Crown Heights is a mixed black-Hasidic area in Brooklyn where the career of the last NYC mayor elected on the Democratic ticket, David Dinkens, came a-cropper in 1991 when the motorcade of a high rabbi struck and killed a 7-year-old black child, setting off a three day pogrom.
From DNA Info:
CROWN HEIGHTS — The alleged "knockout" attacks on Jewish residents of Crown Heights may stem from ongoing racial tension between the neighborhood's black and Jewish communities, a newly-elected Brooklyn politician said.
Councilwoman-elect Laurie Cumbo, who was elected to represent Crown Heights starting in January, released an open letter Tuesday saying that many of her black constituents told her they feel threatened by the growth of the neighborhood's Jewish community — and she fears the tension could be spiking the recent violence.
"Many African American/Caribbean residents expressed a genuine concern that as the Jewish community continues to grow, they would be pushed out by their Jewish landlords or by Jewish families looking to purchase homes," Cumbo wrote in the 1,200-word letter, which was emailed to supporters and posted on her Facebook page.
"I respect and appreciate the Jewish community’s family values and unity that has led to strong political, economic and cultural gains. While I personally regard this level of tenacity, I also recognize that for others, the accomplishments of the Jewish community triggers feelings of resentment, and a sense that Jewish success is not also their success."
She added that these sentiments among black Crown Heights residents "offer possible insight as to how young African American/Caribbean teens could conceivably commit a 'hate crime' against a community that they know very little about."
These tensions have surfaced in the press before. Here's an excerpt from a January 15, 2013 article in Narratively entitled The Ins and the Outs about gentrification in Crown Heights:
“These guys—right here,” Sharon says angrily, standing on Franklin Avenue and pointing up to a banner reading MySpace NYC. “These guys are changing the whole block.”
Sharon is a thirty-nine-year-old black woman, a former construction worker who has lived in the area for twenty-eight years. MySpace NYC is a real estate agency that arrived in 2008, and is perhaps the most controversial, notorious player in the entire Franklin Avenue saga.
By all accounts, MySpace, which is the most visible real estate firm in the neighborhood, does much more business as a brokerage firm working with landlords than it does as a landlord itself. But rumors abound about shell corporations that principals of the company create and then use to purchase property. A undated marketing letter from a group called IDG Holdings but signed by a principal of MySpace informs building owners: “We buy properties ‘As is’ and in any condition and price range. We pay Top Dollar, in Cash, without any Broker fees. We can close as fast as 7-10 days…”
“They try to harass you into selling,” said a West Indian man named Mike, who owns a building just off of Franklin on St. John’s Place. Two years ago, he put his building up for sale, but subsequently withdrew it from the market. He claims that MySpace NYC agents have been hounding him ever since.
“They call you at all kinds of hours,” said Mike. “They’ve come to my house and I have to chase them away…They make offers to you: ‘Oh, we’ve got lots of cash. Let’s do it right now,’ like you’re desperate…Every day the same thing. You tell them no, and no don’t mean nothing!”
The fact that many real estate agencies that do business in the neighborhood happen to be Jewish-owned injects another level of ugly ethnic animosity into the debate. “The Jews” was a phrase that slipped off of many peoples’ tongues in reporting on housing for this story—a kind of shorthand for “real estate” among many blacks and Latinos. (Just a few blocks off of Franklin lies one of the largest communities of Hasidic Jews outside of Israel.)
“I think it’s like the Jewish underground mob going on,” said Sharon. “From what I know of Jewish people, they all stick together…They try to handle their own business.”
But as for the ownership of MySpace NYC specifically, Sharon elaborated: “They’re not regular Jews who wear black. They wear the jeans, the designer labels.”
Posts
61 comments:
"Many African American/Caribbean residents expressed a genuine concern that as the Jewish community continues to grow, they would be pushed out by their Jewish landlords or by Jewish families looking to purchase homes,"
Push out game vs Knockout game.
------
By the way, suppose white teens were going around hitting blacks a and suppose a white politician tried to rationalize such behavior by saying it's just a sociological response among whites to being displaced by blacks.
