Part 1: Evidence? Who Cares?
I find it amusing when people who only watch right-wing news have the balls to proclaim they know what the left-wing news is talking about. How would they know? They never, under any circumstances, ever watch it. Oh, I get it. Limbaugh and Hannity tell them what liberals are saying. Of course that’s how they know! And Limbo and Hannity would never lie to push their agenda.
Here is a very long “discussion” about the Treyvon Martin
case. One of I’m sure many going on in America where the gun-totin’
Constitution-loving Republicans unquestioningly support the stalker with the
gun over the kid with the Skittles – regardless to all contrary facts.
I’m going to break this one up into two parts. There’s sort
of a natural break point where my buddy Richard pushes his eject button and
bails out of the conversation. Fear not, true believers. He has a worthy
successor.
The names have been changed to protect the innocent and the
guilty – and all the shady characters in between.
Enjoy…
Peter
For those who are following the case...
Richard
If the man who attacked the neighborhood watch, Trayvon, had
been white, would we even be talking about this? [Historical signs point to
emphatically to ‘Yes.’]
This is why this case bothers me... the reaction [Not the
murder itself?]. Thousands of people
marching and protesting, cries of racism, etc... Yet none of these people get
upset at the fact that on the same day that a white man killed a black man,
that a couple hundred other black men were killed by black men. Or that many
white men were killed by black men. Or that white men were killed by other
white men. [The shooters in those hypothetical cases, if known, were
probably arrested so a trial could take place and guilt or innocence had the
opportunity of being proven. Unlike this case.]
The point is that it's only racism, and it is only worth
protesting if a white man kills a black man [No, it’s about the shooter not
being arrested, along with a blatant racist aspect. Rush Limbaugh is telling
you how everyone else is portraying it, which they are not, but you wouldn’t
know because you never listen to anyone else but Rush. Who is a lying
drug-addict.], which is the rarest
occurrence [Rare?]. It's like
anything else is "almost expected" and nobody cares. Nobody cares
about black on black crime [Really?],
which is the majority of the crimes [Not the point in this particular
case.], or black on white, which is the
second most common [Also not the point of this case.].... No, the protesters only care about the exception
to the norm. [Of course. That makes sense. Just not the kind based on
knowledge.]
Why is that?
Mourn the loss of life. But to make it all about racism is
insane. [No one is doing that. Conservatives are only telling you that’s
what liberals are doing.] People killing
other people is bad. It shouldn't matter what color skin they have. [Which
is why it doesn’t.]
[That entire rant was pointless since none of the things
Richard said was happening are actually happening. But at least he got to tell
everyone what they know.]
Jill
Richard, perhaps that's true, but you need to remember that
there is absolutely no evidence that Trayvon "attacked" Zimmerman.
Yet there is abundant evidence that Zimmerman killed Trayvon in cold blood,
without provocation. It's not a matter of "a black man was killed by a
white man and that's racist in a socially unacceptable way", it's a matter
of "An innocent child was killed by a man who was supposed to be
protecting people for absolutely no reason other than because the man felt
threatened by his presence." That's the issue here. The racism claim is
only relevant in that what many people believe to be the cause of Zimmerman
feeling 'threatened' is the fact that Trayvon was African American. There is
evidence supporting this, such as the fact that Zimmerman was clearly heard
using racial slurs (the 'N' word) on the 911 tapes. [Since all the incorrect
things Richard said were corrected by the facts Jill just laid out, this is the
spot where this discussion should have ended. But facts never stop Conservatives. Especially ones with an agenda to protect the guy with the gun.]
Peter
I agree that playing it as a "race issue" is
wrong. The problem lies in the fact that a life was taken by another person
without first identifying that there was a PROBLEM to begin with... First off,
Zimmerman really had NO authority... and as far as I can see, was LOOKING for
trouble, and if you look for trouble, eventually you will find it. It doesn't matter
if Trayvon was wearing a hoodie or not; he could have been walking down the
street with a baseball bat, or a Sawzall for that matter, and it would not mean
that he was looking for trouble. I fully support the gun law as a right to self
preservation, but was his life REALLY in jeopardy by a teenager who was packing
nothing more than Skittles and a drink? It is not about race; it is about
aggression... and it appears that Zimmerman was the aggressor... and if he took
a knock to the head and a punch to the nose, that seems more like Trayvon was
the one defending himself, not the other way around. You just don't go around
shooting people because they look suspicious. Zimmerman was the aggressor in
this case... and should be dealt with accordingly. [Sorry, Peter. Using even
more facts and common sense still won’t stop them.]
Mike
Most of the uproar (whether justified or not, I'm not taking
a stance) isn't that a white man killed a black man; it's outrage that a man
was shot, and the shooter hasn't been arrested or charged with anything. [Bingo!]
Those that are trying to make it solely a
racial issue are the usual idiots that I don't devote any attention to, because
they aren't worth it. [Only the right-wing is claiming the left-wing
is trying to make it solely a racial issue – which actually makes it the
right-wing that keeps trying to make it solely a racial issue. Funny how it
works out, huh?]
I don't have all the info on what happened that night (and
neither do the media outlets that are hyping this up right along with the
public), so I'm not going to say that there should or should not be a criminal
charge; we've been given just enough information to elicit a strong emotional
response, and to make us pay attention – for ratings btw.
Richard
Was he "the aggressor" simply because he was armed
and was the one that survived? [No. He was “the aggressor” because he was
aggressive. Not because he had a gun and lived. When you’re minding your own
business and someone attacks you, the attacker is the attacker, regardless of
weaponry and survival status. Dipshit.]
And Trayvon wasn't African American. He was black. Unless he
was born in Africa and came here to become a citizen, the term doesn't fit. [I
am extremely upset that I agree with his assessment on the ‘African American’
title. I believe it of any person born and raised in America that has had
nothing to do with the country origin of their ethnicity. It is a labeling
system that further divides America. We are Americans. However, it has
absolutely nothing to do with this case. Richard brought it up because he has
no real point and just needs to muddy the waters. Some sort of tactic, I
guess.]
And yes, Mike, this is more media hype than anything else.
That's why "unarmed black man" is used in every sentence, to invoke
an emotional response, outrage, and add the racial angle. [It might also
have something to do with an unarmed kid. But you added ‘black’ and changed
‘kid’ into ‘man’ for your own biased purpose.]
Mike
Hey, CNN reports that 75% of Americans want this guy
arrested!
That should mean something, right?? [Like what? That 75%
of Americans aren’t idiots?]
