01-01 George Zimmerman Case – Open Discussion Thread

Use this thread as an open thread just for Zimmerman Case stuff. A place to just dump, collect, or discuss general information about the Trayvon Martin VS George Zimmerman Case.

REMINDER – Please WATCH THE TONE and CONTENT of Commentary. Please be respectful, courteous and considerate of other readers and contributors. Please avoid hatespeak, angry rhetoric, vulgarity, personal attacks and condescension. If you wish to engage in vitriolic, racist, or bitter angry rhetoric, there are alternative sites on the internet more than welcoming to such considerations. But not here. Thank You.

This entry was posted in George Zimmerman Open Thread, Trayvon Martin, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

110 Responses to 01-01 George Zimmerman Case – Open Discussion Thread

  1. eastern2western says:


    I just want to put this video up to prove it is physicall impossible for a 200 lb out of shape male to out run some one who was lighter, faster and younger. In addition to zimmerman weight, he also has a bad back and trayvon also had a two minute start before him. I would personally like to hear bernie de la rionda stutter his way into explaining how was it physically possible for zimmerman to purued trayvon martin with out sounding out of breath in the nen call. my best explaination is a hover board.

    Like

    • TandCrumpettes says:

      I was just thinking about this yesterday. Even if the two could run at the same speed, GZ would never have caught up with the 2-minute head start.

      That got me wondering how Bernie is going to explain it as well. I think he’s going to go for a “Jason Voorhees.”

      See, what happened was, TM was sooooooo scared, he tripped when he turned the corner. Rather than get back on his feet, TM crawled on the ground, like an army man, for 2 whole minutes. This way, all GZ has to do is lumber over confidently after he’s finished his call.

      Jason Voorhess doesn’t have any problem catching up to his victims, either, seeing as all they know to do is fall and scramble.

      Jason also has the ability to disappear from time to time and inexplicably appear ahead of the victim seconds later. In fact, now that I think about it, that completely corroborates DDs story! TM made it “home” and WHOOSH, there’s George to greet him!

      Now, I know I watch too much TV – but I can’t help but wonder if Bernie watches just a little more B-movie horror than I do….

      Like

    • Justice4All says:

      Also worth noting that these men ran 109 yards in less than 15 seconds. Trayvon did not even make it 50 yards in 4 minutes.

      Like

      • eastern2western says:

        in the video, even the fat dude finished in 15 seconds in a 100 meter dash, but trayvon was not able to even able to get to his house that less than 50 yards away with an abundance of time? Bernie has a lot of explaining to do.

        Like

    • LouDaJew says:

      the Trayvon defenders would say that stocky man was in pursuit. notice how they never say George is fat, but stocky. http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/12/26/v-fullstory/3156895/parents-of-trayvon-martin-george.html

      Like

      • howie says:

        In the NFL they never let linemen cover wide recievers. T-con was a WR in football.

        Like

        • libby says:

          Just cuz Trayvon was among the fastest guys on the football team doesnt mean that george was unable to fly (the aliens helped him with his anti-gravity rays and let him move faster than thugvon).

          Like

    • diwataman says:

      Bernie explained it all at the 6/29 hearing, it’s all very clear and easy to understand, which is usually how assertions go, of course proving it beyond a reasonable doubt, well, that doesn’t seem to concern Bernie to much. Bernie is very big on the “chase” thing which is just jammed packed with reasonable doubt it’s truly pathetic that people still assert it but then to throw in the “takes him down” thing is just, well, what can you say, Trayvonitish?

      2:18:40
      “they[SPD call taker] told him[George] to back off or to get back, he didn’t, he runs after this person[Trayvon], he takes em down”

      Like

      • howie says:

        They are going to claim T-Con attacked in self defense. Amazing. From behind and out of the dark. Amazing. What a travesty.

        Like

        • libby says:

          Well, they KNOW that George’s face took on Trayvon’s fist (now they are blaming george for hitting trayvon’s fist with his face).

          Like

      • eastern2western says:

        load of bs. If zimmerman had any intention of killing trayvon, then there was no point of ever getting in a physical conflict with him because he could had shot trayvon from a distance. another thing is there is no criminal in the history has ever called the cops, gave out all of his private information and crime intentions before committing a crime.

