Wednesday, July 31, 2013

Walter Willams "Black Self-Sabotage" article

Professor Walter Williams:

I write to express appreciation for your article and to encourage you to broadcast it to anti-Zimmerman-verdict bloggers and pundits.

Here's an example of three black chicks who consider themselves worthy authors of blog material.  One wrote hatefully about one of the Zimmerman jurors.  Her comments invoked invective from an array of sympathizers, I guess all black:

From the beginning news of the Trayvon Martin killing, I knew black pundits would make a big deal out of it.  I knew they would ignore the numerous outrageous black hate-murders of whites, and play up Martin as an innocent child victim.

The black pundit community has missed a beautiful opportunity to use this incident to encourage black parents and youths to get back in line with the common sense of the 1940's black family structure.  Children cannot grow up with proper ideals or ideas of adults without both a mother and a father at home during formative years.

You might want to broach a subject that black and white pundits alike have utterly ignored:  the ultimate legal responsibility of Trayvon Martin's parents for his criminal, miscreant behavior.  The world seems to have forgotten that they bear responsibility for the behavior of their minor children, whether good or bad.  If good, that means they taught him well.  If bad, that means they did not.  Their negligence as parents resulted in Trayvon's use of disrespect and violence, rather than kindness and respect, to confront George Zimmerman.

What does this mean?  It means George can and should sue Trayvon's parents for the damages he suffered from the injuries Trayvon did to him, and for the expense of defending himself against ill-advised and unjustified murder prosecution.  A substantial damages award would send a loud, clear message to all pundits that parents must train their children to become gracious, good, law-abiding citizens or suffer the consequences.

You might also discuss the economic aspect of broken homes, particularly in the black community.  Johns Hopkins rightly wrote that fatherless households suffer from lack of the man's paycheck.  Most single mothers wallow in poverty and crave the safety net of a man's income.  Instead of encouraging women to get married and stay married, feminist and other liberal pundits howl demands for job and wage equality for women.  Now our beautiful girls will join men on the front lines of battle, and many will return home with horrific injuries and missing limbs from their ridiculous "equality."

Look at the economic indicators.  Government trillions of dollars in debt, wasting money on foreign aid and foreign wars, giving boundless handouts to the needy greedy, and robbing the productive through confiscatory taxes, increasing the debt by billions daily.  This happens because of bad government.  Bad government arises from bad legislators and executives, and bad judges enforce it, leaving only political solutions.  Bad people put most of those bad officials in office.

Bad people?  Did I actually make that politically incorrect assertion?  Yes, I did, and everyone with half a brain understands GIGO - Garbage in produces Garbage OUt.  The ethics of a democracy can never exceed that of the electorate, and our republic fares little better because the superwealthy corporations and individuals contribute enough money to own the legislators and executives through campaign contributions.  Smart, informed, responsible electors would not let that happen.  They'd ignore the glitzy ads, study the candidates, and nominate and elect only those good citizens competent to rule.

Why has the electorate become irresponsible?  For the same reason that so many black and liberal pundits have expressed outrage at the acquittal of Zimmerman while bemoaning the just fate of Martin:

  1. Evil agenda cloaked in "political correctness" by badly educated elitist liberals
  2. Stupidity of at least 75 million Americans
  3. Suffrage and procreation rights for the stupid and irresponsible
I suppose I needn't harrangue you about liberal elitism in universities where students become educated to ignore reality about genetics as the chief cause of stupidity and the iniquity of allowing the stupid to procreate and vote.  You know it first hand because you work in it all the time.  That's where black leaders learn to hate white folks just for the heck of it and learn to deny the problems of black families in American society.

But maybe I do need to point out that more than half of all the black students cannot graduate from high school, and at least half could not graduate no matter how good a home life they had because they are, to tell the truth, stupid.  It takes an 85 IQ to graduate, and US blacks have an average IQ of 84.  They have such a high IQ mostly because of having 18% white genes, and somewhat because of superior diet, education, and culture to sub-Sahara blacks in Africa who enjoy an average IQ of 70.

I have calculated the following approximations of IQ in the US by race:

% of 310M Popu Avg IQ
% <85 IQ
# <85
Non-White Hispanics
Northeast Orientals

Total # stupid people in US


Mama Gump said "stupid is as stupid does."  We refer to people as stupid because they reliably make wrong decisions and take wrong actions that cause  problems for them in life.  The stupid cannot compete for better mates or jobs and they tend to resort to crime and welfare abuse in inner cities.  I have arbitrarily chosen 85 as the IQ point below which a person suffers from stupidity, but in reality, those with IQ below 90 fare little better, and I think that should become the boundary.

Stupid people cannot evaluate relative importances well and so they don't bother evaluating much because it doesn't serve them.  They shoot from the hip as they go through life, leaving in their wake the flotsam and jetsam of troubles they cause and suffer.  They impose terrible burdens on societal infrastructures including health care, education, criminal justice, and welfare.  And many of them, like Trayvon Martin, resort to mugging and street crime to gain peer stature and to obtain the goods  they see advertised on TV, goods they could not otherwise afford.

I say it is cruel and inhumane to allow irresponsible parents to procreate stupid children, and even more irresponsible to do so without providing the means for their care, such as home, marriage, job for the man, and understanding/skill at managing a household budget and planning for kids and old age.

Our society owes children something better than a welfare promise to the stupid and their children, for that puts a huge burden on more productive people.  It owes those children a life FREE of stupidity.  I think procreation of the stupid should become outlawed as a crime against the child.  We wouldn't tolerate a person infecting a living human being with stupidity for life, would we?  So why do we let parents do it to the unborn? 

It just does not make ECONOMIC SENSE.

Now since the stupid generally prove by their misdeeds that they cannot make prudent choices for their own lives or manage their lives properly, why should we expect them to make prudent choices at the polls?  We cannot.  That's how spendthrifts like Barack Obama and warmongers like George Bush got into office.  Only the stupid or leftist liberals or people with a money interest in the election results would vote for such people.  They got the US into serious financial trouble.

