Tag Archives: white

Suspect: I Beat Up White Man Because I Am Mad About Trayvon Martin Case

Suspect: I Beat Up White Man Because I Am Mad About Trayvon Martin Case

Maywood, Ill. – Alton L. Hayes III, a west suburban man charged with a hate crime, told police he was so upset about the Trayvon Martin case in Florida that he beat up a white man early Tuesday.

Hayes and a 15-year-old Chicago boy walked up behind the 19-year-old man victim and pinned his arms to his side, police said. Hayes, 18, then picked up a large tree branch, pointed it at the man and said, “Empty your pockets, white boy.”

The two allegedly rifled through the victim’s pockets, then threw him to the ground and punched him “numerous times” in the head and back before running away, police said. Hayes and the boy are black; the victim is white.

After being arrested, Hayes told police he was upset by the Trayvon Martin case and beat the man up because he was white, Cook County State’s Attorney’s office spokeswoman Tandra Simonton said, citing court records.

Martin, 17, was fatally shot Feb. 26 in Sanford, Fla., by neighborhood watch volunteer George Zimmerman, who was charged April 11 with second-degree murder. Zimmerman is Hispanic, while Martin was black.

Hayes, 18 of the 1200 block of North Woodbine Avenue in Oak Park, was charged with attempted robbery, aggravated battery and a hate crime, all felonies, Oak Park police Detective Cmdr. Ladon Reynolds said.

Hayes was ordered held on $80,000 bond and remained in the Cook County Jail on Friday. He will next appear in court May 11. The boy was referred to juvenile court.

SOURCE

Nurse kidnapped Baby Keegan after gunning down her mother at a Doctors appointment

Nurse Kidnapped Baby Keegan After Miscarriage
PHOTO: Law enforcement officers enter an apartment near the scene where a mother was killed and her baby, Keegan Schuchardt,

By COLLEEN CURRY, GINA SUNSERI, and YUNJI DE NIES (@yunjid)

The nurse who killed a young Texas mother and kidnapped her 3-day-old baby told police she needed the infant to show to her fiance, whom she had misled into believing she had recently given birth to his child.

In a press conference this afternoon, police provided more details of the kidnapping and murder. They said that the suspect, Verna Deann McClain, 30, contacted them Tuesday afternoon as officers frantically searched for 3-day-old Keegan Schuchardt, who was kidnapped after his mother, Kayla Golden, was gunned down outside of a pediatrician’s office. Police had put out an Amber Alert for the child, asking the public to report any sightings of McClain’s vehicle to authorities.

McClain contacted police to say she was affiliated with the vehicle being sought but had nothing to do with the crimes. Her story “fell apart” while investigators interviewed her, according to Montgomery County Sheriff Captain Bruce Zenor. McClain then confessed to killing Golden, 28, and snatching baby Keegan.

Montgomery County D.A.

Golden was shot dead and then run over in the parking lot of the doctor’s office where she was taking Keegan for a check-up. Police said that they believe McClain acted alone, pulling up in a Lexus SUV next to Golden’s car before shooting her, putting the infant in her car, and then hitting Golden with the SUV on the way out of the parking lot.

“My baby, my baby!” Golden reportedly screamed as her infant boy was taken from his car seat.

McClain is charged with capital murder and is being held without bail in a solitary jail cell.

Zenor said during a press conference today that McClain kidnapped the baby because she had told her fiance that she had given birth recently to his child, when in reality she had suffered a miscarriage. She was set to marry the man in May, and felt she needed a baby to show him, Zenor said.
PHOTO: Law enforcement officers enter an apartment near the scene where a mother was killed and her baby, Keegan Schuchardt, inset, kidnapped, April 17, 2012, in Spring, Texas.
Montgomery County Sheriff’s Office/AP
Law enforcement officers enter an apartment… View Full Size
Texas Mother Killed, Newborn Stolen: Nurse Charged Watch Video
Texas Mother Killed, Newborn Stolen: Arrest Made Watch Video
Newborn Kidnapped After Mom Shot Dead Watch Video

Police said they believe Golden was a random target, and that McClain had been familiar with the pediatrician’s office from taking her own children there. McClain has three children.

