"Your" =/= "you're."DOH!
Thanks.
The Oatmeal to the rescue!
I swear I wouldn't be able to write in complete sentences sometimes without his handy posters.I KNOW I would have a harder time getting though most days without his warped sense of humor.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
More communist propaganda, more hip-hop videos and more from The Oatmeal.
Last one NSFW!
Actually, I was being kind of snarky myself.
But I am interested in a response to the suggestions I posted when Moro first asked his question:
Because this case involved an admitted shooter of a teenage boy who had committed no crime other than allegedly assaulting the armed man who was following him?
Because the shooter was not arrested, despite the recommendation of the homicide investigator? And in fact no further public progress was made on the case until after the case received media attention and in fact after the DOJ announced it's own investigation?
Because, despite having, among other evidence Martin's cellphone, the police did not contact Martin's parents for several days?
Because Martin's parents made a great effort to get the media involved? To push for an arrest and a trial?
Because the Internet works that way sometimes? One appeal goes viral and another doesn't?
Most murders are fairly simple affairs. Domestic disputes. Part of other crimes. Fights between criminals. Crimes of passion. Etc.
Some are immediately followed with an arrest. Some the killer is never identified. Some are clear cases of self defense.This case is unique for many reasons.
Especially later posts of Moro's made me wonder if my initial reading of his post was accurate. He didn't respond to any of my suggestions about why this case got attention, but to step away from what others have claimed and what I assume Aretas meant: The liberal media loves a case that lets it claim white racists are to blame.
I think this will sum up what I and many feel about the matter.
“If I had a son, he’d look like Trayvon.” The death of Trayvon Martin is a tragedy--as was the death of a 6-year-old girl named Aliyah Shell, caught in the crossfire of gang violence over St. Patrick’s Day weekend in Chicago.
But Aliyah's story received very little coverage, despite the event being more recent than the Martin tragedy, and despite the fact that it happened in President Barack Obama’s very own Chicago on a weekend when 49 people were shot and 10 others were killed.
No mention of Aliyah from the president. No public outpouring for a young mother who sat untangling her daughter’s hair as shots rang out. Nothing. And yet...
“If I had a son, he’d look like Trayvon.”
Why? Why would the president weigh in on this specific case at this specific time?
It’s not about wrong or right. It’s not about justice. It’s not about Trayvon Martin.
“The despair is there; now it’s up to us to go in and rub raw the sores of discontent, galvanize them for radical social change.”- Saul Alinsky
An interesting quote to consider, from the man who shaped the minds of those who shaped President Obama.
Now consider Obama’s former chief of staff Rahm Emanuel’s notorious statement: “You never want a serious crisis to go to waste.”
The meaning is the same. It is calculating and it is dangerous, part of a bigger picture--a multi-faceted war to divide America for the sole purpose of securing Obama's re-election and subsequent radical social change.
Look at the contrived conflicts on the left wing's political chessboard:
Move 1 Occupy Wall Street: the (self-appointed) 99% versus the 1%
Move 2 Contraceptive/abortifacient mandates: government versus religion
Move 3 Sandra Fluke: women versus conservatives (supposedly)
And now…
Move 4 Trayvon Martin: black versus "white" (so-called)
This is not complicated. President Obama is organizing. It’s that simple, and it’s straight out of the radical playbook:
“Once you organize people, they’ll keep advancing from issue to issue toward the ultimate objective: people power. We’ll not only give them a cause, we’ll make life g$+~~%n exciting for them again — life instead of existence. We’ll turn them on...” – Saul Alinsky
This is not about Trayvon Martin. This is about divide and conquer. Hope and Change has been replaced with Us vs. Them. This about pitting Americans against Americans.
The despair is there... so, what’s Move 5?
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The despair is there... so, what’s Move 5?
... the board only exists in your head, and the people sitting across from you are phantasms.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think this will sum up what I and many feel about the matter.
