No sympathy

Only the most brain-dead of the lefties could still genuinely feel sympathy for the ‘refugees’ after hearing of behavior like this.

“A riot broke out at a refugee centre in Germany after a group of migrants smashed up their accommodations with iron bars over the lack of phone signal.”

And this isn’t the first time such a thing has happened over the most trivial causes.Supposedly these ‘refugees’ fled their countries, fearing for their lives. If that were true, they would be grateful for safety and a roof over their heads. They would not be wreaking havoc over the lack of Nutella or the lack of a phone signal.

It’s impossible for any sane person to sympathize with anyone who has such an attitude of entitlement and such lack of impulse control when frustrated. They are worse than spoiled children and the coddling they receive from do-gooders and the rogue governments of Europe has incited them to be even more violent and demanding.

 

Non-discrimination can be deadly

This story illustrates the fact that not discriminating can cost innocent lives, as well as damaging our societies in numerous ways.

As Val Koinen points out here, it’s insanity on parade. I fully agree with his outrage and apparent exasperation. The older generations, could they have seen into the future, into our time, would surely have been incredulous at this story. Imagine, a crazed killer could behead a man in full view of witnesses, on a bus, then be institutionalized in a ‘hospital’ for a short while — then be granted full freedom — and Canadian citizenship to boot. So now, the crazed killer,  (poor, sick individual, in PC terminology), one Vince Li is a Canadian citizen, with all the privileges and freedoms thereof, and he is known as ‘Will Baker’, for some bizarre reason.

Understandably, the mother of the murdered young man in this story, has opposed freeing the killer, and is quoted as saying ‘I have no words’ in response to the news.

Lest the victim be forgotten, as is usually the case, his name was Tim McLean. He was all of 22 years old. His apparent offense against the murderous Li (aka ‘Will Baker) was in smiling at him as he sat down, and asking Li how he was doing.

There are so many things wrong in this story, things which are symptomatic of how our countries (Canada, our country, and all the West) have lost their way. For instance, the obvious thing is the injustices of our ‘justice systems’, in all Western countries subverted by leftism/bleeding-heart pop psychology, and moral relativism. Then there is the ever-present issue of mass, promiscuous, un-vetted immigration, weighted towards the Third World and hostile, primitive countries in most cases, this being no exception. I am really weary of hearing about how ‘East Asians can produce civilized societies; they have high IQs and low criminality.’ Statements like that show a real ignorance of conditions on the ground in most East Asian countries. I consider Japan an exception, but I don’t idealize Japan, either.

Was this man vetted before immigrating to Canada? Since Canada has one of the most promiscuous immigration policies, being besotted with the idea of “diversity”, they seem to be actively recruiting people from the most backward and most hostile cultures on earth, given the statements their politicians are making. Not that our country is much better, if any. We can only hope that our President means what he has said about curtailing immigration, especially from certain societies. But poor Canada; they seem to have no political leader or other prominent voice to speak up for common sense and for the real, historic people of Canada.

So how many more homicidal or otherwise dangerous and problematic immigrants are in Canada — or in our country — now? How many future Lis does Canada have roaming their country? How many does America have? We are letting millions of un-vetted strangers into our countries, offering up our citizens, our children, our elderly, as potential sacrificial victims — and why? Because it is wrong to discriminate. Always wrong. It is evil. We are not to discriminate about who we allow into our countries on any basis, be it religion, nationality, race, creed, gender(!), health condition, character — any basis whatsoever. Send us your wretched refuse, by all means. We don’t discriminate. Let’s put that phrase on our national epitaphs: ”At least we didn’t discriminate.”

But not to discriminate is to give up our right to choose. It means we take huge risks; we leave it all to random chance. It amounts to having no standards whatsoever. It amounts to saying that one thing is as good as another. Law-abiding or criminal, healthy or contagiously diseased — we don’t care. It’s all the same. Ignorant or educated, skilled or uselessly unskilled, what’s the difference? Those who hate us? Just as welcome as those who like us. Come on in, one and all. And there are no limits on numbers, no quotas. Just keep ’em coming, always room for a few million more.

Imagine applying this kind of insanity to our own homes. If we did so, we’d have no locks on our doors; in fact we ought to leave the doors wide open so that nobody would have to trouble themselves to knock; they can walk right in. And bring their friends, families, in-laws, their whole clan, their whole village from the old country.

