you're more surprised by the suggestion that crime and behaviour is cultural/nurtured than, uuuh, 'determined' by someone's genetic code?
Zimmerman Trial wrote:
Zimmerman said on the tape that the strike caused him to fall to the ground and Martin got on top of him and started to throw more punches.
"He was whaling on my head and I was yelling for help," Zimmerman can be heard saying to Singleton on the tape. "He put his hands on my nose and said, 'You're going to die tonight.'"
He added that he thought Martin was going for his gun, before he pulled on it and shot the young man.
There you go. They are pushing this angle as I said they would. The event leading up to the struggle have become irrelevant. The prosecution has tried to play that "event leading up to" angle and it's failing, badly.Extra Medium wrote:
What Martin did to Zimmerman could be considered unwarranted force thus justifying Zimmerman's alleged self defense. If Martin would have simply punched him then yeah, Zimmerman should go up the river, but he didn't. Fact is, Martin initiated contact with a man following him (as he should have) but then proceeded to use unwarranted deadly force and thus justified Zimmerman using deadly force in his self defense. What led up to that is irrelevant.
Watch this week, the prosecution will switch tactics and stop playing the "Trayvon was minding his own business card" and start trying to play the "Zimmerman hit him first" card.
20 to 1, Zimmerman walks.
Stop the press!extra meds wrote:
The Prosecution have an angle they are taking in an attempt to win a trial.
Race and culture are pretty well intertwined.Uzique The Lesser wrote:
you're more surprised by the suggestion that crime and behaviour is cultural/nurtured than, uuuh, 'determined' by someone's genetic code?
If you want to agree that its culture which is the problem thats pretty well the last nail in multi-culturalism no?
Race
Culture
Pick one, I don't care. The fact is crime and other social issues correlate with either or both across the globe.
Fuck Israel
Yeah... nah, that's pretty dumb right there ^
you seem to be confusing concepts in a hodgepodge mess of bigotry and personal frustration.Dilbert_X wrote:
Race and culture are pretty well intertwined.Uzique The Lesser wrote:
you're more surprised by the suggestion that crime and behaviour is cultural/nurtured than, uuuh, 'determined' by someone's genetic code?
If you want to agree that its culture which is the problem thats pretty well the last nail in multi-culturalism no?
Race
Culture
Pick one, I don't care. The fact is crime and other social issues correlate with either or both across the globe.
'culture' is not directly related to 'multiculturalism'. to say that violence or crime are aspects that can embed themselves in a (local) culture has nothing whatsoever to do with or comment upon multiculturalism. multiculturalism is a specific set of ideologically-informed political policies that lets a nation open up its borders to mass immigration and settlement. 'culture' in the broad sense is just what i'm using to describe how human beings behave and act both as individuals and within a community. culture and 'multiculturalism' are not entwined, just because they both have the cognate of 'culture' in their names. that is stupid in the extreme. you could have issues in a 'culture' in a country that has a monoculture and a white hegemony. multiculturalism gives it a political dimension to do with many cultures somehow 'not getting on together'. that is not the problem being discussed here. what's being discussed is why people riot (or, rather, why people are violent). you want to say it is genetic or 'essential' to someone's race. i am just saying it is cultural - i.e. nurtured, because of their environment - family, school, religion, education, employment prospects etc. none of that has anything to do with the wide framework of ideologies and policies associated with 'multiculturalism'.
you seem terminally confused. angry, and confused. a little lost, perhaps. very few people are born genetically predisposed to violence. even serial killers normally have their psychopathology explained in terms of parenting and early childhood. nobody ever looked at a mass murderer and said "oh, he just had a dominant killing gene". yet you'll try and explain violence by black people as some inherent characteristic of their DNA. you are fucking stupid, man. utterly stupid. you are stuck in the pre-victorian era with your stupid, white, patrician psuedo-scientific bollocks. "the black has an oblong shaped skull, which surely attests to his barbarism, and his animal violence".
Uzi, you're taking it deeper than it needs to go. No one is saying that blacks are genetically predisposed for violence. If that were the case, the Civil Rights movement of the 60's would have been far bloodier than it was. Blacks, just as Native Americans, Hispanics and even Whites have all demonstrated peacefully.
