Black Flash Mob in Cleveland Heights; cleveland.com Refuses to Report Race

At cleveland.com (via Stuff Black People Don’t Like), we find a curiously undescriptive story: “Reports mixed on extent of unrest Sunday at Cleveland Heights street fair.”

CLEVELAND HEIGHTS, Ohio — About 40 Cleveland Heights police officers had to control a crowd of unruly teenagers in the last hour of the Coventry Street Arts Fair Sunday [June 26, 2011], an event [that] closes Coventry Road every summer from Mayfield Road to Euclid Heights Boulevard.

…

The teens, who other kids said were from “all over the place — Cleveland, Cleveland Heights, Shaker Heights — were starting fights, screaming and throwing punches in the crowded streets, according to witnesses and shop owners.

Sarah Corcoran, 21, of Cleveland Heights, said she saw about 75 people run through the street, some yelling, just before the fair was scheduled to end at 6 p.m. Police showed up shortly after to clear the streets.

…

There is no mention of race anywhere in the article. Later, the story was updated to include “[s]ocial network reactions.”

The comments below, mostly from Twitter.com, are only a portion of the chatter over about 7 hours Sunday evening — many others were left off the list because of offensive language.

The tweets start at 7:44 pm on Sunday with WFNYCraig asking:

What happened at the Coventry street fair? I was there earlier in the day, but I see it trending. What did I miss?

Someone give this man a job with the Chicago Tribune! He is on the ball. Anyway, the tweets continued until 9:09 am today (Monday June 27), when Its_ChrisSteez got the last word:

Coventry Shook Too Hard Yesterday.

None of these tweets mention race.

Join me, won’t you, for a fascinating exercise in media studies: log in to Twitter (I used TweetDeck) and search for “coventry, black.” Let us see what, exactly, was “left off the list because of offensive language.”

I know, I know: it’s racist. Indulge me.

(I’m not suggesting any of these people were actually involved in the mob.)

Saturday: Preparations

As early as 4:09 pm on Saturday (June 25) — the day before the “unrest” — Thick_ASS_Jass (who happens to be African-American) complained:

I wanna go to coventry but NIGGAS black ass NIGGAS on that embarassing ghetto dont know how to act ,dont got no home training type shit.

“NIGGAS,” she says, “black ass NIGGAS.” Could be a coincidence. Interestingly enough, her message was promptly re-tweeted by three other people: _SammiJay, Bj_Mariee, and apryl_alone, who all happen to be African-American, as well.

At 7:51 pm, Look_ItsTreMilz promised the following, which was re-tweeted by uniquebre17:

Everybody is gonna be at Coventry tomorrow huh?…. You wont see my black ass up there.

“Everybody” is going to be there — except their “black [asses].” Yes, once again, both happen to be African-American. Actually, from now on, everyone mentioned is African-American unless I specifically state otherwise.

At 10:09 pm, My_FreshAss issued the following stern directive, re-tweeted by IAm_Dnell and CheeksONTresure (all of whom, if you’ve been paying attention, are implicitly African-American):

Coventry gone [going to] be full of FIGHTS, RIOTS, BLACK PEOPLE, DRUGS, ND ——>POLICE SOOOOOO YALL BETTA ACT CIVILIZED!!!

Fascinating: “Coventry,” he noted, is going to be “full of FIGHTS, RIOTS, BLACK PEOPLE, DRUGS,” and that implies a “POLICE” presence, so “YALL BETTA ACT CIVILIZED!!!” But did they heed his warning?

At 11:01 pm, JaeCudi joked with JovTheGreat:

I thought they stopped black people from hanging on Coventry. Lol. JK

At 11:37 pm, masonry fan SaleBrixSckTits speculated:

Coventry gone [going to] pull out them pattywagons [paddy wagons] again on you black fuckers lol

At 11:42 pm, the hypothermic DaniDhaColdest wondered (as did re-tweeter JustFollowHere):

Man why tf [the fuck] y’all gotta always wanna fight &nd start problems on coventry , that’s why BLACK PPL not wanted in a lot of places now GROWUP .

At 12:31 am, which I’m going to go ahead and call Saturday night, LilRedHead_Jada pleaded, along with DeonteeWasThere, _BlowTrees, and Bobby_SickKicks:

Dear Black , Please Don’t Fight On Coventry Like Some Dumbasses ^_^ Love, Jada . . . .

