[Fox] New report challenges the myth of a racially biased criminal justice system.
The death of Saint George Floyd ...The patron saint of Minneapolis... here in Minnesota sparked a burst of lawlessness not just in Minneapolis but across the country. When the riots ended, the country began a years-long examination of race relations not seen since the end of the civil rights era of the 1960s. Much of that conversation centered on the criminal justice system, and specifically the widely accepted narrative that the system is rigged against black people at every stage.
While some of this national reckoning on race has been helpful, activists have used Floyd’s death to push forward an entire movement on diversity, equity and inclusion that has gone beyond the criminal justice system and infiltrated schools, corporations, and every aspect of society. All based on the narrative that the system is biased against blacks.
What if that narrative was false?
In 2021, for the first time, the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension began documenting the race of criminal offenders in all crimes reported in the state. Using the 911 call as the starting point instead of the arrest offers the unique ability to focus analysis of race based criminal justice system performance on offenders rather than on "per capita" data sets of uninvolved law-abiding citizens. The difference is significant, given 98 percent of white and 85 percent of black Minnesotans are law abiding.
In our new report titled Dispelling the Myth of Unwarranted Racial Disparities in Minnesota’s Criminal Justice System, Center of the American Experiment is one of the first to use this new data set in an analysis of Minnesota’s criminal justice system. Offender data and other traditional data sets were used in an analysis which compared white and black adult offenders as they moved through Minnesota’s criminal justice system in 2021.
The analysis found that contrary to the established narrative, Minnesota’s criminal justice system does not create unfair or disparate outcomes for black offenders. In fact, from arrests to charges, sentences, and incarceration, white offenders received more certain and more punitive outcomes.
Examination of the 2021 data showed that blacks represented nine times more criminal offenders overall and ten times more serious offenders (those most likely to receive a prison sentence) than whites. If Minnesota’s criminal justice system was systemically unjust and biased, it would stand to reason those ratios would have worsened for black offenders at each subsequent stage of the criminal justice system. But they didn’t – they improved. In direct conflict with the prevailing narrative, the disparities that followed criminal offenders through the system were frequently more favorable to black offenders and less favorable to white offenders at every stage including incarceration.
Why is this so important to clarify? Because decades of policies that gutted accountability for black offenders have subjected black communities in particular to disproportionate levels of crime. As a result, in 2021 black Minnesotans were victims of serious and violent crime at ten times the rate of white Minnesotans.
Our report definitively shows that in Minnesota, the home state of George Floyd, the criminal justice system is not an unjust system purposefully or even poorly designed to inflict harsher penalties on black Minnesotans. It is a system that deals with grossly disproportionate numbers of black offenders at the outset. Deflecting attention away from this fact, and gutting accountability in a misguided effort to address "disparities" only subjects black communities to continued disproportionately high levels of crime.
I wonder what the reaction from race activists would be if our report showed Minnesota worked hard to end racial bias in the criminal justice system instead of simply proving it never existed. Would they cheer the result as progress toward the color-blind justice system promised in the Constitution? Would they refocus their energy upstream on the reasons more Blacks enter the system in the first place such as education disparities and broken families? Would they support crime victims (who are disproportionally Black) by demanding accountability from all criminals, no matter their race? I hope so but fear the deep divisions in our political system won’t allow it, even when the facts belie the narrative.
#1
What part, exactly, of the so called "national reckoning" on race was helpful to Americans?
Other than Democratzis and weak kneed Republicans, that is. The people who run Fox Snews should bring the network in for an alignment because it's pulling hard to the Left.
#2
I think the impulse to protect women is a healthy thing in men, but if you pick the wrong women to protect, you might get a black eye.
Posted by: M. Murcek ||
08/03/2023 9:34 Comments ||
Top||
#3
The thing about these LE efforts to shield "protected victim groups" from scrutiny in these criminal situations is that it just leads to conspiracy theories floating around that are often more outlandish than the truth would be.
If the manifesto was published, people would read it and say Yeah, (yawn) nut job. What's for lunch?" That's basically what happened with Kaczynski even though the media wanted that manifesto to replace the Bible.
