Trayvon: please stop calling him a “child.”

Team Trayvon (the “mainstream” media, libtards, leftoids, Blacks, assorted goofballs) are fond of referring to 17-year-old, 6-foot-plus Trayvon “No Limits Nigga” Martin as a “child.” A “child” who brings pot and bags of stolen jewelry to school, wears a “grill” (removable gold teef), makes fight club videos of himself, calls himself a “made nigga,” etc.

(It’s funny how when 17-year-old Blacks act out in a group, they’re “youths,” and when they’re left alone by their parents to prowl around a strange neighborhood, they’re “children,” but when it comes to sex they’re “young adults,” no?)

I suppose that Trayvon “No Limits Nigga” is a “child” to the degree to which his father is guilty of child neglect for having left him alone without any supervision.

According to

Here are some things to consider when deciding if your child is old enough to be home alone without a sitter:

You child needs to be responsible. Age does not matter, if your child is not responsible enough to know that he needs to sit down and start on his homework rather than playing video games. Additionally, does your child have good judgment and reasoning abilities, making it possible for him to remember not to open the door when the doorbell chimes, or not let a stranger on the phone know that you are not there?

Epic fail. EPIC. Trayvon “No Limits Nigga” wasn’t responsible enough to know not to bring pot and hot jewelry to school, or to get himself suspended from school several times a year, much less responsible enough to do his homework. His judgment was nowhere near the level of responsibility needed, according to these guidelines.

Is your home safe? If you live in a safe neighborhood, your windows and doors are in good repair, and your child knows how to work the burglar alarm and call the authorities if necessary, you could say that it is by and large safe for your child to be home alone. On the other hand, if your home is near to venues that attract unsafe characters and if your neighborhood is prone to gang violence, leaving your child home alone is unwise.

Epic fail. EPIC. The neighborhood was a high-crime area, and Trayvon “No Limits Nigga” Martin couldn’t even be trusted not to prowl around outdoors.

Have you trained your child in proper safety procedures? In other words, does your child know what to do if there was an attempted break-in, a fire, or other emergency?

Epic Fail. EPIC. Trayvon “No Limits Nigga” was so devoid of knowledge of self-preservational procedure that he thought circling around to confront (and attack) the stranger following him was a good idea. The idea of going home was too complex for him.

Do we know if Mr. Martin, Sr., did any of the things recommended in that article, before he ditched his son (who was visiting from out of town) and went off to dinner with his girlfriend? And shouldn’t we wonder what kind of father brings a “child” to stay with him, and then ditches that “child” to go off to dinner with his girlfriend? Was Trayvon “No Limits Nigga” Martin so much of an anti-social thug that dad didn’t want to take him out to dinner? Such a burden, that he’d rather leave him at home than spend time with him? Remember, he was just visiting. He had just come to stay with dad, but dad was already ditching him for dinner with the girlfriend. Or maybe, it was Trayvon “No Limits Nigga” Martin’s decision? Is that the kind of decision a child makes?

In Mr. Martin, Sr.’s place, would you feel completely comfortable leaving Trayvon “No Limits Nigga” Martin alone in your home? Would you feel he was up to the responsibility? That he had proven he had his head screwed on straight? Would you even feel halfway comfortable?

And why isn’t the media asking Trayvon “No Limits Nigga” Martin’s parents any of these questions? Why haven’t they asked Mr. Martin, Sr., WTF he was thinking leaving his violent, law-breaking, rule-breaking, anti-social, budding young thug of a son home alone?

Would Trayvon “No Limits Nigga” be in the ground right now, if his father hadn’t left him at home alone?

Would he be in the ground right now, if his mother had kept him at home with her, rather than send him to stay with his father?


Ben Tillman on Derb’s “The Talk.”

Funny, I haven’t blogged in quite a while, and when I do, I’m talking about the Derb again:

Ben Tillman posted this comment about Derbyshire’s The Talk at Sailer’s blog:

Ultimately, the Derbyshire controversy boils down to the following question: Do Blacks own non-Blacks?

