Saturday, April 07, 2012
Whiting George Zimmerman
On Thursday, NBC News quietly fired the producer that edited George Zimmerman's 911 call to make him look like a racist, which termination the New York Times reported on one of its blogs at 7:05 pm last night, but not in its dead-tree paper this morning. Not sure what the deadline situation is (am I the only one who wishes that newspapers would publish their deadline times?), but surely the blog post took a little time to write after the news was in the house.
This morning's Grey Lady does feature a column from Charles Blow (online indicated as "published April 6, 2012," yesterday, but with no time stamp) that parses recent Gallup polling data that purports to show that blacks and white differ in their perception of the Martin-Zimmerman case much as they parted company over O.J. Simpson's guilt. Blow chalks up this up to the unequal treatment of blacks and Hispanics by the authorities, starting with school discipline and ending in prison.
Those inequities persist into adulthood and manifest in things like disproportionate rates of stop-and-frisks for blacks and Hispanics in places such as New York City and in harsher sentences for comparable crimes for blacks and Hispanics.Blow does not mention, of course, that Zimmerman is Hispanic (or, in the official and virtually unique formulation of Blow's paper, a "white Hispanic"), because that would make his argument a lot less effective, even if it remains sustainable on the data. Blow is, of course, intellectually dishonest in this omission. Worse, he is guilty of the same sort of selective editing -- call it "NBC editing," so we put a name to it -- that turned this tragedy in to a racialist circus in the first place.This lifetime of harsher treatment seems to stand in stark contrast to the authorities’ treatment of Zimmerman. This perception of unequal treatment eats away at the psyche of these men and boys of color and erodes their faith in a just and honest society. That is its own tragedy.
The killing of Trayvon Martin is a tragedy even if he was pounding on Zimmerman. The promotion of the case as an opportunity for racial grievance is a national tragedy. As with all national tragedies, there are people who will profit financially or politically from its exploitation. Pay careful attention to who they are. CORRECTION: A reader points out (via Facebook comment) that Blow does mention that Zimmerman is a Hispanic earlier in the article, so I apologize for both my poor reading and my criticism of Mr. Blow. The question remains, though, what the proper narrative ought to be. If Hispanics are also treated unfairly by the system, and if therefore Trayvon Martin is not an archtypical victim of white supremacy or domination, why is there so much outrage in this case?
29 Comments:
By 
W.LindsayWheeler, at
Sat Apr 07, 10:01:00 AM:
"The killing of Trayvon Martin is a tragedy...?"
You've got to be kidding?! Right?
The definition of tragedy is about a great man forced to do one thing yet fate sends another experience which harms him. What happened to Trayvon Martin is NOT a tragedy. It is hyperbole to say so.
Martin was in a gated community. He was someplace he wasn't supposed to be. Second, he was beating another individual. If one observes black behavior in violence, they don't stop. They beat people senseless creating serious injuries. Trayvon was 6' tall, taller than Zimmerman and he was punching the heck out of Zimmerman. Martin was physically assaulting Zimmerman and was continuing the attack when the victim was already down.
Zimmerman's act was 'rough justice'. That is what Martin received and that is the event.
It is the liberal press that is demogoguing this issue and creating a firestorm of deluded opinions. It is throwing gasoline on a matchstick.
There is nothing tragic about Trayvon case. Trayvon and his supporters have to recognize that Fate dealt him just the consequences of his acts. Dealing with Black violence is a very dangerous business for they fly off the hook at the nearest provacation and everything to them is 'disrespect'. They take offense at the slightest reprimand. They explode in anger and fury.
To protect yourself from this situation, Europeans need to be armed.
By PD Quig, at
Sat Apr 07, 10:38:00 AM:
Your generalizations are a bit over the top in my opinion, yet I'm not sure that there is a good explanation why Martin was wandering around in the cold and rain inside a gated community. Whatever his rationale, I'm sure his calculus never factored in a trip to the county morgue.
By 
, at
Sat Apr 07, 11:28:00 AM:
"...NBC News quietly fired the producer that edited George Zimmerman's 911 call..."
DON'T YOU BELIEVE IT!! They are using some Obamaesque creativity in defining the word "fired."The guy is on paid leave/vacation and, when the next fabricated story takes over, he'll quietly move into his new (and better paid) position.
