cloudlings
Status:
Joined: April 5, 2013
Last Seen: 6 years
user id: 355856
Location: San Diego
Gender: F
Joined: April 5, 2013
Last Seen: 6 years
user id: 355856
Location: San Diego
Gender: F
23
Quotes
183 Favorites
17 Following
48 Followers
-82 Comment Points
Comments
Comments on Quotes
Comments by User
Quote Comments by User
Flair
183 Favorites
17 Following
48 Followers
-82 Comment Points
Comments
Comments on Quotes
Comments by User
Quote Comments by User
Flair
bye babies :-*
(@disposition)
(@disposition)
You calling me ignorant when you, yourself is ignorant is just ironic.
Now, if you want to continue to be condescending, I don't want to listen.
Now, if you want to continue to be condescending, I don't want to listen.
Now, if you want to continue to be condescending, I don't want to listen.
You calling me ignorant when you, yourself is ignorant is just ironic.
****THIS FORMAT WAS MADE BY PETRICHOR.
And, I'm not sure why you insist on bringing up the Trayvon Martin case, when this quote nor did my comment have anything to do with that. It is honestly so weird how you believe that it would have any relation to my comment or this quote.
This isn't your quote, so I can still reply because I'm not blocked by the OP.
I'm sure you are a lovely person, I just don't agree with you and I don't see a point in continuing this conversation as neither of us is being swayed by the other and unless we do just end it on agree to disagree, I feel like it won't have a good ending.
Pictures show he was badly beaten and an eyewitness has confirmed Trayvon was the one in control of the fight. Regardless of whether he should have followed him, regardless of why he followed him, he was the one that was attacked and he acted in a case of self-defense.
And were is your proof that if it was a black shooter they would be immediately convicted? What are you basing that off of? Media stereotypes and the general idea of or the fact that it actually happens because last I checked, you can only convict someone if they have gone through trial.
Also I thought I blocked you how were you able to respond to my comment
This isn't your quote, so I can still reply because I'm not blocked by the OP.
I'm sure you are a lovely person, I just don't agree with you and I don't see a point in continuing this conversation as neither of us is being swayed by the other and unless we do just end it on agree to disagree, I feel like it won't have a good ending.
And, I'm not sure why you insist on bringing up the Trayvon Martin case, when this quote nor did my comment have anything to do with that. It is honestly so weird how you believe that it would have any relation to my comment or this quote.
It becomes a race issue because Trayvon stands for all Black people in America. Black people can literally be stalked and killed for wearing their hood.
[deleted]
And my comments weren't as stupid as yours, seeing as you had to delete your previous one, lol.
His skin colour is not white, if you have actually seen him you can SEE he is hispanic.
And he was not defending himself, he could have continued walking, but he didn't. He stopped and attacked Zimmerman and quite horribly injured him, as photographic evidence can show.
And really, you're not going to be able to convince me of this being a racial issue because had this been a white kid it would never have made the news, which means we have NO idea just how many times something similar has happened to a white kid because it was never blown up by the media the way this was.
But I can see this is a total dead-end conversation, so I'm blocking you and I am done with this because neither of us is going to change the other ones mind and this is not worth it.
Pictures show he was badly beaten and an eyewitness has confirmed Trayvon was the one in control of the fight. Regardless of whether he should have followed him, regardless of why he followed him, he was the one that was attacked and he acted in a case of self-defense.
And were is your proof that if it was a black shooter they would be immediately convicted? What are you basing that off of? Media stereotypes and the general idea of or the fact that it actually happens because last I checked, you can only convict someone if they have gone through trial.
Also I thought I blocked you how were you able to respond to my comment
This isn't your quote, so I can still reply because I'm not blocked by the OP.
I'm sure you are a lovely person, I just don't agree with you and I don't see a point in continuing this conversation as neither of us is being swayed by the other and unless we do just end it on agree to disagree, I feel like it won't have a good ending.
If you paid attention to the case, it was an issue of Trayvon looking suspicious as anyone walking with a hood up in a place they don't belong would, and attacking a man. Whether that man should have followed him or not is debatable, but he acted entirely in self-defense as an eyewitness has said.
The court case and the over-all ruling is not connected to a racial issue.
The only reason anybody is saying that it is is because the media blew it up into a thing and made it out to be one. They even created a false term to describe Zimmerman, "white hispanic", to mould it into a race issue.
It becomes a race issue because Trayvon stands for all Black people in America. Black people can literally be stalked and killed for wearing their hood.
[deleted]
And my comments weren't as stupid as yours, seeing as you had to delete your previous one, lol.
His skin colour is not white, if you have actually seen him you can SEE he is hispanic.
And he was not defending himself, he could have continued walking, but he didn't. He stopped and attacked Zimmerman and quite horribly injured him, as photographic evidence can show.
And really, you're not going to be able to convince me of this being a racial issue because had this been a white kid it would never have made the news, which means we have NO idea just how many times something similar has happened to a white kid because it was never blown up by the media the way this was.
But I can see this is a total dead-end conversation, so I'm blocking you and I am done with this because neither of us is going to change the other ones mind and this is not worth it.
