Bill Whittle on the Lynching by the media of George Zimmerman

Bill Whittle looks at the lynching, via the media, of George Zimmerman.

The leftie apologists who jumped on board this gravy train should be ashamed for ignoring the evidence.

Is the acquittal of Zimmerman one of the great civil rights injustices of our time? Find out.

Barack Obama claims that Martin “could have been me”:

In a rare and public reflection on race, President Barack Obama called on the nation Friday to do some soul searching over the death of Trayvon Martin and the acquittal of his shooter, saying the slain black teenager “could have been me 35 years ago.”

Well he could have, if 35 years ago Obama was a sneaky, drugged out, violent, burglar who got sprung by a security guard.

 


THANK YOU for being a subscriber. Because of you Whaleoil is going from strength to strength. It is a little known fact that Whaleoil subscribers are better in bed, good looking and highly intelligent. Sometimes all at once! Please Click Here Now to subscribe to an ad-free Whaleoil.

  • Kendall

    Would love to see the counter argument.

    • Bunswalla

      WO has unfortunately jumped feet first into the gravy train. That last sentence was complete crap and, frankly, beneath you.

      1. Sneaky? So it’s OK to shoot to death someone because you think they’re being sneaky.

      2. Drugged out – there was no evidence in the autopsy that he was under the influence of any drug, nor that he exhibited symptoms of violence or paranoia. Zimmerman displayed both of those symptoms, ringing 911 46 times in months leading up to the shooting, and whispering that Martin looked like he was up to no good. Despite being told three times NOT to go and investigate or to follow Martin, he did. Whittle said in is video that the police were there less than a minute after the shooting, so the dispatcher had clearly sent a roller to investigate.

      3. Violent – no evidence that Martin was violent until he was confronted by an armed vigilante asking him what the hell he was doing there. It’s pathetic to try and draw an inference from the fact that Martin trained in MMA – millions of men and women do, it’s a legitimate career and highly profitable entertainment and sporting industry. But very handy if you want to hang something pejorative on somebody.

      4. Burglar – bullshit. No evidence of burglary and if you believe that crap about a “burglary tool” in his locker you’re an idiot. Anything can be portrayed as a burglary tool – the fact he didn’t say it was a crowbar or skeleton keys means it was probably a screw-driver or something equally innocuous.

      5. Security guard – what a joke. George Zimmerman was no more a security guard than I am – and I’m not. He was an unpaid volunteer neighbourhood watch fruit-loop with paranoia tendencies and a well-developed line in profiling. He had no powers of arrest or ability to detain, he should have left it to the police – just like the police told him to do three times.

      That’s just one sentence of WO’s post – counter-argument to Whittle’s dribble to come.

      • opusx

        Whatever lead to the clash between these two almost becomes irrelevant. Zimmerman was put on trial for murder. At the time he shot his weapon was he in fear for his own life? The jury found yes, so found him not guilty. He was not put on trial for being a wanna be security guard. And I was not there, nor anyone else. So only the facts are left of the circumstance of the firearm being used. Your argument reeks of ‘Stephen Wallace was shot for smashing windows’.

        • Bunswalla

          Opus I know your background and expect better of you than drawing such a long bow. If I had a problem with Steven Wallace being shot, I’d say so. I don’t and I haven’t.

          My comment was about the last sentence in Cam’s post, and I said why i disagreed – that’s all.

          Whittle reveals his agenda at the end of a video in which he begins by twisting what’s in the media, in the very act of criticising the media for twisting the facts. Hilarious – more on that below (ironically in reply to one of your comments).

          • opusx

            OK, fair comment. I agree iit becomes such a bloodymesswhen any media get involved.

          • Bunswalla

            True dat.

      • Mediaan

        It was a Gated Community. People who move there do so because they want added security. Why shouldn’t they be allowed to get it, if they want it?

        Plus, Martin is not the nice naive boy he has been portrayed. He was also much bigger, older and tougher looking than in the photographs distributed.

        He had no good reason to be in that community, so merely his being there was a reason to be watchful.

        • Bunswalla

          What’s your point about security? There were no security guards, agents or police involved – at least until after the shooting.

          Zimmerman was a vigilante with a gun – don’t delude yourself that he had any legitimate presence there “on patrol” or that he had any powers to stop, detain, question or arrest. he had none.

          Being watchful is fine, in fact that’s what he was told to do by the police. Shame he didn’t, aye?

          • Mediaan

            Technically being “a security officer” (the only realistic alternative in your three) does not impress me. They are often a bunch of very dubious people.

            I once reviewed their training and selection for the course and was not given the impression it was open to all. Merely to the people who suited the outfit in charge.

