The Big Book of Racialism

What is this?
This is a collection of facts and experience arranged
specifically to open the eyes of anyone fortunate enough to
read it. Racial Equality is a fantasy. It is false. We
are led to believe it for the sake of feelings. We all have
been led to embrace a lie just because the truth is
offensive. Yet to see through it all, youd simply have to
ask yourself, if were all equal, how come we are always
having to come up with excuses for the failings of others?
Well, the answer is simple. We, the people of the
White world, have been lavished with a guilty conscience.
For whatever reason, wed rather believe that everyone is
equal. We are not all equal. Ask yourself, what countries
of the world are the ones receiving the bulk of immigrants?
White countries. What countries enjoy the highest standards
of living? White countries. What countries wield nearly all
the power in the world? White countries. What make up the
greatest society the world has ever seen? The White
countries.
If you are skeptical, read on, and either solidify
your beliefs in what you call the truth, rejecting what
youve been told is bigotry, or be shown the true light of
the world.
First things first. What have you been taught all your
lives? That people from all over the globe are all equal.
We are equal to one another; the only thing to separate us
is the color of our skin. This leads you to believe that
racism is based on nothing but pigmentation, and therefore,
is complete trash.
Well Im afraid thats simply not true. There are
numerous physical differences between the races, but there
is no need to get into them simply because they are
inconsequential. The size of your stature, and anything
else, do not dictate to your muscles the actions you take.
What we want to look at are the mental differences, the
ones that really matter.
When the White race was unfortunate enough to stumble
upon Blacks, what sort of condition were they in? Well, the
simple answer is, the condition theyre still in. Africans
were, and are, in a condition of complete and total
squalor. They lived, and live, in poverty. They were, and
are, totally unable to construct a functioning society.
What will your typical politically correct Joe say to
this? Well the Blacks were denied the means to build a
society like Whites and Orientals had.

Africa is a continent of RICH natural resources. The

Blacks in Africa were surrounded by ocean, yet never
constructed a sail. They were surrounded by jungle, yet
never cut a tree down. They were plagued by wild beasts,
yet never built a weapon worth preserving after its use.
The land was endowed with rich minerals, yet they never
utilized these for progress of any kind. They were
surrounded by each other, yet never devised a written
language of any kind to communicate on paper or record
history. Blacks in Africa had an unimaginable number of
resources at hand, yet they never thought to do anything
with them. If we are all equal, shouldnt the Whites,
Orientals, and Blacks all have progressed at the same rate?
That would seem logical, but we didnt. This is a fact.
Just to clarify, I in no way am lying in this text.
The simple fact is that I do not need to lie. The lie is
equality, and to disprove it all I need to do is speak the
truth.
They were unable to rise above; their limit was the
pathetic squalor they created. They were eventually forced
into slave labor, which was of course, both morally and
economically, wrong. This brings up a surprisingly common,
but completely invalid argument.
The argument is that the slave trade denied Africa the
much needed vitality of its youth, which prevented it from
advancing in parallel with the Europeans and Orientals.
Well, any educated person can tell thats simply not true.
First off, they werent advancing in parallel when we found
them, which was before we started shipping them off to the
slave markets. France and Britain had sent entire armies to
die at the hands of each other, and their numbers were
replaced within a generation. France and Britain seemed to
do just fine. So please, dont bother trying to press that
argument any further.
Another common misconception (that I am also guilty
of) is that Whites went and rounded up the Blacks when they
wanted slaves. It was the Blacks themselves that sold their
own people into slavery. Slavery is still practiced today
in Africa.
When the slaves were freed, we (Whites) said, alright,
who wants to go home? Some Blacks said I do, so we shipped
them off to the African coast, dumped them on a beach and
said here you go, build what you will. They founded the
country of Liberia (named for being recently liberated) and
they were in fact so grateful they named their capital
Monrovia after the US President Monroe. They then proceeded
to enslave the indigenous population. This made up 19 times
their number. So after just being freed from slavery, they
proceed to enslave their own people, not only that but the

slaves make up 95% of the country! A few hundred years with

the White man and these people pick up a few tricks. This
is to such a point that they can return to the ordinary
Blacks and enslave 19 times their own number. The very
notion of being recently freed from slavery and then
pushing those very conditions on your own people; its
enough to make you question the morality of their race.
There is no question that Africa is a primitive place.
But why is that? It certainly isnt our fault, is it? No,
Africa is the simple sum of the abilities of the Black
race. This is what they can create. For those of you who
live in dense, urban areas or large cities, which
neighborhood do you dare not venture to at night? The Black
neighborhood, no doubt. Maybe The Hispanic Neighborhood?
Well, whatever answer came to mind, it wasnt The White
neighborhood, was it?
Whites are not dangerous (by and large). We are not an
aggressive people. The comparative murder rates (which I
will get into later) show this. Im not saying Whites are
perfect. We are not. But as a race, we produce more of the
great minds, more of the brilliant people than any other.
We may produce rapists, murderers, drug dealers and
thieves, but not on the scale Blacks and Hispanics do, and
it is of no hindrance to our progress as a people. These
claims I just made will be supported by the factual
statistics later in this document. Take my word for it for
the next few minutes.
By now youll have noticed that my arguments are
primarily, if not exclusively directed at Blacks. This is
because they are a) the utmost extreme of cases and b)
common everywhere. By this I mean if I were to argue
against Mexicans, I would be alienating Canadian and
British readers (In Canada and England, Mexicans are
basically non-existent). Rest assured, when my point is
across, it wont matter who Im making an example of.
Blacks, as a race, are not capable of producing a
sophisticated society, developing sophisticated technology,
or even a written language, for that matter. If we adhere
to the principle, If you are unable to create it yourself,
you are not qualified to operate It., then immigration
seems to be an insane prospect. Allow me to explain this
further. The reason we are able to sayoperate computers,
is because they were specifically engineered to be userfriendly. Our society has not been structured to cater to
those who are less able to perform to its standards. This
is why Blacks cannot immigrate here and succeed on the
level equivalent to Whites. We created it to our standards,
which is far beyond that of Blacks. To cater to them, weve
already dumbed down the educational system to close the
achievement gap, the gap between where Whites score and

