Subscribe   Contact   

Twitter       Facebook  

About         Archives




Powered by Squarespace

Support BW!

Racist Suspect Watch
Racist Business Index

free your mind!

Cress Welsing: The Definition of Racism White Supremacy

Dr. Blynd: The Definition of Racism

Anon: What is Racism/White Supremacy?

Dr. Bobby Wright: The Psychopathic Racial Personality

The Cress Theory of Color-Confrontation and Racism (White Supremacy)

What is the First Step in Counter Racism?

Genocide: a system of white survival

The Creation of the Negro

The Mysteries of Melanin

'Racism is a behavioral system for survival'

Fear of annihilation drives white racism

Dr. Blynd: The Definition of Caucasian

Where are all the Black Jurors? 

The War Against Black Males: Black on Black Violence Caused by White Supremacy/Racism

Brazen Police Officers and the Forfeiture of Freedom

White Domination, Black Criminality

Fear of a Colored Planet Fuels Racism: Global White Population Shrinking, Less than 10%

Race is Not Real but Racism is

The True Size of Africa

What is a Nigger? 

MLK and Imaginary Freedom: Chains, Plantations, Segregation, No Longer Necessary ['Our Condition is Getting Worse']

Chomsky on "Reserving the Right to Bomb Niggers." 

A Goal of the Media is to Make White Dominance and Control Over Everything Seem Natural

"TV is reversing the evolution of the human brain." Propaganda: How You Are Being Mind Controlled And Don't Know It.

Spike Lee's Mike Tyson and Don King

"Zapsters" - Keeping what real? "Non-white People are Actors. The Most Unrealistic People on the Planet"

Black Power in a White Supremacy System

Neely Fuller Jr.: "If you don't understand racism/white supremacy, everything else that you think you understand will only confuse you"

The Image and the Christian Concept of God as a White Man

'In order for this system to work, We have to feel most free and independent when we are most enslaved, in fact we have to take our enslavement as the ultimate sign of freedom'

Why do White Americans need to criminalize significant segments of the African American population?

Who Told You that you were Black or Latino or Hispanic or Asian? White People Did

Malcolm X: "We Have a Common Enemy"


Deeper than Atlantis

Private Military Contractors Hired to Move Guns and Gold Out of Ferguson 

Business owners in the St. Louis, Missouri area have hired private military contractors to transport guns and gold, fearing their shops will be targeted by looters if a grand jury does not indict Darren Wilson, the police officer who shot and killed Michael Brown in the St. Louis county suburb of Ferguson.


Violent crime has plummeted in the US. Yet White Prosecutors and Police Keep Locking Up Blacks & Papering Cases


Nearly two-thirds of Americans think violent crime increased over the past year, even though violent crime has been on a general decline for two decades, according to a new Gallup survey.

This is one reason the US still leads the world in imprisoning people. Politicians can still take some tough-on-crime stances simply because most Americans have no idea what the reality is on this issue.

Why has the prison population increased in the last 30 years?


Black Chicago Cop Indicted For Excessive Force In 2012 Arrest [no grand jury necessary] 


A Chicago police officer has been indicted on federal charges, accused of using excessive force when he allegedly punched a man during an arrest in 2012, and kicked him while he was handcuffed and lying on the floor face-down.

Aldo Brown, 37, has been charged with one count of violating a victim’s civil rights, and two counts of obstruction of justice. Brown, who has been an officer since 2002, has not yet been scheduled for arraignment.

Federal prosecutors allege Brown and another unnamed officer entered a convenience store on East 76th Street on Sept. 27, 2012, and placed two people in handcuffs. After searching the store, the unnamed officer allegedly removed the handcuffs from one man, and Brown allegedly struck the man several times.

The victim was then handcuffed again, and Brown pulled a gun from the man’s rear pants pocket, according to prosecutors. Brown then allegedly kicked the man while he was lying on his stomach, before Brown and his partner arrested the man.

Brown allegedly falsified a “tactical response report” on the incident, claiming the victim actively resisted, and fled from the officers, and did not indicate Brown punched or kicked the victim.

Prosecutors allege Brown also falsified an arrest report, by claiming he saw a gun in the victim’s poket while interviewing him, then “conducted a [sic] emergency take down.”

The indictment alleges Brown did not see the gun until after he had struck the man several times, and handcuffed him twice.

The second officer was not charged as part of the indictment.

