It is good to see that there are twelve sane people left in this world. It was starting to look doubtful that this many could be found. Somebody managed to find them, however, and appointed them to the jury which last week unanimously found Kyle Rittenhouse “not guilty” of all the charges including first degree murder under which he was being persecuted. No, that is not a typo.
Now, since many people have spent the last two
years hiding under their beds in their basements, sucking their thumbs and clutching
their security masks tightly, hoping that the bat flu Bogeyman won’t get them
before they can take the magic needle that will make him go away, at least
until it is time for their next in an interminable series of jabs, it is
possible that there are many people who don’t know the name Kyle
Rittenhouse. Granted, these are for the most part the sort of
people who are the least likely to ever wish to read a word I have to say, but
just in case this essay finds its way to one of them, I will remind you of who
Kyle Rittenhouse is.
On the twenty-third of last August a woman in
Kenosha, Wisconsin called 9-11 to report that her ex-boyfriend, against whom
she had a restraining order, was trying to steal her vehicle. The
police, who had a warrant for this man’s arrest on charges of criminal
trespass, sexual assault and domestic abuse involving the same woman, showed
up. The man, Jacob Blake, resisted arrest and, reaching into his
ex’s SUV, probably for the knife he had there, was shot several times, which
left him paralyzed from the waist down. Since Blake was black and
the cop who shot him was white, Kenosha soon found itself besieged by the same
sort of agitators of racial violence and strife who had been rioting and
looting and burning down cities all over the United States since earlier that
year when George Floyd had become the only exception to the rule that anyone
who dies with the bat flu virus in his system must be counted a bat flu death
regardless of other co-morbidities not excluding decapitation and
dismemberment.
A note about these agitators. These
are a new kind who make the shakedown hustlers of thirty-forty years ago – the
kind brilliantly parodied by Tom Wolfe in the character of “Reverend Bacon” in
his Bonfire of the Vanities – look tame by
comparison. The latter were, for the most part, merely
concerned with using accusations of racism – and the threat of discrimination
lawsuits – to browbeat companies into paying them off. The new
kind, who claim to be advocates of justice in the face of a society that holds
black lives cheap, care very little themselves about the black lives that are
taken by black criminals, although each year these far exceed the number of
black lives taken by white cops. A similar phenomenon can be found
here in Canada in those who loudly proclaim that every child matters, although
they never seem to include the thousands of unborn children lost each year in
abortion, talking only about kids who died mostly of smallpox over the course
of a century at the Indian Residential Schools, in an attempt to slander
and libel our country and her churches with a trumped up charge of genocide.
It is actually quite rare for a white cop to kill an unarmed black
man. It only seems to be otherwise because every single time it
happens the liberal allies of the race agitators in the media talk about
nothing else for weeks, if not months. Every such victim becomes a
household name. These new race agitators are driven by ideological racial
hatred of the kind peddled by Ibram X. Kendi, Nicole Hannah-Jones, and Robin
D’Angelo. The kind that looks like it was plagiarized from the
writings of Adolf Hitler, with “Jews” scratched out and “white people” written
in on top. Come to think of it, the same thing could be said, mutatis
mutandis, about the rhetoric that most mainstream politicians, media
commentators, and medical associations use about the “unvaccinated”.
Kyle Rittenhouse is a young man from Antioch, a
village in Illinois that is just across the state border from Kenosha of which
it is essentially a satellite community. He was seventeen years old
at the time and had come into the city the day after Blake was shot to stay
with a friend. The violence, looting, destruction, and general
mayhem that had been begun the previous night continued into that
one. The next day, the sort of thing that the lying corporate
news media liked to call a “peaceful protest” was scheduled to occur and,
predictably, it broke out into a riot. Rittenhouse and his friend,
after participating in the city’s clean-up efforts earlier that day, went to an
automobile dealership that had been targeted by the rioters the two nights
previously. They had armed themselves to protect the
property. Rittenhouse carried an AR-15 rifle that he kept at his
friend’s house.
