April 8, 2016 Obama Administration Sticks It To Whitey Luke Ford No sacred cows.

Obama Administration Sticks It To Whitey

Posted on April 8, 2016 by Luke Ford

Robert Weissberg writes: Is the Obama administration, or at least some officials in it, hostile toward whites? This is certainly an awkward, publicly unspeakable question–and answering it is exceptionally difficult. Not easy to discern the motives of countless Washington bureaucrats.

Nevertheless, recent events outside of Baltimore, MD suggest that enmity toward whites does afflict some Obama administrators and our proof, though short of the smoking gun standard, is probably as good as it gets.

In a nutshell, thanks to Washington’s money and political pressure, thousands of poor blacks will now be re-located from Baltimore’s slums to upgraded housing in the surrounding, nearly all-white suburbs.

Baltimore County will spend $30 million over the next decade to help private developers build 1000 homes for low-income African American families in affluent suburbs. In addition, the country will create 2000 units of subsidized Section 8 housing where residents will have access to better schools and less crime (housing must be built or rented in racially integrated clusters to avoid creating new ghettoes).

To ensure that these new residences are family friendly, 500 units must contain three or more bedrooms. Housing access will be encouraged by requiring landlords to consider all sources of income–including public welfare–in assessing tenant creditworthiness. Participants will also receive help with moving expenses and security deposits. And to facilitate integration into new (white) neighborhoods, extensive counseling (called “Mobility Counseling Programs”) will teach newcomers about housekeeping and property maintenance, good neighbor skills, financial management and budgeting.

Government sponsored re-location of poor black city residents into affluent white suburbs is hardly new and rests on a theory positing the malleability of human behavior: pathological behaviors are environmentally determined and so just improve environments and “bad” behavior will vanish. Specifically, moving underclass African Americans to pleasant white, affluent towns will see a notable reduction of crime, illegitimacy, drug and alcohol addiction, welfare dependency, domestic violence and other tribulations currently plaguing black inner-city neighborhoods. In addition, the transformation will succeed absent any prior psychological changes of new arrivals. In effect, an industrious law-abiding African American who autonomously flees to the suburbs to live a better life is identical to his Baltimore neighbor motivated solely by the promise of a more spacious, cheap apartment.

It is also assumed that pathologies will be mitigated by inter-racial, inter-class contact. For example, lower class black youngsters will improve academically if they encounter more studious white classmates. And osmosis will flow only one way–white youngster will not gravitate toward crime when socializing with black inner city refugees.

It is hard to think of a more incorrect theory of human behavior. Tellingly, when such enterprises are discussed in official reports, the stress overwhelmingly is on the benefits to the recipients and advice on how to overcome (white) public resistance. The unspeakable harsh truth is that these newly relocated inner-city residents will bring their pathologies with them and after a few years the areas surrounding the freshly built homes and Section 8 apartments will resemble dilapidated crime-ridden Baltimore.

If the transformative power of a better physical setting were correct, how do you explain massive white resistance to such enterprises? Are the millions of whites who over countless decades fled the influx of underclass blacks hallucinating or being fooled by racial demagogues? If such population movement worked as advertised, why must Washington impose it by court decrees, fines for non-compliance and other cram-down measures? How can advocates of this alleged panacea explain why busing thousands of academically troubled poor black students to top-flight “white” schools has failed? Is leafy small town America the magic cure for drug addiction and illegitimacy? Recall Ferguson, MO: put troubled black residents of St. Louis into a nice white suburb, and you create a new St. Louis slum.

Now for the near-smoking gun proofs that this enterprise smells of contempt for whites. First, all this draconian coercion is outside federal law regulating discrimination in housing. Legal penalties for housing discrimination have nothing to do with coerced integration and to obscure the non-legal gun-to-the-head power, the consent of whites is officially deemed “voluntary.” No doubt, the hapless whites of Baltimore Country just realize that resistance is futile; you will be absorbed by the federal colossus.

Second, prudence would suggest a modicum of cost/benefit analysis of this enterprise, and this scrutiny is totally absent (see here for a sampling of research on the alleged advantage of such re-locations). Only the supposed benefits for blacks inform calculations, for example, better schools, and experience suggests that these are likely to be transitory. Nor is there any mention of how the new arrivals will find employment in suburban areas with limited public transportation.

Total silence surrounds the inevitable costs for whites: loss of home equity, increased school violence, more crime, and the shredded social cohesion associated with imposed racial diversity and, in the long run, the costs of moving elsewhere. Indeed, HUD is already anticipating white flight and is trying to impose rules that would forbid real estate agents from openly discussing the negative consequences forthcoming racial shift.

Of the utmost importance for this near smoking gun evidence, these benefits provided to blacks need not come at the expense of whites. The same millions could have been spent in the city of Baltimore building nice homes for blacks adjacent to their old residences and if suburban whites were guilty of racial discrimination, just fine them versus (non-legally) imposing unwanted integration. Moreover, inner-city construction could have utilized nearby unemployed African American Baltimore residents who would, as an extra dividend, gain some job training (the model is Habitat for Humanity). Everything would be win/win politics. But, this sensible win-win solution fails to harm whites and so it is politically off limits.

Beyond these immediate problems inflicted on whites will be, in all likelihood, the political costs of changing these once relatively racially homogeneous suburbs. Ferguson, MO is the future: more communal racial strife, yet more whites will flee, civil rights groups demanding more “inclusionary” policies, and, eventually, Department of Justice intervention to remedy alleged race-related injustices–a “too white” police department, too few black office holders or an excessive expulsion rates of black students, to name but a few possibilities.

