> The USA has a greater percentage of its population incarcerated than > any other democratic nation, and more than most non-democratic > nations.
> So, what are you complaining about? You should be sleeping very > soundly.
I'm complaining because as long as there are criminals walking the streets and getting paroled to commit more crimes, the percentage in jail has nothing to do with it.
By CARL CAMPANILE --------------------------------------------------------------------------- - ----
UNEXCUSED ABSENCE: Alexandra Hidalgo, 14, studies at home because her mom won't send her to Lafayette HS in Brooklyn, which the schools chancellor calls child abuse.
A defiant Brooklyn mom has kept her 14-year-old daughter out of her high school the entire year because she considers it too dangerous - and she's willing to go to jail over the matter.
Alexandra Hidalgo was expected to register as a freshman at troubled Lafayette HS in September, her zoned school.
But her mother, Catherine Hidalgo, refused to send her there after personally observing fights in the hallway during registration and hearing about numerous reports of violence there.
When she couldn't get an appropriate transfer to another school, she boycotted Lafayette and kept Alexandra home.
Alexandra has not been in school for six months. She's missed the first 31/2 months of her freshman year - and no one has noticed.
Informed about the missing schoolgirl, Chancellor Joel Klein's office said they would immediately file a child-abuse complaint against the parents with the city's Administration for Children's Services.
Hidalgo admitted she's exposed herself to charges of educational neglect. But she said her first priority is to make sure her daughter is safe.
"I'd rather go to jail than have Alexandra go to Lafayette," said Hidalgo, a working mom. "I'll make my case before a judge."
"I went to Lafayette to see for myself. Two 6-foot male students were fighting. I was scared there, and I'm not scared of anything."
Hidalgo said she didn't think it would be difficult to get a transfer to nearby New Utrecht HS, which is actually closer to her Bensonhurst home. But after several visits to high-school placement offices in Brooklyn and Manhattan, her request went nowhere.
Alexandra, a petite teen, graduated from IS 201 in June.
"I hate being home," Alexandra said. "But I never want to go to Lafayette. I could get raped or killed."
While other kids are in school preparing for Regents exams to earn a diploma, Alexandra spends her day reading books and the encyclopedia, watching the Regis Philbin and Maury Povich shows, cleaning the house and picking up her younger sister and brother, Samantha, 10, and Joseph, 7, from PS 163.
She pulled out a three-page report she wrote about Thomas Jefferson and writes current-events summaries from stories in the newspaper.
"I like to read about ancient civilizations, particularly Egypt, and Greek and Roman mythology," Alexandra said.
Under a new federal law, students could request transfers out of unsafe schools. But the state has yet to define what constitutes "dangerous."
In article <atl1aq$n3...@news.monmouth.com>, topcat <top...@aboy.com> wrote:
>Eric da Red wrote:
>> The USA has a greater percentage of its population incarcerated than >> any other democratic nation, and more than most non-democratic >> nations.
>> So, what are you complaining about? You should be sleeping very >> soundly.
>I'm complaining because as long as there are criminals walking the streets >and getting paroled to commit more crimes, the percentage in jail has >nothing to do with it.
Since criminals will always be "walking the streets" with or without parole, what would you like to do about it?
Life sentences for every crime, no matter how petty?
> In article <atl1aq$n3...@news.monmouth.com>, topcat <top...@aboy.com> wrote:
> >Eric da Red wrote:
> >> The USA has a greater percentage of its population incarcerated than > >> any other democratic nation, and more than most non-democratic > >> nations.
> >> So, what are you complaining about? You should be sleeping very > >> soundly.
> >I'm complaining because as long as there are criminals walking the streets > >and getting paroled to commit more crimes, the percentage in jail has > >nothing to do with it.
> Since criminals will always be "walking the streets" with or without > parole, what would you like to do about it?
> Life sentences for every crime, no matter how petty?
> Since criminals will always be "walking the streets" with or without > parole, what would you like to do about it?
It's funny how you liberals always ask us conservatives what *we* would do about issues. It's as though you guys just say "Oh what the hell, there is no solution so let's just let the criminals out". Ridiculous.
> Life sentences for every crime, no matter how petty?
No, but real punishment for violent offenders and life sentences for repeat violent offenders would be a start. Violent offenders should have to do their entire sentence with no possibility of parole. They should have to do forced labor like in the old days. The three strikes and you're in law is good but it should be two strikes.
