White supremacists; Black supremacists is one more evil?

[ptbw forever]

Or are they pretty much equally evil?

You're trying to compare apples and oranges. There is no such thing as a "black supremacist". Blacks don't want supremacy, they want equality. White supremacists want supremacy. White privilege. They think their race is superior. Blacks believe their race is equal to any other race.

Big difference.

^literally a black supremacist....

 

[Billo_Really]

You seem to be obsessed with making a nexus between the fallacy of black supremacy and Affirmative ACTION.
Why?

No, that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying you can't talk about white supremacy and black supremacy as if they were two equal threats to the country.

 

[Picaro]

I think you are confused about the narrow definition of hate crimes.

Projection, as proven by the following ...

A white thug robbing a black store is not a hate crime...but if he does or says something during the course of the robbery to suggest a racial component in his motive for the crime...it becomes a hate crime.

Ah ... no. In fact, that is the hand wave most hate crime legislation uses to claim it isn't a hate crime, just a robbery, if the racist also robs their victim. It was necessary to do that because otherwise they would have to charge far more minorities than whites, which defeats the left wing political agenda behind hate crimes legislation. You have it backwards, probably deliberately so.

 

[JQPublic1]

I think you are confused about the narrow definition of hate crimes.

Projection, as proven by the following ...

A white thug robbing a black store is not a hate crime...but if he does or says something during the course of the robbery to suggest a racial component in his motive for the crime...it becomes a hate crime.

Ah ... no. In fact, that is the hand wave most hate crime legislation uses to claim it isn't a hate crime, just a robbery, if the racist also robs their victim. It was necessary to do that because otherwise they would have to charge far more minorities than whites, which defeats the left wing political agenda behind hate crimes legislation. You have it backwards, probably deliberately so.

In 2015, race was reported for 5,493 known hate crime offenders. Of these offenders:

• 48.4 percent were White.

• 24.3 percent were Black or African American.

• 9.1 percent were groups made up of individuals of various races (group of multiple races).

• 1.0 percent (53 offenders) were Asian.

• 0.9 percent (52 offenders) were American Indian or Alaska Native.

• 0.1 percent (4 offenders) were Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander.

• 16.2 percent were unknown.

 

[JQPublic1]

You seem to be obsessed with making a nexus between the fallacy of black supremacy and Affirmative ACTION.
Why?

No, that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying you can't talk about white supremacy and black supremacy as if they were two equal threats to the country.

My response in post #15 wasn't directed at you. Somehow it was redirected to you instead of the person i responded to. Hmmm. Something fishy is going on here. check 15 for verification.

 

[ThunderKiss1965]

Are you serious ?

Hell yes, I'm serious. There is no black KKK.

There are however groups like the Black Panthers.

 

[ThunderKiss1965]

I think you are confused about the narrow definition of hate crimes.

Projection, as proven by the following ...

A white thug robbing a black store is not a hate crime...but if he does or says something during the course of the robbery to suggest a racial component in his motive for the crime...it becomes a hate crime.

Ah ... no. In fact, that is the hand wave most hate crime legislation uses to claim it isn't a hate crime, just a robbery, if the racist also robs their victim. It was necessary to do that because otherwise they would have to charge far more minorities than whites, which defeats the left wing political agenda behind hate crimes legislation. You have it backwards, probably deliberately so.

In 2015, race was reported for 5,493 known hate crime offenders. Of these offenders:

• 48.4 percent were White.

• 24.3 percent were Black or African American.

• 9.1 percent were groups made up of individuals of various races (group of multiple races).

• 1.0 percent (53 offenders) were Asian.

• 0.9 percent (52 offenders) were American Indian or Alaska Native.

• 0.1 percent (4 offenders) were Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander.

• 16.2 percent were unknown.

You forgot to add or maybe you didn't, what percentage of the population each race is.
Once you include those numbers you see that blacks are more likely to commit hate crimes
Population of the United States by Race and Hispanic/Latino Origin, Census 2000 and July 1, 2005

 

[Picaro]

I think you are confused about the narrow definition of hate crimes.

Projection, as proven by the following ...

A white thug robbing a black store is not a hate crime...but if he does or says something during the course of the robbery to suggest a racial component in his motive for the crime...it becomes a hate crime.

Ah ... no. In fact, that is the hand wave most hate crime legislation uses to claim it isn't a hate crime, just a robbery, if the racist also robs their victim. It was necessary to do that because otherwise they would have to charge far more minorities than whites, which defeats the left wing political agenda behind hate crimes legislation. You have it backwards, probably deliberately so.

