- This topic has 65 replies, 18 voices, and was last updated 13 years, 2 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
i cant seem to stop thinking of the similarity of the two cases- kids stuck in dif. country being accused of crime they didn’t do- yet i am amazed to see the kiddush hashem from this, just look how many ppl around the world davened, donated tzedakah, spent hours, months, and years to help these poor bachaorim. yet amanda knox’s family was all alone. what an unbelievable kiddush hashem we have made!!!!
What? Amanda knox is totally guilty.
Who said Knox is innocent? And why should we discuss someone who is well known for her immorailty?
I agree to the Kiddush Hashem that we made. We should always continue to Moser Nefesh for pidyon shvuyim.
However, the 2 cases are very different.
Knox is accused of Murder , her young roommate is dead. This is much different than the crime of unwittingly bringing in drugs.
The details of the bochurim’s cases were pretty clear cut.
The details of the Murder in the Knox case are not so clear.
Knox falsely accused her boss of the murder.
She also admitted to the murder.
Read, or better yet don’t read, what kind of a life Amanda Knox led. Her alibi was that she was smoking marijuana (lots more left out and marijuana is illegal in Italy) with her equally prust and pritzusdige boyfriend. She also framed an innocent man.
Average non-Jewish Americans are on a higher moral level than she is and get turned off the minute they see all the sleaze in the case. Many Americans have roots in Italy or admire Italian culture and they don’t see why a silly, loose girl should get a break when she went there to have a good time under the guise of language instruction or cultural exchange.
That is why no one cares about Amanda Knox, one way or the other.
I believe she’s innocent. While she might Not be a perfectly innocent girl, I don’t think she did the crime. I think that italian prosecuter is out to get her. Their evidence is contaminated. In America, contaminated evidence is thrown out. But in that small town in Italy, it’s different, they keep it even if it’s not true. I was thinking that it’s looks like mida keneged mida because of America holding Pollard and Rubashkin
Her conviction of murder was just overturned, but her conviction of slander was upheld.
The Italian appeals court just threw out Amanda Knox’s murder conviction and ordered her free.
No comparison at all.
The boys in Japan were completely duped, despite getting caught redhanded.
Amanda and her co-conspirator, knew exactly what they were doing.
They got off for the same reason Strauss-Khan got off.
This sort of crime is tolerated in the West.
But harm a furry animal? Oooh, then you are in trouble.
Strauss-Khan and Knox were accused of two very different things. Knox was accused of something far far worse than Strauss-Khan.
BPT – Even if your opinions make sense -What proof do you have she is guilty?
“Knox was accused of something far far worse than Strauss-Khan. “
But the boys in Japan were accused of something far less yet. And they got slammed (as did S. Rubashkin)
” What proof do you have she is guilty? “
Read the story and draw your own conclusion. I did, and I did. Face it, in the Western legal culture, you can literaly get away with murder (and other serious crimes against humanity, like the one Strauss commited).
Its the culture of permissivness that trickles down into the way everything is viewed.
Want an example? Look at the 40ft bilboards that adorn some of our most traveled highways and river crossings, and you’ll see, the West has a great tolerance for this sort of crime.
bpt -“Read the story and draw your own conclusion.”
I didn’t really draw any conclusion, but I don’t see anything close to determining her guilt. The Appeals Court did draw a conclusion. Do you have any reason to doubt their verdict besides your conspiracy theories?
“besides your conspiracy theories?”
Really, Health; if I want to spin a story, I could do much better than this.
Not to pursue this story anymore than it already has been (after all , this is YWN), take the time to read what Wikipedia has on the story.
Was the DNA non-conclusive? Yes
Are there inconsistancies with the alibis of the accused? Yes
The sad truth is, the West “wants” to find Amanda and co innocent, so they did.
Because to find them guilty is to indict them of behavior that the West thrives on.
bpt – “Was the DNA non-conclusive? Yes
Are there inconsistancies with the alibis of the accused? Yes”
So if DNA is inconclusive, how does this point to her guilt?!?
So if there are inconsistencies, that makes her guilty of murder?
Let’s see if they interrogate (torture) you for 14 hours, if everything you say will be perfectly consistent? She was/is young & afraid. This doesn’t mean that she shouldn’t be held accountable for accusing her boss.
