Government Audit of AI With Ties To White Supremacy Finds No AI (venturebeat.com) 148
Khari Johnson writes via VentureBeat: In April 2020, news broke that Banjo CEO Damien Patton, once the subject of profiles by business journalists, was previously convicted of crimes committed with a white supremacist group. According to OneZero's analysis of grand jury testimony and hate crime prosecution documents, Patton pled guilty to involvement in a 1990 shooting attack on a synagogue in Tennessee. Amid growing public awareness about algorithmic bias, the state of Utah halted a $20.7 million contract with Banjo, and the Utah attorney general's office opened an investigation into matters of privacy, algorithmic bias, and discrimination. But in a surprise twist, an audit and report released last week found no bias in the algorithm because there was no algorithm to assess in the first place.
"Banjo expressly represented to the Commission that Banjo does not use techniques that meet the industry definition of artificial Intelligence. Banjo indicated they had an agreement to gather data from Twitter, but there was no evidence of any Twitter data incorporated into Live Time," reads a letter Utah State Auditor John Dougall released last week. The incident, which VentureBeat previously referred to as part of a "fight for the soul of machine learning," demonstrates why government officials must evaluate claims made by companies vying for contracts and how failure to do so can cost taxpayers millions of dollars. As the incident underlines, companies selling surveillance software can make false claims about their technologies' capabilities or turn out to be charlatans or white supremacists -- constituting a public nuisance or worse. The audit result also suggests a lack of scrutiny can undermine public trust in AI and the governments that deploy them.
"Banjo expressly represented to the Commission that Banjo does not use techniques that meet the industry definition of artificial Intelligence. Banjo indicated they had an agreement to gather data from Twitter, but there was no evidence of any Twitter data incorporated into Live Time," reads a letter Utah State Auditor John Dougall released last week. The incident, which VentureBeat previously referred to as part of a "fight for the soul of machine learning," demonstrates why government officials must evaluate claims made by companies vying for contracts and how failure to do so can cost taxpayers millions of dollars. As the incident underlines, companies selling surveillance software can make false claims about their technologies' capabilities or turn out to be charlatans or white supremacists -- constituting a public nuisance or worse. The audit result also suggests a lack of scrutiny can undermine public trust in AI and the governments that deploy them.
AAI: Artificial Artificial Intelligence... (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
This is just the new border of the AI technology - Artificial Artificial Intelligence...
I am so glad I did not have coffee in my mouth when I read this! LOL!!!!
Makes sense (Score:3, Informative)
White supremacists don't have any actual intelligence, so the simulation is perfect.
Re: (Score:2)
It turns out they just use an if/then statement on ethnicity but the worst part, they used "GOTO".
Re:Makes sense (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
This fake AI is supposed to scape social media looking for clues in investigations. They example they used was it "solving" a child abduction by collecting data from various sources on the web and in apps, but it appears that rather than AI they just had a skilled operator, a.k.a. Mechanical Turk.
In other words it was all as scam from the start.
Re: (Score:2)
If we make scams illegal, that would shut down half of all American businesses!
Re: (Score:2)
But we could cut CO2 emissions by half once we get rid of all the pants on fire.
Re: Makes sense (Score:2)
You provided more information about this than TFA. Thank you.
Version 0.1 of the AI (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Neither do black supremacists or female ones. Oh, were we pretending those don't exist?
I nearly made the same point in my post but it diluted the joke and the article isn't about them so it would be off-topic anyway as well as being pretty obvious.
Re: (Score:3)
Sorry, but that's naive. Some white supremacists are actually highly intelligent. White supremacist William Luther Pierce for example (author of The Turner Diaries) had a PhD in Physics.
That's the thing about high intelligence. You can use it to justify all sorts of idiotic beliefs if you feel the need, and don't bother to analyze why those beliefs are so important to you.
Re: (Score:2)
The problem is trying to cram a bunch of traits into one axis. Knowledge, intelligence, and wisdom are not the same axis. Knowledge itself is at least 2 axes in itself (thus we sometimes speak of depth of knowledge and breadth of knowledge).
So William Luther Pierce certainly had intelligence and a narrow but deep knowledge of physics, but probably not much wisdom.
A more complete picture would include mindfulness, thoughtfulness, and others.
