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.

 

George Zimmerman appears in court. Seems very relaxed.

page: 2
2
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 04:06 PM
link   
reply to post by relocator
 


it doesn't matter if he beats this case or not. its already proven that he has received more compassion than he gives to the people that encounter him.

if the world was in control of people like him, blood would be flowing in the streets up to a horse's bridle.

under our laws, the accused is protected from such barbarism.




posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 04:15 PM
link   
reply to post by michaelbrux
 


Hmm...speculation without first hand knowledge or access to the evidence...two can play that game.

Martin tried to kill another human being and that human being killed him instead after a struggle. Zimmerman was attacked by a man (in most states 17 year olds would be tried as adults in this type of situation) that was 5" taller, 11 years younger, and a high school football player. Thankfully Zimmerman was able to resist the threat that the larger, stronger, younger man posed to him. At least Zimmerman didn't set out to do harm that night unlike Martin; and at least Zimmerman was able to defend himself and not die at the hands of Martin.

I have as much information and facts about this case as you do; interesting how we both arrived at different conclusions. Perhaps what would be best is to be sad at the loss of a life but wait until the evidence is presented and a trial is held before we rain judgement upon this case?

The above summary is not my personal view of how this occurred. I feel that my personal view is irrelevant since I don't have access to the details of the situation. I wanted to create a description of the event using the same opinion based reasoning as the post I replied to. I am deeply saddened at any loss of life and my post history will show my feelings regarding this incident.
edit on 12-4-2012 by Dilligaf28 because: (no reason given)

edit on 12-4-2012 by Dilligaf28 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 04:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dilligaf28
reply to post by michaelbrux
 


Hmm...speculation without first hand knowledge or access to the evidence...two can play that game.

Martin tried to kill another human being and that human being killed him instead after a struggle. Zimmerman was attacked by a man (in most states 17 year olds would be tried as adults in this type of situation) that was 5" taller, 11 years younger, and a high school football player. Thankfully Zimmerman was able to resist the threat that the larger, stronger, younger man posed to him. At least Zimmerman didn't set out to do harm that night unlike Martin; and at least Zimmerman was able to defend himself and not die at the hands of Martin.

I have as much information and facts about this case as you do; interesting how we both arrived at different conclusions. Perhaps what would be best is to be sad at the loss of a life but wait until the evidence is presented and a trial is held before we rain judgement upon this case?

The above summary is not my personal view of how this occurred. I feel that my personal view is irrelevant since I don't have access to the details of the situation. I wanted to create a description of the event using the same opinion based reasoning as the post I replied to. I am deeply saddened at any loss of life and my post history will show my feelings regarding this incident.
edit on 12-4-2012 by Dilligaf28 because: (no reason given)

edit on 12-4-2012 by Dilligaf28 because: (no reason given)


with what did Martin try and kill him? was Martin a trained martial artist? was Martin mixing the Skittles with the Iced Tea to create some sort of explosive device?

the only fact is that Martin is dead and he died from a gunshot wound delivered from Zimmerman's gun. this has been admitted by Zimmerman.

I think you may be misunderstanding my point. the American justice system is better than your opinion...

if Zimmerman goes free or if he is found guilty...this is the fact.

if Zimmerman is found not guilty of murder and he goes to find a job...will it make a difference? I think not.
if Zimmerman is found not guilty of murder and he looks to buy a home...will his neighbors welcome him? maybe they will if he lives around you.

this whole event is not about whether some dimwit killed an unarmed child...this is a fact...he killed him.

its about the rule of Law.

had some Vigilante Hate group posting wanted posters been successful...we all lose...

that the situation that has emerged is taking shape is evidence of Victory in more ways than you may be able to understand.



posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 04:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by michaelbrux

Originally posted by Dilligaf28
reply to post by michaelbrux
 


Hmm...speculation without first hand knowledge or access to the evidence...two can play that game.

