Why black men have a bigger penis

[Count Sudoku]

Because whites and Asians had to develop a higher level of technology just to survive. Then one thing led to another....

Meanwhile Africans just kept on keepin' on. Doing things the way they always had. Until the whites finally returned and rounded them up as slaves.

It's pretty much the same pattern responsible for empires rising and falling throughout human history. A large relatively successful group soon becomes fat and happy. They stop progressing. Meanwhile the barbarians must accept change just to survive. Ultimately they return and use the skills they've developed to destroy those who once oppressed them and a new empire is born. Then repeat, ad infinitum.

Uh huh. Africans didn't invent the wheel or cook meat with fire because they were happy with the way things were. It is normal of everyone to want a higher standard of living and make life easier through technology...(well except for some religious nuts).

You are right about societies becoming fat and happy and being overrun by barbarians though, it's happening to us while we speak. Societies aren't usually wiped out by other societies, they commit suicide through liberalism.

[cole grey]

Uh huh. Africans didn't invent the wheel or cook meat with fire

Real smart - or maybe we were able to use fire in africa for about 700,000 years.

The researchers think the clusters of burnt artefacts, which date to between 790,000 and 690,000 years ago, indicate the sites of ancient camp fires, or hearths, made by either Homo erectus or Homo ergaster.
It could have been a primitive form of Homo sapiens, they say, but other researchers consider this improbable.
"I believe fire was a very advantageous technology which empowered these humans," co-author Nira Alperson, of the Hebrew University in Jerusalem, Israel, told BBC News Online.
Some researchers believe the control of fire enabled dramatic changes in human diet, the ability to defend social groups against wild animals and aided social interaction.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/3670017.stm

[cole grey]

It's kind of interesting how you work, cole.
If you find a reason to doubt an idea you don't like, no matter how small it is, it's big enough to completely discount the idea.

Isn't being completely contradicted in your false analysis of me enough to keep you from spouting off? Apparently not. Unfortunately, since you can provide me no specific evidence to disprove, as with the claim of "dishonesty", I can't hand you your ass. Don't analyze me, you don't have enough information or analytical ability to do it well, so just don't.
If you find a reason, however fantastic and unfounded, you can follow your illogical, unscientific idea. Go ahead.

Now we've been presenting before you a lot of data that convincingly support our point.

You present data that I have explained to you is not able to be used to prove your point convincingly.

You do it every time and none of the information gets through to you at all. Did you learn anything? What my question is, do you read our data and scientific articles that support our arguments and then promptly forget it?

How could I respond with specifics from deep within all the propaganda you have provided without reading it and analyzing it? If you want to send me something that will be able to affect my ideas, present a scientific article.

I know if I were in your position, after time when the evidence piles on itself, it would begin to have an effect on me. Is your opinion the exact same now as it was before you began posting in this thread?

After ten thousand michelson morley experiments in the barn with 70% success rates, should doubters change their opinion? No.

If you were in my position, you wouldn't be a racist, and you would be able to analyze the information properly. I have nothing to lose if blacks are shown to be inferior, I am not black. The racists however are fighting to save their (your)battered egos, creating a powerful reason to hold on to their (your)ideas.
Who is a more honest judge, the unaffected person, or the person who is personally involved in the struggle?

[cole grey]

Some of the people who agree with me were flaming liberals that thought exactly as you do until realilty shattered their fairytale world.

So, you convinced people who believed in a (simplistic) fairytale world, to believe in a different (simplistic) fairytale world.
Smashing success.
You took some followers of propaganda and gave them different propaganda, and convinced them, and that makes your propaganda correct? That is insane.

[Count Sudoku]

So, you convinced people who believed in a (simplistic) fairytale world, to believe in a different (simplistic) fairytale world.
Smashing success.
You took some followers of propaganda and gave them different propaganda, and convinced them, and that makes your propaganda correct? That is insane.

No! They believed your propaganda and then learned reality from the real world. For example...

http://www.city-journal.org/html/13_1_how_i_joined.html

How I Joined Teach for America—and Got Sued for $20 Million

Joshua Kaplowitz

It was May 2000, and the guy at Al Gore’s polling firm seemed baffled. A Yale political-science major, I’d already walked away from a high-paying consulting job a few weeks earlier, and now I was walking away from a job working on a presidential campaign to do . . . what?

Well, when push came to shove, I didn’t want to devote my life to helping the rich get richer or crunching numbers to see what views were most popular for the vice president to adopt. This wasn’t what my 17 years of education were for.

My doctor parents had drummed into me that education was the key to every door, the one thing they couldn’t take away from my ancestors during pogroms and persecutions. They had also filled me with a strong sense of social justice. I couldn’t help feeling guilty dismay when I thought of the millions of kids who’d never even tasted the great teaching—not to mention the supportive family—I’d enjoyed for my entire life.

I told the Al Gore guy, “Thanks, but no thanks.” Weird as he might have thought it, I had decided to teach in an inner-city school.

Five weeks later, I found myself steering my parents’ old Volvo off R Street and into a one-block cul-de-sac. There it was: Emery Elementary School, a 1950s-ugly building tucked behind a dead-end street—an apt metaphor, I thought, for the lives of many of the children in this almost all-black neighborhood a mile north of the U.S. Capitol in Washington. I had seen signs of inner-city blight all over the neighborhood, from the grown men who skulked in the afternoon streets to the bulletproof glass that sealed off the cashier at the local Kentucky Fried Chicken. This was the “other half” of Washington, the part of the city I had missed during my grade-school field trips to the Smithsonian and my two summers as a Capitol Hill intern.

I parked the car and bounded into the main office to say hi to Mr. Bledsoe, the interim principal who had hired me a few weeks before. As he showed me around the clean but bare halls, my head filled with visions of my students happily painting imaginative murals under my artistic direction. I peered through windows into classrooms, where students were bent over their desks, quietly filling out worksheets. I smiled to myself as I imagined the creative lessons I would give to these children, who had never had a dynamic young teacher to get them excited about scholarship the way I knew I could. Their minds were like kindling, I reflected; all they needed was a spark to ignite a love of learning that would lift them above the drugs, violence, and poverty. The spark, I hoped, would be me.

As the tour ended and I was about to leave, Mr. Bledsoe pulled me aside. “The one thing you need to do above all else is to have your children under control. Once you have done that, you’ll be fine.”

Fine. But as I learned to my great cost, that was easier said than done.

I was supposed to pick up that skill over the summer from Teach for America (TFA), an organization, affiliated with AmeriCorps, that places young people with no ed-school background, and usually just out of college, in disadvantaged school districts suffering from teacher shortages. Applicants request placement in one of over a dozen rural and urban school districts around the country that contract with TFA, and I got my first choice, in the city I hoped to live in for the rest of my life.

Teach for America conducts an intensive five-week training program for its inductees during the summer before they start teaching. My year, this “teacher boot camp” took place in Houston. It was there that I quickly figured out that enthusiasm and creativity alone wouldn’t suffice in an inner-city classroom. I was part of a tag team of four recruits teaching a summer-school class of low-income fourth-graders. Even in one- to two-hour blocks of teaching, I quickly realized that my best-planned, most imaginative lessons fell apart if I didn’t have control of my students.

In the seminars we attended when we weren’t teaching, I learned the basics of lesson planning and teaching theory. I also internalized the TFA philosophy of high expectations, the idea that if you set a rigorous academic course, all students will rise to meet the challenge.

