A witness to the killing of Trayvon Martin describes a hate crime gone wrong.
But apparently, it wasn't the Hispanic man who committed the hate crime.
It was Obama's "son", Trayvon Martin
According to the eyewitness:
A black man has an Hispanic man on the ground, beating the crap out of him.
Hispanic man has cut on his head, bloody nose, grass stains on the back
of his white coat.
Witness saw black man in hoodie sitting on him and beating
Hispanic man cries out for help.
Witness turns to dial 911, hears gunshot.
Black man lies dead on the grass.
Looks like Obama's son engaged in felonious assault and got shot dead.
A hate crime gone wrong.
Is this scenario unlikely?
Not when you remember the incredible hatred the two groups have for one another.
The West Coast has seen a tremendous up-swing in both black-on-Hispanic and Hispanic-on-black violence, with hate crimes against Hispanics "soaring".
New York City has seen the same thing.
But, of course, it only hits the national news when the Hispanic can be portrayed as "white" and when the victim is black. If the victim were Hispanic, or was black Hispanic instead of white Hispanic, well... different rules would naturally apply.
Police reveal that Trayvon initiated the assault, punched Zimmerman, beat his head against the concrete several times.
Pat Buchanan asserts that young black males make up between 2 and 3 percent of the population, but are responsible for 30% of society's assaults. In New York, 83% of all gun assaults are by blacks, 15% are by Hispanics - that's 98% of all gun assaults in the city. In the country at large, "white criminals choose black victims in 3 percent of their crimes, but black criminals choose white victims in 45 percent of their crimes."
I wonder where he gets his stats?
Also, it is interesting that a small percentage should have such an unusually large effect is not unique, but it is interesting. I can think of only two other situations where this obtains in a way that our society conspicuously notices, or fails to notice.