Martin tried to kill another human being and that human being killed him instead after a struggle. Zimmerman was attacked by a man (in most states 17 year olds would be tried as adults in this type of situation) that was 5" taller, 11 years younger, and a high school football player. Thankfully Zimmerman was able to resist the threat that the larger, stronger, younger man posed to him. At least Zimmerman didn't set out to do harm that night unlike Martin; and at least Zimmerman was able to defend himself and not die at the hands of Martin.

I have as much information and facts about this case as you do; interesting how we both arrived at different conclusions. Perhaps what would be best is to be sad at the loss of a life but wait until the evidence is presented and a trial is held before we rain judgement upon this case?

The above summary is not my personal view of how this occurred. I feel that my personal view is irrelevant since I don't have access to the details of the situation. I wanted to create a description of the event using the same opinion based reasoning as the post I replied to. I am deeply saddened at any loss of life and my post history will show my feelings regarding this incident.
edit on 12-4-2012 by Dilligaf28 because: (no reason given)

edit on 12-4-2012 by Dilligaf28 because: (no reason given)


with what did Martin try and kill him? was Martin a trained martial artist? was Martin mixing the Skittles with the Iced Tea to create some sort of explosive device?

the only fact is that Martin is dead and he died from a gunshot wound delivered from Zimmerman's gun. this has been admitted by Zimmerman.

I think you may be misunderstanding my point. the American justice system is better than your opinion...

if Zimmerman goes free or if he is found guilty...this is the fact.

if Zimmerman is found not guilty of murder and he goes to find a job...will it make a difference? I think not.
if Zimmerman is found not guilty of murder and he looks to buy a home...will his neighbors welcome him? maybe they will if he lives around you.

this whole event is not about whether some dimwit killed an unarmed child...this is a fact...he killed him.

its about the rule of Law.

had some Vigilante Hate group posting wanted posters been successful...we all lose...

that the situation that has emerged is taking shape is evidence of Victory in more ways than you may be able to understand.







I'll pose a few questions/make a few statements in response:

1.) Do you feel that a 17 year old 6'1 high school football player and a 28 year old overweight hispanic guy are an even match? Do you honestly feel that Martin could not have been a danger to Zimmerman since Martin was "unarmed"?

2.) The debate isn't about the killing of an unarmed child it is about whether the killing was in self defense. Do you have access to information that we the public does not that shows otherwise?

3.) If under the "rule of law" you kill in self defense there is no crime.

4.) I'm not sure why you feel that my neighborhood would welcome Zimmerman. Could you please elaborate on that? It sounds like your making a very broad spectrum statement about the place I live based solely on the information I have provided in my post. Is this another example of your access to privileged information or just you stereotyping me? BTW Zimmerman's neighbors certainly seem to love him; even the african american ones!

5.) I need you to clarify that last "sentence" it makes absolutely no sense. All I see is an attempt to subtlety insult me by saying I can't understand. What I can't understand is the sentence or the thought it is attempting to express.

6.) Why is Zimmerman a "dim wit"?

7.) You are absolutely correct about the black panthers and their bounty! I'm happy to see that we have a common viewpoint in at least some aspect of this.

There is a lot of your bias/tension regarding this situation making its way into your posts. Perhaps you would consider a few moments to cool off before you respond?


edit on 12-4-2012 by Dilligaf28 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 04:42 PM
link   
This whole thing especially 2nd degree murder is BS unless there is some compelling evidence the public has not heard. This is grandstanding and or an attempt to get him to cop to a lessor charge through intimidation. Cops would not arrest, the grand jury would not indict so this prosecutor decides to press charges despite the lack of evidence against him and the great evidence that it was self defense. That's what happens when you have corporate administrative courts that circumvent the constitution. There was a time when a grand jury was the only way to bring a claim.

They could be banking on him being tried and convicted on the media already and hoping a jury convicts on emotion and conjecture the same way.


edit on 12-4-2012 by hawkiye because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 04:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dilligaf28

Originally posted by michaelbrux

Originally posted by Dilligaf28
reply to post by michaelbrux
 



I'll pose a few questions/make a few statements in response:

1.) Do you feel that a 17 year old 6'1 high school football player and a 28 year old overweight hispanic guy are an even match? Do you honestly feel that Martin could not have been a danger to Zimmerman since Martin was "unarmed"?

