[Vision2020] Vision2020 Digest, Vol 85, Issue 95

Fri Jul 19 17:19:34 PDT 2013

You're right, you're not holding any rallies that I know of.

So, what do you think about the death threats on Zimmerman's life?  And the death threats against his parents?  What do you think about the $10,000 bounty put on his life by the New Black Panther party shortly after the event occurred?  

Paul

________________________________
 From: Joe Campbell <philosopher.joe at gmail.com>
To: Paul Rumelhart <godshatter at yahoo.com> 
Cc: "scooterd408 at hotmail com" <scooterd408 at hotmail.com>; "siyocreo at live com" <siyocreo at live.com>; "moscowlocksmith at gmail com" <moscowlocksmith at gmail.com>; "vision2020 at moscow com" <vision2020 at moscow.com> 
Sent: Friday, July 19, 2013 7:47 AM
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Vision2020 Digest, Vol 85, Issue 95

I'm not holding any rallies either. You have got to stop responding to people as if every post on the V is coming from the same person.

I won't comment on your second, distasteful comment.

On Jul 19, 2013, at 6:52 AM, Paul Rumelhart <godshatter at yahoo.com> wrote:

I'm not holding rallies to tout my scenario to the masses, just putting it up there as a counter-point to a media-driven politically-fueled mindset that may end up with another death in what is already a terrible tragedy.
>
>I guess the white (hispanic, whatever) guy can never be a victim himself.
>
>Paul
>
>
>
>
>
>
>________________________________
> From: Joe Campbell <philosopher.joe at gmail.com>
>To: Paul Rumelhart <godshatter at yahoo.com> 
>Cc: "scooterd408 at hotmail com" <scooterd408 at hotmail.com>; "siyocreo at live com" <siyocreo at live.com>; "moscowlocksmith at gmail com" <moscowlocksmith at gmail.com>; "vision2020 at moscow com" <vision2020 at moscow.com> 
>Sent: Friday, July 19, 2013 4:32 AM
>Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Vision2020 Digest, Vol 85, Issue 95
> 
>
>
>You don't see any possible harm in continuing to promote Zimmerman as if he did nothing wrong? A world with MORE folks acting like Zimmerman is a better world? My point is that taking the law into your own hand is wrong, that is what Zimmerman did wrong. Not sure how that attitude encourages harm against Zimmerman.
>
>On Jul 18, 2013, at 8:12 PM, Paul Rumelhart <godshatter at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>I don't know about you, but when no one knows the truth I don't like to make up scenarios that get this guy death threats without actual evidence. It appears to me to be irresponsible.
>>Paul 
>>
>>
>>
>>________________________________
>> From:  Joe Campbell <philosopher.joe at gmail.com>; 
>>To:  Paul Rumelhart <godshatter at yahoo.com>; 
>>Cc:  Scott Dredge <scooterd408 at hotmail.com>; Keely Emerine-Mix <siyocreo at live.com>; Gary Crabtree <moscowlocksmith at gmail.com>; viz <vision2020 at moscow.com>; 
>>Subject:  Re: [Vision2020] Vision2020 Digest, Vol 85, Issue 95 
>>Sent:  Thu, Jul 18, 2013 10:56:31 PM 
>>
>>
>>Paul,
>>
>>Anything is possible. It is possible that you are in the Matrix world. 
>>
>>What I don't understand is why you let loose the possibilities when it affects your beliefs but you hold them tight when it goes against those beliefs.
>>
>>In truth, I can understand your point. I'm not trying to condemn Zimmerman. He was naive and because of that got caught up in an unfortunate situation. But let's be fair about this situation. A young man, perhaps aggressive (unlike most young men?!?) but nonetheless walking in his neighborhood was stalked and shot and killed.
>>
>>You pretend to be in favor of freedom but if a black man is not free to walk around in his own neighborhood without being stalked and then shot then WTF. Freedom doesn't mean squat.
>>
>>Best, Joe
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 3:21 PM, Paul Rumelhart <godshatter at yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>This is what I don't get.  You write "There should have been more evidence and why there wasn't is a story that, in part, touches on institutional racism."  Isn't it possible that they didn't have more evidence of second degree murder because it simply didn't exist, and that your preconceived notions about him are wrong?  One could even call them "racist", because if the evidence doesn't actually exist you are assuming that it is there because you are assuming he was targeting blacks.  That's called reaching a conclusion before all the facts are in.
>>>
>>>You also write "Not to mention that Zimmerman likely would not have been following around a white kid who lived in the neighborhood."  How could you possibly know this?  Hell, Zimmerman didn't even self-identify as "white".  Wouldn't he, in
 his gung-ho neighborhood watch kind of way, be targeting anyone he didn't know?  I've seen no evidence that Zimmerman was motivated even partly by race in this, but I see it assumed all over the damned place.  To the tune of credible death threats to both himself and his parents.
>>>
>>>The guy was found not guilty in a court of law.  Shouldn't that be the end of it?
>>>
>>>Paul
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>________________________________
>>> From: Joe Campbell <philosopher.joe at gmail.com>
>>>To: Scott Dredge <scooterd408 at hotmail.com> 
>>>Cc: Paul Rumelhart <godshatter at yahoo.com>; Keely Emerine-Mix <siyocreo at live.com>; Gary Crabtree <moscowlocksmith at gmail.com>; viz <vision2020 at moscow.com> 
>>>Sent: Thursday, July 18, 2013 2:59 PM
>>>
>>>Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Vision2020 Digest, Vol 85, Issue 95
>>> 
>>>
>>>
>>>I appreciate your contributions on this, Scott. 
>>>