        Like

        • ftsk420 says:

          Also if his intention was to kill why use a gun that would be traced back to him instantly.

          Like

          • eastern2western says:

            yes, that is the whole point because it is not very smart to use once own gun that is registered with once own name and also committing the crime in once own neighborhood.

            Like

        • libby says:

          None of this case (and the media’s constant lies about this case) actually makes any sense at all if you actually employ logic to it.
          If you apply racism on a massive scale (the hatred of white people is racism, too), then it becomes easy to ignore the logic and just hate whitey.

          Like

        • John VI says:

          Of course, in our tech savy modern times, there are NUMEROUS criminals who tweet the details and pictures of the loot from thier crimes AFTER THE FACT.
          I suppose the london rioters did in fact tweet and broadcast thier identities to the public, which includes the police, before they commited their crime. Does that count? :)

          Trayvonites… still BS

          Like

  2. rumpole2 says:

    Daily Daft Posts from Justarse Quest

    Today’s examples are a bit self serving

    Some of the JQ posted reactions to “Daily Daft Posts from Justarse Quest”

    ( My fans in The Trayvon Zone) :D

    Discussion at “Random Topics”

    http://randomtopics.org/viewtopic.php?f=48&t=584&p=19323#p19323

    Like

  3. ottawa925 says:

    I tell you with certainty that you could have a clear, in color, well lit video of what transpired the evening Trayvon met his end, and none of those idiots would concede to anything. Their latest is to cherry pick like 5 or 6 incidents over 30 years (cause I think one occurred in the 80’s) to demonstrate how whites have falsely accused blacks of commiting crimes against them. Yet the writer does an EPIC FAIL, when they neglect to state how many whites ARE murdered and raped by blacks. The writer does an EPIC FAIL when they neglect to post the statistics of black on white and black on black violence. Anyone that would deliberately not tell BOTH sides is just shoveling the BS. You know it. And I know it. The numbers don’t lie. Deal with the numbers don’t throw 5… 6 incidents over 30 years at readers and expect to be taken seriously. The lack of education in that group of Trayvon followers is astonishing. The uneducated are easily led by the nose.

    Like

    • libby says:

      +1,000
      Ironically, the news media doesnt seem like they will be happy until we are as dumb as the rest of the shep they constantly lie to…

      Like

  4. raiikun says:

    Newest resurgence of an old claim I’ve seen that has no basis in law: George reaching for his phone to call police makes him the aggressor.

    I’m pretty sure it was here that someone posted the case law showing that to be the aggressor requires an intentional use or threat of force.

    Like

    • libby says:

      The news media considers it highly aggressive preventing a young thuggamuffin in training from terrorizing a neighborhood (the news media thought it was trayvon’s right to jack whomever he wanted, break into whichever townhomes he wanted and to tresspass in any yard that he wanted).

      Like

  5. dawndoe says:

    Happy New Year to the Zimmerman family! Hopefully 2013 will bring about better times!

    Like

  6. LandauMurphyFan says:

    I’ve just got my Internet back after moving last week, so have been trying to catch up with any news re GZ. (The Treehouse is, of course, the only place I check for REAL news.)

    George and Shellie, my thoughts have been with you over the Christmas period. I can only imagine what Christmas was like in hiding, but I sent you a card and a small donation, and I’m sure many Treepers did something similar.

    2012 is behind you now, and you’ve survived what will surely be the worst year of your lives. May God continue to give you strength in the months (may they be few!) before the courts are forced to face the truth about this tragedy and you are granted full immunity. Even though there are some who will forever choose to believe the lies, your name must and will be cleared in the sight of all who are honest, rational and decent.

    God bless you and keep you.

    Like

    • lovemygirl says:

      Isn’t it fun moving during the Winter? We are straddled between 2 houses but at least they are only 4 blocks apart. My internet was fine but our phone service finally got fixed this morning after 2 weeks.

      Like

  7. ejarra says:

    Happy New Year to all. I found some comments hysterical and sad from this:

    http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/entertainment_tv_tvblog/2012/12/casey-anthony-george-zimmerman-will-be-big-news-in-2013.html

    “All the prosecutor has to prove to sustain a conviction is that Trayvon Martin is dead, and that George Zimmerman is the cause of that death. Simple as that.” “every witness has stated that they either saw a ‘fist-fight’ or ‘wrestling’, and nothing else.”

