I'm not "nitpicking", you blinkered sheep. The point is that they are not "just refugees". The majority are economic migrants. And even if they were "just refugees", they can fuck off to some other Muslim country. You don't see Muslim countries welcoming in "refugees" from non-Muslim countries, do you?
there are no 2 million new immigrants/refugees in Germany. They only passed through. The total number still here is about 600k
Even if that is true, then that is 600k too many. And how many shuffled along to other countries in Europe?
The answer does not interest me.
Then why did you ask the question and guess at an answer? Your pathetic excuses for your failures are dull.
And that's pretty much it. You've shown yourself, over and over again, to be a dull, blinkered sheep. You can keep living in denial, while reality intrudes around you:
"Muslims invading Europe used to get repelled by armies. Now you just invite them in, shove your people aside, and give them welfare. In return for your pathological kindness, they slaughter your people at Christmas markets, sexually assault your women in gangs, and ignore your laws for their own. All while you pay the jizya like a flock of stupid sheep."
If you think that's what anyone cried about then you weren't paying attention to the animal speech
Trump was responding to a comment that explicitly mentioned MS13. That the libshits and you latched on to "animals" out of context is no surprise. Trump has been talking about MS13 for a long time. Maybe if you got out of your libshit media bubble you'd figure out you've been swimming in propaganda soup. Or maybe you like it that way.
But don't take my word for it. You can only hide the context for so long in the Internet age, so instead of just taking it out of context, the libshit media doubled down and then cried even after they acknowledged he was talking about MS13.
went full retard
It isn't the exact same policy, but separating families is not new. Obama initially detained families together. The courts ruled that the children couldn't be contained. So Obama just released "families" together (you know this policy just creates an incentive to traffic children, right?)
Obama also separated families, too, just not as much.
I find myself wondering how I'm supposed to access memory-mapped registers "safely" when the idea of void pointers and uninitialized variables are the devil. How I'm supposed to write code that deals with bootstrapping a processor's MMU. How I'm supposed to write an interrupt handler when different processors have different requirements for ISR stacks. Writing software in that domain isn't well suited to any tool that thinks it can define what "safety" is for all platforms.
Might want to check out Redox. I saw this mentioned elsewhere in the comments. I don't have any personal experience with it, but it looks like they've come pretty far.
PS: The concept behind Rust is to keep your unsafe areas clearly marked as such. Presumably not every piece of code needs to do unsafe things. The Linux kernel has over 10 million lines of code.
It isn't C that's the problem, it's digging around in C in the dark.
C is a big part of the problem. It's a rotten default, which is why you need all those methods on top of it before you get something approaching sanity.
How about spread out in Muslim countries? The poster dead-boy-on-the-beach was already safe in Turkey before his father took him on a dangerous trip.
Germany has 80million inhabitants, that is nearly 2 Syrians per 100 people.
Liked the blinkered sheep that you are, you continually ignore that the majority of people flooding in to Europe were not actually Syrian, the majority are economic migrants, and the majority are young males. And even if they were all valid Syrian "refugees", it's not Europe's responsibility to invite a hostile, supremacist, and alien culture into their midst.
She did not. That is another internet myth.
Your levels of denial are astounding. Again, I provided links, while you deny what the links say. I quoted from The Guardian. Where is your alternative source? Oh, that's right, you don't have any. Too busy making up Nazi conspiracy theories for Islamic attacks.
Strange, that I'm so ignorant and got 2 countries right.
Yes, ignorant enough that you had to ask the question, and had to guess at the other two besides Poland, and only got one right. And also too fucking lazy to search for the answer yourself, and would rather bleat about your ignorance after lecturing me about my supposed ignorance.
Perhaps you want to read this, to get some facts straight:
laugh What "facts" would you like me to get straight? Like "no money" being given to "refugees"? Like nobody being displaced? That Merkel didn't open the floodgates? Like Nazi conspiracy theories? You truly are a fucking joke.
