I was accosted in a library by some bible-thumpers once. <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" /> Not just pulled aside for some Jesus talk, but literally ambushed in a team effort. One guy struck up a conversation with me about God and stuff, and BAM, when the time was right the wife was right behind me reaching for some literature for me to take home. WTH! I'm just trying to read in the library, and I get ambushed Jurassic Park style. <img src="embarrassed.gif" border="0">
And to tell you the truth, aside from the pacifists the only reason people are opposing a war is because they are liberals who have a grudge against Bush.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Mr. Macintosh, you spew out quite a bit of stuff that's both off topic and completely fabricated nonsense.
You got less than half the story there Fellow. And the only part the ****** media wants you to hear.</strong><hr></blockquote>Scott, you should just have that refrain on a sticky note so you can just cut and paste . . . it keeps you from actually having to respond thpughtfully, and, will save some typing
or you could just not bother and we will just assume, in every thread that you mean to blame all the perspectives that you disagree with on the media . . . that way you wo't have to bother typing anything at all . . .
<strong>I was accosted in a library by some bible-thumpers once. <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" /> Not just pulled aside for some Jesus talk, but literally ambushed in a team effort. One guy struck up a conversation with me about God and stuff, and BAM, when the time was right the wife was right behind me reaching for some literature for me to take home. WTH! I'm just trying to read in the library, and I get ambushed Jurassic Park style. <img src="embarrassed.gif" border="0"> </strong><hr></blockquote>
That is a shame that the people who spoke with you made such a "business" of it. Reminds me of when I am in a Barnes & Noble and Amway MLM robots give me the slick and nasty treatment. Such tactics are failures. Sorry you had that experience.
[quote]Originally posted by FellowshipChurch iBook:
<strong>
That story is not even funny. I can not believe that happened. We are free to wear t-shirts no matter what they say in a place such as a mall. The nuts who gave him trouble over his shirt need to face some harsh penalty.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Well... sort of...
[quote]Originally posted by Eugene:
<strong>
It was only defined as tresspassing because the mall is private property, and that's probably the easiest thing to book him for. Had the guys started harassing strangers walking by on the sidewalk it would have indeed been disturbing the peace.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
The mall is private property. They're using the same principle that keeps you out of the 7-11 if you don't have shirt or shoes.
Maybe the security guards were Doofuses, but remember that the mall also has its own sets of rights, and some rights supercede others (see: yelling "FIRE! (the director)" in a movie theater).
If you invited some guy to your backyard barbecue, do you have the right to throw him out when he gets obnoxious, finishes the beer, kicks the dog and starts groping your spouse? Afterall, you invited him over.
(Answer: of course you can-- he drank all of your beer.)
<strong>Scott, you should just have that refrain on a sticky note so you can just cut and paste . . . it keeps you from actually having to respond thpughtfully, and, will save some typing
or you could just not bother and we will just assume, in every thread that you mean to blame all the perspectives that you disagree with on the media . . . that way you wo't have to bother typing anything at all . . .</strong><hr></blockquote>
You have to agree that the media gave less than half the story in this case. You have to agree that it was at least sloppy and at worst intentional. So I'll say that in those situation where the media is "sloppy" with a story like this it usually slanted toward the current agenda of the liberal view.
<strong>You have to agree that the media gave less than half the story in this case. </strong><hr></blockquote>I'm going to withhold judgment on that. Some people have claimed that they were harassing other patrons, some have claimed they were simply wearing a t-shirt. Perhaps the other patrons started harassing them. I suppose we'll eventually hear what happened.
BRussle, did you read the police report? it clearly states that the security guards had been told by other partons (read multiple sets of people) that the defendent and his son were bothering random folks about the peace/war issue.
then then asked them to leave, and remove the shirt. they didn't. they were cited for tresspassing and the cops hauled them off. seems pretty straight forward to me.
reminds me of a news story i saw the other day.
headline teaser before the newscast was
"Dr. in serious trouble after carving initials on woman's uterus"
first thought through my mind?
