# Saudi Prince Arrested for Alleded Sex Crime, L.A.



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

*Saudi prince arrested at L.A. compound for alleged sex crime*

*Assault*










Majed Abdulaziz Al-Saud was arrested Wednesday in the above home.
By Joseph Serna contact the reporter
September 24, 2015


  Los Angeles Police Department
 
 A Saudi prince was arrested at a hillside compound near Beverly Hills on Wednesday after being accused of trying to force a worker to perform a sex act on him, Los Angeles police said.
Police were called to the gated property in the Beverly Glen area, within a gated community on Wallingford Drive, after a caretaker at the home reported a disturbance, officials said. After officers interviewed people inside, a 28-year-old man identified as Saudi prince Majed Abdulaziz Al-Saud was arrested on suspicion of forced oral copulation of an adult.
He was booked and freed on $300,000 bail Thursday afternoon, jail records show. He could not immediately be reached for comment.

The arrest took place at an estate within the gated Beverly Glen community, located on Wallingford Drive, after a caretaker in the home called police. The prince was booked and released on $300,000 bail on Thursday.
Police say Al-Saud, who was renting the home, does not have diplomatic immunity in this situation, the _Times _reports.
http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-saudi-prince-arrest-beverly-hills-20150924-story.html

What a creepy jerk. I thought that kind of sex was against his religion.


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

Speaking of why things become news and why some people seem to see the same things no matter where they look. If we wish to discuss sexual assault and privilege, why not this guy? http://abc7chicago.com/sports/patrick-kane-accusers-attorney-quits-case/1001329/

Or don't we care about the religion of hockey players?


----------



## no really (Aug 7, 2013)

Well I for one care about both cases and think they should be fully investigated. If evidence is sufficient brought to trial.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

A thread started because they could use a news story to put down an entire religion. So expected.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

painterswife said:


> A thread started because they could use a news story to put down an entire religion. So expected.


No surprise. We get to talk about how evil muslims are again.

A one track mind.


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

no really said:


> Well I for one care about both cases and think they should be fully investigated. If evidence is sufficient brought to trial.


Yet the hockey player story has been in the news for quite a while and no mention of it here. One does have to question why the almost immediate interest in the other story by some here. I'm sure we'll get an answer soon.


----------



## no really (Aug 7, 2013)

mmoetc said:


> Yet the hockey player story has been in the news for quite a while and no mention of it here. One does have to question why the almost immediate interest in the other story by some here. I'm sure we'll get an answer soon.


Guess I missed both, haven't heard about either one. :shocked:


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

It all comes down to what your definition of the word "is" is.... Or so we have been told by a man that never had sex with "that" woman.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Oh heck I don't mind using it to further my agenda. 

It's a perfect example of why we need the dynasty tax ,wealth and privilege run amuck. 

OPPS perhaps not so perfect since in this case the tax would just feed back to the family that is the problem.


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

no really said:


> Guess I missed both, haven't heard about either one. :shocked:


Not surprising you missed them. Lots of sexual assault stories go unreported by the national media every day and almost all go uncommented on or have new postings about them here. What makes the Saudi so special he gets singled out? Not asking you, but maybe the OP would like to chime in?


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

No sympathy for the attempted rape victim? :shocked:

Neighbor Tennyson Collins said a resident reported seeing a bleeding woman scream for help as she tried to scale the property&#8217;s 8-foot-high wall Wednesday afternoon.
When Collins drove home from work after 1:30 p.m., police followed his car through the gates and onto the property, which he described as a compound. The website Zillow valued the 22,000-square-foot property at $37 million.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

gapeach said:


> No sympathy for the attempted rape victim? :shocked:


That is true, I did not see you express any or even mention that at all.


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

gapeach said:


> No sympathy for the attempted rape victim? :shocked:


Actually quite a bit. If the allegations are found true I hope the perpetrator gets the full penalty due him. I don't care what his religion is, the law should treat him the same. 

Now, don't you have any sympathy for the alledged victim of the hockey player? Or the victims of the thousands of other sexual assaults that happen on a weekly basis? Are they less worthy of sympathy or mention because they weren't all alledgedly attacked by a , gasp, Muslim? Why did I you single out this story for special mention and not others?


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

gapeach said:


> No sympathy for the attempted rape victim? :shocked:
> 
> Neighbor Tennyson Collins said a resident reported seeing a bleeding woman scream for help as she tried to scale the propertyâs 8-foot-high wall Wednesday afternoon.
> When Collins drove home from work after 1:30 p.m., police followed his car through the gates and onto the property, which he described as a compound. The website Zillow valued the 22,000-square-foot property at $37 million.


Or maybe it's the rich and their $37 million estates you hate so much?


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

I think is is pretty big news when someone from another country, an obvious millionaire Prince, comes to the US and thinks that he is entitled to break our laws and cause much emotional and physical damage to at least one of our citizens.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

mmoetc said:


> Or maybe it's the rich and their $37 million estates you hate so much?


I didn't know a less than half acre land holding was considered as being rich, it almost makes me ashamed of my huge 37 acre "compound". Almost... Not quite!


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

gapeach said:


> I think is is pretty big news when someone from another country, an obvious millionaire Prince, comes to the US and thinks that he is entitled to break our laws and cause much emotional and physical damage to one of our citizens.


I believe it was the fact that he was Muslim that made you post this. I deduce this from your posting history.


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

gapeach said:


> I think is is pretty big news when someone from another country, an obvious millionaire Prince, comes to the US and thinks that he is entitled to break our laws and cause much emotional and physical damage to one of our citizens.


But it's not big news when an NHL hockey player making millions of dollars and whose name is worn on the back of thousands of kids, who has had parades and honors thrown at him does the same to another citizen of our fine country? Is it the fact he is the citizen of another country that drew your attention, or the fact he is the citizen of a particular country? Interesting that my "sympathy" question to you goes unanswered. I'm sure you'll find a way to spin it into your next reply.


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> I didn't know a less than half acre land holding was considered as being rich, it almost makes me ashamed of my huge 37 acre "compound". Almost... Not quite!


Nothing to be ashamed of. $37 million for about 1/2 acre seems a bit pricey but to each their own. Just trying to figure out why peach is such a hater.


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

The Saudi Prince is a millionaire. He rents the property.


----------



## Deacon Mike (May 23, 2007)

gapeach said:


> I thought that kind of sex was against his religion.


Rape or oral? Cause all guys love oral.


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

gapeach said:


> The Saudi Prince is a millionaire. He rents the property.


Is it that he's a millionare or a renter that draws your ire? Here are Mr. Kane's contract details. http://www.spotrac.com/nhl/chicago-blackhawks/patrick-kane/. $44M signing bonus. Pretty sweet. But no mention of his transgressions by you or expression of sympathy for his alledged victim.

Or maybe we all just know how "renters" are.


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

Getting back to the OP, actually, if this happened in Saudis Arabia, the woman would need four witnesses to press charges. Then she'd be beheaded for adultery.


​


----------



## Deacon Mike (May 23, 2007)

gapeach said:


> Getting back to the OP, actually, if this happened in Saudis Arabia, the woman would need four witnesses to press charges. Then she'd be beheaded for adultery.
> 
> 
> ​


You seem very familiar with Saudi law.


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

gapeach said:


> Getting back to the OP, actually, if this happened in Saudis Arabia, the woman would need four witnesses to press charges. Then she'd be beheaded for adultery.
> 
> 
> ​


Then it's "good" for her it happened here where we don't make laws based on antiquated religous beliefs.

Still wanting to know why she is so important to you and no other sexual assault victims seem worthy of mention or sympathy.


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

Why don't you post the topic about the Hockey player?


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

gapeach said:


> Why don't you post the topic about the Hockey player?


I believe I did as part of this discussion. Would you be more concerned for the woman involved if I did post it separately? Why? But more to the point, why the great concern for the woman in California to the seeming exclusion of all other victims?


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

http://mic.com/articles/43075/5-countries-that-respond-to-rape-victims-by-throwing-them-in-prison

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/world/2007-11-25-saudiarabia_N.htm

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-the-crime-having-a-mobile-phone-8846585.html



Deacon Mike said:


> You seem very familiar with Saudi law.


Only what's in the papers........


----------



## no really (Aug 7, 2013)

Deacon Mike said:


> You seem very familiar with Saudi law.


Saudi courts operate under Sharia law, so if the woman was in violation of purdah she would be at fault.


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

Doesn't that mean being covered? He will probably fly home on his private jet and never even go to court.


----------



## trulytricia (Oct 11, 2002)

quote 
* A bleeding woman screaming for help was seen attempting to scale an 8-foot-high wall before a Saudi prince was arrested this week on suspicion of trying to force a worker to perform a sex act on him at his hillside compound near Beverly Hills.

*that's what made it a story


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

gapeach said:


> *Saudi prince arrested at L.A. compound for alleged sex crime*
> 
> *Assault*
> 
> ...





trulytricia said:


> quote
> * A bleeding woman screaming for help was seen attempting to scale an 8-foot-high wall before a Saudi prince was arrested this week on suspicion of trying to force a worker to perform a sex act on him at his hillside compound near Beverly Hills.
> 
> *that's what made it a story


The person who started this thread made it about his religion.


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

Is some kind of rule being broken?


----------



## trulytricia (Oct 11, 2002)

painterswife said:


> The person who started this thread made it about his religion.



And if this had happened with an American 'elite' she would have posted the story also. No matter how white he was or how Christian he claimed to be.


----------



## no really (Aug 7, 2013)

gapeach said:


> Doesn't that mean being covered? He will probably fly home on his private jet and never even go to court.



Being covered is part of it. It does also depend on region, can also include segregation, limited mobility and limits to involvement with government and voting. It just depends on the sect and area.


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

mmoetc said:


> But it's not big news when an NHL hockey player making millions of dollars and whose name is worn on the back of thousands of kids, who has had parades and honors thrown at him does the same to another citizen of our fine country? Is it the fact he is the citizen of another country that drew your attention, or the fact he is the citizen of a particular country? Interesting that my "sympathy" question to you goes unanswered. I'm sure you'll find a way to spin it into your next reply.


Pass .nwt


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

no really said:


> Being covered is part of it. It does also depend on region, can also include segregation, limited mobility and limits to involvement with government and voting. It just depends on the sect and area.


Thank you. We are so lucky not to have to live under those laws. Just one more reason to be glad that we are Americans.


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

trulytricia said:


> And if this had happened with an American 'elite' she would have posted the story also. No matter how white he was or how Christian he claimed to be.


You're free to think that. I'm free, based on previous actions and the specific mention of the man's religion, to think differently. 

And no, peach, you broke no forum rules. By not being willing to stand up for what I see as your true reasons and biases for posting this article you have broken one of my rules.


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

kasilofhome said:


> Pass .nwt


Translation please?


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

gapeach said:


> Thank you. We are so lucky not to have to live under those laws. Just one more reason to be glad that we are Americans.


It is always surprising the number of people so attached to voicing any criticism of conservative or even just common Americans that they rush to support the worst aspects of humanity as long as they are not typically American in origin. 
A strange value system that feels free to shred posters for the beliefs opposing something awful just because it is voiced by those they don't like.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

gapeach said:


> Is some kind of rule being broken?


Did someone say there was a rule being broken? Just pointing out the bias.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

where I want to said:


> It is always surprising the number of people so attached to voicing any criticism of conservative or even just common Americans that they rush to support the worst aspects of humanity as long as they are not typically American in origin.
> A strange value system that feels free to shred posters for the beliefs opposing something awful just because it is voiced by those they don't like.


I could replace the word conservative for liberal and the statement would still be true.


----------



## wiscto (Nov 24, 2014)

no really said:


> Well I for one care about both cases and think they should be fully investigated. If evidence is sufficient brought to trial.


Absolutely. Thank you. As for the Prince... I'm sure he's out of the country by now. Does anyone here still think the Saudi royal family isn't funding and arming ISIS with the billions of dollars of defense assistance our moronic congress continues to give them, so that they can have their little proxy army going up against Shiite Syria and Shiite Iraq?


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

where I want to said:


> It is always surprising the number of people so attached to voicing any criticism of conservative or even just common Americans that they rush to support the worst aspects of humanity as long as they are not typically American in origin.
> A strange value system that feels free to shred posters for the beliefs opposing something awful just because it is voiced by those they don't like.


Care to point to anyone here, or elsewhere, who supported this man? It's never surprising that some here like to make broad generalizations about others with no basis in fact.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

mmoetc said:


> Care to point to anyone here, or elsewhere, who supported this man? It's never surprising that some here like to make broad generalizations about others with no basis in fact.


Almost any apologist who automatically offers attacks on people looking to end such belief systems that allow this horrible behavior to escape responsibility would qualify as such a supporter.


----------



## Sawmill Jim (Dec 5, 2008)

no really said:


> Being covered is part of it. It does also depend on region, can also include segregation, limited mobility and limits to involvement with government and voting. It just depends on the sect and area.


Wouldn't matter if the woman is a non Muslim she is considered as nothing,slave even of less value than a dog as any non Muslim is .

Muhammad is Allah's apostle. Those who follow him are ruthless to the unbelievers but merciful to one another. Through them, Allah seeks to enrage the unbelievers. - 48:29


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

where I want to said:


> Almost any apologist who automatically offers attacks on people looking to end such belief systems that allow this horrible behavior to escape responsibility would qualify as such a supporter.


It's not belief systems that allow these things. Or is the NHL and our worship of athletes just another belief system you would like abolished. Some would like people like this punished for their actions, regardless of their belief system. Others allow people to hide behind their own beliefs because they agree with those beliefs. Maybe the Saudi can ask forgiveness from his god and build a house or two. It seems to work for some. I'd like to see actions punished, not beliefs.


----------



## no really (Aug 7, 2013)

Sawmill Jim said:


> Wouldn't matter if the woman is a non Muslim she is considered as nothing,slave even of less value than a dog as any non Muslim is .
> 
> Muhammad is Allah's apostle. Those who follow him are ruthless to the unbelievers but merciful to one another. Through them, Allah seeks to enrage the unbelievers. - 48:29


To some extent but in this case being one of the prince's it is probably just a spoiled, pampered rich guy. Who knows how devout he is, some of them drink and party pretty hard when away from home.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

no really said:


> To some extent but in this case being one of the prince's it is probably just a spoiled, pampered rich guy. Who knows how devout he is, some of them drink and party pretty hard when away from home.


Yes- a condemnation of privileged classes. But also supported by a culture that will hold the victim responsible for his bad behavior. 
Every culture has a problem with abuse but how they respond to it makes the only difference possible.


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

I really did not know that I was going to start a firestorm by posting this. I have read two articles since about the Prince's crime. I thought it was a man at first that the prince had attacked and if it had not been for the neighbor's account of seeing the bloody woman trying to get away, we would not have known that the victim was a woman. 
I had not heard anything about the hockey player. I hope he is punished severely. 
I still don't know why I was jumped on here because I posted this article. It is definitely news when someone from another country comes to the USA to stay and assaults a citizen no matter where he is from or what his religion is.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

gapeach said:


> I really did not know that I was going to start a firestorm. I have read two articles since about the Prince's crime. I thought it was a man at first that the prince had attacked and if it had not been for the neighbor's account of seeing the bloody woman trying to get away, we would not have known that the victim was a woman.
> I had not heard anything about the hockey player. I hope he is punished severely.
> I still don't know why I was jumped on here because I posted this article. It is definitely news when someone from another country comes to the USA to stay and assaults a citizen no matter where he is from or what his religion is.


Your crime is the lack of political correctness in pointing out that it was a Muslim being accused. When every Proper PC knows that ordinary, nonmuslim Americans engage in such behavior too.
But ordinary Americans do not agree with the idea that he is justified in his attack and it will be prosecuted. Whereas, in this man's home country, that is apparently not the way. Yet no one is allowed to say that might be a contributing factor in his behavior.


----------



## Sawmill Jim (Dec 5, 2008)

gapeach said:


> I really did not know that I was going to start a firestorm by posting this. I have read two articles since about the Prince's crime. I thought it was a man at first that the prince had attacked and if it had not been for the neighbor's account of seeing the bloody woman trying to get away, we would not have known that the victim was a woman.
> I had not heard anything about the hockey player. I hope he is punished severely.
> I still don't know why I was jumped on here because I posted this article. It is definitely news when someone from another country comes to the USA to stay and assaults a citizen no matter where he is from or what his religion is.


