From:  "Truth In Media Reporting" <lying-pricks@msnbc.com>
Date:  03 Oct 2015 11:42:07 Hong Kong Time
Newsgroup:  news.alt119.net/wny.motss
Subject:  

Vester Lee Flanagan: Can a Racist Gay Black Faggot Commit a Hate Crime?

NNTP-Posting-Host:  null

Edwin Hubbel Chapin once said, "Through every rift of discovery 
some seeming anomaly drops out of the darkness, and falls, as a 
golden link into the chain of order."

If ever there was a "seeming anomaly" in the chain to enforce 
the orthodoxy of political correctness, it's Vester Lee 
Flanagan, also known as reporter Bryce Williams.

Flanagan murdered Alison Parker and Adam Ward on live television 
while they were reporting on a feature story for WDBJ in 
Virginia. Parker was the reporter and Ward was the cameraman.

The incident might be chocked up as nothing more than another 
tragic situation of workplace violence except that Flanagan said 
in a 23 page letter to ABC News the killings were out of his 
anger over "racial discrimination, sexual harassment and 
bullying at work." Although his claims of inequity were proven 
to be unsubstantiated, he said he had been "attacked for being a 
gay, black man." He also claimed the Charleston church shooting 
in June ought to have provoked a race war and the incident was 
the inspiration for his dastardly act.

So if Flanagan had not turned the gun on himself and taken his 
own life, but lived, one can only wonder if the two murders he 
committed would have been deemed a hate crime. Parker and Ward 
were both white and straight. Flanagan was black and gay.

So what happens when a black gay man guns down two white 
straight people expressing his motives are connected to issues 
of race and homosexuality?

Ben Shapiro, Senior Editor-At-Large for Breitbart News and a New 
York Times bestselling author, noted in a column about the 
incident:

"Had a white straight man killed a black gay man, released a 
first person tape of the shooting, and then unleashed a 
manifesto about being victimized by affirmative action and anti-
religious bigotry from homosexuals, the media would never stop 
covering the story. They'd be eager to report that shooter's 
motives with all the attendant politically correct hullaballoo 
about the racism and homophobia of the United States more 
broadly. We would hear about white supremacy. We would hear 
excoriations of the Republican presidential candidates for their 
failures to stand with the Black Lives Matter movement �and 
their opposition to same-sex marriage �

Indeed, we would. And, Shapiro goes on to rightly argue that the 
media is more likely to depict Flanagan simply as an "outlier" 
and focus the conversation on the supposed need for gun control.

But what about a question that goes to the heart of the matter �
would Flanagan's crime be deemed a hate crime?

It would seem to fit the category.

The federal government defines a hate crime as "any criminal 
offense �which is motivated, in whole or in part, by the 
offender's bias against a race, religion, disability, sexual 
orientation, or ethnicity/national origin."

Flanagan's rage vented on Parker and Ward seemingly wasn't just 
against them for personal offenses, but as representatives of 
his perceived white, straight, anti-gay oppressors. Whether they 
were burning a cross on a lawn or carrying out a lynching, the 
Ku Klux Klan used the same twisted rationale against blacks and 
gays.

Flanagan's maniacal act also seems to fit the various 
justifications given for hate crime laws. Hate crime laws carry 
tougher penalties because they are deemed to be more brutal in 
nature, allegedly do more psychological harm, and, as a bias 
motivated crime, hurt innocent third parties. In other words, 
the crime not only targets a certain victim, but is directed at 
a group. Over and again, via news footage, the public witnessed 
an excessively brutal act of wanton murder by a man filled with 
hate who meant to do psychological damage to millions, while 
striking out against all people who would discriminate on the 
basis of race or sexuality.

Still, had Flanagan not committed suicide, it's highly unlikely 
he would have been charged with a hate crime. Even though others 
have been charged with the same for less than what he did �some 
for just using derogatory language. Why? Because hate crime laws 
are not about equal justice under the law as our Constitution 
demands. They are, instead, about tipping the scales in favor of 
people from protected groups and not others.

Violent crime should be punished under the same standard no 
matter the victim.

In his book, 10 Truths About Hate Crime Laws, John Aman writes:

"[U]nder the hate crimes regime, the law no longer regards 'man 
as man,' but as a member of a group. Equal justice gives way to 
a system of 'preferential justice,' in which, as novelist George 
Orwell put it, 'All animals are equal, but some animals are more 
equal than others.'"

Aman also contends:

"Hate crime statutes codify legal distinctions based on race, 
ethnicity, national origin, gender, and sexual behavior. They 
alert all Americans to these distinct identities and reinforce, 
magnify, and fix in place group conflict by using the law to 
make them legitimate. The media reinforces these divisions by 
showering attention on crimes purported to be motivated by 
prejudice�ased on differences in race, gender, religion, or 
sexual conduct, such factionalism is moving our society toward 
the 'disuniting of America.' Some are calling this a 'new 
tribalism.'"

Such laws work to create, as Aman asserts, "a perverse incentive 
to seek victimhood, since victimization enhances a group's 
'moral claim on the larger society,' and, therefore, it 
leverages political power." Quoting Shelby Steele, Aman adds, 
"The power to be found in victimization, like any power is 
intoxicating and can lend itself to the creation of a new class 
of super-victims who can feel the pea of victimization under 
twenty mattresses.'"

News reports indicate, as Shapiro wrote, that Flanagan 
"marinated in his self-appointed victimhood status." He sought 
to use it as power over the places where he worked, but 
officials dismissed his complaints. He was constantly looking 
for people to say something to which he might take offense.

Flanagan is not alone in such behavior. Except for the act of 
murder, his worldview either to a greater or lesser degree is 
becoming a national phenomenon.

Is this what we've come to in this country? Whatever happened to 
that greater, former set of ideas about personal responsibility 
and impartial justice, and not identity politics, that were our 
compass?

The point here is hate crime laws may have been enacted with the 
intention of protecting weaker and minority groups, but such 
laws and the politics surrounding them, have instead worked to 
enhance separatism, fueling and magnifying prejudices and 
antagonisms. They have exacerbated feelings of victimization, 
even to the point of violence.

If Flanagan's fury is suggestive of anything, it has a 
connection to this. Moreover, Flanagan is the anomaly indicative 
of our country's need of God's grace in Christ to cleanse away 
the hate and partiality against any man or group �something no 
law can do.

http://www.christianpost.com/news/vester-lee-flanagan-can-a-gay-
black-man-commit-a-hate-crime-144124/
        ��� ��� � �
--
Illegal alien Barack Hussein Obama seizes on this tragedy caused 
by one of his mentally ill homosexual, black ardent supporters, 
to wave the flags for more gun control.