Black Teen Shot, Killed By Neighborhood Watch

[quote name='YendelTrex']I have went into your fanaticism and the fact that you would even bring a thomas jefferson hoax and fraud into a poster posting a link to an article on zimmerman shows it even more. It makes no sense for you to bring that up here and now as a response to an article about ZIMMERMAN. I will not argue with you here over Thomas Jefferson having kids with that slave being a hoax and fraud as it is not the appropriate place. Nor will I get into some crap about slaves either it is not appropriate here either. Start another thread then I will be glad to have it out with you. With TJ the one drop rule or anything else you have brought up in this thread that has been incorrect or inappropriate on your part and or not the place for it. I will take you to task so bring it on.
Damn you really have some ISSUES.... seriously. Thomas Jefferson in response to a zimmerman story? Damn!!

http://news.yahoo.com/george-zimmerman-prelude-shooting-194235114.html

Here I can do it too. Remember that Barney episode well it is the same thing as this piece about zimmerman. Or you know that Hitler romance story same thing as here.
Give me a break doddough. Spin your BS elsewhere you know like maybe your equivalant to stormfront.[/QUOTE]
It's almost as if the Zimmerman article and the characterization of the Jefferson/Hemings relationship as a romance are both mischaracterizations of a positive spin type, a point which I heavily implied and alluded to, and you it missed because you don't know squat about the Hemings case.

This thread has become the current racism megathread thanks to posters like you, so feel free to keep shitting it up by talking about slavery, discrimination of multiracial people, and Hemings.

Saying that I'm a fanatic because I'm a fanatic doesn't make it so. Hell, you can even bump that other thread about me to talk about it.

[quote name='nasum']fluff piece though it may be, I still hold to GZ not having a hard-on for killing a black kid. It's just a series of bad decisions leading to a terrible tragedy. Even if he gets off on Murder II, he'll get crucified in a wrongful death civil trial which would be more advantageous to the family anyways.[/QUOTE]
I'm fairly certain that no one here, especially myself, said that Zimmerman has a hard-on for killing black kids. Also, a civil trial depends on whether or not Zimmerman is allowed to use SYG as a defense, so if he gets off and is allowed to use it, then the family can't do shit to him personally, but can sue the home owners association.
 
[quote name='dohdough']
This thread has become the current racism megathread thanks to posters like you, so feel free to keep shitting it up by talking about slavery, discrimination of multiracial people, and Hemings.

Saying that I'm a fanatic because I'm a fanatic doesn't make it so. Hell, you can even bump that other thread about me to talk about it.
[/QUOTE]

UMMMM lets see you brought up Thomas Jefferson (inappropriately)and slavery NOT ME. Again this is not the place for your stormfrontism equivalent crap.

See how you just BS'd AGAIN!! Not a question because you are so sick or obsessed or both with your fanaticism you can't or refuse to see your BS.

edit: This thread started out that way and you have been pushing your fanaticism to fit that since page one.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='YendelTrex']UMMMM lets see you brought up Thomas Jefferson (inappropriately)and slavery NOT ME. Again this is not the place for your stormfrontism equivalent crap.[/quote]

Oh really? Because was I clearly talking about Durban Brown's characterization of the Zimmerman piece being the most honest article about him in comparison to how people also mischaracterize the Hemings case.

I mean shit, here's the exchange with no edits!
[quote name='DurbanBrown']Finally a honest sounding article on zimmerman and his past. from yahoo no less. thought this was worth sharing...

http://news.yahoo.com/george-zimmerman-prelude-shooting-194235114.html[/QUOTE]
[quote name='dohdough']Yup. It's as honest as how some people describe Thomas Jefferson and Sally Hemings relationship as a "romance."

It's a fluff piece to meant evoke sympathy for Zimmerman.[/QUOTE]

See how you just lied AGAIN!! Not a question because you are so sick or obsessed or both with your fanaticism you can't or refuse to see your lies and BS.
Click to expand...
I don't feel like having to go through explaining why it was necessary to go deeper into my examples because of your ridiculous proclamation of journalistic fraud, but I'm not going to ignore your edit in which you deleted the part about taking my posts to a "stormfront equivalent."

It's hilarious because you see my discussions of how people of color being discriminated against as the equivalent to the rhetoric of white supremacists. It's like we're in bizarro-land.
 
Seriously, that article was anything but honest sounding. Actually I'll take that back, honest sounding, yes, honest in reality? No. I don't give a damn if that neighborhood had been robbed by 100 black men in the last few months, he should have called the police and left it at that. This isn't the comics, we don't allow vigilantes. He thought he was going to be a big man and take matters into his own hands, and he did, now he's going to answer for it.
 
oh I wasn't implying that anyone here in particular stated that he wanted to kill a black kid, but many of his detractors seem to come to that conclusion.

Maybe a better way of saying it is that the act itself wasn't racist, but the aftermath and the divisions made are pretty clearly inline.
 
[quote name='nasum']oh I wasn't implying that anyone here in particular stated that he wanted to kill a black kid, but many of his detractors seem to come to that conclusion.[/QUOTE]
Gotcha. Maybe it's because I don't try to read comments on yahoo or pay attention to the more extreme unnuanced editorials about this case, but I don't recall his detractors calling him a hood-wearing racist that was out to put black kids behind bars(or worse). That kind of sentiment works in opposition to the racial profiling angle which I saw as more prevalent. Feel free to point me in that direction though...hahaha.

Maybe a better way of saying it is that the act itself wasn't racist, but the aftermath and the divisions made are pretty clearly inline.
Click to expand...
Yeah, the event incident was bad enough and it snowballed from there.
 
[quote name='dohdough']Oh really? Because was I clearly talking about Durban Brown's characterization of the Zimmerman piece being the most honest article about him in comparison to how people also mischaracterize the Hemings case.
I mean shit, here's the exchange with no edits!
I don't feel like having to go through explaining why it was necessary to go deeper into my examples because of your ridiculous proclamation of journalistic fraud, but I'm not going to ignore your edit in which you deleted the part about taking my posts to a "stormfront equivalent."
It's hilarious because you see my discussions of how people of color being discriminated against as the equivalent to the rhetoric of white supremacists. It's like we're in bizarro-land.[/QUOTE]

ROTFLOL Your QUOTES clearly show that YOU brought UP THOMAS JEFFERSON inappropriately. Then slavery then hitler. Also "durbanbrown did not say the "most honest article about him".