One can only wonder why officials cannot foresee this racial-train-wreck-in-the-making. This is punitive policy-making that can only reflect the presence of deeply rooted racial animosities. Helping poor African Americans find decent housing is just the polite cover story. At least some government officials in the Obama administration want to punish suburban whites and given that Uncle Sam will foot the bills, inflicting this damage is irresistible.

Posted in America | Comments Off

German Police Raid Apartments Over ‘Right-Wing’ Social Media Posts

Posted on April 8, 2016 by Luke Ford

From Breitbart: Police in Berlin have raided ten apartments because residents may have posted “anti-migrant” views online.

Berlin Police completed a large scale raid on internet users Wednesday. The officers ransacked ten separate apartments in the German capital in the suburbs of Spandau, Tempelhof, Marzahn, Hellersdorf and Pankow.

The force confiscated mobile phones, narcotics and weapons. Nine suspects were arrested, aged 22-58, and are accused of posting messages critical of migrants, migrant helpers and some anti-semitic slogans on social networks like Facebook, WhatsApp, and Twitter, reports Berliner Morgenpost.

The Berlin police have told media that they already knew of the suspects and said that many of them have what they consider a “right-extremist” background. Police spokesman Stefan Redlich said that while many of the men shared anti-migrant views, “the men do not know each other according to previous findings,” and there was no evidence of any planned conspiracy to commit crime among them.

In some of the homes searched police were forced to admit they hadn’t found anything at all, but Redlich justified the raids saying they were maybe, “people who just once expressed their hate-opinion.”

One of the raids in particular was prompted by a Facebook comment to an article regarding an Afghani migrant who was shot dead at the Bulgarian border. The incident took place in October and according to Bulgarian officials it was an accident as a bullet was meant to be a warning shot but ricochet and hit him.

The post responded to the article saying that it was unfortunate too few migrants met with a similar fate, as it might scare the rest of them from coming.

Police announced that the raids show Germans that they are not as safe online as they might think. They say that anyone who says something xenophobic, spreads hate toward migrants, or shares what they consider to be xenophobic music, may be next on the list of apartments to be raided in the future.

58 police were involved in the raids and some illegal items were found in a few of the apartments. Police found one revolver handgun, though it was not mentioned if it had any ammunition or whether or not is was deactivated. They also found an air soft gun, which requires a license to own in Germany and a stun gun that appeared to be camouflaged as a flashlight.

Spokesmen Redlich also mentioned that they had found several unconstitutional symbols but did not divulge specifics. Banned symbols in Germany include Nazi era symbols like the swastika and various Nordic runes used by the Nazis during the era.

Berlin has seen a rapid increase in prosecutions for speech on the internet. In 2014 there were 196 investigations into anti-migrant and xenophobic posts, while 2015 saw 289 cases. In the last six months there have been three raids prior to this one, but so far this has been the largest in scale. Investigators have set up a special task force who work with the organization Network Against Nazis (NAN), headed by ex-stasi agent Anetta Kahani, to monitor internet postings across Germany.

Posted in Censorship, Germany | Comments Off

The Black Quota At Yale Law School

Posted on April 8, 2016 by Luke Ford

20080522_197001904theblackquotaatyalelawschoolmacklinfleming

From 1969:

This exchange of private letters between Macklin Fleming, Justice of the
Court of Appeal, State of California at Los Angeles, and Louis Pollak, Dean
of the Yale Law School, seems to us to raise important issues affecting the
public interest. We are grateful to Justice Fleming and Dean Pollak for
permission to publish the correspondence–Eds.

