Juicefree, you echo my sentiments that any cop that fails to police other cops is in league with him. It bothers me that a cop can break the law in full view of his peers but nobody crosses the thin blue line to see that justice takes place because then he'll be left out to dry by his "brothers". I know it's very difficult occupation, but the police should be held to much higher standards than the rest of us or they're basically just a necessary evil. That's kind of how the mafia started. So, who will watch the Watchmen?
Last edited by marv2; 03-26-2012 at 11:17 PM.
I hear what you're saying Jerry Oz but Jeb is looking at 2016, maybe even a VP slot, I take what he says with a grain of salt because they all seem to be trying to walk that law back now...but the fact is...this isn't the first case in Fla where something similar has happened and Jeb and none of the rest had one thing to say about it.Even Jeb said that the intent of the law was never to provoke a response and then "stand your ground".
I agree with you, I hope this makes them go back and look at this.....even our legislators (NC) are in scramble mode looking over the law we have here that is similar. I also agree this is going to bite them in the arse big time....at least I hope it does. If anything can come out of this tragedy, let's hope it opens the eyes of more people to what's been going on out here.
I see that once again I'm typing so slow that a few responses are coming in before I can respond timely.
As Jerry Oz pointed out, indeed Jeb Bush stated a few days ago that in this case, that "stand your ground'' law doesn't apply. In this case, I don't believe that it's so much the law which is to blame, but rather the lack of due diligence by those charged to uphold law & order that is to blame here.
Had they simply used even an ounce of common sense & merely adhered to the spirit of the law, they would've immediately recognized that this guy overstepped his boundaries & was in clear violation of the spirit of the law. Any of them who possessed an ounce of commond decency & sense would've automatically asked this man why after reporting his suspicions, he chose to basically STALK this young man?
He may have had the right to "stand his ground", but exactly how is stalking someone, especially AFTER the dispatcher told him not to do so, qualify as "standing his ground"?
Furthermore, as he was the aggressor, if he got out of his truck, car, whatever to confront Trayvon, then using the tenets of that law, shouldn't Zimmerman's lawyer be arguing that Trayvon was well within his rights to defend himself & if Zimmerman got punched in the face for pursuing Trayvon, then he got exactly what he deserved, as surely a young man being pursued by a perfect stranger must also reserve the right to stand his ground?
Common sense would dictate that Trayvon had the right to "stand his ground" against a stranger whom was pursuing him.
Not only that, but a few accounts seem to indicate that Trayvon was running away from this guy. This would also indicate that if nothing else, Trayon was attempting to get away from this guy & was far from the aggressor which they're trying to paint him out to be.
If Zimmerman was so bold as to chase Trayvon, then I have to believe that knowing that law, as well as the fact that he was holding a gun, that he felt emboldened enough to get out of his car & confront Trayvon. The news report earlier today claimed that Trayvon went for Zimmerman's gun. If he did, then how was he able to grab for the gun & why was a gun pulled on Trayvon in the first place?
It takes no stretch of the imagination to conclude that Trayvon fully understood that he was likely to catch the short end of the stick & once he had nowhere else to go, he chose not to go down without a fight.
People can try to excuse this away by blaming hoodies (a ridiculous statement if ever I've heard one) or anything else. But the bottom line is that if Zimmerman had simply chosen to remain in his car & let real police officers do their jobs, we'd likely not be having this conversation.
He chose not to, a young man lost his life to a person who IS NOT an officer of the law because he saw a "boogeyman".
And his actions, whether he has a boo-boo on his head or not is what makes him guilty. He over-stepped his boundaries & a innocent young man lost his life.
And for those who are screaming that Zimmerman isn't racist, I wonder if they'd be praising his hispanic heritage if the kid that he shot happened to be not of color.
I'm just saying...
I have another question...
Zimmerman's lawyer has tried to excuse this by mentioning Zimmerman's little head "boo-boo", but given the piss-poor, sorry NON-investigation done by the police department, exactly when was this "attack" reported to the police?