In 2015, race was reported for 5,493 known hate crime offenders. Of these offenders:

• 48.4 percent were White.

• 24.3 percent were Black or African American.

• 9.1 percent were groups made up of individuals of various races (group of multiple races).

• 1.0 percent (53 offenders) were Asian.

• 0.9 percent (52 offenders) were American Indian or Alaska Native.

• 0.1 percent (4 offenders) were Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander.

• 16.2 percent were unknown.

Rubbish. All minorities have to do to avoid being charged with a hate crime is steal the victim's wallet or watch or something, and their lawyer and most legal systems will claim 'it's just a robbery'. Your stats are massaged garbage deliberately used to lie about the extent of the problem. New York state uses this deception all the time, as does California and Illinois, and most other urban areas. With racist AG's like Eric Holder, nobody can take such stats seriously.

 

[dturner1157]

Are you serious ?

Hell yes, I'm serious. There is no black KKK.

The Black Panthers are not their equivalent ?

 

[Picaro]

I think you are confused about the narrow definition of hate crimes.

Projection, as proven by the following ...

A white thug robbing a black store is not a hate crime...but if he does or says something during the course of the robbery to suggest a racial component in his motive for the crime...it becomes a hate crime.

Ah ... no. In fact, that is the hand wave most hate crime legislation uses to claim it isn't a hate crime, just a robbery, if the racist also robs their victim. It was necessary to do that because otherwise they would have to charge far more minorities than whites, which defeats the left wing political agenda behind hate crimes legislation. You have it backwards, probably deliberately so.

In 2015, race was reported for 5,493 known hate crime offenders. Of these offenders:

• 48.4 percent were White.

• 24.3 percent were Black or African American.

• 9.1 percent were groups made up of individuals of various races (group of multiple races).

• 1.0 percent (53 offenders) were Asian.

• 0.9 percent (52 offenders) were American Indian or Alaska Native.

• 0.1 percent (4 offenders) were Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander.

• 16.2 percent were unknown.

You forgot to add or maybe you didn't, what percentage of the population each race is.
Once you include those numbers you see that blacks are more likely to commit hate crimes
Population of the United States by Race and Hispanic/Latino Origin, Census 2000 and July 1, 2005

Yes, and as we know in such riots as the Charlotte riot, the thugs in the street mobs committed numerous violent hate crimes, but magically only one guy has been charged with any.

 

[JQPublic1]

I think you are confused about the narrow definition of hate crimes.

Projection, as proven by the following ...

A white thug robbing a black store is not a hate crime...but if he does or says something during the course of the robbery to suggest a racial component in his motive for the crime...it becomes a hate crime.

Ah ... no. In fact, that is the hand wave most hate crime legislation uses to claim it isn't a hate crime, just a robbery, if the racist also robs their victim. It was necessary to do that because otherwise they would have to charge far more minorities than whites, which defeats the left wing political agenda behind hate crimes legislation. You have it backwards, probably deliberately so.

In 2015, race was reported for 5,493 known hate crime offenders. Of these offenders:

• 48.4 percent were White.

• 24.3 percent were Black or African American.

• 9.1 percent were groups made up of individuals of various races (group of multiple races).

• 1.0 percent (53 offenders) were Asian.

• 0.9 percent (52 offenders) were American Indian or Alaska Native.

• 0.1 percent (4 offenders) were Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander.

• 16.2 percent were unknown.

You forgot to add or maybe you didn't, what percentage of the population each race is.
Once you include those numbers you see that blacks are more likely to commit hate crimes
Population of the United States by Race and Hispanic/Latino Origin, Census 2000 and July 1, 2005

No, I did not forget the percentages. The issue being discussed was about whether whites or blacks commit the most hate crimes numbers, not about the portional numbers. As you can see White people commit far more. But if you want to talk proportions you are defining the potential for the general populaion in each group to commit a hate crime. That's really an unknown factor. Most people don't commit hate crimes as defined by the Feds.so why would proportionality be used to include them. If proportional statistics can be used to make the smaller group look worse than the larger group then another axiom is revealed which would also be true is also true. whites committed 48% of hate crimes against 13% of the black populi. That's a much higher incident of hate crimes committed by whites against blacks since Blacks are just 13% of the population but are victimized almost
4 times as much in relation to their populaion size. Whites are about 66% of the pooulation but represent only 22%of victims.