But the training program skimped on actual teaching and classroom-management techniques, instead overwhelming us with sensitivity training. My group spent hours on an activity where everyone stood in a line and then took steps forward or backward based on whether we were the oppressor or the oppressed in the categories of race, income, and religion. The program had a college bull session, rather than professional, atmosphere. And it had a college-style party line: I heard of two or three trainees being threatened with expulsion for expressing in their discussion groups politically incorrect views about inner-city poverty—for example, that families and culture, not economics, may be the root cause of the achievement gap.

Nothing in the program simulated what I soon learned to be the life of a teacher. Though I didn’t know it, I was completely ill equipped when I stepped into my own fifth-grade classroom at Emery Elementary in September 2000.

The year before I taught, a popular veteran principal had been dismissed without explanation. Mr. Bledsoe finished out the rest of the year on an interim basis, hired me and four other Teach for America teachers, and then turned over the reins to a woman named V. Lisa Savoy. Ms. Savoy had been an assistant principal at the District’s infamous Anacostia High School, in Washington’s equivalent of the South Bronx. Before the start of school, she met with her four first-year TFA teachers to assure us that we would be well supported, and that if we needed anything we should just ask. Most of my veteran colleagues, 90 percent of them black, also seemed helpful, though a few showed flickers of disdain for us eager, young white teachers. By the time school opened, I was thrilled to start molding the brains of my children.

My optimism and naiveté evaporated within hours. I tried my best to be strict and set limits with my new students; but I wore my inexperience on my sleeve, and several of the kids jumped at the opportunity to misbehave. I could see clearly enough that the vast majority of my fifth-graders genuinely wanted to learn—but all it took to subvert the whole enterprise were a few cutups.

On a typical day, DeAngelo (a pseudonym, as are the other children’s names in this and the next paragraph) would throw a wad of paper in the middle of a lesson. Whether I disciplined him or ignored him, his actions would cause Kanisha to scream like an air-raid siren. In response, Lamond would get up, walk across the room, and try to slap Kanisha. Within one minute, the whole class was lost in a sea of noise and fists. I felt profoundly sorry for the majority of my students, whose education was being hijacked. Their plaintive cries punctuated the din: “Quiet everyone! Mr. Kaplowitz is trying to teach!”

Ayisha was my most gifted student. The daughter of Senegalese immigrants, she would tolerantly roll her eyes as Darnetta cut up for the ninth time in one hour, patiently waiting for the day when my class would settle down. Joseph was a brilliant writer who struggled mightily in math. When he needed help with a division problem, I tried to give him as much attention as I could, before three students wandering around the room inevitably distracted me. Eventually, I settled on tutoring him after school. Twenty more students’ educations were sabotaged, each kid with specific needs that I couldn’t attend to, because I was too busy putting out fires. Though I poured my heart into inventive lessons and activities throughout the entire year, they almost always fell apart in the face of my students’ disrespect and indifference.

To gain control, I tried imposing the kinds of consequences that the classroom-management handbooks recommend. None worked. My classroom was too small to give my students “time out.” I tried to take away their recess, but depriving them of their one sanctioned time to blow off steam just increased their penchant to use my classroom as a playground. When I called parents, they were often mistrustful and tended to question or even disbelieve outright what I told them about their children. It was sometimes worse when they believed me, though; the tenth time I heard a mother swear that her child was going to “get a beating for this one,” I almost decided not to call parents. By contrast, I saw immediate behavioral and academic improvement in students whose parents had come to trust me.

I quickly learned from such experiences how essential parental support is in determining whether a school succeeds in educating a child. And of course, parental support not just of the teachers but of the kids: as I came to know my students better, I saw that those who had seen violence, neglect, or drug abuse at home were usually the uncontrollable ones, while my best-behaved, hardest-working kids were typically those with the most nurturing home environments.

Being a white teacher in a mostly black school unquestionably hindered my ability to teach. Certain students hurled racial slurs with impunity; several of their parents intimated to my colleagues that they didn’t think a white teacher had any business teaching their children—and a number of my colleagues agreed. One parent who was also a teacher’s aide threatened to “kick my white ass” in front of my class and received no punishment from the principal, beyond being told to stay out of my classroom. The failure of the principal, parents, and teachers to react more decisively to racist disrespect emboldened students to behave worse. Such poisonous bigotry directed at a black teacher at a mostly white school would of course have created a federal case.

Still, other colleagues, friendly and supportive, helped me with my discipline problems. They let me send unruly students to their classrooms for brief periods of time to cool off, allowing me to teach the rest of my class effectively. But when I turned to my school administration for similar help, I was much less fortunate.

I had read that successful schools have chief executives who immerse themselves in the everyday operations of the institution, set clear expectations for the student body, recognize and support energetic and creative teachers, and foster constructive relationships with parents. Successful principals usually are mavericks, too, who skirt stupid bureaucracy to do what is best for the children. Emery’s Principal Savoy sure didn’t fit this model.

To start with, from all that I could see, she seemed mostly to stay in her office, instead of mingling with students and observing classes, most of which were up at least one flight of stairs, perhaps a disincentive for so heavy a woman. Furthermore, I saw from the first month that she generally gave delinquents no more than a stern talking-to, followed by a pat on the back, rather than suspensions, detentions, or any other meaningful punishment. The threat of sending a student to the office was thus rendered toothless.

Worse, Ms. Savoy effectively undermined my classroom-management efforts. She forbade me from sending students to other teachers—the one tactic that had any noticeable effect. Exiling my four worst students had produced a vast improvement in the conduct of the remainder of my class. But Ms. Savoy was adamant, insisting that the school district required me to teach all my children, all the time, in the “least restrictive” environment. This was just the first instance of Ms. Savoy blocking me with a litany of D.C. Public Schools regulations, as she regularly frustrated my colleagues on disciplinary issues.

Some of Ms. Savoy’s actions defied explanation. She more than once called me to her office in the middle of my lessons to lecture me on how bad a teacher I was—well before her single visit to observe me in my classroom. She filled my personnel file with lengthy memos articulating her criticisms. I eventually concluded that Ms. Savoy tended similarly to trouble any teacher, experienced or novice, who rocked the boat.

And in November I really rocked it. By then, despite mounting tension with Ms. Savoy, and despite the pandemonium that continued to ravage my teaching efforts, I had managed—painstakingly—to build a rapport with my fifth-graders. I felt I was turning a corner. I thought that my students (and their parents) would completely shape up once they saw their abysmal first report cards. D.C. Public Schools grade kids on a highly subjective 1 to 4 scale, 4 being the highest. Most of my students entered fifth grade with grave academic deficiencies, yet their cumulative records revealed fair to excellent grades, making clear that social promotion was standard practice at Emery. I wasn’t playing along. I had given regular tests and quizzes that first semester, and most of my students had earned straight 1s by any rational measure. True to the credo of high expectations, I would give them the grades they earned.

I submitted my report cards to Ms. Savoy, who insisted that my grades were “too low” and demanded that I raise them immediately. I offered to show her all of my students’ work portfolios; but she demurred, informing me that the law obliged me to pass a certain percentage of my students. I paid no attention, gave my students the grades they deserved, and patiently explained to every parent that their child’s grades would improve once he or she started behaving in class and doing the assigned lessons. For this, Ms. Savoy cited me for insubordination.

