A rejected idiot named Majid Movahedi threw a bucket of sulfuric acid over Ameneh Bahrami’s head, blinding and disfiguring her. This woman had been kind to the fool, by the way. She’d given the obviously impoverished man clothing.

An Iranian court ordered that five drops of sulfuric acid be dropped into his eyes. (Source)

This kind of Islamic justice I dig. An eye for an eye, or in this case, two eyes.

“Eye for an eye,” which I think is better understand as “an eye only for an eye,” is a principle of legal justice to encourage proportionate punishment for a crime. Not too lenient, and not too strict; hence, an eye only for an eye. The punishment must fit the crime, a principle codified in our own criminal laws.

Some people cite Matthew 5:39 to argue that Christ put an end to the eye-for-an-eye principle. Not true. As I’ve stated before, that passage deals with personal insults and offenses, not criminal behavior, and admonishing against personal retaliations.

What about capital punishment? Should a murderer be executed in a similar manner in which he killed (shot, tortured, lynched, hit upside the head, etc.)? Our country has developed a system of punishment in which execution methods like drawing and quartering, burning alive, disemboweling, and other methods I mentioned are considered “cruel and unusual,” even if the criminal killed his victim(s) that way. Too bad. I wouldn’t flinch in the slightest to know a child rapist and murderer received within himself the due penalty of his error. Would you?

Majid Movahedi, prepare for the darkness.

(Photo credit: Washington Post)

Monday, October 1: Here’s another from the smart and brave Heather Mac Donald, responding to this op-ed by Orlando Patterson. An excerpt (emphasis added):

“Patterson’s discussion of black crime rates and family breakdown is anti-climactic. But just to make sure that his standing with liberal elites is unassailable, at the end of his piece, Patterson lets fly a few swipes at conservatives. He blames the black incarceration rate on, inter alia, the ‘hypocritical refusal of conservative politicians to put their money where their mouths are on family values.’ This charge, like so much else, is made up out of whole cloth. The only politicians and policy makers who have tried to programmatically strengthen family values are conservatives; the marriage movement, spearheaded by the Heritage Foundation’s Robert Rector, seeks to channel a portion of federal welfare dollars into marriage counseling for the poor. If any liberal politicians have gotten behind this idea, they are keeping quiet about it. And Patterson’s call for ‘greatly expand[ed] social services for infants and children’ –as if the last 40 years of poverty policy haven’t proven the futility of such money sinkholes — is a pathetic diversion from the only effective social service for children: two married parents.”

Saturday, September 29: I try not to blog on weekends, but I wanted you to see an op-ed by Carol Swain on Jena Six. She writes:

“Black crime is a serious problem that stereotypes all black youth. And it must be dealt with by a united black community that stands up and says enough is enough. Unfortunately, too many of our media-appointed leaders have failed to vigorously condemn the attack of the six against the one. This is unfortunate.”

Unrelated Note (9/28 @ 12:04 p.m.): Catch me on Bill O’Reilly’s radio show today around…now.

If you want to know what O’Reilly said about race relations in proper context (his conversation with Juan Williams), listen to his “controversial” comments in full (audio file – thanks IC!).

Later…For O’Reilly radio listeners looking for the CNN segment, here it is.

——————————————————————————–

This is an excerpt from a must-read column by Heather Mac Donald. But for copyright issues, I’d copy and paste the entire thing here. It’s long, but take the time to read it all. I agree wholeheartedly with every single word:

“The Jena protesters will go home in denial of these truths. In fact, the purpose of such mass celebrations — and that is indeed what they are — is to make sure that attention stays far away from the actual problems holding blacks back. Astronomical rates of black criminality are not the only topic that the Jena rallies have obscured. No one wallowing in Jena promotion has had the courage to speak about an even more important crisis, the breakdown of marriage. The nearly 70 percent national illegitimacy rate for blacks — a number that can approach 90 percent in inner cities — is a cataclysm. Its consequences go far beyond the harm to individual black children — especially boys — who grow up without fathers. The real poison of the marriage crisis is the message it sends to young men about personal responsibility. The first duty in civil society is toward one’s own children; everything else is built around it. But when boys are raised without any expectations that they will have to support their children and marry the mother of those children, they fail to learn the most basic lesson about responsibility. They also are freed from the civilizing force of the marriage requirement, which pressures young men to become attractive mates. With enough support, individuals can overcome the moral perils of the illegitimacy culture, but given the prevalence of black crime and disaffiliation from the working world, it’s clear that not enough young men are finding ways to do so.”

Read the rest of “The Jena Dodge.”

My anger about this “Jena Six” business is beyond expressing right now. I’ve never been so ashamed to see black people downplaying what these kids did and disgracefully comparing their treatment by the criminal justice system with what happened to blacks during the turbulent civil rights era. Invoking a moral struggle for justice that was owed to blacks in an attempt to garner sympathy for a cowardly group of young thugs-in-training who ganged up on one white kid? Turns my stomach.

Unfortunately, this is the state of race relations today, and it won’t get much better. The memory of actual discrimination and injustice against blacks is quickly fading. This “Jena Six” crap is the result. Nice message these protesting parents are sending to their children. And the cycle will continue.

[Joe Carter has PDF copies of Jena case hospital records, witness statements, and court documents.]

Well, I guess I found the words to express it.

I’m still nauseated from last night’s race pandering. More later…

Unrelated Addendum: Special thanks for all the kind and encouraging e-mail from people who saw my recent CNN segment and “discovered” my blog. You may not hear back from me, but I’ve read your words and found comfort in them. Rest easy, everybody.

Too funny.

Update: “Vick told reporters that this incident has changed his life. He said he has found Jesus and is turning his life over to God.” (Source – video here)

Oh, brother!

8:18 a.m. PDT: Months ago, I read a strange story about a university president covering up the rape and murder of a student in her dorm room. Why would he do such a thing? I wondered. Was he trying to prevent widespread panic? Did he lie about the crime because the murderer was black and the victim white?

