Slashdot Mirror

Link: https://www.amren.com/news/2015/07/new-doj-statistics-on-race-and-violent-crime/. This one is more honest than the FBI crime stats because it recognizes that Hispanics are culturally (if not racially) different from Whites.

From the article:

"This table can be used for a number of interesting calculations. First, we find that during the 2012/2013 period, blacks committed an average of 560,600 violent crimes against whites, whereas whites committed only 99,403 such crimes against blacks. This means blacks were the attackers in 84.9 percent of the violent crimes involving blacks and whites. This figure is consistent with reports from 2008, the last year DOJ released similar statistics. Perhaps not coincidentally, that was the year Mr. Obama was elected president.

Interestingly, we find that violent interracial crime involving blacks and Hispanics occurs in almost exactly the same proportions as black/white crime: Blacks are the attackers 82.5 percent of the time, while Hispanics are attackers only 17.5 percent of the time.

Some observers argue that what causes the overwhelming preponderance of black-on-white over white-on-black violence is “chance of encounter,” due to the fact that there are five times as many whites as blacks in the American population. However, there are only about 30 percent more Hispanics than blacks, yet black-on-Hispanic violence is almost as lopsided as black-on-white violence. This suggests blacks may be deliberately targeting both whites and Hispanics."

What you call "racism" I call "pattern recognition". Avoid the groid! This is why! This is why "white flight" is a thing. It's not an aversion to melanin even if that contradicts your article of religious faith.

Are you paying the Diversity Tax?

The Color of Crime, 2016 Revised Edition
Quote: "In 2013, a black was six times more likely than a non-black to commit murder, and 12 times more likely to murder someone of another race than to be murdered by someone of another race."
Another quote: "If New York City were all white, the murder rate would drop by 91 percent, the robbery rate by 81 percent, and the shootings rate by 97 percent."

Do black Americans commit more crime?
Quote: "Blacks were disproportionately likely to commit homicide and to be the victims. In 2008 the offending rate for blacks was seven times higher than for whites and the victimization rate was six times higher."
However, that web site is a TV station in Belfast Ireland.

There Are No Successful Black Nations.
The author of that article, Chigozie Obioma, is a black Nigerian.

Detroit bullet proof glass

Average annual income Haiti

Health Information for Travelers to Haiti

Actually, you are incorrect, California has the lowest IQ population in the US, while Oregon and Washington are equal to the midwest. https://www.amren.com/news/201...

https://www.theguardian.com/uk...

http://volokh.com/2013/05/03/l...

http://www.independent.co.uk/n...

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-eng...

https://www.theguardian.com/la...

https://www.cnet.com/news/lond...

https://www.amren.com/news/201...

https://www.reuters.com/articl...

https://www.thenewamerican.com...

Overall, US crime rate is about twice that of Switzerland..

OK, but as of 2015 only 42% of US crime was committed by whites, while whites are 72% of the US population:

.42/.72 = .58

.58 x (about twice) is "about the same".

While we're on the subject, what are David Duke, Jared Taylor and the rest of their KK buddies up to?

Jared Taylor continues to write at American Renaissance, which is experiencing increasing popularity as people become dissatisfied with the Establishment Narrative.

Are they looking to buy a strip mall somewhere?

Many are independent homelands through regional and local communities.

Was the line that made me opt to never buy anything Microsoft makes again. Fuck those racists.

I know Americans can never contemplate the idea that anybody may have freedom who isn't American let alone have MORE freedom

A few places are comparably free, but the vast majority of the world's population, regretfully, continues to live under regimes considerably more oppressive than the US. And I'm not talking just the usual suspects — like China or Russia — generally respectable places like India can be quite intolerant of unpopular opinions and authoritarian in controlling the information networks. It may seem crazy to Americans, but Germans and Brits, for another example, routinely get arrested simply for saying the wrong things on social media — in the US attempts to criminalize "hate speech" are still duly resisted.

