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.

 

Breaking News! George Zimmerman found not guilty.

page: 90
157
<< 87  88  89    91  92  93 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 24 2013 @ 07:51 AM
link   
reply to post by butcherguy
 


This is going over you head. I'll leave it here.




posted on Jul, 24 2013 @ 07:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by JuniorDisco
reply to post by butcherguy
 


This is going over you head. I'll leave it here.

Please do that.
I'll just stay stupid in your eyes. (and I won't mind it one bit)



posted on Jul, 24 2013 @ 09:15 AM
link   
i bet you the remaining jurors come out and say they thought zimmerman was guilty and wished they could have charged him with manslaughter but the evidence and florida judicial system would not allow them to convict him. i bet you the majority of america feels the same way, i know i do.



posted on Jul, 24 2013 @ 12:17 PM
link   
reply to post by JuniorDisco
 



Because this is what you actually wrote in response to me saying "He benefited hugely from Martin not being there":

I was not saying that at all. I was saying the benefit came to society when George pulled the trigger and eliminated a problem child who might have eventually killed someone in his lifetime.


Hardly the action of someone who is sure they got their story straight, is it?

It has nothing to do with his actions regardless of his story. It has everything to do with the lawyer. In case you didn't know lawyers are paid to make those decisions.


You clearly think that this verdict will encourage innocent people to shoot attackers.

I stand corrected on that. You are right. I hope it encourages those millions of victims to protect themselves from rape robbery and murder. After all those doing the raping, robbing, and murdering have it coming to them.


you're going to end up releasing the perpetrator for the same reason: overwhelming evidence that he killed in self defence.

Are you saying that it is NOT O.K. to release someone under those circumstances just because there are no other witnesses and the only other witnesses is dead? You need to re-evaluate that argument.


You realise those are the same things, right? Anyway, you also wrote this:
"Go get into an argument with someone and kill them"

I was responding to what you wrote on page 84 .


Say you and I have an argument which turns into a tussle. I shoot you dead and claim self defence. That's now a much better option for me in terms of walking away from jail than just beating you up. I may have murdered you, but I'll walk.

So I said . ..


I’ll tell you what. Go out and try to prove your theory. Go get into an argument with someone and kill them and then tell me that they let you off for self-defense. After all if it is as easy as you say it is then there shouldn’t be a problem.

That should Cut and Dry That. You said you could do it. I said go prove it.
Try not to continue revisiting that it’s like a broken record.


Where did I say that?

Right here .. .


I bash myself up a little bit, and claim you attacked me.

By that statement you are saying that George probably kicked his own ass, shot Trayvon, and claim self defense. DIDN'T HAPPEN.


You would know. You tried to get me to kill someone earlier

As I had shown earlier, you were the one that said you could do it. I said prove.

Now with all of that being said, instead of repeating everything over again, try to bring some new material to the table.



posted on Jul, 24 2013 @ 01:16 PM
link   
reply to post by conspiracy nut
 





i bet you the majority of america feels the same way, i know i do.

You are wrong. Otherwise there would be droves of white people protesting.

Imagine your little sister or mother on her back with a man beating her head.
Is he just trying to prove his point?
Is he going to only knock her out?
Is he trying to subdue her for rape?
Is he trying to kill her?
Since the man is not telling her what his intentions are should she pull the trigger???????

There may be one or two political twitches left in this story. But it won't amount to anything.

The biggest events left will be.
GZ comes out of hiding.
GZ gets a new job.



posted on Jul, 24 2013 @ 01:29 PM
link   
reply to post by samkent
 


Are you serious?

That is a line of horse S[Snip]T.

It could be easily construed as a violent act for a man to do that to your mother or sister.
Trying to prove his point?
About what? There is no need to violently attack a mother or a sister, knock them on the ground, and get on top of them to prove a point.
That is stoooooooopid as hell to even consider that.

By that you are saying that the attacker has to announce his intentions while he is attacking so that you know if it is OK for the mother or daughter to defend themselves.

To start off with, just Touching someone without their consent is assault weather you make your intentions known or not. Secondly, someone who is attacking is making their intentions known just by touching you without consent.


Since the man is not telling her what his intentions are should she pull the trigger???????

HELL YES ! ! !

P.S.. . . a murderer NEVER announces that he intends to murder you. He just does it.

What planet do you live on?



posted on Jul, 24 2013 @ 01:36 PM
link   
reply to post by ShadellacZumbrum
 

Plus Trayvon threatened to kill Zimmerman....
and he was going for Zimmerman's gun.



posted on Jul, 24 2013 @ 01:39 PM
link   
reply to post by butcherguy
 


I was trying to Not make light of the obvious.

