Menu



error This forum is not active, and new posts may not be made in it.
PromoteFacebookTwitter!
Luis Miguel Goitizolo

1162
61587 Posts
61587
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: ARE WE NOW IN THE END TIMES?
11/4/2015 4:29:07 PM

Glamour Magazine Names Planned Parenthood Abortionist Woman of the Year


KEVIN WANDRA/CHRISTIAN NEWSWIRE


Planned Parenthood CEO Cecile Richards (
Courtesy)

Glamour magazine announced that Planned Parenthood CEO Cecile Richards will be one of the recipients of its "2015 Women of the Year" awards, a decision that Sue Ellen Browder, author of Subverted, finds appalling.

"I understand why Glamour magazine editors are trying to defend what they consider their 'right' to abortion by naming Planned Parenthood CEO Cecile Richards one of the recipients of its '2015 Women of the Year' awards," Browder said.

"These editors sincerely believe, as I once foolishly believed when I was a pro-choice writer for Cosmopolitan magazine, that they are defending truth and justice for women, but they're not. Pro-life feminists who see Planned Parenthood's abortion business for the betrayal of women it truly is are appalled at Glamour's failure to recognize the freedom of a woman to be a mother, whatever her situation or circumstances. I would like to remind both Planned Parenthood and its apologists atGlamour that Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger called abortion 'barbaric' — and she was right."

Browder's personal story of how she helped the sexual revolution hijack the women's movement — and its effects on her life and the future of America — is chronicled in her enthralling new book, Subverted. She recounts why, as a longtime Cosmopolitanjournalist — her dream job — she was a dedicated follower of Sanger and fabricated numerous stories, with the approval of her editors, to sell the casual-sex lifestyle to millions of single, working women.

For a limited time, we are extending our celebration of the 40th anniversary of Charisma. As a special offer, you can get 40 issues of Charisma magazine for only $40!

NEW - Life in the Spirit is your Spirit-filled teaching guide. Encounter the Holy Spirit, hear God speak to you, and enjoy timeless teachings on love, mercy and forgiveness.LEARN MORE!

"Choose a job you love and you will not have to work a day in your life" (Confucius)

+1
Luis Miguel Goitizolo

1162
61587 Posts
61587
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: ARE WE NOW IN THE END TIMES?
11/4/2015 4:37:40 PM

Greece carries out first relocation of refugees to Luxembourg

Reuters


Syrian and Iraqi refugees board an airplane during their relocation process, in this handout picture provided by the Greek Prime Minister's Office, at Athens' International Airport, Greece, November 4, 2015. REUTERS/Andrea Bonetti/Greek Prime Minister's Office/Handout via Reuters

By Michele Kambas

ATHENS (Reuters) - Greece relocated six asylum-seeking families to Luxembourg on Wednesday, the first such transfer from its soil under an European Union plan to ease the burden on nations inundated by an influx of hundreds of thousands of refugees.

Smiling parents holding young children posed for "selfies" with Greek Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras and Luxembourg Foreign Minister Jean Asselborn beside a Greek airliner on the runway before boarding the flight from Athens, live footage showed.

"Thirty in the face of thousands who have fled their homes in Syria and Iraq is a drop in the ocean," Tsipras said.

"But we hope that this becomes a stream, and then a river of humanity and shared responsibility, because these are the principles upon which the European Union was built."

About 86 people have already been transferred directly from Italy to Sweden and Finland under the scheme. But some EU member states have not signed up to it, citing a lack of resources and infrastructure or fears their stability and security could be at risk from taking in large numbers of migrants.

"The relocation of Iraqi and Syrian refugees that we saw today is an encouraging signal we are moving in the right direction," European Parliament head Martin Schulz said during a visit to Athens.

"It is not sufficient that (only) eight states of the EU are participating in the relocation. This is a common challenge."

The two-year, 780-million-euro ($852 million), relocation scheme is funded by the 28-member European Union.

More than 590,000 refugees have entered crisis-hit Greece via its long Mediterranean sea boundary with Turkey this year, putting even more pressure on a country struggling to lift itself out of its debt crisis.

EU SQUABBLING

On a visit to Athens which coincides with the first bailout review by Greece's international lenders, European Economic Commissioner Pierre Moscovici said Greece should not let up on reforms because of the migration influx.

"The Commission has but one compass, that of the growth and stability pact, and rules should be implemented," he said, speaking through an interpreter.

