I believe they are knocking him for telling a story that cannot be verified or proven that included walking around like George Zimmerman looking for an excuse to be violent to pay back a person of a given race for something another person of that race supposedly did...
So, you think he might be lying? What possible reason on Earth would he have to lie about all this? The story doesn't make him look very good, and, alas, his honesty has brought nothing but condemnation.
And, unlike George Zimmerman, Neeson hasn't actually killed anyone. Instead, he committed a 'thought crime'.
*that he did not witness or that did not affect him personally.*
He says a close relative was raped. You don't think that's enough reason to feel rage? How would you feel if a close family member had told you they'd recently been raped?
Of course, Neeson did not handle his anger the right way, but no doubt he felt at a loss to do something, and so violence, which it must be stressed, he did not go through with, was the only way in his mind that he could 'undo' the harm that had been done to his relative.
What makes me laugh is that so many so-called 'progressives', including many men, are at pains to tell us how so few men take rape seriously, and here we have a story where a man was deeply affected and traumatised by his relative's account. Yes, he dealt with it the wrong way. Yes, he made it about himself. But I'd argue that he felt this way only because he was so distraught at the harm done to his relative.
And perhaps we should 'minimise' Neeson's story, seeing as he's talking about a non-event that took place forty years ago. No-one was murdered. No-one was assaulted by Neeson.
reply
share