I wanted to respond to that post on its terms.



posted on Jul, 24 2013 @ 03:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by ShadellacZumbrum

I was not saying that at all. I was saying the benefit came to society when George pulled the trigger and eliminated a problem child who might have eventually killed someone in his lifetime.


Nice. Thank god he's dead, right? Because he, um, might have killed somebody in the future.

As I always say, you guys offer Zimmerman every benefit of the doubt, but Martin is guilty of a sort of 'potential murderer' despite being 17 and, er, never having killed anybody. If you're not racist you're at least something very close to it.



It has nothing to do with his actions regardless of his story. It has everything to do with the lawyer. In case you didn't know lawyers are paid to make those decisions.


So his lawyer made the decision that his story would probably fall apart on the stand.



I stand corrected on that. You are right. I hope it encourages those millions of victims to protect themselves from rape robbery and murder. After all those doing the raping, robbing, and murdering have it coming to them.


Agreed. But remember the rapists, robbers, and murderers can get guns too. And they can plead self defence too.



Are you saying that it is NOT O.K. to release someone under those circumstances just because there are no other witnesses and the only other witnesses is dead? You need to re-evaluate that argument.


No. I'm saying - and you should try to at least work out the basic meaning of what I write before responding - that a situation where it is desirable to kill the other witnesses is not one you want to encourage.

I'm also saying that your understanding of the situation is hopelessly binary. But I'm guessing you won't understand what I mean by that. When one of those robbers you talked about earlier gets into a fight with you, and draws a gun, he's now a lot more likely to shoot you.

Are you saying it's desirable that he is then set free?




I was responding to what you wrote on page 84 .

That should Cut and Dry That. You said you could do it. I said go prove it.


Yes, you tried to get me to kill somebody. You're a violent person, clearly. Or at least that's what the guys who made Martin out to be a gangster would say about you.



By that statement you are saying that George probably kicked his own ass, shot Trayvon, and claim self defense. DIDN'T HAPPEN.


Sorry? How does me saying "I bash myself up a bit" have anything to do with Zimmerman's actions? I never even mentioned him! You just made an assumption that that's what I meant. You should try not to do that.




As I had shown earlier, you were the one that said you could do it. I said prove.


So we're now back to you admitting that you did. Ironic that you accuse me of rehashing my arguments when I've literally had to spend a long post even getting you to remember what you wrote. And I could refer you to my response to it in the first place - that it is literally the stupidest thing I've ever read on this board, in a strong field. But what's the point? All of this has nothing to do with the crux of the argument.



posted on Jul, 24 2013 @ 03:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by ShadellacZumbrum


I wanted to respond to that post on its terms.


Um, I think you may have screwed that up as well. But hey ho.



posted on Jul, 24 2013 @ 04:21 PM
link   
reply to post by JuniorDisco
 





So his lawyer made the decision that his story would probably fall apart on the stand.

No his lawyer had determined that the prosecution had already slit their own throats so there was no need.



Yes, you tried to get me to kill somebody. You're a violent person, clearly. Or at least that's what the guys who made Martin out to be a gangster would say about you.

Are you a blathering idiot?
You are the one who said you could do it. I said prove it. I am not the violent one. You are the one who suggested it. Now go prove it. I want to see if you can, like you say, get away with it.
You are the who said you could not me.
Enough said about that until you bring back pictures and post them. Put your money where your mouth is.


How does me saying "I bash myself up a bit" have anything to do with Zimmerman's actions?

Because you are implying that Zimmerman did that very thing. That is NOT the case. He had a punk hoodlum attack him. That is where his injuries came from.


we're now back to you admitting that you did

Yes I am admitting that you did in fact say you could do it. I just want you to prove it.

There is no need to respond to this. I am not going to bother to dignify your comments. You are a broken record going back over and over and over and over and over. Its terrible. Introduce some new material or submit to your loss, which I might add is more than obvious to Everyone but you.

This will be the last time I respond to you unless you introduce something new.

You have beaten the horse to death. He is laying on the ground with his false teeth knocked, and twitching with the last bit of life he had in him. There is no need to continue to kick him. He is dead.
edit on 24-7-2013 by ShadellacZumbrum because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 24 2013 @ 05:21 PM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.



posted on Jul, 24 2013 @ 11:55 PM
link   
I have to admit I haven't seen all of the posts in the thread, but we still seem to be talking about Zimmerman's being the only story and that he could have been making it up to protect himself.

Perhaps you recall one of the detectives testifying about a "Challenge interview" in which they lied to Zimmerman and told him they had found a video of the entire event. The idea, he told the court, was to shake Zimmerman and his story and to get him to bring his story more in line with what was on the supposed video.