It would appear to me that THAT would've been the FIRST thing that we heard, but this seems to be something that's been mentioned only since this became a firestorm. On what date was this "attack'' reported to the police & why wasn't that report used as a defense from Day One?
Either way, that turn of events simply doesn't jive with that dispatcher call which we've all heard, nor does it jive with the admonishment of the dispatcher who in effect was telling him to cease & desist following Trayvon.
Life's wonderful when you can make things up as you go along because you feel secure enough to feel that no matter what, ain't a damn thing going to be done about it.
I believe that the term is "Carte' Blanche'" & it's been the S.O.P. for all too many people for far too long in situations such as this.
I get the feeling that some folks aren't going to be happy until we have a civil war in our streets.
They are all in walk back mode Juice and although Jeb is suppose to be the smart one, he's still a Bush...I wouldn't trust any of that Bush gang as far as I could throw 'em. I'll give him props for seeming to be a better gov than Scott who is truly a crook but that's as much of a pass I'm willing to give Jeb.
Racism, hoodies....I'm not convince going down that road will get us anywhere...I think we have a better chance attacking that daymn law....we'll have to see how the Martin's lawyers handle this.
Even if they came up with pictures that showed him once snorting half of Bolivia, it would still have no bearing on what he was doing that night, which was minding his business. So that marijuana crap is as meaniningless, as it is despicable. That trace of marijuana meant nothing, that is unless Zimmerman was pissed that he had none of his own, or had already smoked some, which fried his brian into believing that he was Dirty Harry on a mission to rid the world of hoodies.
And that serves to underscore a point that Ms M made here on several occasions about stopping the madness & not acting in concert with B.S.
Dirty hands are dirty hands & when you bust your butt in a job as difficult as law enforcement, you certainly need not complicate it by having to defend dirty partners. And worse than that is the realization that should you dare to speak against a dirty officer, you're likely to be ostracized & even scarier, may find yourself the target of some no-so "friendly" fire for doing so.
That's what makes this whole thing so difficult to combat, as well as to weed out. You'll notice that you rarely see bad officers removed for shooting innocent people. Now dipping into the drug money...that's another matter entirely.
Daymn Juice, Serpico is going to be stuck in my head for the rest of the night. LOL
I agree though, this is going to be a tough one. I hope the Martin's lawyers are up for the task or the DOJ expands their investigation.
I agree with you. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if we see some very creative book keeping, with altered timestamps in an attempt to cover up this piss-poor, lousy job of NON-law enforcement.
Helen Keller can see this in braille & it takes no rocket scientist to figure out where all of this went wrong. They can rectify this situation by simply applying common sense. And from what we've learned there was only ONE person in this situation who had the right to "hold their ground" & by their own law, that was Trayvon.
That law does not say "follow a person & shoot if you believe that you have to". My understanding is that it applies to certain situations & following behind someone for no good reason, or based upon what you THINK is not applicable in such a csae.
No matter how they try to spin this, Zimmerman's actions or lack of adhering to the law is what led to this & he should have to pay for that. And I believe that his actions have given them ample room to absolutely hammer him if they choose to.
The question is will they have the balls to do the right thing because from what we've learned thus far, they have all of the ammunition to do so if they so desire.
I wish that I knew that family & could speak at one of their rallies. Because I have the feeling that I'm making some sense here, but through all of the emotion, no one seems to be thinking about the fact that Trayvon was the one who had the right to stand his ground.
Why this seems to be going above everyone's head, I don't know. I simply don't understand why everyone isn't driving that point home...Trayvon was the pursued, not the pursuer. I thought that that was the whole point of "standing one's ground".
Except for when they change the rules of the game & we all know when those rules change, now don't we?
Perhaps this can lead to a repeal of this law & maybe the family may receive solace should they ever create a "Trayvon Law", which will protect ALL innocent, unarmed people from being killed from an over-ealous cop, or merely some nut-job who is spooked by everyone who looks like the "boogeyman".
