Editor's Note: The photo above is of the 79-year old victim.
The Department of Justice has finally charged someone playing the "knockout game" with a federal hate crime; but, it may not be what you think. Conrad Alvin Barrett, a 27 year old Katy, Texas man, was charged Thursday with a federal racially motivated hate crime. Barrett, white, was charged with the crime for trying to "knock out" a 79 year old black man with a single punch.
According to US Attorney Kenneth Magidson, "suspected crimes of this nature will simply not be tolerated. Evidence of hate crimes will be vigorously investigated and prosecuted with the assistance of all our partners to the fullest extent of the law."
Trending: How Could Stanley Ann Dunham Have Delivered Barack Hussein Obama In August Of 1961 in Hawaii, When Official University Of Washington Records Show Her 2,680 Miles Away In Seattle Attending Classes That Same Month?
So far, nearly all "knockout game" attackers have been blacks who targeted white or Jewish victims. How did Barrett, being white, end up being charged with a federal hate crime when he tried the game on an unsuspecting black man? Barrett made the mistake of recording the attack on his cell phone then showing it to his friends, according to the Department of Justice. The Justice Department also indicated Barrett made other videos of himself where he was"identifying himself in one of them and making a racial slur in another."
In one video, Barrett said, "The plan is to see if I hit a black person, would this be nationally televised?" according to the filed complaint.
"Officials also allege that Barrett hit the man, causing him to fall to the ground, laughed, said 'knockout' and fled."
Barrett's victim spent several days in the hospital suffering from a broken jaw in two places.
"It is unimaginable in this day and age that one could be drawn to violently attack another based on the color of their skin," said FBI Special Agent in Charge Stephen L. Morris. Morris added, "We remind all citizens we are protected under the law from such racially motivated attacks and encourage everyone to report such crimes to the FBI."
Barrett could face 10 years in prison and a $250,000 fine if convicted.
There is no defense for anyone engaging in this activity period. It is a crime – a crime is a crime is a crime.
But, let's look at the Department of Justice reasoning for charging Barrett with a racially motivated hate crime. According to their officials, Barrett made a "moving selfie" where he identified himself and made another where he uttered a racial slur. Following this logic, anyone making a racial slur then hits someone of the race they expounded is guilty of a racially motivated hate crime.
Barrett seemed to be playing the game according to the rules previously established by the majority of individuals participating in this activity with the additional hope of his activity being "nationally televised." In exchange for his 15 minutes of fame, Barrett got more than he bargained for in this case. He not only faces criminal charges but criminal charges designated as racially motivated. Surely Barrett is not the first attacker to take a "moving selfie," use a racial slur when referring to his victim, and then show it to friends. Aren't "selfies" all the rage now? Even Obama has jumped on the "selfie" train. Barrett is, however, a white attacker with a black victim.
It has been reported by numerous news organizations that the majority of perpetrators of the "knockout" game are black with their victims being white or Jewish. However, only one person, in New York, has been charged with a hate crime for targeting a Jewish man. The man charged in the New York attack was Amrit Marajh, 28. Marajh, one of four suspects, was charged with aggravated assault while the other three were released. In a previous article on Freedom Outpost, it was reported Marajh was Muslim, but Marajh was not black. As most are aware, the other name for this game is called "polar bearing," coming from the fact that the victims are white and attackers are black. That name didn't come from this type of activity being committed without racial motivation.
FBI Special Agent in Charge Stephen L. Morris stated he thought it unimaginable that someone could be drawn to commit a crime against another because of race. Obviously, Morris has not been paying attention to the news or he would know this game by its slang term of "polar bearing." The "knock out" game didn't get termed that because attackers were white and hunting actual polar bears.
It is blatantly obvious why a white attacker is charged with a racially motivated hate crime when the victim is black. If you look at the scenario where the attacker is white and the victim black, Rev. Al Sharpton said, "If someone was running around talking about knocking out blacks, we would not be silent." Of course Sharpton would not be silent; he is a professional race baiter. It shouldn't be long before Al makes an appearance to stir the race pot as he did in the Zimmerman case, even though Zimmerman was Hispanic and not white. Although, if Al were smart, he would keep his mouth shut on this one.
The Justice Department and FBI seem to differentiate between a hate crime and a racially motivated hate crime. One could assume that one is worse than the other – racially motivated being the worst. Breaking the law is a crime regardless of the motivation and should be treated as such. It is called equality under the law. All individuals participating in this "knockout" game should be charged with a crime, regardless of race, religion or nationality; victims can die from these types of attacks. However, people like Sharpton, Holder and Obama continue to support inequality under the law. They function under the misguided notion that only whites commit crimes with a racial motivation.
If they believe only whites commit racially motivated crimes, what are they attributing to blacks as motivation for playing this "game?" One can bet it goes back to perceived white oppression; therefore, they cannot be committing a racially motivated crime much less a racially motivated hate crime or even a hate crime.
Since it is possible for victims to die because of these attacks, wouldn't it be more equitable to charge them with a crime befitting that possibility instead of dragging race into the equation?
This is but one example of the double standard maintained by the Department of Justice and this administration. Functioning under the assumption that certain select groups must be protected from "white" oppression and supremacy, it is one the Department of Justice under Obama won't correct any time soon.Don't forget to Like Freedom Outpost on Facebook, Google Plus, & Twitter. You can also get Freedom Outpost delivered to your Amazon Kindle device here.