I find it sick,disturbing and ridiculous that you used all three of those TJ Slavery and hitler in response to an article about Zimmerman. You are a twisted one. As far as your fanaticism is it right there for all to see. Along with your stormfrontism equivalent crap.

edit: I noticed you changed your wording from Thomas Jefferson to just Jefferson earlier. Why is obvious...because you know that the Thomas Jefferson myth is a hoax and fraud. So being your ridiculous example of Thomas Jefferson and it is a fraud then one could easily assume you were also using that to say that the zimmerman article is a fraud. Either way it does not matter....You should have just left it as being a fluff piece and then mentioned the problems you had with it directly. BUTTTTT NOOOoooo you had to go all Thomas Jefferson, Hitler and slavery.
Thus your fanaticism is showing!!!
Not the correct or appropriate place for that CRAP.

edit two: And you did distort and bullshit in post 920 with what you said about me and me addressing it in 921 is me addressing exactly what YOU did (BULLSHIT) . Ignore it all you want but that was bs. Keep twisting and circling but I wont let you get away with your BS, fanatic distortions and ridiculous posts.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='YendelTrex']ROTFLOL Your QUOTES clearly show that YOU brought UP THOMAS JEFFERSON inappropriately. Then slavery then hitler. Also "durbanbrown did not say the "most honest article about him".

I find it sick and disturbing that you used all three of those TJ Slavery and hitler in response to an article about Zimmerman. You are a twisted one. As far as your fanaticism is it right there for all to see. Along with your stormfrontism equivalent crap.[/QUOTE]
You keep saying that I'm a fanatic, but don't address what I'm a fanatic of. You keep saying that I'm like a stormfront poster, but you don't go into detail about that either.

You're the one that said the Jefferson/Hemings case was journalistic fraud, yet you never explained how, but judging from your previous posts, one would be safe to assume that your implication is that their entire relationship, whether it was rape on the regular or romantic, never happened. So how about you explain what was fraudulent about it instead of playing guessing games.

edit: I noticed you changed your wording from Thomas Jefferson to just Jefferson earlier. Why is obvious...because you know that the Thomas Jefferson myth is a hoax and fraud. So being your ridiculous example of Thomas Jefferson and it is a fraud then one could easily assume you were also using that to say that the zimmerman article is a fraud. Either way it does not matter....You should have just left it as being a fluff piece and then mentioned the problems you had with it directly. BUTTTTT NOOOoooo you had to go all Thomas Jefferson, Hitler and slavery.
Thus your fanaticism is showing!!!
Not the correct or appropriate place for that CRAP.
Click to expand...
Hahaha...what edit? I didn't edit shit. But now I remember who you remind me of. It's of that guy that told me to go play with weaponized ebola that accused me of stuff that I clearly never did, like editing posts and pm's. I'm known as vitrioc here, not liar. Your flailing posts don't change that.

And btw, I explained the use of those examples and provided contextual examples as well. All you've done is shown us your mental vomit. Taking my quotes out of context isn't helping your case.

edit: LOLZ...it was serenitygod and he left classic gems such as "go fuck a goat" and "some people just want to watch the world burn." That guy really cracked me up and deleted the thread after having a meltdown.
 
[quote name='dohdough']You keep saying that I'm a fanatic, but don't address what I'm a fanatic of. You keep saying that I'm like a stormfront poster, but you don't go into detail about that either.

You're the one that said the Jefferson/Hemings case was journalistic fraud, yet you never explained how, but judging from your previous posts, one would be safe to assume that your implication is that their entire relationship, whether it was rape on the regular or romantic, never happened. So how about you explain what was fraudulent about it instead of playing guessing games.

Hahaha...what edit? I didn't edit shit. But now I remember who you remind me of. It's of that guy that told me to go play with weaponized ebola that accused me of stuff that I clearly never did, like editing posts and pm's. I'm known as vitrioc here, not liar. Your flailing posts don't change that.

And btw, I explained the use of those examples and provided contextual examples as well. All you've done is shown us your mental vomit. Taking my quotes out of context isn't helping your case.

edit: LOLZ...it was serenitygod and he left classic gems such as "go fuck a goat" and "some people just want to watch the world burn." That guy really cracked me up and deleted the thread after having a meltdown.[/QUOTE]

ROTFLOL seriously you have to stop my stomach hurts from laughing so much.

I addressed the fanatic and of what.

AGAIN if you want to discuss the Thomas Jefferson Hoax/myth start another thread I have already said i will be glad to take you to task. Again you using it was ridiculous at best and inappropriate as was hitler and slavery.

LOL again...I didn't say edit. I said you changed your wording and you did your first post said Thomas Jefferson then you go to just saying Jefferson in a later post. Start a thread as I said.
As far as your ranting on other posters and what they said all I can say is SO.
I will call you all day all week and all year on your ridiculous bullshit. If you don't like it then maybe you should stop posting such garbage.
 
[quote name='YendelTrex']ROTFLOL seriously you have to stop my stomach hurts from laughing so much.

I addressed the fanatic and of what.[/QUOTE]
No. You just call me a fanatic because I'm a fanatic while giving generalized descriptions of what they do. Yet, you've failed to give counter examples of how I'm wrong beyond saying I'm just some crazy loon.

AGAIN if you want to discuss the Thomas Jefferson Hoax/myth start another thread I have already said i will be glad to take you to task. Again you using it was ridiculous at best and inappropriate as was hitler and slavery.
Click to expand...
We can squash it here. Either Jefferson had kids with Hemings or he didn't. Either their relationship was concentual or it wasn't. Either they had a relationship or they didn't.

I'm talking about having a romanticized view of the subjects and you're the one sperging about the examples and not the romanticized viewpoint that I mentioned in many posts. This is what people call "missing the forest for the trees."

