Yeh, and the parents said it wasn't, yet both claim to worship the same Christian god!
But if you think about it Zimmerman's comments are more in line with Christian theology. For example, if it wasn't part of god's plan that Martin would be dead that night (whether by murder or self-defense) how then do the family justify their omnipotent Christian god? If things can happen without him willing or planning it that way then he is not all powerful or all knowing etc etc. Guess they didnt think about that one before they mouthed off again.
Posted by Crush Black Lies (Member # 20324) on :
When he made the statement, it was to establish his Christian faith before the nation. At no time did he say it was "God's plan for me to kill Trayvon." People are running with that statement, taking it out of context. Any Christian knows that all circumstances in life are a result of God's elaborate master plan.
As they say, nothing to see here folks, move along.
Posted by JujuMan (Member # 6729) on :
LD, She was my heroine Posted by Khufu (Member # 17461) on :
“time and unforeseen occurrence befall [us] all.” (Ecclesiastes 9:11) So no matter how bizarre or unlikely the circumstances, tragic events are not predestined. This is what the Bible says.
Therefore, it was not in God's plans. Infact, God had nothing to do with the situation that occured between Martin and Zimmerman.
Posted by asante-Korton (Member # 18532) on :
6 commandment: Thou shalt not kill.
Posted by lamin (Member # 5777) on :
Yeh, and the parents said it wasn't, yet both claim to worship the same Christian god!
quote:But if you think about it Zimmerman's comments are more in line with Christian theology. For example, if it wasn't part of god's plan that Martin would be dead that night (whether by murder or self-defense) how then do the family justify their omnipotent Christian god? If things can happen without him willing or planning it that way then he is not all powerful or all knowing etc etc. Guess they didnt think about that one before they mouthed off again.
Christian theologians solved that one a long time ago with the posit that "humans have free will". It was part of God's omnipotency--as they argued--that humans be endowed with free will. Otherwise humans would just be mindless automatons.
Zimmerman is not too bright.
Posted by Oshun (Member # 19740) on :
quote:Originally posted by Crush Black Lies: When he made the statement, it was to establish his Christian faith before the nation. At no time did he say it was "God's plan for me to kill Trayvon." People are running with that statement, taking it out of context. Any Christian knows that all circumstances in life are a result of God's elaborate master plan.
As they say, nothing to see here folks, move along.
stfu he said he regrets nothing and justifies his lack of regret by saying "it was God's plan not for me to second guess." If a black guy raped and killed a little white girl and said some bullsh!t like that you'd be rolling. The reason why people are interpreting it the way they are is cause he has absolutely no sense of regret for anything that happened according to what he says and is using God as a means not to second guess his actions.
Posted by anguishofbeing (Member # 16736) on :
quote:“time and unforeseen occurrence befall [us] all.” (Ecclesiastes 9:11)
LOL You idiot, this is no way solves the dilemma of the omnipotence of god and tragic events. If it is "unforseen" to god then he is not all knowing. If he knew it would happen and does nothing to stop it, then it was part of his plan. How can Zimmerman (according to Christian theology) or anybody do something that was against god's plan? This means god is not all powerful.
The notion of fee will doesn't adequately address it either because even if you argue god gives free will to humans he still knows what they will choose and allows it. Logically, the fact that this happened under the watch of an all powerful god means that it was part of his plan that Martin die that night.
As a Jew,Christian,Muslim you can't escape this.
Christian theology is on Zimmerman's side here. Again Martin's parents arent too bright.
I think somewhere in the bible (Isiah?) it says that god creates evil. This reconciles the problem of an omnipotent god and an evil world. But it raises other more troubling questions...
quote:Originally posted by asante-Korton: 6 commandment: Thou shalt not kill.
This is stupid on so many levels I swear you must be six or something. lol
Posted by Crush Black Lies (Member # 20324) on :
Poor translation, seeing as the Jews killed to eat and when in war. A more accurate word would be "murder."
quote:Originally posted by asante-Korton: 6 commandment: Thou shalt not kill.
Posted by mena7 (Member # 20555) on :
George zimmerman is a murderer period .Trayvon Martin was minding is own business walking home from the convenience store with a bag of chocolate and can of ice tea on his hand .That racist mestiso stereotype him call him a fucking coon follow him and murder him with a gun .Zimmerman say there was a fight .It doesnt matter to me he started the fight by desobeing the dispatch order and follow the teenager .All the so call bloody head and nose of zimmerman are fake zimmerman family and police cover up of an assassination of an innocent black teenager .Zimmerman father is a retired judge with connection and knowledge that he is using to work the system .Now there is a media propaganda that zimmerman is not a racist,it is gods will like he is a christian .He is going toget rich out of Trayvon Martin murder he already raise $250,000 online .Zimmerman is going to have book deal,interview etc while the mother lost his handsome 17 years old son .Im a kamite if I did what zimmerman did Ill be in prison doing 25 to life .Racisme is still a live .
Posted by Crush Black Lies (Member # 20324) on :
Of course he regrets nothing, dodo! How could he regret shooting Trayvon when he believes there was no other alternative other than to shoot him during the confrontation? When you regret something, it usually means you had options available but chose the wrong one. Were he to regret shooting the kid, then indirectly he would be admitting fault.
quote:Originally posted by Oshun:
quote:Originally posted by Crush Black Lies: When he made the statement, it was to establish his Christian faith before the nation. At no time did he say it was "God's plan for me to kill Trayvon." People are running with that statement, taking it out of context. Any Christian knows that all circumstances in life are a result of God's elaborate master plan.
As they say, nothing to see here folks, move along.
stfu he said he regrets nothing and justifies his lack of regret by saying "it was God's plan not for me to second guess." If a black guy raped and killed a little white girl and said some bullsh!t like that you'd be rolling. The reason why people are interpreting it the way they are is cause he has absolutely no sense of regret for anything that happened according to what he says and is using God as a means not to second guess his actions.
Posted by asante-Korton (Member # 18532) on :
quote:Originally posted by anguishofbeing:
quote:“time and unforeseen occurrence befall [us] all.” (Ecclesiastes 9:11)
LOL You idiot, this is no way solves the dilemma of the omnipotence of god and tragic events. If it is "unforseen" to god then he is not all knowing. If he knew it would happen and does nothing to stop it, then it was part of his plan. How can Zimmerman (according to Christian theology) or anybody do something that was against god's plan? This means god is not all powerful.
The notion of fee will doesn't adequately address it either because even if you argue god gives free will to humans he still knows what they will choose and allows it. Logically, the fact that this happened under the watch of an all powerful god means that it was part of his plan that Martin die that night.
As a Jew,Christian,Muslim you can't escape this.
Christian theology is on Zimmerman's side here. Again Martin's parents arent too bright.
I think somewhere in the bible (Isiah?) it says that god creates evil. This reconciles the problem of an omnipotent god and an evil world. But it raises other more troubling questions...
quote:Originally posted by asante-Korton: 6 commandment: Thou shalt not kill.
This is stupid on so many levels I swear you must be six or something. lol
This coming from someone who is trying to make excuse for a murder LOL you are a joke
Posted by anguishofbeing (Member # 16736) on :
Shooo, go away child!
quote:Originally posted by Crush Black Lies: Of course he regrets nothing, dodo! How could he regret shooting Trayvon when he believes there was no other alternative other than to shoot him during the confrontation? When you regret something, it usually means you had options available but chose the wrong one. Were he to regret shooting the kid, then indirectly he would be admitting fault.
quote:Originally posted by Oshun:
quote:Originally posted by Crush Black Lies: When he made the statement, it was to establish his Christian faith before the nation. At no time did he say it was "God's plan for me to kill Trayvon." People are running with that statement, taking it out of context. Any Christian knows that all circumstances in life are a result of God's elaborate master plan.
As they say, nothing to see here folks, move along.
stfu he said he regrets nothing and justifies his lack of regret by saying "it was God's plan not for me to second guess." If a black guy raped and killed a little white girl and said some bullsh!t like that you'd be rolling. The reason why people are interpreting it the way they are is cause he has absolutely no sense of regret for anything that happened according to what he says and is using God as a means not to second guess his actions.
Oshun is not too bright.
Posted by Crush Black Lies (Member # 20324) on :
Still defending the murderer, clown?
quote:Originally posted by anguishofbeing: Shooo, go away child!
quote:Originally posted by Crush Black Lies: Of course he regrets nothing, dodo! How could he regret shooting Trayvon when he believes there was no other alternative other than to shoot him during the confrontation? When you regret something, it usually means you had options available but chose the wrong one. Were he to regret shooting the kid, then indirectly he would be admitting fault.
quote:Originally posted by Oshun:
quote:Originally posted by Crush Black Lies: When he made the statement, it was to establish his Christian faith before the nation. At no time did he say it was "God's plan for me to kill Trayvon." People are running with that statement, taking it out of context. Any Christian knows that all circumstances in life are a result of God's elaborate master plan.
As they say, nothing to see here folks, move along.
stfu he said he regrets nothing and justifies his lack of regret by saying "it was God's plan not for me to second guess." If a black guy raped and killed a little white girl and said some bullsh!t like that you'd be rolling. The reason why people are interpreting it the way they are is cause he has absolutely no sense of regret for anything that happened according to what he says and is using God as a means not to second guess his actions.
Oshun is not too bright.
Posted by asante-Korton (Member # 18532) on :
quote:Originally posted by Crush Black Lies: Poor translation, seeing as the Jews killed to eat and when in war. A more accurate word would be "murder."
quote:Originally posted by asante-Korton: 6 commandment: Thou shalt not kill.
Was he in a middle of a war? was he trying to eat trayvon? Stop trying to make sense out of a stupid book
Posted by Crush Black Lies (Member # 20324) on :
Humans have free will, yet within the framework of God's master plan. God continues to exercise sovereign control over human affairs, including free will, and right down to the most trivial and mundane matters. Must I quote references in the Bible where God interferes with and, even violates, human free will?
quote:Originally posted by lamin: Yeh, and the parents said it wasn't, yet both claim to worship the same Christian god!
quote:But if you think about it Zimmerman's comments are more in line with Christian theology. For example, if it wasn't part of god's plan that Martin would be dead that night (whether by murder or self-defense) how then do the family justify their omnipotent Christian god? If things can happen without him willing or planning it that way then he is not all powerful or all knowing etc etc. Guess they didnt think about that one before they mouthed off again.
Christian theologians solved that one a long time ago with the posit that "humans have free will". It was part of God's omnipotency--as they argued--that humans be endowed with free will. Otherwise humans would just be mindless automatons.
Zimmerman is not too bright.
Posted by Crush Black Lies (Member # 20324) on :
No turd, it is a poor translation because the Hebrew "ratsak" is correctly translated into English as murder. The word commonly used to identify killing of animals or when engaged in war is "tabak." What you find in the ten commandments is ratsak, not tabak.
quote:Originally posted by asante-Korton:
quote:Originally posted by Crush Black Lies: Poor translation, seeing as the Jews killed to eat and when in war. A more accurate word would be "murder."
quote:Originally posted by asante-Korton: 6 commandment: Thou shalt not kill.
Was he in a middle of a war? was he trying to eat trayvon? Stop trying to make sense out of a stupid book
Posted by Crush Black Lies (Member # 20324) on :
well geez!!! It has not even gone to court yet. Are you schizophrenic?
quote:Originally posted by mena7: George zimmerman is a murderer period .Trayvon Martin was minding is own business walking home from the convenience store with a bag of chocolate and can of ice tea on his hand .That racist mestiso stereotype him call him a fucking coon follow him and murder him with a gun .Zimmerman say there was a fight .It doesnt matter to me he started the fight by desobeing the dispatch order and follow the teenager .All the so call bloody head and nose of zimmerman are fake zimmerman family and police cover up of an assassination of an innocent black teenager .Zimmerman father is a retired judge with connection and knowledge that he is using to work the system .Now there is a media propaganda that zimmerman is not a racist,it is gods will like he is a christian .He is going toget rich out of Trayvon Martin murder he already raise $250,000 online .Zimmerman is going to have book deal,interview etc while the mother lost his handsome 17 years old son .Im a kamite if I did what zimmerman did Ill be in prison doing 25 to life .Racisme is still a live .
Posted by Oshun (Member # 19740) on :
quote:Originally posted by Crush Black Lies: Of course he regrets nothing, dodo! How could he regret shooting Trayvon when he believes there was no other alternative other than to shoot him during the confrontation?
Did I specifically say he didn't regret shooting Trayvon? No I didnt I said he regretted nothing about the incident even the events where he got out the car and followed him which created the whole series of events with no probable cause. Nothing, not even the things he did wrong on his part, does he regret. He says to the fam he didnt know Trayvon was so young as if, had he known this it would've meant anything if he could go back and do it again. but then goes on Hannity and says he doesnt regret anything? That he'd have done the same thing looking at it retrospectively? Wtf Dont appologize to the family if your gonna then go on Hannity and say theres nothing to regret--nothing you feel sorry for doing...
quote:When you regret something, it usually means you had options available but chose the wrong one. Were he to regret shooting the kid, then indirectly he would be admitting fault.
