jbg Posted January 26, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 26, 2012 Maybe the other poster can be more specific about your prejudices.That's what I have in mind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LonJowett Posted January 26, 2012 Report Share Posted January 26, 2012 Aren't they perfectly obvious? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbg Posted January 27, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 27, 2012 Aren't they perfectly obvious? Yeah. That you hate Jews. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LonJowett Posted January 27, 2012 Report Share Posted January 27, 2012 (edited) Yeah. That you hate Jews. I'm Jewish, once lived on a kibbutz, and love Israel. I just see no future for our people in provoking fights with muslims, and find those who try to twist that into a hatred of jews to be pathetic and very, very counter-productive. Edited January 27, 2012 by LonJowett Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbg Posted January 27, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 27, 2012 I'm Jewish, once lived on a kibbutz, and love Israel. I just see no future for our people in provoking fights with muslims, and find those who try to twist that into a hatred of jews to be pathetic and very, very counter-productive. I didn't mean to twist anything. I am concerned that Israel's small size makes its existence questionable if the neighbors don't have truly peaceful intentions, unless they have a buffer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LonJowett Posted January 27, 2012 Report Share Posted January 27, 2012 I didn't mean to twist anything. Playland Amusement Park is a large buffer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbg Posted January 28, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 28, 2012 I'm Jewish, once lived on a kibbutz, and love Israel. I just see no future for our people in provoking fights with muslims, and find those who try to twist that into a hatred of jews to be pathetic and very, very counter-productive. I didn't mean to twist anything. I am concerned that Israel's small size makes its existence questionable if the neighbors don't have truly peaceful intentions, unless they have a buffer. Playland Amusement Park is a large buffer. I tried to make out a serious response to your post, and get back a bad joke. What else can I say?No one has addressed the question as to why some people seem to be above the law. Are they privileged? Or do we fear violence? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LonJowett Posted January 28, 2012 Report Share Posted January 28, 2012 I tried to make out a serious response to your post, and get back a bad joke. What else can I say? A serious response? All you did was say I hate Jews. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest American Woman Posted January 28, 2012 Report Share Posted January 28, 2012 I have no particular reason for these youngsters to wind up with a criminal record, or go to jail. I have two serious problems with the above result: That the "re-arrest" interval is two months, not the normal six months; and That they are free to file an action against the County. I suspect that the defense counsel are nervous that their clients will re-offend, so sought a short period. Further, as a County taxpayer, I am appalled that the County could be sued. There is no question that the wearers of head scarfs knew or should have known that they were forbidden. The signage is clear, and the common sense need for the regulation is obvious. The parties paying for this nonsense are people like myself, who pay taxes and obey the law. I suspect that the very short two-month window, and the ability to sue, are a cave-in to fears of violence. Do you honestly think this is the first time less than a six month re-arrest interval has been part of such a deal? The article says "most adjournments in contemplation of dismissal have a six-month window," which means not all do. So in all of the other cases, do you think it was "a cave-in to fears of violence?" As for their right to sue the county, why wouldn't they have that right? It doesn't mean they are going to win. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted January 28, 2012 Report Share Posted January 28, 2012 They're having their charges dismissed without guilty pleas, yet the police allegedly showed "restraint and professionalism" in the way they handled the situation? Something doesn't add up there. You don't just throw out charges when the cops did everything correctly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest American Woman Posted January 28, 2012 Report Share Posted January 28, 2012 They're having their charges dismissed without guilty pleas, yet the police allegedly showed "restraint and professionalism" in the way they handled the situation? Something doesn't add up there. You don't just throw out charges when the cops did everything correctly. Seems to me you are pretty naive if you believe that never happens. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbg Posted January 29, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 29, 2012 Something doesn't add up there. You don't just throw out charges when the cops did everything correctly. I suspect strongly that it has more to do with the fear of triggering a violent reaction. Appeasement all the way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted January 29, 2012 Report Share Posted January 29, 2012 We'll see when they sue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest American Woman Posted January 29, 2012 Report Share Posted January 29, 2012 We'll see when they sue. Their "lawyers" are probably cooking up a defense as we wait. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbg Posted January 29, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 29, 2012 Their "lawyers" are probably cooking up a defense as we wait. The defense should be the fact that the government needs to be able to manage an inherently dangerous situation in foresight, not hindsight. They should not be held to a standard of perfection. In the real world they'll settle out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest American Woman Posted January 29, 2012 Report Share Posted January 29, 2012 The defense should be the fact that the government needs to be able to manage an inherently dangerous situation in foresight, not hindsight. They should not be held to a standard of perfection. In the real world they'll settle out. I was speaking of the Muslims - they are probably cooking up a story to make the police appear guilty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LonJowett Posted January 29, 2012 Report Share Posted January 29, 2012 I was speaking of the Muslims - they are probably cooking up a story to make the police appear guilty. Those crafty muslims... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kimmy Posted January 29, 2012 Report Share Posted January 29, 2012 They're having their charges dismissed without guilty pleas, yet the police allegedly showed "restraint and professionalism" in the way they handled the situation? Something doesn't add up there. You don't just throw out charges when the cops did everything correctly. If your logic is correct, then something suspicious is going on every time a policeman lets a motorist off with a warning. -k Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Squid Posted January 30, 2012 Report Share Posted January 30, 2012 If the facts of the case are true, and these folks started a near-riot because they don't like removing scarves due to a safety-ban, then not only should they be charged they should also be deported after their sentences are served. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbg Posted January 30, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 30, 2012 If the facts of the case are true, and these folks started a near-riot because they don't like removing scarves due to a safety-ban, then not only should they be charged they should also be deported after their sentences are served. The facts are pretty much undisputed. The Muslim organization was told of the scarf ban but they did not see fit to let their members, who were going to Playland, know about it.What is disputed is whether the police used excessive force, or were goaded by violence directed at them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted January 30, 2012 Report Share Posted January 30, 2012 And I'm not sure how deportation would result from such a small issue. I would hate to think that a single issue could be politicized in such a way to make that happen - it's unfair. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Squid Posted January 30, 2012 Report Share Posted January 30, 2012 And I'm not sure how deportation would result from such a small issue. I would hate to think that a single issue could be politicized in such a way to make that happen - it's unfair. I'm sure that it won't! It probably isn't even being contemplated. However, in my view, immigrants that start riots over not removing a scarf due to safety concerns are not people that I would want in my country. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted January 30, 2012 Report Share Posted January 30, 2012 I'm sure that it won't! It probably isn't even being contemplated. I don't think there's anyone who would even have enough authority to see all the way through that idea, and would also have the discretion to pursue the case. However, in my view, immigrants that start riots over not removing a scarf due to safety concerns are not people that I would want in my country. I thought you might feel that way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted January 30, 2012 Report Share Posted January 30, 2012 I was speaking of the Muslims - they are probably cooking up a story to make the police appear guilty. I guess your POV only makes sense if they're definitely not guilty. Is that your viewpoint ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty Posted January 30, 2012 Report Share Posted January 30, 2012 Look - YOU just said you were trying to help out by listing your prejudices. This is all sort of nonsense anyway, so we likely don't need to parse this further. Maybe the other poster can be more specific about your prejudices. Maybe the 'facilitator' might point out to the other poster to play the ball instead of attacking the poster. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.