April 7th, 2012

Murasaki Shikibu

Blacks, Nonblacks Hold Sharply Different Views of Martin Case

Blacks, Nonblacks Hold Sharply Different Views of Martin Case
Blacks more likely to believe race is a major factor

Black Americans' views differ dramatically from those of nonblacks regarding the circumstances involved in the death of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin in Sanford, Fla., on Feb. 26. Blacks are paying much closer attention to the news of the incident; overwhelmingly believe that George Zimmerman, the individual who shot Martin, is guilty of a crime; believe that racial bias was a major factor in the events leading up to the shooting; and believe that Zimmerman would already have been arrested had the victim been white, not black.



Collapse )

--

Post-racial, y'all.
D:

Oh yeah, this will -definitely- make things better.

Armed Neo-Nazis Now Patrolling Sanford, Say They Are "Prepared" For Post-Trayvon Martin Violence

Neo-Nazis are currently conducting heavily armed patrols in and around Sanford, Florida and are "prepared" for violence in the case of a race riot. The patrols are to protect "white citizens in the area who are concerned for their safety" in the wake of the Trayvon Martin shooting last month, says Commander Jeff Schoep of the National Socialist Movement. "We are not advocating any type of violence or attacks on anybody, but we are prepared for it," he says. "We are not the type of white people who are going to be walked all over."

Collapse )

Source: http://blogs.miaminewtimes.com/riptide/2012/04/heavily_armed_neo-nazis_patrol.php

Yes, because nothing will inspire a sense of safety in people like seeing jack-boot skinheads armed to the teeth patrolling the streets.
normal

Maricopa's ex-Prosecutor, and Joe Arpaio's BFF, Fails to Impress Machiavelli.

The Prosecutor on Trial: Ex-Maricopa County Attorney Faces Disbarment for Political Acts

Nothing was usual when Colorado bar discipline prosecutors John Gleason and James Sudler flew into Maricopa County, Ariz., in March 2010. For security reasons, they used assumed names and stayed at nine different hotels over the next year, as well as rotating through three rental car agencies.

Appointed by Arizona’s chief justice to investigate allegations that Maricopa’s elected prosecutor abused his powers to take down political enemies—even filing bizarre criminal charges against a judge just to prevent a scheduled hearing—they arrived with targets on their backs.

Precautions were worked out by the heads of security at the Colorado and Arizona supreme courts, mindful of the intimidation and harassment faced by many who crossed then-County Attorney Andrew Thomas and his closest ally and enforcer, the self-proclaimed “America’s toughest sheriff,” Joe Arpaio.

While the discipline case was to be decided by early April, appeals are certain either way.

There has been nothing before—in scope and import—like this spectacle, which ended in November. Many professional responsibility lawyers consider this the mother of all discipline trials, though technically it was an administrative hearing.

At age 38 and with virtually no prosecutorial experience, Thomas, a Harvard Law School grad, took office in 2005 after a tough-on-crime campaign, then was re-elected as a populist hero whose battles against illegal immigration helped spark a number of states to enact immigration laws out of frustration with what they see as the feds being feckless on the job. Thomas was instrumental in the movement launched from his state, and the issue is now before the U.S. Supreme Court in Arizona v. United States.

Early in his tenure, the prosecutor started feuding with other elected officials, judges and county managers. He used the bully pulpit of news conferences and opened criminal investigations against those who criticized or questioned his handling of immigration enforcement and other issues.

The detailed, 33-charge bar complaint accuses Thomas and Lisa Aubuchon, his former go-to assistant for prosecuting politically charged matters, of, among other things, filing criminal and civil cases without probable cause or evidentiary basis; bringing them to embarrass, burden or delay; dishonesty and fraud; incompetence; conflicts of interest; and engaging in criminal conduct (by causing an unknowing sheriff’s detective to swear to a false affidavit for charging a judge with crimes after others had balked.) It seeks their disbarment.

The bar also recommended a three-month law license suspension for Rachel Alexander, an obscure conservative blogger-cum-assistant prosecutor who was hired by Thomas for her new-media expertise. Then, brushing off warnings from senior aides and Alexander’s own concerns about her inexperience, he tapped the young prosecutor to handle a federal civil-racketeering case against judges, elected county leaders and other political foes that was widely ridiculed as risible.

Indeed, one required predicate act said simply that two lawyers had laughed at the original complaint’s author, Aubuchon, in a courtroom.

The criminal charges Thomas and Aubuchon filed against now-retired Presiding Criminal Judge Gary Donahoe, as well as the RICO case that included him, loom largest in the discipline case.