            So he wasn’t “a vigilante”, he was a volunteer on watch duty. That means arguably more honest and reasonable than one of those security guards would have been.

            The police number gave instructions, or a suggestion as you might like to say, but that was only a non-sworn employee in the communications section. Not a police officer.

            Not impressed by your argument.

      • johnbronkhorst

        I will take issue with you.
        1…He was walking on the properties of the residents (not in the road) trespassing and suspicious could be termed “Sneaky”
        2…The AUTOPOCY showed traces of cannabis in martin’s system!
        He was carrying 2 ingredients of his drug of choice (according to his own twitter account and other witnesses).
        3….BULLSHIT….his face book page and evidence from the PROSECUTION witness that said he was in fights all the time!!!
        4…It is a crime to have the tools of burglary here too!!! But true no proof as far as we know that he committed burglary.
        5…He was a neighbourhood watch captain (LEADER). We have those here, neighbourhood watch is funnily enough there to WATCH THE NEIGHBOURHOOD ..exactly what Zimmerman was doing!!! Neighbourhood watch is ENDORSED by the police, patrols of neighbourhood watch are endorced by the POLICE!!

        • opusx

          John you are right of course, but, (and this is a big but), Police do not recommend neighbourhood watch volunteers approach anyone suspicious, and to remain as observers only. The reasons for this are obvious. The Police do not want volunteers putting themselves at risk. Volunteers are generally not trained in dealing with these type of situations, and not aware (in this country, of the Bill Of Rights, similar in the US) and most importantly, volunteers do not have the resources to deal with incidents as they unfold. Now where this all went horribly wrong is:

          -Zimmerman got out of his vehicle (he was entitled to but the Police advised him not to). It went downhill FAST from here.

          Now here’s the grey area. If it was me stopped by Zimmerman (or any other volunteer doing what he was doing). I would have glady welcomed the Police come to ascertain I was carrying on in a lawful fashion (no matter what i was wearing). I would not have become confrontational with the volunteer, but rather waited till I was able to go on my lawful merry way. But I am not black, I am white middle aged.

          I am not saying there are not any racially motivated Police officers in this country, but in 12 years as a frontline cop from 1995 to 2007, a lot of that time in Auckland, I can honestly say I never worked with any truly racist officers. Yes, they target teens, especially when moving about in groups. Yes, they target people acting suspiciously at all times of the day and night…hell…that’s their JOB. If you have nothing to hide, let them get on with it, they are, after all, trying to make your community safer.

          -Zimmerman was justified in using the force he did, a jury reflected this. But even I realise this tragedy need not have happened if George had acted on the advise of the Police.

          Would Martin have gone on to be a law abiding, model citizen if this had never happened. I think we are sensible enough to know the answer to that question.

          • johnbronkhorst

            There is no evidence that Zimmerman approached martin. It is suspicious however that the attack Zimmerman seemed to start, immediately after martin had said to his friend on the phone, “……some crazy ass cracker is following me…”
            Did martin turn around and confront then attack Zimmerman?
            Bearing in mind, apart from the bullet wound, there are absolutely NO marks on martin’s body! Also martin had a reputation for violent confrontation and Zimmerman didn’t!

          • opusx

            Agreed, exactly my point, remain at a safe vantage point and observe and report. Martins response to the situation was way over the top, and not that of a reasonable person, hence the outcome. Bunswalla is making the valid point that if the Police were left to be the party that first confronted Martin, the outcome would have been very different. And that’s not to say the outcome would have been different for Martin, just that the whole thing would have been the Police rightly dealing with him, and not a member of the public.

        • Bunswalla

          jbh you seem to equate shouting and lots of exclamation marks with making good points. Sadly you’re wrong on both counts and it would be easier to engage with you if you wrote with your “inside voice”

          1. He wasn’t walking on anybody’s properties, and it’s not a gated community at all. He was walking on the footpath past a residential apartment complex. If it was a gated community the gates would be shut – he wasn’t trespassing and there were no signs or legal justification to prevent him or anyone else walking there.

          2. I’m guessing that an AUTOPOCY is an autopsy. “Traces of cannabis in his system” is not only an extremely long way from being drugged up, but also describes half the population of Miami – and New Zealand. You’re trying to portray him as someone on P going mental and trying to pick fights – you’re wrong. Even if you were right, Zimmerman should’ve done what he was told to do 3 times by the police, and stay in his truck.

          3. If you believe everything you read on the FB pages and Twitter accounts of 17-year-olds there’s not much hope for you.