Blacks on standard testing. We offer extensive welfare

programs which are overwhelmingly taken advantage of by
non-Whites. We push the myth of racial equality so they can
feel better about themselves. Is it that somehow we are
responsible for them? Our justice system persecutes Whiteon-Black crime as hate crimes, but overwhelmingly not
Black-on-White crime. That is an injustice. If were all
equal, shouldnt hate crimes be applied in an equally fair
manner?
Weve grown so obsessed with not offending non-Whites
with the truth that weve basically taken all of their
problems onto our own shoulders. It extends abroad too!
Suddenly its our responsibility to alleviate Africa of its
problems. Well, I hate to break it to you, but to do that
would mean removing the Blacks.
The other night I was listening to some stand up
comedy and this comedian said, I dont like hockey, there's
only one black thing on that ice, and they're all hitting
it with a stick *laughter*, golf...on the other hand
*laughter*. Now think about that for a second, why is it
that a Black person can make this sort of joke, when as if
it were a White comedian standing in front of that
microphone, telling the joke from the opposite standpoint,
how he hates golf and loves hockey because he gets to beat
the black puck with a stick, no one will laugh. Why is it
like that? He'd probably be brought up on charges, dont
you think? Ever hear the James Brown song,Say it loud, Im
Black and Im Proud? What do you say about music that is
about White pride? Its oi!, its for Skinheads, its for
Nazis.
There is something wrong with society today if the
major ethnic group to whom these White countries
originally...belonged to...can be guilted into being
ashamed of who they are to the point where they not only
allow themselves to be ridiculed, but punish people who do
the same thing from the opposite standpoint.
That, is an injustice. Its ridiculous. What gives
them the right to make us feel guilty for such a thing as
being proud of who WE are? Are we not allowed to be proud
because White pride is associated with Nazi Germany? Think
about it, what was Hitler doing? He was securing the
prosperity of his people. The people in Germany were sick
of poverty and immigrants ruining their society, so, as
one, they rose up and took action. Is that so bad? Self
defense is completely justified. White racism is justified.
It is a reaction. It is a reaction to decades of oppression
and injustices.
What brings on this oppression? Were being
deliberately targeted and discriminated against by non-

Whites. Who always takes the blame for the wholes actions?
The man at the top. Well, my friends, the Whites are at the
top, and we bare the responsibility that comes with it. We
are blamed for the failings and faults of others. Worse
still, we accept it. What is the reasoning behind it? Were
responsible for slavery in America, and therefore, the poor
performance of Blacks? Most certainly not. At the time of
this writing, slavery has been over for 140 years. How long
does it take to get your act together? If that werent
enough, they hold a grudge against us for it. Shouldnt
hundreds of thousands of Whites dying to free the Blacks be
enough? The Arabs ran a slave trade much larger than that
of the Whites, yet Blacks seem to hold very, very little
animosity towards them. We died for them, and are less
deserving of their hate, but we receive it anyway. Why. I
suppose the answer is inconsequential. It doesnt even
matter.
In my country, Canada, the government has to meet
racial quotas. Why should a law like this be in place? If
we are all equal, then the workforce should be made up of
equal proportions of people of all races, just because that
will be the way it works out, more or less, right? Wrong,
if the government didnt have to meet racial quotas, wed
have more non-Whites out of work, because they are less
qualified than Whites. Its the simple truth.
Blacks, as a race, produce criminals on an
unprecedented level. This makes them more dangerous as a
people. For instance, almost 1 million White Americans were
murdered, robbed, assaulted or raped by Black Americans in
1992, compared with about 132,000 Blacks who were murdered,
robbed, assaulted or raped by Whites, according to the same
survey. (Note: My statistics are American. Race-based
statistics are extremely difficult to come by for Canada.
They were banned in Toronto and many cities to follow in
1989 because the crime report said (you guessed it) that
Blacks were committing a disproportionately large amount of
crimes. It was deemed offensive and banned.) Blacks thus
committed 7.5 times more violent inter-racial crimes than
Whites even though the Black population is only one-seventh
the size of the White population. When these figures are
adjusted on a per capita basis, they reveal an
extraordinary disparity: Blacks are committing more than 50
times the number of violent crimes of Whites.
Pretty difficult to believe, isnt it? Well, unless
youre about to accuse the US Department of Justice of
being racist, youd better believe it.
*According to the latest US Department of Justice
survey of crime victims, more than 6.6 million violent
crimes (murder, rape, assault and robbery) are committed in
the US each year, of which about 20 per cent, or 1.3

million, are inter-racial crimes. Most victims of race

crime about 90 per cent are White, according to the
survey "Highlights from 20 Years of Surveying Crime
Victims," published in 1993.
The American news media does not want to
the Race War, which remains between the lines
unreported. In fact, to even suggest that the
to be discredited. So let's start suggesting,

talk about
and
war exists is
immediately.

No matter how crime figures are massaged by those who

want to acknowledge or dispute the existence of a Race War,
there is nothing ambiguous about what the official
statistics portray: for the past 30 years a large segment
of Black America has waged a war of violent retribution
against White America.
And the problem is getting worse, not better. In the
past 20 years, violent crime has increased more than four
times faster then the population. Young Blacks (under 18)
are more violent than previous generations and are 12 times
more likely to be arrested for murder than young Whites.
According to the latest annual report on murder by the
Federal Bureau of Investigation, most inter-racial murders
involve Black assailants and White victims, with Blacks
murdering Whites at 18 times the rate that Whites murder
Blacks. These breathtaking disparities began to emerge in
the mid-1960s, when there was a sharp increase in Black
crime against Whites, an upsurge which, not coincidentally,
corresponds exactly with the beginning the modern civil
rights movement. Over time, the cumulative effect has been
staggering. Justice Department and FBI statistics indicate
that between 1964 and 1994 more than 25 million violent
inter-racial crimes were committed, overwhelmingly
involving Black offenders and White victims, and more than
45,000 people were killed in inter-racial murders.
When non-violent crimes (burglary, larceny, car theft
and personal theft) are included, the cumulative totals
become prodigious. The Bureau of Justice Statistics says 27
million non-violent crimes were committed in the US in
1992, and the survey found that 31 per cent of the
robberies involved Black offenders and White victims (while
only 2 per cent in the reverse). When all the crime figures
are calculated, it appears that Black Americans have
committed at least 170 million crimes against White
Americans in the past 30 years. It is the great defining
disaster of American life.
All these are facts, yet by simply writing this story,
by assembling the facts in this way, I would be deemed a
racist by the American news media. It prefers to maintain a