Dean Louis H. Pollak
Yale Law School
New Haven, Connecticut 9 June 1969

Dear Lou:
The press of activity on Alumni Day didn’t allow me to comment
on your report to the Executive Committee of the Yale Law School
Association about current admission policy at the Law School. Hence
this letter.
From your remarks and those of Dean Poor, I understand that 43
black students have been admitted to next fall’s class, of whom 5
qualified under the regular standards and 38 did not. You anticipate
that half this group will actually enroll, thus furnishing 22 black
students in the first year class of 165, of whom perhaps 3 will have
qualified under the regular standards and 19 will not. You also said
that the future policyof the Law School will be to admit 10 per cent
of each entering class without regard to qualification under regular
standards. It thus appears that the demand of the Black Law Students
Union that 10 per cent of the entering class be black has been
more than met. It also appears that 38 fully-qualifed applicants for
admission to Yale Law School have been rejected solely because
they are not members of a minority race. Under current policy the
admission ratio for black applicants (50 per cent) is 5 times the
admission ratio for other applicants (10 per cent).
This new policy represents a radical departure from that set out
in the 1968 Yale Law School catalogue: “Admission is based entirely
on a judgment as to the applicant’s promise of professional
distinction.” It is clearly apparent that to this judgment has been
added the criterion of race.
With the adoption of its new admission policy the Law School has
taken a long step toward the practice of apartheid and the maintenance
of two law schools under one roof. Already there has been
established in the Law School building a Black Law Students Union
lounge with furniture and law books provided by the school. And I
learned from Dean Poor that the 12 black students in the present first
year class who were admitted under relaxed standards have not done
well academically. Dean Poor attributed this deficiency to the preoccupation
of these students with racial activities. I think it equally
logical to attribute their preoccupation with racial activities to their
lack of qualification to compete on even terms in the study of law.
Next year the Law School will have in its midst approximately 30
students who were not required to qualify for admission under the
regular standards because of their race. Of the 128 admittees to next
fall’s entering class who had accepted in early April, the highest
ranking of 13 minority admittees stood in an 8-way tie for 98th place
under the regular criteria for admission. Predictably, most of these
students will find themselves unable to compete in law studies on
even terms with the other students, who have been admitted on the
basis of demonstrated academic performance and aptitude for logical
reasoning.
The immediate damage to the standards of Yale Law School needs
no elaboration. But beyond this, it seems to me the admission policy
adopted by the Law School faculty will serve to perpetuate the very
ideas and prejudices it is designed to combat. If in a given class
the great majority of the black students are at the bottom of the
class, this factor is bound to instill, unconsciously at least, some sense
of intellectual superiority among the white students and some sense
of intellectual inferiority among the black students. Such a pairing
in the same school of the brightest white students in the country with
black students of medic, ere academic qualifications is social experiment
with loaded dice and a stacked deck. The faculty can talk
around the clock about disadvantaged background, and it can excuse
inferior performance because of poverty, environment, inadequate
cultural tradition, lack of educational opportunity, etc. The
fact remains that black and white students will be exposed to each
other under circumstances in which demonstrated intellectual superiority
rests with the whites. If to compensate for disadvantaged
background, the faculty discriminates among students in its grading
and marking, its double standard will be quickly perceived by both
groups of students. Because of the Law School’s current admission
policy the difference between the two groups will be centered on the
factor of race.
No one can be expected to accept an inferior status willingly. The
black students, unable to compete on even terms in the study of law,
inevitably will seek other means to achieve recognition and self-expression.
This is likely to take two forms. First, agitation to change
the environment from one in which they are unable to compete to
one in which they can. Demands will be made for elimination of
competition, reduction in standards of performance, adoption of
courses of study which do not require intensive legal analysis, and
recognition for academic credit of sociological activities which have
only an indirect relationship to legal training. Second, it seems probable
that this group will seek personal satisfaction and public recognition
by aggressive conduct, which, although ostensibly directed at
external injustices and problems, will in fact be primarily motivated
by the psychological needs of the members of the group to overcome
feelings of inferiority caused by lack of success in their studies. Since
the common denominator of the group of students with lower qualifications
is one of race this aggressive expression will undoubtedly
take the form of racial demands–the employment of faculty on the
basis of race, a marking system based on race, the establishment of
a black curriculum and a black law journal, an increase in black
financial aid, and a rule against expulsion of black students who fail
to satisfy minimum academic standards.
These unhappy prospects flow from the abandonment of an objective
system of admission based on intellectual aptitude (painstakingly
evolved over a period of decades) and the adoption of a system
of admission which takes racial considerations into account.
From your remarks and those of other members of the faculty I
gather the new system’s justification rests on three theories.
The first is a theory of proportional representation. Only 1 per cent
of the lawyers in the United States are black, and it is desirable that
this percentage be increased to the proportion of the black population
in the country, roughly 10 per cent. Consequently, all law
schools, including Yale, should have a student body which is 10
per cent black.
The weakness of the proportional argument is that quotas, once instituted,
cannot logically be limited to one group when other groups
exist which are equally entitled to quotas. The next step is a series of
quotas. But if minorities obtain quotas, demands from majority
groups for quotas are bound to ensue. In short order a full-blown
quota system would arise which would necessarily impose restrictions
on overrepresented groups in order to assure a student body
representative of the general population. A quota policy particularly
discriminates against minority groups which have achieved disproportionate
representation in a particular field. Such a policy discriminated
severely against Jewish applicants for admission to medical
schools in the 1930’s. That policy was undoubtedly justified by its
supporters as one designed to preserve a proportion of gentile students
in medical schools equivalent to their proportion in the general
population. Currently, the orientals in California, roughly 1 per cent
of the population, comprise in some instances 30 per cent of the enrollment
in certain engineering and technical schools. Were a quota
system to be introduced in those schools in order to favor black and
Mexican-American applicants, the first losers would be applicants
from the presently disproportionately represented oriental group.
A quota system based on race must assume there are two kinds of
racial discrimination and two types of quotas: the benign type designed
to help a disadvantaged group, and the malignant type designed
to prevent over-representation in a particular field by a hardworking
and competent minority. This argument wholly ignores the
fact that discrimination in favor of X is automatic discrimination
against Y. For X and Y substitute any color, religion, or ethnic background;
the process remains discriminatory. The argument of benign
discrimination glosses over the fact that under a quota system a person
is no longer judged on individual merit but is judged in part
according to his membership in a group. It also assumes that race is
a relevant criterion by which to choose law school applicants.
The faculty may have been persuaded to adopt its present quota
system by the argument of inverse, or compensatory, discrimination
mthat past discrimination against a particular group should be remedied
by present discrimination in its favor until the group catches
up. Here again the vice lies in the substitution of a group standard
of merit for an individual standard and in the extension of the criterion
of race to an area in which it should not apply. The American
creed, one that Yale has proudly espoused, holds that an American
should be judged as an individual and not as a member of a group.
To me it seems axiomatic that a system which ignores this creed and
introduces the factor of race in the selection of students for a professional
school is inherently malignant, no matter how high-minded
the purpose nor how benign the motives of those making the selection.
The aspiration to train more lawyers from minority groups is
highly commendable, but I do not believe it will be furthered by putting
unqualified or poorly qualified black students in competition
with students at Yale Law School who average in the 97th percentile
of intellectual achievement (higher than at any other law school).
There are many good regional and local law schools in Philadelphia,
Boston, Los Angeles, and other metropolitan areas, where black law
students can compete with white law students on equal terms and
where they can study law in competition with students of similar
qualifications and aptitudes. Many of these law schools do not follow
YaMs policy of numerically limited enrollment and are geared to
handle within reason all students who can qualify for admission. In
view of the prevalence of these law schools, the relative ease of admission
to many of them, and their flexibility in handling increased
numbers of students, the initiation of a system of proportional representation
for black students at Yale Law School serves no genuine
need or purpose.
The second justification for the current admission policy derives
from the Oxford precedent of training leaders for underdeveloped
countries. Oxford admitted students from distant countriesnBurma,
Nigeria, Kenyamwithout a close look at their academic qualifications
on the theory that whether or not they qualified for serious study,
something of Oxford culture would rub off; that when these students
returned to their people as leaders they would carry the torch of
Oxford with them. It is argued that, comparably, the mission of Yale
Law School is to train national leaders, and therefore its students
should be representatively selected in order to assure quality leadership
for all segments of the population. This theory assumes that the
study of law and the mastery of legal principles are merely incidental
by products of attendance at Yale Law School. It also assumes that
black lawyers compete only with other black lawyers in the practice
of a special kind of black jurisprudence and therefore the academic
performance of black law students at Yale Law School is largely
irrelevant to the development of their future role as national leaders.
No theory could be a greater myth, for the law the black lawyer
must master to achieve success in his profession is the same law
that the white lawyer must learn to handle. In his legal career the
black lawyer must expect to compete on even terms with the white
lawyer, whether he goes into a government oi_ce (executive, legislative,
or judicial), a corporate department, or a law firm. Any
suggestion to the contrary does a great disservice to black law students,
for I think it a safe prediction that national leadership will
conlinue to come, as in the past, from the ranks of those individuals
who have risen to the top of their occupations and professions.
The third justification for a policy of racial discrimination is based
on the suggestion that the traditional measures of qualification for admission
to law school aptitude tests and college grades–are not
accurate, and therefore the Law School is justified in not paying
strict attention to objective standards of admission. Doubtless there
is room for improvement in measuring aptitude in logical reasoning
and ability to handle abstract concepts, the qualities demanded for
intensive study of law, but from everything I have heard the present
tests achieve reasonably accurate results. For many years the Law
School prided itself on its ability to predict student performance in
law school on the basis of the criteria used for admission, and I
have heard nothing to cast doubt on the continued accuracy of
such predictions. If these criteria are ignored, the consequences are
equally predictable. In 1966 Michigan Law School embarked on a
policy of admitting black students under relaxed standards of admission.
The results of this policy were reported last fall to Michigan
Law School’s Committee of Visitors as “disappointing and to a
degree demoralizing . . . the academic performance is not satisfactory
and some new approaches must be explored.” And, I am told,
similar academic ditBculties are being experienced by the underqualified
black students in the first year class at Yale.
In my view none of the above theories justifies the inclusion of
race, or disadvantaged status, among the criteria for admission to
Yale Law School. While racial quotas may serve a purpose in some
contexts, they are entirely irrelevant to the operation of a graduate
professional school with limited enrollment, admission to which requires
four years of college training and specific aptitude for the
profession involved. The present policy of admitting students on
two bases and thereafter purporting to judge their performance on
one basis is a highly explosive sociological experiment almost certain
to achieve undesirable results.
The number of fully qualified minority applicants is growing, and
because of increased college attendance the number of those who
will qualify for admission to Yale Law School under its regular
standards should mushroom within the next few years. Under an
open door policy of competitive admission without regard to race,
religion, or color, and based solely on demonstrated achievement
and aptitude for the study of law, Yale Law School will maintain national
leadership in legal training. Under any other policy I think
this result doubtful. I urge reconsideration of the current admission
policy.
Very truly yours,
MACKLIN FLEMING

