AFFIRMATIVE ACTION - DISASTROUS CONSEQUENCES

     I have written elsewhere about the disaster of affirmative action, and the theory under-girding it.  That theory is that because all people are equal, then all groups are equally talented in all fields.  Consequently, all groups should attain the top posts in direct proportion to the group's percentage of the population.  If they do not achieve at a proportional rate, the reason must be discrimination (unless good lawyers can take on the numerous attorneys of the Civil Rights Division of the US Department of Justice.  Even if a business rejects DoJ demands and goes to court, even if a business wins, the expense of taking on the DoJ is so expensive that a court victory for a business is Pyrrhic.  Sears won such a case, but the cost was prohibitive, and it soon caved to the quota demands of the DoJ.  Of course, quotas were outlawed in the Civil Rights Act of 1964, but that has not stopped the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and the DoJ.  They have called their demands for quotas a requirement for establishing minority (or female) hiring goals and timetables [the goal was basically a quota, and the timetable the time allotted to hire minorities to achieve the goal or quota], or the DoJ demands an end to any policy that results in "disparate impact" on minorities - meaning they do not get their quota of jobs, etc.  The more popular word for quotas today is "diversity."  The result of all the quota hiring and promotion is simple: merit has been trumped by skin color, gender, or ethnos.  No longer the quality of character, or the qualification for the job; what matters to the DoJ and the US Federal Government is simply race, ethnicity, and gender quotas.  This disastrous system has spread to other Western nations, with different names such as affirmative or positive discrimination in the UK.
    Although I have written about the disastrous consequences of these programs in the abstract, I include the fine article by Nicholas Stix for specific examples of how badly this system unfolds over time.  The war against testing was often led by Eleanor Holmes Norton in the EEOC under Pres. Jimmy Carter.  But judges agreed with her.  In reality, the war on testing was another assault in the war on whites, who invariably outperformed Blacks and Hispanics on examinations.  Testing under Pres. Carter was so restricted that it became too expensive to use in sifting possible employees or promotees.  Criminal background checks, high school grade checks, drug testing, all were deemed racist because they had a disparate impact upon possible minority applicants.  So often, these type of checks were abandoned.
     What are the results of affirmative action?  Read the following article.---Hugh Murray

Diversity Is Strength! It’s Also…Forensic Science Scandals

By Nicholas Stix on January 19, 2014 at 6:27pm

Annie Khan Dookhan

 “Don’t ask, don’t tell” (DADT), may be dead in the military, but it is very much alive in the world of diversity hiring. ‘We won’t ask if you are qualified, and don’t tell if you aren’t.’

Law enforcement and criminal justice rely on modern, First-World police science—medical examiners, crime scene investigators, ballistics experts and forensic scientists. These people conduct autopsies; gather evidence at crime scenes; dust for fingerprints; test-fire and examine suspected murder weapons and ammunition; and weigh and test substances suspected to be drugs in narcotics cases.

If the “experts” are incompetent and/or dishonest, countless innocent people will be doomed to spend years in prison, some may even be executed, while the guilty will go free.

Thanks to the blessings of diversity, America has now reached this level of Keystone Kop police science.

• In Boston on November 22, Trinidadian-born Annie Khan Dookhan [pictured above] pled guilty to 27 counts of “obstruction of justice, perjury, and tampering with evidence,” during the ten years that she was a Massachusetts state police chemist, and was sentenced by Suffolk County Superior Court Judge Carol S. Ball to three-to-five years in prison, and two years’ probation.

Judge Ball said:

“[T]he consequences of her behavior, which she ought to have foreseen, have been nothing short of catastrophic…. Innocent persons were incarcerated, guilty persons have been released to further endanger the public, millions and millions of public dollars are being expended to deal with the chaos Ms. Dookhan created, and the integrity of the criminal justice system has been shaken to the core."

[Chemist who falsified drug tests in criminal cases goes to jail herself by Fabien Tepper, Christian Science Monitor, November 22, 2013.]

Dookhan’s misconduct-tainted cases involving over 40,000 defendants. So far, almost 350 convicted defendants have been released, and the state crime lab where Dookhan worked for ten years has been shuttered.

Dookhan lied in claiming to have a master’s degree in chemistry from the University of Massachusetts. All Human Resources had to do was contact the school where she claimed to have earned it. But it would be “racist” to scrutinize a diversity applicant’s bona fides.

While Dookhan was working ever more rapidly, her colleagues’ work had slowed down, due to a Supreme Court decision requiring drug analysts to appear in court. Quality control should have caught what she was up to—except that she was the head of quality control! She also violated security, and deliberately contaminated thousands of samples.

Finally, Dookhan maliciously claimed that thousands of samples that she had not tested—that’s how she could “complete” her work so rapidly—had tested positive for narcotics, and on top of that, lied about their weights, so as to turn offenses into higher-level crimes entailing longer sentences.

Dookhan was only caught when she forged a colleague’s initials on documents to remove samples she had no business touching.

My reader-researcher RC wrote,

She's a twofer: A person of color as well as female.

How much will Taxachusetts pay to those whose civil rights were violated thanks to her falsified drug tests?

The answer: Potentially billions.

At least the winsome Dookhan has confessed to most of her crimes, and shown contrition. But what made her commit them?

Some observers suggested she sought to impress her superiors. However, I believe the simplest explanation is: she did it because she could. Dookhan worked in an institution in which, previously, applicants were thoroughly vetted prior to hiring, and worked in a secure environment under strong normative constraints on their behavior. But because she was a diversity hire, she found herself in a state of moral anomie, in which there was no vetting, security, or institutional constraints on her behavior. She was the proverbial kid in the candy shop.

Dookhan was merely the latest diversity police science scandal.

• Joyce Gilchrist

Gilchrist [above] was a legendary, black Oklahoma City Police Department forensic chemist whose (initially non-ironic) nickname was “Black Magic,” because for 21 years she was the consummate expert witness, her credibility unchallenged—until 2001:

“Oklahoma City Police Chief M.T. Berry on Tuesday fired forensic chemist Joyce Gilchrist, whose lab techniques and testimony have been under scrutiny by federal, state and local investigators for several months.

“Gilchrist, 53, was fired for a variety of reasons, including "laboratory mismanagement, criticism from court challenges and flawed casework analysis," according to a police statement.