    “that blow to the nose may well have been kick-back from the gun.”

    “There are no wounds anywhere on Trayvon martin suggesting he did anything to pansyass zimmurderman.”

    Yup, sad… But on the bright side there were many Pro-Zs as well.

    Like

    • rumpole2 says:

      :D

      Oh Noes!!!
      Do we need a daft comments at OS thread as well?
      Nah………….. it’s probably the same crowd posting at both places :)

      Zimmerman murdered an unarmed kid.

      A picture of a bloody head doesn’t change that fact. If an unarmed kid can’t resist an armed stalker with a criminal record of violence, none of us are safe

      Like

    • ftsk420 says:

      If it was kick back from the gun then Trayvon would have been shot in a different place. Problem with Trayvon supporters is they don’t think before they type.

      Like

      • libby says:

        Dont mean to be disagreeable here, but I have yet to find proof that trtayvonistas think at all (other than dreaming up scenarios that are improbable, if not impossible-and they sure as heck dont think much about proof)

        Like

  8. diwataman says:

    Here’s a paper I found by Professor of Law, Tamara F. Lawson. I thought Fred Leatherman needed him a woman in his life so I found him a perfect match. Careful, reading this stuff may cause gagging reflexes, sever headaches, and a constant shaking of the head from side to side, sometimes referred to as smh syndrome.

    I am truly tired of this mythical institutionalized black victimization system that is supposedly hidden yet seen everywhere all the time. And as Leatherman said, if you believe George, you’re a racist.;

    “The most important lesson of this case is that racism is alive and well in our nation. The defendant’s characterization of Trayvon Martin presents each one of us with a litmus test. Those who accept and believe what he said are failing the litmus test and seriously need to ask themselves why they were so willing to believe such an obvious lie.”

    http://frederickleatherman.com/2012/12/27/trayvon-martins-murder-forces-us-to-confront-racism/

    A Fresh Cut in an Old Wound – A Critical Analysis of the Trayvon Martin Killing: The Public Outcry, the Prosecutors’ Discretion, and the Stand Your Ground Law

    http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2176438

    Tamara F. Lawson

    http://www.stu.edu/LawsonTamaraF/tabid/2360/Default.aspx

    Like

    • raiikun says:

      That opinion by Leatherman is such an obvious logical fallacy; “Begging the question”. He’s using the conclusion of his argument as the basis for his argument thus declaring it true, when in reality they have not demonstrated that it is an “obvious lie”.

      Like

    • hooson1st says:

      Diwataman:

      Thanks for calling attention to that paper by Tamara Lawson and providing the link.

      It provides a fairly good overview of the various forces at play that changed the legal trajectory of GZ/TM tragedy.

      Although, she is somewhat deficient in presenting salient points in favor of GZ she notes clearly that, “It is too early to tell if the special prosecutor was correct in her re-assessment of the case; the jury will ultimately decide.”

      At CTH, it is been fairly well established, that based on known facts, the murder charge on GZ is not solidly based.

      Like

      • recoverydotgod says:

        A major deficiencies in Ms. Lawson’s presentation are she does not address civil tort reform given that the state seems to be so interested in parenting for parents. Criminal and Civil tort reform should go hand in hand.

        http://jjie.org/international-group-hails-florida-juvenile-justice-reformer/99229

        Like

      • diwataman says:

        I find nothing redeeming in that paper unless you count it as being a good example of the mindset that is indicative to the racial aspect that was created out of whole cloth in this case which is nothing but wholly destructive to due process for non blacks particularly whites who George, might I remind, was for a while. George had to be white in order for what Mz. Lawson and people of her mindset needed George to be in order for that myth that she presents in the paper to play out. When students attend a class of Mz. Lawson’s they won’t be going for education, they’ll be going for indoctrination.

        Like

        • hooson1st says:

          I suspect that Ms. Lawson’s personal leanings, would at least initially, lie with TM narrative spun by Crump et al.

          I thought her paper was remarkably objective as regards examining the legal and social factors that came to influence the legal trajectory of the case and that it shed it light on the legal landscape that would allow for the prosecution of this case to proceed in the manner that it has so far. So while I don’t agree that a murder charge against GZ was warranted based on what we know, there is leeway for the State and prosecutors to proceed in the fashion that they did.