“The sad truth is, the West “wants” to find Amanda and co innocent, so they did.
Because to find them guilty is to indict them of behavior that the West thrives on.”
This is what I mean by “your conspiracy theories”.
What does her behavior have to do with murder? Like you said, this behavior is commonplace, but is murder just as commonplace as this type of behavior? I think not or we would have millions of murders a year.
#1 – The truth is consitant. Lies and coverups leave room for error.
#2 – You are right, there are not a million murders a year. But there are abuses (of the sort I cannot specify here) that are a product of this sort of “who cares” attitude.
And for this, the Strauss Khans and A. Knoxs of the world walk free
bpt -“#1 – The truth is consitant. Lies and coverups leave room for error.”
Spelled ConsiSTEnt. So it’s possible she’s a murderer, but you have no proof she is!
“#2 – You are right, there are not a million murders a year. But there are abuses (of the sort I cannot specify here) that are a product of this sort of “who cares” attitude.
And for this, the Strauss Khans and A. Knoxs of the world walk free”
If you don’t know – Strauss-Khan and A. Knox were not arrested on the same type of crime.
A. Knox was suspected of murder or conspiracy to commit murder. And the reason she went free was because they had no proof of her guilt!
Strauss-Kahn did not end up in court, not because they decided he was innocent. This case was going to be based on – he says/she says. Once it’s known that the woman is a known liar, she wouldn’t be believed over him. No prosecutor is going to prosecute s/o on the basis of an uncredible witness, esp. when the other guy is famous and credible, unless there is other proof.
Stop with your conspiracy theories just because there are lots of people whom have low-life behavior!
I think justice was served in the Knox case (I read Italian, but I did not care to read about the case from the Italian perspective because of the pritzus involved) and at least the soap opera is on its way to a well-deserved end. In any case, it isn’t our inyan except that:
What can we learn from the case?
Sheloi, sheloi asani goy…………ich bin shtultz tzi zan a Yid!
The way that whole crowd lives is baruch Hashem so foreign to our ways, and we need to always make sure we understand what “sheloi asani goy” and “vehaya machanecha kodoish” mean.
If that means sending oisvorfen who have gone OTD and live like Knox and Soleccito and Kerchner did far, far away, that is the price we need to pay to make sure that this kind of behavior is never, ever seen as even remotely normal in our world.
Know watt? (spelled wrong, just to irritate you)
Since you are missing the point I am trying to make, I’ll just leave it this, and move on to the next topic:
What’s at stake here (both the Khan and Knox cases) is the permissivness (spell check?) the West has for crimes of this nature.
bpt -“Since you are missing the point I am trying to make, I’ll just leave it this, and move on to the next topic:”
Actually you are missing my point. But when you move on -do so without trying to get in the last word!
“What’s at stake here (both the Khan and Knox cases) is the permissivness (spell check?) the West has for crimes of this nature.”
What you consider a crime, might not be even Ossur for a Goy.
And as far as I know the West has No permissiveness for murder or crimes against women. You keep repeating the same conspiracy theories – that crime is tolerated because they live in the low-life. One thing has nothing to do with the other. The two were acquited because there wasn’t enough evidence to find either one of them guilty on the crimes that they were accused!
You are right, I did miss your point. OK, let me see if I have it now:
You say the Knox case was tossed because of weak evidence. Perhaps.
What I’m saying is, had this been a “standard” murder (one that did not involve the steam and drama this one did), it would not have even warranted a 2nd look.
Society “wanted” to find these 2 innocent, so they found the facts to support a way off the hook.
Where I think we disagree is, you believe that a person’s motive will not taint the truth.
I believe that a motive (or a bias) will allow you too see the facts the way you want to see them.
And if you read the story from a non-media angle, you’ll agree, the facts could lead you to any conclusion you want to reach.
So, now do I get and adress your point?
” esp. when the other guy is famous and credible “
Oh, yeah. Mr. Khan sure is famous. But not for the kind of behavior that I’d want made public!
bpt -“Society “wanted” to find these 2 innocent, so they found the facts to support a way off the hook.”
Here (above) is were we fundamentally disagree!
“Where I think we disagree is, you believe that a person’s motive will not taint the truth.