[Police chief fires chemist after review by Ken Raymond, The Oklahoman, September 26, 2001.]

As I wrote in 2003 for Middle American News,

For years, Gilchrist’s critics claimed she had falsified evidence and given false testimony, which caused 23 men to be sentenced to death, eleven of whom were executed.

[NBC’s Law & Order: Entertainment Serving the Elite by Nicholas Stix, Middle American News, September, 2003]

Gilchrist has steadfastly insisted that she is innocent of any wrongdoing. She has never been criminally charged.

Millions of Americans learned about the Gilchrist scandal, when it was dramatized in 2001, in a “ripped from the headlines” episode of the popular TV series, Law & Order, “Myth of Fingerprints.”

But, following the m.o. of liberal producer Dick Wolf’s show, hisscriptwriters changed the rogue, black police chemist into a blonde, white woman. [“Lisa Russo”, played by Diana Scarwid, right ].

Also unlike reality, the fictionalized chemist was prosecuted, convicted, and imprisoned.

• Jonathan Salvador

Everyone who worked with Jonathan Salvador in Houston described him as a friendly, hard-working young man, who wanted to improve his work. Unfortunately, as he later admitted, he was in hopelessly over his head. Although he was a police chemist at a Texas Department of Public Safety lab, he did not understand chemistry.

Nevertheless, Salvador’s superiors were pleased with him, and he failed his way up the ladder. He was only caught when he substituted the drug lab results from one court case on an unrelated case. Suspended in February 2012, Salvador was either fired or quit in August, 2012 (reports conflict):

“[A]fter falsifying evidence, and acting ‘with total disregard for policy and procedure,’ according to an inspector general's report.”

[Area prosecutors interpret duties to justice differently by Lisa Falkenberg, Houston Chronicle, March 19, 2013.]

And now, the verdicts in some 4,900 narcotics cases are in jeopardy. So far, 18 convictions have been overturned on which Salvador did lab work—for example,  this one.

A grand jury heard testimony on Salvador’s case last year, but did not indict him.

“A Texas state police crime lab scientist whose shoddy work may have tainted thousands of drug cases had been promoted despite a history of problems doing accurate and timely work, according a review by the Texas Forensic Science Commission.

“A commission report adopted Friday found that Houston crime lab worker Jonathan Salvador struggled with chemistry, was told to correct his work in about a third of his cases and, according to his supervisors, routinely scrambled to keep up with monthly work expectations.

[Texas crime lab worker had history of poor work; Review: despite shoddy work, worker moved up the ladder, WPRC News, April 5, 2013.]

On paper, Gilchrist, Dookhan, and Salvador were all qualified. They all had the requisite college degrees. And yet, they were all utterly unqualified.

Such scandals could have easily been prevented by exercising the hard-won knowledge that has grown out of generations of the development of tools such as college admissions and professional tests. But such tests had been ruled “racist” because blacks, Hispanics, and many other non-white groups did not do as well, on average, as whites and Northeast Asians did.

And so, in the mid-1960s, colleges began a massive program ofsotto voce Affirmative Action, whereby first blacks, then members of all sorts of groups who on average could not come remotely close to meeting admissions requirements, were admitted. Once admitted, these students enjoyed collegiate social promotion and grade inflation.

Affirmative Action got a boost from the Supreme Court in 1971, when the Court ruled in Griggs v. Duke Power that requiring job tests of applicants, or for promotions within a firm was a form of racial discrimination, since blacks (who have a lower average IQ, 78-85, than whites, who average 100) don’t do as well on them, on average, as whites.

Griggs resulted in millions of young people being forced to attend college for no good reason, at great expense in time and money, to receive a substitute IQ test in the form of a college degree. This made Higher Ed, despite its constant cries of poverty, much richer and more powerful. However, faculty and officials engaged in ever more aggressive Affirmative Action, and thereby destroyed the value of the bachelor’s degree, and then even graduate degrees.

When companies that still care about quality seek valid but informal selection mechanisms, such as not hiring applicants with black underclass names like S---avious, academic pseudo-scholars accuse them of—what else?—racism. And if anyone dares notice this pattern of advantaging incompetents “of color,” followed by scandals, thesame pseudo-scholars and activists cry “racism!”

There is no viable solution to the vicious cycle of Affirmative Action. An immigration moratorium would stop the scourge of additional waves of incompetent Third Worlders, but would not solve the problem of a country that has been kidnapped by racial socialists. For that malady, stronger medicine is indicated.

Nicholas Stix [email him] is a New York City-based journalist and researcher, much of whose work focuses on the nexus of race, crime, and education. He spent much of the 1990s teaching college in New York and New Jersey. His work has appeared in Chronicles, The New York Post, Weekly Standard, Daily News, New York Newsday, American Renaissance, Academic Questions, Ideas on Liberty and many other publications. Stix was the project director and principal author of the NPI report, The State of White America-2007. He blogs at Nicholas Stix, Uncensored.

TROUBLEMAKING UNPUNISHED IS TROUBLEMAKING ENCOURAGED

     For a few years now the Left has pushed in the media and in the schools various anti-bullying programs.  The point was to expose and then stop bullying.  It was a commendable policy.  However, now the Obama/Holder Administration is attempting to prevent schools from suspending, expelling, or arresting the real bullies and criminals in the schools. What the new guidelines are trying to do is to insure that if a school is composed of 20% Blacks, then only 20% of the suspensions should be of the Blacks students.  Sounds good, but it is totally divorced from reality.  It is like saying Blacks should not be convicted of murder more than their percentage of the population.  But Blacks as a group commit murder far more than whites or Asians.  Should you not convict them even if they are guilty of murder?  Or should you convict an innocent white just to make the percentages more equal and reduce the percentage gap?

     The theory behind Attorney General Holder's new guidelines, disparage impact, is based on the view that there are no differences between the races.  Blacks, whites, Asians, Amerindians, Aboriginals, are all equally alike in all abilities.  If the percentage of engineers is higher in one group than others, then it is the result of poverty and discrimination.  If more Blacks are expelled from school, it is due to discrimination against Blacks.  Therefore, the need to stress the new guidelines.  Obama/Holder are simply attempting to end discrimination.