I'd rather my tax money go towards building more jails than to welfare recipients.
In article <atli0f$42...@news.monmouth.com>, topcat <top...@aboy.com> wrote:
>Eric da Red wrote:
>> Since criminals will always be "walking the streets" with or without >> parole, what would you like to do about it?
>It's funny how you liberals always ask us conservatives what *we* would do >about issues.
I only ask because you're the one whining about it.
>It's as though you guys just say "Oh what the hell, there is >no solution so let's just let the criminals out". Ridiculous.
Not as ridiculous as your weird opinions about liberals' beliefs.
>> Life sentences for every crime, no matter how petty?
>No, but real punishment for violent offenders and life sentences for repeat >violent offenders would be a start.
Jail constitutes real punishment.
>Violent offenders should have to do >their entire sentence with no possibility of parole.
One of the reasons parole exists is to help manage inmates by giving them some incentive to behave well. Wardens and prison guards generally like the idea, even if they don't like its application in particular cases.
What exactly is the benefit of giving someone a sentence of, say, 8-15 years with possibility of parole in 5 years instead of giving the perp a 5 year sentence with no parole?
And why do you restrict your lust for retribution to violent offenders?
>They should have to do >forced labor like in the old days.
Other than satisfy your revenge fantasies, why?
>The three strikes and you're in law is >good but it should be two strikes.
The problems with the three-strikes law are numerous. I don't feel any safer knowing that serial check-kiters are behind bars for the rest of their lives.
>I'd rather my tax money go towards building more jails than to welfare >recipients.
Welfare is cheaper, and has much more positive social effects.
You can advocate expensive big-government programs if you want, though.
Clave <ClaviusNoSpamDam...@CableSpeed.com> wrote: >"Eric da Red" <berga...@drizzle.com> wrote in message >news:atlhdg$r39$1@drizzle.com... >> In article <atl1aq$n3...@news.monmouth.com>, topcat <top...@aboy.com> wrote:
>> >Eric da Red wrote:
>> >> The USA has a greater percentage of its population incarcerated than >> >> any other democratic nation, and more than most non-democratic >> >> nations.
>> >> So, what are you complaining about? You should be sleeping very >> >> soundly.
>> >I'm complaining because as long as there are criminals walking the streets >> >and getting paroled to commit more crimes, the percentage in jail has >> >nothing to do with it.
>> Since criminals will always be "walking the streets" with or without >> parole, what would you like to do about it?
>> Life sentences for every crime, no matter how petty?
>Organ harvesting for jaywalkers!
I've been known to drive in excess of the speed limit from time to time. Guess I'll wake up in an icy hotel bathtub any day now.
Eric, might put a picture of my kidneys on milk cartons.
> >It's funny how you liberals always ask us conservatives what *we* would do > >about issues.
> I only ask because you're the one whining about it.
I know, liberals discuss, conservatives whine.
> Not as ridiculous as your weird opinions about liberals' beliefs.
There are plenty of them around. Check a few of the threads.
> Jail constitutes real punishment.
It doesn't constitute future deterence.
> >Violent offenders should have to do > >their entire sentence with no possibility of parole.
> One of the reasons parole exists is to help manage > inmates by giving them some incentive to behave well. Wardens and > prison guards generally like the idea, even if they don't like its > application in particular cases.
Yeah right. The reason it exists is due to jail overcrowding.
> What exactly is the benefit of giving someone a sentence of, say, > 8-15 years with possibility of parole in 5 years instead of giving > the perp a 5 year sentence with no parole?
I say give them the 15 year sentence and be done with it.
> And why do you restrict your lust for retribution to violent > offenders?
Uh...because those are the ones actually hurting others?
> >They should have to do > >forced labor like in the old days.
> Other than satisfy your revenge fantasies, why?
It's called deterence. You have to make jail a place nobody wants to go back to under any circumstances.
> >The three strikes and you're in law is > >good but it should be two strikes.
> The problems with the three-strikes law are numerous. I don't feel > any safer knowing that serial check-kiters are behind bars for the > rest of their lives.
But I feel a lot safer knowing someone who has committed multiple violent crimes is behind bars for the rest of their life.
> Welfare is cheaper, and has much more positive social effects.
More of those great liberal beliefs.
> You can advocate expensive big-government programs if you want, > though.