Not to mention certain sunny locales, where one's had can be removed for apostasy.

Reducing America's control over the Internet will — inevitably and by definition — increase the share of control by these governments.

We've seen this before — UN's "Human Rights Council" is a good example of it. All of the things about it, that the so called "Liberals", dismiss as "myths", are actually quite true. It will happen to the Internet's governance — inasmuch as it needs any — as well.

For years the so-called "progressives" have been arguing for a ban on "hate speech". It is already verbotten on most campuses.

On occasion, they may even threaten violence — while accusing "the haters" of making them "feel unsafe". Obviously, some hate is more equal than others.

When this generation graduates and goes on to work at businesses (including their legal departments), as well as government-institutions, they'll bring their notions with them.

those of us who aren't sociopaths

Easy with the name-calling. Please, don't hate.

Glass ceilings are a real thing.

Whether that's true or not, there is not one in Linux (nor FreeBSD) project. And yet, the ratio of females there is even worse, than at Microsoft.

People don't have to be enslaved for a workplace to be a very bad place.

If the free people willingly choose to work somewhere, then it can not be that bad.

there is clear and unambiguous evidence that if we allow discrimination based on those criteria that the results are bad both for society and for the individuals

Such a claim sounds rather hollow without citations. Got any?

Your "anti-discrimination" (poorly) fights symptoms, not the problem — which only gets worse because of your efforts, as we are forced to wonder, if a protected minority occupying an important post really deserved it, or got it thanks to the color of his skin. Racial relations today are worse than before — with Blacks especially alienated.

Your approach demonstrably failed. Decades ago we surrendered an essential liberty to your kind in exchange for a promise of harmony, and now we have neither the liberty nor the harmony. Look at Baltimore — despite having Black mayor and Black police commissioner, it still got racial tensions like nowhere else... It is such an egg on your face, your wisest now blame lead paint!

You are a pathetic failure. And yet, instead of pulling back to reflect on what went wrong, your kind doubles and triples down with new charges. Today even the belly-dancing or yoga are off-limits to the Whitey.

Constitution is junk to you — you may preach "tolerance", but wish to ban "hate speech". And that includes everything that makes you uncomfortable.

The market demonstrably cannot fairly deal with this problem.

Because it is not a market problem. In fact, I am not convinced, it is a problem at all. But, if it is, you and yours are the least qualified to address it.

It shouldn't be ok to incite mass panic (yelling fire in a crowded venue)

It shouldn't, huh? How about statements like "President is a war-criminal" or "He is not a natural-born citizen" — can such speech not some day be banned under the same doctrine? Because it does interfere with the government's efficiency and, consequently, the entire country's quality of life, does not it? We might think this ridiculous today, but many countries — including the various worker's paradises — consider insulting the Dear Leader a felony already. Don't you recognize a slippery slope while sliding down on it?

There is a movement to ban "hate speech" already. The entire Yik Yak app is banned on many campuses and today's students are being trained to accept such a ban already, so it can not be far away, that the thought-police spills out from those institutions into the rest of our world.

For the past 7 years, the number one rebuttal to any critics of the current President was that they are "haters". Do you think, we are far away from the sitting President becoming off-limits for criticism? We aren't — and it all started, when we were sold the bogus premise of "some speech ought to be illegal"...

It is naive to think that complete, and total, freedom of speech was ever intended.

Is it naive? Then I share my naivete with Benjamin Franklin, for example — a Founding Father — who considered any abuses of the freedom of speech to be a lesser evil than entrusting anyone the power to suppress them. For example:

Those abuses of the freedom of speech are exercises of liberty. They ought to be repressed; but to whom dare we to entrust the care of doing it. An evil magistrate intrusted with power to punish for words, would be armed with a weapon the most destructive and terrible. Under pretense of pruning off the exuberant branches he would be apt to destroy the tree.

Do you honestly believe, the fine magistrates of the 21st century Virginia would've helped calm Franklin's fears of that "the most destructive and terrible" weapon?