Although the indictment does not identify the second officer, or either of the men who were handcuffed at the convenience store, two brothers sued Brown and Officer George Stacker in October 2012, claiming the officers beat them during that arrest.

Jecque Howard and Paul Neal said they were working in the store when the two officers came in and began handcuffing people.

“I’m getting a gun pointed at me and punched in my face and kicked in my ribs,” said Jecque Howard.

Howard said the officers never even said why they were there. He said Officer George Stacker was the first to approach him.

“He came to the front and said ‘you work here?’, and I said, ‘yes’. He said ‘well not after today, you’re fired,’” explained Howard.

Howard’s brother, Paul Neal, was working outside the South Shore shop for a government cell phone program at the time.

Surveillance footage obtained by the 2 Investigators was at the center of an Independent Police Review Authority investigation at the time.


Israeli forces sexually abuse detained Palestinian minors


Hundreds protest US support for Mexican drug cartels


Dr. Randy Short: Celebrating 50 Years of FBI assassinating blacks


President announces immigration reforms - A three year promise to not deport and a three year work permit.

From [HERE] US President Barrack Obama on Thursday announced execution action [remarks] on immigration that would allow 4.7 million undocumented immigrants to stay in the US. The reform allows immigrants that have been in the US for more than five years or have children who are citizens to register and pass a criminal background check in order to stay in the country. The reform also requires that immigrants to pay their fair share in taxes. The immigrants will also not be allowed to vote nor will they qualify for certain federal benefits, such as health care coverage. Obama also stated that he would add additional resources at the border in order to stem the crossing of immigrants and return those that have crossed. The president also stated the reform would make it easier for highly skilled graduates and entrepreneurs to stay in the US and contribute.  [MORE]

Estimates vary, but this will probably affect around 4 to 5 million undocumented immigrants. The effect this will have on labor markets is complicated slightly by the fact that it’s not really a full amnesty. Instead it’s really a three year promise to not deport, and a three year work permit. If the next administration decides to not allow renewals or if someone doesn’t apply for one, they can be deported in the future. So the existing literature on legalization may not apply here, or the effects may be mitigated. Will this reduce the wage impact? It’s hard to say.

Another way this could affect labor markets is by increasing labor supply if more immigrants get jobs. This won’t affect native wages much because the evidence shows low-skilled immigration doesn’t really impact native employment much to begin with. But more importantly, illegal immigrants already have jobs. In fact, according to Pew their labor force participation is significantly higher than the native participation rate. Of the 11.2 million illegal immigrants in the U.S., they estimate 8.1 million are in the labor force, a participation rate of 72.3%. In contrast, the overall U.S. participation rate is 62.8% right now. So maybe they will work more, but they already work a lot. [MORE]


Obama secretly extends US combat role in Afghanistan

Press TV

President Barack Obama has secretly signed an order which allows US troops to be involved in combat operations in Afghanistan throughout 2015, a new report says.

The order will authorize American forces to continue their missions against the Taliban and other militant groups, the New York Times reported on Friday.

According to the report, the new authorization will also let US jets, bombers, and drones be used to aid ground troops.

The Times said an administration official said American forces would not carry out "offensive missions" against the Taliban in 2015.

“We will no longer target belligerents solely because they are members of the Taliban,” the official said. “To the extent that Taliban members directly threaten the United States and coalition forces in Afghanistan or provide direct support to Al Qaeda, however, we will take appropriate measures to keep Americans safe.”

Obama’s new decision has been made in recent weeks with his top national security advisors.

Earlier in May, Obama announced that the American military won't have any combat role in Afghanistan next year.

He said nearly 10,000 troops remaining in Afghanistan will only be involved in training Afghan forces.

The US and its allies invaded Afghanistan in 2001 as part of Washington’s so-called war on terror. The offensive removed the Taliban from power, but insecurity continues to rise across the country, despite the presence of thousands of US-led troops.


West’s [white people] Media Outlets Continue to Describe Unknown US Drone Victims [non-whites] As “Militants”

4th Media

It has been more than two years since The New York Times revealed that “Mr. Obama embraced a disputed method for counting civilian casualties” of his drone strikes which “in effect counts all military-age males in a strike zone as combatants…unless there is explicit intelligence posthumously proving them innocent.”