I had forgotten about that, but it's really limited in scope and that's not what is pushing the current censorship. What's really going on is that the Big Tech oligarchy leans heavily left, and they ramped up their censorship to disparately impact conservatives right before the midterms. And if they're going to be political about their censorship, I don't think they deserve legal protection under the law for their content.
No, I were not wrong. I exagerated. I could not know before that you are a nitpicker.
You were factually wrong. That you're trying to pass this off as an "exaggeration" is pathetic.
First of all, as long as Turkey is considered save, we don't accept refugees from there.
"Mrs Merkel had already taken a unique initiative in announcing that all Syrian refugees would be eligible to claim asylum in Germany - unilaterally, and rightly, waiving the so-called Dublin procedures, under which displaced people must claim asylum in the first EU state that they arrive in."
You are conflating people who are citizens of Turkey versus "refugees" who did not originate from Turkey. Not that it matters where they actually originated from, since all they have to do is ditch any papers and claim asylum status based on whatever they are told to say. In practice, once they are in a European country the odds of them being deported are small.
Germany did not lay out a doormat. No idea to what you are referring.
Like I said, you are beyond a useful idiot. A bleating sheep with blinkers on your eyes:
"Merkel's suspension of the Dublin II accord and her decision to do away with all effective vetting of asylum applications submitted by Syrians looks certain to lead to an unprecedented number of migrants arriving in the country; according to the latest estimates, 1.5 million refugees are likely to have arrived in Germany in 2015 alone."
Except for Poland, I don't recall such a country, Hungary or Bulgaria perhaps?
Funny how you lecture me about being ignorant, when you're wrong about everything, and even when you actually admit your ignorance, you can't do a simple search to find the answer.
Obviously you are not aware that [1] were terrorists, and usually not refugees but recruited immigrants or descendants of immigrants and [2] were organized and bribed by Neonazi groups.
Does it hurt to have your head so far up your ass?
First of all: how would we avoid them traveling through a safe country?
Why would you want to? How about they just stop at the first safe country, especially countries where the culture is more like their own. And you're ignoring that the majority are economic migrants.
Secondly: which country would you consider save?
As an example, the dead boy on the beach was taken from a safe environment in Turkey by his father.
Because they don't get Hatz IV, they only get something like $200 pocket money per month.
You said they didn't get money. You were wrong.
He was not supposed to be deported.
Yes, he was. He used every trick, legal loophole, and spineless inaction by the government to avoid it. And after 13 years, the best the government could come up with was to take away his allowance.
The refugees came first, and then Merkel formed politics to organize how to receive them.
"Merkel's suspension of the Dublin II accord and her decision to do away with all effective vetting of asylum applications submitted by Syrians looks certain to lead to an unprecedented number of migrants arriving in the country; according to the latest estimates, 1.5 million refugees are likely to have arrived in Germany in 2015 alone."
you lecture about a situation you have no knowledge about
*snort* You're the one that has been wrong on every front, in complete denial of news reports. You haven't even provided one link in this debate, while I have provided many. You even accused me of not reading a link, when it showed that you were the one who was wrong.
You blame a politician for refugees seeking asylum into the EU, while that politician only has influence over Germany.
Even you can't be this dumb. Laying out the doormat for Germany was obviously going to affect other countries and Europe, and it did. The EU even tried to force other countries to take their "fair share", while wise countries with a backbone told them to fuck off.
You are beyond a useful idiot. You are a bleating sheep with blinkers on your eyes:
"Muslims invading Europe used to get repelled by armies. Now you just invite them in, shove your people aside, and give them welfare. In return for your pathological kindness, they slaughter your people at Christmas markets, sexually assault your women in gangs, and ignore your laws for their own. All while you pay the jizya like a flock of stupid sheep."
It's because you're buying into the strawman argument about the D's wanting to have totally open borders.
The Democrats have become the party of illegal immigration and transgender bathroom "rights".
They support the "sanctuary" city/states. They cry when Trump calls MS13 animals. They act hysterical when Trump has the same policy as Obama. They are the ones against a wall, deportations, and an end to chain migration. They are the ones who are happy their white grandchildren children want to be brown.
