Violent Crimes: Black On White & White On Black: April 2011

Wednesday, April 27, 2011

MAIN MENU PAGE

This page will direct you to all the blogs on this site: Violent Crimes: Black On White & White On Black
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WHITE Violent Crimes - Black Victims
(99 black victims of white violence)

--------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------

BLACK Violent Crimes - White Victims

Below is a Resource Guide for black-on-white violent crimes under the Compulsory Inclusionism laws (i.e. Civil Rights Act 1964 ; Fair Housing Law 1968). These two federal laws created unprecedented new freedoms for people of African descent to work, live in and roam freely in white communities.

(I found, without great effort, a staggering 2540 white victims of black violence! - - note: as of 2016, no longer adding incidents)

Please note: By no means is the long long list of white victims represented in the Links below ALL the victims. Not even the proverbial tip of the iceberg. In 2005, for example, blacks committed more than 580,000 acts of unprovoked violence against white people, well over 90% of all the violence that crossed racial lines! (LINK). Finally, I have spent a very good deal of time - well over a decade - researching black crime in America. Many of the incidents I have come across in which white people are the victim(s), the attacks are simply so inhumane, so cruel and so diabolically savage that it seems to me that many of these attacks are calculated to instill a presentment of terror into the hearts and minds of the white population. But you be the judge. Just click on a link below ... and see what this race has subjected white people to, what no other race would ever tolerate.

Black-on-White Violent Crimes

Sub Categories:

Black Male Massacres - White Victims

Black Males - Abuse Of White Children

Black Males - Gang Rape Of Children
Black Males: Rape & Murder /Attempted Murder - White Female Victims

Black Males - Pack Attack On American Businesses

Black Males - Abuse Of White Elderly
Black Male Ambush - White Victims (under construction)
Black Males - Good Samaritan Murders - White Victims
Black Males - Murder / Attempted Murder Of White Police Officers
Black Male Atrocities Since 1964 - White Victims
Black Male SUCKER PUNCH - White Victims
Black Male Home Invasions - White victims
The Black Male BULLY - America Under Siege
Black Males - Work Place Murders / Slaughters / Massacres
Black Children Who Rape / Rob / Murder - White Victims

Imagery Of Innocent White People Victimized By Blacks Since Integration Was Created in 1964 (Note:: High-Speed Internet recommended)
Blacks Who Got Away With Murder -White Victims
Black Supremacy Doctrine LINK

Where Do Wealthy Blacks Live ?

---------------------------------------

Below is a Resource Guide for African-American crime rates, high school dropout rates, illegitimacy rates and co-habitation rates before and after 1964.
(still under construction)

Black Male Crime Statistics (Pre 1964 - Under the DMG Theorem)
Black Male Crime Statistics (Post 1964 - Under Compulsory Inclusionism)
Prison and Crime Records by race (Black and White) between 1904 and 1960
High School Drop Out Rates
Black Illegitimacy Rates From 1900 to Present
Black Co-Habitation Rates - Historical figures
1965 Moynihan Report - An Unheeded WARNING
Time Magazine 1958
“THE NEGRO CRIME RATE: A FAILURE IN INTEGRATION"

----------------------------------------------

BLACK HISTORICAL EVENTS & HISTORICAL FIGURES

--------------------------------------------

DMG Theorem
Compulsory Inclusionism
Chronological History Of The American Negro's Integration Efforts (1865 to 1968) (NOTE: No White Guilt In this Version)

Why did Black Males demand to be integrated into another racial group (the very group they were also claiming was their brutal oppressor)?

--------------------------------------------

"MAP" Of Known Occupational Ranking Societies
(under construction)
--------------------------------------------

Creators Of Capitalism
(Under construction)
--------------------------------------------

Tuesday, April 12, 2011

American Negroes : Their Own Country - Why It Didn't Happen (1865 to 1964) - Page 2

Main Menu Page

Page [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Occupational Ranking & The Evolution Of Integration
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So, on page one, I addressed the fact that those of African descent in America after 1865 were in fact legally free, free as a distinct people could be. The effort being on the part of white people was to make the Negro race a self-reliant race - a race that would not be permanently, and in perpetuity, dependants of the white race. Of course, for Negro men, particularly those who were former slaves, becoming leaders and providers for their people, as well as moving their race toward self-reliance, this was an edification process that was going to require some time. But the message from white males was always consistently clear, and many times even violently demonstrated, that white males did not want Negroes in their living arrangements, in their working environments, or involved in their political environments. Many Negroes were certainly frustrated by this attitude, many understood and others, they wanted in...but had to believe that that was not likely ever to become a reality. After all, it was white males that created all the economic environments and all the political environments in America - in which they jealously regarded as their status environments. The solution for the Negro race was obvious: A homeland in America.

