MSM Spotlights Dunn Trial ; Ignores Blacks Killing Whites

[LoneLaugher]

No wonder you are so stupid, you are an inbred racist.

So you approve of the MSM publicizing white or Hispanic on black crime, but you disapprove of them doing that with black on white crime. You're a hypocrite and a racist.

Same thing I said to Hazelnut goes for you too.

The media has an agenda, gun control. That is why they keep trying to make this case about stand your ground even though it is a simple murder case. That has nothing to do with race, despite your inbred intolerance.

Then again, you should be used to being wrong. Feel free to pretend you just won the argument.

Who is trying to make this case about "stand your ground"? The media?

How ridiculous.

 

[LoneLaugher]

The inferiority complex that grips the OP is very strong. It fuels a hatred so deep that it allows him to empathize with....and embrace....a wretched character like Michael Dunn.

The OP's weak mind hears about a case where a white man is accused of murdering a black man.....and it's first impulse is to side with the accused. It is not to hear the evidence....or consider the realities of the matter. It is to take up sides with the white person. Period.

In this case, the white person is a mealy-mouthed weakling who has yet to display a single redeeming character trait. Not one of his actions that night...or in the ensuing days....leaves the observer with the impression that he is worth a shit. Yet....here we are.....watching a damaged soul carry water for him. Simply because he identifies with his race.

And....to top it all off.....he whines about the media doing damage to his people. As if the media cares about a single thing beyond ratings.

Pathetic.

 

[protectionist]

No I hate no one. I just don't tolerate idiots.

SO, this means you don't tolerate HLN and MSNBC broadcasting the Dunn trial day after day, while ignoring the many black on white crimes/killings going on ? (as Tank and I showed in the New Nation News links)

And it means you think they should either broadcast the Dunn trial less, or the black on white trials more ? One would think (if you don't tolerate idiots)

New Nation News

Why would I tolerate much less pay attention to the Hysterical Ladies Network?

Maybe there's hope for you after all.

 

[protectionist]

The inferiority complex that grips the OP is very strong. It fuels a hatred so deep that it allows him to empathize with....and embrace....a wretched character like Michael Dunn.

The OP's weak mind hears about a case where a white man is accused of murdering a black man.....and it's first impulse is to side with the accused. It is not to hear the evidence....or consider the realities of the matter. It is to take up sides with the white person. Period.

In this case, the white person is a mealy-mouthed weakling who has yet to display a single redeeming character trait. Not one of his actions that night...or in the ensuing days....leaves the observer with the impression that he is worth a shit. Yet....here we are.....watching a damaged soul carry water for him. Simply because he identifies with his race.

And....to top it all off.....he whines about the media doing damage to his people. As if the media cares about a single thing beyond ratings. Pathetic.

Only thing pathetic here is the amazing number of things you got wrong in this post. I lost count.

1. There is no "inferiority complex" (and right off I'm sensing an anger coming from you, which is ruining your post)

2. There is no hatred (hatred of what ?)

3. However "wretched " a person Dunn may or may or not be, that has nothing to do with the MSM focusing on these white on black cases, while ignoring black on white ones (which happens to be the topic of the OP)

4. The words "weak mind" have no basis, and further bolsters the anger impression coming from this poster.

5. There is no evidence that race has anything to do with anybody "siding"with anybody. Dunn's race has absolutely NOTHING to do with it, and you have not shown a shred of evidence that it does.

6. FALSE! My first (and ONLY) impulse is to consider the evidence, which I have considered.

7. It is beginning to appear that the anger you show is coming from the racial aspect of this case, since you keep talking about that, when the facts of the case are apart from that.

8. I am biracial, and there is nothing in my OP or posts to indicate that I identify with Dunn's race.

9. I stated that ratings is why the MSM is acting the way they do. You have no argument there. And I never whined about anything, certainly not the media doing damage to a race.

10. Considering the FACTS of the case, which is ONLY what I'm considering, I see possibly grounds for acquittal, based on the SUV having left the shooting scene, long enough for a gun to be dumped, and police having not checked the area for 4 days.
This leaves open the possiblility that the SUV guys had a gun (witnesses were inconsistent), and that being the case, it could have been self-defense, and certainly leaves saying it wasn't (beyond a reasonable doubt) impossible.
OK ? That is my assessment (which could be identical no matter what anybody's race is). Now if you can tear yourself away from obsessing over race for about 5 minutes, and if you think you have a rebuttal to what I just said here in number 10, then OK, let's hear it. And tell me about the inconsistencies of the witnesses (admitted by John Guy, the prosecutor), the SUV leaving, having enough time to dump a gun, and police not checking for that gun. I don't want to hear all your crap about race. Got it ?

