Florida boy killed by Neighborhood Watch (2 Viewers)

[Clinton]

Fearing that the lack of race riots in the Sanford community is a sure sign of upcoming race riots in the Sanford community, "concerned" citizens swing into action.

Neo-Nazis are currently conducting heavily armed patrols in and around Sanford, Florida and are "prepared" for violence in the case of a race riot. The patrols are to protect "white citizens in the area who are concerned for their safety" in the wake of the Trayvon Martin shooting last month, says Commander Jeff Schoep of the National Socialist Movement. "We are not advocating any type of violence or attacks on anybody, but we are prepared for it," he says. "We are not the type of white people who are going to be walked all over."

An online reporter claims to have contacted Sanford officials and wrote that those officials deny the presence of neo-Nazis in Sanford...

“At this time the City of Sanford has not confirmed the presence of Neo-Nazis groups.”

My follow up:

“You say “not confirmed.” Is there any indication of such patrols that the Department is aware of?”

Further Response from Sanford Joint Information Center:

“We have no indication of any such patrols at this point in Sanford. The only large gathering was the children and their parents at the Easter egg hunt.”

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/sanford-police-deny-report-armed-neo-nazis-are-patrolling-town-in-case-of-race-riots/

Who knows, though? We've seen government agencies intentionally downplay stories that may raise racial tensions.But according to some in the FFA it's doubtful this story is true. This story would suggest that white disenchantment has become so great that white nationalists are making their feelings known in a national story, but I was assured just a few weeks ago that I was both evil and crazy for suggesting that white disenchantment and even white nationalism were rising.

I'm sure that the two POS white guys that went on a killing spree of black people in Tulsa yesterday also has nothing to do with the above.

 

[timschochet]

If 2 hate groups wind up wiping each other out im sure nobody would shed any tears

Well, Peens might. His online dating circles could be impaired.

 

[Christo]

Of course it was a 'mistake' per NBC.

Why would they intentionally do this? If they were the only one with access to this tape, you might have a point. But it was only a matter of time until some other news outlet would notice the editing.

Forget it. Don't even try. Common sense has gone out the window.

The only people not exercising common sense are those insisting that the only explanation is that it was an innocent mistake. You don't know the guy who did it and you have no way to know if he had an ulterior motive.

 

[Christo]

I kinda hope the guy gets off, we havent had a good looting in the cities in awhile. Thats always good tv....

Where have you been? I missed you. I really did.

Online dating has turned out to be a full time job, been busy

Online porn isn't dating peens.

Im beating them off with a stick, i ran into one lady that liked to be choked. Oh the irony....

Don't let that woman get away.

 

[Tuco]

I can't believe people are taking a statement from NBC saying that what NBC did was an editing mistake to meet a time requirement in a segment. Really, a whole segment? They had to cut out 3 seconds of an important part of a 911 call that completely changed the context of the conversation to meet a 4-5 minute time requirement???? Tim, please tell me that you can see how most people would have a hard time believing that.

 

[Boom Switch]

I kinda hope the guy gets off, we havent had a good looting in the cities in awhile. Thats always good tv....

Where have you been? I missed you. I really did.

Online dating has turned out to be a full time job, been busy

Online porn isn't dating peens.

Im beating them off with a stick, i ran into one lady that liked to be choked. Oh the irony....

Don't let that woman get away.

 

[Christo]

The only people not exercising common sense are those insisting that the only explanation is that it was an innocent mistake. You don't know the guy who did it and you have no way to know if he had an ulterior motive.

That would make the people insisting/insinuating that it was a dishonest mistake equally ridiculous.

I'll go with that.There's nothing wrong with raising the question.

 

[BustedKnuckles]

Your hypothetical had nothing to do with this case. Rather, you said: If you follow someone and engage them and it turns physical and you are armed and the person who you were following wasnt and you shoot them you go to jail. At least in MA."

Which, now that we've taken a look at the law in MA, turns out to not necessarily be true.

my point was if this shooting happened in MA things would be very different for mr. zimmerman

I keep forgetting we're in the "what I say may really not be what I mean" thread.

Under current Massachusetts law, there are no protections for lawful citizens who use force to defend themselves, or others, outside of their dwelling...not sure how much clearer this could be.