Peter
Richard, in the community I live in, in Florida, we have a
guy that appointed himself neighborhood watchman. Nobody asked him to fulfill
this service, and the neighborhood is relatively quiet and mostly seniors. Now
I do not fit the clean-cut white collar suit and tie look, or the over 65
persona, and every time I step outside, he is watching me (and others in the
neighborhood). I have caught him looking into my garage several times. I have
seen him peeking into my windows and doors when I have them open. He is a
lonely, nosy person and wants to be in the middle of everyone's business. It is
none of his business what I do or when I do it, but he tries to make it so. Now
I really don't care if he watches me as long as he does not escalate the
situation into trespassing. Nevertheless, he does this daily. Zimmerman crossed
a line. If the wants to be the neighborhood watch, then so be it... but the
term is WATCHman. It is not his responsibility to approach person of interest,
confront the person of interest, or get into a conversation with the person of
interest. If the person of interest is truly "up to no good" it is
not his problem, period, unless it DIRECTLY affects his life, his property, or
the lives of others. Other people's property is not HIS business. Watch; call
the police; and take notes. That's it.
Mike, thousands called for a Crucifixion... and yet that
does not make it right either. Something stinks about the whole thing... and it
needs to be addressed. The problem is not in the law or in the gun; the problem
is in the shooter. [But it is also with the ‘stand your ground’ law that
protects murders who only need to claim self-defense to get off a murder rap if
there are no witnesses.] He stuck his nose
where it didn't belong, then put his foot into the situation, then threw
himself down the barrel with the bullet. It wasn't his call. And Richard, what
makes him the aggressor is that he was armed and that he FIRED. Even if Trayvon
threw a punch first, and I am not saying that he DID, that does not justify
killing. There are ALWAYS other options. Shooting is a last resort and is best
left that way... because the by-product is permanent.
Tia
And the shooter did call 911 and they told him they don't
need him to follow the kid! If he had followed instructions, no one would've
gotten hurt.
I think race became an issue because of the comments
Zimmerman was heard saying on the phone. [“Fucking coons” and “they always
get away with it” do kind of point to some sort of prejudice, don’t they?] I read somewhere that Z had called police on 46
other occasions, so maybe he does this to all kids with hoodies or anyone he
deems suspicious. To me, Z was just looking for trouble -- he got out of his
car and followed the kid. I think he was just itching to use that gun.
Peter
That's the problem with being a "self appointed
watchman"... you are ALWAYS looking for trouble.
Tia
As for black vs. African American, I think that's up to each
individual to decide how they'd like to be referred to. Just like people
w/autism, for ex., some say "I'm autistic" and some say, "Don't
say I'm autistic, I have autism." No one means any offense, but we can't
know what everyone's preference is.
Peter
And yet, you don't HAVE to look for trouble... trouble
naturally occurs. The thing is to be READY when trouble strikes, not when you
think trouble is ABOUT to strike... only when it strikes. And THEN- how you
respond to it makes all the difference. Are you a contributor to trouble, or a
contributor to healing? Do you bring positive or negative solutions to the
trouble? Are you truly helping, or just muddying the water and exacerbating the
issue?
Tia, I like that. It is like saying "I am not gay, I
have a sexual preference toward (fill in the preference of your
choice)"... ;)P
Though technically what Richard said DOES allude to dual citizenship,
it is topic for another discussion and should be left out of this context.
Richard
The 911 operator told him he didn't need to follow the guy.
But it isn't against the law to follow and keep an eye on him. The fact remains
that Trayvon still attacked him. The media is hyping race, and also look at the
articles. They are using a picture of Trayvon that is a few years old, trying
to depict him as some "little tike"... Now they are all referring to
Zimmerman as "a white Hispanic"... Why? Again, to make it more of a
"black and white thing"...
Last, the New Black Panthers have put out a $10,000 bounty
on Zimmerman and are trying to raise 1 million dollars and an army of 5,000
black men to hunt him down, saying on record, "he should be concerned for
his life"... [The New Black Panthers consist of four guys who are a few
cards short of a full deck. They have no relation to the Black Panthers, who
denounce them. Only FOX “News” has been playing them up since their appearance
during the 2008 election.]
Meanwhile, in the month since this shooting, there have been
a couple hundred black men killed by other black men, dozens of white people
killed by black men, thousands more assaulted, etc... [Not relevant to this
case.]
But by all means, let's focus everything on the one black
kid that was killed by a HISPANIC man, and try to create a racial issue,
protests, and when the investigation concludes and they don't get the verdict
that they want, the ensuing riots... [Richard assumes Zimmerman is innocent.
Well, demands he’s innocent.]
Peter
Richard, looking beyond the media bias toward
"coloring" the truth, the "fact" is still sketchy. If you
thought I was a suspicious character based on my manner of dress, and if you
followed me long enough, I may feel that your intention is life-threatening to
me, in which by Florida law, I would have the right to shoot you down if I felt
my life was in danger. Hell, the kid was a teenager being followed by an adult
male. At the very least, an adult following a teenager can be construed as
harassment and stalking. If Trayvon threw the first punch out of the
"fact" that Zimmerman was following him, thereby creating a
threatening atmosphere, it was Trayvon's very right by Florida law to protect
himself. THAT is what matters here. WHO is responsible for WHAT action. What
the Black Panthers do or do NOT do at this point is their business, and
ultimately THEIR funeral. As for all the other people that have died since
then, that is of no concern in THIS case. As for the COLOR of their skin and
their ethnicities, we KNOW the media hypes things... since neither of us work
FOR the media, I prefer that this post be about the issue of what is considered
self defense and whether his argument fits into that description under Florida
law, and not about the pigment of a man's skin. [Well said.]
Richard’s Brother
I would point out that there isn't any evidence at all that
Trayvon attacked Zimmermann. None. And it should be impossible to conclude
that, considering that Zimmermann was safely tucked away in his vehicle, out of
harm's way. Zimmermann exited his vehicle and initiated a confrontation with
the victim. The outcome of the situation (in this case, the death of a teen
armed with skittles and iced tea) is solely the responsibility of Zimmermann,
who chose to create and escalate a situation that didn't exist (while he was
tucked away, safely in his vehicle). This case has garnered interest not
because we only care about crime when the victim's skin is darker, but because
this was so clearly senseless and unnecessary. This wasn't a gang banger
getting gunned down by a rival drug gang. This wasn't an innocent white man
gunned down by gang bangers robbing a 7-Eleven. This was an asshole with a gun
that provoked a situation with an innocent teenager to the point that he shot
him and killed him. [Also well said.]
