The Zimmerman case?

[LimpyLoo]

WTF, WATMM, WTF

[MisterE]

how is it from rush limbaugh?! it's from the god damned pierce morgan interview! in case you missed it i already linked it but here:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2013/07/16/jeantel_warned_trayvon_that_zimmerman_could_be_a_gay_rapist.html

 

so if rush limbaugh mentions something that a far left guy got out of an interview, that nullifies it? great logic there, captain.

 

RACHEL JEANTEL: "People need to understand, he didn't want that creepy ass cracka going to his father or girlfriend's house to go get -- mind you, his little brother is there. Mind you I told you, I told Trayvon, [Zimmerman] might have been a rapist."

 

ok awe i see youve edited your post to say 'talking point' instead of what it was before which was suggesting that the whole zim=gay rapist thing came from limbaugh. face it, it still doesn't make sense. it's not a 'talking point'. it's something the last person who talked to trayvon went on NATIONAL TV and said. she all but directly said that trayvon went back to 'whoop ass' on zim because of concerns of him

BEING GAY

and therefore PROBABLY A RAPIST

[luke viia]

Is that (Jeantal quote) the only evidence that Zimmerman might be gay? ...just that someone suggested it? (because, reasonably, being followed late at night might mean there's a rapist afoot?) I haven't been following this story at all, but I think that verdict sucks, mostly because I agree about the point that it's difficult to call it self defense when you're literally following someone with a gun in your hand.

[MisterE]

nobody is saying zim is actually gay. but trayvon's girlfriend has basically admitted on national tv that suspicions of him being gay, and therefore a possible rapist, probably motivated trayvon to go back and give him a little 'whoop ass'.

 

so

lets imagine an alternate scenario

where a guy got out of his car and ran a few feet in the direction of someone he had already lost sight of (as evidence by the 911 tape), before turning to go back to his car

 

now, the person who he ran in the direction of, who is gone, decides to go back thinking that that man might have been gay. and also describes him with a racial slur on the phone to someone else

 

so he goes back, and assaults that guy. basically for being suspected gay and belonging to some other race, apparently

 

no gun, no death. just an assault. how would you feel about THAT? i think thats the kind of thing that could start it's own million gay hispanic march or somesuch

 

well, it might if the kid doing the 'whoop ass' were white........

[luke viia]

Well, I'd think that was shitty, I guess. I've actually been assaulted because someone thought I was gay. I didn't shoot them though, just got them to fuck off. And I certainly wouldn't expect any fair treatment or benevolence from someone I was following on their walk home, lol.

 

Anyway, it seems reasonable to just analyze the actual scenario IMO, not invented alternate ones. I wouldn't want someone analyzing alternate scenarios to prove my guiltiness if I was that kid and I were still alive, that's for sure.

 

*stops talking before something is said that results in a 3+ page watmm style semantic bogdown*

[MisterE]

so you think that if you 'follow someone' for a few feet, who probably didn't even SEE you 'following them' because they were out of your sight when you 'followed them', that that person then has the right to assault you?

 

how long of a timeframe/window do they have? can they redeem that free assault like a day later?

up to how many minutes/hrs/days is that freeby (and possible racist and homophobic driven) assault good for?

[SR4]

wow this thread got real crazy

[Alcofribas]

ohhhh excellent side step. 0 effort, 0 thought, 0 intelligence. i totally didnt see that one coming. no, not from you. just compare me to the local lunatic (sorry chunk)

 

thing is. you know damn well it's not like that. and THAT'S why you hate me so much. i don't even care about you. how often have i went out of my way to respond to one of YOUR posts? tata

lol

[luke viia]

so you think that if you 'follow someone' for a few feet, who probably didn't even SEE you 'following them' because they were out of your sight when you 'followed them', that that person then has the right to assault you?

 

how long of a timeframe/window do they have? can they redeem that free assault like a day later?

up to how many minutes/hrs/days is that freeby (and possible racist and homophobic driven) assault good for?

 

I guess they would have 2700 μs, +/- 100 μs of course, before I'd say they've lost their right to assault me. Non-redeemable.

 

[awepittance]

 

ohhhh excellent side step. 0 effort, 0 thought, 0 intelligence. i totally didnt see that one coming. no, not from you. just compare me to the local lunatic (sorry chunk)

 

thing is. you know damn well it's not like that. and THAT'S why you hate me so much. i don't even care about you. how often have i went out of my way to respond to one of YOUR posts? tata

lol

 

lol

[awepittance]

how is it from rush limbaugh?! it's from the god damned pierce morgan interview! in case you missed it i already linked it but here:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2013/07/16/jeantel_warned_trayvon_that_zimmerman_could_be_a_gay_rapist.html

 

so if rush limbaugh mentions something that a far left guy got out of an interview, that nullifies it? great logic there, captain.

 

RACHEL JEANTEL: "People need to understand, he didn't want that creepy ass cracka going to his father or girlfriend's house to go get -- mind you, his little brother is there. Mind you I told you, I told Trayvon, [Zimmerman] might have been a rapist."