HE HAD THE OPTION to listen to the person on the phone and NOT follow Trayvon with NO probable cause he individually did anything wrong! Hannity even tries to guide the conversation in that direction. But Zimmerman said he didnt regret anything, and would not, even in do ANYTHING differently to prevent it and thats where my problem lies.
quote:Oshun is not too bright.
Posted by anguishofbeing (Member # 16736) on :
Oh my, why have you turned against Zimmerman so? Oh shyt, the black ancestry part! Ok got ya! lol lol
quote:Originally posted by Crush Black Lies: Still defending the murderer, clown?
quote:Originally posted by anguishofbeing: Shooo, go away child!
quote:Originally posted by Crush Black Lies: Of course he regrets nothing, dodo! How could he regret shooting Trayvon when he believes there was no other alternative other than to shoot him during the confrontation? When you regret something, it usually means you had options available but chose the wrong one. Were he to regret shooting the kid, then indirectly he would be admitting fault.
quote:Originally posted by Oshun:
quote:Originally posted by Crush Black Lies: When he made the statement, it was to establish his Christian faith before the nation. At no time did he say it was "God's plan for me to kill Trayvon." People are running with that statement, taking it out of context. Any Christian knows that all circumstances in life are a result of God's elaborate master plan.
As they say, nothing to see here folks, move along.
stfu he said he regrets nothing and justifies his lack of regret by saying "it was God's plan not for me to second guess." If a black guy raped and killed a little white girl and said some bullsh!t like that you'd be rolling. The reason why people are interpreting it the way they are is cause he has absolutely no sense of regret for anything that happened according to what he says and is using God as a means not to second guess his actions.
Oshun is not too bright.
Posted by anguishofbeing (Member # 16736) on :
quote:No I didnt I said he regretted nothing about the incident even the events where he got out the car and followed him which created the whole series of events with no probable cause. Nothing, not even the things he did wrong on his part, does he regret.
How do you know that? He thought he was on to a burglar. Maybe Trayvon was scouting the place to rob. We don't know.
Posted by Oshun (Member # 19740) on :
Anguish, Zimmerman even when asked to look at the event retrospectively feels regret for nothing. The issue here isnt what he thought at the moment, but that he says feels NOTHING even after learning Trayvon wasn't armed, and had family that lived nearby. Knowing what he knows, he would do it again and wouldn't second guess what he did because it was "God's will." He is either sly or truly is dumb enough to think he can place responsibility for the choices he made of his free will on God. If everyone could there'd be no hell. He says that he feels no regret even though he said he was "sorry" to Trayvon's family and didnt realize he was so young. Again he shouldn't say "sorry" if he is missing the key ingredient for an apology: A SENSE OF REGRET for his actions. Way for him to switch gears. smh
Posted by Crush Black Lies (Member # 20324) on :
Turn back to the dark side, Luke.
quote:Originally posted by anguishofbeing: Oh my, why have you turned against Zimmerman so? Oh shyt, the black ancestry part! Ok got ya! lol lol
quote:Originally posted by Crush Black Lies: Still defending the murderer, clown?
quote:Originally posted by anguishofbeing: Shooo, go away child!
quote:Originally posted by Crush Black Lies: Of course he regrets nothing, dodo! How could he regret shooting Trayvon when he believes there was no other alternative other than to shoot him during the confrontation? When you regret something, it usually means you had options available but chose the wrong one. Were he to regret shooting the kid, then indirectly he would be admitting fault.
quote:Originally posted by Oshun:
quote:Originally posted by Crush Black Lies: When he made the statement, it was to establish his Christian faith before the nation. At no time did he say it was "God's plan for me to kill Trayvon." People are running with that statement, taking it out of context. Any Christian knows that all circumstances in life are a result of God's elaborate master plan.
As they say, nothing to see here folks, move along.
stfu he said he regrets nothing and justifies his lack of regret by saying "it was God's plan not for me to second guess." If a black guy raped and killed a little white girl and said some bullsh!t like that you'd be rolling. The reason why people are interpreting it the way they are is cause he has absolutely no sense of regret for anything that happened according to what he says and is using God as a means not to second guess his actions.
Oshun is not too bright.
Posted by anguishofbeing (Member # 16736) on :
quote:Originally posted by Oshun: Anguish, Zimmerman even when asked to look at the event retrospectively feels regret for nothing. The issue here isnt what he thought at the moment, but that he says feels NOTHING even after learning Trayvon wasn't armed, and had family that lived nearby. Knowing what he knows, he would do it again and wouldn't second guess what he did because it was "God's will." He is either sly or truly is dumb enough to think he can place responsibility for the choices he made of his free will on God. If everyone could there'd be no hell. He says that he feels no regret even though he said he was "sorry" to Trayvon's family and didnt realize he was so young. Again he shouldn't say "sorry" if he is missing the key ingredient for an apology: A SENSE OF REGRET for his actions. Way for him to switch gears. smh
Whether or not Trayvon was armed or had a family has nothing to do with it. According to him, and the forensics back him up, he was being punched senseless and had to defend himself. Why is that so hard to understand? Think for yourself instead of letting the herd do it for you.
quote:He is either sly or truly is dumb enough to think he can place responsibility for the choices he made of his free will on God.
According to the theology God is ultimately responsible. It sucks, but that what the religion says.
Posted by Oshun (Member # 19740) on :
quote:Originally posted by anguishofbeing:
quote:Originally posted by Oshun: Anguish, Zimmerman even when asked to look at the event retrospectively feels regret for nothing. The issue here isnt what he thought at the moment, but that he says feels NOTHING even after learning Trayvon wasn't armed, and had family that lived nearby. Knowing what he knows, he would do it again and wouldn't second guess what he did because it was "God's will." He is either sly or truly is dumb enough to think he can place responsibility for the choices he made of his free will on God. If everyone could there'd be no hell. He says that he feels no regret even though he said he was "sorry" to Trayvon's family and didnt realize he was so young. Again he shouldn't say "sorry" if he is missing the key ingredient for an apology: A SENSE OF REGRET for his actions. Way for him to switch gears. smh
Whether or not Trayvon was armed or had a family has nothing to do with it.
It has everything to do with it. He said looking at it in retrospect he wouldn't have done anything different. Which means he wouldn't even with the knowledge the guy wasn't armed, and had no intent to break in any homes have changed anything that he did. That INCLUDES his following the guy which he could've prevented.
quote:
quote:He is either sly or truly is dumb enough to think he can place responsibility for the choices he made of his free will on God.
According to the theology God is ultimately responsible. It sucks, but that what the religion says.
People argue pre determination, but coming from Zimmerman it sounds like bullsh!t. If predetermination prevents you from feeling any remorse,any sense that in retrospective you'd do anything different DONT APOLOGIZE TO THE FAMILY. Dont express you REGRETTED anything! He still had the choice to feel retrospectively he wouldn't follow Travyon. God also holds us accountable for our sins, especially those for which we feel no regret towards. There is also the issue of hell. If God didnt want people to feel things like remorse or regret, why is there hell? Why even go to him for forgiveness?
Posted by anguishofbeing (Member # 16736) on :
Zimmerman has reopened a contentious (an sometimes embarrassing) debate on gods supposed omnipotence and the existence of evil in the world.
This is a very existential god, a normal human who like the rest of us can't control events and hence goes through the usual existential anguish.
quote:and had no intent to break in any homes
Really? How do you know this?
Posted by Oshun (Member # 19740) on :
I dont even know why it opened a debate. Zimmerman apologized to the Martins, something that sits contrary to arguing against regret or retrospective second guessing because of "God's will"
Posted by anguishofbeing (Member # 16736) on :
quote:God also holds us accountable for our sins,
Really? How can this god hold anyone to "account" when he is not even all knowing? Does he even know why people do things? He gets disappointed which means he doesn't know. He isnt all knowing so who is he to judge all?
Posted by Oshun (Member # 19740) on :
quote:Originally posted by anguishofbeing: Zimmerman has reopened a contentious (an sometimes embarrassing) debate on gods supposed omnipotence and the existence of evil in the world.
This is a very existential god, a normal human who like the rest of us can't control events and hence goes through the usual existential anguish.
quote:and had no intent to break in any homes
Really? How do you know this?
Are you going to just sit around like a fool and suggest anything, even with no credible evidence should be taken as "truth." Zimmerman had no credible evidence and apologized to the Martins because he didn't know Trayvon was so young. He talked as if he, knowing more about Trayvon wouldn't have assumed he was a burglar worth profiling.
Posted by Oshun (Member # 19740) on :
quote:Originally posted by anguishofbeing:
quote:God also holds us accountable for our sins,
Really? How can this god hold anyone to "account" when he is not even all knowing? Does he even know why people do things? He gets disappointed which means he doesn't know. He isnt all knowing so who is he to judge all?
You call this debate embarrassing yet still continue. I'll ask once more: if Zimmerman truly believes "God's Will" removes any room to retrospectively do things different, why apologize to the Martins?
Posted by anguishofbeing (Member # 16736) on :
Dear professor X, you are the one suggesting that Trayvon had no intent to break in any homes. Now I know you can read minds and shyt but what other evidence do you have sir that this was indeed the case?
quote:I'll ask once more: if Zimmerman truly believes "God's Will" removes any room to retrospectively do things different, why apologize to the Martins?
Because even if it as he believes that it was gods will he still feels sorry for their loss and hurt?
quote:You call this debate embarrassing yet still continue.
Its embarrassing for religious freaks. Try to keep up.
Posted by asante-Korton (Member # 18532) on :
anguishofbeing will keep defending george zimmerman because when he looks at george he sees himself, a racist coward
Posted by Oshun (Member # 19740) on :
quote:Originally posted by anguishofbeing: Dear professor X, you are the one suggesting that Trayvon had no intent to break in any homes. Now I know you can read minds and shyt but what other evidence do you have sir that this was indeed the case?
So you're going to make assumptions with no credible evidence? I think not. The burden of proof is on YOU. Thats besides the point and misses the big picture. ZIMMERMAN apologized sayin he didnt know Trayvon was so young. This mans that there was an element of the scenario he didn't know before, but had he known it things would play out differently. Zimmerman conveys 1. Regret. 2. Explains he thought Trayvon was much older. Even if we take away the issue of whether or not Zimmerman would still assume robbery with no probable cause, when talking to the Martins he suggests that he would do things differently if he had the chance, but then goes to Hannity suggests otherwise. Your nitpicking and focusing on minor details.
quote:
quote:I'll ask once more: if Zimmerman truly believes "God's Will" removes any room to retrospectively do things different, why apologize to the Martins?
Because even if it as he believes that it was gods will he still feels sorry for their loss and hurt?
"sorry" convey regret for ones actions. Regret conveys a desire to do a previous event different. Zimmerman says "sorry" then uses God to suggest he shouldn't feel he should have done anything differently. In short while saying he was sorry to the Martins, he says he's not sorry on Hanity, he feels no regrets. He is inconsistent with whatever ideological position he's trying to push to defend what he did. "Gods will" is irrelevant or he wouldnt have said sorry to the Martins in the first place. If he were ideologically consistent he wouldnt feel the need to feel sorry for their loss because it was God's will that it happened.
quote:
quote:You call this debate embarrassing yet still continue.
Its embarrassing for religious freaks. Try to keep up.
"keep up?" Lol practice what you preach. All I need to say to that... Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
quote:Originally posted by anguishofbeing: Dear professor X, you are the one suggesting that Trayvon had no intent to break in any homes. Now I know you can read minds and shyt but what other evidence do you have sir that this was indeed the case?
Breaking into a home with a bag of skittles, ice tea and some spare change? LOL.
While the rest of the world has realized the breaking in thing was nothing but a figment of Zimmerman's racist/paranoid imagination, Angelina is still stuck in Februari, when it was still arguable what Trayvon was doing in the neighborhood.
This, of course, mirrors Angelina's slow pace when it comes to more scientific subjects.
Posted by TruthAndRights (Member # 17346) on :
quote:Originally posted by anguishofbeing:
quote:Originally posted by Oshun: Anguish, Zimmerman even when asked to look at the event retrospectively feels regret for nothing. The issue here isnt what he thought at the moment, but that he says feels NOTHING even after learning Trayvon wasn't armed, and had family that lived nearby. Knowing what he knows, he would do it again and wouldn't second guess what he did because it was "God's will." He is either sly or truly is dumb enough to think he can place responsibility for the choices he made of his free will on God. If everyone could there'd be no hell. He says that he feels no regret even though he said he was "sorry" to Trayvon's family and didnt realize he was so young. Again he shouldn't say "sorry" if he is missing the key ingredient for an apology: A SENSE OF REGRET for his actions. Way for him to switch gears. smh
Whether or not Trayvon was armed or had a family has nothing to do with it. According to him, and the forensics back him up, he was being punched senseless and had to defend himself. Why is that so hard to understand? Think for yourself instead of letting the herd do it for you.
quote:He is either sly or truly is dumb enough to think he can place responsibility for the choices he made of his free will on God.