Bobby
I gotta agree with Richard-on the list of unjustices in the
Country, this is not top ten for the week-just the only one that fits into a
political playbook. Living in Chicago the violence I know of against young
black men should be protested daily but it never fits into a convenient
political agenda. [What political playbook? I’m pretty sure Richard’s
Brother clearly pointed out what the actual problem is and not the imaginary
liberal agenda you’ve invented.] You are
kidding yourself if you think the goal of the outrage is to improve the safety
of brown and black people. When you realize how important it is to many
people's careers to keep minorities as victims the clearer it all gets. [Whose
careers and in what way are they keeping minorities victims? Details, not
baseless innuendo.]
Richard’s Brother
Bobby...maybe it's ok to care about this crime, in addition
to other crimes? Maybe I don't need to personally care about every single crime
committed in the country each day to care about one of them? And maybe it's ok
to care about this one without a political agenda - and without the presumption
that a political agenda is the only reason to care?
It wasn't a politician's career that made this minority a
victim. It was the actions of Zimmerman that made this minority a victim.
Peter
All it takes is one to affect a change...
Bobby
First of all Richard’s Brother, thank you for not pointing
out my use of the near non-term "unjustice." Secondly, this is an
interesting case legally and certainly fine to care about on a personal level.
When a case colored with grey facts and legal reasoning completely overshadows
the senseless slaughter on a day to day basis of the next generation of young
black men, it seems also okay for me to question the intentions of all of those
who pop up out of nowhere who are suddenly upset about violence against black
kids. Just wondering where everyone was the day before he was killed. We've had
30+ murders in Chicago this month alone-and it's not over yet...and not even
summer! 1.) When do the Black Panthers plan on marching here? 2.) When does the
President (who lives here) plan on making a speech about the dead black
children here? I'm gonna guess....1.) Never 2.) Only if it can get him some
votes! [This illogical premise supposes that any time something happens,
either 1.) Protests must always happen for every single event ever. 2.) No
protests can ever happen ever if a previous protest wasn’t held every single
previous time. I’m gonna guess this premise is… 1.) Not possible or practical.
2.) Stupid.]
Bill Mancuso
Richard's right. It is a "fact" that Treyvon
attacked Zimmerman. Thanks for pointing out the obvious truth that yet again
only you can show us. Walking back to his dad's home from 7-11 and heavily
armed with iced tea and Skittles and talking to his girlfriend on his cell
phone, he suddenly felt the need to attack a man who was not stalking him but
simply sitting in his car and minding his own business. A man who was not just
told NOT to go after Treyvon by a 911 operator and did anyway. A man who didn't
say on tape that 'fucking coons always get away with it.' A mentally stable man
who did not call the police over 45 times in the last year with little cause. A
man who didn't take it upon himself to be the neighborhood watchman. A man who
didn't carry a gun and drive around looking for trouble and instigate the
situation. A man who doesn't have a police-documented history of stalking
people for what HE decides looks suspicious. A man who is not a failed,
frustrated wannabe cop. A man who doesn't have a police record for battery of a
law enforcement officer and obstructing justice. A man who was not previously
involved in a domestic dispute with his ex-fiance after stalking her
neighborhood and refused to leave her house, resulting in a physical
altercation and ultimately, a restraining order against him. A man who didn't
decide that the extremely common occurrence of a kid walking on the sidewalk
where he was supposed to be walking looked suspicious for no other reason than
he saw him walking on the sidewalk. A man who, regardless of all media hype,
was certainly not found standing over a dead, unarmed body and actually sent
home with the murder weapon and never even arrested as would be standard police
procedure, over a month later.
And this incident did not occur in a police precinct with
documented previous racist actions. And the officers certainly did not tell any
of the ear witnesses that it was not the boy they heard screaming for help as
they all claimed, but the man with the gun who weighs 100 lbs more than the boy
- because the police who were not there actually know what the witnesses really
heard. And the police didn't lie that Zimmerman's record was "squeaky
clean." And it wasn't a narcotics officer, instead of a homicide
detective, who didn't let Zimmerman tell him his story, but instead asked him
leading questions to get the conclusion to the incident he was looking for,
that the dead, unarmed, black kid was the attacker.
And this incident was obviously drummed up by Al Sharpton
for some political motive that I can't quite discern, because it has nothing to
do with straight-up justice for a victim.
No, but it is an undisputed "fact" that Treyvon
Martin, the child whose entire record includes suspension for having a bag that
may have contained marijuana, which has
nothing to do with anything, attacked George Zimmerman.
Wait, what does 'fact' mean, again?
Richard’s Brother
The thing is, Bobby, I don't think that cases like this are
overshadowing anything. I think that tends to be a crutch defense that people
use when they have a reason to try and minimize the importance or impact of
something.
Me caring about this case (for the reasons mentioned),
doesn't mean that I don't care about the 30 murders (and counting) this month.
This is a large country of 320+ million people. Not every crime committed can be
elevated to a national story. In much the same way that not every three year
old murdered by her mother is a national story, but Casey Anthony was. [Fair
comparison.]
Certain stories have resonance because they violate one or
more normal expectations that we share. Its not that I don't care about 30
people being murdered in Chicago, it's that I expect about 30 people to be
murdered in Chicago. I'm desensitized to it because it has become my expected
norm.
The human mind is conditioned through long years of
evolution to pay more attention to the violations of our expectations.
Religious leaders in first century Judea were a dime a dozen. Ones that turned
water into wine, and rose from the dead? That one will get talked about at the
water cooler.
It's what we are as a species. It's not about someone's
political career. It's about the way that most individuals react to a teen
getting gunned down by some over zealous a-hole.
I understand that for some, this doesn't rise to the
non-political national importance of defending Rush Limbaugh or calling a
private citizen a whore for something that she never even said. I get that I
should clearly care and have more outrage over that. [He just took a shot at
Richard and Bobby. The drug-addict, Rush called Sandra Fluke a slut and a
prostitute for three days straight for fighting for women's health care. As a result
of his enthusiastic misogyny, almost all of his sponsors fled. Richard and
Bobby were very mad at ‘the liberal mainstream media.’ Somehow, it wasn’t
Rush’s fault for his being an unmitigated fucking asshole, it was ‘the liberal
mainstream media’s’ fault.]
Unfortunately, I don't. I'm left caring more about this kid
and the jack-hole that shot him without cause or reason.