Just after the New Year, Ms. Savoy informed me that she was switching me from fifth grade to second grade; the veteran second-grade teacher would then take over my fifth-graders. Her justification was that I would be able to control younger students more effectively—though I assumed she thought that I could wreak less disruption with the younger kids, who were relatively flunk-proof.

From the start, I tried my best to combat understandable parental resentment that their experienced teacher was being yanked out and replaced by me, a first-year teacher with notoriously poor classroom-management skills. I wrote letters home describing my ambitious plans, called parents with enthusiastic words about their children, and walked my students home after school to increase my visibility in the neighborhood.

Unfortunately, I never got a chance to show that I was in control. Unbelievable as it sounds, my second-graders were even wilder than my fifth-graders. Just as before, a majority of kids genuinely wanted to learn, but the antics of a few spun my entire class into chaos. This time, though, my troublemakers were even more immature and disruptive, ranging from a boy who roamed around the room punching his classmates and threatening to kill himself to a borderline–mentally retarded student, who would throw crumpled wads of paper all day. I was so busy trying to quell anarchy that I never had the chance to get to know my new students, let alone teach them anything.

Ms. Savoy had abandoned all pretense of administrative support by this point. Nearly every student I sent to the office returned within minutes.

This lack of consequences encouraged a level of violence I never could have imagined among any students, let alone second-graders. Fights broke out daily—not just during recess or bathroom breaks but also in the middle of lessons. And this wasn’t just playful shoving: we’re talking fists flying, hair yanked, heads slammed against lockers.

When I asked other teachers to come help me stop a fight, they shook their heads and reminded me that D.C. Public Schools banned teachers from laying hands on students for any reason, even to protect other children. When a fight brewed, I was faced with a Catch-22. I could call the office and wait ten minutes for the security guard to arrive, by which point blood could have been shed and students injured. Or I could intervene physically, in violation of school policy.

Believe me, you have to be made of iron, or something other than flesh and blood, to stand by passively while some enraged child is trying to inflict real harm on another eight-year-old. I couldn’t do it. And each time I let normal human instinct get the best of me and broke up a fight, one of the combatants would go home and fabricate a story about how I had hurt him or her. The parent, already suspicious of me, would report this accusation to Ms. Savoy, who would in turn call in a private investigative firm employed by D.C. Public Schools. Investigators would come to Emery and interview me, as well as several students whom the security guard thought might tell the truth about the alleged incident of corporal punishment.

I had previously heard of three other teachers at Emery that year who were being investigated for corporal punishment. When I talked to them—they were all experienced male teachers—they heatedly protested their innocence and bitterly complained about Ms. Savoy’s handling of the situation. Now that I had joined the club, I began to understand their fears and frustrations.

To define as “corporal punishment” the mere physical separation of two combatants not only puts students at risk but also gives children unconscionable power over teachers who choose to intervene. False allegations against me and other teachers snowballed, as certain students realized that they had the perfect tool for getting their teacher in deep trouble. As I began to be investigated on almost a weekly basis, parents came to school to berate and threaten me—naturally, without reprisals from the administration. One day, a rather large father came up to me after school and told me he was going to “get me” if he heard that I put my hands on his daughter one more time. Forget the fact that I had pulled her off of a boy whom she was clobbering at the time.

With such a weak disciplinary tone set by the administration, by late February the whole school atmosphere had devolved into chaos. Gangs of students roamed the halls at will. You could hear screaming from every classroom—from students and teachers alike. Including me, four teachers (or 20 percent of the faculty) were under investigation on bogus corporal-punishment charges, including a fourth-grade instructor whose skills I greatly respected. The veteran teachers constantly lamented that things were better the previous year, when the principal ran a tight disciplinary ship, and the many good instructors were able to do their job.

It was nearly March, and the Stanford-9 standardized tests, the results of which determine a principal’s success in D.C. Public Schools, were imminent. Ms. Savoy unexpectedly instituted a policy allowing teachers to ship their two or three most disruptive students to the computer lab to be warehoused and supervised by teachers’ aides. My classroom’s behavior and attentiveness improved dramatically for two weeks. Unfortunately, Ms. Savoy abandoned this plan the instant the standardized tests had passed.
After that, my classroom became more of a gladiatorial venue than a place of learning. Fights erupted hourly; no student was immune. The last three months were a blur of violence, but several incidents particularly stand out. One week, two of my emotionally disturbed boys went on a binge of sexual harassment, making lewd gestures and grabbing girls’ buttocks—yes, seven- and eight-year-olds. On another occasion, three students piled on top of one of their peers and were punching him with their fists before I intervened. My students were not even afraid to try to hurt me: two boys spent a month throwing pencils at me in the middle of lessons; another child slugged me in the gut.

But for Ms. Savoy, apparently I was the problem. It seemed to me that she was readier to launch investigations when a student or parent made an accusation against me than to help me out when my students were acting up.

Faced with a series of corporal-punishment charges, no administrative support, and no hope of controlling my second-grade class in the foreseeable future, I should have packed up and left midyear. Surely there were other schools, even inner-city ones, where I could have developed and succeeded as a teacher.

Why did I stay on? Part of the answer lay in my own desperate desire not to fail. I felt that if I just worked harder, I could turn my children around and get them to learn. Another part of the answer was Teach for America’s having instilled in each corps member the idea that you have made a commitment to the children and that you must stick with them at all costs, no matter how much your school is falling apart. Because of this mentality, my TFA friends and I put up with nonsense from our schools and our students that few regular teachers would have tolerated.

The three-person TFA-D.C. staff was stretched too thin to support any of us. When I told them about the debacle at Emery, the D.C. program directors told me to keep my chin up and work harder. They wouldn’t transfer me to another TFA-affiliated elementary school, and pooh-poohed the idea that I had it worse than anyone else in the program. So I was stuck at Emery, unwilling to incur the disgrace that came with quitting.

Fate made the decision for me.

Four days before the end of my first year, I was still planning to return to Emery in the fall. The rumor was that Ms. Savoy would be replaced. With her gone, I thought, I could start fresh and use my hard-won battlefield experience to make a positive difference in underprivileged children’s lives.

The afternoon of June 13 started with the usual mixture of disorder and disrespect. This time, a boy named Raynard, a particularly difficult child, whom I had seen punch other students and throw things in the past, was repeating over and over, “I got to go to the bathroom. I need some water.” The rest of the class tittered as I told him in my sternest teacher voice that we would be having a class bathroom break once everyone was quiet and in his seat.

“I got to go to the bathroom. I need some water.”

Frustrated, I led him to the classroom door with my hand on the small of his back. I nudged him into the hall and closed the door. He would probably spend the remainder of the day roaming the halls with the rest of the troublemakers at Emery, but at least he would be out of sight, so I could get the rest of my class under control. I had given up on teaching for the rest of the day; my class was slated to watch a movie with Ms. Perkins’s first-graders across the hall.

Once Raynard left, I guided my students through a characteristically raucous bathroom break and filed them into Ms. Perkins’s room, where they lapsed into a rare TV-induced calm.

After 15 minutes, the school security guard appeared at the door and beckoned for me. My stomach hit the floor, as I guessed what this meant: yet another corporal-punishment charge. But this time was different. Chaos reigned in the main entranceway as police officers swarmed into the building. Raynard’s mother, I was told, had been in school for a meeting to place her son in a class for emotionally disturbed children. Raynard had told her that I had violently shoved him in the chest out the door of my classroom, injuring his head and back. His mother had dialed 911 and summoned the cops and the fire department. The police hustled me into the principal’s office, where I sat in bewilderment and desperately denied I had hurt Raynard in any way.

