Forum Replies Created
Great, so to sum it up.
to take off internet is the network card
no one knows about bluetooth
And not everyone knows what the yeshiva plans on teaching (word and excel) or that you can probably reinsert this network card.
yes we definitely need better training for police. For example I think they should all be trained in martial arts in order that they can actually hold down suspects without choking them. It shouldn’t need 4 cops to hold down one bad guy. If they would have been confident to tackle him before he got to the car, Blake would still be able to walk.
L’inyan the kids in the back, if it’s true that he was holding a knife i don’t think that he would have any problem holding a gun instead. I mean the guy was willing to fight with the cops in front of them so he couldn’t have been to worried about chinuch. Also, if it’s true that “During the 911 call one of the specific complaints was that this fellow took keys to a car which was not his to operate” then i don’t think the kids would mean anything.
Again as i said, my take on the story is that they thought he was going to get a gun from the car. Why they shot him more than 2-3 times, I don’t know. I suppose the cop panicked.
This case is not a clear cut bad cop story like George Floyd was(sorry Health 🙂 . I don’t know if the guy actually had a gun, but it doesn’t really make a difference. There have been multiple incidents in which a suspect was resisting arrest and then went to his car and pulled a gun from the car. I assume the cop shot Blake because he was afraid of that happening to him. If you want to prove that the cop is a bad guy then you’re going to have to focus on the actual facts rather than the emotional portrayal of “there were 3 little children in the back seat.”
I think the stock market will be dropping significantly within a month or two. There is no way that the current rally isn’t a bubble. You read these articles about how even the most reluctant traders are investing everything just because they don’t want to miss out and you wonder why they don’t see how that is bad news, not good news. When everyone is investing just because the Market is up that means it’s not going up because of any real value and will soon collapse.
The rest of the economy is unpredictable because of Corona so i’m not going to bother trying to predict that.
I leave the CR for 3 weeks and I come back to find that Chauvin was actually giving Floyd the death penalty for shooting a pregnant women about 15 years ago because the legal system did not yet punish him (apparently forgetting that Floyd already sat in prison for this).
I live in Lakewood and kept to social distancing rules until a week or 2 after shavous. After that i stopped being very careful because the case count in lakewood was steadily at a low number for a few weeks and has continued like that all the until now.
As of now i and most of Lakewood are davening in shuls like normal without masks. If Corona starts spreading again then i will change my position.
“That’s not a peaceful protest. It’s a mob of criminals.”
Aha! So then we are talking about 2 different protests 🙂
“ IMHO, I believe that the Feds acted with much Restraint!”
IMHO, that is 100% true. I was talking about a specific tactic which seems to have been stopped.
New body cam from Chauvin’s.
Nytimes-The video offers the fullest portrait yet of the tragic events around Mr. Floyd’s killing. It begins with officers driving to the scene, after a convenience store clerk called 911 and said a man had used a counterfeit $20 bill, and it ends showing officers on the street discussing what happened, after Mr. Floyd is driven away in an ambulance. At one point, in footage not previously seen, the officers are shown dragging Mr. Floyd to the ground after he resisted being put in the squad car.
Once he was on the ground, as Mr. Floyd again said he couldn’t breathe, and asked for water, and begged for his life, Derek Chauvin, the senior officer on the scene, said, in a nonchalant, almost mocking, tone, “takes a heck of a lot of oxygen to say that.”
The footage provides more detail into the action of Mr. Chauvin, who has been charged with second-degree murder and second-degree manslaughter for keeping his knee on Mr. Floyd’s neck for more than eight minutes while he gasped for life. He was later pronounced dead at the hospital.
As the minutes ticked by, and Mr. Floyd became quieter and his body went limp, one officer checked his pulse and said he couldn’t find one.
Mr. Chauvin’s response, uttered with no emotion, was, “uh huh.”
Just before, after being told that Mr. Floyd appeared to be passing out, Mr. Chauvin appears to express more concern for his fellow officers than the man dying under his knee.