          4. Thanks for conceding there was no proof of burglary or intent to commit burglary.

          5. Read Opusx comments re neighbourhood watch – emphasis on the word “watch”. Jumped-up wannabe sheriff vigilantes with loaded firearms are a menace to themselves and the general public. It doesn’t matter if he was elected World-wide Grand Pooh-Bah of the most honourable company of Neighbourhood Watchees – I repeat he had no powers of arrest, questioning or detention. he’s just a wannabe cop who thought he was Elliot Ness about to bust the crime of the century. Only now we have a dead 17 year old, and you think that’s just fine. Shame on you.

          • johnbronkhorst

            1…..yes he was!!!! Independent witness and where the incident happened were on the lawn and path of a PRIVATE house!!!
            2…Trces…so what he was a drug taker , drug dealer, violent (not so little)…ass!!!! ALL the evidence points to it.
            3…Not just that (FB) his “friends too”.
            4..so what!!!
            5…Zimmerman was being a neighbourhood watch leader, like any other, He was the one attacked and beaten, using the ONLY form of defence left to him!!!
            So stop twisting the fact you pratt!!!!

          • tspoon

            At NO time was zimmerman told by police to stay in his car. He wasn’t talking to police he was talking to a dispatcher. The words of the dispatcher: “You don’t need to do that”. Zimmerman is not bound by any law to obey an emergency dispatcher in any case.
            The reason Zimmerman did get out of his car was to find a street name. He did so, walking a small distance to do so. While returning to his car he encountered Martin a second time.

            Stick to the facts Bunswalla. Although if you did, you’d probably have to admit you’ve got diddly…

      • 1. He wasn’t shot to death for being sneaky, he was shot to death for trying to smash Zimmerman’s head into a pulp.

        2. Didn’t you watch the video?

        3. Yes there is plenty of evidence…like oh I don;t know…smashing Zimmerman’s head into the concrete…non-violent people don;t do that…or how about the MMA moves, the street fighting, the re-match to make someone bleed more.

        4. Yep burglar…tools and stolen stuff in his locker.

        5. Whatever.

        • Bunswalla

          OK Cam, let’s do a hypothetical – you’re out for a walk at night minding your own business and some vigilante accosts you wanting to know who the fuck you are and what the fuck you’re doing?

          This vigilante thinks you’re up to no good and says there’s been burglaries in the area carried out by people that look like you and you should just park your arse right there until we get this straightened out.

          Your reaction?

          Thought so.

          • rockape

            Well my reaction certainly wouldnt be to attack him and pound his head on the ground!

          • Bunswalla

            Can you envisage a scenario that would end up with that? I can for sure, and based on Cam’s posts in the past he can too, unless he’s all piss and wind.

          • johnbronkhorst

            I, personally, have confronted 2 people wandering around the back yard of my neighbour. Fortunately they took my, not so polite advice, to FUCK OFF!!!!

          • A discussion would ensue and I wouldn’t be pounding his head into the pavement. Plus he wasn’t minding his own business, he was creeping around on the property of others.

          • johnbronkhorst

            Neighbourhood watch!!!!!! It was Zimmerman who was attacked!!!!

        • Mr_V4

          The “smashing ones” head into the concrete is overdone in my opinion.
          Look where the body was found, nowhere near the concrete.
          The injuries that Zimmerman sustained did not require hospital treatment, if you are familiar with blunt force trauma particularly to the back of the cranium you will realise that this is unusual. There seems to be a lack of bruising, no concussion was reported etc. This is an area of the skull that is extremely vulnerable, one decent blow can result in loss of conciousness and a head injury resulting in death. For this reason I am suspicious of the “Zimmerman says” version of the fight. While you can’t deny an altercation took place, I definitely don’t think it the way “Zimmerman says”. Particularly when one witness saw/heard some of the altercation and said they were both standing at the time.

          • opusx

            All the circumstances surrounding the actual shooting are up for conjecture. The conflicting stories in MSM make the possibility of coming to the correct conclusion almost impossible. The main point of discussion on boards all over the US now concentrate on what the Police told Zimmerman to do, or not to do. They never told him to stay in his truck, they advised him when he said he was following Martin “you don’t need to do that” The fact of the matter is the two ended up in a physical altercation with Zimmerman ending said altercation by shooting Martin. Forget all the actions/in-actions leading up to the shooting by both parties and concentrate only on the act of Zimmerman shooting Martin. This act is what Zimmerman was charged with (whether rightly or wrongly) and this, and only this, was what the Jury had to decide on when addressing the ingredients of the offence of murder. It all comes down to this one second in time…did Zimmerman INTEND to kill Martin? Or was he defending himself because he feared for his life. The jury believed in the self defense claim. Because Zimmerman had been on the phone to local Police (not 911) during the leadup to the fateful shot, it is clear there would be little chance of proving Zimmerman armed himself and then set out with the intent of killing some black kid he found skulking around, ie: pre-meditation. A more appropriate charge could have been one of manslaughter, rather than a degree of murder charge. I have my own thoughts on Zimmerman, but I believe the jury in this matter came to the correct conclusion. There’s so much more to this story that needs to be answered, like was Zimmerman licenced to carry a small firearm etc etc. The fact that race and colour have become the main point of contention in this story just PISSES me off.