 

ok awe i see youve edited your post to say 'talking point' instead of what it was before which was suggesting that the whole zim=gay rapist thing came from limbaugh. face it, it still doesn't make sense. it's not a 'talking point'. it's something the last person who talked to trayvon went on NATIONAL TV and said. she all but directly said that trayvon went back to 'whoop ass' on zim because of concerns of him

BEING GAY

and therefore PROBABLY A RAPIST

You do realize that someone who subscribes to consensus doesn't see Piers Morgan on the 'far left' right?? He's the dude who replaced centrist CNN host Larry King

 

I don't know if you're just fucking stupid or totally trapped in a bubble, when you say shit like this it pulls the rug out from your whole projected 'intelligence'. How can anyone who considers themselves a critical thinker possibly say that Piers Morgan is far left? It's just so many levels of idiocy it's hard to comprehend. It's from Rush Limbuagh because that's where Realclear politics and all the other asinine generic right wing talking point parroting websites you go to get their shit from. The fact that there are still 2-3 people here that take you seriously on this forum is beyond me.

[LimpyLoo]

MisterE, you should lay off the aderrall.

 

 

And why are you so angry? It's really fucking weird...

[BobDobalina]

This country will never vilify prescription drugs as much as much as it does the illegal ones.

 

And why would they? What with the pharma lobby (oops, I meant cartel) having such easy access to the puppet strings. The cartels (energy, healthcare, military-ind complex, et al.) be callin' the shots in Mericuh these days.

 

Also, the plutocrats love nothing more than a good ol' hornet's nest of a "racially charged" injustice to wedge and distract the masses from the fucking over we continue to receive at their hands, including the lingering financial crisis (including rampant unemployment, inflated/rigged markets - particularly housing which we're starting to see cheerleading media coverage for again), eroding freedoms & rights (hi NSA!), lack of access to education (shitty public schools, out of control tuition inflation), the short-sightedness and corruption inherent in our political system... it's practically endless. People need to wake the fuck up.

[Guest zaphod]

monolithic political and corporate forces fucking people over is not a new concept, and people "waking up" into awareness happens regularly.

[Guest zaphod]

nobody is saying zim is actually gay. but trayvon's girlfriend has basically admitted on national tv that suspicions of him being gay, and therefore a possible rapist, probably motivated trayvon to go back and give him a little 'whoop ass'.

 

so

lets imagine an alternate scenario

where a guy got out of his car and ran a few feet in the direction of someone he had already lost sight of (as evidence by the 911 tape), before turning to go back to his car

 

now, the person who he ran in the direction of, who is gone, decides to go back thinking that that man might have been gay. and also describes him with a racial slur on the phone to someone else

 

so he goes back, and assaults that guy. basically for being suspected gay and belonging to some other race, apparently

 

no gun, no death. just an assault. how would you feel about THAT? i think thats the kind of thing that could start it's own million gay hispanic march or somesuch

 

well, it might if the kid doing the 'whoop ass' were white........

 

please stop inventing alternate scenarios so you can play the white victimhood card. i'm so fucking sick of it.

[MisterE]

You do realize that someone who subscribes to consensus doesn't see Piers Morgan on the 'far left' right?? He's the dude who replaced centrist CNN host Larry King

 

I don't know if you're just fucking stupid or totally trapped in a bubble, when you say shit like this it pulls the rug out from your whole projected 'intelligence'. How can anyone who considers themselves a critical thinker possibly say that Piers Morgan is far left? It's just so many levels of idiocy it's hard to comprehend. It's from Rush Limbuagh because that's where Realclear politics and all the other asinine generic right wing talking point parroting websites you go to get their shit from. The fact that there are still 2-3 people here that take you seriously on this forum is beyond me.

woah woah woah. piers morgan being far left may or may not be debatable but it's entirely besides the point that trayvon likely being a homophobe which apparently motivated his assault on zim came out on HIS show. i really find it mind blowing that in the same post you are going to call me fucking stupid, and still try to say that something that came out on piers morgan's show is 'from rush limbaugh'. this is just... amazing. you are actually calling me fucking stupid and telling me that if rush limbaugh repeats something that came from someone else's show, that now makes him the source. you are actually combining those two statements in the same post. OK THEN

 

MisterE, you should lay off the aderrall.

 

 

And why are you so angry? It's really fucking weird...

a) i don't listen to rush limbaugh

b) *I* am not on adderall

c) i'm not angry, i just don't understand why a bunch of left leaning people suddenly see nothing wrong with a little homophobic assault. i'm just trying to understand. so i've posed the question to see if i might get a straight answer.