“You guys all right, though?” he said.
“My knee might be a little scratched, but I’ll survive,” responded another officer, Thomas Lane.
The footage was made available for viewing Wednesday to the public and media by appointment at the Hennepin County Government Center in downtown Minneapolis — in a conference room with a dozen laptop stations — but was not allowed to be copied or recorded.
Doesn’t seem like such a nice guy, eh?
Those who can afford to pay more are mostly doing so, through donations.
The majority of everybody else would have to take out a second mortgage to pay another 2k for 5+ kids for the next 10 years if they are even paying the current 4-5k per kid for elementary school and 8-10k for high school.
A family of 8 kids, 2 in Mesivta and 6 in elementary school, is be paying 35-45k. Most people can’t even afford that. The numbers sky rocket once the kids start going to E”Y. So raising tuition probably won’t make much of an effect on money actually collected.
In regard to that rashi, the fact that we would thibk of stealing as right or wrong wouldn’t actually make it right or wrong which is how i look at morals- the rules of what is actually right or wrong.
“ Can you blame them for wanting to crush the radical Islamists?”
Well it would make sense to stop the radicals, but to put an entire ethnicity into concentration camps, sterilize them and sell their forced labor to Nike isn’t really so appropriate.
“ the police are within their rights to use forceful measures to enforce the law.”
Force is only supposed to be used when needed, that’s why we don’t deploy teargas when arresting a shoplifter. By a peaceful protest, even if it is after curfew, teargas is not needed. When unnecessary force is used we call it police brutality.
They were after curfew in the 1st week or 2. And that makes sense. The problem was that some cities deployed teargas at peaceful protests after curfew.
“ this Liberal idea of this deterrant doesn’t Work. No one is scared to get arrested, if there is No Serious Punishment. So far, in the Cities, No one is scared Not to go out & RIOT!”
What in the world are you talking about? When I said the sentence that I quoted I was talking about peaceful protests! Do you know how to follow a conversation?
“ The Federal Agents are there to arrest people.”
And as I said before, “ The gain is not worth the loss”. I think you forgot to address that.
“ If Non-lethal doesn’t work, then they go to Live Fire!”
The 2nd amendment was designed in case someone like you made it into office.”
“ i dare you to tell me how arresting people who have looted stores, started fires, threw things at officers and assaulted officers , or dispersing illegal gatherings , is not enforcing laws”
It is, but as I said, I don’t like the method of having soldiers in camouflage piling out of unmarked minivans and pulling people off the streets, whether or not those people are guilty. There are better ways of doing this.
(PS: when I said “ That’s why police wear identification tags, which these agents don’t have“ I didn’t know that the agents are wearing the symbol of their agencies which they are, but there is still no way of knowing who individual agents are. Although I do recognize that there is a problem of doxing. But my main issue is the unmarked car tactic being used in Portland)
Anyways, we would have no obligation to follow this learned middos as they would not necessarily be good or bad. We would just see what animals do and then do the same.
But my point being that morals are all fluid in the absence of a higher power because otherwise there is no mekor for the rule, why should i listen to your morals if I can make up my own?
R’ Uri Zohar mentions this in his book. He says that he was at a party and while drunk he stole something and his wife got mad at him. And he says that he remembers thinking to himself that if there is no higher power then what makes stealing wrong besides because that’s what society said.
“If they are doing something wrong – they be held accountable.”
actually not, because when you don’t know who someone is, then you can’t hold them accountable. That’s why police wear identification tags, which these agents don’t have.
“I’m sure they recognized the guy as a Perp.”
Could be, but that’s why i said they should use marked vehicles.
“They needed to do unmarked vehicles for the Element of Surprise”
The gain is not worth the loss.
“This has nothing to do with Commy Russia.”
Well whether you like it or not the fact is that they are using the same tactics.
“To arrest s/o – they have to be Tried in a Court of Law.”