"Holy shit, some dumbass did surgery on her, carved his name on her uterus and stitched her back up!?!" i figured they must have found out when they went back in for something, or did an MRI or something along those lines.
so then the story is actually told in full.
first they interview the woman who's talking about how she feel violated. then the show the Dr.'s school, the hospital etc. really working that sympathy angle. then in the last 5 min. they get to the meat in the matter.
turns out the organ had been removed, as is typical for that procedure. it also turns out that when the organ is sent to the lab for testing (also normal) the doctor takes a cauterizing iron and puts a mark on one side, so the lab knows which side is the front, and which is the back. (again, standard operating procedures).
the only difference? this Dr. happens to put two initials on the organ instead of just an X or something. that had to be the biggest non-story EVER.
If there was more to the story then it is not even a story and my opinion on the matter has become void as I had stated it in my first reply to this subject. I never watch or read CNN anyway as I can not stand their tactics.
Mall Asks Police to Drop Trespassing Charges Against N.Y. Man Arrested Over Anti-War T-Shirt
The Associated Press
Officials at a mall where a man was arrested for refusing to remove an anti-war T-shirt asked Wednesday that trespassing charges against him be dropped.
Police said managers from Crossgates Mall called and asked that the complaint against Stephen Downs be withdrawn. Police Chief James Murley said he would support the mall's decision.
Earlier Wednesday, about 100 anti-war demonstrators marched through the mall to protest the arrest. They told a mall manager they would stop only when charges against the shopper were dropped and when the mall outlined its policy.
"We just want to know what the policy is and why it's being randomly enforced," said Erin O'Brien, an organizer of the noontime rally. "It's only the people in the recent months who have anti-war or peace T-shirts that are being asked to leave the mall."
A mall spokeswoman did not return repeated calls for comment.
Downs' son, Roger, said dropping the charge would not rectify the arrest. "My father feels there's more to this. Crossgates hasn't examined what was wrong here," he said. "I think he'd like an apology."
He said his father would wait to see how the mall handles the case before deciding whether to sue.
Stephen Downs, 61, and his son were stopped Monday by mall security guards and asked to remove their shirts that read "Peace on Earth" and "Give Peace a Chance," or leave. Roger Downs, 31, took off his shirt. But his father, a lawyer with the state Commission on Judicial Conduct and a former Peace Corps volunteer, refused.
The guards called police, and he was charged with trespassing and pleaded innocent.
Tim Kelley, director of Operations for Pyramid Mall management, the mall's owner, said in a statement that Downs' behavior and clothing was disruptive to other shoppers.
The men had had the T-shirts made at a mall store and wore them while they shopped.
"Dr. in serious trouble after carving initials on woman's uterus"
</strong><hr></blockquote>
You know, I once saw Elvis's alien love child with Sarah Michelle Gellar running away from a Burger King in Kalamazoo. It's true! They have Burger Kings in K-Zoo!
<strong>reminds me of a news story i saw the other day.
"Dr. in serious trouble after carving initials on woman's uterus"
.</strong><hr></blockquote>I saw that same story, and you know what . . . it is standard operating procedure and yet its still an interesting 'human interest' story
The man is 'signing his work' . . . he's, in a sense 'claiming' it . . . it is like he imagines the women as a canvas for his art . . . and that is fascinating
I also fully understand how a woman would feel violated by this . . . to become a material in this man's notion of craft and art . . . its strange even though he isn't really doing anything beyond standard operating procedure
personally, I think its a powerful symbol; a gesture that mirrors much larger issues involving how we relate to the world of matter, as mere standing reserve for our usage and disposal . . . its an issue of the paternal doctor figure and his piece of canvas-meat-women that he uses as such but in the call of 'standard-operating procedure' efficiency
so, I think that it is actually quite newsworthy . . . just not a big political issue . . .
its very novelistic . . . I could imagine a Raymond Carver story centering around this sort of thing . . .
Speaking of T-Shirts, Sadam is issuing some look alike US uniforms to some soldiers to comitt atrocities and then blame them on the US. Should there be a war when a man is that sick? Hell yes.
<strong>Speaking of T-Shirts, Sadam is issuing some look alike US uniforms to some soldiers to comitt atrocities and then blame them on the US. Should there be a war when a man is that sick? Hell yes.</strong><hr></blockquote>
So what the hell does that have to do with peace T-Shirts? Oh yeah, nothing!