2.) The debate isn't about the killing of an unarmed child it is about whether the killing was in self defense. Do you have access to information that we the public does not that shows otherwise?

3.) If under the "rule of law" you kill in self defense there is no crime.

4.) I'm not sure why you feel that my neighborhood would welcome Zimmerman. Could you please elaborate on that? It sounds like your making a very broad spectrum statement about the place I live based solely on the information I have provided in my post. Is this another example of your access to privileged information or just you stereotyping me? BTW Zimmerman's neighbors certainly seem to love him; even the african american ones!

5.) I need you to clarify that last "sentence" it makes absolutely no sense. All I see is an attempt to subtlety insult me by saying I can't understand. What I can't understand is the sentence or the thought it is attempting to express.

6.) Why is Zimmerman a "dim wit"?

7.) You are absolutely correct about the black panthers and their bounty! I'm happy to see that we have a common viewpoint in at least some aspect of this.

There is a lot of your bias/tension regarding this situation making its way into your posts. Perhaps you would consider a few moments to cool off before you respond?


edit on 12-4-2012 by Dilligaf28 because: (no reason given)




1. the encounter never had to occur, from what I understand...Zimmerman chose for it happen despite the advice of the 9-11 operator. Zimmerman felt he could take him...the gun he was carrying gave him the necessary courage, apparently. Had Zimmerman felt, in my opinion, that Martin was a real threat, perhaps he'd have heeded the the advice given to him from someone who cared.

2. Read above.

3. What I meant by the rule of Law being victorious was that Zimmerman will have the opportunity to stand trial and prove his innocence, as opposed to him being the victim of a vigilante revenge crime.

4. you seem to like Zimmerman...perhaps he can live around you. that type of behavior won't fly in my town.

5. have to get back to you on this one...i had to delete it so I could get more keystrokes.

6. Only a Dimwit would find himself in such a situation as Zimmerman is in at present.

7. Rule of Law...not the Mob.


edit on 12-4-2012 by michaelbrux because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 04:54 PM
link   
reply to post by michaelbrux
 


1. the encounter never had to occur, from what I understand...Zimmerman chose for it happen despite the advice of the 9-11 operator. Zimmerman felt he could take him...the gun he was carrying gave him the necessary courage, apparently. Had Zimmerman felt, in my opinion, that Martin was a real threat, perhaps he'd have heeded the the advice given to him from someone who cared.

2. Read above.

3. What I meant by the rule of Law being victorious was that Zimmerman will have the opportunity to stand trial and prove his innocence, as opposed to him being the victim of a vigilante revenge crime.

4. you seem to like Zimmerman...perhaps he can live around you. that type of behavior won't fly in my town.

5. have to get back to you on this one...i had to delete it so I could get more keystrokes.

6. Only a Dimwit would find himself in such a situation as Zimmerman is in at present.

7. Rule of Law...not the Mob.



posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 05:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dilligaf28
reply to post by michaelbrux
 


Hmm...speculation without first hand knowledge or access to the evidence...two can play that game.

Martin tried to kill another human being and that human being killed him instead after a struggle. Zimmerman was attacked by a man (in most states 17 year olds would be tried as adults in this type of situation) that was 5" taller, 11 years younger, and a high school football player. Thankfully Zimmerman was able to resist the threat that the larger, stronger, younger man posed to him. At least Zimmerman didn't set out to do harm that night unlike Martin; and at least Zimmerman was able to defend himself and not die at the hands of Martin.

I have as much information and facts about this case as you do; interesting how we both arrived at different conclusions. Perhaps what would be best is to be sad at the loss of a life but wait until the evidence is presented and a trial is held before we rain judgement upon this case?