You are learning Islam and Liberalism share many things in common ,I hope you can see it .:run:


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

Sawmill Jim said:


> You are learning Islam and Liberalism share many things in common ,I hope you can see it .:run:


You know that shouldn't be true. But on this forum it does seem true.
You'd think that people who advocate for treating woman equally would have an abhorrence of a religion that pointed does not. They would be criticizing at the speed of light any Christian sect that makes short shrift of women's equality and in fact use such criticism against people complaining against Islam- the old 'you should shut up because you're just as bad' even when they are clearly not just as bad. Yet are totally silent about Islam in the same regard.
The inevitable conclusion is that such posters find more value in criticizing posters they dislike than in criticizing behavior they dislike.


----------



## wiscto (Nov 24, 2014)

no really said:


> To some extent but in this case being one of the prince's it is probably just a spoiled, pampered rich guy. Who knows how devout he is, some of them drink and party pretty hard when away from home.


Yep. And some of them drink and keep child sex slaves right on their own property. Some of them kidnap and rape foreign migrant workers in broad daylight.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

where I want to said:


> You know that shouldn't be true. But on this forum it does seem true.
> You'd think that people who advocate for treating woman equally would have an abhorrence of a religion that pointed does not. They would be criticizing at the speed of light any Christian sect that makes short shrift of women's equality and in fact use such criticism against people complaining against Islam- the old 'you should shut up because you're just as bad' even when they are clearly not just as bad. Yet are totally silent about Islam in the same regard.
> The inevitable conclusion is that such posters find more value in criticizing posters they dislike than in criticizing behavior they dislike.


I know it looks like that to you but since you have a good amount of people on your ignore list it just might be because you don't see all the information.


----------



## Sawmill Jim (Dec 5, 2008)

where I want to said:


> You know that shouldn't be true. But on this forum it does seem true.
> You'd think that people who advocate for treating woman equally would have an abhorrence of a religion that pointed does not. They would be criticizing at the speed of light any Christian sect that makes short shrift of women's equality and in fact use such criticism against people complaining against Islam- the old 'you should shut up because you're just as bad' even when they are clearly not just as bad. Yet are totally silent about Islam in the same regard.
> The inevitable conclusion is that such posters find more value in criticizing posters they dislike than in criticizing behavior they dislike.


It is like that many places out side these forums too I know a few of them .


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

Deacon Mike said:


> You seem very familiar with Saudi law.


Some really do follow the old wise fact... know your enemy.

Growing up mom taught up about many faiths.. to the point that she contacted leaders of other faiths and ask to attend with a family with children our ages.

We might have brunch with them or just donuts.

Fyi. My mom was a Catholic Sunday school teacher and a volunteer certified special ed teacher at the Catholic school.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

Sawmill Jim said:


> It is like that many places out side these forums too I know a few of them .


I think it comes from the tendency to think in personal terms instead of principles. Sort of "if you don't agree with me continuously, you are a personal enemy" sort of thinking.
And this has allowed the sorry state of one-ups-manship of personal insult to get out of control here.


----------



## Sawmill Jim (Dec 5, 2008)

where I want to said:


> I think it comes from the tendency to think in personal terms instead of principles. Sort of "if you don't agree with me continuously, you are a personal enemy" sort of thinking.
> And this has allowed the sorry state of one-ups-manship of personal insult to get out of control here.


If I may add some's perception of a insult cannot be defined using the English language .Their definition and Websters are in total conflict . Same happens with Islam ,they have the Quran yet deny Muslims go by its teachings .

You get the grist of it and have a better way with words at times than I do. :bow:


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

mmoetc said:


> Nothing to be ashamed of. $37 million for about 1/2 acre seems a bit pricey but to each their own. Just trying to figure out why peach is such a hater.


Really? Why don't you point out the word "HATE" in any of her posts. If this were directed at any member of YOUR elite group here it would've already been deleted w/'points' assessed. 
What I see is extreme envy at the # & informative content in posts other than yours.

I also would imagine the hockey player's crime might've been posted if more were into that sport, or even had seen the story...

But carry on w/your hatefulness.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

Tricky Grama said:


> Really? Why don't you point out the word "HATE" in any of her posts. If this were directed at any member of YOUR elite group here it would've already been deleted w/'points' assessed.
> What I see is extreme envy at the # & informative content in posts other than your.
> 
> I also would imagine the hockey player's crime might've been posted if more were into that sport.
> ...


Did you report it? I bet this post was already reported.


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

mmoetc said:


> Nothing to be ashamed of. $37 million for about 1/2 acre seems a bit pricey but to each their own. Just trying to figure out why peach is such a hater.


I just let this hater thing just go on by. What's the use anyway?:indif: It is like being in Junior high again.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

mmoetc said:


> It's not belief systems that allow these things. Or is the NHL and our worship of athletes just another belief system you would like abolished. Some would like people like this punished for their actions, regardless of their belief system. Others allow people to hide behind their own beliefs because they agree with those beliefs. Maybe the Saudi can ask forgiveness from his god and build a house or two. It seems to work for some. I'd like to see actions punished, not beliefs.


What extreme views you take. Did I say abolish any where? In fact quite to the contrary, I advocate constantly for change. And yes, I am just as horrified by the actions of athletes. And yes, I find those apologists just as ugly as an apologist for a religion. In fact, it seems there was a thread here about it a few months ago.

But as for seperating beliefs from actions, such nonsense. Allowing the culture that creates such behavior to continue unexamined and uncriticized is simply to allow it to flourish without change. That is the logical equivalent as making rules about treating a slave with kindness while not objecting to the institution of slavery. That is a case by case basis too but hardly one the slave finds appealing. He would probably advocate for change in beliefs too.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

I am pretty sure the English royal family doesn't have anything like this going on. 
But if they did I'm quite sure it would be a subject of discussion here and everywhere else. 
Do you suppose the difference is in the religion?


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

no really said:


> To some extent but in this case being one of the prince's it is probably just a spoiled, pampered rich guy. Who knows how devout he is, some of them drink and party pretty hard when away from home.


It wasn't that long ago a foreign prince was photographed naked in an American hotel room with a room full of naked women he's likely doesn't value overly highly and a another foreign prince was said to have paid for sex with an underaged American girl. 

Maybe the problem is that royalty is raised to believe that they are above treating people as anything more than objects to be used as they see fit.


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

AmericanStand said:


> I am pretty sure the English royal family doesn't have anything like this going on.
> But if they did I'm quite sure it would be a subject of discussion here and everywhere else.
> Do you suppose the difference is in the religion?


Do you mean the reaction to it being posted here? I dunno. Like you said, a member of any royal family who came to American and abused anybody would be big news. 


Just like when Prince Harry partied like a rock star in Las Vegas.
He didn't hurt anyone but he probably embarrassed his family.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

gapeach said:


> Do you mean the reaction to it being posted here? I dunno. Like you said, a member of any royal family who came to American and abused anybody would be big news.
> 
> Just like when Prince Harry partied like a rock star in Las Vegas.


That was the news. You made it about his religion. Expected.


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

Are you the hall monitor now? I never said the word Muslim. I never said the word hate. Give it a rest.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

gapeach said:


> Is some kind of rule being broken?


The Golden Rule


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Bearfootfarm said:


> The Golden Rule


I actually believe in the Golden Rule.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

gapeach said:


> Are you the hall monitor now? I never said the word Muslim. I never said the word hate. Give it a rest.


Don't play the victim by trying to tar me with things I did not say or imply. You brought his religion into it in the first post and the later try to castigate posters for not being concerned about the victims when you had not either. As long as you keep trying to play the victim, I don't feel the need to let it rest.


----------



## Sawmill Jim (Dec 5, 2008)

painterswife said:


> That was the news. You made it about his religion. Expected.


When did Prince Harry become a Muslim


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

I am not playing a victim. Nobody has complained except for you and your friends, fellow baiters or whatever the gang is.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

Duplicate


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

gapeach said:


> I am not playing a victim. Nobody has complained except for you and your friends, fellow baiters or whatever the gang is.


Nope a waste of good words.


----------



## wiscto (Nov 24, 2014)

I really thought we'd all be on the same side in this thread.


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

Most of us are.
Maybe they got mad when they saw the headline but that was from the LA News.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

Everyone believes this was a horrible thing. I and it seems others as well did not like the typical tying of bad acts to this person's religion.


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

*More women accuse Saudi prince after his arrest on sex crime charge, LAPD says*

By Joseph Serna 
September 25, 2015

A Saudi prince who allegedly tried to force a female worker to perform a sex act on him inside a massive property near Beverly Hills has now been accused of attacking other women in the home, according to the Los Angeles Police Department.Majed Abdulaziz Al-Saud, 28, was arrested this week on suspicion of forced oral copulation of an adult and freed Thursday on $300,000 bail.
Police said Friday they are investigating claims that Al-Saud also preyed on other women on the estate.
Detectives "found more victims who were also alleging crimes against Mr. Al-Saud," said LAPD Officer Drake Madison.
Al-Saud was detained by police for hours Wednesday afternoon as officers investigated a reported disturbance inside the 22,000-square-foot residence about 12:45 p.m., Madison said.
He was held on suspicion of false imprisonment, sexual assault and battery, then ultimately booked for alleged forced oral copulation of a worker inside the residence, Madison said.
Neighbors reported seeing a bleeding woman screaming for help as she tried to scale an 8-foot-high wall that surrounds the property, at the end of a cul de sac in the 2500 block of Wallingford Drive. The home is within a gated community in the Beverly Glen area.
more w/video
http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-saudi-prince-arrest-beverly-hills-20150924-story.html
I hope all of these people will come forth and that he will be charged for more crimes and that he will rot in a US prison. However, he's probably back in his Castle.


----------



## wiscto (Nov 24, 2014)

gapeach said:


> *More women accuse Saudi prince after his arrest on sex crime charge, LAPD says*
> 
> By Joseph Serna
> September 25, 2015
> ...


That doesn't sound good.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Irish Pixie said:


> I actually believe in the Golden Rule.


So do I.... Those with the gold makes the rules.


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

wiscto said:


> That doesn't sound good.


There may be some more millionaires made in Hollywood with some civil cases.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

AmericanStand said:


> I am pretty sure the English royal family doesn't have anything like this going on.
> But if they did I'm quite sure it would be a subject of discussion here and everywhere else.
> Do you suppose the difference is in the religion?


I suppose the difference is they live in a culture where it would be a scandal if they did and with a judicial system that would not blame the victim for the crime. That might be due to religion, which did influence social standards. But certainly the history of the culture did create a different ethic.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

where I want to said:


> I suppose the difference is they live in a culture where it would be a scandal if they did and with a judicial system that would not blame the victim for the crime. That might be due to religion, which did influence social standards. But certainly the history of the cukture did create a different ethic.


There doesn't seem to have been much scandal at all. Prince Harry went on his merry way and it seems that Prince Andrew seems to have enough friends in high places that the young gal was denied her day in court. 

Realistically, it isn't really all that uncommon for North American judicial systems and society to blame the victim of a sexual assault and there does seem to be another system of justice for the wealthy elite.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

Somewhere in the mishmash of logic here that people insist upon here, they want to use the freedoms in their culture,that have been such a long struggle to achieve, to insist that no criticism can be tolerated of those whose culture has not seen fit to fight for those freedoms. 
How is it possible to use these freedoms to advocate for those who would not have them exist?


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

wr said:


> There doesn't seem to have been much scandal at all. Prince Harry went on his merry way and it seems that Prince Andrew seems to have enough friends in high places that the young gal was denied her day in court.
> 
> Realistically, it isn't really all that uncommon for North American judicial systems and society to blame the victim of a sexual assault and there does seem to be another system of justice for the wealthy elite.


I'm sorry but the minute I hear 'British Royal Family' my hearing turns off. Was he supposed to have violently raped a woman in the US and was not held accountable?


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

where I want to said:


> Somewhere in the mishmash of logic here that people insist upon here, they want to use the freedoms in their culture,that have been such a long struggle to achieve, to insist that no criticism can be tolerated of those whose culture has not seen fit to fight for those freedoms.
> How is it possible to use these freedoms to advocate for those who would not have them exist?


No one has tne freedom to rape or commit sexual assult. Using your freedom to blame a religion for the criminal acts of one is certainly free speech but not at all laudable.


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

Where I want to

Sometimes I have to read your posts 2 or 3 times but I got it on the 3rd read. I don't see it working out.


----------



## kuriakos (Oct 7, 2005)

Some of the people jumping all over the OP for her bringing up the alleged offender's religion are probably some of the same ones who loved talking about Josh Duggar's sexual offenses and I'm quite certain they brought up his religion a time or two, or fifty. And they're probably some of the same people who love it when other prominent Christians are caught engaged in extra-marital activities, and darn near gleeful if it happens to be homosexual extra-marital activities.

Hypocrisy is a bad thing and calling out bad things is a good thing, so I don't see any reason not to mention that the alleged sexual assaulter is a Muslim, as such things are supposedly against his religion.

It was assumed by the OP that it was a homosexual assault and as far as I'm aware that would be against his religion, but is heterosexual assault allowed by Islam? I don't know, but I'd be interested in learning. The answer would be illuminating either way. If it's not allowed, then it reinforces the OP's point. If it is allowed, then we could have a much bigger discussion about that religion.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

kuriakos said:


> Some of the people jumping all over the OP for her bringing up the alleged offender's religion are probably some of the same ones who loved talking about Josh Duggar's sexual offenses and I'm quite certain they brought up his religion a time or two, or fifty. And they're probably some of the same people who love it when other prominent Christians are caught engaged in extra-marital activities, and darn near gleeful if it happens to be homosexual extra-marital activities.
> 
> Hypocrisy is a bad thing and calling out bad things is a good thing, so I don't see any reason not to mention that the alleged sexual assaulter is a Muslim, as such things are supposedly against his religion.
> 
> It was assumed by the OP that it was a homosexual assault and as far as I'm aware that would be against his religion, but is heterosexual assault allowed by Islam? I don't know, but I'd be interested in learning. The answer would be illuminating either way. If it's not allowed, then it reinforces the OP's point. If it is allowed, then we could have a much bigger discussion about that religion.


Duggar used his religion for personal gain and preached about the sanctity of marriage. Did not see the Saudi prince doing that.


----------



## kuriakos (Oct 7, 2005)

painterswife said:


> Duggar used his religion for personal gain and preached about the sanctity of marriage. Did not see the Saudi prince doing that.


So it's only hypocrisy if they preach it? Or if they get personal gain from it? Or only if you don't like it? I don't exactly understand your distinction. I don't expect you to call him out yourself for his supposed hypocrisy, but why attack someone else for calling him out? (Not directed at you specifically, as I don't know if you are one of those who did.)


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

kuriakos said:


> So it's only hypocrisy if they preach it? Or if they get personal gain from it? Or only if you don't like it? I don't exactly understand your distinction. I don't expect you to call him out yourself for his supposed hypocrisy, but why attack someone else for calling him out? (Not directed at you specifically, as I don't know if you are one of those who did.)


I will call out anyone that makes it about the religion instead of the person.


----------



## Sawmill Jim (Dec 5, 2008)

kuriakos said:


> Some of the people jumping all over the OP for her bringing up the alleged offender's religion are probably some of the same ones who loved talking about Josh Duggar's sexual offenses and I'm quite certain they brought up his religion a time or two, or fifty. And they're probably some of the same people who love it when other prominent Christians are caught engaged in extra-marital activities, and darn near gleeful if it happens to be homosexual extra-marital activities.
> 
> Hypocrisy is a bad thing and calling out bad things is a good thing, so I don't see any reason not to mention that the alleged sexual assaulter is a Muslim, as such things are supposedly against his religion.
> 
> It was assumed by the OP that it was a homosexual assault and as far as I'm aware that would be against his religion, but is heterosexual assault allowed by Islam? I don't know, but I'd be interested in learning. The answer would be illuminating either way. If it's not allowed, then it reinforces the OP's point. If it is allowed, then we could have a much bigger discussion about that religion.