Seriously, the media is sickly. And to tell you the truth, aside from the pacifists the only reason people are opposing a war is because they are liberals who have a grudge against Bush.</strong><hr></blockquote>
<strong>BRussle, did you read the police report? it clearly states that the security guards had been told by other partons (read multiple sets of people) that the defendent and his son were bothering random folks about the peace/war issue.</strong><hr></blockquote>I sure did - did you? Because you don't have it quite right. [quote]"Security officer received complaints about defendant wearing a T-shirt "Give Peace A Chance" and defendant's partner wearing other T-shirt Stating Give the inspectors a chance. Received complaints that they were stopping other shoppers."<hr></blockquote>
You seem to be suggesting that it wasn't about the shirt as the media have implied, but instead the true story is that it was really about them being disruptive to other shoppers. But I think it's pretty clear that the t-shirts really were the key.
1. The complaint specifically goes into great detail about the t-shirts, listing what was on them, and says that someone had specifically complained to mall security about the t-shirts. Who the hell would complain about those t-shirts?
2. Only one of the pair was actually arrested - the one who refused to take off the t-shirt. So wearing the t-shirt did seem to be the key.
3. The t-shirts are really the only objectively verifiable evidence - how do we know that some of the other shoppers didn't stop them about their t-shirts? We don't. Maybe they were harassing other shoppers, or maybe someone was harassing them about their shirts, which is what it sounds like to me. We don't know. But we do know they had on the t-shirts and that the one who refused to take off his shirt was the one who was arrested.
[quote]then then asked them to leave, and remove the shirt. they didn't. they were cited for tresspassing and the cops hauled them off. seems pretty straight forward to me.<hr></blockquote>But see that doesn't make any sense. Why would they ask them to leave AND take off the t-shirts? Who cares what they're wearing if they leave the mall? No, the key was that they wanted them to take off their shirts. That is ridiculous, and if you don't see that, then, well, you're just a big old poopy head.
Comments
<strong>
And to tell you the truth, aside from the pacifists the only reason people are opposing a war is because they are liberals who have a grudge against Bush.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Mr. Macintosh, you spew out quite a bit of stuff that's both off topic and completely fabricated nonsense.
Welcome to AppleOutsider!
<strong>
Mr. Macintosh, you spew out quite a bit of stuff that's both off topic and completely fabricated nonsense.
Welcome to AppleOutsider!</strong><hr></blockquote>
He'll fit in great with the rest of us
<strong>
You got less than half the story there Fellow. And the only part the ****** media wants you to hear.</strong><hr></blockquote>Scott, you should just have that refrain on a sticky note so you can just cut and paste . . . it keeps you from actually having to respond thpughtfully, and, will save some typing
or you could just not bother and we will just assume, in every thread that you mean to blame all the perspectives that you disagree with on the media . . . that way you wo't have to bother typing anything at all . . .
<strong>I was accosted in a library by some bible-thumpers once. <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" /> Not just pulled aside for some Jesus talk, but literally ambushed in a team effort. One guy struck up a conversation with me about God and stuff, and BAM, when the time was right the wife was right behind me reaching for some literature for me to take home. WTH! I'm just trying to read in the library, and I get ambushed Jurassic Park style. <img src="embarrassed.gif" border="0"> </strong><hr></blockquote>
That is a shame that the people who spoke with you made such a "business" of it. Reminds me of when I am in a Barnes & Noble and Amway MLM robots give me the slick and nasty treatment. Such tactics are failures. Sorry you had that experience.
Fellowship
<strong>
That story is not even funny. I can not believe that happened. We are free to wear t-shirts no matter what they say in a place such as a mall. The nuts who gave him trouble over his shirt need to face some harsh penalty.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Well... sort of...
[quote]Originally posted by Eugene:
<strong>
It was only defined as tresspassing because the mall is private property, and that's probably the easiest thing to book him for. Had the guys started harassing strangers walking by on the sidewalk it would have indeed been disturbing the peace.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
The mall is private property. They're using the same principle that keeps you out of the 7-11 if you don't have shirt or shoes.
