Song Retracto's Theme, by The Army You Have.
Here are some of the known lies and deceptions regarding the fatal encounter between Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman that have been disseminated to the American public by the mainstream media, to date.
Lie #1. George Zimmerman is a white racist. Although the media have been so thoroughly exposed on this lie that they no longer tell it, they started their coverage of the story by trying to convince the world that Zimmerman was a white man acting upon racist impulses when he attacked a black boy for no reason at all. The media even digitally lightened Zimmerman's skin color in the photo they used to represent him, to make him seem more "Caucasian." George Zimmerman's father is an Ashkenazi Jew, and his mother is a Peruvian mestizo, which makes George a mestizo with Jewish paternal ancestry. (Remember that Barack Obama is a mulatto, and is usually considered black, for a similar reason.) And whereas the media no longer tell this lie, it has achieved its purpose, which was to inflame the blacks into making a wrong-headed "march for justice," while chanting foolish slogans, in most parts of the United States. The black leaders probably feel that they cannot now afford to admit that they were duped, so they carry on with the crusade against "whitey," while knowing full-well that the media have made fools of them.
Lie #2. George Zimmerman outweighed Trayvon Martin by 110 pounds. Originally, the media claimed that Zimmerman weighed about 250 pounds and that Martin weighed only 140 pounds. But the truth was that Zimmerman had lost weight during the years since the photo of him wearing an orange county jail suit was taken, and he weighed only 170 pounds during his encounter with Martin, who had gained weight during the years since the photo from his family's photo album was made, in which Martin, then 12, is wearing a red shirt and smiling. (And that's still the photo that the media most often use to represent Trayvon Martin.) At the time of his encounter with George Zimmerman, Martin weighed 160 pounds. So instead of a weight difference of 110 pounds, the actual difference was only 10 pounds.
Lie #3. Trayvon Martin was on the ground, screaming for help while George Zimmerman was on top of him and beating him up. The blacks and the media seem to enjoy telling this lie. But, on the other hand, they also seem to enjoy repeating the story told by the funeral director who prepared Martin's body for burial, in which he says that Martin's body didn't show any signs of having been in a fight (except for the gunshot wound). If the funeral director is telling the truth, then the persons who claim to have seen Zimmerman on top of and beating Martin, while Martin screamed for help, are lying. Which means that the the other witnesses, who say that Trayvon Martin was on top of and beating Zimmerman, while Zimmerman yelled for help, are probably telling the truth. To hear the testimony of those other witnesses, you'll probably have to browse the media local to Sanford, Florida, and the Orlando Sentinel. The media don't like to mention it, but Trayvon Martin's own father, Tracy Martin, upon listening to the cries for help, told a reporter "That is not my son." Ever since then, the media have been trying to find somebody with expertise in voice recognition who would be willing to fib for a fee, by contradicting that statement by Tracy Martin.
UPDATE: Since I wrote that paragraph, two things have changed. First, Tracy Martin's lawyers convinced him that it had been a blunder to admit to reporters that the cries for help were not those of his son, Trayvon, and so he changed his story. Second, it has turned out that the "expert" who used software to compare Zimmerman's normal speaking voice to the cries for help on the audio tape was the author of that very software and that he was vending it at $5000 per license. Although we don't know that he did anything dishonest, there is a clear conflict of interest. It is likely that he could expect more free advertising from the media in the event that his software gave the result that they preferred, rather than a result that they didn't prefer.
Lie #4. The police video shows no injury on George Zimmerman's head, proving that Zimmerman lied about what happened during his encounter with Trayvon Martin. On the contrary, the police video does show an injury on Zimmerman's head; it's hard to see because of the video's low resolution. The injury is a gash that starts near the top of the back of Zimmerman's head, about where the hair is thinnest, and goes down toward the right. To see the gash, obtain the clearest copy of the police video that you can, then pause the video during the 2.5 seconds when Zimmerman is standing at a point just to the right of the center of the camera's field of view, with his back toward the camera. It is immediately before he is led by Sanford police officers through a door on the far side of the police station garage.
Want a laugh? I joined a leftist forum, Democratic Underground, in order to correct the generally accepted, mistaken belief that the police video showed no injuries on George Zimmerman's head. One of the members there, Catherina, didn't approve of what I'd told the forum's readers, and she began searching the web for information about me and about any opinions I'd previously expressed on other websites. She discovered my racial views and campaigned successfully to have me banned from Democratic Underground for a "Terms of Service" violation that I'd never committed—unless, of course, the TOS for DU presumes to govern how its members use their freedom of speech in other venues. (Which it might do; that's the sort of rule that leftists would impose on everyone, if they could.)
But another DU member, alcibiades_mystery, writing in the discussion thread entitled "Zimmerman injured? I call BS," in a post headed "The 'gash' invented by the Daily Caller's silly 'enhancement'," wrote this:Which is all diversion anyway. The right wing idiot racists spent two days insisting that Trayvon "Mad Dog" Martin beat poor Georgie Zimmerman within an inch of his life, then when the video comes out they have to fake a "gash" on the back of poor Georgie's head because he's walking around 35 minutes later looking like he just finished a moderately stressful game of Go-Fish with a 6 year-old. These right wing racists, scarmbling [sic] for cover once their imbecile story was blown the fuck open by clear videotape, now are actually faking still shots to invent some "gash." The first "gash" not to bleed in the whole history of the human scalp!