 

[Tank]

Black on white murders and rapes are boring and expected, but a white on black murders is unexpected and entertaining

 

[protectionist]

Black on white murders and rapes are boring and expected, but a white on black murders is unexpected and entertaining

You just might have something there. As always, with the media, it's about rating$ and selling advertising.

 

[Tank]

People want to probe into the mind of a intelligent white killer, but the mind of a black killer is boring and primitive

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

The inferiority complex that grips the OP is very strong. It fuels a hatred so deep that it allows him to empathize with....and embrace....a wretched character like Michael Dunn.

The OP's weak mind hears about a case where a white man is accused of murdering a black man.....and it's first impulse is to side with the accused. It is not to hear the evidence....or consider the realities of the matter. It is to take up sides with the white person. Period.

In this case, the white person is a mealy-mouthed weakling who has yet to display a single redeeming character trait. Not one of his actions that night...or in the ensuing days....leaves the observer with the impression that he is worth a shit. Yet....here we are.....watching a damaged soul carry water for him. Simply because he identifies with his race.

And....to top it all off.....he whines about the media doing damage to his people. As if the media cares about a single thing beyond ratings.

Pathetic.

Agreed.

Just as telling is the desperation of conservatives subscribing to this thread attempting to cast Dunn in the role of being some sort of ‘hero’ and ‘victim’ of their mythical contrivance known as the ‘liberal media.’

 

[Quantum Windbag]

The inferiority complex that grips the OP is very strong. It fuels a hatred so deep that it allows him to empathize with....and embrace....a wretched character like Michael Dunn.

The OP's weak mind hears about a case where a white man is accused of murdering a black man.....and it's first impulse is to side with the accused. It is not to hear the evidence....or consider the realities of the matter. It is to take up sides with the white person. Period.

In this case, the white person is a mealy-mouthed weakling who has yet to display a single redeeming character trait. Not one of his actions that night...or in the ensuing days....leaves the observer with the impression that he is worth a shit. Yet....here we are.....watching a damaged soul carry water for him. Simply because he identifies with his race.

And....to top it all off.....he whines about the media doing damage to his people. As if the media cares about a single thing beyond ratings.

Pathetic.

Agreed.

Just as telling is the desperation of conservatives subscribing to this thread attempting to cast Dunn in the role of being some sort of ‘hero’ and ‘victim’ of their mythical contrivance known as the ‘liberal media.’

Funny how this conservative called the OP an inbred racist and argued that Dunn lied about seeing a shotgun yet you still insist that everyone who is conservative is racist.

 

[protectionist]

The inferiority complex that grips the OP is very strong. It fuels a hatred so deep that it allows him to empathize with....and embrace....a wretched character like Michael Dunn.

The OP's weak mind hears about a case where a white man is accused of murdering a black man.....and it's first impulse is to side with the accused. It is not to hear the evidence....or consider the realities of the matter. It is to take up sides with the white person. Period.

In this case, the white person is a mealy-mouthed weakling who has yet to display a single redeeming character trait. Not one of his actions that night...or in the ensuing days....leaves the observer with the impression that he is worth a shit. Yet....here we are.....watching a damaged soul carry water for him. Simply because he identifies with his race.

And....to top it all off.....he whines about the media doing damage to his people. As if the media cares about a single thing beyond ratings.

Pathetic.

Agreed.

Just as telling is the desperation of conservatives subscribing to this thread attempting to cast Dunn in the role of being some sort of ‘hero’ and ‘victim’ of their mythical contrivance known as the ‘liberal media.’

All you "agreed" to is being an ass. I already thoroughly refuted LoneLaugher's idiotic post in my Post # 44, in which I explained my view, having nothing to do with race. Now, if you can get your computer uncovered from all those race cards, maybe you can answer how there can be a conviction. See # 10 in Post # 44.

I see possibly grounds for acquittal, based on the SUV having left the shooting scene, long enough for a gun to be dumped, and police having not checked the area for 4 days. This leaves open the possibility that the SUV guys had a gun (witnesses were inconsistent), and that being the case, it could have been self-defense, and certainly leaves saying it wasn't (beyond a reasonable doubt) impossible.

Note also that even the prosecutor, John Guy admitted there were inconsistencies in the witness accounts., and in a criminal trial, inconsistencies add up to >>> REASONABLE DOUBT.

So how can you make a case for conviction ?

