Sitting during the Star Spangled Banner is a Gesture of Ignorance

The police did not cause the deplorable conditions that blacks must endure in Democrat run cities; it is the end product of Democrat social engineering and failed policies. Blacks today are f

The police did not cause the deplorable conditions that blacks must endure in Democrat run cities; it is the end product of Democrat social engineering and failed policies. Blacks today are forced on to "Uncle Sam's Plantation"* due mainly to their dependence on government and the destruction of the black family. The end result is high crime, to which the police are sent to keep order; but the Democrats and black racebaiters like Al Sharpton, try and do a very good job of transferring the anger to the police that are just doing their job. The reality is some 95% of blacks shot by police are armed, while the leading cause of death of black males is homicide by other blacks. IOW the problem is based in the government social engineering that paid black families more if the father was not living in the house and the Democrat propaganda that blacks can't make it in a white world, that blacks don't have to follow the law, and the police are slaughtering unarmed blacks by the thousands (again completely untrue). And the 49er that refused to stand for SSB, rather than making a statement of protest, he is making a statement of ignorance.

*Back on Uncle Sam's Plantation" Star Parker http://townhall.com/columnists...

SSB is and always has been a tribute to our brothers in arms, that fought, and the many that died, to win and preserve the freedom and liberties we as Americans have enjoyed since we declared our independence in 1776. To not honor our national anthem is to piss on the graves of all those that gave everything (and are unfortunately still giving), so we can live free. 

The Biggest Lie of 2014; "Hands up, Don't shoot";

In 2013 the biggest lie of the year was, "If you like your health-care plan, you can keep it." The biggest lie in 2014 has got to be, "Hands up, don't shoot." From the very beginning the Ferguson narrative that a seasoned veteran police officer murdered a unarmed suspect that was surrendering simply didn't pass the smell test. This narrative was first perpetrated by several questionable witnesses and soon after the autopsy results put  "Hands up, don't shoot" in a very questionable light; predictably however the main street media ran with the story and police Officer Darren Wilson and the Ferguson Police Department became ground zero for police violence against blacks. This also attracted the likes of  race-baiter  Al Sharpton, who continues to monetarily profit by stoking the fires of racism and black vicitimism. Well the DOJ report is in and it categorically refutes the  "Hands up, don't shoot" narrative, placing Michael Brown as instigator and controller of his own destiny. The left then adds insult to injury by claiming blacks have a right to the false narrative because of the discrimination they have experienced at the hands of the police; that it is the fault of the police that the false narrative was embraced. It would seem that the police internal affairs have enough trouble trying to investigating what might be real claims of police misconduct, then have to defend themselves from imaginary police conduct.

 "According to these witnesses, who are corroborated by blood evidence in the roadway," the inquiry states, "Wilson fired at Brown in what appeared to be self-defense and stopped firing once Brown fell to the ground...There is no evidence upon which prosecutors can rely to disprove Wilson's stated subjective belief that he feared for his safety,'' the report concludes. DOJ Ferguson Inquiry; Another interesting point is the majority of honest witnesses that testified to the truth had been constantly threatened to lie and maintain the falsehood of the "Hands up, don't shoot" narrative. Ferguson Grand Jury Witnesses often Cited Fear in Testifying.  But this is certainly no surprise to anyone. The left, in league with the main street media has made an art form out of fabricating narratives and stoking the fires of racial unrest. Who can forget the New York Times describing George Zimmerman a white Hispanic, in order to make the Trayvon Martin shooting a black/white issue; and NBC alters a 911 audio tape to make it sound like George Zimmerman was a racists. It's no great secret that a large percentage of American blacks have been relegated to live in isolated black identified neighborhoods that offer more violence, weaker schools and fewer jobs than  whites of the same economic class; and this is where black cognitive dissidence  comes in. Democrats have continually given blacks nothing more then lip service, keeping them marginalized by maintaining their victim mentality and taking for granted the black voting block while they turn their attention to Unions and court liberal rich political donors.

The big lie from the left is how the police discriminate against blacks and due to institutional racism the black man can not succeed in America today. While racism has not disappeared, the police still go where the crimes are being committed and socioeconomic reality of blacks is they commit more crimes than whites. It is not racism that holds the black community down, it is the result of the systematic destruction of the black family and the left passing off black crime as acceptable civil disobedience (not to mention the misogyny of gangster rap) . Black on black crime is a pandemic, but ignored by Democrats and the main street media. Black on black crime is a pandemic, but ignored by Democrats and the main street media. It's much easier to blame the cops than to face the reality that progressive social engineering with the black community has been a disaster.