Of course, we know it would never happen.
Btw, if blacks are poor victims because Hasidim are pushing them out, are whites victims since so many of them have been forced out of many places via 'white flight' due to the rising tide of black color?
Wow, blacks are being Palestinianized?
Media have been playing the blackout game when it comes to Negro violence... until the victims turned out to be Jewish in parts of NY.
So you guys hear about the latest race hoax in Lunenburg, MA?
That's the most attractive councilwoman I've ever seen.
Admittedly, that's not saying a great deal.
The blacks are right about the Jews trying to push them out. But this is the good ole USA and you're not allowed to do anything about it. Non-discrimination is a bitch. As Steve has said, journalists of the future are going to be very confused about how to write stories.
All of this couldn't have just happened in the past 2 weeks.
"Wow, blacks are being Palestinianized?"
That's a good way to put it, since Blacks established themselves in Brooklyn by pushing out middle class Jews and anyone else who got in their way.
Now that the tide is shifting the other way, they feel that the situation is fundamentally unjust. They feel that the magic year is 1970. Everyone who was pushed out before then has no right to be there. Everyone who tried to come in after then has no right to be there.
And of course that's pretty much how the Arabs feel too. Once they successfully chased the Jews out of Hebron, the Eastern Part of Jerusalem, Gaza City, Judea, and Samaria, those areas became Arab Land forever. If Jews lived there beforehand, it doesn't count. And if Jews came back later, it doesn't count either.
"How would most Jews feel if most black people did this and almost nobody else did, and in a generation or two, black people had the highest average IQs on earth? How would you feel about it?"
Would they still have their propensity for violence; their bad attitudes; their wildly excessive self-esteem; and their virulent hatred for Whites, Jews, and pretty much everyone else?
Or would high IQ's come with a more mellow attitude?
If it's the latter, I am all for it. I want a cure for cancer ASAP.
And of course that's pretty much how the Arabs feel too. Once they successfully chased the Jews out of Hebron, the Eastern Part of Jerusalem, Gaza City, Judea, and Samaria, those areas became Arab Land forever. If Jews lived there beforehand, it doesn't count. And if Jews came back later, it doesn't count either.
Right, but I've heard that the Palestinians may actually be more closely related to the native Israelites that used to live there long ago than contemporary Jews.
Who pushed African-Americans out of Harlem?
http://tinyurl.com/mdnm22w
So far one man in New York has been charged a hate crime for a Knockout Game assault on an Orthodox Jews. He's Indian, though he may (reports vary) be Indo-Guyanese, a group that tends to be much lower on the socioeconomic scale than most Indians.
Peter
“They call you at all kinds of hours,” said Mike. “They’ve come to my house and I have to chase them away…They make offers to you: ‘Oh, we’ve got lots of cash. Let’s do it right now,’ like you’re desperate…Every day the same thing. You tell them no, and no don’t mean nothing!”
I still say SHILL OUT GAME is better than KNOCK OUT GAME.
"Right, but I've heard that the Palestinians may actually be more closely related to the native Israelites that used to live there long ago than contemporary Jews."
I doubt it -- keep in mind that the word "Palestinians" is a recent invention to describe a group of Arabs.
But even if it were true, it would not change my basic point. It's self-serving and hypocritical to point to some year in the recent past as the magic year before which nothing matters and after which nothing matters in terms of moral ownership of some land.
Thank Yahweh that the black vs. white trouble started with the right victims. DeBlasio would have to be an alien not to know that he'd better not have any grand plans that adversely impact the most important people in America's most important city. Hopefully that wariness will provide some collateral protection for the rest of us white people of lesser importance.
I remember when the Knockout game was just black guys (they were called "youths", back then) viciously assaulting whites and asians. Ho hum, blah blah, no news there.
Now, it involves blacks (who have thier reasons, mind you!) viciously assaulting orthodox Jews - now, suddenly, it's news. Attention must be paid.
