Civil Liberty published an article in August drawing attention to what was blindingly obvious to everyone, (but hushed up by the media!), namely, that blacks were heavily over-represented amongst those taking part in the Summer riots in England.
The actual figures were not at that time available in order to confirm that observation. However, figures do now seem to be available and make interesting reading.
This Guardian article gives some figures which clearly show the huge over-representation of blacks amongst rioters. The article was in the small print on an inside page though. Nevertheless, this article is unusually un-PC and honest for the Guardian newspaper which is often quite craven and apologetic when it comes to black (and other ethnic minority) crime.
The article says:
“The analysis of the ethnic backgrounds of those brought before the courts for riot-related offences varied significantly from the local population, with 42% of defendants white and 46% black. Only 7% were Asian.
“The ethnic composition of court defendants was particularly different from the local area profile in three places: Haringey in north London, where 55% of defendants were black compared with 17% of young people locally; Nottingham where 62% of defendants were black compared with 9% locally; and Birmingham, where 46% of defendants were black compared with 9% of young people locally.”
The above figures are actually misleading (perhaps deliberately so or perhaps not, depending on your perspective!) Naïve readers looking at the above figures of Nottingham and Brimingham might conclude that blacks were over-represented to the tune of roughly four or five times. But of course this ignores the numerous large cities in the UK where there are virtually no blacks, and where there were no riots. Sunderland in the North East of England, for example.
Given that blacks form around 2% of the UK population (according to 2001 UK census!) and taking the above 46% of defendants who were black, it follows that blacks were over-represented amongst rioters by a whopping 23 times, not the 4 or 5 times if you go by the above Birmingham and Nottingham figures. Moreover, although 44 different nationalities were involved in the riots, according to the figures, the largest groups by far were from Jamaica and Somalia.
The figures, plus the absence of riots in non-black cities, also confirm the point made by the “disgracefully racist” David Starkey, namely, that “black culture” (if you can call it that?) influences the behaviour of the poorer and less well educated whites. In other words, poor whites in all-white areas did not riot, whereas a substantial numbers of whites in areas with a significant black population did riot.
See more about David Starkey.
The dimwits who make up the ranks of the politically correct like to claim that indigenous cultures adopt only the desirable characteristics of incoming cultures.
Anyone with a grain of common sense knows that both the desirable and undesirable characteristics of an incoming culture will be absorbed by the native culture.
For example, criticism of Islam is virtually forbidden in Islamic countries. Criticism of Islam is very near forbidden in the UK in 2011: try publishing a cartoon that mocks Islam or Mohammed. In contrast, Christianity and Jesus Christ are fair game!
Of course, the politically correct are very comfortable with censorship and banning free speech.
Unfortunately for them, riots are never politically correct!