The Zim-zam Has Been Flim-Flamed

Look, all I'm saying is we shouldn't be listening to anyone in a jet pack proclaiming themself the savior and declaring things best left to the criminal justice system...

Almost every situation with a crime involving blacks. Blacks are this great menace to civil American society who do nothing but commit crimes and upset the otherwise peaceful white utopia. It bleeds into our media, our portrayal of blacks and subsequently how whites who don't even interact with blacks react.

Clutch that handbag baby.

It's why the white pundits can't help but reach for the 'black people need to police themselves' dog whistles after every event. As far as 'Murica is concerned blacks are the embodiment of thug culture.

Maybe I should look more carefully at every white guy in the future. Never know which one might be the next serial killing psychopath. (That was sarcasm btw.)

...

Not saying that every incident shows that, just the hotly contested ones.

Even when they are proven to be the instigators, the media still treats the young black male as a martyr in the eyes of the public. Case in point: Treyvon Martin. To this day he was the instigator of the incident in question that led to his death and at every mention of Zimmerman, get's referred to in a positive light, some poor unarmed kid who was murdered in cold blood by this guy who's in the story they are writing about.

So now we're moving the goalpost as you guys like to say? He stated that the media narrative in this nation is that blacks can do no wrong and that all their problems stemmed from whitey...

If you want that though just look at fox news or just Sean Hannity when it comes to this specific trial.

There's far too many people on either side in these things that are willing to blame either side before anything is really even known.

Seriously. Read what I wrote.

(incoming "you don't know what that word means" excuse)

Sure Flavin.

I mean, you said you rolled off your chair and onto your *** laughing. I asked that if you disagreed and you are saying that I'm moving the goalposts in the argument.

Hint: Saying that I'm moving the goalposts in an argument asking you if you disagree with what was said is the strawman argument.

That is a clear misrepresentation! I did not say I fell onto my ***! For shame KN...

Do I disagree with what Ivlilla said? Yes. Is that what you then followed up with? no. Hence "moving the goalpost" He claimed that the media narrative in this country is one that states a black man can do no wrong and all the problems stem from whitey. You, on the other hand focused the argument to make it about media representation of blacks when related to hate crimes. As if they should be portrayed in a bad light when they are a victim of a hate crime or something? I get what you mean and I still disagree with you. That's why I told you to go look at any fox or conservative media and watch how they focus on the other side just like you may disagree with the narrative on the other side.

Media or not there is a pretty clear division on the issue between groups of people regardless of which narrative you've been exposed to. Each side usually has some pretty vocal advocates so the media narrative doesn't really have the effect you might think it does anyways.

I always love when you put the "hint" up like you think it makes any difference or that other people don't understand what's going on and then you criticize other people like Z the other day for being condescending lol...

Challenge him to a duel!

No I didn't, I asked for an example of a publicized hate crime where the African American was shown in a bad light? Does this sound familiar to you? It should because it is a direct copy/paste of what I wrote (so you don't accuse me of changing the question or moving the goalposts or whatever deflection tactic you choose to use next).

Thing about hate crimes is, it's not always evil white person attacking innocent black person. It happens the other way around, you just do not hear about it.

WHICH IS NOT WHAT I ORIGINALLY LAUGHED AT!!!! How do you not understand this? I mocked one much broader statement from the other guy then you asked me about something more specific.

Are you trying to tell me that you don't hear about crime if its black on white? If so... what world do you live in?

Yeah, remember that white girl who was killed by two black kids so they could steal her bike for parts, or that white kid who was tortured to death on Christmas Eve with a blowtorch by a black woman?

Oh, no wait. No.

You didn't hear about either of those in the media.

You sure as *** heard about Trayvon Martin, though.

So wait... how did you hear about it then?

Internet.

here you go

Here's some more

The TL;DR is that this was ALMOST news, until it turned out it was a black woman who brutally tortured a young white boy to death, and then it was completely dropped, hushed up, and swept under the rug.

Meanwhile, Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman were national headlines for months on end.

So let me get this straight... your evidence that this was "swept under the rug" is that there are plenty of articles out there on all of this and that she was put on trial?

Or in reality you're just upset because it didn't get as much coverage nationally?

Swept under the rug and not getting as much national coverage are two completely different things though...

That's just one example. You have the same access to information I do if you feel like you want to educate yourself.

Horrible, horrible, horrible things are done every day in this country to white people by black people, frequently for no other reason than the victims were white.