I believe that a motive (or a bias) will allow you too see the facts the way you want to see them.”
This I agree with. This is exactly what happenned -because of her “outstanding” behavior, the prosecutor and e/o involved in the first trial convicted her, not on any evidence, but on her behavior. They had a bias similiar to yours’. In the second trial, they were able to separate her personal behavior from the act of murder. By just looking at the evidence with regards to the murder, they found her and her boyfriend innocent.
bpt -“Oh, yeah. Mr. Khan sure is famous. But not for the kind of behavior that I’d want made public!”
I realize your comment is a snide remark, but Mr. Khan was a world famous person before any of these allegations came about. And if you don’t know why -you can just Google IMF!
“Mr. Khan was a world famous person”
Which means several things. A person can be measured by:
* Who he praises (who he admires)
* How he praises (what words are used to describe
* How he is praised (what he is noted for)
Strauss Khan is a great guy? Yah, Ok, its your call
bpt -“Since you are missing the point I am trying to make, I’ll just leave it this, and move on to the next topic:”
And I thought you were moving on, but you keep posting.
“Strauss Khan is a great guy? Yah, Ok, its your call”
Maybe you should invest in a pair of reading glasses?
How in the world did he become a great guy because I wrote -he is famous?
I am glad that Amanda Knox was freed. I don’t trust Kraus. He is a womanizer and that is NOT acceptable in my book.
aries: Kraus and Knox are both cut from the same cloth. She shares the same immorality that he engages in.
“glad that Amanda Knox was freed”
“don’t trust Kraus. He is a womanizer”
I guess its easier to see a male as a villain than it is to see a woman in the same role.
My point is, its decisions like the Knox reversal that empower folks like Strauss Khan
And health, you took me to task for bowing out, but not before getting my last say in, so I jumped back into the ring.
Ready for round 4?
“How in the world did he become a great guy?”
Yes, I know of the work he does for teh IMF. But very little is said in criticism about his personal antics. And THAT needs to be condemned.
Its sort of like saying that Hitler, Y’M was a great politician and strategist. Regardless, if he was or was not, OUR messages needs to be focused on his evil side, so that all the world knows where we stand on a issue like wanton murder.
Where do we stand on the issue of wanton <edited> behaviour?
I know where I stand.
bpt -“But very little is said in criticism about his personal antics. And THAT needs to be condemned.”
You must live in France because here in the US the media did nothing but condemn him. As soon as he was arrested he was found guilty in the media. But you seem obsessed with your conspiracy theories that the world is condoning his behavior.
If you would have gotten up on your soap box and discussed the recent legalization of same gender marriage in NY, this I can understand. But what does these two cases, were they found these two people not guilty, have to do with morality? You keep screaming that they were only found innocent because society is morally corrupt. Until you bring some factual proof – your theories will remain conspiracy theories!
One thing for sure. We all don’t know what the real truth is. We can just make guesses.
DSK admitted without shame that he actually ‘did’ something. Only that it was consentual. Yuck!
Yet I don’t think he should be prosecuted based on the plaintiffs own words.
“the recent legalization of same gender marriage”
Sigh. You just don’t (or won’t) get it do you?
The legalization for same genders is an inevitable side effect of a larger move towards the “legalization” of all sorts of misbehavoiur in this arena.
BTW, your boy DSK made the headlines today. It was either Post or the News, but from across the aisle in the train, I could not see for sure.
Yeah, swell guy. A real role model for the kiddies
bpt -“Sigh. You just don’t (or won’t) get it do you?”
Sigh. You just don’t get it – do you?
I haven’t yet seen any signs of the goyim legalizing immoral acts against women. If anything, women are becoming more powerful in today’s society. Ever hear of women’s lib?
You seem obsessed with the fact that our society is immoral. So obsessed that everytime s/o is declared innocent of criminal charges -that there must be a sinister plot/ conspiracy theory because immorality is abound everywhere! Time to wake up and smell the coffee. Some people are declared innocent because they haven’t been Proven to be guilty beyond a reasonable doubt!
Ok, lets try a different tact.
Would you agree that today’s society is more permissive (in certain areas) than it was 10 years ago?
Presumably, you would say, yes.
Would you agree that society is even more permissive (in those same areas) in the past 5 years, than it was in the 5 years prior to that?