Re:Makes sense (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Makes sense (Score:4, Informative)
"Stupid people can't organize..."
Bullshit.
"...they certainly can't accomplish any political change."
They certainly can, and furthermore they can resist it.
"They get outmaneuvered and blocked at every step."
Who's outmaneuvering you? Blocking you at every step? Your position is that might not only makes right but proves who is smarter. You're not only an asshole, you're an arrogant and ignorant one. Not news, of course.
"Name a single elected office held by one of them."
The 45th president, for one notable example. The government is filled with stupid people, we have an entire party that values it.
"Exactly."
Exactly.
Re:Makes sense (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Stupid people think they are really smart, and are very confident in what they say.
Smart people question everything they believe and appear to be wishy-washy.
So you got a stupid person, yelling Go stop the Bad People!
vs.
The smart person going are these people really bad, and what factors are causing them to do bad things.
The stupid person can convince a lot of people really fast. While the thoughtful person will need to whittle people down over a longer period of time.
So we got a Fox News style journalism.
Re: (Score:2)
Way back in the before time, Fox News would exemplify what the wiser country people would call "fast talking city slickers". They would also nearly instinctively distrust such people.
Re: (Score:2)
People claim this but it never stands up to scrutiny. When you stop cherry-picking data, you find stupid people can organize, schizophrenic people can organize, anarchists can organize, chaotic people can organize, any group can organize.
The musician Sun Ra is a classical example.
Re: (Score:2)
Depending upon your bias, how to you explain Marjorie Taylor Green? Or Trump? I mean even their fans kind of have to admit that there's a bit of a vacuum lock upstairs.
Re: (Score:2)
Literally every elected office has been filled by a stupid person. Most of them currently are.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Bobbit. Greene. McCarthy. IQ 45.
And let's not forget Murdoch's mouthpieces, like bow-tie boy.
Re: (Score:2)
False choice, offered by an ignoramus.
Re: (Score:2)
Should be prosecuted for fraud (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: Should be prosecuted for fraud (Score:2, Insightful)
The fact their previous C-level executive has ties to terrorism has nothing to do with the story. The majority of âoeAIâ in industry has no AI, you can say that of pretty much every antivirus that bills itself as AI, every security product, every camera system, every network access system at best you have a filter or classifier at worst you have a whitelist/blacklist. None of them are continuously trained, especially not on a per customer basis and you have some big names: Cisco, BlackBerry, Sopho
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
AI would need to have a clear legal definition. At this point, AI is as good of a term as calling your food All Natural.
In the case of Utah it depends on the contract and they'll need to show monetary harm to make it worth pursuing. For consumer goods they would fall under consumer protection/false advertising and would have to meet some acceptable definition of AI. Although there's no clear definition of AI I do believe it has some meaning unlike you example as natural could literally mean anything that exists. I don't think we'll ever see a legal definition of AI outside of a very specific context.
Re: Should be prosecuted for fraud (Score:4, Informative)
Even if it was a basic classifier, that would probably have been enough to complete an algorithm audit - the fact that they didn't even have something like that means that these guys must be charlatans of the worst sort. Any halfway competent python developer or data scientist could knock together a classifier from an example online within a day or so - this isn't hard stuff, it's one or two google searches away. They must have zero legitimate technical expertise in their company.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe the link is that a person formerly engaged in illegal activities remains committed to illegal activities as CEO.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
They got a shiny new hood ornament, but it's still attached to a beat up oil burning Pinto.
Clearer article: (Score:5, Interesting)
The title makes it sound like the AI has ties to white supremacy... and that it doesn't exist. This should clear things us.
Utah Gave $20 Million Contract to AI Surveillance Firm That Didn’t Have AI [vice.com]
Utah gave a five-year, $20.7 million contract to an AI surveillance company that did not actually have any AI capabilities, a state auditor has found.
[...]
After Motherboard reported about the privacy issues inherent in such an expansive surveillance proposal and a OneZero investigation found that Banjo CEO Damien Patton once pleaded guilty to helping a KKK leader shoot up a synagogue [medium.com], the state's five-year, $20.7 million contract was suspended and a privacy audit was commissioned. The company has since rebranded as "safeXai."
