Frosty Wooldridge


More About: Racism

American crime: black on black; black on white

Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson love to jump into political cesspools in order to gain national attention for their own benefit.  They utilize the “race card” as a red badge of courage.  They openly chastise white America for not stopping racially motivated violence
In reality, black on black crime continues as the most deadly condition killing young blacks throughout America. Why don’t they speak up about that phenomenon?  Why doesn’t the Congressional Black Caucus work toward solutions that would benefit black Americans out of work?  Out of school? Out of families?  Out of homes?  Out of hope?  Why doesn’t the Hispanic Caucus speak out against joblessness for Hispanic Americans?
While we spend $12 billion a month for a decade in Iraq and Afghanistan, our country falls into horrific moral, spiritual and community degradation.  It’s beyond absurd that we militarize and terrorize countries 10,000 miles away, and spend untold billions on “nation building” while our country splinters with unemployment, homelessness, racial unrest, growing illiteracy, millions of home
foreclosures, babies out of wedlock and incredible crime.
Why doesn’t the Main Stream Media address black on black crime?  How about Mexican on black crime in Los Angeles?  Some estimates show that black on white crime is 40 times greater than white on black crime.
At the same time Hispanic Gary Zimmerman pulled the trigger on the 17 year old thug Trayvon Martin, a 13 year old white boy in Kansas City, Missouri found himself chased down by two black kids and doused with gasoline.  Seconds later, they lit him on fire screaming, “You get what you deserve, white boy.”
Kansas City journalist Paul Thompson said, “He noticed two older boys following him and as he arrived at his home the pair threw gas on him. ‘They rushed him on the porch as he tried to get the door open,' his mother Mrs Coon told KMBC-TV.  One of them poured the gasoline, then flicked the Bic, and said, 'This is what you deserve. You get what you deserve, white boy'.
Mrs. Coon said her son was able to beat the flames out with his hands and shirt and was able to call 911 and his father. Police said the boy had been engulfed in a 'large fireball'. He has lost his eye lashes, eyebrows and some skin on his face.  Coon said her family will move from their home and her son will not return to East High School as he fears her son's attackers may be students there.
Did you hear a single word from any white leaders? Did you hear a peep out of Al Sharpton or Jesse Jackson?    How about a mention about two black kids setting fire to a white 13 year old kid on the Main Stream Media?
Resounding answer: not a word!
It’s pretty sickening when Americans find themselves condemned, convicted and hung by our own Main Stream Media. But in reality, the MSM “chooses” what to dramatically report.  Notice the innocent photograph of Trayvon Martin at 12 years old, but in reality, at 17, he had been thrown out of school three times and intimidated others. Just look at his tattoos and his flipping the bird to all who would watch on Facebook. 
In journalism we call it “downstream reporting” and it has shackled clear thinking, logical action and successful outcomes.  Those of us who are “upstream journalists” attempt to prod, provoke and engage rational thinking, actions and results by solving the problem “upstream” before it becomes a catastrophe.   Often times we suffer name calling, threats and worse.
I have written and spoken against Iraq War from day one.  I have urged withdrawal from Afghanistan for about as long.  Wouldn’t it have been logical to depart from Afghanistan after bin Laden died?   
Wouldn’t it be reasonable to stop insourcing, offshoring and outsourcing of jobs to foreigners when we see 15 million Americans jobless?  Isn’t it logical to enforce our immigration laws as our schools, jobs, hospitals and prisons suffer the results of 20 million illegal aliens working, breaking our laws and living in our country? We pay billions for ESL, free breakfasts and lunches and degraded schools—because of over four million illegal alien children attending our schools.  Does it make to keep doing that?
Wouldn’t it make sense to stop importing 100,000 immigrants every 30 days when we can’t offer jobs to 46 million Americans subsisting on food stamps?  Wouldn’t it be logical to move our country toward highly fuel efficient, environmentally responsible transportation—instead of racing headlong toward an incredible pile up as gasoline sprints toward $10 a gallon?
It’s called “upstream thinking.”  But you won’t find it in our Congress and you haven’t seen it in our current President Obama.  They fail to use foresight, preparation and logical solutions.
Why do we suffer so much black on black violence?  Answer: poverty, no jobs, no education and no hope.  What’s the solution?  Create jobs, workfare, top flight schools, clean neighborhoods and purpose in our ghettoes. 
Instead, we continue waging foreign wars and spend trillions of dollars on military superiority.    We suffer the results of our stupidity as our country disintegrates into 16 year old black kids pouring gasoline on a 13 year old white kid on the front porch of his house.  That is one of thousands and thousands of horrid situations that happen monthly in America.
If we don’t solve the condition that caused the Trayvon Martin incident or the 13 year old kid being doused with gasoline, we will continue to see America degrade into a third world banana republic.  It’s pretty pathetic and it’s coming faster than anyone realizes.


2 Comments in Response to

Comment by Dennis Treybil
Entered on:

Consider the 4th amendment:


The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.


This was a promise to ratifiers that the then-fledgling federal government would not repeat the no-knock searches practiced to enforce the Stamp Act.  Arguably, prior to the 11th amendment, individuals could sue their state for similar violations committed by officials based on this language.  (Notice the 1st amendment is addressed specifically to the federal congress.  The 4th amendment protects people.  As we all know, the meaning attributed to “people” is very important here, but I digress.)


What was the effect of no-knock searches?  No-knock searches incited fear.  What is fear?  Fear is a feeling?  What is security?  Security is a feeling.  But the feeling of fear is not the same as the feeling of security.


