|
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
....for George Zimmerman...
Hannity Lands First Zimmerman Interview The Fox News host will devote the entirety of his Wednesday night show to the sit-down. Should be a hoot. |
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
On Wed, 18 Jul 2012 16:44:35 -0400, X ` Man
wrote: ...for George Zimmerman... Hannity Lands First Zimmerman Interview The Fox News host will devote the entirety of his Wednesday night show to the sit-down. Should be a hoot. Zimmerman's father made that connection when this whole thing blew up in George's face. What does it say about an educated, retired federal judge when he seeks out Sean Hannity for a media surrogate? What that says to me is that Sean is a kindred soul and that he represents what most closely reflects Zimmerman family values. Rush Limbaugh must have been high on oxy and missed the call, so Zimmerman Sr. moved onto the next best spokesperson. |
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
|
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
|
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
|
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
On 7/19/12 9:54 AM, wrote:
On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 08:30:55 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Wed, 18 Jul 2012 15:52:48 -0700, jps wrote: On Wed, 18 Jul 2012 16:44:35 -0400, X ` Man wrote: ...for George Zimmerman... Hannity Lands First Zimmerman Interview The Fox News host will devote the entirety of his Wednesday night show to the sit-down. Should be a hoot. Zimmerman's father made that connection when this whole thing blew up in George's face. What does it say about an educated, retired federal judge when he seeks out Sean Hannity for a media surrogate? What that says to me is that Sean is a kindred soul and that he represents what most closely reflects Zimmerman family values. Rush Limbaugh must have been high on oxy and missed the call, so Zimmerman Sr. moved onto the next best spokesperson. Why would anyone who has said so many dumb things prior to a trial say anything on TV? I wondered the same thing! But, you could tell that Hannity and he had questions and answers all figured out way ahead of the interview. I still giggle about the part where Zimmerman said that killing Martin was God's plan! I wonder why God wanted Martin dead? Maybe god knew what a thug Martin was The thug was the fellow wandering around the neighborhood, stopping passers-by who had every right to be there and then, when the passer-by wouldn't do what Zimmerman wanted, Zimmerman forced a violent confrontation and shot the passer-by. |
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
On 7/19/2012 9:57 AM, X ` Man wrote:
On 7/19/12 9:54 AM, wrote: On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 08:30:55 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Wed, 18 Jul 2012 15:52:48 -0700, jps wrote: On Wed, 18 Jul 2012 16:44:35 -0400, X ` Man wrote: ...for George Zimmerman... Hannity Lands First Zimmerman Interview The Fox News host will devote the entirety of his Wednesday night show to the sit-down. Should be a hoot. Zimmerman's father made that connection when this whole thing blew up in George's face. What does it say about an educated, retired federal judge when he seeks out Sean Hannity for a media surrogate? What that says to me is that Sean is a kindred soul and that he represents what most closely reflects Zimmerman family values. Rush Limbaugh must have been high on oxy and missed the call, so Zimmerman Sr. moved onto the next best spokesperson. Why would anyone who has said so many dumb things prior to a trial say anything on TV? I wondered the same thing! But, you could tell that Hannity and he had questions and answers all figured out way ahead of the interview. I still giggle about the part where Zimmerman said that killing Martin was God's plan! I wonder why God wanted Martin dead? Maybe god knew what a thug Martin was The thug was the fellow wandering around the neighborhood, stopping passers-by who had every right to be there and then, when the passer-by wouldn't do what Zimmerman wanted, Zimmerman forced a violent confrontation and shot the passer-by. Anyone got a link to the entire interview. No one really wants to Hear Harry's version. |
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
|
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 07:33:47 -0400, X ` Man
wrote: On 7/19/12 6:52 AM, X ` Man wrote: On 7/19/12 3:12 AM, wrote: On Wed, 18 Jul 2012 15:52:48 -0700, jps wrote: On Wed, 18 Jul 2012 16:44:35 -0400, X ` Man wrote: ...for George Zimmerman... Hannity Lands First Zimmerman Interview The Fox News host will devote the entirety of his Wednesday night show to the sit-down. Should be a hoot. Zimmerman's father made that connection when this whole thing blew up in George's face. What does it say about an educated, retired federal judge when he seeks out Sean Hannity for a media surrogate? What that says to me is that Sean is a kindred soul and that he represents what most closely reflects Zimmerman family values. Rush Limbaugh must have been high on oxy and missed the call, so Zimmerman Sr. moved onto the next best spokesperson. Why would anyone who has said so many dumb things prior to a trial say anything on TV? To help raise more funds for his defense? Oh, I didn't watch Hannity, but a news report this morning states that Zimmerman thought his murder of the kid was "god's plan." Somehow they've come to the conclusion that this is a political fight and his guilt or innocence is based in the court of public opinion. |
