At 4/28/12 05:19 PM, Feoric wrote:
At 4/28/12 04:34 PM, Korriken wrote:
yes, they are.Just because you would like to think it is to better fit your narrative doesn't mean it is.
What? How is that analogy applicable at all? How does auditioning for a photo shoot have to do with what picture a news story runs with?
it's more closely related than you think. they depicted martin as a featherweight 4 foot tall boy. he was depicted as weak and helpless when it was obviously not the case. and it was done intentionally. misinformation at its finest.
How old was he in that picture?
he looked about 12-14, which funny enough most people thought he was 14 in the beginning until it turned out his age was 17.
You're comparing a 60 year old woman sending in a photo of her on her 18th birthday for a modelling company?
if you're 60 years old and want the modelling company to think you're hot enough for a face to face interview...
How did you think this was at all the same thing?
simple. its called misleading the target audience with fraudulent information.
And honestly your outrage over the picture is kinda disturbing. You're critical of the collective media for using this picture because he looks....like a nice young man? That's your argument?
if it was a current picture, I would say "well, that's his current picture." you want my argument? let's see you answer this question without resorting to trying to appeal to emotions and sidestepping it. "Why did the media, even after getting a current picture of Trayvon, continue to use the babyface picture?"
I mean it's one thing to point out WHY they would use that picture, but to get disgusted with it? You're upset that people think Martin looks like a nice young man? Why? Is it because you would rather him look like this?
if that was an accurate, current picture? yes. Yes I would. Of course, I see what you did there.
Misinformation is not the same as Disinformation. I should have used Misinformation vs Disinformation instead of misleading vs misinformation, my error.
the point is, Journalists, those who job it is to report the news in a fair, unbiased, and accurate way are knowingly using old information and leaving out key information to paint a skewed picture of the situation.
I understand it has no bearing in court.This has been established many many times. By me. Why not instead talk about the bearing it has on himself?
None. there's your answer.
You're assuming that the beating even took place, which we don't know.
I mean I know you're never going to be skeptical over whether or not it happened because I know it's essential for your narrative that he was being viciously beaten but I would at least like to make you ponder the possibility before blocking it out of your head.
I would say the picture of the back of his head, the picture which had a time AND gps coordinate stamp, proving that it was taken just after the gun went off, before cops could arrive and paramedics could clean his head is pretty solid proof that something happened. Also, the guy who took the picture noted the gunpowder burns on Martin's clothes, which is a solid indication that the shot happened at very close range, as in, hand to hand combat range. so yeah, the fight happened. do your homework and drop the emotional appeal.
Not at all, I know it's frustrating to have your arguments picked apart but c'mon, let's not just fall back on "it's just semantics!" or "character assassination!" or "apples and oranges!" because that's just intellectually lazy.
or its pointless.
That sucks, Zimmerman told police he has his head slammed against concrete, not grass.
well, there is that picture the "zimmerman must die" crowd didn't want to see ("graphic" image aka there's some blood on his head)
if I was patrolling my neighborhood, and I see suspicious activity, and I am on the phone with a dispatcher to report said suspicious activity, and the suspicious person in question starts running, and the dispatcher (who is trained to handle emergency calls says to me you don't have to do that I am going to follow the suggestion. I certainly know I have the option to disregard, but why would I? The cops are on the way. The dispatcher advised me not to.
to keep him in your sight so he doesn't find a good hiding place and wait out the cops and then commit his crime?
if the 17 year old kid attacked first, he got himself killed.Y'know, it doesn't really work that way. Actually it doesn't even apply.
it does. stand your ground law is pretty clear on the "if you're attacked, you're not required to try and flee first" aspect. he was not required to try and get away first, not that he could have if he was having his head slammed against the ground.
Undecided? No. I have varying degrees of certainty over what happened that night. I also know that I reserve the right to be completely wrong. We all do. This isn't a courtroom and I'm not on a jury.
true. we'll see what happens next year at the trial, if one even occurs. However, I do expect the charges will be lowered to manslaughter before it begins. the "special" prosecutor probably charged murder in an attempt to try a plea bargain because she knew she had to charge zimmerman to quell the local black community from rioting, and she knows she is in for one hell of a time trying to prove he is guilty of anything other than self defense.Hopefully Zimmerman's attorney isn't a knuckhead... or hopefully Zimmerman doesn't break under the pressure of a murder charge and accept the bargain.
you suck at hiding bias.This is coming from the guy who went on a silly tirade against liberals that wasn't even worth responding to.
I don't try to hide my bias. that's the catch. I know where I stand on issues and so does pretty much everyone else on this board who isn't just now drifting in.