Streets of Philadelphia

[Martin Weidmann]

The policeman asked her "ARE YOU PRAYING?" just before arresting her.  Again "ARE YOU PRAYING?"  But that was not a factor in her arrest?  Then why ask her?  And she "most likely created a nuisance on other occasions"?  It's grounds to arrest someone based on their prior behavior?  And how is she creating a "nuisance" by standing alone praying to herself in this instance?  Is that how they define a nuisance in "Europe"?  It's Orwellian.  And to think the leftist are actually on the side of Big Brother in this age.  If she had been told not to this on a prior occasion, then more power to her.  She is a hero.  Her religious freedom and right to peacefully protest were not only infringed but she had the courage to stand up for them in the face of authoritarian persecution.

The policeman asked her "ARE YOU PRAYING?" just before arresting her.  Again "ARE YOU PRAYING?"  But that was not a factor in her arrest?  Then why ask her?

Ever considered the possibility that the police man asked her out of respect for her faith. If she was praying he may well have waited until she finished her prayer.

And she "most likely created a nuisance on other occasions"?  It's grounds to arrest someone based on their prior behavior?  And how is she creating a "nuisance" by standing alone praying to herself in this instance? 


I know by now that it is nearly impossible to get anything into that head of yours, but (again) she wasn't arrested for praying. She was arrested for violating a lawful order four times in the past. That's what she is charged with.

Is that how they define a nuisance in "Europe"?

You don't even know that England is only one country in Europe?

If she had been told not to this on a prior occasion, then more power to her.  She is a hero.  Her religious freedom and right to peacefully protest were not only infringed but she had the courage to stand up for them in the face of authoritarian persecution.

Utter Bs... Her religious freedom has nothing to do with it. She can practice her faith anywhere she wants, except of course in those Protected areas. He rights were not infringed upon, she broke the law four times, but I guess that doesn't matter for you. Complaining about people breaking the law in the US and cheering people on who break the law in other countries. You're truly pathetic.

[Martin Weidmann]

It's actually sad and hilarious at the same time.

A fanatical right wing zealot, as Richard is, couldn't care less if highly strung American police officers kill innocent people, for walking on the sidewalk or asking for help, on a daily basis, but he cries crocodile tears when a religious nutjob in England gets peacefully arrested by unarmed officers for violating the law for the 5th time in a row.

You can't make this stuff up, but Richard can   

I seriously doubt that anybody wants to be around him for Xmas.

[Richard Smith]

The policeman asked her "ARE YOU PRAYING?" just before arresting her.  Again "ARE YOU PRAYING?"  But that was not a factor in her arrest?  Then why ask her?

Ever considered the possibility that the police man asked her out of respect for her faith. If she was praying he may well have waited until she finished her prayer.

So the policeman who approached her and asked "Are you praying?" just before arresting her was doing so out of respect for her faith?  That is comedy gold.  Breathless in its stupidity.  They "respected" her by telling her she was under arrest, having her searched, and putting her in the squad car where she was interrogated about praying and her bail condition included not praying again in a public area.  He was asking her what she was doing there to ascertain whether he had grounds to arrest her.  When she confirmed that she was praying in regard to the abortion center, she was immediately arrested.  That was literally the ONLY thing she was doing there. 

[Martin Weidmann]

So the policeman who approached her and asked "Are you praying?" just before arresting her was doing so out of respect for her faith?  That is comedy gold.  Breathless in its stupidity.  They "respected" her by telling her she was under arrest, having her searched, and putting her in the squad car where she was interrogated about praying and her bail condition included not praying again in a public area.  He was asking her what she was doing there to ascertain whether he had grounds to arrest her.  When she confirmed that she was praying in regard to the abortion center, she was immediately arrested.  That was literally the ONLY thing she was doing there.

she was interrogated about praying and her bail condition included not praying again in a public area.

She wasn't interrogated about praying. She was merely asked if she was praying. And not praying in a public area is not part of her bail condition. Stop lying, will ya!

He was asking her what she was doing there to ascertain whether he had grounds to arrest her.

Idiot. In the video you hear the police officer say that they wanted to talk to her about previous incidents. In the newspaper link I provided we find out those incidents were four previous violations of a lawful order intended to keep the area safe. They asked her if she would come to the station voluntary and she refused and that's when they arrested her.

She is due in court in February 2023 and it charged with several violations of a lawful order, which is exactly what she was arrested for. She is not charged for praying in public.

[Richard Smith]

she was interrogated about praying and her bail condition included not praying again in a public area.

She wasn't interrogated about praying. She was merely asked if she was praying. And not praying in a public area is not part of her bail condition. Stop lying, will ya!

He was asking her what she was doing there to ascertain whether he had grounds to arrest her.

Idiot. In the video you hear the police officer say that they wanted to talk to her about previous incidents. In the newspaper I provided link we find out those incidents were four previous violations of a lawful order intended to keep the area safe. They asked her if she would come to the station voluntary and she refused and that's what they arrested her.

She is due in court in February 2023 and it charged with several violations of a lawful order, which is exactly what she was arrested for. She is not charged for praying in public.

More personal insults.  This woman was doing nothing other than standing silently and praying.  She was arrested for that.  If the ONLY thing you are doing is praying when you are arrested, and the police ask "Are you praying?" just before arresting her, that means she was arrested for praying.  It is literally the only thing she was doing at the time of her arrest.   If she had been drunk, and the police officer had asked "Have you been drinking?" and she said "Yes" just before arresting her, she would have been under arrest for being drunk.  The fact that she has exercised her religious liberties on prior occasions in a similar manner does not justify her arrest.  Her behavior was entirely lawful on this occasion and any prior occasion in which she peacefully exercised her right to pray.  Every person who believes in human rights should support the ability to pray without fear of arrest.  The act she is under arrest for is praying in public.  That is simply a fact even if the charge is a violation of an ordinance.  It was the only act she was performing when she was arrested. 