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
|
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 23:07:38 -0400, wrote:
On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 13:28:12 -0700, jps wrote: On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 09:54:51 -0400, wrote: Maybe god knew what a thug Martin was Wow, you've convicted Martin of something no one else has. Does that extra-legal right come in a cereal box? You all seem pretty quick to convict Zimmerman without that trial you demanded I think he's a scumbag but I haven't convicted him. I just hope he does time for his stupidity. He deserves it for engaging in a foolish pursuit of someone with whom he had no business nor right. The police dispatcher told him specifically that he "didn't need to do that" when she realized he was running after Trayvon. His negligent actions ended up with the death of a 17 year old kid. |
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
On 7/20/2012 3:07 AM, jps wrote:
On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 23:07:38 -0400, wrote: On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 13:28:12 -0700, jps wrote: On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 09:54:51 -0400, wrote: Maybe god knew what a thug Martin was Wow, you've convicted Martin of something no one else has. Does that extra-legal right come in a cereal box? You all seem pretty quick to convict Zimmerman without that trial you demanded I think he's a scumbag but I haven't convicted him. I just hope he does time for his stupidity. He deserves it for engaging in a foolish pursuit of someone with whom he had no business nor right. The police dispatcher told him specifically that he "didn't need to do that" when she realized he was running after Trayvon. His negligent actions ended up with the death of a 17 year old kid. You have limited knowledge of the facts in this case, yet you are highly opinionated. You've been listening to Krause radio, I'll bet. |
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
On 7/20/12 3:07 AM, jps wrote:
On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 23:07:38 -0400, wrote: On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 13:28:12 -0700, jps wrote: On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 09:54:51 -0400, wrote: Maybe god knew what a thug Martin was Wow, you've convicted Martin of something no one else has. Does that extra-legal right come in a cereal box? You all seem pretty quick to convict Zimmerman without that trial you demanded I think he's a scumbag but I haven't convicted him. I just hope he does time for his stupidity. He deserves it for engaging in a foolish pursuit of someone with whom he had no business nor right. The police dispatcher told him specifically that he "didn't need to do that" when she realized he was running after Trayvon. His negligent actions ended up with the death of a 17 year old kid. A conviction would be nice, but the only real good that might come out of this is a serious modification of Florida's Shoot First So You Don't Have to Question Law. When you initiate a confrontation, as Zimmerman did, you shouldn't be allowed to end it with a firearm and then claim self-defense. But such change isn't likely in a state populated by rednecks, crackers, bible-toters and modern Republicans. |
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
On 7/20/2012 6:50 AM, X ` Man wrote:
On 7/20/12 3:07 AM, jps wrote: On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 23:07:38 -0400, wrote: On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 13:28:12 -0700, jps wrote: On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 09:54:51 -0400, wrote: Maybe god knew what a thug Martin was Wow, you've convicted Martin of something no one else has. Does that extra-legal right come in a cereal box? You all seem pretty quick to convict Zimmerman without that trial you demanded I think he's a scumbag but I haven't convicted him. I just hope he does time for his stupidity. He deserves it for engaging in a foolish pursuit of someone with whom he had no business nor right. The police dispatcher told him specifically that he "didn't need to do that" when she realized he was running after Trayvon. His negligent actions ended up with the death of a 17 year old kid. A conviction would be nice, but the only real good that might come out of this is a serious modification of Florida's Shoot First So You Don't Have to Question Law. When you initiate a confrontation, as Zimmerman did, you shouldn't be allowed to end it with a firearm and then claim self-defense. But such change isn't likely in a state populated by rednecks, crackers, bible-toters and modern Republicans. In my opinion, the only crime committed was by Martin and he paid for it. |
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
In article ,
