If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(KNBC 4 Los Angeles)   LAPD declares citywide tactical alert amid George Zimmerman protests. Link goes to live feed   (nbclosangeles.com) divider line 1083
    More: News, LAPD, Los Angeles, Crenshaw Boulevard  
•       •       •

12966 clicks; posted to Main » on 16 Jul 2013 at 12:35 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



1083 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-07-16 06:55:53 PM

iq_in_binary: What_Would_Jimi_Do: Taylor Mental: Jurors are now saying they knew Zimmerman was wrong and should have been punished but didn't have evidence to overcome reasonable doubt.

So this is basically another OJ or Casey Anthony bullshiat discussion that won't be resolved and the acolytes of the criminal won't shut up until the next Nancy Grace show.

when a jury of your peers has no evidence to convict you, it means you are not a criminal.

How many lynch mobs were convicted, I wonder?

Just because the law is poorly written doesn't mean he didn't do anything wrong.


And this is what I'm thinking. When a community watch guy carries a gun and ignores all directives to not become involved in the apprehension and questioning of suspects it makes him a vigilante. When his actions result in the death of an innocent kid and the justice system legitimizes it, that makes it a LYNCH MOB.

Zimmerman lied so many times its just absurd anyone would believe his story. He got his ass kicked because he crossed the line from being the eyes and ears of the police to being a security guard/cop. For me that is enough culpability to hold him accountable by some measure, even if it's only 5 years incarceration.

People have good reason to be outraged over this because it's an ongoing theme in America where there are two systems of justice - one for affluent whites in the suburbs and another for the nubians who live in the dirty ghettos. But when those nubians move into white neighborhoods everyone panics, just as Zimmerman did. We know this is the case because of all his recorded statements. The coward with a gun got away with murder. Pure and simple.
 
2013-07-16 06:56:06 PM

BraveNewCheneyWorld: TheJoe03: BraveNewCheneyWorld: I remember the white riots after the OJ Simpson verdict too..

Keep it up there Bubba, I bet your so proud of that asinine comment.

You were at a loss to provide a decent response, so it served its purpose.


You expected a response to some hacky comparison that doesn't even make sense? Ok there Zed, we get it, black people should be judged on the actions of a few dumbasses in LA. The thought process of a racist confounds me.
 
2013-07-16 07:15:32 PM

TheJoe03: You expected a response to some hacky comparison that doesn't even make sense? Ok there Zed, we get it, black people should be judged on the actions of a few dumbasses in LA. The thought process of a racist confounds me.


No, not all of them should be judged, but as another said earlier, if they're trying to remove their stereotypes, their community has failed them.
 
2013-07-16 07:19:41 PM

TheJoe03: The thought process of a racist confounds me.


Oh, and pointing out flaws doesn't make one a racist.  So stop trying to shame those who point out your ignorance, we know enough not to be shamed by you.
 
2013-07-16 09:47:41 PM
Taylor Mental:

And this is what I'm thinking. When a community watch guy carries a gun and ignores all directives to not become involved in the apprehension and questioning of suspects it makes him a vigilante. When his actions result in the death of an innocent kid and the justice system legitimizes it, that makes it a LYNCH MOB.

What directives?  There's no requirement to stay in the car.  There is nothing wrong with observing a person walking on a public street.  There is nothing wrong with carrying a gun.  In fact, it saved his life.

Zimmerman lied so many times its just absurd anyone would believe his story. He got his ass kicked because he crossed the line from being the eyes and ears of the police to being a security guard/cop. For me that is enough culpability to hold him accountable by some measure, even if it's only 5 years incarceration.