 If you’re going to correctly compare the rates at which police kill black and white male teenagers, you have to compare teenage crime rates. You can’t just compare crime rates among the entire black and white populations. The rate that these teenagers commit murder, not including rape and other less serious crimes, also provides a somewhat better measure of the perceived threat that they might pose to police...Among blacks, teenage crime is much more prevalent. Based on the most recent available FBI crime numbers, black male teenagers were nine times more likely to commit murder than were their white counterparts. That’s right, nine times, and the gap in these urban areas is undoubtedly even larger  Dangerous Distortions of Cops Shooting Blacks. Instead the left continues to forward the "Hands up, don't shoot" fallacy; that young unarmed black men are being routinely murdered by the police, when the fact is it's a very rare occurrence; in a country of 300 million people, one might be surprised to learn that the number of (ruled) justifiable killings by police (which is the vast majority) is usually less than 400. So, considering the social and racial damage done,  the attempted coercion of witnesses to lie and the fact that the powers that be knew it was a false narrative, "Hands up, don't shoot" is certainly the leading candidate for the biggest lie of 2014.

Why Justice for Michael Brown? and 20/20 Hindsight

It has become obvious that like a reverse form of the Jim Crow laws in the old South, the Black Community believes  that any time a black is killed (especially if the black is unarmed) there is no defense; it is a defacto racist killing. Immediately after the shooting of black Michael Brown by while Police Officer Darren Wilson, the media aired the usual false narrative (the victim was not doing anything and the cop just murdered him), always initiated from a subjective source. This narrative is always extremely simplistic  and void of any real evidence; however it is quickly codified by the media, hungry to sell the narrative that shows the victimization of blacks. Then comes the black activist (Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton and Eric Holder) to make sure black community have been properly race baited to turn on their own community.  Once this narrative is codified, it is used to convict the white police officer in the court of public opinion. What is usually missing from the narrative is always common sense. First, policemen like Off Wilson, a white police officer in a black community, has probably had numerous occasions where he could have justified shooting an unarmed black, but he was never done so; six years of service and he has never fired his firearm in the line of duty. So something different must have occurred.

There is also the second guessing of the officers actions; Why didn't he use a taser? Why didn't he use  rubber bullets; How come he had to shot so many bullets? Most of these questions can be answered by how short  time was compressed (how much time Off Wilson had to make any decisions) between the time the fight in the Off Wilson fought Michael Brown for his pistol and when Off Wilson shot Michael Brown dead. As a matter of fact, the fight over Off Wilson's pistol pretty much determined the sequence of evens afterward. If there is one thing that will trigger the fight or flight response in a police officer it is a fight to retain his firearm. In this case two bullets were fired and Off Wilson's eye socket was shattered during the fight; at this point I imagine Off Wilson  responded mostly out of instinct. (edit) Another subject that is rarely discussed, but known well by Police Officers and is a vital part of their training, is that a surprising number of Police Officers are killed with their own guns; about 8% There are no national statistics on how many times officers' guns are taken away. But the FBI says that of the 616 law enforcement officers killed on duty by criminals from 1994 through 2003, 52 were killed with their own weapon, amounting to 8 percent. Officers Killed by Their Own Guns   (added 11.28.2014);


 Fight or Flight is the body's last ditch effort to save itself, which is fueled by adrenalin; Off Wilson's pulse  rate and blood pressure increased dramatically, he would loose some of his small motor skills, his strength is increased, his pain receptors will shutdown and he will experience tunnel vision as he zeros in on his perceived threat.

When  Michael Brown ran from Off Wilson and he (Off Wilson) exited his vehicle Off Wilson had a shattered eye socket and  had just experienced a life or death fight over his duty weapon; either would likely trigger fight or flight. As a result, Off Wilson probably did not realize the extent of his injury (due to fight or flight), but it is highly possible he was seeing double vision. It is also unlikely that he would have re-holstered his pistol. So pistol in hand as he pursued Michael Brown about 25 feet (according to witnesses) and yelled for him to "freeze!". Michael Brown may have stopped raised his hands and turned toward Off Wilson; whether he had his hands raized or not, he was taunting Off Wilson by saying something similar to, "You're are not going to arrest me" and "What are going to do; shoot me?" It was then Michael Brown apparently rushed Off Wilson.


