The Post-OJ Verdict Paradise
O.J. Simpson’s death last week reminded me of the glorious period in American history when we finally got liberals to stop their infernal race baiting. It came right after O.J. was found not guilty of a double murder he’d obviously committed. That too-brief suspension of racial agitation, what preceded it, and what followed, is recounted in thrilling detail in my book, “Mugged: Racial Demagoguery From the Seventies to Obama.”
For 30 years, the nation’s cities were maelstroms of race riots and inner-city violence, egged on by feckless politicians and an army of journalists scribbling mad defenses of the perpetrators.
In other words, life was much as it is today. Every police shooting of a disaffected inner-city youth was instantly branded an act of unadulterated racism, every racist accusation presumed true, and every crime committed by a disaffected inner-city youth denied.
Eventually, the truth would come out, disproving the official version, whereupon the story would simply fade from the news, as if the media were reading a bedtime story to a child, whispering the ending and tiptoeing out of the room.
(Speaking of which, where are the big, blaring headlines following up on the shooting at the Kansas City Chiefs parade in February, the mass shooting in a New York City subway in 2022 and the 2021 Christmas parade massacre in Waukesha, Wisconsin?)
The main job of a journalist was to gin up mobs of angry disaffected inner-city youths, with prizes awarded to those who managed to incite the most destructive riots.
In 1991, Los Angeles’s KTLA television network edited the tape of police officers subduing a deranged suspect, Rodney King, cutting about 10 seconds from the beginning. Viewers never saw King lunging at an officer, taser darts hanging from his body. This made the cops’ response look like a senseless act of police brutality, rather than the officers’ final efforts to subdue a powerful and violent suspect after all other methods had proved futile.
When the jury acquitted the officers — as everyone who actually watched the trial thought it should — the resulting riots left 63 people dead, thousands injured and did a billion dollars in damage. (See especially Roger Parloff’s and Lou Cannon’s reports on the trial.)
KTLA won a Peabody award for its presentation of the tape.
The most enduring image from the L.A. riots was the savage beating of Reginald Denny, who’d inadvertently driven his 18-wheeler into the middle of the mayhem. Four Black men pulled Denny from the truck’s cab and savagely beat him, smashing his head with a 5-pound oxygenator and a claw hammer. With the world watching live footage of the riots, Damian “Football” Williams dropped a cinderblock directly on Denny’s head, fracturing his skull in 91 places, then did a victory dance around Denny’s lifeless body.
Or, as Rep. Maxine Waters put it, “there were mothers who took this as an opportunity to take some milk, to take some bread, to take some shoes.” No sooner was Williams arrested than Waters showed up at his mother’s house, offering to help him, saying, “her doors were open.”
This was life in America, pre-O.J. verdict.
But then at 10:07 a.m. on Oct. 3, 1995, the world changed, when an estimated 150 million people turned on their TVs to watch the verdict in the O.J. Simpson murder trial: not guilty.
Ninety-five million Americans had watched the slow-speed car chase that had ended with O.J.’s arrest.
Thanks to live television coverage of the trial, nearly everyone in the country had seen the same evidence the jury saw, including O.J.’s blood all over the crime scene.
People saw the Black Congressional Caucus give O.J.’s defense lawyer, Johnnie Cochran, a standing ovation three days before his closing argument.
They saw the juror who was a former Black Panther give O.J. the “black power” salute after the verdict was read.
And they saw blacks across the country cheering the outcome — most shockingly at the esteemed, historically Black Howard University Law School. Witnessing Black law students whooping and applauding O.J.’s acquittal had the same emotional impact as seeing Muslim and BLM college students celebrate the Oct. 7 attack on Israel.
In Black neighborhoods throughout the country, car horns honked in victory when O.J. was acquitted. At a McDonald’s in Clayton, Missouri, the all-black staff burst out in cheers and high fives, while the mostly White customers watched in disbelief. At one high school in St. Louis being filmed for TV, Black students cheered for five solid minutes.
At another high school, after hearing the verdict, 20 Black students beat, kicked and stomped a younger White student while shouting “black power!” Outside the Los Angeles Criminal Courts building, a Hispanic man was assaulted by an angry crowd of Blacks merely for saying he thought O.J. was guilty. In Colorado, a black man beat up his White girlfriend because she disagreed with him about the verdict. He told her Nicole Simpson deserved it and maybe she did, too.
