Trayvon Martin. Why are we not talking about this?

[beebrisk]

I guess the past 8 pages are why we weren't talking about this. It's all opinions. None of us were there and we will never be told ALL the facts. A new one trickles in each day. I feel sorry for all parties involved. I also feel sorry for Gypsy who has just been a voice of reason, trying to point out it's not as black and white as it seems to so many people, figuratively and literally.

Our society loves labels and something to talk about. People of other races kill each other EVERY SINGLE DAY and it's not known world wide. In the next town over a black brother and sister shot an unarmed white male after a very small fender bender. Do you see his family on the news? He didn't do anything wrong and was unarmed. Is this a hate crime? No. It's just sad. Anytime someone loses a life due to something that could have been avoided, it's sad.

^^ Voice of reason^^

 

[missy]

Just checking: you do realize that's why people are so upset over this, right? Not because one young boy was killed, but because it plays into a long, long history of young black men being strung up, shot, beaten, killed, all because our society tells us that, a) they're dangerous and, even when they're only armed with Skittles, so it's okay if bad things happen to them and b) because once bad things happen to them, there are rarely consequences for the people who do those bad things - which tells us that they're worthless.

Trayvon Martin's death as case-in-point is a tragedy. Trayvon Martin's death as part of a pattern, though? Encapsulates a slew of our social problems, in a nutshell, and words fail me when I try to think of what to call that.

I can't even begin to say how much I disagree with this assertion as I do with so many others here.

First off, "our society" does NOT tell us that young men of color are "dangerous and that it's okay if bad things happen to them". To the contrary. That is what our disingenuous and divisive media has drummed into the psyches of a public all too hungry to believe that we live in one big, hateful, racist, cesspool of a country.

To make matters worse, those who profit by such a notion have no better solutions than to call for "retaliation" (Louis Farrakahn) and by placing a bounty on the head of Zimmerman (NBP's). Not wanting to miss out on an opportunity to exploit another tragedy in order to further their own social and political agendas, Sharpton and Jackson are in the fray now.

I'm not the only one who feels this way, either. C.L Bryant, a former NAACP leader said this of Sharpton and Jackson: “They are...acting as though they are buzzards circling the carcass of this young boy.” He states further: “Why not be angry about the wholesale murder that goes on in the streets of Newark and Chicago?...Why isn’t somebody angry about that six-year-old girl who was killed on her steps last weekend in a cross fire when two gang members in Chicago start shooting at each other? Why is there no outrage about that?”

For crying out loud, his own mother trademarked his name last month. And for what purpose?? According to papers filed: "Fulton, 46, is seeking the trademarks for use on “Digital materials, namely, CDs and DVDs featuring Trayvon Martin,” and other products". It doesn't get more despicable than that, folks.

So yeah, there are racists in this country, but the profiteers of racial dis-harmony are quite content with the status quo and with forcing the idea that we are inherently evil and egregiously uncaring down our collective throats.

I for one, am sick of it and refuse to take on the faux guilt and politically correct hand-wringing over a terrible tragedy that has absolutely NO KNOWN FACTUAL basis in racism.

Wow, that is truly despicable. Though not surprising sad to say.

 

[LJL]

I guess the past 8 pages are why we weren't talking about this. It's all opinions. None of us were there and we will never be told ALL the facts. A new one trickles in each day. I feel sorry for all parties involved. I also feel sorry for Gypsy who has just been a voice of reason, trying to point out it's not as black and white as it seems to so many people, figuratively and literally.

Our society loves labels and something to talk about. People of other races kill each other EVERY SINGLE DAY and it's not known world wide. In the next town over a black brother and sister shot an unarmed white male after a very small fender bender. Do you see his family on the news? He didn't do anything wrong and was unarmed. Is this a hate crime? No. It's just sad. Anytime someone loses a life due to something that could have been avoided, it's sad.

I have held out all thread - mostly because what I want to say has been said so much by others - but this it pretty damn close to every word I was thinking. so...

+1

(but sidenote - someone is going to come in and say the fender bender case isn't analogous because the bro/sis team was prob arrested yada yada, but I get your point - that bad things happen that don't mean people are racists, they just suck. Thats what I think youre getting at and I agreeeeee)

 

[Circe]

Wow, that is truly despicable. Though not surprising sad to say.

