Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Site Notices
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
Link Posted: 1/4/2012 8:35:25 AM EDT
So assault is free speech now? Cool!!!!!
Link Posted: 1/4/2012 8:35:47 AM EDT
Didn't you know?

The Palestinians are the bestest evar and can do no wrong!!!
Link Posted: 1/4/2012 8:40:57 AM EDT
Originally Posted By South_Side_Shooter:
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?

Link Posted: 1/4/2012 8:41:06 AM EDT
Arfcom road trip to "free speech" some Berkeley hippies?
Link Posted: 1/4/2012 8:42:46 AM EDT
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.



Link Posted: 1/4/2012 8:43:16 AM EDT
Originally Posted By GNRNR:
Arfcom road trip to "free speech" some Berkeley hippies?


precedent has been set....
Link Posted: 1/4/2012 9:11:19 AM EDT
That decision is begging for a supreme court bitchslap.
Link Posted: 1/4/2012 9:19:54 AM EDT
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.
Link Posted: 1/4/2012 9:22:36 AM EDT
Wow....I knew my State was screwed up, but covering assault under the guise of Free Speech is beyond unacceptable.
Link Posted: 1/4/2012 9:22:43 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/4/2012 9:22:59 AM EDT by Miracle_Pants]
Assault is now protected political speech? Time to beat some hippies, you know, for free speech.
Link Posted: 1/4/2012 9:23:59 AM EDT
Ahh, Berkeley
Link Posted: 1/4/2012 9:26:02 AM EDT
California Judge?

US District Court Judge.
Link Posted: 1/4/2012 9:27:31 AM EDT
Only in Bezerkly CA could low level assault be thought of as "Free Speech".

Have to love activist judges with a political agenda.
Link Posted: 1/4/2012 9:30:58 AM EDT
I wonder what the judge would have ruled if the races were changed? If a Jewish person assaulted a moslem?
Link Posted: 1/4/2012 9:33:58 AM EDT
Originally Posted By VacaDuck:
California Judge?

US District Court Judge.


In NorCal.

Yale graduate. Colombia Law. Obama nominee.
Link Posted: 1/4/2012 9:36:36 AM EDT
So she can fling pig shit back in response
Link Posted: 1/4/2012 9:40:14 AM EDT
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.
Link Posted: 1/4/2012 9:40:28 AM EDT
Originally Posted By MetalChef:
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
Link Posted: 1/4/2012 9:43:15 AM EDT
Wtf is a palestinian?

Where do they come from?
Link Posted: 1/4/2012 9:43:16 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/4/2012 9:44:37 AM EDT by wingnutx]

Originally Posted By Jarhead08:

So assault is free speech now? Cool!!!!!

I'm feeling pretty chatty myself



Originally Posted By gopeterson:

Email me if you want a copy of the actual opinion. Otherwise carry on in a frenzy.

Buzzkill

Link Posted: 1/4/2012 9:43:45 AM EDT
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.

Link Posted: 1/4/2012 9:46:22 AM EDT
Originally Posted By wingnutx:

Originally Posted By Jarhead08:

So assault is free speech now? Cool!!!!!

I'm feeling pretty chatty myself



Originally Posted By gopeterson:

Email me if you want a copy of the actual opinion. Otherwise carry on in a frenzy.

Buzzkill




Sorry to be a downer.
Link Posted: 1/4/2012 9:50:51 AM EDT
Originally Posted By gopeterson:
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.

Link Posted: 1/4/2012 9:51:47 AM EDT

Originally Posted By gopeterson:
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!!!!!!!!!!!!
Link Posted: 1/4/2012 9:52:41 AM EDT
Originally Posted By GNRNR:
Originally Posted By gopeterson:
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.
Link Posted: 1/4/2012 9:55:19 AM EDT
So ramming with buggies in walmart on EBT card day is perfectly legal now!! Oh what fun we will have.
Link Posted: 1/4/2012 10:03:41 AM EDT

Originally Posted By danno-in-michigan:

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.
Link Posted: 1/4/2012 10:14:21 AM EDT
Originally Posted By gopeterson:
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!!!

Link Posted: 1/4/2012 10:16:16 AM EDT
Maybe the judge saw the girls of the IDF thread and only meant to deem ramming of jewish women in general as free speech?
Link Posted: 1/4/2012 10:33:21 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/4/2012 10:34:49 AM EDT by Aimless]
Link Posted: 1/4/2012 10:34:43 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/4/2012 10:35:44 AM EDT by jcrone2]
....
Link Posted: 1/4/2012 10:35:25 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/4/2012 10:36:07 AM EDT by jcrone2]
yeah im sure they smoked her with the cart and nothing happened it's a conspiracy against jews!!!!!@


fucking idiots


Originally Posted By Troubl3shooter:

Originally Posted By danno-in-michigan:

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.


Link Posted: 1/4/2012 10:38:28 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Partisan:
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.
Link Posted: 1/4/2012 10:40:10 AM EDT
In my book that is assault.
Link Posted: 1/4/2012 10:40:35 AM EDT
Originally Posted By gopeterson:
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.
Link Posted: 1/4/2012 10:41:56 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Troubl3shooter:
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.
Link Posted: 1/4/2012 10:41:59 AM EDT
Originally Posted By gopeterson:
Originally Posted By GNRNR:
Originally Posted By gopeterson:
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.
Link Posted: 1/4/2012 10:43:31 AM EDT
Originally Posted By cedjunior:
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.
Link Posted: 1/4/2012 10:46:24 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Jman78:
Originally Posted By cedjunior:
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.
Link Posted: 1/4/2012 10:46:55 AM EDT

Originally Posted By GNRNR:
Originally Posted By gopeterson:
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.
Link Posted: 1/4/2012 11:58:07 AM EDT
Originally Posted By gopeterson:
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?
Link Posted: 1/4/2012 12:57:22 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/4/2012 12:59:13 PM EDT by John_Wayne777]
Top Top