Who the fuck are you even kidding. there is no serious head injury, and perhaps no head injury at all. And you can post a million Daily Caller "enhanced" pics and the lame ass CYA "police report." Everyone knows it's bullshit.
Now that ABC News has released their own high-resolution version of the police video and has admitted that they, too, now see the gashes on the back of George Zimmerman's head that the Daily Caller, the Council of Conservative Citizens, and myself, had noticed several days earlier, what do the members of Democratic Underground have to say on the subject? Not a thing, as far as I can tell. I mean, what could they say, other than "Well, we were wrong. I guess the Daily Caller and that racist we banned knew what they were talking about after all." Um, no. Leftists don't do that. When leftists lose an argument, they pretend that it never happened and sweep it under the rug.
A little checking would have told alcibaides that George Zimmerman's gash did bleed. It was treated by paramedics, probably with antiseptics and astringents, and the bleeding stopped.
UPDATE: I knew it had to be around somewhere: a
photo showing the bleeding wounds on the back of George Zimmerman's head before the EMS paramedics cleaned off the blood. ABC News, apparently eager to atone for their earlier sins lest Congress call them to account for lying and defamation and tampering with evidence, etcetera and so on, have released this very photo, taken by someone with an iphone camera.
Lie #5. George Zimmerman, while speaking on the telephone to the 911 dispatcher, said "This guy looks like he’s up to no good. He looks black." This lie, now known as
Editgate, came from NBC and was aired on the
Today show. To create this fabrication, someone at NBC deleted the part of Zimmerman's comment between the two sentences as well as a comment by the 911 operator. The unaltered tape shows Zimmerman saying, "
This guy looks like he’s up to no good, or he’s on drugs or something. It’s raining and he’s just walking around, looking about." Then the 911 dispatcher asks "Okay. And this guy, is he white, black, or Hispanic?" And then Zimmerman answers "He looks black."Here's a link to the audio recording of
Zimmerman's 911 call.
One oddity about these media lies concerning Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman is the ease with which they are disproved, quite in contrast with their usual competence in deception. The Jewish media bosses can, when they really try, tell much better lies than these.
Not Quite A Lie. The police wanted to charge George Zimmerman for a crime related to his shooting of Trayvon Martin. The media have cleverly used that true statement for a deceptive purpose. Yes, the police
wanted to book Zimmerman for something. They
wanted to do that because it would have removed their risk of political fallout for not charging him. But the district attorney told them that there wasn't enough evidence even for a conviction for "negligent manslaughter," let alone for murder. Since there wasn't a criminal charge that fit the evidence, no charges were filed. Since no charges were filed, Zimmerman was released from police custody. What the media want you to think is that Zimmerman was released on account of racist intervention by some highly-placed official or other. But the truth is that Zimmerman was released because Zimmerman wasn't known to have committed any crimes.
Techniques for deception used by the media.Technique #1. Get the most brazen lies out early, so they create a false impression in the general public that can "color" all subsequently released information. Also, this will politically entrap many of the leaders of the group that is most outraged by the false news. If those leaders are tempted to admit that they were deceived by the media's early lies, they will look like fools in front of their followers.
Technique #2. Two steps forward, one step back. As the media work toward their political objectives—e.g., inflaming blacks against white people, building momentum for a campaign to repeal the "Stand Your Ground" laws, instilling guilt in white people so they will vote once again for Barack Obama—they'll tell
two bald-faced lies, but then they will bring forth "new evidence" (which is usually information they've been sitting on for a week or so) that "casts doubt" on
one of them. The media practice this technique in order to project a false appearance of journalistic integrity and to limit their potential legal liability for spreading false news, inciting riots, and so on.
Note that when evidence emerges that really debunks the media's narrative, and damage control becomes necessary, the media begin a variation on the method,
Technique 2b, which is "two steps
back, one step
forward." They do this to limit their legal liability, in case Congress or somebody might be thinking of calling them to account for their earlier misbehavior. That's what you saw ABC News doing when the photo of the bloody wounds on the back of George Zimmerman's head appeared. Showing the photo and making the obvious comment that maybe, just maybe, Zimmerman had been telling the truth the whole time about being injured by Martin was the two steps back. The one step forward was their shift of emphasis to the idea (which will also be proved false, later) that Zimmerman was "the aggressor," who was therefore not entitled to shoot Martin with his gun. How do the ABC commentators understand Zimmerman to have been the aggressor? Because it is a FACT that the Martin family's lawyer "clearly believes" it to be so. It is a
fact that someone has that
opinion. So there.
Technique #3. Distorting/embellishing previous claims. Initially, the media downplay a fact that doesn't fit the narrative, but they do mention it as unimpressively as they can. Later, however, the media contrive to make that fact disappear. For example, the
New York Daily News ran an article with this headline: "EMS tapes show George Zimmerman did not sustain
fatal injuries in encounter with Trayvon Martin." Very soon afterward, a revision of that claim asserted that George Zimmerman did not sustain any "serious" injuries. And a few days later, they said this in one of their articles: "...EMS documents obtained by the
Daily News suggested the 28-year-old insurance agent didn't sustain
any injuries either in the alleged dust-up." Obviously George Zimmerman sustained no "fatal" injuries, or else he'd now be dead. But how did no
fatal injuries become no
serious injuries, and then become
no injuries at all? That's the magic of media deception.