In the blink of an afternoon, my search for the perfect lesson plan gave way to my search for the perfect lawyer. I was lucky that my parents could afford Hank Asbill, a highly regarded Washington defense attorney.

Two months later, Raynard’s mother filed a $20 million lawsuit against the school district, Ms. Savoy, and myself—and the D.C. police charged me with a misdemeanor count of simple assault against my former student. Thus ended my first and last year as a public school teacher.

After I was charged, Hank Asbill chose a day in early September for me to turn myself in at the District 5 police station near Emery and receive a trial date. The whole ordeal was supposed to take about six hours—but five minutes after I was admitted into custody, the two planes hit the World Trade Center. After the third plane crashed into the Pentagon, the D.C. courts shut down. It was only after 33 hours in jail that I saw daylight again, on September 12.

My criminal trial spanned six days in early March of 2002. It was agonizing watching several former students testifying against me, not to mention facing the very real prospect of spending time in the D.C. jail. The children’s stories as to what happened on June 13 were wildly inconsistent—not surprising, considering that the layout of my classroom precluded them from witnessing anything Raynard had alleged. Hank Asbill countered with a string of character witnesses, friends who attested to my peaceful nature and law-abiding ways, as well as other teachers at Emery who reported on the brutal atmosphere of the school. Hank then brought me to the stand to explain what had actually happened, and he also brought to light Raynard’s medical records from June 13, which showed that the emergency-room doctors had found no evidence of any injury. Fortunately, we drew a rational, deliberative judge, unswayed by the case’s racially charged nature: a poor black kid against a rich white Ivy Leaguer. He found me not guilty, touching off an outpouring of relief from my friends and former colleagues and—not least—me.

My elation was short-lived. As I had surmised, this whole case finally came down to money. Even after my acquittal, even after the accuracy of Raynard’s story had been seriously undermined, his mother and her big-firm lawyers aggressively pursued multi-million-dollar damage claims on the civil side. Yet even as the lawsuit dragged on and the legal cloud over me caused me to lose a job opportunity I really wanted, I refused to entertain Raynard’s mother’s offers to settle the case by my paying her $200,000—a demand that ultimately diminished to $40,000. The school system had no such scruples; it settled the mother’s tort claim in October 2002 for $75,000 (plus $15,000 from the teachers’ union’s insurance company—chump change compared with the cost of defending the litigation). It wasn’t $20 million, but it was still more money than I imagine this woman had seen in her life—a pretty good payout and hardly deterrence to other parents in the neighborhood who felt entitled to shanghai the system.

I stayed in touch with several of my more supportive colleagues and parents, who have told me that Emery, although it has a new principal, is just as out of control two years after I taught there. Veteran teachers with nowhere else to go, they say, are giving up all pretense of teaching; their goal is to make it through the end of each year. Young teachers like my TFA colleagues are staying for a year or two and moving on to private, charter, or suburban schools, or to new careers.

In all the reading and talking I’ve done to try to make sense out of what happened to me, I’ve learned that Emery is hardly unique. Numerous new friends and acquaintances who have taught in D.C.’s inner-city schools—some from Teach for America, some not—report the same outrageous discipline problems that turned them from educators into U.N. peacekeepers.

I’ve learned that an epidemic of violence is raging in elementary schools nationwide, not just in D.C. A recent Philadelphia Inquirer article details a familiar pattern—kindergartners punching pregnant teachers, third-graders hitting their instructors with rulers. Pennsylvania and New Jersey have reported nearly 30 percent increases in elementary school violence since 1999, and many school districts have established special disciplinary K–6 schools. In New York City, according to the New York Post, some 60 teachers recently demonstrated against out-of-control pupil mayhem, chanting, “Hey, hey, ho, ho; violent students must go.” Kids who stab each other, use teachers as shields in fights, bang on doors to disrupt classes, and threaten to “kick out that baby” from a pregnant teacher have created a “climate of terror,” the Post reports.

Several of my new acquaintances in the Washington schools told me of facing completely fabricated corporal-punishment allegations, as I did. Some even faced criminal charges. Washington teachers’ union officials won’t give me hard numbers, but they intimate that each year they are flooded with corporal-punishment or related charges against teachers, most of which get settled without the media ever learning of this disturbing new trend. It is a state of affairs that Philip K. Howard vividly describes in his recent The Collapse of the Common Good: parents sue teachers and principals for suspending their children, for allegedly meting out corporal punishment, and for giving failing marks. As a result, educators are afraid to penalize misbehaving students or give students grades that reflect the work they do. The real victims are the majority of children whose education is being commandeered by their out-of-control classmates.

I’ve come to believe that the most unruly and violent children should go to alternative schools designed to handle students with chronic behavior problems. A school with a more military structure can do no worse for those children than a permissive mainstream school, and it spares the majority of kids the injustice of having their education fall victim to the chaos wreaked by a small minority.

I know for sure that inner-city schools don’t have to be hellholes like Emery and its District of Columbia brethren, with their poor administration and lack of parental support, their misguided focus on children’s rights, their anti-white racism, and their lawsuit-crazed culture. Some of my closest TFA friends, thrilled to be liberated from the D.C. system, went on to teach at D.C. charter schools, where they really can make a difference in underprivileged children’s lives. For example, at Paul Junior High School, which serves students with the same economic and cultural background as those at Emery, the principal’s tough approach to discipline fosters a serious atmosphere of scholarship, and parents are held accountable, because the principal can kick their children back to the public school system if they refuse to cooperate. A friend who works at the Hyde School, which emphasizes character education (and sits directly across a field from Emery), tells me that this charter school is quiet and orderly, the teachers are happy, and the children are achieving at a much higher level—so much higher that several of the best students at Emery who transferred to Hyde nearly flunked out of their new school.

It should come as no surprise that students are leaving Emery in droves, in hopes of enrolling in this and other alternative schools. Enrollment, 411 when I was there, now is about 350. If things don’t change, it will soon be—and should be—zero.

[francois]

The Jim Twins from Ohio
(Excerpt from a U.S. newspaper)

Jim Lewis and Jim Springer first met February 9, 1979 after 39 years of being separated. They were the rarest of twins, and most prized by researchers: identical twins who had been separated at birth, were raised in different families, and had grown to adulthood completely unaware of each other's existence. When Jim Lewis finally found his twin brother, Jim Springer, after years of searching through court records, he knew their unwed mother had put them up for adoption shortly after giving birth.

When the two first met, Lewis described it as "like looking into a mirror." For starters, both had the same first name. They were physically identical. But when they got talking, the similarities were astounding. Both had childhood dogs named Toy. Both had been nail biters and fretful sleepers. Both had migraines. Both had married first wives names Linda, second wives named Betty. Lewis named his first son James Allen, Springer named his James Alan. For years, they both had taken holidays on the same Florida beach. They both drank Miller Lite, smoked Salem cigarettes, loved stock car racing, disliked baseball, left regular love notes to their wives, made doll furniture in their basements, and had added circular white benches around the trees in their backyards. Their IQs, habits, facial expressions, brain waves, heartbeats, and handwriting were nearly identical. The Jim twins lived apart but died on the same day, from the same illness.

[cole grey]

The Jim Twins from Ohio The Jim twins lived apart but died on the same day, from the same illness.