Again, where do you make up this information?  Certainly not from the trial or Zimmerman's statements.  The jury believe that Martin threw the first punch and then followed up with further assaults.  When did he cross the line?  What line did he cross?  Absent a physical assault he's just a guy on a public street.  The neighborhood watch guy on a public street watching a man he doesn't recognize walking around his gated community at night and in the rain attempting to allude him.  In fact, Trayvon's GF's explanation of 'cracka' would have us believe that Martin thought a security guard was following him.  Why would he fear a security guard?  Why didn't he call his dad if he was afraid?  Nobody points to any wrongdoing by Zimmerman.  In fact, no one even points to Zimmerman following Martin after the 911 operator tells him he doesn't have to do that (911 operators will tell you that you don't have to jump in the pool to save a drowning child because they are liable for acts you do at their request.  Zimmerman was under no obligation to obey a 911 operator.)  It's entirely contrived that Zimmerman initiated contact.

People have good reason to be outraged over this because it's an ongoing theme in America where there are two systems of justice - one for affluent whites in the suburbs and another for the nubians who live in the dirty ghettos. But when those nubians move into white neighborhoods everyone panics, just as Zimmerman did. We know this is the case because of all his recorded statements. The coward with a gun got away with murder. Pure and simple.

Zimmerman was not/is not an affluent white.  He lived in a relativity modest community that was at least 20% African-American.  The community was in the middle of a rash of burglaries and home invasions commited by young black males (not Trayvon obviously).  They were looking for the perpetrators.

I'll submit the underlying problem of this whole case is the violence prevalent in, as you call it "the dirty ghetto."  Trayvon may have been used to using violence to settle scores and slights.  Not necessarily fatal violence, but fist fights.  The violence tolerated between black youth in inner cities is simply not understood or tolerated outside that culture.   Trayvon had been suspended for fighting before and apparently accepted it as part of life (fighting).   Black males in today's society are killed disproportionately to any other group.  They are killed overwhelmingly by other Black males.  It's a vicious cycle with it's own causes that are tragic but focusing all that rage on a single Hispanic that defended himself from that violence is not rational.   In chicago and LA, the neighborhod watch is whatever gang controls the street.  There is plenty of violence between blacks and other blacks, hispanics vs blacks and hispanic vs. hispanic.  Some of it is racial and almost all is gange related.  Take a long look in mirror and ask yourself why there is not outrage for the poor black male killed by a poor hispanic male in a turf war and why there isn't a call for more prosecutions and more arrests.  Ask yourself why the same groups that want a stiff penalty for Zimmerman often want less incarcerations when the dead person is still the same poor minority kid.
 
2013-07-16 11:52:10 PM
www.naturalnews.com
msnbcmedia.msn.com

Why so jumpy and shooty, LAPD?

Guilty conscience?

By the way, did you ever do the right thing by those two innocent newspaper delivery women you tried but failed to summarily put to death?
Or did you lawyer it all away and blame the victims?

/Thought so, you utterly corrupt f*cks.
 
2013-07-16 11:56:05 PM

BuckTurgidson: [www.naturalnews.com image 400x225]
[msnbcmedia.msn.com image 380x254]

Why so jumpy and shooty, LAPD?

Guilty conscience?

By the way, did you ever do the right thing by those two innocent newspaper delivery women you tried but failed to summarily put to death?
Or did you lawyer it all away and blame the victims?

/Thought so, you utterly corrupt f*cks.


I believe they offered a rental vehicle to the couple they actually hit with bullets, or something like that, then went back on even that.

/yeah, that was a seriously farked up situation
//put me in Dorner's corner somewhat, even if he was psycho
 
2013-07-17 12:03:53 AM

tbeatty: I'll submit the underlying problem of this whole case is the violence prevalent in, as you call it "the dirty ghetto." Trayvon may have been used to using violence to settle scores and slights. Not necessarily fatal violence, but fist fights. The violence tolerated between black youth in inner cities is simply not understood or tolerated outside that culture. Trayvon had been suspended for fighting before and apparently accepted it as part of life (fighting). Black males in today's society are killed disproportionately to any other group. They are killed overwhelmingly by other Black males. It's a vicious cycle with it's own causes that are tragic but focusing all that rage on a single Hispanic that defended himself from that violence is not rational. In chicago and LA, the neighborhod watch is whatever gang controls the street. There is plenty of violence between blacks and other blacks, hispanics vs blacks and hispanic vs. hispanic. Some of it is racial and almost all is gange related. Take a long look in mirror and ask yourself why there is not outrage for the poor black male killed by a poor hispanic male in a turf war and why there isn't a call for more prosecutions and more arrests. Ask yourself why the same groups that want a stiff penalty for Zimmerman often want less incarcerations when the dead person is still the same poor minority kid.



