More thoughts on the Zimmerman Trial

Chris L explained it in a discussion I saw on facebook recently  better than I've seen anyone explain it yet.

I contend that (1) the only racist on the grounds that night was Trayvon Martin. He's the only one who said racist words and who profiled someone based upon their appearance.

(2) Trayvon Martin's actions made his observation by Zimmerman justified. Not that there needs to be any justification at all. You are within your rights and freedoms to observe anyone in public places, to take their photo, and to watch them.
(3) Zimmerman spent as much of the time as possible during the incident ON THE PHONE with Police. Trayvon didn't call the police, he called a friend to brag about his up coming confrontation. In that call he used racist language. He also made a damning admission that he would be returning from close to the residence he was staying at BACK up to the area where Zimmerman was to confront him.
(4) This part is rather crucial. You've heard much about who was stalking who and who followed who. Well, Zimmerman claimed and all evidence presented at trial is consistent with Trayvon casing houses suspiciously that night in a complex that was subject to a string of home invasions / robberies. He was suspicious enough for Martin to call Police and this behavior is not inconsistent with his history.
You might not have heard this, but Martin was a vandal who was caught on tape vandalizing school property. A lack of respect for the law and for property rights. When he was detained his backpack was searched for the marker he used to tag the school property and they found him to be in possession of fine jewelry and a burglary tool (flathead screwdriver) that were reported missing from a home not far from his school. So it's not just idle speculation that Trayvon was a thief and that his suspicious behavior was benign. Of course Zimmerman didn't know this at the time, but if we are to weigh the veracity of all the evidence presented that Martin was not simply walking straight home from his Skittles purchase, then it certainly adds a pattern of behavior that is consistent with what Zimmerman testified to and reported to the police before he could have known that Martin actually was a thief.

(5) If you watch the entire video of Zimmerman walking the police through the events of that night and look at an aerial view of the map of the location and compare the time stamps of calls and known events, it's rather clear that Zimmerman did not stalk Martin until he was cornered or threatened which precipitated the attack. In fact, all evidence and eye witness testimony confirms that Zimmerman never walked down the direct path that Martin disappeared down before Zimmerman got out of his car. Martin had time to make it all the way down that street and back to confront Zimmerman.

While we don't know his exact location, his own words while he was on the phone, the time scale, and the fact that when Zimmerman stopped at the T-junction at the top of that street to see if he could see Martin he neither saw him nor heard Martin on the phone.
(5) Zimmerman's injuries match his story and the actual shooting doesn't show a frenzied malice and desire to kill Martin. It was only one shot after Zimmerman had already been taken to the ground, beaten on, and Martin went for Zimmerman's gun.
(6) The timeline, eye witnesses, and physical locations fit Zimmerman's story and they show that he did nothing which warranted being assaulted, nor was he quick to pull a gun, nor did he use it inappropriately. Zimmerman broke no law. Trayvon Martin did.

Zimmerman Trial: My Thoughts

Full Story and Live Coverage of the Trial

Having watched most of the trial, I don't think the prosecution was able to make their case, and I will be very surprised if the jury convicts on Murder 2.  I'll be disappointed, but not surprised, if they convict on a lesser included offense.  

It appears to me that Zimmerman did nothing wrong up until the confrontation, and no one knows what caused the confrontation except Zimmerman and Martin.  It's clear from the evidence Martin ended up on top of Zimmerman either, punching him in the face causing his head to repeatedly slam against the concrete, or actually slamming his head into the concrete.  In either case, it it had been me instead of Zimmerman in those circumstances, I would have shot Martin also.

Americans do have and should have the right to defend themselves from an attacker, and we do and should have the right to approach someone who has raised our suspicion to ask them questions or engage them in conversation without being attacked, which is what appears to have happened in this case.

I'm expecting if he's acquitted, or if he's found guilty of a lesser offense but doesn't receive much time in prison, there will be blood!  There will be riots, burning cars, people injured/killed, businesses looted, just like the LA Riots in the 90s.  Just back up all your electronic data off site (carbonite is a good source for this), purchase renters insurance (replacement value, not depreciated value), make a video recording of all your property verbally reading out model numbers and serial numbers for your electronic devices, and head out of town for a few days when the verdict is expected... Preferably to a very expensive area with few minorities. You'll be just fine. Everyone can use a good excuse for a weekend excursion vacation, right?

Happy Independence Day!

