If it's a "hate crime" you're looking for, the New York Times seems to have found a few in West Hollywood, California.
There, the paper reported last week, a homosexual was attacked and beaten by two men who wielded a baseball bat and a metal pipe. Two other homosexuals were attacked earlier in the same way. "The police say they believe the motivation for the beating was homophobia." So does almost everyone else in the area.
That may well be the motivation for the attacks, but how does anyone know? The assailants apparently said nothing to indicate their motivations.
The Times, the local police and the local community are quick to identify "hate" as the motive when the victims are homosexuals. But when the victims are just plain white and the attackers aren't, nobody ever seems to know what the motivation is.
Two days after the Times carried the story about the supposed "hate crime" in California, it carried another story about a brutal bank robbery and mass murder in Norfolk, Nebraska. In that crime, the robber-killers opened fire during their botched attack on a local bank and slaughtered five people. The Times reported the names of three suspects arrested later. It never reported that all four suspects are Hispanics, nor that all but one of the victims are white.
Of course there's no evidence it was a hate crime.
How could the Nebraska Massacre be a "hate crime"? After all, according to the Justice Department, hate crimes committed by Hispanics are classified as having been committed by whites, thus inflating the number of white perpetrators. Moreover, as the Census Bureau likes to remind us constantly, "Hispanic" is not a racial category; a "Hispanic" can be of any race (except when they commit "hate crimes," in which case they are whites).
But while it never occurs to the Times or the bureaucrats whose racial pigeon-holing habits it follows that racial motivations just might have had something to do with the Nebraska Massacre, it clearly occurred to the local Hispanics.
"To the white community, please accept our profound condolences and sorrows," said one local Hispanic during a "healing service" held after the shootings, according to the Washington Post. Apparently this gentleman understands racial realities better than most people. He's not alone.
No sooner had news of the massacre hit the headlines than the head of the state "Mexican-American Commission" popped up in town "to show support for the Hispanic community," as the Omaha Herald reported. She "cautioned that last week's tragedy may be a setback for relations between Anglos and Latinos" and "instructed Hispanics to contact the commission if hateful or racial incidents spring from this tragedy." [VDARE.COM note: The head of the Nebraska Mexican-American Commission is Cecilia Olivarez Huerta – send her email]
That's swell. Four Hispanics shoot down several whites in cold blood, and it's the Hispanics for whom "support" needs to be shown and the whites who are under suspicion for "hateful or racial incidents."
As for the other notorious recent anti-white racial crime, the Wichita Massacre of December 2000, in which four whites were kidnapped, the women raped and all murdered by two blacks, the Times has never to this day bothered to carry one single story about it.
I know because I checked its computer archive. For the Times, as for many whites, anti-white hatred doesn't really exist because race doesn't exist.
For non-whites (in the Nebraska case, Hispanics), the common assumption seems to be that Hispanics will be blamed for the crime, because they think in terms of race. For them race is a living reality; for whites, it's not.
In neither the Wichita nor the Nebraska crimes is there direct evidence of racial or ethnic "hate"—nor is there in the West Hollywood attacks any clear evidence of hatred of homosexuals. Usually in crimes the police designate as "hate crimes," the criminals have to say something like a racial, sexual, or religious slur that indicates motivation.
But obviously, not all criminals are always so obliging, and for many of the kinds of creatures that commit these crimes, the motives aren't always clear anyway. Hate, greed, lust, and anger, among other passions, all hang together in their psyches.
What needs to be done, aside from a good deal more honesty and consistency on the part of newspapers like the New York Times, is to stop trying to lump "hate crimes" together as some kind of meaningful category and start collecting data on simple "racial and ethnic attacks," in which perpetrators of one race commit violence against victims of another, regardless of motive.
That kind of statistic is much simpler to collect and avoids the swamp of identifying motives. And it might also tell us something important about who is really committing more violence against other races.
COPYRIGHT CREATORS SYNDICATE, INC.
October 03, 2002
