The Trayvon Martin Case

[Roadwolf]

 

I really don't buy the criticism of the media argument one iota.

 

I know you don't. You buy in to their crap.

 

This case was nothing more than a local incident. I'm not a member of social media, so I can't speak to that. But I do know that once the mainstream media, & the race baiters, got hold of it, that's when it went viral.

 

As for it being initially ignored, what about the five hundred odd shootings & killings in Chicago? Z v M was only one.

 

If you did watch the media (and by that, alternative media included), you will find that what you claim they ignore, they cover, you just aren't watching it because you think it's "crap." And if it is "crap", as you say, where do you get your news?

[upflying]

If you're a man, you fit the profile of a child molester.

 

This was on the local news tonight and I was reminded of this comment a few pages ago.

The guy in the blue shirt, shorts and hat is allegedly a child molester. San Mateo PD posted the video in the hope of identifying him.

What struck me about the video is how the suspect appears. If I had to profile a male who would perpetrate lewd conduct with a child, this would be it. This guy has pervert written all over him. I point this out because it emphasizes the importance of non-verbal communication and mannerisms when it comes to profiling people.

Clothing, color of clothing, accessories, belts, shoes, hair style, tattoos, facial hair, walk or gait, hand and arm movements, facial expressions, eye movements, smoking material, hygiene, speech patterns, location and time of day are some examples that convey certain pre-judgements and meanings to all of us. Other people "talk" to us without saying a word. All of us profile others based on what we see without even seeing race or taking race into consideration. We categorize other people based on what we perceive through profiling.

I try to understand James' viewpoint that centuries of Black persecution and injustice is the reason for the TM outcry in the community. Seeing it while walking in his shoes his very educational. But sometimes I think Blacks are their own worst enemy. Black on Black crime, disproportional murder and incarceration rates, Black on White crime, Rap music, thug behavior, single parent households, MIA fathers, failed entitlement programs, high school drop out rates, Pop culture, hair style, professional sports scandals, substance abuse, high profile Black racists and denigration of women are issues society watch and pay attention to.

Closing the racial divide should start with all of us looking in the mirror. There are many of us who would give and do anything to close the gap. Unfortunately the anti-social actions of some Blacks are very successful in undoing the good intentioned efforts of others.

Psychology tells us no one pays attention to the good people do. But all eyes are on you when you do something bad.

Not trying to offend, just searching inside myself for reasons why Blacks still feel injustice.

[1springer]

Mr. Barkley has indeed touch upon some truths. Not completely unrelated, what America needs now is a common enemy to rally against. If we continue on our current and worsening divisive path were going to tear this country apart and in the end everyone will lose.

[Twisties]

Part of it, Bob, is that we react to external threats differently than we do internal dysfunctions, no matter how catastrophic. Witness the reaction to terrorism after 911. I would guess fewer than 5000 US residents have been the victim of foreign terrorism in modern times. Let's say since the Iran Embassy in, what was it, 1978? Yet 15k domestic murders a year, give or take a bit, each and every year... on the order of half a million in that time frame.

 

What do we do?

 

Restructure our entire security apparatus to focus on terrorism, to the detriment of domestic programs, and

Give up huge amounts of privacy to the government; throw away our moral high ground and damage our world standing, alienating our strongest allies, and

Start and utterly bungle two wars (only one of which had even the slightest to do with the problem), and

Spend untold trillions of dollars, much of it on ideologically driven boondoggles,

Turn our air travel into a farce (security theater as one prominent member of this board likes to call it) and on, and on.

 

The response defies any rational analysis. But it makes sense to a very large number of people because it was perceived as an external threat.

 

I suspect much of what is at the core of all of this is a pov regarding community identification.

 

As for your clip of the child molester... sorry, I don't see any of what you see in it.

[Rocer]

Quick note: racial issues are big issues in South America (Brazil especially), and Central America. In those societies, the darker your skin the less likely you'll get ahead, it's sort of an unwritten rule (could even be written for all I know). If you watch Latin American television, you'll quickly notice that they are where we used to be a few decades ago, the bad people are portrayed by black actors, the good people by white actors. In Brazil, the poorest people are the black people, period.

 

Having said all of that, the culture of the descendants of Africa seems to be more alive and welcome in these countries than it is here. In the USA, we attach stigmas to African culture--primitive, evil, satanic, ignorant--whereas in Latin/South America, African culture has even intermingled with the Catholic Church imagery, so it is not held as something evil or dirty.