     Of course the Left not only stresses that all races are equal, but that gender, like race is a social construct.  Just as all races are equal, by definition, so men and women are equal, by definition.  If Blacks or women are less likely to be engineers than white or Asian males, it is not because they are unqualified, it is due to discrimination.  Well, because Blacks are more likely to be expelled from school, it is not because they are more disruptive, only because of racist discrimination against them.  That is the ideological basis for Holder's new guidelines.  Look again.  Male students are far more likely to be expelled than female students.  Far more likely.  Since males and females are essentially the same, according to the Left, does this not prove discrimination in the schools against males?  The percentage expelled, male and female, should be the same, just as the racial percentages ought to be the same under Holder's view.  Look at the disparate impact, the percentage differences in expelling male and female students!  Either stop expelling so many males, or start expelling more females.  Why doesn't Holder include the sexual disparity of expulsions in his guidelines?

     In the end, the Left ideology is based upon unreality.  Gender may be a social construct, but it is based in each culture upon the essential, natural differences between males and females.  It is not constructed from thin air, but from the basic hormonal, physical, and other differences between males and females.  And though it is taboo to mention it, there are good reasons to think there are essential differences between and among the races.  Medicines for one group may not work the same for the other.  It may not be a coincidence that marathon winners often come from a small area in East Africa.  And there may me essential reasons, natural reasons that females and Blacks compose fewer engineers than other groups.  It may not be discrimination; it may be the result of nature.

     And what about that student allegedly found with marijuana and with what may have been stolen jewelry in his rucksack?  Had he been arrested, instead of merely suspended, Trayvon Martin might not have been roaming around another neighborhood, attacking a man wary of suspicious characters in the burglarized neighborhood.  It is because the system is too easy, too light on troublemakers, that they are encouraged to get into more trouble. 

     [Nicholas Stix at vdare.com wrote this about Trayvon Martin: But, ironically, the most startling fruit of the Obama/Holder campaign is the death of Trayvon Martin—blown up into a hoaxperpetrated  by the Main Stream Media/ Democrat complex to set the stage for Obama’s re-election.

[Miami-Dade School Police had caught the young thug and thief Martin vandalizing lockers. A search of his bag then turned up stolen jewelry and a screwdriver, which the officer described as a “burglary tool.”

[Proper police procedure would have been to arrest Martin on suspicion of burglary, and turn over the evidence to prosecutors. But instead, the officer, “Darryl Dunn, falsified police records and referred criminal behavior to school discipline.” That was in order to help achieve Miami police Chief Charles Hurley’s objective of “crime reduction.” [Trayvon and The Miami-Dade School Police Department – Redacted FOIA Newly Released – Former Police Chief Charles Hurley by Sundance, The Last Refuge, June 27, 2013. Note that a blog, not the MSM, uncovered this scandal].

[But had Trayvon Martin been prosecuted, he would likely not have been staying at his father’s girlfriend’s home the night he attempted to murder George Zimmerman. He might well still be alive today.

[This police corruption predates Obama/ Holder, going back at least to the early 1990s, creating the fictional national “crime reduction” that I have repeatedly exposed (here,  here, and here).

[In contradiction to Obama/ Holder, as I showed in The State of White America-2007, black school violence against white students is in fact rampant, and has made many schools education-free zones.

[Moreover, historian Raymond Wolters showed in The Burden of Brown and other works that black school violence is as old as school integration. He reports that, back in the 1950s, the NAACP insisted that black students could and would assimilate to white norms whilesegregationists argued that, due to habit and temperament, blacks would never meet white standards. And sure enough, as soon as schools began to integrate, black students refused to follow the rules. They routinely cursed, disrupted classes, engaged in heretofore unseen violence and vandalism, and routinely sexually molested white girls. The NAACP’s response: to scream “Racism!”

As NAACP chief counsel Thurgood Marshall, by then a Supreme Court justice, would brag to his white colleague, William O. Douglas 20 years later: “Now it’s our turn.”]

Brown had never been about fairness. It had always been about theracial conquest.  

     Many Blacks who attend school perform poorly compared to others.  They may be older than others in the class. They may well be more disruptive.  But now schools are told to ignore that, do not suspend, do not expel.  Result: more and more will become disruptive.  It is a prescription for chaos and more and more bullying.  It is a policy so detrimental to education, that it is one expected from the Obama Administration.  The Obama Administration shows that it is the defender of the Bullies and the enemy of real education in America.  

     Hugh Murray

Obama Administration Guidelines Could Lead to Racial Quotas in School Discipline

Ben Wolfgang, Washington Times, January 8, 2014

How discipline is doled out in the classroom now will be under much closer scrutiny by the federal government, but some analysts say the Obama administration’s efforts ultimately may backfire and could lead to de facto racial quotas in American schools.  [That is precisely what the Obama/Holder Administration wants.---HM]

The Education Department and the Justice Department on Wednesday issued new “guidance” to ensure minority students aren’t punished through suspension, expulsion or other means more than their white peers. The administration cited legal authority under Titles IV and VI in offering detailed rules for how school districts can administer discipline.

...But within its guidance, most of which is not controversial and merely reinforces existing nondiscrimination laws, the administration also declares that schools’ disciplinary policies cannot have a “disparate impact” on one particular group.

In plain terms, it means district rules, guidelines and enforcement cannot result in the punishment of more black students than white students for the same offense, for example.

With that in mind, school leaders surely will keep a close eye on whether the same number of children from given racial groups are disciplined in equal number and equal measure for the same behavior.

“You have to make certain that your school discipline cases match those percentages. If you don’t, you’ll have the feds on your doorstep,” said Joshua Dunn, a political science professor at the University of Colorado and director of the university’s Center for Legal Studies. “If they actually do enforce these guidelines, there will be unintended consequences. This creates some rather destructive incentives. I don’t think there’s any way around that.”

Chief among those negative incentives, Mr. Dunn said, will be that teachers, principals and other school personnel may hesitate to punish a minority student for a particular offense out of fear that they will appear prejudiced or that their actions will result in disproportionate effects on one racial group.

Taken to the extreme, such a scenario could lead to even bigger problems, some specialists say.