At its core, the racketeering complaint alleged that, in exchange for a new courthouse, several judges were blatantly throwing civil and criminal cases filed by Thomas’ office against county supervisors and others—even though the building project had long been in the works and was already paid for. Investigators had combed through thousands of documents and found nothing to support the key allegation—that a supervisor pressured the chief judge to hire a certain lawyer for the project—which was based on a second- or third-hand rumor that went uninvestigated and unproven.
Collapse )
no

Walker signs bevy of bills into law--51 pieces of legislation include abortion issues, sex education

Madison - Gov. Scott Walker has signed bills putting new restrictions on abortion, requiring schools that teach sex education to promote marriage and barring those who are discriminated against at work from suing for punitive damages in state court.

Democrats blasted Walker and his fellow Republicans in the Legislature for advancing policies that they say amount to a "war on women."

"He might have thought none of us are watching because it's Good Friday, but all of us women are watching," said former Dane County Executive Kathleen Falk, one of four Democrats competing to run against Walker in a June 5 recall election.

Walker spokesman Cullen Werwie declined to comment Friday on why the governor backed the four bills, which were among 51 pieces of legislation he signed late Thursday. His office announced the signings Friday.

Walker also signed a bill requiring lawmakers to disclose who is sponsoring budget earmarks and a measure to prevent voucher schools programs from automatically expanding to Green Bay and other cities.

The new laws would:

  • Require schools that teach sex education to promote marriage and tell students that abstinence is the only reliable way to prevent pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases. The change in law also allows public schools to teach abstinence-only courses, which had been barred since 2010 under a law Democrats approved when they controlled state government.
  • Prevent people subjected to employment discrimination from seeking punitive and compensatory damages in state court.
  • Require doctors to consult with patients face-to-face - rather than via Web camera - when administering abortion-inducing drugs. That measure would also require doctors to speak privately with women seeking abortions to ensure they were not being coerced, and physicians could face felonies for ignoring the law.
  • Prohibit insurance plans offered in Wisconsin under the federal health care reform law from covering some abortions.

The federal health care law, approved in 2010 by Democrats, requires states to set up exchanges that serve as marketplaces for individuals and small businesses for insurance coverage that for some consumers is subsidized by taxpayers. Under the law signed by Walker, plans offered through Wisconsin's exchange could cover abortions only in cases of sexual assault, incest and the health or life of the woman.

Collapse )

source

hat

Marion Barry puts foot in mouth: "Asians... ought to go."

OVER THE YEARS, [DC Council Member] Marion Barry has said and done so many questionable things that the city whose politics he long dominated has become inured to his behavior. But his racist remarks this week about Asian Americans — and his oblivious response — are too ugly to ignore. On Tuesday Ward 8 Democrats looked past his failings to nominate him to a third consecutive term on the D.C. Council, but that doesn’t mean that the rest of the District and its political leaders should excuse his behavior.

Mr. Barry used the occasion of a victory party Tuesday to make this ignorant observation: “We’ve got to do something about these Asians coming in, opening up businesses, those dirty shops. They ought to go, I’ll just say that right now, you know.” Collapse )
heartbeat flame

Metropolitan police 'buried' report in 2004 warning of race scandal

Scotland Yard veterans claim spiralling crisis triggered by recording of racial abuse was 'accident waiting to happen'

A secret Metropolitan police report warned police chiefs that they needed to take tougher action to stop officers discriminating against black people, and that a failure to do so would threaten a breakdown in community confidence.

The report, obtained by the Guardian, warned top officers that innocent African-Caribbean people were being stopped too often by officers, who wrongly "racially stereotyped" them as criminals.

(TW: In some of the links to other articles (with videos) embedded in this particular article there are some racial slurs when describing racial attacks by the police. I saw a few other slurs too. )

Collapse )



Source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/apr/06/metropolitan-police-warned-racism?newsfeed=true


heartbeat flame

Four Northern Ireland police officers suspended over racist and sectarian texts

Robust inquiry promised by Police Service of Northern Ireland after allegedly racist and sectarian text messages discovered

The Police Service of Northern Ireland has suspended four officers after an internal inquiry into racist and sectarian text messages.

The PSNI's deputy chief constable, confirmed on Friday night her force had in the past investigated incidents of phone text racism.

Judith Gillespie said: "We have had previous investigations who used racist texts and they were dealt with very seriously but this is the first time I can recall that we've suspended four officers."


Collapse )
Source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/apr/06/police-northernireland?intcmp=239

(Small humble request: Could we get a "Sectarianism" tag at some point that I could add to this article?)
|=

I'm a tolerant racist! ...wat?

Derbyshire In 2003: I’m A Proud ‘Racist’

Over at the conservative blog RedState, diarist Leon Wolf notes that in a 2003 interview, the National Review’s resident racist John Derbyshire proudly proclaimed his lack of tolerance for African-Americans:

"I am not very careful about what I say, having grown up in the era before Political Correctness, and never having internalized the necessary restraints. I am a homophobe, though a mild and tolerant one, and a racist, though an even more mild and tolerant one, and those things are going to be illegal pretty soon, the way we are going."