Some sects of Islam women are property The Saudi's are good at loping off heads for most ant reason ,yet the US backs them to the max ,when instead they should nuke them .

One of the other crime categories that leads to beheadingâbesides banditry, murder, drugs or pedophiliaâis simple political dissent. But for activists protesting against the government or calling for reforms, such as the Shiite protesters who rose up in 2011-12, the agonizing wait between their sentencing and being beheaded might take months or even years.
http://www.newsweek.com/2014/10/24/...sis-has-nothing-over-saudi-arabia-277385.html


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Irish Pixie said:


> I actually believe in the Golden Rule.



He who has the gold makes the rules ?


----------



## wiscto (Nov 24, 2014)

I'll be honest. I'm far less suspicious of the British Royal Family than the Saudi Royal Family. For three critical reasons. 

The Saudi Royal Family still runs their country. 
Saudi Arabia is still basically a feudalistic nation where the royals deem themselves worthier than all the rest. 
While the British Royals may be in a position where they are protected, they are also only protected because it is currently convenient to do so...they are wholly at the mercy of the elected government and their popularity with the people. Under those circumstances it's a lot easier to just make the family behave than it is to sweep story after story under the rug.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

where I want to said:


> Somewhere in the mishmash of logic here that people insist upon here, they want to use the freedoms in their culture,that have been such a long struggle to achieve, to insist that no criticism can be tolerated of those whose culture has not seen fit to fight for those freedoms.
> How is it possible to use these freedoms to advocate for those who would not have them exist?


I advocate the Prince in this situation be punished according to US laws. I might be misinformed but since the incident occurred on US soil, I'm not overly concerned about his culture. He deserves to be tried, if convicted, face the same penalty as any other non wealthy person and be shipped home after. 

How do you feel we could change the culture of another country?


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

AmericanStand said:


> He who has the gold makes the rules ?


No, the other one.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

where I want to said:


> Somewhere in the mishmash of logic here that people insist upon here, they want to use the freedoms in their culture,that have been such a long struggle to achieve, to insist that no criticism can be tolerated of those whose culture has not seen fit to fight for those freedoms.
> How is it possible to use these freedoms to advocate for those who would not have them exist?


No one is "advocating" for the perpetrator

Many are just pointing out the obvious bigotry some display towards Muslims
You try to confuse the issues to keep from having to face the reality.

It's not supporting one to point out the guilt of the other
It's just seeing what is really happening even though it's being denied


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

wr said:


> I advocate the Prince in this situation be punished according to US laws. I might be misinformed but since the incident occurred on US soil, I'm not overly concerned about his culture. He deserves to be tried, if convicted, face the same penalty as any other non wealthy person and be shipped home after.
> 
> How do you feel we could change the culture of another country?


Allow some to destroy themselves by staying put and deal with their issues or not.

Allow some to excel independent of our activities.

Basically be an isolationist... no immigrants claiming refuge....clean up you own place.. just tired of press 2 for Engish.


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

Bearfootfarm said:


> No one is "advocating" for the perpetrator
> 
> Many are just pointing out the obvious bigotry some display towards Muslims
> You try to confuse the issues to keep from having to face the reality.
> ...


It is not *many*, it was 3 unless you include yourself.

It was not liked by those 3 that I even posted it even though it is news all over the country, CBS, NBC...etc....I have read all of their articles. 

God forbid, anybody posts about someone from the middle east forcing copulation on an adult as said in some articles. I never said Muslim. All I said that I thought that was against his religion. I guess I should be burned at the stake or publicly flogged by the Mod Squad.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

gapeach said:


> It is not *many*, it was 3 unless you include yourself.
> 
> It was not liked by those 3 that I even posted it even though it is news all over the country, CBS, NBC...etc....I have read all of their articles.
> 
> God forbid, anybody posts about someone from the middle east forcing copulation on an adult as said in some articles. I never said Muslim. All I said that I thought that was against his religion. I guess I should be burned at the stake or publicly flogged by the Mod Squad.


No one cared that you posted it. It was your reference to his religion that is not liked. What do you care if we voice our opinions? That is the purpose of this forum.


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

You and IP, mmoetc jumped all over me and you have carried it on all day!


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

gapeach said:


> You and IP, mmoetc jumped all over me and you have carried it on all day!


We jumped on your post. You still keep playing the victim. You posted it and we did not like your insinuations and spoke up. Did you expect no one to discuss it? Can't take the heat on how you posted it?


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

painterswife said:


> We jumped on your post. You still keep playing the victim. You posted it and we did not like your insinuations and spoke up. Did you expect no one to discuss it? Can't take the heat on how you posted it?



I did not expect you 3 to gang up on me and treat me as if I picked something out of the blue to post because the perpetrator is Muslim. I never even said that he was Muslim. I printed the article just as it described him, a Saudi Prince who forced a sex act on an adult.
He does not have diplomatic immunity. I hope he gets the book thrown at him for all of the other people that he may have hurt and kept captive.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

gapeach said:


> I did not expect you 3 to gang up on me and treat me as if I picked something out of the blue to post because the perpetrator is Muslim. I never even said that he was Muslim. I printed the article just as it described him, a Saudi Prince who forced a sex act on an adult.
> He does not have diplomatic immunity. I hope he gets the book thrown at him for all of the other people that he may have hurt and kept captive.


Your posts have a pattern. Mine do as well. You made it about his religion in the very first post but don't want to own up to it and blame us because we pointed it out.


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

Hey, some stand with the great new orders for the military in regards to abuse and respect for culture.


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

painterswife said:


> We jumped on your post. You still keep playing the victim. You posted it and we did not like your insinuations and spoke up. Did you expect no one to discuss it? Can't take the heat on how you posted it?


Gap.... did you write the op or did you come across in the news as I did...


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

where I want to said:


> Almost any apologist who automatically offers attacks on people looking to end such belief systems that allow this horrible behavior to escape responsibility would qualify as such a supporter.





where I want to said:


> What extreme views you take. Did I say abolish any where? In fact quite to the contrary, I advocate constantly for change. And yes, I am just as horrified by the actions of athletes. And yes, I find those apologists just as ugly as an apologist for a religion. In fact, it seems there was a thread here about it a few months ago.
> 
> But as for seperating beliefs from actions, such nonsense. Allowing the culture that creates such behavior to continue unexamined and uncriticized is simply to allow it to flourish without change. That is the logical equivalent as making rules about treating a slave with kindness while not objecting to the institution of slavery. That is a case by case basis too but hardly one the slave finds appealing. He would probably advocate for change in beliefs too.


Abolish, end. I'm sure you can parse the difference for me though I see none. Oh yeah, it wasn't you calling for the end of other cultures you're just defending those who do call for such an end against unwarranted criticism. How noble of you.

I'm not saying parts of Islam shouldn't be examined and criticized. I've done it myself. What I'm saying is that every bad act by a Muslim shouldn't lead to an automatic criticism and condemnation of the entire religion and all it's followers. No evidence has been brought forth that religion played any role in this incident. It's just as likely that this man is a garden variety sociopath with limited impulse control. Incidents like this happen countless times each week and religion plays no role nor gets any mention. What this man's religion had to do with it is yet to be explored except among the usual cadre who seek to condemn all things Muslim. I make no excuse for this man or his actions just as I make no excuse for any other sexual predator. I'm not sure how it's a bad thing to judge someone for their actions instead of their religion.


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

gapeach said:


> I did not expect you 3 to gang up on me and treat me as if I picked something out of the blue to post because the perpetrator is Muslim. I never even said that he was Muslim. I printed the article just as it described him, a Saudi Prince who forced a sex act on an adult.
> He does not have diplomatic immunity. I hope he gets the book thrown at him for all of the other people that he may have hurt and kept captive.


Then why did you choose this particular sexual assault among the countless other sexual assault stories published each day? Ive not noticed you made the issue of sexual assault a cause cÃ©lÃ¨bre in any other way. Why did you question what his religion had to do with it? Are you claiming you didn't know he was Muslim when you made mention of religion? Why continue to bring up other aspects of Islam and Saudi law if you didn't wish to make religion part of your point? Me thinks the lady doth protest too much.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

gapeach said:


> I did not expect you 3 to gang up on me and treat me as if I picked something out of the blue to post because the perpetrator is Muslim. I never even said that he was Muslim. I printed the article just as it described him, a Saudi Prince who forced a sex act on an adult.
> He does not have diplomatic immunity. I hope he gets the book thrown at him for all of the other people that he may have hurt and kept captive.


I'm thrilled that he can't hide behind diplomatic immunity and I believe he should be tried for the crimes he's charged with but I disagree with the idea that he should be sentenced for anything he was not convicted on. 

If he has harmed others, he should be tried on those matters as well but I don't believe the law has provisions for incarcerating people on things unproven. 

I would also point out that if he is found guilty, I believe that after he has served time, he should be deported back to his own country.


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

gapeach said:


> You and IP, mmoetc jumped all over me and you have carried it on all day!


I actually took a large part of the day off to do more constructive things. You've spent a large part of the day explaining what you didn't think would happen but still haven't really explained why this story, above all the other sexual assault stories to choose from, was the one you choose to run with.


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

kuriakos said:


> So it's only hypocrisy if they preach it? Or if they get personal gain from it? Or only if you don't like it? I don't exactly understand your distinction. I don't expect you to call him out yourself for his supposed hypocrisy, but why attack someone else for calling him out? (Not directed at you specifically, as I don't know if you are one of those who did.)


Hypocracy can take many forms. Whether this man was a devout Muslim who violated his religous beliefs hasn't been established. I've seen no evidence that he spoke out for any particular beliefs or tried to profit from such speech while acting differently. I've seen nothing but the speculation by some here that religion had anything to do with this man's alledged acts. I do know that if he did what he's accused of he deserves to be punished to the full extent of the law and not be hidden behind some mantle of piety. He may well be a hypocrite. He's almost certainly a scumbag.


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

where I want to said:


> Somewhere in the mishmash of logic here that people insist upon here, they want to use the freedoms in their culture,that have been such a long struggle to achieve, to insist that no criticism can be tolerated of those whose culture has not seen fit to fight for those freedoms.
> How is it possible to use these freedoms to advocate for those who would not have them exist?


I've yet to see your evidence that anyone here has insisted that any individual Muslim cannot be criticized nor that all aspects of Islam and Arab and Persian cultures are above reproach. I, and others, have objected to the continued knee jerk criticism by some of all Muslims and all things Islam.


----------



## kuriakos (Oct 7, 2005)

painterswife said:


> I will call out anyone that makes it about the religion instead of the person.


Fair enough, I suppose. I personally do not like that religion, but most of its members (as individuals) don't cause me much concern.

I think the OP was (intentionally or not) making it about the person and not the religion by saying that what he did is against his supposed religion. Had they said he was a "typical Muslim" or something like that, it would be making it about the religion and not about the specific person acting contrary to the religion. That's how I saw it.


----------



## kuriakos (Oct 7, 2005)

mmoetc said:


> I've seen nothing but the speculation by some here that religion had anything to do with this man's alledged acts


This is what I'm missing here. Perhaps this is overflow from other posts that person has made that I haven't seen, but in post #1 of this thread, that person did not speculate that religion had something to do with his acts. They specifically said that they thought what he did was against his supposed religion.


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

mmoetc said:


> Then why did you choose this particular sexual assault among the countless other sexual assault stories published each day? Ive not noticed you made the issue of sexual assault a cause cÃ©lÃ¨bre in any other way. Why did you question what his religion had to do with it? Are you claiming you didn't know he was Muslim when you made mention of religion? Why continue to bring up other aspects of Islam and Saudi law if you didn't wish to make religion part of your point? Me thinks the lady doth protest too much.




Sorry, but it was like headlining the news... right up there with the speaker stepping down.....

Is there a litmus test to pass in order to appease the gods of the of the copy proof forum?...

All I am getting is certainly subjects in current events which impact our society are not to be talked about.

Guess what... why is it the a person serving the military must turn a blind eye to it there on foreign soil... now, we in America are to be shamed to speak of it coming here. Some on our own soil question posts about it here...why .. how far are we to bend over


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

kuriakos said:


> This is what I'm missing here. Perhaps this is overflow from other posts that person has made that I haven't seen, but in post #1 of this thread, that person did not speculate that religion had something to do with his acts. They specifically said that they thought what he did was against his supposed religion.


But why bring up religion at all in discussing a simple crime story. What does what his religion says about certain sex acts have to do with the heinousness of his alledged acts. Why comment about it at all unless it furthers some agenda? I phrased my initial question as I did, referencing the why things become news thread. I did it because many there complained of agenda driven news because they disagree with the agendas they see driving certain stories. I disagree with some people using every "bad Muslim" story to drive their agenda against all Muslims. Nothing in the OP's, and many other's, responses has done much to dissuade me from this feeling. 

Many here complain about trolling. Almost every post in GC is designed to further some agenda and elicit some response. Why else post them and provide editorial comment? Is it all trolling? To some extent it all is. Some are just a bit more honest about themselves and their agendas. I may not like those agendas any more, but I do respect their honesty more.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

kasilofhome said:


> Hey, some stand with the great new orders for the military in regards to abuse and respect for culture.


That's simply not true


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

Sorry but the current events have changed since the Beatles came over from England..we now face other issues.

If any wish to pretend fine that is your choice.... simply avoid such threads... some want to know and become informed voters actively involved and engaged in our nation's pro's and con's.


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

Report Post 
Old Today, 03:22 AM
Bearfootfarm's Avatar	
Bearfootfarm Bearfootfarm is online now


Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Eastern North Carolina
Posts: 35,020
Quote:
Originally Posted by kasilofhome View Post
Hey, some stand with the great new orders for the military in regards to abuse and respect for culture


"That's simply not true"...by Bear foot farm.



U.S. Soldiers Told to Ignore Afghan AlliesÃ¢&#8364;&#8482; Abuse of ...
www.ar15.com &#8250; General &#8250; General Discussion
U.S. Soldiers Told to Ignore Afghan AlliesÃ¢&#8364;&#8482; Abuse of Boys - AR15.COM----- Login? Tools. AR15.Com. 3 Gun Nation. Archery. Online Store. Join The NRA. 6,421 ...






ADVERTISEMENT | ADVERTISE ON NEWSDAY
The Pentagon and the White House condemned on Monday reports that Afghan forces who worked with U.S. military personnel sexually assaulted boys, and members of Congress complained about a U.S. soldier being forced out of the military because he intervened in 2011, attacking an Afghan police commander he believed was raping a

http://www.newsday.com/news/world/c...-stop-a-child-rape-must-leave-army-1.10878418

YES, SOME DO SUPPORT THIS ABUSE....sorry if some do not want to face the facts and claim it is in true.


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

kasilofhome said:


> Sorry, but it was like headlining the news... right up there with the speaker stepping down.....
> 
> Is there a litmus test to pass in order to appease the gods of the of the copy proof forum?...
> 
> ...


Apparently we look at different news feeds. The ones I looked at were talking about the Pope's visit, VW, oil prices, Syrian refugees and almost everything but this story. But the story that was posted and commented on was an LA crime story with no real national import. And religion was thrown right into the mix. Forgive me if I don't think everything is that innocent. Forgive me if I recognize evil in people but don't look to tie religion to every evil act.


----------



## JJ Grandits (Nov 10, 2002)

For the record, Patrick Kane may have been the victim, not the perpetrator. The case happened locally here and has been a subject of great discussion. All evidence shows that the charges against Kane were false.


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

JJ Grandits said:


> For the record, Patrick Kane may have been the victim, not the perpetrator. The case happened locally here and has been a subject of great discussion. All evidence shows that the charges against Kane were false.


But no discussion here of a national sports figure in the spotlight for possible sexual crimes. It was the first high profile case involving sexual misconduct that came up in my news feeds. Maybe if he had been Mohammed Kane it would have moved up the list of other's.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

painterswife said:


> Did you report it? I bet this post was already reported.


For what reason? Really? You could be right, tho, there's some here who speak hatefulness a lot but report others truths.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

Tricky Grama said:


> For what reason? Really? You could be right, tho, there's some here who speak hatefulness a lot but report others truths.