[LimpyLoo]

 

You do realize that someone who subscribes to consensus doesn't see Piers Morgan on the 'far left' right?? He's the dude who replaced centrist CNN host Larry King

 

I don't know if you're just fucking stupid or totally trapped in a bubble, when you say shit like this it pulls the rug out from your whole projected 'intelligence'. How can anyone who considers themselves a critical thinker possibly say that Piers Morgan is far left? It's just so many levels of idiocy it's hard to comprehend. It's from Rush Limbuagh because that's where Realclear politics and all the other asinine generic right wing talking point parroting websites you go to get their shit from. The fact that there are still 2-3 people here that take you seriously on this forum is beyond me.

woah woah woah. piers morgan being far left may or may not be debatable but it's entirely besides the point that trayvon likely being a homophobe which apparently motivated his assault on zim came out on HIS show. i really find it mind blowing that in the same post you are going to call me fucking stupid, and still try to say that something that came out on piers morgan's show is 'from rush limbaugh'. this is just... amazing. you are actually calling me fucking stupid and telling me that if rush limbaugh repeats something that came from someone else's show, that now makes him the source. you are actually combining those two statements in the same post. OK THEN

 

MisterE, you should lay off the aderrall.

 

 

And why are you so angry? It's really fucking weird...

a) i don't listen to rush limbaugh

b) *I* am not on adderall

c) i'm not angry, i just don't understand why a bunch of left leaning people suddenly see nothing wrong with a little homophobic assault. i'm just trying to understand. so i've posed the question to see if i might get a straight answer.

 

 

 

it's extremely intellectually dishonest the way you characterized the 'gay rapist' angle: It wasn't "he's gay, therefore he's a rapist"...and the fact that you framed it that way is hilarious and grounds for you not being taken seriously.

 

At no point in the equation was the 'gay' part separate from the 'rapist' part. You make it sound like a gash-bash scenario, where at worst it would be a rapist-bash.

[MisterE]

i respect that instead of just calling me a fucking idiot or accusing me of being on prescription drugs (which is ironic since i may be one of the few people here on none) you actually took some time to look at what i said and form a counter point. some people are just so intolerant of opposing opinions that they don't even bother, ya know? so we actually got somewhere.

but i don't quite agree with your assessment of my characterization of what was said.

MORGAN: And he was freaked out by it?

JEANTEL: Yes. Definitely after I say may be a rapist, for every boy, for every man, every -- who's not that kind of way, seeing a grown man following them, would they be creep out?

 

 

ok so you're saying, that the gay thing really has nothing to do with it. it's the rapist thing. well, what did she mean when she said 'who's not that kind of way' and that they would be 'creep out'? yeah, she did, just before that say 'after i say may be rapist', so does that mean, when she says 'who's not that kind of way' that she means 'boys who don't like being raped'?

 

is that what 'who's not that kind of way' means? boys who don't want to be raped?

 

boys who's not that kind of way

see grown man following them

would they be creep out

 

i think it's intellectually dishonest of you to try to deny that their idea of zim being gay couldn't have had anything at all to do with trayvons real or supposed fears of zimmerman stalking to rape him and his brother, and that it had nothing to do with him going back to attack zim.

 

boys who's not that kind of way. what's that mean besides 'boys who aren't gay'? so:

boys who aren't gay

see grown man (cracker) following them

should be creeped out (because he will probably rape them)

should go break nose and slam head into sidewalk

 

yeah it is a one thing follows from the other kind of a deal there.

[SR4]

where is it implicity said that Trayvon believed Zimmerman was gay and on top of that, that Trayvon wanted to fight him because of his gayness, not because of his alleged tendency for raping people.

 

wtf why am I even participating in this. this has to be the stupidest fucking argument on WATMM in the past 3 years or so.

[Guest zaphod]

feel like there's a lot of watmmers who seem to think white males are being short changed by the media and the culture at large. i'm baffled by this, but maybe it reflects a larger sub culture.

[SR4]

feel like there's a lot of watmmers who seem to think white males are being short changed by the media and the culture at large. i'm baffled by this, but maybe it reflects a larger sub culture.

 

by "a lot of WATMMers" do you mean MisterE? because otherwise Im not really seeing this.

[Ivy Zemura yvI oo ii oo]

[Guest zaphod]

 

feel like there's a lot of watmmers who seem to think white males are being short changed by the media and the culture at large. i'm baffled by this, but maybe it reflects a larger sub culture.

 

by "a lot of WATMMers" do you mean MisterE? because otherwise Im not really seeing this.

 

 

really? i see it in political threads from one or two posters. maybe "a lot" isn't right, but it's noticeable to me. unfortunately i don't give a shit enough about this point to actually search out and quote people's posts, so you can take it or leave it.

[MisterE]

where is it implicity said that Trayvon believed Zimmerman was gay and on top of that, that Trayvon wanted to fight him because of his gayness, not because of his alleged tendency for raping people.

 

wtf why am I even participating in this. this has to be the stupidest fucking argument on WATMM in the past 3 years or so.

where is it said? have you actually looked at my last few posts? it was said by the LAST PERSON WHO SPOKE TO HIM ALIVE.

 

oh but you think that instead of trayvons actions (which took place directly after that phone conversation) having anything to do with what she claims was said during that, his LAST EVER CONVERSATION, it was instead due to his having knowledge about zimmerman's 'alleged tendency for raping people'?

 

you're right about one thing, it was a stupid argument.

this is why we're here.

[SR4]

i can't even begin to explain to you how fucking stupid you are.