According to the Des Moines Register, police are trying to get to the bottom of what led to a series of attacks at the Iowa State Fair that included the assault of two police officers and a number of other people. The victims, from all I have read, were Caucasian. Their attackers, it seems, were African-Americans.
Below are some quotes from the Des Moines Register which police officers reportedly made.
Sgt. David Murillo stated in a report on Friday night, "On-duty officers at the fairgrounds advise there was a group of 30 to 40 individuals roaming the fairgrounds openly calling it 'beat whitey night.'"
"We don't know if this was juveniles fighting or a group of kids singling out white citizens leaving the fairgrounds," Sgt. Lori Lavorato said. "It's all under investigation, but it's very possible it has racial overtones."
Could it be that 'Beat Whitey Night' had some racial overtones? It depends on who you ask it seems. The police certainly had suspicions, but what did State Rep. Ako Abdul-Samad, D-Des Moines, think? He didn't (at least on 8-24-10) have enough information to decide if the attacks of 'Beat Whitey Night' were racially motivated. While I wasn't there to investigate the incident, I'm going to go out on a limb here and say the attacks WERE racially motivated.
As noted earlier, Sgt. David Murillo documented that on-duty police officers at the fairgrounds said there was a group of 30 to 40 suspects wandering the fairgrounds looking for trouble and openly calling their activities 'Beat Whitey Night'. Either this group of thirty to forty suspects were looking for a guy literally named Whitey or they were looking for some 'whiteys', as in Caucasian people, to beat up. I think we can safely conclude that based on what police officers on the ground there were reporting.
Sgt Lori Lavorato, although somewhat vague in her assessment of the multiple assaults, certainly gave us no reason to suspect the events of the evening weren't racially motivated when she noted that "white citizens" leaving the fairgrounds may have been "singled out" by attackers. The violence of the evening smells distinctly racially motivated from my perspective. How about you?
A lot of you are probably wondering why I'm writing about an event of this nature. The answer is to make a point concerning the liberal mainstream media, tolerance, poltical correctness and the like and how Satan is using them to deceive the masses with great effect.
Prior to writing this commentary, I Googled 'Beat Whitey Night' and couldn't find a single major news network reporting on the attacks. On the other hand, it's a piece of cake to find mainstream media news coverage of the Ground Zero mosque controversy.
No angry crowds have beaten Muslims in New York, but, by the way the mainstream media is handling coverage of that controversy, you'd think so. 'Beat Whitey Night', on the other hand? It just isn't newsworthy, in spite of the fact that one victim had two of his eye sockets (orbital bones) fractured!
What happened at the Iowa State Fairgrounds, if the documentation of the evening's events by the police are accurate, was pure unadulterated hatred of the most vile nature and yet it got virtually zero attention from the media, but can you imagine the coverage the mainstream media would've given to this incident if a gang of Caucasian males referring to their activities as 'Illegal Immigrant Beatdown Night' had beaten up some Hispanics in Arizona? Not only would the attacks have been front page news, every conservative voice in the United States of America would've been implicated as an encourager of the event in all likelihood, just as everyone who holds any dislike of a high-rise mosque being built near Ground Zero is being portrayed by the mainstream media as an opponent of freedom of religion as provided in the U.S. Constitution.
I don't know about anyone else but I'm sick to death of liberals like CBS News anchor Katie Couric making comments like the following, as documented by NewsBusters recently:
"There is a debate to be had about the sensitivity of building this center so close to Ground Zero. But we can not let fear and rage tear down the towers of our core American values."
Does it irritate anyone else to the core that Couric felt the need to paint a portrait of people opposed to the building of the Ground Zero mosque reminiscent in symbolism to the attacks of September 11, 2001 - the very attacks that gave many of those opposed to its construction reason not to want it so close to the site to begin with?
Does it rub anyone else wrong that MSNBC's Norah O'Donnell accused people opposed to the building of the mosque near Ground Zero to murderous terrorists when she said they were "acting like the people who attacked America and killed 3,000 people"? NewsBusters documented that incident of mainstream media bias/insanity as well. On that note, it's news to me and probably to a lot of people who will read this commentary that holding up a sign that reads "No Mosque At Ground Zero" is the equivalent of killing thousands of innocent people but it apparently is, at least over at MSNBC.