“If I had a son, he’d look like Trayvon.” The death of Trayvon Martin is a tragedy--as was the death of a 6-year-old girl named Aliyah Shell, caught in the crossfire of gang violence over St. Patrick’s Day weekend in Chicago.
There is a blatant distinguishing feature here. Aliyah's murderers were charged! The system worked for her. The system did not work for Trayvon. The racial component to Trayvon's story isn't even really about Zimmerman's potential racism, rather, it is about why the system so quickly accepted Zimmerman's self defense claim when there does seem to be some issues with it. To Martin's family, the investigation ended before it began and they were never given a satisfying reason as to why Zimmerman's account of events was accepted at face value by the state attorney. It is absurd to think that Trayvon's case is the same as Aliyah's.
The meaning is the same. It is calculating and it is dangerous, part of a bigger picture--a multi-faceted war to divide America for the sole purpose of securing Obama's re-election and subsequent radical social change.
Speaking for radicals like myself who seek social and economic change - Obama is another war mongering capitalist pig that practices business as usual. He is a big business centrist. You have nothing to worry about - he will run the country exactly the same as it has been run since Reagan with small deviations that are meaningless to the American people so that our two parties can sit around and fight each other for the scraps.
Move 1 Occupy Wall Street: the (self-appointed) 99% versus the 1%
Yes how dare unemployed peoples protest how their system is failing them and has produced one of the worst wage disparities in the history of the world. That poor ceo who makes an average of 500 times his own workers who crashed the economy in the first place.
Move 4 Trayvon Martin: black versus "white" (so-called)
You see it as black vs. white. I am white and I don't. In fact, judging by the number of white people aiding Martin's family I think many do not. I think the media is painting it with that brush because it sells.
Unfortunately, your support for justice for Trayvon is getting hung up in your wild conspiracy delusions and your paranoia over the coming tide of a race war (from what I can gather). Don't worry your system is as screwed up as ever, you still have a corporate stooge in office, whites are still economically superior by a large margin, we are still well on our way to becoming a plutocracy, and nobody is trying to take your guns.
I think Saul Alinsky would be pretty mad at you for comparing him to Obama, Citizen Aretas.
|
|
I just listened again to Zimmerman's 911 call. At the end he says referring to the police:
“Actually, could you have him call me, and I’ll tell him where I’m at?”
To me that means that Zimmerman didn't know where he would be when police arrived because he was still trying to follow Trayvon. Trayvon already tried to avoid the incident once by running away. I think the evidence that Zimmerman continued to look for Martin and succeeded in finding him is pretty strong.
Apparently, according to the right, actual racism and misogyny isn't divisive. Pointing them out is.
This is, in my estimation, true.
It also shows why I've refrained from making any in depth statement on this thread. It seems so clear-cut that I can't be anything but snarky and derisive when discussing the issue. Honestly, I have to walk away from the computer and take ten deep breaths when I'm talking about XP advancement tracks and alignment requirements; I don't trust myself to be able to speak civilly.
Did you know that Obama is a servant of the Rockefellers, who are actually disguised reptilian aliens from the Draco constellation, and who are suppressing magic energy sources revealed to us by other ("good") aliens in crop circles (and subsequently re-discovered by Tesla), in a bid to cement their plan for world domination? I learned all about that in a movie called Thrive. It makes as much sense as the Fox News "Liberal Islamic Communist One-World Conspiracy," but with a better soundtrack.
Apparently, according to the right, actual racism and misogyny isn't divisive. Pointing them out is.This is, in my estimation, true.
It also shows why I've refrained from making any in depth statement on this thread. It seems so clear-cut that I can't be anything but snarky and derisive when discussing the issue. Honestly, I have to walk away from the computer and take ten deep breaths when I'm talking about XP advancement tracks and alignment requirements; I don't trust myself to be able to speak civilly.
Do what I do, Hitdice, and post links to edgy race music.
