George Zimmerman found innocent

The RODOH Lounge is a place for general discussion, preferably non-Holocaust. The Lounge is only lightly moderated but please keep this a friendly place to chat with and get to know your fellow board participants.
User avatar
blake121666
Posts: 3417
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 6:26 am
Contact:

Re: George Zimmerman found innocent

Post by blake121666 »

Scott wrote:
Wed Oct 07, 2020 8:11 pm
I am not sure what the Belgian Congo has to do with the George Zimmerman acquittal, but the graphic below is definitely relevant to lionized African gutter punks like Trayvon Martin.

:)

Image
That meme is ridiculously (and impossibly) false. Paul Kersey wrote an article about that particular meme here:

https://www.unz.com/sbpdl/usa-today-tri ... e-correct/

Intra-racial killings are something like 80% for most races in the USA. About 80% of a killed member of a race is killed by another member of that same race.

Blacks killing non-blacks is a little more than a random distribution would suggest - at 90%. A random distribution of 13% black and 87% non-black would have blacks killing non-blacks 87% of the time of course. So blacks kill non-blacks a little more than if they randomly selected a member of the population regardless of race (which would be about 87% non-black).

Whoever made that meme assumes idiocy in his expected audience. It if course is quite impossible to have those percentages listed there. The numbers are idiot numbers by and for idiots who don't know how to figure percentages.

This should be given as an SAT question. What numbers of killed could POSSIBLY fall inline with the given percentages? :lol: :lol: :lol: Whoever answers ZERO killings is the winner! Whoever has to think about it for more than 5 seconds gets rejected from school! Those who wonder what the idiot who made this meme was thinking should enter a sociological field - working to help retards who ride the short bus (and who make idiotically stupid memes like this)! Someone such as Paul Kersey, for instance, maybe?

SUPPORT RODOH!
Would you like to financially contribute to the upkeep of RODOH? Please kindly contact Scott Smith ([email protected]). Any and all contributions are welcome!


User avatar
Scott
Site Admin
Posts: 2441
Joined: Tue May 15, 2012 2:43 am
Location: USA, West of the Pecos
Contact:

Re: George Zimmerman found innocent

Post by Scott »

Not every Darkie was a slave. Some even owned slaves, in fact. And slavery in the Caribbean, for example, where Blacks off the boat were worked to death cutting sugar cane, was a very different prospect than in the South, where the plantation-owning minority felt they had a Christian noblesse oblige to provide these people with work and were required by law to keep them out of trouble.

I would be all for giving them "Reparations" if it meant that in doing so they were permanently shipped back to sub-Saharan Africa, in spite of Western nations not being endless founts of cash to throw away on other people's welfare.

The main benefit of slavery for the South was that it kept free White labor cheap and the region poor and backwards, exporting cash crops instead of developing any local manufactures. The Negro Tax that we all pay is nothing new.

Also, the Americans eliminated the slave trade in 1808, which blew out a key pillar of triangular trade in the Atlantic─the trade between Africa, the West Indies, and New England and Europe for Black gold, then cash crops like molasses, sugar, cotton, tobacco, timber, and Yankee ships and manufactures from Europe. That system now being unsustainable, the British soon eliminated slavery in their empire. Chattel slavery was revived somewhat economically in the Antebellum South only due to the invention of the cotton gin, but it hardly accounted for the nation's economy, let alone its wealth.

Marxism would posit that civilization is a fraud and that all value (or privilege in comtemporary parlance) comes by the sweat off the back of some "Person of Color." This means that Whites somehow owe Blacks just for being in existence. That is total B.S. The truth is that Africans have never been too known for nation building─but as long as they are off doing their own thing that is fine with me.

Led by the corporate mass-media, which is owned by a certain pale-skinned tribe, certain unscrupulous elements use Bolshevist agitation as a weapon against White people and their communities. And some Liberal Whites go right along with this as a means for sanctimonious virture-signalling. However, when the chickens come home to roost, White Liberals pay the price just as much as Rednecks.

The idea that Whites should be taught not to see Race except in terms of their "privilege and oppression" is a pretty Evil trick.

According to the New York Daily News, detectives are in the process of obtaining DNA from the 14-year-old suspect to see if it can linked to samples recovered from [18-year-old Barnard student] Tessa Majors' body.