The woman’s own parents thought she may have died from an aneurysm, then they heard she’d died of asphyxiation. They didn’t know that she’d been found lying on the floor with a pillow over her head or that her underwear had been removed. (Source)

Despite the “foul” circumstances of the woman’s death, the university sent out an e-mail assuring students that no foul play was suspected. How was that possible?

An idiot-student named Orange Taylor was arrested and charged with killing the woman. He was living off-campus, having been barred from living on campus because of burglary and assault incidents. (10 to 1 he was an “affirmative action” student, but that’s another topic for another post.)

Whatever the university president’s reasons were for covering up the crime, he violated something called the Clery Act, which required him to report the crime to the students. Yesterday, the Eastern Michigan University Board of Regents fired John Fallon. The case had been investigated by the Department of Education and an “independent law firm.” (Source)

Good riddance to bad PC rubbish. And I hope the thug gets the chair, or whatever they have in Michigan.

Here’s what needs to happen next: Round up all 700 raping perverts, tie them to stakes, and roast them alive.

Oh, wait. I skipped a step. Give them a fair trial, then tie them to stakes and roast them alive.

Related post and column:

• Death to Pedophiles I
• Death to Child Rapists

Independent Conservative reports on CNN’s biased coverage.

Hot Air has the blood pressure-raising video.

Previous post: Media Blackout On Christian-Newsom Murders?

Update: I like this idea from a commenter (emphasis in original):

“In the 18th Century, England could send its ne’er-do-wells to Australia. It was a viable option to the death penalty. My variation on that is simple: send them to Antarctica. Send them there with a parka, a tent, a sleeping bag, and a week’s worth of MRE’s [meal, ready to eat]. They can kill each other for food for all I care, and their life (or death) is up to them and their own survival skills…Couldn’t happen soon enough in my opinion.”

By the way, don’t twist my words or my meaning. I didn’t say I’d gleefully throw things at child rapists.

I’d do it somberly.

I just happen to think some criminals should be subjected to modern-day stonings. Is that so wrong?

Commenter Gabe, a Christian, has a reasonable response (unlike mine, apparently) to the questions. Check it out.

——————————————————————————————–

I can’t remember a time when I didn’t advocate the death penalty for animals who rape children.

“We can’t do that,” people would say. “If a man can be put to death for raping someone, what’s to stop him from going ahead and killing the person if he’ll get the same penalty?”

I can see the logic. Sentencing a rapist to death certainly seems disproportionate to the crime of rape, but I’m willing to suspend logic when it comes to the violation of children. I hope capital punishment for child rape becomes law in all states.

And here’s the kind of death a pedophile should face: After he’s found guilty and sentenced to death, he should be tied to a pole in the public square. Every day, all day, until he’s dead, people are allowed to throw at him whatever they can lift. They can spit on him, throw rocks, cans, glass, shoot him with arrows (but no bullets), baseball bats, knives — and he stays tied to that pole in the heat, wind, rain, or snow with no food and only a little water to prolong his misery. And he receives no treatment for his wounds. How long can a person survive that? Days? Weeks? Who cares? His suffering is the focus. People who rape children should suffer a painful, humiliating death.

I’ve heard some say that convicted pedophiles should suffer the same torture they inflicted on the children: rape. In some cases, repeated, brutal rape. I agree.

Does that sound medieval? Those scenarios are two of my milder ones. Human rights, my eye. Too bad we no longer draw and quarter people.

Finally, what I hoped for might come to pass. I read a story this morning with the provocative title, “Proposals to execute pedophiles make headway in US.” I know that rape was punishable by death back in the day, but I had no idea that some states resurrected the penalty. An excerpt:

The idea of executing child rapists, even when there in no loss of life, is making headway in the United States…The Louisiana Supreme Court last week upheld the death sentence for a pedophile, and the governor of Texas is soon to sign into law legislation to that effect.

In 1995, Louisiana was the first state to adopt legislation authorizing the death penalty for child rapists…Ten years later, the movement to make pedophilia punishable by death really picked up steam after nine-year-old Jessica Lunsford was raped and buried alive in Florida by a man with a prior conviction for sex crimes.

Various versions of the “Jessica Law” sprang up all over in the country, imposing in most cases a minimum 25 year jail sentence and the wearing of an ankle bracelet for life for raping a child aged 12 or younger…But in some states, elected officials amended their versions of the “Jessica Law” by adding the possibility of condemning a pedophile to death.

They include Louisiana, Oklahoma, South Carolina [Yee-haw! My home state!], Georgia and Montana.

I like it. I like it a lot. There are bleeding hearts out there who believe condemning a child rapist to death is wrong. In fact, some readers are against the death penalty for murder. You know where I stand, obviously. I am pro-capital punishment. Questions for you:

1) What are your views on the death penalty in general?

2) What are your views on the death penalty for child rapists, whether or not they murder the children?

Wednesday, November 12: Read about another torture-murder. Plenty to go around.

Tuesday, May 22: For more coverage of the Duke case, see the latest post, Journalists’ Rush to Judgment.

Wednesday, May 16: Michelle Malkin covers the Christian-Newsom murders over at Hot Air.

Later…Fellow BC Baldilocks comments about the Christian-Newsom case at Hot Air (emphasis in original):

“Shades of the Wichita massacre (those perverts even mutilated the dog). And, yes, I saw no MSM coverage of that evil incident either.

“As many observers have noted, crimes committed by blacks — regardless of the race of the victim(s) — do not fit the MSMs standard narrative of black people always being the victim. Such crimes don’t even fit Fox News’ narrative.

“In the runup to Stanley “Tookie” Williams’ execution, I said that we black people do not need other people to listen to and cater to the psychopaths in our number because it gives such monsters encouragment and it infantilizes black people as a whole. Well, I think that, by ignoring massacres like this one and like the one in Wichita, the MSM entities, through their inaction and cowardice, are doing just that. It’s one of racism’s sneakier and more insidious manifestations.”