          • Bunswalla

            Hey opus, we should catch up one day and have a beer and a chat, I think we’d both enjoy it and let some of the steam out.

            The thread’s gotten off track – the facts of most of what happened aren’t in dispute, and neither’s the verdict. I have no wish to re-litigate the case and I don’t think you do. In fact if I was on the jury I’m almost certain I’d have voted Not Guilty too. I don’t expect that will be a surprise.

            That’s not what this is about; this post and several others have been all about how the liberal lefty media have demonised Zimmerman, beatified Martin and, like a freshly-lit Molotov cocktail, lobbed the racism card into the middle.

            The right are saying Martin was a vicious drugged-out thug with previous form and definitely up to no good, and Zimmerman is portrayed as a community-minded hero being put into an impossible position from which he could only extricate himself by shooting Martin. They say he’s being unfairly victimised, and have perpetuated the racism row by denying furiously that it really had nothing to do with it.

            The truth is somewhere in the middle, and we’re going to have to live with that. The fascinating thing is the ending of Whittle’s diatribe, where he betrays his real agenda, revealing that Martin’s murder is but a trifle compared to the really big conspiracy theory – that the liberal left and the media have conspired to steal two elections.

          • johnbronkhorst

            Pratt!!! Zimmerman was on the bottom (independent witness)!!
            After the shot, Zimmerman got up, what do you suppose happened to martin? OH yes…the body moved and the photographer was standing on the concrete path!!!

          • Mr_V4
          • Edwin Wigmore

            You clearly have no medical training.

            Any head injuries can be extremely serious and I can’t think of how to do more damage than banging your head on an unforgiving surface like concrete.

            Just because he was shot before he could cause really serious harm doesn’t mean it was overdone. Clearly he wanted to cause terrible harm and that would have been the way to do it.

          • Mr_V4

            That was my point any head injury can be serious, yet Zimmerman despite the 20-30 times his head was pounded on the concrete (again “Zimmerman says”) the injury sustained doesnt seem to match the claim.

        • Bunswalla

          Yeah i watched the video a few times, and found out what little there is to learn of Bill Whittle. He’s a single-issue nutter and fantasist who’s even set himself up as “The Virtual President” posting elaborate videos (complete with fake applause and cut-overs to the real Senate or House) giving his take on what he’d do if he was POTUS. Have a look, you’ll wet yourself laughing.

          The last dozen videos he’s posted – 0 comments. Nobody’s paying any attention, he’s a lunatic.

          His video above is on PSTV – Public Service. Absolutely anyone can broadcast a show on PSTV. Just think of him as the US Martyn Bradbury – i wonder if he’s also into real estate?

  • Phar Lap

    Seems Fox TV channel give out the alternative.When Obama said the death of the youth could have been him in another time.The channel said was a pity he didn’t quote the massacre in Chicago of black on black in the same analogy.Of course selective morality reigns supreme anywhere in making a point.

  • PlanetOrphan

    Cultural profiling will make anyone go crazy, divorces them from society and makes them violent.

    While I agree with this article, It doesn’t even come close to highlighting the injustice of the black people in America, and the reactions to everyday profiling the Black communities have to live with.

    Trayvon Martins’ whole life led to that end, and Zimmerman was the man forced to put an end to that life , the real truth is they are both victims of a life long culture of race profiling by the greater community.

    • opusx

      Excellent comment and all too true. This vid by Chicane sums it up pretty well…watch it all the way to the end.
      http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=5iBqhMfyoPU&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3D5iBqhMfyoPU

      • PlanetOrphan

        Can’t open the link bud.

        • opusx

          Works fine my end, try cut and paste

          • PlanetOrphan

            Gets a web page, but tries to open and fails , with not found type error.

          • opusx

            YouTube: chicane poppiholla , official video

          • PlanetOrphan

            That worked, and agreed, great vid M8!

  • opusx

    Never let the facts get in the way of a good story. The days of professional journalism are over. It used to be that you didn’t have to dig beneath the story to get to the truth. The great thing now though is reasoned people don’t believe everything they read, or see on the box.

