I would need... I don't even know how long... to come up with answers to this ridiculously fantastic and unrealistic scenario you have created out of thin air. Your answers don't follow any form of logic.
Only point of contention is that the shooting took place in Florida, where the high temperature for that day was 69, and the low was only 53, so sweat was entirely possible. Don't want to wade into anything else there, but Florida is where people go to get away from the cold...
Nobody here knows exactly what happened. There seems to be a lot of I-know-what-happened-and-you-obviously-don't-so-you're-wrong stuff going on in this thread, and I suggest we all drop it. Nobody knows what happened. The jury doesn't know what happened. The judge doesn't know what happened. At this point, I'd venture to guess that George Zimmerman himself has only an incomplete and inaccurate recollection of what happened. Arguing about what actually happened is pointless - we don't have access to the truth. Nobody does. It's valid, and maybe even productive, to discuss the implications of the verdict to society, to discuss the pros and cons of vigilantism, to discuss how racism affects trials like this one, and so on. But let's not argue about what actually happened between Zimmerman and Martin. That just turns into my fantasy against your fantasy.
Can't link to it yet because it's too new but the Colbert Report had the best comment yet about the Zimmerman case. GZ's brother notes that GZ has to look over his shoulder now everywhere he goes ..... kind of like a black teen in a hoodie.
You have a fantasy about Zimmerman?? (Lowering my head and trudging off to go sit in the corner facing the wall).
Nothing new to see here. The media and the liberal-left, which includes most of the black community, want their own civil rights movement so bad, they are willing to create one. There is no racism here, except from within the black community.
This story encapsulates the main problem with this whole trial pretty well: http://www.alternet.org/civil-liberties/what-age-does-black-male-become-threat?page=0,1
in re the whole race thing: Color Me Color-Blind by maia Black folks’ skin is really just shades of brown, ‘redskins’ aren’t red, but it’s their assigned hue. Orientals are far from the color of gold, but yellow’s how they’re seen by many of you. Brown people are often considered much less of ‘real’ worth than those who call themselves white. And yet, if you’ll really look at our skins, you’ll find that color’s not like day and night. There’s no clear distinction between ‘us’ and ‘them’ if only skin tint’s what you let yourselves see. No one called ‘white’ is close to snow’s shade, unless an albino... and they’re pink, actually. Bleached in the sun, all bones are virginal white. Underneath our skin surface, all flesh the same...red. Fat layers are yellow, what we cast off is brown. When any heart stops, we’re all just as dead. Before you start saying what color you are, or what shade that guy over there’s meant to be, give a thought to what’s left when your time’s run out, picture your body after two years or three. Do you really think that your skin’s what you are? Do you really think death gives a hoot for your hue? Do you really think people are white, yellow, brown, red? Do you really think color should matter to you? Those who do, surely lack what keeps hearts on track. Their souls' color? Blackest of black!
No, it's empowering to see the truth and understand how the vast majority of people are being spoon-fed their beliefs by people with an agenda. Don't you ever get tired of those chains around your neck, being told to ignore the truth and push an agenda?
JJ, I'm a little confused. You started this thread asking others what they thought about the trial, but in your responses to these opinions, you seem a little upset. Am I missing something?
I began a discussion, a dialogue. I wanted a back-and-forth discussion and that's what has happened. I'm not upset, per se, rather more frustrated with the media and the black community turning this into something its not. This was never about race. Zimmerman is not racist and he singled out Martin for being suspicious, not being black. The fact that he was black is irrelevant. Groups are trying to turn this into a witch-hunt and are advocating mob-rule above the law. They are calling for Zimmerman's head, even though he is innocent. That is what frustrates me, and frankly, it upsets a lot of people in America.
That's what I think We Are... is talking about concerning broad brush strokes. The "black community" isn't turning this into something it's not. People in the country, who are mainly on the left side of politics, are turning this into something that it's not. There are black people who are doing that, but I personally know of people who aren't as well. Actually, I have buddies that are quite peeved about the way their fellow "blacks" as they say, are dealing with the situation. I agree with the rest of your post that this is turning into a witch-hunt when the witch has already been found not to be one, but painting with a broad brush doesn't help further the argument.
Gotta disagree. It encapsulates what the narrative that is trying to be pushed about what the trial is really about, but it's a narrative that is thoroughly biased and one sided, ignoring many important issues that are just as valid but have been ignored.
This is the second thread I am saying this, but I thought everyone knew that there always exceptions. I'm not saying that every black person is screaming for the head of Zimmerman, but the so-called 'leaders' of the community as a whole, such as Sharpton, Jackson and Jealous are waving the battle flag. It's unfortunate for the dissenters, but the leaders and the vocal majority are all singing the same tune.
I agree with E.C. Scrubb. This article and alter.net in general is extremely bias and seeks to racialize something that has nothing to do with race.
Sorry WaC, I don't believe in the notion that everyone's truth is perfectly acceptable. Todays PC society says, 'Hey, he thinks the sky is purple and who are we to tell him different?' Well, I will. The sky is blue. (Assuming the sky is actually blue.) Truth is truth and it's something I'll never waiver on. When the president of the United States says we should 'honor Trayvon' something is terribly, terribly wrong. When a black church in Chicago puts up a sign that reads 'IT IS OK TO MURDER BLACK CHILDREN IN AMERIKKKA' something is wrong. When people see racism where there is no racism, something is wrong. There is truth, and there is opinion. A wise man knows the difference and stands firm in it.
Would it throw this thread completely over the edge if I now make the observation that naked truth can't be known? There is no such thing as observation without interpretation, otherwise, there'd be no way to understand what is being observed. However, by interpreting the observation, we have injected subjectivity into the process and thus, "objective truth" is unknowable. It's exactly why there are so many strong opinions in this thread. Everyone observes, and then interprets those observations through their filters to arrive at their conclusions. When those conclusions are then pushed as "absolute fact," they get reacted to strongly, because it doesn't match up with the other person's "Absolutely fact." Thus, in the end, any and every situation will be subjectively viewed. Some look at this and see racism, some look at this and see self-defense being attacked, some look at this and see an unfair justice system, others look at it and see that the justice system worked, and the problem is, they are all right, depending on which subjective filter is used to understand the objective event.
This is what I disagree with. You say 'some look at this and see racism and they are right.' No, they aren't Again, you can't say a square is a circle and be correct. There is ZERO evidence that says that Zimmerman is a racist, in fact, if you look at his friends and community outreach, you will see just the opposite. So, no, I do not agree that 'they are all right.' It is the same as saying the killing of Trayvon happened in December. Would you say that is also a truth?
I agree that it's difficult to say whether or not Zimmerman is racist and/or went after Martin because he was a black kid (would Zimmerman have followed a white kid the same way he followed Martin? Maybe. Maybe not). But I'm willing to bet that this whole case would have gone differently had Martin been white. If you'll remember, the cops didn't arrest Zimmerman on the spot (they waited more than a month to bring him in). They also didn't give Zimmerman an alcohol or drug test to see if he was on anything. The police at the scene took his story at face value, which was a huge mistake. I honestly believe that Zimmerman would have been taken in for questioning on the spot had Martin been a white kid.
There is evidence from his myspace page and from his purported statements along the lines of 'these punks always get away with it.' I don't recall the exact wording. You don't have to be a KKK member to be racist. Racist views exist along a continuum.