That just does not make ECONOMIC SENSE.

The solution:  a massive push by people of good sense to outlaw suffrage and procreation by stupid and other irresponsible people.

I remind you that the States originally accomplished this by allowing only free, white, landed men to vote.  The Constitution now mandates that children between 18 and 21 and women and the "slave class" may vote.  By "slave class" I mean people so stupid that they cannot exercise the responsibility commensurate with their liberties.

I believe every citizen needs to take a battery of tests and exhibit certain demonstrations of responsibility to establish their "class" of citizenship.  Only the highest class may vote.  Or all can vote, but the lower classes have a dramatically scaled-down vote.

I personally believe everyone should have some say in governments of families and nations, but some voices have higher credibility because of their higher degrees of demonstrable responsibility.

I apologize to you if I have worn you out with this appeal.  Your article inspired me to write it.  Perhaps you will see fit to respond with proposals of your own.  We don't do enough when we merely denounce and admonish.  We need to recommend specific, workable solutions, starting with ideals, and adjusting them as necessary to get the community to embrace them.

Xena of the 3 black chicks politico blog refused to publish my comments because I refused to bash Zimmerman or the jury, and I tried to present the above facts to her readers.  Maybe you can get her to listen to reason because of your skin color and altitude.


Bob Hurt


Bob Hurt         Blog 1 2 3   f  t  
2460 Persian Drive #70
Clearwater, FL 33763
Email; Call: (727) 669-5511
Law Studies: 
Donate   Subscribe
Learn to Litigate with 


Wednesday, July 24, 2013

"TV BOX" Turns your Flat Panel HDMI TV into a Giant Tablet

I just bought and setup a gadget that many of you might like, for not much money.

The popular term is "TV Box."  It's a tiny microcomputer module with cables and an "Air Mouse" remote controller.  It turns your TV into a tablet for browing the web, watching movies, playing games, doing email/facebook, etc.  A modern, fast quad core CPU runs Android 4.2 operating system, and presents a simple menu.  You set up the wireless communication and connect to the internet through your home wireless router and cable internet service.  Then you can browse the web.

Price: $94
Shipping from Hong Kong:  2 to 3 weeks

Of course, with a real tablet you get a microphone so you can talk to it instead of typing.  But this device accepts a USB bluetooth dongle for connecting a keyboard with touchpad, or an air mouse.  The air mouse has a keyboard on it, and a couple of mouse buttons.  You wave it in the air to move the screen pointer.  It works pretty well and intuitively.  It has an HDMI male connector for plugging into the TV.

The CPU module also accepts a 32G MicroSD trans-flash memory chip of the kind that goes into cell phones.  You can pull it out and load it with movies from your home computer, then plug it back into the CPU module and click the function to watch a movie from that chip.

The product includes an AC power adapter with USB cable for powering the CPU module, and a short HDMI cable for connecting the module to the TV.  It provides a micro USB socket and adapter so you can plug a USB hard drive or flash drive into it.  The air mouse requires 3 AAA batteries, not included.  In other words, you get everything you need in the package except those batteries.

Incidentally, I had a little trouble getting started with the device and used eBay messaging to communicate to the vendor in English in Hong Kong.  The vendor bent over backward, so to speak, to get me up and running.  I feel very impressed with the product and quality of service. 

I give this vendor and product FIVE Stars and TWO thumbs up.


Bob Hurt         Blog 1 2 3   f  t  
2460 Persian Drive #70
Clearwater, FL 33763
Email; Call: (727) 669-5511
Law Studies: 
Donate   Subscribe
Learn to Litigate with 


Monday, July 22, 2013

Courts rule against ridiculous foreclosure defense arguments

Remember the famous Judge Schack of New York?  He threw out foreclosure cases to the delight of foreclosure victims all over the USA, giving them hope.

Well hopes got dashed when a NY Appeals court hammered shack for abusing discretion and not following the law.

When will foreclosure victims stop drinking the kool-aid of foreclosure defense?  They waste a fortune hiring malpracticing attorneys to defend against foreclosure, and they lose the house anyway, even when delusional judges like Shack toss the foreclosure.

Also, the show-me-the-note argument often fails.  These opinions explain why:

Henkels v. J.P. Morgan Chase (D. Ariz., 2011) ("Plaintiff argues that the facts in this case are distinguishable from the cases decided by the courts in the District of Arizona. However, Plaintiff does not identify how the facts in this case differ from the numerous District of Arizona cases concluding that the "show me the note" theory and UCC-related arguments are not cognizable legal theories. Plaintiff's reliance on case law from judicial foreclosure states is inapposite in a non-judicial foreclosure state, such as Arizona. The Arizona Supreme Court has explained this distinction: "Unlike their judicial foreclosure cousins that involve the court, deed of trust sales are conducted on a contract theory under the power of sale authority of the trustee. They are therefore held without the prior judicial authorization ordered in a mortgage foreclosure." In re Krohn, 52 P.3d 774, 777 (Ariz. 2002). The Arizona statutes governing the sale of foreclosed property through a trustee's sale do not specifically require that the foreclosing party produce a physical copy of the original Promissory Note. See A.R.S. § 33-807(A) ("[A] power of sale is conferred upon the trustee of a trust deed under which the trust property may be sold . . . after a breach or default in performance of the contract or contracts for which the trust property is conveyed as security, or a breach or default of the trust deed."). 

Accordingly, Plaintiff's allegations relating to the "show me the note" theory and UCC-related arguments will be dismissed for lack of a cognizable legal theory. See Balistreri, 901 F.2d at 699."); 

Mitchell Bank v. Schanke, 2004 WI 13, 268 Wis. 2d 571, 676 N.W.2d 849 (Wis., 2004) ("The parties to this litigation focus on the missing Note and whether the Bank needed to produce the Note to foreclose. The circuit court, the court of appeals, and the parties all speak of the Mortgage as "securing the $50,000 note." Yet, this is an improper use of terminology. "A mortgage, secures the debt, not the note, bond, or other evidence of the debt, while the note represents, and is the primary evidence of, the debt." 59 C.J.S. Mortgages § 143 (1998). What matters is the debt itself, not the Note. Thus, the proper inquiry is whether the Bank failed to prove the debt secured by the Mortgage. 

