United States: The Murder of Trayvon Martin
Written by Dan Baker Tuesday, 15 May 2012
PrintE-mail

We wear the mask that grins and lies,
It hides our cheeks and shades our eyes,
This debt we pay to human guile;
With torn and bleeding hearts we smile,
And mouth with myriad subtleties.

Paul Laurence Dunbar, We Wear the Mask

The first stanza of Dunbar’s poem articulates the racial anxieties felt by black Americans in the late nineteenth century. Tragically, this poem and its sentiments are as timely now as they were in 1896, the same year the Supreme Court ruled in favor of institutionalized racial segregation with Plessy v. Ferguson. Now, in our supposedly “post-racial” society, issues of racial bias and profiling have sprung into the national discourse with the killing of an unarmed young man in Florida by an armed neighborhood watchman.

Corporate media conglomerates like MSNBC and FOX News immediately politicized the killing of Trayvon Martin, selectively hiding facts and starting rumors that fit each channel’s predetermined ideological stance. For MSNBC, this case is one of a murdered young black man at the hands of a racist white vigilante. For FOX, the tragedy in this case lies mostly in the “mainstream media’s” rush to judgment. Hosts like Sean Hannity and Bill O’Reilly proactively obfuscate the facts by smearing the victim through character assassinations that have no bearing on the case. Even more offensive, these figureheads blame the victim for his death, attributing the killer’s violence to natural fear of a young black man wearing a hoodie.

These are the facts as we know them. Armed with just a bag of Skittles candy, 17-year-old Trayvon Martin is talking to his girlfriend on the phone as he walks to his father’s girlfriend’s house around 7 p.m. in the rain. He senses that he is being followed by a man in a car and tells his girlfriend. She tells him to run, but he calmly says that he’ll just keep heading home. In what appears to be a shortcut, he goes through the back public walkway only to see that the man who was following him in the car has gotten out and is now trailing him on foot. The man is George Zimmerman, an armed neighborhood watchman 40 pounds heavier than Trayvon, with a history of domestic violence and a prior arrest for attacking a police officer.

Zimmerman is upset over recent robberies in his neighborhood. He calls the police to make them aware of the situation. In the recording of his call it is clear that he suspects Trayvon may be the thief. The dispatcher asks if George is following him and George says that he is. The dispatcher tells George to stop. Instead, George gets out of his car and continues to follow Trayvon back through the public walkway. Neighbors report seeing a larger man on top of another man and hearing a shrill cry for help before a shot. Independent voice analysts have since claimed that the voice could not be George’s. When police arrive at the scene they find George Zimmerman with an alleged broken nose and a mark on the back of his head; at the time of this writing, released police videos only show the mark and don’t give indication of further harm. Trayvon Martin has been shot dead.

Florida has a law called “Stand Your Ground,” that gives legal immunity to killers who claim self-defense. This was Zimmerman’s claim. For weeks, no arrest was made. Only under growing mass pressure, protests, public outrage, and polarization were charges of second-degree murder filed against Zimmerman. The hypocrisy is revolting. Over 2.2 million Americans are incarcerated, and another 5 million are on parole, with blacks making up a far higher proportion of those under “correctional supervision” than the rest of the population. Who can doubt that if the roles had been reversed, and it was Trayvon who had shot and killed an unarmed white teenager, that he would have been in police custody that very day? And yet, Zimmerman walked free for nearly 2 weeks.

Racism is deeply institutionalized in this country’s misnamed “justice” system. Sure, there is plenty of justice to be had—as long as you have enough money to buy it. The United States is a bourgeois democracy. By definition, this means that there is democracy and justice for the bourgeois—for the rich. But for the workers and the poor, justice is all-too-often an empty word. And if you are also black or Latino, the injustice is compounded even further. This discrepancy did not go unnoticed, and spontaneous protests were organized around the country. Americans are increasingly aware that this is a system in which the color of your skin determines your right to a trial or the ease with which you can claim immunity.

The Trayvon Martin case has again brought the question of race and racism in America to the forefront. Many naively believed that simply by electing a black president, racism would magically disappear. The issue is not that simple. Racism is used to divide and conquer the working class, to divert our attention from the real problems facing us. Instead of fearing and fighting against the cuts, austerity, and crisis that capitalism rains upon us daily, we are instead taught to fear and fight each other. Working class unity is the only way to fight against the poison of racism and its root cause. Malcolm X put it best when he said, “You can’t have capitalism without racism.” We would add: “You can’t have racism without capitalism.”
Home » The Americas » United States

This article is full of distortions and lies, but I don't have time to go through them all now and provide sources for the facts. Equating Racism and Capitalism - that's a new one to me. I wonder if it was written by a socialist or union type. Would you provide a link, please, rhb.

