Originally Posted by sammi jo
Your point is moot as no thread was initiated on the subject; it wasn't discussed.
It isn't moot. The point is that you made a declaration that certain parties on the forums and certain news organizations would take certain actions.ow imagine if it had been a security guard named Zaheer, Zubaida, or Zulfiqar? The media and certain folks in here would be screeching that TERRORISM had reached our homes and gated communities. Patriot Act III would be on Obama's desk already.
Yes so basically a mass shooting on a military base didn't even raise much of an eyebrow thereby showing your claims of paranoia and hysteria are nonsense.
However, the Fort Hood event generated a huge amount of hysteria nationwide
; in a nation of regular serial killings with guns, this one happened to be committed someone with an Arabic name... so it was automatically classified, on a knee-jerk, as a terrorist incident, whereas all the others are merely "crimes". And as usual, Lieberman and Fox News
were the first to spew...
What actions have taken place from Fort Hood? You declared that legislation would be passed. You make it sound like someone killing 13 and wounding 29 people, a total of 42 people, at a very large military base shouldn't even make someone blink or cause any concern. That's just nonsense. There was no hysteria, backlash or any other nonsense you've claimed. One link to a Huffington Post piece warning about the possibility of such actions is in no form the same as people taking those actions.
You're in a very sad place right now.
Originally Posted by tonton
The whole premise that Obama was stoking racial tensions because he said his kid might look like Trayvon is completely and utterly absurd, and only a racist can link race to such a statement.
The fact is, Obama was stoking familial
tension. If you want to criticize that, fine.
If a white dude were killed when Bill Clinton was president and he said, "If I had a son, he might look like (John)," it would never have been questioned as being a race-related thing to say.
You think it's racist for Obama to say that because either:
1) Youre racist; or
2) You ejaculate at any chance you get to try to criticize Obama on any subject.
Nonsense, first of all Bill Clinton nor any of his surrogates could never say "Here's a white dude who was killed and it is proof of white male victim status, proof of white males being systematically being hunted and also proof of a white males being hunted" because none of them would ever seek victim status for white males. Obama has done this for every wedge group he wants to mobilize by claiming they've been victimized. If Clinton did say that about white male and specifically said that other racial groups were victimizing them, then it would indeed be use of race. The reality is race was injected into this by Obama and Democratic surrogates and it has no place in what happened. People saying rule of law, presumption of innocence, don't tell mobs you want someone dead or live, etc are not the racists here. Anyone who would say that is ignorant or worse just maliciously trying to exploit emotions.
Originally Posted by tonton
And it's funny how in half this thread one particular right wing poster (who shall remain unnamed) says that Zimmerman can't be racist because he's half Mexican, and then in the other half he says my friends aren't really minorities because they're only
half Mexican, and Mexican is half white anyway....
To a racist, everything
The reality is that race is used different ways by different people. I was noting your friends are Caucasian. That is true. However in the United States we do not merely consider race to be a matter of skin but of ethnicity. In some parts of the world race is sometimes ONLY ethnicity. Japanese and Chinese do not consider themselves to be of the same race but they are indeed of the same race but are obviously different ethnicities. You know better than this and are just bitter that you were slapped down so badly for your bad logic.
Originally Posted by sammi jo
By demonizing the deceased - before all the facts come out - one is effectively supporting the shooter. The rightwing media is already on this
, by publishing faked pictures
such as this, featuring a suited, smiling "respectable looking" Zimmerman, next to a kid with 'attitude' in prison-shade orange pants, stripped to the waist, underwear showing, with a 4 finger gesture. The problem here is that the kid in the picture is NOT Trayvon Martin.
The shooting happened over a month ago, and probably much information has been buried by now. The black media were on this case right away but for the corporate media, it wasn't a story.... until recently. Parts of the story we don't hear about are the most harrowing... the kid's mom, worried sick about her missing son repeatedly called the police every few hours, only to be told "don't know, maam". This went on for three days until she found out... and all the while, the kid's body was in the morgue... and the the cops claimed they didn't know?
Do you read your own links? Media Matters was having to apologize to Drudge because they claimed he ran a fake photo and he did no such thing. The photo you are linked to shows the absurdity of how the picture the media was running of Zimmerman was a mugshot from an arrest (or something similar) and the only photos they would run of Martin all were of him at age 11-12 as can clearly be seen by his lack of development in them. The reality is no one in the media were running recent photos of either party. So the photo is ironically noting how the media was spinning the story. You don't appear to catch the irony there.