Actually, what happens when responsible cities arrest protestors is they take them down to the station, process them which can take a while and then let them free. it usually takes a few hours, but no courts are involved. The idea is just to annoy the protestors so that they shouldn’t want to do it again.
“ If Non-lethal doesn’t work, then they go to Live Fire!”
The 2nd amendment was designed in case someone like you made it into office.
I believe that to mean on a practical sense more than a moral one. For example we would learn from lions that it’s not a good idea to eat each other just like lions don’t eat members of their own pack.
Stealing is self understood to be wrong, but that does not mean that this self-understanding would be true. Without a higher authority, there is no reason why anything should be good or bad besides for the way I feel. This is actually how the liberal left ended up the way they are.
“ I doubt that they are breaking any Law!”
And I don’t really care about that. I just have a problem with soldiers in unmarked minivans pulling people off the sidewalk. If they were in a convoy of humvees it wouldn’t bother me as much.
“ That’s the purpose of Law enforcement.”
Actually not. The purpose of law enforcement is to enforce the law. There are better ways to do that then acting like the KGB.
“ Do you know the meaning of “CURFEW”?”
Yeah, it means that after this time you get arrested. Teargas is for when violence is necessary.
“ If Non-lethal doesn’t work, then they go to Live Fire!”
The 2nd amendment was designed in case someone like you made it into office.
Well yes, and that means that Hashem coded being nice into the Torah. That doesn’t mean the Torah isn’t the reason to be nice, just that the Torah says you should be nice.
I agree that there are sources problematic to my view, but I think that it is a much bigger issue to say that there is a set of rules preceding Hashem. (Your 3rd option might address this, but I don’t really understand what you meant)
“Stealing is bad because of what it is.”
That’s not a very logical statement, although it does feel good.
“ how would the commandment ‘enlighten’ him to realize that it is bad?”
I don’t think that that is the point of the commandments. I think the point is simply to let us know what God wants.
“ He would think ‘the Torah forbids all the good stuff’, and would deny the very basis of moral ideas.”
See, you’re going in circles. You’re trying to address my point, but your using your ideas to do that. So when you say “ deny the very basis of moral ideas“ I don’t think that’s even a issue simply because I don’t think you can have a basis for morals that isn’t God.
The basic idea of what I’m trying to say is, that to believe in morals coming before religion is to believe that there is a power which comes before God which is not something that Judaism believes in.
And by the way, with your third option I think you run into issues when Hashem commands immoral thing. Like killing the whole Amalek. Or if you don’t think Amalek poses issues, in parshas Mattos, when Moshe tells his army to kill all the male children and grown women (even those that did not participate in the sin) from the POW’s. I think that Hashem has to be above morality in order for this to work.
(I’m not arguing, just pointing out)
I have a little bit of a hard time wrapping my head around your third option. Do you know which book it is in?
Socialism originally gained so much popularity because in a utopian society it makes the most sense, if everyone worked together than we could produce more. At that point in the worlds history, nobody understood that bad apples always ruin everything.July 22, 2020 12:23 am at 12:23 am in reply to: Why does the government give benefits to kollel yungerleit? #1885345
“There’s no law that says you have to work.”
“Welfare helps people buy things.”
“These kollel yungeleit are supporting grocery stores with the money.”
To delude yourself that this is why it is okay for Kollel Yungeleit to collect welfare does not cast a good light on your intelligence. It is okay simply because the government offered free money and you’d have to be stupid to say No thank you.
It definitely seems as though they are pulling suspects off the streets throughout the city, not just by the courthouse. There is extensive video evidence for this.
I don’t know whether or not the actions taken by Homeland Security are constitutional or not, but the tactics being used definitely scare me. people being pulled off the streets into unmarked vehicles by soldiers in gas masks definitely doesn’t sound like the America I know. At least paint the name of the organization to which the vehicle belongs to on the vehicle.