I'm advocating spending money on something that might actually help innocent people not get assaulted.
My response to you wasn't that long at all. Your exscuse is bollocks.
You never lived in the "inner city"of those places you mentioned.
What happened, you get your wallet stolen by kids in Hoboken?
Moron.
And if you did live in the trenches of those places, what brought about the change that you could live in such up-scale areas. Please regale us. You hit the lottery or invent the "pet rock"???
> > I live in Philly, I know those towns. > > But many of the statements you made (which I see you convenienlty snipped) > > were moronic. How welcome would a black be in some of your upper class > white > > neighbourhoods up there in North Jersey?
> I don't conveniently snip anything. My stupid f'in ISP won't let me post a > message that is too big. Something about space considerations.
> If you don't want to believe my statements that's up to you, but to call > them moronic is moronic. This stuff happened and still happens only now it's > worse, you have to worry about getting shot in school. That's why I send my > daughter to private school.
> Keep trying to spin it like there is no reverse racism. I have black people > walk down my street all the time, nobody bothers them. While my neighborhood > now is primarily white, there are some black families and nobody bothers > them.
> Now let's you and I go walk through Irvington and see what happens?
Ow wow, what a f-ing moron. This is gonna be such fun.............
First off, you dodged every question I asked you with "What has this got to do with not wanting to admit that there is reverse racism"? which wasn't what I was responding to, but we can';t acces that because you "snipped" it. Why? No balls?
So let's play your game..........
I justified no one's "bad behaviuor" but I noticed you had no defense when I asked if things that happen in the "hood" (I'll use the term you know from Jerry Springer since this is obviuosly the closest you're ever gotten to it) happen in the "burbs, you danced and dodged.
You're right, there are a lot of losers who like to steal, get drunk, get drunk, do drugs and have an inherent hatred of whites.
The only difference is, in the city these people are black. In your neighbourhood, they are your kids.
> > Ah, you feel safer, but you never answered the question. > > Any drug dealing going on where you live?
> What has this got to do with you not wanting to admit there is a lot of > reverse racism in the inner city?
> > Anybody smacking their wife around? > > No murders at all?
> What has this got to do with you not wanting to admit there is a lot of > reverse racism in the inner city?
> > And I've lived in west Philly, so I can assure you I've "walked the walk." > > I live in center city now (which if you believe another idiot poster on > this > > ng, means that I live in a worse part of town) and we think nothing of > > walking eight to ten blocks for a night of entertainment,foodshopping and > > dinner through white,black, and asian neighbourhoods.
> Oh, now you're my hero!
> > But back to your "new home." > > You gonna tell me a kid down the block who gets busted selling "E" at a > > party won't have better legal representation than an urban kid in the same > > situation?
> What has this got to do with you not wanting to admit there is a lot of > reverse racism in the inner city?
> > And I'll tell you one more thing, when I did live in west Philly, I might > > not have been invited to every party, but I was respected as a member of > the > > neighbourhood.
> > If you were getting brat up for being white, you might have wanted to take > > "street smarts 101" over.
> > It sound like you are just where you belong.
> This is what you liberals do. You try to justify one groups bad behavior by > pointing out supposed similar things in another group. Here are the facts. > There are a lot of good people in the inner city and those people would love > to move out themselves. But there are also a lot of losers who like to > steal, get drunk, do drugs and have an inherent hatred of whites. You don't > want to believe it, that's on you.
> By CARL CAMPANILE > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > ----
> UNEXCUSED ABSENCE: > Alexandra Hidalgo, 14, studies at home because her mom won't send her to > Lafayette HS in Brooklyn, which the schools chancellor calls child abuse.
> A defiant Brooklyn mom has kept her 14-year-old daughter out of her high > school the entire year because she considers it too dangerous - and she's > willing to go to jail over the matter.
> Alexandra Hidalgo was expected to register as a freshman at troubled > Lafayette HS in September, her zoned school.
> But her mother, Catherine Hidalgo, refused to send her there after > personally observing fights in the hallway during registration and hearing > about numerous reports of violence there.
> When she couldn't get an appropriate transfer to another school, she > boycotted Lafayette and kept Alexandra home.
> Alexandra has not been in school for six months. She's missed the first 31/2 > months of her freshman year - and no one has noticed.