NBC, master of MSNBC, would never "fire" someone for simply trying to right an historical wrong (as the extreme lefties see it).
By darovas, at
Sat Apr 07, 02:12:00 PM:
Blow doesn't mention that Zimmerman is HIspanic?
"The USA Today/Gallup poll found that most blacks believe that George Zimmerman, the Hispanic man who shot and killed Trayvon Martin, a black teenager, in what he claims was an act of self-defense, is definitely guilty of a crime."
By Dawnfire82, at
Sat Apr 07, 03:11:00 PM:
The stars must have aligned and Hastur must be stirring under the Yellow Sign, because I actually agree with something Wheeler wrote.
This kid's shooting was not a "tragedy." He leaped upon and began to savagely beat someone without provocation. Unfortunately for him, his victim was armed and shot him. I'd have done the same thing.
Moreover, if I were to leap upon and begin to savagely beat someone without provocation, I would expect them to use a gun if they had one. This "kid" (a 6'2", drug-using burglar and wannabe thug) got what was coming to him.
After all, what's the fucking point of concealed weapons if people cannot use them to defend themselves against actual bodily harm?
I'd actually like to see more such instances. Maybe if enough bullying thugs get shot waylaying law-abiding citizens, some of them will be deterred.
But thanks to the predictable bullshit of race-hustling fossils and deceitful media propaganda, this isn't about crime and self-defense... noooo, it's about racism and how it's inappropriate, wrong, even evil to defend yourself in your own neighborhood when your attacker is a black kid.
But there's wasn't a peep from these creatures a couple of months ago when a gang of blacks attacked a white kid and set him on fire with gasoline for the "crime" of being white.
What a disgusting society we have.
By Aegon01, at
Sat Apr 07, 04:31:00 PM:
Firstly, I'm rolling my eyes at WLW's Shakespearean definition of a tragedy. Secondly, I'm laughing at his outright racist way of describing the barbarity with how black people fight, and how "they fly off the hook at the nearest provocation." That's also how the cast of Jersey Shore fights. So yeah, I lol'd.
That said, if Zimmerman's account is completely true, then yeah I guess it just sucks for Trayvon that Zimmerman had a gun to defend himself with, and his response was justified.
By darovas, at
Sat Apr 07, 05:11:00 PM:
By Dawnfire82, at
Sat Apr 07, 08:10:00 PM:
I'm... not sure what your point is unless you're just trying to reinforce the totally discredited media narrative of white on black violence. If so, challenge accepted.
First, we have a gang of blacks beating and robbing a white tourist in broad daylight while a crowd not only watches and laughs, but then steals his stuff.
Exhibit two: the same week as the infamous "Trayvon" case, three blacks murdered a white student inside his dorm room. Almost no coverage resulted. Dog bites man, really, as you'll see below.
Exhibit three: a gang of blacks set upon and beat a white man, saying "[Get] that white [man]. This is for Trayvon ... Trayvon lives, white [man]. Kill that white [man]," according to the police report. I wonder what "[man]" replaces?
Exhibit four: gang of blacks (do you see a pattern here?) beat a Hispanic kid so badly that he required restorative surgery.
Not to mention the gasoline-burning I cited before, also perpetrated by a gang of blacks. And these are stories that I just happened to know about already from like the last month.
But if that isn't enough, let's hear from the Department of Justice, shall we? Scientist types are supposed to like numbers.
As proportions go, black on white (which includes most Hispanics, btw) acquaintance homicide has steadily increased from about 4% of homicides to about 7%. White on black has increased from 1.5% to 3.4% in the same period (i.e. one half of the increase of black on white).
For stranger homicide, black on white has fallen from 18.5% to 17.7% and white on black has fallen from 4.7% to 4.5%. In both cases, the black-on-white rate is significantly higher than the reverse.
As far as raw numbers go, in 2005 there were 159 white on black acquaintance homicides and 314 black on white ones. Black on black? 1,957. White on white (and recall that there are several times more whites in the country than blacks) amount to 2,129.
Altogether, the number of acquaintance killings of whites total 2,463, of which blacks caused about 12.7% and whites caused 86.4%. The number of killings of blacks total 2,118, of which whites caused about 7.5% and blacks caused about 92.3%.