The Mortgage in question here secures two categories of debts. First, it secures the $50,000 debt evidenced by the missing Note. Second, the Mortgage, via the dragnet clause, purports to secure all antecedent debt owed by the Waltkes to the Bank. With respect to the first category—the debt evidenced by the Note—the Bank was not required to produce the Note in physical form, if it could establish the Note's existence, terms, and conditions through other evidence, or otherwise establish the existence of outstanding debt secured by the Mortgage. See, e.g., New England Savs. Bank v. Bedford Realty Corp., 680 A.2d 301, 310 (Conn. 1996) (finding that the loss of a promissory note supporting a mortgage was not fatal to foreclosure action). "In Wisconsin, the cause of action on a note evidencing an indebtedness and the cause of action to foreclose the mortgage on real estate that secures the indebtedness are distinct." Bank of Sun Prairie v. Marshall Dev. Co., 2001 WI App 64, ¶ 12, 242 Wis. 2d 355, 626 N.W.2d 319. Thus, in the context of a mortgage foreclosure action: 

A bill or note is not a debt; it is only primary evidence of a debt; and where this is lost, impaired or destroyed bona fide, it may be supplied by secondary evidence. The loss of a bill or note alters not the rights of the owner, but merely renders secondary evidence necessary and proper. 

Therefore, it matters not whether the Note itself is produced, as long as the Bank can prove the underlying debt secured by the Mortgage.")

And I have attached the Welk v GMAC ruling from the USDC in Minnesota.  There a scammer foreclosure defense attorney Butler sued an array of banks and argued all kinds of nonsense for an array of clients.  The court sent him packing, and I expect him to get disbarred.

Court of Appeals affirms:,

The only practical way to address foreclosure is to get the mortgage examined professionally, and then shove the causes of action in the mortgagee's face and demand settlement, or sue the lender.

Call me if you need help with that.

Bob Hurt         Blog 1 2 3   f  t  
2460 Persian Drive #70
Clearwater, FL 33763
Email; Call: (727) 669-5511
Law Studies: 
Donate   Subscribe
Learn to Litigate with 


Wednesday, July 17, 2013

Foreclosure Defense Lawyer Sanction $323,307 for Worthless Stall Tactics


DON'T waste your money on a foreclosure defense lawyer. 

Instead, invest in a comprehensive Mortgage Fraud Examination.  Call me for a Free, full explanation at 727 669 5511.  Read this sad sanction story to see what ALL judges should do to foreclosure defense lawyers who present bogus legal theories and failing arguments to waste court time and client money:

The chief federal judge in Minnesota has taken the rare step of ordering an investigation of a Minneapolis foreclosure lawyer who has been slapped with sanctions at least nine times since 2011. 

The sanctions imposed by federal district judges against William B. Butler total $323,307, according to Star Tribune calculations. 

In a March 2012 memorandum, Schiltz hit Butler with a $50,000 sanction and another $7,500 in legal fees for the entities he’d sued, saying Butler had filed “nearly 30 frivolous lawsuits.” He called Butler’s arguments “evasive and often absurd,” said he misrepresents the facts with “constantly shifting and contradictory arguments.” 

In another case, in June 2012, U.S. District Judge Ann Montgomery ordered Butler to pay a $75,000 sanction, plus $17,068 in attorneys’ fees. 

“Butler’s insistence on re-litigating losing arguments is staggering, and it comes with a cost, because it multiplies the expense of litigation and monopolizes scarce judicial resources,” she wrote. “Moreover, no one, not even Butler, can reasonably or competently believe in the merits of any of these arguments.” 

In August 2012, U.S. District Judge Donovan Frank hit Butler with $45,451 in sanctions. He said Butler’s “baseless” arguments had been “consistently rejected” by other courts. He also noted that Butler had defaulted on his mortgage and had “been living in his house for more than three years without making any payments.” 

Arguing that MERS does not hold the note, as Butler does, “is frivolous under Minnesota law,” said Schiltz, and has been rejected by the state Supreme Court, the U.S. Court of Appeals “and by every federal judge sitting in Minnesota who has addressed the argument,” he said. 

“Butler attracts clients through a website that blatantly misrepresents Minnesota law and attacks the legal system, the banking system and other targets,” Schiltz said. “Butler has been quite successful in attracting clients who either do not know or do not care that he has never actually won a show-me-the-note claim.” 

Attorney Jeff Vesel, who has represented some homeowners in foreclosure who were previously clients of Butler, conceded that some got temporary relief, staying in their homes for free while he sued. 

But Vesel said that instead of helping clients on a case-by-case basis, Butler presses the same theory for all his cases, which has “practically zero chance” of succeeding. 
Butler said, “I’m not in it for the money,” and more than 10 percent of his cases are done for free. But according to one “legal service agreement” from Butler’s firm, he required clients to pay him $2,000 up front, followed by monthly payments of $495. 

James Konobeck, a 62-year-old retired custodian and painter, said he paid Butler thousands of dollars to represent him in a bid to block the foreclosure of his house in Marine on St. Croix. “I really got the shaft,” he said. “I sure wish I hadn’t given him a dime.” 

He said the foreclosure and Butler’s handling of the case made him feel suicidal. He said he managed to save his home, but only after hiring Vesel. 

Lloyd Koenig, 63, said he had to pay Butler $1,500 up front, but still lost his home in Becker, Minn., to foreclosure. Butler continues to send him monthly bills of $495, which Koenig hasn’t paid. “I don’t know that he knows exactly what he is doing,” Koenig said. 

Butler says he cut Konobeck’s bill by 80 percent with Konobeck’s concurrence and blames Judge Schiltz for not following the legal precedents. He said he is still billing Koenig because his case is on appeal. 