"Concerning Greece, we have another compass, the adoption of the memorandum of understanding and the (reform) program. Nothing should make us loosen these reforms."

Greece has already spent 1.5 billion euros on reception centers and staff to handle the migrants, a government source told Reuters. It needs 100 million euros for identification and relocation, the source said.

EU leaders approved the transfer of about 160,000 asylum seekers from Greece and Italy in September, after crisis talks marred by bitter disputes over how to share the burden.

However, the death toll from drowning among refugees making the short but dangerous crossing from Turkey to Greece's outlying eastern islands is now rising again as the seas have got rougher and temperatures drop as winter approaches.

From the beginning of the year until Oct. 29, at least 435 people died, including many children. Such danger could be avoided if refugees were registered and entered legal relocation schemes from Turkey itself, Tsipras said.

Five more people, three of them children, died in an overnight sea crossing from Turkey to the island of Lesbos, which has received the bulk of refugees coming from Turkey just a few miles away across the water.

Lesbos has run out of space in its mortuary for dead refugees and is now keeping them in a freezer truck. It has declared three days of mourning in memory of the victims.

The European Union wants leaders of the world's 20 biggest economies to also help tackle the migration crisis when they meet in Turkey this month.

($1 = 0.9153 euros)

(Additional reporting by Lefteris Papadimas, Angeliki Koutantou and Lefteris Karagiannopoulos; Editing by Alison Williams)

"Choose a job you love and you will not have to work a day in your life" (Confucius)

+1
Luis Miguel Goitizolo

1162
61587 Posts
61587
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: ARE WE NOW IN THE END TIMES?
11/4/2015 5:50:41 PM

Kerry’s Debacle in Vienna, by Michael Whitney

http://www.counterpunch.org/2015/11/03/kerrys-debacle-in-vienna/

shutterstock_222347737

Can someone explain to me why President Obama decided to announce that he’s going to deploy U.S. Special Forces to Syria on the same day that Secretary of State John Kerry was scheduled to meet with Russian and Iranian diplomats to discuss how to end the four and a half year-long war?

What was that all about?

Did he think he was going to scare the Russians and Iranians by rattling a few sabers?

Did he think that they’d call off their military offensive and withdraw their support for Assad?

What was he thinking?

Even Kerry was embarrassed by the announcement, which accomplished nothing except to convince the attendees that US foreign policy is concocted by amateurs who have no idea what they’re doing. That’s all it achieved.

According to the New York Times, “Mr. Kerry told reporters the timing of the announcement was ‘a coincidence’ and that he was not aware a decision had been made until earlier Friday.” (Obama Sends Special Operations Forces to Help Fight ISIS in Syria, New York Times)

“A coincidence”? Kerry thinks it was a coincidence?

Fortunately, the Times isn’t nearly as clueless as Kerry, in fact, they even admit what the real objective was. Check it out:

“President Obama announced on Friday that he had ordered several dozen Special Operations troops into Syria for the first open-ended mission by United States ground forces in that country…

… the dispatch of American troops …was meant to bolster diplomatic efforts by Secretary of State John Kerry, who on Friday reached an agreement in Vienna with countries with opposing stakes to explore “a nationwide cease-fire” …(Obama Sends Special Operations Forces to Help Fight ISIS in Syria, New York Times)

See? It wasn’t coincidence at all. It was intentional. It was designed to “bolster diplomatic efforts by Secretary of State John Kerry.” In other words, it was a threat, pure and simple.

To really appreciate how short-sighted the move was, we need to try to understand why these talks were convened to begin with. What’s the purpose of these negotiations and who requested them?

Well, Washington requested them; not Russia, not Iran, not Saudi Arabia, not Turkey and not Europe. Washington. And the reason Washington wanted these meetings is because (as the Times says) they want “to explore a nationwide cease-fire”. The administration wants to stop the fighting. Now. That’s why Kerry has been running around like a chicken with his head cut off to get all the diplomats together in one place ASAP.

But don’t presume for a minute that because Washington wants a ceasefire, that they also want a “political solution” or “negotiated settlement” or peace, because they don’t. Peace isn’t even on the agenda and it never has been. For the last four and a half years the US has been supporting Sunni extremists and other militant groups to make sure that peace is avoided at all cost, because peace would be an obstacle for the real objective, which is regime change.

So what changed; in other words, why is Kerry so eager to convene meetings now when he’s had every opportunity to call off the dogs for the last four years?

