Spot the difference?

https://twitter.com/MaajidNawaz/status/1255483308978339840

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/apr/29/new-york-mayor-de-blasio-criticized-tweet-packed-jewish-funeral

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/apr/29/new-york-mayor-de-blasio-criticized-tweet-packed-jewish-funeral

No one is above the law, or deserving of special treatment. The coronavirus does not differentiate between religions.

Original Quill wrote:https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/apr/29/new-york-mayor-de-blasio-criticized-tweet-packed-jewish-funeral

No one is above the law, or deserving of special treatment.  The coronavirus does not differentiate between religions.

You fail to see the special treatment in language here used between two groups

Nobody is claiming people are above the law

Thorin wrote:

Original Quill wrote:https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/apr/29/new-york-mayor-de-blasio-criticized-tweet-packed-jewish-funeral

No one is above the law, or deserving of special treatment.  The coronavirus does not differentiate between religions.

You fail to see the special treatment in language here used between two groups

Nobody is claiming people are above the law

https://twitter.com/MaajidNawaz/status/1255483308978339840

This is a big story in NYC.  It's in all the papers, and because it's in New York, it's all over the country.

I think the difference between Mayor de Blasio's tone is the funeral for the Rabbi broke the distancing code.  I see this as being respectful to all people, but if you break the law...you will be spoken to a bit more harshly. It's different provocations.

Any mother would understand.  She tells the children politely, you may have one cookie a day.  But when she comes home and finds one kid raided the cookie jar, consuming a dozen cookies despite the rule, her tone becomes a bit more stern.

Original Quill wrote:This is a big story in NYC.  It's in all the papers, and because it's in New York, it's all over the country.

I think the difference between Mayor de Blasio's tone is the funeral for the Rabbi broke the distancing code.  I see this as being respectful to all people, but if you break the law...you will be spoken to a bit more harshly.  It's different provocations.

Any mother would understand.  She tells the children politely, you may have one cookie a day.  But when she comes home and finds one kid raided the cookie jar, consuming a dozen cookies despite the rule, her tone becomes a bit more stern.

This was not a case of being stern but being led by anger and that anger by the culmination of an entire group, Jews

You still fail to see the issue around the language here

I have no issue with the language around advising people to "refrain from social gatherings

This is the length laid out for the religious aspect of Muslims during a religious fetsival

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-04-23/nyc-to-serve-500-000-free-halal-meals-to-Muslims-during-ramadan

What length was laid out for a small number of Jews to be able to attend a funeral here?

Hence spot the difference?

Steps are made and bent over backwards to accommodate one group religiously and yet another no plan was formulated to accommodate their wish to say goodbye

One religious group has rightfully help enacting their faith based festivals. Another religious is cast as criminal for doing exactly the same

Spot the difference yet?

phil wrote:This was not a case of being stern but being led by anger and that anger by the culmination of an entire group, Jews

I don't think so. There is no equivalency in the provocations of the two situations. That makes a world of difference. One is simply stating the rule. The other is dealing with someone who broke the rule.

That is the difference I see. You ask: "What length was laid out for a small number of Jews to be able to attend a funeral here?" No length was laid out for either Jew or Muslim...the virus doesn't play any favorites. Therefore, the rule must be uniform.

The Jewish people broke the distancing rule, and it bears no comparison to before-the-fact instructions to another religious group that has breached no rule. Again, the virus doesn’t play any favorites.

Original Quill wrote:

phil wrote:This was not a case of being stern but being led by anger and that anger by the culmination of an entire group, Jews

I don't think so.  There is no equivalency in the provocations of the two situations.  That makes a world of difference.  One is simply stating the rule.  The other is dealing with someone who broke the rule.

That is the difference I see.  You ask: "What length was laid out for a small number of Jews to be able to attend a funeral here?"  No length was laid out for either Jew or Muslim...the virus doesn't play any favorites.  Therefore, the rule must be uniform.

