VTA

UDFA
Messages
2,668
Reaction score
594
It's a blatant deflection of the real debate.

~Sees protests in a racially charged case.~

"Oh but look... you're not protesting here. Therefore, your protest is invalid." Even though the compared case doesn't appear to have a racial component to it.

Maybe they should be protesting all of these murders. But even if they did, it wouldn't change the facts of the Zimmerman case.

It's really not. The real debate is who is gaining for perpetuating racism? This kid and the hundreds like him are no more or less dead than the one killed by a 'white hispanic'.

The real debate is why are people allowing themselves to be duped and taking sides? Don't they know when they do they only inflame the issue? It's one-upmanship and becomes a thing no longer predicated on indignation over a dead kid. There are many dead kids to choose from, which one brings the greatest gain in arguing over?

The unfortunate truth is when the Zimmerman thing became news, a great number of immediate response were predicated on the possible reactions due to race, instead of genuine sorrow for a dead kid. No one gives a crap about strange dead kids, they only care about purpose, no matter what form it comes in, just give them purpose. Fighting racism? Right on! Fighting religious ideologies? Perfect. A dead kid merely dead? Meh.
 

JBond

UDFA
Messages
2,667
Reaction score
2
Maybe they should be protesting all of these murders. But even if they did, it wouldn't change the facts of the Zimmerman case.

Which facts are you alluding to? Most of the quotes I have seen from protestors are completely ignorant and ignore the facts of the case.
 
Messages
8,660
Reaction score
0
It's really not. The real debate is who is gaining for perpetuating racism? This kid and the hundreds like him are no more or less dead than the one killed by a 'white hispanic'.

The real debate is why are people allowing themselves to be duped and taking sides? Don't they know when they do they only inflame the issue? It's one-upmanship and becomes a thing no longer predicated on indignation over a dead kid. There are many dead kids to choose from, which one brings the greatest gain in arguing over?

The unfortunate truth is when the Zimmerman thing became news, a great number of immediate response were predicated on the possible reactions due to race, instead of genuine sorrow for a dead kid. No one gives a crap about strange dead kids, they only care about purpose, no matter what form it comes in, just give them purpose. Fighting racism? Right on! Fighting religious ideologies? Perfect. A dead kid merely dead? Meh.
This is just you being cynical... Not everyone feels the way you project them to.
 

superpunk

Pro Bowler
Messages
11,003
Reaction score
0
It's a blatant deflection of the real debate.

~Sees protests in a racially charged case.~

"Oh but look... you're not protesting here. Therefore, your protest is invalid." Even though the compared case doesn't appear to have a racial component to it.

Maybe they should be protesting all of these murders. But even if they did, it wouldn't change the facts of the Zimmerman case.

Exactly. /logicalfallacythread
 
Messages
8,660
Reaction score
0
Which facts are you alluding to? Most of the quotes I have seen from protestors are completely ignorant and ignore the facts of the case.
I'm not hiding the ball by "alluding" to facts. I'm just speaking of the facts in a general sense. They don't change whether Darryl Green's death is protested or not. I also don't answer for "most of" the quotes you've "seen" from protestors.
 
Messages
8,660
Reaction score
0
Zimmerman only had a racial component after the media injected one.

Why would they do that?
I don't think so. I think the media reported the race angle. But a racial component was present when a white hispanic man spotted a black teenager in a gated community in Sanford, Florida.
 
Messages
46,859
Reaction score
5
Five Moments That May Have Led to George Zimmerman's Acquittal

By SENI TIENABESO and MATT GUTMAN

Only the six female jurors know for certain what testimony or evidence convinced them to acquit George Zimmerman of murder charges in the death of Trayvon Martin, but there were key moments in the trial that appeared to undermine the prosecution's case for conviction. Here are five of them.



Chris Serino was the lead investigator looking into the shooting of Martin and initially urged the Sanford, Fla., prosecutor to charge Zimmerman with manslaughter, a recommendation that was rejected.

Serino was called to the stand by the prosecution and was expected to be a key witness against Zimmerman. In his "just-the-facts" style of answering questions, Serino was repeatedly questioned by the prosecution and defense about Zimmerman's version of what happened that night. But in a surprise, the investigator was asked by Zimmerman's lawyer whether he believed Zimmerman was telling the truth, and the cop answered, "Yes."

The next day the prosecution asked that the jurors be directed to disregard Serino's comment and the judge agreed, but the damage may have been done.


John Good was another prosecution witness whose words may have helped Zimmerman more than the prosecution. Good lived near where the fatal shot was fired and appeared to have had the best view of the brief fight between Zimmerman and Martin.

Good testified that he saw what he believed to be Martin on top of Zimmerman. "The color on top was dark and the color at bottom was…red," Good said referring to the men's clothing. At another point he told the court that the person on the bottom had "lighter skin color."

Zimmerman is a white Hispanic who was wearing a red and black jacket that night. Martin, who was black, was wearing a dark sweatshirt.

"The person on the bottom, I could hear a 'Help,'" Good said.

Under cross examination by Zimmerman's lawyer, Good said he believes he saw Martin on top punching Zimmerman "MMA style," a reference to mixed martial arts.