> Informed about the missing schoolgirl, Chancellor Joel Klein's office said > they would immediately file a child-abuse complaint against the parents with > the city's Administration for Children's Services.
> Hidalgo admitted she's exposed herself to charges of educational neglect. > But she said her first priority is to make sure her daughter is safe.
> "I'd rather go to jail than have Alexandra go to Lafayette," said Hidalgo, a > working mom. "I'll make my case before a judge."
> "I went to Lafayette to see for myself. Two 6-foot male students were > fighting. I was scared there, and I'm not scared of anything."
> Hidalgo said she didn't think it would be difficult to get a transfer to > nearby New Utrecht HS, which is actually closer to her Bensonhurst home. But > after several visits to high-school placement offices in Brooklyn and > Manhattan, her request went nowhere.
> Alexandra, a petite teen, graduated from IS 201 in June.
> "I hate being home," Alexandra said. "But I never want to go to Lafayette. I > could get raped or killed."
> While other kids are in school preparing for Regents exams to earn a > diploma, Alexandra spends her day reading books and the encyclopedia, > watching the Regis Philbin and Maury Povich shows, cleaning the house and > picking up her younger sister and brother, Samantha, 10, and Joseph, 7, from > PS 163.
> She pulled out a three-page report she wrote about Thomas Jefferson and > writes current-events summaries from stories in the newspaper.
> "I like to read about ancient civilizations, particularly Egypt, and Greek > and Roman mythology," Alexandra said.
> Under a new federal law, students could request transfers out of unsafe > schools. But the state has yet to define what constitutes "dangerous."
"ROBW wrote: > My response to you wasn't that long at all.
If you're not going to believe anything I say there is no sense continuing the conversation.
> Your exscuse is bollocks.
It pisses people off that I have to do it, but there is nothing I can do about it. Maybe I'll pay to post on a better news server.
> You never lived in the "inner city"of those places you mentioned.
Maple Ave. in Irvington McChesney Street in Orange Laura St. in Elizabeth
Look them up
Graduated from Elizabeth High School.
It's you liberals that are the liars, not me.
> What happened, you get your wallet stolen by kids in Hoboken?
> Moron.
This proves your a liar and have no clue about the inner city. When are we going to Irvington, tough guy?
> And if you did live in the trenches of those places, what brought about the > change that you could live in such up-scale areas. > Please regale us. > You hit the lottery or invent the "pet rock"???
I went to school and made something of myself, that's why I have no tolerance for liberals who tell me it can't be done.
ROBW wrote: > Ow wow, what a f-ing moron. > This is gonna be such fun.............
Now I know why everyone thinks you're an idiot.
> First off, you dodged every question I asked you with "What has this got to > do with not wanting to admit that there is reverse racism"? which wasn't > what I was responding to, but we can';t acces that because you "snipped" it. > Why? No balls?
I told you why I snipped it, dummy.
You're questions aren't related to what's going on in the inner city. Don't twist the argument back to the suburbs. That has nothing to do with the reverse racism in the inner city.
> So let's play your game..........
> I justified no one's "bad behaviuor" but I noticed you had no defense when I > asked if things that happen in the "hood" (I'll use the term you know from > Jerry Springer since this is obviuosly the closest you're ever gotten to it) > happen in the "burbs, you danced and dodged.
> You're right, there are a lot of losers who like to steal, get drunk, get > drunk, do drugs and have an inherent hatred of whites.
That's all I'm sayin' yo!
> The only difference is, in the city these people are black. > In your neighbourhood, they are your kids.
Try to justify it this way. I don't see any decent people wanting to stay in the inner cities because of the problems in the 'burbs.
You are wasting your time with Robwimp. He's the ultimate coward. A Cowardly Objector during the Vietnam War, sells ties for a living, shacked up because he's afraid of being betrayed and so insecure he's afraid to have children.
A bigger loser you won't find on Usenet.
And don't believe his "But I'm not a Democrat" line. He was until Gore conceded and then he called himself a green. LZ
> If you're not going to believe anything I say there is no sense continuing > the conversation.
> > Your exscuse is bollocks.
> It pisses people off that I have to do it, but there is nothing I can do > about it. Maybe I'll pay to post on a better news server.
> > You never lived in the "inner city"of those places you mentioned.
> Maple Ave. in Irvington > McChesney Street in Orange > Laura St. in Elizabeth
> Look them up
> Graduated from Elizabeth High School.