What does a video about some overwrought outrage over a few tweets, over a trailer for a video game, have to do with this topic? We're talking about developers, that wield actual power over a software project, going against one of the fundamental principles of open source.
Which is why the *only* solution is to pass a law so that Facebook, Twitter, ISPs, etc are not held legally liable for the content other people disseminate on their platform.
Are you being sarcastic, or do you not know that they already enjoy this legal protection?
see for a study citation that shows most of the censorship on campus is directed at left wing people. Make of it what you will but the study appears accurate
Oh, really? Where's the study? You link to a YouTube video by a lefty pundit. If you watch the video, the 75% number comes from a Tweet. I challenge you to find a "study" that shows that 75% number. Let's see a proper citation, none of this regurgitation of a regurgitation.
Matthew Lawson, prosecuting, said police were following a "lengthy procedure" to get the information from Facebook itself.
Why is it a "lengthy procedure" that takes longer to convict this man and sentence him to 14 months in prison? Why don't they raid the offices of Facebook? Why do megacorps have more rights than individuals?
That is actually what we do, and try to improve. Does not work in a war zone, though.
No, because you have these people crossing multiple safe countries to arrive in Europe. Merkel laid out the welcome mat, and predictably the flood came.
We don't do that.
You're in denial. I gave you a link to where a woman was being displaced to make room for "refugees".
And if they would "hate the west", they would not come here.
Why not? Have you never heard of invasion? Muslims invading Europe used to get repelled by armies. Now you just invite them in, shove your people aside, and give them welfare. In return for your pathological kindness, they slaughter your people at Christmas markets, sexually assault your women in gangs, and ignore your laws for their own. All while you pay the jizya like a flock of stupid sheep.
And what is wrong with that?????
So you first claim they get no money, and now you ask what is wrong with a "refugee" receiving an allowance for 13 years after he was supposed to be deported?
You seem not to get anything. [..] Why should we sent a guy back who did not commit any crime? You are a moron, plain and simple.
What I find amusing is that no manufacturer that decides to go with a notch [..] The notch in the iPhone X made possible for Apple to shave off the bottom chin and make all bezels (except the notch area) the same width around the phone, giving it its treademark looks.
What's amusing is that phone "innovation" has come down to an ugly hardware "notch" that interrupts the symmetry of the display area.
BTW, the Essential phone had a completely different type of notch, it doesn't house any IR or proximity sensors...
Bernie Sanders never said people shouldn't own their own homes or be able to make money.
But he has hammered the issue of wealth inequality. He's a hypocrite; he is the 1%. He can sell two of his homes so he only has one, and give the proceeds to those "in need". He doesn't need the government to relieve himself of his wealth to reduce "income inequality". Why doesn't he lead by example?
I see in another post of yours you believe black people have inherently lesser IQ
This is a statistical fact.
Racism didn't end with the Civil Rights Act
Redlining is a natural outcome when you apply statistics to predict loan repayment. Subprime lending practices, caused by banks being pushed to make "diversity" loans, resulted in the 2008 financial crisis.
Racism has both enslaved them, and worked to keep them from accumulating opportunity
Try watching some Thomas Sowell. Anyways, there's been "affirmative" action for decades, which prioritized blacks. And blacks underperform in other countries that don't have the "historical racism" excuse.
But please, cry more about identity politics when we're just six months out from getting to hear you whine about the grand oppression of having to hear "happy holidays".
Your own non-partisan link admits bias in police use of force.
The New York Times is partisan. It clearly leans left. But even they admitted BLM is based on an incorrect narrative -- blacks were not more likely to be shot by cops. And that bias for force was less than 20%. Hardly an epidemic.
Meanwhile, the cops were able to bring Timothy McVeigh, the Aurora Theater shooter, and Dylan Roof in for trial alive after they committed mass murder.
Did it occur to you that maybe that were brought in alive because they didn't resist arrest?
The focus on shootings
The vast majority of police deaths are caused by shootings.
is your own desperate attempt to forgive the cops for killing people you manifestly don't care about for comparitively minor crimes, or no crime at all.