says... On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 23:07:38 -0400, wrote: On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 13:28:12 -0700, jps wrote: On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 09:54:51 -0400, wrote: Maybe god knew what a thug Martin was Wow, you've convicted Martin of something no one else has. Does that extra-legal right come in a cereal box? You all seem pretty quick to convict Zimmerman without that trial you demanded I think he's a scumbag but I haven't convicted him. I just hope he does time for his stupidity. He deserves it for engaging in a foolish pursuit of someone with whom he had no business nor right. You are an idiot. In your statements above you have tried and convicted Zimmerman. The police dispatcher told him specifically that he "didn't need to do that" when she realized he was running after Trayvon. His negligent actions ended up with the death of a 17 year old kid. The police dispatcher said "Ok, we don't need you to do that." I challenge you to provide a source for your quote. |
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
On 7/20/12 7:48 AM, BAR wrote:
In article , says... On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 23:07:38 -0400, wrote: On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 13:28:12 -0700, jps wrote: On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 09:54:51 -0400, wrote: Maybe god knew what a thug Martin was Wow, you've convicted Martin of something no one else has. Does that extra-legal right come in a cereal box? You all seem pretty quick to convict Zimmerman without that trial you demanded I think he's a scumbag but I haven't convicted him. I just hope he does time for his stupidity. He deserves it for engaging in a foolish pursuit of someone with whom he had no business nor right. You are an idiot. In your statements above you have tried and convicted Zimmerman. Amazing, isn't it, that someone who served in the military ostensibly to defend the Constitution gets up on his electronic soapbox and tells someone he is an "idiot" for merely expressing his opinion. Obviously the marines don't check recruits for basic intelligence and ability to understand. The police dispatcher told him specifically that he "didn't need to do that" when she realized he was running after Trayvon. His negligent actions ended up with the death of a 17 year old kid. The police dispatcher said "Ok, we don't need you to do that." I challenge you to provide a source for your quote. When the police say "don't do that," most people of at least average intelligence "don't do that." I suppose if you were in the military or if you are really really stupid or both, it's okay to ignore that advice. Righties...always trying to split hairs to defend their lack of understanding of issues. |
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
On 7/20/2012 7:55 AM, X ` Man wrote:
On 7/20/12 7:48 AM, BAR wrote: In article , says... On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 23:07:38 -0400, wrote: On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 13:28:12 -0700, jps wrote: On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 09:54:51 -0400, wrote: Maybe god knew what a thug Martin was Wow, you've convicted Martin of something no one else has. Does that extra-legal right come in a cereal box? You all seem pretty quick to convict Zimmerman without that trial you demanded I think he's a scumbag but I haven't convicted him. I just hope he does time for his stupidity. He deserves it for engaging in a foolish pursuit of someone with whom he had no business nor right. You are an idiot. In your statements above you have tried and convicted Zimmerman. Amazing, isn't it, that someone who served in the military ostensibly to defend the Constitution gets up on his electronic soapbox and tells someone he is an "idiot" for merely expressing his opinion. Obviously the marines don't check recruits for basic intelligence and ability to understand. The police dispatcher told him specifically that he "didn't need to do that" when she realized he was running after Trayvon. His negligent actions ended up with the death of a 17 year old kid. The police dispatcher said "Ok, we don't need you to do that." I challenge you to provide a source for your quote. When the police say "don't do that," most people of at least average intelligence "don't do that." I suppose if you were in the military or if you are really really stupid or both, it's okay to ignore that advice. Righties...always trying to split hairs to defend their lack of understanding of issues. Note to the English professor: When you paraphrase, quotes are inappropriate. |
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
In article om,
