Black ‘Mobs’ Attack White Patrons Outside Wis. State Fair
“It looked like they were just going after white guys, white people.” That’s how Norb Roffers described the scene outside the Wisconsin State Fair on Thursday night to Newsradio 620 WTMJ in Milwaukee. “They were attacking everybody for no reason whatsoever,” he added.
Roffers and others painted a grim and detailed picture of what unfolded during the first day of the fair. “It was 100% racial,” claimed Eric, an Iraq war veteran who told the station that young people beat on his car.
WTMJ sums up their accounts: “Witnesses’ accounts claim everything from dozens to hundreds of young black people beating white people as they left State Fair Thursday night.”
Milwaukee Police confirmed to WTMJ that officers responded to “complaints of battery, fighting and property damage due to a large, unruly crowd.” However, since reports of injuries were still coming in, police could not give a detailed account of what happened. Here is just some of what the witnesses claim to have experienced:
“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.”SOURCE
“That rated right up there with it. When I saw the amount of kids coming down the road, all I kept thinking was, ‘There’s not enough cops to handle this.‘ There’s no way. It would have taken the National Guard to control the number of kids that were coming off the road. They were knocking people off their motorcycles.”
“As we got closer to the street, we looked up the road, and we saw a quite a bit of commotion going on and there was a guy laying in the road, and nobody was even laying there. He wasn’t even moving. Finally a car pulled up. They stopped right next to the guy, and it looked like someone was going to help him. We were kind of stuck, because we couldn’t cross. Traffic was going through. Young black men running around, beating on people, and we were like ‘Let’s get the heck out of here.’ The light turned, and I got attacked from behind. I just got hit in the back of the head real hard. I’m like, ‘What the heck is going on here?’ I heard my bell ring.”
Roffers further described what witnesses said happened to the man who was lying in the street.
“People were saying he was on a bike. They tore him off his bike and beat on him. We were walking to the west on Schlinger. I was watching behind me a lot more diligently, making sure there wasn’t anybody coming to get us anymore.”
“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.”
Then, Eric talked about trying to get out of the car to help the victim.
“My wife pulled me back in because she didn’t want me to get hit. Thankfully, there was surprising a lady that was in the car in front of me that jumped out of the car real quick and went over there to try to put her body around the kid so they couldn’t see he was laying there and, obviously, defenseless.
Her husband, or whoever was in the car, was screaming at her to get back into the car. She ended up going back into the car. These black kids grabbed this kid off the ground again, and pulled him up over the curb, onto the sidewalk and threw him into the bushes like he was a piece of garbage.”
Eric claimed that the victim in that beating was by himself, and that there was a split of white people on one sidewalk and black people on the other.
“There was nobody else around to help him. There were no other white people, period, on that side of the street. They were going in the opposite direction because, those people who were coming out of the fair that saw these people coming, they either went back into the fair or took off running south on 84th Street.”
“The thing that irritated me, the State Fair Police, the State Police, were down by the Pettit entrance to get in there,” said Eric. “There was probably 5 or 6 officers down there. That’s where all these kids came from. They came out of the Midway, across the front of the Pettit. They were still filing out of there. The State Fair Police, they knew this was going on. They knew these kids were beating these guys in between that exit and Schlinger at the next gate.”
“They were stopping traffic, and I said ‘What in the hell,’ excuse my language, ‘what are you guys doing directing traffic when there are 300, 400 black kids up the road beating the hell out of everybody, pushing people off of motorcycles?’ I was livid. I could not believe they were directing traffic.”
Call to scrap 'useless' equalities watchdog which costs taxpayers millions
Britain’s embattled human rights quango should be scrapped, a report says today. It claims that the Equality and Human Rights Commission contributes ‘very little to meaningful equality’ despite costing the taxpayer tens of millions of pounds a year.
The Civitas think-tank says that abolition would come at ‘no obvious cost to the public’.
The report is scathing of the pay and expenses of the Commission’s most senior staff, including chairman Trevor Phillips who receives £112,000 a year for working three and a half days a week. It also criticises the quango’s ‘illogical’ use of statistics and ‘narrow approach’ to social policy.
The report is a fresh blow to the quango which has suffered a series of financial scandals and high-profile resignations, culminating in a scathing Government review which found it had failed to do its job and had cost too much money. It is now facing large-scale cuts in its Whitehall funding.
The report found ‘serious flaws’ in the way that the EHRC demonstrates inequality in Britain. It says the Commission is quick to blame unfairness in society while ignoring other important influences which could explain the differences between social groups.
It says that, for example, the EHRC points to differences in life expectancy between British-born women (80.5 years) and women of Pakistani origin (77.3) as a sign of unfairness. However, it fails to draw attention to the much larger difference in life expectancy between Pakistani women living in Britain (77.3) and women living in Pakistan (67.5 years).
Jon Gower Davies, the report’s author, says the Commission’s goal of equality is unrealistic as it wishes that ‘life outcomes be entirely divorced from health limitations, cultural practices and lifestyles’.
