SWEET BRIAR, Va. – Barely a week into the semester at Sweet Briar College, and already a student has admitted to a “hate crime” hoax.
It turns out that the student who put “‘White Only’ and ‘Colored’ signs on doors and water fountains” is no longer enrolled in the school (surprisingly), and she will not likely face “hate crime” charges, as reported at The College Fix.
To add to the insanity, the school went on “lockdown” Wednesday after a threatening caller said:
“We want justice.”
“Who is the white girl that did this?”
“Ferguson and now this.” (referring to the racial unrest in Ferguson, MO)
“Hands up! Don’t shoot!”
“We’re coming up there. We want justice.”
But the student who created the signs was black herself, as revealed in an announcement by President James Jones.
As usual with such hoaxes, the initial reaction was hand-wringing and consternation. But when the perpetrator(s) is discovered to be a “social justice” crusader, the punishment becomes much more lenient. In this case, the President of the College seemed more than sympathetic.
President James Jones wrote despairingly after the signs were discovered on Thursday:
For someone who grew up in the deeply segregated South, those words recall to me a world of racial discrimination, disregard for human dignity, and institutionalized prejudice.
We have among us someone who is essentially bigoted and mean-spirited who would recall the Jim Crow days of separation, mirroring the apartheid of South Africa that summoned the calm voice of reason of Nelson Mandela to decry hatred and to seek to change one’s immediate environment for the better. On the other [hand], perhaps more theoretically positive: Someone, moved by the play, sought to use the old, abusive words to remind us that while such terms were part of the historical past, some of the emotions lurking behind the words might still linger in a few.
It seems that Jones was attempting damage control in the event that the “hate crime” turned out to be a hoax.
A local news station, WDBJ7, reported that Jones invited the “Virginia Center for Inclusive Communities” to speak with students and “plans to create a new ‘diversity committee,’ made up of students who can help the campus deal with racial topics in a less dramatic way.”
Before anti-racism rallies could be held at all-female liberal arts college in Virginia, however, the perpetrator confessed to the “hate crime,” apologizing profusely.
The President made a new announcement, saying in part:
Here at our College, our young friend attended the Wednesday performance of In Sweet Remembrance, was profoundly moved by the remarkable play, pondered the many difficult messages encased in the play itself, and Thursday morning, decided, if naïvely, to make a statement herself to remind herself and others that minorities carry burdens imposed by history upon their lives each and every day.
In yet another announcement, President Jones declared:
Per federal regulations, the name of the student involved will not be released, but because of the circumstances and the questions it has raised, I can tell you that she is African-American and that I believe her apology was sincere.
Should “hate crimes” have different punishments if the perpetrator is found to be a progressive hoaxster? Does it hurt less for a victim of a “hate crime” if it turns out to be a hoax? Despite the pain it may cause, the motive is what is important, as shown time and again when it comes to “hate crime” hoaxes.
Consider that the FBI classifies anonymous graffiti as a hate crime on par with a convicted hate crime. Even without a defendant, scrawled words can be considered a hate crime.
When do students find time for class with all of this drama?
Courtesy Liberty Unyielding. Published with permission.