Perhaps you should read what you quoted earlier. There are not protections for people who use excessive force. There are protections for people who use force that's not excessive.

im pretty sure shooting an unarmed person during a wrestling match is excessive force, but keep trying to confuse the issue , its what you do best.

 

[Courtjester]

The only people not exercising common sense are those insisting that the only explanation is that it was an innocent mistake. You don't know the guy who did it and you have no way to know if he had an ulterior motive.

That would make the people insisting/insinuating that it was a dishonest mistake equally ridiculous.

No, but it is funny how certain people here are willing to call what NBC did an honest mistake and not racially/ratings motivated, but yet those same people are convinced they know that what Zimmerman did was racially motivated beyond a shadow of doubt.

 

[Christo]

The only people not exercising common sense are those insisting that the only explanation is that it was an innocent mistake. You don't know the guy who did it and you have no way to know if he had an ulterior motive.

That would make the people insisting/insinuating that it was a dishonest mistake equally ridiculous.

FWIW, though, your argument could be equally fashioned to be, "You have no idea if the sun is going to rise in the East tomorrow."It's true. You really don't. But we make predictions/assumptions of interpretation of recent events off of larger sets of data to tell us what would be a reasonable interpretation. And in that sense, the innocent/ulterior groups aren't equal here.

News media has a long and storied history of shaping the news. Not as long as the sun. But don't lets all go around crying for NBC because not everyone believes the producer is Mother Theresa.

 

[Christo]

Your hypothetical had nothing to do with this case. Rather, you said: If you follow someone and engage them and it turns physical and you are armed and the person who you were following wasnt and you shoot them you go to jail. At least in MA."

Which, now that we've taken a look at the law in MA, turns out to not necessarily be true.

my point was if this shooting happened in MA things would be very different for mr. zimmerman

I keep forgetting we're in the "what I say may really not be what I mean" thread.

Under current Massachusetts law, there are no protections for lawful citizens who use force to defend themselves, or others, outside of their dwelling...not sure how much clearer this could be.

Perhaps you should read what you quoted earlier. There are not protections for people who use excessive force. There are protections for people who use force that's not excessive.

im pretty sure shooting an unarmed person during a wrestling match is excessive force, but keep trying to confuse the issue , its what you do best.

It's interesting that you feel need to insert new "facts" into your hypothetical to support your position.

 

[Tuco]

Of course it was a 'mistake' per NBC.

Why would they intentionally do this? If they were the only one with access to this tape, you might have a point. But it was only a matter of time until some other news outlet would notice the editing.

Possibly, because even if caught, their apology would never get the airtime or have the impact that their incorrect audio did.

Unavoidable they wouldn't be caught. And you are right, this apology won't get the airtime the negative news surrounding this did.

Should have typed 'when' instead of 'if.'

I watch the first 20 minutes of The Today Show just about every day while exercising. I saw the segment that they made the mistake on. I've also seen more Martin/Zimmerman segments every day after that mistake was aired. What I haven't seen aired during the same highly viewed portion of the show was NBC admitting to the mistake or apologizing for it. Have they made any sort of on-air statement about this, or has it just been in print?

 

[timschochet]

I can't believe people are taking a statement from NBC saying that what NBC did was an editing mistake to meet a time requirement in a segment. Really, a whole segment? They had to cut out 3 seconds of an important part of a 911 call that completely changed the context of the conversation to meet a 4-5 minute time requirement???? Tim, please tell me that you can see how most people would have a hard time believing that.

Why not? One of the reasons that I reject almost all conspiracy theories, whether from the left or the right, is that the "deliberate" explanation is always the most unlikely. Even if I were to accept what you just wrote as plausible, it still leaves us with the alternative that a news show producer, someone who has worked his whole life to achieve that status, and is probably well-paid, would put his career on the line in order to deliberately edit a few seconds off a tape in an attempt to further inflame a situation that was already highly inflamed, and that this was done with the knowing collusion of co-workers and, ultimately NBC executives, all of whom continue to lie about it with no leaks. That seems so extremely unlikely to me that I am willing to accept just about any other explanation. The explanation that NBC gave seems highly plausible to me, so I accept it. Christo is correct that I don't KNOW it's the truth. But just because I don't know something doesn't mean I can't use basic logic and deduction to reach my conclusions.