What changed is Vladimir Putin. Putin got sick and tired of the US ripping these Middle East countries to shreds and decided to put an end to it. So he formed a coalition (The 4+1: Iran, Iraq, Syria and Hezbollah) and started bombing the hell out of the jihadis.

This created a big problem for Washington because many of these violent extremists have been armed and trained by the US. They’re Washington’s “guys” and they’ve been doing Washington’s dirty-work by prosecuting a proxy war that is designed to topple Syrian President Bashar al Assad. That’s why Kerry convened the meetings, because he needs a ceasefire to save as many of these US-backed scoundrels as possible. Here’s Kerry’s actual statement following Friday’s confab:

“The theory of the ceasefire is very simple: Certain parties control or influence people with guns and the ability to fight. And if we do reach an agreement with respect to some of the road forward, there would be a responsibility for those with influence and those with – those who have direct control over certain parties, they would control them. Obviously, with respect to Daesh and al-Nusrah, there is no ceasefire, there would be none, and those are the early parameters. But much more needs to be discussed between militaries, the politics….. There are all kinds of possibilities, but they remain to be explored.”

Does it seem to you, dear reader, that Kerry is a lot more interested in working out the particulars of a ceasefire than he is in ending the conflict? That’s because his real aim is not peace and humanitarian assistance, but saving as many of these bloodthirsty hyenas as possible. That’s Washington’s goal.

Why does it matter?

It matters because if Washington doesn’t really want peace, then we have to assume that the talks are a charade and that Kerry is just buying time so he can regroup his forces and resume the war at some later date.

How do we know this?

We know it because Kerry delivered a speech to the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace the day before he left for Vienna in which he announced exactly what the US strategy is. Here’s what he said:

“In northern Syria, the coalition and its partners have pushed Daesh (ISIS) out of more than 17,000 square kilometers of territory, and we have secured the Turkish-Syrian border east of the Euphrates River. That’s about 85 percent of the Turkish border, and the President is authorizing further activities to secure the rest…….

We’re also enhancing our air campaign in order to help drive Daesh, which once dominated the Syria-Turkey border, out of the last 70-mile stretch that it controls.” (U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry on the Future of U.S. Policy in the Middle East, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace)

There it is in black and white. Kerry is basically telling his inner-circle friends thatWashington is moving on to Plan B, a fallback plan that will involve the establishment of a “safe zone” on the Syrian side of the Syrian-Turkish border where the US and its partners can continue to arm, train and deploy their jihadi hoodlums back into Syria whenever they choose to do so. So now we know what Obama’s Special Forces are really going to be doing in Syria, don’t we? They’re going to be overseeing operations that will put this plan into motion.

How do you think Putin is going to like the idea that Washington wants to annex sovereign Syrian territory so they can continue hostilities for the foreseeable future?

He’s not going to like it at all, in fact, it could be a big problem for him. If the US secures an area where it can dig in for the long-haul, then they might actually succeed in turning the conflict into another Afghanistan-type quagmire, which appears to be what many of Washington strategic planners actually want.

So what should Putin do? How does he achieve his objectives without getting bogged down?

Well, the first thing he’s got to do is realize that Vienna is a joke. The Obama administration isn’t serious about a diplomatic solution at all. It’s all just smoke and mirrors. Kerry’s admission that the US controls “about 85 percent of the Turkish border, and the President is authorizing further activities to secure the rest” proves beyond a doubt that Washington is already moving ahead with Plan B. That’s the whole deal in a nutshell.

Putin has probably already figured out that Vienna is fraud, which would explain why his main man, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, has refused to make any concessions on any of the points that are being discussed. (in Vienna) As far as Lavrov is concerned, all of Russia’s demands are going to be met or there’s not going to be a deal. The state and its institutions will remain intact, the terrorist groups will be exterminated, Assad will be a part of the “transitional government”, and the Syrian people will decide for themselves who leads them in the future. This is the basic Geneva roadmap and Lavrov is sticking to it like glue. Washington is going to comply because they’re not going to be given a choice in the matter.

As for the ceasefire: Well, Lavrov shot down that idea too. Here’s what he said: “If a ceasefire is declared, no terrorist organizations should be subjected to it.” In other words, the Russian-led coalition is going to keep killing these jokers until every last one of them is dead.

This statement hasn’t appeared in any western media, probably because it clarifies who is really setting the agenda. Russia is setting the agenda. It also suggests that there is no wiggle room in Moscow’s approach, and there isn’t. The terrorists, moderate or radical, are going to be hunted down and exterminated. End of story.

