Here is a quote of exactly what you said.
http://www.debatepolitics.com/break...artin-photos-stormfront-6.html#post1060342146
False.
I am asssuming that Zimmerman is racist because I heard the word coon.
:rofl And that is true. I did hear the word coon when I listened to the recording. Did you know that I quoted two sentences of yours, though? One was accurate, one was a lie. I figured that your penchant for ignoring large swaths of words in posts would lead you to ignore the second sentence, and I was not dissapointed.
You also said "Those examples you gave were you being facetious or sarcastic." Which is pure bull****. And you just provided the evidence proving that that claim is bull**** and therefore, you liar.
As anyone who actually reads that paragraph that quoted can see, I also said "
As I noted before, though, the best argument I have heard with regard to what he said as far as creating the benefit of the doubt on his racism is that he might have said "goon". That actually makes sense in the context of the phone call and, to be honest, it provides enough basis for me to alter my opinion that he is definitely a racist. Now I would say it really depends on whether he said "goon" or "coon".
Now, you can see that my example of GOON was neither facetious nor sarcastic. In fact, I retracted my
previous claims about Zimmerman being a racist
based on that example. The fact that the sentences where I did this are immediately
after the one you quoted proves that you are a liar. You can't claim your didn't see them because YOU must have seen them.
The best thing about it is that
you have provided the evidence that proves you are a liar. Well done.
See, what I heard is what I heard. Learning that I might have heard incorrectly doesn't change what I heard when I listened to the audio. That's just a fact of reality.
If someone normally carries a gun then they will carry it with them where ever they can legally carry it.
And if they are following random strangers they are not normal. People who follow random strangers aren't normal.
When they do this while armed, they are abnormal people who have become a danger to themselves and others.
If a normal person is on neighborhood watching watching his and his neighbors property then he is going to watch the suspicious person until the cops can get there and maybe even ask the suspicious person what they are doing.
Watching =/= following. Stop lying in order to pretend you have a point.
Only a ****ing idiot would follow a potential criminal. Are you saying being a ****ing idiot is the norm?
A lot can happen in between the time the cops are called and when they show up.
Of course I know that a lot can happen before the police arrive. For example, the ****ing idiot who becomes a danger to himself and others by following random stranger while armed can end up killing an innocent person.
Or in cases where the person being followed
isn't an inocent person and is actually a criminal, the ****ing idiot who thinks he's a cowboy can get himself killed by said criminal who doesn't appreciate being followed by a ****ing idiot who thinks he's a cowboy.
At any rate, we've pretty much established the fact that Zimmerman was being a ****ing idiot (and that his extraordinary idiocy has ruined multiple people's lives). Now, unless you think that being a ****ing idiot is normal, we've
also established that Zimmerman was
not behaving like a normal person would.
I never claimed neighborhood watch equal police.
They why did you say that it was the job of someone in the neighborhood WATCH to keep the neighborhood safe from crime when that's
not the job of the neighborhood watch?