J
Joe
Guest
who is keeping it in the public eye ? affect change ? like stop assaulting people with your fist ? dont take your fist to a gun fight ?
There will be widescale rioting after Zimmerman verdict. Debunk, please
- Thread starter Joe Newman
- Start date
who is keeping it in the public eye ? affect change ? like stop assaulting people with your fist ? dont take your fist to a gun fight ?
J
Joe
Guest
Never let a crisis go to waste . That is the Obama administration in a nutshell . manufactured crisis . Saul Alinjsky 101
Exploiting crises and manufacturing crises are not necessarily linked. The Zimmerman trial got a lot of public interest because of the unique circumstances and the race factor. Nobody created that. The media feeds on viewers, so if people watch it, then they follow it. No need for any great conspiracy here.
Unless you have some evidence it was unduly promoted?
Affect change like don't follow people around with a gun, and then shoot them when they get confrontational.
Martin's death is just one of hundreds, it's not a big deal in itself, and we don't really know what happened. But it illustrates a problem with the law. The change people want is a change to the stand-your-ground law. So people can't just kill anyone they feel is looking at them the wrong way.
J
Joe
Guest
Yes MSNBC and many other networks created the race factor by saying he was white in the first place because he had a Jewish German name . Then lightened the picture of him to make him appear whiter then he was . Then throw in the race baiter Al Sharpton and the New Black panthers showing their true colors , No regard to the thousands of black on black murders as well as the black on white . No press on all the black flash mobs attacking innocent whites for no reason since the Election of Americas first Black President . This wasnt racial at all . It was self defense according to the evidence . I thought youd be the one to except the facts and not the emotional feelings Mick ? Its about Gun control as usual . Just because they failed after exploiting the Sandy hook tragedy .
J
Joe
Guest
d
Either you didn't watch the trial or just misinformed ? So if they change the stand your ground law then Zimmerman is beaten to death ? how is that fair ? This isnt the UK or Australia they dont like the law they can leave . This isn't about the stand your ground law this is just chiseling away at the second amendment and our Constitution .
J
Joe
Guest
Nobody knows exactly what happened but EVIDENCE supports Zimmerman's claims . So dont make it seem as if Trayvon was just a innocent little kid with skittles . Everyone who is against Zimmerman think they seem to know exactly how it happened ?
SR1419
Senior Member.
Once again, you avoid the question to promote your bias...
You said "Rodney King was the last time they used the excuse to riot to fill their liquor cabinets"
Who are "they"? Was Obama in office in 1992? How much "liquor" has been stolen in relation to this case?
Own your comments- do not evade the hard truth of your beliefs.
JeffreyNotGeoffrey
Active Member
Before Zimmerman started to stalk him with a gun Trayvon was an innocent kid with skittles. Past Zimmerman getting out of the car not much is certain. There is a lot of space for interpretation after that. And just because a criminal jury said he was not guilty does not mean he was innocent. OJ any one? I support the courts but they are not always right.
J
Joe
Guest
who are they ? a lot of blacks and some mexicans some asians some whites but from the videos Iv seen mostly black . doesnt matter who is in office when you have the same race pimps . the liquor cabinets come from the song from Sublime
SR1419
Senior Member.
"mexicans" really? how do you know "they" weren't Guatemalan or Nicaraguan or Costa Rican? I am surprised you didn't say "chinese" instead of Asians...
Any vids of people stealing liquor during these Zimmerman protests?? or is that just more race baiting by you?
Do you realize that you come across as a walking cliche?
J
Joe
Guest
Mexicans do live in LA ya know ? didnt see any in the Vid but im sure there must have been at least 1 of other races ? Plenty of racism during the riots by blacks towards whites and Koreans .
J
Joe
Guest
racism
NAACP Rejects Black Conservatives From National Conference http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiep...nservatives-from-national-conference-n1642861
NAACP Rejects Black Conservatives From National Conference http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiep...nservatives-from-national-conference-n1642861
Last edited by a moderator:
Drew
Active Member
Back to the OP,
Your interesting web analytics methods notwithstanding, how would you explain that so far, you seem to have misread the tealeaves?
You made some pretty big predictions that by now have pretty demonstrably not come to pass.