Sunday: Flash Mob

At 8:32 am on Sunday (the day of the “unrest”), MauriceAmir vowed:

Im Not Going To The Coventry Feat. Black People Always Make Some Shit Ghetto Af. Plus I Gotta Work :)

At 9:18 am, the possibly self-hating quezzy_quell discriminated:

If I go to coventry I’m goin early so I dnt have to put up wit black ppl…

At 10:55 am, the celestial PaintTheCosmos (real name “Dionna Sherice,” race technically unknown) cursed:

Did want to go to Coventry, but black people like to fuck shit up.

At 11:24 am, the educated HoesTaughtMe (reinforced by the equally learned ToneJetTaughtMe) ordered:

NO SHOOTING, Coventry The Last Place Black People Got!

At 11:27 am, the similarly erudite _TONYtaughtme (supported by Drea_CreatedYou) equated:

coventry = fighting . yu cant put a bunch of black people in one area cuz they dk [don’t know] how to act .

At 11:41 am, Pauly_Frm_Phs predicted:

Today gone [going to] be black tennagers last time on Coventry

Weedy_TheOG and PeeGee_17 concurred.

At 12:06 pm, iStriptor_Nike prayed:

Dear lord, don’t let these black rambunctious kids ruin the Coventry fest this time … Sincerely, Kasey Moreland

At 12:22 pm, Lanky_Ralf begged:

Dear black people, please dont embarass us today on coventry. Sincerely, Ralf .

At 1:04 pm, SincerelyKELLEY asserted:

All these black people at coventry today . i just KNOW its gonee [going to] be some drama .. smhh [shaking her head] !

At 2:57 pm, leahbonnielove lamented:

I enjoyed coventry this afternoon. Had to go before it got “all black” lmao.

At 4:55 pm, McTeddy13_, too, lamented (followed by I_amFatdaddy):

I really wanted to go to the Coventry Festival but it’s just too many black people going so I don’t wanna go anymore -___-

At 5:14 pm, shortly before the flash mob, Yesjessicaa, who is White (and kinda cute), noted:

Nora and I are at the Coventry fair and we walked past a group of black girls and one of them goes ” EWWW, I hate white girls”

Just before 6 pm, the Blacks rioted. At 6:26 pm, 81smallz suggested:

Young black kids of cleveland… Smarten up.. Ur looking goofy out here.. #coventry

This was re-tweeted by fourteen people, nearly all of them clearly African-American.

Alright, I think you get the point. From now on, I’m only going to show you a few interesting tweets. There are plenty more out there, all saying pretty much the same thing.

At 7:45 pm, Murda_Moosh wrote:

coventry fest….never again! a damn mess! black kids dunno how to act !

At 12:04 am, which I’m going to go ahead and call Sunday night, BoY_SaNiTy (race ambiguous) wrote:

Coventry was just a bunch of over dressed black people looking for trouble i swear on it

Monday: Aftermath

At 6:44 am, teeelash wrote:

Some shooting in Coventry sha, black boys as usual RT@yourmbour: AH!!! Wetin happen … RT @teeelash: The black race is cursed.

At 12:09 pm, BadAssNmd_Ticia wrote:

Coventry was nothing but a bunch of black highschool kids running wild. Waste of time #yessssss

At 2:04 pm, KraftyWurker, who is apparently a donkey, wrote:

Newspapers persist in calling black bastards who rioted at Coventry Art Fair “teens” or “kids”. Let’s see how many adults were arrested?

Finally, at 10:08 pm, IndiaAlanna inverted Doctor Strangelove with this tweet:

black ppl fucking up the coventry fest…fighting at the peace park. smh [shaking her head]

Conclusion

Phew. Reporting is hard work.

Well, there you have it: what cleveland.com couldn’t be bothered to report. The “unrest” at the Coventry Street Arts Fair on Sunday was yet another Black flash mob. Once again, Blacks are running wild in the streets, and the mainstream media simply refuse to report it. Don’t believe me? Watch Fox8’s video and ask yourself: is there any adjective that could be used to describe these “unruly teenagers”?

Wondering how the mainstream media will manage to justify this bit of censorship? Well, they won’t have to, unless you — the readers and viewers and listeners — complain about it.

Read Full Post »

Mobs Are All-Black; Tribune: We Won’t Report Race Until All Blacks Are in Mobs

Chicago is under attack by packs of wild Blacks (that’s “groups of people who are (a) wild and (b) Black”), and the Chicago Tribune thinks you’re racist for noticing. Reporter Mary Schmich wonders, “When a news story omits race, do we really know any less?” (June 8). If you think the answer is “yes, obviously,” you’re not alone: readers gave her a one-star rating, just like they did her editor.

You probably know the basic facts.

It happened Saturday night.