Re: (Score:3)
The company has since rebranded as "safeXai."
They can't get away with that rebrand. That's a cartesian product, so the result should still contain ai elements. They should have rebranded as aiX0 or something.
Re: (Score:2)
I read it as a vector cross-product, the result being completely orthogonal to both "safe" and "ai".
Re: (Score:2)
Well the term AI is very loosely defined.
One could argue that a spell checker is an AI, As it takes an input then it determines the best possible outcomes where there isn't a match.
So this firm may had been doing a keyword search on social media, with "AI" that can find alternate spellings of a keyword.
I would really blame Utah for spending so much money on a company doing some smoke and mirrors.
Re: (Score:2)
Strike one, no actual AI or anything that could be stretched to fit the term.
Strike 2, CEO is a person who could never in a million years be vetted for any security related position.
Strike 3, the board couldn't even manage to weed a known terrorist and racist out of the running for CEO of a security related company.
When asked for a comment, Banjo's CEO replied... (Score:3)
Snake oil (Score:2)
The audit result also suggests a lack of scrutiny can undermine public trust in AI and the governments that deploy them.
Snake oil brought into disrepute by snake oil salesmen.
CEO? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
I hardly read TFS and couldn't care less about what bias their AI may or may not have, or if it even qualifies for AI. My irritation is as to why a 17 year old who shot up a synagogue in 1990 isn't still in prison somewhere and is instead CEO of some company. Aren't there empty beds in Gitmo? He was an adult, he was a klukker, he knew what he was doing. I see it as only secondary that no one was killed. I would have forcibly harvested his organs and thrown away the husk.
I"m fine with locking up for life all 17 years olds who were guilty of "involvement" with any (non self-defense) shooting.
(I think you'd find that the resultant lifer cells wouldn't primarily contain white supremacists though. Which may be why we don't do that.)
17 is a juvenile (Score:2)
As such, life without parole is no longer a possibility, and the sentences for juveniles are, in general, much shorter than for adults.
Re: (Score:2)
We can speculate that he didn't murder worshipping Jews because he lacked sufficient balls and stew on that while keeping the organ harvester primed and ready. Because it scratches some peculiar itch.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
A minor should never, ever be tried as an adult. They don't have the rights of an adult, they should not be saddled with the responsibilities.
It's their parents' job to teach them not to shoot up a synagogue.
You should be held responsible for the crimes of your offspring until they reach legal majority. It's the only way to address this ongoing failure in parenting at all levels.
Re: (Score:2)
Score 1 with no comment history available while my karma has actually just gone up and is at "Excellent"
Is this what censorship-by-editor looks like?
Re: (Score:2)
Score 1 with no comment history available while my karma has actually just gone up and is at "Excellent"
Is this what censorship-by-editor looks like?
It's showing as:
Starting Score: 1 point
Moderation +1
100% Insightful
Total Score: 2
...to me. Something did erase your +1 karma bonus, somehow. It happens to my posts sometimes too. No idea why. Censorship-by-editor is usually much less subtle than that. When I commented about the failures of the ascii art filter, the editors buried that post, making it inaccessible in the story thread. Not at -1, but not retrievable.
Hanlon's Razor applies. Slashcode is still as buggy as a stale cowpie in a pasture. One of these days a dung beetle is going to get into the datacenter
Re: (Score:2)
I take exception to your implication that everyone who's against white supremacists is a leftist.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Too obvious (Score:4, Interesting)
Are we not gonna mention the fact that a white supremacist calling his AI company "Banjo" is a little too on the nose?
That should have been the first clue, right there.
Re:Too obvious (Score:5, Funny)
Woah, woah, woah. Banjo player here. Just liking the instrument doesn't make you racist - it originated with black communities, after all.
Now, does it mean that you are a sadistic bastard with poor taste that likes to inflict obnoxious sounds on the eardrums of innocent bystanders? No comment.
Re: (Score:2)
I've got nothing but love for banjo players. As a dobro player myself, I have many social interactions with banjoists, and many of them are fine people once you get the banjo out of their hands.
I just think a white supremacist calling his company "Banjo" is so on the nose that it would get laughed out of a writers room on a television sitcom.