One of the criteria of use of force is the size and pre-knowledge of their fighting ability of the suspect. Michael Brown was 604 390lbs,  Off Wilson on the other hand looks to be of average size, say 509-511 and average build. There is also the fact that just moments before, Off Wilson was in a fight for his life, as he and Michael Brown were fighting over his gun in Off Wilson's SUV. This means Off Wilson had pre-knowledge of Brown's fighting ability and his desire to disarm and possibly kill him (Off Wilson) with his own gun. Having this in mind one can only imagine what was going through Off Wilson's mind when Michael Brown suddenly rushed him. What we know happened was Off Wilson started shooting at Michael. When he a bullet actually struck Michael Brown is debatable. Contrary to most peoples belief system, unless a weight bearing bone is broken or a massive wound to the brain, bullets do not stop people. Michael Brown may have been struck early on or Off Wilson may have missed his first shots; it's unknown. If a person is struck with a fatal wound(s) that will cause him to bleed to death, it will take this wounded person 30 seconds to "bleed out"; during this time it is not unusual for the wounded person to continue their attack with no sign that they have been wounded, until they suddenly fall down dead. As mentioned before, the effects of fight or flight is a loss of some small motor skills and tunnel vision; which sometimes mean the shooter will loose the ability to hit any small targets, such as an arm or leg, that he might be aiming at. This is why the police are always trained to shoot "center of mass" as it offers the best chance of the shooter hitting his target.

If one wants to know why Off Wilson shot so many bullets, it is most likely because the first bullets he shot did not stop Michael Brown's attack. This was described by a witness: "The police kept dumpin on him, and I’m thinking the police kept missing – he like – be like – but he kept coming toward him". So how many bullets does it take to stop a person attacking you? The answer should be self evident; as many as it takes to stop the attack. So the number of shots fired by Off Wilson is really irrelevant.

What has been obvious from the beginning, it seems the only entity interested in a vigorous investigation was the Ferguson Police Dept. Most of those politically posturing say they want "justice for Michael Brown;" the message is clear, I've already seen enough and Off Wilson is guilty."   This includes the most of the media (CNN  has been especially heavy handed with this), the Governor of Missouri,  Jay Nixon (who also said that a  "vigorous prosecution must now be pursued" in Michael Brown's death), the NAACP,the Brown Family' s Attorney Benjamin Crump (and chief  race baiter) not only demanded equal justice for Michael Brown also said "We will not accept three-fifths justice,"( a reference to the Three-Fifths Compromise in the US Constitution which had nothing to do with the comparative worth of black slaves and whites; this was even voiced by the legendary black activist Frederick Douglas," but has been used by many dishonest and unscrupulous black activist to forward a personal agenda ) . Eric Holder was the reason Ferguson PD waited so long to release the tape of Michael Brown robbery of the liquor store 10 minutes before Off Wilson's contact and also said he remembered being stopped for DWB (Driving While Black); again implying that Michael Brown to was contacted and shot because we was black.

The standard that Off Wilson needs to be judged is black letter law; Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386 (1989) (a court decision drummed into every police officer in training) "The reasonableness of a particular use of force must be judged from the perspective of a reasonable officer on the scene, rather than with 20/20 vision of hindsight. The reasonableness must account for the fact that officers are often forced to make split-second judgments - in circumstances that are tense, uncertain, and rapidly evolving". But this has not stopped the media and activist from de-compressing what was perhaps 20 harrowing seconds in both the life of Michael Brown's and Off Wilson. This of course is exactly what Graham v. Connor says should not be done;  "a particular use of force must be judged from the perspective of a reasonable officer on the scene, rather than with 20/20 vision of hindsight." and this is what needs to stop or their will be no justice for either Michael Brown or Off Wilson.

Deconstructing the Trayvon Martin Murder Trial and Aftermath Part 2; the Blogosphere

Update #1 I submitted a much condensed letter of this piece to the Santa Cruz Sentinel, which they published. Here is the letter and the blog exchange that followed.

"So in your book, whoever brings a gun to a fist fight wins." "You are being absurdly simplistic to make such a blanket statement."