          While the exposition of the basic facts of the GZ/TM encounter are well documented here at CTH, the conjecture as to the contour of the prosecution effort are more speculative.

          At this point, I don’t see how this case goes to trial. It doesn’t mean that the racial and political overtones won’t prevail pre-trial, and in fact, a trial may ensue.

          Like

    • Chip Bennett says:

      From Ms. Lawson’s conclusion:

      This case is about the killing of an unarmed Black teen walking with candy and iced tea that did not make it home alive.

      Sorry, but if she can’t even get the basic facts of the case correct, then she renders herself incapable of contributing anything worthwhile to the discussion.

      Also, this (the true end-point of her paper) [emphasis added]:

      Race is salient in the discussion of discretionary charging decisions. Race is salient in evaluating a jury’s reaction to a black victim, and its assessment of the defendant’s credibility on the reasonableness of acting in self-defense against the black aggressor/victim.115 Racial stereotypes are still part of American culture, and, by default, part of the American criminal justice system. Instead of being colorblind, an impossible exercise, the impact of race must be addressed head-on and become openly part of the legal critique and used where necessary to amend laws that enable race, or the fear of race, to be a guise to harm the disfavored race.

      No, Ms. Lawson. Justice is, and should be, colorblind. The Fourteenth Amendment guarantees that all citizens enjoy equal protection under the law.

      Further, race had nothing to do with the Zimmerman-Martin case. Martin attacked Zimmerman, unprovoked, and committed a felony aggravated battery against Zimmerman. Zimmerman shot Martin in self-defense, and was legally and morally justified in doing so.

      Like

      • hooson1st says:

        Chip:
        The points you make are valid, but I would frame it devoid of her adjectives.

        The legal case is about an unarmed individual shot and killed by an armed individual.

        Her article, when read within the context of her stated objectives, is fairly good.
        I would emphasize a different phrase within the portion of the article you cited; ” the impact of race must be addressed head-on.”

        I agree with you that race should have nothing to do with the case, but as we have seen, it does, because of non-legal factors.

        The Lawson article offers a framework justifying the prosecution actions to date. That framework can be dissected and dismembered if addressed head on.

        A good point to start is for Ms. Lawson to define what “guise” means to her within the context of “guise to harm the disfavored race”.

        Like

        • Chip Bennett says:

          The legal case is about an unarmed individual shot and killed by an armed individual.

          With respect, I would distill it even further: the legal case is about a homicide. The question is whether the homicide was legally justified or not.

          That the homicide victim was unarmed may or may not be relevant. As such, referring to Zimmerman as “armed” and Martin as “unarmed” already creates a premise of guilt on the part of Zimmerman. In reality, the unarmed Martin initiated an unprovoked, felony aggravated battery against Zimmerman, and Martin’s armed felony battery victim was fortunately able to defend himself against said felony.

          Being unarmed did not stop Martin from attacking Zimmerman, but had Zimmerman not been armed, he would likely have ended up hospitalized or dead, and Martin would be alive, and at-large for his felony assault.

          Like

          • hooson1st says:

            I agree with your distillation.

            And while I would also agree that the use of the adjectives “armed” and “unarmed” contributes to the “premise of guilt” on GZ’s part, it ought not to, strictly speaking, if we are dealing with the questions of justifiable-or-not homicide.

            In non-police involved killings, the reality is that the onus of explanation falls on the part of the armed survivor.

            Like

            • jello333 says:

              I wish there were better terms we could use than “armed” and “unarmed”. Not sure what they would be, but clearly there are some cases (like this one) where the distinction is not all that great. And you most definitely don’t need to have a man-made weapon in your hand to have lethal capabilities.

              (And Sharon, if you’re watching, YAY! For some reason this thread finally allowed me in. A day late, but whatever… ;) )

              Like

            • howie says:

              I agree. Justifiable or not. It is obvious Zimmerman committed Homicide by shooting T-con.. That is not the question.

              Like

  9. howie says:

    He wants to eliminate racism in society. Amazing thought process. Then he must want to repeal the civil rights act of 1964. Racism I think is favoring one race over another. He does not want to eliminate it as he claims. He is a liar. He wants to play handicapper of the outcome of peoples endeavors. They seek to level the playing field by adding weights to those races they see as outperforming other races in the race. Just like at the horse track.