A dozen or so teenage males went on the prowl near North Michigan Avenue in Chicago’s toniest shopping district. They attacked five people, ages 20 to 68. Their loot included a backpack, a wallet, a bike, an iPad, a BlackBerry and an iPod Touch. The cops quickly arrested five alleged assailants, at least three of them from the South Side, and vowed to find the rest.

Right. A dozen — or was it 15 to 20? — young Black people went “on the prowl” for “loot” (accurate and obnoxiously unserious phrasing) and attacked five people, four apparently White (so difficult to find out, when reporters like Ms. Schmich won’t do their job) and one visiting Japanese oncologist (CBS Chicago, June 5 and June 6; Chicago Tribune, June 6). The police have charged five Blacks for the attacks; a sixth has been charged with mob action, and at least 20 arrested, in connection with the attacks.

Well done, Ms. Schmich. You got the “basic facts” — well, not right, but close.

If you’ve followed the story — and who hasn’t? — there’s another fact that you also know, but it’s one you haven’t read in the Tribune or seen explicitly stated by most of the official media: The young men were black.

Quelle surprise.

The reader response gives me some hope for the future of America:

“Shame on you and the Chicago Tribune for your politically correct crap when doing these type of stories,” one reader emailed several Tribune writers. “This is a diverse city and when you don’t physically describe them, we don’t know who to protect ourselves from.”

I’ve omitted the portion of his note that referred to “them” in ugly language.

God forbid someone should use “ugly language” to refer to these savages! (That’s “people who are savage.”) Why, that could hurt — no, not someone’s face, that’s what baseballs and fists do — no, not Chicago’s economy, that’s what packs of wild Blacks “prowling” around robbing people in rich neighborhoods do — but it could definitely probably hurt someone’s feelings!

Another reader wrote: “I can’t imagine that if a gang of white teenagers went to the South Side of Chicago and began attacking African-Americans including a 68-year-old that the race card would be left out of your coverage. … I see a media double standard here.”

You are absolutely correct, anonymous reader: the news media are thoroughly biased in favor of Black people.

So why would a news organization avoid a fact? This fact?

It’s a reasonable question, even if many of the people asking it on Internet comment boards have wrapped it up in irrational, irresponsible venom.

You mean they dared to notice the Black crime epidemic destroying American cities — destroying their city — and reacted like rational, responsible people should react (namely, with venom)?

I’m ambivalent about the omission of the attackers’ race in the news accounts, but I think I would have decided to leave it out too.

As an editor pointed out when I asked about it, the crimes don’t appear to be racially motivated. There’s no sign the criminals picked victims because they were of a certain race. They picked them because they had certain stuff.

Well, sure. No racial motivation here. It’s just gangs of Blacks, and only Blacks, crossing the city to attack Whites and Asians, and only Whites and Asians — well, as far as I can tell. It’s not like reporters in Chicago are actually reporting this story.

“People see it as a media conspiracy,” he said of the decision to leave out their race. “It’s a media quandary.”

How could anyone be so irrational and irresponsible as to see this universal media censorship of the race angle as a “conspiracy”? Why, that’s no different from believing the government is controlled by lizard men from the center of the Earth!

Here’s the quandary, for editors, for cops, for all of us:

Race alone doesn’t predict or explain behavior. Just because this mob was young and black hardly means that all young, black people in groups are a violent mob. Knowing the race of these attackers is no form of protection.

Wrong, Ms. Schmich. You moron. First, race alone does predict and explain behavior. It doesn’t predict or explain it perfectly, but it’s better than nothing. Knowing that the animal outside your front door is a tiger doesn’t predict or explain its behavior perfectly either, but it’s useful information if your objective is to not get eaten. That’s why stereotyping is justified. The potential benefits of learning, from further contact with the tiger, that this particular tiger is not dangerous (e.g., the benefit of leaving through the front door of the house, rather than the back) are outweighed by the potential costs of learning that it is, in fact, dangerous (e.g., the cost of getting eaten).

Now how can skin color predict and explain behavior? Trick question. Race isn’t just skin color; it’s in your blood, it’s in your bones, and it’s in your DNA. You see, race is genetic, and every human behavioral trait is heritable (Eric Turkheimer’s First Law of Behavior Genetics). That’s why there are innate race differences in intelligence and criminality.

Second, everyone knows that not all groups of young Blacks are violent mobs. You moron. On the other hand, a lot of them are. The same cannot be said, at this time and in this place, of groups of young Whites or young Chinese or young Eskimos. Do you see any reason for reporting the race of these mobs yet?

