NAACP and Their Pro Bono Lawyers

  

Dominant Male Group Theorem and historical structure of a human society:  
Prior to 1964, all human societies in recorded history followed the same pattern in their establishment: homogeneity in race, language, and religion. These characteristics undoubtedly played a vital role in maintaining stability within the society. For example, note how few civil wars have been recorded since the time of the ancient Greeks (regarding the American Civil War, as President Lincoln said to a group of prominent Negroes "..consider what we know to be the truth. But for your race among us there could not be war.").₁

Since all of history demonstrates a predisposed male grouping behavior in the establishment of a society, as well as its continuation (at least I cannot find a single exception in recorded human history), let's express this grouping pattern for the establishment of a society in the following way:

When a male group (males similar racially, linguistically and religiously) establishes claim to a geographic area, this group then seeks to create a society. A society must have a social stratification system; and when that social stratification system exists ... a society is then formed. When the society is formed the male group that created it becomes the Dominant Male Group. There are two primary functions a society serves, which allows it to achieve stability and longevity: (1) stratify the Dominant Male Group; (2) perpetuate the Dominant Male Group.

Again, there is no known deviation from the above grouping behavior for establishing a society's social strata (that I'm aware of) prior to 1964.

Females historic role within a society: Prior to 1964, throughout human history females had always been separated from the males; and never allowed into the male group's social strata. Female's historic role within a society was simply to procreate for the male group...and to raise the children. Keeping the females separate wasn't - isn't - a pejorative act by males. Females lack 'true status' (as do males outside the DMG). Theoretically then, that is if the DMG theorem is an immutable law of human nature, as all of human history suggest it is, if the social stratification system (systems specifically stratified by occupational titles) created by the DMG is compromised ... the structure itself will become compromised. Collapse of the system would seem to be inevitable.

Do you think America is as stable politically today under the compulsory integration laws than before the laws were passed (specifically, the Civil Rights Acts '64, 65, '68)?

Historical Group Recognition (HGR): In order to build societies throughout human history males from the dominant male group used "group recognition", or HGR. All racial and ethnic groups on our planet ... are here today because of this recognition characteristic.

'True status': The theory behind 'true status' infers that only members of the same male group (racially, linguistically, religiously similar) may have status in that male group's social stratification system (macro or micro group structure). 

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

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

NAACP

From the NAACP's beginning (1910) to around 1925, in these formative years, and with the organization basically destitute year in and year out, the NAACP was forced to rely on white male attorneys who were willing to work  pro bono (without compensation). There were three lawyers who were willing to do the bulk of this kind work for the advancement of the NAACP ::

-- Albert Enoch Pillsbury (born 1849 - died 1930)

-- Moorfield Storey (born 1849 - died 1930)

-- Arthur Spingarn (born 1878 - died 1971)
Note: black lawyers at that time could not afford to work pro bono.  

   However, there are two things regarding the NAACP in these formative years which I find more than a little troubling (and I hope you do as well)  :: 1) the legal strategy they used; 2) the apparent hypocrisy of the white pro bono attorneys.

1.   Legal Strategy::  Much emphasis is generally given in today's literature to the legal strategy the NAACP' employed in pursuing its lauded integration agenda. However, there is another aspect to this strategy which has been given little importance or recognition (if any) and I think it bears pointing out: the NAACP's  activities were not in any way consistent with existing rules for lawyers in 1910 --   all the way up to 1964 for that matter.  Also never noted is the unprecedented special treatment NAACP lawyers consistently received at the hands of the New York State Bar. That is, what ethical boundaries other lawyers were either forced by their state bar to accept, or morally bound to respect, the NAACP lawyers were always allowed to freely engage in violating. Lawyers (in 1910) were supposed to represent for a fee individuals, companies or, from time to time, a group of any other sort seeking redress over a legal issue or point of law.  Lawyers were not supposed to stir up lawsuits, advertise their services in any media or call upon prospective clients and offer their services pro bono . However, for the NAACP lawyers, when they brazenly stirred up lawsuits, or called upon prospective clients and offered their services pro bono (cases were generally selected based on whether it could create publicity for the organization), they always got a pass.  Perhaps because of the clients the NAACP were pursuing, ones that could never afford to pay a fee for lawyer services, the New York Bar allowed these guys to get away with all their ethics violations. However, the following point still needs to be driven home here: For lawyers to work for an organization, and where the primary purpose of that organization is to stir up lawsuits, claiming their efforts are for the "public good", was, prior to 1910, unprecedented in America, as well as in every other Western Civilization country. 1

