Just curious....you are aware that to "fix" (lower) the (inacurate) 99%, more black people need to be killed by white people, right?

So what this statement advocates is more whites (non-blacks) killing blacks, not less black on black homicide, because just less black on black homicide makes the 1% (which is also inaccurate) get higher.

You did intend to be advocating more white on black homicide, right?

Actually if you look, I didn't quote you, I paraphrased what you've lied for years, barely missing quoting your recent false claims....i accidentally switched the word "crime" and "killing".
Where's the meaningful difference?
It's still a blatantly racist lie of extreme exaggeration....But you're correct, you recently lied that 99% of black homicides are by other blacks and 1% by police...recently you only imply the lie that 99% of crime against blacks is black on black crime.
The real number if I recall topped out at about 91%, about 7% more than white on white crime at the maximum and falling since 2012 or so. In 2018, 81% of white homicides were white on white, 89% black on black. Claiming it was EVER 99% black on black and 1% police (so 0% white or non black on black) is a bold faced racist lie racists tell....you've been telling it for years despite being shown the real crime statistics from the FBI repeatedly. The slight discrepancy is easily explained by higher poverty rates among blacks and redlining, forcing blacks to live only in designated minority areas with other blacks while whites can buy property anywhere.

You never ask why white Karens are so disrespectful, do you.
We know why you think....because you think most black families don't include fathers, because you believe black men don't raise children, they abandon them.

Maybe it's because they've been disrespected, often to death, for 400 years and don't see a reason to respect their bullies....Just a guess.

No I don't, my pair are grown, I don't need to grow a second pair, nor do I need to show them to little girls like you. Funny, you subconsciously know I have a pair so you call me nutboy...because you imagine them so large they're the main focus of my appearance. Thanks for the unintended compliment.

Is that why republicans usually get <10% of the black vote?
I think they are no different from non blacks in that they can see who is working for their interests and who is working against them. You clearly don't think they are capable of that.

Republicans switched from supporting civil rights to opposing them in order to win the southern white (mostly racist) vote. You aren't ignorant of this historical fact, you simply choose to deny it like any facts you don't like. That history has been accepted for 50 years +-....are you saying I'm so good I made it up at two years old and got the nation to play along?! Damn, I'm good.

In American politics, the Southern strategy was a Republican Party electoral strategy to increase political support among white voters in the South by appealing to racism against African Americans.[1][2][3] As the civil rights movement and dismantling of Jim Crow laws in the 1950s and 1960s visibly deepened existing racial tensions in much of the Southern United States, Republican politicians such as presidential candidate Richard Nixon and Senator Barry Goldwater developed strategies that successfully contributed to the political realignment of many white, conservative voters in the South who had traditionally supported the Democratic Party rather than the Republican Party. It also helped to push the Republican Party much more to the right.[4]
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy

I may not be the walking encyclopedias my parents were, but at least I know my own language, and my nations history.

Racism-prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one's own race is superior.
-the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races.

....I absolutely hate the bastardized definition you gave, because it's flatly wrong and just an excuse for horrid behavior.
Edit: the statement "I feel "racism against whites" is not only currently impossible, but the idea is inherently racist. " is inherently racist.
One, whites are hardly always dominant in every situation (I sure as hell wasn't when I lived in East Palo Alto for years) and two, actual dominance has little to do with racism, it's about what you think. For example, if blacks think they're automatically superior to others based on race, but not in status because they are oppressed, they are perfectly capable of vile, even murderous racism towards non blacks.

Clearly, racism paired with power is far more harmful, but the powerless can be just as racist.

She exemplifies the problem we have with identity politics: it's important to her that she is black and queer (since she repeatedly references that). How does that qualify her, above and beyond any other (non-black/queer/ trans/ Am. Indian/Hispanic) candidate to keep the buses running, the property taxes collected, the garbage service operational, the homeless shelters staffed, etc.? I don't care about her ethnicity or gender preference when I am deciding on who to vote for - and how she can apparently believe that I should, is a complete mystery to me.

In all seriousness though, here's my thoughts on the matter: I believe the n-word is used by most black people ironically. It's an attempt to reclaim power over the word that was used for so long--including today--to oppress them.

The thing is, there is precedent for this ironic use. Many in the gay community use the word "bitch" in an affection and jesting way to other members, but it takes on a completely different tone when a heterosexual person--even one who has a large circle of gay friends--tries to use it in a similar manner towards a gay person.

The thing is that this kind of ironic language usage is self-deprecating. As a member of the black or gay community, you're using a derogatory term that could just as easily be applied to you by somebody else.

Self-deprecating humor of this kind doesn't work so well when you're not a member of the group. It just comes across as punching down, especially in the case of privileged group members like middle-class white kids who will likely never know what it is like to be an "other" in their country of citizenship no matter how much they may sympathize (although as "minority" groups continue to eclipse the Caucasian population maybe within my lifetime they might actually start to experience it).