Here's a great idea from Atheist Revolution for creating a 4th of July Family Tradition. Devote some time on the 4th to reading with your kids some of the classic documents of American history. Not the revisionist garbage being swallowed by Christian extremists like Rep. Louie Gohmert(R-TX), but the original material. There are so many good ones to choose from, but I think I'll start with these:
Declaration of Independence
U.S. Constitution
Treaty of Tripoli
McCollum v. Board of Education Dist. 71, 333 U.S. 203 (1948)
Engel v. Vitale, 82 S. Ct. 1261 (1962)

There is much the Christian right does not want you to know about American history. Fortunately, the information is out there and can be accessed with little effort.

A Christian Nation?

Joseph Farrah sounds just like a member of the Taliban talking about Islam in his article, "Why Atheists can't be real Americans", where he said,

"If you want to live in the freest nation on earth, understand why it has been that way for 230-plus years. It’s because of the principles of self-governance that only work in a society of responsible, moral people accountable to the teachings of the One True Creator God found in the Bible."

What an idiot!

He was responding to a sermen by Chuck Hagee where Hagee said America was built for christians, not for non-christians, and if non-christians don't like living in a theocracy, we should leave the country.

These people prey on the ignorance of others in order to use their religion to control people.

Here's the truth quoted from The Thinking Atheist

Martin Bashir on Abortion Rights

Let me start by saying that I oppose the GOP's efforts to restrict a womans access to abortion.  That being said, I'm not sure if Martin Bashir (and his guests) are getting stupider, or if he's just being unleashed to allow his stupidity to be more easily aired on this TV program, but I've noticed a trend with him where he or his guests make really ridiculous statements.

Of course a womans right to an abortion should protected, and that abortions should be safe, legal and accessible, but Bashir isn't doing the cause any favors by saying the kind of stuff that was said on his show today.  Two examples:

1.  For the past year or so, they have been criticizing the GOP for the ridiculously stupid comments they've made regarding women, rape, and abortion.  Like Aikens "legitimate rape" comment.  They've been asking why the GOP keeps making these gaffs, and why it's all men that seem to be talking about the se issued that only (or primarily) affect women.  They've been asking why don't allow conservative women to make these arguments about access to abortions?  I can understand that criticism and see the logic behind it.

But today, he had a guest on that was criticizing the GOP for "hiding behind a womans skirt" because the GOP now has a female congressman making these arguments.  They said look at these "tough guys" hiding behind a "womans skirt" to have her make these arguments for them.

To Martin Bashir and his guest:  You can't have it both ways!

2.  As if that wasn't bad enough, his guest said on his show today that women should be taken at their word that they've been raped and said it's absurd they should have to prove they've been raped by enduring a humiliating medical procedure that essentially re-rapes them.  She said we should just believe them and not take any steps to prove or disprove their claims.

If you're not planning to prosecute anyone for raping anyone else, that would be just fine, but if you intend to put someone in prison for committing the crime of rape, you dam well better prove the rape occured, and that the accused was the one who did it.

To Martin Bashir:  Where do you get these people and why do you let them say such ignorant shit on your tv show?  It makes you look really really bad!!

Radical Right Wing Zealots Wish for Revolution

Everyone who advocates for, encourages, or incites an attempted armed and/or violent coup against or democratically elected government is a traitor and should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. In the US, we vote them out, we don't shoot them out.

The following are examples of threats against our government made by these idiots on social media.  Let me go on record as saying I am a patriotic American who, having already spent most of my adult life serving my country, would gladly fight anyone who attempted to overthrow my government, regardless of what party or ideology occupied the government at that time.  Most of these people are wannabe's and posers who pretend to be tough online, but would never really attempt anything they spout off about.  The most they could ever hope for is to inspire or incite some mentally deranged wing nut to take up a gun and try to go down in history as a hero.   Fortunately  for us, most of these crazies have very little chance of success, like the idiot who took pot shots at the white house in 2011.  We should never take this threat for granted though.  Scott Roeder is a great example of someone who can be radicalized and inspired to action by these idiots talking about stuff they'd never do themselves on the internet.

This discussion can be found here.  

    

Whistle blower or traitor?

What's the difference between a whistle blower and a traitor? A whistler blower uses approved channels to report problems with classified or sensitive programs and is protected from retribution under federal law, while a traitor illegally releases classified information to the media and flees the country to not answer for his crimes.

Forbes Story of the traitor Edward Snowden


Approved channels include:
The employees chain of command
Osha's Whistle Blower Protection ProgramOffice of the Inspector General
The Congressional Select Committe on Intelligence

What do you want to be he's going to eventually provide some or all of the classified information he stole from the US Government to China or Russia in exchange for helping him obtain political  asylum?