paternalistic double-standard in its coverage of Black

America, a lower standard.*1
Think to yourself and ask, what causes racism?
Racists? No. If that were true, where could racism have
come from? Racial tension causes racism. Multiculturalism
causes racial tension. Never before in the history of human
civilization have two separate peoples lived in proximate
geographical spaces and not come into conflict with one
another. If the conflict was race motivated, who knows, the
point is never before have two races lived in proximity to
one another and had peace.
No society has ever survived multiculturalism. The
only possible argument you can raise against that is that
no society has endured indefinitely. Well, Id like to hope
that ours will. How can our culture survive if we do
nothing to celebrate it, whilst taking in other peoples at
the same time?
Do you think bringing them into our society has
changed them? Because youre right. (Remember Liberia?) It
has. The Blacks here are clearly not only smarter, but more
able to become intelligent than their African companions
who have not been immersed in White culture. You do have
good, hard-working, decent Blacks, but whos to say his
children will be the same? Sure, you can teach a dog to
shake hands, but have you ever heard of a dog teaching its
puppies to shake hands?
It's funny to me that the same lame excuses they use for
Africa is what we hear in America.
Lack of education. (School is not only free, but it's
mandatory in America)
They live in violence-prone areas. (They create violenceprone areas)
Lack of jobs. (Businesses will leave an area that is
dangerous, and no new businesses will come)
The only BS excuse we hear in the U.S. that they can't get
away with saying in Africa is A history of racism and
discrimination.
Otherwise, the failure of Black Africans is the same
as the failure of Blacks in America. They can't claim
discrimination in Africa as a cause of failure, because of
the simple fact that in areas of Africa heavily influenced
or controlled by Whites, Blacks have the highest standard
of living on the whole continent. That is an undeniable
fact.

Now, even in those areas, do the Blacks have as high a

standard of living as Whites? No, of course not, and they
never will. Some people think Blacks and Whites will only
have equal standards of living when the Whites decline the
level of Blacks, but that will never happen. Will our
standard of living decline? Of course. But no matter how
low our lifestyle goes, that of non-Whites will go
proportionally lower. When we are able to thrive and start
businesses, niggers may complain that they are poor, but at
least they have jobs. And the ones who won't work will
still be fed, clothed and housed by our tax dollars. When
we are put out of business, our standard of living will
decline, but then the niggers will have NO jobs and there
will be NO free welfare money, since the tax base will be
gone.
So even as we decline to the level niggers are at now,
niggers will have no way of maintaining their current
lifestyles, so as we sink, they will sink even lower. So
there will never be parity. I am basing that on historical
and economical reality, there is nothing new happening
here.
The Blacks are, once again, being used to fruitlessly
go to war with the hand that feeds them in the vain hopes
that they will somehow benefit from our demise.
A few simple examples are Haiti, Rhodesia, South Africa,
and American cities. The niggers jack the White man, and
then realize that they are worse off than before. The short
term gratification of gloating over our reversal of fortune
doesn't do much for an empty belly. I can't blame the
niggers for not learning their lesson, since White people
haven't learned that lesson, either.
The Black race produces more criminals and delinquents
than Whites. This is on a racial level; as a whole. If you
just kept the good ones, what criteria would you judge them
on? What do they bring to the table? Is it worth the time
and effort spent sorting them? Just because these
particular ones have risen above their genetic limitations
doesnt mean their kids will.
*
Blacks commit more crimes than Whites, therefore, they
are not only more dangerous (to us *and* themselves), but
cost us money in the form of policing, jailing, and the
pricy court process disproportionate to their numbers.
*
When Blacks populate an area, they turn it into a
ghetto. Its not that Ghettos produce poor, stupid Blacks;
poor, stupid Blacks produce ghettos. This can be attributed
to their inability to form a functioning society on their
own.

The following is a table containing data on the top 10

Whitest and Blackest cities in America*. The First column
contains the name and location of the city, the 2nd contains
the % of White or Black inhabitants, the 3rd contains the
Crime Relocation Index* rating, and the 4th the % of the
population below the poverty line.
*

Each city has a population of at least 500,000.

*
The Crime Relocation Index is a number system used to
gauge the crime in a city. 100 is the national average, so
if your city has an index rating of 50, it has half the
crime of the national average, if it has an index rating of
200 it has twice the crime of the national average, etc.

Top 10 Blackest Cities

Top 10 Whitest Cities

City

Black

Index

Poverty

City

White

Gary, IN.

84%

538

22.2%

Livonia, MI.

95.5 35

Index

Poverty

2%

Detroit,
MI.

81.6% 556

21.7%

Cape Coral,
FL.

93

30

5.3%

Birmingham
, AL.

73.5% 367

20.9%

Boise City,
ID.

92.2 56

5.9%

Jackson,
MS.

70.6% 368

19.6%

Independence
, MO.

91.9 107

6.4%

New
Orleans,
LA.

67.3% 405

23.7%

Cedar
Rapids, IA.

91.9 53

4.9%

Baltimore,
MD.

64.3% 601

18.8%

Sioux Falls,
SD.

91.9 76

5.6%

Atlanta,
GA.

61.4% 532

21.3%

Warren, MI.

91.3 87

5.2%

Memphis,
TN.

61.4% 321

17.2%

Manchester,
NH.

91.7 65

7.7%

Washington
, DC

60%

436

16.7%

Springfield,
MO.

91.7 79

9.9%

Richmond,
VA.

57.2% 386

17.1%

Scottsdale,
AZ.

96.2 70

3.4%

So all the White cities have low poverty rates, while

all the Black cities have high poverty rates. What does
this tell you? Poverty causes crime? Maybe. Blacks cause
poverty? In a way. Blacks cause crime which causes poverty?
Definitely. Poverty generates petty crime, such as theft of
food. Theft of food is generally not reported and simply
written off as an expense at the end of each accounting
cycle for the store.
Poverty does not cause crime, not the kind of crime
we're looking at here. Simply because the overwhelming
majority of crime you can attribute to poverty, plain and
simple, will go unreported. Crime causes poverty. Crime
makes an area a worse place to live, so property value goes
down and it's a stack of dominoes from there. Therefore it
is the inhabitants of the cities that truly dictate whether
they do well or not, as it is their responsibility to well,
you know...not kill each other.
That can be argued back and forth forever, so we'll
leave that alone for now. The Blackest cities have higher
poverty rates, and by the equalists logic, the crime
should be proportional to the poverty, so we'll compare.
The Blackest city was matched with the Whitest, the 2nd
Blackest with the 2nd Whitest, etc.
White City
Livonia, MI
Cape Coral, FL
Boise City, ID
Independence, MO
Cedar Rapids, IA
Sioux Falls, SD
Warren, MI
Manchester, NH
Springfield, MO
Scottsdale, AZ

What Crime Should Be

48.5
135.8
103.6
120
83.7
179
129.9
143.7
258.5
76.7

What It Is
35
30
56
107
53
76
87
65
79
70

In every case, the Black cities are committing more

crimes in proportion to poverty than the White cities.
Approximately 11.9% of the United States lives below the
poverty line. The mean % of Black poverty in the Blackest
cities is 19.92. The mean crime index for the Blackest
cities is 451. This means that the rest of the United
States should have crime equal to 269.4. Wow, it's 100.

The following are just race-based statistics I felt

were too much to work into the body of my argument, so they
are here for you to see.

