American Dissident Voices: America, Race, and Violent Crime

Harvey family; and Dandridge and GrayAmerican Dissident Voices broadcast of February 22, 2014

by Kevin Alfred Strom

ONE HORRIFIC SYMPTOM of our dispossession is violent crime, which blights the lives of innocent White Americans every day. One of the most important studies ever published on this subject, “Racial Violence in America,” by writer and researcher Jerry Abbott, is available on the National Vanguard Web site. Much of what I’ll be talking about today is taken from that excellent essay, which includes incontrovertible mathematical and statistical proof that violent crime bears a close, nearly direct, relationship to the presence of Blacks and Mestizos in our midst. (ILLUSTRATION: Top: Richmond, Virginia’s Harvey family — brutally murdered: Ruby, 4, Stella, 9, Kathryn, 39, and Bryan, 49. Bottom: Ray Dandridge and Ricky Gray, arrested for the Harvey murders and a string of other killings)

Huge areas of our once-beautiful cities have become “no go” areas for Whites. In some of the worst places, utility companies seldom make repairs and even the police and the postal service fear to tread. In some areas, non-White gangs are literally in charge. White parents can no longer let their children roam free, from neighborhood to neighborhood, as they did when I was young: A White child’s life now consists of transportation from one controlled (and, one hopes, safe) venue to another for a succession of pre-planned activities. America has changed, and not for the better.

Let’s take a look at the statistics compiled by US law enforcement agencies on violent crime:

The average Black commits murder 7.9 times as often as the average White.

The average Black commits rape 4.4 times as often as the average White. If all rapes were reported, the Black to White ratio would be closer to 11.

The average Black commits armed robbery 9.6 times as often as the average White.

The average Black commits theft 17 times as often as the average White.

The average Black commits aggravated assault 3.9 times as often as the average White.

The average Black commits simple assault about 22 times as often as the average White.

Actually, the Black/White ratios for violent crimes are even higher than that, because the government falsely categorizes Mestizo criminals from Central America as White in these statistics. Middle Eastern offenders are also fraudulently categorized as White. (Interestingly, the government does not lump Mestizos in with Whites when publishing statistics on victims of crime.) When corrections are made for these statistical errors — or should I call them tricks? — we find that the average Black commits murder almost 9 times as often as the average White. One of the strengths of Jerry Abbott’s work is that he not only exposes such statistical sleight of hand — he corrects for it, so we can understand what’s really going on, something “our” government apparently doesn’t want us to do.

When it comes to interracial murders, the figures are even more shocking. From the study:

The Justice Department uses its “White” category as a racial miscellaneous bin. . . The government can’t make Whites out of non-Whites by passing laws or making policies, any more than it can change the value of pi to 3.0000 for the convenience of engineers and architects. But they certainly have managed to impart confusion in the interpretation of their crime statistics — probably intentionally, don’t you think?

When you remove the non-Whites from the “White” offender totals, the per capita rate ratio of Black-on-White murders to White-on-Black murders becomes (typically) about 23. This ratio is a measure of the relative higher capacity of Blacks for racial hatred and of the relatively higher propensity of Blacks toward violence, as compared with Whites.

…Black and Mestizo gangs commit more murders in a single week, on the average, than all the organized White “racist” groups have even been accused of for the past 50 years. The government’s emphasis on so-called “hate crimes” (with a notable bias toward finding White people guilty of committing them) is the result of political pressure brought to bear on government agencies by the Jewish controlled media and by Jewish pressure groups, including the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai Brith [ADL]. There is no genuine criminal justice need for the special category of “hate crime”; however, even if there were, the categorization is presently being abused with an anti-White bias.

And these facts are buttressed by other researchers. According to Frank Borzellieri in The Unspoken Truth, “Black-on-White robbery and rape are both 70 times more likely than the reverse; and Black-on-White gang violence is 83 times more likely.”

* * *

 “Hate crimes” are an invented category of crime, with no basis in reality. There were already laws in place, before the invention of the term “hate crime,” making robbery, assault, and murder illegal. Such crimes, among many others, may be turned into “hate crimes” based on a police officer’s or prosecutor’s opinion of what the perpetrator was thinking at  — or before, even long before — the time the crime was committed.