According to the theology God is ultimately responsible. It sucks, but that what the religion says.
Key words right there....that's what THE RELIGION SAYS.....
Posted by Oshun (Member # 19740) on :
Forget debating what it says, Zimmermans actions of apologizing to the Martins contradicts a position of no regret because of "God's will"
Posted by TruthAndRights (Member # 17346) on :
quote:Originally posted by Oshun: Forget debating what it says, Zimmermans actions of apologizing to the Martins contradicts a position of no regret because of "God's will"
Indeed...an apology is what-
a·pol·o·gy [uh-pol-uh-jee] noun, plural a·pol·o·gies. 1. a written or spoken expression of one's regret, remorse, or sorrow for having insulted, failed, injured, or wronged another: He demanded an apology from me for calling him a crook.
2. a defense, excuse, or justification in speech or writing, as for a cause or doctrine.
apology (əˈpɒlədʒɪ)
—n , pl -gies 1. an oral or written expression of regret or contrition for a fault or failing 2. a poor substitute or offering 3. another word for apologia
[C16: from Old French apologie, from Late Latin apologia, from Greek: a verbal defence, from apo- + logos speech]
The whole point in making an apology to someone, is to express your remorse for whatever harm and/or offense you've committed against that person...hence why I never apologize to anyone unless it's genuine- I don't believe in giving 'false apologies'....
Posted by anguishofbeing (Member # 16736) on :
quote:So you're going to make assumptions with no credible evidence? I think not. The burden of proof is on YOU.
You keep repeating this because you have no where else to go. You, like sweetie, have no idea what his intentions were that night. The fact that he has skittles and ice tea doesn't mean he was not scouting the area to rob or to come back. duuuh! lol I don't know what his intentions were and neither do you. What we are more certain of is that he physically attacked Zimmerman that night.
As for his apology I dont know why you and the fake dread above cant understand. Religious people arent rational, so they will feel "sorry" for a tragic event even though they believe it was "god's will". Thats their way of rationalising tragedy in a world controlled by an all powerful god. They do this all the time. No brainer. Martin's mother is the one who has to explain to her church how is it that an all powerful god had nothing to do with her son dying that night. Posted by Khufu (Member # 17461) on :
quote:Originally posted by anguishofbeing:
quote:“time and unforeseen occurrence befall [us] all.” (Ecclesiastes 9:11)
LOL You idiot, this is no way solves the dilemma of the omnipotence of god and tragic events. If it is "unforseen" to god then he is not all knowing. If he knew it would happen and does nothing to stop it, then it was part of his plan. How can Zimmerman (according to Christian theology) or anybody do something that was against god's plan? This means god is not all powerful.
The notion of fee will doesn't adequately address it either because even if you argue god gives free will to humans he still knows what they will choose and allows it. Logically, the fact that this happened under the watch of an all powerful god means that it was part of his plan that Martin die that night.
As a Jew,Christian,Muslim you can't escape this.
Christian theology is on Zimmerman's side here. Again Martin's parents arent too bright.
I think somewhere in the bible (Isiah?) it says that god creates evil. This reconciles the problem of an omnipotent god and an evil world. But it raises other more troubling questions...
quote:Originally posted by asante-Korton: 6 commandment: Thou shalt not kill.
This is stupid on so many levels I swear you must be six or something. lol
Obviously there has been an misunderstanding. I said:“time and unforeseen occurrence befall [us] all.” Meaning tragic events such as natural disasters, accidents, being at the wrong place and at the wrong time, etc. No where in that scripture it said that such events was unforseen by God.
2 Not necessarily. For example: If I knew that a Tornado was headed towards the next town and did nothing to warn the people, then was it my plan for the loss of life that the Tornado took? The same here with God.
You have a Predestinarian view. This concept would mean that, prior to creating angels or earthling man, God exercised his powers of foreknowledge and foresaw and foreknew all that would result from such creation, including the rebellion of one of his spirit sons, the subsequent rebellion of the first human pair in Eden and all the bad consequences of such rebellion down to and beyond this present day. This would necessarily mean that all the wickedness that history has recorded ( crime, immorality, oppression, resultant suffering, lying, hypocrisy, false worship and idolatry) once existed, before creation’s beginning, only in the mind of God, in the form of his foreknowledge of the future in all of its minutest details. If the Creator of mankind had indeed exercised his power to foreknow all that history has seen since man’s creation, then the full weight of all the wickedness thereafter resulting was deliberately set in motion by God when he spoke the words: “Let us make man.”.
God has the capability to know from the beginning the finale. However, God does not have to use this capability, just as he does not always have to use his immense power to the full. He wisely uses his ability of foreknowledge selectively. He uses it when it makes sense to do so and fits the circumstances.
3 No where in the Bible does it says that God creates Evil.lol If true, it would be in direct conflict with God’s moral standards and qualities, which includes justice, honesty, impartiality, love, mercy, and kindness.
You asked: "How can Zimmerman (according to Christian theology) or anybody do something that was against god's plan? This means god is not all powerful". It was never God's plan from the start.lol Like I said, God did not having anything to do with the situation that took place between Zimmerman and Martin. If it was God's plan every choice we make in life, then why would God make his intelligent creatures "accountable for their acts" If it was his plan right from the get-go?
Posted by anguishofbeing (Member # 16736) on :
quote:No where in that scripture it said that such events was unforseen by God.
Which mean your reply was pointless. The argument here is waht god wanted, his plan, his will, wish etc etc.
quote:It was never God's plan from the start.lol
Then he is not all powerful.
quote:If it was God's plan every choice we make in life, then why would God make his intelligent creatures "accountable for their acts"
Because he is irrational like those that made him up. If he is all powerful, how can all tragedy not be part of his plan???? If he did not want tragedy in the world there would be none. Simple no brainer.
quote:No where in the Bible does it says that God creates Evil.lol
Isaiah 45, God says "I make peace, and create evil".
Posted by Oshun (Member # 19740) on :
quote:Originally posted by anguishofbeing:
quote:So you're going to make assumptions with no credible evidence? I think not. The burden of proof is on YOU.
You keep repeating this because you have no where else to go. You, like sweetie, have no idea what his intentions were that night.
You dont prove a negative "sweetie" so learn about logical fallacies and shut that sh!t up. Your the one with nowhere to go here thats why your still on that. Even I gave you this point the big picture is still in tact. Zimmerman already apologized, which means he said he he regretted his actions and that he didnt know he was so young. Then he goes on Hannity and says he IN retrospect would change nothing even with the knowledge he has now cause "its Gods Will". Cept if it was Gods will and you regret nothing WHY apologize. You havent answered this til now, relying on an unimportant area of discussion to avoid that the proof of Zimmermans lies are easy to detect when looking at the big picture. Your problem "sweetie" is that you fail to understand he is not being ideologically consistent. I'm going to have to repeat this word to make sure you dont miss my main point here. So lets say it somemore:
He is not ideologically consistent
He is not ideologically consistent
He is not ideologically consistent
He is not ideologically consistent
He is not ideologically consistent
He is not ideologically consistent
There. Apologizing and saying he didnt know Trayvon was so young as if that would change anything and then using God to express he'd do nothing different later. He's inconsistent.
quote:As for his apology I dont know why you and the fake dread above cant understand. Religious people arent rational, so they will feel "sorry" for a tragic event even though they believe it was "god's will".
This is not the same as the common form of "irrationality" you speak of. If someone dies, and people tell the family "we are sorry for your loss, but it was part of Gods plan for them to go" that means if it were in the individuals power, they would've prevented it, but it was God's will not theirs. This is obvious when we think about how we use the word sorry. We use it with the notion of we would take back something that happened did IF WE HAD THE THINGS NEEDED TO CONTROL THE PROBLEM. In fact this actually isn't all that irrational.Acknowledging that they couldnt control the situation and that it was the plan of a higher power doesn't change this.
Zimmerman is different. He said that IF he had simply known Trayvon was as young as he was things would've been different (yea right). He was willing to place himself in a position of what he would've done if he had more control of the situation (in this case, more knowledge). He then says he'd have changed nothing even with control because to think in those terms is now wrong.
His way of using God and sorry isn't common and looking at his rap sheet, I dont think he truly cares about religion in this. If God told him not to second guess why did he do so in front of the Martin family? Why did he say he didnt know Trayvon was so young. Which is also, another lie IIRC cause he didnt he say on the tape Trayvon was a teen? If so thats just more reason to think hes a just a pathological liar as if his lying for bail and being crafty enough to speak in code wasnt enough.
Posted by Crush Black Lies (Member # 20324) on :
Here is a scripture that goes right to the point:
Amo 3:6 Shall a trumpet be blown in the city, and the people not be afraid? shall there be evil in a city, and the LORD hath not done [it]?
quote:Originally posted by anguishofbeing:
quote:No where in that scripture it said that such events was unforseen by God.
Which mean your reply was pointless. The argument here is waht god wanted, his plan, his will, wish etc etc.
quote:It was never God's plan from the start.lol
Then he is not all powerful.
quote:If it was God's plan every choice we make in life, then why would God make his intelligent creatures "accountable for their acts"
Because he is irrational like those that made him up. If he is all powerful, how can all tragedy not be part of his plan???? If he did not want tragedy in the world there would be none. Simple no brainer.
quote:No where in the Bible does it says that God creates Evil.lol
Isaiah 45, God says "I make peace, and create evil".
Posted by anguishofbeing (Member # 16736) on :
quote:You dont prove a negative "sweetie" so learn about logical fallacies and shut that sh!t up.
What a jackass you are. Its not proving a negative, it you backing up your claim, "and had no intent to break in any homes"
Now how do you know this? Explain.
quote:He's inconsistent
Because religious people are suppose to be rational and consistent right? lol
I wonder if you are as ticked off about the twelve blacks that died yesterday as you are about one thug wanna be?
quote:He then says he'd have changed nothing even with control.
Because he believes he did nothing wrong stupid. His claim is self-defense so what is there to regret other than a fool that had to die for his own stupidity? He is saying he's not sorry for acting on his suspicions but he is sorry for their loss.
Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by Crush Black Lies: When he made the statement, it was to establish his Christian faith before the nation. At no time did he say it was "God's plan for me to kill Trayvon." People are running with that statement, taking it out of context. Any Christian knows that all circumstances in life are a result of God's elaborate master plan.
As they say, nothing to see here folks, move along.
quote:Originally posted by Crush Black Lies: Here is a scripture that goes right to the point:
Amo 3:6 Shall a trumpet be blown in the city, and the people not be afraid? shall there be evil in a city, and the LORD hath not done [it]?
Jackass, that aint the point. Do try to keep up.
Did god create evil? The bible says he did. In fact it would be a necessary claim in light of the view he is suppose to be all powerful. If evil has another source then he is not all powerful, and there goes one of Christianity's more important claim.
Posted by Khufu (Member # 17461) on :
Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
quote:Originally posted by anguishofbeing: You, like sweetie, have no idea what his intentions were that night. The fact that he has skittles and ice tea doesn't mean he was not scouting the area to rob or to come back. duuuh! lol I don't know what his intentions were and neither do you.
You're so clueless, its mind boggling. The only reason why you're entertaining this scenario (that Trayvon was scouting the area), is because Zimmerman put that idea in your feeble mind, LOL.
Zimmerman's suspicion wasn't even rational; he was clearly paranoid, and here you go, parroting him. You're so phucking impressionable, lol.
Posted by IronLion (Member # 16412) on :
quote:Originally posted by anguishofbeing: blah...blah...blah
^Rat! Bo-Rat! Police Rat....
Neighborhood watcher!
Posted by Crush Black Lies (Member # 20324) on :
mother fucker, I was helping you out! ungrateful bastard!
quote:Originally posted by anguishofbeing:
quote:Originally posted by Crush Black Lies: Here is a scripture that goes right to the point:
Amo 3:6 Shall a trumpet be blown in the city, and the people not be afraid? shall there be evil in a city, and the LORD hath not done [it]?
Jackass, that aint the point. Do try to keep up.
Did god create evil? The bible says he did. In fact it would be a necessary claim in light of the view he is suppose to be all powerful. If evil has another source then he is not all powerful, and there goes one of Christianity's more important claim.
Posted by IronLion (Member # 16412) on :
quote:Originally posted by Crush Black Lies: mother fucker, whine..whine..whine...