The paper noted that “this counting method may partly explain the official claims of extraordinarily low collateral deaths,” and even quoted CIA officials as deeply “troubled” by this decision: “One called it ‘guilt by association’ that has led to ‘deceptive’ estimates of civilian casualties. ‘It bothers me when they say there were seven guys, so they must all be militants. They count the corpses and they’re not really sure who they are.’”

But what bothered even some intelligence officials at the agency carrying out the strikes seemed of no concern whatsoever to most major media outlets. As I documented days after the Times article, most large western media outlets continued to describe completely unknown victims of U.S. drone attacks as “militants”—even though they (a) had no idea who those victims were or what they had done and (b) were well-aware by that point that the term had been “re-defined” by the Obama administration into Alice in Wonderland-level nonsense.

Like the U.S. drone program itself, this deceitful media practice continues unabated. “Drone strike kills at least four suspected militants in northwest Pakistan,” a Reuters headline asserted last week. The headline chosen by ABC News, publishing an AP report, was even more definitive: “U.S. Drone in Northwest Pakistan Kills 6 Militants.”

In July, The Wall Street Journal‘s headline claimed: “U.S. Drone Strike Kills Five Militants in Pakistan’s North Waziristan.” Sometimes they will turn over their headlines to “officials,” as this AP reportfrom July did: “Officials: US drone kills 7 militants in Pakistan.”

Since its 2012 report, the Times itself has tended to avoid the “militant” language in its headlines, but often lends credence to dubious official claims, as when it said this about a horrific U.S. drone strike last December on a Yemeni wedding party that killed 12 people and wounded at least 15 others, including the bride: “Most of the dead appeared to be people suspected of being militants linked to Al Qaeda, according to tribal leaders in the area, but there were also reports that several civilians had been killed.”

Other U.S. media accounts of that strike were just as bad, if not worse. The controversies over the definition of “militant” are almost never mentioned in any of these reports.

A new article in The New Yorker by Steve Coll underscores how deceptive this journalistic practice is. Among other things, he notes that the U.S. government itself—let alone the media outlets calling them “militants”—often has no idea who has been killed by drone strikes in Pakistan.

That’s because, in 2008, George W. Bush and his CIA chief, Gen. Michael Hayden, implemented “signature strikes,” under which “new rules allowed drone operators to fire at armed military-aged males engaged in or associated with suspicious activity even if their identities were unknown.”

The Intercept previously reported that targeting decisions can even be made on the basis of nothing more than metadata analysis and tracking of SIM cards in mobile phones.

The journalist Daniel Klaidman has noted that within the CIA, they “sometimes call it crowd killing….  If you don’t have positive ID on the people you’re targeting with these drone strikes.” The tactic of drone-killing first responders and rescuers who come to the scene of drone attacks or even mourners at funerals of drone victims—used by the Obama administration and designated “terror groups” alike—are classic examples.

Nobody has any real idea who the dead are, but they are nonetheless routinely called “militants” by the American government and media. As international law professor Kevin Jon Heller documented in 2012, “The vast majority of drone attacks conducted by the U.S. have been signature strikes—those that target ‘groups of men who bear certain signatures, or defining characteristics associated with terrorist activity, but whose identities aren’t known.’”


The End of Eyewitness Testimonies [a major tool of racist injustice]  


Memory, as experts have been trying to teach judges and jurors, does not function like an iPhone camera recording. Memories can not only be deleted; they can be altered or invented without you even realizing it, as shown in a study published last year in the International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, which involved 861 U.S. soldiers enrolled in a survival school. As part of training, they endured abusive interrogations. Afterward, many were shown a photo of someone who looked nothing like their interrogator, and interviewers insinuated that the person depicted was the culprit. Eighty-four percent of the soldiers misidentified their interrogators after being misled, and some also remembered weapons or telephones that never existed.  

An extensive body of research with similar findings has become increasingly perplexing for the nation’s judicial systems, leading the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) to release a sweeping report last month calling for an overhaul of how the courts and law enforcement deal with one of the most powerfully persuasive pieces of evidence that can sway a jury: eyewitness identification. Research has shown that leading questioning or suggestive behavior by psychiatrists, police or acquaintances, as well as accounts in the media, can result in “planting” false memories in the mind of a witness. In some cases, this can lead witnesses to believe they saw incidents that never occurred. In lawsuits recently filed against Castlewood Treatment Center in St. Louis, plaintiffs have argued that therapists used hypnosis and psychiatric drugs to recover “hidden” abuse memories that turned out to be false.

