Bob Costas; idiot, hack, fool, jerk, all of the above?

Several months ago, jackass. You’re a duplicitous and equivocating SOB, essence, and you’ll get a more than fair return on your “incivility”. Originally Posted by I B Hankering

References please.

Are you still in touch with Jazmine? Want some sloppy seconds?

Bob Costas is now off again talking about Zimmerman and Treyvon Martin. He says that it would not have happened if there were no guns involved. Okay, Zimmerman would be dead or severely injured and the unknown perp would still be walking the streets looking for his next target. Costas also forgot to talk about the lawsuit against his company and their tampering with video and audio to make Zimmerman look guilty. Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

Let's not forget that the ONLY reason Zimmerman and Martin every met up was because Zimmerman followed Martin, after being advised not to by the police operator. And the exact happenings of what occurred after they met up are up to speculation and will hopefully come out in the trial.Is Zimmerman 100% innocent? I don't know and neither do you. And please tell us what in Martin's past leads you to believe he was a hardened criminal who, if alive, would be looking for his next target?

Do you recommend that we do everything that the police dispatchers tell us to do? Even God allows free will but the police don't! Did I say that Martin was a hardened criminal? No, so you owe me a traction. What I was saying according to Martin's facebook page he imagined himself a up and coming badass. If he had put Zimmerman in the hospital or morgue it would give him street cred. He would be looking for his next challenge rather than turning himself into the police.

Where's Bob telling us that automobiles cause drunk driving?

http://http://www.tmz.com/2012/12/08...-manslaughter/

Where's Bob telling us that automobiles cause drunk driving? Originally Posted by TheDaliLama

He takes the subway to work, cab to the stadium, and a plane in between. Well...

.. he used to travel in public.

May be not so much these days.

Do you recommend that we do everything that the police dispatchers tell us to do? Even God allows free will but the police don't! Did I say that Martin was a hardened criminal? No, so you owe me a traction. What I was saying according to Martin's facebook page he imagined himself a up and coming badass. If he had put Zimmerman in the hospital or morgue it would give him street cred. He would be looking for his next challenge rather than turning himself into the police. Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

I recommend that you listen to someone in a position of authority who is trying to give you sound advice. A person has free will up until that time it impacts another person's free will. IMHO, Zimmerman's actions impacted Martin's free will to simply walk down the street. Had Zimmerman listened to the police dispatcher he would not be in the trouble he is in. Zimmerman's responsibility was to report such incidents, not follow anyone.

I assume you think I owe you a "retraction", not a "traction". No you did not state that Martin was a "hardened criminal" but you did state "the unknown perp would still be walking the streets looking for his next target." Or looking to do something criminal. Again, there is nothing Martin did prior to his meeting Zimmerman that would indicate such actions.

I recommend that you listen to someone in a position of authority who is trying to give you sound advice. A person has free will up until that time it impacts another person's free will. IMHO, Zimmerman's actions impacted Martin's free will to simply walk down the street. Had Zimmerman listened to the police dispatcher he would not be in the trouble he is in. Zimmerman's responsibility was to report such incidents, not follow anyone. Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

#1: A police dispatcher had no authority to direct Zimmerman.
#2: A police officer on the phone had no authority to direct Zimmerman.
#3. Had Zimmerman done nothing and Martin raped and murder a tenant "we" might be having a different conversation with a different tone ... your assessment is Monday morning quarterbacking with months of reflection and additional information that Zimmerman did not know at the time and had no way of timely finding out.

#1: A police dispatcher had no authority to direct Zimmerman.
#2: A police officer on the phone had no authority to direct Zimmerman.
#3. Had Zimmerman done nothing and Martin raped and murder a tenant "we" might be having a different conversation with a different tone ... your assessment is Monday morning quarterbacking with months of reflection and additional information that Zimmerman did not know at the time and had no way of timely finding out.
Originally Posted by LexusLover

I never said anything different on #1 or #2. I said the police dispatcher gave "advice" to Zimmerman, which had he followed, he would not have gotten his ass in trouble. No one told him he had to follow their instructions. But he should have done so.