The British monarchy are the big bads in both Lyndon LaRouche's and, at least as far I can tell, Alex Jones's conspiracy theories. Maybe more.
I've never cared for them, myself, but I'm pretty sure Obama's serving Wall Street's interests, not theirs.
Lyndon LaRouche is a proud son of New Hampshire. Live free or die!
I've never cared for them, myself, but I'm pretty sure Obama's serving Wall Street's interests, not theirs.
Wait -- he's serving Wall Street, and simultaneously using "Occupy Wall Street" to push his sinister Communist anti-Wall Street agenda?
He's more devious than we ever imagined!
You'd understand, Kirth, if you read The New Federalist.
I just listened again to Zimmerman's 911 call. At the end he says referring to the police:
“Actually, could you have him call me, and I’ll tell him where I’m at?”
To me that means that Zimmerman didn't know where he would be when police arrived because he was still trying to follow Trayvon. Trayvon already tried to avoid the incident once by running away. I think the evidence that Zimmerman continued to look for Martin and succeeded in finding him is pretty strong.
Yeah. That bit struck me as off too. Even if he didn't know the exact address he was parked in front of, it would have been easy enough to tell them he'd be at the SUV near the corner.
Although he says OK and stops running, he never actually said in the 911 call that he was going back to his car or that he wasn't continuing to look for Martin.
|
|
NBC issues “apology” for edited Zimmerman 911 callI just listened again to Zimmerman's 911 call. At the end he says referring to the police:
“Actually, could you have him call me, and I’ll tell him where I’m at?”
To me that means that Zimmerman didn't know where he would be when police arrived because he was still trying to follow Trayvon. Trayvon already tried to avoid the incident once by running away. I think the evidence that Zimmerman continued to look for Martin and succeeded in finding him is pretty strong.
Yeah. That bit struck me as off too. Even if he didn't know the exact address he was parked in front of, it would have been easy enough to tell them he'd be at the SUV near the corner.
Although he says OK and stops running, he never actually said in the 911 call that he was going back to his car or that he wasn't continuing to look for Martin.
I thought the edit was only blocking out Zimmerman voluntarily giving Martin's race. I listened to the full copy now widely available and not the NBC edited one. In the full copy this conversation about meeting at the mailbox took place at the end:
I really don't have much of a horse in this race as I'm preferring to just refrain from being an armchair judge because it seems to me that the facts are blurred from both sides of the agenda. I figured I'd toss that link in there just to add to the perception issue that this case is generating with lots of speculation and misinformation. Some subtle; some overt.
|
|
I really don't have much of a horse in this race as I'm preferring to just refrain from being an armchair judge because it seems to me that the facts are blurred from both sides of the agenda. I figured I'd toss that link in there just to add to the perception issue that this case is generating with lots of speculation and misinformation. Some subtle; some overt.
I will sum up the agendas:
Agenda 1: Zimmerman walks free and thats that.
Agenda 2: A full investigation of Zimmerman's claim to self defense is launched and if needed charges filed so that Zimmerman can defend his claim in a court of law.
The very fact that it is "blurred" requires, in my armchair opinion, that agenda 2 be explored.
Lyndon LaRouche is a proud son of New Hampshire. Live free or die!LaRouche is a loon. New Hampshire can keep him.
Actually, I don't think he's lived in NH for over a half century.
Hmmm, I wonder what the LaRouchites have to say about Trayvon Martin...nothing as yet, I fear.
Although they did have an article whose headline ran "Israel Got Everything It Needed to Bash Iran from British Puppet Obama." So, there you go.
Also, I just called up the credit union to see why my card keeps getting declined even though it says I have available funds. Am talking to the guy, and, on a whim, I ask him what my account history looks like. He says that I withdrew $200 bucks three times in a row at a Winn-Dixie. "What's a Winn-Dixie?" I ask. "It's a grocery store, I think," he says. "There's no grocery store in New England with Dixie in its name!" I yell. He tells me to calm down. I meekly comply.