Posted by: M. Murcek ||
08/03/2023 9:39 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Tyrant for trans sake.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
08/03/2023 13:52 Comments ||
Top||
Japan had already gotten its teeth kicked in by Russia during the Mongolian fight and by Zhukov no less. After that, before Pearl Harbor, Japan signed a secret non-aggression pact with Russia keeping it from Germany.
FDR knew Japan very well may attack, but they thought it would be in the Philippines and Wake. The US had even issues orders to prepare for a Japanese attack in those areas. Pearl was a complete surprise and shock.
#2
Oh, that again. I read the book, there is one on this particular conspiracy theory.
No, if anything FDR considered a Japanese attack in the Philippines to be likely. Likely is NOT the same as certain. Hawaii is a long, long way from the Japanese Home Islands and most US military planners were blind to the military abilities of Japan.
The US just came out of the brutal great depression (1929 – 1941) and the American people were still reeling from the pain of that event to get caught up in a war.
The US also thought the Japs would strike South America first to get access to rubber plantations for their modernized war machine, so my father manned a 50 cal along the Rio Grande in case they then hit Southern border to prevent a US response to a South American encursion.
#4
Everyone knew the attack was coming at Pearl. The US Navy drilled in their Fleet Problems repeatedly. The Japanese had an exam question at the naval academy about the best way to attack Pearl. It wasn't a surprise nor a secret.
South America? Never seen any references to that in Japanese sources. It was the oil in the Pacific they needed.
#5
A Pacific Fleet was created in 1907 when the Asiatic Squadron and the Pacific Squadron were combined. In 1910, the ships of the First Squadron were organized back into a separate Asiatic Fleet. The General Order 94 of 6 December 1922 organized the United States Fleet, with the Battle Force as the Pacific presence. Until May 1940, the Battle Force was stationed on the West Coast of the United States. Headquarters, battleships, aircraft carriers and heavy cruisers were stationed at San Pedro close to the Long Beach Naval Shipyard. Light cruisers, destroyers and submarines were stationed at San Diego.
During the summer of 1940, as part of the U.S. response to Japanese expansionism, it was instructed to take an "advanced" position at Pearl Harbor, Hawaii. Long term basing at Pearl Harbor was so strongly opposed by the commander, Admiral James O. Richardson, that he personally protested in Washington. Political considerations were thought sufficiently important that he was relieved by Admiral Husband E. Kimmel, who was in command at the time of the attack on Pearl Harbor. The Pacific Fleet was formally recreated on 1 February 1941, when General Order 143 split the United States Fleet into separate Atlantic, Pacific, and Asiatic Fleets. - wiki
It was always - ALWAYS - assumed that the Japanese were going to go after the PI first, then our respective fleets would meet in a dreadnaught armageddon. See also, War Plan Orange.
Spike Flomort7424 rightly and accurately points out that the USN's fleet problems almost exclusively focused on Pearl, but keep in mind too that Pearl was...well, convenient. To actually exercise WPO would have cost a hell of a lot of money that the USN just didn't have. The PI was always, always the focus - but WPO always assumed that Pearl and San Diego would be operational; you take one out of the equation and it's over. Roosevelt was legitimately stunned when he got the word that Pearl was hit; and fortunately we had admirals ready to sort things.
#10
#7 The Japanese DID attack the Philippines. At the same time.
Posted by: Spike Flomort7424 2023-08-03 09:50
Spike,
They actually hit the PI ten hours after MacArthur got word of the strike on Pearl....who then proceeded to lock up tight and do nothing. When the Japanese finally did show up, they demolished the Far East Air Force, destroyed the USN facilities there, and the US Army/Philippine garrisons were doomed to slow defeat.
#11
This site has a lot of groupthink going, doesn't it? Something tells me there's a lot of everyone thinking the same here. I can see I'm not welcome, but I'll leave you with this parting gift of facts.
#12
Are there still Boston Massacre conspiracies bubbling on the back burner?
Posted by: Super Hose ||
08/03/2023 11:34 Comments ||
Top||
#13
parting gift of facts
You have your facts we have ours.