Between 60 and 80 percent of psychologists and other mental health professionals still believe therapy can retrieve repressed memories, as noted in a 2013 study in Psychological Science. Yet many scientists and mental health professionals now believe that research does not support the notion that traumatic experiences can “disappear” from one’s memory only to be recalled years later in evocative detail. Here’s the more likely scenario: Those traumatic memories were instead conjured up as false memories after leading questioning by a therapist.

When it comes to long-term recollections, most memory researchers believe modifications are constantly being made, while gaps in narrative are filled in with experiences and expectations—not the actual events. Stressful situations (especially those involving a weapon), like Yvonne’s abduction, can be particularly vexing for the memory: They can take a person’s attention away from an attacker’s face and possibly lead to a skewed or mistaken identification.

Unsettling as it might be to admit it, the mind is really a muddle of distorted memory associations, further complicated by the distracting details of the moment. For most of our country’s judicial history, this understanding has been largely absent from courtrooms, but a string of shocking cases across the world over the past three decades has ushered in debate, discussion and, finally, the revamping of national laws on the issue.  

Take Donald M. Thomson, a psychologist and attorney in Australia who was arrested for assault and rape in 1975. The night before his booking, Thomson had appeared on a television show discussing his research on the flaws of eyewitness testimony. As the show aired, the woman who would later identify Thomson as her attacker was being raped in her apartment. Thomson’s alibi was solid—the television show had been live. The victim later admitted she had been watching the show before she was attacked. Authorities dropped charges against Thomson after realizing the victim had confused his face on her television screen with her rapist’s.

There have been 318 wrongful convictions overturned by DNA evidence since 1989. In most of those cases, the eyewitnesses who testified felt confident in their memories when under oath on the stand. Yet eyewitness testimony contributed to 72 percent of those wrongful convictions, according to the Innocence Project, a nonprofit legal and public policy group.

Gary Wells, a professor at Iowa State University who has been working on the issue of lineups and eyewitness identifications since the 1970s, says that for a defendant, it used to be, if “you get mistakenly identified by an eyewitness, you’re just going down. There was pretty much nothing definitive enough to trump the eyewitness account.” But when DNA exonerations began seeping into the legal system in the 1990s, more courts began to ask: Why are so many eyewitness accounts misfiring?

That question has prompted some courts to revamp how such evidence is handled. In 2011, the New Jersey Supreme Court released detailed jury instructions, requiring consideration (usually at the end of a trial) of the crime’s duration of time, a witness’s level of stress or distraction, distance from the event, lighting at the time, intoxication, a focus on a distracting weapon, if there were possible racial challenges (since research shows that people make more mistakes trying to identify strangers of races different from their own) and exposure to information that may mislead the memory.

In 2012, the Oregon Supreme Court also mandated new procedures for allowing eyewitness identifications in court, requiring determination of whether “suggestive” tactics like cueing the witness or bolstering an identification were used by law enforcement. Meanwhile, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court has been positioning itself to follow suit after three years of closely examining the issue and hearing oral arguments this past September in four cases involving eyewitness testimony. Eleven states now require law enforcement officials to follow more careful procedures when obtaining eyewitness identifications, according to the NAS report, but policies and practices vary widely by state. Despite growing awareness about memory science, the intricacies of how it works still remain largely unfamiliar to many jurors, witnesses, attorneys, judges and law enforcement officials.


Racist Republicans Mad b/c Rep. Marcia Fudge said "We lost [elections] because our party has, to some extent, lost white Southerners due in part to the race of our President."

"Democrats lost Senate control because we failed to mobilize young voters across racial and regional spectrums," her statement continued. "We failed to persuade Southern voters to hold true to core Democratic values. We lost because the Hispanic community was insufficiently motivated.

"We lost because of ideological differences within the Democratic Party and with our Administration. We lost because our party has, to some extent, lost white Southerners due in part to the race of our President."

Blaming Black people for choosing not to vote for puppeticians who do nothing to address racism/white supremacy is deception in service of the necessary illusion of choice.[MORE]



High blood pressure and kidney decline may be caused by Racist Conduct by Whites


Feeling judged because of your race could have a negative impact on your physical health, a new study finds.

A team of researchers studied 1,574 residents of Baltimore as part of the Healthy Aging in Neighborhoods of Diversity across the Life Span study and found that 20% of the subjects reported feeling that they had been racially discriminated against “a lot.”

