Justice for Zimmerman
- Thread starter Adebisi
- Start date
-
Guest, did you like the last podcast notification?? Well here's the second one, and for the third podcast! Yep. This Thursday 8-8-24 at 7pm Central
Go here to check out his podcast thread for info on topics and links!Go into the FoH discord and find the Happy Time Fun Hour channel and give it a listen!
- Status
Adebisi
Clump of Cells
- 27,702
- 32,797
hodj
Vox Populi Jihadi
- 31,672
- 18,377
Here's one of the apologist articles for the way she speaks and communicates stating basically that if you think she doesn't speak well, its because you're a racist who enjoys "language privilege"
http://www.policymic.com/articles/52...t-your-english
Further, apparently the Defense daring to contest her testimony in open court because their job is to defend their client is racist, according to this article.
http://www.policymic.com/articles/52...t-your-english
So basically, if you think Jeantel speaks badly, you bettercheck your privilege.
Further, apparently the Defense daring to contest her testimony in open court because their job is to defend their client is racist, according to this article.
fanaskin
Well known agitator
- 55,887
- 138,036
You can't know that and all the evidence and character evidence points to otherwise.
trayvon had texts about wanting to fight all the time, and to the point of not caring if he got suspended from school he'd rather bloody another kids nose.
Also he turned around walked a football field length then confronted zimmerman, trayvon approached zimmerman not the other way around.
How do you know that evil lizard men shapeshifters didn't instigate the fight numbers? there's no way to disprove that.
Tanoomba
ジョーディーすれいやー
- 10,170
- 1,439
Wrong. Next.
What you're failing to grasp is that the very nature of communication itself is entirely context-sensitive. The prime minister of Japan might be an eloquent and intelligent speaker, but if he tried to talk to you he'd sound like a blubbering idiot. Doesn't make him a bad communicator, it makes him better at communicating the way he learned how to communicate, to the people he learned how to communicate to. In the context of this conversation, I consider you to be a pretty lousy communicator. You're projecting when you should be inferring, and going on tangents that are neither related nor relevant to what we were talking about. That's bad communication.
No. This is a stupid statement.
I've done no such thing. Communication is context-sensitive, and Jeantel is fluent in the language she learned in the context she grew up in. That fact that this language hinders her ability to interact with society at large is something we both agree on. I've said as much several times.
What makes you think people speaking broken English makes me feel better? I think it sucks balls that "Ebonics" has evolved at all. I don't think it's something to take cultural pride in, and I don't think it needs to be defended or protected. I'm just saying, from a communicative standpoint, it functions exactly the same as any language does.
See what I mean about tangents?
Context.
Guess what? Linguists debate the rules of "proper" English all the time. Some people still argue against the use of dangling participles or whether or not you can start a sentence with a conjunction. In the end, the only people who care are linguists because, again, context is everything. The verb "to love" is a non-continuous verb, it can not be used in the progressive tense. That didn't stop McDonald's from pushing their "I'm loving it" campaign. While that may technically be breaking the rules of English, it has since become common usage and the meaning being communicated is extremely clear. I am an English teacher and I will never, ever say "an historic day" or "in hospital" because, while correct, those phrases sound archaic and awkward to me. English is an incredibly complex language whose rules change all the time. As someone who uses textbooks to teach English to non-native speakers, I often point out where sample dialogues sound stiff and unnatural, offering alternatives that will help my students communicate more effectively. English, as it is spoken by millions and millions of people, is not standardized and does not strictly adhere to a set of rules.
Remember what I said about projecting when you should be inferring? No, your jibberish did not constitute a new language. I had to read that sentence twice, slowly, just to figure out what you were trying to say. If you grew up hearing people talk like that and had no problem understanding it and were eventually able to speak it and be understood, then yes, that would be a language. See, you're saying that Ebonics isn't systematic, but what you just wrote is a far better example of non-systematic speech. It's random and chaotic. Ebonics isn't. As broken and full of errors as it is, there is a rhyme and reason to it, which is why people are able to use it to effectively communicate with each other. Heck, even I understood what Jeantel was saying, and don't nobody speak no Ebonics in my neighborhood.
Agreed.