Richard
What we have, and we barely have that as the investigation
is not yet concluded and so none of us really know exactly what happened, is
perhaps an overzealous neighborhood watchman [“The self-appointed
neighborhood watch commander, he wanted to protect his neighborhood – he just
got a little overzealous.” – Rush Limbaugh …I wonder just how many unarmed
innocent people have to be murdered by someone before Rush considers it
‘regular’ overzealous instead of just ‘a little’ overzealous.] who got into a tussle with a 17 year old(whom I read
was recently suspended for 10 days for beating up a bus driver), and it
escalated and Trayvon ended up getting shot. [You read wrong.]
So far, that is all that we know, that the neighborhood
watch man, who is himself a minority, made a bad judgement call. Can we all
agree on that? [No. Murdering someone for no reason is not ever to be
considered “a bad judgment call.”]
That said, it is now one of the top news stories, grabbing
national attention, activist groups are mobilizing, bounties being offered,
armies being raised, and the President himself had to make a comment in a press
conference about it.
Why?
Why is the media calling Zimmerman "white"? [Why
are you calling him a minority?] Why are
the pictures of Trayvon from when he was 12 or 13? Why is color in every
headline? Why are people marching? [Might have something to do with
the ‘minority’ calling Trayvon a fucking coon and stalking and murdering him
for no reason and never being arrested.]
That's what I am talking about. Not about some knucklehead not
using his head and making a bad choice that ended with a life lost. [Again,
the words ‘knucklehead,’ ‘bad choice’ and ‘life lost’ will not be used to soften
a case of ‘senseless murder.’ No matter how much you try.]
The issue for me is how the media is handling this,
deliberately skewing the news and trying to CREATE a racial issue, [You
don’t have to create an issue if it actually exists.] going so far as to call the hispanic man a
"white hispanic" [A term always used for white Hispanics.] in an effort to get people all whipped up, and the
end result will be violence and more lives lost... [Well, that might
be jumping to a wild conclusion based on nothing.] The media is being horrendously irresponsible IMHO, bordering on
criminal [According to people defending the gun-wielding murderer.]. If it is illegal to yell fire in a crowded movie
theater because it could cause a panic and get people hurt, why would it be ok
for the media to lie and create a story that may ultimately create riots,
looting and other violence over an issue or situation that they fabricated for
ratings and to advance a political agenda? [Well, Mr. Pointless
Analogy, maybe because nothing you just said is even remotely true.]
Why would I get time in jail for yelling fire, and they get
rewarded financially for doing the same thing but on a much larger scale??? [Yelling
fire when there is none, which results in injuries is slightly different
than stalking and murdering someone for no reason and it being reported in the
media.]
Richard’s Brother
I have a different list of what we know:
1) The victim wasn't doing anything, and was minding his own
business.
2) George Zimmerman was not in any danger, tucked safely
away in his vehicle.
3) The 911 operator advised George Zimmerman to stay in his
vehicle and not pursue the teenager that hadn't done anything wrong.
4) George Zimmerman exited his vehicle to initiate a
confrontation with the victim.
5) As a result of that confrontation, George Zimmerman shot
and killed the victim.
6) The local police department didn't initiate an
investigation, until the story became a national news story.
That's what we know. What the victim was suspended for is
irrelevant. It has no bearing on the situation, since the victim didn't drag
Zimmerman from his vehicle and attack him. Because of what we know - this story
has received national news attention. Because we should all be more outraged
over this than you were over Rush Limbaugh losing some sponsors, no?
Bill Mancuso
7) The police didn't arrest the shooter, and then sent the
shooter home with the murder weapon.
Richard
1) You don't know that, you guess that and you may or may
not be right but have to say it in order to take the opposing side to whatever
I say. [According to Zimmerman himself on the 911 tape, he saw Martin
walking and decided to go after him.]
2) He was, and he stepped out, so he did initiate contact. [Again, according to Zimmerman himself on the 911
tape, he saw Martin walking and decided to go after him. That is not Zimmerman
in trouble. It is Zimmerman CAUSING trouble.]
3) Yes, they did, and as was previously stated, an operator
is not an authority and it isn't against the law to ignore one. [Wow.
There’s Zimmerman’s defense. “Mr. Zimmerman, why did you pursue Mr. Martin
after being told not to?” “A 911 operator is not an authority and it isn't
against the law to ignore one.” “My apologies, Mr. Zimmerman. Your Honor, I’d
like to drop all charges. It is clear Mr. Zimmerman was in his right to stalk
and murder Mr. Martin for no reason since a 911 operator is not an authority.”]
4) Agreed [You see initiating conflict as being
innocent?]
5) As a result, yes, but you don't know what happened in
between. It's like the underpants gnomes from South Park. Step 1 is steal
underpants, step 3 is profit. But they forgot what step 2 was. [Whatthefuck?]
6) The incident happened a month ago, and there is an
investigation ongoing. [No, there wasn’t until the news went nationwide over
two weeks later.] He was not arrested
because it isn't illegal to follow someone. [Shooting someone results
in an arrest 100% of the time during normal circumstances. But that’s only
police procedure. Why follow it?] And the
evidence at the scene was that the Trayvon attacked him, and while he was on
the ground being beaten he then drew his weapon and shot. That was what one of
the witnesses said on the police report anyway. [There were no
witnesses. That’s how Zimmerman was able to claim self-defense after stalking
an unarmed kid and murdering him for no reason.] The cops at the scene assessed what happened and ruled it a self
defense shooting. The Grand Jury that commences next week will review the data
and determine a course of action. [There is no Grand Jury commencing
next week. Someone would have to be arrested for that to happen. No one was
arrested.] But everything at the scene said
that while he could have stayed in his car and all that, the facts were that
the guy did attack him and he did defend himself. [“But everything at
the scene said that… he could have stayed in his car,” would be a statement
that would convict Zimmerman in court. Were he ever to be arrested. And you
keep on using the word “facts.” I do not think it means what you think it
means.]
BTW, Rush didn't lose many sponsors and in fact other sponsors
tripled doubled and tripled their ad dollars to the show. [According to
Rush, the only source of this information that you listen to. But not according
to facts. And speaking of which, you really should stop using “fact” in your
sentences until you learn its definition.]
Once again, the same media at work, skewing things, creating scenarios that
don't exist, clouding the issue to advance their own ratings and political
agenda. [Oh, boy. Project much?]
That's why they are using 5-7 year old pictures, that is why
they are using race, etc... The same people lying and fabricating things here,
are the same clowns that fed you BS about "rush's situation". [I
agree. That clown, Rush IS lying to you.]
And they do so, because you and your ilk eat it up without question.
[Do you and your ilk eat Rush’s shit without question?]