    Like

  10. Chip Bennett says:

    Happy New Year, Zimmerman family, and may God bless each one of you.

    I pray also for God’s grace on the Martins, and I pray for myself, for the humility and gravity to recognize that my choices and actions as a parent can have an uplifting or a devastating impact on the lives of my daughters.

    Like

    • nettles18 says:

      To the Zimmerman Family – May 2013 bring you great health. Without our health our ability to enjoy life is diminished. I know you are under a great deal of stress and encourage you to focus on your health. It will help you deal with all that comes. Continue to be patient, the truth will eventually be known. George, you are not alone, a great many people believe you have the right to be presumed innocent, the right to remain silent in court (no matter what Judge Lester said), the right to have the evidence against you challenged and weighed before passing judgement. May 2013 bring justice to all.

      Like

  11. Rich Branson says:

    Is it possible for Zimmerman to sue Tracy and Sybrina and Crump? Not only for their slanderous statements but isn’t the parent responsible for the actions of their children?

    Like

  12. brutalhonesty says:

    listening to the radio and an abc show called perspective is on, http://abcnewsradioonline.com/perspective/ (they have podcasts)
    They covered the trayvon martin case in the year in review:
    ” The Trayvon Martin Shooting
    In February, a shooting in Florida sparked a heated dialogue about race in the small town of Sanford. 17-year-old Trayvon Martin was shot and killed by George Zimmerman. Martin was African American. ABC’s Aaron Katersky was in Sanford in the days following the shooting”

    so of course they had to mention trayvon is black…..they went on to claim george felt syg laws protected him (still pretty sure gz himself never said syg ever)…oh and they opened the story with “it was halftime of the nba allstar game when trayvon left his dads apartment to go to 7-11″…..WTF?!? ABC has zero excuses to get any facts wrong…especially the half time julison creation. to me it was spun against george however they did manage to play zimmerman audio saying trayvon said “your gonna die m-f’er” and that trayvon had reached for the gun.

    Like

    • justfactsplz says:

      George did not say SYG., you are right.

      Like

      • jello333 says:

        And even further… if I recall correctly, in the Hannity interview George said that before this case he didn’t even know exactly what the SYG laws were.

        Like

        • justfactsplz says:

          That is right. He really didn’t know that term and what it meant. He just stated he shot Trayvon in self defense. It was the Martin camp that jumped on the SYG part.

          Like

  13. brutalhonesty says:

    “Where he purchased Skittles for his little brother and an iced tea for himself” OMFG!!!! It was never tea and chad isnt even his brother…
    “Acting against the wishes of the 911 operator Zimmerman followed Martin” jeeze it never stops with this lie.

    Like

  14. LetJusticePrevail says:

    Today is the first day of a whole new year, and a time for a new beginning.

    WE all know the truth, and what facts support it.

    And, we ALL know that the media constantly misreports the facts, either due to ignorance or malicious intent.

    Now, we can post the truth HERE, and in other blogs, all we want, but that is not enough to change the stories printed in the media. And the media holds the real power to influence public opinion.

    If our goal is to disseminate the truth to OTHERS, then we need to take it TO them.

    I am not suggesting that we simply comment on their threads or blogs, where a limited few (and not the authors) will respond but, rather, that we identify the authors who appear to be ignorant of the actual facts, and contact them PERSONALLY by email, snail mail, telephone, or in person if possible, and present the actual facts from the disclosed reports.

    Granted, most will not be initially willing to engage in an honest dialogue, but it only takes ONE to start making people wonder what happened. Then others MIGHT be willing to reexamine what has been written about the case, and about George, and be willing to publicly print a counterpoint that is more in line with the truth.

    Wouldn’t that be a more productive use of our time and effort, rather than posting back and forth here, among ourselves?

    Like

    • selfdefenseadvocate says:

      Excellent suggestion. Unless people are willing to take a stand where it might do some good, we are just spinning our wheels and doing little more than promoting gossip.

      Like

      • LetJusticePrevail says:

        I believe that we are on the same page, but an actual, organized effort needs to be outlined and put into action. This will not be easy, and will require the time and effort of several people, not just a few. We will need to identify authors of news pieces who *might* be receptive to the idea of reconsidering their opinions and will also be willing to engage with people of our “ilk”.