This leads us, again, to our ONE question from page one:

Why didn’t people of African descent in America from 1865 to 1964 demand a homeland in America, whereby they could achieve mastery over their own destiny, and create their own DMG - their own society - separate and autonomous from the American DMG?

Since integration was so vigorously sought by Negro males (achieved in 1964 with the Civil Rights Act), and for such a long period of time (since 1865), it stands to reason that something within American males’ society had to be very attractive to them to make such a lengthily supplication. So let us form the following hypothesis:

Negro males intuitively believed what existed in the living/ working environments of the American males (the American males’ society i.e. his social stratification system) existed because of the racial group's culture and very likely would not exist among the Negro race - because of Negro culture - if they sought separation and autonomy.

First, how the word “culture” is going to be used here requires a short explanation. The word culture, as it relates to a human society, is going to be divided into innate and non-innate.

Innate-culture: The innate-culture resides within the male and becomes discernible when his male-group forms its society i.e. its social stratification system.1 Essentially, an innate-culture is a grouping characteristic shared by the whole male group. And, for the sake of our discussion here, the innate-culture will only be used to identify whether the male group can form an occupational ranking social stratification system. In other words, a male-group's innate-culture is either occupational ranking or non-occupational ranking. So if the innate-culture within the male group will not allow a social stratification system based on occupational ranking of the males, then the male-group will use a non-occupational ranking social stratification system (e.g. animal husbandry; subsistence farming).

Non-innate-culture: Non-innate-culture within a society involves all those things that make the male-group’s society distinct, other than race (e.g. language, status symbols, religion, style of dress, diet, folklore, etc). Naturally, only a non-innate-culture can be taught.

Note: I am not going to delve into the theoretical origin of the Occupational Ranking culture. I have included a MAP (under construction) tracing the origins of the Occupational Ranking system as it concerns Western Civilization. This is not theoretical.

Occupational Ranking & The Production of "Wealth"

"Occupational Ranking is an innate-culture of the male-group (excluding females) that allows the male group to achieve the necessary grouping and organizational behavior conducive to the production of "wealth." Wealth is basically the production of marketable material items. The better the male group is at stratifying itself under occupational titles, the more marketable wealth they will theoretically be capable of creating."

-------------------------------

1. The creation of a human 'society' has essentially always followed the same pattern: A male-group (males racially, linguistically and religiously similar) first claim a geographic area. This same male-group then creates a social stratification system (to rank males within their own male group). When the social stratification system is created, a "society" now exists. The male-group that created the society becomes the Dominant Male Group (DMG). Historically, societies have stratified their DMGs by either Occupational Ranking or Non-Occupational Ranking.
-------------------------------------

PART III>>CLICK HERE

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Evolution Of Integration Link

Sunday, April 10, 2011

American Negroes Page I: Their Own Country - Why It Didn't Happen (1865 to 1964)

Main Menu Page For All Blogs

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Page [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Integration As A "Right"

Most of us have watched documentaries from the 1960s concerning civil-rights (i.e. integration rights). And while we watched we listened to a narrator tell us the marches, the sit-ins, the pray-ins, the protests, etc., are about a people (the black race) demanding their "equal rights," "equal opportunity," "freedom now" and "manhood." And white people in these documentaries are always depicted as the miscreants ... fighting to deny blacks their just rights and pursuits. The black race, that is, is being denied integration rights, and not just being wronged by white people ... white people are deliberately oppressing them. But was the black race really being wronged and/ or oppressed where and when white people desired racial separation? After all, separate living and working arrangements prior to 1964 was completely consistent with American history. And even human history. In other words, prior to 1964 there is in fact no recorded example of two distinct racial groups living in mutual harmony and sharing the same political system and/or living arrangements.1 So if racial integration had no basis in American history, no basis in legality in American history, and no basis in recorded human history,2 how is it that white people were wronging the black race where and when they practiced separation? Well, the plain and simple fact is, and despite what grade school, high school and college texts books insists, white people were obviously not wronging the black race were and when they practiced racial separation. Again, one distinct people living separate from another distinct people was not only the norm in American history but also human history as well.

The black race's so-called 'fight' for justice, freedom, manhood and equality from the late 1950s and early 1960s also produced some very strange inconsistencies in human nature. A few examples :

African-Americans are remonstrating for the complete nullification of the existence of their distinctness as a people (i.e. they want civil rights legislation that forbids the recognition of race, which eliminates them as a distinct people in America).

African-Americans are claiming their very manhood and "freedom" can only be achieved within the structure of another male-group - the very group they are claiming is their oppressor. (also this LINK)
African-Americans want integration - into white male society - to relinquish all effort among their people to achieve self-reliance as a distinct people (which would make them the only people in human history to never achieve this human requirement).

African-Americans claim their children are better off learning among another people's children.