And bytch, you better stop the whining or amma bytch-slap you into a corner! !
Posted by Khufu (Member # 17461) on :
quote:Originally posted by anguishofbeing:
quote:No where in that scripture it said that such events was unforseen by God.
Which mean your reply was pointless. The argument here is waht god wanted, his plan, his will, wish etc etc.
quote:It was never God's plan from the start.lol
Then he is not all powerful.
quote:If it was God's plan every choice we make in life, then why would God make his intelligent creatures "accountable for their acts"
Because he is irrational like those that made him up. If he is all powerful, how can all tragedy not be part of his plan???? If he did not want tragedy in the world there would be none. Simple no brainer.
quote:No where in the Bible does it says that God creates Evil.lol
Isaiah 45, God says "I make peace, and create evil".
I've already explain to you that it was NOT God's will/plan for Zimmerman to kill Martin. Unless you or Zimmerman can prove which you can not. According to Zimmerman's logic and yours, it was God's plan my cell phone was stolen, It was God's plan I trip and fell, It was God's plan my house was burglarized, It was God's plan for the 2011 Japan tsunami etc.
(2)The Bible clearly states: “The whole world is lying in the power of the wicked one.” This world reflects the personality of the invisible spirit creature who is “misleading the entire inhabited earth.” Satan is hateful, deceptive, and cruel. So the world, under his influence, is full of hatred, deceit, and cruelty. That is one reason why there is so much suffering and tragedy. A second reason why there is so much tragedy is that, mankind has been imperfect and sinful ever since the rebellion in the garden of Eden. Sinful humans tend to struggle for dominance, and this results in wars, oppression, and suffering. third reason for suffering is “time and unforeseen occurrence.” like I said earlier. People may suffer because they happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time like Trayvon Martin case.
The tradegy and suffering you see in the world today was NOT God's plans in the beginning for mankind.
The context of Isaiah 45:7 makes it clear that something other than “bringing moral evil into existence” is in mind. The context of Isaiah 45:7 is God rewarding Israel for obedience and punishing Israel for disobedience. God pours out salvation and blessings on those whom He favors. God brings judgment on those who continue to rebel against Him. “Woe to him who quarrels with his Master” (Isaiah 45:9). That is the person to whom God brings “evil” and “disaster.” So, rather than saying that God created “moral evil,” Isaiah 45:7 is presenting a common theme of Scripture – that God brings disaster on those who continue in hard-hearted rebellion against Him. Do you understand?
The problem here is you do not know how to properly interpret the various types of literature found in the Bible.
Posted by Crush Black Lies (Member # 20324) on :
quote:Originally posted by IronLion:
quote:Originally posted by Crush Black Lies: mother fucker, whine..whine..whine...
And bytch, you better stop the whining or amma bytch-slap you into a corner! !
Posted by IronLion (Member # 16412) on :
^now that's better...
Posted by Oshun (Member # 19740) on :
quote:Originally posted by anguishofbeing:
quote:You dont prove a negative "sweetie" so learn about logical fallacies and shut that sh!t up.
What a jackass you are. Its not proving a negative, it you backing up your claim, "and had no intent to break in any homes"
Now how do you know this? Explain.
With an absence of evidence of criminal intent innocence is assumed. Just as, in the absence of evidence for a pink whale its non existence is assumed. Yknow what? Im not even playin your game anymore. You just focus on this cause it makes you look like youve got much to say about the big picture when this point aint important in getting it.
quote:
quote:He's inconsistent.
Because religious people are suppose to be rational and consistent right?
I covered this so Im not gettin into your horesh!t again.
quote:I wonder if you are as ticked off about the twelve blacks that died yesterday as you are about one thug wanna be?
Actually I learned about that after posting what your responding to and didnt know any black people died until you said it. Nice try, but the spotlight is still on you.
quote:
quote:He then says he'd have changed nothing even with control.
Because he believes he did nothing wrong stupid.
Which is why he apologized saying he didnt know Trayvon was so young, stupid.
quote: His claim is self-defense so what is there to regret other than a fool that had to die for his own stupidity?
According to Zimmerman he said he was sorry cause he didnt know how young Trayvon really was as if, had he known hed have came to the understanding Trayvon wasnt worth profiling. He presents his basis to regret his actions on this bit of info and later retracts it. What the fvck does this have to do with "self defense"? Nothing cause he was saying he had no regrets for even profiling and even in retrospect would follow Trayvon. HE WAS IN NO DANGER OF HARM when choosing to follow him. Why are you still talking about self defense? Even if YOU think there is room to assume with no evidence Trayvon was out to cause trouble, Zimmerman told the Martins HE did not know Martin was so young. This means from HIS PERSPECTIVE knowing this was enough to suggest his innocence and wouldve acted differently. HE THEN takes back what he said to the family. Hes a liar.
Posted by anguishofbeing (Member # 16736) on :
quote:The only reason why you're entertaining this scenario (that Trayvon was scouting the area), is because Zimmerman put that idea in your feeble mind, LOL
Ahhmm, no, not really. Given the fact that he is a thug wanna be who was caught with 12 pieces of women's jewelry he couldn't account for I wouldn't state (unlike Oshun) that he had no intention to break in houses. I think its safer to say I don't know.
quote:The problem here is you do not know how to properly interpret the various types of literature found in the Bible.
Hey religious nut, if evil has a source other than god then he is not all powerful, the source of everything, blah blah blah. Isiah solved that problem by stating simply that he created evil. Nuff said. Get over it.
quote: With an absence of evidence of criminal intent innocence is assumed.
I'm not asking you for the principle that western jurisprudence is built on. I am asking you how do you know his intentions that night? You didn't simply assume, you stated he had no intention. Of course your dumbass don't know this. Thats my point.
quote:According to Zimmerman he said he was sorry cause he didnt know how young Trayvon really was as if, had he known hed have came to the understanding Trayvon wasnt worth profiling. He presents his basis to regret his actions on this bit of info and later retracts it. What the fvck does this have to do with "self defense"? Nothing cause he was saying he had no regrets for even profiling and even in retrospect would follow Trayvon. HE WAS IN NO DANGER OF HARM when choosing to follow him. Why are you still talking about self defense? Even if YOU think there is room to assume with no evidence Trayvon was out to cause trouble, Zimmerman told the Martins HE did not know Martin was so young. This means from HIS PERSPECTIVE knowing this was enough to suggest his innocence and wouldve acted differently. HE THEN takes back what he said to the family. Hes a liar.
So youre saying all this shyt to say you don't think he regrets killing a black kid. Ok fine. So fuking what?
Posted by Oshun (Member # 19740) on :
quote:
quote:According to Zimmerman he said he was sorry cause he didnt know how young Trayvon really was as if, had he known hed have came to the understanding Trayvon wasnt worth profiling. He presents his basis to regret his actions on this bit of info and later retracts it. What the fvck does this have to do with "self defense"? Nothing cause he was saying he had no regrets for even profiling and even in retrospect would follow Trayvon. HE WAS IN NO DANGER OF HARM when choosing to follow him. Why are you still talking about self defense? Even if YOU think there is room to assume with no evidence Trayvon was out to cause trouble, Zimmerman told the Martins HE did not know Martin was so young. This means from HIS PERSPECTIVE knowing this was enough to suggest his innocence and wouldve acted differently. HE THEN takes back what he said to the family. Hes a liar.
So youre saying all this shyt to say you don't think he regrets killing a black kid. Ok fine. So fuking what?
No its not just that he doesnt regret it. Hes a liar. and has lied constantly throughout this thing. I dont think he gives a fig for religion in this instance either. So I'm not gonna waste time arguing the bible. Posted by anguishofbeing (Member # 16736) on :
How do you think the events went down that night?
Posted by Oshun (Member # 19740) on :
What does that have anything to do with what I'm talking about?
Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
quote:Originally posted by anguishofbeing: Given the fact that he is a thug wanna be who was caught with 12 pieces of women's jewelry he couldn't account for I wouldn't state (unlike Oshun) that he had no intention to break in houses. I think its safer to say I don't know.
You can say that about anything Trayvon did, that got him into trouble, but you focus on breaking in, why?
For instance, he allegedly also swung at a bus driver, and he was caught with weed, yet you never said 'he might have been in the neighborhood to buy weed, we don't know', lol.
You know Zimmerman put that burglary seed in your impressionable mind. If he hadn't brought it up, you wouldn't even be associating the found jewels to him being in his father's neighborhood, just like you're not trying to associate his other offenses to him being in his father's neighborhood.
Posted by anguishofbeing (Member # 16736) on :
quote:What does that have anything to do with what I'm talking about?
Why so defensive junior?
quote: but you focus on breaking in, why?
Breakin--->thief---->twelve pieces of women's Jewelry---->maybe he was there to breakin.
Sweetie, if I didn't know about the 12 pieces of jewelry and his retarded tweeter page I would have concluded Zimmerman was indeed paranoid. But the guy seems to know how to spot the delinquents. It would've been much easier for you fools if Trayvon was like his brother: someone who seems to actually want to make something of himself and contribute meaningfully to society and his community. Trayvon was on his way to be liability to the blk comm.
You know the "paranoid-Zimmerman" "he-had-no-reason-to suspect" lines are uncomfortable knowing Trayvon was an up an coming gangsta. Like I said months ago, you all are just saving face now. You need to give all those Tshirts and signs stocked up in your garage meaning. lol
Posted by Oshun (Member # 19740) on :
quote:Originally posted by anguishofbeing:
quote:What does that have anything to do with what I'm talking about?
Why so defensive junior?
Not defensive, just dont see what its got to do with what im talkin bout.
quote:Sweetie, if I didn't know about the 12 pieces of jewelry and his retarded tweeter page I would have concluded Zimmerman was indeed paranoid. But the guy seems to know how to spot the delinquents.
So because Zimmerman has proven himself a lying snake to the family, and even the law, has power issues taking his patrol too seriously, lets all just assume he really molested and tried to rape the accuser. He'd be in no position to spot delinquency showing degenerate behavior himself. In fact, his pathological lying, and deceptiveness is degenerate. I would never have the gall to get up to a grieving family and lie out my ass like he did or risk sanctions lying at a bail hearing, while speaking to my wife in code. To hell with even mentioning the attempted rape and molestation accusations. Zimmerman didnt see any legitimate basis to ASSUME delinquency. He saw a black kid in a hoodie and assumed he was one. Thats not good enough.
quote: It would've been much easier for you fools if Trayvon was like his brother: someone who seems to actually want to make something of himself and contribute meaningfully to society and his community. Trayvon was on his way to be liability to the blk comm.
You always miss the big picture over small details. Zimmerman had no probable cause to follow him and knew nothing of Trayvon's history. He would've profiled any black boy walking down that street in a hoodie. Stop b!tching about history Zimmerman didnt know about and realize this is what the black community is saying. That is why they're holding up signs like:
You tell these people what Zimmerman visually saw that would separate Trayvon from their kids. A gang symbol? Zimmerman didnt know anything but that Trayvon was black, and a teen.
quote:You know the "paranoid-Zimmerman" "he-had-no-reason-to suspect" lines are uncomfortable knowing Trayvon was an up an coming gangsta.
"Gangsta" rap is targeted to white boys. But theres no major initiative to tail them. It Doesnt matter whether Trayvon was a "gangsta" in the making or wasnt. ZIMMERMAN HAD NO PROBABLE CAUSE to assume it. How would you like your government and community following you everywhere you go and taking from you all your freedoms with no probable cause? There are plenty of good black boys who can dare to walk around at night and have a right to like white boys can.
Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
quote:Breakin--->thief---->twelve pieces of women's Jewelry---->maybe he was there to breakin.
Look at this sequence of non-sequitors posing as a stream of logically coherent thoughts. Lets see how capable you are at holding yourself to the same standards you expect of others: prove Trayvon stole those items.
quote:You know the "paranoid-Zimmerman" "he-had-no-reason-to suspect" lines are uncomfortable knowing Trayvon was an up an coming gangsta.
Prejudiced blurts like this one betray your supposed neutral stance and fake, false pretense posture to wait for more evidence to surface.
Lets keep it real here; you already had your mind made up from the get go. That's why you never adjust your views about Zimmerman when incriminating material surfaces, but you always use negative news about Trayvon as confirmation that he was up to no good.
Zimmerman is innocent until proven guilty, Trayvon is already guilty of your charges, despite the fact that Zimmerman clearly has a way more sinister past.
You have issues, Angelina.
Posted by anguishofbeing (Member # 16736) on :
quote:Not defensive,
Then answer the fuking question.
quote:Zimmerman didnt see any legitimate basis to ASSUME delinquency.