If someones's truth is hate, it deserves to be reported.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

wr said:


> There doesn't seem to have been much scandal at all. Prince Harry went on his merry way and it seems that Prince Andrew seems to have enough friends in high places that the young gal was denied her day in court.
> 
> Realistically, it isn't really all that uncommon for North American judicial systems and society to blame the victim of a sexual assault and there does seem to be another system of justice for the wealthy elite.


This is so very wrong but it doesn't seem to happen as much as in the past.

Like when Clinton derided the child who was raped IN COURT in order to get the guilty rapist off the hook then laughed about it later. Don't think you can come up w/another case as filthy & VILE as that...at least not among pols running for POTUS.


----------



## no really (Aug 7, 2013)

painterswife said:


> If someones's truth is hate, it deserves to be reported.


I have seen a lot of hate in this forum for religion period.


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

mmoetc said:


> Apparently we look at different news feeds. The ones I looked at were talking about the Pope's visit, VW, oil prices, Syrian refugees and almost everything but this story. But the story that was posted and commented on was an LA crime story with no real national import. And religion was thrown right into the mix. Forgive me if I don't think everything is that innocent. Forgive me if I recognize evil in people but don't look to tie religion to every evil act.


So, where is the approval list of current events we that meet your non mod approval.

The Kane case.... had holes in it.
I have prior knowledge of the handling of rape kits in Erie county..
It did not jive with me.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

kuriakos said:


> Some of the people jumping all over the OP for her bringing up the alleged offender's religion are probably some of the same ones who loved talking about Josh Duggar's sexual offenses and I'm quite certain they brought up his religion a time or two, or fifty. And they're probably some of the same people who love it when other prominent Christians are caught engaged in extra-marital activities, and darn near gleeful if it happens to be homosexual extra-marital activities.
> 
> Hypocrisy is a bad thing and calling out bad things is a good thing, so I don't see any reason not to mention that the alleged sexual assaulter is a Muslim, as such things are supposedly against his religion.
> 
> It was assumed by the OP that it was a homosexual assault and as far as I'm aware that would be against his religion, but is heterosexual assault allowed by Islam? I don't know, but I'd be interested in learning. The answer would be illuminating either way. If it's not allowed, then it reinforces the OP's point. If it is allowed, then we could have a much bigger discussion about that religion.


Post of the day award.


----------



## no really (Aug 7, 2013)

painterswife said:


> If someones's truth is hate, it deserves to be reported.


I really don't think there is anyone in this forum that has the ultimate knowledge of truth.


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

no really said:


> I really don't think there is anyone in this forum that has the ultimate knowledge of truth.


Reality in its finest.


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

wr said:


> I'm thrilled that he can't hide behind diplomatic immunity and I believe he should be tried for the crimes he's charged with but I disagree with the idea that he should be sentenced for anything he was not convicted on.
> 
> If he has harmed others, he should be tried on those matters as well but I don't believe the law has provisions for incarcerating people on things unproven.
> 
> I would also point out that if he is found guilty, I believe that after he has served time, he should be deported back to his own country.


*
More women accuse Saudi prince after his arrest on sex crime charge, LAPD says
*
By Joseph Serna 
September 25, 2015

A Saudi prince who allegedly tried to force a female worker to perform a sex act on him inside a massive property near Beverly Hills has now been accused of attacking other women in the home, according to the Los Angeles Police Department.Majed Abdulaziz Al-Saud, 28, was arrested this week on suspicion of forced oral copulation of an adult and freed Thursday on $300,000 bail.
Police said Friday they are investigating claims that Al-Saud also preyed on other women on the estate.
Detectives "found more victims who were also alleging crimes against Mr. Al-Saud," said LAPD Officer Drake Madison.
Al-Saud was detained by police for hours Wednesday afternoon as officers investigated a reported disturbance inside the 22,000-square-foot residence about 12:45 p.m., Madison said.
He was held on suspicion of false imprisonment, sexual assault and battery, then ultimately booked for alleged forced oral copulation of a worker inside the residence, Madison said.
Neighbors reported seeing a bleeding woman screaming for help as she tried to scale an 8-foot-high wall that surrounds the property, at the end of a cul de sac in the 2500 block of Wallingford Drive. The home is within a gated community in the Beverly Glen area.
more w/video
http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/l...924-story.html

*This was what I was talking about, Detectives "found more victims who were also alleging crimes against Mr. Al-Saud," said LAPD Officer Drake Madison.*

I never knew before yesterday morning that there were limits as to what new articles you should post here because it might offend some people that a Saudi Arabian Prince was involved.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

painterswife said:


> No one cared that you posted it. It was your reference to his religion that is not liked. What do you care if we voice our opinions? That is the purpose of this forum.


Ah, of course. Gotta not like ANY reference to 'religion'. It was ONLY Peach who brought up Islam NO mention of that in the article. No one even gives it another thought that Saudi is total muslim. Or their laws or their disregard for women. And children.


----------



## JJ Grandits (Nov 10, 2002)

mmoetc said:


> But no discussion here of a national sports figure in the spotlight for possible sexual crimes. It was the first high profile case involving sexual misconduct that came up in my news feeds. Maybe if he had been Mohammed Kane it would have moved up the list of other's.


Possibly true. But remember, bias can go in both directions. This thread proves it.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

painterswife said:


> We jumped on your post. You still keep playing the victim. You posted it and we did not like your insinuations and spoke up. Did you expect no one to discuss it? Can't take the heat on how you posted it?


And right there you're saying "we did not like YOUR insinuations"...Nothing about the article at all, just about Peach's "insinuations".


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

no really said:


> I really don't think there is anyone in this forum that has the ultimate knowledge of truth.


But yet we can only deal with the reality here on the page.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

Tricky Grama said:


> And right there you're saying "we did not like YOUR insinuations"...Nothing about the article at all, just about Peach's "insinuations".


Spot on. Now you get it.


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

gapeach said:


> *
> More women accuse Saudi prince after his arrest on sex crime charge, LAPD says
> *
> By Joseph Serna
> ...


No limits. Post away. Comment away. Expect counter opinions. Maybe answer a question now and then. Why this particular story? Why mention the man's religous beliefs? You'd have to try a lot harder to offend me and even then I'd not report you. I'd call you out openly and give you a chance to respond.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

mmoetc said:


> I actually took a large part of the day off to do more constructive things. You've spent a large part of the day explaining what you didn't think would happen but still haven't really explained why this story, above all the other sexual assault stories to choose from, was the one you choose to run with.


I really don't know why anyone has to apologize, explain or otherwise say WHY they posted anything. 

THIS article was big news...came out in an email-prolly-of news reports that many get daily. IF there were other rape reports, I'd be billing to bet they'd get posted. Perhaps those who get sports news emails would have the hockey one.


----------



## JJ Grandits (Nov 10, 2002)

tricky grama said:


> and right there you're saying "we did not like your insinuations"...nothing about the article at all, just about peach's "insinuations".




thou shalt not insinuate!!!!!!!


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

[No message]


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

JJ Grandits said:


> thou shalt not insinuate!!!!!!!


Insinuate all ypu want to. Just don't cry victim when you don't like the responses. Oh go ahead an cry victim. I will have an opinion on that to. This is a discussion forum after all.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

mmoetc said:


> But why bring up religion at all in discussing a simple crime story. What does what his religion says about certain sex acts have to do with the heinousness of his alledged acts. Why comment about it at all unless it furthers some agenda? I phrased my initial question as I did, referencing the why things become news thread. I did it because many there complained of agenda driven news because they disagree with the agendas they see driving certain stories. I disagree with some people using every "bad Muslim" story to drive their agenda against all Muslims. Nothing in the OP's, and many other's, responses has done much to dissuade me from this feeling.
> 
> Many here complain about trolling. Almost every post in GC is designed to further some agenda and elicit some response. Why else post them and provide editorial comment? Is it all trolling? To some extent it all is. Some are just a bit more honest about themselves and their agendas. I may not like those agendas any more, but I do respect their honesty more.


Why say anything about his 'religion'??? B/c that religion is not a religion, it is a theocratic political movement hell bent on destroying western civilization, setting up a world-wide caliphate to rule under sharia law. We are at war w/some who are of this movement. Islam is in the news daily DAILY!


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

Tricky Grama said:


> Why say anything about his 'religion'??? B/c that religion is not a religion, it is a theocratic political movement hell bent on destroying western civilization, setting up a world-wide caliphate to rule under sharia law. We are at was w/some who are of this movement. Islam is in the news daily DAILY!


You are entertaining.


----------



## no really (Aug 7, 2013)

painterswife said:


> But yet we can only deal with the reality here on the page.


There is no reality in a forum, it is personal reactions to discussion. Your reality my reality can be two different things or they may overlap.


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

Tricky Grama said:


> Why say anything about his 'religion'??? B/c that religion is not a religion, it is a theocratic political movement hell bent on destroying western civilization, setting up a world-wide caliphate to rule under sharia law. We are at was w/some who are of this movement. Islam is in the news daily DAILY!


I applaud your honesty. You're wrong in so many ways but at least your honest. I think I'll now go enjoy my weekend. It'll include watching football with my favorite follower of this evil movement. Hope I come back with my head intact.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

painterswife said:


> Spot on. Now you get it.


Yup. NO mention of the article. NONE. It was the article that brought up your eversodefended 'religion', just so ya know. But you & others attack the messenger AND the POSTER instead. Typical.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

The fact that it was a Saudi prince makes it about Islam. As heir to control of a large Islamic nation that the ruling family rules with Islamic principles , how could it not be ?


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

painterswife said:


> Spot on. Now you get it.


At least you admitted it. I can tell you it is not worth it for the condemnation that posting one article about the Saudi Prince and his brutal sexcapades has caused here.


----------



## no really (Aug 7, 2013)

The comment GP wrote about this type of sex would be in violation of the teachings of the Quran is true. Rape is wrong.


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

painterswife said:


> Insinuate all ypu want to. Just don't cry victim when you don't like the responses. Oh go ahead an cry victim. I will have an opinion on that to. This is a discussion forum after all.


Then why the ruckus over the subject of someone thread?


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

painterswife said:


> you are entertaining.


ttb
dttb


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

gapeach said:


> At least you admitted it. I can tell you it is not worth it for the condemnation that posting one article about the Saudi Prince and his brutal sexcapades has caused here.


Worth it to you? You started this thread. You thought it was worth discussing and made it about the religion in your first post. All your subsequent spin and that of your supporters does not change what you did. Crystal clear.


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

And thank you peach for posting it. It is relevant and to our society to be aware.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

:shrug:


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

painterswife said:


> Worth it to you? You started this thread. You thought it was worth discussing and made it about the religion in your first post. All your subsequent spin and that of your supporters does not change what you did. Crystal clear.


Had this been the first time, or even the 10th, article bashing muslims I doubt there would have been a word said. *After incessant bashing of all things muslim, and equating all muslims with terrorists, the bigotry gets old. *

I'm not a big fan of christianity, I think there are some that are sanctimonious, petty, judgmental people that use their religion to make themselves feel superior. However, I don't post my opinion, and correlating articles, constantly and I don't believe this group symbolizes the average christian.


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

DTTB :run:


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

kasilofhome said:


> Then why the ruckus over the subject of someone thread?


Because when I posted that I thought that kind of sex would be against his religion. I never said he was any particular religion but obviously being a Saudi Prince, anybody would probably think that he is Muslim.

It does not matter how much Christianity is disliked here and that our Bible has been described here as Fairy Tales and that God has been called Sky Daddy. The main thing here at least with these 3 on this thread is that the Muslims are not to be posted about if it is something bad that they might have done wrong and certainly not of a sexual nature.

That part of LA where this Prince was renting the mansion is becoming a playground for rich young muslims. They are partying hardy, racing their Ferrararis and getting arrested, getting sent home and who knows what else? They have been kicked out of their other playgrounds.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

gapeach said:


> Because when I posted that I thought that kind of sex would be against his religion. I never said he was any particular religion but obviously being a Saudi Prince, anybody would probably think that he is Muslim.
> 
> It does not matter how much Christianity is disliked here and that our Bible has been described here as Fairy Tales and that God has been called Sky Daddy. The main thing here at least with these 3 on this thread is that the Muslims are not to be posted about if it is something bad that they might have done wrong and certainly not of a sexual nature.
> 
> That part of LA where this Prince was renting the mansion is becoming a playground for rich young muslims. They are partying hardy, racing their Ferrararis and getting arrested, getting sent home and who knows what else? They have been kicked out of their other playgrounds.


You can try to twist the reason we responded to your thread over and over. It does not make it true. It was yet another cherry picked news story that gave you the platform to post about Muslims once again. At least Tricky Grama owns her biases have the guts to own yours.


----------



## no really (Aug 7, 2013)

Irish Pixie said:


> Had this been the first time, or even the 10th, article bashing muslims I doubt there would have been a word said. After incessant bashing of all things muslim, and equating all muslims with terrorists, the bigotry gets old.
> 
> I'm not a big fan of christianity, I think there are some that are sanctimonious, petty, judgmental people that use their religion to make themselves feel superior. However, I don't post my opinion, and correlating articles, constantly and I don't believe this group symbolizes the average christian.


I have a unique view on this as in my family are native born Muslims, devout, loving, wonderful human beings. As one said until the fear is gone and people understand what a true Muslim is there will be problems. He also said it is in a large part their own fault for having such closed societies. 

He teared up discussing ISIS and the other terrorists, as he has lost much to that type of activity. 

But all that said there needs to be some open minds on both sides. Peach's comments about were not incorrect, Islam considers the accusations if true to be haraam.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

wr said:


> I advocate the Prince in this situation be punished according to US laws. I might be misinformed but since the incident occurred on US soil, I'm not overly concerned about his culture. He deserves to be tried, if convicted, face the same penalty as any other non wealthy person and be shipped home after.
> 
> How do you feel we could change the culture of another country?


1) I was serious, I have never heard of a royal incident involving rape in the US. So if he got away with something, I would think it wrong but I simply don't know.
2) Another culture can be effected by world opinion- look at apartheid in S. Africa. I think treating women worse than that should merit equally severe sanctions but it is rare for 'women's issues' to become a rallying cry anywhere.
3) The US ought to be less respectful of other cultures where they conflict with our own when the conflict is in the US. The whole idea of having slaves in this country just because the people are from another country is repulsive. And it should be made socially clear to visitors and immigrants that somethings are not acceptable. The media should not tip toe around the problems due to PC-ness. Sending a 14 year old girl back to the old country so she can marry a 40 year old man is not ok. I don't care how ok it is elsewhere.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

mmoetc said:


> I applaud your honesty. You're wrong in so many ways but at least your honest. I think I'll now go enjoy my weekend. It'll include watching football with my favorite follower of this evil movement. Hope I come back with my head intact.


Too late.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

kasilofhome said:


> DTTB :run:


Could you please stick to entire words in English?


----------



## trulytricia (Oct 11, 2002)

gapeach, 

thank you for posting. When one of the worlds elites gets busted I like to read about who they are. It doesn't happen very often does it.

when I was young I did not think news stories about crime should even tell race. haha. Don't think that anymore. 

When a dog mauls someone yes I want to know what breed of dog that is. I am looking for something. Clues, reasons.

I remember when music man Phil Spector finnally got thrown in jail. I read a lot about him. There were clues going way back.


----------



## no really (Aug 7, 2013)

wr said:


> There doesn't seem to have been much scandal at all. Prince Harry went on his merry way and it seems that Prince Andrew seems to have enough friends in high places that the young gal was denied her day in court.
> 
> Realistically, it isn't really all that uncommon for North American judicial systems and society to blame the victim of a sexual assault and there does seem to be another system of justice for the wealthy elite.


I have tried to find articles related to some sort of sexual assault accusations against them. Do you have links to these articles?


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

Bearfootfarm said:


> Could you please stick to entire words in English?


Lol:hysterical::facepalm:


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

no really said:


> I have tried to find articles related to some sort of sexual assault accusations against them. Do you have links to these articles?