Either way, something must be done or other innocent blood is likely to be spilt, as people have grown weary of seeing people getting away with killing unarmed minorities at a whim.
There are similar laws all over the country but what it seems to boil down to is the way they were crafted....this one comes off as poorly written no matter what they try to say the intent was.
Honestly, I don't believe that Zimmerman is going to have an easy go with this.
For one thing, he can't claim to be a police officer who's in the line of duty, as has been the case for most of these situation of which many of us refer to.
Zimmerman is NOT an officer of the law & neighborhood watch notwithstanding, he has no right to pursue, then shoot an unarmed, innocent kid. Had they been able to simply sweep this under the rug as they did for nearly a month, perhaps they could've wished this away into the cornfiled like little Anthony did in The Twilight Zone.
But thanks to the internet, this story isn't going away & is taking on a life of it's own. I believe that there have been protests in at least 20 different states & that county is looking pretty damn bad right now.
In the end, I believe that it will come down to the fact that this guy was deputized to be NOTHING. He acted as a rogue, a vigilante who is a prisoner of his own mind, kind of like the episode of The Twilight Zone, "Four O'
Clock", where this guy decided that on a certain day at 4:00, all of the bad people were going to be shrunk damn near to microbes. Problem was that when the clock struck 4, he was the only one who shrunk.
And just as they're trying to toss out stories about Trayvon, don't be surprised if folks don't start doing some digging into Zimmerman. And I have a feeling that they're going to find something unpleasant about Zimmerman, perhaps some old Myspace or Facebook page, which will paint him in a VERY negative light. I say this because often times, these self-appointed do-gooders tend to leave their ramblings written somewhere. And one has to believe that if he was foolish enough to be heard saying "they always get away with it...", it's more than a little likely that he's written that or worse somewhere. Most likely somewhere on the internet because the internet seems to have the mystical power to make people say some of the most racist, obnoxious, vile crap imaginable, simply because they have an audience who laps it up, or because they believe that they're anonymous.
Well folks aren't always as anonymous as they believe themselves to be, as many have lived to discover.
I believe that this is way too hot for them to allow him to get away with. I predict a psychiatric evaluation which will naturally spell out some kind of traumatic experience in his past...robbery perhaps? And likely, he'll need some therapy to ease his trouble mind from being called "fat" when he was in preschool or some such shit.
If not that, I believe that he's going to need a good cleaners from the tire marks that are going to end up on his back after that bus rolls over him after they rightfully throw him under it. I because that he's going to end up under that bus NOT because anyone has any true desire to do so, but because whether it's political or someone trying to save their job/jobs, they're going to HAVE to do it.
This non-deputized person set himself up as judge, jury then finally, executioner.
How many people are really going to want to take the heat for a guy like him?
I believe that self-preservation, if nothing else will find him somewhat behind the 8-ball.
If not that, then I'd suggest that he find himself some tanning cream, a few hoodies of his own or a new country in which to live because if he gets off, his live isn't going to be worth a wooden nickel & a lot of people out there are going to be gunning for him.
And to further dispel the profiling myth, most of them won't come wearing any damn hoodies either.
Last edited by juicefree20; 03-27-2012 at 12:27 AM.
There are certain counties in America which truly scare me because of the mindset that is behind laws such as this one.
That the people believed this to be a good idea & let it pass should trouble every law-abiding citizen because all that it takes is just one person to either dislike you or be suspicious of you to make everything go haywire.
THAT is the danger of this law. It's too arbitrary & allows the judgement og someone who could be a loose cannon or a borderline mental case to play judge & jury with people's lives & that should never be allowed.
I don't want to see it come to that Juice. Seems to me we'd be playing into their hands. It time to be smart headed not hot headed.
I've been around a few more years longer than you but you've been around long enough to know, once there was out and out racism....laws were passed but it never went away...it turned into institutional racism where we were told we were doing nothing but whining and just needed to pull ourselves up by our bootstraps and it never went way and now we're back to where we started.
