By Simon Krejsa
“Hispanics” are defined as “white” when they commit crimes, including the murders of blacks. Probably 90% of “Hispanics” are nonwhite. The majority of “Hispanics” are Amerindians (including mestizos), and a large minority of “Hispanics” are black (including mulattos and “zambos,” a mixture of African and Amerindian). So if a mestizo/Amerindian murders a non-“Hispanic” black, the offense is classified as a white-on-black homicide.
Most absurdly, if a black "Hispanic" murders a non-"Hispanic" black, the offense is classified as a white-on-black homicide. And if a black "Hispanic" murders a white, it's classified as a white-on-white homicide. It's reasonable to assume that nonwhite “Hispanics” murder more non-“Hispanic” blacks than do “non-Hispanic whites,” even though the latter group is 5-6 time larger. So blacks, non-“Hispanic” and “Hispanic,” are probably 30-times more likely to murder whites than vice-versa. See my VDARE article, “Hispanic Sex Offenders Listed as ‘White,’ Why.”
Racially, the category “Hispanic” causes nothing but confusion and ignorance, and should be abolished.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
10 comments:
In some instances American Indians have been counted as White. It depends on the situation.
I see. So, White is actually another word for Hispanic.
"the category “Hispanic” causes nothing but confusion and ignorance ..."
As they say in the computer business: "It's not a bug, it's a feature."
Last night I was perusing a piece by Colin Flaherty on the subject at American Thinker. In the comments someone kept linking to "FBI Statistics" which purport to show black and white crime rates are closer than Realists believe. However, these stats had no "Hispanic" category.
Where did crimes by "Hispanics" go? We're always told "Hispanics" are the New Majority. Where are they in the FBI stats? Can we assume they are lumped in the "White" section?
In 2013 the FBI began categorizing Hispanics, previous to that they did lump them together with whites. I'm not sure how that works if you do a historical study of crime (do they use the old stats when whites and Hispanics were lumped together?), but it does appear the FBI, at least, has finally realized you can't compare the motivations of a recent 3rd world immigrant from the barrio to upper middle class white guy John Smith. Jerry PDX
FBI stats from 2012:
https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2012/crime-in-the-u.s.-2012/tables/43tabledatadecoverviewpdf
Expanded FBI stats with Hispanic category from following year 2013:
https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2013/crime-in-the-u.s.-2013/tables/table-43
The authorities skew crime statistics via more than games with the Hispanic category. The mulatto Obama Doppelgänger murderer of his White school teacher, Phillip Chism, was apparently booked as a White man.
I hadn't really deciphered what was going on with the FBI tables but looking at them a little more carefully I figured out what the FBI was doing. It created a separate "ethnicity" table for hispanic/latino. It did NOT create a hispanic/latino table in the race category in order to subtract them from the white category. I do understand the reasoning, a hispanic/latino can be any race so subtracting them from the white category would be deceptive and inaccurate. However, it does inflate the white crime category considerably, because as you pointed out Mr. Stix, even African/latino's could get categorized as white. The FBI allowed that particular deception to continue for many years despite it's obvious flaws, though since it demonized whites I guess the FBI was OK with it.
The ethnicity table categorizes crimes by ethnicity, so the only way to get a read on an actual breakdown by race would be to guesstimate how many hispanic/latino's are actually white, black or asian. The majority are undoubtedly of asian origin, or at least that is the dominant gene category, even if mixed, but a significant number would be pure white and a moderate number black also (going by the one drop rule).
I'm going to say, off the top of my head, scanning through the numbers that we could drop white arrest number by 15% or so, black numbers might be affected one way or the other depending on how one defines a "black" latino. I suspect that black latino's are more likely to be categorized as latino rather than black than whites so it's more likely black arrest rates are even higher than the tables indicate. OK, pure speculation, maybe someone who knows something about race proportions and/or statistics could do a professional job of interpreting what the data is telling us. Sorry, I'm not that one but the info is out there.
One thing of note in those tables, notice the extraordinary high rates of black arrest rates. Only one category are they the same as whites: DUI. That's it. Everywhere else they run 2-5 times their population ratio. Categories like "Crimes against families" blacks are twice the rate of their population ratio. You know, the kind of crime they love to stereotype as whitey's thing. Another link to the tables is below. Jerry PDX
https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2013/crime-in-the-u.s.-2013/tables/table-43
"it does inflate the white crime category considerably, because as you pointed out Mr. Stix, even African/latino's could get categorized as white."
NYC crime stats show light skinned Puerto Ricans or Dominicans as WHITE? Mr. Stix can expound?
The Texas Ten Most Wanted always list a mestizo as a WHITE.
The execution lists for TX do show the persons as Hispanic. But that is a private web site I think.
"The FBI allowed that particular deception to continue for many years despite it's obvious flaws, though since it demonized whites I guess the FBI was OK with it."
Not so much the FBI but various administrations I think. They don't WANT whitey in this country to know the true nature of stuff, even though most whitey have an intuitive sense of what is occurring and for some time now.
Post a Comment