Towards midnight, a serial pederast named Joseph
Rosenbaum who had been convicted on multiple counts of raping prepubescent boys
confronted Rittenhouse and, backed by a mob, chased him across a parking lot
throwing things at him, before cornering him and attempting to seize his
gun. The mob urged him to kill Rittenhouse, but Rittenhouse –
obviously in self-defense – pulled the trigger and fatally shot
Rosenbaum. Rittenhouse, heading towards the police to report the
killing, was attacked by the mob. One of them knocked his hat off,
then, when he had tripped and fallen into the street, another jump kicked and
curb stomped him. Another rioter, Anthony Huber, also a convicted
felon, grabbed the barrel of Rittenhouse’s gun and whacked him with his skateboard.
Rittenhouse, again in obvious self-defense, shot Huber in the chest, killing
him. At this point Gaige Grosskreutz, who claimed he was present as
a volunteer paramedic and an observer for the American Civil Liberties Union,
approached Rittenhouse. When he was a few feet away from him, he
pulled out his own Glock semi-automatic pistol for which his conceal-carry
permit had expired (he had pleaded guilty three years previously to carrying a
firearm while intoxicated). Aiming it at Rittenhouse’s face, he lunged
towards him. Rittenhouse, still on the ground, shot
Grosskreutz in the arm, wounding but not killing him. He, that is
Rittenhouse, then turned himself in to the police.
Rittenhouse, if he had been the kind of
dangerously violent serial killer/domestic terrorist the deceitful liberal
corporate media later portrayed him as being, could easily have taken out
dozens of people with the kind of semi-automatic rifle he was
carrying. He only shot three people, each of whom attacked him first,
each of whom was a convicted criminal participating in a violent, rioting,
mob. Any sane, non-corrupt, prosecutor with any sense of justice
and decency, would never have charged him with a crime at all, much less had
him tried as an adult. Especially when the media were already
preparing to crucify him in their court of manufactured opinion. As
these events had taken place in the midst of a riot in which the state
governor, city mayor, and other high civil officials had taken the side of the
anarchistic mob and tied the hands of law and order, it is hardly a surprise
that the prosecutor jumped on the “lynch Rittenhouse” bandwagon and charged
him.
The liberal, or more accurately left-wing
extremist, media subjected Rittenhouse to intense vilification. It
was not a mere Two Minutes Hate, as with Emmanuel Goldstein the object of the
ire of Orwell’s Big Brother, or even a Hate Week, but what is now going on
Fifteen Months of Hate. They accused him of being a “white
supremacist”, although they could produce no evidence of this accusation, such
as statements of a racial supremacist nature that he had made or proof of his
membership in a white supremacist organization.
The accusation seemed particularly odd to
several who took note of the fact that all three men whom he had shot were
white. They ought not to have been surprised. Had they
been paying attention they would have noticed that the extremely illiberal
“liberal” left is now using “white supremacist”, which formerly was reserved
for people ideologically committed to formal doctrines of white racial
supremacy such as National Socialism and attached to groups that promote the
same, the way they used to use “racist”, that is to say, as a slur thrown at
anyone who stands up to their agenda, whether it is on a point that has
anything to do with race or not.
The crazier among them attempt to back up this
practice with Critical Race Theory, the aforementioned anti-white ideological
racial hatred that is promoted in academe. It uses the same kind of
irrationality that was employed by Susan Brownmiller, Andrea Dworkin, and
others in the lunatic fringe of the second-wave of feminism, a lunatic fringe
that quickly became the mainstream of that movement, in coming up with their
arguments for their positions that all men are rapists and that all
heterosexual intercourse is rape. Those arguments were along the
following lines: rape is not about sex but about power, its function is to keep
women subordinate to men, all men benefit from this whether they commit actual
rape or not, all women are oppressed by this whether they are actual rape
victims or not, therefore all women are victims and all men rapists, and
because of the imbalance of power between the sexes there can be no real
consent in heterosexual intercourse ergo it is all rape. If you
think I’m making any of this up, read Brownmiller’s Against Our Will:
Men, Women and Rape (1975) and Dworkin’s Intercourse (1987).