> It's you liberals that are the liars, not me.
> > What happened, you get your wallet stolen by kids in Hoboken?
> > Moron.
> This proves your a liar and have no clue about the inner city. When are we > going to Irvington, tough guy?
> > And if you did live in the trenches of those places, what brought about > the > > change that you could live in such up-scale areas. > > Please regale us. > > You hit the lottery or invent the "pet rock"???
> I went to school and made something of myself, that's why I have no > tolerance for liberals who tell me it can't be done.
Lone Haranguer wrote: > You are wasting your time with Robwimp. He's the ultimate coward. A > Cowardly Objector during the Vietnam War, sells ties for a living, > shacked up because he's afraid of being betrayed and so insecure he's > afraid to have children.
> A bigger loser you won't find on Usenet.
> And don't believe his "But I'm not a Democrat" line. He was until Gore > conceded and then he called himself a green. > LZ
On Mon, 16 Dec 2002 10:21:32 -0500, "topcat" <top...@aboy.com> wrote:
>ROBW wrote:
>> Ah, you feel safer, but you never answered the question. >> Any drug dealing going on where you live?
>What has this got to do with you not wanting to admit there is a lot of >reverse racism in the inner city?
>> Anybody smacking their wife around? >> No murders at all?
>What has this got to do with you not wanting to admit there is a lot of >reverse racism in the inner city?
>> And I've lived in west Philly, so I can assure you I've "walked the walk." >> I live in center city now (which if you believe another idiot poster on >this >> ng, means that I live in a worse part of town) and we think nothing of >> walking eight to ten blocks for a night of entertainment,foodshopping and >> dinner through white,black, and asian neighbourhoods.
>Oh, now you're my hero!
>> But back to your "new home." >> You gonna tell me a kid down the block who gets busted selling "E" at a >> party won't have better legal representation than an urban kid in the same >> situation?
>What has this got to do with you not wanting to admit there is a lot of >reverse racism in the inner city?
>> And I'll tell you one more thing, when I did live in west Philly, I might >> not have been invited to every party, but I was respected as a member of >the >> neighbourhood.
>> If you were getting brat up for being white, you might have wanted to take >> "street smarts 101" over.
>> It sound like you are just where you belong.
>This is what you liberals do. You try to justify one groups bad behavior by >pointing out supposed similar things in another group. Here are the facts. >There are a lot of good people in the inner city and those people would love >to move out themselves. But there are also a lot of losers who like to >steal, get drunk, do drugs and have an inherent hatred of whites. You don't >want to believe it, that's on you.
>TC
Seems like Rob has never heard the phrase 'white flight'. Most large cities have it.
Happy Christ's Birthday!
JD
"100% of the successful terrorist attacks on commercial airlines for 20 years have been committed by Arabs. When there is a 100% chance, it ceases to be a profile. It's called a 'description of the suspect.'" - Ann Coulter
"Ah yes, we must mollify angry fanatics who seek our destruction because otherwise .. they might get mad and seek our destruction." - Ann Coulter 9/26/2002
'Conservatives believe IN America, liberals believe in and worry about what other countries SAY about America.' -Me
'All I really need to know about Islam, I learned on September 11.' -Me
In article <atlq46$91...@news.monmouth.com>, topcat <top...@aboy.com> wrote:
>Eric da Red wrote:
>> >It's funny how you liberals always ask us conservatives what *we* would >do >> >about issues.
>> I only ask because you're the one whining about it.
>I know, liberals discuss, conservatives whine.
I make no such generalization.
>> Not as ridiculous as your weird opinions about liberals' beliefs.
>There are plenty of them around. Check a few of the threads.
>> Jail constitutes real punishment.
>It doesn't constitute future deterence.
That may or may not be true. How do you know?
If it doesn't, then we are left again with no options other than life imprisonment for nearly every crime, or mass executions.
>> >Violent offenders should have to do >> >their entire sentence with no possibility of parole.
>> One of the reasons parole exists is to help manage >> inmates by giving them some incentive to behave well. Wardens and >> prison guards generally like the idea, even if they don't like its >> application in particular cases.
>Yeah right. The reason it exists is due to jail overcrowding.
That's why I used the phrase "one of the reasons."
Parole existed even before the current situation of overcrowded jails, however.