When I look at all that's gone on before I have to ask myself, why keep going down the same road knowing racism will never go away... and I don't care if it's 30% of the country or 100%...it's BS whatever the amount but it's time to deal with the fact it's never going away so we need to find a better way to get around this sht. We can't change other people but we can change the laws that keep screwing us. We can change the people in office that are doing the same. I mentioned we were 12% of the population...do you really think we'll win a fighting war? Taking some out before we all die is not my idea of winning.
Truth is, some counties should scare you....hell there are some in the North I don't bother with but I don't have any reason to hang out in these types of places so I don't.
Speaking as a Southerner, there is a dynamic that's hard for outsiders to understand for Blacks that live in these types of places...sometimes it's not as bad as the stereotypes make it out to be....but let's be real and honest Juice, there are some Black neighborhoods that scare me too and I could name a few other ethnic neighborhoods as well. I'm not about to start hiding cause there are bad people out here but I am going to continue to fight for what's right and fair no matter the race, creed, gender, religion or color but I'm going to do my best to be smart about it.
I just think that people are tired of seeing innocent, unarmed young men die simply because of the color of their skins.
I would hope that no innocent people are harmed but I have to say that ever since President Obama took office, there seems to be a level of disrespect & dormant boldness that has definitely emboldened some. Some of the things that we've heard over the past 3 years have been more than a little over the top & when you have a guy like Gingrich trying to make an issue & demanding an apology from President Obama for saying that if he had a son, he'd look like Trayvon & seen how many people are lapping that up, is a very unsettling thing.
It's not mpst of us black nor white who seem hell-bent on dragging America back to the 1930's. Unfortunately, there are all too many ignorant people who seem to want to do just that & if they have their way, that's exactly where we'd end up.
It's bad enough when innocent, unarmed minorities are killed by cops who can at least offer up the excuse that they were ''in the line of duty". That's bad enough when it's excused away. But when the equivalent of less than a mall cop with a flashlight feels emboldened to follow, then kill an unarmed kid for no reason whatsoever & can get away scot-free, then you have sown the seeds for disaster.
Which is why I don't believe that this guy is going to walk. The summer's coming & the weather is already unseasonably hot. I don't believe that this is how they want to start off the summer is a state which already has serious issues with violence.
If the town doesn't give the Martin Family justice, I believe that the DOJ will. This is a no-brainer & for several reasons, I don't believe that Zimmerman's going to turn out to be the kind of guy that very many are going to want to fall on the sword for. If I'm wrong, then it's going to be a very hot summer in some counties in Florida.
It doesn't have to be that way. All that they have to do is the right thing & a lot of grief can be avoided.
It takes two sides to make a war Juice...and before young kids like Trayvon were being gunned down they were hanging from trees....
Juice you and the young ones don't even know what being tired is...hell I barely know..... but burning down my own neighborhood and picking up a gun is not the way.
I was going to mention that as well. I wish that there were an equal outcry as regards black-on-black crime, but I guess that's a topic for another thread.
And of course, there are neighborhoods in my borough which I wouldn't want to be in. Hell, there are streets that I wouldn't hang out on. Admittedly, things in those neighborhoods are much better than they were 10 years ago.
Though it gets more attention when done by others, it's sad to think that young black males are a frequent target of damn near everyone, even other black males.
And while all of that angers me, I guess that what makes these types of incidents piss me off the most is that when young black males are killed by outsiders it's not because they are killed by gang members or perhaps drug dealers whom may have some kind of history. It's more of a random thing which means that all of us are targets.
That's not usually the case in our communities, where unfortunately most of the victims have had some kind of past with their assailant(s), or were/are involved in drug dealing or gangs, which makes such an inevitability a constant possibility. And in neighborhoods such as those that some of us live in, you know what to do & how to avoid much of the nonsense.
