Guilty while liberal

Posted by Guessedworker on Wednesday, 08 November 2006 22:55.

Our fine national media today reported the end of the trial of three Pakistanis, Faisal Mushtaq, 27, Zeeshan Shahid, 28, and his brother Imran Shahid, 29, for the kidnap and most cruel murder of 15-year old Kriss Donald in Glasgow in 2004.

Kriss’ murder was the worst racially-motivated killing ever to occur in Britain. The life sentences reflect that and Kriss’ family have indicated satisfaction at their minimum terms of 27, 22 and 23 years respectively. The sentencing statement of the judge, Lord Uist, can be read here, courtesy of the BBC.

The BBC also courteously informed us that racism and race crime is not actually an Original Sin of white people. No, it has been “redefined “, apparently. Now it can include black and Asian thugs. One can only wonder what their race crimes were before the redefinition. A bit of noisy joshing around, I suppose, while knifing some poor white bastard for purely economic reasons.

It has taken some appalling murders and the black v brown riots last year in Lozells to drag the liberal mind reluctantly towards this “redefinition”. And now we see why the coverage of Kriss’ case has been so shamefully absent until today. It’s the same reason the BBC felt compelled to put the “redefinition” piece on-line. They are trying to slip-slide away from the charge that for decade after decade they have played a venomous game with race.

Remember this?

Racial violence: The ugly facts

Late one night last November, Sanjay heard a noise outside the front of his house. A circle of rowdy teenagers were on the lawn. They were throwing small stones at the door and window of his house where he lives with his mother and two sisters.

“Go back to your own country,” one shouted. “Get out and don’t come back.”

The other things they said were too awful to repeat, said 20-year-old Sanjay - not his real name.

Sanjay lives in a council house in Greenwich, south-east London, just a few miles from where Stephen Lawrence was murdered in 1993. While most racial incidents don’t end in murder there are dozens like this every week ...

How to avoid getting a well-deserved, red-hot right-wing poker up your liberal jacksie, that’s the BBC’s problem now. And that’s what the long silence and the sudden “redefinition” are really about. Quite disgusting intellectual cowardice.

It extends to the statistical apologetics that follow news of the “redefinition”:-

The most recent analysis shows that in 2004, 87,000 people from black or minority ethnic communities (BME) said they had been a victim of a racially motivated crime. In the same period, 92,000 white people said they had also fallen victim.

Focusing on violent racial attacks, 49,000 BME were victims. Among whites, the number was 77,000.

Of those that involved wounding 4,000 were BME. Among the white population it was 20,000.

The numbers can be highly misleading, though. Since about 90% of people in Britain are white, the statistics actually show the risk of being a victim of race crime is significantly greater if you are from an ethnic minority.

According to the most recent Home Office analysis, the chances for a white person is less than 1%. For Black and Asian people it is put at about 1%.

But what these figures show is that the 10% of the population that is non-white commits over 50% of all race crime, over 60% of violent race crime and over 80% of race crime involving wounding. These are startling figures that liberal Britain does not feel comfortable with, not after so many fruitful decades dinning guilt and self-hatred into our ears. So they choose instead to pootle around with some nice egalitarian 1% risk factor.

Probably the piece de resistance, though, is their reference to the National Front’s long-running and rather noble endeavour to track the killings of white Britons by our vibrant fellow-countrymen. As much as anything, The Fallen List is a memorial to our people who would have had the chance of a long and fulfilling life were it not for the immigration policies of successive British governments. They are casualties in the Establishment’s war against its own people.

For the BBC, however ...

The far right has tried to exploit what it claims is the untold story of racial attacks on white people. On the National Front website they feature a long list of “The Fallen”, white people they say were killed by non-whites.

Two sentences. Two lies. The Fallen List is not a log of race crimes against white Britons, and does not claim to be. It includes hit-and-run accidents, for example. And the NF don’t have to claim to list “whites they say were killed by non-whites.” The killings are a matter of public record, albeit not a record that the BBC has made public. And capping these deceits is the BBC’s breath-taking hypocrisy in accusing someone other than themselves of exploiting race crime for political ends.

So overall, then, not even the worst racial murder in this country’s history is sufficient to cause the BBC to challenge its liberal bias and print the naked, inconvenient truth. It is reasonable to conclude, I think, that nothing on earth will make them do so wherever non-white racism against whites is involved. Our defaming as Originally Sinful racist whites is not over yet.

Tags: Media

Comments:

Posted by Guessedworker on Thu, 09 Nov 2006 08:26 | #

Svi,

The redef article mentions the fact that 3500 car thefts are reported by Asians as race attacks - and entered on the stats as such by the police. So the likelihood is that the overall figure of race crimes by whites is substantially inflated.

You have to be wearing a pretty good set of liberal blinkers to miss all the import of the BCS figures and come up an equitable 1% likelyhood of falling victim to race crime. What’s wrong with saying there are nine times as many race criminals among non-whites, for example?