    • Bunswalla

      Yes, agree – never let the facts get in the way of a good story. Let’s start with Whittle – his beginning and ending should be a signal about his agenda and the value he places on the “facts”.

      He decries the media for lynching poor old George, and cites the People magazine cover as Exhibit A. Yet the magazine doesn’t say it was murder, or ascribe blame, or say it was racist – it simply says “An American Tragedy”. is there anybody who doesn’t think the whole thing was a tragedy? it referred to “Trayvon Martin’s Death” – not his shooting, or killing, or murder, or execution – just his death. Nothing pejorative there.

      Not only that but it clearly shows (on the cover, bottom right) a headline referring to an article in the magazine “George Zimmerman – his side of the story” – doesn’t really sound like an MSM witch-hunt, does it? Of course you have to be quick to see that part – Whittle zooms in to the part of the cover that shows the article about Trayvon’s parents talking about the son they’ve lost. Wouldn’t want people to call bullshit on his story before he really started, aye?

      Most of the rest of the video is an appalling confection of rumour, innuendo, supposition, dot-joining and making shit up to suit his agenda. So what even if he was buying ingredients to make a home-made drug? What business is that of George Zimmerman’s – a person with no legal credentials or powers?

      Whittle admits that Zimmerman would be top of the list of people who thought it was a bad idea to get out of his truck that night – yet he did. He was told not to on 3 occasions by the police dispatcher – yet he did.

      The “evidence” that Martin was sitting on top of Zimmerman, raining “MMA-style” punches on him which forced poor George to shoot him to death, just doesn’t add up. Where was Goerge’s gun? How did he get to it with Martin sitting on him, beating the crap out of him?

      But the final clincher, the zinger that shoots Whittle’s own argument down in flames (is that what the “afterburner” thing is all about?) is when he can’t help himself by having a go at Obama. I nearly pissed myself laughing – it all fell into place. This whole thing is Obama’s fault – he’s another sneaky drugged out Black dude, up to no good. Everything about him is a lie covered up by the MSM – his drug-taking, his “true” country of birth, his “unreleased” college transcripts. It’s all a conspiracy by the lefty liberal media to install a black man (a BLACK man!) in the White House. FFS it’s called the White House for a reason, and the commies and pinkos are out to destroy all that. And people, many of them on this blog, fall for such utter tripe.

      • opusx

        I agree with you. That’s what I mean by my post. What clouds all if this is the relevance of the charge of murder against Zimmerman. And that really amounts to the action of a split second in the whole sorry story. Did he intend to murder Martin? The jury (the only individuals whose opinions mattered in this case) found Zimmerman used force he felt justified at the time because he feared for his life. You could say a much fairer fight would have been both men were unarmed, but Zimmerman had a firearm.

  • johnbronkhorst

    If Zimmerman had left his gun at home. Who would have been on trial, for what, who would have been dead and what would be being said now?

    • Macca

      Absolutely nothing would have been said JB – it wouldn’t have even made the news!
      I note also our own media are pretty frugal with the facts but quick to show the prostests!

    • Bunswalla

      If Zimmerman had stayed home, what would’ve happened?

      If Zimmerman had stayed in his truck, like the police dispatcher told him the first time, what would’ve happened?

      If Zimmerman had stayed in his truck, like the police dispatcher told him the second time, what would’ve happened?

      If Zimmerman had stayed in his truck, like the police dispatcher told him the THIRD time, what would’ve happened?

      • opusx

        This tragedy wouldn’t have happened. Zimmerman realised all too late he was out of his league. He should have left it to the police, but for reasons of his own he chose not to. The big question is “did he impeach Martins rights to be able to go about his business without interference” If that we’re established to be the case then Zimmermans use of the firearm would almost certainly have been unjustified. On the murder charge as it was heard, the jury arrived and the correct outcome. But it is clear the big picture here is racial profiling, and that’s just plain dangerous.

        • rockape

          Profiling be it racial or otherwise is something we have to live with. I am and still probably look ex military. Normally customs is a breeze. However I do a bit of yacht delivery, travelling light,oneway ticket, bought and paid for by a third party I just know I am going to get pulled out of the queue. Do I jump up and down and say your only checking me because I am white,elderly and with short hair? Profiling is a process to reduce the amount of checks and effort required to catch the bad guys.

          • Bunswalla

            They didn’t pull you out of line because you’re white, elderly and with short hair. They pulled you out because they have evidence that people who travel light, stay only a short time and have tickets paid for by third parties are often drug runners, or may be entering the country for purposes other than what they state. In other words, evidence-based profiling.