Again, you would most likely agree.
<Now for the clincher>
Would you agree that each time the bar gets lowered,and a perpertrator of such wanton behavoir gets idolized, it makes it that much easier to kasher abbhorent behavior?
If you are on Team Yiddishkeit like the rest of us, you would again need to agree.
So, now do you see why letting DSK and Ms. Amamnda off scott free sends such a bad message?
The legality of “guilt” or “innocence” is besides the point. Its a matter of who do we cheer for, and who do we condenm?
What we (at least, me) are talking about here is the cheapening of the most sublime human interaction, one that has been defaced by today’s society.
We of Team Yiddishkeit need to take a stand. This sublime human interaction (can’t get more specific, but ha’maven yo’vin) is not a sport, and not a powerplay.
Its much more than that, and we need to treat it as such. And by giving people like DSK and Amanda the green light, we take this sublime gift and drag it thru the mud.
bpt – “Would you agree that each time the bar gets lowered,and a perpertrator of such wanton behavoir gets idolized, it makes it that much easier to kasher abbhorent behavior?”
We must have different Torahs. My Torah says they have 7 Mitzvos. Those touchy feely things are for Yidden. If they committed a crime which the Torah Assurs then they should be prosecuted. If not, not. What brings down the sanctity of this world is when the Goyim not only don’t prosecute people who live the Toievah lifestyle, but they celebrate it, esp. in NYS where such marriage is legal!
Don’t mix the two up. These two weren’t on trial for their behavior, but for specific crimes! I don’t even know what their behavior was to even start judging them up on it – whether they did things against the Torah or not. I’m not as informed as you because I don’t read the Enquirer or such trash to know all about their behaviors!
Health: No arayos is one of the 7 mitzvos for goyim.
bpt
“The legality of “guilt” or “innocence” is besides the point. Its a matter of who do we cheer for, and who do we condenm?
What we (at least, me) are talking about here is the cheapening of the most sublime human interaction, one that has been defaced by today’s society.
We of Team Yiddishkeit need to take a stand. This sublime human interaction (can’t get more specific, but ha’maven yo’vin) is not a sport, and not a powerplay.”
So why do we make excuses for the Japanese boys?
Dr. Seuss -“Health: No arayos is one of the 7 mitzvos for goyim.”
Maybe you should stop reading children’s books and start learning the Torah. The behaviors’ that people claim they did (Knox & company) aren’t Ossur Al Pi Torah. Also whatever Strauss-Khan did can’t even be judged up in a non-Jewish court because he is a Jew and even in Bais Din there has to be Hasrah and Eidim – which there isn’t.
Find better things to gossip about. And to say that they should be prosecuted for their behavior, even if immoral, is showing a deep lack of understanding of our Torah and how it works!
“We must have different Torahs”
Well said, Health. Well said.
Apparently, we do have different torahs.
I think I’ll stick to mine.
” So why do we make excuses for the Japanese boys? “
Because what they did was done as a result of being taken advantage of.
We make no such excuses for the person who took advantage of them
bpt -“Apparently, we do have different torahs.”
Mine is based on Halacha; what is yours’ based on?
His is based from Har Sinai.
Halacha is based on Torah. Torah is not based on halacha.
gezuntheit – But the way we Pasken is the Ammitah Shel Torah. Maybe you and him belong to other groups like Xianity. They also believe in the Old Testament (Torah Sheb’ksav)!
I cannot believe Health just told BPT he belongs to Christianity.
“what is yours’ based on?”
The same scroll we all danced with on ST. Its the interpretation and hashkafa we seem to be at odds with.
Mine (the interpretation and hashkafa) is based on listening to what I have heard and seen in 40+ years of being around very respected, learned figures of the Yeshiva and Chassidish world. Not to mention a dozen or so years of classroom learning, and 20 or so years of contiuning education (the Orthodox+ brand).
So, as you can see, I’ve got a whole lotta ammo in my pencil box.
What I say, is a distilled version of what I have heard from the pulpit, from the press, from the people, whom the Orthodox world holds dear.
I’d show my position to the odom godol of your choice, and am pretty sure I’d be told, my approach to the DKS / Amanda story is the correct one for a Ben Torah to have, one that takes a stand against immorality.
Who’s got your back?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.