2.    Hypocrisy::  I have also found it very troubling that the white pro bono lawyers for the NAACP (as well as all the other members of the NAACP who were white), who worked for or on behalf of this organization - which promoted racial integration - were unwilling themselves to practice what they were promoting.  In other words, none of the white attorneys for the NAACP were willing to live among the Negro people (Arthur Spingard was a man of considerable wealth who chose to live in an exclusively white community on a palatial estate in upstate New York); nor were they willing to send their children to a predominately Negro school; nor were they ever willing to try to make a living exclusively among the Negro population. Yet, they were essentially telling America’s White population that integration and race-nullification was the right direction for their people; and not only was it the right direction, but the moral one as well.  The way I understand hypocrisy, this does appear to fit the definition. If integration of the races, still an unknown concept in human history at that time (1910 to 1925), was, as the NAACP was claiming, actually the right course to commit to, it does seem that the ones promoting this "radical" new agenda should be the ones at very least practicing it themselves. 

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

On July 2, 1964, the political / economic system of Compulsory Inclusionism (Civil Rights Act) was created in the USA, and its main purpose was/is to integrate the Dominant Male Group (white Christian males). NOTE: It's also interesting to note that only countries of Western Civilization origin have established - thru written laws - a compulsory integration system. (the ability of white males to become slaves to their written laws...never ceases to amaze me)

AGAIN, do you think America is as stable politically today under the compulsory integration laws than before the laws were passed (e.g. Civil Rights Acts '64, 65, '68)?

----------

Are the following Links notable *consequences* when a DMG allows encroachment into their social stratification system?

1) LINK...

2) OJ Simpson Double Murder/ Acquittal (black jury)...

3) LINK

4) Why do blacks continue to fail? Well, ...it's got to be white people's fault - they're "born to be racist" LINK

5) 1947... Mendez, et al v. Westminister School District of Orange County (CA)... Hispanics won the case for a desegregated school... Guess what? The school is 100% Hispanic today...and they aren't complaining one bit! LINK

6) MASSACRE LINK

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

NOTE: In the 100 years existence of the NAACP, there has yet to be a documented case of a white male / female member of this organization that moved from their predominantly White community into a predominantly black community. 2

------------------------------------
Lincoln (1862): "We look to our condition, owing to the existence of the two races on this continent. I need not recount to you the effects upon white men, growing out of the institution of Slavery. I believe in its general evil effects on the white race. See our present condition---the country engaged in war!---our white men cutting one another's throats, none knowing how far it will extend; and then consider what we know to be the truth. But for your race among us there could not be war...  It is better for us both, therefore, to be separated."

1. https://quod.lib.umich.edu/l/lincoln/lincoln5/1:812?rgn=div1;view=fulltext

2. I could not find a single documented case. If someone knows of a case(s), please include it below in the comment section (with a source).

Walter White & The NAACP

The little black male in the middle is Walter White

   Walter F. White was born in 1893 in Atlanta, Georgia. He attended an all-black high school and an all-black college. At 25 years old, Mr. White joined the NAACP (1918). In 1931, at 37 years old, he became the Executive Director of the NAACP, and would remain in that capacity until his death in 1955 (White also booted W.E.B. Du Bois from the organization in 1934).