I don't know her motivations ... but Amadou Diallo's name became common currency in rap. There IS the possibility she wants to prevent that sort of notoriety, not profit from her son's death (which ... I dunno, it feels like it sort of encapsulates a lot of social stereotypes in and of itself that people are trying to exonerate a white dude who said "****ing coons" moments before he shot a 17 year old black boy from racial bias, but quick to condemn a black mother on considerably less evidence).

ETA: Edited to fix the coding I screwed up, and to say I'm not finger-pointing you guys: there have been a few stories playing on that stereotype.

 

[Matata]

First off, "our society" does NOT tell us that young men of color are "dangerous and that it's okay if bad things happen to them". To the contrary. That is what our disingenuous and divisive media has drummed into the psyches of a public all too hungry to believe that we live in one big, hateful, racist, cesspool of a country.

LOL beebrisk, the drawbridge at your castle has been up for far too long. I grew up in a ghetto where it was open hunting season on "*iggers." I was trained by my mother to cross the street if I saw a black man coming, god forbid there should be more than one, rather than risk bodily harm. She was never assaulted by a black man; she learned from her mom who was never assaulted either. I was taught that blacks are dirty, uneducated, brood-bearing animals that suck the juice out of the welfare system. This feeling was prevalent during the 50s-70s and it is still prevalent today. I do not think the city where I grew up is the only one where racist ideals linger.

I have a relative who is a cop in a large east coast city who, along with his comrades, boast how they arrange for "dirty *iggers" to have "accidents" in jail to ensure they get the message about toeing the line. And they boast about how, working in cahoots with judges, rightful bail is denied those "animal *iggers" to ensure they stay in jail. There is so much more to tell but I doubt anything will crack the lenses of your rose-colored glasses.

If you believe there is no prejudice today toward blacks, try an experiment -- darken your skin, don a wig, and try to get a cab at night in an upper middle class neighborhood in your area.

 

[Imdanny]

Where did I say no one is arguing about race? Quote me please. I am tired of you putting words in my mouth.

It's not a question of ignorance or knowledge, it's a question of stopping and looking at the legal constraints. Again, I am not saying Stand Your Ground will be an effective defense. I am saying that the police are forced to take it into account and make factual determinations prior to arrest.

Emotional responses are fine, and even useful. Everyone is entitled to them. I've had my fair share of outrage and horror. But I still don't see that the police's failure to arrest Zimmerman is racially motivated, or even avoidable by them at this juncture.

"I actually already mentioned the racial slur earlier in this thread.

I am starting to get the sense you want to have arguments that no one else is having."

QED.

 

[Imdanny]

MissStepcut, the pretense that you "understand" the law is unwarranted. You have an opinion about it. Others are entitled to have their own opinion of it. You disagree with some about the law. That's your opinion. Plenty of lawyers in this thread have disagreed with you. You state you understand it and others don't. No, they disagree .

Moreover, you say that others have not argued about race. I'm not going to quote the relevant posts but you should re-read the thread.

Please drop this, "I understand; you're ignorant" non-argument and make your own points.

I provided you with a statute to talk about. It doesn't appear that you even read it.

If you want to talk about the law, you have to get into the details. It's not a discussion when you meet questions with platitudes like, "I'm not saying it might not apply."

I've asked for it before but I'll ask again: where is the legal analysis that says that the police do not need to make a factual determination under the Stand Your Ground law prior to arresting Zimmerman? I haven't seen any lawyer in this thread or in the media coverage say that, so I am still operating on the analysis from a criminal law professor that I posted. And I have read the statute, that's why I am still sticking to the position I'm in. Did you read the analysis I posted and linked to?

Where did I say no one is arguing about race? Quote me please. I am tired of you putting words in my mouth.

It's not a question of ignorance or knowledge, it's a question of stopping and looking at the legal constraints. Again, I am not saying Stand Your Ground will be an effective defense. I am saying that the police are forced to take it into account and make factual determinations prior to arrest.

Emotional responses are fine, and even useful. Everyone is entitled to them. I've had my fair share of outrage and horror. But I still don't see that the police's failure to arrest Zimmerman is racially motivated, or even avoidable by them at this juncture.