 

[timschochet]

The only people not exercising common sense are those insisting that the only explanation is that it was an innocent mistake. You don't know the guy who did it and you have no way to know if he had an ulterior motive.

That would make the people insisting/insinuating that it was a dishonest mistake equally ridiculous.

No, but it is funny how certain people here are willing to call what NBC did an honest mistake and not racially/ratings motivated, but yet those same people are convinced they know that what Zimmerman did was racially motivated beyond a shadow of doubt.

What a terrible analogy. And I challenge you to link any regular poster in this thread who has stated that Zimmerman was racially motivated beyond a shadow of doubt.

 

[Underachievers]

Of course, Tim believes that it must be true since it is on the internet.But if it was Foxnews that did this, I doubt you would be so believing.

There's no reason to give Fox News the benefit of any doubt. You can't make your whole reputation and then claim that you're being singly mistreated.

I get a tingle up my leg every time I hear altered 911 tapes.Oh wait...that was a different news channel.

 

[timschochet]

I'm sure that the two POS white guys that went on a killing spree of black people in Tulsa yesterday also has nothing to do with the above.

Word to the wise, Clinton: it's in pretty poor taste to have a "smiley-wink" emoticon next to a story about a killing spree. Just saying.

 

[timschochet]

Gotta go, guys. Church awaits. Happy Easter to everyone here.

 

[Chaos Commish]

Christo/Carolina Hustler, is this you? And is that Tim right next to you?

I spit out coffee.

 

[identikit]

Christo/Carolina Hustler, is this you? And is that Tim right next to you?

I spit out coffee.

It just keeps giving and giving.

 

[squistion]

The only people not exercising common sense are those insisting that the only explanation is that it was an innocent mistake. You don't know the guy who did it and you have no way to know if he had an ulterior motive.

That would make the people insisting/insinuating that it was a dishonest mistake equally ridiculous.

No, but it is funny how certain people here are willing to call what NBC did an honest mistake and not racially/ratings motivated, but yet those same people are convinced they know that what Zimmerman did was racially motivated beyond a shadow of doubt.

False equivalency. A national news organization with multiple parties involved versus one individual (completely unknown at the time). Also not everyone who thought what NBC did was a mistake are also completely convinced that what "Zimmerman did was racially motivated beyond a shadow of doubt," - at least I am not.

 

[Christo]

I can't believe people are taking a statement from NBC saying that what NBC did was an editing mistake to meet a time requirement in a segment. Really, a whole segment? They had to cut out 3 seconds of an important part of a 911 call that completely changed the context of the conversation to meet a 4-5 minute time requirement???? Tim, please tell me that you can see how most people would have a hard time believing that.

Why not? One of the reasons that I reject almost all conspiracy theories, whether from the left or the right, is that the "deliberate" explanation is always the most unlikely. Even if I were to accept what you just wrote as plausible, it still leaves us with the alternative that a news show producer, someone who has worked his whole life to achieve that status, and is probably well-paid, would put his career on the line in order to deliberately edit a few seconds off a tape in an attempt to further inflame a situation that was already highly inflamed, and that this was done with the knowing collusion of co-workers and, ultimately NBC executives, all of whom continue to lie about it with no leaks.

That seems so extremely unlikely to me that I am willing to accept just about any other explanation. The explanation that NBC gave seems highly plausible to me, so I accept it. Christo is correct that I don't KNOW it's the truth. But just because I don't know something doesn't mean I can't use basic logic and deduction to reach my conclusions.

This is exactly how you approach everything. You have reached a conclusion that you can't possibly know for a fact to be true but you still insist it's the only conclusion to be reached. No one would argue with you if you just said from what I know I believe it to be an honest mistake but there is the possibility the producer/editor is a douchbag and did it on purpose because he believed his bosses would let it slide.

 

[Christo]

The only people not exercising common sense are those insisting that the only explanation is that it was an innocent mistake. You don't know the guy who did it and you have no way to know if he had an ulterior motive.

