What has this blog told you about CNN, Yahoo and the rest of the media branding Hispanic George Zimmerman a RACIST becaue it was POSSIBLE (that, is, some BIASED people heard it that way) that George Zimmerman said "f---ing coon " under his brath. This was one of the momost DISHONEST,, evil stories "journalists" have EFVER put out, and based on so little. The orginal Yahoo story, putting forth the mainstream media view, even made a big deal out of the Samford poice "admitting' that they MISSED this POSSIBLE racial sllur!!! What I want to know is if it is POSSIBLE to be more EvIL than these "journalists", aincluding Wwolf Blitzer and CNN, who are willing to try to BRAND a man (George Zimerman) a RACIST and HATE CRIMINAL based on ridiculous SPOECULATION , It is not too much to say that the media could have gotten Zimerman SHOT with this kind of stuff, and may still do so. Their "coverage" of this Martin kiling has been the WORST I have ever seen (:meaning it is the sorst, by any "journalsits" in the history of man, and wee have yet to see any APOLOGY for it. I still ahve to slay that Hitler, Stalin, Muslim terrorist, other terrorists, serail killers and mass murderers PROBAABLy aare still more evil than these "journalistgs". The GAP, however, is closing every day.
Why did I pick out Wolf Blitzer and CNN:/ It is because I saw a few minutes of Blitzer tonight. You will remember that the LEFTISTS at CNN couuld not even agree that the the "noise" ont eh 911 tape was George Zimmerman sayhing "f---ing coon" (lol--always absurd). LHowever, that did not stop CNN from making a big point about it--even continuing to say: But what if he DID say it? And what if President Obama once called John McCain a "f---ing honkier". No, I have NO EVIDENCE that President Obama did any such thing. . But neither did the media have ANY EVIDENCE taht George Zimmerman said "f---ing coon". All they had was a DISTORTED audio tape that Zimmerman said SOMETHIGN under his brath (NOT when confronting Marting, but simply while he wsa "following' Martin). It coululd have been anything. It tells lyou just how bad these peoople ("journalists") are that tthey were willing to go with this absurd SPECUATION based on such flimsy stuff: specualation which BRANDED Zimmerman a racist (and which they INTENDED to to that). Well, I saw those few minutes of Blitzer tonight, and the new" evidence" is that Zimmerman probably--or possibly, and it was never MORE than "possible" that he said "coon'--said "f---ing COLD". Wolf Blitzer then went on to show that he is UN-AMERICAN, and a despicable human being.
That is because Blitzer still refused to let it go. His plaintive cry: "Isnot there some way to be SURE whether Zimmerman said "coon"? say what, Wolf. You lousy excuse for a hman being, along with the rest of you at CNN. Whatever happened to "inocent until proven guilty? :You heard me, Wolf. Whatever hapened to PRESUPTION OF INNOCENCE. You, Wolf, and the rest of the media have ABANDONED that with regard to the LYNCHING of George Zimmerman, haven't you? You are ready to LYNCH an Hispanic to show how much you are ready to "supprot" African-Americans: RACISTS that yoiu are. Ype, Wolf, I just called lyou a RACIST, with much MORE basis than you at CNN have had for so labelling George Zimmerman. Let me spel it ut for CNN, in words of ne syllable: It is not up to George Zimmreman to PROVE tghat he did not say "f---ing coon". . It is up to people wo allege he DID say it to PROVE what they say (not just SPECULATE on what he MIGHT have said, if Zimmerman were NUTS and living 75 or a hundred years int he past.