Not so the randomness such as the cases of a Trayvon Martin or a Michael Griffith, as they didn't have to be dealers nor gang members. They could've been any of us, which is what makes these situations so maddening. They occur not because of some past beef, nor because of retribution for some misdeed. They just happen because of the color of one's skin & can happen for absolutely no reason whatsoever.
And you can't account for, nor make provisions for that kind of randomness because you never see it coming until it's too late to be able to avoid it.
I'm angry too Juice but we have to start thinking with our brains and not our emotions.
Think about this Juice. Why do you think many of these Repubs are trying to stop people from getting an education....not just Blacks either.
It's much easier to manipulate a person who can't or doesn't think Juice...it's easier to push the emotional buttons of people who don't take the time to reason things through. It's a form of control Juice and we have to stop falling into the trap.
I didn't understand why people burned down Bushwick back in 1977 during the blackout & I don't know why anyone would burn down their own neighborhhod in any uprising.
I don't believe that anyone's going to burn down their own neighborhood over this.
But considering that there is now a bounty on his head, given the economics of today, the pure dislike for his actions, as well as how these incidents always seem to find the shooter getting off scot-free, I believe that there are a lot of young men whom can also be targeted by a guy like this who are going to get justice however they can.
This guy can't hide behind a badge & if he were truly wise, I'd suggest that a few years behind bars would be a desirable alternative.
But I don't think that it'll come down to any violence because I believe that wiser heads will prevail & won't be willing to go down with the ship with this guy.
I believe that when all is said & done, they're going to find a way for some sort of justice to be served.
Thids has become much bigger than that police force could've ever imagined that it would be & I don't believe that for one moment that this case was going to draw the attention that it has.
I guess that 2 weeks of silence can lull you that way.
When a person starts talking about blood being shed as a result of a racial incident I see all the Black neighborhoods that have gone up in flames in the past Juice. Did I miss a White neighborhood that burn down?
Juice, I mentioned this before, this has been going on for awhile but it was under the national radar...now that it's out, we'll see what happens.
Let's get involved in anyway we can to help fight this and keep the focus on it but let's be smart about it, let's not get sidetracked. ...eye on the prize Juice....eye on the prize.
Last edited by ms_m; 03-27-2012 at 02:04 AM.
There was a time when people would go out & wreck things. But of late an encourging thing has been happening.
Here when 51 shots were volleyed at Sean Bell, there were protests, some civil disobedience, but no violence. Despite the anger, no one fired any shots, no one broke windows, the leaders & the family told the protetors that they wanted peace & respect for their loved one & that;'s exactly what they got.
Al Sharpton hs received a lot of flak but he told the demonstrators that we didn't need anyone acting the fool & giving people any excuses like "see how those people are?" & everyone acted accordingly.
I believe that most of our leaders full well understand that in this day & age, it's not wise to push the envelope of violence. I believe that in the 60s, there was no other choice because people were tired of turning the other cheek & there are times when the only thing that people understand is violence. But in this day & age, that approach would result in one bloody mess, as these day, the brothers are also armed.
But I'm proud to say that during our recent protests, they've been free of violence & I've yet to hear of any violence during the current protests, so I don't believe that anyone really wants that. With that said, I also understand that they simply can't keep turning a blind eye to situations such as this & something must be done in order to prevent these occurrences.
I hope you're right Juice. Violence is what started this recent event, violence will not stop it.
I've gotten hooked on Al Jazeera, it has it good points as well as bad but overall it brings a perspective to events that you don't get from US news. Sometimes it's embarrassing to watch foreigners come up with more intelligent and insightful comments on this issues than people right here in the US. Talk about scary....ignorant folks are scaring the hell out of me and they seem to be multiplying by the day here Juice. It's not all right wing extremist and Repubs either...
Yep, let's focus on who is a racist and who should wear hoodies while others are passing laws to legally kill us. geeze...what's it going to take to wake us up?