Schiltz suggested that “Butler’s clients may be paying him, not for bringing legitimate claims, but simply for each month that he delays foreclosure by tying up mortgages in frivolous court proceedings.”
Bob Hurt         Blog 1 2 3   f  t  
2460 Persian Drive #70
Clearwater, FL 33763
Email; Call: (727) 669-5511
Law Studies: Donate   Subscribe
Learn to Litigate with Jurisdictionary

Tuesday, July 16, 2013

Florida Negress returns to house, fires warning shots, gets 20 years

The above article must certainly anger America's Negroes over what they consider unfairness of the Florida courts.

In this case the woman, in a heated dispute with her estranged children, went outside to her car and returned with her pistol, then fired warning shots, whereupon her husband and the kids ran out of the house.  Her lawyer begged the court to acknowledge her immunity under Florida's STAND-YOUR-GROUND LAW.

The judge refused, saying she obviously did not fear for her life or she wouldn't have returned to the house.

A less angry, more sensible woman would have stayed out of the house and called the police to remove her hostile husband.

Angry people lie a lot and don't think straight.  They hide the truth and make problems worse just to seem right.  They tend to want to punish and get even.  They tend to communicate with solid objects (guns, knives, rocks, fists, etc).

Now, add stupidity to the anger.   I remind the reader that half of America's Negroes have such low intelligence that they cannot graduate from high school.  That means members of that half make poor choices because they cannot evaluate relative importances or solve problems sensibly.  In other words, they don't think straight either.

Should the reader think the woman is stupid because she just earned a mandatory 20-year prison sentence for firing warning shots to scare her husband?  Well, think it or not, she has a 50% chance of being what I call stupid.  If she suffers from stupidity, the law should not allow her anywhere close to a loaded gun.

I make this point not to denigrate Negroes, for America also has a lot of stupid Caucasians and non-Caucasian Hispanics, nearly 80 million, altogether who cannot graduate from high school because of their low cognitive skill.

Oops, I seem to have hit a huge road block here.  The Constitution, written by and for generally smart Caucasians, doesn't contain a word about stupidity, lack of cognitive ability, etc. 

But it does contains the 2nd Amendment acknowledging the right of the people to keep and bear arms and forbidding any infringement on that right.   

But the people need to read that with some common sense perspective.  "The People" obviously cannot include irresponsible children or insane people.  Common sense dictates that at least some of the rights which the Constitution guarantees do not operate as absolute rights, but rather operate as privileges extended to responsible people.  Everyone should realize that
    (quote from Bob Hurt)
Well, I guess the stupid don't realize that.  Apparently they expect to have the same rights as intelligent people have.  And irresponsibles other than the stupid might realize it, but they don't care.  They want the same rights as responsible people enjoy, but without exercising commensurate responsibility.

And here we see a major problem with our Constitution.  The problem explains why government employees, particularly the President and legislators and judges have such a hard time obeying its mandates.  You have to read those mandates and take them literally with common sense and a grain of salt, so to speak.

Should the woman in that article have had access to a firearm?  Maybe not.  But once she got the firearm in the house, she used it relatively responsibly.  She could have shot her belligerent husband in the heart, and killed him dead, or just wounded him to keep him from threatening to hurt her or keep him from actually hurting her.  A warning shot seems a lot more responsible than shooting the man.  Apparently she thought he needed scaring more than shooting.  I guess that makes some sense.

But her sentence by the court shows that she cooked her own goose when she did that.  It would have made far more sense to stay outside and call the cops from her cell phone or the neighbor's phone.  That would have been the lawful, sensible thing to do.  But her anger, and possibly her stupidity, led her to make the wrong choice.

This brings up my final point.  People should not demand gun rights without regard to the fact that America contains around 80 million stupid people of different races.  The stupid, the irresponsible, and the dangerous should have restrictions on their liberties and rights.  They should
  1. Never possess a loaded gun or other dangerous weapon;
  2. Live and work under supervision in protective communities or homes rather than in outside society where they stupidly harm others and become victims to more intelligent people;
  3. Receive education and vocational training suitable for their limited intellects;
  4. Not procreate more of their kind, especially if they lack the ability to rear children properly;
  5. Not have the privilege of voting in any election.
Intelligent, productive families should be able to take in the stupid as domestic servants, become responsible for their behavior, and provide them with food, shelter, gainful work, health care, exercise, and a loving environment where they can be part of the family.


Bob Hurt         Blog 1 2 3   f  t  
2460 Persian Drive #70
Clearwater, FL 33763
Email; Call: (727) 669-5511
Law Studies: Donate   Subscribe
Learn to Litigate with Jurisdictionary


Jury thinks Trayvon Martin Needed Killing as Anti-Caucasian Bias Increases

Angry Negroes Make America Dangerous for Caucasians
Copyright© 15 July 2013 by Bob Hurt.  All rights reserved. Distribute with attribution.

Abstract:  American Negroes tend toward violence against Caucasians, especially in the wake of the Jury’s not-guilty verdict in the murder trial of George Zimmerman.  Outrage by Negroes and others demonstrates that the fault lies with stupidity and irresponsible parents.


Jury Acquits Zimmerman, Makes Negroes Angry

The Sanford Florida 6-woman jury unanimously acquitted George Zimmerman for killing Trayvon Martin because the jury thought Trayvon needed killing, under the circumstances. 

That should have come as no surprise to the many millions of Negroes who voted for Obama because of Obama's Negroid features, but apparently it did.  I have surveyed countless expressions of chagrin by them and their moral supporters that the jury did not convict George Zimmerman for shooting his brutal attacker in the heart.  And I marvel that so many people can allow themselves to become so blind to reality, or be so stupid.

The evidence showed that Zimmerman did not stalk or initiate a violent confrontation with Martin, but Martin stalked Zimmerman, attempted to beat him to death, and even made a grab for Zimmerman's self-defense pistol in order to shoot Zimmerman to death.