And spraying teargas at people simply chanting slogans? this is not even unique to the feds. in the beginning of the protests i saw live video of people being teargassed for protesting after curfew. Why was that necessary? in many big cities, Dallas for example, police simply arrested 100’s of protesters, loaded them on buses and drove them to the station. So then why the need to teargas peaceful protesters?
I hope Trump did not push for the army to use these scare tactics as this will definitely change my perception of him.July 21, 2020 10:59 pm at 10:59 pm in reply to: Why does the government give benefits to kollel yungerleit? #1885317
From the government’s perspective, yes, the programs were not designed very smartly.
From a Kollel person’s perspective, it’s a gift from Hashem!
Different people, different beliefs. If it really bothers you then don’t use WhatsApp.
I was looking for a different organization/business that offers the same services.
(i accidentally hit submit) And how about libel? and even telling China American secrets (also known as spying)?
Is it your belief that death threats are protected by the 1st amendment?
The main reason why the immigration laws of 100-200 years ago aren’t feasible is because back then once you came into the country you were on your own. If you didn’t have money for healthcare for example, then you died. It was that simple.
Nowadays it would cost tens of thousands of dollars to support a single immigrant until they found a well paying job, America can’t afford to take in millions of people a year.
I personally feel that the correct strategy would be to teach immigrants English when they come in, have live in schools to bring them up to a full high school education, and then help them with job placement. In order for this to work, I believe in a policy forcing every company which sells goods in the USA to produce 50% of their goods in America. The government can even subsidize the added cost up to the amount of tax money generated from the new jobs. This I believe should result in a healthy job market.
I just watched the video again, and his neck is definitely on the ground with his head being at an odd angle. So I think everyone here (with the possible exemption of Milhouse) believes that it is definitely possible that Floyd died of asphyxiation. Therefore the facts are not problematic.
Now that we established this, I think we can safely say that the video speaks for itself.
You often say “ Floyd was definitely not murdered.”, but you have never actually proved that he wasn’t murdered or even tried to. All you have ever said is that it is possible that he died from something else, but that doesn’t prove that he didn’t die of asphyxiation.
Maybe you didn’t understand. In the quoted example, the intent when carving Hitler into the mountain was to honor him solely for creating the national park.
But I assume you actually did know this, and so then I have an Interesting point to make. You wrote “ a statue of hitler stands for nazism”. That is an absolute. Meaning, that you as a would be victim of Hitler believe that if there is a statue of him Then no matter the actual intention, it stands for Nazism. So then why should a black man feel any different about a statue of someone who abused black people?
what i meant was that the same way if a random frum guy tells you a funny line about how “Only a yid…” you don’t feel like he hates you, but if a random goy would say “only a jew would…” you would say he hates yidden, if a Black says the N word it is not considered racist.
However, when discussing the holocaust, the subject matter is not whether you are hating someone but rather whether or not you are cheapening the sacrifices of victims. Therefore it would not make a difference who is making the offending statement.
Because of the above explanation, the statement “I think the same reasoning is here too” is incorrect. I am afraid that i cannot explain any further. Either you get it or you don’t.
As n0mesorah explained, this thread is not about whether or not specific actions are right or wrong. It is about whether or not it makes sense that certain groups would be offended/bothered by certain cultural decorations/items.
“ African Americans can’t be racist to each other?
Jews can be anti Semitic”
Well yeah, but I think you know what I meant.
I assume they are the same – Meshugoim that will never actually do anything useful.
He was definitely busy “accidentally” saying Hitler instead of De Blasio and Germany instead of NY.
But I do believe you that if you had seen it you would have said something.
As to your devils advocacy, I’m not sure what the comparison is. In regards to the holocaust either you are cheapening the memories of the survivors or not. By the N word, the way I understand it is that a white saying the Nword it is traditionally viewed as a racist thing to say, so when a black says it that doesn’t really apply. A better comparison to the N word would be Jewish money jokes.