The NRA Wants the Law Protecting Trayvon Martin's Killer in All 50 States
By Nick Baumann and Dave Gilson
| Wed Mar. 21, 2012 3:27 PM PDT
http://motherjones.com/mojo/2012/03/nra-trayvon-martinThe National Rifle Association continues to press more states to adopt Florida-style "stand your ground" laws like the one that's made it difficult to prosecute George Zimmerman, the self-appointed neighborhood watch captain who shot and killed 17-year-old Trayvon Martin in Sanford, Florida, in late February. Zimmerman has claimed self-defense despite the fact that Martin was unarmed. Since "stand your ground" laws allow people who feel threatened to use deadly force—even if they have an opportunity, as Zimmerman did, to safely avoid a confrontation—Zimmerman has not been arrested or charged. (If you haven't heard about the Martin case, get the full rundown in our explainer.)
The proliferation of these laws is part of a deliberate lobbying campaign by the NRA. In 2005, at the NRA's urging, Florida became the first state to pass a "stand your ground" law. Before that, most states required you to retreat from a confrontation unless you were inside your own home. Now 24 states have these "stand your ground" laws, which critics call "shoot first" laws (Gawker's pseudonymous blogger "Mobuto Sese Seko" calls the laws "a great, legally roving murder bubble") because they authorize citizens to use deadly force even if the person who makes them feel threatened is, like Martin, unarmed.
Keep your eyes on this Joe Oliver. You really can't miss him as he has been on just about every news program around the clock since early yesterday. He is really something else.........
The NRA will only be happy when everybody is walking around strapped, Old West style. And I saw Joe Oliver. He has nothing to say but gets chippy if someone questions him on any specific aspect of the case. Sounds like he could use a heaping plate of STFU.
Former reporter and news anchor Joe Oliver continued his media tour on behalf of his friend George Zimmerman, who claims he killed 17 year-old Trayvon Martin in self defense, with an appearance on MSNBC’s Hardball. Among several inaccurate or contradictory claims, Oliver offered a bizarre explanation of the 911 tape in which Zimmerman appears to grumble “f**kin’ coons” moments before shooting Trayvon to death.
As Zimmerman’s friend, Joe Oliver’s take should be expected to be somewhat one-sided, but he made several statements that were misleading or outright false. He referred to a leaked police report of George Zimmerman’s account as “the report that was released today,” and that it “indicates that Trayvon came up to George and was the aggressor.”
Yes, that “report” “indicates” that because it was coming from George Zimmerman himself. Oliver used similarly parsed words in an earlier interview with Fox News, speaking of the moment the “gun went off,” and trying to raise the possibility that the shooting was accidental, in contradiction of Zimmerman’s claim of self defense.
But Oliver told an outright falsehood when he said that “there are witness accounts to verify that” Trayvon was the aggressor, and that “from the accounts that I’ve heard, it was Trayvon that threw the first punch that knocked George down and broke his nose.”
The only account that says Trayvon made the first physical contact is Zimmerman’s. All of the other witnesses’ accounts begin with the struggle already in progress, except one. The only surviving witness to Zimmerman’s first contact with Trayvon says it was Zimmerman who accosted Trayvon Martin. Whether you believe her or not, to claim that there are witnesses to that first contact who support Zimmerman’s story is a lie.
But the most bizarre thing about Oliver’s interview with host Chris Matthews was his explanation for that racially-charged 911 call.
“Were you surprised when you heard he used the racial slur?” Matthews asked. “The f’ing c-word. Were you surprised he used a term like that?”
Oliver said he’d listened to the tape over and over, and concluded that Zimmerman had either said “coon” or “goon,” and proceeded to offer strange mitigations for each. “There are a lot of parts of this country where people proudly call themselves coon-asses, Louisiana, in particular” and added that he didn’t know “too many people under 40 that use that term as a racial slur.”
I’m not even sure what he’s saying there…that Trayvon ventriloquated the word “coon” into Zimmerman’s phone as a boast about the Cajun heritage of his own ass? What the effing eff is he talking about?