In sum, blacks managed to proportionally kill more white acquaintances than whites did blacks, *actually* kill more whites than whites did blacks, and still be responsible for more than 92% of black acquaintance homicides.
The absolute numbers of stranger killings are even more lopsided. Blacks were responsible for more than 28% of stranger killings of whites and 87.6% of killings of blacks.
In every single case, black on white killings are substantially more than white on black killings, while blacks are still responsible for about 90% of black killings *as well.*
That white on black homicide is a serious problem in this country is flat WRONG. Period. If white on black killings were perfectly fair (i.e. in proportion to black populations), there would be MORE of them. White on black killings are actually far BELOW what they should be if victims were determined randomly (12.7%).
The narrative otherwise is complete and total horse-shit.
By , at
Sat Apr 07, 09:07:00 PM:
The race angle that everyone is playing up, including some overt racial slurs on this blog, totally miss the mark. Black, White, Hispanic, Native American all miss the basic dynamic. Zimmerman was a wannabe cop who provoked a confrontation. We know he was told not to chase the kid he ultimately shot because we have a 911 recording telling him not to follow. Does anyone doubt that the fact he had a gun emboldened him to ignore the direction he received? This "confrontation" would never have occurred if Zimmerman didn't feel the power a gun gave him to track down someone that wasn't doing anything illegal. Keep in mind that not one single scenario has Trayvon following Zimmerman and looking to provoke a fight.
By , at
Sat Apr 07, 09:12:00 PM:
It is a sad commentary when this debate centers on the definition of "tragedy". Are you all serious? If these wack statistics re racial violence are correct, does that mean that Treyvon had it coming--just equaling out the stats? Really, I used to read this blog for a libertarian, and educated viewpoint. Has it been highjacked by a bunch of skinheads?
By Aegon01, at
Sun Apr 08, 01:53:00 AM:
Anon @ 9:12
WLW doesn't speak for all of us. In fact it's incredibly rare that anybody agrees with him on anything, as Dawn pointed out. He's kind of our resident troll.
Anon @ 9:07
I basically agree, except that it was his job as a "neighborhood watchman" or whatever in a gated community to look out for people he hadn't seen before walking the streets in the wee hours of the morning. He should have listened to the cops and let them handle it since they have actual authority, and I think you're right about the gun emboldening him to confront Trayvon, but I'm not going to suddenly take an anti-gun stance because some guy got a power high.
By darovas, at
Sun Apr 08, 02:09:00 AM:
What conservatives really think about blacks
By Gary Rosen, at
Sun Apr 08, 02:23:00 AM:
What democrats really think about Jews
You can take that race card and shove it up your ass, darovas. Be thankful I didn't bring up Marion Barry. Next up: what teabaggers really think about gays.
By darovas, at
Sun Apr 08, 02:59:00 AM:
Gary, Derbyshire's list is just a better-publicized version of your friend Dawnfire82's comments above, so who is playing the race card here? By the way, do you agree with Derbyshire? If not, what points of his do you take issue with?
Not sure what you think the Arutz Sheva article is saying. Taken at face value, it says that significant numbers of both Republicans and Democrats "blame Jews" for "the financial crisis" (18.4% among Republicans, 32% among Democrats). [Arutz Sheva is a kosher source for meshuggenehs, but the study seems to be of reliable provenance.] It's unfortunate, but the fact that several high profile financial crooks were Jewish (Madoff, Boesky, Milken, Fastow, et al.) invites suspicion from some, and is twisted to serve the antisemitic purposes of others.
As it turns out, a strong majority of the Democrats I know are Jews.
By Gary Rosen, at
Sun Apr 08, 03:17:00 AM:
"If not, what points of his do you take issue with?"
The same ones you do. Have you stopped beating your wife?
"Not sure what you think the Arutz Sheva article is saying."
That significantly more Democrats hold anti-semitic views than Republicans.
"the fact that several high profile financial crooks were Jewish (Madoff, Boesky, Milken, Fastow, et al.)"
Is this more r-a-a-a-a-cist than Derbyshire, if his facts were correct (I'm not saying they were, I don't know).
Also noting you didn't respond to Barry, or "teabaggers". Is an obscure columnist more significant than a former mayour and current councilman of a major city - the nation's capital, in fact? I am just damn sick and tired of leftists/liberals/democrats claiming moral virtue on grounds of racism when there is so much evidence of racism on their own part.