That would make the people insisting/insinuating that it was a dishonest mistake equally ridiculous.

No, but it is funny how certain people here are willing to call what NBC did an honest mistake and not racially/ratings motivated, but yet those same people are convinced they know that what Zimmerman did was racially motivated beyond a shadow of doubt.

False equivalency. A national news organization with multiple parties involved versus one individual (completely unknown at the time). Also not everyone who thought what NBC did was a mistake are also completely convinced that what "Zimmerman did was racially motivated beyond a shadow of doubt," - at least I am not.

One person edited the tape.

 

[squistion]

The only people not exercising common sense are those insisting that the only explanation is that it was an innocent mistake. You don't know the guy who did it and you have no way to know if he had an ulterior motive.

That would make the people insisting/insinuating that it was a dishonest mistake equally ridiculous.

No, but it is funny how certain people here are willing to call what NBC did an honest mistake and not racially/ratings motivated, but yet those same people are convinced they know that what Zimmerman did was racially motivated beyond a shadow of doubt.

False equivalency. A national news organization with multiple parties involved versus one individual (completely unknown at the time). Also not everyone who thought what NBC did was a mistake are also completely convinced that what "Zimmerman did was racially motivated beyond a shadow of doubt," - at least I am not.

One person edited the tape.

But the argument is that everyone in the chain of command at NBC was involved in this and signed off on it.

 

[Courtjester]

The only people not exercising common sense are those insisting that the only explanation is that it was an innocent mistake. You don't know the guy who did it and you have no way to know if he had an ulterior motive.

That would make the people insisting/insinuating that it was a dishonest mistake equally ridiculous.

No, but it is funny how certain people here are willing to call what NBC did an honest mistake and not racially/ratings motivated, but yet those same people are convinced they know that what Zimmerman did was racially motivated beyond a shadow of doubt.

What a terrible analogy. And I challenge you to link any regular poster in this thread who has stated that Zimmerman was racially motivated beyond a shadow of doubt.

Why Tim is this terrible?You are convinced using your basic logic (as you say) that NBC made an innocent mistake. You don't know the person who did it. You aren't privy to the behind the scene there. This could have been NBC plan all along, but you give them a pass and call it a mistake.

You are convinced again, using you basic logic, that Zimmerman killed Martin in a criminal act (as you have posted over and over and over). You weren't there. You don't even know what the prosecutor has or doesn't have. You don't know him, but you believe it to be a racially motivated killing.

So be consistent in using logic, Tim.

 

[Christo]

The only people not exercising common sense are those insisting that the only explanation is that it was an innocent mistake. You don't know the guy who did it and you have no way to know if he had an ulterior motive.

That would make the people insisting/insinuating that it was a dishonest mistake equally ridiculous.

No, but it is funny how certain people here are willing to call what NBC did an honest mistake and not racially/ratings motivated, but yet those same people are convinced they know that what Zimmerman did was racially motivated beyond a shadow of doubt.

False equivalency. A national news organization with multiple parties involved versus one individual (completely unknown at the time). Also not everyone who thought what NBC did was a mistake are also completely convinced that what "Zimmerman did was racially motivated beyond a shadow of doubt," - at least I am not.

One person edited the tape.

But the argument is that everyone in the chain of command at NBC was involved in this and signed off on it.

I certainly haven't said that. Look at my original post in this string--You don't know the guy who did it and you have no way to know if he had an ulterior motive.But in the end, employers are responsible for their employees actions.

 

[jon_mx]

There is some awful posts in this thread.

No one is forcing you to keep posting.

If you must know what I was referring to, a few off the top of my head:- The plagiarized cheesy post from some blog that was more suitable for a romance novel. The only thing missing was talking about his throbbing loins. - Any defense of NBC's editing of the 911 tape which was an intentional effort to fan the flames of an already heated up racial debate. The worst piece of journalism in a long time by a major network.- Saying that Zimmerman is guilty of a crime and should be arrested, while admitting there is virtually no chance of convicting him.- Saying the Treyvon might have stolen something or referring to him as a thug.- Any post which describes Zimmerman has hunting down Treyvon.- Insisting that the police acted in a racially biased way but have nothing concrete to base it on.And that is not even mentioning dinner with my black friends or any trolling by mad sweeney.