>> What exactly is the benefit of giving someone a sentence of, say, >> 8-15 years with possibility of parole in 5 years instead of giving >> the perp a 5 year sentence with no parole?
>I say give them the 15 year sentence and be done with it.
Why? According to you, jail does not offer future deterrence, so a potential perp is not going to be any more intimidated by the prospect of a 15 year sentence than by a 5 year sentence, or a 5 day sentence, or a 500 year sentence.
If you can demonstrate that the recidivism rate for large classes of offenders is higher after a 5 year sentence than a 15 year sentence, your basic approach to the subject will have some merit.
>> And why do you restrict your lust for retribution to violent >> offenders?
>Uh...because those are the ones actually hurting others?
Who is the cause of more hurt: a drug-addled kid who steals a purse, or a stock swindler who destroys the retirement plans of thousands of people?
>> >They should have to do >> >forced labor like in the old days.
>> Other than satisfy your revenge fantasies, why?
>It's called deterence.
That's not what you said above.
>You have to make jail a place nobody wants to go back >to under any circumstances.
It already is, except for a very small number of truly pathetic people. That's one reason why accused people usually plead innocent, and try to plea-bargain their sentences to the lowest possible duration.
>> >The three strikes and you're in law is >> >good but it should be two strikes.
>> The problems with the three-strikes law are numerous. I don't feel >> any safer knowing that serial check-kiters are behind bars for the >> rest of their lives.
>But I feel a lot safer knowing someone who has committed multiple violent >crimes is behind bars for the rest of their life.
How many of these people have been snagged by the 3-strikes laws who wouldn't have been incarcerated long-term (or forever) without it? Compare this number to the number of petty offenders who are in jail for life due to 3-strikes laws.
>> Welfare is cheaper, and has much more positive social effects.
>More of those great liberal beliefs.
It's also true.
>> You can advocate expensive big-government programs if you want, >> though.
>I'm advocating spending money on something that might actually help innocent >people not get assaulted.
It doesn't seem to be working especially well so far.
> Media Support Citizenship Awards For Central Park Rapists
> The BRILLIANT Ann Coulter - December 4, 2002
> HOPING FOR A different result, journalists are re-litigating the Central > Park rape case in their pages, skipping the fuss and bother of the adversary > process. The New York Times recently announced that "so far," there is > "almost nothing to back the original findings of guilt." That's if you don't > count 10 videotaped confessions and five guilty verdicts rendered by two > duly constituted juries.
So much for the brilliant Ms Coulter, last heard on national TV lamenting the fact that "Democratic men are are girly boys".
A more thoughtful conclusion might be...Just how did police get five (false) confessions? And the value of jury trial when the press and police have already made up their mind. In this case, made up their mind to find a black offender.
We love the city. I guess you just have to be cut out for it.
Of course, the "flight" in Philly has as much to do with things like the wage tax, ridiculous insurance rates and rents as much as any racial problems.
> On Mon, 16 Dec 2002 10:21:32 -0500, "topcat" <top...@aboy.com> wrote:
> >ROBW wrote:
> >> Ah, you feel safer, but you never answered the question. > >> Any drug dealing going on where you live?
> >What has this got to do with you not wanting to admit there is a lot of > >reverse racism in the inner city?
> >> Anybody smacking their wife around? > >> No murders at all?
> >What has this got to do with you not wanting to admit there is a lot of > >reverse racism in the inner city?
> >> And I've lived in west Philly, so I can assure you I've "walked the walk." > >> I live in center city now (which if you believe another idiot poster on > >this > >> ng, means that I live in a worse part of town) and we think nothing of > >> walking eight to ten blocks for a night of entertainment,foodshopping and > >> dinner through white,black, and asian neighbourhoods.
> >Oh, now you're my hero!
> >> But back to your "new home." > >> You gonna tell me a kid down the block who gets busted selling "E" at a > >> party won't have better legal representation than an urban kid in the same > >> situation?
> >What has this got to do with you not wanting to admit there is a lot of > >reverse racism in the inner city?
> >> And I'll tell you one more thing, when I did live in west Philly, I might > >> not have been invited to every party, but I was respected as a member of > >the > >> neighbourhood.
> >> If you were getting brat up for being white, you might have wanted to take > >> "street smarts 101" over.
> >> It sound like you are just where you belong.