“Eventually, you’ll have disorder in schools. . . . They either suspend white students for relatively trivial things or they don’t punish black students for behavior that is really disruptive or even violent,” said Hans Bader, a senior attorney at the Competitive Enterprise Institute. “You’re effectively commanding them to have racial quotas” with respect to which students are disciplined and how often.

...While the guidance itself is non-binding and carries no additional legal weight, the federal government theoretically could cut funding to states or local school districts if they have violated Title VI, which specifically prohibits discrimination based on race, sex or national origin.

Obama's New America: Black Savagery Unpunished

CRIME UNPUNISHED IS CRIME ENCOURAGED - Hugh Murray
This is from Frontpage.com a site conducted by David Horowitz.  Colin Flaherty wrote the informative book, White Girl Bleed a Lot, one that I reviewed.  Read this, for it represents a picture of what happens in more and more of America.  Black savagery goes unpunished.  To demand punishment for their crimes, means you are denounced as a racist and may become a new victim.  Meanwhile. the TV news anchors and newspaper editorials tell us of "white privilege" and the Obama Administration appoints officials who refuse to treat people equally.  People wonder how Detroit failed as a city.  Rochester is showing how it is following the road to Detroit.---Hugh Murray

Black Mob Violence in Rochester: Get Used To It

January 9, 2014 by Colin Flaherty 101 Comments

Rochester does not have a problem with black mob violence.  Or black on white crime. The city does, however, have a problem with white people who are not used to it.

So says a Rochester city councilman.

The latest example is a “disturbing” video of a group of black people laughing and dancing as they talk about how they are going wait for an “old lady” to leave a convenience story, then smash her in the face with a snow ball. And a fist.

Which they did. Thanks to the efforts of local activist Davy V., police have a copy of the video and know who the culprits are. And they will talk to them eventually. But police told the local paper it looks more like harassment than assault.

Which should make Rochester councilman Adam McFadden a happy man. McFadden schooled white people about their finicky sensibilities toward crime in 2011. The occasion was an episode of large-scale black mob violence at a city-sponsored Memorial Day party featuring barbecue ribs.

More than 200 black people showed up, ate, rioted, then left. Police arrested 13 black people, including one for assaulting an officer. If anyone in Rochester was surprised or upset, they did a good job hiding it. The local paper explained that several public holiday gatherings had been cancelled the year before because of violence, and “the city has an ongoing issue with crowds of youth at the Liberty Pole downtown.”

Which continue today — the Liberty Pole is the site of regular and frequent black mob violence, especially when students ride the bus there after school. Sometimes accompanied by gunfire. The paper does not talk about the black part.

McFadden explained the 2011 black mob violence, thusly: “I think what you saw at the [Memorial Day barbecue] is what we’ve been seeing in many of our neighborhoods for two decades,” said  McFadden. “It’s just that you had a lot of people there who are not used to that culture and got to witness it personally.”

In the two years since,  McFadden has been proven correct over and over again — with many of the episodes documented in White Girl Bleed a Lot: The Return of Racial Violence to America and How the Media Ignore It.

The city’s Lilac Festival was once a national showcase of horticultural excellence. Today, the annual flower show is just another excuse for frequent episodes of black mob violence.

By the time it was over last year, 200 people were arrested and four people were stabbed. A man with a shotgun escaped and two police officers were hurt.

Two months prior to the festival, the Rochester police chief sent potential criminals a letter, saying he was watching them and they’d better start behaving. They did not.

Local reporters do not – or will not – report what many readers know: “Let’s face it, this is a racial problem,” said Ann Marie Cummings in the comment section of the Democrat and Chronicle. “Whether it is the Puerto Rican fest, last year at the rib fest, or problems at sea breeze with gangs. It’s obvious these street thugs pick arenas … large amount of people attending.”

In September of 2013 in the Rochester suburb of Irondequoit, police had to close down a movie theater after 400 to 500 black people started fighting inside and outside a showing of the movie Insidious, Chapter 2.

Most of the fighters were from Rochester.

“I saw police officers chasing kids, as we were pulling out of the parking lot to leave we saw police officer knock kids to the ground and one police officer was batoning kids,” said Alton Johnson to Rochester YNN.

Lt. Jonna Izzo explained it all to News 8: “They have pent up energy from being scared in the movie theater and they come out and they don’t know what to do with that energy.”

Some residents said it was strange that anyone could blame a large scale act of violence and mayhem on a movie. Others said it had nothing to with the movie: That mall and others in Irondequoit have been plagued by black mob violence for years:

“So it’s not the first time and won’t be the last !!,” said David Sevor at the web site for WHAM TV news. “It’s sad these young teenagers don’t know how to behave out in public.”

Mike Alpaha was more explicit: “It’s been a problem that has been escalating for a long time. White people are the real problem! Your all too scared to speak up and talk about the real problem!”

“These young black kids are out of control and have no discipline in the home. They have no respect for anyone (especially white people). But everyone is scared of being called a racist for telling it how it is.I’m not a racist, but I can say that the inner city black youth are out of control and only getting worse!”

Four police departments from neighboring jurisdictions assisted. City officials called the bus company, which returned the rioters to Rochester. No one was arrested.

Meanwhile, police are looking for the “old lady” who was struck with a snow ball and a fist.

But the activist who discovered the tape and recorded it before it could be removed is not holding his breath. Davy V. is a filmmaker and blogger who writes in Rochester. He describes some of the actors and actions:

Sunday evening, a Rochester, NY youth who goes by the Facebook name “True Goon Tocool Sneekey” posted a :53 second video titled “Just doin shit watch the smack cam”.

The video starts with the youth laughing and talking into the camera.

“I’m bout to smack the old lady with the snowball when she come out the store,” he says.

A few seconds later, as more laughter is heard in the background, an older woman is seen coming out of a corner store located at the intersection of Jay and Child Streets, on the city’s west side.

The youth in the video then hits the woman in the side of the head.

The youths then run off as one of them is heard yelling “Smack cam! Smack cam!”

Then one of the youths is heard saying “I’m gonna get the fuck up outta here before she calls the cops!”, obviously referring to the woman they just assaulted.

Davy V. says police are not taking the crime seriously.