This wasn't a race issue. It was a shooting that perhaps
could have been avoided. Nothing more, nothing less. I admitted that the guy
probably used poor judgement. [Calling black people “fucking coons” does not
equal a race issue and murder is poor judgment. I’m learning a lot today.]
It doesn't justify the media doctoring pictures [Nobody
has doctored photos.], calling a hispanic
man white to try to create a racial issue [Some White Hispanics: Rita
Hayworth, Martin Sheen, Raquel Welch, Andy Garcia, Salma Hayek, Christy
Turlington, Ricky Martin, Cameron Diaz, Christina Aguilera], it doesn't explain racial marches [Yeah,
“Fucking coons” kinda does.], the Black
Panthers [The New Black Panthers – not affiliated with the Black
Panthers.] raising an army [Four
guys.] and offering a bounty to hunt him
down and kill him [They don’t have any money], etc... [Etc? Stamping an 'etc' on the end of all your fabricated lists sure does convince me there are a lot more things than you listed.]
You are not dispelling or disproving my "outrage",
you are exemplifying it by not being astute enough to see that you are part of
the problem. [I know you are, but what am I?]
Bill Mancuso
What exactly was Zimmerman in danger of before he initiated
the confrontation with Martin? The 'sharpened' Skittles, the '9mm' iced tea,
the 'explosive' hoodie, the 'threatening' manner in which Martin was walking
home from 7-11 or how he was 'intimidatingly' minding his own business while
talking to his girlfriend on the phone?
In light of the base facts presented so far (not the
delusional ones distorted by Richard, but the actual ones), it seems Martin was
the one 'standing his ground' when confronted by a strange man with a gun who
was stalking him.
Richard’s Brother
1) We do know that. I am saying it because it is what we
know. When I say things that disagree with or contradict you, it's not because
of my need to oppose you. It's because you have an alarming tendency to say
things that aren't true. And I have a debilitating need to point it out when
you do. [I know that feeling.]
2) Hooray!
3) No one is demanding that he be arrested for ignoring a
non-binding suggestion from the 911 operator. I am pointing out that at no
point was Zimmerman in any danger, and further, he was specifically given
correct instructions on how to continue to avoid being in any danger.
4) Hooray!
5) What happened between "Zimmerman initiated a
confrontation" and "The confrontation ended violently with Zimmerman
shooting the victim" doesn't matter. As Bill points out, once Zimmerman
left his vehicle to initiate the confrontation, it seems to me that FL's
"Stand Your Ground" law should be applied to the victim, and not
Zimmerman. I would think that you'd jump at the chance to use this as an
example for why everyone should be armed. Maybe if the victim was armed, he
could have stood his ground more successfully?
6) The incident happened a month ago, and there was no
investigation at all until the public outcry over the lack of any
investigation.
I am astounded that you are such an expert on what the
evidence at the scene were, and what all the facts are - given that your only
exposure to the evidence and facts is filtered through the same media that is
somehow simultaneously informing you personally, but misleading everyone else. [I
love this analysis.]
I would love to have access to the pure stream of
information that you have access to that is provided without any bias
whatsoever. Do they call you directly to provide all of the unfiltered facts?
Do they fax you the police reports that they are withholding from everyone
else? Is this available online somewhere? Do I need a password? The
"clowns" that fed me BS about "rush's situation" was the
Congressional Record of what the woman actually said during her testimony and
the handbook that Georgetown provides all of its students that covers their
health insurance policy. I'm not sure what you have that is more pure than
that, but if you can help us enlighten ourselves by getting access to your
information sources, I'm sure we'd all be better off for it. [Yes. I love
this analysis.]
Richard
Bill and my brother, no matter how much you try to make this
about the shooting itself, it won't work. This is not nor has it ever been
about whether Zimmerman should have gotten out of the car. [Yep, it is.]
So stop trying to reduce it all down to that. [(Stop
trying to reduce it to what it’s about. I want it to be about liberal media
bias.)]
It is and always has been about how the media is covering
it, skewing it, and trying to make this a race issue when it clearly wasn't. [Clearly.] Maybe after this powder keg blows up and we have a
few more Reginald Denny's on our hands, maybe then you and others will wake up
and see this for what it is. A blatant attempt to create a race issue and rile
people up when race was never a part of it. [It’s difficult to
comment on his every stupid declaration. It’s almost all of them and I’m not
clever enough to keep inventing new smart-ass things to say.]
It's a shooting that the cops said was self defense [No.
The NRA-backed ‘stand your ground’ law forced the police to let him go because
the only witness was dead, so they only had Zimmerman’s word about what
happened.], that probably involved a poor
decision on the part of Zimmerman. [Murder is not a poor decision.]
And yet, it is now international news, everyone is up in
arms, bounties being raised, search parties, marches, etc...
Stop the insanity, and stop falling prey to it. [Picture
me making a fart noise.]
Richard’s Brother
Shouldn't we ALL be trying to make this about the shooting
itself? I understand why you don't want it to be about that, but isn't that
what this SHOULD be about? This is entirely about whether Zimmerman should have
gotten out of the car. Because if he didn't, there would have been no incident
that the media would have to allegedly distort for whatever nefarious purpose
you feel they are about. You are the one getting lost in the weeds. Not me. But
still - if you can please provide the source of your complete and unbiased
knowledge on all topics, I would love to have access to it as well. It really
could save us a lot of time in the future.
Bill Mancuso
So, Richard, are you saying the media killed Martin? Because
this is 100% about Zimmerman getting out of his car and stalking and murdering
an unarmed person for no apparent reason. A reason that no one, even you,
Richard, has been able to express. What exactly did he stalk Martin for?
Wait. I think I figured it out. Richard is unquestioningly
defending the guy with the gun. Because he had a gun. Because guys with guns
are always right. Because guns. And also guns. Guns guns guns. Constitution
rights freedom guns.
Richard
No, I don't care about it, not at this level. [As in
every case in the past, Richard expresses his disdain toward caring about
reasons for events when they completely contradict his opinion.] We have shootings every day. I am questioning why
THIS one is so important, and why the media is so desperate to pump this up,
even going so far as calling the hispanic man, white. [Why are you
insisting this White Hispanic is only White? To support your fact-free theory? It doesn't matter what color the murderer is to me.]
And Bill, give it a rest. If it was murder, the cops would
have arrested the hispanic and this never would have even made the news. It
isn't like murders in Miami are rare, you know? [They never arrested the
shooter, as is common police procedure. No investigation was launched until the
media shined a big, bright light on it. THAT might be why THIS one is so
important.]