Utah bastion of believers (Score:2)
Getting better! Hope springs
Perfect blackbox definition.
turtles all the way down ... (Score:2)
As the public does not trust AI or the governments deploying, or claiming to deploy, AI, and probably would not trust politically appointed scrutineers, it is hard to see how any more trust can be lost.
Homer Simpson can probably outperform most current AI, even after a dozen Duff beers.
Of course (Score:2)
....anything that references "AI" in 2021 is lying because THERE IS NO ACTUAL AI.
There are very "clever" self-pruning algorithms, there are massive data sources that allow Hari-Seldon-ish predictions of otherwise soft subjects with reasonably high reliability for the GROUP (ie not individuals), there are even algorithms that attempt (generally execrably) to simulate creativity which is more about base-pattern-matching and repetition from source material with a slight random factor...but none of these things
Duh. There is no such thing as AI (yet). (Score:2)
That "industry definition" is the definition of the scam industry. Everybody in the IT industry knows that.
But now guess what you are part of, dear author of TFA.
Hint: It's not IT.
Buzzword (Score:2)
Haha. (Score:3)
No AI. Also, no human intelligence. Also, no white supremacy, at least in the classic, "legacy" definition. Of course, in the new and improved definition of "white supremacy," everything is connected, including AI, not to mention dog food and the color yellow.
Re:That's not how AI works (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
If higher policing leads to a higher crime rate (because more people are... checked) the numbers become a fact.
This is only applies crimes where police have to catch someone in the act. Crimes that leave evidence like murder, property damage, arson, kidnapping, etc. can be reliably tracked. Dropping the police presence to zero doesn't make these crimes disappear, you're still gonna have dead bodies rolling into the morgue and fire marshals finding arson.
Re: (Score:3)
What does any of this bullshit even mean? The training in question is training of AI, not cops, and there wasn't even any AI to train. Any who are these "witch hunters", and how does your racist injection of one example change the argument?
Since the comment you responded to clearly needs to be explained to you, it addresses a basic truism that data that may be used to train AI can itself be inherently tainted with bias, resulting in a biased AI model. The OP is providing an example of that, and you're an
Re:That's not how AI works (Score:5, Insightful)
You have to be careful though. Does the neighborhood have a high crime rate because there are more criminals or because more crimes are detected because it gets more patrols?
I agree with your basic sentiment however one should never forget that you get what you measure. This is always the problem of social science and making decisions based on gathered data. Unlike in the lab its rarely the case the measuring was truly done in the same way at the same frequency.
Re: (Score:2)
Or more crimes are prosecuted because the police / juries are racist?
Re: (Score:3)
So you make a claim about an individual that is based on their ethnicity and you can't back it up by sufficient and unambiguous evidence, then it's racism.
And if you're capable of rational thought you should realize that such racist reasoning is fallacious. It's a variant of an association fallacy, like if you claimed that Hitler ate sugar, so people who eat sugar are like Hitler. Though it's even worse than that, because at least eating sugar is a active choice that people
Re: (Score:2)
In theory, racism isn't complicated. In practice, currently in the US, "racism" gets put before everything else, gets assumed even if there are other good reasons readily plausible. So that's the other extreme, and a problem because it obscures the real problems and obstructs better approaches.
Oh, and I said at the start that the very definition of racism was stretched well beyond its original meaning. Your answer is in essence that anything you can't otherwise convincingly justify is therefore an issue o
Re: (Score:2)
So you make a claim about an individual that is based on their ethnicity
*Solely* on their ethnicity? Or merely *including* their ethnicity? Considering that ethnicity (or even more prominently, race) is easily observable and tied into multiple other variables that are important, should you exclude it from classifiers merely for involving the R-word?
like if you claimed that Hitler ate sugar, so people who eat sugar are like Hitler
Easy answer: eating sugar is non-specific, so eating sugar is not a useful feature for selecting a more-Hitler-like subset of a population.
(Of course, after any easy test, if a false positive is undesirable, you still need to do a go
Re: (Score:2)
For example if the allegation is a racially motivated crime, by definition race might be a factor. It 'might', evidence is still required.
Re: (Score:2)
If you can prove with evidence beyond a doubt that ethnicity or race are relevant, go ahead.
From the classifier's perspective, that's a simple matter of statistical significance that is easily enough decided.
and we can deduce that the events in question were caused by race or ethnicity.
