Are the media removing references to blacks from eyewitnesses’ accounts of black mayhem?

Concerning the Minneapolis Star-Tribune’s article on the riot in the Mall of America, Paul K. writes:

The article is remarkable in its refusal to identify the defining trait of the “young people” who went on the rampage. Even the witnesses who are quoted speak in generalities—”[my son and husband] witnessed a group of teenage men fighting,” and, “we were in The Limited and saw many, many teenagers running past.” Do people really talk like this? I suspect that whatever identifiers the witnesses may have applied to the horde were sanitized before publication.

- end of initial entry -

Robert B. writes:

It just so happens that I know the Michelle Maher quoted in the article. She would have been racially explicit in her description of the rampagers—therefore, the paper is guilty of arbitrarily rewording witness statements.

By coincidence, my college age daughter was trying to get into the mall that afternoon so she could take her seven year old brother to see the movie “Tintin”—luckily they couldn’t get in to the parking ramp and left.

Many years ago, the owners of the MOA were among the most vocal proponents of the construction of a light rail train that runs from downtown Minneapolis to the MOA.. At the time, most people joked that the billion dollar boondoggle was being built just so that the feral blacks living on the North side of Minneapolis could get to the mall for shoplifting. While the train is used by some football and baseball fans to get from the mall (free parking) to the stadiums in downtown Minneapolis, for the most part, all it does is ferry the feral to the MOA. Thus, the owners of MOA have reaped what they have sown.

Posted by Lawrence Auster at December 27, 2011 08:19 PM | Send