As a first-year, Canadian university student, one of the things I've been subjected to for most of the fall semester in multiple classes has been a narrative of (white) Canadians just not giving a dam about crimes involving Canadian indians, including allegations of widespread rape/sexual abuse (and not just within the residential school system).
This may be true, or it may be the usual suspects attempting to prey on white guilt to a greater or lesser degree, but if the facts do actually support this interpretation, it provides a strange counterpoint to American society's largely giving a pass to American blacks for whatever mayhem they see fit to generate.
I remember a few years ago Fox News was talking about a poll that came out which revealed anti-Semitic opinions which involve hatred of Jews, is way more common in the African American community than it is in the White American Gentile community.
Of course the mainstream media was mostly silent about that revelation, because it does not fit their narrative that hatred of Jews in America is mostly limited to blond haired and blue eyed Nordic Northern European "Aryans".
The reality is that percentage wise there are more anti-Semites in America who look Louis Farrakhan than there are anti-Semites who look like Mel Gibson.
I doubt it -- keep in mind that the word "Palestinians" is a recent invention to describe a group of Arabs.
You could say the same thing about the word "Israelis" being used to describe a group of Jews or Semites.
But even if it were true, it would not change my basic point. It's self-serving and hypocritical to point to some year in the recent past as the magic year before which nothing matters and after which nothing matters in terms of moral ownership of some land.
No, it would then be hypocritical for the current Israelis, since their claim is based on the idea that they are the true descendants of the original inhabitants. Just like Indian reservations are reserved for a current tribe that has ties to the ancestral tribe in the area.
With so many white chicks having mulatto babies, it seems like while black guys play knock out game with white males, they play knock UP game with white females.
With so many white chicks having mulatto babies, it seems like while black guys play knock out game with white males, they play knock UP game with white females.
You're a real genius. Pat yourself on the back.
"No, it would then be hypocritical for the current Israelis, since their claim is based on the idea that they are the true descendants of the original inhabitants."
1. That's not the primary or sole basis of their claim.
2. It's true, depending of course on what you mean by "original inhabitants." Jews are certainly the oldest group which can trace a bona fide connection to the area.
3. Even if it were false, and even if it were the sole basis of their claim, it would not be hypocritical. It would be false, of course -- but not hypocritical.
"You could say the same thing about the word 'Israelis' being used to describe a group of Jews "
You could, and you would be making the same mistake if you used that word to suggest or imply that "Israelis" have some sort of historic claim to the land in and around Israel.
"By the way, suppose white teens were going around hitting blacks a and suppose a white politician tried to rationalize such behavior by saying it's just a sociological response among whites to being displaced by blacks.
Of course, we know it would never happen. "
Yes, no mainstream white politician would be allowed to do it.
We are allowed to talk about "black neighborhoods" and "Palestinian Land" as if there is some principle that once a third-world group takes over an area, in whole or in part, it becomes their turf forever. But you're not supposed to talk about "white neighborhoods" or "Jewish Land" in this way.
Fortunately, the Orthodox Jews don't really care about this sort of politically correct nonsense.
The woman pictured here isn't black at all, but she's considered such in the USA unfortunately.
She's a biracial, a mulatta with a yellow-brown skin tone (think like Barack Hussein Obama, except a female).
She's actually more typical of biracial women than exceptional and very rare extremely pale-skinned African-American biracial.
Clash of the titans in Ultimate Victim game.
>> You could say the same thing about the word "Israelis" being used to describe a group of Jews or Semites
i assume you don't allow Zimbabweans to define/judge the historicity of your peoplehood.
We don't allow non-Hebrew-literates to define ours.
we know how important the Crown-Heights-nikkim think Steve is by counting the number of times they've written of him.
We measure how important Steve thinks THEY are by noticing the amount of ink he spills about THEM.
Welcome to the world of zero-sum economics. No longer do we create wealth; find what group you belong to and fight over the scraps.
Anonymous said...
we know how important the Crown-Heights-nikkim think Steve is by counting the number of times they've written of him.