A Civitas spokesman said: ‘Abolishing the EHRC would not just be a cost-saving exercise. It may well be an opportunity to channel resources into pertinent issues holding back equality and fairness.’ Mark Hammond, chief executive of the EHRC, said: ‘There are many reasons why people experience different levels of prosperity, health and happiness, but in some cases this can be because of discrimination and unfairness.
‘No one blames Britain for that, but it’s our job to start a debate on issues where we could see better outcomes for people suffering unfair disadvantages.’
Having a satellite dish 'is a human right,' says European court
It is regarded as a luxury that allows people to watch top sport and blockbuster movies from the comfort of their armchairs. But owning a satellite dish is actually a human right, according to unelected European judges.
In an extraordinary ruling, lawmakers in Strasbourg have warned that banning dishes on listed buildings, social housing and even private homes could breach the right to freedom of expression by preventing people from practice religion.
The judgement is a huge blow to campaigners who have fought to stop the large metal dishes blighting the brickwork of historic buildings and rental properties.
The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC), Britain’s discrimination watchdog, has now published new guidance warning that landlords could be at risk of being sued if they try to stop their tenants putting up a satellite dish.
Housing Minister Grant Shapps said that the ruling, under the Human Rights Act, threatened to drive ‘a horse and cart’ through planning laws.
The quango issued the guidance following a recent case at the European Court of Human Rights. Two tenants in Sweden took their government to court after they were evicted by their landlord in a dispute over a dish. The couple installed one of the dishes on their rented property but the landlord ordered them to take it down. They refused and were later thrown out of the property.
But European judges ruled that the Swedish government had failed in its obligation to protect the couple’s right to receive information. It found that satellite dishes come under Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
In its guidance, Britain’s equalities watchdog suggested that a disabled tenant who received transmissions of religious services held overseas would have their rights to freedom of religion breached if their landlord banned satellite dishes.
The European Commission’s Internal Market Commissioner Frits Bolkestein said: ‘The right to use a satellite dish [is] one of the many concrete benefits for European consumers of the free movement of goods and services within the internal market.
‘Satellite dishes are an increasingly popular tool for receiving multiple services via satellite: they facilitate mutual exchanges between our various cultures by overcoming national borders, and familiarise the general public with the new remote communications technologies. Their use must therefore be free from any unjustified obstacle.’
Australian church says spanking is OK, opposes push to ban corporal punishment
MUMS and dads could face court for smacking their children, a major church has warned as it resists the push to ban corporal punishment in the home.
The 600,000-strong Presbyterian Church fears that parents could be stopped from using corporal punishment as yet another state moves to ban smacking.
Under a controversial human rights charter, Victoria will join NSW in outlawing the use of corporal punishment. Under Queensland law, parents are allowed to use "reasonable force" when disciplining their children.
In a submission to a Victorian parliamentary inquiry, the church said that the charter could be used to dump the common law right to smack children provided force wasn't unreasonable or excessive. "Many Australian families use reasonable physical discipline from time to time," the church said. "There is a significant body of research confirming its utility in raising children well."
But Australian Childhood Foundation chief executive Dr Joe Tucci yesterday said it was never right to hit children and NSW's lead should be followed. "If parents are really angry or frustrated at the time that they're doing it they could inadvertently hurt kids and that's our concern about it," he said. "More and more parents are moving away from physical punishment because it's not effective."
However, adolescent psychologist Dr Michael Carr-Gregg said it was ridiculous to legislate against smacking. "I don't think we should be criminalising people who, when their children run across the road, they give them a tap on the bum," he said.
Dr Carr-Gregg said he didn't believe smacking was the solution to bad behaviour, but attempts to ban it had not worked.
A recent [bogus] study said that parents who smacked their children could be depriving them of the skills they needed to cope with school and even with adulthood.
The Presbyterian church submission said Australia was being pressured to ban corporal punishment by a United Nations committee overseeing implementation of the Convention on the Rights of the Child.
Political correctness is most pervasive in universities and colleges but I rarely report the incidents concerned here as I have a separate blog for educational matters.
American "liberals" often deny being Leftists and say that they are very different from the Communist rulers of other countries. The only real difference, however, is how much power they have. In America, their power is limited by democracy. To see what they WOULD be like with more power, look at where they ARE already very powerful: in America's educational system -- particularly in the universities and colleges. They show there the same respect for free-speech and political diversity that Stalin did: None. So look to the colleges to see what the whole country would be like if "liberals" had their way. It would be a dictatorship.
For more postings from me, see TONGUE-TIED, GREENIE WATCH, EDUCATION WATCH INTERNATIONAL, FOOD & HEALTH SKEPTIC, GUN WATCH, AUSTRALIAN POLITICS, DISSECTING LEFTISM, IMMIGRATION WATCH INTERNATIONAL and EYE ON BRITAIN (Note that EYE ON BRITAIN has regular posts on the reality of socialized medicine). My Home Pages are here or here or here or Email me (John Ray) here. For readers in China or for times when blogger.com is playing up, there is a mirror of this site here.