So was Zimmerman innocent, Morally, after all? - Page 2 - GoFuckYourself.com

maxjohan · 07-20-2013, 07:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ReggieDurango

I forget, what are the specific things he lied about?

Saying that, Trayvon Martin was holding his hand around his mouth. So he couldn't breath. And then, saying the: "You're Gonna Die Tonight, Motherfucker".

The guy is a freaking sn*ke, and half the world supports this guy. But that's just my opinion.

ReggieDurango · 07-21-2013, 09:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by maxjohan

Saying that, Trayvon Martin was holding his hand around his mouth. So he couldn't breath. And then, saying the: "You're Gonna Die Tonight, Motherfucker".

The guy is a freaking sn*ke, and half the world supports this guy. But that's just my opinion.

Dude, I honestly don't know the truth - and very few do, of course, but didn't the neighbor testify that trayvon was on top of zimmerman beating the shit out of him???

kane · 07-21-2013, 10:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ReggieDurango

Dude, I honestly don't know the truth - and very few do, of course, but didn't the neighbor testify that trayvon was on top of zimmerman beating the shit out of him???

Yes, he said he saw Martin on top hitting him and supposedly the evidence supports that claim.

The only real unanswered question, really the million dollar question, is how the fight started. Zimmerman says Martin attacked him. There is no evidence to prove that wasn't the case and since there is no evidence to prove otherwise the jury didn't really have a choice but to find him not guilty.

Baring someone coming out of the woodwork who happened to see it all go down we will likely never know exactly what happened that fateful night.

ReggieDurango · 07-26-2013, 05:46 AM

bump for discussion

Best-In-BC · 07-26-2013, 06:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ReggieDurango

Never judge a book by it's cover:
aka, understand something fully and educate yourself about it BEFORE you freak out and form your opinion.

If any large number of people ever did this it would destroy religion.

ReggieDurango · 07-26-2013, 01:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Best-In-BC

If any large number of people ever did this it would destroy religion.

Well maybe that's what needs to happen!!!

ReggieDurango · 07-28-2013, 07:19 PM

This issue clearly needs more discussion!! So BUMPITTY BUMP!

sperbonzo · 07-29-2013, 04:49 AM

http://reason.com/archives/2013/07/2...es-thanks-to-m

Zimmerman Backlash Continues Thanks to Media Misinformation
The media fails, again.

Cathy Young | July 27, 2013

More than a week after George Zimmerman?s acquittal in the fatal shooting of black teenager Trayvon Martin, the backlash against the verdict continues. President Obama spoke some undeniable truths when he noted that the African-American community?s intense reaction to the case must be seen in the context of a long, terrible history of racism. But there is another context too: that of an ideology-based, media-driven false narrative that has distorted a tragedy into a racist outrage.

This narrative has transformed Zimmerman, a man of racially mixed heritage that included white, Hispanic and black roots (a grandmother who helped raise him had an Afro-Peruvian father), into an honorary white male steeped in white privilege. It has cast him as a virulent racist even though he once had a black business partner, mentored African-American kids, lived in a neighborhood about 20 percent black, and participated in complaints about a white police lieutenant?s son getting away with beating a homeless black man.

This narrative has perpetuated the lie that Zimmerman?s history of calls to the police indicates obsessive racial paranoia. Thus, discussing the verdict on the PBS NewsHour, University of Connecticut professor and New Yorker contributor Jelani Cobb asserted that ?Zimmerman had called the police 46 times in previous six years, only for African-Americans, only for African-American men.? Actually, prior to the call about Martin, only four of Zimmerman?s calls had to do with African-American men or teenage boys (and two of them were about individuals who Zimmerman thought matched the specific description of burglary suspects). Five involved complaints about whites, and one about two Hispanics and a white male; others were about such issues as a fire alarm going off, a reckless driver of unknown race, or an aggressive dog.

In this narrative, even Zimmerman?s concern for a black child?a 2011 call to report a young African-American boy walking unsupervised on a busy street, on which the police record notes, ?compl[ainant] concerned for well-being??has been twisted into crazed racism. Writing on the website of The New Republic, Stanford University law professor Richard Thompson Ford describes Zimmerman as ?an edgy basket case? who called 911 about ?the suspicious activities of a seven year old black boy.? This slander turns up in other left-of-center sources, such as ThinkProgress.org.

Accounts of the incident itself have also been wrapped in false narrative?including such egregious distortions as NBC?s edited audio of Zimmerman?s 911 call which made him appear to say that Martin was ?up to no good? because ?he looks black.? (In fact, Zimmerman explained that Martin was ?walking around and looking about? in the rain, and mentioned his race?of which he initially seemed unsure?only in response to the dispatcher?s question.)

While this falsehood was retracted and cost several NBC employees their jobs, other fake facts still circulate unchecked: most notably, that Zimmerman disobeyed police orders not to follow Martin (or even, as Cobb and another guest asserted on the NewsHour, not to get out of his car). In fact, there was no such order. The dispatcher asked if Zimmerman was following the teenager; Zimmerman said yes, the dispatcher said, ?We don?t need you to do that,? and Zimmerman replied, ?Okay.? (Just before this, the dispatcher had made comments that could be construed as asking him to watch Martin, such as, ?Just let us know if he does anything else.?)

