Enough with the obfuscation, already (Part One)

 by Takuan Seiyo  

| View comments |  Print This Post

The deafening national silence about black-on-white crime would qualify as an eternal disgrace merely in comparison with the deafening roar that accompanies white-on-black/ brown crime.  Without easily accessible, true data about racial, ethnic and nationality group crime rates, the citizen is deprived of the foundation on which to judge the necessity and fairness of a variety of policies ranging from crime profiling, to the true effects of immigration laws and enforcement procedures.

Part One — Blinded, On Purpose

Then the emperor walked along in the procession under the gorgeous
canopy, and everybody in the streets and at the windows exclaimed,
'How beautiful the Emperor's new clothes are!'¹

And so are we, pretending to revel in "diversity," begging forgiveness when our accidental mentions of statistical racial truths are smashed by foaming zealots screaming RACISM!, and pressing closer to the walls to make ample clearance for the preening barbarians shimmying down the center.

Like a transparent, barn-size boulder, there is a huge fact lying in our midst, with our government, mass media, educational institutions, and a goodly part of our diversity-bamboozled citizenry pretending that it's not there. Tiptoeing around the consensual invisible, we leave it to the "racist right" to notice and speak of the boulder and of the thousand cuts it inflicts on all of us tiptoers bumping into its sharp edges a thousand times a day.

I am speaking of black and brown crime, particularly against whites. In every city in America, and increasingly in its suburbs and countryside, one reads weekly of horrific, incomprehensible crimes.  Those of us who haven't yet become Invasion of the Body Snatchers green pods, know that a great many such crimes are perpetrated by blacks and Latinos on whites. But press and TV reports tend to omit the race of non-white criminals, often failing even to report on such crimes, while giving ample coverage to crimes committed by whites.

A polar bear, not koala

The mass media have gone over to the dark side. They might as well be part of the old KGB's disinformatsya campaign. Unless one is lucky enough to stumble on a telltale detail the editors forgot to excise: a name like Treyshawn, an apparel item like a do-rag, a location that's in a heavily ethnic neighborhood, one remains as clueless about the nature of America's crime reality as one is about its other realities. Clueless except for an inchoate sense of foreboding, fear, and a determination to do what it takes to live in zones not yet blessed by the touted bounty of ethno-racial diversity.

It is outside our theme and allotted space to prove here that there is a pervasive anti-West, anti-white, anti-American bias in the mass mainstream media (MSM). People who need convincing ought to familiarize themselves first with the work of the Media Research Center, and with the hundreds of studies and books that have dealt with this topic since The Left-Leaning Antenna did so in 1971.

It will suffice to say here that there is a giant social experiment going on – the largest and, excepting the Bolshevik regime, the most destructive in the history of Western Civilization. Like with the Soviets, the consent of the governed has not been sought. Multiculturalism, Political Correctness, the fetish of diversity, the suppression of truthful research about racial and cultural differences — all serve as the ideological platforms in this experiment, and the education industry and the mass media serve as its main agents of subversion.

The MSM – from the BBC through Le Monde to Newsweek – are not only disinterested in reporting on reality as it is, but have an overriding agenda of falsifying this reality to suit their ideological purposes. To update Hans Christian Andersen, we, the townsmen, are no longer lined up on the street to watch the emperor in his new suit of clothes. We can no longer make up our minds independently whether to believe our eyes' input that the emperor is naked, or to let our psyche bend our cognition to conform to the crowd. Now we sit at home in front of the flat panel and see the procession LIVE ON TV! And we see the naked emperor fully clothed because the mass media that generates the coverage has Photoshopped, and DVE'd, and digitally superimposed a resplendent suit of clothes on the emperor's naked butt.

Fjordman, the great Norwegian blogger, wrote this in a recent web essay:

[A] paleontologist will tell you, any creature whose eyes and ears misinform it about the environment, will not long survive. This can be compared to being attacked by an angry and hungry polar bear, while your eyes and ears, the media, tell you that it's a cute koala bear who just wants to be cuddled. Meanwhile, your brain has been indoctrinated to think happy thoughts about diversity and smile to all creatures, regardless of their nature or intentions. This is pretty much how the entire West is today. The heavy bias of our media and our education system constitutes a very real threat to our survival.

John Leo pointed out in his "Sins of Omission" that at the same when there was a media frenzy about the white Duke lacrosse teams' alleged rape of a black stripper, a black man actually raped a white woman at a black fraternity at Duke. Reporting the rape, North Carolina’s News & Observer omitted the race of the suspect, even though it had been mentioned in the police report. The blogger Confederate Yankee commented on this disparity by running the mock headline, RACELESS FEMALE RAPED BY RACELESS MALE AT A PARTY HOSTED BY A RACELESS FRATERNITY IN THE SAME CITY WHERE RICH WHITE BOYS RAPED A POOR BLACK STRIPPER.