Meanwhile, here in the real world
The mainstream media's ongoing portrayal of opposition to the building of the Ground Zero mosque as some sort of affront to freedom of religion may be true on the part of some people demonstrating against it but it isn't a majority view. Far from it! The overwhelming majority of people opposed to its construction at the location currently under consideration merely want the mosque to be built elsewhere, which New York Governor David Paterson offered to help with if developers of the mosque would be willing to relocate. Paterson said he wasn't willing to meet with the mosque's developers because he was opposed to the building of a mosque, but was willing to do so in the interest of quelling the unrest plans to build it there has caused.
You'd think followers of the "peaceful religion" of Islam, so quick to be offended if anyone does or says anything they deem to be insulting, like draw a cartoon of their prophet for example, would be sensitive to the feelings of others but they aren't nor are they expected to be. And why is that? There are a number of reasons, but the reason at the top of the list where the issue of the Ground Zero mosque and the mainstream media is concerned? In my humble opinion, it's because the November elections are within view and liberals everywhere are in a panic.
When President Obama sounded off in favor of the Ground Zero mosque being built, it struck a sensitive nerve with many voters. This, in turn, gave rise in liberal circles to greater concerns that the Democratic Party may not fare well in the November elections than existed before he offered his opinion. Worse than that in the eyes of the mainstream media? The American public, based on recent polling, is more concerned about where the president's spiritual loyalties lie than ever before. Many Americans now believe, despite his insistence that he is a Christian, President Obama is in reality a Muslim. What has the backlash created by the president's position on the mosque led to other than outrage in the eyes of many Americans? The mainstream media saying anything, doing anything it perceives it has to do to rescue President Obama's reputation that he, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid can continue to call all the shots in Washington at any cost, the end result of which many feel is going to pose a threat to the security and prosperity of our nation to say the very least.
Personally? While I would prefer they freely receive the gospel of
Jesus Christ and be saved,
I don't mind if the Muslims want to build a mosque. Having said that, I, as do many Americans, wonder why it has to be built so close to Ground Zero when there are alternatives that could lower tensions without any infringement on the religious freedoms of New York's Muslim community occurring. It's a question I believe the liberal mainstream media should be asking, but instead of doing that? Its strategy is to accost the reputation of anyone who isn't whistling a happy tune on the issue, purely out of loyalty to their liberal ideologies.
The Bottom Line
Whether I'm correct in my opinion that the liberal mainstream media is so 'in the tank' for President Obama that it is willing to stoop to most any low where journalistic integrity is concerned is up to you to decide but, if I'm wrong and the mainstream media is genuinely concerned that freedom of religion is threatened by those wanting the Ground Zero mosque to be relocated, surely a gang of youth at the Iowa State Fair holding a 'Beat Whitey Night' is worthy of getting some mainstream media attention as racial hatred of that variety should be unacceptable in any law-abiding nation with the freedoms the United States of America affords all of its citizenry.
There may well be those who will read this commentary and see it as little more than political in tone, but the devil - literally - is in the details of all that has been discussed in this commentary.
Satan specializes in deception and is masterful in his ability to subtly manipulate the thoughts of humanity. This I well understand, but it is beyond my comprehension how anyone could look back on the events of September 11, 2001 and be comfortable with the construction of a 13-story mosque within spitting distance of Ground Zero. This is especially true when the imam in charge of the project (Feisal Abdul Rauf), in a 2006 interview with Barbara Walters on the topic of Heaven, seemed less than certain where suicide bombers like the 9/11 terrorists go when they die, as documented in a NewsBusters article:
WALTERS: Do you believe that a suicide bomber goes to Heaven?
RAUF: One of the things that we are taught is never to say somebody will go to Hell or somebody will go to Heaven. It is up to God to decide.
WALTERS: So one man's suicide bomber is another man's martyr?
RAUF: Well, the expression that I've heard is, "One man's terrorist is another man's hero."
This is the same imam currently on a taxpayer-funded trip to the Middle East where he is acting as "a symbol of American religious freedom." On that topic, Reverend Franklin Graham raised some valid points when he said, "I think there is no place for this. Can you imagine if the State Department paid to send me on a trip anywhere? The separation of church and state – the critics would have been howling."
It's an understatement to suggest the critics would've been howling if a Christian had been sent on a trip of that nature. The mainstream media would've been screaming louder than a fair-skinned boy being beaten up by a gang of thugs at the Iowa State Fairgrounds on 'Beat Whitey Night'! Am I right or am I right?
I did mention that the mainstream media is up in arms that many Americans are upset about the Ground Zero mosque, but hasn't chosen to make the American people aware that there was a 'Beat Whitey Night' at the Iowa State Fair, didn't I? Okay, just checking.
1 Peter 5:8:Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour:
Keep it in mind - and keep looking up for our redemption draweth nigh!
