chior boy with a violent temper

Or they want to distance themselves from what was their one-time hero poster boy. What are the odds some of the very vocal George Z supporters put this whole thread on ignore.

I said from day one he was a bad apple who disregarded all the basic principles of neighborhood watch. Now even the local police who were far too cozy with him back then seem to have woken up. But will the RWW crowd here ever admit maybe they backed a sleazeball? I doubt it. Originally Posted by Old-T

I guess you forgot what all the hub bub was about. Despite what you say, the right wing did not embrace Zimmerman, the right wing embraced the law, due process, and the truth. In the end, we were proven right. Trayvon did attack him, he did defend himself, he was found not guilty, and repeatedly the media, the activists, and Obama were caught lying about what happened that night. So if I understand OT, he is against due process and the truth. Anything that George was involved in afterwards has no relation with anything that happened that night.

I never did "back" Martin. I didn't "back" Zimmerman. It was my assessment from the early reports, through the trial, that Zimmerman may have been acting in self-defense, or at the worst Martin died in a struggle initiated by Martin.

Apparently, the Jury arrived at a similar conclusion.

If either one of them are "sleazeballs" ... they are still entitled to a presumption of "innocence" until it is proven otherwise, and Zimmerman is still innocent of any criminal charges in the death of Martin. Originally Posted by LexusLover

No, I seem to remember you were rather reasonable in those discussions. Unlike many others. Notice how quickly IB chimes in with his absurd revisionist history of how he wanted to almost canonized Georgie? And how IIFFy is now concerned about whether a top I on this forum is "important". Good for you IIFFy! That is probably the first time you ever pondered that question. You certainly don't worry about significance with most of YOUR posts.

Or they want to distance themselves from what was their one-time hero poster boy. What are the odds some of the very vocal George Z supporters put this whole thread on ignore.
Originally Posted by Old-T

That is a gross misrepresentation of the arguments that were made in this forum.

The arguments were over the evidence and if there was enough to convict him. Just because that most reasonable believed there was not enough for a conviction doesn't mean he was thought of as some hero.

That's why your lame ass post is ignored.

I suggest you reread some of the threads. Yes, a lot of people addressed the issues. Some went far overboard, especially with their comments about what is and is not appropriate neighborhood watch behavior, and whether GZ was being overly aggressive/hostile. Looks like he has indeed established a track record of hostility, short temper, and violence tendencies.

Again, not everyone who said he should be acquitted was unreasonable. But please don't try and pretend they were all strictly arguing jurisprudence. Remember someone even changed his handle to "Hero Zimmerman". He at least has admitted that was a bit overboard if I remember right. My long standing ridicule of IB and all he stands for goes back to his excessive gushing over what a great human being Georgie was.

If you were on the sane side of the argument, then I have no beef with you. I don't particularly recall your posts from then.

I suggest you reread some of the threads. Originally Posted by Old-T

Some on here have already exceeded their statistical life expectancy, and yet others have demonstrated severe cases of reading comprehension deficiencies.

While others simply desire to rewrite history to appear on the "correct side," which I kindly reference as 20-20 Monday morning hindsight ... and in some instances xray vision with their 20-20 hindsight.

But those three impediments could be assessed in most of these epic threads.

The bottom line is: Like OJ he is still innocent of the alleged murder, because the State in each case failed to meet their required burden to over the presumption.

LL, completely agree. Sadly.

LL, completely agree. Sadly. Originally Posted by Old-T

Don't go getting all misty on us... Old-Tearyeyes

Who is "misty"?

Are you backing off your earlier claim OT? You seemed to want to indict all "RWW" in your earlier post but now your coming off as saying , well....some of you were okay but a few others (who I will not name) were jerks for standing up for the law and system. Does that about cover it?

When he was acquitted, it was like a New Year's Rockin' Eve for some of you.

As I recall there was a lot of gloating and crowing as if it had been a personal victory of good over evil, especially from certain members of a certain Klan, err, Clan, that shall go nameless.

