Poll Zimmerman "Guilty Beyond a Reasonable Doubt"

[Brian GC]

One more reported post from this thread and we're gonna shut it down. You guys need to stop the insults and pissing contests and stick to discussing the topic.

ARPC

Could you please point out the post(s) that is being reported so we know what is being received as offensive? I can't find it.

Also, rather than shutting the thread down, would you consider warning the offensive ones by PM? By shutting down a thread and not singling out the trouble makers just shifts these problems to another thread IMO.

[coolwhip]

Not exactly accurate and somewhat incoherent, but basically correct.

We were well entrenched in Vietnam by the time LBJ fabricated the Gulf of Tonkin attack on an American ship. LBJ did that to get us even more involved so his wealthy industrialist buddies could make even more money selling their war wares to the government.

Since we already had advisors in Vietnam while the French still owned that war, I have to believe that we had specific reasons for wanting to be more involved. The Catholic angle from JFK is one that is kept low key, but may have played more of a role in why we escalated our being involved in Vietnam after a Catholic becomes president;
http://www.reformation.org/vietnam.html[/SIZE][/FONT][/LEFT][/LIST]

I didn't want to go into a dissertation earlier and agree with what you posted here. I maintain the highest respect for those Americans that served in this war, but I would like to state that my opinions of the politics involved can be scathing if unleashed. If only our soldiers could know the real truth before going into battle....on second thought, if they did there may not be any willing to go in support of political foolishness.

[the dangling wrangler]

Could you please point out the post(s) that is being reported so we know what is being received as offensive? I can't find it.

Also, rather than shutting the thread down, would you consider warning the offensive ones by PM? By shutting down a thread and not singling out the trouble makers just shifts these problems to another thread IMO.

Sorry sport. I don't think anyone here, let alone a moderator has to, or should answer to you.

[Brian GC]

Sorry sport. I don't think anyone here, let alone a moderator has to, or should answer to you.

See, if it was up to me, this is the type of post that should be reported.

[the dangling wrangler]

See, if it was up to me, this is the type of post that should be reported.

Well, report it then. If I broke any posting rules, you can be sure I'll be notified.
By a moderator.

[cool-in-cayman]

I wonder of the people that voted “not guilty” how many actually believe Zimmerman’s story?

You don't have to believe Zimmerman to find him not guilty. Excluding most everything he has to say, the evidence shows that he called the cops, was beaten up and Martin was not.

A witness saw Martin beating him.

There is audio evidence with likely Zimmerman screaming for help.

There is no evidence that Zimmerman was doing anything illegal, or that he confronted Martin. Excluding Zimmerman's account of how they came into contact only leaves speculation.

Therefore there simply is not enough evidence to convict Zimmerman of anything at this point.

[cool-in-cayman]

I didn't say we didn't do any good, just that it wasn't our place to be at that time. When JFK took office, we were not involved in any wars. Yet, JFK's acceptance speech took on an air of the U.S. protecting itself from it's enemies. That was a typical leftist speech designed to put the people into a state of fear. Was it to maintain political power through fear or was it to help American industrialists sell their wares for war, who knows. One thing we can be certain of is that we did not get involved in Vietnam with full intentions of helping out the Vietnamese. A lot less killing would have occured had the U.S. stayed out of that conflict.

American leftists used Vietnam from every angle they could. Vietnam was one of the most successful American liberal campaign ever designed and orchestrated by the American left. As it turned out, the Vietnamese people who stayed in Vietnam did quite well under their Communist victors. It is very similar to Cuba. We only hear from those who were discontent with the changes to these countries and not from those who stayed and adapted to the new regimes.

I know I am probably just being naive, but do you have one shred of proof that anyone in high authority conspired with defense contractors to orchestrate a war in Vietnam or anywhere else for the purpose of making greedy contractors rich? I'm sure this opinion is shared by many, but so too is the opinion shared that that WTC 7 was purposely blown up by the Jooz.

[cool-in-cayman]

Define morality in terms of Communist versus Republic government. We in the U.S. are considered immoral by Communists and Muslims worldwide. Is their definition of what moral is wrong? Why?

Show me a communist regime that allows freedom of speech, freedom of expression, the right to pursue your god given talents without being catogorized and dispatched by the government. Show me a communist regime that doesn't sensor almost all forms of human interaction in one way or another. Show me a communist regime that doesn't arrest those who are vocal against the regime. Show me a communist regime in which the officials are elected by the people and not some sort of polit bureau.