“I wonder if the woman who came out of that store, and was attacked by some young punk who blinded sided her, hitting her on the side of her head, if that woman had been RPD Sgt. Elena Correia’s mother, or grandmother, would she brush it off as ‘harassment’, which is nothing more than a violation,” said Davy V.

Maybe Councilman McFadden would know. But he is not returning calls or emails.

AFRICA: FROM COLONY TO FREEDOM TO ...GENOCIDE

From Yahoo news

Over 30,000 African migrants protest in Israel: police

AFP

By Jack Guez 1 hour ago

Tel Aviv (AFP) - More than 30,000 African asylum seekers who entered Israel illegally protested in Tel Aviv on Sunday, police said, in the biggest rally ever staged by migrants in the Jewish state.

"More than 30,000 demonstrators marched peacefully in Tel Aviv," police spokeswoman Lubra Samri told AFP.

Gathered in the coastal city's central Rabin Square, the protesters sharply criticised Israel's refusal to give them refugee status and the detention without trial of hundreds of asylum seekers.

"We are all refugees" and "Yes to freedom, no to prison!" they chanted in English, with Israeli rights activists also joining the march.

Ultra-Orthodox MP Eli Yishai, the hardline former interior minister who in 2012 led the government campaign to round up and deport tens of thousands of illegal migrants, denounced the protest.

Yishai said that the "infiltrators", as authorities call them, were encouraged by "anti-Zionist human rights organisations".

Demonstrators wave the Eritrean (right), former Ethiopian flag and Israeli flag as thousands of Afri …

Rights groups say most African migrants in Israel cannot be deported because their lives would be under threat if they returned to their homes in Sudan and Eritrea.

Yishai told the website of Maariv daily that Tel Aviv, where many of the migrants live, "long ago became an African city".

He said the demonstration was "a sharp and clear cry for the state of Israel and judicial and law enforcement authorities to apply all the means at their disposal to return the infiltrators to their countries".

Dawud, an Eritrean asylum-seeker at the protest, told AFP: "We have fled persecution, dictatorships, civil wars and genocides.

"Instead of considering us refugees, Israel treats us like criminals," he added, without giving his full name.

Thousands of African asylum seekers who entered Israel illegally via Egypt stage a protest in Tel Av …

Dawud said the demonstrators intended to head for the UN refugee agency's Tel Aviv office and foreign embassies in the city in further rallies on Monday.

Many illegal immigrants, who are often employed in menial jobs in restaurants and hotels, also launched a three-day strike in several Israeli cities on Sunday.

Rising wave of protest

Under legislation passed on December 10, authorities can detain illegal immigrants entering Israel for up to a year without trial.

The same month a sprawling detention facility named "Holot" or "Sands" opened in southern Israel's Negev desert to house illegals crossing the nearby Egyptian border and for immigrants already in the country deemed to have disturbed public order.

The moves triggered protest marches by migrants, including inmates who are allowed out during the day but locked in at night, but Sunday's was the largest demonstration by far.

Israel says that there are close to 60,000 illegal immigrants from Africa in the country and that they pose a threat to the state's Jewish character.

Along with arrests and deportations, Israel has also built a high-tech fence along the border with Egypt's barren Sinai, the main point of clandestine entry.

Many migrants live in poor southern neighbourhoods of Tel Aviv where violent race riots erupted in 2012.

Anti-migrant protesters there were addressed by MPs from Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's Likud party, including hardliner Miri Regev, who at the time called the Africans "a cancer in our body".

+++++++++++++++++

++++++++++++++++++++++++

This is from Dictionary.com

World English Dictionary

prejudice  (ˈprɛdʒʊdɪs)
— n
1.	an opinion formed beforehand, esp an unfavourable one based on inadequate facts

++++++++++++++++++++++

A scientific approach is one that considers all possibilities, and rejects none that might conflict with an established ideology.  One may eventually reject possible solutions based upon ideology, ethics, religion, but reason and experiments should provide the widest range of possibilities before any are rejected.

++++++++++++++++++++

Below is my reply to the article on Yahoo News – it is an expanded reply.---Hugh Murray

Hugh Murray 14 hours ago

9

114

50 years ago, Black Africans demanded the end of colonialism and the end of apartheid. They wanted Black rule, and they got it. Now they can't endure it and flee to white nations pretending to be refugees. [There are over 100 nations in Africa.  If they were truly seeking asylum, why not just move to a neighboring Black African nation?  The reason – it would be just as oppressive, if not more so.  So instead, they flee Black run nations.  What have they found in the new, free, anti-colonial, Black nations of Africa?  In the words of the article above: “Dawud, an Eritrean asylum-seeker at the protest, told AFP: "We have fled persecution, dictatorships, civil wars and genocides.”  He fled to Israel, not to a neighboring state, and not to South Africa, or Nigeria, or the Central African Republic.  Instead, the Black Africans try to escape Black rule by trekking to Israel, or crowding top heavy, dilapidated boats for Greece, Italy, or Spain.  They choose to avoid the “freedom” of Black dominated countries.  Was the situation as bad under colonialism?]

    The Blacks won their independence from colonialism.  Now, they find life under the independent Black nations unbearable, lands of “persecution, dictatorships, civil wars and genocides.”  They got what they wanted, and it is horrible. Now Lefties will demand African resettlement AND political rights in Europe, Israel,  and other lands. When they gain the vote, they will extend to Europe the same horrors that we now envelop Africa.

    Israel has the correct policy. Deport the invaders. America should join Israel with a similar policy. Ignore the Leftwing protests and deport the invaders, the infiltrators of Israel, of Europe, of the US.   Of the more than 100 Black African nations in Africa, the “asylum seekers” spurn those nations to infiltrate Israel, Spain, Greece, Italy, all of Europe, and other white nations.  But as their numbers grow, the white nations become less white, less prosperous, more crime ridden, more “multicultural.”

     The end of colonialism in Africa terminated white rule in the continent.  But white colonialism has been replaced by incredible slaughter, as in Rwanda when Hutus sought to exterminate Tutsis, and the civil wars in Ivory Coast, Liberia, the Congo, Central Africa Republic, Ethopia, etc.  Where there has been a renewal of slavery, as in parts of the Sudan, where there has been starvation, as in parts of the Congo, where there has been, in the words of Dawud, lands of “persecution, dictatorship, civil wars, and genocide.”  And white farmers are reduced daily (sometimes through brutal murders) in lands like Zimbabwe and the new South Africa.  Genocide.  But it’s against whites, so the UN and the liberal crowd ignore the victims.