Technique #4. Retrenchment. The news media occasionally publish a statement calling for calm and coolness and lamenting the lack of objectivity of persons who have "rushed to judgment." The purpose of this technique is to redirect guilt to someone other than the media bosses. In this case, for example, the media have tried to portray the
lying ("rushing to judgment") as something that only the likes of Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton have been doing. No way, Jose. Jesse and Al were doing it, all right; but they were doing it
on this occasion because the news media made fools out of them. Now they're boxed in, politically speaking, because if they admit before their impassioned black followers that they were wrong, those black followers will see them as the fools they are. It was the Jewish bosses of the media who made of the Trayvon Martin shooting into the national circus that it has become, with an extravagant claims about racism—calling George Zimmerman "a white man"—that have since been disproved, but whose effect just keeps rolling along under the political momentum it acquired
before it was disproved.
Media Censorship.On 5 April 2012, ABC News released a high-resolution version of the police station video that shows the gashes on the back of George Zimmerman's head more clearly. The hi-res video appeared on the
Huffington Post website, in an article by Danielle Cadet. In her article, Ms. Cadet writes:
Last week, a video was released showing George Zimmerman at the Sanford Police Department the night he shot and killed Trayvon Martin. It originally appeared as though the neighborhood watch volunteer showed no signs of the violent confrontation he told police took place between himself and the teen that night, but ABC news has enhanced the video showing signs of injury on Zimmerman's head.
Ah, that isn't quite true.
Zimmerman's injury was certainly visible in the original low-resolution video from the Sanford police station garage. You just had to look for it at the part of the video where Zimmerman was turned so that the camera looked upon the back of his head. I don't believe that it is likely that the news media failed to notice the injury then; I think that they just thought they could get away with declaring that it did not exist, and nobody would check. When people did check, they did see the gashes on Zimmerman's head, and they spoke up. I was one of them.
So it was time for the media to cover their butts again, by offering this re-digitized video with higher resolution, so that they can say "Well, we didn't see it before, but we do see it now, so yeah Zimmerman's head was injured." See how honest they are? Their not seeing the gashes on Zimmerman's head in the low-res original video,
even though lots of other people did, was just an honest mistake. One in a
long parade of same. In true Jewish fashion, the media bosses have claimed five dollars' worth of moral credit after demonstrating only five cents' worth of honor.
I tried to get that message across in a comment below the article, but I wasn't able to do so. I received a pop-up notice that my account has been banned from
The Huffington Post. Evidently, they don't want anyone chasing after the media's highly paid professional liars and crying "Foul!" the instant the lies appear. Here is the comment that I tried to leave:
The news media took two steps forward with the "no visible injuries on Zimmerman's head" idea, and now this is the one step back they're taking. ABC News wasn't the first to report the gashes on the back of Zimmerman's head. The Daily Caller did so a week earlier.
Even in the low-resolution earlier video, the gashes were visible during the 2.5 seconds in which Zimmerman stands with his back to the camera in the Sanford police station garage, immediately before he is led by officers through a door on the far side of the room. Although the gashes were visible to anyone who looked at the video carefully, the media trumpeted to the entire world the false news that Zimmerman's had showed no injuries, which further incited the blacks around the United States to commit acts of "retribution" violence against white people.
Yes, even the early media lie about Zimmerman being a "white man," though it has long since been disproved, still serves to cause the blacks to target the wrong race for their hostile reactions.
Objectives of the Media Bosses.Whatever the rest of the world does or doesn't know about the encounter between Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman, the police and the EMS paramedics have the relevant first hand knowledge, and, if Zimmerman goes on trial, they will step forward to give testimony. The police and the paramedics saw George Zimmerman's injuries, and they wrote their reports from personal examination. The media bosses know that police reports and medical records exist that contradict their narrative, which means that the media bosses don't really care what happens to Zimmerman. Whether he's murdered by a mob of vigilante blacks, or whether he's eventually acquitted by a jury, it's all the same to the Jews who control the mass media.
What they care about are the political objectives that they hope to achieve with the racial controversy they've manufactured. The media bosses are mostly Zionist Jews, and they want...
1. Blacks to hate whites more than they already do and to become more belligerent and aggressive than they already are, so that the white people will focus more of their energy defending themselves from blacks and less of it defending themselves from Jewish rapacity.
2. To build up political momentum for repealing the "Stand Your Ground" laws, which they don't like because they empower decent people and burden criminals with the "duty to retreat." In Israel, the media bosses would favor "Stand Your Ground" laws, at least for Jews, but in America they want the opposite.
3. To instill guilt in white people, right before the presidential election, so that they will vote once again for Barack Obama. There's nothing so effective as guilt in making white people do what isn't really in their best interests.