Well, if such a thing as "Harassment by Computer" should be illegal, this guy's actions seem to qualify for it.

But I don't think, it should be. In fact, too much speech is already considered illegal — and the list is likely to grow as the Illiberals are trying to add "hate-speech" to the prohibited list.

Well, as we are often reminded by various Illiberals here at home:

• Freedom of Speech is a privilege ;
• Hate Speech should be banned;
• “This isn’t really the ’60s anymore [...] people can’t really protest like that"
• "Constitution is not a suicide pact"

Given the "pragmatic" approach to rights even in the country, which explicitly puts them in writing, should we be surprised, other places are even more restrictive?

They certainly don't appear to be talking about things that are generally offensive, but specific, targeted harassment

It is a slippery slope regardless. And we know, where it leads — Illiberals have been advocating banning "hate speech" for years. Guess who will be deciding, which speech is hateful? Ministry of Truth can't be far behind...

you shouldn't worry about the torrent of abuse directed towards you on every site you visit. Right?

Right.

Just suck it up and be glad you're not dead?

Strawman.

GP never said anything about the US being a paragon of free speech protections.

Well, somebody should have said it — and I applaud you for saying it fairly well. Thank you.

The US is a paragon of free speech — not because there is no room for improvement, but because all (certainly most) other societies are worse in this regard. And though various Illiberals do come up from time to time with seductively-sounding proposals to ban "hate" speech, and even claim, the Constitution is outdated and "people can’t really protest like that anymore", the prevailing opinion remains, that any speech should be allowed and countered only with one's own speech.

Back to the question about UK, that country is certainly sliding farther away from liberty — along with the rest of the Western world. When a fatwa was issued calling for death of Salman Rushdie, for example, over his insulting Islam in an otherwise unremarkable book, the man received police protection and other support from his government. Nobody — except, maybe, that valiant Illiberal Jimmie Carter — blamed the victim for "deserving" the danger.

Years later, reaction to Mohammed-mocking cartoons is rather more mixed. And while it is still legal to burn American flag, if you decide to burn Koran, everybody from local to federal authorities will be on your case pressuring you to abandon your exercise of free speech.

This exactly describes the situation in our company. The Indians have no initiative, no desire to learn things off the clock. They ignore production alerts until they pile up and then look for somebody else to blame. They ignore everything. They are uncreative and cannot come up with any solution to save their lives. I have had to deal with this in various companies over the last 15 years. They are just stupid and useless. They all want us to believe that Indians are smart but where is the evidence? If you research it, you discover that Indians universities are rife with cheating and when they come to universities in the US, they are terrible cheaters.
In short, that is the Indian way and that is one reason that India itself is such a total shithole.

In NYC, we had a terrible problem with Indians in that they never flushed their own toilets and often pissed on the toilet seats, as if they were high caste and expected someone else to do it. Their code was just as sloppy and slapdash. Every company I have worked for eventually gets the picture that they are terrible workers, stupid and not worth even the piddling money they earn. I have been gratified to see them driven out of every company I work for. It's a damned relief.

old white people

Like this guy. Fortunately they caught the perpetrator.

http://www.amren.com/features/2013/12/mandela-white-genocide-with-a-whimper/

Required reading for anyone who thinks Mandela was an angel.

There's nothing wrong with immigration. In fact the best way they could balance it out is by letting anyone freely live anywhere and apply for any job.

Free unrestricted immigration is not necessarily good, because then you get purely economic immigration of people who have no intention of actually living by the laws of the land they move to, and eventually assimilating, and have only moved for better quality of life and a welfare check. You know, the kind of problems that Europe is having today with some Muslim immigrants, for example. I don't think anyone wants that kind of stuff in their neighborhood - and don't forget that, in a democracy, these people also get voting rights...