No one except Zimmerman knows whether he continued to track Martin?or, as he claims, headed back to his truck only to have Martin confront him. No one but Zimmerman knows who initiated physical violence. Both eyewitness testimony and forensic evidence, including injuries to Zimmerman?s face and the back of his head, supported his claim that he was being battered when he fired the gun. It was certainly enough to create reasonable doubt. Yet accounts that deplore the verdict often completely fail to mention Zimmerman?s injuries. Thus, Washington Post columnist Eugene Robinson says only that an unarmed ?skinny boy? could not have been a serious threat to ?a healthy adult man who outweighs him by 50 pounds??nearly doubling the actual 27-pound difference between Martin and Zimmerman and omitting the fact that Martin was four inches taller.

The false narrative also makes it axiomatic that a black man in Zimmerman?s shoes wouldn?t stand a chance?especially if he had shot someone white. Never mind examples to the contrary, such as a 2009 case in Rochester, New York in which a black man, Roderick Scott, shot and killed an unarmed white teenager and was acquitted. Scott, who had caught 17-year-old Christopher Cervini and two other boys breaking into a car, said that the boy charged him and he feared for his life. (While the analogy has been decried as false in a number of Internet discussions because Scott actually saw Cervini doing something illegal, this is irrelevant to the self-defense claim: stealing from a car does not call for execution.)

What about general patterns? In the New Republic article, Ford cites a report in the Tampa Bay Times showing that ?stand your ground? self-defense claims in Florida are more successful for defendants who kill a black person (73 percent face no penalty, compared to 59 percent of those who kill a white person). But he leaves out a salient detail: since most homicides involve people of the same race, this also means more black defendants go free. Nor does he mention that another article based on the same study of ?stand your ground? cases from 2005 to 2010 noted ?no obvious bias? in the treatment of black defendants?or mixed-race homicides: ?Four of the five blacks who killed a white went free; five of the six whites who killed a black went free.?

One Florida case has been widely cited as a contrast to the Zimmerman verdict and a shocking injustice: the case of Marissa Alexander, a black woman said to be serving twenty years in prison for a warning shot to scare off her violent estranged husband. But that?s not quite what happened. Alexander?s ?stand your ground? claim was rejected because, after the altercation with ex-husband Rico Gray, she went to the garage, returned with a gun and fired a shot that Gray said narrowly missed his head (a claim backed by forensics). There is plenty of evidence that Gray was abusive, but Alexander was not the complete innocent her champions make her out to be: she also assaulted Gray, giving him a black eye, while out on bail for the shooting and under court orders to stay away from him. Her twenty-year sentence, required by a mandatory minimum for firearm offenses, was a travesty; her conviction was not.

Liberals and disenchanted conservatives who decry fact-free ideological narratives, true-believer hysteria and willful reality-denial on the right should take a good look at the left?s Zimmerman Derangement Syndrome. Some far-right blogs have trafficked in bad information of their own, using Martin?s marijuana use, past fighting, and teenage social-media bluster to portray him as a thug and even spinning bizarre theories about his possible drug dealing the night of his death. Yet this instance, their misdeeds are dwarfed by far more mainstream liberal ?faux news? (meticulously documented on a dissenting left-of-center blog, The Daily Howler). As a fiction, Zimmerman the white supremacist rivals Obama the Kenyan-born commie Muslim.

Obama was right when he said that the racial context?the context of a history in which just sixty years ago blacks really could be murdered at will for giving trivial offense to a white person, and of a present in which young black males still face the daily reality of racial profiling?gave Trayvon Martin?s death a powerful and painful resonance for black Americans. That made it all the more incumbent on the media to be scrupulously truthful and responsible in their coverage. At this, they have spectacularly failed, with deplorable consequences.

.

ReggieDurango · 07-29-2013, 06:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sperbonzo

http://reason.com/archives/2013/07/2...es-thanks-to-m

Zimmerman Backlash Continues Thanks to Media Misinformation
The media fails, again.

Cathy Young | July 27, 2013

More than a week after George Zimmerman?s acquittal in the fatal shooting of black teenager Trayvon Martin, the backlash against the verdict continues. President Obama spoke some undeniable truths when he noted that the African-American community?s intense reaction to the case must be seen in the context of a long, terrible history of racism. But there is another context too: that of an ideology-based, media-driven false narrative that has distorted a tragedy into a racist outrage.

This narrative has transformed Zimmerman, a man of racially mixed heritage that included white, Hispanic and black roots (a grandmother who helped raise him had an Afro-Peruvian father), into an honorary white male steeped in white privilege. It has cast him as a virulent racist even though he once had a black business partner, mentored African-American kids, lived in a neighborhood about 20 percent black, and participated in complaints about a white police lieutenant?s son getting away with beating a homeless black man.