        But aside from Mr. White's career choice and his performance within the NAACP, there is one thing that I found about Mr. White to be more than a bit peculiar (and many others during his lifetime as well), which is what he claimed as his actual race. He looked undeniably like a Caucasian male.  His hair was blond, his eyes were blue, and his skin tone was white as an Englishman's. Yet he always insisted to everyone, and quite freely, that he was a Negro (Walker claimed both of his parents were very light-skinned blacks).1   However, an incident in Atlanta in 1906 undoubtedly had to register with the then 13-year-old Walter regarding his appearance (that is, if Walter really was spawned from negro parents...and he really did believe he was black).  A race riot had erupted (black males raped four white females in the month of September - and local white males had had ENOUGH) and white mobs formed looking for blacks ... and revenge.  Walter and his father were driving home when they encountered one of the many angry white mobs that had formed. Upon seeing Walter and his father, however, the mob simply ignored them - because they looked white. Naturally, it is a given that Walter didn’t leap from the car and shout to that raging mob he was black (one does have to wonder, if it were blacks attacking white people [like the Watts Riot] and they came upon Walter, would he have escaped their racial attack by insisting he was black?). So in this case, Walter’s appearance saved him a certain beating, maybe even his life. In essence, Walter was one of the very few males in America at that time who could play two race cards. In Walter's case, it was akin to him sitting at a poker table and being the only player who was allowed to substitute a King for a Queen, or vice versa, whenever he felt there was an advantage to do it. Naturally, with an advantage like that, Walter would do quite well at a poker table. And at America's racially separated table, Walter, not surprisingly (human nature being what it is), often leaped from one side to the other - that is, whenever it benefited him. Everywhere a black man couldn't go because of the established color line, Walter had no trouble crossing over. He ate at restaurants traditionally reserved for white people. He stayed at any hotel he fancied and went into any white theater or white community he chose to visit. And, again, it's a given that Walter, while in the process of receiving the benefits or services normally reserved for white people, never once revealed he considered himself a Negro. In the area of employment, the most crucial of all stations in life for a male at that time, Walter's appearance turned out to be the deciding factor in his career choice. Weldon Johnson, a Negro, recognized Walter’s appearance as an advantage to the NAACP and arranged a nice paying job for him (Walter was basically hired as a spy for the organization). This was also a time when most urban adult Negro males were unemployed (1918). So Walter was able to secure employment at the NAACP because of the way he looked, and he did quite well there financially, assuming control of the whole organization in 1931 --the beginning of the Great Depression.  Yes, no question about it, Walter, being able to jump the color line whenever he recognized an advantage to be had, was able to live far better than the average Negro male.

     But, of what race did Walter White belong? White? Or Black?  Even though Walter White would never admit it , which was obvious to everyone,  he was in fact a white male. But what about the  one drop rule (one drop of black in your lineage, you're black)? The one drop rule should be regarded exactly as it sounds to rational thinking people : Absurd.  Let's look at it this way...  Appearance equates to what the human being is cognizant of. Walter White’s appearance was Caucasian.  The racial message he conveyed to people then ... was that he was Caucasian. Additionally, let's look at Walter's situation through the DMG Theorem.  According to the Theorem, a Dominant Male Group is composed of males racially, linguistically and religiously similar (including the non-religious).  Walter's appearance was unmistakable Caucasian, he spoke English and he was Christian. Therefore, according to the Theorem and, again, regardless of what Walter believed his racial identity to be, he was a member de jure of the Caucasian race in America (he was an American, not a Negro).

1. There is no evidence Walter's parents were "light skinned negroes". No picture of his parents - strangely - exist. Hmmm.  Could be that little Walter was just so desperately seeking attention...so he claimed he was black. And, of course, among blacks he sure would stand out. People do weird things. Also, I do believe it is genetically impossible for a person to have blond hair and blue eyes and come from even light skinned negroes. No doubt in my mind...Walter's parents were both white. 

Martin L. King's REAL Agenda In Memphis (1968)

<<<  MEET THE UNEMPLOYED BULLIES

                                                                                                                                                                                                        






Law-Abiding White People vs. The Black BULLIES

White People:: “The Negro race is supposed to be separate and be a self-reliant people. There is no constitutional right to integration. What is wrong with building your own towns, cities, industries, tax base, and residential housing? –White people did it.  Or,  colonize a place in America if you insist White people are your brutal oppressor.”

The Black BULLIES:: “No we ain’t gonna do none of that. I mean build nothin’! You gonna SUBMIT to race-nullification, gift us double standards, preferences and set-asides.”

White people:: “Every distinct people must achieve self-reliance. Why, Mr. American Black man, should YOU be the only example in human history where that requirement of achieving self-reliance as a people doesn’t apply?”

Black BULLIES:: ”Yeah, well you don’t tell us NOTHING. We tell you. When we want somthin’ you give it to us. If we ain’t got it, well, you damn well better get it for us.”

                                                                        ——

  In order to invigorate the sanitation workers to the 'cause'  the AFSCME  promised them a whopping 30% pay raise!

The union also raised ‘unsafe working conditions’ for the garbage men. Though a closer examination of this issue showed it actually had no merit to it.  This issue came about because two black males were killed on the job a few weeks before the strike.  When it rained or became cold, it was common practice among the city sanitation workers for the two workers on the back of the truck to sit inside the hopper. Naturally, this is an extremely dangerous thing to do.  If the compactor would somehow engage while they were in the hopper, they would literally get chewed to pieces. And the workers certainly knew the risk.  On a cold and rainy day in January, two black sanitation workers were riding inside the hopper when... Well, you know.