A different, real headline reads:

80-Year-Old Man Attacked Near Jersey City Church:
Assault Comes Less Than A Month After 101-Year-Old Woman Attacked

The lead paragraph is:

(CBS) JERSEY CITY, N.J. Less than a month after the NYPD began a frantic search for a man who assaulted and robbed a 101-year-old woman and an 85-year-old woman, Jersey City police are searching for four young muggers who viciously attacked an 80-year-old man while trying to rob him.

We are informed that the old man, Evristo Conidi, was walking outside the St. Paul the Apostle Church at 6:30 pm when three males and a female, in their late teens or early 20s, approached him and punched him repeatedly in the face, knocking him to the ground and demanding money.

What is missing here is the race of the suspects. The 101-year-old woman was white, and she was assaulted and robbed by a black man – which is not mentioned here either. Inferring from his name, the 80-year-old assault victim was white. In the absence of relevant information, we attribute blackness to his assailants, simply because there aren't many American white youths who gang-mug octogenarians in front of churches.

When the crime is reported but the telling detail is missing, it's one thing. But the MSM has another way to try to erase the vicious polar bear from our consciousness. It simply does not report his attacks, or reports them on page 6.

In this manner, the Knoxville, Tennessee atrocity was covered by local Knoxville media, but the national media did not deem it newsworthy. It was the pyjama media that came upon it four months later, and brought it to the attention of the nation. So that we get a full grasp of what the New York Times and ABC and all their peers consider un-newsworthy, here is the story of the crime, as relayed by one of the bloggers who gave it early attention, the ex-cop, James Lilley:

On Saturday January 6, 2007 Hugh Christopher Newsom, age 23 and Channon Gail Christian, age 21, both students at the University of Tennessee, went out on a date. They were driving in Channon’s Toyota 4-Runner when they were carjacked at gunpoint. Suddenly the crime turned far more savage than an armed car theft. Chris and Channon were kidnapped and driven to 2316 Chipman Street where they were forced into the home at gunpoint. While Channon was forced to watch, her boyfriend was raped prison style and then his penis was cut off. He was later driven to nearby railroad tracks where he was shot and set afire. But Channon’s hell was just beginning. She was beaten; gang raped repeatedly in many ways, had one of her breasts cut off and bleach poured down her throat to destroy DNA evidence — all while she was still alive. To add to Channon’s degradation the suspects took turns urinating on her. They too set her body afire, apparently inside the residence, but for some reason left her body there — in five separate trash bags.

Arrested for the crime were Lemaricus Davidson, 25, Letalvis Cobbins, 25, George Thomas, 24, Vanessa Coleman, 18. All four have lengthy records of violent crime. Why such people are on the street is a question no longer even asked, for it has been asked a hundred thousand times for 40 years already, to no effect. But at least we have the Internet now, to share information our ruling elites would rather hush-up.

It's noteworthy that the Knoxville law authorities, otherwise entirely tight-lipped about the case, were quick to deny the sexual mutilation allegations. The coverage by the Knoxville News Sentinel seems also to have been strangely muted, as though bending over backwards to blunt the sharper edges of the current racial truth could make up for Tennessee's opposite racial truth prior to the civil rights era. For instance, in its rush to deny the blogosphere's sexual mutilation allegations, the News Sentinel also labeled as "fiction" bloggers' reports that the assailants poured acid down Channon Christian's throat. Instead, the newspaper asserted that it was "only" bleach. It's hardly a comforting correction.

If it weren't for a few blogger-sleuths like Michelle Malkin, the Knoxville atrocity would have probably gone unnoticed outside its town of origin. It is ironic that to know the true state of our society we need in the United States a samizdat – a Russian word that denoted the underground truth-dissemination network in the perennially lying Soviet state. And Knoxville is by no means an outlier case.

In November 2002, Michelle Malkin observed that the eight-week trial of Jonathan and Reginald Carr had come to a close, with no mention in the national news media except for Fox News, the Associated Press, and some conservative Internet sites.

The Carr brothers were black. The victims — Jason Befort, Befort's fiancée, Heather Muller, Bradley Heyka, and Aaron Sander – were white. The Carrs had  broken into the victims' residence, in Wichita, Kansas, and then forced the men and women present to perform sexual acts on each other. The Carrs then raped the women, drove all five victims to an ATM machine, and forced them to withdraw money from their accounts.

Then they drove to a snowbound soccer field. The five victims were forced to kneel in the snow and beg for their lives, to no avail. They were executed by gunshots to the head. The Carrs then ran over the victims with their truck. Befort's fiancée miraculously survived, and was able to identify the attackers, all of whom – in the all-too-familiar pattern, had lengthy rap sheets.