The National Review has tried to distance itself from Derbyshire’s views, but the magazine has gone silent on whether it will take any action. As Atlantic’s Ta-Nehisi Coates writes to National Review: “‘Derb’ told you what he was in 2003. And National Review continued to employ him. That’s who they are.”

RedState’s Wolf states, “[Derbyshire] is not, as his defenders at the execrable Taki mag say, confronting the world with uncomfortable truths, he is proudly declaring himself to be a racist and arguing that it is correct to be racist.” Thus, says Wolf, “The longer this drags on without a definitive severing of the relationship, the more damage will be done to National Review. I cannot imagine what sort of deliberation is required to make this decision, but I hope, for National Review’s sake, that it can be completed before the weekend is over.”

Update:
At the Daily Caller, conservative pundit Matt Lewis writes, “In one fell swoop (actually, Derbyshire has a history of flirting with this sort of thing, but it has finally caught up with him), he has done more harm to the conservative cause than any liberal ever could. … I believe in free speech — especially unpopular speech. But that doesn’t mean National Review has to subsidize it.”

source: http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/04/07/460176/derbyshire-in-2003-im-a-proud-racist/
|=

Oh look, he doesn't like women either, this is my surprise face.

In 2009, Derbyshire Argued Women Shouldn’t Vote: ‘Women Voting Is Bad For Conservatism’

The National Review’s John Derbyshire isn’t just an avowed racist and a homophobe. He’s also a misogynist. In 2009, he authored a book that contained a chapter titled “The Case Against Women’s Suffrage.” In it, he argued the country would be better off if women didn’t have the right to vote. He discussed his views in a Sept. 2009 interview with Alan Colmes:

DERBYSHIRE: Among the hopes that I do not realistically nurse is the hope that female suffrage will be repealed. But I’ll say this – if it were to be, I wouldn’t lose a minute’s sleep.

COLMES: We’d be a better country if women didn’t vote?

DERBYSHIRE: Probably. Don’t you think so?

COLMES: No, I do not think so whatsoever.

DERBYSHIRE: Come on Alan. Come clean here [laughing]. Ahem, PRRIIIIIIIIIIIIICK

COLMES: We would be a better country? John Derbyshire making the statement, we would be a better country if women did not vote.

In an Oct. 2009 interview with Thom Hartmann, he clarified his stance, arguing that women should have the right to vote but simply shouldn’t exercise it. As he stated, “the proposition that women voting is bad for conservatism, and as a conservative, of course, I think that’s bad for society.” Listen here:



But remember, anyone who tells you there’s a conservative “war on women” is spouting pure “fiction,” according to RNC Chairman Reince Priebus.

Source: http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/04/07/460188/in-2009-derbyshire-argued-women-shouldnt-vote-women-voting-is-bad-for-conservatism/

And only just NOW has he been fired? Jesus Christ. Of course, I think he was fired less for having racist views, and more because he was just being blunt about it.
Paul Card

You knew this was coming...

National Review fires John Derbyshire

The National Review has fired longtime columnist John Derbyshire following an article he wrote for an online magazine that was widely viewed as racist in nature.

"[Derbyshire's] latest provocation, in a webzine, lurches from the politically incorrect to the nasty and indefensible," National Review editor Rich Lowry wrote in a statement posted late Saturday night. "We never would have published it, but the main reason that people noticed it is that it is by a National Review writer. Derb is effectively using our name to get more oxygen for views with which we’d never associate ourselves otherwise. So there has to be a parting of the ways."

In the highly controversial column, written for Taki's Magazine on Thursday, Derbyshire suggests white and Asian parents talk to their children about what makes black people different and the threats posed to their safety by black people. Five percent of black people are "ferociously hostile" to whites, according to Derbyshire, and most are willing to be hostile. Derbyshire advises parents to tell their children not to live or stay long in predominantly black communities.

"You don’t have to follow my version of the talk point for point; but if you are white or Asian and have kids, you owe it to them to give them some version of the talk," Derbyshire concludes. "It will save them a lot of time and trouble spent figuring things out for themselves. It may save their lives."

"Derb has long danced around the line on these issues, but this column is so outlandish it constitutes a kind of letter of resignation," Lowry wrote. "It’s a free country, and Derb can write whatever he wants, wherever he wants. Just not in the pages of NR or NRO, or as someone associated with NR any longer."

The outpouring of criticism was quick, with The Atlantic's Ta-Nehesi Coates calling Derbyshire a racist, and Forbes calling for Derbyshire to be fired.


Collapse )


-Source