Tuesday, May 15: Wow. *** [letter removed from site - letter writer said he forgot to include link to my post - I believe him] lifted an entire paragraph from this post for his letter to the editor at Chattanoogan.com (last paragraph). (Hat tip: Matt Sheffield)

Also, several people in the comment section mentioned that “white supremacist” and “neo-Nazi” sites have taken up the Christian-Newsom murder case as a cause. What that has to do with the main focus of this post — the media blackout and feminist non-outrage — is a mystery to me.

In a free society, unpopular speech is protected. That’s why we have something called the First Amendment. That some people are using this case to further their nefarious goals, whatever they may be, is called life. Deal with it. People of all colors do things to manipulate and influence — for positive and negative reasons.

That so-called white supremacists may use this post or the Christian-Newsom case to bolster their movement or whatever won’t stop me from calling things as I see them. It’s the risk we take in a country that allows freedom of speech. Well, it’s a risk I take.
——————————————————————————————-

I’ve been dragging my feet on this one, but it’s time to step up.

Early this year, a white couple was carjacked, tortured, raped, and murdered by a group of black thugs. Christopher Newsom (23) was gang-raped, shot and set on fire. There are unconfirmed reports that the killers cut off his penis while he was still alive. The going-to-straight-to-hell murderers made Channon Christian (21) watch, and then they gang-raped her over four days and left her to die. There are unconfirmed reports that her breasts were cut off while she was still alive. (Also see this story and the Wikipedia entry)

I’ve been getting e-mail about this case since it happened, but I’ve been hesitant to blog about it. Flopping Aces published a big post about the case last night, which probably accounts for why I received a few more Christian-Newsom e-mails this morning. Here goes!

I’ve noticed that mainstream media are reluctant to report this story, especially when it first happened. In light of the blanket coverage the Duke “rape” case received, the paucity of coverage in this case seems a bit unbalanced. I mean, isn’t the brutal, black-on-white gang-rape, mutilation, and murder of two people more than or at least as newsworthy as a white-on-black gang-rape (which obviously was phony)? Even if the stripper’s allegations had been true, why was the Duke case burning up the airwaves while the Christian-Newsom case barely emits a spark?

What’s up with the lack of blanket media coverage? I’m not talking about a story here or there with case updates. The media should be swarming around this story. What happened to Christian and Newsom should be all over the airwaves and printing presses.

What’s up with the stunning silence of feminist types and hate-crime proponents? Forget Newsom. He was a white male. But what about Christian? Where are the pot-bangers and wanna-be castrators?

Have so-called black leaders said anything about what those thugs did? They have so much to say about everything else.

Every time someone starts telling the truth about black crime, someone else comes out of the woodwork to remind everyone that a “few” black criminals don’t define the black community. From my perspective, it’s difficult to argue that point with a straight face. Of course, the murderous deeds and thuggish ways of black criminals shouldn’t define all blacks. But if you try to pretend that it’s not a serious problem that blacks commit a disproportionate share of crimes — an incontrovertible fact — or that the lack of blanket media coverage and outrage has nothing to do with race, you’re being willfully blind and foolish.

As I see it, black crime is so commonplace that it’s just not interesting to white liberal journalists, especially black-on-white crime. And white liberal feminists are more outraged when white men use a so-called sexist term than they are with black-on-white rape statistics. I have yet to hear a feminist condemn what was done to Christian.

I’m disgusted by the whole incident, which is why I haven’t blogged about it. But I’m publishing this post and opening comments for people who want to discuss it. Be civil.

Update: Remember the international outrage over the beating and murder of a homosexual named Matthew Shepard? There was a TV movie and everything! I doubt Hollywood will touch the Christian-Newsom case.

A commenter linked to this. I don’t remember reading anything about that case.

Update II: Glenn Reynolds writes: “My earlier comment on the [Christian-Newsom] case has had me excoriated by some white-supremacist sites for covering up a hate crime…Well, to be a hate crime, the motivation has to be hate. I haven’t seen any evidence of that so far. It’s certainly true, of course — as LaShawn notes — that if the races were reversed the press would be all over this case and lots of people would be confidently pronouncing it a hate crime without any evidence other than the races of the perpretrators and victims, but since it’s black-on-white crime they’re making less noise. That’s the press.”

That’s the problem with “hate crimes.” All crimes are motivated by hate, but crimes committed by a perpetrator who utters a slur are considered worse than other crimes. What difference does it make if a thug is motivated by hatred of blacks or hatred of rich people?

In order for “hate crime” charges to be added to the Christian-Newsom case, somebody had to have used a racial slur, and a witness would have to come forward. In my opinion, it doesn’t matter who said what in the Christian-Newsom case or any other. Hate crime laws are redundant, not to mention nonsensical.

I call hate crime laws by their proper name: thought crime laws. They were devised to penalize certain people for thinking nasty thoughts about certain “protected” groups of people.

(See Hate E-Mail and Hate Crimes and links under “Related Posts”)

Update III: A commenter writes:

Because of the Duke non-rape case I looked up some National Crime statistics on the internet. It appears that about one-third of white women who report being raped say the attacker was black. But of the over 30,000 black rape victims in, as I recall 2005, none reported being raped by a white man. The percentage of blacks raped by whites is probably not zero, but it is certainly low. Statistics also indicate that black men are about 8 times as likely to commit murder as non-Hispanic white men. I kept some statistics here in Tarrant County a few years ago (before the huge influx of Mexicans, who seem to kill each other with great frequency) and came up with statistics that indicated that about half of the victims were killed by someone they knew. Of the half of whites killed by strangers, about 90% of the time the killer was black. On the other hand, of the blacks killed by strangers, none were killed by whites other than policemen. Most of these cases were barely reported in the news. But, some years later when some whites did kill a black man for no apparent reason it was national news. (By the way, I suppose everyone already would guess it, but women rarely ever kill a stranger.)

Resources:

• Stories about the case are difficult to find, but check the Google news archive.

Related posts:

• “Men in their thirties” Rob Georgetown Jewelry Store
• Crime Time: Annual FBI Thug Report

I’m pleased to announce the kickoff of the “Super Tuesday of Equality” campaign.

