Okay, you put a finer point on it than I did. Liberals, perhaps not completely 100% buying the factual theory that the specific gang of racist white cops in the Simpson case framed Simpson for a murder he did not commit, nonetheless cheered the verdict. As you said, "I honestly don't blame them." Right or wrong, to this day, liberals see the Simpson verdict as a vindication of their slogans regarding systemic white supremacy in America. To liberals, the Simpson case was a hallmark of the civil rights movement.
Nah. You're wrong. Everyone has told you here that you're wrong. It was divided along racial lines, not political ones. Liberals aren't holding that case up as anything.
1) There IS systemic racism and elitism in policing. That is undeniable.
2) Simpson got off mostly due to his wealth and celebrity that allowed him to afford the best defense a person can get...and then a little bit of celebrity power didn't hurt him either.
3) I UNDERSTAND why the black people in the crowd I was in cheered that day. I did not and do not agree with their sentiment. It DID surprise me, but it also helped me understand how they felt, and their feelings are justified due to poor treatment by white people in this country since our founding. They weren't cheering that O.J. Simpson the man was found not guilty. They were cheering because finally a black man was found innocent. If you can't understand that, then you aren't observant or caring or understanding or mindful or a whole host of other things.
You are one internally confused person. You are saying on the one hand that black people were "justified" in cheering for the acquittal of a person who committed an unjustified and brutal double murder, but that you "do not agree with their sentiment."
"They weren't cheering that O.J. Simpson the man was found not guilty." I don't know why you decided to make that up. What a ridiculous statement. Very demeaning to blacks. You saying that black people cheered a verdict of not guilty of someone they believed was guilty of double murder, solely because of the color of his skin.
25 years on and its clear that the majority of liberals now believe Simpson was innocent. Maybe you can't figure out your feelings on it, but that doesn't mean your fellow liberals can't.
Liberal today means something very different from 160 years ago. Liberal 160 years ago, worldwide meant a person was involved in anti-slavery movement and believed in increased rights for workers globally. Today, self-proclaimed liberals advocate abortion, trans issues and six months parental leave. It's okay to be passionate about something but no one should assume in 2022 that a person referring to himself or herself as liberal is an advocate for Black people.
I've seen OJ I'm person in the 90s, he's just a large, powerful individual. Of course he could tear through some unsuspecting waiter with a blade
No he could not. I was in O.J. Simpson Fan Club in mid-70s. By mid-80s he was a physically broken down person. I say him in person in 1979, by early 1990s, no way. Because you saw O.J. as a sideline reporter does not mean ... . Does not matter your opinion of O.J. as a fighter. I responded to a poster who stated it looked like preplanned murder(s). That is why I brought up Jason Simpson and mental health. Murder scene looked like a psychotic person tore everything and everyone apart. Because O.J. Simpson looked healthy to you on tv does not mean he was capable of hand to hand combat versus a karat black belt
You are an absolutely ignorant son of a bi*ch who needs to be in a wood chipper.
Derek ...did a documentary on him...and the Goldman sister..even said not Jason
Bill Dear was on Jason but Derek's findings exonerated Jason.
look...i don't like the running community because all you do is spread your rumors at a bar after club practices.
You, sir and your whole club are a-holes that are purely social media and gossip.
F the entire running community and your happenstance friends.
Liberal today means something very different from 160 years ago. Liberal 160 years ago, worldwide meant a person was involved in anti-slavery movement and believed in increased rights for workers globally. Today, self-proclaimed liberals advocate abortion, trans issues and six months parental leave. It's okay to be passionate about something but no one should assume in 2022 that a person referring to himself or herself as liberal is an advocate for Black people.