The fact was the Japanese militarists who ran Japan had no intention of surrendering. They were willing to sacrifice the civilian population for their power and collective necks as they had already demonstrated at Saipan and Okinawa. A behavior that would have continued if we landed on the home islands. What the bombs did was shift the power from the militarists to the politicians who wanted to end the war and destruction. Since taking power in the 30s, any politician who was considered a threat to their power was assassinated. Even in the last hours they attempted a coup to prevent surrender. Please point out one major war that ended solely upon air/sea bombardment and blockade.
#15
Perhaps this is a forest for the trees issue? My purpose in posting this was NOT the spurious argument that FDR wanted the attack on Pearl Harbor per se, but the macro strategic questions behind the US/UK meetings that produced the Atlantic Charter and throughout the rest of 1941, to wit, how to keep the Soviet Union in the war.
If the Japanese came into the war in 1941, it seems likely that their massive armies in China would have been able to pin down the Siberian Russian forces that were being shifted west to stop the Barbarossa onslaught. Churchill was keenly aware of the vulnerabilities of the Empire, the UK itself after the Dunkirk evacuation, and was desperate to obtain greater US aid, engagement and eventually, war with Germany. My interest is in trying to get insights into the question of how FDR considered the risks to the US IF the Brits were defeated, and how if they did the US faced a two-ocean threat as the sole remaining major power not under Axis rule. What drastic measures would FDR have been considering to avoid a UK defeat and how key a lynchpin to achieve that was keeping the Soviets in the war.
But I've never failed to be impressed by his messages. I thought I knew a lot about the end of WW II. Thanks, Bill.
Posted by: Bobby ||
08/03/2023 12:26 Comments ||
Top||
#17
"The fact was the Japanese militarists who ran Japan had no intention of surrendering. They were willing to sacrifice the civilian population for their power and collective necks as they had already demonstrated at Saipan and Okinawa. A behavior that would have continued if we landed on the home islands..."
Agreed. The idea of mass producing reflective "white anti-Bomb smocks" was being discussed.
"What the bombs did was shift the power from the militarists to the politicians who wanted to end the war and destruction"--P2K
No. The Japanese upper echelon were clinging to the idea that a neutral USSR would step in and allow the existence of a strong Imperial Japan as a a counterweight to the Colonial Powers. Then Stalin tore up the Japan-USSR Neutrality Treaty and crushed Manchuria. All hope of a "Diplomatic Solution" was crushed and the end was clear: Surrender or be starved to death by blockade/transportation destruction, urban centers firebombed into ashes and finally landings followed by occupation. The A-Bombs were just a radioactive cherry on top of an excrement sundae.
The A-Bombs did offer a wonderful psychological bandage to the wounded Japanese psyche. The Allies, US particularly, did not beat their armies, shoot down the air forces, sink all their ships and crush them by economic production -- They Cheated! They had to use these new-fangled A-Bombs!
#18
Read "The Imperial Japanese Navy" Naval Institute Press. By late 1943, early 1944 the Japanese had lost so many ships, especially destroyers, the end of the navy was inevitable. They had lost too many carrier planes and especially pilots that they could not replace.
Posted by: Deacon Blues ||
08/03/2023 13:55 Comments ||
Top||
#19
No.
Japan and Russia were at it already.
Other than some quirky initial success, Russia stomped Japan.
The conflict was drawing resources from Communist Backed Chinese Forces.
I haven't heard one like this since the last I was around 'libertarians'.
#20
I'm sure I've posted this here before but here goes....
In his Autobiography a young Akira Kurosawa got married and prepared for the Emperor to order the national suicide. He was a very western director but would have followed the orders if given by the Emporer. Luckily for Japan the Emporer decided he could not win and surrenders. The bombs likely saved Japan.
Direct Translation via Google Translate. Edited. by Petr Akopov
[RIA] The situation around Niger is developing so unusually that it becomes clear that the old world order is changing right before our eyes.
Less than a week has passed since the coup, but many countries have already become involved in the situation around one of the poorest countries in the world and the world record holder in terms of fertility (that is, large families - the total birth rate in Niger is seven).
But after last Thursday the presidential guard overthrew President Mohamed Bazum , and its commander Abdurahman Tchiani proclaimed himself president of the National Council for the Defense of the Motherland, it seemed that everything would develop according to the usual scheme for the region (fortunately, this is already the seventh coup in this part Africaover the past three years): neighbors and regional organizations will condemn the military who have taken power, will call on them to return the legally elected president to power, the West will do the same, and Russia will at least verbally call for the restoration of the former power.