Blacks murder more than 1,600 Whites each year.

Blacks murder Whites at 18 times the rate Whites

murder Blacks.

Black neighbourhoods are 35 times more violent than

White neighbourhoods.

In the last 50 years, the White part of the American

population has declined from 90% to 72%. The U.S.
now has about 33 million Blacks and 25 million
Hispanics (legal and illegal). By the year 2050,
American Whites will be a minority, just 49%. By
2100, Whites will be 25% of the population.

The White race is 8% of earth's population.

There are an estimated 486 prison inmates per

100,000 U.S.

At midyear 2004 there were 4,919 Black male prison

and jail inmates per 100,000 Black males in the
United States, compared to 1,717 Hispanic male
inmates per 100,000 Hispanic males and 717 White
male inmates per 100,000 White males.

400,000 foreigners collect Social Security in the

U.S.

Immigrants cost 133 Billion dollars a year in job

losses.

Last year over 10 Billion dollars was sent to Mexico

alone by Mexican workers in the U.S.

Bilingual education doubles the cost of educating

immigrants.

Services and benefits to legals and illegals is 68

Billion dollars a year, and rising.

Non-citizens get 7 Billion dollars a year in Welfare

(Food stamps, housing, medical, etc...)

Between 1991-1995 The number of illegal aliens

sentenced in Federal court rose 167% while the
increase among citizens sentenced rose only 13%

Bureau of Prisons officials estimate that 20% of

Federal inmates are illegal aliens.

The average annual cost of a Federal inmate is $23,

381.
U.S. Population in 1994

74.0% White, 12.5% Black, 9.1% Hispanic, 3.5% Asian

Perpetrators of Murder
Perpetrators of Rape
1993 - 40.7% White, 57.6% Black 1993 - 56.9% White, 41.3% Black
1995 - 43.4% White, 54.4% Black 1995 - 55.6% White, 42.4% Black
Perpetrators of Robbery
Perpetrators of Assault
1993 - 36.5% White, 62.1% Black 1993 - 58.4% White, 39.8% Black
1995 - 38.7% White, 59.5% Black 1995 - 59.6% White, 38.4% Black
The average Black commits murder 7.9 times as often as the average White.
(Frank Borzellieri puts the ratio more recently at 8.5.)
The average Black commits (reported) rape 4.4 times as often as the average White.
If all rapes were reported, the Black to White ratio would be closer to 11.*
The average Black commits armed robbery 9.6 times as often as the average White.
The average Black commits theft 17 times as often as the average White.*
The average Black commits aggravated assault 3.9 times as often as the average
White.
The average Black commits simple assault about 22 times as often as the average
White.*
*2

In 2002, Whites and Blacks were each 40 percent

of the inmates in local jails around the United
States, even though Whites outnumbered Blacks by
about six to one.
In 2001, Blacks were about six times more likely
than Whites to be sent to prison, while Hispanics
were three times more likely than Whites to be
sent to prison.

Note: A few people have complained that these tables

are difficult to read. To make the text stand out
better, highlight the tables with your mouse.

Whites, Blacks and Murder - 1995

Murder in the United States by race and age with additional details
Sources: Crime in the United States, 1995, Table 2.6, and Statistical Abstract of the United States, 1996, Table 24.

Whites

Blacks

Whites

Blacks

Population
Ratio
White / Black

9 - 12

12

17

12074

2349

5.140

7.3

13 - 16

492

723

11677

2301

5.075

7.5

17 - 19

1117

1675

8697

1647

5.281

7.9

20 - 24

1398

2067

14528

2669

5.443

8.0

25 - 34

1733

1711

34027

5475

6.215

6.1

35 - 44

1108

771

35081

5088

6.895

4.8

45 - 54

479

302

25852

3122

8.281

5.2

55 - 64

192

115

18355

2124

8.642

5.2

65 - 74

104

48

16822

1629

10.327

4.8

total or average

6635

7429

177113

26404

6.708

7.5

Age Group

Murders committed by US population (thousands)

Per Capita Rate of

Murder
Perpetration, Ratio
of Black to White

Whites, Blacks and Murder - 1996

Murder in the United States by race and age with additional details
Sources: Crime in the United States, 1996, Table 2.6, and Statistical Abstract of the United States, 1996, Table 24.
Per Capita Rate of
Murder
Perpetration, Ratio
of Black to White

Whites

Blacks

Whites

Blacks

Population
Ratio
White / Black

9 - 12

12196

2398

5.086

5.9

13 - 16

388

498

11837

2335

5.069

6.5

17 - 19

1009

1437

8746

1662

5.262

7.5

20 - 24

1189

1761

14548

2688

5.412

8.0

25 - 34

1417

1462

33328

5427

6.141

6.3

35 - 44

911

728

35492

5153

6.888

5.5

45 - 54

430

250

26789

3288

8.148

4.5

55 - 64

189

79

18752

2173

8.630

3.6

65 - 74

73

38

16701

1640

10.184

5.3

total or average

5612

6260

178389

26764

6.665

7.4

Age Group

Murders committed by US population (thousands)

Whites, Blacks and Murder - 1997

Murder in the United States by race and age with additional details
Sources: Crime in the United States, 1997, Table 2.6, and Statistical Abstract of the United States, 1996, Table 24.

Whites

Blacks

Whites

Blacks

Population
Ratio
White / Black

9 - 12

14

12318

2447

5.034

7.8

13 - 16

333

384

11997

2369

5.064

5.8

17 - 19

929

1260

8795

1677

5.244

7.1

20 - 24

1114

1616

14568

2707

5.382

7.8

25 - 34

1301

1377

32629

5379

6.066

6.4

35 - 44

822

638

35903

5218

6.881

5.3

45 - 54

434

237

27726

3454

8.027

4.4

55 - 64

162

88

19149

2222

8.618

4.7

65 - 74

77

42

16581

1652

10.037

5.5

total or average

5178

5656

179666

27125

6.624

7.2

Age Group

Murders committed by US population (thousands)

Per Capita Rate of

Murder
Perpetration, Ratio
of Black to White

Whites, Blacks and Murder - 1998

Murder in the United States by race and age with additional details
Sources: Crime in the United States, 1998, Table 2.6, and Statistical Abstract of the United States, 1996, Table 24.
Per Capita Rate of
Murder
Perpetration, Ratio
of Black to White

Whites

Blacks

Whites

Blacks

Population
Ratio
White / Black

9 - 12

12

12440

2496

4.984

12.0

13 - 16

282

276

12157

2403

5.059

5.0

17 - 19

910

1018

8844

1692

5.227

5.8

20 - 24

1127

1480

14588

2726

5.351

7.0

25 - 34

1380

1275

31930

5331

5.989

5.5

35 - 44

927

598

36314

5283

6.874

4.4

45 - 54

415

244

28663

3620

7.918

4.7

55 - 64

166

82

19546

2271

8.607

4.3

65 - 74

59

36

16461

1664

9.892

6.0

total or average

5271

5021

180943

27486

6.583

6.3

Age Group

Murders committed by US population (thousands)

Whites, Blacks and Murder - 1999

Murder in the United States by race and age with additional details
Sources: Crime in the United States, 1999, Table 2.6, and Statistical Abstract of the United States, 1996, Table 24.