Tanoomba
ジョーディーすれいやー
- 10,170
- 1,439
English itself changes frequently. Many rules that used to be strictly enforced are not just found in outdated textbooks. We add new words to our vernacular all the time, often because of the influence of pop culture. For example, "Google" is now considered a verb, as in "I Googled the Spanish revolution" (although dictionaries have not yet caught up). This is the nature of English and language in general. While your last statement is sarcastic, it's also pretty accurate. To be fair, you can't repeat something yourself and have it become accepted use of the language, but if enough people do that's exactly what happens.
hodj
Vox Populi Jihadi
- 31,672
- 18,377
Assertion fallacy. Next.
Really? Math is a language. If I say 2+2 = 16, am I speaking a new form of math? I mean its just a dialect, right? Everyone I grew up with knew that what I really meant was 2+2=4, its just that anyone else who happens to come across this communication will think I said 2+2=16.
So basically, no because you said so? Great argument there dipshit.
Citation required.
Citation required.
Except it doesn't. As we clearly saw on the stand in the trial.
No, I see another point you're unable to actually counter, so you just write it off.
There is no context. Just saying the word "Context" isn't even coming close to making a point or supporting a position. Its just you, being a bad troll again.
Well, see, that would be a perfect example of how linguistics isn't really a science, and is entirely subjective and more of a humanities field than anything else.
The Elements of Style disagrees with you. So does pretty much every English language instructor around the globe who follows the formalized rules for teaching English to non native speakers.
No, I really don't. I'm pretty sure you don't know what those words mean in the first place.
And I had to listen to Rachel Jeantel's testimony 4 times before I could understand what she was saying. That's the point. It just went over your head though. Which is to be expected.
How dare you question the structure of my language, which I speak natively in my home with my pet goat and my rabbit? Why are you so racist and bigoted, Tanoomba? You don't have the right to define my language and enunciation and grammar for me. Check your fucking privilege.
And yet those changes are systematized and formulaic and employed in English education.
Find me an ebonics educator
Precisely
Vandyn
Blackwing Lair Raider
- 3,656
- 1,382
There is no evidence that he did. Depends also what you mean by 'instigate'. If at worse, he asked Martin who he was, does that constitute instigating?
On the other hand, we do have evidence that Martin wasn't this scared little boy who went running for his life as well as evidence that Martin had Zimmerman in a dominate position for at least 40+ seconds (the length of the screaming).
Cad
scientia potentia est
- 25,028
- 47,140
Yea yea, Pat Buchanan, etc etc... but the figures are interesting
Black America's Real Problem Isn't White Racism
In the aftermath of the acquittal of George Zimmerman, Eric Holder, Al Sharpton and Ben Jealous of the NAACP are calling on the black community to rise up in national protest. Yet they know - and Barack Obama, whose silence speaks volumes, knows - nothing is going to happen.
"Stand-Your-Ground" laws in Florida and other states are not going to be repealed. George Zimmerman is not going to be prosecuted for a federal "hate crime" in the death of Trayvon Martin. The result of all this ginned-up rage that has produced vandalism and violence is simply going to be an ever-deepening racial divide. Consider the matter of crime and fear of crime.
From listening to cable channels and hearing Holder, Sharpton, Jealous and others, one would think the great threat to black children today emanates from white vigilantes and white cops. Hence, every black father must have a "conversation" with his son, warning him not to resist or run if pulled over or hassled by a cop. Make the wrong move, son, and you may be dead is the implication.
But is this the reality in Black America?
When Holder delivered his 2009 "nation-of-cowards" speech blaming racism for racial separation, Manhattan Institute's Heather Mac Donald suggested that our attorney general study his crime statistics.
In New York from January to June 2008, 83 percent of all gun assailants were black, according to witnesses and victims, though blacks were only 24 percent of the population. Blacks and Hispanics together accounted for 98 percent of all gun assailants. Forty-nine of every 50 muggings and murders in the Big Apple were the work of black or Hispanic criminals.
New York Police Commissioner Ray Kelly confirms Mac Donald's facts. Blacks and Hispanics commit 96 percent of all crimes in the city, he says, but only 85 percent of the stop-and-frisks are of blacks and Hispanics. And these may involve the kind of pat-downs all of us have had at the airport. Is stop-and-frisk the work of racist cops in New York, where the crime rate has been driven down to levels unseen in decades?