Well, the West, of course, will also be alarmed by the possibility of losing an ally and the appearance of Russian military experts in Niger.
That's how it was in the early days. The United States and France angrily condemned the coup, there was even talk of French military intervention (there are both American and French military bases in the country), the regional organization Economic Community of West Africa (ECOWAS) threatened Niamey with large-scale sanctions and the use of force if the putschists Bazum will not be released within a week. That is, two threats of military intervention in a country of 25 million were voiced (albeit unofficially in the French case).
But since the beginning of this week, things have changed. French Foreign Minister said that Paris is not planning military intervention. Then the authorities of Mali and Burkina Faso (neighbors of Niger) issued a statement that they would consider any military intervention in the internal affairs of Niger a declaration of war against them. And the Guinean authorities said: it is necessary to refrain from the use of sanctions and military intervention - they will not solve the problem, but they can lead to a humanitarian catastrophe, the consequences of which could go beyond the borders of Niger.
What is going on? The fact is that ECOWAS unites 15 countries of West Africa , including eight former French colonies. But participation in the organization of three of them was suspended due to military coups - and these are precisely the same Mali, Guinea, Burkina Faso, which stood up for Niger. That is, the four members of the association are already out of step, which calls into question the very existence of ECOWAS. Of course, no intervention in Niger was planned - they simply decided to frighten the new authorities in Niamey.
Only the regional giant Nigeria is suitable for the entry of military contingents from all ECOWAS countries, but she is definitely not going to forcefully restore order from her northern neighbor. And even more so, African countries do not want to drag chestnuts out of the fire for the West - not only because of hostility towards the former colonialists, but also because it was France and the United States that brewed all the mess that the region is now clearing up.
Yes, there have been coups before, as well as civil wars, but it was after the Western intervention in Libya in 2011 that the problems in this part of the Sahara , including in Mali and Niger, greatly escalated. By eliminating the pan-Africanist Gaddafi, the West played into the hands of the separatist and jihadist forces in the region - and everyone in West Africa understands this. The West did not like the pan-African plans of the Libyan leader, which could potentially interfere with the control of the region, but in return, Paris and Washington received only increased chaos and unrest, which hit their positions as well.
And besides, Russia appeared in the region.
First in the Central African Republic, then in Mali and Burkina Faso, and now, as the West fears, the Russians must also be expected in Niger. A country where our positions were minimal - even the embassy was closed in the 90s. And now, at a demonstration near the French embassy in Niamey, they were waving Russian flags and demanding a Wagner.
In our social networks, they even began to write that the new leader of the country, General Tchiani, at one time (either in the 80s, or in the 10s) converted to Orthodoxy, but this is an outright lie, and also aimed at discrediting Russia in Niger (a Muslim country ). The point is not the religion of Tchiani, but the fact that neighboring Mali and Burkina, whose leaders have just returned from Russia, stood up for him. That is, the new Nigerian authorities will see that several countries in the region, after having strengthened their ties with the Russians, have gained a loud voice and the ability to defend their interests, despite Western pressure, and this in itself will be the best advertisement for Russia in Niger.
And our interests there are not only in expanding influence on another African country and not only in uranium (which is important for France), but also in those pan-African projects that are connected with Niger. First of all, we are talking about the Trans-Saharan gas pipeline - a project that has been trying to be implemented for a decade and a half. The 4,500 kilometer pipeline is to deliver gas from the Gulf of Guinea to the Mediterranean Sea, that is, from Africa to Europe . This project became relevant again after Europe's divorce from Russia - the Europeans are looking for a replacement for Russian gas. And last summer, they decided to resume work on the trans-Saharan project. It passes through only three countries: Nigeria, Niger and Algeria., and the latter is an old and very close partner of Russia, and an equally consistent opponent of French influence south of its borders.
