January 03, 2016

Source: Shutterstock

The Week’s Most Feckless, Reckless, and Neckless Headlines

Despite all the illiterate and innumerate yapping and yelping and yipping that has clogged public discourse over the past year like freshly poured cement lodged in a desiccated colon, the Washington Post analyzed official data and concluded that less than four percent of fatal police shootings in 2015 involved a white cop killing a black person. This means that of 965 fatalities due to police shootings, a grand total of 37 black lives were lost at the hands of white cops in 2015.

When one compares that to an average over the past few years of around 5,000 blacks killing other blacks per annum, the stats reveal that black Americans are roughly 135 times more likely to be killed by other blacks than by white policemen. That’s a multiple, not a percentage.

The Post article notes:

Although black men make up only 6 percent of the U.S. population, they account for 40 percent of the unarmed men shot to death by police this year….

However, the Post fails to note that the same 6 percent of the population routinely commits over half of the nation’s murders. In this racist system that many insist was built to perpetuate white supremacy, somebody messed up the program, because though Asian Americans comprise about 5.6 percent of the population, they account for only 2 percent of the victims of fatal police shootings. Geez, that may correlate in some degree to the fact that in America, Asians hardly commit any murders. Whether the topic is average income, crime rates, or IQ scores, Asians have a pesky tendency to undermine every dimwitted assertion that the American system is designed to squash nonwhites under its thumb.

Scanning the same police stats, it becomes immediately apparent that the overwhelming majority of victims killed by police are men. Does this mean that police are “sexist”? No, it means that men disproportionately commit homicide and are thus more likely to engage in shootouts with police. Same goes for alleged “racism” in police shootings.

“€œLess than four percent of fatal police shootings last year involved a white cop killing a black person.”€

Houston police have arrested 37-year-old Gary Nathaniel Moore“€”a black man with full-blown Islamic beard and a “prayer bump” on his forehead”€”on suspicion of setting fire to a storefront mosque on Christmas day. Moore had reportedly visited the mosque five times daily to pray.

The news will undoubtedly disappoint people such as actor Samuel L. Jackson, who recently said he “really wanted” the San Bernardino shooters to be white, or the fake tough-guy geek David Sirota, who infamously wrote, “Let’s hope the Boston Marathon bomber is a white American.” In both cases the killers belonged to the Religion of Peace.

Where White People Meet is a new dating website for whites who seek to date whites. It is similar to Black People Meet, Latino People Meet, and JDate, “The Leading Jewish Singles Network!”

But of course the site’s founders”€”despite not uttering one peep about white superiority”€”stand accused of being “White Supremacists” rather than simply “people who prefer banging people of their own race.”

A U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver has dismissed a lawsuit filed by a female college student in New Mexico who claimed that she was denied her free speech rights after being booted from a class for describing lesbianism as “perverse.”

Assigned to write “an essay about a lesbian film” as part of a cinema class, Monica Pompeo indeed depicted Sapphic carnality as “perverse.” Her paper also referred to the “barren wombs” of the film’s lesbian protagonists.

Pompeo’s teacher, Caroline Hinkley, claims she was “personally offended” by the paper, that it possibly contained “hate speech,” and demanded a rewrite. It was suggested that the word “barren” be replaced by “childless” to make it, you know, less triggering. Pompeo refused, claiming “I don”€™t like to be told what words I may and may not use, ever.”€

The anti-lesbian student was then ejected from the class for speaking freely, only to lose a free-speech lawsuit. A federal court has made it official: The Founding Fathers did not intend for the First Amendment to permit American citizens to criticize lezzies, dykes, carpet-munchers, pearl-divers, clam-lickers, bean-flickers, librarians, female athletes, spinsters who own a lot of cats, lifelong tomboys, ladies who wear pantsuits, and women who are too ugly to get a man.


Sign Up to Receive Our Latest Updates!