     As the number of African refugees gain shelter and “political” rights in the West, the future  seems visible.  The future of mankind will be the planet of Detroits. 
    My reply is not based upon prejudice.  I did not prejudge the issue.  I simply note the collapsed state of many African nations.  Indeed, I quote one of the invaders of Israel using his assessment of African nations.  Was it worse under white colonialism?  Then why do so many thousands of Africans seek refuge in white nations?  Is there something about whites?  About Black rule?  I am not speaking about all Black people, but about when Blacks form the government.  
    If some deem my analysis as racist, and therefore, one should not read it or consider this alternative, my response is - look at reality.  The Business Insider, economic periodical, just issued a list of the most 25 failed states on the planet.  The majority of them are in Africa, plus Haiti, Yemen, North Korea, and some war-torn Muslim nations.  Look at the assessment of the Blacks who are seeking refuge.  All see problems in African states.  If one refuses to consider one possible explanation of a problem for ideological reasons (because it sounds racist), then one has eschewed the scientific method.  By contrast, one must consider all possible, and especially probable explanations, if one is to be reasonable and scientific.  If one refuses to consider an explanation because some view it as racist, one has abandoned reason, and substituted faith, the faith of the Left.  That faith is unscientific, and is often anti-scientific.  I prefer not to prejudge an issue.  I prefer research and reason to the faith of the Left wing.  Call me what you wish.---Hugh Murray

Replies (

•  

Mark 14 hours ago

There is a word for this, virus.

•  

The Man 13 hours ago

But the politicians ( ruling elite ) will always encourage this because it leads to instability. Yet they will never have to deal directly on a day to day basis with this genetic flotsam. No different here in the good old USA...do you think the politicians ( ruling elite ) have ever had to deal with the low level/IQ, street thugs ( or as they like to say...ThugZZZZZ ) that we in the middle class encounter every day.

•  

Richard 12 hours ago

unfortunately truths that you write could not be spoken in the free US or you would be ostracized ! Politically correct is the word of the day. More B.S. don't tell the truth!

Ron B 12 hours ago

It's unfortunate but true, the blacks wanted black rule in Africa. Yet when they got it they didn't know what to do with it. Even in this country black run cities generally become a haven for crime and corruption (look at Detroit).

Laquesha 11 hours ago

It's far to late for America. Israel said they already had 60k of them in their country so they are infected. I wish I was rich I would go found the last safe place on earth and not let one of them in. 