Zimmerman had right to self-defense 

In a letter to the editor, Liz Camarie proclaimed the lesson learned from Trayvon Martin's death is no one should be allowed to carry guns? Really? The next tactic of the anti-gun zealots appears to be an attack on the right of self-defense; Peter Klotz implied that self-defense is always racially biased murder and can never be justified. There is a saying that "God created man; Sam Colt made them equal." But the Liz Camaries and Peter Klotzes of the world would prefer the weak fall victim to the brutish. Zimmerman shot Martin because Martin was on top of him, banging his head against the sidewalk. While the prosecution tried to minimize the injuries, one or two more slams of Zimmerman's head against the concrete could have resulted in his death; by shooting Martin, Zimmerman probably saved his own life, but apparently to some, there are lives more valuable than others. Brad Goodwin, Live Oak

Mitch Alsip · Top Commenter · Santa Cruz, California

Brad - So in your book, whoever brings a gun to a fist fight wins. 

 Brad Goodwin · Top Commenter · Santa Cruz, California

You are being absurdly simplistic to make such a blanket statement.The issue was Zimmerman did nothing to provoke Martin other than follow him and call the police. Zimmerman had followed numerous other suspicious suspects of different races yet none resulted in a violent altercation until Martin decided to jump the "crazy ass cracker." At some point when you're being beaten down you have the right to protect yourself. Zimmerman was on his back with Martin on top of him so he could not run away. Martin was slamming Zimmerman's head against the cement; I've had this done to me and it invokes a certain level of panic; in criminal case slamming someones head against the cement is a felony and considered "Assault with a Deadly Weapon". Every incident needs to be taken on it's own merits; certainly people are beaten to death all the time. When an assault raises to the level of a felony and life threatening, the victim has the right to deadly force to protect himself; even if the victim is a White Hispanic and the aggressor is a 17 year old black teenager.

 geepierces (signed in using yahoo)

Brad Goodwin - I wasn't there, were you? How can you say, "Zimmerman did nothing to provoke Martin other than to follow him and call the police" ? We have no IDEA what transpired prior to the alleged events.

Roy McAlister · Top Commenter · Luthier at Self Employedgeepierces, "We have no IDEA what transpired prior to the alleged events" We know there is zero evidence to support your theory that Zimmerman did anything illegal to provoke assault & battery. All evidence and witness accounts indicate neither of these guys broke any laws...until Trayvon committed battery on George. Tell me what non-physical, legal act justifies that level of assault?

 Brad Goodwin · Top Commenter · Santa Cruz, California
geepierces, to say we have no idea what happened is wrong. First we know for a fact that prior to this incident Zimmerman reported numerous suspicious suspects and called the police on them. We also know that during all those reportings, he never contacted or harassed any of them. Zimmerman's defense presented the narrative I presented and called witnesses to show what evidence there was was consistent with Zimmerman's statements after the fact. The prosecution tried to poke holes in the narrative and failed and Zimmerman was acquitted. It makes no sense to suggest another narrative simply because this one is not politically correct and has also not withstood scrutiny in a court of law. In other words, this is the only narrative we have that has withstood scrutiny to use to determine if there was a violation of the law; regardless it is also this narrative the race baiting media and Al Sharpton's claim is the result of racism.

Several days later the Sentential printed a response letter

  NRA's stamp on gun that killed Trayvon Martin

A 190-pound man with a gun tackles and kills a 140-pound kid with candy he just bought at the store. All of America is a witness to this crime and can do nothing. Because the kid was black the KKK will laugh until their hearts are content. The kid holding that sign in the newspaper saying "Am I next?" knows what's going on. The NRA has their stamp on that gun.

Clay Collins, Soquel

  "You and the media also seems to have missed that in early 2011 Zimmerman participated in a citizen forum at the Sanford City Hall, to protest the beating of a black homeless man by the son of a white Sanford police officer. During the meeting, Zimmerman called the behavior of officers on duty "disgusting" and detailed officers napping while on duty and refusing to take on difficult assignments."

 