I mean, how hard is it for non-black people to not call someone an n-word? Very few black people are okay with it. The whiny " b-b-but they use the word all the time" excuse just reeks of entitlement to me.

But what do I know. I'm just some dumb white kid living in a foreign country where I can be pulled over by cops because I look different from the rest of the population and jailed for not immediately providing ID (unlike Japanese people who are legally not required to carry ID at all).

Shouldn't, but because they so consistently kill unarmed people, then support the killings with a blue wall, the success is no longer up for debate, they're failing. That doesn't mean they don't do good, or should be abolished, it means eradicating the culture of 'us vs them' that comes FROM police at every turn....starting with prosecutions. I'm glad to see that's the case here.
Agreed, there needs to be a system of third party oversight, or special prosecutors for all police misconduct cases, and prosecutions for obstruction for officers that don't help in those prosecutions.
Nothing, and I mean NOTHING, can protect an African American male from being shot by police....hands up don't shoot has gotten a pretty large number killed since it became a slogan. Nothing but being a non black male decreases your chances of being shot...not even being 12.

Cops should have to justify pulling their gun at all, it should trigger an alert at the station and start a live stream from their cameras, accessible by the public (but maybe with a day's delay so there's no chance of interference) which should be always on and a felony to tamper with. I can't fathom why the body cams can turn off, or why they aren't live streamed to a public server...the videos are public property, like any product of a public servant.

The stats were percentage of total population, not individuals. The Jewish (immigrant)population was growing exponentially faster than non-Jewish. The concern is because it was the Jewish ones that decided to permanently relocate in huge numbers (larger than all other demographics put together) across the continent to a single small country that could not stop them, and then take it by force, expelling the natives.
This "refugee from hostility" bullshit is just that as I see it. If, as you claim, the Arab population in Palestine was already hostile to Jews specifically (and I contend that if they were it was a function of massive illegal immigration, often by militants, that pushed them to it), then moving there would do absolutely nothing to alleviate the concern they might have for people that are hostile in Northern Europe. It's a complete red herring argument, ridiculous on it's face, and worse when examined closely.

"except for the holocaust part"....
Tell that to the families of the students murdered by police, or the tens of thousands of Guatemalans fleeing murder squads. State sponsored murder is state sponsored murder, it doesn't require total genocide (although the Jews don't have a monopoly on that either) and Mexicans and others have just as valid a claim that they are oppressed by it (not to the same extent as Jews under the Nazis, no, but as much or more than before the Nazis started their campaigns).

OK, let's play pretend...starting with pretending the rest of the world has an American constitution requiring equal treatment and denying discrimination based on race or religion....but I'll bite.
Almost all that happened in the 50's-60's....in case you weren't aware....without the Rwandan genocide part, or the backing by a foreign nation arming the black side. I think there were even attempts at succeeding by some groups back then....but they got no support, and were 'driven into the sea' in essence, mostly driven into prison, hiding, or a 6 ft box in reality.
Comparing the Arab league to NATO and the US is hardly realistic, unless the black nation in your "example" gets the military backing of Russia, China, Africa, South America, and parts of central America, and NATO only contains the US, Mexico, and Canada, and has no chance against new Africa and it's allies, which beats them mercilessly then expands north for decades. Also, you have to change the immigration from Rwanda, a tiny nation, to black "refugees" from the entire planet...and even then you don't have close to the same per capita immigration problem European Jewish immigrants posed to native Palestinians. All that said...I'm pretty sure some Northern leaders publicly declared they would drive the secessionists into the sea in the civil war, so it would be nothing new here. Also, it would be totally proper to do so in your hypothetical, IMO. Any invaders can be driven out by force by any nation...and that nation gets to decide who's an invader. Keep in mind that in your example, the black nation would expel all non blacks and seize their property....which is usually called theft.

I'll stick with my Mexican analogy, it's vastly more apt, IMO....it's as if you forgot that there are native Mexicans in the US that did have their property rights infringed on and were discriminated against (and still are)...and/or aren't aware that Rwanda is much smaller than the US or even smaller than many individual states, and/or ignored that the Arab League is much smaller and infinitely less capable than the UN or NATO, so not a decent comparison.....or aren't aware of.....well, that's enough, no need to harp.

That's just plain wrong. Black people can ABSOLUTELY be racist, they can even be racist against black people.
http://videosift.com/video/Chappelle-Black-white-supremacist
Black people can even perpetrate institutional racism...just see 'blackpeoplemeet.com' who's policy is to exclude non-black people as proof they can do it.

Please note the actual definition of the word below, and that your limited definition is the secondary one, not primary. The primary definition describes the most common usage, the secondary one describes institutional racism, which is a side effect of the those in power holding to the primary.

Racism: noun
1. a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human racial groups determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to dominate others or that a particular racial group is inferior to the others.
2. a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination.
3. hatred or intolerance of another race or other races.

@Mordhaus
Definitely not helping race relations by fear-monger.