There are, additionally, a number of spinoff benefits to the Jews from a high-profile racial controversy. For example, I would be willing to bet a small sum that there's a Jewish screenwriter around somewhere who is already working on a script for a movie that will dramatize the media's false account of the Trayvon Martin vs. George Zimmerman encounter. Actors will be auditioned for roles in that movie before long. After it is released, the film will do two things: (1) make certain Jewish movie moguls richer and (2) reinforce popular belief in the lies that the Jew-controlled news media have been telling.
This controversy was started by the Zionist Jews who control the mainstream media, including the major TV networks. If it had not been for their malicious deceptions, the Trayvon Martin shooting would have been just another instance in which a man successfully defended himself from an attacker by using a gun—which really is all that happened. Since these media bosses have set in motion events that have brought violence and endangerment to so many others, it is legitimate to ask why these people should be immune to such effects themselves. Shouldn't they get a taste of the medicine they've made others take?
And the lies just keep coming...
On 1 April 2012, the New York Times posted online a partial summary of the encounter between Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman that appears biased in favor of Trayvon Martin. It repeats the disproved assertion that the police video shows no sign of injury to Zimmerman's head. It contains "witness" testimony from persons who say they saw Zimmerman on top of, and beating, Martin, but it omits testimony from witness who say they observed Martin on top of, and beating, Zimmerman.
This article is slanted into deception even more than most leftist newsprint is. Perhaps it was posted as an April Fool's Day joke, but, in case it wasn't, here's my feedback to the Times.
I am reasonably certain that what your article shows underneath the subtitle "What detectives told Trayvon's father" is not really what detectives told Trayvon's father. It might be what Trayvon's father said detectives told him, but I rather doubt that any detectives would use the melodramatic "You got me!" as Trayvon's last words. And that casts doubt on the rest of that section.
However, it is true that Trayvon approached GEORGE (if you're going to use first names, be consistent about it, okay?) twice. The first time occurs when George is making his 911 call. He tells the operator that Trayvon has seen him and is coming his way, reaching toward his waistband as he does so. Then Trayvon changed his mind and started running in another direction.
George, suspicious because of recent burglaries in the community, and because he did not recognize Trayvon as a resident of the community, and because of the hour (near sunset), begins following Trayvon. The 911 operator, still on the phone, hears the sounds of George's motion and asks whether George is following. George says "Yeah." The 911 operator says "We don't need you to do that."
Listen to the audio tape, and you will hear when George stops following Martin. His heavier breathing, audible on the tape, ends about 12-15 seconds after the 911 operator suggests that following is unnecessary. Then George turns to go back to his SUV.
At that point, Trayvon could have simply gone on into his father's girlfriend's house and watched TV until bedtime. But, instead, he chose to intercept George and challenge him. Perhaps he meant to teach him a dominance lesson. And he died for his prideful aggression.
You folks in the media have lied repeatedly about events. You've deliberately left out important details, or denied the existence of such details. The NBC alteration of George Zimmerman's words on the 911 audio tape is an example. But there are others.
If you look closely at the right moment in the video tape where George Zimmerman is being searched by Sanford police officers in the police station garage, you can see the injury on his head that was inflicted by Trayvon Martin. The contrast is low, but you can see the gash anyway, by pausing the video at the right point. It starts at the top of George's head, about where the hair is thinnest, and goes down toward the right. By asserting that the video shows no injury to George's head, the Times and other media outlets have lied in a manner likely to prejudice potential jurors in any forthcoming criminal trial against George with false news.
Furthermore, the media have lied about the difference in weight between Trayvon and George, initially stating that George was about 110 pounds heavier than Trayvon. But it has turned out that the difference was closer to 10 pounds only. Again, the media lied in a manner likely to prejudice potential jurors in any criminal trial against George that might take place.
And the "call for peace" by Trayvon's parents and the duo of race-baiting black preachers is a diplomatic deceit copied over from the Cold War between the US and the Soviet Union. It fools nobody. They're getting ready for war, and, therefore, so must we.
Further observations.It is rather strange that the organized mestizo groups, such as La Raza, have all abandoned George Zimmerman, who is himself a mestizo, despite his German/Jewish surname. Apparently, provided that there's a substantial enough political gain,
the Latino leaders will abandon one of their own and send their groups marching with the blacks.
So that leaves only those who don't have a reason to favor either side, and who are honest enough not to capitalize on it for selfish gain, to buck the Jewish lies in the media and fight for the truth, just because it is the truth. Among those fighters are the
white nationalists, who have observed from the beginning that George Zimmerman's story is consistent with the facts as the Sanford police, the paramedics, and the Florida district attorney have presented them, and that therefore George Zimmerman is likely to be the one in the legal and moral right of things. It has come out that George Zimmerman was an anti-racist activist, which means that he has crusaded on behalf of non-whites against white interests, which would make him, politically speaking, the
enemy of white nationalists. In other words, the white nationalists, who, given any chance, would kick George Zimmerman's mestizo butt and deport him to Peru,
are for the time being his most devoted defenders. Because it isn't Zimmerman
per se whom they are defending; it's a truth under attack by the pack of malicious, self-serving Zionist Jewish liars who own and operate the mainstream media.