 As for the mayor, he believed the garbage collectors, like the police and firemen, could not legally strike, and he was not going to give them a pass on that.  Which brings us to another aspect of this strike that could not possibly have escaped the mayor's reasoning, or the city council ( 3 of the 9 council members were black). Since the sanitation workers were at the bottom of the pay scale, any percent pay raise they received would be expected by every other city department. That is,  everyone working for the city from the bottom up would be expecting a pay raise - a 30% pay raise.

 By March, and more than two weeks into the strike, the sanitation workers (and the union) had still made no progress on their wage demands - or the checkoff provision. The support for the strikers had at this point grown to include the NAACP and all the black ministers in the area.

 For the blacks, apparently, any issue now where white people appeared on one side and blacks were on the other, and the white guys weren’t knuckling under to the blacks' demands, it then had a tinge of suspect racism attached to it. And if the specter of racism wasn’t there, blacks were more than willing to invent it. When blacks marched through Memphis’ business district on February 23rd, and it was beginning to descend into yet another black male looting and burning episode (Memphis had endured a black male looting and burning less than a year earlier), the police interceded immediately and maced the marchers.  Evidently, some of those maced were black ministers, who seized this opportunity to imply racism on the part of the police by telling the media that they believed it was a deliberate attack on them because they were black. Since the late 50s, urban blacks had won virtually every issue where they employed the tactic of marching into a white community, usually led by black ministers, claiming a denial of their constitutional rights.  In Memphis, however, black ministers and the NAACP were now organizing marches because black sanitation workers wanted higher wages ... and their union was demanding a checkoff provision. This is obviously a horse of a completely different color. Workers do not have a legal right to a higher wage simply because they demand it; nor does a union have a right to a checkoff provision.  Blacks had gotten used to winning through the use of these 'bully' marches, and, it seemed, they weren’t going to settle for anything but winning here. The black strike leaders (the NAACP, black ministers and black union representatives) sent black children into the streets - telling them to skip school - to support the strike and saw no problem with it. They created an illusory racism issue by implying that working conditions were unsafe because the sanitation workers were mostly black, and by implying that police maced black protesters, including ministers, because they were black (what white minister[s] ever marched for higher wages for white workers?). They led marches (with almost entirely black participants) down the streets of Memphis’ business district to deliberately disrupt white businesses and to try to frighten them.  The black strike leaders even urged blacks to boycott white-owned city businesses, even though these businesses had nothing to do with the strike.

 However, even with these bully tactics, the mayor and the city council were not caving in. Black ministers and the NAACP clearly saw they were losing and they were getting desperate. They still had one final card to play:  the 'unemployed'  Martin Luther King.

 On March 3rd, the pastor of Centenary Methodist Church, James Lawson, who was not only a longtime acquaintance of Martin Luther King but was also chairman of the strike committee, pleaded to King to come and help the cause of the strikers. King agreed and made arrangements to come in mid-March.

 As part of a last ditch effort by the mayor to resolve the strike, on March 16th (the strike began on February 11th) he offered the union a compromise, suggesting the voters should approve official recognition of the union (and by so doing give or refuse them their checkoff provision). The black-run union turned it down. The stage was set now for King.

 On March 18th, King arrived in Memphis and gave a speech before a predominantly black audience and promising to return at the end of the month to lead a march.

 No one at this particular time should have been surprised that King would want to get involved in this issue - which had had nothing to do with forced integration. King in 1968 was essentially a man in search of a new purpose for himself and his SCLC organization. His civil-rights agenda had been almost entirely usurped by the Democratic Party, with only one issue from all his civil-rights demands still remaining: integration of the residential communities of the white population. However, King probably lost much of his desire to pursue this issue using his established method of marches. Back in early March of 1966, he and his black followers (no whites would join him on this one) were bombarded with bottles, bricks and rocks in Marquette Park, Ill. , while marching in a white neighborhood demanding whites practice race-nullification with regard to their living arrangements. Afterwards, King commented about his treatment in Marquette Park, saying he had “never seen as much hatred and hostility on the part of so many people.”   The reality here, however, was that King was now marching through a residential neighborhood, not down Main Street. And why shouldn't white males feel threatened?  Hadn't black males over the previous two years looted and burned thousands of white businesses across the country? And hadn’t blacks attacked and even murdered white people in these - all unprovoked - riots solely because they were white?  Hadn’t over one thousand blacks less than seven months earlier in Chicago, completely unprovoked by the police or white people, rioted, which included throwing Molotov cocktails at white police officers?   White people it seems had every right to be suspicious of blacks at this point.  Who's to say they wouldn't charge into white people's homes and perpetrate that same feral behavior?   To white males, the Marquette Park march was a deliberate attempt to threaten their wives and children.  And, last but not least, regarding the housing issue most whites also believed they elected political representatives to deal with this type of grievance.