I mean, if five whites had kidnapped a black couple and tortured, raped, and murdered them, that would have been national news and cities would have burned.

So, given that these things don't show up in the news when whites are the victims and blacks are the perpetrators, you have the following options:

1) They are purposefully being excluded from public view because they do not fit the narrative the media is pushing.

2) They are purposefully being excluded from public view because no one *** cares because it's not a sensation when blacks do horrible things to white people because that's merely expected of them.

Go out on the street and ask a hundred people who Trayvon Martin was, and then ask those same 100 people who Jonathan Foster was.

Go on, do it.

Oh wait, this would force you to confront a harsh truth that contradicts your world view, so you're going to dismiss it, and me, as crackpot, insane, racist, etc.

who?


On another note: Zimmerman wasn't found innocent based on the stand-your-ground law, they didn't even try to go that approach...

I'm not sure what makes this more interesting though; the guy who almost shot him had a previous encounter, or if it had just been somebody after his head, I guess news at 11?

The two cases aren't even remotely related, and the point you're trying to make is baseless. Mona Nelson, the woman who killed Jonathan Foster, is serving life in prison without parole. She was held accountable for the crime.

Not only was George Zimmerman acquitted for the murder of an unarmed 17 year old boy, he's become a celebrity among you and your brood, so much so that he was invited- and had the audacity to show up- to an Orlando gun show and sign autographs.



This man is literal scum of the earth, and so is everyone who supports him.

Isn't that the point? Black guy shoots white guy, nobody bats an eye. White guy shoots black guy, everyone loses their minds.

Or are you going to say that it's acceptable how little media covers black on white hate crimes?

Ever heard of Gilbert Collar? I bet you if you do a little research (fat chance in your case), you would see strong similarities on a hotly contested trial that is mentioned on this very thread, with one minor difference. Let's see if you can figure it out.

/playsJeopardymusic

You and others keep confusing self defense with murder, stop it.

You also keep confusing "unarmed" with harmless, stop it.

You also keep confusing teenage thug with "boy," stop it.

Thug is the new N-word, haven't you heard?

Have you heard the word?


On point: heard and subsequently rolled my eyes and ignored.

None of it is. People are just trying to start drama over it.

All the girlfriend stuff was typical domestic dispute where the news overreacted because his name was in it. In each case the GF decided to either recant (which means she lied to the police) or just not press charges.

This is a totally different situation where another guy in the community has been screwing with GZ for months. The first few times he tried to provoke GZ and even called the police claiming GZ pointed a gun at him (where he demonstrated he didn't even have a gun at that time), and this latest incident the dude just pulled up next to GZ and fired a gun at him then sped away.

It's basically a case of a progressive extremest trying to take "revenge for Trevon!". Stand your ground has nothing to do with it. Reading all the past information, what we have is the liberal press continuing to paint this guy in the worst light possible.

Hell GZ wasn't even shot, the bullet missed and hit his windshield. Shards from the windshield cut his face but otherwise no injuries. The other guy was trying to murder him, which due to the previous stalking (actual legal stalking btw) would qualify this as attempted first degree murder. Lets see the liberal press try to defend this guy now.

Wait ... are the liberals still trying to defend TM's felony assault? Even after the trial where the medical evidence and ballistics provided that TM was straddling GZ and punching him in the face repeatedly? Eye witness testimony further collaborates that evidence and the prosecutions witness's were discovered to have been tampered with and coached before the trial.

If after all that publicly available information, people still can't see past their own biases and use objective rational, then they simply can't be reasoned with. What use is logic and reason to someone who values neither?

Trayvon was a thug that much is simple you don't just attack someone and bash there head into the ground for following you.

If this dude who took a shot at Zimemrman is the one who has been harassing him for months then he's in the wrong not Zimmerman.

It's called political correct narrative. It's a Marxist term used to referencing treating something as true because it's politically convenient and not because it's actually true. Lysenkoism is a prime example of this, the agricultural theories of Trofim Lysenko was discovered to be incorrect early on but they were politically convenient for the political leadership at the time. So the western concept of genetics and evolution was actively suppressed and those who utilized it were censored or killed as a way to maintain the politically correct belief in Lysenkoism, even if objectively it was killing people via starvation. That concept was then passed on to western professors as a form of cultural influence which then made its way to the core progressive ideology we see today. It's the reason they believe their feelings are more important then objective reality, it doesn't matter how many people get killed or what happens to anyone else, as long as they feel good then it's a win for them.