We measure how important Steve thinks THEY are by noticing the amount of ink he spills about THEM.
Right. Jews are powerful and important in the contemporary US. Steve Sailer is not powerful or important in the contemporary US.
Both Steve Sailer and Jews grasp these elementary facts.
Do you have a point? Or are you just proudly displaying your recent discovery of the sky's blueness?
This "Knockout Game" is just a modern version of a common warrior activity in hunter-gatherer societies. The most familiar example for Americans would be the Plains Indians "counting coup." Young warriors would demonstrate their street cred (or, prairie cred in this case) by hitting a cavalry soldier on the back with a stick or his horse in the rump and getting away scot free. If the warror got injured or embarrassed in the attempt he got less credibility than if he succeeded without retribution. Back at the camp fire he would regale his fellow warriors and the squaws with stories of his bravery. Knockout Game is just the 21st century version of this with cell phone cameras and Youtube. However, it's still an activity of a primitive hunter-gatherer society.
i assume you don't allow Zimbabweans to define/judge the historicity of your peoplehood.
We don't allow non-Hebrew-literates to define ours.
Well, there are not so many Zimbabweans caring about our peoplehood.
On the other hand, Hebrew-literates ...
So please, thanks to send your nice advice to your co-ethnics.
Orthodox Jews want bigger neighborhoods in which to raise their 7+ children, and white liberals want to live in the city and not have to drive a hour a day to get to work. Add in the fact that black neighborhoods like Bedford–Stuyvesant and Brownsville have some of Broolyn's best housing stock, and you have the current situation.
It's only a matter of time before blacks have been pushed out completely.
Of course the mainstream media was mostly silent about that revelation, because it does not fit their narrative that hatred of Jews in America is mostly limited to blond haired and blue eyed Nordic Northern European "Aryans".
But it does fit the narrative that jews hate/fear blond haired and blue eyed Nordic Northern European "Aryans" more than blacks.
The fact that many real estate agencies that do business in the neighborhood happen to be Jewish-owned....
"happen to be"?
1. That's not the primary or sole basis of their claim.
2. It's true, depending of course on what you mean by "original inhabitants." Jews are certainly the oldest group which can trace a bona fide connection to the area.
3. Even if it were false, and even if it were the sole basis of their claim, it would not be hypocritical. It would be false, of course -- but not hypocritical.
1. That is a primary basis of their claim: they are related to the original inhabitants of the area, therefore they should be allowed to be there.
2. That may not necessarily be true. The contemporary Palestinians may have a greater connection to the original Israelis than the contemporary Jews do.
3. It would be hypocritical, since their claim is that their claim to the land should take precedence over competing claims because they were there first originally.
You could, and you would be making the same mistake if you used that word to suggest or imply that "Israelis" have some sort of historic claim to the land in and around Israel.
That's how the word "Israelis" is used: to suggest or imply some sort of historic claim to the land in and around Israel.
>percentage wise there are more anti-Semites in America who look Louis Farrakhan than there are anti-Semites who look like Mel Gibson<
Who cares? The only important battle is yesterday's battle, not tomorrow's battle.
We don't allow non-Hebrew-literates to define ours.
Tell your fellow Jews that sword has two edges. Wish I had a finn for every Jew I'd argued with who sought to define my group to his advantage, without an iota of concern for how I define it.
"That is a primary basis"
Lol, "a" primary basis. Nice weaseling, professor McWeasel.
"The contemporary Palestinians may have a greater connection to the original Israelis than the contemporary Jews do."
And I might be the King of France.
Anyway, are disputing that Jews are the oldest group which can trace a bona fide connection to the area?
You do realize, don't you, that there was no group of Arabs which were referred to as "Palestinians" before the 20th century?
"their claim is that their claim to the land should take precedence over competing claims because they were there first originally."
If that were the claim, it would not be hypocritical since it is not based on some arbitrary, self-serving standard.
"That's how the word "Israelis" is used: to suggest or imply some sort of historic claim to the land in and around Israel. "
No it is not. Why are some Arabs referred to as "Israeli"?
