When will Democrats stop killing unarmed black Americans?

Never claimed to have clairvoyant powers--though to you any logical thought probably seems mystical and superhuman but that's a different matter. I only look at what posters say and what is addressed in the media.

It is clear Z was told not to follow. See, you are pretending you have clairvoyant powers -- because without special 'clairvoyant powers -- there is no way in hell you can claim to 'know' as fact that Zimmerman continued to follow Martin.

Magically a kid teleports to attack him? Ever wonder why he would do so? I was not there, but I have seen nothing indicating the kid chased Zimmerman, so a reasonable situation is the Zimmrman kept following him, because I for one do not subscribe to the teleport option or the one that has humans acting like quantum particles.

Your posts about height and weight are meaningless drivel. Not according to the MSM and those who would lynch Zimmerman; it's been a major part of their spiel from day one -- it's you who is spouting drivel.

They (as with the original post about bench pressing weights) is still a red herring. "He's lighter than what the press reported, so he's inocent!" "No, wait a minute, the kid was lighter so HE must be the guilty one!" You bring up a topic and can't even figure out if heavy is good or if heavy is bad. Oh, I see, now you are saying to be in shape is BAD, and a guy who is not in shape is a victim. By the way, do you know what condition Zimmerman is or is not in? Persoanlly I do not know and I don't care, but you seem to believe that he must be out of shape because that increases his victim status.

As to prejudging, I have done none of it as far as Zimmerman goes. BS, Old-goaT you've done it multiple times in this thread: see above.

As far as the majority of posters on here I don't have to, their comments condemn themselves. The bigots are quite ready to give Zimmerman a medal and declair him a national hero because he shot a thuggish black boy.

If you don't see bias and racial stereotyping in this thread it is only because you don't want to.

And don't waste your electrons telling me that the news media is biased--yep, they sure are. Some overboard one way, some the other. Few care to be objective. But that is not the point of my comments (you don't see me claiming they are any better), but since I'm posting on HERE, my comments are directed to the posters HERE, many of whom look only at skin color to tell who is right and who is wrong--just as they are accusing the press of doing. They just don't agree on which color is which.

You, for example, who say "your ilk" made certain statements when I have never said any such thing. But we have seen on repeated threads that you have zero guilt about putting words in my mouth, do you? You gleefully lie about what I said and go into a childish rant when I call you the liar you are.

On the other hand you ignore when you are called to task based upon your quotes:

IB: "To most rational people, one rape and one shooting is still too many."

Me: "if rational people believe one shooting is too many, and you are fine with the shooting in question, that means you are admitting you are irrational."

IB: Crickets. You are still lost, Old-goaT.

You are too, too funny, Old-goaT!!! Originally Posted by Old-T

.

There you go again, Buffoon.

Me: "As to prejudging, I have done none of it as far as Zimmerman goes."

IB Buffoon: "BS, Old-goaT you've done it multiple times in this thread: see above."

OK, so I look above and what do I find: I B's "proof": "Not according to the MSM and those who would lynch Zimmerman"

So now--according to Ol' IB, if MSM says it that's the same as if I said it. Hate to disapoint you Buffoon, MSM does not represent me, I'm not on their board of directors nor on their editorial staff. I happen to not agree with much of what they believe.

But none of that matters to you as we all know. You lie--again--about anyone and anything who disagrees with you.

Me: "As to prejudging, I have done none of it as far as Zimmerman goes." Originally Posted by Old-T

You lie Old-goaT!!!

You prejudged at post # 70

It's about a guy with a gun getting into a macho vigilanti mindset. [You do not know that, so you are prejudging.] Originally Posted by Old-T

You prejudged again at post # 71

To me the most telling comment in all this was in the call when Z was told not to engage but he did. That is the mark of a guy looking to be macho rather than do his part.[You do not know that, so you are prejudging.] Originally Posted by Old-T

And you prejudged again at post # 75

I was not there, but I have seen nothing indicating the kid chased Zimmerman, so a reasonable situation is the Zimmrman kept following him [You cannot know that, so you are prejudging.], because I for one do not subscribe to the teleport option or the one that has humans acting like quantum particles. [Your suppositions are not proof, so you are prejudging.] Originally Posted by Old-T

So now--according to Ol' IB, if MSM says it that's the same as if I said it. Originally Posted by Old-T

You -- like the MSM -- prejudged Zimmerman and jumped to conclusions not supported by the evidence made available to the public. Chew on that Old-goaT.

