The SPLC has mocked and insulted white victims of racially motivated hate crimes in the United States.

The SPLC then claims that white people who are protesting the Genocide in South Africa are “neo-nazis.” To back this claim, they cite one guy in Louisiana with a website. They say he is an ex-con and a member of an obscure “neo-nazi” group that no one has ever heard off. We did some searching and can’t find any evidence that there was a protest in Louisiana, or that the guy named by the SPLC had anything to do with organizing any of the protests that occurred around the US. The SPLC then rants about two other people they say is connected to the first guy. We googled their names. One is dead and the other appears to be in prison. So obviously neither of the those two organized any protests. Nice detective work SPLC!

Look at this comment that the SPLC allowed someone to post on their website! This was in response to the SPLC mocking the victims of Genocide in South Africa. Look at the poster’s name. “Antifa” is a violent Marxist gang that has committed violent attacks on conservatives all over the world.

The protests against South African genocide are part of a worldwide effort launched in Europe. In the United States, the protests were organized primarily on facebook. We can’t find any evidence that the ex-con named by the SPLC played any significant role whatsoever. It is simply some guy with a website that redistributed information from other sources.

To show you how much integrity the SPLC has, check out this story. A while back, the Associated Press ran a fake story claiming that Rosa Parks was the victim of an attempted rape by a white employer when she was young. CofCC.org immediately debunked the story as a hoax. The SPLC posted a tirade on their website attacking CofCC.org for debunking the hoax. Yet, at the same time they admit in the condemnation that we “might” be right. Well, in short order, the Rosa Parks institute also denounced the story as a complete and utter hoax. The SPLC had claimed that CofCC.org might be right about the story being a hoax, but “the answer died with Parks in 2005.” Well, we did know. The Associated Press writer faked the evidence. Every single aspect of the story was a hoax.

The fact that the SPLC would condemn someone for exposing a very blatant, obvious, and racially incendiary hoax shows they are completely without any moral compass.

The fake Rosa Parks story:
CofCC.org exposes the story as a hoax.
SPLC attacks CofCC.org for exposing story as a hoax.
Rosa Park Institute denounces AP hoax as an even bigger hoax than originally reported by CofCC.org

Mandela health problems renew fears of mass genocide in South Africa.

A common racial abuse that blacks hurl at white people in South Africa is “wait until Mandela dies.” This stems from a common belief among black South Africans, and some American blacks, that the all out mass genocide of whites will begin when Nelson Mandela dies. Militant black South Africans believe that they have yet to experience the “Uhuru” that came to other African nations in the 1960s. This “Uhuru” was usually marked by mass murder and a catastrophic collapse of society.

Below, Khallid Muhammed describes the “Uhuru” plan for South Africa.

This is Khallid Muhammed died in 2001. He was the National Youth Minister for the Nation of Islam and the Leader of the New Black Panther Party. He was publicly supported by Al Sharpton and Sharpton paid $10,000 to cover the cost of his funeral. Major black politicians like Keith Ellison, and black celebrities like Ice Cube were vocal public supporters of Muhammed and his violent rhetoric.

Notice Muhammed spits on Nelson Mandela and considers him a weakling for not having led a mass murder of white people himself. In other parts of the video Muhammed praises the campaign of violence and murder led by Winnie Mandela and endorses the “necklacing” of blacks “snitches and sellouts.”

Winnie Mandela’s horrific campaign of necklacing. She was found guilty of being an accomplish in the murder of a 14-year-old black boy. She was ordered to pay a fine. In 1998, the South African government declared that she “politically and morally accountable for the gross violations of human rights.” Nothing happened to her. In fact, she ran for parliament and won. She was convicted of election fraud in 2003, but allowed to run for re-election anyway. She still holds her seat in parliament.

“With our boxes of matches and our necklaces we shall liberate this country” – Winnie Mandela 1986.

 

Restricting Voting Rights, Race, and Future Time Orientation

Restricting Voting Rights, Race, and Future Time Orientation

 http://onestdv.blogspot.com/2011/11/restricting-voting-rights-race-and.html

The left may actually have a grasp of race and politics than conservatives. In an article at NYTimes.com entitled The White Party, Columbia journalism professor Thomas Edsall writes the millionth article I’ve read summarizing racial voting trends. Seriously, I read this same article about once a week, basically just a list of statistics on what race votes for what party. Here’s an excerpt to show what I’m talking about:

Another way of looking at it is this: fully 88.8 percent of all ballots cast in 2010 for House Republicans were cast by whites, compared to 63.9 percent for Democrats.