" a strong majority of the Democrats I know are Jews"
Not this Jew.
By darovas, at
Sun Apr 08, 04:06:00 AM:
Gary, could you please be more explicit in your assessment of the Derbyshire piece? Do you agree with it? If not, on what points do you disagree?
I did not "respond to Barry" because you yourself said that you "didn't bring up Marion Barry". Or by saying that you did not bring up Marion Barry, were you intending to bring up Marion Barry?
By MTF, at
Sun Apr 08, 09:44:00 AM:
Does anyone doubt that the fact he had a gun emboldened him to ignore the direction he received?
Are there any facts proving he ignored the direction he received from the 9-1-1 operator?
Throughout this case Zimmerman has been presumed guilty of Martins murder. First, the news media would have had you believe Z muttered a racist epitaph just before confronting M. That theory is now gone. Z outweighed M by 100 pounds is another MSM meme disproved. Z called 9-1-1 hundreds of times in the preceding 12 month period is yet another falsity the media would have you believe.
Now we are left with this "Z tracked M down against police instruction" meme. Are there any facts to prove this one true?
By W.LindsayWheeler, at
Sun Apr 08, 10:55:00 AM:
I'm at least man enough to put a REAL name to my comments. Others slime away and take pot shots. Does anybody have the courage to stand by what they write?
As to Aegon, the use of the term "troll" is an ad-hominem attack. You don't want to take on the facts of the case but since I buck leftist orthodoxy, I committed crimethink and therefore a "troll". I'm a published author of pretty substantial scientific and classical matters, and I'm a troll?
It is funny to see the liberals and the leftists revolt against the hegemony of the Catholic Church and came up with diversity, tolerance, and free speech in order to attack the control of the Catholic Church in Culture.
So what has the Left done? Set up its own Inquisition. Aegon and friends set up their own Cultural Orthodoxy of Political Correctness and then use ad-hominem attacks to silence the ones that breach their conventional sophistry.
As Benjamin D'Israeli said this ""All is race - there is no other truth". Race is very fundamental to the cosmos. Each race has its own peculiar traits. Race defines culture and Culture defines politics. D'Israeli also said this: "The difference of race is one of the reasons why I fear war may always exist; because race implies difference, difference implies superiority, and superiority leads to predominance."
You can't argue with observable fact. Funny, the Left doesn't care for observable fact but wants to dabble in its pie-in-the-sky sophistries of fantasy. Aegon's position belongs in the fantasy section of a bookshop. And look how "anonymous" accuses us of being "skinheads"! LOL. Another ad-hominem attack. Race is part of reality. Sticking up for own's own is Righteousness. That is a virtue. It is Marxists that want to do away with race that use ad-hominem attacks against their critics in order to slime their character in hopes of winning the argument because they sure do NOT have any facts to back them up with. Their arguments are based on sentimentality.
Fact: African races are dysfunctional. How many White on Black rapes have there been? Hardly any. But Black on White rapes? there is about 10,000 a year or more! The Left and Aegon and his friends will not discuss that. That is Taboo. I'm a Marxist heretic if I mention that there is such a thing as 'race differences'. Race differences is a heresy that they attack and burn at the pillar. So much for their tolerance and diversity. Their double standards is just incredible!
By Aegon01, at
Sun Apr 08, 02:24:00 PM:
Yes, Lindsay, you're a very brave girl for coming out on here with your real name. Personally, I'll use my real name with my posts the day TH does.
Do you know what a troll actually is? The definition of a troll on the Internet is someone who says something inflammatory for the pleasure of making people mad. Maybe I'm stretching the definition a tad since you sincerely believe the things you say.
The Cultural Orthodoxy you mention has simply changed from what it was 50 years ago. Back then you'd have fit right in with that Cultural Orthodoxy, and you'd have tried to "silence" someone like me. I happen to think that saying something like "African races are dysfunctional" is a completely unreasonable thing to say. I happen to think that making all sorts of terrible assumptions about someone based solely on their race, something that they have absolutely no control over, is absolutely vile. Given the right opportunities and the right upbringing, any person can do anything. That's a quintessentially American idea, and one you should be completely on board with.
