New in PJ Media:
After Tyrone Bernard Wells Jr. murdered Randee Leann Rios, he called 911 and announced matter-of-factly, “I’m reporting a murder.” According to the transcript made available Sunday, Wells told the 911 operator, “It was on my account.” The operator replied: “Hold on, you said the murder was on your account? What does that mean?” Wells explained, “Yes, ma’am. That means, in the name of Allah, I murdered her.”
This only confirmed what Seattle’s KING 5 reported as far back as March 30: Wells explained that “he had been reading the Qur’an before Rios came over and told police ‘that verses in the Qur’an seemed to indicate to him that it would be necessary for him to kill Rios.’” Yet for the most part, Seattle’s media has been resolutely mute about Wells’ own stated motive for the killing. Could that be because it doesn’t fit the preferred establishment media narrative?
Conservative Seattle talk radio host Jason Rantz noted Sunday that not only did Wells’ reference to the Qur’an not receive “on-air coverage from local outlets nor the Seattle Times,” but even worse, “Times reporter Sara Jean Green went a step further, claiming there was no motive presented by the prosecutors.” It’s true: Green’s March 30 account of the murder states, “The charges don’t provide a motive for Rios’ slaying, but prosecutors say Wells claimed to have been using meth in the days leading up to her killing.” Rantz points out that “this was a lie when Green reported the story,” as the charges contain Green’s words about his Qur’an reading.
Now that the 911 call transcript only underscores Wells’ Islamic motivation, will the Seattle Times report about this fact? Of course not. Rantz recounts that Jodie DeJonge, metro editor for the Times, said that the paper had no plans to “correct or update their story.” “This is a tragic, complicated story,” explained the Times. “At this time, we have no plans to revise it. We will continue to track this case.”
In reality, it isn’t complicated at all. It’s a brutal murder, to which the perpetrator has confessed. According to KING 5, “Prosecutors requested Wells’ bail be set at $5 million to reflect the ‘extreme danger’ he poses to the community if he was released from jail, according to charging documents.” Wells also told the 911 operator that “he used a hatchet and a pair of bolt cutters to kill the woman.” When police arrived, Wells was waiting for them, his clothes smeared with blood. Inside his apartment was an “extremely bloody” scene, and Rios’ body with “major trauma about the head.” Wells’ hatchet and bolt cutters were near the body.
There is more. Read the rest here.
gravenimage says
A Seattle Man Says He Killed ‘In the Name of Allah.’ Why Won’t the Media Report That?
……………
To whitewash Islam? To avoid making Muslims look bad? To avoid “Islamophia”? Those are the usual reasons for this craven obfuscation.
bill says
Muslims can only be represented as victims in the US media and most of the MSM
gravenimage says
So often true, bill.
somehistory says
The motive is changed to protect the guilty evil of islam.
OLD GUY says
The more of these muslim/islamic followers that are allowed to migrate into our society the more often these killings are going to take place. Stop the migration invasion of islam into America. Islam is as big a threat to our society as Russia, China or any other foreign enemy invader.
Jim Austin says
Why won’t the liberal media report that jihadists kill because of their religion?
An obscure, local publication in California provides a clue.
“Conflict narratives continue to promote division and misunderstanding. Peace narratives promote understanding, cooperation and lay the foundation for the conditions necessary for a peaceful society.” — a quote of Peace Fellow Alden Jacobs, p. 5, “Sharing ideas on waging peace — Part Two,” by editor Mary-Justine Lanyon, The Alpine Mountaineer.
Narratives in this context mean explanations about causes of violence. Presumably, one would prefer narratives that accurately explain the causes.
However, this Alden Jacobs isn’t interest in accuracy. He wants “peace narratives” that raise hopes to achieve peace by projecting good will on both sides and clearing up misunderstandings.
Thus reports that Moslem holy works expressly promote cruelty, aggression, tyranny and murder would be regarded as “conflict narratives” that “promote division and misunderstandings.”
The debate is metaphysical. The issue is objectivity versus subjectivity. Do we live in a world where facts are facts regardless of how we may feel about them, or do we live in a world where we can make unpleasant facts disappear by preventing them from entering our consciousness awareness?
Liberals clearly believe the latter.
gravenimage says
Yes, Jim–no interest in actual *truth*.