>>>What Roger is missing in the previous post is that I'm not condemning the jurors. I think there was a failure in the justice system -- broadly construed -- that was essentially racist, if we want to be honest about it. But I don't think the failure was with the verdict. Given the laws, given the evidence, likely the verdict was correct.
>>>
>>>And here is a positive thing about all this -- that I think you'll like too, Scott: the justice system -- narrowly construed -- for all its criticisms, might be just fine; given the evidence, they made the right decision. There should have been more evidence and why there wasn't is a story that, in part, touches on institutional racism.
>>>
>>>Not to mention that Zimmerman likely would not have been following around a white kid who lived in the neighborhood.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 2:01 PM, Scott Dredge <scooterd408 at hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>My Tuesday morning quarterback analysis of this would be that in the heat of the moment neither Zimmerman nor Martin were thinking rationally.  I disagree with Gary about 'Martin's decision' but wouldn't call that opinion 'stupid'.  My guess is that Martin eventually went into 'fight or flight' type of mindset once he realized he was being tracked.  He's only 17 years old, he wouldn't have much real world experience in diffusing confrontations. Once this kind of situation escalated to the point where there both scrapping, I'd expect adrenaline rushes and survival instincts to be kicking in with both of them.  They were fighting.  All bets are off at this point with the edge going to Zimmerman since he would was aware that he was in possession of a gun.
>>>>
>>>>-Scott
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>________________________________
>>>>Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2013 12:06:11 -0700
>>>>From: godshatter at yahoo.com
>>>>To: siyocreo at live.com; moscowlocksmith at gmail.com; philosopher.joe at gmail.com
>>>>CC: vision2020 at moscow.com
>>>>
>>>>Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Vision2020 Digest, Vol 85, Issue 95
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>I don't see where you are coming from, Keely.  You are responding to this paragraph, right?
>>>>
>>>>"Poor decisions were made by both Zimmerman and Martin. Zimmerman's 
decisions may have been ill considered (following on foot if that is in 
fact what he did) but legal. Martin's decision to leap out of the bushes
 and assault a stranger instead of simply continuing on the seventy yard
 to his fathers girlfriends home was not."
>>>>
>>>>Where is the intellectual dishonesty?  Why do you think this analysis is "stupid"?
>>>>
>>>>Someone leaving their vehicle and walking down a sidewalk behind someone else is not, in fact, illegal.  Neither is following him in an SUV while talking to the police.  It was probably not a brilliant idea on Zimmerman's part, but not illegal.  If Zimmerman's account is correct, Martin confronted him, knocked him to the ground with a punch to the nose, and continued to beat his head into the pavement for about a minute.  We don't know for certain, of course, that what Zimmerman says is true, but it seems to be supported by the evidence.  He had a broken nose, cuts on the back of his head, and bruises on his face.  When the police played an audio recording of the screams during the event for Martin's father, he was asked if he thought it was his son screaming.  He replied
 "no".  When they played the recording for Zimmerman's father, he replied that he thought it was his son and that he sounded like he was screaming for his life.
>>>>
>>>>Confronting someone and knocking him to the ground and then pummeling him with blows crosses a definite line.  Zimmerman claims that he was trying to move back off the concrete when Martin saw his gun.  He then allegedly told Zimmerman that he was "going to die tonight".  That's when he shot him.
>>>>
>>>>As I said before, it appears that the "white guy stalks and then guns down a defenseless black child" meme doesn't fit this case. Martin could have avoided a confrontation simply by continuing to walk home to his dad's girlfriend's place.  I agree with the jury that there was no evidence for second degree murder, certainly not beyond a reasonable doubt.
>>>>
>>>>Just forget how the media wants to portray this event, and think about this possible
 scenario:
>>>>
>>>>Zimmerman is tired of a spate of recent burglaries in his community, and wants to do something about it.  He joins the local neighborhood watch.  He does what you should do on the neighborhood watch, he phones anything he sees as suspicious in to the police.
>>>>
>>>>Now comes the night in question.  He sees a teenager walking through the neighborhood in the rain in the dark wearing black clothes and a black hoodie that covers his face.  He does what he has always done at this point, he calls it in.  He follows him to keep tabs on where he is until the police get there.  When they ask him his location, he can't tell them precisely.  Maybe because it's dark and rainy outside and he hasn't been paying attention to his exact location as he tries to keep him in sight.  So he gets out of his SUV, walks down the block until he can see a street sign, and then starts to walk back to his vehicle.  He is
 then confronted by Martin, a confrontation he tries to avoid, and he gets attacked.  He's on the ground, Martin is straddling him, punching him in the face and causing his head to get smashed into the sidewalk.  Zimmerman, still trying to get away rather than fight, tries to scooch back to the grass so that his head isn't getting smashed into the concrete anymore.  In doing so, his clothes get disheveled and his concealed weapon shows.  Martin threatens his life, and Zimmerma 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20130719/c579e2a0/attachment-0001.html>