Justice Department Quota Queen Loretta King: FDNY Must Pay Minorities for Failing; Will Whites Have to Pay Blacks and Hispanics for Murders, Too?
Print Friendly and PDF

(Beginning at about 4:14 of the Fox News clip,Washington Times writer Quin Hillyer discusses outlaw Justice Department quota queen Loretta King, who is behind this, as well as so many other governmental racial atrocities, including the unconstitutional railroading of Jeremiah Munsen.)
By Nicholas Stix
Last revised at 10 p.m., on Sunday, March 27, 2011.

Crimeblogger extraordinaire Nivius Vir writes, on the Justice Department’s “discrimination” lawsuit against the FDNY,

Our friends at the Department of “Justice” are at it again. When they’re not ignoring Black Panthers that are terrorizing whites at voting precincts (here and here), they’re trying to force fire departments to compensate minorities for failing test grades.

They ask such perplexing questions on these “unfair” tests (with an open-book option) as, how many fire-hydrants do you see? The DOJ is demanding that minorities should be able to pass their tests after missing “as much as seventy percent” of the exam. 

The “Justice” Department has also demanded that Dayton, Ohio police allow incompetent police officers to join their ranks, forcing police to accept terrible test scores as passing. 

[“FDNY Forced to Pay Minorities for Failing?”by Nivius Vir, Nivius Vir, March 27, 2011.]

Such political and judicial demands are all based on racist, anti-scientific, anti-moral “disparate impact theory,” one of whose logical consequences is that once a certain number of blacks or Hispanics has been arrested—say a number equal to the number of whites arrested in the previous year—that either no more blacks or Hispanics may be arrested for the rest of the year, or every member of a (unconstitutionally) protected class who is arrested, once the quota has been met, must be released and paid a hefty settlement, even if he was caught red-handed, committing murder.

The foundations of “disparate impact theory”—i.e., “affirmative action,” “multiculturalism,” and “diversity”—are these: 

1. Race war presupposition #1: A racial and ethnic zero-sum game, in which blacks and Hispanics (and any other unconstitutionally “protected class”) benefit only to the degree that whites (or heterosexual white men) are harmed; and

2. Race war presupposition #2: All blacks and Hispanics are “victims,” and all whites are “oppressors,” and as long as one white is left, the worse or more incompetently blacks and Hispanics act, the more whites must be punished. For all eternity.

“Disparate impact theory” is thus a program for the promotion of racism, failure, and evil.

The DOJ commented to Fox News that “they don’t make any race-based decisions.”

A little Justice Department humor there.

To see the effects of early affirmative action—most modest, compared to what Loretta King envisions—on the San Francisco Fire Department, read the 1998 whistleblower report by fireman Ray Batz, inAmerican Renaissance“Quotas in the San Francisco Fire Department; A report on ten years of mischief.”

To see the greatest realization, to date, of Loretta King’s diversitopian vision for law enforcement, read the chapter on crime, particularly the section on New Orleans, in the NPI report which I edited,The State of White America-2007, and co-authored with VDARE contributors, economist Edwin S. Rubinstein (The Cost of DiversityPDF) and historian Robert J. Stove (The Unsleeping Eye: Secret Police and Their Victims).
If whites submit to becoming a minority in their own country, in which case both private and government anti-white terror will increase, will the multicultural alliance re-define Asians as “oppressors”? It certainly won’t re-classify them as “victims.” 

As numerous incidents, most dramatically, the Alexandra Wallace case have shown, many younger Asians are tired of being the “model minority,” and want to get in on the fun of terrorizing whites. Could they really be so stupid, as to seek a coalition with those who have a murderous hatred for them, and against those who have welcomed them with open arms?

Print Friendly and PDF