Posts: 667
Threads: 25
Joined: December 18, 2013
Reputation:
13
RE: Atheists, George Zimmerman and the burden of proof
February 17, 2014 at 10:49 am
(February 17, 2014 at 8:51 am)EgoRaptor Wrote: (February 17, 2014 at 6:10 am)kılıç_mehmet Wrote: Yes, I understand that, but Zimmerman is not "white" according to American racial classifications. You don't seem to understand how it works. If Zimmerman had been killed by a white man or another hispanic, headlines would read "Hispanic Murdered in Cold Blood by White Killer!" However, because he killed a black man it is easy to pass him off as white. It is a win-win for the left & the media outlets. The left gets to perpetuate the myth of blacks being eternally oppressed, & the media outlets get lots of business. One outlet even referred to Zimmerman as a "white hispanic". It couldn't matter less what ethnicity Zimmerman is, he shot a black man & looks white enough, so obviously this proves how oppressed blacks are by evil whitey.
We heard absurd comments like 'its now open season on black people' as if black people were being regularly murdered by white people and never did any murder themselves.
Some may call them junk, I call them treasures.
Posts: 10720
Threads: 15
Joined: September 9, 2011
Reputation:
119
RE: Atheists, George Zimmerman and the burden of proof
February 17, 2014 at 12:47 pm
There seems to be a misapprehension in how the word 'stalking' is being applied here. When you're stalking a deer, there is not requirement for you to have stalked that deer on previous occasions for it to be considered 'stalking'. In the context the word was originally used, the connotation seems to be stalking as in 'following someone for the purpose of attacking them'. 'He stalked his victim stealthily.'
Posts: 667
Threads: 25
Joined: December 18, 2013
Reputation:
13
RE: Atheists, George Zimmerman and the burden of proof
February 17, 2014 at 1:28 pm
(This post was last modified: February 17, 2014 at 1:29 pm by là bạn điên.)
Quote:When you're stalking a deer, there is not requirement for you to have stalked that deer on previous occasions for it to be considered 'stalking'.
BUT. there is a requirement when stalking a deer to move stealthily. You cannot stalk an animal that is moving quickly away from you. You can only stalk an animal that is for all intents and purposes not travelling
Quote: In the context the word was originally used, the connotation seems to be stalking as in 'following someone for the purpose of attacking them'. 'He stalked his victim stealthily.'
Since you are Americans then using Websters is most appropriate and they posit 2 definitions
1 : a person who closely follows and watches another person for a long period of time in a way that is threatening, dangerous, etc.
2 : a person who slowly and quietly hunts an animal
So neither applies in this case.
Some may call them junk, I call them treasures.
Posts: 4055
Threads: 39
Joined: October 2, 2011
Reputation:
16
RE: Atheists, George Zimmerman and the burden of proof
February 17, 2014 at 1:33 pm
(February 16, 2014 at 12:23 am)Rampant.A.I. Wrote: (February 15, 2014 at 6:22 pm)EgoRaptor Wrote: Zimmerman is still essential to the left. He is being used to push the idea that blacks are perpetually oppressed & in constant need of white people feeling guilty about being white.
Or it could be that it disturbs people someone was unreasonably acquitted of cold-blooded murder.
Maybe you could link us a Stormfront thread about the leftist conspiracy.
Well, I don't think the acquital was unreasonable. O.J. Simpson was acquited even though he obviously was the murderer, his lawyer simply made a good case, and the attorneys didn't. In Zimmerman's case, no one is denying that someone died, but the circumstances are rather different.
Quote: You don't seem to understand how it works. If Zimmerman had been killed by a white man or another hispanic, headlines would read "Hispanic Murdered in Cold Blood by White Killer!" However, because he killed a black man it is easy to pass him off as white. It is a win-win for the left & the media outlets. The left gets to perpetuate the myth of blacks being eternally oppressed, & the media outlets get lots of business. One outlet even referred to Zimmerman as a "white hispanic". It couldn't matter less what ethnicity Zimmerman is, he shot a black man & looks white enough, so obviously this proves how oppressed blacks are by evil whitey.
Well the same here, mate. Here, concepts such as black and white do not exist, but leftards always seem to have the backs of ethnic minorities no matter what they do, even those who commit acts of violence and terrorism, the left supports them regardless.
I don't think its because they love blacks so much, its because they need allies and the left traditionally used minorities to provide themselves with a basis to wield political power.
Üze Tengri basmasar, asra Yir telinmeser, Türük bodun ilingin törüngin kim artatı udaçı erti?
Posts: 137
Threads: 1
Joined: November 30, 2010
Reputation:
4
RE: Atheists, George Zimmerman and the burden of proof
February 17, 2014 at 1:56 pm
Actually it isn't about keeping allies. It is about treating people fair. This country does not and never has treated minorities fairly. We can see it all through our society today. We can see it in how republicans treat Obama. We can see it in our legal system. We can see it how the police treat minorities. We can see it in the hatred that republicans have for minorities.
It just goes on and on. Ya. I would love to think this country is racism blind, but it isn't. And like any good american, I will call it what it is. I will call a spade a spade.
Posts: 1946
Threads: 17
Joined: February 6, 2014
Reputation:
18
Atheists, George Zimmerman and the burden of proof
February 17, 2014 at 2:53 pm
(February 16, 2014 at 11:42 pm)là bạn điên Wrote: (February 16, 2014 at 9:17 pm)Rampant.A.I. Wrote: Right, and OJ is still looking for "the real killers".
Why is it your standard of proof is so much higher when it comes to what's right in front of your face?
You have proof that there was COLD BLOODED murder. Please share it with us.
(February 16, 2014 at 11:36 pm)Isun Wrote: You are full of it I pointed out that, you don't have to hide to be considered a stalker, but I also mentioned that this case didn't rise to that level. Next time read instead of jumping to conclusions.
I am sure they investigate a lot of crimes committed by whites, but as a black man you are more likely to be convicted and more likely to be arrested. More likely to get the death penalty. It goes on and on and on.
I stated quite plainly that there was a legal and non legal definition. the non legal involves moving unobserved in pursuit of prey (such as when stalking a deer) the legal involves Repeatedly following a person with intent to harrass or distress. neither applied to Zimmerman. this 'Stalking' accusation is a pathetic attempt to pretend that by following Martin Zimmerman was somehow breaking the law.
Once again. lets deal with murder directly. Are you claiming that black people are statistically no more likley (in the USA) to commit murder than white people?
Do you think more white people are murdered by black people in the US or more black people are murdered by white people.
What about rape- are more black women raped by white men or are more white women raped by black men? No word games or misdirection please.
Hannity: Do you regret getting out of car?
Zimmerman: No.
Hannity: Do you regret having gun?
Zimmerman: No.
Hannity:Do feel you would be sitting here if you didn’t have that gun?
Zimmerman: No. I feel it was all God’s plan. For me to second-guess it ...
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/201...artin.html
Murder without regret is the definition of murder in cold blood. Are Zimmerman's own words enough for you?
It's God's plan for Christians to gun down unarmed black men in the street.
Posts: 1322
Threads: 70
Joined: November 18, 2013
Reputation:
16
RE: Atheists, George Zimmerman and the burden of proof
February 17, 2014 at 3:45 pm
(February 17, 2014 at 1:56 pm)Isun Wrote: Actually it isn't about keeping allies. It is about treating people fair. This country does not and never has treated minorities fairly. We can see it all through our society today. We can see it in how republicans treat Obama. We can see it in our legal system. We can see it how the police treat minorities. We can see it in the hatred that republicans have for minorities.
It just goes on and on. Ya. I would love to think this country is racism blind, but it isn't. And like any good american, I will call it what it is. I will call a spade a spade. So I take it you are a leftist? This comment is inane. You claim institutionalized racism on a huge scale, yet provide no evidence to back it up other than "Republicans are mean to Obama!" Pathetic really, but this is what the left has had to fall back on in recent times. Leftism isn't about the workers anymore, it is about stopping evil whitey.
Posts: 137
Threads: 1
Joined: November 30, 2010
Reputation:
4
RE: Atheists, George Zimmerman and the burden of proof
February 17, 2014 at 5:55 pm
You would have to be brain dead not to realize there is an institutionalized racism. But that's what FOX has taken advantage of is the fear of white american's of losing their country. After all, it is whites that should run the country, not blacks.
