Thursday, March 22, 2012

Trayvon Martin, George Zimmerman and Sheppard Smith: Liar on the Unfair and Unbalanced Network (the Lynching of Zimmerman Continues)

Sheppard Smith saiod this today on the unfair and unbalanced network, regarding the Trayvon Martin kiling and the "report" his network was about to give: "We report, you decide". Smith then went on to PROVE he, and his netework, are among the most blatant LIARS who have ever lived (something I have known about Smith for a LONG time). The is Smiths' "deescripton" of the FACTS of the Trayvon Martin matter (showing that he and his neteork care no more for the actual FACTS than any of the rest of the media):

"Martin was sent by his family to pick up some pills ffor a sibling. He went to a convience store, and was carrying the pills and a drink as he was walking back home. George Zimmerman then waqlked up to Martin, as Martin was walking home, and shot him dead."

Is it possible to tell a more blatant LIE than this descriptoion? I don't hink so. No this is NOT a "meatter of opinion", and is not even a matter of whether Zimmerman is guilty of some sort of homicide. It is a matter of a blatant LIE about the FACTS, and Smith KNEW he was liying. How do I now that? I know that because Smith then proceeded to CONTRADICT himself.

Nope. There is NO construction of the actual facts that can enable you to say that George Zimmerman "walked up to Trayvon Martin, as he was walking home, and shot him dead." Smith then went to a reporter and they started VAGUELY discussing the facts. Smith, himself, mentined the 911 calls thatZimmerman made, including BEFORE the shooting. Those 911 calls alone make clear--both before and after the killing--that this is NOT a matter of Zimmerman "walking up to Martin" and just shooting him dead. Then Smith and the reporter talked a LITTLEW about what Zimmerman said, and that included Zimmerman's claim that he was WALKING AWAY from Martin when Martin attacked him. Then the reporter mentioned that Zimmerman evidently had a BLODY NOSE. Remember the earlier blog article today where I mentioned that the city manager said that the PHYSICAL EVIDENCE supported Zimmerman's satement. A BLOODY NOSE would be part of the physical evidence. But Smith was UNINTERESTED. The had LIED, and he was bascially stickng by the LIE by ignoring the actual facts . So much for: "We report, and you decide". Yoyu, SheppardSmith, are a LIAR. And YOU, the unfairand unbalanced network, LIE every time you use that staement to LIE about your "coverage" of "news".

l"But, Skip, capital punishment is a pretty extreme reaction to a bloody nose. Don't you think it is extreme for Zimmerman to shoot dead an unarmed teenager when when it is Zimmerman who may have "provoked" the fight in the first place by 'following' the teenabger."

As I have previiously stated, you will NEVER know the exact factrs from our media, because they are NOT INTERESTED. Sheppard Smith and the unfair and unablanced network were certainly not interested. Basically, Smith's conclusinon was that the ENTIRE COUNTRY is AGRY aoub this, and is demanding the LYNCHING of George Zimmerman. Okay, Smith did not actually use the word "lynching", but you shuold realize this is LESS of a LIE (my "interpretive" word "lynching") that what SMITH said on the air. He virtualy stated, as a fact, that the local authorities (and probably the grand jury) would have NO CHOICE but to go after George Zimmerman as someone who had jsut walked up a shot an innocent teenager dead (without, as far as Smith was concerned, any excuse at all). You don't have to believe George Zimmerman's satement to the police to realize that it HAD to be more accurate than Sheppard Smith's BLATANT LIES>

Should George Zimmerman be arrested for homicide? I don't know. He WAS the one who called 911, and he evidently DID have a bloody nose. Further, the 911 calls obviously do not realy CONTRADICT his staatement, or the police would have arrested hi. But George Zimerman is not a "hero". This blog has previously ridiculted the strange habit of racial "activists" of making HEROES out of BLACK THUGS who have had their "rights' denied, or been treated way too harshly for the onduct that they have committed (more haarshl than maybe white thugs are, or would have been, treated in the same circumstances). No, I have no problem with asserting that black people accused of wrongful conduct should be treated the same as "white" peopele. But that does MPT make people who--at least aguably--did things wrong HEROES. Yes, I am talking aobut peole like the "Jana 6", if I am getting the name of that Arkansas (I think) town right where those six teenaged thugs were tretated too harshl,y. Unlike our media, I apply the SAME standard to white peole (wihout trying to equate the relatively minor condut--not true of black MURDERERS who activists say should not receive the death penalty, or sometimes even any severe penalty at all, because of either racial bias in the system or som e alleged techinical violation in their trial) as I do to black people. I think a black person is entitled to his rights, including whatever "technical" (not really involving moral guilt or innocence) that he may have. I believe that George Zimmerman is entiteld to the SAME rights, including the right not to be RAILROADED by POLITICAL PRESSURE.