My friends, I am not trying to be divisive in any way here. No distinct people in human history ever did any of this. Never.  What occurred between 1955 and 1964 is simply off the chart in terms of expected human behavior. Human male-groups, according to recorded human history, DO NOT demand to be integrated into another male-group (i.e. into another male-group's social stratification system).  Allow me to drive home this point with the following short narrative:: The year is 1770. The feared Sioux Indian tribe, their mighty warriors along with their women and children, march over to the mighty Crow Indian tribe's recognized boundary, and there the Sioux remonstrate against being forced to live separately from the Crow. They want to hunt on Crow land. They want to eat at the Crow table. They want their children to learn from the Crow children. They want IN! "Down with the lines of segregation" the mighty Sioux warriors and their women and children bellow out - being led by their medicine man. The Crow leaders confront the remonstrators and ask what they want...what do they really want. The mighty Sioux warriors claim that all they want is their "freedom," "dignity" and "equality," and the right to achieve "manhood"...and all this can only be achieved within the Crow tribe. The Crow tribal leaders, realizing they are wronging the mighty Sioux tribe with their separate living arrangement, relent and bestow across-the-board integration rights for the Sioux people. Now does this sound even remotely possible? Of course not. No Indian tribe would ever do such a thing. In fact, throughout human history no racial group - no male-group  - had ever demanded to be integrated into another male-group!  Yet, there it was, African-Americans remonstrating for racial integration rights i.e. civil rights, which includes the complete nullification of their existence as a distinct people.3 It shouldn't be happening.

(Note: A male-group consists of males who are located within a contiguously defined geographic area and are similar racially, linguistically and religiously. Male-groups are the primary building blocks for every society/ nation in human history i.e. the 'male-group' is the creator of the social stratification system, which is the prerequisite to a society).

So, if we base our opinion for predicting human behavior on all of recorded human history, what should we have witnessed in the late 1950s and early 1960s regarding Negro demands? This: The Negro people in America, after almost 100 years of being brutally oppressed, facing persistent racism and bigotry directed at them (they claim), and a denial of freedom, dignity and manhood, being lynching for sport, or for "general purposes" (they claim), beating them on the streets for the sheer joy of it, forcing them to live in substandard housing, exploiting their labor, etc., they simply cannot bear the persecution, the exploitation, the calculated injustices and misery any longer. So they collectively demand what has numerous and undeniable historical precedents : a homeland. A homeland, so after almost 100 years of oppression and misery they can finally achieve the cherished dream of self-determination (i.e. the right to create their own Dominate Male Group -  DMG). A place where true freedom, dignity and manhood can be achieved. Where they can finally have the opportunity to be master of their own destiny.

Well, we are all acutely aware that the American Negro never made even the slightest movement toward the goal of achieving self-determination. Indeed, they actually did the COMPLETE opposite! This incredible and unprecedented act of demanding integration into another male-group, again, a group they are also claiming is their brutal oppressor, I firmly believe, has to be explained. It simply should not be good enough to attempt to explain away this unprecedented demand by saying that civil rights was/is about the fight for "equality,” "freedom," and "manhood" and that these attributes (for the Negro) could only be achieved by forcing their Anglo oppressor to give them integration rights i.e  Compulsory Inclusionism.

So,

(1) Why didn’t people of African descent in America from 1865 to 1964 demand a homeland in America, whereby they could achieve mastery over their own destiny, and create their own DMG - their own society - separate and autonomous from the American DMG?

Note: I want to emphasize that my theoretical outline from here on only concerns pre 1964.

First, let's address one of the biggest deceptions in American history:: the belief that the civil rights movement was about achieving "freedom" for the Negro people in America. The black race was in fact free. In every sense of the word they were a free people. They were free to build their own industries, their own towns & cities and thereby create their own political environment(s); or, with the vast amount of unsettled land in America, they were completely free to colonize a place in America and create their own autonomous living arrangement(s) (e.g. like the Mormons).

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Citations:

1. Blacks did have political seats in state and local legislatures. However, they did not have any control of what legislation was actually made into law. That power rested, in every legislature in America, with white Christian males.

2. Race nullification is not in the US Constitution. Plessy v. Ferg. settled that dilemma in 1896. However, states could create their laws with respect to integration rights for the negro, as consistent with the 10th Amendment. New York, for example, required race-nullification in their states' school system. It should also be noted that presidents Roosevelt (1940) and Kennedy (1961) both issued executive orders forbidding racial discrimination in the federal workforce and government contracts, respectively. Though both were largely unenforceable i.e. white males refused to follow these laws (it was their economic environment - status environment - created by white males and for white males).

3. It should also be noted that the 1964 Civil Rights Act nullified white Christians in America as the recognized 'Americans', stripping them of their DMG status as well their identity as a people. Today, the former 'Americans' are now referred to simply by a color: white people.