I'd say the problem stems from the treatment of blacks in America since the 60's. Since the end of the main civil rights movements there has been a major change in the way the rest of America treats and thinks about blacks. For the most part, if you're white, you learn early on to never openly criticize them, say anything negative about them or even physically engage them for fear of being labeled a racist or a bigot. This has led to a wide mindset of overinflated confidence and a sense that they are owed something for the mistreatment of past generations. I've experienced it first hand in the workplace where someone disagreed with a black person so they just make a loud fuss and everyone caves because no one wants to labeled a racist, bigot or intolerant.
Whites are constantly told by everyone what we do wrong, what we have to be ashamed of, why we suck or why we're the bad guys. No one is allowed to say any of that to a black person unless they are themselves black and has thus established a massive and glaring double standard. (e.g. Blacks calling each other niggers but acting outraged if anyone else does)
You can even see that here in this thread. I post a list of all the African American riots in the past 50 years and I'm instantly attacked and labeled a bigot. I show real life, hard, physical, undeniable and widely verifiable list of events that are proven beyond a shadow of a doubt to have happened, yet I'm a bad guy for bringing it up. I'm a bad dude for predicting that if they don't get their way, there will be a riot, even thought there is a clear, well documented pattern of this happening. Culturalism, multiculturalism, genetics, none of that shit is relevant. It is simply an local (read:national) attitude of "get what we want or we throw a fit".
I'd say the problem stems from the treatment of blacks in America since the 60's. Since the end of the main civil rights movements there has been a major change in the way the rest of America treats and thinks about blacks. For the most part, if you're white, you learn early on to never openly criticize them, say anything negative about them or even physically engage them for fear of being labeled a racist or a bigot. This has led to a wide mindset of overinflated confidence and a sense that they are owed something for the mistreatment of past generations. I've experienced it first hand in the workplace where someone disagreed with a black person so they just make a loud fuss and everyone caves because no one wants to labeled a racist, bigot or intolerant.
Whites are constantly told by everyone what we do wrong, what we have to be ashamed of, why we suck or why we're the bad guys. No one is allowed to say any of that to a black person unless they are themselves black and has thus established a massive and glaring double standard. (e.g. Blacks calling each other niggers but acting outraged if anyone else does)
You can even see that here in this thread. I post a list of all the African American riots in the past 50 years and I'm instantly attacked and labeled a bigot. I show real life, hard, physical, undeniable and widely verifiable list of events that are proven beyond a shadow of a doubt to have happened, yet I'm a bad guy for bringing it up. I'm a bad dude for predicting that if they don't get their way, there will be a riot, even thought there is a clear, well documented pattern of this happening. Culturalism, multiculturalism, genetics, none of that shit is relevant. It is simply an local (read:national) attitude of "get what we want or we throw a fit".
dilbert has precisely claimed in the past that 'blacks are violent' by some inherent race or genetic characteristic (or some sort of pseudo-scientific, deterministic rubbish). look at his posts. he constantly posts with the smug swagger of someone who thinks he is racially superior to these people. and he'll use any sort of hackneyed jibberish to try and justify it. he's an insecure white dude with no place in the world except by his mommies tit.
I'm insecure?
OK
OK
I disagree, I'd say its a global thing, the question is why.Extra-Meds wrote:
is simply an local (read:national) attitude of "get what we want or we throw a fit".
Fuck Israel
why else would you try and construe silly scientific theories about black inferiority if you didn't have a precious concern for your own racial 'worth'?
get a girlfriend and move out. stop filling yourself with this bile.
get a girlfriend and move out. stop filling yourself with this bile.
If you'd been paying attention you'd have noted that most times I've pointed out that asians, excluding penis size, are our superiors.
So how could I be a white supremacist if the yellow man is ahead?
So how could I be a white supremacist if the yellow man is ahead?