I understand what you are saying, and that racial causes that liberals advocate for don't necessarily help black people. But being a liberal means advocating for black people, at least in the virtue signaling sense. That's how you end up with liberals like Flagpole trying to find a way to justify and excuse the black people who openly celebrated the acquittal of Simpson on an unjustified double murder. They were "justified" according to Flagpole in cheering for a double murderer -- but he doesn't share that sentiment that they were justified. He even goes so far as to mind read black people saying the garbage like "They weren't cheering that O.J. Simpson the man was found not guilty. They were cheering because finally a black man was found innocent." Flagpole knows. He just knows, even when he contradicts himself - he's right both ways.
Liberals, being what they are, have gone from Flagpole's rationale to just believing that Simpson was innocent. Take a poll of liberals you know, and most will saying Simpson was framed by racist cops.
Femboi is a child. I am over twenty years older than OJ was when he killed his wife and her friend. I play tennis against some who are half my age and I beat them easily, despite two metal hips. At 47 it was easy for me to keep pace with twenty years olds.
Spot the narcissist ^^ And it's *twenty year olds, darling.
So you found a typo. It's the only thing you spotted. The point, which you failed to get, is that a 47 year old former athlete is not in any way aged or frail.
Liberal today means something very different from 160 years ago. Liberal 160 years ago, worldwide meant a person was involved in anti-slavery movement and believed in increased rights for workers globally. Today, self-proclaimed liberals advocate abortion, trans issues and six months parental leave. It's okay to be passionate about something but no one should assume in 2022 that a person referring to himself or herself as liberal is an advocate for Black people.
I understand what you are saying, and that racial causes that liberals advocate for don't necessarily help black people. But being a liberal means advocating for black people, at least in the virtue signaling sense. That's how you end up with liberals like Flagpole trying to find a way to justify and excuse the black people who openly celebrated the acquittal of Simpson on an unjustified double murder. They were "justified" according to Flagpole in cheering for a double murderer -- but he doesn't share that sentiment that they were justified. He even goes so far as to mind read black people saying the garbage like "They weren't cheering that O.J. Simpson the man was found not guilty. They were cheering because finally a black man was found innocent." Flagpole knows. He just knows, even when he contradicts himself - he's right both ways.
Liberals, being what they are, have gone from Flagpole's rationale to just believing that Simpson was innocent. Take a poll of liberals you know, and most will saying Simpson was framed by racist cops.
Nah. You're wrong. Everyone has told you here that you're wrong. It was divided along racial lines, not political ones. Liberals aren't holding that case up as anything.
1) There IS systemic racism and elitism in policing. That is undeniable.
2) Simpson got off mostly due to his wealth and celebrity that allowed him to afford the best defense a person can get...and then a little bit of celebrity power didn't hurt him either.
3) I UNDERSTAND why the black people in the crowd I was in cheered that day. I did not and do not agree with their sentiment. It DID surprise me, but it also helped me understand how they felt, and their feelings are justified due to poor treatment by white people in this country since our founding. They weren't cheering that O.J. Simpson the man was found not guilty. They were cheering because finally a black man was found innocent. If you can't understand that, then you aren't observant or caring or understanding or mindful or a whole host of other things.
You are one internally confused person. You are saying on the one hand that black people were "justified" in cheering for the acquittal of a person who committed an unjustified and brutal double murder, but that you "do not agree with their sentiment."
"They weren't cheering that O.J. Simpson the man was found not guilty." I don't know why you decided to make that up. What a ridiculous statement. Very demeaning to blacks. You saying that black people cheered a verdict of not guilty of someone they believed was guilty of double murder, solely because of the color of his skin.
25 years on and its clear that the majority of liberals now believe Simpson was innocent. Maybe you can't figure out your feelings on it, but that doesn't mean your fellow liberals can't.
The "majority of liberals" believe that? So how did they identify as "liberals" and who polled them? Facts, please.
No he could not. I was in O.J. Simpson Fan Club in mid-70s. By mid-80s he was a physically broken down person. I say him in person in 1979, by early 1990s, no way. Because you saw O.J. as a sideline reporter does not mean ... . Does not matter your opinion of O.J. as a fighter. I responded to a poster who stated it looked like preplanned murder(s). That is why I brought up Jason Simpson and mental health. Murder scene looked like a psychotic person tore everything and everyone apart. Because O.J. Simpson looked healthy to you on tv does not mean he was capable of hand to hand combat versus a karat black belt
You are an absolutely ignorant son of a bi*ch who needs to be in a wood chipper.