Posted in Affirmative Action, Blacks | Comments Off

Francis Fukuyama and Charles Krauthammer

Posted on April 8, 2016 by Luke Ford

From Steve Sailer in 2005:

Fukuyama Responds to Krauthammer: The Israelization of American Foreign Policy. You may recall that prominent neocon Francis “End of History” Fukuyama jumped ship awhile ago and criticized Charles Krauthammer in The National Interest for his lack of realism about the Iraq War. Krauthammer responded, predictably, by playing the anti-Semitism card. Here is part of Fukuyama’s rebuttal:

“Krauthammer says I have a “novel way of Judaizing neoconservatism“, and that my argument is a more “implicit and subtle” version of things said by Pat Buchanan and Mahathir Mohamad. Since he thinks the latter two are anti-Semites, he is clearly implying that I am one as well. If he really thinks this is so, he should say that openly.”

A little late, perhaps, Francis? “First they came for Pat Buchanan, but I was not Pat Buchanan, so I said nothing. Then they came …”. But better late than never. Fukuyama continues:

“What I said in my critique of [Krauthammer’s] speech was, of course, quite different. I said that there was a very coherent set of strategic ideas that have come out of Israel’s experience dealing with the Arabs and the world community, having to do with threat perception, preemption, the relative balance of carrots and sticks to be used in dealing with the Arabs, the United Nations, and the like. Anyone who has dealt with the Arab-Israeli conflict understands these ideas, and many people (myself included) believe that they were well suited to Israel’s actual situation. You do not have to he Jewish to understand or adopt these ideas as your own, which is why people like Vice President Dick Cheney and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld share them. And it is not so hard to understand how one’s experience of Arab-Israeli politics can come to color one’s broader view of the world: The 1975 “Zionism is racism” resolution deeply discredited the UN, in the eyes of Jews and non-Jews alike, on issues having nothing to do with the Middle East. This is not about Judaism; it is about ideas. It would be quite disingenuous of Charles Krauthammer to assert that his view of how Israel needs to deal with the Arabs (that is, the testicular route to hearts and minds) has no impact on the way he thinks the United States should deal with them. And it is perfectly legitimate to ask whether this is the best way for the United States to proceed.”