If the no-knock searches conducted to enforce the Stamp Act conjured up support for a revolution, could similar searches conducted by federal officials contribute to a convulsion within?


Did it matter whether the individual(s) who violated the security of someone’s person was a British Soldier or a Federal Marshal?  No.  The security was violated and that was offensive.


In its letter, the 4th amendment clearly limits searches conducted by federal officials.  Absent any specific legislation, individuals could sue over searches that violated this language.


Consider the highlighted phrases from the 4th amendment:


The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.


If it doesn’t matter whether the individual(s) who violated the security of someone’s person was a British Soldier or a Federal Marshal, does it change anything if the perpetrator happens to be a private citizen not acting in any official capacity?  No.  If the security is violated, that is offensive.


Can the acts committed against the Coon youth that day be seen as violating his personal security?  And not just violating his personal security, violating his personal security at his home. 


It just so happens that if the perpetrator is not a federal official, legislation has to be in place before the violation occurs to provide a basis for criminal charges.  I recently listened to Marc Victor’s talk at a gun show.  I was amazed at what “assault” is.  Surely, based on what I heard him say about assault in the context of gun display, assault laws apply to what happened to the adolescent Coon boy.


In the steps of due process, the plaintiff can opt out at any point.  Prosecutors can press on against the plaintiff’s wishes, but often as not, observe them.


Absent the Coon’s wish to opt out, this should proceed at least to a Grand Jury.


Who knows?


But all that is formal justice.  Formal justice accomplishes the function of containment.  It keeps the conflict limited to those initially involved.  It is supposed to prevent the conflict from spilling out among the populace and lead to a convulsion within.  It does not render right that which went wrong.


What happened at the Coon house that day was wrong and can never be rendered right.


Another part of formal justice is the SCOTUS doctrine of “incorporation”, where they impose restrictions of the federal constitution upon the states.  This is a mixed blessing at best.  But it’s phony baloney.  And it’s not phony baloney because of the concept.  It is phony baloney because of the source. 


The law is not merely consent of the governed, the law is the will of the people.  The will of the people cannot be imposed upon them.  The people must choose the right path.  I choose therefore I am.  Not somebody (literally or figuratively) held a gun to my head and made me say something, or do something, and I said it or did it - therfore I am. 


I choose, therefore I am.

To make a choice, someone must know the option exists and that it is viable.  The will of Coon’s attackers is demonstrated by their actions.  Have they ever heard of non-initiation of force?  Apparently not.


My arguments here concerning the spirit of the constitution and personal incorporation have no legal weight.  Zero.  Nada.  And there is considerable historical fact in support of Powell’s frequent assertion to the effect that the constitution is a con.


Even so, that con included promises enticing enough to secure its ratification.  Some of those promises were retracted within 3 years of the passage of the Bill of Rights, in the 11th amendment.


Still, even if the framers and their successors won’t keep those promises to us, We the People can keep them ourselves – for ourselves and for one another.


Consider the excerpt from Paine I cited a few days ago:


Declaration of the Rights of Man - 1789


Approved by the National Assembly of France, August 26, 1789


The representatives of the French people, organized as a National Assembly, believing that the ignorance, neglect, or contempt of the rights of man are the sole cause of public calamities and of the corruption of governments, have determined to set forth in a solemn declaration the natural, unalienable, and sacred rights of man, in order that this declaration, being constantly before all the members of the Social body, shall remind them continually of their rights and duties; in order that the acts of the legislative power, as well as those of the executive power, may be compared at any moment with the objects and purposes of all political institutions and may thus be more respected, and, lastly, in order that the grievances of the citizens, based hereafter upon simple and incontestable principles, shall tend to the maintenance of the constitution and redound to the happiness of all. Therefore the National Assembly recognizes and proclaims, in the presence and under the auspices of the Supreme Being, the following rights of man and of the citizen:


It is well and good that the promise exists in the 4th amendment.  But if all it amounts to is “ink stains dried up on some line” (with apologies to Glen Campbell), it has no effect whatsoever.  And if all it amounts to is some thunderous utterance, the echoes of which have long since died out, from some bench in some high court somewhere, it also is of no effect.  To have effect, the ideas must live and abide in the hearts and minds of  the people.


If ignorance is part of the problem, education is part of the solution.


DC Treybil



Comment by Ed Price
Entered on:

If this topic truly interests you, and you want to do a little research, consider the American Renaissance magazine, online, if you like, at

Inside AM you can find books, articles and studies that show that:

1. Black on black crime is worse than white on black;

2. Black on black crime is way worse than white on white crime;

3. Black on white crime is way worse than white on white or white on black crime;

The studies are not usually based on count. Rather, they are based on percentages. The reason for this is that whites in America outnumber blacks, so direct statistic analysis would be an incorrect evaluation. However, even in direct statistics, not based on percentages, some kinds of black crime are still greater than white crime of the same kind.

What is interesting to note is, most of the racism stuff in America is a furtherance of black-against-everybody crime, although some of it is big business and big Government taking advantage of the situation.

There are also books and studies that show that, on the average, African blacks in Africa - those that do not have any European ancestors - have an IQ that is about 15 points lower than white Europeans or Americans that do not have any black ancestors.

As a side-note, the average IQ of native Southeast Asians is about 10 points greater than white Europeans or white Americans.

Join us on our Social Networks:


Share this page with your friends on your favorite social network:

Purse.IO Save on All Amazon Purchases