This is the essence of our immigration policies, on the premise that we ‘need’ more warm bodies — but most especially, ”diverse” warm bodies. People of color. Visible minorities, vis-mins, isn’t that what Canadians call them?

Insanity, as Val Koinen says, indeed, but our overlords, who are masterminding this whole ‘fundamental transformation’ of our national homes, are not insane as much as power-mad, greedy, and determined. They know what they are doing. There is a plan at work, though it seems  madness to the sane amongst us.

So our cultural Marxist system is busily destroying our countries under the guise of humane, compassionate ‘non-discrimination.’ Unless we commit ourselves to returning to common sense discernment, to choosing between good and evil, safe and unsafe, beneficial or destructive, we will continue to see many other stories like this one.

I’m impressed

I’ve been pleased with how busy President Trump has been since he took office. I can’t say I was one of those reluctant Trump voters who said they didn’t believe he would follow through on his promises, so I haven’t been surprised at his actions once he was in office. But this Executive Order impresses me; it’s a very sound idea, something that would have been done years, no, decades ago in a sane world. It’s only common sense, and it’s basic to what the role of government was meant to be in this country, that is, if we are to take the Founding Fathers’ intentions seriously.

“To better inform the public regarding the public safety threats associated with sanctuary jurisdictions, the Secretary shall utilize the Declined Detainer Outcome Report or its equivalent and, on a weekly basis, make public a comprehensive list of criminal actions committed by aliens and any jurisdiction that ignored or otherwise failed to honor any detainers with respect to such aliens,” the order reads.

The Executive Order also states that to “promote the transparency and situational awareness of criminal aliens in the United States,” the Secretary and the Attorney General are hereby directed to collect relevant data and provide quarterly reports on the “immigration status of all aliens incarcerated under the supervision of the Federal Bureau of Prisons; the immigration status of all aliens incarcerated as Federal pretrial detainees under the supervision of the United States Marshals Service; and the immigration status of all convicted aliens incarcerated in State prisons and local detention centers throughout the United States.”

Yes, I know I’m a ”glass-half-empty” kind of person, always hoping for the best possible outcome rather than half-measures, always wanting things to be done now, at once, not incrementally. And I don’t want to diminish the credit due to Trump for signing this order. But it would be nice if they would include ‘legal aliens’, people who have valid visas but who are not yet citizens. Or how about giving statistics on all immigrants involved in felonies? It would give us an idea of the real ‘value’ of immigration. So many Americans have been ingrained with the idea that ‘legal immigrants’ wear halos, and that legal=good, while only illegal immigrants are a problem in any way. For the last couple of decades that’s been one of my aims: getting people to see that we need to examine immigration in general, all immigration, not just the illegal kind.

But this is a start; it’s much needed and President Trump deserves kudos for this.

 

 

‘What they saw’

The headline on this piece quotes a source saying that investigating NYPD officers were ‘sickened by what they saw’ in the e-mail evidence in the Hillary investigation.

How trustworthy the sources are here is beyond me; I’m not familiar with the websites from which this information comes, so I leave that judgement to those who know more about them.

What I do know, because I remember the late 1990s during the Clinton pre-impeachment scandal(s), is that all the right-wing forums were a-buzz with rumor and speculation every time someone leaked new ‘revelations’ about the Clintons’ misconduct. Every time, the headlines screamed ‘Latest bombshells will finally expose the Clintons! Smoking gun found!‘ or similar sensationalism. Whatever it was, there was always something that was promoted as being ‘the Big One! This is it! This will make Clinton resign!’

As history shows, no matter what was revealed, it was never enough to cause the shameless Clintons and their minions and defenders to admit anything, much less to retire in disgrace. They brazened it out till the bitter end, even being so bold as to trash the White House when they departed. Of course the liberal lying media denied what happened, following their pattern of covering up anything done by ‘their own.’ If you search on the subject you will find the media sycophants calling the damage just ‘pranks’ and mischief, downplaying it, if not outright denying that it happened.

This is what happens with a dishonest media machine; Thomas Jefferson wrote so often of the vital importance of a free and independent press. We are now living the consequences of not guarding against the corruption of the media, and the concentration of media control in a few, very politicized hands.

So, it may be that these latest ‘bombshells’, this time involving much more than ‘juvenile pranks’ like trashing the White House, or worse even than the Lewinski lewdness, will prove devastating to the corrupt Democrat crime machine and all their degenerate associates and contributors. We can hope.