White people took it all in and said: That’s it. This has drained the last reserves from the Guilt Account. After that, mau-mauing appeals to White self-condemnation were futile. Accusing someone of racism suddenly stopped working, as if there were a glitch in the subway system and Metro cards didn’t open the turnstile anymore.
It was the best thing that had happened to black people in a very long time. No longer did they have to endure pompous Whites treating them like children: Do you like your ice cream? Is that good?
Black criminals were locked up, saving tens of thousands of black lives. The very next year, welfare reform became law and hundreds of thousands of black women left the rolls and got jobs. Race hucksters lost their power to intimidate, and talented black people rose to the fore.
Black Americans had won the final civil rights battle: The right to be treated like adults.
But you can’t suppress liberal patronizing forever. A dozen years passed, memories faded, and a half-Black Hawaiian who’d never faced one iota of race discrimination, except in his favor, ran for president on the most left-wing agenda in history. (That is, until President Senile Dementia’s staff became president.)
With that, White liberals breathed a sigh of relief and returned to their favorite hobby: accusing other White people of racism.
So now we’re right back where we started, but this time with a vengeance.
COPYRIGHT 2024 ANN COULTER
“Ein Schlag auf den Hinterkopf erhöht das Denkvermögen” (“A slap on the back of the head increases the ability to think”) is a German proverb from the good old days that is still in common use today. However, the assumption that the desired effect would also be achieved by negroid “bitch-slapping” white grannies has no rational basis whatsoever. https://twitter.com/TheNCBeat/status/1779998100414718059
ONLY THAT’S how “education” (based
on the RESPECT for a teacher) works!
https://de.zxc.wiki/wiki/Kuschelp%C3%A4dagogik
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tadell%C3%B6ser_%26_Wolff
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gqWynPYHHK0
Anyone who thought they could insult, deceive or take the piss out of a teacher in the 1950s was likely to get “a set of hot ears” (Satz heiße Ohren). There wasn’t much faffing about (or even endless “discussions” like today). All the children who were taught self-discipline in the Hitler Youth were the courageous entrepreneurs who made the economic miracle (Made in Germany) possible, loosely based on Nietzsche’s motto: “What doesn’t kill us makes us strong!”, from which these communist incompetents and total failures are still feeding today,
Of course, all of this is demonized to-
day as cold, heartless and unfeeling.
https://de.zxc.wiki/wiki/Johanna_Haarer
https://de.zxc.wiki/wiki/Bernhard_Bueb
https://de.zxc.wiki/wiki/Michael_Winterhoff
The ancient Greeks already knew that man does not really change in order to achieve reward and gain, but solely to avoid punishment and loss. A certain politically and financially influential ethnic group, which is (allegedly) at home in the Middle East, has perverted the principle of duty into a principle of pleasure and has persuaded people that this is desirable. Communism is their means of achieving their unspeakable capitalism. Although nature places pleasure after effort. “No fight, no chomp” (Ohne Kampf kein Mampf), and not “Make Love Not War” or “Sex, Drugs & Rock ‘n’ Roll” (Wein, Weib & Gesang).
And yet another essay by Ann without mentioning the people who control the press in the US-Zionest Jews. The Jewish owned press easily enrages the black thugs.
I don’t know whether this will actually get posted, as I’m not subscribed to TOQ. I used to be, or at least occasionally posted comments, about 10 years ago. I stopped commenting and visiting some years ago for several reasons, although probably mainly because of the overall repetitive nature of the articles, which always seemed to try to make the same tired old points and were basically preaching to the choir.
A couple of specific examples include an author whose penchant was movie reviews, wherein he pointed out the various hidden agendas present in Hollywood productions that we have all been aware of since forever, etc. In reading those reviews, the question quickly became, why is this person watching Hollywood movies when he knows, as anyone does who has two brain cells to rub together, that they are generally garbage? For someone who likes watching films, there are many foreign ones (Japanese and Korean, for example) that are very good, without the usual hidden agendas, provided a person doesn’t have a rabid aversion to subtitles.