So I think it's reasonable to require that immigrants adhere to some basic norms and customs (beyond what's written down in law) in the society that receives them, and that their eventual citizenship is conditional on "good conduct" with respect to those norms and customs. It may sound like discrimination when compared to natural-born citizens, but for the latter a lot of those norms are ingrained as part of their upbringing in that culture, and so different treatment is not unwarranted.

You asked for stories:
http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/10559641/ (WRAL TV)
http://www.vladtv.com/blog/80199/14-year-old-kills-intruder-in-gang-of-four-trying-to-break-in/ (link confirming the aforementioned)
http://www.amren.com/news/2013/01/woman-hiding-with-kids-shoots-intruder/ (mom defends herself and her kids from asshat hellbent on getting his hands on her)

You can find these stories all over the internet... just google "______________ defends themselves with a firearm" (fill in the blank) and you'll find plenty of stories like these.

Another thing that you'll find (if you do some research and ignore the lamestream media and BS talking points from both sides) is that the gross majority of these mass killings are done by deranged individuals with histories of mental illness, criminal actions, terrorist connections, and the like. Very few of the weapons used to perform these horrid actions were acquired legally, and even fewer were legally allowed to even possess a firearm.

Here's a link to some no bullshit firearms statistics:
http://www.justfacts.com/guncontrol.asp (justfacts.com)

http://www.amren.com/mtnews/archives/2011/07/minority_rules.php Scientists at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute have found that when just 10 percent of the population holds an unshakable belief, their belief will always be adopted by the majority of the society. The scientists, who are members of the Social Cognitive Networks Academic Research Center (SCNARC) at Rensselaer, used computational and analytical methods to discover the tipping point where a minority belief becomes the majority opinion. The finding has implications for the study and influence of societal interactions ranging from the spread of innovations to the movement of political ideals.

So all we have to do is educate 10 percent of the population and make them understand patents are bad.

It gives me hope.

Now I have a reason to strongly dislike this hacking group. Blacks and hispanics are violent, sub-human animals, and do not have anything in common with Whites. Not all beings that walk upright and talk are to be considered modern men. There are enough documented cases of black on white or brown on white crime (and a near complete absence of the reverse) to completely support a return to segregation. Don't believe me? You are probably a libtard, and would like to see the White race ground under the boot heel of your PC Nazi laws and policies. Curious to know more? Check out these sites. We are not racist, we are race realists. You cannot force sub-human animals and civilized men to live in close proximity with each other.

American Renaissance
New Nation News
Occidental Dissent

You are not alone! Lock hands with each other, refuse to allow the blacks and hispanics to infiltrate and undermine your cultural beliefs! To those that would side with the libtards in thinking we are all equal and that being White is something to be ashamed of, I will only say that you are a traitor to your race.

Yeah, I second that. Apparently they're only happy with the Japanese making new toys if they stay in their own country.

These scams are very common. Africa is a source of most of these scams. In general, Africa is in a state of complete collapse. I'm afraid that until the problems in Africa are fixed, these scams will continue to grow in frequency and size.

Parent a bit heavy-handed but I think the troll mod is unfair since the article romanticizes long-haul trucking.

Truckin' is still a dirty and unsafe business. BTW, the "retread" parent is referring to is the practice of dremelling new grooves into balding tires(which is legal if the tire was designed for it, but is often done unsafely and illegally, like much truck maintenance).

Nonsense. That does not explain why the Negros in USA suffer so much in education, and need all kinds of help just to get passing grades. That does not explain why Negros tend to commit the highest amount of murders and rapes.

Actually, Just read a few sites to clear all your doubts once and for all:

American Ren. StormFront.

You were moderated down for telling the truth about the racial disparity of crime statistics of which blacks are overrepresented, by a factor of 8 or more for some crimes, including robbery and theft.

Professor Peter Fine at Florida Atlantic University had an idea for an art class. He would gather a group of students to produce work around their idea of their racial identity. But as part of the class he asked them to take a DNA test that would break down their racial background. His bet was that most of the class--of whom the majority saw themselves as whites of European descent--had no real idea who they were.