Police said that from the moment witnesses called to report a woman shot in the parking lot in Spring, Texas, multiple law enforcement agencies raced to find baby Keegan. Two detectives spotted a vehicle matching the description of the one in the incident in a nearby apartment complex and entered McClain’s home, but found it empty.

McClain later showed up at her apartment, and told police that the baby was at the apartment of her sister, in a neighboring county. A SWAT team in that county found Keegan alive six hours after the kidnapping.

Police said McClain has expressed remorse for the killing.

Keegan is now with a relative, police said. They would not comment on why the child is not being released to his father.

Golden’s other two children are in a “safe place,” according to her mother, Linda Golden, though she would not specify where. It was unclear whether Keith Schuchardt is the father of Golden’s other children, ages 4 and 19 months.

Schuchardt told ABC News he held Keegan last night when the infant was found.

“It was wonderful. It was nice to know he’s still alive,” he said today. “[Golden] was the best girl I’ve ever been with. She’s just good for the kids, good with the kids. She helped me out through a lot of stuff.”

Golden’s mother, Linda Golden, said the tragedy has devastated her family and Keith Schuchardt.

“Her husband is devastated. We don’t know what we’re going to do. They loved each other very much, they really were just so sweet to each other,” she said. “Me and her were really really close, we went everywhere together, did everything together. She was my only daughter. I don’t know what I’m going to do.”

Linda Golden said her daughter did not know her murderer, and was unlikely to fight with or disagree with anyone.

“She would never fight with anybody or argue with anybody, she was such a sweet person. They say this lady wanted a baby real bad, was a registered nurse, and just picked out my daughter and killed her,” Golden said. “She would never fight with anybody, but she was fighting for her baby, and got killed.”

Witnesses said the mom fought to keep the baby from the kidnappers, but ended up in the parking lot with gunshot wounds.

“She was laying on the ground. She wasn’t moving for nothing,” witness Joshua Jesson told ABC station KTRK in Houston. “But then I saw a blue Lexus drive off in that direction.”

“The child was being put into the suspect vehicle and that’s when the mother tried to get into the car,” Lt. Dan Norris with the Montgomery County Sheriff’s Office said. “The car sped away, knocking the lady to the ground.”

An affidavit obtained by ABC News from the Montgomery County police states that McClain admitted to shooting Golden and taking the baby.

According to the affidavit, McClain’s sister, Corina Jackson, had recently said that her sister would be adopting a baby soon. After she allegedly killed Golden and stole her newborn, McClain stated to her sister that she now had the child. McClain has three children ages 16, 10 and 6.

“There were statements that were made by Ms. McClain that led us to believe this was an intentional act on her part, not that Ms. Golden was targeted specifically, but that this was part of a plan to kidnap a child,” Ligon said.

McClain, a mother of three, made her first appearance in magistrate court this morning. According to the Montgomery County district attorney’s office, she was charged with capital murder early this morning.

“She’s given a full statement to the detectives with the Montgomery County Sheriff’s Department,” the district attorney, Brett Ligon, said today on “Good Morning America.” “As part of the statement with that agency, in conjunction with the other evidence that we were able to obtain yesterday…we did charge her [McClain] in the early hours of this morning with capital murder.”

Though witnesses from the scene of the crime had told authorities there were two people in the car, police today said they are convinced that McClain had acted alone.

SOURCE

Race-Based Hate

FBI: Hate Crimes Target Blacks In 70 Percent Of Race-Based Cases
Hate Crimes

Custom Search

Blacks were the group most likely to be the targets of race-based hate crimes, according to a new federal report.

The report, compiled by the FBI’s civil rights division, found that the large majority of racial bias crimes were “motivated by anti-black bias.” Latinos were the targets of 66 percent of all hate crimes motivated by ethnicity or national origin. Jews were the targets of most crimes against religious groups, and most crimes against a particular sexual orientation or gender were motivated by “anti-homosexual male bias.”