Postings are not getting any better here people. Except for some of the comedic value of those attempting to defend NBC's 'simple mistake.'

 

[jon_mx]

The only people not exercising common sense are those insisting that the only explanation is that it was an innocent mistake. You don't know the guy who did it and you have no way to know if he had an ulterior motive.

That would make the people insisting/insinuating that it was a dishonest mistake equally ridiculous.

No, but it is funny how certain people here are willing to call what NBC did an honest mistake and not racially/ratings motivated, but yet those same people are convinced they know that what Zimmerman did was racially motivated beyond a shadow of doubt.

False equivalency. A national news organization with multiple parties involved versus one individual (completely unknown at the time). Also not everyone who thought what NBC did was a mistake are also completely convinced that what "Zimmerman did was racially motivated beyond a shadow of doubt," - at least I am not.

One person edited the tape.

But the argument is that everyone in the chain of command at NBC was involved in this and signed off on it.

Nice attempt to distort what was said and change the issue.

 

[squistion]

The only people not exercising common sense are those insisting that the only explanation is that it was an innocent mistake. You don't know the guy who did it and you have no way to know if he had an ulterior motive.

That would make the people insisting/insinuating that it was a dishonest mistake equally ridiculous.

No, but it is funny how certain people here are willing to call what NBC did an honest mistake and not racially/ratings motivated, but yet those same people are convinced they know that what Zimmerman did was racially motivated beyond a shadow of doubt.

False equivalency. A national news organization with multiple parties involved versus one individual (completely unknown at the time). Also not everyone who thought what NBC did was a mistake are also completely convinced that what "Zimmerman did was racially motivated beyond a shadow of doubt," - at least I am not.

One person edited the tape.

But the argument is that everyone in the chain of command at NBC was involved in this and signed off on it.

I certainly haven't said that. Look at my original post in this string--You don't know the guy who did it and you have no way to know if he had an ulterior motive.

I didn't say that was your argument. I was responding to court jester - the reference to certain people. Perhaps I should have edited out the earlier part of the thread.

 

[Gigantomachia]

Just to be clear, still talking about an adult shooting an unharmed teenager, correct??

I'm pretty sure Martin was harmed.

Wait, what?? Is this fact or your opinion?

 

[Christo]

What the FFA really needs is fewer people who want to play parse-the-phrase cop and ignoring the intent behind a phrase but rather focus on the literalism of it.

If you write something and people respond to it's literal sense then it should be obvious that your intent wasn't apparent and you should clarify it rather than getting defensive.

 

[jon_mx]

Postings are not getting any better here people.

This is like Miss Congeniality at the 4-H Beauty Pageant saying that Miss Argentina's ### is too big.

Perhaps, that is the perception. But find one post in this thread that ranks against the crap I pointed out. OK, I tried a little bit of fishing with a socialism post, but it was too early for the fish to be biting.

 

[Gigantomachia]

What the FFA really needs is fewer people who want to play parse-the-phrase cop and ignoring the intent behind a phrase but rather focus on the literalism of it.

If you write something and people respond to it's literal sense then it should be obvious that your intent wasn't apparent and you should clarify it rather than getting defensive.

well played Christo, well played.

 

[parasaurolophus]

Guess all of you "liberal media" conspiracy people will have to look somewhere else in order to justify your delusions. Oh well.

Funny how you simply believe everything NBC says but don't cut Zimmerman any slack. That's cute.

 

[Bonzai]

What the FFA really needs is fewer people who want to play parse-the-phrase cop and ignoring the intent behind a phrase but rather focus on the literalism of it.

If you write something and people respond to it's is literal sense then it should be obvious that your intent wasn't apparent and you should clarify it rather than getting defensive.

Your sentence doesn't make any sense. Could you please clarify so that we know what you mean?

Too easy.

 

[Clinton]

I'm sure that the two POS white guys that went on a killing spree of black people in Tulsa yesterday also has nothing to do with the above.

Word to the wise, Clinton: it's in pretty poor taste to have a "smiley-wink" emoticon next to a story about a killing spree. Just saying.