Ward Connerly, Chairman of the American Civil Rights Institute, is the man behind the anti-race preferences in government momentum. Campaigns kicked off this week in Colorado, Missouri, and Arizona.

The campaigns are a push to place initiatives on the November 4, 2008, ballot against skin color preferences. Connerly and company have already encouraged three states to pay more than lip service to equality and ban government-mandated race and sex preferences in government hiring and admissions.

Californians passed Proposition 209 by 54 percent in 1996, and the state of Washington passed I-200 with 58.3 percent of the vote in 1998. The Michigan Civil Rights Initiative, which appeared on the November 7, 2006, ballot as Proposal 2 after facing challenges by several groups, passed with 58 percent of the vote. (Also see An Affirmative Action Lesson for Mary Sue Coleman)

Michigan voters have spoken, but groups continue to challenge the will of the people and fight for skin color preferences for a certain race.

Linda Chavez, Colorado native and chairman of the Center for Equal Opportunity, said, “Racial preferences have not only harmed better qualified white and Asian students who have been passed over for admission, but the black and Hispanic students who are the intended beneficiaries. I have seen firsthand the unintended consequences at the University of Colorado (Boulder), where I taught in the university’s first affirmative action program…students who struggled to complete coursework for which they were ill-prepared, embittered in the process, many of them dropping out. No one benefits when students are held to different standards based on the color of their skin. Nor can preferential admissions based on race make up for the often unequal educational opportunities that disadvantaged students encounter in public schools throughout the nation.”

The proposed language for the Colorado Civil Rights Initiative (CCRI), subject to change: “The state shall not discriminate against or grant preferential treatment to any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity or national origin in the operation of public employment, public education or public contracting.”

Missouri: “The state shall not discriminate against or grant preferential treatment to any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity or national origin in the operation of public employment, public education or public contracting.”

Valery Pech Orr, executive director of CCRI, asked, “Are we really all equal, as we claim, or are we to be judged primarily by our gender and skin color? My family has been in Colorado for generations – my great grandparents homesteaded here in 1883. We in this state are individualists, racial and gender preferences run counter to our most basic values, and we expect that will be made abundantly clear on November 4, 2008.”

Orr was a co-plaintiff in Adarand Constructors, Inc. v. Pena (1995). Adarand sued the government for its use of race to award contracts, citing a violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution. An appeals court affirmed the lower court’s summary judgment for the plaintiffs and held that racial discrimination claims should be reviewed under immediate scrutiny rather than the more appropriate standard (in my opinion) of strict scrutiny. The Supreme Court disagreed, holding that racial classifications imposed (mandated) by all levels of government must be reviewed under the strict scrutiny standard.

Under strict scrutiny, it’s almost impossible to justify racial classifications. In other words, the standard is designed to nullify any law that treats people differently based on race. While this concept is easier to understand in the context of Jim Crow and southern resistance to integration, Americans have lost sight of just how odious government-mandated racial classifications truly are, especially black Americans, some of whom unabashedly support discrimination as long as blacks benefit. History has a nasty way of repeating itself, so be careful what you wish for.

It’s shameful that we’re still battling against racial discrimination by the government in 2007, isn’t it?

Says Ward Connerly (emphasis added), “Getting our nation to the point of applying a single standard to all Americans is one of the most crucial issues of our time. If events of the past couple of weeks have taught us anything at all, it is that race will continue to divide our nation as long as we insist on treating people differently. Both Don Imus, in his despicable comments about the young women of the Rutgers basketball team, and those who rushed to judgment in the Duke lacrosse case made the same mistake: they looked at individuals and saw only skin color. We have to get past that kind of thinking – and we must start by getting our government out of the business of privileging some Americans for the color of their skin and penalizing others. By now it should be clear that that leads only to bitterness and discord.”

Connerly is the author of Creating Equal: My Fight Against Race Preferences. See the book review.

Update: Blogger John Rosenberg at Discriminations has more on Super Tuesday for Equality.

I just received word that Oklahoma is on the equality bandwagon, too. State representative Randy Terrill said, “We believe the people of Oklahoma are fair and believe in equal treatment under the law. Ward Connerly and his organizations have done excellent work exposing policies that divide us and now we are delighted to have his support in pursuing the Oklahoma Civil Rights Initiative.”

Related posts:

• Ward Connerly Responds
• Race-Related News Links and Commentary
• Urban: The Race Preference Loophole
• Has “White Guilt” Run Its Course?

The Duke case is over for me, in a sense. I’ll update you on Mike Nifong’s legal woes now and then. But for the most part, the case turned out the way I wanted it to.

Did you catch the former players and the NC attorney general on “60 Minutes” yesterday? I was hoping the formerly indicted men wouldn’t be bitter and would continue to behave like gentlemen, and they didn’t disappoint. They talked about how emotionally draining it was to live under indictment for heinous crimes, facing prison and knowing they hadn’t done anything to that woman.

As for her, sister needs serious help. If she doesn’t care enough to get it for herself, perhaps she’ll do it for her three children. I’ll keep them in my prayers.

There are blogs out there dedicated to the case, so check them frequently if you want to follow developments. The Johnsville News rounds up most Duke case-related articles and blog posts. LieStoppers is a group effort (with at least one attorney), with news links and commentary. Crystal Mess is run by an attorney, and John in Carolina frequently covers the media’s role in this mess.

KC Johnson, a Brooklyn College professor, started blogging the case because of the unbelievably inappropriate behavior of pampered Duke professors, screeching about the white male patriarchy and signing on to a “listening” statement filled with anonymous and third-hand quotes from black students. He’s gone on to write articles and consult for ABC, and he’s working on a book. He’s attended several hearings in person, live-blogging the proceedings. His Durham-in-Wonderland is the top go-to blog on the Duke case. Bookmark or subscribe to all the Duke blogs if you need a daily fix.

Read my latest Duke case column at Townhall, “Every One His Due,” where I castigate the castigators. An excerpt:

It was like an episode of “Law & Order.”