This narrative has perpetuated the lie that Zimmerman?s history of calls to the police indicates obsessive racial paranoia. Thus, discussing the verdict on the PBS NewsHour, University of Connecticut professor and New Yorker contributor Jelani Cobb asserted that ?Zimmerman had called the police 46 times in previous six years, only for African-Americans, only for African-American men.? Actually, prior to the call about Martin, only four of Zimmerman?s calls had to do with African-American men or teenage boys (and two of them were about individuals who Zimmerman thought matched the specific description of burglary suspects). Five involved complaints about whites, and one about two Hispanics and a white male; others were about such issues as a fire alarm going off, a reckless driver of unknown race, or an aggressive dog.

In this narrative, even Zimmerman?s concern for a black child?a 2011 call to report a young African-American boy walking unsupervised on a busy street, on which the police record notes, ?compl[ainant] concerned for well-being??has been twisted into crazed racism. Writing on the website of The New Republic, Stanford University law professor Richard Thompson Ford describes Zimmerman as ?an edgy basket case? who called 911 about ?the suspicious activities of a seven year old black boy.? This slander turns up in other left-of-center sources, such as ThinkProgress.org.

Accounts of the incident itself have also been wrapped in false narrative?including such egregious distortions as NBC?s edited audio of Zimmerman?s 911 call which made him appear to say that Martin was ?up to no good? because ?he looks black.? (In fact, Zimmerman explained that Martin was ?walking around and looking about? in the rain, and mentioned his race?of which he initially seemed unsure?only in response to the dispatcher?s question.)

While this falsehood was retracted and cost several NBC employees their jobs, other fake facts still circulate unchecked: most notably, that Zimmerman disobeyed police orders not to follow Martin (or even, as Cobb and another guest asserted on the NewsHour, not to get out of his car). In fact, there was no such order. The dispatcher asked if Zimmerman was following the teenager; Zimmerman said yes, the dispatcher said, ?We don?t need you to do that,? and Zimmerman replied, ?Okay.? (Just before this, the dispatcher had made comments that could be construed as asking him to watch Martin, such as, ?Just let us know if he does anything else.?)

No one except Zimmerman knows whether he continued to track Martin?or, as he claims, headed back to his truck only to have Martin confront him. No one but Zimmerman knows who initiated physical violence. Both eyewitness testimony and forensic evidence, including injuries to Zimmerman?s face and the back of his head, supported his claim that he was being battered when he fired the gun. It was certainly enough to create reasonable doubt. Yet accounts that deplore the verdict often completely fail to mention Zimmerman?s injuries. Thus, Washington Post columnist Eugene Robinson says only that an unarmed ?skinny boy? could not have been a serious threat to ?a healthy adult man who outweighs him by 50 pounds??nearly doubling the actual 27-pound difference between Martin and Zimmerman and omitting the fact that Martin was four inches taller.

The false narrative also makes it axiomatic that a black man in Zimmerman?s shoes wouldn?t stand a chance?especially if he had shot someone white. Never mind examples to the contrary, such as a 2009 case in Rochester, New York in which a black man, Roderick Scott, shot and killed an unarmed white teenager and was acquitted. Scott, who had caught 17-year-old Christopher Cervini and two other boys breaking into a car, said that the boy charged him and he feared for his life. (While the analogy has been decried as false in a number of Internet discussions because Scott actually saw Cervini doing something illegal, this is irrelevant to the self-defense claim: stealing from a car does not call for execution.)

What about general patterns? In the New Republic article, Ford cites a report in the Tampa Bay Times showing that ?stand your ground? self-defense claims in Florida are more successful for defendants who kill a black person (73 percent face no penalty, compared to 59 percent of those who kill a white person). But he leaves out a salient detail: since most homicides involve people of the same race, this also means more black defendants go free. Nor does he mention that another article based on the same study of ?stand your ground? cases from 2005 to 2010 noted ?no obvious bias? in the treatment of black defendants?or mixed-race homicides: ?Four of the five blacks who killed a white went free; five of the six whites who killed a black went free.?

One Florida case has been widely cited as a contrast to the Zimmerman verdict and a shocking injustice: the case of Marissa Alexander, a black woman said to be serving twenty years in prison for a warning shot to scare off her violent estranged husband. But that?s not quite what happened. Alexander?s ?stand your ground? claim was rejected because, after the altercation with ex-husband Rico Gray, she went to the garage, returned with a gun and fired a shot that Gray said narrowly missed his head (a claim backed by forensics). There is plenty of evidence that Gray was abusive, but Alexander was not the complete innocent her champions make her out to be: she also assaulted Gray, giving him a black eye, while out on bail for the shooting and under court orders to stay away from him. Her twenty-year sentence, required by a mandatory minimum for firearm offenses, was a travesty; her conviction was not.