No scientist would deny that genetics of families have strong effects on development.
It is just that, by the time genetic factors have been diffused thoughout a population as diverse as a racial group, the factors are much less important, maybe completely negligible, but certainly not able to account for the vast differences you attribute solely to genetics.


AND SUDOKU - The common practice on this forum is NOT to post whole articles, but rather point out the most informative parts, and a link to allow people to get the rest. It is annoying, but I see you may not have had time to pick up on that yet, please do so.
Also, "one man's story" articles are not science, but I appreciate your effort.
Did you post it to support my point?

"I quickly learned from such experiences how essential parental support is in determining whether a school succeeds in educating a child."

[francois]

It is just that, by the time genetic factors have been diffused thoughout a population as diverse as a racial group, the factors are much less important, maybe completely negligible, but certainly not able to account for the vast differences you attribute solely to genetics.

Do you think crime statistics support that sentiment?
Nevermind. Crime has nothing to do with genetics--it's all socioeconomics. I'm sorry. It was stupid of me to suggest such a thing.

but certainly not able to account for the vast differences you attribute solely to genetics.

cole, I never attributed anything solely to genetics. To imply something like that is just silly. My position has been that genetics play a powerful influence on a lot of things. That in no way means that I don't think environment is important.

My position has been that both genetics and environmental conditions are influential in a persons role and ability to produce in a society.
Your position has been that it's purely environmental. Genetics aren't important. Am I missing something?

[francois]

but I see you may not have had time to pick up on that yet, please do so.
Also, "one man's story" articles are not science, but I appreciate your effort.

I actually read the whole thing and it was pretty interesting. That poor guy got screwed bad. That's a truly screwed up school. However, the author says that since the whole ordeal he's researched the problem and found that the Emergy middle school where he taught is hardly a unique or isolated case. There are lots of school like it where the students abuse the teachers and the teachers get into trouble for breaking up fights. As a result, the kids can do anything they want.

It's a totally fucked up situation.

[cole grey]

My position has been that both genetics and environmental conditions are influential in a persons role and ability to produce in a society.
Your position has been that it's purely environmental. Genetics aren't important. Am I missing something?

Yes.
Of course genetics has a huge role. Put two psychotic axe murderers together to procreate, and your chances are good that you will have some tendencies against having mental health.
But don't say that a certain racial group has more "axe-murderer" genes.
Quite simple.
You are missing the fact that populations have diverse genetic input when it comes to things like personality and intellectual ceilings.

Also, you ARE DEFINITELY saying only genetic factors are important in getting the differences posted, when you reference a chart didviding the IQ scores by race, and not modifying for social factors.
If you mean to say something else, use a different chart.

p.s. - did you read this??
Originally Posted by Joshua Kaplowitz
"I quickly learned from such experiences how essential parental support is in determining whether a school succeeds in educating a child."

[francois]

You are missing the fact that populations have diverse genetic input when it comes to things like personality and intellectual ceilings.

We're concerned with averages, not nuances in personality. We're concerned about things that matter and things we can measure, like one's propensity torward violence, for example.

I don't think it's unreasonable to say blacks are very violent due at least partly to biological factors.
I don't think it's unreasonable to say whites are relatively non-violent due at least partly to biological factors.
I don't think it's unreasonable to say Orientals are very non-violent due at least partly to biological factors.
If you spend some time looking at the statistics it's pretty interesting the patterns you see.

Also, you ARE DEFINITELY saying only genetic factors are important in getting the differences posted, when you reference a chart didviding the IQ scores by race, and not modifying for social factors.

I'm not. The differences between races aren't purely genetic. There are also other things that can influence a person's ability to achieve, like a person's attitude about education for instance. That person's attitude can be influenced by his/her culture. It's not all genetics, even though those other facts are probably in one way or another impacted by genetics. Biology often shines through in culture, but not always.

p.s. - did you read this??
Originally Posted by Joshua Kaplowitz
"I quickly learned from such experiences how essential parental support is in determining whether a school succeeds in educating a child."

Yup.

[Count Sudoku]

Yes.
Of course genetics has a huge role. Put two psychotic axe murderers together to procreate, and your chances are good that you will have some tendencies against having mental health.
But don't say that a certain racial group has more "axe-murderer" genes.
Quite simple.
You are missing the fact that populations have diverse genetic input when it comes to things like personality and intellectual ceilings.

Also, you ARE DEFINITELY saying only genetic factors are important in getting the differences posted, when you reference a chart didviding the IQ scores by race, and not modifying for social factors.
If you mean to say something else, use a different chart.

p.s. - did you read this??
Originally Posted by Joshua Kaplowitz
"I quickly learned from such experiences how essential parental support is in determining whether a school succeeds in educating a child."

I read it and this Kaplowitz guy is no doubt still a flaming liberal, however my point was to give an example of a situation that would turn a flaming liberal into a racial realist.

Here's another, it's way shorter so I'll post the whole thing, it was originally done as a long rambling screed but I broke it up paragraph wise to make it a little easier to read. It's from a fired high school teacher's blog which I don't think is up anymore. The high school teacher was given death threats for "talking bad" about the students and the school in general.

Crying Wolf

Aptly titled, it's what we do best here at Regnef. In a literal sense, this could be verified via the 5 false fire alarms this week alone. 2 on Friday March 31, 2 on Thursday March 30, and 1 earlier in the week. Nothing like 30 minute breaks in the courtyard to negate the rare actual 5 day work week! (well, almost a full week - Friday was a 1/2 day). You see at Regnef, every Monday is a holiday/day off - whether Pulaski Day, Martin L. King Day, President's Day, Lincoln's birthday, Columbus Day...the list goes on and on. Ironically, I doubt that any of those we "honor" if given the option, would elect to close schools. These men were big on education. They would be the type to say "have school on Saturday to honor me". But nope - at Regnef we close the doors, and the students don't know a lick about MLK or Lincoln, DEFINITELY not a thing about Pulaski, and can't name all the presidents, let alone honor them. Naturally, this just MIGHT be the reason that students don't ever beleive they're actually in school. With so many 3 day weekends, 4 days of school doesn't seem like much to put forth effort toward. This is, of course, not counting the fact that Regnef has record low attendance on Fridays and Mondays due to "student imposed" holidays; that is, they just don't feel like coming to school.

Let me get back on track: crying wolf; the 5 false fire alarms in 1 week. Note, there were several in the previous 2 weeks as well. I'd guesstimate about a dozen or so this year alone. Not sure how much that costs the school in terms of fines, but one thing it definitely earns is the scorn of firefighters. Can you blame them? I mentioned the gathering in the courtyard during alarms. This is apparantly a new security procedure - since there have been several violent incidents this week in which they evacuated via standard routes and the usual street mob gathering ended up in an ambulance being called. As yes, I love the courtyard. I somehow doubt that evacuating 1,200 students from the building via only 3 exits to the courtyard would be the most timely way to save lives if there were a real fire, but it's the new standard. Highlights today included students smoking weed while leaning against the assistant principal's vehicle and local neighborhood gangbangers jumping the fence to get into the courtyard. Additionally, a new "trouble shooter" has been called upon to assist Regnef. The gentleman won't really say what his position is, and has no title. When asked, he said "I do whatever the principal needs". He usually walks the halls with a walkie-talkie, but you have to wonder if it's a front and he's really reporting back about the teachers. All good surveillance needs better counter surveillance. Then again, maybe he really is here to help. Time will tell.