Three, drunken, rowdy, privileged, elitist, indulged, slur-slinging lacrosse-playing white men accused of beating, strangling, raping (vaginally and orally), and sodomizing a poor, oppressed black woman forced to take off her clothes for strange men in order to feed her children, while the lacrosse team erected a “blue wall of silence,” barricading themselves within the old-boy protection of the moneyed white male patriarchy – no writer could have penned a more gripping drama.

Also see Star Parker’s “Getting perspective on Imus and Duke.”

Addendum: Read how DA Mike Nifong set about lying and downplaying the lack of DNA evidence, while forging ahead with the case and pandering to blacks at North Carolina Central University, a black college the accuser attended.

Can a negro, whose ancestors were imported into this country, and sold as slaves, become a member of the political community formed and brought into existence by the Constitution of the United States, and as such become entitled to all the rights, and privileges, and immunities, guarantied by that instrument to the citizen?

On this day 150 years ago, the Supreme Court’s answer to that question was, “No.” A negro descendant of slaves could not be a citizen of the United States.

One hundred and fifty years ago wasn’t that long ago. But when you consider how far the descendants of slaves have progressed — the rights, privileges, and immunities they enjoy, the “preferred minority” perch they occupy, their relative wealth compared to blacks in other countries — 150 years seem light-years away.

Born a slave in 1799, Dred Scott had traveled with his master to free territory. After his master died, Scott sued for his freedom, arguing that since he was living in free territory, he should be released from slavery. A state court rejected his claim.

Dred Scott v. Sandford eventually made it to federal court, where the issue was narrowed to whether the federal court had jurisdiction over the case and whether Scott had standing to sue. As expected, the Supreme Court ruled that Scott, as a slave, had no standing; therefore, the court had no jurisdiction. The court went on to declare the Missouri Compromise of 1820 unconstitutional: Congress had no authority to restrict slavery. Slaves were property and slave owners had a right to travel anywhere in the U.S. with their property.

Tensions between pro- and anti-slavery factions increased, and the Civil War began several years after the Scott case. Afterward, blacks were declared free, and slavery in America was abolished. Congress introduced a series of legislation that prohibited slavery, declared all citizens equal before the law, and gave itself the power to enforce abolition.

In would take another 100 years for black Americans to reap the full benefits of post-Civil War legislation. And blacks have reaped those benefits a thousandfold. I should say, blacks have had opportunities to reap the benefits. Some have not, choosing to forgo opportunities that people fought and died to give them. They have the freedom to do that.

(Right now, 2007, is the best time it has ever been for black Americans, and I dare any country or system of government to come close to providing such opportunities.)

It gets sticky, however, when descendants of slaves use the bondage of their ancestors, long buried in the graves, as an excuse for failing to seize opportunities, preferring to blame the “legacy of slavery” for everything from their own immoral behavior to the disproportionately black prison population to the fact that three-quarters of black children in this country are born without the benefit of a stable, two-parent family.

Such people fail to see the hypocrisy of demanding to be treated equally, without regard to race, while demanding entitlements because of their race. They want people to see past their skin color, while making sure their skin color remains front and center.

Slavery was abolished 142 years ago, and government-mandated discrimination ended about 50 years ago, give or take a few years. Again, that was a short time ago, yet blacks as a group have come so far. But not far enough. Since slavery lasted about 250 years and blacks were less than full citizens for an additional 100 years, perhaps it will take another 350 years for the convenient “legacy of slavery” excuse to disappear, as well as the paranoia about “institutional racism.”

[Note: Although I clarified the numbers in the comment section, I'll note it here. I'm basing the "250 years" of slavery statement on various sources that date slavery on this continent to the early to mid 1600s. People can dispute whether that time frame is official or correct, but it's the one I'm using. Some commenters pointed out that slavery didn't exist in the U.S for 250 years because there was no U.S. until the late 1700s. I'm straining my eyes to find in the post where I said slavery existed in the U.S. for 250 years. If anyone finds the reference, do let me know.]

Three hundred and fifty years still wouldn’t be enough time to abolish excuses. It is human nature to point fingers, and that trait will never go away, even if 1,000 opportunities to succeed fell into one’s lap.

Addendum: Commmenter Jimmy reminded me about two of Walter Williams’s columns that mention the so-called legacy of slavery: “Family Secrets” and “Victimhood: Rhetoric or reality?”

From “Family Secrets” (emphasis added):

“One need not deny the existence of racial discrimination to ask the policy-relevant question: How much of what we see can be explained by discrimination? The black illegitimacy rate is close to 70 percent. Less than 40 percent of black children live in two-parent families. This produces devastating socioeconomic consequences, but is it caused by racial discrimination? Or, might it be a legacy of slavery? In the early 1900s, black illegitimacy was a tiny fraction of today’s rate. Roughly 75 percent, and in New York City 85 percent, of black children lived in two-parent households.

The fact of lower illegitimacy and more intact families, at a time when blacks were much closer to slavery and faced greater discrimination, suggests that today’s unprecedented illegitimacy and weak family structure has nothing to do with discrimination and slavery. It’s explained better by promiscuity and irresponsibility, and as such it’s not a civil rights problem.”

Commenter and blogger Big Mo attended a reenactment commemorating the Dred Scott decision.

More Dred Scott blogging from the Legal Times.

Related posts:

• Dreading Dred Scott
• A Secret History of the Democratic Party
• Democratic And Republican Platforms Through The Years
• Anti-Lynching Legislation
• Gospel of Oppression
• Black Immigrants “Work Harder”

Sources/Resources:

• Dred Scott: Heirs to history
• The Worst Supreme Court Decision Ever?
• Wrong way to teach about Dred Scott
• Decision of the Supreme Court in the Dred Scott Case (New York Times, March 6, 1857)
• Dred Scott Case Collection
• Dred Scott Case (Wikipedia)

Update (2/16) III: A white college student fed up with the obsessive and silly pursuit of skin color diversity at the expense of common sense and fairness writes:

“Every morning, I sit down with a delicious Dewick breakfast, coffee and the Daily. As of late, every morning, I make it to the Viewpoints page and read a heart-warming article about tolerance, diversity and community. Then every morning, I roll my eyes, shut the Daily and reach for a newspaper from the real world. This morning, after reading that not enough white people came to the town meeting and that intro-level English classes should be turned into race relations classes, I have had enough.”