Liberals and disenchanted conservatives who decry fact-free ideological narratives, true-believer hysteria and willful reality-denial on the right should take a good look at the left?s Zimmerman Derangement Syndrome. Some far-right blogs have trafficked in bad information of their own, using Martin?s marijuana use, past fighting, and teenage social-media bluster to portray him as a thug and even spinning bizarre theories about his possible drug dealing the night of his death. Yet this instance, their misdeeds are dwarfed by far more mainstream liberal ?faux news? (meticulously documented on a dissenting left-of-center blog, The Daily Howler). As a fiction, Zimmerman the white supremacist rivals Obama the Kenyan-born commie Muslim.

Obama was right when he said that the racial context?the context of a history in which just sixty years ago blacks really could be murdered at will for giving trivial offense to a white person, and of a present in which young black males still face the daily reality of racial profiling?gave Trayvon Martin?s death a powerful and painful resonance for black Americans. That made it all the more incumbent on the media to be scrupulously truthful and responsible in their coverage. At this, they have spectacularly failed, with deplorable consequences.

.

Again, I plan on reading all this later on!

ReggieDurango · 07-29-2013, 11:37 AM

Bump
5678

Best-In-BC · 07-29-2013, 11:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sandman!

i would shoot anyone attacking me also

dont matter the skin color

Captain Kawaii · 07-29-2013, 12:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sperbonzo

http://reason.com/archives/2013/07/2...es-thanks-to-m

Zimmerman Backlash Continues Thanks to Media Misinformation
The media fails, again.

Cathy Young | July 27, 2013

More than a week after George Zimmerman?s acquittal in the fatal shooting of black teenager Trayvon Martin, the backlash against the verdict continues. President Obama spoke some undeniable truths when he noted that the African-American community?s intense reaction to the case must be seen in the context of a long, terrible history of racism. But there is another context too: that of an ideology-based, media-driven false narrative that has distorted a tragedy into a racist outrage.

This narrative has transformed Zimmerman, a man of racially mixed heritage that included white, Hispanic and black roots (a grandmother who helped raise him had an Afro-Peruvian father), into an honorary white male steeped in white privilege. It has cast him as a virulent racist even though he once had a black business partner, mentored African-American kids, lived in a neighborhood about 20 percent black, and participated in complaints about a white police lieutenant?s son getting away with beating a homeless black man.

This narrative has perpetuated the lie that Zimmerman?s history of calls to the police indicates obsessive racial paranoia. Thus, discussing the verdict on the PBS NewsHour, University of Connecticut professor and New Yorker contributor Jelani Cobb asserted that ?Zimmerman had called the police 46 times in previous six years, only for African-Americans, only for African-American men.? Actually, prior to the call about Martin, only four of Zimmerman?s calls had to do with African-American men or teenage boys (and two of them were about individuals who Zimmerman thought matched the specific description of burglary suspects). Five involved complaints about whites, and one about two Hispanics and a white male; others were about such issues as a fire alarm going off, a reckless driver of unknown race, or an aggressive dog.

In this narrative, even Zimmerman?s concern for a black child?a 2011 call to report a young African-American boy walking unsupervised on a busy street, on which the police record notes, ?compl[ainant] concerned for well-being??has been twisted into crazed racism. Writing on the website of The New Republic, Stanford University law professor Richard Thompson Ford describes Zimmerman as ?an edgy basket case? who called 911 about ?the suspicious activities of a seven year old black boy.? This slander turns up in other left-of-center sources, such as ThinkProgress.org.

Accounts of the incident itself have also been wrapped in false narrative?including such egregious distortions as NBC?s edited audio of Zimmerman?s 911 call which made him appear to say that Martin was ?up to no good? because ?he looks black.? (In fact, Zimmerman explained that Martin was ?walking around and looking about? in the rain, and mentioned his race?of which he initially seemed unsure?only in response to the dispatcher?s question.)

While this falsehood was retracted and cost several NBC employees their jobs, other fake facts still circulate unchecked: most notably, that Zimmerman disobeyed police orders not to follow Martin (or even, as Cobb and another guest asserted on the NewsHour, not to get out of his car). In fact, there was no such order. The dispatcher asked if Zimmerman was following the teenager; Zimmerman said yes, the dispatcher said, ?We don?t need you to do that,? and Zimmerman replied, ?Okay.? (Just before this, the dispatcher had made comments that could be construed as asking him to watch Martin, such as, ?Just let us know if he does anything else.?)

No one except Zimmerman knows whether he continued to track Martin?or, as he claims, headed back to his truck only to have Martin confront him. No one but Zimmerman knows who initiated physical violence. Both eyewitness testimony and forensic evidence, including injuries to Zimmerman?s face and the back of his head, supported his claim that he was being battered when he fired the gun. It was certainly enough to create reasonable doubt. Yet accounts that deplore the verdict often completely fail to mention Zimmerman?s injuries. Thus, Washington Post columnist Eugene Robinson says only that an unarmed ?skinny boy? could not have been a serious threat to ?a healthy adult man who outweighs him by 50 pounds??nearly doubling the actual 27-pound difference between Martin and Zimmerman and omitting the fact that Martin was four inches taller.