But personally I am not investing too much in this latest story, not until it is actually out in the open, if ever. It may prove to be yet another of many damp squibs, as with virtually all of the ‘explosive revelations’ against the Clintons in the late 90s.

The thing is, our enemies, the ‘progressives’, liberals, Democrats, are people who are generally lacking in morals, especially as regards sexual behavior. Even when sexual behavior becomes transgressive to the point of violating the laws of God and man, they have no sense of shame. They generally can’t be shocked, being very amoral people in a deep sense. Oh, sure, they have perfected the art of feigning shock, when they can find a political enemy caught in some compromising situation  — like when some Christian minister is caught in sexual misbehavior. Then they suddenly are full of high morals, reacting with condemnation, for example, if the misbehavior happens to involve homosexuality — while normally they champion, no, celebrate homosexuality. And look at how they defend, even now, Roman Polanski.

They are not like normal people who recoil from certain things naturally; they are hardened in their amorality; everything is excused as a lack of understanding on our part; everyone is a victim of genes or childhood trauma (child abusers, for example) or their behavior is called good and natural (transsexualism, homosexuality, bestiality).

There is nothing much that can shock them, and when it comes to politics they would defend the Devil himself because after all he is one of their own.

So, we’ll see what develops. It would be a great surprise, and decidedly a good thing if some eleventh-hour revelation brings down the Democrats and all their associates and enablers, especially in the media. That would be the kind of deus-ex-machina we need, but if they are to be defeated it may just be down to the usual factors: let the elections play out, and pray that the vote-rigging does not work this time for the Democrat machine.

Illegal alien crimes

Here’s a blog devoted to reporting crimes by illegal aliens (including some refugee crimes, apparently). While their efforts are worthwhile, seeing as how the lying media probably under-report and downplay such crimes, I can’t help reiterating that legal or illegal, the issue should be that the quality of the immigrants we now admit to our country means that more crime in our country is the result.

I don’t see why so many immigration restrictionists want to reduce the issue to one of ‘illegal vs. legal immigrants’, with legal=good and illegal, bad. It is not that cut and dried. Even apart from the serious crimes committed by immigrants of all kinds, we just do not need more immigrants, especially those from violent, unstable, high-crime countries.

A ‘Startpage’ web search yielded a slew of articles by a range of sources, from the Wall Street Journal (yes, they of ‘There Shall Be Open Borders’ fame) to PBS, the WaPo, some libertarian open-borders sources, and so on. Skewed much? In any case, reading those sources would have us believe that immigrants are much more law-abiding than natives of this country. Maybe — depending, of course, on which ‘natives’ you mean.

Even alternative search engines seem to give heavily biased results.

This article from American Thinker says that it appears illegal immigrants commit murder at a higher rate than the native-born population. Whether there is any data on the difference between immigrants here legally vs. those here illegally, it isn’t easy to determine.

Yet what logical basis could there be to believe that only those who enter the country illegally are even potentially lawbreakers? I suppose there is just the vague unsupported assumption that a criminally-prone person would not ”go by the rules” in coming to this country. But what of those who come here via chain migration, as relatives of legal immigrants or legal residents of foreign birth? Or refugees? Are they vetted thoroughly, and as has been asked often, how can we vet people from third-world countries, where good public records are not kept, or not available?

Donald Trump has taken a lot of flak for saying that Mexicans commit a lot of rape in this country. Some sources, even the normally immigration-skeptical CIS, have argued that data shows immigrants commit less crime, but as is pointed out here, it isn’t that simple. The methods used in collecting data (including self-reporting, in many cases, by offenders) and the unwillingness of government departments to collect and collate such data means that even the government really has no definitive answers.

It’s simple common sense to look at the countries from which most of our immigrants come; are those countries high-crime, high-violence countries, reflecting cultures of that type? In the vast majority of cases, the answer is yes. Why, then, should those immigrating here suddenly become law-abiding and peaceable, when their countries are violent and dysfunctional, and in many cases, downright lawless? It requires a great deal of credulity to believe that people from countries where violence and crime are a way of life would suddenly become model neighbors here in the United States.

We are being misled by the media and by the powers-that-be, as in so many things.

Wikileaks on deleted e-mails

From Wikileaks latest, Hillary Clinton and her people deleted 33,000+ e-mails, knowing that it was illegal to do so.