Here’s something else Lavrov said:

“Russia remains firm on its position that fighting terrorism should be conducted in accordance with the solid basis of international law, whether we are talking about military interventions from air or ground operations, these need to be conducted in agreement with the government or with the UN Security Council.”

In other words, if a country, like the US, decides to conduct military operations in Syria illegally, (which it is) then they do so at their own risk. Russia is going to continue to aggressively implement its battle plan whether US Special Forces put themselves in harms way or not.

Also, the Russian-led offensive is going to reestablish Syria’s sovereign borders. If Obama wants to claim a part of Syria’s territory as a refuge for his for-hire assassins, then he’d better be prepared to fight for it, because that’s what it’s going to take.

Putin has shown a remarkable ability to anticipate Washington’s moves and take preemptive steps to minimize their impact. Even so, it’s going to be tough sledding if Obama is able to create a sanctuary on the Turkish border where jihadis can enter and exit Syria at will keeping the country in a permanent state of turmoil. In that case, Putin would face his worse nightmare, the prospect of staying in Syria forever.

Does Putin have something up his sleeve to counter this threat? Would he, for example, be willing to deploy his own elite shock-troops from the 7th Guards Airborne-Assault (Mountain) Division, who have been spotted around Latakia, to wrest control of the border from rebel fighters thus putting a swift end to Washington’s twisted plan to create a safe zone, splinter Syria into smaller statelets and create a permanent haven for Islamic extremists?

Putin sees terrorism as a direct threat to Russia’s national security. He’s going to do whatever it takes to defeat the enemy and win the war. If that means he’s got to put Russian boots on the ground to get the job done, then that’s what he’ll do.


"Choose a job you love and you will not have to work a day in your life" (Confucius)

+1
Luis Miguel Goitizolo

1162
61587 Posts
61587
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: ARE WE NOW IN THE END TIMES?
11/5/2015 12:00:53 AM

Britain: Russian jetliner may have been downed by bomb

Associated Press



LONDON (AP) — British and U.S. officials said Wednesday they have information suggesting the Russian jetliner that crashed in the Egyptian desert may have been brought down by a bomb, and Britain said it was suspending flights to and from the Sinai Peninsula indefinitely.

Intercepted communications played a role in the tentative conclusion that the Islamic State group's Sinai affiliate planted an explosive device on the plane, said a U.S. official briefed on the matter. He spoke on condition of anonymity because he wasn't authorized to discuss intelligence matters publicly.

The official and others said there had been no formal judgment rendered by the CIA or other intelligence agencies, and that forensic evidence from the blast site, including the airplane's black box, was still being analyzed.

The official added that intelligence analysts don't believe the operation was ordered by Islamic State leaders in Raqqa, Syria. Rather, they believe that if it was a bomb, it was planned and executed by the Islamic State's affiliate in the Sinai, which operates autonomously.

Other officials cautioned that intercepted communications can sometimes be misleading and that it's possible the evidence will add up to a conclusion that there was no bomb.

British Foreign Secretary Philip Hammond said there was a "significant possibility" the crash was caused by a bomb, and Britain was suspending flights to and from the Sinai resort of Sharm el-Sheikh indefinitely.

After a meeting of the British government's crisis committee, COBRA, Hammond said Britain was advising its citizens not to go on vacation to Sharm el-Sheikh, which is visited by hundreds of thousands of Britons a year.

Meanwhile, Russian and Egyptian investigators said Wednesday that the cockpit voice recorder of the Metrojet Airbus 321-200 had suffered substantial damage in the weekend crash that killed 224 people. Information from the flight data recorder has been successfully copied and handed over to investigators, the Russians added.

Prime Minister David Cameron's office said British aviation experts had been sent to Sharm el-Sheikh, where the flight originated, to assess security before British flights there would be allowed to resume.

Several British flights due to leave Sharm el-Sheikh for the U.K. Wednesday were grounded, leaving hundreds of tourists stranded.

Cameron's 10 Downing St. office said late Wednesday that the team's preliminary report "noted that the Egyptian authorities had stepped up their efforts but that more remains to be done."

Downing Steet said it could not say "categorically" why the Russian jet had crashed.

"But as more information has come to light, we have become concerned that the plane may well have been brought down by an explosive device," it said in a statement.

Cameron had discussed the issue of security at the Sharm el-Sheikh airport with Egyptian President Abdel-Fattah el-Sissi, who flew to Britain on Wednesday for an official visit, Downing Street said.