For example, if you get in an altercation with a Black in a parking lot which leads to a charge of assault against you, you may face many times the normal fines and jail time of an ordinary assault charge if the “authorities” decide that you harbored hatred for Blacks in your heart prior to the fight. In other words, some politically correct bureaucrat’s opinion about your feelings will make all the difference in the world in the sentence you would receive if convicted. And, if you are discovered to have read politically incorrect books in the past or said something critical of Blacks on an online forum, that could well be the decisive factor in escalating your assault charge to a “hate crime” charge. It sure could boost the career of an inner-city cop or ambitious prosecutor to send a “racist” to jail, don’t you think? And what White man or White woman would want to speak out against non-White immigration or crime now that such statutes are on the books, knowing it might be used against him or her in court some day?

So it’s not surprising to discover that when Whites commit violence against Blacks, it’s termed a “hate crime” a greater percentage of the time than when Blacks commit violence against Whites. And it’s also not surprising to discover that the Jewish power structure was the number one force pushing for the adoption of “hate crime” laws, doubtlessly hoping to intimidate White  Americans into silence on racial matters.

Nevertheless, Blacks commit such a disproportionate amount of violence against Whites that, even with such skewed application of the “hate crime” label, they still commit more than three times the number of such crimes than do Whites per capita — and four times the hate-motivated murder rate. This, despite the flagrantly obvious bias of the authorities when, again and again, they refuse to categorize attacks and killings of Whites by Blacks as “hate crimes,” despite explicit plans to harm Whites or the use of anti-White slurs during the crimes.

Unlike the unnecessary, fluid, and politicized category of “hate crimes,” there already long existed the real and undeniable category of interracial crimes — interracial assault, interracial murder, interracial rape, and all the rest. To categorize a crime as interracial one need not read minds to divine the feelings in a perpetrator’s heart. All that is necessary is that the victim and perpetrator be of different races. This is a much more difficult category to politicize. Statistics for interracial crime are much less likely to be fudged or faked than those for “hate crimes.” In the same year that Blacks were four times more likely to commit “hate crime” murder against Whites as the reverse, they were fourteen times as likely to commit interracial murder. That’s a big difference. Which statistic is based on hard facts, and which is based on politically-motivated fakery? The answer is obvious.

Back to the study:

Thus, the political function of the “hate crime” category becomes evident — hate crime is an ill-defined category mainly used to trap Whites — which points toward the motive for creating that category of crimes…

As mentioned earlier, the FBI and DoJ usually lump Hispanics — most of whom are Mestizos — into their “White” racial category for the purpose of recording the race of crime perpetrators. However, on the relatively rare occasion when a violent White perpetrator chooses a victim whom he believes to be a[n] Hispanic… the FBI / DoJ pull out their “hate crime” score sheets and chalk up another non-White victim of a White “hate criminal.”

Let’s go over that again.

With Whites and Blacks, the law-enforcement policy regarding “hate crimes” seems to be one of “selective noticing.” As a rule (with exceptions) a “hate crime” is NOTICED when the perpetrator is White and the victim is Black. When the perpetrator is Black and the victim is White, no “hate crime” is noticed .

With Whites and Hispanics, the law-enforcement policy regarding “hate crimes” seems to involve a selective imputation of Mestizo [ancestry]. When the Mestizo is the perpetrator and the White is the victim, the FBI usually adopts the position that the Mestizo was White, too, so therefore the crime had no racial bias. But when the perpetrator is White and the victim is a Mestizo, the FBI does not perform its racial switcheroo on the Mestizo, and thus another “hate crime” by a “White racist” is recorded.

* * *

The mass media, which I have shown on this program to be dominated by the Jewish minority, purposely minimize the nature and extent of non-White crime.

This is true of news programs and newspapers, which systematically fail to report the races of victims — when they are White — and criminals — when they are non-White — except when to do so is absolutely unavoidable. These news outlets have a history, too, of very selective outrage: A non-White victim of Whites, like Rodney King or Trayvon Martin (never mind the fact that Zimmerman was only part White), is made into a national sensation, with flagship stories and headlines that run for months, burning unforgettable memories into the national consciousness. But when a crowd of 40 Blacks pulled a White man from a truck in Milwaukee, brutally beat him and then ran over him with his own truck, killing him, there was no outrage. When half a dozen Blacks in Jacksonville decided to attack the next White person they saw, then fell upon a mentally-disabled 50-year-old and beat him to death for the thrill of it, there was no media outrage and hardly any coverage. When similar attacks by Blacks on Whites occur all over the country under the name “The Knockout Game,” killing or maiming hundreds of Whites, many of them helpless and elderly, the controlled media utter hardly a peep.