Excellent points.

Unfortunately...

farm1.staticflickr.com

... "Ginger" isn't likely to "get it".
 
2013-07-17 12:14:31 AM

Wizzywig: Cobblestone, I want to hate you, but I cant because even though you dont agree with someone, you are still cordial and appreciate the efforts of the opposition. B*stard.


Hey! I can take a little ribbing, that's why I'm here! You learn more by actively engaging those that have differing views than people that agree with you any day of the week. Fark is one of the best places on the internet for that, and it's why I've been an active reader for over a decade. I've always been amazed at how relatively pure the comments sections are on this site for how large of a reach the site has as a News Aggregator. The signal-to-noise ratio is pretty incredible when you think about it. The amount of noise on Reddit makes my eyes glaze over.

Anyways, through these comments, I've been kind of frustrated with myself because all of my arguments are coming from very Trayvon-Tinted Glasses. I could make a lot of arguments from Zimmerman's point of view too, that would make me seem a bit more even-handed about this, but I've been primarily playing the Foil in my posts.
 
2013-07-17 12:40:20 AM

BraveNewCheneyWorld: as another said earlier, if they're trying to remove their stereotypes, their community has failed them.


Why are only minorities judged by what members of their ethnic group do? When a white guy (or a group of whities) does some stupid shiat no one brings up their race and all that. You are a fool and an obvious racist, stop pretending.
 
2013-07-17 12:41:38 AM

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Oh, and pointing out flaws doesn't make one a racist.  So stop trying to shame those who point out your ignorance, we know enough not to be shamed by you.


Judging an entire race based on the actions of a few is racist, you should feel shame. I'm trying to point out YOUR ignorance but you're far too moronic to get it.
 
2013-07-17 01:13:55 AM

TheJoe03: BraveNewCheneyWorld: as another said earlier, if they're trying to remove their stereotypes, their community has failed them.

Why are only minorities judged by what members of their ethnic group do? When a white guy (or a group of whities) does some stupid shiat no one brings up their race and all that. You are a fool and an obvious racist, stop pretending.


OH NO!

When George Zimmerman shot Trayvon Martin, it WASN'T seen as in indictment of ALL WHITES and the EVIL, BIASED, OPPRESSIVE HEEL that the WHITE MAN uses to keep the BLACK MAN down, was it??? (Hint: Ask all the "peaceful demonstrators" in LA, Oakland, Houston, etc. what their "beef" is)

FYI, Zimmerman's mother is 1/4 black, and 3/4 Hispanic, while his FATHER is 100% "white" (and 100% JEWISH).

That makes Zimmerman 1/8 black. 3/8 Hispanic, 50% "white", doesn't it???

Zimmerman is EXACTLY as "white" as that "White Debbil Obama".

Yet Zimmerman has been spun as being WHITE by all the race baiters INCLUDING Obama, who is every bit as farking "white" as Zimmerman.

Now, what were you saying, TheJoe03? Because I'm not sure that your point was clear.

Why don't you assplain it to us?
 
2013-07-17 01:17:32 AM

TheJoe03: BraveNewCheneyWorld: as another said earlier, if they're trying to remove their stereotypes, their community has failed them.

Why are only minorities judged by what members of their ethnic group do? When a white guy (or a group of whities) does some stupid shiat no one brings up their race and all that. You are a fool and an obvious racist, stop pretending.