        Frankly, since the *vocal* supporters of George Zimmerman represent a very small portion of the population, we might already be viewed as members of a “lunatic fringe” movement and be met with a negative knee jerk reaction to our viewpoint. With that in mind, a circumspect approach would be necessary.

        Like

    • ejarra says:

      This is why I posted a comment here: http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/entertainment_tv_tvblog/2012/12/casey-anthony-george-zimmerman-will-be-big-news-in-2013.html

      If more of us, who more of this case than most, were to comment in news reports, it may help spread the truth.

      Like

      • LetJusticePrevail says:

        Yes, every comment we make helps a *little*, but that is not enough. All that happens when we comment to blogs or news articles is that we provide more fodder for the TrayHuggers to ridicule and allows them yet another opportunity to spout their ridiculous nonsense. What is needed is to communicate directly and personally with the actual media authors, themselves.

        We are already adept at discovering the articles themselves, now we need to develop ways to approach the actual authors and engage them in respectful discussion that presents the facts that they overlook or omit. It won’t be easy, and we will be frequently rebuffed, but anything less only allows the status quo to be maintained.

        Like

        • dmoseylou says:

          I have e-mailed / tweeted authors of articles, their managers, and their editors for many months. I have also e-mailed / tweeted talk show hosts / commentaries. I reference the obvious misinformation they have presented AND supply links to validate not only my allegations of incorrect information, but to also enable their own verifications of my statements. I have notified some people MANY, MANY times; they never change their false narrative. But, I have actually received a few positive responsive tweets, from smaller websites.

          I have individual folders: 1. Crump Lies. 2. Tracy Lies. 3. Sybrina Lies. etc, etc, etc. The entire Scheming Scammers Team Lies. When a news site posts blatant lies, I send them a very polite note with these back-up files. They know the truth. They are, unfortunately, much more interested in $$$ than a silly little notion like TRUTH.

          Like

          • LetJusticePrevail says:

            During any of your attempts did you receive any confirmation of receipt, or did you get the complete blow off?

            Like

            • libby says:

              I got a jerk from HLN to say some of the nastiest things (levi page). Why be happy with the truth if you can spin a false narrative that makes whites appear evil?

              Like

              • LetJusticePrevail says:

                Well, I guess that we can scratch *him* off any list of likely prospects. Any other replies, or just the “cold shoulder” from all of the rest?

                Like

          • jello333 says:

            I’m not a fan of Sean Hannity. But I admire that he stood up for George when nobody else would. So I’m wondering if he might be a good person to start with. Fox is well-known for often pushing against the tide on various issues, and so might they want to be seen as the first major media outlet to start “correcting the lies” told about George, and the whole case in general? If nothing else, the other media outlets — the ones who hate Fox, and are their direct competitors — would have to reexamine their own biased reporting, if they intend to argue with Fox.

            Like

            • jordan2222 says:

              I am not holding my breath, but I am thinking that eventually someone is going to do a story that refutes the previous media lies,..point by point.. with actual facts but that will require courage and along with that comes risk. So far, they all appear to be afraid of offending blacks.

              That is the REAL issue that should be addressed. If that does not happen, then this case will forever be remembered for how a white man got away with murdering a black teenager. I would hope someone does this BEFORE the self defense hearing because it will be too late after that, if it’s not already.

              Like

              • LetJusticePrevail says:

                A single story would never be enough to relate all of the mechanisms that came into play here. I am not sure that a feature length documentary film could properly tell what happened.

                Like

    • Sharon says:

      I’d suggest not seeing it as having to be one or the other. Both are very, very useful. I’m guessing that many of those posting/discussing here have never before taken the opportunity to jump into practical analysis like this, exposing the reality of the wreckage of parts of our judicial system, and whether they ever comment on a newspaper site or not, they are far better equipped and more knowledgeable than they were. And I’m suspecting they’re making an impact on family members and friends, whether they are discussing the GZ case or not.

      Like

      • LetJusticePrevail says:

        Oh, I wholeheartedly agree with both of your points. Engaging newcomers in our discussions helps to provide them with a perspective they won’t get elsewhere, and encourages an honest debate. At the same time, it DOES provide encouragement for any family members who visit here. All I am suggesting is that we take our efforts *further* to maximize their effect.

