Author Archives: admin

How our Cities evolve by population and white/black ratio

Pretty damning.

New Haven

Pop: %wht %blk
1990 130 474 53.9 36.1
1980 126 109 62.1 31.9
1970 137 707 72.6 26.3
1960 152 048 85.1 14.5
1950 164 443 94.0 5.8
1940 160 605 96.1 3.9
1930 162 655 96.7 3.3
1920 162 537 97.1 2.8
1910 133 605 97.3 2.7
1900 108 027 97.2 2.7

Hartford

Pop: %wht %blk
1990 139 739 40.0 38.9
1980 136 392 50.3 33.9
1970 158 017 70.8 27.9
1960 162 178 84.5 15.3
1950 177 397 92.8 7.1
1940 166 267 95.7 4.3
1930 164 072 96.0 4.0
1920 138 036 96.8 3.0
1910 98 915 98.1 1.8
1900 79 850 97.5 2.4

Oakland

Pop: %wht %blk
1990 372 242 32.5 43.9
1980 339 337 38.2 46.9
1970 361 561 59.1 34.5
1960 367 548 73.6 22.8
1950 384 575 85.5 12.4
1940 302 163 95.3 2.8
1930 284 063 95.3 2.6
1920 216 261 94.3 2.5
1910 150 174 94.5 2.0
1900 66 960 96.8 1.5

Chicago:

Pop: %wht %blk
1990 2,783,726 45.4 39.1
1980 3,005,072 49.6 39.8
1970 3,366,957 65.6 32.7
1960 3,550,404 76.4 22.9
1950 3,620,962 85.9 13.6
1940 3,396,808 91.7 8.2
1930 3,376,438 92.9 6.9
1920 2,701,705 95.8 4.1
1910 2,185,283 97.9 2.0
1900 1,698,575 98.1 1.8

Cleveland
Pop: %wht %blk
1990 505 616 49.5 46.6
1980 573 822 53.5 43.8
1970 750 903 61.0 38.3
1960 876 050 71.1 28.6
1950 914 808 83.7 16.2
1940 878 336 90.3 9.6
1930 900 429 91.9 8.0
1920 796 841 95.6 4.3
1910 560 663 98.4 1.5
1900 381 768 98.4 1.6

Philadelphia:

Pop: %wht %blk
1990 1 585 577 53.5 39.9
1980 1 688 210 58.2 37.8
1970 1 948 609 65.6 33.6
1960 2 002 512 73.3 26.4
1950 2 071 605 81.7 18.2
1940 1 931 334 86.9 13.0
1930 1 950 961 88.6 11.3
1920 1 823 779 92.6 7.4
1910 1 549 008 94.5 5.5
1900 1 293 697 95.1 4.8

Baltimore:

Pop: %wht %blk
1990 736 014 39.1 59.2
1980 786 775 43.9 54.8
1970 905 759 53.0 46.4
1960 939 024 65.0 34.7
1950 949 708 76.2 23.7
1940 859 100 80.6 19.3
1930 804 874 82.3 17.7
1920 733 826 85.2 14.8
1910 558 485 84.8 15.2
1900 508 957 84.3 15.6

Gary

Pop %wht %blk
1990 116,646 16.3 80.6
1980 151,953 25.2 70.8
1970 175,415 46.7 52.8
1960 178,320 61.1 38.8
1950 133,911 70.6 29.3
1940 111,719 81.7 18.3
1930 100,426 82.1 17.8
1920 55,378 90.4 9.6
1910 16,802 97.6 2.3

Newark
Pop %wht %blk
1990 275 221 28.6 58.5
1980 329 248 30.8 58.2
1970 382 417 44.0 54.2
1960 405 220 65.6 34.1
1950 438 776 82.8 17.1
1940 429 760 89.2 10.6
1930 442 337 91.0 8.8
1920 414 524 95.8 4.1
1910 347 469 97.2 2.7
1900 246 070 97.2 2.7

Detroit

Pop: %wht %blk
1900 285,704 98.55 1.44
1910 465,766 98.75 1.23
1920 993,678 95.81 4.11
1930 1,568,662 92.22 7.65
1940 1,623,452 90.71 9.19
1950 1,849,568 83.58 16.25
1960 1,670,144 70.83 28.87
1970 1,511,482 55.50 43.69
1980 1,203,339 34.38 63.07
1990 1,027,974 21.63 75.67
2000 951,270 12.26 81.55
2010 713,777 10.61 82.69

Five Top Papers Run 18 Opinion Pieces Praising Syria Strikes–Zero Are Critical

http://fair.org/home/five-top-papers-run-18-opinion-pieces-praising-syria-strikes-zero-are-critical/

Five major US newspapers—the New York Times, Washington Post, USA Today, Wall Street Journal and New York Daily News—offered no opinion space to anyone opposed to Donald Trump’s Thursday night airstrikes. By contrast, the five papers ran a total of 18 op-eds, columns or “news analysis” articles (dressed-up opinion pieces) that either praised the strikes or criticized them for not being harsh enough:

New York Times

After the Missiles, We Need Smart Diplomacy on Syria (4/7/17)
Acting on Instinct, Trump Upends His Own Foreign Policy (4/7/17) (originally headlined “On Syria Attack, Trump’s Heart Came First”—presumably changed due to social media mockery)
Trump Raises the Stakes for Russia and Iran (4/7/17)
Syria’s ‘Conundrum’: Limited Strikes Risk Entrenching Assad’s Strategy (4/7/17)

Washington Post

Editorial: Trump’s Chance to Step Into the Global Leadership Vacuum (4/7/17)
Trump Enforces the ‘Red Line’ on Chemical Weapons (4/6/17)
Trump Has an Opportunity to Right Obama’s Wrongs in Syria (4/6/17)
Syrian Opposition Leader: Trump Has a Chance to Save Syria (4/7/17)
Was Trump’s Syria Strike a Moral Impulse or a Policy Change? (4/7/17)
Will Trump’s Decision to Strike Syria Reset His Presidency? (4/7/17)
Trump Might Be Going to War. But He Has No Plans for Establishing Peace (4/7/17) (Though the piece has criticism of Trump, it starts by declaring that the missile strikes were “an appropriate response to an act of unspeakable horror.”)

Wall Street Journal

Editorial: Trump’s Syria Opportunity (4/7/17)
With Strike on Syria, Trump Sends a Global Message (4/7/17)

USA Today

Editorial: Trump Pulls the Trigger in Syria (4/7/17)
Syria Missile Strike Could Lead to Political Solution (4/7/17)

Daily News

Praise Trump’s Syria Action, but Question His Explanation (4/7/17)
Trump’s Syria Response Raises Urgent Questions (4/7/17)
Trump’s Syria Action: A Limited Strike for a Specific Purpose (4/7/17)

Some, such as “The Riddle of Trump’s Syria Attack” (New York Times, 4/7/17) and “Was That Syria Attack Legal? Only Congress Can Say” (USA Today, 4/7/17) were value neutral—neither expressly in support of the attacks nor opposing them.

Cable news coverage was equally fawning. In the hours immediately following the attack, MSNBC had on a seemingly never-ending string of military brass and reporters who uncritically repeated the assertion the strikes were “proportional” and “limited.” MSNBC didn’t give a platform to a single dissenting voice until four hours after the attacks began, when host Chris Hayes, according to his own account, had on two guests opposed to the airstrikes in the midnight slot. MSNBC host Brian Williams got into a bit of hot water when he lovingly admired a slick video sent over by the Pentagon showing tomahawk missiles being fired from US navy vessels (FAIR.org, 4/7/17).

CNN’s resident Serious Military Person Lt. Gen Mark Hertling repeated over and over—seemingly on script—that the strikes were “bold, tactical.” CNN’s Fareed Zakaria gushed praise on Trump Friday morning (4/7/17; FAIR.org, 4/7/17), telling host Alisyn Camerota, “I think Donald Trump became president of the United States…. This was a big moment.”

Due to the mostly bipartisan support for the airstrikes, it’s somewhat predictable that corporate media would follow suit. No need to debate the morality or utility of the strikes, because the scene played out per usual: Dictator commits an alleged human rights violation, the media calls on those in power to “do something” and the ticking time bomb compels immediate action, lest we look “weak” on the “global stage.” Anything that deviates from this narrative is given token attention at best.

Two Types of Narcissism

—” The grandiose narcissist doesn’t seem motivated to avoid rejection, but just to try to maximize his or her pleasure in gaining attention and power. The vulnerable narcissist doesn’t just seek to avoid negative outcomes or even rejection, but to avoid outcomes that will reflect unfavorably on his or her self-image.”—

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/fulfillment-any-age/201611/why-narcissists-feel-they-need-look-so-good

In US, poverty and homicides INVERSELY correlate

Those lines are almost flip visions of each other (Especially if one ignores the 1990s.) Turns out, at least since 1959, there an inverse correlation between poverty and homicide in the US. Homicide goes up when poverty decreases. Statically significant and everything. Well, that’s awkward.

http://www.copinthehood.com/2017/02/the-curious-case-of-poverty-and-crime.html

Only Jews Have a Right to Their Identity, Claims Leading Jewish Supremacist

European Americans who want to keep America’s “essence” European are a “scourge” but Israel has a “non-negotiable right” to be Jewish.

This is the opinion of leading anti-European Jewish supremacist Menachem Rosensaft, who claims to be the “Founding Chairman of the International Network of Children of Jewish Holocaust Survivors” and regular columnist in the Zionist-controlled mass media.

https://whitewraithe.wordpress.com/2012/05/29/only-jews-have-a-right-to-their-identity-claims-leading-jewish-supremacist/

Immigration to Israel and Israeli Citizenship

“The rights of a Jew under this law, and the rights of an Ole under the Citizenship Law -1952, and the rights of a Ole under any other law, are given to the child or grandchild of a Jew, the spouse of a Jew the spouse of a child and grandchild of a Jew; Except a person who was born Jewish and out of his free will converted his religion.””

http://www.visa-law.co.il/immigration-to-israel/