[Edited To Add] I'm not particularly interested in playing whack-a-mole. I'm just curious what led you to so emphatically and confidently predict a result that was essentially the opposite of what happened.
J
Joe
Guest
People participate in a demonstration led by activist Quanell X, local community leaders and hip-hop stars in reaction to the acquittal of neighborhood watch member George Zimmerman Monday, July 15, 2013, in Houston. Credit: AP
Friends try to calm down, David Wright, top, who reacted after he was told he couldn't enter the Bob Casey Federal Courthouse in Houston as more than 100 protestors organized outside for a protest in reaction to the acquittal of neighborhood watch member
People participate in a demonstration led by activist Quanell X, local community leaders and hip-hop stars in reaction to the acquittal of neighborhood watch member George Zimmerman Monday, July 15, 2013, in Houston. Credit: AP
CAUGHT ON TAPE: PRO-TRAYVON MARTIN 'PROTESTERS' ATTACK HOUSTON GRANDMOTHER AND REFUSE TO LET FAMILY TAKE CHILD TO HOSPITAL http://www.theblaze.com/stories/201...-refuse-to-let-family-take-child-to-hospital/
Last edited by a moderator:
J
Joe
Guest
Last edited by a moderator:
SR1419
Senior Member.
you tell me ? why does the left glorify criminal behavior ?
...and again Joe avoids answering the hard questions...
Instead, misuses (intentionally?) or misunderstands what the meaning of the word glorify is:
Can you point out where in the article the authors praised the subject or expresses admiration?External Quote:
Last edited by a moderator:
J
Joe
Guest
J
Joe
Guest
NO because I didnt read the article I wont either . When you put a picture of a Terrorist on a magazine cover intended for RockStars thats enough to piss off a lot of people especially in Boston . Yet you see nothing wrong with it ?
J
Joe
Guest
- Expand
Elizabeth Brown @brownelizabethg21m
Boston bomber is on the cover of Rolling Stone. That magazine did more than drop the ball, they scored for the other team. #no
A lot on Twitter are not happy Left and Right . yet you see nothing wrong ? Sad
Last edited by a moderator:
J
Joe
Guest
see what they think in Boston
SR1419
Senior Member.
So...you will pass judgement while admittedly remaining ignorant of the content.
Fascinating...its like a little kid plugging their ears in hopes reality will just go away.
Moreover, the magazine- and its cover- is not "intended for rock stars" - it is a magazine that covers current culture and as such just covers a wide range of topics and has a long history of investigative reporting covering a great deal of difficult issues.
I am sure you had no issues when they printed the story on Gen McChrystal and his issues with Obama...
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-runaway-general-20100622
or was that just another article glorifying violence?
Last edited:
J
Joe
Guest
Thats why Walgreens pulled it off their shelves along with many other ouitlets . He is a murderer Period . Not a General
A killer terrorist or a General ? Funny many on the left and right find it very offensive being he didnt even go to trial ? So you can place a explosive device next to a child and wind up with a glamorous cover on Rolling Stone Mag ?
J
Joe
Guest
LAPD: Roving Hollywood robbers may also be Zimmerman protest vandals http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-hollywood-robbers-20130717,0,7520634.story
Last edited by a moderator:
J
Joe
Guest
Coming from me ? Whats that supposed to mean ? Sometimes the left and the right can actully agree on some things . Some times even the ACLU gets it right . even though I disagree most of the time . Do you think they are the same ?
Joe Newman
Active Member
Yes. We may safely say my prediction was wrong. It did not jump off as I said it would. Why, I don't know, since it wasn't for lack of effort on many sides. After the verdict, #riot on twitter was a non-stop wave of efforts to get the ball rolling, that's for sure. The next day, the one tweet that summed it up best for me was the one that said, "msm, we want our money back. We paid for riots. What happened?"
Still, as I said from the start, better safe than sorry. Chalk it up to inadvertently being trapped between two of the hotspots on Broadway during the Oscar Grant riots in Oakland and having to steer through the rubble and torn down fences from the mob who had passed through Telegraph earlier. Seeing the Oaktown footage brought back all that.
I was right about the riot pimping, but I was wrong about the riots happening in the wake of it, so my prediction is debunked.