The officer testified that, when told they had the whole thing on tape, Zimmerman said "Thank God." The officer's experience led him to believe, as he told the court, that Zimmerman was being truthful.



posted on Jul, 26 2013 @ 12:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by ShadellacZumbrum

No his lawyer had determined that the prosecution had already slit their own throats so there was no need.


That's your opinion. Mine is that he would have continued to change his story under pressure and thus damaged his case.




Are you a blathering idiot?
You are the one who said you could do it. I said prove it. I am not the violent one. You are the one who suggested it. Now go prove it. I want to see if you can, like you say, get away with it.
You are the who said you could not me.
Enough said about that until you bring back pictures and post them. Put your money where your mouth is.


I don't think I'm the "blathering idiot"[sic].

Here's how this exchange has gone:

ME - the Zimmerman verdict coupled with Florida's gun laws makes innocent people more likely to get shot

YOU - Prove it, go out and murder someone.

ME - What? No way. Why do you want me to murder someone?

YOU - I never said that.

ME - ...? You said it here (provides quote)

YOU - YES. Go out and do it!


As an aside I pointed out that were you to be murdered in the near future in a similar way that Martin was, you would ironically likely be labelled as a dangerous, violent person for suggesting this.




Because you are implying that Zimmerman did that very thing. That is NOT the case. He had a punk hoodlum attack him. That is where his injuries came from.


I'm implying no such thing. You inferred that, but I never made any comment on Zimmerman.




Yes I am admitting that you did in fact say you could do it. I just want you to prove it.


As I said before - and note that it's not me that is the broken record here - one can prove, or at least logically arrive at, conclusions without actually carrying out the activity in question. This is something most people learn by about the age of ten, I'd say.

If you are killed in a fight started by someone else, and there are no witnesses, will you be happy that the law is so generous to them when it lets them go? Personally I would want there to be something in the statutes that made that eventuality less likely.



posted on Jul, 26 2013 @ 01:06 PM
link   
reply to post by JuniorDisco
 


Still Beating that Dead Horse? Have some Damn Mercy for crying out loud.

Look at him. He isn't even twitching anymore. Now your jumping on his false teeth to squeeze whatever last bit of life is in there.

I know you can't help yourself. I guess I am going to have to forgive that. You have already lost the argument so I don’t know why you continue.

But, if you are going to post garbage you need to Quote Exactly what was said.. . . Here, I will do it for you. ..

You Said .. .


Say you and I have an argument which turns into a tussle. I shoot you dead and claim self defence. That's now a much better option for me in terms of walking away from jail than just beating you up. I may have murdered you, but I'll walk.

I Said . ..


I’ll tell you what. Go out and try to prove your theory. Go get into an argument with someone and kill them and then tell me that they let you off for self-defense. After all if it is as easy as you say it is then there shouldn’t be a problem.

Those quotes came from page 84 and 85. Read it a couple of times to be sure that it sinks in.

There is absolutely No Question what you said. There is absolutely No Question what I said.


note that it's not me that is the broken record here

It most certainly is you. Why did you come back to revisit the same thing over and over and over and over?

I Need to get that Poor Innocent Horse Buried before it is Absolutely Desecrated. You should be ashamed of yourself.

Now go away. You are adding nothing to the conversation. I will not entertain any further responses.

edit on 26-7-2013 by ShadellacZumbrum because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 26 2013 @ 02:02 PM
link   
reply to post by charles1952
 


Any "challenge interview" should have been done on the night of the shooting. Serino spent 5 minutes or so with Zimmerman before saying he was free to go, when really he should have been letting him sweat for a few hours after Singleton's initial interview, and then going in and not treating Zimmerman like it was him who was the victim.



posted on Jul, 26 2013 @ 02:13 PM
link   
reply to post by IvanAstikov
 




and not treating Zimmerman like it was him who was the victim.

Even though he was the victim.



posted on Jul, 26 2013 @ 02:18 PM
link   
reply to post by IvanAstikov
 


Are you suggesting the investigation was Incomplete?

And why leave him sweat for so long, Especially if he knew he had told the truth in the first place?

ETA:

People in that kind of situation that are telling the truth don't sweat so easily.

edit on 26-7-2013 by ShadellacZumbrum because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 26 2013 @ 09:22 PM
link   
George Zimmerman is as Guilty as George Bush with bird crap on his shoulder!



posted on Jul, 26 2013 @ 09:41 PM
link   
reply to post by faust833
 


Do you care to elaborate on that at all?

Your Avatar says that you are a Deep Thinker.

Prove it.

Your statement brings nothing to the conversation.

If nothing, try to utilize your "Deep Thinking" skills to table a discussion that is worth responding to.




top topics



 
157
<< 87  88  89    91  92  93 >>

log in

join