 

Still, I am of the opinion that the most enlightened place to live from a racial perspective is the USA. I say that for this reason: in the USA, people may be ignorant of other cultures and might accidentally offend, but our national and dearly held ideal is for excellence to rise to the top, regardless of any other variables such as race, gender, or whatever. We aren't there yet, but I think that there are very few people out there who are opposed to this ideal. In the USA, there are no rules--written or otherwise--that suggest the darker your skin the less socially mobile you become.

 

Canada might be an even more enlightened place than the US. We have the same cultural melting pot and a lot more mixed marriages. Oh, that and gay marriage etc

 

Lester, I wouln't rush to that conclusion. Canada's record of injustice to its' first nation peoples is well documented and unfortunately ongoing as depicted in this recent violent arrest. . Nor is our record of confiscation of property and internment of Canadian citizens with Japanese heritage during WWII an example of an enlightened society. Nor was our treatment again of isolated northern communities by experimenting on whole populations including children by intentionally starving them. Or how about the bulldozing of the Africville community in Halifax in the mid 60's. Further, comparing our so called "enlightened place" is not an apples to apples comparison. We have a tenth of the population and are not necessarily faced with the same issues as the U.S. but my examples are, to me, a clear indication that we are as culpable as anything we might accuse the U.S. of.

 

Paul

[SWB]

We have over 38 pages of exhaustive dialogue on this thread. I don't see any real "understanding" from the differing sides on this. Though James good will is apparent and appreciated, I don't really see any enlightenment or changed opinions. To quote the late Sen. Patrick Moynihan in his observation that "Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.". In one argument after another, I see the T.M. defenders and Zimmerman haters using their own set of "facts" to support their arguments, which substantially differs with the objective, known facts based on evidence. The basic facts are this:

 

 

• Trayvon Martin attacked and pinned George Zimmerman. He was the "assailant".
  
• George Zimmerman was already in contact with the Police multiple times. Whatever G.Z.' intentions, his actions were consistent with that of a law abiding citizen. G.Z. was the VICTIM, and a victim who fought back with the means at his disposal.
  
• G.Z. was in a place he had a right to be, carrying a weapon he had an absolute right to carry along with the legal authorization to carry it concealed.
  
• T.M.'s attack left Zimmerman no avenue of retreat, nor any other option but to defend himself.
  
• G.Z's wounds and T.M's scuffed fists, G.Z.'s wet back and T.M.'s wet knees, the trajectory of the bullet, eye witness testimony of the neighbor closest to the attack, and G.Z.'s own unrestrained, consistent testimony supports only one version of events, that T.M. attacked G.Z. with intent to commit great bodily harm on G.Z., and G.Z. prevented his own death or serious injury by firing one shot into T.M. with his handgun.
  

 

That's it. That's all of it. No conjecture or Presidential politicizing will change the facts. If, as President Obama said, T.M. was 18 yrs old and possessed a legal handgun and CCW permit, indeed T.M. could have legally "stood his ground" and defended himself against G.Z. using a handgun, but for the fact that Obama deliberately obscured, that T.M. was the assailant and G.Z. the victim. Again, every single T.M. supporter does this kind of obfuscation, i.e. using their "own facts" rather than the objective known facts. Obama reversed the roles to assert that T.M. was innocent, that G.Z. was the assailant, which is both a straw man argument and veritably not true. Obama's words and attempt to stroke up emotions of hate towards George Zimmerman just as the prosecutors impugning of G.Z. after the jury verdict, are OUTRAGEOUS!

 

 

It brings in substantial factual background on both Zimmerman and Martin not admissible in a court of law, but revealing none the less. Nothing in this blog is new, just a summary of known facts.

 

I'd say that it's time for the moderators to close this thread. The verdict is in. A jury has spoken. We have 38 pages of dialogue with very little middle grown. The facts won't convince T.M. supporters that T.M. was in any way at fault, nor that G.Z. was justified in his use of deadly force.

 

What will happen is that Obama and his T.M. supporters will attack MY Constitutional rights to own or carry a weapon, my HUMAN rights to self-defense and to "stand my ground" in the face of assault. They will "spin" or create new "facts" to paint G.Z. and every man or woman who carries a gun as morally wrong and any critic of T.M. as either an overt or latent racist.

 

BMWST.COM is a great site. We have a bunch of great people on this forum, and we have in common a love of freedom of riding a quality motorbike on the open roads of the USA and the world. It's a great common denominator. Let's not ruin it.