The degree to which the Republican Party has become a white party is also reflected in the composition of primary voters. For example, on March 4, 2008, in Ohio — where non-Hispanic whites are 81.1 percent of the population, blacks 12.2 percent, and Hispanics 3.1 percent — the Republican primary turnout was 97 percent white. Hispanics were 2 percent and the black turnout was so low it was zero percent, statistically speaking. One percent was described as “other.”

In the Jan. 19, 2008, South Carolina primary, 96 percent of the Republican turnout was white, 2 percent black, 1 percent Latino and 1 percent other. The population of the state is 64.1 percent white, 27.9 percent black and 5.1 percent Hispanic.

Oh wait, I forgot the other part of this formulaic sort of article – castigate Republicans as racist merely on the basis of support amongst whites.

Now, moving toward what has all the markings of a historic ideological and demographic collision on Nov. 6, 2012, Republicans are doubling down on this racially fraught strategy.

But even Dr. Edsall admits Republican never make any explicit appeals to white voters, with this presumably the most basic justification of his characterization above:

While the subject of race and of the overwhelmingly white Republican primary electorate are never explicitly discussed by Republican candidates, the issue is subsumed in blatant anti-immigration rhetoric.

Ahh once again, the liberal mind-reading ability arises. Funny that liberals can so adeptly parse the hidden motivations of conservatives, including those of racist whites, institutionally racist businesses, women-hating men, and so on. Right after the above, Dr. Edsall notes a parallel strategy amongst Democrats, though the accusations of bias are conspicuously absent:

The major threat to the Republican “white” strategy is a revival of the high turnout among minorities that carried Democrats to victory in 2008.

But our intrepid Dr. Edsall does not stop there – he notes how those evil Republicans have enacted laws with the specific (though unstated) intention of reducing minority turnout:

Republicans, however, are taking advantage of their newly won control of state governments across the country to enact laws designed to suppress minority turnout. Republican legislators and governors are reversing decades of liberalized access to the ballot by passing laws restricting or eliminating election day registration, early voting, the broader use of absentee ballots and voting by mail…Liberal groups, including the Brennan Center for Justice at the New York University Law School, estimate that as many as five million men and women will be unable to vote because of these laws, which disproportionately affect minority voters.

OK, maybe we’re not supposed to question the premises of leftist academics writing for the NYbetaT. But may I ask why exactly, in the liberal paradigm of racial behavioral egalitarianism, would “restricting election day registration and early voting” disproportionately affect minority voters? I presume it does (see next paragraph), but these laws don’t disenfranchise felons, a class whose racial disparities liberals can at least blame on our racist society. These laws merely demand that people put a little effort into voting, undoubtedly an act of great importance and one that should be granted to those who can exhibit the most trivial amount of responsibility. What exactly about racist judges, racist schools, and racist police officers would make minorities less able to register ahead of time? One presumes that someone who has the ability and information to vote on voting day also has the ability to register prior to that day. Liberals can’t resolve this “conundrum” and it’s why articles such as Dr. Edsall’s rely on invective rather than analysis.

So why do blacks and Hispanics suffer disproportionately from these measures? (Let me just add that I love these laws.) They lack “future time orientation,” a concept well known amongst the HBD-osphere but surprisingly absent from academic discourse on intelligence. Two of the top Google results are from HalfSigma and Mangan. HalfSigma provides a great definition:

What is “future time orientation”? Presumably this refers to planning for a better future and placing future benefits over immediate gratification…The prisons are full of people lacking in “future time orientation,” because committing a crime to get some quick cash or get revenge at someone who pissed you off is an example of enjoying immediate gratification at the expense of one’s future.