If you have a problem with what Derbyshire wrote, then you have answered the question in the affirmative.

Suppose that Derbyshire’s daughters and other non-Blacks followed Derbyshire’s advice. What would be the result? Only that Blacks would be deprived of the presence of non-Blacks and the positive externalities they produce.

If you object to this result — if you think this is wrong — you are asserting that Blacks have an ownership interest in non-Blacks that obligates non-Blacks to be where Blacks want them to be and to share with Blacks what they produce.

Interesting. I wonder what substantive answer Libtards could, or would, give to this. That might be a bit like asking “I wonder what non-libtard answer libtards could give to this,” I suppose. They’d probably just change the subject, or argue over semantics, or lean on their old standby, feminine shaming language:

“The problem is Derb’s hate-speech”

“Laws against discrimination are not slavery.”


I think they’d just stick to talking about how indecent it was of Derb to say what he said. But that raises the question: why are libtards so comfortable ignoring criticisms leveled against them? Why are they so uninterested in acknowledging, much less correcting, their obvious moral and ethical failings? Is it just as simple as conformity? I.e., they wouldn’t get a “buzz” from going against the grain of their groupthink and moving to higher moral and ethical ground because they only get a buzz from the groupthink?

John Derbyshire – Moral Cretin?

Something’s Rotten in the Republic

As the story line goes, a secretive cabal of elites, insufficiently stimulated by our nations’ inadequate diversity, or irritated by their demands for better wages, or shocked by their insistence that their interests trump those of foreigners, has decided to replace them with as much stealth as such a project can muster.

I wish I could believe it. Being allergic to conspiracy theories, I can’t. Being also at an age when I can regard the future beyond the next few summers with calm indifference, I think if the root stocks of Britain and America—nations blessed with representative government—were so stupid as to let wily elites drive them to minority status in their ancestral lands, the fools deserve the race war that’s probably coming to them.

Ever notice how it is only the scoffers like Derbyshire who use terms like “a secretive cabal of elites”? I call this the “Joo mind control rayz lulz” technique; in academic circles, it’s known as a straw man argument – an argument your opponent creates out of whole cloth and attributes to you as if you made it, but chosen for its stupidity because your opponent is better at refuting the arguments he invents for you than the arguments you actually make. It’s a tell-tale sign of weakness.

But that’s not what I really find salient in John’s piece. What I find remarkable is that John thinks little old ladies taken in by confidence men deserve bankruptcy. His response to the plight of victims of fraud goes beyond the decadence and cowardice of indifference, to the open malice of schadenfreude. There’s really no way to make that kind of statement, and object to the crime of fraud, and remain morally consistent.

Hey, to each his own, I suppose.

John refers to a segment about unemployment that “dragged its weary length for over 12 minutes while I howled at the monitor: “Mention immigration! Go on, at least mention it! Tell us about the H-1B scam!”

Why would they mention it? If they did, by Derbyshire’s lights, it should only be to note how much they deserve their plight. Even more curious, why would John “howl” at the television?

I do feel some mild regret on behalf of my kids, who I suppose will spend some of their adult years in a continent-sized version of 1970s Lebanon or 1990s Yugoslavia or 1960s/70s/80s/90s/00s Congo/Sudan/Somalia/Ethiopia/Zimbabwe, but at least I’ve taught the little Derbs (him and her) how to use firearms.

If John’s kids were full bearers of his ancestral legacy (instead of only half-bearers), he’d feel twice as much regret on their behalf. So that’s one up side to miscegenation – half the regret contemplating your children’s doom. Miscegenation and national ruin sound like the best match since “hey, you got your peanut butter in my chocolate!”

John notes that the Office of Refugee Resettlement “is now running three years late with these reports. Gosh, you might almost think there’s something they don’t want you to know about refugee resettlement, mightn’t you? Such as, oh, that the whole shebang is fraud-addled and that genuine refugees are a tiny minority of those resettled.”

But John’s already signed off on fraud. Fraud victims deserve their fate. Is this sort of thinking indicative of the logic they teach in British public schools?