Another specific example of why I stopped commenting and visiting TOQ was the very frequent lionization of everything German, Nazi-related, or Hitler-related. (Spare me the reminder that the term “Nazi” is a jewish invention and that the National Socialists never referred to themselves as such. Or did they? I frankly don’t know, but this is yet another example of the mostly irrelevant sidetracks that individuals in these circles busy themselves with. In short, the “Nazis” and Hitler were German nationalists, basically, and as such they frankly are not aspiring entities for all but a tiny number non-German Europeans. I think it is obvious that they are divisive figures in European history and for most Europeans, not unifying ones.
Be all that as it may, enough digressing about my opinions on this so-called “movement”, or whatever people around here want to call it, let me get to the reason I’m posting this comment.
To the readers of TOQ, I only ask that you give me the honor of reading to the end of my comment before dismissing it beforehand.
For the record, I’m just an average White guy, born in the former West Germany, who came to the US at an early age a good number of decades ago. My ethnicity is mostly German and part Slovenian. I’ve been “jew aware” for my entire adult life, and even earlier.
I don’t care about celebrities and have never followed the popular American sports. The Simpson trial never interested me, although it was near impossible to avoid hearing about it, during the time of the trial.
Due to my indifference, I never had a strong opinion on Simpson’s guilt or innocence. I was, of course, aware of the divisiveness of the case and that the guilty versus innocent opinions among the public were mainly split down racial lines, although not entirely.
After Simpson’s acquittal, he gave several interviews over a period of years. Watching those interviews, I was struck by his overall behavior, demeanor, manner of speaking, etc., that, frankly, did not strike me as the behavior of a person guilty, or feeling any guilt, of having commited those two vicious, brutal, cold-blooded murders. In many of those interviews, he seemed almost jovial and, oddly, often seemed to almost deliberately draw attention on himself while at the same time vehemently denying that he had committed the crimes. There were, of course, many comments on places like YouTube wherein people typically claimed that Simpson’s demeanor was “typical” of homicidal psychopaths, etc. I myself just didn’t see it, but as I didn’t really care about the case I didn’t pay it much attention.
Fast forward to about two or three years ago, when I came across a book entitled ‘O.J. Is Innocent And I Can Prove It’, published in 2012 (or 2014, according to Amazon), by a private investigator named William C. Dear. I had seen the book before, and it is supposedly a republished version of an earlier book by the same author, entitled ‘O.J. Is Guilty But Not Of Murder’, published in 2000.
As I had always had an interest in so-called true crime (I knew one of the surviving victims of the so-called Son of Sam attacks), and due to the intriguing title, I bought a used copy of the book and read it. I also came across a documentary on YouTube, entitled ‘The Overlooked Suspect’, that is based on and gives a complete account of the contents of the book.
In short, the author has assembled a very compelling collection of evidence that point the finger at a very plausible suspect other than O.J. Simpson, a suspect the LAPD never investigated and totally ignored by the media. Without giving away the suspect’s identity, other than it being a “He”, here are some of the facts that Mr. Dear discovered about the suspect. This is by no means a complete list:
1) He had a long history of violence, including threatening a girlfriend with a knife
2) He had been prescribed medication to control his clinically diagnosed rage, which he had stopped taking a month or two prior to the murders
3) He had military training in hand-to-hand combat
4) He was bulky and muscular enough to subdue Goldman who, although unarmed, was no physical slouch himself
5) He owned an article of clothing that very plausibly was one of the things found at the murder scene
6) He very plausibly could have had an emotional motive, possibly even a sexual one, in rage killing Nicole Simpson
7) Contrary to statements by the LAPD, his alibi was not iron clad
8) O.J. Simpson hired and paid for a high-priced defense attorney on behalf this suspect, even before he hired one for himself
Let that last point sink in.
After having read the book and watched the documentary, Simpson’s odd behavior, starting with the so-called “Bronco Chase”, just a few days after the murders, to his strange behavior in various interviews after his acquittal, started to make sense. There was a very good and very plausible reason behind his behavior in drawing attention toward himself, while at the same time denying the crimes.
Some TOQ readers might be aware of this book and know the identity of the suspect. For those who don’t, do yourselves a favor and at least watch the documentary on YouTube. As somewhat awkward and even distasteful as it is for me to write this, you might actually be pleasantly surprised at the identity of the suspect. Even those readers who have always thought O.J. Simpson was innocent ought to watch it, or read the book, because your reasons for assuming his innocence have probably been wrong.
Sorry for the lengthy comment and thanks for reading.