Zim Zam paints Confederate battle flag to raise money for

Motherfucker, I'm pissed. You just accused me of going at length about something that you alleged I knew nothing about, and then wrote three times as much with a bunch of outright garbage.

There were two witnesses. One claimed Zimmerman was on top, but was far away, and couldn't see any striking, merely that one was on top.

The other witness also couldn't identify either party when he saw them fighting, but named Martin's shirt color as being the one on top, and said that he thought the person on top was was striking at the person below him. He also thought that they were dogs at first, which should tell you how much visibility he had, and per the cross-examination, the witness couldn't actually see any punches being thrown.

He also wasn't even sure which of them yelled, merely that it was yelling, and he assumed that the person on the bottom would be the one doing the yelling.

There was no testimony suggesting that TM was slamming zimmerman's head against the concrete, or anything beyond punching, and frankly, neither witness was sure about which one was doing it, just that there was one on top punching at the other.

I guess this was all self-inflicted while he was on top of Martin beating him up:

http://www.cbsnews.com/pictures/george-zimmermans-injuries/

Meanwhile, there isn't a mark on Martin's face. Do you know of any injuries to him other than the gunshot wound?

Every indication is that Martin was beating him from an extremely dominant (mounted) position. He had injuries to the back of his scalp and face and the screaming was coming from the person on the bottom.

The witnesses weren't 100% sure that they saw striking but they thought they did. That's pretty irrelevant in the presence of physical evidence that it happened.
 
The Islamaphobe label is synonymous with common sense if one accepts the facts of this wicked religion and the manner in which millions of fellow humans are treated with not only its approval but also cooperation. To go even farther, many of the atrocities visited upon the poor populations unlucky enough to be born in the Muslim world can be directly tied to the religion's teachings.

ISIS flags are worn in America, sold in America, yet we never hear liberals throwing a fit over that. We hear of this "war on women", which I guess means some women get paid a little less? I've never seen it, every woman who works in my office makes more than I, but regardless this seems to pale in comparison to the organized, structured, and mandated way women are routinely abused in the Muslim world. Yet the same SJWs that see a female CEO making $7.5million annually as opposed to the $10million some random male CEO made as such an atrocity they label it a "war" either completely turn a blind eye to the actual abuses, maimings, and killings targeting women in the Muslim world and excuse such as just part of their "culture" that we rational, moral Westerners need to learn to accept or be labeled things like Islamaphobe.

Do I hate Islam for warping the minds and laws of the richest nation in the middle east, one America has found itself unfortunately supporting on the world stage, allowing that dictatorial kingdom to violate human rights on a daily basis. Do I hate that we support a country that has daily public mutilations, beheadings, and stonings? A country where homosexuals will be killed if discovered, where terrorists find refuge and a welcoming place to expand their inner hatred, a "kingdom" where women are considered third-class citizens and oftentimes treated as the property of their fathers or husbands?

Yeah, all good reasons to hate an violent ideology wrapped in the guise of religion that teaches its followers to do and believe such wretched things. One that claims over 1 billion followers worldwide, of them around 10% total worldwide but upwards of 40% in some countries publicly stating that suicide bombings of civilians is an acceptable tactic and justified. That is deserving of hate.

So by labeling someone an Islamaphobe I'm assuming you don't believe their hatred justified, even if they told you it was because of religious teachings that allow and even promotes a man keeping sex slaves, yet calls for two consenting adulterers to be punished with stoning? More on stoning, you know even in modern times over half of Muslims worldwide believe stoning as acceptable punishment for an adulterer? Might be due to the recent fatwa that stated in part that Muslims who criticized Sharia punishments were in dangers of apostasy themselves.

I'm assuming you can guess what this vehicle of spirituality assigns as punishment for apostasy, right?

But all this is fine and dandy with the leftist circles here in the west. A drunk college kid has sex with another drunk college kid and sudden we're living in a "rape culture" of epidemic proportions, yet there are actually millions upon millions of women living under governments that not only won't protect them from rape or punish their rapists, but one that will actually punish the victim for speaking out about her rape! Not deserving of the label "rape culture" even though that culture and its holy book allows sex slaves! If you're a slave, it is always rape every time. And this religion so edifies these owner-property relations that the rape that occurs is the only sexual intercourse in the entire religion that is technically allowed outside the confines of a marriage. So according to this religion of peace that supposed invented mathematics while we were still perfecting cave drawings won't allow a young man and young woman to enjoy each other on penalty of death, I guess just telling the man to go rape his slave until the urge for consensual sex with his loved one goes away. Of course no mind is paid to the female in this case, as for her to even admit she wanted sex would be grounds for punishment and a possibly a turn-off for her rapist boyfriend/future husband.

Yeah you're right, anyone who would hate this religion of peace must be a bigot.