Image Image

I am certainly not a fan of imperialism─Whites should have stayed out of Africa and left it to the Muslims and the Hottentots─but maybe old King Leopold knew something important about these people that Whitey has simply forgotten.

:-)

“So people are getting injured, and our job is to protect this business, and a part of my job is to also help people. If there’s somebody hurt, I’m running into harm’s way.
That’s why I have my rifle because I need to protect myself, obviously.
But I also have my med-kit.”

~ "Siege" Kyle Rittenhouse
(Kenosha, WI - 25 AUGUST 2020)

User avatar
blake121666
Posts: 3417
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 6:26 am
Contact:

Re: George Zimmerman found innocent

Post by blake121666 »

The USA outlawing the trans-atlantic slave trade in 1808 was a result of Britain's policy to outlaw it worldwide. You have that backward, Scott. It is little known, but areas such as my own (Maryland) perversely ramped-up that trans-atlantic slave trade during this period when it was outlawed. Maryland - being the North/South border state it was - had a huge business in selling black slaves to the more southern (and some western) cotton-producing states. So much so that Maryland slave traders (in Annapolis) thrived in the trans-atlantic slave trade in this period. It was technically outlawed but ironically booming in this period for Annapolis.

I intentionally miswrote many things in an earlier post hoping for BT to correct me (the northern colonies of course had a smaller amount of chattel slavery until the Revolution, for instance). BT is not interested in discussing details. He'd rather deal in navel-gazing ignorant philosophizing. And the propaganda of the 19th century (which I demur at discussing with him).

So BT and I simply talk past each other.

User avatar
blake121666
Posts: 3417
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 6:26 am
Contact:

Re: George Zimmerman found innocent

Post by blake121666 »

Off the top of my head, I think the statstics people use something like 1 million black chattel slaves in 1800 and like 6 million at the time of the Civil War.

So a 6-fold increase in like 50 years. And yet BT likes to think of some large mass of black slaves being enslaved for his whimsical "300 years" (he used to say 400 years :roll: ).

And it was probably 6-fold less in the prior 50 years.

This doesn't suggest the harsh slavery of the rest of the hemisphere (and elsewhere) - where large percentages were worked to death. The continental British colonies received far fewer black slaves. And those populations had a quick doubling rate.

Focusing everyone's attention on this period as people keep doing will not result in the result desired of those who are doing this.

Although I've suspected for a few decades that Jews could very well be behind a scheme to genocide American blacks. This could very well be part of that Jewish desire.

But then again, I suspect Jews to be behind all kinds of nasty stuff - consciously or not! :D
Last edited by blake121666 on Thu Oct 08, 2020 1:51 am, edited 1 time in total.

Turnagain
Posts: 8855
Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2014 11:44 pm
Contact:

Re: George Zimmerman found innocent

Post by Turnagain »

Well, there's for damn sure no shortage of niggers in the country now.

User avatar
Scott
Site Admin
Posts: 2441
Joined: Tue May 15, 2012 2:43 am
Location: USA, West of the Pecos
Contact:

Re: George Zimmerman found innocent

Post by Scott »

This should have some better crime data.

https://www.amren.com/the-color-of-crime/

:)

“So people are getting injured, and our job is to protect this business, and a part of my job is to also help people. If there’s somebody hurt, I’m running into harm’s way.
That’s why I have my rifle because I need to protect myself, obviously.
But I also have my med-kit.”

~ "Siege" Kyle Rittenhouse
(Kenosha, WI - 25 AUGUST 2020)

User avatar
blake121666
Posts: 3417
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 6:26 am
Contact:

Re: George Zimmerman found innocent

Post by blake121666 »

Scott wrote:
Thu Oct 08, 2020 2:25 am
This should have some better crime data.

https://www.amren.com/the-color-of-crime/

:)
Interracial crime

In 2013, of the approximately 660,000 crimes of interracial violence that involved blacks and whites, blacks were the perpetrators 85 percent of the time. This meant a black person was 27 times more likely to attack a white person than vice versa. A Hispanic was eight times more likely to attack a white person than vice versa.
Assuming USA population = 60% white, 20% hispanic, 13% black, 7% other.

Assuming an interracial altercation:
Odds of black attacking white: Whites are (60/87 = 69%) of the non-black population => 69%.
Odds of white attacking black: Blacks are (13/40 = 33%) of the non-white population => 33%.

So blacks are (85/69 => 23%) more likely to attack whites than a random attack.