The Jewish people broke the distancing rule, and it bears no comparison to before-the-fact instructions to another religious group that has breached no rule.  Again, the virus doesn’t play any favorites.

But that is simple and utter gobbledegook

The difference is all aspects were made out to ensure a religious festival could be played out and yet a simple funeral could not

You even invoke what is wrong here. 

Your terminology. "the Jewish people"

When what happened was some people broke distancing rules here. 

Hence the issue.

"The Jewish people" never broke any rule

Some people who are Jews broke the rules

Do you see how you use the same poor language?

You use a collective language which if used against any other group. You would scream foul play

Lets use and rephrase your last sentence and show up how ridiculous your claim is and how in no actual circumstance would you ever possible use this.

"The Black people broke the distancing rule, and it bears no comparison to before-the-fact instructions to another religious group that has breached no rule. "


Go figure

When you invoke the term, "the Jewish people". You invoke a guilt by association standard, as if they are all of one mind

That is unadulterated antisemitism

phil wrote:...what happened was some people broke distancing rules here

I know. The question is why? You can't have one religion breaking the rule, in order to administer their rites, and other religions being obedient. The virus doesn't pay attention to the religious rites, Hasidic or otherwise.

The virus simply spreads when groups gather. It doesn't make exceptions for any funerals.

Were there large gatherings of Muslims that de Blasio failed to admonish? I don't have enough context to go on.

The tweet to Muslims seems to be simply saying, "we've got halal meals available to you." The tweet to Jews is saying, "no more large gatherings, and this time I mean it." I don't see the connection.

Ben Reilly wrote:Were there large gatherings of Muslims that de Blasio failed to admonish? I don't have enough context to go on.

The tweet to Muslims seems to be simply saying, "we've got halal meals available to you." The tweet to Jews is saying, "no more large gatherings, and this time I mean it." I don't see the connection.

I’m with you. He apologized if some of his language was wrong but essentially the message was backed by a lot of non-Hasidic Jewish groups.

Ben Reilly wrote:Were there large gatherings of Muslims that de Blasio failed to admonish? I don't have enough context to go on.

The tweet to Muslims seems to be simply saying, "we've got halal meals available to you." The tweet to Jews is saying, "no more large gatherings, and this time I mean it." I don't see the connection.

As bad as quill

Thorin wrote:

Ben Reilly wrote:Were there large gatherings of Muslims that de Blasio failed to admonish? I don't have enough context to go on.

The tweet to Muslims seems to be simply saying, "we've got halal meals available to you." The tweet to Jews is saying, "no more large gatherings, and this time I mean it." I don't see the connection.

As bad as quill

Didge. I’m not understanding your point. I’m trying to.

His message to the Muslim community is about them celebrating Ramadan in lockdown and that meals are available if because of the lockdown they can’t get the ingredients themselves or have no way to prepare food to break their fast.

For the message to the Hasidic Jews, they were breaking the law by congregating for a funeral which has been denied to ALL faiths or non-believers, just like weddings and baptisms etc... That the Rabbi died of COVID-19 is just the icing on the cake, so to speak.

Granted his language in the second message was not good but he was understandably angry, but he apologized. Other Jewish groups have backed him up.

Cass wrote:

Thorin wrote:


As bad as quill

Didge. I’m not understanding your point. I’m trying to.

His message to the Muslim community is about them celebrating Ramadan in lockdown and that meals are available if because of the lockdown they can’t get the ingredients themselves or have no way to prepare food to break their fast.

For the message to the Hasidic Jews, they were breaking the law by congregating for a funeral which has been denied to ALL faiths or non-believers, just like weddings and baptisms etc... That the Rabbi died of COVID-19 is just the icing on the cake, so to speak.

Granted his language in the second message was not good but he was understandably angry, but he apologized. Other Jewish groups have backed him up.

Why single out an entire ethnic religious group?