According to the internet, Winn-Dixie is a chain of grocery stores based out of Florida. Florida again!!
Let's just give it back to the Spanish, or better yet, the Seminoles.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Workers revolution to smash whoever defrauded my checking account!
I like the Strawberry Kiwi Capri Suns, fyi.
Agenda 2: A full investigation of Zimmerman's claim to self defense is launched and if needed charges filed so that Zimmerman can defend his claim in a court of law.
Zimmerman wouldn't have to defend his claim in court. The State of Florida would have to prove it was not self defense beyond a reasonable doubt, once that issue was raised. It's an affirmative defense.
(I don't mean to pick on you, honest. You're quotes have just been the easiest to pick the response from.)
Workers revolution to smash whoever defrauded my checking account!
I'll bring the pitchforks!
Thanks for the link, Urizen. He sounds a bit drunk, and I still hear him use a racial slur.
Actually, I was being kind of snarky myself.
But I am interested in a response to the suggestions I posted when Moro first asked his question:
Because this case involved an admitted shooter of a teenage boy who had committed no crime other than allegedly assaulting the armed man who was following him?
Because the shooter was not arrested, despite the recommendation of the homicide investigator? And in fact no further public progress was made on the case until after the case received media attention and in fact after the DOJ announced it's own investigation?
Because, despite having, among other evidence Martin's cellphone, the police did not contact Martin's parents for several days?
Because Martin's parents made a great effort to get the media involved? To push for an arrest and a trial?
Because the Internet works that way sometimes? One appeal goes viral and another doesn't?
Most murders are fairly simple affairs. Domestic disputes. Part of other crimes. Fights between criminals. Crimes of passion. Etc.
Some are immediately followed with an arrest. Some the killer is never identified. Some are clear cases of self defense.This case is unique for many reasons.
Especially later posts of Moro's made me wonder if my initial reading of his post was accurate. He didn't respond to any of my suggestions about why this case got attention, but to step away from what others have claimed and what I assume Aretas meant: The liberal media loves a case that lets it claim white racists are to blame.
I think this will sum up what I and many feel about the matter.
“If I had a son, he’d look like Trayvon.” The death of Trayvon Martin is a tragedy--as was the death of a 6-year-old girl named Aliyah Shell, caught in the crossfire of gang violence over St. Patrick’s Day weekend in Chicago.
But Aliyah's story received very little coverage, despite the event being more recent than the Martin tragedy, and despite the fact that it...
[L4D2: Dark Carnival]That's...one theory.[/L4D2: Dark Carnival]
|
|
Agenda 2: A full investigation of Zimmerman's claim to self defense is launched and if needed charges filed so that Zimmerman can defend his claim in a court of law.
Zimmerman wouldn't have to defend his claim in court. The State of Florida would have to prove it was not self defense beyond a reasonable doubt, once that issue was raised. It's an affirmative defense.
(I don't mean to pick on you, honest. You're quotes have just been the easiest to pick the response from.)
Errr...if the state of Florida believes, after their investigation and the convening of the grand jury, to charge Zimmerman, Zimmerman will go on trial for manslaughter (or worse), and the prosecutor will pick apart his version of events while his defense will defend his claim. It just won't be an affirmative defense.
The issue with Zimmerman's claim of self defense get particularly wonky in the state of Florida. A claim of self defense puts the burden of proof on the state before prosecution can begin. However, in most other (if not all) states, prosecution begins with indictment; in Florida, it begins with arrest. This means that the police can't arrest or interrogate Zimmerman unless they have evidence that it wasn't self defense.
Everyone (media that is) is repeating "stand your ground" again and again cause it's a great soundbyte, but the Florida judicial/legal process seems to be more pertinent to this case.
Personally, I think that Zimmerman would incriminate himself in about three minutes if interviewed by the police but it's in the hands of the grand jury now.
Take all this with a grain of salt, I'm not a lawyer.