However, does that mean I "approve" of what AGeorge Zimmerman did? As I again say, the problem here is that I KNOW that I am not getting the FACTS from our media. So I can't form a real opiniion. And I really am not interested in trying to do my own "nvestigatino" of the matter (especially in that I cannot even read things like full transcripts of the 911 calls in any reasonable periood of time). But I have DOUBTS that George Zimmerman acted totaly in a way to put him on the side of the angels here. After all, he did kill an unarmed man (a 17 year old almsot being old enough to be fighting in Afghanistan, or to have fought in World War II), when Zimmerman alpparently could have walked away from an confrontatino much earlier than he did. And Zimmerman evidently only had a "bloody nose". As stated, KILING is a heavy "penalty" for a bloody nose. BUT. Do i know jst how the situation appeared to Zimmerman? Do I KNOW that Zimmerman knew that Martin had no weapon (such as a knife or club)? Do I KNOW whether Zimmerman panicked, and realy thought he was in danger of his life? Florida law says that Zimmerman did not have to RETREAT from an ATTACK. Sheppard Smith, or you,m are entitled to believe that Zimmerman gengaged in too much provocative behavior of his own to rely on that law, or that Zimmerman was big enough to not need a gun to fight off the attack of a boy (yound man) wo evidenty did not have the build of Hercules. However, it is thte FACTS taht teh media should be telling me, or YOU. And THEN we could decide what we think these facts tell lus. Yes, Sheppard Smit, and YOU, are entitled to believe that Florida law takes to "lenient" a view of "deadly force". Firne. That is a matter of opinion, upon which reasonable minds can differ (always realizing that a person--in a somewhat different situation than Zimmerman--might justifiably be upset at "monday Morning FQuarterbacking" about whether the person was in immediate danger of his life when the person was, say, MUGGED by three or four balkc teenagers witout obvious weapons (or, of course, WHITE teenagers without obivus eaons). These are more complex matters tahn the media--disonest and incompetent as they are--want to OBJECTIVELY tell you about. None of this changes the FACT that Sheppard Smith BLATANTLY LIED about the FACTS of this case, and showed completre DISINTERST in the factual facts (his CLOSED MIND having obviusly been made up).

No. I do not regard Zimmerman as any kind of "hero" hhere. I jsut can't get around the idea that he pursued this matter too far, and could hve done BETTER than he did to avoid a deadly outcome (always realizing that Zimmerman's OWN GUN could have been used against him if he did not use it himself, and that this is another of the FACTS as to which the media will NEVER adequately explore). Stl, desite what Sheppard Smith says, I have NO present informatin upon which I can give an opinion that Zimmerman should be CHARGED with homiced under Florida law. I KNOW that Zimmerman did not simplyl walk up to a boy walkng home and shoot him dead (which is, so hep me, how Sheppard Smith described this). As I have also said in previous articles on this subjet, Zimmrman seemed to take much more on himself that I would ever have done, instead of leaving it to the police (again realizing that I, or you, have no way of knowing whether we have the FACTS on this, because the media is not interested in the facts). As I have said, however, do we NEEDD people like George Zimmerman willing to take it upon himself to help PROTECT his neighbors? I don't reject the idea out of hand. In fact, I would say that BLACK neighboroods may well NEED someone like George Zimmerman (balck or white) to ACT against crime in the neighborhood. At times, black individuals have been PROPERLY (in my view, if the reports of their activities I have read were accurate) hailed as HEROIES for trying to take back black enighborhoods from DURUGE DEALLERS and other undesirables (undesirable for the blakc peole living in the neighblorhood) So is it POSSIBLE to say that there is somethinbg of the HEORO in George Zimmerman, even if you and I might rightly fquestin the legnths to which he went (and his judgment)? I thnk so.

In other words, would the country be a better palce if MORE peole were willing to take a lot more interest in their neighborhood, and protecting their neighbors, than I do (hermiit that I am)? Again, the idea seems reasonable to me. This medai RIDICULE (I don't hink I am overstating here) of Zimmerman as a "neighborhood watchman" is somewhat disturbing in itself.