LOL again...I didn't say edit. I said you changed your wording and you did your first post said Thomas Jefferson then you go to just saying Jefferson in a later post. Start a thread as I said.
As far as your ranting on other posters and what they said all I can say is SO.
Click to expand...
Uhhh...do I type George Zimmerman or Trayvon Martin in every post? Do I type Sally Hemings in every post? Or Barack Hussein Obama II? Or do people really need to type out the full fucking name of other people ever? You're really grasping at straws here.

I will call you all day all week and all year on your ridiculous bullshit. If you don't like it then maybe you should stop posting such garbage.
Click to expand...
LOLZ...have fun buddy.
 
Twist and squirm all you want you little worm it doesn't change that you have been a crazy loon and obviously not knowledgeable at all much less intelligent. For the Thomas Jefferson hoax, myth, fraud and lie..... AGAIN START A THREAD this is not place for it!!! Seriously start a thread I will tear you apart. But do not expect to use Hitler, Thomas Jefferson, and slavery when responding to an article about Zimmerman and not be called a ridiculous fool for it. If you seriously think you can bury it or twist this into something else you can't. It's there and you did it.

Keep twisting and squirming I have pointed out your lies, distortions, bullshit fanaticism and on and on as it happened since I joined here. You can't weasel out of it. Keep trying though it is a nice case study for a friend of mine that has printed this thread out. We actually have bets as well on what twist , avoidance, denial, distortion, lie, spin, etc etc bullshit technique you will employ in your next post.

You are out there and it makes for a good study. Enjoy you are to be the center topic in classrooms and your fanatic behaviour seen and studied by hundreds possibly thousands of students.

This thread is a matter of record and if I was you I would be embarrassed and ashamed. Remember that it is all there so keep trying hard little buddy..... it is all there.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='YendelTrex']Twist and squirm all you want you little worm it doesn't change that you have been a crazy loon and obviously not knowledgeable at all much less intelligent. For the Thomas Jefferson hoax, myth, fraud and lie..... AGAIN START A THREAD this is not place for it!!! Seriously start a thread I will tear you apart. But do not expect to use Hitler, Thomas Jefferson, and slavery when responding to an article about Zimmerman and not be called a ridiculous fool for it. If you seriously think you can bury it or twist this into something else you can't. It's there and you did it.

Keep twisting and squirming I have pointed out your lies, distortions, bullshit fanaticism and on and on as it happened since I joined here. You can't weasel out of it. Keep trying though it is a nice case study for a friend of mine that has printed this thread out. We actually have bets as well on what twist , avoidance, denial, distortion, lie, spin, etc etc bullshit technique you will employ in your next post.

You are out there and it makes for a good study. Enjoy you are to be the center topic in classrooms and your fanatic behaviour seen and studied by hundreds possibly thousands of students.

This thread is a matter of record and if I was you I would be embarrassed and ashamed. Remember that it is all there so keep trying hard little buddy..... it is all there.[/QUOTE]

Really?
 
[quote name='depascal22']Really?[/QUOTE]

Yes really.

Edit: actually I misspoke he might be at the center OF A topic in classrooms...

He is in this thread being observed for a study by a friend of mine.

edit two:Great I blew it my friend called me and yelled at me. The cat is out of the bag. They also wanted it to be known that all identities and the site will be replaced and protected in anything she does. No links no names just behaviour etc.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='Clak']Seriously, that article was anything but honest sounding. Actually I'll take that back, honest sounding, yes, honest in reality? No. I don't give a damn if that neighborhood had been robbed by 100 black men in the last few months, he should have called the police and left it at that. This isn't the comics, we don't allow vigilantes. He thought he was going to be a big man and take matters into his own hands, and he did, now he's going to answer for it.[/QUOTE]

Don't even bother, when it is all said and done people are just gonna be too ignorant to grasp the truth of what you said period.
 
[quote name='YendelTrex']Twist and squirm all you want you little worm it doesn't change that you have been a crazy loon and obviously not knowledgeable at all much less intelligent. For the Thomas Jefferson hoax, myth, fraud and lie..... AGAIN START A THREAD this is not place for it!!! Seriously start a thread I will tear you apart. But do not expect to use Hitler, Thomas Jefferson, and slavery when responding to an article about Zimmerman and not be called a ridiculous fool for it. If you seriously think you can bury it or twist this into something else you can't. It's there and you did it.

Keep twisting and squirming I have pointed out your lies, distortions, bullshit fanaticism and on and on as it happened since I joined here. You can't weasel out of it. Keep trying though it is a nice case study for a friend of mine that has printed this thread out. We actually have bets as well on what twist , avoidance, denial, distortion, lie, spin, etc etc bullshit technique you will employ in your next post.[/QUOTE]
I'm guessing that your proof lies in "common sense" right?:rofl:

edit(lolz..you're and your)
You are out there and it makes for a good study. Enjoy you are to be the center topic in classrooms and your fanatic behaviour seen and studied by hundreds possibly thousands of students.

This thread is a matter of record and if I was you I would be embarrassed and ashamed. Remember that it is all there so keep trying hard little buddy..... it is all there.
Click to expand...
[quote name='YendelTrex']Yes really.

Edit: actually I misspoke he might be at the center OF A topic in classrooms...

He is in this thread being observed for a study by a friend of mine.[/QUOTE]
Ahahaha....yeah ok. Now I'm curious about what type of class and which institution. I'd even like to get a copy!

I'd be more ashamed as a researcher to publish a report that has a friend actively trolling and skewing results, but that's just me. Especially one throwing out insults like "special friend," little worm, fanatic, etc. I'm guessing she's leaving that part out of course. I'm also guessing that it isn't a class in ethics. And if you guys are betting on which debate tactic I'm going to use next, congratulations to the winner?:applause::roll:

oh, and have fun here:
http://www.cheapassgamer.com/forums/showthread.php?p=9579286#post9579286
 
[quote name='depascal22']It might even be a study on the effect of trolls for all we know. I think we all knew Yendrel was a little too zealous to be real.[/QUOTE]
Nah, I'm sure he's legit. The part about the study came after he started escalating his rhetoric and if he's making bets with his friend about my responses, it's probably an assignment for an intro-like class and not anything of any academic rigor because the results are now tainted now that we "know."

