The media calls George Zimmerman white. And the media calls Jake England white. Zimmerman’s mother, however, is Peruvian, according to the New York Daily News. The Council of Conservative Citizens says England is Cherokee Indian, but the media is calling him white.
Jake England, accused of shooting three Negroes.
Are American Indians and all Hispanics now “white”? (Nicholas Stix asked the question Sunday, April 9.) The media is certainly calling them that. Any race, any ethnic group of the Mongolian or Caucasian race, any human group that is not Negroid, is now referred to in the media (and in police reports) as “white.” This is pushing racism beyond the pale. Does the Negro define all race? You’re either black, or white? If you have a problem with blacks, that means you’re white?
Everyone noticed that “George Zimmerman,” by his photographs released in the press, was obviously not exactly white. The first photo that came out looked sufficiently Hispanic. We were then told that his mother was Peruvian. But, for the sake of racial drama, or some such iniquity, the media identified him as white. This, of course, stirred the passions of black people, and brought out the big guns of race pimpery: Al Sharpton and Jessie Jackson. This in turn made for more great stories.
George Zimmerman, half Peruvian, but, in the
media’s eyes, “white.” From an early police photo
But now, in the Tulsa, Oklahoma murders, there is a serious question about one of the two perpetrators: Jake England. The media called him white, but, people on the internet are saying he is a Cherokee Indian. He certainly looks less than white in his released photographs in the news, and those on his own FaceBook page. Again, it is more provocative news to make another white against black case. It is more effective to call and Indian white, especially if he killed a black.
So what is happening here? What about those Department of Justice statistics we quoted in “American Indian Homicide: The Real Racist Story”? For example, the Bureau of Justice Statistics indicated that 80% of the violent crimes against Indian women are committed by “whites.” The Department of Justice said that 60% of all violent crimes against Indians are committed by “whites.”
Jake England, Cherokee Indian, from northeast Oklahoma,
an area with historical co-habitation of Indians with
Given the fact that the media calls any non-Negroid people “white,” and, more importantly, police reports are identifying non-Negroes as “white,” these statistics must be reconsidered entirely. They appear to be intentional anti-white manipulations. It is another case of white oedipal liberals trying to destroy the white America.
Jared Taylor, president of American Renaissance, the gentleman’s think tank on white race relations in America, made some interesting observations about manipulated statistics in race crime reports. In “Race, Crime, and Violence” (July, 1999), Taylor classified American racial statistics by the categories of White, Black, Asian, and American Indian, so that, when he says “A black is 103 times more likely to rob a white than vice versa,” his white-based statistic is based on Caucasian people—white American people, not including Asians, Hispanics, Pacific Islanders, or American Indians. The crimes of Negroes against actual “white” Americans are then even much higher. While in 1997 some 49% of murder victims were black, 90% of the 15,289 murders in that year were ‘same race’ murders. There were 1,100 whites killed by blacks, and 480 blacks killed by whites, which means a black was 15 times more likely to kill a white than vice versa.
George Zimmerman, from a more recent photograph.
In 1994, American Renaissance (Samuel Taylor) reported:
In 1992, police reported 23,760 murders and non-negligent homicides. Although they are only 12 percent of the population, blacks committed about 55 percent of the murders. This means that murder rates, by race, were dramatically different. “Whites” (including Hispanics) killed at a rate of 5.1 per 100,000 while the rate for blacks was 43.3 per 100,000. Blacks are therefore 8.5 times more likely to commit murder than whites and, all by themselves, account for the fact that the United States has a higher murder rate than England or Italy.
These kinds of statistics, in which the figures for at least two other races, Asian and American Indian, are kept separate from the black and white statistics, have not been publicized to any helpful extent. Indeed, what we are seeing now, in the cases of George Zimmerman and Jake England, is the indication of intentional distortion of statistics by categorizing all people as either black or white. This is a clear attempt at reducing the black crime statistics in the United States. Whatever statistics are generation by a ratio of 10 blacks to 100 whites, those statistics will be greatly reduced if the ratio is 10 to 200, or to 500. The larger the “white” group, the smaller the black crime statistics—and also the more ‘intense’ the minority status of the black group.
Just how long, and to what extent this negligent if not sinister practice anti-white statistical bias has been going on is a subject in dire need of research.
An interesting historical note about race, from Oklahoma State Health Department certificates of birth or live birth, may shed some light on the issue. The standard 20th century birth form, until the 1980’s, asked for “Color or Race.” With that kind of choice, many Indians, for example, would put “White” on that line. People did not put “Red,” “Yellow” or even “Brown.” You might put Haitian, Mexican, or German, as your race, if you were so inclined to think of your self; but as your color, you would only think black or white. People responded to the first indicator required: “color.” You were either black or white. White, then, meant simply that you were not black.
So, there are perhaps historical factors affecting the habit of statistics, habits formed basically by census forms and health department forms. Late 19th and early 20th century census forms required answers from the same option: “Color or Race.”
Crimes reports from the Department of Justice are based generally on police reports, which, in turn, are based on what the perpetrators say they are, ethnically or racially, or nationally; the identity of the victims, if living, are based on what they say they are. If dead, the racial identity is based on their birth certificate, if available, or on what an autopsy report says.
Some of the statistics are derived from nothing more scientific than a survey.