NBC has claimed that it fired the Miami producer who "accidentally" edited the audio tape of George Zimmerman's 911 call in such a way that Zimmerman sounds like a racist. However, NBC refuses to name the guilty person, so we don't really know whether NBC's statement is the truth or not. NBC has left us with the impression that NBC hires liars (actually all the networks do), and therefore this might be another NBC false claim made by another NBC liar. Until we can check to make sure that it's true, it won't be possible to credit such an unspecific claim about NBC's internal "corrective" measures. In fact, NBC's continuing claim that the edit was unintentionally done makes the rest of their claim easy to doubt. I mean: whoever this wayward producer is, he couldn't have done a "better" job of besmirching George Zimmerman in the eyes of the public if he had tried. It stands to reason that such "good" work probably isn't "accidental."
Update! The furor over the NBC "editgate" began after NBC aired the deceptively altered audio tape of George Zimmerman's 911 call on the
Today show on 27 March. However, I have learned that this same deception had appeared, again in audio, on the 22 March segment of the
Today show. So NBC kept the "accidental mistake" (ha ha) uncorrected for a week, and played it once again to a national audience. Further, the same misleading edit appeared in text form
three times on the NBC Miami website on 19 and 20 March. The three articles were later corrected by revision. In other words, NBC has tried to use this deceptive edit of Zimmerman's 911 call
five times, but has only admitted to and apologized for
one of them.
Further Reading:Counter-Currents Publishing
Council of Conservative Citizens
Examiner.com
VDARE 2
The Daily Caller 4
The American Thinker 4 5
Evidence that Trayvon Martin Doubled Back (Detailed map from WAGIST)
WaPo Media Watchdog Barks Up Wrong Tree, Protects NBC, by Tom Maguire of Just One Minute
Angels Wear White Hoodies, by Spirit•Water•Blood
Stand Your Ground, America, by Peter Ferrara of The American Spectator
We Are All George Zimmerman (Daniel Greenfield, Canada Free Press). "George Zimmerman has been chosen to serve as a gladiator in the circus that distracts a bankrupt nation from the criminal folly of its leaders." A very good metaphorical summary of what's behind the George Zimmerman trial, the trial that wasn't necessary for the man who broke no laws.
Something Strange about Zimmerman's (Previous) Lawyers' Defense Strategy.
The word is out that George Zimmerman's (former) attorneys will would have use[d] the "Shaken Baby Syndrome" defense as a way of showing that Zimmerman was justified in shooting Trayvon Martin.
That's just 'way too creative. Zimmerman was justified in shooting Martin because Martin instigated combat with Zimmerman, and, just before Zimmerman shot him, Martin had been bashing Zimmerman's head against the sidewalk.
It's simple. George Zimmerman killed Trayvon Martin in self-defense. No fancy psychobabble defenses about "syndromes" are needed. Even the "Stand Your Ground" defense isn't needed. Straight-up self-defense is sufficient, all by itself.
Why make it complicated, when simple should work?
Well, one obvious reason is to sabotage the hopes of one's own client by earning the contempt of the jury. Jurors won't like it if they think they're being bamboozled or flummoxed. The lawyer knows this. If the lawyer is honestly serving his client, then he won't engage in behavior that gives the jury the false impression that he "must" resort to fancy psychobabble defenses in a desperate effort to get his client off the hook, when, in actual fact, no such desperate efforts in jury-hoodwinking are needed because the plain truth, simply told, will get the job done.
It's possible that Zimmerman realized this the moment he saw his first legal team, on TV, ventilating their intention to use the "Shaken Baby Syndrome" defense. Zimmerman probably got the idea that his lawyers were getting ready to frame him, to sell him out, even if he could not identify the nature or the source of their motivation. So he quit talking to them, and he understandably disregarded their advice, and, in what might have been a naive assumption that Angela Corey was a more honorable person, he spoke to her instead.
My reply to someone who believed that Zimmerman should not have 'pursued' Martin.
George Zimmerman was the captain of the neighborhood watch, and there had been burglaries in the community he patrolled. It was his JOB to check out unfamiliar persons; it was his JOB to investigate Trayvon Martin.
That said, it isn't true that Zimmerman followed Martin to the point of catching up with him. Zimmerman stopped following Martin 12 seconds after the 911 operator said that following wasn't necessary. Then he turned around and began walking back to his SUV.
It was Trayvon Martin who caught up with George Zimmerman.
Martin, who could have just gone into his father's girlfriend's residence and watched TV until bedtime, chose instead to pursue Zimmerman and challenge him with the words "You got a problem?"
It was Trayvon Martin who instigated combat, gaining the advantage of delivering the first solid punch.
It was Trayvon Martin who, getting the better of the fight, was sitting on George Zimmerman and slamming Zimmerman's head into the concrete sidewalk.
Zimmerman was trying to move so that his head would be over grass instead of concrete when Martin saw Zimmerman's gun. Martin tried to get Zimmerman's gun, probably in order to shoot Zimmerman with it.
In self-defense, then, only then, did Zimmerman draw his gun and shoot Martin.
If it had been me, I'd have shot Martin sooner. I'd have drawn my gun the moment Martin punched me in the face, and I'd have shot him then. By not using his gun when Trayvon Martin started banging Zimmerman's head against the sidewalk, George Zimmerman showed more restraint than a reasonable man must, and more restraint than the "Stand Your Ground" law requires.
The "Middle Ground" Is Not Fairplay.