I am talking about the media and how they are handling this,
and try as you might, you simply cannot argue that so you have to keep trying
to get it back to why he got out of the car. Not gonna play that game. If you
want to discuss that topic, start your own thread. [Not gonna play the game
where facts contradict your wishes, so you will invent alternate realities and
present them as fact? OK. I’m used to you doing that.]
Bill Mancuso
You don't care about the actual point of this case? Yes, of
course we have to keep trying to get it back to the actual point and off the
meaningless one you invented to try and support your nonsensical view.
And Richard’s Brother already explained clearly why this one
in particular has been deemed important. But you ignored that and keep spewing
nonsense.
And of all of us in this thread, Richard, YOU seem to be the
one talking about race all the time. We keep talking about the simple fact of
someone murdering a defenseless person for no reason and the only action that
has been taken is the dead kid was drug tested - not the murderer who got to
keep his gun and go home. YOU keep pumping up the race angle.
Why did Zimmerman stalk and murder Martin? And yes, when you
shoot your gun into someone for no reason and they die, that is murder.
Richard
Shootings happen every day. Like the Mississippi State
student that was just shot multiple times and murdered in his dorm room by 3
black men. Didn't hear about that one? Why would you? It has black men as the
killers, and there is no way to play the race card, advance a political agenda,
milk it for ratings, etc... [The other murders are irrelevant to this case.
And anything that ever gets on the news is for ratings. Has been since the 60’s
when the News and Entertainment divisions in TV broadcasting merged. So, that’s
an irrelevant point as well. However, no one seems to be able to tell me what
is the political advantage to defending a murder victim.]
To the Left, and the majority of the media, racism is a one
way street. Only whites can be racist. [No. Right-wing media tells you what
left-wing media says. And since you never watch left-wing media, you only know
what lies Rush tells you.] Black on black
crime, black on white crime, white on white crime... none of that gets ratings.
[Except for all the times it’s in the news that you are ignoring just
to perpetuate your bullshit.] None of that
can be exploited. [Except for all the times it is.] None of that can get protests going, talk show guest
appearances, contributions, etc... [Except when it does.]
So the media only focuses on the white on black crime, [In
your deluded mind. O.J. Simpson.] even
though that is the MINORITY of the crimes committed. And even if the one side
isn't white, they will call the hispanic person white just so that it fits the
template. [Or because that’s what he is.]
This isn't about a questionable shooting, it never has been.
[Yes it is. And that the shooter was never arrested.] It's about how the media is trying to twist it into
something that it isn't, when there are DEFINITE racial issues, or
UNQUESTIONABLE murders going on that are swept under the rug and ignored
because they cannot make ratings from them or advance an agenda. [Bla
bla bla. The same thing over and over.]
Yeah, maybe the guy should have stayed in his car. [Maybe?] So what? That justifies international media
attention? That justifies bounties, armies of thugs looking for him, protests,
marches, etc? [Shooting someone and never getting arrested qualifies
for a protest or two. It is not about race. Right-wing media is massively
playing up the “Liberal media is making it about race!” angle when they aren’t.
But you wouldn’t know that. Liberal media wants an arrest and an
investigation.]
please... The media is taking a story that would normally be
buried on page 7, and creating a racial issue where none exists. [What I
just said.]
And no Bill, it isn't murder.
Under your definition, if a woman is being beaten and raped
and she kills her attacker then she is guilty of murder... But I guess that in
your world, she probably is a murderer... [That would not be my definition.
But I do so love your completely off the mark analogies.]
Richard’s Brother
Can I ask why you are so insistent on calling him Hispanic?
That isn't any more accurate than calling him "white". His father is white,
and his mother is Hispanic. Maybe in your eyes, that's enough to consider him
"Hispanic", but it's not very accurate. Also, under Bill's
definition, if I start a fight with someone, get my ass kicked, and then shoot
him, at the very least it doesn't qualify as self-defense. Because I started
the fight. Lastly, maybe I missed it in your post, but I am still waiting for
you to enlighten us to your source of all pure facts without bias or deceit. I
think you're dodging the question because you have ulterior motives for
selecting only certain parts of the story to care about that fulfill your
desire to make this not racial - despite his call to 911 sort-of contradicting
the notion that this wasn't racially motivated, at least in part. [Like the
part where Zimmerman called Martin a ‘fucking coon’?]
Richard
I guess for the same reason that we call Obama a black
President? Isn't he half white?
But if we called him white, than we wouldn't be able to play
the race card whenever people disagree with him. I forgot myself, I forgot the
double standard... My bad. [No one plays the race card for simply
disagreeing with him. It’s when Republicans disagree with their own proposals
that Obama likes and when Republicans hold up ‘Nigger’ signs and ‘Homie, go
back to Kenya’ signs and Photoshopped African Witch Doctor pictures of Obama –
that’s when Republicans are being racist. Then, when Democrats point out that
blatant racism, Republicans claim the ‘race card’ is being played. Because to
Republicans, exposing their racism is only asshole Democrats playing the race
card. And that's the actual double standard. Like the current Republican war
on women. All the anti-woman laws Republicans are passing are not the issue to
them. It’s that the asshole Democrats are pointing it out. Because Republicans
are double standard kings.]
As to the rest, let the grand jury do its job. If they
decide that he instigated it, he will be arrested and charged. [When was
Zimmerman arrested for this grand jury to take place? I must have missed it.]
But the race card and the media circus has no place in this,
IMHO. [Then stop bringing up the race issue.]
Bill Mancuso
No, Richard, only people on the right claim people on the
left think racism is a one-way street that applies only to whites. See, that
lie makes you feel justified in lying all the time. Who started spouting
"reverse racism?" The right did. There is no such thing as reverse
racism - that implies only white people can be racist. Anyone who hates anyone
because of their race is a racist.
Anyway, this is about a man murdering an unarmed person for
no reason. Not for some racist thing YOU keep bringing up.
I forgot to mention that "reverse racism" actually
means "not racist."
Richard’s Brother
I would love to let the grand jury do its job. There was no
grand jury until this story got blown up though. Which was sort of the whole
point. I don't understand how you can on the one hand whine and complain about
the race card being played - and in the same breath whine that we are trying to
reduce this to something that has nothing to do with race.
I'd have to go back and check, but as far as I know, I
didn't mention race once in this thread (or anywhere on the intertubes). Peter
and the ABC blurb didn't mention race. It mentioned a 17-year old Florida high
school student, and it mentioned the name of the guy that shot and killed him.
Maybe it went into further detail if you clicked the link, but I didn't. But
neither Peter nor the blurb were sensationally setting this up as the racial
war you are accusing them of.