One of the most well-known stereotypes about blacks, one that can’t be blamed on racist whites, is that they never show up on time. “Future time orientation” largely explains this as blacks lack the ability to analyze how present decisions will manifest as consequences for future situations. Blacks and Hispanics, due to their lower intelligence, have difficulty in planning, delaying gratification, and, most fundamentally, foreseeing future outcomes based on a perhaps complicated set of current data. Clearly then, blacks and Hispanics want to vote right when they’re able to, they don’t want to wait or plan ahead for something that won’t occur until a later date. Children think this way too, as evinced by the famous marshmallow study – they can’t temper their impulses in order to make rational decisions. As HalfSigma says, “the black man would rather hang out” than get off the stoop to do something for something else that won’t even occur for awhile later. (Do liberals get around this by having ACORN and other community organizers round up NAMs in the ghetto on voting day?)

However, even if this didn’t have the fortunate consequence of reducing minority turnout, I’d still support the measures. While I view democracy as an OK system, I still don’t want the listless classes having their say. I also don’t want a monopolized system of power, one largely confined to elitists living in the social Ivory Tower. I want a happy medium where the productive masses vote because they know what’s best and fair, not because they want a piece of the pie without working for it. By requiring a little bit of foresight in gaining voting rights, we ensure that the proper class of individual, non-criminal, mature, informed, and responsible, comprises the largest portion of the voting public. How can Dr. Edsall disagree with that? Oh wait, that’s waayyyccist.

The Rioting Act

The Rioting Act

“Black people gotta lotta problems
But they don’t mind throwing a brick”

Joe Strummer’s longing lyrics to The Clash’s 1977 hit White Riot are a gross libel on a community, but they also contain a grain of truth. The diplomat’s son who always wanted to be a working class hero was waxing envious about what he saw as black willingness to rise up and take direct action against the ‘system’. He wanted both to join them and have a racially exclusive “White riot—a riot of my own”.

The long unheard song has been widely aired over the last four days, as Britons watched parts of their inner cities dissolve in partly race-driven unrest, in the worst rioting for over two decades.

The problems were sparked by the police shooting last Thursday of a 29 year old black man named Mark Duggan in Tottenham, north London. At first it was said the police had fired in self-defence, but now it seems both shots were fired by police. Duggan had been under surveillance, presumably because of his membership of the Star gang, which according to the Guardian’s Gavin Knight

. . . had a notorious reputation for being armed, dealing Class A drugs and intent on making money. It was affiliated to larger, older gangs in the area.

Tottenham gossip has it that Duggan was “a major player” in the local demi-monde, who “lived by the gun” and caused “grief”. These associations seem reasonable grounds for keeping an eye on him, although of course any death at the hands of the police is unfortunate.

As always with these incidents, there will be an in-depth investigation and normally an accurate account of the circumstances eventually emerges—as happened in the recent cases of Jean Charles de Menezes and Ian Tomlinson. But there seems little appetite to await any such inquiry.

This is partly because there are especially painful echoes in Tottenham of previous confrontations between blacks (AKA “youths”) and police (called “The Feds” by youths who were playing computer games when they should have been doing homework—AKA “acting white”).

The most notorious incident was in 1985, when a white policeman called Keith Blakelock was macheted to death by youths on the Broadwater Farm Estate. The proximate cause of that violence was the death of a black woman during a police raid—and that raid had been designed to suppress rolling unrest after the police shooting a few days previously of Cherry Groce in Brixton, south of the Thames. In 1999, there was again unrest in N15 when Roger Sylvester died whilst being restrained by police.

And it is not only Tottenham which holds these memories, but large parts of black Britain. The idea that the Feds pick on the youths out of casual racism is endemic and ingrained amongst many whites as well as blacks, and is remorselessly fed by the political left.

Black-police relations are coloured (sorry!) by folk-memories of street battles going all the way to the first days of large-scale black immigration in the late 1940s. In 1958, there were the Notting Hill riots, when white Teddy Boys rocked and rolled along the streets in their blue suede shoes attacking random Afro-Caribbeans who quite naturally resisted, and since then there has been a sort of low level, sporadic ethnic intifada in parts of England’s inner cities, interspersed with outbreaks of worse violence exploited by the far Left, the mainstream Left and (counterproductively) by the far Right. The mainstream Right’s response has usually been to masterfully do nothing, trusting that the naughtiness will magick itself away.

While Conservatives alternately blustered and equivocated, and Labourites poured political petrol on all flames, inoffensive people (many black) were constrained to watch as their districts were periodically destroyed by youths AKA activists—Brixton, Toxteth, Handsworth, St. Paul’s, to name just a few once agreeable suburbs that have erupted before and have just erupted again.