What did this blog tell you IMMEDIATELY (present core: Blog 10,001 Media 0)? This blog told you=, corretly, that it wuld make MORE sense to believe tghatZimmerman had triped over a RACCOOON than that Zimmreman was saying THIS "racial slur" undr his brath. I am almost 65 yeqars of age, and have lived basically all of my life in and around the South (althogh El Paso is, of course, really teh Southwst rather than the deep Sought--but I spent the first 12 years of my life in Arkansas). I have NEVER heard the wrod"ccon" used as a racial slur in "reaal life". I have heard it in a movie or two, and maybe in an article or two, but I only remember hearing it as part of a LIST of racial slurs that have been used. I have no doubt that "coon" HAS been used as a racial slur. However, it is ABSURD that Zimmerman did so, "under his brath", in 2012. As Sherlock Holmes liked to say to Watson: "When you have eliminated the impossible (that Zimmerman used "coon" as a racial slur because he just happened to feel like it at the time), then whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth. To misquote Johnny Cash, as to "naming' the word, f any, that Zimmeran said "coon": "Cold, boon, raccoon, loon, moon, croon, ANYTHING but "coon". As I say, it tells you just how EVIL the modern media is that they could EVER have considered this worth making into a major story. It jsut would boggle the mind of any REASONBLE person ("journalists" need not apply) taht Zimmerman actually said "coon", especially at the particular pont he supposedly said it. Now, unlike lthe media, if the FACTS FORCED ME to beleive that Zimmeran said "coon", I would reluctantly accept ti. But it is ABSURD. It would make Zimmerman to be something out of the OLD bays of Louisiana, and I doubt if the word is even used much THERE anyomroe. The word is simply NOT USED. That means that the media was willing to MAKE UP A SLUR WORD TO BRAND ZIMMERMAN A RACIST, on any excuse.
The media shouuld APOLOGIZE to Zimmerman (for this, and many other things)). Blitzer's--have I told you Blitzer is a DESP:ICABLE HUMAN BEING--only comment on NBC's LIE about what Zimmerman said on the 911 ape (see blog article a day or two ago) was to basically say (sadly) that it made it diifficult to charge Zimmerman with a Federal HATE CRIME (assuming this "coon' propaanda comes to nothing). What Blitzer was tellng you, while DELIBERATELY not telling you, was that there is NO EVIDENCE to usuggest that Zimmeran was a racist, motivated by race in his actins regarding Martin. Too bad we can't say the same about CNN, and the rest of the media (Sheppard Smith, this continues to mean YOU and other s on the unfair and unbalanced network). Those peole clearly ARE moticated by RACE, and the deserive for a RACIAL LYNCHING. What the media has tried to do here is spread FEAR and RACIAL HATRED based on very litte. For that, they should not "apologize" to "white peole". They should, rather, apologize to BLACK PEOPLE, to HSISPANICS and to George Zimmerman.
Oh. Did I mention that Blitzer is still ushing the "question" of why Zimmerman hads not yet been CHARGED. Taht was ayuet another media LIE: the ideea that Zimmerman had not been ARRESTED. That poice video, which tghe media only tried ot use to LIE abut Zimmerman's injuries, shows that Zimmerman WAS ARRESTED (again, no APPOLOGY from the LIEARS of the media). Zimmerman was brought in to the policesstatin in handcuffs. Under the rules set out by the United States Supreme Court, or by anyone else, that was an ARREST . What is true was that Zimmerman has not been CHARGED with a crime, and wsa let go after the initial arrest. Blitzer is stilll pushiing the mainstream media positin--the LYNCH MOB position--that Zimmerman needs to be arrested sooner rather than later. Why else ask, as Blitzer did tonight: "Why the delay".
Why has thei blog PREDICTED thqat Zimmerman will eventually be charged with SOMETHING? This is the reaosn. The media is TELLING the authorities what is going to happen to them if they do NOT charge Zimmerman. As this blog has told you, MAYBE Zimmerman shuld be charged with mansaughter. But if he IS so charged, or with murder (fwhihc would be absurd, in the absnence of evidence we don't know abut), it will be for the WRONG reason. It will be for POLITICAL REASONS, and ot avoid the RACE RIOT that OUR MEDIA has set luyp. George Zimmerman deserves for this case to be evaluaged like any otehr case, with race not considered (except on the Federal level of that "hate crime" charge for which there is NO evidence). George Zimmerman shuld get the same result that would be reached if there had been two "white" people involved" two balck peole involved; or two Hispanic people involved.--with NO political pressure (lynch mob pressure) to arrive at a particular result. You say that is now impossible? I agree, and that is another tragbedy in a tragic case.
P.S. No proofreading or spell checking (bad eyesight).