An essay by Ron Allen, NBC News Correspondent, entitled "Trayvon Martin: Where Do We Go From Here?" and posted on MSNBC. In the essay, Allen wrote:
Some will never be satisfied unless George Zimmerman, the 28-year-old man who shot 17-year-old Trayvon Martin, is arrested, charged, convicted and jailed for a long time.Others insist fairness demands an innocent man, wrongly accused in the court of public opinion, be allowed to get on with his life.
The outcome, of course, will more likely land somewhere in the middle.
I hope not. The truth isn't evenly divided between the two camps. All of it is to be found on the side that recognizes George Zimmerman to be an innocent man who shot an aggressor in self-defense. There isn't even the tiniest bit of truth in favor of the other side, which wants Zimmerman arrested, charged (with crimes he didn't commit), and sent to prison. There's no reason at all even to put Zimmerman on trial, since the District Attorney found the evidence for criminal behavior on Zimmerman's part to be insufficient even to convict him of "negligent homicide."
To put Zimmerman on trial would mean that the courts have abandoned their duty to establish justice and have bowed to political pressure. To wrongly convict Zimmerman would mean that the judicial system is corrupted, probably beyond any repair short of a civil war and a revolutionary change of government.
To compromise truth is to lie. To compromise fairness is to cheat. If the outcome is "somewhere in the middle," then the outcome will be wrong. So let the blacks march. Let them march for a year. Let them march year after year, so long as that is all they do. If they do anything else, then let them be arrested, or treated to what a SWAT team can do when it means business. Let it become clear to the blacks that they are doing nothing more than making noise and wasting their own time. Let it have no practical effect, ever.
The trial that shouldn't have been necessary might happen anyway.
Not long after the shooting, after the police had all the evidence in hand, after the county district attorney had examined the reports of the police and the records from the EMS paramedics, the district attorney told the police that there wasn't enough evidence of criminal guilt even to convict George Zimmerman of negligent manslaughter.
The black man presently acting as US president has weighed in with a prejudicial comment in Trayvon Martin's favor ("If I had a son, he would look like Trayvon"). Not long afterward, the Florida government sent a special prosecutor to arrange for Zimmerman to be railroaded into prison. Does Angela Corey have any new evidence? Probably not. The Sanford police and the local DA wouldn't have been careless, and it isn't likely that they missed anything that Corey has discovered since.
The local authorities, in other words, have had all of the evidence that Angela Corey now has, and they've had it longer than she's had it, and they never in all that time found any reason to think that George Zimmerman committed a crime. Not even a little crime, such as negligent manslaughter. But Ms. Corey, on the contrary, finds sufficient reason to charge Zimmerman with the substantially greater crime of second-degree murder. It would seem, then, that Ms. Corey's reasons probably have nothing to do with the evidence, but rather with her own interest in her career, and perhaps with the government's intention to sacrifice George Zimmerman so that the blacks will be appeased and, maybe, won't riot quite as much as they otherwise would.
"We do not prosecute by public pressure or by petition. We prosecute based on the facts on any given case as well as the laws of the state of Florida," Corey said. And that's what you'd expect her to say, whether or not it is true. The historical record of such things indicates that political pressure does change the way the legal system works. Whether the change corrupts the legal system, or whether it serves to counter corruption that is already in the legal system depends entirely on who is telling the truth and on who is telling the lies.
Angela Corey probably didn't take this job expecting to lose. And since the evidence doesn't support conviction, she will have to pick a jury that cares little for evidence. Which means she'll have to avoid older white men, who respect evidence, have an instinctive grasp of epistemology, and are inclined to judge in accord with demonstrated facts. And she'll favor jurors who are younger, non-white, and female because those types have a track record of judging on their emotions, with an aim to demonstrate some sort of feel-good moral lesson, even if it might be an inappropriate one in the case they are deciding.
If a defendant in a criminal case is innocent, and the evidence generally goes his way, then anyone wanting to see justice done (i.e., the defendant cleared of the charges) should want the jury to be twelve reasonably well-educated, politically conservative, white grandfathers. And, for this purpose, "white" includes Saxons, but excludes Jews. A just verdict by that jury becomes less probable with each deviation from that prescription.
Unfortunately, that ideal jury isn't likely to materialize. Sanford FL is 47.3% white, 29.8% black, 17.4% Hispanic, with the remaining 5.5% being Asians and odds&ends. The jury composition that most nearly matches the racial demographics would be 6 whites, 4 blacks, 2 Hispanics.
So expect a jury of blacks, leftists, women and, maybe, a Hispanic or two of the sort that turned their backs on Zimmerman because he was Peruvian instead of Mexican. These jurors will have convicted George Zimmerman before the trial even begins. No matter how clearly and overwhelmingly the evidence supports the justifiability of the shooting as self-defense, no matter how many media lies are exposed in the courtroom, and no matter how many witnesses for the prosecution are revealed to be perjurers, these jurors will vote for conviction. And that will be that.
Sooner or later, in prison, George Zimmerman will be attacked and killed, probably with great torture and gruesomeness, by black prison inmates. We are looking at the steps leading toward a blood sacrifice to political correctness.