Whites

Blacks

Whites

Blacks

Population
Ratio
White / Black

9 - 12

11

12562

2545

4.936

7.8

13 - 16

218

247

12317

2437

5.054

5.7

17 - 19

672

976

8893

1707

5.210

7.6

20 - 24

978

1285

14608

2745

5.322

7.0

25 - 34

1112

1089

31231

5283

5.912

5.8

35 - 44

788

531

36725

5348

6.867

4.6

45 - 54

389

207

29600

3786

7.818

4.2

55 - 64

144

84

19943

2320

8.596

5.1

65 - 74

70

27

16341

1676

9.750

3.8

total or average

4378

4457

182220

27847

6.544

6.7

Age Group

Murders committed by US population (thousands)

Per Capita Rate of

Murder
Perpetration, Ratio
of Black to White

Whites, Blacks and Murder - 2000

Murder in the United States by race and age with additional details
Sources: Crime in the United States, 2000, Table 2.6, and Statistical Abstract of the United States, 1996, Table 24.
Per Capita Rate of
Murder
Perpetration, Ratio
of Black to White

Whites

Blacks

Whites

Blacks

Population
Ratio
White / Black

9 - 13

12684

2594

4.890

1.6

13 - 16

171

226

12477

2471

5.049

6.7

17 - 19

651

922

8942

1722

5.193

7.4

20 - 24

1064

1427

14628

2764

5.293

7.1

25 - 34

1157

1204

30532

5235

5.832

6.1

35 - 44

821

547

37136

5413

6.861

4.6

45 - 54

428

244

30537

3952

7.727

4.4

55 - 64

169

55

20340

2369

8.586

2.8

65 - 74

68

31

16217

1684

9.630

4.4

4532

4659

183493

28204

6.506

6.7

Age Group

total or average

Murders committed by US population (thousands)

Note: Three additional murders in 2000 were committed by Blacks under the age of nine.

Whites, Blacks and Murder - 2001

Murder in the United States by race and age with additional details
Sources: Crime in the United States, 2001, Table 2.6, and National Population Projections, Detailed Files, 2001-2010

Whites

Blacks

Whites

Blacks

Population
Ratio
White / Black

9 - 12

12950

2664

4.861

4.2

13 - 16

196

234

12436

2486

5.002

6.0

17 - 19

732

894

9608

1859

5.168

6.3

20 - 24

1172

1521

15113

2860

5.284

6.9

25 - 34

1266

1210

29539

5220

5.659

5.4

35 - 44

843

609

36611

5752

6.365

4.6

45 - 54

447

251

32474

4361

7.446

4.2

55 - 64

176

58

21050

2473

8.512

2.8

65 - 74

62

30

15804

1715

9.215

4.5

total or average

4901

4813

185585

29390

6.315

6.2

Age Group

Murders committed by US population (thousands)

Per Capita Rate of

Murder
Perpetration, Ratio
of Black to White

Whites, Blacks and Murder - 2002

Murder in the United States by race and age with additional details
Sources: Crime in the United States, 2002, Table 2.6, and National Population Projections, Detailed Files, 2001-2010
Per Capita Rate of
Murder
Perpetration, Ratio
of Black to White

Whites

Blacks

Whites

Blacks

Population
Ratio
White / Black

9 - 12

18

13007

2659

4.892

12.6

13 - 16

227

198

12534

2562

4.892

4.3

17 - 19

648

802

9646

1867

5.167

6.4

20 - 24

1265

1547

15438

2918

5.291

6.5

25 - 34

1342

1325

29347

5238

5.603

5.5

35 - 44

827

627

36104

5740

6.290

4.8

45 - 54

493

275

32859

4539

7.239

4.0

55 - 64

176

63

22419

2603

8.613

3.1

65 - 74

70

21

15736

1751

8.987

2.7

5055

4876

187090

29877

6.262

6.0

Age Group

total or average

Murders committed by US population (thousands)

Note: Two additional murders in 2002 were committed by Blacks under the age of nine.

Whites, Blacks and Murder - 2003

Murder in the United States by race and age with additional details
Sources: Crime in the United States, 2003, Table 2.5, and National Population Projections, Detailed Files, 2001-2010

Whites

Blacks

Whites

Blacks

Population
Ratio
White / Black

9 - 12

12890

2622

4.916

2.8

13 - 16

185

229

12761

2642

4.830

6.0

17 - 19

625

889

9685

1887

5.132

7.3

20 - 24

1147

1542

15726

2970

5.295

7.1

25 - 34

1229

1365

29252

5260

5.561

6.2

35 - 44

879

575

35508

5727

6.200

4.1

45 - 54

440

276

33486

4707

7.114

4.5

55 - 64

185

62

23439

2726

8.598

2.9

65 - 74

81

25

15728

1758

8.947

2.8

4778

4967

188475

30299

6.221

6.5

Age Group

total or average

Murders committed by US population (thousands)

Per Capita Rate of

Murder
Perpetration, Ratio
of Black to White

Note: One additional murder in 2003 was committed by Whites under the age of nine.

These tables show that Blacks are committing murder on

a higher per capita rate in every age group over the decade
span of the survey of statistics.
The tables show that Blacks at all ages exhibit much
higher per-capita rates for murder perpetration than Whites
(at the same age) do. The racial behavioral difference is
higher for younger Blacks than it is for older ones, with
the very largest deviation at about age 21 or 22.
However, at no age do Blacks have a per-capita murder
perpetration rate that is low enough to be "merely" twice
that of the White rate.
Further, only in the 55-64 age group do Blacks in some
years have a per capita murder perpetration rate slightly
less than triple the White rate for that same age group.
If the crimes of Hispanics were removed from the tally
of "White" crimes, the exception just mentioned would not
occur, and there would be no age group for which the Black
per capita murder perpetration rate was low enough to be
"merely" triple the White rate. The tables in the previous
two parts were not corrected for the Justice Department's
erroneous inclusion of non-White Hispanics in its list of
allegedly "White" offenders.
As a rule of thumb, White people over the age of 20
have about the same per capita murder perpetration rate as
Blacks who are 2.0 to 2.5 times their age.

