by Russ Kick
Jacksonville, Florida. A group of four to six white men agreed that they would brutalize the next black person they saw walking down the street. That person turned out to be a mentally disabled 50-year-old, whom they beat and stomped into unconsciousness. He later died of his injuries.
Are you surprised that you’ve never heard of these sickening murders based on racial hatred? You didn’t see saturation coverage on the news. You didn’t hear politicians decrying racism. You didn’t see a livid Jesse Jackson on CNN. Why? Because these acts of brutality didn’t happen exactly as I described above. Oh, they happened, all right. The only thing is, the races of the attackers and victims were reversed. That is, a white man was beaten and then crushed by a mob of 40 black people who were furious that a black man bumped into his truck.¹ In Jacksonville, it was a gang of black men who stomped a mentally-disabled man to death solely because he was white.²
Because these hate crimes were perpetrated by black against whites — even though they were based completely on racial hatred — the national media, politicians, and civil rights leaders ignored them.
Below are some more hate crimes that have been ignored because they happened the “wrong way” (i.e., they were black-on-white instead of white-on-black).
At their trial, “Detectives described the woman’s night of terror, including repeated threats to kill her.
“The woman leaped out of the minivan after one of the men raped her. Naked, she sprinted across Lefthand Canyon Road before Steve Yang tackled her, authorities said.
“‘They were all screaming at her, calling her names and hitting her,’ Detective Jane Harmer testified.
“Yang put her in a headlock and dragged her back into the van, where she was raped repeatedly, Harmer said.
“‘It was a free-for-all,’ Harmer testified.
“One man threatened to ‘cut and burn her,’ and another put a gun barrel to the back of her head when they released her, Harmer said.”9
This particular case provides a perfect example of the terrible way that anti-white hate crimes are handled. First, the investigators decided not to tell police officers about the racial aspects of the case, even while the police were conducting a manhunt to find the boy’s killer. When this was revealed by the Washington Post, city council member Joyce Woodson defended this withholding of information from the cops on the front line. “What they did was proper. We already live in a racially charged world.” The Democratic mayor of Alexandria implied his agreement: “Efforts to sensationalize this investigation will only hurt this investigation.”13
To make things even stranger, the FBI offered to send agents and a fugitive task force to help with the manhunt, but the local police rejected the offer. They also refused the help of the FBI’s profilers, forensics experts, and others.14
Eventually, the police arrested a suspect who was reportedly tied to the scene by DNA evidence. In another bizarre move, the Justice Department — which had acknowledged that it was monitoring the case — declined to prosecute the killing as a hate crime. The government’s prosecutor in the case cannot charge the victim with a hate crime. “There’s no applicable hate crimes law in Virginia,” he explained.15
An editorial in the Washington Times pointedly commented on the deafening silence surrounding the brutal child-murder: “Has anyone seen Jesse Jackson around lately? Kweisi Mfume? Al Sharpton? For persons whose political antennae are ordinarily so sensitive that they can pick up racial tremors a thousand miles away, they seem to have overlooked a possible hate crime right here in the vicinity of the nation’s capital.”
Even though all of the above incidents occurred in the last ten years, anti-white hate crimes are not new. The Village Voice writes of “the wave of random street killings that terrorized San Francisco in 1973. The ‘Zebra killers’ struck without warning, murdering whites at night. Most victims were shot. One was raped, another beheaded. Four young black Muslims were arrested in 1974 and charged with 14 murders, seven assaults, one rape, and an attempted kidnapping. The Zebra killers were convicted in 1976.”16
The Central Park jogger, you’ll recall, was a white woman who was gang raped and beaten almost to death by a gang of black and Hispanic teenagers in 1989. This incident introduced the term “wilding” to the nation. As Nicholas Stix described it: “The boys dragged her 200 yards to a secluded place, where they fractured her skull with a plastic-wrapped, four-foot lead pipe, and some large rocks. The boys ripped the Jogger’s clothes off of her, tying her hands behind her back with her sweatshirt, gagging her, and taking turns beating, stomping, and raping the unconscious woman, as 75 per cent of her blood oozed into the Central Park grass. They left her, with bruises, welts, and wounds literally from head to toe, for dead.”17
Despite the fact that physical evidence, eye witnesses, and video-taped confessions by the attackers in their parents’ presence all pointed to the young men’s guilt, protestors outside the courtroom referred to the trial as a “lynching.”