He was right. Of 13 students, only one turned out to be completely European. The rest displayed a mixture of European, Native American, African and Asian genes. The one black student turned out to be 21 per cent white. Read more.

A totally arbitrary collection of students in a random art class in a Florida state university, and 12 out of 13 students DNA tested mixed blood.

As I said: It's over. 12 out of 13. You lost. 12 out of 13. Tough shit. 12 out of 13.

You might be surprised how pure some family lines are.

Translation: "My family tree Does Not Branch."

No matter how inbred you think your family tree is, odds are quite good that I would get the pleasure of watching you choke on your own actual DNA test.

Do you fix our leaking sink, or just let it go on dripping

A sink is useless if you don't crank the faucet open at times.
And that's one sink I'd be delighted to help open full blast.

-

genetic testing [] is usually done on a sample of people that have something to gain by lying about who the father is

True, and basing the cited statistic on that sample set would indeed yield entirely bogus inflated results. That sort of study must be preformed based upon combined DNA data for father and child that became incidentally available by reason *not* involving paternity cases. For example situations where an unsuspecting father and child are both tested for some genetic disease.

And perhaps I shouldn't have said "at least 10%". There have been quite a few studies coming up with varying results both higher and lower, but it doesn't much matter. 10% yields an 80% invalidation rate in an asserted 4 generation family tree. Even a 1% false paternity rate yields a 47% invalidation rate for an asserted 6 generation family tree. Even an entirely fictional 0.1% false paternity rate invalidates 64% of asserted 10 generation family trees.

-----

Professor Peter Fine at Florida Atlantic University had an idea for an art class. He would gather a group of students to produce work around their idea of their racial identity. But as part of the class he asked them to take a DNA test that would break down their racial background. His bet was that most of the class--of whom the majority saw themselves as whites of European descent--had no real idea who they were.

He was right. Of 13 students, only one turned out to be completely European. The rest displayed a mixture of European, Native American, African and Asian genes. The one black student turned out to be 21 per cent white.

Read more.

A totally arbitrary collection 13 "white european" students in a Florida Atlantic University art class, of 12 out of 13 DNA tested as some sort of mixed ancestry.

A substantial minority of "white" American racists are in fact part black themselves, and that quickly shifts far into the majority of them when you start counting native american and asian and others.

-

You can blame Negroes and "Hispanics" for most the crime which would occur. See this fascinating article.

All the rabbits in the world won't change that.

Maybe not but it certainly might help. Rabbits can survive on grass and crude silage, can be grown in relatively small areas and reproduce reliably. Faster than goats, the most widely eaten animal on the planet.

Similar husbandry programs with cavia porcellus, guinea pigs to you, have helped many families lift themselves out of poverty in Peru and other areas in South America.

Rabbits would be better suited to the colder climate of North Korea. The fur would provide a secondary revenue source. It may not sound like much but when you're dirt poor having meat to eat and furs to trade is big deal.

How is this not a good thing? Why would you want to see the North Korean people starve just because their government is the asshat of the world? That's almost as silly as people hating all Americans because Bush is a douche bag. It's not like they elected that idiot in North Korea and there's growing evidence we didn't elect our idiot, either.

That's a fact: http://www.amren.com/946issue/946issue.html#cover

Although that doesn't talk about all the people that suburbans avoid, it does talk about black people - which represent a big chunk of that group.

The article points out that that blacks commit a lot more crime than other groups. That is simply a fact, regardless of the reason why. E.g. even if whites (or sunspots) are to blame, blacks do commit more crime.

One reason blacks with money try to live apart from other blacks (and one assumes whites with money think the same) is that blacks commit a lot of crime. If it was "racism", I guess you'd have to call the blacks racist too.

It isn't racist to point out that blacks commit a huge amount of crime (10x the white rate), nor is it racist to point out that Chinese and Japanese commit a lot less crime than white people.