Classifiers don't deal with causality, that's not their job (which is to extract the most useful information from a limited amount of data). In fact that's one of the reasons why their decisions can't be racism -- they're *not* ascribing any causal consequences to any immutable traits (because they don't deal with causality). By definition racism *requires* you to make that causal connection.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Racism can also be prosecuting a black person for a crime they genuinely committed, while letting a white person who did the same thing get away with it.
Re: (Score:2)
If you make the claim claim that "70% of all blacks are criminal" you need to back that up as well.
Beyond that, groups as loosely defined as ethnicity (non 'voluntary membership') usually do not act as a single entity. Groups still comprised of individuals.
So even if you could back that claim up, it would still not apply to the individual. It would only apply t
Re: (Score:2)
good comment, more please
Re: (Score:2)
Crime rates often go up when the neighbourhood creates a panopticon of doorbell cameras and CCTV. Some places are installing private automatic licence plate readers on entry roads.
Suddenly people are reporting more and more crimes, stuff that was happening anyway but went unnoticed or unreported. Littering, pavement fouling, speeding, kids accidentally breaking something with their ball, minor vehicle collisions that would have gone untraced etc.
It can actually have quite negative effects as people get more
Re: That's not how AI works (Score:2)
Reported crime rates go up, but do the actual crime rates go down?
Re: (Score:2)
So like with other situations as well, where the method to measure a quantity does influence the very outcome of the measurement, we need to work around the issue. We'd need some kind of double blind study. But how would we do that?
Total and absolute surveillance comes to min
Re: (Score:3)
"...with police obliged to get involved due to there being video evidence..."
While I agree with your points, come on now. Police feel no obligation due to the existence of video evidence.
Re: (Score:2)
Unrelated: what is your beef with the 17th amendment?
Re: (Score:3)
Because the needs of state governments to have real representation themselves isnt addressed now that we have the direct election of senators. Most of the voting public does not have a clear understanding of what the administrative needs of states are and where responsibility federal versus state divides. Unfunded mandates are good example of things that would happen a lot less if States had representation.
Secondly it turns the senate into body far to easily influenced by a few big often out of state monied
Re: (Score:2)
I would subscribe to your newsletter
please post more
Re: That's not how AI works (Score:2)
Murders and robbery/theft/vandalism of businesses tends to be pretty fucking static in terms of percentage of crimes reported to the police regardless of police presence. This is because bodies tend to turn up unless specifically executed by a criminal organization willing to go to great pains to hide said bodies, and businesses, unlike individuals, are unlikely to suffer repercussions from criminals for reporting said crimes.
Re: (Score:3)
You have to be careful though. Does the neighborhood have a high crime rate because there are more criminals or because more crimes are detected because it gets more patrols?
If you are talking drug use, for example, then more policing definitely means higher crime statistics. The only crime with highly reliable data, that can be compared between regions, is homicide. Murders are the only crime with anything like 100% reporting rate, little ambiguity in definitions, and well investigated. Do those neighbourhoods have a higher homicide rate?
I can't find neighborhood data, but it seems blacks in Utah are more that ten times more likely to be victims of homicide than whites or
Re: (Score:2)
Does the neighborhood have a high crime rate because there are more criminals or because more crimes are detected because it gets more patrols?
That's easy, cross reference it with how often crimes show up in other statics. Whether the police arrest someone or not, a murder is still going to put a dead body in the morgue. Fire marshals are still going to report arson. Insurance companies are still going to pay for car thefts and property damage. Even if you had zero data from the police you can still track lots of criminal activity.
The problem isn't a lack of reliable data. We do have fairly reliable metrics. We just don't like what they tell us.
Re:That's not how AI works (Score:4, Insightful)
As a white guy in early 40's if I get pulled over, I just worry about a ticket. So when I get pulled over I am calm, polite and rational (I usually stop myself from instinctively saying thank you after he give me a ticket.).
If you are black guy, and you get pulled over, They may arrest you, and pull you into questioning, because you "match" the profile of an other criminal, or worse. So when you are pulled over you are more anxious and scared. Which then makes the police even more alert.