Google Prince Andrew and underage girls


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

Irish Pixie said:


> Had this been the first time, or even the 10th, article bashing muslims I doubt there would have been a word said. *After incessant bashing of all things muslim, and equating all muslims with terrorists, the bigotry gets old. *
> 
> I'm not a big fan of christianity, I think there are some that are sanctimonious, petty, judgmental people that use their religion to make themselves feel superior. However, I don't post my opinion, and correlating articles, constantly and I don't believe this group symbolizes the average christian.


Muslims are in the news whether you like it or not. We, the USA now is committed to take Muslim Immigrants, you might as well get ready for more muslim news. You have to get used to the fact that you cannot control what others post here. If you don't like it, don't read it but you cannot control the rest of us. We are not living in Utopia. I don't think Americans like the idea of rich young millionaires coming to rent estates where they can have sex slaves either. You might spend a lot of time here but it is not exclusively your domain as it isn't anybody elses'either.


----------



## no really (Aug 7, 2013)

painterswife said:


> Google Prince Andrew and underage girls


Interesting!! Wonder if the investigation is ongoing, I would hope so.


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

trulytricia said:


> gapeach,
> 
> thank you for posting. When one of the worlds elites gets busted I like to read about who they are. It doesn't happen very often does it.
> 
> ...


Thank you, Tricia. Oh, that Phil Spector....he was so disgusting. 
I think when we are older we think of our daughters, granddaughters and how horrible it is just because people have money and influence they think they are entitled to do whatever they want to and doing it in another country is even worse. When it gets to the oil countries, they think they can get by with anything.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

gapeach said:


> Muslims are in the news whether you like it or not. We, the USA now is committed to take Muslim Immigrants, you might as well get ready for more muslim news. *You have to get used to the fact that you cannot control what others post here*. If you don't like it, don't read it but you cannot control the rest of us. We are not living in Utopia. I don't think Americans like the idea of rich young millionaires coming to rent estates where they can have sex slaves either. You might spend a lot of time here but it is not exclusively your domain as it isn't anybody elses'either.


And you'll have to get used to people not liking the ugliness you post. 

ETA: And stop making yourself out to be a victim.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

painterswife said:


> You can try to twist the reason we responded to your thread over and over. It does not make it true. It was yet another cherry picked news story that gave you the platform to post about Muslims once again. At least Tricky Grama owns her biases have the guts to own yours.


I'm reading that a few here would NOT like to see anymore derogatory things posted about muslims. That's not gonna happen. 
Things happen several ties a day that followers of Islam do that are against the very principles of this nation. Most of us will continue to post them. 

Funny how there's one blowing themselves up nearly every day somewhere, killing innocent folks & we've stopped posting the everyday occurances...are we 'seasoned' to it by now? Perhaps we shoold go back to posting those, seems the apologists are unaware.

It seems you've misread/misinterpreted my post about your slam on Peach. My post blatantly 'insinuated' that you were wrongly insulting Peach & not her posting of an article.


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

Many are used to those and the collected you. A sense of humor helps and a backbone too.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

Tricky Grama said:


> I'm reading that a few here would NOT like to see anymore derogatory things posted about muslims. That's not gonna happen.
> Things happen several ties a day that followers of Islam do that are against the very principles of this nation. Most of us will continue to post them.
> 
> Funny how there's one blowing themselves up nearly every day somewhere, killing innocent folks & we've stopped posting the everyday occurances...are we 'seasoned' to it by now? Perhaps we shoold go back to posting those, seems the apologists are unaware.
> ...


Then report it. I slammed her post. If the mods think it is an insult then they can delete it. I am sure it has already been reported even though so many claim they don't.

I do see the apologist slant on all the posts supporting the original post . Post away. I will respond when ever I feel the need.


----------



## no really (Aug 7, 2013)

Hope this won't get me kicked out but what the heck is going on?

Maybe it's just me, haven't been in this forum long, but there seems to be an underlying animosity between two groups.

Almost a turf war or retribution for some previous action.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

no really said:


> Hope this won't get me kicked out but what the heck is going on?
> 
> Maybe it's just me, haven't been in this forum long, but there seems to be an underlying animosity between two groups.
> 
> Almost a turf war or retribution for some previous action.


Do you know that I use to get PM's from the former mod that my kind and my politics was not welcome here? In fact I it was posted by many right here in this forum. many here still don't like that we can have an opinion that is different from theirs.


----------



## no really (Aug 7, 2013)

painterswife said:


> Do you know that I use to get PM's from the former mod that my kind and my politics was not welcome here? In fact I it was posted by many right here in this forum.


No I did not. Is that former mod posting here on this thread?

So it is a form of retaliation for past actions?


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

no really said:


> No I did not. Is that former mod posting here on this thread?


No. The posters are though.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

no really said:


> Hope this won't get me kicked out but what the heck is going on?
> 
> Maybe it's just me, haven't been in this forum long, but there seems to be an underlying animosity between two groups.
> 
> Almost a turf war or retribution for some previous action.


There is definite animosity. The long time forum members that lean right had their stance validated since day one of Chuck taking over this forum, they perceive themselves as the only people with a valid opinion. Angie only intensified the conservative slant of the forum by shutting down threads and leaning even more heavily right in her moderation. Any dissension from right wing, christian values was highly discouraged. Any indication of her moderating bias and you were given infractions or banned. 

The new admin has a much more moderate approach- open discussion but no personal insults or attacks. The long time right leaning forum members don't like this because they have never experienced it, and are chaffing under the restriction. The left leaning have personally experienced much more damaging chaffing so the new policies are a breath of fresh air. 

That's my opinion of the situation.


----------



## no really (Aug 7, 2013)

painterswife said:


> No. The posters are though.


So retribution or revenge maybe? 

I think everyone should be able to voice and opinion but this has become a mess of the two opposing sides. It totally alienates those of us that are here for discussion.

Now that the mod is gone if it was me I'd be enjoying my freedom to post.


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

I don't understand then, PW, why you and IP attack me. I never sent a pm to the other mod saying anything about either of you. I did not even know who either of you were. Quit tell me to stop playing the victim. Both of you are cocked and ready to jump on me in a heartbeat. Just like I just posted, I am not going to be dictated as to what I post by either of you. If you don't like then, just pass on it. I know the little game that you are playing and obviously, you have played it in the past. You are so good at it and it is really the same thing over and over.


----------



## no really (Aug 7, 2013)

Irish Pixie said:


> There is definite animosity. The long time forum members that lean right had their stance validated since day one of Chuck taking over this forum, they perceive themselves as the only people with a valid opinion. Angie only intensified the conservative slant of the forum by shutting down threads and leaning even more heavily right in her moderation. Any dissension from right wing, christian values was highly discouraged. Any indication of her moderating bias and you were given infractions or banned.
> 
> The new admin has a much more moderate approach- open discussion but no personal insults or attacks. The long time right leaning forum members don't like this because they have never experienced it, and are chaffing under the restriction. The left leaning have personally experienced much more damaging chaffing so the new policies are a breath of fresh air.
> 
> That's my opinion of the situation.



If it was me I would enjoy it not spend precious time trying to relive past problems. There is so much going on in the world this is minuscule.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

no really said:


> No I did not. Is that former mod posting here on this thread?
> 
> So it is a form of retaliation for past actions?


It's not retaliation on the left leaning side (at least for me)... it's a freedom to finally express our opinion without reprisal from an unfair admin.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

no really said:


> So retribution or revenge maybe?
> 
> I think everyone should be able to voice and opinion but this has become a mess of the two opposing sides. It totally alienates those of us that are here for discussion.
> 
> Now that the mod is gone if it was me I'd be enjoying my freedom to post.


How is it either? Me speaking my mind without being infracted or banned? Me making sure that what I see as hypocrisy and bigotry gets pointed out. I am discussing just some don't like my viewpoint.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

gapeach said:


> I don't understand then, PW, why you and IP attack me. I never sent a pm to the other mod saying anything about either of you. I did even know who either of you were. Quit tell me to stop playing the victim. Both of you are cocked and ready to jump on me in a heartbeat. Just like I just posted, I am not going to be dictated as to what I post by either of you. If you don't like then, just pass on it. I know the little game that you are playing and obviously, you have played it in the past. You are so good at it and it is really the same thing over and over.


I have not attacked you. I am all over your present posting that has a bias towards every Muslim based only their religion.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

no really said:


> If it was me I would enjoy it not spend precious time trying to relive past problems. There is so much going on in the world this is minuscule.


I don't think that is what the left leaning are doing. We can finally express our opinion, and we are. It's not well received because for over 12 years an opposing viewpoint was generally not allowed.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

No really said: 
So retribution or revenge maybe? 

I think everyone should be able to voice and opinion but this has become a mess of the two opposing sides. It totally alienates those of us that are here for discussion.


:hijacked:
IMHO-others can chime in, "like" or not-but HT has become: "Lookee what WE can do to YOU now! How do you like it? Paybacks are heck, aren't they? See, now we can say "You disgust me" w/o impunity. We can insult you and you can no longer insult us!".

I guess they had NO idea how many of us got 'points', 'demerits', scolding, & many were banned too.


----------



## no really (Aug 7, 2013)

Irish Pixie said:


> It's not retaliation on the left leaning side (at least for me)... it's a freedom to finally express our opinion without reprisal from an unfair admin.


Expression is fabulous but all sides have the same right. All I'm saying is can we please try to behave without the fights to the death here?

I have tried to get several friends to join, after reading the posts throughout the forum they declined. Overall it is the toxic atmosphere, the two groups that seem to be here mainly for sport not adult discussion. 

Thing is they are not really right or left, simply interested in homesteading and discussing the world today.


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

exactly. That is why it is jr high school all over again with pm's taking the place of notes being passed back and forth. It's all about control no matter what the left says. You want to control what can be discussed here. Abortion and PP are great topics for you. You love those.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

no really said:


> Expression is fabulous but all sides have the same right. All I'm saying is can we please try to behave without the fights to the death here?
> 
> I have tried to get several friends to join, after reading the posts throughout the forum they declined. Overall it is the toxic atmosphere, the two groups that seem to be here mainly for sport not adult discussion.
> 
> Thing is they are not really right or left, simply interested in homesteading and discussing the world today.


The problem is that everyone has to try or the cat fight continues. It's mainly contained to general chat anyway. Were your friends not interested in the homesteading forums?

Painterswife started a thread a while back about trying to be "nicer". I can't remember the title but it wasn't well received by all. Perhaps she'll remember the title and link it.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

Tricky Grama said:


> :hijacked:
> IMHO-others can chime in, "like" or not-but HT has become: "Lookee what WE can do to YOU now! How do you like it? Paybacks are heck, aren't they? See, now we can say "You disgust me" w/o impunity. We can insult you and you can no longer insult us!".
> 
> I guess they had NO idea how many of us got 'points', 'demerits', scolding, & many were banned too.


I agree that some of what you would call your side likely got banned unfairly as well. That is not right.

The former moderation did a really great job of whipping up both sides at times. Both sides got heated. I know of circumstances where left leaning people got really nasty because they knew their friends had been moderated unfairly and whipped the right leaning people into a fury. They responded and got banned. It was unfortunate on all sides.

I personally don't want anyone to be banned. I want us to be able to get down an dirty about each others posts. Take the infraction, take the time out even but I don't like out right banning because even though I may detest and speak out voraciously about some posts I respect your right to post it if it is within the rules we all have to follow.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

gapeach said:


> exactly. That is why it is jr high school all over again with pm's taking the place of notes being passed back and forth. It's all about control no matter what the left says. You want to control what can be discussed here. Abortion and PP are great topics for you. You love those.


I don't PM. I speak my mind right here in this forum. I am able to do that now.


----------



## TripleD (Feb 12, 2011)

I was going to say on page 1 to try him and after conviction lop off his head but I didn't.:hijacked:


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

I am not the only person here who sees Islam for what it is. It is a fact of life and it is not pretty when you ready that ISIS members will be in with the refugees that the US will take in. There are different opinions as to how many per 100 because a lot of them will not be known. If you go back and look at my post topics you will not see any topics about regular or peaceful muslims. They are about ISIS, Obama and Muslims in the politics forum and of course the 2 from yesterday and that was not one thing wrong with what I posted. The only topics I have posted have been in the news and there are not that many of them. I have commented on other posts. Unless, I am asked by the moderators not to post something, I will continue my freedom of speech.


----------



## no really (Aug 7, 2013)

Irish Pixie said:


> The problem is that everyone has to try or the cat fight continues. It's mainly contained to general chat anyway. Were your friends not interested in the homesteading forums?
> 
> Painterswife started a thread a while back about trying to be "nicer". I can't remember the title but it wasn't well received by all. Perhaps she'll remember the title and link it.


Yep they first looked in the chicken or goat forums, seems there was some dustup going on. 

Than they made the mistake of checking GC :surrender:. The one part of the forum they all said was comfortable was singletree. I kinda think one of them will join just for that. By the way this lady can grow tomatoes on and rock and is our go to for goat and chicken problems.


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

TripleD said:


> I was going to say on page 1 to try him and after conviction lop off his head but I didn't.:hijacked:


If he was not a prince, I do think he would be punished by his own country.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

painterswife said:


> I don't PM. I speak my mind right here in this forum. I am able to do that now.


I don't either. In fact, I've received some seriously ugly PMs and don't like to see there is a message waiting.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

gapeach said:


> exactly. That is why it is jr high school all over again with pm's taking the place of notes being passed back and forth. It's all about control no matter what the left says. You want to control what can be discussed here. Abortion and PP are great topics for you. You love those.


It is not all lefties that are doing this. Just a very small band of vigilantes deliberately attacking posters as policy. They seem to feel that is ok if it is in the name of right. However, as happens with most vigilantes who are unchecked, what is simply a bad idea in the first place gets lowered to the level of bullying or worse. 

There is a difference between rendering an opinion that is offensive and liberately setting out to be offensive continuously as a tactic.


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

painterswife said:


> I agree that some of what you would call your side likely got banned unfairly as well. That is not right.
> 
> The former moderation did a really great job of whipping up both sides at times. Both sides got heated. I know of circumstances where left leaning people got really nasty because they knew their friends had been moderated unfairly and whipped the right leaning people into a fury. They responded and got banned. It was unfortunate on all sides.
> 
> I personally don't want anyone to be banned. I want us to be able to get down an dirty about each others posts. Take the infraction, take the time out even but I don't like out right banning because even though I may detest and speak out voraciously about some posts I respect your right to post it if it is within the rules we all have to follow.


Wow...really ...banning... you... a reinstated sock puppet...as we know never lost your voice.... you did what you wanted ...banning.. means something.. I laugh when I here of the complaints from sock puppets that they that they were banned.....


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

no really said:


> So retribution or revenge maybe?
> 
> I think everyone should be able to voice and opinion but this has become a mess of the two opposing sides. It totally alienates those of us that are here for discussion.
> 
> Now that the mod is gone if it was me I'd be enjoying my freedom to post.


Things really haven't changed that much as far as the differing factions, or the level of insults tossed around

The biggest difference now is one side isn't being silenced by biased moderators, and those who were the "chosen" before think it's "not fair".

Reality is I was banned for comments no more insulting than what many are posting every day, even as they whine about how they are being mistreated due to (now non-existent) favoritism.

I got 4 points for:



> First, a LOWER DEFICIT is NOT a "surplus"
> Secondly, these are PROJECTIONS, not reality.
> 
> *You'lll drown in all that Kool Aid*


4 more for this one:



> Read more carefully, and stop playing the "victim" card, since I haven't put you down at all.
> 
> And why talk about "debating opinions" when your idea of debate is to tell everyone "your opinion isn't relevant"


(Part of the problem in that thread was disagreeing with a moderator, although the comment above was made to someone else)

It only took 12 points for a "lifetime" ban, and I got 8 in one day :shrug:

Don't believe all the spin about how bad things are now, because it's all an act.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

kasilofhome said:


> Wow...really ...banning... you... a reinstated sock puppet...as we know never lost your voice.... you did what you wanted ...banning.. means something.. I laugh when I here of the complaints from sock puppets that they that they were banned.....


Glad you are entertained. You sure seem to have a bee in your bonnet that I got my original username reinstated.


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

so, why complain you were able by breaking the rules to have the banning be meaningless.

To me it's a kin to complaining you got a fine of a million dollars and it was waived.