Once in 10 – or is it 15? 20? – years, there is a white-on-black crime that belongs in a similar subhuman category. In 1998, three white men in Jasper, Texas, beat up a black man, James Byrd, then chained him to the back of a pickup truck and dragged him three miles to his death. Rightly, this murder received massive MSM coverage and much public condemnation. It also served as a fulcrum for the Left, and its loudspeaker, the selfsame MSM, to push for enacting "hate crimes" legislation.

But there would be another heinous murder in Jasper, Texas. Four years after the murder of James Byrd, a white man named Ken Tillery hitched a ride with three black men. Like James Byrd, Tillery was kidnapped and beaten. Then he was run over and crushed to death.  As David Horowitz remarked:

The copycat nature of the crime made it a natural news story. But there was none, save a modest account in the Houston Chronicle, to which nobody paid any attention. This savagery was apparently nothing. The pigments were politically incorrect.

If the murder of James Byrd is a "hate crime," and the murder of Ken Tillery is not, and Wichita and Knoxville are not "hate crimes" either, then the whole category is a contemptible joke. The U.S. Government's propaganda machine makes much of the statistic that, of the 7,160 "hate crimes" in 2005, 60.6% of the 6,804 offenders were white and 19.9% were black. But if only white-on-black crime qualifies as "hate crime," what is the use? And what is the significance of the government's and the media's trumpeting of 4,116 (i.e. 60.5% of 6804) "hateful" white criminals when, each year, as we shall see below, there are hundreds of thousands of white victims of violent black criminals?

The wrong pigments scared away the national media also in North Charleston, S.C., where in 1999, seven black youths attacked two white bicyclists, leaving one permanently disabled. And in Long Beach, California, where in 2006, 11 black teen girls attacked and severely beat three young white women. And all this is just what I, a complete layman in these matters, dug up in a few hours at the computer.

It is useful to consider in this context what the traditionalist social thinker, Lawrence Auster, calls Auster’s First Law of Majority-Minority Relations in Liberal Society. To paraphrase, it states that the worse a designated minority group behaves, the more it is praised, the more the sins of its members are covered up, the more "racist" it becomes to speak the truth about their behavior, and the more their behavior must be blamed on whites.

The numbers

The deafening national silence about black/brown-on-white crime would qualify as a disgrace merely in comparison with the deafening roar that accompanies white-on-black/ brown crime. Much more than that, it's an autoimmune disease of our civilization because blacks and Latinos commit crimes against whites at many times the reciprocal crime rates.

The MSM report just about any salient national crime statistics, except this. One can try to source such data for oneself, but it's designed not to be user friendly. The FBI's website, for instance, features a large statistical report on U.S. crime in 2005. It has a list of 81 tables – unnamed in the index, so that one has to wade through them all to find the data one wants. For the working stiff like me, who makes a living in ways other than sifting through mounds of unlabeled crime data, it amounts pretty much to a runaround.

I give myself two hours to find the interracial crime rates in 2005. The data appears to have been sliced every which way, except this way. Searching for what counts, one drowns in a sea of tabulated data that doesn't count.

Looking at Expanded Homicide Data Overview, for instance, we read: Data from single victim/single offender incidents showed that 92.6 percent of black victims were murdered by black offenders, and 84.8 percent of white victims were murdered by white offenders.

This is useless. The single victim/single offender category seems to be an artifice created to disguise the true impact of black-on-white crime. It would omit, among many others, all the crimes cited in this article. To get something meaningful, we have to do the hard work ourselves.

Going to another table, we find that of the 17,029 murders in 2005, 4,899 were by "race unknown," 5,452 were by whites, 6,379 were by blacks, and 299 by "other."  But to understand what reality stands behind these numbers, we have to dig deeper, on our own.

According to the 2000 census, whites were 75.1% of the population. Included in that was 6% of the total population that self-identified as white Latinos. The total percentage of Latinos was 12.5%. Blacks were 12.3% of the population. Given the demographic changes since 2000, we can roughly extrapolate that perhaps 66% of the population in 2005 was white of European origin, 15% was Latino, and 12.5% was black.

If we take just the above data, we arrive at a murder rate 6.18 times higher for blacks than for whites. Given that the FBI statistics lump Latinos with whites, it is certain that if the two categories were properly separated, a large number of murders attributed to whites would be reassigned to the Latino classification. This suggests that the true disparity of murder rates by blacks and whites is much higher than 6.17. To put it differently, blacks murder at perhaps eight or nine times the rate of whites – a factoid that the FBI apparently considers too hot to deal with.