The above summary is not my personal view of how this occurred. I feel that my personal view is irrelevant since I don't have access to the details of the situation. I wanted to create a description of the event using the same opinion based reasoning as the post I replied to. I am deeply saddened at any loss of life and my post history will show my feelings regarding this incident.
edit on 12-4-2012 by Dilligaf28 because: (no reason given)

edit on 12-4-2012 by Dilligaf28 because: (no reason given)


And here we go. Second page, and itll already devolve into another "tray is wrong" "zimm is wrong" thread.




posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 05:05 PM
link   
reply to post by Dilligaf28
 





28 year old overweight


I don't know....that police station video and now his court appearance video show him to be a pretty buff, in-shape guy who looks like he can hold his own pretty easily. He didn't appear overweight to me in the slightest. And 28 isn't exactly old.



posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 05:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by michaelbrux
reply to post by michaelbrux
 


1. the encounter never had to occur, from what I understand...Zimmerman chose for it happen despite the advice of the 9-11 operator. Zimmerman felt he could take him...the gun he was carrying gave him the necessary courage, apparently. Had Zimmerman felt, in my opinion, that Martin was a real threat, perhaps he'd have heeded the the advice given to him from someone who cared.

2. Read above.

3. What I meant by the rule of Law being victorious was that Zimmerman will have the opportunity to stand trial and prove his innocence, as opposed to him being the victim of a vigilante revenge crime.

4. you seem to like Zimmerman...perhaps he can live around you. that type of behavior won't fly in my town.

5. have to get back to you on this one...i had to delete it so I could get more keystrokes.

6. Only a Dimwit would find himself in such a situation as Zimmerman is in at present.

7. Rule of Law...not the Mob.


1. The 911 operator is not a law enforcement officer and their warning had no legal weight to compel Zimmerman to follow it. He was acting in his capacity as a Neighborhood Watch member in pursuing someone that he found suspicious given the totality of circumstances in the recent events of the neighborhood.

3. He will stand trial. If he is found innocent will your opinion of him change?

4. I don't like or dislike Zimmerman I do not know him. I see more generalizing in this response to me but no answer to the original query I made.

6. If I ever defend myself against someone and end up killing them to preserve my life then I will gladly wear the "dimwit" monicker; yet your usage of it is yet another example of a broad generalization about someone based purely on hear say rather than on facts.

7. Rule of law over mob rule is something we agree on.


Originally posted by michaelbrux

that the situation that has emerged is taking shape is evidence of Victory in more ways than you may be able to understand.



This is what I need you to clarify



posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 05:07 PM
link   
reply to post by captaintyinknots
 


Your right in that it is turning into that type of thread. I'm confused as to why you quoted me rather than the person that originally posted the whole "martin is right zim is wrong" thing to begin with?



posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 05:09 PM
link   
the last sentence that didn't make any sense deserves its own post.

i've come to the conclusion that the true nature of the 'war' that is being waged against the United States of America is not an attack on physical things...but a war against its laws, which form the foundation of the system. If you destroy the Constitution...you destroy the nation which rests upon it....does this make sense?

i outed a poster the other day because i felt she had created a thread for the singular purpose of brainstorming ways to attack the 4th Amendment of the Constitution. or at least to disseminate this concept to a broad audience.

i was explaining this by pointing out that the Casey Anthony case from last summer was an attack upon the 5th Amendment...specifically the provision concerning Double Jeopardy.

So..when I see a case like Zimmerman/Martin...i look at it as a weapon system designed to destroy, in the minds of the people, a part of their laws or their faith in their government to deliver 'Justice'.

This self-described 'New Black Panther Party', for example, puts forth a Wanted---Dead or Alive---poster...similar to the ones most Americans, including myself, will associate with the Old West and the one that George W. Bush issue for Osama bin Laden...

if people begin to respond to such things...this represents a failure of the system to provide them with the feelings of security they desire.

because Zimmerman was, at the very least, arrested, allowed perhaps to post bail, and is scheduled to stand trial for the crimes he's been accused of...the system has delivered what it said it will...thus, there is no need for the alternative; Vigilante Revenge Crimes.

so...its makes sense...

or does it?



posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 05:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dilligaf28
reply to post by captaintyinknots
 


Your right in that it is turning into that type of thread. I'm confused as to why you quoted me rather than the person that originally posted the whole "martin is right zim is wrong" thing to begin with?