----------



## no really (Aug 7, 2013)

Bearfootfarm said:


> Things really haven't changed that much as far as the differing factions, or the level of insults tossed around
> 
> The biggest difference now is one side isn't being silenced by biased moderators, and those who were the "chosen" before think it's "not fair".
> 
> ...


IMHO it is worse than when I first joined. And why do insults need to be thrown around for sometimes 5 or 6 pages. 

I've gotten called down for something heck I can't remember what, just went about my merry way. It is just not so important that I have a problem forgetting totally about it. 

I don't care about which side feels they won I like to discuss and hear views. If I disagree with them I tried to elucidate why, not because of who posted but because I value information.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

kasilofhome said:


> so, why complain you were able by breaking the rules to have the banning be meaningless.
> 
> To me it's a kin to complaining you got a fine of a million dollars and it was waived.


Do you think that not being able to post as yourself with the history you have accumulated over that time is meaningless? I guess if you do that you will not understand.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

What utter nonsense about wanting everyone to have the right to post. Almost no one is in that camp anymore at all. That is the opposite of what's going on. 
The mere mention of gray in a post rouses the black and whiters into a fenzy.
In reality having a discussion, a real discussion, allows movement in both directions from extremes. Bullying on a personal level forces people to harden their positions.


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

Some how I doubt that you are painterwife or cornhusker parents dub him that.

You never lost your history... we had a clue..

Sorta like a tell tale the odor of cookies in an oven.. one does not did not need to a thing to know what was going on.

Your history was intact..


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

where I want to said:


> What utter nonsense about wanting everyone to have the right to post. Almost no one is in that camp anymore at all. That is the opposite of what's going on.
> The mere mention of gray in a post rouses the black and whiters into a fenzy.
> In reality having a discussion, a real discussion, allows movement in both directions from extremes. Bullying on a personal level forces people to harden their positions.


I disagree.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

kasilofhome said:


> Some how I doubt that you are painterwife or cornhusker parents dub him that.
> 
> You never lost your history... we had a clue..
> 
> ...


Yup, you do not understand.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

I understand I can't use my religious experience to make decisions about jobs and hiring. 
But why can't I use it here ? 
In the interests of full disclosure I am of the Church of Christ.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

AmericanStand said:


> I understand I can't use my religious experience to make decisions about jobs and hiring.
> But why can't I use it here ?
> In the interests of full disclosure I am of the Church of Christ.


Of course you can but you can expect responses that disagree.

We see it in all the religious discussion threads. One Christian telling another Christian they are not Christian enough.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Then what's the problem with someone pointing out the evil in Islam , repeatedly ?


----------



## wiscto (Nov 24, 2014)

AmericanStand said:


> Then what's the problem with someone pointing out the evil in Islam , repeatedly ?


I guess the only problem I see with it is that a lot of those evils have and sometimes still do exist within Christianity. I think it's an issue of human nature. People twist religion to their own designs all the time. But there's really no problem with expressing your opinion. If someone thinks it's bigoted, though, they're going to tell you.


----------



## kuriakos (Oct 7, 2005)

no really said:


> I have seen a lot of hate in this forum for religion period.


Me too, but I respect that kind of hate more than I respect the Christian-only hate from people who jump to defend Muslims at every opportunity. At least some are consistent in their hate.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

But they are being consist when they always hate Muslims


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

Tricky Grama said:


> And right there you're saying "we did not like YOUR insinuations"...Nothing about the article at all, just about Peach's "insinuations".


That is because it was taken personally.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

gapeach said:


> exactly. That is why it is jr high school all over again with *pm's taking the place of notes *being passed back and forth. It's all about control no matter what the left says. *You want to control what can be discussed here.* Abortion and PP are great topics for you. You love those.


The only PM I've ever gotten from someone specifically wanting to gang up on some others to control the content was from one of *your* "buddies" who is posting on this thread about how bad they have it now.

You got a copy of it yourself, because it's listed in the header, so pretending it's "the left" who wants to control things here is totally disingenuous.

I still have the PM's, and I agree it's just like Jr High.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

no really said:


> IMHO it is worse than when I first joined.
> 
> *And why do insults need to be thrown around for sometimes 5 or 6 pages.*
> 
> ...


They don't need to be, but some just have to act childish when confronted with the truth.


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

Bearfootfarm said:


> The only PM I've ever gotten from someone specifically wanting to gang up on some others to control the content was from one of *your* "buddies" who is posting on this thread about how bad they have it now.
> 
> You got a copy of it yourself, because it's listed in the header, so pretending it's "the left" who wants to control things here is totally disingenuous.
> 
> I still have the PM's, and I agree it's just like Jr High.


I don't remember a pm like that. I delete my inbox as soon as I read something.


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

Hey &#8211; GOOD NEWS: Saudi Arabia To Head UN Human-Rights Panel
[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JO58NPRCBgw[/ame]


Flight risk by a suspect with substantial wealth. Should have just set bail at a cool $1 billion with every expectation that he&#8217;d run, and then declare him persona non grata and deny him reentry.

*Beverly Hills Police Arrest Saudi Prince For Forced Sex On Female Worker*

A Saudi Prince sexually abused and beat at least three women during a three-day party in his $37 million Beverly Hills home, a new lawsuit claims.
The graphic new allegations against Majed Abdulaziz Al-Saud, 28, were filed by his alleged victims on Friday night.
It comes two days after the monarch, who does not have diplomatic immunity, was arrested on suspicion of forcing a woman to perform oral sex on him.
According to the suit seen by the LA Times, Al-Saud&#8217;s alleged victims described his behavior as &#8216;extreme&#8217;, &#8216;outrageous&#8217;, and &#8216;despicable&#8217; as they were &#8216;imprisoned&#8217; for days.
For the past few summers, rich young Saudis, Qataris, Kuwaitis and other Middle Easterners, accompanied by their personal Ferraris, Bugattis and Aventadors, have flocked to the area after their former haunts in Paris, London, Cannes and Monaco became less receptive to the crush of super-expensive supercars with Arabic tags drawing crowds of gaping rubberneckers

While international travelers accounted for 63 percent of spending in the Golden Triangle last year &#8211; with one rich Saudi buying a $27million estate by helicopter without even walking inside.

Earlier this month a Qatari playboy fled the United States after police investigated a race through Beverly Hills involving his $1.4million Ferrari.
http://theyamtimes.com/saudi-prince-sexually-abused-multiple-women/


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

I'm noticing a trend here.... A lot of wealth envy. Bad behavior comes in every tax bracket, why the emphasis about how large a house someone lives in when committing crimes? Or to which god they pray to? :shrug:


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

I don't see any wealth envy. I see outrage that young princes can jet in and out of countries, commit whatever crimes that what they wish to with no respect to that country's laws, and with their diplomatic immunity, jet back to their respective countries, irrespective of the laws that they have broken whether or not it leaves suffering people in their wake.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

gapeach said:


> *Flight risk by a suspect with substantial wealth. Should have just set bail at a cool $1 billion with every expectation that heâd run, and then declare him persona non grata and deny him reentry.*
> 
> Beverly Hills Police Arrest Saudi Prince For Forced Sex On Female Worker
> 
> ...





gapeach said:


> I don't see any wealth envy. I see outrage that young princes can jet in and out of countries, commit whatever crimes that what they wish to with no respect to that country's laws, and with their diplomatic immunity, jet back to their respective countries, irrespective of the laws that they have broken whether or not it leaves suffering people in their wake.


how did you miss the wealth envy? Other than the part about not having diplomatic immunity the rest that I bolded (right at half of the article) is wailing about how rich these guys are.


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

YH, really, you are getting to be about like your co-horts, Nobody is having any wealth envy. It is more like being MAD because these rich jerks come here and break our laws, then speed back to their respective countries with no regets, no sympathy for the hurts and wounds that they have caused our people. What are you doing now? Taking up for them?
How would you like for them to come where you live and do that?


----------



## trulytricia (Oct 11, 2002)

Irish Pixie said:


> I don't think that is what the left leaning are doing. We can finally express our opinion, and we are. It's not well received because for over 12 years an opposing viewpoint was generally not allowed.



An absolutely untrue statement. I was there. I know.


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> how did you miss the wealth envy? Other than the part about not having diplomatic immunity the rest that I bolded (right at half of the article) is wailing about how rich these guys are.


Ok
A person of some sex living somewhere did something per someone of some sex with some injury know known if fatal or super official.
The potentially claim might be a felony count or not...one of the parties might have been an employer and one an employee...maybe.
Both parties were assumed to be residents of earth and assigned to have been alive during the previous events.

...yep that could be the future of news reports.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

kasilofhome said:


> Ok
> A person of some sex living somewhere did something per someone of some sex with some injury know known if fatal or super official.
> The potentially claim might be a felony count or not...one of the parties might have been an employer and one an employee...maybe.
> Both parties were assumed to be residents of earth and assigned to have been alive during the previous events.
> ...


right, it does lack the attention grabbing aspect of 37million dollar rented living quarters and the nearly half acre "estate" along with all the rest of the big money and fancy cars.... At least one of which was valued at 1.4 million. Nope no wealth involved with your reporting.


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

Soros, gates, and Zuckerman want to certainly know on where not to live.


Perhaps have stats been considered as to whether access to funds increases a person of being a flight risk.....


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

gapeach said:


> YH, really, you are getting to be about like your co-horts, Nobody is having any wealth envy. It is more like being MAD because these rich jerks come here and break our laws, then speed back to their respective countries with no regets, no sympathy for the hurts and wounds that they have caused our people. What are you doing now? Taking up for them?
> How would you like for them to come where you live and do that?


1st let me be very clear here. I have no "cohorts" on this site or any other. While I have been fortunate enough to meet a few of our fellow posters in r/l and some here may share some of my views you may rest assured that any post I make here reflects only my own personal views. If others agree with me that's fine, if others disagree with me that's fine too. I have not read a single post in my years on this forum posted by anyone that would not be welcome at my dinner table or share a nip out of my jug at any time.

I am certainly not defending jerks of any nationality or income level that cause harm to others. Wrong is simply wrong. It does puzzle me somewhat as to why the media places such emphasis on someone's wealth while reporting a criminal act. I see that as wealth, or perhaps class envy. Either by the reporter themselves or by the audience they hope to add to their readership.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

I actually did some reading on diplomatic immunity and I don't think the Prince accused of sexual assault would qualify. 

I'm not sure about the guy racing the expensive car because there simply isn't enough details. Racing has broad connotations from street races to exceeding the speed limit.


----------



## Wanda (Dec 19, 2002)

trulytricia said:


> An absolutely untrue statement. I was there. I know.




I have been here since Chuck took over the board and I saw the bias very early on. I would love to have Ken S. running the board again for about a week.:shocked: He showed people how to stick to the rules!:nono:


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> how did you miss the wealth envy? Other than the part about not having diplomatic immunity the rest that I bolded (right at half of the article) is wailing about how rich these guys are.


Seems that was brought up b/c the wealth appeared to be what got the a pass, along w/princiness.


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

There is a good reason to state race, employment, sex, assets,appearances etc.

Missing person ...Will have minimal success.. when
The Amber alert is..

We need your help nation wide search for a missing person ....please call... 1800.I am scared to be called a bigot.

In giving out the home it might assisted in connecting to other potential victims..homes of that nature have need for staffing.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

Tricky Grama said:


> Seems that was brought up b/c the wealth appeared to be what got the a pass, along w/princiness.


Her post was about religion about you trying to reverse engineer her post is funny.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Tricky Grama said:


> Seems that was brought up b/c the wealth appeared to be what got the a pass, along w/princiness.


$300K bail doesn't sound like a free pass to me.


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

Percentages and ratios make a big difference.

My girlfriend has five million a year blow money... dealing with a fender bender is not going to stress her out where as...dinging someone's car door will by me will.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> $300K bail doesn't sound like a free pass to me.



See that's why we need the reporting about the wealth. 
In this area we commonly see bail in a case of this sort set at amounts equal to the mans total wealth to as much as 50 times his wealth. 

It would appear that this bail was a insignificant portion of the princes wealth.


----------



## no really (Aug 7, 2013)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> $300K bail doesn't sound like a free pass to me.


For most of us it wouldn't be but consider the money available to him. It is probably alot less than he would spend on toys.

I do feel that bail should be realistic when it comes to income.


----------



## trulytricia (Oct 11, 2002)

Wanda said:


> I have been here since Chuck took over the board and I saw the bias very early on. I would love to have Ken S. running the board again for about a week.:shocked: He showed people how to stick to the rules!:nono:



No.

I can see where it may have *felt* that way to you, perhaps because of the sheer number of Repubs. But no. This place was wild with opinions and arguments and people were being banned for language and whatever. Left and right.


I say no to the rewriting of history.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

trulytricia said:


> *No*.
> 
> I can see where it may have *felt* that way to you, perhaps because of the sheer number of Repubs. But no. This place was wild with opinions and arguments and people were being banned for language and whatever. Left and right.
> 
> ...


So _your_ perception is law?


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

painterswife said:


> Her post was about religion about you trying to reverse engineer her post is funny.



Is using the word *religion* in a post now not allowed?


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

gapeach said:


> Is using the word *religion* in a post now not allowed?


Don't play the victim. No one ever said it should not be allowed.


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

Why do you continue to harp on it then?


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

gapeach said:


> Why do you continue to harp on it then?


Probably because most of your posts (both here and politics) are anti muslim.

And before the howl starts that I'm a pro muslim supporter and anti christian, I don't believe in either one. I think all religion is the problem in the world today.

My point is that you simply cannot denigrate an entire religion on the actions of their extreme. The same goes for christianity, the vast majority are good people... just like the vast majority of muslims. It's the extreme of each that are the problem. 

The "poor misunderstood me" thing is getting old.


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

wr said:


> I actually did some reading on diplomatic immunity and I don't think the Prince accused of sexual assault would qualify.
> 
> I'm not sure about the guy racing the expensive car because there simply isn't enough details. Racing has broad connotations from street races to exceeding the speed limit.


*Looks like he got out of jail free.*

Earlier this month, a Qatari prince, Sheikh Khalid bin Hamad al Thani, was videotaped racing a yellow Ferrari through Beverly Hills at speeds of up to 100 miles per hour, blowing through stop signs and frightening residents. Al Thani later denied driving recklessly and claimed he had diplomatic immunity, Beverly Hills police said. Authorities consulted with the State Department and the Qatar consulate and determined he did not have diplomatic immunity, police Chief Dominick Rivetti said during a Sept. 17 news conference.
Al Thani reportedly flew back to Qatar before he could be arrested.
*Click for more from the Los Angeles Times.*


----------



## no really (Aug 7, 2013)

I fail to see how posting a news story and making a comment that is factual is denigrating a religion. That being said I do have family and friends that are Muslim. They were disgusted but not in the least surprised by the princes actions. Now did I denigrate a whole religion? 

If someone posts about a particular subject repeatedly how about concentrating on the post, discuss, attempt to disprove or agree to disagree. Than move on. We are all not going to agree on everything. Thank the Ancestors, it would be very boring.


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

So, what.

She is up on the news of the day, very relevant, of great importance to many.

None have been forced to read any thing.. it's each person's personal responsibility to select what they wish to read... blaming a writer for present and writing something is passing the buck of responsibly or potentially a control issue to stifle another freedom of speech.

If there is another reason I am open to hear about it.


----------



## no really (Aug 7, 2013)

gapeach said:


> *Looks like he got out of jail free.*
> 
> Earlier this month, a Qatari prince, Sheikh Khalid bin Hamad al Thani, was videotaped racing a yellow Ferrari through Beverly Hills at speeds of up to 100 miles per hour, blowing through stop signs and frightening residents. Al Thani later denied driving recklessly and claimed he had diplomatic immunity, Beverly Hills police said. Authorities consulted with the State Department and the Qatar consulate and determined he did not have diplomatic immunity, police Chief Dominick Rivetti said during a Sept. 17 news conference.
> Al Thani reportedly flew back to Qatar before he could be arrested.
> *Click for more from the Los Angeles Times.*




Not at all surprising.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Yes it's a good thing wealth didn't figger into that. Otherwise if he had a $100 jalopy he might Have had to flee the county in a Rowboat.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

no really said:


> I fail to see how posting a news story and making a comment that is factual is denigrating a religion. That being said I do have family and friends that are Muslim. They were disgusted but not in the least surprised by the princes actions. Now did I denigrate a whole religion?
> 
> If someone posts about a particular subject repeatedly how about concentrating on the post, discuss, attempt to disprove or agree to disagree. Than move on. We are all not going to agree on everything. Thank the Ancestors, it would be very boring.


