Posted by
sgtmajorbrad on Monday, October 01, 2007 2:20:55 PM
In this world of ours where everything you eat causes
cancer, every bodily function causes global warming and everything you say can
be considered a hate crime we’ve had for a long time a sinister agenda to mask
the criminal offenses committed by the Hispanics. One of the most offensive
examples of this is the ruling by Judge Munley in the injunction against the Hazleton
ordinances. Judge Munley cited that the City of Hazleton
was unable to prove that the illegal immigrants increase the level of crime in
their community. How could they when the statistics are staked against them?
To try and clarify the FBI has what they call the,”Uniform
Crime Reporting – UCR,” program. This is a program where the information
gathered on the arrest reports is standardized according to the UCR
requirements. When it comes to race the choices are, “White, Black, American
Indian or Alaska Native and Asian and Pacific Islander.” It is said that Hispanic
is an ethnic representation and not a race but when it comes to hate crime
statistics they are represented well. The government believes its ok to show
what “Brown can do for you” if they’re a victim but they’re white if they’re
an offender. It wasn’t always this way.
In a document @ http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/guidelines/guidelines
under Appendix 1 - A brief history of the UCR program there is a statement that
reads:
“the OMB
authorized the FBI to
collect data regarding the ethnic origin of persons arrested. The FBI
collected ethnicity data from local and state law enforcement agencies until
1987, when the OMB's
authorization expired. “ This little reference is the only thing I can
find that remotely explains why we don’t track statistical information
associated with criminal Hispanic offenders which leaves to question how does
ICE look for criminal immigrants if you can’t classify them by their ethnicity.
The UCR handbook defines the races as:
“The racial categories used in the UCR Program were adopted from
the Statistical Policy
Handbook (1978) published by the Office of Federal
Statistical Policy and Standards, U.S.
Department of Commerce. The racial designations are defined as follows:
White. A person having origins in
any of the original peoples of Europe, North
Africa, or the Middle
East.
Black. A person having origins in
any of the black racial groups of Africa.
American Indian or Alaskan Native. A
person having origins in any of the original peoples of North America and who maintains cultural identification through tribal affiliation
or community recognition.
Asian or Pacific Islander. A
person having origins in any of the original peoples of the Far
East, Southeast
Asia, the Indian subcontinent, or the Pacific Islands.
This area includes, for example, China, India, Japan, Korea,
the Philippine Islands,
and Samoa.
UCR handbook page 97
http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/handbook/ucrhandbook04.pdf
So I guess this leaves out the criminal Indians of the America’s
south of our border? If you think this isn’t a problem then how do you explain
all of the Hispanic population in our prison systems that have no direct
correlation to the arrest statistics.
With the increased interest of the American people in
protecting our sovereignty and eliminating illegal immigration it would stand
to reason that we would want to know what the adverse effects are of the ethnic
representations associated with illegal immigration. The problem is serious
enough to mandate the collection of the ethnic statistical data seeing how we
are killing more citizens in this nation than our solders that are being killed
in the Iraq War
by the murdering, baby raping, drunk driving, illegal aliens.
This politically correct gherkin jerkin manipulation of
statistical data needs to stop or be applied equally under the law. If the
Hispanics want to be white for statistical purposes then they can be excluded
from all minority based incentives and programs. Yank the classification from
MWBE and the SBA and then see who starts screaming.