Unless you are saying that the facts are racist, or something similarly irrational.

We Danes are not afraid of anyone.

There is a fundamental tension in geopolitics between two competing principles: Self-determination vs territorial integrity. Recent geopolitical fashion, driven largely by the US Civil Rights movement of the 1960s, has subordinated self-determination to territorial integrity. Specifically, territorial boundaries may not be changed in service of self-determination of minority groups or even majority groups. Self-determination has been limited to mean the ability of residents of a territory, whatever their background, beliefs or preferences, to impose their will on other residents of that territory. To address the objection that this results in tyranny, a long, ambiguous and, in practice, selectively enforced list of "human rights" has been declared by the United Nations -- rights that are supposed to prevent tyranny. Part of the rhetoric for this sort of territorial integrity is the prevention of forced migrations.

By allowing eminent domain compensation to eject residents from their homes in service of other private uses, Kelo et al v. City of New London states that civil authorities may find it necessary to force the migration, with just compensation, of some of their private citizens, for the benefit of other private citizens, so long as the greater public good is served.

This SCOTUS decision takes the stance that territorial integrity can be violated for the "public good" even if the development thereby enabled is a private one. There is just one thing between this decision and a dramatic geopolitical revolution allowing people to create societies with others of like mind for their own living experiments:

The Sections 1981 and 1982 of the Civil Rights Act of 1870.

As Frank Salter points out in "On Genetic Interests: Family, Ethny and Humanity in an Age of Mass Migration", mass migration has put all territories "in play" world-wide. Key to this has been a perverse notion, largely arising from the 1960s reinterpretation of Section 1982 of the Civil Rights Act of 1870. That reinterpretation, spread throughout the world via the US's dominant position during the era, is that the right of central governance to over-ride local governance and even individual, private freedom of association, extends to anything that might remind one of the institution of slavery. Such reminders are called "badges... of slavery". Never mind that when you violate private preferences for personal association you have created a new form of slavery. Apparently, the over-riding governmental interest since the 1960s has been to keep all rights, public and private, territorial and contractual (see Section 1981), "in play" between all ethnies worldwide.

When people realize how much property value is being destroyed by the misguided notion that all people everywhere should be forced to live the multicultural experiment of some misguided 60s idealists and greedy 21st century globalists -- multiculturalist supremacism -- it will become apparent that eminent domain compensation as a means of allowing new territorial boundaries to form is not the slippery slope to Armageddon but rather the path away from it, to true diversity and to the stars.

They're after their own government and territory.

Wouldn't it be rather fascinating to see what they did with their own country?

PS: I happen to think that self-determination (mutually consenting adults forming their own states with territorial claim via eminent domain-driven migration as practical mechanism) is the fundamental human right upon which all other human rights are founded and that territorial integrity and democracy are secondary considerations. Large cranial capacity shouldn't be a prerequisite for human rights. But it would be particularly rational for supporters of the principle of human rights to give priority to Hawaiian self-determination since they are particularly endangered by outbreeding and displacement and are obviously a unique ethny.

Not race?

Then you just need to compare conviction rates as a percentage of cases brought to trial. Studies have shown that arrest rates are higher for blacks, but that the conviction rate is much lower indicating bias in police arrests. On murder cases that actually go to trial, the chances for a black getting the death penalty vs a white are higher, indicating bias in the justice system.

example
example2

Maybe they were just channeling this: http://www.amren.com/mtnews/archives/2004/10/40000 _library_m.php

Good graph of the crime situation

It's more intolerant/ignorant to deny us our right of association with whom we please. You can always also visit http://www.amren.com/colrcrim.html.

IT HAS now become acceptable to discuss black crime,'' writes Mr. Ed Koch, former Mayor of New York City. I'm not sure this is a compliment to those of us who have been doing it for years -- Patrick Buchanan, Samuel Francis, and especially Professor William Wilbanks of Florida International University, to mention just a few. But we welcome Mr. Koch into our midst nonetheless.