 To virtually every white male in Marquette Park, King had gone too far this time (whites were still maintaining that blacks should build their own homes, communities, etc.; and still entirely perplexed as to why this male group had to be “allowed in” ... and with no QUID PRO QUO... everywhere white people went: schools, workplace and, now, their residential community). King did initiate one more compulsory integration housing march through Cicero, Illinois, on September 4th; however, this time he had several thousand National Guardsmen protecting him. Since no more marches were conducted by King on this issue after Cicero, and none were planned, it seems that King was just trying to send a message to the white community, as if saying, “See, you didn't scare me. You didn't win. I’m back.”  But clearly, King got the message in Marquette Park.

  With the housing issue proving too dangerous for King to continue to pursue, his abundance of free time now was concentrated on his new project : the Poor People’s Campaign, which was to involve another march on Washington D.C (being a full-time or even part-time pastor apparently no longer interested King).  Pastor Lawson’s plea for help in early March was likely only seen initially by King to be a brief diversion from his project. But certainly as the days passed, King and/or his inner circle of associates had to see the profitable potential in this workers' strike. If King could end this strike to the union’s satisfaction, he would not just be a hero to the union in Memphis. This could be the beginning of a whole new line of business for him and his SCLC organization. Every strike, anywhere in America, King could offer his services - for a substantial fee, of course. What city, what company, what corporation wouldn’t knuckle under to King if he could threaten them by summoning thousands of his people to march down Main Street and deliberately disrupt businesses and community life? Yes, no one should question that ML King was in the beginning stage here of launching a new career -- a shakedown organization.

Martin L. King arrived back in Memphis - as he promised - on March 28th.

  The Martin Luther King Jr. Riot … began on March 28th and lasted throughout the day. About 1000 - mostly blacks - participated in the march toward, and through, the city's [white] business district (King had instructed his people to "ratchet it up"). Once the young black males reached the business district of the city they unleashed their prearranged plan, which was to break into the stores and loot them. One 16-year-old black male looter was killed by police. And though this black-initiated riot lasted only a few hours, black youths still managed to loot and/or burn 150 white-owned businesses. On the evening of the 28th King made a quick apology for the riot then promptly left the city. However, he vowed to return to finish the job. On April 3rd King arrived back in Memphis and was immediately served a federal restraining order at his motel, preventing him from participating in any marches without a court order. The democrats, who ran the local gov't., wanted nothing more to do with King's immature tactics. That afternoon, pastor King, apparently in a jovial mood, asked one of his longtime associates, Ralph Abernathy , to "Come on over here, you big black motherfucker, and let me suck your dick. ..."1. Later that evening King had a pillow fight with Andrew Young, then left for Mason Temple church to give his Mountain Top speech.

On April 4, Martin Luther King Jr. was assassinated.

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

1. Ralph Abernathy Book: And the Walls Came Tumbling Down: An Autobiography

White People Who Believe Black Racism Stories

Most of us do not make up racism stories. However, some do.  I also find it curious that all the racism stories involve black and white - all of them. Motives vary.

1.  Black Hate Crime Hoax:  LB Williams, a 50-year-old black man, and married to a white female,  in the late night hours on November 4, 2011,  placed a wooden cross on his drive way, dowsed it with flammable liquid, then set it on fire. Williams then called police and claimed a hate crime was just committed against him. Williams then left a note taped to his front door so his [white] wife would find it.

“They were watching us, I assumed me and the kids, and that I better not leave that [N-word],” Donna Williams said. The note was signed “KKK.” 

Yes, you read right.  The KKK is warning the white wife NOT to leave the black man.  Hmmm.  It seems the black male was/ is in the process of a divorce  i.e.  he's a mooch and didn't want to be thrown out of her home and forced to provide for himself. Williams has been arrested for filing a false police report, among other offenses.

2.   William Hance (a black male)  in 1978 sent a letter to the Columbus, GA, police dept. telling them that a group  of racists white males were going to retaliate and kill a black female for the recent murders of seven elderly white females in Columbus. A dead black female (Gail Jackson) was then found by police.  However,  police later discovered the letter was a hoax, written by Hance to cover-up his murder of the mentioned black female. Note:  A sadistic black male serial rapist/murder, Carlton Gary, who was still on the loose at that time in Columbus, was responsible for the murders of the seven elderly white females.