I said police don't make factual determinations? Alrighty, then.

 

[MissStepcut]

Where did I say no one is arguing about race? Quote me please. I am tired of you putting words in my mouth.

It's not a question of ignorance or knowledge, it's a question of stopping and looking at the legal constraints. Again, I am not saying Stand Your Ground will be an effective defense. I am saying that the police are forced to take it into account and make factual determinations prior to arrest.

Emotional responses are fine, and even useful. Everyone is entitled to them. I've had my fair share of outrage and horror. But I still don't see that the police's failure to arrest Zimmerman is racially motivated, or even avoidable by them at this juncture.

"I actually already mentioned the racial slur earlier in this thread.

I am starting to get the sense you want to have arguments that no one else is having."

QED.

Those were separate thoughts, as obviously was the case by the paragraph break. I raised the racial slur in response to someone else bringing up the "race argument," so, hello, obviously I knew it was going on... I was engaging in it!!

 

[Imdanny]

And I have read the statute, that's why I am still sticking to the position I'm in.

Well, I asked you a specific question concerning a specific statue and I linked to it. You declined to discuss it.

Ok. But your "argument" about the "stand your ground" statutes is you've read them, you understand them, and you're sticking to your position.

Ok.

Maria demolished your argument. That was a few pages back.

But, by all means, please keep lecturing us about how we don't understand nor even care about the law in Florida.

 

[Imdanny]

Where did I say no one is arguing about race? Quote me please. I am tired of you putting words in my mouth.

It's not a question of ignorance or knowledge, it's a question of stopping and looking at the legal constraints. Again, I am not saying Stand Your Ground will be an effective defense. I am saying that the police are forced to take it into account and make factual determinations prior to arrest.

Emotional responses are fine, and even useful. Everyone is entitled to them. I've had my fair share of outrage and horror. But I still don't see that the police's failure to arrest Zimmerman is racially motivated, or even avoidable by them at this juncture.

"I actually already mentioned the racial slur earlier in this thread.

I am starting to get the sense you want to have arguments that no one else is having."

QED.

Those were separate thoughts, as obviously was the case by the paragraph break. I raised the racial slur in response to someone else bringing up the "race argument," so, hello, obviously I knew it was going on... I was engaging in it!!

Actually, no they weren't separate thoughts. They both related to the part of my post you chose to put in bold. I mean, if you want to engage me, do it. But, and I mean honestly, don't be surprised when I respond.

 

[MissStepcut]

And I have read the statute, that's why I am still sticking to the position I'm in.

Well, I asked you a specific question concerning a specific statue and I linked to it. You declined to discuss it.

Ok. But your "argument" about the "stand your ground" statutes is you've read them, you understand them, and you're sticking to your position.

Ok.

Maria demolished your argument. That was a few pages back.

But, by all means, please keep lecturing us about how we don't understand nor even care about the law in Florida.

Maria did no such thing. The professor Maria cited to didn't address the limitations on the police. All due respect to Maria, but she didn't even touch the issues the law creates for the police, or share a source that did.

I did address the statute, and you responded to it. I responded to you, then you dropped it. Feel free to pick it back up though.

I am not lecturing anyone. I am pointing out the nuances in the issue, which are complex and difficult. I don't totally understand them myself; the law appears to ask the impossible of the police. No one in this thread has cited to any Florida attorney explaining why the law doesn't restrain the police. Though I would be interested to read it.

 

[MissStepcut]

Those were separate thoughts, as obviously was the case by the paragraph break. I raised the racial slur in response to someone else bringing up the "race argument," so, hello, obviously I knew it was going on... I was engaging in it!!

Actually, no they weren't separate thoughts. They both related to the part of my post you chose to put in bold. I mean, if you want to engage me, do it. But, and I mean honestly, don't be surprised when I respond.

I am sorry that my post was confusingly structured. I never meant to deny that this thread, and the issue, is full of racial issues. Obviously I know that it is, since earlier in the thread, when someone said they didn't think Zimmerman was motivated by race, I brought the racial slur on the tape to her attention.