A formal introduction to the staff might be a more professional angle to take, instead of just showing up and walking the halls. More smoke and mirrors: Regnef has a new group of tough-talking security guards in suits that mostly intimidate and bluff the students with empty threats. Nothing like calling in the cavalry in the 26th week of school to make sure the place runs as it should.How about those security cameras? They rock. The amount of fellatio performed and drugs sold in the stairwells continues to grow, since there are no cameras there and security sure won't walk the stairs. Walking/rotating patrols are not a standard security procedure here at Regnef. Instead, our guards like to sit on desks or chairs and chat on their cell phones. Their behavioral patterns are predictable and known by students; when they take lunch, when they sleep, and which guards will let you do whatever you want. Additionally, because they do not rotate, guards become friendly with students. The students give false respect in return for the favor of walking the halls, selling snacks and cd's, and treating teachers in whatever fashion they deem appropriate. (usually the same way an interrogator may treat a hostage at Gitmo or Abu-Ghraib). The guards are neighborhood locals who may be friends of the students' families, church members, or dating a relative. The loyalty is to the hood, not the school. The administration at Regnef need to understand and change this.Then again, "you get what you pay for". That was the explanation offered up by Regnef's principal in response to some teacher's laptop being stolen from a locked classroom. This guy's was the 6th of the year -all from locked classrooms. That students were recorded on camera either picking a lock or using a key for entry (believe me, they're not skilled enough to pick a lock because that skill acquisition actually requires discipline, patience, and practice). This means they have keys. Wonder who they get those from? Could it be the teachers who regularly have the students selling candy bought at wholesale for "fundraisers"? True, a rare few fundraisers are legitimate efforts at raising money for teams that are denied the basic finances to buy needed equipment. The shame is that teachers have no real knowledge as how to fundraise or win grants properly. Most times, however, there is simply an arrangement that the student will share 1/2 the profit with the supplier (teacher with a Costco card). There are teachers in schools with an army of student "salespeople" working for them who make literally thousands of dollars yearly on these ventures. How embarassing.
Back to theft at Regnef: kids with keys, security and administration with no accountability. Apparantly it was a teacher's fault last week when a borrowed LCD projector was stolen from a locked classroom. This teacher was informed of his tremendous faults, while volunteering at the school on a Sat. morning, by the principal. (This poor sap is one of those who had a laptop stolen and was told that the solution was to claim it on homeowner's insurance because the school wasn't responsible). Granted, it was passed from colleage to colleague (the library where it was checked out and to be returned to is notoriously closed or unattended) and that ain't right. But later, the LCD was mysteriously "returned". Turns out that one of the coaches, who in some abstract way feigns security guard status, errand runner for the "discipline office" (or just hangs out in there) had "borrowed" the projector from a locked classroom to watch game film with it. The reamed-out teacher is still waiting for that admission or a quasi-apology of sorts from the principal, but it won't come. And what exactly does that coach do at Regnef anyway? (besides re-locate expensive equipment without telling anyone.) No one really knows. In fact, does anyone know if any of the disciplinarians or security "experts" indeed HAVE any expertise or training? The head of discipline was a band teacher for over 20 years, until this year when appointed to head of the discipline office. That expertise must have been gained overnight or in some super-seminar. Perhaps this very well-paid official can teach Regnef's criminals how to play the trumpet, because consequences sure aren't being taught.On the security note: When the A.P. was asked today "why can't cell phones, hats, hoodies, and music players be confiscated on the way in the door when bags are scanned and students go through the metal detectors, for later retreival by parents?", the answer was: "we're doing what we can to get to June 16, those are things that maybe we'll consider for next year." Nevermind that this is a policy that can be implemented in a matter of days. Nevermind that it would likely greatly reduce these problems:- students texting or calling one another to schedule fights, fellatio, drug deals, or notifying one another as to the location of security personnel so they can be avoided.- students calling outsiders during false alarms who deliver weapons to the school - like the gun earlier this week.- students ignoring staff because they are listening to their music players- the sale of illegally copied cd's by students (and staff)- students calling their friends and baby-daddies during class.These are things staff must deal with in the halls of Regnef everyday. But instead, the administrative priority is to station staff in front of fire alarm boxes so they can't be pulled. Don't mind the fights occuring in the now-unattended classrooms, the textbooks, chalk, erasers, and people being thrown out of windows, the vandalism, or the theft of teacher items. A band-aid is better than a cure; that's the attidude at Regnef.I wonder if secretly there is no confidence that security can handle a task as simple as contraband confiscation? Or a fear that security may in fact steal the items? Or are they so worried that this may generate media attention from inconvenienced parents who have to retreive their little darling's electronics and gang-banging hoodie and hat of choice, or may attempt to hold the school liable via bogus lawsuit threats for lost or stolen items? The fact is, Regnef has no idea as to its legal procedural rights. Confiscation of contraband is one of them.And why institute a standard blue/white dress code? I mean, it's so much more fun to decipher which gang is being represented by appropriately chosen colors, teams, symbols, etc.

Amazing - 83% of the school gets government paid free or reduced (about 40 cents) breakfast/lunch, but 83% of the students at Regnef can also somehow afford $100 NBA jerseys, several pairs of gym shoes, and some really hideous fake-fur pimp-coats that look to be constructed of road kill. And there's nothing more appealing than the young ladies who wear their full pregnant bellies with pride, tiny half t-shirts proudly displaying that sexy newly attained protrusive belly button and mammaries, and the new "ink of the week". Lots of student names being tattooed on backs, necks, arms, and wrists. In case they forget who they are. And "Fuck the Ville!" "Dirty 130's run this bitch!" "GDN!" (Gangster Disciples Nation, for those less in-tuned to the local gang acronyms) At least, that's what the airbrus hed t-shirts that are allowed in Regnef say! That is, the ones that don't have pictures of handguns or serve as cotton tombstones letting us all know that "Lil' Wayne, gone but never forgotten, RIP 1993- 2000". Dress code? Bah! Regnef loves it this way! The saga continues: 2 teachers cars with tires flattened this week. 3 weeks ago, a young guy had his car window bricked (for the second time) and his door smashed. Course, his hubcaps were stolen months ago. Am I repeating myself?

And the violence! Who doesn't love a good stand-off between a teacher and a 19 year old 260 lb. special ed student (who Regnef supposedly "can't" kick out because of the SPED designation)? There's nothing like a man-child balling his fists and screaming "I'm a beat your motherfucking white bitch ass, motherfucker, I'll kill you, I will shoot your fucking ass you fucking white bitch" when a teacher asks him to evacuate the building during a fire alarm. Naturally, if that teacher were to defend himself verbally or physically, the kid's mom will be at the school, the teacher will be investigated, and that's that. There is the mistakenly held notion that "self-defense" means one must wait until the other "throws the first punch" in order to take action. This is incorrect. An individual has the legal right to defend him/herself in a hostile situation when an aggressor places the subject in a position in which immediate safety is compromised. To all the Johnny Cochran wanna-be p arents and students out there: think again. You'll be a laughed out of court. And to the administrators that think a teacher can "never" put hands on a student, you too should reconsider that the lawsuit faced because you have verbalized instructions that result in teacher injury ("reactive" self defense instead of "proactive" self-defense) will be much greater than the pathetic attempt at prosecution of a properly responding staff member. The State doesn't even want to pursue a case in which, on camera, a student moves agressively toward a teacher and creates a hostile confrontation. If you tell a teacher to not act until acted upon, that teacher may be stabbed or seriously hurt before they feel they have a right to defend themselves. Now THAT's lawsuit potential! It's techinically called "failing to provide a safe working environment", and it will be taken seriously by the courts - especially given Regnef's reputation. And what better to couple with violence than a serious drug problem? The student caught last month possessing enough marijuana to distribute to the whole junior class (about 10 oz) was suspended for 10 days. Not arrested. Not prosecuted. Why not? Because the school police officers were at the police station processing a previous in-school arrest (I'm convinced they are among the hardest workers at Regnef - likely because school politic consequences mean nothing to them; they are the police, and they do their job) and the security staff failed to search the dealer properly. Finally, after an unannouced 3-week vacation, the Tech Coordinator at Regnef has been reprimanded by being removed from this position and appointed instead to a different, higher paying position - one that has no cumbersome responsibilities like computer or network maintenance. So Regnef has no tech person now. When a pc or printer breaks - too bad! When grades have to be entered and the program must be activated by the tech coordinator - sorry!: Cancun calls!We shall see how many fire alarms are pulled next week...VIVA REGNEF! The true House of Illusions!