Again you have the liberal left exaggerating and fabricating reality. First Trayvon Martin was not an 12 year old kid coming back from the candy store (the Skittles and Coke notwithstanding), we has a 17 year old, almost a man who liked to wear wife beater T shirts, flip off his computer cam, smoke marijuana and party with his girlfriend. These are certainly no reason to demonize or kill Martin, but it does show his level of sophistication. Further as mentioned, Zimmerman's height/weight was 507/ 185 lbs; Martins was 6'/ 160lbs. You and the media also seems to have missed that in early 2011 Zimmerman participated in a citizen forum at the Sanford City Hall, to protest the beating of a black homeless man by the son of a white Sanford police officer. During the meeting, Zimmerman called the behavior of officers on duty "disgusting" and detailed officers napping while on duty and refusing to take on difficult assignments.Wikipedia. There is also the fact that the KKK was a southern Democrat organization that appeared during reformation; this of course was after a bloody civil war fought almost exclusively because the Democrats were against freeing their slaves. There were also Jim Crow laws and voter intimidation that Southern Democrats so often compare to requiring ID to vote, but were also the result of Southern Democrats racism and southern segregation. And lets not forget the 3/5ths rule that forced the North to count Southern slaves as if they were voting free men. What America has been witness to is Democrat demonization, race baiting and fabrication of the facts to create racial distrust and polarization. The poor kid holding the sign will be just one more victim of the likes of Al Sharpton and liberal Democrats that feed and are empowered by spreading the lie of the hopelessness black victimism and black separatism. Are their racial crimes in America? Of course, but just like the boy who cried wolf, if the Al Sharptons and liberal Democrats interject race into every multi-race incident, the real civil rights crimes become buried under a pile of non-related incidents were information has been fabricated, participants demonized, and races separated. Good job Mr Collins, good job

  "There is also the fact that the KKK was a southern Democrat organization that appeared during reformation; this of course was after a bloody civil war fought almost exclusively because the Democrats were against freeing their slaves. There were also Jim Crow laws and voter intimidation that Southern Democrats so often compare to requiring ID to vote, but were also the result of Southern Democrats racism and southern segregation. And lets not forget the 3/5ths rule that forced the North to count Southern slaves as if they were voting free men".

Matt Blechar · Top Commenter

Clay Collins, nothing like throwing out the race card when racism doesn't exist in Martins case. The main fact about this case was that Trayvon was beating Zimmermans head against the concrete endangering his life, Zimmerman acted to save his life with a gun which he had every right to BY LAW. Can we expose and really look at Trayvon for who he was at the time? He was a criminal thug, that used drugs, got kicked out of his parents house, got kicked out of his High School because he got caught with stolen jewelry HE STOLE. Wake up, he wasn't this innocent KID you and all the other race baiters claim he was.

 Will Sharp · Top Commenter

Matt you know only one side of the story because the other person is dead. But only an idiot (or a foxpublican) would think that if the kid had shot zimmerman that he wouldn't have been arrested. And we know that zimmerman decided to get out of his vehicle and confront Trayvon against what he was told by dispatch. Bottom line zimmerman got away with murder because their was a lack of evidence according to the jurors who have spoken out.
And of course since your source is conservative media your unaware that your boy zimmerman was charged with at least 3 assault cases prior to him killing an unarmed 17 y/o.
One of the assault charges was "resisting a police officer with violence". Now what do you think is worse a 16 y/o who got busted with a small amount of pot or an adult with 3 charges of assault? Here's my source for you and other nra dumb@$$es
http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/03/27/10894561-zimmerman-accused-of-domestic-violence-fighting-with-a-police-officer?lite

 RealityCheck SantaCruz · Top Commenter · Santa Cruz, California

Will Sharp - At least get the facts straight from your own source. 3 charges are not '3 cases'. And there weren't even three charges. There were two (from the same incident) which were dropped. In the other case, there were no charges, only mutual restraining orders. Then you ignore Martin's priors (dropped, or never brought.)
In the end, both acted stupidly, but only Martin acted criminally, and it was his bad luck that the guy he assaulted was armed.

Brad Goodwin · Top Commenter · Santa Cruz, California

Will Sharp, again you misstating Zimmerman's crimes. #1 he was never arrested or charged with domestic violence; the two simply filed mutual restraining orders and there absolutely nothing that would indicate he committed a crime, since any evidence of Domestic Violence requires a mandatory arrest. #2 the two so-called felony charges and your three cases, were all the result of one incident and one push, where an underage and intoxicated Zimmerman, of a police officer; one push and the charges were later dropped. As you have also said only one person really knows what happened, yet you are content with fabricate your own scenarios to match your world view. Given the fact, which was entered into evidence and not contested by the prosecution, that Zimmerman had called on and followed numerous suspicious persons, yet never harassed or confronted any of them. Zimmerman said he exited his car because he has lost sight of Zimmerman and wanted to see where he went, not to confront him. While this may seem a self serving statement, it is consistent with his past behavior. Your whole attitude is typical liberal fabrication of facts and demonization of anyone or anything that runs counter to their separatist and polarizing world view.