This is actually the same kind of thing that has happened to white nationalists and their defenders, like Matt Hale and Edgar Steele. Neither of them were guilty of the charges brought against them. But both were convicted by juries who were either made to hate them or who hated them from the start. The biggest difference is that the trial of George Zimmerman is getting a much wider exposure from the mainstream media whose deceptions, after all, started the whole affair.
Humorous reversal of the media's trick with photographs.
The media have been using a family album photograph of Trayvon Martin as a young boy in order to generate sympathy for him, even though he was considerably bigger at age 17 and was the aggressor during his fight with George Zimmerman. This image is frequently used by leftist newspapers.

Although this is perhaps the least of the mainstream media's deceits in this affair, it nonetheless has had a profound effect in the way much of the public generally, and the blacks in particular, have come to think about the events in Sanford, Florida, on 26 February 2012.
To show you how images can warp judgment, here's an equivalent pair of Zimmerman and Martin photographs, except with the age-reduction effect reversed, so that you see it in Zimmerman's favor.

My letter to Trayvon Martin's parents.I received an unsolicited email via a leftist activist website called "Change.org." The email contained a "thanks for your support" kind of letter, attributed to Tracy Martin and Sybrina Fulton, father and mother of Trayvon Martin. Well, I haven't been supporting the Martins because I believe that they are factually and morally in the wrong, and that their opposition, George Zimmerman, is factually and morally in the right.
Since I received an email, I sent this reply:
| To: Tracy Martin and Sybrina Fulton <mail@change.org> |
|
Dear Mr. Martin and Ms. Fulton,
I'm not on your side in this matter. I believe that your son was the aggressor in the fight between himself and George Zimmerman on the evening of 26 February.
From what I've been able to learn about the incident, George Zimmerman was fulfilling his duties as a member of the neighborhood watch. He had a gun with him, legally, so that he could deal with potentially deadly encounters with any criminals he might chance to meet while on patrol.
Mr. Zimmerman followed your son because he did not recognize him and because there had been burglaries in the gated community where you, Mr. Martin, were living. It was never Mr. Zimmerman's intention to attack your son. He only wanted to make sure that your son had a good reason for being inside the community.
That is why he began following Trayvon. He wanted to ask some questions. If your son had simply stood there and said, "My name is Trayvon Martin. I'm here because my Mom sent me to live with my Dad for a few days," then nothing bad would have happened.
Zimmerman would have said, "Okay, Trayvon. I just had to know that you were here with a good reason because we've been having some problems with break-ins and people have been getting robbed. Nice to meet you."
And that would have been that. But, of course, that isn't what happened.
Mr. Zimmerman had been speaking with the 911 dispatcher while following Trayvon, and the entire conversation was recorded. The phone also picked up the sound of Zimmerman's motion and his heavier breathing as he followed Trayvon. The 911 dispatcher heard these sounds and asked "Are you following him?" And Zimmerman said, "Yeah." The dispatcher said, "We don't need you to do that."
If you will listen closely to the audio recording, you will hear when Zimmerman stops following Trayvon. It happens about 12 seconds after the dispatcher said that following was unnecessary. Zimmerman's breathing slows, and the sounds of rapid motion disappear. Zimmerman had stopped following Trayvon. He had turned around and was walking back toward his SUV.
At that point, Trayvon could have gone inside the house where you were living, Mr. Martin. He could have watched TV until bedtime. And that would have been the end of it. But that isn't what Trayvon decided to do.
Closing the distance with George Zimmerman was Trayvon's doing. Not Zimmerman's.
Instigating combat was also Trayvon's idea. Not Zimmerman's.
Trayvon gained the advantage of landing the first solid blow, knocking Zimmerman to the ground.
Trayvon followed up this first punch by jumping on top of Zimmerman and slamming his head into the concrete sidewalk repeatedly.
Zimmerman showed extreme restraint up until this point. He didn't draw his gun at first. He was moving so that his head would be over grass instead of concrete, so Trayvon wouldn't be hurting him so much.
But while Zimmerman moved, his pistol became visible to Trayvon. Trayvon decided to try to get the gun.
Mr. Zimmerman knew that this was the VERY LAST MOMENT in which it would be possible to defend himself. So he drew his gun and shot Trayvon with it.
Frankly, Mr. Martin and Ms. Fulton, I would not have waited so long to do the shooting.
Your son got an attitude in which he was determined to give another man a "dominance lesson," and he died for his prideful aggression.
Although I sympathize for your loss, I'm not going to allow that sympathy to distort my perception of the facts or the conclusions that I draw from those facts. May neither of you ever again have cause for grief of this kind. |
And now a word from...Jerry's Aryan Battle Page The media will, if called to account for their actions on the Trayvon Martin/George Zimmerman story, assert their free speech rights. But free speech does not protect someone who intentionally starts a riot, and that appears to be what the media bosses have done. They instigated riots from coast to coast, and they ought to be prosecuted for doing so. Their crime is aggravated by the fact that they knowingly used misleading photos and incorrect descriptions of both Martin and Zimmerman, that they knowingly sought after false witnesses, and that they knowingly misrepresented audio and visual evidence before a national audience. I accuse the media of deliberately creating a clear and present danger to the people of the United States by a criminal misuse of their access to the public. |
The Stealth Retractions have Begun!