Maybe the security guards were Doofuses, but remember that the mall also has its own sets of rights, and some rights supercede others (see: yelling "FIRE! (the director)" in a movie theater).
If you invited some guy to your backyard barbecue, do you have the right to throw him out when he gets obnoxious, finishes the beer, kicks the dog and starts groping your spouse? Afterall, you invited him over.
(Answer: of course you can-- he drank all of your beer.)
It's not like I was disagreeing with the complaint. I was just saying they avoided harsher punishment.
[ 03-06-2003: Message edited by: Eugene ]</p>
<strong>Scott, you should just have that refrain on a sticky note so you can just cut and paste . . . it keeps you from actually having to respond thpughtfully, and, will save some typing
or you could just not bother and we will just assume, in every thread that you mean to blame all the perspectives that you disagree with on the media . . . that way you wo't have to bother typing anything at all . . .</strong><hr></blockquote>
You have to agree that the media gave less than half the story in this case. You have to agree that it was at least sloppy and at worst intentional. So I'll say that in those situation where the media is "sloppy" with a story like this it usually slanted toward the current agenda of the liberal view.
<strong>
You have to agree that the media gave less than half the story in this case. </strong><hr></blockquote>
You have to agree that this is true in most cases. The deciding factor is how the editor can make it a story that sells. This one sold.
<strong>You have to agree that the media gave less than half the story in this case. </strong><hr></blockquote>I'm going to withhold judgment on that. Some people have claimed that they were harassing other patrons, some have claimed they were simply wearing a t-shirt. Perhaps the other patrons started harassing them. I suppose we'll eventually hear what happened.
then then asked them to leave, and remove the shirt. they didn't. they were cited for tresspassing and the cops hauled them off. seems pretty straight forward to me.
reminds me of a news story i saw the other day.
headline teaser before the newscast was
"Dr. in serious trouble after carving initials on woman's uterus"
first thought through my mind?
"Holy shit, some dumbass did surgery on her, carved his name on her uterus and stitched her back up!?!" i figured they must have found out when they went back in for something, or did an MRI or something along those lines.
so then the story is actually told in full.
first they interview the woman who's talking about how she feel violated. then the show the Dr.'s school, the hospital etc. really working that sympathy angle. then in the last 5 min. they get to the meat in the matter.
turns out the organ had been removed, as is typical for that procedure. it also turns out that when the organ is sent to the lab for testing (also normal) the doctor takes a cauterizing iron and puts a mark on one side, so the lab knows which side is the front, and which is the back. (again, standard operating procedures).
the only difference? this Dr. happens to put two initials on the organ instead of just an X or something. that had to be the biggest non-story EVER.
news just sucks now.
Fellowship
Mall Wants to Drop Peace T-Shirt Charges
Mall Asks Police to Drop Trespassing Charges Against N.Y. Man Arrested Over Anti-War T-Shirt
The Associated Press
Officials at a mall where a man was arrested for refusing to remove an anti-war T-shirt asked Wednesday that trespassing charges against him be dropped.
Police said managers from Crossgates Mall called and asked that the complaint against Stephen Downs be withdrawn. Police Chief James Murley said he would support the mall's decision.
Earlier Wednesday, about 100 anti-war demonstrators marched through the mall to protest the arrest. They told a mall manager they would stop only when charges against the shopper were dropped and when the mall outlined its policy.
"We just want to know what the policy is and why it's being randomly enforced," said Erin O'Brien, an organizer of the noontime rally. "It's only the people in the recent months who have anti-war or peace T-shirts that are being asked to leave the mall."
A mall spokeswoman did not return repeated calls for comment.
Downs' son, Roger, said dropping the charge would not rectify the arrest. "My father feels there's more to this. Crossgates hasn't examined what was wrong here," he said. "I think he'd like an apology."
He said his father would wait to see how the mall handles the case before deciding whether to sue.
Stephen Downs, 61, and his son were stopped Monday by mall security guards and asked to remove their shirts that read "Peace on Earth" and "Give Peace a Chance," or leave. Roger Downs, 31, took off his shirt. But his father, a lawyer with the state Commission on Judicial Conduct and a former Peace Corps volunteer, refused.
The guards called police, and he was charged with trespassing and pleaded innocent.
