Sunday, 22 November 2009

Hate by any other name

I wonder how many white Americans know that if they were attacked by a gang of Blacks, Hispanics or Asians, who beat them to the ground and then set about them with machetes, Clubs and bats, while shouting “We hate you you white [expletive] Cracker, we are doing this to you because we hate you and your whole [expletive] white race!” their attackers could not be charged with a hate crime. Even if the gang then pulled out guns and fired a dozen bullets into their heads while screaming “We hate you, hate you, we hate you!” Their murder would still not be a hate crime.

They could be murdered, raped, tortured, even dismembered alive, but, no matter how much actual hate was involved in their dispatch from this earth, it would still not count as a hate crime.

Meanwhile, however, the act of tugging a headscarf, could well be a hate crime even if no physical injury occurred. That is provided, of course, that it was not a heterosexual, white Christian wearing the headscarf at the time it was tugged, in that case, it would not be a hate crime, even if the headscarf tugging were accompanied by an assault with a 50 pound mallet.

The reason for this is that as white people, unless they are gay (since October 2009), disabled or, in some limited circumstances, female, are not a “protected class” under US anti-discrimination legislation, they are therefore, not protected by the current hate crimes legislation, and, as such, can not be the victim of a hate crime.

Technically white people over 40 are protected from discrimination, but only when the discrimination relates specifically to age, which isn't much help when they are being battered around the head by a 200 pound Negro.

Believe it or not, the same distinction does not apply in Britain, however, the effect is the same, as we all know, the police and crown prosecution service would rather crawl over red hot coals than charge a non-white person with a racially motivated crime against a white person. The terrible killing of Kriss Donald was an exception only because the authorities could not deny the racial motive of his killers, who went out looking for a white boy, snatched an innocent child from the street and tortured him to death for no reason other than the colour of his skin.

Even the CPS could not find a way to ignore that, although they certainly tried, and the media have been busily burying all memory of the case ever since.

In America that would have made no difference. In the USA, Kriss's skin colour, the very thing his murderers killed him for, would by law have prevented his murder being treated as a race hate crime. The law deliberately denies white males protection from hate crimes.

The hate crimes legislation was recently extended to include hate crimes against gays and lesbians. This move was strongly opposed by the so called Religious Right, and by many Nationalists. By doing so, they again demonstrated their seemingly suicidal instinct for picking the wrong target.

It matters not a jot that an additional minority group has been included amongst the preferred groups who have been selected for protection, what matters is that the legislation deliberately denies protection to another politically chosen section of the population.

By opposing the extension of the legislation, the Right left themselves open to, in some instances legitimate, accusations of homophobia, whilst by their very actions appearing to imply that the hate crimes legislation, as it stood, was acceptable, when it was most certainly not.

The Right allowed themselves to appear beset by irrational prejudice, whereas, in fact, the law itself was drafted on that very basis. The iniquity of the US hate crimes laws are that they exclude selected groups, based on race, gender and (now) sexual orientation, the Right should be challenging the left to defend their anti white racism and bigotry, rather that providing them with diversion to hide behind, not to mention an open goal through which they could and did call us bigots.

A law should protect everyone, or it is a bad law. The current hate crimes legislation in both its prior and post October 2009 forms is a bad law because it enshrines racial and sexual discrimination into US law, and it is that iniquity which the right should have been fighting.

Those who opposed the Matthew Shepard Act in the manner they did were defeated, because it is indefensible to argue that a law should not protect a particular group, however, that is what the law already does and why the law itself is indefensible. The exclusion of whites from the protection of hate crimes legislation is indefensible, and results entirely from bigotry and racial prejudice on the part of the left wing zealots who drafted the law.

The exclusion is based on the politically and racially motivated fantasy that most hate crimes are committed by young heterosexual white males, which is patently untrue. In fact young white males are most likely the main victims of hate crimes, statistically they are the main victims of interracial violence, and it denies all credibility to suggest that the majority of that violence does not have racial animus at its root.

There are vast areas of many US cities where an unarmed white man dare not go in peril of his life, there are far fewer, if any, areas where a black man would be at similar risk, yet it is the black man, not the white who the law protects.

Everyone knows that to send a young white man to an unsegregated American prison is cruel and unnatural punishment, the lowlife scum in Hollywood, who out sick society treat as heroes, laugh and joke about the multiple gang rape and violent abuse of white men in prison, crimes which are far less likely to be inflicted on a black man. Yet, at the same time political correctness bars the authorities from even acknowledging this let alone protecting the victims, for no reason other than that the victims are white and their abusers black.