Pictures show he was badly beaten and an eyewitness has confirmed Trayvon was the one in control of the fight. Regardless of whether he should have followed him, regardless of why he followed him, he was the one that was attacked and he acted in a case of self-defense.
And were is your proof that if it was a black shooter they would be immediately convicted? What are you basing that off of? Media stereotypes and the general idea of or the fact that it actually happens because last I checked, you can only convict someone if they have gone through trial.
Also I thought I blocked you how were you able to respond to my comment
This isn't your quote, so I can still reply because I'm not blocked by the OP.
I'm sure you are a lovely person, I just don't agree with you and I don't see a point in continuing this conversation as neither of us is being swayed by the other and unless we do just end it on agree to disagree, I feel like it won't have a good ending.
To be truly unprejudiced is to treat Trayvon as if his skin colour did not matter, as if he were any other colour of skin, which is what most informed people are doing.
That's what the jury did. They didn't take his skin colour into account because it has absolutely nothing to do with the case.
Obsessing over it and trying to use it as a point to convict a man is wrong.
If you paid attention to the case, it was an issue of Trayvon looking suspicious as anyone walking with a hood up in a place they don't belong would, and attacking a man. Whether that man should have followed him or not is debatable, but he acted entirely in self-defense as an eyewitness has said.
The court case and the over-all ruling is not connected to a racial issue.
The only reason anybody is saying that it is is because the media blew it up into a thing and made it out to be one. They even created a false term to describe Zimmerman, "white hispanic", to mould it into a race issue.
It becomes a race issue because Trayvon stands for all Black people in America. Black people can literally be stalked and killed for wearing their hood.
[deleted]
And my comments weren't as stupid as yours, seeing as you had to delete your previous one, lol.
His skin colour is not white, if you have actually seen him you can SEE he is hispanic.
And he was not defending himself, he could have continued walking, but he didn't. He stopped and attacked Zimmerman and quite horribly injured him, as photographic evidence can show.
And really, you're not going to be able to convince me of this being a racial issue because had this been a white kid it would never have made the news, which means we have NO idea just how many times something similar has happened to a white kid because it was never blown up by the media the way this was.
But I can see this is a total dead-end conversation, so I'm blocking you and I am done with this because neither of us is going to change the other ones mind and this is not worth it.
Pictures show he was badly beaten and an eyewitness has confirmed Trayvon was the one in control of the fight. Regardless of whether he should have followed him, regardless of why he followed him, he was the one that was attacked and he acted in a case of self-defense.
And were is your proof that if it was a black shooter they would be immediately convicted? What are you basing that off of? Media stereotypes and the general idea of or the fact that it actually happens because last I checked, you can only convict someone if they have gone through trial.
Also I thought I blocked you how were you able to respond to my comment
This isn't your quote, so I can still reply because I'm not blocked by the OP.
I'm sure you are a lovely person, I just don't agree with you and I don't see a point in continuing this conversation as neither of us is being swayed by the other and unless we do just end it on agree to disagree, I feel like it won't have a good ending.
YOU are the one obsessing over Trayvon's race.
To be truly unprejudiced is to treat Trayvon as if his skin colour did not matter, as if he were any other colour of skin, which is what most informed people are doing.
That's what the jury did. They didn't take his skin colour into account because it has absolutely nothing to do with the case.
Obsessing over it and trying to use it as a point to convict a man is wrong.
If you paid attention to the case, it was an issue of Trayvon looking suspicious as anyone walking with a hood up in a place they don't belong would, and attacking a man. Whether that man should have followed him or not is debatable, but he acted entirely in self-defense as an eyewitness has said.
The court case and the over-all ruling is not connected to a racial issue.
The only reason anybody is saying that it is is because the media blew it up into a thing and made it out to be one. They even created a false term to describe Zimmerman, "white hispanic", to mould it into a race issue.
It becomes a race issue because Trayvon stands for all Black people in America. Black people can literally be stalked and killed for wearing their hood.
[deleted]
And my comments weren't as stupid as yours, seeing as you had to delete your previous one, lol.
His skin colour is not white, if you have actually seen him you can SEE he is hispanic.
And he was not defending himself, he could have continued walking, but he didn't. He stopped and attacked Zimmerman and quite horribly injured him, as photographic evidence can show.
And really, you're not going to be able to convince me of this being a racial issue because had this been a white kid it would never have made the news, which means we have NO idea just how many times something similar has happened to a white kid because it was never blown up by the media the way this was.
But I can see this is a total dead-end conversation, so I'm blocking you and I am done with this because neither of us is going to change the other ones mind and this is not worth it.
Pictures show he was badly beaten and an eyewitness has confirmed Trayvon was the one in control of the fight. Regardless of whether he should have followed him, regardless of why he followed him, he was the one that was attacked and he acted in a case of self-defense.
And were is your proof that if it was a black shooter they would be immediately convicted? What are you basing that off of? Media stereotypes and the general idea of or the fact that it actually happens because last I checked, you can only convict someone if they have gone through trial.