Page II >>CLICK HERE

Saturday, April 9, 2011

Japan - Agrarian To Occupational Ranking (1853)

(Main Menu Page For All Blogs )

Japan Alters Its Social Stratification System

In 1853, at the behest of American merchants, US President Millard Fillmore sent Commodore Perry with a letter to Japan’s ruling body to seek a trade treaty. Japan at this time, and throughout her history, was primarily an agrarian, subsistence farming nation - a people who had not yet discovered coin currency. It was also a country which fiercely protected its isolation. With an exception made only to Dutch traders, any attempt by other Western nations to land on Japanese soil for the purpose of trade or any other reason, was under the threat of immediate attack (Western merchants were primarily interested in Japan as a place to dock their ships and pick up supplies). When Commodore Perry arrived in the Bay of Tokyo with three steam-powered warships, and fixed with cannons, the Japanese, whose only means of defense was the sword and the bow and arrow, had little choice but to receive him. Perry delivered his letter and promised to return within a year to receive the Japan's reply. The following year Perry did return, but with even a bigger fleet, comprised this time of seven war ships. The Japanese, gazing at the site of these mammoth warships, and forced also to witness a demonstration of the power of their cannons, knew they had no option and promptly negotiated a trade treaty.

Certainly the Japanese had to feel bullied by the weapons these Americans possessed. And how could they also not fail to realize the overt threat to their own sovereignty should these Americans decide to exercise their very apparent superiority? While we have to assume the Japanese saw themselves as intellectual equals to these white skinned men, nevertheless, how could they explain this very evident superiority? That is, what allowed these Americans to achieve it? Obviously the Japanese saw that it was the structure of the American’s society that allowed them to create their weapons. We can logically assume this since from approximately that year (1853) the Japanese, on their own volition, set about to structurally overhaul their political and economic arenas and model them after the American system. In other words, they set about to create an Occupational Ranking social stratification system. They were, as we know, successful. By 1900 (less than 40 years), Japan had not only replicated America’s societal structure (i.e. creating wealth using occupational titles to stratify its male group), but was also producing material items very similar in quality to the Americans. However, this success had another ramification to it. Up until this time, only Europeans had Occupational Ranking systems. This transformation by the Japanese from an agrarian societal structure to an Occupational Ranking one, demonstrated that it was not just those of the European race who were capable of creating this type of social stratification system.

By 1964, those people/ male groups that were capable of a creating an Occupational Ranking stratification system were now apparent.

Marcus Garvey: Negro Separation, Self-Improvement & Self-Sufficiency

(Main Menu Page For All Blogs)

A man who wanted to be a King

Marcus Garvey (1887 – 1940)

Marcus Garvey was born in Jamaica in 1887. According to Garvey, his father, a freed slave, earnestly counseled him on the necessity of getting an education. Whether inspired by his father or his own innate desire to learn, Marcus Garvey became a very well-read man by his early 20s. He was intelligent, a great orator, and also a very eloquent writer, though he never did finish high school. Oddly enough, Garvey’s lack of a high school diploma did not stop him from attending (or visiting?) colleges in England. In 1914, Garvey decided to turn his attention and god-given abilities to help his people (people of African descent) achieve a sense of dignity and power over their lives … that he believed the European males were conspiring to deny them. To that end, in 1914 Marcus Garvey founded the Universal Negro Improvement Association (UNIA), which he believed could be an instrument to unite all peoples of African descent, including the African continent and those in the Western Hemisphere.

In 1916, Garvey arrived in the U.S. to promote his new ideology of African unification to America‘s Negroes. Among Marcus Garvey’s concerns were the European powers that had colonized Africa, and by so doing, Garvey believed, deprived its native people of operating as their own rulers; and thereby denying them the right to determine their own destiny. However, as vexed as he was at European powers seizing land in Africa, Garvey’s more important concern, which he would dedicate the next decade to, was the plight of the American Negro. Garvey believed the Negro in America could never achieve equality (i.e. integration rights). He believed the white man would not allow this. Over the course of the next eight years he would give hundreds of passionate speeches to Negro audiences in almost all of the major cites of North, Mid-West, and even the South. His speeches to America’s Negroes were some of the most well-honed diatribes on the Negro's state of affairs in America to that date.