Oh look, the media are starting to be nice to George now. (Like the Abominable Snowman said as he playfully abused Daffy Duck, "I will hug him and pet him and squeeze him and call him George.")
George Zimmerman, Prelude to a Shooting, by Christ Francescani, REUTERS.
But they had no good reason for their earlier nastiness toward him. Rather, they had a sinister motive.
Quote from the article: "On February 26, George Zimmerman shot and killed unarmed black teenager Trayvon Martin in what Zimmerman says was self-defense. The furor that ensued has consumed the country and prompted a re-examination of guns, race and self-defense laws enacted in nearly half the United States."
That "furor" wasn't spontaneous. It was deliberately incited and fanned into flame by the mainstream media. Murders most foul were overlooked so that the Trayvon Martin shooting would occupy the national center stage for five weeks, during which the media made us think that Zimmerman was "a white man" and "a racist" and "a thug" and "a vigilante" and so on.
Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson recognized the signals. It was time for another episode of "Hate the White People and Riot," in the tradition of Tawana Brawley and Crystal Mangum. And, as it is turning out, the media were hoaxing again. And the blacks were suckers for the hoax, once again.
The media bosses were looking for a shooting incident somewhat like this one because they had three objectives that publicizing such an incident would help them gain.
First, they wanted to inflame the blacks so that they would be even more belligerent toward whites than they usually are, so that the whites, in turn, having to cope with black trouble, would have less attention left over to watch out for trouble from the ethnic group to which most of the media bosses belong. Jew know whom I mean, I'm sure.
Second, they wanted a pretext for beginning a crusade to repeal the Stand Your Ground laws, which, besides being laws that most Americans favor, have saved more (and better) lives than they've cost. The media bosses don't want whites armed. Armed people can fight back, you know.
Third, they wanted to instill in whites a sense of guilt so that they would vote for Obama again. There's nothing like guilt to motivate someone to do what isn't really in his own best interests.
Quote: "During the time Zimmerman was in hiding, his detractors defined him as a vigilante who had decided Martin was suspicious merely because he was black."
Rather, the media defined him that way. They even lied and pulled some of the most awful frauds, such as NBC's Editgate, which was a brazen deception even by their standards. But all of the mainstream media, TV and press, were using unwarranted pejorative language, unspoken assumptions, and retouched, out-of-date photographs to milk sympathy for Trayvon Martin and to slant public opinion against George Zimmerman.
The mainstream media denied for as long as they could the injuries on Zimmerman's face and the back of his head, even though many others saw those injuries more than a week before ABC News grudgingly admitted that they saw them, too.
The mainstream media floated the hoax that Zimmerman had cursed Trayvon Martin with a racial epithet, when, in fact, he had cursed the cold weather.
And now the media are trying to correct without seeming to retract. They've been caught hoaxing us with false news, and now they want to make us forget that the national circus over Trayvon Martin's shooting was their own work.
They could have given this alleged crime equal time with the 13-year-old white boy in Kansas City MO who was doused with gasoline and set on fire by blacks, with the old white woman (Nancy Strait) in Tulsa OK who was raped and beaten to death by blacks, with the white student (John Sanderson) at Mississippi State who was murdered by three black men. But the media kept those stories on the back burner, so that nothing would distract the public from the Trayvon Martin vs. George Zimmerman drama.
The MSM are unreliable, and by now everyone should know it. The only reason they're finally, belatedly, and hesitantly recognizing the George Zimmerman is the good guy—maybe—is that they've realized that this story won't serve them as they had originally planned. Don't let them claim five hundred dollars' worth of moral credit when they've barely demonstrated five cents' worth of honor.
Why are blacks so gullible for lies that pander to their self-pity, as well as being so resistant to persuasion by physical evidence in conflict with their self-pitying preconceptions? A famous white explorer of Africa once remarked that whites should regard blacks as big children: simple-minded but dangerous, and that whites should never treat with blacks as equals because it was an error that led only to destruction. It is advice that liberals are famous for disregarding. But it was good advice."I have given my life to try to alleviate the sufferings of Africa. There is something that all white men who have lived here like I must learn and know: that these individuals are a sub-race. They have neither the intellectual, mental, or emotional abilities to equate or to share equally with white men in any function of our civilization. I have given my life to try to bring them the advantages which our civilization must offer, but I have become well aware that we must retain this status: the superior and they the inferior. For whenever a white man seeks to live among them as their equals they will either destroy him or devour him. And they will destroy all of his work. Let white men from anywhere in the world, who would come to Africa, remember that you must continually retain this status; you the master and they the inferior like children that you would help or teach. Never fraternize with them as equals. Never accept them as your social equals or they will devour you. They will destroy you."
—Dr. Albert Schweitzer Nobel Prize Winner 1952 from his African Notebook.. |
I'll bet that when the truth is known, everyone except the blacks will see that George Zimmerman was telling the plain truth the whole time. Why won't the blacks also reach this understanding?
If you have to ask, then you don't know blacks. They'll start a lie, or else gullibly accept one told them—a lie that makes them look noble, or persecuted, or somehow better than they really are—and they repeat it forever. Unlike the Jews, who know the truth but eternally deny it, the blacks actually believe their lies. The dishonesty of blacks is a simple dishonesty, as you might expect, given their generally low intelligence.