If this had been Muslims. do you think he would have used the same language and singled them out based on the actions of a few Muslims? People need to read Maajids point here to understand where he is coming from on this

Its the language that is the issue here. Not whether some Jews attended a funeral which all agree is wrong.

His message did not require singling out any group, when plenty of people are flouting these rules

He even states after saying Jews and all communities

The language was appalling and why he was rightly criticised

People seem to be stuck on the point that some Jews broke the rules.

Why does the whole Jewish community need to be told this, based on what a few did?

Have a read Cass.


"Outrage as NYC's Mayor de Blasio singles out Orthodox Jews for breaking social distancing when he and his wife traveled 11 non-essential miles to go for walk in Brooklyn and thousands gathered to watch the Blue Angels flyover"


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8269271/Bill-Blasio-attack-singling-Jewish-community-breaking-social-distancing.html

phil wrote:If this had been Muslims. do you think he would have used the same language and singled them out based on the actions of a few Muslims? People need to read Maajids point here to understand where he is coming from on this

The answer is yes.  Had these been Muslims, or Ringling Bros. clowns, the Mayor would have treated them all the same.

The Mayor didn't single the group out.  What distinguished the Hasidic people was that they thought themselves privileged and went ahead to violate distancing rules.  They self-selected by believing their status gave them license to break the law...and no one is above the law.

Original Quill wrote:

phil wrote:If this had been Muslims. do you think he would have used the same language and singled them out based on the actions of a few Muslims? People need to read Maajids point here to understand where he is coming from on this

The answer is yes.  Had these been Muslims, or Ringling Bros. clowns, the Mayor would have treated them all the same.

The Mayor didn't single the group out.  What distinguished the Hasidic people was that they thought themselves privileged and went ahead to violate distancing rules.  They self-selected by believing their status gave them license to break the law...and no one is above the law.

You can always rely on Quill to be antisemitic

So now you are attacking Hasidic Jews, based on the actions of a number who attended a funeral

Unbelievable

Was it by any chance that they loved this religious leader more than they fear the virus?

I am not excusing their actions of those who attended the funeral. Those who did were wrong to do so during this crisis, but to claim an entire group believe they are privileged. Based on zero evidence, when Jews are by a large margin the most persecuted ethnic people in history that still exist today. Shows its you're latent hate of Jews that is the issue here. 

You have no conception of what privileged means

If this had been African Americans or Muslims. These comments would have never happened by a Mayor of New York

Its because of of lies promoted by people like you Quill., that has seen the rise of hate crimes against Jews in New York

https://www.cityandstateny.com/articles/politics/ask-experts/why-have-anti-semitic-risen-new-york.html

phil wrote:You can always rely on Quill to be antisemitic

It's not antisemitic if they self-selected.  It was their decision, no act of mine.

Any group, of any religion, club, fraternity, or persuasion, that chooses to break the law, is going to be arrested or cited.  It's called a self-selection bias:

Babylon NG wrote:Self-selection bias
In statistics, self-selection bias arises in any situation in which individuals select themselves into a group, causing a biased sample with non-probability sampling. It is commonly used to describe situations where the characteristics of the people which cause them to select themselves in the group create abnormal or undesirable conditions in the group. It is closely related to the Non-response bias, describing when the group of people responding has different responses than the group of people not responding.

The agency, in this case, is not the authority (Mayor de Blasio) but the group self-selecting into the harm.  The authority is operating under a completely neutral and different set of circumstances.

Original Quill wrote:

phil wrote:You can always rely on Quill to be antisemitic

It's not antisemitic if they self-selected.  It was their decision, no act of mine.

Any group, of any religion, club, fraternity, or persuasion, that chooses to break the law, is going to be arrested or cited.  It's called a self-selection bias:

Its guilt by association, hence anti-Semitic to cast an entire group of people based off the action of a small number of people. Especially with your bullshit claim that Hasidic Jews did this based off a view of privilege

Time and time again I have easily proven that its the likes of hateful people like yourself Quill, that has seen the massive rise in hate directed towards Jews

You even fail to see the poor and hateful language that you continually use and try to worm your way out of this

Like I said, on the very same day many people flouted the rules, but only Jews were singled out

Thorin wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

It's not antisemitic if they self-selected.  It was their decision, no act of mine.