The number of hate crimes remained essentially flat between 2009 and 2010. There were 6,628 hate crimes reported in 2010, up very slightly from 6,604 in 2009. About 47 percent of all the reported hate crimes were racially motivated, with 20 percent motivated by religion, 19.3 percent motivated by sexual orientation, and 12.8 percent motivated by nationality.

“Almost a fourth of our 2010 civil rights caseload involved crimes motivated by a particular bias against the victim,
” said Eric Thomas, the bureau’s civil rights chief in Washington. “We frequently worked these cases with state and local law enforcement to ensure that justice was done–whether at the state level or at the federal level.”

The FBI said that because of the James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crime Prevention Act, the bureau is making some changes to collect more information for bias crimes against a particular gender or gender identity and for crimes in which juveniles are targets. The law, which was signed by President Obama in 2009 and was meant to bolster and expand existing hate crimes laws. It is named after two of the most high profile victims of hate crimes in recent memory. Shepard was a college student who died in 1998 after being tortured and tied to a fence for being gay. That same year, Byrd, a black man in rural Texas was killed after being dragged behind a pickup truck for miles by a group of white supremacists. At the time of their killings, there were no hate crime laws in many states.


Video ,Deryl Dedmon Leaves The Courtroom In Jackson , Miss. , Pool) , Sept. 30 , After Entering a “Not Guilty” Plea Before Hinds County Circuit Judge Jeff Weill , Friday , On a Capital Murder Indictment. Dedmon Is Charged With Running Down James Craig Anderson On June 26 With a Pickup In What Authorities Say Was a Hate Crime.


SOURCE

The Crime of Making Americans Aware of their Own History

The Crime of Making Americans Aware of their Own History

by William Blum

Global Research

Is history getting too close for comfort for the fragile little American heart and mind? Their schools and their favorite media have done an excellent job of keeping them ignorant of what their favorite country has done to the rest of the world, but lately some discomforting points of view have managed to find their way into this well-defended American consciousness.

First, Congressman Ron Paul during a presidential debate last month expressed the belief that those who carried out the September 11 attack were retaliating for the many abuses perpetrated against Arab countries by the United States over the years. The audience booed him, loudly.

Then, popular-song icon Tony Bennett, in a radio interview, said the United States caused the 9/11 attacks because of its actions in the Persian Gulf, adding that President George W. Bush had told him in 2005 that the Iraq war was a mistake. Bennett of course came under some nasty fire. FOX News (September 24), carefully choosing its comments charmingly as usual, used words like “insane”, “twisted mind”, and “absurdities”. Bennett felt obliged to post a statement on Facebook saying that his experience in World War II had taught him that “war is the lowest form of human behavior.” He said there’s no excuse for terrorism, and he added, “I’m sorry if my statements suggested anything other than an expression of love for my country.” (NBC September 21)

Then came the Islamic cleric, Anwar al-Awlaki, an American citizen, who for some time had been blaming US foreign policy in the Middle East as the cause of anti-American hatred and terrorist acts. So we killed him. Ron Paul and Tony Bennett can count themselves lucky.

What, then, is the basis of all this? What has the United States actually been doing in the Middle East in the recent past?

the shooting down of two Libyan planes in 1981
the bombing of Lebanon in 1983 and 1984
the bombing of Libya in 1986
the bombing and sinking of an Iranian ship in 1987
the shooting down of an Iranian passenger plane in 1988
the shooting down of two more Libyan planes in 1989
the massive bombing of the Iraqi people in 1991
the continuing bombings and draconian sanctions against Iraq for the next 12 years
the bombing of Afghanistan and Sudan in 1998
the habitual support of Israel despite the routine devastation and torture it inflicts upon the Palestinian people
the habitual condemnation of Palestinian resistance to this
the abduction of “suspected terrorists” from Muslim countries, such as Malaysia, Pakistan, Lebanon and Albania, who were then taken to places like Egypt and Saudi Arabia, where they were tortured
the large military and hi-tech presence in Islam’s holiest land, Saudi Arabia, and elsewhere in the Persian Gulf region
the support of numerous undemocratic, authoritarian Middle East governments from the Shah of Iran to Mubarak of Egypt to the Saudi royal family
the invasion, bombing and occupation of Afghanistan, 2001 to the present, and Iraq, 2003 to the present
the bombings and continuous firing of missiles to assassinate individuals in Somalia, Yemen, Pakistan, and Libya during the period of 2006-2011