According to Kelly, a majority of his police force, which he has been able to cut from 41,000 officers to 35,000, is now made up of minorities. But blacks are also, per capita, the principal victims of crime. Would black fathers prefer their sons to grow up in Chicago, rather than low-crime New York City, with its stop-and-frisk policy?
Fernando Mateo, head of the New York taxicab union, urges his drivers to profile blacks and Hispanics for their own safety: "The God's honest truth is that 99 percent of the people that are robbing, stealing, killing these drivers are blacks and Hispanics."
Mateo is what The New York Times would describe as "a black Hispanic" Yet he may be closer to the 'hood than Holder, who says he was stopped by police when running to a movie - in Georgetown. Which raises a relevant question. Georgetown is an elitist enclave of a national capital that has been ruled by black mayors for half a century. It's never had a white mayor.
Is Holder saying we've got racist cops in the district where Obama carried 86 percent of the white vote and 97 percent of the black vote? And his son should fear the white cops in Washington, D.C.?
What about interracial crime, white-on-black attacks and the reverse?
After researching the FBI numbers for "Suicide of a Superpower," this writer concluded: "An analysis of 'single offender victimization figures' from the FBI for 2007 finds blacks committed 433,934 crimes against whites, eight times the 55,685 whites committed against blacks. Interracial rape is almost exclusively black on white - with 14,000 assaults on white women by African Americans in 2007. Not one case of a white sexual assault on a black female was found in the FBI study."
Though blacks are outnumbered 5-to-1 in the population by whites, they commit eight times as many crimes against whites as the reverse. By those 2007 numbers, a black male was 40 times as likely to assault a white person as the reverse.
If interracial crime is the ugliest manifestation of racism, what does this tell us about where racism really resides - in America? And if the FBI stats for 2007 represent an average year since the Tawana Brawley rape-hoax of 1987, over one-third of a million white women have been sexually assaulted by black males since 1987 - with no visible protest from the civil rights leadership.
Today, 73 percent of all black kids are born out of wedlock. Growing up, these kids drop out, use drugs, are unemployed, commit crimes and are incarcerated at many times the rate of Asians and whites - or Hispanics, who are taking the jobs that used to go to young black Americans.
Are white vigilantes or white cops really Black America's problem?
Obama seems not to think so. The Rev. Sharpton notwithstanding, he is touting Ray Kelly as a possible chief of homeland security.
http://news.yahoo.com/black-americas...070000529.html
Black America's Real Problem Isn't White Racism
In the aftermath of the acquittal of George Zimmerman, Eric Holder, Al Sharpton and Ben Jealous of the NAACP are calling on the black community to rise up in national protest. Yet they know - and Barack Obama, whose silence speaks volumes, knows - nothing is going to happen.
"Stand-Your-Ground" laws in Florida and other states are not going to be repealed. George Zimmerman is not going to be prosecuted for a federal "hate crime" in the death of Trayvon Martin. The result of all this ginned-up rage that has produced vandalism and violence is simply going to be an ever-deepening racial divide. Consider the matter of crime and fear of crime.
From listening to cable channels and hearing Holder, Sharpton, Jealous and others, one would think the great threat to black children today emanates from white vigilantes and white cops. Hence, every black father must have a "conversation" with his son, warning him not to resist or run if pulled over or hassled by a cop. Make the wrong move, son, and you may be dead is the implication.
But is this the reality in Black America?
When Holder delivered his 2009 "nation-of-cowards" speech blaming racism for racial separation, Manhattan Institute's Heather Mac Donald suggested that our attorney general study his crime statistics.
In New York from January to June 2008, 83 percent of all gun assailants were black, according to witnesses and victims, though blacks were only 24 percent of the population. Blacks and Hispanics together accounted for 98 percent of all gun assailants. Forty-nine of every 50 muggings and murders in the Big Apple were the work of black or Hispanic criminals.
New York Police Commissioner Ray Kelly confirms Mac Donald's facts. Blacks and Hispanics commit 96 percent of all crimes in the city, he says, but only 85 percent of the stop-and-frisks are of blacks and Hispanics. And these may involve the kind of pat-downs all of us have had at the airport. Is stop-and-frisk the work of racist cops in New York, where the crime rate has been driven down to levels unseen in decades?
According to Kelly, a majority of his police force, which he has been able to cut from 41,000 officers to 35,000, is now made up of minorities. But blacks are also, per capita, the principal victims of crime. Would black fathers prefer their sons to grow up in Chicago, rather than low-crime New York City, with its stop-and-frisk policy?