There are a lot of COMPLEX issues here, and NONE of them have antything to do with "racism" (other than the strange insistence of our media on tring to "prove" we are a RACIST country, when I believe they are the primary "racists" in the country: in the real meaning of the term, which is viewing individuals--assigning them "rights"--based on their RACE rather than in a "color blind" manner). It is our MEDIA, and other leftists, who now insiston DEFNNING people on the basis of race, and upon talknig constantly about "race as if that is the IMPORTANT element in sometning like the Martinshooting. Do you REALLY think that Zimmerman shot Martin because Martin was BLACK? I hae seen no evidence of that. Now it is , of curse, possible that Zimmerman was more "nervous" and suspicioius of Martin becaue he was black, but that is hardly the same thing. To listen to our media, ou would thiink this country is more RACIST than it ihas ever been, instead of LESSS racist (asiide foom the media and leftists concentrating more on race than they ever have) than the country has ever been. We, after all, have a BLACK (mixed,r ealy, as is true of amost the whole populiation to one degere or anoteher) President. KHerman Cain might even have been the nominee of the OTHER party, if he had not been (figuratively) LYNCHED, using the old stereotype of black men and white women. This blog supported Cain, until he withdrew, even while recognizing he wsas not perfect.

Nope. Waht we have to do is get BEOND RACE. I think the PEOLE of the United Sates are ready for that. I don't think the MEDIA, and the LEFT (including the numberous "racial politicians" that Obama was supposed to supersede in a new era), refuse to LET us get BEYOND "race" . That is the saddest thing about the Martin/Zimmerman matter. It should NOT be about RACE. I t should be about the FACTS, and whether Zimmerman violated the law--perhaps also about whether the law should be changed. No, I would not have the same opiniino if there were evidence that zimmerman wanted to INTIMIDATE black voters, or balck activists--or EVIDENCE that Zimmerman were conducting some CAMPAIGN of intimidattin against balck peole in general. I now of NO such EVIDENCE. All we have is a SINGLE incident where Zimmerman MAY have overreacted to a single INDIVIDUAL (who happened to be black, which may or may not have had ANYTHING to do with how Zimmrean acted or how the police handled the matter). The Martin family, AND Zimmerman, are entitled to INDIVIDSUAL JUSTICE. We have to get away from the idea that this knnd of thing is all about RACIAL JUSTICE. I don't hink any other thing could help balck people in this country more, and you can see who is primariy holding us back form such a COLOR BLIND society. No, I don't have any problem with people looknig at the Zimmeran matter and saying that the Martin family did not get INDIVIDUAL justice for Trayvon Martin. I do have a problem with people UNINTERESTED in the actual facts, and only interested in the idea that the USA is a racist country (makng this ALL about race).

That is why I ahve concentrated so much on the TERRIBLE media coverage of the Trayvon Martin killing. This was a chance for the media to look at the FACTS, and SHOW the Samford police how a NEUTRAL look at the facts should have been conducted. Instead, the media has "shown" the Samford police how a criminal investigation should NOT be conducted: by suggesting that George Zimmerman should be LYNCHED to "show" balck people in this country that this is not a "racist" country. The Samford police SHOULD have looked at this incident in an entirely color blind manner. They MAY not have done that. I don't know. I have seen no ereal evidence of that, but it is possible. There is more possiblitiy that they UNCHOSCIIUSLY just did a slipshod "investiagation" of the matter. However, whatever you thnk of the Samford plice, our MEDIA have shown a BLOODTHIRSTY, LYNCH MOB atttitude totally uninterested in a NEUTRAL look att he FACTS. In short, no matter how bad you think the Samford police did their job, our media has done THEIR JOB WORSE. More, our media would--with abaolute certaintly--be MORE UNFAIR to George Zimmerman, if they were the police, than the Samford plice could possibly have been to Trayvon Martin and the Martin family. Se jsut can't ge to a color blind society with this constant OVEREMPHASIS on RACE.

P.S. No proofreading or spell checkng (bad eyesight). What if there were EVIDENCE that Zimmerman was dlieverately lookng for a black person to KILL? Well, then, I would asay Zimemeran DESERVES to HAN (or be killed by lethal injectin) But I have seen NO such evidence, or eally any evidence at all that race had any important impact on what either Zimmerman or the police did (whether they acted appropriately or inappropriately).

1 comment:

Dacia said... need to hire a proofreader. I like reading your blog, but take a English and Spelling class at a local college.