I guess I didnt take his original statement that way. Either way, i dont intend on participating in another of these threads...



posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 05:11 PM
link   
reply to post by CoherentlyConfused
 


28 isn't old (i'm 32 so I hope it isn't hold) but there is a big difference between a 6'1 high school football playing athlete and a 5'6 hispanic especially when a portion of that difference is 11 years of age.

The actual differences/similarities between these two would be a lot easier to compare if the media were not constantly showing us old out of date pictures of both of these men.



posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 05:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by michaelbrux
the last sentence that didn't make any sense deserves its own post.

i've come to the conclusion that the true nature of the 'war' that is being waged against the United States of America is not an attack on physical things...but a war against its laws, which form the foundation of the system. If you destroy the Constitution...you destroy the nation which rests upon it....does this make sense?

i outed a poster the other day because i felt she had created a thread for the singular purpose of brainstorming ways to attack the 4th Amendment of the Constitution. or at least to disseminate this concept to a broad audience.

i was explaining this by pointing out that the Casey Anthony case from last summer was an attack upon the 5th Amendment...specifically the provision concerning Double Jeopardy.

So..when I see a case like Zimmerman/Martin...i look at it as a weapon system designed to destroy, in the minds of the people, a part of their laws or their faith in their government to deliver 'Justice'.

This self-described 'New Black Panther Party', for example, puts forth a Wanted---Dead or Alive---poster...similar to the ones most Americans, including myself, will associate with the Old West and the one that George W. Bush issue for Osama bin Laden...

if people begin to respond to such things...this represents a failure of the system to provide them with the feelings of security they desire.

because Zimmerman was, at the very least, arrested, allowed perhaps to post bail, and is scheduled to stand trial for the crimes he's been accused of...the system has delivered what it said it will...thus, there is no need for the alternative; Vigilante Revenge Crimes.

so...its makes sense...

or does it?





I want to offer an olive branch of sorts in order to keep this discussion civil. If you accept it I feel we can move forward in a civil discourse. I need you to offer one to me as well; in this case it would be to stop putting in the rather thinly veiled insults, stop asking me if I "understand", and in general try to support your argument without insulting me to do so.

Do you accept my olive branch and offer your own? If you do please reformat that last reply and leave out the little jabs, veiled insults, etc. so we can have a discussion. Also please try to answer the questions I have posed rather than avoiding them; it would be civil to answer a question posed to you.
edit on 12-4-2012 by Dilligaf28 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 05:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dilligaf28

Originally posted by michaelbrux
reply to post by michaelbrux
 


1. the encounter never had to occur, from what I understand...Zimmerman chose for it happen despite the advice of the 9-11 operator. Zimmerman felt he could take him...the gun he was carrying gave him the necessary courage, apparently. Had Zimmerman felt, in my opinion, that Martin was a real threat, perhaps he'd have heeded the the advice given to him from someone who cared.

2. Read above.

3. What I meant by the rule of Law being victorious was that Zimmerman will have the opportunity to stand trial and prove his innocence, as opposed to him being the victim of a vigilante revenge crime.

4. you seem to like Zimmerman...perhaps he can live around you. that type of behavior won't fly in my town.

5. have to get back to you on this one...i had to delete it so I could get more keystrokes.

6. Only a Dimwit would find himself in such a situation as Zimmerman is in at present.

7. Rule of Law...not the Mob.


1. The 911 operator is not a law enforcement officer and their warning had no legal weight to compel Zimmerman to follow it. He was acting in his capacity as a Neighborhood Watch member in pursuing someone that he found suspicious given the totality of circumstances in the recent events of the neighborhood.

3. He will stand trial. If he is found innocent will your opinion of him change?

4. I don't like or dislike Zimmerman I do not know him. I see more generalizing in this response to me but no answer to the original query I made.