 

[Crixus]

Or are they pretty much equally evil?

You're trying to compare apples and oranges. There is no such thing as a "black supremacist". Blacks don't want supremacy, they want equality. White supremacists want supremacy. White privilege. They think their race is superior. Blacks believe their race is equal to any other race.

Big difference.

Same evil and you support it.


Houston man charged with trying to plant bomb at Confederate statue in Hermann Park


There it is right there. In that article you have a white privlaged terriorist bomb maker and they are a democrat bomb maker ( and not a very good one). There is no difference. All these people are the same. Even the rhetoric differs only in the color they support .

 

[Rustic]

Or are they pretty much equally evil?

You're trying to compare apples and oranges. There is no such thing as a "black supremacist". Blacks don't want supremacy, they want equality. White supremacists want supremacy. White privilege. They think their race is superior. Blacks believe their race is equal to any other race.

Big difference.

You can't be that stupid in the head…?
Lol

 

[JQPublic1]

I think you are confused about the narrow definition of hate crimes.

Projection, as proven by the following ...

A white thug robbing a black store is not a hate crime...but if he does or says something during the course of the robbery to suggest a racial component in his motive for the crime...it becomes a hate crime.

Ah ... no. In fact, that is the hand wave most hate crime legislation uses to claim it isn't a hate crime, just a robbery, if the racist also robs their victim. It was necessary to do that because otherwise they would have to charge far more minorities than whites, which defeats the left wing political agenda behind hate crimes legislation. You have it backwards, probably deliberately so.

In 2015, race was reported for 5,493 known hate crime offenders. Of these offenders:

• 48.4 percent were White.

• 24.3 percent were Black or African American.

• 9.1 percent were groups made up of individuals of various races (group of multiple races).

• 1.0 percent (53 offenders) were Asian.

• 0.9 percent (52 offenders) were American Indian or Alaska Native.

• 0.1 percent (4 offenders) were Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander.

• 16.2 percent were unknown.

Rubbish. All minorities have to do to avoid being charged with a hate crime is steal the victim's wallet or watch or something, and their lawyer and most legal systems will claim 'it's just a robbery'. Your stats are massaged garbage deliberately used to lie about the extent of the problem. New York state uses this deception all the time, as does California and Illinois, and most other urban areas. With racist AG's like Eric Holder, nobody can take such stats seriously.

Those stats are all we have. Reporting Police agencies make the call on which crimes are hate crimes and they collect the evidence. Considering their often abrasive relationships with Blacks...i doubt they would cover up or hide any hate crime commited by a black person.no matter who the AG is.

 

[Rustic]

BS. VERY few whites believe themselves to be superior, but of course they exists. There are also black supremacists, very few, but they also exist. If all they wanted was equal rights and that's all they want they would be the first to condemn Affirmative Action policies. Affirmative action doesn't level the playing field, it absolutely tilts it (ask the Asians that get fucked by it all the time). Not doing so is an admission that they're incapable of competing without getting "bonus" points from the white man. They don't need it. I know too many very intelligent highly talented blacks from various backgrounds to buy into the "oh pitty poor oppressed me" bullshit. Success is directly related to education, work ethic, and ATTITUDE. They're more than capable of competing, but some choose not too when they can guilt people into GIVING it to them. Things that are GIVEN are rarely appreciated. They've been enabled by white guilt for too long. Equal rights does NOT mean equal outcome. The thing about equal rights is that with equal rights, comes equal responsibility. They will be judged as everyone else is judged, good or bad, no excuses....I'm not denying that racism exists, of course it does, but it's not nearly as widespread as some would like to believe. You can find anything if you're looking hard enough and you want to see it.....and to the ops question...yes, they're all POSs. There's no room for "Supremacists" of any kind in today's society.

Treating them as equals is bullshit. There is a big threat in this country from white supremacists, Nazi lovers and right wing militia. There are no black groups that equal that in size or number.

This is a bullshit thread designed to take heat off white supremacists, who happen to be the very fuckers we fought in WWII.

Its politically correct people like you that have no morals, wrong is wrong. You're too weak minded to realize the reality.

 

[Correll]

Or are they pretty much equally evil?

Both are equally bad.

But the black supremacist are far more dangerous because of their mainstream allies in the dems and the libs.

 

[ThunderKiss1965]

I think you are confused about the narrow definition of hate crimes.