Could this be an exercise in Poe's Law? I doubt it.

edit: And to keep this relevant to the topic, Zimmerman's lawyer announced that Zimmerman's website was able to solicit $204,000 in donations. $5,000 went to the bond and $49k went to "living expenses." The lawyer also made a comment that he was unaware of the amount until after the bond hearing and that if the judge knew, it could've affected the judge's decision on the amount of bond. As of now, the judge knows and is waiting for more information on the account before deciding on increasing the amount or other action.
 
Wow I love how you can kill a child for any reason and receive thousands of dollars. Don't even know how to feel about that. How much money has the martins received? You know because at the end of the day its their child that was killed but it seems many people couldn't give another shit about some dead hoodie wearing thug. I hope your kids never get killed for walking.

Still to this day that haven't stated why Zimmerman got out I his car after calling the police. From what I have learned jn this thread you can do anything you want up unto actually hitting someone and still claim self defense.
 
[quote name='Soodmeg']Wow I love how you can kill a child for any reason and receive thousands of dollars. Don't even know how to feel about that. How much money has the martins received? You know because at the end of the day its their child that was killed but it seems many people couldn't give another shit about some dead hoodie wearing thug. I hope your kids never get killed for walking.

Still to this day that haven't stated why Zimmerman got out I his car after calling the police. From what I have learned jn this thread you can do anything you want up unto actually hitting someone and still claim self defense.[/QUOTE]
Almost. You forgot the part where you have to kill the person because dead people tell no tales.
 
defense funds are very common and a great thing for tax payers. Id much rather private parties pay for his defense than the state. Brutal murderers on death row get private funding for appeals from people who oppose the death penalty without scrutiny from the media, I don't see what the issue is with Zimmerman getting money.
 
[quote name='caltab']defense funds are very common and a great thing for tax payers. Id much rather private parties pay for his defense than the state. Brutal murderers on death row get private funding for appeals from people who oppose the death penalty without scrutiny from the media, I don't see what the issue is with Zimmerman getting money.[/QUOTE]
There are two reasons why it's problematic:

1. His bond was set according to his alleged financial difficulty of not having any money period.

2. He certainly knows his audience and designed his website to court and solicit donations from ultra-nationalists, bigots, and racists.

Donations from people opposing the death penalty are different from the type of people that Zimmerman targeted. Considering the way the death penalty has been applied in a racist manner, it demonstrates an even greater reason as to why someone shouldn't be comparing the two.

Should he be able to solicit funds from whoever he wants? Of course, but don't expect people to not be critical of the way he does it considering the way he did.

edit: Don't get me wrong, the first point is the more important one because it's subverting the process.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You don't know why his bond was set the way it was- the judge did not say. There are a ton of factors that go into if its set and for how much. Bond isn't meant to be punitive, especially in Florida. It's main goal is to ensure the person will not flee. There is nothing to indicate he is a flight risk. He has a minimal criminal history. The judge actually pointed that out right before he set the bond. A minor altercation with civilian clothed police when he was 20 is not a major criminal event for someone facing 2nd degree. Usually that type of person has a long checkered passed. Another major factor is if there are legit questions as to a persons guilt . Zimmerman's defense attorney did a very good job pointing out the potential weaknesses in the case.

I really doubt the defense attorney intentionally mislead the judge-he would get in a lot of trouble for that. After all, the lawyer is the one who disclosed the huge sum of money. The website wasn't up for very long before Zimmerman was arrested, once he was in jail he wouldn't have been able to easily access the website. We also dont know when the funds were raised. They could have been mostly after his arrest, which would make it more believable Zimmerman wouldn't have known.

I think the judge is waiting to see how the money is handled. If it's monitored and controlled by the defense attorney that would minimize the increased flight risk due to the newly available funds. But 150k bond is pretty standard in florida for this type of charge, I wouldnt be surprised if the Judge leaves the bond unchanged. Florida's philosophy on bond is the way it really should be---it does a nice job balancing the fact the defendent is innocent until proven guilty while giving some incentive not to flee.
 
Well that was fun. My special friend was outed as being at the minimum a hypocrite http://www.cheapassgamer.com/forums/showthread.php?p=9586410#post9586410 end of post 32 shows him being a hypocrite clearly.

As I said in this thread he is a fanatic http://www.cheapassgamer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=317558&page=45 post 897 and that thread about sally shows it even more. He will pick and choose what fits his beliefs and choose to make fact what he wants while ignoring the rest and failing to see the whole picture.

Checkmate in that thread. I clearly showed he is a hypocrite. There was nothing left for him to BS on as it was crystal clear that he was full of it. So the coward closes the thread but not without taking a digg first. Typical.

CHECKMATE!!
 
LOLZ...wrong thread, homie. Me thinks someone is butthurted.

If you want to discuss it, open a new thread so you can tear me up some more.:rofl:
 
I can't find the article done by Yahoo! But while I was at work the other day I noticed they did a write up on Al Sharpton addressing the Martin supporters in light of the 20th anniversary of the Rodney King beating and subsequent riots.

While I think Sharpton can be a HUGE jackass I actually thought that was a classy move on his part giving that the anniversary almost coincided exactly with the day that Zimmerman was released on bail.
 
[quote name='dohdough']LOLZ...wrong thread, homie. Me thinks someone is butthurted.

If you want to discuss it, open a new thread so you can tear me up some more.:rofl:[/QUOTE]

I don't need to start a thread I tore you apart in that one. It was crystal clear that you are a hypocrite. The fact is you couldn't BS your way out of it so you close the thread and take a shot. That shows you are a coward as well.

Checkmate!! Are you going to throw the board and pieces here too and storm away like the cry baby loser you are?? :cry:

edit: I bet the your next part of your tantrum is to delete the thread.....
 
I'm not the one whining about it. You said you were done and I said that I'd close the thread because of it. Don't blame me because you don't have any impulse control. If you think you won, more power to ya.

And weren't you the one that was whining about derailing threads in this very thread? Like for two pages? As in the LAST two pages?

edit: I bet the your next part of your tantrum is to delete the thread.....
Click to expand...
LOLZ, do you want to make a wager on that? You can make a new thread to do that too!
 