In fact, the significance of black crime is even greater than Mr. Koch realizes, for without it, the level of violence in the United States would not be appreciably greater than that of the European nations with whom we are most often compared.

As the chart at the bottom of this page shows, Americans as a whole are more violent than Europeans: twice as likely as Frenchmen to commit murder and more than five times as likely as Germans to commit robbery. However, as is clear from the separate calculations for American blacks and whites, it is very high rates of violent crimes by blacks -- eight times as high as whites for murder and more than ten times for robbery -- that yield this result.

These figures actually overstate the white crime rate, since the FBI's Uniform Crime Reports classify Hispanics as white.'' About 9 per cent of the population is Hispanic, and jurisdictions that treat them as a separate category report that they are two to six times as likely as whites to commit murder and robbery.

These figures have a bearing on the debate over gun control. White Americans, who have easy access to guns, are less likely to kill each other than are the British, who are almost completely disarmed. Would gun control be so widely advocated if America were less violent than Britain?

This comparison with Europe suggests that the United States has neither a unique culture of violence nor inadequate gun laws. It has a high rate of violent crime because it has a large number of violent black criminals. Let us hope Mr. Koch will agree that it is now respectable to say so.

CRIMES PER 100,000 POPULATION

A-Britain B-France C-Germany D-Italy E-U.S.A. F-American Whites G-American Blacks

Murder: A-7.4 B-4.6 C-4.2 D-6.0 E-9.3 F-5.1 G-43.4

Robbery: A-62.6 B-90.4 C-47.4 D-68.6 E-263.0 F-126 G-1,343

Source: Uniform Crime Reports for U.S. data, The Economist for European data. European data for 1990; American data for 1992

Mr. Taylor is the author of Paved With Good Intentions: The Failure of Race Relations in Contemporary America . He is also the Editor of American Renaissance magazine, a publication dedicated to telling the truth about race, racial differences and their meaning.

Number 8 Prison Rape Researcher: University of South Dakota psychologist Cindy Struckman- Johnson was one of the first to seek anonymous written narrative testimonies from prisoners about the realities of prison life, and she employed a handful of students to help process the returned surveys. What she got stunned them all: One in ten inmates in the survey had been the victim of a sexual assault, many repeatedly. But it wasn't the numbers alone that made the impact, it was the vividness of the accounts and the desperation expressed. To read page after first- person page of sexual torture--"This happens every day. Please, please, can you do something about it"--well, says Struckman- Johnson, "some of my students almost couldn't handle it."

Actually, prison rape is a very racial thing. He was completely right to point out that it would almost certainly be large black men doing the raping. You see, the black gangs, and the Hispanic gangs, do not let anybody (else) touch members of their own race. The whites fail to form such gangs, and are victimized. Often the youngest white males, usually in for some sort of first time drug offence, are in the most danger. Check out the article Hard Time by Jared Taylor.

You might find the Color of Crime interesting. You are absolutely correct that blacks cause the most crime. They also have lower intelligence in general than white people. Would someone please explain to me again how "diversity is our strength???" LOL

And the other major criminal group is not "wealthy white males between the ages of 45 and 65" but Jews of any age

Dozens of other Americans, Europeans, Australians and Canadians have been jailed for exercising their right to free speech.

Read more about it here

Vanguard News Network

A must read for any person who cares about censorship.

Return to the dark ages

A must read for any person who cares about censorship.

Return to the dark ages

Here and here
Check references to see where this data is coming from.

"some of the poorest and least influential people in your country for some of it's biggest problems. That makes no sense."

Well, I am tired of getting blamed for all the evils of society.
You know what? I do get up in the morning, go to work, don't abuse anyone etc ... yet every report I have seen seems to blame me for causing the pain and suffering of these "poor people."
Seems simplistic? Hell, maybe it is but, frankly, it is the truth.