[Count Sudoku]

Yes.
Of course genetics has a huge role. Put two psychotic axe murderers together to procreate, and your chances are good that you will have some tendencies against having mental health.
But don't say that a certain racial group has more "axe-murderer" genes.
Quite simple.
You are missing the fact that populations have diverse genetic input when it comes to things like personality and intellectual ceilings.

Also, you ARE DEFINITELY saying only genetic factors are important in getting the differences posted, when you reference a chart didviding the IQ scores by race, and not modifying for social factors.
If you mean to say something else, use a different chart.

p.s. - did you read this??
Originally Posted by Joshua Kaplowitz
"I quickly learned from such experiences how essential parental support is in determining whether a school succeeds in educating a child."

I read it and this Kaplowitz guy is no doubt still a flaming liberal, however my point was to give an example of a situation that would turn a flaming liberal into a racial realist.

Here's another, it's way shorter so I'll post the whole thing, it was originally done as a long rambling screed but I broke it up paragraph wise to make it a little easier to read. It's from a high school teacher's blog which I don't think is up anymore. The teacher received death threats when he lost his anonymity for talking bad about the students and ended up quitting.

Crying Wolf

Aptly titled, it's what we do best here at Regnef. In a literal sense, this could be verified via the 5 false fire alarms this week alone. 2 on Friday March 31, 2 on Thursday March 30, and 1 earlier in the week. Nothing like 30 minute breaks in the courtyard to negate the rare actual 5 day work week! (well, almost a full week - Friday was a 1/2 day). You see at Regnef, every Monday is a holiday/day off - whether Pulaski Day, Martin L. King Day, President's Day, Lincoln's birthday, Columbus Day...the list goes on and on. Ironically, I doubt that any of those we "honor" if given the option, would elect to close schools. These men were big on education. They would be the type to say "have school on Saturday to honor me". But nope - at Regnef we close the doors, and the students don't know a lick about MLK or Lincoln, DEFINITELY not a thing about Pulaski, and can't name all the presidents, let alone honor them. Naturally, this just MIGHT be the reason that students don't ever beleive they're actually in school. With so many 3 day weekends, 4 days of school doesn't seem like much to put forth effort toward. This is, of course, not counting the fact that Regnef has record low attendance on Fridays and Mondays due to "student imposed" holidays; that is, they just don't feel like coming to school.

Let me get back on track: crying wolf; the 5 false fire alarms in 1 week. Note, there were several in the previous 2 weeks as well. I'd guesstimate about a dozen or so this year alone. Not sure how much that costs the school in terms of fines, but one thing it definitely earns is the scorn of firefighters. Can you blame them? I mentioned the gathering in the courtyard during alarms. This is apparantly a new security procedure - since there have been several violent incidents this week in which they evacuated via standard routes and the usual street mob gathering ended up in an ambulance being called. As yes, I love the courtyard. I somehow doubt that evacuating 1,200 students from the building via only 3 exits to the courtyard would be the most timely way to save lives if there were a real fire, but it's the new standard. Highlights today included students smoking weed while leaning against the assistant principal's vehicle and local neighborhood gangbangers jumping the fence to get into the courtyard. Additionally, a new "trouble shooter" has been called upon to assist Regnef. The gentleman won't really say what his position is, and has no title. When asked, he said "I do whatever the principal needs". He usually walks the halls with a walkie-talkie, but you have to wonder if it's a front and he's really reporting back about the teachers. All good surveillance needs better counter surveillance. Then again, maybe he really is here to help. Time will tell.

A formal introduction to the staff might be a more professional angle to take, instead of just showing up and walking the halls. More smoke and mirrors: Regnef has a new group of tough-talking security guards in suits that mostly intimidate and bluff the students with empty threats. Nothing like calling in the cavalry in the 26th week of school to make sure the place runs as it should.How about those security cameras? They rock. The amount of fellatio performed and drugs sold in the stairwells continues to grow, since there are no cameras there and security sure won't walk the stairs. Walking/rotating patrols are not a standard security procedure here at Regnef. Instead, our guards like to sit on desks or chairs and chat on their cell phones. Their behavioral patterns are predictable and known by students; when they take lunch, when they sleep, and which guards will let you do whatever you want. Additionally, because they do not rotate, guards become friendly with students. The students give false respect in return for the favor of walking the halls, selling snacks and cd's, and treating teachers in whatever fashion they deem appropriate. (usually the same way an interrogator may treat a hostage at Gitmo or Abu-Ghraib). The guards are neighborhood locals who may be friends of the students' families, church members, or dating a relative. The loyalty is to the hood, not the school. The administration at Regnef need to understand and change this.Then again, "you get what you pay for". That was the explanation offered up by Regnef's principal in response to some teacher's laptop being stolen from a locked classroom. This guy's was the 6th of the year -all from locked classrooms. That students were recorded on camera either picking a lock or using a key for entry (believe me, they're not skilled enough to pick a lock because that skill acquisition actually requires discipline, patience, and practice). This means they have keys. Wonder who they get those from? Could it be the teachers who regularly have the students selling candy bought at wholesale for "fundraisers"? True, a rare few fundraisers are legitimate efforts at raising money for teams that are denied the basic finances to buy needed equipment. The shame is that teachers have no real knowledge as how to fundraise or win grants properly. Most times, however, there is simply an arrangement that the student will share 1/2 the profit with the supplier (teacher with a Costco card). There are teachers in schools with an army of student "salespeople" working for them who make literally thousands of dollars yearly on these ventures. How embarassing.