The false narrative also makes it axiomatic that a black man in Zimmerman?s shoes wouldn?t stand a chance?especially if he had shot someone white. Never mind examples to the contrary, such as a 2009 case in Rochester, New York in which a black man, Roderick Scott, shot and killed an unarmed white teenager and was acquitted. Scott, who had caught 17-year-old Christopher Cervini and two other boys breaking into a car, said that the boy charged him and he feared for his life. (While the analogy has been decried as false in a number of Internet discussions because Scott actually saw Cervini doing something illegal, this is irrelevant to the self-defense claim: stealing from a car does not call for execution.)

What about general patterns? In the New Republic article, Ford cites a report in the Tampa Bay Times showing that ?stand your ground? self-defense claims in Florida are more successful for defendants who kill a black person (73 percent face no penalty, compared to 59 percent of those who kill a white person). But he leaves out a salient detail: since most homicides involve people of the same race, this also means more black defendants go free. Nor does he mention that another article based on the same study of ?stand your ground? cases from 2005 to 2010 noted ?no obvious bias? in the treatment of black defendants?or mixed-race homicides: ?Four of the five blacks who killed a white went free; five of the six whites who killed a black went free.?

One Florida case has been widely cited as a contrast to the Zimmerman verdict and a shocking injustice: the case of Marissa Alexander, a black woman said to be serving twenty years in prison for a warning shot to scare off her violent estranged husband. But that?s not quite what happened. Alexander?s ?stand your ground? claim was rejected because, after the altercation with ex-husband Rico Gray, she went to the garage, returned with a gun and fired a shot that Gray said narrowly missed his head (a claim backed by forensics). There is plenty of evidence that Gray was abusive, but Alexander was not the complete innocent her champions make her out to be: she also assaulted Gray, giving him a black eye, while out on bail for the shooting and under court orders to stay away from him. Her twenty-year sentence, required by a mandatory minimum for firearm offenses, was a travesty; her conviction was not.

Liberals and disenchanted conservatives who decry fact-free ideological narratives, true-believer hysteria and willful reality-denial on the right should take a good look at the left?s Zimmerman Derangement Syndrome. Some far-right blogs have trafficked in bad information of their own, using Martin?s marijuana use, past fighting, and teenage social-media bluster to portray him as a thug and even spinning bizarre theories about his possible drug dealing the night of his death. Yet this instance, their misdeeds are dwarfed by far more mainstream liberal ?faux news? (meticulously documented on a dissenting left-of-center blog, The Daily Howler). As a fiction, Zimmerman the white supremacist rivals Obama the Kenyan-born commie Muslim.

Obama was right when he said that the racial context?the context of a history in which just sixty years ago blacks really could be murdered at will for giving trivial offense to a white person, and of a present in which young black males still face the daily reality of racial profiling?gave Trayvon Martin?s death a powerful and painful resonance for black Americans. That made it all the more incumbent on the media to be scrupulously truthful and responsible in their coverage. At this, they have spectacularly failed, with deplorable consequences.

.

Excellent article.

- It seems many other board members here fall into the NBC school of Journalism camp.

ReggieDurango · 07-29-2013, 01:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Captain Kawaii

Excellent article.

- It seems many other board members here fall into the NBC school of Journalism camp.

I STILL am planning on reading the article at some point in the nearish future...

Captain Kawaii · 07-29-2013, 02:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ReggieDurango

I STILL am planning on reading the article at some point in the nearish future...

Its good to plan. Have fun.

ReggieDurango · 08-01-2013, 11:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Captain Kawaii

Its good to plan. Have fun.

Thanks, I've been REALLY busy, but haven't forgotten about my plan...

Captain Kawaii · 08-02-2013, 01:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ReggieDurango

Thanks, I've been REALLY busy, but haven't forgotten about my plan...

The big bosses have a plan. Their plan is for you NOT read that piece. That would SLOW their plan DOWN. Johan Falk.

ReggieDurango · 08-02-2013, 05:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Captain Kawaii

The big bosses have a plan. Their plan is for you NOT read that piece. That would SLOW their plan DOWN. Johan Falk.

In that case, I will try my absolute best to read it in the next 24 hours. I'm just really slow reader, and the length of the text is a bit daunting. But I'm sure that once I sit down and focus I'll be able to get through it.