Marcus Garvey was not an integrationist. He was a black nationalist ... who wanted America’s Negroes to move back to their ancestral homeland (Africa). His stated destination for them was the state of Liberia. With that goal in mind, Garvey launched a shipping line called the Black Star Line in 1919. In this same year, he was also able to convince a sufficient number of his people to loan him enough money to actually purchase a ship. However, the short of it is, this line, managed and run entirely by Negroes, was continually plagued by internal corruption, as well as Garvey’s own mismanagement. Not surprisingly, it ran up massive debts in a very brief time and subsequently failed in 1922. It also never made a single voyage to Africa. Garvey’s fault was not that he was corrupt. He just didn’t have the wherewithal to manage a company the size of Black Star - at least there is no evidence he was running a scam. His shipping line though was actually quite a audacious and fanciful idea, and not because he wanted to use it to transport people of African descent back to their ancestral homeland. Rather, because it was so grandiose even the biggest financial tycoons of the day would have scoffed at the possibility of launching such an endeavor. Yet, Garvey actually did get his shipping line up and going. It took a man of extraordinary talents to get as far as he did, even though, in truth, his enterprise was certainly doomed from the beginning. Garvey being a terrible businessman simply accelerated the inevitable.

As for Garvey’s inspiration to reunite the American Negroes with their ancestral homeland, he was up against two formidable challenges: 1) the economic boom of the 1920s; 2) the NAACP. With regard to America’s economy in the 1920s, American Negroes were not in that bad of shape in urban America. At least most were working. And those that were unemployed, all Negroes certainly knew - for the evidence was all around them - it was only a matter of finding remunerable work to end their indigence.

And regarding the NAACP at this time, its agenda was in direct conflict to what Garvey was preaching. Garvey was telling the Negro that it was his fault for his present predicament because he was failing to recognize his true home (Africa), and failing to do what was necessary to get there. The NAACP, however, was telling the Negro to seek integration into America’s Anglo power base; and that his present state of affairs was entirely the white man’s fault i.e. for failing to provide the Negro integration and race-nullification. Obviously, Garvey and the NAACP were simply canceling out the message of the other.

Finally, regarding Garvey's organization, he claimed a membership of 4 million members worldwide in 1920. The NAACP's membership stood at about 62,000 (the book Chronological History Of The Negro reports that the NAACP had 85,000 members in 1919 - pg. 387).

Garvey's Conviction:: Other than rumors, there is no concrete evidence - that I could find - that exists today that the NAACP applied pressure (or money?) to U.S. government officials to pursue a fraud charge against Garvey. Regarding the evidence presented against Garvey, and ultimately used to convict him, it was shockingly flimsy. Garvey received a five year prison sentence. However, President Calvin Coolidge, perhaps perusing the evidence and wanting to do the right thing, did intervene after two years of Garvey's sentence and commuted his term. Upon Garvey's release, he was deported back to his native Jamacia (1927).

Garvey's Conviction: "Garvey blamed Jewish jurors and a Jewish federal judge, Julian Mack, for his conviction. He felt they had been biased because of their political objections to his meeting with the acting imperial wizard of the Ku Klux Klan the year before. In 1928, Garvey told a journalist: "When they wanted to get me they had a Jewish judge try me, and a Jewish prosecutor. I would have been freed but two Jews on the jury held out against me ten hours and succeeded in convicting me, whereupon the Jewish judge gave me the maximum penalty."" Wikipedia

>>> Garvey forgot to mention two other Jewish males, and prominent members of the NAACP's Executive Committee at this time:: Arthur and Joel Spingarn. Jewish conspiracy? Possibly. There is one absolute certainty here: the NAACP, still a fledgling organization and economically destitute at this time, benefited the most when Garvey was deported. <<<

Marcus Garvey remains the only man of African descent prior to 1964 that gained a substantial following among American Negroes…advocating for black separation, self-improvement and self-sufficiency.

Garvey: “At maturity the black and white boys separated, and took
different courses in life. I grew up then to see the
difference between the races more and more….” “I
asked, "Where is the black man's Government?" "Where
is his King and his kingdom?" "Where is his President, his
country, and his ambassador, his army, his navy, his men
of big affairs?" I could not find them, and then I declared,
"I will help to make them.””

Friday, April 8, 2011

Mary White Ovington - Creator Of NAACP

Mary White Ovington was born in 1865 in Brooklyn, NY. Her childhood and adolescence were (okay, not surprisingly) completely unremarkable. Her adulthood, however, once she emerged into it, from then on she seems to have been determined to be a contradiction to what others of her people were doing : She was a life-long spinster when just about every other female desired marriage; she was Unitarian when virtually all Christians believed in the Trinity; she was a socialist when the overwhelming majority of Americans were for capitalism. So it should not be surprising to see Miss Ovington in 1908 conceive of an organization (the NAACP) for which the stated purpose was what the vast, vast majority of her people were dead-set against:: integration of one race into another - black into white.