PS - you call labeling HLN and MSNBS liberal media, a "mythical contrivance". HA HA HA!! Oh please! That would be the mythical contrivance of the year. Is there anyone who doesn't know that these stations are liberal ?
EARTH TO CCJ: MSNBC is far more liberal than Fox is conservative. You want proof ? Just ask.

 

[Politico]

People want to probe into the mind of a intelligent white killer, but the mind of a black killer is boring and primitive

And there you go with the racist shit. Shame insane people don't know they are nuts. I would pay for an honest interview.

 

[LoneLaugher]

The inferiority complex that grips the OP is very strong. It fuels a hatred so deep that it allows him to empathize with....and embrace....a wretched character like Michael Dunn.

The OP's weak mind hears about a case where a white man is accused of murdering a black man.....and it's first impulse is to side with the accused. It is not to hear the evidence....or consider the realities of the matter. It is to take up sides with the white person. Period.

In this case, the white person is a mealy-mouthed weakling who has yet to display a single redeeming character trait. Not one of his actions that night...or in the ensuing days....leaves the observer with the impression that he is worth a shit. Yet....here we are.....watching a damaged soul carry water for him. Simply because he identifies with his race.

And....to top it all off.....he whines about the media doing damage to his people. As if the media cares about a single thing beyond ratings. Pathetic.

Only thing pathetic here is the amazing number of things you got wrong in this post. I lost count.

1. There is no "inferiority complex" (and right off I'm sensing an anger coming from you, which is ruining your post)

2. There is no hatred (hatred of what ?)

3. However "wretched " a person Dunn may or may or not be, that has nothing to do with the MSM focusing on these white on black cases, while ignoring black on white ones (which happens to be the topic of the OP)

4. The words "weak mind" have no basis, and further bolsters the anger impression coming from this poster.

5. There is no evidence that race has anything to do with anybody "siding"with anybody. Dunn's race has absolutely NOTHING to do with it, and you have not shown a shred of evidence that it does.

6. FALSE! My first (and ONLY) impulse is to consider the evidence, which I have considered.

7. It is beginning to appear that the anger you show is coming from the racial aspect of this case, since you keep talking about that, when the facts of the case are apart from that.

8. I am biracial, and there is nothing in my OP or posts to indicate that I identify with Dunn's race.

9. I stated that ratings is why the MSM is acting the way they do. You have no argument there. And I never whined about anything, certainly not the media doing damage to a race.

10. Considering the FACTS of the case, which is ONLY what I'm considering, I see possibly grounds for acquittal, based on the SUV having left the shooting scene, long enough for a gun to be dumped, and police having not checked the area for 4 days.
This leaves open the possiblility that the SUV guys had a gun (witnesses were inconsistent), and that being the case, it could have been self-defense, and certainly leaves saying it wasn't (beyond a reasonable doubt) impossible.
OK ? That is my assessment (which could be identical no matter what anybody's race is). Now if you can tear yourself away from obsessing over race for about 5 minutes, and if you think you have a rebuttal to what I just said here in number 10, then OK, let's hear it. And tell me about the inconsistencies of the witnesses (admitted by John Guy, the prosecutor), the SUV leaving, having enough time to dump a gun, and police not checking for that gun. I don't want to hear all your crap about race. Got it ?

Oh! You are NOT a piece of shit racist who thinks the media is unfair to white people? Why didn't you say so?

 

[protectionist]

The inferiority complex that grips the OP is very strong. It fuels a hatred so deep that it allows him to empathize with....and embrace....a wretched character like Michael Dunn.

The OP's weak mind hears about a case where a white man is accused of murdering a black man.....and it's first impulse is to side with the accused. It is not to hear the evidence....or consider the realities of the matter. It is to take up sides with the white person. Period.

In this case, the white person is a mealy-mouthed weakling who has yet to display a single redeeming character trait. Not one of his actions that night...or in the ensuing days....leaves the observer with the impression that he is worth a shit. Yet....here we are.....watching a damaged soul carry water for him. Simply because he identifies with his race.

And....to top it all off.....he whines about the media doing damage to his people. As if the media cares about a single thing beyond ratings. Pathetic.

Only thing pathetic here is the amazing number of things you got wrong in this post. I lost count.

1. There is no "inferiority complex" (and right off I'm sensing an anger coming from you, which is ruining your post)

2. There is no hatred (hatred of what ?)

3. However "wretched " a person Dunn may or may or not be, that has nothing to do with the MSM focusing on these white on black cases, while ignoring black on white ones (which happens to be the topic of the OP)

4. The words "weak mind" have no basis, and further bolsters the anger impression coming from this poster.

5. There is no evidence that race has anything to do with anybody "siding"with anybody. Dunn's race has absolutely NOTHING to do with it, and you have not shown a shred of evidence that it does.