In short, the evidence showed Martin as just another Negro thug in a hoodie determine to "hate Whitey" and teach Whitey not to disrespect Negro thugs by watching them case the neighborhood in a hoodie on a dark and stormy night.

Have Negro Thugs Become the New Ku-Klux-Klan?

I find it amazing that nobody brought up Florida's anti-Ku-Klux-Klan laws which forbid wearing a hood to disguise the identity, precisely what Martin did and many other Negro thugs do.  Even innocent kids, ignorantly trying to seem "cool" wear them also.  That just makes it easier for thugs to disguise their intentions to burgle, rob, knock-out, beat, and shoot their growing array of victims around America.  Sure some people wear hoodies to protect themselves against rain and cold.  But thugs wear hoodies to hide their identities and to intimidate their victims, and that violates the spirit and intent of these Florida statutes:

·         876.11 Public place defined.
·         876.12 Wearing mask, hood, or other device on public way.
·         876.13 Wearing mask, hood, or other device on public property.
·         876.14 Wearing mask, hood, or other device on property of another.
·         876.15 Wearing mask, hood, or other device at demonstration or meeting.
·         876.155 Applicability; ss. 876.12-876.15.
·         876.16 Sections 876.11-876.15; exemptions.
·         876.17 Placing burning or flaming cross in public place.
·         876.18 Placing burning or flaming cross on property of another.
·         876.19 Exhibits that intimidate.
·         876.20 Wearing mask and placing exhibit to intimidate.
·         876.21 Sections 876.11-876.20; penalty.

Did Pro-Martin News Commentators Go NUTS?

Virtually every anti-Zimmerman commentator I have seen on TV or read from blogs/news has ignored Martin's thug behavior of initiating the fight by the following behavior:

1.      Stalking and sneaking up on Zimmerman to confront him for no good reason, 
2.      Slugging Zimmerman in the face without provocation,  
3.      Attempting to beat Zimmerman to death, 
4.      Attempting to bash Zimmerman's brains out on the concrete sidewalk, 
5.      Threatening to kill Zimmerman by saying "Tonight you're gonna die," and
6.      Trying to grab Zimmerman's self-defense pistol so as to shoot Zimmerman to death.

Those six behaviors constitute the behaviors of a MURDEROUS THUG, and the jury knew it, so why don't most of the Negro and other anti-Zimmerman pundits in America know it?

I recall seeing a Negro woman protesting and commenting on TV in front of the courthouse.  She claimed "Black life has value."  Clearly she has no clue about the value of anything.  She would have preferred to see Martin murder Zimmerman JUST BECAUSE OF MARTIN's NEGROID FEATURES.

Many apparently neutral commentators seem dismayed over Martin's death.  To the contrary, they should applaud it.  Martin has ended up precisely where he ought to be:  dead in the ground with a bullet hole in his heart.   He died as a consequence of the way he lived his life, as a thug.  He got what he deserved.  I cannot think of a more fitting end for a murderous thug of any kind, Negro or otherwise.  And I consider commentators who say otherwise as both fraudulent and NUTS.

Dangerous Negro Thuggery Trend Bad for America

Without getting into all the reasons why so many Negroes have become thugs, clearly Negro thuggery is bad for America, and as I view the situation, it gets worse and worse as the years roll by.  For several years now, Negro thugs have practiced the "Knock-Out" game.  In this terrible game, a pack of Negro thugs walk along a street or alleyway, and when they pass by a Caucasian man, one of them will throw a fast, hard punch at the man's face in an effort to knock him out cold with one strike.  

I consider such behavior a stark indicator of unjustified racial hatred.  As I see it (and as the law suggests) the victim would be fully justified in side-stepping the attacker, pulling a gun, and shooting the attacker to death.

While people can concoct all kinds of excuses for hateful Negro thuggery, no one can deny that it has become a dangerous trend.  Anonymous scholar La Griffe du Lion shows the nature of that trend by analyzing US Government crime statistics in his 1999 article "Crime in the Hood." 

In that article he shows the math that proves the following:

1.      Negroes have 3 times the likelihood that Caucasians have of committing a crime of violence;
2.      Negroes have 64 times the likelihood of committing a violent crime against Caucasians than vice versa;
3.      A Caucasian family of 4 living in an all-Negro inner city neighborhood has a 99% chance of a Negro attack against a family member in any given year.

Martin's thuggish attack against Zimmerman constitutes a blindingly stellar example of the danger of Negroes to Caucasians.  To me that means that ALL Caucasians should keep out of striking range of Negroes they don't know and trust, and Caucasians should arm themselves like Zimmerman did so as to have some degree of preparation for surviving a violent confrontation, burglary, robbery, mugging, car-jacking, etc., by a Negro thug.

If the Martin killing has not taught America any other lesson, it has taught that the bulk of the vocal Negroes of America will blindly and illogically support a Negro thug's efforts to beat and murder a Caucasian, JUST because the Negro has Negroid features and the victim had Caucasian features, and without regard to any other factor.

Lessons for Americans to Learn

La Griffe's math and Negro outrage over the Martin killing show three things:

1.      Negro thugs prefer Caucasian victims, 
2.      Generally, Negroes present a danger to Caucasians, and
3.      Other Negroes will support the Negro thug against the Caucasian victim regardless of the facts.  

Furthermore, America can count on the bulk of the mainstream news media carrying a torch for the cause of Negro thuggery against Caucasian victims, especially when the Caucasian survives by killing the attacker.  As the Martin killing example shows, that media will try to make the case for the Caucasian's guilt and the Negro thug's innocence, even though the Caucasian was completely innocent and the Negro thug had no innocence whatsoever.

Thinking Americans should ponder this conundrum:
How much worse will Negro thuggery against Caucasians become as Negroes begin to outnumber Caucasians?  

It Gets Worse, Not Better

Birth rate trends show that Caucasian births now constitute fewer than 50% of all births in the United States.  I predict that Negro and media bias against Caucasians will continue to increase in the years to come.  And I predict that Negro thuggery will increase until government finds a way to put irresponsible people in protective compounds – safe, controlled communities with gainful employment.