In his subjective mind he saw reason to call 911. Was it profiling yes. Racial profiling? Maybe. So fuking what? One less parasite on the race.
quote:prove Trayvon stole those items.
lol Dumbo, I ever said I could prove anything: whether he stole, sold drugs, wanted to break in etc. I believe they were stolen yes; I then from this think its not at all far fetched (or "racist") to think Zimmerman might have been on to something that night. In other words Martin might have been scouting the area. I don't know. Sorry to disappoint you again by not making definitive statements on it unlike some people.
quote:Lets keep it real here; you already had your mind made up from the get go.
Not true. When you do this you look desperate. Initially I was unsympathetic to Zimmerman go back and read the threads. I didn't buy his story about Martin attacking him. Until his gangster tweeter page and "negative news" about him made me cautious. Now with the forensics, its almost beyond doubt.
quote:That's why you never adjust your views about Zimmerman when incriminating material surfaces,
What do you mean incriminating? And how does this "material" affect his story given forensic appear to back him up?
quote:but you always use negative news about Trayvon as confirmation that he was up to no good.
The negative views did color ( ) my judgement yes. And I think even you are inclined to believe Zimmerman's side but its too late for you now to admit it. HAHAHHA
Posted by IronLion (Member # 16412) on :
quote:Originally posted by anguishofbeing: How do you think the events went down that night?
But Rat
I thought you knew it all, how it went down that night, while you were on duty neighbourhood watching with Zimmerman...eh rattus?
We know you you lil snitching police rat:
Posted by Oshun (Member # 19740) on :
quote:Originally posted by anguishofbeing:
quote:Not defensive,
Then answer the fuking question.
When you explain it's relevance. This entire time you've done nothing but distract from the big picture by focusing on minor details that wouldn't change the big picture even if you were correct. So explain the relevance of your question or I'll assume it's not.
quote:
quote:Zimmerman didnt see any legitimate basis to ASSUME delinquency.
In his subjective mind he saw reason to call 911. Was it profiling yes. Racial profiling? Maybe. So fuking what? One less parasite on the race.
You are arguing potential with Trayvon meanwhile the killer is a confirmed parasite to the black community in his lack of probable cause. Even if Trayvon would've been a delinquent, the greater parasite to our race is Zimmerman who stands for the removal of a black man's ability to mind his own business without being profiled with no cause. Your critical thinking skills... wtf where are they? Profiling based on race means GOOD people have to deal with being stalked with no probable cause. Stop thinking about what it means for Trayvon individually and conceptualize that profiling means black males have to live without freedoms WHITE PEOPLE HAVE regardless of whether they are criminals or not. Zimmerman had nothing to go on but race which means ALL BLACK MALES are at risk.
Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
quote:I ever said I could prove anything: whether he stole, sold drugs, wanted to break in etc. I believe they were stolen yes; I then from this think its not at all far fetched (or "racist") to think Zimmerman might have been on to something that night.
Ha ha ha. You phuckin’ slippery slime ball, now you’re framing your accusations as merely constituting hunches, when they were strong enough for you to say ''breakin, thief'', whatever the phuck that meant. Zimmerman was not onto something that night. All his assumptions were wrong:
-Trayvon was not entering a gated community; he was staying there -When it’s raining, you put on your hoodie, that’s what they are for. -Trayvon was not aimlessly walking around, as evinced by the convenient store footage and the fact that he was heading back to watch the basketball game
Zimmerman never cited any behavior from which it is reasonable to adjudge someone’s behavior as suspicious, other than what has been confirmed elsewhere to not constitute suspicious behavior at all.
In fact, days before the incident occurred, Zimmerman was already on the lookout for suspicious (young black) men, even to the point of knocking on doors to alarm people about their safety, and calling the cops on ‘suspicious looking’ people.
You’re retarded if you think Zimmerman’s pre-existing paranoia about suspicious looking (black) men in the area qualify him to be in a position to be judging suspicious from non-suspicious, let alone if you attempt to connect Zimmerman's paranoid statements to something which you have yet to prove (that Trayvon stole the jewelry).
quote:What do you mean incriminating? And how does this "material" affect his story given forensic appear to back him up?
Inconsistencies in his accounts of what happened after being told to not pursue, his history of calling the cops on people, self-incriminating statements he made in court, etc. etc.
What forensics? What the evidence shows, is that Trayvon ran away from Zimmerman, was chased down by Zimmerman, and that Trayvon then subsequently phucked up the person who, from his point of view, appeared to be stalking him during nighttime, without identifying himself as a ‘neighborhood watch’ rambo.
quote:The negative views did color ( ) my judgement yes.
Thanks for stating the obvious.
Posted by anguishofbeing (Member # 16736) on :
quote:When you explain it's relevance.
Obviously you dispute Zimmermans account so what you do think happened?
quote:-Trayvon was not aimlessly walking around, as evinced by the convenient store footage
Zimmerman thought from his point of view he was aimlessly walking around because of his behavior to him in the neighborhood. Trayvon could have been coming from the fuking bible study, doesn't matter in the context of the reason Zimmerman thought he was suspicious.
And of course your dumbass don't know if he was in fact "heading back to watch the basketball game". This is your assumption. As said he could've been scouting the neighborhood to comeback.
quote: Zimmerman’s pre-existing paranoia about suspicious looking (black) men in the area
And this "pre-existing paranoia" had nothing to do with recent breakins done by black men, according to some who live in the neighborhood, right?
quote:Inconsistencies in his accounts of what happened after being told to not pursue, his history of calling the cops on people, self-incriminating statements he made in court, etc. etc.
LOL What a dumbo you are. All this has nothing to do with whether he killed the thug in self-defense. Not against the law to follow someone, or even profile. Although I think the liberal thought police may one day bring that in.
quote:something which you have yet to prove (that Trayvon stole the jewelry).
hehehe Oh please, you know that little hoodlum stole it or was keeping it for one of his other hoodlum buddies. But yeh, like your he-was-heading-right-back-home-after-the-store line, I admit its only an assumption.
quote:that Trayvon then subsequently phucked up the person who, from his point of view, appeared to be stalking him
LOL bingo dumbass! **his point of view, his point of view** Zimmerman had his and Trayvon had his. What we don't have is evidence Trayovn was physically attacked while we have that Zimmerman was. What forensics? That one you cunt.
Not against the law to have a point of view (even if racist); not against the law to follow someone you think looks suspicious; not against the law to think hoodies make you look suspicious. All this is liberal PC BS, signs of desperate case.
quote:Trayvon ran away from Zimmerman
We don't know if he ran because he was caught scouting and decided to "phuk up" as you say Zimmerman for it. Or he thought Zimmerman was going to kill him. Again, assumptions, asumptions. So even if you want to argue he was "standing his ground from Zimmerman's...following?" (LOL!) Zimmerman had cause to respond to Trayvon's "phuking up" as you call it. Case closed, sell those T-Shirts before its too late.
quote: Thanks for stating the obvious.
Oh STFU on this one you self-righteous prick. As if your views arent colored by other character news too. lol
Posted by Oshun (Member # 19740) on :
quote:Originally posted by anguishofbeing:
quote:When you explain it's relevance.
Obviously you dispute Zimmermans account so what you do think happened?
You're not following this. I was sayin I don't like Zimmerman's character right now. he's showing himself to be a pathological liar. It's not the issue for me right now the accuracy of Zimmerman's account what happened or what the verdict will be. I'm speaking about his character. He said to the Martins he wouldn't have followed Trayvon if he knew then how old he was, and then goes on Hannity and says the exact opposite. Alone it cant prove guilt or innocence prolly but it says to me, but it leaves a bad taste in my mouth.
Even if we could take bein an adult as probable cause to follow Trayvon, hed from what said on Hannity have followed Trayvon anyway knowin he was a kid. So he would've gone in and followed him with no cause EVEN FROM THE PERSPECTIVE ON WHAT WAS PROBABLE CAUSE THAT HE WAS ABLE TO GIVE TO THE MARTIN FAMILY. Oh and speaking of that "didnt know he was so young excuse," someone verify this for me if yall can, but didn't he say on the tapes that Martin was a teen? Neways, his constant lyings a poor display of character. He lied to the court, and was very crafty bout tryin to get away with it. Im not gonna respond to other parts of what you say cept its not probable cause and blacks deserve to feel free to go where they want without having to be stopped everywhere in America like white people. We want the same rights. You aint got probable cause back the fvck up off.
Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
quote:Originally posted by anguishofbeing: Zimmerman thought from his point of view he was aimlessly walking around because of his behavior to him in the neighborhood. Trayvon could have been coming from the fuking bible study, doesn't matter in the context of the reason Zimmerman thought he was suspicious.
learn how to debate, dufus. The point you're raising is totally irrelevant to what I said.
You said Zimmerman might have been onto something, when making a connection between the jewelry and his walking to the grocery store. In response, I'm telling you that he wasn't onto something, and that Calling the cops on so called ''suspicious looking'' people was daily routine for Zimmerman.
He was literally scoping the neighborhood for (black) men, and if Trayvon hadn't been there, he would have called the cops on some other 'suspicious looking' (black) man, as he did several times prior to setting eyes on Trayvon.
quote:Originally posted by anguishofbeing:
quote: Zimmerman’s pre-existing paranoia about suspicious looking (black) men in the area
What does this have to do with the fact that the majority of Zimmerman's 911 calls about 'suspicious people' weren't predicated on actual suspicious behavior?
quote:Originally posted by anguishofbeing:
quote:Inconsistencies in his accounts of what happened after being told to not pursue, his history of calling the cops on people, self-incriminating statements he made in court, etc. etc.
LOL What a dumbo you are. All this has nothing to do with whether he killed the thug in self-defense. Not against the law to follow someone, or even profile. Although I think the liberal thought police may one day bring that in.
Again, you asked me what incriminating evidence there was in regards to Zimmerman, and I gave you examples. You know someone is silently aware of his defeat when he starts bringing up irrelevant bullsh!t for the second time in a row.
quote:But yeh, like your he-was-heading-right-back-home-after-the-store line, I admit its only an assumption.
Dumbass, this is not disputed by anyone. It is corroborated by his brother, and the fact that he slipped out the house during half time. You know what the implications are right? LOL. Another blow to your cooked up ''possibility'' that he was ''scouting the area''.
Your case is dwindling, and its going down the drain fast.
quote:Originally posted by anguishofbeing:
quote:that Trayvon then subsequently phucked up the person who, from his point of view, appeared to be stalking him
LOL bingo dumbass! **his point of view, his point of view** Zimmerman had his and Trayvon had his. What we don't have is evidence Trayovn was physically attacked while we have that Zimmerman was. What forensics? That one you cunt.
Not against the law to have a point of view (even if racist); not against the law to follow someone you think looks suspicious; not against the law to think hoodies make you look suspicious. All this is liberal PC BS, signs of desperate case.
Its not against the law? Man, what the phuck are you talking about? You don't know sh!t. When Zimmerman assigned for the neighborhood watch thing, instructing police officers explicitly told the attendants that they weren't allowed to pursue, let alone bring a gun out. The police dispatcher said the same goddamn thing to Zimmerman. Do you think that absence of a specific law that prohibits the above is material to the fact that Zimmerman overstepped his boundaries, and is illegible for being persecuted for what he did?
quote:Originally posted by anguishofbeing:
quote:Trayvon ran away from Zimmerman
We don't know if he ran because
Of course we know Trayvon ran. Zimmerman told the dispatcher that Trayvon ran, and his girlfriend said the same thing. You just keep phucking up, don't you, Angelina?
quote:So even if you want to argue he was "standing his ground from Zimmerman's...following?" (LOL!) Zimmerman had cause to respond to Trayvon's "phuking up" as you call it.
Dufus, Zimmerman wasn't even supposed to be in the porch area behind the houses after he called 911 from inside his car (which was in front of the houses) and told the dispatcher 'oh sh!t, he's running', and the dispatcher told him 'we don't need you to follow him'. He got out of his car anyway, entered the porch area with his gun, cornered Trayvon, and whatever happened from that point is his responsibility.
Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
d.p.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: Do you think that absence of a specific law that prohibits the above is material to the fact that Zimmerman overstepped his boundaries, and is illegible for being persecuted for what he did?
If the boundaries you are talking about are not bound by law then he cannot be held accountable for over stepping them in a court of law. Yes prosecutions are about specific laws that are broken. You are allowed by law to follow someone. Zimmerman claims not to have his gun out until after he claims he was attacked by Martin
Posted by asante-Korton (Member # 18532) on :
Trayvon Martin confronted George Zimmerman and asked him what his problem was (After George Zimmerman had been following him in his car) George Zimmerman than reached into his pocket (To grab his phone as he has claimed) and Trayvon punched him in the nose.