Minorities tend to not have as many sub-groups.  Take a redneck for example.  Not all of them are retarded, but every time one of them demonstrably is it does somewhat reflect on that sub group in the eyes of many.

It's not like ALL blacks get judged by what a group of them do.  Plenty of respectable actors and laywers and doctors and what have you that never riot, never protest, and some even similarly call treyvon a thug.  Then then get called "oreo" or "race traitor".

Now, the blacks that are getting the ribbing here are the one's that conveniently overlook Treyvon's violence and adamantly suggest GZ was racist/race profiling.  That is a given sub-set, but it's not only blacks doing that.  Plenty of everyone else is as well, and they all get labeled as dipshiats regardless of their skin color.

But again, just like GZ/TM, if a black is on the receiving end, it MUST be racism.

That's the error in yours, and many other people's perceptions.  Being black doesn't make one above reproach for obnoxious(and/or violent) behavior, thinking otherwise is racist in and of itself.  It's a common flaw among many left leaning types.  They think that they are on the "just" side, and can be a gigantic asshole and no one can say anything.

Not all blacks do that, as I mentioned, but a given subset does, same as with whites and reds and blues.  Yes, there are some who are legitimately bigots, but no where near the level of accusation that gets thrown around.  That's what's disturbing.
 
2013-07-17 01:38:48 AM

Amos Quito: OH NO!

When George Zimmerman shot Trayvon Martin, it WASN'T seen as in indictment of ALL WHITES and the EVIL, BIASED, OPPRESSIVE HEEL that the WHITE MAN uses to keep the BLACK MAN down, was it???


Which is also some racist divisive bullshiat, the same bullshiat your type does. Two wrongs don't make a right.
 
2013-07-17 01:39:51 AM

omeganuepsilon: That's the error in yours, and many other people's perceptions.  Being black doesn't make one above reproach for obnoxious(and/or violent) behavior, thinking otherwise is racist in and of itself.


Ah, now the race baiters are putting words in my mouth.
 
2013-07-17 02:01:13 AM

TheJoe03: omeganuepsilon: That's the error in yours, and many other people's perceptions.  Being black doesn't make one above reproach for obnoxious(and/or violent) behavior, thinking otherwise is racist in and of itself.

Ah, now the race baiters are putting words in my mouth.


Yeah, that "I'm rubber you're glue" argument will really win people over, Sparky.
 
2013-07-17 02:03:36 AM

omeganuepsilon: Yeah, that "I'm rubber you're glue" argument will really win people over, Sparky.


You shouldn't have put words in my mouth.
 
2013-07-17 02:12:02 AM
BuckTurgidson:
Why so jumpy and shooty, LAPD?

Guilty conscience?

By the way, did you ever do the right thing by those two innocent newspaper delivery women you tried but failed to summarily put to death?
Or did you lawyer it all away and blame the victims?

/Thought so, you utterly corrupt f*cks.


You really don't know what happened, do you.  Righteously ignorant is no way to go through life son.
 
2013-07-17 02:32:42 AM

omeganuepsilon: I'm explaining a couple flawed and incomplete reasoning possibilities of the crowd in general, which you seem to belong to


I never said the stuff you claimed I believed in, you sad little racist.
 
2013-07-17 03:24:59 AM

TheJoe03: Amos Quito: OH NO!

When George Zimmerman shot Trayvon Martin, it WASN'T seen as in indictment of ALL WHITES and the EVIL, BIASED, OPPRESSIVE HEEL that the WHITE MAN uses to keep the BLACK MAN down, was it???


Which is also some racist divisive bullshiat, the same bullshiat your type does. Two wrongs don't make a right.



Listen, Cuddles, it wasn't me or anyone of "my type" that took a clear case of self defense and blew it up into a nationwide, racially charged shiatstorm. Credit for that little maneuver goes to those that give marching orders to the race-baiters, the sleazy-assed politicians and the house-broken media.