Deconstructing the Trayvon Martin Murder Trial and Aftermath

Having been a police officer and detective for some 26 years, I have seen many criminal trials. Most criminal trials, including homicide trials, developed around the Prosecution presenting a narrative as to what occurred and the evidence that backs up their narrative; the Defense then tries to poke holes in the narrative to create reasonable doubt. The strength of the Prosecution's narrative usually determines whether the suspect is found guilty or innocent. In the Trayvon Martin case these roles were reversed which shows the weakness of the  Prosecution's case. The Defense had a defensible narrative backed by evidence that George Zimmerman, as a neighborhood watch captain, saw a suspicious person (Trayvon Martin), in his gated community and called the police. The police told Zimmerman not to engage the suspect and they would send a patrol car. Zimmerman followed Martin and at some point lost sight of him. Martin than then came up behind Zimmerman, overpowered him and took him to the ground, where he proceeded to pound his head on the sidewalk. Zimmerman, who was legally carrying a concealed firearm than shot Martin one time and Martin died of his wounds. Now, before I continue, I should say this narrative is in dispute by some. There are many who believe that in any altercation between a black and white , the white is always the instigator. Therefore you have a contingent that believe that Zimmerman stalked and attacked Martin, and when Martin got the best of him, Zimmerman shot him. Probably the most compelling argument against this is Zimmerman's past behavior. Zimmerman was well known to the police because he had made numerous calls regarding suspicious people in his neighborhood and not once in all those incidents did Zimmerman ever even contacted one of these people he was calling on. With absolutely no evidence to the contrary, the idea of this counter narrative being a defensible narrative it is nothing more than wishful thinking.

The Prosecution must now take a defense posture and try and poke holes in the Defenses narrative;  this  reversal almost never leads to guilty verdict, which is why most cases of this kind never go to court. The tactics include, minimizing injuries, overstating differences in statements, minimizing the strength of the evidence and a great deal of conjecture and demonization of the defendant and witnesses. These are all things juries hate the most about trials, especially when it comes from the Prosecution as they are usually held to a higher standard. Examples of this were the injuries to Zimmerman that included a broken nose and two lacerations on the back of his head; to the prosecution this was a bump on the nose and a couple of scraps. The Prosecution called the  Medical Examiner from Jacksonville, Valerie Rao solely as a witness to minimize Zimmerman's injuries. Rao said Zimmerman's head didn't reflect that his head was being slammed with great force into a sidewalk as he claims and her contention was that Zimmerman's injuries were insignificant to show the Prosecution's contention that Zimmerman's life was not in danger. The problem with this is first, Rao never examined Zimmerman but simply looked at photos and the photos of his injuries. The so called  "bump" on Zimmerman's nose showed a somewhat disfiguring injury; his nose flattened against his face. Further there is not necessarily a correlation between the surface injury of a head wound and a resulting concussion. Concussions often do not result in cranial bruising or bleeding, which can be seen in an MRI. Usually doctors have to rely solely on the symptoms articulated by the patient. Further, if a person's head is banged against concrete, any resulting lacerations are a result of the skin being parted between the victim's skull and the sidewalk; it would be malpractice for any doctor to declare a person with similar injuries to Zimmerman, as being insignificant and not worth a thorough examination to determine of the person has a concussion. Below is the common photo showing Zimmerman's injures on top and the more graph photot that was rarely shown on the bottom.

Next you have the prosecutions 3 different  versions of the incident by Zimmerman; by all accounts they were simply minor variations. One variation that was touted by the Prosecution was Zimmerman first said that Martin jumped out of some bushes before we was attacked. Later Zimmerman said he wasn't sure if Martin actually jumped out of the bushes, he just assumed so because Martin seemed to come out of nowhere; an absurdly similar statement. There is also a  question during the fight, when Zimmerman was on the ground and Martin on top of him, whether Zimmerman pulled both Martins hands off his mouth or one when Zimmerman said Martin tried to grab his pistol. Another was a question about Martin's hand position at the time of the shooting and some other minor differences that Zimmerman told a friend. All of these can easily be chalked up to a person trying to recall an incident that will probably the most stressful and horrifying incident in his life. 

