I wouldn't call the statement iffy at all. He claimed self defense. How do you go about proving him wrong? Even if he lied, he's still got a slight injury, there's no hard evidence, and the only other witness is dead.

This is the case whether there is a SYG law or not...

Has that ever been indicated?

Not directly, but the victim's family has repeatedly suggested that they believed he was a flight risk, and usually that makes things like "don't leave the state" orders happen.

Not directly, but the victim's family has repeatedly suggested that they believed he was a flight risk, and usually that makes things like "don't leave the state" orders happen.

 

Not directly and usually, meaning no?

Not directly, but the victim's family has repeatedly suggested that they believed he was a flight risk, and usually that makes things like "don't leave the state" orders happen.

 

 

Who wouuld issue such an order?

Man, imagine the outrage if this were a white person dropping N-bombs on the radio.

 

http://www.wtsp.com/news/article/250102/8/...taff-apologizes

 

Michelle said during the interview, "Let me tell you, the things that's about to happen, to these honkeys, these crackers, these pigs, these pink people, these ---- people. It has been long overdue. My prize right now this evening ... is gonna be the bounty, the arrest, dead or alive, for George Zimmerman. You feel me?"

Man, imagine the outrage if this were a white person dropping N-bombs on the radio.

 

http://www.wtsp.com/news/article/250102/8/...taff-apologizes

You do realize that there are actually not a trivial number of white supremacist radio shows broadcast in this country, right? They can occasionally book guests like Pat Buchanan and Ron Paul.

 

No one really cares about them as long as they dont' actively organize violence (See: Hal Turner). Just like, once again, no one should really care about the head of the particular hate group that is consistently cited by Conservatives in any case where race comes up.

Man, imagine the outrage if this were a white person dropping N-bombs on the radio.

 

http://www.wtsp.com/news/article/250102/8/...taff-apologizes

 

It's also easy to imagine all of the right-wing blogs defending it.

 

But yeah there's usually more outrage when historically oppressive groups use racial insults against the groups they historically oppressed.

Ah, the old "well they do it too so whatever" response.

Edited April 11, 201213 yr by Jenksismybitch

Ah, the old "well they do it to so whatever" response.

No, that's the "I really don't pay any attention to the fact that white supremacist groups exist and broadcast on radio, and yet Republicans care about every single thing the "New Black Panther Party" hate group does." defense.

 

I don't care about the "New Black Panther party". It has at the most a few thousand members nationwide according to their own statements, and are probably a lot smaller than that. The original group disowns this group.

 

The only reason anyone has heard about this group is that the Republicans have a political interest in pushing it. That's it. I'm sure the Martin family and the Zimmerman family both have a ton of death threats out of this, but there is no media group organized to publishing all those, but there is one happy to make use of the existence of the "New Black Panther Party" hate group and anything they do.

Ah, the old "well they do it too so whatever" response.

And hell, you're original statement was "Imagine if the other side did so how much of an outrage it would be". I imagine now you're going to spend your next several weeks cataloging hate radio just to make sure that we're appropriately outraged. "They do it to" is exactly waht your initial post said was impossible.

And hell, you're original statement was "Imagine if the other side did so how much of an outrage it would be". I imagine now you're going to spend your next several weeks cataloging hate radio just to make sure that we're appropriately outraged.

 

The "well they do it too" is exactly the response the right-leaning media is using: stories of blacks killing or hurting whites, hyperventilating about the New Black Panthers, the "where are the marches against black-on-black crime?!" stories.

NBC News is now reporting that George Zimmerman – the Sanford, Florida neighborhood watch supervisor who shot Trayvon Martin – will be charged in connection with the shooting. The Washington Post also reported that Zimmerman will be charged. Zimmerman’s lawyers on Tuesday withdrew their counsel in the case.

In terms of black - white relations the US was pretty once sided place in the 1830s. Whites could say anything about blacks and it was accepted. Today, the pendulum has swung so far to the other side that blacks can say just about anything about whites and it is tolerated or accepted.