Any group, of any religion, club, fraternity, or persuasion, that chooses to break the law, is going to be arrested or cited.  It's called a self-selection bias:

Its guilt by association, hence anti-Semitic to cast an entire group of people based off the action of a small number of people. Especially with your bullshit claim that Hasidic Jews did this based off a view of privilege

Time and time again I have easily proven that its the likes of hateful people like yourself Quill, that has seen the massive rise in hate directed towards Jews

You even fail to see the poor and hateful language that you continually use and try to worm your way out of this

Like I said, on the very same day many people flouted the rules, but only Jews were singled out

You are not engaging your mental processing faculties.      

It's an old tactic: we used to occupy the the dean's office intentionally, as a manner of demonstrating.  As the cops dragged us away, we would scream police brutality.

But the truth is, we put ourselves there.  Same with this Hasidic group.  Intentionally, or through shear arrogance, they put themselves in harm's way.

Original Quill wrote:

Thorin wrote:

Its guilt by association, hence anti-Semitic to cast an entire group of people based off the action of a small number of people. Especially with your bullshit claim that Hasidic Jews did this based off a view of privilege

Time and time again I have easily proven that its the likes of hateful people like yourself Quill, that has seen the massive rise in hate directed towards Jews

You even fail to see the poor and hateful language that you continually use and try to worm your way out of this

Like I said, on the very same day many people flouted the rules, but only Jews were singled out

You are not engaging your mental processing faculties.      

It's an old tactic: we used to occupy the the dean's office intentionally, as a manner of demonstrating.  As the cops dragged us away, we would scream police brutality.

But the truth is, we put ourselves there.  Same with this Hasidic group.  Intentionally, or through shear arrogance, they put themselves in harm's way.

Again yet more examples of guilt by association targeting an entire group based off the actions of a few individuals from that group

You do not like me pointing this obvious fact out and hence now attack my mental processing abilities

Hence you have clearly surrendered the argument

Time and time again I have pointed out the problem with the issue here Quill. Your obvious disdain towards Jewish people and this is very evident ion this thread

Dude, nobody is being anti-semitic in this thread -- not even de Blasio.

Referring to the original tweet, you use a nice tone of voice when offering people free food, and a stern tone of voice when people keep breaking rules.

To assume that the nice tone of voice was because he was addressing Muslims, and that the stern tone of voice was because he was addressing Jews, is a huge leap, and actually reeks of snowflakery.

Ben Reilly wrote:Dude, nobody is being anti-semitic in this thread -- not even de Blasio.

Referring to the original tweet, you use a nice tone of voice when offering people free food, and a stern tone of voice when people keep breaking rules.

To assume that the nice tone of voice was because he was addressing Muslims, and that the stern tone of voice was because he was addressing Jews, is a huge leap, and actually reeks of snowflakery.

That is because you have not the slightest clue what antisemitism is Ben and on many occasions I have pointed this out

Even more so when you once thought it was funny to joke about me being placed in an oven

The point again which is so far again above your head, was that many people were breaking the rules and he singled out one group of people

That is inherently wrong and you would be one of the first people up in arms if this had been said of Muslims/ African Americans by a Republican official. That is the double standard here

When you have studied the history of antisemitism and see how your continue denial of how and why this leads to further hate of Jews still existing today. Then you might begin to have a grasp of why this was wrong

Let me try to understand this

One message is:

“Hey free food if you can’t get out”

The other message is:

“Stop gathering and maintain social distancing!”

Two different messages, so what has the recipient’s race or religion got to do with it?

eddie wrote:Let me try to understand this

One message is:

“Hey free food if you can’t get out”

The other message is:

“Stop gathering and maintain social distancing!”