Word to the wise, Tim, but the wink emoticon indicates sarcasm or in this case the exact opposite of what was written. My true feelings on the incident are reflected in how I described the shooters as "POS". POS stands for pieces of ####. That hardly suggests I derive any joy from the tragic events.Personally, Tim, I think you trying to draw attention away from criticism you're rightly receiving for your naivete by misplacing criticism onto me is in much worst taste.

 

[parasaurolophus]

Fearing that the lack of race riots in the Sanford community is a sure sign of upcoming race riots in the Sanford community, "concerned" citizens swing into action.

Neo-Nazis are currently conducting heavily armed patrols in and around Sanford, Florida and are "prepared" for violence in the case of a race riot. The patrols are to protect "white citizens in the area who are concerned for their safety" in the wake of the Trayvon Martin shooting last month, says Commander Jeff Schoep of the National Socialist Movement. "We are not advocating any type of violence or attacks on anybody, but we are prepared for it," he says. "We are not the type of white people who are going to be walked all over."

Good for them

I cant wait until they bump into the Black Panthers ...LLLLETS GET READY TO RUMBLE!!!!

Cheers for Neo-Nazi white supremacists and wishes for racial confrontation and violence.How appropriate it is Easter Sunday.

If 2 hate groups wind up wiping each other out im sure nobody would shed any tears

Tim would weep for the black panthers because it isn't their fault.

 

[identikit]

I'm sure that the two POS white guys that went on a killing spree of black people in Tulsa yesterday also has nothing to do with the above.

Word to the wise, Clinton: it's in pretty poor taste to have a "smiley-wink" emoticon next to a story about a killing spree. Just saying.

Word to the wise, Tim, but the wink emoticon indicates sarcasm or in this case the exact opposite of what was written. My true feelings on the incident are reflected in how I described the shooters as "POS". POS stands for pieces of ####. That hardly suggests I derive any joy from the tragic events.Personally, Tim, I think trying to draw attention away from criticism you're rightly receiving for your naivete by misplacing criticism onto me is in much worst taste.

That's his MO.

 

[Christo]

What the FFA really needs is fewer people who want to play parse-the-phrase cop and ignoring the intent behind a phrase but rather focus on the literalism of it.

If you write something and people respond to it's is literal sense then it should be obvious that your intent wasn't apparent and you should clarify it rather than getting defensive.

Your sentence doesn't make any sense. Could you please clarify so that we know what you mean?

 

[jon_mx]

Guess all of you "liberal media" conspiracy people will have to look somewhere else in order to justify your delusions. Oh well.

Funny how you simply believe everything NBC says but don't cut Zimmerman any slack. That's cute.

I guess only FoxNews is the only one who can be suspected of conspiring to spin the news. timschochet foxnews site:forums.footballguys.com.....1290 results.

 

[timschochet]

Guess all of you "liberal media" conspiracy people will have to look somewhere else in order to justify your delusions. Oh well.

Funny how you simply believe everything NBC says but don't cut Zimmerman any slack. That's cute.

I guess only FoxNews is the only one who can be suspected of conspiring to spin the news. timschochet foxnews site:forums.footballguys.com.....1290 results.

That would be correct. Of the major networks which feature news, Fox is the only one where there appears to be clear evidence that the news presentations (not the editorial content) is deliberately distorted to reach a certain result. There is no evidence of equivalence from any of the other networks. This latest story is the closest I have ever seen, and I suspected all along, it's not deliberate. Therefore it is correct to criticize Fox and not the others. I'm sorry that this doesn't fit your political agenda. If Fox were the one news station with liberal editorial content, and the other news presentations had conservative editorial content, my analysis would be the same. Fox is the culprit here.

 

[identikit]

That was a short church service, Tim.

 

[timschochet]

That was a short church service, Tim.

The wife isn't ready yet

 

[identikit]

That was a short church service, Tim.

The wife isn't ready yet

Ahh.Understand that.

 

[jon_mx]

Guess all of you "liberal media" conspiracy people will have to look somewhere else in order to justify your delusions. Oh well.

Funny how you simply believe everything NBC says but don't cut Zimmerman any slack. That's cute.