tony286 · 08-02-2013, 05:12 AM

http://bewytchme.com/george-zimmerma...right-holster/
"First off, please explain to me how Martin was able to see this black gun, in a black inside waistband holster, which is underneath George Zimmerman in the dark.
Second, please tell me how the hell George Zimmerman is supposed to be able to ?pin? Trayvon Martin?s arm with his right arm, then with the same arm reach behind him to pull the gun out of the holster, aim, and shoot a perfect shot. Unless George Zimmerman?s right arm unhinges at the elbow, it?s physically impossible. His elbows would have to bend -out- to get to the gun ? which means Trayvon Martin?s arm is no longer restrained.
Martin had, accordingly to George Zimmerman, done the following, unprovoked: Hit him in the nose so hard he knocked him down, straddled him, banged his head repeatedly against a cement sidewalk, tried to suffocate him. But when George Zimmerman goes to get his gun out and shoot, Trayvon Martin just sits there?
And that?s before we get to the ridiculous idea of Trayvon Martin ? upon seeing the gun ? instead of continuing the assault or making an immediate mad scramble for the gun, decides to sit up and make a bad-ass quote before ?taking his hand off George Zimmerman?s mouth and sliding it down his chest?. I mean, it makes no sense. Why would Trayvon Martin run his hands down George Zimmerman?s chest? The gun was behind and underneath George. Why would he say anything at all? He?d just grab the gun.
And of course we have to consider that while Trayvon Martin was supposedly straddling and pummeling George Zimmerman, George Zimmerman?s hands/arms apparently weren?t free to punch back / block / remove hands from nose/mouth etc ? George Zimmerman says all he could do was squirm to get his head of the sidewalk. Which means Trayvon Martin had to have been sitting or otherwise restraining George Zimmerman?s arms with his legs.
If so?.how does George Zimmerman pin Trayvon Martin?s arm, and how is he then able to get his gun out?" an interesting read

ReggieDurango · 08-02-2013, 05:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tony286

http://bewytchme.com/george-zimmerma...right-holster/
"First off, please explain to me how Martin was able to see this black gun, in a black inside waistband holster, which is underneath George Zimmerman in the dark.
Second, please tell me how the hell George Zimmerman is supposed to be able to ?pin? Trayvon Martin?s arm with his right arm, then with the same arm reach behind him to pull the gun out of the holster, aim, and shoot a perfect shot. Unless George Zimmerman?s right arm unhinges at the elbow, it?s physically impossible. His elbows would have to bend -out- to get to the gun ? which means Trayvon Martin?s arm is no longer restrained.
Martin had, accordingly to George Zimmerman, done the following, unprovoked: Hit him in the nose so hard he knocked him down, straddled him, banged his head repeatedly against a cement sidewalk, tried to suffocate him. But when George Zimmerman goes to get his gun out and shoot, Trayvon Martin just sits there?
And that?s before we get to the ridiculous idea of Trayvon Martin ? upon seeing the gun ? instead of continuing the assault or making an immediate mad scramble for the gun, decides to sit up and make a bad-ass quote before ?taking his hand off George Zimmerman?s mouth and sliding it down his chest?. I mean, it makes no sense. Why would Trayvon Martin run his hands down George Zimmerman?s chest? The gun was behind and underneath George. Why would he say anything at all? He?d just grab the gun.
And of course we have to consider that while Trayvon Martin was supposedly straddling and pummeling George Zimmerman, George Zimmerman?s hands/arms apparently weren?t free to punch back / block / remove hands from nose/mouth etc ? George Zimmerman says all he could do was squirm to get his head of the sidewalk. Which means Trayvon Martin had to have been sitting or otherwise restraining George Zimmerman?s arms with his legs.
If so?.how does George Zimmerman pin Trayvon Martin?s arm, and how is he then able to get his gun out?" an interesting read

Here is another wall of text that I plan on reading in the future.

TheSquealer · 08-02-2013, 07:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tony286

http://bewytchme.com/george-zimmerma...right-holster/
"First off, please explain to me how Martin was able to see this black gun, in a black inside waistband holster, which is underneath George Zimmerman in the dark.
Second, please tell me how the hell George Zimmerman is supposed to be able to ‘pin’ Trayvon Martin’s arm with his right arm, then with the same arm reach behind him to pull the gun out of the holster, aim, and shoot a perfect shot. Unless George Zimmerman’s right arm unhinges at the elbow, it’s physically impossible. His elbows would have to bend -out- to get to the gun – which means Trayvon Martin’s arm is no longer restrained.
Martin had, accordingly to George Zimmerman, done the following, unprovoked: Hit him in the nose so hard he knocked him down, straddled him, banged his head repeatedly against a cement sidewalk, tried to suffocate him. But when George Zimmerman goes to get his gun out and shoot, Trayvon Martin just sits there?
And that’s before we get to the ridiculous idea of Trayvon Martin – upon seeing the gun – instead of continuing the assault or making an immediate mad scramble for the gun, decides to sit up and make a bad-ass quote before ‘taking his hand off George Zimmerman’s mouth and sliding it down his chest’. I mean, it makes no sense. Why would Trayvon Martin run his hands down George Zimmerman’s chest? The gun was behind and underneath George. Why would he say anything at all? He’d just grab the gun.
And of course we have to consider that while Trayvon Martin was supposedly straddling and pummeling George Zimmerman, George Zimmerman’s hands/arms apparently weren’t free to punch back / block / remove hands from nose/mouth etc – George Zimmerman says all he could do was squirm to get his head of the sidewalk. Which means Trayvon Martin had to have been sitting or otherwise restraining George Zimmerman’s arms with his legs.
If so….how does George Zimmerman pin Trayvon Martin’s arm, and how is he then able to get his gun out?" an interesting read

You know how someone has no argument? They ask retarded questions that have been addressed time and time again, namely in a court of law, by the defense, by the prosecution, by expert witnesses, through cross examination, through rebuttal witnesses and in front of a judge and jury.... as if they are new, as if they are revelations and as if they are somehow thought provoking.