And it must happen that yesterday in Moscow Sergei Shoigu held talks with the chief of staff of the National People's Army of Algeria Said Shangrikha. Although this visit was only announced the day before, on Monday, it is, of course, unrelated to the events in Niger. But General Shangriha is the second person in Algeria, a country where the army plays a huge role, a country for which gas exports are of great importance. So a window of opportunity opens up for Niger - thanks to the presence of several neighboring countries at once that have staked on Russia, General Tchiani can really lead his country out of French captivity. And he will not even need to change Mohammedanism to Orthodoxy for this.
[Bee] OTTAWA, CANADA — Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announced the separation from his wife of 18 years Tuesday, shocking millions of Canadians who reportedly had no clue the effeminate leader had been married this whole time, least of all to a woman.
"Oh wow, he was married?" said normal Canadian woman Jill Thorleaf. "That's nice. Wait -- to a woman? Really?? Huh. Wow. I had no idea. Good for him."
In a brief statement, Trudeau called for privacy as his life crumbled around him. "Please stop asking if Sophie was really a woman," said a tearful Trudeau. "You're hurting my feelings! Sophie is real. She's real! The next person who asks is getting curb stomped by a Mountie!"
Trudeau's Canadian wife, who no one has ever seen and may not exist, has reportedly had her bank account and assets frozen pending reconciliation. If she returns home and lets her husband decorate the living room of the Rideau Cottage the way he wants, she will be welcomed back with open arms. "The ball is in her court," Trudeau maintained. "She has to stop having her own opinions and feelings."
"Or else," he added ominously.
At publishing time, the Canadian press was mourning what has been deemed a terrible setback for interracial marriage in Canada.
Posted by: Frank G ||
08/03/2023 07:27 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[12 views]
Top|| File under: Commies
[Federalist] A House subcommittee report affirms that the ’Proximal Origin’ paper was not the result of rigorous scientific research but rather a coverup.
Most people are aware by now that the Chinese Communist Party’s cover-up of Covid-19 pandemic-related information, especially between late 2019 and early 2020, delayed governments worldwide from taking appropriate interventions that would have prevented many deaths and much suffering. But a recent congressional hearing revealed that the CCP wasn’t the only one guilty. A few key public health officials and scientists in the West served as the party’s useful idiots by shutting down debates about the origin of the pandemic early on.
The House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic held a hearing in mid-July to "examine the potential conflicts of interest and suppression of scientific discourse by the National Institutes of Health surrounding the drafting, publication, and critical reception of the infamous ’The Proximal Origin of SARS-CoV-2’ (Proximal Origin) correspondence."
The infamous paper, "The Proximal Origin of SARS-CoV-2," was published in the influential journal Nature Medicine on March 17, 2020. Its five authors wrote with unequivocal confidence: "Our analyses clearly show that SARS-CoV-2 is not a laboratory construct or a purposefully manipulated virus. We do not believe that any type of laboratory-based scenario is plausible."
Joao Monteiro, the chief editor of Nature Medicine, tweeted on the same day: "Let’s put conspiracy theories about the origin of #SARSCoV2 to rest and help to stop the spread of misinformation—great work from @K_G_Andersen #covid19." The prestige of the authors and the magazine turned this paper into one of the most potent weapons to suppress the debate over the lab-leak theory of Covid’s origin.
According to the House subcommittee’s report, since the commentary’s publication, it has been regarded as "the single most impactful and influential scientific paper in history" and "has been accessed 5.84 million times." Government officials, the media, scientists, and many others referred to it as indisputable evidence that the lab-leak theory was a conspiracy and that anyone who brought it up was a conspiracist and a racist. The Chinese Communist Party welcomed the commentary as scientific backing to insist that Covid-19 originated in nature; thus, the CCP was not responsible for the 15 million Covid-related deaths and millions more suffering during the pandemic.
#2
What y'all don't understand is that the split second the virus got loose or was released, everyone in the funding chain for it became blackmailable to say whatever the CCP wanted them to, up to and including creating fraudulent papers to back them up. From saying it was zoonotic from bats, pangolins, or racooon dogs, to "HCQ and Ivermectin kills."
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
...The patron saint of Minneapolis...
[Bee] OTTAWA, CANADA — Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announced the separation from his wife of 18 years Tuesday, shocking millions of Canadians who reportedly had no clue the effeminate leader had been married this whole time, least of all to a woman.