        Like

      • jello333 says:

        I think I’ve made an impact on many friends. I’m in a couple of “secret” FB groups, which includes mostly all lefties (sorry! ;) ). I noticed many months ago that a couple of them were starting to get interested in this case, and were of course on the wrong side of it. So that’s when I knew I had to say something. I went into a lot of details about what I know, and asked them to please TRUST ME on this one. They KNOW me, after all, and they like and trust me, and know that I wouldn’t just blindly take one side over the other on something as controversial as this case. So after explaining a lot of things to them, and convincing some of them to dig a little deeper, I think I caught them before it was too late. Admittedly none of them (as far as I know) are willing to be as “out there” as I am about the case and George’s innocence… but by the same token, none of them has become a “Trayvonite”. And I think without my intervention, there’s a very good chance that might have happened. I’m kinda proud of that. Not just that I helped prevent more people from going over to the dark side (which is good for George and the cause of justice), but that those people are friends of mine, and I did something good for THEM, too.

        Like

        • Sharon says:

          That’s excellent in so many ways. I think a lot of us are doing that type of things in a dozen different ways, things that we were not doing 3 years ago. So it’s all good… ;)

          Like

        • jordan2222 says:

          I have been able to successfully get a few people at HuffPost to see things differently, too.. But that is rare, and I doubt I could have made a difference if those people had not been following me as a result of posts I made about other issues on which we agreed.

          Expressing OPINIONS about the George Zimmerman case over is a total waste of time. I rarely comment on this case any more, but at some point, quite a while ago, I began to post only facts with supporting links but even that often invited angry diatribes. If I ask a legitimate question, it’s either ignored or they post a sarcastic nonsensical remark.

          Like

          • jello333 says:

            Yeah, that’s about how it goes. If you make a comment to a random bunch of people, they’ll probably just ignore (or belittle) you. In order to accomplish much, it almost has to be people you already know pretty well, preferably friends. And then, if you’re lucky, they’ll be willing to listen to you. As I said, my friends know where I stand on issues of justice and fairness, on “right and wrong”, and on racism. So when they see me saying things that are outside the mainstream, they don’t just write it off. They KNOW I have good reason to say what I’m saying, and so they give me the benefit of the doubt. I’m sure all of us can say the same… the closer we are to people, the better chance we have of “getting through” to them.

            Like

  15. jordan2222 says:

    On the subject of racism:

    Birds of a feather flock together. Lions do not mate with tigers.

    If God only wanted one race, why did He create others?

    How are you going to force something to happen that is unnatural? Isn’t that like telling God he doesn’t know what He is doing?

    Ever wonder why integration was changed to desegregation? Never mind.

    Sorry for thinking out loud but I am getting tired of this crap so I think I am just going to be a proud, natural born common sense racist.
    —————————–
    “Thinking out loud” may also be an excuse for making out of context statements that seem to be designed to stir conflict about the mixing of the races. No connection to the subject of the thread. –Admin

    Like

    • Rick Madigan says:

      According to biologist Spencer Wells, we are all one race, the human race, and we are all from Africa, so technically, all of us on the US continent can say we are African American.

      Wells PBS documentary “Journey of Man,” explains his research on how different races originated from the African group; much of it has to do with their journey and the climatic conditions they endured.

      If you are interested in knowing about the R1B Haplo Caucasian group specifically, Wells talks about their journey to Iberia with Charlie Rose:
      .

      Like

      • dmoseylou says:

        I know of Mr. Wells and his work. I have also been an avid follower of Dr. Bill Bass (The Body Farm) for many years. Each of these men has conducted outstanding research that, corroborated with others in their field, IMO, leaves no doubt whatsoever that all mankind originated in Africa.

        Like

      • jordan2222 says:

        I am a bit familiar with his work. Evolution, blood lines and the origin of species have always intrigued me.

        However, in the end, I decided to go with Scripture, looking at it through a magnifying glass as best I could.

        God’s “chosen people” were true Israelites, not the “Jews” so many others believe today. Intermarriage was forbidden. Each time that happened, a prophet arose and God ordered that they all be killed, including women and children.

        They eventually got here after escaping the Assyrian/Babylonian captivity. America is the “land promised.” I am an Israelite and will never let anyone steal my birthright.