America is littered with hidden hate crimes which are not acknowledged as such because the law is not intended to protect white people.

In 2002, the Carr brothers, Reginald and Jonathan, raped, sodomised and tortured five young whites in Wichita, inflicting acts of extreme violence and humiliation on them including forcing the three young male victims to perform involuntary sexual acts both on each other and on the female victims, before taking them naked into the frozen winter countryside and shooting each, execution style (amazingly one of the two female victims survived). Shortly after killing four of their victims the Carrs attempted to hijack another woman, again a white one, almost certainly with the same motive.

Despite the fact that the brothers were black and all their victims white and in the face of the obvious hatred involved in their crime, the authorities laughably (should that be contemptibly?) declared that “race played no part” in the crime and the brothers did not face hate crimes charges. This was of course a charade, they could not have been charged with a hate crime because of the skin colour of their victims.

Likewise, none of those charged and currently standing trial for the brutal 2007 rape and murder of Channon Christian and Christopher Newsom in Knoxville can face hate crimes charges, despite the level of brutality involved. Brutality minimised and suppressed by the national media, who even denied that genital mutilation had been inflicted, until one lawyer fainted in court at the sight of the photographs.

I defy anyone to suggest that the killers in both the Wichita and Knoxville cases would not have been automatically charged with hate crimes had the races been reversed.

The abject hypocrisy was exposed n the Knoxville case when the prosecution argued that racism could not be involved because one of the defendants had previously dated a drug addled white girl. This ignored the fact that he had actually beaten the woman, and also than out in Virginia, Bobby Ray Brewster faced hate crimes charges for allegedly beating and raping his own black girlfriend, a crime the alleged "victim" now claims never occurred.

in ways such as this the authorities will perform somersaults to avoid charging a non white person with a hate crime against a white person, because they don't want to admit that the law does not permit them to do so.

Some actually argue that whites are not entitled to such protection because “whites have power”. This echoes that deeply evil and unpleasant old bigot Jo Brand's claim that you can't be racist against whites for the same reason. These claims completely ignore the fact that in numerical terms both in America and in Britain there are more deprived white people living beneath the poverty line than all other racial groups .

The lying media will throw statistics at us to suggest otherwise, but in terms of the numbers of people officially living in poverty, there are more whites than any other group, in America it is more than twice as many.

They have no power, why are they not entitled to protection?

The left will no doubt claim that even deprived whites have power because other whites do. However, this is like claiming that the average citizen in a third world dictatorship has power because those at the top of their society have billions of dollars in Swiss bank accounts and enjoy more power over others in their country than a white man has dreamed of since the Romanovs were shot in Ekaterinburg.

The assertion is not merely hypocritical it is deceitful, and deliberately so.

The reason that “Hate crimes” do not protect white people because they are designed to fit a fake world view within an entirely fake world, which exists only in the agenda deluded minds of the true believers and and possibly the script writers of CSI Vegas and Law and Order Special Victims Unit. A politically correct fantasy world where all hate victims are black or brown and all hate criminals are white, male and preferably “preppy”.

As the left in Britain cling to their tiny number of totem white perpetrator hate crimes, such as the tragic murders of Stephen Lawrence and Anthony Walker, whilst ignoring the far higher number of crimes which do not fit their chosen narrative, the American left have their celebrated handful of anti-black hate crimes, which they constantly roll out whenever they need to distract the public from what is really happening. The most famous of this relatively small number of white perpetrator hate crimes is the truly terrible murder of James Byrd Jnr.

However, even that awful crime is not exactly what it seems. The main perpetrator in the killing of James Byrd Jnr, a man called John King, had himself been the victim of multiple hate crimes, having been subjected to repeated gang rapes by black men in prison not long before the killing.

King had shown no previous evidence of being a "racist" before he went to prison, but he had become one by the time he came out. This does not, in any way excuse what was done to James Byrd Jnr, but who can doubt that had a black man been repeatedly raped and brutalised by white men, this would most certainly have been held up as mitigation no matter how awful a crime he then went on to commit.

It is not my purpose to defend John King, merely to point out our society does not permit him the claim to mitigation which they would willingly grant a black man, merely because King is white.