Does it bother you when a white person is unlawfully killed by police? Should we have mass protests, professional athletes kneeling during the anthem, and slogans declaring that White Lives Matter? And what about the black-on-black murders, that absolutely dwarfs deaths from police? And what about police deaths by blacks, just going to turn a blind eye?
Are you going to ignore how the founders of BLM idolize a cop-killing, black supremacist that fled to Cuba? Why yes, you are. All that matters are black issues, amiright? No need to hear differently, that would be racist!
Well, mostly they're dismissed because the "proof" cited for them is none and easily debunked if you have at least a minimum of education and bother to actually dig past the surface.
On the other hand, you've got the libshit media calling the killing of white farmers and the seizing of their lands a "conspiracy theory" just because Trump dared tweet about it. You even get stuff like this:
Newsweek, March 2018: "A White Farmer Is Killed Every Five Days in South Africa and Authorities Do Nothing about It, Activists Say"
Newsweek, August 2018: "White Nationalists Praise Donald Trump For Spreading White South African Farmers Conspiracy Theory"
Vox: "It's hard to overstate how unprecedented that is: The president of the United States just directed the secretary of state to look into a racist conspiracy theory he saw on Fox News -- a conspiracy theory that is a major talking point for white nationalists and neo-Nazis.
Whether or not it's actually true is irrelevant." (bold mine)
Slashdot Mirror
Wow nitpicking again. So they are "just refugees"
I'm not "nitpicking", you blinkered sheep. The point is that they are not "just refugees". The majority are economic migrants. And even if they were "just refugees", they can fuck off to some other Muslim country. You don't see Muslim countries welcoming in "refugees" from non-Muslim countries, do you?
there are no 2 million new immigrants/refugees in Germany. They only passed through. The total number still here is about 600k
Even if that is true, then that is 600k too many. And how many shuffled along to other countries in Europe?
The answer does not interest me.
Then why did you ask the question and guess at an answer? Your pathetic excuses for your failures are dull.
And that's pretty much it. You've shown yourself, over and over again, to be a dull, blinkered sheep. You can keep living in denial, while reality intrudes around you:
"Muslims invading Europe used to get repelled by armies. Now you just invite them in, shove your people aside, and give them welfare. In return for your pathological kindness, they slaughter your people at Christmas markets, sexually assault your women in gangs, and ignore your laws for their own. All while you pay the jizya like a flock of stupid sheep."
If you think that's what anyone cried about then you weren't paying attention to the animal speech
Trump was responding to a comment that explicitly mentioned MS13. That the libshits and you latched on to "animals" out of context is no surprise. Trump has been talking about MS13 for a long time. Maybe if you got out of your libshit media bubble you'd figure out you've been swimming in propaganda soup. Or maybe you like it that way.
But don't take my word for it. You can only hide the context for so long in the Internet age, so instead of just taking it out of context, the libshit media doubled down and then cried even after they acknowledged he was talking about MS13.
went full retard
It isn't the exact same policy, but separating families is not new. Obama initially detained families together. The courts ruled that the children couldn't be contained. So Obama just released "families" together (you know this policy just creates an incentive to traffic children, right?)
Obama also separated families, too, just not as much.
Formal methods are needed to provide sanity in any language. Don't leave home without them.
I don't foresee them gaining mainstream traction. They've been around a long time, but are still very niche.
Verified C has less syntax than C11.
Sure, you can take a subset of C, removing the nasty bits, but it's not C anymore.
So I'm unsure what you're referring to.
I'm referring to standard C.
I find myself wondering how I'm supposed to access memory-mapped registers "safely" when the idea of void pointers and uninitialized variables are the devil. How I'm supposed to write code that deals with bootstrapping a processor's MMU. How I'm supposed to write an interrupt handler when different processors have different requirements for ISR stacks.
Writing software in that domain isn't well suited to any tool that thinks it can define what "safety" is for all platforms.
Might want to check out Redox. I saw this mentioned elsewhere in the comments. I don't have any personal experience with it, but it looks like they've come pretty far.
PS: The concept behind Rust is to keep your unsafe areas clearly marked as such. Presumably not every piece of code needs to do unsafe things. The Linux kernel has over 10 million lines of code.