Feminism has since doubled-down on this insanity and in women’s studies and
gender studies courses across academe indoctrinate their victims with the idea
that lesbianism is the norm and heterosexuality is a false social construct
imposed upon women by the patriarchy. Critical Race Theory imputes
white supremacy to all who commit the sin of existing while white by a similar
process which starts with the premise that everything in Western civilization,
down to and including the words we speak and the way we do arithmetic, exists
for the purpose of oppressing “people of colour” and empowering white people,
especially white men. It is this sort of nonsense that has so
rotted the liberal mind that in a civic-minded young man, defending a business
against attack from violent rioters, looters, and arsonists stirred up by
agitators of racial strife and then killing in self-defense when said
anarchists attacked him, they see something like a Klansman or a
goose-stepping, swastika and jackboot wearing, sieg heiling
skinhead. Ironically, a strong case could be made that someone who
actually is one of those things is today likely far less filled with dangerous and violent racial
bigotry and hatred than the average “liberal” news commentator as “Peter
Simple”’s prejudometer might show if it actually existed.
Mercifully, despite the prosecutor’s politically-motivated mala
fide prosecution and the left’s attempts to sabotage Rittenhouse’s
chances of a fair trial by trying him in the media before the jury had a chance
to hear the evidence much less deliberate, justice has prevailed.
Hopefully, Rittenhouse will now sue everyone from the creep currently occupying
the top position of state in the American republic down for all the character
assassination he has been forced to endure. The Washington
Post and CNN agreed to settle out of court with Nick Sandmann, the
Covington Catholic high school student who was similarly subjected to a hate
fest by these and other media after he was accosted by a drum-beating Native
Indian activist while attending the March for Life at the Lincoln Memorial in
Washington DC in 2019 and dared to stand his ground, over the multi-million
dollar defamation suits his family filed against them. While under
ordinary circumstances I would be loath to suggest making an already too
litigious society more so, the only way the corporate media is ever going to
stop demonizing non-leftists in this manner is if enough such defamation suits
cause them either to re-think their behaviour or to go bankrupt.
Predictably, the left has been throwing a
collective tantrum ever since the verdict was announced. Up here in
the Dominion of Canada, the leader of the furthest to the left of all the
parties with representation in the House of Commons, Jimmy Dhaliwal, issued an
idiotic tweet in which he said that the verdict “feels like another failure by
a broken system designed to protect some and hurt others”. If
you ever want to know what the truth about any hot topic issue is, find out
what Jimmy Dhaliwal has said about it. The truth will almost always
be the exact opposite of that.
Down south, the left has just thrown one of
their own, one Mary Lemanski who had been the social media director for the
Democratic Party of DuPage County, Illinois under the bus for connecting the
Rittenhouse acquittal to the actions of one Darrell Brookes Jr., who drove into
a crowd during the Christmas parade
in Waukesha, Wisconsin on Sunday, killing
five people and leaving about forty more wounded. Lemanski called
the act “karma” and said “You reap what you sow, Wisconsin”, tweeting out that
“it was probably self-defense”, as if mowing down a crowd with a car was the
same thing as shooting three people who were attacking you. This is the
sort of confusion that is only to be expected from the sort of twits who
do not understand the difference between what Kyle Rittenhouse was doing in
Kenosha - protecting property as a private person against the threat of
destructive crime and vigilante justice. The latter is what happens
when private persons, after a crime has been committed, track down the person
they think or know to be guilty, and exact vengeance upon him as cop, judge,
jury, and executioner rolled into one. Whether the verdict was connected
to Brookes’ act in the sense of being its motivation, or part of its
motivation, is not yet clear, although the vehemence with which some portions
of the left are denying it would seem to suggest that it probably
was. Indeed, I only bring this up because what happened to Lemanski
is so unusual. The left does not ordinarily police its own for language
considered to be extreme in this way. This suggests that they
are terrified that more people will make the same connection that she did,
although racial activist Vaun Mayes said something similar – he suggested that
Brookes’ actions were the “start of a revolution” in response to the verdict,
and does not seem to have been punished for it.
For my part, I hope the Rittenhouse acquittal is
the start of a reaction – that “opposite of a revolution” that the great Joseph
de Maistre called for - and a return to common sense, law and order, the right
of self-defense, and all other aspects of civilization that have been in short
order during the racial madness of recent years.
No comments:
Post a Comment