 

[GlamMosher]

I have a relative who is a cop in a large east coast city who, along with his comrades, boast how they arrange for "dirty *iggers" to have "accidents" in jail to ensure they get the message about toeing the line. And they boast about how, working in cahoots with judges, rightful bail is denied those "animal *iggers" to ensure they stay in jail.

Wow. just...wow.

I don't even think race should be an issue here and it is sad that is all coming down to that - was it a racist attack? It should be wrong because of what happened, black, white, shades of brown, whatever, either or both of them.

What sort of world do we live in that has a law that this can happen and it is acceptable?

 

[MissStepcut]

I don't think I have anything else to contribute to this thread, and I'm plenty frustrated, so I am going to walk away, but at least we're all talking about it now and aware of more facts and concerned than when the thread was started. It will be interesting to see how it all plays out.

 

[Gypsy]

If there is a racist element, is it Zimmerman's caucasian half or his hispanic half that's at fault?

Whichever half it was that said "effing coons".

And I heard "Effing punks"... I even rewound it, surprised because I did NOT hear coons. I heard punks. Very clearly, punks.

 

[GlamMosher]

For crying out loud, his own mother trademarked his name last month. And for what purpose?? According to papers filed: "Fulton, 46, is seeking the trademarks for use on “Digital materials, namely, CDs and DVDs featuring Trayvon Martin,” and other products". It doesn't get more despicable than that, folks.[/b]

Wow, that is truly despicable. Though not surprising sad to say.

From http://www.news.com.au/world/murder...a-nation-divided/story-e6frfkyi-1226311542251

An attorney for Martin's mother has also confirmed that she filed trademark applications for two slogans containing her son's name: "Justice for Trayvon" and "I Am Trayvon." The applications said the trademarks could be used for such things as DVDs and CDs.
The trademark attorney, Kimra Major-Morris, said in an email that Fulton wants to protect intellectual property rights for "projects that will assist other families who experience similar tragedies."
Asked if Fulton had any profit motive, the attorney replied: "None."

 

[GlamMosher]

And I heard "Effing punks"... I even rewound it, surprised because I did NOT hear coons. I heard punks. Very clearly, punks.

The determination seems to be whether he said "coons" or "goons". It is definitely an "oo" sound.

I am not even really sure what a "goon" is, but one website (urban dictionary) says it means "n*gga" in Florida.

 

[Gypsy]

I'm not the only one who feels this way, either. C.L Bryant, a former NAACP leader said this of Sharpton and Jackson: “They are...acting as though they are buzzards circling the carcass of this young boy.” He states further: “Why not be angry about the wholesale murder that goes on in the streets of Newark and Chicago?...Why isn’t somebody angry about that six-year-old girl who was killed on her steps last weekend in a cross fire when two gang members in Chicago start shooting at each other? Why is there no outrage about that?”

So yeah, there are racists in this country, but the profiteers of racial dis-harmony are quite content with the status quo and with forcing the idea that we are inherently evil and egregiously uncaring down our collective throats.

I for one, am sick of it and refuse to take on the faux guilt and politically correct hand-wringing over a terrible tragedy that has absolutely NO KNOWN FACTUAL basis in racism.

I agree with this. I think there are horrendous tragedies being overlooked and under investigated everywhere. But that's not the argument that is being made by the people who have decided THIS case is the one they should be upset about.

Circe... yes, racial tensions exist. No denying it. And yes, we should be upset about it and TRYING TO HEAL IT.

But fabricating a racial crime in the absence of actual proof is a crime too. Why can't you see that? Again, George is not America, and he isn't Sanford. He's a person. And even in a racist TOWN, heck a racist COUNTRY, it is possible that a man of one color harms another of a different color without the color of their skins meaning anything more than simple pigmentation. And until and unless you can prove to me that it was otherwise, I am not going to assume that it was anything other than that. And that's not wrong.


Fabricating racial crimes doesn't serve justice, it doesn't serve history, it doesn't serve the greater good, and it doesn't serve our country's need to heal.

 

[lulu]

Amen, Gypsy, amen.