Read the rest.

Thanks for linking, Michelle. Check out this Washington Post article about MM.

Update (8:21 p.m) II: Want more proof that race preferences are on the way out? An hispanic cop sued because he claimed his department passed him over for lesser qualified blacks. And he won $254,000. Despite what liberal justices on the Supreme Court say, race preferences are unlawful and cannot be justified, even for god-almighty “diversity.” Expect to read about more such lawsuits filed by whites, hispanics, and Asians, and be prepared to see blacks and hispanics fighting to be THE-preferred-minority-group-in-charge. Pitiful, the whole bloody game.

(Hat tip: Discriminations)

——————————————————————–

You may recall that I blogged about a white student who was accepted to an Urban Journalism Workshop — sponsored by Virginia Commonwealth University (taxpayer-supported), the Dow Jones Newspaper Fund, and the Richmond Times Dispatch — based on her qualifications and then rejected based on her race. The Center for Individual Rights (CIR) filed suit on her behalf. (Also see White Student Sues for Racial Discrimination)

[Update: I've corrected CIR's name. I wrote "Center for Civil Rights" instead of "Center of Individual Rights." Sorry for the confusion. But that's why linking to sources is good! I think Ward Connerly's organization was on my mind when I wrote the post this morning.]

Well, the case has been resolved in her favor. Last month, the Dow Jones Newspaper Fund, Media Group Corporation, and Virginia Commonwealth University agreed to open the summer workshop to all races. Apparently, the agreement applies to workshops at other schools as well. Download a PDF copy of the settlement agreement. (Also see Journalism Programs to Be Race Blind)

One can make an argument that programs for “minorities” are necessary, given the seemingly intractable academic achievement gap problem and other disadvantages that disproportionately affect certain minorities (poor family formation, fatherless homes, etc). Private entities have the “freedom of association” to do just that, but public entities do not. It is against the law to discriminate against people on the basis of race, and taxpayers should not be coerced into supporting illegal programs. We do it all the time with illegal “immigration,” of course, but that’s a separate matter.

As I’ve said many times, a government with the power to discriminate against whites and in favor of minorities can wield that same power to discriminate against minorities and in favor of whites. It should not have the power to do either.

The time to end race-based programs is at hand. With three states voting to ban preferences in government hiring and admissions (Washington, California, and Michigan), and more states on the way, the government had better find a cleverer way to achieve its obsessive and unrealistic pursuit of skin deep-only diversity, because discriminating against whites (and Asians, in some cases) is blatantly illegal.

The consequences of racial discrimination can be pretty steep. Last year, a judge decided that 40 white male professors at Northern Arizona University were entitled to $4.1 million in back pay and raises. Southern Illinois University agreed to open three previously racially exclusive fellowships to all races after the Department of Justice threatened to sue. And 40,000 whites who applied to and were rejected by the University of Michigan between 1995-2003 may file claims and seek damages against the taxpayer-supported school for racial discrimination. CIR filed suit against the school ten years ago on behalf of two people, and that case has been settled. Each plaintiff will receive $10,000 in damages.

Damages. To a lawyer, that word is golden. Treble damages. Even a liberal lawyer who supports skin color discrimination won’t be able to resist that. Government institutions had better wise up, especially in states with explicit anti-racial discrimination laws on the books. Dismantle race preference policies now, and find a subtler way to admit lower qualified minorities to achieve that elusive, amorphous, and godlike goal of “diversity.”

Or be prepared to pay up.

Trivia: Because of skin deep-only preferences, black Africans and children of recent African immigrants are overrepresented in colleges and universities, at the expense of the descendants of black American slaves, for whom so-called affirmative action was created. (Source)

Related posts:

• Asians: The Non-Preferred Minority
• Colorblind Bind
• Florida’s Lower IQ Scheme Doomed to Fail
• Value of Diversity
• Hispanics Whine For Entitlements

Addendum: Expect to see more successful discrimination lawsuits. People are winning because the law is on their side.

Update (1:47 p.m.): Commenter Duke writes:

“LaShawn, it’s much more insidious than you know. In all ‘Hispanic’ areas, where the stores, street vendors, and various other Hispanic entrepreneurs ply their trade they are required to ‘pay a tax’ to the gangs or get beaten, shot, etc. This tax acts to keep a class of people who would normally earn their way out of poverty mired in a lower class forever. MS-13 is actually an international terror group and Hispanics have been terrorized by this gang for four years. But if they sing they swing, as the saying goes.

“The race hustlers, almost always credit card liberals or professional agitators, have put up walls to protect the gangs. The now notorious Special Order 40, which is now used in every metro area, makes the police criminals if they demand proof of citizenship—asking for a valid driver license can be asking for proof of citizenship—or even look like they suspect anyone of being illegal. No searches of cars or trucks is possible so guns are trafficked back and forth across cities and states.”

————————————————————————————————-

International Gang Initiative

Los Angeles’s gang issues are now an international priority. LA mayor Antonio Villaraigosa said that “many gangs across North and Central America” originated in LA, so American taxpayers will be funding “transnational” anti-gang units in Central American countries.

Law enforcement officials met (are meeting?) to discuss what to do about hispanic gangs. Although several stories mention Asian, black, and white gangs (don’t laugh), we all know who’s causing the real trouble. I’m sure a fair number of hispanic gang members are illegal aliens, so kicking them out of the country should be a top priority. Since the federal government isn’t interested in enforcing immigration law, however, state and local governments have to take up the slack and deal with it.

From where I’m sitting, it’s vital that we get rid of thugs who aren’t even authorized to be here in the first place, but understandably, foreign law enforcement officials don’t want them, either. From the BBC:

The heads of the national police forces of several countries where gangs are prevalent, including El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras and Mexico are meeting officials from US drug enforcement agencies and the FBI…Some Central American officials have expressed concern about US methods of deporting gang members to countries where local authorities are unable to arrest them because they have committed no crime in their country of origin…Of the 120 people arrested in a recent anti-gang raid in El Salvador, 40 had been deported from the US at least once, the country’s police chief Rodrigo Avila-Aviles said.