Third, knowing the race of these attackers is absolutely a form of protection. You moron. (See my example of the tiger, above.) We get it, Black-apologist cretins: not every group of two or more Blacks is a violent mob. How about groups of two or more Blacks at night, in a (formerly) safe — meaning White (and/or Asian) — part of town, dressed like — well, like ghetto Black thugs? How about then, when race is part of a more complete profile? Oh, wait, the cretins demand that race alone predict criminality with 100 percent accuracy. Otherwise they won’t report it. And you’re racist for noticing it.

Unless of course the races are reversed.

And yet race is an aspect of what happened Saturday night.

This oughta be good.

It’s a piece of the story simply because we notice. Young men from poor black neighborhoods create mayhem in a wealthy, predominantly white, touristed neighborhood? In the image capital of this historically segregated city? Of course we notice. By “we,” I mean everybody.

Yes, certainly, the real problems here are historical segregation and people noticing Black crime.

A friend recounts talking about the attacks with two of her friends. All three are black. One of their first thoughts was: “Oh my God, are they black kids?”

My friend wondered about their race because she worried about how their acts will reflect on all the good black kids.

Oh, those poor good Black kids (wherever they may be). They’re being reflected upon by Black criminals! That must be… agonizing.

The mother of one of the accused attackers noticed the racial aspect too. The Sun-Times quoted her as saying bails would have been lower if the crimes were on the South or West sides.

“If it’s black-on-black crime,” she said, “nobody cares.”

Look at that, we’ve identified another real problem: racism in the justice system! Except there isn’t any (Unamusement Park’s First Law of Race and Crime). Still, it’s good we brought it up. It distracted everyone from Black criminals, preventing any horrific, disfiguring reflections on “good black kids.”

So, yes, the attackers were black. We notice. But how to measure the relevance of the fact?

Here’s a thought, Ms. Schmich: measure it in White victims.

Read Full Post »

Black Mobs Attack White People; Tribune Editor: Race Is Not a Factor

Chicago is under attack by packs of wild Blacks (that’s “groups of people who are (a) wild and (b) Black”), and the Chicago Tribune thinks you’re racist for noticing. Editor Gerould W. Kern explains to his paper’s hopelessly racist White readers in a recent article, “When race is relevant in news coverage” (June 10), that race is never relevant when it might make Black people look bad. If you think that’s a stupid policy, you’re not alone: Kern’s propaganda apologia has a one-star rating, the lowest possible, based on over 500 reader responses.

This week the Chicago Tribune published several news stories and related columns about assaults by groups of youths in the Streeterville area of downtown Chicago. More coverage appears Sunday.

A number of readers have asked why we have not included racial descriptions of the assailants and the victims in these incidents.

To be precise, the readers have asked why the Tribune refuses to report that all the assailants are Black and, as far as I can tell, all the victims were White except for one visiting Japanese oncologist. It’s not a coincidence: the assailants are Black because Blacks are more criminal than Whites, and the victims are almost exclusively White because Blacks deliberately target them.

It’s what you might call a “racially motivated hate crime,” except of course only White people can commit those.

Some of the victims of Black thugs in Chicago.

We do not reference race unless it is a fact that is central to telling the story.

By all indication, these attacks were motivated by theft, not race. Further, there is no evidence to suggest that the victims were singled out because of their race. Therefore we did not include racial descriptions in our initial news reports.

Bullshit. Here’s how we know these animals (that’s “people who are behaving like animals”) were hunting White people: they come from the South side of Chicago, and their victims live on the North side. From CBS Chicago (June 6):

Three of the teens – Dvonte Sikes, 17, of the 7500 block of South Normal Avenue [map 1]; Travolus Pickett, 17, of the 8400 block of South Dorchester avenue [map 2]; and Derodte Wright, 18, of the 3500 block of South State Street [map 3] — have been charged as adults with felony robbery and mob action.

… The attacks are raising serious concerns about safety in the busy, Manhattan-like neighborhood [Streeterville] just north of downtown.

In the same article, we learn that this has been going on for months:

A man walking his dog early Monday morning said he is so disturbed by the flash mob attacks that he is planning on moving out of the neighborhood. He said the latest incidents are not isolated, and the flash mobs have been hitting the area for several months.

And speaking of victim blaming:

Asked whether tourists and people wanting to enjoy the lakefront should be concerned, [Police Supt. Garry] McCarthy said, “No. No. But, what we do have to do is have awareness. You don’t want to walk in dark areas by yourself after having a fight at a bar with a friend and you’re going home. We still have to pay attention to common-sense things to do. We have to be aware. That’s the nature of the world today. But, nobody should be afraid of this.”

Yeah, I’m sure Black thugs only ever attack White people and Japanese oncologists after bar fights.