Even after the researchers adjusted the results for race, this group had higher systolic blood pressure than those who perceived only a little discrimination.

Over a five-year followup, the group who felt more racial discrimination also tended to have greater decline in kidney function. When the researchers, co-led by Deidra C. Crews, MD, assistant professor of medicine and chair of the diversity council at Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, adjusted for age and lifestyle factors, the effect stayed constant for African-American women.

“Psychosocial stressors could potentially have an effect on kidney function decline through a number of hormonal pathways,” Dr. Crews said. The release of stress hormones can lead to an increase in blood pressure, and high blood pressure is one of the leading causes of kidney disease.

This isn’t the first time that perceived racial discrimination has been linked to chronic diseases: a 2011 study found that lifetime discrimination was linked to higher rates of hypertension.


Black Family wins settlement in Hays State Prison wrongful death lawsuit


The first lawsuit filed against Georgia's prison system for violence at Hays State Prison that led to four prisoner deaths has been settled for several hundred thousand dollars.

RaHonda MacClain, the mother of Damion MacClain, had wanted the state held accountable for ignoring the ruthless gang violence and dangerous conditions where cell door locks were left broken or could be defeated with only a napkin.

It was those conditions that led to her son being beaten and strangled and left in his prison bed to die, her lawsuit filed in September 2013 stated.

If she had lived long enough to testify against the Department of Corrections -- from State Commissioner Brian Owens to the dorm guards at Hays -- MacClain's family said they wouldn't have chosen to settle.

But MacClain was the main witness in the case, said her brother Lysander Turner. After her unexpected death earlier this year, the Southern Center for Human Rights, which handled the case for the family, encouraged him to settle. Turner said he didn't want to give the exact amount of the settlement.

"If it was left up to me I would have took it all the way," he said. "It wasn't really about the money. I just wanted to bring the attention of the public to the Department of Corrections."

The Department of Corrections didn't comment on the settlement Tuesday.

Damion MacClain was the second prisoner killed in a week at Hays State Prison in December 2012. Two more men would die in a seven-week span before the Department of Corrections ousted the warden and funneled millions of dollars to fix broken cell doors and harden cells where prisoners were pulling the metal from window frames and vents to make deadly weapons.

The families of the last two inmates killed -- 19-year-old Pippa Hall-Jackson and Nathaniel Reynolds -- also sued the Department of Corrections in October. The suit alleges that 11 prison officials -- from the state commissioner to low-level guards -- were deliberately indifferent to the growing violence that led to their sons' deaths.

The deaths at Hays State Prison and dozens of others in the Georgia prison system haven't gone unnoticed, said state Sen. Vincent Fort, D-Atlanta, who held a hearing in April at the Capitol to discuss the growing violence.

Fort said the state must do more to ensure the safety of its prisoners. He said he will meet with Owens before he decides whether to introduce legislation next year.[MORE]


U.N. Torture Panel Criticizes Police Brutality in the United States


Baltimore Decides to Disclose the Results of Police Brutality Lawsuits to the Public 


In a progressive move, Baltimore officials have announced the city will make the outcome of all civil lawsuits alleging police brutality available to the public.

A six-month investigation by the Baltimore Sun revealed that the city has paid $5.7 million since 2011 on lawsuits and settlements in 102 civil suits alleging police brutality and misconduct.

The Sun‘s report included accounts of broken bones and beaten faces of suspects during arrests. Victims of brutality and civil rights violations in Baltimore include a 15-year old boy riding a dirt bike, a 26-year old pregnant accountant who witnessed a beating, a 50-year old woman selling church raffle tickets, a 67-year old church deacon rolling a cigarette and an 87-year old grandmother aiding her wounded grandson, the report said.

The newspaper found that sometimes officers did not complete their use-of-force reports, which are required after a violent arrest.

Nearly all of the people in the incidents were cleared of criminal charges, according to The Sun.

City solicitor George Nilson enacted a new policy for police settlements and court judgements that will provide increased training for officers who are often cited in these kinds of lawsuits. He told The Sun that the new policies will give the public more information.

“I want to end the thinking that we’re hiding the ball, because we’re not,” he told The Sun.

The new database will have summarizations of excessive force lawsuits. It will have a record of the outcomes of lawsuits and settlements reached. Cases that have already been settled won’t be posted, but are available upon request, according to Nilson. City lawyers will conduct research to examine if Baltimore’s non-disclosure clauses are “fair and consistent with best practices.”