[quote name='dohdough']I'm not the one whining about it. You said you were done and I said that I'd close the thread because of it. Don't blame me because you don't have any impulse control. If you think you won, more power to ya.

And weren't you the one that was whining about derailing threads in this very thread? Like for two pages? As in the LAST two pages?

LOLZ, do you want to make a wager on that? You can make a new thread to do that too![/QUOTE]

Yendel reminds me of Bill O'Reilly - how Bill says "I'll give you the last word" and then Bill always takes the last word.

Yendel - why don't you show a little integrity, if you're done then you're done. Tapping out and then whining about it does not make you look good.
 
[quote name='camoor']Yendel reminds me of Bill O'Reilly - how Bill says "I'll give you the last word" and then Bill always takes the last word.

Yendel - why don't you show a little integrity, if you're done then you're done. Tapping out and then whining about it does not make you look good.[/QUOTE]

I didn't tap out but I guess you would know that if you finished reading the thread and my response to you. But instead you jump on me here without a clue of what you are talking about. I actually showed DD for what he is in that thread and beat down his hypocrite ass and when he couldn't bs his way out of that one closed the thread and took a pop shot. He showed clearly he was a hypocrite and a coward. Now why don't you go jump on your butt buddy and tell him about his integrity... or are you okay with a fanatic hypocrite who runs away like little baby? Birds of a feather...


Next time you jump in you should at least get the FACTS straight.

Pathetic!!

edit: I am sure you wont even read this one either you like to take pop shots and run away too. Birds of a feather...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='YendelTrex']I didn't tap out but I guess you would know that if you finished reading the thread and my response to you. But instead you jump on me here without a clue of what you are talking about. I actually showed DD for what he is in that thread and beat down his hypocrite ass and when he couldn't bs his way out of that one closed the thread and took a pop shot. He showed clearly he was a hypocrite and a coward. Now why don't you go jump on your butt buddy and tell him about his integrity... or are you okay with a fanatic hypocrite who runs away like little baby? Birds of a feather...


Next time you jump in you should at least get the FACTS straight.

Pathetic!!

edit: I am sure you wont even read this one either you like to take pop shots and run away too. Birds of a feather...[/QUOTE]

I think the preponderance of evidence supports the theory that TJ had kids with Sally Hemings. I thought DD won the debate. I also wasn't impressed with how you constantly shifted the goal posts and played all sorts of cheap debate tricks.

I understand you disagree but calling me names is not going to change my opinion.
 
[quote name='camoor']I think the preponderance of evidence supports the theory that TJ had kids with Sally Hemings. I thought DD won the debate. I also wasn't impressed with how you constantly shifted the goal posts and played all sorts of cheap debate tricks.

I understand you disagree but calling me names is not going to change my opinion.[/QUOTE]

That is fine you can choose to make the assumption but it is not fact. Like you said it is an assumption. (TJ AND SALLY)

I NEVER MOVED THE GOAL POSTS AT ALL.
 He assumed (as he always does) when he made the thread possibly that I was some racist person who would deny the possibility or say it was a romance and that is his pattern... assumption and prejudgment. If you read the thread I stuck to the subject and my point.... he was all over the damn place possibly because he knew I WAS RIGHT after MY FIRST POST. He started the thread with an assumption the first post was proof of that. Also his first post set the assumption tone that it was accurate CONCLUDED and accepted by those who did the study. Nope it was not. But you see he knew that.. that is probably why he said Jefferson not Thomas Jefferson. He blew it though and shortly after that as well by stating what he did to GBAstar then attacking me for basically saying the same damn thing. From there he went off the deep called me racist talked about Martians, gravity, creationism, threw out garbage left and right tried to change the topic altogether and on and on. That is his game I played HIS game for a few posts and addressed his silliness. When I had enough I let him have it with his own words.
I made and proved my point and that is IT IS NOT FACT and there is no proof that makes it that and ANYONE and that means DOHDOUGH who puts it forth as FACT are, like I said and what started it all.. a lie, hoax, or fraud.

He was not only proven to be wrong and beaten by his own words and his own game but also shown to be a hypocrite and gave more proof of his fanaticism and he then ended it closed the thread threw out a cheap closing shot when he couldn't BS his way through anymore..showing that he is a coward on top of it.

Oh yes you came at me here not the other way around.

Again you like your feather friend can't get the FACTS straight. (who moved the goal posts and who played CHEAP debate tricks)

You and him can take and CHOOSE what you like that fits your belief and view and proclaim it as FACT....While I will continue to look at things with reason, some healthy skepticism, "critically", objectively and look at the whole picture. Have fun in your little world...birds of a feather.

edit: OMFG I was going to say it.... Watch msut77 or renique (or whatever his name is) will chime in next with their driveby crap . I Swear I was going to put it and even told my wife. I was also going to include them in my birds of a feather..
Oh well. But damn they are just to easy DD, msut and ren and sometimes you to see coming a mile away.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='camoor']I think the preponderance of evidence supports the theory that TJ had kids with Sally Hemings. I thought DD won the debate. I also wasn't impressed with how you constantly shifted the goal posts and played all sorts of cheap debate tricks.

I understand you disagree but calling me names is not going to change my opinion.[/QUOTE]

I have the guy on ignore so I only saw quotes but yeah, he did a ton of back peddling and mangling of definitions.
 
[FONT=&quot] [quote name='Msut77']I have the guy on ignore so I only saw quotes but yeah, he did a ton of back peddling and mangling of definitions.[/QUOTE]

I love this little kiddie...he IGNORES EVERYONE that doesn't see things in his childish narrow way but yet does his drive by crap and attacks those he is supposedly ignoring.

That is just too damn funny. Ignore.. direct smack to those he is sticking his fingers in his ears to.... but still hears somehow (since he is attacking them) and then is like "you can't say anything back nanny nanny boo boo I have my fingers in my ears."

I am sooo glad he is on DD's side and not mine ( i wouldn't want him or let him be and oh wait he doesn't know my side he can't read it...riiiggghhhttt)

[/FONT][FONT=&quot] He is a good fit though with dd, ren, and the like. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]



[/FONT]
 
[quote name='camoor']Yendel reminds me of Bill O'Reilly - how Bill says "I'll give you the last word" and then Bill always takes the last word.

