Free George Zimmerman!

Rose_NoHo wrote:

<quoted text>
Why are all fundies racists?
Don't you believe god created us all?

Why are you offened and go crying to topix over a screen name that has many meanings

Hint wrote:

Are all black women hoes, militant, and stupid?

No, just your mother.
Wish her Happy Mother's Day for me.

imagine2011 wrote:

<quoted text>
Even if a nice civil black couple moves in next door, everyone may not be so worried about this civil couple, but who are their relatives and friends and how do they behave, is the question.

Are you purposely leaving out those raggedy Appalachian hillbillies who move in and look "civil" until their cousins and in-laws come over friday night and party until early Saturday morning? Your cousins by chance?

WiseAmerican wrote:

<quoted text>Are you purposely leaving out those raggedy Appalachian hillbillies who move in and look "civil" until their cousins and in-laws come over friday night and party until early Saturday morning? Your cousins by chance?

Not just hillbilly types wait till a upper class couple has a screaming fight at 4 am. Or their drunk teenage daughter and her boyfriend crashes into the garage.
No subset of humans is immune to ass/ holes

is there any recent news regarding this case?

sure went quiet with media.

Reality Speaks wrote:

is there any recent news regarding this case?
sure went quiet with media.

It went quiet because the truth came out that it was not an innocent boy walking along but rather a punk with an attitude problem the assaulted a guy with a gun and got the business end of that gun. It also came out that it was not about race to the dismay of Al Sparpton and all the others that make a living off of race baiting and trying to find racism under every rock even when there is nothing there to find.

Telgin wrote:

<quoted text>It went quiet because the truth came out that it was not an innocent boy walking along but rather a punk with an attitude problem the assaulted a guy with a gun and got the business end of that gun. It also came out that it was not about race to the dismay of Al Sparpton and all the others that make a living off of race baiting and trying to find racism under every rock even when there is nothing there to find.

I'm sure Al SPARPTON canvases the 48 states looking under every rock for racism that's not there. What you and others overlook is racial profiling. When Zimmermen called police every description he gave was of a black male. If you heard his 911 calls he always said, "My wife said "he" (any black) fits the description of the buglary suspect. That is racist.

WiseAmerican wrote:

<quoted text>I'm sure Al SPARPTON canvases the 48 states looking under every rock for racism that's not there. What you and others overlook is racial profiling. When Zimmermen called police every description he gave was of a black male. If you heard his 911 calls he always said, "My wife said "he" (any black) fits the description of the buglary suspect. That is racist.

Is BUGLARY stealing bugs? How many Zimmermans are in one Zimmermen?

WiseAmerican wrote:

<quoted text>I'm sure Al SPARPTON canvases the 48 states looking under every rock for racism that's not there. What you and others overlook is racial profiling. When Zimmermen called police every description he gave was of a black male. If you heard his 911 calls he always said, "My wife said "he" (any black) fits the description of the buglary suspect. That is racist.

If the suspect is black, and the person in question is black then that is an accurate comparison between the two and is NOT racist. If you want to complain about something you should be complaining about the fact that it is a black guy the majority of the time committing the crime which in turn makes the rest looked down upon. You can and probably will deny this but everyone KNOWS it to be true.

Reality Speaks wrote:

is there any recent news regarding this case?
sure went quiet with media.

Zimmerman officially pled not guilty, submitting his plea in writing (didn't appear in court). Waived his right to a speedy trial to give his lawyer more time to prepare. Current motion (not sure if it has been submitted or not) has to do with how much can be withheld from the press.

Apparently the judge is OK with redacting names of witnesses, but O'Mara seems to be asking for something more than that. Normally Florida allows a high degree of disclosure to the press. O'Mara seems to be moving in a direction of trying to control the flow of information. He has set up a monitored Zimmerman website (comments are moderated) and a Facebook--all in the name of trying to move public opinion in his client's direction (along with fundraising).

He is still leaning heavily on the "angry black people are dangerous" card--keeping his client hidden, ensuring that names (and possibly other information) of witnesses are redacted, and generally trying to draw things out for as long as possible, hoping to puncture any momentum toward justice for Trayvon.