says... On 7/20/2012 3:07 AM, jps wrote: On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 23:07:38 -0400, wrote: On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 13:28:12 -0700, jps wrote: On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 09:54:51 -0400, wrote: Maybe god knew what a thug Martin was Wow, you've convicted Martin of something no one else has. Does that extra-legal right come in a cereal box? You all seem pretty quick to convict Zimmerman without that trial you demanded I think he's a scumbag but I haven't convicted him. I just hope he does time for his stupidity. He deserves it for engaging in a foolish pursuit of someone with whom he had no business nor right. The police dispatcher told him specifically that he "didn't need to do that" when she realized he was running after Trayvon. His negligent actions ended up with the death of a 17 year old kid. You have limited knowledge of the facts in this case, yet you are highly opinionated. You've been listening to Krause radio, I'll bet. You have limited knowledge of the facts in this case, yet you are highly opinionated. You've been listening to Rush radio, I'll bet. |
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
In article m,
says... On 7/20/2012 6:50 AM, X ` Man wrote: On 7/20/12 3:07 AM, jps wrote: On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 23:07:38 -0400, wrote: On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 13:28:12 -0700, jps wrote: On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 09:54:51 -0400, wrote: Maybe god knew what a thug Martin was Wow, you've convicted Martin of something no one else has. Does that extra-legal right come in a cereal box? You all seem pretty quick to convict Zimmerman without that trial you demanded I think he's a scumbag but I haven't convicted him. I just hope he does time for his stupidity. He deserves it for engaging in a foolish pursuit of someone with whom he had no business nor right. The police dispatcher told him specifically that he "didn't need to do that" when she realized he was running after Trayvon. His negligent actions ended up with the death of a 17 year old kid. A conviction would be nice, but the only real good that might come out of this is a serious modification of Florida's Shoot First So You Don't Have to Question Law. When you initiate a confrontation, as Zimmerman did, you shouldn't be allowed to end it with a firearm and then claim self-defense. But such change isn't likely in a state populated by rednecks, crackers, bible-toters and modern Republicans. In my opinion, the only crime committed was by Martin and he paid for it. Opinions are like assholes, everybody has one. |
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
On 7/20/2012 8:34 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
In article om, says... On 7/20/2012 3:07 AM, jps wrote: On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 23:07:38 -0400, wrote: On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 13:28:12 -0700, jps wrote: On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 09:54:51 -0400, wrote: Maybe god knew what a thug Martin was Wow, you've convicted Martin of something no one else has. Does that extra-legal right come in a cereal box? You all seem pretty quick to convict Zimmerman without that trial you demanded I think he's a scumbag but I haven't convicted him. I just hope he does time for his stupidity. He deserves it for engaging in a foolish pursuit of someone with whom he had no business nor right. The police dispatcher told him specifically that he "didn't need to do that" when she realized he was running after Trayvon. His negligent actions ended up with the death of a 17 year old kid. You have limited knowledge of the facts in this case, yet you are highly opinionated. You've been listening to Krause radio, I'll bet. You have limited knowledge of the facts in this case, yet you are highly opinionated. You've been listening to Rush radio, I'll bet. That's your opinion. |
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
|
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
On 7/20/12 10:39 AM, JustWait wrote:
On 7/20/2012 10:21 AM, wrote: On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 06:50:01 -0400, X ` Man wrote: When you initiate a confrontation, as Zimmerman did, you shouldn't be allowed to end it with a firearm and then claim self-defense. WTF are you supposed to do, say "I got a gun, guess you better kill me"?? You are an idiot. That all assumes they can prove Zimmerman initiated it. Simply getting out of your car is not initiating a confrontation and that is all Corey is alleging he did in the indictment Ahh, so you are NOT the guy who shot up the movie theater in Colorado. You're who I thought of as the perp when I heard about the massacre. |
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
|
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
On 7/20/2012 10:41 AM, X ` Man wrote:
On 7/20/12 10:39 AM, JustWait wrote: On 7/20/2012 10:21 AM, wrote: On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 06:50:01 -0400, X ` Man wrote: When you initiate a confrontation, as Zimmerman did, you shouldn't be allowed to end it with a firearm and then claim self-defense. WTF are you supposed to do, say "I got a gun, guess you better kill me"?? You are an idiot. That all assumes they can prove Zimmerman initiated it. Simply getting out of your car is not initiating a confrontation and that is all Corey is alleging he did in the indictment Ahh, so you are NOT the guy who shot up the movie theater in Colorado. You're who I thought of as the perp when I heard about the massacre. But you didn't alert the authorities. Hmmmm.... |
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
In article , says...