 

[Gypsy]

For crying out loud, his own mother trademarked his name last month. And for what purpose?? According to papers filed: "Fulton, 46, is seeking the trademarks for use on “Digital materials, namely, CDs and DVDs featuring Trayvon Martin,” and other products". It doesn't get more despicable than that, folks.[/b]

Wow, that is truly despicable. Though not surprising sad to say.

From http://www.news.com.au/world/murder...a-nation-divided/story-e6frfkyi-1226311542251

An attorney for Martin's mother has also confirmed that she filed trademark applications for two slogans containing her son's name: "Justice for Trayvon" and "I Am Trayvon." The applications said the trademarks could be used for such things as DVDs and CDs.
The trademark attorney, Kimra Major-Morris, said in an email that Fulton wants to protect intellectual property rights for "projects that will assist other families who experience similar tragedies."
Asked if Fulton had any profit motive, the attorney replied: "None."

Okay so. What was she supposed to say?

Yes, my son is dead and all I can think about is my own financial future. Of COURSE the lawyer says, "no motive for profit"... sheesh, you give this woman the benefit of the doubt but George MUST be a racist... even though there is no proof... you are sure HE'S LYING. But the woman who trademark's her son's name? Nope, there was no motive for profit there.

Do you even realize how inconsistent you are being?

 

[Gypsy]

Because his actions were unacceptable. your opinion based on not having all the true facts, which I don't have either

Because his actions were inexcusable. your opinion based on not having all the true facts, which I don't have either

Because his actions were racist. your opinion based on not having all the true facts, which I don't have either

Because his actions undermined fundamental human dignity and human rights. your opinion based on not having all the true facts, which I don't have either

Because the federal government has to serve notice that this will no longer be allowed. your opinion based on not having all the true facts, which I don't have either

I am surprised that you are actually asking me this question, Karl. Why did the judiciary branch of the United States federal government first start to prosecute crimes against African-Americans as violations of the civil rights of those individuals? Because state laws allowed the persecution of African Americans!
Why are the same laws not used against African-americans when they attack whites? because the laws are racist.

Deb see my edit above I knew you would jump on that word.
Legally if it was legal under Florida law he is the victim.

No one posting in this thread has the true facts of the incident.
Only the over hyped and sometimes downright wrong media reports.

Amen.

Does anyone in this thread watch Big Bang Theory? There this scene where Sheldon and his mom square off about Facts and Opinions.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SzHHZ5oXAr0

That's what this post (and this thread) remind me of.

 

[Gypsy]

I guess the past 8 pages are why we weren't talking about this. It's all opinions. None of us were there and we will never be told ALL the facts. A new one trickles in each day. I feel sorry for all parties involved. I also feel sorry for Gypsy who has just been a voice of reason, trying to point out it's not as black and white as it seems to so many people, figuratively and literally.

Our society loves labels and something to talk about. People of other races kill each other EVERY SINGLE DAY and it's not known world wide. In the next town over a black brother and sister shot an unarmed white male after a very small fender bender. Do you see his family on the news? He didn't do anything wrong and was unarmed. Is this a hate crime? No. It's just sad. Anytime someone loses a life due to something that could have been avoided, it's sad.

Thank you honey. And I wholeheartedly agree with your post.

 

[missy]

For crying out loud, his own mother trademarked his name last month. And for what purpose?? According to papers filed: "Fulton, 46, is seeking the trademarks for use on “Digital materials, namely, CDs and DVDs featuring Trayvon Martin,” and other products". It doesn't get more despicable than that, folks.[/b]

Wow, that is truly despicable. Though not surprising sad to say.

From http://www.news.com.au/world/murder...a-nation-divided/story-e6frfkyi-1226311542251

An attorney for Martin's mother has also confirmed that she filed trademark applications for two slogans containing her son's name: "Justice for Trayvon" and "I Am Trayvon." The applications said the trademarks could be used for such things as DVDs and CDs.
The trademark attorney, Kimra Major-Morris, said in an email that Fulton wants to protect intellectual property rights for "projects that will assist other families who experience similar tragedies."
Asked if Fulton had any profit motive, the attorney replied: "None."

Well, I do not believe that and my disbelief has nothing to do with race.
But time will tell, won't it.