 

I think these kind of conversations between us are great around a campfire with a few beers in hand, but lethal to friendship when done on internet forums. People are less likely to stare one another in the eye and imply that they are racists or child murderers or right-wing or left-wing nuts when they are face to face. Civilized people, black and white and yellow and red and pokadot can disagree with one another - just takes a few more beers or a bottle of wine to smooth out the disagreements.

 

I wish to heck, as I said in another post, that T.M. had chosen to talk to G.Z. rather than attack him. G.Z. could have been a positive influence in T.M.'s life, as he had with every other neighbor who had met him. This is a tragic death of a black young man, and the tragic but deliberate ruin of an apparently exemplary Hispanic American.

 

In that I stand with George Zimmerman, "I AM George Zimmerman". No amount of threats, protests, riots, malicious prosecutions, NSA wire taps, nor Presidential race baiting will change my stand on the Constitution and the moral right of self-defense.

 

Scott

[1springer]

well said Sir!

[Selden]

I don't consider myself to be a Zimmerman "hater" or a Martin "defender", but after Scott's tirade, which seems very, very close to the "no politics" line, I agree that mods should close this thread, as it's getting very close to spinning out of control.

[Effjay]

+3...

Mods, please lock this thread

[beemerman2k]

Scott: were I a moderator, I'd strike your post for it's complete disregard for our no politics policy, and then I'd send you a strongly worded message.

[beemerman2k]

The enemy of progress is the attitude that says, "I am right and you are wrong". That is the enemy of progress. Progress, understanding, and reconciliation can only be made when we open ourselves to the idea that right/wrong, good/bad, or whatever, help me to understand you and I'll help you to understand me.

 

Everybody wants to be right, everyone wants to preach, we all want to assert our own self righteousness. So long as that's what we are about, that right there IS the problem.

 

As a black man, I cannot be clean of the ways I add to the problem without your help. And as a white man, you cannot be clean of your ways without my (or other people who are outside your world view) help. An old Persian proverb says,

 

The eye sees all but itself

 

The wise appreciate this truth. We would all do well to learn this as well.

[Whip]

Scott: were I a moderator, I'd strike your post for it's complete disregard for our no politics policy, and then I'd send you a strongly worded message.

 

It seems to be more about names and opinions than politics. I think it was clean.

 

No left and right in it, just facts as they have come up.

 

If the Pres decided to declare war we could reference his reasons and debate them couldn't we?

 

 

I don't know.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[beemerman2k]

No Whip, we couldn't. Go back and read the rules again. Probably something we should all do from time to time.

 

The problem is this: by opening the door of politics and political personalities, the discussion quickly descends into a downward spiral of opposing political ideologies. I would not be happy if that were to happen in this thread.

 

As far as I'm concerned, Washington has nothing to do with what happened in Sanford, FL that night, nor do our political leaders have anything to do with our desire to be a part of the solution rather than part of the problem.

 

This discussion is about what happened that night, the ensuing trail, and verdict rendered. But more importantly, this thread is about why different races see things the way they do, and how we can understand and reconcile these differences. Why should we care do to that? Because we owe it to our country, that's why.

 

Washington has nothing to do with this. Nothing at all.

[Whip]

Okay.

 

 

The Pres referenced what is being discussed here(not exactly here) and made comments about it.

 

I think it is news worthy and would be hard to talk around in the context of this discussion.

 

If tomorrow the Pres said he wanted to ban motorcycles would we not be able to discuss it because he is an elected politician?

 

 

I think if SWB had said all liberals/conservatives like XXXX believe XXXXXXXXX.....then it would be against the rules.

 

I will accept and learn from whatever is decided.

 

Thanks for your service as a Mod.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Whip]

"No conjecture or Presidential politicizing will change the facts. If, as President Obama said, T.M. was 18 yrs old and possessed a legal handgun and CCW permit, indeed T.M. could have legally "stood his ground" and defended himself against G.Z. using a handgun, but for the fact that Obama deliberately obscured, that T.M. was the assailant and G.Z. the victim. Again, every single T.M. supporter does this kind of obfuscation, i.e. using their "own facts" rather than the objective known facts. Obama reversed the roles to assert that T.M. was innocent, that G.Z. was the assailant, which is both a straw man argument and veritably not true. Obama's words and attempt to stroke up emotions of hate towards George Zimmerman just as the prosecutors impugning of G.Z. after the jury verdict, are OUTRAGEOUS! "

 

 

I can see it either way.

 

 

 

 

[beemerman2k]

Thanks Whip, but I am NOT a mod!

[Whip]

I mean your past service.....I wouldn't be arguing with you if you were still a mod.