On 7/20/2012 10:21 AM, wrote: On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 06:50:01 -0400, X ` Man wrote: When you initiate a confrontation, as Zimmerman did, you shouldn't be allowed to end it with a firearm and then claim self-defense. WTF are you supposed to do, say "I got a gun, guess you better kill me"?? You are an idiot. Another crazy rant. You didn't even notice the word "initiate" a "confrontation"?? If you come at me in the middle of the night, do not announce who you are, and confront me, hell yes I'm going to fight back! |
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
|
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
On 7/20/2012 10:46 AM, Meyer wrote:
On 7/20/2012 10:41 AM, X ` Man wrote: On 7/20/12 10:39 AM, JustWait wrote: On 7/20/2012 10:21 AM, wrote: On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 06:50:01 -0400, X ` Man wrote: When you initiate a confrontation, as Zimmerman did, you shouldn't be allowed to end it with a firearm and then claim self-defense. WTF are you supposed to do, say "I got a gun, guess you better kill me"?? You are an idiot. That all assumes they can prove Zimmerman initiated it. Simply getting out of your car is not initiating a confrontation and that is all Corey is alleging he did in the indictment Ahh, so you are NOT the guy who shot up the movie theater in Colorado. You're who I thought of as the perp when I heard about the massacre. But you didn't alert the authorities. Hmmmm.... Funny quote from harry, he being the only one here who makes it clear he hides behind his guns, get's his balls from dryfiring them in the basement while he spreads his bile from group to group.... |
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
On 7/20/12 11:32 AM, JustWait wrote:
On 7/20/2012 10:46 AM, Meyer wrote: On 7/20/2012 10:41 AM, X ` Man wrote: On 7/20/12 10:39 AM, JustWait wrote: On 7/20/2012 10:21 AM, wrote: On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 06:50:01 -0400, X ` Man wrote: When you initiate a confrontation, as Zimmerman did, you shouldn't be allowed to end it with a firearm and then claim self-defense. WTF are you supposed to do, say "I got a gun, guess you better kill me"?? You are an idiot. That all assumes they can prove Zimmerman initiated it. Simply getting out of your car is not initiating a confrontation and that is all Corey is alleging he did in the indictment Ahh, so you are NOT the guy who shot up the movie theater in Colorado. You're who I thought of as the perp when I heard about the massacre. But you didn't alert the authorities. Hmmmm.... Funny quote from harry, he being the only one here who makes it clear he hides behind his guns, get's his balls from dryfiring them in the basement while he spreads his bile from group to group.... Sorry, PsychoScotty, but... ....I don't *hide* behind anything or anyone and... ....I do dryfire my pistols from time to time, usually after cleaning them, to make sure I've put all the pieces and parts back together properly. Now, excessive dryfiring of some pistols can be problematical, but a dryfire or two on occasion isn't going to hurt anything on most of them. In fact, just this morning I stripped down, cleaned, and reassembled my custom CZ Shadow and, of course, I cycled it once when I was finished to make sure everything was working properly. It's ready to help ward off any marauding, door busting PsychoScotties that show up here. It's a backup to the 12 gauge. |
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
On 7/20/2012 11:28 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
In article , says... On 7/20/2012 10:21 AM, wrote: On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 06:50:01 -0400, X ` Man wrote: When you initiate a confrontation, as Zimmerman did, you shouldn't be allowed to end it with a firearm and then claim self-defense. WTF are you supposed to do, say "I got a gun, guess you better kill me"?? You are an idiot. Another crazy rant. You didn't even notice the word "initiate" a "confrontation"?? If you come at me in the middle of the night, do not announce who you are, and confront me, hell yes I'm going to fight back! Fight back with words, I hope. Otherwise there is a possibility you might suffer the same fate as Martin. I hope this little confrontation you initiated doesn't provoke you into doing something violent and stupid. |
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
In article m,
says... On 7/20/2012 11:28 AM, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On 7/20/2012 10:21 AM, wrote: On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 06:50:01 -0400, X ` Man wrote: When you initiate a confrontation, as Zimmerman did, you shouldn't be allowed to end it with a firearm and then claim self-defense. WTF are you supposed to do, say "I got a gun, guess you better kill me"?? You are an idiot. Another crazy rant. You didn't even notice the word "initiate" a "confrontation"?? If you come at me in the middle of the night, do not announce who you are, and confront me, hell yes I'm going to fight back! Fight back with words, I hope. Otherwise there is a possibility you might suffer the same fate as Martin. How do you know that Martin didn't first ask him who he was and what he was doing? The phone call he was on is clear. I hope this little confrontation you initiated doesn't provoke you into doing something violent and stupid. What are you ranting about NOW???? |