 

[AGBF]

I had written:

"I am surprised that you are actually asking me this question, Karl. Why did the judiciary branch of the United States federal government first start to prosecute crimes against African-Americans as violations of the civil rights of those individuals? Because state laws allowed the persecution of African Americans!"

You replied:

Why are the same laws not used against African-americans when they attack whites? because the laws are racist.

I plan to go back and rebut more of what you wrote, Karl, because I find it illogical (which really drives me up a wall). One thing at a time, though. You don't mean that the laws to which I referred (the laws that that keep people from violating the civil rights of others) are racist. You mean that, in your opinion, the laws are applied unfairly or in a racially unjust way. At least I assume that you don't mean the laws are racist. How could a law that says no one can violate the civil rights of anyone else be racist?

Deb/AGBF

 

[Circe]

I'm not the only one who feels this way, either. C.L Bryant, a former NAACP leader said this of Sharpton and Jackson: “They are...acting as though they are buzzards circling the carcass of this young boy.” He states further: “Why not be angry about the wholesale murder that goes on in the streets of Newark and Chicago?...Why isn’t somebody angry about that six-year-old girl who was killed on her steps last weekend in a cross fire when two gang members in Chicago start shooting at each other? Why is there no outrage about that?”

So yeah, there are racists in this country, but the profiteers of racial dis-harmony are quite content with the status quo and with forcing the idea that we are inherently evil and egregiously uncaring down our collective throats.

I for one, am sick of it and refuse to take on the faux guilt and politically correct hand-wringing over a terrible tragedy that has absolutely NO KNOWN FACTUAL basis in racism.

I agree with this. I think there are horrendous tragedies being overlooked and under investigated everywhere. But that's not the argument that is being made by the people who have decided THIS case is the one they should be upset about.

Circe... yes, racial tensions exist. No denying it. And yes, we should be upset about it and TRYING TO HEAL IT.

But fabricating a racial crime in the absence of actual proof is a crime too. Why can't you see that? Again, George is not America, and he isn't Sanford. He's a person. And even in a racist TOWN, heck a racist COUNTRY, it is possible that a man of one color harms another of a different color without the color of their skins meaning anything more than simple pigmentation. And until and unless you can prove to me that it was otherwise, I am not going to assume that it was anything other than that. And that's not wrong.


Fabricating racial crimes doesn't serve justice, it doesn't serve history, it doesn't serve the greater good, and it doesn't serve our country's need to heal.

Gyps - at the end of the day, I think we're just too far apart on this one. You think I'm fabricating evidence, and I think you're ignoring it, because we're interpreting the same information in two radically different ways. I vote agree to disagree, I think, because until more information comes to light, we're just talking about in circles ....

 

[beebrisk]

For crying out loud, his own mother trademarked his name last month. And for what purpose?? According to papers filed: "Fulton, 46, is seeking the trademarks for use on “Digital materials, namely, CDs and DVDs featuring Trayvon Martin,” and other products". It doesn't get more despicable than that, folks.[/b]

Wow, that is truly despicable. Though not surprising sad to say.

From http://www.news.com.au/world/murder...a-nation-divided/story-e6frfkyi-1226311542251

An attorney for Martin's mother has also confirmed that she filed trademark applications for two slogans containing her son's name: "Justice for Trayvon" and "I Am Trayvon." The applications said the trademarks could be used for such things as DVDs and CDs.
The trademark attorney, Kimra Major-Morris, said in an email that Fulton wants to protect intellectual property rights for "projects that will assist other families who experience similar tragedies."
Asked if Fulton had any profit motive, the attorney replied: "None."

Ha! Excellent spin!

Because lawyers' motives are always pure, yes?

Because it's reasonable that a grieving mother should seek the immediate comfort of a trademark attorney/ambulance chaser by protecting her recently dead child's "intellectual property rights", yes??

Yeah. Totally reasonable behavior.

 

[LJL]

And I heard "Effing punks"... I even rewound it, surprised because I did NOT hear coons. I heard punks. Very clearly, punks.

The determination seems to be whether he said "coons" or "goons". It is definitely an "oo" sound.

I am not even really sure what a "goon" is, but one website (urban dictionary) says it means "n*gga" in Florida.