I’m always suspicious of “international” efforts to do anything where the U.S. is involved. Inevitably, we end up paying the most money and bearing the heaviest burden. It sounds to me like Central American countries, where most illegal aliens hail from these days, don’t want the U.S. to enforce its own laws and kick illegal thugs out. If the criminals we deport have committed no crime in those countries, officials can’t hold them. Yes, that’s a problem, but those countries need to find a mechanism or loophole in the law to throw them in prison anyway. Problem solved!

What to do about the gangs? Villaraigosa parrots the same old line about the relationship between poverty and gangs. There is a correlation, but I think they need to drill down deeper and address other issues like fatherlessness and poor family formation , rather that focus on poverty per se. Plenty of people classified as poor according to federal guidelines don’t shoot people in the face and cut them up. (Not to say that all fatherless people commit crimes, but…you know what I mean. It’s something within the subculture itself.)

Then again, what do I know? I’m just a blogger.

“Hate” and Unintended Consequences

One thing I find sort of funny about so-called hate crime laws is that in LA, the classes of people the laws were created to protect are committing the “hate” crimes.

I’m thoroughly convinced that hate crime laws were the product of a bunch of liberals sitting around scheming up a legal way to muzzle white people (or if that didn’t work, add more time to their sentences). Suddenly, “minorities” and homosexuals were “protected” against hurt feeings, and if white people committed crimes against these classes and thought nasty things about them because of their race or homosexuality, the crime was somehow worse.

In California, with blacks and hispanics killing each other, prosecutors are now faced with trying and jurors faced with judging members of two protected groups, with no white boogeyman in sight.

Charging a black person who attacks a white person or an hispanic person who attacks a black person with a “hate” crime is not what liberals intended when they wrote hate crime laws, but perhaps the unintended consequences will cause legislators to rethink these irrational thought crime measures and wipe them from the books.

Prediction: As liberals continue to watch their collective multicultural wet dream fade into an unsatisfying whimper, expect a push to repeal hate crime laws or re-write them to exempt “minorities” from prosecution under those laws.

Black Entrepreneur Hires Illegal Aliens

It’s good to know, perversely speaking, that white folks aren’t the only ones hiring illegal aliens. Green Forever Landscaping in Upper Marlboro, Maryland, owned by a black man named Nikita Floyd, hires illegal aliens. (Source) Another entry for WeHireAliens.com!

Floyd implies that his illegal alien employees are better workers than his black employees. I’ve heard other people say that, too. Regardless, what Floyd and countless others are doing is illegal, and I’m going to do my tiny part in the illegal “immigration” fight and submit his business to WeHireAliens. I heard the feds are monitering the site. Too bad “civilians” have to do the government’s job.

Sources:

• Targeting cross-border gangs
• Los Angeles police start most-wanted gangs list
• Study downplays link between area gangs, Central America
• Injunction unit is a good tool against gangs

(Photo sources: AP and Washington Post)

Update II (1/3): See “Hispanic-on-Black Violence: Protestors, Where Are You?”

Update: If Darrent Williams’s killer is black, expect to hear no more about the case. However, if the killer is white, expect man-bites-dog media coverage.

Also not of interest to the “black community” or white liberal media: latino-on-black crime.

Nifong responds to media after his swearing in ceremony (video).
——————————————————————

Why did certain blacks in Durham, North Carolina, rally around a black stripper claiming to have been gang raped by three white men but virtually ignore the more destructive trend of black-on-black crime in their midst? (Duke blogger KC Johnson elaborates on blacks’ deafening silence about the latest developments in the so-called rape case.)

Last year, four young black men were murdered by a black man in a drug-related incident, and I don’t remember the national or local NAACP or black citizens of Durham protesting against the perpetrator. I don’t recall the so-called New Black Panthers showing up at the courthouse and shouting him down, either.

New Black Panther member Bruce Bridges said, “We’re here today because a human life has been violated in the city of Durham, and we’re here seeking justice.” (Source)

Isn’t death a more serious violation than rape? Isn’t taking a human life the ultimate violation?

Durham County School Board member Jackie Wagstaff reportedly said, “I am here with these brothers because it appears Durham does not want to see the truth.”

What about the truth of “brothers” killing other “brothers”? Were Bridges and Wagstaff protesting in front of the courthouse or in front of the murderer’s house after he killed four black men? Why is it that black “activists” shout and camera-hog about rumors of white-on-black crimes but express no outrage about black-on-black crime that goes on daily?

My assessment is well-known. It is neither profitable nor psychically satisfying to speak out against or address black-on-black violence. So-called black leaders and others inclined to protest have no interest in chastising their own people for living careless, reckless, fruitless, and crime-saturated lives. Guilt-tripping whites is where the money and other perks are.

Columnist DeWayne Wickham wrote about this strange phenomenon. Last month, Kevin West (and others), the son of a friend, was killed in a typical black-on-black, drug-related crime. He wrote (emphasis added):

As troubling as it is that [Sean] Bell’s life might have been cut short by the unlawful actions of some rogue cops, it bothers me more that most of this nation’s black murder victims are killed by other blacks. And despite this chilling fact, nowhere have tens of thousands of people taken to the streets recently to protest this carnage. Not in New York, or Baltimore, or Atlanta, or Detroit, or Chicago. Nowhere.
…
Of the country’s 14,860 homicide victims in 2005, 7,125 were black, according to the FBI’s Uniform Crime Report. And of the 3,289 cases that year in which a single black was killed by a single assailant, the FBI says, 91% of the killers were black.

Let me put this another way: The number of blacks killed in 2005 in this one homicide category alone approaches the total of all the blacks lynched in this country from 1882 to 1968, according to records maintained by Tuskegee University.

Sad stats, indeed.