It can’t be repeated or emphasized enough. The biggest lie of the “war on terrorism”, although weakening, is that the targets of America’s attacks have an irrational hatred of the United States and its way of life, based on religious and cultural misunderstandings and envy. The large body of evidence to the contrary includes a 2004 report from the Defense Science Board, “a Federal advisory committee established to provide independent advice to the Secretary of Defense.” The report states:

“Muslims do not hate our freedom, but rather they hate our policies. The overwhelming majority voice their objections to what they see as one-sided support in favor of Israel and against Palestinian rights, and the long-standing, even increasing, support for what Muslims collectively see as tyrannies, most notably Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Pakistan and the Gulf states. Thus, when American public diplomacy talks about bringing democracy to Islamic societies, this is seen as no more than self-serving hypocrisy.”

The report concludes: “No public relations campaign can save America from flawed policies.” (Christian Science Monitor, November 29, 2004)

The Pentagon released the study after the New York Times ran a story about it on November 24, 2004. The Times reported that although the board’s report does not constitute official government policy, it captures “the essential themes of a debate that is now roiling not just the Defense Department but the entire United States government.”

“Homeland security is a rightwing concept fostered following 9/11 as the answer to the effects of 50 years of bad foreign policies in the middle east. The amount of homeland security we actually need is inversely related to how good our foreign policy is.” – Sam Smith, editor of The Progressive Review

The lies that will not die

In his September 22 address at the United Nations, Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad mentioned the Nazi Holocaust just twice:

“Some European countries still use the Holocaust, after six decades, as the excuse to pay fines or ransom to the Zionists.”

“They threaten anyone who questions the Holocaust and the September 11 event with sanctions and military action.”

That was it.

By the term “questions the Holocaust” the Iranian president has made clear repeatedly over the years what he’s referring to. He has commented about the peculiarity and injustice of a tragedy which took place in Europe resulting in a state for the Jews in the Middle East instead of in Europe. Why are the Palestinians paying a price for a German crime? he asks. And he has questioned the figure of six million Jews killed by Nazi Germany, as have many historians and others of all political stripes who think the total was probably less. This has nothing to do with the Holocaust not taking place.

But, as usual, the Western media pretends that it doesn’t understand.

The New York Post (September 22) referred to the Iranian president as “the world’s foremost Holocaust denier, the would-be genocidist Ahmadinejad”.

Agence France Presse (September 22) stated: “The Iranian leader repeated comments casting doubt on the origins of the Holocaust.”

The Washington Post wrote of “Ahmadinejad’s speech suggesting larger conspiracies were behind the Holocaust and the Sept. 11 attacks caused delegates to walk out.” (September 23)

And Amy Goodman on Democracy Now! (September 23) included this amongst the radio program’s news headlines: “For the third straight year, Ahmadinejad sent delegates to the exits after questioning the Nazi Holocaust.”

Without further explanation of that incendiary term — and none was given — what can “questioning the Nazi Holocaust” mean or imply to most listeners other than that Ahmadinejad was questioning whether the Holocaust had actually taken place?

Once again I must point out that I have yet to read of Ahmadinejad ever saying simply, clearly, unambiguously, and unequivocally that he thinks that what we know as the Holocaust never happened. For the record, in a speech at Columbia University on September 24, 2007, in reply to a question about the Holocaust, the Iranian president declared: “I’m not saying that it didn’t happen at all. This is not the judgment that I’m passing here.”

Indeed, I do not know if any of the so-called “Holocaust-deniers” actually, ever, umm, y’know … deny the Holocaust. They question certain aspects of the Holocaust history that’s been handed down to us, but they don’t explicitly say that what we know as the Holocaust never took place. (Yes, I’m sure you can find at least one nut-case somewhere.)