There is a concerted, focused and ongoing effort to maintain separation, suspicion, distrust, animosity and hatred between various groups in the US - not only racial, but religious, cultural and class divisions.

Any time a people can become united in identity and purpose, they potentially become a formidable force of opposition that might tend to threaten those who guard their precious Oligarchic Authoritarian power structure.

Better to keep these groups divided, squabbling and at each others throats.

Back vs white, male vs female, rich vs poor, gay vs straight. Republican vs Democrat...

The more squabbling divisions you can create/reinforce, the better your chances at preventing UNITY, manipulating the stupid louts to your advantage, and increasing Authoritarian power.

Don't you think?
 
2013-07-17 03:35:36 AM

Amos Quito: Listen, Cuddles, it wasn't me or anyone of "my type" that took a clear case of self defense and blew it up into a nationwide, racially charged shiatstorm. Credit for that little maneuver goes to those that give marching orders to the race-baiters, the sleazy-assed politicians and the house-broken media.

There is a concerted, focused and ongoing effort to maintain separation, suspicion, distrust, animosity and hatred between various groups in the US - not only racial, but religious, cultural and class divisions.

Any time a people can become united in identity and purpose, they potentially become a formidable force of opposition that might tend to threaten those who guard their precious Oligarchic Authoritarian power structure.

Better to keep these groups divided, squabbling and at each others throats.

Back vs white, male vs female, rich vs poor, gay vs straight. Republican vs Democrat...

The more squabbling divisions you can create/reinforce, the better your chances at preventing UNITY, manipulating the stupid louts to your advantage, and increasing Authoritarian power.

Don't you think?


Literally none of that has to do with my point that it's racist to make black people answer to some random douches in LA. I have no problem with black or white or any kind of people, you can argue that garbage with someone else. I don't even disagree with your points in that post, but I'm not sure what that has to do with judging the black race based on some random people while no one does that with white people. If you're going to change the subject, then why even quote me? You can make your point without including me.
 
2013-07-17 07:39:22 AM

Amos Quito: FYI, Zimmerman's mother is 1/4 black, and 3/4 Hispanic, while his FATHER is 100% "white" (and 100% JEWISH).


Underlined and all-caps. It's like you think that's the most critical piece of information in your entire post.

This isn't Stormfront, though I understand that with an increasing number of posters like you it's getting hard to tell the difference. Or do you just find this a good place to recruit?
 
2013-07-17 08:24:14 AM

vygramul: This isn't Stormfront, though I understand that with an increasing number of posters like you it's getting hard to tell the difference. Or do you just find this a good place to recruit?


You losing the argument?  It seems that's the time you usually pull the "you're a racist" card.
 
2013-07-17 08:32:26 AM

Molavian: You losing the argument?  It seems that's the time you usually pull the "you're a racist" card.


It was pretty strange for him to put so much emphasis on his Jewish heritage, especially for a guy known on this site for appearing to be anti-Semitic and very critical of Jews
 
2013-07-17 10:04:08 AM

TheJoe03: omeganuepsilon: I'm explaining a couple flawed and incomplete reasoning possibilities of the crowd in general, which you seem to belong to

I never said the stuff you claimed I believed in, you sad little racist.


You argue like a child.
 
2013-07-17 10:27:57 AM

Molavian: vygramul: This isn't Stormfront, though I understand that with an increasing number of posters like you it's getting hard to tell the difference. Or do you just find this a good place to recruit?

You losing the argument?  It seems that's the time you usually pull the "you're a racist" card.


You mean calling Martin a racist for saying "cracker" means the person is losing the argument?
 
2013-07-17 10:54:47 AM

vygramul: Molavian: vygramul: This isn't Stormfront, though I understand that with an increasing number of posters like you it's getting hard to tell the difference. Or do you just find this a good place to recruit?

You losing the argument?  It seems that's the time you usually pull the "you're a racist" card.

You mean calling Martin a racist for saying "cracker" means the person is losing the argument?