ReggieDurango · 08-02-2013, 07:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheSquealer

You know how someone has no argument? They ask retarded questions that have been addressed time and time again, namely in a court of law, by the defense, by the prosecution, by expert witnesses, through cross examination, through rebuttal witnesses and in front of a judge and jury.... as if they are new, as if they are revelations and as if they are somehow thought provoking.

Hi squealer, maybe I should change my plans of reading all of the walls of text in those articles above? Or do you think that I should read them after all? LOL

07-29-2013, 04:49 AM	#58
sperbonzo I'd rather be on my boat. Industry Role: Join Date: May 2003 Location: Miami, FL Posts: 9,744	http://reason.com/archives/2013/07/2...es-thanks-to-m Zimmerman Backlash Continues Thanks to Media Misinformation The media fails, again. Cathy Young \| July 27, 2013 More than a week after George Zimmerman?s acquittal in the fatal shooting of black teenager Trayvon Martin, the backlash against the verdict continues. President Obama spoke some undeniable truths when he noted that the African-American community?s intense reaction to the case must be seen in the context of a long, terrible history of racism. But there is another context too: that of an ideology-based, media-driven false narrative that has distorted a tragedy into a racist outrage. This narrative has transformed Zimmerman, a man of racially mixed heritage that included white, Hispanic and black roots (a grandmother who helped raise him had an Afro-Peruvian father), into an honorary white male steeped in white privilege. It has cast him as a virulent racist even though he once had a black business partner, mentored African-American kids, lived in a neighborhood about 20 percent black, and participated in complaints about a white police lieutenant?s son getting away with beating a homeless black man. This narrative has perpetuated the lie that Zimmerman?s history of calls to the police indicates obsessive racial paranoia. Thus, discussing the verdict on the PBS NewsHour, University of Connecticut professor and New Yorker contributor Jelani Cobb asserted that ?Zimmerman had called the police 46 times in previous six years, only for African-Americans, only for African-American men.? Actually, prior to the call about Martin, only four of Zimmerman?s calls had to do with African-American men or teenage boys (and two of them were about individuals who Zimmerman thought matched the specific description of burglary suspects). Five involved complaints about whites, and one about two Hispanics and a white male; others were about such issues as a fire alarm going off, a reckless driver of unknown race, or an aggressive dog. In this narrative, even Zimmerman?s concern for a black child?a 2011 call to report a young African-American boy walking unsupervised on a busy street, on which the police record notes, ?compl[ainant] concerned for well-being??has been twisted into crazed racism. Writing on the website of The New Republic, Stanford University law professor Richard Thompson Ford describes Zimmerman as ?an edgy basket case? who called 911 about ?the suspicious activities of a seven year old black boy.? This slander turns up in other left-of-center sources, such as ThinkProgress.org. Accounts of the incident itself have also been wrapped in false narrative?including such egregious distortions as NBC?s edited audio of Zimmerman?s 911 call which made him appear to say that Martin was ?up to no good? because ?he looks black.? (In fact, Zimmerman explained that Martin was ?walking around and looking about? in the rain, and mentioned his race?of which he initially seemed unsure?only in response to the dispatcher?s question.) While this falsehood was retracted and cost several NBC employees their jobs, other fake facts still circulate unchecked: most notably, that Zimmerman disobeyed police orders not to follow Martin (or even, as Cobb and another guest asserted on the NewsHour, not to get out of his car). In fact, there was no such order. The dispatcher asked if Zimmerman was following the teenager; Zimmerman said yes, the dispatcher said, ?We don?t need you to do that,? and Zimmerman replied, ?Okay.? (Just before this, the dispatcher had made comments that could be construed as asking him to watch Martin, such as, ?Just let us know if he does anything else.?) No one except Zimmerman knows whether he continued to track Martin?or, as he claims, headed back to his truck only to have Martin confront him. No one but Zimmerman knows who initiated physical violence. Both eyewitness testimony and forensic evidence, including injuries to Zimmerman?s face and the back of his head, supported his claim that he was being battered when he fired the gun. It was certainly enough to create reasonable doubt. Yet accounts that deplore the verdict often completely fail to mention Zimmerman?s injuries. Thus, Washington Post columnist Eugene Robinson says only that an unarmed ?skinny boy? could not have been a serious threat to ?a healthy adult man who outweighs him by 50 pounds??nearly doubling the actual 27-pound difference between Martin and Zimmerman and omitting the fact that Martin was four inches taller. The false narrative also makes it axiomatic that a black man in Zimmerman?s shoes wouldn?t stand a chance?especially if he had shot someone white. Never mind examples to the contrary, such as a 2009 case in Rochester, New York in which a black man, Roderick Scott, shot and killed an unarmed white teenager and was acquitted. Scott, who had caught 17-year-old Christopher Cervini and two other boys breaking into a car, said that the boy charged him and he feared for his life. (While the analogy has been decried as false in a number of Internet discussions because Scott actually saw Cervini doing something illegal, this is irrelevant to the self-defense claim: stealing from a car does not call for execution.) What about general patterns? In the New Republic article, Ford cites a report in the Tampa Bay Times showing that ?stand your ground? self-defense claims in Florida are more successful for defendants who kill a black person (73 percent face no penalty, compared to 59 percent of those who kill a white person). But he leaves out a salient detail: since most homicides involve people of the same race, this also means more black defendants go free. Nor does he mention that another article based on the same study of ?stand your ground? cases from 2005 to 2010 noted ?no obvious bias? in the treatment of black defendants?or mixed-race homicides: ?Four of the five blacks who killed a white went free; five of the six whites who killed a black went free.? One Florida case has been widely cited as a contrast to the Zimmerman verdict and a shocking injustice: the case of Marissa Alexander, a black woman said to be serving twenty years in prison for a warning shot to scare off her violent estranged husband. But that?s not quite what happened. Alexander?s ?stand your ground? claim was rejected because, after the altercation with ex-husband Rico Gray, she went to the garage, returned with a gun and fired a shot that Gray said narrowly missed his head (a claim backed by forensics). There is plenty of evidence that Gray was abusive, but Alexander was not the complete innocent her champions make her out to be: she also assaulted Gray, giving him a black eye, while out on bail for the shooting and under court orders to stay away from him. Her twenty-year sentence, required by a mandatory minimum for firearm offenses, was a travesty; her conviction was not. Liberals and disenchanted conservatives who decry fact-free ideological narratives, true-believer hysteria and willful reality-denial on the right should take a good look at the left?s Zimmerman Derangement Syndrome. Some far-right blogs have trafficked in bad information of their own, using Martin?s marijuana use, past fighting, and teenage social-media bluster to portray him as a thug and even spinning bizarre theories about his possible drug dealing the night of his death. Yet this instance, their misdeeds are dwarfed by far more mainstream liberal ?faux news? (meticulously documented on a dissenting left-of-center blog, The Daily Howler). As a fiction, Zimmerman the white supremacist rivals Obama the Kenyan-born commie Muslim. Obama was right when he said that the racial context?the context of a history in which just sixty years ago blacks really could be murdered at will for giving trivial offense to a white person, and of a present in which young black males still face the daily reality of racial profiling?gave Trayvon Martin?s death a powerful and painful resonance for black Americans. That made it all the more incumbent on the media to be scrupulously truthful and responsible in their coverage. At this, they have spectacularly failed, with deplorable consequences. . __________________ Michael Sperber / Acella Financial LLC/ Online Payment Processing [email protected] / http://Acellafinancial.com/ ICQ 177961090 / Tel +1 909 NET BILL / Skype msperber