Republicans are people who are primarily greedy, fearful, and hate anyone they fear. Religious nuts who want to force their religion on everyone else.
They fear immigration. They fear blacks might take their jobs. They think they are all criminals. It goes on and on.
As one person pointed out and is in my opinion accurate. If you are republican, it doesn't mean you are a racist, but if you are racist, then you are most likely to be republican.
Posts: 1322
Threads: 70
Joined: November 18, 2013
Reputation:
16
RE: Atheists, George Zimmerman and the burden of proof
February 17, 2014 at 6:51 pm
(February 17, 2014 at 5:55 pm)Isun Wrote: You would have to be brain dead not to realize there is an institutionalized racism. But that's what FOX has taken advantage of is the fear of white american's of losing their country. After all, it is whites that should run the country, not blacks.
Republicans are people who are primarily greedy, fearful, and hate anyone they fear. Religious nuts who want to force their religion on everyone else.
They fear immigration. They fear blacks might take their jobs. They think they are all criminals. It goes on and on.
As one person pointed out and is in my opinion accurate. If you are republican, it doesn't mean you are a racist, but if you are racist, then you are most likely to be republican. That has to be the stupidest comment I have ever heard. Tell me which party freed the slaves? Which party was home to the notoriously racist George Wallace. Which party brought Jesse Helms to the forefront?
PS. You still haven't given me one good example of institutionalized racism. All you have done is bash the GOP, which I must admit deserves to be bashed, but you are accusing them of being racist, which they are not.
Posts: 667
Threads: 25
Joined: December 18, 2013
Reputation:
13
RE: Atheists, George Zimmerman and the burden of proof
February 17, 2014 at 11:27 pm
(This post was last modified: February 18, 2014 at 12:05 am by là bạn điên.)
(February 17, 2014 at 1:56 pm)Isun Wrote: Actually it isn't about keeping allies. It is about treating people fair. This country does not and never has treated minorities fairly Yup. Certain minorities get into college with lower grades than the majority, get preferential hiring. Certain minorities are allowed to insult the majority as much as they like but you may not do the same in return
[/quote]
Quote: We can see it all through our society today. We can see it in how republicans treat Obama. We can see it in our legal system. We can see it how the police treat minorities. We can see it in the hatred that republicans have for minorities.
if you hadn;t noticed the republicans are a different party than Obama. its their job to oppose him. Obama has lied over and over again and his partisan statements in the Zimmerman case were disgusting.
Quote:It just goes on and on. Ya. I would love to think this country is racism blind, but it isn't.
Youa re right . Jews are often singled out and attacked by Black nationalist movements and no one does a damned thing. the Nation of Islam ,with their ultra racist rhethoric' are welcome at any 'progressive 'event
Quote: And like any good american, I will call it what it is. I will call a spade a spade.
You can tell who are the dominant group by who you aren't allowed to criticise.
(February 17, 2014 at 11:27 pm)là bạn điên Wrote: (February 17, 2014 at 1:56 pm)Isun Wrote: Actually it isn't about keeping allies. It is about treating people fair. This country does not and never has treated minorities fairly Yup. Certain minorities get into college with lower grades than the majority, get preferential hiring. Certain minorities are allowed to insult the majority as much as they like but you may not do the same in return Quote: We can see it all through our society today. We can see it in how republicans treat Obama. We can see it in our legal system. We can see it how the police treat minorities. We can see it in the hatred that republicans have for minorities.
if you hadn't noticed the republicans are a different party than Obama. its their job to oppose him. Obama has lied over and over again and his partisan statements in the Zimmerman case were disgusting. never in US history has such inexperienced candidate been chosen to be president. presidents have been Army Cheifs, governors or very senior senators with decades of experience. Obama was what? A junior senator who had once edited the Harvard Law review and then suddenly he is president?
Quote:It just goes on and on. Ya. I would love to think this country is racism blind, but it isn't.
You are right . Jews are often singled out and attacked by Black nationalist movements and no one does a damned thing. the Nation of Islam ,with their ultra racist rhethoric' are welcome at any 'progressive 'event.
Quote: And like any good american, I will call it what it is. I will call a spade a spade.
You can tell who are the dominant group by who you aren't allowed to criticise.
Some may call them junk, I call them treasures.
|