This brings to mind the Nixon tapes during the Watergate hearings back in the 1970s, wherein the media treated as shocking the idea that Nixon’s secretary (on his orders, allegedly) purposely deleted parts of those tapes. All of 18 minutes of the tapes! Compare that to the potentially damning material in tens of thousands of e-mails. Notice the obvious difference in the way the media treats the two situations.

Hillary? Give her the benefit of the doubt, by all means. Maybe she wasn’t aware she was doing anything illegal — yes, she’s supposedly a brilliant woman, has been a ‘co-president’ with her reprobate ‘husband’, was supposedly a hot-shot  lawyer and an Ivy Leaguer with a high IQ but she didn’t know? Which is it? Brilliant woman, or simply ignorant of the law?

But Nixon and the missing 18 minutes? He was an evil, diabolical man who was obviously covering up some kind of serious wrongdoing.

And remember, the genius Hillary was one of those who was part of the Watergate investigation. It’s ironic that now she is caught doing the kind of thing for which Nixon was so reviled by the likes of Hillary and the leftist media. Does this fall under the heading of ‘karma’ to which the lefty New-Agers are always alluding? If so, then it’s fitting.

Our system fails us, again

I don’t like to write much about these kinds of horrifying stories; there are enough bloggers who shine the spotlight on such occurrences; that’s their specialty, so I don’t feel called to write about it. But this case just distresses me, not only because it is one more in a never-ending series of such avoidable outrages, but because so many people end up focusing on irrelevancies like this ”man’s” immigration status.

It doesn’t matter whether he was here legally or illegally; the point is he does not belong here, should not be here, should never have crossed the “border” into our country, and this poor child should never have encountered him, or anyone like him.
About this time the usual crowd — bleeding-heart Republicans or lefties, will say: ‘but we have native-born sex offenders, too.’

Unfortunately, yes, we do, and we are stuck with them, until or unless somebody catches on that these kinds of lowlifes cannot be ”cured” by therapy or good intentions or understanding or pills or ‘chemical castration.’ Some would doubtless argue that we cannot execute people like this — after all we hardly even execute killers, even mass killers, anymore. Failing execution we should find a way to send them off the planet somewhere, but that isn’t likely to happen soon, sadly. So yes, we are stuck with these miscreants who are born here, and who are of our folk. But it must be pointed out that certain cultures, the Hispanic/mestizo culture being one of them, are more prone to this kind of behavior. Some other cultures do not share our ideas about minimum ages for sexual activity, or about the need for consent on the part of both partners, providing both are of the age to give consent.

And there’s little evidence that it is only the illegal foreigners in our country who are guilty of this kind of thing; having papers or documents does not mean the possessor is of good character, especially when many Third World immigrants have no paper trails, and cannot be ‘vetted’; there is an element of wishful thinking in the idea that ‘if we just vet them thoroughly, they will be good bets.’ No. Immigrants, refugees, legal or illegal, we cannot vet most of them. We can only go by the overall picture of the cultures these people are coming from, and assess them accordingly. We cannot gamble any more lives on the long shot, on the notion that most of them are harmless people, just like us under the skin.

Legal or illegal, we don’t need more immigrants of any kind from these kinds of backward and degenerate cultures.

This latest case in Texas reminded me of another case, also in Texas, several years ago, in which a rancher caught a Latino immigrant (ironically named ‘Jesus‘) molesting his (the rancher’s) 5-year old daughter. He beat the man severely and the ‘man’ died as a result.

God bless the Texas legal system; they did not charge the father for beating the offender (who of course died, ultimately.) That poor child will likely never be the same, as with many children who suffer such a fate,  but at least she won’t have to relive the whole experience through the legal system for years. Her father acted on a natural and healthy impulse to save and protect his daughter, and in doing so, he may well have saved others from the same fate, by removing the offender, preventing further crimes and outrages.

Whereas this ‘man’ (with the ironic name ‘Alas‘) in Fort Worth will likely live to offend another day, and likely against other children, after they briefly institutionalize him and give him ‘therapy’, then release him. Will he then be deported? Maybe, but then the odds are that he will be back. Multiple times, like most such deportees.

Our immigration system and our legal system are failing us, and failing our children.

And most of the ‘conservatives’ can only harp on his being ‘illegal.’ The point, though, is that he should not be here, legally or illegally, nor should tens of millions of others whose contribution to our society is all negative.

Trump: Hillary is the ‘real bigot’?

Where have we heard this line of rhetoric before?