6. FALSE! My first (and ONLY) impulse is to consider the evidence, which I have considered.

7. It is beginning to appear that the anger you show is coming from the racial aspect of this case, since you keep talking about that, when the facts of the case are apart from that.

8. I am biracial, and there is nothing in my OP or posts to indicate that I identify with Dunn's race.

9. I stated that ratings is why the MSM is acting the way they do. You have no argument there. And I never whined about anything, certainly not the media doing damage to a race.

10. Considering the FACTS of the case, which is ONLY what I'm considering, I see possibly grounds for acquittal, based on the SUV having left the shooting scene, long enough for a gun to be dumped, and police having not checked the area for 4 days.
This leaves open the possiblility that the SUV guys had a gun (witnesses were inconsistent), and that being the case, it could have been self-defense, and certainly leaves saying it wasn't (beyond a reasonable doubt) impossible.
OK ? That is my assessment (which could be identical no matter what anybody's race is). Now if you can tear yourself away from obsessing over race for about 5 minutes, and if you think you have a rebuttal to what I just said here in number 10, then OK, let's hear it. And tell me about the inconsistencies of the witnesses (admitted by John Guy, the prosecutor), the SUV leaving, having enough time to dump a gun, and police not checking for that gun. I don't want to hear all your crap about race. Got it ?

Oh! You are NOT a piece of shit racist who thinks the media is unfair to white people? Why didn't you say so?

I guess because I prefer to stay ON TOPIC (like you should be doing). At this point in the thread, 2 subjects are relevant. First, the MSM ignoring black on white crime, while sensationalizing day by day coverage of white on black crime. While this may be all for ratings, it's still racist, and they shouldn't be exploiting hothead racism (like YOURS for instance) to boost their profits,

Secondly, as long as we are deluged with this trial, we might as well observe it and report it fairly and correctly. There's nothing we can to do about the lost young life, and that's a shame, but also we shouldn't be a lynch mob ranting from racist underpinnings either.

Now, if anybody thinks they can answer what I asked in Post # 50, after reading my perspective on it, let's hear it. How can this trial not be an acquittal ?

PS - if you can't control your anti-white racism, get a dart board with George Wallace's picture on it. That would be better than polluting this thread.

 

[protectionist]

People want to probe into the mind of a intelligent white killer, but the mind of a black killer is boring and primitive

And there you go with the racist shit. Shame insane people don't know they are nuts. I would pay for an honest interview.

I think I would just about pay for someone to answer what I said in Post # 50. Any takers ?

 

[Politico]

The answer to your question is the investigation was bungled just as I said it was. That boils it down to the only word in your post that matters 'Possibility', which equals reasonable doubt which means not guilty. Unfortunately they overcharged as usual so the jury is all confused exactly as I said they would be.

 

[LoneLaugher]

People want to probe into the mind of a intelligent white killer, but the mind of a black killer is boring and primitive

And there you go with the racist shit. Shame insane people don't know they are nuts. I would pay for an honest interview.

I think I would just about pay for someone to answer what I said in Post # 50. Any takers ?

Start a thread with that as the topic, then. This one is about the media not covering black on white murder as vigorously as it covers white on black murder.

You should know. You started it.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/8606276-post1.html

 

[protectionist]

And there you go with the racist shit. Shame insane people don't know they are nuts. I would pay for an honest interview.

I think I would just about pay for someone to answer what I said in Post # 50. Any takers ?

Start a thread with that as the topic, then. This one is about the media not covering black on white murder as vigorously as it covers white on black murder.

You should know. You started it.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/8606276-post1.html

I might also just about pay for someone from the media to be accountable for this huge dichotomy between publicity on white on black crime and black on white crime (which is nearly zero)

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I think I would just about pay for someone to answer what I said in Post # 50. Any takers ?

Start a thread with that as the topic, then. This one is about the media not covering black on white murder as vigorously as it covers white on black murder.

You should know. You started it.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/8606276-post1.html

I might also just about pay for someone from the media to be accountable for this huge dichotomy between publicity on white on black crime and black on white crime (which is nearly zero)

I would pay for you to shut your racist stink hole.

Tell me something, oh might idiot, if the media is all about white on black crime why don't they harp about all the cases of white on black crime that occur? Why are they only whinging about "Stand your ground" cases in Florida that have nothing to do with stand your ground? Could it be that their focus is something other than white on black crime?