Well said. America’s foreign policy blunders of the last 30 months have less to do with the fact that so many highly influential people in Washington and New York, like Krauthammer, think about Israel and its welfare all the time, as to the fact that it has become extremely dangerous to one’s career to point out that they do. As Gene Expression blogged:

And I’m sorry, but ethnicity will and should legitimately be a topic brought up in the ensuing debate. Consider an analogy. Suppose that Wolfowitz, Perle, Shulsky, Feith, Ledeen, and all the rest were South Asian Americans rather than Jewish Americans and had names like Ramachandran, Patel, and Choudhury. Again they’d be selected from a highly educated group that was less than 2% of society (there are about 2 to 3 million South Asian Americans, about 1/2 to 1/3 the number of American Jews depending on how you count).

Now suppose they were pushing the US to invade Pakistan, and talking about how the Islamic terrorists killing Indian citizens in Kashmir were the same ones bombing the US on 9/11. Assume that they did this whilst having relatives, extended families, and significant contacts in India.

Now, their arguments would not – and should not – be dismissed out of hand. After all, it is probably more accurate to say that Al Qaeda, the Taliban, and the ISI are/were more closely involved in Muslim terrorism in Kashmir than they are with anti-Israeli terrorism in Palestine. (As far as I know, Al Qaeda has never directly attacked Israel.)

But while their arguments would not be dismissed out of hand, clearly their visible ethnicity would figure into the debate. Plenty of people would take their opinions with a grain of salt, knowing that humans tend to be ethnocentric on the population level if not the individual level. It would be scurrilous to dismiss their arguments simply because they were of Indian ancestry, especially if they were born in America. But it would be foolish to think their ethnicity wasn’t impacting any of their arguments, and to rule out mention of their ethnicity as “anti-Subcontinental.”

What we need, now more than ever, is free discussion. Closed discussion helped get us into Iraq.

Posted in America, Iraq, Israel, Neoconservatives | Comments Off

Voice Of Hope Suspected Of Murdering Girl

Posted on April 8, 2016 by Luke Ford

Washington Post:

Police arrest 17-year-old in slaying of first-year University of Texas student

Police have arrested a 17-year-old suspect in the slaying of a University of Texas dance student, law enforcement officials said Friday.

Austin Police Chief Art Acevedo said at a news conference that Meechaiel Criner has been booked into the county jail on a first-degree murder charge in the slaying of Haruka Weiser, a first-year student from Portland, Ore. Weiser, 18, was last seen Sunday night leaving the university’s drama building en route to her dorm, police said. Roommates reported her missing the next morning.

Weiser’s body was found on campus Tuesday in Waller Creek by the university’s alumni center, a short walk from the drama building.

A December 2014 issue of a student publication, the Tiger Times, of Texas High School in Texarkana, Tex., contains an article about Criner headlined “Voice of hope.” The article, on page 12 and accompanied by a photograph of Criner, says the teenager was the victim of schoolyard taunts at an early age because of a “thick, African-like” accent.

“I’ve been bullied almost my whole life,” Criner was quoted as saying. “In elementary school, I would come home crying almost every day. It was because of my accent, you see. People couldn’t understand me.”

Criner told the Tiger Times that he had spent several months in foster care and later lived with a grandmother. The article portrays Criner as a victim of violence and bullying who wants to work to help others.

“I like to stand up for people,” Criner was quoted as saying. “I like to help others. … What I want to leave behind is my name – I want them to know who Meechaiel Criner is.”

Posted in Blacks, Crime | Comments Off

Fired For Noticing

Posted on April 8, 2016 by Luke Ford

Comments to Steve Sailer:

* The political coalition of the left depends entirely on keeping united various groups that really don’t like each other much, so the progressives do everything they can to keep their anger directed at oppressive law-abiding middle class whites. Noticing social ills that can’t be put on this much-hated demographic is verboten.

* It’s not the prediction that is wrong it’s what flows from it. Bryant Gumble noted this a few years back when Larry Bird caught flack for saying basketball is a black man’s game. Gumble noted it was wrong because if you concluded black men were good at something, then you could conclude they were also bad at stuff.

Well… duh.

So you can’t reliably predict, or profile, these murderers because soon somebody will start to point the finger at the black community’s culture and values that help create these guys. Or maybe even feminism for promoting unwed and single parenthood. We can’t have that now, can we?

As Bryant Gumble so unironically pointed out: they’re not taking any of the blame.

Must be a straight white man’s fault.

* I’ll merely reference the words of the great Joe Sobran:

“Nobody really disagreed with me. That, in fact, was the problem. Nothing creates more awkwardness than saying things people can’t afford to admit they agree with. Disagreement is manageable. It’s agreement that wreaks havoc. If people disagree, they’ll debate you. If they secretly agree with something, but are furious with you for saying it, then they’ll try to shut you up by any means necessary.”

Posted in Blacks | Comments Off

What About The SAT Score?

Posted on April 8, 2016 by Luke Ford

News: Montclair, New Jersey: As a New York high school student checked her phone for the results of her university admissions applications, she was overcome by disbelief.
One by one, each relayed the same news: Harvard. Yes. Dartmouth. Yes. Princeton. Yes. The University of Pennsylvania. Yes. Cornell, Yale, Columbia, Brown: yes, yes, yes, yes.
It was March 31, the emotion-filled day when Ivy League universities posted their decisions online. And Augusta Uwamanzu-Nna, a senior at Elmont Memorial High School, Long Island, became the second student there to pull off an exceedingly rare feat: She swept all eight.
She screamed. Then she cried.
“It’s so surreal,” Ms Uwamanzu-Nna, 17, said on Wednesday. “It’s still hard to actually believe that this has happened to me.”
The accomplishment is all the more remarkable given the increasingly fierce competition that has driven down acceptance rates at selective universities for years. Harvard’s, for example, was 5.2 per cent this year, down from 9.3 per cent in 2006. News reports suggest that just a few students pull off a sweep each year.
What’s more, Ms Uwamanzu-Nna (pronounced oo-wah-man-ZOO-nah) is just the latest student from her school to do it. In 2015, Harold Ekeh drew national headlines when he was accepted to 13 universities, including all eight Ivies.
School officials said Mr Ekeh, now a freshmen at Yale, had been a huge inspiration to other students. He is also close friends with Ms Uwamanzu-Nna.