WiseAmerican wrote:

<quoted text>I'm sure Al SPARPTON canvases the 48 states looking under every rock for racism that's not there. What you and others overlook is racial profiling. When Zimmermen called police every description he gave was of a black male. If you heard his 911 calls he always said, "My wife said "he" (any black) fits the description of the buglary suspect. That is racist.

I don't think that the fella you are responding to cares.

He is of the opinion that taking out black kids is OK--beause they are all up to no good anyway.

I wonder what would happen to a bunch of black kids these days who chased down a white kid and held him to the ground to cut his hair.

Telgin wrote:

<quoted text>If the suspect is black, and the person in question is black then that is an accurate comparison between the two and is NOT racist. If you want to complain about something you should be complaining about the fact that it is a black guy the majority of the time committing the crime which in turn makes the rest looked down upon. You can and probably will deny this but everyone KNOWS it to be true.

If the rapist was male and the person in question is male, then that is an accurate comparison between the two.

FKA Reader wrote:

<quoted text>
If the rapist was male and the person in question is male, then that is an accurate comparison between the two.

Your comparisons are idiotic but anyway, yes, thats right. Its an accurate description though is in need of more description. But you can not say its is sexist just because you said male, right?

Telgin wrote:

<quoted text>Your comparisons are idiotic but anyway, yes, thats right. Its an accurate description though is in need of more description. But you can not say its is sexist just because you said male, right?

Ummmm, depends. If you arrested the guy because he was male and the rapist was male and there is no other evidence--probably would get hit for wrongful arrest. Likewise if the police went out and rounded up all males within a perimeter of the crime and required them all to give DNA samples--it would be raining dollars for lawyers.

With regard to the "rash" of break-ins (apparently 8 over 15 months--which doesn't seem to be exactly a rash), there seems to be a high degree of supposition regarding the race of the suspects. There were actual arrests in 3 break-ins. Hence, in those cases we know something about the race of the person who did it. Zimmerman's neighbor, however, was willing to say on camera that all of the break-ins were done by young black males.

So--there is a supposition that young black males are committing some crimes, although evidence seems to be lacking. To go from that to calling the police whenever a young black male is spotted walking down the street is, actually, profiling.

Telgin wrote:

<quoted text>If the suspect is black, and the person in question is black then that is an accurate comparison between the two and is NOT racist. If you want to complain about something you should be complaining about the fact that it is a black guy the majority of the time committing the crime which in turn makes the rest looked down upon. You can and probably will deny this but everyone KNOWS it to be true.

Jefferey Dahmer ate people, he was white, does that mean we are to "look down upon" every white male?

FKA Reader wrote:

<quoted text>
I don't think that the fella you are responding to cares.
He is of the opinion that taking out black kids is OK--beause they are all up to no good anyway.
I wonder what would happen to a bunch of black kids these days who chased down a white kid and held him to the ground to cut his hair.

Those black kids would be charged with aggrevated assault, and be facing 10 ten apiece in prison.

Aggravated assault

FKA Reader wrote:

<quoted text>
I don't think that the fella you are responding to cares.
He is of the opinion that taking out black kids is OK--beause they are all up to no good anyway.
I wonder what would happen to a bunch of black kids these days who chased down a white kid and held him to the ground to cut his hair.

Problem is that the group of blacks attacking the white kid would not end with just a haircut. They would be stomping him and might end like in Chicago with them setting him on fire and leaving him for dead. Thats why they would get 10 years.

5EnzyteBob wrote:

<quoted text>
More Ebonics training?
Jeffrey Dahmer was not a white Christian, he was a Jew.
Jared Loughner (Tuscon) was also a Jew.
David Berkowitz (Son of Sam) was a Jew.
Dylan Klebold (Columbine) was a Jew.
T.J. Lane (Chardon) looks like a hillbilly or a Jew.

Did I say W.A.S.P? I said white male, and Jeff Dahmer was (he's dead) a white male.

Telgin wrote:

<quoted text>Problem is that the group of blacks attacking the white kid would not end with just a haircut. They would be stomping him and might end like in Chicago with them setting him on fire and leaving him for dead. Thats why they would get 10 years.

"thats"