Trayvon was probably under the impression that George was going to pull a gun out of his pocket so his reaction was to punch him in the nose to defend himself after George Zimmerman had been following him in his car
Posted by anguishofbeing (Member # 16736) on :
His brother? lol Early on in an interview, before the bloody pics etc, his brother said when asked about Zimmerman's story about Trayvon attacking him that that doesn't sound like Trayvon. So his bother statement means shyt. He obviously don't know his little thug brother or was lying.
You and brother don't know what was in Trayvon's mind his intentions when leaving the house that night only that he went to the store. He could go to the store get the skilttles, so as evidence he went to the store, then scout the neigbourhood while coming back. Killing two birds with one stone. Corroborate that Trayon had no intention to scout that night my ass. lol
Site the law that say you can't following someone you think looks suspicious while calling 9/11 or STFU. Even lyness can apply basic logic here over your dumbass LOL!!!
I'm not disputing whether or not he ran, jackass, you one slow MF. lol I am saying we don't know why he ran. Read my post again doofus.
In the end you and the other mind-reader still don't know what were his intentions that night.
Posted by asante-Korton (Member # 18532) on :
"Hes Running"
Posted by TruthAndRights (Member # 17346) on :
quote:Originally posted by anguishofbeing: His brother? lol Early on in an interview, before the bloody pics etc, his brother said when asked about Zimmerman's story about Trayvon attacking him that that doesn't sound like Trayvon. So his bother statement means shyt. He obviously don't know his little thug brother or was lying.
You and brother don't know what was in Trayvon's mind his intentions when leaving the house that night only that he went to the store. He could go to the store get the skilttles, so as evidence he went to the store, then scout the neigbourhood while coming back. Killing two birds with one stone. Corroborate that Trayon had no intention to scout that night my ass. lol
Site the law that say you can't following someone you think looks suspicious while calling 9/11 or STFU. Even lyness can apply basic logic here over your dumbass LOL!!!
I'm not disputing whether or not he ran, jackass, you one slow MF. lol I am saying we don't know why he ran. Read my post again doofus.
In the end you and the other mind-reader still don't know what were his intentions that night.
And neither do you Posted by anguishofbeing (Member # 16736) on :
Exactly. Thank you. Please explain this to the two dumbos above. lol
Sweetie, while you come back beating the same dead horse again could you also please explain what is an "actual suspicious behavior"? Is this something objective where we can all see it an agree on it when we see it? Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
Well, your unbalanced attitudes towards Trayvon and Zimmerman indicates you've taken sides, so clearly, you did make up your mind; you're just not man enough to stop hiding behind your false pretense of 'not knowing'.
Everyone knows you're a b!tch Angelina. You know it was time to exit gracefully, hence, your short reply aka copout.
Posted by anguishofbeing (Member # 16736) on :
hehehe
Come on bitch don't run. You brought it up.
What is this "actual suspicious behavior"? Obviously Zimmerman was only justified in your view if there was this "actual suspicious behavior". What is it?
Posted by asante-Korton (Member # 18532) on :
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: Well, your unbalanced attitudes towards Trayvon and Zimmerman indicates you've taken sides, so clearly, you did make up your mind; you're just not man enough to stop hiding behind your false pretense of 'not knowing'.
Everyone knows you're a b!tch Angelina. You know it was time to exit gracefully, hence, your short reply aka copout.
True, he knows his wrong but he is too embarrassed to admit so
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by asante-Korton: Trayvon Martin confronted George Zimmerman and asked him what his problem was (After George Zimmerman had been following him in his car) George Zimmerman than reached into his pocket (To grab his phone as he has claimed) and Trayvon punched him in the nose.
Trayvon was probably under the impression that George was going to pull a gun out of his pocket so his reaction was to punch him in the nose to defend himself after George Zimmerman had been following him in his car
According to Zimmerman the punch broke his nose and knocked him down, Trayvon said "you're going to die tonight" and he began beating him on the ground and banging his head into the concrete sidewalk. He said Trayvon straddled and tried to suffocate him, causing excruciating pain. Zimmerman said he “shimmied” on the ground to get off the concrete, causing his shirt to go up and gun to be exposed. George was probably under the impression that Trayvon might get to the gun and kill him and thought he might lose consciousness so he shot him. Understand that the the claim by Zimmerman that Trayvon said "you're going to die tonight" might be true and Trayvon is not around to say he didn't say that.
Posted by asante-Korton (Member # 18532) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
quote:Originally posted by asante-Korton: Trayvon Martin confronted George Zimmerman and asked him what his problem was (After George Zimmerman had been following him in his car) George Zimmerman than reached into his pocket (To grab his phone as he has claimed) and Trayvon punched him in the nose.
Trayvon was probably under the impression that George was going to pull a gun out of his pocket so his reaction was to punch him in the nose to defend himself after George Zimmerman had been following him in his car
According to Zimmerman the punch broke his nose and knocked him down, Trayvon said "you're going to die tonight" and he began beating him on the ground and banging his head into the concrete sidewalk. He said Trayvon straddled and tried to suffocate him, causing excruciating pain. Zimmerman said he “shimmied” on the ground to get off the concrete, causing his shirt to go up and gun to be exposed. George was probably under the impression that Trayvon might get to the gun and kill him and thought he might lose consciousness so he shot him. Understand that the the claim by Zimmerman that Trayvon said "you're going to die tonight" might be true and Trayvon is not around to say he didn't say that.
Trayvon asked george what his problem was and the first thing George does is reach into his pocket, (remember that trayvon has no idea who this guys was and why he was following him) So when he reached into his pocket trayvon must of thought that he was going to pull a gun out and shoot him so his reaction was to hit george.
Posted by Oshun (Member # 19740) on :
quote:Originally posted by anguishofbeing: hehehe
Come on bitch don't run. You brought it up.
What is this "actual suspicious behavior"? Obviously Zimmerman was only justified in your view if there was this "actual suspicious behavior". What is it?
I don't believe Zimmerman had much suspicious behavior to go on. He said that "this guy is up to no good, he must be on drugs or somethin'. It's raining and he's looking about."
...WTF. Looking about in the rain is probable cause for a drugged theif? No its not. He knows people have the right to look about. Thats why he was tellin the Martin family he didnt know Trayvon was so young. Well on the tape he guesses Trayvons age correctly bein in his somewhere in his late teens:
He is a pathological liar. Why change your story, about what made the guy "suspicious" like, twice? And then why say you would change NOTHING even in retrospect. Cause the thing that sealed Trayvons fate hadn't sh!t to do with anything he did but what he came out as when was born. Black and male. Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by asante-Korton:
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
quote:Originally posted by asante-Korton: Trayvon Martin confronted George Zimmerman and asked him what his problem was (After George Zimmerman had been following him in his car) George Zimmerman than reached into his pocket (To grab his phone as he has claimed) and Trayvon punched him in the nose.
Trayvon was probably under the impression that George was going to pull a gun out of his pocket so his reaction was to punch him in the nose to defend himself after George Zimmerman had been following him in his car
According to Zimmerman the punch broke his nose and knocked him down, Trayvon said "you're going to die tonight" and he began beating him on the ground and banging his head into the concrete sidewalk. He said Trayvon straddled and tried to suffocate him, causing excruciating pain. Zimmerman said he “shimmied” on the ground to get off the concrete, causing his shirt to go up and gun to be exposed. George was probably under the impression that Trayvon might get to the gun and kill him and thought he might lose consciousness so he shot him. Understand that the the claim by Zimmerman that Trayvon said "you're going to die tonight" might be true and Trayvon is not around to say he didn't say that.
Trayvon asked george what his problem was and the first thing George does is reach into his pocket, (remember that trayvon has no idea who this guys was and why he was following him) So when he reached into his pocket trayvon must of thought that he was going to pull a gun out and shoot him so his reaction was to hit george.
It doesn't matter is Trayvon was justified in punching Zimmerman and then getting on top of him hand slamming his head into concrete. It doesn't matter if Trayvon thought he had to do this to defend himself from a gun. -because even if Zimmerman believed Trayvon's attack was an attempt to defend himself in doing in so Trayvon then reversed the situtation and was in the position to kill Zimmerman while defending himself. -but further, Zimmerman claims Trayvon was not just trying to defend himself , that he threatened to kill Zimmerman not just stop him, not just take his gun away but kill him. Trayvon had taken control of the situation. It is possible he could have killed Zimmerman. You can say it would be justifed. But if the other person kills you back first that is also self defense
Anyway too many people carry in Florida -and also Colorado
Maybe there should be a law, that while you can carry a gun, you can't do it while doing a neighborhood watch because that is asking for problems.
Posted by IronLion (Member # 16412) on :
quote:Originally posted by anguishofbeing the Rattus: hehehe
Come on bitch don't run. squeak...squeak...squeak... ?
Police Rat aka Anguish of a bitch Posted by anguishofbeing (Member # 16736) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
quote:Originally posted by asante-Korton:
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
quote:Originally posted by asante-Korton: Trayvon Martin confronted George Zimmerman and asked him what his problem was (After George Zimmerman had been following him in his car) George Zimmerman than reached into his pocket (To grab his phone as he has claimed) and Trayvon punched him in the nose.
Trayvon was probably under the impression that George was going to pull a gun out of his pocket so his reaction was to punch him in the nose to defend himself after George Zimmerman had been following him in his car
According to Zimmerman the punch broke his nose and knocked him down, Trayvon said "you're going to die tonight" and he began beating him on the ground and banging his head into the concrete sidewalk. He said Trayvon straddled and tried to suffocate him, causing excruciating pain. Zimmerman said he “shimmied” on the ground to get off the concrete, causing his shirt to go up and gun to be exposed. George was probably under the impression that Trayvon might get to the gun and kill him and thought he might lose consciousness so he shot him. Understand that the the claim by Zimmerman that Trayvon said "you're going to die tonight" might be true and Trayvon is not around to say he didn't say that.
Trayvon asked george what his problem was and the first thing George does is reach into his pocket, (remember that trayvon has no idea who this guys was and why he was following him) So when he reached into his pocket trayvon must of thought that he was going to pull a gun out and shoot him so his reaction was to hit george.
It doesn't matter is Trayvon was justified in punching Zimmerman and then getting on top of him hand slamming his head into concrete. It doesn't matter if Trayvon thought he had to do this to defend himself from a gun. -because even if Zimmerman believed Trayvon's attack was an attempt to defend himself in doing in so Trayvon then reversed the situtation and was in the position to kill Zimmerman while defending himself. -but further, Zimmerman claims Trayvon was not just trying to defend himself , that he threatened to kill Zimmerman not just stop him, not just take his gun away but kill him. Trayvon had taken control of the situation. It is possible he could have killed Zimmerman. You can say it would be justifed. But if the other person kills you back first that is also self defense
Its ironic that Lyness of all people would have to break down the, if complicated to some, concept of self-defense to the dumbos. lol
Oshun, I'm done try9ng to understand your ramblings. As for asante, well she's obviously twelve, next year.
Posted by Oshun (Member # 19740) on :
^ I wouldnt be surprised if you simply had no response to what I'm saying. Its really aint that hard to get he constantly changed his basis for probable cause to follow Trayvon.
Posted by TruthAndRights (Member # 17346) on :
quote:Originally posted by IronLion: Anguish of a bitch
Posted by asante-Korton (Member # 18532) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
quote:Originally posted by asante-Korton:
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
quote:Originally posted by asante-Korton: Trayvon Martin confronted George Zimmerman and asked him what his problem was (After George Zimmerman had been following him in his car) George Zimmerman than reached into his pocket (To grab his phone as he has claimed) and Trayvon punched him in the nose.
Trayvon was probably under the impression that George was going to pull a gun out of his pocket so his reaction was to punch him in the nose to defend himself after George Zimmerman had been following him in his car
According to Zimmerman the punch broke his nose and knocked him down, Trayvon said "you're going to die tonight" and he began beating him on the ground and banging his head into the concrete sidewalk. He said Trayvon straddled and tried to suffocate him, causing excruciating pain. Zimmerman said he “shimmied” on the ground to get off the concrete, causing his shirt to go up and gun to be exposed. George was probably under the impression that Trayvon might get to the gun and kill him and thought he might lose consciousness so he shot him. Understand that the the claim by Zimmerman that Trayvon said "you're going to die tonight" might be true and Trayvon is not around to say he didn't say that.
Trayvon asked george what his problem was and the first thing George does is reach into his pocket, (remember that trayvon has no idea who this guys was and why he was following him) So when he reached into his pocket trayvon must of thought that he was going to pull a gun out and shoot him so his reaction was to hit george.