One lie that really gets on my nerves is that "the disipatcher told George Zimmerman to stay in the truck", or that "George Zimmerman got out of the truck after the dispatcher told him not to"

Big lie.

The exact words of the dispatcher were

"We don't need you to do that."

Then George Zimmerman said "OK".

rhb, the above article you posted includes this lie -

"The dispatcher asks if George is following him and George says that he is. The dispatcher tells George to stop.(This is a Lie) Instead, George gets out of his car and continues to follow Trayvon back through the public walkway."

Because - here is The Transcript of George Zimmerman's Call to the Dispatcher -

[www.documentcloud.org]

The Dispatcher did not tell George Zimmerman to stop following him. The Dispatcher said "We don't need you to do that." The dispatcher cannot tell someone what to do - they have strict protocol to follow. The dispatcher cannot tell George to follow or to not follow someone. I know because it happened to me when I called 911 two times and said I was going to do this or that, and they told me that they are not allowed to tell me what to do or what not to do. I was on my own, just like George Zimmerman was on his own at that point.

So I'm sick of hearing that 'they told George Zimmerman to stay in his truck, and he got out' or 'George Zimmerman got out of the truck after the police told him not to." All Lies by the Libs.

Read the Transcript.

[www.rawfoodsupport.com]
Re: Demand A Real Plan…
Posted by: banana who
Date: January 26, 2013 03:38PM

Riverhouse Bill: check this out: [consciouslifenews.com]

For some odd reason, I immediately thought of people like YOU when I read it...

John, thankyou for the internet shill jacket. if it fits Id wear it.



Shouldn’t truth propagate itself naturally, rather than through, well…propaganda?
Why do you cry shill John.

Please focus on the message not the messenger

If I where a shill Id not waste time with you John.

If the money is right I would be three shills anyone hiring? I

John you just might be right, I may be a shill and be watching all your post,
You did ask some time back more than one time do I ever read your post? sorry it took me till now to say only what I report.

Friends,
What's with all of this ultra-extreme right wing political rhetoric and propaganda and racism on the Raw Foods forum? I thought this was going to be nipped in the bud, but apparently it's totally okay with Prana.
Riverhouse Bill, you, of all people, are no 'internet shill.' You are a truth seeker.
Okay... and now back to 'sane world' where people don't listen to right wing libertarians and actually believe their nonsense.

Sharrhan:


[www.facebook.com]

Kwan, Hey I missed you and your post come back,
Yes KKK and Uncle Adolf somtimes eat raw food here.
But its too right wing to fly.

People are diverse. They have opinions that differ from yours even if they're on the same diet that you're on. No one is stopping you from adding your voice.

kwan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Friends,
> What's with all of this ultra-extreme right wing
> political rhetoric and propaganda and racism on
> the Raw Foods forum? I thought this was going to
> be nipped in the bud, but apparently it's totally
> okay with Prana.
> Riverhouse Bill, you, of all people, are no
> 'internet shill.' You are a truth seeker.
> Okay... and now back to 'sane world' where people
> don't listen to right wing libertarians and
> actually believe their nonsense.

HH --
Diverse is one thing. Badly informed propaganda is another. What I'm reading from you and John Rose is mostly the latter.

Sharrhan:


[www.facebook.com]

Hi Kwan-

You seem to primarily deal in ad hominems. If you say that someone uses propaganda without proving how, it's nothing more than an attempted insult. It's certainly not dialogue. Same goes for this "extreme right-wing" accusation. I would respond thoughtfully and critically to things you say, but you don't really say anything, and you certainly don't say it nicely. You don't even know me. IMO, you use standard political smoke and mirrors. If you see something that you disagree with, you call it something that's a pejorative in your world; "propaganda," "extreme right-wing," "libertarian," etc. and offer no proof. That's an infuriating approach that unfortunately shuts a lot of people down. Not me.

Please show me how I use propaganda. Would love to hear all about it. I also wouldn't mind hearing how you define Libertarianism.

Wow, I had to look up 'ad hominems'. Perfect word that I should have been using. Wish I had better vocabulary.

Yes, I'd be interested in proof of propaganda as opposed to statement of fact.

I like the last two paragraphs. Rings true.