"The person on top was ground and pounding the person on the bottom?"asked Zimmerman attorney Mark O'Mara.

"Correct," said Good


Rachel Jeantel was Trayvon Martin's friend who was talking with him on a cell phone until just moments before Martin was killed. She told the jury that Martin was scared of a "creepy a** cracker" who was following him and just before losing contact with Martin said she heard him say, "Get off. Get off."

But under a grueling cross examination by Zimmerman's lawyer Don West Jeantel conceded that it was difficult to hear what Martin was saying and that she did not know who threw the first punch when Zimmerman and Martin came face to face.

"The last thing you heard was something hitting somebody?" West asked her.

"Trayvon got hit," Jeantel said.

"You don't know that, do you?" the defense lawyer said.

"No sir," she said.

"You don't know that he didn't take his fist and drive it into Zimmerman's face do you?" the lawyer pressed.

"No sir," Jeantel replied.


Renowned forensics expert Vincent Di Maio may have been one of Zimmerman's strongest witnesses. He told the jury that the pattern of powder burns and other forensic evidence on Martin's body indicated that the teenager's sweatshirt was two to four inches away from his body at the time he was shot, meaning that Martin was leaning forward over Zimmerman when he was killed.

"The medical evidence is consistent with his [Zimmerman's] statement," Di Maio told the Florida court.



The words of Trayvon Martin's father were also used to undermine the prosecution's case. A key battle in the trial was over who was heard screaming for help in the background of a 911 call before the fatal shot was fired. Martin's family insisted the voice was their son's voice, while Zimmerman's parents told the court it was Zimmerman screaming.

Serino testified that when Martin's father, Tracy Martin, first heard the tape he said it was not Trayvon. "He looked away and under his breath said, 'No,'" Serino told the court.

A second police officer gave a similar description of Tracy Martin's reaction to the tape.
 
Messages
46,859
Reaction score
5
I don't think so. I think the media reported the race angle. But a racial component was present when a white hispanic man spotted a black teenager in a gated community in Sanford, Florida.

When Daryll Green was killed, did his killers not realize he was a black male?
 

VTA

UDFA
Messages
2,668
Reaction score
594
This is just you being cynical... Not everyone feels the way you project them to.

Not everyone, but enough. And that's all it takes and that's who gets the face time. Shit look at this forum, that thread is the hottest thing going and why? The racial element imposed on it. What is everyone arguing about in it? One side, the racial element imposed or the other side, how the kid was profiled. There's no denying it's all emotion behind each and every participants argument, but very little is genuine indignation over a dead kid. A black, 'hunted, stalked' a 'wannabe, white hispanic'. What the fuck do they have to do with the crime? The imposition of racial profiling attached to it.

A black kid shot by gang members really doesn't seem to incite much personal passion even among blacks. I guess all we can take from it is that race is greater than life, and as long as each race sticks to killing it's own, we really have no problems.

I don't know if it's cynicism and not recognition. When things go bad in a society, why is the person pointing to it a cynic?
 

jeebus

UDFA
Messages
1,650
Reaction score
0
It sure would be cool to see large organized protests bring attention to the murders in poor areas. Not just the murders hyped by the media and race monger and chief, but to the massive amounts of crime taking place on a daily basis. I would love to see fathers being held accountable for the children the choose to bring into the world. There needs to a be a complete shift within the poorer social-economic areas of our country were "snitching" is punishable by death.

Snitching should always be punishable by death.

You want to play the game you play by the rules.

And fvck shifting the values of our poor, just keep them as an underclass for us to live on and if they get upset we can always raise the food stamp budget.
 

superpunk

Pro Bowler
Messages
11,003
Reaction score
0
That thread is the hottest thing on here because it's the offseason and we've got heaps of racists in denial about how fucking unabashedly racist they are.
 

VTA

UDFA
Messages
2,668
Reaction score
594
You're making point. Everyone is more concerned about racists in the bushes and much, much less about the actual value of life.
 
Messages
10,636
Reaction score
0
Their closing arguments were also like a middle school report stuffed with nonsense.

They should've tied some of zimmermans lies together and formulated a story based off of that.
 

VTA

UDFA
Messages
2,668
Reaction score
594
yeah the racists could give a fuck that a little ****** kid got offed - zim innocent


That's too extreme and if there's any cynicism it's in that attitude. Unfortunately the entire premise of the whole ugly issue is that in choosing to believe either side of the story or suggestion, you're supposedly choosing it based on race. You're by default a racist. Of course both sides will deny that and in some cases rightly so, but this is the value imposed on it from the start. It was always a losing argument for either side.

It's entirely a product of imposing a viewpoint through controlled focus. The national media can't realistically report every death that occurs in this nation, so it has to decide what is more viable, in terms of serving it's interests. It chooses to focus on the angle of perpetuating the idea that this contry is some some sort of racial turmoil.
 

bbgun

Administrator
Messages
15,176
Reaction score
2,369
You seem to be the only racist here, SP.

Why do you hate "White Hispanics?"

Punk is right. The fact that the media concocted such an absurd term tells you it was all about race. The hunt for the "great white defendant" continues.
 
Top Bottom