You're improving. At least you are giving refererences. That's a good start. Another century or two and you might make cogent arguments.

Post 70: I'll spot you this one. It did come across more judgemental that I intended. Trying to counterballance the posters who are portraying Zimmerman as a hero.

Post 71: Wrong. Every indication I have seen says he was told not to follow but continued to do so. As I mentioned, I have been part of community watches in three states and this is a prime rule in all three: when told to stop following, that meas stop following. My personal experience is--as I said--his reported actions are the mark of a macho guy in it for the wrong reasons. I never claimed this was what was going on inside Zimmerman's head, but it IS an indication and symptom, which is what I stated.

Post 75: You are wrong. Logic my young man, logic. If I read that Zimmerman kept following, and I read nothing that the kid chased him, it does seem reasonable that Z followed. Which is not the same as my saying "Zimmerman DID chase after him". Learn to read, learn to think. Both are good life skills. Given what was stated by both sides of the press, what would YOU say is a reasonable hypothisis?

Post 75, second part: I still believe that quantum effects on human sized objects is highly unlikely--as is teleportation. I do admit, those are suppositions on my part, but suppositions I suspect most intelligent humanoids (including Conservatives) would agree with.

So, you are hitting 1 for 4 on this thread. Fot you that is damn good! Bravo!

I would love to hear YOUR interpretation of the data presented so far. Unlike you, I really can seperate speculation vs fact. Most sentient homo sapiens really do a lot of that--trying to look at limited data and logically think about the possible connections. POSSIBLE. LOGICAL. You should try it some time, it's great fun, and beneficial.

So, keeping track--just for fun of course--you are now 1 for 6 on the last two threads where you lied about what I had said. At least you ARE moving in the right direction.

PS: I really wonder if the races in question were reversed how quickly you might be calling for the rope. Note, I would never say you would--just asking a question. That might (notice another subjunctive) be a difficult choice, I don't know. But I do have my suspicions.

Smile, it's Sunday!

...
His weight seems rather a red herring--170 pounds is quite enough to pull a trigger.. Originally Posted by Old-T

Is Old-T an alternate handle for WTF who doesn't understand what a red herring argument is?

Magically a kid teleports to attack him? Originally Posted by Old-T

Gawd talk about a red herring!

T, this is about an accurate portrayal of what the two parties were on the night of the shooting.

You're improving. At least you are giving refererences. That's a good start. Another century or two and you might make cogent arguments. Already light years ahead of you.

Post 70: I'll spot you this one. It did come across more judgemental that I intended. Trying to counterballance the posters who are portraying Zimmerman as a hero.√


Post 71: Wrong. Every indication I have seen says he was told not to follow but continued to do so. As I mentioned, I have been part of community watches in three states and this is a prime rule in all three: when told to stop following, that meas stop following. My personal experience is--as I said--his reported actions are the mark of a macho guy in it for the wrong reasons. I never claimed this was what was going on inside Zimmerman's head, but it IS an indication and symptom, which is what I stated. O' but you did; see below.

Post 75: You are wrong. Logic my young man, logic. If I read that Zimmerman kept following, and I read nothing that the kid chased him, it does seem reasonable that Z followed. Which is not the same as my saying "Zimmerman DID chase after him". Learn to read, learn to think. Both are good life skills. Given what was stated by both sides of the press, what would YOU say is a reasonable hypothisis? You are the one who needs to read and learn. Zimmerman claims he was returning to his vehicle when Martin confronted him. That is what is in the police report, and what do you want to bet Zimmerman stands by that story in court? So sit on your 'hypothesis' [aka 'prejudgement'] and rotate.

Post 75, second part: I still believe that quantum effects on human sized objects is highly unlikely--as is teleportation. I do admit, those are suppositions on my part, but suppositions I suspect most intelligent humanoids (including Conservatives) would agree with. Sit on your 'suppositions' [aka 'prejudgement'] and rotate.

So, you are hitting 1 for 4 on this thread. Fot you that is damn good! Bravo! You cannot count any better than you can read.

I would love to hear YOUR interpretation of the data presented so far. Unlike you, I really can seperate speculation vs fact. Most sentient homo sapiens really do a lot of that--trying to look at limited data and logically think about the possible connections. POSSIBLE. LOGICAL. You should try it some time, it's great fun, and beneficial. Wait for the legal system to do its job. How is that for an 'interpretation'.

