Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: LindyBill who wrote (95514)	1/16/2005 7:17:43 PM
From: LindyBill	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793568

I extrapolated from these numbers that black men [6% of the population] commit over 63% of the total murders. Commonsense and wonder - Long overdue Failing To Be Our Brothers' Keepers (JOSEPH H. BROWN - Tampa Tribune) Published: Jan 16, 2005 I have to give it to Jeff Rawlins, assistant principal at Jefferson High School. Frustrated by the recent murders of Kwane Doster and John Simmons, he challenged the community in last weekend's Saturday Forum to start a movement against black-on- black crime. I have to give him his props because he, a white man, has shown more outrage about the staggering homicide rate among young black men than any black person around here. Doster, 21, and Simmons, 15, were shot to death over ``trash talk,'' the in-your-face banter that goes on between young black men over the most trivial of issues. It happens too frequently, and Rawlins, a career educator who has ``spent too much time crying with scores of concerned parents and grandparents,'' has had enough. Need I recite the sad statistics? In 2002 the United States had 14,054 homicides, according to the FBI's Uniform Crime Report. Black men accounted for nearly 40 percent of victims, and black men committed 95 percent of those murders. Those are alarming statistics for a group that makes up about 6 percent of the population. So why, as Rawlins wondered, haven't national black organizations put the issue of black fratricide front and center? The reasons are as old and outdated as some of their agendas. Reinforcing Stereotypes If whites were responsible for 95 percent of black homicides, there would be all-out mobilization by black organizations. They would march holes in their shoes, giving speech upon speech upon speech about how ``this genocide of our young black people'' had to stop. Unfortunately, black groups are reluctant to put black-on-black homicide out front for fear that openly acknowledging this social pathology would verify what racist whites believe. Still, that's no excuse. And I thought we had stopped worrying about what racist white people thought back in the 1960s. I guess I was wrong. An old college roommate of mine, a psychology major, once told me of a theory that I still find valid: When pathological behavior extends over long periods of time, even the most pragmatic individuals begin to suspect genetic reasons for the pathology. So the code of silence on the high black murder rate only reinforces the most negative of stereotypes. If Only They Wore Hoods On Monday the nation celebrates the birthday of Martin Luther King, a man whose tactics to achieve equality for black America stressed nonviolence. There will be much talk of his ``dream,'' but there will be little talk of the fact that King considered self-criticism an essential part of the struggle for equality. In his 1958 book ``Stride Toward Freedom,'' he wrote: ``Negroes must be honest enough to admit that our standards do often fall short. One of the sure signs of maturity is the ability to rise to the point of self- criticism. Whenever we are objects of criticism from white men, even though the criticisms are maliciously directed and mixed with half truths, we must pick out the elements of truth and make them the basis of creative reconstruction. We must not let the fact that we are victims of injustice lull us into abrogating responsibility for our own lives.'' King went on to say: ``Our crime rate is far too high. ... Negro leaders must develop a positive program through which Negro youth can become adjusted to urban living and improve their general level of behavior.'' But don't expect any black ``leaders'' to do that any time soon. ``Maybe black criminals can start wearing white hoods,'' Hakim Hasan of the Urban Institute wrote in Savoy magazine a few years ago. ``Perhaps then, black leadership will address black-on-black crime.'' Joseph H. Brown is a Tribune editorial writer Posted by Jerry Scharf at January 16, 2005 02:59 PM \| TrackBack Comments: The FBI uniform crime statistics are somewhat off. 16,204 murders for 2002. The 14,054 number comes from a chart that doesn't include victims whose age was unknown. 48.5% of victims were black. 92.3 percent of them were killed by black offenders. 84.7 percent of white victims were killed by white offenders. Black people make up about 13% of the U.S. population. Posted by: Greg January 16, 2005 04:07 PM Greg, Excuse me for pointing this out, but if black "people" make up about 13% of the population, then black "men" probably do make up about 6%. Joseph Brown is rather courageously bringing into the light of day some sad facts that many would prefer to hide. Let's not quibble with the details, but understand that there is a frightful emergency within our country, and mobilize our best minds and best efforts to save our country's children from perpetuating these horrors. Posted by: Alvar NC de Vaca January 16, 2005 06:06 PM Alvar, You are correct. I did overlook that they were speaking only about "men". I agree with the main point of the post and the correct numbers still make the same points valid. I disagree, however, with your opinion that we shouldn't quibble with the details. We should hold a higher standard than Michael Moore or Dan Rather. "Fake but accurate", just doesn't cut it.

To: LindyBill who wrote (95514)	1/17/2005 2:14:12 AM
From: KLP	Respond to of 793568

From a Republican site, Democrats on WMD....including this from Kennedy...maybe he was "lying then"....or is he lying now? Or....? This website has plenty of quotes and direct links to what the Democrats said about how they were sure Saddam had WMD...we can compare what they say then, versus what they say now...And remind the liberal media of these quotes from their favorite folks, like Kennedy, Clinton, Kerry, etc .... vermontgop.org Actually, Sen. Ted Kennedy also was aware of the evidence and believed that Iraq had WMDs. The following is from a Kennedy press release issued last October and still on his website: kennedy.senate.gov It is not possible to reconcile these comments with his slanderous accusations of last week: "There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein's regime is a serious danger, that he is a tyrant, and that his pursuit of lethal weapons of mass destruction cannot be tolerated. He must be disarmed. ... There is clearly a threat from Iraq, and there is clearly a danger... We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction. ... In public hearings before the Senate Armed Services Committee in March, CIA Director George Tenet described Iraq as a threat but not as a proliferator, saying that Saddam Hussein 'is determined to thwart U.N. sanctions, press ahead with weapons of mass destruction, and resurrect the military force he had before the Gulf War.' That is unacceptable... "If Saddam's regime and his very survival are threatened, then his view of his interests may be profoundly altered. He may decide he has nothing to lose by using weapons of mass destruction himself or by sharing them with terrorists. .. Nor can we rule out the possibility that Saddam would assault American forces with chemical or biological weapons. ... Clearly we must halt Saddam Hussein's quest for weapons of mass destruction." -- October 4, 2002 Kennedy also wrote at the time, "Let me say it plainly: I not only concede, but I am convinced that President Bush believes genuinely in the course he urges upon us. --9/27/03 kennedy.senate.gov So what happened, Ted?