You started whining about race immediately. In fact, now
that I read your first post again, I thought it worth looking at. You are
bitching and moaning like a baby about media bias - meanwhile, let's all see
how Richard presented it:
"If the man who attacked the neighborhood watch,
Trayvon, had been white, would we even be talking about this?"
A) Trayvon isn't a man. He's a 17-year old kid. Why did you
attempt to portray him as a man?
B) Who attacked who isn't a fact in this case, yet. The only
eyewitness to the start of the altercation is the guy that shot and killed the
other guy.
C) George Zimmerman isn't a member of any neighborhood
watch. I assume that you are referring to him this way in order to lend more of
an air of credibility to Zimmerman. Why?
Everyone here has either ignored the racism angle (aside
from noting the evidence in his initial 911 call that suggests it might have
been partially an element in either his profiling, or in his insistence on
following him and confronting him), or agreed with you that it shouldn't have
been played. OF COURSE the new Black Panther Party is wrong to put out a
bounty. OF COURSE it would be wrong to riot and pillage over it. OF COURSE Al
Sharpton is being an ass about this. All of those things being wrong doesn't
have anything to do with this case though. [True.]
You've since relayed that you read that he was suspended for
10 days for beating up a bus driver. The police leaked the information
(illegally) that he was suspended for 10 days because the school caught him
with a baggy with trace amounts of weed in it, and they have a zero tolerance
policy. Why did the police leak that? Why did you bother to talk about what he
was suspended for? [And why was Richard’s infallible source of information
wrong about what he was suspended for?]
Richard
Because he wasn't the adorable little innocent 12 year old
kid that the pictures in all the news stories that were trying to depict him as
some "helpless little tike that was murdered for eating skittles"....
All of the news accounts have reported that Zimmerman was
the head of the neighborhood watch. [Self-appointed. You forgot
‘self-appointed’.]
And the Black Panthers, Sharpton and all the things that you
claim are crazy and wrong, are part of it because of how the media is
portraying this. Why can't you understand that the media has taken one issue, a
man perhaps using poor judgement and confronting someone, which then escalates
and he has to defend himself and shoots the guy, and created an entirely
different monster out of it? [‘Confronting’ and ‘instigating’ are not under
any circumstance ‘defending.’ And ‘murder’ will never simply be considered
‘poor judgment.’]
Is admitting that I am right so hard for you? Is it more
important to "try and prove Richard wrong on the internets" really
worth setting aside common sense and your own credibility on things?
The shooting was in part caused by Zimmerman, the head of
the neighborhood watch program, following and confronting him. Nobody, myself
included, has denied that or said that he is without blame.
That is not nor has it ever been in debate or the argument.
I am talking about how it is being handled, mis-represented
intentionally, and used for ratings and all sorts of other nonsense that has no
relevance here. But by all means, continue trying to win an argument that
nobody has made and that everyone agreed with you on in post #1. LOL
Bill Mancuso
The shooting was in part caused by Zimmerman in that it was completely caused by Zimmerman when he stalked and murdered an
unarmed person for no reason. Zimmerman, the self-appointed head of his own neighborhood watch not affiliated
with the real Neighborhood Watch Program.
The only ones intentionally misrepresenting this case are
the police department that did nothing until the media got a hold of the story
and are now scrambling to cover their asses by leaking confidential, false and
irrelevant information to smear the dead victim's name and Zimmerman's lawyer
who has so far changed the story four times.
And so far as I can tell, the only ones trying pathetically
to benefit politically off this case are Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum by
attacking Obama. Other than those two, there's no political bent I can see.
Unless your secret source of unbiased information knows
something that nobody else does.
And the New Black Panthers are literally four guys that have
nothing to do with the actual Black Panthers, who disavow them.
And regardless of all this, the media didn't shoot and
murder an unarmed kid for no reason. Zimmerman did. And the media didn't sweep
the whole event under the rug for two weeks (hoping to forever). The police
department did.
Richard’s Brother
So, because he wasn't a cute 12 year old kid, your response
was to simply lie about him? You couldn't take the same angle that the ABC
blurb did, and call him a 17-year old high school student? Which would be...I
don't know...accurate?
Is the news that reported he was the head of the
neighborhood watch the same news that is lying to everyone about everything
else? That's the lone factoid you choose to believe?
It isn't hard for me to admit that you are right. If it ever
happens (you being correct about something), I'll be happy to point it out.
Richard
Bill, you are an ass, just stop posting. He didn't stalk him
and murder him for no reason, else he would have been arrested on the spot. [Except
for the facts?]
And Bill, what in your post in any way addresses the abysmal
way the media is handling this by trying to turn it into a race issue and
"mobilizing the troops"? [Only the right-wing media is turning it
into a race issue by continually demanding to its viewers that the left-wing
media is turning it into a race issue – which they are not. I know this because
I watch both. Unlike you.]
And Brother, can you explain why the media is covering it
from the angle that it is? If not, then STFU.
[I am an ass and Richard’s Brother should shut the fuck
up. Is this a man who is getting frustrated with repeating the same lies over and
over, to no avail?]
Bobby
It's sad that 30 black kids unambiguously murdered a month
doesn't bother you, but you can get really upset about a case where the facts
are unclear simply because it makes a good political angle for a media focused
on the goal of liberalism-keeping brown and black people in their place. One
thing I can say for all this outrage-it is either disingenuous or based upon
some extreme intellectual laziness. [This bullshit will be expanded upon and
dealt with in Part 2.]
Richard’s Brother
I'll get to that, right after you offer a better explanation
for why you outright lied about this kid, when the correct description of him
was less than an inch away from your eyeballs.
You didn't refer to this 17-year old kid as a man by
accident. I just want you to admit why you intentionally altered the facts.
I'd also like to know how you know that Trayvon attacked
Zimmerman. Since only two people were present, and one of them sort of has a
reason to lie about it (since he shot and killed the other witness). And I wouldn't
mind knowing how you know that he was suspended for 10 days for beating up his
bus driver.
I wouldn't know what the media is up to because I seem to be
able to avoid them. I'm not sure why you can't.
That's how I am able to stay focused on facts and details I
stead of just making shit up or intentionally lying about it like you are doing
above.
This is Peter's page so I will stop polluting it, but if you
seriously explain why you lied about him and referred to him a 17-year old kid
walking down the street with skittles and ice tea a man, I would appreciate it.
I know several 17-year-olds. None of them are men.
Bill Mancuso
This ass would like to know what Martin was stalked and
murdered for, then, Richard. You certainly have not provided an answer from
your secret source of infallible information and the Zimmerman team hasn't
either.
