Maybe it was a Hate-Crime

Is the “Ministry of Truth” hiding something that’s inconvenient to the establishment party line?

Here’s a good representation of how the assault of Justice Souter is being reported.

Being that no media outlet is identifying the attackers of Justice Souter by race, you can safely bet that the assailants are of a minority. And since Justice Souter was not robbed, what then would be the motive? You don’t suppose that this would be a hate-crime, do you?

No, of course not. For a crime of this nature to qualify as a hate-crime, Justice Thomas would had to have been assaulted by a several white men. And, under that scenerio, it’s guaranteed that the media would be trumpeting the race of the assailants.

Why is it that the media is intent on brainwashing the populace regarding hate-crimes?

That’s a hell of a conspiracy theory to base on a facts you’ve *assumed *ain’t it?. Try this: If the kids had been white, would that have been reported, either? Or if black kids had assaulted Thomas? Hold your horses until you know something, anything.

As for it not being a robbery, if a guy’s out jogging, he may not have anything on him worth robbing him of. Perhaps that was their intent, regardless of the victims’ identity?

FWIW, there have been occasional discussions reported over the years about allowing TV cameras into the Supreme Court chambers, but the justices have turned down the idea every time based largely on preserving their own ability to go out in public unharassed. True, anyone who cares to can find out what any of them look like with no trouble at all, but generally they can go out like Souter did without being pestered by lobbyists and autograph-seekers.

Considering the gay rumor surrounding Souter, it’s just as easy, with as much evidence, to jump to the conclusion that it was a gay-bashing rather than a race-based assault as you do. I’m not saying I buy either rather than it being random violence.

Ain’t no assumption, just relying on the media’s own record of reporting hate-crimes.

The media has a documented record of trumpeting white-on-minority crimes, while supressing minority-on-white crimes.

For example, the dragging death of James Byrd received extensive national coverage, and still today, receives occasional mention, while the equally heinous murders committed by Reginald and Johnathan Carr, by comparison, received virtually no national exposure.

In keeping with the approved template in reporting hate-crimes, it is the media that is guilty of making assumptions in their witch-hunts for white racists.

Remember all the hand-wringing over the burning of black churches accross the South, and how the supposed burnings were portrayed to be the result of white racists? But, when all the investigations were done, there had been no rash of church burnings perpetrated by white racists.

The media spent hours of air-time and gallons of ink just to satisfy the politics of political correctness regarding so-called hate-crimes. In other words, a campaign of brainwashing.

Yuh-huh. All that said, Razor, it might do you good to provide some evidence, or at least suggest why your idea is even remotely plausible.

I already done that.

No, you haven’t done nothing. You made a bunch of suppositions.

No you haven’t; you’ve used your opinion on hate crimes to justify an assumption, which you then used to bolster your opinion. No facts have been involved, thus far.

No, I made a statement of fact that is inconveninent for you. The media has a history of trumpeting white-on-minority hate-crimes, while supressing minority-on-white hate-crimes. The media also has a history of fabricating hate-crimes in thier witch-hunt for white racists.

This, you deny?

Come on, now. Be honest. I just gave two factual instances of media “reporting” that bolsters my opinion.

…And you gave no evidence that what you say actually happened (Souter beaten up by white guys, media covers it up) actually did happen. When you do that - which you won’t, because you can’t - you’ll have something.

Two! Blimey. One, actually, and you didn’t even demonstrate that that was a hate-crime, or that it was under-reported, let alone that it was under-reported for reasons of mass media anti-white conspiracy.

Shit, there were RIOTS? Riots in LA? I never heard about that on the libral mediar.


Words simply are inadequate to express the pity I feel for all us pore white folks being assailed by the one-sided media.

Coupla points:

First, the horrific crimes of the Carr brothers did receive national coverage. I don’t have a cite, but I believe I can safely say that there was national coverage, because I live in New York City, and I know something about their killing spree. QED.

Second, the murder of James Byrd was most definitely racially motivated, whereas the crimes of the Carr brothers, if I remember correctly, were motivated mostly by greed (with a large dose of sociopathy and general bad-guy-ness mixed in). Quite a difference.

Third, as of today, I don’t think we know that much about the Souter assault. I read about it in the New York Times this morning. It says he was assaulted while jogging. It did not reveal the location of the crime, although the Times did speculate that since Souther does most of his jogging at a track located on a presumably secure Army base, the assault must have happened between his home and that track, since he was known to run from one to the other.

Beyond that, we don’t know a thing. We don’t know if his assailants were black or white. We don’t know if they recognized their victim. We don’t know diddly.

And there’s no reason (whether or not Souter is gay, which is his own business) to insinuate that this was any kind of rough-trade thing gone wrong (and I’ve seen and heard some speculation along those lines already).

Lack of any evidence at all to you constitutes proof? They didn’t say so, so it must be so? I didn’t see anything in any of the quotes in the OP that even hinted at any kind of hate crime, Razorsharp. Ar you so “sharp” that you can read between the lines? All three of the cites you gave suggest to me nothing more than a common mugging. Lacking information on the race/ethnicity/religion/politics of the assailants, I can’t see how you arrived at your conclusion. Why don’t you come back to GD when you’ve got something? Or just post a rant in the pit.

If you go back and look, you will see that I wrote that in comparison to the James Byrd death that the Carr borthers received virtually no national exposure. I didn’t say that they received no national exposure.

If you read the specifics of the incident, you will find that the Carr brothers assaulted their victims for two hours before taking them to an ATM and forcing them to withdraw money to rob them of. So, according to the Carr brother’s actions, greed was the secondary motive.

Furthermore, forcing a victim to watch and endure the raping of his fiance during the last moments of his life, before having a bullet put into his brain, would be a pretty good indicator of hate being one of the motivating factors.

Dumb question, maybe…
But I thought SCOTUS Justices had bodyguards. Secret Service, perhaps.
I know the U.S. Marshals protect other Federal judges.

Please indicate where I said anything about “proof”. Don’t put words into my mouth, that’s called “bearing false witness”.

The “pit” would seem to be more to your liking.

See, here’s how it works. White on white or black on black crime is not considered newsworthy. It is supposedly the interracial component that makes it newsworthy.

Now, from past experience, if Justice Thomas were assaulted by several whites, don’t you think that their race would have been mentioned in the press releases?