From the random probability above blacks should be (69/33 = 2.1) times more likely to attack a white than a white would attack a black (given an interracial altercation). If blacks attack whites 85% of the time (given an interracial altercation) and that is 27 times more likely than a white attacking a black, then that is saying that whites attack blacks (85%/27 = 3%) of the time - as opposed to the expected 33% of the time for a random interracial altercation. I doubt this is the case, although I guess it COULD be. Let's see the data. This means that of the 40% of the non-white population, when a white attacks someone of that non-white population, that person attacked is only black 3% of the time! I call horseshit to that! Who the hell are whites attacking, American Indians! :lol: :lol: :lol: Your reference is BULLSHIT. Or it is retardedly misdirecting one with its numbers. My interpretation of its numbers is how a reasonable person would interpret it. Obviously, they are misrepresenting their case to me. How do you interpret their bullshit?

Odds of white attacking hispanic: Hispanics are (20/40 = 1/2) of the non-white population => 50%
Odds of hispanic attacking white: (Whites are 60/80) = 3/4 of the non-hispanic population => 75%

A hispanic should be only (75/50 => 50%) more likely to attack a white than vice versa (1.5 times).

Should I trust the data in your link? Not without seeing the data. I have no doubt the bullshitter who wrote your reference is misleading people with its numbers. That weblink is very dishonestly presenting data.

I suspect it is dishonestly mixing up inter-racial and intra-racial data. Obviously that webpage is. I haven't looked at the book that webpage is referencing.

EDIT: 80% of altercations are intra-racial. Your reference is misleading to the point of being dishonest. No doubt about it. It is obviously written for retards who wish to dishonestly view that situation in a ridiculously exaggerated, retarded, and biased way.

Please show me how that is not the case if you think otherwise, Scott - given that 80% of altercations are intraracial.

I have little doubt that one could probably find that black violence is much greater than with other groups. But your references are stating downright retarded things. And it is to mislead other retards.

User avatar
Scott
Site Admin
Posts: 2441
Joined: Tue May 15, 2012 2:43 am
Location: USA, West of the Pecos
Contact:

Re: George Zimmerman found innocent

Post by Scott »

blake121666 wrote:
Thu Oct 08, 2020 1:15 am
The USA outlawing the trans-atlantic slave trade in 1808 was a result of Britain's policy to outlaw it worldwide. You have that backward, Scott. It is little known, but areas such as my own (Maryland) perversely ramped-up that trans-atlantic slave trade during this period when it was outlawed. Maryland - being the North/South border state it was - had a huge business in selling black slaves to the more southern (and some western) cotton-producing states. So much so that Maryland slave traders (in Annapolis) thrived in the trans-atlantic slave trade in this period. It was technically outlawed but ironically booming in this period for Annapolis.


No, the Constitution prohibited outlawing the slave trade until 1808, which is why it was done at that time. The British did not outlaw slavery until later, although before the American Civil War.

However, the British were fighting the Barbary Pirates and Muslim slave traders about this time, which was a major worldwide scourge, and is one reason why they were impressing American sailors for their Navy.

Some slave trading might have increased on the black market after 1808, but that does not mean overall trading increased once it was outlawed. Contrary to popular belief, for example, Prohibition did not increase the sale of alcohol in the 1920s, although it made Catholic importers/smugglers of Canadian "sacramental gin" rich, such as Joe Kennedy.

The North no longer having a financial interest in slavery because of the 1808 outlawing of the slave trade, took off the brakes for many of them to become puritanical Abolitionists. Before the Civil War, Northern states were using the tariff as a punitive measure against the cotton-exporting South to drive up the cost of imported manufactures far beyond what was reasonable to promote Northern industry.

Here's a link to the PDF of the AmRen report:

https://www.amren.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/Color-Of-Crime-2016.pdf

One problem with crime statistics is that they are not kept consistently and they often have arbitrary categories. So "White" in some statistics includes Hispanics and Arabs, and so on.

Also, many crimes are simply not solved, so the race of the perpetrators don't even get figured in.

The Black-on-Black crime is staggering but probably under-reported. Blacks are more likely to be in contact with other Blacks, so them being victimized most often by other Blacks makes sense for that reason alone.

If all of this is still too complicated, Blacks are about 13 percent of the population and commit over 50 percent of the murders.

If we restrict this to just Black male Yoof, the percentage of the violent crime in the country (not just murders) that they alone are responsible for is mind-blowing.