            What Zimmerman did was very different. He had no evidence that Martin was up to no good, or was being ‘sneaky’ he just didn’t like the look of him. Also Zimmerman (and this is the important bit that everybody conveniently overlooks as if Zimmerman’s actions were legitimised by some sort of vested authority) had no power to detain, question or confront Martin in any way. He didn’t just overstep his authority – he had NO authority.

          • rockape

            Sorry buns but their is evidence that people who wear hoodies up even on warm days in shops are doing it to disguise their identity. There is evidence that many shoplifters are either young,brown or poor looking. Is what I have said racist?

          • Bunswalla

            I don’t know – is the handle rockape racist?

          • pukakidon

            Sorry you might be making assumptions of racism there Buns. It is a nickname for a specific branch within one of the British services.

          • Bunswalla

            Yep, the Royal Golliwogs – got it.

          • pukakidon

            Shit you have a racism problem. Next you will be shouting in peoples faces.

          • opusx

            It is something we live with all the time now, case in point being how westerners generally perceive Muslims in this day and age. I’ve done it in the past, and still do I guess. Because no matter how much we wish we did, we still don’t have an accurate P.O.S.meter we can point at someone to ascertain if they are inherently good or bad (evil). But really do we even want to go anywhere near a state where big bro can jack into your thoughts??.? Brrrrr.

      • johnbronkhorst

        Are you really that stupid?
        Zimmerman was doing what he was supposed to, as an endorsed LEADER of the neighbourhood watch (in HIS neighbourhood). He was patrolling as neighbourhood watch people do!!!
        Martin was TRESSPASSING, by walking on the properties of Zimmerman’s neighbours.
        It was Zimmerman who was attacked and defended himself with the only thing at hand!!!
        The is why it was SELF DEFENCE!!!!!!

        • Bunswalla

          Endorsed by who jbh? What “powers” do you think being in a neighbourhood watch group gives you?

          I’ll give you a clue jbh, because you seem to be missing the point in your usual 8-year-old tantrum way, he has ZERO POWERS!!!!!!

          THAT’S NO POWERS JOHN! NONE! NONE AT ALL!!!!! NOT ANY POWERS – ZERO, ZILCH, NADA.

          Get the picture John?

          • opusx

            I think he does mate. To be fair, reading all these posts the general consensus or feeling is that Zimmerman was justified in in what he did in those final moments. There is anger at how Zimmerman has been portrayed, and I agree with this sentiment, but conversely on the merits of this horrible case, the portrayal of Martin has been ramped up as well. This was a fateful night where the personalities of the two involved had almost certainly predetermined the outcome when they clashed. By definition a tragedy in the making.

          • johnbronkhorst

            Neighbourhood watch are endorsed by the POLICE. As are their leaders!!!

        • Mr_V4

          Zimmerman was not patrolling, he was running errands, one of which included going to the grocery store.
          And for the billionth time there was no trespass involved.

  • Nick K

    I’m in Hawaii at the moment and can safely say the only racists here on this issue are the African-Americans. The was an excellent article in today’s paper by an African-American law professor who said the acquittal was right, just and what should have happened. He writes there was no evidence and those wanting blood, including politicians, are the problem, not the justice system. Hear hear.

  • pukakidon

    The problem now is that the media no longer read any background information or ty to ascertain the facts before making an ill founded judgement. They just read the tripe offered by other like minded biased fools.

    The funny thing is that if this had been “blackman kills white child” it would not have even made the news. Unfortunately in the US the Jails are predominantly full of black murderers, and the fact that the President of the US seems to think that that could have been him shows his real racist side and the the racial stereotypical divide between between all races in the US.

    A Hispanic killing a black person has been twisted by the ignorant media both here and in the US to a “Whiteman murders a black boy” is racist hatred incitement.

  • Col

    I don’t want to be racist, but if you blend in with the darkness, eg hoody over head and walk down dark pathways, you are a target no matter what colour you are.

    • pukakidon

      Agree, the hoody is the mark of up to no good, just the same as the fools wearing gang colours and patches.

      Doesn’t matter what race they are.

    • Bunswalla

      Yes, and women who go out at night in short skirts and revealing tops are really asking for it and deserve to be raped.

      Love your logic, Einstein.

      • dyannt

        Not asking for it, Bunswalla, but putting themselves at great risk.

        In too many cases; they got what they didn’t ask for.

        It should be everyone’s right to be out on the streets at any hour of the day, dressed in whatever fashion one chooses, (except naked I believe) but in the current night time culture it is a right that needs considering before exercising that right.

        Every choice we make can have more than one consequence.