I guess only FoxNews is the only one who can be suspected of conspiring to spin the news. timschochet foxnews site:forums.footballguys.com.....1290 results.

That would be correct. Of the major networks which feature news, Fox is the only one where there appears to be clear evidence that the news presentations (not the editorial content) is deliberately distorted to reach a certain result. There is no evidence of equivalence from any of the other networks. This latest story is the closest I have ever seen, and I suspected all along, it's not deliberate. Therefore it is correct to criticize Fox and not the others. I'm sorry that this doesn't fit your political agenda. If Fox were the one news station with liberal editorial content, and the other news presentations had conservative editorial content, my analysis would be the same. Fox is the culprit here.

Seriously Tim?

 

[identikit]

That was a short church service, Tim.

The wife isn't ready yet

I was thinking you had gotten yourself an intern.

 

[humpback]

A resonable person knows what happened the night trey was shot to death and if you dont theres something wrong with the way you`re wired.

you keep saying zimmerman had his head slammed into the ground , but as your leader christo keeps saying we havent heard zimmermans side of the story. You`re as guilty as us treyvon supporters of fabricating the missing minute of what happened and who actually started the struggle between zimm and trey. For all you know they had words and then someone pushed the other and they started wrestling. Zimm could have hit his head falling backwards and then he reached for his gun and trey tried to prevent zimm from pointing at at him and lost that advantage and was eventually shot to death. Its as probable as what you keep saying happened.

How's your wiring?

my wiring is great , thanks for asking.

seriously? Are you saying a reasonable person doesnt already know from the 911 calls and the witness accounts what happened to trey? An unarmed teen was shot to death by an armed wannabe cop who was paranoid.That scenerio i posted above is in my reasonable mind, what happened based on the witness that said he saw and heard trey and george talking, then arguing , then fighting closely (wrestling)before the gun went off. Anyone who has followed this case had the timelines down to the minutes, so what is it we dont actually know? what trey and zimm were thinking? not every thought but using 911 calls we know pretty much know what zimm was thinking and if we go by treys GF we know what trey was thinking also. Throw in the lack of blood and injuries on zimm and the fact that some of the cops on the scene wanted to charge zimmerman with manslaughter its pretty clear what went on that night.So keep playing defense lawyer and try to dispel common logic and sense.

First you say a reasonable person knows what happened that night and if you don't then something is wrong with the way you're wired. Then you admit that we haven't heard Zimmerman's side of the story and go through a bunch of scenarios, which are all possible, but we clearly don't know what happened. Then you combine the two and say both in this last post. Sorry, but you're all over the damn map.

 

[cstu]

Fearing that the lack of race riots in the Sanford community is a sure sign of upcoming race riots in the Sanford community, "concerned" citizens swing into action.

Neo-Nazis are currently conducting heavily armed patrols in and around Sanford, Florida and are "prepared" for violence in the case of a race riot. The patrols are to protect "white citizens in the area who are concerned for their safety" in the wake of the Trayvon Martin shooting last month, says Commander Jeff Schoep of the National Socialist Movement. "We are not advocating any type of violence or attacks on anybody, but we are prepared for it," he says. "We are not the type of white people who are going to be walked all over."

An online reporter claims to have contacted Sanford officials and wrote that those officials deny the presence of neo-Nazis in Sanford...

“At this time the City of Sanford has not confirmed the presence of Neo-Nazis groups.”

My follow up:

“You say “not confirmed.” Is there any indication of such patrols that the Department is aware of?”

Further Response from Sanford Joint Information Center:

“We have no indication of any such patrols at this point in Sanford. The only large gathering was the children and their parents at the Easter egg hunt.”

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/sanford-police-deny-report-armed-neo-nazis-are-patrolling-town-in-case-of-race-riots/

Who knows, though? We've seen government agencies intentionally downplay stories that may raise racial tensions.But according to some in the FFA it's doubtful this story is true. This story would suggest that white disenchantment has become so great that white nationalists are making their feelings known in a national story, but I was assured just a few weeks ago that I was both evil and crazy for suggesting that white disenchantment and even white nationalism were rising.

I'm sure that the two POS white guys that went on a killing spree of black people in Tulsa yesterday also has nothing to do with the above.