Since YOU keep pressing the 'race' aspect - here are the
facts all of which are on tape - It wasn't the media who called Martin a
"fucking coon" and expressed his dismay that "they always get
away with it." Never expressing just what it was that the "fucking
coon" was trying to get away with - other than being black - which was the
ONLY reason Zimmerman gave why a kid doing the 100% normal, everyday activity
that billions of people across the globe do every day - walking on a sidewalk -
was suspicious. Then stalked and murdered him. For no reason.
I'll stop posting when you stop completely making things up.
Everyone else is presenting simple, basic facts of the case. You are trying to
blame the media. And the Black Panther party. And Al Sharpton. And activist
groups. And an unarmed dead kid. And President Obama. And other cases not
relevant to this one. Everyone but the actual shooter. Who stalked and murdered
someone for no reason.
Bill Mancuso
My last post is a reply to the one starting with,
"Bill, you are an ass..." It seems more nonsense is being introduced
that Richard’s Brother is dealing with.
Liberals are keeping brown and black people in their place?
Richard
Yes, Liberals are, for the same reason that drug companies
would rather not cure cancer. If you develop a vaccine that you can give at
birth and it takes away the chance of getting cancer, you make some money now
and then that's it. There is far more money to be made in treating cancer than
in curing it.
And that applies here. Far more money and power to be had
from dealing in racism than in ending it.
Bill Mancuso
Specific examples, please.
And what exactly is the cure for racism that liberals are suppressing
in order to keep it alive so they make more money off of it? [He never answers. I was so curious to know the cure for racism.]
Oh, and good job completely ignoring the entirety of my last
post except the mention of liberals suppressing blacks.
Bobby
If you don't live or work in a poor black neighborhood, it
might be hard to see. The way to stop discrimination based on race is to stop
discriminating based on race! (not my quote...I think John Roberts). Most every
Democrat program to help the poor minorities results in more poor minorities
dependant on government. This results in more poor minorities dependant on
government. It can be viewed in 3 generations of adults living in public
housing, none of which have ever been employed. There are black neighborhoods
where the unemployment rate is well over 50%...not because they are all being
discriminated against...but because well meaning Democrats have elected people
promising to change things. It's just those elected never seem to be good
students of history or care about RESULTS. When the results are a society where
young black men are murdered liberals then find someone else to blame...like
claiming an epidemic of racism is killing black children in Florida. The Travon
case is terrible and sad. Even more sad is how likely you are to get murdered
if you are a young black man not due to the (possible) racism of a latino man
in a Florida subdivision, but of the laziness of millions of Democrat voters to
realize while they are patting each other on the back for being racially
sensitive, they are responsible for the greatest racial crime today. [Yeah.
Um. I’m not going to comment on this farkakte paragraph because it’s pretty
much the entirety of our Part 2 argument. Patience.]
Bobby’s Mom
Actually, LOVE. That is SO true. You said it so well. [A
paragraph only a mother could love.]
Bobby
Okay that's checkmate fellas...my Mom agrees with me. ;)
Richard’s Brother
Bobby, I didn't say it didn't bother me. [And so begins
the meme of explaining to Bobby that you didn’t say what he just claimed you
said. Happens a lot in Part 2.] I said that
its not national news because it has become normal. Which is in itself
something that bothers me. But what makes national news is what violates
expectations, not what meets them.
Richard - you understand that there is a reason why the NIH
researches a cure for cancer too, and that the company that develops the
vaccine will be richer than God, right?
Bobby - it's pretty easy to point out that the answer to
racism is !racism. And I assume it's equally easy to just blame it all on those
sneaky liberals, but you didn't actually answer the question. Prior to all of
this government intervention, this country wasn't exactly a utopia for
minorities. It kind of sucked.
So instead of blaming it all on liberals, and the instant
abolishment of all government social programs, what's the answer?
For my money, there's only one viable solution. All of the
racists have to finally die out, and be replaced by !racists.
Bobby
You are arguing with a straw man...I never blamed "all
liberals," nor did I argue for the abolishment of all government programs.
The liberals to blame are the ones who vote for politicians who impliment
racist policies. (ie replacing the black father with government) And who is
arguing for the abolishment of all social programs...not me. The government has
a moral obligation to take care of those in real need-just not what we have
now-which is social programs the effect of which are to keep minorities poor
and dependant on the Government forever. [Based on what?] What other racism do you think is responsible for
the state of minorities? The roaming bands of neighborhood watch people? The
point is this whole thing is about distracting from the real problem and trying
to resurect a mostly dead old demon while using a death as a political tool. [To
what gain?] Do not allow discrimination.
End government sponsorship of low expectations. It's offensive and racist no
matter what the good intentions of Democrats. [I can’t wait till you
read Part 2.]
Richard’s Brother
So we end government sponsorship of low expectations and
that's that? Racism solved? If not, what else is in your prescription?
Also, at least I appear to be in good company on this case.
On the night of the incident, the lead homicide investigator wanted to charge
Zimmerman with manslaughter, and subsequently filed an affidavit that he found
Zimmerman's account not compelling.
He appears to lack Richard's sources as well.
Bobby
The lead investigator by definition would make that
determination and (s)he would be the person I would trust most. [So, you trust that Zimmerman's account is crap, like the lead investigator does?] If he didn't
have the authority to place the charge I think that police department should
consider calling the position something other than lead homicide investigator.
[?] Your question about racism is problematic because you can not control the minds
of people-what you can and should do is stop supporting a political system with
racist results. [??] When millions of Americans admit that the policies are
destroying the black family, hope for black children, and all too often the
lives of black children - that would be a good start. [???] When thousands and
thousands more lives are at stake, where are Jacksons, Sharpton, and the many
people who are so polarized about this case? That's what people are upset about
who think the attention on this case is misplaced-hypocrisy. [I don’t know
if I understood any of that. Especially all of his own statements that he
contradicts in Part 2.]
Peter
So let me get this straight... the media only focuses on
white on black crime... oh, wait... and so does Richard...
LMFAO!!!! Richard and Richard’s Brother, the two of you
crack me up!!! It is amazing how polar opposite you both are...
TO BE CONTINUED…
As I’m sure you’ve figured out by now, this went on so
long that I needed to split it up. This seemed to be a natural point for the break
since Richard and his Brother don't post anymore. It’s pretty much just me and
Bobby McGee from here on in. Peter comments as well, but the head-to-head is
between me and Bobby. The topic makes a hard right turn away from the actual case
and how it’s presented in the media and heads toward how this is all the fault
of Liberals and their racist policies.
Yeah.
No comments:
Post a Comment