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
On 7/20/2012 12:45 PM, iBoaterer wrote:
In article m, says... On 7/20/2012 11:28 AM, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On 7/20/2012 10:21 AM, wrote: On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 06:50:01 -0400, X ` Man wrote: When you initiate a confrontation, as Zimmerman did, you shouldn't be allowed to end it with a firearm and then claim self-defense. WTF are you supposed to do, say "I got a gun, guess you better kill me"?? You are an idiot. Another crazy rant. You didn't even notice the word "initiate" a "confrontation"?? If you come at me in the middle of the night, do not announce who you are, and confront me, hell yes I'm going to fight back! Fight back with words, I hope. Otherwise there is a possibility you might suffer the same fate as Martin. How do you know that Martin didn't first ask him who he was and what he was doing? The phone call he was on is clear. I hope this little confrontation you initiated doesn't provoke you into doing something violent and stupid. What are you ranting about NOW???? I can assume you are clueless. |
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
|
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
In article om,
says... On 7/20/2012 12:45 PM, iBoaterer wrote: In article m, says... On 7/20/2012 11:28 AM, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On 7/20/2012 10:21 AM, wrote: On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 06:50:01 -0400, X ` Man wrote: When you initiate a confrontation, as Zimmerman did, you shouldn't be allowed to end it with a firearm and then claim self-defense. WTF are you supposed to do, say "I got a gun, guess you better kill me"?? You are an idiot. Another crazy rant. You didn't even notice the word "initiate" a "confrontation"?? If you come at me in the middle of the night, do not announce who you are, and confront me, hell yes I'm going to fight back! Fight back with words, I hope. Otherwise there is a possibility you might suffer the same fate as Martin. How do you know that Martin didn't first ask him who he was and what he was doing? The phone call he was on is clear. I hope this little confrontation you initiated doesn't provoke you into doing something violent and stupid. What are you ranting about NOW???? I can assume you are clueless. I am! I have NO idea what you are ranting about a confrontation that *I* initiated... |
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
On 7/20/2012 1:09 PM, iBoaterer wrote:
In article , says... On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 11:29:14 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 06:50:01 -0400, X ` Man wrote: When you initiate a confrontation, as Zimmerman did, you shouldn't be allowed to end it with a firearm and then claim self-defense. That all assumes they can prove Zimmerman initiated it. Simply getting out of your car is not initiating a confrontation and that is all Corey is alleging he did in the indictment Well the, why did he get out of the car? AND you're forgetting the phone conversation Martin was having. He got out of the car to WATCH the person he called the cops on so he could point him out when they got there. Is getting out of your car a crime now? Corey seems to think so. Bull****, he confronted Martin. His girlfriend heard it. Is looking at a car a crime now? That's why you seem to think Zimmerman was justified in killing Martin. Don't get ahead of yourself. Lots happened between the first inquiry and the big bang. |
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
On 7/20/2012 1:10 PM, iBoaterer wrote:
In article om, says... On 7/20/2012 12:45 PM, iBoaterer wrote: In article m, says... On 7/20/2012 11:28 AM, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On 7/20/2012 10:21 AM, wrote: On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 06:50:01 -0400, X ` Man wrote: When you initiate a confrontation, as Zimmerman did, you shouldn't be allowed to end it with a firearm and then claim self-defense. WTF are you supposed to do, say "I got a gun, guess you better kill me"?? You are an idiot. Another crazy rant. You didn't even notice the word "initiate" a "confrontation"?? If you come at me in the middle of the night, do not announce who you are, and confront me, hell yes I'm going to fight back! Fight back with words, I hope. Otherwise there is a possibility you might suffer the same fate as Martin. How do you know that Martin didn't first ask him who he was and what he was doing? The phone call he was on is clear. I hope this little confrontation you initiated doesn't provoke you into doing something violent and stupid. What are you ranting about NOW???? I can assume you are clueless. I am! I have NO idea what you are ranting about a confrontation that *I* initiated... I know you don't. Maybe you should just get out of the sandbox. |
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
In article om,