Two different messages, so what has the recipient’s race or religion got to do with it?

Read back as I am not going to repeat myself

phil wrote:You do not like me pointing this obvious fact out and hence now attack my mental processing abilities

I don't think you've succeeded, didge. Your statement is neither 'obvious' nor 'factual'. Because you fail or refuse to recognize this, I'm being kind and calling it a failure of your mental processing.

That is in lieu of calling you a damn liar! Would you feel better if I slapped you around a bit? No, of course not. We are gentlemen, after all.

Original Quill wrote:

phil wrote:You do not like me pointing this obvious fact out and hence now attack my mental processing abilities

I don't think you've succeeded, didge.  Your statement is neither 'obvious' nor 'factual'.  Because you fail or refuse to recognize this, I'm being kind and calling it a failure of your mental processing.

That is in lieu of calling you a damn liar!  Would you feel better if I slapped you around a bit?  No, of course not.  We are gentlemen, after all.

You can call me what you like Quill but you are neither in a position or qualified to state on the mental faculties of people. Only someone with such an inflated ego would perceive themselves to have this ability to look down on people as you do

I have easily succeeded in pointing out your glaring fallacy arguments. The main one being guilt by association, which was formed from your latent dislike of Jews

Thorin wrote:

eddie wrote:Let me try to understand this

One message is:

“Hey free food if you can’t get out”

The other message is:

“Stop gathering and maintain social distancing!”

Two different messages, so what has the recipient’s race or religion got to do with it?

Read back as I am not going to repeat myself

It won't help, didge. You have just conflated two different messages, neither of which had anything to do with religion.

Original Quill wrote:

Thorin wrote:

Read back as I am not going to repeat myself

It won't help, didge.  You have just conflated two different messages, neither of which had anything to do with religion.

I am not expecting it will help you ever understand Quill, but Eddie is much more open minded than yourself

Thorin wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Thorin wrote:

Read back as I am not going to repeat myself

It won't help, didge.  You have just conflated two different messages, neither of which had anything to do with religion.

I am not expecting it will help you ever understand Quill, but Eddie is much more open minded than yourself

If you’re saying that it isn’t just the Jewish community that have been seen to be breaking the rules on social distancing then yes, you’re right, he should never have singled out ONE group.

Is that the case?

(I have come to this thread late and admit I have only skimmed the comments)

And this is why Quill and Ben fail to see the problem. 

Bill De Blasio Is Not Anti-Semitic. But His Dumb Tweet Feeds A Dangerous Idea.

New York City’s mayor has a long history with the city's Jews. His tweet after a funeral still fuels an image that can linger.

New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio found an impressively spooky combination of words late Tuesday night.

“My message to the Jewish community, and all communities, is this simple: the time for warnings has passed,” he tweeted soon after taking part in breaking up a public funeral of an Orthodox rabbi in Brooklyn that had broken social distancing rules.

The tweet has spiraled out Wednesday, with some in and out of the city accusing de Blasio of anti-Semitism in specifically calling out the city’s Jews and blaming a community of over 1 million for the dangerous actions of some 2,000. The Republican Jewish Coalition said the mayor’s tweet “encourages and foments anti-Semitism.” Wednesday morning brought an increasingly familiar online horror: the trending Twitter trifecta.




Screengrab from Twitter



(In case you have doubts on this point, it has never in recorded history been good news for Jews when “Jews” is trending.)
It’s easy to see why people are concerned by de Blasio’s tweet. New York City’s Hasidic community has been hit especially hard by the coronavirus, with some 700 people in the community dead in the New York area. And rather than being broadly oblivious to the disease, thousands of Orthodox Jews have volunteered to donate the antibodies in their blood plasma. The suggestion of specific blame for the virus’s spread comes as there have been early reports of increased anti-Semitism in the US and around the world during the pandemic.