Half a Man…

Half a Man is a book written by Miss Ovington (released in 1911). As the title implies, Miss Ovington did not believe the Negro male was a full man, only but “half a man."1 Full manhood for the Negro male, Miss Ovington suggests , was only obtainable with integration into another race; that is; the Caucasian male society (her race), which the black man continually sought out and juxtaposed himself. Miss Ovington’s opinion of those of African descent was derived mainly from her observations of them in the Negro section of Manhattan, New York (she actually lived among the Negro people there - in a Negro tenement - to get a better understanding of them). Her book is basically a description of Negro life from slavery to the beginning of the 20th century. It entails the struggles and trials and tribulations of a people in a world they were forced to accept (the white man's ways). 2 It is also a book about the Negro male’s struggle in the urban environment of Manhattan, his legacy of slavery, his persistent unemployment, the menial jobs he is almost always assigned to (when he does find work), his criminal propensity, his inability to be a provider for his family … among many other seemingly extraneous details of daily Negro life in this borough that is more than a bit taxing on any reader's time and patients.

Miss Ovington was blessed with a very long life, dying in 1951 at the age of 86. Note: I wonder what Miss Ovington would have thought of her little creation (The NAACP) had she lived long enough to see the black male-initiated Watts Riots?

------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Miss Ovington in her book claims to have acquired this description, “half a man”, through a conversation she had with a college-age Negro male, but her account, at least to me, simply does not ring true.

2. I refer to blacks being "forced" as individuals to accept the ways of the white man. The black race collectively, however, had the right and opportunity to live separate from the the white population. Of course, there was no law against this. They had the right to build their own towns, their own cities, or colonize a place in America's vast amount of unsettled land (1865 to 1964). In other words, American blacks after 1865 were in fact a completely FREE people. However, free from the white man, his towns, cities...and his way of life was not what the average black man in America wanted. They integration...and integration by any means necessary. The Johnson Administration gifted them what they so desperately coveted i.e. across-the-board forced integration rights.

Town of Boley - Negro Males Only Large Town In America

(Main Menu Page For All Blogs )

A Town That Just Couldn't Become A City

Boley, OK. was established in 1904 (incorporated in 1905) and was, at the time, located in the Creek Nation of the Indian Territory. It is credited with becoming the largest and most long-lasting prominent Negro town in the United States.

Boley was founded on September 22, 1904 by two Negro men, T. M. Haynes and James Barnett. At its peak (1910), it had two banks, two cotton gins, a newspaper, a hotel, and a railroad stop. It was also a town that was run entirely by Negro men Its population peaked in 1911 to about 4000 (this number is likely over-estimated by about 2500). It dropped steadily over the next 20 years, settling at about 1000 in the 1930s. It has remained at about that number ever since. As for why I am dedicating a blog to this small Negro town, it's because Boley serves as an excellent example of a town that should have, if white and black were indeed the same, blossomed into a great and thriving Negro city (Negro males established no cities in America). The best feature of the Negro town was the railroad, which was an enormous advantage for any marketable product.

However, for reasons that must have remained a mystery to the Negro leaders of Boley, during the two Great Migration periods for blacks (1910 to 1930 & 1940 to 1970) , southern Negroes (males & females) simply refused to make Boley their destination when they decided to leave their rural farms for other economic opportunities.

Oh , by comparison , in 1910, the city of Tulsa, OK , created and run entirely by white males, had a population of over 18,000 people. About 4% (800 apprx.) of the city's population was black in 1910. By 1920, the black population had swelled to over 9000.

Of further note, Boley, OK, declared bankruptcy in 1939.

Ossian Sweet - A Planned Massacre (1925)

(Main Menu Page For All Blogs )

Use of 'Negro' and 'American' in this blog::
I am not entirely sure when the term 'Negro' began to be widely accepted as the black races' group designation in America. After 1980, it fell out of use (replaced by African American). However, at the time of the the event described below(1925), the word Negro was the accepted usage to describe those of African descent. Therefore, I will use it periodically in this blog. No disparagement intended. As for the use of 'American' to describe white people, my intent is::: 1) to give identity and recognition to the male group that was responsible for the entire creation of American society at that time (i.e. between 1790 and 1964, all the political & economic arenas in America were created by one people::white Christian males); 2) to remove race or color as a group description of people. However, since people have become so accustomed to seeing the word "white" used to describe the recognized Americans, I will use it from time to time.

Note: Because of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the term 'American ' no longer describes a group of people. An 'American' today is a political expression used to describe a hodgepodge group of diverse peoples.

------------------------------------

OSSIAN SWEET CASE

There appears to be a very concerted effort on the Internet today (aided by a very intellectually sloppy written book,The Arc Of Justice ) to make Ossian Sweet into something of a hero. The facts of his life, however, seem to paint quite a different picture. The brief bio on Ossian Sweet is this::

-- In 1919, after a long eight years, Sweet finally graduated from Wilberforce college (he was a lackluster student at best).

-- Sweet applied for acceptance to Howard University College of Medicine, which was one of the better all-Negro medical schools. Because, and only because, many of the students had left for military service (World War I), Sweet was admitted i.e. to fill vacancies.