Another enduring lie about Ahmadinejad is that he has called for violence against Israel: His 2005 remark re “wiping Israel off the map”, besides being a very questionable translation, has been seriously misinterpreted, as evidenced by the fact that the following year he declared: “The Zionist regime will be wiped out soon, the same way the Soviet Union was, and humanity will achieve freedom.” (Associated Press, December 12, 2006) Obviously, the man was not calling for any kind of violent attack upon Israel, for the dissolution of the Soviet Union took place peacefully.
Carl Oglesby

The president of Students for a Democratic Society (SDS), 1965-66, died September 13, age 76. I remember him best for a speech of his I heard during the March on Washington, November 27, 1965, a speech passionately received by the tens of thousands crowding the National Mall:

The original commitment in Vietnam was made by President Truman, a mainstream liberal. It was seconded by President Eisenhower, a moderate liberal. It was intensified by the late President Kennedy, a flaming liberal. Think of the men who now engineer that war — those who study the maps, give the commands, push the buttons, and tally the dead: Bundy, McNamara, Rusk, Lodge, Goldberg, the President [Johnson] himself. They are not moral monsters. They are all honorable men. They are all liberals.

He insisted that America’s founding fathers would have been on his side. “Our dead revolutionaries would soon wonder why their country was fighting against what appeared to be a revolution.” He challenged those who called him anti-American: “I say, don’t blame me for that! Blame those who mouthed my liberal values and broke my American heart.”

We are dealing now with a colossus that does not want to be changed. It will not change itself. It will not cooperate with those who want to change it. Those allies of ours in the government — are they really our allies? If they are, then they don’t need advice, they need constituencies; they don’t need study groups, they need a movement. And if they are not [our allies], then all the more reason for building that movement with the most relentless conviction.

It saddens me to think that virtually nothing has changed for the better in US foreign policy since Carl Oglesby spoke on the Mall that day. America’s wars are ongoing, perpetual, eternal. And the current war monger in the White House is regarded by many as a liberal, for whatever that’s worth.

“We took space back quickly, expensively, with total panic and close to maximum brutality,” war correspondent Michael Herr recalled about the US military in Vietnam. “Our machine was devastating. And versatile. It could do everything but stop.”
Items of interest from a journal I’ve kept for 40 years, part V