Comments to Steve Sailer:

* Assuming the Intel thing isn’t rigged/affirmative-action, she sounds legit. No doubt her applications got some bonus for being black, but she doesn’t seem like a poster child for the worst affirmative action stupidity.

* But judging from the names and her picture both Miss Uwamanzu-Nna and her predecessor, Mr. Ekeh, are probably also Ibo. Migration patterns might go a long way towards explaining why they both wound up in the same town. This is a news worthy bit of the picture that I’m sure NYT reporters and editors will instinctively avoid as a career-ending move.

* One of the ironies of affirmative action is that while affirmative action was intended as a sort of crude reparations for the ill treatment that descendants of American black slaves endured, many of the current beneficiaries of affirmative action for blacks have, like Obama himself, ZERO American black slave ancestry because their parents are recent immigrants from Africa or the Caribbean, or else they are mulattoes who were raised by their white mothers and have little if any contact with their black fathers or talented tenth octoroons who pass the paper bag test or children of black professionals who are not really in need of reparations. Once you eliminate those categories and blacks who are recruited because of their athletic talent, the number of actual brothas at elite schools is vanishingly small. For those with STEM majors, you would need a microscope to find them. Even though standards for blacks are relaxed somewhat, most American ghetto blacks are so far behind academically that they could not survive in a challenging academic environment even sheltered inside an AA studies dept let alone as a physics or math major.

* The detail I always look for in these stories is: what is the student’s SAT score?

Her other achievements are easy enough to find in the various reportage on her: her being valedictorian, her GPA, her Intel Science Search performance. But no mention anywhere that I can see of her SAT scores.

Last year another student of Nigerian background from the same school, Harold Ekeh, got into all 8 ivies, and his combined SAT scores were mentioned: 2270. This is almost the precise median score for Harvard (2260). Yet he did not, apparently, get a National Merit Scholarship, which is almost certainly due to a too low PSAT score (obviously, everything else in his background would make the National Merit Scholarship people salivate over handing him an award). So no doubt his PSAT was the regression to his mean, and his SAT a deviation against it.

The predictable never seems to stop being predictable.

* Yeah, but she is nothing compared to that female soccer player who’s scored the most goals in the history of the sport. I hear about her every four years the women’s World Cup rolls around. Most goals ever scored in the sport, which means more than any man soccer player either! I bet when you take the number of goals Pele scored, homeruns Babe Ruth hit, and baskets Michael Jordan sunk and add them together, the goals she’s scored are still an order of magnitude greater than that! She must be the most amazing figure in sports history! Not to mention inspiring, brave, smart, funny, passionate, kind, and cute. I hope she gets a big endorsement deal, like with GoDaddy or something, four years from now when we’re reminded she’s scored the most goals ever!

* Some of the ancestors of some of the Nigerian immigrants might actually have sold some of the ancestors of today’s African American to white slave traders. While most whites probably never had slave-owning ancestors, and many whites had ancestors who actually fought against slavery.

So the irony of the ironies is that the descendants of (African) slave traders might get preferential treatment over the descendants of Union soldiers who gave or at least risked their lives to end slavery.

* Ivies coordinate with each other not to fight for the same student, and only make exceptions for the most exceptional applicants. In other words, normally nobody gets admitted to all eight Ivies, even if one applies to all of them, because once one of them accepted you, the others will turn you down so that you will not be in a position to turn them down.

It’s obvious why blacks are the only ones for whom they all make exceptions. I’d be surprised if a similar student wasn’t found next year (and each year from now on) either.

Posted in Affirmative Action, Blacks | Comments Off

Has Trump given up on the Jews?

Posted on April 8, 2016 by Luke Ford

Perhaps Trump will get a boost from gentile Americans if he is not seen as pandering to special interests.

Trump’s national security team is all gentile. Trump said all the right things to AIPAC a couple of weeks ago but nobody believes his heart was in it. He’s an American nationalist, not an Israel-firster.

Chaim Amalek: “One would have to be some sort of delusional neocon to believe, even if only for a moment, that Yidden are going to be lining up to actually vote for Ted Cruz. Torah Jews will vote for Trump, and the secular ones will vote for whichever Democrat is nominated.”

AP: LAS VEGAS — Ted Cruz will have hundreds of influential Republican donors and Jewish leaders all to himself this weekend in Las Vegas as he addresses the Republican Jewish Coalition.

Cruz’s rivals for the GOP presidential nomination, Donald Trump and John Kasich, declined invitations to attend — a puzzling move in particular for Trump as he tries to project himself as a party unifier who deserves the Republican nomination even if he falls short of winning enough delegates in the primaries to clinch it outright.

Trump as of late Thursday did not have any public events scheduled through the weekend.

It’s a “missed opportunity” for Trump to build on a well-received recent speech before the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, said Abbie Friedman, an RJC board member who introduced Trump when he spoke to the Republican group in December. “With Cruz coming in, he’ll have the entire platform to himself to win support from an incredibly powerful and important group.”

The RJC is funded by the top political donor of 2012, Sheldon Adelson, and meets at the billionaire’s Venetian casino resort on the Strip.