Now Al Sharpton and Russell Simmons are coming out against the knockout game.
The civil rights leaders want to stop the “knockout game” and the targeting of Jews. Reports of “knockout game” attacks have been reported around the country, and have been concentrated in particular in Brooklyn.
I wonder if they are concerned about regular whites getting attacked?
That's the most attractive councilwoman I've ever seen.
Admittedly, that's not saying a great deal.
12/4/13, 5:08 PM
In NYC? You've prolly seen Sarah Palin, she was a councilwoman.
Lol, "a" primary basis. Nice weaseling, professor McWeasel.
When speaking to a weasel, you have to weasel a bit. But I don't have to. I'll say it: it's the primary basis for their claim to that specific territory.
Anyway, are disputing that Jews are the oldest group which can trace a bona fide connection to the area?
You do realize, don't you, that there was no group of Arabs which were referred to as "Palestinians" before the 20th century?
It's not clear that Jews are the oldest group which can trace a bona fide connection to the area. More genetic testing would have to be done.
You do realize, don't you, that the group of Jews in Israel today weren't "Israelis" before 1948?
If that were the claim, it would not be hypocritical since it is not based on some arbitrary, self-serving standard.
It would obviously be hypocritical if they made that claim and then still claimed the land even if it turned out that the contemporary Palestinians have a greater connection to the original Hebrews than the contemporary Jews do.
No it is not. Why are some Arabs referred to as "Israeli"?
Yes it is. The whole point of using "Israel" and "Israelis" rather than "Jewishland" and "Jews" is to suggest or imply some sort of historic claim to the land in and around Israel.
De Blasio has just nominated Bill Bratton as Police Commish. This is a good sign. Sharpton hates him. Bratton's a good guy.
De Blasio's a lib. But he doesn't want to preside over a crime wave.
"Sean Hannity has been trumpeting the assaults on Jews for the last two weeks. He didnt give a damn about knockout assaults before that."
He does what Rupert Murdoch tells him to do.
On another note, Nelson Mandela is dead.
You do realize, don't you, that there was no group of Arabs which were referred to as "Palestinians" before the 20th century?
Who knows?
liberal: "The knockout game does not exist."
neoconservative: "The knockout game is only a problem in Crown Heights."
libertarian: "The Federal Reserve caused the knockout game."
"i assume you don't allow Zimbabweans to define/judge the historicity of your peoplehood."
Hah, this is rich. No, pal, they allow Hebrews like you to do it - and it's "anti-semitic" to protest it.
Sabril, the basic facts are these: Israel is not a liberal democracy, it's a Jewish democracy. Jewish democracy was built on the back of genocide, thrives on ethnic oppression, and is sustained by boundless hypocrisy. No way around that, I'm afraid. The question is why does this state deserve anyone's support?
"When speaking to a weasel, you have to weasel a bit."
Please show me where I weaseled. Cites, quotes, and links please.
" it's the primary basis for their claim to that specific territory."
Please show proof of this claim. Cites, quotes, and links please.
"It's not clear that Jews are the oldest group which can trace a bona fide connection to the area. M"
Well what other group has been around as long or longer? You do realize, don't you, that there was no group of Arabs referred to as "Palestinians" before the 20th century?
"It would obviously be hypocritical if they made that claim and then still claimed the land even if it turned out that the contemporary Palestinians have a greater connection to the original Hebrews than the contemporary Jews do."
No, it would simply be wrong. But anyway, there was no group called "Palestinians" at the time when Jews were concentrated in the area.
"You do realize, don't you, that the group of Jews in Israel today weren't 'Israelis' before 1948?"
Absolutely. So what?
"The whole point of using 'Israel' and 'Israelis' rather than 'Jewishland' and 'Jews' is to suggest or imply some sort of historic claim to the land in and around Israel."
Please show proof of this claim. Cites, quotes, and links please.
And please answer my question:
Why is it that there is a group of Arabs which are referred to as "Israeli"?
"Who knows?"
Lol, I know. And now you do too.