So, keeping track--just for fun of course--you are now 1 for 6 on the last two threads where you lied about what I had said. At least you ARE moving in the right direction. You are so pathetic.

PS: I really wonder if the races in question were reversed how quickly you might be calling for the rope. Note, I would never say you would--just asking a question. That might (notice another subjunctive) be a difficult choice, I don't know. But I do have my suspicions. The MSM wouldn't have deemed it as a 'newsworthy' event let alone whip up racial animosity and attempt to try and convict the individual in the court of public opinion.

Smile, it's Sunday! Originally Posted by Old-T

You did prejudge at post # 71

To me the most telling comment in all this was in the call when Z was told not to engage but he did. [You do not know that, so you are prejudging.] Originally Posted by Old-T

This latest rant of yours is even more babble than typical. I reference what is known (personal experience) and what data I have (press reports, etc.) to draw inferences and opinions. Unlike you I can distinguish between a belief based upon limited data and a subsequent new belief based upon more data. So far, more data supports my opinions than yours, but that really doesn't matter. In my world you really are allowed to have your own opinion even if I think it is illogical and biased.

The meta-difference between your views and mine is that you claim all inferences that disagree with your world view are not allowed. You scream that I and others should not be allowed to think and hold opinions unless they conform to your opinions. YOU will tell us what conclusions have enough evidence to support and which do not. You know what that sounds like to me? Communism. That is exactly the kind of mind control--only one value system, one belief system allowed--that Papa Joe would have been proud of.

You think Zimmerman is a fine upstanding citizen, so we should all agree with that point of view. You point to his statement that he was returning to his car, and so any contrary views are dismissed. That isn't prejudging? Of course it is--the ONLY difference is you allow pre-judging when it agrees with your view. Hypocrite. For all you rant against Communism, you do share a lot of common traits with them. Anyone who disagrees should listen carefully for the midnight knock on the door and the train to Siberia. Why is it always the ultra-conservative wackos who believe in Freedom of Speech only for those who agree with them? (The ultra-liberals have their own wackos who believe shouting fire in the theater IS acceptable, but that is a different sickness for a different time).

Reading your posts is better than reading the morning comics. More laughs to the word--although they are often laughs of pathos.

Old T, if you are here for a rational discussion, you will be sorely disappointed. If you are here to listen to fanatical rants unrelated to reality, peppered with homosexual slurs and multi-colored fonts to prove an incomprehensible point, then you'll find this place very entertaining. Not informative, but entertaining.

This latest rant of yours is even more babble than typical. I reference what is known (personal experience) and what data I have (press reports, etc.) to draw inferences and opinions. Unlike you I can distinguish between a belief based upon limited data and a subsequent new belief based upon more data. So far, more data supports my opinions than yours, but that really doesn't matter. In my world you really are allowed to have your own opinion even if I think it is illogical and biased.

The meta-difference between your views and mine is that you claim all inferences that disagree with your world view are not allowed. You scream that I and others should not be allowed to think and hold opinions unless they conform to your opinions. YOU will tell us what conclusions have enough evidence to support and which do not. You know what that sounds like to me? Communism. That is exactly the kind of mind control--only one value system, one belief system allowed--that Papa Joe would have been proud of.

You think Zimmerman is a fine upstanding citizen, so we should all agree with that point of view. You point to his statement that he was returning to his car, and so any contrary views are dismissed. That isn't prejudging? Of course it is--the ONLY difference is you allow pre-judging when it agrees with your view. Hypocrite. For all you rant against Communism, you do share a lot of common traits with them. Anyone who disagrees should listen carefully for the midnight knock on the door and the train to Siberia. Why is it always the ultra-conservative wackos who believe in Freedom of Speech only for those who agree with them? (The ultra-liberals have their own wackos who believe shouting fire in the theater IS acceptable, but that is a different sickness for a different time).

Reading your posts is better than reading the morning comics. More laughs to the word--although they are often laughs of pathos. Originally Posted by Old-T

The summary of your posts: judgmental lies and distortions.