Nope. Are the majority of your posts anti muslim?

ETA: It's just my opinion that the whole "muslim bad, christian good" mentality is wrong. I'd do the same if the situation were reversed. Generalizations suck.


----------



## no really (Aug 7, 2013)

Irish Pixie said:


> Nope. Are the majority of your posts anti muslim?


Nope, but I am neither judge, jury or executioner.


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

So.........what is the balance of themes one must post.

I sure hope I will be chastised for never posting about living vegan is great.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

no really said:


> Nope, but I am neither judge, jury or executioner.


Neither am I. I'm simply stating my opinion. If I ever negatively generalize an entire religion, race, gender, etc. by all means call me on it. I'd deserve it.


----------



## no really (Aug 7, 2013)

Irish Pixie said:


> Neither am I. I'm simply stating my opinion. If I ever negatively generalize an entire religion, race, gender, etc. by all means call me on it. I'd deserve it.


I don't see the point in "calling" someone on opinions, it is better to discuss or educate to the best of my ability. I have talked about my relations with different religions but I try to not be aggressive nor demanding. All that happens when demanding a change in opinions is a shut down of the other party.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

no really said:


> I don't see the point in "calling" someone on opinions, it is better to discuss or educate to the best of my ability. I have talked about my relations with different religions but I try to not be aggressive nor demanding. All that happens when demanding a change in opinions is a shut down of the other party.


I believe that has been tried, and the posters were called "pro muslim" and that "we support terrorists". 

Do you feel it's right to cast all muslims as terrorists for the actions of extremists?


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

Muslims are a subject of concern to this country due to the violence done by people in the name of that religion and due to our involvement in the never ending violence in the Middle East, which unlike the opinion of some has been endemic from prehistory onwards and not the result of nasty Americans. 
There is a horrible dichotomy in western liberal thinking where it is demanded that the west tolerate different cultures who don't agree to mutual toleration. So someone will be changing their ideas. And as far as I can tell, the liberals are determined to commit suicide in the attempt to accommodate. 
Frankly it is not Muslim "radicalization" that is the insurmountable problems, it is the utter irrationality of the liberal in demanding the west change to accommodate the very values that lead to conflict. This certainly means the death of most, if not all, liberal ideals. If Muslims do not make any accommondation, then liberals will accommodate themselves out of existence.


----------



## no really (Aug 7, 2013)

Irish Pixie said:


> I believe that has been tried, and the posters were called "pro muslim" and that "we support terrorists".
> 
> Do you feel it's right to cast all muslims as terrorists for the actions of extremists?


Of course not but neither do I like any other attacks on religion. Do I have the need to change all minds, no. Do I think they are wrong yes, but beating over the head will not change anything. There is a large degree of fear involved, which I totally understand. Only time and experience will change some of the hard core, maybe. 

Guess I just don't care if someone has different views even if I find them unusual and ill informed.

Disagree, discuss and move on.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

painterswife said:


> Her post was about religion about you trying to reverse engineer her post is funny.


What are you talking about? I'm referring to YH's post about wealth. As one of your side said not too long ago: "Try to keep up".


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> $300K bail doesn't sound like a free pass to me.


And where is he now? 300K's a drop in the bucket for him.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

where I want to said:


> Muslims are a subject of concern to this country due to the violence done by people in the name of that religion and due to our involvement in the never ending violence in the Middle East, which unlike the opinion of some has been endemic from prehistory onwards and not the result of nasty Americans.
> There is a horrible dichotomy in western liberal thinking where it is demanded that the west tolerate different cultures who don't agree to mutual toleration. So someone will be changing their ideas. And as far as I can tell, the liberals are determined to commit suicide in the attempt to accommodate.
> Frankly it is not Muslim "radicalization" that is the insurmountable problems, it is the utter irrationality of the liberal in demanding the west change to accommodate the very values that lead to conflict. This certainly means the death of most, if not all, liberal ideals. If Muslims do not make any accommondation, then liberals will accommodate themselves out of existence.


Post of several milleneums' award.


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

Newspapers (editorial position)

Liberal: New York Times, Boston Globe, Los Angeles Times, Washington Post
http://libguides.pace.edu/c.php?g=63918&p=410866


At least they cannot bash my "source". The LA Times is as liberal as any other media source. However, they are only reporting what is happening in their own geographic area. I certainly would expect the newspaper of any city to report such crimes as this, sexual abuse and holding hostages and sorry you few objectors, just zip on by if I post something about a theocracy that you are trying to protect. 


Saudi Arabia is an Islamic theocracy. Religious minorities do not have the right to practice their religion. Non-Muslim propagation is banned, and conversion from Islam to another religion is punishable by death as apostasy.[5] Proselytizing by non-Muslims, including the distribution of non-Muslim religious materials such as Bibles, is illegal. In late 2014 a law was promulgated calling for the death penalty for anyone bringing into the country "publications that have a prejudice to any other religious beliefs other than Islam" (thought to include non-Muslim religious books)
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_Saudi_Arabia


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

where I want to said:


> Muslims are a subject of concern to this country due to the violence done by people in the name of that religion and due to our involvement in the never ending violence in the Middle East, which unlike the opinion of some has been endemic from prehistory onwards and not the result of nasty Americans.
> There is a horrible dichotomy in western liberal thinking where it is demanded that the west tolerate different cultures who don't agree to mutual toleration. So someone will be changing their ideas. And as far as I can tell, the liberals are determined to commit suicide in the attempt to accommodate.
> Frankly it is not Muslim "radicalization" that is the insurmountable problems, it is the utter irrationality of the liberal in demanding the west change to accommodate the very values that lead to conflict. This certainly means the death of most, if not all, liberal ideals. If Muslims do not make any accommondation, then liberals will accommodate themselves out of existence.


Voice of reason and a very good post!


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> Quote:
> Originally Posted by gapeach View Post
> Looks like he *got out of jail* free.
> 
> ...


If he left the country *before he was arrested*, he was never in jail, and therefore couldn't have "gotten out of jail free".

Without seeing the video, it's hard to say they even had grounds to arrest him.


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

Bearfootfarm said:


> If he left the country *before he was arrested*, he was never in jail, and therefore couldn't have "gotten out of jail free".
> 
> Without seeing the video, it's hard to say they even had grounds to arrest him.



I was only using a quip, like a Monopoly game - "get out of jail free".


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

*Owner of speeding Ferrari in Beverly Hills is drag-racing Qatar prince*


By Joseph Serna and Richard Winton contact the reporters
September 17, 2016

http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-beverly-hills-cars-qatar-20150917-htmlstory.html

[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tFMgwbDIEfs[/ame]


----------



## Sawmill Jim (Dec 5, 2008)

Case dismissed lack of evidence ,says the judge with the new Lexus :goodjob:


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

gapeach said:


> *Looks like he got out of jail free.*
> 
> Earlier this month, a Qatari prince, Sheikh Khalid bin Hamad al Thani, was videotaped racing a yellow Ferrari through Beverly Hills at speeds of up to 100 miles per hour, blowing through stop signs and frightening residents. Al Thani later denied driving recklessly and claimed he had diplomatic immunity, Beverly Hills police said. Authorities consulted with the State Department and the Qatar consulate and determined he did not have diplomatic immunity, police Chief Dominick Rivetti said during a Sept. 17 news conference.
> Al Thani reportedly flew back to Qatar before he could be arrested.
> *Click for more from the Los Angeles Times.*


According to the article you posted, it wasn't by way of diplomatic immunity so if he does return to the US, he will likely face charges, which would be fair and just. 

I'm still somewhat of the mindset that wealth does play a greater role in sentencing than religion because Justin Beiber was charged in the US at least once for street racing and if I'm not mistaken a DUI he hasn't spent many days incarcerated nor has he been deported.


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

wr, I don't think it is religion in these kinds of crimes. I feel like it is more political, Don't offend the big oil countries. That kind of thing. I feel that the US grovels at the feet of these countries. The whole religion comment that I made, I thought it was against his religion for him to do that kind of sex was so overblown, that this is not even related. I think these rich guys seem to think that they have found a new playground where there are not laws for them. Their bail if they are arrested is nothing to them.

With Justin Beiber the same thing applies as far as his wealth.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

gapeach said:


> wr, I don't think it is religion in these kinds of crimes. I feel like it is more political, Don't offend the big oil countries. That kind of thing. I feel that the US grovels at the feet of these countries. The whole religion comment that I made, I thought it was against his religion for him to do that kind of sex was so overblown, that this is not even related. I think these rich guys seem to think that they have found a new playground where there are not laws for them. Their bail if they are arrested is nothing to them.
> 
> With Justin Beiber the same thing applies as far as his wealth.


I've never asked my Muslim friends about their sex lives so I can't comment on that. 

Given that neither situation cited was offered diplomatic immunity, suggest that the US isn't overly afraid of offending a big oil country. 

Is bail in the US set according to the crime committed or is it set according to personal wealth? I'm not pointing fingers or making any kind of accusation, just not sure how that works.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Bail is set based on both crime and wealth , the idea being it's supposed to be enough to encourage you to return for court. 
Obviously it would take less of your wealth to get you to return for a parking citation than a slam dunk murder charge.


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

Per the judge 
Following the regulations of the jurisdiction and as always state and federal in compliance with the constitution and Bill of right the community where the person would be released to normally keeps quiet yet when vocal and timely the community voice is often heard.

So, it assumed the the powers that be ...often judges that are elected Will be seeking what is in the interest of society and the accused.


----------



## kuriakos (Oct 7, 2005)

> Is bail in the US set according to the crime committed or is it set according to personal wealth? I'm not pointing fingers or making any kind of accusation, just not sure how that works.


Both, in addition to other factors such as ties to the community, flight risk, etc. Resources at the defendant's disposal are usually a fairly small part of the whole picture. It's much more common for a low net worth defendant to disappear than it is for one with any wealth, even given identical bail amounts. But the nationality/citizenship of the defendant can also be factored into the flight risk assessment.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Tricky Grama said:


> And where is he now? 300K's a drop in the bucket for him.


I have no idea where he is now, do you?


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

You would think since the race car driver skipped out and went home that the LAPD would have made the bail higher for the Saudi Prince. Of course, we really don't know what the bail is now since he has additional charges.


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> I have no idea where he is now, do you?


I will see what I can dig up. My DH has been interested in the case too. He is the one who told me where to look for the race car drivers tape.


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

question with out a visit to a courthouse judge....was bail even set... the Prince took off... so quite possibly... no judge issued a bail hearing order


----------



## kuriakos (Oct 7, 2005)

gapeach said:


> You would think since the race car driver skipped out and went home that the LAPD would have made the bail higher for the Saudi Prince. Of course, we really don't know what the bail is now since he has additional charges.


First, the court sets bail, not the police. If it were up to the police, nearly everyone would be held without bail.

Second, there is no connection between the two cases. No court should set a higher than normal bail on such a tenuous association. There have been cases where people of certain nationalities have been given higher bail partially because others of their nationality have skipped bail, but that's still working its way through the courts as to whether it's constitutional. And in this case the nationality isn't even the same and the other prince did not skip bail. He simply left, as he had the right to do.

I'm not arguing that $300,000 was the correct bail. I don't know enough to form an opinion on that, but the Qatari prince's driving should have no bearing on the Saudi prince's bail.


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

&#8220;More women accuse Saudi prince after his arrest on sex crime charge, LAPD says&#8221; 
The Daily Mail interviewed Beverly Glen residents who said all cars have disappeared from the compound driveway, and the prince appears to have moved out. "I am sure he has taken off on his private jet by now," one neighbor said. "I don't think he even needs a passport to get out of here." 
Below, a photograph of a man said to work for the LA Saudi Consulate in Los Angeles who showed up at the residence of Majed Abdulaziz Al-Saud, shortly after LAPD arrived. The photo was taken by a neighbor.








From Joe Serna's updated report today in the LA Times: 

A civil lawsuit filed in L.A. County Superior Court on Friday claims he attacked other women inside the home for several days. 
The suit, filed by three women only identified as Jane Does, accuses him of &#8220;extreme,&#8221; &#8220;outrageous,&#8221; and &#8220;despicable&#8221; behavior that started Monday and ended in his arrest. The lawsuit seeks unspecified damages and claims Al-Saud inflicted emotional distress, assault and battery, sexual discrimination and retaliation against the workers, among other allegations. The attorneys who filed the suit did not return calls seeking comment.
When officers arrived at the home Wednesday, they found a &#8220;party atmosphere&#8221; inside the compound, Lt. John Jenal said. 
Neighbors reported seeing a bleeding woman screaming for help as she tried to scale an 8-foot-high wall that surrounds the property, at the end of a cul-de-sac in the 2500 block of Wallingford Drive. The home is within a gated community near Beverly Hills. Officers escorted about 20 people out of the house, many of them staff, Collins said. 

@JosephSerna - check out PD incidents for 2571 Wallingford dr. yest. Arab prince arrested-serious brass at incident 
 1:46 PM - 24 Sep   View image on Twitter   


  Joe Serna, LAT *&#10004;* @JosephSerna  

Saudi prince sued in connection w/ alleged Westside sex assault(s). Update to this coming: http://lat.ms/1MMnnYj  
 7:48 PM - 25 Sep 2015


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

Is there some legal reason the additional women would not be able to file criminal charges?


----------



## kuriakos (Oct 7, 2005)

No reason I'm aware of, unless their claims are untrue, but that would technically preclude the civil suit as well. I am skeptical of them because of the timing and circumstances. They could just be after some money, which they will probably never get even if they win the suit. I don't doubt that if the prince did it to one woman, he probably did it to others, though.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

kuriakos said:


> No reason I'm aware of, unless their claims are untrue, but that would technically preclude the civil suit as well. I am skeptical of them because of the timing and circumstances. They could just be after some money, which they will probably never get even if they win the suit. I don't doubt that if the prince did it to one woman, he probably did it to others, though.



My thinking is that additional criminal charges would strengthen the initial charges.


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

I was wondering what FEHA is after reading the additional charges.

The FEHA is the principal California statute prohibiting employment discrimination covering employers, labor organizations, employment agencies, apprenticeship programs and any person or entity who aids, abets, incites, compels, or coerces the doing of a discriminatory act. It prohibits employment discrimination based on race or color; religion; national origin or ancestry, physical disability; mental disability or medical condition; marital status; sex or sexual orientation; age, with respect to persons over the age of 40; and pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions. The FEHA also prohibits retaliation against for opposing any practice forbidden by the Act or for filing a complaint, testifying, or assisting in proceedings under the FEHA.
_ Unlimited compensatory and punitive damages.
Plaintiff does not have to win a unanimous jury verdict._ CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

where I want to said:


> Muslims are a subject of concern to this country due to the violence done by people in the name of that religion and due to our involvement in the never ending violence in the Middle East, which unlike the opinion of some has been endemic from prehistory onwards and not the result of nasty Americans.
> There is a horrible dichotomy in western liberal thinking where it is demanded that the west tolerate different cultures who don't agree to mutual toleration. So someone will be changing their ideas. And as far as I can tell, the liberals are determined to commit suicide in the attempt to accommodate.
> Frankly it is not Muslim "radicalization" that is the insurmountable problems, it is the utter irrationality of the liberal in demanding the west change to accommodate the very values that lead to conflict. This certainly means the death of most, if not all, liberal ideals. If Muslims do not make any accommondation, then liberals will accommodate themselves out of existence.


Once again I made it back from interacting with Muslims, Christians and many others with out talk or threat of violence or forced conversions. How does it keep happening.