I realize Trump is not perfect, and this may not turn me against him, because the alternative is much, much worse. But is Trump just courting the elusive ‘African-American’ vote? Or is he trying to win back the Trump-phobic ‘cuckservative’ vote? Either possibility seems like a waste of time to me.

In any case, see the responses of the Free Republic faithful to this speech of Trumps: they roundly cheer it, and think it constitutes ‘throwing down’, and ‘his best speech ever!’ One comment says “Right on Mr. Trump! BlackVotesMatter!”

And that alone is enough to make me think the opposite. The FR crowd, for those who shun that forum, love to use that line about the Democrats ‘being the real racists’, considering it to be a potential coup-de-grace to the Democrat Party, if only blacks would see it the same way — which, of course, they don’t and won’t. To blacks, all Whites are ‘real racists’, even those who protest they aren’t. Especially those who protest they aren’t, and point the finger at other Whites.

From the speech:

“It is time for our society to address some honest and very difficult truths.

The Democratic Party has failed and betrayed the African-American community. Democratic crime policies, education policies, and economic policies have produced only more crime, more broken homes, and more poverty.”

Who writes these speeches? Trump seems to have some on his staff who are part of that FoxNews group of pundits who seem to be influencing him towards being more ‘inclusive’, reaching out to the very people who oppose him the most, and hate him.

How can Trump be a potential advocate for the majority population while trying to appeal  to minorities with endless grievances? One can’t serve two masters.

And bad as the Democrats are, it’s just a falsehood to say that Democrats are to blame for black dysfunction and crime; that attitude takes moral agency away from blacks, as if they are in fact blank slates who have been shaped completely by the Democrat Party, and exercise no free will at all.

I am sorry to see Trump recycling these pathetic memes of the Limbaugh/Fox News crowd.

Update: Byron York writes about the speech, in a piece entitled ‘Asking for black votes, a very different Donald Trump’.

Another note: a commenter at Free Republic says the speech was ‘partly written by Rudy Giuliani’, and York reports that Newt Gingrich approves highly of the message.

Certifiably insane — or?

Jean-Claude Juncker has said that the EU will never give up on their open-borders policy, despite the growing migrant crisis and the ramped-up terrorist acts in Europe. He says the EU will not give up on the so-called ”free movement of people” within the EU.

“This is one of the four fundamental freedoms of the founding Treaty of Rome. It is an inviolable principle,” he said.

[…]Speaking after Islamic terror attacks left 130 dead in Paris last November, Mr. Juncker rejected calls to rethink the EU’s open doors policy on migration from Africa and the Middle East. Dismissing suggestions that open borders led to the attacks, Mr. Juncker said he believed “exactly the opposite” – that the attacks should be met with a stronger display of liberal values including open borders.”

Apparently this statement was before the most recent attacks, which resulted in an elderly priest in Normandy murdered in his church, his throat slit. Some reports say that he was beheaded, but as we cannot automatically assume the media is giving accurate and complete information, given the fact that their marching orders from TPTB are to lie and mislead so as to further the agenda; the days of honest and objective journalism, insofar as they ever existed, are now a distant memory.

In response to the latest outrage, Hollande the globalist stooge says that the French people are ‘at war with ISIS.’ Shades of George W. Bush saying we were at war with ‘terror’, not with Islam, the “religion of peace.” Anything to avoid naming an enemy, an enemy which is not an abstraction. And saying that the enemy is ‘Islamism’ or ‘extremism’ or just ISIS, is a copout, a politically correct way of narrowing the blame down to ‘just a few extremists, a few bad apples who don’t represent Islam.’

If Juncker and his fellow globalist lackeys are sincere believers in their evil agenda of destroying nations and peoples, they are, as I’ve said for years, either insane or evil. Some people attribute the actions of Merkel, Juncker, and all their sorry kind to incompetence or to simple power-hunger.  Even now, some people can’t seem to see that this bizarre Camp-of-the-Saints scenario is not just the result of blundering or of simple political party ambitions (for instance Americans saying “it’s all about keeping the Democrats in power, more Democrat votes,” etc.) or ‘cheap labor’ for business — although that last apparently is a motivator for big business and small business too, in some cases. No, the madness we see playing out has method to it. They are working to a purpose, and working furiously to accomplish their malevolent goals. Nobody does this kind of evil, of this magnitude, for ordinary reasons.

And for my Christian readers, yes, we are fighting against ‘principalities and powers,’ and ‘spiritual wickedness in high places.’

Oh, and I am waiting for the claims that ‘this was staged; nobody died; the survivors are crisis actors and the blood was ketchup.’