Old T, if you are here for a rational discussion, you will be sorely disappointed. If you are here to listen to fanatical rants unrelated to reality, peppered with homosexual slurs and multi-colored fonts to prove an incomprehensible point, then you'll find this place very entertaining. Not informative, but entertaining. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

It probably says a lot about my character, but yes, I come to this forum when I am board and looking for a few moments of surreal amusement watching feeding time at the zoo, and I admit I carry a stick to rattle the inhabitants' cages. Bad Old-T! But it's just too easy with guys(?) like IB.

I wish there were more posters like you; sometimes I agree with you, sometimes I don't, but you are thought provoking and worth reading; OK, most the time . It does make your posts stand out in here.

The odd part is that the ultra-right folks here accuse me of being a flaiing liberal. I also post on another board (also when I am bored) and say many of the same things--only there I get cursed out as being the second coming of Attila. Sadly we have become a very polarized bi-modal population.

The summary of your posts: judgmental lies and distortions. Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Judgment is usually deemed a good thing in civilized society, yet you use it as a slur--a clear symptom of someone who supports a mind-control society. Hitler did not want judgment, nor did Stalin. Judgment is only an anathema to despots who don't want the populous to think for themselves. Why do you think judgement is a bad thing?

Lies? No. Opinions that disagree with yours--especially when stated as opinions--are not lies.

Distortions? See "Lies" above.

It probably says a lot about my character, but yes, I come to this forum when I am board and looking for a few moments of surreal amusement watching feeding time at the zoo, and I admit I carry a stick to rattle the inhabitants' cages. Bad Old-T! But it's just too easy with guys(?) like IB.

I wish there were more posters like you; sometimes I agree with you, sometimes I don't, but you are almost always thought provoking and worth reading; OK, most the time . It does make your posts stand out in here.

The odd part is that the ultra-right folks here accuse me of being a flaiing liberal. I also post on another board (also when I am bored) and say many of the same things--only there I get cursed out as being the second coming of Attila. Sadly we have become a very polarized bi-modal population. Originally Posted by Old-T

Old-goaT, your posts in this thread have been nothing more than judgmental lies and distortions. You may as well be working for the MSM.

Old-goaT, your posts in this thread have been nothing more than judgmental lies and distortions. You may as well be working for the MSM. Originally Posted by I B Hankering

I replied to your comment already. Why not quote my reply--why quote this post of mine to COG instead? Could be a typo, but it could also be a sly, cunning attempt by you to deflect the readers off the trail (on second thought, not likely). Did my actual response to you hit too close to home? Do you cringe to think you display some traits in common with those Godless Commie Bastards? Well, you do.

Hey, as a side note I have a favor to ask: the next time you see MSM (which I always thought was MSN) use my words without giving me credit, please let me know. I thought I was on their blacklist as well. I have posted lots of replies to MSN "news" stories on line, and very few have been supportive of their position--something called accuracy that you only marginally care about, but I'm compulsive in that regard, sorry.

I replied to your comment already. Why not quote my reply--why quote this post of mine to COG instead? Could be a typo, but it could also be a sly, cunning attempt by you to deflect the readers off the trail (on second thought, not likely). Did my actual response to you hit too close to home? Do you cringe to think you display some traits in common with those Godless Commie Bastards? Well, you do.

Hey, as a side note I have a favor to ask: the next time you see MSM (which I always thought was MSN) use my words without giving me credit, please let me know. I thought I was on their blacklist as well. I have posted lots of replies to MSN "news" stories on line, and very few have been supportive of their position--something called accuracy that you only marginally care about, but I'm compulsive in that regard, sorry. Originally Posted by Old-T

Old-goaT, you've already been exposed as a liar. Your posts have mirrored the lies and distortions broadcast by the MSM, and they too have been revealed as liars. Why don't you let the legal system run its course without interjecting your biased 'hypotheses', 'opinions' and 'suppositions'. Can you handle letting those in a position to know -- which you aren't -- do their jobs? How communistic is that, Old-goaT?

Old-goaT, you've already been exposed as a liar. Your posts have mirrored the lies and distortions broadcast by the MSM, and they too have been revealed as liars. Why don't you let the legal system run its course without interjecting your biased 'hypotheses', 'opinions' and 'suppositions'. Can you handle letting those in a position to know -- which you aren't -- do their jobs? How communistic is that, Old-goaT? Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Glad to know where you stand:
--Opinions IB doesn't agree with = lies
--Judgement should be surpressed

Welcome to the gulag!