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

Honorable Judge James Ware

3.   Judge James Ware invented a story (i.e. the judge lied) about having a brother who was gunned down by racist white teenagers in Alabama in the pre compulsory integration era (pre 1964).  For years people (mainly white people) believed it. Then, someone decided to do some fact-checking. Judge Ware was finally caught in his lie.  Many people believe Mr. Ware used the hoax to advance his career i.e. to make white people pity him.

4.   Yet Another Hate Crime Hoax:   "Officials say 21-year-old [black female] UW-Parkside junior Khalilah Ford, of Louisville, Kentucky, confessed to creating [an African American] hit list found on campus.
Kenosha County Sheriff. Bill Beth says Ford’s name was the only name to appear spelled correctly on the hit list, and that was a big clue for detectives." SOURCE


5.   -- I recently read on a blog site about a guy who claimed in 1972 his [white] 89-year-old grandfather told him about a terrible lynching incident that occurred in 1912,  It involved three lynched black men that were found, and witnessed by gramps himself,  hanging from the rafters in a barn; and that lynching blacks (according to gramps) was not only a regular occurrence in the city back then but the white guys actually did it for sport - just for the fun it. The city was Cincinnati.

However, had the author did a little research he would have discovered that the lynching story was just a tall tale.  For instance, the Tuskegee Institute, which recorded lynching incidents beginning in 1882, reported no lynchings in Cincinnati for the year 1912. (Between 1882 and 1968, Tuskegee Institute reported 16 blacks lynched in Ohio - none in Cincinnati.  Oh, and how many of those lynched blacks were lynched by blacks? Tuskegee Institute doesn't have the answer to that one.

   Finally, the NAACP, which established its Cincinnati branch in 1915, also does not report in any of its literature that black men were being lynched in the city of Cincinnati.   

As incredibility reckless journalism as his narrative was, what I found to even more incredibly reckless, however,  was all the comments the white male received in his comment section.  Every single comment (most were white) contained one or all of these: (1) told him it was a great story; (2) what a horrible time it was in American history for blacks; (3) we've come such a long way since those terrible times, but more work is needed.  In other words, not one of those who commented bothered to do any fact-checking either. Every one of them bought the tall tale.


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

6.  Dr. Madonna G. Constantine, a former Columbia professor, was fired in 2008 for plagiarism. She also, many believe, hung a noose on her own office door, then reported a racist act against her. And the motive for this? It would lend credence to her attack on the university (where [white] people still hang nooses) for practicing “institutional racism” against her. She has forced the university to defend itself in three separate lawsuits related to her firing. 

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

Lying black female Tawana Brawley


7.   Tawana Brawley, a 15-year-old black female, in 1987 accused six white men of rape and smearing dog feces on her.  Brawley's story was proven to be a complete fabrication. She later absconded with over $200,000, which was donated - by gullible people - for her defense. There are those who claim she made up her rape story because she was out too late and feared what her stepfather might do as punishment. But if that was the case, why involve six white males? - and something guaranteed to make headline news. Police later believed her stepfather and mother were willing participants in the hoax ... to destroy the lives of six white males, that neither of them had ever met.

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

 And for those who want many, many more examples of blacks inventing racism incidents, here's a good link:  http://www.westernrevival.org/hate_crimes.htm

And,

http://www.landlordpolitics.com/mattson1.html

And, 

Courtney Thomas, 18, wrote a message on the bathroom stall..." It named five African American students including Courtney himself… and said they would be lynched and kill" SOURCE

