Wednesday, April 4, 2012
Miscellaneous 126
1) On CNN last night, they had yet another audio expert examine the 911 tape of George Zimmerman and after a far more resolute examination of it, it now appears that Mr. Zimmerman was muttering, "fucking cold" and NOT "fucking coons". Not that this necessarily changes any potential murder or manslaughter charges, mind you, but it does in fact mitigate the hate-crime component greatly, I think.............2) And tonight, YET ANOTHER audio expert has since said that the phrase in question is, "fucking punks". Will we, folks, ever truly know what this frigging idiot said?............3) Not that I know all of the facts of this case, mind you. But at least from what I can glean up to now, there does appear to be a sufficient amount of evidence for a solid manslaughter charge. a - Trayvon Martin wasn't doing anything illegal. b - George Zimmerman had no right to be following the kid (if in fact he felt that Trayvon was suspicious, all that the dude really needed to do was call the police). And c - Mr. Zimmerman clearly didn't need to use lethal force (if by chance he did feel threatened, he could have just as easily shot him in the arm or the leg).............3) Joy Behar went on Dr. Drew's show last night and right on cue started drilling Palin. "Why in the hell are we still listening to her?", she put forth rhetorically....and it was like (and, yes, this is me holding court now), "Probably for the same reasons that we're still listening to you; because we really like listening to dullards with a sub-100 IQ babbling incessantly."............4) Her and frigging Sarah Palin, what a frigging pair, huh?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
10 comments:
Take it up with the CNN voice expert, wd. They played it in a much higher resolute manner and it was definitely NOT coons (an extremely dated term to begin with).
Playing the tape at a "much higher resolute manner" removes the "s" at the end of the word and replaces it with a "ld"? I don't buy it. He said "coons".
Hm, let's see here, a CNN voice and audio expert or wd, a person whose psychological livelihood is purely contingent upon a certain narrative? Gee, that's a hard one, folks - NOT!!
Yes, wd, it does.
And, yes, I HAVE listened to the tape, many times and in many different ways. And I agree with the audio expert who clearly knows more than you and I combined that it clearly wasn't coons, an old term that nobody under the age of 60 even uses anymore.
When it was revealed that Zimmerman used that word, I was NOT like, "gee, I've never heard that word before... I wonder what it means"? (I'm under 60).
btw, my psychological livelihood is not purely contingent upon a certain narrative. But I think yours might be. From the beginning you're been resistant to the "narrative" that this was a hate crime.
In any case, one narrative we can sure is being played out here is... [1] I disagree with Will, [2] Will argues passionately and intelligently (in his mind) to try and convince me, [3] I'm not convinced, [4] since I'm not convinced it must be because I'm stupid/a partisan... Will levies appropriate/justified insults.
We've seen this play out numerous times.
I follow the evidence, wd. When the audio experts said that the scream wasn't Zimmerman's, I noted it. And when CNN's audio expert enhanced the 9/11 tape to show that it wasn't coons that Mr. Zimmerman was saying, I noted that, too. Following the evidence, wd, it's as simple as cherry pie. You just might want to try it sometime and then maybe you can serve on a jury eventually, too.......Yes, some young people do know what the word, coon, is. But when the last time that you actually heard somebody use it? For me, it was probably sometime in the early '70s.......And your claim that I've been resistant from the beginning to the "hate crime narrative" is patently false. When it appeared that Mr. Zimmerman was saying coons, I was VERY persuadable (contingent upon the rest of other evidence, of course).
Will: when CNN's audio expert enhanced the 9/11 tape to show that it wasn't coons that Mr. Zimmerman was saying, I noted that, too.
I found the video online, watched it, and am not convinced they showed he didn't use that word. It certainly APPEARED as though they did, but I need further verification (other experts).
It sounded like a different tape to me (and no, I'm not accusing CNN of anything, I just don't get how it could go from sounding like one word to another completely different sounding word).
Will: But when the last time that you actually heard somebody use it?
The Zimmerman 911 tape. Or, actually, the discussion of that tape.
Also, if he actually said "cold" that doesn't mean his actions weren't racially motivated.
wd, in a court of law, the state has to prove that his actions WERE racially motivated. Mr. Zimmerman doesn't have to prove that they WEREN'T.
If he said it (which is doubtful). There's more than enough reasonable doubt (on the hate crime charge, I'm saying - aggravated manslaughter, that just might be a different story) and your previous comment thoroughly underscores it.......And, yes, it's the very same tape. It was just enhanced by a person who knows more about audio/voice analysis than you and I ever will.
Post a Comment