It is important to remember that the racial

classification policy of the Justice Department, including
the FBI, erroneously designates Latino Hispanics, Arabs,
Jews, various mixed breeds, and etcetera as "Whites" when
they are crime perpetrators. (It makes no such error when
these other racial groups and mongrelizations are crime
victims.) It is possible to estimate that real Whites
probably committed about 75% of the crimes attributed to
"White" offenders in Justice Department statistics, but
that estimate was not undertaken in the tables.
Black and Mestizo (Mexican Spanish/Native Mix) gangs
commit more murders in a single week, on the average, than
all the organized White "racist" groups have even been
accused of for the past 50 years. The government's emphasis
on so-called "hate crimes" (with a notable bias toward
finding White people guilty of committing them) is the
result of political pressure brought to bear on government
agencies by the Jewish controlled media and by Jewish
pressure groups, including the Anti-Defamation League of
B'nai Brith. There is no genuine criminal justice need for
the special category of hate crime; however, even if there
were, the categorization is presently being abused with an
anti-White bias.
"Hate crime," in other words, is less of a law-enforcement
concept than a political one. It is used to assist in
maintaining the "politically correct" illusion an
illusion exactly opposite to the reality that Whites are
less lawful and more violent than non-Whites. As we shall
see from official government sources of crime data, the
truth is that Whites are more lawful and less violent than
Blacks or Mestizos, the two non-White groups having the
most substantial minority presence within the United
States.
Whites comprise 59% of death-row inmates, while Blacks
comprise only 39%. Dishonest liberals like to portray those
numbers as showing bias against Blacks because the
percentage of Blacks on death row is higher than the
percentage of Blacks in the general population (about 14%
in 2000). The implicit assumption that the liberals are
making is, as you might expect, that Whites and Blacks are
equals in terms of the per capita murder perpetration rate.
That assumption is false, and it is a false assumption that
liberals make with mendacious consistency. The per capita
murder perpetration rate for Blacks is about eight times
higher than that for Whites, so that although Whites
outnumber Blacks in the United States by almost six-to-one,
Blacks often commit more murders per year than Whites do.
If the death penalty were applied without bias, then at
least half of the death-row prison population would be
Black. Any Black death-row percentage less than 50%

indicates an anti-White bias with the death penalty, not an

anti-Black bias.

Heres a comparison between Detroit, Michigan, and

Windsor, Ontario. You can see each city from each other,
they are mere kilometers apart. They watch the same TV,
listen to the same music, see the same movies, listen to
the same radio, etc.

1999
WINDSOR (2% Black)
Type of Crime
Murder
Robbery
Aggravated
Assault
Car Theft
Arson
Rape

Total # of
Incidents
8
143

Rate per 100,000

Population
4
72

1,710

865

53
120
162

27
60
82

DETROIT (81.6% Black)

Type of Crime

Total # of
Incidents

Rate per 100,000

Population

Murder
Robbery
Aggravated
Assault
Car Theft
Arson
**Rape**

396
7,868

42
827

13,037

1,371

25,892
2,121
811

2,722
219
85

**It's actually much worse. The Detroit police have been caught falsifying rape (and
other) statistics.

To summarize, my argument is that non-Whites, Blacks,

in particular, bring nothing to the table except costs and
crime. They cannot create anything of value on their own,
and therefore cannot be expected to live to the standards
weve set for ourselves. They have proven that to be true.
They murder, rob, rape and beat us at a rate completely
disproportionate to their numbers. This converts to a cost
not only in life but in billions of dollars. We are a
superior race. We are the most civil. We are the most
dominant. And I, for one, am not going to sit back and live
a fantasy while my race is destroyed by inter-breeding and
lowering my standards for the sake of acceptance. Your
people are dying. Take action, spread the word, and spread
this document so that more may become aware.
We must not alleviate the responsibilities of these
people to be decent human beings. Its not crime, its
poverty? Its not a riot, its rage? What is that? That is
making excuses. They have no excuse. If anything, tolerance
will be our downfall.
Sources
*1 Paul Sheehan, Sydney Morning Herald
*2 Census Bureau and FBI Uniform Crime Reports
-http://www.jabpage.org/jabpage.html
* Various statistics gathered from various government
sites. All reputable, guaranteed.

Hitler, the Holocaust, and

the Jews

Dear Lord, where to begin? If you thought what I

had to say about Blacks was broad and incoherent, just
wait. Weve been raised to believe that Hitler was this
terrible tyrant. But was he really? What were his
objectives?
-Create a Germany free of non-Whites.
-Secure the resources his people needed to prosper.
-Ensure that his Third Reich will endure long after he
is gone.
Few people actually recognize that Hitler tried to
deport the Jews. He didnt want them, and as it turns out,
no one else did, either.
If
out, too
yourself
probably

you go to a bar one night, get beat up and kicked

bad, but if you go to 9 bars in one night, get
beat up and kicked out of all of them, its
you.

No one wanted them. Hitler was forced to keep them,

and feed them, throughout the course of the war to follow.
If Hitlers original intentions were to exterminate the
Jews, rather than remove them from Germany, why did he then
proceed to provide for them over the course of the war.
Hitler, at the time, was supporting armies all over the
world, yet he still found enough food, water, shelter and
clothing so that these Holocaust Survivors can still be
talking about it today.
Arguing that Hitler was a great man will lead to
nowhere, so instead I will make arguments about what he
did, and you can decide for yourself who he really was.
The holocaust, in White Nationalist circles, has
become known as the Holohoax. This is not because we
choose to deny the despicable acts of our beloved Hitler.
This is because the evidence and logic has revealed the
story of the Holocaust to be nothing but propaganda.
It has been said that in order to expose the
perpetrator of a crime, you must look to who will benefit.
Who benefited from the Holocaust? Jews. As a direct result,
they were awarded a state to call their own. The terrorstate of Israel. The Jews forced their way into Palestine,
guns drawn, and its been that way ever since. They still
have their guns drawn. Why? Because they have no right to
be there, and the Arabs arent too happy about living next
to Jews that shoot their children for playing soccer too
close to the border. Maybe thats why Arabs hate us so
much, because we put the Jews on their doorstep. Id hate

anyone that put a murderous, manipulative, deceiving,

corrupting, parasitical vermin race at my doorstep too.
The Holocaust is a huge moneymaking enterprise, an
endless gravy train of "reparations" and Government grants
to museums, foundations and 'tolerance' centres flows to
Jewish pockets. It legitimises the bandit state of Israel
and places the Jew on a moral pedestal so that no matter
what crimes he may commit his position is unassailable.
Why, when the number of detainees who died at
Auschwitz was cut from 4 million to 1.5 million by the camp
museum researchers, was the total of 6 million not reduced
accordingly? Where did the extra 2.5 million dead Jews come
from to keep the magic number at 6 million?