And, of course, it’s not just the BBC. The entire national media outside of Scotland ignored the trial until yesterday because they are all in the same boat. And not just the trial ... reporting the murder itself was avoided, and the dramatic flight of these three creeps back home and their eventual extradition should have been front-page news, too.

The acid test now is: how will the media behave next time there is an inter-racial murder with big news potential?

Posted by Al Ross on Thu, 09 Nov 2006 08:47 | #

I was surprised to see the headline in the Gannett-owned liberal Glasgow Herald which read “Killed For Being The Wrong Colour”, in reference to the Kriss Donald murder trial.

Posted by Amalek on Thu, 09 Nov 2006 12:20 | #

It’s a waste of time trying to sift crimes by motivation. Perceptions are too subjective, too influenced by transient political criteria. Legislators are as squinty as media gatekeepers.

All we need to know is whether one race is more prone to polluting society with criminality—whether within or beyond that race—and if so, which race? We can then decide collectively how to deal with it as a matter of social policy, not judicial procedure.

If it transpires that a particular alien race (or races) is innately too prone to misbehaving and upsetting their hosts, we can decide what combination of biological assimilation, deportation or lockdown would best cure the problem—if we do not deem the cure worse than the disease.

In court, criminal acts should be judged and sentenced on harm done, not on the presumed motives of the perpetrators.

Posted by Al Ross on Thu, 09 Nov 2006 12:53 | #

The latest example of unacceptable behaviour by African immigrants was reported by Malaysia’s New Straits Times, the article pointing out that the subject was raised, due to public complaints, at the last Cabinet meeting and action would be taken against offending Blacks.

If I raised the question of bad African behaviour with the British government’s risibly-named Commision for Racial Equality I would probably be arrested for ‘racism’.

http://www.nst.com.my/Current_News/nst/Tuesday/National/20061109101429/Article/local_1.html

Posted by Guessedworker on Thu, 09 Nov 2006 13:12 | #

The link appears to have been taken down, Al.

Posted by Kenelm Dighy on Thu, 09 Nov 2006 13:39 | #

Just how the Hell can a car-theft be conflated into a ‘racist incident’?
Now I kiss my copy of ‘1984’ three times, and say a little prayer to the benediction to the ghost of George Orwell.

Posted by Al Ross on Thu, 09 Nov 2006 13:40 | #

Yes, GW, I think the NST is setting up tomorrow’s edition, given that Malaysia is 8 hours ahead of GMT.

Another encouraging aspect of this crackdown on Africans in Malaysia was the statement by a government official to the effect that, even if those rounded up by Immigration Department raids possess valid entry visas, the officers are confident that some will have overstayed and may be working illegally and thus subject to penalties including caning, fines and imprisonment prior to unappealable deportation.

Emulation please, UK (and EU).

Posted by Orion Blue on Thu, 09 Nov 2006 16:28 | #

This “redefinition” should have occurred at around this time last year, when the Computer Technician in London was murdered in a University car park by three Asian men, even though witnesses heard the defendents shouting anti-White racial epithets at their victim.

The pretext for failing to treat the crime as Racism was that the three men had also used racial epithets against and Afro-Caribbean man, prior to their killing in the car park.

Good article, unmasking the duplicity and hypocrisy of the Media in relation to non-White racial crime. I read the hastily-prepared article the BBC put up (though it is equally likely that they had prepared it in advance of the verdict), and was thinking of doing a ‘hit’ on it too.

Posted by Desmond Jones on Thu, 09 Nov 2006 19:59 | #

if we do not deem the cure worse than the disease.

According to Darwin, the disease means extinction. How can the cure be worse?

Posted by Andy on Thu, 09 Nov 2006 20:05 | #

I’m not a statistician (or even a very good mathematician) but from the crime statistics kindly reported by the BBC, it would appear that the only thing that whites have going for them is that they are less likely to be attacked because they outnumber blacks 9 to 1. Two thoughts:

1. Whites produce fewer offspring and immigration continues almost unopposed. This means that as the percentage of whites in the population continues to fall, the crime imbalance will get significantly worse.
2. These statistics are nationwide. Surely this means that in areas where whites form a much smaller part of the local population, the probability of falling victim to a racial attack is considerably higher?

Posted by Desmond Jones on Thu, 09 Nov 2006 21:25 | #

Right on both accounts Andy. LaGriffe’s analysis shows clearly the larger the black community [i.e. St. Louis, Detroit, Camden, NJ] the greater the probability whites will be attacked.

Crime in the Hood. Violent victimization of whites by blacks is modeled in a racially mixed inner-city neighborhood. Its evolution is traced from the first black to move in, to the last white who moves out. The probability of a white being violently attacked is developed as a function of a neighborhood’s racial composition. It is shown to increase nonlinearly, approaching unity as a neighborhood becomes predominately black. Volume 1, Number 3, November 1999