But the broad attacks on the mayor merit a correction. Bill de Blasio, regardless of what the president’s eldest son and others who enjoy punching down at the oft-punched mayor suggest, is not anti-Semitic. He’s clumsy, and reflective of the frequently well-intentioned but dangerous thinking about Jews that has become increasingly popular in American politics.

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/mattberman/bill-de-blasio-antisemitism-coronavirus-jews

Thorin wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

I don't think you've succeeded, didge.  Your statement is neither 'obvious' nor 'factual'.  Because you fail or refuse to recognize this, I'm being kind and calling it a failure of your mental processing.

That is in lieu of calling you a damn liar!  Would you feel better if I slapped you around a bit?  No, of course not.  We are gentlemen, after all.

You can call me what you like Quill but you are neither in a position or qualified to state on the mental faculties of people. Only someone with such an inflated ego would perceive themselves to have this ability to look down on people as you do

I have easily succeeded in pointing out your glaring fallacy arguments. The main one being guilt by association, which was formed from your latent dislike of Jews

It's not "mental faculties" that I called out, didge. It's the wrongful reasoning, which I call deficient mental processing. Now, you either choose to be irrational, or it's other factors (lack of IQ, lack of intellectual discipline, lack of training, etc.). But it's pathology is definitely not neuropsychiatric in nature.

It's something that you could correct, if you cared to. You have in fact improved over the time I've known you. But you are still misperceiving other's messages, and chasing down insignificant rabbit holes.

And yes, I am qualified to judge...it's called grading. I used to do it when I was teaching at university.

But even they say he's not antisemitic, just ... insensitive.

I guess he should have added, #NotAllJews?

Just for the benefit of discussion, here's the image of de Blasio's tweet:


He did say, "and all communities."

And, he went out of his way to disclaim the very thing that didge is now accusing him of.

What part of "NO" do you not understand, didge?

Original Quill wrote:

Thorin wrote:

You can call me what you like Quill but you are neither in a position or qualified to state on the mental faculties of people. Only someone with such an inflated ego would perceive themselves to have this ability to look down on people as you do

I have easily succeeded in pointing out your glaring fallacy arguments. The main one being guilt by association, which was formed from your latent dislike of Jews

It's not "mental faculties" that I called out, didge.  It's the wrongful reasoning, which I call deficient mental processing.  Now, you either choose to be irrational, or it's other factors (lack of IQ, lack of intellectual discipline, lack of training, etc.).  But it's pathology is definitely not neuropsychiatric in nature.

Again you are neither qualified or in a position to state on the mental faculties of people. Especially when you hold a bias towards right anyone right of Stalin. 

I mean I easily proved my points that now all you are doing is coming up with some of the biggest load of crap and distractions talking about your perceived views on my ability to reason.

It shows this is what you always do when you know your reasoning itself was flawed, that you instead try to undermine an individual with basically made up crap

Again even left wing woke media sources see the problem with the tweet and yet you still fail to do so. Hence you have created a barrier in your mind, that prevents you seeing the problem here. So if you want to talk about a mental faculty here, then that is a valid assessment of your inability to see the problem. This is inherent in all people that hold discriminatory views of groups of people, whether they are racist, homophobic etc.

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/mattberman/bill-de-blasio-antisemitism-coronavirus-jews

Ben Reilly wrote:But even they say he's not antisemitic, just ... insensitive.

I guess he should have added, #NotAllJews?

Just for the benefit of discussion, here's the image of de Blasio's tweet:


He did say, "and all communities."

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/mattberman/bill-de-blasio-antisemitism-coronavirus-jews

Thorin wrote:

Ben Reilly wrote:But even they say he's not antisemitic, just ... insensitive.

I guess he should have added, #NotAllJews?

Just for the benefit of discussion, here's the image of de Blasio's tweet:


He did say, "and all communities."

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/mattberman/bill-de-blasio-antisemitism-coronavirus-jews

Also why not just say all communities and not just single out Jews Ben? On a day as seen when even he broke the rules?