Personally, I think that Zimmerman would incriminate himself in about three minutes if interviewed by the police but it's in the hands of the grand jury now.
Well considering he was already in police custody and apparently didn't, I'd say that is not really likely (to happen in 3 minutes).
Errr...if the state of Florida believes, after their investigation and the convening of the grand jury, to charge Zimmerman, Zimmerman will go on trial for manslaughter (or worse), and the prosecutor will pick apart his version of events while his defense will defend his claim. It just won't be an affirmative defense.
Agenda 2: A full investigation of Zimmerman's claim to self defense is launched and if needed charges filed so that Zimmerman can defend his claim in a court of law.
Zimmerman wouldn't have to defend his claim in court. The State of Florida would have to prove it was not self defense beyond a reasonable doubt, once that issue was raised. It's an affirmative defense.
(I don't mean to pick on you, honest. You're quotes have just been the easiest to pick the response from.)
Affirmative defense is a legal term meaning a defense that has to be actively provided and put forward by the defense. Once the defense does so, the burden then shifts back to the state to prove each and every element of the charge, including lack of self defense beyond a reasonable doubt. This is why the defense often calls no witnesses during the trial phase, because ALL of the burden is on the State to prove the allegations beyond a reasonable doubt. (This is the part where I have to add, I may be a lawyer, but I'm not your lawyer, you will have to do your own research yadda yadda yadda...)
The issue with Zimmerman's claim of self defense get particularly wonky in the state of Florida. A claim of self defense puts the burden of proof on the state before prosecution can begin. However, in most other (if not all) states, prosecution begins with indictment; in Florida, it begins with arrest. This means that the police can't arrest or interrogate Zimmerman unless they have evidence that it wasn't self defense.
Everyone (media that is) is repeating "stand your ground" again and again cause it's a great soundbyte, but the Florida judicial/legal process seems to be more pertinent to this case.
*cut*
100% accurate
Skip to 1:00 for the groovie tunes!
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Affirmative defense is a legal term meaning a defense that has to be actively provided and put forward by the defense. Once the defense does so, the burden then shifts back to the state to prove each and every element of the charge, including lack of self defense beyond a reasonable doubt. This is why the defense often calls no witnesses during the trial phase, because ALL of the burden is on the State to prove the allegations beyond a reasonable doubt. (This is the part where I have to add, I may be a lawyer, but I'm not your lawyer, you will have to do your own research yadda yadda yadda...)Errr...if the state of Florida believes, after their investigation and the convening of the grand jury, to charge Zimmerman, Zimmerman will go on trial for manslaughter (or worse), and the prosecutor will pick apart his version of events while his defense will defend his claim. It just won't be an affirmative defense.
Agenda 2: A full investigation of Zimmerman's claim to self defense is launched and if needed charges filed so that Zimmerman can defend his claim in a court of law.
Zimmerman wouldn't have to defend his claim in court. The State of Florida would have to prove it was not self defense beyond a reasonable doubt, once that issue was raised. It's an affirmative defense.
(I don't mean to pick on you, honest. You're quotes have just been the easiest to pick the response from.)
I am glad I went into physics instead of law...well also, I am glad I don't live in Florida.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If you're in Miami, and you've got my debit card info, I'm gonna get you!
I am glad I went into physics instead of law...well also, I am glad I don't live in Florida.
I was THIS close to changing my mind and going to medical school.... so there you go.
Affirmative defense is a legal term meaning a defense that has to be actively provided and put forward by the defense. Once the defense does so, the burden then shifts back to the state to prove each and every element of the charge, including lack of self defense beyond a reasonable doubt. This is why the defense often calls no witnesses during the trial phase, because ALL of the burden is on the State to prove the allegations beyond a reasonable doubt. (This is the part where I have to add, I may be a lawyer, but I'm not your lawyer, you will have to do your own research yadda yadda yadda...)Errr...if the state of Florida believes, after their investigation and the convening of the grand jury, to charge Zimmerman, Zimmerman will go on trial for manslaughter (or worse), and the prosecutor will pick apart his version of events while his defense will defend his claim. It just won't be an affirmative defense.
