Looks like we have a few black supremecists on our hands
 

http://www.todaystmj4.com/news/local/126825018.html

"It was 100% racial," claimed Eric, an Iraq war veteran from St. Francis who says young people beat on his car.

"I had a black couple on my right side, and these black kids were running in between all the cars, and they were pounding on my doors and trying to open up doors on my car, and they didn't do one thing to this black couple that was in this car next to us. They just kept walking right past their car. They were looking in everybody's windshield as they were running by, seeing who was white and who was black. Guarantee it."

"I saw them grab this white kid who was probably 14 or 15 years old. They just flung him into the road. They just jumped on him and started beating him. They were kicking him. He was on the ground. A girl picked up a construction sign and pushed it over on top of him. They were just running by and kicking him in the face."

Wow...

I have no words.. :-(

EW, were you hurt badly?

There are more than a few Black supremacists in the world. Welcome to what began in the 1930s and has taken violent forms quite a few times (the relatively rare occasions where Black supremacists feel they have the resources and the power to do something) in the world's history.

The fact that EW (Mr. Day Late Dollar Short) started this thread is very funny.

I guess these Black girls didn't get the memo that Black people were safe. I assume Black people were safe. I guess we'll never know if this was primarily racial violence.

Some of those dumbass youth were handled and proper measures will be taken:

http://host.madison.com/wsj/news/loc...cc4c03286.html

Black supremacists? I don't know.

Violent criminals with an apparent racial bias? Yep.

This was COMPLETELY taken out of context, but that's to be expected from TMJ4.

West Allis is an area in which this type of behavior is honestly the norm from teenagers of any race.

In addition, the reason this entire riot started was a clash between two groups protesting/supporting Scott Walker at the fair.

It obviously escalated far beyond that. I just wish one station would at least mention that.

LOL at the witness accounts. I was waiting to read all about the gunfire after the first guy said it was just like Iraq. Then he says 400-800 black kids are beating people when everyone else says more like 100. Hyperbole much?

Says the "hyperbolizer".

If I read correctly, one person says 50-100 and that was inside the fair. He was outside the fair in his car.

But it's definitely their socio-economic status, long history of oppression that causes them to do this. The same thing definitely happens in West Virginia.

You didnt have to give yourself a new nickname for trying to oversell a riot. Supremacy?

Read your article again and find the other quote that references the number "a hundred" for the estimate of rioters. I will admit I oversold what the original guy said, but that was from poor memory after closing the article. Go ahead and slap my hand. He said 300 or 400 people were there. Still far short of a war torn zone, especially considering this other quote:

"I have not seen anything like this in my life.* It was a huge mob, and it was a fight that maybe lasted one to two minutes." Two minutes of Iraq. What a slap in the face.

A mob lynching of a black man (which this appeared, at least according to eyewitnesses, to be attempted murder several times) would certainly be connotated as white supremecists, whether or not it was true. Do you think that Emmett Till's attackers motives were exaggerated?

You missed the point.

You said:
"everyone else says more like 100"

I said:
"If I read correctly, one person says 50-100 and that was inside the fair. He was outside the fair in his car."

But I guess you committed to hyperbole twice. One person is not "everyone else".

It sounds like these kids were a bunch of thugs, and no one was safe--regardless of race. I'm not sure if they were black "supremecists," but I don't think they were black "supremacists."

And I said go back and read the article...everyone else did say that. (including someone outside the fair.) It's not hyperbole to quote the article. It is to turn a riot into a race war.

LOL at the appeared to be attempted murder and comparing this to a lynching. So is it Iraq or a lynching. Riots can be scary. Attempted murder is a legal term. Assault may be a little more befitting. Let the DA do the grandstanding.

No on else said that. Quote the article for me. Where exactly does it give a number other than one inside the fair and the veteran?

Hooked on phonics worked for me! Notice she said over a hundred and not over 300 or 400.

No, because the lynching of Emmet Till was in fact motivated by white supremacy. But not all lynchings are racially motivated, which is irrelevant anyway, as there wasn't any lynching going on in this story.

Instead of trying (and failing) to make these political points, why don't you stick to refusing to affiliate with shanes and telling all kinds of other inconsistent stories about your fraternity membership. At least that's entertaining.

There wasn't any lynchings because it was stopped. Attempted murder is still attempting murder. Would it have been any less acceptable if the lynchers had nearly killed Emmett, but didn't? That's what happened here.

This was a mass attempted lynching. It seems fairly evident from the story and from other eye-witness testimony from other sources that it was indeed racially based.

Perp.

Keep playing the victim. No1curr

Who's being hyperbolic now? (As if "black supremacists" wasn't hyperbolic enough.)

Lynching is more than mob violence and more than murder. Lynching is not necessarily racially-based (though certainly in this country, most lynchings have been racially-based, being used by whites to try to "control" minority groups). From the Encyclopedia Britannica: "lynching, a form of violence in which a mob, under the pretext of administering justice without trial, executes a presumed offender, often after inflicting torture and corporal mutilation."

So unless you can point out to me where the perpetrators of this alleged "mass attempted lynching" could be said to be attempting to administer their own justice to those they believed to be guilty of something, then no -- there's nothing "fairly evident" about it at all.

No. No. NO. No and No. That was NOT what this was. It was a RIOT, not a mass race-motivated attempted lynching.

There were white people involved in the rioting too. As were there people of every race. In fact, the white people started the whole damn thing.

No one was attempting to lynch anyone.

Honestly.

Stop ruining EW's hopes and dreams.

Proof?

I'm sorry: I didn't think to take photos while I was there.

Here's as much as I do have. WISN reported this (http://www.wisn.com/r/28769947/detail.html), which got out of hand with the arrival of pro-Walker supports and contributed to what happened.

I'm not saying those kids were completely justified in what they were doing. I'm saying that it wasn't black supremacists attempting to lynch all the white folks.

This is probably not enough proof for you, but I feel like I'm qualified to comment, seeing as I was actually present when this took place.

I have been wondering what caused the riot? We/I haven't heard down here in the south.

BTW - there are white, black, asian, indian, and hell, probably even green supremacists somewhere in our cosmos. I think this was more opportunism because I seriously doubt all 50 to over 100 of the rioters even knew why they were beating the crap out of white people. But I may be completely wrong.

Usually the case in riots.

The start of the animosity was due to the protests against/for Governor Walker. It escalated hugely from there but no one is really sure how or why....

Truth.

I don't think anyone really knows, as far as I understand.

They are my least favorite station. Also, I always end up wondering if John Malan wears a toupée.