Yendel - why don't you show a little integrity, if you're done then you're done. Tapping out and then whining about it does not make you look good.[/QUOTE]

He is just a blustery blow hard, he once accused me of being someone alt of all things.

In another post you mentioned preponderance of evidence, all he has is "nuh uh".

http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/1331/update
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='Msut77']fingers in my ears nanny nanny boo boo
[/QUOTE]

Damn you are thick!!

Get off DD's dick and when you are not on it quit eating up his turds and trying to regurgitate them and turn them into some kind of gold when it is just a different kind of crap.

You want to debate me then quit playing your little fingers in your ears game. Are you 8 years old? 8 year olds are more mature and smarter than you so sorry 8 year olds.
You had your chance on that thread and now you want to do it here on DD's dick and ignoring the other side of what the debate was...You are a fucking joke.

That's right I know you wont you are a coward just like DD and ren. If not the same person you certainly are of the same diseased, dirty, used, old rag.

You guys are a joke...wait wait no not a joke you guys are SICK!!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='dohdough']I must be responding to myself because we're each other's alts.:rofl:[/QUOTE]

We are really dedicated to have thousands of fake posts over years and develop our own posting styles. Meanwhile yendels font changes randomly, perhaps he was cutting and pasting his drivel. Perhaps he thinks it will make people pay attention.
 
Gotta get back into this.

Zimmerman now quarter-black, half-Hispanic, with the last quarter determined at a later date at the 2012 Racial Draft.

Zimmerman received $200k from supporters.

Zimmerman receiving sympathy all over the place, including from the Associated Press.

Zimmerman gets bail and secret out-of-state location.

NBC News under fire for editing the 911 call and being responsible for this myth that Zimmerman "disobeyed" the cops and mentioned Martin's race before being asked. Producer gets thrown out on his ass.

Alan Dershowitz, top attorney and hot dog eating champ ten years running, says the prosecutor overshot on charges and should be hiring an attorney herself.

It gets better and better every day.
 
[quote name='Spokker']Gotta get back into this.

Zimmerman now quarter-black, half-Hispanic, with the last quarter determined at a later date at the 2012 Racial Draft.

Zimmerman received $200k from supporters.

Zimmerman receiving sympathy all over the place, including from the Associated Press.

Zimmerman gets bail and secret out-of-state location.

NBC News under fire for editing the 911 call and being responsible for this myth that Zimmerman "disobeyed" the cops and mentioned Martin's race before being asked. Producer gets thrown out on his ass.

Alan Dershowitz, top attorney and hot dog eating champ ten years running, says the prosecutor overshot on charges and should be hiring an attorney herself.

It gets better and better every day.[/QUOTE]
LOLZ...more of the same eh?

You forgot this one:
trayvon-martin-george-zimmerman-fake-photo-via-pinterest-e1332883436177.png


Btw, I noticed that you have very interesting timing.
 
my favourite thing about that picture is that we're supposed to forgive the past of GZ because he's a better more mature adult now, but we can't possibly assume that the teenage rebellion phase would ever pass for TM.

The myopic thinking of this whole thing is just fascinating. Everything needs to be painted as black and white (not a racial pun, I mean actual colours on the spectrum) with no shades of grey. If there isn't a villian and a hero it all of the sudden becomes too confusing for most people to understand.
 
[quote name='nasum']my favourite thing about that picture is that we're supposed to forgive the past of GZ because he's a better more mature adult now, but we can't possibly assume that the teenage rebellion phase would ever pass for TM.

The myopic thinking of this whole thing is just fascinating. Everything needs to be painted as black and white (not a racial pun, I mean actual colours on the spectrum) with no shades of grey. If there isn't a villian and a hero it all of the sudden becomes too confusing for most people to understand.[/QUOTE]

I agree 100 percent.

This case along with some other recent personal discoveries about the world as me reeling. My outlook about the world has been shattered with the fact that humanity hasnt moved an inch in either direction. It might as well still be the 1800 and were burning that lady who happens to be slightly taller than everyone because that means shes a witch.

Humans will never be able to think of anything rationally....its just like when that dumb fucking idiot slidecage tried to pathetically deflect outrage by picking another random act of violence and asking where the outrage was. Because like most Americans (humans) he is too fucking dense to understand that a person can be outrage by both...they dont have to pick just one.

The amount of fallacy that our society tries to believe in is baffling to me and as I learn more I am just more and more confused/enlighten as to how the world is so screwed. Even though there are a million different answer for all problems we are taught that there can only be 1 right 1 wrong no in between.
 
I think I saw George Zimmerman at the 7-11 near the airport today. He got a piece of pizza and paid in cash.

It might not have been him. But then again, it very well could have been.
 
[quote name='Soodmeg']
Humans will never be able to think of anything rationally....its just like when that dumb fucking idiot slidecage tried to pathetically deflect outrage by picking another random act of violence and asking where the outrage was. Because like most Americans (humans) he is too fucking dense to understand that a person can be outrage by both...they dont have to pick just one.[/quote]A person can be outraged by both but the majority of people aren't. Are media outlets and the stories they print and air not an expression of what people want to read, see and hear about? If people want to read about something, it will be printed in the newspaper or shown on TV. People generally do not want to read about those other "random" acts of violence.

There is a car/plane accident analogy here. Car accidents are relatively common, so you don't hear about them often unless it's a big pile up or something unusual. While flying is much safer than driving, you hear about any plane accident that happens. It's on the front page and there are very rigorous investigations.

Black on black and black on white crimes perpetuated by young black males are so common (especially if you consider their general representation in the population) that they just sort of fade away like car accident stories. In the grand scheme of things, white on black crime is relatively rare, so it'll get more attention in general.

Something like a mob of 100 blacks attacking a white man and woman certainly rises to the level of public interest, but most people don't want to read about it. Some have been thoroughly convinced that being informed of such stories is insensitive at best and racist at worst. For others, reading about black attacks every day would just get boring.

But then again, you're not outraged about those other stories either. You're outraged that people attempt to shine a light on them. That's what you're complaining about.
 
While we're on the subject of dispelling bullshit...