 

[Whip]

'Yup, you can hardly talk about the price of eggs without there being a political aspect to it. BUT, you don’t have to talk about that political aspect. There are economic, social, physiological, psychological, health, etc., etc., etc., aspects to virtually every topic. As long as those are what’s being discussed, and the political aspects are not (THIS INCLUDES EVEN BEING HINTED AT), then subjects are open for discussion. '

 

 

NANDO

 

 

I think he walked the line.

 

 

[beemerman2k]

I mean your past service.....I wouldn't be arguing with you if you were still a mod.

 

 

 

Now that's funny!

[10ovr]

Scott: were I a moderator, I'd strike your post for it's complete disregard for our no politics policy, and then I'd send you a strongly worded message.

What the hell is a strongly worded message ??? It's that like a slap on the hand or a punch in the noise :lurk:There are politics all through this tread,,, Maybe he just said something that got your panties in a knot ????

[Whip]

I mean your past service.....I wouldn't be arguing with you if you were still a mod.

 

 

 

Now that's funny!

 

I am trying to get to 10,000 posts without saying anything.

 

So far so good.

 

[upflying]

The thread is filed with political innuendo. But I think the taboo line is crossed when political names are mentioned.

On a recent matter, did anyone profile the child molester I posted in the video? I had one reply and he did not see it.

I guess that little test proves profiling people is not an exact science. Based on how we are wired, we all profile differently.

I guess cops see things differently. Here is the video I posted a few pages ago.

[beemerman2k]

Scott: were I a moderator, I'd strike your post for it's complete disregard for our no politics policy, and then I'd send you a strongly worded message.

What the hell is a strongly worded message ??? It's that like a slap on the hand or a punch in the noise :lurk:There are politics all through this tread,,, Maybe he just said something that got your panties in a knot ????

 

Once again, read the rules.

 

As to me getting my panties in a knot, let me say this (as I already did): progress is destroyed when people seek to assert their own right-ness rather than to seek understand why others might have the perspective they do. Only by a community of people willing to listen can any progress be made. This is why I love the quote:

 

Seek first to understand, then to be understood.

 

Some once said that war is an acronym, (W)e (A)re ®ight. Self righteousness is the stuff of conflict and division, not unity and understanding.

 

Well, if you insist upon touting why you are right and others are wrong, fine, just leave political personalities out of it.

[beemerman2k]

Oh, and I failed to address the matter of the strongly worded letter. My letter would go something like this:

 

Were I to be a guest in your home, you would not appreciate it if I told your wife to get me a beer, and told the kids to go to bed, and called CableTV to add movie channels, and then sat in your chair, and...

 

When I'm in your house, I am expected to abide by your rules.

 

Guess what, this web forum? It ain't your house, it's someone else's. Please abide by the rules :smirk:

[10ovr]

Oh, and I failed to address the matter of the strongly worded letter. My letter would go something like this:

 

Were I to be a guest in your home, you would not appreciate it if I told your wife to get me a beer, and told the kids to go to bed, and called CableTV to add movie channels, and then sat in your chair, and...

 

When I'm in your house, I am expected to abide by your rules.

 

Guess what, this web forum? It ain't your house, it's someone else's. Please abide by the rules :smirk:

You come to AZ and My Casa Your Casa,,No rules at my house,,First one to the chair gets it,,,,,As for the beer,,My X wife well be glade to get you one,,,As for kids,,Sold them,,to much work,,, I love moves,,, When ya coming over,,,

[beemerman2k]

Oh, and I failed to address the matter of the strongly worded letter. My letter would go something like this:

 

Were I to be a guest in your home, you would not appreciate it if I told your wife to get me a beer, and told the kids to go to bed, and called CableTV to add movie channels, and then sat in your chair, and...

 

When I'm in your house, I am expected to abide by your rules.

 

Guess what, this web forum? It ain't your house, it's someone else's. Please abide by the rules :smirk:

You come to AZ and My Casa Your Casa,,No rules at my house,,First one to the chair gets it,,,,,As for the beer,,My X wife well be glade to get you one,,,As for kids,,Sold them,,to much work,,, I love moves,,, When ya coming over,,,

 

 

I like 10over. He's my kinda guy

[Joe Frickin' Friday]

We have over 38 pages of exhaustive dialogue on this thread. I don't see any real "understanding" from the differing sides on this. Though James good will is apparent and appreciated, I don't really see any enlightenment or changed opinions.

 

I'm showing 52 pages. Depends on your settings I guess.

 

In any event, I agree that very little new ground is being covered anymore, and now it's devolved into an argument about what constitutes political discussions. Time for everyone to move on to The Next Big Thing.