Back to theft at Regnef: kids with keys, security and administration with no accountability. Apparantly it was a teacher's fault last week when a borrowed LCD projector was stolen from a locked classroom. This teacher was informed of his tremendous faults, while volunteering at the school on a Sat. morning, by the principal. (This poor sap is one of those who had a laptop stolen and was told that the solution was to claim it on homeowner's insurance because the school wasn't responsible). Granted, it was passed from colleage to colleague (the library where it was checked out and to be returned to is notoriously closed or unattended) and that ain't right. But later, the LCD was mysteriously "returned". Turns out that one of the coaches, who in some abstract way feigns security guard status, errand runner for the "discipline office" (or just hangs out in there) had "borrowed" the projector from a locked classroom to watch game film with it. The reamed-out teacher is still waiting for that admission or a quasi-apology of sorts from the principal, but it won't come. And what exactly does that coach do at Regnef anyway? (besides re-locate expensive equipment without telling anyone.) No one really knows. In fact, does anyone know if any of the disciplinarians or security "experts" indeed HAVE any expertise or training? The head of discipline was a band teacher for over 20 years, until this year when appointed to head of the discipline office. That expertise must have been gained overnight or in some super-seminar. Perhaps this very well-paid official can teach Regnef's criminals how to play the trumpet, because consequences sure aren't being taught.On the security note: When the A.P. was asked today "why can't cell phones, hats, hoodies, and music players be confiscated on the way in the door when bags are scanned and students go through the metal detectors, for later retreival by parents?", the answer was: "we're doing what we can to get to June 16, those are things that maybe we'll consider for next year." Nevermind that this is a policy that can be implemented in a matter of days. Nevermind that it would likely greatly reduce these problems:- students texting or calling one another to schedule fights, fellatio, drug deals, or notifying one another as to the location of security personnel so they can be avoided.- students calling outsiders during false alarms who deliver weapons to the school - like the gun earlier this week.- students ignoring staff because they are listening to their music players- the sale of illegally copied cd's by students (and staff)- students calling their friends and baby-daddies during class.These are things staff must deal with in the halls of Regnef everyday. But instead, the administrative priority is to station staff in front of fire alarm boxes so they can't be pulled. Don't mind the fights occuring in the now-unattended classrooms, the textbooks, chalk, erasers, and people being thrown out of windows, the vandalism, or the theft of teacher items. A band-aid is better than a cure; that's the attidude at Regnef.I wonder if secretly there is no confidence that security can handle a task as simple as contraband confiscation? Or a fear that security may in fact steal the items? Or are they so worried that this may generate media attention from inconvenienced parents who have to retreive their little darling's electronics and gang-banging hoodie and hat of choice, or may attempt to hold the school liable via bogus lawsuit threats for lost or stolen items? The fact is, Regnef has no idea as to its legal procedural rights. Confiscation of contraband is one of them.And why institute a standard blue/white dress code? I mean, it's so much more fun to decipher which gang is being represented by appropriately chosen colors, teams, symbols, etc.

Amazing - 83% of the school gets government paid free or reduced (about 40 cents) breakfast/lunch, but 83% of the students at Regnef can also somehow afford $100 NBA jerseys, several pairs of gym shoes, and some really hideous fake-fur pimp-coats that look to be constructed of road kill. And there's nothing more appealing than the young ladies who wear their full pregnant bellies with pride, tiny half t-shirts proudly displaying that sexy newly attained protrusive belly button and mammaries, and the new "ink of the week". Lots of student names being tattooed on backs, necks, arms, and wrists. In case they forget who they are. And "Fuck the Ville!" "Dirty 130's run this bitch!" "GDN!" (Gangster Disciples Nation, for those less in-tuned to the local gang acronyms) At least, that's what the airbrus hed t-shirts that are allowed in Regnef say! That is, the ones that don't have pictures of handguns or serve as cotton tombstones letting us all know that "Lil' Wayne, gone but never forgotten, RIP 1993- 2000". Dress code? Bah! Regnef loves it this way! The saga continues: 2 teachers cars with tires flattened this week. 3 weeks ago, a young guy had his car window bricked (for the second time) and his door smashed. Course, his hubcaps were stolen months ago. Am I repeating myself?

And the violence! Who doesn't love a good stand-off between a teacher and a 19 year old 260 lb. special ed student (who Regnef supposedly "can't" kick out because of the SPED designation)? There's nothing like a man-child balling his fists and screaming "I'm a beat your motherfucking white bitch ass, motherfucker, I'll kill you, I will shoot your fucking ass you fucking white bitch" when a teacher asks him to evacuate the building during a fire alarm. Naturally, if that teacher were to defend himself verbally or physically, the kid's mom will be at the school, the teacher will be investigated, and that's that. There is the mistakenly held notion that "self-defense" means one must wait until the other "throws the first punch" in order to take action. This is incorrect. An individual has the legal right to defend him/herself in a hostile situation when an aggressor places the subject in a position in which immediate safety is compromised. To all the Johnny Cochran wanna-be p arents and students out there: think again. You'll be a laughed out of court. And to the administrators that think a teacher can "never" put hands on a student, you too should reconsider that the lawsuit faced because you have verbalized instructions that result in teacher injury ("reactive" self defense instead of "proactive" self-defense) will be much greater than the pathetic attempt at prosecution of a properly responding staff member. The State doesn't even want to pursue a case in which, on camera, a student moves agressively toward a teacher and creates a hostile confrontation. If you tell a teacher to not act until acted upon, that teacher may be stabbed or seriously hurt before they feel they have a right to defend themselves. Now THAT's lawsuit potential! It's techinically called "failing to provide a safe working environment", and it will be taken seriously by the courts - especially given Regnef's reputation. And what better to couple with violence than a serious drug problem? The student caught last month possessing enough marijuana to distribute to the whole junior class (about 10 oz) was suspended for 10 days. Not arrested. Not prosecuted. Why not? Because the school police officers were at the police station processing a previous in-school arrest (I'm convinced they are among the hardest workers at Regnef - likely because school politic consequences mean nothing to them; they are the police, and they do their job) and the security staff failed to search the dealer properly. Finally, after an unannouced 3-week vacation, the Tech Coordinator at Regnef has been reprimanded by being removed from this position and appointed instead to a different, higher paying position - one that has no cumbersome responsibilities like computer or network maintenance. So Regnef has no tech person now. When a pc or printer breaks - too bad! When grades have to be entered and the program must be activated by the tech coordinator - sorry!: Cancun calls!We shall see how many fire alarms are pulled next week...VIVA REGNEF! The true House of Illusions!

[James R]

francois:

I don't think it's unreasonable to say blacks are very violent due at least partly to biological factors.
I don't think it's unreasonable to say whites are relatively non-violent due at least partly to biological factors.
I don't think it's unreasonable to say Orientals are very non-violent due at least partly to biological factors.
If you spend some time looking at the statistics it's pretty interesting the patterns you see.

Who were the major fighters in the two World Wars? Predominantly black Africa, or predominantly white Europe and America?

[francois]

You made your point James, but we're talking about a different kind of violence here.
I'm talking about the kind of violence committed within societies and organizations. Societies in East Asia are very non-violent. Western societies are quite a bit more violent. And societies in sub-Saharan Africa are very violent.

It's because they're not quite yet civilized to the extent as the rest of the world. They're clearly still operating in the tribal unit. When groups become civilized, one thing that is rewarded is an individual's inclination to be generous and engage in reciprocity with other individuals and groups.
This might explain why it's almost universally experienced that black people don't tip as much as other groups. Generosity hasn't yet been recognized by their genome as being a thing that could be helpful in survival.

[James R]

If I take a random black person, a random white person and you and compare your genomes, chances are equal that you will share more genes with the black person than the white person.

Therefore, your racist genetic arguments are baseless. You can talk about societies, sure, but a genetic basis to supposed racial differences in violent behaviour? Give me a break.

[francois]

So you don't think genetics have anything to do with a person's predisposition for violence?

[James R]

Genetics probably play a role. But there's no established link to race.

[francois]

So crime statistics (I'm sure you're all too familiar with those.) that indicate extremely high violence for blacks, relatively low violence for whites and very low violence for Orientals are 100% completely circumstancial?

[spuriousmonkey]

You seem to mistake your desire for a causal relationship for an actual causal relationship. That's not how reality works.