Derek ...did a documentary on him...and the Goldman sister..even said not Jason
Bill Dear was on Jason but Derek's findings exonerated Jason.
look...i don't like the running community because all you do is spread your rumors at a bar after club practices.
You, sir and your whole club are a-holes that are purely social media and gossip.
F the entire running community and your happenstance friends.
Liberal today means something very different from 160 years ago. Liberal 160 years ago, worldwide meant a person was involved in anti-slavery movement and believed in increased rights for workers globally. Today, self-proclaimed liberals advocate abortion, trans issues and six months parental leave. It's okay to be passionate about something but no one should assume in 2022 that a person referring to himself or herself as liberal is an advocate for Black people.
I understand what you are saying, and that racial causes that liberals advocate for don't necessarily help black people. But being a liberal means advocating for black people, at least in the virtue signaling sense. That's how you end up with liberals like Flagpole trying to find a way to justify and excuse the black people who openly celebrated the acquittal of Simpson on an unjustified double murder. They were "justified" according to Flagpole in cheering for a double murderer -- but he doesn't share that sentiment that they were justified. He even goes so far as to mind read black people saying the garbage like "They weren't cheering that O.J. Simpson the man was found not guilty. They were cheering because finally a black man was found innocent." Flagpole knows. He just knows, even when he contradicts himself - he's right both ways.
Liberals, being what they are, have gone from Flagpole's rationale to just believing that Simpson was innocent. Take a poll of liberals you know, and most will saying Simpson was framed by racist cops.
So you have just admitted you haven't actually taken that poll. You have just made it up. Like the rest of that bs about "liberals".
Liberal today means something very different from 160 years ago. Liberal 160 years ago, worldwide meant a person was involved in anti-slavery movement and believed in increased rights for workers globally. Today, self-proclaimed liberals advocate abortion, trans issues and six months parental leave. It's okay to be passionate about something but no one should assume in 2022 that a person referring to himself or herself as liberal is an advocate for Black people.
I understand what you are saying, and that racial causes that liberals advocate for don't necessarily help black people. But being a liberal means advocating for black people, at least in the virtue signaling sense. That's how you end up with liberals like Flagpole trying to find a way to justify and excuse the black people who openly celebrated the acquittal of Simpson on an unjustified double murder. They were "justified" according to Flagpole in cheering for a double murderer -- but he doesn't share that sentiment that they were justified. He even goes so far as to mind read black people saying the garbage like "They weren't cheering that O.J. Simpson the man was found not guilty. They were cheering because finally a black man was found innocent." Flagpole knows. He just knows, even when he contradicts himself - he's right both ways.
Liberals, being what they are, have gone from Flagpole's rationale to just believing that Simpson was innocent. Take a poll of liberals you know, and most will saying Simpson was framed by racist cops.
Mike here. Yeah psycho Mike
I'm risking a ban
i always do...Look up the derek lavasseur documentary about oj/Jason or I'll blast you and eat your family hamburgers..dahmer style.
I understand what you are saying, and that racial causes that liberals advocate for don't necessarily help black people. But being a liberal means advocating for black people, at least in the virtue signaling sense. That's how you end up with liberals like Flagpole trying to find a way to justify and excuse the black people who openly celebrated the acquittal of Simpson on an unjustified double murder. They were "justified" according to Flagpole in cheering for a double murderer -- but he doesn't share that sentiment that they were justified. He even goes so far as to mind read black people saying the garbage like "They weren't cheering that O.J. Simpson the man was found not guilty. They were cheering because finally a black man was found innocent." Flagpole knows. He just knows, even when he contradicts himself - he's right both ways.