Also I thought I blocked you how were you able to respond to my comment
This isn't your quote, so I can still reply because I'm not blocked by the OP.
I'm sure you are a lovely person, I just don't agree with you and I don't see a point in continuing this conversation as neither of us is being swayed by the other and unless we do just end it on agree to disagree, I feel like it won't have a good ending.
YOU are the one obsessing over Trayvon's race.
To be truly unprejudiced is to treat Trayvon as if his skin colour did not matter, as if he were any other colour of skin, which is what most informed people are doing.
That's what the jury did. They didn't take his skin colour into account because it has absolutely nothing to do with the case.
Obsessing over it and trying to use it as a point to convict a man is wrong.
If you paid attention to the case, it was an issue of Trayvon looking suspicious as anyone walking with a hood up in a place they don't belong would, and attacking a man. Whether that man should have followed him or not is debatable, but he acted entirely in self-defense as an eyewitness has said.
The court case and the over-all ruling is not connected to a racial issue.
The only reason anybody is saying that it is is because the media blew it up into a thing and made it out to be one. They even created a false term to describe Zimmerman, "white hispanic", to mould it into a race issue.
It becomes a race issue because Trayvon stands for all Black people in America. Black people can literally be stalked and killed for wearing their hood.
[deleted]
And my comments weren't as stupid as yours, seeing as you had to delete your previous one, lol.
His skin colour is not white, if you have actually seen him you can SEE he is hispanic.
And he was not defending himself, he could have continued walking, but he didn't. He stopped and attacked Zimmerman and quite horribly injured him, as photographic evidence can show.
And really, you're not going to be able to convince me of this being a racial issue because had this been a white kid it would never have made the news, which means we have NO idea just how many times something similar has happened to a white kid because it was never blown up by the media the way this was.
But I can see this is a total dead-end conversation, so I'm blocking you and I am done with this because neither of us is going to change the other ones mind and this is not worth it.
Pictures show he was badly beaten and an eyewitness has confirmed Trayvon was the one in control of the fight. Regardless of whether he should have followed him, regardless of why he followed him, he was the one that was attacked and he acted in a case of self-defense.
And were is your proof that if it was a black shooter they would be immediately convicted? What are you basing that off of? Media stereotypes and the general idea of or the fact that it actually happens because last I checked, you can only convict someone if they have gone through trial.
Also I thought I blocked you how were you able to respond to my comment
This isn't your quote, so I can still reply because I'm not blocked by the OP.
I'm sure you are a lovely person, I just don't agree with you and I don't see a point in continuing this conversation as neither of us is being swayed by the other and unless we do just end it on agree to disagree, I feel like it won't have a good ending.
YOU are the one obsessing over Trayvon's race.
To be truly unprejudiced is to treat Trayvon as if his skin colour did not matter, as if he were any other colour of skin, which is what most informed people are doing.
That's what the jury did. They didn't take his skin colour into account because it has absolutely nothing to do with the case.
Obsessing over it and trying to use it as a point to convict a man is wrong.
If you paid attention to the case, it was an issue of Trayvon looking suspicious as anyone walking with a hood up in a place they don't belong would, and attacking a man. Whether that man should have followed him or not is debatable, but he acted entirely in self-defense as an eyewitness has said.
The court case and the over-all ruling is not connected to a racial issue.
The only reason anybody is saying that it is is because the media blew it up into a thing and made it out to be one. They even created a false term to describe Zimmerman, "white hispanic", to mould it into a race issue.
It becomes a race issue because Trayvon stands for all Black people in America. Black people can literally be stalked and killed for wearing their hood.
[deleted]
And my comments weren't as stupid as yours, seeing as you had to delete your previous one, lol.
His skin colour is not white, if you have actually seen him you can SEE he is hispanic.
And he was not defending himself, he could have continued walking, but he didn't. He stopped and attacked Zimmerman and quite horribly injured him, as photographic evidence can show.
And really, you're not going to be able to convince me of this being a racial issue because had this been a white kid it would never have made the news, which means we have NO idea just how many times something similar has happened to a white kid because it was never blown up by the media the way this was.
But I can see this is a total dead-end conversation, so I'm blocking you and I am done with this because neither of us is going to change the other ones mind and this is not worth it.
Pictures show he was badly beaten and an eyewitness has confirmed Trayvon was the one in control of the fight. Regardless of whether he should have followed him, regardless of why he followed him, he was the one that was attacked and he acted in a case of self-defense.
And were is your proof that if it was a black shooter they would be immediately convicted? What are you basing that off of? Media stereotypes and the general idea of or the fact that it actually happens because last I checked, you can only convict someone if they have gone through trial.
Also I thought I blocked you how were you able to respond to my comment
This isn't your quote, so I can still reply because I'm not blocked by the OP.
I'm sure you are a lovely person, I just don't agree with you and I don't see a point in continuing this conversation as neither of us is being swayed by the other and unless we do just end it on agree to disagree, I feel like it won't have a good ending.
You calling me ignorant when you, yourself is ignorant is just ironic.