By W.LindsayWheeler, at
Sun Apr 08, 08:28:00 PM:
Aegon, I'm a guy.
You are right the "cultural orthodoxy" has changed. The cultural orthodoxy is not Cultural Marxism. Amerika is a Marxist country with Marxist morality called 'political correctness' and as I said, "culture defines politics', it is no wonder that we have Marxist president. Our law is Marxist and everytime an employer fills out paperwork about who is working in his business to see how many Africans he has employed and how many women he has employed--that's Marxism. This "equal housing" and this "equal employment" is Marxist. Americans have adopted hook line and sinker the Marxist dogma.
But Aegon, education can not overcome "nature". The pseudo-Aesopin tale of the Scorpion and the Frog. Both thought that 'nature' doesn't have meaning. And so the Scorpion in mid-stream starts to sting the frog and the frog cries out why--and the Scorpion says, it is in my nature to do so.
Nature always effervescences. It is not about education, poverty or such. Why look at sub-Saharan Africa. There is no white oppresion there. Look at former Rhodesia. Under European control, Rhodesia was the bread basket of the world then under African control--they have to ship food in. It's a basket case.
Look at Detroit. Or Philedelphia, the litter capital of the world.
"Given the right upbringing"? Swiss watches are made by Germans who are anal retentive people. Swiss watches are not made in Africa.
Aegon, I'm not an Amerikan anymore. Why would I belong to a Masonic Novus Ordo for? The Novus Ordo that turns the Natural Order upside down?
The biggest thing of the 20th and now the 21st Century is all about race and its destruction by the liberals and the Marxists. Anybody that adheres to political correctness adheres to Marxism a genocidal ideology.
By W.LindsayWheeler, at
Sun Apr 08, 08:34:00 PM:
Aegon, I'm a guy.
You are right the "cultural orthodoxy" has changed. The cultural orthodoxy now is Cultural Marxism. Amerika is a Marxist country with Marxist morality called 'political correctness' and as I said, "culture defines politics', it is no wonder that we have Marxist president. Our law is Marxist and everytime an employer fills out paperwork about who is working in his business to see how many Africans he has employed and how many women he has employed--that's Marxism. This "equal housing" and this "equal employment" is Marxist. Americans have adopted hook line and sinker the Marxist dogma.
But Aegon, education can not overcome "nature". The pseudo-Aesopin tale of the Scorpion and the Frog. Both thought that 'nature' doesn't have meaning. And so the Scorpion in mid-stream starts to sting the frog and the frog cries out why--and the Scorpion says, it is in my nature to do so.
Nature always effervesces. It is not about education, poverty or such. Why look at sub-Saharan Africa. There is no white oppresion there. Look at former Rhodesia. Under European control, Rhodesia was the bread basket of the world then under African control--they have to ship food in. It's a basket case.
Look at Detroit. Or Philedelphia, the litter capital of the world.
"Given the right upbringing"? Swiss watches are made by Germans who are anal retentive people. Swiss watches are not made in Africa.
Aegon, I'm not an Amerikan anymore. Why would I belong to a Masonic Novus Ordo for? The Novus Ordo that turns the Natural Order upside down?
The biggest thing of the 20th and now the 21st Century is all about race and its destruction by the liberals and the Marxists. Anybody that adheres to political correctness adheres to Marxism a genocidal ideology.
By W.LindsayWheeler, at
Sun Apr 08, 08:36:00 PM:
The delete button doesn't work. It is the second post that is the corrected version.
By MTF, at
Sun Apr 08, 08:58:00 PM:
Wheeler, I am so glad not to live in your narrow, bitter, ignorant world. Right now I'm watching the Kinshasha Orchestra perform the Ode To Joy on second hand instruments in the middle of the poorest country in Africa. Those people each offer more to the world than you, and as polluted as I feel reading your post I feel redeemed to see these people at work.
Happy Easter or Passover to all and may everyone (including Wheeler) feel the joy of the season.
By Assistant Village Idiot, at
Sun Apr 08, 09:16:00 PM:
darovas and Anon 9:07 are mindreading. It's just ignorant, and no more need be said about it.
If you find yourself agreeing with them, it is likely because you share their prejudices and leapt to the same narrative.