-- Sweet graduated without distinction. No Negro hospital offered him a position.

-- Sweet moved to Detroit and opened a medical practice (the building in which Sweet's office was located was owned by a black pharmacist and Sweet worked out a rent deal where he would recommend all his clients to him).

-- After less than a year of practice, Sweet, along with his new wife, left for France. (the source of money for the Sweets' travel to Europe appears to be the monies received from their wedding). While in France, Sweet - he claims - attended Madame Curie Institute, France's most distinguished medical school. After attending classes at Madame Curie Institute, Sweet and his wife traveled to Vienna and - Sweet claims - he attended medical classes there.

(NOTE: There is no evidence to the veracity of Sweets claims that he "attended" [not enrolled?[ in these medical schools. It should also be noted that Sweet could not speak French or German. So why did he go to France then Austria? Likely, so he could hang a plaque on his wall inferring that he studied medicine at Europe's finest medical schools. His clients were all African-Americans, so none would be capable of going to the expense of trying to prove he didn’t actually enroll in medical schools in Europe. Well, that would be a very unethical thing to do, right? Read on.

-- Sweet and his wife returned to America in July 1924, with a new baby (Sweet and his family moved back in with his wife's parents - who lived in a predominantly American [white] community.

-- Nine months after returning from Europe, Sweet, mysteriously, is now being driven around by a chauffeur. He also produced $3,500 to put a down payment on a home in an American (white) community (Sweet charged his clients $1.00 for his services, meaning he would have had to receive full payment from over 3,500 negro clients over that nine month period - working fives days a week, that would mean he would have to see 20 clients per day! Where did Sweet get all this money?

-- Ossian Sweet, his wife and his child moved into their new home. Accompanying them are nine black males who brought with them rifles and a large cache of ammo (all concealed in boxes). And in Sweet's small home - in blistering heat - they impatiently waited for an American mob to charge in and try to forcibly evict them.

-- After two days of waiting...the impatient Negroes, without any provocation, aimed their guns out the top story window and fired a volley into the crowd of Americans below. One American was mortally wounded, another seriously wounded.

-- The Negroes were all arrested ... and the NAACP arrived immediately.

-- Clarence Darrow to the rescue...

-- Sweet's wife and child suddenly took ill and died (NOTE: Sweet, according to the book Arc of Justice, had a violent tempter and his relationship with his wife was often extremely contentious).₁

-- Ossian Sweet was stripped of his medical license sometime in the 1930s (note: there can be only ONE reason for the state of Michigan to pull his license: FRAUD. Sweet most likely was working in cahoots with the black pharmacist to cheat their negro clients i.e. Sweet would conjure up phony ailments on his clients, then Sweet and the pharmacist would split the money made from Sweet’s phony prescriptions)

-- According to the book Arc Of Justice, after Sweet's wife and child died, a female tried to live with him but she fled because of battering. A male also tried to live with Sweet but he too was battered and fled.

--Sweet was arrested for practicing medicine without a license; and he was also arrested for selling tobacco to minors.

My own honest and dispassionate assessment of Ossian Sweet, largely based on the evidence from Arc of Justice, is that he was a completely unremarkable man in every way , though be behaved like an elitist. Sweet was painfully unsociable - not developing a single enduring friendship in his entire life - and he was also a VERY unethical man as well (he took out numerous loans claiming he was a doctor after his license was pulled). In 1960, Ossian Sweet, deep in debt and facing eviction, his life a complete failure, committed suicide by shooting himself in the head. Ossian Sweet was considered no hero at the time he shot himself.

--------------------

A Planned Massacre? The evidence is pretty darn convincing.

In 1925 … Dr. Ossian Sweet bought a home in an established American community - knowingly violating the color line - in a deliberate attempt to provoke the local American population to remove him. In three previous attempts over the prior few months in Detroit suburbs, Negroes had attempted to move into all-American neighborhoods , only to be met with protests and physical expulsion. To the Americans this was NOT about racial superiority. It was about protecting their property values; and also protecting their families. It was no myth that Negroes moving into American-built residential communities would create a decline in neighborhood property values. It was also no myth that Negro males had a known crime problem. What the Americans insisted upon at that time was that the Negroes build their own community(ies) ... separate from the Americans. However, Negroes in Detroit, like everywhere else in American urban centers, as white people were now discovering by 1925, would NOT build their own homes. This was the case with Ossian Sweet. He paid more than 25% above the property value for his home (where in the heck did he get the money from? Likely, the NAACP).