Fernando Mateo, head of the New York taxicab union, urges his drivers to profile blacks and Hispanics for their own safety: "The God's honest truth is that 99 percent of the people that are robbing, stealing, killing these drivers are blacks and Hispanics."
Mateo is what The New York Times would describe as "a black Hispanic" Yet he may be closer to the 'hood than Holder, who says he was stopped by police when running to a movie - in Georgetown. Which raises a relevant question. Georgetown is an elitist enclave of a national capital that has been ruled by black mayors for half a century. It's never had a white mayor.
Is Holder saying we've got racist cops in the district where Obama carried 86 percent of the white vote and 97 percent of the black vote? And his son should fear the white cops in Washington, D.C.?
What about interracial crime, white-on-black attacks and the reverse?
After researching the FBI numbers for "Suicide of a Superpower," this writer concluded: "An analysis of 'single offender victimization figures' from the FBI for 2007 finds blacks committed 433,934 crimes against whites, eight times the 55,685 whites committed against blacks. Interracial rape is almost exclusively black on white - with 14,000 assaults on white women by African Americans in 2007. Not one case of a white sexual assault on a black female was found in the FBI study."
Though blacks are outnumbered 5-to-1 in the population by whites, they commit eight times as many crimes against whites as the reverse. By those 2007 numbers, a black male was 40 times as likely to assault a white person as the reverse.
If interracial crime is the ugliest manifestation of racism, what does this tell us about where racism really resides - in America? And if the FBI stats for 2007 represent an average year since the Tawana Brawley rape-hoax of 1987, over one-third of a million white women have been sexually assaulted by black males since 1987 - with no visible protest from the civil rights leadership.
Today, 73 percent of all black kids are born out of wedlock. Growing up, these kids drop out, use drugs, are unemployed, commit crimes and are incarcerated at many times the rate of Asians and whites - or Hispanics, who are taking the jobs that used to go to young black Americans.
Are white vigilantes or white cops really Black America's problem?
Obama seems not to think so. The Rev. Sharpton notwithstanding, he is touting Ray Kelly as a possible chief of homeland security.
http://news.yahoo.com/black-americas...070000529.html
Tanoomba
ジョーディーすれいやー
- 10,170
- 1,439
Gavinmad
Mr. Poopybutthole
- 43,280
- 52,309
Well, there was some dispute several pages ago about that 'zero cases of a white sexual assault on a black female' assertion. Also, if there are so many more white people than black people, from a strictly statistical sense it makes sense that there would be more black on white crime than black on white crime, since there are substantially more white people in the available victim pool.
hodj
Vox Populi Jihadi
- 31,672
- 18,377
Your tacit admission you don't know what you're talking about, again, is accepted.
SO, what I'm reading here is, TM is the only person caught using racial slurs, and his assault is a hate crime?
hodj
Vox Populi Jihadi
- 31,672
- 18,377
Arbitrary
Tranny Chaser
- 28,244
- 75,987
I don't necessarily agree. With all the white people out there committing crimes and given how greatly they out number blacks I would think that the numbers shouldn't be so stark in contrast. We've got 433,934 crimes against whites and only 55,685 crimes by whites committed against blacks. On a nominal level whites should be beating out everyone in terms of victimization due to their over representation.
Tanoomba
ジョーディーすれいやー
- 10,170
- 1,439
Here's the situation:
I studied language acquisition. It's important to what I do. I'm not an authority by any means, but when I tell you something about the nature of language, it's because that's a conclusion generations of people studying languages and language acquisition have come to. You respond with out-of-your-ass bullshit that is objectively wrong, after once again missing the point I've made, and then congratulate yourself on winning the argument you made up in your head. You constantly, constantly demand "proof" of arguments being made against you, but you have clearly shown that you are more than willing to ignore proof altogether if it doesn't suit your needs. This board is your personal masturbation chamber, and you're just here to spooge on our faces. If that's how you get your jollies that's totally fine (more power to you), but don't pretend you're actually engaging in some kind of debate.
I propose you get infracted every time you complain about other people's posts.
Simply raging teenage hormones and wrestling with the emotional pain of a split up family coming through in his emails. We don't know for sure that Martin went back looking for a fight. You're just blinded by your racial hatred.
- Status