Just look at the kind of dangerous stupid Negro thugs represent to Caucasians:

·         A Chicago area teen beat and robbed a white man in April 2012 because the Martin killing upset him so.  Cops arrested him for a hate crime.

·         In his book White Girl Bleed a Lot Colin Flaherty carefully documents an epidemic of “black mob violence.”

·         Black Panthers leader King Samir Shabazz, raging over the impending Zimmerman acquittal, threatened Caucasians in general with violence.  He declared 
 “This time we’re doing it right...  [T]his time we’re not burning down our communities.  This time we’re going out to Whitey’s suburbs and burning down HIS community… We’re going to make Whitey feel the pain.”  
The comments at the below link show considerable Negro support for the threat.

·         One web site documents dozens of tweets from raging Negroes threatening to kill Zimmerman and other Caucasians because the jury acquitted him.

The reader should ponder this question in light of the above realities:
How could we possibly have a clearer indication of abject stupidity or sinister motive on the part of the Negroes to injure innocent Caucasians?

Parents of Negro Thugs 100% Responsible for Their Teens’ Thuggery

Let us look frankly at the reality of teen thuggery.  Society does not rear children to have values.  Parents do. Upwards of 70% of Negro children have only one parent, the mother, at home to rear them. And many Negro fathers go from woman to woman, essentially spawning single-parent children in the process, as though they have the duty to sow their seed in the community.  Negro families have become intensely matriarchal as a result.  Negro "baby-daddies" show little or no responsibility for the children they have abandoned to the mother's care, and both mother and children have plummeted into poverty as a consequence, both becoming wards of the state through various welfare programs.

Trayvon Martin lived in a single-parent home.  He lived with his mother. And apparently neither she nor Martin's father taught him to treat strangers with love and respect.  Martin learned hatred and disrespect for Caucasian men from his parents and associates.

Government holds parents responsible for the much of the misbehavior of their minor children.  But Florida law allows prosecution of certain kinds of minors as adults for some crimes. So, had Martin survived his attack on Zimmerman, the prosecutor would probably have attacked Martin for trying to slugging Zimmerman, jumping on him, and trying to beat him to death.  And Martin would probably sit in prison right now.

But Martin did not survive, and now Zimmerman has survived the 16-month ordeal of hiding, wearing a police monitor device on his ankle, hostility from the bulk of the mainstream media and Negroes of America, and facing lawyers and prosecution, including the outrageous hostility of the prosecutor who did his best to rape Zimmerman's character in front of the jury and media representatives in court.

Martin's parents' lawyers claimed they have filed a civil lawsuit against Zimmerman, probably for wrongful death, in spite of the not guilty verdict.  The public should wonder why.  They should scream in outrage against such an idiotic lawsuit.  EVERYBODY with half a brain knows that the jury made the correct determination, though the bulk of America's Negroes and their pundits hate to admit it - Trayvon Martin needed killing for attempting to murder George Zimmerman.

WHO will compensate Zimmerman for the loss of 16 months of his life in this ordeal, destruction of his reputation, and the enduring hatred of the bulk of the Negroes in America?  Who really bears the blame for the outrageous hate crime that Trayvon Martin committed against George Zimmerman?  Common sense will give you the answer:

Trayvon Martin's parents - his father Tracy and his mother Sabrina Fulton - bear the blame for poorly training Martin and poorly preparing him for life in the outside world.  They received plenty of indications of Martin's growing thuggery - the school had kicked him out for having weed and burglar tools and contraband; he put gold on his teeth to look like a common thug; he wore a hoodie to cloak his identity and intimidate others.  The news media reported those items.  Where there's smoke there's fire.  What other thug signals did the media not report?

I believe it safe to conjecture that had Martin's parents done a better job rearing him, he would not have become a thug, and he would not have tried to murder Zimmerman.  But for their negligent parenting, their son would still live, and his victim would not have suffered outrageous prejudice by the media and the Negroes of America, not to mention the mental anguish, the court battle, and the expense.  Tracy and Sabrina have done all that damage to Zimmerman through their agent son, as though they commanded their son to do it.  And Zimmerman ought to hold them responsible by suing them for the damages resulting from that negligence.

DO NOT make the mistake of whining on the parents' behalf that they have suffered enough.  They have not begun to suffer as they should.  They OWE Zimmerman those 16 months, expenses, and relief from his own mental suffering.  They owe it because their negligence caused their son to try to murder Zimmerman.  And Martin, a minor child, had not yet reached his 18th birthday.

As I see it, Zimmerman MUST sue them in another round of self-defense, for Martin's parents intend to drag Zimmerman through a civil trial for something like wrongful death.  I hope he has the good sense to get his legal team to attack them with every ounce of energy possible for causing the death of their son and neglecting to rear him to act like a decent, civil human being.

Most of all, Zimmerman should sue them to send a message to all the parents of thugs in America, regardless of race, to do an excellent job of rearing the children to behave like decent, respectful human beings.  Otherwise they will learn absolutely nothing from this incident other than to hate "creepy-ass cracker" Caucasians for the duration of their short time on this world.

Stupid Is as Stupid Does

It should scare the reader half to death to know that, had Martin turned 18, he would now have the right to vote in elections.  God save America from such abject insanity as letting such bozo thugs vote!

All Americans should come to grips with realities of IQ with respect to racial groups, because knowing those IQs and other racial propensities can help people better to "profile" one another.  

Though pundits rant, rave, and rail against racial profiling, only an idiot does not do it.  In fact, Israel's airport security experts use profiling to minimize the likelihood that terrorists will board aircraft to cause damage to them.  Look in the news for terrorist incidents in Israeli aircraft.  You won't find any.  Profiling explains why.

The FBI and other national intelligence and investigation agencies employ highly trained professional profilers who do nothing more than anticipate behavior from criminals they have profiled.  They use a combination of information about the individual, including race, education, family life, and criminal record to understand that individual's criminal tendencies.  When possible, they begin by looking at the individual's physical characteristics.

