@Header

I'm sorry; I'm not following. What's the "yes, I do" pertain to?

@Header

You can not tell me if the races were reversed, whites doing this to a black that racial hate crimes too would not be laid!

I'm not trying to tell you or anyone else that. Right now, I think we can all agree that there's a mad rush in society to view ANY crime where the perpetrator is white and the victim non-white as racially motivated, even if that were the furthest thing from the truth. It's wrong and we should call it such.

Equally wrong - IMHO - is saying any crime where the perpetrator is black and the victim is non-black is racially motivated, for the exact same reason.

Yes I do believe if the said postal worker was black this would not occur

Respectfully, I would be curious to know if you've ever lived in a ghetto. I have. And I can give you my word of honor that low-class people will go after ANYONE that they think is giving them attitude.

Or to use a different example, Chiraq - or Chicago, to the rest of us - isn't plagued by white-on-black or black-on-white violence; it's plagued by black-on-black violence. So believe me when I say that there isn't this "black bloc" of solidarity that some people may think exists.

Or maybe I'll just let Chris Rock tell his version of it:

@Header

It pains me a bit to hear that - as I concur with you, that we do tend to agree on a lot of things - yet I respect your right to have a differing opinion and I deeply appreciate you being civil in your disagreement.

@Alysandir these black women just needed an excuse to attack the white female postal employee and the stimulus checks was their phony reason. Just in case you’ve been sleeping for the last decade or so blacks have been voicing their hatred for white people in no uncertain terms and there’s a long history and pattern of racial violence committed by blacks against whites. You’d have to be blind not to notice it.

@Andyman

I'm going to assume you completely ignored what I wrote above, so I'm going to paraphrase it for you as a courtesy:

• I believe that saying white-on-black crime is automatically a hate crime, is bullshit.
• I believe that saying black-on-white crime is automatically a hate crime, is bullshit.

If there's evidence that race was the motivation for the crime, then we can talk about hate crimes.

But for right now, where you see two black women beating up a white woman because she's white, I see two low-class women beating up a postal worker because they're pissed they didn't get their stimulus check and they're taking it out on the postal worker. It's still bullshit they did that, but that doesn't make it a hate crime.

@Alysandir what is it exactly that you’re looking for when you say you need evidence of a hate crime? Do the black women have to be yelling “We hate you you white ass cracker ass bitch!” as they assault her for it to be a hate crime? Very often racially motivated attacks occur without a word being said. In this instance the cover of stimulus checks was used but it could have just as easily happened without any excuse being made.

What I look at is pattern recognition. Is there a long RECENT history of black women attacking white women for no apparent reason? Most definitely and I post about just such incidents in the multiple true crome groups I am in both on this site as well as others.
Is there a RECENT history of whites women assaulting black women for no apparent reason? If there is I’m unaware of it but if there were I would also attribute a racial motive to such crimes regardless of whether they were yelling “ni*ger” while they did it.

@Andyman

what is it exactly that you’re looking for when you say you need evidence of a hate crime?

I'm not sure why I keep needing to repeat myself, but how about evidence that the crime was committed BECAUSE of a racial hatred? This is what my very first post, and every post since, has been trying to illustrate.

Let me try this; I want you to read the four bullet points below and answer to yourself which ones are the racially-motivated hate crimes. Please, just humor me.

• If white women attack a white postal worker because they didn't get their check, is it a racially-motivated crime?
• If black women attack a black postal worker because they didn't get their check, is it a racially-motivated crime?
• If white women attack a black postal worker because they didn't get their check, is it a racially-motivated crime?
• If black women attack a white postal worker because they didn't get their check, is it a racially-motivated crime?

The answer to which one of them are the racially-motivated hate crime is....none of them. Because I explicitly told you the motivation was "because they didn't get their check." Their race and the race of the postal worker are completely irrelevant in this exercise.

Now, let's take this example and apply it to what happened with these women. You're saying that the black women attacked the postal worker because she's white and that's enough. I'm saying that the fact that they didn't get their check is the reason.

In this instance the cover of stimulus checks was used but it could have just as easily happened without any excuse being made.

Answer me this: do you think they would've attacked the postal worker if the postal worker had their check and gave it to them? Because if you truly think this was a racially-motivated attack, then you're going to say YES, because according to your point-of-view, the check has nothing to do with why they attacked her, right? The check was only "cover." They attacked her only because they hate white people. This is what you're saying.

Furthermore, you go on to say:

What I look at is pattern recognition. Is there a long RECENT history of black women attacking white women for no apparent reason?

But wait..."for no apparent reason?" We just got done establishing that the apparent reason - what you referred to as "cover" - was that they didn't get their check! How do you reconcile that? How do you acknowledge that there was a disagreement, that you then claim was just pretext so they could attack a white woman, and then in the very breath claim that it's a complete mystery why they did this, because there's no apparent reason for them to be upset?

Do you not see that you're doing the exact same thing as the media is doing to white people? You're ignoring every detail that doesn't fit your narrative, just the same as the media.

Please tell me how I'm wrong about this. Please tell me what's the difference between the media saying the Atlanta shooter was a hate crime - even though he told police he shot them because he has sexual issues - and you saying that missing stimulus check was just an excuse for them to commit a hate crime?

Two wrongs do not make a right.

@Alysandir I don’t believe these women would have attacked had the postal worker been a black woman. There would have likely been a lot of angry words back and forth but I doubt it would have escalated into the beat down that occurred. What you’re asking for is “court of law” evidence of a racial motivation which of course there isn’t. Just the same I’m certain that there was a racial component to this crime and I’m completely aware that it would be unprovable in a court of law. It’s just something people who have been paying close attention develop a sense about, based on a long history of other similar incidents. You may very well believe this is just a simple case of “low class people” behaving badly but from what I have seen over these many years these “low class” interracial attacks are almost exclusively black on white. If you can show me examples of groups of white people assaulting black individuals I would love to see them. I’m not aware of any.

It wouldn’t hold up in a court of law but I am very confident from all I have observed these many years that the postal employee being white played a huge part in why this escalated the way it did. If the postal employee had been Asian I would feel the same way as blacks seem to have the same animosity towards Asians as they do whites.

Sometimes there isn’t tangible evidence in life, just gut instinct and educated guesses.

@Andyman

I hear what you're saying. Believe me, I hear what you're saying. I want to be clear about that.

And for the record, I'm not saying that I can prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that this had no racial motivation to it. I want to be very clear about that too. There may very well have been racial motivations here.

The only thing I'm really saying is that if we want white people to be given the benefit of the doubt until there's enough reason to think it's a racial thing, then we have to be willing to also give black people the benefit of the doubt for the same reason, until proven otherwise.

Further, while I do appreciate that your life experience tells your gut that this would've gone down differently had the postal officer been anything other than white, my gut tells me the opposite. I have seen more black-on-black violence than I've seen any other kind, combined. Granted, I may be older (or younger) and I may live in a different part of the country from you, which may also factor into the difference in our experience.

But like I said to @Header, I give you my word of honor I've seen some real dustups between black people over what I would consider to be nothing. Stupid stuff. Like, "you got my order wrong at McDonald's," stupid stuff. Like, "bitch, the sign said this can of peas was this price and you charged me this price and you need to go fix your shit before I fuck you up," stupid stuff.

So maybe that's why I see this the way I do.

@Alysandir I have no disagreement with you.

I believe if she was black nothing would have happened.

@vangr

That does seem to be the majority consensus.