Last edited by Dilbert_X (2013-07-02 05:48:38)
Fuck Israel
where did i mention asians? i said your own 'racial worth'. you seem awfully concerned about being above black people.
as for stating genetically that asians are 'above' whites... rofl. this crackpot science goes nowhere. where do inuits fit in?
as for stating genetically that asians are 'above' whites... rofl. this crackpot science goes nowhere. where do inuits fit in?
Because it normally works?Dilbert_X wrote:
I'm insecure?
OKI disagree, I'd say its a global thing, the question is why.Extra-Meds wrote:
is simply an local (read:national) attitude of "get what we want or we throw a fit".
i bet if zimmerman's lastname is gonzales or mendez or something mexican nobody would give a shit.
what is 'zimmerman' meant to connote? jewishness? that guy is meant to be jewish? thought never even crossed my mind.
or are you trying to say if it was blacks-on-latino violence, and not a white-american dude, the media wouldn't care? i could probably get on board with that. just another killing in the ghetto, right?
or are you trying to say if it was blacks-on-latino violence, and not a white-american dude, the media wouldn't care? i could probably get on board with that. just another killing in the ghetto, right?
pretty much this. zimmerman is a pretty white/jew name so yeah.Uzique The Lesser wrote:
or are you trying to say if it was blacks-on-latino violence, and not a white-american dude, the media wouldn't care? i could probably get on board with that. just another killing in the ghetto, right?
Closed while I figure out wtf is going on with reports
Good points and bad points made. Race relations thread that way. Respond by picture thread that way. EE Chats that way. Got a bit personal. Got tasteless. Targeted wipe. Reopened.
Good points and bad points made. Race relations thread that way. Respond by picture thread that way. EE Chats that way. Got a bit personal. Got tasteless. Targeted wipe. Reopened.
I think it is pretty dumb to think riots will happen. Completely different time and circumstances.
- globefish23
- sophisticated slacker
- +334|6540|Graz, Austria
Fun fact:
'Zimmermann' means 'carpenter' in German.
Jesus supposedly was a carpenter and he was a Jew.
'Zimmermann' means 'carpenter' in German.
Jesus supposedly was a carpenter and he was a Jew.
Last edited by globefish23 (2013-07-06 15:16:20)
>_<Judge Debra Nelson ruled Monday that George Zimmerman’s attorneys will be able to present evidence about how Trayvon Martin may have been high on marijuana the night he was shot to death.
Martin’s toxicology report indicates that THC, the active drug in marijuana, was in his blood at the time of his death on Feb. 26, 2012.
Zimmerman, a former neighborhood watch captain, is charged with second-degree murder for killing 17-year-old Martin in Sanford, Florida. He told police that night that the teenager looked suspicious and that there had been several break-ins in the neighborhood. The two got into a physical altercation, and Zimmerman said he was forced to draw his gun and kill Martin.
Read for yourself: Martin's autopsy
Zimmerman’s attorneys argued Monday that the report shows Martin’s judgment may have been impaired the night of the shooting, and it may have affected his decision-making.
Prosecutors fought hard against the admissibility of Martin's THC levels accusing Zimmerman's attorneys of trying to get bad-character evidence in through the backdoor.
Fuck Zimmerman.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
that was horrible.
Check out the dance moves in this one:
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
No.
Macbeth wrote:
>_<Judge Debra Nelson ruled Monday that George Zimmerman’s attorneys will be able to present evidence about how Trayvon Martin may have been high on marijuana the night he was shot to death.
Martin’s toxicology report indicates that THC, the active drug in marijuana, was in his blood at the time of his death on Feb. 26, 2012.
Zimmerman, a former neighborhood watch captain, is charged with second-degree murder for killing 17-year-old Martin in Sanford, Florida. He told police that night that the teenager looked suspicious and that there had been several break-ins in the neighborhood. The two got into a physical altercation, and Zimmerman said he was forced to draw his gun and kill Martin.
Read for yourself: Martin's autopsy
Zimmerman’s attorneys argued Monday that the report shows Martin’s judgment may have been impaired the night of the shooting, and it may have affected his decision-making.
Prosecutors fought hard against the admissibility of Martin's THC levels accusing Zimmerman's attorneys of trying to get bad-character evidence in through the backdoor.