Oliver also has Zimmerman covered on the “goon” front. “Goon, I’ve been informed by my 17-year-old daughter that, among her peers, that’s a term of endearment.”
So, now, 28 year-old George Zimmerman is a peer to 17 year-old girls? What the eff is this guy talking about?
The answer is simple. Instead of simply being an honest character witness for his friend, instead of just saying “The George Zimmerman I know could never have shot a young man in cold blood,” Joe Oliver has elected to deceive, mislead, and muddy the waters. If the media are going to continue to enable this, they need to start calling him on it.
Just saw an excellent report on Al Jazeera about this case and they came at it from a different way from what I've seen so far. They visited multiple community watch programs throughout Florida and discovered they all had the same rules. You are only the eyes and ears of the community. You do not approach or try to apprehend anyone and under no circumstances are your allowed to carry a firearm.
These programs have been very successful in reducing crime without any fatalities. Combining that with the knowledge that Zimmerman was not a community watch member in the neighborhood and he broke all the rules even if he had been, seems like a great angle to promote and push.
My eyes are open a lot because of this. At lunch today, I saw at least 12 co-workers wearing hoodies including one supervisor and two females. Of that number, six were black, five were white, and one was Asian. There were many more seen with them on the warehouse floor. I tried to imagine anyone thinking of any of them as a hoodlum but was not successful.
A contractor buddy of mine who is staunchly conservative stopped by and he started on the hoodie mitigation factor and I told him to stop before he started. When I told him there are hundreds of kids wearing hooded sweatshirts on every college in America and nobody sees them as thugs, he didn't have a response. This case is only about two things: Zimmerman's actions and the police department's inaction.
Agree Jerry Oz.
I was listening to a young Black banker from Charlotte talking about walking to his complex and watching a woman cross the street when she saw him coming...ironically, they were going to the same complex and he was wearing a suit. Making it about the hoodie is a distraction.
I guess I've been away too long,but here's something I would like to share from singer Sinead O'Connor. It was posted on her website,and has been shared on various media sites. It's a bit lengthy,but worth reading ...
Last edited by GeeTee(HPK); 03-28-2012 at 02:43 AM.
GeeTee, heads are exploding all over the world, especially among evangelicals.
This is something I think many of us have heard all our lives but there is a PBS documentary (I can't remember the title) that traces the exact region in Africa and even tribe from which anthropologist have said all of mankind descends. It's fascinating and makes convincing arguments with evidence.
DAYMN!Time and again, taxis would pass Kotto up to pick up the murderer, not knowing who either was.
I wonder if they ever told the cab driver what they had done? I have a feeling they would have thought twice about pre-judging someone if they had. The sad thing about all of this Jerry Oz, many times people don't even realize what they are doing and when you point it out they get defensive.
Hell, we all tend to pre-judge people at times but if we are aware of it and own it, most people will think before automatically acting on those feelings.
Sean Hannity has to be the vilest man on television IMO.
There is nothing really new here. http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/20...police-officer But, it shows Zimmerman's past concisely. I must say, from everything I've read, this comes down to two things for sure. Zimmerman shot Martin without a valid reason. And, the Sanford failed to do their job. And the more I think about it, Martin's past has nothing to do with the incident. Zimmerman's does.
I don't have much time, but I wanted to pass through to say a couple of things.
For what it's worth, today's New York Daily News reports that the lead homicide detective, Chris Serino wanted to arrest Zimmerman for manslaughter on the night of the shooting. He didn't believe Zimmerman's account & signed an affidavit on the night of Feb. 26th which stated that he didn't believe Zimmerman's account of the incident.
He was overruled by the state's Attorney's Office due to "lack of evidence" to make an arrest.
On another note, this whole attitude as regards how many people view blacks, as well as how young the attitude take hold within some, can be found by the recent response to the movie "Hunger Games".