A Bush administration regulation on Sept. 30, 2004 said Americans cannot buy or smoke Cuban cigars even in countries where the cigars are legal, such as Canada, Mexico, Europe, indeed most of the world. The same goes for Havana Club rum and other Cuban products.
April 26th, 2007 posting from the courageous but anonymous Iraqi woman who has, since August 2003, published the indispensable blog Baghdad Burning. Her family, she reported, was finally giving up and going into exile. In her final dispatch, she wrote: “There are moments when the injustice of having to leave your country simply because an imbecile got it into his head to invade it, is overwhelming. It is unfair that in order to survive and live normally, we have to leave our home and what remains of family and friends. … And to what?”
“God appointed America to save the world in any way that suits America. God appointed Israel to be the nexus of America’s Middle Eastern policy and anyone who wants to mess with that idea is a) anti-Semitic, b) anti-American, c) with the enemy, and d) a terrorist.” — John LeCarre (London Times, January 15, 2003)
Army Gen. David Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq admonished his troops regarding the results of an Army survey that found that many U.S. military personnel there are willing to tolerate some torture of suspects and unwilling to report abuse by comrades. “This fight depends on securing the population, which must understand that we — not our enemies — occupy the moral high ground,” he wrote in an open letter dated May 10 and posted on a military Web site. (Washington Post, May 11, 2007)
“To most of its citizens, America is exceptional, and it’s only natural that it should take exception to certain international standards.” — Michael Ignatieff, former Canadian politician and Washington Post columnist
It is easy to understand an observation by one of Israel’s leading military historians, Martin van Creveld. After the U.S. invaded Iraq, knowing it to be defenseless, he noted, “Had the Iranians not tried to build nuclear weapons, they would be crazy.” — Noam Chomsky
“It is easier for an American member of Congress to criticize an American president than to criticize an Israeli Prime Minister; it is easier for them to criticize an unjust and unwarranted US war than one launched by Israel.” — Jeffrey Blankfort
Ken Livingston, Mayor of London, re: his visit to Cuba in 2006: “What really stood out for me was hearing first hand from people working in the medical services just how appalling the US blockade is. When you meet people who are treating eye disorders and blindness on a huge scale and they describe how difficult it is to get the equipment they need except through indirect routes because of the blockade you get a feel for the scale of the injustice that is being imposed on Cuba.” Livingston might have added that the “indirect routes”, even if available, are much more expensive.
In 1965 when UN Secretary-General U Thant tried to open back-channel ties to the North Vietnamese, US Secretary of State Dean Rusk called him off by shouting: “Who do you think you are, a country?” (Washington Post BookWorld, January 7, 2007)
George W. Bush: “Years from now when America looks out on a democratic Middle East, growing in freedom and prosperity, Americans will speak of the battles like Fallujah with the same awe and reverence that we now give to Guadalcanal and Iwo Jima” in World War II. (Associated Press, November 11, 2006)
The National Endowment for Democracy was US Government initiated, and although ostensibly “independent,” has been continually funded by the US Congress, and its Board has included top level actors in the US Government’s foreign policy apparatus, including former Secretaries of State Henry Kissinger and Madeleine Albright, former National Security Council Chair Zbigniew Brzezinski, and former World Bank President Paul Wolfowitz.
CBS News, September 9, 2006: Senator Jay Rockefeller says the world would be better off today if the United States had never invaded Iraq. Does Rockefeller stand by his view, even if it means that Saddam Hussein could still be in power if the United States didn’t invade? “Yes. Yes.” says Rockefeller. “He wasn’t going to attack us.”
William Appleman Williams, in his 2007 book “Empire as a way of life”: Analyzing US history from its revolutionary origins to the dawn of the Reagan era, Williams shows how America has always been addicted to empire in its foreign and domestic ideology. Detailing the imperial actions and beliefs of revered figures such as Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln and Franklin Delano Roosevelt, this book is the most in-depth historical study of the American obsession with empire, and is essential to understanding the origins of our current foreign and domestic undertakings.
Compare Washington’s reaction in recent years to popular uprisings alleging electoral fraud in the Ukraine and Georgia to its reaction to the same in Mexico in 2006 when the rightwing Felipe Calderon was declared the winner in a very questionable manner.
Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez, in his talk at the United Nations, September 20, 2006, sharply criticized US president George W. Bush’s foreign policies and Bush himself. Britain’s Foreign Secretary Margaret Beckett suggested that the Chávez comments were beyond the pale of diplomatic protocol at the UN. “Even the Democrats wouldn’t say that”. However, the Guardian reported that “Delegates and leaders from around the world streamed back into the chamber to hear Mr Chávez, and when he stepped down the vigorous applause lasted so long that it had to be curtailed by the chair.”

Only the imperialist powers have the ability to enforce sanctions and are therefore always exempt from them.

SOURCE

White People Face the Worst Racism? THEY think so

White People Face the Worst Racism?

By: Jenée Desmond-Harris | Posted: May 23, 2011

Whites believe that they have replaced blacks as the primary victims of racial discrimination in contemporary America, according to a new study by researchers at Tufts University’s School of Arts and Sciences and Harvard Business School.

The authors of “Whites See Racism as a Zero-Sum Game That They Are Now Losing” found that both whites and blacks agree that anti-black racism has decreased over the last 60 years. That sounds pretty reasonable. But the kicker is that whites surveyed believe that anti-white racism has increased and is now a bigger problem than anti-black racism:

Norton of Harvard asked a nation-wide sample of 208 blacks and 209 whites to indicate the extent to which they felt blacks and whites were the targets of discrimination in each decade from the 1950s to the 2000s. A scale of 1 to 10 was used, with 1 being “not at all” and 10 being “very much.”