 

[protectionist]

Start a thread with that as the topic, then. This one is about the media not covering black on white murder as vigorously as it covers white on black murder.

You should know. You started it.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/8606276-post1.html

I might also just about pay for someone from the media to be accountable for this huge dichotomy between publicity on white on black crime and black on white crime (which is nearly zero)

I would pay for you to shut your racist stink hole.

Tell me something, oh might idiot, if the media is all about white on black crime why don't they harp about all the cases of white on black crime that occur? Why are they only whinging about "Stand your ground" cases in Florida that have nothing to do with stand your ground? Could it be that their focus is something other than white on black crime?

1. I've already stated what their focus is, and smart people all already know.

2. The fact that you bring race into this, shows what a racist pig YOU are.

3. I haven't heard one word about stand your ground in the Dunn case, and it wasn't a factor in the Zimmerman case either. That's another thing you don't need to bring up.

4. You have a distinctive talent. Bringing up irrelevant things.

5. I said before you were a bore. That hasn't changed.

 

[protectionist]

In Post # 11. I said this >> "When I said "the fanatically ultra-liberal MSM", I was referring to that part of the MSM that is fanatically ultra-liberal, namely (on cable news shows) HLN and MSNBC."

What I should have said is >> HLN, MSNBC, and CNN being the worst of the lot. And the two worst offenders, who wear their bias like a badge of honor, are Nancy Grace and Chis Cuomo. Watching a conversation they had about the Dunn trial this morning was disgusting. Everything they said was anti-Dunn and pro-teenagers of the SUV - who we still don't know if they had a gun, and the prosecution never proved they didn't.

Right after that, was a interview that Cuomo had with George Zimmerman. Predicatably, it was totally biased against George, with a string of loaded questions being asked by Cuomo, all appearing to make him look guilty of wrongdoing. Here is a list of some of those questions (in red) followed by my comments, and Zimmerman's (in blue)

1. C: "The victim was Trayvon Martin, you know that."

At this point the recording appears to have been cut into, with something edited out.

P: I would have said Zimmerman was the real victim. He was doing a right thing, providing security for his homeplace, and if Martin attacked him, then Martin got what he asked for. That's not being a "victim". Nobody really knows how this fight started so, it's impossible to say who is the "victim", and Cuomo shouldn't make unsubstantiated assumptions.

Zimmerman himself said "when I was having my head bashed into the concrete, my nose broken, and beaten, so I wouldn't say I was not a victim. "

I wouldn't say he was not a victim either, and especially with the false charges lodged against him, which appeared to be the result of racial agitating by Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson combined with the spinelessness of Florida Gov. Rick Scott, and the maliciousness of Attorney General Angela Corey.

C: "Of this, Zimmerman is sure, despite the public outrage painting him as a racist, and a strong case by a prosecution, calling him a murderer."

P: Saying "public" outrage gives the false impression that everyone is outraged and painting Z as a racist. That's absurd. In a Pew poll, when confronted with the notion > "The issue of race is getting more attention than it deserves", 52% of respondents agreed. Only 13% of blacks agreed. The "public" that Cuomo is referring to are blacks, and most notably those who have some animosity toward whites and what they see as the white establishment. But does Cuomo point that out. Nope. He intentionally makes it sound like everybody thinks George is racist.
And "strong case by a prosecution, calling him a murderer." HA HA. The prosecution had NO CASE period, and everybody knows it, and Angela Corey has herself been brought up on charges for the improper way she charged Zimmerman.

C: "What do you want to say to people who say you went out that night, as a vigilante, looking for trouble, and found it, and bailed yourself out."

P: Clearly, Cuomo is trying to villainize Zimmerman, calling his admirable volunteer security work "vigilante" and saying he was "looking for trouble". Well, EARTH TO CUOMO: As a former licensed security guard, supervisor, and manger, I can tell you that anybody who is providing security in a housing complex IS SUPPOSED TO GO LOOKING FOR TROUBLE. That is part of the expectation. It's called going ON PATROL. If you just sit in one place, and don't go out looking around for breaches of security, you're not going to find them when they occur. You're not going to be able to observe them and report them, which is your fundamental job to do.

I could go on and on with this, but these examples are indicative of the whole interview. Basically, designed to be a slam job on Zimmerman. Nancy Grace does the same thing now with Dunn on her show. 100% biased, unprofessional, gutter-level "journalism". I guess I should have realized what a joke CNN is when they kicked out Lou Dobbs (who is now doing a fine job on the much more fair and balanced Fox News.

http://www.thewrap.com/george-zimmerman-tells-cnns-chris-cuomo-victim-heated-interview/