It doesn't matter is Trayvon was justified in punching Zimmerman and then getting on top of him hand slamming his head into concrete. It doesn't matter if Trayvon thought he had to do this to defend himself from a gun. -because even if Zimmerman believed Trayvon's attack was an attempt to defend himself in doing in so Trayvon then reversed the situtation and was in the position to kill Zimmerman while defending himself. -but further, Zimmerman claims Trayvon was not just trying to defend himself , that he threatened to kill Zimmerman not just stop him, not just take his gun away but kill him. Trayvon had taken control of the situation. It is possible he could have killed Zimmerman. You can say it would be justifed. But if the other person kills you back first that is also self defense
Anyway too many people carry in Florida -and also Colorado
Maybe there should be a law, that while you can carry a gun, you can't do it while doing a neighborhood watch because that is asking for problems.
Lioness do you believe that George Zimmerman is innocent or guilty?
Do you believe that if Zimmerman would of simply said that he was the neighbor hood watch that none of this would of ever happened?
If the police went up to trayvon and asked him what he was doing and trayvon reached into his pocket what do you think the police would have done?
Posted by asante-Korton (Member # 18532) on :
quote:Originally posted by anguishofbeing:
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
quote:Originally posted by asante-Korton:
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
quote:Originally posted by asante-Korton: Trayvon Martin confronted George Zimmerman and asked him what his problem was (After George Zimmerman had been following him in his car) George Zimmerman than reached into his pocket (To grab his phone as he has claimed) and Trayvon punched him in the nose.
Trayvon was probably under the impression that George was going to pull a gun out of his pocket so his reaction was to punch him in the nose to defend himself after George Zimmerman had been following him in his car
According to Zimmerman the punch broke his nose and knocked him down, Trayvon said "you're going to die tonight" and he began beating him on the ground and banging his head into the concrete sidewalk. He said Trayvon straddled and tried to suffocate him, causing excruciating pain. Zimmerman said he “shimmied” on the ground to get off the concrete, causing his shirt to go up and gun to be exposed. George was probably under the impression that Trayvon might get to the gun and kill him and thought he might lose consciousness so he shot him. Understand that the the claim by Zimmerman that Trayvon said "you're going to die tonight" might be true and Trayvon is not around to say he didn't say that.
Trayvon asked george what his problem was and the first thing George does is reach into his pocket, (remember that trayvon has no idea who this guys was and why he was following him) So when he reached into his pocket trayvon must of thought that he was going to pull a gun out and shoot him so his reaction was to hit george.
It doesn't matter is Trayvon was justified in punching Zimmerman and then getting on top of him hand slamming his head into concrete. It doesn't matter if Trayvon thought he had to do this to defend himself from a gun. -because even if Zimmerman believed Trayvon's attack was an attempt to defend himself in doing in so Trayvon then reversed the situtation and was in the position to kill Zimmerman while defending himself. -but further, Zimmerman claims Trayvon was not just trying to defend himself , that he threatened to kill Zimmerman not just stop him, not just take his gun away but kill him. Trayvon had taken control of the situation. It is possible he could have killed Zimmerman. You can say it would be justifed. But if the other person kills you back first that is also self defense
Its ironic that Lyness of all people would have to break down the, if complicated to some, concept of self-defense to the dumbos. lol
Oshun, I'm done try9ng to understand your ramblings. As for asante, well she's obviously twelve, next year.
Durrrrrrrrrr asante is going to be tweleve next year duuuurrrrrrrrrrrrrrr i think im funny durrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr
quote:orginally posted by anguishofbeingabitch: I'm not disputing whether or not he ran, jackass, you one slow MF. lol I am saying we don't know why he ran. Read my post again doofus.
he was not running he was skipping.. He wasn't running
Anyone one can tell by watching the zimmerman interview that he is not all there in the head which is probably why anguishofbeingabitch supports and understands him so well
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by asante-Korton: Lioness do you believe that George Zimmerman is innocent or guilty
Explain how events could have happened that would make him guilty of murder.
.
Posted by asante-Korton (Member # 18532) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
quote:Originally posted by asante-Korton: Lioness do you believe that George Zimmerman is innocent or guilty
Explain how events could have happened that would make him guilty of murder.
.
Lioness do you believe that George Zimmerman is innocent or guilty?
Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
quote:Originally posted by asante-Korton:
quote:Originally posted by anguishofbeing:
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
quote:Originally posted by asante-Korton:
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
quote:Originally posted by asante-Korton: Trayvon Martin confronted George Zimmerman and asked him what his problem was (After George Zimmerman had been following him in his car) George Zimmerman than reached into his pocket (To grab his phone as he has claimed) and Trayvon punched him in the nose.
Trayvon was probably under the impression that George was going to pull a gun out of his pocket so his reaction was to punch him in the nose to defend himself after George Zimmerman had been following him in his car
According to Zimmerman the punch broke his nose and knocked him down, Trayvon said "you're going to die tonight" and he began beating him on the ground and banging his head into the concrete sidewalk. He said Trayvon straddled and tried to suffocate him, causing excruciating pain. Zimmerman said he “shimmied” on the ground to get off the concrete, causing his shirt to go up and gun to be exposed. George was probably under the impression that Trayvon might get to the gun and kill him and thought he might lose consciousness so he shot him. Understand that the the claim by Zimmerman that Trayvon said "you're going to die tonight" might be true and Trayvon is not around to say he didn't say that.
Trayvon asked george what his problem was and the first thing George does is reach into his pocket, (remember that trayvon has no idea who this guys was and why he was following him) So when he reached into his pocket trayvon must of thought that he was going to pull a gun out and shoot him so his reaction was to hit george.
It doesn't matter is Trayvon was justified in punching Zimmerman and then getting on top of him hand slamming his head into concrete. It doesn't matter if Trayvon thought he had to do this to defend himself from a gun. -because even if Zimmerman believed Trayvon's attack was an attempt to defend himself in doing in so Trayvon then reversed the situtation and was in the position to kill Zimmerman while defending himself. -but further, Zimmerman claims Trayvon was not just trying to defend himself , that he threatened to kill Zimmerman not just stop him, not just take his gun away but kill him. Trayvon had taken control of the situation. It is possible he could have killed Zimmerman. You can say it would be justifed. But if the other person kills you back first that is also self defense
Its ironic that Lyness of all people would have to break down the, if complicated to some, concept of self-defense to the dumbos. lol
Oshun, I'm done try9ng to understand your ramblings. As for asante, well she's obviously twelve, next year.
Durrrrrrrrrr asante is going to be tweleve next year duuuurrrrrrrrrrrrrrr i think im funny durrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr
quote:orginally posted by anguishofbeingabitch: I'm not disputing whether or not he ran, jackass, you one slow MF. lol I am saying we don't know why he ran. Read my post again doofus.
he was not running he was skipping.. He wasn't running
Anyone one can tell by watching the zimmerman interview that he is not all there in the head which is probably why anguishofbeingabitch supports and understands him so well
hahahahahaha
Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
SOMEONE is lying their phucking ass off, particularly in the area of who confronted the other party.
Posted by anguishofbeing (Member # 16736) on :
quote:Originally posted by asante-Korton:
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
quote:Originally posted by asante-Korton: Lioness do you believe that George Zimmerman is innocent or guilty
Explain how events could have happened that would make him guilty of murder.
.
Lioness do you believe that George Zimmerman is innocent or guilty?
LOL Notice a trend with these guys. They claim Zimemrman's is lying his pants off [yet shy away from explaining what they think went down that day.
"I hear some like ‘bump.’ You could hear someone had bumped Trayvon."
Oh Jesus, hearing a bump doesn't necessarily mean "someone bumped Trayvon". Your logic is as basic as that semi-literate girl. Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
Swenet, give us a possible sequence of events that would make Zimmerman guilty
If you prove he's a liar you still have to come up with a step by step scenario in which he is guilty
Posted by Oshun (Member # 19740) on :
quote:Originally posted by anguishofbeing:
quote:Originally posted by asante-Korton:
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: [qb]
quote:Originally posted by asante-Korton: Lioness do you believe that George Zimmerman is innocent or guilty
Explain how events could have happened that would make him guilty of murder.
.
Lioness do you believe that George Zimmerman is innocent or guilty?
LOL Notice a trend with these guys. They claim Zimemrman's is lying his pants off [yet shy away from explaining what they think went down that day.
Depends on what it is you argue. If you sayin he's had a big habit of lying or changing his story about things, that can be proven without knowing.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
Ice-T Defends Gun Rights: "The Last Form Of Defense Against Tyranny"
Ice-T: Well, I'll give up my gun when everybody does. Doesn't that make sense? If there were guns here, would you want to be the only person without one?
Krishnan Guru-Murthy, anchor, Channel 4 News: So do you carry guns routinely at home?
Ice-T: Yeah, it's legal in the United States. It's part of our Constitution. You know, the right to bear arms is because that's the last form of defense against tyranny. Not to hunt. It's to protect yourself from the police.
Anchor: And do you see any link between that and these sorts of incidents (Aurora)?
Ice-T: No. Nah. Not really really. You know what I'm saying, if somebody wants to kill people, you know, they don't need a gun to do it.
Anchor: It makes it easier though, doesn't it?
Ice-T: Not really. You can strap explosives on your body, they do that all the time.
On anti-gun laws: "That's not going to change anything. The United States is based on guns, you know."
Posted by asante-Korton (Member # 18532) on :
quote:Originally posted by anguishofbeing:
quote:Originally posted by asante-Korton:
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
quote:Originally posted by asante-Korton: Lioness do you believe that George Zimmerman is innocent or guilty
Explain how events could have happened that would make him guilty of murder.
.
Lioness do you believe that George Zimmerman is innocent or guilty?
LOL Notice a trend with these guys. They claim Zimemrman's is lying his pants off [yet shy away from explaining what they think went down that day.
"I hear some like ‘bump.’ You could hear someone had bumped Trayvon."
Oh Jesus, hearing a bump doesn't necessarily mean "someone bumped Trayvon". Your logic is as basic as that semi-literate girl.
LMAO
Posted by anguishofbeing (Member # 16736) on :
quote:Originally posted by anguishofbeing: hehehe
Come on bitch don't run. You brought it up.
What is this "actual suspicious behavior"? Obviously Zimmerman was only justified in your view if there was this "actual suspicious behavior". What is it?
Posted by Grumman (Member # 14051) on :
Maybe Zimmerman isn't the killer after all?
Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
quote:Originally posted by anguishofbeing: Notice a trend with these guys. They claim Zimemrman's is lying his pants off yet shy away from explaining what they think went down that day.
Oh noo, they didn't!! That's outrageous!!
Lol, you're such a b!tch. Cry me a river.
Posted by IronLion (Member # 16412) on :
quote:Originally posted by IronLion:
quote:Originally posted by anguishofbeing the Rattus: hehehe
Come on bitch don't run. squeak...squeak...squeak... ?
Police Rat aka Anguish of a bitch
Bo rattus! neighborhood snitch, informant, neighborhood watcher!
Rats Posted by anguishofbeing (Member # 16736) on :
So what is this "actual suspicious behavior" that has to be displayed for Zimemrman's call to be justified?
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: Swenet, give us a possible sequence of events that would make Zimmerman guilty
If you prove he's a liar you still have to come up with a step by step scenario in which he is guilty
it's funny how no one has tried to answer this yet.
I am asked to comment if I believe Zimmerman is guilty or not. The prosecution has not yet presented a case for murder. They have not yet outlined a scenario in which a murder happened.
Posted by IronLion (Member # 16412) on :
quote:Originally posted by anguishofbeing: So what is this "actual suspicious behavior" squeak..squeak..squeak...?
This, Mr Rat, this...:
Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
^lol. His taking the role of a rat aka sellout is certainly suspicious, got that right.
Posted by Oshun (Member # 19740) on :
quote:Originally posted by anguishofbeing: So what is this "actual suspicious behavior" that has to be displayed for Zimemrman's call to be justified?
THERE IS NONE THATS THE POINT. Everytime he tried to provide a reason he always changed what he justified as "suspicious." How hard is this to understand? Posted by anguishofbeing (Member # 16736) on :
lol
You should follow Sweetie and STFU on this one. It was such a stupid statement notice he's avoiding it. Or have you found out what it means yet Sweetie, if so lets hear it! lol
Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
No one is avoiding anything. Its no use debating someone who isn't man enough to stand behind his own assumptions, and who always hides behind possibilities, re: the possibility that Trayvon was scouting the area, DESPITE the fact that Trayvon went out during half time, DESPITE the fact that he was talking to his girlfriend damn near the whole time he was outside, DESPITE the fact that he went to the convenient store, WHICH IS ON TAPE. This all disqualifies any speculations of Trayvon being on the streets just to look at the buildings, as Zimmerman presumed.
The fact of the matter is, had someone clued Zimmerman in on the above, at that exact time, he would've paid Trayvon no mind, and this whole thing would never have happened. You, being the big b!tch made rat that you are, are trying to hang on to the possibility that Trayvon was there to scout there area. DESPITE ANYTHING TANGIBLE, other than a possibility, which is something that Zimmerman doesn't even do, TO THIS DAY.
You're only embarrassing yourself.