Liberals, being what they are, have gone from Flagpole's rationale to just believing that Simpson was innocent. Take a poll of liberals you know, and most will saying Simpson was framed by racist cops.
Look up Derek Levasseur.
Look up his OJ investigation
Based upon your recommendation, I have looked up Derrick Levasseur and his "OJ investigation." I have educated myself on this. Ask me anything. Go ahead. Shoot. Shoot me some questions on Derrick Levasseur and his OJ investigation. Go ahead. I'll answer anything you got. I'll set you straight one way or the other.
You surprise the first one by pulling out a knife real quick and stabbing them, which surprises the second one. Then you stab them.
Both Nicole and Ron were stabbed multiple times and slashed. If you see someone stabbed multiple times normal reaction is to run and in case of Ron a black belt karate could have tried to interfere. Which I'm convinced Ron could have kicked OJ in the middle of his stabbing of Nicole.
Femboi is a child. I am over twenty years older than OJ was when he killed his wife and her friend. I play tennis against some who are half my age and I beat them easily, despite two metal hips. At 47 it was easy for me to keep pace with twenty years olds. I am not and have never been the athlete Simpson was. Armed with a knife - and his rage - and taking them by surprise - they weren't expecting to be murdered - Simpson would have been unstoppable. By anyone.
This thread is nothing more than an argument by someone with no grasp of any of the facts of the case, who has attempted to build a "case" from his own infantile misconceptions. 12 people who were given the facts after the circus that was his criminal trial had no difficulty in coming to the truth. He killed two people.
Are you really comparing playing tennis to the struggle of life and death? Survival instincts kick in when someone is trying to kill you. Even animals have this instinct. It's hard for me to dismiss two young people in prime of their physical fitness would have gone down that easily.
Femboi is a child. I am over twenty years older than OJ was when he killed his wife and her friend. I play tennis against some who are half my age and I beat them easily, despite two metal hips. At 47 it was easy for me to keep pace with twenty years olds. I am not and have never been the athlete Simpson was. Armed with a knife - and his rage - and taking them by surprise - they weren't expecting to be murdered - Simpson would have been unstoppable. By anyone.
This thread is nothing more than an argument by someone with no grasp of any of the facts of the case, who has attempted to build a "case" from his own infantile misconceptions. 12 people who were given the facts after the circus that was his criminal trial had no difficulty in coming to the truth. He killed two people.
Are you really comparing playing tennis to the struggle of life and death? Survival instincts kick in when someone is trying to kill you. Even animals have this instinct. It's hard for me to dismiss two young people in prime of their physical fitness would have gone down that easily.
The point I was making was that even in one's late sixties it is easily possible to have the physical resources to match those far younger. For a former pro athlete, 47 is easily capable of doing what he did.
Simpson's victims wouldn't have expected to be attacked. By the time he had attacked them with a lethal weapon, it was too late. He, on the other hand, was driven by his own rage. He was a powerful man. They wouldn't have seen it coming. They had no chance.
The civil jury had no trouble concluding he had killed them. You really have no idea about any of this.
You surprise the first one by pulling out a knife real quick and stabbing them, which surprises the second one. Then you stab them.
Both Nicole and Ron were stabbed multiple times and slashed. If you see someone stabbed multiple times normal reaction is to run and in case of Ron a black belt karate could have tried to interfere. Which I'm convinced Ron could have kicked OJ in the middle of his stabbing of Nicole.
Goldman was likely stabbed first.
Had Nicole been attacked 1st, Goldman would have escaped
Are you really comparing playing tennis to the struggle of life and death? Survival instincts kick in when someone is trying to kill you. Even animals have this instinct. It's hard for me to dismiss two young people in prime of their physical fitness would have gone down that easily.
The point I was making was that even in one's late sixties it is easily possible to have the physical resources to match those far younger. For a former pro athlete, 47 is easily capable of doing what he did.
Your hypocrisy is impressive.
Remember the above when you call masters runners dopers just because they perform well.