The fact hate crimes legislation enshrines anti-white racism into US law is hardly surprising in a country where a Hispanic anti-white racist and feminist bigot has just been appointed to the Supreme court, and where the legal system conspires to deny “standing” to anyone attempting to question the highly dubious eligibility of their affirmatively appointed president. However, the prejudice behind this law goes further, as anti white racism has become an increasingly prominent feature in popular culture.

In music hip-hop and rap are not only valued above blue grass, but they is now valued above the classical greats, and certainly never mocked and disparaged in the same way. When the public watch the popular soaps they see dim and dawkish whites confronting bright and confident blacks and their cop shows are all about white crime, black heroes and politically correct victims.

All the while Americas superpower strength is falling away, its streets are less safe and its infrastructure is crumbling. As its once great cities like Baltimore, Cleveland and St Louis follow New Orleans and Detroit into crime ridden decay and social collapse one is left to wonder if this was somehow the aim.

We in Europe should tremble as we watch, because what happens in America today will most likely happen here tomorrow and the same dark forces that steer our course steer theirs. There is an agenda to what is going on and it is not an agenda designed to serve us of European origin well.

As with so much else, the true hate behind the hate crimes laws lurks in the hearts of those who drafted them, and they have only just begun.

22 comments:

JPT said...

Read my 'Harry Brown' post for a similar(ish) thing.

Sarah Maid of Albion said...

Yes I just read it. For anyone who hasn't here is a link to it

It makes a very similar point. In reality the gangs are black but in fantasy propaganda they are white.

Anonymous said...

Those pics makes one realise that race is just a social construct!

alanorei said...

One thing for sure, putting different races together that don't belong together is a social DEstruct.

You'll see the same 'non-racist' racist crimes on BBC Crimewatch, no matter how violent and vicious the crime is, e.g. brutal rape of heavily pregnant white woman by black burglar in North London in May 2008, as I posted on September 30th last.

But on BBC1's Children In Need Wogan referred to Cheryl Tweedy-Cole as "the nation's sweetheart."

Saints preserve us.

Sir Terence and co. (including CT-C and her (current, serially unfaithful) other half) should all be sent a copy of this article, Sarah.

Dr.D said...

All "hate crime" legislation, wherever it exists, is a fraud. If people would only think clearly, crime is not perpetrated against people out of any motive other than hatred, so the term "hate crime" is redundant. There are no personal injury "love crimes," nor are there "crimes of necessity" or any sorts of personal injury crime other than those driven by hate.

The whole idea of "hate crime" legislation is to have unequal justice, a fundamental social flaw that people have worked for years to remove. He we have idiots willfully putting it right back into the system!

The Holy Scripture has something to say about this: Leviticus 19:15 Ye shall do no unrighteousness in judgment: thou shalt not respect the person of the poor, nor honour the person of the mighty: but in righteousness shalt thou judge thy neighbour. It is quite clear that the Lord God expects all people to be judged equally, without special consideration given to one group or special condemnation given to another. Hate laws are against the law of God.

Dr.D said...

All "hate crime" legislation, wherever it exists, is a fraud. If people would only think clearly, crime is not perpetrated against people out of any motive other than hatred, so the term "hate crime" is redundant. There are no personal injury "love crimes," nor are there "crimes of necessity" or any sorts of personal injury crime other than those driven by hate.

The whole idea of "hate crime" legislation is to have unequal justice, a fundamental social flaw that people have worked for years to remove. He we have idiots willfully putting it right back into the system!

The Holy Scripture has something to say about this: Leviticus 19:15 Ye shall do no unrighteousness in judgment: thou shalt not respect the person of the poor, nor honour the person of the mighty: but in righteousness shalt thou judge thy neighbour. It is quite clear that the Lord God expects all people to be judged equally, without special consideration given to one group or special condemnation given to another. Hate laws are against the law of God.

Sarah Maid of Albion said...

To my mind the huge mistake which the Right made was not insisting that the law be extended to give equal protection to everybody.

That would have neutralised the evil damn act. The law is designed to stigmatise white people, and it can't do that if it treated everyone equally as it should do under the constitution.

Now it has been extended to cover gays, it will be interesting to see how the authorities try to hide the fact that most anti gay hate crimes are committed by minorities.

Anonymous said...

Who will be brave enough to post the videos that have just gone up on SA Sucks I wonder? How South Africa was stolen from us all.

Anonymous said...