        Like

    • jordan2222 says:

      I am sorry but racism is prevalent in every single thread about the George Zimmerman case and has been from the start. We speak “carefully” almost as if we are afraid to address the real issue. We don’t want to step too much on Crump’s toes.

      Everyone here has a different definition of racism but it is a huge part of the case. Why do we allow “them” to disparage us? The Civil Rights Act was passed in 1964, almost 50 years ago, and blacks today have more rights than any of us.

      Serious question: Is it even possible for them to assimilate into a predominately white society?

      I will shut up because you have scolded me but I believe we, not them, have caused this to happen.

      Like

  16. arkansasmimi says:

    Just something silly… noticed in the Walgreen sale paper they have Arizona Tea and Drink on sale 3/$10.00 (12 pk) It caught my eye because it had the Tea and DRINK words… made me think about the stupid media.

    Like

    • arkansasmimi says:

      Wow, if you get your Waddermelon Drink on sale, catch a few Skittle after Christmas markdowns you have your LEAN going on and some Chump change to spare :)

      Like

      • jordan2222 says:

        That is funny. How on earth did have a power outage? Happy New to you.

        Like

        • arkansasmimi says:

          Well 10 inches of beautiful snow fell upon my dear state on the first time in 86 years ON Christmas, and broke many many trees which fell upon the power lines. All gone for us now, we had rain to melt it last night lol. Thank YOU! And Happy New Year to you too :)

          Like

          • jordan2222 says:

            You would think by now the EPA would have figured out a way for us all to have interrupted power regardless of the weather. I have been though over 20 hurricanes and not having electricity was the worst part of them all.

            Like

            • arkansasmimi says:

              LMBO, maybe that is what that EPA lady was doing, the one who resigned because of fake emails (which one supposedly was as a man) ;)

              Like

            • arkansasmimi says:

              At least this time was only short time, Christmas/New Year 2000 we had horrible ice storm and was without power over a week. God Bless those Linemen/women who came and restored our power, away from their families during Christmas and New Year.

              Like

  17. cmsiq2 says:

    Disgusting. I was watching CBS New Years Eve Special, and about 12:10 they had a commercial from Google, that had all the “positive” highlights from 2012.

    With motivating music in the background, they showed quick clips dealing with people overcoming obstacles and such. Halfway through the commercial, they showed the racist lynch mob “Justice for Trayvon”, acting like they are having some kind of positive influence in America this past year.

    Like

  18. wrongonred says:

    Does anyone know if the Justice for George Zimmerman Facebook Page was shut down? Voluntarily or involuntarily? The page with the couple thousand likes seems to have disappeared…..just curious

    Like

  19. LittleLaughter says:

    Law & Order SVU was on USA today at my hubby’s grandmother’s home. It was a newer episode (with an overweight Mariska Hargitay and an aged Ice T, with little newbie, young detectives I don’t know running about). It was about vigalanties, I think, and one of the newbies made the comment that “It’s like the Trayvon Martin case in Florida- when people take the law into their own hands. I just left the room.
    I understand L&OSVU is an NBC production. I quit watching L&O a long time ago when their leftist political slant was in every episode. This case hasn’t even had the hearing yet! How incredibly reckless. Did anyone else happen to catch that episode when it first aired? I wonder when that was? I am sure it was *Pre-Lawsuit*!

    Like

    • libby says:

      trayvon was taking the law into his own hands (george had called the police for help while trayvon had tried to solve his problems all by hisself).
      deedee never once stated that as afraid as trayvon had been, he never once called the cops nor did he axe (this is proper ebonics, right?) her to. trayvon was the vigilante trying to set the record straight for thugs in training (and trying to redistribute the wealth of the lcoal communuity, seemingly)

      Like

  20. LittleLaughter says:

    Caught in the Spam vortex. :-(

    Like

  21. LittleLaughter says:

    Trying again…
    I was asking if anyone had caught the episode of L&O SVU when a newbie det made the comment, while refferencing vigalanties, that it “was like the Trayvon Martin case in flordida- that’s what happens when you take the law into your own hands.” I hate L&O because of it’s liberal politics in every episode. I am guessing this episode was Pre-Lawsuit. It should be added to the NBC suit.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s