 

At some point the pendulum will swing back to some sane place in the middle. I hope for all of our sakes, it is sooner rather than later. There should be no tolerance for these comments. We need to hold everyone to the same standard.

The real persecuted minority in today's society are whites!

 

Tex, why did you choose 1830? Why not 1860, when blacks were still slaves? Or 1960, when segregation was still legal? Or the 90's and the 2000's, when banks still discriminated against minorities over loan terms and conditions and blacks were routinely targeted by police in much higher percentages? Or the 2010's, when blacks still faced seriously disproportionate sentencing terms?

 

The real persecuted minority in today's society are whites!

 

Tex, why did you choose 1830? Why not 1860, when blacks were still slaves? Or 1960, when segregation was still legal? Or the 90's and the 2000's, when banks still discriminated against minorities over loan terms and conditions and blacks were routinely targeted by police in much higher percentages? Or the 2010's, when blacks still faced seriously disproportionate sentencing terms?

 

I wanted to make as clear and example as possible about public speech. I am talking about public comments. By the 1970s those public comments were not tolerated. (Jimmy the Greek, Howard Cosell, etc) Today even more so. Please remember I am talking about public comments that would be cut from the same cloth as what is being said now against whites.

Plenty of derogatory speech directed at minorities is still allowed. See: significant portions of Gingrich's campaign.

 

What is "now being said against whites?"

I wanted to make as clear and example as possible about public speech. I am talking about public comments. By the 1970s those public comments were not tolerated. (Jimmy the Greek, Howard Cosell, etc) Today even more so. Please remember I am talking about public comments that would be cut from the same cloth as what is being said now against whites.

These are public comments by a hate group. You're reaching out to the equivalent of a white supremacist group and you're pretending that those comments are tolerated.

 

They're tolerated to the same extent white supremacist groups are tolerated, and there are over a thousand of those in the country today, but I'm still waiting to see where someone catalogs everything they say. Of course, no one does that...

 

because they're hate groups!

 

If you put a white supremacist on the air, you're not going to be stunned that they say bad things about blacks and jews, and no one's going to make some silly point about how we've gone too far in tolerating hatred. Instead, people would wonder why in the world you gave that person the microphone in the first place.

 

No one wonders that in this case of course, because giving them the microphone serves the important purpose of making sure everyone knows that it's ok to be suspicious of black people because, hey look, they hate us!

Tex, The Bell Curve was published in the 1990's. The shoddy, pseudo-scientific research behind it is still "debated" today. These are ideas that literally call blacks genetically inferior to whites. These conversations aren't limited to obscure white supremacist magazines or stormfront but pop up at places like NRO and Andrew Sullivan's blog.

So, following up on the previous post where I noted that charges will be filed:

UPDATE: According to @mattgutmanABC, investigators don't know George Zimmerman's location.

Im just going to wait and see what happens at this point, if the Prosecutor charges him, yay I was right, if they dont charge, boo hiss I was wrong.

 

It happens.

Im just going to wait and see what happens at this point, if the Prosecutor charges him, yay I was right, if they dont charge, boo hiss I was wrong.

 

It happens.

According to multiple media sources, the Prosecutor has called a 6:00 EST press conference to announce the charges against Mr. Zimmerman, whose location is currently unknown to investigators.

Yeah Ive read that its likely, but why hang my hat on likely, might as well wait and see.

Yeah Ive read that its likely, but why hang my hat on likely, might as well wait and see.

I can't imagine that every press organization would run with their own statement saying he's about to be charged if that part wasn't true.

According to multiple media sources, the Prosecutor has called a 6:00 EST press conference to announce the charges against Mr. Zimmerman, whose location is currently unknown to investigators.

 

According to multiple media sources, the Prosecutor has called a 6:00 EST press conference to announce the charges against Mr. Zimmerman, whose location is currently unknown to investigators.

 

For some reason, I read the seventh word in that sentence as "Pentagon" and was thinking this got blown more out of proportion than normal. But that would be sort of awesome.