This thread will wind up like that. It's headed that direction now. This is the 25th post. When will the stupid bullshit start in earnest?

Are you backing off your earlier claim OT? You seemed to want to indict all "RWW" in your earlier post but now your coming off as saying , well....some of you were okay but a few others (who I will not name) were jerks for standing up for the law and system. Does that about cover it? Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

Not backing off anything. Not every conservative is a RWW. It is the second W that differentiates the sane conservatives from the nuts. And quite honestly, the nuts at not worth my time to go back through the archives. The RWWs disavow and revise anything I would quote back to them anyway.

Not backing off anything. Not every conservative is a RWW. It is the second W that differentiates the sane conservatives from the nuts. And quite honestly, the nuts at not worth my time to go back through the archives. The RWWs disavow and revise anything I would quote back to them anyway. Originally Posted by Old-T

You LWW punk can't back your up BS...

Oh no! Looks like one of this boards favorite heroes, little George Z, is in trouble again. Aggravated assault.

This guy was a loose cannon with a bad temper and a machismo complex from the first time he hit the front pages. Somehow I don't think he is finished his fall from gun toting poster boy to recognized psychopath. Originally Posted by Old-T

George Zimmerman is no angel. The media is exposing him because his shooting was so controversial.


Jim

I suggest you reread some of the threads. Yes, a lot of people addressed the issues. Some went far overboard, especially with their comments about what is and is not appropriate neighborhood watch behavior, and whether GZ was being overly aggressive/hostile. Looks like he has indeed established a track record of hostility, short temper, and violence tendencies.

Again, not everyone who said he should be acquitted was unreasonable. But please don't try and pretend they were all strictly arguing jurisprudence. Remember someone even changed his handle to "Hero Zimmerman". He at least has admitted that was a bit overboard if I remember right. My long standing ridicule of IB and all he stands for goes back to his excessive gushing over what a great human being Georgie was.

If you were on the sane side of the argument, then I have no beef with you. I don't particularly recall your posts from then. Originally Posted by Old-T

You're a liar, Old-THUMPER. It was your contention that Zimmerman was guilty of the charges leveled by the lib-retard MSM and nefarious race-baiters. The evidence and how it was misrepresented by the MSM and the overboard vilification of Zimmerman by you, the lib-retard MSM and the race-baiters was overwhelmingly the crux of the many threads in this and the other forum, Old-THUMPER, and your lying ass cannot cite a single post to back-up your present, lying accusations, Old-THUMPER.

Point one of those discussions: Martin was not the twelve year old choir boy you and your ilk misrepresented him to be, Old-THUMPER. Point two and three of those discussions: Martin was a street fighting thug who took pride in making others bleed, and that he used drugs was evident in the autopsy showing a drug in his blood and liver damage that was highly unusual for someone of his age. Points: four, five, six and seven of those discussions: Martin he was caught with burglary tools and women's jewelry in his possession, and he was so unruly that he was suspended from school and his mother foisted him off on his father because she couldn't deal with his behavior. Point eight of those discussions: Martin had plenty of time to reach his dad's pad, but he chose instead to turn and attack a man with a gun. Martin died because he was a stupid thug. Point nine: each and every one of the previous mentioned facts was at some point misrepresented by you, the lib-retard MSM and the nefarious race-baiters, Old-THUMPER. The facts substantiated Zimmerman's version of events, and the jury agreed, Old-THUMPER.

Now take your hurt-butt and go home and keep crying over the verdict, Old-THUMPER. BTW, Old-THUMPER, you're the jackass fabricating a "revisionist history" for what was discussed in those other threads.

Oh no! Looks like one of this boards favorite heroes, little George Z, is in trouble again. Aggravated assault.

This guy was a loose cannon with a bad temper and a machismo complex from the first time he hit the front pages. Somehow I don't think he is finished his fall from gun toting poster boy to recognized psychopath. Originally Posted by Old-T

This guy needs to get his shit together. One justifiable shooting doesn't mean all his troubles will be.


Jim