So, why would the Florida State Attorney file charges against Zimmerman, , if the above is even mostly correct. Well, even a low information voter would surmise, if they didn't know already, that Trayvon Martin was black and George Zimmerman is not. But from the very beginning racial bias that was ruled out.  The Sanford Florida lead investigator in the case,  Det. Chris Serino, said he thought Zimmerman profiled Trayvon because of his attire and the circumstances — but not his race. The FBI investigated the case and reported that after interviewing nearly three dozen people in the George Zimmerman murder case, they found no evidence that racial bias was a motivating factor in the shooting of Trayvon Martin. If nothing else, it is a fact that Zimmerman had called the police on numerous suspicious subjects in his neighborhood of all races for years and never had a violent encounter for years. Even when Zimmerman called the police on Martin, it took a coaxing from the 911 operator even to get his race.

"Black race victimism  is they way civil rights activist like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson make their living. Their interjection into any incident is designed solely to drive a wedge between races and try to retard any progress in race relations."

Black race victimism  is they way civil rights activist like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson make their living. Their interjection into any incident is designed solely to drive a wedge between races and try to retard any progress in race relations.They latched onto this case as a way to increase their stature and forward their twisted message of racial inequality and victimism through continued  race baiting; i.e. "The only reason Martin is dead is because we was profiled and shot by a white man because he was black"; ignoring the actions by Martin that led to his death.  Again this is absurd as Zimmerman had reported many suspicious persons, many of them black before and the only one that resulted in any altercation at all was the incident with Martin. The simple reason was Martin was the only person that had ever decided to physically take on Zimmerman for following him. Martin's reasoning was explained by his girlfriend Rachel Jeantel. Even though her testimony was carefully coached  by the prosecution and some of which contradicted the evidence, she quoted Martin as  saying on the telephone he was being followed by a “creepy ass cracker”. Jeantel is so immersed in her lower class black culture of drug use and partying that she didn't even realize that “creepy ass cracker” is a pejorative. Just like the "N" word in the South,  "cracker" becomes a non-pejorative only through common usage and immersion in a isolated subculture. The end result was obvious, the fact that is was Martin  attacking the “creepy ass cracker” who was following him not only placed the blame for the incident on Martin, but it showed if there was any racial bias going on, it was with Trayvon Martin acting on it, not Zimmerman.

 "..we also have the President personalizing the incident by saying "Trayvon Martin could have been me 35 years ago"; one wonders if that means a 17 year old Barrack Obama would have beat down a "creepy ass cracker"".

With the acquittal of Zimmerman, Al Sharpton and the other race-baiters have turned their attention to a federal civil rights trail for Zimmermann. Even though there is simply no basis for such a trial, is is probably a 50/50 proposition that one may occur. First you have the Attorney General, Eric Holder and his infamous speech in 2008 when he said, "Though race-related issues continue to occupy a significant portion of our political discussion and though there remain many unresolved racial issues in this nation, we average Americans simply do not talk enough with each other about race..", in other words average Americans tend to ignore racial inequality. we also have the President personalizing the incident by saying "Trayvon Martin could have been me 35 years ago"; one wonders if that means a 17 year old Barrack Obama would have  beat down a "creepy ass cracker" because he was following him. So the chances of a federal trail based solely on the racial bias of Holder and President Obama is likely.

I would also be remiss by not commenting on the media that has been part and parcel of the race baiting, trying to drum up protests from the black community at large; the media even invented a new racial identity for Zimmerman, calling him a White/Hispanic. First the media as a whole continued to use photos of Martin taken when was 13-14 and not the 17 year old want-to-be as his later photos and facebook entries showed before they were expunged.

You also have NBC "News" doctoring Zimmerman's call to the police making it appear that Zimmerman was racially biased; as mentioned earlier the police dispatcher had to prompt Zimmerman to describe Martin's race. In totality you have the media at large trying desperately to create the allusion of a racial incident. The media continues this allusion by slanted coverage of the Al Sharpton organized "Justice for Trayvon" protest rallies by not reporting the protests are only drawing a few hundred protestors in large cities and only couple of dozen protestors in smaller cities. Further there is also a disconnect between many of the protest rallies and even President Obama, regarding the Stand Your Ground laws in Florida and elsewhere. The fact is the Zimmerman defense never claimed immunity from the Stand Your Ground law, but it has become a rallying point nonetheless and I would not be surprised if Al Sharpton is perpetuating this ignorance to use it as a protest issue that is more provocative than the nuance of a self defense motive. 

Finally there are the civil rights activists that are calling for large and nationwide protesters to pressure the Federal Department of Justice to file a federal civil rights case against for Zimmerman.   The tactic seems to completely ignore the rule of law that is supposed to protect individuals against the tyranny of the majority, or the loudest group; or the tyranny of criminal trials based on populist pressure or politically expedient rational. In other words those believing the their protests will force a federal trial are hoping the very laws that protect civil liberties will be violated in this case.

