You wrote in your previous post that “intelligence” was not as big a factor in criminal behaviour as “environmental factors”. But you would have to agree that while criminal behaviour is concentrated in the disadvantaged class, so is low intelligence. But disadvantaged class people who are intelligent are upwardly mobile, and soon become part of the working class or higher. But unintelligent people stay in the disadvantaged class and commit crimes. Therefore, it is reasonable to deduce that criminals are not criminals because they are poor, they are criminals because they are stupid.

According the noted book “The Bell Curve”, by Richard J. Herrnstein, the average IQ of American negroes is only 85, they are not noted for their academic achievements in schools or universities, and are conspicuous by their absence in the scientific world. You have said that IQ tests culturally disadvantage minorities when measuring intelligence. I admit that you may be correct. But IQ tests are designed to measure cognitive ability for job suitability in Western type cultures. African derived people may have high intelligence in an African pre industrial environment but they do not appear to have the type of cognitive abilities crucial to surviving in the modern Western world.

Uberlegan has correctly stated that African negroes have much higher levels of testosterone than white men, and this hormone is known to be crucial in whether a man is inherently violent or not. And the levels of this hormone in the human body is controlled by genetic factors.

To summarise. Criminals are typically young men with low intelligence and high levels of aggression causing hormones, which makes them prone to violent behaviour and risk taking behaviour. I put it to you that such a description matches the profile of African negro males. Given the catastrophic effects upon social unity which crime can cause any community, are you willing to bet the future welfare of your community that I am wrong, just because you believe there is absolutely no difference between the races other than the undeniable physical ones?

Amel,
Thank you for your contribution, You have nailed the question,and answered it honestly, putting words in your mouth, but you mean "Tribalism", yes now we are getting somewhere.
I think you realy do not beleive in all that garble of Genoside of aboriginies, but it is a cool weapon of deseption for you to hang on with, as perhaps , you are an interested part of an ethno group, even other non ethno groups that relate to the Genoside or even the stolen generation are the victims of their own perpetuated ignorance. That is the Agendas of the Sub Intellectuals described before.
In Short, Tribalism is the very reason why Multiculturalism is Multicrimminalism, The Lies and deseption it needs to create the impression it is ok, is only acheived by those with Agendas controling the outlets that are meant to protect you, and inform you. That is re-engineering and deseption , and when you have such a massive lie covered up and The Propaganda weapon deployed, you must realise we are in big trouble.
Those that are of hardened Marxist Ideolgies only beleive in what makes them glow and , not what are facts,"Total Denial". Antonio Gramski theories of Social re-order are the Ideologies these Psychopaths follow to achieve their goals. By changing Social definitions.They are the New Gestapo, and the new Fascist Leaders that aspire to control you and your thoughts, and how you live your life, "Communism, Fascism, Islamism", Alarm bells yet, sure something there sounds familiar.
Like I said before, peoples grasp on History , "Not Postmodern Written",is bad, very bad.

Hey Nitwit Racist AMEL!

Check the latest statistics at the ABS. Even as at the 2001 population census of the 20 million residents in Australia only 8.5 million were Anglo (that includes descendants from the UK as well as
people who were born in the UK). This means that the other 13.5 million are not Anglo as you obviously think, but are a conbination of other Europeans, Asians and Middle-Easterners, and only 7 million of them were born in Australia. Effectively, this means that in less than 50 years Australia has gone from 99% Anglo to just 42%. This is crazy considering that the majority has always been against it. It is a true testament to the extreme Christ-like tolerance that the Average Aussie must have considering there hasn't even been one race riot - and that is in the face of two of these guest ethnic groups becoming our nations crime/drug capitals (Bankstown & Cabramatta).
I know that most of these people, whether from Uk or not are still loyal Australians, but ask yourselves now, anyone whos descendents do not come from the UK or who isn't a native aboriginal (who no doubt feel just as strongly about letting this second wave of huge settlement happen, namely multicultural migration, why does the left always hark on about white settlers when they let their other ethnic mates on mass in the back door. They really care about aboriginal land/health issues), what would you say if half of China, Greece,Italy, Lebanon, Vietnam,Turkey,Suadi Arabia(for gods sake) was ordered by god knows who, against the will of the majority, to demographically change by over half in a 50 year period? I know what the answer would be from not only the expats but the left also. They would totally be on the side of whatever little nationalist movement that was against it. When such groups are white the "dumb" call them Neo-Nazis.

Interesting that none of the white supremacist/armchair geneticists here has yet managed to state clearly what a "race" is. Come on guys, if it's that obvious a concept it can't be that hard to define...

I won't hold my breath.

@All: I think you realy do not beleive in all that garble of Genoside of aboriginies, but it is a cool weapon of deseption for you to hang on with, as perhaps , you are an interested part of an ethno group, even other non ethno groups that relate to the Genoside or even the stolen generation are the victims of their own perpetuated ignorance. That is the Agendas of the Sub Intellectuals described before.

I was going to ask the same question about Africans,crime and genetics.I don't know why such a big deal is being made about "Multiculturalism" since "Navtive"Australians non-white and white get along so well with each other.

@Matthew S:I see you have some statistics,I know you can't give me the real reason behind those stats.I won't ask.

a native aboriginal (who no doubt feel just as strongly about letting this second wave of huge settlement happen, namely multicultural migration, why does the left always hark on about white settlers when they let their other ethnic mates on mass in the back door. They really care about aboriginal land/health issues), what would you say if half of China, Greece,Italy, Lebanon, Vietnam,Turkey,Suadi Arabia(for gods sake) was ordered by god knows who, against the will of the majority, to demographically change by over half in a 50 year period.

Maybe they do,thats up to them. Blacks in South Africa have allowed Indians,Malays, Greeks, plus a large amongnt of Sweds and Germans to set up businesses in South Africa, just recently. Alot of the Diamond mines and Gold mines are run by these people. Ericsson the Swedish mobile phone company does business in South Africa because Africa has one of the fast growing mobile phone purchases. Namibia is a peaceful"African country" it has a multicultural population,they have resolve things, but do you ever hear the good.

If whites migrated to the worlds poorest countries en masse, I wonder if in time, that country would still be poor. I doubt it.

Whites seem to prosper anywhere they go, blacks live in poverty anywhere they go (london, the carribean, new york, johhanesburg).