TECTONIC PLATES ADRIFT? - Wilson, Lenin; Putin, Obama - rUSsiA

                                                    by Hugh Murray
     I was away for two weeks in Asia, and spent less than 3 hours on the net.  The cable TV in my hotel room was quite limited, and I had trouble finding real news of the world.  BBC and CNN seemed to show nothing but homages to Nelson Mandela, the South African radical who was jailed for years and then emerged as a negotiator for the dismantling of apartheid.  Day after day, the funeral seemed to be the only world news on the British and American channels.  Deutsche Welle showed talking heads.  The local Thai stations showed the continuing demonstrations in Bangkok, but I did not understand the language, so quickly changed the channels.  The Fox Sports channel showed little soccer, and then mainly from the Dutch league, which I do  not follow.  I did chance upon one channel, in English, that kept my attention.  Oliver Stone was interviewed for about an hour, with a co-author on the Hidden History of the US.  I generally disagreed with his views, and yet because of his terrific film, JFK, I kept watching.  There was other news from the Washington bureau.  Yet, I had never heard of the channel.
     Then there was a program on army life, but the language was a Slavic one.  The news showed the demos in Thailand, but much more time was devoted to those in the Ukraine.  Then it dawned on me, RT must stand for Russian Television, Russia Today.  The Ukrainian reports were substantial.  American Sen. John McCain was shown as he asserted among the anti-government protestors that the Ukrainian government's decision not to join the European Union was unacceptable.  We were informed that an American State Dept. official was among the crowd handing out food to the protestors.  But there was additional commentary.  One surmised that if the Ukraine joined the EU, it would be among the most impoverished, joining Greece, and Spain in poverty, while the wealth of the country would be sent to EU bankers.  Later, RT stressed that while anti-gov. protestors were in one square, pro-gov. protestors were just a short distance away in another square.  Clearly, many wanted to move closer to the EU and Western Europe; just as clearly, the govt. and many others preferred to stay closely allied to Russia.
     RT also devoted considerable time to Russian leader's State of the Union speech this December, 2013.  When I heard the analysis of his speech on RT, I began to think the tectonic plates of the world may be changing.
     Soon after the Bolshevik revolution of 1917, the new Communist government did many things.  Like Snowden who exposed so many secret documents, the Soviets exposed the double-dealing of the Allies, and how they intended to divide the world into colonies and spheres of influence if the Western nations defeated the Central Powers - i.e, if the UK, France, the US, etc. defeated Germany, Aus.-Hungary, and Turkey.  The Soviets also abolished the supremacy of the church in the new Soviet state, and abolished the anti-homosexual laws that had been on the books.
     The West did win the war, and American President Woodrow Wilson seemed a savior of democracy and the world, for a short time.  The religious man, who demanded racial segregation of the American federal bureaucracy, who was determined that the new League of Nations would not cave to the Japanese demand for a statement of equality of all races, had also used federal troops to close the bordellos in New Orleans where a genre of music had originated.  Unable to find work in the closed cat houses, the musicians moved North to Memphis, St. Louis, Chicago, New York and eventually Paris and the world.  From the houses of jizz and sex, jazz became an international rage.  Under Wilson, the religious strain could also be seen in the enactment of Prohibition, the ban on drinking alcohol.  By 1920, Americans were disillusioned with Wilson and his war.  Wilson's Democratic Party was swept out of office, and the Republicans led the nation to a return to Normalcy.  Not quite.  Women cut their hair, shortened their skirts, began to smoke, and dance ( and even drink, in defiance of the new law).  The new automobiles were becoming bordellos on wheels, according to some preachers.  Yet, even in this relaxed atmosphere in America, with some jazz titles like Masculine Women and Feminine Men, homosexuality was still illegal and strongly stigmatized.  By contrast, homosexuality was no longer illegal in the New Red Russia.  And Communist front-groups, like the League of Militant Athiests in the West, made it clear that they rejected the old morality of the church.  And though illegal in the new Weimar Germany, it was becoming quite open, and even films were made like, Different from the Others, and A Man's Young Girlhood, and Dr. Magnus Hirschfelt's sexual institute and campaign for legalization of homosexuality made Berlin a center of research and agitation on this issue.  Christopher Isherwood would stay at the institute when he moved to Berlin in the early 1930s.  In the 1920s then the new Soviet Union, and to some extent Weimar Germany may have been viewed as gay havens.  Dispite flappers and speakeasy (illegal liquor) in the US, the KKK marched down the streets of Washington DC and traditional values were upheld; religion was popular, and evolution was condemned even in the courts.
     The Depression brought out new demands for morality, to clean up the filth that may have caused such economic misery.  Admittedly, it was not so clear in the US, for with the election of Democrat Franklin Roosevelt, one of the first acts was to end Prohibition, so Americans could drink alcohol legally once again.  But there would be no more immorality portrayed on the silver screen, as the Hays office would censor Hollywood films.  No more homos portrayed in the movies, no more exposure of so much skin by the young starlets, and dialog had to be decent.  Just a few weeks before FDR took the oath as President of the US, Adolf Hitler became German Chancellor, and he too demanded greater morality of the Germans.  Quickly, the Hirschfeld institute was raided and closed, and its books and research volumes were burnt.  Most gay publication were now illegal, as were most gay bars.  And in 1934, when Hitler killed Roehm and other leaders of his Storm Troopers, then homosexuality was utterly condemned in the new Germany.  Hitler's New Germany was to be a Moral Germany.  Not to be outdone, Stalin created a new constitution for his USSR, and each state in that union was now required to ban homosexuality.  The Webb's assured readers that homosexuality had been imported into the USSR by foreigners, anyway.
      In WWII, the various nations went to war expressing their own versions of "morality," and incarcerating, criminalizing, and sometimes exterminating those deemed immoral or unworthy of life.  By the 1950s, there were basically 2 super powers and views of the world, atheistic communism, which still outlawed homosexuality, and free, religious America.  To illustrate the contrast, the American pledge to the flag was changed again.  Initially, one was to raise the right arm to the flag, palm up, and recited the pledge.  But that was to similar to the fascist salute, so the right hand over the heart replaced the outstretched arm.  In the 1950s, the wording was changed: "one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all" was lengthened by the insertion of "under God" after nation.  Judeo-Christian morality against atheistic Communism.
     By 2009 with the election of Barack Obama as Pres. of the US, one can see the enormous changes.  Judeo-Christian morality is no longer on a pedestal in the age of multiculturalism.  Moreover, the foreign policy of Obama and Hillary Clinton is openly pro-Muslim, and helped the fanatical Muslim Brotherhood achieve power in Egypt, and its allies take power in Libya, and almost in Syria.  Europe has ever more Muslim immigrants who achieve a privileged status thanks to liberal judges and bureaucrats in the EU.  Londonstan has areas of sharia law today, as do many cities in the UK, the Netherlands, France.  The Left has allied itself with the most anti-feminist, most anti-gay crowd, the Muslims.  Obama generally accepts this view inside the US.
    Putin's Speech of December 2013 is in some ways amazing.  The former KGB official comes out defending Christian morality, implicitly attacking gays, Muslims, and the cult of the multi.  Meanwhile, America's President Obama has become a champion of gays, illegal aliens, Hispanics, Blacks, single mothers abortions, etc.  While Obama demands a liberal agenda for most nations, Putin now urges nationalism, national traditions, traditional values, religion.  Suddenly, the former KGB Communist seems to have more in common with the right wing in Europe that seeks to preserve national traditions, that opposes liberal judicial edicts from Brussels, that opposes economic diktats from Berlin.  The Left of the KGB seems to be meeting the Right of Marine LePen in France, of UKIP in Britain, and of various right wing parties throughout Europe.  One contrast, some of the Rightwing parties, as those in the Netherlands, have be led by gays who are horrified by the violent hatred of the Muslims.
     In the 1950s, America stood for traditional religion and traditional values and traditional bigotries.  Today, it stands for multiculturalism and persecution of any speech that offends one of the many "favored" minorities or women.  Today, Putin proclaims the New Russia stands for traditional values and religion and (traditional bigotries).
    American Rightwinger Pat Buchanan had long criticized Pres. G W Bush and Obama for meddling in Eastern Europe and antagonizing Russia.  He would not agree with Sen McCain in the Ukraine.  Indeed, in his most recent column, Buchanan sees Russia's Putin as one of "us," a Paleoconservative.
    Bottom Line - In the 1920s America, even with its flappers, represented nationalism and traditional religious values.  In the 1920s the New Soviet Union represented internationalism, and a sexual revolution in which a woman official declared sex was like a "glass of water," (perhaps she should have said like a box of chocolates) with abortion, homosexuality, and more open-type marriages.  Religion in the USSR was persecuted.  Today, there has been a reversal - Putin represents nationalism and traditional religious values; Obama represents internationalism and secularism, feminism, abortion, homosexuality, etc.   How the world has changed?  Or is this just cosmetic?  And how will it continue to change?

He Hurls a Compendium of Facts

IT’S TIME FOR THE TRUTH!  THE JFK COVER-UP:

THE REAL CRIME OF THE CENTURY (2012) by CHARLES E. HURLBURT

Rev. by Hugh Murray

            Hurlburt has written an “overview” of the Kennedy assassination case.  His book is not based on new research, but he has assembled and organized the research of many authors who have delved in the topic.  Hurlburt has deduced a reasonable assessment of the entire case – the murder in Dealey Plaza, the autopsies, the slaying of the accused, the investigation, and the “cover-ups.”  With Hulbert’s numerous footnotes, he guides the inquisitive reader to the sources of his assertions.