8.  Made-Up Story to make people SUBMIT to her guilt-tripping>>LINK

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

  Pavlov's Dogs' Syndrome

  There does appear to be a pattern, a formula if you will, to all of these made up stories: All the stories have blacks as their victim(s) … and are intended for the ears of oh so many gullible white people out there.  And it's obvious to me today that many white people actually do seem to crave these stories. Why?  My theory is that Americans over the last 45 years (since the launching of Compulsory Inclusionism in 1964), through Hollywood movies and TV shows, as well as through their educational system (i.e the rewriting of their history), have been taught by implication that American white Christians  are simply the most wicked of all people in human history.  And why are they so wicked?  The wickedness seems to emanate primarily from ONE thing: the failure of white people all over America to instantly commit to race-nullification when the black race migrated to the Anglo-created urban centers of  America  between 1865 and 1968 (white people, that is, were being racist).  This failure to integrate created, so white people have been programmed to believe, incalculable suffering for the black race; and in which blacks still suffer the haunting lingering effects from it to this very day. So when white people hear stories of black victimization by their people, like Pavlov's dogs ... they are conditioned to :: (1) purge themselves of guilt and tell the world how much they despise racism;  (2) they are not one of those hate-filled white people - of which they also feel duty-bound to remind us all that there is still oh so many racists white people still out there; (3) they feel deep sorrow and deep pity for the helpless and victimized black victim(s).  When their conditioned purging process is complete ... the white people feel good about themselves. However, since the programming is a never-ending process, so too must the purging be never-ending. Every story they hear, whether it sounds true or not, they are overwhelmed by the need to purge themselves -- so they can feel good. And on and on it goes...

By the way, does anyone know of any K -12 school literature, Hollywood produced movie or TV show addressing the issue of racism and the perpetrators are not white Christian males?

http://theinjusticefile.blogspot.com/2011/01/black-violence-white-victims-part-i_09.html 

The Moynihan Report - An Unheeded WARNING

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

* 1965 *

The Moynihan Report

 Daniel Patrick Moynihan was a liberal democrat who was appointed by President Kennedy to be Assistant Secretary of Labor and stayed on during the Johnson Administration. In 1965, Moynihan produced a report on the then current state of the Negro family in America. The primary purpose of the the report was to inform America that the Negro family was in major crisis, due - as Moynihan saw it - to the cycle of poverty bred by an unstable family unit (specifically in urban America).  Moynihan also decided to use his report to provide an explanation for the economic differences between the white race and the black race (white people's standard of living was, obviously, much higher than blacks).   In  Moynihan's subjective opinion , he basically attributed the lower standard of living by black people in America to the legacy of slavery. Yes, this was nice safe ground, as no one could prove him wrong. But rather than staying within the safe ground of the legacy of slavery, Moynihan decided, no doubt in an effort to appear to be fair-minded, to venture into the realm of "competence testing,"  suggesting that nature itself could very well be playing a part in creating the economic disparity between the two racial groups. That is,  white people may be endowed with a higher degree of intelligence than blacks.  Of course, self-anointed leaders from the black race were furious. Moynihan's suggestion also contradicted the ideology he inferred the gov’t was now committing itself to regarding black economic desolation (the legacy of slavery was the root caused for the economic problems of the black race).  

The report ended up costing Moynihan his job. 1

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

     End of the Beginning : The Report began with a declaration that America was now in a new state of affairs, that there had been a “Negro American revolution”.  Negroes had achieved their integration (with the help of the Johnson and Kennedy Administrations). Now there was an “End of the Beginning”. They (blacks) had won something no male group had ever won : the “right” to be integrated into another race’s social stratification system - though it need also be mentioned that no other male group ever demanded such a  thing in human history. The next step for blacks (actually the federal government's next step) was “equality.”  But equality for the blacks was to have a different meaning.  According to the Moynihan Report:

“The demand for Equality of Opportunity has been generally perceived by white Americans as a demand for liberty, a demand not to be excluded from the competitions of life - at the polling place, in the scholarship examinations, at the personnel office, on the housing market. Liberty does, of course, demand that everyone be free to try his luck, or test his skill in such matters. But these opportunities do not necessarily produce equality: on the contrary, to the extent that winners imply losers, equality of opportunity almost insures inequality of results.

The point of semantics is that equality of opportunity now has a different meaning for Negroes than it has for whites. It is not (or at least no longer) a demand for liberty alone, but also for equality - in terms of group results.” 

In other words people, blacks, as a racial group,  must be equal in all things with white people. That is, all statistical economic differences must be racially level.   And how was this new definition of equality to be achieved for the American Negro?  By integration , taxation and new government programs. 

Moynihan then points out the true crux of the failings of the black race in America (as the white liberals saw it) : the disintegration of the black  family unit.  

“The evidence -- not final, but powerfully persuasive -- is that the Negro family in the urban ghettos is crumbling. A middle-class group has managed to save itself, but for vast numbers of the unskilled, poorly educated city working class the fabric of conventional social relationships has all but disintegrated. There are indications that the situation may have been arrested in the past few years, but the general post-war trend is unmistakable. So long as this situation persists, the cycle of poverty and disadvantage will continue to repeat itself.”

Also,

“The white family has achieved a high degree of stability and is
maintaining that stability. By contrast, the family structure of lower
class Negroes is highly unstable, and in many urban centers is
approaching complete breakdown.”