I know I'm the proverbial fly in the ointment but I wonder if you guys realise that the huge imbalance you now see with regards to whites having no protection is because previously black men were much more likely to be arrested if they attacked whites while whites who attacked blacks were not even investigated. There were many blacks innocently put to death for crimes against whites that they did not commit. I'm not saying that the situation now is fair but you reap what you sow and what goes up must come down - and America and Great Britain were at the top and now theyre on their way down making way for the far east and Asian giants. That's life and history and there is nothing much we can do about it is there?

Lilliput

PS - My house was just burgled by two white folk - there are wankers of all colours !!!!!!!!!!

Sarah Maid of Albion said...

Anonymous 13:22

Do you mean this?

WARNING!: Very very Graphic

Sarah Maid of Albion said...

I am sorry to hear of your house Liliput, I hope you didn't lose too much. It is lucky you know who did it.

As to the rest of your post, do you base your claim on evidence or anecdote?

There are many legends about historic white racism, they are not all true

alanorei said...

Your comments are precise, Dr. D, as always.

As Thomas Carlyle once said:

"If you will have your laws obeyed without mutiny, see well that they be pieces of God Almighty's Law: otherwise all the artillery in the world will not keep down mutiny."

It is my firm belief that our present anti-British Government will soon find out the truth of Carlyle's observation, to its collective cost.

Be therefore encouraged, my fellow* mutineers.

*In the generic sense, of course.

As the prophet Isaiah said, millennia ago, "To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them" Isaiah 8:20.

The task of the BNP is to start turning on the lights again, in a place that is now judicially as dark as the pit of hell, which is not the only resemblance of the present House of Commons to said abode.

P.S. Re: US blacks being disproportionately and/or unjustly punished, supposedly, I posted this comment on Sarah's blog on July 25th this year but it bears repeating, even if it too is only anecdotal:

[A] white liberal congressman [once] protested that most individuals who went to the chair or gas chamber are "poor, black and friendless." He was answered by a black congressman who said that "Most of the people they shot are poor, black, friendless and DEAD."

Having also been burgled and with my son having suffered the theft of a new £300 bike some years ago, as well as successfully resisting the theft of his wallet as a student in London this year, all 3 crimes having been perpetrated by local white trash, I too sympathise with Lilliput. The felons will face a Higher Court one day, where they will discover that flogging and hanging would have been an easier option when the Judge pronounces sentence.

Anonymous said...

Sarah,

Yes... If the world paid proper attention during the supposed dark days of apartheid they would see why we needed it.

Anonymous said...

We in Europe should tremble as we watch, because what happens in America today will most likely happen here tomorrow and the same dark forces that steer our course steer theirs.

Here in America, we recognize the situation as being the reverse of what you describe, and fear that Europe's current Orwellian nightmare, where making even factual statements about the Holocaust is illegal, is the bleak future we face.

Sarah Maid of Albion said...

Anonymous 17:37

You are probably correct, certainly Europe is far further down the road to an Orwellian Hell as far as free speech, or the lack of it, is concerned.

Yours is a more violent society (although we are catching up fast) hence the madness of politically correct hate laws which neither protect the main victims nor punish the primary offenders is all the more stark.

Editor said...

Gentry Family Laid To Rest After Brutal Attack When, when will they stop killing us...

Anonymous said...

Great writing Sarah. I am an American who discovered your blog a few months ago and have been visiting every day since.

BTW, not to nit pick but the Wichita killings were in 2000 (November I believe).

Sarah Maid of Albion said...

Thanks Anonymous 12:25

You are correct, the killing was in 2000, it was the trial which happened in 2002.

That was careless of me.

I am pleased you enjoy the blog

Sarah

Wotan said...

They are sick. They introduce laws that make a large proportion of the country less safe than they were before.

In which case their days are numbered. The people of this country will not tolerate arrogant ethnics walking around with a race card in their pocket and a chip on their shoulders for that much longer.

Anonymous said...

Sarah,

Even if they aren't all true - enough certainly are - otherwise we wouldn't be in this situation.

Lilliput

Sarah Maid of Albion said...

Liliput

Why must it be true, even in part? If part of it is a lie, why can't all of it be a lie?

If would not be the first time that a people were condemned on the basis of a lie.

Dr.D said...

As usual, Lilliput, you have not said very clearly what it is you are saying. You said, "Even if they aren't all true..." Even if WHAT are not all true, Lilliput? THEY needs an antecedent.

Just what on earth were you really saying?