            Hurlburt does not pretend to hold all the answers to these crimes; indeed, he asserts that some of the evidence is blatantly contradictory, so one will have to arrive at the most probable conclusions from what we are provided.  Unfortunately there is much that we still do not know, for “the CIA is still refusing to release over a million records…until at least 2017…”(p. 306)  I do not accept all of Hurlburt’s hypotheses.  While he rejects Kennedy’s throat wound as being the exit wound for a bullet fired at the Texas School Book Depository (that in the Warren Report version then travels to injure Gov. Connally in several spots), Hurlburt also rejects the notion that the small throat wound in Kennedy was the result of a shot from the front.  Instead, Hurlburt argues that a bullet from the back cracked Kennedy’s skull, and a small piece of bone might have exited the throat.  Hurlburt also contends that there were seven shots in Dealey Plaza fired at the President from different locations.  Needless to say, Hurlburt believes that the assassination was a conspiracy, and one that reached high levels of government.

            Yet, Hurlburt’s short summary of so much material permits new questions to rise.  For example, he notes that when Oswald was Marine stationed in Japan, he received medical treatment for VD, which he contracted “in the line of duty, not due to in own misconduct.”(115)  Was Oswald having sex with a suspected KGB prostitute for the US Government?  Was Oswald and agent of the US Government?

            Hurlburt spend many pages on “a dirty rumor.”  Beginning in November 1963 rumors circulated that Oswald was employed by the FBI, and possibly the CIA, even earning $200 a month from the FBI.(75-76)  Hurlburt quotes early Warren Commission proceedings as to how they should tackle this “dirty” rumor, and how to resolve the issue.  After considerable discussion, they basically asked FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover about Oswald.  Hoover denied Oswald was either an agent or an informer.  The Warren Commission made no further investigation of the topic.

            Yet, one of the first actions by the FBI in November 1963 was to destroy evidence.  Earlier that month Oswald had left a note at the FBI office in Dallas for Agent Hosty.  Once Oswald was identified as the probable assassin, Hosty was order by his FBI superior to destroy that note.  Hosty flushed it.  In his own book, former FBI Agent Don Adams reveals that his FBI reports of November 1963 were distorted to absolve other possible suspects, and aimed at fulfilling Hoover’s view that Oswald was the lone, nut assassin.  When Oswald was arrested for disturbing the peace in downtown New Orleans in the summer of 1963 – the scuffle he had while distributing pro-Castro leaflets with a group of anti-Castro Cubans – Oswald requested to speak with an FBI agent.  There seems to be no notes of that conversation.  Were those notes ordered to be destroyed by FBI superiors, too?

            Despite the FBI’s distortion and destruction of evidence, the Warren Commission decided to rely chiefly upon the FBI for its investigation into the Kennedy assassination.

            Hurlburt writes how the Establishment sought to smear and destroy those who questioned the official conclusion that Oswald was a lone, nut assassin, who in turn was slain by Jack Ruby who hoped to spare Mrs. Kennedy the trauma of a trial in Dallas.  To maintain the official line, liberal icon, Earl Warren sought to prevent American publication of Mark Lane’s Rush to Judgment, an early, powerful critique of the Warren Commission’s conclusions.

            Hurlburt includes how Lyndon Johnson’s Attorney General, Ramsey Clark, sought to derail the Jim Garrison investigation by appointing a small panel of pro-CIA doctors to review the Kennedy autopsy photographs and x-rays and thereby prevent Garrison from subpoenaing the records.  Unfortunately, Hurlburt does not include the statement Clark made soon after Garrison arrested New Orleans businessman Clay Shaw in connection with a conspiracy to kill Kennedy.  On national television, Clark declared that the federal government had looked into Shaw, and he was not involved in any plot.  Garrison arrests Shaw for involvement; that week, the US Attorney General declares Shaw innocent!  But Clark’s absolution raised other questions at the time.  When was Shaw cleared?  By whom?  Why was he investigated about this case?  Clark’s attempt to smother the Garrison investigation backfired in this particular incident.

            Hurlburt may have been misled by a Garrison article stating his interest in the Kennedy case was spurred by a conversation with Louisiana Sen. Russell Long.  Garrison had acted much earlier.  In November 1963 he had David Ferrie arrested in connection with the murder, and then handed him over to the FBI.  The FBI questioned Ferrie and had him released.  One wonders if those notes were also destroyed.

            Hurlburt is far too harsh on New Orleans DA Jim Garrison, whose investigation brought up for the first time Oswald’s visits to Clinton, Louisiana, his relation to Guy Banister, David Ferrie, pro-Castro Cubans; and Garrison placed Dr. Pierre Finck under oath to testify about the Kennedy autopsy at Bethesda Naval Hospital, and how doctors were ordered by the big brass not to perform basic functions of an autopsy.  Garrison also showed a print of the Zapruder film many times in court so all could see the President’s head knocked to the left and back, presumably by a bullet from the front right.  Garrison failed to prove Shaw guilty of conspiracy to the jury; but interviewed on television soon after, many of the jurors were convinced there was a conspiracy.

            Hurlburt is excellent at taking on the defenders of the Warren Report – the New York Times, CBS, Gerald Posner, and Marquette Prof. John McAdams.  For example, Prof. McAdams emphasized the movement in the Zapruder film of Gov. Connally’s lapel, meaning the bullet hit him earlier than Connally was aware.  Hurlburt shows a photo of the Governor’s coat, and the bullet hole is not by the lapel.  Yet, occasionally Hurlburt’s discussion is unclear, as when he seeks to describe where Oswald was in the lunch room with his Coke on the 2^nd floor of the TSBD shortly after the shooting as a police officer Baker was able to see and confront him.

            Hurlburt reminds the readers of some obvious facts too often overlooked.  For example, the “magic bullet” of the Warren Commission, that entered Kennedy’s back, exited his throat, then hit Connally’s side, wrist, and leg, had no blood or fleshy material on it.  Also, the rifle discovered on the 6^th floor of the TSBD was identified by two weapons experts as a German Mauser.  The rifle bought by Hidell (Oswald) was a Mannlicher-Carcano and had “Made in Italy” clearly stamped on it.  There are many other thought-provoking facts in this book.  Overall, Hurlburt has provided a service with his work.  It is an easy to read compendium of important material.  Even when one disagrees, his argument provokes thought.  The book indicts the government for its long-term and continuing cover-ups of the assassination of Pres. John Kennedy in Dallas.