#3 is just plain stupid. What on earth would lead you to believe that Martin was planning on raping and murdering someone??? Zimmerman was an over-zealous
Deputy Dawg who over-reacted and put himself in a precarious position by following someone for absolutely no reason.

A dispatcher has no authority to tell a citizen anything. They can, as you say, give advice which the citizen is not required to follow. A person on the scene with some common sense has a better grasp on the situation that someone who answers phones and is miles away.

A dispatcher has no authority to tell a citizen anything. They can, as you say, give advice which the citizen is not required to follow. A person on the scene with some common sense has a better grasp on the situation that someone who answers phones and is miles away. Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

Exactly correct. And had Zimmerman followed the dispatcher's advice, he wouldn't be facing criminal charges as he is today.

#1: A police dispatcher had no authority to direct Zimmerman.
#2: A police officer on the phone had no authority to direct Zimmerman.
#3. Had Zimmerman done nothing and Martin raped and murder a tenant "we" might be having a different conversation with a different tone ... your assessment is Monday morning quarterbacking with months of reflection and additional information that Zimmerman did not know at the time and had no way of timely finding out.
Originally Posted by LexusLover

right wing tea sippers will defend anything.Now the police have no authority.

References please.

Are you still in touch with Jazmine? Want some sloppy seconds? Originally Posted by essence

Sounds like you're the one who had "sloppy seconds", essence. Regarding references: http://www.eccie.net/showpost.php?p=2191889&postcou nt=1

BTW, jackass, you ran away from and went completely silent on this issue several days ago:

Odumbo was referring to the events of 9/11 2001, jackass. Originally Posted by I B Hankering

You've made that assertion before, I have asked you for evidence for this assertion, nd you have provided none.

Another fantasy lie by the (fill in the blanks) gang of 5 (IBH, JDB, W, JB, a n other). Originally Posted by essence

I know. He was acknowledging the anniversary of 9/11.

But the fact that he was referring to something else at some prior point in his speech is absolutely no evidence that when he was referring to acts of terror he was solely referring to the original twin towers.

You are making one and one add up to a conspiracy of silence.

You may get a hint from the fact that he used the plural - actS of terror.

Is this nonsense the basis of the republican campaign?

Geez.

I don't think Obama is the best president ever, but these republican idiots scare me, given what I know that the majority of US citizens I meet are educated, wise and thoughtful. Originally Posted by essence

Thank you for explaining that, it is now very clear.

When, in 2012, Obama referred to acts of terror, in the days after the Bhengazi terrorist attack, he was referring solely to the multiplicity of acts of terror in 2001, and did not include, when he used the term 'acts of terror', the most recent act of terror.

It's very clear now, I understand the full situation, and who the crazy ones are.

I'm out. Originally Posted by essence

Kroft: Mr. President, this morning you went out of your way to avoid the use of the word terrorism in connection with the Libya attack. Do you believe that this was a terrorist attack?

Obama: Well it's too early to know exactly how this came about, what group was involved, but obviously it was an attack on Americans.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/w...ttack/1684503/

Eat Crow-ley and choke, essence! Originally Posted by I B Hankering

http://www.eccie.net/showpost.php?p=...8&postcount=39

Except Glen Beck has built a media empire, employing thousands; while Whitlock relies on the color of his skin to keep his ass employed, despite his obvious incompetence. Originally Posted by Whirlaway

Still waiting on some evidence of Beck's huge employment rolls, you lying sack of shit!

When did a 911 call operator become a police officer?


So if some TSA guy "advised" you to suck his cock, you'd be down on your knees without hestitation.

Sounds like you're the one who had "sloppy seconds", essence. Regarding references: http://www.eccie.net/showpost.php?p=2191889&postcou nt=1

BTW, jackass, you ran away from and went completely silent on this issue several days ago:




http://www.eccie.net/showpost.php?p=...8&postcount=39 Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Your references do not reference anything about my bitching about civility - not surprising, seeing as I don;t recall ever bitching about civility.

Some of us have a life, hence I come and go on these forums.

You still haven;t given me Jazmin's phone #, so you can have sloppy seconds.