> >This is what you liberals do. You try to justify one groups bad behavior by > >pointing out supposed similar things in another group. Here are the facts. > >There are a lot of good people in the inner city and those people would love > >to move out themselves. But there are also a lot of losers who like to > >steal, get drunk, do drugs and have an inherent hatred of whites. You don't > >want to believe it, that's on you.
> >TC
> Seems like Rob has never heard the phrase 'white flight'. > Most large cities have it.
> Happy Christ's Birthday!
> JD
> "100% of the successful terrorist attacks on > commercial airlines for 20 years have been committed > by Arabs. When there is a 100% chance, it ceases to > be a profile. It's called a 'description of the > suspect.'" - Ann Coulter
> "Ah yes, we must mollify angry fanatics who seek our destruction > because otherwise .. they might get mad and seek our destruction." > - Ann Coulter 9/26/2002
> 'Conservatives believe IN America, liberals believe in and worry about > what other countries SAY about America.' > -Me
> 'All I really need to know about Islam, I learned on September 11.' > -Me
> What about NONE of the the convicted's DNA not being found IN the victim? > Can you explain that?
The juries knew this back in 1989 and convicted the defendants anyway. The logic was, they all participated in the attack, so they are all guilty of rape. The only new evidence that that has come out since then is that the semen on the victim has been linked to Reyes. This shows only that Reyes also raped the jogger, not that the 1989 defendants are innocent.
On Wed, 18 Dec 2002 22:19:27 -0500, "ROBW" <noddy...@comcast.net> wrote:
>Philly does, too.
>We love the city. >I guess you just have to be cut out for it.
>Of course, the "flight" in Philly has as much to do with things like the >wage tax, ridiculous insurance rates and rents as much as any racial >problems.
>And you still haven't answered my questions.
>No drugs or crime in the burbs????
>robw
Crime and drugs are not as highly concentrated as it is in the cities. I'm here in Allentown, with more than a few cops being relatives and friends. Are you friends with city cops? Real good friends? They'll clue you in. Cities are like honey to ants, the ants being the poor, the deranged, and of course with them comes the criminal element. The city is mother-teat to them, they flock to it so as to get their welfare checks faster. A-town, Easton is being inundated with NYC and New Jersey drug dealers. Just look at the local crime section in your paper. As I said...talk to cops. Surely they would know the inside scoop as to what causes crime and 'flight' from the city. Don't tell me a person isn't safer living in the suburbs.
JD
"100% of the successful terrorist attacks on commercial airlines for 20 years have been committed by Arabs. When there is a 100% chance, it ceases to be a profile. It's called a 'description of the suspect.'" - Ann Coulter
"Ah yes, we must mollify angry fanatics who seek our destruction because otherwise .. they might get mad and seek our destruction." - Ann Coulter 9/26/2002
'All I really need to know about Islam, I learned on September 11.' -Me
> On Wed, 18 Dec 2002 22:19:27 -0500, "ROBW" <noddy...@comcast.net> > wrote:
> >Philly does, too.
> >We love the city. > >I guess you just have to be cut out for it.
> >Of course, the "flight" in Philly has as much to do with things like the > >wage tax, ridiculous insurance rates and rents as much as any racial > >problems.
> >And you still haven't answered my questions.
> >No drugs or crime in the burbs????
> >robw
> Crime and drugs are not as highly concentrated as it is in the cities. > I'm here in Allentown, with more than a few cops being relatives and > friends. Are you friends with city cops? Real good friends? They'll > clue you in. Cities are like honey to ants, the ants being the poor, > the deranged, and of course with them comes the criminal element. The > city is mother-teat to them, they flock to it so as to get their > welfare checks faster. A-town, Easton is being inundated with NYC and > New Jersey drug dealers. > Just look at the local crime section in your paper. As I said...talk > to cops. Surely they would know the inside scoop as to what causes > crime and 'flight' from the city. > Don't tell me a person isn't safer living in the suburbs.
> JD
> "100% of the successful terrorist attacks on > commercial airlines for 20 years have been committed > by Arabs. When there is a 100% chance, it ceases to > be a profile. It's called a 'description of the > suspect.'" - Ann Coulter
> "Ah yes, we must mollify angry fanatics who seek our destruction > because otherwise .. they might get mad and seek our destruction." > - Ann Coulter 9/26/2002
> 'All I really need to know about Islam, I learned on September 11.' > -Me
