If you believe the news, today's America is plagued by an epidemic of violent hate crimes. But is that really true? In Hoax, Professor Wilfred Reilly examines over one hundred widely publicized incidents of so-called hate crimes that never actually happened. With a critical eye and attention to detail, Reilly debunks these fabricated incidents—many of them alleged to have happened on college campuses—and explores why so many Americans are driven to fake hate crimes. We're not experiencing an epidemic of hate crimes, Reilly concludes—but we might be experiencing an unprecedented epidemic of hate crime hoaxes.

You Can’t Say That! Do you have a right to be offended by the facts? Against all the evidence, the mainstream media insist that America has never been more racist and sexist. The police are waging a war on Black people. “White privilege” means minorities never get a fair shake. Although this narrative of oppression is demonstrably fictitious, it is taboo to question it, and those who do so risk being labeled racist or sexist themselves. America needs an honest conversation based on common sense and cold, hard facts. Honesty and respect for the facts are the specialty of Wilfred Reilly, the celebrated author of Hate Crime Hoax. In Taboo, he fearlessly examines ten forbidden truths that have been buried by political correctness. They include: -The Black rate of violent crime is roughly 2.5 times the white rate. When demographic variables are taken into account, there are no racial differences in the rate of police-involved shootings. -Interracial crime is remarkably rare, but 75 to 80 percent of it occurs against white people. -Minorities can be racist—take the Nation of Islam, which holds that white people are an inferior race created by a Black scientist. -Disparities between racial groups in IQ testing and SAT performance are the result of cultural variables, such as the presence of a father in the home, not racism. Reilly goes where most social scientists fear to tread, using objective statistics and common sense to tackle taboo topics. Taboo is an essential takedown of the lies you hear every day from ideological activists and lazy, biased media.

Hate crimes-violence aimed at individuals because they are members of a particular group-were once considered the rare illegal actions of a small but vocal assortment of extremists who thrived on hating minorities. No more. In this new book by two of the country's leading experts on hate crimes, published ten years after their classic book of the same name, these most-recognized authorities and media commentators reinterpret this scourge of our generation-hatred based on race, religion, sexual orientation, ethnicity, gender, and even citizenship. In the aftermath of the worst act of terrorism in this country's history-the bombing of the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001-the authors probe the causes and characteristics of such acts of hatred and, most vitally, their consequences for all of us.

THE TRUTH ABOUT THE BLACK LIVES MATTER MARTYRS “This book is essential. Don’t miss it.” —MARK LEVIN “A brilliant examination of the actual facts of the George Floyd case and the subsequent exploitation of his death by Black Lives Matter.” —LEO TERRELL, civil rights attorney & commentator In his latest salvo in the battle for America’s survival, David Horowitz exposes the racial hoax that is spawning riots and dividing the nation. Examining the twenty-six most notorious cases of police “racism”— from Trayvon Martin and Michael Brown to George Floyd and Breonna Taylor—Horowitz demonstrates that Black Lives Matter has lied about every one of them in its quest to undermine law and order, fuel race hatred, and destroy America. In case after case, the lies and mythmaking break down under Horowitz’s scrutiny. Even the chief prosecutor in the George Floyd case was forced to admit that he had no evidence of racial bias, while Breonna Taylor, the longtime accomplice of a major drug dealer, was killed when she and her boyfriend resisted arrest. The unchallenged myths about racist murders by the police have brought mayhem and crime to our cities, where the victims are predominantly black. They are also a slander against the United States, the least racist country in history, and against black Americans, the vast majority of whom are successful and law-abiding citizens. Now the Biden administration has embraced the false narrative of “systemic racism” and “white supremacy,” which supposedly infect every aspect of American life, using it to justify a witch hunt for “domestic terrorists.” Most Americans, black and white, know in their bones that this portrayal of their country is a lie. An unflinching and courageous accounting, I Can’t Breathe is the urgently needed proof that they are right.

In the early 1980s, a new category of crime appeared in the criminal law lexicon. In response to concerted advocacy-group lobbying, Congress and many state legislatures passed a wave of "hate crime" laws requiring the collection of statistics on, and enhancing the punishment for, crimes motivated by certain prejudices. This book places the evolution of the hate crime concept in socio-legal perspective. James B. Jacobs and Kimberly Potter adopt a skeptical if not critical stance, maintaining that legal definitions of hate crime are riddled with ambiguity and subjectivity. No matter how hate crime is defined, and despite an apparent media consensus to the contrary, the authors find no evidence to support the claim that the United States is experiencing a hate crime epidemic--instead, they cast doubt on whether the number of hate crimes is even increasing. The authors further assert that, while the federal effort to establish a reliable hate crime accounting system has failed, data collected for this purpose have led to widespread misinterpretation of the state of intergroup relations in this country. The book contends that hate crime as a socio-legal category represents the elaboration of an identity politics now manifesting itself in many areas of the law. But the attempt to apply the anti-discrimination paradigm to criminal law generates problems and anomalies. For one thing, members of minority groups are frequently hate crime perpetrators. Moreover, the underlying conduct prohibited by hate crime law is already subject to criminal punishment. Jacobs and Potter question whether hate crimes are worse or more serious than similar crimes attributable to other anti-social motivations. They also argue that the effort to single out hate crime for greater punishment is, in effect, an effort to punish some offenders more seriously simply because of their beliefs, opinions, or values, thus implicating the First Amendment. Advancing a provocative argument in clear and persuasive terms, Jacobs and Potter show how the recriminalization of hate crime has little (if any) value with respect to law enforcement or criminal justice. Indeed, enforcement of such laws may exacerbate intergroup tensions rather than eradicate prejudice.

The Rise of Victimhood Culture offers a framework for understanding recent moral conflicts at U.S. universities, which have bled into society at large. These are not the familiar clashes between liberals and conservatives or the religious and the secular: instead, they are clashes between a new moral culture—victimhood culture—and a more traditional culture of dignity. Even as students increasingly demand trigger warnings and “safe spaces,” many young people are quick to police the words and deeds of others, who in turn claim that political correctness has run amok. Interestingly, members of both camps often consider themselves victims of the other. In tracking the rise of victimhood culture, Bradley Campbell and Jason Manning help to decode an often dizzying cultural milieu, from campus riots over conservative speakers and debates around free speech to the election of Donald Trump.

Describes the brutal 1998 death of James Byrd, Jr., a black man dragged to his death behind a pick-up truck driven by three young white men, discussing the men convicted of the crime and the racism that pervades American society.

The author examines the controversies surrounding cyber-harassment, arguing that it should be considered a matter for civil rights law and that social norms of decency and civility must be leveraged to stop it. --Publisher information.