It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Exclusive! First hand Witness: Trayvon Martin attacked Zimmerman Zimmerman Innocent Smoking Gun

page: 376
105
<< 373  374  375    377  378  379 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 24 2012 @ 03:25 PM
link   
reply to post by seabag
 


You said that Trayvon was stoned. He wasn't. However, when the media repeats THC over and over without explaining that, people will think he was on drugs.

As I said, that's like showing an old pic of Zimmerman and Trayvon. That's not a LIE-- it is in fact pictures of the two-- but it's a distortion and drills an idea into people's heads. Make sense?




posted on May, 24 2012 @ 03:28 PM
link   
reply to post by solarjetman
 



I don't know about that...there are different levels. A ton of people smoke weed, including many brilliant thinkers, poets, artists, engineers. I'm not calling Trayvon a brilliant thinker, but I simply don't think smoking weed is a big deal, and I certainly don't think that it is a "gateway" that makes someone prone to breaking the law in other more serious ways either.


Why do employers drug test if it’s no big deal?




My point was simply that the media can be biased in more than one way-- hence you don't hear about Zimmerman's Temazepam and Adderall prescriptions, whose side effects can include aggression and mood instability.


If he had those substances they were prescribed by a medical doctor…SO WHAT??



I feel kind of ridiculous having to explain why smoking weed isn't a big deal, but I'll be honest-- if this weren't Trayvon who were in question, I have a strong feeling none of us would even be thinking twice about this incredibly insignificant issue.


I certainly don’t think it’s a big deal, especially with regard to this case, but it does dial back all of this “Trayvon was an innocent little angel” BS a few notches.



posted on May, 24 2012 @ 03:29 PM
link   
These what if's are silly.
Zimmerman could not of caught up with treyvon
and try to detain him, treyvon ambushed him
when zimmerman came around the corner
What if, what if, what if,
how did zimmerman grab treyvon
by the arm to initiate it if treyvon
was running, which was what made zimmerman
get out of the suv.. Zimmerman could of never
out run treyvon.
edit on 24-5-2012 by popsmayhem because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 24 2012 @ 03:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by solarjetman
reply to post by seabag
 


You said that Trayvon was stoned. He wasn't. However, when the media repeats THC over and over without explaining that, people will think he was on drugs.

As I said, that's like showing an old pic of Zimmerman and Trayvon. That's not a LIE-- it is in fact pictures of the two-- but it's a distortion and drills an idea into people's heads. Make sense?


How do we know he wasn't stoned? I don't know that one can tell by the levels of THC exactly WHEN someone last used.

He may or may not have been stoned but he was a stoner! Is that better?



posted on May, 24 2012 @ 05:13 PM
link   
Why are you arguing with me about it being a big deal when you just agreed that "it certainly isn't a big deal?" This has nothing to do with Zimmerman's innocence or guilt. For all I know, Trayvon was guilty as sin. My ONLY point here is that this alleged "witch hunt" you guys are so adamantly fighting is in your head, because the same exact "witch hunting" MSN outlets will happily repeat THC over and over until people actually think it has anything to do with what happened that night. To single out something as irrelevant as THC out of hundreds of pages of evidence is just as bad IMO.



posted on May, 24 2012 @ 05:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by seabag

Originally posted by solarjetman
reply to post by seabag
 


You said that Trayvon was stoned. He wasn't. However, when the media repeats THC over and over without explaining that, people will think he was on drugs.

As I said, that's like showing an old pic of Zimmerman and Trayvon. That's not a LIE-- it is in fact pictures of the two-- but it's a distortion and drills an idea into people's heads. Make sense?


How do we know he wasn't stoned? I don't know that one can tell by the levels of THC exactly WHEN someone last used.

He may or may not have been stoned but he was a stoner! Is that better?