6. If I ever defend myself against someone and end up killing them to preserve my life then I will gladly wear the "dimwit" monicker; yet your usage of it is yet another example of a broad generalization about someone based purely on hear say rather than on facts.

7. Rule of law over mob rule is something we agree on.


Originally posted by michaelbrux

that the situation that has emerged is taking shape is evidence of Victory in more ways than you may be able to understand.



This is what I need you to clarify


1. That's Tyranny and Anarchy.

2. I'm sorry to hear that you feel the Government decides the quality of your soul.

6. You should pray to your creator that you are always on the defense then...



posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 05:35 PM
link   
reply to post by Dilligaf28
 


i reread that post an unless you are a member of the New Black Panther Party or George W. Bush, I can't find any veiled insults. No insults were implied or intended.



posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 05:43 PM
link   
reply to post by michaelbrux
 


1. It is tyranny to be subjected to authority that is not justly derived or valid. The 911 dispatcher had no authority to order Zimmerman to halt; therefore his refusal to do so in fact an action against tyranny.

2. Where do you come up with this stuff?

3. I wouldn't take a life unless I had to to preserve my life or someone else's. I'm proud that I would defend myself or anyone else that is unable to defend themselves against the actions of an aggressor.

Your insults are thinly veiled and I will lift that veil. When you say "Do you understand" or "makes sense...or does it" you are trying to "box in" the other person; in other words you are trying to ask the question in such a way that one answer comes out to make the responder look intelligent and the opposite answer makes them look less than intelligent. Saying things like "I think you may be misunderstanding my point. the American justice system is better than your opinion... " not only offers up an insult it affirms your belief that your own views are superior. Your assuming that your convictions are correct and that I simply cannot understand them. Has it occurred to you that your convictions are wrong?

Where are the answers to the questions I posed? Please go back and answer them.
edit on 12-4-2012 by Dilligaf28 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 06:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dilligaf28
reply to post by michaelbrux
 


1. It is tyranny to be subjected to authority that is not justly derived or valid. The 911 dispatcher had no authority to order Zimmerman to halt; therefore his refusal to do so in fact an action against tyranny.

2. Where do you come up with this stuff?

3. I wouldn't take a life unless I had to to preserve my life or someone else's. I'm proud that I would defend myself or anyone else that is unable to defend themselves against the actions of an aggressor.

Your insults are thinly veiled and I will lift that veil. When you say "Do you understand" or "makes sense...or does it" you are trying to "box in" the other person; in other words you are trying to ask the question in such a way that one answer comes out to make the responder look intelligent and the opposite answer makes them look less than intelligent. Saying things like "I think you may be misunderstanding my point. the American justice system is better than your opinion... " not only offers up an insult it affirms your belief that your own views are superior. Your assuming that your convictions are correct and that I simply cannot understand them. Has it occurred to you that your convictions are wrong?

Where are the answers to the questions I posed? Please go back and answer them.
edit on 12-4-2012 by Dilligaf28 because: (no reason given)


1. Zimmerman's actions were against good counsel. he was under no legal obligation to follow it...considering all things...perhaps he sees now that he should have considered it. his life wouldn't suck so bad and as an added bonus he wouldn't have to account for the person he killed.

When he can't find a wife or job and loses his home perhaps then all this will make sense to him.

2. You may not understand, but I'm what I call a True Believer. You may stand before men to be Judged, but you will definitely stand before God...if you think you're gonna stand before HIS Throne and your statement of Acquittal from the State of Florida is gonna be of value...you believe in lies.

3. I'm not 100% certain that I'd take a life to defend my own...even if I did...I'm not certain if I be okay with it.

3b. That's cool...for a minute I thought you were the new leader of the New Black Panther Party...

to be fair...you were the first to say that what I wrote didn't make sense...i'm just trying to be clear...I have poor writing skills and my thoughts and sentences are often fragmented and difficult to follow. I've learned that over the past month.



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 1   >>

log in

join