Please show me where I weaseled. Cites, quotes, and links please.
Google your handle and this site.
Please show proof of this claim. Cites, quotes, and links please.
Please show proof that this isn't the claim. Cites, quotes, and links please.
Well what other group has been around as long or longer? You do realize, don't you, that there was no group of Arabs referred to as "Palestinians" before the 20th century?
Well some have said that the Palestinians may actually be more closely related to the native Israelites that used to live there long ago than contemporary Jews. They should do more testing. You do realize, don't you, that the group of Jews in Israel today weren't "Israelis" before 1948?
No, it would simply be wrong.
No, it would be hypocritical if they made that claim and then still claimed the land even if it turned out that the contemporary Palestinians have a greater connection to the original Hebrews than the contemporary Jews do.
Please show proof of this claim. Cites, quotes, and links please.
Show proof that this isn't the claim. Cites, quotes, and links please.
Why is it that there is a group of Arabs which are referred to as "Israeli"?
Those Arabs are citizens of a state which uses the word "Israel" and "Israelis" to suggest or imply some sort of historic claim to the land in and around Israel.
"Google your handle and this site."
"Please show proof that this isn't the claim. Cites, quotes, and links please."
Sorry, but it's not my responsibility to go searching for evidence to support your lies.
You are -- of course -- completely unable to back up any of your nonsense. Nice attempt at shifting the burden of proof, though.
In the case of this particular fight, in the words of a member of the Tribe, "It's a shame only one side can lose."
"sabril said...
Anyway, are disputing that Jews are the oldest group which can trace a bona fide connection to the area?"
The Torah itself disputes that, does it not? It recounts the Hebrews seizing much of that land, at the behest of God, from the original people who lived there.
By the way, I do not engage with "Mr. Anon" due to his past dishonesty.
If anyone who is not on my shit list is curious, I am happy to document his lying.
Sorry, but it's not my responsibility to go searching for evidence to support your lies.
You are -- of course -- completely unable to back up any of your nonsense. Nice attempt at shifting the burden of proof, though.
Well it's not my responsibility to search for evidence of your lies. You're unable to back up your nonsense. The burden of proof was always on you, since you're the one making categorical assertions. I simply said that it may be case that the Palestinians are more related to the original inhabitants and that further study may have to be done.
"sabril said...
By the way, I do not engage with "Mr. Anon" due to his past dishonesty."
Sabril is lying about me lying. I didn't. He is.
"If anyone who is not on my shit list is curious, I am happy to document his lying."
Yeah, everyone is dying to see your carefully documented library of grievances. Perhaps they'd like to see your matchbook collection too.
Anyone not on his shit list? Isn't that a null set? If you ask for documention, be sure to require ten quotes, nine citations from Lexus-Nexus, eight refereed papers from "Nature", and seven swans a swimming.
"The burden of proof was always on you, since you're the one making categorical assertions."
Nonsense, you asserted that I regularly weasel -- you couldn't back it up.
You asserted that "The whole point of using 'Israel' and 'Israelis' rather than 'Jewishland' and 'Jews' is to suggest or imply some sort of historic claim to the land in and around Israel"
You couldn't back it up.
And so on.
Anyway, I don't engage with liars like you or Martin B.
Goodbye, liar.
By the way, I do not engage with "Mr. Anon" due to his past dishonesty.
If anyone who is not on my shit list is curious, I am happy to document his lying.
I think we're all curious about how to get on your "shit list." Do tell.
"sabril said...
Anyway, I don't engage with liars like you or Martin B."
You casually toss around accusations of others, yet your posts are full of nothing but deceitful sophistry. YOU are a liar.
"Svigor said...
I think we're all curious about how to get on your "shit list." Do tell."
Whenever I see a post by Sabril I think of Ron Liebman's character, Paul Lazzaro, in "Slaughterhouse Five" shouting at Billy Pilgrim: "Your on my list, pal!"
It's easy to get on Sabril's list. Just point out that he's a liar.
LOL; Grasshopper, you brilliant statesman, you.
Post a Comment