Update 

In a strange turn of events Zimmerman came across a traffic accident where he assisted extracting a family from a rolled over SUV and put out a fire with his own fire extinguisher. Zimmerman Saves Family of Four in Florida Car Crash; the end result of being saved by Zimmerman is the family is in fear for their safety from the left ling wackos that will not allow any information to go unchallenged and demonized if it runs counter to their race polarization narrative. 

Revisionists Hide the Truth Behind Constitution's 3/5ths Compromise

When one listens to Al Sharpon it is sometimes difficult to determine if he is just ignorant, or if his worldview is so narrow that all things can only be viewed through the prism of race victimization. Case and point is his view that the Constitution is a racist document due to its defining black slaves as three-fifths human. This is such an absurd mischaracterization one has to wonder if he has actually even read the Constitution.

The three-fifths clause, aka the three-fifths compromise is found in Article 1, Section 2, Paragraph 3 of the United States Constitution and states as follows;

“Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons.”

The three-fifths compromise first showed up when the Articles of Confederation were being debated. The confederation wanted the South to include their slaves in their population count, which was to be used to determine the amount of taxes paid. The South objected since in some slave states, slaves outnumbered free men by 60% (very close to three fifths) and including them would have over doubled the amount of taxes they would have to pay. “After proposed compromises of 1⁄2 by Benjamin Harrison of Virginia and 3⁄4 by several New Englanders failed to gain sufficient support, Congress finally settled on the 3⁄5 ratio proposed by James Madison. But this amendment ultimately failed, falling two states short of the unanimous approval required for amending the Articles of Confederation (only New Hampshire and New York were opposed).” Wikipedia

The three-fifths compromise was resurrected in the Constitution but for an entirely different reason. Rather than counting black slaves as three fifths a person, the Constitution determined that three fifth’s of the slaves would be counted when determining Congressional representatives, which was based on population. The North did not want to allow the Southern slave states to include their slaves for the representative count, since they were not free men and by definition not represented by congress, they viewed counting the southern slaves as free men as a corruption of the constitutional process; but the South argued that unless their slaves were counted, their representation would be far too few for them to sign on to the Constitution; hence there was a compromise.

If Al Sharpton would have look at the three-fifths compromise in a rational manner, rather than his knee jerk reaction, he would have realized, that rather than him wanting the Constitution to recognize black slaves the same as a free man, it would have been to the slaves best interest that they not be counted at all. This would have reduced the control the Southern slave states had even when counting only 3/5’s of the slaves; the “… result (was) southerners dominated the Presidency, the Speakership of the House, and the Supreme Court in the period prior to the Civil War.” Wikipedia

What you also find is the same revisionists that want to brand the Constitution as racist, also ignore the abolitionist movement as the main causation of the Civil War. It is commonly believed by Historians that there were 5 primary reasons for the Civil War; but these "reasons" are still based in the use of slaves and the abolition movement. #1 The invention of the Cottin Gin; which evolved the South to a one crop economy dependent on slavery. #2 State Rights; even here you find slavery to be the center of this political movement. John C Calhoun is often identified as one of the strongest voices toward limited government and states rights; yet you find his strongest arguments were for the protection of white minority rule and the defense of slavery. #3 The fight between Slave and Non-Slave State Proponents; again you the slave states recognizing that the fewer new slave states, the less pro-slavery representation there would be in Congress. When Kansas and Nebraska became territories a federal act allowed the states to use popular sovereignty to determine whether they would be free or slave. This resulted in wide spread violence in Kansas where proslavery Missourians began to pour into the state to help force it to be slave. #4 Growth of the Abolition Movement; one of the key turning points in this movement was the Dred Scott decision. Dred Scott had far reaching implications as it voided the Missouri Compromise and the Kansas-Nebraska Act (described above) challenging state sovereignty in the area of slavery. #5 The election of Abraham Lincoln; it was so strongly believed that Lincoln was an abolitionist that South Carolina, Mississippi, Florida, Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, and Texas seceded from the Union even prior to his inauguration.

So just as with the three-fifths compromise, the revisionists want to re-define the causes of the Civil War, as anything other than the sacrifice of hundreds of thousands of men and women to put an end of slavery. The single theme to the Civil was the abolition of slavery and the white men that were in charge that deemed it so important they were willing to sacrifice their lives and tear the United States apart, before they would allow it to continue.