Unfortunately, the believers in silver bullets will not die out.
Unfortunately, the believers in the mythical "better programmer" solution will not die out.
It isn't C that's the problem, it's digging around in C in the dark.
C is a big part of the problem. It's a rotten default, which is why you need all those methods on top of it before you get something approaching sanity.
Where should those 1.5million Syrian refugees be?
How about spread out in Muslim countries? The poster dead-boy-on-the-beach was already safe in Turkey before his father took him on a dangerous trip.
Germany has 80million inhabitants, that is nearly 2 Syrians per 100 people.
Liked the blinkered sheep that you are, you continually ignore that the majority of people flooding in to Europe were not actually Syrian, the majority are economic migrants, and the majority are young males. And even if they were all valid Syrian "refugees", it's not Europe's responsibility to invite a hostile, supremacist, and alien culture into their midst.
She did not. That is another internet myth.
Your levels of denial are astounding. Again, I provided links, while you deny what the links say. I quoted from The Guardian. Where is your alternative source? Oh, that's right, you don't have any. Too busy making up Nazi conspiracy theories for Islamic attacks.
Strange, that I'm so ignorant and got 2 countries right.
Yes, ignorant enough that you had to ask the question, and had to guess at the other two besides Poland, and only got one right. And also too fucking lazy to search for the answer yourself, and would rather bleat about your ignorance after lecturing me about my supposed ignorance.
Perhaps you want to read this, to get some facts straight:
laugh What "facts" would you like me to get straight? Like "no money" being given to "refugees"? Like nobody being displaced? That Merkel didn't open the floodgates? Like Nazi conspiracy theories? You truly are a fucking joke.
It's more complicated than that. See for example: https://www.npr.org/sections/a...
I had forgotten about that, but it's really limited in scope and that's not what is pushing the current censorship. What's really going on is that the Big Tech oligarchy leans heavily left, and they ramped up their censorship to disparately impact conservatives right before the midterms. And if they're going to be political about their censorship, I don't think they deserve legal protection under the law for their content.
No, I were not wrong. I exagerated. I could not know before that you are a nitpicker.
You were factually wrong. That you're trying to pass this off as an "exaggeration" is pathetic.
First of all, as long as Turkey is considered save, we don't accept refugees from there.
"Mrs Merkel had already taken a unique initiative in announcing that all Syrian refugees would be eligible to claim asylum in Germany - unilaterally, and rightly, waiving the so-called Dublin procedures, under which displaced people must claim asylum in the first EU state that they arrive in."
You are conflating people who are citizens of Turkey versus "refugees" who did not originate from Turkey. Not that it matters where they actually originated from, since all they have to do is ditch any papers and claim asylum status based on whatever they are told to say. In practice, once they are in a European country the odds of them being deported are small.
Germany did not lay out a doormat. No idea to what you are referring.
Like I said, you are beyond a useful idiot. A bleating sheep with blinkers on your eyes:
"Merkel's suspension of the Dublin II accord and her decision to do away with all effective vetting of asylum applications submitted by Syrians looks certain to lead to an unprecedented number of migrants arriving in the country; according to the latest estimates, 1.5 million refugees are likely to have arrived in Germany in 2015 alone."
Except for Poland, I don't recall such a country, Hungary or Bulgaria perhaps?
Funny how you lecture me about being ignorant, when you're wrong about everything, and even when you actually admit your ignorance, you can't do a simple search to find the answer.
Obviously you are not aware that [1] were terrorists, and usually not refugees but recruited immigrants or descendants of immigrants and [2] were organized and bribed by Neonazi groups.
Does it hurt to have your head so far up your ass?
First of all: how would we avoid them traveling through a safe country?
Why would you want to? How about they just stop at the first safe country, especially countries where the culture is more like their own. And you're ignoring that the majority are economic migrants.
Secondly: which country would you consider save?
As an example, the dead boy on the beach was taken from a safe environment in Turkey by his father.
Because they don't get Hatz IV, they only get something like $200 pocket money per month.
You said they didn't get money. You were wrong.