Because we're having an argument with Martin, right?
 
2013-07-17 12:10:48 PM

tbeatty: What directives?  There's no requirement to stay in the car.  There is nothing wrong with observing a person walking on a public street.  There is nothing wrong with carrying a gun.  In fact, it saved his life.


If you don't know this you either haven't been paying attention or you're being willfully obtuse. The police tell neighborhood watch organization volunteers not to pursue, not to attempt to apprehend suspects. The police dispatcher specifically told him not to follow Martin.

Again, where do you make up this information?  Certainly not from the trial or Zimmerman's statements.  The jury believe that Martin threw the first punch and then followed up with further assaults.  When did he cross the line?  What line did he cross?  Absent a physical assault he's just a guy on a public street.  The neighborhood watch guy on a public street watching a man he doesn't recognize walking around his gated community at night and in the rain attempting to allude him.  In fact, Trayvon's GF's explanation of 'cracka' would have us believe that Martin thought a security guard was following him.  Why would he fear a security guard?  Why didn't he call his dad if he was afraid?  Nobody points to any wrongdoing by Zimmerman.  In fact, no one even points to Zimmerman following Martin after the 911 operator tells him he doesn't have to do that (911 operators will tell you that you don't have to jump in the pool to save a drowning child because they are liable for acts you do at their request.  Zimmerman was under no obligation to obey a 911 operator.)  It's entirely contrived that Zimmerman initiated contact.

You obviously live in some kind of fantasy world where facts mean nothing because you get to interpret everything to justify your paranoid delusions.  Zimmerman had at least one opportunity to question Martin from the safety of his vehicle. All he had to do was roll down the window and ask "Hey man, are you lost, can I help you?" to explain why he was stalking the kid. Zimmerman later lied about this moment when saying Martin circled his truck, it never happened. He also lied later in his statement to the police that he didn't know how old Martin was when he clearly says on the non-emergency call that Martin was in his late teens and called him "a kid."

And then there are the two utterances Zimmerman made about "farking punks" who "always get away" indicating exactly what his frame of mind and intent was. Another lie he told was that the police dispatcher told him keep an eye on Martin while there was no such directive. He told him to "let me know if he does anything else" meaning break the law or threaten Zimmerman. Shortly thereafter we hear Zimmerman running after Martin and the dispatcher asks him "are you following him?"

As for the altercation and who started it, nobody knows. The one thing we know for certain is that Martin was doing nothing wrong and Zimmerman was a threat by any standard. It doesn't matter there were previous burglaries in the area, how was Martin supposed to know this when Zimmerman, by his own admission neglected to explain what he was doing chasing Martin?

Zimmerman got away with murder. I just wish you paranoid gun nuts would stop making excuses for him. He would not have even needed his gun had he not been so stupid and hateful.
 
2013-07-17 12:41:49 PM

BraveNewCheneyWorld: vygramul: Molavian: vygramul: This isn't Stormfront, though I understand that with an increasing number of posters like you it's getting hard to tell the difference. Or do you just find this a good place to recruit?

You losing the argument?  It seems that's the time you usually pull the "you're a racist" card.

You mean calling Martin a racist for saying "cracker" means the person is losing the argument?

Because we're having an argument with Martin, right?


Ah, I see, so I can tell YOU Amos Quito is a racist, and that's ok. I'm just not allowed to say it to HIM.

These rules of yours are strange and take some getting used to.
 
2013-07-17 12:57:27 PM

vygramul: BraveNewCheneyWorld: vygramul: Molavian: vygramul: This isn't Stormfront, though I understand that with an increasing number of posters like you it's getting hard to tell the difference. Or do you just find this a good place to recruit?

You losing the argument?  It seems that's the time you usually pull the "you're a racist" card.

You mean calling Martin a racist for saying "cracker" means the person is losing the argument?

Because we're having an argument with Martin, right?

