July 17, 2013 Black liberals keep bemoaning the danger to their own
teenage sons after the "not guilty" verdict in George Zimmerman's murder
trial. To avoid what happened to Trayvon Martin, their boys need only
follow this advice: Don't walk up to a stranger and punch him,
ground-and-pound him, MMA-style, and repeatedly smash his head against
the pavement.

The Justice-for-Trayvon crowd keeps pretending there hasn't been a trial
where the evidence overwhelmingly showed that Trayvon committed the
first (and only) crime that night by assaulting Zimmerman. Instead, the
race agitators are sticking with the original story peddled by the
media, back when we had zero facts. To wit, that Zimmerman had stalked a
young black child and shot him dead just for being black and wearing a

Dozens of these hair-on-fire racism stories are retold in my book,
Mugged: Racial Demagoguery from the Seventies to Obama
-20> . In the golden age of racial demagoguery, they came at a pace of
about one a year. Al Sharpton was usually involved.

A normal person would hear some of the more outlandish allegations and
think, "I can't believe it!" not meaning, "Wow! What a blockbuster
story!" but rather, "I would like to hear the facts because I literally
don't believe it." (That was much of America's reaction to the media's
claim last year that a neighborhood-watch captain in Florida had hunted
down a black teenager and shot him dead just for wearing a hoodie.)

Whenever a much-celebrated claim of racism turned out to be false --
which was almost always -- you'd just stop hearing about it. There would
never be a clippable story admitting that the media's harrumphing had
been in error: Attention, readers! That story we've been howling about
for several months turned out to be a complete fraud.

A little time would pass, and then we'd get an all-new, excited "America
is still racist" media campaign. Journalists are incapable of learning
that they should get all the facts before launching moral crusades.

As a result, the official record shows: A few hate crimes and some
unverified hate crimes with no clear resolution one way or another. As
long as the fraudulent hate crimes didn't get counted as strikeouts,
liberals always looked like Ted Williams.

Since they didn't keep an accurate batting average, I did it for them in
-20> .

The case most like George Zimmerman's is the Edmund Perry case. In 1985,
Perry, a black teenager from Harlem who had just graduated from Phillips
Exeter Academy, mugged a guy who turned out to be an undercover cop. He
got shot and a few hours later was dead.

Instead of waiting for the facts, the media rushed out with a story
about Officer Lee Van Houten being a trigger-happy, racist cop. When
that turned out to be false, The New York Times looked at its shoes. It
was the kind of story the elites wanted to be true. It should be true.
We had such high hopes for that one. Damn!

The initial news accounts stressed not only that Perry was a graduate of
Exeter on his way to Stanford, but that he was unarmed. (In all
white-on-black shootings, the media expect the white to have
RoboCop-like superpowers to detect any weapons on the perp as well as
his resume.)

A few weeks after the shooting, The New York Times called Perry "a
prized symbol of hope." In a telling bit of obtuseness, The Times said
that "all New Yorkers have extraordinary reasons to wish for the
innocence of the young man who was killed." I doubt very much that the
cop being accused of being a murderous racist hoped for that.

An article in The Village Voice explained: "[L]ike so many other victims
in this city," Perry was "just too black for his own good."

Luckily for the policeman, Perry had mugged him in a well-lit hospital
parking lot. Twenty-three witnesses backed the officer's story in
testimony to the grand jury. (Unlike Zimmerman, Van Houten's case was at
least presented to a grand jury.)

As I wrote in "Mugged": "God help Officer Van Houten if he had been
mugged someplace other than a hospital parking lot with plenty of
witnesses." Such as, for example, a dark pathway in The Retreat at Twin
Lakes. There weren't 23 witnesses backing Zimmerman's story, only about
a half-dozen. But, as with Van Houten, the evidence overwhelmingly
corroborated Zimmerman's story.

In Van Houten's case, even after it was blindingly clear that Perry had
mugged him, the truth was only revealed amid great sorrow. When the
facts were unknown, the cop was a racist. When it turned out Perry had
mugged the cop, it was no one's fault, but a problem of "violence,"
"confusion" and "two worlds" colliding.

Perhaps, someday, blacks will win the right to be treated like
volitional human beings. But not yet.

As with Zimmerman's case this week, some journalists pretended to have
missed the court proceedings that supported the self-defense story. Even
after the grand jury's refusal to indict Van Houten, Dorothy J. Gaiter
of the Miami Herald wrote about Perry in an article titled "To Be Black
and Male Is Dangerous in U.S." She asked: "How do you teach a boy to be
a man in a society where others may view him as a threat just because he
is black?"

Van Houten said he was jumped, knocked to the ground, punched and kicked
by Edmund Perry. Grand jury witnesses backed his story. Isn't it
possible that Van Houten saw Perry as a threat for reasons other than
"just because he is black"?

(And please stop talking about Martin's "hoodie"! Zimmerman wasn't
worried about the hoodie; he was worried about being beaten to death.)

Instead of turning every story about a black person killed by a white
person into an occasion to announce, "The simple fact is, America is a
racist society," liberals might, one time, ask the question: Why do you
suppose there would be a generalized fear of young black males? What
might that be based on?

Throw us a bone. It's because a disproportionate number of criminals are
young black males. It just happens that when Lee Van Houten and George
Zimmerman were mugged by two of them, they survived the encounter.


Share on facebook <http://www.anncoulter.com/columns/2013-07-17.html#> 
Share on twitter <http://www.anncoulter.com/columns/2013-07-17.html#> 
Share on email <http://www.anncoulter.com/columns/2013-07-17.html#> 
Share on print <http://www.anncoulter.com/columns/2013-07-17.html#> 
More Sharing Services
<http://www.anncoulter.com/columns/2013-07-17.html#>  1.5K

Reply via email to