They said the levels were so low that it wouldn't have had any effect on him. Are you asking me if there is a difference between "he wasn't under the influence of drugs that night" and "he was under the influence of drugs that night?"



posted on May, 24 2012 @ 05:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by solarjetman
Why are you arguing with me about it being a big deal when you just agreed that "it certainly isn't a big deal?" This has nothing to do with Zimmerman's innocence or guilt. For all I know, Trayvon was guilty as sin. My ONLY point here is that this alleged "witch hunt" you guys are so adamantly fighting is in your head, because the same exact "witch hunting" MSN outlets will happily repeat THC over and over until people actually think it has anything to do with what happened that night. To single out something as irrelevant as THC out of hundreds of pages of evidence is just as bad IMO.


So it would be fine
for zimmerman to be
convicted on hearsay, conjecture,
and false BS evidence?
That is not justice..

Spanish decent, mexican, peruvian, bolivian...

It just shows these prosecuters and zimmerman haters
are grasping at straws, grasping at hearsay for a conviction?
INSANE
edit on 24-5-2012 by popsmayhem because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 24 2012 @ 05:41 PM
link   
reply to post by popsmayhem
 

What??? Dude, I just said in my post that YOU QUOTED this has nothing to do with Zimmerman's innocence or guilt. BS is BS no matter who it supports, and I think it would do us ALL a big favor to trim the fat and focus on what really matters.

For some reason, whenever someone points out BS against TM you guys flip out like I support the witch hunt and believe TM is still a 13 year old choir boy. Why is that?
edit on 24-5-2012 by solarjetman because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 24 2012 @ 06:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by solarjetman

Originally posted by seabag

Originally posted by solarjetman
reply to post by seabag
 


You said that Trayvon was stoned. He wasn't. However, when the media repeats THC over and over without explaining that, people will think he was on drugs.

As I said, that's like showing an old pic of Zimmerman and Trayvon. That's not a LIE-- it is in fact pictures of the two-- but it's a distortion and drills an idea into people's heads. Make sense?


How do we know he wasn't stoned? I don't know that one can tell by the levels of THC exactly WHEN someone last used.

He may or may not have been stoned but he was a stoner! Is that better?


They said the levels were so low that it wouldn't have had any effect on him. Are you asking me if there is a difference between "he wasn't under the influence of drugs that night" and "he was under the influence of drugs that night?"


Well, something hurt your feelings.

My point was he's a stoner...which is a character flaw. It demonstrates that he isn't some "innocent little kid" but just a typical urban thug IMO.

I am entitled to MY opinion of his character, right?



posted on May, 24 2012 @ 06:43 PM
link   
reply to post by seabag
 

Of course you are. But saying "stoned Trayvon," as you originally stated, isn't an opinion. It's BS, and I like to call that out where I see it. TM could've been the reincarnation of Al Capone and that still wouldnt make him stoned. I'm sorry if that hurts YOUR feelings.
edit on 24-5-2012 by solarjetman because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 24 2012 @ 07:57 PM
link   
reply to post by solarjetman
 


Oh, I get it now. 

What you're doing is the equivalent of getting someone off on a technicality. You want to sway the opinion away from the facts by focusing on a trivial aspect of my argument. 

So I will retract my "stoned" remark. Does that change the FACT that the injuries clearly support the witness accounts as well as the defendant's claim? Of course not. 

Now that we're past that, what's wrong with my argument? 
edit on 24-5-2012 by seabag because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 24 2012 @ 11:10 PM
link   
reply to post by popsmayhem
 


Just one question. How was TM supposed to know that GZ was going to exit his car and follow him? Since you claim he sized him up, he had to do that while sitting in his car before he ran. So how did TM know EXACTLY where to run and hide and wait for GZ find hi?

Do you know what your scenario sounds like? It sounds like you are implying GZ was 'hunting', and you don't even recognize you are doing it. I know you could care less that GZ killed TM. You don't care about facts or evidence its clear.

Just let me know how TM knew GZ was going to follow him out of his car? And how he knew where to hide so GZ would find him so he could attack him?



posted on May, 24 2012 @ 11:17 PM
link   
reply to post by popsmayhem
 


Still pushing that ambush lie I see.