Still, where are the interracial crime rates? A friend in law enforcement directs me to a web page of the Bureau of Justice Statistics of the U.S. Department of Justice. With the FBI website proclaiming, Uniform Crime Reporting Program; 75 Years of Providing Crime Data to the Nation, I get confused as to why the US DoJ needs a separate center for generating ostensibly the same data. Particularly, as it proves even more useless than the FBI data.

What I find here leaves an impression, perhaps a calculated one, of black victimhood rather than black criminality. For instance, it's good to know that the prevalence of imprisonment in 2001 was higher for black males (16.6%) and Hispanic males (7.7%) than for white males (2.6%), and for black females (1.7%) and Hispanic females (0.7%) than white females (0.3%). But in the absence of information about the higher rates of crime committed by blacks and Latinos, such data only stokes up the fires of the racial "tactical victim" lobby that decries such higher rates of imprisonment as proof of racist oppression.

Looking at the Bureau of Justice Statistics' List of Publications, I find Hispanic Victims of Violent Crime, but I do not find Victims of Hispanic Violent Crime. It's more of the same in the press releases, where one reads, for August 9, 2007:

Black Americans accounted for 13 percent of the U.S. population in 2005 but were the victims of about 15 percent of all of the nonfatal violent crime and about 49 percent of all homicides.

This paragraph was carried by the major news services. As to who has made of Black Americans such disproportionate victims, this wasn't relayed in the news releases I read. Understandably, too, for one has to read half way to the bottom of the page, to find this:

Among single victim-single offender homicides, about 93 percent of black victims were murdered by black offenders.

Again, the citizen, who pays for these statistics, does not care about sophistic categories like "single victim-single offender." Just give us the whole truth, straight. And so, at the end of the two hours I give up. The data is there, I know, but it's not designed for access by the voting citizen.

I find what I am after a few days later, in the penultimate paragraph of a Chicago Tribune article, "What is a hate crime?"  There, after 1,300 words predictably downplaying the Knoxville atrocity, setting up and taking down the straw man of its "hate crime" status, reminding us of Tennessee's Ku Klux Klan past etc., the Tribune puts in its "on the other hand" sentence:

In 2005, there were more than 645,000 victims of cross-racial violent crimes between blacks and whites in the U.S. In 90 percent of those crimes, black offenders attacked white victims.

This is what I was after; this is what comes across from Wichita and Knoxville and Jersey City and Charleston and Long Beach. But the U.S. Government does not connect the dots for you, offering instead what the Tribune calls "a mixed picture of crime and race in America."

We may have a single conscience-stricken journalist to thank for that 90% finding. After toeing the  race-obscurantist editorial line throughout the article, in the penultimate paragraph he made use of the Tribune's Lexis-Nexis account and numbers-crunching resources, to reveal the lie in the center of our national neurosis.

But all this still leaves an entire criminal class out of the picture. It's composed of illegal immigrants and illegals-made-legal, overwhelmingly Mexican and Central American Mestizos. There is so much there that we have to leave it to a separate treatment, in "Importing Mayhem," next week.

The 90% solution

Without easily accessible, true data about racial, ethnic and nationality group crime rates, the citizen is deprived of the foundation on which to judge the necessity and fairness of a variety of policies ranging from crime profiling, to the true effects of immigration laws and enforcement procedures. He has no rhetorical arrows in his quiver against the incessant barrage of accusations of racism and discrimination that are hurled about wantonly by a good part of the black and brown communities, almost their entire political leadership, and their vast artillery cover of self-flagellating, white useful idiots.

Like a trained monkey, we live with conditioned reflexes implanted in our brains, designed to make us squirm and retreat when the trainer holds up a yellow card with a word like racism, discrimination, intolerance or stereotyping. And when the red card is brandished, reading, RACIST!, we cannot help but fall on our faces, and kowtow nine times while beating our chest and muttering Mea maxima culpa. Actually, one has little choice in this matter, except if one does not mind losing one's job, standing in the community, and future prospects.

Perhaps arming ourselves with a talisman spelling out "90%," and a few other lucky charms with similar, simple facts inscribed on them, can help when the barons of diversity and earls of nondiscrimination bear down on us, demanding that, like every one else, we genuflect and loudly praise the emperor's new clothes, as he passes by.

Truth and reality, when scorned persistently, over decades, exact a terrible revenge. We ought to consider that it's better to be a living "racist" planted in reality, than a brain-dead, therefore doomed, worshipper of the false Kumbaya idol.

* * *

1. Edmund Dulac's illustration for "The Emperor's New Clothes" in Stories from Hans Andersen, Hodder & Stoughton Ltd, London, 1911, via Project Gutenberg.

Race & Ethnicity, Multiculturalism

Read more articles by Takuan Seiyo