Trump declined an invitation to attend a private dinner at Adelson’s home Thursday night with the Republican Jewish Coalition’s board, according to people with direct knowledge of the invitation who weren’t authorized to share the details about the event. Trump decided not to attend the dinner even before he canceled a West Coast trip that he’d planned for Thursday and Friday.

Trump’s spokeswoman and his campaign manager did not respond to requests for comment on Thursday.

The Republican front-runner does not appear to be sending surrogates to Las Vegas, either, as onetime presidential candidate Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker did last year.

“That, to me, is a real revelation into the weakness of his campaign,” said Ari Fleischer, another RJC board member who has said he would back any GOP nominee in the general election. “There should be someone here on the ground. That’s what good campaigns do.”

In addition to speaking Saturday to more than 500 attendees, Cruz has a separate, smaller event planned with RJC members. His chief Jewish liaison, Nick Muzin, will be there throughout the conference. And pro-Cruz outside groups that can take unlimited contributions are setting up shop in the Venetian this weekend, ready to land donations.

“There’s a lot of interest in hearing from Ted Cruz in light of his win in Wisconsin and the impact that has on re-shaping the race,” said Republican Jewish Coalition executive director Matt Brooks. “It’s all coming together at a crucial juncture.”

Brooks said some of his organization’s members no longer see Trump as the overwhelming front-runner and predict a contested convention this summer.

Posted in Donald Trump | Comments Off

The talk-radio godfather of Trumpamania: What Michael Savage can tell us about America’s white working class

Posted on April 8, 2016 by Luke Ford

I’ve usually avoided listening to Michael Savage because I don’t:

* Like listening to commercials
* Don’t want more negativity and anger in my life.

Almost all talk radio seems aimed at inspiring rage.

Here’s a good article in Salon:

Long before Trump’s arrival on the scene, it was conservative radio talk show host Michael Savage, the idealogical godfather of “Trumpism,” who galvanized this insurgency. Savage gave it a voice and a powerful narrative, one that proved extremely helpful to those, like iconoclastic Senator Ted Cruz, who rose to prominence taking on the very same GOP beltway insiders that Donald Trump is now making so nervous.
Years before Trump, Savage had already redefined the nature of the American political landscape when he blew up the Republican Party establishment’s hold on its working class base. Trump can come or go, but this insurgency has a depth and breadth that can’t be ignored.
I have been a longtime listener to Savage because I think that, as a journalist, you risk being blindsided if you ignore someone to whom millions of your fellow Americans are tuning in. I saw the rise of Trump coming several months ago precisely because I know how deep the support runs in so much of America for Savage’s nativist mantra, that the very survival of the nation is threatened by the erosion of our “borders, language, and culture.”
Between American multinationals, who do everything and anything to avoid taxes, and American politicians, who so often trade on their office to amass vast fortunes, regular working class Americans feel abandoned. For decades, as businesses have increasingly exploited undocumented immigrants for cheap labor or moved operations out of the country entirely, these voters have become resentful, watching their wages stagnate and full-time jobs with benefits become scarcer by the day.
For many of them, Savage’s “Savage Nation” is a kind of sanctuary. In his running commentary, he’s gone after the duopoly of Republican and Democratic elites. While Trump was still playing nice in polite society and donating money to Democrats, Savage was building a huge audience skewering political correctness and going after what he perceived as the excesses of both parties.
Savage calls liberalism “a mental disorder,” and blames it for the disintegration of a national cohesion that gave America the backbone to conquer fascism in the Second World War, and the persistence to outlast the Soviet Union in the Cold War that followed. For Savage, the classical foundations of western civilization are innately superior to whatever else is out there.
Yet, he will go on populist rants denouncing U.S. multinationals for outsourcing tech jobs. He has zeroed in on the bi-partisan tradition of elected officials that go on to enrich themselves by doing the bidding of corporations, and even foreign interests.
Savage is a raconteur of many parts, with roots in New York City, where he grew up. He is a bestselling New York Times author, has a master’s degree in medical anthropology and a Phd from the University of California at Berkeley in epidemiology and nutrition sciences. He says he is an avid conservationist and animal lover, yet dismisses global warming as a hoax.
His extemporaneous musings about his daily comings and goings, his 11-pound poodle Teddy, and about his days growing up in working class New York, are poignant and display a rich emotional arc. Unlike his rightwing colleagues, that rant on politics exclusively, Savage’s dynamic range makes him engaging company.
He can talk to listeners about what he had to eat and drink the night before, and, in the process, share the vicissitudes of growing older with millions intimately. He’s speaking to you and only you, especially if you fit his key demographic, the disaffected white conservative voter. Back in a flattering 2009 New Yorker profile Savage’s show was described as “one of the most addictive programs on radio, and one of the least predictable.”

The New Yorker profile is indeed flattering:

Although his father was a devout materialist, Savage seems to have spent much of his life searching for the right way to articulate his Jewish heritage. For a time, in the eighties, he attended Friday-night services at the Chabad House in Berkeley. And he loves to talk about his well-worn Hebrew Bible, which is full of annotations and Post-it notes. Despite his alliance with evangelical Christians, he seems untempted by Christianity itself. “You go to a graveyard, and someone’s dead, and they give the mumbo-jumbo,” he told his listeners one afternoon. “You want to believe the Resurrection. Do you actually believe it? Many of you do.” But, on another afternoon, he riffled through the Book of Revelation in an attempt to explain the latest perfidies of the Obama Administration. “We now have a prophecy emerging in front of our eyes,” he said.
When Savage gets really apocalyptic, it can be hard to separate his political observations from his medical complaints, and maybe he’s not quite convinced that they really are separate. Recently, he has had vision problems, which have come to acquire a symbolic significance. “I feel as though, almost, I’m losing my sight from looking every day at such horror,” he says. “I feel as though my eyes are closing on me, because they don’t want to see it anymore.” When he talks on the air about his homes in “hidden locations,” he suggests that he’s worried about some crazed liberal assassinating him. “I have to watch out for them, because they’re all psychopaths,” he says. Listen to Savage long enough and you may be persuaded to think that liberalism is code for all the stupid things we just can’t conquer: weakness and decadence and human frailty and death itself.
Near the end of “Psychological Nudity,” Savage writes, “I’m watching the sands of time fall into the hourglass. There’s more sand on the bottom now than there is on the top.” And he makes reference to his own death with startling frequency: a few times an hour, week after week. Just about anything can set him off. A beautiful pair of Shetland sheepdogs in the mall reminds him of the dogs’ kindly owner, which in turn reminds him of unkind dog owners, which makes him think about Michael Vick’s dogfighting operation, which brings to mind dead dogs, which leads him, inexorably, to a consideration of “the old boxeroo, waiting at the end of the road for all of us.” His thoughts on dying are often informed by Buddhist theories of enlightenment and reincarnation.

Posted in America, Radio | Comments Off

Dale Hurd: European Elites Conspired to Lie about the Islamic Enemy

Posted on April 8, 2016 by Luke Ford

Blood on Their Hands: Europe’s Immigration Lie, by Dale Hurd, CBN.com, April 5, 2016

BRUSSELS — We now know that there has been a cover-up by governments and the media in Western Europe about the potential danger of immigration from the Islamic world. It was a conspiracy involving politicians, police officials, and journalists.

The European public was programmed by a relentless media campaign to believe immigration was good; criticism of immigration was racist.

Six months before the deadly Islamic terror attacks in Belgium, left-wing demonstrators were playing dead in the streets of Brussels, protesting for more immigration from the Middle East and against stronger borders in Europe — stronger borders that might have saved the lives of 34 people killed in Brussels last month.

Sold a Bill Goods? The Left’s mantra has been “no walls, no borders.” But many Europeans now realize they were sold a bill of goods about open borders and immigration by the political and media class.

Voices who warned about the threat from open immigration were either branded racist or simply ignored. Belgian Jewish leader Joël Rubinfeld warned CBN News a year and a half ago that the Belgian government was too soft on Muslim extremists, and that more attacks were coming.

“We say you need a very long fork to eat with the devil. I think there is no fork long enough to eat with Islamism,” he said.

And the multicultural charade has now clearly crumbled — in Germany when the city of Cologne was caught trying to cover-up massive New Year’s sex attacks, in Sweden where the public learned that the police and media covered up large scale sexual assaults at a summer music festival in Stockholm last year, and in Brussels, which became a home to some of the most dangerous terrorists in Europe.

In cities across Western Europe, women are now afraid to walk alone at night on the street. Muslims make up almost half of Belgium’s prison population, and Jews everywhere live in fear of anti-Semitic attacks.

This didn’t just happen, but in many cases the information has been suppressed.

Immigration Cover-Up Sweden has been notorious for censoring the problems of immigration. Newspapers obscured the faces and changed the skin tone of crime suspects with immigrant backgrounds, while showing their faces as if they were white native Swedes.

The Swedish police even had a special code when handling immigrant crime: code 291.

“Code 291 — and this is in all the Swedish newspapers now — the police were told to cover up any crime related to the refugees. Do not tell the media. Do not leave a paper trail,” Swedish policy analyst Tino Sanandaji told CBN News.

“Apparently now we’re finding out there were hundreds of violent crimes,” he said.

Some Swedes have become so frustrated with the censorship that they go to social media to get the truth out themselves. For instance, one YouTube video posted by “The Angry Foreigner” begins with, “Hey, welcome to Sweden. This is the number one rape capital of Europe.”

A lot of Swedes now realize they’ve been lied to, and they’re wondering what else the government and media have been hiding from them.

A Muzzled Media “You have a lot of problems that were never reported until literally days ago,” Sanandaji said. “It was factually true, but they decided that it was against their ideological agenda. They covered it up. Now we’re finding it out.”

The man who found evidence that one of Sweden’s largest papers covered up the sex assaults in Stockholm is journalist Chang Frick, who says journalists have been either too afraid or not allowed to report the truth.

“I read books about the Soviet Union and everyone was checking each other. This is the situation we have in Sweden. But it’s more in a soft way,” Frick said. “You don’t get in jail for having the wrong thoughts. You would lose your job. You would get socially stigmatized.”

The paper, Dagens Nyheter, says the claim that it was part of a cover-up is “a lie,” and that it could not confirm the story.

Blood on Their Hands? Ingrid Carlqvist, a distinguished fellow at the Gatestone Institute, has been telling Swedes for years that they were being misled about immigration. Now, she feels vindication.

“I’ve been trying to tell the Swedish people this for five years or something. And everyone said, ‘No, it couldn’t be like that. Politicians don’t lie like that. Journalists are honest. They couldn’t lie about this, no, no, no,’” she said.

“Now everything has exploded, and there is not a living person in this country who can go on (covering their eyes),” she said.

Swedish immigration policy changed. It was forced to because it faced a system-wide collapse. There are now guards on the border, and some Swedish papers have reported more openly about the problems of immigration.

But if you think the European Left has learned its lesson about the danger of open borders, you would be wrong. After the Brussels attack, there were several articles essentially blaming terrorism on racism and calling for continued opened borders.

There are refugees who need help, but Europe’s misplaced generosity has brought war to its doorstep. And some believe that politicians, police officials, and journalists now have blood on their hands.

Posted in Europe, Islam | Comments Off