Ugly, anti-white insinuation
I've written it a hundred times if I've written it once; I don't know if whites are more racist than blacks or if blacks are more racist that whites. I simply don't know of any study that has considered the question.
It doesn't stop the race-baiters from using ugly, coded language that accepts "racial profiling" is only a white on black problem.
A letter I sent to the Boston Globe today:
Editor,
Mr. Derrick Z. Jackson is disingenuous, at best, when he writes, “The Justice Department last week released more data showing that African-Americans and Latinos are still much more likely to be searched and arrested with force than white drivers who are pulled over (The eloquence of Ellison’s invisible man, May 6, E9).”
First, I searched the Department of Justice (DOJ) website and, as of this writing, the underlying report supporting the DOJ abstract that suggests the above statement has not been made available on the DOJ site so the details beneath the “conclusions” are not yet public.
Second, we know from a July 2003 Boston Globe follow-up study to its own February 2003 study that minority police officers, at least in the city of Boston, are tougher on other minorities (Minority officers are stricter on minorities, July 20, 2003).
I reproduce the meaningful segments from the opening sentences from the July Boston Globe article, “When police departments are accused of racial profiling, white officers are generally the ones facing scrutiny. But a Boston Globe analysis of 20,000 Boston police tickets and warnings tells a different story: Minority officers here are at least as tough as whites on minority drivers, and sometimes tougher . . . minority officers were less lenient overall, issuing fewer warnings to all drivers . . . and the racial gap was wider, with minority officers ticketing 43 percent of whites and 54 percent of minorities at the same speeds, the Globe found . . . further, the records show that black officers were toughest on Latino drivers, ticketing 67 percent of Latinos, but just 47 percent of blacks.”
I look forward to reading the complete DOJ report when it is finally released. I’ll be curious, as everyone else concerned about improving race-relations is curious, to know if the DOJ noted the race of the police officer in its statistics. (End of letter.)
I know a ton about both of the Boston Globe studies because after the first study was published I wrote the author, former Boston Globe Correspondent, Mr. Bill Dedman, and said the results of the study would have been more helpful if we knew the race of the police officers involved in the traffic stops. He replied that the race of the police officer was not required, traffic stop data for any of the Massachusetts towns (it is now, though).
Six months later, out of the blue, I receive an email from Mr. Dedman alerting me to a new study and the results that were going to run in the Boston Globe the very next day. The new study will have data related to the race of the police officer. I cited some of the key statistics in the letter above.
If you visit the DOJ site, by the way, there is disclaimer language in the abstract that warns no conclusions can be made about racial profiling. This disclaimer was harmful to Mr. Jackson's propaganda so he chose to ignore it. Now there's a surprise.
I've written it a hundred times if I've written it once; I don't know if whites are more racist than blacks or if blacks are more racist that whites. I simply don't know of any study that has considered the question.
It doesn't stop the race-baiters from using ugly, coded language that accepts "racial profiling" is only a white on black problem.
A letter I sent to the Boston Globe today:
Editor,
Mr. Derrick Z. Jackson is disingenuous, at best, when he writes, “The Justice Department last week released more data showing that African-Americans and Latinos are still much more likely to be searched and arrested with force than white drivers who are pulled over (The eloquence of Ellison’s invisible man, May 6, E9).”
First, I searched the Department of Justice (DOJ) website and, as of this writing, the underlying report supporting the DOJ abstract that suggests the above statement has not been made available on the DOJ site so the details beneath the “conclusions” are not yet public.
Second, we know from a July 2003 Boston Globe follow-up study to its own February 2003 study that minority police officers, at least in the city of Boston, are tougher on other minorities (Minority officers are stricter on minorities, July 20, 2003).
I reproduce the meaningful segments from the opening sentences from the July Boston Globe article, “When police departments are accused of racial profiling, white officers are generally the ones facing scrutiny. But a Boston Globe analysis of 20,000 Boston police tickets and warnings tells a different story: Minority officers here are at least as tough as whites on minority drivers, and sometimes tougher . . . minority officers were less lenient overall, issuing fewer warnings to all drivers . . . and the racial gap was wider, with minority officers ticketing 43 percent of whites and 54 percent of minorities at the same speeds, the Globe found . . . further, the records show that black officers were toughest on Latino drivers, ticketing 67 percent of Latinos, but just 47 percent of blacks.”
I look forward to reading the complete DOJ report when it is finally released. I’ll be curious, as everyone else concerned about improving race-relations is curious, to know if the DOJ noted the race of the police officer in its statistics. (End of letter.)
I know a ton about both of the Boston Globe studies because after the first study was published I wrote the author, former Boston Globe Correspondent, Mr. Bill Dedman, and said the results of the study would have been more helpful if we knew the race of the police officers involved in the traffic stops. He replied that the race of the police officer was not required, traffic stop data for any of the Massachusetts towns (it is now, though).
Six months later, out of the blue, I receive an email from Mr. Dedman alerting me to a new study and the results that were going to run in the Boston Globe the very next day. The new study will have data related to the race of the police officer. I cited some of the key statistics in the letter above.
If you visit the DOJ site, by the way, there is disclaimer language in the abstract that warns no conclusions can be made about racial profiling. This disclaimer was harmful to Mr. Jackson's propaganda so he chose to ignore it. Now there's a surprise.
posted by Zack at 9:03 PM
1 Comments:
Everybody says there is this RACE problem. Everybody says this RACE problem will be solved when the third world pours into EVERY white country and ONLY into white countries.
The Netherlands and Belgium are more crowded than Japan or Taiwan, but nobody says Japan or Taiwan will solve this RACE problem by bringing in millions of third worlders and quote assimilating unquote with them.
Everybody says the final solution to this RACE problem is for EVERY white country and ONLY white countries to "assimilate," i.e., intermarry, with all those non-whites.
What if I said there was this RACE problem and this RACE problem would be solved only if hundreds of millions of non-blacks were brought into EVERY black country and ONLY into black countries?
How long would it take anyone to realize I'm not talking about a RACE problem. I am talking about the final solution to the BLACK problem?
And how long would it take any sane black man to notice this and what kind of psycho black man wouldn't object to this?
But if I tell that obvious truth about the ongoing program of genocide against my race, the white race, Liberals and respectable conservatives agree that I am a naziwhowantstokillsixmillionjews.
They say they are anti-racist. What they are is anti-white.
Anti-racist is a code word for anti-white.
Post a Comment
<< Home