He was not supposed to be deported.
Yes, he was. He used every trick, legal loophole, and spineless inaction by the government to avoid it. And after 13 years, the best the government could come up with was to take away his allowance.
The refugees came first, and then Merkel formed politics to organize how to receive them.
She turned a stream of "refugees" into a flood:
"Merkel's suspension of the Dublin II accord and her decision to do away with all effective vetting of asylum applications submitted by Syrians looks certain to lead to an unprecedented number of migrants arriving in the country; according to the latest estimates, 1.5 million refugees are likely to have arrived in Germany in 2015 alone."
you lecture about a situation you have no knowledge about
*snort* You're the one that has been wrong on every front, in complete denial of news reports. You haven't even provided one link in this debate, while I have provided many. You even accused me of not reading a link, when it showed that you were the one who was wrong.
You blame a politician for refugees seeking asylum into the EU, while that politician only has influence over Germany.
Even you can't be this dumb. Laying out the doormat for Germany was obviously going to affect other countries and Europe, and it did. The EU even tried to force other countries to take their "fair share", while wise countries with a backbone told them to fuck off.
You are beyond a useful idiot. You are a bleating sheep with blinkers on your eyes:
"Muslims invading Europe used to get repelled by armies. Now you just invite them in, shove your people aside, and give them welfare. In return for your pathological kindness, they slaughter your people at Christmas markets, sexually assault your women in gangs, and ignore your laws for their own. All while you pay the jizya like a flock of stupid sheep."
It's because you're buying into the strawman argument about the D's wanting to have totally open borders.
The Democrats have become the party of illegal immigration and transgender bathroom "rights".
They support the "sanctuary" city/states. They cry when Trump calls MS13 animals. They act hysterical when Trump has the same policy as Obama. They are the ones against a wall, deportations, and an end to chain migration. They are the ones who are happy their white grandchildren children want to be brown.
Why allow people who think pineapple on pizza is acceptable to use Linux?
Don't knock it until you've tried it. I used to think the same, but ham and pineapple pizza is awesome.
This wasn't a cancer. This was Kyle being thrown under the bus
Kyle is the cancer. The other developers wizened up, a welcome change in the software industry.
Very timely, very relevant: https://youtu.be/l63nY0AYebI
What does a video about some overwrought outrage over a few tweets, over a trailer for a video game, have to do with this topic? We're talking about developers, that wield actual power over a software project, going against one of the fundamental principles of open source.
Which is why the *only* solution is to pass a law so that Facebook, Twitter, ISPs, etc are not held legally liable for the content other people disseminate on their platform.
Are you being sarcastic, or do you not know that they already enjoy this legal protection?
The infection runs deep.
see for a study citation that shows most of the censorship on campus is directed at left wing people. Make of it what you will but the study appears accurate
Oh, really? Where's the study? You link to a YouTube video by a lefty pundit. If you watch the video, the 75% number comes from a Tweet. I challenge you to find a "study" that shows that 75% number. Let's see a proper citation, none of this regurgitation of a regurgitation.
Matthew Lawson, prosecuting, said police were following a "lengthy procedure" to get the information from Facebook itself.
Why is it a "lengthy procedure" that takes longer to convict this man and sentence him to 14 months in prison? Why don't they raid the offices of Facebook? Why do megacorps have more rights than individuals?
That is actually what we do, and try to improve. Does not work in a war zone, though.
No, because you have these people crossing multiple safe countries to arrive in Europe. Merkel laid out the welcome mat, and predictably the flood came.
We don't do that.
You're in denial. I gave you a link to where a woman was being displaced to make room for "refugees".
And if they would "hate the west", they would not come here.
Why not? Have you never heard of invasion? Muslims invading Europe used to get repelled by armies. Now you just invite them in, shove your people aside, and give them welfare. In return for your pathological kindness, they slaughter your people at Christmas markets, sexually assault your women in gangs, and ignore your laws for their own. All while you pay the jizya like a flock of stupid sheep.
And what is wrong with that?????