If you think I’m being too hard on the old lemon-stuffer, consider his articles on Kevin MacDonald’s work. This “fraud victims deserve it” line isn’t a new one for the Derb. It’s a consistent one.

Yes, I’m turning. CBS; the administration; Congress; the Associated Press; there’s something going on here.

Better late than never, I suppose. Maybe if more White men “turned” before they’re out to pasture, we’d have a decent shot at turning things around.

Pakistanis hang Obama in effigy

A supporter of the Human Rights Network group wears a mask of U.S President Barack Obama with a noose around his neck while holding the U.S flag during an anti-American rally in Karachi February 26

But don’t expect any hue and cry from the American press over this. Pakistanis aren’t White Americans. If White American Conservatives had done this, the press would have a field day. They’d be calling us terrorists, racists, etc. But since Pakistanis are quite fertile ground for terrorists, and they aren’t White, Christian, or of European descent, Auster’s First Law of Majority-Minority Relations suggests that if anything, the American Left & Media (but I repeat myself) will run cover for and defend the Pakistani effigy-hangers, rather than criticize them.

Just keep in mind that they’d go ape if you did it, White man. It’s only racism when Whites, Europeans, Conservatives, Christians, etc., do it. Anti-racism means “anti-White racism.”

She Dialed 911. The Cop Who Came to Help Raped Her.

(H/T to The Daily Kenn):

This one’s pretty cute:

She Dialed 911. The Cop Who Came to Help Raped Her.

When the brick crashed through her bathroom window and somebody began kicking in her front door, the 19-year-old single mother of two in Milwaukee dialed what are supposed to be the most trustworthy three numbers.

“I called 911 for help,” she later said in court. “I didn’t call 911 to be the victim.”

Within minutes, two police officers responded. One took her 15-year-old brother outside to speak to him. The other cop, Police Officer Ladmarald Cates, gave her boyfriend $10 and told him to go the store and get some water. She told him that he was welcome to chilled water from her refrigerator.

“I only drink bottled water,” Cates said.

Her boyfriend has a pronounced limp and set off with no promise of returning soon. Cates asked to see the broken window and she led him down a narrow hallway to a bathroom in the back. She felt sure that jealous neighbors had attacked her happy home because she dared to defy what seemed surely to be her fate as an inner-city teenage single mom.

She now stood on a floor littered with broken glass and pointed to the brick. The cop she had summoned to protect her instead chose this moment to grab the back of her head by her hair and sodomize her. Then he raped her.

Her revulsion in the aftermath was so visceral that she vomited as she ran outside. The cop’s partner had become concerned when he did not immediately see Cates and called for back-up. Other cops began arriving and saw a woman screaming incoherently about being raped.

Cates appeared and grabbed her by the waist, spinning her around. Her swinging feet may or may not have struck the partner. She was handcuffed and taken in, told at the stationhouse that she was being charged with assaulting a police officer.

The predictive power of race, again. Abuse of power, sex crime, screams “NAMs in charge.” The pro-White commenters at TDB missed the dog-whistle of “inner city single mother” and assumed the victim is White, when she’s probably Black.

Kudos to TDB for printing the ‘boon’s name and photo (after reading the piece all the way through, I’m pretty sure what we’ve got here is an “inner city” journalist reporting rape by “inner city” cops on an “inner city” woman – a real preview to journalism in Idiocracy – but honest is honest).

Question of the day: is there any doubt whatsoever in anyone’s mind that this would be national news if the perp was White? The networks would be all over this for days, at the least. They’d have been all over Andrew “Assassinate 0bama” Adler if he was White, too, but that’s for another post.

Things Famous Men Have Said About The Jews

Someone on my old blog made the excellent suggestion that Ethnopatriots should gather quotes from famous men about the Jooz (step up and take credit sir, I’ve forgotten who you were). So, here’s the thread for the purpose. I managed to (“African-American!!!”)-rig this thread up onto the sidebar, so it’ll always be right where everyone can find it. Until FATPO kicks my door down and drags me away screaming, anyway.

Links are welcome.