[quote name='Spokker']A person can be outraged by both but the majority of people aren't. Are media outlets and the stories they print and air not an expression of what people want to read, see and hear about? If people want to read about something, it will be printed in the newspaper or shown on TV. People generally do not want to read about those other "random" acts of violence.[/QUOTE]
Martin-Zimmerman wasn't an act of random violence and Adkins was as close as it gets. The only comparisons you can draw are that someone was killed, there was an SUV, and it involved a black male and a multiracial white/Hispanic(maybe Latino) man. As for media attention, we still hear far more about white women missing or killed than non-white anything. So according to your logic, people don't care or want to hear about missing or killed non-white people?

There is a car/plane accident analogy here. Car accidents are relatively common, so you don't hear about them often unless it's a big pile up or something unusual. While flying is much safer than driving, you hear about any plane accident that happens. It's on the front page and there are very rigorous investigations.
Click to expand...
This is a horrible analogy especially when you make a completely different point in the above.

Black on black and black on white crimes perpetuated by young black males are so common (especially if you consider their general representation in the population) that they just sort of fade away like car accident stories.
Click to expand...
Most crime is intraracial and is no more common than whites committing intraracial crime. Just because there's no outrage or media coverage doesn't mean that there was some perverted miscarriage of justice.

In the grand scheme of things, white on black crime is relatively rare, so it'll get more attention in general.
Click to expand...
First you use black on black and black on white crime as one metric and then you change to white on black for the other metric. Did you think someone wasn't going to notice or that you're being less than honest about how you're spinning the facts?

Using your wonderful chart about hate crime prosecutions alone, whites commit three times as many compared to black people. How the hell does that even rank as relatively rare in any grand scheme of things?

Something like a mob of 100 blacks attacking a white man and woman certainly rises to the level of public interest, but most people don't want to read about it. Some have been thoroughly convinced that being informed of such stories is insensitive at best and racist at worst. For others, reading about black attacks every day would just get boring.
Click to expand...
You must be referring to the most recent case where the guy that got beat up claimed that it was motivated by racial backlash from the Martin case when in reality, it was a long running family feud which he precipitated.

Or maybe you're talking about that state fair about a year ago that was debunked as being an all-out race war of black people targeting whites?

But then again, you're not outraged about those other stories either. You're outraged that people attempt to shine a light on them. That's what you're complaining about.
Click to expand...
All outrage isn't the same and there's more than a little projection going on here. This isn't about being pissed at people bringing up the case as a tragic case, but about people like you that make false equivalencies by trying to equate 2 cases with completely different circumstances.

You keep saying that people aren't outraged about other cases or that we should be outraged, but you don't say why we should be outraged. Screaming "black people do it too!" is a vapid argument.

tl; dr Stop being a racist fuck.
 
[quote name='dohdough']
Martin-Zimmerman wasn't an act of random violence and Adkins was as close as it gets. [/quote]Was this one random?

http://hamptonroads.com/2012/05/beating-church-and-brambleton

How about this one?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-beating-white-man-revenge-Martins-death.html

Or this one.

http://articles.nydailynews.com/2012-03-04/news/31122324_1_white-boy-fire-tv-station

Can they all be debunked? If they are random, does that make it better? Should something be done about random crime as well as targeted crime? If the result is the same, dead people, beat up people, does intent matter as far as public perception and public safety go? Considering that intraracial homicide tends to involve familiars, while interracial homicide is more likely to involve strangers than intraracial homicide (according to the DOJ), does it not make sense to practice vigilance among those who are a different race than you are as well as those who are the same race?

For homicides committed by --

a friend or acquaintance of the victim, less than one-tenth (8%) were interracial
a stranger to the victim, one-quarter were interracial
Click to expand...

So according to your logic, people don't care or want to hear about missing or killed non-white people?
Click to expand...
Well, attractive white ladies. They aren't going after hambeasts.

Most crime is intraracial and is no more common than whites committing intraracial crime. Just because there's no outrage or media coverage doesn't mean that there was some perverted miscarriage of justice.
Click to expand...
Right, but understand proportionality. Whites commit less crime than you would expect based on their representation in the population. Since many Latino criminals are classified as white in the statistics, the lily-white WASPY crime rate is very, very low. On the other hand, blacks are 13% of the population and young black men commit much more crime than we would otherwise expect.

But, staying on the topic of intraracial crime, has it ever occurred to you, even as a sort of devil's advocate sort of thing, that the reason most crime is intraracial is because whites moved away from poor black areas? Do you think that if whites moved in to South Central Los Angeles or Oakland or places where blacks live, that the interracial crime statistics would increase in the direction that most racists would expect, or would the interracial crime rate equalize? And is it not a curious thing that despite all this segregation, the black on white crime rate is so disproportionately out of whack with the white on black crime rate?

First you use black on black and black on white crime as one metric and then you change to white on black for the other metric. Did you think someone wasn't going to notice or that you're being less than honest about how you're spinning the facts?
Click to expand...
The fact is that blacks are disproportionately criminal versus whites. Latinos are less criminal than blacks but moreso than whites. Asian-Americans are the least criminal using the four broadly defined groups.

Much of the explanation is based around class instead of race, but Latinos present a conundrum because a predominantly Latino area is not necessarily criminal because it is poor. Latino American border towns are some of the safest and poorest places in the nation. Big Hispanic cities like Santa Ana are pretty average as far as crime goes, and does not compare to the typical inner city. I think there are cultural explanations. Latinos have not yet bought into this idea that their plight is somehow caused by malicious whites, and therefore do not harbor the kind of hostility to whites that many blacks do.

Using your wonderful chart about hate crime prosecutions alone, whites commit three times as many compared to black people. How the hell does that even rank as relatively rare in any grand scheme of things?
Click to expand...
Implying crime is worse because of some subjective definition of "hate." I've always thought hate crime laws were worse for blacks because it tends to downplay black on black violence, which is the most pressing issue young black men face. "Racial hate crime" implies it's a bigger deal with the crime is interracial. It seems very counter-productive to me.

You must be referring to the most recent case where the guy that got beat up claimed that it was motivated by racial backlash from the Martin case when in reality, it was a long running family feud which he precipitated.
Click to expand...
Yeah man, he deserved that beating.