The British disclosures were an embarrassment to el-Sissi, who had insisted in an interview with the BBC on Tuesday that the security situation in the Sinai Peninsula is under "full control." He has staked his legitimacy on restoring stability and reviving Egypt's economy.

The suspension of flights is a further blow to Egypt's troubled tourism industry, which has suffered in the unrest that followed the 2011 Arab Spring. The one bright spot for Egypt has been tourism at the Red Sea resorts.

The Irish Aviation Authority followed the British lead and directed Irish airlines to suspend flights to Sharm el-Sheikh Airport and into the airspace of the Sinai Peninsula "until further notice."

The British acted "too soon," said Hany Ramsay, deputy head of Sharm el-Sheikh's airport.

"Other countries might soon follow them, Ramsay told The Associated Press, suggesting there may be political and commercial motives behind the British statement.

"They want to hurt tourism and cause confusion," he added.

Several airlines, including Lufthansa and Air France, stopped flying over Sinai after the crash, but British carriers had kept to their schedules. Almost 1 million Britons visit Egypt each year, many to Sharm el-Sheikh, which is also popular with Russians.

The Metrojet flight carrying mostly Russian vacationers from Sharm el-Sheikh to St. Petersburg broke up in the air at an altitude of 31,000 feet 23 minutes after takeoff and came down in the Sinai desert, Russian officials said.

The plane crash site, 70 kilometers (44 miles) south of the city of el-Arish, lies in the northern Sinai, where Egyptian security forces have for years battled local Islamic militants.

Two U.S. officials told the AP on Tuesday that U.S. satellite imagery detected heat around the jet just before it went down.

The infrared activity could mean many things, including a bomb blast or an engine on the plane exploding due to a malfunction. One of the officials who spoke condition of anonymity because they weren't authorized to discuss the information publicly said a missile striking the jetliner was ruled out, because neither a missile launch nor an engine burn had been detected.

The Islamic State group claimed it had downed the plane because of Moscow's recent military intervention in Syria against the extremist group, but el-Sissi dismissed that as "propaganda" aimed at damaging Egypt's image.

Douglas Barrie, military aerospace expert with the International Institute for Strategic Studies in London, said it was too soon to say for sure the cause of the crash but the "general suspicion" that an explosive device was involved has been mounting. He said the British government's decision made sense.

"It's a political decision to err on the side of caution if it has been deemed possible that an explosive device was involved and there are concerns about the levels of security at the airport involved," he said.

The Moscow-based Interstate Aviation Commission, which oversees civil aviation in much of the former Soviet Union, said in a statement that information from the Metrojet flight's data recorder had been successfully copied and given to investigators. But the cockpit voice recorder "received serious mechanical damage."

Egypt's Aviation Ministry also said the voice recorder is "partially damaged" and that as a result "a lot of work is required in order to extract data from it."

Metrojet, the plane's owner, and Russian authorities offered conflicting theories of what happened. Metrojet officials have insisted the crash was due to an "external impact," not a technical malfunction or pilot error.

Russian officials have said it's too early to jump to that conclusion. El-Sissi told the BBC that the cause of the crash may not be known for months and that there should be no speculation until then.

Rescue teams in Egypt combed the Sinai desert for more remains and parts of the plane's fuselage as grief-stricken Russian families in St. Petersburg faced an agonizing wait to bury their loved ones.

Russian and Egyptian rescue workers expanded their search area in the Sinai to 40 square kilometers (15 square miles). The Russian state television channel Rossiya-24 reported the plane's tail was found 5 kilometers (3 miles) away from the rest of the wreckage.

Only one body has been released to a Russian family for burial so far. Relatives have identified 33 bodies and the paperwork is nearly finished on 22 of those, meaning the families should get the bodies shortly, said Igor Albin, deputy governor of St. Petersburg, in a televised conference call.

___

Dilanian reported from Washington. Associated Press writers Dmitry Lovetsky in St. Petersburg, Russia; Gregory Katz in London; Jim Heintz in Moscow and Nour Youssef in Cairo contributed to this report.