Agenda 2: A full investigation of Zimmerman's claim to self defense is launched and if needed charges filed so that Zimmerman can defend his claim in a court of law.
Zimmerman wouldn't have to defend his claim in court. The State of Florida would have to prove it was not self defense beyond a reasonable doubt, once that issue was raised. It's an affirmative defense.
(I don't mean to pick on you, honest. You're quotes have just been the easiest to pick the response from.)
Exactly. An affirmative defense is the legal equivalent of saying "Yes, but..." As in, a person gets charged with a crime or has a lawsuit brought against them, they answer the charges, not with a denial, but with a "Yes, I admit that I did it, but here is why..." and then it rests upon the plaintiff (in the Zimmerman case, the State) to prove that the "Yes, but..." reason was insufficient beyond reason.
Did you know that Obama is a servant of the Rockefellers, who are actually disguised reptilian aliens from the Draco constellation, and who are suppressing magic energy sources revealed to us by other ("good") aliens in crop circles (and subsequently re-discovered by Tesla), in a bid to cement their plan for world domination? I learned all about that in a movie called Thrive. It makes as much sense as the Fox News "Liberal Islamic Communist One-World Conspiracy," but with a better soundtrack.
DUDE DUDE DUDE!
Go on Youtube and search Ventura Conspiracy.Jesse Ventura has a show on TruTV where he "exposes" conspiraciees.
It is a f%+~ing RIOT!
Personally, I think that Zimmerman would incriminate himself in about three minutes if interviewed by the police but it's in the hands of the grand jury now.Well considering he was already in police custody and apparently didn't, I'd say that is not really likely (to happen in 3 minutes).
He didn't incriminate himself in the eyes of cops who just couldn't give two s$!%s about some hooded thug being shot.
Two things you have to know about cops:
1)They're lazy.
2)See #1.
Thanks for the heads-up, meat. I'm always up for some fun conspiracy-time!
Thanks for the heads-up, meat. I'm always up for some fun conspiracy-time!
It's seriously hilarious. Like, I love Jesse Ventura even if I think he's a lunatic. He's a lunatic that has it right his fair share of the time. He "exposes" some genuinely questionable organizations/conspiracies, but it's just the way the thing is shot and produced. It's just...freaking comedy gold!
Personally, I think that Zimmerman would incriminate himself in about three minutes if interviewed by the police but it's in the hands of the grand jury now.Well considering he was already in police custody and apparently didn't, I'd say that is not really likely (to happen in 3 minutes).He didn't incriminate himself in the eyes of cops who just couldn't give two s~*#s about some hooded thug being shot.
Two things you have to know about cops:
1)They're lazy.
2)See #1.
Well considering the cops wanted to charge him and it was the state attorney that said no, I'd think you might want to get to know a few more things about cops.
|
|
Now that I understand the Florida SYG law..let me get something straight. If I rob someone, and there are no witnesses, and he fights back, hits me in the face and bloodies my nose, and then I shoot him and kill him...but then claim self defense and leave out the part about my robbing...it is immediately an affirmative defense case based on my word against...nobodies?
FWIW I have no recollection of anyone saying or implying that George Zimmerman was anything other than Latino. That fact came out pretty quickly in the news coverage. Doesn't mean it CAN'T be racially motivated, though I think that's just one factor among many.
Personally I think the SYG law, castle doctrine, etc. just need to go, or be seriously revised. There's just a huge gulf between a man defending his house and hunting someone down that passed by it.
Personally I think the SYG law, castle doctrine, etc. just need to go, or be seriously revised. There's just a huge gulf between a man defending his house and hunting someone down that passed by it.
There's nothing wrong with stand your ground, its just being grossly misused by the prosecutors. If it wasn't stand your ground they'd probably just be abusing another loophole.