Note:
There is enough evidence to convince me that Ossian Sweet and his cohorts had planned a MASSACRE of white people, and it was either orchestrated by, or involved, the NAACP. The Plan (scheme) appeared to be this:: With NAACP money, Sweet would buy a home in a American community, move into the house...where he (and the NAACP) knew his presence was certain to cause a neighborhood protest. He would bring with him nine other black males, armed to the gills with guns & ammo, and there inside Sweet's home they would wait for white people to come barging in to physically remove them. The Negroes would then all open fire on them. And after the MASSACRE, the men involved would allow themselves to be arrested and plead defense of their life and property from a raging mob. The renowned Clarence Darrow, a proud member of the NAACP at this time, would then be summoned (by the NAACP) to represent the Negroes. And buttressing the case for a planned massacre and Darrow's representation is the fact that Sweet postponed his move-in date until after Darrow finished with the Scopes trial in Tennessee. And what would be in it for the NAACP to arrange this massacre? With the presence of Darrow, it would be headline news in every major metropolis in the country i.e. priceless coast to coast publicity for the still largely unknown NAACP. And after the trial, well, if Darrow lost, the NAACP would claim is was because of a prejudiced white jury. They still would get the benefit of coast-to-coast publicly. However, if Darrow got an acquittal for the men, this is where the NAACP would expect to really cash in. They would naturally be rocketed to instant stardom status among Negroes. And what would be the expectation here? The NAACP's empty treasury would explode anew with dues paying members. The NAACP would also be viewed as the Negro's new guardian of integration justice, and a defender against the heavy-handed injustices white people allegedly continually inflicted on the Negro people all across America. This was, again, in my opinion, how it was supposed to have play out.

The best laid schemes of mice and men...

Move-in date Sept. 7, 1925:

First, remember there were three previous attempts by Negroes to move into American communities in the Detroit area, and each time the Negroes were forced to leave (there were no reported injuries). Ossian Sweet, naturally, expected this same scenario to play out. However, it should also be pointed out that for the black participants to have any chance for a legitimate defense in the use of deadly force, it was first necessary to have the white people come charging into Sweet's residence and threaten them.

As ten American police officers stood guard in front of Sweet's home on September 7th, nine Negro men helped Sweet move a few household items into his home, including a concealed large cache of guns and ammo. In sweltering 105 degree heat the Negroes waited throughout the day and then the night for the Americans to come charging into the home to forcibly evict them.

However, on this first day, though a large number of Americans gathered outside Sweet's home (estimates range from 25 up to 100), and much to the dismay of the waiting Negroes, no home invasion occurred -- not even a hint of one.

On the second day, again the heat index rose to over 100 degrees and, again, the ten Negro males (plus Sweet's wife and child) waited in the small home . By evening time, and with no hint of a mob attack, the Negroes' frayed nerves had made them impatient. When a rock hit the house, this was provocation enough. The Negroes, through and open window, simultaneously opened fired on the group of people outside the home. The result of the volley was one American dead and one seriously wounded. There were at least 9 police officers (all Americans) stationed outside Sweet's home that evening. When the shots were fired the officers charged into Sweet's home demanding to know why on earth the Negroes were firing their guns. When the officer in charge found out that an innocent American had been slain, he ordered the arrest of all the Negroes (including Mrs. Sweet).

Clarence Darrow (as planned) was summoned ... and he accepted - being paid a mind-boggling fee at that time of $5000 dollars. In the end Darrow did his lob and secured a hung jury for all the Negroes (not a single one of the ten Negro males who participated in the "massacre" scheme was convicted of a crime in this case). The NAACP also (as planned) used this case to get nationwide publicity for its organization among the Negro people.

Innocent White Victims Of This Attempted Massacre :
* Eric Houghberg (seriously injured but survived)
* Leon Breiner (deceased, left behind wife and daughter)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

(1) Death Of Sweet's Wife & Child:: Sweet's wife was said to have died, like his daughter, of tuberculosis. However, the mystery is where both could have possibly contracted the disease, and in such a short period of time. They lived in a white community, before and after the trial (TB was a problem in black communities at that but not the white communities). Those who claim it was TB, insists Mrs. Sweet contracted the disease when she was incarcerated in the [white man's] jail in Detroit during the trial. But she was only there for about 30 days! Highly implausible to say the least. Since Sweet was a doctor, he certainly had access to many drugs that could have inflicted a death with similar symptoms to TB. No question Ossian Sweet loathed his wife. When she left for Arizona to attempt to recover from whatever she thought was ailing her, she made a miraculous recovery. When she returned to Ossian Sweet, she was dead in just a few months. I wonder if there was a life insurance policy?

(2) Property Values: A commission was set up by Detroit mayor immediately following the arrest of Ossian Sweet and the others. The report (according to the book 'Chronological History of The Negro'), stated that the hostile attitude of whites toward blacks, when blacks attempted to move into established white neighborhoods, was mostly based on "fear of property value depreciation".

Violent Crimes: Black On White & White On Black