says... On 7/20/2012 1:09 PM, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 11:29:14 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 06:50:01 -0400, X ` Man wrote: When you initiate a confrontation, as Zimmerman did, you shouldn't be allowed to end it with a firearm and then claim self-defense. That all assumes they can prove Zimmerman initiated it. Simply getting out of your car is not initiating a confrontation and that is all Corey is alleging he did in the indictment Well the, why did he get out of the car? AND you're forgetting the phone conversation Martin was having. He got out of the car to WATCH the person he called the cops on so he could point him out when they got there. Is getting out of your car a crime now? Corey seems to think so. Bull****, he confronted Martin. His girlfriend heard it. Is looking at a car a crime now? That's why you seem to think Zimmerman was justified in killing Martin. Don't get ahead of yourself. Lots happened between the first inquiry and the big bang. So? Fact is Zimmerman confronted Martin. |
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
On 7/20/12 2:42 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 13:09:32 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 11:29:14 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 06:50:01 -0400, X ` Man wrote: When you initiate a confrontation, as Zimmerman did, you shouldn't be allowed to end it with a firearm and then claim self-defense. That all assumes they can prove Zimmerman initiated it. Simply getting out of your car is not initiating a confrontation and that is all Corey is alleging he did in the indictment Well the, why did he get out of the car? AND you're forgetting the phone conversation Martin was having. He got out of the car to WATCH the person he called the cops on so he could point him out when they got there. Is getting out of your car a crime now? Corey seems to think so. Bull****, he confronted Martin. His girlfriend heard it. Is looking at a car a crime now? That's why you seem to think Zimmerman was justified in killing Martin. What was the first thing the girlfriend said she heard between them? Hint, it was Martin addressing Zimmerman. Martin was shot because he was beating the **** out of Zimmerman. I am not sure what the law is where you live but aggravated battery is a forcible felony in Florida and a bystander could have legally shot Martin if they came up on him beating Zimmerman's head on the concrete. Is that what Rush told you to say? |
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
On 7/20/2012 1:39 PM, iBoaterer wrote:
In article om, says... On 7/20/2012 1:09 PM, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 11:29:14 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 06:50:01 -0400, X ` Man wrote: When you initiate a confrontation, as Zimmerman did, you shouldn't be allowed to end it with a firearm and then claim self-defense. That all assumes they can prove Zimmerman initiated it. Simply getting out of your car is not initiating a confrontation and that is all Corey is alleging he did in the indictment Well the, why did he get out of the car? AND you're forgetting the phone conversation Martin was having. He got out of the car to WATCH the person he called the cops on so he could point him out when they got there. Is getting out of your car a crime now? Corey seems to think so. Bull****, he confronted Martin. His girlfriend heard it. Is looking at a car a crime now? That's why you seem to think Zimmerman was justified in killing Martin. Don't get ahead of yourself. Lots happened between the first inquiry and the big bang. So? Fact is Zimmerman confronted Martin. How so? |
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
On 7/20/2012 2:50 PM, X ` Man wrote:
On 7/20/12 2:42 PM, wrote: On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 13:09:32 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 11:29:14 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 06:50:01 -0400, X ` Man wrote: When you initiate a confrontation, as Zimmerman did, you shouldn't be allowed to end it with a firearm and then claim self-defense. That all assumes they can prove Zimmerman initiated it. Simply getting out of your car is not initiating a confrontation and that is all Corey is alleging he did in the indictment Well the, why did he get out of the car? AND you're forgetting the phone conversation Martin was having. He got out of the car to WATCH the person he called the cops on so he could point him out when they got there. Is getting out of your car a crime now? Corey seems to think so. Bull****, he confronted Martin. His girlfriend heard it. Is looking at a car a crime now? That's why you seem to think Zimmerman was justified in killing Martin. What was the first thing the girlfriend said she heard between them? Hint, it was Martin addressing Zimmerman. Martin was shot because he was beating the **** out of Zimmerman. I am not sure what the law is where you live but aggravated battery is a forcible felony in Florida and a bystander could have legally shot Martin if they came up on him beating Zimmerman's head on the concrete. Is that what Rush told you to say? I wonder what would have happened if Martin's plan to kill Zimmerman had worked out. Would O'Bama still have said "That's my boy"? |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:53 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com