Strange and portentous times we are living in, but then we knew this was coming. It was predicted, and even some who don’t read the Bible or believe prophecy sensed that this was taking shape. Yet some still don’t see the larger significance of it.

Incitement?

More fallout from the Dallas police murders: a man went to the home of an Indianapolis police officer and fired shots at the officer’s home and car.

The officer, a 10-year veteran of the force, was relaxing in his home around 2:25 a.m. after a night shift when a bullet whizzed near the window, police said. His wife and child were sleeping in the home. The family is unharmed, though the officer is concerned for his wife and child, IMPD Chief Troy Riggs said.

[…]Riggs said Ratney wore a T-shirt that, on the front, had the words, “F— the police.” On the back, he said, the shirt read, “Black Lives Matter,” a social justice movement that protests police shooting deaths of black men. The movement was born out of the acquittal of George Zimmerman, who was accused in the 2012 shooting death of Trayvon Martin, an unarmed teen.

Riggs cautioned the community to refrain from using Ratney’s alleged actions to judge those who support Black Lives Matter.”

Hmm, might Riggs have a bias in this case? Why the need to caution the public, excuse me, the ”community” against ‘judging’ BLM supporters? Would such a warning be issued against those judging supporters of some (theoretical) ‘white supremacist’ group?

Just a rhetorical question of course.

On Steve Sailer’s blog, his usually astute commenters offer opinions on what provoked this attack or similar attacks since the Dallas cop murders. Someone opines, quite reasonably, that videos (presumably YouTube and others) fan the flames and lead to more violent incidents. I won’t argue with this, and obviously it’s not just YouTube militants stoking up anger and rage, but the controlled media play a huge role.

But are outside sources the ultimate cause of this kind of thing? They may be the proximate cause, but evidently this man in Indianapolis and others who have similarly acted out have long-standing grievances and grudges and hatreds, and needed little to provoke him to do something violent.

But think about similar violence back in the 1960s. There was no YouTube then, and the media, while they were rather liberal/leftish even back then, were much less incendiary than today’s masters of agitprop masquerading as ‘journalists’. So on what can we blame the 60s black-on-White violence or cop-killings ? There were, of course, militant black groups behind much of the aforementioned.

But what about the anti-White violence of the Reconstruction-era South? Today’s agitators and race-hucksters were not there — but there were in the South carpetbaggers and scalawags who incited or passively allowed such violence, and provided opportunity for it to be carried out on a disarmed and disenfranchised White populace. Still, they could not have incited violence unless there was a receptive attitude to that incitement on the part of the black ‘freedmen.’

The ultimate cause of this kind of violence is that disparate peoples, judging by all of human history, seem always to end up in some kind of conflict, often violent to some degree or other. Even peoples of the same skin color and similar appearance, as in the former Yugoslavia, found themselves unable or unwilling to live together in the same geographical area. Human nature can’t be overruled by governmental edicts, nor is even the most persistent propaganda powerful enough to bring about harmony between incompatible peoples. Many White Americans stubbornly persist in the belief that if we all agree to be ”colorblind” and to be ”just Americans” that all can live happily as neighbors. This only proves that a strong desire, an overpowering need to believe such ideas, and a wish for ‘peace’ at any cost, can cause people to cling to a failed idea indefinitely. So far.

Unfortunately it is only White Americans who subscribe to this fantasy idea of ‘colorblindness’ as a magic cure for interracial conflict and violence. It will never work as long as only one side agrees to pretend; one side cannot make the pretense work all alone. And most White people still don’t see this, refuse to see it. So far.

Thomas Jefferson foresaw what would happen long ago.

“It will probably be asked, Why not retain and incorporate the blacks into the state, and thus save the expense of supplying, by importation of white settlers, the vacancies they will leave? Deep rooted prejudices entertained by the whites; ten thousand recollections, by the blacks, of the injuries they have sustained; new provocations; the real distinctions which nature has made; and many other circumstances, will divide us into parties, and produce convulsions, which will probably never end but in the extermination of the one or the other race. To these objections, which are political, may be added others, which are physical and moral. The first difference which strikes us is that of colour. Whether the black of the negro resides in the reticular membrane between the skin and scarf-skin, or in the scarf-skin itself; whether it proceeds from the colour of the blood, the colour of the bile, or from that of some other secretion, the difference is fixed in nature, and is as real as if its seat and cause were better known to us.