User Panel
Posted: 1/4/2012 8:34:11 AM EDT
Back in June of 2010 a leader of a pro-Palestinian student group at University of Berkeley allegedly rammed a Jewish woman with a shopping cart as she staged a counter-protest to an anti-Israel "Apartheid Week” rally conducted by the Muslim Student Association and Students for Justice in Palestine. The counter-protest was dubbed "Israel Wants Peace Week.” Now, U.S. District Court Judge Richard Seeborg has deemed that the Muslim students who harassed Jessica Felber and other Jewish students were simply engaging in protected political speech. http://news.yahoo.com/ca-judge-deems-ramming-jewish-woman-shopping-cart-003506015.html Um, yeah. No. - TS |
|
Didn't you know?
The Palestinians are the bestest evar and can do no wrong!!! |
|
Quoted:
Didn't you know? The Palestinians are the bestest evar and can do no wrong!!! 1) ROP can do no wrong 2) So this means somebody can [coc violation] this judge with a shopping cart and call it protected political speech, right? |
|
You realize that the student was suing the University and that it was the University that was dismissed, right? The news story is not exactly accurate.
|
|
Quoted:
Arfcom road trip to "free speech" some Berkeley hippies? precedent has been set.... |
|
Almost makes you sad the Occupy movement is pretty much dead. Sooo many missed opportunities.
Oh, and reading the proverbial beat down that a higher court will provide to this Super Genius Extraordinaire on the bench should be fun. |
|
Wow....I knew my State was screwed up, but covering assault under the guise of Free Speech is beyond unacceptable.
|
|
Assault is now protected political speech? Time to beat some hippies, you know, for free speech.
|
|
Only in Bezerkly CA could low level assault be thought of as "Free Speech".
Have to love activist judges with a political agenda. |
|
I wonder what the judge would have ruled if the races were changed? If a Jewish person assaulted a moslem?
|
|
Quoted:
California Judge? US District Court Judge. In NorCal. Yale graduate. Colombia Law. Obama nominee. |
|
Attention. You have all been mislead by the news story. I just read the entire decision by the Judge. It has absolutely nothing to do with an assault with a shopping cart. Zero, nothing, nada.
The suit was bullshit. It essentially said that the U.C. Berkley permitted a hostile atmosphere by allowing pro-Palestinians to protest. Most of the Plaintiff's complaints were related to protests where she wasn't even present. Email me if you want a copy of the actual opinion. Otherwise carry on in a frenzy. |
|
Quoted:
Only in Bezerkly CA could low level assault be thought of as "Free Speech". Have to love activist judges with a political agenda. Gotta love the people's republic of kalifornia |
|
Quoted: So assault is free speech now? Cool!!!!! I'm feeling pretty chatty myself Quoted: Email me if you want a copy of the actual opinion. Otherwise carry on in a frenzy. Buzzkill |
|
Thread title is not truthful. The judge did NOT rule that hitting someone with a shopping cart was free speech. Read the article, not just the thread title. The issue was whether the UNIVERSITY, which was the entity being sued, had an obligation to intervene. Here's what the judge held: “Rather, that event occurred when she, as one person attempting to exercise free speech rights in a public forum was allegedly attacked by another person who likewise was participating in a public protest in a public forum.” The judge didn't hold that the assault was lawful or "free speech," but was instead merely rendering an opinion on the duty the University owed in this circumstance.
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
So assault is free speech now? Cool!!!!! I'm feeling pretty chatty myself Quoted:
Email me if you want a copy of the actual opinion. Otherwise carry on in a frenzy. Buzzkill Sorry to be a downer. |
|
Quoted:
Attention. You have all been mislead by the news story. I just read the entire decision by the Judge. It has absolutely nothing to do with an assault with a shopping cart. Zero, nothing, nada. The suit was bullshit. It essentially said that the U.C. Berkley permitted a hostile atmosphere by allowing pro-Palestinians to protest. Most of the Plaintiff's complaints were related to protests where she wasn't even present. Email me if you want a copy of the actual opinion. Otherwise carry on in a frenzy. Reading is for faggots. The shopping cart of liberty does not approve. |
|
Quoted: Attention. You have all been mislead by the news story. I just read the entire decision by the Judge. It has absolutely nothing to do with an assault with a shopping cart. Zero, nothing, nada. The suit was bullshit. It essentially said that the U.C. Berkley permitted a hostile atmosphere by allowing pro-Palestinians to protest. Most of the Plaintiff's complaints were related to protests where she wasn't even present. Email me if you want a copy of the actual opinion. Otherwise carry on in a frenzy. Quit that shit!!!!! GD is on a ROLL!!!!!!!!!!!!
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Attention. You have all been mislead by the news story. I just read the entire decision by the Judge. It has absolutely nothing to do with an assault with a shopping cart. Zero, nothing, nada. The suit was bullshit. It essentially said that the U.C. Berkley permitted a hostile atmosphere by allowing pro-Palestinians to protest. Most of the Plaintiff's complaints were related to protests where she wasn't even present. Email me if you want a copy of the actual opinion. Otherwise carry on in a frenzy. Reading is for faggots. The shopping cart of liberty does not approve. Ok. That made me laugh out loud. |
|
So ramming with buggies in walmart on EBT card day is perfectly legal now!! Oh what fun we will have.
