https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/i...01L8tfL1wSua8S

Shhhh...don't tell nobody!

https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/i...o3kxbb4U81ONHm

Are you skeptical that this actually happened? Or do you think it might be some kind of setup?

He was brave enough to "risk his life" (as one article put it) to help pull a family from unstable wreckage but was terrified of a teenage boy?

I am so thankful there were no injuries and I hate to roll my eyes at a good deed but this just seems...well, incredibly convenient is a good phrase for it.

I said all I was going to say.

I wonder what would have happened to OJ Simpson if something like this had happened after his acquittal??

Like some of my coworkers keep pointing out is that back when OJ was acquitted, there were no protests from the white community over the outrage of a black man "possibly" killing white people.....

Could that possibly be because there is no history in this country of Jim Crow laws or other legal and societal systems that denied justice to white people on a wholesale basis, making the OJ verdict an acceptable anomaly rather than another example of "the black man" once again getting away with killing "the white man"?

No, that couldn't be it at all. :rolleyes:

I think your co-workers may lack the basic critical thinking skills to understand that this isn't about one white man killing one black man. It's about the perception that while all people are equal under the law, some groups of people are still more equal than others.

I wasn't sure. It either reeked of cognitive dissonance or tinfoil hattery and I was trying to determine which it was.

You can choose; whichever suits you.

What is "the white community"?

Is that like the white power/the South will rise again crowd?

Yeah...okay....

If you were alive and conscious during that time, you would know this DID happen when O.J. Simpson was acquitted. It sometimes took a different form than street protests but it was outrage all the same. It was predominantly (not only) white people whereas the Zimmerman trial is predominantly (not only) Black people. As usual, the predominantly white outrage was seen as using their rights as U.S. citizens to voice their outrage and push for a civil suit. Since only white people can be rational and well-grounded, people are quick to pretend as though white people throughout history have just "silently let justice work however it works...be at peace out of respect for the system." Someone needs a history lesson including the O.J. Simpson verdict.

This will suffice for the time being:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...l-1576351.html

http://articles.latimes.com/1995-10-..._simpson-trial

http://www.nytimes.com/1995/10/08/we...j-simpson.html

http://www.cnn.com/US/OJ/daily/9510/10-04/women_react/

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/s...toryId=4934067



Your coworkers (or the media you've been reading/listening to/watching) are clueless and do not realize how outraged many white people were and still are over the O.J. Simpson verdict. That is the selective memory that I keep talking about as it pertains to race and ethnicity. I worked in the legal field back then and distinctly recall white people, in general, being shocked and pissed. These white people, in general, did their own form of protest. Protest takes many forms. Some white people who are outraged do not engage in public outrage and protest because those whites realize that for every O.J. Simpson, there are hundreds of "Joe Horns".

And, as with many if not most defendants, O.J. Simpson's life and career were crap after he was acquitted. The white media generally LOVED O.J. Simpson before this happened but turned their back on him to either express their own outrage or avoid losing white customers who were pissed.

No, the "white community" exists just as the Black community, Asian community, Native American community, and so forth. Communities are groups of people with common identifiers. Common identifiers does not mean there is no variation within the groups and communities.

Thanks for all the dialogue....I want to make it clear that on this whole issue I am dead in the middle.....I can't lean one way or another due to the fact that I personally was not at the scene when this event occurred And therefor cannot possibly make a stance one way or the other.....that may seem problematic to some or cowardly to others but I usually only make decisions based on the information I'm given, be it from colleagues and the media, and discussion boards.....tht being said, I try to keep as well informed about the current issues, I try to keep as open a mind as I can, I try to make sure I listen to both sides of the issues, and I often to try imagine myself in the others shoes....

I live in Cincinnati (yeah the same city that Mark Twain wrote he wanted to live at the end of te world becuase it's twenty years behind the times......) and back in 2001 we ourselves had a very bad situation where a black teenager was killed by a police officer, the teen was unarmed, but th officer thought he was reaching for a gun.....this whole event triggered a series of local riots that shut the city down for several days...I was out of work for a week.....and we lost a ton of convention work becuase of boycotts....

I just hope that in the whole Zimmerman/Martin event that cooler heads will prevail and an honest true and open discussion can occur within this country over deep rooted issues that honestly have always been swept under the rug whenever a distraction came along.

Again, thanks an just my $.02
BG

Spare us. There are few things more annoying than uninformed fence sitting devil's advocates who claim to just be sparking debate.

Im not trying to spark a debate....Im trying to gain information form various sources to be able to form a better opinion of the situation.......Im trying to do what the leaders of our country are asking.......talking about this issue.

Some of your posts seem genuinely inquisitive. Some of your posts seem like your personal opinion which is wonderful if you admit to having an opinion. Some of your posts seem like devil's advocate. For instance, do not chase after media comparisons of O.J. Simpson and George Zimmerman and type a GC post beginning with "I wonder..." if you could just as easily research what really occurred in 1995. When we have to tell you what really happened in 1995, it makes it seem as though you are clueless, disagree with certain GC posts which requires an opinion on your part, or you are attempting devil's advocate for the sake of debate. If none of these are true then you need to try a different way of gaining information and talking about this issue.

What does O.J. Simpson have to do with Zimmerman? Anybody that wants to make a correlation between these two cases needs to actually look into the cases and see how different they really are.