Thanks Riverhouseblill

I'm still waiting for an explanation of how Racism is connected to Capitalism.

You should read the book White Cargo: The Forgotten History of Britain's White Slaves in America. [www.amazon.com]

Nice try, rhb, on trying to blame "Racism" on "British Capitalists" when the Slave Trade actually originated in Africa where Blacks sold other Blacks into Slavery.

**********

"Slavery existed for centuries before the first slaves came to America. Old Egyptian, Greeks, and Romans owned the slaves. In Africa there were many kingdoms and slavery was legal. When Europeans came to Africa, slavery there already existed.
The first European slave traders were from Portugal. The little country of Portugal built the first European fort in Africa in 1481. It was called Fort Elmina. Soon, people from other countries found out about the slave trade. Spain was one of the biggest slave trading nations. They needed African slaves to work on their plantations in South America and Caribbean. This is where most of the slaves were taken during the first few centuries of the Atlantic slave trade.
England was one of the latest countries to start slave trade. Soon England became on of the biggest slave trading nations. They began to bring slaves to the Caribbean. They formed the Royal African Company in 1672. This allowed English colonies in America to easily buy slaves from English traders. At the beginning only a few slaves came to English colonies. But when the big tobacco and rice plantations grew in the colonies in the south the slave trade increased.
Although many people think that most slaves were stolen or caught by slave traders, this is not the truth. Most slaves were bought by Europeans from other African people. Often, rival tribes sold into slavery members of other tribes they captured during wars. Most of the slaves came from the West Africa and spoke many different languages."

How about placing the BLAME for Slavery on THE BLACKS WHO SOLD OTHER BLACKS as Slaves. The Blacks were the Slave Traders, rhb.

THE BLACKS WERE THE FIRST RACISTS AND THE BLACKS WERE THE FIRST CAPITALISTS.

***************

According to colonial records, the first slave owner in the United States was a black man.

Prior to 1655 there were no legal slaves in the colonies, only indentured servants. All masters were required to free their servants after their time was up. Seven years was the limit that an indentured servant could be held. Upon their release they were granted 50 acres of land. This included any Negro purchased from slave traders. Negros were also granted 50 acres upon their release.

Anthony Johnson was a Negro from modern-day Angola. He was brought to the US to work on a tobacco farm in 1619. In 1622 he was almost killed when Powhatan Indians attacked the farm. 52 out of 57 people on the farm perished in the attack. He married a female black servant while working on the farm.

When Anthony was released he was legally recognized as a “free Negro” and ran a successful farm. In 1651 he held 250 acres and five black indentured servants. In 1654, it was time for Anthony to release John Casor, a black indentured servant. Instead Anthony told Casor he was extending his time. Casor left and became employed by the free white man Robert Parker.

Anthony Johnson sued Robert Parker in the Northampton Court in 1654. In 1655, the court ruled that Anthony Johnson could hold John Casor indefinitely. The court gave judicial sanction for blacks to own slave of their own race. Thus Casor became the first permanent slave and Johnson the first slave owner.

Whites still could not legally hold a black servant as an indefinite slave until 1670. In that year, the colonial assembly passed legislation permitting free whites, blacks, and Indians the right to own blacks as slaves.

By 1699, the number of free blacks prompted fears of a “Negro insurrection.” Virginia Colonial ordered the repatriation of freed blacks back to Africa. Many blacks sold themselves to white masters so they would not have to go to Africa. This was the first effort to gently repatriate free blacks back to Africa. The modern nations of Sierra Leone and Liberia both originated as colonies of repatriated former black slaves.

However, black slave owners continued to thrive in the United States.

By 1830 there were 3,775 black families living in the South who owned black slaves. By 1860 there were about 3,000 slaves owned by black households in the city of New Orleans alone."

[truthinheart.com]
“Sugar Blues” By William Dufty.
Order the book that will forever change your view of Sugar (and its destruction of many empires). The lust for sugar was the cause of 2/3rds of the slavery of Africans in the last 500 years. Learn details of ancient and modern history and its enslavement to sugar. Read the first chapter online. 255 pages. 1975.
[truthinheart.com]

Thanks, Swimmer. I'm becoming more interested in history these days. These articles remind me of the old westerns we used to watch.

'Capitalism' is not a dirty word to me.

Sugar. When most people think of slavery, it's the cotton plantations that come to mind. Interesting website.

Good night

John,

Great read. I read that when it came out. That's the that book started my health food path.