Those who were (badly) paid to police these places were constrained to accept the blame for operational mistakes (rightly)—but also the far bigger mistakes made by politicians who expected them to do a Godawful job without giving them the tools they needed or even much thanks.

Not only that, but the police were accused of being at best indifferent to the needs of black people, or worse, having a “canteen culture of racism”. Anti-cop conspiracies cluster around any mysterious black deaths—like the 1981 New Cross Fire, when 13 partygoers were burned to death by a black man, which many in SE14 still believe was a police/National Front cover-up). Then there was Stephen Lawrence (which led to the 1999 Macpherson Report), Ricky Reel (Asian, but co-opted into African-ness for political purposes, who fell into the Thames and drowned in 1997) and Joy Gardner (a several times warned illegal immigrant who died in 1993 after struggling with immigration officials). The latter case inspired one of the great works of 20th century protest poesy. Benjamin Zephaniah’s last lines are perhaps the best, and not just because they are the last:

I cannot help but wonder
How the alien deporters
(As they said to press reporters)
Can feel absolute relief.

Deaths of blacks while in police custody (and they are disproportionately likely to be in police custody for certain categories of crime) are especially controversial, even though 75% of such deaths are of whites. In these cases, the dead are always saintly and the police always guilty until they are proven guilty. So too with Mark Duggan – who somehow managed to combine being a criminal “major player” with being a model dad.

There was a highly charged demonstration outside the local police station on Saturday, and afterwards vibrancy vibrated through Tottenham and adjacent areas, with what the media called “disaffected youths” setting fire to cars and buses, looting from and then torching shops. They were soon joined by shrewder others, using the “protests” as a cover to promote assorted adolescent agendas or obtain democratic discounts at JJB Sports.

On Sunday and Monday, the violence spread across London to encompass Camden/Chalk Farm, Bethnal Green, Peckham, Ealing, Deptford, Lewisham, Clapham, Croydon (a man found there with gunshot wounds later died), Bromley, Woolwich, East Ham and Stratford. Outside London, there were outbreaks in Birmingham, Leeds, Liverpool, Bristol and Nottingham.

Monday night was the London Fire Brigade’s busiest ever night (including the Blitz) and the Metropolitan Police Assistant Commissioner admitted to the BBC “The Met was stretched beyond belief in a way that it has never experienced before.” The only good news was that several football matches were called off. London became quieter on Tuesday, thanks to the presence of 16,000 police, but there were problems in Birmingham again, and in Manchester and Wolverhampton—which could not even be headed off by the joyous news of David Cameron’s return from holiday.

The events brought in their train a half-horrible, half-hilarious farrago of fact and fantasy. There was the Russian reporter who claimed that the roaring of escaped lions and tigers from London Zoo could be heard in high streets. There was video footage of a gang of rioters who came to help a fallen man to his feet so they could go through his pockets more easily. There were stories of “vigilantes” tooling up with baseball bats to defend their families and premises. There were the girl geniuses interviewed by BBC Radio 4, sitting in the street at 9.30am drinking stolen rosé to refresh their maidenly parts after a hectic night of after-hours shopping:

It was madness, it was good fun . . . showing the rich people we can do what we want . . . it’s the governmen’s fault. The Conserva’ives, Yeah, wha’ever it is . . . who it is. I dunno.

Asked if these agreeable activities would carry on the next night, they reflected, with growing confidence.

Yeah, hopefully, definitely.

One tactician who criticized the police response seemed shy about revealing his alternative master-plan:

I don’ need to be talkin’ about wot they need ta be doin’

Another Napoleon put his finger on one of the inherent problems of “colour-blind” policing:

The police are bein’ abusive—they don’ like black people, they don’ like Asian people, they don’ like their own people.

There was an amusing disconnect between the widely quoted West Indian lady representing respectable Hackney opinion and the un-Bowdlerized Youtube actualité:

Why are you burning people’s shops that they have worked hard to build up?… Look at that shop over there, she has worked hard to make it work and you’re just going to go and burn it up?

Her impassioned addendum was less widely mentioned:

And for what, just to say you are warring and a badman? This is about a f***ing man who was shot in Tottenham. This ain’t about busting up the place. Get real, black people, get real…You lot piss me the f**k off.