      • pukakidon

        You know how to twist words eh Buns. Skulking around private property at night concealing your identify wearing a hoody is asking for trouble. It is the very reason many public bars and Malls ban the wearing of Hoodies. I guess there is not use arguing with you because you have made up your mind and no logic will change that

        • Bunswalla

          I like to research facts and become informed before I make a call. Your generalisations e.g. wearing a hoody is “the mark of up to no good” and is the “same as…wearing gang colours and patches” show an absence of information, if not intelligence.

          Don’t want to be accused of twisting words, so I used yours.

          • So far you haven’t presented any facts other than those presented by the media before the case went to trial, they certainly didn’t cover the trial and are now trying to cover up the facts that were presented at the trial where the jury who heard all the facts found the defendant NOT GUILTY.

            Many of your so called fact are in fact lies perpetrated by useful idiots and the media

      • tspoon

        good point, but you have been arguing Martins anger and subsequent attack were righteous due to Zimmermans offending him by asking questions and letting him know he was being watched. What about if my female partner offends me somehow? Mmm? Can I righteously teach her not to do stuff I don’t like? No, didn’t think so. Pretty dopey position you’re pushing there Bunswalla.

    • I’ll do it my way

      It doesn’t even have to have anything to do with race. just a hoodie hating culture that is alive and well in NZ.
      While driving my V8 late home from town (visiting grandchildren) weather was raining so I was driving slower than normal, being cold I put my beanie on with my hoodie up, was pulled over by policewoman who shone a light right into my eyes with the ‘what are you doing’ voice saved specially for teenagers hoons.
      To be greeted by me a grey headed 60 year old petrol head. ‘Oh oh sorry ‘she said ‘ why ‘ said I ‘what did I do?’ I was just checking’ said she and was gone in a flash before a could say ‘profiling again’

      • opusx

        Were you slouched down in your seat? Riding with one hand on the wheel and the other hand txtin? Dead giveaway you are UP TO NO GOOD ;-)

        • I’ll do it my way

          yeah well normally I do all of the above but like I said raining…late at night… :-)

      • pukakidon

        And that is what we pay our Police for, to keep an eye out for suspicious activity..

        Just watch Police 10 7 or crime watch. If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck it is probably a duck, most thieving and burglary’s are carried out by people dressed like you were. I wonder if you had of attacked her and started bashing her head against the ground and then she pulled her weapon out and shot you, would there be all this nonsense.

        This is a racist issued. Black shit stirring people and Buns are trying to put the blame on White people, they are stereotyping anyone who is not black is therefore white. I am afraid this is pretty ignorant thinking.

        This is about someone who looked suspicious like you were and then being asked what you were doing cruising past peoples houses at night as you looked suspicious. In this case you acted appropriately, unfortunately in the case of the Young American man he did not and paid the price.

  • kakrot

    We will never know if Martin was out there buying sweets or if he was prowling the streets looking for white woman to rape. The evidence however does point to him having a appetite for violent sex and black people are known for raping and murdering white people.

    • Bunswalla

      Your logic is irrefutable, in that it’s impossible to argue against anything so breathtakingly stupid, and clearly a waste of time to do so. Nice trolling, sir.

      Oh, other than the fact that he did buy some sweets, but that was probably a decoy.

      • twinkletoes

        Skittles, the sweets, are used with codeine, robatussen and watermelon or other soda (which Martin also had in his bag), to make a very powerful opiate drink called Watermelon lean. Purple lean is another one and this drink can kill if not taken slowly. The skittles are part of the concoction, for some reason.

        • Debbie

          Not everyone who buys Skittles also buys Robatussin lol. Quickly, round up all the Skittles buyers! Also, Skittles is not actually the preferred ‘candy’ for this ‘drug’ concoction. Jolly Ranchers are.

      • Kimbo

        You are dissembling.

        The possibility/likelihood that the sweets cold be used for cheap home-made drugs is a useful correction to the supposed contect setter of the innocent black kid (who was 17, not 12 as the photos that were publsihed on the the front page of magazine covers) gunned down by a paranoid racist.

        Media usually always uses a “narrative” to sell its story. The defence, and Zimmerman apologits have the legitimate right to undermine that narrative – IF the facts don’t fit, or can be interpreted in a number of ways.

        Yes or no – Was Travvon Martin a kid exhibiting signs of aggression in his life? I’m not asking about the day in question, nor the colour of his skin, but in general terms?

        • Bunswalla

          1. Kakrot is a fake poster set up to troll. I should’ve checked before feeding the trolls.

          2.It doesn’t matter what Martin was buying or what he was going to do with it. The fact is he was breaking no laws and was accosted by an armed vigilante with no powers to do so. Now he’s dead. Disagree?

