In an article published Sunday by USA Today, one Ferguson protester said that bloodshed is necessary for “the cause.” An individual identified as 27-year-old Jay Daniels made it clear in no uncertain terms that people — presumably white people — will have to be killed.
“Some people are going to have to die for the cause,” he said. “It’s sad to say, but this is the new civil rights movement for our generation, and there will be casualties and there should be bloodshed.”
Breitbart’s Warner Todd Huston slammed USA Today for including the comment from the young financial consultant. “It seems irresponsible for USA Today to throw fuel on the fire by repeating the call for bloodshed for a ’cause’ that is neither clearly defined nor easily understood even by those who feel aggrieved,” he wrote.
While the addition of the comment seems irresponsible, USA Today provided a service to the country, perhaps without knowing it. By including the call for violence and death, Aamer Madhani and Yamiche Alcindor provided a window into the worldview of those engaging in protests around the country.
As we have reported, Ferguson protesters have called for the systematic murder of all white people in general, and Darren Wilson in particular. Protesters have also burned and destroyed business, many of which are owned and operated by minorities, as though the violence will in some way compensate for Brown’s death. Other protesters have openly called for a Communist revolution and the radical Islamist group ISIS has offered to send fighters if protesters accept Islam and swear loyalty to its leader. As we reported earlier Sunday, Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan called for violence to “tear” America apart if protesters demands are not met.
But, Huston says, the “irresponsible narrative” published by USA Today “does not help solve the problems that do exist in race relations today. It only exacerbates them.” Nevertheless, he added, USA Today got one thing right.
“Certainly USA Today is correct when it writes, ‘The anger in the African-American community’ over the non-indictment of officer Wilson ‘hasn’t subsided,” he wrote. “This in unquestionable.”
But what, exactly, do protesters really want? A license to commit crimes based on race? An overthrow of the government? A second, bloody civil war? The paper doesn’t say.
Even USA Today admits there’s no single clear message. “Even in Ferguson, some protesters said there were disparate groups with differing messages that made it difficult to get everybody on the same page,” the paper said, “as has happened with the Occupy Wall Street protest movement that began in 2011 against social and economic inequality worldwide.”
“For many young adults and teens, Ferguson has become no less than a seminal event that has opened their eyes about the state of race relations in America,” USA Today said. For others, it has become what former GOP Rep. Allen West called the “left’s racial Waterloo.” Now, he adds, “Ferguson burns and a family is embarrassed not only nationally, but internationally.”