He didn't get those bruises in a bar fight.

Returning to Kern’s article:

There are circumstances when race may be relevant, such as describing a criminal suspect being sought by police. But this description must be accompanied by other detailed information, such as height, weight, scars, clothing, etc. By adhering to this practice, we guard against subjecting an entire group of people to suspicion because of the color of their skin.

Kern’s fantasy world: Blacks are exactly the same as White people, because race is only skin deep. Therefore it would be irrational and racist to be suspicious of Blacks. But White readers are stupid. If we tell them the race of the thugs who are attacking them, they’ll start thinking irrational, racist things.

Reality: Blacks are less intelligent and more criminal than White people, and this seems to have a significant genetic (innate) component. In particular, race is genetic. Therefore it is rational to be suspicious of Blacks. But Gerould W. Kern of the Chicago Tribune lives in a rich White neighborhood, far away from Black savages (that’s “people who are (a) Black and (b) savages”). If you mention unflattering things about them, he will call you racist.

A couple of Black savages.

The story had another dimension: The public discussion that followed the attacks. That did involve race.

…

Tribune columnists John Kass, Mary Schmich and Dawn Turner Trice wrote extensively about fears, perceptions, accusations and assumptions regarding the role of race in these attacks. These commentaries took the temperature of this public debate and put it in context.

Justified “fears.” Accurate “perceptions.” Well-founded “accusations.” Empirically supported “assumptions.” Don’t worry: all of it vanishes in the proper race-denialist “context.”

We’ll deal with those clowns later.

Read Full Post »

Chicago Under Attack by Packs of Wild Blacks; Tribune: You’re Racist for Noticing

Pardon the unintentional rhyme, but Chicago is under attack by packs of wild Blacks. (That’s “groups of people who are (a) wild and (b) Black.” Go ahead, tell me it’s not an accurate description.) Paul Kersey is all over this. They’re storming buses 15 at a time, beating White people with bottles and robbing them (NBC Chicago, June 8). Gangs of 15 or 20 are ambushing White pedestrians and bicyclists, as well as one visiting Japanese oncologist (CBS Chicago, June 5 and June 6; Chicago Tribune, June 6). Smaller groups are using pepper spray to disable their victims (CBS Chicago, June 3 and June 5). Contrary to media reports, the problem isn’t “teens” or “youths” or “kids” or “people.”

The problem is Black people.

These thugs are the problem. Concealed carry might be the solution.

Until recently, the hopelessly biased mainstream media were content merely to ignore, suppress, censor the race — not races — of these savages. (That’s “people who are savage.”) But censorship wasn’t enough. It couldn’t stop readers from seeing the photos. It couldn’t stop them from watching the videos. It couldn’t stop them from looking out their windows at the dark-skinned mobs rampaging outside. And it couldn’t stop the White victims from telling everyone they knew.

So the readers noticed, and pretty soon they cracked the secret code: if a story omits the race of the perpetrators, it’s not because the reporter doesn’t know what race they were. It’s because they were all Black.

That’s when readers started to complain. Oh, those complainers. I guess they don’t enjoy being beaten with bottles and baseballs — and fists and feet, of course — or sprayed with mace, then robbed of the things they bought with the money they earned working jobs — yes, jobs, something many Blacks just can’t be bothered with anymore. Stampeding over welfare application forms? Sure. But jobs? Not so much.

The Chicago Tribune reacted to the complaints of their customers in a way that shouldn’t be surprising to Park readers: they denounced — no, not the Black thugs, of course not — their own readers, for being so darn raciss. Yes, if you notice the race of a criminal, and that race happens to be Black (which it frequently is), then you are a racist — doubly so if you write in to ask why Tribune staff don’t notice it themselves.

There will be no five-month anniversary spectacular for Unamusement Park. It is canceled on account of Black savages (that’s “people who are (a) Black and (b) savage”) destroying our cities. Sorry, maybe next month. Instead, please enjoy a short series on the savages’ apologists (not to say accomplices) at the Chicago Tribune, winner of Unamusement Park’s first annual Most White-Hating Newspaper Award. I’m going to cover the following dishonest, despicable stories:

1. “When race is relevant in news coverage” (June 10), by Gerould W. Kern, Editor
2. “When a news story omits race, do we really know any less?” (June 8), by Mary Schmich
3. “Mob attacks: Fear, too, is often skin deep” (June 8), by Dawn Turner Trice
4. “Race and the ‘flash mob’ attacks” (June 8), by Steve Chapman

Please enjoy.

No, scratch that. Please get mad as hell.

Read Full Post »