BEFORE

AFTER

HOLOHOAX MATHEMATICS : 6,000,000 - 2,500,000 =

6,000,000
Some important questions to ask yourself:

Why do the Jews own figures for their total European

population pre and post Holohoax not show a fall in
numbers?
How can the 'confessions' from the Nuremburg War
Crimes Tribunal be regarded as authentic when

according to Allied doctors who examined the German

prisoners many of them had been tortured?
How can confessions which state that Jews were
variously steamed to death, gassed by non poisonous
diesel exhaust fumes, beaten to death by pedal powered
clubbing machines, electrocuted 25,000 at a time on
giant metal plates and vaporized by a 'death ray' be
regarded as evidence?
Why is the confession of the Auschwitz camp commandant
written in English, a language he did not understand,
and why are the pages spattered with blood?
How could the Germans have gassed one million Jews at
Auschwitz in 'chambers' which could never have
functioned? Why would these chambers be designed so
that they would have discharged highly explosive and
toxic Hydrocyanic gas right under the naked flames of
the camp crematoria and next to the commandants
quarters? Did the Germans wish to poison themselves
and blow the entire camp apart?
Why did the Simon Wiesenthal Centre exhibit a
photograph on its website showing smoke coming from a
'crematorium' which was in fact airbrushed on and was
coming not from a chimney but a fence post?
Why do 'survivors' claim to have seen smoke and flames
and ashes issuing from crematorium chimneys night and
day when reconnaissance photos show no smoke at all
and the blueprints of the crematoria show that the
chimneys were fitted with flame and smoke traps?

If there was a Concentration Camp at Treblinka where 850,000 Jews were killed
then why does it not appear on wartime reconnaissance photos - and why has a
ground penetrating radar survey of the site revealed no foundations, no evidence
of buildings and no bodies?
How did the Germans dispose of 1.1 million corpses at Auschwitz? The
crematoria did not have anything like the capacity to dispose of this number. The
alternative story of burning bodies in pits would have required so much petrol that
the entire German war effort would have been paralyzed. So how WERE the
bodies disposed of?

Here is what happens when you dig a pit at Auschwitz, where the water table is only

inches under the soil, how many bodies do you think could be burned in this pit?

How can 'eyewitness' tales of Jewish prisoners working as 'Sonderkommando'

dragging bodies from the 'gas chambers' be true? None of these stories mention
gas masks and some even say the Sonderkommando were smoking cigarettes
IN A CHAMBER FULL OF EXPLOSIVE POISONOUS GAS.

An 'eyewitness' drawing of a Jewish Sonderkommando and a German guard, both

immune to Zyklon-B!

Why are so many 'survivors' tales, kept in museum archives, unavailable for
public view?
If it is true that the Germans lined tens of thousands of Jews against what is
called the 'shooting wall' at Auschwitz and blew their brains out then why can you
visit this wall today and see for yourself that there are no bullet holes in it?
Sure the Jews were singled out to be removed from German life
and deported, and sure, some of them died from disease and
starvation when Allied bombing had wrecked Germany's
infrastructure, but that does not constitute a crime - the JEW
declared war first!

ADOLF HITLER'S ONLY MISTAKE WAS THAT HE

WAS TOO NICE TO THE JEWS
-www.Whitepower.co.uk

"The term 'Holocaust survivor' originally designated

those who suffered the unique trauma of the Jewish ghettos,
concentration camps and slave labour camps, often in
sequence. The figure for those Holocaust survivors at war's
end is generally put at some 100,000. The number of living
survivors cannot be more than a quarter of this figure now.
Because enduring the camps became a crown of martyrdom,
many Jews who spent the war elsewhere represented
themselves as camp survivors. Another strong motive behind
this misrepresentation, however, was material. The postwar
German government provided compensation to Jews who had
been in ghettos or camps. Many Jews fabricated their pasts
to meet this eligibility requirement. 'If everyone who
claims to be a survivor is one,' my mother used to exclaim,
'who did Hitler kill?'"
-Norman G. Finkelstein
Jewish Writer
During the war 4,000,000 Jews entered the United States
illegally.
Where are these numbers accounted for?
Many Jews however did die, but that was from the lack
of food, and typhus carrying lice. The common belief is
that the Germans used Zyklon-b to gas the Jews. The camp
invoices show that large amounts were ordered. The problem
here is the fact that Zyklon-b is a fumigating agent, used
to rid clothing of lice. Besides, if they were to
successfully kill 6 million Jews by gassing, they would
have had to have done it at a rate of 157 Jews an hour, and
it takes Zyklon-b more than 21 hours to completely filter
out of a well ventilated room. It is of interest to note
that the Holocaust Survivor tales tell of Germans
entering the gas chambers mere minutes after the gassing
took place.
Lets look at the facts.
Most the Jews died of starvation and typhus. The Jews
starved towards the end of the war because the allies were
bombing Germanys infrastructure day and night. By the
wars end, they were simply unable to feed them.
Typhus broke out because of all of the dead bodies
they couldnt process.
The ovens and burning pits of bodies are lies.
While the ovens existed, they were never designed to
process Jews wholesale; they were designed to cremate

bodies. (But not on the scale they were eventually called

upon for.) -To prevent outbreaks of viruses. As mentioned
before, the water table is just inches below the soil, how
can you burn a bunch of bodies in a pond?
They did not use Zyklon-b to gas Jews, its a
delousing agent. Every aspect of the German war effort was
efficient, why not this? The Germans had nerve agents, why
not use them to exterminate the Jews if that was Hitlers
intention?
There was never an order from Hitler to exterminate
Jews.
F. Leuchter was an engineer and America's leading gas
chamber expert. He designed gas chambers for the American
prison system.
He was hired by Ernst Zundel (Prominent Holocaust
Denier) to go to Europe and study the alleged gassing
sites, because Zundel was being charged with a crime in
Canada for questioning the holocaust. Leuchter believed
everything he had been taught about the gassings, but he
objectively did his job, and quickly became convinced that
nobody could possibly have been gassed in any of these
camps.
There is too much data to go into........but the
simple way to look at it is to wonder how come there are so
many "holocaust survivors" in the world........How the hell
do you survive 6 years in a death camp? If I had you in a
"death camp" I just wouldn't waste food or water on you for
2 weeks, and you'd be dead........Some of them say, "Oh,
they made us work so they couldn't kill us right away."
Well--was it a work camp or a death camp? Because I assure
you that hundreds of thousands of people don't survive
death camps......