If anything, more white people out in the street protesting would be a great thing.

It would show some of the kids that, there are many non-blacks that take these situations seriously.

White people shouldn't be afraid of being on the streets anymore than other people. Black, hispanic, asian, etc.

..glass panes on the other hand..

you guys might want to stay inside. = P

Um....did you forget what color the slaves that built the pyramids were? Have you heard of indentured servitude? Ever heard of an empire called Rome? Whites HAVE a history of being slaves.
Have you forgotten how the Irish, or German, or Chinese, or Japanese, etc. were treated? White, and other non-blacks have been treated as dirty on mass for the color of their skin, or the lilt of their voice, or the shape of their eyes, really for just about every ridiculous reason man could think of. Blacks have no monopoly on a history of mistreatment of their 'group'. They do seem to be the main target today however.
Do you think ghettos are 100% black? Let me dissuade you of that fallacy...they are not. Many 'white' people have LIVED many if not all of the experiences of people of color, for example, mixed race people (particularly those in the south), adopted white babies in black families, and whites that simply identify more closely with a 'black' community. Not ALL white people are ignorant of the reality and implications of racism. Some are.
Because 'white people' may not have ALL the answers does not mean they should not have a voice at the table discussing racial issues....but they should certainly not be the only voice either....they probably should not be the loudest voice too.

If Blacks did not commit more crimes than other groups then women would not be clutching their purses and other demographic groups would not be as afraid.


Blacks are seven times more likely than people of other races to commit murder, and eight times more likely to commit robbery.

When blacks commit crimes of violence, they are nearly three times more likely than non-blacks to use a gun, and more than twice as likely to use a knife.

Hispanics commit violent crimes at roughly three times the white rate, and Asians commit violent crimes at about one quarter the white rate.

The single best indicator of violent crime levels in an area is the percentage of the population that is black and Hispanic.

Interracial Crime

Of the nearly 770,000 violent interracial crimes committed every year involving blacks and whites, blacks commit 85 percent and whites commit 15 percent.

Blacks commit more violent crime against whites than against blacks. Forty-five percent of their victims are white, 43 percent are black, and 10 percent are Hispanic. When whites commit violent crime, only three percent of their victims are black.

Blacks are an estimated 39 times more likely to commit a violent crime against a white than vice versa, and 136 times more likely to commit robbery.

Blacks are 2.25 times more likely to commit officially-designated hate crimes against whites than vice versa.

State and local prosecutors filter jury pools of blacks all the time, with the purpose to stack the deck against black defendants. Such juries are more likely to convict and pass down relatively harsh sentences for black defendants.

In fact, this practice has been going on for so long, is so egregious and is so oft used, that a university study proved it statistically significantly in North Carolina. Also, legislation in two states has been passed allowed black inmates to appeal sentences to correct this practice.

Here is the latest case to fall under such a law.

So, really @chilaxe, the burden of proof is on you to prove that the jury wasn't stacked with non-blacks, especially in a southern state like Florida, where this practice is known to be done.

>> ^bobknight33:

Quit your raciest rants. Just the guy is non black does not give anyone a free pass out of jail.
You don't know what happened so keep you shit to yourself.
Maybe the guy though he had a gun I don't know, you don't know and we don't know. Time will tell.
Being 1/2 the size don't mean jack. An 8 year old with a gun is just as deadly as a 17 or 35 year old.
>> ^Drax:
>> ^bobknight33:
Both left and right smear facts when its convenient and both side are smearing this story for all its worth.
I don't think all the facts are in. I don't know who is right or wrong. All I know is that sadly there is a grieving family who lost their son.
Hopefully ideology won't get in the way of facts.

Yeah, it's certainly a fact that an unarmed teenage boy of his size needed to be shot in the chest with a gun in order to be dealt with.
So many in fact that there's no reason to detain the non-black person at all. Yeah.



If by gun you mean skittles. Shitbird.

Even if he did have a gun, the guy should still go straight to the station and be arrested. If he just THOUGHT he had a gun, then he should go there as well.

Zimmerman is racist. And so are the cops that did not arrest him immediately.

>> ^bobknight33:

Quit your raciest rants. Just the guy is non black does not give anyone a free pass out of jail.
You don't know what happened so keep you shit to yourself.
Maybe the guy though he had a gun I don't know, you don't know and we don't know. Time will tell.
Being 1/2 the size don't mean jack. An 8 year old with a gun is just as deadly as a 17 or 35 year old.
>> ^Drax:
>> ^bobknight33:
Both left and right smear facts when its convenient and both side are smearing this story for all its worth.
I don't think all the facts are in. I don't know who is right or wrong. All I know is that sadly there is a grieving family who lost their son.
Hopefully ideology won't get in the way of facts.

Yeah, it's certainly a fact that an unarmed teenage boy of his size needed to be shot in the chest with a gun in order to be dealt with.
So many in fact that there's no reason to detain the non-black person at all. Yeah.