White and black estimates of bias in the 1950s were similar. Both groups acknowledged little racism against whites at that time but substantial racism against blacks. Respondents also generally agreed that racism against blacks has decreased over time, although whites believed it has declined faster than blacks do.

However, whites believed that racism against whites has increased significantly as racism against blacks has decreased. On average, whites rated anti-white bias as more prevalent in the 2000s than anti-black bias by more than a full point on the 10-point scale. Moreover, some 11 percent of whites gave anti-white bias the maximum rating of 10 compared to only 2 percent of whites who rated anti-black bias a 10. Blacks, however, reported only a modest increase in their perceptions of “reverse racism.

These data are the first to demonstrate that not only do whites think more progress has been made toward equality than do blacks, but whites also now believe that this progress is linked to a new inequality — at their expense,” note Norton and Sommers. Whites see racial equality as a zero sum game, in which gains for one group mean losses for the other.

The belief that anti-white bias is more prevalent than anti-black bias has clear implications for future public policy debates and behavioral science research, say the authors.

A co-author of the study called the results “surprising.” That’s putting in mildly. But maybe we’ve missed the way white Americans have been systemically deprived of access and opportunities. Maybe we’ve overlooked all the times whites have been targeted by implicit and explicit race-baiting attacks, whether they’re playing professional sports or seeking elected office. Maybe we didn’t get the memo on the way the legacy of discrimination against white Americans continues to manifest itself in worse outcomes in income, home ownership, health and employment for them, the way white people are told they’re “objectively” ugly, and the disgust so many Americans felt the last time a white person ran for president.

Oh, wait, none of that has happened? So we’re talking about white people being victimized by things llike affirmative action, the Smithsonian’s new black museum and scholarships for minorities? In that case, perhaps the study should be renamed, “Whites Have Forgotten What Racial Discrimination Actually Is.” Until then, we’ll just put these bewildering results in the old “Blame it on the small sample size” file.

The study appears in the May 2011 issue of the journal Perspectives on Psychological Science.

SOURCE

And, for a little fun! Here are Stuff White People Like!

Example:)

#125 Bob Marley

April 22, 2009 by clander

During the course of a white person’s education they will go through many phases including but not limited to: “awkward,” “classic rock,” and “being really into a foreign country.” Of these phases, there is only one that all white people are required to go through before they can obtain their bachelor’s degree. It is known as “Bob Marley.”

Depending on the coolness of the white person, they can experience this stage anywhere between the sixth grade and their last year of college. Regardless of when they went through this phase, every white person can tell you about the time when they had Legend on repeat. If you wish to test this theory, go to any floor in a College Dorm and there is a 100% chance you will find at least one Bob Marley poster.

It is also worth noting that white people tend get into smoking marijuana during this phase. This is why all white people view the combination of the two as one of the most pleasurable experiences on earth. But when white people really want to take it to the next level they will combine Bob Marley, Marijuana, a long weekend and some sort of notable outdoor location (beach, cottage, or patio). There are few activities on earth that are more appealing to white people.

The only acceptable reasons for declining participation are a prior engagement at a music festival or a commitment to go camping.

It’s also worth noting that when talking to white people about Bob Marley there is no need to use his surname. This is because all white people refer to him simply as “Bob.”

Since so many people are into Bob Marley, it is only natural for advanced white people to profess to only marginally liking Bob Marley (note: it is impossible for a white person to outright dislike him). Instead, these white people will claim to preferring more obscure artists like Burning Spear or Peter Tosh.

But be warned that a white person saying they like “reggae” what they really mean is “reggae from 1965-1983.”

Under no circumstances should you ever bring a white person to a dancehall reggae concert, it will frighten them.

Note: if you are talking to a white person who is really into Bob Marley, has dreadlocks, and professes to be a Rastafarian, you should end the conversation immediately. These people are of no value unless you need directions to a WTO protest or have questions about how bad a human can smell.

SOURCE