Meanwhile Islam is completely excused any bigotry its followers hold and publicly espouse, not just overseas but right here in the good ol' USA. Of course everyone has heard about the Christian baker, that despicable person who didn't want to bake a gay wedding cake for the homosexual couple who had targeted his business for predatory litigation and an easy payday, but have you ever seen the video a group made where they went to every wedding cake shop in Dearborn, MI asking the Muslim proprietors the same request. They didn't get a polite, meek refusal and an explanation why baking such a cake was at odds with the teachings of their religion. Oh no, Dearborn Muslim bakers were much more vocal in their refusal, most times physically pushing the couple out the door while shouting homosexual slurs.

No lawsuits, since these group went to Dearborn to capture this very reaction and highlight the glaring difference in application of law and forced adherence to the dictated cultural norm of secularism.

Christians are forced to bake that cake, and charged $135k in a verdict which forced them out of business. Meanwhile Muslim bakers are excused and free of being drug into court over refusing to bake gay cakes. I guess their religion is more important to them and deserves to be overlooked by the government.

In Muslim communities all over the world, even in the US, such things as female genital mutilation of infants, honor killings of promiscuous or raped daughters, and lets not forget always a steady supply of instruction on how and why to wage terrorism against the Great Satan(that's us, by the way!) is commonplace and still accepted by mainstream followers of this religion and liberals here in America ignore it. Yet studiously go over campaign finance reports and find a Christian CEO who donated a pittance to Prop 8 ten years ago and we have the makings of a national witchhunt until the poor guy loses his position. Lost his job and his reputation, just over donating to the political side that, of note, won the majority of voters in California that year in an election last decade.

Too bad we don't have detailed voting records, we could scour through them with equal zeal and ensure all 7,000,000 Californians who voted Yes on Prop 8 that year are soon looking for work.

Yeah, Islam is great man, its Christians we need to be going after. They are really the cause for all the evils and strife in the world today. Just look at such atrocities like the Crusades, where Christians at the Massacre at Ayyadieh killed 3000 Muslim soldiers only 824 years ago! Or how about that horrid Spanish Inquisition, where the actual Christian church prosecuted and ultimately executed somewhere between 2000-5000 people not that long back, I think around 15-20 years before Columbus crossed the ocean and came to North America.

Now I see how some can say Christianity is just as bad as Islam, certainly.

Muslims could modernize, I ask Christians today about their holy book and some of the batshit crazy things like taking slaves and raping the daughters of defeated foes, and you know how they respond? "Oh, it is just like crab meat and pork, that's all old testament and we don't follow those teachings anymore." BAM, problem solved. Hey, your nutty desert faith still has crazy tales of talking bushes and global floods, but at least you can excise the evil and cruel commandments supposedly passed to you by your deity two millennium ago. What's stopping Islam from doing the same? I'll start, how about we change Sharia law to say instead of stoning a guy to death for cheating on his wife we simply perform this ancient ritual called a "divorce", and since the husband was the adulter our wise Imam judges will simply have the wife gang-raped....wait, no, they will grant her a larger cut of the communal property. Yeah, that sounds more post 16th century to me. Oh, oh, I got another one. Instead of commanding all Muslims to wage war on the infidel and slaughter all who refuse to convert to Islam we set aside some of that oil money to buy Korans and put in hotel rooms like the Gideons do with Christian Bibles! I wonder, which do you think would lead to more converts, forcing them at the point of a sword upon fear of death? Or exposure to some of the Holy, Allah-inspired Word while the infidel is waiting for room service? One more, can't take all the good ideas for reformation of Islam: instead of killing a friend you've went to mosque with since childhood simply for growing out of sky daddy and his child-marrying prophet after reading one too many science books, how about we just remove their name from the mailing list and rescind his invitation to the Ramandan hunger party? Simple, less messy, and you save your religion from looking like a Copper Age death cult.

Some good shit right here, could not have said it better. It's so obvious, it hurts. Islam apologists should be slapped repeatedly.
 
I guess this was all self-inflicted while he was on top of Martin beating him up:

http://www.cbsnews.com/pictures/george-zimmermans-injuries/

Meanwhile, there isn't a mark on Martin's face. Do you know of any injuries to him other than the gunshot wound?

Every indication is that Martin was beating him from an extremely dominant (mounted) position. He had injuries to the back of his scalp and face and the screaming was coming from the person on the bottom.

The witnesses weren't 100% sure that they saw striking but they thought they did. That's pretty irrelevant in the presence of physical evidence that it happened.

Where on earth did I claim "self inflicted?"
 
You do realize that the trajectory of GZ's shot was fired up and not down, right?
 
You do realize that the trajectory of GZ's shot was fired up and not down, right?

Not sure what that was about, but that (and other physical evidence) were not germane to a discussion of witness testimony, and that was the claim that I was replying to.

Yes, they can show things that the witnesses failed to prove, but if some dumb motherfucker says "the witnesses said the gun was fired upwards" (no dumb motherfuckers have said this, to my knowledge), then they are just as wrong if they claim "it was WITNESS TESTIMONY that established these 'facts,'" when it was mostly physical evidence suggesting that certain events had occurred.
 
I didn't say anything about witness testimony.
 
Back
Top