There were small mercies, such as the Hackney shop-owner who found that the “feral rats” who had fingered through her stock had taken all the designer label stuff but left “the tasteful things”.

Behind this semi-comic carry-on lies a terrible story of decent people of all races besieged terrified in their own houses and waking up to find their homes, shops, streets scorched and littered with debris. On Tuesday, Channel 4 interviewed a Sri Lankan shopkeeper who had lost an estimated £30,000 worth of uninsured stock, and trembling young women trapped in Manchester city centre because their way home was blocked by hundreds of masked men breaking into shops.

And behind this again, the seriously irresponsible and unpleasant (and almost always white) hard left are at work. A leaflet entitled Don’t Panic; Don’t Talk! initially circulated in Bristol soon found its way to the Indymedia website, giving what must surely be illegal advice:

“Do think about changing your appearance…get rid ALL clothes you were wearing…spray cans, demo-related stuff, dodgy texts/photos on your phone. Don’t make life easy for them by having drugs, weapons or other illegal stuff in your house.”

The Socialist Workers’ Party (or should that be Worker’s?) jumped helpfully on the bandwagon, because “the state tries to discredit riots”. This cannot be allowed to happen, because “riots can win important gains”. They continued, with the brilliant reasoning we always hope for from this quarter:

It’s not about people smashing up their local area for no reason. It’s about them expressing their anger, wherever they happen to be.

After all, what is a riot compared with the violence dished out daily by the system?

The violence of riots is minor compared to the violence the system inflicts on a daily basis—like famines . . .  and wars that slaughter millions.

It’s all down to that Great Satan the “anarchy of the market” which As Any Fule No is “far more devastating than the supposed anarchy on the streets”.

Labour MP John McDonnell would seem to go along with some of this analysis, Tweeting sagely:

Reaping what has been sown over 3 decades of creating grotesquely unequal society with alienated young copying ethos of looting bankers.

Ken Livingstone, ex-London Mayor and again Labour candidate for that post, concurs:

[T]he economic stagnation and cuts imposed by the Tory government inevitably create social division . . . [the rioters] feel no-one at the top of society, in government or City Hall, cares about them or speaks for them.

Gavin Knight of the Guardian at least realizes there are serious obstacles in the way of rehabilitation for disaffected youths wanting to be disinfected from criminality:

Youth offenders who try to turn their back on a life on the streets are constantly hampered by prospective employers doing Criminal Records Bureau checks.

Perhaps he should lead by example, and give a few of them jobs at the Guardian. At least they’ll all have nice new trainers to wear to the interview.

 

The Enemy: The Combine

Barnhardt: The Combine


Locust: name your enemy, know his name, say it out loud when confronted, and be ready to kill them all!

From Ann Barnhardt:

THE COMBINE
POSTED BY ANN BARNHARDT – JULY 13, AD 2011 8:02 PM MST

New term. And no, not in Latin this time. This is the brainchild of Andrea Shea King and ThirdWaveDave.

We need a name for the collective criminal enterprise that is our Federal Government. Democrat. Republican. Marxist. All of them, because they’re all in it together. The name?

THE COMBINE

A combine is defined as a combination of persons or groups for the furtherance of their political, commercial, or other interests, as a syndicate or cartel.

Uh, yeah. That’s it. That’s it EXACTLY.

Children, the Republicans are going to sell us out. Do you know why? Because Obama and Reid and Pelosi and Boehner and McConnell and Cantor . . . they’re all on the same team.

The Combine.

Obama’s little hissy fit this afternoon? It’s all playacting for our benefit – to keep us fooled into believing that they are “representing the American people”.

They represent THEMSELVES. Their priority is looting the government for as much money as possible before the economy implodes, getting that wealth ferreted away somehow, and then using that same wealth to seize control after the implosion.

It’s ALL about the COMBINE.

And this time, it is going to be for somewhere between $2.0 and $2.4 trillion dollars. And it’s all going to go offshore or otherwise off the grid, laundered through unions, foreign governments and sympathetic corporations, which will then launder it right back into the pockets of the Combine.

It’s time to start buying and storing potable water and storing gasoline. Silver is still under $40 per ounce. And, of course, ammunition.

Lots and lots of ammunition.