:)

“So people are getting injured, and our job is to protect this business, and a part of my job is to also help people. If there’s somebody hurt, I’m running into harm’s way.
That’s why I have my rifle because I need to protect myself, obviously.
But I also have my med-kit.”

~ "Siege" Kyle Rittenhouse
(Kenosha, WI - 25 AUGUST 2020)

User avatar
been-there
Propositions Moderator
Posts: 9632
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 8:59 am
Contact:

Re: George Zimmerman found innocent

Post by been-there »

Scott wrote:
Thu Oct 08, 2020 1:05 am
Not every Darkie was a slave. Some even owned slaves, in fact.
Obfuscation.
That is not contested. So is a form of camouflage. A muddying of the waters to avoid conceding certain self-evident facts.

Scott wrote:
Thu Oct 08, 2020 1:05 am
...the plantation-owning minority felt they had a Christian noblesse oblige to provide these people with work and were required by law to keep them out of trouble.
I suggest this comment demonstrates a denial of the ‘Christian’ racist, white-supremacist, self-satisfied, self-justifying, immoral and DELUSIONAL mind-set that predominated in Christian/‘western’ society during the three centuries of the trans-Atlantic slave trade.
That extremely lucrative Slave-trade was NOT formed and perpetuated out of any noble motive to “provide these people with work and keep them out of trouble”!! :roll:
I also suggest this comment is maintained by a denial of the majority under-belly of supposedly ‘Christian’ society, viz. the vast majority of people that paid only lip-service to Christian values and its noblesse oblige.

Scott wrote:
Thu Oct 08, 2020 1:05 am
...Also, the Americans eliminated the slave trade in 1808
Eliminated??
Nah. It just morphed. E.g. A form of slavery still exists in the American Penal System TODAY.

Scott wrote:
Thu Oct 08, 2020 1:05 am
...This means that Whites somehow owe Blacks just for being in existence. That is total B.S.
Again I suggest this comment shows your viewpoint is only maintainable by DENYING certain self-evident facts. As it is self-evident that the huge numbers of ‘Blacks’ “in existence” on the continent of north and south America is because of the white-supremacist, racist activity of whites.
So ‘whites’ DO owe ‘blacks’ for them “existing” in America!

Scott wrote:
Thu Oct 08, 2020 1:05 am
Led by the corporate mass-media, which is owned by a certain pale-skinned tribe, certain unscrupulous elements use Bolshevist agitation as a weapon against White people and their communities.
Sure. No doubt it is so.

Scott wrote:
Thu Oct 08, 2020 1:05 am
And some Liberal Whites go right along with this as a means for sanctimonious virture-
Definitely. No doubt this is true also.

Scott wrote:
Thu Oct 08, 2020 1:05 am
However, when the chickens come home to roost, White Liberals pay the price just as much as Rednecks.
Agreed.

Scott wrote:
Thu Oct 08, 2020 1:05 am
The idea that Whites should be taught not to see Race except in terms of their "privilege and oppression" is a pretty Evil trick.
Sure. But is that ONLY what is occurring?

Scott wrote:
Thu Oct 08, 2020 1:05 am
I am certainly not a fan of imperialism ─ Whites should have stayed out of Africa…
Then why can’t you accept that ALL the race problems you are experiencing and have issues with “OWE” their “EXISTENCE” to the consequences of that white imperialism?

Scott wrote:
Thu Oct 08, 2020 1:05 am
...maybe old King Leopold knew something important about these people that Whitey has simply forgotten.
He “knew” that they were defenceless and therefore could be very easily exploited.
He “knew” that perpetrating the most horrific crimes against them in order to amass huge amounts of wealth would go largely unnoticed in Europe.
He “knew” that even if noticed, those crimes would not be punishable by any ‘white’ law.

What has changed recently is that we as a ‘white’ society are increasingly starting to view those crimes differently now.
"When people who are honestly mistaken learn the truth,
they either cease being mistaken
or they cease being honest"
-- Anonymous

User avatar
been-there
Propositions Moderator
Posts: 9632
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 8:59 am
Contact:

Re: George Zimmerman found innocent

Post by been-there »

blake121666 wrote:
Thu Oct 08, 2020 1:15 am
...I intentionally miswrote many things in an earlier post hoping for BT to correct me...
:lol:

:roll:

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 17 guests