Its a well established fact there was no ambush, and you know that. Its pretty sad you keep saying it over and over and over and over. And you know when you say it, you are call GZ daddy a liar, you know that right? I don't think Daddy Zimmerman would like that of his best most loyal supporter. If your gonna lie you should at least make sure it has potential to damage the other side and not your own.

It funny you don't realize that.



posted on May, 24 2012 @ 11:18 PM
link   
reply to post by seabag
 


How do we know GZ wasn't stoned? Why is TM only of concern to you? If your child was shot, under ANY circumstances, wouldn't you want the shooter drug tested?

Im betting, no you wouldn't care about the shooters blood system but you would DEMAND your dead child be tested, is that about right?



posted on May, 24 2012 @ 11:41 PM
link   
LilDudeissocoolsuch said in this thread
www.abovetopsecret.com...


Would Zimmerman had been following, stalking, lets say Mormon Missionaries? No of course not. He stalked a black individual waring a hoody. That was racial motive.

Because of Zimmerman's racial motivation that lead to his act of stalking is what placed him in a position.


LilDudeissocoolsuch also in the thread posted video of Bill O'Riley discussing profiling and racial profiling. This post: www.abovetopsecret.com...

LilDudeissocoolsuch was against Bills views that sometimes profiling by police are necessary.

First off we dont know that Zimmerman was using racial profiling. He could have just been profiling based on other factors besides race. For anyone to assume that it had to be racial profiling simply because Martin was black is stupid. You were not there, you don't have first hand information or any clue what really happened.

Bill brings up a good point. Police both black and white do use profiling to help find criminals and stop crime. Black police often profile individuals that happen to be black and that also fit a criminal profile, and shake them down to find out if they are committing crimes. Does this make the black cop a racist or traitor to his skin color? That's Crazy.

I live in a an apartment complex in New Orleans. After Hurricane Katrina hit this neighborhood was flooded with Mexican and black hoodlums selling crack and breaking into homes, cars and shooting people. (This was a few weeks after the storm when people started returning home) This neighborhood previously did not have a high population of black or Mexican people. We and our neighbors had to profile to maintain our safety. If we saw a group of black or Mexican people standing around yes, wearing hoodies that may conceal weapons, we avoided them. If we knew they were hanging around a place say a car or house they had no business being around, we called the cops. We didn't have any trouble with the few law abiding Mexican and black people we knew were previously part of our community. They were on our side to help stop this bad criminal element. Were we profiling for racisms sake? No.

I think no one knows what was in Zimmermans mind - he could have been racially profiling Martin yes, but there is no evidence that proves this. Anyone jumping on the racist profiling bandwagon is not thinking clearly. There may have been other things a neighborhood watch patrol person would be looking for. We simply don't have the facts to say one way or another. One thing is clear, many in the black community it seems has turned this into a racial profiling witch hunt. They did this without facts. How ignorant can people be. They took a tragedy and used it to further their social agenda. These people should be ashamed of themselves.



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 06:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by fbluth
reply to post by popsmayhem
 


The only way treyvon could
of done that to zimmerman
was in a ambush..

How else could zimmerman catch up
to treyvon, if treyvon did not want
him too?



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 06:42 AM
link   
reply to post by popsmayhem
 


So then you are saying that GZ father is a liar then? Would that be correct? GZ father said his son was sucker punched at the 'T' and knocked to the ground and TM got on top and starting beating him and pounding his head in the sidewalk for over one minute. TM body was found 30+ feet from the "T" of the sidewalk. GZ father and Dee Dee both say that words were exchanged, that is not an ambush.

So you are saying that GZ father is lying? Ok, I get it, you won't even believe GZ own blood relatives who have much more incentive than you to get GZ off and you think they are lying.

So, if GZ family is lying, the media is lying, all the witness, except John are lying, all the evidence is lying, and yet somehow GZ is not lying.

Ok, got ya.