One can conjecture about the nature of a person by knowing the average IQ of the racial group of that person.  Psychometrists have established these averages in the USA:

·         Ashkenazi Jews – 115
·         Northeastern Orientals - 105 to 107
·         Caucasians - 100
·         Non-Caucasian Hispanics - 90
·         Mexicans - 87
·         Negroes - 84

By contrasting US Negroes with Africa's Negroes one can see a vast intelligence gulf.  Sub-Saharan Africans have an average IQ of 70, in spite of the many smart Caucasians and Indians who live there.  The people of some countries there have an average IQ down in the 50's. US Negroes have a dramatically higher average IQ than their Africa "cousins" partly because in the USA they get better diet, education, and culture. But US Negroes are about 18% Caucasian, and that accounts more than any other factor for their higher average intelligence than Africa Negroes.  People inherit their intelligence from their parents.

Psychometrists consider that an average IQ difference of 15 or more points is "significant."  That means that people in a group with an average IQ 15 points lower than that of another group cannot compete with that group for the better jobs and mates.  In the US, one must have an IQ of at least 85 to graduate from high school and 110 to earn a bachelor degree from a standard college.    Furthermore, the stupid have low value of productivity.   And they impose a terrible financial burden on systems of health care, criminal justice, social welfare, and prisons, FAR out of balance with the value of their productivity.  A surfeit of stupid people destroys industrial incentive to automate and innovate.  Stupid people make their nation less competitive in international commerce, which explains why the Sub-Saharan productivity has the value of spit, figuratively speaking.

The foregoing facts hint strongly at the reason the US suffers from so much Negro thuggery.  "Stupid is as stupid does," according to Forrest Gump's sagacious mother.  Low-IQ people reliably make a lot of wrong decisions followed by wrong actions.  They find it difficult to solve problems, and tend to resort to brute force to cure their dilemmas. They cannot create an advanced civilization, but they will tend to destroy one.  And when they procreate, they tend to produce low-IQ children.

No one can doubt that Trayvon Martin made a terribly wrong decision in trying to beat George Zimmerman to death.  Such a decision, coupled with burglary and smoking weed and dressing and acting generally like a thug, provide a key to visualizing Martin's low intelligence.  Only a callous dumbass would do what he did to Zimmerman.

I do not mean to say that parents and schools cannot train the stupid.  The stupid just take monumentally MORE training than do smarter people to get the point, and some points they will never get because of their inability to evaluate relative importances and solve problems sensibly.  Maybe Martin would have eventually graduated from high school.  And maybe not.  Maybe the school would have tossed him out permanently for his thuggery.  And maybe the school district leaders had already intentionally dumbed down the curricula so that underachieving and stupid kids can get undeserved high school diplomas.  Florida's Comprehensive Assessment Test (FCAT) scores, broken down by race, almost perfectly mirror the race-based average IQ scores I listed above.

These IQ and FCAT scores suggest a sad reality for Negroes, America's most cognitively challenged race in spite of the efforts of members of that race to become Caucasian:
Half of US Negro students lack the cognitive ability to graduate from high school.
That reality will condemn at least half of the US Negroes to lifetimes of low-paying jobs, low-quality mates, crime, welfare abuse, and trouble-making children who will not do well in life.

Only a benign eugenics program can cure this problem in a civilized society.  By that I mean sterilize the stupid of all races so they cannot procreate more of their kind.  Procreating a stupid child knowingly or negligently should become a kind of crime against humanity.  It certainly constitutes a crime against the child.  So, why should stupid parents think they have the right to do it?  You got it - they're stupid.  So, we can rely on them to make stupid choices followed by stupid actions.

In Africa Negroes try to cure that problem with internecine genocidal wars in which they slaughter a million or more people every year.  The homicide rate in Africa stands higher than the rate in any other continent. Read this Wikipedia article for corroboration:

And, as Trayvon Martin's behavior and the associated Negro outrage over his deserved killing testify, US Negroes lean in the direction of genocide against US Caucasians.  That of course, should they accomplish it, will only compound their problems.  Any greatness the USA enjoys now derived from the contributions of its Caucasian component over hundreds of years, in spite of, not because of, its Negro component.  I neglect to cite exceptions to this fact, even though exceptions exist, because the exceptions are not the point.  

I make this point:  
Unfounded Negro outrage over Martin's deserved killing tends to lead to STUPID, civilization-destroying behavior.   
It hardly makes sense for Negroes to rampage against Caucasians when they have become 18% Caucasian through miscegenation and Caucasian contribution to their average IQ has lifted them a standard deviation above the moron level of stupidity of their Africa cousins.

But as I have tried to point out, stupid behavior characterizes the Negro race in the USA BECAUSE it US Negroes have an average IQ of 85, so low that half its members cannot graduate from high school, and many more than that behave irresponsibly because of deficient parenting.  We cannot expect "good" parenting from stupid people.

Stupidity Leads to Hate Crimes

Hate crimes become the natural byproduct of low intelligence.  The reason for hate crimes lies in the lack of understanding that accompanies stupidity.  The stupid often don’t realize that other important facts exist which they do not yet know.  They often don’t even recognize relevant facts as having relevance.  And they naturally tend to arrive at wrong conclusions, make wrong and harmful or irresponsible decisions, and engage in wrong actions.  Their actions often make matters worse, rather than solving problems that they cannot understand.

The stupid become putty in the hands of demagogues and racial leaders who want to use the masses of stupid people as a weapon to force society or government to give in to their whims. 

I see as crystal clear examples of demagogues such outfits and leaders as the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), the Student Non-Violent Coordinating Committee, the Rainbow Coalition, Martin Luther King, Ralph Abernathy, Malcolm X, Louis Farrakhan, Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Charlie Rangel, and Sheila Jackson Lee to name just a few. 