It wouldn't have happened if a black guy hadn't killed his dad.

 

[Fennis]

man you guys are really obsessed with timschochet. its kinda weird.

 

[cstu]

I can't believe people are taking a statement from NBC saying that what NBC did was an editing mistake to meet a time requirement in a segment. Really, a whole segment? They had to cut out 3 seconds of an important part of a 911 call that completely changed the context of the conversation to meet a 4-5 minute time requirement???? Tim, please tell me that you can see how most people would have a hard time believing that.

Why not? One of the reasons that I reject almost all conspiracy theories, whether from the left or the right, is that the "deliberate" explanation is always the most unlikely. Even if I were to accept what you just wrote as plausible, it still leaves us with the alternative that a news show producer, someone who has worked his whole life to achieve that status, and is probably well-paid, would put his career on the line in order to deliberately edit a few seconds off a tape in an attempt to further inflame a situation that was already highly inflamed, and that this was done with the knowing collusion of co-workers and, ultimately NBC executives, all of whom continue to lie about it with no leaks.

That seems so extremely unlikely to me that I am willing to accept just about any other explanation. The explanation that NBC gave seems highly plausible to me, so I accept it. Christo is correct that I don't KNOW it's the truth. But just because I don't know something doesn't mean I can't use basic logic and deduction to reach my conclusions.

This is exactly how you approach everything. You have reached a conclusion that you can't possibly know for a fact to be true but you still insist it's the only conclusion to be reached. No one would argue with you if you just said from what I know I believe it to be an honest mistake but there is the possibility the producer/editor is a douchbag and did it on purpose because he believed his bosses would let it slide.

You're right.The FFA is in sore need of a footnote function.

Actually, I'll start.1 The FFA is in sore need of a footnote function.2 I'll PM Shuke about it right away.3------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1: By start, I don't mean I'll literally start working on it. I mean I'll start by showing how a footnote function could serve the purposes of the FFA by decreasing the likelihood that any opinions get misconstrued.

2: This is to be interpreted as sarcasm. What the FFA really needs is fewer people who want to play parse-the-phrase cop and ignoring the intent behind a phrase but rather focus on the literalism of it.

3: And by "right away" I mean never. And there's really no reason to PM Shuke. He actually isn't in charge of the web design/forum interface. PM'ing Shuke is apparently a long shtick tradition.

I approve of this footnote schtick.

 

[Clinton]

Fearing that the lack of race riots in the Sanford community is a sure sign of upcoming race riots in the Sanford community, "concerned" citizens swing into action.

Neo-Nazis are currently conducting heavily armed patrols in and around Sanford, Florida and are "prepared" for violence in the case of a race riot. The patrols are to protect "white citizens in the area who are concerned for their safety" in the wake of the Trayvon Martin shooting last month, says Commander Jeff Schoep of the National Socialist Movement. "We are not advocating any type of violence or attacks on anybody, but we are prepared for it," he says. "We are not the type of white people who are going to be walked all over."

An online reporter claims to have contacted Sanford officials and wrote that those officials deny the presence of neo-Nazis in Sanford...

“At this time the City of Sanford has not confirmed the presence of Neo-Nazis groups.”

My follow up:

“You say “not confirmed.” Is there any indication of such patrols that the Department is aware of?”

Further Response from Sanford Joint Information Center:

“We have no indication of any such patrols at this point in Sanford. The only large gathering was the children and their parents at the Easter egg hunt.”

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/sanford-police-deny-report-armed-neo-nazis-are-patrolling-town-in-case-of-race-riots/

Who knows, though? We've seen government agencies intentionally downplay stories that may raise racial tensions.But according to some in the FFA it's doubtful this story is true. This story would suggest that white disenchantment has become so great that white nationalists are making their feelings known in a national story, but I was assured just a few weeks ago that I was both evil and crazy for suggesting that white disenchantment and even white nationalism were rising.

I'm sure that the two POS white guys that went on a killing spree of black people in Tulsa yesterday also has nothing to do with the above.

It wouldn't have happened if a black guy hadn't killed his dad.

That does appear to be the motive according to one of the shooter's Facebook postings.