There is a kernel of truth in your usual diatribe. A lot of that violence is due to our involvement. Our involvement has done nothing to lessen the violence and much to create more chaos and vacuums where it can flourish. Violence isn't just endemic to the Middle East and Muslims. Show me the prolonged period of history where due to religous, nationalistic, systemic or just plain quest for power and dominance the west has been at peace. Show me how the expansion of Christianity and "western culture" allowed for the inclusion of other cultures. From the Pope's latest saint to the mission schools less than 100 years ago inclusion and assimilation was never part of the equation. I'm equally amused by those who forget the history of immigration in this country. Wisconsin doesn't have a law mandating public schools be taught in English bexause those good German burghers were so eager to assimilate. Little Italies, Greektowns, Irish pubs, and the Hassidic enc&#322;aves in NYC don't exist because immigrants were anxious to assimilate.

None if this excuses or justifies the violence and fighting done in the name of Muslim extremism. But none of what you say makes a lot of Muslims different than any other immigrant group to our land. You conveniently ignore the 2nd , 3rd and further generation Muslims in this country who add much to our western culture without any agenda to eradicate it. You see only in black and white, not the many subtle shades of gray, and even brown, that exist. You speak of absolutes in a world where the only true absolute is there are none. By not even being open to the possibility of the Muslim who can live in peace with others or seeing the examples of where they have and do exist you close a lot of doors, which if opened even slightly, might enlighten your world.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

mmoetc said:


> Little Italies, Greektowns, Irish pubs, and the Hassidic enc&#322;aves in NYC don't exist because immigrants were anxious to assimilate .



Nope actually they do. 
ASimulation is hard work. Order to make it easier immigrants band together in places where they can find comfort and direction from others that have made the change.


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

AmericanStand said:


> Nope actually they do.
> ASimulation is hard work. Order to make it easier immigrants band together in places where they can find comfort and direction from others that have made the change.


Where they can speak their native tongue, eat their native food, practice the religion they brought from the old country, not be ridiculed for clothing or cultural practices foreign to the mainstream and generally hang on as much to the past as they could. Assimilation takes time and usually succeeding generations to venture beyond closed immigrant neighborhoods. There are many Hmong here in Wisconsin relocated after our excursion in SE Asia. I know grandparents who have been here 30+ years who can barely speak English and grandkids who have fully adopted to "western" culture while honoring their roots. They're not much different than some of the Italian families I grew up around whose grandmothers clucked their tongues at us youngsters and chastised us in a foreign tongue while I played with their grandkids who grew up to be doctors, engineers and factory workers who couldn't order off an Italian restaurant menu without translation. I knew people growing up who wouldn't vote for a Kennedy because of their fear of Catholocism and it's allegience to the Pope. This past weekend shows a bit how times have changed and how I hope they continue to change to when Muslim isnt a dirty word to some.


----------



## trulytricia (Oct 11, 2002)

mmoetc 

Your post are too too funny! You reveal your little judgements and assumptions while glorifying yourself.

You don't know or understand people on this forum at all.. You just don't get it.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

trulytricia said:


> mmoetc
> 
> Your post are too too funny! You reveal your little judgements and assumptions while glorifying yourself.
> 
> You don't know or understand people on this forum at all.. You just don't get it.


That's a rather personal and insulting opinion of another member.


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

trulytricia said:


> mmoetc
> 
> Your post are too too funny! You reveal your little judgements and assumptions while glorifying yourself.
> 
> You don't know or understand people on this forum at all.. You just don't get it.


I actually know and understand many just like those here. I also know and understand many not like them. I've lived an interesting life filled with interesting people. It's lead me treat people as individuals. I can point to someone I've met in almost every demographic who embodies the worst traits society has to offer. I can say the same about those who embody the best. No race, religion, culture, sex, sexual orientation or group had a monopoly on good or evil. I'm glad my posts amuse you and glory be to me.


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

Irish Pixie said:


> That's a rather personal and insulting opinion of another member.


I'd ask you to delete this. It serves no purpose other than to feed the discord. I'll do that myself.


----------



## trulytricia (Oct 11, 2002)

mmoetc 

you just did it again LOL! and Irish Pixie you did it too! hahaha


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

trulytricia said:


> mmoetc
> 
> you just did it again LOL!


Glad I can be there for ya. It might add something to the conversation if you'd actually add something, like a personal anecdote or observation, a study or a link, that shows that today's immigrants are less interested in assimilation than previous generations. Or not.


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

push one for English


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

kasilofhome said:


> push one for English


And in parts of wisconsin in living memory pushing one would have gotten you german. English was two. http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?stor---=102523977


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

mmoetc said:


> Once again I made it back from interacting with Muslims, Christians and many others with out talk or threat of violence or forced conversions. How does it keep happening.
> 
> There is a kernel of truth in your usual diatribe. A lot of that violence is due to our involvement. Our involvement has done nothing to lessen the violence and much to create more chaos and vacuums where it can flourish. Violence isn't just endemic to the Middle East and Muslims. Show me the prolonged period of history where due to religous, nationalistic, systemic or just plain quest for power and dominance the west has been at peace. Show me how the expansion of Christianity and "western culture" allowed for the inclusion of other cultures. From the Pope's latest saint to the mission schools less than 100 years ago inclusion and assimilation was never part of the equation. I'm equally amused by those who forget the history of immigration in this country. Wisconsin doesn't have a law mandating public schools be taught in English bexause those good German burghers were so eager to assimilate. Little Italies, Greektowns, Irish pubs, and the Hassidic enc&#322;aves in NYC don't exist because immigrants were anxious to assimilate.
> 
> None if this excuses or justifies the violence and fighting done in the name of Muslim extremism. But none of what you say makes a lot of Muslims different than any other immigrant group to our land. You conveniently ignore the 2nd , 3rd and further generation Muslims in this country who add much to our western culture without any agenda to eradicate it. You see only in black and white, not the many subtle shades of gray, and even brown, that exist. You speak of absolutes in a world where the only true absolute is there are none. By not even being open to the possibility of the Muslim who can live in peace with others or seeing the examples of where they have and do exist you close a lot of doors, which if opened even slightly, might enlighten your world.



Little I said had anything to do with muslims. It had to do with people who will not allow any conversation about issues involving muslims. Who therefore encourage and maybe even create violence by confirming the paranoid thoughts that everyone has that some one is out to get you. This attitude of supporting the idea that every discussion is a version of islamaphobia is the opposite of throwing away the baby with the bathwater. It's keeping the bathwater and the baby in it.

Anyone who can dismiss any discussion of Islam that is not a fawning platitude as bigotry has a problem. Try reading without assuming. 

Frankly such posting as you make, ranting about anyone making comment about violence in the name of Islam, is the problem. Not the generality of Muslims.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

mmoetc said:


> And in parts of wisconsin in living memory pushing one would have gotten you german. English was two. http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?stor---=102523977


Now find the Germans creating bombs in the name of Lutherans. Sheesh. Not every Muslim is a terrorist but it takes only a small percentage to get attention.
To dismiss every comment on that percentage with the platitude of it not being everyone is simply to say nothing should be done about the few.


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

* Majed Abdulaziz Al-Saud *

Posted by Staff under World News 

*Majed Abdulaziz Al-Saud*, A Saudi Prince sexually abused and beat at least three women during a three-day party in his $37 million Beverly Hills home, a new lawsuit claims.
The graphic new allegations against Majed Abdulaziz Al-Saud, 28, were filed by his alleged victims on Friday night.
It comes two days after the monarch, who does not have diplomatic immunity, was arrested on suspicion of forcing a woman to perform oral sex on him.
According to the suit seen by the LA Times, Al-Saudâs alleged victims described his behavior as âextremeâ, âoutrageousâ, and âdespicableâ as they were âimprisonedâ for days.
Police reported a âparty atmosphereâ when they arrived at the house after a bleeding woman was allegedly seen trying to climb out of the housing compound.
Officers said they expect more women to begin coming forward with allegations.
Majed was charged with forced oral copulation of an adult on Friday, then quickly released after posting a $300,000 bond.
The Saudi prince is scheduled to be in Los Angeles court October 19th.
However, speaking to Mail Online, neighbors say they believe the prince has already fled the country on a private jet, leaving his rented house behind.
One woman, who would only give her name as Isabel, said: âNumerous cars were coming in and out of the property late Thursday, and it looked like the Prince was moving out.â
Meanwhile another neighbor, Eric Stiskin, added: âI am sure he has taken off on his private jet by now. I donât think he even needs a passport to get out of here.â
A third, who wished to remain anonymous, said: âHe has all the wealth to disappear and not come back. He can make a quick getaway, never come back and the accusations could still remain here.
âItâs a cowardly way of dealing with things, when he should just face the music.â
http://usinform.com/2015/09/majed-abdulaziz-al-saud.html


Not surprising at all that he has checked out and left the country. I hope that the poor women that he abused will get the help that they need. At least he cannot come back into the country, we can hope anyway.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

gapeach said:


> * Majed Abdulaziz Al-Saud *
> 
> Posted by Staff under World News
> 
> ...


I strongly hope these women get the opportunity to see their case go to trial but I did read the article and it is only a neighbor that indicates they believe the prince has left the country so I wouldn't consider it fact but certainly a possibility. 

I've flown in and out of the US many times on private planes and the crew and I always have to present passports and proper identification and it is my understanding is the law of the land in both our countries.


----------



## kuriakos (Oct 7, 2005)

A neighbor saying he's sure the prince has already taken off doesn't mean much. He may have. He may not. The activity at the house doesn't either. Perhaps he was evicted because of the allegations, or he's simply staying somewhere else to avoid the media. Just wait until October 19th to find out if he shows up for court.

As to the passport, it's not required to leave the U.S. but only to legally get into another country, but there are ways of getting into most countries illegally. Flying to a small airport without immigration officials is one. Or he could simply fly home. I imagine a prince doesn't need a passport to get into his own country. I haven't heard if his passport was surrendered as a condition of bail, but he probably has multiple passports anyway.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

gapeach said:


> I think is is pretty big news when someone from another country, an obvious millionaire Prince, comes to the US and thinks that he is entitled to break our laws and cause much emotional and physical damage to at least one of our citizens.


This is a lot like the story with the French diplomat back in 2012. In that case he raped a maid in a NY hotel. He wound up paying dearly for it.


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

I remember that. He sure did. The louse!


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

gapeach said:


> I remember that. He sure did. The louse!


Hopefully this guy will get the same.


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

kuriakos said:


> A neighbor saying he's sure the prince has already taken off doesn't mean much. He may have. He may not. The activity at the house doesn't either. Perhaps he was evicted because of the allegations, or he's simply staying somewhere else to avoid the media. Just wait until October 19th to find out if he shows up for court.
> 
> As to the passport, it's not required to leave the U.S. but only to legally get into another country, but there are ways of getting into most countries illegally. Flying to a small airport without immigration officials is one. Or he could simply fly home. I imagine a prince doesn't need a passport to get into his own country. I haven't heard if his passport was surrendered as a condition of bail, but he probably has multiple passports anyway.


I wonder why wasn't his visa revoked as part of his bail conditions so he couldn't flee the country?

​


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

gapeach said:


> I wonder why wasn't his visa revoked as part of his bail conditions so he couldn't flee the country?
> 
> ​


I don't think it would have stopped him. I am sure Saudi Arabia would let him back in. And like Kuriakos said you don't need one to leave. Just to get in wherever you are going. He never should have been bailed.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

kuriakos said:


> A neighbor saying he's sure the prince has already taken off doesn't mean much. He may have. He may not. The activity at the house doesn't either. Perhaps he was evicted because of the allegations, or he's simply staying somewhere else to avoid the media. Just wait until October 19th to find out if he shows up for court.
> 
> As to the passport, it's not required to leave the U.S. but only to legally get into another country, but there are ways of getting into most countries illegally. Flying to a small airport without immigration officials is one. Or he could simply fly home. I imagine a prince doesn't need a passport to get into his own country. I haven't heard if his passport was surrendered as a condition of bail, but he probably has multiple passports anyway.


That is correct and I can only speak to my experience but I've always been required to present to airport personnel in the country I am boarding and again when landing.


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

wr said:


> That is correct and I can only speak to my experience but I've always been required to present to airport personnel in the country I am boarding and again when landing.


But then you don't have the privilege of being a prince.:hrm:


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

gapeach said:


> But then you don't have the privilege of being a prince.:hrm:


I could be but it might take a while to get everything reconfigured :grin:


----------



## gibbsgirl (May 1, 2013)

gapeach said:


> But then you don't have the privilege of being a prince.:hrm:


Do you think they'd accept a family tree that goes back to royalty? It's a ways back there, but we're direct blood. My daughter thinks it makes her some type of forgotten princess. I keep telling her its neat, but no one's gonna give her the Kate Middleton treatment!

Help me out gapeach! Is there a link to the royalty waiver for passport requirements? Maybe we'd take up more traveling if that'd be the workaround! Really not a tsa fan here.

I doubt that guy would have any trouble hopping on a private jet and popping home and getting through any travel security. I think there's probably a lot of rich, politically powerful folks who can do so.


----------



## kuriakos (Oct 7, 2005)

I read today that there are thousands of Saudi princes. I wasn't able to find anything about whether this particular prince is one of the "important" ones. He's almost certainly not in line to the throne or this would be a much bigger story.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

kuriakos said:


> I read today that there are thousands of Saudi princes. I wasn't able to find anything about whether this particular prince is one of the "important" ones. He's almost certainly not in line to the throne or this would be a much bigger story.



I couldn't find anything on him either.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Apparently he is in the line enough to have some of the money.


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

This is the first article that I have seen that said he had to spend the night in jail and what he would face if convicted.

http://www.malaysiandigest.com/worl...facing-sex-assault-charge-in-los-angeles.html
*LOS ANGELES:* A Saudi prince has been arrested in Los Angeles for allegedly trying to force a woman to perform oral sex on him at a Beverly Hills mansion.
Prince Majed Abdulaziz Al-Saud was arrested in the early afternoon Wednesday after police were called to the gated compound, Officer Drake Madison, of the Los Angeles police department, told AFP.
*He said the 28-year-old prince was arrested on suspicion of forced oral copulation of an adult and spent the night in jail before posting a $300,000 (268,000 euros) bail on Thursday.*
Witnesses reported seeing a bleeding woman scream for help as she tried to scale the wall of the property, the Los Angeles Times reported.
The prince, who was also detained for false imprisonment, battery and criminal threats, is due to appear in court on October 19.
*If convicted, he faces up to eight years in prison and a $10,000 fine*.


----------



## kuriakos (Oct 7, 2005)

AmericanStand said:


> Apparently he is in the line enough to have some of the money.


True, but they make something like a billion a day from oil in Saudi Arabia so there's plenty to make even the 5th string princes multi-millionaires.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Where do I sign up ?


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

AmericanStand said:


> Where do I sign up ?


I just learned that if we fold you up in a flat box, we can ship you anywhere for $20 :rotfl:


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

That sounds a lot cheaper than my last commercial flight and just as comfortable .


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

Honestly, If someone offered me a million dollars right now but with the stipulation that I had to live the rest of my days in Saudi Arabia, I would turn it down even if I was a man.

That might be OT as far as this thread goes but if those Princes had it so good in Saudi Arabia why would they want to rent a house in LA unless it is to do things that they would dare do at home or maybe it is just because they think they can break our laws and get away with it.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

gapeach said:


> Honestly, If someone offered me a million dollars right now but with the stipulation that I had to live the rest of my days in Saudi Arabia, I would turn it down even if I was a man.
> 
> That might be OT as far as this thread goes but if those Princes had it so good in Saudi Arabia *why would they want to rent a house in LA *unless it is to do things that they would dare do at home or maybe it is just because they think they can break our laws and get away with it.


Because there's very few blondes in Saudi Arabia and everyone knows blondes are more fun!


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

gapeach said:


> Honestly, If someone offered me a million dollars right now but with the stipulation that I had to live the rest of my days in Saudi Arabia, I would turn it down even if I was a man.
> 
> That might be OT as far as this thread goes but if those Princes had it so good in Saudi Arabia why would they want to rent a house in LA unless it is to do things that they would dare do at home or maybe it is just because they think they can break our laws and get away with it.


I don't think they simply rent a house to break laws but there is a certain image associated with certain parts of the US, California being one of them.


----------