Projection, as proven by the following ...

A white thug robbing a black store is not a hate crime...but if he does or says something during the course of the robbery to suggest a racial component in his motive for the crime...it becomes a hate crime.

Ah ... no. In fact, that is the hand wave most hate crime legislation uses to claim it isn't a hate crime, just a robbery, if the racist also robs their victim. It was necessary to do that because otherwise they would have to charge far more minorities than whites, which defeats the left wing political agenda behind hate crimes legislation. You have it backwards, probably deliberately so.

In 2015, race was reported for 5,493 known hate crime offenders. Of these offenders:

• 48.4 percent were White.

• 24.3 percent were Black or African American.

• 9.1 percent were groups made up of individuals of various races (group of multiple races).

• 1.0 percent (53 offenders) were Asian.

• 0.9 percent (52 offenders) were American Indian or Alaska Native.

• 0.1 percent (4 offenders) were Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander.

• 16.2 percent were unknown.

You forgot to add or maybe you didn't, what percentage of the population each race is.
Once you include those numbers you see that blacks are more likely to commit hate crimes
Population of the United States by Race and Hispanic/Latino Origin, Census 2000 and July 1, 2005

No, I did not forget the percentages. The issue being discussed was about whether whites or blacks commit the most hate crimes numbers, not about the portional numbers. As you can see White people commit far more. But if you want to talk proportions you are defining the potential for the general populaion in each group to commit a hate crime. That's really an unknown factor. Most people don't commit hate crimes as defined by the Feds.so why would proportionality be used to include them. If proportional statistics can be used to make the smaller group look worse than the larger group then another axiom is revealed which would also be true is also true. whites committed 48% of hate crimes against 13% of the black populi. That's a much higher incident of hate crimes committed by whites against blacks since Blacks are just 13% of the population but are victimized almost
4 times as much in relation to their populaion size. Whites are about 66% of the pooulation but represent only 22%of victims.

Black make up 13% of the population but commit 24.3 percent of the hate crimes. Whites make up 66% of the population and commit 48.4% of the crimes. I don't know what other world math your using but real world says as a percentage of the racial populations blacks commit more hate crimes than any other.

 

[ThunderKiss1965]

Are you serious ?

Hell yes, I'm serious. There is no black KKK.

The Black Panthers are not their equivalent ?

They spew the same hate.

 

[ThunderKiss1965]

I think you are confused about the narrow definition of hate crimes.

Projection, as proven by the following ...

A white thug robbing a black store is not a hate crime...but if he does or says something during the course of the robbery to suggest a racial component in his motive for the crime...it becomes a hate crime.

Ah ... no. In fact, that is the hand wave most hate crime legislation uses to claim it isn't a hate crime, just a robbery, if the racist also robs their victim. It was necessary to do that because otherwise they would have to charge far more minorities than whites, which defeats the left wing political agenda behind hate crimes legislation. You have it backwards, probably deliberately so.

In 2015, race was reported for 5,493 known hate crime offenders. Of these offenders:

• 48.4 percent were White.

• 24.3 percent were Black or African American.

• 9.1 percent were groups made up of individuals of various races (group of multiple races).

• 1.0 percent (53 offenders) were Asian.

• 0.9 percent (52 offenders) were American Indian or Alaska Native.

• 0.1 percent (4 offenders) were Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander.

• 16.2 percent were unknown.

Rubbish. All minorities have to do to avoid being charged with a hate crime is steal the victim's wallet or watch or something, and their lawyer and most legal systems will claim 'it's just a robbery'. Your stats are massaged garbage deliberately used to lie about the extent of the problem. New York state uses this deception all the time, as does California and Illinois, and most other urban areas. With racist AG's like Eric Holder, nobody can take such stats seriously.

Those stats are all we have. Reporting Police agencies make the call on which crimes are hate crimes and they collect the evidence. Considering their often abrasive relationships with Blacks...i doubt they would cover up or hide any hate crime committed by a black person.no matter who the AG is.

Actually given the current climate they are less likely to call crimes that minorities commit against other races as hate crimes. Another statistic that blows your racist cop crap out of the water, more white people are killed by cops than blacks even though blacks are responsible for nearly half the violent crimes committed in the US

 

[Crixus]

Or are they pretty much equally evil?

Both sides are cut from the same cloth. They do everything the same. Zero difference other then the minority's they hate, but even in that reguards ANTIFA which is the new democrat party and the white power movement are two peas in a pod.