So these populations may get more patrols where it is easier to get caught. Also the population is scared of the police, so they try really hard to solve problems without them. These areas get a bad reputation so it is more difficult to find a job or start a business their, so people are impoverish, thus may need to stretch laws in order to survive. Which increased their chance of getting caught and creates a viscous circle.
The problem with racism today isn't like the 1980's "very special episode" where there is that guy who just hates people because of the color of their skin. But a very complex set of conditions where a bias from experience feeds back to itself to increase a bias.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
AI is only as biased as the data you train it with. Computers cannot be racist if you don't program/train them to be racist.
The problem is the people training them don't know they're programming/training them with biased data. So the outcome of the computer is racist, whether you thought you were doing it or not.
Re: (Score:3)
The problem is your data may be filled with Biases already, So it learns to follow the the trend of the data that is given.
If you want to train an AI to say find the best job for a candidate, and you populate data of equal weight from 1900-today. It will probably take the person gender and race into account as a factor, and apply them to the stereotypical jobs they had performed in the past. Vs. realizing that the data is bias, and coding factors such as weight and saying ignore such information to help
Re:How are White supremacists (Score:4, Insightful)
Because, at least in the US, the rules of society are biased in their favor. Compare the response to the BLM protests in DC last summer with the seditionists 3 months ago. BLM was met with a massive military response, the seditionists weren't. Guess which group had more white supremacists and cop killers in it?
Your anallysis is bunk (Score:2)
> Compare the response to the BLM protests in DC last summer with the seditionists 3 months ago.
BLM caused a billion dollars in damages and deliberately murdered dozens of people over the span of months.
The rioters, who had no real plans whatsoever beyond apparently LARPing as a cow shaman, deliberately killed no one. Sicknick died of a blood clot and the autopsy found no head injuries, causing several outlets to retract stories that he was hit with a flagpole or fire extinguisher. He told family befor
Re: (Score:2)
I think "BLM" is getting a bad rap on this. I think legitimate BLM protests were fine - most of those ended during the day. The shit we saw after that, the fires, violence, etc.. was the usual rabble who attach themselves including antifa (colloquially, but if you don't like that term then whatever you call those filthy little skinny-jeans wearing anarcho-communist street vermin in black bloc garb) and just straight up criminals who wanted to loot and arson.
Similarly, 90% of the people at the Jan 6 march we
Re:How are White supremacists (Score:4, Informative)
Not only was there no military deployed prior to the attack on the Capitol on January 6th, the request for military support was actively denied.
BLM, OTOH, was met with this [snopes.com].
If the seditionists had been met with a similar military response they probably wouldn't have attacked.
But you knew that.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, you have one example. Yet even Snopes admits the National Guard then was deploying in response to a violent mob -- in fact, they deployed after multiple days [wikipedia.org] of violence and destruction. In contrast, the January 6th protests were not preceded by days of widespread violence and destruction by the people expected to attend them. That is the real difference between the two cases.
There was also no "massive military response" prior to the attacks on the White House on May 29, or May 30, or May 31, or Ju
Re: (Score:2)
They, in fact, did mobilize the National Guard [cnbc.com] in response to the Jan 6 riots.
But you want us to freak out over the National Guard protecting a statue?
While Snopes says that the BLM riots were "mostly peaceful" despite several dozen people being murdered by looters, like David Dorn.
Liar (Score:2)
The seditionists, who were trying to disrupt the government, were cop killers. They killed a police officer. They beat him to death.
But you knew that.
Re: (Score:3)
They didn't beat anyone to death. Only the family knows why the cop died, and his body was cremated quite quickly. But he wasn't beaten.
So, yeah, sorry, no cop killers. Just a bunch of idiots. One person was shot by a cop, everybody else who died that day had a heart attack or something.
Compare that with numerous people who were killed during BLM riots, including a retired police officer and a little girl.
Re: (Score:2)
Then the entire #resistence was doing what?
Right Sedition only matters to leftists when supposed conservatives engage in it. Your lot is the worst kind of hypocrites this wold has ever seen.
Re: How are White supremacists (Score:2)
Thank God DC has strong gun laws right?
Re: How are White supremacists (Score:2)
Nice to see the lefty shitbirds downvoting reality. Nothing in my post could be regarded as fiction, but because it doesnt fit the leftist narrative it is a troll.