Or maybe you're talking about that state fair about a year ago that was debunked as being an all-out race war of black people targeting whites?
Click to expand...
Debunked? Here's the 911 tape from Milwaukee: http://www.todaystmj4.com/news/local/127276733.html

Local news correctly reported the story, but the national news omitted details on race.

http://www.huntingtonnews.net/7120

You keep saying that people aren't outraged about other cases or that we should be outraged, but you don't say why we should be outraged. Screaming "black people do it too!" is a vapid argument.
Click to expand...
You can feel however you want about it. I don't think you should or should not be outraged. I'm simply stating that many people are not. Many excuses are made for the ridiculous amount of black crime put up with in this country and others.
 
[quote name='Spokker']Was this one random?

http://hamptonroads.com/2012/05/beating-church-and-brambleton

How about this one?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-beating-white-man-revenge-Martins-death.html

Or this one.

http://articles.nydailynews.com/2012-03-04/news/31122324_1_white-boy-fire-tv-station [/QUOTE]
Couldn't find any white on black crime eh? Numbers alone should be able to give you more results.:roll:

Your original point was that people don't care, but you don't go into why...just more of your usual circular reasoning that black people commit more crime because they're black.

Can they all be debunked? If they are random, does that make it better? Should something be done about random crime as well as targeted crime? If the result is the same, dead people, beat up people, does intent matter as far as public perception and public safety go? Considering that intraracial homicide tends to involve familiars, while interracial homicide is more likely to involve strangers than intraracial homicide (according to the DOJ), does it not make sense to practice vigilance among those who are a different race than you are as well as those who are the same race?
Click to expand...
Of course it matters if you're pushing racist bullshit like we should be suspicious of every black person that we're around. According to your own source, interracial murders are so rare that if anything, we should be more leery of white people because they commit twice as many interracial murders. You mention proportionality, but what's the baseline for it? When white victims drop to 80% instead of 86%?


Well, attractive white ladies. They aren't going after hambeasts.
Click to expand...
And they also tend to give white kids more exposure as well.

Right, but understand proportionality. Whites commit less crime than you would expect based on their representation in the population. Since many Latino criminals are classified as white in the statistics, the lily-white WASPY crime rate is very, very low. On the other hand, blacks are 13% of the population and young black men commit much more crime than we would otherwise expect.
Click to expand...
Whites don't commit less crimes and I've explained why in countless replies to that trope. You keep parroting that black men commit crimes out of proportion to their numbers, yet you still don't say why.

But, staying on the topic of intraracial crime, has it ever occurred to you, even as a sort of devil's advocate sort of thing, that the reason most crime is intraracial is because whites moved away from poor black areas? Do you think that if whites moved in to South Central Los Angeles or Oakland or places where blacks live, that the interracial crime statistics would increase in the direction that most racists would expect, or would the interracial crime rate equalize? And is it not a curious thing that despite all this segregation, the black on white crime rate is so disproportionately out of whack with the white on black crime rate?
Click to expand...
I know the answer to all those questions. Do you? Cause from what I can see, your only point is that black men commit more crime because they're black.

The fact is that blacks are disproportionately criminal versus whites. Latinos are less criminal than blacks but moreso than whites. Asian-Americans are the least criminal using the four broadly defined groups.

Much of the explanation is based around class instead of race, but Latinos present a conundrum because a predominantly Latino area is not necessarily criminal because it is poor. Latino American border towns are some of the safest and poorest places in the nation. Big Hispanic cities like Santa Ana are pretty average as far as crime goes, and does not compare to the typical inner city. I think there are cultural explanations. Latinos have not yet bought into this idea that their plight is somehow caused by malicious whites, and therefore do not harbor the kind of hostility to whites that many blacks do.
Click to expand...
Oh right...it's not cause they're black, it's because of black culture. Yeah...that's totally not racist.

Tell me, how would you describe the plight of Native Americans in the country then? Or how about the Hmong, Cambodian, or Laos communities?

Implying crime is worse because of some subjective definition of "hate." I've always thought hate crime laws were worse for blacks because it tends to downplay black on black violence, which is the most pressing issue young black men face. "Racial hate crime" implies it's a bigger deal with the crime is interracial. It seems very counter-productive to me.
Click to expand...
Yeah man, he deserved that beating.
Click to expand...
Yeah man, I totally said he did.

Sorry, but I'm not as dogmatic as you.

Debunked? Here's the 911 tape from Milwaukee: http://www.todaystmj4.com/news/local/127276733.html

Local news correctly reported the story, but the national news omitted details on race.

http://www.huntingtonnews.net/7120
Click to expand...
Yup. And you totally didn't omit that there were a bunch of black kids fighting another bunch of black kids. It was the race war as those people were reporting right?:roll:

You can feel however you want about it. I don't think you should or should not be outraged. I'm simply stating that many people are not. Many excuses are made for the ridiculous amount of black crime put up with in this country and others.
Click to expand...
LOLZ...wut? You're not just simply stating shit. You're making strong assertions that no one gives a shit that black people commit crimes out of proportion to their numbers because of some nebulous concept of black "culture" and that we "put up with it" all over the fucking world. Did you somehow miss that black men are already imprisoned at far greater numbers and make up like 50% of the prison population? Should we just lock them all up?

WTF is wrong with you. I've seen some pretty racist shit on this thread alone, your post takes the fucking cake.
 
It's also a narrowminded view of "crime" as seatbelt and speeding violations probably aren't on that list but are committed in vastly larger numbers by your wasps.

There's a framework to the argument:
Black Crime = gang stuff and that's bad and serious
White Crime = traffic violations (and that's "ok") and shit like embezzlement and kiddie porn.

We've got a majority of the population (we'll call them talk radio fans) that think along the lines of "crime = crime no matter what" but are wholly satisfied to not use traffic violations in their "figures" for crime as it applies to race. This also excuses getting let off with a warning and the classic "looks like you've got a tail-light out" scenarios.

So that produces this thinking of "a black guy is more likely to shoot another black guy than two white guys in the same scenario". Ok fine. Then a white guy is more likely to kill 20 people and leave their bodies in the woods while sniffing their dirty underpants postmortem...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top