Tim Kelley, director of Operations for Pyramid Mall management, the mall's owner, said in a statement that Downs' behavior and clothing was disruptive to other shoppers.
The men had had the T-shirts made at a mall store and wore them while they shopped.
<img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />
<strong>
"Dr. in serious trouble after carving initials on woman's uterus"
</strong><hr></blockquote>
You know, I once saw Elvis's alien love child with Sarah Michelle Gellar running away from a Burger King in Kalamazoo. It's true! They have Burger Kings in K-Zoo!
<strong>reminds me of a news story i saw the other day.
"Dr. in serious trouble after carving initials on woman's uterus"
.</strong><hr></blockquote>I saw that same story, and you know what . . . it is standard operating procedure and yet its still an interesting 'human interest' story
The man is 'signing his work' . . . he's, in a sense 'claiming' it . . . it is like he imagines the women as a canvas for his art . . . and that is fascinating
I also fully understand how a woman would feel violated by this . . . to become a material in this man's notion of craft and art . . . its strange even though he isn't really doing anything beyond standard operating procedure
personally, I think its a powerful symbol; a gesture that mirrors much larger issues involving how we relate to the world of matter, as mere standing reserve for our usage and disposal . . . its an issue of the paternal doctor figure and his piece of canvas-meat-women that he uses as such but in the call of 'standard-operating procedure' efficiency
so, I think that it is actually quite newsworthy . . . just not a big political issue . . .
its very novelistic . . . I could imagine a Raymond Carver story centering around this sort of thing . . .
the organ was removed from the body.
he puts specific initials on it. hell, if nothing else it's easier to tell who did which operation then.
if it has to be marked, are two specific letters that different than the generic "X" that everyone else was using? i sure didn't think so.
<strong>Speaking of T-Shirts, Sadam is issuing some look alike US uniforms to some soldiers to comitt atrocities and then blame them on the US. Should there be a war when a man is that sick? Hell yes.</strong><hr></blockquote>
So what the hell does that have to do with peace T-Shirts? Oh yeah, nothing!
You're like scott times two. You're my hero.
<strong>
Seriously, the media is sickly. And to tell you the truth, aside from the pacifists the only reason people are opposing a war is because they are liberals who have a grudge against Bush.</strong><hr></blockquote>
<a href="http://www.moveon.org/emergency"; target="_blank">http://www.moveon.org/emergency</a>;
(someone should make a "Gulf War II" thread)
<strong>BRussle, did you read the police report? it clearly states that the security guards had been told by other partons (read multiple sets of people) that the defendent and his son were bothering random folks about the peace/war issue.</strong><hr></blockquote>I sure did - did you? Because you don't have it quite right. [quote]"Security officer received complaints about defendant wearing a T-shirt "Give Peace A Chance" and defendant's partner wearing other T-shirt Stating Give the inspectors a chance. Received complaints that they were stopping other shoppers."<hr></blockquote>
You seem to be suggesting that it wasn't about the shirt as the media have implied, but instead the true story is that it was really about them being disruptive to other shoppers. But I think it's pretty clear that the t-shirts really were the key.
1. The complaint specifically goes into great detail about the t-shirts, listing what was on them, and says that someone had specifically complained to mall security about the t-shirts.
2. Only one of the pair was actually arrested - the one who refused to take off the t-shirt. So wearing the t-shirt did seem to be the key.
3. The t-shirts are really the only objectively verifiable evidence - how do we know that some of the other shoppers didn't stop them about their t-shirts? We don't. Maybe they were harassing other shoppers, or maybe someone was harassing them about their shirts, which is what it sounds like to me. We don't know. But we do know they had on the t-shirts and that the one who refused to take off his shirt was the one who was arrested.
[quote]then then asked them to leave, and remove the shirt. they didn't. they were cited for tresspassing and the cops hauled them off. seems pretty straight forward to me.<hr></blockquote>But see that doesn't make any sense. Why would they ask them to leave AND take off the t-shirts? Who cares what they're wearing if they leave the mall? No, the key was that they wanted them to take off their shirts. That is ridiculous, and if you don't see that, then, well, you're just a big old poopy head.