And some of these controlled media outlets even admit that they are doing this. When a dozen Blacks gang-raped an 11-year-old in Houston recently, the Houston Chronicle studiously avoided mentioning the race of the attackers in its initial stories. Cindy Horswell, a senior writer for the paper, stated “We don’t ever include race normally — unless race is made an issue by other people.”

Tom Kent, the deputy managing editor for standards and production at the Associated Press, the wire service from which hundreds of newspapers across the country get their national news, said they have essentially the same policy: “We don’t identify people’s race in most stories, unless that is an issue.”

The Jewish-owned New York Times, no surprise, has a similar policy of concealing race in its stories: Philip Corbett, the Times associate managing editor for standards, says “We would mention race in a physical description only if it really is a detailed physical description that readers would learn something from. But if the description is a ‘white man in his 40s’ or ‘a black man in a hoodie,’ then you’re not really providing any useful information and it could be sort of boiler plate.”

And I’m not even mentioning the largely Jewish advertising agencies, whose portrayals of burglars in security system ads — or other criminals — almost always show White perpetrators, ostensibly to avoid hurting the sensitive feelings of non-Whites.

This is also true of so-called “reality” programs, like the long-running Cops series, which purports to show real-life stories of police officers on the dangerous streets of our cities. John Langley, the creator of the series, is a Gentile working in a very Jewish, very pro-multiracialist field. He’s a man who, to keep his high-paying job, always has to keep a moistened finger raised to sense which way the winds of political correctness are blowing. Recently a Black “civil rights” group tried to get his series canceled because, they claimed, it showed too many Black criminals. But Langley shot back, in an interview with Jewish journalist Ben Shapiro, saying that he purposely minimizes the number of non-White offenders shown on his show, and maximizes the number of White criminals shown, inverting reality so as not to, in his words, “contribute to negative stereotypes.” Langley said “I show more White people than statistically what the truth is in terms of street crime. If you look at the prisons, it’s 60-something per cent. people of color and 30-something per cent. of White people. If you look at Cops, it’s 60 per cent. White and 40 per cent. [people of color] — it’s just the reverse. And I do that intentionally, because I don’t want to contribute to negative stereotypes.”

So when you turn on your television or open your morning newspaper or read your “mainstream” news site, you’re getting a very sanitized vision of reality — a false image in which the real perpetrators of brutal violence against our people, the Blacks and Mestizos who are robbing and raping and murdering our children, our wives, our grandparents, our sons, and our daughters have been carefully edited out of the picture. They have been airbrushed out of the picture because showing us the truth might make us wake up to the dangers posed by living in a multiracial society — might make us question the idea of having open borders — might make us doubt the wisdom of sending our children into “integrated” schools — and just might make White people realize we have common interests and ought to stand together to protect them. And that the masters of the media cannot allow. It might just put an end to their agenda of White genocide — it might just put an end to their agenda of getting Black sperm to unite with White eggs — and, if we get angry enough, they fear, it might just put an end to them.

I urge each and every one of you who hears my words to read and share Racial Violence in America with your friends and family members. It’s irrefutable, insightful, and magnificently documented. It will convince even the most skeptical that we are being lied to about non-White crime in this country. It will awaken any mind that is still capable of independent thought. And, if what we say has changed your life and the lives of your loved ones for the better, we would deeply appreciate your support.

* * *

You’ve been listening to American Dissident Voices, the radio program of the reconstituted National Alliance membership organization, founded by William Luther Pierce in 1970. This program is published every week at and Please write to us at National Alliance, Box 172, Laurel Bloomery, TN 37680 USA. We welcome your support, your inquiries, and your help in spreading our message of hope to our people. Once again, that address is Box 172, Laurel Bloomery, TN 37680 USA. Until next week, this is Kevin Alfred Strom reminding you to keep on thinking free.