So you first claim they get no money, and now you ask what is wrong with a "refugee" receiving an allowance for 13 years after he was supposed to be deported?
You seem not to get anything. [..] Why should we sent a guy back who did not commit any crime? You are a moron, plain and simple.
You are a useful idiot beyond help.
Unless his amazing display of charity causes billionaires around the country to suddenly become far far more charitable it is an empty gesture.
How is it an "empty gesture" when the people receiving his wealth will actually benefit?
Working to fix the systemic problems is a lot more effectual.
Who says you can't do both? Bernie is a hypocrite who would rather keep his wealth.
What I find amusing is that no manufacturer that decides to go with a notch [..] The notch in the iPhone X made possible for Apple to shave off the bottom chin and make all bezels (except the notch area) the same width around the phone, giving it its treademark looks.
What's amusing is that phone "innovation" has come down to an ugly hardware "notch" that interrupts the symmetry of the display area.
BTW, the Essential phone had a completely different type of notch, it doesn't house any IR or proximity sensors...
Oh, yeah, that's completely different. *eyeroll*
Bernie Sanders never said people shouldn't own their own homes or be able to make money.
But he has hammered the issue of wealth inequality. He's a hypocrite; he is the 1%. He can sell two of his homes so he only has one, and give the proceeds to those "in need". He doesn't need the government to relieve himself of his wealth to reduce "income inequality". Why doesn't he lead by example?
I see in another post of yours you believe black people have inherently lesser IQ
This is a statistical fact.
Racism didn't end with the Civil Rights Act
Redlining is a natural outcome when you apply statistics to predict loan repayment. Subprime lending practices, caused by banks being pushed to make "diversity" loans, resulted in the 2008 financial crisis.
Racism has both enslaved them, and worked to keep them from accumulating opportunity
Try watching some Thomas Sowell. Anyways, there's been "affirmative" action for decades, which prioritized blacks. And blacks underperform in other countries that don't have the "historical racism" excuse.
But please, cry more about identity politics when we're just six months out from getting to hear you whine about the grand oppression of having to hear "happy holidays".
I've never complained about it once.
PS: It's okay to be white.
Your own non-partisan link admits bias in police use of force.
The New York Times is partisan. It clearly leans left. But even they admitted BLM is based on an incorrect narrative -- blacks were not more likely to be shot by cops. And that bias for force was less than 20%. Hardly an epidemic.
Meanwhile, the cops were able to bring Timothy McVeigh, the Aurora Theater shooter, and Dylan Roof in for trial alive after they committed mass murder.
Did it occur to you that maybe that were brought in alive because they didn't resist arrest?
The focus on shootings
The vast majority of police deaths are caused by shootings.
is your own desperate attempt to forgive the cops for killing people you manifestly don't care about for comparitively minor crimes, or no crime at all.
Does it bother you when a white person is unlawfully killed by police? Should we have mass protests, professional athletes kneeling during the anthem, and slogans declaring that White Lives Matter? And what about the black-on-black murders, that absolutely dwarfs deaths from police? And what about police deaths by blacks, just going to turn a blind eye?
Are you going to ignore how the founders of BLM idolize a cop-killing, black supremacist that fled to Cuba? Why yes, you are. All that matters are black issues, amiright? No need to hear differently, that would be racist!
Well, mostly they're dismissed because the "proof" cited for them is none and easily debunked if you have at least a minimum of education and bother to actually dig past the surface.
On the other hand, you've got the libshit media calling the killing of white farmers and the seizing of their lands a "conspiracy theory" just because Trump dared tweet about it. You even get stuff like this:
Newsweek, March 2018: "A White Farmer Is Killed Every Five Days in South Africa and Authorities Do Nothing about It, Activists Say"
Newsweek, August 2018: "White Nationalists Praise Donald Trump For Spreading White South African Farmers Conspiracy Theory"
Vox: "It's hard to overstate how unprecedented that is: The president of the United States just directed the secretary of state to look into a racist conspiracy theory he saw on Fox News -- a conspiracy theory that is a major talking point for white nationalists and neo-Nazis.
Whether or not it's actually true is irrelevant." (bold mine)