View Gallery


"Choose a job you love and you will not have to work a day in your life" (Confucius)

+1
Luis Miguel Goitizolo

1162
61587 Posts
61587
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: ARE WE NOW IN THE END TIMES?
11/5/2015 12:49:36 AM

Survey: Half of black millennials know of police abuse

Associated Press

In this Sunday, Aug. 9, 2015, file photo, protesters march to mark the one-year anniversary of Michael Brown being shot and killed by Ferguson Police Officer Darren Wilson. Years before the high-profile deaths of Brown, Trayvon Martin and Freddie Gray, more than half of African-American millennials indicated they, or someone they knew, had been victimized by violence or harassment from law enforcement, a report released Wednesday, Nov. 4, 2015, says. (AP Photo/Jeff Roberson)


WASHINGTON (AP) — Long before the deaths of Trayvon Martin, Michael Brown and Freddie Gray, more than half of African-American millennials indicated they, or someone they knew, had been victimized by violence or harassment from law enforcement, a new report says.

The information, from the "Black Millennials in America" report issued by the Black Youth Project at the Study of Race, Politics and Culture at the University of Chicago, reflects starkly different attitudes among black, Latino, Asian and white millennials when it comes to policing, guns and the legal system in the United States.

Researchers, who have surveyed millennials several times during the past decade, point out that the disparities existed well before the "Black Lives Matter" movement began.

In the 2009 Mobilization and Change Survey, 54.4 percent of black millennials answered yes to the question "Have you or anyone you know experienced harassment or violence at the hands of the police?" Almost one-third of whites, 1 in 4 Latinos and 28 percent of Asian-Americans surveyed said yes to the same question.

The study, released to The Associated Press on Wednesday, comes as the United States grapples with concerns over policing in minority communities following the deaths of Martin, 17, in Florida three years ago, Brown, 18, in Ferguson, Missouri, last year and Gray, 25, in Baltimore earlier this year. Their deaths, as well as those of other black men and women, have inspired nationwide protests under the "Black Lives Matter" and "Say Her Name" monikers.

But even while being the wellspring of those movements, a clear majority of black millennials — 71 percent — said in that same survey they believe police in their neighborhood were "there to protect you." Eighty-five percent of whites, 76 percent of Hispanics and 89 percent of Asians also said police were in their neighborhood to protect them.

"We know that young blacks are more likely to be harassed by the police. We know that they are more likely to mistrust their encounters with the police," said Cathy Cohen, chair of the political science department at the University of Chicago and leader of the Black Youth Project. "But we also know from actually collecting data that a majority of them believe that police in their neighborhood are actually there to protect them, so I think it provides us with more complexity."

Another survey done by the project in 2013, the Black Youth Project Quarterly Survey, showed that the percentage of blacks and Latinos who said they knew people who carried guns had declined, but more of them knew someone who was the victim of gun violence. Twenty-four percent of blacks and 22 percent of Latino millennials said they or someone they knew "carried a gun in the last month." Almost half of white millennials — 46 percent — said they knew of someone who carried a gun.

However, 22 percent of black millennials and 14 percent of Latino millennials said they or someone they knew were the victim of gun violence in the last year, compared with 8 percent of white millennials.

It's not surprising that young blacks and whites feel differently on these issues, given the different experiences the groups are reporting, said Jon Rogowski, an assistant political science professor at Washington University in St. Louis. For example, white millennials don't report having to explain themselves to police, while millennials of color report that officers stopped them simply to question them about what they were up to, he said.

"We see story after story about how this leads into a more combative situation which has escalated and led to, in some instances, tragic outcomes," said Rogowski, who co-authored the Black Millennials In America report. "So the experiences that these different communities have had based on where they live and the kinds of policing procedures that are in place there, we would argue, lead to these different patterns."

After arrest, black millennials also don't believe everyone gets fair treatment from the legal system in the United States. They're not alone in this feeling, with only 38 percent of all millennials agreeing with the statement that "the American legal system treats all groups fairly" in the 2014 Black Youth Project survey.

The 2009 survey was taken between October and November 2008, May and July 2009 and November and January 2010 and included 4,345 people 18 years old and older. The 2014 Black Youth Project Survey consisted of four surveys conducted between 2012 and 2014 and included 6,118 people.

The surveys were done by GfK Knowledge Network using GfK's probability-based KnowledgePanel, which is designed to be representative of the U.S. population. The margin of sampling error for all respondents is plus or minus 2.5 percentage points.

___

Black Millennials In America report: http://tinyurl.com/pacjuxp

__

Jesse J. Holland covers race, ethnicity and demographics for The Associated Press. Contact him at jholland@ap.org, on Twitter at http://www.twitter.com/jessejholland and on Facebook at http://www.facebook.com/jessejholland .

"Choose a job you love and you will not have to work a day in your life" (Confucius)

+1