As far as the suspicious thing, your b!tch ass knows it isn't common for a hoodie wearing person, who looks at buildings (assuming Trayvon even did that) to have the cops called on him. Why isn't this commonplace, bitch made Angelina, if not that normal people, other than Zimmerman, don't find that suspicious?
On the other hand, people alert authorities ALL THE TIME, when they see unattended bags or strange substances in or near airports. Why is that, Angelina?
Clearly there wasn't anything suspicious that night about Trayvon; he took a giant leap of faith by making dozens of assumptions that have now turned out to be absolutely false (and non-sequitors to begin with). Of course, Zimmerman knows this, as he wouldn't have apologized if he still felt Trayvon was really a menace to society. After his arrest, Zimmerman never persisted on Trayvon's behavior being abnormal, even though this could clearly work to his advantage. Why is that, Angelina?
You're keeping speculation alive that Zimmerman himself (the one who said that Trayvon was acting suspicious in the first place), dropped a long time ago.
You're so phucking dumb and lame.
Posted by Oshun (Member # 19740) on :
quote:Originally posted by anguishofbeing: lol
You should follow Sweetie and STFU on this one. It was such a stupid statement notice he's avoiding it.
No one is avoiding anything dumbfck. His story changed and contradicted itself numerous times as to why he thought Trayvon was suspicious. If he had a reason that was legitimate WHY would he do that? Please answer. YOU stop avoiding things and answer that!
Posted by anguishofbeing (Member # 16736) on :
Get the context straight retard. The scouting argument only came up because Oshun claimed he had no intention to rob houses that night. And you agreed. My point is both your dumb asses don't know that. Being on the phone with girlfriend, buying skittles doesnt mean he had no intentions. How fuking dumb are you all not to see that? lol
I dont have to "hang on" to anything. It means shyt whether he was going to bible study or scouting the area. Based on what we know so far Zimmerman was within his right to shoot his ass. Neither you or the rest of gang have yet to prove otherwise. Which is why all you dumbos can scream is "if he didn't call", "if he didn't leave his car", "if he didn't follow Trayvon". All of which is not illegal dick suckers! lol
P.s. when are you going to specify what is an "actual suspicious behavior" instead of the round robin BS?
Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
^You need to get the context straight. Being on the phone with his girlfriend, buying skittles and all the other aforementioned facts make it obsolete to speculate about any other motives other than going to the store for skittles and ice tea.
The fanatic psychedelic trips you engage in, where you cook up random possibilities that aren't predicated on anything, are manifestations of the same intellectual deficits you've displayed elsewhere (remember when you failed epically trying to deny that 'dwd' most likely reads 'David').
The 'scouting' thing is in fact something that you pulled out of your ASS. Someone with your IQ might just as well say there was a possibility that he was there to dance butt naked in the rain AND buy skittles at the same time.
The tangible evidence suggest Trayvon was out there buying skittles, other random cooked up coo coo possibilities notwithstanding.
p.s., when are you going to put forward clues that Trayvon stole those jewels, or that Zimmerman might have been onto something when he implicated that Trayvon was there to commit burglary?
Posted by Oshun (Member # 19740) on :
quote:Originally posted by anguishofbeing: Get the context straight retard. The scouting argument only came up because Oshun claimed he had no intention to rob houses that night. And you agreed. My point is both your dumb asses don't know that.
I say drop tryin to debate objective innocence cause it misses the point overall. Provin objective innocence is NOT important here. All thats important is reviewing Zimmermans reasons for branding Trayvon with SUBJECTIVE GUILT. WHAT were the reasons ZIMMERMAN gives to follow Trayvon? Did it count as probable cause? Is it consistent? If Zimmerman had a valid reason to continue to suspect Trayvon WAS going to steal, why does his reason for having profiled Trayvon change? Ill say it again if your slow: Zimmerman HAS NO CONSISTENT REASONS when explaining why he assumed Trayvon WAS a perp.
Posted by anguishofbeing (Member # 16736) on :
Why the hell are you looking for "consistency" from a crazed paranoid racist you fuking idiot? lol You all say the guy is a lying paranoid so why bang your head over it? lmao!!
quote:Being on the phone with his girlfriend, buying skittles and all the other aforementioned facts
Yeh coz he wouldn't be scouting with his "bitch" on the other line right? lol
Jesus Christ Sweetie you make no fuking sense each time you come back with this shyt.
Nice try with the Jewels etc to avoid specifying this "actual suspicious behavior". lol Timid fuking piece of shyt, and you call me coward. HAHAHAH
"The tangible evidence suggest Trayvon..."
^ do you know what the fuk that word means and the implications? It means you don't fuking KNOW. The subtle nuance and technicality of the English language has escaped your illiterate brain. hehehe
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
here's what people are operating on:
Zimmerman is a racist. He's paranoid and fearful of black people so he decided to go out and dominate one since he had a gun on him and a car. And if the guy got uppity he'd just shoot him. So he saw Trayvon and found his victim. He knew he would have to instigate a fight so he could make it look like self defence. So he kept the gun hidden and then followed him, harassed and provoked Trayvon until Trayvon finally attacked him . Then he pulled out the gun and killed him.
Can you prove it?
Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
quote:Originally posted by anguishofbeing:
quote:Being on the phone with his girlfriend, buying skittles and all the other aforementioned facts
Yeh coz he wouldn't be scouting with his "bitch" on the other line right? lol
Its an unsubstantiated random coo coo fantasy scenario that YOU cooked up; its right up there with the possibility that he was on the streets to dance butt naked in the rain.
quote:"The tangible evidence suggest Trayvon..."
^ do you know what the fuk that word means and the implications?
It means there is no evidence whatsoever for anything other than that Trayvon went to the convenient store, and that other random cooked up fantasies can be disqualified. Especially the random coo coo possibility you mentioned. There are 6 billion people on this earth, and every time they walk the streets, there is a possibility that they're scouting the area, SO FUCKING WHAT.
Posted by anguishofbeing (Member # 16736) on :
In other words you don't know.
Do you know this? "actual suspicious behavior".
Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
quote:Originally posted by anguishofbeing: In other words its an unsubstantiated random coo coo fantasy scenario that I cooked up
I agree
quote:Originally posted by anguishofbeing:Do you know this? "actual suspicious behavior".
Actual suspicious behavior would be what sizable portion of the general population can agree on, not ''there have been several break ins, and this guy looks at houses''.
Notice also that Oshuns statement about Trayvon not being there to break into houses (which is what Zimmerman was hinting at), is a seperate issue from whether he was scouting the area. Not only do you cook up random coo coo possibilities, you're also totally side-tracking the discussion. What else can we expect of an intellectually challenged prostitute.
Posted by anguishofbeing (Member # 16736) on :
What is an "actual suspicious behavior"? Jesus Sweetie its beyond embarrassing now. lol
I don't have to side track, the little hoodlum deserved to die based on American law and some may argue even natural law. Case closed. You fools have yet to prove otherwise, even Lynass is taunting your dumbasses on your inability to prove your case. lol
Posted by asante-Korton (Member # 18532) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: here's what people are operating on:
Zimmerman is a racist. He's paranoid and fearful of black people so he decided to go out and dominate one since he had a gun on him and a car. And if the guy got uppity he'd just shoot him. So he saw Trayvon and found his victim. He knew he would have to instigate a fight so he could make it look like self defence. So he kept the gun hidden and then followed him, harassed and provoked Trayvon until Trayvon finally attacked him . Then he pulled out the gun and killed him.
Can you prove it?
who is operating on this?
Posted by IronLion (Member # 16412) on :
quote:Originally posted by anguishofbeing: What is an "actual suspicious behavior"? Jesus blah..blah..blah... lol
Ratatouille...that's it!
"Anguish of a Bitch" aka pink informer rat
Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
quote:What is an "actual suspicious behavior"?
So, you're not only intellectually challenged, I see your reading comprehension and/or memory is sub par as well.
quote:I don't have to side track
Stop running b!tch. Angelina, what does the random cooked up speculation of him being there to scout the area have to do with whether or not he was in the streets to break into houses?
quote:the little hoodlum
Do yo thang Angelina, keep on proving how much your support of Zimmerman hinges on your dislike of Trayvon (rather than evidence), and how much your dislike of Trayvon feeds your desire to be butt buddies with Zummerman. BTW, what is your evidence that he was a hoodlum? Let me guess, its another self admitted assumption that you're not willing to stand behind and defend? LOL. B!tch.
quote:deserved to die based on American law and some may argue even natural law. Case closed. You fools have yet to prove otherwise
No need to bring counter evidence for something that doesn't exist in the first place, Angelina. The implicated self defense laws don't opinionate on who or what deserves to die. Damn you're intellectually challenged.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
Trayvon did not look suspicious because he had a bag of skittles and that is what little kids eat. What gangster would be caught eating a bag of skittles? Furthermore he also had iced tea. Criminals don't drink Iced Tea, they drink whiskey or beer. Iced tea is the kind of drink that is more grown up than soda. But it's still not all the way grown up, it's not like drinking straight tea or coffee it has a lot of sugar in it, And guess what? Kids like sugar. Trayvon may have been 17 but he had the innocence of a 13 year old. Look at his snaking habits. What thug trying to rob a house is going to be eating candy and beverages on the way anyway? They need their hands free to do stuff.
Zimmerman must have seen the skittles and Iced Tea, he knew what was up, this kid was no house robber. But he didn't care he was on a mission.
Look at this Zimmerman guy in the interviews. He acts wormy, an unlikeable type dude. Type of dude that gets his lunch money taken. Buys a gun, thinks he's a big shot and got God on his side to boot. -got that pussy look on his face, you know this bitch is lying through his teeth
Posted by IronLion (Member # 16412) on :
quote:Originally posted by anguishofbeing: blah ..blah..baaa.. Based on what we know so far Zimmerman was within his right to shoot his ass....
oh you fockkin rat bytch, fokkin-snitching police rat,
Posted by Narmerthoth (Member # 20259) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: Trayvon did not look suspicious because he had a bag of skittles and that is what little kids eat. What gangster would be caught eating a bag of skittles? Furthermore he also had iced tea. Criminals don't drink Iced Tea, they drink whiskey or beer. Iced tea is the kind of drink that is more grown up than soda. But it's still not all the way grown up, it's not like drinking straight tea or coffee it has a lot of sugar in it, And guess what? Kids like sugar. Trayvon may have been 17 but he had the innocence of a 13 year old. Look at his snaking habits. What thug trying to rob a house is going to be eating candy and beverages on the way anyway? They need their hands free to do stuff.
Zimmerman must have seen the skittles and Iced Tea, he knew what was up, this kid was no house robber. But he didn't care he was on a mission.
Look at this Zimmerman guy in the interviews. He acts wormy, an unlikeable type dude. Type of dude that gets his lunch money taken. Buys a gun, thinks he's a big shot and got God on his side to boot. -got that pussy look on his face, you know this bitch is lying through his teeth
Which one are you...sir? You seem to have little to no potential in the area of science either.
Posted by anguishofbeing (Member # 16736) on :
LOL!
Damn still no progress.
Still no closer to what this "actual suspicious behavior" looks like or proving Zimmerman's guilt. Bytch ass. lol
Posted by TruthAndRights (Member # 17346) on :
Posted by Apocalypse (Member # 8587) on :
Balaam's Ass wrote
quote: I don't have to side track, the little hoodlum deserved to die based on American law and some may argue even natural law. Case closed. You fools have yet to prove otherwise, even Lynass is taunting your dumbasses on your inability to prove your case. lol
You deserve to die Cunny Hole based upon Bob Marley's lyrics: "kill cramp and paralyze all the weak at conception. Wipe them out of creation." But state the American law that sentences a person to die for walking with a bag of skittles fool!
Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
quote:Originally posted by anguishofbeing: LOL!
The last nerve twitchings of a semi-dead rat in its terminal phase, pre rigor mortis.
You've been decimated, acknowledge your better and walk away with some dignity.
Posted by Oshun (Member # 19740) on :
quote:Originally posted by anguishofbeing: LOL!
Damn still no progress.
Still no closer to what this "actual suspicious behavior" looks
..wtf.. we used zimmermans own words for what he said was suspicious and showed he changed his story. if you gotta change your story YOU HAD NO PROBABLE CAUSE TO SUSPECT!
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
anyone has the right to find someone suspicious with no good reason and to follow a person with no good reason
Posted by IronLion (Member # 16412) on :
quote:Originally posted by anguishofbeing: Squeak!
Damn still no progress.
blah...blah...what this "actual suspicious behavior" ...blah....blah...blah
Focking bytch informant.
Police Ratty aka Anguish-of-bytch
Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
Black teenager Rayshawn Moreno deserved to get kidnapped and beaten up by police officers because he is a liability to the black community.
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Mad]](mad.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