Last edited:
J
Joe
Guest
I hope your right but its not over till the media lets go and The DOJ . Id say after Rev Al demonstrations thsi week if something major hasnt happened its less likely too . Their will however be isolated incidents as I posted above that are using Trayvon as a excuse for criminal behavior .
You didnt say right after the verdict .
Joe Newman
Active Member
I don't know why it didn't jump off. No one else does either. Anybody who has a good theory step up. The media get no credit and the admin made great hay off the tealeaves. The irs is in the rearview mirror, the Snowden plane's wings have thawed and it's taken off for obsurity while everyone was busy being Trayvon Martin.
Now it's time for reappraisal and civil suites and another stab at gun control so thing like this can't happen and marches to ensure that they do. It's all just scandal wallpaper, brilliant by way of blase.
I went bold because had it followed through on the windup and gone off as advertised, I wanted to save time so people didn't have to uncover all the coincidences afterward.
Pete Tar
Senior Member
You seem to have a very derogatory opinion of the general public, like they're too stupid to care about anything that isn't fed to them specifically to create that effect.
There are people, his direct family and community for example, for whom this was a real issue and not some manufactured plot to divert attention. If people care enough to comment or put energy in then that's a reflection of their priorities and concerns.
There's a lot of stuff going on in the world, people choose what they respond to, some things have a more visceral effect on them than others. Something that makes you go, 'this is my team, that is not' is a primal and attractive force. Something to identify with and bond you as a community.
The other current affair issues are still there - maybe they are made of more complex issues that don't catch people's imaginations as easily or are harder to take specific sides on. Simple moral outrage is easy, complex legal precedents hard.
There is still discussion about all those other issues, so it's not as if this case has driven it from the public's minds because they're incapable of caring about more than one thing at once.
There are people, his direct family and community for example, for whom this was a real issue and not some manufactured plot to divert attention. If people care enough to comment or put energy in then that's a reflection of their priorities and concerns.
There's a lot of stuff going on in the world, people choose what they respond to, some things have a more visceral effect on them than others. Something that makes you go, 'this is my team, that is not' is a primal and attractive force. Something to identify with and bond you as a community.
The other current affair issues are still there - maybe they are made of more complex issues that don't catch people's imaginations as easily or are harder to take specific sides on. Simple moral outrage is easy, complex legal precedents hard.
There is still discussion about all those other issues, so it's not as if this case has driven it from the public's minds because they're incapable of caring about more than one thing at once.
Or the ingredients for lean... depends on what you would like to imagine or not imagine about the image of an "innocent kid," I guess.
Images aside, here is a harder form of evidence:
From a lawyer familiar with the case... simple rule of thumb that applies to everyone, you never know what might happen if you start beating someone up. It doesn't matter if they're harassing you or not. Recently a drunk Goldman Sachs employee in NYC called someone a "n***" when they tried to keep him from stumbling into the street. They punched him and he was knocked out cold, left on the street. Perhaps deservedly so, yet they were still arrested for assault. That's just the way it is. Because even if someone is a racist that doesn't mean that you get to beat them up by law. (So if you do, then run... faster! Geez.)External Quote:
The "criminal jury" heard more of the evidence about the "innocent kid" (although apparently the cell phone evidence was suppressed)... and you apparently didn't, to say the least.
Zimmerman is probably about as innocent as anyone could be, which is to say... not very. Pretty sure he and his wife could still get into legal trouble for trying to hide/transfer that money, etc.
But if the roles of the "creepy ass cracker" were reversed and the racist thug/gangster Trayvon Martin had beaten, shot and/or killed Zimmerman then it's highly unlikely that it would be a national story for various ignorant, trendy and stupid groups of people to get upset about.
Maybe there's some argument for tribal debts based on tribal imagery if modern groups and "gangs" of people are ignorant and stupid enough to believe in that. So African Americans have a right to beat up "whites" based on tribalism and old, tribal debts... but then Russian immigrants, Hispanics, Israelis and so forth could still "stand their ground" or defend themselves from "gangster" black mob violence and so forth? But if that's the case, then it should be made clear in law exactly which American "whites" it's ok to beat up or knock the eyeballs out of in the "knock out game" and so forth. Because even people with a tribal/gang mentality would still need some semblance of the rule of law, right?
Last edited:
