Posted on 07/19/2013 12:23:47 PM PDT by Mrs. Don-o
Mrs. Don-o delivering some whoop-ass. That’s how she do.
At least I only copied your tagline....................:-)............http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/3045045/posts?page=13#13
Your usual brilliance.
enough : )
Extremely well done! Thank you!
Ah, those inconvenient facts.
Dear friends,Your account and reaction to the Zimmerman trial exhibits the very worst of Progressive thought. It is, in fact, contrary to your own professed concern of peace and life.
You are, first, failing to tell the truth. Second, you are failing to practice the sort of meticulous analysis of events which is most likely to bring the truth of things to the surface. In that failure you are, third, pouring gasoline on the fire of resentment and grievance kindled by those who make a living off societal discontent.
I imagine that if a howling mob of right-wing activists surrounded your offices, "breathing threats and slaughter," you would not hesitate to call the police. And so you should. You have friends, a cause, and above all family who depend on your being alive and well.
But, as they say, "When seconds count, the police are only minutes away." By dialing 911 you would have already endorsed violence, or the credible threat of violence, as a legitimate means of self-protection. That you appeal to hired guns makes no moral difference. Doing something or paying others to do it is virtually equivalent, morally speaking.
So, fourth, you invoke a moral sentiment which you yourselves do not hold.
In the mere mention of Stand Your Ground and in your gratuitous lamenting of "militarization" you appeal to emotion over reason. Your safety while you publish your opinion is guaranteed by, well, the military! And not only the military but the local law enforcement organizations, on whom you rely to keep the roads drivable and the neighborhood livable, protect your right to form and promulgate your opinions.
However, largely because of people who share your opinions, we have come to a point in history where malefactors are coddled and slapped on the wrist. Consequently money has been diverted from community safety to social programs which blindly seek for "root causes" while they ignore the violence all around.
A number of events led me to buy my first handgun and to join the reserve corps of my sheriff's office. But chief among them was this: a robber who had been "compassionately" slapped on the wrist for his first offense later shot a mother's three children before her eyes. When I read that I decided that rather than say to my daughter, "I'm sorry, dear, but I am too morally pure to save your life," it was in fact morally incumbent upon me, as parent, to be able to DO (rather than say)," Don't worry, dear, you're safe now. He'll never hurt anybody again.
So your fifth offense against life and peace is the pretense that it is morally superior to let evil-doers kill our children while we stand by and wring our hands.
I strongly urge you to reconsider both your careless methods of moral analysis and your faulty moral thinking.
Beautifully argued. All of the details are familiar to those who have followed the case closely, but I could never have put it together as well as you have done.
And, of course, most liberals haven’t the slightest knowledge of or interest in the facts. Which makes it well worth while rubbing their noses in it, in the hopes that one day they will wake up.
excellent ... explains well...but some will not be persuaded with facts...
I sent mine to their reply-to address on their e-mail newsletter, but now I have an odd feeling they wouldn't get it, so I'm going to send mine to info@, too.
I hope they hear from a few people other than just you & me.
When I was over there on the left, I was challenged so infrequently -- well, it was almost unheard-of --- but when it happened, by letter or face-to-face, I was genuinely shocked.
And each shock helped me. Really, it did.
So now I feel I must do this for the sake of the folks' intellectual progress, as well as their well-being and redemption.
bump
Very well done. Thank you!
BTTT
Extremely well said!! Too bad this group was just as ‘knee-jerk’ in its opinions as most of the so-called ‘civil rights’ groups in the US, even though, as you have so clearly stated, the facts introduced into evidence do not support ANY of their claims against Mr. Zimmerman.
Great work
That outfit behaves like hippies for life
I’m anti abortion
Its just easier to explain and define
Again...well done
Dear [name],
Thank you for providing your views with regard to the George Zimmerman case and the larger issues surrounding it. Our Editor will have the lead in considering the appropriateness of future related material, including any presentation of alternate views. But I did want to provide some comments.
The brevity of articles means we can not develop the matters very much, and we have difficulties in presenting nuances. Our perspective in responding to the national dialogue kindled by this case is not to delve into the details of the specific case, but to look for where the dialogue can lead us on consideration of basic issues confronting our country.
We did not opine on the verdict (personally I feel that the jury had little alternative to its verdict) nor did we present any theory as to how the confrontation went down. Neither did we attempt to evaluate the character of George Zimmerman. I regret if the brief commentary may have led you and perhaps others to make assumptions about what CL thinks on these matters.
Also because our focus is on the larger issues not the details of the trial, our views are informed by much more than what is found in the transcript of the trial.
This incident began with Zimmerman's characterization of Martin as suspicious. Nothing has come to light which would indicate that, at the time Zimmerman so labeled Martin, Zimmerman had observed any behavior of Martin's which could fairly be described as suspicious.
Furthermore, we know that Zimmerman made at least 46 calls to police reporting black males as suspicious over a period of 8 years. There is no such thing as absolute proof on this matter, but I think the evidence indicates that the incident started with racial profiling.
That he doesn't fit a classic racist stereotype doesn't change that, nor do the details of the subsequent confrontation after Zimmerman called police and followed Martin despite the police dispatcher telling him not to.
Twin Lakes is not a rich community, but it is a gated community. In Florida, the mentality surrounding gated communities has worked its way down to a much more modest income level than where it started. I think that mentality is relevant in considering the attitudes in our country, and their relation to creating a society of more harmony. See, for example, this piece by an Orlando journalist on "Florida's problematic gated communities" - http://www.cnn.com/2012/03/28/opinion/burton-florida-gates/
The fact that the Stand Your Ground law was not invoked in the trial does not mean that such laws do not affect the societal atmosphere. I agree with the President's comments on this point yesterday. Suchlaws provide a societal seal of approval on violent approaches to real or perceived threats. It is in this larger atmosphere that Zimmerman went out and followed a young black man, who at that point in time had not in any way threatened Zimmerman, while armed with a gun capable of killing Martin.
[Omitting some kind personal comments about me.] We hope we can continue to work together despite differences we might have on some matters.
Yours for Peace, Justice and Life,
Bill Samuel
President, Consistent Life
My volley back to Consistent Life
Hi Bill,
Hey, I’m grateful for the time and thought you have given to your response. Prompt, as well! You were looking for dialogue, and I was, too. I like CL, and have always believed that the give-and-take of communication with you and your colleagues is well worth the effort
I understand that a newsletter item can’t cover issues in depth; nor can fine shading of meaning be developed.
“We did not opine on the verdict … nor did we present any theory (of the confrontation ) …neither did we attempt to evaluate the character of George Zimmerman.”
But --- since you refrained from addressing any of the essential issues of the case--- it’s hard to see how your views “are informed by much more than what is found in the transcript of the trial.” They seem to be informed by much less.
If you hadn’t the time or space to devote to actual fact-finding --- and that’s understandable --- you should have refrained from latching onto a white-hot contentious case whose whole meaning and resolution depend on facts. What you did, is proceed not on the basis of facts, but of assumptions. That’s where the problem lies.
”This incident began with Zimmerman's characterization of Martin as suspicious. Nothing has come to light which would indicate that Zimmerman had observed any behavior of Martin's which could fairly be described as suspicious.”
This is an argument from ignorance. You hadn’t seen what Zimmerman told the police in the subsequent investigation. That would have been in the transcript you didn’t read.
“Furthermore, we know that Zimmerman made at least 46 calls to police reporting black males as suspicious over a period of 8 years.”
Read the complete log of the 46 calls, found here:
Of that total, seven --- not 46 --- specified “black males.” See for yourself. I was able to check and verify this in 5 minutes. Some of the calls were about potholes in the street; a car blocking a road; fire or smoke alarms going off; a garage door being wide open when homeowner was away; loud drunks; menacing dogs. The average # of calls specifying black male? Less than one per year.
Moreover, the FBI and the local and Florida State LE investigators interviewed dozens of people who knew Zimmerman or worked with him --- including many from the Twin Lakes community ---and none, not one, thought his activities involved racial profiling. The police and dispatchers volunteered that they did not think his reporting was excessive.
“There is no such thing as absolute proof on this matter, but I think the evidence indicates that the incident started with racial profiling. “
Nonsense. Zimmerman didn’t even mention what the race of the “suspicious man” was, until the dispatcher specifically asked him, “OK, and this guy is he white, black, or hispanic?” Zimmerman responded, “He looks black.”
“Zimmerman called police and followed Martin despite the police dispatcher telling him not to.”
Once again, a full reading of the exchange--- rather that NBC’s incriminating edited version, for which they belatedly apologized --- gives a different perspective.
First, Zimmerman didn’t call “the police” (as in the general police station number, or 911) He called the designated non-emergency line. He wasn’t hyperventilating over an imagined crisis. He was doing precisely what he was instructed to do as a Neighborhood Watch captain.
Second, the dispatcher didn’t straightaway “tell him” not to follow. Here’s how the exchange went:
The dispatcher first asks Zimmerman to keep an eye on the person: “Just let me know if this guy does anything else.”
A little later, Zimmerman says, “He’s running”. The dispatcher asks, “He’s running? Which way is he running?” Again, It’s the dispatcher (for a second time) asking Zimmerman to watch the person.
Third, the dispatcher says, “Are you following him? Zimmerman says “Yeah,” and the dispatcher says “We don’t need you to do that.” Zimmerman instantly agrees, “OK.” (Notice that nobody “forbids” or “prohibits” or “orders” anything. The dispatcher just says, “We don’t need you to do that.” )
Then Zimmerman says he doesn’t know/can’t see the address of the place where he’s parked, but to have the police call him when they arrive in the area, and he’ll get them a more exact location. This was 7:13 pm.
The next thing we know is that, at 7:17 --- four minutes later --- the police arrive, and Zimmerman is bleeding from the nose, the mouth and the back of the head, and Martin is dead.
What happened in those 4 minutes? From the physical and testamentary evidence:
| We don’t know… | We do know… |
|---|---|
| if Zimmerman continued following | he got out of his SUV |
| if he was familiar with that general area | he’d said he’d have to get the exact location |
| if he knew Martin had circled back behind him | Martin knocked him down with a heavy blow to the face |
Here’s what we know from physical and eyewitness evidence: in those 4 minutes, Martin knocked Zimmerman to the ground, straddled him, and started beating him in a Mixed-Martial-Arts stance called “ground and pound.” Zimmerman’s injuries included 2 long back-of-the-head lacerations, 2 contusions, and abrasions on the back of his head, a broken nose, two black eyes, and other bruising.
Martin had no bruises whatsoever, except for abrasions on his knuckles, consistent with having given somebody a heavy beating.
The grass strains on Zimmerman were up and down the length of his pants and jacket, on the back only. Martin had grass and mud only on the bottom half of the front of his pants leg, consistent with having been on top while Zimmerman was on the bottom.
The only eye witness said he saw Zimmerman on the bottom., with Martin on the top raining blows down on him. There would scarcely have been time for a verbal exchange, unless Zimmerman screaming “Help me! Help me!” can be considered an exchange.
http://tinyurl.com/7-identify-zim-scream
Seven witnesses identified the screams as Zimmerman’s. Meanwhile, Trayvon Martin’s father said he did NOT think the recorded voice he heard screaming, was his son’s.
See how important evidence is? It’s the difference between proof and prejudice.
As for the Twin Lakes community, your comments about the “mentality” of “gated communities” show that you again started off with a rich set of prejudices based on noth… forgive me, based on Bonita Burton’s article, which you then generalize to “attitudes in our country,” and which might be generalized to everybody of the Anglo-Peruvian “race,” , or all English-speaking Americans, or all ambulatory 21st century males, given another insightful article or two.
Bonita Burton’s article, by the way, is a head-scratcher. She experiences a burglary in which home-invaders depredate her property and the physical safety of her family; her neighbors comfort her and try to improve their security; and she calls the neighbors “hysterical” and “strident”? What would she do if her two little children ---who were in the home at the time --- had gotten in the predators’ way and were smacked about a bit? Call the neighbors “paranoid”? To be blunt: she hasn’t got the sense she was born with.
Back to the specific case: it’s hard to see what else Zimmerman could have done. Maybe waited until he’s had his head slammed against the concrete another 3 or 4 times, decided he was on the verge of losing consciousness; judiciously concluded that this really WAS an emergency, and then called 911?
One more thing: when Zimmerman was being interrogated at the station, officer Chris Serino told Zimmerman that Martin may have videotaped the encounter (a police ruse to get him to think he wouldn't get away with lying). Zimmerman's immediate response was, "Thank God! I was hoping someone had videotaped it." It was after this that Serino told the court he thought GZ was telling the truth.
I think it’s a testament to the spontaneity of the truth that a man who believes a fraught incident has been objectively recorded, doesn’t often blurt out a lie.
Bill, I thank you again for your attention to my comments. I know that both of us are motivated by our shared interest in justice and good judgment.
"No Truth, no Justice" -- comes right before "No Justice, No Peace"---
[signed]
Good reply.
Once again, brilliant!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.