|
|
Quoted: Thread title is not truthful. The judge did NOT rule that hitting someone with a shopping cart was free speech. Read the article, not just the thread title. The issue was whether the UNIVERSITY, which was the entity being sued, had an obligation to intervene. Here's what the judge held: "Rather, that event occurred when she, as one person attempting to exercise free speech rights in a public forum was allegedly attacked by another person who likewise was participating in a public protest in a public forum.” The judge didn't hold that the assault was lawful or "free speech," but was instead merely rendering an opinion on the duty the University owed in this circumstance. I quoted the title, and it's amusing to me that Yahoo is citing The Blaze. |
|
Quoted:
Attention. You have all been mislead by the news story. I just read the entire decision by the Judge. It has absolutely nothing to do with an assault with a shopping cart. Zero, nothing, nada. The suit was bullshit. It essentially said that the U.C. Berkley permitted a hostile atmosphere by allowing pro-Palestinians to protest. Most of the Plaintiff's complaints were related to protests where she wasn't even present. Email me if you want a copy of the actual opinion. Otherwise carry on in a frenzy. GODDAMMIT!! I can FEEL the righteous indignation being drained from my psyche and I DON'T LIKE IT!!! |
|
Maybe the judge saw the girls of the IDF thread and only meant to deem ramming of jewish women in general as free speech?
|
|
I knew when I clicked the link and saw the blaze that it was a lie. The blaze is replacing wacky weekly world news as the batboy of bullshit right wing articles.
|
|
yeah im sure they smoked her with the cart and nothing happened it's a conspiracy against jews!!!!!@
fucking idiots Quoted:
Quoted:
Thread title is not truthful. The judge did NOT rule that hitting someone with a shopping cart was free speech. Read the article, not just the thread title. The issue was whether the UNIVERSITY, which was the entity being sued, had an obligation to intervene. Here's what the judge held: "Rather, that event occurred when she, as one person attempting to exercise free speech rights in a public forum was allegedly attacked by another person who likewise was participating in a public protest in a public forum.” The judge didn't hold that the assault was lawful or "free speech," but was instead merely rendering an opinion on the duty the University owed in this circumstance. I quoted the title, and it's amusing to me that Yahoo is citing The Blaze. |
|
Quoted:
I wonder what the judge would have ruled if the races were changed? If a Jewish person assaulted a moslem? Let me rip the turban or head gear off a Palestinian's head, and rat tail his ass with it and find out. |
|
Quoted:
Attention. You have all been mislead by the news story. I just read the entire decision by the Judge. It has absolutely nothing to do with an assault with a shopping cart. Zero, nothing, nada. The suit was bullshit. It essentially said that the U.C. Berkley permitted a hostile atmosphere by allowing pro-Palestinians to protest. Most of the Plaintiff's complaints were related to protests where she wasn't even present. Email me if you want a copy of the actual opinion. Otherwise carry on in a frenzy. Thank you for the post sir. But i will still stand by my frenzied comment above in support of this arfcom frenzy thread. |
|
Quoted:
Back in June of 2010 a leader of a pro-Palestinian student group at University of Berkeley allegedly rammed a Jewish woman with a shopping cart as she staged a counter-protest to an anti-Israel "Apartheid Week” rally conducted by the Muslim Student Association and Students for Justice in Palestine. The counter-protest was dubbed "Israel Wants Peace Week.”
Now, U.S. District Court Judge Richard Seeborg has deemed that the Muslim students who harassed Jessica Felber and other Jewish students were simply engaging in protected political speech. http://news.yahoo.com/ca-judge-deems-ramming-jewish-woman-shopping-cart-003506015.html Um, yeah. No. - TS Bizarro World out there. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Attention. You have all been mislead by the news story. I just read the entire decision by the Judge. It has absolutely nothing to do with an assault with a shopping cart. Zero, nothing, nada. The suit was bullshit. It essentially said that the U.C. Berkley permitted a hostile atmosphere by allowing pro-Palestinians to protest. Most of the Plaintiff's complaints were related to protests where she wasn't even present. Email me if you want a copy of the actual opinion. Otherwise carry on in a frenzy. Reading is for faggots. The shopping cart of liberty does not approve. Ok. That made me laugh out loud. Me too. The shopping cart of liberty does not approve. |
|
Quoted:
Maybe the judge saw the girls of the IDF thread and only meant to deem ramming of jewish women in general as free speech? Unfortunately, not all Jewish women look like that. Otherwise my grandmother would of gotten off my back years ago. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Maybe the judge saw the girls of the IDF thread and only meant to deem ramming of jewish women in general as free speech? Unfortunately, not all Jewish women look like that. Otherwise my grandmother would of gotten off my back years ago. Google "Jessica Felber." Not remotely Women of IDF material. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Attention. You have all been mislead by the news story. I just read the entire decision by the Judge. It has absolutely nothing to do with an assault with a shopping cart. Zero, nothing, nada. The suit was bullshit. It essentially said that the U.C. Berkley permitted a hostile atmosphere by allowing pro-Palestinians to protest. Most of the Plaintiff's complaints were related to protests where she wasn't even present. Email me if you want a copy of the actual opinion. Otherwise carry on in a frenzy. Reading is for faggots. The shopping cart of liberty does not approve. Thanks for the new sig line. |
|
Quoted:
Attention. You have all been mislead by the news story. I just read the entire decision by the Judge. It has absolutely nothing to do with an assault with a shopping cart. Zero, nothing, nada. The suit was bullshit. It essentially said that the U.C. Berkley permitted a hostile atmosphere by allowing pro-Palestinians to protest. Most of the Plaintiff's complaints were related to protests where she wasn't even present. Email me if you want a copy of the actual opinion. Otherwise carry on in a frenzy. You expect anyone here to listen to the truth? |
|
Quoted:
So assault is free speech now? Cool!!!!! Seems like the cartee sued the school for not protecting her from the carter. That's a wee bit different. |
|
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.