I believe most of these high-handed charlatans mislead stupid and gullible Negroes into thinking “Whitey” abuses them at every turn.  In reality, the stupidity of Negroes (like the stupidity of members of any other racial group, including Caucasians) constitutes the greatest source of the abuse they suffer.  The demagogues promise to work for the stupid Negroes by making laws that protect them from Whitey or give them a free ride through welfare benefits, and especially by punishing Whitey for treating Negroes in general badly.

I see some merit in the efforts of those leaders, but like the stupid Negroes they claim to serve, they also act stupidly by offering solutions that only make the Negro dilemma worse rather than better.  The demagogues convince Negroes of all kinds that Whitey is out to get them and wants to hold them down.  That generally has little truth to it.

One finds the real truth on the adage that one cannot make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear.  Society can do nothing to make stupid people smarter.  Society can only prevent the procreation of the stupid through eugenics programs that breed the stupid out of existence.  Or do what stupid African tribes do:  slaughter them.  That, of course, constitutes a hate crime that one should not commit.

But there lies an important point.  Dealing with and accommodating the stupid who run around loose in America becomes profoundly frustrating because the stupid bear watching at all times, lest they do stupid, destructive things, like committing hate crimes such as rampages and mayhem against members of other racial groups. That reality begs for some solution other than allowing them to run around without supervision.
I have determined that the USA contains upwards of 79 million stupid people (IQ below 85, can’t even graduate from high school).

·         Caucasians - 34 million
·         Non-Caucasian Hispanics - 24 million
·         Negroes - 21 million

Of the above, Negro males have the highest average testosterone levels, making them generally more aggressive.  That high aggression combined with stupidity makes them dangerous.  And that explains the rampant Negro hostility in the Zimmerman acquittal.

It also explains why stupid Negroes frustrated what they consider injustice in the Zimmerman acquittal seems to suggest to them that they should commit hate crimes against any or all Caucasians to get even. 

Some Negro pundits stupidly or dishonestly denounce society’s general contempt for Negro men.  Such blatant intellectual dishonesty prevents them from denouncing the stereotypically contemptible behavior of Negro men.  Some may loudly and illogically proclaim from their bully pulpits that the jury should have convicted Zimmerman because of the centuries of abuse Negroes suffered at the hands of Caucasian slavers and slave owners.  The intellectual dishonesty of such pundits prevents them from denouncing the Africa Negroes who captured and enslaved Negroes from other tribes and SOLD those fellow Negroes into slavery to begin with.

While this should not surprise anyone, it does suggest that society should not just sit back on its heels and do nothing at all to stifle violent, unjust, and irrational hate crimes by stupid Negroes against innocent Caucasians.

Readers with any sense will take this as their cue to write their legislators and demand whatever practical action will bring a screeching halt to unfounded racial violence, even if it means changing the US Constitution to outlaw unsupervised stupidity and outlaw procreation of the stupid.  Procreating stupid children and failing to supervise them in adulthood makes no civilizational sense at all in an advanced industrialized nation like the USA.

The New Martin-Zimmerman Struggle

The US Attorney General has announced he intends for the Department of Justice to reopen the investigation against Zimmerman in the ridiculous hope of finding some Zimmerman race-related violation of Martin’s civil rights.  And Martin’s parents likewise hope to win a wrongful death lawsuit against Zimmerman.  Sensible Americans realize that the racial hatred and financial/political gain motivates the legal actions of Martin’s Negro parents and the Negro US Attorney General against Zimmerman.  And of course, the bulk of America’s interested Negroes protest that the mostly-Caucasian jurors proclaimed the Caucasian Zimmerman non-guilty because they held a racial bias against the Negro Martin.

The Attorney General’s minions will find nothing as a basis for getting a grand jury to indict Zimmerman, even though everyone knows the DOJ can easily get any grand jury to indict a ham sandwich, so to speak. The DOJ would have to prove Zimmerman went into the night with racial hatred on his mind and attacked Martin because of Martin’s race.  Such proof does not exist, so I predict that the DOJ will never get a conviction of Zimmerman.

If Martin's parents stupidly intend to sue George Zimmerman for wrongful death of their son, even though they know Zimmerman killed him righteously in self-defense, and even they know that Martin DESERVED to die under the circumstances, then they deserve what they will probably get in a fair and just court:  NOTHING.

But Zimmerman should sue Martin's parents and seek compensatory damages for having to tolerate the following:
  • ·   Martin's abuse and attempted murder,
  • ·   The lawsuit by Martin's parents, and
  • ·   The vile and unjust outrage of the bulk of the Negro pundits and Negro population of America who have anything to say about this matter. 
I believe Zimmerman has a good chance of winning such a lawsuit.

Stereotyping Does Not Constitute Racial Prejudice

People cannot help stereotyping people of different racial groups.  A stereotype simply represents an average discernable physical, mental, or behavioral characteristic.  The stereotyping does not mean that the stereotyper feels any prejudice against the person or persons they have stereotyped.  It means that without knowing that person more intimately, the stereotyper has only the stereotype by which to anticipate behavior of and prepare to interact with the stereotyped person.  That does NOT constitute racial prejudice.  It constitutes an exercise of common sense. 

That explains why pundits from the President on down have to warn America’s angry Negroes not to become violent.  They should have enough sense to recognize the jury’s acquittal of Zimmerman as righteous, and to remain peaceable on their own.  Apparently pundits realize that, stereotypically, many of them they don’t.

# # #

The author, Bob Hurt, retired from the computer industry in 2002 and became an independent student, analyst, and philosopher of law, politics, and civilization.  He plays country and classical guitar, enjoys family life, and writes commentaries on topics that interest him to his blogs.  If you wish to comment on the above article by writing to him personally, please do so with love and respect.  Bob Hurt will attempt to answer sincere, thoughtful, polite correspondence.
Bob Hurt         Blog 1 2 3   f  t  
2460 Persian Drive #70
Clearwater, FL 33763
Email; Call: (727) 669-5511
Law Studies: Donate   
Learn to Litigate with Jurisdictionary