1939: 15,688,259
1947: 11,266,600
---------------4,421,659
This is odd: 4,421,659 does not equal 6 million. It is 1.6
million less. Then why do the Jews say 6 million perished?
But wait, a very strange discrepancy occurs in the almanacs
for 1946 and 1949 as they state their respective 1939
figures:
1949/1939: 16,643,210

1946/1939: 15,688,259
---------------954,951 = around 1 million
So, when the AJC (or anyone else using the same statistics)
calculated WWII Jewish losses using the 1949 figures, they
would be about 1 million higher than before.
How did they arrive at these two different figures? If we
use the higher 1939 WJP number, then the total difference
pre/post war is 5.4 million. I guess 5.4 is close enough to
6 million to call it 6 million. But by this time I think
the game is up. There is a book titled The First Holocaust
which states that the Jews were using the 6 million figure
in pre-WWI days, apparently to obtain sympathy -- and, more
importantly, money.
The real problem with all of the figures in the World
Almanac is that the sole source for them is the American
Jewish Committee, which is an anti-Christian, anti-Gentile,
and anti-American organization. When you add those three
things together, they sum up to massive disinformation.
May we not give heed to Jewish fables.
http://www.ihr.org
Hitler was right.
After the war ended, the Jews pounced on the
opportunity to manipulate events to their benefit. They
used the deaths of their people to push their agenda. And
it worked. How many people do you know that question the
events of the holocaust? Logic tells you its false, so how
is it that we have all come to accept it? Through our
guilt, weve been accustomed to not question. In the same
way were always making excuses for Blacks and other
minorities, were constantly trying to find ways around
reality to make sure the Jews arent offended.
We are all under the influence of the mass media,
whether you admit to it or not. Would you have ever
questioned the holocaust had I not said anything? I know I
never did until someone said something to me. The charade
is so perfect, that even when logic is slapping you in the
face you still believe. I have to acknowledge how effective
it is. But also I have taken it upon myself to debunk it,
to fight it, and to spread the truth.
I just dont know what to do. My personal opinion is
to kick them all out of our countries. Or perhaps,
segregation is the answer. If we did that, the horrible,
crime-ridden communities would be created for everyone to

see and prove my point further. Then, after everyone is

fully convinced, we could kick them out. I hope all who
have read this have done so with an open mind. Hell, even
if you didnt youre probably asking yourself a few
questions anyway. I hope youve all learned something for
having read this. I hope youre all aware. I hope, for
those of you who still reject this as unfounded racism,
that it doesnt take a gang of Blacks to rape you, or your
sister, or daughter, or girlfriend, to get you to really
think.
To conclude, it is evident that Blacks commit more
crimes than Whites. They are less civilised, despite our
efforts. They continuously squander the money we give the
African nations. The NAACP always chews anyone out who
speaks the truth. When Blacks cant think of an excuse for
their actions, they resort to unfounded, ignorant
statements such as George Bush does not care about Black
people (- Kanye West on Hurricane Katrina).
I will take the blame no longer. It is not my fault
that Blacks act like a bunch of monkeys when we do not
absolutely, ruthlessly outnumber and dominate them, and I
am in no way obligated to help them.
Our governments, under the influence of an
overwhelmingly Jewish media, and under pressure of guilt,
continuously poor tax dollars into helping them out. Has it
changed anything?
*We have enough problems at home to worry about before we
should even consider sending money abroad.
*Africa has been receiving aid for decades, and nothing has
changed.
*How can we possibly expect lending more money to them
would bring them out of debt?
*Blacks in America, together, would constitute the 10th
richest nation on the planet, yet still, as evident in the
crime statistics; theyre raping, robbing, murdering and
beating Whites on an ever increasing scale. What does money
change? Nothing. No amount of money changes that theyre
still Black; theyre still an inferior, violent people, as
a whole.
In crime, and in education, its always the same
order: Blacks on the bottom, Hispanics a little better, and
Whites on top. Do we intentionally do this? We must,
because its racism that keeps the Black man down, right?
So what, do we like Hispanics a little better than we like
Blacks, thats why weve rigged the system so theyre a
little better? Asians do better than us half the time in

school, do we like them better than we like ourselves?

Absolutely not, thats just the way it works.
Mulattos (Black/White mix) always do better than
Blacks, but worse than Whites. Is it because we recognize
them and immediately scheme to push them down, but not as
far down as the full-blooded Blacks? In my personal
experience, actually, I find mulattos to be somewhat
smarter than Blacks, like I said, but just as poorly
behaved. It would seem that, seeing how popular it is to be
Black these days, they feel they need to prove their
Blackness, and act like an even bigger jackass than the
full-Blacks do. But that could be just where Im from.
Asians, actually, come from such densely populated
areas that they have to try exceptionally hard to get
ahead. Japan, for example, has but one natural resource,
fish. In order to have a competitive economy, the Japanese
emphasize education to make their workforce extremely
skilled and intelligent. Japan is by far the most developed
Oriental country. Perhaps this can be attributed to the
fact that it was basically engineered by the Americans post
WWII.
Its a common belief that Asians are smarter than
Whites. Thats simply not true; theyre just raised to try
harder. If theyre so smart, how come theyre unable to
construct a functioning society? The closest example to
ours is one that we built from the ground up. But anyway, I
have much admiration for the Japanese; theyre a hardworking, dignified people.
Does that mean I want to have a kid with one of them?
No. Does that mean I want to live among them? No. It means
I accept them as good, decent people. Race mixing is
treason. Look what it did to the Spanish! The Spaniards
came to America, and their colonists bred with the
Amerindians, giving birth to the trash Americans find south
of their border, and more and more every year, within their
borders.
The very fact of the matter is that Blacks, for the
most part, embrace a culture that celebrates violence,
crime, stupidity and ignorance. People try to blame their
behaviour as a people on that, but they dont listen to rap
in Africa, and things arent any better there. India is the
rape capital of the world. When Indians come here, they
dont bring the rape with them. You can conclude that the
rape must be a product of circumstance, and not the people.
In Africa, however, there is rape, murder, theft and
general violence. When Africans come here, they bring the
rape, murder, theft and general violence with them. You can
conclude that is a result of the people, regardless of the
environment.

You know, the Blacks use the same graphs and

statistics that we do, except they try to use it as proof
that the American justice system is racist. Uh-huh. Like
the majority of crack dealers are White, but we are so
racist we only arrest the Black ones. You know, I see that
99.9% of Americans in prison for rape are men. Can I say
that proves discrimination against men? You aren't trying
to say that 99% of rapists are men are you? That would be
sexist. Well, most rapists are men. And most crack dealers,
rapists, murderers, carjackers, etc, are Black men. Just
the facts.
This is not racism. This is racialism. I am
acknowledging the differences between the races. Its
offensive, sure, but then again, thousands of Whites being
victimized consistently is offensive too. These are the
facts. Do what you will.