I grew up in Florida and when I think of "goon" I think of mafia henchmen or similar. Its like saying big dumb enforcers.. maybe what someone would call a dumb jock, but not the star player.... I never heard that it was a racial slur or similar.

 

[beebrisk]

I'm not the only one who feels this way, either. C.L Bryant, a former NAACP leader said this of Sharpton and Jackson: “They are...acting as though they are buzzards circling the carcass of this young boy.” He states further: “Why not be angry about the wholesale murder that goes on in the streets of Newark and Chicago?...Why isn’t somebody angry about that six-year-old girl who was killed on her steps last weekend in a cross fire when two gang members in Chicago start shooting at each other? Why is there no outrage about that?”

So yeah, there are racists in this country, but the profiteers of racial dis-harmony are quite content with the status quo and with forcing the idea that we are inherently evil and egregiously uncaring down our collective throats.

I for one, am sick of it and refuse to take on the faux guilt and politically correct hand-wringing over a terrible tragedy that has absolutely NO KNOWN FACTUAL basis in racism.

I agree with this. I think there are horrendous tragedies being overlooked and under investigated everywhere. But that's not the argument that is being made by the people who have decided THIS case is the one they should be upset about.

Circe... yes, racial tensions exist. No denying it. And yes, we should be upset about it and TRYING TO HEAL IT.

But fabricating a racial crime in the absence of actual proof is a crime too. Why can't you see that? Again, George is not America, and he isn't Sanford. He's a person. And even in a racist TOWN, heck a racist COUNTRY, it is possible that a man of one color harms another of a different color without the color of their skins meaning anything more than simple pigmentation. And until and unless you can prove to me that it was otherwise, I am not going to assume that it was anything other than that. And that's not wrong.

Fabricating racial crimes doesn't serve justice, it doesn't serve history, it doesn't serve the greater good, and it doesn't serve our country's need to heal.

Correct. It does however, serve those who are in a position to profit from it: Trademark attorneys, Sharpton-esque race baiters, the media, authors of future books sure to be written about the incident, and from the looks of it, the boy's own mother. That's the ugly and politically incorrect truth as I see it.

 

[Laila619]

Who really cares what the mother's motive is? She lost her CHILD, the most horrific thing any parent could ever have to go through . Why is she relevant to the case?

 

[Gypsy]

I'm not the only one who feels this way, either. C.L Bryant, a former NAACP leader said this of Sharpton and Jackson: “They are...acting as though they are buzzards circling the carcass of this young boy.” He states further: “Why not be angry about the wholesale murder that goes on in the streets of Newark and Chicago?...Why isn’t somebody angry about that six-year-old girl who was killed on her steps last weekend in a cross fire when two gang members in Chicago start shooting at each other? Why is there no outrage about that?”

So yeah, there are racists in this country, but the profiteers of racial dis-harmony are quite content with the status quo and with forcing the idea that we are inherently evil and egregiously uncaring down our collective throats.

I for one, am sick of it and refuse to take on the faux guilt and politically correct hand-wringing over a terrible tragedy that has absolutely NO KNOWN FACTUAL basis in racism.

I agree with this. I think there are horrendous tragedies being overlooked and under investigated everywhere. But that's not the argument that is being made by the people who have decided THIS case is the one they should be upset about.

Circe... yes, racial tensions exist. No denying it. And yes, we should be upset about it and TRYING TO HEAL IT.

But fabricating a racial crime in the absence of actual proof is a crime too. Why can't you see that? Again, George is not America, and he isn't Sanford. He's a person. And even in a racist TOWN, heck a racist COUNTRY, it is possible that a man of one color harms another of a different color without the color of their skins meaning anything more than simple pigmentation. And until and unless you can prove to me that it was otherwise, I am not going to assume that it was anything other than that. And that's not wrong.


Fabricating racial crimes doesn't serve justice, it doesn't serve history, it doesn't serve the greater good, and it doesn't serve our country's need to heal.

Gyps - at the end of the day, I think we're just too far apart on this one. You think I'm fabricating evidence, and I think you're ignoring it, because we're interpreting the same information in two radically different ways. I vote agree to disagree, I think, because until more information comes to light, we're just talking about in circles ....

YES! Totally agree. ((BIG HUG))