But you still failed to answer my question. How was TM supposed to know that GZ was going to get out of his car and follow him? Since GZ was still in his car when GZ said 'he ran'.....how would TM know where to hide in order to ENSURE that GZ found him? Why would TM run in the first place? Why not just confront GZ right at his car? I mean, wouldn't that ensure that he got to beat GZ a**? If TM wanted to beat down GZ so badly, why didn't he do it right there when GZ says 'he's coming to check me out'....why would he run to later 'ambush'?

Can you even tell how ridiculous you sound when you say such things? It is absurd to thing that if TM wanted to confront and fight GZ that he would 1st run IN HOPES that GZ would follow him and IN HOPES GZ would find him. You don't think that sounds silly? Or do you think TM was physic?



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 06:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by fbluth
reply to post by popsmayhem
 
How was TM supposed to know that GZ was going to get out of his car and follow him?


How did zimmerman know treyvon
was going to ambush him?

He didn't, he would of never let
treyvon get on top of him and beat
his head in if he knew.



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 07:53 AM
link   
reply to post by popsmayhem
 


Ok. I see I made you think about actual logical things. Seeing as you have no answers for me, you can only continue to answer with your fantasies of ambush.

Sorry I made you think. I know it hurts.



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 05:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by fbluth
reply to post by popsmayhem
 


So then you are saying that GZ father is a liar then? Would that be correct? GZ father said his son was sucker punched at the 'T' and knocked to the ground and TM got on top and starting beating him and pounding his head in the sidewalk for over one minute. TM body was found 30+ feet from the "T" of the sidewalk. GZ father and Dee Dee both say that words were exchanged, that is not an ambush.


First off your facts are wrong he was in the yard of the first Condo on the right side looking down the walkway. The yards arent even 30 ft long. His actually place where he was was about 10 ft from the corner of the building.Secondly if it happened as zimmerman claimed and Treyvon was standing down that sidewalk and asked zimmerman if he had a problem he probably walked closer to Treyvon to get a better look.The problem is i dont believe Zimmerman thought Treyvon was going to punch him.Because if Zimmerman believed that he should have been ready to trade off blows with Treyvon which do to the autopsy report we know didnt happen.


So you are saying that GZ father is lying? Ok, I get it, you won't even believe GZ own blood relatives who have much more incentive than you to get GZ off and you think they are lying.

So, if GZ family is lying, the media is lying, all the witness, except John are lying, all the evidence is lying, and yet somehow GZ is not lying.


The eye witness reports are consistent with Zimmerman's story unless your talking about character witnesses which is totally irrelevant to the case.


But you still failed to answer my question. How was TM supposed to know that GZ was going to get out of his car and follow him? Since GZ was still in his car when GZ said 'he ran'.....how would TM know where to hide in order to ENSURE that GZ found him? Why would TM run in the first place? Why not just confront GZ right at his car? I mean, wouldn't that ensure that he got to beat GZ a**? If TM wanted to beat down GZ so badly, why didn't he do it right there when GZ says 'he's coming to check me out'....why would he run to later 'ambush'?


Why did Treyvon have to know he was getting out the car he could see he wasnt blind.Im sure the hiding was to get away from Zimmerman why would you hide to be found thats just stupid. As far as confronting someone in there vehicle anybody with any street smarts knows you dont do that come on now. As far as why run then get brave im sure if he was hiding he got a look at zimmerman and come on hes not very scary and Treyvon could have thought why am i running from this A hole. So he decided to confront him by asking Do you have a problem? If Zimmerman looked the least bit scared i can see Treyvon getting cocky and beating him senseless. At his age i had some fights start very similar to that. Fortunately for me i didnt beat there head against the ground (usually just enough to put them down and walk away) and im also fortunate i didnt run across anybody carrying a gun. Do i think Zimmerman is a wimp yes.However he does have the right to defend himself and if he believed Treyvon was going to kill him (again being a pansy) then he had the right to shoot him before serious injury occurred.

I think i got all your questions any more?



new topics

top topics



 
105
<< 373  374  375    377  378  379 >>

log in

join