I wasn’t comparing Nazis to slave owners, but I’m just curious: why when someone who you think is a liberal says something you think is calling someone a Nazi it“ cheapens who the Nazis were and downplays the Jewish experience during the war. ” but when Heshy Tischler calls De Blasio “Hitler” it’s totally fine?
“ If for Time Immorial there was Slavery, & now some guys are saying it isn’t Moral, they can’t be blamed for Not thinking that way.”
True, but that doesn’t mean that people of color who would’ve been subjugated to their persecutions aren’t going to be rightfully offended by statues glorifying them.
“ If the Government decides to get rid of these Statues, I wouldn’t have any problem”
Great, I already wrote “ I wasn’t saying it is okay to tear down offensive statues.” maybe you didn’t see that post.
“ These Statues weren’t put up to discriminate against anyone!”
And I never said otherwise. What I did say was that if in comparable situations It bothers us, then we should be able to understand why it bothers others. My example of Eichman wasn’t either a statue built to discriminate against anyone , and I assume that it would still bother you.
“ In some cities, there is No rule of law, just Anarchy!”
“ Those Slave owners didn’t think in Anyway, that they were Doing something Immoral.”
So, if I kill someone, It would be a good defense to say that I don’t believe that there is anything wrong with killing people? Does that mean you think that doctors who do abortions aren’t doing anything wrong?
Personally, it would bother me if a statue of Eichmann was in Times Square to commemorate his inventing the internet or something. I guess my skin isn’t as thick as yours.
Seems like many people missed the point of my original post.
I wasn’t saying that slaveholders are Nazis. I wasn’t saying it is okay to tear down offensive statues. All i was saying is that we as yidden should be able to understand why a statue of a great man who also was a slaveholder might be offensive to someone whose great-great-grandparents were slaves, the same way a statue of a great man who also helped the germans in the holocaust would be offensive to us.
That doesn’t mean that the holocaust and slave ownership are equally bad.
i don’t really care who started slavery. The idea is that if we don’t understand why a black person should be bothered by a statue of a man who was also a slaveholder, then we shouldn’t be bothered by a statue of a man who had a side job as a Nazi guard.
That does not mean that Thomas Jefferson is evil or innocent. That also does not mean that the part time Nazi guard is evil or innocent.
And by the way, you write “How are you comparing Stautes that honoring people for what ever reason, just because they believe in Slavery to Nazism?!?”
So to be clear, rounding up Jews and putting them into concentration camps = completely evil, but buying blacks and putting them into forced labor = totally fine.
Maybe i misunderstood what you are trying to say, please clarify. i didn’t realize i was saying something controversial.
Just to clarify, i fully agree. My point was just that we should understand why it bothers black people, not that we should agree with tearing it down.
“ And he wouldn’t have, but HE decided to take a cop’s taser & resist Arrest.”
I’m not sure what you are trying to do. Are you trying to argue with me? But you wrote basically the same thing that I did, “ that still does not mean the cop did anything wrong when he shot Brooks. he had a taser pointed at him and had the full right to defend himself.”
I guess you are simply agreeing with me, but then why the caps and exclamation points?
1) Rayshard Brooks did not deserve to die.
2) that still does not mean the cop did anything wrong when he shot Brooks. he had a taser pointed at him and had the full right to defend himself. shooting at a specific body part is very hard when you need to shoot in a split second, that’s why he simply pointed at center of mass and fired.
I believe that 99% of these people are in the category of tinok shenishba.
I say 99% and not 100% because I assume someone here will say they know someone that _______.
“ Ok, I’m sorry. You can continue to try to convince Health of your point.”
Ok, I’m sorry. You can continue to try to convince Health of your point. I personally am finished repeating the same points over and over.
Well, I’ve already said that there is no changing my mind on that topic, and seeing as you don’t view what I said in the other thread as making any sense, I would understand if you decided to ignore me in that thread.
When someone is simply repeating the same dumb idea over and over without even bothering to listen to logic, then it is time to end the debate. If he is willing to listen to your point of view, then we continue the conversation.