[Martin Weidmann]

More personal insults.  This woman was doing nothing other than standing silently and praying.  She was arrested for that.  If the ONLY thing you are doing is praying when you are arrested, and the police ask "Are you praying?" just before arresting her, that means she was arrested for praying.  It is literally the only thing she was doing at the time of her arrest.   If she had been drunk, and the police officer had asked "Have you been drinking?" and she said "Yes" just before arresting her, she would have been under arrest for being drunk.  The fact that she has exercised her religious liberties on prior occasions in a similar manner does not justify her arrest.  Her behavior was entirely lawful on this occasion and any prior occasion in which she peacefully exercised her right to pray.  Every person who believes in human rights should support the ability to pray without fear of arrest.  The act she is under arrest for is praying in public.  That is simply a fact even if the charge is a violation of an ordinance.  It was the only act she was performing when she was arrested.

The act she is under arrest for is praying in public.  That is simply a fact even if the charge is a violation of an ordinance.

She is charged with violating a lawful order four times and will go to court for that. But that doesn't stop our resident fool (who has never been in Europe and is clueless about the English legal system) to disagree and make up a bogus story about her being arrested for praying.

It's not only hilarious but also a perfect demonstration of a total lack of any sense of reality, which he also displays frequently in the Kennedy case. Ignoring the actual evidence, misrepresenting facts and making up stories he can't support with any evidence is Richard's trademark! (*)

The bottom line is here that a bogus story of an innocent bystander arrested for praying makes for a far more dramatics (in Richard's mind) than the story of a religious nutjob who is known for intimidation of women visiting abortion centers and who gets arrested for several violations of a lawful city ordinance.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(*) Richard once claimed that the evidence for Oswald coming down the TSBD stairs unnoticed after the shots was that it happened! Says it all, really...

[Richard Smith]

The act she is under arrest for is praying in public.  That is simply a fact even if the charge is a violation of an ordinance.

She is charged with violating a lawful order four times and will go to court for that. But that doesn't stop our resident fool (who has never been in Europe and is clueless about the English legal system) to disagree and make up a bogus story about her being arrested for praying.

It's not only hilarious but also a perfect demonstration of a total lack of any sense of reality, which he also displays frequently in the Kennedy case. Ignoring the actual evidence, misrepresenting facts and making up stories he can't support with any evidence is Richard's trademark! (*)

The bottom line is here that a bogus story of an innocent bystander arrested for praying makes for a far more dramatics (in Richard's mind) than the story of a religious nutjob who is known for intimidation of women visiting abortion centers and who gets arrested for several violations of a lawful city ordinance.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(*) Richard once claimed that the evidence for Oswald coming down the TSBD stairs unnoticed after the shots was that it happened! Says it all, really...

This is real simple.  Pay attention.  The law she violated is intended to protect public spaces from objectionable conduct.  So that the public can make use of them. For example, not cleaning up after your dog in a park.  It is not unlawful for the public to be in these places.  In fact, the law is intended to promote the usage of public areas.   This woman was arrested on a public sidewalk.  Her presence on a public sidewalk is not a crime.  Every citizen can lawfully be present in a public area.  She has to be committing some objectionable act in that area in the opinion of the authorities. 

In this instance, she was asked "Are you praying?" by the policeman to determine whether her presence there was to protest the nearby abortion clinic.  It was her acknowledgement that she was praying that led to her arrest in this instance.  The act of praying or expression of religious liberties is deemed objectionable by the authorities when it comes to abortion.  No dissent is allowed.  That was her crime.  To pray in contradiction of the authoritarian's desire to suppress any dissent to abortion was her crime.  She committed no other act other than to pray.  As a result, it is proper and correct to deem her arrest to be for praying.  The fact that Martin characterizes a person arrested for standing peacefully and praying to be a "religious nutjob" is the real reason behind her arrest.  An anti-religious bigotry.  Shameful. 

[Martin Weidmann]

This is real simple.  Pay attention.  The law she violated is intended to protect public spaces from objectionable conduct.  So that the public can make use of them. For example, not cleaning up after your dog in a park.  It is not unlawful for the public to be in these places.  In fact, the law is intended to promote the usage of public areas.   This woman was arrested on a public sidewalk.  Her presence on a public sidewalk is not a crime.  Every citizen can lawfully be present in a public area.  She has to be committing some objectionable act in that area in the opinion of the authorities. 

In this instance, she was asked "Are you praying?" by the policeman to determine whether her presence there was to protest the nearby abortion clinic.  It was her acknowledgement that she was praying that led to her arrest in this instance.  The act of praying or expression of religious liberties is deemed objectionable by the authorities when it comes to abortion.  No dissent is allowed.  That was her crime.  To pray in contradiction of the authoritarian's desire to suppress any dissent to abortion was her crime.  She committed no other act other than to pray.  As a result, it is proper and correct to deem her arrest to be for praying.  The fact that Martin characterizes a person arrested for standing peacefully and praying to be a "religious nutjob" is the real reason behind her arrest.  An anti-religious bigotry.  Shameful.

As I said earlier; a perfect demonstration of a total lack of any sense of reality!

The law she violated is intended to protect public spaces from objectionable conduct.

Indeed, and she apparently violated that law four times.

This woman was arrested on a public sidewalk. 

Yes, so what? Are there specific places now where you can arrest somebody for violating the law four times?

She has to be committing some objectionable act in that area in the opinion of the authorities. 

Really? So if a guy robs a bank on Monday and on Tuesday he is just standing on the sidewalk doing nothing wrong, police can't arrest him? Is that your "logic"?