Ah, I see, so I can tell YOU Amos Quito is a racist, and that's ok. I'm just not allowed to say it to HIM.

These rules of yours are strange and take some getting used to.


Yeah, the rules are strange because you apparently have the reasoning skills of a hamster.  I'd like to explain the numerous logical inconsistencies you've made, but I fear it would be a fruitless endeavor.
 
2013-07-17 01:20:29 PM

BraveNewCheneyWorld: vygramul: BraveNewCheneyWorld: vygramul: Molavian: vygramul: This isn't Stormfront, though I understand that with an increasing number of posters like you it's getting hard to tell the difference. Or do you just find this a good place to recruit?

You losing the argument?  It seems that's the time you usually pull the "you're a racist" card.

You mean calling Martin a racist for saying "cracker" means the person is losing the argument?

Because we're having an argument with Martin, right?

Ah, I see, so I can tell YOU Amos Quito is a racist, and that's ok. I'm just not allowed to say it to HIM.

These rules of yours are strange and take some getting used to.

Yeah, the rules are strange because you apparently have the reasoning skills of a hamster.  I'd like to explain the numerous logical inconsistencies you've made, but I fear it would be a fruitless endeavor.


Searching for logical inconsistencies in my posts is, in fact, a fruitless endeavor.

You, on the other hand, have to explain how writing "Jewish" in all-caps and then underlining it should be interpreted. He did it for a reason. Why was he stressing that? What's he trying to communicate?
 
2013-07-17 01:51:20 PM

TheJoe03: Literally none of that has to do with my point that it's racist to make black people answer to some random douches in LA.



Okay... but Is it not every bit as "racist" to indict the entire "white" community for the non-racist actions of one man defending his life in Florida? Because that is exactly what has happened here, no? I mean, the actions of those "random douches in LA" are only an extreme example of the outrage that is pulsing through the black community, no?

Why is one "racist" while the other is not?


TheJoe03: I have no problem with black or white or any kind of people, you can argue that garbage with someone else. I don't even disagree with your points in that post, but I'm not sure what that has to do with judging the black race based on some random people while no one does that with white people.


As I said above, the idiotic reaction of the "random people" you mention are the extreme manifestation of the indignant outrage of the broader black community (and those who sympathize with them). They charge that their suffering, as a "community", is attributable to the institutional racism that pervades American society, and they have indicted the "white race" as a whole - using the GZ/TM incident as the latest poster child.

So your statement that "no one does that with white people"is incorrect, and is in itself racist.

This whole incident is much ado about nothing. There was no racial motivation on Zimmerman's part, there was no institutional racism on the part of Sanford officials, and neither the trial, the judge, the jury nor the attorneys were racist.

Zimmerman was exonerated. Justice was served. The fact that this issue continues to spark controversy is an indeed a sign of a cancer that we should all take VERY seriously - that being the actions of the malignant, manipulative race-baiters.
 
2013-07-17 02:01:28 PM

vygramul: Searching for logical inconsistencies in my posts is, in fact, a fruitless endeavor.


Ok..

Molavian: You losing the argument?  It seems that's the time you usually pull the "you're a racist" card.


vygramul: You mean calling Martin a racist for saying "cracker" means the person is losing the argument?


Just for starters, the "you're a racist" card in Molavian's statement would be applied to the arguer. In your reply statement, the "you're a racist" card you're trying to use is (improperly) applied to the racism of Trayvon Martin, who is not the arguer, but the subject of the argument. It therefore does not apply and is logically inconsistent with Molavian's statement.

vygramul: You, on the other hand, have to explain how writing "Jewish" in all-caps and then underlining it should be interpreted. He did it for a reason. Why was he stressing that? What's he trying to communicate?


I'm only guessing, but it might be because Jews seem to be a punching bag for every race, regardless of color. I think it's a little more disturbing that you're actually looking to be offended by this without even being able to clearly articulate why it is so much more offensive to you.
 
Displayed 33 of 1083 comments

First | « | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report