Wickham wonders, as I do, why blacks turned out in droves to “protest” police actions in the killing of Sean Bell in New York City, but West’s death was a footnote. No need to wonder. Entitlements and concessions are what they care about, not black lives. Ironically enough, one of Bell’s killers may have been black, but all we read and heard were implications of white racism. Dolts.

Also see “No, the Cops Didn’t Murder Sean Bell.”

Now, what could be happening is that blacks are protesting against and ranting about black-on-black crime, and the jaded media simply fail to report it. After all, black-on-black and black-on-white crimes are more common, but just the perception of white-on-black crime gets their investigative reporting juices flowing. Possibly…but not likely. If blacks are protesting against something, you better believe a reporter from somebody’s newspaper will be there.

Look, I understand the all-too-human tendency to point fingers, but important to the development of good character is a willingness to face hard truths. Black crime rates are out of control, and it’s not white peoples’ faults. Criminality and incarceration (however brief) is a defining characteristic of black subculture. The least of our concerns are drunk white men at house parties or perceived “racist” police shootings. If white cops want to kill black men and white boys want to rape black women, they’ll need to kill and violate a hell of a lot of them to catch up to black-on-black crime stats.

Post takeaway: Hypocrisy and idiocy are equal opportunity afflictions.

Addendum: Lots of Duke news at The Johnsville News.

Also see Harry Jackson’s “Open Letter to the Black Community” and Thomas Sowell’s “The real issue at Duke.”

Related posts:

• Dine, Young Cannibals
• Salaciousness Sells
• “Men in their thirties” Rob Georgetown Jewelry Store

Wednesday, December 27: This post is closed to commenting. To discuss recent case developments, see 2007 Prediction: Mike Nifong Will Drop All Charges.

Update II (12/23): From a reader:

Dear LaShawn,

There are so many things I don’t agree with in your blog, however, you and I have seen eye to eye on the Duke scandal.

As a black woman, I was so annoyed and frankly embarrassed at people jumping to conclusions and lining up to defend this woman and drag these men through the mud. This was a disservice to black causes and to women’s causes. This was a disservice to humanity. To automatically judge a case based on people’s melanin content and whether they have a uterus or a penis is truly a disgrace, and the perpetrators of this are now laying low, hoping the whole thing goes away. I guess crow is a meal better eaten silently.

Thank you for staying on this case the way you did. I am glad those fake civil-righters and lame pseudo-feminists have been proven wrong. Since most of them lack a moral compass, I doubt that they will learn from their lessons but, hey, I can dream.

Jaded in California

Update (12/22 @ 3:33 p.m.): The Smoking Gun has posted the dismissal order. It seems the stripper-accuser may claim she was penetrated by something other than a penis. Under NC law, that’s not rape. Although I don’t believe she was penetrated by anyone or anything at 610 N Buchanan on March 13, 2006, the rape charges can’t be sustained based on the latest version of her gang-rape fantasy.

Commenter Richard Nieporent wrote:

It is perfectly obvious what Nifong is doing by not dismissing all of the charges. He is holding the three Duke Lacrosse players hostage in an attempt to prevent their lawyers from filing criminal and civil charges against him. Nifong knows that it’s much easier to convict the Duke Lacrosse players of sexual assault because DNA evidence is not needed. He is hoping that by holding these remaining charges over their heads they will be amenable to a quid pro quo of Nifong dropping all charges if they do not pursue a criminal or civil case against him.

***

Unbelievably cool. More here and here.

Merry Christmas, Dave, Collin and Reade!

Later…but they’re still charged with kidnapping and sexual offense! So much for the “Merry Christmas.”

The stripper-accuser, who said she was beaten, raped, sodomized, and forced to perform oral sex, now says she “doesn’t know” if she was penetrated. Uh…how can one be sodomized and not know it? Hmm…

Reade Seligmann has a paper trail supporting his story that he wasn’t even there at the time of the so-called offense.

Mike Nifong conspired to hide exculpatory evidence. Dropping the gang-rape charges doesn’t change or mitigate that fact. In the past two weeks, I’ve been interviewed for two stories about this case. I hope my quotes make the cut. I’ll link to the stories either way.

Are you blogging this latest development? Trackback to this post, and I’ll link to you.

***

Blogger (and non-blogger) coverage:

Betsy Newmark: “I still don’t see how Nifong can go ahead with the other charges. The accuser will still be the main witness and she has zero credibility. And this new development will just be one new version of her story that will be open to some powerful cross examination.”

Power Line: “How the DA hopes to get a conviction on those charges (or any others), given the history of the case and the accuser’s shredded credibility, is anyone’s guess.”

Durham native Mary Katharine Ham: “It’s Durham. It’s full of a bunch of liberal white people who love to get yelled at by black people, and a bunch of liberal black people who are happy to oblige them. This story scratched that white guilt itch soooo good, they just couldn’t let it go, even though it was pretty clear from the beginning that the story was a little off.”

Tapscott’s Copy Desk @ The Examiner, Michelle Malkin, Independent Conservative, Talk Left (briefly discusses legal ramifications), The American Pundit, Diggers Realm, Hot Air, A Blog For All, Outside the Beltway, OpiniPundit, Lead and Gold, NixGuy.com, Sensible Mom…

More bloggers: The Bitch Girls, The Johnsville News (lots of linkage), Hoystory, Rhymes With Right…

And more bloggers: Blue Star Chronicles, Irons in the Fire, AOL Elections Blog…

Non-bloggers: Rabbi Aryeh Spero asks, “Where’s the ACLU to Defend the Duke Lacrosse Players?”; Thomas Lifson says, “Nifong may be too embarrassed to drop all charges at this point.”

———————————————————————-
Note to first-time and new readers: Check out the Duke Rape Case archives (going back to April – sometimes the “Next Page” link at the bottom left of the middle column doesn’t show up in the IE browser unless you move the cursor near the small dash) and two columns I wrote for Townhall, The Most Absurd Rape Story of the Year (original title) and Scottsboro Revisted.
———————————————————————-

Not interested in this case?

Check out my post on one Christian’s efforts to ban the Harry Potter books from government school library shelves.