And what caused this family breakdown?  Well, Moynihan (and the Johnson Administration) couldn’t very well blame the black males (or their cultural constraints - their non-Occupational Ranking nature), so he cites:

“…three centuries of exploitation [slavery and, after 1865, the white man‘s failure to commit to race-nullification] …” “Here the consequences of the historic injustices done to Negro Americans are silent and hidden from view. But here is where the true injury has occurred: unless this damage is repaired, all the effort to end discrimination and poverty and injustice will come to little.”

But how is the Negro family going to be repaired so they could achieve “equality as a group” with the white population?

In Moynihan’s summation he makes it clear that his report is only about “defining a problem” (all related to slavery) and not to “propose solutions to [fix] it.”  However, the solution is obvious: massive government intervention into urban black life. What else could possibly be the reason to produce such a report?

Then Moynihan decided to bring up two issues, undoubtedly in an effort to be fair-minded. 

The first issue concerned "competence".

“The ultimate mark of inadequate preparation for life is the failure rate on the Armed Forces mental test. The Armed Forces Qualification Test is not quite a mental test, nor yet an education test. It is a test of ability to perform at an acceptable level of competence. It roughly measures ability that ought to be found in an average 7th or 8th grade student. A grown young man who cannot pass this test is in trouble. Fifty-six percent of Negroes fail it. This is a rate almost four times that of the whites.”

The second issue concerned the Negro male's abandonment of his children.

“It may be noted, for example, that for most of the post-war period male Negro unemployment and the number of new AFDC cases rose and fell together as if connected by a chain from 1948 to 1962. The correlation between the two series of data was astonishing. (This would mean that 83 percent of the rise and fall in AFDC cases can be statistically ascribed to the rise and fall in the unemployment rate.) In 1960, however, for the first time, unemployment declined, but the number of new AFDC cases rose [black males had more jobs but black females with children were filing for more government assistance]. In 1963 this happened a second time.  In 1964 a third. The possible implications of these and other data are serious enough that they, too, should be understood before program proposals are made.” 

The inference in these final two observations here are important as they are ominous. (1) How can the educational system be the suggestive route to opportunity and advancement for the black race if less than half of the black males - for whatever reasons - are only able to reach the performance level more indicative of a child than an adult? (2)  How can the government expect to “fix” the Negro urban family (by employing black males and forcing integration into white male-created work groups) if the monies from these jobs are not going to be used - by the Negro males - to support his family?

Time would tell... 

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

1.  After this report was made public, and even though members of the media (print or TV)  and academia refused to delve into the inferences made by Moynihan, nevertheless, President Johnson immediately banished him from his administration.  Black self-anointed leaders claimed he was being racist. 

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)     
          

•  ALL White-On-Black Violent Crimes 
•  White Male SUCKER PUNCH - Black Victims 
•  American (White Male) Initiated Riots - Flashpoints (1900 to 1964)   
•  Redefining A Society
• White Violence - Black Victims -- Imagery Of Innocent Black People Victimized By Whites Since Compulsory Integration Was Created

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

                       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 Privilege - CASHING IN On Lawsuits Against White-Owned Businesses 
• Where Do Wealthy Blacks Live ? 

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

                    BLACK  HISTORICAL  EVENTS &  HISTORICAL  FIGURES

•   African-American Committed Atrocities from 1900 to 1964
•   American-Initiated Riots - Flashpoints (1900 to 1964) 
•  Rosewood Massacre (1923) What Really Happened 
•  Ossian Sweet - Detroit 1925 - A Planned Massacre 
•  Martin L. King's REAL Agenda In Memphis (1968)
•  Watts RIOT (1965) - The Beginning Of Black-Intiated Riots 
•  Charitable Giving of White Toward Black In American History (1865 to 1964)
•  NAACP- Its Real Creators - Its Real Purpose   
•  W.E.B. DuBois
•  Marcus Garvey
• The Pink Franklin Case & The NAACP 
•  Blacks  Who  Lynched  Blacks -- Truth Behind American Lynchings
•  The Houston Negro MASSACRE (1917)
• George Stinney - An Atrocity Being Rewritten
• Compulsory Inclusionism (Civil Rights) -Those Who Died Pursuing Integration
• Industrialization & Urbanization - Negroes Migrate To Anglo-Built Cites
• The 'NO GUILT' Evolution Of Integration (Civil Rights) 
                                          

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

•  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) 
                                   --------------------------------------------