Show me that, and I'll explain the morality differences between communism and an elected republic gov.

I have no problem with others calling us immoral, I think they are wrong and we are right.

[the dangling wrangler]

You don't have to believe Zimmerman to find him not guilty. Excluding most everything he has to say, the evidence shows that he called the cops, was beaten up and Martin was not.

A witness saw Martin beating him.

There is audio evidence with likely Zimmerman screaming for help.

There is no evidence that Zimmerman was doing anything illegal, or that he confronted Martin. Excluding Zimmerman's account of how they came into contact only leaves speculation.

Therefore there simply is not enough evidence to convict Zimmerman of anything at this point.

Some of the members here want a public lynching, not justice.
Seems like, if you don't see things their way, you're nothing but pure evil.

Zimmerman is not Richard Kuklinski.

[k-fridge]

Could you please point out the post(s) that is being reported so we know what is being received as offensive? I can't find it.

Also, rather than shutting the thread down, would you consider warning the offensive ones by PM? By shutting down a thread and not singling out the trouble makers just shifts these problems to another thread IMO.

They've been warned over and over. Next stop is locking them out of ARP.

[RoBoTeq]

I wonder of the people that voted “not guilty” how many actually believe Zimmerman’s story?

I would be interested in this as well. Since there is nothing to support Zimmerman's claims that can't be explained more rationally and there is plenty of evidence, both physical and from an earwitness that suggests Zimmerman's story is not true, along with the now documented fact that Zimmerman is prone to lie to anyone and everyone.....well, I'd just like to know too.

[RoBoTeq]

You don't have to believe Zimmerman to find him not guilty. Excluding most everything he has to say, the evidence shows that he called the cops, was beaten up and Martin was not.

The same evidence shows that Zimmerman lied in court when he told Martin's family that he thought Martin was older. The same evidence shows that Zimmerman deceived the 911 operator into believing that Martin was casing houses, when in fact, Martin was not even near any of the houses. The same evidence shows that rather stop pursuing Martin as was suggested by the 911 operator, Zimmerman continued stalking Martin. The same evidence shows that Zimmerman had to actually turn the corner of the building and walk several yards toward where Martin was going in order to have murdered Martin where the murder took place. Just saying....

A witness saw Martin beating him.

That witness has now declined testifying and several other claimed witnesses testify that it could have been Martin under Zimmerman. One eyewitness claims that Zimmerman was on top of Martin when he shot Martin, and then Zimmerman flipped Martin over after he shot Martin. It will be interesting to see how many of these so called witnesses show up for court, especially since a couple of purjury charges have already been handed down in this case.

There is audio evidence with likely Zimmerman screaming for help.

Really? Likely Zimmerman? How do you come to that conclusion when two voice analyst experts say it could not have possibly been Zimmerman?;

""As a result of that, you can say with reasonable scientific certainty that it's not Zimmerman," Owen says, stressing that he cannot confirm the voice as Trayvon's, because he didn't have a sample of the teen's voice to compare."

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/...ific-certainty

There is no evidence that Zimmerman was doing anything illegal, or that he confronted Martin. Excluding Zimmerman's account of how they came into contact only leaves speculation.

It is true that there is no evidence that either Zimmerman or Martin were doing anything illegal prior to their physical contact of one another. The earwitness who heard the reporte between Zimmerman and Martin just before a scuffling sound over the phone may well be enough to show that Zimmerman did indeed initiate contact with Martin.

Therefore there simply is not enough evidence to convict Zimmerman of anything at this point.

All of this information keeps being posted over and over and over, yet you people keep regurgitating the same misinformation as if you haven't already been shown that what you are posting is simply not accurate....why?

[RoBoTeq]

I know I am probably just being naive, but do you have one shred of proof that anyone in high authority conspired with defense contractors to orchestrate a war in Vietnam or anywhere else for the purpose of making greedy contractors rich? I'm sure this opinion is shared by many, but so too is the opinion shared that that WTC 7 was purposely blown up by the Jooz.

Of course there is nothing to show for proof of any conspiracy to initiate war in order to sell war products.....that's why these guys are so good at what they do....

There is absolute proof that LBJ did fabricate the attack in the Gulf of Tonkin though; http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=l8_tv7KTJi0