Four years later, a black man named Colin Ferguson opened fire inside a commuter train in Long Island. Six people died and nineteen were injured. “Police recovered from Ferguson’s pocket a handwritten note titled, ‘Reasons for This.’ It expressed hatred towards whites, Asians, and ‘Uncle Tom blacks,’ and stated that Nassau County, Long Island was chosen as ‘the venue’ because of its predominantly white population.”19 How did politicians and commentators respond to this racially motivated bloodbath? President Clinton ignored the racial aspects, instead using the incident as an excuse to once again call for tighter gun control laws. Commentators either denied that it was a hate crime or admitted that it was but then tied themselves in knots to explain it away. The Dallas Morning News interviewed a sociologist who “conceded that Ferguson picked his victims on the basis of race, but did not think this justified the hate crime label.”20
A scholarly book on hate crimes (discussed more below) notes: “When the Reverend Louis Farrakhan, Nation of Islam leader, mentioned Colin Ferguson, the Long Island Railroad mass murderer, at a rally in New York City, the audience cheered. In a speech before an audience of 2,000 at Howard University, Nation of Islam spokesman Khalid Muhammed drew loud applause when he stated, ‘I love Colin Ferguson, who killed all those white folks on the train.’”21
This is a “straw man” argument: Even if it were true, it would still not affect the fundamental point that anti-black hate crimes receive national coverage and trigger political denunciations, while anti-white crimes are ignored. Besides, isn’t the media all about reporting flukes? As they say in the news business, “Dog bites man” is not a story, but “Man bites dog” is. Or, to use another example, an airplane landing safely is not news — an airplane crashing is. So if these instances of anti-white violence were incredibly rare, that would be even more of a justification for covering them, not less. But these instances aren’t rare. The statistics show this.
The book Hate Crimes: Criminal Law and Identity Politics is a revelatory study of the phenomena. It was coauthored by James B. Jacobs, who is the director of the Center for Research in Crime and Justice at New York University and a professor of law at the NYU School of Law, and Kimberly Potter, an attorney who was formerly a research fellow at the Center for Research in Crime and Justice. Published by Oxford University Press as part of their Studies in Crime and Public Policy series, its credibility is as impeccable as possible.
The loudly promoted “hate crime epidemic” in America is an illusion.
The authors also reveal the surprising statistics regarding interracial crime. It turns out that 80 percent of violent crimes involve an attacker and victim of the same race. “For the 20 percent of violent crimes that are interracial, 15 percent involve black offenders and white victims; 2 percent involve white offenders and black victims; and 3 percent involve other combinations.”23
These statistics include all instances of interracial violent crime, not just those labeled “hate crimes.” To see the rates of anti-white and anti-black violence that have been categorized as hate crimes, one only needs to take a cursory look at the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reports specifically on hate crime to see that blacks commit them at a higher rate than whites.24
According to the US Census Bureau’s most recent projection (for Sept. 1, 2000), 82.2 percent of the US population is white, while 12.8 percent is black. If Hispanics are excluded from both counts, then the numbers are 71.4 percent white and 12.2 percent black.25
In the most recent year for which FBI data are available (1998), we see that there were 2,084 anti-black hate crimes committed by whites, and 567 anti-white hate crimes committed by blacks. Though the absolute number of anti-black crimes is 3.6 times as high as anti-white crimes, keep in mind that there are almost six times as many whites as blacks in the US. To get a true picture, we need to look at the proportional rates.
Eighty percent of violent crimes involve an attacker and victim of the same race.
Looking at hate crimes involving death and rape tells an even starker story. In 1998 five white people were killed in hate crimes, while three black people were killed in the same period. During that year, four women of each race were raped as a result of racial hatred. If these incidents were occurring between the races at equal rates based on their populations, we’d expect to see six times as many blacks killed and raped by whites as the opposite. Yet we see an equal number of rapes and almost twice as many anti-white slayings.
How can we ever hope to bridge the racial divide if we won’t even look at the hard facts of racism?
It’s obvious that the media, politicians, and civil rights groups have an agenda: They want to keep us ignorant of the realities of race relations. They present us with the completely untrue view that only white people commit hate crimes, or, if it must be admitted that blacks also commit hate crimes, they are seen as isolated incidents, bizarre anomalies that somehow don’t qualify as hate crimes.
The reality of the situation is that we’re all attacking each other. A look at the FBI’s hate crime statistics will pry the scales from your eyes. Besides the figures already mentioned, you’ll see that Native Americans and whites are attacking each other in equal numbers, blacks are attacking Asians, Asians are attacking Jews, multi-racial groups are attacking blacks, and on and on.
The issue of violent racial hatred is much more complex, universal, and disturbing than the simple-minded white-on-black paradigm that is universally touted.
Clearly, the issue of violent racial hatred is much more complex, universal, and disturbing than the simple-minded white-on-black paradigm that is universally touted. We need to accept this fact as individuals, then pressure the media, politicians, and other opinion-makers to accept it, too, and start telling the sticky truth about the situation.