of murder, non-negligent manslaughter;rnforcible rape; aggravated assault, simplernassault, intimidation; arson; and destruction,rndamage, or vandalism of property.”rnAfter the Attorney General delegatedrnthis responsibility to the director of thernFBI, “the task of developing the proceduresrnfor, and managing the implementationrnof, the collection of hate crime data”rnwas assigned to the Uniform CrimernReports Section of the FBI. Because ofrnthe time which elapsed before that FBIrnsection received this assignment, 1991rnwas the first year for which hate crimernstatistics could be compiled. Sincernthen, the specific types of hate crimes reportedrnby the FBI have been: “Racial—rnanti-white, anti-black, anti-AmericanrnIndian/Alaskan Native, anti-Asian/PacificrnIslander, anti-multiracial group”; “Ethnicity/rnNational Origin; anti-Hispanic,rnanti-other ethnicity/national origin”;rn”Religious: anti-Jewish, anti-Catholic,rnanti-Protestant, anti-Islamic, anti-otherrnreligious group, anti-multireligiousrngroup, anti-atheism/agnosticism/etc.”;rn”Sexual Orientation: anti-male homosexual,rnanti-female homosexual, antihomosexual,rnanti-heterosexual, antibisexual.”rnAs the above listing makes clear, thernFBI does identify victims of hate crimesrnby race, ethnicity/national origin, religion,rnor sexual orientation, in conformityrnwith congressional intent. The FBI doesrnnot, however, apply the same standardsrnto perpetrators of hate crimes. Instead,rnperpetrators are identified only by race:rnwhite, black, American Indian/Alaskanrnnative, Asian/Pacific Islander, multiracialrngroup, or unknown. The problem isrnthat, according to this methodology,rnHispanics are recognized as victims, butrnnot as perpetrators. Since most Hispanicsrnare often officially classified asrn”white”—the Department of Healthrnand Human Services, for example, in itsrnJune 1996 report on illegitimacy rates inrnthe United States for 1994, counted 9 Jrnpercent of all unwed Hispanic womenrnwho gave birth as “white” in order to arrivernat a 25 percent illegitimacy rate forrn”whites”—and since perpetrators of haterncrimes are only recognized by race, Hispanicsrncommitting hate crimes are oftenrnclassified as “white.” The Departmentrnof Justice reports that for the federalrnprison system alone in 1991, the most recentrnyear for which this statistic is available,rnHispanics represented 28 percent ofrnthe total prison population, which thenrnnumbered 54,006. How many of thesernHispanic convicts had committed haterncrimes? Under the FBI’s methodology,rnit is impossible to say.rnMoreover, not only is it highly likelyrnthat a Hispanic’s attack on an Asian, arnblack, or a Jew will be classified as arn”white” hate crime, but apparently if onernHispanic attacks another Hispanic—forrninstance, if a Mexican attacks a Cuban—rnthat too will be listed as a “white” haterncrime. An additional problem, one makingrnthe Census Bureau’s more restrictedrnterm of “White Not of Hispanic Origin”rnequally inappropriate, is that everyonernfrom the Middle East, which is officiallyrnidentified as North Africa and SouthwestrnAsia (i.e., Arabs, Berbers, Baluchis,rnKurds, Persians, Turks, etc.), is classifiedrnas “white.” Any attacks or acts of intimidationrnor vandalism against Asians,rnblacks, or Jews by members of theserncommunities would therefore also bernclassified as “white” hate crimes. Again,rnthe FBI’s methodology makes it impossiblernto ascertain how many “white” haterncrimes are really perpetrated by NorthrnAfricans and Southwest Asians.rnMembers of these same communities,rnhowever, when they are the victims ofrnhate crimes, are not classified as “white”rnbut rather by their “ethnicity/nationalrnorigin” or “religion.” Therefore, accordingrnto the official records. North Africansrnand Southwest Asians, like Hispanics,rncan only be victims, not perpetrators, ofrnhate crimes.rnFor the five years for which hate crimernstatistics have been compiled, the FBI reportsrnthat the percentage of all haterncrimes perpetrated by “whites” has been;rn65 percent in 1991, 64 percent in 1992,rn51 percent in 1993, 57 percent in 1994,rnand 59 percent in 1995. And because ofrnits flawed methodology, the public isrnmisled into believing that European-rnAmericans are the principal perpetratorsrnof the hate crimes against Hispanics,rnNorth Africans, and Southwest Asians.rnFor people to assume that “white” is synonymousrnwith “European-Americans” isrnunderstandable. After all, according tornthe 1990 Census, more than 93 percentrnof all “whites” are European-Americans.rnThis fact does not mean, however, thatrnover 93 percent of the “white-perpetratedrnhate crimes” are committed by European-rnAmericans.rnThe meaninglessness of this “white”rncategory can be seen in how the federalrngovernment treats the former SovietrnCentral Asian republics of Kazakhstan,rnKirgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan,rnand Uzbekistan, While the United Nationsrnofficially identifies these states asrnAsian—they are, after all, located in Asiarnand, with a few exceptions, are populatedrnprimarily by groups that are raciallyrnAsian—the U.S. Agency for InternationalrnDevelopment, the U.S. Census Bureau,rnand the U.S. Immigration and NaturalizationrnService all classify the fivernCentral Asian republics as “European.”rnThe current methodology employedrnby the FBI in compiling hate crimernstatistics is clearly inaccurate and misleading.rnIf the FBI would employ thernterms “European-American,” “Hispanic,”rnand “Middle Eastern” when identifyingrnthe perpetrators of such crimes, itrncould correct this problem and introducernsome much-needed rationality to its operations.rnThe true victims and perpetratorsrnof these crimes could then be knownrnand dealt with accordingly.rnJoseph E. Fallon writes from Rye,rnNew York.rnMILITARYrnSex Scandalrndu Jourrnby Brian MitchellrnK: kof course not. She was the poor,rnunfortunate midshipman who wasrn”chained to a urinal” at the UnitedrnStates Naval Academy in the winter ofrn1990. The incident came at the end of arnlong day of snowball fights and practicalrnjokes, in which Ms. Dreyer had willinglyrntaken part. Sometime later, Dreyer leftrnthe academy and used her humiliation inrnthe men’s room to explain to her fatherrnwhy she had left. Her father complainedrnto the academy, which investigated andrnreprimanded the midshipmen involved.rnIt did not end there, of course. Thernlocal papers heard about the urinal, andrnwhat began with a snowball fight quicklyrnsnowballed into a national scandal. Beforernlong the academy was facing tworninternal and two congressional investigationsrninto the incident. Nine monthsrnlater, Faffaire Dreyer culminated with arnpress conference on Capitol Hill, atrnMAY 1997/39rnrnrn