The Al-Soufi family is facing new threats as police investigate individuals

[oldjones]

Agree. if you watch the video the 3 morons are trying to intimidate her, if you can't see that, I can't help you. You just don't want it to be true.

Since she did attend the rally, there would seem to be evidence they may have tried, but certainly did not succeed. We'll have to wait for the trial to learn whether merely impeding and delaying is judged to be intimidation. At least read the definition, if you continue to insist on playing judge here on TERB

 

[Gooseifur]

Since she did attend the rally, there would seem to be evidence they may have tried, but certainly did not succeed. We'll have to wait for the trial to learn whether merely impeding and delaying is judged to be intimidation. At least read the definition, if you continue to insist on playing judge here on TERB

I'm not playing the judge, the video speaks for itself, although I do think that Al-Soufi is the least culpable of the 3. She did attend, she also said she felt intimidated, does that not mean anything? Her testimony plus the video is pretty damning . In my opinion they are guilty in yours they are not. I guess your playing judge too because you don't think they did anything wrong.

 

[basketcase]

I'm not playing the judge, the video speaks for itself, although I do think that Al-Soufi is the least culpable of the 3. ....

And lest we forget the story of this thread, the family has zero culpability.

 

[Gooseifur]

And lest we forget the story of this thread, the family has zero culpability.

Agree the family has nothing to do with it.

 

[bver_hunter]

No it's not right if disabled people are mocked. I haven't heard of a story where a university speaker mocked disabled people, am I missing something? Why do you think some of these speakers are asked to come and speak at these universities? It's because students have requested them. The universities don't do it just for kicks. These students pay to go to these schools and can request whichever speakers they want. But again you only advocate for speakers who don't offend. I pose this question to you. If a university books a pro-life speaker, which they have in the past. There are some students who believe abortion is murder and would be offended by such speaker. should they be allowed to speak?

This is not about University Speakers, but the hall in the campus being rented out to politicians / political speakers. They can be very controversial ones as well. Remember that a certain individual called Trump mocked a disabled reporter on one occasion, though it may not have been at a University campus. The students not necessarily want such individuals to be present on their campus and that is why they demonstrate against their presence. Anyway you object to people being allowed to mock disabled individuals, and should that same rule not be applied to attacking individuals based on their race, ethnicity or religion?

Well, if it is a Pro-Life speaker then why will those who believe that abortion is murder, object to such a speaker?? They will agree 100% with the views of such speakers.

Remember all the same that Pro-Life and Women's Right to decide about their own bodies will go across racial, and ethnic lines. As long as the University has no problem with likewise allowing in those who are Women's Abortion Rights speakers as well, then it should not be a big issue. The students can then sit together and discuss the pros and cons on both sides of the aisle. But when there are racist speakers that really offend those based on certain ethnicities or religions then that is a different kettle of fish!!

 

[oldjones]

I'm not playing the judge, the video speaks for itself, although I do think that Al-Soufi is the least culpable of the 3. She did attend, she also said she felt intimidated, does that not mean anything? Her testimony plus the video is pretty damning . In my opinion they are guilty in yours they are not. I guess your playing judge too because you don't think they did anything wrong.

Then quote me saying that, please.

What a person feels is not evidence of a crime. Nor is what you 'feel' any actual evidence of what I personally think.

The only accurate thing you've said above is that you have already judged Al-Soufi guilty, based on no other evidence than the video.

Have you looked up the definition of criminal intimidation yet?

 

[Gooseifur]

This is not about University Speakers, but the hall in the campus being rented out to politicians / political speakers. They can be very controversial ones as well. Remember that a certain individual called Trump mocked a disabled reporter on one occasion, though it may not have been at a University campus. The students not necessarily want such individuals to be present on their campus and that is why they demonstrate against their presence. Anyway you object to people being allowed to mock disabled individuals, and should that same rule not be applied to attacking individuals based on their race, ethnicity or religion?

Well, if it is a Pro-Life speaker then why will those who believe that abortion is murder, object to such a speaker?? They will agree 100% with the views of such speakers.

Remember all the same that Pro-Life and Women's Right to decide about their own bodies will go across racial, and ethnic lines. As long as the University has no problem with likewise allowing in those who are Women's Abortion Rights speakers as well, then it should not be a big issue. The students can then sit together and discuss the pros and cons on both sides of the aisle. But when there are racist speakers that really offend those based on certain ethnicities or religions then that is a different kettle of fish!!

I meant to say a pro-choice speaker, if one shows up at a university where the majority of students feel that abortion is murder, should they be allowed to speak? They are offending a majority of the students. If someone believes abortion is murder and against what they believe in that is offensive too. Have you ever tried to convince a pro-lifer they are wrong? I have it's pointless. You have no problem in allowing speakers from both sided of this issue, why not racists? They have a right to speak as well. I don't agree with them but they should have the same rights as anyone else. If some students want to hear them speak, then they should be allowed.

 

[Gooseifur]

Then quote me saying that, please.

What a person feels is not evidence of a crime. Nor is what you 'feel' any actual evidence of what I personally think.

The only accurate thing you've said above is that you have already judged Al-Soufi guilty, based on no other evidence than the video.

Have you looked up the definition of criminal intimidation yet?

Yes I have read the definition, it's vague in some areas but blocks or obstructs a highway is the same as blocking a street in my eyes, maybe you see it differently. Based on her account of the incident and the video. I think he will be convicted unless something else comes out at trial. Maybe she provoked him in some way. There were a lot of witnesses there so lets see what happens.

 

[dickydoem]

This is not about University Speakers, but the hall in the campus being rented out to politicians / political speakers. They can be very controversial ones as well. Remember that a certain individual called Trump mocked a disabled reporter on one occasion, though it may not have been at a University campus. The students not necessarily want such individuals to be present on their campus and that is why they demonstrate against their presence. Anyway you object to people being allowed to mock disabled individuals, and should that same rule not be applied to attacking individuals based on their race, ethnicity or religion?

You must be referring to Trudeau mocking an indigenous protester at a fundraiser, "Thank you for your donation".