But his actions and words sparked a furious backlash, with critics pointing out he travels 11 miles from his home to go for a walk and that crowds had earlier gathered to watch a military flyover but were not similarly treated by officials.
[i]
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8272973/Bill-Blasio-apologizes-shutting-Jewish-orthodox-funeral-attended-hundreds-Brooklyn.html

phil wrote:Again you are neither qualified or in a position to state on the mental faculties of people.

I never said I was, and I just disclaimed it once again.

Now, in your rage, you are deliberately misconstruing others, in your haste to vent your anger. The fight, to you, is more important than the truth. That is not constructive, either to you or to your argument.

Original Quill wrote:

phil wrote:Again you are neither qualified or in a position to state on the mental faculties of people.

I never said I was, and I just disclaimed it once again.

Now, in your rage, you are deliberately misconstruing others, in your haste to vent your anger.  The fight, to you, is more important than the truth.  That is not constructive, either to you or to your argument.

I am neither angry or in a rage. Hence yet more deflections

You never spoke of any truth here and in fact make a derogatory comment in regards towards Hasidic Jews

You have not the first clue about psychology and this is evident by your very immature attempt's at goading here

phil wrote:Also why not just say all communities and not just single out Jews Ben?

Because that group self-selected themselves into the issue. You don't abstract and generalize just to blur the message.

Original Quill wrote:

phil wrote:Also why not just say all communities and not just single out Jews Ben?

Because that group self-selected themselves into the issue.  You don't abstract and generalize just to blur the message.

Just as many people did that same day, including the Mayor themselves in breaking the rules

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8272973/Bill-Blasio-apologizes-shutting-Jewish-orthodox-funeral-attended-hundreds-Brooklyn.html

Hence why you still fail to see why it was wrong to single out a specific  group of people

There is 1.5 million Jews in New York and 1,498,000 Jews did not attend this funeral

So why do the Jewish community need to be singled out here?

phil wrote:I am neither angry or in a rage. Hence yet more deflections

I disagree. I think you are angry and in a rage, and it doesn't take much to set you off. It's probably your great folly, and the reason you didn't go further in school.

You personalize every issue in two or three exchanges, and then you see red...shut off all reasoning, and nothing progresses with you. Too bad...you've got other talents, which are negated as soon as you abandon reasoning.

Original Quill wrote:

phil wrote:I am neither angry or in a rage. Hence yet more deflections

I disagree.  I think you are angry and in a rage, and it doesn't take much to set you off.  It's probably your great folly, and the reason you didn't go further in school.

You personalize every issue in two or three exchanges, and then you see red...shut off all reasoning, and nothing progresses with you.  Too bad...you've got other talents, which are negated as soon as you abandon reasoning.

You can think all you like, but I have pointed out that you are incorrect as again. This is merely a tactic you employ in debates when you have no viable reasoned views to present.

You have not the first clue about me as a person

phil wrote:Hence why you still fail to see why it was wrong to single out a specific group of people

The law is the law. It's the prosecutor's prerogative to undercharge some criminals, and others not, depending upon evidentiary reasons. Unless you have independent evidence that it was intentional, invidious discrimination, you're not going to win that battle.

Original Quill wrote:

phil wrote:Hence why you still fail to see why it was wrong to single out a specific  group of people

The law is the law.  It's the prosecutor's prerogative to undercharge some criminals, and others not, depending upon evidentiary reasons.  Unless you have independent evidence that it was intentional, invidious discrimination, you're not going to win that battle.

That still fails to answer my point

Try again

Just as many people did that same day, including the Mayor themselves in breaking the rules

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8272973/Bill-Blasio-apologizes-shutting-Jewish-orthodox-funeral-attended-hundreds-Brooklyn.html

Hence why you still fail to see why it was wrong to single out a specific group of people

There is 1.5 million Jews in New York and 1,498,000 Jews did not attend this funeral

So why do the Jewish community need to be singled out here?