07-26-2013, 05:46 AM	#54
ReggieDurango Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: California Posts: 4,748	bump for discussion

07-28-2013, 07:19 PM	#57
ReggieDurango Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: California Posts: 4,748	This issue clearly needs more discussion!! So BUMPITTY BUMP!

07-29-2013, 11:37 AM	#60
ReggieDurango Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: California Posts: 4,748	Bump 5678

08-02-2013, 05:12 AM	#68
tony286 lurker Industry Role: Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: atlanta Posts: 57,021	http://bewytchme.com/george-zimmerma...right-holster/ "First off, please explain to me how Martin was able to see this black gun, in a black inside waistband holster, which is underneath George Zimmerman in the dark. Second, please tell me how the hell George Zimmerman is supposed to be able to ?pin? Trayvon Martin?s arm with his right arm, then with the same arm reach behind him to pull the gun out of the holster, aim, and shoot a perfect shot. Unless George Zimmerman?s right arm unhinges at the elbow, it?s physically impossible. His elbows would have to bend -out- to get to the gun ? which means Trayvon Martin?s arm is no longer restrained. Martin had, accordingly to George Zimmerman, done the following, unprovoked: Hit him in the nose so hard he knocked him down, straddled him, banged his head repeatedly against a cement sidewalk, tried to suffocate him. But when George Zimmerman goes to get his gun out and shoot, Trayvon Martin just sits there? And that?s before we get to the ridiculous idea of Trayvon Martin ? upon seeing the gun ? instead of continuing the assault or making an immediate mad scramble for the gun, decides to sit up and make a bad-ass quote before ?taking his hand off George Zimmerman?s mouth and sliding it down his chest?. I mean, it makes no sense. Why would Trayvon Martin run his hands down George Zimmerman?s chest? The gun was behind and underneath George. Why would he say anything at all? He?d just grab the gun. And of course we have to consider that while Trayvon Martin was supposedly straddling and pummeling George Zimmerman, George Zimmerman?s hands/arms apparently weren?t free to punch back / block / remove hands from nose/mouth etc ? George Zimmerman says all he could do was squirm to get his head of the sidewalk. Which means Trayvon Martin had to have been sitting or otherwise restraining George Zimmerman?s arms with his legs. If so?.how does George Zimmerman pin Trayvon Martin?s arm, and how is he then able to get his gun out?" an interesting read