As for WLW, "troll" isn't the right word. I don't know what the internet term is for "poster child for confirmation bias is."
By , at
Sun Apr 08, 09:30:00 PM:
I'd like to see an actual photograph of what this 'skittles carrying kid' looked like. I'm thinking more wannabee hoodlum than fits the narrative the media put out there. Some of you have cited the arrests in Tulsa ... not to sound 'racist' but the one dude looks Asian (aka not 'white') and I'm told he went out on the 3rd anniversary his dad was murdered by blacks who were not charged with a race crime, or (in his view) adequately punished for the crime. Not that it justifies it (it doesn't) but it's a data point that some might find merits some thought.
I maintain we still know next to nothing about Zimmerman or Martin, or what happened. We may never know. What is clear is that the POTUS racialized it (FL has 17 in the EC), and neglected to focus on so many other heinous crimes. And it's clear to me that this WH hates the right to own a firearm, and wants FL's laws put on public trial.
Dawnfire ... I like the way you think.
By Gary Rosen, at
Mon Apr 09, 02:45:00 AM:
"I maintain we still know next to nothing about Zimmerman or Martin, or what happened. We may never know. What is clear is that the POTUS racialized it (FL has 17 in the EC), and neglected to focus on so many other heinous crimes."
You nailed it, John. Even if it turned out that Zimmerman was trigger-happy and/or motivated by race this is a one-off case that pales in comparison to the ongoing black-on-black violence in the inner cities. Bill Cosby has been talking about this for years but bringing this up doesn't help BO's re-election. He is flinging every identity card (gender, race, probably religion next) he can think of because he needs to divert people's attention from an economy that is still anemic after three years of Hope and Change.
By , at
Mon Apr 09, 03:42:00 PM:
I note a definite decrease in the civility of comments on this blog of late. Perhaps it is due to the emotionally charged issue of Zimmerman/Trayvon, but it is sad to see regardless of the cause.
By , at
Mon Apr 09, 06:44:00 PM:
BTW ... to update a prior post late in this thread. The guy in Tulsa (I've read) is Cherokee, AKA non-white. Which leads to why I'm posting again.
TH ... you asked 'why there is so much outrage'. I believe the answer is that for a long time the accepted script is that White/Caucasian folks are keeping the Colored/Black/AA folks down.
There are powerful forces who make money keeping people pissed off. I've even turned off the TV, since I don't need help to know how to vote, and most of what's on the TV news is brainless trash calculated to piss me off. Likewise, much of what's in the internet 'news'.
This entire matter is a function of election politics, and the politics/business of race relations. Add to it the fact that the Dems do NOT like us owning firearms. They hate the FL law, and have mis-characterized it as 'stand your ground' (not what it's named), with a visualization that a person is a vigilante if he/she chooses a method of self-defense. We have NO dialogue on the countless violent crimes happening every day (yes, much is black/white, or black/black). Why is that (I'll offer ... doesn't fit the script).
... and we have jack squat on fast/furious.
Early on, including on TH's FB page, I had words with some idiot that M was 'attacked' because he was wearing a hoodie. No, but when you wear one you do look like a hoodlum in my opinion. Inflammatory, perhaps, but it's as stupid as saying he was attacked for walking with skittles, or wearing a certain type of footwear.
And I agree ... and confess prone to same, that there is a general lack of civility in the discussion on your wonderful blog. Ease up folks, take a step back and look at the big picture. We do NOT know what happened, or even what this kid looks like. They still have either a image of him at 12, or one of some other black. And Z's pic is of an arrest of 'battery'. I'm divorced. In the throes of it all, my wife punched me in the face and came at me with a knife. If I'd hit her, my attorney advised I'd go to jail. I didn't, so there are no photos of my unshaven wearing orange.
How many articles mention that Z is Hispanic AND a registered DEMOCRAT? So take all the manipulation for what it is.
THINK. And let's wait on due process ...
By , at
Wed Apr 11, 04:36:00 AM:
"By John, at Mon Apr 09, 06:44:00 PM:... The guy in Tulsa (I've read) is Cherokee, AKA non-white..."
I believe the correct terminology would be White Cherokee.
Ps. If you post as Anonymous because you do not want log ln to an account, using the Name/URL (the URL is not required)function achieves the same result only you are not Anonymous.