Whereas Blacks, Latinos, Asians & others have had absolutely no problem with the fact that iconic characters such as "Rambo", "Don Corleone", "Dirty Harry", "Rocky", "Luke Skywaker" & any damn hero you choose to name WAS NOT of their particular ethnicity, some folks of the ''majority'' & some very young people at that, were so offended that 2 primary characters of "Hunger Games" happened to be black.
Despite the fact that the book clearly identified these characters as having "DARK BROWN SKIN", some obviously missed that descriptive & via Twitter, some dropped N-bombs, one questioned why ALL of the good charcters had to be black? One voiced the opinion that they were upset at having felt so much sympathy & crying for one of the characters when reading the book, only to see the movie to discover that that sympathetic charcter she'd shed tears for, proved to be black.
Still others whom had followed & enjoyed the book, had the movie "ruined" for them because two of the sympathetic characters turned out to be black.
This serves to underscore a few fundamental problems...
1. It seems that some feel that only people who look like them are worthy of sympathy or empathy
2. Only folks whom look like them can be regarded to be a "GOOD'' guy or gal.
which seems to indicate that they seem to believe...
3. Blacks aren't capable of being heroic, much less be ''good'' guys or gals whom are worth crying for, feeling empathy toward, much less being people worth rooting for.
That is, unless they're singing, dancing, dunking a ball or hitting one over a fence.
If these type of attitudes are the sort which people harbor in their hearts over a damned movie, then exactly what must be their attitudes when it comes to the real world?
People of all ethnicitics have supported movies featuring mainstream actors & actresses for decades & never seem bothered by the fact that those stars don't look like they do. Yet two girls whom were described in a manner which seems to indicate that if not black, then they were pretty damn close to it & a lot of folks (young ones at that whom are supposed to be more enlightened these days) lost their minds at the visual.
Which is what makes books such a wonderful thing. Despite the words & descriptives which lie within the book, one can close their eyes & make their hero or heroine whomever or whatever they want them to be.
And if the character is noble enough, why they can even convince themselves that the character is exactly like the person staring back at them from their mirror(s).
And folks keep insisting that folks wearing towels on their heads are the ones whom we need to be worried about.
If that's the case, then they damn sure aren't the only ones to worry about because all terrorists don't come bearing bombs.
Some come armed with bigoted ideas, prejudices & sensibilities about fellow AMERICANS from about 60 years ago & don't seem very inclined to give them up.
Not even for make-believe characters from a book.
Last edited by juicefree20; 03-28-2012 at 08:34 PM.
Well that explains why that crook of a Gov Scott, suddenly jumped into action to do the right thing and call a special investigation....the plot thickens.He was overruled by the state's Attorney's Office due to "lack of evidence" to make an arrest.
Excellent post, Juicefree. Two thoughts come to mind:
1. People envisioning their heroes with similarities to themselves is akin to man recreating God in his own image. That's why it's entirely reasonable for some to imagine Christ with blonde hair and blue eyes although he lived in the Middle East 2,000 years ago. I'm not trying to start this argument, just making the point. It would absolutely create millions of atheists immediately if they were to find out that Christ had brown skin, thick hair, and a semitic (Jewish/Arab) nose. It would be as unacceptable as imagining fictional characters being black. For the record, His appearance doesn't matter to me.
2. The terrorists who caused the 9/11 tragedy made a pointed effort to Anglicize themselves; shaving and wearing their hair and clothes in the least "ethnic" way to make sure they brought no attention to themselves. Curiously, Juan Williams and his ilk have their Islamic radar go full tilt when they see the most obvious people of middle eastern origins. It seems to me the least dangerous ones would be the ones wearing full beards and Arabic garb, but the ones least likely to be fit the "terrorist" profile are the ones who catch the brunt of the hate.
but the ones least likely to be fit the "terrorist" profile are the ones who catch the brunt of the hate.
Like the Iraqi-American woman living near San Diego who was beaten to death a few days go....
Lionel Ritchie on Piers right now. Will be repeated 3 & 6 hrs later