          3. Bill Whittle has the right to say whatever he wants. I have the right to call bullshit on it.

          4. Yes or no? It’s not really a yes or no question is it? My 2 teenagers exhibit signs of aggression in their lives. I’m pretty sure I did at that age too. I’m guessing maybe even you did, or were you too busy going to church and helping to cure cancer? I’m also not sure the point of the question, particularly if you specifically discount the day in question, which is really the only day that matters.

          • Kimbo

            “It doesn’t matter what Martin was buying or what he was going to do with
            it. The fact is he was breaking no laws and was accosted by an armed
            vigilante with no owers to do so. Now he’s dead. Disagree?”

            Yes – I disagree. The point of the sweets was that they could have been used for an illegal, anti-social purpose – which fitted with the demeanour that Zimmermann claims brought Martin to his attention. Martin may not have been breaking any laws, but, judging by Zimmermenn’s account, he was a legitimate object of suspecion. It is not illegal to follow someone. Also, Zimmermann was injured, allegedly beaten by Martin, who, according to witnesses, was on top of Zimmermann, given him a pounding.

            As that is more compelling evidence than any of the circumstantial race-baiting narrative you’ve given to support the idea Zimmermenn initiated (“accosted” according to you – I’ve seen you give no facts to suuport that assertion, but I’m open to you addressing that failure. Over to you…) the physical confrontation, the “facts/preponderence of evidence” would suggest it was Martin, not Zimmerman who attacked first.

            ” Bill Whittle has the right to say whatever he wants. I have the right to call bullshit on it”. Agreed. But rephrased, that means, “I have the wright to write and say any shit that comes into my head. But you are implying your opinion deserves respect. I’m not close-minded to the possibility it may have merit – but so far you’ve demonstrated nothing that suggests it is. Perghaps you may want to calmly sit, back, reasses, and have another go if you really believe you have relevant facts at your disposal…

            You are still being disingenuos over the matter of Martin’s aggressive background. Your kids weren’t killed and the subject of a media witch-hunt running the narrative that placed someone in the role of gunning down a supposedly innocent and harmless angelic-faced kid for no reason.

          • Bunswalla

            So to be clear, you disagree that Martin was breaking no laws (either that or you disagree that he’s dead, which I doubt), but in the same breath you say “Martin may not have been breaking any laws”.

            It’s hard to have a debate with some that contradicts themselves, but in any case I’m not saying my opinion is any more or less valid than Whittle’s – or yours for that matter. I don’t care if you respect it or not, and I’m happy to consider yours – as soon as you work out what it is.

          • Kimbo

            I never said Martin was breaking any laws (up to the point of the assualt).

            What I said was that theer is circumstantial and wider charatcetr evidence that corroborates Zimmermann’s opinion that he (Martin) was a legitimate subject of suspiscion and civilian surveillance.

            Now, kindly tell share with the calss what conclusive, indisutable evidence you have that Zimmerman initiated (“accosted” is the precise phrase you used) the physical confronttaion that subsequently occurred?

            Because that goes to the heart of the matter…

    • Col

      So are white people known for raping and killing, not just black.
      What happen here, is two people both in the wrong area, what ever was going down no one will really know.

  • cows4me

    Zimmerman was stitched up from day one by the criminal organisation running the joint, the whole case was to the beck and call of the scumbag administration, fired up by their arse licking liberal media. Obummer and his Marxists mates would love nothing more than civil disorder. It’s all a game to these evil bastards, pit one side against the other, hope like hell chaos breaks lose. The end game is Marshall law, gun confiscation, governance by decree and Communist rule.

    • opusx

      The prosecution on the charge of murder should never have been bought against Zimmerman, the evidence to support the charge was never there, so yes, a politically motivated prosecution and most probably for the reasons you state (albeit replace communist with socialist :-).

  • geoff

    Where were all these demonstrators when O.J Simpson was acquitted? I

  • rockape

    My wife made the comment that in Vanuatu when we meet 4 or 5 dark skinned guys a t night carrying their Machetes we dont feel threatened. Would I feel the same in Downtown South Auckland, the East end of London or New york. Does that make me racist or a good judge of the threat? And have I used racial profiling to assess the threat.

    • opusx

      Mate, it’s called being cautious :-).

  • snakebit

    Zimmerman was fucked over by the liberal elite, simple as that.

  • Super_Guest

    Seems to me people want one of these guys to be a mustache-twirling villain, when they don’t get one they pick one of the guys and run with it disregarding the situation as a whole. Problem is you’re gonna be called “rathist” if you pick Martin.

27%